Effect of different mulching materials on maize growth and yield in conservation agriculture systems of sub-humid Zimbabwe

W. Mupangwa; I. Nyagumbo; E. Mutsamba; W. Mupangwa; I. Nyagumbo; E. Mutsamba

doi:10.3934/agrfood.2016.2.239

AIMS Agriculture and Food

2016, Volume 1, Issue 2: 239-253. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2016.2.239

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Effect of different mulching materials on maize growth and yield in conservation agriculture systems of sub-humid Zimbabwe

CIMMYT Southern Africa Regional Office, P.O. Box MP 163, Mount Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe

Received: 09 January 2016 Accepted: 31 May 2016 Published: 25 January 2016

The introduction of conservation agriculture (CA) for smallholders increased the competition for crop residues between crop and livestock enterprises of the mixed smallholder farming system. Smallholders practicing CA have resorted to using grass and leaf litter in addition to available crop residues. The effect of these different mulching materials on maize (Zea mays L.) growth and yield is not well documented in smallholder CA systems of southern Africa. A two-year experiment was run in 2012/13 and 2013/14 seasons to evaluate the effect of maize residues, grass (Hyparrhenia filipendula (L.) Stapf.) and leaf litter that farmers are currently using and residues from leguminous species, sunhemp (Crotolaria juncea L.) and Tephrosia (Tephrosia vogelii ((Hook) f.)) on maize nitrogen (N) uptake, growth and yield.
Significant differences in soil water content across treatments were only observed during March in 2012/13 season. Maize residues retained more soil water and Tephrosia had the lowest soil water content when seasonal rainfall pattern was erratic. Grass and Tephrosia treatments had the lowest chlorophyll content. Conventional ploughing, maize residues and leaf litter had similar chlorophyll content which was significantly higher than grass and Tephrosia treatments. At a site with higher initial soil fertility conventional ploughing treatment out yielded the other treatments by 727–1265 kg ha⁻¹. With more degraded sandy soil conventional practice had 119–430 kg ha⁻¹ more maize grain than the CA treatments. With adequate fertilization, the mulching materials have a similar effect on maize growth in basins and direct seeding. Further studies on different application rates of mulching materials and mineral N fertilizer, and nutrient release patterns of these residues are critical in order to better understand soil fertility management under smallholder CA systems.
- chlorophyll content,
- grass mulch,
- leaf litter,
- maize residues,
- Tephrosia
Citation: W. Mupangwa, I. Nyagumbo, E. Mutsamba. Effect of different mulching materials on maize growth and yield in conservation agriculture systems of sub-humid Zimbabwe[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2016, 1(2): 239-253. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2016.2.239

Related Papers:

Abstract

The introduction of conservation agriculture (CA) for smallholders increased the competition for crop residues between crop and livestock enterprises of the mixed smallholder farming system. Smallholders practicing CA have resorted to using grass and leaf litter in addition to available crop residues. The effect of these different mulching materials on maize (Zea mays L.) growth and yield is not well documented in smallholder CA systems of southern Africa. A two-year experiment was run in 2012/13 and 2013/14 seasons to evaluate the effect of maize residues, grass (Hyparrhenia filipendula (L.) Stapf.) and leaf litter that farmers are currently using and residues from leguminous species, sunhemp (Crotolaria juncea L.) and Tephrosia (Tephrosia vogelii ((Hook) f.)) on maize nitrogen (N) uptake, growth and yield.
Significant differences in soil water content across treatments were only observed during March in 2012/13 season. Maize residues retained more soil water and Tephrosia had the lowest soil water content when seasonal rainfall pattern was erratic. Grass and Tephrosia treatments had the lowest chlorophyll content. Conventional ploughing, maize residues and leaf litter had similar chlorophyll content which was significantly higher than grass and Tephrosia treatments. At a site with higher initial soil fertility conventional ploughing treatment out yielded the other treatments by 727–1265 kg ha⁻¹. With more degraded sandy soil conventional practice had 119–430 kg ha⁻¹ more maize grain than the CA treatments. With adequate fertilization, the mulching materials have a similar effect on maize growth in basins and direct seeding. Further studies on different application rates of mulching materials and mineral N fertilizer, and nutrient release patterns of these residues are critical in order to better understand soil fertility management under smallholder CA systems.

References

[1]	Romney DL, Thorne P, Lukuyu B, et al. (2003) Maize as food and feed in intensive smallholder systems: management options for improved integration in mixed farming systems of east and southern Africa. Field Crops Res 84: 159-168. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(03)00147-3
[2]	Valbuena D, Erenstein O, Homann-Kee Tui S, et al. (2012) Conservation Agriculture in mixed crop–livestock systems: Scoping crop residue trade-offs in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. Field Crops Res 132: 175-184. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.02.022
[3]	Rufino MC, Rowe EC, Delve RJ, et al. (2006) Nitrogen cycling efficiencies through resource-poor African crop-livestock systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 112: 261-282. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2005.08.028
[4]	Twomlow SJ, Steyn JT, du Preez CC (2006) Dryland farming in southern Africa. Chapter 19. In: Petersen GA, Unger WP, Payne WA (eds.). Dryland Agriculture 2nd Ed. Agronomy Monograph N^o. 23. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin. 769-836.
[5]	Homann Kee-Tui S, Bandason E, Maute F, et al. (2013) Optimizing livelihood and environmental benefits from crop residues in smallholder crop-livestock systems in southern Africa: Crop residue uses and trade-offs, exploring options for sustainable intensification with stakeholders. International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India. 60.
[6]	Wall PC, Thierfelder C, Ngwira A, et al. (2013) Conservation Agriculture in Eastern and Southern Africa. In: Jat, R.A., Graziano de Silva, J., (Eds.), Conservation Agriculture: Global Prospects and Challenges. CABI, Cambridge USA, ISBN-13: 9781780642598.
[7]	Waddington SR, Murwira HK, Kumwenda JDT, et al. (eds.) (1998) Soil Fertility Research for Maize-Based Farming Systems in Malawi and Zimbabwe. Proceedings of the Soil Fert Net Results and Planning Workshop held from 7 to 11 July 1997 at Africa University, Mutare, Zimbabwe. Soil Fert Net and CIMMYT-Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe. 312.
[8]	Waddington SR (2003) Grain legumes and green manures for soil fertility in southern Africa-Taking stock of progress. Proceedings of a Conference held 8-11 October 2002 at Leopard Rock Hotel, Vumba, Zimbabwe. Soil Fert Net and CIMMYT-Zimbabwe. 246.
[9]	Nyathi P, Campbell B (1995) Interaction effect of tree leaf litter, manure and inorganic fertilizer on performance of maize in Zimbabwe. Afr Crop Sci J 3: 451-456.
[10]	Mtambanengwe F, Mapfumo P (2005) Organic matter management as an underlying cause of soil fertility gradients on smallholder farms in Zimbabwe. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 73: 227-243. doi: 10.1007/s10705-005-2652-x
[11]	Zingore S, Murwira HK, Delve RJ, et al. (2007) Influence of nutrient management strategies on variability of soil fertility, crop yields and nutrients balances on smallholder farms in Zimbabwe. Agric Ecosyst Environ 119: 112-126. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.06.019
[12]	Rusinamhodzi L, Corbeels M, Zingore S, et al. (2013) Pushing the envelope? Maize production intensification and the role of cattle manure in recovery of degraded soils in the smallholder farming areas of Zimbabwe. Field Crops Res 147: 40-53. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.03.014
[13]	Thierfelder C, Rusinamhodzi L, Ngwira AR, et al. (2014) Conservation agriculture in Southern Africa: Advances in knowledge. Renew Agric Food Syst 30: 1-21.
[14]	Govaerts B, Sayre, KD, Goudeseune B, et al. (2009) Conservation agriculture as a sustainable option for central Mexican highlands. Soil Till Res 103: 222-230. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2008.05.018
[15]	Thierfelder C, Wall PC (2009) Effects of conservation agriculture techniques on infiltration and soil water content in Zambia and Zimbabwe. Soil Till Res 105: 217-227. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2009.07.007
[16]	Mupangwa W, Twomlow S, Walker S (2013) Cumulative effects of reduced tillage and mulching on soil properties under semi-arid conditions. J Arid Environ 91: 45-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2012.11.007
[17]	Nyamangara J, Marondedze A, Masvaya EN, et al. (2014) Influence of basin-based conservation agriculture on selected soil quality parameters under smallholder farming in Zimbabwe. Soil Use Manag 30: 550-559. doi: 10.1111/sum.12149
[18]	Cheesman S, Thierfelder C, Eash NS, et al. (2016) Soil carbon stocks in conservation agriculture systems of southern Africa. Soil Till Res 156: 99-109. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2015.09.018
[19]	Duncan AJ, Tarawali SA, Thorne PJ, et al. (2013) Integrated crop/livestock systems – a key to sustainable intensification in Africa. Trop Grassl 1: 202-206.
[20]	Delve RJ, Cadisch G, Tanner JC, et al. (2001) Implications of livestock feeding management on soil fertility in the smallholder farming systems of sub-Saharan Africa. Agric Ecosyst Environ 84: 227-243. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(00)00244-9
[21]	Rufino MC, Dury J, Tittonell P, et al. (2011) Competing use of organic resources, village-level interactions between farm types and climate variability in a communal area of NE Zimbabwe. Agric Syst 104: 175-190.
[22]	Mashango G (2015) Conservation agriculture challenges in developing countries and possible solutions – the case of Gokwe South district, Zimbabwe. J Techn Sci Special Issue 1: 67-80.
[23]	Mtambanengwe F, Kirchmann H (1995) Litter from a Tropical Savanna woodland (miombo): Chemical composition and C and N mineralization. Soil Biol Biochem 27: 1639-1651. doi: 10.1016/0038-0717(95)00073-N
[24]	Chikowo R, Mapfumo P, Leffelaar PA, et al. (2006) Integrating legumes to improve N cycling on smallholder farms in sub-humid Zimbabwe: resource quality, biophysical and environmental limitations. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 76: 219-231.
[25]	Palm CA, Sanchez PA (1991) Nitrogen release from the leaves of some tropical legumes as affected by their lignin and polyphenolic contents. Soil Biol Chem 23: 83-88. doi: 10.1016/0038-0717(91)90166-H
[26]	Gentile R, Vanlauwe B, van Kessel C, et al. (2009) Managing N availability and losses by combining fertilizer N with different quality residues in Kenya. Agric Ecosyst Environ 131: 308-314. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2009.02.003
[27]	Lundy ME, Pittelkow CM, Linquist BA, et al. (2015) Nitrogen fertilization reduces yield declines following no-till adoption. Field Crops Res 183: 204-210. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.07.023
[28]	Mhlanga B, Cheesman S, Maasdorp B, et al. (2015) Contribution of cover crops to the productivity of maize-based conservation agriculture systems in Zimbabwe. Crop Sci 55: 1791-1805. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2014.11.0796
[29]	Whitbread AM, Jiri O, Maasdorp B (2004) The effect of managing improved fallows of mucuna pruriens on maize production and soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics in sub-humid Zimbabwe. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 69: 59-71. doi: 10.1023/B:FRES.0000025291.62043.11
[30]	Pandey RK, Maranville JW, Chetima MM (2000) Deficit irrigation and nitrogen effects on maize in a Sahelian environment II. Shoot growth, nitrogen uptake and water extraction. Agric Water Manag 46: 15-27. doi: 10.1016/S0378-3774(00)00074-3
[31]	Liu K, Wiatrak P (2011) Corn (Zea mays L.) plant characteristics and grain yield response to N fertilization programs in no-till system. Am J Agric Biol Sci 6: 279-286. doi: 10.3844/ajabssp.2011.279.286
[32]	Vincent V, Thomas RG (1961) An agro-ecological survey of Southern Rhodesia: Part I agro-ecological survey. Salisbury, Government Printers.
[33]	Nyamapfene K (1991) Soils of Zimbabwe. Nehanda Publishers (Pvt) Ltd, Harare, Zimbabwe.
[34]	Burt R, Wilson MA, Kanyanda CW, et al. (2001) Properties and effects of management on selected granitic soils in Zimbabwe. Geoderma 101: 119-141. doi: 10.1016/S0016-7061(00)00100-2
[35]	Twomlow S, Urolov JC, Jenrich M, et al. (2008) Lessons from the field – Zimbabwe’s conservation agriculture task force. J Semi-Arid Trop Agric Res 6: 1-11.
[36]	Statistix. Statistix 9: Analytical Software. 2008. Available from: www.statistix.com
[37]	Hatfield JL, Sauer TJ, Prueger JH (2001) Managing soils to achieve greater water use efficiency: A review. Agron J 93: 271–280. doi: 10.2134/agronj2001.932271x
[38]	Monzon JP, Sadras VO, Andrade FH (2006) Fallow soil evaporation and water storage as affected by stubble in sub-humid (Argentina) and semi-arid (Australia) environments. Field Crops Res 98: 83-90. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2005.12.010
[39]	Muchecheti F, Madakadze IC, Soundy P (2012) Production of rape (Brassica napus L.) on soils amended with leguminous tree prunings: Yield responses in relation to the chemical composition of the tree prunings. Afr J Agric Res 7: 3541-3549.
[40]	Cairns JE, Sanchez C, Vargas M, et al. (2012) Dissecting maize productivity: Ideotypes associated with grain yield under drought stress and well-watered conditions. J Int Plant Biol 54: 1007-1020. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7909.2012.01156.x
[41]	Lafitte HR (1994) Identifying production problems in tropical maize: a field guide. Mexico, D.F. CIMMYT.
[42]	Nezomba H, Mtambanengwe F, Chikowo R, et al. (2014) Sequencing integrated soil fertility management options for sustainable crop intensification by different categories of smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe. Exp Agric 51: 17-41.

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2016 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)