Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Session 2 best planting practices dst

33 views

Published on

Presentation on modelling, field activities and the development of the Decision Support Tool

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Session 2 best planting practices dst

  1. 1. Development of the Best Planting Practices (PP) Decision Support Tool (DST) – V1 www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org
  2. 2. Overview www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Best Planting Practices DST: 1. Background and modelling framework (Stefan Hauser): • Introduction • Learnings from literature • Learnings from baseline and rapid characterization • Modelling framework: Decision Tree Models 2. Field activities (Busari Mutiu): • Field activities: Best Planting Practices Trials • Field trial results 3. Development of the DST (Thanni Bolaji): • Overview of recommendations • The Decision Support Tool • Next steps and additional data needs
  3. 3. Overview www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Best Planting Practices DST: 1. Background and modelling framework (Stefan Hauser): • Introduction • Learnings from literature • Learnings from baseline and rapid characterization • Modelling framework: Decision Tree Models 2. Field activities (Busari Mutiu): • Field activities: Best Planting Practices Trials • Field trial results 3. Development of the DST (Thanni Bolaji): • Overview of recommendations • The Decision Support Tool • Next steps and additional data needs
  4. 4. Introduction www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Best Planting Practices DST: • Specific purpose: recommend crop density, tillage (ploughing + ridging practices) and associated weed control that minimize total cost of production (without reducing yield) or maximize net revenue • Requested by: OYSCGA (NG) and CAVA-II (NG) • Other partners: - • Intended users: Extension Agents (EAs) and commercial cassava growers with access to tractors • Expected benefit: Root yield increased by 4 tonnes/ha or an equivalent cost saving of US$100/ha realized by 29,100 HHs, with the support of 266 extension agents, on a total area of 14,550 ha, generating a total value of US$1,455,000 • Current version: V1: implemented at 5x5km, using GIS soil information to estimate yield increases from tillage operations and total cost and revenue based on default or user-defined cost of operations and price of roots • Approach: Decision tree model based on analysis of field trial data • Input required: Planting and harvest date, details on current practice, cost of operations (tillage and weeding), expected price of fresh roots, yield estimate (visual method) • Interface: Enketo webform running on a smartphone, tablet or PC (online use), and serving as a ‘hybrid’ between research tool and a practicable dissemination tool
  5. 5. Learnings from the literature review www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Many aspects… Some clearly understood, others highly dependent on local conditions Effects well-understood → not investigated further. Effects highly dependent on local conditions + large cost implications → priority for further research
  6. 6. Principles of the Best Planting Practices Tool www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org 1. Obtain details on current practice 2. Identify alternative options within given constraints 3. Evaluate to what extent the performance of alternative options is location-dependent, based on analysis of multilocational field trial data 4. If so, identify GIS (or other) predictor variables to estimate location-specific effects of tillage practices on cassava root yield 5. Convert yield effects to changes in gross revenue using price of roots (default values or user input) 6. Estimate total cost based on costs of operations (default values or user input) (assuming optimized land preparation can save on max. 1 weeding operation) 7. Recommend alternative options that either save on cost (without negative impact on yield) or maximize net revenue using a decision tree model The PP-DST is developed based on following steps and principles:
  7. 7. Principles of the Best Planting Practices Tool www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org What are the alternative options? 2. Increase or decrease the number of ploughing operations • Location-specific effects expected, related to texture and rainfall • Tillage intensity interacts with weed control (type, cost and timing) 1. Modify (increase) the crop density – learnings from CWMP: • Little impact on yield expected if crop stand is good • Important impact on weeding requirement 3. Ridging • Planting on flat not recommended if harvest during dry season • Ridging is not always expected to be necessary or advantageous • Ridging can save on max. 1 weeding operation
  8. 8. Principles of the Best Planting Practices Tool www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Modelling framework Are the effects of tillage (ploughing + ridging) dependent on field conditions? Evaluate through multilocational field testing covering target environments Can we predict these effects based on GIS information? Develop decision tree models
  9. 9. Principles of the Best Planting Practices Tool www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org What is current practice? – learnings from the RC survey Current practices for land preparation and weeding (597 households across SW Nigeria) TZ-LZ TZ-EZ TZ-SZ TZ-ZZ NG-SE NG-SW Method of land preparation Manual (by hoe) 89.0 99.6 91.1 100 96.7 65.7 Animal traction 7.2 0 0 0 0.1 1.3 Mechanized (tractor) 3.8 0.4 8.9 0 3.2 32.9 Number of primary tillage operations (ploughing) Zero-tillage 0 36.4 2.1 5.5 1.2 1.2 Single plough 1.9 50.8 86.8 21.6 55.8 9.1 Double plough (or more) 98.1 12.9 11.0 72.9 43.0 89.8 Number of secondary tillage operations (ridging) Flat 3.0 99.6 71.5 14.7 9.9 25.9 Mounds 0 0 0 19.0 32.4 45.5 Ridges 97.0 0.4 28.5 66.3 57.7 28.7 Var1 Lake zone Eastern zone Southern zone Zanzibar SE Nigeria SW Nigeria 1 → About 1/3 of cassava growers use tractors for land preparation. → Most cassava growers conduct at least 2 primary tillage operations. → Secondary tillage operations vary amongst cassava growers. Primary and secondary tillage are independent. Farmers with access to tractors perform more than 1 ploughing operation.
  10. 10. Principles of the Best Planting Practices Tool www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org What is current practice? – learnings from the RC survey Additional surveys on costing of operations (253 households across Oyo and Ogun states) 1. Cost of land preparation (tractor rent or labour) first ploughing 24200 Naira ha-1 second ploughing 19500 Naira ha-1 manual ridging 34000 Naira ha-1 tractor ridging 18350 Naira ha-1 2. Cost of weeding operations hoe weeding 29600 Naira ha-1 herbicide application 12200 – 23900 ha-1 (pre –emergence including herbicide) herbicide application 12400 – 22200 ha-1 (post–emergence including herbicide)
  11. 11. Principles of the Best Planting Practices Tool www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org What is current practice? – learnings from the RC survey Additional surveys on prices of cassava roots (612 households across Oyo and Ogun states) y = 84.624x + 39997 r² = 0.001 y = 456x2 - 77.8x + 106367 r² = 0.1966 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 Pricepertruckloadfreshcassavaroots (Nairaperappr.3tonnes) low high Linear (low) Poly. (high) Average highest and lowest price of cassava fresh roots per 3 ton truck load over the past year in Oyo and Ogun states, Nigeria
  12. 12. Overview www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Best Planting Practices DST: 1. Background and modelling framework (Stefan Hauser): • Introduction • Learnings from literature • Learnings from baseline and rapid characterization • Modelling framework: Decision Tree Models 2. Field activities (Busari Mutiu): • Field activities: Best Planting Practices Trials • Field trial results 3. Development of the DST (Thanni Bolaji): • Overview of recommendations • The Decision Support Tool • Next steps and additional data needs
  13. 13. Best Planting Practices Trials www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Evaluate effects of planting density, fertilizer, tillage and ridging: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 2 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Nil 3 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 4 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 5 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 6 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 7 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 8 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 9 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 10 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 11 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 12 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 13 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 14 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 15 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 16 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 17 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Fertilizer 18 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 80 19 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 20 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 21 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Nil 22 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 23 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 24 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 25 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 26 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 27 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 28 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 29 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 30 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 31 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 32 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 33 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 34 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Fertilizer 35 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 36 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 29.6 Flat Ridged Flat Ridged Single plowing Zero Plowing HerbicideFarmer'schoice Weed control “Farmers’ choice” Manual, mechanical or herbicide “Optimal weed control with herbicide” Round up - pre tillage, Primextra - pre emergence and Round up - post emergence, if required Fertilizer: 75:18:90 kg/ha NPK Density: low = 10000 ha-1 high = 12500 ha-1
  14. 14. Best Planting Practices Trials www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Sampling frame: maximize representativeness across target AoI Cluster number Presence Currently existing trials Oyo Ogun 6 mostly in Oyo 3 0 Eruwa, Ori Ire, Atiba 7 Oyo and Ogun 2 1 Ido & Igbo Ora 1 all in Oyo 3 0 Saki East, Saki West 11 Oyo and Ogun 2 Around Odeda 9 all in Ogun 2 Ikenne 8 all in Ogun 2 Ipokia 8 7 Proposed number of cassava clusters Cluster number Proportion (%) Area (Ha) Cumulative proportion 6 23.04 704,479 23.04 7 18.94 579,095 41.99 1 15.27 466,958 57.26 11 13.06 399,291 70.32 9 7.26 221,880 77.58 8 6.77 206,847 84.34 5 3.87 118,351 88.21 13 3.27 99,960 91.48 10 2.88 87,977 94.36 14 2.25 68,793 96.61 12 2.14 65,442 98.75 2 0.78 23,923 99.54 4 0.46 14,084 100.00 3 0.004 131 100.00
  15. 15. Best Planting Practices Trials www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Impressions and learnings from the field – some pictures
  16. 16. Best Planting Practices Trials www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Impressions and learnings from the field – some pictures Weeding on time and sufficiently thoroughly is a major constraint – farmers do not look at the trial area as their own land under cassava (very pronounced in the first year). Introduction of herbicide based weeding versus farmers choice in 2017 – requires trained sprayer operators to get the full benefits of herbicides. Volatility in the cassava market (sudden high prices) upset the trial calendar leading to data losses due to farmers harvesting earlier than planned.
  17. 17. Best Planting Practices Trials www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Current overview of trials and status of trials BPP trials status 2017 Established Active Ewekoro 9 5 Ibooro 11 11 Ikenne 6 6 Imelo 3 3 Ipokia 6 6 Ifo 2 2 Alabata 8 8 FUNAAB 7 7 Oyo state 45 42 Total 97 90 Reasons for trial losses were mainly weed infestation. For qualified herbicide application, spray service providers could not be found in all sites.
  18. 18. Best Planting Practices Trials www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Results Yield ~ Fertilizer + Density + Ridging * Ploughing + (Ridging | fieldID) + (Ploughing | fieldID) + (Fertilizer | fieldID) Mean root yield across 38 field locations in Oyo and Ogun state F0 F1 P10P12 DP SP ZT DP SP ZT 0 5 10 15 0 5 10 15 CassavaRootYield[t/ha] Flat Ridges DP = Double plough SP = Single plough ZT = Zero-tillage F0 = control F1 = with fertilizer P10 = 10,000 plants ha-1 P12 = 12,500 plants ha-1 Analysis of Variance Table Sum Sq Mean Sq NumDF DenDF F.value Pr(>F) BTill 271.10 135.55 2 30.97 5.651 0.008087 ** STill 88.65 88.65 1 39.69 3.696 0.061750 . Fert 1957.60 1957.60 1 44.71 81.609 1.205e-11 *** Den 1.58 1.58 1 653.48 0.066 0.797608 BTill:STill 55.04 27.52 2 458.72 1.147 0.318440 --- Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
  19. 19. Best Planting Practices Trials www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Results Yield ~ Fertilizer + Density + Ridging * Ploughing + (Ridging | fieldID) + (Ploughing | fieldID) + (Fertilizer | fieldID) Variation in effects on yield across 38 field locations (modelled) ACFDNG000034 ACFDNG000035 ACFDNG000044 ACFDNG000045 ACFDNG000048ACFDNG000054 ACFDNG000055 ACFDNG000064 ACFDNG000065 ACFDNG000068 ACFDNG000074 ACFDNG000075 ACFDNG000078 ACFDNG000084 ACFDNG000085 ACFDNG000088 ACFDNG000094 ACFDNG000095 ACFDNG000098 ACFDNG000104 ACFDNG000105 ACFDNG000114 ACFDNG000118 ACFDNG000128 ACFDNG000138ACFDNG000144 ACFDNG000148 ACFDNG000164 ACFDNG000184 ACFDNG000188 ACFDNG000194 ACFDNG000198 ACFDNG000199 ACFDNG000264 ACFDNG000277 ACFDNG000294 ACFDNG000297 ACFDNG001822 ACFDNG000034 ACFDNG000035 ACFDNG000044 ACFDNG000045 ACFDNG000048 ACFDNG000054 ACFDNG000055 ACFDNG000064 ACFDNG000065 ACFDNG000068 ACFDNG000074 ACFDNG000075 ACFDNG000078 ACFDNG000084 ACFDNG000085ACFDNG000088 ACFDNG000094 ACFDNG000095 ACFDNG000098 ACFDNG000104 ACFDNG000105 ACFDNG000114 ACFDNG000118 ACFDNG000128 ACFDNG000138 ACFDNG000144 ACFDNG000148 ACFDNG000164ACFDNG000184 ACFDNG000188 ACFDNG000194 ACFDNG000198 ACFDNG000199 ACFDNG00 ACFDNG000277 ACFDNG000294 ACFDNG000297 ACFDNG001822 ACFDNG00 ACFDNG000035 ACFDNG000044 ACFDNG000045 ACFDNG000048 ACFDNG000054 ACFDNG000055 ACFDNG000064 ACFDNG000065 ACFDNG000068ACFDNG000074 ACFDNG000075 ACFDNG000078 ACFDNG000084 ACFDNG000085 ACFDNG000088 ACFDNG000094 ACFDNG000095 ACFDNG000098 ACFDNG000104ACFDNG000105 ACFDNG000114 ACFDNG000118 ACFDNG000128 ACFDNG000138 ACFDNG000144 ACFDNG000148 ACFDNG000164 ACFDNG000184ACFDNG000188 ACFDN ACFDNG000198 ACFDNG000199 ACFDNG000264 ACFDNG000277 ACFDNG000294ACFDNG000297 ACFDNG001822 ACFDNG000034 ACFDNG000035 ACFDNG000044 ACFDNG000045 ACFDNG000048 ACFDNG000054 ACFDNG000055 ACFDNG000064 ACFDNG000065 ACFDNG000068 ACFDNG000074 ACFDNG000075 ACFDNG000078 ACFDNG000084 ACFDNG000085 ACFDNG000088 ACFDNG000094 ACFDNG000095 ACFDNG000098 ACFDNG000104 ACFDNG000105 ACFDNG000114 ACFDNG000118 ACFDNG000128 ACFDNG000138 ACFDNG000144 ACFDNG000148 ACFDNG000164 ACFDNG000184 ACFDNG000188 ACFDNG000194 ACFDNG000198 ACFDNG000199 ACFDNG000264 ACFDNG000277 ACFDNG000294 ACFDNG000297 ACFDNG001822 Effect of single plough Effect of double plough Effect of ridging over fla Effect of fertilizer -10 0 10 -10 0 10 -10 0 10 -10 0 10 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 BLUP effect [t/ha] Cumulativeprobability mean eff = 1.91 sd = 1.56 mean eff = 1.45 sd = 6.62 mean eff = 1.27 sd = 5.90 mean eff = 4.27 sd = 1.21
  20. 20. How are these results fed into the DST? www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Can this variation in effects of tillage be predicted? Recursive partitioning using texture data from GIS layers (texture – ISRIC + rainfall -CHIRPs) Fertilizer effect uncorrelated Ridging effect uncorrelated Primary tillage effect uncorrelated Rainfall and texture do not explain variation in effects of primary tillage and ridging.
  21. 21. How are these results fed into the DST? www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Can this variation in effects of tillage be predicted? Recursive partitioning the control yield… Yield under zero-tillage and yield when planted on flat are the best predictor for effects of primary tillage and ridging, resp. Cut-off is ~10 t ha-1. Differences could be related to weeds (type, pressure, management)? Further investigation needed.
  22. 22. Overview www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Best Planting Practices DST: 1. Background and modelling framework (Stefan Hauser): • Introduction • Learnings from literature • Learnings from baseline and rapid characterization • Modelling framework: Decision Tree Models 2. Field activities (Busari Mutiu): • Field activities: Best Planting Practices Trials • Field trial results 3. Development of the DST (Thanni Bolaji): • Overview of recommendations • The Decision Support Tool • Next steps and additional data needs
  23. 23. Estimating total cost and revenue www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org User input on cost of operations 1. Cost of tillage operations: • Cost of renting a tractor (if not owned). • Option to differentiate between 1st tillage, 2nd tillage and ridging • All cost estimates for a fixed plot area 2. Cost of weeding operations: • Type of weeding operations • Option to differentiate by weeding method (manual or herbicide-based) • All cost estimates for a fixed plot area 3. Unit prices of roots: • Compulsory input
  24. 24. Interpreting the recommendations www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Yield effects of primary and secondary tillage operations Primary tillage (ploughing) and secondary tillage (ridging) effects depend on yield level. → Farmers need to specify their yield level (low and high). → Optimal practice depends on cost of ploughing, ridging and weeding. Ridging saves 1 weeding operation.
  25. 25. Packaging in a tool for field use www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org How to make this framework available for quick and easy use? PP-DST packaged as a simple enketo webform, with details on current practice and cost of operations as only inputs (for now). Introduction Current practice Cost of operations Recommendations
  26. 26. Packaging in a tool for field use www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org How to make this framework available for quick and easy use? PP-DST packaged as a simple enketo webform, with details on current practice and cost of operations as only inputs (for now) – also developed in paper form has, as an alternative (or preferred) tool for EAs / cassava growers.
  27. 27. Next steps www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org 1. Validation exercises (in collaboration with EAs of dev. partners requesting the DST) • Technical evaluation: how accurate are predictions? • Gather feedback: what functionality is needed and how to interface with the end-user? 2. Allow optional input by end-user (else use default values): • Land area differentiation • Date of harvest • Price of output differentiated by produce type, time of harvest, quantity sold, market type,… 3. Improve understanding of site-specific effects • Focus on interaction with weed pressure and species • Link with improved weed management • Timing of ploughing operation? 4. Other aspects of best planting practices • Impact on erosion? • Harrowing • … V1 is a ‘hybrid’ between a research tool and the intended ‘app’
  28. 28. Questions and discussion www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org Questions?

×