Data Analysis of Intercropping Experiments by Bivariate Analysis Variance and Comparison of the Means and Drawing Graphs with Skew Axes

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Seed and Plant Improvement Research Department, Khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Mashhad Iran.

Abstract

Approaches of data analysis in intercropping experiments and evaluation of crop competition are very important in interpreting the results. Intercropping advantages may be influenced by both plant density and relative frequency of the intercrop components as key factors. The fundamental problem in replacement series method (usual method on intercropping experiments) arises from the two-dimensional nature of intercropping. Results based on linear regression model are not independent of plant densities, and varying densities produce different results. Conducting methods such as univariate analysis of variance or comparing the means by using procedures such as the least significant difference (LSD) or Duncan's multiple range test (DMRT) are not appropriate to evaluate data obtained from the interpreting experiments, due to fact that they cannot explain simultaneously the response of agronomic plant to different treatments. On the other hand, bivariate analysis of variance has enough accuracy and sensitivity in this regard because effects of treatments on each plant, as a component of a planting system, are not independent of another plant and are placed under its interaction effect. The effects can be explained with the help of graph drawing in which the angle between two axes depends on the magnitude of the effect and the positive or negative effect of the interaction changes between two states of open angle and closed angle. The variance and covariance calculations, mean comparisons, graph drawing and the determination of significant differences between means were performed by using a program (Skew Axes)*. For practical application of the method of bivariate analysis and Skew Axes program with incorporation of one input data file (yield of sesame and sorghum intercropping ) and showing some figures, correlation and relation between yield of two specific for a specific treatment(density, proportion or interaction of density and proportion), also possibility to analyzed two values obtained from one plot related to a specific treatment simultaneously were presented and discussed.

Keywords

References

Altieri, M. A., and Liebman, M. 1986. Insect, weed and plant disease management in multiple cropping. pp. 183-218. In: Francis, C. A. (ed.) Weed Management in Multiple Cropping Systems. Vol. 1. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, USA.
 
Anonymous 2011. SAS/STAT User`s Guide. Second ed. SAS Institute Inc., Gary, No. th Carolina, USA.
 
Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Ghose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-332.
 
Baumann, D.T., Kropff, M. J., and Bastiaans, L. 2000. Intercropping leeks to suppress weeds. Weed Research 40: 359-374.
 
Chew, V. 1976. Comparing treatment means: A compendium. HortScience 11: 348-37.
 
Coolman, R. M., and Hoyt, G. D. 1993. Increasing sustainability by intercropping. Horticulture Technology 3: 309-311.
 
Cousens, R. 1985 . Simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Annals of Applied Biology. 107: 239-252.
 
Cousens, R. 1988. Misinterpretation of results in weed research through in appropriate use of statistics. Weed Research 28: 281-289.
 
Dear, K. B. G., and Mead, R. 1983a. The use of bivariate analysis techniques for the presentation, analysis and interpretation date statistics in intercropping. Technical Report No. 1. Department of Applied Statistics, Reading University, Readind, UK.
 
Dear, K. B. G., and Mead, R. 1983b. Testing assumptions and other topics in bivariate analysis in intercropping . Technical Report No. 2. Department of Applied Analysis Statistics, Reading University, Reading, UK.
 
Evans., R. A., Book, D. N., and Young, J. A. 1982. Quadratic response surface analysis of seed germination trials. Weed Science 30: 411-416.
 
Francis, C.A. 1989. Biological efficiences in multiple-cropping systems. Advances in Agronomy 42: 1-42.
 
Fukai, S., and Trenbath, B. R. 1993. Processes determining intercrop productivity and yields of component crops. Field Crops Research 34: 247-271.
 
Gilliver, B., and Pearce, S. C. 1983. A graphical assessment of data from an intercropping factorial experiment. Experimental Agriculture 19: 23-31.
 
Joliffe, P. A., Minjas, A. N., and Runeckles, V. C. 1984. A reinterpretation of yield relationships in replacement series experiments. Journal of Applied Ecology 21: 227-243.
 
Liebman, M., and Davis, A. S. 2000. Integration of soil, crop and weed management in low-external-input farming systems. Weed Research 40: 27-47.
 
Marshall, A. D., and Jain, S. K. 1969. Interference in pure and mixed population of Avena fatua and Avena barbata. Journal of Ecology 57: 251-270.
 
Midmore, D. J. 1993. Agronomic modification of resource use and intercrop productivity. Field Crops Research 34: 357-380.
 
Morris, R. A., and Garrity, D. P. 1993. Resource capture and utilization in intercropping: non-nitrogen nutrients. Field Crops Research 34: 319-334.
 
Rejmanek. M. G., Robinson, R., and Rejmannkova, E. 1989. Weed-Crop competition: Experimental designs and models for data analysis. Weed Science 37: 276-284.
 
Roush, M. L., Radosevich, S. R., Wagner, R. G., Maxwell, B. D., and Petersen, D. T. 1989. A comparison of methods for measuring effects of density and proportion in plant competition experiments. Weed Science 37: 268-275.
 
Spitters, C. J. T., and Kropff, M. J. 1989. Modeling competition effects in intercropping systems. Discussion paper for workshop on intercropping IITA, lbadan, Nigeria. www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/sas/library/nesug00/bt3005.pdf.
 
Watkinson, A. R. 1981. Interference in pure and mixed populations of Agrostemma gitbago. Journal of Applied Ecology 18: 967-976.
 
 
Seed and Plant Production Journal
Volume 32, Issue 2
November 2016
Pages 157-171

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics