Inclusive Technology Performance Evaluation in the Production of Teff (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter)

IF 1.8 Q2 AGRONOMY Advances in Agriculture Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1155/2022/9031999
Ademe Mihiretu, M. Asresu
{"title":"Inclusive Technology Performance Evaluation in the Production of Teff (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter)","authors":"Ademe Mihiretu, M. Asresu","doi":"10.1155/2022/9031999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Different management practices likely to enhance teff production are used in Ethiopia, however, evidence on their relative performance is little studied or unavailable. This on-farm experiment was conducted to assess the performance of different management practices for teff productivity, profitability, and acceptability in subtropical districts of North East Amhara. Four trial treatments (viz., IKIM, IBIM, LBIM, and LBFM) were laid out in an unreplicated simple block considering farmers as replication during the main cropping seasons of 2019 and 2020. Tukey’s (HSD) test following one-way ANOVA, partial budget analysis, and weighted matrix ranking were used to explain the significance level, profitability, and preference traits, respectively. Results presented a significant (\n \n p\n \n  ≤ 0.01) treatment difference across districts in days to maturity, grain, and biomass yields. Among treatments, IKIM had short maturity days at Sekota (94), Dehana (105), and Lasta (95) districts. The grain yields were on average 1.75 ton ha−1, 1.45 ton ha−1, and 1.63 ton ha−1 at Sekota, Dehana, and Lasta districts, respectively. The lowest grain yields of 0.70 ton ha−1, 0.58 ton ha−1, and 0.63 ton ha−1 were recorded from LBFM. Despite the higher total variable costs, IKIM was gainful having 51400 ETB, 40579 ETB, and 46928 ETB net benefits at Sekota, Dehana, and Lasta districts, respectively. The MRR showed that a marginal profit of 13.77, 9.76, and 9.23 ETB was gained per each 1.00 ETB investment for shifting the practice (LBFM to IKIM). Therefore, we recommend IKIM as best management practice for consistent teff production in similar agroecological conditions.","PeriodicalId":30608,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Agriculture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9031999","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Different management practices likely to enhance teff production are used in Ethiopia, however, evidence on their relative performance is little studied or unavailable. This on-farm experiment was conducted to assess the performance of different management practices for teff productivity, profitability, and acceptability in subtropical districts of North East Amhara. Four trial treatments (viz., IKIM, IBIM, LBIM, and LBFM) were laid out in an unreplicated simple block considering farmers as replication during the main cropping seasons of 2019 and 2020. Tukey’s (HSD) test following one-way ANOVA, partial budget analysis, and weighted matrix ranking were used to explain the significance level, profitability, and preference traits, respectively. Results presented a significant ( p  ≤ 0.01) treatment difference across districts in days to maturity, grain, and biomass yields. Among treatments, IKIM had short maturity days at Sekota (94), Dehana (105), and Lasta (95) districts. The grain yields were on average 1.75 ton ha−1, 1.45 ton ha−1, and 1.63 ton ha−1 at Sekota, Dehana, and Lasta districts, respectively. The lowest grain yields of 0.70 ton ha−1, 0.58 ton ha−1, and 0.63 ton ha−1 were recorded from LBFM. Despite the higher total variable costs, IKIM was gainful having 51400 ETB, 40579 ETB, and 46928 ETB net benefits at Sekota, Dehana, and Lasta districts, respectively. The MRR showed that a marginal profit of 13.77, 9.76, and 9.23 ETB was gained per each 1.00 ETB investment for shifting the practice (LBFM to IKIM). Therefore, we recommend IKIM as best management practice for consistent teff production in similar agroecological conditions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Teff生产中的包容性技术绩效评价(Eragrostis tef, Zucc.)Trotter)
埃塞俄比亚采用了可能提高苔麸生产的不同管理做法,但是,很少研究或没有关于其相对效果的证据。在阿姆哈拉东北部亚热带地区进行了田间试验,以评估不同管理措施对teff生产力、盈利能力和可接受性的影响。考虑到2019年和2020年主要种植季节的农民进行复制,在一个不可复制的简单块中布置了四种试验处理(即IKIM、IBIM、LBIM和LBFM)。采用单因素方差分析、部分预算分析和加权矩阵排序后的Tukey’s (HSD)检验分别解释显著性水平、盈利能力和偏好特征。结果表明,不同地区的处理在成熟期、籽粒和生物量产量方面存在显著差异(p≤0.01)。在治疗中,IKIM在Sekota(94)、Dehana(105)和Lasta(95)地区的成熟天数较短。Sekota、Dehana和Lasta地区的平均粮食产量分别为1.75吨、1.45吨和1.63吨。LBFM的最低产量分别为0.70、0.58和0.63 t ha - 1。尽管总可变成本较高,但IKIM在Sekota、Dehana和Lasta地区分别获得了51400 ETB、40579 ETB和46928 ETB净收益。MRR显示,每投资1.00个ETB,将获得13.77、9.76和9.23 ETB的边际利润,以转移实践(LBFM到IKIM)。因此,我们推荐IKIM作为在类似农业生态条件下持续生产苔草的最佳管理实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Agriculture
Advances in Agriculture Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
100
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Rural Household Perception of Drought Occurrence and Its Influence on Livelihood Strategy in Northeast Ethiopia Effect of Spacing and Different Levels of Phosphorus on Growth and Yield of Malepatan-1 Variety of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (Linn.) Walp.) in Dang District, Nepal The Variation of Oviposition Preference and Host Susceptibility of the Oriental Fruit Fly (Bactrocera dorsalis Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) on Commercial Mango Varieties Characterisation of the Endophytic and Rhizospheric Bacillus licheniformis Strains Isolated from Sweet Potato with Plant Growth-Promoting and Yield Enhancing Potential Response of Whitefly Population to Rabbit Urine Foliar Spray on Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1