IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v11y2021i10p1002-d655629.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Potential of Termite Mound Spreading for Soil Fertility Management under Low Input Subsistence Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Amsalu Tilahun

    (Department of Natural Resources Management, Jimma University, Jimma P.O. Box 307, Ethiopia)

  • Wim Cornelis

    (Department of Environment, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

  • Steven Sleutel

    (Department of Environment, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

  • Abebe Nigussie

    (Department of Natural Resources Management, Jimma University, Jimma P.O. Box 307, Ethiopia)

  • Bayu Dume

    (Department of Agro-Environmental Chemistry and Plant Nutrition, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food, and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences, Kamycka 129, 16500 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Eric Van Ranst

    (Department of Geology (WE13), Ghent University, Campus Sterre S8, Krijgslaan 281, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

Abstract

Termites can play a localized prominent role in soil nutrient availability and cycling because mound materials are often enriched in nutrients relative to surrounding soil. Mound materials may thus prove to be useful amendments, though evidently mound spatial arrangement needs to be considered as well. Furthermore, it is not known if gradients of soil properties exist from termite mound to interspace sites. Studying both aspects would be required to decide whether spreading of mounds or spatially differentiated management of surrounding crop to accommodate soil fertility gradients would be valid nutrient-management strategies. Mound abundance and mass were estimated at 9 and 4 mounds ha ?1 , representing 38.9 and 6.3 t ha ?1 on Nitisols and Vertisols, respectively. Soil physical and chemical properties were measured on samples collected from internal and external parts of mounds and adjacent soils at 0.5, 1 and 10 m away from mounds. In general, termite mounds were enriched in plant nutrients and SOC on Vertisols but not on Nitisols. Termite mounds constituted only 0.3 to 1.3% of the 0–15 cm SOM stock on a per ha basis but nevertheless the immediate vicinity of termite mounds was a relative fertile hotspot. Hence, under the studied condition, we suggest spatial arrangement of crop around termite mounds according to soil fertility gradient and spatially differentiated nutrient management strategies. Our result suggests recommendation of termite mound spreading for soil nutrient amendment has to consider plant nutrient stock in termite mounds on per ha basis besides their nutrient enrichment. Interesting topics for future investigation would be growth experiment for different crops with mound materials treatment. It would also be interesting to study the effect mound building termite on soil properties under different soil conditions, slope class and land use.

Suggested Citation

  • Amsalu Tilahun & Wim Cornelis & Steven Sleutel & Abebe Nigussie & Bayu Dume & Eric Van Ranst, 2021. "The Potential of Termite Mound Spreading for Soil Fertility Management under Low Input Subsistence Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:10:p:1002-:d:655629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/10/1002/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/11/10/1002/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yanggen, David & Kelly, Valerie A. & Reardon, Thomas & Naseem, Anwar, 1998. "Incentives for Fertilizer Use in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Review of Empirical Evidence on Fertilizer Response and Profitability," Food Security International Development Working Papers 54677, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    2. Keijiro Otsuka & Takashi Yamano, 2005. "The Possibility of a Green Revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Kenya," The Electronic Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, vol. 2(1), pages 7-19.
    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. Sheahan, Megan & Black, Roy & Jayne, T.S., 2013. "Are Kenyan farmers under-utilizing fertilizer? Implications for input intensification strategies and research," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 39-52.
    2. Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Jayne, Thomas & Muyanga, Milu & Sanou, Awa, 2017. "Are African Farmers Experiencing Improved Incentives To Use Fertilizer?," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 270632, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    3. Theriault, Veronique & Smale, Melinda & Haider, Hamza, 2017. "Maize Yield Response to Fertilizer under Differing Agro -Ecological Conditions in Burkina Faso," Food Security International Development Working Papers 263194, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    4. Larson,Donald F. & Muraoka,Rie & Otsuka,Keijiro, 2016. "On the central role of small farms in African rural development strategies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7710, The World Bank.
    5. Jia, Xiangping, 2009. "Synergistic Green and White Revolution: Evidence from Kenya and Uganda," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51367, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Veronique Theriault & Melinda Smale & Hamza Haider, 2018. "Economic incentives to use fertilizer on maize under differing agro-ecological conditions in Burkina Faso," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(5), pages 1263-1277, October.
    7. Clay, Daniel C. & Kelly, Valerie A. & Mpyisi, Edson & Reardon, Thomas, 2001. "Input Use and Conservation Investments among Farm Households in Rwanda: Patterns and Determinants," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 57053, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    8. Jayne, T.S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Burke, William J. & Ariga, Joshua, 2016. "Agricultural Input Subsidy Programs In Africa: An Assessment Of Recent Evidence," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 259509, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    9. Omonona, B. T. & Liverpool-Tasie, L. S. O. & Sanou, A. & Ogunleye, W. O., 2019. "Is Fertilizer Use Inconsistent With Profitability? Evidence From Sorghum Production In Nigeria," Nigerian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Nigerian Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 9(01), October.
    10. Murathi Kiratu, Nixon, 2014. "An Assessment of the Impact of Kilimo Plus Subsidy Program on Smallholder Farmers' Food Security and Income in Nakuru North District, Kenya," Research Theses 243470, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    11. Donovan, Cynthia & Damaseke, M. & Govereh, Jones & Simumba, D., 2000. "Framework and Initial Analyses of Fertilizer Profitability in Maize and Cotton in Zambia," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 54460, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    12. Evita Pangaribowo & Nicolas Gerber & Pascal Tillie, 2013. "Assessing the FNS impacts of technological and institutional innovations and future innovation trends," FOODSECURE Working papers 11, LEI Wageningen UR.
    13. Tahirou Abdoulaye & John H. Sanders, 2005. "Stages and determinants of fertilizer use in semiarid African agriculture: the Niger experience," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(2), pages 167-179, March.
    14. Kijima, Yoko & Ito, Yukinori & Otsuka, Keijiro, 2010. "On the Possibility of a Lowland Rice Green Revolution in Sub-Saharan Africa:," Working Papers 25, JICA Research Institute.
    15. Bumb, Balu L. & Fuentes, Porfirio A. & Johnson, Michael E., 2011. "Policy options for improving regional fertilizer markets in West Africa:," IFPRI discussion papers 1084, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    16. Traub, Lulama Ndibongo & Jayne, Thomas S., 2004. "The Effects of Market Reform on Maize Marketing Margins in South Africa," Food Security International Development Working Papers 54570, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    17. Abdoulaye, Tahirou & Sanders, John H., 2006. "New technologies, marketing strategies and public policy for traditional food crops: Millet in Niger," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-3), pages 272-292, October.
    18. Yoko KIJIMA & Dick SSERUNKUUMA & Keijiro OTSUKA, 2006. "How Revolutionary Is The “Nerica Revolution”? Evidence From Uganda," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 44(2), pages 252-267, June.
    19. Moradeyo Adebanjo Otitoju & Dennis D. Ochimana, 2016. "Determinants of farmers’ access to fertilizer under fertilizer task force distribution system in Kogi State, Nigeria," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1225347-122, December.
    20. Estelle Koussoubé & Céline Nauges, 2017. "Returns to fertiliser use: Does it pay enough? Some new evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(2), pages 183-210.

    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:gam:jagris:v:11:y:2021:i:10:p:1002-:d:655629. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.