Effect of Mulching ,..0001

EFFECT OF MULCHING, COMPACTION AND IRRIGATION SCHEDULING ON THE
PERFORMANCE OF OKRA (ABELMOSCHUS ESCULENTUS) IN A SEMI-ARID

CLIMATE
Jibrin Musa Dibal , Babagana Umara*2 and Yawale Bashir Alhaji**
*1
*Department Agricultural and Environmental Resources Engineering, Faculty of

Engineering, University of Maiduguri, P.M.B. 1069, Maiduguri. Borno State
Nigeria
** North East Zone Agricultural Development Programme (NEZADP), Yobe State,
Nigeria
1
jdibal@yahoo.com 2babazulum@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
The effect of incorporating two organic matters (Wood chips (WC) and Beans chaff (BC) into
soils, four levels of soil compaction (0, 5, 15, 20 hammer blows) and three irrigation intervals (5,
10, 15 days irrigation intervals (D.I.I.) and their interactions on germination and growth of Okra on
sandy loamy soil was studied in a semi-arid environment. Incorporating BC produced best seedling
emergence and plants’ shoot and root development compared to WC. It can deduced that BC can
be a good material for improvement of soil structure. Soils compacted at 10 hammer blows gave
the earliest seeding emergence and better plants’ growth compared to other compaction levels.
Compacting above 10 hammer blows exhibited poor plant development. The best mean values of
the plant growth parameters were seen when irrigated at 10 days irrigation intervals (D.I.I.). The 5
D.I.I appeared to be too close and had resulted into blockages of soil pore spaces and waste of
resources. On the other hand, the 15 D.I.I was too long and had inflicted moisture stress on the
plants. This means moderate irrigation can be beneficial while long intervals can result into
resource waste. The interaction of BC and 10 hammer blows compaction significantly (P=0.05)
resulted into higher mean values of most of growth parameters. This is especially true for LC, PH,
PG, DrWS, WWRT, and RL. WD incorporated soil that were compacted at 20 hammer blows
gave the least plant performance. Plants grown on soils that were compacted at 10 hammer blows
and received water at 5 D.I.I. and those irrigated at 10 D.I.I. were statistically similar. This means
increasing soil moisture can serve as a means of ameliorating the adverse effect of soil compaction.
1. INTRODUCTION
Proper soil management that would ensure optimum crop production is a function of the soil type.
Understanding the responses of soils under varied conditions is, therefore, of a paramount
importance in agriculture, since soils are among the principal determinants of crop production
(W.M.O., 1989). Agboola (1979) reported that most soils, such as that obtained in the arid and
semi-arid regions are brown or reddish, and are characterized among others, by poor structure, low
organic matter content and poor water holding capacity. They are, consequently indexed low to
very low productivity soils.
Incorporating organic matters into soils can significantly improve their physical and hydraulic
properties (Ohu et al., 1991; Stone and Ekwue, 1996), and decrease soil temperature & weed
infestations (Shrikastava et al., 1994).
J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

Scheduling on The Performance of Okra (Abelmoschus Esculentus) in a Semi-Arid Climate”
Agricultural Engineering International the CIGR Ejournal Manuscript LW08 017 Vol. X, Month,
year.
Soil compaction is caused by application of external forces. Such external forces could be as a
result of machinery traffic, animal and human movement on the soils. Compaction can
remarkably modify the soil structure, with consequential effect of delayed or obstructed seedling
emergence, malformed plant roots, restricted water infiltration, reduced water and nutrient uptake
and stunted plant growth (James, 1993; Kok et al., 1996; Ishaq et al., 2003; Mamman and Ohu,
2004; Filipovic et al., 2006). It can also lead to a change in soil heat capacity, increase in surface
run off and potentials of flooding (Al-Adawi and Reeder, 1996). Ultimately, compaction can
reduce crop yields.
Loose soils, on the other hand, have high infiltration and drainage rates and high heat
conductivities. Plants grown on such soils would suffer serious water and nutrient stress due to
water and nutrient stresses. Loose soils are also characterized by high evapotranspiration in excess
of potential evapotranspiration, even when water applications follow correct schedules. This
would have negative effect of retarded crop growth, poor water use efficiencies, depressed crop
yields, and hence economic loss. Evidently, certain degree of compaction is rather necessary on
some soils to improve their water holding capacities, reduce excessive nutrient leaching and to
ensure adequate soil strength for root anchorage (Lal et al., 1979; Ohu et al., 1991; James, 1993;
Mamman and Ohu, 1997; and Mamman and Ohu, 1998)
Irrigation had played a vital role in food production globally. But irrigation practices, especially in
the rural areas of most developing nations are characterized by over- or under-irrigation, leading to
crop water stress, with consequential effect of depressed crop yields (Roger, et al., 2002; Shock,
2002; Doorenbos and Kassam, 1981). Applying the right amount of water to crops at the right time
is therefore a vital tool in irrigated agriculture (James, 1993; Dibal et al., 2006).
Okra is produced in Nigeria, and many other African countries, both as a rain fed and irrigated
crop, but mostly in gardens. It is used as a food, eaten fresh or fried, or grated into a soup, in which
it forms the important part. Okra, also, has a medicinal quality (Kochhar, 1986). It therefore has a
high economic value.
Most studies conducted in the semi-arid region of Nigeria concentrated on compaction and organic
matter incorporation, but little has been done on moisture stress-yield relationship. With the
increase of small-scale wood processing industries which correspond to the demand of wood
products for the ever increasing population of the region, wood chips are gradually becoming an
environmental as well as economic problem. This study was conceived to investigate the effect of
organic matter incorporation using bean chaff and wood chips, soil compaction and irrigation
interval and their interactions on the growth of Okra in a semi-arid environment.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study was conducted at Maiduguri (11.5o N, 13.5oE, 345 m above mean sea level) in the semi-
arid region of the northern Sahel savannah, Nigeria (Kindersley, 1999), from mid-September
year.
through mid-November of 2007. The area is highly vulnerable to desertification (Dibal, 2002).
Table 1 shows some selected physical properties of the soil.
Table 1: Some physical properties of the soil used in the study
Parameter Value
Sand (2-0.05mm) (%,w/w) 77
Silt (0.05-0.002 mm)(%, w/w) 16.6
Clay (<0.002 mm) (%, w/w) 6.4
Texture Sandy loam
Field capacity (%, w/w) 20.7
Permanent wilting point (%, w/w) 9.5
Infiltration rate (cmhr-1) 2.5
Dry bulk density (Mgcm-3) 1.65
Saturated hydraulic conductivity (mmhr-1) 25.2
Soil saturation (%) 45.3
The experiment consisted of a factorial combination of mulch (Wood-chips (WC) and beans chaff
(BC)), soil compaction (0, 10, 15 & 20 hammer blows) and irrigation intervals (5, 10 & 15 days)
with three replications laid in a split plot design within a randomized complete block. Mulching
constituted the main plots, while compaction and irrigation intervals were allocated to subplots.
Soil samples used for the study were collected from the top 60 cm of the soil profile at the
University of Maiduguri Research Farm (UMRF). Larger clods were broken and graded. The
initial moisture content was found to be 2.39 (%, w/w). The soil sample was divided into two sub-
samples (A and B). Each of the two mulch materials was ground to pass through 0.05 m sieve and
incorporated in the two soil samples; WC into sub sample A, and BC into B. A hand fork and a
trowel were used for the mixing until a homogenous state was achieved in both sub-samples. The
organic mater contents were found to have risen by 2 % and 12 % in sub samples A and B
respectively, after wetting for 15 days. Both of the sub samples were divided into four (A 1, A2 A3
A4; and B1 B2 B3 B4). They were then treated with compaction in the order of subscripts 1, 2, 3 & 4
receiving 0, 10, 15 & 20 blows respectively, each in a mould (15 cm internal diameter by 20 cm
deep) using standard proctor hammer ( Lambe, 1951). These compactions corresponded to 0,
287.7, 398.2 and 508.7 KPa respectively (Ohu and Raghavan, 1985). Four Okra seeds were sown
in each of the moulds at a depth of 5 cm. Water was added to raise the moisture content in the
moulds to field capacity to initiate germination. Seedlings were thinned to two (2) per mould.
During each irrigation, 265.5 cm3 of water was applied to each mould; this was equivalent to 150
m3 per ha. Daily evapotranspiration was computed using Soil Conservation Service (SCS) version
of Blaney Criddle model (James, 1993). An irrigation efficiency of 70 % was assumed, since there
were no losses due to runoff, deep percolation, etc. Irrigation treatments were imposed after the
appearance of the first true leaves. The plants were grown for 56 days under laboratory conditions.
Growth parameters monitored include percent emergence (PE), Leaf count (LC), Plant height
(PH), Plant girth (PG), Wet weight of shoot (WWS), Dry weight of shoot (DrS), Wet weight of
roots (WWR), Dry weight of roots (DrR) and root length (RL). LC, PH, and PG were recoded
year.
every 7 days (d), but only the final values were reported herein. WWS, DrWS, WWR and DrR
were determined at the end of the experiment. All data collected were subjected to statistical
analysis of variance using the F- test. Differences among the treatment means and their interactions
were separated using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) as descried by Gomez and Gomez
(1984).
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Effect of Compaction on Soil Bulk Density
Table 2. shows the wet bulk density of the soil incorporated with the two organic materials.
Generally, a linear relationship was observed between the bulk density and number of blows. The
20 hammer blows at 20 % moisture content gave the most compact soil, irrespective of the type of
organic matter incorporated. These values parallel the findings of Lal et al. (1979), Ekwue (1990)
& Mamman and Ohu (2004). This result, however, deviated from earlier findings, e.g. Ekwue and
Stone (1995), Diaz-Zorita and Grosso (2000) and Filipovi et al. (2006) for the same type of soil.
This is attributed to the absence or variation of organic matter in their soils. This means,
incorporating the organic matters had had a positive effect on the soil. These mulch materials could
therefore be used, not only for the purpose of rising the organic matter content of the soil, but also
to achieve some degree of compaction for reasons mentioned previously.
Table 2: Soil bulk density (Mg/cm3) as a function of compactive efforts for soil incorporated with
BC and WC at various moisture contents
Compactive efforts (Hammer blows)

% Moisture 0 10 15 20
content BC WC BC WC BC WC BC WC
0 1.071 1.271 1.641 1.672 1.812 1.841 1.902 1.932
10 1.211 1.591 1.645 1.691 1.834 1.894 1.913 1.998
15 1.321 1.631 1.684 1.712 1.845 1.862 1.941 1.912
20 1.431 1.632 1.959 1.785 1.911 1.872 1.966 1.992

year.
Records on emergence were taken 3 days after planting (DAP), which was the first day that
emergence was observed, up to 12 DAP when emergence was noticed to have stopped. Moulds
treated with BC mulch exhibited best emergence at all levels of compaction compared to those
treated with WC mulch (Table 3). This result shows that using WC as a mulch material
considerably increased the compactibility of the soil that delays seed emergence, while BC
improved the soil structure instead. This observation is similar to that of Montemayor (1995). The
earliest complete emergence was observed at 10 hammer blows & 10 % moisture content. This
means soils compacted with more than 10 hammer blows were so dense that had had a detrimental
effect on the seed emergence.
3.2 Effect of Compaction on Seed Emergence

Table 3: Seed emergence (%) as a function of compactive efforts for soil incorporated with BC and
WC at various moisture contents
Compactive efforts (Hammer blows)

% Moisture 0 10 15 20
content BC WC BC WC BC WC BC WC
0 33.33 33.33 33.33 3.33 33.33 66.7 100 66.7
10 66.7 33.33 100 33.33 100 66.7 100 66.7
15 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 66.7 33.7 66.7 66.7
20 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 00 33.33 00
3.3 Effect of Organic Matters on Growth Parameters
Generally, soils treated with BC produced more healthy plants than those treated with WC organic
matter. LC, PH, DrWS and RL were all significantly (P = 0.05) higher in BC treated soils than WC
treated soils (Table 3). WWS, WWR and DrR were statistically unaffected by the incorporation of
these organic matters. A closer look, however, revealed that all the measured parameters were best
in BC treated soils. This performance could be attributed to the high nitrogen content of the BC
mulches.
Table 4:Effect of type of mulch materials on the growth of Okra

DRWR(g
Mulches LC [ ] PH (cm) PG (cm) WWS (g) DrwS (g) WWR (g) ) R L (m)
WC 20.78b 36.82b 9.43 5.39 0.47b 0.61 0.07 18.65b
BC 25.73a 49.41a 9.88 5.50 1.72a 0.78 0.04 31.95a
LSD 8.44 6.61 4.48 ---- 6.61 ---- ---- 13.73
All means within a column followed by same letters are not different at 5 % level of significance using LSD.

year.
3.4 Effect of Compaction on Growth Parameters
With the exception of WWS and WWR, all parameters measured were significantly ( P = 0.05)
affected by compaction levels (Table 5). Root development was particularly affected at compaction
levels beyond 10 hammer blows. This is attributed to poor soil aeration in soils with higher
compaction, which inhibited root respiration (Koenig, 2003) and increased soil shear strength (Al-
Adawi and Reeder, 1996; Lyndina, 1998; Sin et al. 1989; Nosalewiez and Lipie, 2002; Ekwue and
Stone, 1995; Voorhees, 1977). This suggests that it is of no use compacting sandy loam soils
beyond 10 hammer blows, as it could restrict proper plants’ root development. Table 4 further
indicates that the performance of above the ground biomass were statistically at par at 0 and 20
hammer blows, but the highest numerical values of these parameters were at 10 hammer blows. PG
and WWS were unaffected by this treatment, but still, they followed the same trend. This means all
the measured parameters responded in a reciprocal fashion to soil compaction levels. Boone et al.
(1987), Boone et al. (1994), Assaheed et al. (1990) and Ishaq et al. (2003) had similar
observations.
Table 5:Effect of compaction levels on the growth of okra

Compact-
tion levels LC [ ] PH (cm) PG (cm) WWS (g) DrwS (g) WWR (g) DRWR (g) R L (m)
0 14.18b 22.63b 5.35 3.283 0.367b 0.45 0.038b 18.27a
10 18.18a 29.97a 6.45 3.85 0.733a 0.5 0.042a 19.2a
15 13.07b 20.1b 5.133 2.6 0.198b 0.317 0.014b 8.967b
20 12.15b 19.05b 4.767 2.317 0.145b 0.23 0.019b 8.333b
LSD 11.9 9.4 6.3 ----- 0.9 ---- 1.78 2.0
3.5 Effect of Irrigation Intervals on Growth Parameters
Irrigation intervals had significantly (P = 0.05) influenced the growth parameters of Okra (Table
6). All plants irrigated at 15 days irrigation intervals (D.I.I) showed poor appearance in terms of all
the parameters measured. Most of the parameters (LC, PH, DrW and RL), however, indicated that
the response of plants irrigated at 5 and 10 D.I.I were statistically at par (Table 6). But plants
irrigated at 10 D.I.I. were best. It is obvious, therefore, that irrigating at 15 D.I.I. was too long to
have caused a water stress on the plants, hence the poor performance. Earlier reports e.g.
Doorenbos and Kassam (1981), Feibert and Shock, (2000), Mouromical and Ierna (1995) and
Ortega et al. (2002) cautioned that long irrigation intervals, especially on moisture sensitive crops,
can inflict water stress on the crops and has the detrimental effect of drastic yield depression and

year.
serious economic loss. On the hand, irrigating at 5 D.I.I. appeared to be too close. Pore spaces
were therefore blocked, particularly that mulch materials were incorporated. Plants irrigated at 5
D.I.I did not receive adequate moisture as designed for them. Furthermore, such blockage restricts
gaseous exchange between the soil and the atmosphere, which is an essential phenomenon for
proper plant development, and hence their poor performance.
Table 6:Effect of irrigation intervals on the growth of okra

Irrigation
interval LC [ ] PH (cm) PG (cm) WWS (g) DrwS (g) WWR g) DrWR (g) R L (m)
5 14.52b 16.22b 5.367b 3.583 0.433a 0.467 0.087a 17.85a
10 18.63a 28.3a 8.25a 3.9 0.418a 0.45 0.08a 17.58a
15 17.33b 16.91b 4.017b 3.9 0.108 0.48 0.041b 9.08b
LSD 16.8 13.2 8.90 ---- 1.37 ---- 2.54 4.12
3.6 Interaction Effects of Mulches and Compaction
Only PG and WWS were unaffected by the interaction effect of mulches and compaction (Table 7).
The heights of plants grown on BC X 10 blows were found to be statistically similar with plants
grown on soils treated with WC X 10 blows, but LC was highest at soils with BC X 10 blows.
Root development parameters (WWR, DrWR, RL) were highest at BC X 10 blows. Generally, the
result showed that incorporating BC and compacting at 10 blows had translated to the best plants.
The interactions of WC with all levels of compactions did not yield anything beneficial. This
suggests that plants grown on BC-incorporated soils and lightly compacted have potentials of
better yields.

year.
Table 7: Interaction effects of mulches and compaction levels
LC [ ] PH (cm) PG (cm) WWS(g) DrwS g) WWR g) DrWR (g) R L (m)

WC X 0 5.871 9.021 2.229 1.371 0.129 0.171 0.026 5.986
WC X 10 6.871 10.17 2.7 1.614 0.2 0.186 0.021 5.643
WC X 15 5.186 8.329 2.157 1.114 0.056 0.114 0.01 2.971
WC X 20 4.914 8.071 2 1.043 0.039 0.097 0.003 2.771
BC X 0 6.286 10.38 2.357 1.443 0.186 0.214 0.007 9.671
BC X 10 7 11.23 2.829 1.686 0.257 0.243 0.014 10.81
BC X 15 6.014 8.9 2.243 1.114 0.114 0.157 0.002 4.714
BC X 20 5.5 8.257 2.086 0.943 0.086 0.1 0.013 4.371
LSD 16.89 13.22 --- --- 1.37 1.47 2.54 4.12
3.7 Interaction Effects of Mulches and Irrigation Intervals
Using BC mulches, irrigated at 5 D.I.I produced plants with highest growth parameters, followed
by plants grown on BC X 10 D.I.I. This is especially true for LC, PH, DrWS, WWR and RL.
(Table 8). PG was not significantly (p = 0.05) affected by this interaction. A closer look, however,
revealed that plants grown on soils with BC, irrigated at 5 D.I.I. were thicker than all plants from
other treatments studied. RL of plants grown BC X 5 D I I treated soils were statistically at par
with those grown on BC X 10 D.I.I. treated soils. Soils with WC and irrigated at 15 D.I.I. exhibited
the poorest root development. Their roots were seen very thin and coiled. Obviously, they were
unable to penetrate the densely compacted soils, and the water applied was not enough to soften
the soil. This suggests that when Okra is grown on sandy loam soil with BC mulches, it can be
irrigated even up to 10 days intervals. It also means BC organic matter has a greater potential of
improving the water holding capacity (WHC) of soils

year.
Table 8: Interaction effects of mulches and irrigation intervals
LC [ ] PH (cm) PG (cm) WWS (g) DrwS (g) WWR (g) DRWR(g) R L (m)
WC X 5 13.75b 22 5.4 3.22b 0.3b 0.45b 0.025b 13.73b
WC X 10 13.48b 20.56 5.325 2.8b 0.253b 0.2b 0.029b 8.15b
WC X 15 12.75b 19.73 5.175 2.97b 0.188b 0.34b 0.043b 8.525b
BC X 5 15.68a 25.31 5.75 3.15b 0.475a 0.4b 0.04b 18.35a
BC X 10 14.48a 21.88 5.55 3.65a 0.375b 0.475a 0.056a 18.23a
B CX 15 13.25b 20.65 5.35 2.87b 0.275b 0.375b 0.009b 15.18b
LSD 14.6 ---- ---- 4.12 1.17 1.272 2.187 4.171
3.8 Interaction Effects of Compaction and Irrigation Intervals
Soils compacted at 10 blows and irrigated at 5 D.I.I appeared to produce plants that are healthier
than all other soils (Table 9). The numerical values of PG were, however, similar for plants grown
on soils compacted at 10 hammer blows and irrigated at 5 D.I.I and those irrigated at 10 D.I.I. at
the same compaction level. WWS and WWR were both highest on soils compacted at 10 hammer
blows and irrigated at 5 D.I.I. RL responded in similar fashion. Soils with zero compaction and 10
D.I.I produced plants with heaviest dry plants’ roots. All soils that received 20 hammer blows and
irrigated at either 10 or 15 DII produced least overall performance. This means crops grown on
compacted soils may require more frequent water application, but soil compaction beyond 10
hammer blows seriously restricts root development and crop growth especially when irrigated at
longer intervals. Evidently, the effect of soil compaction on crop growth is a factor of quantity of
water applied. Prudent irrigation scheduling can therefore mitigate the effect of compaction on
crop growth and most probably, resulting yields. This observation is inline with the findings of
Ekwue and Stone (1995) and Ishaq et al. (2003).
Table 8: Interaction effects of compaction and irrigation intervals

year.
Compaction x DRWR(
irr. intervals LC [ ] PH (cm) PG (cm) WWS (g) DrwS (g) WWR (g) g) R L (m)
0X5 15b 25.07a 5.5 3.4b 0.4b 0.6a 0.025b 21.8b
0X10 14.05b 22.04b 5.35 3.3b 0.4b 0.35b 0.055b 18.5b
0X15 13.5b 20.79b 5.2 3.15b 0.3b 0.4b 0.035a 14.5b
10X5 17.9a 27.85a 6.6 4.05a 0.6b 0.45b 0.04b 23.8a
10X10 16.4ab 24.7b 6.5 3.75b 0.55a 0.59a 0.053a 17.35b
10X15 14.25b 22.35b 6.25 3.75b 0.45 0.5b 0.039b 16.45b
15X5 13.15b 22 5.35 2.9b 0.3b 0.4 0.015b 9.8b
15X10 13.45b 19.5b 5.1 2.4b 0.2b 0.25b 0.002b 8.5b
15X15 12.6c 18.8b 4.95 2.5b 0.09b 0.3b 0.026b 8.6b
20X5 12.8c 19.7b 4.85 2.4b 0.25b 0.25b 0.02b 8.75b
20X10 12c 18.65b 4.8 2.25b 0.105b 0.2b 0.002b 8.4b
20X15 0.9c 18.8b 4.65 2.3b 0.08b 0.24b 0.006b 7.85b
LSD 7.02 16.22 --- 5.84 1.67 1.83 3.10 3.86
CONCLUSIONS
The study had demonstrated the effect of mulching, compaction and irrigation intervals on the
performance of Okra. Beans chaff (BC) appeared to have reduced soil compactibility, improved
the structure of soil, seed emergence and growth of Okra than wood chips. Wood chips may
perform similar, probably, if given longer period of decomposition. BC which is ordinarily used as
an animal feed, could therefore be a great window of improving the economy of farmers when
incorporated into soils for crop production. Crop growth is improved when the soil is compacted,
but it is of no benefit compacting soils beyond 10 hammer blows. Correct irrigation schedules
should be used in irrigation designs to avert crop water stress and its detrimental effects of poor
crop growth and resulting yield losses. Though, only vegetative and root growth were reported
here, it is expected that this report would be applied to final crop yields. This is because final crop
yields are directly proportional to healthy vegetative plant appearance.
REFERENCES
** “
J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation
year.
Agbbla, S.A.(1979). An Agricultural Atlas of Nigeria. Oxford University press. 248p.
Al-adawi, S.S. and Reeder, R.C. (1996). Compaction and sub soiling effects on corn and soybean
yields and soil physical properties. Trans. ASAE,5:1614-1649
Assaheed, A.M., McGowan, M. Hebblethwaite, P.D. and Brereton, J.C. (1990). Effects of soil
compaction on growth, yields and light interception of selected crops. Ann. Appl. Biol. 117:655-
666
Boone, F.R., Van der Werf, H.M.G., Kroesbergen, B., Ten hag, B.A., and Boers, A. (1987). The
effect of compaction of arable layer of sandy soil on the growth of maize fro silage. Neth. J. Agric.
Sci., 35:113-128
Boone, F.R., Vermeulen, G.D. and Kroesbergen, B. (1994). The effect of mechanical impedance
and soil aeration as affected by surface loading on the growth of pea. Soil and Tillage Res. 32, :
237-251
Dibal, J.M., Dauda A., and Umara, B. (2006). Irrigation and Society. A review. University of
Maiduguri Faculty of Engineering Seminar Series 4 (1) : 52-61
Diaz-Zorita,M. and Grosso, G. A. (2000). Effects of soil texture, organic carbon, and water
retention on the compaction of soils fron Argentinean pampas. Soil and Tillage Res.,54:121-126.
Dibal, J.M. 2002) Desertification in Nigeria. Causes, effects and review of control measures. University of
Maiduguri Faculty of Engineering Seminar Series 2(1): 59-74.
Doorenbos, J. and Kassam, A.H. (1981). Yield response to water. Food and Agricultural
Organization (FAO) Irrigation and Drainage paper 33, Rome, 198 p.
Ekwue, E.I. (1990).Organic matters effect on soil strength properties. Soil and Tillage Res .16:280-
288.
Ekwue, E.I. ansd Stone, R.J. (1995). Organic Matters Effect on Soil Strength Properties of
compacted soils. Trans. ASAE 38, 357-365.
Feibert, E.B.G. amd Shock, C.C. (2000). Deficit irrigation of potatoes. www.fao.org/docrep. Date
accessed, 26th Jan., 2005.

year.
Filippovic, D., Husnjak, S., kosutic, S. and Gosppodaric, Z. (2006). Effect of tillage system on
compaction and crop yield of Albic Lavisol in Croatia. J. of Terremechanics.43 (2) : 177-189.
Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical procedures fro agricultural researches, 2 nd
edition, John Wiley and Sons, New York.:304-308
Ishaq, M., Ibrahim, L and lal, R. (2003). Persistence of subsoil compaction effects on soil
properties and growth of wheat and cotton in Pakistan. Experimental Agriculture 39:341-348.
James, L.G. (1993). Principles of farm irrigation system design. John Wiley & Sons Inc. Canada.
542p.
Kindersley, P.(1999).World Atlas. Millennium Edition Dorling Kindersley, London. 492 p
Kochhar, S.L. 1986. Tropical crops. A textbook of economic botany. Macmillan, India. 467p
Koenig, R. (2003). Solutions to soil problems IV. Soil structure (compaction).

www.extention.usu.edu. Date accessed: Oct. 5. 2008.
Kok, H., Taylor, R.K. and Lamand, R. E. and Kesen, S. ( 1996). Soil compaction. Problems and
solutions. Crops and Soils 4-6 :1-4.
Lal, R. Wilson, G.F. and Okigbo, B.O. (1979). Chamges in properties of Alfisols produced by
various crop covers. Soil Sci.27:377-382.
Lambe, T.w. (1951). Soil testing for engineers. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Lyndina, T.E. (1998). On the effect of field crop root system and soil compaction. Proc. Intl. Conf.
ISTRO on soil compaction and crop production. Gödöllö, Hungary, 205-208.
Mamman, E and Ohu, J.O. (1997). Millet yields aa affected by tractor traffic on sandy loam soil in
Borno state , Nigeria. Soil and Tillage Res. 42: 133-140
Mamman, E and Ohu, J.O. (1998). Millet yields aa affected by tractor traffic on air permeability
and millet production sandy loam soil in Borno state , Nigeria. Ife J. of tech.8 :1-7.

year.
Mamman, E and Ohu, J.O. (2004). The influence of organic matter on compactibility and air
permeability of some soils in Borno state. AZOJETE 4:74-
Montemayor, M.B. (1995). Effect of soil compaction during planting on cotton emergence. Journal
of Agric. Engrg Res. 61:129-136.
Mouromical,G. and Ierna, A.(1995).Influence of irrigation regime on growth and yield of potato.
Potato Research. 38(3): 307-318.
Nosaleviez, A and lipeec, J. (2002). Effect of localized soil compaction and wetness on early root
growth and functions (in Polish). Acta Agrophysics, 78:199-208.
Ohu, J.O. and G.S.V. Raghavan, 1985. Prediction of static equivalent pressure of proctoe
compaction blows. ASAE 28(5) 1398pp
Ohu,J.O., Foloronso, O.A. and Ekwue, E.I.(1991). The influence of tractor traffic on crop
production in semi-arid region of Nigeria.Proc. 12th Intl. Conf. ISTRO, IITA, Ibadan, Nigeria.:238-
245.
Ortega, J.F., J.M. Tarjuelo and J.A. de Juan. 2002 “Evaluation of Irrigation Performance in
Localized Irrigation Systems of Semiarid Regions(Castilla-La Mancha, Spain)”.Agricultural
Engineering International: the Cigr Journal of Scientific Research and Development. Manuscript
LW 01 007. Vol IV.
Roger,O.A; William,H.N; and A.K. Bradley 2002. Irrigation Scheduling using water-use tables.
CISI039 Cooperative Extension System. University of Idaho Colleges of Agriculture, Moscow
Idaho. 12p.
Sin, G. I., St Terbea, M. and Borugu, I. (1989). Influence of soil compaction on growth and yield
of field crops and some working parameters at ploughing (in Germany) In: Vortrage Wissench
Tagung FZb:26-29
Shrikastiva, P.V., Parich, M.M. and Sawani, N.G. and S.Raman. 1994. effect of drip irrigation and
mulching on tomato yield. Agricultural water management 25(12):179-184.
Stone, R.J. and E.I. Ekwue 1996. soil compressibility as influenced by sewage sludge
incorporation. J. Agric. Engrg Res., 64:227-236
Voorhees, W.B. 1977. Soil compaction. How it influences moisture, temperature, yield and growth.
Crop Soil Management 29 ;7-10

year.
W.H.O.1987. World Meteorological Organization technical note No. 186. Land Management in
arid and semi-arid areas. 148p

year.

Effect of Mulching ,..0001

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Effect of Mulching ,..0001

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

EFFECT OF MULCHING, COMPACTION AND IRRIGATION SCHEDULING ON THE

PERFORMANCE OF OKRA (ABELMOSCHUS ESCULENTUS) IN A SEMI-ARID

*Department Agricultural and Environmental Resources Engineering, Faculty of

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

Table 1: Some physical properties of the soil used in the study

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Compactive efforts (Hammer blows)

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

3.2 Effect of Compaction on Seed Emergence

Compactive efforts (Hammer blows)

3.3 Effect of Organic Matters on Growth Parameters

Table 4:Effect of type of mulch materials on the growth of Okra

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

Table 5:Effect of compaction levels on the growth of okra

3.5 Effect of Irrigation Intervals on Growth Parameters

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

Table 6:Effect of irrigation intervals on the growth of okra

3.6 Interaction Effects of Mulches and Compaction

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

LC [ ] PH (cm) PG (cm) WWS(g) DrwS g) WWR g) DrWR (g) R L (m)

3.7 Interaction Effects of Mulches and Irrigation Intervals

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

3.8 Interaction Effects of Compaction and Irrigation Intervals

Table 8: Interaction effects of compaction and irrigation intervals

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

Kindersley, P.(1999).World Atlas. Millennium Edition Dorling Kindersley, London. 492 p

Koenig, R. (2003). Solutions to soil problems IV. Soil structure (compaction).

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

J. M. Dibal, B. Umara and Y. B. Alhaji** “Effect of Mulching, Compaction and Irrigation

Potrebbero piacerti anche