Assessment of economic and environmental performance in citrus-based intercropping systems

Martins, Carlos Roberto; Rodrigues, Geraldo Stachetti; Barros, Inácio de

doi:10.1590/0100-29452021463

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Fruticultura

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Economy • Rev. Bras. Frutic. 43 (1) • 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-29452021463 copy

Assessment of economic and environmental performance in citrus-based intercropping systems

Avaliação de desempenho econômico e ambiental de sistemas consorciados à base de citros

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

The economic and environmental performances of agriculture intercropping depend on the complementarities between the crops that make up the system. The objective of this work was to analyze the citrus-based intercropping systems in the Coastal Tablelands region of Northeastern Brazil, aiming to identify the associations of crops with better economic and environmental performances. The study started with the construction of a set of integrated indicators, with which the field information was recorded and the performance indices calculated, based on three principles: Profitability, Productive Efficiency, and Biological Regulation. Citrus orchards in monoculture resulted in lower environmental economic performance indices. The intercropping systems that yielded the best environmental and economic performance indices in the citrus orchards were: cassava; cassava, corn and beans; corn and pumpkin. The indicators associated with these economic-environmental performances were profit, seasonality, productive diversity, profit evenness, plant health control impact level, and efficiency in the use of water, nitrogen, and phosphate.

Index terms
fruticulture; citriculture; sustainability assessment; Coastal Tablelands; smallholding growers

Sociedade Brasileira de Fruticultura Via de acesso Prof. Paulo Donato Castellane, s/n , 14884-900 Jaboticabal SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 16 3209-7188/3209-7609 - Jaboticabal - SP - Brazil
E-mail: rbf@fcav.unesp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[TFN0101] ^Source:
Autors

Reference case of studied farm	State	Municipality	Orchard area (ha)
1	Sergipe	Itabaininha		15
2	Sergipe	Boquim		7,4
3	Bahia	Rio Real		9,1
4	Sergipe	Santa Luzia do Itanhy		7,3
5	Sergipe	Arauá		3,8
6	Sergipe	Lagarto		9,0
7	Sergipe	Tomar do Geru		4,2
8	Sergipe	Salgado		3,0
9	Sergipe	Pedrinhas		2,8
10	Sergipe	Arauá		2,4
11	Sergipe	Cristinópolis		9,2
12	Sergipe	Estância		5,6
13	Sergipe	Umbauba		4,0
14	Bahia	Acajutiba		2,1
15	Sergipe	Riachão das Dantas		4,6
16	Sergipe	Indiaroba		3,5
17	Bahia	Esplanada		2,9
18	Bahia	Itapicuru		1,2
19	Bahia	Jandaia		3,2

Reference Farm	Intercrop species 1	Intercrop species 2	Intercrop species 3
1	-	-	-
2	-	-	-
3	Papaya (Carica papaya)	Watermelon (Citrullus lanatus)
4	Cassava (Manihot esculenta)	Papaya	Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea)
5	Cassava	-	-
6	Corn (Zea mays)	Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata)	Cassava
7	Fava (Vicia faba)	Corn	-
8	Cassava	-
9	Pumpkin (Curcubita spp)	Corn	-
10	Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus)	Yam (Dioscorea sp)	-
11	Papaya	Passion fruit (Passiflora edulis)	-
12	Cowpea	Pumpkin	-
13	Corn	-	-
14	Peanuts	-	-
15	Cassava	Corn	-
16	Passion Fruit	-	-
17	Okra	Pumpkin	-
18	Common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris)	-	-
19	Passion fruit	Corn	-

Associated crop		Elemental contents
Associated crop	(a) Standard stand (number of plants/ha) when sole crop	(b) Nitrogen (mg/g FW)	(c) Phosphorus (ppm FW)	(d) Potassium (mg/g FW)	(e) Fresh Energy content (MJ/kg FW)	(f) Dry matter (% decimal)	Energy (MJ/kg MS)
Citrus	416^(a1)	1.773	221	2.6	2.9	0.158	18.1
Cassava	16000^(a2)	1.378	220	3.6	1.98	0.118	16.8
Corn	60000^(a3)	1.232	2450	5.0	16.7	0.875	19.1
Peanut	50000	4.533	4388	6.8	28.0	0.954	29.3
Cowpea	60000^(a4)	3.578	3592	13.5	16.7	0.898	18.6
Yam	20800^(a5)	0.165	1224	4.9	2.9	0.166	17.3
Common bean	200000^(a6)	3.535	4366	15.1	16.6	0.891	18.6
Pumpkin	660^(a7)	0.176	198	3.4	1.4	0.076	17.8
Watermelon	400^(a8)	0.126	229	2.7	1.5	0.079	19.5
Papaya	1330^(a9)	0.148	131	1.8	1.4	0.082	17.1
Passionfruit	2220^(a10)	3.520	680	3.5	4.1	0.082	49.5
Okra	40000	0.396	72	0.37	1.4	0.12	11.2
Fava bean	20000	4.041	269	1.57	16.7	0.898	18.6

Reference farm	Profitability			Production efficiency							Biological regulation
Reference farm	Profit (Pr)	Profit evenness (PE)	Income seasonality (S)	Area Equivalence Index (AEI)	Efficiency in the use of water (EW)	Efficiency in the use of N (EN)	Efficiency in the use of P (EP)	Efficiency in the use of K (EK)	Return on investment in fossil fuel energy (RIFFE)	Return on investment in labor (RIL)	Plant health control impact level (PHCIL)	Productive diversity (PD)
1	0.07	0.00	0.42	0.16	0.25	0.41	0.17	0.07	0.11	0.37	0.35	0.00
2	0.07	0.00	0.44	0.21	0.29	0.39	0.22	0.07	0.16	0.34	0.07	0.00
3	0.71	0.42	0.93	1.00	0.57	0.26	0.21	0.09	0.28	0.35	0.36	0.79
4	0.65	0.39	0.87	0.71	1.00	0.29	0.17	0.08	0.91	0.37	0.00	1.00
5	0.56	0.91	0.50	0.41	0.70	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.50	0.50	0.95	0.54
6	0.96	0.81	0.69	0.38	0.51	0.93	0.32	0.17	0.54	0.34	0.90	0.96
7	0.69	0.24	0.91	0.30	0.52	0.24	0.46	0.06	1.00	0.71	0.33	0.66
8	1.00	0.45	1.00	0.47	0.62	0.22	0.07	0.03	0.19	0.16	0.81	0.49
9	0.72	0.80	0.54	0.51	0.79	0.33	1.00	0.12	0.57	1.00	0.67	0.47
10	0.75	0.19	0.79	0.27	0.41	0.12	0.12	0.04	0.15	0.14	0.61	0.99
11	0.68	0.13	0.68	0.37	0.28	0.31	0.19	0.03	0.31	0.22	0.18	0.81
12	0.58	0.62	0.62	0.46	0.49	1.00	0.42	0.13	0.22	0.34	0.43	0.64
13	0.53	0.57	0.29	0.32	0.35	0.14	0.88	0.21	0.58	0.98	0.39	0.22
14	0.54	0.78	0.41	0.37	0.21	0.45	0.53	0.24	0.38	0.44	0.93	0.75
15	0.60	0.95	0.48	0.31	0.35	0.31	0.75	1.00	0.33	0.47	0.30	0.76
16	0.67	1.00	0.90	0.24	0.70	0.61	0.50	0.10	0.41	0.25	0.34	0.43
17	0.83	0.64	0.84	0.41	0.36	0.15	0.10	0.01	0.20	0.18	0.63	0.56
18	0.49	0.55	0.18	0.24	0.17	0.23	0.80	0.11	0.22	0.42	0.33	0.51
19	0.70	0.54	0.54	0.27	0.54	0.34	0.64	0.11	0.54	0.38	0.76	0.70
Mean	0.62	0.53	0.63	0.39	0.48	0.35	0.40	0.14	0.40	0.42	0.49	0.59