Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:19:14.248Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Soil, Cultivation History and Weather on Responses of Wheat to Fertilizers in Northern Tanzania

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

G. D. Anderson ,
B. G. Houston  and
P. J. Northwood
G. D. Anderson
Affiliation:
Northern Research Centre, Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Wildlife, Tengeru, P.O. Box 3101, Arusha, Tanzania
B. G. Houston
Affiliation:
Northern Research Centre, Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Wildlife, Tengeru, P.O. Box 3101, Arusha, Tanzania
P. J. Northwood
Affiliation:
Northern Research Centre, Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Wildlife, Tengeru, P.O. Box 3101, Arusha, Tanzania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The nature of the soil, the influence of previous natural grassland, ley, fallow or cultivation, and the weather conditions before and after planting are shown to affect the yield of wheat, and its response to fertilizers, especially nitrogen. Out of seventeen experiments over four seasons, involving nitrogen top-dressings on wheat, thirteen gave economic increases after the application of I cwt per acre of ammonium sulphate nitrate (A.S.N.). Such applications to the first, second or third wheat crops after Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana) ley, or to land continuously cropped for a number of years, nearly always gave an economic increase in grain yield, but on continuously cultivated land, with normal rainfall after planting, an economic return to a second cwt per acre was probable. Following a one-season fallow, economic responses to nitrogen only occurred when the pre-planting period was very wet. Yields of wheat after ley, both with and without applied nitrogen, tended to be superior to those on continuously-cropped land. Responses to phosphorus only occurred in one area, where the importance of applying both N and P, particularly to newly-ploughed grassland, was very evident. Loss of organic matter, and structural deterioration accompanied by lower efficiency in the utilization of water and nitrogen, are probably the main causes of falling yields on soils cultivated for many years. The use of grass/legume leys is suggested as the best means of maintaining these naturally fertile soils in a highly productive state, even though the present returns from the legs themselves may be less profitable than wheat cropping.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , July 1966 , pp. 183 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, G. D. (1964). Proc. 8th Int. Cong. Soil Sci., Bucharest. Comm. 4.Google Scholar
Anderson, G. D. (1965). E. Afric. agric. J. 30, 206.Google Scholar
Anderson, G. D. & Houston, B. G. (1963). Tengeru Rep. 4.Google Scholar
Anderson, G. D. & Houston, B. G. (1964). Tengeru Rep. 9.Google Scholar
Anderson, G. D., Houston, B. G. & Northwood, P. J. (1965). Tengeru Rep. 32 and 34.Google Scholar
Birch, H. F. & Friend, M. T. (1956). J. Soil Sci. 7, 156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, H. F. (1958). Plant and Soil 10, 9.Google Scholar
Birch, H. F. (1959). Plant and Soil 11, 262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, H. F. (1964). Plant and Soil 20, 43.Google Scholar
Bremner, J. M. (1960). J. agric. Sci. 55, 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, G. W. (1964). Fert. Soc. Proc. 80.Google Scholar
Cunningham, R. K. (1963). j. Soil Sci. 14, 334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Hoore, J. (1964). African Soils 9, 65.Google Scholar
Evans, A. C. (1963). E. Afric. agric. j. 28, 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuggles-Couchman, N. R. (1961). Min. Agric. Bull. 19.Google Scholar
Hagenzieker, F. (1957). Plant and Soil 9, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horrell, C. R. (1961). E. Afric. agric. J. 28, 174.Google Scholar
Houston, B. G. (1963). Tengeru Rep. 10.Google Scholar
Houston, B. G. (1965). Tengeru Rep., 38.Google Scholar
Kabaara, A. M. (1964). E. Agric. agric. j. 30, 142.Google Scholar
Le Mare, P. H. (1959). Emp. J. exp. Agric. 27, 197.Google Scholar
Linscott, D. L., Fox, R. L. & Lipps, R. C. (1962). Agron. J. 54, 187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Low, A. J., Piper, F. J. & Roberts, P. (1963). J. agric. Sci. 60, 229.Google Scholar
Meiklejohn, J. (1962). Emp. J. exp. Agric. 30, 115.Google Scholar
Moore, A. W. (1962). Emp. j. exp. Agric. 30, 239.Google Scholar
Moore, A. W. (1963). Plant and Soil. 19, 127.Google Scholar
Naveh, Z. & Anderson, G. D. (1965). S.T.R.C.(O.A.U./F.A.O.) Symposium on Fodder Crops and Follows, Kampala.Google Scholar
Pereira, H. C., Chenery, E. M. & Mills, W. R. (1954). Emp. J. exp. Agric. 22, 148.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. B. (1963). Plant and Soil 19, 173.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. B. D. (1960). J. agric. Sci. 55, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, J. B. D. & Gacoka, P. (1962). J. Soil Sci. 13, 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rounce, N. V. & Milne, G (1936). E Afric. agric. J. 2, 145.Google Scholar
Scow, R. M. (1962). j. Soil Sci. 13, 1.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. R. (1960). J. Soil Sci. 11, 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. M. (1963). Nature, Lond. 200, 222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Der Paauw, F. (1963). Plant and Soil 19, 324.Google Scholar
Viets, Frank G. jr., (1962). Adv. Agnon. 14, 223.Google Scholar
Walkley, A. & Black, I. A. (1934). Soil Sci. 37, 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetselaar, R. (1961). Plant and Soil 15, 110, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetselaar, R. (1962). Plant and Soil 16, 19.Google Scholar