IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ccsesa/230292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Tillage Practices for Maize (Zea mays) Grown on Different Land-Use Systems in Eastern Zambia

Author

Listed:
  • Mafongoya, Paramu
  • Jiri, Obert
  • Phophi, Mutondwa

Abstract

Improved fallows of Sesbania sesban (Sesbania) have been known to improve soil physical and chemical properties and increase crop yield compared to traditional fallows. However, the effects of soil tillage practices after improved fallows on soil properties, weeds, labour and subsequent maize crop have not been assessed in Southern Africa. This study aimed to evaluate how tillage practices affect yield of maize and affect soil properties after two years of fallow and subsequent cropping phase. In this study, done at sites in eastern Zambia, maize yield from a two-year planted Sesbania, natural fallow, continuously fertilized and unfertilized maize were compared under conventional, flat till and zero tillage practices. A split plot experiment, with improved fallow systems in the main plot and the tillage practice in the subplot, was established at the sites. The results showed that the increases in grain yield under conventional tillage over zero tillage practice were 17.8% and 28.2% during 2000/2001 and 2001/2002 seasons, respectively, at Msekera. At Chadiza, the increases in grain yield under conventional tillage over zero tillage were 66.3% and 327.4% during 2000/2001 and 2001/2002 seasons, respectively. Greater maize yields were achieved under Sesbania planted fallows compared to the natural fallow and maize monoculture without fertilizer. Overall, zero tillage practice resulted in lower maize grain yield, higher bulk density, reduced water intake, higher weed infestation and high labour demand during weeding compared to conventional tillage.

Suggested Citation

  • Mafongoya, Paramu & Jiri, Obert & Phophi, Mutondwa, 2015. "Evaluation of Tillage Practices for Maize (Zea mays) Grown on Different Land-Use Systems in Eastern Zambia," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ccsesa:230292
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.230292
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/230292/files/P2-p10-23.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.230292?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kwesiga, Freddie & Franzel, Steven & Mafongoya, Paramu & Ajayi, Olu & Phiri, Donald & Katanga, Roza & Kuntashula, Elias & Place, Frank & Chirwa, Teddy, 2005. "Improved fallows in Eastern Zambia: history, farmer practice and impacts," EPTD discussion papers 130, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John N. Ng’ombe, 2017. "Technical efficiency of smallholder maize production in Zambia: a stochastic meta-frontier approach," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(4), pages 347-365, October.
    2. Michael Jacobson & Cori Ham, 2020. "The (un)broken promise of agroforestry: a case study of improved fallows in Zambia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 8247-8260, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ccsesa:230292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ccsenet.org/sar .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.