comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity ... 1 forrage english.pdfcomparative study...
TRANSCRIPT
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
2
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and
profitability of forage sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Reception of originals: 08/07/2016
Release for publication: 11/04/2016
Muhammad Aamir Iqbal
Institutions: University of Agriculture Faisalabad
University of California Davis
Address: Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan
Department of Plant Sciences, University of California Davis, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Asif Iqbal
Institution: University of Agriculture Faisalabad
Address: Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan
E-mail: [email protected]
Muhammad Ayub
Institution: University of Agriculture Faisalabad
Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture Faisalabad-38040, Pakistan.
Javaid Akhtar
Institution: University of Agriculture Faisalabad
Address: Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture Faisalabad-
38040, Pakistan
Abstract
A two year field trial was executed to determine the effect of planting times and spatial
arrangements on physiological growth, agro-qualitative attributes and profitability of
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems during 2013 and 2014. There were three planting
times: sorghum + soybean sown at the same time (S1), sorghum sown 15 days before soybean
(S2), sorghum sown 15 days after soybean (S3) and four spatial arrangements (sorghum and
soybean sown in 1:1(T1), 1:2(T2), 2:1(T3) and 2:2 (T4) row proportions). The experiment was
carried out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with factorial arrangements and
was replicated thrice. The statistical analysis of data revealed that forage sorghum sown 15
days before soybean in 2:1 row proportion (S2T3) recorded the highest physiological growth.
The same treatment was instrumental in giving the highest quality forage with considerably
higher crude protein, ether extractable fat and ash contents; however soybean performed
better when it was sown 15 days before forage sorghum in 2:2 row proportions (S3T4). Data
regarding economic analysis for different intercropping systems revealed that the highest net
income of Rs. 42971 and Rs. 46871 ha-1
and BCR of 2.13 and 2.24 were earned from
sorghum sown 15 days before soybean in 2:1 row proportion (S2T3) during 2013 and 2014
respectively. Overall, it is concluded that delaying soybean sowing for 15 days after sorghum
not only increased forage quality but profit was also augmented.
Keywords: Glycine max L. Intercropping. Spatial arrangements. Sorghum bicolor L.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
3
1. Introduction
Forages are deemed to be the most nutritious and economical feed for dairy animals
(Iqbal et al., 2015). Among forages, cereal forages occupy central position due to higher
biomass production per unit area and ultimately farmers are able to extract more economic
returns with increased milk and meat production (Addo et al., 2011). However, it is a matter
of grave concern that cereal forages provide only 10-15% of animal feed globally and the rest
comes from other expensive and comparatively less nutritious sources (Iqbal et al., 2015b).
Among cereal forages, sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) holds great potential to yield
large quantities of green forage for dairy entrepreneurs as well as small farmers and that too
with considerably less irrigation and fertilization requirements than forage maize (Iqbal and
Bethune, 2015). Sorghum can be successfully grown on even marginal lands due to its
potential to tolerate salinity and other soil toxicities (Arshad and Ranamukhaarachchi, 2012).
It is also worth mentioning that sorghum is not comparable on animal nutrition scale and
resultantly large ruminants need to be supplemented with protein rich concentrates to obtain
sustainable milk supplies (Ahmad et al., 2007).
Protein supplements are quite expensive and act as a triggering agent in sky-rocketing
the cost of production of milk and resultantly farmers suffer a huge loss in their net economic
returns (Ayub et al., 2004: Iqbal and Iqbal, 2015). Furthermore, in comparison with staple
food and cash crops, farmers are not able to get same profit with cereal forages including
sorghum cultivation on per unit land basis and this economic factor has led many farmers to
switch to cash crops instead of forage crops (Samuel and Dejene, 2003).
Intercropping of forage sorghum with legumes like soybean can be an option to
increase green forage yield per unit land area with comparatively better agro-qualitative
attributes of forage (Surve et al., 2011) and ultimately increased economic returns can put a
halt to switching from forages to cash crops. Intercropping is a practice which involves
sowing of two or more component crops on the same piece of agricultural land for boosting
productivity and profit of the farmers (Tajudeen, 2010).
Cereal-legumes intercropping offers numerous advantages like higher productivity due
to exploitation of different soil horizons by component crops, reduce incidence of insect-pest
due to changed microclimate caused by component crops having different agro-botanical
characteristics and last but not least diversification of farm out puts (Pal and Sheshu, 2001).
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
4
Legumes intercropping with cereals have been described by majority of the
researchers as nitrogen saving strategy (Yadav and Solanki, 2002) because some experiments
have revealed that in well conducive environments for biological nitrogen fixation, nitrogen
fertilizer dose may be reduced up to 50% (Asafu-Agyei et al., 1997). As fertilizers have
played their part in multiple environmental hazards such as eutrophication, global warming,
climate change, ground water contamination and ozone depletion in stratosphere, thus
legumes offer environmentally sound and agriculturally stable option and their inclusion in
intercropping systems with cereals is bound to increase the productivity as well as the stability
of cropping systems (Crew and Peoples, 2004).
Cereals-legumes intercropping systems not only increase the primary nutrients (N&P)
concentration in roots and shoots of crop plants but also enhance micro-nutrients absorption
(Singh and Singh, 2004). It was revealed that when maize was intercropped with peanuts, then
the concentration of micro nutrients was increased in the shoots of component crops. It was
recorded that in intercropping systems, there was 2.5 fold more concentration of zinc and iron
in shoots as compared to their mono cropping. Potassium concentration in shoot was also
increased, while Calcium concentration was decreased in shoots of component crops (Inal et
al., 2007).
Soybean (Glycine max L.) is an excellent annual forage legume with a fairly high
forage potential and may be a good option to be intercropped with forage sorghum. It has the
potential to yield a reasonably high dry matter yield and that too in a short span of time (Addo
et al., 2011). Soybean though mostly cultivated as an oil seed crop, but it is highly desirable
forage for dairy animals because of considerably higher protein than other forage legumes
(Ahmad et al., 2001). Another advantage associated with soybean is its ability to fix
atmospheric nitrogen through symbiotic nitrogen fixing process (Akunda, 2001).
It has been reported that though sorghum and legumes intercropping resulted in higher
total biomass production but the yield of component crops was decreased due to intense
competition for growth resources (Cochran and Schlentner, 1995). Thus delayed sowing of
one of the component crops might reduce the drastic impact of dominant crop on
physiologically recessive crop (Akhtar et al., 2013). Furthermore, the role of spatial
arrangements has rarely been investigated for sorghum-soybean intercropping systems under
irrigated conditions. Thus different spatial arrangements also need to be optimized for
boosting the productivity and profitability of sorghum-soybean intercropping systems.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
5
Thus, the present study was conducted with the trilateral objectives to evaluate the
physiological growth of forage sorghum, to assess the agro-qualitative attributes of
component crops and to analyze the profitability of sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
under different planting times and spatial arrangements in irrigated conditions.
2. Materials and Methods
The location of the experiment was Agronomic Research Area of the Department of
Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan during two consecutive years of
2013 and 2014. Experimental site lies between 30.35-41.47°N latitude and 72.08-73.40°E
longitude at an elevation of 184.4 m above sea level. The experiment was laid out in different
fields during 2013 and 2014.
The experimental treatments were consisted of three planting times: sorghum +
soybean sown at the same time (S1), sorghum sown 15 days before soybean (S2), sorghum
sown 15 days after soybean (S3) and four spatial arrangements: sorghum and soybean sown in
1:1 row proportion (T1), 1:2 row proportion (T2), 2:1 row proportion (T3) and 2:2 row
proportions (T4). Thus there were twelve treatments in total.
The experiment was carried out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with
factorial arrangements and was replicated thrice. The experimental soil was sandy clay loam
and was deficient in all three primary macro nutrients along with organic matter (less than
1%). The pH of the experiential soil was between 7.6-7.7 during both years.
Pre-sowing irrigation of 10 cm was applied and then proper seed bed preparation was
done with three cultivations (up to a depth of 12 cm), which were followed by rigorous
planking. Sorghum (cv. Hegari) and soybean (cv. Ajmairi) were sown with single row hand
drill as per treatments. The seed rate of sorghum and soybean was 70 and 100 kg ha-1
. 80 kg N
and 60 kg P2O
5 ha
-1 were applied (all phosphorous at the time of sowing, while nitrogen was
applied in three equal splits). Both component crops were harvested manually at pre-
flowering stage with hand sickle.
The experimental variables were measures by following standard procedures. Leaf
area index was measured by using following formula,
LAI = Crop leaf area (m2)/ Land area (m
2)
Leaf area duration was calculated by the formula
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
6
LAD = (LAI1+LAI
2) (t
2-t
1)/2
Where
LAI1
= Leaf area index at first harvest
LAI2
= Leaf area index at final harvest
t1
= Date of observation of first leaf area index
t2
= Date of observation of final leaf area index
Crop growth rate was calculated by the formula
CGR = (W2-W
1)/ (t
2-t
1)
Where W1
and W2
are the dry weight at times t1
and t2
respectively.
Net assimilation rate was calculated by the formula
NAR= TDM/LAD
Where, TDM and LAD are the total dry matter yield and leaf area duration,
respectively.
KJeldahl digestion method was used to determine crude protein. This method gave
nitrogen which was multiplied with 6.25 constant factor to estimate crude protein. Ether
extractable fat was determined by using Soxhlet extraction apparatus. Similarly, ash was
calculated by burning samples in in a muffle furnace at (550-650°C) until white or grey ash
was obtained. After that, residues were cooled in a desiccator and recorded the weight (W2)
and percentage was calculated as follows:
Total ash % = W2
– W1/ weight of the sample × 100
2.1. Statistical analysis
Data collected were analyzed statistically using Fisher’s analysis of variance technique
through a computer program “MSTAT-C” (Freed and Eisensmith, 1986) and least significant
difference (LSD) test at 5% probability level was employed to compare the differences among
the treatments means (Steel et al., 1997).
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
7
2.2. Economic analysis
To calculate economic analysis, cost of production for both years was worked out. The
cost of production of forage Sorghum and different forage sorghum-legumes intercropping
systems in 2013 and 2014 was computed for the factors such as sowing, irrigation, harvesting
and land rent. Then the variable rates according to each treatment were determined and
summed up to the subtotal and then benefit-cost ratio (BCR) was calculated using the
following formula.
BCR = Gross income/ Total cost
Net income was also calculated by deducting the total expenditure from the gross
income. Economic analysis for both the experimental years was carried out by using the
methodology as described in CIMMYT (1988).
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Physiological growth parameters of forage sorghum
Physiological parameters are important in determining the growth and development of
crop plants particularly in intercropping systems. The highest leaf area indices (5.46 and 5.93
during 2013 and 2014 respectively) and leaf area duration (74.2 and 78.3 days during 2013
and 2014 respectively) were recorded by sorghum sown 15 days before soybean in 2:1 row
proportion (S2T3). The same treatment was instrumental in recording the highest crop growth
rate (44.81 and 48.93 g m-2 day-1
during 2013 and 2014 respectively) and net assimilation rate
(15.29 and 15.96 g m-2
day-1
during 2013 and 2014 respectively) of forage sorghum. It was
followed by sorghum sown 15 days before soybean in 1:1 row proportion. Overall, sorghum
planted 15 days earlier than soybean under different planting patterns performed better than
sorghum sown at the same time with forage soybean which in turn performed better than
sorghum planted 15 days after soybean under different planting patterns during both years.
The statistical analysis of the recorded data showed that sorghum and soybean sown in
2:1 row proportion yielded significantly higher physiological growth parameters of forage
sorghum and it was followed by sorghum and soybean sown in 1:1 row proportion which in
turn performed better than sorghum and soybean planted in 1:2 row proportion which was
statistically at par with sorghum and soybean sown in 2:2 row proportions. These results put
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
8
an approval stamp on the findings of Zandvakili et al. (2012), who reported that leaf area
indices and leaf area duration of sorghum were reduced in sorghum-legumes intercropping
systems in comparison with sole sorghum and they suggested that by delaying the sowing of
one of the component crops might increase growth and development of component crops.
These findings are also in agreement with those presented by Dhope et al. (1992), who
reported that comparatively higher crop growth rate and net assimilation rate of forage
sorghum was resulted when sorghum was provided competition free environment at earlier
growth stages while in intercropping with forage legumes, crop growth rate of forage
sorghum was reduced significantly. Thus delayed sowing of forage soybean for 15 days gave
forage sorghum an added advantage just like sole sorghum in terms of more nutrients and
moisture availability.
3.2. Qualitative attributes of sorghum and soybean
Forage quality plays an important role in sustainable and profitable production of milk
and meat particularly in the long run. Among quality attributes of forages, protein occupies
the central position due to its vital role in a variety of metabolic and tissue repair processes
going on in animal’s body and more importantly their positive role in increasing milk
production of large ruminants. Similarly, fats serve as a source of energy for ruminants and
ash presents mineral constituents of forage required in several metabolic processes.
Fiber is considered to be an anti-nutritional factor and only needs to be present in
small amount in animal feed. Sorghum planted 15 days before soybean in 2:1 row proportion
(S2T3) gave significantly higher crude protein (9.17 and 9.25% during 2013 and 2014
respectively), ether extractable fat (2.38 and 2.28% during 2013 and 2014 respectively) and
ash (9.63 and 9.45% during 2013 and 2014 respectively), while it was followed by sorghum
sown 15 days before soybean in 1:1 row proportion (S2T1). The highest crude fiber (29.20 and
29.52% during 2013 and 2014 respectively) was recorded by sorghum sown 15 days after
soybean in 1:2 row proportions (S3T2). Sorghum sown 15 days before soybean in 2:1 row
proportion (S2T3) was instrumental in yielding the lowest crude fiber (28.29 and 29.16%
during 2013 and 2014 respectively) of forage sorghum.
The highest crude protein (20.84 and 20.98% during 2013 and 2014 respectively),
ether extractable fat (1.90 and 1.96% during 2013 and 2014 respectively) and ash (11.08 and
11.14% during 2013 and 2014 respectively) were given by soybean planted 15 days before
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
9
sorghum in 2:2 row proportions (S3T4) while it was followed by soybean planted 15 days
earlier than sorghum in 1:2 row proportion (S3T2). The lowest crude fiber contents were also
recorded by soybean planted 15 days earlier than sorghum in 1:2 row proportion (S3T2). These
results are in line with those of Khan et al. (2007), who reported that component crops if
provided competition free conditions especially at early growth stages, it resulted in higher
crude protein, ether extractable fat and ash contents while lowering crude fiber contents. They
were of the view that it was due to complimentary use of soil and environmental resources by
component crops in sorghum-legumes intercropping systems. Contrarily, they stated that
spatial arrangements had no significant influence on quality attributes of forage sorghum.
Wanjari et al. (2005) and Marer et al. (2007) also reported similar results that delayed sowing
of component crops resulted in better quality forage.
3.3. Economic analysis and benefit-cost ratio (BCR)
Economic analysis was also done to find out the most economical planting time and
spatial arrangement for sorghum-soybean intercropping systems under climatic conditions of
Faisalabad during 2013 and 2014. Different sorghum-soybean intercropping systems sown
under different planting times and spatial arrangements resulted different net incomes. Data
regarding economic analysis for different intercropping systems revealed that the highest net
income of Rs. 42971 and Rs. 46871 ha-1
was earned from sorghum sown 15 days before
soybean in 2:1 row proportion (S2T3) during 2013 and 2014 respectively. The least economic
returns were recorded from the plots where forage sorghum was sown 15 days after soybean
under different spatial arrangements.
The highest BCR of 2.13 and 2.24 was also obtained from the same intercropping
system (sorghum sown 15 days before soybean in 2:1 row proportion) during 2013 and 2014
respectively. It was followed by sorghum sown 15 days before soybean in 2:2 row
proportions (S2T4). The lowest net income and BCR were recorded by sorghum planted 15
days after soybean in 2:2 row proportions (S3T4).
It is interesting to note that forage sorghum sowing 15 days before soybean under all
spatial arrangements outperformed other intercropping systems in terms of monetary benefits.
The lowest economic returns were given by sorghum sown 15 days after soybean under
different spatial arrangements. Thus, it can be interpreted that delayed sowing of soybean for
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
10
15 days gave competition free conditions to forage sorghum which is the major contributor to
green forage yield and ultimately higher economic returns was obtained due to better
physiological growth and forage yield. These results are in complete agreement with those of
West and Griffith (1992) as well as Mpairwe et al. (2002), who concluded that sorghum and
legumes intercropping resulted in higher biomass production and finally higher economic
returns were, recorded which were much higher than pure stand of forage sorghum. They
were of the view that intercropping of legumes with cereal forages caused little increase in
total expenditures but total monetary benefits were multiplied by many folds.
4. Conclusions
It is concluded from this two years field trial that sorghum sown 15 days before
soybean in 2:1 row proportion appeared to be the most productive intercropping systems in
term of physiological growth of forage sorghum. The same treatment was instrumental in
yielding sorghum forage with better quality attributes, but soybean recorded higher quality
forage when it was sown before sorghum in 2:2 row proportions. Comparatively better
physiological growth is bound to increase total biomass production and ultimately net income
was also increased due to significantly higher benefit to cost ratio when sorghum was sown
earlier than soybean. Thus it is suggested that farmers can get huge monetary benefits along
with better quality forage by intercropping forage sorghum 15 days earlier than soybean in 2:1
row proportion.
5. References
ADDO, Q.A., DARKWA, A.; OCLOO, G.K. Growth analysis of component crops in a
maize-soybean intercropping system as affected by time of planting and spatial arrangement.
Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences, v. 6, n. 6, p. 34-44, 2011.
AGEGNEHU, G.; GHIZAW, A.; SINEBO, W. Yield performance and land-use efficiency of
barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian highlands. European Journal of Agronomy,
v. 25, p. 202–207, 2006.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
11
AHMAD, A.H.; AHMAD, R.; MAHMOOD, N. Production potential and quality of mixed
sorghum forage under different intercropping systems and planting patterns. Pakistan Journal
of Agricultural Sciences, v. 44, n. 2, p. 87-93, 2007.
AKHTAR, M.F.; AHMAD, A.U.H.; ZAMIR, M.S.I.; KHALID, F.; MOHSIN, A.U.; AFZAL,
M. Agro-qualitative studies on forage sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) sown alone and in
mixture with forage legumes. Pakistan Journal of Science, v. 65, n. 2, p. 179-185, 2013.
ARSHAD, M.; RANAMUKHAARACHCHI, S.L. Effects of legume type, planting pattern
and time of establishment on growth and yield of sweet sorghum-legume intercropping.
Australian Journal of Crop Sciences, v. 6, n. 8, p. 1265-1274, 2012.
AYUB, M.; TANVEER, A.; NADEEM, M.A.; SHAH, S.M.A. Studies on the fodder yield
and quality of sorghum grown alone and in mixture with rice-bean. Pakistan Journal of life &
Social Sciences, v. 2, n. 1, p. 46-48, 2004.
CIMMYT. 1988. An economic training handbook. Economic programme, CIMMYT.
Mexico.
COCHRAN, L.V.; SCHLENTNER, S.F. Intercropped oat and faba bean in Alaska dry matter
production, dinitrogen fixation, nitrogen transfer, and nitrogen fertilizer response. Agronomy
Journal, v. 87, p. 420–424, 1995.
CREW, T.E.; PEOPLES, M.B. Legume versus fertilizer source of nitrogen: ecological
tradeoffs and human needs. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment, v. 102, p. 279-297,
2004.
DHOPE, A.M.; Mahakulkar, B.V.; Wanjari, S.S., Sheker, V.B.; Potdukhe, N.R. 1992.
Intercropping of leguminous crops in newly evolved sorghum genotypes (SPV-669). Crop
Research, 5: 207-211.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
12
FREED, R.D.; EISENSMITH, S.P. 1986. MSTAT microcomputer statistical program.
Michigan State Uni. Agric., Michigan, Lansing, USA.
IQBAL, M.A.; IQBAL, A. Overviewing forage shortage for dairy animals and suitability of
forage sorghum for ensiling. Global Veterinaria, v. 14, n. 2, p. 173-177. 2015.
IQBAL, M.A.; IQBAL, A.; AKBAR, N.; KHAN, H.Z.; ABBAS, R.N. A study on feed stuffs
role in enhancing the productivity of milch animals in Pakistan- Existing scenario and future
prospect. Global Veterinaria, v. 14, n. 1, p. 23-33, 2015.
IQBAL, M.A.; AHMAD, B.; SHAH, M.H.; ALI, K. A study on forage sorghum (Sorghum
bicolor L.) production in perspectives of white revolution in Punjab, Pakistan: Issues and
future options. American-Eurasian Journal Agricultural & Environmental Science, v. 15, n.
4, p. 640-647, 2015a.
KHAN, Z.R.; Midegaa, C.A.O.; HASSANALIA, A.; PICKETTB, J.A.; WADHAMS, L.J.
Assessment of different legumes for the control of striga hermonthica in maize and sorghum.
Crop Science, v. 47, p. 730-734, 2007.
MARER, S.B.; LINGARAJU, B.S.; SHASHIDHARA, G.B. Productivity and economics of
maize and pigeon pea intercropping under rainfed condition in northern transitional zone of
Karnataka. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences, v. 20, n. 1, p. 1-3, 2007.
MPAIRWE, D.R.; Sabiiti, E.N.; Ummuna, N.N.; Tegegne, A.; Osuji, P. 2002. Effect of
intercropping cereal crops with forage legumes and sources of nutrients on cereal grain yield
and fodder dry matter yields. African Crop Science Journal, v. 10, n. 1, p. 81-97, 2002.
MPAIRWE, D.R.; SABIITI, E.N., UMMUNA, N.N.; TEGEGNE, A., OSUJI, P. 2002. Effect
of intercropping cereal crops with forage legumes and sources of nutrients on cereal grain
yield and fodder dry matter yields. African Crop Science Journal, v.10, n. 1, p. 81-97, 2002.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
13
PAL, U.R.; SHESHU, Y. 2001. Direct and residual contribution of symbiotic nitrogen
fixation by legumes to the yield and nitrogen uptake of maize (Zea mays L.) in the Nigerian
Savannah. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Sciences, 187 (1):53-58.
SAMUEL, M.; DEJENE, M. Effects of under sowing annual forage legumes on grain and dry
matter stalk yield of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) and dry matter forage yield in the eastern
Amhara region. Conference; Summary p. 285-291, 2003.
SINGH, V.; SINGH, P. 2004. Effect of intercropping of guara and cowpea with forage
sorghum on yield and nutrient uptake during summer season. Haryana Journal of Agronomy,
v. 20, n. 1-2, p. 97-98, 2004.
STEEL, R.G.D.; TORRIE, J.H.; DEEKEY, D.A. Principles and procedures of statistics: A
Biometrical Approach. 3rd ed. Mc Graw Hill Book Co. Inc. New York. p. 400-428, 1997.
SURVE, V.H.; PATIL, P.R.; ARVADIA, M.K. Performance of fodder sorghum (Sorghum
bicolor L.), maize (Zea mays L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) under sole and
intercropping systems. Madras Agricultural Journal, v. 98, n. 10-12, p. 372-374, 2011.
TAJUDEEN, O.O. Evaluation of sorghum-cowpea intercrop productivity in Savanna Agro-
ecology using competition indices. Journal of Agricultural Science, v. 2, n. 3, p. 142-151,
2010.
WANJARI, S.S.; DESHMUKH, J.P.; DANDGE, M.S. Intercropping of soybean with
sorghum. Agricultural Science Digest, v. 25, n. 4, p. 269-271, 2005.
WEST, T.D.; Griffith, D.R. Effect of strip intercropping corn and soybean on yield and profit.
Journal of Production Agriculture, v. 5, p. 107–110, 1992.
YADAV, N.S.; SOLANKI. Effect of intercropping of forage legumes with pearl millet and
sorghum in arid region. Forage Research, v. 28. n. 2, p. 77-79, 2002.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
14
ZANDVAKILI, O.R.; ALLAHDADI, I.; MAZAHERI, D.; AKBARI, G.A.; JAHANZAD, E.;
MIRSHEKARI, M. Evaluation of quantitative and qualitative traits of forage sorghum and
lima bean under different nitrogen fertilizer regimes in additive-replacement series. Journal of
Agricultural Sciences, v. 4, n. 6, p. 46-57, 2012.
Acknowledgements
The principal author extends a sincere gratitude to Higher Education Commission (HEC)
of Pakistan for providing financial assistance to complete this study under Indigenous
Scholarship (5000-Fellowships). The technical guidance and lab. facilities provided by Prof.
Dr. Daniel H. Putnam (CE specialist), Department of Plant Sciences, University of California
Davis, USA, is also thankfully acknowledges.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
15
Fig. 1: Interactive effect of planting times and spatial arrangements on leaf area index,
leaf area duration (days), crop growh rate (g m-2
day-1
) and net assimilaton rate (g m-2
day-1
) of sorghum.
Fig. 2: Interactive effect of planting times and spatial arrangements on crude protein
(%), crude fiber (%), ether extractable fat (%) and ash (%) of sorghum.
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
16
Fig. 2a. Interactive effect of planting times and spatial arrangements on crude protein
(%), crude fiber (%), ether extractable fat (%) and ash (%) of forage soybean.
S1T1= Sorghum planted on same day with soybean in 1:1 row proportion S1T2= Sorghum
planted on same day with soybean in 1:2 row proportion S1T3= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 2:1 row proportion S1T4= Sorghum planted on same day with soybean in 2:2
row proportion S2T1= Sorghum planted 15 days before soybean in 1:1 row proportion S2T2=
Sorghum planted 15 days before soybean in 1:2 row proportion S2T3= Sorghum planted 15
days before soybean in 2:1 row proportion S2T4= Sorghum planted 15 days before soybean in
2:2 row proportion S3T1= Sorghum planted 15 days after soybean in 1:1 row proportion
S3T2=Sorghum planted 15 days after soybean in 1:2 row proportion S3T3= Sorghum planted
15 days after soybean in 2:1 row proportion S3T4= Sorghum planted 15 days after soybean in
2:2 row proportion
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
17
Table 1: Effect of planting times and spatial arrangements on net income and BCR of
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems during 2013.
Treatments Expenditures
Rs. ha-1
Gross
Income
Rs. ha-1
Net
Income
Rs. ha-1
BCR
S1T1= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 1:1 row proportion
37775 64046 26271 1.69
S1T2= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 1:2 row proportion
37775 62228 24453 1.64
S1T3= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 2:1 row proportion
37775 69891 32116 1.85
S1T4= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 2:2 row proportion
37775 62175 24400 1.63
S2T1= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 1:1 row proportion
37775 75103 37328 1.98
S2T2= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 1:2 row proportion
37775 73650 35875 1.94
S2T3= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 2:1 row proportion
37775 80764 42971 2.13
S2T4= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 2:2 row proportion
37775 73591 35816 1.93
S3T1= Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 1:1 row proportion
37775 62516 24741 1.65
S3T2=Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 1:2 row proportion
37775 60071 22296 1.59
S3T3= Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 2:1 row proportion
37775 65328 27553 1.72
S3T4= Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 2:2 row proportion
37775 59978 22203 1.58
Comparative study on temporal and spatial complementarity and profitability of forage
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems
Iqbal, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Ayub, M.; Akhtar, J.
Custos e @gronegócio on line - v. 12, n. 4 – Oct/Dec - 2016. ISSN 1808-2882
www.custoseagronegocioonline.com.br
18
Table 2: Effect of planting times and spatial arrangements on net income and BCR of
sorghum-soybean intercropping systems during 2014.
Treatments Expenditures Gross
Income
Rs. ha-1
Net
Income
Rs. ha-1
BCR
S1T1= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 1:1 row proportion
37775 68737 30962 1.81
S1T2= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 1:2 row proportion
37775 65391 27616 1.73
S1T3= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 2:1 row proportion
37775 73385 35610 1.94
S1T4= Sorghum planted on same day
with soybean in 2:2 row proportion
37775 65428 27653 1.72
S2T1= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 1:1 row proportion
37775 80116 42341 2.12
S2T2= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 1:2 row proportion
37775 76600 38825 2.02
S2T3= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 2:1 row proportion
37775 84646 46871 2.24
S2T4= Sorghum planted 15 days before
soybean in 2:2 row proportion
37775 76578 38803 2.00
S3T1= Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 1:1 row proportion
37775 64671 26896 1.71
S3T2=Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 1:2 row proportion
37775 61900 24125 1.63
S3T3= Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 2:1 row proportion
37775 67700 29928 1.79
S3T4= Sorghum planted 15 days after
soybean in 2:2 row proportion
37775 61837 24062 1.63