Intercropping

Abstract: Studies of agroecosystems during the past 30 years have lead several agri­ cultural scientists to question the commitment of modem industrial agriculture to high intensity monocultural production . Additionally, current research directions in integrated pest management emphasize biological interactions among insect pests, natural enemies, and other crop pests, such as weeds. These inquiries have led to a recent rebirth in interest and research activities on cultural and biological controls in entomology . Vegetational diversity plays a central role in this research renaissance. If one considers it broadly, vegetational diversity involves mixing different kinds of plants in a plant community, but, to paraphrase Vilfredo Pareto ( 1 12), vegetational diversity appears like a bat; within it one can find both birds and mice . More specifically, vegetational diversity varies in three ways: the kinds, the spatial array, and the temporal overlap of the plants in the mixture. In most cases, the mixed plants are different plant species. These plants might be two crops, which is called intercropping; a crop and a weed, which is called weedy culture; or a crop and a beneficial noncrop, which is known by many names including nursery crops, living-mulches, cover­ cropping, etc . In some cases, however, different plant genotypes are mixed (41), including polyvarietal mixtures of agronomically dissimilar genotypes

Abstract: Criteria for evaluating different intercropping situations are suggested, and the Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) concept is considered for situations where intercropping must be compared with growing each crop sole. The need to use different standardizing sole crop yields in forming LERs is discussed, and a method of calculating an ‘effective LER’ is proposed to evaluate situations where the yield proportions achieved in intercropping are different from those that might be required by a farmer. The possible importance of effective LERs in indicating the proportions of crops likely to give biggest yield advantages is discussed.

Abstract: Intercropping is a farming practice involving two or more crop species, or genotypes, growing together and coexisting for a time. On the fringes of modern intensive agriculture, intercropping is important in many subsistence or low-input/resource-limited agricultural systems. By allowing genuine yield gains without increased inputs, or greater stability of yield with decreased inputs, intercropping could be one route to delivering ‘sustainable intensification’. We discuss how recent knowledge from agronomy, plant physiology and ecology can be combined with the aim of improving intercropping systems. Recent advances in agronomy and plant physiology include better understanding of the mechanisms of interactions between crop genotypes and species – for example, enhanced resource availability through niche complementarity. Ecological advances include better understanding of the context-dependency of interactions, the mechanisms behind disease and pest avoidance, the links between above- and below-ground systems, and the role of microtopographic variation in coexistence. This improved understanding can guide approaches for improving intercropping systems, including breeding crops for intercropping. Although such advances can help to improve intercropping systems, we suggest that other topics also need addressing. These include better assessment of the wider benefits of intercropping in terms of multiple ecosystem services, collaboration with agricultural engineering, and more effective interdisciplinary research.

Abstract: Results of a literature survey indicate that weed population density and biomass production may be markedly reduced using crop rotation (temporal diversification) and intercropping (spatial diversification) strategies. Crop rotation resulted in emerged weed densities in test crops that were lower in 21 cases, higher in 1 case, and equivalent in 5 cases in comparison to monoculture systems. In 12 cases where weed seed density was reported, seed density in crop rotation was lower in 9 cases and equivalent in 3 cases when compared to monocultures of the component crops. In intercropping systems where a main crop was intersown with a "smother" crop species, weed biomass in the intercrop was lower in 47 cases and higher in 4 cases than in the main crop grown alone (as a sole crop); a variable response was observed in 3 cases. When intercrops were composed of two or more main crops, weed biomass in the intercrop was lower than in all of the component sole crops in 12 cases, intermediate between component sole crops in 10 cases, and higher than all sole crops in 2 cases. It is unclear why crop rotation studies have focused on weed density, whereas intercropping studies have focused on weed biomass. The success of rotation systems for weed suppression appears to be based on the use of crop sequences that create varying patterns of resource competition, allelopathic interference, soil disturbance, and mechanical damage to provide an unstable and frequently inhospitable environment that prevents the proliferation of a particular weed species. The relative importance and most effective combinations of these weed control tactics have not been adequately assessed. In addition, the weed-suppressive effects of other related factors, such as manipulation of soil fertility dynamics in rotation sequences, need to be examined. Intercrops may demonstrate weed control advantages over sole crops in two ways. First, greater crop yield and less weed growth may be achieved if intercrops are more effective than sole crops in usurping resources from weeds or suppressing weed growth through allelopathy. Alternatively, intercrops may provide yield advantages without suppressing weed growth below levels observed in component sole crops if intercrops use resources that are not exploitable by weeds or convert resources to harvestable material more efficiently than sole crops. Because of the difficulty of monitoring the use of multiple resources by intercrop/weed mixtures throughout the growing season, identification of specific mechanisms of weed suppression and yield enhancement in intercrop systems has so far proven elusive. Significant advances in the design and improvement of weed-suppressive crop rotation and intercropping systems are most likely to occur if three important areas of research are addressed. First, there must be continued attention to the study of weed population dynamics and crop-weed interference in crop rotation and intercropping systems. More information is needed concerning the effects of diversification of cropping systems on weed seed longevity, weed seedling emergence, weed seed production and dormancy, agents of weed mortality, differential resource consumption by crops and weeds, and allelopathic interactions. Second, there needs to be systematic manipulation of specific components of rotation and intercropping systems to isolate and improve those elements (e.g., interrow cultivation, choice of crop genotype) or combinations of elements that may be especially important for weed control. Finally, the weed-related impacts of combining crop rotation and intercropping strategies should be assessed through careful study of extant, complex farming systems and the design and testing of new integrated approaches. Many aspects of crop rotation and intercropping are compatible with current farming practices and could become more accessible to farmers if government policies are restructured to reflect the true environmental costs of agricultural production.