Study

Soil erosion on Alfisols in Western Nigeria, I. Effects of slope, crop rotation and residue management

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Change tillage practices

Action Link
Soil Fertility

Add mulch to crops

Action Link
Soil Fertility
  1. Change tillage practices

    A replicated experiment in 1970-1974 on sandy-clay to clay soil in Nigeria (Lal, 1976) found lower runoff under no-till maize Zea mays-cowpea Vigna unguiculata treatments (2% of total annual rainfall) compared to conventionally ploughed bare fallow (36%). Soil loss was lower under no-till (0.1 t/ha) compared to conventionally ploughed continuous maize (41 t/ha), cowpea-maize (43 t/ha) and bare fallow (230 t/ha) treatments. Slopes of 1, 5, 10 and 15% received the following treatments: bare fallow (conventionally ploughed); continuous maize (conventionally ploughed, mulched); continuous maize (conventionally ploughed, no mulch); maize-cowpea rotation (zero-tillage); and cowpeas-maize rotation (conventionally ploughed). Plots were 25 x 4 m and were replicated five times on each slope. Soil and runoff water was collected from each plot after every rainstorm using a water collection system below ground level downslope of the plots.

     

  2. Add mulch to crops

    A replicated experiment in 1970-1974 on sandy-clay to clay soil in Nigeria (Lal, 1976) found that mulched continuous maize Zea mays after ploughing had the lowest soil loss (0 t/ha) compared to continuous maize without mulch (41 t/ha) and bare fallow plots (230 t/ha). Runoff was also lower in the mulched treatment (2% of total annual rainfall) compared to bare fallow (36%). Slopes of 1, 5, 10 and 15% received the following treatments: bare fallow (conventionally ploughed); continuous maize (conventionally ploughed, mulched); continuous maize (conventionally ploughed, no mulch); maize-cowpea Vigna unguiculata rotation (zero-tillage); and cowpeas-maize rotation (conventionally ploughed). Plots were 25 x 4 m and were replicated five times on each slope. Soil and runoff water was collected from each plot after every rainstorm using a water collection system below ground level downslope of the plots.

     

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust