Maize yields from rotation and intercropping systems with different legumes under conservation agriculture in contrasting agro-ecologies

被引:25
|
作者
Mupangwa, W. [1 ]
Nyagumbo, I [2 ]
Liben, F. [3 ]
Chipindu, L. [2 ]
Craufurd, P. [4 ]
Mkuhlani, S. [5 ]
机构
[1] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr, ILRI Shoalla Campus,POB 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[2] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr, POB MP 163, Harare, Zimbabwe
[3] Ethiopian Inst Agr Res, POB 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
[4] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr, Agr Bot Div, NARC Res Stn Khumaltor, POB 5186, Kathmandu, Nepal
[5] Univ Cape Town, Dept Environm & Geog Sci, Climate Syst Anal Grp, Cape Town, South Africa
关键词
Crop rotation; Eastern and Southern Africa; Forage; Intercropping; Monocropping; ZEA-MAYS L; SUSTAINABLE INTENSIFICATION; CROP PRODUCTIVITY; SOIL PROPERTIES; GRAIN LEGUMES; TILLAGE; BENEFITS; GROWTH;
D O I
10.1016/j.agee.2020.107170
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
Maize (Zea mays L.) is a key food security crop in Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA). Maize yield gaps are large in the smallholder farming systems of ESA but can be closed by a combination of improved crop varieties and sustainable cropping systems. On-farm trials were conducted in five countries of ESA over a seven-year period to assess the effects of different cropping systems on maize productivity. Cropping systems tested were conventional practice (Conv_sole) compared with variants of conservation agriculture (CA) such as sole maize (CA_sole), intercropping (CA_intercropping) and rotation (CA_rotation). Maize yield varied with cropping system and agroecological conditions. In highlands, CA_intercropping (3709 kg ha(-1)) outperformed Conv_sole (3456 kg ha(-1)), CA_sole (3596 kg ha(-1)) and CA_rotation (3545 kg ha(-1)) with similar legumes in the cropping system. The CA_rotation (3050 kg ha(-1)) out-yielded the other treatments (2645-2864 kg ha(-1)) in lowlands where similar legumes were grown in the cropping system. Without rotation practices, CA_sole (3596 kg ha(-1)) outperformed the conventional and CA_intercropping treatments (2954-3036 kg ha(-1)) in highlands with similar legumes in the cropping system. In lowlands, CA_intercropping (2802 kg ha(-1)) out yielded the other treatments (2485-2658 kg ha(-1)). The highest maize yield was from CA systems with groundnut (3609 kg ha(-1)) and common bean (3307-3576 kg ha(-1)) under rotation and intercropping practices, respectively. Maize-pigeon pea intercropping (35 %) and maize-groundnut rotation (31-43 %) under CA had the highest maize yield advantages over the conventional practices. The most stable maize yields were from the maize-common bean systems under CA. There is scope for promoting CA cropping systems integrated with grain and forage legumes to address maize productivity challenges on smallholder farms of ESA.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 11 条
  • [1] Maize yield effects of conservation agriculture based maize–legume cropping systems in contrasting agro-ecologies of Malawi and Mozambique
    Isaiah Nyagumbo
    Siyabusa Mkuhlani
    Charity Pisa
    Donwell Kamalongo
    Domingos Dias
    Mulugetta Mekuria
    [J]. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2016, 105 : 275 - 290
  • [2] Maize yield effects of conservation agriculture based maize-legume cropping systems in contrasting agro-ecologies of Malawi and Mozambique
    Nyagumbo, Isaiah
    Mkuhlani, Siyabusa
    Pisa, Charity
    Kamalongo, Donwell
    Dias, Domingos
    Mekuria, Mulugetta
    [J]. NUTRIENT CYCLING IN AGROECOSYSTEMS, 2016, 105 (03) : 275 - 290
  • [3] Heterosis and correlation deviations in maize under different agro-ecologies
    Singode, Avinash
    Singh, K. P.
    Srivastava, Ekta
    Guleria, S. K.
    Devlash, R.
    Dar, Z. A.
    Lone, A. A.
    Ahmad, Bilal
    Mahajan, V.
    [J]. INDIAN JOURNAL OF GENETICS AND PLANT BREEDING, 2014, 74 (04) : 438 - 443
  • [4] Physiological Efficiency of Corn-legumes Intercropping Systems under Conservation Agriculture Practice Systems (CAPS) in Northern Mindanao, Philippines
    Gonzaga, Apolinario B., Jr.
    [J]. MINDANAO JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2018, 16 : 92 - 110
  • [5] Relay intercropping and mineral fertilizer effects on biomass production, maize productivity and weed dynamics in contrasting soils under conservation agriculture
    Mhlanga, B.
    Cheesman, S.
    Maasdorp, B.
    Mupangwa, W.
    Thierfelder, C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE, 2017, 155 (06): : 876 - 887
  • [6] On-farm evaluation of yield and economic benefit of short term maize legume intercropping systems under conservation agriculture in Malawi
    Ngwira, Amos R.
    Aune, Jens B.
    Mkwinda, Symon
    [J]. FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2012, 132 : 149 - 157
  • [7] Forage and maize yields in mixed crop-livestock farming systems Enhancing forage and maize yields in mixed crop-livestock systems under conservation agriculture in sub-humid Zimbabwe
    Mutsamba, E. F.
    Nyagumbo, I
    Mupangwa, W.
    [J]. NJAS-WAGENINGEN JOURNAL OF LIFE SCIENCES, 2020, 92
  • [8] Weed seedbank, above-ground weed community and crop yields under conventional and conservation agriculture practices in maize-wheat-mungbean rotation
    Ghosh, Sonaka
    Das, T. K.
    Nath, C. P.
    Bhatia, Arti
    Biswas, D. R.
    Bandyopadhyay, K. K.
    Yeasin, Md
    Raj, Rishi
    [J]. WEED RESEARCH, 2023, 63 (04) : 270 - 281
  • [9] Effects of precision conservation agriculture in a maize-wheat-mungbean rotation on crop yield, water-use and radiation conversion under a semiarid agro-ecosystem
    Parihar, C. M.
    Jat, S. L.
    Singh, A. K.
    Ghosh, A.
    Rathore, N. S.
    Kumar, B.
    Pradhan, S.
    Majumdar, K.
    Satyanarayana, T.
    Jat, M. L.
    Saharawat, Y. S.
    Kuri, B. R.
    Saveipune, D.
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT, 2017, 192 : 306 - 319
  • [10] Differential response from nitrogen sources with and without residue management under conservation agriculture on crop yields, water-use and economics in maize-based rotations
    Jat, S. L.
    Parihar, C. M.
    Singh, A. K.
    Nayak, H. S.
    Meena, B. R.
    Kumar, B.
    Parihar, M. D.
    Jat, M. L.
    [J]. FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2019, 236 : 96 - 110