Session 2 3 Development of the Best Planting Practices Decision Support Tool

Development of the
Best Planting Practices (PP)
Decision Support Tool (DST) – Version2
www.iita.org | www.cgiar.org | www.acai-project.org

Overview
Best Planting Practices DST:
1. Introduction (Busari Mutiu):
• The PP use case
• Learnings from the baseline
• Summary of year 2 achievements
2. Field activities (Florence Olowokere):
• Field activities: Best planting practices trials
• Field trial results
3. Advances with the DST development (Stefan Hauser):
• Modelling framework
• Year1 – Year2 validation results
• The Decision Support Tool
4. Validation exercises (Bashir Adesiyan and Stephen Olonade):
• First impressions from ongoing validation exercises
• Next steps and additional data needs

Introduction
Best Planting Practices DST:
• Specific purpose: recommend crop density, tillage (ploughing + ridging practices) and associated
weed control that minimize total cost of production (without reducing yield) or
maximize net revenue
• Requested by: OYSCGA (NG) and CAVA-II (NG)
• Other partners: -
• Intended users: Extension Agents (EAs) and commercial cassava growers with access to tractors
• Expected benefit: Root yield increased by 4 tonnes/ha or an equivalent cost saving of US$100/ha
realized by 29,100 HHs, with the support of 266 extension agents, on a total area of
14,550 ha, generating a total value of US$1,455,000
• Current version: V2: estimates yield effects of tillage operations and calculates total cost and revenue
based on default or user-defined cost of operations and price of roots
• Approach: Decision tree model based on analysis of field trial data
• Input required: Planting and harvest date, details on current practice, cost of operations (tillage
and weeding), expected price of fresh roots, yield estimate (visual method)
• Interface: Enketo webform running on a smartphone, tablet or PC (online use), and serving
as a ‘hybrid’ between research tool and a practicable dissemination tool

Learnings from the baseline survey
Baseline study: over 3,200 farmers’ fields characterized
• Use of tractor for tillage only common in SW Nigeria; zero-tillage common in EZ of Tanzania
• Mounds common in SW Nigeria; planting on flat very rare in LZ of Tanzania

Principles of the Best Planting Practices Tool
1. Obtain details on current practice
2. Identify alternative options within given constraints
3. Evaluate to what extent the performance of alternative options is location-dependent, based on
analysis of multilocational field trial data
4. If so, identify GIS (or other) predictor variables to estimate location-specific effects of tillage
practices on cassava root yield
5. Convert yield effects to changes in gross revenue using price of roots (default values or user input)
6. Estimate total cost based on costs of operations (default values or user input)
(assuming optimized land preparation can save on max. 1 weeding operation)
7. Recommend alternative options that either save on cost (without negative impact on yield) or
maximize net revenue using a decision tree model
The PP-DST is developed based on following steps and principles:

What are the alternative options?
2. Increase or decrease the number of ploughing operations
• Location-specific effects expected, related to texture and rainfall
• Tillage intensity interacts with weed control (type, cost and timing)
1. Modify (increase) the crop density – learnings from CWMP:
• Little impact on yield expected if crop stand is good
• Important impact on weeding requirement
3. Ridging
• Planting on flat not recommended if harvest during dry season
• Ridging is not always expected to be necessary or advantageous
• Ridging can save on max. 1 weeding operation

Modelling framework
Are the effects of tillage (ploughing + ridging)
dependent on field conditions?
Evaluate through multilocational field
testing covering target environments
Can we predict these effects
based on GIS information?
Develop decision
tree models

What is current practice? – learnings from the RC survey
Additional surveys on costing of operations (253 households across Oyo and Ogun states)
1. Cost of land preparation (tractor rent or labour)
first ploughing 24200 Naira ha-1
second ploughing 19500 Naira ha-1
manual ridging 34000 Naira ha-1
tractor ridging 18350 Naira ha-1
2. Cost of weeding operations
hoe weeding 29600 Naira ha-1
herbicide application 12200 – 23900 ha-1 (pre-emergence including herbicide)
herbicide application 12400 – 22200 ha-1 (post-emergence including herbicide)

V1 version of the PP DST (end of 2017)

V1 version of the PP DST (end of 2017)
PP-DST packaged as a simple enketo webform, with details on current practice and
cost of operations as only inputs (for now).
Introduction Current practice Cost of operations Recommendations

Best Planting Practices Trials
Evaluate effects of tillage and ridging, fertilizer and weed control method
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
2 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Nil
3 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
4 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
5 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
6 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
7 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
8 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
9 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
10 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
11 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
12 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
13 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
14 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
15 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
16 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
17 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Fertilizer
18 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
80
19 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
20 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
21 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Nil
22 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
23 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
24 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
25 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
26 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
27 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
28 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
29 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
30 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
31 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
32 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
33 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
34 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © Fertilizer
35 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
36 80 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©
29.6 Flat Ridged Flat Ridged
Single plowing Zero Plowing
HerbicideFarmer'schoice
Weed control “Farmers’ choice”
Manual, mechanical or herbicide
versus
“Optimal weed control with herbicide”
Round up - pre tillage,
Primextra - pre emergence and
Round up - post emergence, if required
Fertilizer: 75:18:90 kg/ha NPK
Density: high = 12,500 ha-1
2016 – 2017 BPP-1 = 24 trt.
2017 – 2018 BPP-2 = 16 trt.

Sampling frame: maximize representativeness across target AoI
Cluster
number
Presence
Currently existing trials
Oyo Ogun
6 mostly in Oyo 3 0 Eruwa, Ori Ire, Atiba
7 Oyo and Ogun 2 1 Ido & Igbo Ora
1 all in Oyo 3 0 Saki East, Saki West
11 Oyo and Ogun 2 Around Odeda
9 all in Ogun 2 Ikenne
8 all in Ogun 2 Ipokia
8 7
Proposed number of
cassava clusters
Cluster
number
Proportion
(%)
Area (Ha)
Cumulative
proportion
6 23.04 704,479 23.04
7 18.94 579,095 41.99
1 15.27 466,958 57.26
11 13.06 399,291 70.32
9 7.26 221,880 77.58
8 6.77 206,847 84.34
5 3.87 118,351 88.21
13 3.27 99,960 91.48
10 2.88 87,977 94.36
14 2.25 68,793 96.61
12 2.14 65,442 98.75
2 0.78 23,923 99.54
4 0.46 14,084 100.00
3 0.004 131 100.00

Current overview of trials and status of trials - Nigeria
Nigeria BPP-1 2016 BPP-2 2017 BPP-3 2018
State planted harvested planted harvested planted Harvested
Oyo 45 43 44 31 38 Ongoing
Ogun 52 23 40 37 4 Ongoing
Total 97 66 84 68 42 Ongoing
Primary tillage
×
Secondary tillage
×
Planting density
×
Fertilizer
Primary tillage
×
Secondary tillage
×
Weed control
×
Fertilizer
Primary tillage
×
Secondary tillage
×
Weed control

Impressions and learnings from the field – some pictures
Farmers generally don’t want to plant their cassava using zero tilled land.
Weed control is more difficult under zero-tillage, non-ridged fields
More frequent herbicide-based weed control needed under zero-till, non-ridged fields.

Results 2016 – 2017 (BPP-1)
PD = planting density
• 10,000 plants ha-1
• 12,500 plants ha-1
Fertilizer
• F0 = nil
• F1 = NPK (75:20:90)
Primary tillage
• ZT = zero-till
• SP = single plough
• DP = double plough
Secondary tillage
• FL = planted on flat
• RG = planted on ridges
Largely independent effects of planting density (+ 1.6 t/ha), fertilizer (+ 4.3 t/ha), and primary tillage
(+2.0 t/ha for single plough, + 3.5 t/ha for double plough)
Effects of tillage were highly site-specific, and not related to soil texture or rainfall conditions.
Possibly related to interactions with weed intensity/severity and method of weed control?

Results 2017 – 2018 (BPP-2)
WC = weed control method
• FC = farmer’s current practice
• HB = herbicide-based weed control
Fertilizer
• F0 = nil
• F1 = NPK (75:20:90)
Primary tillage
• ZT = zero-till
Secondary tillage
Independent effect of fertilizer (+2.6 t/ha), no effect of ridging after a single ploughing operation, and
herbicide weed control less effective under zero-tillage.
Effects of tillage remain highly site-specific, and not related to soil texture or rainfall conditions.
Best predictor is the overall yield level of the field…

Results 2017 – 2018 (BPP-2)
WC = weed control method
• FC = farmer’s current practice
• HB = herbicide-based weed control
Fertilizer
• F0 = nil
• F1 = NPK (75:20:90)
Primary tillage
• ZT = zero-till
Secondary tillage
Little benefit from primary or secondary tillage under low-yielding conditions (<15 t/ha), and negative
effects of herbicide-based weed control. Many farmers abandoned zero-tillage plots!
No difference between weed control methods under high-yielding conditions, and increased yield
with increased tillage intensity. Best option determined by cost of ploughing, ridging and weeding…

Results 2016 – 2017 (BPP-1) + 2017 – 2018 (BPP-2): common treatments
Primary tillage
• ZT = zero-till
Secondary tillage
Consistent overall effects by primary and secondary tillage by yield conditions across both years.
The effect of ridging remains to a large extent site-dependent (sd = 3.2 t/ha between fields), and
unclear what drives these differences. Possibly related to weed types and weed severity.
→ BPP-3 + closer investigations through interactions with CWMP

How are these results fed into the DST?
Can this variation in effects of tillage be predicted?
Tillage only makes sense under high-yielding conditions…
Can farmers estimate what conditions to expect in their field?
Primary tillage
• ZT = zero-till
Secondary tillage

How are these results fed into the DST?
Align with other use cases: picture-based estimates of current yield
0-3 tonnes/acre 3-6 tonnes/acre 6-9 tonnes/acre 9-12 tonnes/acre 12-15 tonnes/acre
Tillage unlikely to increase yield Tillage likely to increase yield
Tillage intensity depends on relative cost
of ploughing, ridging and weeding

Validation exercises – pilot study
• Currently 137 farmers across SW Nigeria involved in pilot
validation exercise…
• Supervised by trained extension agents, and coordinated by
primary development partners (OYSCGA)
• NARS teams of agronomists assist in training and monitoring.
• DSTs and all data collection through a suite of ODK forms

Validation exercises – overview
Valid DST forms submitted: 225
Current yield estimate >4 tonnes per acre: 162 (72%)
Established trials: 137

What is being recommended?
Primary tillage
T0 = zero-tillage
T1 = single plough
T2 = double plough
Secondary tillage
FL = planting on flat
RG = planting on ridges
Current practice Recommended practice
Primary
tillage
Secondary
tillage
Primary
tillage
Secondary
tillage

What is being recommended?
Most common combinations…
Primary tillage
T0 = zero-tillage
T1 = single plough
T2 = double plough
Secondary tillage
FL = planting on flat
RG = planting on ridges
Currentpractice
Recommended practice
T0-FL T0-RG T2-FL total
T0-RG 2 10 9 21
T1-FL 5 10 11 26
T2-FL 4 3 22 29
total 11 23 42
Increase in tillage intensity: 35%
No change: 34%
Decrease in tillage intensity: 31%

Why these 3 recommendations?
Zero-tillage, planting on flat, if…
Cassava root price = low
Ridging cost = high and > tillage cost
Zero-tillage, planting on ridges, if…
Cassava root price = medium
Ridging cost = medium and ≈ tillage cost
Double plough, planting on flat, if…
Cassava root price = high
Ridging cost = medium and > tillage cost
11%
23%
42%

Expected impact on total cost and net revenue
Net revenue increases of 50-200 USD/ha…
• through cost-saving, when T0-FL or T0-RG
is recommended
• through investments of 50-200 USD/ha in a
second ploughing operation (T2-FL)

Validation exercises – impressions from the field

Key Activities
Training-of-Trainers
• Objective : Training of trainers who will train the farmers
• Date : April 2018
• Location : Saki, Ido, IITA
• Audience: EAs + lead farmers and Npower Agro
Step-down training
• Objective :
• to enlighten farmers on new innovative ways of planting
• to train farmers on land preparation and spacing
• Date and Location: Farmer’s field
• Audience: EAs and Farmers

Key Activities
Apply DSTs
• Objective: obtain recommendations, and show forth the
work that is been assigned for the validation exercise
• Date and Location: household farms
• Audience: EAs
Coordinate farmer’s tillage operations
Objective: organize farmer’s tillage operations and land preparation
to meet validation exercise’s specification, and provide farmers
more understanding on innovative ways of cassava planting and
land management
• Date and Location : Farmer’s field
• Audience : EAs and Farmers

Key Activities
Planting
Objective: monitor planting of the validation exercise
following DST recommendation and monitor plots for
intermittent weeding as and when necessary
• Date and Location : various farms
• Audience: EAs and farmers
Gapping
Objective: replant missing or non-germinated stands to meet up
with the targeted numbers of planting on the field
• Date and Location : 4 weeks after planting and various farms
• Audience: EAs and farmers

Testimonies from farmers
• I have learnt about spacing of 0.8m x 1m.
• I have learnt how to document my farming activities
(e.g., planting date).
• I have learnt about replacement of non-sprouted
cassava.
• I have learnt about monitoring of different parameters
(like plant height) on cassava field.
Shuaib Abdul-Azeez – OYSCGA OY

Testimonies from Extension Agents
The following are what I have learnt from the BPP
validation trial:
• Use of herbicide for weed control.
• Cassava planted on ridges performs better than the
one planted on flat.
• Double-plough is better than single-plough.
Adesiyan Bashir – OYSCGA OY

Key Activities
Training-of-Trainers
• Objective: To train the trainers who are to train the
Extension agents on the process of DST validation in
order to improve them.
• Date: 11th-13th April,2018.
• Location: Alumni Building Secretariat Hall, FUNAAB.
• Audience: IITA Team, NARS/FUNAAB, Block
Extension Officers, OGUN ADP, CAVA 2 team, and
AMREC.
Step-down training
• Objective: Understand the principles of the validation exercise
towards development of the DSTs to provide better
recommendation to farmers and EAs.
• Date: 7th - 8th May, 2018
• Location: Ogun State Agricultural Development Programme
,Headquarter, Idi-Aba, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria.
• Audience: NARS/FUNAAB Team, Block Extension Officers,
Identified Extension Agents working with Ogun ADP, CAVA 2
team, Adesanya A. A (AMREC-FUNAAB), and Abdul-Azeez
Ismail – Private Extension Agent (Imeko-Afon)

Key Activities
Familiarization with the tools and the exercise
• All coordinators download all tools relevant for
their use case (SP/HS and/or PP)
• Follow a process of registering all participating
EAs and households (HHs), equipping them with
ID cards.
• EA field activities include monitoring using ODK
forms for harmonized data collection.

Testimonies from farmers
• I learnt about cassava spacing of 0.8m x 1m.
• I have learnt the importance of planting fresh cassava
cuttings as the plot planted with fresh cuttings looks
more beautiful than the old cuttings.
• I have realized that double plough + ridges is better
than zero-tillage.
Simeon Fabiyi – CAVA II OG

Testimonies from Extension Agents
I have learnt the following
• Cassava spacing of 0.8m x 1m against 1m x 1m.
• Gapping.
• Timely and frequent weeding.
• Importance of planting fresh cassava cuttings.
• Cassava monocrop performs better in the field than
when it is mixed with another crop.
Adebiyi Paul – CAVA II OG

Learning from development partners
What have we learned so far?
1. Engagement with EAs
• Good human relations are important!
• Close monitoring of EAs is needed, and remuneration is key…
• EAs are now familiar with the use of smartphones but continued training is necessary
• EAs have increased their skills in good agricultural practice
2. Process of the validation
• Increased knowledge on land preparation and tillage operation, plant spacing (and
space between each ridges), gapping, the use of herbicides in cassava and the
potential of new cassava varieties
• The exercise serves as “theory of change” to deliver the improved practices and
strengthens interactions between Extension Agents and farmers
• Farmers are eager to use the BPP-DST if well packaged for the enhancement of
higher productivity and increased income
3. Recommendation from the tool
• It makes farming easier for the farmers
• Its an eye-opener to the farmers
• The DST can serve as an improvement to the CAVA-II advisory services program

Thank you very much !!!
Questions and discussion

Session 2 3 Development of the Best Planting Practices Decision Support Tool

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Session 2 3 Development of the Best Planting Practices Decision Support Tool

Similar to Session 2 3 Development of the Best Planting Practices Decision Support Tool (20)

More from African Cassava Agronomy Initiative

More from African Cassava Agronomy Initiative (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Session 2 3 Development of the Best Planting Practices Decision Support Tool