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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2001/2002 rainy season. Short duration varieties were selected to suit the weather conditions of the region that is characterized by low and unpredictable rainfall patterns. This parer summarizes results for the 2001/2002 season. Materials and Methods Site Characteristics Matopos. The Matopos site is 1344 m above sea level, with flat land on the lower slope within the Matopos Hills. The soil at the site is classified as the Matopos 3E.4 using the Zimbabwe Classification system (Pellic-Eutric Vertisol), which describes an imperfectly drained vertisol derived from igneous/ metamorphic rocks. The soil is deep (l30 cm+) and is water-saturated for short periods every year. It is mostly made of black clay with a granular structure in the top layers. This soil is fertile with 100% base saturation and a high cation exchange capacity (CEC) (Moyo, 2001). Prior to the 2001/2002 cropping season the land had been planted to millet breeding trials that had received 300 kg ha- I basal Compound D fertilizer. Lllcydale. The Lucydale site is l378 m above sea level, located on a gently undulating plain. The soil type at the site is described as a Eutric Arenosol 5G.2 (Zimbabwe Classification) that is a typical moderately deep to deep well-drai.'1ed fersiallitic soil derived from granite. The soil is excessively well drained. The tops layers of the soil are coarsegrained sand and loamy sand with apedal structure. The soil has a slightly acidic pH 5 in the top layers. This soil is less fertile compared to the Matopos soil and has a base saturation of 60% in the top layer (Moyo, 2001). Experimental Design At each site, 10 determinate and 12 indeterminate varieties were planted. The selected fields at both Matopos and Lucydale were previously under millet breeding trials. Prior to planting the pigeonpea, both sites received a basal dressing of 300 kg ha- i Comp--ound D and the soil was ploughed using a tractor drawn disc plough to a depth of 0.20 m. The design was a complete randomized block design with three replicates. The determinate pigeonpea plot size was 5.0 m x 2.0 m, with a between row spacing of 0.5 m and within row spacing of 0.2 m. The indeterminate plots were 5.0 m x 3.0 m in size with a row spacing of 0.75 m and plant-to-plant spacing of 0.3 m. These are recommended plant densit!~s for the Matopos elevation. The Matopos plots (both determinate and indeterminate) were hand planted on 10 December 2001 and the Lucydale plots were planted on 12 December 2001. Four seeds were planted per station about 5 cm deep to !Ilaximize germination. Crop Management and Records of Observations All plots were thinned to one plant per planting station three weeks after planting the two sites. Weeding was done using hand hoes, as weed pressure dictated. A single spraying of Dimethoate was carried out at both- sites on 12 March to destroy leaf eaters. Observations were done every day and records were taken for date to 50% flower, date to 75% maturity, plant height, final plant stand, harvest date, woody biomass yield and grain yield. The crop at Matopos was affeCted by frost and both the indeterminate and determinate crops wilted. At the Lucydale site the crops received a further 20 mm of rainfall in June and all the varieties started flowering again. The indeterminate varieties could not reach maturity due to destruction by animals at the podding stage. A one way Analysis of Variance (for randomized blocks) was performed on woody biomass and grain yield using Genstat for Windows (5 th Edition). Results and Discussion Rainfall Data Total rainfall for the season, October 2001 to June 2002 (Table I), was close to the long-term average with 536.5 mm at the Matopos site and 427 mm at Lucydale. However, it was poorly distributed, and the determinate varieties received effectively 124 mm at Matopos and 133 mm at Lucydale. Given the moist condition of the seedbeds at planting at both sites, germination was good. Responses of Determinate Pigeon Pea Varieties Short duration determinate pigeonpea varieties flowered approximately two weeks earlier at the Matopos heavy· clay site, when compared to the sandy Lucydale site, despite that planting was only one day apart (Table 2). Despite the earliness of flowering at Matopos, a similar length of time was required for the pigeonpea varieties to reach physiological maturity; typically 116 days from planting. However, the early flowering at Matopos Table 1. Total rainfall (mm) at ICRISAT Research fields from October 2001 to April 2002. Season longterm Month OctOl NovOl OecOl Jan02 Feb02 Mar02 Apr02 Total mean Matopos 64 108 134 44 12 2 134 536.5 590 lucydale 41 132 112 41 16 3 46 427 76 Grain legumes and Green Manures for Soil Fertility in Southern Africa
Table 2. Characteristics of short duration determinate pigeon pea varieties grown during the 2001/2002 For the indeterminate season at Matopos and lucydale. varieties, early ma turity Days to 50% flowering Days to 75% maturity Grain yield kg ha I Biomass kg ha I was associated with Site/variety Matopos Lucydale Matopos Lucydale Matopos Lucydale Matopos Lucydale highest grain yield. Variety ICPL87091 (829 kg/ Var 1 IGEAP 00360 61 77 118 118 739.3 504.0 7383.9 6329.9 ha), ICEAP 00721 (682 Var 2 IGEAP 00394 61 71 118 118 746.7 343.3 6538.9 8521.7 kg/ha) and ICEAP 00718 Var 3 IGEAP 00535 61 73 115 114 902.0 614.0 5201 .0 4468 .9 (641 kg/ha) were the Var 4 IGEAP 00536 61 77 115 115 848.7 634.7 5224.4 4555 .6 highest yielding indeter Var 5 IGEAP 00753 61 77 116 118 705.3 360.7 6642.9 5785.8 minate varieties, but Var 61GEAP 00781 61 75 117 118 1058.0 370.7 5815 .6 5129.0 these gave lower yields Var 7 IGPL 86012 61 73 115 114 744.0 458.0 4365.7 4177.3 than the best performing Var 81GPL 87091 61 77 115 118 773.3 398.0 6114.3 4909.1 determinate varieties. Var 9 IGPL 87105 61 71 115 114 840.7 592.7 4109.6 4668.1 The average for the inde Var 10 IGEAP 93027 61 77 118 115 749.3 Site mean 61 75 116 116 810.7 SED 0 3 0.901 0.870 172.3 had a major influence on yields. The pigeonpea yields at Mqtopos averaged 810.7 kg ha- I compared with 482.3 kg ha- I for Lucydale. There was no statistical difference between varieties at both sites. Variety ICEAP 00394 yielded significantly (P>O.OOl) more woody biomass than other varieties at Lucydale, and performed similarly to the other varieties at Matopos. However, it had the lowest grain legume yield of any variety on the sands at Lucydale and gave one of the lowest yields at Matopos. Varieties ICEAP 00535 and ICEAP 00536 performed above average at Matopos and significantly (P
Page 2 and 3:
Grain Legumes and Green Manures for
Page 4 and 5:
Acknowledgments • The Leopard Roc
Page 6 and 7:
Evall!ating mucuna green manure tec
Page 9:
INTRODUCTION AND CONFERENCE OBJECTI
Page 12 and 13:
Table 1. Paradigm shifts underlying
Page 14 and 15:
100 90 80 - - 0 - - Uptake by ihe m
Page 16 and 17:
- 6 ~ 9 8 7 0- 5 CḎ ns 4 0::: 3
Page 18 and 19:
Table 3. Millet grain and total dry
Page 20 and 21:
Dvorak KA 1996. Adoption potential
Page 23 and 24:
LEGUMES FOR SOIL FERTILITY IN SOUTH
Page 25 and 26:
to the system in such a way that th
Page 27:
Muetzelfeldt, R.1. 1995. A framewor
Page 30 and 31:
ing capacity. Legumes offer other b
Page 32 and 33:
people/km2), land holdings are smal
Page 34 and 35: ments. It would help researchers to
Page 36 and 37: Own livestock Gununo farmers for th
Page 39: Questions and Answers ~ey Papers To
Page 42 and 43: Historical Perspective on Soyabean
Page 44 and 45: ganic amendment for resource-poor f
Page 46 and 47: MPhil. Thesis. University of Zimbab
Page 48 and 49: deal of research work has been bias
Page 50 and 51: 1600 '7 ns 1400 ~ 1200 Cl ~ 1000 "C
Page 52 and 53: Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF)
Page 54 and 55: Boswell EP, Koide RT, Shumway DL, A
Page 56 and 57: Materials and Methods The trial was
Page 58 and 59: 0.9 0.8 ~ 0.7 Rec '-' 0.6 Vl ::9 0.
Page 60 and 61: Series no 5. Soil Science SOciety o
Page 62 and 63: Materials and Methods Persistence o
Page 64 and 65: content resulted in increased rhizo
Page 66 and 67: (Mugwiia and Murwira, 1997). Howeve
Page 68 and 69: Table 2. Average maize yield estima
Page 70 and 71: implied that most fanners prefer to
Page 73 and 74: ] Questions and Answers Rhizobium,
Page 75 and 76: ADDING A NEW DIMENSION TO THE IMPRO
Page 77 and 78: Materials and Methods The study use
Page 79 and 80: a) Chikwaka b) Chinyika !21 C. absu
Page 81 and 82: Table 3. N, P and Kconcentrations (
Page 83: Abstract SCREENING OF SHORT DURATIO
Page 87 and 88: RISK DIVERSIFICATION OPPORTUNITIES
Page 89 and 90: management technologies with differ
Page 91 and 92: Table 3. Expected annual returns (Z
Page 93: Table 6. Risk diversification indic
Page 96 and 97: een renewed interest in green manur
Page 98 and 99: unfertilised maize crop of over 200
Page 101 and 102: Questions and Answers Screening of
Page 103 and 104: GREEN MANURE AND FOOD LEGUMES RESEA
Page 105 and 106: 7000 6000 ';' €.. 5000 .~MzSole :
Page 107 and 108: Table 5. Maize grain yield (kg ha")
Page 109: Phiri, A.D.K. 1999. Effects of Sesb
Page 112 and 113: amount of roots with sl:nnhemp. It
Page 114 and 115: It was proved that a mixed farming
Page 116 and 117: Table 3. Above·ground biomass (t/h
Page 118 and 119: and horticulture in Zimbabwe: Case
Page 121 and 122: GRAIN LEGUMES AND GREEN MANURES IN
Page 123 and 124: Results Table 1. Adaptation of gree
Page 125 and 126: Four rates of fertilizer N were app
Page 127 and 128: THE ROLE OF COWPEA (VIGNA UNGUICULA
Page 129 and 130: Table 1. Non-legume cropping patter
Page 131 and 132: Table 9. Common pests on cowpeas as
Page 133 and 134: few of the farmers interviewed acqu
Page 135:
Murwira, H.K., M.J. Swift and P.G.H
Page 138 and 139:
Materials and Methods On farm exper
Page 140 and 141:
18000 1600) 14000 a) Zambia 12000 m
Page 143 and 144:
EFFECT OF DIFFERENT GREEN MANURE LE
Page 145 and 146:
.. ~ Table 2. The effect of time o
Page 147:
Chivinge, O.A., E. Kasembe, and I.K
Page 150 and 151:
times with regionally specific adap
Page 152 and 153:
ter content at 180 cm was still wel
Page 154 and 155:
to amount of biomass, quality of bi
Page 156 and 157:
with the natural fallow, which did
Page 158 and 159:
and K to maize as an equivalent amo
Page 160 and 161:
forts to understand the mechanisms
Page 162 and 163:
gen recovery rates in relation to p
Page 164 and 165:
The first steps to improve soil fer
Page 167 and 168:
Questions and Answers .Identificat
Page 169 and 170:
MUCUNA - MAIZE ROTATIONS AND SHORT
Page 171:
Table 3. Percent nitrogen (% N) con
Page 174 and 175:
~e decomposition of legume residues
Page 176 and 177:
Table 3. Effect of forage legumes o
Page 178 and 179:
available nutrients and vice versa,
Page 180 and 181:
Conclusion and Recommendation Mucun
Page 182 and 183:
Specific objectives were to: • Te
Page 184 and 185:
'"~ v '" ~ ~ 1400000 1200000 100000
Page 187 and 188:
EFFECT OF SURFACE APPLICATION AND I
Page 189:
it 4 a···· · ... - :.!! e.....
Page 193 and 194:
PERFORMANCE OF GREEN MANURES AND GR
Page 195:
Mungwi soil, cowpea and soyabean pr
Page 198 and 199:
Among BNF systems, symbiotic system
Page 200 and 201:
3500 .f"'3000 ca ,c2500 CI "" - 200
Page 202 and 203:
above-ground biomass was not transl
Page 204 and 205:
3000 "0 ]i >. ,5 ~ C> 800 600 400 2
Page 206 and 207:
Most interventions involving green
Page 208 and 209:
~ ~~----.-~r-~-------------r~~ Aoo
Page 210 and 211:
stover N, followed by after pigeon
Page 212 and 213:
tems in Malawi and Zimbabwe. Procee
Page 214 and 215:
1965). The tailings and AgLi were a
Page 216 and 217:
The significant soybean yield could
Page 218 and 219:
twice the yield is necessary. We ha
Page 220 and 221:
Table 1. Maize and Grain Legumes Pr
Page 222 and 223:
Recommendations and Conclusion In v
Page 224 and 225:
performance of private sector compa
Page 226 and 227:
the investment costs incurred. The
Page 228 and 229:
Results and Planning Workshop. Soil
Page 231 and 232:
A SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF LEGUME
Page 233 and 234:
Table 1. Gross margins from the dif
Page 235 and 236:
Abstract LINKING TECHNOLOGY DEVELOP
Page 237 and 238:
3. If households are linked to prod
Page 239 and 240:
Table 9. Average Table 8. Pigeonpea
Page 241 and 242:
ance of sorghum-pigeonpea intercrop
Page 243:
Mligo, J.K., 1995. Pigeonpea breedi
Page 246 and 247:
To Charles Nhemachena, et al. Q: 1)
Page 248 and 249:
• Assessment of the potential ben
Page 250 and 251:
few studies characterized the house
Page 252 and 253:
• Conduct more research to measur
Page 254:
Socio-Economics, Policy and Technol
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?