Light distribution at the fruit tree-crop interface and consequences for yield in sloping upland agroforestry

Agroforestry can improve soil conservation and overall farm productivity compared with sole-crop systems, but its benefits are limited by competitive interactions between tree and crop components. Studies on light competition have been performed on relatively flat land, but slope can influence light distribution. Little is known about optimizing light utilization and enhancing system productivity and/or income from agroforestry on sloping land. This study examined how slope influences light distribution and performance of maize and coffee crops in fruit tree-crop agroforestry. Starting hypotheses were that 1) crops upslope of tree rows receive and intercept greater amounts of light than those downslope; and 2) position of the crop is more important for light interception and yield when fruit trees have a large, dense canopy. Five-year-old fruit-crop agroforestry experiments on west-southwest facing slopes were revisited. Each agroforestry treatment was divided into nine zones relative to the tree rows (zone 5), with zones 1–4 upslope and 6–9 downslope of the fruit tree row. Light distribution was assessed using Hemiview and SunScan and compared with that in sole-maize and sole-coffee systems. Crop growth and yield were also recorded. Incident light to the crop was higher in the sole-crop system than in agroforestry. In agroforestry, incident light to the crops was lower downslope of trees than upslope but increased with increasing distance from the tree rows. On average, 0.40–0.50 fraction of total light reached the soil surface. Downslope had a stronger negative effect on light distribution and crop yield than upslope. The available light at the soil surface provides scope for additional components. Further studies on the light demands of different crops during the season could improve system design.

---

• View source

---

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38655

---

Altmetric score:

Dimensions Citation Count: