Agronomic and economic benefits of integrated nutrient management options for cowpea production

Abstract

The limitation of soil amendments and insufficient and irregular rainfall are the main factors accounting for the decline in crop yields in the Sahelian low-input cropping systems. This study explored the agronomic and economic responses of integrated use of millet glume-derived compost with synthetic fertilizer in cowpea-based cropping system. A two-year field experiment was laid out as factorial design arranged in randomized complete blocks with three rates of compost (0, 4000, and 8000 kg ha−1) and three rates of recommended synthetic fertilizer (0, 50, and 100%). Cowpea grain yield increased markedly with combined application of compost and synthetic fertilizer. The combined use of compost applied at 8000 kg ha−1 and 50% of the recommended rate of synthetic fertilizer increased cowpea grain yield by 51% compared to the application of 100% of the recommended rate of synthetic fertilizer. The rainwater use efficiency (RaUE) increased by 52 and 49% with the combined application of compost at 8000 kg ha−1 along with 50% of the recommended rate of synthetic fertilizer when compared to the application of 100% of the recommended rate of synthetic fertilizer in 2013 and 2014, respectively. All treatments induced a positive net income, and the highest value/cost ratio was achieved with combined application of compost and synthetic fertilizer. This study highlights the possibility of improving cowpea productivity through combined use of composted locally available organic input with half of the recommended rate of synthetic fertilizer. This combination would reduce the investment in mineral fertilizer currently made by smallholder farmers in the Sahelian low-input cowpea cropping system and reduce environmental pollution resulting from the current practice of burning the millet glume.

"Effects of a New Rhizobium-Based Biofertilizer (Fertiriz) on Growth and the Yield of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp)"

“…All fertilized variants, independently of what kind of source (lot) was used, statistically overpassed the absolute control. It coincides with results informed by Jiménez et al [14] and dos Santos et al [30] in common beans, or by Issoufa et al [31] in cowpea, showing the efficiency of the inoculant introduced in the crop compared with chemical fertilizer. In any typical process to produce a biofertilizer, strains selected as inoculants are typically grown at a fermenter scale and used to coat seeds of compatible legume hosts to introduce them into the soil [32].…”

Poverty Alleviation Through Technology-Driven Increases in Crop Production by Smallholder Farmers in Dryland Areas of Sub-Saharan Africa: How Plausible Is This Theory of Change?

“…Without more information on the economic performance of the various interventions once adopted and operated by farmers it is not possible to analyze in detail the contributions any gains might make to household income. However, based on the limited information presented above on one of them (Zai pits), surveys of the literature on the profitability of cropping best practices, e.g., Harris and Orr (2014) and limited data on the performance of various cropping "best practices" in these five countries (Duguma et al, 2010;Mucheru-Muna et al, 2010;Otinga et al, 2013;Badolo, 2017;Elias et al, 2017;Theriault et al, 2018;Issoufa et al, 2020), it is unlikely that even large percentage increases in yield following adoption of improved technologies will significantly increase the income of most households. Crop production increases can improve household food security and nutritional quality and will contribute some progress toward poverty lines, but they are insufficient on their own to take smallholder farmers out of poverty (Gassner et al, 2020).…”