Acta Physiologiae Plantarum

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 1113–1119 | Cite as

Effects of intercropping sugarcane and soybean on growth, rhizosphere soil microbes, nitrogen and phosphorus availability

  • Xiuping Li
  • Yinghui Mu
  • Yanbo Cheng
  • Xinguo Liu
  • Hai Nian
Original Paper


The effects of sugarcane plantation intercropped with soybean on plant growth, yield, enzyme activity, nitrogen and phosphorus contents, the microbe quantity of rhizosphere soil were investigated. Results showed that dry weight of biomass and yield under sugarcane/soybean intercropping were increased by 35.44 and 30.57 % for sugarcane, and decreased by 16.12 and 9.53 % (100-grain weight) for soybean, respectively. The nitrogenase activity of intercropping soybean nodule was significantly increased by 57.4 % as compared with that in monoculture models. The urease activities of intercrops sugarcane and soybean were promoted by 89 and 81 % as compared to that of the monoculture models, respectively. The effective nitrogen and phosphorus contents of rhizospheric soil of intercrops sugarcane and soybean were increased by 66 and 311.7 %, respectively, as compared to those in the monoculture system. Microbe number of rhizosphere soil in the intercropping pattern increased significantly as compared to those in the monoculture models. The quantities of bacteria, fungi, and actinomyces increased by 42.62, 14.5 and 78.5 % in the intercropping sugarcane, while the intercropping soybean increased by 188, 183 and 73 %, respectively. Therefore, growing sugarcanes in combination with soybean can be considered a good agriculture management practice, helping to promote plant growth, yield and increase soil nutrients.


Sugarcane Soybean Intercropping Soil microbe Soil enzyme activity 



This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31171508), Special Fund for Agro-scientific Research in the Public Interest (No. 200903002), and Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System (No. CARS-04-PS09).


  1. Aggarwal PK, Garrity DP, Liboon SP, Morris RA (1992) Resource use and plant interactions in a rice-mungbean intercrop. Agron J 84:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berg MP, Kniese JP, Verhoef HA (1998) Dynamics and stratification of bacteria and fungi in the organic layers of a Scots pine forest soil. Biol Fertil Soils 26:313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bokhtiar SM, Majid MA, Islam MJ (1995) Fertilizer management for sugarcane-potato intercropping in the Old Himalayan Piedmont Plain soils of Bangladesh. Bangladesh J Sugarcane 17:107–112Google Scholar
  4. Chai Q, Huang P, Huang GB (2005) Effect of intercropping on soil microbial and enzyme activity in the rhizosphere. Acta Pratacul Turae Sin 14(5):105–110Google Scholar
  5. Chowdhury MK, Rosario EL (1994) Comparison of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium utilization efficiency in maize/mungbean intercropping. J Agric Sci 122:193–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dick RP (1994) Soil enzyme activities as indicators of soil quality. In: Doran JW, Coleman DC, Bezdicek DF, Stewart BA (eds) Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment, SSSA Special Publication Number 35. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 107–124Google Scholar
  7. Evan AC (1960) Studies in intercropping. I. Maize or sorghum with groundnuts. East Afr Agric J 26:1–10Google Scholar
  8. Gianfreda L, Bollag JM (1996) Influence of natural and anthropogenic factors on enzyme activity in soil. In: Stotzky G, Bollag JM (eds) Soil biochemistry, vol 9, pp 123–193Google Scholar
  9. Guan SY (1986) Soil enzyme and its analysis method. Agriculture Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  10. He JF, Huang GQ, Liao P, Liu XY, Su YH (2006) Effects on disaster reduction of maize/soybean intercropping ecological system on upland red soil. Meteorol Disaster Reduct Res 29(4):31–35Google Scholar
  11. Huang RH (2002) The primary report of comparative experiments of wide-rows cultivation for sugarcane. Guangxi Sugarcane Canesugar 4:16–17Google Scholar
  12. Imam SA, Hossain AHMD, Sikka LC, Midmore DJ (1990) Agronomic management of potato/sugarcane intercropping and its implication. Field Crop Res 25:111–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ledgard SF, Frency JR, Simpson JR (1985) Assessing nitrogen transfer from legumes to associated grasses soil. Boil Biochem 17:575–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li L, Li XL, Zhang FS, Yang SC, Lu MJ (2000) Uptake and utilization of nutrition as related to yield advantage in wheat/soybean intercropping. Plant Nutr Fertil Sci 6(2):140–146Google Scholar
  15. Liu GS, Jiang NH, Zhang LD, Liu ZL (1996) Soil physical and chemical analysis and description of soil profiles. In: Sun HL, Liu GS (eds) Standard methods for observation and analysis in Chinese Ecosystem Research Network. Standards Press of China, Beijing, pp 5–40Google Scholar
  16. Marschner P, Marino W, Lieberei R (2002) Seasonal effects on microorganisms in the rhizosphere of two tropical plants in a polyculture agroforestry system in Central Amazonia, Brazil. Biol Fertil Soils 35:68–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Moscatelli MC, Fonck M, Angelis PD, Larbi H, Macuz A, Rambelli A, Grego S (2001) Mediterranean natural forest living at elevated carbon dioxide: soil biological properties and plant biomass growth. Soil Use Manag 17:195–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ofori F, Stern WR (1987) Cereal–legume intercropping systems. Adv Agron 41:41–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Putnam DH, Herbert SJ, Vargas A (1986) Intercropped corn-soyabean density studies, II. Yield composition and protein. Exp Agric 22:373–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ruggiero PDJ, Bollag JM (1996) Soil as a catalytic system. In: Stotzky G, Bollag JM (eds) Soil biochemistry, vol 9, pp 79–122Google Scholar
  21. Sasakawa H, Trung BC, Yoshida S (1986) Stem nodulation on Aeschynomene indica plants by isolated rhizobia. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 32:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sathyavely A, Chinnasamy K, Rujubekarum S (1991) Studies on intercropping in sugarcane with pulses and oilseeds. SISSTA Sugar J 17:35Google Scholar
  23. Singh NB, Singh PP, Nair KPP (1986) Effect of legume intercropping on enrichment of soil nitrogen, bacterial activity and productivity of associated maize crops. Exp Agric 22:339–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tang JC, Mboreha IA, She L, Liao H, Chen HZ, Sun ZD, Yan XL (2005) Nutritional effects of soybean root architecture in a maize/soybean intercropping system. Sci Agric Sin 38(6):1196–1203Google Scholar
  25. Yadav RL, Prasad SR, Singh K (1987) Fertilizer requirement and row arrangement of pulses in sugarcane based cropping systems. Indian J Agron 32:80–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Franciszek Górski Institute of Plant Physiology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiuping Li
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yinghui Mu
    • 1
  • Yanbo Cheng
    • 1
  • Xinguo Liu
    • 1
  • Hai Nian
    • 1
  1. 1.College of AgricultureSouth China Agriculture UniversityGuangzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Guangdong AIB Polytechnic CollegeGuangdongPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations