The Agronomy of Tef

918 views
802 views

Published on

International Food Policy Research Institute/ Ethiopia Strategy Support Program and Ethiopian Development Research Institute co-organized a full day conference on Teff value chain with Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research and Agriculutural Transformation Agency on October 10, 2013 at Hilton Hotel

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
918
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
30
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • <number>
  • <number>
  • <number>
  • The Agronomy of Tef

    1. 1. The Agronomy of Tef By Solomon Chanyalew and Kebebew Assefa 10 October, 2013 Addis Ababa
    2. 2. Outline   Past research findings/recommendations Results of two seasons experiments       Sowing method by seed rate Planting method Planting depth and row spacing Spacing trial for hill planting Tentative recommendations Advantages of row planting
    3. 3. 1. Past research findings/recommendations  Tef is cultivated in much the same way as wheat and barley  Depending on the location and maturity of the cultivar tef is grown during the main growing season between July and November, and also during the small rainy season (Belg)  It is mainly cultivated as a monocrop, but occasionally under a multiple cropping system (intercroped with rapeseed, safflower and sunflower or relay-cropped with maize and sorghum  It is also cropped sequentially in a crop-rotation system in the mid- and high-altitude areas after chickpea, field pea and
    4. 4. Past research recommendations….(cont’d)  Seed bed preparation: tef field is ploughed two to five times depending on the soil type, weed conditions and waterlogging.  Heavy clay soils and fields with high weed populations receive ploughing more frequently than loam or sandy soils and those with fewer weeds.  Vertisols in areas where there is a problem of waterlogging are ploughed more than those without in order to open drainage furrows.
    5. 5. Past research recommendations….(cont’d) Under most farmers production system, tef seeds are sown on the surface of the soil and left uncovered or sometimes covered very lightly   Under moisture stress conditions packing the seedbed before sowing promotes germination and increases grain yield through increasing stand establishment  Vertisols that suffer from soil crusting moderate packing of the seedbed is useful to enhance stand establishment
    6. 6. Past research recommendations….(cont’d) Seedbed packing is done before sowing tef to make the  seedbed firm, prevent the soil surface from drying quickly, assist germination of seeds and to free the seedbed from weeds.  No additional positive advantage from packing the seedbed in areas with a reliable and sufficient amount of rainfall  Planting depth: Good emergence from depth of 5-20 mm than surface or dipper than 20 mm Tef germinates and establishes faster on Andosols than on Vertisols 
    7. 7. Past research recommendations….(cont’d)  Seed rate: 15-50 kg of seeds are sown/ha under different conditions  25-30 kg/ha seeds are recommended for broadcast sowing  Could be done with lower seed rate if a manually or motordriven broadcaster or drill is available.
    8. 8. Past research recommendations….(cont’d)  Fertilizer application: Systematic studies on the fertilizer requirements of tef under varying conditions and in various regions need further investigation  60kgN and 26kgP2O5 (Vertisols) and 40kgN and 26kg P2O5kg per ha (Andosols)  Weeding: It is best to start with a weed-free and clean field and with clean tef seeds  Hand-weeding once at early tillering stage is ideal and adequate, if the weed population is low  Second weeding at stem-elongation stage should be done if the infestation is high
    9. 9. Past research recommendations….(cont’d)  Pre-sowing and post-emergence herbicides available for the control of weeds  Weed competition causes about 52% crop losses In general, the use of improved and appropriate agronomic practices and cropping systems would greatly contribute to overcoming production constraints and improving the productivity of tef.
    10. 10. 2. Results of two seasons experiments No. Activities Methodology Location 1 Sowing method and RCBD, with 3 rep& 12 seed rate trial entry, plot=9m2 3 2 Planting method RCBD with 3 rep & 10 entry, plot size =9m2 3 3 Planting depth & row spacing RCBD with 3 rep & 12 entry, plot size=9m2 1 4 Spacing by hill planting trial RCBD with 3rep & 12 entry plot size=9m2 1
    11. 11. 2.1. Sowing method by seed rate  No significant differences among the treatment combinations observed for all traits assessed  Although not significantly different, row sowing with 20 cm row spacing at 20 kg/ha of seed rate resulted in the highest grain yield (2.6 t) followed by 25 kg/ha row sowing (2.5 t/ha)  Broadcasting at 25kg/ha gave the highest shoot biomass yield (17.4 t/ha)
    12. 12. Table 1. Sowing methods by seed rate at Debre Zeit during the 2011-2013 main season( combined over two years) PAL Lodging index Shoot Biomass (Kg/ha) Grain Yield(Kg/ha) 46.83 45.77 48.63 49.07 48.13 49.27 45.2 49 49.37 48.63 49.03 49.1 109.03 105.93 116.87 115.3 115.2 112.07 105.9 113.47 115.57 116.6 118.87 115.2 68.83 56 64.33 71.17 73.83 73.83 68.67 64.5 69.83 76 75.33 70.83 8861 8079 13625 14694 16824 17375 7255 10542 14069 16111 16810 16727 1709.6 1701.5 2398 2397.2 2467.4 2364.8 1403.2 1754.5 2343.9 2411.5 2622.4 2528.3 48.37 48.02 114.29 112.37 69.03 69.83 13711.42 13117.29 2267 2083.09 Means of seed rates( over all sowing methods )treatments 2.5 106 48.85 5 106 47.17 10 105 48 15 105 48.47 20 106 48.02 25 106 48.67 Mean 106 48.19 SEM(±) 0.51 0.35 LSD (P = 0.05) 0.0722 0.9242 115.98 111.93 112.45 111.05 113.02 115.57 113.3 0.91 0.9054 68.58 73.25 70.75 68.67 64.00 71.33 69.43 1.3 0.1910 14562.51 13664.35 12312.5 11641.21 12923.61 15381.94 13414.35 727.84 0.8792 2365.1 2190.75 2110.83 2084.35 2013.7 2286.4 2175.19 79.94 0.9966 CV 6.24 14.84 27.75 23.71 Treatments Sowing methods DTM Seed rate(kg/ha) Broad casting 2.5 105 5 106 10 106 15 106 20 105 25 106 Row sowing 2.5 106 5 105 10 106 15 105 20 105 25 106 Means of sowing method(over all Seed rats) Broad casting 106 Row sowing 105 1.41 PH 6.08
    13. 13. Sowing method by seed rate
    14. 14. Row planted and not lodged Row planted and partly lodged
    15. 15. 2.2. Planting method experiment  Uniform seed rate of 5 kg/ha for broadcasting and row sowing and 3 seeds/hill for hill planting  Significant differences were observed for Shoot biomass and grain yield  Row sowing with 10 cm row spacing at 5 kg/ha seed rate showed the highest grain yield and shoot biomass  Transplanting (20cm b/n rowsx15cm b/n plant) showed the lowest lodging index values (Table15)
    16. 16. 2.2. Planting method experiment Treatment LOGI SB kg/ha Broadcasting @ 5 kg/ha RS@5with 20 cm row spacing RS@5with 15 cm row spacing RS@5with 10cm row spacing Hill planting (3seeds)(20cm x 20cm) Hill planting (3seeds) (20 cm x 15cm) Hill planting (3seeds)(20cm x10 cm) 64.83 72.33 67.50 71.33 64.00 59.5 65.00 16903 19653 17273 21861 8495 6440 9870 Gy (kg/ha) 2489.8 2440.6 2320.0 2621.3 1505.7 1344.6 1613.3 Transplanting (20cmb/n rowsx10cm b/n plant) 49.00 15468 2208.9 Transplanting (20 cm b/n rows x15cm b/n plants) Transplanting (20cmb/nrowsx20cm b/n plants) LSD P(0.05) CV %) SEM (±) Mean 46.33 56.33 0.0342 20.77 2.03 61.62 13532 12722 <0.0001 37.33 1169.31 14221.76 2236.9 2181.7 0.0001 23.47 84.36 2096.28
    17. 17. Results of Planting Method Experiment
    18. 18. Lodging incidence as affected by planting methods
    19. 19. Early stage Grain filling stage
    20. 20. 2.3. Planting depth and row spacing Results:  Uniform seed rate of 5 kg/ha was used.  No significant differences were observed for recorded traits among treatment combinations.  Highest grain yields were obtained from treatment combinations of and highest 20 cm row spacing at 3 cm sowing depth shoot biomass was obtained from treatment combination of 10 cm row spacing at 3cm depth .  Regarding sowing depth, 0 cm and 3 cm appeared appropriate but deeper sowing resulted in poor stand establishment
    21. 21. Table 3. Mean Lodging index ,and shoot biomass and grain yield of tef as affected by row spacing and planting depth on black soil at Debre Zeit during the 2011-2013 main season Treatments Row Spacing 10 DTM PAL PLH Lodging index SB (Kg/ha) GY (Kg/ha) 106.6 106.5 110.97 108.57 110.3 108.83 101.43 106.03 105.97 111.57 102.63 106.23 73.33 68.17 74.67 66.83 69.33 68 64.33 69.83 67.83 80.17 65.83 69.83 14620 15653 14093 13167 12736 13949 12394 13741 12685 12218 11417 10093 2277 1979.3 2149.6 2011.3 1866.7 1811.7 2130.4 2404.3 2291.9 1866.7 1712.6 1416.3 105.67 108.88 106.87 69.75 68.54 71.25 13100.69 13369.21 12721.06 2066.76 1925.00 1995.05 107.14 0.8 68.78 72.67 70.78 67.12 69.85 1.03 12396.60 13598.77 13473.77 12785.49 13063.66 907.83 1922.96 1973.77 2060.56 2025.12 1995.602 67.18 0.9196 5.87 0.41 10.68 0.9316 23.95 0.6983 25.84 Sowing Depth 0 104.33 46.1 3 104.33 44.9 5 103.17 47.53 15 0 104 45.8 3 104 47.43 5 104 45.37 20 0 103.83 45.07 3 104 47.5 5 104.67 45.97 25 0 104 45.63 3 104 46.03 5 104 45.17 Means of sowing depth(over all row –spacing) 0 104.25 45.58 3 103.96 46.06 5 103.88 46.48 Means of Row Spacing( over all Sowing depth )treatments 10 103.72 46.4 15 104.06 46.02 20 104.22 45.61 25 104.11 46.13 Mean 104..028 46.04 SEM(±) 0.33 0.32 LSD (P<0.05) 0.6864 0.1786 CV 1.29 5.85
    22. 22. Results of Row Spacing by Planting Depth
    23. 23. 2.4. Spacing trial for hill planting Results:  Statistically significant differences (P≤0.05) among treatments were observed for lodging index, shoot biomass and grain yield  Highest shoot biomass yield (10259 kg/ha) was obtained from 10 cm row spacing by 5 cm intra-row spacing treatment  15 cm row spacing X 5 cm and intra row spacing gave highest (2965 kg/ha) grain yield compared to other treatments.
    24. 24. Table 4. Mean lodging index, shoot biomass and grain yield of tef as affected by inter- and intra-row spacing on black soil at Debre Zeit during the 2011/12 main season Treatments Inter-row spacing (cm) 10 15 20 Lodging index Grain yield (kg/ha) 86.00 77.0 69.33 63.33 76.00 70.00 65.00 61.00 76.00 64.67 59.00 54.67 10259.2 8222.23 8851.80 7074.07 9777.70 8555.53 6333.30 7000.00 8851.83 8555.53 6814.80 5111.10 2685.20 2385.10 2608.13 2319.60 2965.20 2480.00 2115.57 2193.30 2207.70 2695.50 2098.17 1789.60 79.44 70.67 64.44 59.67 9629.92 8444.43 7333.32 6395.06 2686.04 2518.63 2273.96 2100.83 74.08 68.00 63.58 8601.85 7916.66 7333.32 2548.32 2438.52 2197.77 68.55 7.08 9.35 12.65 7950.60 1035.46 1368.08 15.95 2394.86 285.72 377.50 14.61 Intra-row spacing (cm) 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 Means of intra-row spacing (Over all inter-row spacings) 5 10 15 20 Means of inter-row spacing (Over all intra-row spacings) 10 15 20 Mean SEM (±) LSD (P< 0.05) CV% Shoot biomass (kg/ha)
    25. 25. Spacing Trial for Hill Planting
    26. 26. Tentative conclusion/recommendations  Row spacing: 20cm row spacing seems optimal for better shoot biomass and grain yields as it allow carrying out agronomic management practices such as weeding and thinning. In addition, it gives enough room for better resource utilization by plants avoiding competition. - manually or motor-driven seed driller should be in place Planting depth: 0cm and 3cm appears acceptable depth because going beyond 3cm depth could cause poor germination due to failure of seedlings to emerge out from deep soil.  Seed rate: 10kg/ha is optimal 
    27. 27. Advantages of row planting Ease of management  Reduced seed rate  Efficient fertilizer utilization  Contribution for reduced lodging incidence 
    28. 28. Thank You

    ×