Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T23:04:45.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of maize-based intercropping on runoff, soil loss, and yield in foothills of the Indian sub-Himalayas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2021

Rajeev Ranjan Open the ORCID record for Rajeev Ranjan [Opens in a new window] ,
N.K. Sharma ,
Ambrish Kumar ,
Monalisha Pramanik ,
Harsh Mehta ,
P.R Ojasvi  and
R.S. Yadav
Rajeev Ranjan*
Affiliation:
Division of Agricultural Physics, ICAR – Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, 110012, India Soil Science and Agronomy Division, ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Research Centre, Datia, Madhya Pradesh, 475661, India
N.K. Sharma
Affiliation:
Soil Science and Agronomy Division, ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, 218, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, 248195, India
Ambrish Kumar
Affiliation:
Hydrology and Engineering Division, ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, 218, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, 248195, India College of Agricultural Engineering, Dr Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa, Samastipur, Bihar-848125, India
Monalisha Pramanik
Affiliation:
Hydrology and Engineering Division, ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Research Centre, Datia, Madhya Pradesh, 475661, India
Harsh Mehta
Affiliation:
Plant Science Division, ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, 218, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, 248195, India
P.R Ojasvi
Affiliation:
Hydrology and Engineering Division, ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, 218, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, 248195, India
R.S. Yadav
Affiliation:
Soil Science and Agronomy Division, ICAR – Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Research Centre, Datia, Madhya Pradesh, 475661, India
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Soil and nutrients losses due to soil erosion are detrimental to crop production, especially in the hilly terrains. An experiment was carried out in three consecutive cropping seasons (2012–2015) with four treatments: sole maize; sole maize with plastic mulch; maize and cowpea under plastic mulching; and maize and soybean under plastic mulching in randomized block design (RBD) to assess their impact on productivity, profitability, and resource (rainwater, soil, and NPK nutrients) conservation in the Indian sub-Himalayan region. The plot size was 9 × 8.1 m with 2% slope, and runoff and soil loss were measured using a multi-slot devisor. The results showed that mean runoff decreased from 356 mm in sole maize with plastic mulch plots to 229 mm in maize + cowpea intercropping with plastic mulch, representing a reduction of 36% and corresponding soil loss reduction was 41% (from 9.4 to 5.5 t ha−1). The eroded soil exported a considerable amount of nitrogen (N) (13.2–31.4 kg ha−1), phosphorous (P) (0.5–1.7 kg ha−1), and potassium (K) (9.9–15.6 kg ha−1) and was consistently lower in maize + cowpea intercropping. The maize equivalent yield (MEY) was significantly higher in maize + cowpea with plastic mulch intercropping than the other treatments. These results justify the need to adopt maize with alternate legume intercrops and plastic mulch. This strategy must be done in a way guaranteeing high yield stability to the smallholder farmers of the Indian sub-Himalayan region.

Keywords

IntercroppingRunoffSoil erosion
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 57 , Issue 2 , April 2021 , pp. 69 - 84
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ali, I., Khan, F. and Bhatti, A.U. (2007). Soil and nutrient losses by water erosion under monocropping and legume intercropping in slopping land. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research 20, 161–166.Google Scholar
Badorreck, A., Gerke, H.H. and Hüttl, R.F. (2013). Morphology of physical soil crusts and infiltration patterns in an artificial catchment. Soil Tillage Research 129, 1–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.still.2013.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bashagaluke, J.B., Logah, V., Opoku, A., Sarkodie-Addo, J. and Quansah, C. (2018). Soil nutrient loss through erosion: impact of different cropping systems and soil amendments in Ghana. PLoS ONE 13, e0208250. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208250 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertol, I., Engel, F.L., Mafra, A.L., Bertol, O.J. and Ritter, S.R. (2007). Phosphorus, potassium and organic carbon concentrations in runoff water and sediments under different soil tillage systems during soybean growth. Soil and Tillage Research 94, 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2006.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, C.A. (1965). Methods of soil analysis, part II. Chemical and microbiological properties. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A., ASA, Monograph no.9, 1179–1206.Google Scholar
Bouraima, A. K., He, B. and Tian, T. (2016). Runoff, nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) losses from purple slope cropland soil under rating fertilization in three Gorges region. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 23, 4541–4550. doi: 10.1007/s11356-015-5488-1 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bouyoucos, G.J. (1927). The hydrometer as a new method for the mechanical analysis of soil. Soil Science 23, 343–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, G., Chai, Q., Huang, G., Yu, A., Feng, F., Mu, Y., Kong, X. and Huang, P. (2015). Belowground interspecies interaction enhances productivity and water use efficiency in maize-pea intercropping systems. Crop Science 55, 1–9. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2014.06.0439 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egarter-Vigl, L., Depellegrin, D., Pereira, P., De Groot, D. and Tappeiner, U. (2017). Mapping the ecosystem service delivery chain: capacity, flow, and demand pertaining to aesthetic experiences in mountain landscapes. Science of The Total Environment 574, 422–436. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.209 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feng, L., Raza, M.A., Chen, Y., Khalid, M.H.B., Meraj, T.A., Ahsan, F., Fan, Y., Du, J., Wu, X., Song, C., Liu, C., Bawa, G., Zhang, Z., Yuan, S., Yang, F. and Yang, W. (2019). Narrow-wide row planting pattern improves the light environment and seed yields of intercrop species in relay intercropping system. PLoS ONE 14, e0212885. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212885 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finch, H.J.S., Samuel, A.M. and Lane, G.P.F. (2014). Soils and soil management, In Finch, H.J.S., Samuel, A.M. and Lane, G.P.F. (eds) Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition, Lockhart & Wiseman’s Crop Husbandry Including Grassland. Woodhead Publishing, pp. 37–62, https://doi.org/10.1533/9781782423928.1.37 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flanagan, D. (2002). Erosion Encyclopedia of Soil Science. Lal, R (ed.) New York: Marcel Dekker, pp. 395–398.Google Scholar
Francis, C.A., Flor, C.A. and Temple, S.R. (1976). Adapting varieties for intercropping systems in the tropics. In Papendick, R.I., Sanches, P.A. and Triplett, G.B. (eds), Multiple cropping. American Society of Agronomy. Special publication number 27. pp. 235–253.Google Scholar
Gitari, H.I., Karanja, N.N., Gachene, C.K.K., Kamau, S., Sharma, K. and Schulte-Geldermann, E. (2018). Nitrogen and phosphorous uptake by potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) and their use efficiency under potato-legume intercropping systems. Field Crops Research 222, 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2018.03.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical procedure for agricultural research. New York, USA: John Wiley, pp. 680.Google Scholar
Guo, M., Zhang, T., Li, Z. and Xu, G. (2019). Investigation of runoff and sediment yields under different crop and tillage conditions by field artificial rainfall experiments. Water 11, 1019. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11051019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, M.L. (1973). Soil Chemical Analysis. New Delhi, India: Prentice Hall of India Pvt Ltd, pp. 38–204.Google Scholar
Kar, G. and Kumar, A. (2007). Effects of irrigation and straw mulch on water use and tuber yield of potato in eastern India. Agricultural Water Management 94, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2007.08.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khola, O.P.S., Dube, R.K. and Sharma, N.K. (1999). Conservation and production ability of maize (Zea mays)-legume intercropping systems under varying dates of sowing. Indian Journal of Agronomy 44, 40–46.Google Scholar
Kurothe, R.S., Kumar, G., Singh, R., Singh, H.B., Tiwari, S.P., Vishwakarma, A.K., Sena, D.R. and Pande, V.C. (2014). Effect of tillage and cropping systems on runoff, soil loss and crop yields under semiarid rainfed agriculture in India. Soil and Tillage Research 140, 126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.03.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakaria, B.L., Narayan, D., Katiyar, V.S. and Biswas, H. (2010). Evaluation of different kharif crops for minimizing runoff and soil loss in Bundelkhand region. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science 58, 252–255.Google Scholar
Lal, R. (2001). Soil degradation by erosion. Land Degradation & Development 12, 519–539. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.472 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamessa, K., Sharma, JJ., Tessema, T. (2016). Influence of cowpea and soybean intercropping pattern in sorghum on striga (Striga hermonthica) infestation and system productivity at Mechara, Eastern Ethiopia. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare 6, 17.Google Scholar
Li, H., Jiang, D., Wollenweber, B., Dai, T. and Cao, W. (2010). Effects of shading on morphology, physiology and grain yield of winter wheat. European Journal of Agronomy 33, 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2010.07.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, J., Zheng, F., Li, G., Bian, F. and An, J. (2016). The effects of raindrop impact and runoff detachment on hillslope soil erosion and soil aggregate loss in the Mollisol region of Northeast China. Soil Tillage Research, 161, 79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2016.04.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahapatra, S.K., Obi Reddy, G.P., Nagdev, R., Yadav, R.P., Singh, S.K. and Sharda, V.N. (2018). Assessment of soil erosion in the fragile Himalayan ecosystem of Uttarakhand, India using USLE and GIS for sustainable productivity. Current Science 115, 108–121. doi: 10.18520/cs/v115/i1/108-121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandal, D. and Sharda, V.N. (2011). Appraisal of soil erosion risk in the eastern Himalayan region of India for soil conservation planning. Land Degradation & Development. DOI: 10.1002/ldr.1139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masvaya, E.N., Nyamangara, J., Descheemaeker, K. and Giller, K.E. (2017). Is maize-cowpea intercropping a viable option for smallholder farms in the risky environments of semiarid southern Africa? Field Crops Research 209, 73–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.04.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, Q., Fu, B., Tang, X. and Ren, H. (2008). Effects of land use on phosphorus loss in the hilly area of the loess plateau China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 139, 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-007-9826-8 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohanty, S., Sonkar, R.K. and Marathe, R.A. (2002). Effect of mulching on Nagpur mandarin cultivation in drought prone region of Central India. Indian Journal of Soil Conservation 30, 286–289.Google Scholar
Muoni, T., Koomson, E., Öborn, I., Marohn, C., Watson, C.A., Bergkvist, G., Barnes, A., Cadisch, G., and Duncan, A. (2020). Reducing soil erosion in smallholder farming systems in east Africa through the introduction of different crop types. Experimental Agriculture 56, 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479719000280 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nwosisi, S., Nandwani, D. and Hui, D. (2019). Mulch treatment effect on weed biomass and yields of organic sweet potato cultivars. Agronomy 9, 190; https://doi:10.3390/agronomy9040190 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyakatawa, E., Jakkula, V., Reddy, K.C., Lemunyon, J.L. and Norris, B.E. Jr (2006). Soil erosion estimation in conservation tillage systems with poultry litter application using RUSLE 2.0 model. Soil and Tillage Research 94, 410–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2006.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyawade, S.O., Gachene, C.K.K., Karanja, N.N., Gitari, H.I., Schulte-Geldermann, E. and Parker, M.L. (2019). Controlling soil erosion in smallholder potato farming systems using legume intercrops Geoderma Regional 17, e00225 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2019.e002252352-0094 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyawade, S.O., Karanja, N., Gachene, C., Parker, M. and Schulte-Geldermann, E. (2018). Susceptibility of soil organic matter fractions to soil erosion under potato-legume intercropping systems in central Kenya. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 73, 568–577. doi: 10.2489/jswc.73.5.567 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, S.R., Cole, C.V., Watanabe, F.S. and Dean, L.A. (1954). Estimation of Available Phosphorus in Soils by Extraction with Sodium Bicarbonate. US Department of Agriculture (Circular No. 939).Google Scholar
Qin, W., Hu, C. and Oenema, O. (2015). Soil mulching significantly enhances yields and water and nitrogen use efficiencies of maize and wheat: a meta-analysis. Scientific Reports 5, 16210. DOI: 10.1038/srep16210 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quinton, J.N., Catt, J.A. and Hess, T.M. (2001). Selective removal of phosphorus from soil: is event size important? Journal of Environmental Quality 30, 538–545. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2001.302538x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ran, L.S., Lu, X.X., Fang, N.F. and Yang, X.K. (2018). Effective soil erosion control represents a significant net carbon sequestration. Scientific Reports 8, 12018. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-30497-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sahoo, D.C., Madhu, M., Muralidharan, P. and Sikka, A.K. (2015). Land management practices for resource conservation under vegetable cultivation in Nilgiris hills ecosystem. Journal of Environmental Biology 36, 1039–1044.Google Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. (2011). Base SAS® 9.3 Procedures Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Sharda, V.N., Dogra, P. and Prakash, C. (2010). Assessment of production losses to water erosion in rainfed areas of India. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 65, 79–91. doi: 10.2489/jswc.65.2.79 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, K.R. and Arora, S. (2012). Management of excess runoff and soil loss under different cropping systems in rainfed foothill region of North-west India. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 11, 277–280.Google Scholar
Sharma, R.C. and Banik, P. (2013). Baby Corn-legumes intercropping system: II weed dynamics and community structure. NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 67, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2013.08.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, A.R. and Behera, U.K. (2009). Recycling of legume residues for nitrogen economy and higher productivity in maize (Zea mays)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 83, 197–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-008-9212-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, N.K., Singh, R.J., Mandal, D., Kumar, A., Alam, N.M. and Keesstra, S. (2017). Increasing farmer’s income and reducing soil erosion using intercropping in rainfed maize-wheat rotation of Himalaya, India. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 247, 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.06.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, R.K., Chaudhary, R.S., Somasundaram, J., Sinha, N.K., Mohanty, M., Hati, K.M., Rashmi, I., Patra, A.K., Chaudhari, S.K. and Lal, R. (2020). Soil and nutrients losses under different crop covers in vertisols of Central India. Journal of Soils and Sediments 20, 609–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-019-02437-w CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Six, J., Conant, R.T., Paul, E.A. and Paustian, K. (2002). Stabilization mechanisms of soil organic matter: implications for C- saturation of soils. Plant and Soil 241, 155–176. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016125726789 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A., Snapp, S., Dimes, J., Gwenambira, C. and Chikowo, R. (2016). Doubled-up legume rotations improve soil fertility and maintain productivity under variable conditions in maize-based cropping systems in Malawi. Agricultural Systems 145, 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.03.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snapp, S.S., Grabowskia, P., Chikowoa, R., Smith, A., Anders, E., Sirrine, D., Chimonyo, V. and Bekunda, M. (2018). Maize yield and profitability tradeoffs with social, human and environmental performance: is sustainable intensification feasible? Agricultural Systems 162, 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Subbaiah, B.V. and Asija, G.L. (1956). A rapid procedure for determination of available nitrogen in soil. Current Science 25, 259–260.Google Scholar
Taschen, E., Amenc, L., Tournier, E., Deleporte, P., Malagoli, P., Fustecd, J., Bru, D., Philippot, L. and Bernard, L. (2017). Cereal-legume intercropping modifies the dynamics of the active rhizospheric bacterial community. Rhizosphere 3, 191–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rhisph.2017.04.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walkley, A. and Black, I.A. (1934). An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, R.W. (1979). Intercropping: its importance and research needs. Part II. Agronomy and research approaches. Field Crop Abstracts 32, 73–85.Google Scholar
Xue, J., Gou, L., Shi, Z-g., Zhao, Y. and Zhang, W. (2017). Effect of leaf removal on photosynthetically active radiation distribution in maize canopy and stalk strength. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 16, 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61394-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, F., Liao, D., Wu, X., Gao, R., Fan, Y., Raza, M.A., Wang, X., Yong, T., Liu, W., Liu, J., Du, J., Shu, K. and Yang, W. (2017). Effect of aboveground and belowground interactions on the intercrop yields in maize-soybean relay intercropping systems. Field Crops Research 203, 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2016.12.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Ranjan et al. supplementary material

Ranjan et al. supplementary material

Download Ranjan et al. supplementary material(File)
File 524.3 KB