k 7- h' -
- -• Fi — aioe 7co(7z)
5- 7 - - 7- S 7 7-4 . S . SS' • '5 ' -
I -
/
- . INTERIM, REPORT TO - . 7. 7 ' -~v U N E
5- /) ON
IES (m)[17 INTERCROPPING
ON
, FARMING SYSTEMS -1 j
/4. 55 5555 1975
S ' . . '- . /7/ - " S • -
, 'S l~
- 2-
- -- 7 • INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TROPICAL AGRICULTURE
IBADAN-NIGERIA REVIEW OF UNEP SUPPORTED SYSTEMS AGRONOMY CROPPING SYSTEMS EXPERI MENT S
The objective of the IITA Farming Systems Program is to replace
existing food crop production systems by more efficient systems that attain
I good yields of improved crop varieties on a sustained basis through :-
developing suitable land clearing and soil management
techniques that minimize erosion and soil deterioration.
use of appropriate crop combinations, sequences and
management practices that minimize use of costly inputs
e.g. fertilizers and pesticides.
development of appropriate technologies that increase
agricultural productivity while minimizing drudgery, and
accurate monitoring of environmental conditions and
changes in such a way as to reliably relate these to crop
performance, guide timing of operations and for predictive
purposes.
Emphasis in research and related activities is given to the problems
and needs of smaliholders in the developing countries of the tropics. As a
result of continuing increases in population and labour constrints, over
70% of these mainly subsistent and partially commercial smaliholders are
operating small farm sizes of usually less than 2 hectares. These farms
under decreasing periods of fallow are becoming increasingly subjected to
serious soil deterioration and erosion under tropical rainstorms. The same
degradation processes result from mechanized land, development and clearing techniques used in large scale farms in tropical Africa.
On the basis of the above considerations, the IITA Systems Agronomy
Cropping Systems investigations (see attached report) is giving top priority to the following:
studies of cropping patterns and sequences involving relay,
strip and multiple cropping systems of various cropping
sequences and rotations which will enable the smaliholder
to produce a range of improved food crops including
vegetables and one or more crops grown for cash on a
sustained basis.
use of crop combinations and sequences which provide
effective cover and with minimum tillage and mulching
effectively minimize erosion and water loss.
development of suitable crop residue management techniques
and methods of taking advantage of biological and nitrogen
fixation and mycorrhizal phosphate nutrition and various
cultural and other crop and soil management practices so
as to increase the efficiency of fertilizer use and reduce
the amount and cost of fertilizer used by farmers In the humid
tropics.
4 3
4. integrated pest and disease management including the
use of improved pest and disease resistant widely adapted
crop varieties and appropriate weed control techniques in
addition to suitable crop combinations and sequences
that minimize the use of costly and sometimes dangerous
pesticides.
The following preliminary studies have as their main objective the provision of data on crop competition and compatible crop combinations for use in devising suitable relay and intercropping systems, planting patterns and rotations that give reasonably high yields while minimizing soil deterioration:
Maize - Melon Cassava intercropping
Maize - Grain Legumes Intercropping experiment
Maize, groundnuts, sweet potato, and cocoyam
intercropping experiment at Ikenne in 1974 and 1975.
Maize, cowpea, and soybean sequence of cropping
and fertilizer experiment.
Maize, cowpea variety and pattern of planting
experiment.
Mulching and minimum tillage experiments
Maize/groundnuts intercropping experiment
Yam, Maize, Melon, Cowpea intercropping.
K 4
These experiments have resulted in the selection of certain crop combinations such as maize/melon, maize/sweet potato and maize/cocoyam mixtures which apart from giving reasonably good yields protect the soil against erosion and control weeds. They have also resulted in the selection of possible suitable cropping sequences for all the year round cropping that should give high yields and high economic returns, protect the soil against erosion, minimize weed growth and probably disease and pest damage.
In addition, they include a range of major staples and crops that can be grown for cash. Included is a range of alternative crop combinations some of which are suitable for the different ecological subregions and socio- economic requirements of the humid tropics. The spreading of labour more evenly throughout the year in the management of these cropping sequences and rotations was also taken into account. Examples of some of these combinations are as follows:..
Maize/melon cassava relay and intercropping experiment
Maize grain legume pattern of intercropping experiment
M aize/ground nut s/sweet potato and cocoyam intercropping
experiment.
Maize and cowpea var.ety and pattern of planting experiment
Maize/groundnut intercro pping experiment
Grain/maize/melon and cowpea intercropping experiment.
The maize/cowpea/soybeans sequence of cropping and fertilizer experiment and to some extent the sorghum, pigeon pea, cowpea and soybean late season intercropping experimcnt the results of which are 5 not yet available for this report) will In addition to providing Information on crop combinations and compatibility above all provide very valuable
Information on crop sequences that are productive In and minimize nitrogen fertilizer application by making as much use of residual nitrogen resulting from nitrogen fixation by the previous legume crop.
The crop residue management and strip cropping experiment has as its objectives (1) the evaluation of different organic waste materials
Including crop residues for mulching In minimum tillage, (2) the study of the multiferous effects of mulches (temperature regulation, erosion control,
Increased infiltration rate, addition of nutrients to the soil etc), and (3) study of effects of organic residues on pest and disease incidence as a basis of developing good organic residue management methods that minimize nematode and other pests and disease build up.
These possible cropping combinations and sequences that will be subjected to field tests economic evaluation and iongterm rotation trials are listed below and diagrammed in FIgure 2. In addition to other studies at
IITA the UNEP funds will also be used (starting in 1976) for longterm crop combinations and sequences studies which include studies of fertilizer, requirements of crops grown in mixed culture and pest and disease incidence
and management in Intereropping.
Possible Qpping Combinations and Sequences
1. Melon (March-April) relay cropped with cassava or maize Melon (March-April) followed by sweet potatoes (June) relay interplanted at wide spacing every 4 meters with pigeon pea (July).
Melon (March-April) interplanted with maize at wide spacing 4 - 6 meters - with groundnuts, soybeans, or vegetables in between followed by sweet potatoes, intercropped with groundnuts, cowpeas, or soybeans and sorghum (June - July).
Melon intercropped with Celosia, okra, tomatoes, groundnuts or maize at wide spacing (2 - 3 meters) fb cassava or sweet potato interplanted with pigeon peas every 4 meters.
Early maize relay planted with groundnuts followed by sweet potatoes lntercropped with pigeon pea or sorghum intercropped with grain legumes.
Yams intercropped with maize alternating with rows of vegetable cowpeas followed by pigeon peas intercropped with sweet potatoes, semi-erect cowpeas or soybeans.
Strip cropping sequences should preferably involve alternating double rows of short or creeping plants with single rows of taller plants, e.g. sweet potatoes and tree type pigeon peas soybeans and maize : and cocoyams and maize with the taller crop at wide spacin of 4 meters apart.
Some of the longterrn multiple (relay, double, triple and strip) cropping experiments and rotations which Involve the above cropping patterns and combinations are diagrammed in Fig. 2 They will be Initiated in
1976 at IITA (Ibadan), Ikenne and probably at the High Rainfall Station
at Onne In 1977. REPORT ON IITA INTERCROPPING, RELAY MID SEQUENCE OF CROPPING EXPERIMENTS FOR 1974/75
B. N. Okigbo Agronomist (Systems) I ITA Ibadan, Nigeria
The systems agronomy subprogram intercropping experiments involv±ng
(1) maize/melon/cassava; (2) inaize/cocoyam/groundnuts/sweet potato at
Ikenne, and (3) maize/grain legumes started in 1974 were completed and
repeated in 1975. The studies of the effects of different mulches on maize, cowpeas, soybeans, and cassava under minimum tillage was expanded
from 9 to 22 mulch treatments with several scientists cooperating and a
maize/soybean/cowpea sequence of cropping and fertilizer experiment was
continued in 1975. New experiments initiated to select possible
components of multiple or relay cropping systems consicted of (1) yams/
maize/melon/cowpeas intercropping exteriment; (2) maize/groundnuts
patterns of planting experiment; (3) maize vegetable cowpeas inter-
cropping experIment; (4) cassava/maize Intercropping experiment invol-
ving different lengtha of cassava cuttings, and (5) late season sorghum/ cowpeas/aoybeansfdwarf pigeon pea intercropping experiment. Cooperative
projects in which the systems agronomy subprogram was involved included the continuing root crops - oil palm systems survey with the agricultural economics aubpiogram and maize mulching and fertilizer continuous
function design experiment with the soil fertility cubprogrm.
Maize - Melon - Cassava Intercroppin : Results of Intercropping maize and melon were presented In the 1974 annual report. No overall signi-
ficant differences were observed in casoava plant population and root
fresh weight means in relation to crop mixture due mainly to the high
soil heterogeneity and consequently high coefficient of variability
(Table 1). But there were highly significant differences among casaava 1711 root dry weights. Plant populations, root fresh and dry weights decreased significantly with lateness of planting (Fig. 1). While plant population
and root dry weight decreased with increasing number of crops in the mixture according to the trend cassava sole inaize-cassava maize-melon
cassava, fresh weight of roots followed the trend cassava sole maize" melon-cassava maize cassava. There were significant differences in plant population, root fresh and dry weights in relation to thtes of planting (Pig. 2). As observed in maize, no significant differences in plant population and yield occurred at low and high fertilizer levels due perhaps to high fertility level in Block E following several years of cropping and fertilizer applications.
The calorie equivalents and the gross returns of the yields of the
different crop combinations are shown in Table 2 There were highly
significant differences in the calorie values of the different crop
combinations with the highest valueB observed in maize-melon and maize- melon-cassava crop combinations where the cascava was planted in May,
June and July. Gross values followed the same trend with the highest returns observed in maize melon-cassava mixture with the cassava relay cropped in the middle of June. Cassava bacterial blight and cercoapora
leaf spot damage were observed to be highest in the April planted sole
cassava and cassave-maize treatment8, medium in May sole cassava and maize-melon cassava treatments and lIghtest in the remaining treatments.
This experiment was repeated at Ikenne in 1975 and only results of the maize crops so far harvested will be presented here. There was complete
failure of the meloa crop due to very late planting and failure to prodee 3 mature fruits even though there was good veetative growth. Significant differences were observed in maize grain and stover yields and stern lodging in different crop mixture8 but no Bignificant differences occurred in plant population and root lodging (Table 3). There was a tendency for lodging to be reduced by cassava intercropping. Consequently both root and stem lodging were higher where maize was grown alone or with melon and at the very late cassava relay cropping dates where time of over- lapping of cassava with maize in the intercrop was drastically reduced.
In general stayer and to some extent grain yields were highest in the sole cropped plots and those where cascava was planted through maize early or late. The lowest yield was observed in plot8 where cassava was planted on the 23rd of August 1975 followed by those planted on the 25th of October
1975. Mean grain dry weight-yield of intercropped plots amounted to about 70% of sole crop plots. No significant difference re8ulted from different levels of fertilizers.
From these preliminary results it can be concluded that (1) iraize-melon intercropping at the usual uiaize population of 53,000 plants per hectare drastically reduces melon yields. (2) relay cropping of cassava through maize is feasible especially when the cassava is planted thtcugh the maize from time of planting to about two montcs after planting, (3) relay planting of cassava through maize beyond two months after planting may result in reduced cassava plant population, and (4) intercropping of maize and cassava reduces lodging in maize but not always significantly so.
Maize - Grain Legumes Intercropping Experiment : This experiment which was started In 1974 to study the effects of iutercropping patterns on the
4
performance of the components of the mixtures was repeated in 1975. In this report the yields of the legume components which were not available
for the 1974 report and the yields of maize for the two years are considered.
Grain Legumes : As expected, significant differences in fresh pod and
p dry grain yields were observed among legume species due to their different
yielding potentialities and to some extent significantly different plant
populations at which they are grown (Table 4), Climbing cowpa
(Sitaopole) and pole urns produced the lowest yields when grown along the
same rows with maize as compared to when it is grown in either single
alternating rows or alternating four rows with maize but while pole lime
in alternating four rows with maize produced more than three times the
dry grain yield of those grown on the same and in single alternating
rows climbing cowpea (Sitaopole) in single alternating rows produced almost
five times the grain yield of those on the same rows with maize and two
and a half times the yield of those in four alternating rows. The low
yields of both legumes when grown on the same rows with maize is due
partly to mutual shading and partly to the heavy lodging of the tall maize
variety (TZBC3) which is unable to support the legumes. Damage by anthracnose was higher in Sitsopole grown on the oame and in four alter -
nating rows with maize than in single alternating rows. Serious attack
of golden yellow rnosaic virus occurred in the lime beans becaue of early
planting but this did not appear to reduce yieldt4 considerably. In bush
lime and soybeans yields on single alternating rows with maize were lower
than in four alternating rows perhaps as a result of more shading in
single alternating rows but the differeae was only significant in soybeans. In erect cowpeas (Prima), dwarf pigeon pea Lnd tree type pigeon pea, single rows alternating with maize gave higher yields than alternate four rows but only in the tree type pigeon pea was this significant. It would appear that in pigeon peas peat damage is more serious and spraying more effective in single alternating rows than in four alternating rows. In general, mean dresh pod and dry grain yields for climbing cowpeas and pole lir.ta on single and four alternating rows were significantly higher than on the same rows with maize.
Early maize 1975 : Observations in 1975 early maize are shown in Table 5.
As observed in the early maize of 1974 there were highly significant differences in lodging due to more serious lodging in maize grown on same rows with legumes as compared to those grown on different rows. Significnnt differences we e also observed in plant population, grain and stover yields.
These differences were mainly due to higher plant populations and higher yields of maize stover and grain yields in plots where maize was grown along the same rows with legume and consequently with double the plant population and plot area than where maize single and four rows alternated with legumes. Maize plant population, dry weight of stover and dry grain yields in 1975 amounting to 20404 plants per hectare, 2.18 t/lia and 1.94 t/ha in plots where maize was grown on the same rows with legumes were actually lower than 22786 plants, 2.59 tons and 2.96 tons/ha respectively observed on the same plot area where single, two or four rows of maize alternated with rows of legumes. Mean plant population, stover yields and grain yields of 21827, 2.12 t and 2.16 t/ha respectively for half the plot size of sole maize plots were also lower than the comparative values on equva1ent plot sizes where maize rows alternated with those of 1agumes 6
Maize plant population and grain yields on single and double alternating
rows were higher but not altogether significantly so than those in four
alternating rows with legumes. Although stover weeds were lowest for
maize grown in two alternating rows as compared to those on single and
four alternating rows but differences were not significant. Thus Individual
plants on single and double alternating rove gave much higher grain yields
per plant than those grown sole, on the same and in four rows with legumes.
Maize grown in single alternating rows with pole liina, bush iitia, dwarf
pigeon pea and tree type pigeon pea gave higher grain yields than those
in double and four alternating rows or on the same rows with other legumea.
Similar trends were observed in atover yields. Trends in plant population
stover and grain yields were similar to corresponding treatments in
1974. While alternation of single or double rows of maize with corres-
ponding rows of legumes is somewhat detrimental to legume yields except
for pigeon peas, it usually gives high maize grain yields as compared to
maize grown sole or in four rows alternating with those of legumes.
Maize, groundnuts sweet potato, and cocoyam intercropping experiment at Ikenne In 1974 and 1975 Maize : In 1974 when planting was delayed till July due to difficulties
in obtaining cocoyams, there were significant differences in maize yield
and significantly higher grain yields were observed on plots w th sole
crop maize and those intercropped with groundnuts as compared to plots
on which maize was intercropped with either aweet potato or cocoyam (Table 6)
The lowest yields were obtained where maize was intercropped with sweet
potato. In 1975 significant differences in grain yields occurred as a result
of intcrcropping but while there were no significant differences amcng 7 grain yields in intercropped plots, grain yield of sole crop maize was lower than in plots where maize was intercropped with groundnuts cocoyam and sweet potato but this was significant only for cocoyam. No significant differences were observed as a result of planting the maize on the sane row as the groundnut, cocoyam or sweet potato but lower yields were observed in plots with sole crop maize and where maize was planted along the same rows with the other intercrops. No significant differences were observed in maize plant population at harvest but planting of maize on the same row as the associated crop slightly decreased plant population. Plant population was lowest where maize was intercropped with sweet potato and highest where intercropped with gronndnuta.
Groundnuts : Croundauts intercropped with maize in 1974 yielded only 7% of the sole crop dry nut yield while in 1975 the mean yield on intercropped plots was 79% that of sole cropped plots. The yield of groundnuts was almost five times higher in 1975 as compared to 1974 due to the use of improved IAR varieties (Zaria 1-4). Even though the experiment was carried out on the same plots as in the previous year, there was no serious damage by rosette or cercospora leaf spot to which the improved varieties were more tolerant than the Ikenne local used in 1974. Plant population and number of nuts produced were slightly higher where the groundnuts were planted in between maize rows than on the same row but the differences were not significant.
!weet potato : Significantly higher fresh weight of marketable tubers and number of tubers were produced on sole crop plots as compared to maize intercropped plots. Mean yield of tubera fran ploto where Bwet potato was planted along the same rows as maize was 96% that of plots where they Li were planted in between maize rows but this was not significant. As with groundnut, sweet potato mean yield in 1974 was only 38% that of the 1975 crop grown on the same plots.
Cocpyam : Yield of corma under sole cropping was almost double the yield in plots where cocoyam (Xanthosome.) was intercropped with maize in
1974. The cocoyam yields were very low due to serious attack by an unidentified leaf disease and late planting. The 1975 cocoyaxu crop has not yet been harvested. Intercropping of groundauta, cocoyams and sweet potatoes at Ikenne in 1974 with maize resulted in higher calorie yields than sole cropping (Table 6). Similarly with the exception of sole sweet potato, gross values were higher for Intercropped plots as compared to sole cropping. For one interested in growing cocoyan, groundnuts and sweet potato at Ikenne it would appear less beneficial to include maize as it is to intercrop these crops with maize where main interest is on the maize crop. As indicated in the 1974 annual report, intercropping drastically reduced weed growth in maize especially where cocoyams or sweet potato was grown with maize.
Maize, copea, and soybean sequence of cropping and fertilizer experiment
This experiment with the treatments indicated in Tables 7 and 8 was started to determine the effect previous cowpea and soybean crops on the succeeding maize crop in addition to estimating the extent of nitrogen fixation in soybean and cowpea crops following maize which received three levels of nitrogen. No significant differences were observed among treatment means in plant population and grain yields in the first planting of maize, cowpeaa and soybeans during the late season of 1974 (Table 7). 9
In the second planting of the same crops in the early season of 1975, no significant differences were observed in maize plant population following
cowpeas as compared to maize following soybeans and no marked differences were observed among fertilizer treatments (Table 8). Maize plants
following soybeans reflected the nitrogen level treatments by their light
green colour and poor vegetative growth at the lower nitrogen levels while maize after cowpeaa had dark green colour at all nitrogen levelu. However
there were no significant differences in grain yield in maize as a result
of previous cropping with cowpeas and soybeans or nitrcen fertilizer levels.
Maize grain yields in the no nitrogen fertilizer treatments after cowpeas
exceeded grain yields at the corresponding treatment following soybeans
by up to 22 percent. Maize grain yields at the 45 kg-N and 90 kg-N
following cowpeas were 7.5 percent lower and 10 percent higher respectively
than maize that received corresponding treatments after soybeans. Stover
yields of maize following soybeans (5.469 t/ha) was significantly higher
than in maize following cowpeas (4.974 t/ha). No significant differences
in grain and stover yields were observed among fertilizer levels but both
yields tended to increase with fertilizer level. No significant previous cropping and fertilizer interaction occurred in plant populaticn, grain
and stover yields and no significant differences were observed among nitrogen levels in soybean plant population and grain yield following maize.
Poor germInation in the soybean variety (Bossier) resulted in very low
plant population and yield.
As in soybeans no significant differences among nitrogen levels was observed
in cowpea (If e Brown) plant population and grain yield following maize
but grain yield tended to decrease with increasing levels of nitrogen 10 applied to the preceeding maize crop. It is expected that all treatment effects will become more pronounced as number of years of cropping increase.
Maizecoea variety and pattern of planting experiment : The objective of this experiment is to study the performance of three varieties of vegetable cowpeas consisting of an unimproved local variety (Akidi) from
East Central, Siaopole supplied by CLIP and Diana (FARV-13) :ecently released by FOAR, Ibadan, in intercropping with late maize planted in one two and four plants per stand.
Maize : No significant differences were observed in plant population and stem lodging (Table 9). Number of maize plants per stand id not markedly affect plant population but there was slightly higher plast population at two plants per stand. Root lodging was significantly highest in maize planted at two plants per stand with Sitsopole and lowest in sole crop maize at two plants per stand. It was also lowest at two plants per stand as compared to one and four plants per stand but not significantly so. Heavy storms during the second half of 1975 contributed to the significantly higher number and percentage stem lodging observed than root lodging. There were highly significant differences in stover and grain yields. The highest grain yields were observed in maize planted in one or two plants per stand with Diana and Sitsopole whIle the lowest was observed in sole maize at one plant per etand followed by maize at four plants per stand intercropped with Dinna. Grain yield decreeed slightly with increasing number of plants per stand. In sole maize plots, the lowcst stover yield was observed in maize planted one plant per stand while the highe.st yield was in maize at two plants per stand. 11
Significantly higher overall stover yield was observed in maize grown
at two plaflt8 per stand than at one and four plants per stand.
Fresh pod yields and grain yields in cowpeas were significantly higher under sole cropping than under intereropping (Table 9). While seed yields
in cowpeas decreased slightly with increasing number of intercropped naige plants per stand, fresh weight of pods was lowest in cowpeas grown with
two maize plants per stand. The local variety (Akidi) under intercropping exceeded Sitaopole and Dinna in weight of fresh pods, the actual yields amounting to 0.44, 0.42 and 0.28 t/ha respectively. Sitaopole gave higher fresh pod yields under sole cropping than Akidi which exceeded
Dinna.
Cowpea plant population in sole plots significantly exceeded those in
intercropped plots while plant population in intercropped plots with four maize plants per stand exceeded those with one and two maize plants per stand but not significantly so (Table 9). Pod fresh weight yields of the three cowpea varieties followed the trend sole cowpea inter- crop with one maize plant per stand with four maize plants per stand with two maize plants per stand (Table 10). Trends in grain yields were similar but yield of cowpeas intercropped with maize at two plants per stand equalled those intercropped with maize at four plants per stand. This was more pronounced in seed dry weight than in fresh weight of pods.
Seed yieid3 of Akidi and Dinna were equal but double those of Sitaopole.
Yields of cowpeas were adversely affected by the residual cffect of paraquat preemerge.nce application which killed many plants or stunted their growth in addition to flaie weed ccntrol technique triad on the plots which also had adverse effecto on both iaaize and cawpeas. it is hoped 12 that as the use of these techniques are perfected in future such mishaps may be avoided. l4ulching and minimum tillage experiments : An experiment was started in
1974 to study the effects of nine mulches and minimum tillage on four test crops (maize, cowpea, soybean, dwarf pigeon pea and caasava) on an
Egbeda soil but this was discontinued at the end of the year and in its place a more elaborate experiment to study the effects of 22 mulch treat- ments, on the same test crops excluding pigeon peas was started on a badly eroded Egbeda soil. Data collected in the first mulch experiment are presented in Table 11 and observations in the second u1ch experiment started In 1975 are presented in Tables 12 & 13. Significant differences were observed among nine mulch treatments in maize grain yield, cowpea grain yield, soybean plant population, pigeon pea plant population and grain yield. No significant differences were observed among treatments in the early season maize crop and cassava plant population and root yields. The lowest early maize grain yield occurred in bare plots on which weeds were hand-weede and left on the surface while the highest yield was observed in the saw dust mulch. Other mulch treatments gave intermediate values. In cowpeas, the lowest yields were observed in bare clean weeded plots and translucent polythene mulch while the highest yIeld occurred in the rice husk mulch. In soybeans the lowest grain yields occurred on saw dust followed closely by the bare plots with weeds left in the surface while the highest yield was observed on plots mulched with rice husk as with cowpeas. Fi.owring and maturity in cowpeas, soybeans and pigeon peas were earlier in the translucent polythene mulch followed closely by the bare plots with and without weeds lcft on the surfece. 13
In pigeon peas the lowest yield occurred on bare plots where weeds were
removed fo11oed by Guinea grass (Panicuin maximum) mulch while the highest
yields were obtained in hand weeded plots with weeds left on the surface
followed by the maize stover mulch. Thus differential yield effects
were observed with different crops but 'bare' plots gave a mean yield of
2.11t/ha for all crops as compared to 2.35 t/ha in mulched plots for the
1974 late season and 1.59 t/ha and 1.78 t/ha for the 1975 early season crops respectively. The effects of the mulching were thus slightly more
- pronounced in the dry late season cropping than in the early wet season. Cassava fresh root yields were lowest on the two bare plots with weed left
on surface (14.23 and 14.30 t/ha) as compared to a mean value of 21.03 t/ha
on mulched plots. The highest cassava root yield occurred in the rice
husks mulch followed closely by the translucent polythene mulch.
In the complex organic residue management experiment started in the 1975
only the early season crops data with the exception of the cassava are
available (Tables 12 & 13). Maize, soybeans and cowpeas exhibited the best vegetative growth and dark green colour in the legume husks and
pigeon pea tops mulches and the poorest growth and yellowish green colour on the bare and corn cobs treatments. Cassava had a very impressive vegetative growth on black polythene covered plots where the height of
cascava plants was about double the heights of plants in other treatments at three months after planting. Cassava plants in the baick polythene
covered plots were very dark green in colour before fertilizers were applied
while in other treatments, the leaves were very pale or yellowish green
in colour Indicating that the plants may be deficient in nitrogen. In
the 1975 early maize crop, significant differences were observed in time 14 of tasselling and silking, stem lodging and stover yields (Table 12).
No significant differences were observed in plant population and grain yields. Tasselling occurred earliest in the oil palm leaves, rice husks, and legume husks mulched plots and latest on the bare, saw dust, Andropogon straw, chipped mixed twigs and translucent polythene mulches. Silking occurred earliest in the maize cobs, rice straw, elephant grass straw,
Guinea grass straw, pigeon pea tops, soybean tops, and mixed twigs mulches and latest in saw dust mulch followed by bare plots. Root looging (number and percentage) was lowest in the bare followed by elephant grass mulch and highest in the oil palm leaf mulch followed by chipped cassava stems mulch. Stover grain yield in the elephant grass mulch significantly exceeded those in other mulches while that of the maize cobs mulch was the least.
In soybeans significant differences were observed in plant population in different mulches but there were no marked yield differences (Table 13).
Cowpeas exhibited significant differences among treatment means in time of flowering and grain yield. Earliest flowering and maturity occurred in the black followed by translucent polythene mulches but latest on plots covered with mixed twigs. This is probably due to the higher temperatures under the polythene mulches. Cowpea grain yield was highest in the translucent plastic mulch and lowest in Adropogon straw mulched ;plot followed by that of the bare plots. There were serious germination problems with the soybean variety Bossier and less than 15% geruinatiori occurred in the bare plots. Because of low germination, soybeans gave very low yields with the lowest yIeld recorded on the bare plots. In the first mulch experiment the highest weight of weeds removed were from unriulched plots 15 but in the second mulch experiment very high quantities of weeds were harvested from all plots. The lowest amount of weed growth occurred in the bare plots followed by black polythene mulched plots. In the rice husks and straw and legume husks mulches, a lot of seedlings removed resulting from crop seeds in the mulch contributed to the 'weed' weight.
The above results are only preliminary since at the beginning of both experiments the plots were cultivated. It is therefore very 2ikely that the minimum tillage effects will be more pronounced as from the second year. Moreover, various observations being made on the chemical charac- teristics and changes in mulches and soils, neinatological observations, microbiological changes etc. are still to be assembled before a true picture of what is taking place under the mulches can be presented.
Maize groundnuts intereropping experiment
Groundnuts : Significant differences in plant population at harvest, yields of dry undecorticated and decorticated nuts and cercospora leaf spot incidence were observed among varieties (Table. 14). Pattern of planting of maize and groundnuts did not significantly affect plant popu- lation and cercospora incidence as it did in yield of nuts. Zaria 2
14 25-68) and Zaria 1 (F 439-2) had significantly higher plant populations than the rest. Zaria 1 (F 439-2) gave significantly higher yield of nuts than all the other varieties while Ikenne local gave the least yield which did not differ significantlj from the other three Zaria (IAR) lines.
Cercospora leafspot incidence was high but Zaria 4 (M 276-70 RRI) was the
least affected followed by Zaria 2 M 25-68). The most susceptible line
(Zaria 1 (F 439-2]) gave the highest yield. Yieldc were signifIcantly 16
highest in sole groundnut plots but there WfS no significant difference due to either pattern of planting or planting on the flat as compared to
planting on the ridge. It is very likely that as a result of the tall maize variety (TZBC3) used, pattern of planting did not affect the amount
of shading of the groundnuts. No significant variety x patterns of planting
interactions were observed but the plants on sole plots shed their leaves
and started dying off earlier than those interctopped with maize. In all
groundnut varieties germination of the nuts stated prior to harvesting and it may be necessary to plant and harvest the groundnuts slightly earlier than the maize.
Maize : No significant differences were observed in maize intercropted with different groundnut varieties or grown in different intercropping patterns (Table 14). The percentage of plants that lodged were least in maize intercropped with Ikenne local but only differences due to stem
lodging were significant. At the early period of growth when maize plants were about a meter high 1odgng after heavy storms was least in maize grown in furrows. Pattern of planting significantly affected germination of maize, tasselling, plant population a'id weight of unshelled cobs at harvest. Germination was significantly lowest in maize grown in furrows which also significantly had the lowest plant population, lowest cob yields and tasselled last (i.e. attained 50% tssel.ing not less than two days after other pattern of planting treatments). The varieties of groundunts in the intercropping somehow aignificantly affected tasselling and stein lodging. Tasselling occurred earliest In maize intereropped with Zaria 1
(IAR. FM 439-2) while stem lodging was least in maize intercropped with the local variety (Ikenne local). Very poor grain yields were observe.d 17 perhaps as a result of late planting in May. On the other hand, stover yields very high. Although there were no significant differences in stover yields, the highest stover yield was observed in plots in which maize was intercropped with the local variety. Intercropping of groundnuts with maize (a practice which appears to be gaining more ground in the southern areas of Nigeria) resulted not only in higher production of calories per hecare but also higher gross values especially with an improved higher yielding variety such as Zaria 1 than as a result of different intereropping patterns.
The excessive shading of groundauts by maize necessitates use of a shorter maize variety in addition to reducing shading by differential planting dates, lower plaut populations and by planting patterns which permit more light through the maize canopy.
Yarn, Maize, Melon, Cowpea Intercropping
The objective of this experiment is to study the performance of yams, melon, cowpeas, (semi-erect Tvu 1190 and vegetable, type cowpea Sitaopole) and maize in different intercropping coibinatiorts using the recommended plant populations and different planting patterns. The planting patterns invovied included planting of maize in single row along the ridge with one, two or four plants per stand, staggered planting of maize in two plants per stand and alternation of yam-maize cowpea intercrop rows with those of yam-maize melon every two rows.
Yams : There were highly Bignificant differences in plant population, number of tubers and tuber yield (Table 16). Plant population vas highest
In plots where yams were planted sole and which according to the P lCnting 18 pattern used involved 25% more plants than in intercropped plots. Yarn population and number of tubers decreased with increasing number of crops intereropped with yams. The same trend was observed in tuber yield but yam tuber yield in plots where yarn was intercropped with three crops was slightly higher than where it was intercropped with one crop. The lowest tuber yield and number of tubers occurred in plots where yarn was intercropped with cowpea (Tvu 1190) while the highest was in sole cropped plots. The highest tuber yield of 23.09 t/ha was observed in sole cropped yams while the ].owest was in yarns intercropped with maize at two plants/ stand staggered followed by plots with yams intereropped with Tvu 1190.
Maize : Significant differences in plant population, stem lodging, stover and grain yields were observed in relation to crop mixtures and patterns of planting (Table 17). Plant population was lowest where maize was intereropped with cowpea (Tvu 1190) and highest where maize at two plants per stand was intercropped with yams. Stem lodging was least in plots where maize at two and four plants per stand was intercropped with melon and highest where maize at two plants per stand was lntercropped with
Tvu 1190. Grain yield was lowest where maize at four plants per stand was intercropped with Tvu 1190 with or without yams and melon and highest in sole crop mize at one and two plants per stand. Stover yield was highest where maize at two plants per stand was intercropped with yams and lowest where yam was intercropped with Tvu 1190 next to wf:ich was maize intercropped with yams, melon and cowpeao. Plant population and stem lodging tended to increase with increasing numier of maize plaxts per stand while stover and grain yields tended to decrease with the number of plants per stand. With the exception of root lodging, the stern iodging and plant population, stover and grain yleldu decreased with the number 19 and species of crops in the mixture
Cowpeas : Significant differences were observed in plant population, fresh weight of pods and grain yield of the two cultivars of cowpeas in relation to crop combinations and associated planting patterns (Table 18).
Plant population was significantly higher in some mixtures than where the cowpeaa were grown as sole crop. Tvu 1190 had reduced plant population under sole cropping as compared to where it was intercropped. Sitaopole gave significantly higher pod fresh weight yield under sole cropping than in intercropping with the lowest yield observed where Sitaopole was intercropped with maize at two plants per stand and with maize, yams, and melon. Grain yield was very high in Tvu 1190 intercropped with melon.
Lowest cowpea yields occurred in Sitaapole grown with maize at four plants per stand. Each cowpea variety gave decreasing plant population and grain yield with increasing number of crops in the mixture.
Melon! Plant population fruit fresh weight and seed yield differed significantly in relation to crop combinations and, planting patterns
(Table 19). Plant population, fresh fruit and seed yields were highest in sole crop melon but while plant population was lowest in plots where melon was intereropped with yams, maize and cowpeas, fruit fresh weight and seed yields were lowest where melon was intercropped with Tvu 1190 in staggered planting. Melon plant population, fruit fresh weight and seed yields decreased with increasing number of crops in the mixture.
The overall calorie equivalents of the various crop yields and their gross values in Naira are presented in Table 20. Fighest calorie equivalent values were obtained where yams, maize, melon and cowpeae (Thu 1190) were intercropped followed by maizeyaia intercrops. The lowest calorie 20 equivalent was observed in sole Sitaopoie. The gross values of the crops was highest in yws grown as sole crop followed by intererops involving yams and especially yams intercropped with maize, melon and cowpea (Tvu 1190).
This experiment shows that in areas where yam is a major staple and or cash crop, it would be most meaningful to intecrop it with reduced plant populations of maize and melon or grow it as a sole crop. Intercropping maize and cowpeas gave higher total returns than sole cropping only in plots involving Tvu 1190. Melon intercropped with cowpeaa except when grown on the same rows with Sitaopole gave higher total yields and gross returns than sole crop melon.
More studies involving planting patterns and differeflt dates of planting of melons and plant populations are necessary before a good picture of
the performance of different crops in the mixtures can be developed
and optimi yields of the various crops in mixture realized. Table 1 : Observations on cassava (Isunikankiyan relay cropped through different maize-melon intercrops at different planting dates in 1974 at Ibadan
Treat Dates of Treatments Plant Fresh wt. Dry wt. of No. Planting Population of roots roots t/ha per ha t/ha
18/4/74 Cassava 9843.75 a 26.13 a 14.95 bcd 5 18/4/74 Maize Cassava 9609.38 a 18.87 a 10.57 abc 6 18/4/74 Maize Melon Cassava 9259.38 a 21.34 a 11.95 abc 7 26/5/74 Cassava 9921.88 a 28.20 a 15.79 c.d 8 2615/74 Maize Cassava 9962.50 a 19.27 a 10.79 abc 9 26/5/74 Maize Melon Cassava 9571.88 a 20.86 a 11.68 abc 10 16/6/74 Cassava 10000.0 a 21.15 a 11.84 abc 11 16/6/74 Maize Cassava 9650.0 a 21.16 a 11.85 abc 12 16/6/74 Maize Melon Cassava 9637.50 a 34.16 a 19.13 d 13 17/7/74 Cassava 9884.38 a 18.69 a 10.47 abc 14 17/7/74 Maize Cassava 9415.63 a 17.07 a 9.56 abc 15 17/7/74 Maize Melon Caçsava 9296.88 a 14.17 a 7.94 ab 16 16/8/74 Cassava 9806.25 a 13.32 a 7.46 ab 17 16/8/74 Maize Cassava 9375.0 a 12.91 a 7.23 ab 18 16/8/74 Maize Melon Cassava 9571.88 a 10.42 a 5.84 a C)'. N. C'. (') C) IN C ( '.i) () C'. '.) Cl o ci'. C) -I I/ L II '.0) U) .Z C'-) .-1 C) 0'. N. IN C C'-) (N l IN C 4 (14 IN .4 r,-1
L.l 0 0 4 C) () F-I 'C (0 - C) () CJ, '.) (C '.0 .11.. > . • 5 C) • %:) ,-4 U'. 1!) . r--. CI -4(1 1 C, '. C) ('4 Cl) • SO ")(''LiC) ) 0) u' C C/) C) ' 'C ,4 .j LI', L/', 1', L I< (3 C) ci'. 0'. r- IN ,-4 ,-4 ('.4 -I 4 ,'4 r-4 ('4 1 r4 4 0) C) __ -,-- - t) •.-) O' Cl) LI) -1 • . • e S • . S S S S * S • S S S 0 sr-I •C' •Ui • sC) • •Cl\ • .11) • ) .1) () r- s-I ('4 .J C) C) 00 00 C'-) s-I '.0 ('4 C) s-I ON CT'. (9'. r-4 '.0) S S • * S S S S S S S Ci C) •r4 N s-I • • N. '4) fl • Ci'. s-I • r-. cn • C') N. • .j C,) 0)4.1 0'. • • ('1 4 ('4 • NO -...' • .f r4 • s-I ON • (I'. N- '.•) Cl) f C) 0 ON 0 ON C) C) C C) ON (3'. 0) C C•j 1-4 s.4 14 r i Qr4
C') C') N- (I) .Z 0'. C' C)) C) .j L!'. cr1 (') C) C)'. ('4 0'. U. C) ('4 -zt C' '.40 Cl) * • N. • s-I N- C) N- 0 -J LI) .,') •oj' s-I CC) IN u1 C) % Cl) • • • . . . • • S CD 0'. • ,-4 ('4 C,.) 4 4 s--I C) I'-, U s-I CT'. 0'. If) -. 0) - C) C') ('4 Cl) - ('4 Cs-1 C) Cl) L/) ('4 ('4 ('4 r-4 s-4 s-I ' c: .0 r4 Ci 0) •Tj z C) (Y) ..(j- C) C'- •Ci- '-.0 • If) • C) • S S r- S S C) 5 • C) • S s-i Ctl w a a • • a • • • • • • 0 C.. . -4 C) C) C) 0 C) C) C) '-4 C•'4 '.0 C-) s-I ('4 (A Ci' <1 N. ('4 N C) '.C) -.j C' ('4 IN 0'. C") C') N- C) 0) C..) 3-I S • S S • S • • S S S S • ci) • • '.0 '.0) -.i- • N- U) • /) '.0 • 'i•) N. • 10 C) s--I s--I s--.I i-I s.-1 s-I s-1 r-.4 s-I .--4 r-4 4 C) Ci C4 N. U') C)' C") NO - C)' (') N. If) Cj'. '.0 C') C) 4) •r- s-4 s-I N- 'C Ci'. ( tf, N. •. s-I Ci'. .. N. C. 0 Cj 0 4.' (3 • • • • . S S 1-' C) 0 H 4.) s-I s-I .-I s-I s-I s-I s-1 r-4 C') s- r-4 s-I s-i s-I s-I C) I) •1. -, -5-, '__, 'S., 'LI ( p-'. C) ,. 0) 44.' 1-4' >s-4 C0 r-4 .) C) C, C.. C.- :i : C: Cii i Cd 0 (I • . Co C') ') Co ) Co C) H co ci Ci C) '- C) Ci C) 0) (. 0 C.) C.. C) 0 Ci 0 0) Ci U CiC)O Or) C) OC.. C)0 ci C) s--I 0 o) 0 s-I CL) 0 s-I C') C s-I CL) 0 s-I Cl) 0 13 4-) Ci 0 Ci v- C) s-i C) Co r-i (4 Co s-I C CL) s-4 Cj Co s-I Cs) .. -• -.-.-.. > -....--.- . --..• > -..,--. > '.4 C) C) C) 0) (3 C) C) (3 0) C. 0 C) ) C) (3 C) 0 C) _•. •3• t 4 0CLJNNCdCot4NCLi3.4-)CL)NN0)NN )C.) .4s--I s-4r3.-3C..r4r4 C.s-4.rIC')s-Ir4Cl)sI1 (4 Cl) C) s-I ('4 C') -.1 to '.C) N- C) o 0 s-I s-I s-I 4 s-.-I s-I s-I p-I s-I Ci 0 CGi Ci Ci Ci Lt '.0 CO D'.o C) 1f'i '.0 C'. .-' Cfj C'. '0 CO - -'t 4 CD C) N- N- C' C' CO N- Lfl C' CD N-'0 c4 IS-- CO C) C' CO -I--I ci 00 II) i-i --4 c-i (4-4 4-4 C) 0 'C) c:L. C) 0 41 >C .00CiOOCicCCi.OucCCi r-4 C) C' CO ON C'. CO -t C) .-- -4 - c--i C' C' C' e-a ON '-0 ci >- CO '.0 .- C' 'C' *r CO ..- N- CD C- C-I '-C CD CD .. CD Ci (-I Ci ('4 c-I ('-I -4 -i ('4C-4 i-.(---ic'i i-.i c-'c- c'.j ,:I c--i S--I C) 00 C'C'4 Ci C) 3') C) - u CO 41 -0 '.0 CD () if'i C-) CD C' CD ('4 CO N- - - ci C/) Q cfl cfl '1) CD Cl) CD CD CD C'-) ("4 ("4 '0 -.1 C' - CO ci JJ 00 CD O CM c'4 N- tf' tf' c> CD CD C' CO C--I '-1 <, c- az-, tf CD CD CD CD CD -.1 . . . q Ov 0. 0 - C) ON C) ci ci C) CC C'-.) C) N- C) Zr) ('4 tt ° '0 CD ('-4 CD - CD ..i ifCC CDN-'0C'-4'.0C'N-C--ICD 1JC)".CO c'It') -4 P-i iD. C) N- C) ON '0 N- N- CO CO CO C) N- C) N- C' X. 03 0 CI' O CD ("4 CD C') C-) (n ("4 C') CD -- CD -CI- CD CD C') C') C) P.4 54 Ci If' N CD CD *1) N ci C' o '0 N- CO C' -5-- --5- - S--- ci 0 LI) C-) u') c-I ii') r-4 LrI C') N. ('4 -'-4 Ci Ls If', If) S--. CC -.. Ci -. •-.. C C) 0 C) CC > ON - r'4 > —.. -5 C) -. Ci C) i-i k '0 '0 .-4 Ci -.r a) CD C) '0 C) CD C)) 4.1 C) C) C) C) Ci Cs) c-a (1, C') C) C--a C)) I Ci Ci Ci Ci c CC C) CCj 4.) ('4 Ci C) (C) (3 Ci (I (C C) (C) C) ei L C) 3_),-4 C)' 0CC 4-I > :. - ). > 4-; >'--- ci.4I-I Ci Cl; f-I 4.V" C) OOCCOC)OCiC-C))O C) ciOCiC - )r'-I C)) v-I Ct .-4 C)) .-4 1)) ,-, C) s-C C) 0) s-I 4.1 Ci •,-4 i-' ,-4CJCiC) c'344 4.1 I J ') ..4 s-4 . s-4 C'3Cj(CCiCi'(CCCCC)CC(iCi iC)Ci 0O C) zzzz zz:Z '-4 CC ccl. -1 Z .-1 ':1- LI) '.0 CO C' ,- C') N-- CO -( c q C") -Cl- (-4 s-( r4 '-1 v-4 r4 r Table 4 : Plant population and yield data on legumes in the maize pattern of planting experiment in 1974. I Grain Legumes Plant Fresh Dry Population Weight of Grain yield per ha IPods, t/ha tfha L. Maize alone 2. Climbing cowpeas (Sitaopole)fmaize same row 11,884 efg 1.42 g 0.08 f 3. Climbing cowpeas (Sitaopole)/maize alt. rows 9,452 efg 2.22 g 0.43 def 'i. Climbing cowpeas (Sitaopole)/raaize alt. 4 rows 12,301 ef 2.46 efg 0.22 def 3. Pole lima/maize same row 7,714 hi 1.41 g 0.23 f S. Pole lime/maize alt. rows 11,815 fgh 2.96 ef 0.25 de 7. Pole lima/maize alt. 4 rows 10,495 efgh 5.16 bc 0.84 c . Erect cowpea (Prima)/maize alt. rows 42,603 a 1.20 fg 0.15 ef 9. Erect cowpea (Prima)/maize alt. 4 rows 43,299 a 1.01 g 0.13 ef 0. Bush lima/rnaize alt. rows 13,554 de 0.67 g 0.11 f Bush lima/maize alt. 4 rows 15,707 d 1.05 g 0.15 ef Soybeans/maize alt. rows 30,302 c 3.24 de 0.33 def Soybeans/maize alt. 4 rows 34,472 b 4.96 cd 0.50 •b 4. Dwarf pigeon pea/maize alt. rows 11,678 efg 6.69 be 1.04 be t5. Dwarf pigeon pea/maize alt. 4 rows 12,024 efg 5.96 he 0.93 c Tree type pigeon pea/maize alt. rows 6,047 i 11.15 a 1.78 d Tree type pigeon pea/maize alt. 4 rows 8,440 ghi 8.34 b 1.29 b g* g* Legume same row as maize 9,799 ef 1.42 0.16 ef* Legume alt. rows with maize 17,924 d 4.02 cd 0.58 b Legume 4 rows alt. with maize 4 rows 19,534 d 4.18 cd 0.58 h * These figures refer to means based on climbing cowpeas (Sitaopole) and pole lima only. .. ¼. ,-1 7-1 'vi (A) 00 ' 4) C) C) 0 04) J3 (1 0 4c .4_I it C) /4 -IC C) CI ( LJCJ .. •U (.,4)4-4 (JO CJrJ (1CJ 'itt$ o 14 - ,-4 CO -)' CO (N LI'). LI) (N C) Cl) ('1 -.J C) L/') I-.. N- .4 If') Ci') C) N. C.) L') 41 4,') (") I-I C- 0(N C" • (N N- C'-) • CA -.zf • C) '-1' • ON ( • sJ) CD • N- (N CA • C) C 9. "-4 C) 14 LI') C') (N 4 C') c-i if i c') C' C') .N C') (N (N (-.4 C') C") C'-' C") j- ri c-.. 1-i C) () 1-I 4.4 0 CO 4-i V. -IC -IC C) 00 IC' C) .4)4) 'vI(i (JO".. $ ci) 4.4 'f--I C, 4C) C.) 0 C) .0 4).4) JO 'U C) JO C) ' 4.4 ..)o(JcC; -L'.4).0cJ -C)(,ccLc CLC.JO C0CJJOC,O.:tCJC,.:0 0 (0 (1' 14 C LI) a) ) •.-4 4.1 C') ' 0,1 CA C" C") C") Ii) r4 () Cl) LI', N..4 r1 N- t.J N. 'n ii') r-1 C'-. (N C"' '.0 (C) C) (N N 14 -'-4 C')(N JC' •• C) 14 .4(NC'J(N 1)C')1)CJ.4C(N (N )(NC'JCN Ct, 4_I ti 1:1. 4_Ir a) Cl) C) 'IC 300 00 00 4)4) 0() -IC ci 0 C) L).L- -1 OJO.4.)JO.LJJO ,U,tJOJOJOJO.0,0JO,04JO.0i tf)C) '.I ci) N' C 14 N 0 ON C) 11 .4 C) LI') '.0 (N N.. -1 4,') -.3 C:) N- -4 C) LI C) .4 (N N. (N .f) N' ON .4 C) '.4) 4/') tf.. N. 411 '..) -Z) C" -'-4 r-1 v-I ', (N v--I C) CO U. If') C') 0". 0.) C') .4J v-4 C") Li) N- CO -.1- L . 4..J0,.,'.,i,,. 0)C.')Li.:':' J.C..14l CC') ---. _- - - - - _.- - -- -. -S -S • - -S - '- '- ••' -S - /3 1) '.3 C) LI C) .1 (3 Li -:1 (4 4) (3 U C) .3 0 Cl C, fl) C) (3 0 Cl 0 4) C) '3 3 (tI 1)) 41 14 t, Nt'A C4t')t-C(4 &4Ll.IL4 4IW.'4 •'J(-'('-) .-JLI'4(4 0 I , .4 •ri r4 'p-C .,-. ,4 - -4 .r) ,t -v-I •.-t 'v-I r' v- .4 'v-I ', ',. ',-( I .0 .. .r4 ',-1 ., t. C, (C.' C. _ '; C. 1 ( C. t. ) C. C.. C" L (4 C. C, C) -. C A C -. C 0) -. ;, ; . z z Iq 4,) C) C) • • ...... • t . • • . • • . • • . . * . • 1-4 .- r- '-4 '-4 v-I v-I '-4 v-I .-4 r-4 C".) Cu C'-) C'-.) iN ('-3 C-I (N C--i L '. c1 0 ') t 4j •. J C) C) U) V. • --... i . (.i 4 0 L()CC p. - C) ci) p-i JC) 0 U 0 -'- 0 <4 • s_A( 14&' 0 C) 0 co C) C) .1.3 41 4 r- 0 CO %r,. . 0) 0. 3.4 3.4 Ci 41 44 0 C) .44 CG) tp- - o .-4 C) (•.k ri ("C C) () ft - r— N. -4 41 C) U. :- •----. '4-4 -S 44 0 C-i C. Cl- - C r- ti cf ("s .4-f 3.4 a>o I -4 -4-4 Ci) C) 4.3 :- 0 C) C) N. —4 • -'0 • C) 10 QCC)P 34 C) OOkO r-4 C) p. o r- 0. 0 C) U 'C. '-4 I-i C) -C. Ci) C) 3-I ..0 ..P 0 p. C)c •CN 0. 0 PE-i I 3-' o N. C) 43 1-4 43 -4 C) C) 4--I P •c'-4' c C) 1'. a' C) C) o r-i '-I •1 0 43 r4 4j 4j0 0 cli 1 r-4CflN. 43 ; >p c'-IC0 • - 34 3 4 4 • 4 'C. co 0 4JC) 0 C) r4 U J0 o C1 Q -4j 0 ci) p. •— •;( C) 00C)P 0 -4. CO 0 -4 Z ) J .J t/) ) C) E-1 D- 0 C C) 41 P C) -' -4 - -4 .4-4 •1 C) 0 c' -4 (C -JC 1-1 C) '-4 C) 0) '-I C'.0 (fl - Lfl '.0 I p. C) .0 < 0 rJcir) >- C CD-('? 0 - rr-—; ()E-4 — --1 CL C • ol 041 41) C .i ;0 A. U) 4L1 - •.0 LA • C) C) (0 (0 (0 e - It) r a .f..Q ---4 $ (3)0)0) (1 C) a) 00 0 ciC) O j C') L/) 0 0 1.4 1-. 1.4 - U] LI) -I Z CL CC (I, 000 CLo zz j) U•Q - o 0 E ci. 4-1 co (0 C) 4.10 . r c. C C) -° C) 0. U] C a 0 (rj(iJaj (OCu(t' - .-1 CO i c. 'j C) (0 Cu (i) C) 0 .. S4 N. (0 N- (0 0) (C) N- CO (0 -f (0(0(0 (o (0 (0 - (I) 0) — C') CO C) C_'3 C'3 (') C') •• (U f. Co v_ a) --..4 — .z. f) ($D ' .-4 (0 0) 0 4•J C')' (V) C) — C) — CO (.) 0 C C) — ( U) - C) C'-' r-1 N- 00 1 N- Ci) 4 C)) C) (0 0 C) — C) - c' — C) c- Cl C Cl) 4.1(0 a. a (0 C)C)C) (0(l) C) (1) (0 Cl) (0(0 C) C) C) U]O. C Cl) ci) C (0 (I) (C) (.0 (0 - (-0 C) 0-. N- - (1) C) C) C) L/) _1 o u —4 Z 'c' 0) ' z Q0 m ra ..ci fu S ( C. Is. 0 41 (•) c') C- ci:v (N (N (N C) l4• •.-4 • . . L-J 0 0 0 '-4 z (:. C) (1) CL; C) ci 00 N C.) (1) 000 0 0 r4 Cj •$ ( C.; 1.i C/) .4.1 iJ ci o (N ('C (N cr > '11 -i •C'4 Cfl (N C) '. C) 0 C CD '.1 ii —C ; si C'.) C') (N >.0 .rC i-C 94 (IN CA Cl) C) cLC ).-. C: r- r- ti__i 4-1 :) 'I) (1) Cr) •:' ci + + + 44 ci p.' C) C) r1 Ci C) C') C.) (.1 -C) : a ou :ii çc .i: . C.) r4 I.i C ci (i c: C.; C.)Ii.4 4J•-4 1 4 s.4 C;) r4 ci .4r4Q •..4C.; ci 4.1 .-1 r1 C. N. (N I/C 004-4 zc C) Ii 4-1 C) o in )-I r- • ci zz Zl C CL; C...) •(:.J L r1 o c.r 4iC)C) (1) o 4-i ..:..3 4.) Cl) r4 (4.4 C) U) C) ci oo CJ ...., 0 I.) ' •rl C)CJ) •,-1 CL; .4.) 0) C) L C) 4J4J::i.; C) cC) th C) ci C C) N. Cl) 4.4 • • C) • o .4.1 C) C) C ,-C .j C) N. (.) CL; .ilL C) 4 0 -4i0 Cl) (N C') r-4 (J , C) c'•) C") ci 0 W r.4 0 4-4 CU Cl) 114 C.; 1-4 Cl) 4.1 IL; C.) CL; i—C ci () C.; ci i-I o •H 4.4 in C) '0 0 40 ) C.) ci 0 T) rJ • C. (N I 4 cC CL; C. (C C.; c-i 4.4 d %.' 1-11 44 CI ON N. '.0 -.4 (N r4 CC.. ., .1.1 - N. C") i—C ci C) r.i C") Cfl r'l N- (ON. 0 (, 0 cv;C;C; 4.) 1-4 44 o C:) 1-4 0 C-) C) C-i CL; C-i •.-4 C; CCC.; C.. Ci c-.; •-4 C) Ct) C) ,-I N. s••) u) tel ¼ -..-.i- (:) N. CL; u CJ -.1' co N- r4 ('4(0 Ci) Cl) N. C) 4.) C-.. o r- '0 N-o C.) (N I.-) 4-I (4) 4j4 C.) i—I 0 cL. 611 -:1 in -'1. .. I/)'.L) -.;j• if) Li) ci (1)0 14- C) I4 C) ci 4) c.; •- ..-1 CL; I) CL; c C co C) ..( ..-4 ('4 (N ç) c-- i—I C) IC) (N If) LH C)4J i/ .. i-i r-C .. C') co —4 1 C. (9 ,-4 (IC (A -. Ce P.4 I.' • N. C', 110 N. N. o (") C') (') C') (') C") r C' C) C) CflC') C'! C') Cf . C) 00 0 0 00 000 C) P4 'I)'0 ) '.0 '4) '.0 ti '.0 If) (4) -Li o in - , o in ci c' n 0 H 4.1 1.4 C-... C. C) C) C..i C, ) C) 4]) ,f) C) • U4 •,-4 1.4.4 C.) 00 IDC/) cCdCd 0 CdCdCdCdCdCdCdCd .,..4 .--4 Cd CO H '.0 C) 'D .0-.1 C (N N. N. CC 0) N- L' In (N .-4 • H C) 00 C C) C 0 0 Cf H 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 00 0 C 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 1_I $.i 0 r1 (1) ci) c O.) CdCdCdCdCdCdCdCdCd Cd 0 N-Hr-I '.O-.10H H c -.. H CO • . • '.0 Cl) Cl) c.i c4 c' -d cn ..i CO C' -Zr (?) Cd P. W4U4-J • z . 0v-40 000000000 0000 1-4 0 0 0 bo LI o ci) ,.0 Qj 'dci) rlCd 'dWCJ CdCdCdOU'd)'d Cd cci 0 cfl 03 -Zr (N -Zr N- -Zr N. in N. H H 0 03 4) Cd ,-4 -i 0 '.0 0 (N '.0 03 (J. (N 0 -Zr '.0 0 (N (N In 03 H ) Cl) CC 00 0'. • H 0 .1 C'l 0 (N '.0 0 LI". N- 0 '.0 p.4 0. C:). a a • a tanaaAa . a a A SI 1-4 o 0'. (N tfl r- -n- -1- c" H In - U". CO 0'. H 0 (N ci) (N In (N H i-I .-4 (N (N (N (N (N (N C') (N C') C') 0. CO cdcdcdcdcdCd0cdcd0Ccd CdCdCd Cd H H Co H ON '.0 ('1 In .Zr CC) In I!'. 00 0'. 0'. In 0 '4. '.0 H cci C) . • • Ifl '.0 N- N- '.0 r- o'. '10 in o'. '. in -K '.0 CO N. '.0 4. .-.4-.. ••S• H H H H H H H i-I H H H H H H H H 0 •0 44 Cd Cd > H Cd H (N In c'. 0 0 - o.. en in N- N C') Ifl N- N. O Cl) Z) • • • a-. a) In In H C") in en en in K co 44 r4 "-.. (I 4_i '4 tfl LI') it'. in IT '4 U'. it'. -Zr U') '4 in -4. LI') - 0 Dt In .0.0,0.0,0 ,O co Cd Cd A in C) 1- 4-I ".4 0) LI'. '.0 (N 0) (") ON if) H (N H '.0 0 if) 0 Cl'. 0 • •(N'.0Co0N.0)0Q(f)QC0' '.DN.'.0CN 0 H 0 'C) • .4( H çi 0 U". '.0 0'. H '.C. In 0'. In '.0 C'. 03 0 0 0) H 0 4_i LU (N C") (N (N C") (N (') (N C". Cr) r-1 ("1 C") C') In C") cdO Cd ci) co 0(1) ".4 H -4. H r'-. co N- N- H 0'. In in a-. (N 1- 0 (N • •(NCCoa-C'4(N(NCON.0.ZrN.CO 0C'40'.0\ ba C) 4-1 'tj • Z • • U, C/I 0 N. 0) (N 0 CC CO 0'. 0" 0 (N 0'. 0'. '.0 N. CO C') C) -zr - -1' U') 'Zr (N Cl) - LI') LI') - - -4. -4. -4. N C) H 4-i 0 H CdCdCdCdCdCdcdcdClCd(dCd Ci)CciCd 4J4-' CO r. co ,Cd H Co H In 0 In In H 0 N. Li') it) co H . • '.0 (N H N. it) N- 0'. 110 0 '0 0'. ON In (N 0 (N (11CC H ) )..i . . • c"'. 0 '.0 0'. (N •• .-4 C") 0 .-4 H .-C Cl) C") It N. C") P.4 0. Ci a a .aaaSI a a a -Z * a a oa) O C). N. 0*1 03 it') '.0 CO 00 N- in '4.03 In 03 '.0 N-. '0 H Ct)C')Cfl (')Ct)CflC") 4.1 1-4 HHH H H H Cd cci cci 0 0 0 U,4J .rI.r-4HCd O00 0 CdCd td4_i4 44(i) (1) 0•. 0 'd'd'd'Ci'd'd'd+++ 1-44-1444.1 1) (I) CiCdCdCdCdCdCdCdCdCd'd'd'O '-I ç 0444J444444JJ4J4J1J4JJ.J CiHHH Cd (I) r-),-'C Cd - -"- 0 E-4 Cd C) H C') 17 r-4 C') H C') '4. H C')'4' CO H C') '4. 4_i ci) H0WC)0)0)WWWCiCiC.)(1CdCl) (DWC)(1 Cl) 'dCdNNNNNNWNNNNN NNNN ( .'.4 ..4 4 '.4 '.4 1.4 '.4 .'.4 •'.'f H H H H ".4 ".4 HIn'.ON.COO'.0'-lC'JIn-ZrIn r-IC'1Ct)-4. 0 0 .-4'.00'. 0 •-4 '-400 0 0 000 'O •0 1.40 0 C , '.0 0 0cC .0 000 0 0 000 •0 P. •0 0 00 4.4 0 00 0 , 04.4 10 r, C)4(% 0 .. 4 4 '0 000 P. 0 000 •0 U C'40. '0 0) 0 4' 0 0 •.-4 000 4-4 P. 0 0 000 41 cli ce cd 0 I00 0 0 1-4 U 4-4 bO U 0.00 0 0 O (0 C4.-4 r-1'000 97 U 'Or-. r-r-. o 1444 ,-4-4.1 0 U 41 0 (0 04.4 (00 00(0 U .0 Ow N - tf I00'.'O - CO U P4 W 'Or'- ui '0 10 U (0 '-4 (-4 (0 -0 0 '-'0 '.4 (0(0 CO CA 04 .-4 -4 .-4 14 4 '0 1.4 0 04.4 00 .0.00 .-4r"* 0030 4-1 tSr- CsO'a) .-Ir'f.'l C ba 00 (0 '.4.S .-4'.-4 C f P. 0) 000 U UNc4ON(0 .4.1 0 0 ril 4-' 1-4 r40'lr") ..t , fs . , 0 . ... N .' 7.N4 N 3' ol ,. (ft N '3 N 3) U) U) t 'C (-4 C.; 04 4•C'01 4; >44.0 '3 Ci 44 t).0 0 C' 0(4.0 (C. U.0 0.044043.0 o 44 > 44 4-. N'3 C .. -. N C) '0 CO, cC Cr t-. o c' r-. i- - a' -.0 Ci' 4'- Co r-. C .7. 'o r-. -4 '3'0 '3'3(.4 .3'3'3 43 '343 (4(4 44 4.4 - C ' C' -'4 C. -' -4. Si (4(3 '-4 '0 '3 N C SOC 10 .7 40 C) '3 N 'C) U) C) C.) '3 In p. 41 U) 3' N'3 U) -.0 N M. '1'. I) C') N'0 3 N N 4-4 i so 44. 4 '0'0'0ZD '4 '0C'0'000 (4 41 N 0' N C'S N 4.4 U) ('4 N .. -.7 - U) -. .. N '3 4- ('S C') 4 4) 4) (3 is .0 k C' '0 C-i in N " so U) U) .(' Co -3 '.7 N N N N W. eq (44 -4 U C CC 0 4-' C'C'(4UUCC',C'.t)U)4JC'4-,UC'C'.A.0.0.0 '-4 .4) j Q ••-.4 4: , , , ,3 'C (4 (4 3 s-I CU -4 N ('i "4 05 C-i C') .3 - -' C") .-( ei '3 '3 £3 .0 '0.0 .0.0'0'3 '3 .4. sos3'3 -.0 .0 -.0 '35.3 '0'0 '0 U '.4 '3. 14 0 1 -.4 10 C as D Lf £3 VS -.7 (4 .-'. -. N C-) (-4 N 'ft 5 C') N 4'i '-4 N N ) if) Cr, 41 £4 U)U)U)f)U)6',;.'U)U)C43;ft(4'5U)U.VSU)iflU)U)44'4 -4 0 C' p.' C 0 s- 4'-. -.'t ) ,"i N C) it, . C 4') C' 4- N ' -4 4') C 3.. 0. 0. '0 0 ('1 C') C') NC'S 4"')"S Cl ('S C C') C') N N Cl N 4') N C') C') C') C') C U 4, (4 '43 E. 4, 0. (4 4. W C' N 41 -4 C. 3C') ... (4 .44 14 41 4, --4 Qr.. .0 '4 p. l'3CU00.C4; ,CC c0 '4 044 44U)osJC'.3.)-,-' 0.t,,'3 4444-1(45) 4o r_ >Cc to (44,4-. 'C'C('3O0.'U'3'3,' 4.4-.Cc'-•-.)C'.)C';5.I2')(4 U044 C .4) N 4-3 0'. 0 Cdl 'LI '() ci 0sCDL C.\'J\ 3'.0'-4cDN.0'.00C'l-.zi C' C) -Zi -cC.) '4) C) 1 .-4 If) -z o •.- • C) H i 4- U .-I C' C'1 N (N C'-) (') ('4 C) Cs) c-.: U) (') C') Cs) C-4 C) N (N N C") Cs1 4.4 C) 5-i 9-4 .-4 C.) C,., L. 4, C C _ 4'.) (" C tJ t. C, C C c C-. C C 03 '1) C) C)) J C') -ZrC') Cs) (-' N (\ N Li) I.?) ON . C) .- (3 N. ON .-4 C') Cr.) L'I '0 ci C') - N C') Cl) C) ( j C') Cl) -.. (') '4) C') Li) . S S • • • S S C)QQC)O0(D0C)C)QCDOCD000C)QCD() Cl) '0 '1: 'cl Ti J 'Vi 10 'ti 'Ci TI CMJ 0 C_I 'i (I C) U C.) ' C) C) U (J U C.) C) C) U CC' Ili ._.. C) ,L .0 C) .i i3 - u £ .0 ,0 - .0 .4) .0 ,L) 4 C) U t.. ( . ,0 c. k. .) cr U t. ,L t; C:' c. t , (: C6 t: (. c. Ii ,- Ci) C') .') N. i-I C" N. Cs) N. .- C-'- .-) Vi '4) -1 '-C) r-- '.0 C.!) Cr) N- Cr' C..) L') '--I ) -: C-'- ON C) 'T Li) C) (C) C) -rj' '-0 C') '-I '-0 .0 0 C) Li) ç,) 'r) N- 0' - N. U) N- N- C' (r. (N -. - L I C) CD C) r-4 C') 0 0 1-i-i C') '.0 'j', ') C'J zj If) ('-4 C..) C) . - '-J - Li) -4 .ç -j .4 C) f-I 44 4-- 4-: , 'ti tli C. '4.4 4. 9-4 U.4 14 4.4 44 't) C) 9-4C1C)rJ()Qe)('OJ t4,4UCJQCJC) QU.L) .0 C) i-1 r-I C) 'U 'ti 'i ,.' 0 : ,ci 'C) V.4 Cl I 'C) 'C) ' ) 1 I1 'vi .0 4. C'; C; 4 •,-I -4 41) C)) C) cr) U) C.,.' Cl-. (:;' -I N- '-C) C') C) C) ,-I 0) C) C) 00 '.0 U) C') C' (. '.'. 4 '% 0 C) ...) C) 0) C) CI.' C) C)' N. CD - C') S-zr C-SI C) C'; C) 'c -r' 'C) ol oJ o 'vi 't.' LW 'vi 9-1 'vi 0.' (.0 U C) 0 ti0 44.-4 U U C) (J'C) C) U 44 00 C) 0 L ,.'i ,-Q .0 C.) 0) 0 CI (') ,f) f4 ,j) Q 'C) a C) 44 ) • C) C-.' C.. C C).) C ,.C) 'Ci ,L) .0 'V (CC C.. 0 C .0 0 CCC C 'C) 44 C) C css C) C) 0.. ') C) C) N- C-"- C") C') C) N. C") C C') C") C') C') C') N. C") N. C') C') C) C") N. C') Cl) PN '4) '4) C') C) C) "C) C') C" C) Cl ) Cl) C') C") '-C) Ci') '.0 (") C') C') C") '-0 cq 0 '-I 0 ( 0 . . (.) '-4 0 C) '.0 -.- -..j' -. Cs) C) C") N C) '-C) '.) ,- -.zJ- C' .-4 C- C) C') I.') '4) -4 C') ci -:1- -. '-)- -4 -5- -C:.' -Z.<• .4 ,. -rj -ri' -.4- .4 -4 .4 -.). C') C') -j- 1-5 ç U) o N- 0 Cr' C) rl 4J 4JL C C C Ci C ci C C ci t-J ci C-'; C'; C C) C-) ci c C) C) ci C -1 i N Cl) (3 C) .4 Cl) C) U) CCC") -- C)) C') N. -4 CI) N- '-I) -4 i-I CC) (C) ..-4 r4 CL) 4 CC) Cl Cr) C)) ( 14 ) LI) r-4 (I) '4) ,-"I C) Z 'J 'C) -3 C)'4) '.C) 0" CD .1.1 0 ci.P.i ,-I -zi, ,-4 C,) '4" '4) N. .)C) co -• "3 Cs) C) '0 N. .4 r-I C. 00 0 C') .'4 0) r1 (. '-0 C' 04 C) ,-I C.) Cd" -4 C.'.' C' 0) C--i Ci) N C') C") ('4 _ 0) p4 C') C') C'-) C") C" (N C) C") C') C) N Cl: C) Cs) C') Cs) C") (14 C") '-I C) C") s-I •::: C) C) Cl) r-1 . i C) 0l C). -.4 - vi14 U 5.141 •.-I U) CJ ' C'; ,Li C) (.1 CC )4 U)5-4 00.C) F-I U> 1J 0 .)4.' 0U 0'-' 00. '-4 0 c).14 611 f.41 C)U)t)41 o .0. CC' 4J4Jr-4 U)iCJ 0) 00.0 (...'j (5WUC)i4.J-.-1 C)Q F-I C)0s-).-J-11 b04-1 00.,s: •,-I-l-4Uc'; .0 C),) JJ.:)C)CQCd),; Cu u:)c,C.') a. -CCCiL.Q i r-IC.) WOO-I ' - )U0c- c.0004J'V'U,i4Cd) CNN CICI)r ,-r)Cd)UC n CCC) C)C)c) s-4.-,4 I U C) C) C) C)i Co C) C) --4 •.-I --I Ci ,--I t. '. -,-4 -,4 . o , .- F-I Cs) C').4 U) '-0 N. CD CC) C) r'I Cs) C1 ).4 L/') '4) N. C) Ci' C) F-I ("1 r-I i-I "I 4 rI f-I r-I r'I I C') C') C') 4-4 Co Ci CC CC ci CC CO CC F)) Ii U) it' co c cm 0 03 ci ---.. Cl) ('F 44 '+4 ,.-4 r.4 '-4 •-4 .-4 r-4 --F MR •0 -4 -4 •0 1I C ,-1 C -.4 ci Ill c 3 c U • .4 CO --F 03 C-I Cci ('F fl CC, -4 ('-I 1-4 Ln '.0 '0 '0 ,- u, U ('4 C cli "-F C > CI) CC 0 ,-4 P-I r-4 t-.4 r-1 ,-.4 p-I ...-.I .-4 --F U) Ci) 41 0 0 (6 CC Cl (6 (6 Cl Cl CO (O (6 C o -4 '0 03 ul N. C-I - N- p-' 03 C'4 4; 1-4 • . . s . Cl QJ 0 CD r-4 p--i p-I p-.4 .• .I r4 .' 41 41 CC 41 Ci CO .0 CC CC CC CO a, CO C' C.) Ci -,-C 03 Co C-I C- N. c- C- -j -1- i-I N. (N (N C') C . . . . ci U'. If) Ct) '.0 Ct'. If'. '0 if) LA ci $4 '44 0. -'-4 o . -C CO tO CO (ICC 41 Ci 41 c') 03 C") i-F C' C") . - c''. Cl) C ). C.F '.0 '0 -4 ('4 Co '0 CD CC. '0 '.0 CO Ci C") CO i-I N. (N Cs) It) C- C') C') C') C'-. If) Li-'. Lt) c-I '.0 4.1 C. F-' CO N i 41 4 U) 00,-I C...... CO CO CO CO .0 (6 tO tO to CO U) I C 1- r-. N. "'SF c- C') C'- rn '.C) 03 -t ON 03 wl (3 (3'. C * - . • Ci 0) C.i '.(3 '0 U) It) It) 11t '.0 0 F.4 C CC 03 '- CC' 0 CO a) 04 03 c i--F (3 03 (0 0) c-SF - • . . - --4 (N Fl U) 'C... -. C Ci .0 ,0 ,0 U) .--4 41 ("F C'- 0' (54 .4. 03 '.0 03 03 0'. C-- (N C-F (N - Ci -'-4 41 CC I. F-' Ci U) Cd C ii '-4 p4_. CTj -- .- .- CF -4 .0 (1) '' I-.F C) CiCiCCsJO C) .i ci c..0 1.4 - Fl - 41 D •.- C C) A.) CC C'-4 O',-I O'-4 !-I- Dr 1-I C z 41 * 1.. 1.. Q 0 i' cfl i Fl C C C C C i-) Ci C-I 03 0'. C'- .- CJ 0 4-4 0 -4 0 '. F;::) CCIO'.00C'.DCOI -CO'a' .0) iF 0 LI o CC F-F ' -i 0' --i 4 --4 "C) t.2 C-4 ( 0) CC Ci 41 0) 41 Ii) .-.4 LI .403 F 4 Lf) 1-40's F.-FC"..l '•-"CC F' IF'. '-'C) D F-F i F-F ( 41 CC, (N -. .F1) C) .,-I -i C -i-i ) -.-i CO. Ns N 1C)CC.,4 C U)OZt00 '-F It.) t ci ),-4 Q') Ln '0 Table 15: Calorie values and gross returns for intercropped Maize and five varieties of groundnuts MAIN TREATMENTS ______CALORIE x 10 7 GROSS RETURNS IN I MAIZE G'UT TOTAL MAIZE G'NiJT TOTAL 1 Maize (sole) 4.82 - 4.82 298.22 - 298.22 a G'Nut Local Ikenne 4.82 2.79 2.79 298.22 421.76 719.99 b Maize Zaria 1 (F439-2) 4.82 5.70 10.52 298.22 860.09 1159.02 c Maize Zaria 2 (N25-68) 5.28 3.87 9.15 326.93 584.16 911.09 d Maize Zaria 3 (EM9 69 R74) 4.64 3.68 8.32 287.17 555.99 843.16 e Maize Zaria 4 (M276-70RRI) 4.64 2.95 7.59 287.17 445.79 732.96 2 G'Nut Sole - 13.81 13.81 - 2083.93 2083.93 3 Maize & G'Nut on same ridge 5.18 114 6.32 320.31 172.35 492.66 4 Maize on one side of ridge G'Nut on the other 4.96 1.26 6.22 307.05 190.58 497.63 5 Maize In furrow G'Nut on ridge 4.21 1.03 5.24 260.66 155.78 416.44 6 Maize & G'Nut on alt. rows on Flat - 4..86 1.09 5.95 300.42 164.06 464.48 H Table 16 : Plant population, number rf tubers an fresh weight of tubers in yarns in relationtc crop combinations cbservcci in Ibaan in 1975. Plant Numcr of Fresh uaiht - Treatments Porulation tubers of tu:ers per Ha jer Ha c !Pr 1. Yarnes alone 9250 b 18250 1: 23.09 b 7 Yam + maize 2,'stnnd staggerc 7000 a 13509 ab 10.01 a. 8 Yam + maize 2/stand same rcu 7000 a 14750 h 13.38 b II Yam + TVU 1190 6500 a 11750 a 10.93 a± 12 Yam + Sitmic1& 6750 a .12009 a 12.30 ab 21 Yam + maize 2/stand + Sitacpole + melon 7000 a 12250 a 11.38 ab 22 Yam + maize 4/stand + TU 1190 every 2 rows alt, with melon 6250 a 13000 ab 14.25 b I Yams alone 9250 b 18250 b 23.09 b 2 Yarns + 1 crop 6813 a 13003 ab 11.65 ab 3 Yarns + 3 crops 6625 a 12625 a 12.82 ab Means c•posito the cane letter in each column are not significantly different. 01- k H a) H 10 , ,.0, .c ,0,0CdCd,0CdCdcCdC1Cd a) CdCd .,-4 4.) 03 LI') C) C) C") C) CX) 0 C") CO LI') (') CO a) cli If) r- N- LI') U") '.C) N- C) CX) C) If) cli -..j' C) Li") N- If) -Zr 0' ,-4 LI') If) H C') 1.1 34 ON CC'\ Co C) H 1$') C) '. LI') (3\ Q\ LI') 0) C') C) C" It C") C) ifI C" If) 0) i-1 N. a) 4 C') H C') C') (N C') H H H C') C') H 4.1 -a) H a) H a) •'a)(3) CD 00 (3) 4.) ,r. 44L1.4 'C)OCJ"dcJ,.OWO 440O0 4-'d,0 41 ( 4 04-i a)'a),C) a),13 cdC)O cd a)a)cd 4)4)a)cJcdC)a)a)a)0 (3) 0 1-i N- H N- 0" N- C") It Co C") IX') It') 1.0 N. C') C') - 0'. U') 0 H Li') '.X) -It 110 H (3) o C") N- H C'- a '.o o cn (') 00' C') C) N. LI') N. 110 L/) N- C) ON I!') '.X) 11") 44 a) 4.) • . . . )4_4 - -r Ln C') -Z3' C") C") C') C") C") C") H C") C") Cs) C") H '-Zr C') C') H 'a) Ll H 0 4.) 4.) to 41 Cd Cd cd Cd co Cd Cd Cd a) cii Cd cii Cd(U CdCdCdCdCdCdCdCd 41 Cd o r') a) CO C") 0\ N. CX) C") N- LI) ON - CO 0 CX) 00 -Zr '.0 0 U') H C') Co C) Cot!) 0) () 0 o to C) C") ON C'-) If) ON C') C') Co C") '. fl C") 0 0' '.0 0) H 'I) '.0 LI') -Zr '.0 C) -Zr •rl r1 • . S I_I_I 4.) 0 a) mdo-.t-Z1--r-Zr - -Zr C') C') (N C") - U") - -.i) C) -d' a) '-4 a) 'H 1.8 (I) cu u a)Ci •14 to U Cd co a) ,0 Cd cii a) 'a) a) C)0 ,1 0 0 p. 41 U') U, a) r' a)C') ON LI)',l 0) '.0 C'-) IT N- CX) m C") '-ii' '.0 H '-Zr C') 'C) '-Zr C") H N- ON 0 'a) 4-) to C,) C") (0 -Zr CX) Co C) H C") Zr r-4 C") N- C'-) 1.0 1.0 0') -4 CO N- - 1,0 C") C) cii 0.) • S • • 4.) 1-4 a) 0 CD-Zr C) CO - '.0 '.0 C") 3'- H C') -. N- C") H '000 'Zr - N- C") Cd H r4H .H HC"IC'ICNHH H H H H H H C') H H H H H (I) 'a) Cd 0 a) a) C) () C) C.) Cd ,r) C,) ,X).0 4.84J,a) cii ,X) a) a) cii cii cii Cd to Cii cii cii a)CJCi) CdQCdCdCdCdCdCiia)a). C) to cd H 1-4 C") C) C) ('-4 ii') Li") Cl) C) I') CO CO CO C's) CO - '.0 H C) CO 33 CO CO '.0 N- C') 0 ,X1 r4 1.0 U') C) '.0 N- ON- (n CO C") '.00X)C\ 0000 11)0003c")C)C'4H a) a) to P.8 o N- C) Li") CC) H 'Zr Li') Co '.Zl• '.0 0) O '.0 C) CN N- ClCT') H '.0 0) 0) C') c") Cd 0 N- IZI, -Zr U') C) C") H '10 ON 0 C") '.C) N. '.0 C) 0 ON C') 0 03 C") '.0 0 III C) to 0) o P-I -Zr -Zr C') C") - '-Zr -Zr If') -Zr -Zr C") -1' C") -,i) -ii' -Vi) 41 H 0 H 41 r1 .' o rl HO H ci) r4 H a) 014 a)cii 00 14; CD- CDcd+c'4 0.0. •. a) r.4O .O p.0 Cd - - 0 .4,) - - 0.0+ U U 0 P. C') H (1) o 04 0" cii CO•• H H 60 Ci(3) 4.) 0 0 4) U) (3) H 1.4 1.4 c1-ia) P. a)p.0 • r4OJC). • 'a) a)CdCd 1i,,O0 rd 0 3 CD cd p-IH'rI 4.) 0 u1 H 04 Ci) + (V C) H CD'-1 H i-I Cd ci) Q4JciiCTJ (3) 4-) Ci Cd .il 14 bOO,) cii 4..) Na) (3) cll-i++ ci) p. CdCd p. r4 E 4J4JCJ)14 0 HO ci) Cd 4.) ((3 U) E C)Ja)j'a)C)C)r4 'C)a)"a) CO cia) 00 0 U Cd 0r-400 1-il-i a) rl a) $-i E cii a) ci) cii Cd Cd cii cii 4Ja)Ci)Ci) 00HHHH0a)C) En a) aj Cli 4..) 4,34.1 4,) 4.14.84.) a)4JU4J HCdCdCDH00041 U 0 14 p. H 4J0-a)U)F0HC') C,) • -'- '- -.. -. "-,, 4,) ci)H H (1) P. I-,- C'-) C') C'-) -.1' C') C") -Zr -Zr (N "Zr -4p4HC'4-Zr a)cii++++++cd++ 1-1 0 H 3-4 -'-4 Cl) a) (3) (3) C) (3) a) a) (I) a) 4) CD CD cliui-iciWa) ,.00a)CD0)CD00000i ) (I) a) N N N N C) N N N N N N N PONNN NNNNNNNNNN r4 41 H E 0 HH HH'r4-rl cii ci) Ci) ci) cii CT) ci cii cii 0 a) Ci) 14ci)c3ci) cJCdCdCdCd(iicliCddciiCd a) (L) Cd Cd Cl) H CL 4.) I cii. Z U 00 H Table 18 Ne plrnt "opulr'ticn, freth weirht of ve8etib1c cowpe (Sit3cpcic md cpo dry f,,rriin yield in reLiticn to crop ect-Linctims in 1975 P1'nt Fresh wt. Popul-ticn of c1iibin yi1d Trett.ents per ll Ccwpe tIh' (Sitropole) -recn Pods/h' 4 Cowçcms olone TVU 11") 3250 do .. 2.19 5 Clirnhin Cowpen. (Sit'cpcic) olone 38500 do 4.75 0.74 'hc 11 T'U 1190 + Ymtii 42125 e .. 1.0 c1 12 Clirnhin2 Ccwpe (Sitmqcle) + Yrms 25625 b 2.62 bc 0.41 13 C1imLiri Ccwpers (Sitcpo1c)-3-Mize 2,'ctnd 27875 b - 0.97 m 0.15 c 14 TVU 1190 +Mmize 2/ste- n6 40063 do .. 0.66 -'kc 15 TvT:; 1190 Mmize 4/str..id 39813 do .. 1.32 c 16 r;1ir.bin g 4/strnc! 37563 ci 1.54 b 0.24 17 TVU 1190 + Melon sm rcw stmered 39009 zie ..' 2.64 18 TVU 1190 + Mcicn 1ternmte rows 14138 a .. 4.60 d 0.51 aL . i9 C1ifoing Cc. eas(SitacpcIe)+4c1on crrne row 37375 d 3.26 be 20 C1im1:in Ccwpeas(Sitccpc1±)4-Mdcn 'it. row 13003 a 2.62 to 0.82 a. 21 Ciimbin: Cowpcas(Sitmcpcle)+Yans+Molcn + ilaize 2/stand . 40063 do 1.02 a 0.16 a 22 TVU 1190 every 2 rows alternatinI with Melon + Ma120 4/stand 36438 do .. 1.10 a Crop Combination Means TVU 1193 alone - 39250 do .. 2.19 ci CliDbinF Ccwpem (Sitacpolc)alcne 38500 do 4.75 0.74 etc TVU 1190 + 1 Crop3 5038 d .. 2.25 d Clit±ing Ccwpea. (Sitacpoie)+ 1 Crop 23288 a 2.20 hc 0.42 a TV1J 1190 + 3 Crops 38438 de .. 1.10 C1imhin Ccwpem (Sit'cpcle)+ 3 Crcps 40063 de 1.02 a 0.16 a -4 ci) 'I (I) .000 ro ru0.0 o ro c If) CC LI) C') C) LI) C') C) o c: co O) C') C') J .-- Co ')' if) "-1' N- it) (0 Co C) C) C) C') 'D C) CD (.Q4() a. co . . . . 2 C) -'-4 2 C 4-4 -- 000 0 00.0 0 (a 0 C') Cl) C') N. -4 c'. i- '-4 'z)' ('I N- CD (1) C) (0 '1' (0 N- —4 q, CD C, QCo0) C C') C") -1 '-4 a) es-' C') 4 -1 '-0 —4 0 —4 C '0 0 0 -I-i .0.0.0 .0 0,00 C ci) 0 co 4-' CD C) C) C).• C) C) CD (D CD S.-. 0 Q, 0 I-f) C) C) C) C) LI) C) C) C) C) C OW • • (ci - C') (D C) CO C) C13 Li-) CD C) ---4 Co If) CD C') C) (0 (') U) C) (ON-N LI) N- C) 3' C) If) 14 N- C) iI)a)C) C) OD 0) co Cl) C) C) 03 0) —4 C)) 4, ---4 —4 C ci) 04 0 U) 0 LI) --4 U) LI) C ( (ji- C)) U) 4-, #0 0 C CL (1)0+ +.9 11) 00 U ca-a C 0 ooc o ow a) --4 uoo Co o 0 U) OWO ' 0 C) —4 + + .. (I) U) I- ci) a. Ei •aa 0 4-. o • CC0 Ei 00 4-4 (1) 0 _4 ,_,N 0 .— 0 - It) o —I 4.J C C-'--' (2) (1) --I Cl) 00 4-, Q-4c') a) 1-1 0 "-'4-) 0C'1'r++ ++ C + + (0 C CC - CCC U) f. ONNO o OOU) c' 000 —4 --4 _-4 _l .-4 .-4 ci) --4 o 0000 ci) -'-I 00 0 4.1 ---4 0 -'--'I C) ci) '-1 Z f C") Cl) 0 N C)) 0) CD C') C') El Eu I U c- () C) N- -.r 4) (N -.: zr - '- U) NZr C -. C.:kO ') C) C r-i -4 C) C' C') Li) C) '.0 U) 0 C' '.0 - '.0 C-'! '.43 (') CIJ ti•'. r, CA N. tJ 'J 1-.. U) N- r- C') -..- (A Is) C'-. Cl) .-1 C") ,-4 ,-' CA C-.) C'-4 .-.r) 1. ('1 • -IU') • .C'5,-4 • U 0 • C')r'-. • •c. '-4 i-C -•' C') p cl ci C' 0) 0'4 CO (2) Ci C') C'-- C') -. r4 (') CT' CO . • I-I ,. • . . CA 10 . 1.4 U C' ,-4 11) . -t C'! CA 0" i-S C' •i .- I N. N- -.f .-4 - Cl) 0 '4) C'.) U) -4 C-C Cl) N. N- '4) .-4 i-I C') LI 'I U) U) 'I C) U) r-4 -H w () I.-). 1 '-0 -zj • '43 cc o C..) C) Is) • . ..iJ . i • • '.43 C'.) . .-4 C-C 1') Cl) C-..) Cl) 0 0 C-) I-I C) C-') CA C) C') Ci- C') fl &. .g' '.C) C) N 13 N- • (") C. .. C') • N- CT) r4 (A . • • i--I C'.) • . • Irl Cl) U') N. -4) • • U) '.2) C') C') . • . . C') '-.zJ r4 '.0 '.1) '.0 -Zr U) -.:j. C') C') Z4. 't ("S 4-i ON U) CA C-) C) N. '4) cr U' C.) i-S C-i C) N- C') . 0) C') (C I..) C') '2) C') .., (N -., U) (C) C') (,) ,- C' C) i-S (/' ..) co CA C) (1' C) C,.) 'S- '-.0 '-I ci L) (C) C) C') N- C') C) C'- 110 CJ C' C') C) N- C.) C)', N- CA N- ('4 C') (C) Cl) LH El i-I i- i--I ,-4 i--I i-I 44 r1 'U i-4 C) '.0 C') C) C') C') i--I U) N- N. 4-4 C) li 0 ¼!) . . . . •N-CA • -N-C) • • COO N- C3 o a C) U) C) i-I i-I (C) i--S ('C C'- C'--) (A 'C C') 4..) • I • CC C-) '4) N- U) (7' 0) C) C-' (C) '4) C'S C'.) C-i -U N (I) ('4 C') '4) i-S C') 0) Cl) .-S C)) U) (U Cl., • 0 • • • C) C) N- N- '7' • . 4-'- u'S (C-) f-. . . • . '.4) U) r4 -H C) :3 0 CI C) -i C.') CU-S () 0.-li-I 2) C)(a QC C) (2) '-4 C) C) '-4 1-5 C) 1-4 1- 4-i C. 0 ClON 0 i) 1-s rS > C) C) CU,l i-S CU '...i C) • c.') El C- '-I Or-s i--so 0 C,) C. L.j C. 4-J 1 'l 'tj : c ci C) -,-s > > .-i c. C. C, T.) 4-3 U (' El El C. 'j - +.,. i-I (C) C) CI . ('S (2) i--S p-S C) C,) 4_i '3 (2 '-- -- -r + 0 r-' ± ± '.i' ± C-N C-", C C - -_ -. r C12('.4 C) (' i--i i-I r'.. ç' C'.) (2 0 ç '- '2;-ii--4 '._',-Sr) . 0 4.14 ,) ci i-s '.3 c. N U U .3 : ". L (2 ii .0 (-4 N CI 0 U U '-4 .,-4 4_i 4_i p --4 U i i._i i -.. i-I 4 rI C) ai jC)cr5C, '-4 C' i--C i-S C) .4 ',. -.. --.. El Cl - - •------. C. >1 (1)N, ('S--st. c- Ut; Tt't(-)N('.2t N(''., - 0u' ':31.4 C, C. C Lt, UQCJ3C lit) Lj .-. >-' ,' ;.. -' -s ' ? . C') C') -Ct U) '.0 N- C.) C". C) .-' C'! C') .Zf Li) U) N- (;.) CA r,' --1 C'! r_-) r4 i-4 ui-4 y-4 ,-..4 i-I i-S i-i i-S (N C') C'.) a N -'-4 ITJ (OOO) U3t:EInd 0d UTd ulpayq C) •1- \ ('3 C) -4 '-4 (OOO) uoT4eInd 0d UP!d UOAI 4-. LI) C) U) Ck >' L_ -.4 _i •0 —4 4-I 0 10 M I 4-.0 (I) U) 0 o —4 L1 —I 0 '4-I 0 >'(XXY')( . U) (f'>"; —i —4 ecj- 1) -'-4 U, 0>. •4 4J rj O bo 0 —4 4-. fzj + '-4 o j o ici 0. U) t;._ 0 -.-. o. ' •'•-' '' a rj 44 i i _ 0.8 NXX -10 .4-. ro (ti —4 0. — —, 0 0. C) U) C) LI) C) ('1 1 4-. a13o}'uo] ni PIeTÀ oo uPeA —4 'a (-4 U) Cl iJ) CD U) 0 C13('1 -4 _-I e-Ii/'J 0 .L PIOTA 00U ue OL4\ '-4- H 0 - — I - - I I r I I L to CD . ci I . 2. N O (D • .(D 1 M rt tQ N _±_ ------,, .'-.I N \\\ \ 0 - --c, - En \ \- --\ .-.-. ---- . -----,------ \.-. •1 0 0 - --• • . . 0 - 0 •-----'- 13) .-. . .. - ...-•..------C) C-) rI IV z I IIJNL • C) 0 -z 0 Cl) ID • U a 0 w '-I \ fD •_•..- •-O -• Z 0 -----•------•.--- ..--- T 0 k Ir - 1 4) t 8tatenant of Expcnditureon Farminq 3yatcna ?or for the year rnded 31et Docrrber 1975 ] ,ci,entl1. tur Profecotonal Salariao 256,000 253,186.56 Benefite and Allowancia 202,800 208,246.19 Reu1nr Ia1ariee 260,850 259,272.20 Official Tiavel 37,960 34,632.83 Eupplise and Exponsen 10,310 7,569.86 Offnite Research 24,710 20,853.26 &quipmsnt 106,730 121,899.82 899* 360 !hi ,662.72 ONtW ACtICU1TUMk a Bupplisa and Epana.. 4• 750 4,123.69 Daily Rated Labor 13,750 13,939.96 Supplies and Ltpansea 24,1 5) 25,207,30 37,900 39,141.66 pPIjN0 StTJt Daily Rated Labor 55,900 55,651.90 supplies and Expemom 16 9 660 16,996.33 12,560 72 o648.23 Unity Rated Labor 1,400 1,066.00 Supplies and Expanse. 2,900 992.51 2' 4,300 56050.51 f r. .4 .1 H Thi,rnclituro tAL?t Dnily 1Uted Lnbor 7,140 7,593.O0 upp1Lae MW Expenses 1 2 720 I p 733.41 0,860 9,320.41 k2j4 ctuaiv & Dii1y Uz*tQd Lnbor 13,910 14,115.77 Supplies and Expawas .65 35,760 37,456.42 fob Lirgics & gmramX0fl Dnily Rntod Labor 12,460 1:3, 36 .30 supplies and 150050 17, i'7.1fl 27& 510 30(i7L.56 WEAL FAMaNG 8?8'L'I • 01 60916000 0I01100097.00 '1ia abova CLguaa ara aubja P.L.C. Pritchard, 27th Vbruary 1916 Tvwwureve I' Statement of Capital Items Included in Expenditure on Farming Systems Program for the Year Ended 31st December 1975 (of which items marked * are specifically for work on inter-cropping systems) Description Amount Hydraulic Bench - Gravimetric . $7,559.94 Fleco Model - Tree Pusher . 4,019.58 3 Miniature Temperature Recorder Scales . 4,127.21 3 Landmaster Cultivators . * 4,733.68 120 50mm Soil Thermometers . * 1,562.79 Grain Dryer RD-1200 . 1,834.81 Construction of Traversing Mechanism for Gamma Scanning Equipment 2,572.40 6 Peugeot Autocycles 2,099.52 1 Therrnocirculator Radiant-heat Oven . 1,638.00 1 Hot Pack Model 214300 Mech. Conversion Tru-temp Oven 7,621.60 1 Plant Growth Photometer + Accessories ) 4 Maximum Wind Indicator ) 2,043.47 1 Recording Rain Gauge ) 2 Mech. Pyranograph, 1 Meteograph 3,120.42 1 Hygrothermograph ) 1 Mercurial Barometer ) 1 Portable Area Meter + Accessories . 6,186.32 1 Model N4000 Tecator Digestion System . 3,950.59 Mulch Plot Run-off Collection Construction . * 4,000.00 1 Pneumatic Stripper Harvester 1,514.80 1 Harrison 13" Lathe M300 40" Centre-gapped + Accessory 5,607.98 2 Pedestrial Tractors ) 1 Sickle Mower + Accessories ) 2,506.38 1 Range Rover 11,000.00 1 KWH Unit Blower ) 1 Power Sprayer ) 2,238.67 1 Crop Moisture Meter ) 1 Soil Moisture Tester ) Biology Laboratory Furniture 14,980.00 $94,918.16 18th March 1976 D.L.C. Pritchard, Treasurer.