Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,386

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improving intercropping: a synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology

Open access
Brooker, Rob W., Bennett, Alison E., Cong, Wen‐Feng, Daniell, Tim J., George, Timothy S., Hallett, Paul D., Hawes, Cathy, Iannetta, Pietro P. M., Jones, Hamlyn G., Karley, Alison J., Li, Long, McKenzie, Blair M., Pakeman, Robin J., Paterson, Eric, Schöb, Christian, Shen, Jianbo, Squire, Geoff, Watson, Christine A., Zhang, Chaochun, Zhang, Fusuo, Zhang, Junling, White, Philip J.·2015·New Phytologist

Abstract

Summary: Intercropping is a farming practice involving two or more crop species, or genotypes, growing together and coexisting for a time. On the fringes of modern intensive agriculture, intercropping is important in many subsistence or low‐input/resource‐limited agricultural systems. By allowing genuine yield gains without increased inputs, or greater stability of yield with decreased inputs, intercropping could be one route to delivering ‘sustainable intensification’. We discuss how recent knowledge from agronomy, plant physiology and ecology can be combined with the aim of improving intercropping systems. Recent advances in agronomy and plant physiology include better understanding of the mechanisms of interactions between crop genotypes and species – for example, enhanced resource availability through niche complementarity. Ecological advances include better understanding of the context‐dependency of interactions, the mechanisms behind disease and pest avoidance, the links between above‐ and below‐ground systems, and the role of microtopographic variation in coexistence. This improved understanding can guide approaches for improving intercropping systems, including breeding crops for intercropping. Although such advances can help to improve intercropping systems, we suggest that other topics also need addressing. These include better assessment of the wider benefits of intercropping in terms of multiple ecosystem services, collaboration with agricultural engineering, and more effective interdisciplinary research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/nph.13132

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Cited by

See all 1,386

Metadata

Authors
Brooker, R. W., Bennett, A. E., Cong, W., Daniell, T. J., George, T. S., Hallett, P. D., Hawes, C., Iannetta, P. P. M., Jones, H. G., Karley, A. J., Li, L., McKenzie, B. M., Pakeman, R. J., Paterson, E., Schöb, C., Shen, J., Squire, G., Watson, C. A., Zhang, C., Zhang, F., Zhang, J., & White, P. J.
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-11-03
Volume
206
Issue
1
Pages
107-117
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2169383877
Cited by
1,386
References
11
FWCI
66.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Improving intercropping: a synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/nph.13132
The paper
Brooker, R. W., Bennett, A. E., Cong, W., Daniell, T. J., George, T. S., Hallett, P. D., Hawes, C., Iannetta, P. P. M., Jones, H. G., Karley, A. J., Li, L., McKenzie, B. M., Pakeman, R. J., Paterson, E., Schöb, C., Shen, J., Squire, G., Watson, C. A., Zhang, C., . . . White, P. J. (2015). Improving intercropping: a synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology. New Phytologist. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13132

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.