Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T10:57:18.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cassava root yield variability in shifting cultivation systems in the eastern Amazon region of Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 October 2022

Thomas Abrell Open the ORCID record for Thomas Abrell [Opens in a new window] ,
Krishna Naudin ,
Felix J.J.A. Bianchi ,
Debora Veiga Aragao ,
Pablo Tittonell  and
Marc Corbeels
Thomas Abrell
Affiliation:
CIRAD, UPR AIDA, F-34398 Montpellier, France AIDA, University of Montpellier, CIRAD, Montpellier, France Wageningen University and Research, Farming Systems Ecology, P.O. Box, 430, Wageningen, AK6700, the Netherlands
Krishna Naudin
Affiliation:
CIRAD, UPR AIDA, F-34398 Montpellier, France AIDA, University of Montpellier, CIRAD, Montpellier, France
Felix J.J.A. Bianchi
Affiliation:
Wageningen University and Research, Farming Systems Ecology, P.O. Box, 430, Wageningen, AK6700, the Netherlands
Debora Veiga Aragao
Affiliation:
Embrapa, Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Amazônia Oriental, Tv. Dr. Eneas Pinheiro, s/n – Marco, Belém, PA66095-903, Brazil
Pablo Tittonell
Affiliation:
CIRAD, UPR AIDA, F-34398 Montpellier, France AIDA, University of Montpellier, CIRAD, Montpellier, France Groningen Institute of Evolutionary Life Sciences, Groningen University, PO Box 72, Groningen, AB9700, the Netherlands
Marc Corbeels*
Affiliation:
CIRAD, UPR AIDA, F-34398 Montpellier, France AIDA, University of Montpellier, CIRAD, Montpellier, France IITA, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, PO Box 30772, Nairobi, 00100, Kenya
*
*Corresponding author. Email: corbeels@cirad.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Cassava flour is the main source of carbohydrates for family farmers in the Amazon region of Brazil. Cassava is mainly grown under shifting cultivation, in recurrent cultivation periods initiated through slash-and-burn. Its sustainability is, however, questioned due to the associated deforestation and often rapidly decreasing crop productivity. There is an urgent need to make these cassava systems more sustainable and more profitable, but we currently lack a deep understanding of the key factors governing their productivity. We conducted an on-farm study on 37 cassava fields of smallholder farmers at three locations that spanned a range of crop-fallow frequencies, some of which were initiated through slash-and-burn while others through fire-free land clearance. First, we analysed how cassava plant density at harvest was related with pedoclimatic and management factors in slash-and-burn systems. Second, we assessed the relationship between plant density and cassava root yield at harvest and conducted a yield gap analysis to better understand which factors govern cassava productivity beyond plant density in slash-and-burn systems. Finally, we compared cassava productivity between slash-and-burn and the fire-free land clearing techniques that some farmers started to adopt in the study region. Cassava yields averaged 7.2 ± 5.4 Mg ha–1 (50% of the average yield of 14.2 Mg ha–1 in the Pará State), and ranged from 0 (in case of root rot diseases) to 24 Mg ha–1. Cassava yield was associated with plant density at harvest (ranging from 0 to 10 000 plants ha–1), suggesting that managing plant density is a key determinant of the attainable yield levels. In addition, differences in cassava root yields could be largely explained by differences in labour inputs for weeding and fallow clearing, the effect of the latter depending on soil texture. Therefore, our results suggest that labour is a key production factor for cassava in the shifting cultivation systems of the Eastern Amazon in which the use of external inputs, such as chemical fertilizers and herbicides, is limited. Further, root yields were influenced by the method of field preparation, whereby yields were about 50% lower (and more variable) when fields were prepared by slash-and-burn than by mechanical ploughing or herbicide application. Despite the significantly higher yields, these alternatives to burning the vegetation are, however, still hardly adopted in Paragominas. Hence, there is a need for supporting more sustainable production systems through local and national public policies. These new systems should not only focus on soil fertility management but also on weed control and, more generally, on labour productivity.

Keywords

Shifting cultivationYield gapSoil fertilityWeed pressureBrazil
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 58 , 2022 , e38
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Affholder, F., Poeydebat, C., Corbeels, M., Scopel, E. and Tittonell, P. (2013). The yield gap of major food crops in family agriculture in the tropics: assessment and analysis through field surveys and modelling. Field Crops Research 143, 106–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Affholder, F., Tittonell, P., Corbeels, M., Roux, S., Motisi, N., Tixier, P. and Wery, J. (2012). Ad hoc modeling in agronomy: what have we learned in the last 15 years? Agronomy Journal 104, 735–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albuquerque, J.A.A., Sediyama, T, Silva, A.A., Carneiro, J.E.S., Cecon, P.R. and Alves, J.M.A. (2008). Interferência de plantas daninhas sobre a produtividade da mandioca (Manihot esculenta). Planta Daninha 26, 279–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andriesse, J.P. and Schelhaas, R.M. (1987). A monitoring study on nutrient cycles in soils used for shifting cultivation under various climatic conditions in Asia. III. The effects of land clearing through burning on fertility level. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 19, 311–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspiazú, I., Sediyama, T., Rebeiro, J.I. Jr., Silva, A.A., Concenco, G., Ferreira, E.A., Galin, L., Silva, A.F., Borges, E.T. and Araujo, W.F. (2010). Atividade fotossintética de plantas de mandioca submetidas a competição com plantas daninhas. Planta Daninha 28, 963–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandeira, C.T. (2015). Brazilian forestry legislation and to combat deforestation government policies in the Amazon. Ambiente & Sociedade 18, 215–234.Google Scholar
Bianchi, F.J.J.A, Booij, C.J.H. and Tscharntke, T. (2006). Sustainable pest regulation in agricultural landscapes: a review on landscape composition, biodiversity and natural pest control. Proceeding of the Royal Society of London 273, 1715–1727.Google ScholarPubMed
Boas, S.A.V., Oliveira, S.A.S.D., Bragança, C.A.D., Ramos, J.B. and Oliveira, E.J.D. (2016). Survey of fungi associated with cassava root rot from different producing regions in Brazil. Scientia Agricola 74, 60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinkmann, W.L.F., Nascimento, J.C.D., Brinkmann, W.L.F. and Nascimento, J.C.D. (1973). The effect of slash and burn agriculture on plant nutrients in the Tertiary region of Central Amazonia. Acta Amazonica 3, 55–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruun, T.B., Ryan, C.M., de Neergaard, A. and Berry, N.J. (2021). Soil organic carbon stocks maintained despite intensification of shifting cultivation. Geoderma 388, 114804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byju, G., Ravindran, C.S., Nair, R.H. and Ravi, V. (2010). Tillage and planting methods on soil properties, yield, root rot and nutrient uptake in a continuously grown cassava field in a semi arid Vertisol of India. Advances in Horticultural Science 24, 176–182.Google Scholar
Carmenta, R., Coudel, E. and Steward, A.M. (2018). Forbidden fire: does criminalising fire hinder conservation efforts in swidden landscapes of the Brazilian Amazon? Geographical Journal 185, 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carvalho, V.D., Chagas, S.J.R. and Botrel, N. (1993). Produtividade e qualidade de raízes em diferentes épocas de colheita de variedades de mandioca. Revista Brasileira de Mandioca 12, 49–58.Google Scholar
Cock, J.H. (1976). Characteristics of high yielding cassava varities. Experimental Agriculture 12, 135–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, H.C. (1961). The study of shifting cultivation. Current Anthropology 2, 27–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coomes, O.T., Takasaki, Y. and Rhemtulla, J. M. (2011). Landuse poverty traps identified in shifting cultivation systems shape long-term tropical forest cover. Proceeding of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 108, 13925–13930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Rouw, A. (1995). The fallow period as a weed-break. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 54, 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Rouw, A., Casagrande, M., Phaynaxay, K., Soulileuth, B. and Saito, K. (2014). Soil seedbanks in slash-and-burn rice fields of northern Laos. Weed Research 54, 26–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delmotte, S., Tittonell, P., Mouret, J.C., Hammond, R. and Lopez-Ridaura, S. (2011). On farm assessment of rice yield variability and productivity gaps between organic and conventional cropping systems under Mediterranean climate. European Journal of Agronomy 35, 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denich, M., Vielhauer, K., Kato, M.S.D.A., Block, A., Kato, O.R., de Abreu Sá, T.D., Lücke, W. and Vlek, P.L.G. (2004). Mechanized land preparation in forest-based fallow systems: the experience from Eastern Amazonia. Agroforestry Systems 61, 91–106.Google Scholar
Diaz, A., Dini, C., Viña, S. and García, M. (2018). Technological properties of sour cassava starches: effect of fermentation and drying processes. LWT 93, 116–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekeleme, F., Hauser, S., Aster, G., Dixon, A., Weller, S., Olorunmaiye, P., Usman, H., Adeyemi, O. and Chikoye, D. (2016). Weed management in cassava in Africa: challenged and opportunities. Outlooks on Pest Management 27, 196–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elisabeth, M. and Claessen, C. (1997). Manual de Métodos de Análise de Solo. Rio de Janeiro: EMBRAPA-CNPS.Google Scholar
Feldpausch, T.R., Rondon, M.A., Fernandes, E.C.M., Riha, S.J. and Wandelli, E. (2004). Carbon and nutrient accumulation in secondary forests regenerating on pastures in Central Amazonia. Ecological Applications 14, 164–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fermont, A.M., Van Asten, P.J.A., Tittonell, P., van Wijk, M.T. and Giller, K.E. (2009). Closing the cassava yield gap: an analysis from smallholder farms in East Africa. Field Crop Research 112, 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujisaka, S., Hurtado, L. and Uribe, R. (1996). A working classification of slash-and-burn agricultural systems. Agroforestry Systems 34, 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenland, D.J. and Nye, P.H. (1959). Increases in the carbon and nitrogen contents of tropical soils under natural fallows. Journal of Soil Science 10, 284–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölscher, D., Möller, R.F., Denich, M. and Fölster, H. (1996). Nutrient input-output budget of shifting agriculture in Eastern Amazonia. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 47, 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, R., Kauffman, J. and Cummings, D. (2002). Dynamics of aboveground and soil carbon and nitrogen stocks and cycling of available nitrogen along a land-use gradient in Rondônia, Brazil. Ecosystems 5, 244–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2019). Produção Agrícola Municipal. http://www.sidra.ibge.gov.br/ (accessed 25 July 2021).Google Scholar
Jakovac, C.C., Dutrieux, L., Siti, L., Peña-Claros, M. and Bongers, F. (2017). Spatial and temporal dynamics of shifting cultivation in the middle-Amazonas river: expansion and intensification. PLoS ONE 12, e0181092.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jakovac, C.C., Peña-Claros, M., Mesquita, R.C.G., Bongers, F. and Kuyper, T.W. (2016). Swiddens under transition: consequences of agricultural intensification in the Amazon. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 218, 116–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kato, M.S.A, Kato, O.R., Denich, M. and Vlek, P.L.G. (1999). Fire-free alternatives to slash-and-burn for shifting cultivation in the eastern Amazon region: the role of fertilizers. Field Crops Research 62, 225–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemos, E.C.M., Vasconcelos, S.S., Santiago, W.R., de Oliveira, M.C.M. and Souza, C.M.D.A. (2016). The responses of soil, litter and root carbon stocks to the conversion of forest regrowth to crop and tree production systems used by smallholder farmers in eastern Amazonia. Soil Use and Management 32, 504–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lojka, B., Lojkova, J., Banout, J., Polesny, Z. and Preininger, D. (2008). Performance of an improved fallow system in the Peruvian Amazon – modelling approach. Agroforestry Systems 72, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mburu, J., Börner, J., Hedden-Dunkhorst, B., Mendoza-Escalante, A. and Frohberg, K. (2007). Feasibility of mulching technology as an alternative to slash-and-burn farming in eastern Amazon: a cost–benefit analysis. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22, 125–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melifonwu, A.A. (1994). Weeds and their control in cassava. African Crop Science Journal 2, 519–530.Google Scholar
Modesto, M.D.S. and Alves, R.N.B. (2016). Cultura da Mandicoa: Apostila. Brasilia: Embrapa.Google Scholar
Oka, M.I., Limsila, J.A. and Sarakarn, S.U. (1987). Relationship between characteristics and germination ability of cuttings in cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly 21, 70–75.Google Scholar
Olutayo, A., Olubunmi, A.O., Olanipekun, S.O., Olasoji, J. and Aduramigba-Modupe, V. (2014). Growth and yield performance of cassava/maize intercrop under different plant population density of maize. Journal of Agricultural Science 6, Article 8.Google Scholar
Parsons, D., Ramı´Rez-Aviles, L. and Jerome, H. (2009). Managing maize production in shifting cultivation Milpa systems in Yucatan through weed control and manure application. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 133, 123–134 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patrignani, A. and Ochsner, T.E. (2015). Canopeo: a powerful new tool for measuring fractional green canopy cover. Agronomy Journal 107, 2312–2320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poltronieri, L.S., Trindade, D.R., Silva, H.M. and Albuquerque, F.C. (1997). Patógenos associados à podridão mole de raízes de mandioca no estado do pará. Fitopatologia Brasileira 22, 111.Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Sagrilo, E., Soares, P., Filho, V., Pequeno, M.G., Celeste, M., Vidigal, G., Scapim, C.A., Kvitschal, M.V., Rui, R. and Rimoldi, F. (2006). Effect of harvest period on foliage production and dry matter distribution in five cassava cultivars during the second plant cycle. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology 49, 1007–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sánchez, P.A. (1982). Nitrogen in shifting cultivation systems of Latin America. Plant and Soil 67, 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schons, A., Streck, N.A., Storck, L., Adeliburiol, G., Zanon, A.J., Pinheiro, D.G. and Kraulich, B. (2009). Arranjos de plantas de mandioca e milho em cultivo solteiro e consorciado: crescimento, desenvolvimento e produtividade. Bragantia 68, 155–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, T.S., Lima e Silva, P.S., Braga, J.D., Da Silveira, L.M. and Sousa, R.P.D. (2013). Planting density and yield of cassava roots. Revista Ciência Agronomica 44, 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva-Forsberg, M.C. and Fearnside, P. (1997). Brazilian Amazonian Caboclo agriculture: effect of fallow period on maize yield. Forest Ecology and Management 97, 283–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommer, R., Vlek, P., Sá, T.D., Vielhauer, K., Coelho, R.D. and Fölster, H. (2004). Nutrient balance of shifting cultivation by burning or mulching in the eastern Amazon – evidence for subsoil nutrient accumulation. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 68, 257–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staver, C. (1991). The role of weeds in the productivity of Amazonian bush fallow agriculture. Experimental Agriculture 27, 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stromgaard, P. (1984). The immediate effect of burning and ash-fertilization. Plant and Soil 80, 307–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tittonell, P. and Giller, K.E. (2013). When yield gaps are poverty traps: the paradigm of ecological intensification in African smallholder agriculture. Field Crop Research 143, 76–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tittonell, P, Vanlauwe, B., Corbeels, M. and Giller, K.E. (2008). Yield gaps, nutrient use efficiencies and response to fertilisers by maize across heterogeneous smallholder farms of western Kenya. Plant and Soil 313, 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, S., Lucotte, M., Revéret, J.P., Davidson, R., Mertens, F., Passos, C. and Romaña, C. (2015). Agroforestry systems as a profitable alternative to slash and burn practices in small-scale agriculture of the Brazilian Amazon. Agroforestry Systems 89, 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhl, C., Clark, H., Clark, K. and Maquirino, P. (2009). Successional patterns associated with slash-and-burn agriculture in the upper Rio Negro region of the Amazon basin. Biotropica 14, 249–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Ittersum, M.K., Cassman, K.G., Grassini, P., Wolf, J., Tittonell, P. and Hochman, Z. (2013). Yield gap analysis with local to global relevance – a review. Field Crop Research 143, 4–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Vliet, N., Adams, C., Vieira, I.C.G. and Mertz, O. (2013). Slash and burn and shifting cultivation systems in forest agriculture frontiers from the Brazilian Amazon. Society & Natural Resources 26, 1454–1467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villa, P.M., Martins, S.V., de Oliveira Neto, S.N., Rodrigues, A.C., Martorano, L.G., Monsanto, L.D., Cancio, N.M. and Gastauer, M. (2018). Intensification of shifting cultivation reduces forest resilience in the northern Amazon. Forest and Ecology Management 430, 312–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visses, F.D.A., Sentelhas, P.C. and Pereira, A.B. (2018). Yield gap of cassava crop as a measure of food security – an example for the main Brazilian producing regions. Food Security 10, 1191–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vosti, S.A., Witcover, J. and Carpentier, C.L. (2002). Agricultural Intensification by Smallholders in the Western Brazilian Amazon: From Deforestation to Sustainable Land Use. Research Reports 130. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.Google Scholar
Wood, S., Rhemtulla, J. and Coomes, O. (2017). Cropping history trumps fallow duration in long-term soil and vegetation dynamics of shifting cultivation systems. Ecological Applications 27, 519–531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed