International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316

HOSTED BY
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Soil and Water Conservation Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/iswcr

Original Research Article

Integrated soil, water and agronomic management effects on crop

productivity and selected soil properties in Western Ethiopia
Teklu Erkossa a,n, Timothy O. Williams a, Fanuel Laekemariam b
a
International Water Management Institute, P. O. Box 5689, C/o ILRI Addis Campus, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
b
Wolita University, Ethiopia

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Land degradation is a major challenge limiting crop production in Ethiopia. Integrated soil and water
Received 15 September 2017 conservation is widely applied as a means to reverse the trend and increase productivity. This study
Received in revised form investigated the effects of such integrated approaches at two sites, Jeldu and Diga, in Western Ethiopia. A
30 May 2018
split plot design with physical soil and water conservation in the main plots and agronomic practices in
Accepted 3 June 2018
the sub plots was employed. Maize (Zea mays L.) followed by groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) at Diga, and
Available online 30 June 2018
wheat (Triticum aestivum) followed by faba bean (Vicia faba L.) were the test crops. Surface soils were
Keywords: sampled before sowing and after the crop harvest, and analyzed for selected parameters. Soil moisture
Land degradation content during the growing period was also monitored. The use of soil bund increased soil moisture
Soil bund
content, and significantly (P o 0.05) increased days to flowering and maturity, kernel weight and harvest
Inter-cropping
index, grain yield of the test crops, with the exception of maize. The improved agronomic practices
Improved crop varieties
Crop-livestock systems (intercropping, fertilization and row planting) significantly (P o 0.05) increased grain yield of all the test
crops. The effect of the treatments on soil parameters may require longer time to be evident. Although
the increase in crop yield due to soil bund and the improved agronomic practices is eminent, economic
analysis is necessary before recommending the widespread use of the improved options.
& 2018 International Research and Training Center on Erosion and Sedimentation and China Water and
Power Press. Production and Hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-
ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction amendments is recognized as a major contributor to the lower

Human induced land degradation is a serious global threat that
increases vulnerability to climate change, especially in marginal
agro-ecosystems with low and variable rainfall, steep slopes and
depleted soil fertility with resultant low agricultural productivity
(Scherr and Yadav, 1995). In Ethiopia, agriculture is a key livelihood
source for over 85% of the country's population estimated to reach
101 million by 2016 and growing at 2.5% (Beyene, 2015; UN De-
partment for Economic and Social Affairs: Population division,
2015). Agriculture accounts for 43% of national GDP, 90% of export
revenue, 70% of the country's raw materials for industries and
engaging 83% of the labor force (CSA, 2014). Thus, it plays a crucial
role in life and livelihoods in the country.
Growth in agricultural productivity, which is influenced by
anthropogenic and natural (mainly climatic and edaphic) fac-
tors could not match that of the demand. Land degradation
coupled with the limited capacity of the land users to apply
n
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: teklu68@gmail.com (T. Erkossa).
Peer review under responsibility of International Research and Training Center
on Erosion and Sedimentation and China Water and Power Press.
productivity (Alemayehu, 2008; Erkossa, Awlachew, & Hagos,
2009; Erkossa, Wudneh, Desalegn, & Taye, 2015; Fanuel, Kibe-
bew, Tekalign, Karltun, & Gebrekidan, 2016; Tireza, Eyasu, &
Nata, 2013; Wudneh, Erkossa, & Devi, 2014). Although a con-
siderable increase in crop production is reported in recent
decades, studies show expansion of cultivated area is a major
contributor to the growth (Alemayehu & Dorosh Dand Sinafi-
keh, 2011; Fanuel, 2015). However, as the prime lands, espe-
cially in the settled highlands are used up, expansion of culti-
vation is directed towards lands with different land uses, such
as forest (Bishaw, 2001) or grazing lands (Olson & Maitima,
2006). Expansion of agriculture to new lands usually involves
either moving into the areas adjacent to the currently culti-
vated lands or migration to other areas with different agro-
ecological settings.
Regardless of the condition of the new land acquired this
way, farmers attempt to produce the same traditional crops
using the techniques that are not necessarily suitable for the
new site (Erkossa et al., 2015). The attendant deforestation in
tandem with undulating terrain and fragile nature of the lands
and the heavy seasonal rains lead to erosion and deterioration
of soil quality (Erkossa et al., 2015; Fanuel et al., 2016; Schmidt

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2018.06.001
2095-6339/& 2018 International Research and Training Center on Erosion and Sedimentation and China Water and Power Press. Production and Hosting by Elsevier B.V. This
is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
306 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316
& Zemadim, 2015). A recent study demonstrated that loss of
plant nutrients with eroded sediments from the fragile eco-
systems in western Ethiopia following the conversion to agri-
cultural use resulted in a significant yield reduction with an
immediate harm to the income of the farm households (USD
220 ha
1 and 150 ha
1 due to the loss of N and P, respectively)
(Erkossa et al., 2015). Another study in southern Ethiopia by
Fanuel et al. (2016) also indicated the decrease in soil nutrients
and crop yields on steep slope cultivated lands compared to
lower landscape positions that was attributed to soil erosion.
Innovative land, water and crop management practices, in-
cluding the use of soil and water conservation and improved
agronomic practices such as intercropping, row planting and fer-
tilization would increase crop yields and improve soil quality and
enhance ecological and economic resilience reducing the need for
further expansion of agricultural land. Studies show that soil
bunds reduce surface runoff, increase infiltration and improve
availability of water and nutrient to plants (Schmidt & Zemadim,
2015; Tadele et al., 2013; Tireza et al., 2013) and consequently
contribute to higher crop yield (Soomro, Rahman, Odhano, Gul, &
Tareen, 2009; Tadele et al., 2013), especially in areas where soil
moisture is a key constraint (Kassie et al., 2008). In areas where
soil depth and infiltration capacity are not limiting, contour soil
bunds can help store water in the soil profile for use by crops
during the dry spells as well as after cessation of the rain.
After accounting for the area taken out production due to
their construction, Adimassu, Mekonnen, Yirga, and Kessler
(2014) reported no significant yield increase due to the use of
soil bunds in the short term despite the improvement in soil
quality. In addition to the offset due to reduction in the effec-
tive growing area, this may be related to the local agro-ecolo-
gical settings including the extent of soil degradation, the type
of crop grown, the use of complementary agronomic practices
such as the choice of suitable crop varieties, cropping systems,
sowing methods and soil fertility management practices. For
instance, in areas where fertilizers are used, the immediate
Fig. 1. Location map of the districts where the study was conducted.
increase in crop yield due to soil bund may be related to the
avoided nutrient loss with runoff (Erkossa et al., 2015). Besides,
if moisture is limiting, the effect of retained soil moisture on
crop yield could be immediate.
Implementation of an appropriate agronomic practices
complements the physical soil and water conservation mea-
sures such as soil bund to accelerate the return to investment
through increased crop yield. Intercropping which is widely
practiced by smallholder farmers in developing countries of
Africa, Asia and South America enables better utilization of
limited resources, and improves soil quality, particularly if
legumes are involved (Conant, 2009; Muoneke & Asiegbu,
1997) and increase crop yield (Woodfine, 2009). The use of
suitable crop species and varieties, proper planting method
and application of the right types of fertilizers complement
the positive effects of physical soil and water conservation.
Therefore, the use of physical soil and water conservation in
tandem with appropriate agronomic practices may be a judi-
cious and cost-effective strategy to maintain soil quality and
enhance crop yield. However, research based evidences re-
garding the effects of physical soil and water conservation
options used in conjunction with agronomic practices in the
humid tropical areas in western Ethiopia is not established.
This study examined the hypothesis that the integrated use of
soil bund and improved agronomic practices can enhance soil
quality and increase crop yield.
2. Materials and method
2.1. Description of the study area
2.1.1. Location
The study was conducted in Jeldu (9° 02'
09° 15' N & 38°
05'
38° 12' E) & Diga (09°10′N
09° 00′N & 36°10′E-36°30′E)
districts in western Ethiopia, located at 115 km & 346 km, re-
spectively to the west of Addis Ababa in the Blue Nile River Basin
 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316 307

Major characteristics, distribution of crops, livestock and key challenges across the study landscape positions in western Ethiopia.Source: Offices of Agriculture in each District, Annual Reports (2006–2010); ILRI Baseline Survey
(Fig. 1). The districts were purposively selected as they represent

Termites infestation, organic matter depletion, poor infiltration capacity, inefficient

quite well the farming systems in the Blue Nile River Basin, where

Lack of water storage & distribution systems, inefficient water use, inadequate
intensive crop cultivation is a recent phenomenon and accelerated
rain-induced soil erosion is at an alarming rate, threatening hu-

Deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, soil fertility depletion, soil acidity

Demographic pressure, soil fertility depletion, shortage of l&, soil acidity
man livelihood and environmental integrity.

water use, lack of water storage & distribution systems, soil acidity
2.1.2. Agro-ecology and soils
At both sites, as depicted in (Table 1) the elevation ( 4 1400
m at Jeldu & 4 500 m at Diga) affects the climate and in turn

Soil erosion, soil fertility depletion, shallow soil depth

Deforestation, cultivation of steep slopes, soil erosion,
resulted in the high variability of rainfall and temperature. The
lowest elevation ( o 1500 m. a. s. l.) is at Diga while the highest
( 4 3200 m. a. s. l.) is at Jeldu. This high variation in elevation
(Table 1) does also mean undulating topography with steep
slopes covered by soils with variable quality but are suitable
for diverse crop species. However, the prevailing natural and

Major challenges at District scale

anthropogenic challenges need to be addressed to exploit the
potential. The rainfall at both sites is unimodal starting be-
tween April and May and ending in September, with the
maximum occurring about end of July or early August (Fig. 2).
Diga receives higher precipitation, but the corresponding
evapotranspiration (PET) loss is also higher than that of Jeldu.

market access
Within each site, both precipitation and PET vary across ele-
vations, such that the temperature increases with elevation
while PET decreases. The mean annual rainfall ranges from 900
mm at Jeldu to more than 2000 mm at Diga. The mean mini-
mum and maximum annual temperatures are 17 °C & 22 °C,

Cattle, sheep, horse &

cattle, sheep, horse &

Cattle, goats, mule &

Cattle, goats mule &

respectively. Analysis of the composite surface soil samples

Cattle, sheep, goats,

Cattle, sheep, goats

taken before implementation from both sites revealed that the

Major livestock
soils are rich in clay ( 4 60%) and moderately acidic with low to
medium organic matter content and adequate to marginal

donkey

donkey

donkey

donkey
equine

equine
phosphorus levels (Table 2).

2.2. Farming systems

Barley- potato wheat, faba bean,

Maize-sorghum- sesame, finger
Maize, sorghum sesame, finger

Maize, tef sorghum, vegetables

Tef, finger millet niger seed,
Mixed crop-livestock agriculture is the dominant livelihood,
while the major crops grown vary between and within the

Wheat, tef, sorghum

districts across elevations (Table 1). Rainfed agriculture is the millet, groundnut
dominant system although small scale traditional irrigation is
practiced in limited areas along the valley bottoms and on the
Major crops

sides of streams. The major crops at both sites under rainfed

sorghum

condition include: maize (Zea mays), barley (Hordium vulgar-

millet

enset

ae), wheat (Triticum aestivium), tef (Eragrostis tef Zucca), and

sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). While potato (Solanum tuberosum)
District Landscape position Elevation range (m a. Mean annual rain-

and enset (Ensete ventricosum) are also important crops in the

highland part of Jeldu, sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) and cash
crops such as groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.), sesame (Sesa-
1376
2037

900
1350
fall (mm)

mun indicum) and coffee (Coffea arabica) are also widely grown
at Diga. Population pressure, land degradation, inefficient use
of water (rainfed and irrigated) and inappropriate land use and
land and water management practices, are among the common
challenges to the sustainability of the agricultural systems.
Report, 2010: Zemadim et al. (2013) and own survey

2700
3200

2300
2700

2.3. Selection of sites and participating farmers

1800
2300
1451–2000
42000

o 1450

The study site was selected in 2010 by the Nile Basin De-
s. l)

velopment Challenge (NBDC) sponsored by the Challenge

Program on Water and Food (CPWF) for implementation of
activities related to rainwater management systems for sus-
tainable crop and livestock productivity in the Blue Nile Basin.
The process involved formation of an Innovation Platforms (IP)
in 2011 at each district, which facilitated the participation of
Middle

Middle
Lower

Lower
Upper

Upper

all stakeholders’ in innovation design, planning and im-

plementation (Lema, Mulema, Le Borgne, & Duncan, 2015).
After detail characterization of the farming systems across
Table 1

Jeldu
Diga

landscape, land degradation, termite infestation and declining

crop productivity were identified as the major constraints to
308 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316

Fig. 2. Average rainfall and evapotranspiration for Jeldu (a) and Diga (b) sites as estimated using NewLocClim.

Table 2
Selected soil physical and chemical properties of the plots before implementation of the treatments.

$ $
Soil parameter Jeldu Critical values and classification Diga Critical values & classification

Soil bund No bund Soil bund No bund

Texture clay clay clay clay Over 60% clay

pH 6.2 7 0.6 6.1 7 0.4 moderately acidic 6.3 7 0.3 5.7 7 0.5 moderately acidic
Corg (%) 2.4 7 0.5 2.9 7 0.7 low 4.4 7 1.0 4.1 7 1.1 medium
Nt (%) 0.28 7 0.1 0.29 7 0.0 high 0.24 7 0.0 0.20 7 0.1 medium
C: N ratio 8.57 10.00 very low-low 18.33 20.50 7 0 high
NH4-N (mg kg
1) 0.3 7 0.5 0.5 7 0.5 1.6 7 0.9 2.5 7 1.7
NO3-N (mg kg
1) 142.2 7 0.6 135.9 7 6 189.8 7 46.7 192.7 7 41.1
Available P (mg kg
1) 32.2 7 21.2 15.6 7 2 adequate/ marginal 21.8 7 10.7 16.9 7 4.7 adequate/marginal
Available S (mg kg
1) 1.6 7 0.9 0.97 7 0.2 1.8 7 0.6 2.2 7 0.8

$Landon, J.R. (Ed.), 1991. Booker tropical soil manual. A handbook for soil survey & agricultural land evaluation in the tropics & subtropics. Longman Inc, New York, U.S.A. 450p.

productivity. In 2014, the Humidtropics program adopted the
same IP, and presented the result of the previous study, which
was used in identification of innovations. Low crop pro-
ductivity mainly due to loss of plant nutrients with runoff,
terminal moisture stress, use of low yielding local varieties,
inappropriate planting method, mono-cropping and non-or
unbalanced use of fertilizers were among the constraints
identified (Lema et al., 2015). The IP prioritized soil bund and
improved agronomic practices as entry point to reverse the
trend of land degradation and to increase crop production and
selected two Peasant Associations (PA) 1 , Kolu Gelan in Jeldu
and Arjo in Diga as representative for farming systems in mid
1
PA is the smallest administrative unit in rural Ethiopia.
and low elevations, respectively (Fig. 3). The two PAs are
characterized by soils with low infiltration capacity that leads
to high runoff during the rainy season which in turn results in
soil moisture stress during the dry spells and shortly after
cessation of rainfall. For the field experiment twenty and
thirty voluntary farmers willing to participate and allocate a
quarter of hectare for the study were randomly selected in
2014 after checking the suitability of their plots for the trial in
terms of representativeness, proximity and distribution across
the area.
2.4. Treatments and experimental design
A split plot design with the soil and water conservation
measures (soil bund vs no bund) in the main plot and
 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316 309

Fig. 3. Location map of the farm plots within Kolu Gelan and Arjo peasant associations.

agronomic practices (improved vs traditional) in subplots was
employed on 20 and 30 farm plots at Jeldu and Diga, respec-
tively (Table 3). The selected farmers were trained about the
implementation of the trials, including land preparation and
recommended agronomic practices for the test crops. In addi-
tion, those farmers selected to test soil bunds were trained on
how to prepare it in the first year, and maintain in the fol-
lowing years. At each site, half of the participant farmers as-
sisted with the local development agents have constructed
contour soil bund with 0.6 m width and 0.6 m depth and having
downstream soil heap of 0.6 m wide and 0.4 m height (Fig. 4)
on their plots. Corresponding farm plots with no bund were
selected near those with soil bund after checking for their si-
milarity with those farms with soil bund.
The bunds were tied at 3 m interval to maintain uniform dis-
tribution of the runoff in the basin. About 3–4 bunds per plot with
an average length of 30 m were constructed at 10–15 m interval
depending on the slope gradient and dimension of the plots. De-
sho grass (Pennisetum pedicelatu) was planted on the soil heaped
on the downstream side of the bund, both to stabilize the bund
310 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316
Table 3
Implementation plan of the experiment at Jeldu and Diga sites in western Ethiopia.
Site Farming system represented Treatments
2014
Diga Lowland- maize based system Main plota
Soil bund
No bund
Jeldu Midland- wheat based system Soil bund
No bund
a
The soil bunds were stabilized using vegetative materials including desho grass.
Fig. 4. Schematic sketch and dimension a typical soil bund used in the study.
and to ensure the efficient utilization of the land (i.e., forage for cut
and carry purpose).
Before planting in 2014, each plot was equally divided into
two and assigned to the improved agronomic practices and the
control (Table 3). Improved varieties of wheat (Kekeba) and
hybrid maize (BH543) in 2014 and faba bean (Gabalcho) and
local cultivar of groundnut (Burre) in 2015 were planted at
Jeldu and Diga, respectively on their respective recommended
planting dates and seeding rates. The row planted wheat seed
was placed by hand after ripping the bed at 25 cm spacing and
both the row planted and broadcast plots received 100 kg ha
1
NPS (a compound fertilizer containing 19%N, 38%P 2 O 5 and 7% S,
respectively) at planting while 100 kg ha
1 urea (46
0-0) was
top-dressed 36–40 days after planting. Similarly, maize was
planted at 75 cm x 60 cm spacing and haricot bean (Nasir) was
planted at 37.5 cm x 30 cm spacing 36
40 days later for the
intercropped plots. Regardless of the treatments, the maize
plots received the full dose of 100 kg ha
1 NPS and half of the
100 kg ha
1 urea at sowing, while the remaining half was top
dressed when the maize was at knee height.
In 2015 at Jeldu, faba bean was planted at 40 cm x 40 cm spa-
cing for the row and at a rate of 200 kg ha-1 for the broadcast
treatments, whereas groundnut was planted at 128 kg ha
1 at
Diga. All of the faba bean and the improved plots of groundnut
received NPS fertilizer at a rate of 200 kg ha
1 and 50 kg ha
1,
respectively. Except for the treatment factors, all the plots received
a uniform agronomic management.
2015
Sub plots Main plota Sub plot
1. maize haricot bean intercropped Soil bund 1. groundnut þ fertilizer
2. sole maize 2. groundnutþ no fertilizer
1. maize haricot bean intercropped No bund 1. groundnut þ fertilizer
2. sole maize 2. groundnutþ no fertilizer
1. wheat- row Soil bund 1. faba bean- row
2. wheat- broadcast 2. faba bean- broadcast
1. wheat row No bund 1. faba bean- row
2. wheat- broadcast 2. faba bean- broadcast
2.5. Soil sampling and analysis
In June 2014, immediately before the treatments were im-
plemented, a composite surface (0–30 cm) soil samples consisting
of 10 sub-samples from each farm plot were taken to form 1 kg
sample using a zigzag pattern and analyzed to establish the initial
conditions of the soils. In February 2015, immediately after the
crops were harvested, a composite surface soil samples with five
sub samples per sub plot were collected from the treated and
control plots. The samples were analyzed at ‘Horticoop’ a private
soil laboratory for pH, organic carbon (Corg), available phosphorus
(AP), total nitrogen (Nt), available nitrogen (Nitrate N & Ammo-
nium N) and available Sulfur (AS).
Soil pH was determined at 1:2 soil: water suspension ratio
using pH meter (Mylavarapu, 2009). Soil Corg was determined by
dichromate oxidation method (Walkley & Black, 1934). Kjeldahl
digestion and distillation method (Jackson, 1958) for total nitro-
gen, spectrophotometer (Estefan, Sommer, & Ryan, 2013) for mi-
neral nitrogen (NH4 þ & NO3-) was employed. Available phos-
phorous was also measured using spectrophotometer after ex-
traction according to Bray II method (Bray & Kurtz, 1945). Available
sulfur was determined using turbid metric method (Kowalenko,
1985). In addition, gravimetric soil moisture at 0–30 cm and 30–60
cm depth was determined at 10–15 days intervals.
Soil texture was analyzed using the hydrometer method
(Bouyoucos, 1951). Soil bulk density was determined using soil
core samples, taken using core sampling ring (51 mm long & 50
mm internal diameter) from about the middle of 0–30 cm and that
of 60 cm soil depth, respectively (Anderson & Ingram, 1993).
2.6. Agronomic data collection
Agronomic parameters indicating growth, yield and yield
components of the test crops such as population count, plant
height, days to 50% flowering and physiological maturity, number
of tillers per plant (except for maize), above ground biomass, grain
yield, harvest index (HI) and thousand kernel weight (TKW) were
determined. For determination of yield and yield components, a
square quadrant with 1 m2 size was randomly assigned to three
random spots in each plot; the crop within each quadrant was
harvested and weighed, and manually threshed to separate the
grain and the straw. The grain was weighed using a top-load
balance and the difference in weight between the above ground
biomass and the grain was considered as straw fresh weight.
Twenty gram of the straw and 10 g of the grain were taken to la-
boratory and dried in oven at 65 °C for 48 h and the moisture
content was determined, and used to determine the dry biomass
and to adjust moisture content of the grain to 12.5%, and then the
 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316 311

yield per hectare was calculated. The sum of oven dried straw and
grain adjusted to 12.5% moisture content was considered as the
total above ground biomass. From the oven dried grain, 1000 seeds
were randomly picked and weighed to get the thousand-kernel
weight. Harvest index was determined by dividing the grain (ad-
justed to 12.5% moisture content) by the total dry above ground
biomass.
2.7. Data analysis
Both the soil and crop data was subjected to general linear
model procedure using the Statistical Analysis System SAS (SAS,
2008). When the main and interaction effects of the treatments
were significant, mean comparison was performed using least
significance differences (LSD) at 5% level of probability. In addition,
t-test was run to detect changes among soil parameters between
the initial samples and those collected at harvest of each crop.
3. Results and discussion
The main and interaction effect of the treatments on crop
performance and soil parameters are presented separately. While
most of the crop performance indicators were significantly af-
fected by the main effects, few of them were affected by the in-
teraction. With a few exceptions, the treatments did not sig-
nificantly affect the soil characteristics.
3.1. Crop growth and productivity
3.1.1. Crop growth
Growth is the most important process to understand in pre-
dicting plant responses to the environment (Hopkins, 1995). In
2014, which was a normal year in the region in terms of rainfall,
the use of soil bund significantly (p o0.05) increased the number
of days to maturity of maize. In 2015, when the region faced one of
the worst droughts in 30 years caused by El Niño climate condi-
tions, that led to failed harvests (AfDB, OECD, UNDP, 2016), the use
of contour bund significantly increased days to flowering and
maturity of groundnut, and days to flowering and plant height of
faba bean as compared to the control (Table 4). The extended
number of days to flowering and maturity is related to the effect of
soil bund in increasing availability of moisture due to the reduced
runoff and increased infiltration and enhancing nutrients avail-
ability, especially nitrogen that would have been lost with runoff
(Admassu et al., 2014). The reduced limitation of water and nu-
trients allowed luxurious vegetative growth of crops grown on
plots with soil bunds, while those grown without soil bund swit-
ched to early senescence and maturity due to the possible terminal
moisture stress (Fig. 4).
The agronomic practices led to a significant effect on most
of the growth parameters including tillers per plant, plant
height and days to flowering and to maturity of wheat, and
days to maturity of maize in 2014, but in 2015 only the number
of days to flowering of groundnut was significantly affected. In
2014, row sowing of wheat resulted in a significant increase in
number of tillers per plant, plant height and days to maturity,
but it reduced days to flowering. This is because row method of
sowing allowed lower competition and created better access to
resources (nutrient and water) for the plants leading to lux-
urious vegetative growth ‘horizontally’ such as the increased
tillering & ‘vertically’ like the enlarged plant height. The ex-
tended days to maturity, which enables longer time for pho-
tosynthesis and translocation of the carbohydrates enhances
seed size and weight leading to increased yield and harvest
index. Although intercropped haricot bean failed to complete
its life cycle due to shade effect of maize, the maturity of maize
intercropped with bean delayed by 7 days (Table 4) as com-
pared to the sole maize implying that the crop got longer time
for photosynthesis and translocation of carbohydrate. Row

Table 4
Effect of soil conservation measures and agronomic practices on growth and phenology of some crops grown at Diga and Jeldu districts in western Ethiopia.

Treatments Jeldu Diga

Days to flowering Days to maturity Tiller per plant Plant height (cm) Days to flowering Days to maturity Population m
2
2014

Wheat Maize

Soil and water conservation measures

Soil bund 59.5 147.5 4.95 99.6 65.7 166.6a

No bund 58.6 144.3 3.95 98.1 64.7 159.6b
LSD (5%) ns ns ns ns ns 4.5
Agronomic practices
Row/intercropped 56.8b 147.8a 5.5a 105.1a 65.3 164.1a
Broadcast/sole 61.3a 144.9b 3.5b 92.6b 65.1 162.1b
LSD (5%) 3.8 1.9 0.34 2.4 NS 1.4
CV (%) 0.9 2.0 4.5 3.7 3.2 1.7
2015
Faba bean Groundnut
Soil and water conservation measures
Soil bund 80.5a 114a 2.0a 60.9a 145.1a 6.2a
No bund 78.6b 107b 1.8b 56.9b 136.9b 5.4b
LSD (5%) 0.5 5.0 0.16 2.5 4.7 0.8
Agronomic practices
Row/fertilizer 79.6 112a 2.0 59.6a 141.3 5.9
Broadcast/no fertilizer 79.5 108b 1.8 58.2b 140.7 5.6
LSD (5%) Ns 2.5 Ns 0.8 ns Ns
CV (%) 0.4 2.1 16.6 2.1 2.7 15.3

LSD ¼ least significant difference; ns ¼ not significant; CV ¼ coefficient of variation; $ subplot treatments shown for 2014/2015; means in the same column for the same
factor followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of probability.
312 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316

Table 5
Effect of soil and water conservation options and agronomic practices on yield and yield components of some crops grown at Jeldu and Diga districts in western Ethiopia.

Treatments$ Jeldu Diga

Wheat Maize

Biomass (t ha
1) Grain (t ha
1) HI Thousand kernel weight (g) Biomass (t ha
1) Grain (t ha
1) HI Thousand kernel weight (g)
2014

Soil and Water Conservation

Soil bund 21.3a 2.9a 0.14 43.3a 19.3a 6.9 0.36 349a
No bund 18.7b 2.5b 0.14 40.6b 13.6b 6.2 0.46 316b
LSD (5%) 2.6 0.3 ns 2.3 3.2 ns Ns 29
CV (%) 14.4 12.3 17.1 6.5 23.1 17.7 19.0 10.3
Agronomic Practices
a
Row/intercropped 20.9 2.9a 0.15a 42.1 18.0a 7.1a 0.32 354a
Broadcast/sole 19.1b 2.4b 0.13b 41.9 14.9b 6.0b 0.31 311b
LSD (5%) 1.5 0.2 0.01 Ns 2.0 0.61 Ns 18
CV (%) 11.00 11.74 15.43 6.09 23.1 17.7 19.0 10.3
2015
Soil and Water Conservation
Faba bean Groundnut
Soil bund 24b 3.3a 0.14a 107.4a 6.0 2.2a 0.38a 6.0
No bund 35a 3.1b 0.09b 101.0b 5.2 1.4b 0.26b 5.2
LSD (5%) 4.0 0.08 0.02 1.5 Ns 0.43 0.06 Ns
CV (%) 16.3 2.8 12.9 2.26 19.0 14.0 19.8 19.0
Agronomic Practices
Row/fertilizer 32.0a 3.3a 11.1a 106.0a 5.85 2.0a 0.33 5.6
Broadcast/sole 27.0b 3.1b 12.1b 102.5b 5.34 1.6b 0.30 5.3
LSD (5%) 3.2 0.1 2.1 Ns 0.17 Ns Ns
CV (%) 16.3 2.8 12.9 2.1 19.0 14.0 19.8 19.0

LSD ¼ least significant difference; ns ¼ not significant; CV ¼ coefficient of variation; $ subplot treatments shown for 2014/2015; means in the same column for the same
factor followed by the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of probability.

planting of faba bean in 2015 following the row planted wheat Table 6
in the previous year has significantly increased number of days Interaction effect of soil and water conservation and agronomic practices on days to
maturity of faba bean and kernel weight of groundnut in 2015 in western Ethiopia.
to maturity, while application of fertilizers to groundnut grown
on precursor of maize intercropped with haricot bean has Agronomic Soil No bund
significantly increased the number of days to flowering of the practices bund
groundnut.
Days to maturity of faba bean Row sowing 132a 127b
Broadcasting 131a 122c
3.1.2. Crop productivity- yield and yield components LSD (5%) ¼ 0.54; CV (%) ¼ 20
Table 5 depicts the effects of contour bund and improved Thousand kernel weights of NPS fertilizers 11.6a 10.8c
agronomic practices on yield and yield components of the test groundnut No fertilizer 11.2b 10.7c
crops grown in 2014 and 2015 at Jeldu and Diga. In 2014, the LSD (5%) ¼ 2.3; CV (%) ¼ 17

use of soil bund significantly increased the total biomass yield
and hundred seeds weight of both wheat and maize, but the
corresponding increase in grain yield was significant only on
wheat. The grain yield increase due to soil bund ranged from
6% for faba bean in 2015–11% and 16% for maize and wheat in
2014, to a maximum of 57% of groundnut in 2015, but the in-
crease for maize was not significant. In 2015, although the use
of soil bund has significantly (P o 0.05) reduced the total above
ground biomass of faba bean (by 31%), it has significantly in-
creased the TKW and HI and consequently exhibited grain yield
of 6% as compared to the traditional practice of no soil bund.
The reduction of biomass due to the use of soil bund may be
related to the excess water that leads to poor aeration during
the main rain season. The increased water availability during
the grain filling stage might have contributed to the increased
HI, leading to increased grain yield as compared to that ob-
tained due to the control. In faba bean, water stress decreases
the final leaf area (Claudio et al., 1997), net photosynthesis
(Hura, Hura, Grzesiak, & Rzepka, 2007), light use efficiency
(Xia, 1994), pod retention and filling by reducing the avail-
ability of assimilates and distorting hormonal balance (Ghas-
semi-Golezani, Ghanehpoor, & Mohammadi-Nasab, 2009).
The improvement in yield and yield components due to soil
bund is related to the enhanced water availability during the
grain filling stage (Fig. 4) due to reduced runoff and increased
LSD ¼ least significant difference; ns ¼ not significant; CV ¼ coefficient of var-
iation; means in the same column for the same factor followed by the same letter
are not significantly different at 5% level of probability
infiltration and enhanced nutrients availability (Admasu et al.,
2014) that has resulted in increased individual grain weight
and number of grains per plant. This corroborates the findings
of Ghassemi-Golezani et al. (2009) who reported a superior
performance of well-watered crops (including faba bean)
during the grain filling stage that led to more and larger grains
and consequently higher grain yield per unit area. According to
Zhang and Oweis (1998), adequate water at or after anthesis
stage does not only allow the crop to increase photosynthesis
rate but also gives extra time to translocate the carbohydrate to
grains which improves grain size and increases grain yield
(Akram, 2011). The length of the grain filling period is an im-
portant determinant of yield of all grain crops (Egli, 1998).
As mentioned earlier, the fertilizer rate recommended under
the traditional condition in which runoff is allowed to wash off the
nutrients was used for all plots, irrespective of the treatments.
However, when the nutrient loss with runoff is avoided due to the
soil bunds, the fertilizer applied could be more than the required
leading to over fertilization, especially nitrogen that led to tall
plants and lodging (Rajkumara, 2008) which was exhibited in
wheat and maize in 2014 and faba bean in 2015. In this
 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316 313

Fig. 5. Effect of soil bund on soil moisture content (0–60 cm) at Jeldu in 2024.

Fig. 6. Effect of soil bund on soil moisture content (0–60 cm) at Jeldu in 2025.

connection, a recent study conducted in the same area showed a
significant loss of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers with runoff
with attendant substantial yield reduction (Erkossa et al., 2015).
This partly explains the extremely low harvest index of wheat and
faba bean grown subsequently.
On the contrary, the crops grown without soil bund also ex-
hibited lower HI, TKW and grain yield, even when they gave higher
above ground biomass, which is related to the moisture stress after
the secession of rainfall (Fig. 3), which led to shorter grain filling
duration and lower accumulation of dry matter in the growing
kernels (Agueda, 1999; Garcia, 2003; Samarah, 2004; Samarah,
Alqudah, Amayreh, & McAndrews, 2009; Sanchez, Garcia, & An-
tolin, 2002) as a result of the reduction in the rate and duration of
starch accumulation in the endosperm (Brooks, Jenner, & Aspinall,
1982).
Similarly, the improved agronomic practices (row sowing of
wheat and faba bean at Jeldu and intercropping of maize with
haricot bean followed by application NPS fertilizer) have sig-
nificantly improved most of the yield and yield components at
both locations in both years. At Jeldu, row planting of wheat in
2014 and faba bean in 2015 has significantly increased above
ground biomass, grain yield, and HI and kernel weight of both
crops, except for the kernel weight of wheat in 2014. This confirms
the previous findings in in which row sowing significantly in-
creased in plant high, pods plant, biomass and seed yield of faba
bean (Wakweya & Meleta, 2016) and wheat (Alemu, Emana, Haji, &
Legesse, 2014; Soomro et al., 2009) as compared to broadcast
planting. Likewise, intercropping of maize with haricot bean in
2014 followed by application of NPS on groundnut has sig-
nificantly increased biomass, grain yield and kernel weight of
maize in 2014, but in 2015 the increase was significant only on
grain yield of groundnut. This contradicts the previous findings in
which intercropping of maize with haricot bean has either sig-
nificantly reduced or had no appreciable effect on maize yield
(Tolera, 2003; Adafre, 2016). The discrepancy may be related to the
fact that the haricot bean could grow only for few weeks only to
perish and become ‘green manure’ for the maize crop, which had
rather a positive effect on the main crop. In 2015, row planting has
significantly reduced the HI of faba bean which is related to the
luxurious vegetative growth and lodging which may be due to
over fertilization. The fertilizer rate used in the study was re-
commended for the traditional practice of broadcast planting, in
which the crop access to the nutrients is lower than in row
planting where fertilizers are placed in row with the seeds.
314 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316

Table 7
Surface soil (0–30 cm) chemical properties as affected by soil and water conservation and agronomic practices at Jeldu in western Ethiopia.

Year Treatment pH (1:2 water) OC (%) TN (%) NH4-N (%) NO3-N (%) Pav (mg kg
1) Sav (mg kg
1)

Jeldu 2014 Soil bund 5.9 2.9 0.27 0.11 70.4 7.8 13.6
No bund 5.9 2.9 0.29 0.08 72.8 9.5 13.6
LSD (5%) ns ns ns 0.03 ns ns ns
Row 5.9 3.0 0.29 0.08 76.9 8.5 13.5
Broad cast 5.9 2.9 0.28 0.11 66.3 8.9 13.8
LSD (5%) ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
CV (%) 3.3 17.5 18.48 56.44 30.0 31.8 37.5
2015 Soil bund 6.0 3.4 2.25a 0.46a 16.4 14.3a 11.5
No bund 5.9 2.5 0.27b 0.21b 23.0 3.9b 13.9
LSD (5%) ns ns 0.52 0.09 ns 3.9 ns
Row 5.9 1.5 0.26b 0.45a 27.2a 6.6b 14.0
Broad cast 5.9 1.3 2.26a 0.22b 12.2b 11.6a 11.4
LSD (5%) ns ns 0.44 0.08 5.21 3.36 ns
CV (%) 5.2 18.3 17.6 33.5 32.4 28.5 34.8
Diga 2014 Soil bund 5.9 4.8 0.26 0.4 85.5 10.6 9.0
No bund 5.7 4.6 0.22 0.3 98.0 9.4 7.1
LSD (5%) ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Intercropped 5.7 4.7 0.24 0.3 90.9 10.2 8.1
Sole 5.8 4.6 0.24 0.3 93.7 9.7 7.8
LSD (5%) ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
CV (%) 3.3 19.5 207 42.3 29.4 33.2 34.7
2015 Soil bund 5.7a 4.71 0.25 0.31 89.9 8.4 9.4
No bund 5.5b 4.98 0.25 0.23 86.6 7.2 7.26
LSD (5%) 0.19 ns ns ns ns ns ns
Fertilizer 5.6 4.85 0.25 0.32a 90.0 8.2 7.5b
No fertilizer 5.5 4.84 0.25 0.21b 86.5 7.3 9.2a
LSD (5%) ns ns ns 18.37 ns ns 1.7
CV (%) 4.8 14.6 6.7 22 24.3 11.0 39.3

LSD ¼ Least significant difference; ns ¼ Not significant; CV ¼ Coefficient of variation; means in the same column for the same factor followed by the same letter are not
significantly different at 5% level of probability

3.1.3. The interaction effects
The interaction effect of the treatments was significant only
on days to maturity of faba bean and 100 kernel weight of
groundnut in 2015 (Table 6). The highest number of days to
maturity (132 days) was due to the combined use of soil bund
and row planting as opposed to the lowest (122 days) which
was due to broadcast on plots without soil bund. This may be
related to the luxurious vegetative growth of the crop due to
the combined effect of prolonged water availability made
possible by the soil bund and the possible increased nutrient
availability because of the reduced nutrients loss with runoff
and the improved placement of the seeds and fertilizers which
results in reduced competition between plants in row sowing
as compared to the broadcast method (Soomro et al., 2009). As
depicted in Table 6, the combined use of soil bund and appli-
cation of fertilizers on plot with precursor crop maize inter-
cropped with haricot bean resulted in the highest kernel
weight of groundnut as opposed to the lowest which was
obtained when no fertilizer was used on plots without soil
bund. This is related to the increased water availability during
the grain filling stage of the crop, which also allowed pro-
longed utilization of the fertilizer. The residual effect of the
previous year, in which nitrogen fixing haricot bean was
grown, might also have contributed to the increased vegeta-
tive growth, which gave the seeds longer time to mature.
3.2. Soil physicochemical characteristics
3.2.1. Soil moisture content
At both sites and the monitored soil layers (0–30 cm and 30–
60 cm), the soil moisture content of the plots with soil bund
consistently exceeded that of the control, but the difference
between the two layers and the agronomic practices was
negligible. Figs. 5 and 6 depict the effect of the soil bund on soil
moisture content at 0–60 cm (the effective root depth of most
crops in the area) at Jeldu in 2014 & 2015, respectively. Evi-
dently, the soil moisture content of the plots treated with soil
bund exceeded that of the control throughout the study period.
While the soil moisture of the plot with soil bund exceeded the
moisture content at field capacity for several months, that of
the control plots exceeded only briefly. This shows that level
soil bunds may retain excess water during the high rainfall
weeks which could be detrimental to sensitive crops such as
wheat and faba bean, the sign of which was observed in some
plots during the study. Further, with the recession and seces-
sion of rainfall, the moisture content of the plots with soil bund
remained higher than that of the control plots and permanent
wilting point until the crops were harvested.
Apparently, this was because, the major part of the rain-
water was forced to infiltrate due to the soil bund. Under the
traditional practices represented by the control plots, the wa-
ter is lost as runoff and hence not used for crop production
(Nyssen et al., 2005; Rao et al., 1998). It also causes soil erosion
and nutrient loss with a detrimental effect on-site and off-site
(Erkossa et al., 2015). Technically, level soil bund is meant to
store water instead of safe disposal, which is the case with the
graded version. The construction of the graded soil bund re-
quires an integrated watershed management approach in
which the drainage from all plots in the neighborhood should
coordinated. However, if such arrangement is not an option,
level bunds which put all the water into the soil profile for use
by the current and subsequent crops can be used, provided the
disadvantageous such as waterlogging effect does not out-
weigh the benefits.
 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316 315

3.2.2. Soil chemical characteristics
The main and interaction effect of the treatments was sig-
nificant only on a few of the soil parameters considered (Ta-
ble 7). Generally, the effects are inconsistent and sometimes
contradictory to expectations. In 2014, the main and interac-
tion effects of the treatments was not significant on any of the
parameters considered, but in 2015, soil bund significantly
increased TN, NH 4 -N and available P at Jeldu and soil pH at
Diga. Similarly, row planting of wheat in 2014 and faba bean in
2015 at Jeldu and intercropping of haricot bean with maize
followed by application of NPS to groundnut in 2015 at Diga
significantly increased the NH 4 -N content of the soil in 2015.
On the other hand, TN and available P were reduced due to row
planting of wheat in 2014 and faba bean in 2015 at Jeldu. Si-
milarly, intercropping of haricot bean with maize followed by
application of NPS significantly reduced available sulfur in
2015 at Diga. However, irrespective of the treatments, several
of the parameters have significantly changed as compared to
their status before implementation of the treatments (Ap-
pendix A Table A1).
4. Conclusion
weight and harvest index. As a result, the grain yield was
higher when soil bund was used as compared to when not,
even when the total above ground biomass was lower. The
improved agronomic practices, row planting of wheat and faba
bean, intercropping of maize with haricot bean and fertiliza-
tion of groundnut, all have enhanced crop growth, yield and
yield components. However, the effect on soil moisture and soil
chemical characteristics was negligible. The interaction effect
between the soil and water conservation and agronomic
practices was significant on days to maturity of faba bean and
thousand kernel weight of groundnut where the combined use
of the practices resulted in the highest number of days to
maturity of faba bean and the highest kernel weight of
groundnut. While the effect of the treatments on soil quality
may require longer time, the improvement on crop pro-
ductivity is due to the use of both the soil and water con-
servation and the improved agronomic practices is eminent.
However, the analysis of the net economic benefits and farm-
ers’ opinion in view of the long term economic and ecological
benefits is a prerequisite for recommending the widespread
use of the practices.

The use of contour soil bund in a relatively high rainfall area
of western Ethiopia and improved crop management practices
have improved crop growth and yield, but the effect on soil
chemical characteristics was limited to few parameters. Over-
all, the impact of soil bund on crop growth and yield was
greater in 2015 which is the dry year than in 2014 which is the
normal year. This may also exhibit the cumulative effect of the
treatments. The use of soil bund increased soil moisture con-
tent during the growing period, and resulted in extended
growing period. This increased the number of days to flowering
and maturity, which contributed to the increased kernel
Acknowledgements
This study was financially supported by the CGIAR Humidtropics
program and the International Water Management Institute. The
support obtained from the IP members including the participating and
non-participating farmers in designing and implementation of the
field trial is highly appreciated. Nigusu Bekele helped in soil sampling
while MSc students, Anania Tesfaye, Ebisa Ararsa, Ferede Abuye and
Keberku Endashaw, all from Ambo University helped in field data
collection and sampling. Yenenesh Abebe, GIS expert with IWMI has
helped in generating the location maps.

Appendix A

See Table A1.

Table A1
Soil bund and crop management practices on the soil chemical properties at Jeldu during 2014 in western Ethiopia.

Soil parameter (N ¼ 20) Test Soil and Water Conservation Practices Crop Management Practices

Soil bund t-sig. No bund t-sig. Row planting t-sig. Broadcasting t-sig.

pH B 6.2 7 0.6 NS 6.1 7 0.4 NS 6.117 0.5 NS 6.117 0.5 NS

A 5.9 7 0.3 6.0 70.0 5.96 7 0.2 5.95 7 0.2
OC (%) B 2.4 7 0.5 * 2.9 70.7 NS 2.7 7 0.7 NS 2.7 7 0.7 NS
A 2.9 7 0.7 3.0 7 0.5 3.0 7 0.5 2.9 7 0.7
TN (%) B 0.28 7 0.1 NS 0.29 70.04 NS 0.29 7 0.05 NS 0.29 7 0.05 NS
A 0.27 7 0.1 0.29 70.5 0.29 7 0.05 0.28 7 0.06
NH4-N (mg kg
1) B 0.3 7 0.5 * 0.5 70.5 ** 0.40 7 0.5 ** 0.40 7 0.5 **
A 0.07 7 0.1 0.04 7 0.04 0.05 7 0.04 0.06 7 0.09

1
NO3-N (mg kg ) B 142.17 98.6 ** 135.9763.7 *** 139.0 783.1 ** 139.0 783.1 ***
A 70.4 7 31.0 72.8 7 17.0 76.9 7 21.6 66.3 7 26.9

1
Available P (mg kg ) B 32.2 7 21.2 *** 15.6 7 15.4 NS 23.9 720.4 ** 23.9 720.4 **
A 7.8 73.9 9.5 7 3.6 8.5 7 3.7 8.9 7 3.9
Available S (mg kg
1) B 1.6 7 0.9 *** 0.97 7 0.2 *** 1.3 7 0.8 *** 1.3 7 0.8 ***
A 13.6 7 5.0 13.6 7 5.8 13.5 74.7 13.8 7 6.0

B ¼ before treatment A ¼after treatment NS ¼ Non-significant difference.

*, **, ***, significantly different at 5%, 1% and o.1% level of probability, respectively.
316 T. Erkossa et al. / International Soil and Water Conservation Research 6 (2018) 305–316
References
Adafre, A., N. (2016). Advantages of maize-haricot bean Intercropping over sole
cropping through competition indices at west Badewacho woreda, Hadiya
zone, SNNPR. Academic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Research, 4
(1), 1–8.
Adimassu, Z., Mekonnen, K., Yirga, C., & Kessler, A. (2014). Effect of soil bunds on
runoff, soil and nutrient losses, and crop yield in the central highlands of
Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Development, 25, 554–564.
AfDB, OECD, UNDP (2016). 201. 6 African Economic outlook- Ethiopia (〈Ethiopia_
African%20Economic%20Outlook_2016_WEB.pdf〉, latest referred to on; 10/11/
2016).
Agueda, G. (1999). Barley yield in water- stress condition. The influence of pre-
cocity, osmotic adjustment and stomatal conductance. Field Crops Research, 62,
23–34.
Akram, M. (2011). Growth and yield components of wheat under water stress of
different growth stages. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research, 36(3),
455–468.
Alemayehu S. Dorosh Dand Sinafikeh A. (2011). Crop Production in Ethiopia: Re-
gional Patterns and Trends. Development Strategy and Governance Division,
International Food Policy Research Institute, Ethiopia Strategy Support Program
II, working paper 0016. Ethiopia.
Alemayehu S. T. (2008). Decomposition of Growth in Cereal Production in Ethiopia,
Paper prepared for the DFID funded study Understanding the constraints to
continued rapid growth in Ethiopia: the role of agriculture (〈http://users.ox.ac.
uk/  econstd/Brief_Tafesse.pdf〉, latest referred to on: 18/10/2016).
Alemu, T., Emana, B., Haji, J., & Legesse, B. (2014). Impact of wheat row planting on
yield of smallholders in Arsi zone of Ethiopia. International Journal of Economics
and Empirical Research, 2(12), 510–517.
Anderson, J. M., & Ingram, J. S. I. (1993). Tropical soil biology and fertility. A handbook
of methods ((2nd ed.). Wallingford U.K.: CAB International.
Beyene, F. (2015). Incentives and challenges in community - based rangeland
management: Evidence from eastern Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Develop-
ment, 26, 502–509.
Bishaw, B. (2001). Deforestation and Land Degradation on the Ethiopian Highlands:
A Strategy for Physical Recovery, Paper presented at International Conference
on Contemporary Development Issues in Ethiopia, Kalamazoo, Michigan, U.S.A.
August16-18, 2001Deforestation and Land Degradation on the Ethiopian
Highlands: A Strategy for Physical Recovery.
Bouyoucos, G. J. (1951). A recalibration of the hydrometer methods for making
mechanical analysis of soils. Agronomy J, 43, 434–438.
Bray, H. R., & Kurtz, L. T. (1945). Determination of organic and available forms of
phosphorus in soils. Soil Science, 9, 39–46.
Brooks, A., Jenner, C., & Aspinall, D. (1982). Effects of water deficit on endosperm
starch granules and on grain physiology of wheat and barley. Australian Journal
of Plant Physiology, 9, 423–436.
Conant, R. T. (2009). Rebuilding resilience: Sustainable management for climate mi-
tigation and adaptation, Technical Report on Land and Climate Change for the
Natural Resources Management and Environment Department. Rome: FAO.
CSA (Central Statistical Authority) (2014). Agricultural sample survey: report on
livestock and livestock characteristics (private peasant holdings). Volume II
Statistical Bulletin, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia E.C.), Statistical Bulletin 532. Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
Egli, D. B. (1998). Seed biology and the yield of grain crops. Wallingford, UK: CAB
International.
Erkossa, T., Awlachew, S. B., & Hagos, F. (2009). Characterization and productivity
assessment of the farming systems in the upper part of the Nile basin. Ethiopian
Journal of Natural Resources, 11(2), 149–167.
Erkossa, T., Wudneh, A., Desalegn, B., & Taye, G. (2015). Linking soil erosion to on-
site financial cost: Lessons from watersheds in the Blue Nile basin. Solid Earth, 6,
765–774.
Estefan, G., Sommer, R. and Ryan, J. (2013). Methods of Soil, Plant and Water
Analysis: A manual for the West Asia and North Africa region. ICARDA, 3rd ed. P
244.
Fanuel, L. (2015). Soil spatial variability analysis, fertility mapping and soil plant nu-
trient relations in Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia (Ph.D. Dissertation). Ethiopia:
Graduate School, Haramaya University.
Fanuel, L., Kibebew, K., Tekalign, M., Karltun, E., & Gebrekidan, H. (2016). Physio-
graphic characteristics of agricultural lands and farmers' soil fertility manage-
ment practices in Wolaita zone, Southern Ethiopia. Environmental Systems Re-
search, 5(24), 1–16.
Garcia, L. (2003). Evaluation of grain yield and its components in durum wheat
under Mediterranean condition. Agronomy Journal, 95, 266–274.
Ghassemi-Golezani, K., Ghanehpoor, S., & Mohammadi-Nasab, A. D. (2009). Effects
of water limitation on growth and grain filling of faba bean cultivars. Journal of
Food, Agriculture & Environment, 7(3&4), 442–447.
Hopkins, W. G. (1995). Introduction to plant physiology. Canada: John Wiley&Sons.
Hura, T., Hura, K., Grzesiak, M., & Rzepka, A. (2007). Effect of longterm drought
stress on leaf gas exchange and fluorescence parameters in C3 and C4 plants.
Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 29, 103–113.
Jackson, M. L. (1958). Soil chemical analysis (pp. 183–204)New Jersey: Prenstice-
Hall, Inc., Engle Wood Cliffs.
Kassie, M., Pender, J., Yesuf, M., Kohlin, G., Bluffstone, R., & Mulugeta, M. (2008).
Estimating returns to soil conservation adoption in the northern Ethiopian
highlands. The Journal of International Agricultural Economics, 38(2), 213–232.
Kowalenko, C. G. (1985). A modified apparatus for quick and versatile sulfate sulfur
analysis using hydriodic acid reduction. Communication in Soil Science and Plant
Analysis, 4(2), 125–138.
Lema, Z., Mulema, A. A., Le Borgne, E., & Duncan, A. (2015). Innovation platforms for
improved natural resource management and sustainable intensification in the
Ethiopian Highlands In: I. Dror, J. J. Cadilhon, M. Schut, M. Misiko, &
Sh Maheshwari (Eds.), Innovation Platforms for Agricultural Development: Eval-
uating the Mature Innovation Platforms Landscape, 2016 (pp. 117–132). New
York: Routledge.
Muoneke, C. O., & Asiegbu, J. C. (1997). Effects of okra planting density and spatial
arrangement in intercrop with maize on the growth and yield of the compo-
nent species. Agronomy Journal, 179, 201–207.
Mylavarapu, R. (2009). UF/IFAS extension soil testing laboratory (ESTL) analytical
procedures and training manual. Circular 1248, Soil and Water Science Depart-
ment, Florida Cooperative Extension Service. Institute of Food and Agricultural
Sciences, University of Florida.
Nyssen, J., Vandenreyken, H., Poesen, J., Moeyersons, J., Deckers, J., Mitiku, H., &
Govers, G. (2005). Rainfall erosivity and variability in the northern Ethiopian
highlands. Journal of Hydrology, 311, 172–187.
Olson, J. M., & Maitima, J. M. (2006). Sustainable Intensification of Mixed Crop-Live-
stock Systems, land use change impacts and dynamics 110 (LUCID) Policy Brief # 1.
Nairobi, Kenya: International livestock research institute.
Rajkumara, S. (2008). Lodging in cereals – a review. Agricultural Review, 29(1),
55–60.
Rao, K. P. C., Steenhuis, T. S., Cogle, A. L., Srinivasan, S. T., Yule, D. F., & Smith, G. D.
(1998). Rainfall infiltration and run-off from an Alfisol in semi-arid tropical
India. Soil Tillage Research, 48, 61–69.
Samarah, N. H., Alqudah, A., Amayreh, J., & McAndrews, G. (2009). The effect of late-
terminal drought stress on yield components of four barley cultivars. Journal of
Agronomy and Crop Science, 195, 427–441.
Samarah, N. H. (2004). Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 25, 145–149.
Sanchez, D., Garcia, J., & Antolin, M. (2002). Effects of soil drought and atmospheric
humidity on yield, gas exchange, and stable carbon isotope composition of
barley. Photosynthetica, 40, 415–421.
Schmidt, E., & Zemadim, B. (2015). Expanding sustainable land management in
Ethiopia: Scenarios for improved agricultural water management in the Blue
Nile. Agriculture Water Management, 158, 166–178.
Soomro, U. A., Rahman, M. U., Odhano, E. A., Gul, S., & Tareen, A. Q. (2009). Effects of
Sowing method and seed rate on growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aesti-
vum). World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5(2), 159–162.
Tadele, A., Aemro, T., Yihenew, G., Birru, Y., Wolfgramm, B., & Hurni, H. (2013). Soil
properties and crop yields along the Terraces and Toposequece of Anjeni wa-
tershed, central highlands of Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Science, 5(2),
134–144.
Tireza, N., Eyasu, Y., & Nata, T. (2013). Quantification of the impact of integrated soil
and water conservation measures on groundwater availability in Mendae
catchment, Abraha We-Atsebaha, eastern Tigray, Ethiopia. Momona Ethiopian
Journal of Science (MEJS), 5(2), 117–136.
Wakweya, K., & Meleta, T. (2016). Effect of sowing method and seed rate on the
growth, yield and yield components of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) under highland
conditions of Bale, southeastern Ethiopia. Research Journal of Agriculture and
Environmental Management, 5(3), 086–094.
Walkley, A., & Black, C. A. (1934). An examination of different methods for de-
termining soil organic matter and the proposed modification by the chromic
acid titration method. Soil Science, 37, 29–38.
Woodfine, A. (2009). Using sustainable land management practices to adapt to and
mitigate climate change in sub-Saharan Africa: resource guide version 1.0.
TerrAfrica. 〈www.terrafrica.org〉.
Wudneh, A., Erkossa, T., & Devi, P. (2014). Sediment and nutrient lost by runoff from
two watershed, Digga district in blue Nile basin, Ethiopia. African Journal of
Environmental Science and Technology, 8(9), 498–510.
Xia, M. Z. (1994). Effects of soil drought during the generative development phase
of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) on photosynthetic characters and biomass produc-
tion. Journal of Agricultural Science, 122, 67–72.