ArticlePlants (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Optimizing Row Ratio Configurations for Enhanced Productivity and Resource-Use Efficiency in Maize-Alfalfa Intercropping.
Article in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physiological Ecology and Regulation of High-Yield Maize Cultivation.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Optimizing planting geometry in sorghum-soybean systems: asymmetric row spacing improves resource use efficiency and crop adaptation in semi-arid environments.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Maize-alfalfa intercropping is practiced in Northeast China to improve land productivity and forage production. However, competition between the two crops can reduce system performance, which calls for an emphasis on optimal row ratio. Hence, the current study evaluated the effects of diverse maize-alfalfa row ratio configurations (1:1, 2:1, 2:2, 3:1, 3:2, and 3:3) on resource-use efficiency, physiological traits, and yield performance. It was noted that the mono-cropping system had higher physiological and agronomic values for both crops. With regard to the intercropping configuration, the 2:2 steadily outperformed all other intercropping row ratios. Whereas alfalfa grew tallest in 2:2, maize plant height peaked under the 3:1. Photosynthetic rate and chlorophyll content were highest under 2:2, for both crops. The yield results indicated that alfalfa achieved maximum forage and biomass, whereas maize performed best under a 3:1 configuration. Outstandingly, under the 2:2 ratio, the cumulative system yield exceeded alfalfa mono-cropping by 55% and maize mono-cropping by 56-57%. There was superior complementarity and land-use advantage under 2:2, as indicated by the highest resource-use indicators of LER (land equivalent ratio), LEC (land equivalent coefficient), SPI (system productivity index), and K (crowding index). Competitive Indices showed that competition was more balanced under 2:2, with maize dominating in systems with higher maize proportions. Overall, the 2:2 row ratio provided the best balance of reduced competition and enhanced complementarity, offering a more efficient and sustainable maize-alfalfa intercropping strategy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.