Search

Copyright of Journal of Ecology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

More diverse plant communities are generally more productive than monocultures. This benefit of species diversity is supposed to stem from resource partitioning of species in mixtures where different species use the resources spatially, temporally, or chemically in distinct ways. With respect to water, the simultaneous cultivation of crops with distinct water uptake patterns might reduce niche overlaps and thus result in higher productivity. However, little is known about whether and how spatial water uptake patterns of crop species differ among different planting arrangements and whether these changes result in increased niche partitioning and explain overyielding in mixtures.Stable isotopes of water and a Bayesian model were used to investigate the spatial water uptake patterns of six different crop species and how these patterns change depending on the planting arrangement (monocultures vs mixtures). Niche overlaps and niche widths in spatial water uptake were compared among the different crop diversity levels and linked to productivity. Furthermore, spatial water uptake was related to competition intensity and overyielding in mixtures.We found evidence for increased niche partitioning in spatial water uptake, and therefore complementary spatial root distributions of crop species, and higher expected productivity in mixtures compared to expected productivity in monocultures both due to inherent species‐level differences in water uptake and plasticity in the water uptake pattern of species. We also found a significant relationship of competition and overyielding with observed patterns in spatial water uptake. These results suggest that competition was most intense in shallow soil layers and enhanced overyielding was related to a gradual increase of water uptake in deeper soil layers. Thus, overyielding might be related to a more complete spatial exploitation of available water sources.Synthesis. Differences in spatial water uptake and niche partitioning of intercropped species, driven most likely by a complementary spatial root distribution, might explain why mixtures outperform monocultures. These findings underpin the potential of intercropping systems for a more sustainable agriculture with a more efficient use of soil resources and hence reduced input demands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent meta-analyses demonstrate that intercropping can increase the land use efficiency of crop production by 20–30 % on average, indicating a strong potential contribution to sustainable intensification. However, there is substantial variability around this average: individual studies range from half to double the land productivity of monocrops. Legume-cereal intercrops and intercrops with high temporal niche separation tend to be more productive than the average, but these two combination types are not always suitable. There is a need to explore other possibilities to achieve productive intercrops. We explored whether two simple functional traits involved in radiation use, plant vegetative height and specific leaf area (SLA), could be used to predict intercrop productivity. Height and SLA together are associated with key plant life-history and resource economy strategies determining competitiveness and tolerance of competition, especially with regard to light, and could therefore be expected to underpin overyielding in intercrops. In the first year of our study, we grew crops as monocrops at one site in Kenya and measured their height and SLA. In the second year, we grew crops in monocrop, intercrop, and single plant treatments at two sites in Kenya and one site in Nigeria. Together, these treatments allowed us to identify whether each intercrop combination overyielded or underyielded, and whether any overyielding was driven by facilitation and/or differences in inter- vs intraspecific competition. We then related the strength of these interactions to the two traits. We found that intercrop grain yields varied in relation to the height and SLA of each species in the intercrop, but together these traits explained less than a third of variation in intercrop land equivalence ratios (LER). More variation could be explained by allowing for the effect of site, suggesting that the two traits interact with site conditions to determine yield. Biomass LERs responded differently to grain LERs, suggesting that plasticity in resource allocation in response to intercropping conditions may further influence yields. Our study found some evidence that combining species with traits indicating contrasting responses to competition (an avoidant species with a tolerant species) could increase resource use complementarity and thus intercrop overyielding. However, it was clear that other factors (such as additional traits, or the trait by site interaction) are needed to refine our understanding of intercrop productivity. A trait-based framework has potential to predict intercrop productivity, but simple measures of height and SLA alone are insufficient. • Intercrop yields vary from much lower than sole crops to much higher across different studies. • Plant traits may mediate competition and facilitation between intercrops, and predict yields. • Two simple traits, vegetative height and specific leaf area (SLA), explained some variance in yields. • Yields were higher when tall species with a low SLA were paired with short species with a high SLA. • Height and SLA alone cannot reliably predict intercrop yields: other traits should be explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]