Genotype×cropping system interaction in climbing beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown as sole crop and in association with maize (Zea mays L.)

Gebeyehu, Setegn; Simane, Belay; Kirkby, Roger Alexander

doi:10.1016/j.eja.2006.01.005

Cited by 32 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, intercropping advantage from genotypes may not necessarily reflect performance under sole cropping indicating the need for evaluating genotypes under intended cropping systems. Yield advantages from maize-bean associations have been reported in several studies (Gebeyehu et al, 2006;Muraya et al, 2006;Worku, 2008Worku, , 2014Workayehu and Wortmann, 2011). Though most of the contribution was derived from the dominant component, maize, differences in intercropping advantage appeared due to variability among the associated bean genotypes.…”

Section: Partial and Total Land Equivalent Ratiomentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The bean component may not have exerted much competition on the maize component either because of the competitiveness of the maize hybrids and/or the less aggressive nature of the bean genotypes (Muraya et al, 2006). In other studies, maize yield did not suffer from intercropping when the bean was planted a month after maize emergence (Gebeyehu et al, 2006) and from relay planting (Davis and Gracia, 1983;Worku, 2014). The long growth duration of maize and its dominant nature provided by its architecture may have lessened a strong competition from common bean.…”

Section: Grain Yield and Yield Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Plant genotypes are rarely developed for mixed cropping systems despite the potential of these systems to provide multiple ecosystem services (Isaacs et al, 2016). Significant cropping system by genotype interactions have been reported from maize-bean intercropping (Hauggaard-Nielsen and Jensen, 2001;AtuaheneAmankwa et al, 2004;Gebeyehu et al, 2006) whereas Worku (2008) has not observed a significant interaction. Differences in growth habit and morphology of the component bean genotypes involved may have contributed to reported differences in the response of genotypes to cropping systems (Worku, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…To minimize unwanted variation among the ratios and identify the most productive association, yield of the best sole crop bean genotype was used as standardization factor instead of individual sole crop yields of genotypes (Mead and Willey, 1980;Oyejola and Mead, 1982;Gebeyehu et al, 2006).…”

Section: Intercropping Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies have shown yield reduction when beans are grown with maize under intercropping (Gebeyehu et al, 2006;Tana et al, 2007;Worku, 2008). On the other hand, the magnitude of intercropping efficiency depends largely on the performance of the associated beans.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Performance variation among improved common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under sole and intercropping with maize (Zea mays L.)

Abera¹,

Worku²,

Beyene³

2017

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Periodic assessment of released common bean cultivars is essential to screen genotypes that offer superior intercropping advantage to farmers when grown in association with maize. Thus, comparative performance of improved genotypes representing commonly used growth habit and market classes were investigated under sole and intercropping system at Halaba special district, Southern Ethiopia. Treatments consisted of a factorial combination of seven common bean genotypes and two cropping systems, which were arranged in a split plot design replicated three times. Cropping system and genotype were assigned as main and sub plot factors, respectively. Cropping system by genotype interaction was significant for bean grain yield and two of the yield components causing moderate changes in ranking. Relative yield reduction due to association with maize varied from 26% for genotype Sari-1 (Type II)

show abstract

Section: Partial and Total Land Equivalent Ratiomentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Grain Yield and Yield Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Intercropping Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Performance variation among improved common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under sole and intercropping with maize (Zea mays L.)

Abera¹,

Worku²,

Beyene³

2017

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Farmers’ Knowledge and Perception of Climbing Beans-Based Cropping Systems in Rwanda

Ruganzu

Mutware

Uwumukiza

et al. 2014

Challenges and Opportunities for Agricultural Intensification of the Humid Highland Systems of Sub-Saharan Africa

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genotype × environment interaction and yield stability in a cowpea-based cropping system

Padi¹

2007

Euphytica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Twenty-four cowpea genotypes were evaluated under sole cropping or additive series intercropping with sorghum from 2004 to 2005 at four sites representative of the Guinea and Sudan savannah ecologies in Ghana. The aim was to determine whether cowpea breeding programs that emphasize selection under sole-crop conditions have the potential to produce cultivars that are effective under additive series intercropping. Genotype · cropping systems interaction was significant for days to 50% flowering but not for grain yield, biomass and other studied traits. Genotypic yield reaction to cropping systems indicated that bridging the yield gap between sole cropping and intercropping systems is best addressed by agronomic interventions that reduce stress on intercrop cowpea rather than by selecting for specifically adapted genotypes for intercropping. Significant genotype · environment interactions were observed for all traits when data was pooled over cropping systems. Partitioning of the genotype · environment interaction variance indicated that days to 50% flowering was dominated by heterogeneity of genotypic variance, whereas genotype · environment interactions for grain yield and biomass was mainly due to imperfect correlations. Large differences in genotypic yield stability were observed as estimated by the among-environment variance, regression of yield on the environmental index, Kataoka's index, and by partitioning of genotype · environment interaction sum of squares into components attributable to each genotype. The results suggest that in regions where genotype · environment interaction for yield frequently causes re-ranking across environments, genotypes with the least contribution to the interaction sum of squares are likely to be most productive. On the whole, the results support the contention that breeding under sole-crop conditions has the potential to produce cultivars effective under intercropping conditions.

show abstract

Genotype×cropping system interaction in climbing beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown as sole crop and in association with maize (Zea mays L.)

Cited by 32 publications

References 23 publications

Performance variation among improved common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under sole and intercropping with maize (Zea mays L.)

Performance variation among improved common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under sole and intercropping with maize (Zea mays L.)

Farmers’ Knowledge and Perception of Climbing Beans-Based Cropping Systems in Rwanda

Genotype × environment interaction and yield stability in a cowpea-based cropping system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About