Explores yield effects of different walnut–potato intercropping configurations, suggesting optimal planting patterns.
Intercropping systems are beneficial for resource utilization; however, the spatial proximity of companion species leads to competition for shared resources, particularly light. A walnut–potato intercropping model was established to understand the photosynthetic and physiological mechanisms underlying yield and marketability responses. Three intercropping treatments were established based on the number of potato ridges between walnut tree rows: B1 (three ridges), B2 (five ridges), and B3 (seven ridges). All intercropping and monoculture (CK) plots used an identical double-row planting pattern per ridge. Results showed that ridge density induced significant physiological changes and yield impacts. Compared to CK, B3 significantly reduced soluble protein content, net photosynthesis (Pn), and antioxidant enzyme activities (SOD, CAT), while B1 and B2 showed intermediate, non-significant reductions. Peroxidase (POD) activity increased progressively with ridge number (B3 > B2 > B1 > CK), indicating dose-dependent shade stress. Intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) was significantly elevated under all intercropping treatments, suggesting a predominantly non-stomatal, biochemical limitation on photosynthesis rather than water stress. Yield was highest in CK, followed by B1 and B2—which were statistically comparable to CK—while B3 yielded the least due to severe shading. Marketability declined sharply in B3, with fewer than half of tubers reaching commercial grade. Multivariate analysis showed distinct clustering of yield-associated variables (Pn, protein, marketability) separate from shade-stress indicators (POD, Ci) across treatments. These findings provide practical and scientific evidence to optimize walnut–potato intercropping configurations under the arid conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: