Skip to content

Interactive Effects of Drought-Tolerant Varieties and Fertilizer Microdosing on Maize Yield, Nutrients Use Efficiency, and Profitability in the Sub-Humid Region of Benin

Pierre G. Tovihoudji, B. Moukaïla Bagri, Michel Batamoussi Hermann, Z. E. Henri Tonnang, P. B. Irénikatché Akponikpè

Frontiers in Agronomy March 17, 2022 DOI: 10.3389/fagro.2021.763430 via DOAJ

Summary

AI-generated from the abstract

Combining drought-tolerant maize varieties with fertilizer micro-dosing substantially improved yields and profitability for smallholder farmers in northern Benin. Over two years, micro-dosing increased grain yields by 171% and stover yields by 98% compared to no fertilizer, with the highest micro-dosing rate matching the recommended broadcast rate. Drought-tolerant varieties yielded 19% more than a drought-sensitive variety, and the best combination—the TZE-Y variety with the highest micro-dosing rate—boosted grain yield by 658 kg ha⁻¹ and gross return by $203 USD over the sensitive variety with micro-dosing. Further on-farm testing is needed before precise recommendations can be made.

Study at a glance

Characteristics Field experiment Peer reviewed
Population Drought-tolerant maize varieties and a drought-sensitive maize variety grown in sub-humid northern Benin
Interventions MD2 broadcast fertilizer at recommended rate no fertilizer control
Dose MD1: 25 kg N ha⁻¹ + 4 kg P ha⁻¹; MD2: 25 kg N ha⁻¹ + 8 kg P ha⁻¹; MD3: 35 kg N ha⁻¹ + 8 kg P ha⁻¹; RR: 76 kg N ha⁻¹ + 13 kg P ha⁻¹
Duration 2-year field experiment (2018 and 2019)
Keywords Maize cropping systems Drought-tolerant Fertilizer micro-dosing Resource use efficiency Profitability
Key finding Combining drought-tolerant maize varieties with fertilizer micro-dosing, especially the MD3 option (35 kg N ha⁻¹ + 8 kg P ha⁻¹) on the TZE-Y variety, can optimize maize productivity and profitability in the sub-humid region of Benin.

Abstract

In sub-Saharan Africa, smallholder farming systems continue to record very low yields despite the availability of appropriate crop management technologies. A 2-year field experiment was conducted in 2018 and 2019 at the Agricultural Research Station of Northern Benin to evaluate the growth response, grain yield attributes, and nutrient- and water- use efficiencies of different drought-tolerant (DT) maize varieties (TZEE-W-POP-STR QPM, TZE-Y-POP-STR, 2008Syn-EE-W DT-STR, and 2000Syn-EE-W of 80–90 days cycle), compared to DMR-ESR-W, a drought-susceptible (DS) variety of 90 days cycle, under different fertilizer options [no fertilizer control, microdosing option 1 (MD1, 25 kg N ha−1 + 4 kg P ha−1), option 2 (MD2, 25 kg N ha−1 + 8 kg P ha−1), option 3 (MD3, 35 kg N ha−1 + 8 kg P ha−1), and broadcast fertilizer at recommended rate (RR, 76 kg N ha−1 + 13 kg P ha−1). Generally, combining microdosing with DT varieties showed a very good performance by increasing the leaf area and biomass by 71 and 85%, respectively, at anthesis compared to the conventional practice. Microdosing increases grain and stover yields by 171 and 98%, respectively, compared to an unfertilized control with generally no difference between MD3 and RR treatments. Also, the DT varieties obtained the best yields (+19%), with the highest value observed with the TZE-Y variety. Significant interaction was found between varieties and fertilization for grain and stover yields. During the two cropping seasons, microdose fertilization increases the DT grain yield and gross return by 658 kg ha−1 and 203$USD, respectively, than their application on drought sensitive variety. The results of the current study demonstrated that there is a considerable potential for smallholder farmers of northern Benin to improve the maize productivity by means of DT varieties and of fertilizer microdosing. Using, especially, the MD3 option on the DT variety, TZE-Y, may be the best combination in optimizing the maize production in the sub-humid region of Benin, instead of the climate sensitive variety of the DMR-ESR under the microdosing or a common fertilization practice. However, further testing of the technologies through on-farm experiments are required before a precise advice can be given. Precisely, there is a need to evaluate these management options in farmer's fields, taking into account the climatic, soil, and management conditions to better assess and understand the variation in response and in economic benefits and risk.

Comments

No comments yet.

Log in to comment