The aim of this project is to document the adoption and impact of improved maize germplasm at poor, maize-dependent farmers’ level, in combination with understanding how access to affordable quality maize seed can be achieved through seed sector development. The assumption is that understanding the challenges, opportunities and implications of changes in the maize seed value chain will improve research results, and support the higher adoption and impact of research-derived maize germplasm. For this project, independent studies were carried out in four areas ( Mexico/Chiapas, India/Bihar, Malawi and Zambia).
The present data is from a long-term trial set at Msekera Research Station in Zambia to monitor and evaluate the the longer term effects of conservation agriculture practices on soil quality, soil water dynamics, weeds, pests/diseases and crop yield. The treatments set to investigate this are: T1: Control plot 1 (CPM1); traditional farmers practice mouldboard plough on the flat, maize as a sole crop, no residue retention, stubble incorporated into the row for the following season. T2: Control plot 2 (CPM2); ridge and furrow system dug by hand, maize as a sole crop, no residue retention, stubble incorporated into the row for the following season T3: Basins (BAM), residue retention on the surface, maize as a sole crop T4: Dibble stick (DISM), residue retention on the surface, maize as a sole crop T5: Direct seeder (DSM), residue retention on the surface, maize as a sole crop T6: Direct seeding maize/cowpea intercropping (DS-M/C), 90cm rows, residue retention on the surface T7: Direct seeding cowpea (Cowpea-maize rotation) (DS-MC), residue retention on the surface T8:Direct seeding maize (Maize-cowpea rotation) (DS-CM), residue retention on the surface T9:Direct seeding soya (Soybean-maize r otation) (DS-MS), residue retention on the surface T10: Direct seeding maize (Maize-soybean rotation) (DS-SM), residue retention on the surface The present data set is from 2012 to 2016.
This trial is designed with 1 conventional farmers practice and 4 conservation agriculture (CA) treatments in 5 replications; Plots are subdivided into a continues maize area and a maize/legume (sunnhemp) rotation to investigate the effect of CA practices on soil quality and system productivity. The trial was set in the growing season of 2005 and is still running through to 2017 and beyond. The treatments are as follows: T1. Conventional mouldboard ploughing (CPM): maize with residue removal, manual seeding and fertilization in the tilled seedbed after ploughing. Plots are subdivided into split plots with continues maize and a maize/sunnhemp rotation T2. Sub-soiling with a Magoye ripper (RIM): maize with residue retention, manual seeding and fertilization in the ripping line. Plots are subdivided into split plots with continues maize and a maize/sunnhemp rotation T3. Direct seeding (DSM) with a Fitarelli Jabplanter: maize with residue retention, seeding and fertilization is carried out with the Jabplanter. Plots are subdivided into split plots with continues maize and a maize/sunnhemp rotation T4. Basin Planting (BAM): maize with residue retention, a manual system were basins (at 15cm x 15cm x 15cm spacing) are dug with hoes during the winter period and manually seeded and fertilized at the onset of rains. Plots are subdivided into split plots with continues maize and a maize/sunnhemp rotation T5. Magoye ripping (RI-ML): maize with residue retention, intercropped with cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) at seeding of maize. Plots are subdivided into split plots with continues maize/cowpea pea and a maize/cowpea//sunnh emp rotation.
This data set is from a long-term (2010-2016) trial set in sandy soils. The study seeks to monitor and evaluate the effects over time of conservation agriculture (CA) practices on crop yield, soil quality, weeds, pests and diseases. The trial was set as a randomised complete block design with the following treatments: T1: Check plot (CP); traditional farmers practice using the mouldboard plough, maize as a sole crop, no residue retention, stubbles incorporated T2: Direct seeding with animal drawn seeder (DSM), maize as a sole crop, residue retention (at a rate of 2.5-3 t ha-1 in the first year, thereafter all crop residues retained) T3: Basin (BAM), maize as a sole crop, residue retention T4: Jab planter (JPM), maize as a sole crop, residue retention T5: Direct seeding with animal drawn seeder (DSMB), biochar incorporated, maize as a sole crop, residue retention T6: Direct seeding with animal drawn seeder (DSMP), maize-pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) intercropping, residue retention T7: Crop rotation A1 (A1M): direct seeding with animal drawn seeder, maize-groundnut rotation (Phase 1), residue retention; Maize- Groundnut T8: Crop rotation A2(A2G): direct seeding with animal drawn seeder, maize-groundnuts rotation (Phase 2), residue retention; Groundnuts- Maize T9: Crop rotation B1 (B1M): direct seeding with animal drawn seeder, maize-sunflower rotation (Phase 1), residue retention; Maize- Sunflower T10: Crop rotation B2 (B2S): direct seeding with animal drawn seeder, maize-sunflower rotation (Phase 2), residue retention; Sunflower- Maize.
The purpose of the study was (1) to assess the economic viability of custom-hire service for ZT in CSISA's target districts in Bihar, the development of ZT service provision businesses over time, and constraints to further business expansion; (2) to assess service providers’ resource endowment, risk exposure, risk preferences, and risk management practices; (3) based on (2), to identify influencing factors of engaging in ZT service provision, including influencing factors of the scale of the service business operation.
The purpose of the study was (1) to assess the performance of ZT wheat as compared to conventional-tillage wheat in farmers' fields in six CSISA target districts in Bihar; (2) to assess farmers’ resource endowment, risk exposure, risk preferences, and risk management practices; (3) based on (2), to identify influencing factors of farmers' awareness and adoption of ZT in wheat, including social network effects.
This study contains spring wheat yield data (1st, 2nd, and 3rd WYCYTs and 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th SATYNs) from 136 international environments that were used to evaluate the predictive ability of different models in diverse environments by modeling G×E using the pedigree-derived additive relationship matrix (A matrix).
The objective of this work set is to demonstrate the best options currently available for the management of conservation agriculture (CA) practices in different communities in Mozambique. Eleven communities were selected from the districts of Sofala, Tete and Manica (approximately 100 to 200 families in each community) to host these demonstration sites and six demo fields were installed in each community from 2006-2015 (9 seasons). The treatments in each community were as follows: 1. Farmers' practice (control)- Traditional management with removal of stubble. 2. Conservation agriculture- The stubble is kept in the ground, there is no preparation of the ground, and the sowing is done manually in covachos previamento open (see the management of the covachos) and with SULCADOR in Nhamatiquite. 3. Direct sowing (SD): The stubble is kept in the soil, the direct sowing is done with Matraca or sharp bread.
The present data is based on on-farm demonstration sites set in Malawi to demonstrate the best options available at the moment for the management of drought-tolerant maize varieties and conservation agriculture practices in Balaka, Machinga and Zomba communities. Crop yields in southern Africa are generally low compared to the world average and the average of developing regions. Thus, this calls for the identification of more sustainable strategies that are capable of increasing yields. Amongst the possible strategies is conservation agriculture (CA). This data is a subset of a larger data set from southern Africa that seeks to demonstrate the effects of CA technologies as compared to the traditional farmers' practices. The CA treatments included: 1. Farmers check. Traditional land preparation (ridges) and maize management. Residues may be grazed, removed, burned or incorporated into the ridges. 2. Conservation Agriculture – sole maize. No tillage, no burning. Previous year’s ridges retained (but not reformed). Residue retained (mulch). 3. Conservation Agriculture – maize/legume intercrop. No tillage, no burning. Previous year’s ridges retained (but not reformed). Residue retained (mulch). The data set presents yields for maize and the legumes from these sites over 10 seasons (2005-2015).
On-farm demonstration plots were set in Zambia to demonstrate the effects of conservation agriculture (CA) technologies as compared to the traditional farmers practice (ploughing with a mouldboard plough). The CA treatments included basins (BA), ripping (RI) and direct seeding with a direct seeder (DS) and direct seeding with a jab planter (JP). Also superimposed to the treatments are rotations and intercropping of maize with a grain legume (either soyabean or cowpea) and these are compared with continuous maize planting. The study is carried out in various communities of Zambia. Thus, the data set presents yields for maize and the legumes from these sites over 9 seasons (2006-2015).
