Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273

Effects of soil properties, mulch and NPK fertilizer on maize yields

and nutrient budgets on ferralitic soils in southern Benin
A. Saı̈dou a,b,∗ , B.H. Janssen b,1 , E.J.M. Temminghoff b
a Laboratoire d’Ecologie Appliquée FSA/UAC, 01 BP 526 RP Cotonou, Benin
b Sub-department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Wageningen University
Dreijenplein 10, 6703 HB Wageningen, The Netherlands

Abstract
Four on-farm experiments examined whether modest applications of fertilizers in combination with prunings from na-
tive agroforestry trees would be an alternative to maintain the fertility of ferralitic soils in Benin. An application of about
1.9 t ha−1 dry matter of mulch of Senna siamea combined with 30 kg N ha−1 , 22 kg P ha−1 and 25 kg K ha−1 as compound
fertilizer was compared with (1) 60 kg N ha−1 , 43 kg P ha−1 and 50 kg K ha−1 as compound fertilizer alone, (2) mulch of S.
siamea alone (about 3.2 t ha−1 dry matter), and (3) a control treatment. Criteria were soil properties, yields, nutrient uptakes,
and nutrient budgets. Application of sole mulch had no significant effects (P > 0.05) on maize yields, while combined
application of prunings and NPK fertilizers or sole NPK increased yields significantly (P < 0.05). The most limiting nutrient
was P. The local maize cultivar was efficient in P uptake, but not in internal nutrient utilization efficiency; mulch increased
significantly the internal P utilization efficiency (P < 0.05). Soil properties were interpreted with the QUEFTS (quantitative
evaluation of the fertility of tropical soils) computer program. The predicted and measured yields were almost the same for
maize without NPK. The measured responses to NPK were much lower than the responses calculated by QUEFTS. The calcu-
lated nutrient budgets were split into balances for available nutrients and for those not immediately available (NIA). Nutrient
budgets were negative for the control and sole mulch treatments, and positive for the NPK treatments. Mulch improved the
balances of NIA nutrients. The present experiment could not prove that combining NPK with mulch is the best option for
sustainable agriculture. It may be more economical to apply lower rates of fertilizer to local maize than those applied in the
two NPK treatments in the present study.
© 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Available nutrients; Ferralitic soil; QUEFTS; Mulch; NPK fertilizers; Nutrient balance

1. Introduction pendent on a prolonged process of natural fallow to

In southern Benin, agriculture provides income
and employment for the major part of the population.
The land-use system is based on shifting cultivation
that is generally not intensive and almost totally de-
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +229-022359; fax: +229-303084.
E-mail addresses: saidou.aliou@lycos.com (A. Saı̈dou),
bert.janssen@wur.nl (B.H. Janssen).
1 Tel.: +31-317-482339/489111; fax: +31-317-483766.
restore soil fertility and maintain the potential pro-
ductivity of the land (Leihner et al., 1997). Beside
the positive effect on soil physical and biological
properties, the capacity of fallow to accumulate avail-
able nutrients in the arable layer of the profile is
very important (Bernard, 1995). The amount of avail-
able nutrients that are accumulated during the fallow
period depends on the duration of the fallow, the con-
centration of nutrients in the different layers of the
soil profile, and the quality of fallow vegetation. All

0167-8809/$ – see front matter © 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00184-1
266 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273

these factors are developing unfavorably in southern
Benin.
The high population density in this region
(130–220 inhabitants km−2 ) has resulted in the break-
down of this traditional land-use system, because it
obliges farmers to shorten the fallow period or to pro-
long the cropping cycle. The use of fertilizers is still
uncommon and crop yields are low. Without input by
fertilizers or other sources of plant nutrients, nutrient
budgets are negative, resulting in soil fertility deple-
tion. This is the fundamental biophysical cause of the
decline of soil productivity in this region of Benin
(Bernard, 1995; Gaiser et al., 1997), and it threatens
the sustainability of crop yields and farming systems
(van der Pol et al., 1993).
Inorganic fertilizers alone do not offer satisfactory
perspectives for long-term cultivation on Ferralitic
soils in southern Benin. The reasons are that they of-
ten are too expensive to make their use economically
attractive and that the additional production of roots
and of crop residues they bring about is not sufficient
to maintain soil organic-matter content.
The aim of this study is to evaluate soil fertility sta-
tus and its maintenance under different nutrient man-
agement types.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Site description
The study was conducted in Allada region in
southern Benin. The area is located around longitude
Table 1
Ranges of dry matter (t ha−1 ), and N, P and K (kg ha−1 ) applied with mulch and inorganic fertilizers in the proceeding years (1994–1997)
and in 1999a
Treatment Ranges of dry matter Ranges of N
2◦ 09 E and latitude 6◦ 39 N and at an altitude of
about 92 m a.s.l. The average yearly rainfall of about
1200 mm is bimodally distributed, a long rainy sea-
son from March to July and a short one of about 2.5
months starting in September.
The soil is classified as a clayey, kaolinitic iso-
hypothermic Paleustult (Akondé, 1995) with a sandy
topsoil and clayey subsoil. According to FAO (1990)
soil classification, the ferralitic soil of Benin consists
mainly of Ferrali-Haplic Acrisols.
2.2. Experimental design and crop management
The experiments were carried out in two vil-
lages (Attotinga and Tokpa) in the départment de
l’Atlantique. Fields formerly used for the University
of Hohenheim project (SFB 308) (Böhringer, 1994;
Bernard, 1995) were sampled for the study. Four
farmers were selected, two in Attotinga and two in
Topka. The experiment was set up according to a
randomized complete block design with four treat-
ments and four farmers as blocks. Soil samples were
collected at a depth of 0–0.30 m in each experimental
unit before trial establishment in 1999.
The four treatments were: control (Co), mulch
alone (S) of Senna siamea, a combination of S.
siamea mulch + NPK fertilizer (S–NPK), and min-
eral fertilizer alone (NPK). The mulch was applied
1 week after sowing and NPK (14–23–14) fertilizer
45 days after sowing. Table 1 presents the ranges
of dry matter and N, P and K nutrients supplied
with inorganic fertilizers and with mulch in the pe-
riod 1994–1997 and in 1999. S. siamea mulch was
Ranges of P Ranges of K

1994–1997 1999 1994–1997 1999 1994–1997 1999 1994–1997 1999

Mulch
S 7–10 2–4 156–216 53–85 11–15 3–6 49–68 17–27
S–NPK 7–9 2 161–193 35–48 11–13 2–3 51–61 11–15
Inorganic fertilizer
Co 0–180 0 0–45 0 0–80 0
S 0–30 0 0–60 0 0–60 0
S–NPK 120–270 30 172–189 22 150–220 25
NPK 180–240 60 116–172 43 170–200 50
a Data from 1994 to 1997 were obtained from University of Hohenheim SFB project at IITA, Benin.
 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273
combined with inorganic fertilizer to reduce to a
minimum rate the quantity of NPK fertilizer usually
applied by farmers. This option is supposed to be
an alternative for soil fertility maintenance in the
area.
Seeds of a local maize (Zea mays) variety with a
cycle of 3 months were sown. The local cropping
system was followed, i.e. sowing at random without
any regular pattern with four plants per hole and
returning crop residues (stems + leaves) to the soil
after harvesting. The plot size was 15 m × 15 m,
the harvest area was 64 m2 (8 m × 8 m). Crops
were harvested at maturity, and separated into grain,
stems + leaves, husks, and the central axis. The crop
yields were subjected to analysis of variance, using
the Tukey HSD (honestly significant difference) test at
P = 0.05.
2.3. Soil and plant analysis and data
interpretation
Soil samples were analyzed at the central laboratory
of the Sub-department of Soil Science and Plant Nu-
trition of Wageningen University, according to Houba
et al. (1995), for pH(H2 O) (1:2.5), organic carbon (wet
oxidation by sulfochromic acid), exchangeable K and
actual CEC (with 0.01 M BaCl2 ), total nitrogen and
total phosphorus in a mixture of H2 SO4 –Se and sal-
icylic acid, available phosphorus (Olsen method) and
NO3 − -N and NH4 + -N in 0.01 M CaCl2 . Plant sam-
ples were dried at 70 ◦ C until constant weight and an-
alyzed for total N, P and K according to Walinga et al.
(1989).
QUEFTS (quantitative evaluation of the fertility of
tropical soils) program (Janssen et al., 1990; Janssen
and Guiking, 1990) was used for the interpretation of
soil analytical data.
2.4. Calculation of nutrient budgets and
balances
With regard to the estimation and calculation of the
nutrient inputs (INs) and outputs (OUTs), the method-
ology described by Stoorvogel and Smaling (1990)
and Smaling and Fresco (1993) was applied to each
experimental unit. The following INs and OUTs were
assessed:
267
IN1 Application of inorganic fertilizer
IN2 Application of organic fertilizer
IN3 Atmospheric deposition
IN4 Biological nitrogen fixation
OUT1 Removal of harvested products
OUT2 Removal of crop residues
OUT3 Leaching of N and K
OUT4 Gaseous losses of N
OUT5 Erosion
The input by sedimentation (IN5) was assumed to
be negligible. The addition of organic materials (IN2)
is calculated by multiplying the quantities applied with
the mass fractions of N, P and K. Nutrient supplies
by wet and dry deposition (IN3) were estimated from
the experimental results of Stoorvogel et al. (1997a).
They found average concentrations (mmol m−3 ) of so-
lutes in rain water of 0.04 P, 3 K, 5 NH4 + -N and 6
NO3 − -N. These concentrations were combined with
the total amount of rainfall from January until July
(1060.8 mm). Nutrient inputs from Harmattan dust as
found by Stoorvogel et al. (1997b) were used to esti-
mate the input by dry deposition kg ha−1 at 0.11 for P
and 2.50 for K. As no leguminous crops were grown,
biological N-fixation (IN4) consisted of non-symbiotic
N2 -fixation only. It was estimated as a transfer func-
tion of mean rainfall (van den Bosch, 1994).
The outputs of N, P and K by the harvest products
(OUT1) and crop residues (OUT2) were calculated by
multiplying the respective quantities of dry matter with
the nutrient mass fractions. Leaching (OUT3) of phos-
phorus was assumed to be negligible. The amount of N
and K leached are assumed to be dependent on mineral
soil N and exchangeable K, fertilizer N and K, rainfall
and clay content (Smaling et al., 1993). The mineral
soil N (in kg ha−1 ) in the soil top layer was estimated
from the NO3 − -N and NH4 + -N data, the volumic mass
(1.38 kg dm−3 according to Saı̈dou (1992)) and soil
depth (30 cm). Gaseous losses of N (OUT4) through
ammonia volatilization were assumed to be negligi-
ble (Smaling, 1993), although a little NH3 may have
escaped because pH(H2 O) was around 7 (Table 2).
Losses through denitrification were calculated as a
function (Smaling et al., 1993) of average rainfall,
soil clay content, mineral soil-N, fertilizer-N and N
mineralized from mulch during the cropping season
as estimated with the NMIN program (Janssen and
268 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273

Table 2
General soil characteristics (0–30 cm) per farm before trial establishment in 1999a
Farm Soil characteristics

pH Clay Organic C N-total P-Olsen P-total CEC Exchange K

(H2 O) (%) (g kg−1 ) (g kg−1 ) (mg kg−1 ) (mg kg−1 ) (mmol kg−1 ) (mmol kg−1 )
I 6.6 b 6.5 b 6.0 c 0.5 c 2.3 a 86 d 21.5 c 0.9 b
II 6.7 b 8.8 b 8.0 b 0.8 b 1.9 a 163 c 41.3 b 1.3 b
III 7.0 a 12.0 a 8.5 b 0.8 b 3.2 a 204 b 48.0 b 3.1 a
IV 6.8 ab 11.8 a 13.0 a 1.2 a 1.8 a 307 a 81.3 a 1.5 b
HSDb (5%) 0.3 3.4 1.8 0.2 4.06 50 16.6 1.7
a Values followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P = 0.05 (Tukey test).
b Honestly significant difference.

Catalan, 1990). Soil erosion (OUT5) was esti- treatments. The lowest soil fertility level was found
mated with the universal soil loss equation (USLE) in Farm I, and the highest in Farms III and IV. Some
(Wischmeier and Smith, 1978). For its use per sea- significant differences (P < 0.05) among farms were
son, it was modified by Smaling (1993): A = 1100 − observed. The average ratios C:N and C:total P were
RKSLCP, where A is the soil loss in kg ha−1 per 12.6 and 72.5 in Farm I, while the average values for
season, R the rainfall erosivity, S the slope gradient, these ratios in the other farms were 10.6 and 45, indi-
L the slope length, C the land cover and P is the cating that the quality of soil organic matter in Farm
land management. A detailed explanation is given by I was lower than in the other farms.
Saı̈dou (2000).
The nutrients in the INs and OUTs were subdivided 3.2. Yields and nutrient uptake
into available and not immediately available (NIA)
nutrients using the coefficients suggested by Janssen In general, yields were modest (Table 3). The rather
(1999). The fractions of available N and P in the mulch weak agronomic performance generally observed is
(IN2), however, were estimated with the NMIN pro- probably a result of the low production potential of
gram (Janssen and Catalan, 1990). Next, the balances the local tall maize variety, the rather low soil fertility,
of available (BALAV) and of NIA (BALNIA) nutri- and perhaps the inadequate management.
ents were calculated. Maize grain and stover (stems and leaves + husks
+ central axis) yields and uptakes of P and K (Table 3)
were significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the NPK
3. Results and discussion
Table 3
3.1. Soil analytical data Mean values per treatment of grain (dry matter) and stover (dry
matter) yields (kg ha−1 ) and measured uptakes of N, P and K
(kg ha−1 )a
The relevant general soil characteristics are pre-
Treatment Grain yield Stover Uptake
sented in Table 2. The soils had a neutral reaction, with
pH(H2 O) around 7. Clay content was low to moder- N P K
ate. From other studies it is known that kaolinite is the Co 1008 b 1877 b 30 a 4.8 c 15 b
main clay mineral (Gaiser, 1993). Also organic car- S 989 b 1727 b 29 a 4.2 c 20 b
bon was low to moderate. As a result, the actual CEC S–NPK 1217 ab 2061 ab 37 a 7.5 b 26 ab
and exchangeable K were low to moderate. P-Olsen NPK 1455 a 2526 a 42 a 10.1 a 35 a
was low, except in S–NPK and NPK fields that had re- HSDb (5%) 348 576 15.7 2.4 13.1
ceived substantial amounts of P fertilizer in the period a Values followed by the same letter are not significantly dif-
1994–1997 (Table 1). With all soil characteristics, no ferent at P = 0.05 (Tukey test).
significant difference (P > 0.05) was found between b Honestly significant difference.
 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273 269

fields than in the fields where no inorganic fertilizer

was applied. Unfertilized maize had small and poorly
filled cobs, pointing to P deficiency. The yields and
uptakes of N and P obtained with the mulch sole
treatment did not significantly differ (P > 0.05)
from the control. The disappointing efficacy of the
S. siamea mulch must probably be ascribed to a low
immediate availability of N and P. The C:N ratio was
24, near the borderline expected to give immediate
net N-immobilization and N-mineralization, and the
C:P ratio of 364 has most likely led to P immobiliza-
tion. Our results are in accord with those of Gaiser
et al. (1997) in southern Benin, who found some
N-deficiency in maize plants when S. siamea mulch
was applied sole.
The average proportions N:P:K were 5.1:1:3.6. As
7.8:1:5 are considered the optimum ratios for (hy-
brid) maize (Janssen et al., 1994), it follows that in
the present study P was obviously the most limiting
nutrient. The relationships between the maize grain
yields and the uptakes of N, P and K (internal utiliza-
tion efficiency) as measured in the field according to
treatments and farms are presented in Figs. 1 and 2,
respectively. Farm II had the highest internal utiliza-
tion efficiencies for all three nutrients, followed by
Farms IV, III and I but no significant difference (P >
0.0) was observed among the farms. The differences
among treatments were less marked than those among
farms and visible only for P. For that nutrient, some
significant differences (P < 0.05) were observed
among the treatments. The internal utilization effi-
ciency of P seemed to increase when S. siamea mulch
was added (treatment S > Co; treatment S–NPK >
NPK), possibly because the mulch improved growth
conditions in the topsoil. The positive effect of mulch
on internal P utilization efficiency counterbalanced
the negative effect of P immobilization.

3.3. Interpretation of soil analytical data

by QUEFTS

The yields predicted by QUEFTS, as presented

in part A of Table 4, were comparable to the mea-
sured yields for the treatments Co and S, but much Fig. 1. Relationships between yields and uptakes of N, P and K
higher than the measured yields for the treatments according to treatments. Legend: (䊊) control; (䊏) S. siamea; (䉫)
S–NPK and NPK. This was considered an indi- NPK; (䉱) S. siamea mulch + NPK.
cation that the maize cultivar used was unable to
respond to fertilizer nutrients in a same way as the
270 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273
Fig. 2. Relationships between yields and uptakes of N, P and K
according to farms. Legend: (䉫) Farm I; (䊏) Farm II; (䉱) Farm
III; (䊊) Farm IV.
maize hybrids used for the original calibration of
QUEFTS (Janssen et al., 1990; Janssen and Guiking,
1990). The QUEFTS calculations were examined
in more detail (Saı̈dou, 2000), with the following
results:
1. The actual uptake of P measured in the field was
higher than the potential P supply predicted with
QUEFTS. This again indicated that P was strongly
limiting. Another reason for the difference be-
tween measured and calculated uptake of soil P
could be that in the present experiments the upper
30 cm of the soils were sampled, while the calcu-
lation of potential nutrient supply in QUEFTS is
based on empirical relationships between nutrient
uptake and chemical data of the top 20 cm of soil.
Because the chemical data in the upper 20 cm usu-
ally are higher than those in the 20–30 cm layer,
the estimates of the potential nutrient supply by
QUEFTS are too low.
2. The maximum apparent recoveries of fertilizer
were 0.4 for N, 0.14 for P, and 0.4 for K in the
field, while in QUEFTS default values of 0.5 for N,
0.1 for P and 0.5 for K are used. This suggests that
the local cultivar was efficient in absorbing P. The
rather low recoveries of N and K may be ascribed
to the fact that these nutrients were not limiting.
3. The grain yields produced per kg of N, P and K
actually taken up (i.e. the internal utilization effi-
ciencies in kg kg−1 ) were 20–40 for N, 110–270
for P, and 25–90 for K. These values are rather
low compared to the standard values of 30–70 for
N, 200–600 for P, and 30–120 for K, respectively,
that are used in QUEFTS. The lower internal uti-
lization efficiencies proved to be a result of both
a low harvest index and high nutrient contents es-
pecially in the (relatively small) seeds of the local
maize cultivar.
On the basis of the above findings it was decided to
modify QUEFTS as follows:
• The maximum recovery fraction of fertilizer P was
set at 0.14 instead of 0.10.
• Assuming that soil P could also be taken up 1.4
times as efficiently as in the standard situation of
QUEFTS, the coefficients in the QUEFTS equation
for the calculation of potential soil P were multi-
plied by 1.4.
 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273 271

Table 4
Maize yields as calculated with the original (A) and the generally revised (B) version of QUEFTS
Treatment Farm Mean M/Ca

I II III IV

(A) Original
Co 578 1145 911 1488 1031 0.97
S 351 1070 794 2031 1062 0.93
S–NPK 1770 2371 3071 2784 2499 0.49
NPK 2750 2940 3243 2919 2963 0.49
Means 1362 1882 2005 2306 1889 0.62
M/C 0.41 0.97 0.47 0.58
(B) Revised
Co 503 893 653 1236 821 1.23
S 344 808 609 1527 822 1.20
S–NPK 1194 1644 2160 1886 1721 0.71
NPK 2379 2221 2566 2344 2378 0.61
Means 1105 1392 1497 1748 1435 0.81
M/C 0.50 1.32 0.63 0.76
a Ratio of measured to calculated yield.

• The coefficients in the equations for the calcula-
tions of possible yield ranges were changed into
20–70 for N, 110–270 for P, and 25–120 for K.
The requirements in QUEFTS of a minimum uptake
(5 kg N ha−1 , 0.4 kg P ha−1 and 2 kg K ha−1 ) before
any grain filling can take place were reduced to
0.1 kg of each of the nutrients.
The predicted yields by QUEFTS modified in this
way are presented in part B of Table 4. Although on
average these yields were closer to the measured yields
than those of the original QUEFTS version, the results
for the treatments without NPK were less satisfying.
or the original as well as for the revised version of
QUEFTS, the ranking of the farms with respect to the
ratio of measured/calculated yields (M/C) was in the
order: II > IV > III > I.
From these, it became obvious that QUEFTS needs
to be modified for maize cultivars such as the present
local one with regard to three aspects at least: higher
uptake efficiency for soil and fertilizer P, lower inter-
nal utilization efficiency of absorbed N, P and K, and
lower maximum yield.
3.4. Nutrient balances
There were only minor differences among farms in
nutrient INs, and they were caused by differences in
the amounts of mulch that had been applied (Table 1).
The input by atmospheric deposition was estimated at
4.9 kg N ha−1 , 0.12 kg P ha−1 , and 3.7 kg K ha−1 . Dif-
ferences in nutrient OUTs among farms and among
treatments were caused mainly by differences in mea-
sured yields and nutrient contents (Table 3), and in cal-
culated erosion, and a little by differences in calculated
leaching. Farm IV had slopes around 7%, and therefore
more erosion than the other farms where the slope was
3–4%. The calculated losses of N, P and K by erosion
varied from 1 to 13 kg N ha−1 , 0.2 to 2.5 kg P ha−1 ,
and 4 to 20 kg K ha−1 per season for Farms I, II,
and III, while these values were 23–45 kg N ha−1 ,
4–10 kg P ha−1 , and 30–62 kg K ha−1 for Farm IV.
Given all the assumptions made for the calculations,
the data of nutrient losses by erosion are highly spec-
ulative. Leaching varied from 5 to 14 kg N ha−1 , and
from 0.7 to 5.1 kg K ha−1 .
Table 5 summarizes the balances of available, NIA,
and total nutrients, averaged per treatment (A) and per
farm (B). The total balances of treatment Co, being
−38 kg N ha−1 per season, −6.9 kg P ha−1 per season
and −32 kg K ha−1 per season, were more negative
than the −14 kg N ha−1 per year, −1.3 kg P ha−1
per year and −4 kg K ha−1 per season predicted by
Stoorvogel and Smaling (1990) for maize in Benin
while that of N was close to that estimated by van der
Pol et al. (1993) (−47 kg N ha−1 per year). Treatment
272 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273

Table 5 The differences in BALAV among treatments were

Balances of available (BALAV), not immediately available (BAL- in the same order (NPK > S–NPK > S or Co) as
NIA) and total N, P and K in kg ha−1 per season
the differences in yield; the more available nutrients
Nutrient Balance Treatment Mean had been applied, the higher the yields. The differ-
Co S S–NPK NPK ences in BALAV among farms, however, were in an
order opposite to the differences in yield (Farms II, IV,
(A) Averaged per treatment
N BALAV −22 −5 12 26 3
III, I).
BALNIA −16 37 24 −11 9
Total −38 32 36 15 11
P BALAV −3.5 −2.7 −0.4 2.7 −1.0 4. Conclusion
BALNIA 0.1 3.6 20 34.5 14.6
Total −3.4 −0.9 19.6 37.2 13.1
K BALAV −10 14 29 38 18
Topsoil analytical data (clay content, SOM, actual
BALNIA −22 −12 −9 −14 −14 CEC) revealed that soil fertility in southern Benin is
Total −32 2 20 24 4 low to moderate, with P as the most limiting nutrient.
Nutrient Balance Farm Mean The grain yields of the local maize variety increased
upon addition of inorganic fertilizer N, P and K, but
I II III IV
the response to the extra nutrients derived from the
(B) Averaged per farm inorganic fertilizers was modest. The used maize cul-
N BALAV 16 −9 7 −2 3 tivar had a low internal nutrient utilization efficiency
BALNIA 16 10 14 −7 8
which was related to a low harvest index. The internal
Total 32 1 21 −9 12
P BALAV 1.4 −3.0 −0.7 −1.6 −1.0 nutrient utilization efficiency proved highly dependent
BALNIA 14.5 14.3 14.7 14.5 14.5 on the farmer.
Total 15.9 11.3 14 12.9 13.5 Addition of mulch did not directly result in better
K BALAV 23 14 18 16 18 yields, probably because of P immobilization, but the
BALNIA −3 −7 −9 −38 −14
internal P utilization efficiency in mulched plots was
Total 20 7 9 −22 4
higher than in plots without mulch; the two effects of
mulch counterbalanced each other. Maize receiving
Co had negative balances, because no nutrients fertilizer NPK had a lower internal P utilization effi-
were added apart from IN3 (atmospheric deposition) ciency than maize without NPK. The present exper-
and IN4 (biological N fixation). Because mulch (S) iment, however, could not prove that the best option
was assumed to suppress erosion, BALNIA-N and for sustainable agriculture is to combine NPK with
BALNIA-K of treatments S and S–NPK were higher mulch. It may be more economical for the local cul-
than those of treatments Co and NPK. Treatment Co tivar to receive less than 60 kg N ha−1 , 43 kg P ha−1
was also low for BALNIA-P, but treatment NPK was and 50 kg K ha−1 , the rates of the NPK treatment of
not, because 80% of added fertilizer P was considered the present research.
to be NIA-P (100%—maximum recovery of 20%, Yields predicted by the original version of QUEFTS
see above). Treatment NPK had the largest additions were close to the measured yields in the fields with-
of available nutrients and hence had the most posi- out NPK fertilizer, but much higher than the measured
tive BALAV. NIA-N balances were positive for both yields in the fields receiving NPK fertilizer; the pre-
mulch treatments as the majority of mulch N was diction was better for farms with good management
considered to be not immediately available. than on the other farms.
Farm I had the largest positive balance for available High negative nutrient balances were calculated in
nutrients, and Farm II the largest negative balance the unfertilized fields. Because mulch was assumed
which is a result of the differences in yield and nu- to suppress erosion, BALNIA-N and BALNIA-K of
trient uptake. Farm IV had the largest negative or treatments S and S–NPK were higher than those of
lowest positive NIA balances because of high soil loss treatments Co and NPK. Treatment NPK had the
there from erosion and relatively high soil N, P and largest additions of available nutrients and hence had
K contents. the most positive BALAV.
 A. Saı̈dou et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 100 (2003) 265–273
References
Akondé, T.P., 1995. Potential of alley cropping with Leucaena
leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit and Cajanus cajan (L.) Mill.
for maize (Zea mays L.) and cassava (Manihot esculenta
Crantz) production on an Acrisol in Benin Republic (West
Africa). Hohenheimer Bodenkundliche Hefte 25. University of
Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany, 166 pp.
Bernard, M., 1995. Fertility restoration of degraded Nitisols and
the possibility to increase mineral fertilizer efficiency by Senna
siamea mulch in local farming systems of southern Benin.
Working Paper Series No. 4. Special Research Programme 308,
University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany, 22 pp.
Böhringer, A., 1994. Simultaneous fallow-cropping systems in the
sub-humid forest-savanna mosaic zone of West Africa. PhD
Thesis. University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany, 256 pp.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 1990. FAO–UNESCO
soil map of the world. Revised legend. Soils Bulletin 60. FAO,
Rome, Italy, 119 pp.
Gaiser, T., 1993. Bedeutung der organischen bodensubstanz für
eigenschaften und ertragsfähigkeit von vertisolen und acrisolen
in Süd-Benin. Dissertation. Hohenheimer Bodenkundliche
Hefte, Institut für Bodenkunde und Standortslehre 12,
Universität Hohenheim, Stuttgart, 168 pp.
Gaiser, T., Oehl, F., Stahr, K., 1997. Effect of mulch material from
agroforestry trees on nutrient uptake and nutrient balance of
maize. In: Renard, G., Neef, A., Becker, K., von Oppen, M.
(Eds.), Soil Fertility Management in West African Land Use
Systems. Margraf Verlag, Weikerheim, Germany, pp. 273–279.
Houba, V.J.G., Novozamsky, I., van der Lee, J.J., 1995. Soil
Analysis Procedures (Soil and Plant Analysis Part 5B), Series
of syllabi. Sub-department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition,
Wageningen University, The Netherlands, 217 pp.
Janssen, B.H., 1999. Basics of budgets, buffers and balances
of nutrients in relation to sustainability of agroecosystems.
In: Smaling, E.M.A., Oenema, O., Fresco, L.O. (Eds.),
Nutrient Desequilibria in Agroecosystems. CAB International/
Cambridge University Press, Wallingford/Cambridge, UK,
pp. 27–56.
Janssen, B.H., Catalan, R.L., 1990. NMIN: Nitrogen Minera-
lization. Computer Program, Sub-department of Soil Science
and Plant Nutrition, Wageningen University, The Netherlands.
Janssen, B.H., Braakhekke, W.G., Catalan, R.L., 1994. Balanced
plant nutrition: simultaneous optimization of environmental and
financial goals. In: Etchevers, B.J.D. (Ed.), Proceedings of
the Transactions of the 15th World Congress of Soil Science,
Acapulco, Mexico. International Society of Soil Science,
Aguscalientes, Mexico, pp. 446–447.
Janssen, B.H., Guiking, F.C.T., 1990. Modelling the response
of crops to fertilizers. In: van Beusichem, M.L. (Ed.), Plant
Nutrition—Physiology and Applications. Developments in Plant
and Soil Science, vol. 41. Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 699–703.
273
Janssen, B.H., Guiking, F.C.T., van der Eijk, D., Smaling, E.M.A.,
Wolf, J., van Reuler, H., 1990. A system for quantitative
evaluation of the fertility of tropical soils (QUEFTS). Geoderma
46, 299–318.
Leihner, D.E., Doppler, W., Bernard, M., 1997. Agro-ecological
on-farm evaluation of selected technologies to improve soil
fertility in southern Benin (Part II). Project SFB 308. University
of Hohenheim/IITA, Benin, Cotonou, pp. 383–409.
Saı̈dou, A., 1992. Effet de l’apport de différents matériaux végétaux
sur la fertilité d’un sol ferrallitique (terre de barre) du Sud
Bénin. Ingénieur Agronome Thesis. Faculty of Agronomic
Science, National University of Benin, Abomey Calavi, Benin,
71 pp.
Saı̈dou, A., 2000. Fertility and nutrient management in ferralitic
soil terre de barre of Bénin. MSc Thesis. Sub-department of
Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Wageningen University, The
Netherlands, 54 pp.
Smaling, E.M.A., 1993. An agro-ecological framework for
integrated nutrient management. PhD Thesis. Wageningen
University, The Netherlands, 250 pp.
Smaling, E.M.A., Fresco, L.O., 1993. A decision-support model
for monitoring nutrient balances under agricultural land use
(NUTMON). Geoderma 60, 235–256.
Smaling, E.M.A., Stoorvogel, J.J., Windmeijer, P.N., 1993.
Calculating soil nutrient balances in Africa at different scales.
II. District scale. Fert. Res. 35, 227–235.
Stoorvogel, J.J., Smaling, E.M.A., 1990. Assessment of soil
nutrient depletion in sub-Saharan Africa 1983–2000, vol.
I. Main Report. The Winand Staring Centre for Integrated
Land, Soil and Water Research (SC-DLO), Wageningen, The
Netherlands, 137 pp.
Stoorvogel, J.J., Janssen, B.H., van Breemen, N., 1997a. The
nutrient budgets of a watershed and its forest ecosystem in the
Taı̈ national park in Côte d’Ivoire. Biogeochemistry 37, 159–
172.
Stoorvogel, J.J., van Breemen, N., Janssen, B.H., 1997b. The
nutrient input by Harmattan dust to a forest ecosystem in Côte
d’Ivoire, Africa. Biogeochemistry 37, 145–157.
van den Bosch, H., 1994. NUTMON: A Decision Support
System for Sustainable Use of Soil Macronutrients in Kenya
Farming Systems, Version 1.1. DLO Winand Staring Centre,
Wageningen, The Netherlands.
van der Pol, F., Gogan, F.A.C., Dagbenonbakin, G., 1993.
L’épuisement des sols et leur valeur économique dans le
départment du Mono, Bénin. RAMR Report Project/KIT,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 79 pp.
Walinga, I., van Vark, W., Houba, V.J.G., van der Lee,
J.J., Novozamsky, I., 1989. Plant Analysis Manual. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Wischmeier, W.H., Smith, D.D., 1978. Predicting rainfall erosion
losses to conservation planning. Agricultural Handbook No.
537. USDA, Washington, DC, USA, 58 pp.