Display options
Share it on

Plant Soil. 2018;427(1):125-138. doi: 10.1007/s11104-017-3365-z. Epub 2017 Aug 08.

Inter- and intra-species intercropping of barley cultivars and legume species, as affected by soil phosphorus availability.

Plant and soil

Tegan Darch, Courtney D Giles, Martin S A Blackwell, Timothy S George, Lawrie K Brown, Daniel Menezes-Blackburn, Charles A Shand, Marc I Stutter, David G Lumsdon, Malika M Mezeli, Renate Wendler, Hao Zhang, Catherine Wearing, Patricia Cooper, Philip M Haygarth

Affiliations

  1. 1Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, Okehampton, Devon EX20 2SB UK.
  2. 2The James Hutton Institute, AB15 8QH and Dundee, Aberdeen, Scotland DD2 5DA UK.
  3. 3Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YQ UK.

PMID: 30996483 PMCID: PMC6438642 DOI: 10.1007/s11104-017-3365-z

Abstract

AIMS: Intercropping can improve plant yields and soil phosphorus (P) use efficiency. This study compares inter- and intra-species intercropping, and determines whether P uptake and shoot biomass accumulation in intercrops are affected by soil P availability.

METHODS: Four barley cultivars (

RESULTS: Barley-legume intercrops had 10-70% greater P accumulation and 0-40% greater biomass than monocultures, with the greatest gains occurring at or below the sub-critical P requirement for barley. No benefit of barley-barley intercropping was observed. The plant combination had no significant effect on biomass and P uptake observed in intercropped treatments.

CONCLUSIONS: Barley-legume intercropping shows promise for sustainable production systems, especially at low soil P. Gains in biomass and P uptake come from inter- rather than intra-species intercropping, indicating that plant diversity resulted in decreased competition between plants for P.

Keywords: Barley; Legume; Phosphorus availability; Phosphorus uptake; Plant diversity; Yield

References

  1. Nature. 2001 Jul 5;412(6842):72-6 - PubMed
  2. Plant Physiol. 2011 Jul;156(3):1078-86 - PubMed
  3. Plant Physiol. 2011 Jul;156(3):989-96 - PubMed
  4. Ecol Lett. 2013 May;16(5):695-706 - PubMed
  5. New Phytol. 2014 Jul;203(1):63-9 - PubMed
  6. New Phytol. 2015 Jan;205(2):720-30 - PubMed
  7. Science. 2015 Feb 13;347(6223):1259855 - PubMed
  8. New Phytol. 2015 Apr;206(1):107-117 - PubMed
  9. New Phytol. 2016 Jan;209(2):823-31 - PubMed
  10. Sci Total Environ. 2016 Jan 15;542(Pt B):1078-93 - PubMed
  11. Sci Rep. 2016 Jan 05;6:18663 - PubMed
  12. Ann Bot. 2016 Mar;117(3):363-77 - PubMed
  13. Environ Sci Technol. 2016 Nov 1;50(21):11521-11531 - PubMed
  14. Plant Sci. 2017 Feb;255:12-28 - PubMed
  15. Trends Plant Sci. 2017 May;22(5):385-394 - PubMed

Publication Types