Seminar - Andreas Oswald - June 3, 2010

1. Soil fertility and crop
management
June, 3rd, 2010
A. Oswald, J. Sanchez, G. Quispe, M. Rojas, P. Calvo, J. Caycho

2. MIE
Semillas
Integración de componentes
MIP
Suelo
Integración
socio-
económica
Introduction

3. Introduction
Goals:
Contribute to the development of integrative research
approaches in division 4 and CIP;
Establish soil fertility and cropping systems management as
a component of ICM in division 4 ;
Contribute to an intensification of collaborative activities
among divisions and partner programs;
Support NARES in capacity building and soil fertility
research;
Extent activities to other CIP-regions;

4. Integrative Research
Contribute to the development of integrative research
approaches in division 4;
- time consuming task;
- depending on the effort and attitude of scientists
involved;
- requires leadership and commitment;
- eventually removed from the priority activities;

5. Collaborative activities
Contribute to an intensification of collaborative activities among
divisions and partner programs;
- collaborative activities division 3 and 5;
- Papa Andina, ALTAGRO, Urban Harvest, CONDESAN;
With other institutions – NARS, NGOs etc.;

6. Support capacity strengthening
Support NARES in capacity building and soil fertility research;
- INIA, INIAP - PROINPA;
- CEDEPAS, YANAPAI
conclusions:
need for basic training and standardization
- design, implementation, evaluation and statistical analysis;
- time series
- locations
participatory approaches;
development of training approaches;
feed-back – robustness of methods and technologies – scaling out

7. Soil fertility & crop management research
Establish soil fertility and cropping systems management as a component of ICM in
division 4;
Soil fertility and fertilizer use
organic amendments
manure, compost, biol
inorganic amendments
fertilizer use, types, efficiency
Crop management
minimum tillage and use of mulch
in the Andes
in China
traditional potato production technologies
development of a concept of sustainable agricultural systems and evaluation of
technologies
Biological amendments
PGPR
crop production and protection
seed production
Mycorrhiza
crop production

8. Soil fertility and fertilizer use
I. Present situation
Duration of fallow
period in years
Altiplano Aramachay
0 35.0 10.0
1 7.5 26.6
2 27.5 39.3
3 12.5 21.3
4 15.0 2.7
5 2.5 --
Location
Average area
cultivated with
potato in ha
manure in kg
ha-1
OM* in kg
ha-1
N in kg
ha-1
P in kg
ha-1
K in kg ha-1
Aymara n=20 1.50 ± 0.47 4070 ± 1132 1741 ± 609 76 ± 23 44 ± 12 107 ± 30
Choppcas
n=25
0.74 ± 0.58 3637 ± 3110 1642 ± 1525 58 ± 52 35 ± 32 59 ± 49
Marcavalle
n=35
0.45 ± 0.33 4240 ± 2370 2014 ± 1012 85 ± 41 42 ± 34 47 ± 45
Aramachay
n=50
0.46 ± 0.25 10076 ± 6611 3869 ± 2539 147 ± 83 118 ± 67 374 ± 212
Altiplano
n=214
0.55 ± 0.55 5365 ± 2455 2441 ± 1117 86 ± 39 45 ± 21 96 ± 44
Location
% of farmers
appl. fertilizer
N in kg
ha-1
P in kg
ha-1
K in kg
ha-1
Aymara
n=20
100 160 ± 46 209 ± 44 186 ± 53
Choppcas
n=25
22 26 ± 18* 9 ± 7 22 ± 16
Marcavalle
n=35
97 195 ± 110 144 ± 61 117 ± 72
Aramachay
n=33
100 133 ± 77 156 ± 113 107 ± 41
Altiplano
n=214
21 55 ± 45* 0 0

9. y = 0.0224x + 75.99
R
2
= 0.316*
0
100
200
300
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000
Organic matter in kg/ha
Nfertilizerinkg/ha
y = -0.0027x + 209.32
R
2
= 0.287*
0
100
200
300
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000
Tuber yield in kg/ha
Nfertilizerinkg/ha
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
0 10000 20000 30000
Tuber yield in kg/ha
Organicmatterinkg/ha
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000
Tuber yield in kg/ha
Organicmatterinkg/ha
Soil fertility management
Relation of OM applications and tuber yield in
Aramachay and Aymara
Relation of OM applications and tuber yield in
Choppcas and the Altiplano
Relation of N and OM applications in
Aramachay and Aymara
Relation of N applications and tuber yield in
Aramachay and Aymara

10. 0 100 200 300 400 500
Output
Input
Output
Input
Output
Input
Output
Input
Fertilizer N Manure N (50%) Soil N Potato N
Aymara
Aramachay
Choppcas
Altiplano
N input – output relationship in farmers‘ fields of communities in the Central Andes
- 21 t/ha
- 27 t/ha
- 13 t/ha
- 11 t/ha

11. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Output
Input
Output
Input
Output
Input
Output
Input
Fertilizer N Manure N Soil N
Potato N Barley N Oats N
Aymara
Aramachay
Choppcas
Altiplano
N input – output relationship in farmers‘ fields of communities in the Central Andes

12. Soil fertility and fertilizer use
I. Organic amendments
- home made
- abundant availability
- produced based on robust, easy processes
- nutrient source
- increase nutrient use efficiency
- improve plant recovery after stress events

13. Biodigestores (tratamientos)
Ingredientes 1 2 31
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 121
Agua (l) 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Estierco (kg) 2
15+5 0+20 15+5 15+5 15+5 15+5 0+20 0+20 0+20 0+20 15+15 15+5
Melaza (kg) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 5 5 5 5 2.5
Leguminosa (kg) 1 1 1 1 2 1
Leche (l) 1.5 1.5 1.5 3 1.5
Ceniza (kg) 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0.5
Levadura (kg) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.25
Nitrógeno (kg) 0.9 0.9 0.9
Fósforo (kg) 0.9 0.9
Capacidad en l 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120
1 = tratamientos 3 y 12 tienen los mismos ingredientes, pero tratamiento 12 fue removido 2 veces al día;
Organic amendments – Biol / manure tea

14. Figura 1: Lectura de pH de los Bioles (7 noviembre 2008 - 9 marzo
2009)
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Tratamientos
pH
18 dias 36 dias 58 dias 72 dias 92 dias 107 dias 120 dias
0.00
1000.00
2000.00
3000.00
4000.00
5000.00
6000.00
N P K Ca Mg Na
Macroelementos
mg/L
Basicos Acidos
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
Cu Zn Mn Fe B
Microelementos
mg/L
Basicos Acidos
Grupos Peso fresco promedio
(g/maceta)
Básicos 8.2
Ácidos 12.0
Fertilizante foliar (20-20-20) 14.3
Sin aplicación 9.8
Organic amendments – Biol / manure tea

15. Compost:
-C/N – 25:1
-pathogen free
-low or no ammonium
-activates soil life
-slow release of nutrients
-improves soil structure –
aeration, moisture holding
capacity, CEC
Organic amendments – compost
0
10
20
30
40
50
g/planta
10 g/maceta 20g/maceta
Compost-llama Compost-cow Compost-chickenControl
0
3
6
9
12
15
Control
10
t/ha
m
anure
NPK
120-120-120Llam
a
1:1
fLlam
a
2:1
f
Llam
a
2:1
Cow
1:1
f
Cow
2:1
f
Cow
2:1Chicken
1:1
f
Chicken
2:1
fChicken
2:1
Pot trial
Field trial

16. Rendimiento comercial y total en t/ha
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Marcavalle
t/ha
Ñuñunhuayo Tingo
0
2
4
6
8
Control 8 t/ha 16 t/ha 24 t/ha 80 N 160N 8t/ha +
80 N
8t/ha +
160 N
Soil fertility and fertilizer use

17. Soil fertility and fertilizer use
0
5
10
15
20
Huamantanga Camotillo Peruanita Yana Huayro
16t manure 24t manure
NPK 80-100-100 NPK 160-100-100

18. Crop management
I. Minimum tillage
I. Andes
ChiwaChaqmeoBarbecho

19. Crop management
I. Minimum tillage
I. Andes
5
10
15
20
organic inorganic
3755m asl 4102m asl 4144m asl
5
10
15
20
Barbecho Chacmeo Chiwa
3755m asl 4102m asl 4144m asl
Oswald et al. 2009. The complexity of simple tillage systems. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 147, 399-410

20. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
winter potato winter potato
early rice
late rice
spring potato
summer rice
rapeseed, vetch rapeseed, vetch
barley, wheat barley,
Potentials and opportunities
new short duration rice varieties increase winter fallow period;
temperatures adequate for potato production;
winter potato intensifies land-use-system;
II. Minimum tillage - China
Oswald et al. 2009. Minimum tillage systems with potato in winter cropping regions of subtropical China. Tropentag – Biophysical and socio-economic frame conditions for
sustainable management of natural resources. 06-08.10.2009, Hamburg, Germany

21. Winter potato cropping system
farmers’ innovation;
often as minimum tillage system on heavy rice soils;
several types according to climatic or soil conditions;

26. Soil fertility and fertilizer use
Biological amendments
- Plant Growth Promoting Bacteria - PGPR
- Mycorrhiza
- PGPR
- Laboratory tests
- Greenhouse experiments
- Field trials

27. Variedad Canchan
Control
0
10
20
30
C1 C2 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8
Tuber Plant
0
10
20
30
C1 C2 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15 B16
Tuber Plant
Yungay Canchan
control
control B1C2
B9C2
Pot trials
Oswald et al., 2010 Evaluating soil rhizobacteria for their ability to enhance plant growth and tuber yield of potato. Annals of Applied Biology (in press).

28. 0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Acelga Rabanito Espinaca Maiz
Control Bac 22 Act 16M2 Azo 16M2
8 semanas
10 semanas
11 semanas
11 semanas
Bac17M9 Azo16M2 Act16M2Control
Control Bac17M9 Azo16M2 Act16M2
g/plant
- all crops showed increments in fresh and dry matter
- plant weight increased between 40% - 140%
Crop diversity

29. PGPR use in different production systems
I. Aeroponics
Tubers production from
inoculated plants
better growth of inoculated plants;
the growth period of inoculated plants
was extended by up to 30 days;
adequate bacteria populations could be
maintained in the irrigation water and on
potato roots;1.00E+00
1.00E+02
1.00E+04
1.00E+06
1.00E+08
1.00E+10
Inocul. Water Water Water Canchan Inocul. Non-
inoc.
Total bacteria Bacillus Azotobacter
Planting
30 days
60 days
60 days
60 days
cfu
Variety Peruanita with PGPR Variety Peruanita without PGPR

30. Aeroponics
0
20
40
60
80
100
Des Revo Cruza Conde Unica Capiro Perri Yun Can
Number of tubers/plant
0
100
200
300
400
500
Des Revo Cruza Conde Unica Capiro Perri Yun Can
Tuber yield in g/plant
0
2
4
6
8
Des Revo Cruza Conde Unica Capiro Perri Yun Can
Mean tuber weight in g
with bacteria without bacteria
(315)
(78)
(20)
(83)
(4)
(126)
(63) (38)
(6)
(665)
(72)
(-12)
(82)
(-1)
(133)
(42)
(-5)
(-14)
inoculated plants produce more
tubers and often greater tuber
weights;
tuber size is similar or greater
with non-inoculated plants

31. Farmers’ greenhouse
Location Palermo Yacari 1 Yacari 2
Bacteria control A1-15/06 control B1-22/06 control A3-30/06
Chard 3.28 + 60% 4.69 + 41% 4.88 + 60%
Spinach 3.63 + 14% 3.44 + 2% 3.88 + 29%
Beetroot 4.38 + 3% 4.69 + 3% 7.81 - 20%
Radish -- -- 4.38 - 13% 5.31 - 29%
Pumkin -- -- 1.62 + 42% -- --
Yields in kg/m2 of horticultural crops in 3 greenhouses in Puno, Peru

32. Yield increase of coriander
or beetroot inoculated with
PGPR strains over control
without bacteria at farmers’
fields in Huachipa, Lima.
Farmers’ fields – horticultural crops
-30
-15
0
15
30
45
60
A1-22/06 A1-17/06 B1-22/06 B1-27/06 A3-25/06 A3-27/06
Coriander Beetroot

33. Field evaluation: cultivars, agro-ecologíes, crops
Trials implemented: Lima (0 m asl), Huancayo (3,300m asl);
Aymara (3,900m asl), Puno (3,900m asl)
Varieties: Única, Revolución, Yungay, Amarillis,
Ccompis, Amarillo del Centro, Andina,
Queccorani
Crops: potato and maize
2007 – 2009 14 trials with and potato and 1 trial with maize
64 strains used: 21 Bacillus, 8 Azospirillum,13 Azotobacter,
8 Pseudomonas, 14 Actinomycetes
13 positive strains: 4 Bacillus 19%
1 Azospirillum 13%
4 Azotobacter 31%
3 Actinomycetes 21%
1 Pseudomonas 13%
Field trials with potato

34. Strain Number of field trials Positive yield response % increase
A1-30/06 Actinomycetes 10 3 11-30
A1-30/08 2 1 19
A1-45/08 1 1 16
A2-18/08 Azospirillum 1 1 10
A3-15/06 Azotobacter 5 2 10
A3-16/08 3 2 9-13
A3-39/08 3 2 10-23
B1-04/06 Bacillus 2 1 14
B1-05/06 2 1 8
B1-21/06 8 1 38
B1-22/06 5 2 11-17
B1-29/06 3 1 28
B1-35/06 4 1 18
P1-20/08 Pseudomonas 2 1 16
B1-35/06+P1-20/08 1 1 9
Results of fields trials 2006-2009

35. 0
3
6
9
12
4.5 5.6 6.8 7.8
pH
drytuberweighting
P1-20/08 B1-35/06 A2-20/08 A3-19/08 Control
Pot trial using bacterial strains to inoculate potato plants growing in
substrate with different pH

36. 0
5
10
15
20
tuberculosing/plant
0
50
100
150
200
%
ControlP1-20/08
P1-20/08
B1-35/06
B1-35/06
A2-19/08
A2-19/08
A3-19/08
A3-19/08
A1-19/08
A1-19/08
Peso seco de tuberculos in g de plantas de papa inoculadas
con rhizobacterias en substratos con diferentes texturas
Incrementos en % del
peso seco de tuberculos
de plantas de papa
inoculadas con
rhizobacterias en
substratos con diferentes
texturas
Arena Musgo Tierra
100 0 0
80 20 0
60 40 0
40 60 0
0 10 90
0 25 75
0 50 50
20 40 40

37. -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
% increase/reduction over control
A1-30/06
A1-30/08
A3-16/08
A3-39/08
A2-01/08
B1-21/06
P1-08/08
Control
Salcedo Tahuaco
17.2 t/ha
4.2 t/ha
Results of fields trials

38. Future activities
I. Fertilizer use efficiency
I. Improving the efficiency of organic inputs for low-input systems;
II. Improving the efficiency of inorganic fertilizers for high input
systems;
II. Minimum tillage
I. Developing minimum tillage systems for tuber crops;
II. Developing MT options for marginal environments;
III. Biological amendments
I. Use in pre-basic seed production;
II. Use in marginal environments and low-input systems;
III. Improve the quality and efficiency of organic fertilizers;
IV. Nutrient management
I. Farm nutrient inventories;
II. Capacity building in nutrient management – NARS and farmers
V. Genetic improvement
I. Screening for fertilizer use efficiency;
II. and/or nutrient appropiation capacity;

39. gracias