Forage yield, competition and economic benefit of intercropping cactus and millet with mulch in a semi-arid environment

References

• Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M. 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper, 56, Rome.
   Google Scholar
• Amorim DM, Silva TGF, Pereira PC, Souza LSB, Minuzzi RB. 2017. Phenophases and cutting time of forage cactus under irrigation and cropping systems. Pesquisa Agropecuária Tropical 47: 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-40632016v4742746.
   Google Scholar
• Araújo Júnior GN, Silva TGF, Souza LSB, Souza MS, Araújo GGL, Moura MSB, Santos JPAS, Jardim AMRF, Alves CP, Alves HKMN. 2021. Productivity, bromatological composition and economic benefits of using irrigation in the forage cactus under regulated deficit irrigation in a semiarid environment. Bragantia 80: e1221. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4499.20200390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbosa ML, Silva TGF, Zolnier S, Silva SMS, Steidle Neto AJ. 2018. The influence of cladode morphology on the canopy formation of forage cactus plants. Revista Caatinga 31: 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252018v31n121rc.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carvalho AA, Silva TGF, Souza LSB, Moura MSB, Araújo GGL, Toledo MPS. 2017. Soil moisture in forage cactus plantations with improvement practices for their resilience. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 21: 481–487. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v21n7p481-487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dias-Martins AM, Pessanha KLF, Pacheco S, Rodrigues JAS, Carvalho CWP. 2018. Potential use of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) in Brazil: Food security, processing, health benefits and nutritional products. Food Research International 109: 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.04.023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding D, Zhao Y, Feng H, Hill RL, Chu, Zhang T, He J. 2018. Soil water utilization with plastic mulching for a winter wheat-summer maize rotation system on the Loess Plateau of China. Agricultural Water Management 201: 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2017.12.029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diniz WJS, Silva TGF, Ferreira JMS, Santos DC, Moura MSB, Araújo GGL, Zolnier S. 2017. Forage cactus-sorghum intercropping at different irrigation water depths in the Brazilian Semiarid Region. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 52: 724–733. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-204x2017000900004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-mageed TAA, Samnoudi IME, Ibrahim AEM, Abd AR, Tawwab E. 2018. Compost and mulching modulates morphological , physiological responses and water use eficiency in sorghum (Bicolor L . Moench) under low moisture regime. Agricultural Water Management 208: 431–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.06.042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• El-mageed TAA, Semida WM, El-wahed MHA. 2016. Effect of mulching on plant water status , soil salinity and yield of squash under summer-fall deficit irrigation in salt affected soil. Agricultural Water Management 173: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.04.025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EMBRAPA. 2013. Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação de Solos. Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, 3 ed, 353.
   Google Scholar
• Farias I, Lira MA, Santos DC, Tavares Filho JJ, Santos MVF, Fernandes APM, Santos VF, 2000. Manejo de colheita e espaça- mento da palma forrageira, em consórcio com sorgo granífero, no Agreste de Pernambuco. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 35: 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2000000200013.
   Google Scholar
• Ghosh PK, 2004. Growth , yield , competition and economics of groundnut /cereal fodder intercropping systems in the semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Research 88: 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2004.01.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Havilah EJ. 2011. Forages and pastures: Annual forage and pasture crop species and varieties. In: Fuquay JW (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Dairy Sciences (2nd edition). Academic Press, Elsevier Ltd. pp 552–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374407-4.00193-X.
   Google Scholar
• Jardim AMRF, Santos HRB, Alves HKMN, Ferreira-Silva SL, Souza LSB, Araújo Júnior GN, Souza MS, Araújo GGL, Souza CAA, Silva TGF. 2021a. Genotypic differences relative photochemical activity, inorganic and organic solutes and yield performance in clones of the forage cactus under semi-arid environment. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 162: 421–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2021.03.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jardim AMRF, Silva TGF, Souza LSB, Araújo Júnior GN, Alves HKMN, Souza MS, Araújo GGL, Moura MSB. 2021b. Intercropping forage cactus and sorghum in a semi-arid environment improves biological efficiency and competitive ability through interspecific complementarity. Journal of Arid Environments 188: 104464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2021.104464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jardim AMRF, Souza LSB, Alves CP, Araujo JFN, Souza CAA, Pinheiro AG, Araujo GGL, Campos FS, Tabosa JN, Silva TGF. 2021c. Intercopping forage cactus with sorghum affects the morphophysiology and phenology of forage cactus. African Journal of Range & Forage Science. https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2021.1949749.
   Google Scholar
• Li S, Li Y, Lin H, Feng H, Dyck M. 2018. Effects of different mulching technologies on evapotranspiration and summer maize growth. Agricultural Water Management 201: 309–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2017.10.025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima LR, Silva TGF, Pereira PC, Morais JEF, Assis MCS. 2018a. Productive-economic benefit of forage cactus-sorghum intercrop- ping systems irrigated with saline water. Revista Caatinga 31: 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252018v31n122rc.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima LR, Silva TGF, Jardim AMRF, Souza CAA, Queiroz MG, Tabosa JN. 2018b. Growth, water use and efficiency of forage cactus sorghum intercropping under different water depths. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental 22: 113–118. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v22n2p113-118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lira JB, Andrade AP, Magalhaes ALR, Campos FS, Araújo GGL, Deon DS, Regitano Neto A, Cunha DS, Tabosa JN, Silva TGF, et al. 2020. Production of pearl millet irrigated with different levels of brackish water and organic matter. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 51: 701–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2020.1729794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopes I, Montenegro AAA, Lima JLMP. 2019. Performance of Conservation Techniques for Semiarid Environments: Field Observations with Caatinga, Mulch, and Cactus Forage. Water 11: 792–807. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11040792.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machiani MA, Javanmard A, Morshedloo MR, Maggi F. 2018. Evaluation of competition, essential oil quality and quantity of peppermint intercropped with soybean. Industrial Crops & Products 111: 743–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.11.052
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marengo JA, Alves LM, Alvala RCS, Cunha AP, Brito S, Moraes OLL. 2017. Climatic characteristics of the 2010–2016 drought in the semiarid Northeast Brazil region. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências 90: 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Masvaya EN, Nyamangara J, Descheemaeker K, Giller KE. 2017. Is maize-cowpea intercropping a viable option for smallholder farms in the risky environments of semi-arid southern Africa? Field Crops Research 209: 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.04.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moraes GSO, Guim A, Tabosa JN, Chagas JCC, Almeida MP, Ferreira MA. 2019. Cactus [Opuntia stricta (Haw.) Haw] cladodes and corn silage: How do we maximize the performance of lactating dairy cows reared in semiarid regions? Livestock Science 221: 133–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2019.01.026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morais JEF, Silva TGF, Queiroz MG, Araujo GGL, Moura MSB, Araújo Júnior GN. 2017. Hydrodynamic changes of the soil-cactus interface, effective actual evapotranspiration and its water efficiency under irrigation. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 21: 273–278. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v21n4p273-278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson WCD, Hoffmann MP, Vadez V, Roetter RP, Whitbread AM. 2018. Testing pearl millet and cowpea intercropping systems under high temperatures. Field Crops Research 217: 150–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.12.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira PC, Silva TGF, Zolnier S, Morais JEF, Santos DC. 2015. Morfogênese da palma forrageira irrigada por gotejamento. Revista Caatinga 28: 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252015v28n321rc.
   Google Scholar
• Pimentel LG, Cherubin MR, Oliveira DMS, Cerri CEP, Cerri CC. 2019. Decomposition of sugarcane straw: Basis for management decisions for bioenergy production. Biomass and Bioenergy 122: 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.01.027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinheiro KM, Silva TGF, Carvalho HFS, Santos JEO, Morais JEF, Zolnier S, Santos DC. 2014. Correlações do índice de área do cladódio com características morfogênicas e produtivas da palma forrageira. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 49: 939–947. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2014001200004.
   Google Scholar
• Qin W, Hu C, Oenema O. 2015. Soil mulching significantly enhances yields and water and nitrogen use efficiencies of maize and wheat: a meta-analysis. Scientific Reports 5: 16210. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qin HT, Lu C, Dang P, Zhang M, Guan XK, Wen PF, Wang T-C, Siddique KHM. 2017. Benefits and limitations of straw mulching and incorporation on maize yield, water use efficiency, and nitrogen use efficiency. Agricultural Water Management 256: 107128. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107128
   Google Scholar
• Queiroz MG, Silva TGF, Zolnier S, Silva SMS, Lima LR, Alves JO. 2015. Características morfofisiológicas e produtivas da palma forrageira em diferentes lâminas de irrigação. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 19: 931–938. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v19n10p931-938.
   Google Scholar
• Queiroz MG, Silva TGF, Zolnier S, Silva SMS, Souza CAA, Carvalho HFS. 2018. Relações hídrico-econômicas da palma forrageira cultivada em ambiente semiárido. Irriga (Sl) 1: 141–154. https://doi.org/10.15809/irriga.2016v1n01p141-154.
   Google Scholar
• Raseduzzaman M, Jensen ES. 2017. Does intercropping enhance yield stability in arable crop production? A meta-analysis. European Journal of Agronomy 91: 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2017.09.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rolim GS, Sentelhas PC, Barbieri V. 1998. Planilhas no ambiente EXCEL para os cálculos de balanços hídricos: normal, seqüencial, de cultura e de produtividade real e potencial. Revista Brasileira de Agrometeorologia 6: 133–137.
   Google Scholar
• Sadeghpour A, Jahanzad E, Esmaeili A, Hosseini MB, Hashemi M. 2013. Forage yield, quality and economic benefit of intercropped barley and annual medic in semi-arid conditions: Additive series. Field Crops Research 148: 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.03.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos R, Neves AL, Pereira LG, Verneque R, Costa CT, Tabosa J, Scherer C, Gonçalves L. 2017. Divergence in agronomic traits and performance of pearl millet cultivars in Brazilian semiarid region. Grassland Science 63: 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/grs.12154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva GS, Oliveira RA, Queiroz NL, Silva MNB, Sousa MF, Silva SA. 2013. Desempenho agronômico de algodão orgânico e oleaginosas consorciados com palma forrageira. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 17: 975–981. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-43662013000900010.
   Google Scholar
• Silva TGF, Araújo Primo JT, Silva SMS, Moura MSB, Santos DC, Silva MC, Araújo JEM. 2014a. Indicadores de eficiência do uso da água e de nutrientes de clones de palma forrageira em condições de sequeiro no Semiárido brasileiro. Bragantia 73: 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1590/brag.2014.017.
   Google Scholar
• Silva TGF, Miranda KR., Santos DC, Queiroz MG, Silva MC, Cruz Neto JF, Araújo JEM. 2014b. Área do cladódio de clones de palma forrageira: modelagem, análise e aplicabilidade. Agrária 9: 633–641. doi: 10.5039/agraria.v9i4a4553
   Google Scholar
• Silva TGF, Araújo Primo JT, Morais JEF, Diniz WJS, Souza CAA, Silva MC. 2015. Growth and productivity of cactus forage clones in semiarid and relationship with meteorological variables. Revista Caatinga 28: 10–18. doi: 10.1590/1983-21252015v28n402rc
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa Jr JGA, Cherubin MR, Cerri CEP, Cerri CC, Feigl BJ. 2017. Sugar cane straw left in the field during harvest: decomposition dynamics and composition changes. Soil Research 55: 758–768. https://doi.org/10.1071/SR16310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza MS, Silva TGF, Souza LSB, Alves HKMN, Leite RMC, Souza CAA, Araújo GGLD, Campos FS, Silva MJ, de Souza PJOP. 2021. Growth, phenology and harvesting time of cactus- millet intercropping system under biotic mulching. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 67: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2020.1852553.
   Google Scholar
• Souza MS, Silva TGF, Souza LSB, Jardim AMRF, Araújo Júnior GN, Alves HKMN. 2019. Practices for the improvement of the agricultural resilience of the forage production in semiarid environment: a review. Amazonian Journal of Plant Research 3: 417–430. https://doi.org/10.26545/ajpr.2019.b00051x.
   Google Scholar
• Temesgen A, Fukai S, Rodriguez D. 2015. As the level of crop pro ductivity increases : Is there a role for intercropping in smallholder agriculture. Field Crops Research 180: 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2015.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ullah A, Ahmad A, Khaliq T, Akhtar J. 2017. Recognizing production options for pearl millet in Pakistan under changing climate scenarios. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 16: 762–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61450-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou G, Zhang J, Chen L, Zhang C, Yu Z. 2016. Temperature and straw quality regulate the microbial phospholipid fatty acid composition associated with straw decomposition. Pedosphere 26: 386–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1002-0160(15)60051-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, Zhang Y, Gong S, Xu D, Juan S, Zhao Y. 2018. Evapotranspiration, crop coefficient and yield for drip-irrigated winter wheat with straw mulching in North China Plain. Field Crops Research 217: 218–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.05.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yilmaz Ş, Özel A, Atak M, Erayman M. 2014. Effects of seeding rates on competition indices of barley and vetch intercropping systems in the eastern mediterranean. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 39: 135–143. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1406-155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar