Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T06:24:37.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of crop rotation and fallow residue management on maize growth, yield and soil carbon in a savannah-forest transition zone of Ghana

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2009

S. G. K. ADIKU ,
J. W. JONES ,
F. K. KUMAGA  and
A. TONYIGAH
S. G. K. ADIKU*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Florida, USA Department of Soil Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra, Ghana
J. W. JONES
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Florida, USA
F. K. KUMAGA
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra, Ghana
A. TONYIGAH
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra, Ghana
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected] and [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of seven maize (Zea mays)–fallow rotation and fallow residue management treatments on growth, maize yield and soil carbon within a savannah-forest farming zone of Ghana. Over a 4-year period, maize rotated with bare fallow (control) produced an average maize biomass and yield of 4·0 and 1·0 t/ha/yr, respectively. Maize rotated with elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum) with the fallow grass residue burning produced an average maize biomass and yield of 8·0 and 2·0 t/ha/yr, respectively. The removal of the fallow grass biomass (9·0 t/ha/yr) by burning resulted in a low total residue (maize stover+fallow residue) returned to the soil (7·0 t/ha/yr). The total residue returned to the soil was 14·0 t/ha/yr. Despite the larger total residue returned to the soil by the incorporation treatment, the performance of the maize was not significantly different from that of the fallow residue burning treatment. Maize rotated with cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), mucuna (Mucuna pruriens) or pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) produced similar maize biomass of 8·0 t/ha/yr and yields of 2·0 t/ha/yr, but with higher variability for the maize–cowpea rotation. Biomass produced by fallow cowpea, mucuna or pigeon pea were 4·0, 5·0 and 8·0 t/ha/yr, respectively, and total residues added to the soil were 13·0, 13·0 and 15·0 t/ha/yr, respectively. Maize–grass rotation with fertilizer application to the maize resulted in biomass and yield production of 11·0 and 3·0 t/ha/yr, respectively, and fallow grass production of 12·0 t/ha/yr. The total residue returned to the soil was 18·0 t/ha/yr. Soil organic carbon (SOC) declined under all treatments over time, with the control losing about 55% of the initial SOC by the end of the trial. The decline in SOC was 19% for the fertilized maize–grass rotation, but all other treatments lost between 33 and 44% SOC. Overall, the fertilized maize–grass and maize–pigeon pea rotations were identified as those that sustained relatively high maize yields, returned large residue amounts to the soil and minimized soil carbon loss.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 147 , Issue 3 , June 2009 , pp. 313 - 322
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adeoye, G. O. & Agboola, A. A. (1985). Critical levels for soil pH, available P, K, Zn and Mn and maize ear-leaf content of P, Cu and Mn in sedimentary soils of South-Western Nigeria. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 6, 65–71.Google Scholar
Ae, N., Arihara, J., Okada, K., Yoshihara, T. & Johansen, C. (1990). Phosphorus uptake by pigeon pea and its role in cropping systems of the Indian subcontinent. Science 248, 477–480.Google Scholar
Bandaranayake, W., Qian, Y. L., Parton, W. J., Ojima, D. S. & Follet, R. F. (2003). Estimation of soil organic carbon in turf grass systems using CENTURY MODEL. Agronomy Journal 95, 558–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brams, E. A. (1971). Continuous cultivation of West African soils: Organic matter diminution and effects of applied lime and phosphorus. Plant and Soil 35, 401–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, R. H. & Kurz, L. T. (1945). Determination of total organic and available forms of phosphorus in soils. Soil Science 59, 39–45.Google Scholar
Cheruiyot, E. K., Mumera, L. M., Nakhone, L. N. & Mwonga, S. M. (2003). Effect of legume-managed fallow on weeds and soil nitrogen in following maize (Zea mays L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) crops in the Rift Valley highlands of Kenya. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 43, 597–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chivenge, P. P., Murwira, H. K., Giller, K. E., Mapfumo, P. & Six, J. (2007). Long-term impact of reduced tillage and residue management on soil carbon stabilization: implications for conservation agriculture on contrasting soils. Soil and Tillage Research 94, 328–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Covaleda, S., Pajares, S., Gallardo, J. F. & Etchevers, J. D. (2006). Short-term changes in C and N distribution in soil particle size fractions induced by agricultural practices in cultivated volcanic soil from Mexico. Organic Geochemistry 37, 1943–1948.Google Scholar
GGDP (Ghana Grains Development Project) (1991). A Study of Maize Technology Adoption in Ghana. Mexico, D.F.: GGDP.Google Scholar
Hobbs, P. R. (2007). Conservation agriculture: what is it and why is it important for future sustainable food production? Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 145, 127–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ishikawa, S., Adu-Gyamfi, J. J., Nakamura, T., Yoshihara, T., Watanabe, T. & Wagatsuma, T. (2002). Genotypic variability in phosphorus solubilising activity of root exudates by pigeon pea grown in low-nutrient environments. Plant and Soil 245, 71–81.Google Scholar
Lal, R. (1974). Soil temperature, soil moisture and maize yield from mulched and unmulched soils. Plant and Soil 40, 129–143.Google Scholar
Lal, R. (2006). Enhancing crop yields in developing countries through restoration of the organic carbon pools in agricultural lands. Land Degradation and Development 17, 197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lal, R., Kimble, J. M., Follet, R. F. & Cole, C. V. (1998). The Potential of US Cropland to Sequester Carbon and Mitigate Greenhouse Effect. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Lascano, R. J. & Baumhardt, R. L. (1996). Effects of crop residue on soil and plant water evaporation in a dryland cotton system. Theoretical and Applied Climatology 54, 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebig, M. A., Morgan, J. A., Reeder, J. D., Ellert, B. H., Gollany, H. T. & Schuman, G. E. (2005). Greenhouse gas contributions and mitigation potential of agricultural practices in northwestern USA and western Canada. Soil and Tillage Research 83, 25–52.Google Scholar
Minitab (2004). Minitab for Windows. User Manual. Release 14. Coventry, UK: Minitab Inc.Google Scholar
Nair, P. K. R. (1984). Soil Productivity Aspects of Agroforestry: Science and Practice of Agroforestry. Nairobi, Kenya: International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF).Google Scholar
Riezebos, H. T. & Loerts, A. C. (1998). Influence of land use change and tillage practice on soil organic matter in southern Brazil and eastern Paraguay. Soil and Tillage Research 49, 271–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skjemstad, J. O., Janik, L. J. & Taylor, J. A. (1998). Non-living soil organic matter: what do we know about it? Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 38, 667–680.Google Scholar
Vågen, T.-G., Lal, R. & Singh, B. R. (2005). Soil carbon sequestration in sub-Saharan Africa: a review. Land Degradation Development 16, 53–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walkley, A. & Black, I. A. (1934). Determination of organic matter in the soil by chromic acid digestion. Soil Science 63, 251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, W. R. & Foss, J. E. (1972). Contributions of clay and organic matter to the cation exchange capacity of Maryland soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 36, 115–118.Google Scholar
Yang, X. M. & Wander, M. M. (1999). Tillage effects on soil organic carbon distribution and storage in a silt loam soil in Illinois. Soil and Tillage Research 52, 1–9.Google Scholar