Title: High productivity of wheat intercropped with maize is associated with plant architectural responses
Abstract: Annals of Applied BiologyVolume 168, Issue 3 p. 357-372 RESEARCH ARTICLE High productivity of wheat intercropped with maize is associated with plant architectural responses J. Zhu, J. Zhu orcid.org/0000-0002-9093-651X Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorW. van der Werf, W. van der Werf Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorJ. Vos, J. Vos Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorN.P.R. Anten, N.P.R. Anten Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorP.E.L. van der Putten, P.E.L. van der Putten Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorJ.B. Evers, Corresponding Author J.B. Evers Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands Correspondence J.B. Evers, Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, PO Box 430, 6700 AK, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author J. Zhu, J. Zhu orcid.org/0000-0002-9093-651X Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorW. van der Werf, W. van der Werf Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorJ. Vos, J. Vos Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorN.P.R. Anten, N.P.R. Anten Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorP.E.L. van der Putten, P.E.L. van der Putten Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The NetherlandsSearch for more papers by this authorJ.B. Evers, Corresponding Author J.B. Evers Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands Correspondence J.B. Evers, Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, PO Box 430, 6700 AK, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 09 February 2016 https://doi.org/10.1111/aab.12268Citations: 31Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Mixed cultivation of crops often results in increased production per unit land area, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. Plants in intercrops grow differently from plants in single crops; however, no study has shown the association between plant plastic responses and the yield advantage. Here, we assessed the productivity of wheat–maize intercropping as compared to sole wheat and sole maize, and the associated differences in wheat shoot and leaf traits. In two field experiments, intercrop wheat and maize were both grown in alternating strips consisting of six rows of wheat and two rows of maize. The traits of wheat plants in border rows of the strips were compared to the traits of plants in the inner rows as well as those in sole wheat. Leaf development, chlorophyll concentration and azimuth, as well as the final leaf and ear sizes, tiller dynamics of wheat and yield components of both crops were determined. The relative densities of wheat and maize in the intercrop were 0.33 and 0.67, respectively, but the corresponding relative yields compared to the respective monocultures were 0.46 for wheat and 0.77 for maize. Compared to wheat plants in the inner rows of the intercrop strips as well as in the monoculture, border-row wheat plants in the intercrop strips had (a) more tillers owing to increased tiller production and survival, and thus more ears, (b) larger top leaves on the main stem and tillers, (c) higher chlorophyll concentration in leaves, (d) greater number of kernels per ear and (e) smaller thousand-grain weight. Grain yield per metre row length of border-row wheat was 141% higher than the sole wheat, and was 176% higher than the inner-row wheat. The results demonstrate the importance of plasticity in architectural traits for yield advantage in multispecies cropping systems. Supporting Information Filename Description aab12268-sup-0001-AppendixS1.zipapplication/x-zip-compressed, 4 MB Appendix S1. Leaf shape coefficient calculation method. Table S1. Yield components in different rows of intercrop with late sown maize. Figure S1. Field view of wheat–maize relay intercropping at second matured leaf stage of wheat (12 April), sixth to seventh matured leaf stages of wheat (jointing stage) and maize sowing (11 May), eighth to ninth matured leaf stages of wheat and zero to first matured leaf stages of maize (22 May), at nine matured leaf stage of wheat (heading stage) and third matured leaf stage of maize (9 June), at milk development stage of wheat and eighth matured leaf stage of maize (12 July) and at ripening stage of wheat and approximately 14 (final leaf) matured leaf stage of maize (tasseling stage, 1 August). Left side corresponds to the east direction in the field. Figure S2. The shape of a full-grown wheat leaf by plotting normalised margin to midrib distance (0.5 × the width measured) versus normalised distance to leaf tip. Points are measurements and line is the shape function with fitted parameters (Eqn 1 in the main text). For the spring wheat cultivar used in this study, coefficient values were Lm = 0.713 and C = 0.760. Figure S3. Moment of leaf tip and collar appearance on main stem (A) and tiller 1 (B) of wheat in row 1 (border row, squares), row 2 (circles) and row 3 (triangles) in wheat–maize relay strip intercropping and in sole wheat (transverse triangles) versus phytomer rank. The top series of symbols represent leaf senescence time, middle series of symbols represent leaf mature time and bottom series of symbols represent appearance time. Error bars representing SE are not shown as they would be smaller than the symbols. Figure S4. Distribution of the leaf angle between leaf and row for all available leaves. The angle between row and leaf is refined within 0–90°. Zero degree means that the leaf is along with the row direction. Bars represent the proportion of data that locates in a specific range. Lines represent the density estimation by the ‘kernel density estimation’ function in R. Figure S5. Thousand-kernel weight versus number of kernels per metre row length. LS represents an intercrop treatment in which maize was sown 2 weeks later than in the intercrop system presented in the main text. Number of kernels per metre row length can be seen as the sink capacity. A big sink capacity would require a big source. This figure indicates that the low value of thousand-kernel weight in border-row wheat of intercrop (IC) could be a consequence of shading by maize. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article. References Acreche M.M., Slafer G.A. (2006) Grain weight response to increases in number of grains in wheat in a Mediterranean area. Field Crops Research, 98, 52–59. Altieri M.A. (2009) Agroecology, small farms, and food sovereignty. Monthly Review, 61, 102–113. Bremner P.M., Rawson H.M. (1978) The weights of individual grains of the wheat ear in relation to their growth potential, the supply of assimilate and interaction between grains. Functional Plant Biology, 5, 61–72. Brooker R.W., Bennett A.E., Cong W.F., Daniell T.J., George T.S., Hallett P.D., Hawes C., Iannetta P.P.M., Jones H.G., Karley A.J., Li L., McKenzie B.M., Pakeman R.J., Paterson E., Schöb C., Shen J., Squire G., Watson C.A., Zhang C., Zhang F., Zhang J., White P.J. (2014) Improving intercropping: a synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology. New Phytologist, 206, 107–117. Bustos D.V., Hasan A.K., Reynolds M.P., Calderini D.F. (2013) Combining high grain number and weight through a DH-population to improve grain yield potential of wheat in high-yielding environments. Field Crops Research, 145, 106–115. Chappell M.J., Wittman H., Bacon C.M., Ferguson B.G., Barrios L.G., Barrios R.G., Jaffee D., Lima J., Méndez V.E., Morales H., Soto-Pinto L., Vandermeer J., Perfecto I. (2013) Food sovereignty: an alternative paradigm for poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation in Latin America. F1000Research, 2, 235 (doi: 10.12688/f1000research.2-235.v1). Cong W.-F., Hoffland E., Li L., Six J., Sun J.-H., Bao X.-G., Zhang F.-S., Van der Werf W. (2014) Intercropping enhances soil carbon and nitrogen. Global Change Biology, 21, 1715–1726. Donald C.M. (1968) The breeding of crop ideotypes. Euphytica, 17, 385–403. Eichhorn M.P., Paris P., Herzog F., Incoll L.D., Liagre F., Mantzanas K., Mayus M., Moreno G., Papanastasis V.P., Pilbeam D.J., Pisanelli A., Dupraz C. (2006) Silvoarable systems in Europe – past, present and future prospects. Agroforestry Systems, 67, 29–50. Evers J.B., Vos J., Fournier C., Andrieu B., Chelle M., Struik P.C. (2005) Towards a generic architectural model of tillering in Gramineae, as exemplified by spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). New Phytologist, 166, 801–812. Evers J.B., Vos J., Andrieu B., Struik P.C. (2006) Cessation of tillering in spring wheat in relation to light interception and red : far-red ratio. Annals of Botany, 97, 649–658. Evers J.B., Vos J., Chelle M., Andrieu B., Fournier C., Struik P.C. (2007) Simulating the effects of localized red:far-red ratio on tillering in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) using a three-dimensional virtual plant model. New Phytologist, 176, 325–336. Fischer R.A. (1975) Yield potential in a dwarf spring wheat and the effect of shading. Crop Science, 15, 607–613. Fischer R.A. (1985) Number of kernels in wheat crops and the influence of solar radiation and temperature. Journal of Agricultural Science, 105, 447–461. Fischer R.A., Stockman Y.M. (1986) Increased kernel number in Norin 10-derived dwarf wheat: evaluation of the cause. Functional Plant Biology, 13, 767–784. Fournier C., Andrieu B., Ljutovac S., Saint-Jean S. (2003) ADEL-Wheat: a 3D Architectural Model of wheat development. In International Symposium on Plant Growth Modeling, Simulation, Visualization, and their Applications, pp. 54–63. Eds B.G. Hu and M. Jaeger. Beijing, China: Tsinghua University Press/Springer. Gregory P.J., Reddy M.S. (1982) Root growth in an intercrop of pearl millet/groundnut. Field Crops Research, 5, 241–252. Grime J.P. (1994) The role of plasticity in exploiting environmental heterogeneity. In Exploitation of Environmental Heterogeneity by Plants: Ecophysiological Processes Above- and Belowground, pp. 19. Eds M.M. Caldwell and R.W. Pearcy. San Diego, California, USA: Academic Press, Inc. Jose P., Douglas B., Saikat D., Deepayan S., R Development Core Team. (2013) nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R Package Version 3.1-113. Kirby E.J.M., Riggs T.J. (1978) Developmental consequences of two-row and six-row ear type in spring barley: 2. Shoot apex, leaf and tiller development. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge, 91, 207–216. Lauer J.G., Simmons S.R. (1988) Photoassimilate partitioning by tillers and individual tiller leaves in field-grown spring barley. Crop Science, 28, 279–282. Lauer J.G., Simmons S.R. (1989) Canopy light and tiller mortality in spring barley. Crop Science, 29, 420–424. Li L., Sun J.H., Zhang F.S., Li X.L., Yang S.C., Rengel Z. (2001) Wheat/maize or wheat/soybean strip intercropping I. Yield advantage and interspecific interactions on nutrients. Field Crops Research, 71, 123–137. Li Q.-Z., Sun J.-H., Wei X.-J., Christie P., Zhang F.-S., Li L. (2010) Overyielding and interspecific interactions mediated by nitrogen fertilization in strip intercropping of maize with faba bean, wheat and barley. Plant and Soil, 339, 147–161. Li L., Zhang L., Zhang F. (2013) Crop mixtures and the mechanisms of overyielding. In Encyclopedia of Biodiversity. 2nd edn, pp. 382–395. Ed S.A. Levin. Waltham, MA, USA: Academic Press. Lithourgidis A.S., Dordas C.A., Damalas C.A., Vlachostergios D.N. (2011) Annual intercrops: an alternative pathway for sustainable agriculture. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 5, 396–410. Loreau M., Hector A. (2001) Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments. Nature, 412, 72–76. Loss S.P., Siddique K.H.M. (1994) Morphological and physiological traits associated with wheat yield increases in Mediterranean environments. Advances in Agronomy, 52, 229–276. Maddonni G.A., Chelle M., Drouet J.-L., Andrieu B. (2001) Light interception of contrasting azimuth canopies under square and rectangular plant spatial distributions: simulations and crop measurements. Field Crops Research, 70, 1–13. Maddonni G.A., Otegui M.E., Andrieu B., Chelle M., Casal J.J. (2002) Maize leaves turn away from neighbors. Plant Physiology, 130, 1181–1189. Makumba W., Janssen B., Oenema O., Akinnifesi F.K., Mweta D., Kwesiga F. (2006) The long-term effects of a gliricidia–maize intercropping system in southern Malawi, on gliricidia and maize yields, and soil properties. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 116, 85–92. Makumba W., Akinnifesi F.K., Janssen B., Oenema O. (2007) Long-term impact of a gliricidia-maize intercropping system on carbon sequestration in southern Malawi. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 118, 237–243. Marshall B., Willey R.W. (1983) Radiation interception and growth in an intercrop of pearl millet/groundnut. Field Crops Research, 7, 141–160. McMaster G.S., LeCain D.R., Morgan J.A., Aiguo L., Hendrix D.L. (1999) Elevated CO2 increases wheat cer, leaf and tiller development, and shoot and root growth. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 183, 119–128. Novozamsky I., Houba V.J.G., van Eck R., van Vark W. (1983) A novel digestion technique for multi-element plant analysis. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 14, 239–248. Noy-Meir, Briske (2002). Ong C.K., Marshall C., Saoar G.R. (1978) The physiology of tiller death in grasses. 2. Causes of tiller death in a grass sward. Grass and Forage Science, 33, 205–211. Peng S., Khush G.S., Virk P., Tang Q., Zou Y. (2008) Progress in ideotype breeding to increase rice yield potential. Field Crops Research, 108, 32–38. R Core Team (2014) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Rao M.R., Willey R.W. (1980) Evaluation of yield stability in intercropping - studies on sorghum/pigeonpea. Experimental Agriculture, 16, 105–116. Reddy M.S., Willey R.W. (1981) Growth and resource use studies in an intercrop of pearl millet-groundnut. Field Crops Research, 4, 13–24. Sadras V.O., Slafer G.A. (2012) Environmental modulation of yield components in cereals: heritabilities reveal a hierarchy of phenotypic plasticities. Field Crops Research, 127, 215–224. Sanchez-Bragado R., Molero G., Reynolds M.P., Araus J.L. (2014a) Relative contribution of shoot and ear photosynthesis to grain filling in wheat under good agronomical conditions assessed by differential organ δ13C. Journal of Experimental Botany, 65, 5401–5413. Sanchez-Bragado R., Elazab A., Zhou B., Serret M.D., Bort J., Nieto-Taladriz M.T., Araus J.L. (2014b) Contribution of the ear and the flag leaf to grain filling in durum wheat inferred from the carbon isotope signature: genotypic and growing conditions effects. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 56, 444–454. Serrago R.A., Alzueta I., Savin R., Slafer G.A. (2013) Understanding grain yield responses to source–sink ratios during grain filling in wheat and barley under contrasting environments. Field Crops Research, 150, 42–51. Silvertown J., Gordon D.M. (1989) A framework for plant behavior. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 20, 349–366. Simpson G.M. (1968) Association between grain yield per plant and photosynthetic area above the flag-leaf node in wheat. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 48, 253–260. Slafer G.A., Savin R., Sadras V.O. (2014) Coarse and fine regulation of wheat yield components in response to genotype and environment. Field Crops Research, 157, 71–83. Sofield I., Evans L.T., Cook M.G., Wardlaw I.F. (1977) Factors influencing the rate and duration of grain filling in wheat. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 4, 785–797. Sparkes D.L., Holme S.J., Gaju O. (2006) Does light quality initiate tiller death in wheat? European Journal of Agronomy, 24, 212–217. Trenbath B.R. (1993) Intercropping for the management of pests and diseases. Field Crops Research, 34, 381–405. Vandermeer J. (1989) The Ecology of Intercropping. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Vandermeer J.H. (2011) The Ecology of Agroecosystems. Boston, MA, USA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Verma V., Foulkes M.J., Worland A.J., Sylvester-Bradley R., Caligari P.D.S., Snape J.W. (2004) Mapping quantitative trait loci for flag leaf senescence as a yield determinant in winter wheat under optimal and drought-stressed environments. Euphytica, 135, 255–263. Vos J., Evers J.B., Buck-Sorlin G.H., Andrieu B., Chelle M., de Visser P.H.B. (2010) Functional–structural plant modelling: a new versatile tool in crop science. Journal of Experimental Botany, 61, 2101–2115. Werner E.E., Peacor S.D. (2003) A review of trait-mediated indirect interactions in ecological communities. Ecology, 84, 1083–1100. Wolfe M.S. (2000) Crop strength through diversity. Nature, 406, 681–682. Yachi S., Loreau M. (2007) Does complementary resource use enhance ecosystem functioning? A model of light competition in plant communities. Ecology Letters, 10, 54–62. Zhang L., van der Werf W., Zhang S., Li B., Spiertz J.H.J. (2007) Growth, yield and quality of wheat and cotton in relay strip intercropping systems. Field Crops Research, 103, 178–188. Zhang L., van der Werf W., Bastiaans L., Zhang S., Li B., Spiertz J.H.J. (2008) Light interception and utilization in relay intercrops of wheat and cotton. Field Crops Research, 107, 29–42. Zhu Y., Chen H., Fan J., Wang Y., Li Y., Chen J., Fan J., Yang S., Hu L., Leung H., Mew T.W., Teng P.S., Wang Z., Mundt C.C. (2000) Genetic diversity and disease control in rice. Nature, 406, 718–722. Zhu J., Vos J., van der Werf W., van der Putten P.E.L., Evers J.B. (2014) Early competition shapes maize whole-plant development in mixed stands. Journal of Experimental Botany, 65, 641–653. Zhu J., van der Werf W., Anten N.P.R., Vos J., Evers J.B. (2015) The contribution of phenotypic plasticity to complementary light capture in plant mixtures. New Phytologist, 207, 1213–1222. Citing Literature Volume168, Issue3May 2016Pages 357-372 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Publication Year: 2016
Publication Date: 2016-02-09
Language: en
Type: article
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 40
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot