Cited by 51Agricultural Science and FertilizationAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsAgriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

POTENTIAL OF BIOMASS TRANSFER TECHNOLOGIES IN SUSTAINING VEGETABLE PRODUCTION IN THE WETLANDS (DAMBO S) OF EASTERN ZAMBIA

KUNTASHULA, E., MAFONGOYA, P. L., SILESHI, G., LUNGU, S.·2004·Experimental Agriculture

Abstract

Farmers grow vegetables widely during the dry season in wetlands known locally as dambo s in southern Africa. Declining soil fertility is one of the major factors limiting smallholder vegetable production in the dambo s of eastern Zambia. An experiment was initiated with 43 farmers with the objective of assessing the agronomic and economic feasibility of foliar biomass of gliricidia (Gliricidia sepium) and leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala) for production of cabbage, onion and a subsequent maize crop during the dry season. The treatments were, on a dry-matter basis, 8 and 12 t ha−1 gliricidia, 12 t ha−1 leucaena and 10 t ha−1 manure+half the recommended fertilizer rate, inorganic fertilizer at recommended rate, and a control without any inputs. Direct field measurements and informal enquiries were used for evaluating the effects of different treatments. The highest cabbage and onion yields were obtained from manure+half-rate fertilizer application. The gliricidia biomass transfer technology produced cabbage, onion and maize yields comparable with the full fertilizer application. In both cabbage and onion, manure+fertilizer gave generally higher net incomes. Biomass transfer also recorded higher net incomes than the control, and required lower cash inputs than the fully fertilized crop. Net incomes of the biomass treatments were substantially reduced by the labour costs for pruning and incorporation of the biomass. The results indicate that the gliricidia biomass transfer technology could be used as an alternative to inorganic fertilizers for vegetable production in dambo s.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s001447970300142x

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
KUNTASHULA, E., MAFONGOYA, P. L., SILESHI, G., & LUNGU, S.
Affiliations
World Agroforestry Centre (KE)
Venue
Experimental Agriculture
Published
2003-12-02
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
37-51
ISSN
  • 0014-4797 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-4441
OpenAlex
W2122544506
Cited by
51
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Experimental Agriculture (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Agriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management
Keywords
Gliricidia sepium, Leucaena leucocephala, foliage biomass, smallholder vegetable production, cabbage, onion, maize, soil fertility decline, inorganic fertilizer alternatives, manure, net income, dry season cultivation, dambos, Eastern Zambia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review