Double and Monocropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum Under Different Tillage and Row Spacings

Crabtree, R. J.; Makonnen, Girma A.

doi:10.1097/00010694-198109000-00004

Cited by 7 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1980 to 1984 Over the 5-yr study period, monocropped wheat yielded an average of 650 kg ha -I more than did double-cropped wheat ( Table 2). These results are similar to those reported by Crabtree and Makonnen (2). For the same period, irrigated, conventionally tilled, monocropped grain sorghum averaged 5650 compared to 4866 kg ha -I for rain fed, conventionally tilled, monocropped grain sorghum.…”

supporting

confidence: 90%

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions¹

Crabtree¹,

Greenland²,

Mehdawi³

et al. 1986

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sufficient amounts and distribution of rainfall are often the major limiting crop production factors in the southern Great Plains. This is especially true for summer crops whether grown in mono-or double-cropping situations since these factors have significant impact on yields and profitability. This study was conducted at the Oklahoma Vegetable Research Station, Bixby, OK, from 1980 to 1984, on a Wynona silt loam soil (Cumulic Haplaquolls) with 0 to 1% slope. The objectives were to compare yields and net economic returns of mono-and double-cropped wheat (Triticum aestivum (L.) em. Theil) and grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor(L.) Moench] where all wheat was produced under rainfed conditions and where monoand double-cropped grain sorghum were produced under both rainfed and irrigated conditions. Over the 5-yr period, rainfed, monocropped wheat yielded an average of 3498 compared to 2848 kg ha~• for rainfed, double-cropped wheat. Irrigated, conventionally tilled, monocropped grain sorghum yielded an average of 5650 compared to 4866 kg ha-1 for rain fed, conventionally tilled, monocropped grain sorghum. Irrigated, no-till, double-cropped grain sorghum yielded an average of 4976 compared to 3856 kg ha~• for rainfed, no-till, double-cropped grain sorghum. Rainfed, monocropped wheat produced the highest net economic return per hectare of any of the five cropping systems. Net return from rainfed, conventionally tilled, monocropped grain sorghum was nearly equal to that of wheat. Irrigation increased the yields of mono-and double-cropped grain sorghum 784 and 1120 kg ha-•, respectively. However, given these yields, the price of grain sorghum would have to increase from 0.10 to 0.25 and 0.19 dollars kg-• for mono-and double-cropped grain sorghum, respectively, before irrigation would become economically feasible.Additiofllll index words: Triticum aestivum (L.) em. Theil, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench, Conventional tillage, No-till.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 90%

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions¹

Crabtree¹,

Greenland²,

Mehdawi³

et al. 1986

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is generally accepted that yield increases when Finger millet rows are narrowly spaced. This, however, is not always supported by the literature (Crabtree and Rupp, 1980;Teich et al, 1993;McLeod et al, 1996;Lafond and Gan, 1999;Hiltbrunner et al, 2004). Intercropping has gained interest because of potential advantages it offers over yielding, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Finger millet and horsegram intercropping systems in replacement series for advantages and weed smothering

Pradhan

Patil

Sao

et al. 2018

ASD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The land use efficiency and weed suppression through intercropping plays a pivotal role. A field experiment was carried out on finger millet (Eleusine indica L. Gaertn) -horsegram (Macrotyloma uniflorum (Lam.) Verdc.) mono-and intercropping with various weeding (0, 1, or 2 hand-weeding operations) and row spacing (20 and 30 cm) treatments in the Bastar plateau region of India over consecutive five Kharif seasons (2010/2014). The experimental design was a randomized complete block with eighteen treatments replicated thrice. Five percent significant differences were observed in yield and its economics with and without weeding treatments. Horsegram yield was significantly reduced by Finger millet when intercropped. However, total productivity and land use efficiency were higher under the intercropping system as compared to monocrops of either species. There was a significant reduction in weed density and biomass for the intercropping system over both monocrops. Finger millet facilitated an increase in nodule number and dry weight in horsegram under intercropping over monocrops, moreover, root length of horsegram was greater when intercropped. These findings suggest that intercropping Finger millet and horsegram increase total productivity per unit area improve land use efficiency and suppress weeds. Focussing the experimental findings, Finger millet-horsegram (30 cm) with two weedings may be recommended for yield advantage, higher net income, more efficient utilization of resources, and weed suppression as a biological control in western plateau region of India.

show abstract

“…Typical doublecrop production systems include burning the wheat stubble after wheat harvest (Banks, 1990;Sanford, 1982;Wesley and Cooke, 1988) and planting soybean no-till, or preparing a seedbed for both crops (Banks, 1990;Crabtree and Rupp;1980;Sanford, 1982) Published in J. Prod.…”

Section: What Is the Overall Assessment Of A Continuous No-till-plantmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No-till soybean production has potential for success when used in an uninterrupted, year-to-year system (Lewis, 1985;Moseley and Hagood, 1990;Robinson et al, 1984;Sanford, 1982). In doublecrop systems, soybean may be planted no-till after wheat harvest in standing or burned stubble (Banks, 1990;Crabtree and Rupp, 1980;DeFelice et al, 1987;Edwards et al, 1988;Lewis, 1985;Moseley and Hagood, 1990;Robinson et al, 1984;Sanford, 1982;Touchton and Johnson, 1982;Wesley and Cooke, 1988). The usual practice for wheat planting is to prepare a seedbed, even if the soybean crop is planted no-till (Sanford, 1982;Sanford et al, 1986).…”

Section: What Is the Overall Assessment Of A Continuous No-till-plantmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The usual practice for wheat planting is to prepare a seedbed, even if the soybean crop is planted no-till (Sanford, 1982;Sanford et al, 1986). Winter wheat has been sown notill following soybean in the southwestern or drier regions of the USA, and yields resulting from this practice have been similar to those resulting from wheat planted in a prepared seedbed (Crabtree and Rupp, 1980;Gerik and Morrison, 1985).…”

Section: What Is the Overall Assessment Of A Continuous No-till-plantmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Net Returns from No-Till Doublecrop Winter Wheat and Irrigated Soybean on a Clay Soil

Heatherly

Elmore

Wesley

et al. 1996

Journal of Production Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic evaluation of agronomic production practices is required to determine their feasibility in cropping systems with two or more crops. Net returns from continuous double‐cropped wheat (Triticum oestivum L.) and irrigated soybean [Glycine ma (L.) Merr.] were calculated using data from plantings made in 1988, 1989, and 1990 near Stoneville, MS, on a Tunica clay (clayey over loamy, montmorillonitic, nonacid, thermic, Vertic Haplaquept) in tilled and no‐till seedbeds in both burned and standing wheat stubble. Yield of soybean was not affected by stubble management or seedbed preparation. Yield of wheat was reduced in plantings made following soybean that was planted in standing wheat stubble in the first 2 yr of the study. Seedbed preparation for wheat planting had an inconsistent effect on wheat yield. Wheat yields declined as the study progressed. Combined net returns were greater from the burned stubble treatment in 2 of the 3 yr, and this was attributed to the higher net returns from wheat in this treatment. Combined net returns from the tilled seedbed treatment were similar to those from the no‐till treatment in 1988 and 1989; in 1990, net returns from the tilled seedbed treatment were higher. These results indicate that highest combined net returns from a continuous wheat‐soybean doublecrop system will be obtained when soybean is planted in burned wheat stubble. Low and declining wheat yields in this short‐term study (confounded with year effects) indicate that continuous wheat‐soybean doublecropping using no‐till planting of wheat is not a viable management option. This conclusion has to be verified with longer‐term research, however. Research Question Doublecropping of winter wheat and soybean is a common practice in the southern USA. On the clay soils of the lower Mississippi River Valley, wet fall weather often precludes the planting of wheat in a prepared seedbed, thus reducing the planned doublecrop acreage. Seeding wheat in a no‐till seedbed could result in increased wheat plantings, and thus more acres could be allotted to doublecropping. This study was conducted to assess the economic risk of no‐till planting of wheat and soybean as a way of increasing doublecropped acreage. Literature Summary Doublecropping winter wheat with soybean is an important cropping practice in the southern USA. In the doublecrop system, soybean is planted no‐till in standing wheat stubble, or in a no‐till or prepared seedbed following burning of wheat stubble. Wheat is usually planted in a prepared seedbed following soybean harvest, even if the soybean crop is planted no‐till. Doublecropped wheat and soybean results in greater economic returns than monocropped soybean when soybean is irrigated. The economic feasibility of no‐till seeding of doublecrop wheat in a continuous winter wheat‐soybean doublecrop system where soybean is irrigated is unknown. Study Description A field study was conducted for three doublecrop cycles (October 1987 through October 1990) on Tunica clay near Stoneville, MS. Wheat stubble was either bu...

show abstract

Double and Monocropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum Under Different Tillage and Row Spacings

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions¹

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions¹

Finger millet and horsegram intercropping systems in replacement series for advantages and weed smothering

Net Returns from No-Till Doublecrop Winter Wheat and Irrigated Soybean on a Clay Soil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Double and Monocropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum Under Different Tillage and Row Spacings

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions1

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions1

Finger millet and horsegram intercropping systems in replacement series for advantages and weed smothering

Net Returns from No-Till Doublecrop Winter Wheat and Irrigated Soybean on a Clay Soil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions¹

Mono‐ and Double‐Cropped Wheat and Grain Sorghum under Rainfed and Irrigated Conditions¹