last final thesis of umer

Recommendations

Info

a prerequisite for increased agricultural productivity, natural resource conservation and sustainabledevelopment (CCRP, 2009).Poor agricultural production and productivity is also a problem in Somale Region of Ethiopia dueto low soil fertility and the situation is worsened by cultivating of one crop year after year causingcertain nutrient depletion.The majority of somale region farmers lack financial resources topurchase sufficient amount of mineral fertilizers to replace soil nutrients removed throughharvested crop products, crop residues, and through loss by runoff, leaching and as gases.Consequently, poor soil fertility has emerged as one of the greatest biophysical constraint toincreasing agricultural productivity hence threatening food security in this region.Therefore, it is necessary to adopt improved and sustainable agronomic practices in order toguarantee improvement in food productivity and there by food security (Landers, 2007). Suchtechnologies include the use of integrated soil fertility management (ISFM) like intercroppingcereals with legumes (Sanginga and Woomer, 2009). Intercropping legumes with cereals in waterlimited areas like the study area can be a principal means of intensifying crop production bothspatially and temporally to improve crop yields for smallholder farmers and for effective laborutilization per unit of area of available land (Seran and Brintha, 2010).1.3 Objective of the study1.3.1 General objective of the studyThe purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of maize-cowpea intercropping systems onthe productivity of the component crops, on soil fertility and investigate the cost effectiveness ofintercropping.3
1.3.2 Specific objectives1. To evaluate how different population densities of cowpea variety influences the yield andyield components of maize crop.2. To study the effects of different cowpea varieties intercropped with maize on yield and yieldrelated components of maize crop.3. To demonstrate the crop yield differences between intercropping and sole cropping of maize.1.4. Research Questions‣ Does maize and cowpea intercropping have a significant relationship with the yields of thecomponent crops?‣ Does different combinations of cowpea varieties with maize affects the productivity ofmaize?‣ How different population densities of cowpea affects the maize yield?‣ Does intercropping be economically feasible to small holder farmers compare to solecropping of the component crops?1.5. HypothesisIntercropping maize with different densities and varieties of cowpea will affect the yield andyield related components of the component crops.4
Page 1 and 2: MEKELLE UNIVERSITYCoDANRYield and E
Page 3 and 4: ABSTRACTA field experiment was cond
Page 5 and 6: BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHThe author, Omar
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTSDECLARATION.......
Page 9 and 10: 4.1.2 Soil analysis after Harvestin
Page 11 and 12: LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1.Ethio-maize
Page 13 and 14: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMSA
Page 15: Cowpea is tolerant to a wide range
Page 19 and 20: around the world are planted under
Page 21 and 22: 2.3. Maize Production in EthiopiaEt
Page 23 and 24: Food products, like corn meal, corn
Page 25 and 26: 2.6. Origin, Distribution and World
Page 27 and 28: 2.8. Importance of IntercroppingCer
Page 29 and 30: (Rusinamhodzi et al., 2012). Simila
Page 31 and 32: Photo synthetically active radiatio
Page 33 and 34: usually reduces weed occurrence (Zu
Page 35 and 36: Ayisi, 2005). Higher plant densitie
Page 37 and 38: The Somali Regional State has a bim
Page 39 and 40: maize. The treatments combinations
Page 41 and 42: using a spectrophotometer (Olsen et
Page 43 and 44: For cowpeaNumber of pods per plant:
Page 45 and 46: Net benefit (NB): was calculated by
Page 47 and 48: Moreover, the pH value was 7.71, wh
Page 49 and 50: 2002). In addition to that, the dif
Page 51 and 52: allows sole crops to extend its veg
Page 53 and 54: cowpea increased, the height of the
Page 55 and 56: of ears per plant in intercropped m
Page 57 and 58: variety. This result was in conform
Page 59 and 60: The highest HI (47.86%) was recorde
Page 61 and 62: Table 10.Effects of densities and v
Page 63 and 64: Table 11.Interaction effect of the
Page 65 and 66: Table 12.Effects of component densi
Page 67 and 68:
Significantly higher number of pods
Page 69 and 70:
density of cowpea to 50%. This decr
Page 71 and 72:
Harvest Index (%)Harvest index of c
Page 73 and 74:
Tauro et al. (2013) showed that whe
Page 75 and 76:
The highest net benefit (69,264.81
Page 77 and 78:
varieties and planting density of c
Page 79 and 80:
Altieri, M.A., Glaser, D.L. & Schmi
Page 81 and 82:
Chemeda F, 1996, Effect of bean and
Page 83 and 84:
Demessew Mengesha,2002. Effect of p
Page 85 and 86:
Florentine, S.K. & Fox, J.E.D., 200
Page 87 and 88:
IPS (Industrial Project Service), 2
Page 89 and 90:
Li L, Sun JH, Zhang FS, Li XL, Yang
Page 91 and 92:
Africa and Australia. Eds: Whitebre
Page 93 and 94:
Raji, J.A. (2007). Intercropping so
Page 95 and 96:
Sisay, T., (2004).Effect of plantin
Page 97 and 98:
USDA, 2016. United States Departmen
Page 99 and 100:
APPENDIXESAppendix Table 1.Mean squ
Page 101 and 102:
Appendix Table 5.Mean square values
Page 103 and 104:
Experimental Photos90
Page 105:
92
show all

last final thesis of umer

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

Delete template?

Save as template?