HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Szumigalski, A. R. Articles by Van Acker, R. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Szumigalski, A. R. Articles by Van Acker, R. C. Agricola Articles by Szumigalski, A. R. Articles by Van Acker, R. C. Related Collections Intercropping Systems Nitrogen Plant and Soil Interactions Nutrient Management Crop Ecology

Nitrogen Yield and Land Use Efficiency in Annual Sole Crops and Intercrops

Department of Plant Science, Univ. of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Fall soil nitrate N (NO3––N) concentration after harvest for different crop treatments (W = wheat, C = canola, P = pea, WW = double density wheat) at two depths over four site–years at Manitoba, Canada. Means from same series with same letter were not significantly different according to protected LSD(0.05). Note different scale for Kelburn in 2003. There were no WW treatments in 2002.

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Effect of crop treatment (W = wheat, C = canola, P = pea, WW = double density wheat) on crop dry matter N yield over four site–years at Manitoba, Canada. Means from same series with same letter were not significantly different according to protected LSD(0.05). In 2002, in-crop herbicide treated and untreated subplots were pooled due to nonsignificant crop treatment x herbicide treatment interactions. There were no WW treatments in 2002.