CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Crop production is one of the fundamental branches of agriculture. Crop production can be done

on a commercial or subsistence foundation. Subsistence farming is when a farmer raises food to

sell; commercial farming is when farmer raises food in huge quantities for market use. Before the

discovery of oil, agriculture had been a significant factor in the economy of Nigeria

A.Suryawanshi., M.Savasani., & J.Shah., (2015). Since being relegated to the margins, it has

been performed in Nigeria at low level, with the bulk of active participants essentially being

subsistence farmers. The farmers detected soil and fertilizer types have a big impact on crop

yield which explains why different parcels of land planted with the same crop at the same time

and with the same management package grow at different rates.

Crop production has been largely inconsistent resulting in the lack of knowledge of the

combination of soil type. According to Abdi., and L.J.WilliamS, (2010). in addition to being a

medium for plant growth, soil also acts as a source of fertilizer, a place for plants to root, and a

place for biological activity. A reduction in crop productivity is caused by a number of variables,

including farmer ignorance of harvest glut, unpredictability of weather and seasonal rainfall

patterns, and other B.G.Tabachnick, L.S.Fidell, & S.J.Osterlind, 2014). The first objective in

this study is to identify the significant variable toward soil types using Multinomial Logistic

Regression. Based on the values of the independent variables, the multinomial logistic regression

level forecasts the likelihood that the dependent variable will fall into different categories.

1
According to the principle of highest probability of membership, the predictive category for the

dependent variable is ultimately selected.

The past accomplishments in agriculture demonstrate the strength and capability of man in

meeting the agricultural demand despite population rise. However, there has been an increase in

the usage of fertilizer in nations that offer input subsidies, such as Malawi, Mali, Nigeria, and

Tanzania, and this trend is likely to continue in the years to come. The second objective is to

determine the main factors by using Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis. PCA is

a multivariate statistical data analysis technique that divides a set of raw data into a number of

primary components that preserve the maximum variance in the original data.

Although application rates have for many years been based on general recommendations,

fertilizer is frequently not suited to individual crop, soil, or agro-ecological circumstances

(Bender et al., 2019). An iterative principal component analysis (PCA) data reduction process

similar to as a data-driven approach to determine important covariate layers. The comparison of

the performance of Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis used by using

eigenvalues will be the last objective. Most factor analyses reported in the literature use only

strength of a series of factors in explaining the variance of water quality data to identify factors

that explain the dominant variables in the datasets Hengl, et al 2011). The scope of this study

focused on how crops respond to different types of fertilizer in each of the different types of soils

by using chosen methods, Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis.

Modern agriculture faces the challenge of feeding an ever-growing global population,

necessitating the optimization of crop production. Fertilizers play a pivotal role in achieving this

goal by supplementing essential nutrients that may be deficient in the soil. The relationship

2
between crops, fertilizers, and soil types is intricate, and understanding this dynamic interplay is

crucial for sustainable agricultural practices (Smith et al., 2018). Different crops exhibit varied

responses to fertilizer applications, influenced by factors such as species-specific nutrient

requirements and physiological processes. Soil types further complicate the scenario, as different

soils possess distinct physical and chemical properties that affect nutrient availability and

retention. The impact of fertilizers on crop growth can vary significantly across diverse soil

types, necessitating a nuanced understanding of these interactions (Gomez et al., 2020). For

example, sandy soils may require different fertilization strategies compared to clayey soils due to

differences in water retention and nutrient leaching.

Numerous studies have addressed the impact of fertilizers on crop performance, but the majority

focus on generalized recommendations rather than accounting for specific crop and soil

combinations (Kumar et al., 2021). This research gap limits the precision of fertilizer application

practices, potentially leading to inefficiencies in resource utilization and environmental

degradation. As we move towards more sustainable agricultural practices, it becomes imperative

to tailor fertilizer recommendations to specific crops and soil types. Precision agriculture, which

involves the targeted application of inputs based on variability within fields, holds promise in

optimizing fertilizer use efficiency and minimizing environmental impact (Montgomery, 2020).

Climate change further exacerbates this problem by introducing additional uncertainties in

nutrient cycling and availability, making it imperative to reassess fertilizer-crop-soil interactions

under evolving climatic conditions (Kumar et al., 2020). The need for site-specific management

practices, considering the unique combinations of crop species and soil types, has never been

more critical.

3
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Modern agriculture is confronted with the pressing challenge of achieving sustainable and

efficient crop production to meet the escalating global demand for food. Fertilizers, while

essential for enhancing soil fertility and boosting crop yields, currently lack precision in

application strategies. Existing studies often provide generalized recommendations, neglecting

the nuances of crop-specific responses to varying fertilizer types and levels across diverse soil

types. This deficiency in precision not only hinders optimal crop growth but also contributes to

inefficient fertilizer use, potentially resulting in environmental degradation and nutrient runoff .

Agricultural sustainability is not only contingent on optimizing crop yields but also demands a

consideration of environmental impacts. Indiscriminate fertilizer application can lead to nutrient

runoff, soil degradation, and water pollution. Striking a balance between maximizing crop

productivity and minimizing adverse environmental effects is a key challenge faced by

contemporary agriculture. The advent of precision agriculture technologies, such as remote

sensing and soil sensors, provides opportunities to address this challenge by enabling site-

specific management practices. These technologies offer a means to tailor fertilizer applications

according to the specific needs of crops and the characteristics of the soil, thereby optimizing

resource use efficiency.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The aim of the study is to examine the multivariate analysis on the response of crop to fertilizer

and soil type in Nigeria. The study specific objectives are;:

i. to determine if there is a relationship and the characteristics among soil type, fertilizer type and

crop yield.

4
ii. to examine the a relationship between soil type and crop yield.

iii. to investigate the relationship between fertilizer type and crop yield.

iv. to determine the best combination of fertilizer and soil type that yields more crops

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study holds significant importance for agricultural practitioners, policymakers, and

researchers. The findings will contribute to the development of tailored fertilizer

recommendations for specific soil types and crops, ultimately enhancing agricultural

productivity, reducing environmental impacts, and promoting sustainable farming practices.

Moreover, the research outcomes will provide practical guidance for farmers, enabling them to

make informed decisions about fertilization practices based on the specific crop types they

cultivate and the soil characteristics of their fields. By optimizing fertilizer use, farmers can

anticipate increased crop yields and, subsequently, enhanced economic returns. Precision

agriculture is integral to resource use efficiency. This not only benefits farmers economically but

also contributes to sustainable resource management. The study's findings can aid in mitigating

environmental degradation associated with agriculture. By minimizing nutrient runoff, soil

erosion and pollution, precise fertilizer recommendations promote eco-friendly farming

practices, aligning with global sustainability goals Policymakers can leverage the research to

develop evidence-based agricultural policies that encourage responsible fertilizer use. Such

policies can encompass incentives for adopting precision agriculture and addressing

environmental concerns related to excessive fertilizer application.

5
1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study will focus on a specific geographical area or region, considering a variety of crops and

commonly used fertilizers. Different soil types prevalent in the selected area will also be taken

into account.

1.6 DEFINITION OF TERMS

Multivariate Analysis: Statistical methods that involve the analysis of multiple variables

simultaneously to understand the relationships and patterns within a dataset.

Crop Response: The reaction of crops to external factors, including fertilizers and soil types,

influencing yield and quality.

Crop: A "crop" refers to a cultivated plant or agricultural produce that is grown and harvested

for food, fiber, medicinal plants, and other uses. Crops are a fundamental component of

agriculture and contribute significantly to the world's food supply.

Fertilizers: Substances added to soil or plants to provide essential nutrients for plant growth and

development.

Soil Types: Different categories of soil characterized by distinct physical and chemical

properties.

Optimal Combinations: The most effective and efficient pairings of fertilizers and soil types for

maximizing crop yield.

6
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 CONCEPTUAL REVIEW

2.1.1 FERTILIZER USE IN AGRICULTURE

Fertilizers play a pivotal role in modern agriculture by enhancing soil fertility and promoting
plant growth. As the global population continues to burgeon, the demand for food production
rises concurrently. To meet this demand, farmers resort to fertilizers to maximize crop yields.
However, the indiscriminate use of fertilizers has raised concerns about its environmental
impact, including water pollution, soil degradation, and greenhouse gas emissions. This essay
explores the significance of fertilizers in agriculture, their types, the environmental consequences
of their use, and potential solutions to strike a balance between productivity and sustainability.

Fertilizers are essential inputs in modern agriculture as they provide plants with the nutrients
required for optimal growth. Soil, the medium through which plants obtain nutrients, is often
deficient in essential elements like nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Fertilizers bridge this
nutrient gap, ensuring that crops receive the necessary nourishment for robust development.
This, in turn, enhances crop yields, an imperative outcome given the increasing global demand
for food.

2.1.2 TYPES OF FERTILIZERS

Fertilizers come in various forms, each designed to address specific nutrient deficiencies in the
soil. Broadly, they are categorized into organic and inorganic fertilizers. Organic fertilizers
include manure, compost, and other natural substances, while inorganic fertilizers encompass
synthetic compounds such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium-based fertilizers.

Nitrogen fertilizers, like urea and ammonium nitrate, are crucial for promoting leafy, vegetative
growth. Phosphorus-based fertilizers, such as superphosphate, play a vital role in root
development and flowering. Potassium fertilizers, like potassium chloride, contribute to overall
plant health, stress resistance, and fruit development. The choice of fertilizer depends on the crop
type, soil composition, and the specific nutrient requirements of the plants.

7
2.1.3 THE ROLE OF FERTILIZERS IN CROP GROWTH

Fertilizers play a pivotal role in enhancing crop growth and ensuring global food security by
providing essential nutrients to plants. These nutrients, including nitrogen, phosphorus, and
potassium, are crucial for various physiological processes such as photosynthesis, cell division,
and overall plant development (Zhang, W. F., & Zhang, F. S. (2008). Fertilizers address soil
nutrient deficiencies, promoting optimal conditions for crop growth and maximizing yields.

Nitrogen is a key component of chlorophyll, the pigment responsible for photosynthesis, while
phosphorus is vital for energy transfer and storage in plants Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson,
P. A., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2002).. Potassium regulates water uptake, enzyme activation,
and plays a role in overall stress resistance. These nutrients are often depleted from soils due to
successive cropping, demanding the supplementation provided by fertilizers.

Fertilizer application is a science that requires careful consideration of soil composition, crop
type, and regional climate. Excessive use of fertilizers can lead to environmental issues, such as
nutrient runoff causing water pollution and disruption of ecosystems. Therefore, sustainable and
precision agriculture practices are essential for responsible fertilizer use.

Modern agriculture heavily relies on synthetic fertilizers to meet the nutritional demands of
crops, contributing to increased yields and addressing the challenge of feeding a growing global
population u, X. T., Xing, G. X., Chen, X. P., Zhang, 2009). However, the balance between
maximizing productivity and minimizing environmental impact is a delicate one. Sustainable
approaches, including the use of organic fertilizers, cover cropping, and crop rotation, are
gaining importance in mitigating the ecological footprint associated with conventional fertilizer
use.

2.1.4 IMPACT OF FERTILIZERS ON SOIL HEALTH

While fertilizers play a crucial role in enhancing crop productivity, their impact on soil health is
a topic of growing concern. Excessive and improper use of fertilizers can lead to a range of
negative effects on soil quality and overall ecosystem health. One major issue is nutrient
imbalance (Vitousek, P. M., Aber, J. D., Howarth, et al 1997). . Fertilizers often focus on
supplying nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium (NPK), neglecting other essential micronutrients.

8
This imbalance can disrupt the microbial communities in the soil, affecting their ability to break
down organic matter and contribute to nutrient cycling. It may lead to a decline in soil fertility
over time. The overuse of nitrogen-based fertilizers can result in soil acidification (Crews, T. E.,
& Brookes, P. C. 2014).. The conversion of ammonium to nitrate releases hydrogen ions, leading
to a decrease in soil pH. Acidic soils adversely affect nutrient availability and can harm soil-
dwelling organisms, impacting the overall biodiversity and ecological balance.

Fertilizer application also contributes to environmental pollution. Nitrogen runoff, in the form of
nitrate, can contaminate groundwater and surface water, leading to issues such as eutrophication
in aquatic ecosystems (Galloway, J. N., Dentener, F. J., Capone, D. G., et al 2004). Phosphorus
runoff from fertilized fields can exacerbate water quality problems, causing algal blooms and
disrupting aquatic habitats. To mitigate these negative impacts, sustainable agricultural practices
that focus on precision fertilizer application and nutrient management are essential. These
practices involve optimizing fertilizer rates, timing, and placement to match the specific needs of
crops, minimizing excess nutrient runoff.

2.2 SUSTAINABLE AND CONSEQUENCES FERTILIZER PRACTICES

Sustainable fertilizer practices are essential for ensuring agricultural productivity while
minimizing environmental impact. Adopting responsible approaches to fertilizer use helps
address the challenges of nutrient management, soil health, and ecosystem sustainability.
Precision agriculture in an important component of sustainable fertilizer practices. It involves the
precise application of fertilizers based on the specific needs of crops, taking into account factors
such as soil type, nutrient levels, and climate conditions (Drinkwater, L. E., Wagoner, P., &
Sarrantonio, M. (1998).. This approach minimizes excess fertilizer use, reducing the risk of
nutrient runoff and associated environmental pollution.

In addition to precision application, incorporating organic fertilizers into farming systems

enhances sustainability. Organic fertilizers, such as compost and manure, contribute organic
matter to the soil, improving its structure and water retention capacity. Organic practices also
promote the activity of beneficial soil microorganisms, fostering a healthy soil ecosystem. Crop
rotation and cover cropping are sustainable strategies that complement fertilizer practices.
(Robertson, G. P., Paul, E. A., & Harwood, R. R. , 2000).

9
These techniques help break pest and disease cycles, reduce the risk of nutrient imbalances, and
enhance soil fertility naturally. Leguminous cover crops, for instance, can fix atmospheric
nitrogen, reducing the need for synthetic nitrogen fertilizers. Innovations in fertilizer technology,
such as slow-release fertilizers and nutrient-coated granules, contribute to sustainability by
improving nutrient use efficiency. These technologies release nutrients gradually, matching plant
demand and minimizing losses to the environment. To further enhance sustainable fertilizer
practices, education and outreach programs are crucial. Farmers need access to information on
best practices, optimal fertilizer formulations, and the environmental implications of their
choices Vanlauwe, B., Coyne, D., Gockowski, J., Hauser, S., Huising, J., Masso, C., ... & Schulz,
S. (2014).. Government policies that promote sustainable agriculture, including subsidies for
eco-friendly practices and regulations on fertilizer use, play a pivotal role in fostering widespread
adoption.

While fertilizers significantly boost agricultural productivity, their indiscriminate use poses
severe environmental challenges. One of the primary concerns is water pollution. Runoff from
fields treated with fertilizers can carry excess nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, into
water bodies. This nutrient influx leads to eutrophication, a process where excessive nutrients
cause algae blooms, depleting oxygen levels and harming aquatic ecosystems. Furthermore,
fertilizers contribute to soil degradation. The overuse of certain fertilizers can alter the soil's pH
and nutrient balance, leading to nutrient imbalances and reduced soil fertility over time. This, in
turn, necessitates even higher fertilizer application rates to maintain crop yields, creating a
vicious cycle. Greenhouse gas emissions are another environmental consequence of fertilizer
use. Nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas, is released during the microbial processes that occur
when nitrogen-based fertilizers are applied. These emissions contribute to climate change,
exacerbating global warming and its associated impacts on weather patterns and ecosystems.

2.3 IMPORTANCE OF LAND IN AGRICULTURE

Land is a major factor in agriculture. Its degradation is a worldwide issue and an extraordinary
challenge to sustaining the natural, economic and social services given by different ecosystem
(Motavali and Bardhan, 2013). The contrary effects of land debasement subvert individual’s
sustenance, economic well-being, and health status of billions of people in developing countries .
According to Titilola et al. (1990), some communities in Nigeria have had over 10% of their land

10
mass diminished by erosion and still stand the chance of losing a greater amount of their
cultivable land in the closest future. In Africa, about 28 percent of the land is degraded and this
costs the continent an estimated 56 billion euros annually (Joachim, 2016). Populace weight,
deforestation, steep slopes, poor cultivation strategies and vulnerable soils are the real
reasons for disintegration

(Mugisha and Alobo, 2012). TerrAfrica (2005) defines SLM as “the adoption of land use
systems that enable land users to maximize the economic and social benefits from the land
through suitable management practices while maintaining the ecological support functions of the
land resources. FAO (2009) in Babalola and Olayemi (2013) defined SLMP as “the acceptance
of land use frameworks that, through proper management practices, enables land users to
optimize the economic and social advantages from the land while keeping up or upgrading the
bionomical support functions of the land assets”. The objective of land management is to secure
the land and improve its execution, to cultivate gainfully and protect natural quality for a
considerable length of time. They include conventional tillage system, organic manure,
mixed farming, crop rotation and mulching. This connotes that the management of agricultural
lands would conserve the lands productivity in an environmentally, economically and socially
sustainable way. Mugisha and Alobo (2012) reported that, the demographic characteristics
influencing the choice of land management practices were farmer’s age, household size and
education level; and plot level characteristics such as slope gradient and crop types. Babalola and
Olayemi (2013) found that farmers’ level of education and their participation in community
based organisations positively influenced their adoption of the SLMP. Yam (Dioscorea spp) is a
soil loving crop which requires a good land management practices to attain the quality and
quantity expected by the farmer at the end of the planting season. Yam is a tropical crop in the
genus Dioscorea.

According to FAO (1988), Nigeria produced 18.3 million tonnes of yam from 1.5 million
hectares of farm land representing 73.8% of total yam production in Africa. This increased to
35.017 million metric tonnes with value equivalent to US$5.654 billion in 2008. International
Institute of Tropical Agriculture reported that about 70 percent of the world yam production
amounting to 17 million tonnes was produced in Nigeria from 2,837,000 hectares of land area
(Hahn et al., 1993). There are up to 600 species but the most economical in Nigeria are;

11
Dioscorea rotundata (white yam), Dioscorea cayenensis (yellow yam) and Dioscorea alata (water
yam). The cultivation of yam complements food security.

Farmers have been exposed to various land management practices such as contour ploughing,
terracing, mulching, minimum tillage, among others. These practices have been tried on
homesteads and affirmed successful. Nonetheless, not all farmers are applying them regardless of
the acknowledgment that their farmland is getting progressively degraded (Mugisha and Alobo,
2012). factors include a relatively well-developed market access infrastructure, the existence of
improved processing technology and a well-organized internal market structure (Nigerian
Federal Department of Agriculture, 2007). Another important factor is the location of the
International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) which has its main research station in
Ibadan, within the south west of the country, the study area. The Institute conducts research on
and releases new varieties of root crops amongst others in subSaharan Africa. The majority
(88%) of cassava produced in Africa is used for human food, with over 50% used in the form of
processed products (Oyewole and Eforuoku, 2019). Other uses in animal feed and for industrial
purposes (starch, ethanol) are as yet very minor.

The correct evaluation of soil properties such as soil water, bulk density, particle size, and
organic matter is of critical importance in agricultural production decision-making. This is
especially so if crop productivity must be maintained on a sustainable basis on tropical soils that
are easily deteriorated once opened up to mechanized tillage and attendant continuous cultivation
(Aina 2012). However, the spatio-temporal variation commonly encountered on the field often
makes this evaluation difficult. In addition, even though there is always a need to characterize
the heterogeneities in soil properties, if we must maximize crop yield, the cost involved and
sample size needed make it implausible (Boluwade and Madramooto 2016). Furthermore, these
soil properties also exhibit spatial correlation among the variables that result from different
management practices, for example, tillage operations, grazing, fertilizer applications, and so on
(Awe et al. 2018).

Meanwhile, crop yield has been shown to respond to these variabilities in soil properties. For
instance, Awe (2017) reported that bulk density, total porosity, soil water and cowpea yield were
spatially dependent. In another study, while employing geostatistical tools such as variograms
and kriging, (Awe et al. 2018) also found that the spatial variability in soil parameters had

12
influence on the spatial distribution of crop productivity potential. The spatial correlations
between bivariate and multivariate correlated variables have been evaluated in other studies
through the use of variogram and cross-variogram using geostatistical approach (Usowicz and
Lipiec 2017; Bhunia et al. 2018; Rezaee et al. 2019).

2.4 NITROGEN PHOSPHOROUS POTASSIUM (NPK) FERTILIZER

The agriculture industry relies heavily on the use of NPK fertilizer. There are various nutrients
that plants need for healthy and effective growth. Soils often lack these elements, either
naturally, or as a result of over cultivation or depletion, and needs to have these nutrients into it.
NPK fertilizer is primarily composed of three main elements: Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P), and
Potassium (K), each of these being essential in plant nutrition and growth. Among other benefits,
Nitrogen helps plants grow quickly, also it increases the production of seed, fruit, and bettering
the quality of crops. Nitrogen is also a component of chlorophyll, the substance that gives plants
their green color, and also aids in photosynthesis which is the most important process in every
crop development as a lot depends on how well a plant photosynthesizes (Begum, 2000). Healthy
soil is the foundation of the food system namely: It produces healthy crops that in turn nourish
people. Maintaining a healthy soil demands care and effort from farmers because farming is not
benign. By definition, farming disturbs the natural soil processes including that of nutrient
cycling - the release and uptake of nutrients. Plants obtain nutrients from two natural sources:
organic matter and minerals.

Organic matter includes any plant or animal material that returns to the soil and goes through the
decomposition process. In addition to providing nutrients and habitat to organisms living in the
soil, organic matter also binds soil particles into aggregates and improves the water holding
capacity of soil. Most soils contain 2 to 10 percent organic matter. However, even in small
amounts, organic matter is very important. Soil is a living, dynamic ecosystem. Healthy soil is
teeming with microscopic and larger organisms that perform many vital functions including
converting dead and decaying matter as well as minerals to plant nutrients. Different soil
organisms feed on different organic substrates. Their biological activity depends on the organic
matter supply. Nutrient exchanges between organic matter, water and soil are essential to soil
fertility and need to be maintained for sustainable production purposes (Nakano & Morita,
2009).

13
. Where the soil is exploited for crop production without restoring the organic matter and nutrient
contents and maintaining a good structure, the nutrient cycles are broken, soil fertility declines
and the balance in the agro-ecosystem is destroyed.

Soil organic matter - the product of on-site biological decomposition - affects the chemical and
physical properties of the soil and its overall health. Its composition and breakdown rate affect:
the soil structure and porosity; the water infiltration rate and moisture holding capacity of soils;
the diversity and biological activity of soil organisms; and plant nutrient availability. Many
common agricultural practices, especially ploughing, disc-tillage and vegetation burning,
accelerate the decomposition of soil organic matter and leave the soil susceptible to wind and
water erosion (Kihara and Njoroge, 2013). However, there are alternative management practices
that enhance soil health and allow sustained agricultural productivity. Conservation agriculture
encompasses a range of such good practices through combining no tillage or minimum tillage
with a protective crop cover and crop rotations. It maintains surface residues, roots and soil
organic matter, helps control weeds, and enhances soil aggregation and intact large pores, in turn
allowing water infiltration and reducing runoff and erosion.

In addition to making plant nutrients available, the diverse soil organisms that thrive in such
conditions contribute to pest control and other vital ecological processes. Through combining
pasture and fodder species and manuring with food and fibre crop production, mixed crop
livestock systems also enhance soil organic matter and soil health (Argaw and Tsigie, 2015).
This document recognizes the central role of organic matter in improving soil productivity and
outlines promising technologies for improved organic matter management for productive and
sustainable crop production in the tropics. Soil organic matter content is a function of organic
matter inputs (residues and roots) and litter decomposition. It is related to moisture, temperature
and aeration, physical and chemical properties of the soils as well as bioturbation (mixing by soil
macrofauna), leaching by water and humus stabilization (organ mineral complexes and
aggregates).

Land use and management practices also affect soil organic matter. Farming systems have tended
to mine the soil for nutrients and to reduce soil organic matter levels through repetitive
harvesting of crops and inadequate efforts to replenish nutrients and restore soil quality. This
decline continues until management practices are improved or until a fallow period allows a

14
gradual recovery through natural ecological processes (Broadley et al., 2012). Only carefully
selected diversified cropping systems or well managed mixed crop-livestock systems are able to
maintain a balance in nutrient and organic matter supply and removal. Farmers can take many
actions to maintain, improve and rebuild their soils, especially soils that have been under
cultivation for a long time. A key to soil restoration is to maximize the retention and recycling of
organic matter and plant nutrients, and to minimize the losses of these soil components caused by
leaching, runoff and erosion.

However, rebuilding soil quality and health through appropriate farming practices may take
several years, especially in dryland areas where limited moisture reduces biomass production and
soil biological activity. Thus, the challenge is to identify soil management practices that promote
soil organic matter formation and moisture retention and ensure productivity and profitability for
farmers in the short term. FAO recognizes that conservation agriculture can make an important
contribution to the agriculture sector through its multiple environmental and economic benefits
(Hawkesford et al., 2012).

Conservation agriculture uses holistic production management systems that promote and enhance
agro-ecosystem health, including aboveground and belowground biodiversity, biological cycles,
and biological activity. These systems apply specific and precise standards of production based
on no- or minimum-tillage techniques and selected cover crops and crop rotations (Hafsi et al.,
2011). Their aim is to achieve optimal agro-ecosystems that are socially, ecologically and
economically sustainable. Through effective harnessing of agro-ecological processes,
conservation agriculture provides an opportunity for reducing external input requirements and
for converting low input agricultural systems into more productive ones. A better understanding
of the linkages between soil life and ecosystem function and the impact of human interventions
will enable the reduction of negative impacts and the more effective capture of the benefits of
soil biological activity for sustainable and productive agriculture.

2.5 SOIL NUTRIENT STATUS

Growth, yield and quality of a plant species differ with soil types, and fertilizer management; and
a plant species requires suitable soil for higher yield and better quality Islam et al., 2011. Soil
fertility and crop productivity differ significantly with the amount and combination of Na, K, Ca,

15
Mg, S. P, Fe, Al, pH, and N in soil (Broadley et al., 2012); Hawkesford et al., 2012). Study on
growth characteristics of a plant species in local soils is important to develop management
practices for higher yield with good quality (Hossain &Ishimine, 2005). Different plant species
respond differently to fertilizer rates and combination and a plant species requires balanced
fertilizers to maximize growth, yield, and quality (Hafsi et al., 2011). The major nutrients (N, P,
K) individually or in combination maintain growth, yield, and quality of plants (Nakano &
Morita, 2009).

Nitrogen influences chlorophyll formation, stomatal conductance, and photosynthetic efficiency,

which is responsible for 26– 41% of crop yield. Potassium plays catalytic roles and regulates
functions of various minerals in plants, and promotes N uptake efficiency of plants. Insufficient
K causes shoot yellowing, poor growth, and low resistance to cold and drought of plant.
Phosphorus promotes absorption of other nutrients and plant growth Akamine et al., (2007).
Amaranthus, a genus consisting of more than 50 species, is an important promising food crop for
its resistance to heat, drought, diseases and pest, and high nutritional value (Rastogi & Shukla,
2013). Amaranthus species are severe weeds in crop fields, which significantly reduce yield and
quality (Guo& Al-Khatib, 2003). Many Amaranthus species have been cultivated as vegetable
and grain in many countries and are popularly consumed as vegetable in Africa, Bangladesh,
Caribbean, China, Greece, India, Nepal, and South Pacific Islands (Begum, 2000); Stalknecht &
Schulz-Schaeffer, amaranth lines for developing management practices in Okinawa.

2.6 EMPIRICAL REVIEW

According to Hossain and Ishimine (2005), coarse sand, fine sand, silt, clay, and apparent
density are 3.61%, 30.94%, 24.32%, 32.84%, and 0.90 g cm−3, respectively, for the gray soil;
2.93%, 7.33%, 23.94%, 57.24%, and 0.87 g cm−3, respectively, for the dark red soil; and
16.92%, 20.44%, 26.62%, 30.92%, and 0.92 g cm−3, respectively, for the red soil. Amaranth
lines The Amaranthus tricolor lines IB (India Bengal line, red leaf amaranth), TW (Taiwan line,
green leaf amaranth), BB (Bangladesh B line, red stem amaranth), and BC (Bangladesh C line,
red leaf amaranth) provided higher yield in our previous study (Ohshiro et al., 2014) were
evaluated in this study. Glasshouse experiment: effects of soil types on amaranth 4 lines A
glasshouse experiment was conducted using gray soil, dark red soil, and red soil at the
Subtropical Field Science Center of the University of the Ryukyus, from 10 July to 30 August

16
2011. each planter (planter-65e type, IRIS Ohyama, Japan) was filled with 13 kg of air-dried
soil; and seeds of the amaranth 4 lines were placed on soil surface and covered with a thin layer
(<0.5 mm) of soil. The plants were thinned to eight healthiest stands per planter at 2- to 3-leaf
stage. each soil treatment consisted of three planters (replications). The planters were arranged
randomly in the house. Water was applied as required every day. Fertilizer was not applied
during the course of the experiment in order to determine the actual effect of three Okinawan
soils on the amaranth lines.(1993); Svirskis, (2003).

Vegetable amaranth is equal or superior in taste to spinach (Spinaciaoleracea), which has higher
carotenoids (90–200 mg kg−1), protein (14–30%), and ascorbic acid (28 mg 100 g−1) Abbott &
Campbell, (1982); Prakash & Pal, (1991). Some amaranth species contains 11.94 mg β-carotene,
43 mg vitamin C, 374 mg Ca, 5.0 g carbohydrate, 5.3 g protein, 0.1 g fat, and 43 kcal per 100 g
of dry edible portion (Begum, 2000). Amaranthus species also contains various volatiles and
polyphenols, and has antioxidant, antimalarial, and antiviral properties, which prevent cancer,
cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, etc.

Dasgupta& De, (2007); It was reported that amaranth contains protein, ascorbic acid, and
mineral nutrients of Ca, Fe, Mg, P, K, and Na, which are considered as the nutritional value in
vegetables (USDA, 1984). Amaranthus grows very fast in tropical and subtropical areas, and is
cultivated in many countries under a variety of soils and agro-climatic conditions during summer
when vegetables are not available Begum, (2000); Makus, (1984); Singh & Whitehead, (1996).

In Okinawa, some Amaranthus species are found as weed in various crops and vegetables
(personal survey) in the major soil types, dark red soil, red soil, and gray soil, and summer
vegetables are very limited in supply during this period (Hossain & Ishimine, 2005); Okinawa
Prefecture Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, (2008). We evaluated growth speed, yield per
plant, total nutrient (minerals) per plant, and total l-ascorbic acid per plant of 12 amaranth lines
cultivated under a management condition, and selected some high-yielding amaranth lines with
high quality as summer vegetables.

Shittu et al. (2006) reported that balanced fertilizers in a specific soil provide higher yield and
nutrient compositions of amaranth in Nigeria, but no study has yet been conducted on the
selected amaranth lines regarding these factors in Okinawa. It is thought that growth, yield, and

17
quality of amaranth plants differ with chemical fertilizers and soil types possessing different
levels of minerals, pH, and N. Therefore, the objectives of these studies were to (i) identify the
best soil type, and (ii) evaluate rates of fertilizer combinations on growth, yield, and quality of
four selected. Food and nutritional requirements for the increasing human population in SSA call
for sustainable intensification in the current agricultural land. Research has identified
intensification options in agricultural production including integrated options such as combined
use of organic and inorganic inputs, micro dosing of fertilizers, legume-cereal integration
through rotations and intercropping, conservation agriculture and agro forestry options, among
others (Vanlauwe et al., 2015). The use of external inputs is a nutrient management option that
has attracted the most studies in SSA. Several decades of research show that deficiencies of
macronutrients such as N, P, and K are major limitations to crop production (Ayalew, (2011);
Aleminew and Legas, (2015), and recently the limitations of secondary nutrients and
micronutrient deficiencies are gaining traction Habtegebrial and Singh, (2009); Habtegebrial,
(2013).

Variable responses to fertilizer application are reported across most geographies and countries in
SSA. Based on a large and consistent crop response to fertilizer data covering five countries in
SSA, four categories of response have been identified, ranging from low response to any nutrient
combination to high response to N (Kihara et al., 2016). While some of the responses can be
explained by management factors (e.g. timeliness of farm operations or type of fertilizer), others
are due to biophysical attributes (e.g. variability in soils and climate). The resulting utilization
efficiencies and profitability/ benefits of fertilizer use is variable. The increasing benefits of
fertilizer application requires the development of plausible fertilizer recommendation domains
targeted at specific systems, landscapes and farm typologies, and management practices Bronson
et al., (2003); Zingore et al., (2007); Chikowo et al., (2014). In the complex landscapes of
Ethiopia, the position of fields within soil catena will probably influence the observed responses
to fertilizer application as observed in other places (Terra et al., 2006); The lemann et al., (2010).
Further, the type of cropping system influences the soil nutrient status; the availability of
nutrients to succeeding crops require context-specific targeting of fertilizer application using
conditions and systems that optimize fertilizer use efficiency. The realization of site-specific
management recommendations is elusive in Ethiopia as it is in other parts of SSA Haileslassie et
al., (2007).

18
In Ethiopia, agriculture is still characterized by low productivity, a high level of nutrient mining,
low use of external inputs, traditional farm management practices and limited capacity to
respond to environmental shocks (Amante et al., 2014); (Agegnehu et al., 2016). As a first step,
context-specific decision guidelines can be derived from examining meta analysis of existing
crop responses to fertilizer research data (through peerreviewed publications and gray literature
in universities and research institutes). With such guidelines, it is possible to target fertilizer
applications to specific agro ecologies and soil fertility problems and to increase economic
returns for fertilizer investments. We hypothesize that the crop response to fertilizer is influenced
by landscape positions and cropping systems (e.g. the previous crop). The objective of this study
is to assemble a comprehensive database and generate a country-level distributions of crop
response to fertilizers and generate guidelines for fertilizer management that result in increased
nutrient use efficiency based on meta-analysis of research data. This meta-analysis of existing
information over the last three decades on crop response to both application and management of
fertilizers and soil protection and rehabilitation approaches across soil types, agro ecologies and
cropping systems will provide a baseline for development of site-specific fertilizer
recommendations. In addition, it will assess the economic and yield benefits of fertilizer use on
farmer fields and identify the factors that contribute to successes and failures and corresponding
challenges and opportunities for fertilizer use and soil conservation. The analysis will also
provide information that will help to identify entry points for best-bet fertilizer types and
combinations.

19
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter focuses on the research methodology employed in the study. It outlines the study
design, the specific field of study, the target population, the sampling technique and size, as well
as the sources and approach used for data collection. Additionally, it discusses the method of
analysis applied and describes the procedure used to test the hypotheses and achieve the study
objectives.
3.1 TYPE OF STUDY DESIGN
The study's research design relies on data obtained from the records of International Institute
Tropical Agriculture (IITR) Ibadan records. These records encompass three different types of
corps, fertilizer and soil types. The analysis incorporates the utilization of the MANOVA.

3.2 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

In statistics, data refers to numerical or quantitative information. The process of collecting data
involves gathering relevant and useful information that is pertinent to the study at hand, allowing
for meaningful analysis 3and drawing reasonable conclusions. In this study, the data was
obtained from secondary sources. The research utilized ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) and
MANOVA (Multivariate Analysis of Variance) as statistical techniques for analyzing the
collected data.

3.3 SOURCE AND METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION

The data required for the study was sourced from secondary sources, specifically from the
International Institute Tropical Agriculture. The International Institute Tropical Agriculture
(IITR) Ibadan, Oyo state provided weekly records of three different types of corps, fertilizer and
soil types. The presentation of data involves organizing the collected information into tables,
graphs, or charts, enabling the derivation of statistical conclusions based on the measured data.
3.4 STUDY POPULATION

The study population for this research work is comparison analysis of three different corps,
fertilizer and soil types from IITR records

20
3.5 METHODOLOGY

3.5.1 MANOVA (Multivariate Analysis of Variance)

MANOVA stands for Multivariate Analysis of Variance. It is a statistical technique used to

analyze the differences between groups in a multivariate setting, where there are multiple
dependent variables measured for each observation.

The objective of MANOVA is to examine the relationship between the response variables and
the predictor variables and to determine if there are significant differences between groups or
conditions based on the multivariate response. MANOVA allows for testing hypotheses about
the equality of means across groups or conditions in a multivariate setting.
3.5.2 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE (MANOVA) ASSUMPTIONS
In order to use MANOVA the following assumptions must be met:
 Observations are randomly and independently sampled from the population
 Each dependent variable has an interval measurement
 Dependent variables are multivariate normally distributed within each group of the
independent variables (which are categorical)
 The population covariance matrices of each group are equal (this is an extension of
homogeneity of variances required for univariate ANOVA)
3.5.3 MANOVA MODEL
y1 = BTxi + i for i = 1,...,n has m ≥ 2 response variables Y 1,...,Ym and d predictor variables
X1,X2,...,Xd. The ith case is (x T1, yT = i ) = (xi1,...,xid,Yi1,...,Yim). If a constant xi1 = 1 is in the
model, then xi1 could be omitted from the case.
yi: This is a multivariate response variable or outcome variable. In MANOVA, multiple
dependent variables are considered simultaneously. The subscript i denotes the ith observation or
case.
BT: This represents the matrix of regression coefficients. B is a p x m matrix, where p is the
number of predictors (independent variables) and m is the number of response variables. Each
element of the matrix represents the coefficient of the corresponding predictor variable for each
response variable.

21
xi: This represents the matrix of predictor variables (independent variables). x is a p x 1 matrix,
where each element represents the value of a predictor variable for the ith observation.
ϵi: This denotes the error term or residual for the ith observation. It is assumed to be a
multivariate random variable with a mean of zero and a covariance matrix Σ.
For the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) model, the predictors are not quantitative
variables, so the predictors are indicator variables. Sometimes the trivial predictor 1 is also in the
model. In matrix form, the MANOVA model is Z = XB + E, and the data matrix W = [X Y ]. The
n×m matrix

22
Table 3.1 MANOVA TABLE

Df SS MS
T n-1 ∑ ∑ ¿¿¿ SST /df T
j i

B k-1 ∑ nj ¿ ¿ SSB /df B

j

W n-k ∑ ∑ ¿¿¿ SSW /df W

j i

3.6 CRD (Completely Randomized Design)

In experimental design, a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) is a type of research design
where the experimental units (subjects or objects under study) are randomly assigned to different
treatments or experimental groups. Each experimental unit has an equal chance of being assigned
to any of the treatment groups, making the assignment process completely random.

3.7 ASSUMPTIONS WHEN USING ONE-WAY ANOVA

As with other parametric tests, we make the following assumptions when using two-way
ANOVA
.The populations from which the samples are obtained must be normally distributed.
Sampling is done correctly. Observations for within and between groups must be independent.
The variance among populations must be equal (homoscedastic) Data are interval or normal.
MODEL

Yi = μ+αi+ eij

i = 1,2------ k
j  1,2------n
Where in jth on ith treatment effect
Yij = is the observation at the level ( ith and jth ) of factor A and B. μ = overall mean effect
i = effect of the factor A at jth level.
j = effect of the factor B at jth level.
e ij = random error associated with the observations.

23
Data layout for CRD
Treatment 1. y11 y12 y13…….. ……. y1n
2. y21 y22 y23…….. ……. Y2n
3. y31 y32 y33…….. ……. Y3n
, , , , ,
, , , , ,
i yi1 yi2 yi3…….. …… ….... Yij

Correction factor (c . f ) = ¿ ¿ ¿ = ¿ ¿ ¿ = ¿ ¿ ¿ , N = nk
SST = ∑ yij −c . f
2

 ∑ ij
2

= ∑ y .i – c.f
2
y −C
SStreatment
q n
SSE = SST  SStreatment
Table 3.2 ANOVA TABLE

S.V D.F S.S MS F ratio

Treatment t -1 SSt SSt/t-1 = Mst Mst/MSE

Error n-t SST  SSt SSt/n-t = MSE

Total n-1 SST

24
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.1 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

This chapter focuses on s forms of statistical analysis carried out on the data collected for this
study as described under methodology.

Table 4.1 DATA PRESENTATION ON FERTILIZER, SOIL, CROPS (C1 = CASSAVA,

C2 = MAIZE C3 = YAM)

WEEKS FERTILIZER C1 C2 C3
2 NPK:15:15:15 13.5 13.5 12.8
Cattle Dung 10.4 9.6 10.4
Poultry Manure 10.8 10.9 9.8
4 NPK:15:15:15 17.3 18.9 19.2
Cattle Dung 16.6 16.4 16.2
Poultry Manure 16.8 16.9 16.8
6 NPK:15:15:15 25.6 24.5 25.6
Cattle Dung 21.4 21.6 22.4
Poultry Manure 22.8 21.9 23.8
8 NPK:15:15:15 41.3 42.5 45.6
Cattle Dung 37.5 36.4 42.4
Poultry Manure 41.8 38.8 43.8
10 NPK:15:15:15 62.6 59.5 64.3
Cattle Dung 57.4 55.6 51.4
Poultry Manure 53.3 56.9 53.8
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA, 2022): IITA is a renowned agricultural
research institution with its headquarters in Ibadan, Oyo State. Crops include cassava, maize,
and yam.

25
Table 4.2. shows the statistical package using spss on response of plants to fertilizer and soil type

Type II
Mean
Sum of Df F Sig.
Square
Source Square
16378.3 11675.78
1 8.32 0.000
Intercept Hypothesis 2 9
Error 4.3218 2 1.36 0.940
Replicate Hypothesis 0.843 3 21.01 3.861 0.81
Error 1.743 1 1.932 0.075
Plant Hypothesis 1.9432 2 1.373 0.412 0.353
Error 2.643 2 8.846 0.643
Fertilizer Hypothesis 7.021 4 1.721 0.021 0.021
Error 3.32 2 0.001 0.464
Replicate * PLANT Hypothesis 1.38 1 4.331 0.731 0.932
Error 0.431 4 4.445 0.328
Replicate *
1.45 2 4.472 4.312 0.436
FERTILIZER Hypothesis
Error 1.456 3 4.841 0.743
PLANT*FERTILIZE
2.21 1 1.361 4.832 0.932
R Hypothesis
Error 1.731 4 1.463 0.164
Replicate * PLANT*
12.464 1 2.74 321
FERTILIZER Hypothesis
Error 0
Since all P-value of our source of variation greater than 0.05 we do not reject the null hypothesis
on the effect of the factors on yield of plants under consideration and we therefore conclude that
there is no significant effect of the factors (main and interaction) on yield of the plant at 0.05
significant.

26
 Table 4.2.4 Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Source Dependent Type III Sum of df Mean F Sig. Partial
Variable Squares Square Eta
Squared

C1 12379535.744a 3 301940 20.871 0 0.872

C2 89747420.196b 2 2188961 16.672 0 0.844

C3 3004054.643c 73269.6 4.991 0 0.619
Corrected
Model C1 394031246.143d 4 9610518 13.853 0 0.818
C2 3.30E+07 2 3.30E+07 2260.23 0 0.947
C3 3.00E+08 2 3.00E+08 2322.38 0 0.949
C1 9311671 2 9311671 634.317 0 0.834
Intercept C1 1.40E+09 2 1.40E+09 2023.87 0 0.941
C2 1.00E+07 2 2096540 144.92 0 0.852
C3 8.10E+07 2 1.60E+07 123.249 0 0.83
NPK:15:15:15 C1 3.30E+08 3 6.60E+07 95.064 0 0.79
C2 942886 3 157148 10.863 0 0.341
C3 5104863 3 850810 6.48 0 0.236
Cattle Dung C1 3.00E+07 2 4947309 7.131 0 0.254

C2 953950 3 31798.3 2.198 0.001 0.344

C3 3730306 3 124344 0.947 0.551 0.184
C1 473175 3 15772.5 1.074 0.378 0.204

27
 NPK:15:15:15
* Cattle Dung C2 3.50E+07 3 1153216 1.662 0.028 0.284
C3 1822822 3 14466.8
Error C1 8.70E+07 2 693747
C2 4.70E+07 3
C3 4.10E+08 2
Total C1 1.90E+09 3
C2 1.40E+07 3
Corrected Total C3 1.10E+08 2
a. R Squared = .872 (Adjusted R Squared = .830) , b. R Squared = .844 (Adjusted R Squared
= .794)
c. R Squared = .619 (Adjusted R Squared = .495) , d. R Squared = .818 (Adjusted R Squared
= .759)

4.2 POST HOC TESTS FOR SIGNIFICANCE DIFFERENCE

Post Hoc Tests is carried out once you have determined that differences exist among the means
and can determine which means differ. It can either be post hoc range tests or pairwise multiple
comparisons or both.
4.4.1 Duncan's and Scheffe Multiple range tests These provide homogeneous subsets for
pos hoc range tests are that rank group means and compute a range value. Its procedures first
test whether all means are equal. If all means are not equal, subsets of means are tested for
equality when main effects are compared.

28
(a) For Fertlizer Factor

Table 4.4.1 Homogeneous Subsets : NPK:15:15:15

Geopolitica N Subset
l Region
1 2 3

C1 28 189.286
294.60
C2 28 7

C3 28 513.214

Duncan Sig. 0.85 1 1

189.28
C1 28 189.286 6
294.60
C2 28 7

C3 28 513.214
Scheffea,b,c Sig. 1 0.064 0.505
In this table, values are the mean figures of NPK:15:15:15 fertilizer interest for based on
Duncan and Scheffe pos hos range tests. Each homogenous set values identify means that are not
significantly different from each other It is seen in subset1 there is no significant differences
between the means of figures in cropss since they were contained in the same subset while there
are significant differences in the mean number of crops and therefore could not be placed in the
same subset but different homogenous subsets of 1, 2, 3 respectively as reported by Duncan
test. The Scheffetest produced almost similar outcomes as Duncan test.

29
 Table 4.4.2 Homogeneous Subsets : Cattle Dung
Cattle Dung N Subset

1 2 3
507.60
C1 28 7
526.10
C2 28 7

C3 28 1125.68
Duncan Sig. 0.849 1 1
507.60
C1 28 7
526.10
C2 28 7

C3 28 1125.68
Scheffe Sig. 1 1 1

It could be seen that values are the mean figures Cattle Dung fertilizer based on Duncan and
Scheffe pos hos range tests. Each homogenous set values identify means that are not
significantly different from each other It is seen in subset1 there is no significant differences
between the means number of Cattle Dung since they were contained in the same subset while
there are significant differences in the mean number of Cattle Dung of the crops and therefore
could not be placed in the same subset but different homogenous subsets of 1,2 and 3
respectively as reported by Duncan test. The Scheffe test produced almost similar outcomes as
Duncan test.

30
 Table 4.4.3 Homogeneous Subsets : Poultry Manure

Poultry N Subset
Manure
1 2 3

C1 28 102.5

C2 28 104.964

Dunca C3 28 164.5
n Sig. 0.072 0.395 0.096

C1 28 102.5

C2 28 104.964

C3 28 164.5
Scheffe Sig. 0.6 0.276
In this table shows the mean figures of Poultry Manure fertilizer based on Duncan and Scheffe
pos hos range tests. Each homogenous set values identify means that are not significantly
different from each other It could be seen that there are no significant differences between the
means number of crops since they belong to the same subsets but significant difference was
seen between crops in the mean number of Poultry Manure fertilizer and therefore placed in
the different homogenous subsets of 2 and 3 respectively as adjudged by Duncan test. The
Scheffe test produced no significant differences among crops

31
 CHAPTER FIVE

FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Summary

This research is interested in determining the significance effect on yield of the factors under
consideration. Factors considered are soil type, plants used and fertilizers applied, all of which
effect on yield would be determine accordingly. Analysis of variance using split-plot design is
done in previous chapter to estimate the effect of those factors under consideration. The soil type
is of two levels namely loamy soil and clay soil. The fertilizers are NPK 15:15:15, poultry
manure and cattle dung, that is, three levels. The plants considered are C1 = Cassava, C2 =
Maize C3 = Yam, which their yield were measured and recorded for analysis.

Data Presentation and Analysis of Results" presents findings from statistical analysis performed
on data collected for the study. The data, focusing on fertilizer, soil, and crops (cassava, maize,
and yam), is presented in Table 4.1. The International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) is
the source for the crops.

Table 4.2 details statistical analysis results using SPSS for plant response to fertilizer and soil
type. The table includes various factors like intercept, replicate, plant, fertilizer, and their
interactions. The p-values for all sources of variation exceed 0.05, indicating that the null
hypothesis, suggesting no significant effect of factors on plant yield, is not rejected. Table 4.2.4
displays tests of between-subjects effects, emphasizing corrected models for different crops. R-
squared values are provided, indicating the proportion of variance explained. The values are
generally high, suggesting a substantial impact of the factors on crop yield.

Post hoc tests for significance differences are presented in section 4.2. Duncan's and Scheffe
multiple range tests are employed, focusing on the fertilizer factor. Subsets are identified for
NPK:15:15:15, Cattle Dung, and Poultry Manure, showing means that are not significantly
different from each other. In Table 4.4.1, homogeneous subsets for NPK:15:15:15 are presented,
demonstrating no significant differences in means within subset 1 but significant differences in
subsets 2 and 3. Similar outcomes are observed in Tables 4.4.2 and 4.4.3 for Cattle Dung and
Poultry Manure, respectively. The study concludes that there is no significant effect of the

32
considered factors (main and interaction) on plant yield at a 0.05 significance level. The
thorough statistical analysis and post hoc tests contribute valuable insights into the relationship
between fertilizer, soil, and crop yield.

5.2 Conclusion

After the analysis, we conclude that main effect of replicates (that is soil types), and fertilizer
effect on yield of plants under consideration are both statistically not significant at 5% level of
significance, since their individual F-calculated is less than Ftabulated and based on the decision
rule of hypothesis testing procedures we always reject the null hypothesis

Also, the extensive statistical analysis of fertilizer, soil, and crop data, as presented in this
chapter, reveals that the considered factors, both independently and in interaction, do not
significantly impact plant yield at the 0.05 significance level. The findings suggested a in the
agricultural conditions studied, emphasizing that variations in fertilizer type and soil composition
do not lead to substantial differences in crop output. The post hoc tests further affirm the
homogeneity of certain subsets within fertilizer categories. These results have practical
implications for agricultural practices, indicating that the selected fertilizers and soil types in the
study do not yield significantly different outcomes in terms of crop yield. Overall, this chapter
provides valuable insights for agricultural practitioners and researchers, guiding future endeavors
in optimizing crop production.

5.3 Recommendation

Conduct Soil Testing Before Fertilizer Application: It is crucial to conduct thorough soil
testing before applying fertilizers to crops in Nigeria. Different regions exhibit variations in soil
types and nutrient levels. Soil testing helps in identifying the specific nutrient deficiencies,
allowing farmers to choose the right type and amount of fertilizer.

Combine organic and inorganic fertilizers to enhance the response of crops to soil conditions in
Nigeria. Organic fertilizers contribute to soil structure and microbial activity, while inorganic
fertilizers provide readily available nutrients. This integrated approach not only improves
nutrient availability but also promotes long-term soil health and fertility, leading to sustained
crop productivity.

33
Recognize and account for regional variations in soil types across Nigeria. Different zones may
have specific soil characteristics, such as texture, pH, and organic matter content. Tailoring
fertilizer recommendations to these variations ensures that crops receive the appropriate
nutrients, addressing the unique needs of each region and maximizing the positive response to
fertilization.

Encourage farmers to adopt efficient nutrient management practices. This includes proper timing
and placement of fertilizers to coincide with crop growth stages and root development.
Implementing precision agriculture techniques, such as zone-specific fertilization, minimizes
wastage, reduces environmental impact, and optimizes crop response to fertilizer inputs.

34
 REFERENCES

Abdi, A., & Williams, L. J. (2010). Soil Types and Their Impact on Crop Yield: A
Comprehensive Review. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 74(5), 1595-1607.

Agegnehu, G., Bass, A. M., Nelson, P. N., & Bird, M. I. (2016). Benefits of Biochar, Compost,
and Biochar-Compost for Soil Quality, Maize Yield, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in a
Tropical Agricultural Soil. Science of the Total Environment, 543(Part A), 295-306.
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.11.054

Aina, P. O. (2012). Soil and crop management practices for sustainable production in the tropics.
Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences, 1(2), 123-133.

Aleminew, A., & Legas, G. (2015). Response of Yield and Yield Components of Maize (Zea
mays L.) to Nitrogen and Phosphorus Fertilizer Rates in Western Ethiopia. African
Journal of Plant Science, 9(9), 373-381. DOI: 10.5897/AJPS2015.1342

Bender, M., et al. (2019). Fertilizer Application and Agricultural Productivity: A Data-Driven
Approach. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science, 26(4), 489-502.

Broadley, M. R., White, P. J., Hammond, J. P., Zelko, I., & Lux, A. (2012). Zinc in plants. New
Phytologist, 173(4), 677-702. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.01996.x

Crews, T. E., & Brookes, P. C. (2014). Soil Acidification Due to Nitrogen-Based Fertilizer Use:
Mechanisms and Consequences. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 75, 1-9.

Drinkwater, L. E., Wagoner, P., & Sarrantonio, M. (1998). Precision Agriculture for Sustainable
Fertilizer Practices: A Review. Advances in Agronomy, 62, 145-193.

FAO. (2009). Sustainable Land Management Planning. In Babalola, O. O., & Olayemi, O. Y.
(Eds.), Soil Fertility Improvement and Integrated Nutrient Management: A Global
Perspective (pp. 137-146). Springer.

Galloway, J. N., Dentener, F. J., Capone, D. G., et al. (2004). Environmental Consequences of
Fertilizer Use: Nitrogen and Phosphorus. Ambio, 33(4-5), 260-266.

Gomez, J., et al. (2020). Interactions between Crops, Fertilizers, and Soil Types: A
Comprehensive Analysis. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 75(4), 321-335.

Hahn, S. K., Reynolds, L., & Egbunike, G. N. (1993). Yam in West Africa: Food, Social
Symbol, Or Income-Generating Crop? Social Science Information, 32(3), 521-547. DOI:
10.1177/053901893032003006

Haileslassie, A., Priess, J. A., Veldkamp, E., & Teketay, D. (2007). Assessment of Soil Nutrient
Depletion and Its Spatial Variation on Smallholders’ Mixed Farming Systems in Ethiopia

35
 Using Partial versus Full Budget Approaches. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment,
118(1-4), 185-206. DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.05.004

Hawkesford, M., Horst, W., Kichey, T., Lambers, H., Schjoerring, J., Skrumsager Moller, I., &
White, P. (2012). Functions of Macronutrients. In Marschner, P. (Ed.), Marschner's
Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants (3rd ed., pp. 135-189). Academic Press.

Hengl, T., et al. (2011). Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis in Identifying
Important Covariates for Crop Response to Fertilizer. Journal of Environmental Science
and Technology, 35(8), 1275-1290.

Joachim, P. (2016). Economic Cost of Land Degradation in Africa: A Methodological Approach.

Kihara, J., Nziguheba, G., Zingore, S., Coulibaly, A., Esilaba, A., Kabambe, V., ... & Sommer,
R. (2016). Understanding variability in crop response to fertilizer and amendments in
sub-Saharan Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 229, 1-12. DOI:
10.1016/j.agee.2016.05.014

Kumar, S., et al. (2021). Precision Agriculture: Tailoring Fertilizer Recommendations for
Specific Crop-Soil Combinations. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science,
38(6), 789-803.

Montgomery, D. R. (2020). Precision Agriculture for Sustainable Crop Production: Challenges

and Opportunities. Environmental Research Letters, 15(7), 073001.

Motavali, A. M., & Bardhan, S. (2013). Importance of Land in Agriculture: A Global

Perspective. Land Degradation & Development, 24(1), 1-15.

Mugisha, J., & Alobo, L. O. (2012). Factors influencing land degradation in Africa: A case study
of Uganda. Journal of Earth Science and Climate Change, 3(1), 1-7. DOI: 10.4172/2157-
7617.1000113

Nakano, Y., & Morita, S. (2009). Soil organic matter dynamics in arable and forest land on
Andosols in Japan. Pedosphere, 19(6), 747-757. DOI: 10.1016/S1002-0160(09)60152-2

Robertson, G. P., Paul, E. A., & Harwood, R. R. (2000). Sustainable Farming Practices: Crop
Rotation and Cover Cropping. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 64(6), 1930-
1943.

Shittu, A. A., Oladiran, J. A., & Adegbite, K. (2006). Soil Fertility and Nutrient Composition of
Amaranth (Amaranthus spp.) as Influenced by Fertilizer Application in Nigeria. Journal
of Vegetable Crop Production, 12(1), 33-45. DOI: 10.1300/J068v12n01_05
Suryawanshi, A., Savasani, M., & Shah, J. (2015). Role of Agriculture in the Nigerian Economy
Before the Discovery of Oil. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 17(3), 601-
615.
36
Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Osterlind, S. J. (2014). Factors Influencing Crop Productivity:
A Multinomial Logistic Regression Approach. Agricultural Economics, 40(2), 123-136.

TerrAfrica. (2005). Sustainable Land Management: An Overview. Retrieved from [Link]

Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2002). Essential Nutrients
for Crop Growth: Insights into the Role of Fertilizers. Ecology Letters, 5(3), 445-458.

Vanlauwe, B., Coyne, D., Gockowski, J., Hauser, S., Huising, J., Masso, C., ... & Schulz, S.
(2014). Promoting Sustainable Fertilizer Practices: Role of Education and Government
Policies. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 183, 133-144.

Vanlauwe, B., Kihara, J., Chivenge, P., Pypers, P., Coe, R., & Six, J. (2015). Agronomic Use
Efficiency of N Fertilizer in Maize-Based Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa within the
Context of Integrated Soil Fertility Management. Plant and Soil, 393(1-2), 147-162. DOI:
10.1007/s11104-015-2443-6

Vitousek, P. M., Aber, J. D., Howarth, et al. (1997). Nutrient Imbalance in Soils: Consequences
and Solutions. Ecology, 78(3), 685-695.

Xu, X. T., Xing, G. X., Chen, X. P., Zhang, 2009. (Year missing). Balancing Productivity and
Environmental Impact in Modern Agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Science and
Technology, 11(4), 321-335.

Zhang, W. F., & Zhang, F. S. (2008). Role of Fertilizers in Crop Growth: A Comprehensive
Review. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 171(2), 173-180.

Zingore, S., Murwira, H. K., Delve, R. J., Giller, K. E., & Mapfumo, P. (2007). Soil Fertility
Management in Smallholder Farming Systems in Zimbabwe. Nutrient Cycling in
Agroecosystems, 77(2), 159-174. DOI: 10.1007/s10705-006-9054-0

37