Four experiments were conducted for two back-to-back seasons in a semi-arid Savannah zone, at the University of Zalingei margin, two kilometres east of Zalingei town Western Darfur State. The purpose of the research was to measure the land tantamount ratio of two leguminous grazing lands species viz. Clitoria ( Clitoria ternatea ) and Siratro ( Macroptilium atropurpureum ) intercropping at assorted cultural patterns and fencing under rainfed conditions. The influence of cultivated land ( conventional and preservation cultivated land ) , weeding ( mechanical weeds control ) and enclosures versus unfastened croping system interventions was determined. The experimental design used was spilt-plot design with three replicates, in which mechanical weed control was assigned to the sub-plot and cultivated land systems ( conventional and zero-tillage ) to the chief secret plans. Datas were collected on eatage output ( fresh and dry affair production ) and land tantamount ratio. The consequences indicated that, cultural patterns and enclosure significantly increased entire forage output ( fresh and dry affair production ) which was coupled with high land tantamount ratio ( i.e. over 1.0 )

Keywords: Savannah zone, Zalingei Town, eatage production, cultivated land.

Introduction

The inclusion of one or two highly toothsome workss with other of lower palatableness could ensue in over use and eventual riddance of the favorite species ( Plath, 1954 ) . Seed mixture of species appears to hold several advantages over bases of a individual species ( Cox and Cole, 1960 ) . There are certain advantages of mixture over pure bases, these include, different rooting wonts may ensue in more different usage of dirt wet and foods from assorted dirts deepnesss, seasonal production is likely to be more unvarying, a assorted diet is likely to be more desirable and produce greater additions, mixtures may hold greater length of service and some workss of mixtures may hold favourable influences on others such as nitrogen arrested development ( Nichols and Johnson, 1969 ) .

Pull offing the complexness of interactions that are possible when more of the elements diverseness is present in the farm system is a cardinal portion of cut downing the demand for external inputs and traveling toward sustainability ( Andrews and Kassam, 1976 ) . A Primary and direct manner of increasing diverseness of an agro-ecosystem is the intercropping system that allows interaction between persons of the different harvests and assortments ( Dariush, et al 2006 ) .

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

It has been recognized that during recent old ages that intercropping i.e. turning two or more harvests together on the same country ) can frequently bring forth high outputs than exclusive harvests, but there can be jobs in measuring the grade of output advantage ( Mead and Willey, 1980 ) . Intercropping can add temporal diverseness through the consecutive planting different harvests during the same season. Harmonizing to Dariush, et Al ( 2006 ) an of import tool for measuring the intercropping system is so called land equivalent ratio ( LER ) . Land tantamount ratio is defined as the comparative land country required as a exclusive harvest to bring forth the same outputs as intercropping ( Mead and Willey, 1980 ) . Supplying that all other things being equal steps of the output advantage obtained by turning two or more harvests or assortments as intercrop compared to turning the same harvest or assortments as a aggregation separates monoculture ( Andrews and Kassam, 1976 ) .

By and large, LER measures the degrees of intercrop intervention traveling on the cropping system. Theoretically, if the agro- ecological features of each harvest in a mixture are precisely the same the entire LER should be 1.0 and the partial LERs should be 0.5 for each. On other manus, a sum of LER of higher than 1.0 indicates the presence of positive inter-specific intervention that exists in the mixture is non every bit intensive as the inter-specific intervention that exist in the monoculture ( Dariush, et al 2006 ) . However, Kutrata, ( 1986 ) stated that an LER value of 1.0 bespeaking no difference in output between the intercrop and the aggregations of monocultures and any value greater than 1.0 indicates advantage for intercrop. While LER of 1.2 indicates that the country planted to monoculture would necessitate to be 20 % greater than the country planted to intercrop for the two to bring forth the combined output.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four experiments were carried out during the class of the survey 2009/2010-2010/2011. Two experiments each season, which include:

* Protected ( enclosure ) in which experiment was protected by a fencing made of subdivisions of trees ( Acacia melifera and other thorny species ) .

* Unprotected ( unfastened ) , the field was left to be grazed by little flocks. The two sites were close to each other in order to avoid dirt fluctuation.

The interventions consist of two cultivated land systems which include:

* Conservation or no cultivated land in which the dirt left unploughed.

* Conventional cultivated land, the dirt was ploughed by utilizing Baladi Big Dipper, in order to upset and powderize the dirt and to increase its volume.

Weeding was carried out several times during the experimental period ( manually ) by utilizing custodies hoes to destruct the noxious weeds. Six interventions were used, these include:

* Weeded Clitoria ( CW )

* Un-weeded Clitoria ( CW0 ) .

* Weeded Siratro ( SW ) .

* Un-weeded Siratro ( SW0 ) .

* Weeded Clitoria and Siratro ( SCW ) .

* Un-weeded Clitoria and Siratro ( SCW0 ) .

Because the top dirt surface of the site is frequently crusted, which may defy to H2O infiltration and hence affect seed sprouting, pre-seeding, cultivated land operation was carried out utilizing spring toothed agriculturist, for both sites in order to better infiltration feature of the dirt and fix good tilt seedbed. ( The operation was done merely after the first rain shower ) . The interventions were indiscriminately assigned as follows:

T0: ( CW, CW0, SW, SW0, SCW, SCW0 ) .

Thymine: ( CW, CW0, SW, SW0, SCW, SCW0 ) .

The experimental design used was Spit-plot design in which the two cultivated land systems were assigned to the chief secret plans and the weed control interventions were assigned to the sub-plots. Treatments were replicated three times to do a sum of 36 secret plans in each site ( 2x6x3 ) . ( Plot size is 10×10 metre ) .

Planting:

Seeding of the rangeland was carried out by the two grazing land leguminous plants ( Siratro and Clitoria seeds ) . Seeding was done instantly after the rain showers on the 25th of July for each season ( in rows ) at a rate of 5kg/Fed. ( Tahir, 2003 ) . Seeding was carried out during the two back-to-back showery seasons. Some seeds were sown in an unfastened scope and other was sown in enclosure scope.

Eatage fresh output:

A quadrat of one metre square was indiscriminately thrown over the turning workss in each secret plan, and the shoots inside the quadrat were cut and weight utilizing spring balance. The eatage fresh output was so obtained in ton /ha.

Dry affair production:

The pronounced country that used for fresh weight was cut, weighed air-dried for 15 yearss to make a changeless weight. Then reweighed, and the dry affair was expressed in ton /ha.

Entire eatage production:

The full secret plan in each intervention for the two experimental sites was cut individually ( at adulthood ) bundled, air- dried and weighed. The entire eatage production was expressed in ton /ha.

Land tantamount ratio finding:

The land tantamount ratio of the two experiments was calculated for the fresh and dry affair production throughout the two turning seasons and for the two systems used. LER was determined harmonizing to the equation below as stated by Mead and Willey ( 1980 ) ; Dariush et Al, ( 2006 ) .

Land Equivalent ratio:

LA and LB are the LERs for the single harvests ( Clitoria and Siratro ) .

YA and YB are the single harvest outputs in intercropping, where SA and SB are their outputs as exclusive harvests. The partial LERs are so summed up to give the entire LER for the intercrop.

Statistical analysis:

Statistical analysis of the informations collected was performed utilizing analysis of discrepancy as described by Gomez and Gomez ( 1984 ) . Duncan ‘s multiple scope trials was used for average separation.

Consequence

Entire fresh output production ( Tons/ha. )

By and large, weed control improved the entire fresh output of the two leguminous species under survey either when grown as a exclusive harvest or in mixture during the two turning seasons. It was observed that weed control significantly increased the entire fresh output of exclusive Clitoria, exclusive Siratro and Clitoria Siratro mixture by 43.8 % , 19.1 % and 31.52 % , severally during the first season inside the enclosure system, while no statistical differences were recoded between the interventions as a consequence of weed control during the 2nd season of the same closed system ( Table 1 ) . Furthermore, entire fresh output produced as a consequence of weed control was significantly higher in weeded secret plans versus un-weeded 1s during the two turning seasons for the unfastened system as shown in Table 1. In general the entire fresh output produced inside the enclosure of different interventions was higher than that of the unfastened system during the two turning seasons by 7.12 % and 11.75 % , severally.

Although there was an addition in entire fresh output making up to 9.29 tons/ hour angle ; as a consequence of cultivated land, conventional cultivated land showed no important influenced on entire fresh output for both leguminous species under survey throughout the two turning seasons and between the two scope systems as shown in Table2.

Entire dry affair output production ( tons/ha ) .

As illustrated in Table.3, although there was no statistical consequence on entire dry affair output of grazing land leguminous plant workss under survey as a consequence of weed direction, weeded secret plans recorded higher dry affair production of both Clitoria sole, Siratro sole and Clitoria – Siratro mixture by 24.7 % , 26.4 % and 40 % , severally over un-weeded 1s. However, weed control significantly increased the entire dry affair production up to 4.05, 4.2 and 4.85 tons/ha. Versus the untreated secret plans of Clitoria sole, Siratro sole and Clitoria- Siratro mixture during the first and the 2nd season inside the enclosure, severally.

Refering, the unfastened system and as shown in Table.3, weed control showed no important consequence on entire dry affair production between the different interventions during the first growth season, while weeded secret plans of Clitoria sole, Siratro sole and Clitoria-Siratro mixture statistically out yielded the un-weeded 1s during the 2nd season.

Cultivated land operation, ( conventional cultivated land versus zero cultivated land ) showed no important consequence on entire dry affair, in the unfastened and closed system during the two seasons ( Table 4 ) . On the other manus, entire dry affair production of weeded secret plans inside the enclosure well out yielded that of the unfastened system throughout the two turning seasons by 6.59 % and 10.8 % , severally

.

The Land equivalent ratio ( LER ) of Clitoria and Siratro intercropping.

As illustrated in Tables 5 and 6, the entire fresh LER production well exceeded that of the exclusive production for both Clitoria and Siratro during the two seasons of growing. However, the entire fresh LER of the intervention TW0 ( conventional cultivated land zero weeding ) was recorded higher LER for both the closed and unfastened systems by 2.18 and 2.33, severally, over T0W0 ( zero cultivated land zero weeding ) inside the enclosure system during the first season. On the other manus, LER for fresh output during the first season of the unfastened system the intervention T0W0 ( zero cultivated land zero weeding ) scored the highest value ( 2.51 ) ( Tables 5 and 6 ) . During the 2nd growth season the LER values were by and large lower than those of the first turning season. Valuess of LER obtained from the intervention TW0 ( conventional cultivated land zero weeding ) of both closed and unfastened systems were 1.44 and 1.67 LER, severally, more than T0W ( zero cultivated land weeding ) intervention.

Refering, the dry affair production, as represented in Tables 7 and 8, consequences showed that the mixture or intercropping of Clitoria and Siratro combinations had resulted in significant consequence on entire LER. Maximum and minimal LER values of 1.48 and 1.10 were attained from the interventions TW0 ( conventional cultivated land zero weeding ) and T0W0 ( zero cultivated land zero weeding ) intercropping combinations inside the enclosure system during the first season, severally. While inside the unfastened system maximal and minimal entire LER values of 1.83 and 1.24 were obtained by interventions TW0 ( conventional cultivated land zero weeding ) and TW ( conventional cultivated land weeding ) combinations of the first season, severally ( Table 7 ) . During the 2nd growth season it was observed that the entire LERs of both Siratro and Clitoria intercropping combinations were drastically higher than their cropping monocultures. Maximum and minimal LER values of 1.86 and 1.06 inside the enclosure and 1.99 and 1.54 inside the unfastened system were obtained by interventions TW ( conventional cultivated land weeding ) , T0W0 ( zero cultivated land zero weeding ) of closed and TW0 ( conventional cultivated land zero weeding ) and T0W0 ( zero cultivated land zero weeding ) of the unfastened system, severally ( Table 8 ) . By and large, the existent partial LER values of the intervention TW0 ( conventional cultivated land zero weeding ) in all of intercropping combinations during the two turning seasons and the two systems is higher than that of the other interventions.

Table 1. Consequence of interventions on entire fresh output ( tons/ha. ) ( weed control )

Treatments

2009/2010.

2010/2011

Closed

Open

Closed

Open

CW

9.81ab

9.21ab

9.08a

8.54ab

CW0

5.51ab

4.38ab

6.71a

6.28ab

Southwest

5.22ab

7.19abc

10.08a

7.49ab

SW0

4.17b

4.04c

8.21a

5.45b

CSW

14.15a

10.78a

11.99a

10.76a

CSW0

9.69ab

9.57a

8.83a

9.93ab

SE ±

0.36

0.26

0.24

0.35

C.V %

26.58

9.21

12.86

21.46

Meanss followed by the same missive ( s ) within a given column are non significantly different at ( P & A ; lt ; 0.05 ) degree harmonizing to Duncan ‘s multiple scope trial

Table 2. Consequence of interventions on entire fresh output, ( tons/ha. ) Cultivated land system.

Treatments

2009/2010.

2010/2011

Closed

Open

Closed

Open

T0

8.25a

7.84a

9.01a

7.67a

Thymine

7.93a

7.22a

9.29a

8.49a

SE ±

0.76

0.34

1.12

0.43

C.V %

46.13

27.17

59.95

25.88

Meanss followed by the same missive ( s ) within a given column are non significantly different at ( P & A ; lt ; 0.05 ) degree harmonizing to Duncan ‘s multiple scope trial.

Keies:

CW: Clitoria weeded. CW0: Clitoria un-weeded. Southwest: Siratro weeded. SW0: Siratro un-weeded

CSW: Clitoria and Siratro mixture weeded. CSW0: Clitoria and Siratro un-weeded. T0: Zero Tillage ( No cultivated land ) Thymine: Cultivated land

Table 3 Effect of interventions on entire dry affair, ( tons/ha. ) ( Weed control. )

Treatments

2009/2010.

2010/2011

Closed

Open

Closed

Open

CW

4.05ab

3.56a

3.27a

2.93bc

CW0

3.69ab

3.08a

2.46a

2.12de

Southwest

4.20ab

3.44a

3.22a

2.37cd

SW0

2.87b

3.04a

2.37a

1.72e

CSW

4.85a

4.80a

5.07a

4.77a

CSW0

4.01ab

4.13a

3.03a

3.41b

SE ±

0.21

0.17

0.09

0.14

C.V %

32.13

28.48

17.06

29.10

Meanss followed by the same missive ( s ) within a given column are non significantly different at ( P & A ; lt ; 0.05 ) degree harmonizing to Duncan ‘s multiple scope trial.

Table 4. Consequence of interventions on entire dry affair, ( tons/ha. ) ( Tillage system ) .

Treatments

2009/2010.

2010/2011

Closed

Open

Closed

Open

T0

4.17a

3.37a

3.19a

2.74a

Thymine

3.72a

3.93a

3.28a

3.03a

SE ±

0.13

0.14

0.31

0.04

C.V %

19.89

23.52

58.33

8.17

Meanss followed by the same missive ( s ) within a given column are non significantly different at ( P & A ; lt ; 0.05 ) degree harmonizing to Duncan ‘s multiple scope trial

Keies:

CW: Clitoria weeded. CW0: Clitoria un-weeded. Southwest: Siratro weeded. SW0: Siratro un-weeded

CSW: Clitoria and Siratro mixture weeded. CSW0: Clitoria and Siratro un-weeded. T0: Zero Tillage ( No cultivated land ) Thymine: Cultivated land

Table 5. LER fresh outputs ( Ton/ha. ) First season 2009/2010.

System

Closed

Open

Lir

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

Treatments

T0W

0.97

1.08

2.05

0.73

0.68

1.41

T0W0

0.99

0.92

1.91

0.89

1.62

2.51

TW

0.71

0.99

1.70

0.63

0.67

1.30

TW0

0.83

1.35

2.18

1.29

1.04

2.33

Table 6. LER fresh outputs ( Ton/ha. ) 2nd.season 2010/2011

System

Closed

Open

Lir

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

Treatments

T0W

0.53

0.49

1.02

0.73

0.54

1.27

T0W0

0.66

0.37

1.03

0.78

0.72

1.50

TW

0.86

0.42

1.28

0.75

0.65

1.40

TW0

0.94

0.50

1.44

1.08

0.65

1.67

Keies:

T0W: Zero Cultivated land Weeded T0W0: Zero Cultivated land Zero Weeding

TW: Cultivated land Weeded TW0: Cultivated land Zero Weeding

Table 7. LER dry affair outputs ( Ton/ha. ) First season 2009/2010..

System

Closed

Open

Lir

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

Treatments

T0W

0.69

0.48

1.17

0.59

0.84

1.43

T0W0

0.67

0.43

1.10

0.61

0.69

1.30

TW

0.48

0.86

1.34

0.42

0.82

1.24

TW0

0.52

0.96

1.48

0.92

0.91

1.83

Table 8. LER dry affair outputs ( Ton/ha. ) 2nd.season 2010/2011

System

Closed

Open

Lir

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

LA Clitoria

LB Siratro

Entire LA+LB

Treatments

T0W

0.74

0.59

1.33

0.79

0.94

1.73

T0W0

0.67

0.39

1.06

0.93

0.61

1.54

TW

0.96

0.89

1.85

0.93

0.95

1.88

TW0

1.00

0.55

1.55

0.89

1.10

1.99

Keies:

T0W: Zero Cultivated land Weeded T0W0: Zero Cultivated land Zero Weeding

TW: Cultivated land Weeded TW0: Cultivated land Zero Weeding

Discussion

Consequence of grazing land mixture ( intercropping ) and land tantamount ratio:

The productiveness of Clitoria-Siratro mixture and land tantamount ratios ( LERs ) were assessed in footings of fresh and dry affair production throughout the two turning seasons and the two graze forms used viz, enclosure and unfastened systems. Consequences showed that the LER values of fresh outputs and dry affair production for both Clitoria-Siratro mixtures well exceeded that of their corresponding monoculture. Since the thought of land tantamount ratio in most instances, is the most of import comparing between output of the chief harvest in mixture and its output in pure base, it is instead expected that the combination of component species in mixture will be more productive than the species grown as a exclusive harvests.

The consequence obtained were strongly coincided with the definition of land tantamount ratio in that the combination of component species in the mixture were more productive than the same species when grown as exclusive harvests. However, the LERs ratio, in about all instances, were greater ( over one ) than the sole which interpreted as advantage of mixture over exclusive. Similarly, Mazaheri and Overysi ( 2004 ) documented that an LER of 1.0 or less bespeaking that no difference in output between the intercrop and the aggregations of monoculture, while any value greater than 1.0 indicates that output advantage for intercropping. Furthermore, Mead and Willy, ( 1980 ) ; Dariush et Al ( 2006 ) confirmed that LER is taken as a step of comparative output advantage for illustration LER of 1.2 indicates that the country planted to monocultures would necessitate to be 20 % greater than the country planted to intercrop to bring forth the same combined outputs ( i.e. 20 % more land would be required as a exclusive harvest to bring forth the same output as intercropping ) . In add-on, more researches were carried out to show the advantage of intercropping versus exclusive harvests. Ta, and Fari ( 1987 ) indicated that consequences of mix-cropping herd’s grass with alfalfa significantly increased both pasturage and N concentration when compared to timothy grown in a pure base. Whereas Sengul, ( 2003 ) realized that legume mixtures with one or two grass species gave higher dry affair output than the individual harvest. The high quality of the mixtures was besides reflected in their big N crops compared to pure bases of lucerne and pure grasses. Furthermore, the protein concentration of the hay from the mixtures was higher than that of pure base. The LER values of grass mixtures were higher in both individual and binary grass mixtures in presence of Medicago ( 1.10, 1.22 ) and Onobrychis ( 1.08, 1.11, severally ) than those of their pure stands.

x

Hi!
I'm Niki!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out