intercropping strategies under conservation agriculture: africa rising science, innovations and...

Intercropping strategies under CA: Africa RISING science, innovations and technologies with scaling potential from ESA-Zambia Christian Thierfelder (CIMMYT), Geoff Heinrich (CRS), Dale Lewis (COMACO), Mulundu Mwila (ZARI) and Mateete Bekunda (IITA) Key messages Intercropping maize with Gliricidia sepium with no fertilizer provides benefits for the associated maize in the range of 66% Intercropping lablab with maize can generate immediate yield benefits under no fertilization but only if the lablab is intercropped 3 weeks later than maize to reduce competition Intercropping maize with legumes offers many benefits e.g. increased groundcover, weed control, improved soil fertility, fodder, diversification of income and nutrition. This poster is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. January 2017 We thank farmers and local partners in Africa RISING sites for their contributions to this research. We also acknowledge the support of all donors which globally support the work of the CGIAR centers and their partners through their contributions to the CGIAR system Objectives and approach Farmers in eastern Zambia face production constraints due to declining soil fertility, degradation and the negative effects of climate variability and change. To sustainably increase productivity, a range of intercropping options were tested in maize-based conservation agriculture systems including grain legumes, green manures and agro- forestry species. These were tested both on-farm and on-station in replicated trials across farms in Chipata and Lundazi and at the Msekera Research Station in Eastern Zambia. Key results Yield results across farms (n=264) with Gliricidia intercropping systems of different age (e.g. two and four years) on two contrasting soil types showed yield benefits of 66% between unfertilized Gliricidia-maize intercropping and an unfertilized control with sole maize (Figure 1, Picture 1). However, yield benefits were much greater between fertilized maize and the unfertilized control. Maize-lablab intercropping under no fertilization showed greater yield benefits than intercropping with pigeonpea (Figure 2). However this was only significant if the lablab planting was delayed by 3 weeks. Under fertilization there was no difference between treatments (Figure 2) Significance and scaling potential Intercropping may provide cash constrained farmers an option to increase soil fertility without depending on mineral fertilizer only. In conservation agriculture systems, intercropping provides additional benefits (i.e. ground cover, weed control, additional income from intercrops, erosion control, increased nutrition amongst others). Both COMACO and CRS have targeted large numbers of smallholder farmers with different intercropping strategies (>150,000 farmers) and the data generated by Africa RISING will provide the necessary evidence and support these attempts. AB B AB AB A AB a a a a a a 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 maize sole maize/PP maize/lablab 0 days maize/lablab 7 days maize/lablab 21 days maize/cowpea Maize grain yield (kg ha -1 ) no fert fert Figure 2: Integration of green manure cover crops into farming systems, Eastern Zambia b b a a b a a a a a b c b c c 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 2 year loam 2 year sandy clay 4 year loam 4 year sandy clay Overall average Maize grain yield (kg ha -1 ) Gliricidia/maize Maize fertilized Maize unfertilized Figure 1: Effect of Gliricidia sepium intercropping on maize yield without mineral fertilizer, Eastern Zambia Picture 1: Maize-Gliricidia sepium intercropping under CA without mineral fertilizer, Eastern Zambia Photo credit: C. Thierfelder

Upload: africa-rising

Post on 21-Jan-2018

71 views

Category:

Science

1 download

Report

Download

Embed Size (px):

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Intercropping strategies under conservation agriculture: Africa RISING science, innovations and technologies with scaling potential from ESA-Zambia

Intercropping strategies under CA: Africa RISING science, innovations and technologies with scaling potential from ESA-Zambia

Christian Thierfelder (CIMMYT), Geoff Heinrich (CRS), Dale Lewis (COMACO), Mulundu Mwila (ZARI) and Mateete Bekunda (IITA)

Key messages Intercropping maize with Gliricidia sepium with no fertilizer provides

benefits for the associated maize in the range of 66% Intercropping lablab with maize can generate immediate yield

benefits under no fertilization but only if the lablab is intercropped 3 weeks later than maize to reduce competition

Intercropping maize with legumes offers many benefits e.g. increased groundcover, weed control, improved soil fertility, fodder, diversification of income and nutrition.

This poster is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. January 2017

We thank farmers and local partners in Africa RISING sites for their contributions to this research. We also acknowledge the support of all donors which globally support the work of the CGIAR centers and their partners through their contributions to the CGIAR system

Objectives and approachFarmers in eastern Zambia face production constraints due to declining soil fertility, degradation and the negative effects of climate variability and change. To sustainably increase productivity, a range of intercropping options were tested in maize-based conservation agriculture systems including grain legumes, green manures and agro-forestry species. These were tested both on-farm and on-station in replicated trials across farms in Chipata and Lundazi and at the Msekera Research Station in Eastern Zambia.

Key resultsYield results across farms (n=264) with Gliricidia intercropping systems of different age (e.g. two and four years) on two contrasting soil types showed yield benefits of 66% between unfertilized Gliricidia-maize intercropping and an unfertilized control with sole maize (Figure 1, Picture 1). However, yield benefits were much greater between fertilized maize and the unfertilized control.

Maize-lablab intercropping under no fertilization showed greater yield benefits than intercropping with pigeonpea (Figure 2). However this was only significant if the lablab planting was delayed by 3 weeks. Under fertilization there was no difference between treatments (Figure 2)

Significance and scaling potentialIntercropping may provide cash constrained farmers an option to increase soil fertility without depending on mineral fertilizer only. In conservation agriculture systems, intercropping provides additional benefits (i.e. ground cover, weed control, additional income from intercrops, erosion control, increased nutrition amongst others).

Both COMACO and CRS have targeted large numbers of smallholder farmers with different intercropping strategies (>150,000 farmers) and the data generated by Africa RISING will provide the necessary evidence and support these attempts.

BAB AB

400

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

2800

maize sole maize/PP maize/lablab 0days

maize/lablab 7days

maize/lablab21 days

maize/cowpea