Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T11:11:28.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EFFECT OF MODIFICATION OF TREE DENSITY AND GEOMETRY ON INTERCROP YIELDS AND ECONOMIC RETURNS IN LEUCAENA-BASED AGRO-FORESTRY SYSTEMS FOR WOOD PRODUCTION IN ANDHRA PRADESH, SOUTHERN INDIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 January 2010

J. V. N. S. PRASAD ,
G. R. KORWAR ,
K. V. RAO ,
K. SRINIVAS ,
C. A. RAMA RAO ,
CH. SRINIVASARAO ,
B. VENKATESWARLU ,
S. N. RAO  and
H. D. KULKARNI
J. V. N. S. PRASAD*
Affiliation:
Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500059, India
G. R. KORWAR
Affiliation:
Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500059, India
K. V. RAO
Affiliation:
Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500059, India
K. SRINIVAS
Affiliation:
Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500059, India
C. A. RAMA RAO
Affiliation:
Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500059, India
CH. SRINIVASARAO
Affiliation:
Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500059, India
B. VENKATESWARLU
Affiliation:
Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Santoshnagar, Hyderabad-500059, India
S. N. RAO
Affiliation:
Indian Tobacco Company (ITC), Paper Boards and Specialty Papers Division (PSPD), Secunderabad-500003, India
H. D. KULKARNI
Affiliation:
Indian Tobacco Company (ITC), Paper Boards and Specialty Papers Division (PSPD), Sarapaka, Khammam (Dt), Andhra Pradesh-507 201, India
*
‡Corresponding author. prasad_jasti@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Leucaena leucocephala is cultivated at close spacings that do not permit intercropping. This has been a discouraging factor for small landholders who need regular income to establish leucaena plantations and benefit from the rapidly expanding market for wood. Therefore, on-farm experiments were conducted near Bhadrachalam, Khammam district, Andhra Pradesh, India, from August 2001 to January 2006, to study the effect of reducing tree density and modifying tree geometry on the growth of leucaena and productivity of intercrops. The inter-row spacing of 1.3 m in farmers' practice was increased up to 13 m to examine whether wide-row planting and grouping of certain rows would facilitate extended intercropping without sacrificing wood yield. Tree density treatments tried were 1.3 × 1.3 m, 3 × 0.75 m, 3 × 1 m, 5 × 0.8 m and 3 × 2 m which gives densities of 5919, 4444, 3333, 2500 and 1666 trees ha−1, respectively. Tree geometry treatments tested were 7 × 1 m paired row spacing (7 × 1 PR), 10 × 1 m triple row spacing (10 × 1 TR), and 13 × 1 m four rows (13 × 1 FR) with a constant tree population of 2500 trees ha−1. Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) was the intercrop. While changes in tree density affected diameter at breast height (DBH) significantly, modification of tree geometry did not affect tree height and DBH. Marketable wood and dry biomass productivity was highest with 3 × 0.75 m spacing, and reducing tree density and alteration of tree geometry reduced the biomass considerably. In 2001, 2002 and 2003 seasons, respectively, tree spacing at 3 m produced mean yields of 97, 23 and 11% of the sole crop cowpea yield whereas modified tree geometry treatments produced mean yields of 97, 61 and 20% of sole crop yield. The widest spacing (13 × 1 FR) recorded 95, 73 and 30% of the sole crop yields during 2001, 2002 and 2003, respectively. Net returns from intercropping of leucaena in 3 × 0.75 m spacing was 36% higher than that of the farmers' practice. Although wider tree geometry treatments recorded lower net returns, they provided higher intercrop yields and returns in the first two years of plantation establishment. Therefore, it can be concluded that in regions where annual rainfall is around 1000 mm, leucaena can be planted at a spacing of 3 × 0.75 m for improving intercrop performance, higher tree productivity and returns.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 155 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ares, A., St Louis, D. and Brauer, D. (2003). Trends in tree growth and under storey yield in silvopastural practices with southern pines. Agroforestry Systems 59: 27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernando, A. L., Reis, M. G. F., Reis, G. G., Harrison, R. B. and Firme, D. J. (1998). Effect of spacing on growth and biomass distribution in Eucalyptus camaldulensis, E. pellita, E. europhylla plantations in southeastern Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management 104: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burner, D. M. and Brauer, D. K. (2003). Herbage responses to spacing of loblolly pine trees in a minimal management silvopasture in south eastern USA. Agroforestry Systems 57: 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniel, T., Helms, J. and Baker, F. S. (1979). Principles of Silviculture, 2nd edn.New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Dhyani, S. K. and Tripathi, R. S. (1999). Tree growth and crop yield under agrisilvicultural practices in northeast India. Agroforestry Systems 44: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dube, F., Couto, L., Silva, M. L., Leite, H. G., Garcia, R. and Araujo, G. A. A. (2003). A simulation model for evaluating technical and economic aspects of an industrial eucalyptus based agroforestry system in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Agroforestry Systems 55: 73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franzel, S. and Sherr, S. J. (2002). Trees on the Farm: Assessing the Adoption Potential of Agroforestry Practices in Africa. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.Google Scholar
Grant, J. C., Nichols, D., Pelletier, M. C., Glencross, K. and Bell, R. (2006). Five year results from a mixed-species spacing trial with six sub tropical rainforest tree species. Forest Ecology and Management 233: 309–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hummel, S. (2000). Height, diameter and crown dimensions of Cordia alliodora associated with tree density. Forest Ecology and Management 127: 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khybri, M. L., Gupta, R. K., Ram, Sewa and Tomar, H. P. S. (1992). Crop yields of rice and wheat grown in rotation as intercrops with three tree species in the outer hills of western Himalaya. Agroforestry Systems 17: 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohli, A. and Saini, B. C. (2003). Microclimate modification and response of wheat planted under trees in a fan design in northern India. Agroforestry Systems 58: 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulkarni, H. D. (2008). Private farmer and private industry partnerships for industrial wood production: A case study. International Forestry Review 10: 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lal, R. (1989). Agroforestry systems and soil surface management of a tropical alfisol. I. Soil moisture and crop yields. Agroforestry Systems 8: 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malik, R. S., Dutt, D., Tyagi, C. H., Jindal, A. K. and Lakharia, L. K. (2004). Morphological, anatomical and chemical characteristics of Leucaena leucocephala and its impact on pulp and paper making properties. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 63: 125.Google Scholar
Nair, P. K. R. (1993). An Introduction to Agroforestry. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nissen, T. M., Midmore, D. J. and Cabrera, M. L. (1999). Above ground and below ground competition between intercropped cabbage and young Eucalyptus torelliana. Agroforestry Systems 46: 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinkard, E. A. and Neilsen, W. A. (2003). Crown and stand characteristics of Eucalyptus nitens in response to initial spacing: implications for thinning. Forest Ecology and Management 172: 215–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pottinger, A. J. and Hughes, C. E. (1995). A review of wood quality in Leucaena. In: Leucaena Opportunities and Limitations: Proceedings of a Workshop, Bangor, Indonesia, January 1994. ACIAR Proceedings Canberra. 57: 98.Google Scholar
Narain, P., Singh, R. K., Sindhwal, N. S. and Joshie, P. (1998). Agroforestry for soil and water conservation in the western Himalayan valley region of India. Agroforestry Systems 39: 191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puri, S. and Nair, P. K. R. (2004). Agroforestry research for development in India. 25 years of experiences of a national program. Agroforestry Systems 61: 437–452.Google Scholar
Rao, Y. V. (1984). Leucaena plantations – A farming experience. Leucaena Research Reports 5: 48–49.Google Scholar
Rao, M. R., Ong, C. K., Pathak, P. and Sharma, M. M. (1991). Productivity of annual cropping and agroforestry systems on a shallow alfisol in semi arid India. Agroforestry Systems 15: 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salazar, A., Szott, L. T. and Palm, C. A. (1993). Crop-tree interactions in alley cropping systems on alluvial soils of the upper Amazon basin. Agroforestry Systems 22: 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxena, N. C. (1995). Wood markets for farm eucalyptus in northwest India. In: Farm Forestry in South Asia. (Eds Saxena, N. C. and Ballabh, V.), New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Singh, G., Singh, N. T., Dagar, J. C., Singh, S. and Sharma, V. P. (1997). An evaluation of agriculture, forestry and agroforestry practices in a moderately alkali soil in north western India. Agroforestry Systems 37: 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suresh, K. K. and Rai, R. S. V. (1988). Allelopathic exclusion of understorey by a few multipurpose trees. International Tree Crops Journal. 5: 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szott, L. T., Palm, C. A. and Sanchez, P. A. (1991). Agroforestry in acid soils of the humid tropics. Advances in Agronomy 45: 275–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, C. C. (1991). Shade tolerance of tropical forages: A review. In Forages for Plantation Crops (Eds Shelton, H. M., Stur, W. W.). ACIAR, Canberra.Google Scholar