Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Early Access

Impact of planting systems and nutrient management on growth and yield of maize and soybean in a maize + soybean cropping system

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.4451
Submitted
25 July 2024
Published
25-11-2024
Versions

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during Kharif 2023 at Lovely Professional University, Punjab, using a split-plot design (SPD) with five main plot treatments and five subplot treatments, replicated three times, to evaluate the effects of intercropping and nutrient management on maize growth and productivity. The main plot treatments consisted of cropping systems: Sole maize (M1), Sole soybean (M2), Maize + Soybean (1:1, M3), Maize + Soybean (1:2, M4) and Maize + Soybean (2:3, M5). Subplot treatments included nutrient management strategies: Absolute control (S1), 100% RDF through inorganic fertilizers (S2), 70% RDF + NPK nano fertilizer spray (S3), 70% RDF + homemade NPK spray (S4) and 70% RDF + plant extract NPK spray (S5). Results indicated that monocropped maize and soybean systems outperformed intercropping in terms of growth and grain yield, with similar trends observed for stover yield. Among nutrient management practices, foliar application of plant extract NPK showed the most significant improvement, enhancing growth attributes and crop growth rate (CGR) by 14.1% in maize and 43.4% in soybean and increasing productivity by 18% in maize and 30.6% in soybean compared to the control. The interaction of maize and soybean with foliar plant extract NPK spray led to grain yield increases of 36.6% in maize and 50.7% in soybean compared to untreated controls. Furthermore, the crop equivalent yield and land equivalent ratio were maximized in the maizesoybean intercropping system at a 1:1 ratio. This study underscores the role of strategic nutrient management and intercropping in optimizing maize and soybean productivity, with foliar NPK plant extract spray showing the most promising results for enhancing growth and yield.

References

  1. Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR, Haddad L, et al. Food security: The challenge of feeding 9 billion people. Science. 2010;327(5967):812-18.
  2. Foley JA, Ramankutty N, Brauman KA, Cassidy ES, et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature. 2011;478(7369):337-42.
  3. Katyayan A. Fundamentals of agriculture. Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh: Kushal Publications and Distributors. 2005;p. 10-1.
  4. Lithourgidis AS, Dordas CA, Damalas CA, Vlachostergios D.Annual intercrops: an alternative pathway for sustainable agriculture. Aust J Crop Sci. 2011;5(4):396-410.
  5. Ghanbari A, Dahmardeh M, Siahsar BA, Ramroudi M. Effect of maize (Zea mays L.) - cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) intercropping on light distribution, soil temperature and soil moisture in arid environment. J Food Agric Environ. 2010;8:102-08. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/20103048861
  6. Prasad R, Brook R. Effect of varying maize densities on intercropped maize and soybean in Nepal. Exp Agric. 2005;41(3):365-82. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479705002693
  7. Manna M, Ghosh P, Acharya C. Sustainable crop production through management of soil organic carbon in semiarid and tropical India. J Sustain Agric. 2003;21(3):85-114. https://doi.org/10.1300/J064v21n03_07 SINGH ET AL 10 https://plantsciencetoday.online
  8. Kocsy G, Toth B, Berzy T, Szalai G, et al. Glutathione reductase activity and chilling tolerance are induced by a hydroxylamine derivative BRX-156 in maize and soybean. Plant Sci. 2001;160 (5):943-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9452(01)00333-8
  9. FAO. FAO statistical yearbook: World food and agriculture. Rome: FAO; 2020.
  10. Directorate of maize research. ICAR-Indian Institute of Maize Research; 2024. https://iimr.icar.gov.in
  11. Battaglia M, Thomason W, Fike J, Evanylo G, von Cossel M, Babur E. The broad impacts of corn stover and wheat straw removal for biofuel production on crop productivity, soil health and greenhouse gases emissions - A review. GCB Bioenergy. 2021;13(1):45-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12774
  12. Liu Y, Du H, Li P, Shen Y, et al. Pan-genome of wild and cultivated soybeans. Cell. 2020;182(1):162-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.05.023
  13. Yang F, Huang S, Gao R, Liu W, et al. Growth of soybean seedlings in relay strip intercropping systems in relation to light quantity and red: Far-red ratio. Field Crops Res. 2014;155:245-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.08.011
  14. Valinejad M, Vaseghi S, Afzali M. Starter nitrogen fertilizer impact on soybean yield and quality. Int J Eng Adv Technol.2013;3(1):333-37.
  15. Mustafa M, Azam M, Bhatti HN, Khan A, et al. Green fabrication of copper nano-fertilizer for enhanced crop yield in cowpea cultivar: A sustainable approach. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology. 2024;56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2023.102994
  16. Mkindi AG, Tembo YL, Mbega ER, Smith AK, et al. Extracts of common pesticidal plants increase plant growth and yield in common bean plants. Plants. 2020;9(2):149.
  17. Keya Tudu C, Dey A, Pandey DK, Panwar JS, Nandy S. Role of plant derived extracts as biostimulants in sustainable agriculture: A detailed study on research advances, bottlenecks and future prospects. New and Future Developments in Microbial Biotechnology and Bioengineering. 2022;159-79.
  18. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd Edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York. 1984;680.
  19. Usman M, Nangere MG, Musa I. Effect of three levels of NPK fertilizer on growth parameters and yield of maize-soybean intercrop. Int J Sci Res Publ. 2015;5(9):1-6. https://doi.org/d41edd4b9faf1981acac227c8d2565b19c4354
  20. DeRosa MC, Monreal C, Schnitzer M, Walsh R, Sultan Y. Nanotechnology in fertilizers. Nat Nanotechnol. 2010;5(2):91-93. https://www.nature.com/articles/nnano.2010.2
  21. Al-Zreejawi SA, Al-Juthery H. Effect of spray with nano NPK, complete micro fertilizers and nano amino acids on some growth and yield indicators of maize (Zea mays L.). IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2020;9(1):553.
  22. Si Z, Qin A, Liang Y, Duan A, Gao Y. A review on regulation of irrigation management on wheat physiology, grain yield and quality. Plants (Basel). 2023;12(4):692. https://www.mdpi.com/2223-7747/12/4/692
  23. Raza MA, Feng LY, van der Werf W, Cai GR, et al. Narrow-wide-row planting pattern increases the radiation use efficiency and seed yield of intercrop species in relay-intercropping system. Food Energy Secur. 2019;8(3).https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.170.
  24. Manasa P, Maitra S, Barman S. Yield attributes, yield, competitive ability and economics of summer maize-legume intercropping system. Int J Agric Environ Biotechnol. 2020;13(1):33-38. https://doi.org/10.30954/0974-1712.1.2020.16
  25. Rajeshkumar A, Venkataraman NS, Ramadass S. Integrated weed management in maize-based intercropping systems. Indian J Weed Sci. 2018;50(1):79-81. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2018.00018.7
  26. Twaij BM, Hasan MN. Bioactive secondary metabolites from plant sources: Types, synthesis and their therapeutic uses. Int J Plant Biol. 2022;13(1):4-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijpb13010003
  27. Rajendran M, Selvaraj RCA, Sundaram VB. Evaluation of nanostructured slow-release fertilizer on soil fertility, yield and nutritional profile of Vigna radiata. Recent Pat Nanotechnol. 2017;11(1):1-13.
  28. Rashmi CM, Prakash SS. Effect of nano phosphorus fertilizers on growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) in central dry zone of Karnataka. Mysore J Agric Sci. 2023;57(2):286-93. Available from: http://uasbangalore.edu.in
  29. Abdel-Aziz HMM, Hasaneen MNA, Omer AM. Nano chitosan-NPK fertilizer enhances the growth and productivity of wheat plants grown in sandy soil. Span J Agric Res. 2016;14 (1):902-10. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2016141-8205
  30. Babubhai BD. Evaluation of potassic nano fertilizer under incubation trial and its effect on growth, yield and nutrient uptake by maize (Zea mays L.) crop [MSc thesis]. Junagadh: Junagadh Agriculture University; 2018.
  31. Rathnayaka RMNN, Mahendran S, Iqbal YB, Rifnas LM. Influence of urea and nano-nitrogen fertilizers on the growth and yield of rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivar ‘Bg 250’. Int J Res Pub. 2018;5(2):1-9. https://hal.science/hal-04194488
  32. Mandal MK, Banerjee M, Banerjee H, Alipatra A, Malik GC. Productivity of maize (Zea mays) based intercropping system during kharif season under red and lateritic tract of West Bengal. Bioscan. 2014;9(1):31-35. https://links/5715058208aeafcb935d29e3
  33. Raza MA, Khalid MHB, Zhang X, Feng LY, et al. Effect of planting patterns on yield, nutrient accumulation and distribution in maize and soybean under relay intercropping systems. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):4947. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-41364-1
  34. Yang F, Wang X, Liao D, Lu F, Gao R, et al. Yield response to different planting geometries in maize-soybean relay strip intercropping systems. Agron J. 2015;107(1):296-304. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj14.0263
  35. Avil Kumar K, Reddy MD, Sivasankar A, Reddy NV. Yield and economics of maize (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max) in intercropping under different row proportion. Indian J Agric Sci. 2003;73(2):69-71.
  36. Ghosh P. Growth, yield, competition and economics of groundnut/cereal fodder intercropping systems in the semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Res. 2004;88(2-3):227-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2004.01.015
  37. Nardi S, Pizzeghello D, Schiavon M, Ertani A. Plant biostimulants physiological responses induced by protein hydrolyzed-based products and humic substances in plant metabolism. Scientia Agricola. 2016;73(1):18-23. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-9016-2015-0006.
  38. Iqbal M, Umar S, Mahmooduzzafar F. Nano-fertilization to enhance nutrient use efficiency and productivity of crop plants. Nanomaterials and Plant Potential. 2019;473-505.
  39. Rawat S, Singh RK, Singh P, Upadhyay PK, et al. Studies on comparison of nano-urea and prilled urea for enhancing maize (Zea mays) growth and productivity. Indian J Agric Sci. 2024;94 (3):325-28. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v94i3.143292
  40. Kumar R, Kumar S, Chikkappa GK, Das AK, et al. Unveiling genotype × environment dynamics for grain yield in QPM hybrids through AMMI, GGE Biplot and MTSI approach. Indian J Genet. 2024;84(3):449-60.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.