Response of maize to copper and sulphur in tropical regions

Ojeniyil, S. O.; Kayode, G. O.

doi:10.1017/s0021859600076450

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are also in agreement with those of Kang and Osiname (1976) in Nigeria, who reported that at all six sites where their experiments were conducted, maize yield response to S was significant only for the first 7.5 kg/ha of S applied. Ojeniyi and Kayode (1993), using rates of S fertilizer ranging from 10 to 80 kg S/ha, found no responses from rates higher than 10 kg S/ha, and reported that only this rate increased maize yields in the year following the application year. Kayode (1990) also reported that 10 kg S/ha was adequate for cowpea [ Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sulfur Nutrition of Maize in Four Regions of Malawi

Weil

Mughogho

2000

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sulfur, though widely deficient in Africa, has received little attention by soil fertility researchers. Shifts to low‐S, high‐analysis fertilizers, continuous cropping, and higher‐yielding varieties may have increased S limitations in maize (Zea mays L.) production. We aimed to characterize maize S nutritional status in farmers’ fields in four regions of Malawi and determine maize response to S. Four 42 to 68 km2 study areas were delineated, two with low‐elevation lacustrine soils, and two with highly weathered residual upland soils. Maize plants in 238 farmer fields were sampled for nutrient analysis at 8‐ to 12‐leaf vegetative and tasseling growth stages. Replicated experiments were conducted in two years on a total of 20 farms to determine maize yield responses to S with and without N and/or P. Sampling areas differed significantly in maize S concentrations, S Diagnosis and Recommendation Integrated System (DRIS) indices, and N:S ratios. For earleaves, means were 1.46 g/kg S; S DRIS index, 12.2; and N:S ratio, 11.5. The ratio of N:S in the earleaf was the best predictor of maize yield response to (R2 5 0.58) Maize yields showed a N × S interaction such that there were no responses to S unless N was also supplied. With 80 kg/ha N, a significant response to S was shown by maize in all but one of 20 experiments. A response curve for S showed that 5 to 10 kg/ha of S was optimal, with mean yield responses ranging from 90 to 142 kg grain/kg S.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sulfur Nutrition of Maize in Four Regions of Malawi

Weil

Mughogho

2000

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The poor soil P status in Zaria, a common feature of many savannah soils (Uyovbisere and Lombin 1991;Buerkert et al 2001;Vanlauwe et al 2002), was confirmed by the low soil Bray-I P at the start of the experiment. Sulphur deficiencies in cereals have also been reported in the savannah, especially in the drier, intensively farmed areas (Kang et al 1981;Friesen 1991;Ojeniyi and Kayode 1993). In Zaria, over the period 2002-2004, mean grain yield declined in all N treatments, despite substantial P and S applications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Assessment of nutrient deficiencies in maize in nutrient omission trials and long-term field experiments in the West African Savanna

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legume-maize rotation and maize nitrogen (N)-response trials were carried out simultaneously from 1998 to 2004 in two distinct agro-ecological environments of West Africa: the humid derived savannah (Ibadan) and the drier northern Guinea savannah (Zaria). In the N-response trial, maize was grown annually receiving urea N at 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 kg N ha -1. In Ibadan, maize production increased with N fertilization, but mean annual grain yield declined over the course of the trial. In Zaria, no response to N treatments was observed initially, and an increase in the phosphorus (P) and sulphur (S) fertilizer application rate was required to increase yield across treatments and obtain a response to N applications, stressing the importance of non-N fertilizers in the savannah. In the rotation trial, a 2-year natural fallowmaize rotation was compared with maize rotated with different legume types: green manure, forage, dualpurpose, and grain legumes. The cultivation of some legume types resulted in a greater annual maize production relative to the fallow-maize combination and corresponding treatments in the N-response trial, while there was no gain in maize yield with other legume types. Large differences in the residual effects from legumes and fallow were also observed between sites, indicting a need for site-specific land management recommendations. In Ibadan, cultivation of maize after the forage legume (Stylosanthes guianensis) achieved the highest yield. The natural fallow-maize rotation had improved soil characteristics (Bray-I P, exchangeable potassium, calcium and magnesium) at the end of the trial relative to legume-maize rotations, and natural fallow resulted in higher maize yields than the green manure legume (Pueraria phaseoloides). In Zaria, maize following dual-purpose soybean achieved the highest mean yield. At both sites, variation in aboveground N and P dynamics of the legume and fallow vegetation could only partly explain the different residual effects on maize.

show abstract

“…Pot and greenhouse experiments, and studies where yields were reported in units per plant without providing data on plant population, as well as publications that reported yields as percentages were excluded as these lacked true productivity information. In some cases, the source of P (e.g., SSP) and sources of micronutrients (e.g., ZnS) contained S. As such, we assumed that if the S contained in the macronutrient control treatment was at least 40 kg S ha −1 , further S in the micronutrient treatment can be ignored since no further response to S is expected (Kang and Osiname 1976;Ojeniyi and Kayode 1993). When no S was included in the macronutrient control treatment, but the micronutrient source also contained S (e.g., in the form of zinc sulfate, in the case of Abbas et al (2007)), we considered this as "combined" rather than single micronutrient response.…”

Section: Data Retrievalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of secondary nutrients and micronutrients increases crop yields in sub-Saharan Africa

Kihara

Sileshi²,

Nziguheba

et al. 2017

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Secondary and micronutrients are important in enhancing crop productivity; yet, they are hardly studied in sub-Sahara Africa. In this region, the main focus has been on macronutrients but there is emerging though scattered evidence of crop productivity limitations by the secondary and micronutrients. Elsewhere, widespread deficiencies of these nutrients are associated with stagnation of yields. Here, we undertake a meta-analysis using 40 articles reporting crop response to secondary and micronutrients to (1) determine the productivity increase of crops and nutrient use efficiency associated with these nutrients, and (2) provide synthesis of responses to secondary nutrients and micronutrients in sub-Sahara Africa. This study used 757 yield data rows (530 from publications and 227 from Africa Soil Information Service) from field trials carried out in SSA between 1969 and 2013 in 14 countries. Data from publications constituted response to S (49.4%), Zn (23.0%), S and micronutrient combinations (11.5%), and <10% each for Cu, Mo, Fe, and B. Data from Africa Soil Information Service were all for S and micronutrient combinations. Of the two sources, most yield data are for maize (73.6%), followed by sorghum (6.7%) and wheat (6.1%) while rice, cowpea, faba bean, tef, and soybean each accounted for less than 5%. The major points are the following: (1) application of S and micronutrients increased maize yield by 0.84 t ha −1 (i.e., 25%) over macronutrient only treatment and achieved agronomic efficiencies (kilograms of grain increase per kilogram of micronutrient added) between 38 and 432 and (2) response ratios were >1 for S and all micronutrients, i.e., the probability of response ratio exceeding 1 was 0.77 for S and 0.83 for Zn, 0.95 for Cu, and 0.92 for Fe, and indicates positive crop response for a majority of farmers. We conclude that S and micronutrients are holding back crop productivity especially on soils where response to macronutrients is low and that more research is needed to unravel conditions under which application of S and micronutrients may pose financial risks.

show abstract

Response of maize to copper and sulphur in tropical regions

Cited by 15 publications

References 7 publications

Sulfur Nutrition of Maize in Four Regions of Malawi

Sulfur Nutrition of Maize in Four Regions of Malawi

Assessment of nutrient deficiencies in maize in nutrient omission trials and long-term field experiments in the West African Savanna

Application of secondary nutrients and micronutrients increases crop yields in sub-Saharan Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About