Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:18:32.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrated nutrient management for resource-poor farming systems: A case study of adaptive research and technology dissemination in Uganda

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Charles S. Wortmann  and
Henry Ssali
Charles S. Wortmann*
Affiliation:
Soil Fertility Specialist, Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583;
Henry Ssali
Affiliation:
Senior Researcher, Kawanda Agricultural Research Institute, P.O. Box 7065, Kampala, Uganda.
*
Corresponding author is C.S. Wortmann ([email protected]).
Get access

Abstract

Resource-poor farmers often have diverse but small quantities of materials available that might be used to manage soil fertility. Opportunity costs of money are very high and farmers often opt to invest their scarce financial resources elsewhere rather than in fertilizer. This paper presents an approach to adaptive research and technology dissemination that was applied in Uganda and is applicable for improvement of integrated nutrient management (INM) in resource-poor farming systems. While little information may be available from research conducted in a particular agroecological zone (AEZ), information on INM components from diverse sources may be applicable for major crops in that AEZ. This information must be compiled and subjected to agronomic and economic analysis. A conceptual framework, e.g., in the form of a tentative decision guide, is then constructed, with consideration of interactions among nutrient sources, given the farmers' situations. Researchers estimate the most likely rates of application and substitution ratios, and then judge their confidence in the estimates. Priority actions are then identified for research and extension. When confident of their estimates, researchers formulate recommendations for promotion through extension means. If confidence is lacking, on-farm verification trials or other research may be needed. The approach is illustrated by work done for one AEZ in Uganda for maize and dry bean production, but is intended for application to other resource-poor farming systems in eastern Africa.

Keywords

agroecological zonesdry beansgreen manuresLantana camaramaizeopportunity costssoil fertility
Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , December 2001 , pp. 161 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2001

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

1.CIMMYT. 1988. From Agronomic Data to Farmer Recommendations: An Economics Workbook. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico, D.F.Google Scholar
2.Fischler, M., and Wortmann, C.S.. 1999. Green manure research in eastern Uganda—A participatory approach. Agroforestry Syst. 47:123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Foster, H.L. 1976. Soil Fertility in Uganda. Ph.D. thesis. University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Dept. of Soil Science, U.K.Google Scholar
4.FURP. 1987. Final Report, Annex III. Fertilizer Use Recommendation Project. Ministry of Agriculture, Nairobi, Kenya.Google Scholar
5.Giller, K.E., Amijee, F., Brodwick, S.J., and Edje, O.T.. 1998. Environmental constraints to nodulation and nitrogen fixation of Phaseolus vulgaris L. in Tanzania. II. Response to N and P fertilizers and inoculation with Rhizobium. African Crop Sci. J. 6:171–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Jannsen, B.H., Guiking, F.C.T., van der Ejik, D., Smaling, E.M.A., Wolf, J., and van Reuler, H.. 1990. A system for quantitative evaluation of the fertility of tropical soils (QUEFTS). Geoderma 46:299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Jones, E. 1972. Principles for using fertilizers to improve red ferrallitic soils in Uganda. Exp. Agric. 8:315–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Kayuki, C.K., and Wortmann, C.S.. 2001. Plant materials for soil fertility management in subhumid tropical areas: Nutrien release and crop response. Agron. J. 93:929–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Ritchie, J.T., Singh, U., Godwin, D.C., and Hunt, L.A.. 1989. A User's Guide to CERES-Maize V2.10. International Fertilizer Development Center, Muscle Shoals, AL.Google Scholar
10.Ssali, H., and Keya, S.O.. 1983. The effect of phosphorus on nodulation, growth and dinitrogen fixation by beans. Biol. Agric. Hort. 1:135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Ssali, H., Keya, S.O., and Balisundaram, V.R.. 1981. Influence of phosphorus application rates and placement on the nodulation, growth and yield of beans and soybeans grown at two nitrogen levels. Kenya J. Sci. Tech. 2:91–98.Google Scholar
12.Stoorvogel, J.J., Smaling, E.M.A., and Janssen, B.H.. 1993. Calculating soil nutrient balances in Africa at different scales I. Supranational scale. Fert. Res. 35:227–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Wortmann, C.S., and Eledu, C.A.. 1999. Uganda's Agroecological Zones: A Guide for Planners and Policy Makers. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Kampala, Uganda.Google Scholar
14.Wortmann, C.S., Fischler, M., Alifugani, F., and Kayuki, C.K.. 1998. Accomplishments of participatory research for systems improvement in Iganga District, 1993–1997. Occasional Paper No. 27. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Kampala, Uganda.Google Scholar
15.Wortmann, C.S., and Kayuki, C.K.. 1998. Nutrient balances and expected effects of alternative practices in farming systems of Uganda. In E.M.A. Smaling (ed.). Nutrient Balances as Indicators of Productivity and Sustainability in Sub-Saharan African Agriculture. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 71:115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Wortmann, C.S., and Kayuki, C.K.. 2000. Tree legumes in medium-term fallows: N2 fixation, nitrate recovery and effects on subsequent crops. African Crop Sci. J. 8:263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Wortmann, C.S., McIntyre, B.D., and Kayuki, C.K.. 2000. Annual soil improving legumes: Agronomic effectiveness, nutrient uptake, nitrogen fixation and water use. Field Crops Res. 68:75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Wortmann, C.S., Schnier, H.F., and Muriuki, A.W.. 1996. Estimation of fertilizer response of maize and bean intercropping using sole crop response equations. African Crop Sci. J. 4:51–55.Google Scholar