Advertisement

Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 165–172 | Cite as

Intercropping field crops between rows of Leucaena leucocephala under rainfed conditions in northern India

  • S.P. Mittal
  • Pratap Singh
Article

Abstract

A field study was conducted for six years (1981–1986) on sandy loam soil on intercropping hedgerows of Leucaena leucocephala (Lam) de Wit. with three field crops viz. maize (Zea mays L), black gram (Vigna mungo L) and cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L Taub.). In treatments 1 and 2 Leucaena hedges were planted as pure crops at close (25 cm × 75 cm) and wide (25 cm × 375 cm) spacings. In treatments 3, 4 and 5 the three field crops were intercropped between the hedgerows of Leucaena at the wide spacing, and in treatments 6, 7 and 8 the field crops were raised as pure crops. Leucaena was topped to 75 cm each time it attained a height of 175 cm.

The pure crop of Leucaena at close spacing produced an average, over the six years, of 34 t ha−1a−1 of green fodder and 9.4 t ha−1a−1 of air dry fuelwood. The Leucaena at wide spacing produced 18.9 t ha−1a−1 of green fodder and 6.3 t ha−1a−1 of fuelwood. Intercropping with field crops decreased the yield of green fodder and fuelwood. The yield of all the field crops was less when raised as intercrops than as pure crops.

Mean maximum net returns were obtained from intercrops of Leucaena and cluster bean (Rs 3540 ha−1a−1) which were significantly higher than the returns from pure crop of Leucaena at wide spacing but similar to the returns from pure crops of cluster bean. Leucaena with maize (Rs 3273 ha−1a−1) and black gram (Rs 3125 ha−1a−1) gave significantly higher net returns over pure crops of Leucaena at wide spacing, maize and black gram.

ICRISAT = International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics- Hyderabad, India.

Key words

Agroforestry biomass intercropping alley cropping maize (Zea maysblack gram (Vigna mungoCluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonolobaleucaena (Leucaena leucocephala

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agnihotri Y, Madhukar RM and Singh P (1986) Weekly rainfall analysis and agricultural droughts at Chandigarh. Vayu Mandal 16 (3 & 4): 54–56Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cochran WG and Cox GM (1957) Experimental designs. First Indian Edition (1959) Asia Publishing House, Bombay, India pp 106–117Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics) 1986. Annual Report 1985. Patancheru A.P. 502 324 India pp 303–304Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics) 1987. Annual Report 1986. Patancheru A.P. 502 324 India pp 305–307Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rachie KO (1983) Intercropping tree legumes with annual crops. In Plant Research and Agroforestry. Ed PA Huxley International Council for Research in Agroforestry Nairobi Kenya pp 103–110Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Redhead JF, Maghambe JA and Ndunguru BJ (1983) The intercropping of grain legumes in agroforestry system. In Plant Research and Agroforestry. Ed PA Huxley International Council for Research in Agroforestry Nairobi Kenya pp 117–124Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shah P (1988) Potential of agroforestry as land use technology for rural poor. In Advances in Forestry Research in India Vol I Eds R Parkash, SS Negi and MP Shiva. International Book Distributors Dehradun India pp 27–28Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Venkateswarlu JV (1986) Efficient resource management for drylands. In Souvenir 15 years of Dryland Agricultural Research. Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture Hyderabad India pp 54Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • S.P. Mittal
    • 1
  • Pratap Singh
    • 1
  1. 1.Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training InstituteResearch CentreChandigarhIndia

Personalised recommendations