Search

Organic amendments can reportedly sustain and increase lowland rice productivity in smallholder systems. Few studies have assessed locally-available substrates in hydrologically variable floodplain environments. We investigated the effects of green and farmyard manures on rice yields, and total soil C and N in the Kilombero floodplain, Tanzania. At both the fringe and the middle positions, five treatments were applied in 2016 and 2017, comprising (1) non-amended control, (2) farmyard manure, (3) pre-rice legumes, (4) post-rice legumes and (5) a combination of green and farmyard manures. Residual treatment effects were assessed in 2018 when rice plots were uniformly non-amended. Depending on the year and the position, organic amendments increased rice grain yields by 0.7–3.1 Mg ha–1 above the non-amended control. Sole green and farmyard manure applications had similar effects on grain yield, while a combination of green and farmyard manure led to a significant increase in grain yield above both the control and sole applications of organic amendments in both years. The contribution from biological N2 fixation by legumes ranged from 4 to 61 kg N ha–1. Despite partial N balances being mostly negative, we observed positive residual effects on the yield of the non-amended rice in the third year. Such effects reached up to 4 Mg ha−1 and were largest with post-rice legumes, sole or combined with farmyard manure. Irrespective of the position in the floodplain, manures significantly increased soil C and N contents after two years, hence enhancing soil fertility and resulting in increased rice grain yields. Comparable benefits may be obtained along the hydrological gradients of other large river floodplains of the region and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To meet the growing rice demand in Africa, gaps between actual and attainable yields have to be reduced. In Tanzania, this particularly concerns smallholder rain-fed production systems in the floodplains. After quantifying the existing yield gaps, key contributing factors need to be analyzed to improve site-specific management. Field experiments were conducted for three years and in three pedo-hydrological environments (fringe, middle, and center positions) of the Kilombero floodplain to evaluate: (1) The grain yield under farmers' management (actual yield), (2) yield with the best-recommended management (attainable yield), and (3) the non-limited yield simulated by the APSIM model (potential yield). In the field, we additionally assessed incremental effects of (1) field bunding and soil levelling, (2 and 3) additionally applying of 60 kg N ha−1, as urea or as farmyard manure (FYM), and (4 and 5) incorporating in-situ-grown leguminous green manures. Attainable yields were determined with mineral N application at 120 kg ha−1, additional PK fertilizer and supplemental irrigation. On average across years and positions, the potential, the attainable, and farmers' actual yields were 11.5, 8.5, and 2.8 t ha−1 indicating a high total yield gap. About 16–38%, 11–20%, and 28–42% of this gap could be attributed to non-controllable yield-reducing (i.e., pest and diseases), yield-limiting (i.e., water and nutrient deficiencies), and yield-defining factors (i.e., poor soil and crop management), respectively. Results indicate a closure of the exploitable yield gap (differences between attainable and farmers' actual yields) by up to 6.5 t ha−1 (nearly 60% of the potential yield). This exploitable yield gap was larger in 2016 than in 2017. Also, the gap was larger in the water-limited fringe and middle than in the frequently submerged center positions. Simple field bunds combined with land levelling could close 15–35% of the exploitable yield gap, depending on field positions and year. FYM or green manures were less effective than mineral N; however, in 2017 and in the wetter middle and center positions, they reduced the yield gap by >50%. We conclude that yield gaps in rainfed rice in Kilombero floodplain are large, but that a site- and system-specific adaptation of crop management can close much of the exploitable yield gap and increase grain yields by 0.7–4.8 t ha−1. Similar benefits may be obtained in other hydrologically variable floodplain environments of the region and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In East Africa, smallholder farmers produce rainfed lowland rice mainly in floodplains. Low nitrogen contents of the predominant Fluvisols and highly variable hydrological conditions result in low yields and large yield variations, and hence, result in high production risks for farmers. We investigated crop management strategies aimed at increasing yield and reducing yield variability. The field trials were carried out in the Kilombero floodplain near Ifakara in Tanzania, in three hydrological zones (potentially drought-prone fringe, favorable middle and submergence-prone center positions) over three years. The study compared farmers' management practices (no field levelling and bunding, no fertilizer input), with the effect of bunding and levelling alone, or in combination with mineral N use at 0 (bunding), 60 (recommended rate) and 120 kg + 60 kg PK ha−1 (attainable yield). Rice mean grain yields (averaged over the four treatments) were higher in the fringe (6.5 t ha−1) and the middle (5.7 t ha−1) than in the center positions (4.6 t ha−1). Farmers' practice resulted in lowest yield (3.0 t ha−1) and highest yield variability, with an adjusted coefficient of variation (aCV) of up to 91% between fields, years and positions. Simple bunding of the plots and field levelling increased yields by 40% above farmers' practice, particularly in the fringe and middle positions, while reducing yield variation (aCV of 36–61%). Mineral N application resulted in the highest yields (7.0 t ha−1) and further reduced yield variation (aCV of 14–27%). However, only in bunded fields of the floodplain fringe rice could benefit from N application beyond 60 kg ha−1, while mineral N use efficiency was lower in middle and center positions. Improved crop management options are most beneficial in floodplain fringe positions, where they can increase yields and reduce production risks. Due to low yield, high production risks and poor responsiveness to management interventions, the center may be taken out of rice production and could be considered for future use as protection zones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]