Does reduced intraspecific competition of the dominant species in intercrops allow for a higher population density?
Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow cultivating the dominant species at an increased density in intercropping to obtain greater yield. However, experimental results are inconclusive whe...
Saved in:
Published in | Food and energy security Vol. 10; no. 2; pp. 285 - 298 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Bognor Regis
John Wiley & Sons, Inc
01.05.2021
Wiley |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow cultivating the dominant species at an increased density in intercropping to obtain greater yield. However, experimental results are inconclusive when the optimal within row density in the sole crop is not well established. Here, we conducted a two‐year experiment to test the hypothesis that optimal within row plant density of dominant species in intercropping would be higher in the intercrop than in the sole crop. We tested three maize densities (3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1) in both sole maize and two replacement designed intercrops. The row configurations of two intercrops are two rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M2P4) and four rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M4P4). Peanut was grown at the same plant density of 12 plants m−1 row in both sole crop and intercrops. The results indicated that increasing maize density from the optimal density in monoculture is not worthy of promotion to improve yield in intercropping, which denied our hypothesis. The land equivalent ratios (LER) in the dry year (2017) were higher than the wet year (2016). Maize yields per unit area of the whole intercropping system were highest with densities of 4.5 and 6 plants m−1 row, with no significant difference between these two densities. Maximum maize yields in sole cropping were obtained with maize densities of 6 plants m−1 row. Intercropping provided higher yields at low and intermediate sole crop maize densities, but not at high sole crop maize density. Average land equivalent ratios at 3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1 of maize were 1.09, 1.04, and 0.95 in 2016, and 1.07, 1.10, and 1.02 in 2017. Our results suggest that intercropping performs better at conditions with less resources than adequate resources.
The current study explored whether intercropping allows increasing the density of the dominant species in terms of plants per meter row above what is optimal in sole cropping. The results demonstrating a different maize yield‐density response in intercropping with sole maize and contradict the notion that the optimal density of a dominant species is higher in intercropping than in sole cropping. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow cultivating the dominant species at an increased density in intercropping to obtain greater yield. However, experimental results are inconclusive when the optimal within row density in the sole crop is not well established. Here, we conducted a two‐year experiment to test the hypothesis that optimal within row plant density of dominant species in intercropping would be higher in the intercrop than in the sole crop. We tested three maize densities (3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1) in both sole maize and two replacement designed intercrops. The row configurations of two intercrops are two rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M2P4) and four rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M4P4). Peanut was grown at the same plant density of 12 plants m−1 row in both sole crop and intercrops. The results indicated that increasing maize density from the optimal density in monoculture is not worthy of promotion to improve yield in intercropping, which denied our hypothesis. The land equivalent ratios (LER) in the dry year (2017) were higher than the wet year (2016). Maize yields per unit area of the whole intercropping system were highest with densities of 4.5 and 6 plants m−1 row, with no significant difference between these two densities. Maximum maize yields in sole cropping were obtained with maize densities of 6 plants m−1 row. Intercropping provided higher yields at low and intermediate sole crop maize densities, but not at high sole crop maize density. Average land equivalent ratios at 3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1 of maize were 1.09, 1.04, and 0.95 in 2016, and 1.07, 1.10, and 1.02 in 2017. Our results suggest that intercropping performs better at conditions with less resources than adequate resources. Abstract Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow cultivating the dominant species at an increased density in intercropping to obtain greater yield. However, experimental results are inconclusive when the optimal within row density in the sole crop is not well established. Here, we conducted a two‐year experiment to test the hypothesis that optimal within row plant density of dominant species in intercropping would be higher in the intercrop than in the sole crop. We tested three maize densities (3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1) in both sole maize and two replacement designed intercrops. The row configurations of two intercrops are two rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M2P4) and four rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M4P4). Peanut was grown at the same plant density of 12 plants m−1 row in both sole crop and intercrops. The results indicated that increasing maize density from the optimal density in monoculture is not worthy of promotion to improve yield in intercropping, which denied our hypothesis. The land equivalent ratios (LER) in the dry year (2017) were higher than the wet year (2016). Maize yields per unit area of the whole intercropping system were highest with densities of 4.5 and 6 plants m−1 row, with no significant difference between these two densities. Maximum maize yields in sole cropping were obtained with maize densities of 6 plants m−1 row. Intercropping provided higher yields at low and intermediate sole crop maize densities, but not at high sole crop maize density. Average land equivalent ratios at 3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1 of maize were 1.09, 1.04, and 0.95 in 2016, and 1.07, 1.10, and 1.02 in 2017. Our results suggest that intercropping performs better at conditions with less resources than adequate resources. Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow cultivating the dominant species at an increased density in intercropping to obtain greater yield. However, experimental results are inconclusive when the optimal within row density in the sole crop is not well established. Here, we conducted a two‐year experiment to test the hypothesis that optimal within row plant density of dominant species in intercropping would be higher in the intercrop than in the sole crop. We tested three maize densities (3, 4.5, and 6 plants m −1 ) in both sole maize and two replacement designed intercrops. The row configurations of two intercrops are two rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M2P4) and four rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M4P4). Peanut was grown at the same plant density of 12 plants m −1 row in both sole crop and intercrops. The results indicated that increasing maize density from the optimal density in monoculture is not worthy of promotion to improve yield in intercropping, which denied our hypothesis. The land equivalent ratios (LER) in the dry year (2017) were higher than the wet year (2016). Maize yields per unit area of the whole intercropping system were highest with densities of 4.5 and 6 plants m −1 row, with no significant difference between these two densities. Maximum maize yields in sole cropping were obtained with maize densities of 6 plants m −1 row. Intercropping provided higher yields at low and intermediate sole crop maize densities, but not at high sole crop maize density. Average land equivalent ratios at 3, 4.5, and 6 plants m −1 of maize were 1.09, 1.04, and 0.95 in 2016, and 1.07, 1.10, and 1.02 in 2017. Our results suggest that intercropping performs better at conditions with less resources than adequate resources. Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow cultivating the dominant species at an increased density in intercropping to obtain greater yield. However, experimental results are inconclusive when the optimal within row density in the sole crop is not well established. Here, we conducted a two‐year experiment to test the hypothesis that optimal within row plant density of dominant species in intercropping would be higher in the intercrop than in the sole crop. We tested three maize densities (3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1) in both sole maize and two replacement designed intercrops. The row configurations of two intercrops are two rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M2P4) and four rows maize intercropped with four rows peanut (M4P4). Peanut was grown at the same plant density of 12 plants m−1 row in both sole crop and intercrops. The results indicated that increasing maize density from the optimal density in monoculture is not worthy of promotion to improve yield in intercropping, which denied our hypothesis. The land equivalent ratios (LER) in the dry year (2017) were higher than the wet year (2016). Maize yields per unit area of the whole intercropping system were highest with densities of 4.5 and 6 plants m−1 row, with no significant difference between these two densities. Maximum maize yields in sole cropping were obtained with maize densities of 6 plants m−1 row. Intercropping provided higher yields at low and intermediate sole crop maize densities, but not at high sole crop maize density. Average land equivalent ratios at 3, 4.5, and 6 plants m−1 of maize were 1.09, 1.04, and 0.95 in 2016, and 1.07, 1.10, and 1.02 in 2017. Our results suggest that intercropping performs better at conditions with less resources than adequate resources. The current study explored whether intercropping allows increasing the density of the dominant species in terms of plants per meter row above what is optimal in sole cropping. The results demonstrating a different maize yield‐density response in intercropping with sole maize and contradict the notion that the optimal density of a dominant species is higher in intercropping than in sole cropping. |
Author | Stomph, Tjeerd‐Jan Zhang, Lizhen Werf, Wopke Zhang, Yue Evers, Jochem B. Wang, Qi Zhang, Dongsheng Feng, Chen Sun, Zhanxiang Wang, Ruonan Bai, Wei |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Qi surname: Wang fullname: Wang, Qi organization: Wageningen University – sequence: 2 givenname: Wei surname: Bai fullname: Bai, Wei organization: Liaoning Academy of Agricultural Sciences – sequence: 3 givenname: Zhanxiang surname: Sun fullname: Sun, Zhanxiang organization: Liaoning Academy of Agricultural Sciences – sequence: 4 givenname: Dongsheng surname: Zhang fullname: Zhang, Dongsheng organization: Shanxi Agricultural University – sequence: 5 givenname: Yue surname: Zhang fullname: Zhang, Yue organization: China Agricultural University – sequence: 6 givenname: Ruonan surname: Wang fullname: Wang, Ruonan organization: China Agricultural University – sequence: 7 givenname: Jochem B. surname: Evers fullname: Evers, Jochem B. organization: Wageningen University – sequence: 8 givenname: Tjeerd‐Jan surname: Stomph fullname: Stomph, Tjeerd‐Jan organization: Wageningen University – sequence: 9 givenname: Wopke surname: Werf fullname: Werf, Wopke organization: Wageningen University – sequence: 10 givenname: Chen surname: Feng fullname: Feng, Chen organization: Liaoning Academy of Agricultural Sciences – sequence: 11 givenname: Lizhen orcidid: 0000-0003-1606-6824 surname: Zhang fullname: Zhang, Lizhen email: zhanglizhen@cau.edu.cn organization: China Agricultural University |
BookMark | eNp1kU9rGzEQxUVJIakT6EcQ9NLLOvrv3VMpadIGAj0kd6GVRrHMWtpKMsHfvrKdQinpXDSI33vMzPuAzmKKgNBHSpaUEHbtofAlW5F36IIR0XdcDeLsr_4cXZWyIa16pegwXKDyLUHBGdzOgsMh1mzKDDb4YLFN2xlqqCFFnDyua8AubUM0seIj1JQhHkSQbU5zwWaa0gv2KWOD1-F5DRnPad5N5ujhIJZQ918u0XtvpgJXr-8CPd3dPt386B5-fr-_-frQWcEZ6SyzaqUGL4UVYDlfrSio0RA3Dr1ho7C9G0ag0htpvDPGMOmp47wnznogfIHuT7YumY2ec9iavNfJBH38SPlZm1yDnUAzD4pxKkYrieAKBiM985I1VypYM12gTyevOadfOyhVb9Iuxza9ZpJJpRTvWaOWJ6pdo5QMXttQj7u3s4ZJU6IPMelDTLrF1ASf_xH8GfMNtDuhL2GC_X85fXf7yA_8byE8pTo |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1007_s42729_024_01708_x crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cj_2021_09_010 crossref_primary_10_1155_aia_8847195 crossref_primary_10_1073_pnas_2201886120 crossref_primary_10_1002_fes3_364 crossref_primary_10_3390_agronomy11061225 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_fcr_2024_109647 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jafr_2022_100404 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_fcr_2024_109513 crossref_primary_10_1002_agj2_20828 crossref_primary_10_59983_s2024020403 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_fcr_2025_109833 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_scitotenv_2022_157970 crossref_primary_10_1002_fes3_319 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_agsy_2022_103584 crossref_primary_10_3390_plants13223193 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jafr_2024_101229 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cj_2024_10_010 crossref_primary_10_3390_agronomy14030527 crossref_primary_10_3389_fpls_2024_1344110 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.376 10.1023/A:1011909414400 10.1016/j.fcr.2020.107926 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00126-5 10.2307/1941795 10.1023/A:1004724219988 10.1016/j.eja.2017.09.008 10.1016/j.agwat.2009.09.011 10.2134/agronj2011.0205 10.1017/CBO9780511623523 10.1016/S0378-3774(02)00177-4 10.1016/S1161-0301(00)00080-0 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.024 10.1007/s13593-014-0277-7 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.01.011 10.2307/2403711 10.5194/hess-11-1633-2007 10.2134/agronj2003.0241 10.1016/0022-5193(80)90297-0 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.09.001 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.12.010 10.1016/j.fcr.2010.11.006 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.09.023 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2003.00805.x 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107661 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107613 10.1016/bs.agron.2019.10.002 10.2135/cropsci2016.02.0083 10.1016/j.eja.2011.02.007 10.1038/srep17592 10.2134/agronj2018.04.0275 10.1016/j.fcr.2020.107819 10.1023/A:1022352229863 10.2134/agronj2003.1475 10.1016/j.eja.2016.05.009 10.1016/j.jplph.2007.01.016 10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00278-X 10.1111/gcb.12738 10.3390/agronomy9030150 10.2134/agronj14.0263 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.09.019 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a086699 10.1079/9780851994178.0000 10.1016/S0378-4290(02)00124-7 10.1146/annurev-phyto-082712-102246 10.1016/0169-5347(90)90095-U 10.1016/B978-0-12-384719-5.00363-4 10.1017/S0014479700010796 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.09.010 10.1007/s11258-016-0616-7 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00156-3 10.1007/s00442-009-1333-x 10.1038/188342a0 10.1007/BF01867035 10.1007/s11104-015-2619-x 10.5194/bg-14-3851-2017 10.2134/agronj2006.0205 10.1007/s11269-008-9383-0 10.1007/s10658-019-01711-4 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | 2021 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2021 The Authors. published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. – notice: 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. |
DBID | 24P AAYXX CITATION 3V. 7QH 7ST 7UA 7X2 8FE 8FG 8FH 8FK ABJCF ABUWG AEUYN AFKRA ATCPS AZQEC BENPR BGLVJ BHPHI C1K CCPQU DWQXO F1W GNUQQ H97 HCIFZ L.G L6V M0K M7S PATMY PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PKEHL PQEST PQGLB PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS PTHSS PYCSY SOI DOA |
DOI | 10.1002/fes3.270 |
DatabaseName | Wiley Online Library Open Access CrossRef ProQuest Central (Corporate) Aqualine Environment Abstracts Water Resources Abstracts Agricultural Science Collection ProQuest SciTech Collection ProQuest Technology Collection ProQuest Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) Materials Science & Engineering Collection (subscription) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest One Sustainability ProQuest Central UK/Ireland Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Central Technology collection Natural Science Collection Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Korea ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts ProQuest Central Student Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality SciTech Premium Collection Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional ProQuest Engineering Collection Agricultural Science Database ProQuest Engineering Database Environmental Science Database ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Central China Engineering collection Environmental Science Collection Environment Abstracts DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef Agricultural Science Database Publicly Available Content Database Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional ProQuest Central Student Technology Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central China Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality Water Resources Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management ProQuest Central ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest One Sustainability ProQuest Engineering Collection Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central Korea Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection ProQuest Central (New) Engineering Collection Engineering Database ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition Agricultural Science Collection ProQuest Technology Collection ProQuest SciTech Collection Aqualine Environmental Science Collection ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts Materials Science & Engineering Collection Environmental Science Database ProQuest One Academic Environment Abstracts ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) |
DatabaseTitleList | Agricultural Science Database CrossRef |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: 24P name: Wiley Online Library Open Access url: https://authorservices.wiley.com/open-science/open-access/browse-journals.html sourceTypes: Publisher – sequence: 3 dbid: 8FG name: ProQuest Technology Collection url: https://search.proquest.com/technologycollection1 sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Agriculture |
EISSN | 2048-3694 |
EndPage | 298 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_2fe62314bc50436e9a5f2f52daa1421d 10_1002_fes3_270 FES3270 |
Genre | article |
GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research Team Construction and Talent Development Project funderid: JZ0145B752017 – fundername: China Scholarship Council funderid: 201706350221 – fundername: International Cooperation and Exchange of the National Science Foundation of China funderid: 31461143025 – fundername: National Key R&D Program of China funderid: 2016YFD0300202 – fundername: European Union’s Horizon 2020 Programme for Research and Innovation funderid: 727217 |
GroupedDBID | 0R~ 1OC 24P 31~ 5VS 7X2 7XC 8-0 8-1 8FE 8FG 8FH AAFWJ AAHBH AAHHS AAZKR ABDBF ABJCF ACCFJ ACCMX ACUHS ACXQS ADBBV ADKYN ADZMN ADZOD AEEZP AEQDE AEUYN AFKRA AIWBW AJBDE ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ATCPS AVUZU BCNDV BENPR BGLVJ BHPHI CCPQU D-8 D-9 EBS ECGQY EJD ESX GODZA GROUPED_DOAJ HCIFZ HZ~ IAO ITC KQ8 L6V M0K M7S M~E O9- OK1 PATMY PIMPY PROAC PTHSS PYCSY WIN AAYXX AFPKN CITATION PHGZM PHGZT 3V. 7QH 7ST 7UA 8FK AAMMB ABUWG AEFGJ AGXDD AIDQK AIDYY AZQEC C1K DWQXO F1W GNUQQ H97 L.G PKEHL PQEST PQGLB PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS SOI PUEGO |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c4320-c2c6769f54c4ec33771e6ba0db98a2b4c8d9be15fa5afdaaa25f1d3380dcfe03 |
IEDL.DBID | BENPR |
ISSN | 2048-3694 |
IngestDate | Wed Aug 27 01:31:28 EDT 2025 Wed Aug 13 08:53:20 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:04:34 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 02:56:15 EDT 2025 Wed Jan 22 16:29:04 EST 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 2 |
Language | English |
License | Attribution |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c4320-c2c6769f54c4ec33771e6ba0db98a2b4c8d9be15fa5afdaaa25f1d3380dcfe03 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 |
ORCID | 0000-0003-1606-6824 |
OpenAccessLink | https://www.proquest.com/docview/2525666382?pq-origsite=%requestingapplication% |
PQID | 2525666382 |
PQPubID | 2032546 |
PageCount | 14 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_2fe62314bc50436e9a5f2f52daa1421d proquest_journals_2525666382 crossref_citationtrail_10_1002_fes3_270 crossref_primary_10_1002_fes3_270 wiley_primary_10_1002_fes3_270_FES3270 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | May 2021 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2021-05-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 05 year: 2021 text: May 2021 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | Bognor Regis |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Bognor Regis |
PublicationTitle | Food and energy security |
PublicationYear | 2021 |
Publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc Wiley |
Publisher_xml | – name: John Wiley & Sons, Inc – name: Wiley |
References | 2015; 35 2015; 184 2010; 97 2013; 2 2009; 160 1980; 83 2001b; 236 1983; 7 2020; 160 2020; 246 2015; 107 2003; 95 1993; 3 2016; 79 2001; 87 1984; 53 2003; 91 2003; 248 2001 2015; 379 2020; 253 2018; 217 2013; 51 2001a; 70 2018; 615 2020; 257 2012; 138 2001; 14 2019; 111 2011; 121 1989 2011; 120 2019; 154 2009; 23 2001; 71 2019; 9 2015; 5 2011; 1 2002; 79 2007 2011; 34 1989; 26 2012; 104 2008; 165 2007; 11 2007; 99 2017; 214 1980; 16 2017; 91 2017; 17 2016; 217 2017; 57 1960; 188 2015; 21 1956; 7 2005; 97 2019; 212 2015 2000; 220 2019; 657 2003; 61 1990; 5 e_1_2_7_5_1 e_1_2_7_3_1 e_1_2_7_9_1 e_1_2_7_19_1 e_1_2_7_60_1 e_1_2_7_17_1 e_1_2_7_62_1 e_1_2_7_41_1 e_1_2_7_64_1 e_1_2_7_13_1 FAO (e_1_2_7_15_1) 2015 e_1_2_7_43_1 e_1_2_7_11_1 e_1_2_7_45_1 e_1_2_7_47_1 e_1_2_7_26_1 e_1_2_7_49_1 e_1_2_7_28_1 Yahuza I. (e_1_2_7_53_1) 2011; 1 e_1_2_7_50_1 e_1_2_7_25_1 e_1_2_7_31_1 e_1_2_7_52_1 e_1_2_7_23_1 e_1_2_7_33_1 e_1_2_7_54_1 e_1_2_7_21_1 e_1_2_7_35_1 e_1_2_7_56_1 e_1_2_7_58_1 e_1_2_7_39_1 e_1_2_7_6_1 e_1_2_7_4_1 e_1_2_7_8_1 e_1_2_7_18_1 e_1_2_7_16_1 e_1_2_7_40_1 e_1_2_7_61_1 e_1_2_7_2_1 e_1_2_7_14_1 e_1_2_7_42_1 e_1_2_7_63_1 e_1_2_7_12_1 e_1_2_7_44_1 e_1_2_7_10_1 e_1_2_7_46_1 e_1_2_7_48_1 e_1_2_7_27_1 e_1_2_7_29_1 Bolker B. (e_1_2_7_7_1) 2007 e_1_2_7_51_1 e_1_2_7_30_1 e_1_2_7_24_1 e_1_2_7_32_1 Shinozaki K. (e_1_2_7_37_1) 1956; 7 e_1_2_7_55_1 e_1_2_7_22_1 e_1_2_7_34_1 e_1_2_7_57_1 e_1_2_7_20_1 e_1_2_7_36_1 e_1_2_7_59_1 e_1_2_7_38_1 |
References_xml | – volume: 35 start-page: 911 year: 2015 end-page: 935 article-title: Ecological principles underlying the increase of productivity achieved by cereal‐grain legume intercrops in organic farming. A review publication-title: Agronomy for Sustainable Development – volume: 246 year: 2020 article-title: Modelling water use in wheat‐maize relay strip intercropping: Model description, calibration and testing publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 1 start-page: 1 year: 2011 end-page: 17 article-title: Yield‐density equations and their application for agronomic research: A review publication-title: International Journal of Biosciences – volume: 5 start-page: 360 year: 1990 end-page: 364 article-title: Asymmetric competition in plant populations publication-title: Trends in Ecology & Evolution – year: 2001 – volume: 87 start-page: 191 year: 2001 end-page: 207 article-title: The information content of indicators in intercropping research publication-title: Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment – year: 1989 – volume: 236 start-page: 63 year: 2001b end-page: 74 article-title: Temporal and spatial distribution of roots and competition for nitrogen in pea‐barley intercrops‐a field study employing P‐32 technique publication-title: Plant and Soil – volume: 2 start-page: 382 year: 2013 end-page: 395 – volume: 160 start-page: 747 year: 2009 end-page: 755 article-title: Competition, traits and resource depletion in plant communities publication-title: Oecologia – volume: 61 start-page: 1 year: 2003 end-page: 12 article-title: Measurement of evapotranspiration of irrigated spring wheat and maize in a semi‐arid region of north China publication-title: Agricultural Water Management – volume: 214 start-page: 283 year: 2017 end-page: 290 article-title: Does maize hybrid intercropping increase yield due to border effects? publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 5 start-page: 17592 issue: 1 year: 2015 article-title: Effects of Long‐term Conservation Tillage on Soil Nutrients in Sloping Fields in Regions Characterized by Water and Wind Erosion publication-title: Scientific Reports – volume: 97 start-page: 215 year: 2010 end-page: 223 article-title: Water requirements of maize in the middle Heihe River basin, China publication-title: Agricultural Water Management – volume: 16 start-page: 105 issue: 2 year: 1980 end-page: 116 article-title: Evaluation of Yield Stability in Intercropping: Studies on Sorghum/Pigeonpea publication-title: Experimental Agriculture – volume: 91 start-page: 707 year: 2003 end-page: 720 article-title: Indices of plant competition publication-title: Journal of Ecology – volume: 165 start-page: 490 year: 2008 end-page: 503 article-title: Interspecific root interactions and rhizosphere effects on salt ions and nutrient uptake between mixed grown peanut/maize and peanut/barley in original saline‐sodic‐boron toxic soil publication-title: Journal of Plant Physiology – volume: 188 start-page: 342 year: 1960 article-title: Plant population and crop yield publication-title: Nature – volume: 91 start-page: 34 year: 2017 end-page: 43 article-title: Plant growth regulator and its interactions with environment and genotype affect maize optimal plant density and yield publication-title: European Journal of Agronomy – volume: 51 start-page: 499 year: 2013 end-page: 519 article-title: Disease in intercropping systems publication-title: Annual Review of Phytopathology – volume: 7 start-page: 9 year: 1983 end-page: 14 article-title: Intercropping as cultural pest control: Prospects and limitations publication-title: Environmental Management – volume: 11 start-page: 1633 year: 2007 end-page: 1644 article-title: Updated world map of the Köppen‐ Geiger climate classification publication-title: Hydrology and Earth System Sciences – volume: 34 start-page: 287 year: 2011 end-page: 294 article-title: Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea‐cereal intercropping systems publication-title: European Journal of Agronomy – volume: 21 start-page: 1715 year: 2015 end-page: 1726 article-title: Intercropping enhances soil carbon and nitrogen publication-title: Global Change Biology – volume: 257 year: 2020 article-title: Maize plant density affects yield, growth and source‐sink relationship of crops in maize/peanut intercropping publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 17 start-page: 3851 year: 2017 end-page: 3858 article-title: Morphological plasticity of root growth under mild water stress increases water use efficiency without reducing yield in maize publication-title: Biogeosciences – volume: 53 start-page: 349 year: 1984 end-page: 362 article-title: Competition within stands of and publication-title: Annals of Botany – volume: 248 start-page: 305 year: 2003 end-page: 312 article-title: Using competitive and facilitative interactions in intercropping systems enhances crop productivity and nutrient‐use efficiency publication-title: Plant and Soil – volume: 120 start-page: 345 year: 2011 end-page: 351 article-title: Maize hybrids less dependent on high plant densities improve resource‐use efficiency in rainfed and irrigated conditions publication-title: Field Crops Research – year: 2015 – volume: 3 start-page: 92 year: 1993 end-page: 122 article-title: Crop rotation and intercropping strategies for weed management publication-title: Ecological Applications – volume: 379 start-page: 227 year: 2015 end-page: 238 article-title: Growth trajectories and interspecific competitive dynamics in wheat/maize and barley/maize intercropping publication-title: Plant and Soil – volume: 7 start-page: 35 year: 1956 end-page: 72 article-title: Intraspecific competition among higher plants VII. Logistic theory of the C‐D effect publication-title: Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University. Ser. D, Biology – volume: 99 start-page: 984 year: 2007 end-page: 991 article-title: Why do maize hybrids respond differently to variations in plant density? publication-title: Agronomy Journal – volume: 212 start-page: 203 year: 2019 end-page: 210 article-title: Plastic film cover during the fallow season preceding sowing increases yield and water use efficiency of rain‐fed spring maize in a semi‐arid climate publication-title: Agricultural Water Management – volume: 246 year: 2020 article-title: Intercropping maize and soybean increases efficiency of land and fertilizer nitrogen use. A meta‐analysis publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 615 start-page: 767 year: 2018 end-page: 772 article-title: The new green revolution: Sustainable intensification of agriculture by intercropping publication-title: Science of the Total Environment – volume: 138 start-page: 11 year: 2012 end-page: 20 article-title: Yield advantage and water saving in maize/pea intercrop publication-title: Field Crops Research – year: 2007 – volume: 79 start-page: 39 year: 2002 end-page: 51 article-title: Response of Brazilian maize hybrids from different eras to changes in plant density publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 57 start-page: 32 year: 2017 end-page: 39 article-title: Maize stand density yield response of parental inbred lines and derived hybrids publication-title: Crop Science – volume: 97 start-page: 839 year: 2005 end-page: 846 article-title: Yield response of corn to crowding stress publication-title: Agronomy Journal – volume: 71 start-page: 123 year: 2001 end-page: 137 article-title: Wheat/maize or wheat/soybean strip intercropping. Ⅰ. Yield advantage and interspecific interactions on nutrients publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 657 start-page: 987 year: 2019 end-page: 999 article-title: Yield advantage and nitrogen fate in an additive maize‐soybean relay intercropping system publication-title: Science of the Total Environment – volume: 23 start-page: 2317 year: 2009 end-page: 2342 article-title: Comparative assessment of new design criteria for irrigation improvement in Egypt publication-title: Water Resources Management – volume: 217 start-page: 913 year: 2016 end-page: 922 article-title: Yield‐density relationships of above‐ and belowground organs in var. populations publication-title: Plant Ecology – volume: 79 start-page: 58 year: 2016 end-page: 65 article-title: Density responses and spatial distribution of cotton yield and yield components in jujube ( )/cotton ( ) agroforestry publication-title: European Journal of Agronomy – volume: 220 start-page: 13 year: 2000 end-page: 25 article-title: Studies on the improvement in iron nutrition of peanut by intercropping with maize on a calcareous soil publication-title: Plant and Soil – volume: 107 start-page: 296 year: 2015 end-page: 305 article-title: Yield response to different planting geometries in maize‐soybean relay strip intercropping systems publication-title: Agronomy Journal – volume: 160 start-page: 1 year: 2020 end-page: 50 article-title: Designing intercrops for high yield, yield stability and efficient use of resources: Are there principles publication-title: Advances in Agronomy – volume: 253 year: 2020 article-title: Border‐row proportion determines strength of interspecific interactions and crop yields in maize/peanut strip intercropping publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 83 start-page: 345 year: 1980 end-page: 357 article-title: Density‐dependence in single‐species populations of plants publication-title: Journal of Theoretical Biology – volume: 217 start-page: 125 year: 2018 end-page: 133 article-title: Optimised sowing date enhances crop resilience towards size‐asymmetric competition and reduces the yield difference between intercropped and sole maize publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 9 year: 2019 article-title: Impact of increasing maize densities on agronomic performances and the community stability of productivity of maize/peanut intercropping systems publication-title: Agronomy – volume: 184 start-page: 133 year: 2015 end-page: 144 article-title: Temporal niche differentiation increases the land equivalent ratio of annual intercrops: A meta‐analysis publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 121 start-page: 423 year: 2011 end-page: 429 article-title: Yield response to plant density of maize and sunflower intercropped with soybean publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 14 start-page: 1 issue: 1 year: 2001 end-page: 12 article-title: Nitrogen fixation by common bean ( L.) in pure and mixed stands in semi‐arid south‐east Kenya publication-title: European Journal of Agronomy – volume: 154 start-page: 931 year: 2019 end-page: 942 article-title: Intercropping cereals with faba bean reduces plant disease incidence regardless of fertilizer in put; a meta‐analysis publication-title: European Journal of Plant Pathology – volume: 70 start-page: 101 year: 2001a end-page: 109 article-title: Interspecific competition N use and interference with weeds in pea‐barley intercropping publication-title: Field Crops Research – volume: 111 start-page: 1 year: 2019 end-page: 11 article-title: Use of EDAH improves maize morphological and mechanical traits related to lodging publication-title: Agronomy Journal – volume: 95 start-page: 1475 year: 2003 end-page: 1482 article-title: Effects of nitrogen rate, irrigation rate, and plant population on corn yield and water use efficiency publication-title: Agronomy Journal – volume: 104 start-page: 331 year: 2012 end-page: 336 article-title: Density dependence rather than maturity determines hybrid selection in dryland maize production publication-title: Agronomy Journal – volume: 26 start-page: 1043 year: 1989 end-page: 1057 article-title: Bivariate diagrams for plant competition data: Modifications and interpretation publication-title: Journal of Applied Ecology – ident: e_1_2_7_11_1 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.376 – ident: e_1_2_7_19_1 doi: 10.1023/A:1011909414400 – ident: e_1_2_7_57_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2020.107926 – ident: e_1_2_7_18_1 doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00126-5 – ident: e_1_2_7_27_1 doi: 10.2307/1941795 – ident: e_1_2_7_64_1 doi: 10.1023/A:1004724219988 – volume: 7 start-page: 35 year: 1956 ident: e_1_2_7_37_1 article-title: Intraspecific competition among higher plants VII. Logistic theory of the C‐D effect publication-title: Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University. Ser. D, Biology – ident: e_1_2_7_61_1 doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2017.09.008 – ident: e_1_2_7_63_1 doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2009.09.011 – ident: e_1_2_7_5_1 doi: 10.2134/agronj2011.0205 – volume-title: World reference base for soil resources 2014: International soil classification systems for naming soil and creating legends for soil maps year: 2015 ident: e_1_2_7_15_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_43_1 doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511623523 – ident: e_1_2_7_25_1 doi: 10.1016/S0378-3774(02)00177-4 – ident: e_1_2_7_29_1 doi: 10.1016/S1161-0301(00)00080-0 – ident: e_1_2_7_31_1 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.024 – ident: e_1_2_7_4_1 doi: 10.1007/s13593-014-0277-7 – ident: e_1_2_7_14_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.01.011 – ident: e_1_2_7_38_1 doi: 10.2307/2403711 – ident: e_1_2_7_32_1 doi: 10.5194/hess-11-1633-2007 – ident: e_1_2_7_17_1 doi: 10.2134/agronj2003.0241 – ident: e_1_2_7_48_1 doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(80)90297-0 – ident: e_1_2_7_62_1 doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.09.001 – ident: e_1_2_7_20_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.12.010 – ident: e_1_2_7_42_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2010.11.006 – volume: 1 start-page: 1 year: 2011 ident: e_1_2_7_53_1 article-title: Yield‐density equations and their application for agronomic research: A review publication-title: International Journal of Biosciences – ident: e_1_2_7_47_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.09.023 – ident: e_1_2_7_49_1 doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2745.2003.00805.x – ident: e_1_2_7_52_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107661 – ident: e_1_2_7_41_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107613 – ident: e_1_2_7_39_1 doi: 10.1016/bs.agron.2019.10.002 – ident: e_1_2_7_3_1 doi: 10.2135/cropsci2016.02.0083 – ident: e_1_2_7_28_1 doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2011.02.007 – ident: e_1_2_7_40_1 doi: 10.1038/srep17592 – ident: e_1_2_7_59_1 doi: 10.2134/agronj2018.04.0275 – ident: e_1_2_7_46_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2020.107819 – ident: e_1_2_7_58_1 doi: 10.1023/A:1022352229863 – ident: e_1_2_7_2_1 doi: 10.2134/agronj2003.1475 – ident: e_1_2_7_45_1 doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2016.05.009 – ident: e_1_2_7_21_1 doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2007.01.016 – ident: e_1_2_7_13_1 doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00278-X – ident: e_1_2_7_12_1 doi: 10.1111/gcb.12738 – ident: e_1_2_7_51_1 doi: 10.3390/agronomy9030150 – ident: e_1_2_7_54_1 doi: 10.2134/agronj14.0263 – ident: e_1_2_7_30_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.09.019 – volume-title: Ecological models and data in R year: 2007 ident: e_1_2_7_7_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_10_1 doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a086699 – ident: e_1_2_7_16_1 doi: 10.1079/9780851994178.0000 – ident: e_1_2_7_35_1 doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(02)00124-7 – ident: e_1_2_7_8_1 doi: 10.1146/annurev-phyto-082712-102246 – ident: e_1_2_7_50_1 doi: 10.1016/0169-5347(90)90095-U – ident: e_1_2_7_26_1 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-384719-5.00363-4 – ident: e_1_2_7_33_1 doi: 10.1017/S0014479700010796 – ident: e_1_2_7_55_1 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.09.010 – ident: e_1_2_7_24_1 doi: 10.1007/s11258-016-0616-7 – ident: e_1_2_7_23_1 doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00156-3 – ident: e_1_2_7_44_1 doi: 10.1007/s00442-009-1333-x – ident: e_1_2_7_6_1 doi: 10.1038/188342a0 – ident: e_1_2_7_34_1 doi: 10.1007/BF01867035 – ident: e_1_2_7_60_1 doi: 10.1007/s11104-015-2619-x – ident: e_1_2_7_9_1 doi: 10.5194/bg-14-3851-2017 – ident: e_1_2_7_36_1 doi: 10.2134/agronj2006.0205 – ident: e_1_2_7_22_1 doi: 10.1007/s11269-008-9383-0 – ident: e_1_2_7_56_1 doi: 10.1007/s10658-019-01711-4 |
SSID | ssj0000866199 |
Score | 2.3159568 |
Snippet | Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow... Abstract Dominant species in intercropping experience less resource competition compared with its monoculture. This reduced competition for resources may allow... |
SourceID | doaj proquest crossref wiley |
SourceType | Open Website Aggregation Database Enrichment Source Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 285 |
SubjectTerms | Agricultural practices Agricultural production Biological competition Cereal crops Competition Corn Crop yield Crops density Dominant species Equivalence Experiments Hypotheses Intercropping intraspecific competition land equivalent ratio Land use Legumes Monoculture Monoculture (aquaculture) Nitrogen Peanuts Planting density Population density Ratios Resources row configuration Sole cropping yield |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1LS8QwEA7iSQ_iE9cXEURP1TaPbnsSX4sIelHBW0iTiQqyu2xXxH_vTNpdVlC8eCqkCYSZaeZL8-Ubxg4AgkuLUieQ-yJRkNukEl4l3gU6PnRSKboofHuXXz-qmyf9NFPqizhhjTxwY7gTEQAzdKYqR1pbOZRWBxG08NZmSmSeVl_MeTObqbgGF5h3ynKiNpuKkwC1PBZUk3gm_0SZ_m_YchahxhTTW2ZLLTbkZ82cVtgc9FfZ4tnzqNXHgDVWXw6g5iPSWwXPX-nPLN2VJL4PdxECRwoWHwSOyI77QcN04bETjnzt0yAYUeGumtOh-wdH2Motf4mEDz6cFvTinrjt48_TdfbQu3q4uE7augmJU3Qh2glHxNWglVPgpOx2M8grm_qqLKyolCt8WUGmg9U2oB2t0CHzuFdN0UOQyg023x_0YZNxX2hs8KQ32lWl7RbS-9Rp5xB2Salshx1NjGlcqylOpS3eTKOGLAyZ3aDZO2x_2nPY6Gj80Oec_DF9T8rXsQHjwbTxYP6Khw7bmXjTtJ9jbYRGZIfYqhAddhg9_OskTO_qXuJz6z8ms80WBHFgIkFyh82PR--wiyBmXO3FeP0CjVnypA priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – databaseName: Wiley Online Library Open Access dbid: 24P link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwjV1JS8UwEA6iFz2IKz43Ioieqm2WLidxe4igCCp4C2kyUUFepX0i_nszaV9VUPBUSCfQZjrNl-SbbwjZBXAmzgsZQWrzSECqo5JZEVnj8PjQcCEwUfjqOr24F5cP8qFjVWIuTKsP0W-4YWSE_zUGuC6bwy_RUAcNP2CZX67PYGYt0vmYuOn3VzxUT9vykShNG_G0EBPt2ZgdTjr_mI2CaP8PpPkdr4YJZ7hA5jukSI9b1y6SKRgtkbnjx7pTy4Bl0pxV0NAa1VfB0mfcp8XMSWT_UBMAcSBk0cpRj_OorVreCw1GvufzCDtBjWW8GopH8O_Ug1iq6VOgf9DXvrwXtch0H38crZC74fnd6UXUVVGIjMD0aMMM0lidFEaA4TzLEkhLHduyyDUrhcltUUIinZbaWa01ky6xfuUae39BzFfJ9KgawRqhNpe-waL6aCYKneXc2thIYzwI41zoAdmfDKYyncI4Frp4Ua02MlM47MoP-4Ds9JavrarGLzYn6I_-Pupgh4aqflRdWCnmwOO3RJQGldhSKLR0zEnm3yMRLLEDsjnxpuqCs1FMepznkVbOBmQvePjPh1DD81vur-v_NdwgswxZL4ESuUmmx_UbbHnYMi63w_f5CX6Z63U priority: 102 providerName: Wiley-Blackwell |
Title | Does reduced intraspecific competition of the dominant species in intercrops allow for a higher population density? |
URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002%2Ffes3.270 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2525666382 https://doaj.org/article/2fe62314bc50436e9a5f2f52daa1421d |
Volume | 10 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1Lb9QwEB7R7QUOFU-xUFZGQnAKTfzIOqeqhV0qJKoKitSb5djjthLabJNFiH-Px-tdigRcEsmxo8Tjx-fx528AXiEGV-pGFVh7XUisbdFyLwvvAm0fOiElHRT-dFqffJUfL9RFdrgNmVa5GRPTQO07Rz7yA67i5BynR80PlzcFRY2i3dUcQmMHduMQrPUIdo9np2eft16WCNjjCqHZqM6W_CDgIN5yik18ax5Kcv1_YMzbSDVNNfP7sJcxIjtaG_UB3MHFQ7h3dNlnnQx8BMP7DgfWk-4qenZNHlo6M0m8H-YSFE5ULNYFFhEe892a8cJSpljyekGFsKcAXgOjzfcfLMJXZtlVIn6w5TawF_PEcV_9PHwM5_PZ-buTIsdPKJykg9GOOyKwBiWdRCfEdFph3drSt422vJVO-6bFSgWrbPDWWq5C5eOatYyWwlI8gdGiW-BTYF6rmOBJd3QqGzvVwvvSKeci_BJC2jG82VSmcVlbnEJcfDNrVWRuqNpNrPYxvNzmXK71NP6S55jssX1OCtgpoesvTe5QhgeMyK2SrSMNthobqwIPisf_qCSv_Bj2N9Y0uVsO5ncjGsPrZOF_foSZz76IeH_2__c8h7ucWC6JArkPo1X_HV9EmLJqJ7DD5Vm86vmHSW6Xk7Tk_wUHL-5Q |
linkProvider | ProQuest |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lb9QwELZKOQAHxFNsKWAkHqfQxI9sckBVoV229HFhkXqzHHtcKqHNNllU9UfxH5lxkqVIwK2nSI5tJX7NZ_ubbxh7BRBcWpQ6gdwXiYLcJpXwKvEu0PWhk0qRo_DRcT79qj6f6JM19nPwhSFa5bAmxoXa147OyLeERuOM5rEQ24vzhKJG0e3qEEKjGxYHcHmBW7b2_f4u9u9rISZ7s4_TpI8qkDhF7sJOOKJ1Bq2cAifleJxBXtnUV2VhRaVc4csKMh2stsFba4UOmcedXIrfD6nEam-wm0qiISfH9Mmn1ZEO7g5wO1IOErep2ArQyneCAiFfMXoxNsAfgPYqLI52bXKP3e0BKd_pRtB9tgbzB-zOzmnTi3LAQ9bu1tDyhkRewfMzOg4mB00iGXEXcXfkffE6cIST3NcdvYbHTFjybE6FoKFoYS2nm_4LjliZW_4tskz4YhVFjHsi1C8vtx-x2XU062O2Pq_n8IRxX2hM8CRyOlalHRfS-9Rp5xDrSansiL0dGtO4Xsic4ml8N50EszDU7AabfcRernIuOvGOv-T5QP2xek9y2zGhbk5NP3uNCIAwMVOVI8G3HEqrgwha4H9kSmR-xDaH3jT9GtCa3yN2xN7EHv7nR5jJ3heJz43_1_OC3ZrOjg7N4f7xwVN2WxC9JnIvN9n6svkBzxAfLavncVRyZq55FvwCO1EohQ |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1baxQxFD7ULYg-iFdcrRrBy9PYmUwylwcprbtLa3UpWqFvIZNLLcjOOrNS-tP8d56TmVkrqG99GsgkIfd8J_nyHYAXznkTF6WMXGaLSLhMRxW3IrLG0_WhSYWgh8If59n-F_H-RJ5swM_hLQzRKoc1MSzUtjZ0Rr7NJW7OuD0WfNv3tIijyWxn-T0iD1J00zq40-iGyKG7OEfzrX17MMG-fsn5bHr8bj_qPQxERtDTYcMNUTy9FEY4k6Z5nris0rGtykLzSpjClpVLpNdSe6u15tInFq26GOvi4hSzvQabORlFI9jcm86PPq0PeNBWQOOkHARvYyy3a9M3nNwiX9oCg6eAP-DtZZAcdrnZbbjVw1O2242nO7DhFnfh5u5p00t0uHvQTmrXsoYkX51lZ3Q4TM81iXLETEDhgQXGas8QXDJbd2QbFiJhyrMFJXIN-Q5rGd37nzNEzkyzr4FzwpZrn2LMEr1-dbFzH46vomEfwGhRL9xDYLaQGGBJ8jQXpc6L1NrYSGMQ-aWp0GN4PTSmMr2sOXnX-KY6QWauqNkVNvsYnq9jLjspj7_E2aP-WP8n8e0QUDenqp_LinuHoDERlSH5t8yVWnruJcd6JIIndgxbQ2-qfkVo1e_xO4ZXoYf_WQg1m35O8fvo__k8g-s4A9SHg_nhY7jBiWsTiJhbMFo1P9wTBEur6mk_LBmoK54IvwCLay4X |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does+reduced+intraspecific+competition+of+the+dominant+species+in+intercrops+allow+for+a+higher+population+density%3F&rft.jtitle=Food+and+energy+security&rft.au=Wang%2C+Qi&rft.au=Bai%2C+Wei&rft.au=Sun%2C+Zhanxiang&rft.au=Zhang%2C+Dongsheng&rft.date=2021-05-01&rft.issn=2048-3694&rft.eissn=2048-3694&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=285&rft.epage=298&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002%2Ffes3.270&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1002_fes3_270 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2048-3694&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2048-3694&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2048-3694&client=summon |