Atenção: Todas as denúncias são sigilosas e sua identidade será preservada.
Os campos nome e e-mail são de preenchimento opcional
Metadados | Descrição | Idioma |
---|---|---|
Autor(es): dc.contributor | Midwest Regional/SAA | - |
Autor(es): dc.contributor | Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) | - |
Autor(es): dc.creator | Perdoná, Marcos J. | - |
Autor(es): dc.creator | Soratto, Rogério P. [UNESP] | - |
Data de aceite: dc.date.accessioned | 2022-02-22T00:29:04Z | - |
Data de disponibilização: dc.date.available | 2022-02-22T00:29:04Z | - |
Data de envio: dc.date.issued | 2020-12-11 | - |
Data de envio: dc.date.issued | 2020-12-11 | - |
Data de envio: dc.date.issued | 2019-12-31 | - |
Fonte completa do material: dc.identifier | http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20016 | - |
Fonte completa do material: dc.identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/200007 | - |
Fonte: dc.identifier.uri | http://educapes.capes.gov.br/handle/11449/200007 | - |
Descrição: dc.description | Arabica coffee (Coffea arabica L.)–macadamia (Macadamia integrifolia Maiden & Betche) intercropping presents benefits at the initial phase; however, coffee yields gradually decline because of shading, and mechanized coffee harvesting may be impeded by the growth of macadamia trees. An experiment was conducted under irrigated conditions in southeastern Brazil to evaluate whether coffee–macadamia intercropping and the use of pruning to allow mechanized coffee harvesting offers agronomic and economic advantages over continuously cropped coffee monoculture (monocropped coffee). In addition, we aimed to evaluate which macadamia cultivar (Hawaiian cultivars; HAES 344, HAES 660, and HAES 816; Brazilian cultivars: IAC 9–20, IAC 4–12B, and IAC 4–20) is most suitable for long-term intercropping with mechanized coffee harvesting. Hawaiian macadamia cultivars have a narrower canopy, requiring less pruning of the lateral branches to allow the traffic of the mechanical coffee harvester. The macadamia cultivar IAC 4–12B had the highest kernel yield and IAC 4–20 had the lowest yield. Because intercropped treatments have 33.3% fewer coffee plants and their production per plant was reduced by shading, the coffee yield in these treatments was on average 38% lower than that in monocropped coffee. However, due to the sale of the macadamia kernel, coffee–macadamia intercropping was economically superior to coffee monoculture. Depending on the macadamia cultivar, the economic benefit of intercropping was from 9% (IAC 4–20) to 206% (HAES 816 and IAC 4–12B) higher than that achieved with monocrop coffee cultivation. | - |
Descrição: dc.description | São Paulo Agency of Agrobusiness Technology (APTA) Midwest Regional/SAA, Av. Rodrigues Alves, 4040 | - |
Descrição: dc.description | São Paulo State Univ. (UNESP) College of Agricultural Sciences Dep. of Crop Science Av. Universitária, 3780, Lageado Experimental Farm | - |
Descrição: dc.description | São Paulo State Univ. (UNESP) College of Agricultural Sciences Dep. of Crop Science Av. Universitária, 3780, Lageado Experimental Farm | - |
Formato: dc.format | 429-440 | - |
Idioma: dc.language | en | - |
Relação: dc.relation | Agronomy Journal | - |
???dc.source???: dc.source | Scopus | - |
Título: dc.title | Arabica coffee–macadamia intercropping: Yield and profitability with mechanized coffee harvesting | - |
Tipo de arquivo: dc.type | livro digital | - |
Aparece nas coleções: | Repositório Institucional - Unesp |
O Portal eduCAPES é oferecido ao usuário, condicionado à aceitação dos termos, condições e avisos contidos aqui e sem modificações. A CAPES poderá modificar o conteúdo ou formato deste site ou acabar com a sua operação ou suas ferramentas a seu critério único e sem aviso prévio. Ao acessar este portal, você, usuário pessoa física ou jurídica, se declara compreender e aceitar as condições aqui estabelecidas, da seguinte forma: