大豆玉米带状间作下不同行比配置对作物个体和群体产量及效益的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.23.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】 为优化黄淮海区域玉米大豆间作种植模式，通过评估不同行比配置对作物农艺性状、群体冠层结构、产量构成要素、边际效应及综合经济效益的影响，筛选适宜的行比模式，以提升土地资源利用效率及经济效益。【方法】 设置4行大豆间作2行玉米（4﹕2）、6行大豆间作4行玉米（6﹕4）、4行大豆间作4行玉米（4﹕4）3种行比模式，并以大豆单作（SCK）和玉米单作（MCK）为对照，测定分析不同行比配置下作物干物质积累量、叶面积指数(LAI)、叶绿素相对含量（SPAD）、冠层透光率及产量构成要素。采用分内外行取样法评估边际效应及经济效益。【结果】 与单作相比，间作显著降低了玉米（灌浆期、乳熟期及成熟期）和大豆（盛花期、盛荚期、鼓粒期及完熟期）的单株干物质积累量。在行比模式中，4﹕4模式的玉米单株干物质积累量最高，而大豆则以6﹕4模式最高。行比配置显著影响了两作物各行间干物质积累量及产量。玉米产量排序为：4﹕4模式>4﹕2模式>6﹕4模式，较MCK分别降低15.22%、18.02%和12.62%；大豆产量排序为：6﹕4模式>4﹕4模式>4﹕2模式，较SCK分别降低55.99%、50.43%和56.00%。间作玉米表现出明显边际优势，边行产量显著高于内行。间作体系下，玉米和大豆的冠层透光率、LAI及SPAD值均低于单作。玉米的冠层透光率、LAI和SPAD值均表现为：4﹕4模式>4﹕2模式>6﹕4模式；大豆冠层透光率排序为4﹕4模式>6﹕4模式>4﹕2模式，其LAI和SPAD值排序同玉米。玉米LAI受行比影响显著，而其SPAD值及大豆的LAI、SPAD值行间差异均不显著。经济效益及间作优势评估中，4﹕4模式表现最优，其土地当量比(LER)、相对拥挤系数(K)及经济效益均为最高。间作玉米的LER值和K值均高于大豆，且玉米竞争比率(CR_m)显著高于大豆(CR_s)（CR_m>1,CR_s<1），表明玉米在种间竞争中占据优势。【结论】 相较于单作，间作模式虽降低了两作物单株干物质积累量、LAI及SPAD值，但显著提升了土地当量比及综合经济效益。本试验条件下，4﹕4模式群体冠层结构更优，玉米边际优势显著，在维持玉米产量水平的同时增收大豆，实现了总产量与经济效益的协同提升。

关键词: 玉米大豆间作, 行比模式, 边际效应, 产量, 经济效益

Abstract:

【Objective】 To optimize the soybean-maize intercropping system in the Huang-Huai-Hai region, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of different row ratio configurations on crop agronomic traits, canopy structure of the population, yield components, edge effects, and overall economic benefits. The goal was to identify suitable row ratio configurations, thereby improving land resource use efficiency and economic returns. 【Method】 Three row ratio configurations were implemented: 4 rows of soybean intercropped with 2 rows of maize (4:2), 6 rows of soybean intercropped with 4 rows of maize (6:4), and 4 rows of soybean intercropped with 4 rows of maize (4:4), using monoculture soybean (SCK) and monoculture maize (MCK) as controls. Crop dry matter accumulation, leaf area index (LAI), relative chlorophyll content (SPAD), canopy light transmittance, and yield components were measured. The inner and outer row sampling approach was adopted to evaluate edge effects and overall economic benefits. 【Result】 Compared with monoculture, intercropping significantly decreased per-plant dry matter accumulation in maize during the filling, milking, and maturity stages, and in soybean during the full flowering, full pod, grain filling, and full maturity stages. Among the row ratio configurations, maize exhibited maximum per-plant dry matter accumulation under the 4:4 pattern, whereas soybean achieved its highest accumulation under the 6:4 pattern. Row ratio configurations significantly influenced inter-row variations in dry matter accumulation and yield for both crops. Maize yield followed the order 4:4 pattern>4:2 pattern>6:4 pattern, representing reductions of 15.22%, 18.02%, and 12.62% relative to MCK, respectively; soybean yield followed the order 6:4 pattern>4:4 pattern>4:2 pattern, corresponding to reductions of 55.99%, 50.43%, and 56.00% compared with SCK, respectively. Intercropped maize exhibited pronounced edge advantage, with border row maize yields significantly exceeding those of inner rows. Within the intercropping system, both maize and soybean demonstrated lower canopy light transmittance, LAI, and SPAD values compared with their monoculture counterparts. Maize canopy light transmittance, LAI, and SPAD values followed the consistent ranking: 4:4 pattern>4:2 pattern>6:4 pattern; soybean canopy light transmittance followed 4:4 pattern>6:4 pattern>4:2 pattern, while its LAI and SPAD values mirrored the ranking pattern observed in maize. Maize LAI was significantly influenced by row ratio configuration, whereas no significant inter-row variations were detected for maize SPAD values or for soybean LAI and SPAD values. In evaluations of economic returns and intercropping advantages, the 4:4 pattern configuration demonstrated superior performance, achieving the highest values for land equivalent ratio (LER), relative crowding coefficient (K), and economic benefits. Maize in intercropping exhibited higher LER and K values relative to soybean, with the maize competition ratio (CR_m) being significantly greater than that of soybean (CR_s) (CR_m>1, CR_s<1), demonstrating maize's competitive dominance in interspecific competition. 【Conclusion】 Although intercropping reduced per-plant dry matter accumulation, LAI, and SPAD values for both crops compared with monoculture, it significantly increased the land equivalent ratio (LER) and overall economic benefits. Under the experimental conditions, the 4:4 pattern exhibited more optimal canopy architecture, with maize demonstrating pronounced edge advantage. This system maintained maize yield while generating additional soybean income, thereby achieving the synergistic enhancement of total productivity and economic returns.

Key words: soybean-maize intercropping, row-ratio pattern, marginal effect, yield, economic efficiency

房健, 秦召纪, 于园园, 于宁宁, 赵斌, 刘鹏, 任佰朝, 张吉旺. 大豆玉米带状间作下不同行比配置对作物个体和群体产量及效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(23): 4841-4857.

FANG Jian, QIN ZhaoJi, YU YuanYuan, YU NingNing, ZHAO Bin, LIU Peng, REN BaiZhao, ZHANG JiWang. Impacts of Varying Row Ratio Arrangements on Plant Performance, Stand Yield, and Comprehensive Benefits in Soybean-Maize Strip intercropping[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(23): 4841-4857.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.23.004

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2025/V58/I23/4841

图/表 18

表1

图1

图2

图3

表2

表3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

图10

图11

图12

表4

表5

表6

参考文献 2

[1]	SWINTON S M, LUPI F, ROBERTSON G P, HAMILTON S K. Ecosystem services and agriculture: Cultivating agricultural ecosystems for diverse benefits. Ecological Economics, 2007, 64(2): 245-252.
[46]	LI Z X, WANG J W, YANG W T, SHU L, DU Q, LIU L L. Benefit of sweet corn/soybean intercropping in Guangdong Province. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2010, 18(3): 627-631. (in Chinese)
	李志贤, 王建武, 杨文亭, 舒磊, 杜清, 刘丽玲. 广东省甜玉米/大豆间作模式的效益分析. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18(3): 627-631.
[45]	MIDEGA C A O, SALIFU D, BRUCE T J, PITTCHAR J, PICKETT J A, KHAN Z R. Cumulative effects and economic benefits of intercropping maize with food legumes on Striga hermonthica infestation. Field Crops Research, 2014, 155: 144-152.
[44]	QIN Y, GUO H J, YANG J, ZHAO Y K, YANG H, HAN Q X, LI L. Analysis on waxy corn/soybean intercropping pattern and economic benefit. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 43(25): 55-56. (in Chinese)
	秦燕, 郭泓鋆, 杨进, 赵永康, 杨洪, 韩庆新, 李兰. 鲜食糯玉米/大豆间作模式及经济效益分析. 安徽农业科学, 2015, 43(25): 55-56.
[43]	JING B, SHI W J, CHEN T. Maize/soybean intercropping with nitrogen reduction: A pathway for improved nitrogen efficiency and reduced environmental impact in Northwest China. Soil and Tillage Research, 2025, 253: 106696.
[42]	SHEN L, WANG X Y, LIU T T, WEI W W, ZHANG S, KEYHANI A B, LI L H, ZHANG W. Border row effects on the distribution of root and soil resources in maize-soybean strip intercropping systems. Soil and Tillage Research, 2023, 233: 105812.
[41]	CHENG B, LIU W G, WANG L, XU M, QIN S S, LU J, GAO Y, LI S X, Ali RAZA, ZHANG Y, et al. Effect of planting density on photosynthesis, yield and stem resistance to inversion in soybean under corn-soybean strip intercropping. China Agricultural Science, 2021, 54(19): 4084-4096. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.19.005. (in Chinese)
	程彬, 刘卫国, 王莉, 许梅, 覃思思, 卢俊, 高阳, 李淑贤, Ali RAZA, 张熠, 等. 种植密度对玉米-大豆带状间作下大豆光合、产量及茎秆抗倒的影响. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(19): 4084-4096. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.19.005.
[40]	LITHOURGIDIS A S, VLACHOSTERGIOS D N, DORDAS C A, DAMALAS C A. Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea-cereal intercropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, 2011, 34(4): 287-294.
[39]	KOU C L, WANG Q J, WU J C, WANG Y Q, LI X D. Research on the optimal allocation model of maize peanut intercropping system. Tillage and Cultivation, 2000(6): 14-15. (in Chinese)
	寇长林, 王秋杰, 武继承, 王永歧, 李新端. 玉米花生间作系统优化配置模式研究. 耕作与栽培, 2000(6): 14-15.
[38]	GU Y, ZHENG H Y, LI S, WANG W T, GUAN Z Y, LI J Z, MEI N, HU W H. Effects of narrow-wide row planting patterns on canopy photosynthetic characteristics, bending resistance and yield of soybean in maize-soybean intercropping systems. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14: 9361.
[37]	WANG Q, SUN Z X, BAI W, ZHANG D S, ZHANG Y, WANG R N, VAN DER WERF W, EVERS Jo B, STOMPH T-J, GUO J P, ZHANG L Z. Light interception and use efficiency differ with maize plant density in maize-peanut intercropping. Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering, 2021, 8(3): 432-446.
[36]	LIU Y K, YAN X D, XU Y P, YUE M Q, XIAO Y, LIU Z K. Study on maize and soybean intercropping pattern and economic benefit. Journal of Hebei Agricultural Sciences, 2012, 16(3): 23-26. (in Chinese)
	刘艳昆, 闫旭东, 徐玉鹏, 岳明强, 肖宇, 刘忠宽. 玉米-大豆间作模式与经济效益研究. 河北农业科学, 2012, 16(3): 23-26.
[35]	LUO C S, GUO Z P, XIAO J X, DONG K, DONG Y. Effects of applied ratio of nitrogen on the light environment in the canopy and growth, development and yield of wheat when intercropped. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2021, 12: 719850.
[34]	LIU X, RAHMAN T, SONG C, SU B Y, YANG F, YONG T W, WU Y S, ZHANG C Y, YANG W Y. Changes in light environment, morphology, growth and yield of soybean in maize-soybean intercropping systems. Field Crops Research, 2017, 200: 38-46.
[33]	LI N, ZHAI Z X, LI J M, DUAN L S, LI Z H. Effect of sowing date and density on sink/source relationship and canopy light transmission of summer maize (Zea mays L.). Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2010, 18(5): 959-964. (in Chinese)
	李宁, 翟志席, 李建民, 段留生, 李召虎. 播期与密度组合对夏玉米群体源库关系及冠层透光率的影响. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18 (5): 959-964.
[32]	ZHU M, SHI Z S, LI F H, WANG Z B. The initial report about different maize genotypes intercropping. China Journal of Seeds, 2010, (8): 63-65.
[31]	LIU T X, LI C H, FU J, YAN C H. Population quality of different maize (Zea mays L. genotypes intercropped.). Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009, 29(11): 6302-6309. (in Chinese)
	刘天学, 李潮海, 付景, 闫成辉. 不同基因型玉米间作的群体质量. 生态学报, 2009, 29(11): 6302-6309.
[30]	CUI X P, ZHENG J H, HU D M. Research progress on the effects of sowing date and density on soybean growth and development. Heilongjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2021(9): 123-128. (in Chinese)
	崔晓培, 郑金焕, 胡冬梅. 播期与密度对大豆生长发育影响的研究进展. 黑龙江农业科学, 2021(9): 123-128.
[29]	CAO M J, WANG J Y, CUI Y, BLESSING D, LI S, CHEN X F, GU Y. Effects of different maize and soybean intercropping ratios on photosynthetic characteristics and yield of soybean. Soybean Science, 2023, 42(1): 48-54. (in Chinese)
	曹曼君, 王婧瑜, 崔悦, BLESSING D, 李双, 陈喜凤, 谷岩. 不同玉米大豆间作行比对大豆光合特性及产量的影响. 大豆科学, 2023, 42(1): 48-54.
[28]	WU J. Effect of different distance between maize strips on light energy utilization of strip intercropped maize[D]. Yaan: Sichuan Agricultural University, 2023. (in Chinese)
	武晶. 不同玉米带间距离对带状间作玉米光能利用的影响[D]. 雅安: 四川农业大学, 2023.
[27]	BAI J, ZHANG C Y, DING X P, ZHANG J W, LIU P, REN B Z, ZHAO B. Effects of row spacing and mulching reflective film on the yield and light utilization of summer maize. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(19): 3942-3953. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.19.008. (in Chinese)
	白晶, 张春雨, 丁相鹏, 张吉旺, 刘鹏, 任佰朝, 赵斌. 行距配置和覆反光膜对夏玉米产量及光能利用的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(19): 3942-3953. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.19.008.
[26]	DORNHOFF G M, SHIBLES R M. Varietal differences in net photosynthesis of soybean leaves. Crop Science, 1970, 10(1): cropsci1970.0011183X001000010016x.
[25]	YIN F W, WANG W X, GU S B, WANG D. Effect of planting distance configuration repression on wheat yield formation with wide planting. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2018, 38(6): 710-717. (in Chinese)
	殷复伟, 王文鑫, 谷淑波, 王东. 株行距配置对宽幅播种小麦产量形成的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2018, 38(6): 710-717.
[24]	CHEN C X, TANG J H, CHEN J J, WANG N, FU X W, DU X J, XU W X. Effect of planting patterns on photosynthetic capacity and grain filling characteristics of summer soybean at seed-filling stage. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2018, 36(3): 101-105. (in Chinese)
	陈传信, 唐江华, 陈佳君, 王娜, 符小文, 杜孝敬, 徐文修. 种植方式对夏大豆鼓粒期叶片光合能力及籽粒灌浆特性的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2018, 36(3): 101-105.
[23]	PENG J L, ZHANG Y Q, TANG J H, ZHANG N, SU L L, LI Y J, XU W X. Effect of plant-row spacing on photosynthetic characteristics and yield of summer soybean. Soybean Science, 2015, 34(5): 794-800, 807. (in Chinese)
	彭姜龙, 张永强, 唐江华, 张娜, 苏丽丽, 李亚杰, 徐文修. 株行距配置对夏大豆光合特性及产量的影响. 大豆科学, 2015, 34(5): 794-800, 807.
[22]	LIU Z H, PAN G F, CHEN W, QIN M G, CAO C G, CHANG C L, ZHAN M. Effects of varieties collocation between crop seasons on the yield and resource use efficiency of maize-late rice cropping in Hubei Province. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2020, 46(12): 1945-1957. (in Chinese)
	刘志辉, 潘高峰, 陈文, 秦明广, 曹凑贵, 常昌龙, 展茗. 品种搭配对湖北省玉米-晚稻复种产量及资源效率的影响. 作物学报, 2020, 46(12): 1945-1957.
[21]	WANG J K. Distance between adjacent rows of maize and pea affect nitrogen facilitation and competition in intercropping systems[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2014. (in Chinese)
	王建康. 间距对玉米间作豌豆氮素竞争互补的调控效应[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2014.
[20]	ZHU J. The controlling effect and mechanism of maize density on theintercropping peas “N min inhibitory effect”[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2012. (in Chinese)
	朱静. 玉米密度对间作豌豆“氮阻遏”的调控效应及机制[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2012.
[19]	DHIMA K V, LITHOURGIDIS A S, VASILAKOGLOU I B, DORDAS C A. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio. Field Crops Research, 2007, 100(2/3): 249-256.
[18]	AGEGNEHU G, GHIZAW A, SINEBO W. Yield performance and land-use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian Highlands. European Journal of Agronomy, 2006, 25(3): 202-207.
[17]	GHOSH P K. Growth, yield, competition and economics of groundnut/cereal fodder intercropping systems in the semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Research, 2004, 88(2-3): 227-237.
[16]	XU L N, YAN Y, MEI P P, CHEN S L, HUANG S B, WANG P. Canopy light distribution and humidity analysis of different maize varieties. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2020, 35(6): 106-112. (in Chinese)
	徐丽娜, 闫艳, 梅沛沛, 陈士林, 黄收兵, 王璞. 不同玉米品种冠层光分布和湿度比较研究. 华北农学报, 2020, 35(6): 106-112.
[15]	CHEN Y X, PENG D D, HU F, HU Y Q, BAI S H, XU K W. Effects of different plant types and planting densities of maize on the yield, nutrient uptake, and utilization of intercropped soybean. Pratacultural Science, 2021, 38(1): 136-146. (in Chinese)
	陈远学, 彭丹丹, 胡斐, 胡月秋, 白世豪, 徐开未. 玉米不同株型及种植密度对间作大豆产量和养分吸收利用的影响. 草业科学, 2021, 38(1): 136-146.
[14]	CHEN G R, YANG W Y, ZHANG G H, WANG L M, YANG R P, YONG T W, LIU W G. Effects of potato/soybean intercropping on photosynthetic characteristics and yield of three soybean varieties. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2015, 26(11): 3345-3352. (in Chinese)
	陈光荣, 杨文钰, 张国宏, 王立明, 杨如萍, 雍太文, 刘卫国. 马铃薯/大豆套作对3个大豆品种光合指标和产量的影响. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(11): 3345-3352.
[13]	CUI L, SU B Y, YANG F, YANG W Y. Effects of photo-synthetically active radiation on photosynthetic characteristics and yield of soybean in different maize/soybean relay strip intercropping systems. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014, 47(8): 1489-1501. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.08.005. (in Chinese)
	崔亮, 苏本营, 杨峰, 杨文钰. 不同玉米-大豆带状套作组合条件下光合有效辐射强度分布特征对大豆光合特性和产量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(8): 1489-1501. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.08.005.
[12]	YANG C J, TAN C Y, CHEN J Q, LIU Z Y, GONG L N, ZHU X T. Effects of corn and soybean interplanting on yield, agronomic traits and dry matter accumulation of soybean during seed filling period. Guizhou Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 43(11): 38-42. (in Chinese)
	杨春杰, 谭春燕, 陈佳琴, 刘作易, 龚丽娜, 朱星陶. 间作玉米对大豆鼓粒期产量与农艺性状及干物质积累的影响. 贵州农业科学, 2015, 43(11): 38-42.
[11]	UNDIE U L, UWAH D F, ATTOE E E. Effect of intercropping and crop arrangement on yield and productivity of late season maize/ soybean mixtures in the humid environment of south southern Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science, 2012, 4(4): 37-50.
[10]	CHEN X. F, SUN N, GU Y. Photosynthetic and chlorophyll fluorescence responses in maize and soybean strip intercropping system. International Journal of Agriculture&Biology, 2020, 24(4): 799-811.
[9]	ZHAO J H, SUN J H, CHEN L Z, LI W Q. Growth and interspecific competition of crops as affected by maize row spacing in soybean/ maize intercropping system. Soybean Science, 2019, 38(2): 229-235. (in Chinese)
	赵建华, 孙建好, 陈亮之, 李伟绮. 玉米行距对大豆/玉米间作作物生长及种间竞争力的影响. 大豆科学, 2019, 38(2): 229-235.
[8]	TANG F Y, CHEN W J, WEI Q Y, GUO X H, LIANG J, CHEN Y. Effects of row ratio and maize plant type on yield and benefit of maize soybean intercropping. Soybean Science, 2019, 38(5): 726-732. (in Chinese)
	汤复跃, 陈文杰, 韦清源, 郭小红, 梁江, 陈渊. 不同行比配置和玉米株型对玉米大豆间种产量及效益影响. 大豆科学, 2019, 38(5): 726-732.
[7]	REN Y Y, WANG Z L, WANG X L, ZHANG S Q. The effect and mechanism of intercropping pattern on yield and economic benefit on the Loess Plateau. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2015, 35(12): 4168-4177. (in Chinese)
	任媛媛, 王志梁, 王小林, 张岁岐. 黄土塬区玉米大豆不同间作方式对产量和经济收益的影响及其机制. 生态学报, 2015, 35(12): 4168-4177.
[6]	YANG H, ZHOU Y, CHEN P, DU Q, ZHENG B C, PU T, WEN J, YANG W Y, YONG T W. Effects of nutrient uptake and utilization on yield of maize-legume strip intercropping system. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(6): 1476-1487. (in Chinese)
	杨欢, 周颖, 陈平, 杜青, 郑本川, 蒲甜, 温晶, 杨文钰, 雍太文. 玉米-豆科作物带状间套作对养分吸收利用及产量优势的影响. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1476-1487.
[5]	LUO W Y, TANG Z J, REN Y F, YANG W Y, WANG X C. Effects of bandwidth and row ratio on population yield and benefit of fresh maize intercropping with fresh soybean. Journal of Sichuan Agricultural University, 2019, 37(4): 442-451. (in Chinese)
	罗万宇, 唐庄峻, 任永福, 杨文钰, 王小春. 带宽、行比对鲜食玉米间作鲜食大豆群体产量效益的影响. 四川农业大学学报, 2019, 37(4): 442-451.
[4]	POWER A G. Ecosystem services and agriculture: Tradeoffs and synergies. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 365(1554, Food security: Feeding the world in 2050): 2959-2971.
[3]	SERAN T H, BRINTHA I. Review on maize based intercropping. Journal of Agronomy, 2010, 9(3): 135-145.
[2]	GAO Y, DUAN A W, QIU X Q, SUN J S, ZHANG J P, LIU H, WANG H Z. Distribution and use efficiency of photosynthetically active radiation in strip intercropping of maize and soybean. Agronomy Journal, 2010, 102(4): 1149-1157.

年份 Year	处理 Treatment		玉米公顷穗数/大豆公顷株数 Ear number(ears/hm²)/plant number (plants/hm²)	玉米穗粒数/大豆株粒数 Grains per ear/grains per plant	玉米千粒重/大豆百粒重 1000-grain weight (g)/100-grain weight (g)	产量 Yield (kg·hm^-2)	总产量 Total yield (kg·hm^-2)
2022	玉米 Maize	4﹕2	63630	528ab	341.21a	11464b	13599
		6﹕4	62790	517b	341.72a	11093c	13565
		4﹕4	64230	535a	340.76a	11710a	13956
	大豆 Soybean	4﹕2	115335	83b	22.21b	2135c	-
		6﹕4	115335	93a	23.13a	2472a	-
		4﹕4	116310	86b	22.54b	2246b	-
2023	玉米 Maize	4﹕2	61395	529b	381.68b	12396c	14431
		6﹕4	60840	518c	380.33b	11986d	14303
		4﹕4	62460	532b	384.52b	12777b	14834
		MCK	63645	581a	395.40a	14621a	14621
	大豆 Soybean	4﹕2	123750	61c	26.95b	2034b	-
		6﹕4	123990	71b	26.32c	2317b	-
		4﹕4	115080	66c	27.08b	2057b	-
		SCK	193620	87a	27.75a	4674a	4674

处理 Treatment			玉米公顷穗数/大豆公顷株数 Ear number(ears/hm²)/ plant number (plants/hm²)	玉米穗粒数/大豆株粒数 Grains per ear/grains per plant	玉米千粒重/大豆百粒重 1000-grain weight (g)/100-grain weight (g)	公顷产量 Yield (kg·hm^-2)
玉米 Maize	4﹕2	B1	61395	529c	381.68b	12396c
	6﹕4	B1	62835	566b	392.39a	13955b
		B2	58845	471e	368.28c	10207d
	4﹕4	B1	65760	573ab	388.23ab	14629a
		B2	63930	492d	380.82b	11978c
	MCK		63645	581a	395.40a	14621a
大豆 Soybean	4﹕2	B1	121650	64c	27.16ab	2115bcd
		B2	125850	58c	26.73ab	1951d
	6﹕4	B1	120930	75b	26.90ab	2440 bc
		B2	124605	75b	26.66ab	2491b
		B3	126450	61c	25.40b	1959d
	4﹕4	B1	112875	68bc	27.05ab	2076cd
		B2	117270	64c	27.11ab	2035d
	SCK		193620	87a	27.75a	4674a

间作方式 Intercropping pattern	土地当量比 Land equivalent ratio			相对拥挤系数 Relative crowding coefficient
间作方式 Intercropping pattern	LER_m	LER_s	LER	K_m	K_s	K
4﹕2	0.848b	0.435c	1.283a	1.320b	0.183b	0.241d
6﹕4	0.820b	0.496b	1.316a	1.119c	0.242b	0.271c
4﹕4	0.874b	0.440c	1.314a	1.729a	0.196b	0.339b
MCK	1.000a	-	1.000b	1.000d	-	1.000a
SCK	-	1.00a	1.000b	-	1.000a	1.000a

间作方式 Intercropping pattern	侵占力Aggressivity		竞争比Competitive ratio
间作方式 Intercropping pattern	A_m	A_s	CR_m	CR_s
4﹕2	0.060c	-0.119b	3.099a	0.323c
6﹕4	0.079b	-0.079c	2.132b	0.469b
4﹕4	0.244a	-0.244a	1.829c	0.547a

年份 Year	处理Treatment	总收入 Total income (yuan/hm²)	投入 Input (yuan/hm²)							净收入 Net income (yuan/hm²)
年份 Year	处理Treatment	总收入 Total income (yuan/hm²)	机械Machinery	大豆种子Soybean seed	玉米种子Maize seed	肥料Fertilizer	人工Artificial	农药 Pesticide	总和 Sum	净收入 Net income (yuan/hm²)
2022	4﹕2	38227a	2100	1200	975	2550	1125	1500	9450	28777ab
	6﹕4	39158a	2100	1200	975	2550	1125	1500	9450	29708ab
	4﹕4	39395a	2100	1200	975	2550	1125	1500	9450	29945a
2023	4﹕2	39868a	2250	1200	975	2670	1200	1425	9720	30148ab
	6﹕4	40420a	2250	1200	975	2670	1200	1425	9720	30700a
	4﹕4	40883a	2250	1200	975	2670	1200	1425	9720	31163a
	MCK	34213b	1800	-	975	2100	640	975	6490	27723b
	SCK	24959c	1800	1200	-	600	800	1200	5600	19359c