Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Photosynthetic and yield responses of rotating planting strips and reducing nitrogen fertilizer application in maize–peanut intercropping in dry farming areas
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Photosynthetic and yield responses of rotating planting strips and reducing nitrogen fertilizer application in maize–peanut intercropping in dry farming areas
Do you wish to request the book?
Photosynthetic and yield responses of rotating planting strips and reducing nitrogen fertilizer application in maize–peanut intercropping in dry farming areas
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Photosynthetic and yield responses of rotating planting strips and reducing nitrogen fertilizer application in maize–peanut intercropping in dry farming areas
2022
Overview
Improving cropping systems together with suitable agronomic management practices can maintain dry farming productivity and reduce water competition with low N inputs. The objective of the study was to determine the photosynthetic and yield responses of maize and peanut under six treatments: sole maize, sole peanut, maize–peanut intercropping, maize–peanut rotation–intercropping, 20% and 40% N reductions for maize in the maize–peanut rotation–intercropping. Maize–peanut intercropping had no land-use advantage. Intercropped peanut is limited in carboxylation rates and electron transport rate (ETR), leading to a decrease in hundred-grain weight (HGW) and an increase in blighted pods number per plant (N BP ). Intercropped peanut adapts to light stress by decreasing light saturation point (I sat ) and light compensation point (I comp ) and increasing the electron transport efficiency. Intercropped maize showed an increase in maximum photosynthetic rate (Pn max ) and I comp due to a combination of improved intercellular CO 2 concentration, carboxylation rates, PSII photochemical quantum efficiency, and ETR. Compare to maize–peanut intercropping, maize–peanut rotation–intercropping alleviated the continuous crop barriers of intercropped border row peanut by improving carboxylation rates, electron transport efficiency and decreasing I sat , thereby increasing its HGW and N BP . More importantly, the land equivalent ratio of maize–peanut rotation–intercropping in the second and third planting years were 1.05 and 1.07, respectively, showing obvious land use advantages. A 20% N reduction for maize in maize–peanut rotation–intercropping does not affect photosynthetic character and yield for intercropped crops. However, a 40% N reduction decreased significantly the carboxylation rates, ETR, I comp and Pn max of intercropped maize, thereby reducing in a 14.83% HGW and 5.75% lower grain number per spike, and making land-use efficiency negative.
