Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T04:45:16.965Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Productivity and optimum plant density of pigeonpea in different environments in Tanzania

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2007

J. K. MLIGO  and
P. Q. CRAUFURD
J. K. MLIGO
Affiliation:
ARTI Ilonga, Kilosa PO, Morogoro, Tanzania
P. Q. CRAUFURD*
Affiliation:
Plant Environment Laboratory, The University of Reading, Cutbush Lane, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AF, UK
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The objective of the present study was to determine the optimum plant density of four pigeonpea genotypes, representing early, medium and late maturing types, grown in five contrasting environments in Tanzania. ICPL 86005 (early), Kat 50/3 and QP 37 (medium) and Local (late) were grown at four plant densities (40 000–320 000 plants/ha) in irrigated and rainfed conditions at Ilonga and under rainfed conditions at Kibaha, Selian and Ismani. At maturity, total above-ground biomass and seed yield (SY) were measured. The highest yields were obtained in the irrigated experiment at Ilonga, where the medium/late genotypes produced 25 t biomass/ha and 5·6 t seed/ha. The lowest SY were at Kibaha, 0·58 to 1·76 t/ha, where a severe drought occurred. In nearly all cases the response to density was linear or asymptotic. The response of ICPL 86005 was significantly different from the other three genotypes. The optimum density for SY varied from 37 000 to 227 000 plants/ha in ICPL 86005, compared with 3000 to 101 000 plants/ha in the medium/late genotypes. The highest optimum density was at Selian and Ismani and the lowest at Ilonga and Kibaha, where drought occurred. Optimum densities therefore varied greatly with genotype (duration) and environment, and this variation needs to be considered when planning trials.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 145 , Issue 4 , August 2007 , pp. 343 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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

Akinola, J. O. & Oyejola, B. A. (1994). Planting date and density effects on six pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) cultivars at three Nigerian Savanna locations. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 123, 233–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akinola, J. O. & Whiteman, P. C. (1975). Agronomic studies on pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.). 2. Responses to sowing density. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 26, 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azam-Ali, S. N., Rao, R. C. N., Craigon, J., Wadia, K. D. R. & Williams, J. H. (1993). A method of calculating the population/yield relations of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) in semi-arid climates. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 121, 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauhan, Y. S. (1990). Pigeonpea: optimum agronomic management. In The Pigeonpea (Eds Nene, Y. L., Hall, S. D & Sheila, V. K.), pp. 257–278. Wallingford, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Chauhan, Y. S., Venkataratnam, N. & Sheldrake, A. R. (1987). Factors affecting growth and yield of short duration pigeonpea and its potential for multiple harvests. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 109, 519–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Counce, P. A. (1987). Asymptotic and parabolic yield and linear nutrient content responses to rice population density. Agronomy Journal 79, 864–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craufurd, P. Q. (1996). Effect of plant population density on dry matter partitioning and yield in a short duration cultivar of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) grown in the tropics. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 127, 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, W. R. & Gardner, H. R. (1983). Principles of water management under drought conditions. Agricultural Water Management 7, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genstat V Committee (1987). Genstat V Reference Manual. Oxford, UK: Oxford Science Publications.Google Scholar
ICRISAT (1991). Annual Report for 1990/91. Patancheru, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Keatinge, J. D. H. & Hughes, G. (1981). Planting density effects on the dry-season productivity of short pigeonpeas in the West Indies. II. Yield and moisture supply. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Pigeonpeas, Vol. 2. (Ed. Virmani, S.), pp. 241–248. Patancheru, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Khah, E. M., Roberts, E. H. & Ellis, R. H. (1989). Effects of seed ageing on growth and yield of spring wheat at different plant-population densities. Field Crops Research 20, 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawn, R. J. & Troedson, R. J. (1990). Pigeonpea: physiology of yield formation. In The Pigeonpea (Eds Nene, Y. L., Hall, S. D. & Sheila, V. K.), pp. 179–208. Wallingford, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Lawn, R. J. & Williams, J. H. (1987). Limits imposed by climatological factors. In Food Legume Improvement for Asian Farming Systems (Eds Wallis, E. S. & Byth, D. E.), pp. 83–98. Canberra, Australia: ACIAR.Google Scholar
Mligo, J. K. (1998). Towards an understanding of the adaptation of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] in Tanzania. Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Reading.Google Scholar
Mligo, J. K. & Craufurd, P. Q. (2005). Adaptation and yield of pigeonpea in different environments in Tanzania. Field Crops Research 94, 43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obuo, J. E. & Okurut-Akol, H. (1995). Effect of spacing on yield of two pigeonpea cultivars in Uganda. In Improvement of Pigeonpea in Eastern and Southern Africa: Annual Research Planning Meeting 1994 (Eds Silim, S. N., King, S. B. & Tuwafe, S.), pp. 84–86. Patancheru, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Omanga, P. A., Summerfield, R. J. & Qi, A. (1996). Flowering in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) in Kenya: responses of medium- and late-maturing genotypes to location and date of sowing. Experimental Agriculture 32, 111–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, M. J., Carberry, P. S., Chauhan, Y. S., Ranganathan, R. & O'Leary, G. J. (2001). Predicting growth and development of pigeonpea: a simulation model. Field Crops Research 71, 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silim, S. N., King, S. B. & Tuwafe, S. (1995). Improvement of Pigeonpea in Eastern and Southern Africa: Annual Research Planning Meeting 1994. Patancheru, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Squire, G. R. (1990). The Physiology of Tropical Crop Production. Wallingford, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Wallis, E. S., Byth, D. E. & Whiteman, P. C. (1981). Mechanized dry seed production of pigeonpea. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Pigeonpeas, Vol. 1. (Ed. Virmani, S.), pp. 51–60. Patancheru, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Willey, R. W. & Heath, S. B. (1969). The quantitative relationships between plant populations and crop yield. Advances in Agronomy 21, 281–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar