ArticleScientific reports2026
Economic evaluation and intercropping indices of maize-common bean system under variable fertilization in Southwestern Ethiopia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maize-common bean intercropping is considered one of the strategies to increase productivity per unit area of land and improve the use of limited resources. Despite its widespread practice in southwestern Ethiopia, limited empirical evidence exists on its economic profitability. Therefore, the research was conducted to determine the profitability and economic performance of intercropping systems by using standard existing indices under two farmyard manure conditions (with and without), two planting patterns (1:1 and 1:2 maize: common bean rows), and four nitrogen (N) rates (0, 46, 92, and 138 kg N ha⁻¹), laid out as a factorial randomized complete block design with three replications. The results showed that the MAI, MRR, and yield increase (65,388.2 ETB ha⁻¹, 362%, and 16%, respectively) were obtained from the treatment FYM + 1:2 pattern + 138 kg N ha⁻¹, while the MRR (475%) was obtained from FYM + 1:1 + 46 kg N ha⁻¹. Also, maize showed higher Aggressivity, CR, and AYL values than common bean, indicating a stronger competitive ability as a result of increased N rate, with opposite trends for common bean, and IA of common bean was negative across most treatments. Aggressivity was also negative except at the 1:2 pattern at 0 kg N ha⁻¹, which indicates low competition from maize when no fertilizer was applied. However, FYM + 1:2 pattern + 138 kg N ha⁻¹ achieved the highest land-use efficiency and monetary advantage. Nevertheless, partial budget analysis indicated that FYM + 1:1 pattern + 46 kg N ha⁻¹ generated the most acceptable marginal rate of return (475%) and a net benefit of 59,250.43 Ethiopian Birr (ETB) ha⁻¹ under the study conditions. Therefore, this treatment is recommended for the study area due to its more attractive return on variable costs for farmers.
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.