CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Separating the effects of trees on crops: the case of Faidherbia albida and millet in Niger

Export citation

Faidherbia albida (Del.) A. Chev. is an important tree species of the scattered tree or parkland systems in the Sahel. The improved crop growth under its canopy is well known, and has been attributed to various components notably: higher soil fertility, improved microclimate and better soil physical properties. The relative contributions of each of these components are not known, but knowledge about this is essential for making proper decisions concerning management options. The overall tree effect on crop production (expressed as fraction of the sole crop production) is analysed here as a weighted sum of (positive and negative) relative net tree effects on the resources for crop growth. In this sum, the weights reflect the degree of limitation of the resources in the environment at the tree-crop interface. The paper shows how the relative net tree effects and the accompanying weights can be estimated from field experiments. In an on-farm field experiment in Niger, millet production under the F. albida canopy was about 36% higher than in the open field. The nitrogen availability under trees was estimated to be more than 200% higher than in the open causing a 26% production increase. The phosphorus availability was estimated to be almost 30% higher and because of its high limitation causing a production increase of 13%. The net effect via other resources (notably light and water) was negligible (3% production reduction) and not significant.

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011820412140
Altmetric score:
Dimensions Citation Count:

Related publications