15.03.2015 Views

Grain Legumes and Green Manures for Soil Fertility in ... - cimmyt

Grain Legumes and Green Manures for Soil Fertility in ... - cimmyt

Grain Legumes and Green Manures for Soil Fertility in ... - cimmyt

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

few studies characterized the household assets<br />

of the host farmers. Consequently it is difficult<br />

to assess the reasons why some farmers may<br />

favour one technology <strong>and</strong> others another.<br />

• Few papers presented actually showed clear<br />

hypotheses <strong>for</strong> the experiments.<br />

• It is evident from the papers presented that host<br />

farmers are beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g to develop their own local<br />

taxonomies. These need to be catalogued to<br />

enable wider dissem<strong>in</strong>ation.<br />

Suggestions aris<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• There is a need to collate <strong>in</strong><strong>for</strong>mation from different<br />

trials <strong>in</strong> the region <strong>in</strong>to GIS databases to<br />

look at soil, climate <strong>and</strong> social <strong>in</strong>teractions.<br />

• Ex ante market studies on legumes are required.<br />

This will meet a grow<strong>in</strong>g need to assess market<br />

dem<strong>and</strong>s <strong>for</strong> legumes be<strong>for</strong>e they are promoted<br />

<strong>in</strong> an area.<br />

• Need a synthesis study on results ~e have to<br />

date concern<strong>in</strong>g the relative merits <strong>and</strong> benefits<br />

of <strong>in</strong>tercropp<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> rotations.<br />

• Comb<strong>in</strong>ations of <strong>in</strong>organics <strong>and</strong> organics need<br />

further attention. More <strong>and</strong> detailed studies are<br />

required on the synergistic effects of organiC<br />

<strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>organic fertility amendments. At the<br />

same time, work is required to develop simple<br />

<strong>and</strong> transferable messages.<br />

• Detailed economic analyses of many of the <strong>in</strong>terventions<br />

br<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>to question their appropriateness<br />

<strong>for</strong> smallholder farm<strong>in</strong>g systems. If research<br />

<strong>in</strong>tends that the smallholder farmer is to<br />

benefit from their work, it is essential that research<br />

take on a greater participatory emphasis<br />

<strong>in</strong> problem identification, development <strong>and</strong><br />

evaluation of <strong>in</strong>terventions.<br />

legume residues <strong>and</strong> concluded t fertilizer N<br />

applications were necessary <strong>for</strong> susta<strong>in</strong>ed production<br />

(based on one abnormal year).<br />

2. N availability/dynamics <strong>in</strong> soil:<br />

• M<strong>in</strong>eral-N <strong>in</strong> soil does not correlate well with N<br />

recovery by maize from preced<strong>in</strong>g legumes nor<br />

with maize yield response.<br />

• M<strong>in</strong>eral-N dynamics suggest that m<strong>in</strong>eralized<br />

N is flushed through the soil profile be<strong>for</strong>e<br />

maize roots are present to extract it, lead<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

poor synchrony of N availability <strong>and</strong> N uptake<br />

by maize.<br />

3. N recovery from legumes (<strong>and</strong> fertilizer) by<br />

subsequent maize crops:<br />

• Measured us<strong>in</strong>g 15N techniques by Chikowo et<br />

al.<br />

• Net N <strong>in</strong>puts from legumes were < 10 kg/ha <strong>for</strong><br />

soybean, pigeonpea <strong>and</strong> erotolaria but> 80 kg/<br />

ha <strong>for</strong> mucuna.<br />

• N recovery was always < 36%; be<strong>in</strong>g least <strong>for</strong><br />

mucuna (12%) <strong>and</strong> greater <strong>for</strong> legumes with<br />

small N <strong>in</strong>puts. Their high percent recovery<br />

possibly be<strong>in</strong>g due to their low total N <strong>in</strong>put.<br />

• N recovery from fertilizer was 2x N recovery<br />

. from mucuna, which had similar <strong>in</strong>puts (95 <strong>and</strong><br />

84 kg-N fha, respectively).<br />

Issues from the questions <strong>and</strong> discussion:<br />

• Economics of green manures: What marg<strong>in</strong>al<br />

<strong>in</strong>crement/ yield ga<strong>in</strong> is necessary <strong>for</strong> farmers<br />

to take up the technology?<br />

• The multiple uses of green manures need 'to be<br />

considered <strong>in</strong> maize/green manure-gra<strong>in</strong> legume<br />

systems; e.g., animals that graze residues.<br />

Legume Benefits on Maize Productivity<br />

<strong>and</strong> <strong>Soil</strong> Properties<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong> issues from the three presentations <strong>in</strong> this<br />

session were:<br />

1. Maize response to legumes <strong>in</strong> rotations <strong>and</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>tercrops.<br />

2. N availability / dyna.mics <strong>in</strong> soil as affected by<br />

green manures <strong>and</strong> gra<strong>in</strong> legumes <strong>in</strong> rotations<br />

<strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>tercrops.<br />

3. N recovery from legumes (<strong>and</strong> fertilizer) by<br />

subsequent maize crops.<br />

1. Maize response to legumes <strong>in</strong> rotations <strong>and</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>tercrops:<br />

• In two studies, legumes gave very large maize<br />

yield <strong>in</strong>creases; by 2-3x the yields without fertilizer.<br />

• BUT one study found only weak responses to<br />

Improv<strong>in</strong>g the Productivity of <strong>Gra<strong>in</strong></strong> <strong>Legumes</strong><br />

<strong>and</strong> <strong>Green</strong> <strong>Manures</strong><br />

Highlight po<strong>in</strong>ts from the papers:<br />

1. Agronomic effectiveness of phosphate rock<br />

products, mono-ammonium phosphate <strong>and</strong><br />

lime on gra<strong>in</strong> legume productivity <strong>in</strong> some<br />

Zambian soils (abed I. Lungu <strong>and</strong> Kalaluka<br />

Muny<strong>in</strong>da)<br />

• Partially acidulated phosphate rock (PAPR)<br />

ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>ed a high level of soil P than mono ammonium<br />

phosphate (MAP)<br />

• Lime <strong>in</strong>creased P effectiveness <strong>and</strong> legume biomass<br />

productivity<br />

• Optimal P application rate <strong>for</strong> legumes was 80<br />

kg P20S per ha<br />

• Simply processed PAPR (acidulated with sulphuric<br />

acid) was agronomically as effective as<br />

242<br />

<strong>Gra<strong>in</strong></strong> <strong>Legumes</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Green</strong> <strong>Manures</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Soil</strong> <strong>Fertility</strong> <strong>in</strong> Southern Africa

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!