Fig 1.
Incoming PAR accumulation during 2013, 2014 and 2015 growing seasons, in Heze city.
Data were recorded from the local Meteorological Bureau.
Fig 2.
Row arrangement for treatments RI, SI1, SI2, and SI3.
HHLA model construction for row intercropping (RI). ERCRT model construction for strip intercropping (SI), e.g. SI3.
Fig 3.
Fraction of intercepted PAR in HHLA and ERCRT models.
The black frame indicated intercepted PAR by maize. The green frame indicated for intercepted PAR by soybean.
Fig 4.
LAI dynamics of intercropped maize (b, d) and soybean (a, c) during the growing seasons of 2013 and 2014.
RI: one row maize intercropped with one row soybean; SI1: strip intercropping with maize model width (Wm): soybean model width (Ws) of 60:140 (maize row of 20 cm); SI2: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 80:120 (maize row of 40 cm); SI3: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 100:100 (maize row of 60 cm); SS: sole soybean; SM: sole maize. Bars at each data point represent standard deviation of the mean (n = 3).
Fig 5.
Crop height of intercropped maize (b, d) and soybean (a, c) during the growing seasons of 2013 and 2014.
RI: one row maize intercropped with one row soybean; SI1: strip intercropping with maize model width (Wm): soybean model width (Ws) of 60:140 (maize row of 20 cm); SI2: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 80:120 (maize row of 40 cm); SI3: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 100:100 (maize row of 60 cm); SS: sole soybean; SM: sole maize. Bars at each data point represent standard deviation of the mean (n = 3).
Fig 6.
PAR intercepted fraction dynamics of intercropped maize (b, d) and soybean (a, c) during the growing seasons of 2013 and 2014.
RI: one row maize intercropped with one row soybean; SI1: strip intercropping with maize model width (Wm): soybean model width (Ws) of 60:140 (maize row of 20 cm); SI2: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 80:120 (maize row of 40 cm); SI3: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 100:100 (maize row of 60 cm); SS: sole soybean; SM: sole maize. Bars at each data point represent standard deviation of the mean (n = 3).
Fig 7.
Accumulative intercepted PAR dynamics of intercropped soybean (a, c) and maize (b, d) during the growing seasons of 2013 and 2014.
RI: one row maize intercropped with one row soybean; SI1: strip intercropping with maize model width (Wm): soybean model width (Ws) of 60:140 (maize row of 20 cm); SI2: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 80:120 (maize row of 40 cm); SI3: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 100:100 (maize row of 60 cm); SS: sole soybean; SM: sole maize.
Table 1.
Dry matter, intercepted PAR and radiation use efficiency (RUE) of soybean, maize and system.
The “System” combined all crops together. System intercepted PAR and dry matter is sum of that all crops, and system RUE is the system dry matter divided by system intercepted PAR. Means in columns followed by the different letters are significantly different (P<0.05; n = 3).
Fig 8.
Dry matter simulation of intercropped soybean (a) and maize (b) during the growing seasons of 2015.
The measured data were represented in dots. RI: one row maize intercropped with one row soybean; SI1: strip intercropping with maize model width (Wm): soybean model width (Ws) of 60:140 (maize row of 20 cm); SI2: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 80:120 (maize row of 40 cm); SI3: strip intercropping with Wm: Ws of 100:100 (maize row of 60 cm); SS: sole soybean; SM: sole maize. Bars at each data point represent standard deviation of the mean (n = 3).
Table 2.
RMSE and MBE of simulated and measured dry matter of each treatment in 2015.