Balanced fertilization based on indigenous soil nutrient status and crop demand is imperative for efficient nutrient management and enhancing crop yield. A field experiment was conducted at Kersa District, Southwestern Ethiopia during 2019/20 cropping season to determine the effects of nutrient combinations on nutrient recovery fraction, physiological efficiency and economic benefits of maize. The treatments includes T1 [Control], T2 [NP], T3 [PKS (-N)], T4 [NKS (-P)], T5 [NPS (-K)], T6 [NPK (-S)], T7 [NPKS], T8 [NPKSZn (-B)], T9 [NPKSB (-Zn)] and T10 [NPKSZnB]. The treatments were arranged in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications each. Maize grain yield, total (grain + straw) nutrient concentration and economic of fertilizer use were analyzed during experimentation. The data were analyzed using SAS 9.0 version software. The results indicated that grain yield, biomass yield and nutrient recovery fractions of maize responded significantly due to different mineral fertilizer combinations. Accordingly the maximum grain yield (8702.6kg ha-1) and biomass yield (20.1tha-1) were obtained from T8 treated with (N120 P40 K40 S20 Zn5 kgha-1), while the lowest grain yield (2028.5 kgha-1 and 2793.5 kgha-1) and biomass yield (5.6 tha-1 and 7.2 tha-1) were recorded from control and N-omitted plots, respectively. Compared with NP and control plots, application of NPKSZn produced 76.6% and 29.8% yield advantages, respectively. The maximum apparent recovery fraction of each nutrient was obtained from application of N120 P40 K40 S20 Zn5 kgha-1. Economic analysis showed, this treatment generate the highest net benefit of 80,364 ETB ha-1 (1$=42Birr) with acceptable marginal rate of return (MRR) (486.35%). Therefore, incorporating Zn with in major macronutrients (NPKS) is more important to increase maize production in the study area.
| Published in | American Journal of Applied Scientific Research (Volume 8, Issue 3) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12 |
| Page(s) | 44-51 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Grain Yield, Economic Use, Nutrient Combination, Physiological Efficiency, Recovery Efficiency
| [1] | Alloway, B. J. (2008). Zinc in Soils and crop nutrition: International fertilizer industry association. 2nd edition, IZA and IFA Brussels, Belgium and Paris, France, pp 1-135. |
| [2] | CIMMYT Economics Program, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center. (1988). from agronomic data to farmer recommendations: an economics training manual (No. 27). CIMMYT. |
| [3] | CSA World Food Program and the Central Statistical Authority. (2019). Compressive food security and vulnerability analysis (CFSVA) in Ethiopia. |
| [4] | Fageria NK, Slaton NA. and Baligar VC. (2003). Nutrient management for improving lowland rice productivity and sustainability. Advances in agronomy. Jan 1; 80 (1): 63-152. |
| [5] | FAO Food and Agricultural Organization. (2018). Small family farms country factsheet. Full text available at: http://www.fao.org/3/i8911en/I8911EN.pdf |
| [6] | Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. (1984). Statistical procedures for agricultural research. |
| [7] | Gondek K., Gondek A. (2010). The influence of mineral fertilization on the yield and the content of the selected macro and microelements in spring wheat. J. Res. Appl. Agric. Eng., 55 (1), 30. |
| [8] | Holden, S., Shiferaw, B. and Pender J. (2004). Non-farm income, household welfare and sustainable land management in a less-favored area in the Ethiopian highlands. Food policy, 29 (4), 369-392. |
| [9] | Howarth J. R., Parmar S., Jones J., Shepherd C. E., Corol D. I., Galster A. M., Hawkins N. D., Miller S. J., Baker J. M., Verrier P. J., Ward J. L., Beale M. H., Barraclough P. B., Hawkes ford M. J. (2008). Co-ordinated expression of amino acid metabolism in response to N and S deficiency during wheat grain filling. J. Exp. Bot., 59 (13), 3675. |
| [10] | Jones, C., Olson, R and Dinkins, C. (2011). Nutrient uptake timing by crops: to assist with fertilizing decisions. Montana State University, pp 2-8). |
| [11] | Khan, H. R., Faize S. M. A, Islam M. N., Adachi T., and Ahmad I. U. (1992). Effect of salinity, gypsum and Zn on mineral nutrition of rice. Inter. J. Trop. Agric. 10 (2): 147-156. |
| [12] | Kurwakumire N., Chikowo R., Mtambanengwe F., Mapfumo P., Snapp S., Johnston A. and Zingore S. (2014). Maize productivity, nutrient, and water use efficiencies across soil fertility domains on smallholder farms in Zimbabwe. Field Crops Research. pp. 164: 136-147. |
| [13] | Malakouti, M. J. (2008). The effect of micronutrients in ensuring efficient use of macronutrients. Turk J. Agric., 32: 215-220. |
| [14] | Mortvedt JJ. (1994). Needs for controlled-availability micronutrient fertilizers. Fertilizer research. Jan 1; 38 (3): 213-21. |
| [15] | Mosier, A., Syers, J and Freney J. (2004). Agriculture and the nitrogen cycle. Assessing the impacts of fertilizer use on food production and the environment. Scope-65. Island Press, London, pp 193-207. |
| [16] | Potarzycki J. (2003). Single Superphosphate as a Source of S for Spring Barley. Ii. N And S Utilization from Fertilizers. Nawozy Nawoż.-Fert. Fertil., 4 (17), 193. |
| [17] | Rao KV. (2014). Research themes-Site–specific integrated nutrient management for sustainable rice production and growth. Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, India: Rice Knowledge Management Portal (RKMP), Directorate of Rice Research. Field Crops Res. 157: 27 – 34. |
| [18] | Rapsomanikis G. (2015). The economic lives of smallholder farmers: An analysis based on household data from nine countries. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. |
| [19] | SAS (Statistical Analysis System). (2012). SAS 9.3 Macro Language: Reference. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. |
| [20] | Shiferaw, B., Mulugeta, H., Atinafu, A. and Abay A. (2018). Macro and micro nutrients for optimizing maize production at Hawassa Zuria District, Southern Ethiopia. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Health, 8 (5), 27-31. |
| [21] | Srinivasarao, Ch., Vittal, K. P. R., Venkateswarlu, B., Wani, S. P., Sahrawat, K. L., Marimuthu, S and Kundu S. (2009). Carbon stocks in different soils under diverse rain fed systems in tropical India. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 40: 2338–2356. |
| [22] | Sultana S, Kashem MA, Mollah AK. (2015). Comparative assessment of cow manure vermicompost and NPK fertilizers and on the growth and production of Zinnia (Zinnia elegans) Flower. Open Journal of Soil Science.; 5 (09): 193. |
| [23] | Tesfaye B., Rurinda, J., Kebede, M., Mutegi, J., Hailu, G., Tufa, T. and Sida T. S. (2019). Yield response and nutrient use efficiencies under different fertilizer applications in maize (Zea mays L.) in contrasting agro ecosystems. Int. J. Plant & Soil Sci, 29 (3), 1-19. |
| [24] | Wilkinson, S. R., D. L. Grunes, and M. E. Sumner. (2000). Nutrient interactions in soil and plant nutrition. In: Handbook of soil science, M. E. Sumner, Ed., 89–112. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. |
| [25] | Woldeyesus S., Ralph G. and Anton E. (2004). Genotypic variation for nitrogen use efficiency in Ethiopian barley, Field Crop Research, 85: 43-60. |
| [26] | Wondwosen T. and Sheleme B. (2011). Identification of growth limiting nutrient (s) in Alfisols: Soil physico-chemical properties, nutrient concentrations and biomass yield of maize. American Journal of plant nutrition and fertilization technology. 1 (1), pp. 23-35. |
| [27] | Worldometer. (2019). Elaboration of data by United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2019 Revision. (Medium-fertility variant). Worldometer (www.Worldometers.info). |
APA Style
Habetamu Getinet. (2022). Nutrient Recovery Efficiency and Economics of Fertilizer Use of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Determined by Nutrient Combinations in Jimma Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia. American Journal of Applied Scientific Research, 8(3), 44-51. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12
ACS Style
Habetamu Getinet. Nutrient Recovery Efficiency and Economics of Fertilizer Use of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Determined by Nutrient Combinations in Jimma Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia. Am. J. Appl. Sci. Res. 2022, 8(3), 44-51. doi: 10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12,
author = {Habetamu Getinet},
title = {Nutrient Recovery Efficiency and Economics of Fertilizer Use of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Determined by Nutrient Combinations in Jimma Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia},
journal = {American Journal of Applied Scientific Research},
volume = {8},
number = {3},
pages = {44-51},
doi = {10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajasr.20220803.12},
abstract = {Balanced fertilization based on indigenous soil nutrient status and crop demand is imperative for efficient nutrient management and enhancing crop yield. A field experiment was conducted at Kersa District, Southwestern Ethiopia during 2019/20 cropping season to determine the effects of nutrient combinations on nutrient recovery fraction, physiological efficiency and economic benefits of maize. The treatments includes T1 [Control], T2 [NP], T3 [PKS (-N)], T4 [NKS (-P)], T5 [NPS (-K)], T6 [NPK (-S)], T7 [NPKS], T8 [NPKSZn (-B)], T9 [NPKSB (-Zn)] and T10 [NPKSZnB]. The treatments were arranged in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications each. Maize grain yield, total (grain + straw) nutrient concentration and economic of fertilizer use were analyzed during experimentation. The data were analyzed using SAS 9.0 version software. The results indicated that grain yield, biomass yield and nutrient recovery fractions of maize responded significantly due to different mineral fertilizer combinations. Accordingly the maximum grain yield (8702.6kg ha-1) and biomass yield (20.1tha-1) were obtained from T8 treated with (N120 P40 K40 S20 Zn5 kgha-1), while the lowest grain yield (2028.5 kgha-1 and 2793.5 kgha-1) and biomass yield (5.6 tha-1 and 7.2 tha-1) were recorded from control and N-omitted plots, respectively. Compared with NP and control plots, application of NPKSZn produced 76.6% and 29.8% yield advantages, respectively. The maximum apparent recovery fraction of each nutrient was obtained from application of N120 P40 K40 S20 Zn5 kgha-1. Economic analysis showed, this treatment generate the highest net benefit of 80,364 ETB ha-1 (1$=42Birr) with acceptable marginal rate of return (MRR) (486.35%). Therefore, incorporating Zn with in major macronutrients (NPKS) is more important to increase maize production in the study area.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Nutrient Recovery Efficiency and Economics of Fertilizer Use of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Determined by Nutrient Combinations in Jimma Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia AU - Habetamu Getinet Y1 - 2022/07/13 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12 DO - 10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12 T2 - American Journal of Applied Scientific Research JF - American Journal of Applied Scientific Research JO - American Journal of Applied Scientific Research SP - 44 EP - 51 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2471-9730 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajasr.20220803.12 AB - Balanced fertilization based on indigenous soil nutrient status and crop demand is imperative for efficient nutrient management and enhancing crop yield. A field experiment was conducted at Kersa District, Southwestern Ethiopia during 2019/20 cropping season to determine the effects of nutrient combinations on nutrient recovery fraction, physiological efficiency and economic benefits of maize. The treatments includes T1 [Control], T2 [NP], T3 [PKS (-N)], T4 [NKS (-P)], T5 [NPS (-K)], T6 [NPK (-S)], T7 [NPKS], T8 [NPKSZn (-B)], T9 [NPKSB (-Zn)] and T10 [NPKSZnB]. The treatments were arranged in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications each. Maize grain yield, total (grain + straw) nutrient concentration and economic of fertilizer use were analyzed during experimentation. The data were analyzed using SAS 9.0 version software. The results indicated that grain yield, biomass yield and nutrient recovery fractions of maize responded significantly due to different mineral fertilizer combinations. Accordingly the maximum grain yield (8702.6kg ha-1) and biomass yield (20.1tha-1) were obtained from T8 treated with (N120 P40 K40 S20 Zn5 kgha-1), while the lowest grain yield (2028.5 kgha-1 and 2793.5 kgha-1) and biomass yield (5.6 tha-1 and 7.2 tha-1) were recorded from control and N-omitted plots, respectively. Compared with NP and control plots, application of NPKSZn produced 76.6% and 29.8% yield advantages, respectively. The maximum apparent recovery fraction of each nutrient was obtained from application of N120 P40 K40 S20 Zn5 kgha-1. Economic analysis showed, this treatment generate the highest net benefit of 80,364 ETB ha-1 (1$=42Birr) with acceptable marginal rate of return (MRR) (486.35%). Therefore, incorporating Zn with in major macronutrients (NPKS) is more important to increase maize production in the study area. VL - 8 IS - 3 ER -
Information
Email: