Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis

Scarcity of quantity and quality feed has been a key constraint to productivity of smallholder crop-livestock systems. Tropical forages include a variety of annual and perennial grasses, herbaceous and dual-purpose legumes, and multipurpose trees and shrubs. They have been promoted in Sub-Saharan Af...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Paul, Birthe K., Koge, Jessica, Maass, Brigitte L., Notenbaert, An Maria Omer, Peters, Michael, Groot, Jeroen C.J., Tittonell, Pablo A.
Formato: Journal Article
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Springer 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108642
_version_ 1855520058645676032
author Paul, Birthe K.
Koge, Jessica
Maass, Brigitte L.
Notenbaert, An Maria Omer
Peters, Michael
Groot, Jeroen C.J.
Tittonell, Pablo A.
author_browse Groot, Jeroen C.J.
Koge, Jessica
Maass, Brigitte L.
Notenbaert, An Maria Omer
Paul, Birthe K.
Peters, Michael
Tittonell, Pablo A.
author_facet Paul, Birthe K.
Koge, Jessica
Maass, Brigitte L.
Notenbaert, An Maria Omer
Peters, Michael
Groot, Jeroen C.J.
Tittonell, Pablo A.
author_sort Paul, Birthe K.
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Scarcity of quantity and quality feed has been a key constraint to productivity of smallholder crop-livestock systems. Tropical forages include a variety of annual and perennial grasses, herbaceous and dual-purpose legumes, and multipurpose trees and shrubs. They have been promoted in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) for increasing livestock productivity and household income through higher quantity and quality of herbage, while contributing to soil improvement and higher food crop yields. For the first time, we quantitatively reviewed 72 experimental studies from across SSA to take stock of geographical distribution and forage technology focus of past research; quantify magnitudes of multidimensional impacts of forage technologies; and present variability in forage agronomy data. Improved forage technologies were classified into four groups: (i) germplasm, (ii) management, (iii) cropping system integration, and (iv) feeding regime. Mean weighted response ratios were calculated from 780 pairs of observations for 13 indicators across the five impact dimensions. Improved forage germplasm had on average 2.6 times higher herbage productivity than local controls, with strongest effect in grasses. Feeding regimes with improved leguminous forages increased milk yield by on average 39%, dry matter intake by 25%, and manure production by 24%. When forage technologies were integrated with food crops, soil loss was almost halved, soil organic carbon increased on average by 10%, and grain and stover yields by 60% and 33%, respectively. This study demonstrates the central role improved forages could play in sustainable intensification of crop-livestock systems in SSA. It highlights the need for multidisciplinary and systems-level approaches and studies to quantify synergies and tradeoffs between impact dimensions. Further research is needed to explain forage agronomic yield variability, unraveling interactions between genotype, on-farm environmental conditions, and management factors. Results from this review can inform development programs, prioritizing technologies proven successful for dissemination and indicating magnitudes of expected impacts
format Journal Article
id CGSpace108642
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2020
publishDateRange 2020
publishDateSort 2020
publisher Springer
publisherStr Springer
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace1086422025-11-11T17:45:22Z Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis Paul, Birthe K. Koge, Jessica Maass, Brigitte L. Notenbaert, An Maria Omer Peters, Michael Groot, Jeroen C.J. Tittonell, Pablo A. grasses gramineas soil organic carbon carbono organico del suelo livestock ganado agronomy agronomia cropping systems sistemas de cultivo environmental engineering Scarcity of quantity and quality feed has been a key constraint to productivity of smallholder crop-livestock systems. Tropical forages include a variety of annual and perennial grasses, herbaceous and dual-purpose legumes, and multipurpose trees and shrubs. They have been promoted in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) for increasing livestock productivity and household income through higher quantity and quality of herbage, while contributing to soil improvement and higher food crop yields. For the first time, we quantitatively reviewed 72 experimental studies from across SSA to take stock of geographical distribution and forage technology focus of past research; quantify magnitudes of multidimensional impacts of forage technologies; and present variability in forage agronomy data. Improved forage technologies were classified into four groups: (i) germplasm, (ii) management, (iii) cropping system integration, and (iv) feeding regime. Mean weighted response ratios were calculated from 780 pairs of observations for 13 indicators across the five impact dimensions. Improved forage germplasm had on average 2.6 times higher herbage productivity than local controls, with strongest effect in grasses. Feeding regimes with improved leguminous forages increased milk yield by on average 39%, dry matter intake by 25%, and manure production by 24%. When forage technologies were integrated with food crops, soil loss was almost halved, soil organic carbon increased on average by 10%, and grain and stover yields by 60% and 33%, respectively. This study demonstrates the central role improved forages could play in sustainable intensification of crop-livestock systems in SSA. It highlights the need for multidisciplinary and systems-level approaches and studies to quantify synergies and tradeoffs between impact dimensions. Further research is needed to explain forage agronomic yield variability, unraveling interactions between genotype, on-farm environmental conditions, and management factors. Results from this review can inform development programs, prioritizing technologies proven successful for dissemination and indicating magnitudes of expected impacts 2020-08 2020-07-01T13:36:48Z 2020-07-01T13:36:48Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108642 en https://hdl.handle.net/10568/110715 Open Access application/pdf Springer Paul, B.K.; Koge, J.; Maass, B.L.; Notenbaert, A.; Peters, M.; Groot, J.C.J.; Tittonell, P. (2020) Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa. A meta-analysis. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 40:22. ISSN: 1774-0746
spellingShingle grasses
gramineas
soil organic carbon
carbono organico del suelo
livestock
ganado
agronomy
agronomia
cropping systems
sistemas de cultivo
environmental engineering
Paul, Birthe K.
Koge, Jessica
Maass, Brigitte L.
Notenbaert, An Maria Omer
Peters, Michael
Groot, Jeroen C.J.
Tittonell, Pablo A.
Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis
title Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis
title_full Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis
title_fullStr Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis
title_short Tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis
title_sort tropical forage technologies can deliver multiple benefits in sub saharan africa a meta analysis
topic grasses
gramineas
soil organic carbon
carbono organico del suelo
livestock
ganado
agronomy
agronomia
cropping systems
sistemas de cultivo
environmental engineering
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/108642
work_keys_str_mv AT paulbirthek tropicalforagetechnologiescandelivermultiplebenefitsinsubsaharanafricaametaanalysis
AT kogejessica tropicalforagetechnologiescandelivermultiplebenefitsinsubsaharanafricaametaanalysis
AT maassbrigittel tropicalforagetechnologiescandelivermultiplebenefitsinsubsaharanafricaametaanalysis
AT notenbaertanmariaomer tropicalforagetechnologiescandelivermultiplebenefitsinsubsaharanafricaametaanalysis
AT petersmichael tropicalforagetechnologiescandelivermultiplebenefitsinsubsaharanafricaametaanalysis
AT grootjeroencj tropicalforagetechnologiescandelivermultiplebenefitsinsubsaharanafricaametaanalysis
AT tittonellpabloa tropicalforagetechnologiescandelivermultiplebenefitsinsubsaharanafricaametaanalysis