Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 29

TITLE PAGE

EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF N.P.K FERTILIZER ON THE


GROWTH AND YIELD OF MAIZE

BY

GLADYS BULUS NYAGANIBA


REG. NO: 2014/2015/H0093

BEING A PROJECT PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT


OF CROP SCIENCE, TARABA STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE,
JALINGO

JULY, 2016.
1

CHAPTER ONE
1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study


Maize (Zea mays) ranks third after wheat and rice in the world grain
production. It is grown extensively with equal success in temperate, sub-tropical
and tropical regions of the world (Anonymous, 2009 10). It belongs to the
grass family of Gramineae and originated from Central America, where it is
known as corn (Gordon and Whitney, 1993). It is believed that maize was
introduced into Africa and West Africa by the Portuguese at the beginning of the
16th Century (Onwueme, 1976). Its grains, which serve as food, feed as well as
industrial raw materials contain carbohydrate in form of starch up to 80% and
crude protein up to 10% (Mangel, 1978).
Maize crop is a key source of food and livelihood for millions of people
in many countries of the world. It is produced extensively in Nigeria, where it is
consumed roasted, baked, fried, pounded or fermented (Agbato, 2003). In
advance countries, it is an important source of many industrial products such as
corn sugar, corn oil, corn flour, starch, syrup, brewers grit and alcohol (Dutt,
2005). Corn oil is used for salad, soap-making and lubrication. Maize is a major
component of livestock feed and it is palatable to poultry, cattle and pigs as it
supplies them energy (Iken et al, 2001). The stalk, leave, grain and immature

ears are cherished by different species of livestock (Dutt, 2005) in spite of the
increasing relevance and high demand for maize in Nigeria, yield across the
country continues to decrease with an average of about it/ha which is lowest
African yield ( Fayenisin, 19930).
According to Sridhar and Adeoye (2003), maize has a fibrous rough
system which has seminal and prop root in the soil stem, stalk which are solid
unbranched and herbaceous where ear bearing branches are formed. Maize can
supply human requirement for iron when largely consumed (Gordon and
Whitney, 1993).
Fertilizer play an important role in increasing the maize yield and their
contribution is 40-50 percent. Balanced and optimum use of nitrogen,
phosphorous and potassium fertilizer play a pivotal role in increasing yield of
cereals (Asghar et al, 2010).
Cereal crops are influenced by N fertilizer in many ways, firstly it
increases N supply and helps/results in canopy (leaf area index, LAI) and (leaf
area duration, LAD), which ultimately results in high rates of dry its amounts
can also affect the growth of the plants. Thirdly, late and or heavy N application
may result in grain unacceptable to industry because of their high N/protein
contents ( Uyovbisere, 2000). Therefore, in this way quality and quantity of
grain is also influenced by fertilizer application finally fertilized.

It was also found that deficiency or excess of N affects the partitioning of


assimilates between vegetative and reproductive organs (Donald and Hamblin,
2006). By increasing N supply, leaf area index, leaf area duration photosynthetic
radiation interception and radiation use efficiency also increase (Muchow and
Davis, 1988; Sinclair and Horic, 1989 and Cannor et al, 2012).
Among the limiting factors, proper level and ratio of nitrogen,
phosphorous and potassium are of prime importance (Asghar et al, 2010). 2.
The steady decline in maize yield can be attributed to: rapid reduction in
soil fertility caused by intensive use of land and reduction of fallow period as
reported by. Failure to identify and plant high yielding varieties most suited or
adapted to each agro-ecological zone (Kim, 1997, Olakojo et al; 1998) Use of
inappropriate plant population and final yield (Zeidan et al; 2006). Negligence
for soil amendment such as organic manure and inorganic fertilizers which
improve soil condition and enhance crop yield.
1.2 Problem Statement
Fertilizer has been known to increase plant growth and yield for a long
time ago, but the best macro elements and the required ratio was not properly
understood, as various brand of NPK fertilizers in market are been
recommended to the local farmers by the extension agents. The ratio of
nitrogen, phosphorous of potassium that the plant required must be investigated
upon.
4

1.3 Significance of the Study


This research work will be able to provide the farmers with the best ratio
of N.P.K fertilizer for maize production in the Jalingo area and the state at large
so that the farmers will know the best composition of N.P.K fertilizer to
purchase for maize production.
1.4 Objectives of the Study
The objectives of the study include:
1. to identify the effects of N.P.K fertilizers on the growth and yield of
maize in Jalingo
2. to determine which ratio of N.P.K fertilizer that gives the optimum
growth and yield of maize in Jalingo

CHAPTER TWO
2.0

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Origin, Classification and Botany of Maize


It is generally agreed that teosine (Z Mexicana) is an ancestor of maize,
although opinions vary as to whether maize is a domesticated version of
teosinte, (Galinat, 1988). Zea is a genus of the family Graminae (Poaceae),
commonly known as the grass family. Maize is monoecious plant, that is male
and female flowers occurs separately on the same plant. The male inflorescence
or flower is produced from near the growing point i.e. at the end of the stem
axis. The collection of female inflorescence is known as cob or car and each is a
collection of long styles, commonly known as silks which emerge from the top
of the cob. The silk is a combination of both style and stigma which receives the
pollen grains. Pollination is by means of wind, after fertilization the styles
wither and the grains develop to maturity. The grains usually become mature
four to six weeks after fertilization. (Okoroafor et al, 2013).
The whole structure (ear) is enclosed in numerous large foliaceous bracts
and a mass of long styles (silks) protrude from the tip as a mas of silky threads
(Hitchcock and Chase, 1971). Pollen is produced entirely in the stamina
inflorescence and ear, entirely in the postulate inflorescence. Maize is wind
pollinated and both self and cross pollination is usually possible (Vargas, 2000).

Maize is cultivated worldwide and represents a staple food for a significant


proportion of the worlds population. No significant native toxins are reported to
be associated with the genus zea (International Food Biotechnology Council,
1990) (IFBC, 1990).
2.2 Importance and Uses of Maize
In sub-Saharan Africa, maize is a staple food for an estimated 50% of the
population and provides 50% of the basic calories. It is an important source of
carbohydrate, protein, iron, vitamin B and minerals. Africans consume maize as
a starchy base in a wide variety of porridges, pastes, grits, and beer. Green
maize (fresh on the cob) is eaten parched, baked, roasted or boiled and plays an
important role in filling the hunger gap after the dry season (Swanton et al,
1991).
Maize consumption is projected to increase by 50% globally, and by 93%
in Sub-Saharan Africa from 1995 to 2020 (IFPRI, 2000, as cited by Pingali and
Pandey, 2001) while much of the global increase in use of maize is for animal
feed, human consumption is increasing and accounts for about 70% of all maize
consumption in Sub-Saharan Africa (Aquino et al., 2001). Although maize is
primarily a provider of calories, supplying almost 20% of the worlds food
calories, it also provides about 15% of all food-crop protein (National Research
Council, 1988).

Maize grains have nutritional value as they contain 72% starch, 10%
protein, 4.8% oil, 8.5% fibre, 3.0% sugar and 1.7% ash (Chaudhary, 1983). It is
the most important cereal fodder and grain crop under both irrigated and rainfed
agricultural systems in the semi-arid and tropics (Hussan et al, 2003).
2.3 N.P.K Fertilizer
The low fertility status of most tropical soil hindered maize production as
maize production as maize has a strong exhausting effect on the soil. It was
generally observed that maize fail to produce good grain in plots without
adequate nutrients (Adediran and Banjoko, 2003) Inorganic fertilizer exert
strong influence on plant growth, development and yield (Stefano et al 2004).
The availability of sufficient growth nutrients from inorganic fertilizers
lead to improved cell activates, enhance cell, multiplication and enlargement
and luxuriant growth (Fashina et al; 2002). Luxuriant growth resulting from
fertilizer application leads to larger dry matter production (obi et al,2005)n
owing better utilization of solar radiation and more nutrient (Sadee et al, 2001).
The use of inorganic fertilizer on crop increased yield as Adediran and Banjoko
(2003) observed that there was substantial depletion of nutrients with the yields
where no N.P.K fertilizer was applied. This position was reported by
Uyovbisere et al; (2001) who reported there was substantial depletion of
nutrients and available phosphorus were substantially reduced with cropping in
humid zone of south, western Nigeria.
8

Nitrogen as well as Phosphorus plays an important role in fruit, seed and


quality development of okra (Nihort, 1985). NPK fertilizer has been reported to
give a yield increase in okra (Babatola, 2006). Different methods of fertilizer
application have been known to influence plant yields. Sweeney et al. (1996)
reported that greater yields of early-grazing samples and higher P and K
concentration was obtained by broadcasting fertilizer than was obtained for
knifing (subsurface banding).
Crop response to N fertilization varies with rate, timing and methods of N
application in relation to plant development. Cochran et al, (1978) reported
increased biomass build-ups of soft white winter wheat due to accumulation of
fall-applied fertilizer in the lower layers of the root profile, which can be
available to the crop late in the growing season. Mahler et al. (1994) reported
better use of banded fertilizer by spring wheat and attributed this to the fact that
the banded fertilizer is positionally more available to the crop than germinating
weeds.
In broadcasting, the fertilizer is uniformly applied over the soil surface
and may be incorporated in the soil or left on the soil surface and may reach the
root zone by percolating rainfall or irrigation water. Application of NPK
fertilizer by broadcasting method encourages vigorous and wider root network
for absorption of available plant nutrients from the soil solution (Toews and
Soper, 1998). N fertilizer placement by broadcasting method does not optimize
9

the use of limited fertilizer resources, which may just be as available to the
weeds as it is to the crop (Tisdale et al., 1985).
The effect of NPK fertilizer application rates on growth and yield of okra
has been studied by many researchers in Nigeria, but there seem to be a dearth
of information on the effect of NPK fertilizer application rates and methods of
application.

10

CHAPTER THREE
3.0

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Experimental Site


The field experiment was conducted at the Nukkai Dry Season Irrigation
Teaching and Research Farm of the Department of Crop Science, Taraba State
College of Agriculture, Jalingo during the 2016 dry season cropping.
Jalingo is located at latitude 8o50`N and longitude 11o45`E of the equator.
The area has a distinct climate with wet season from April-October and dry
season from November to March. Rainfall ranges from 700-1500mm per annum
and temperature of about 27O 30OC within an elevation of 1320mm above sea
level.
3.2 Experimental Design
The field experiment comprised of five (5) treatments which was
replicated three times and laid out in a Randomized Complete Block Design
(RCBD) as shown in figure 1 below: -

11

REP 1

REP II

REP III

T1

T3

T4
3M

T2

T4

T1
0.5M

T3

T2

T3

T4

T1

T2

T5

T5

1M

T5

Treatments
T1 = 200kg/ha NPK 20:15:15
T2 = 200kg/ha NPK 20:10:10
T3 = 200kg/ha NPK 15:15:15
T4 = 200kg/ha NPK 20:05:05
T5 = No fertilizer (Control)
3.3 Source of Materials
The NPK fertilizers was sourced from the Taraba State Agricultural
Development Project,(TADP) while the improved maize seeds was bought from
Agro-Allied Store in Jalingo, Hoe, Pegs, Paper, Biro, Weighing Balance, Thread
and other was purchased and others collected from the Department of Crop
Science, College of Agriculture, Jalingo Taraba State.

12

3.4 Cultural Practices


The land for the experiment was cleared, ploughed and demarcated into
plots of 3M X 3M. The plots was irrigated one day before planting and planting
was done in the early morning hour at the rate of 2 seeds per hole and later
thinned to 1 stand per hole at 2 weeks after planting. Weeding was done at 2-3
weeks after planting during the weeding the plant was earth to support the stand
or avoid breakage by wind. After weeding the various fertilizers rate was
applied as stated above. Watering was done at three days interval till maturity.
The matured the maize was harvested.
3.5 Data Collection
Data were collected on ten samples plants or stands on each plot and tagged for
data collection at 3, 6, 9 and 12 weeks after planting and the average taken.
The following parameters were taken:
i.

Plant height (cm):


Plant heights of maize were measured from the soil surfaces to the tip
of the inner most leaf at 3, 6, 9 and 12 WAP. Ten randomly sampled
plants in a plot were measured throughout using a meter ruler. The

ii.

mean of ten plants were computed and recorded as plot weight.


Number of leaves per plant:
Number of leaves of ten randomly sampled plants per plot and the
number of fully expanded green leaves were tagged and combed 3, 6,

iii.

9 and 12 WAP. The mean is recorded as number of leaves per plant.


Stem diameter or girth (cm):
13

Stem girth of maize were measured from ten randomly sampled plant
from each plot using venire caliper and the average was recorded as
stem girth.
Leaf length (cm):
Leaf lengths were recorded of the ten randomly sampled fully matured

iv.

green leaves from the leaf tip of the stem at 3, 6, 9 and 12 WAP. The
v.

mean recorded as leaf length.


Leaf width (cm):
The width of ten selected plant in each plot were measured and the

vi.

average taken at 3, 6, 9 and 12 WAP.


Number of cob per plant:
Number of cob per plants on the ten randomly sampled plants was

vii.

taken at maturity and the mean recorded as number of cob per plant.
100 Seeds weight (cm):
This was obtained from the threshed grain per plot by randomly
counting 100 grain and weighting balance and their weight recorded in

grain (g).
viii. Grain yield of maize kg/ha:
Grain yield were computed from the grain yield of each plot as
follows: -seed yield (kg/ha)
= Yield/plot (kg)
Net plot size (144.0m2) x 10000m2
ix.

Cob weight per plant:


The weights of ten sampled cobs after harvesting are weighed in the
weighting balance and the average taken and the weight of the cob.

3.6

Data Analysis

14

Data collected was subjected to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and


means were separated using Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 5% level of
probability, according to the method described by Singh and Chardhary (1986).

15

CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1: Mean square for nine (9) character of Maize in Jalingo
Source of
Variation

df

PH
(cm)

SG
(cm)

LL
(cm)

NL

Rep (r-1) (3-1)


Trt (t-1) (4-1)
Err (r-1) (t-1)
Total rt 1

2
3
6
11

54.83
0.21 55.1
679.83* 5.87* 11546.52*
321.63 2.86 5754.8

LW
(cm)

NC

CW
(cm)

0.08
0.14
0.25 1.38
30.08* 80.20* 1.00* 36.18*
15.01 40.05 4.16 17.63

GY/
Plot
Kg
0.07
2.84*
1.39

=Significant, **=Highly significant, NS=Not significant, PH=Plant height, SG=Stem girth, LL=Leave length, NL=Number
of leave, LW=Leave width, NC=Number of cobs, CL=Cob weight, GY/Plot= Grain yield per plant, 100SW= 100% seed
weight.

Table 2: Means of Performance of the nine (9) characters of maize in Jalingo


Treatments

PH
(cm)

SG
(cm)

LL
(cm)

NL

LW
(cm)

NC

CW
(cm)

T1
T2
T3
T4
LSD

44.77a
47.15a
60.02a
68.82ab
17.58

1.37a
2.22a
3.07ab
3.8bc
1.65

34.1a
35.07a
44.22a
46.32a
14.38

3.75a
3.75a
6a
8.75ab
3.79

1.55a
1.57a
2.75a
3.07ab
6.20

0.75a
0.75a
1.5a
1.5a
1.99

3.92a
5.07a
8.02a
9.57ab
4.11

GY/
Plot
Kg
1a
0.97a
2.2b
2.3b
1.15

100SW
(kg)
0.65a
0.50a
1.35a
1.35a
2.13

Means within the same column with the same letters are not significantly different.
a

=Significant, ab=Highly significant, b=Not significant, PH=Plant height, SG=Stem girth, LL=Leave length, NL=Number of
leave, LW=Leave width, NC=Number of cobs, CW=Cob weight, GY/Plot= Grain yield per plant, 100SW= 100% seed
weight.

The result of analysis of variance (Table 1) showed that significant


difference existed among the nine (9) characters studied in maize. The
significant difference among the characters revealed that that all the characters
behave independent of one another in the environment and that weeding regime
have significant effect on characters.
The mean of performance of the nine (9) characters as influence by
weeding regime revealed that plant height (Table 2) showed that Treatment 4
16

100SW
(g)
0.2
1.08*
4.76

produced the tallest plant, closely followed by treatment 3, while the shortest
plant was recorded by treatment 1. This in disclosed that weeding thrice had the
taller plant as a result of less competition with weed for space, light, nutrient
etc.
Similarly the mean performance of stem girth also revealed that
significant difference for the character. However, Treatment 4 recorded the
widest stem, followed by Treatment 3, while the narrowest stem was obtained
by Treatment 1. This also indicated that the effect of weeding regime on the
stem of the plant.
Number of leaves per plant (Table 2) revealed significant difference
among some of the characters studied. The highest number of leaves was
recorded by Treatment 4, closely followed by Treatment 3, then Treatment 2.
The lowest number of leaves per plant was obtained by Treatment 1. This result
revealed that weeding regime had significant effect on number of leaves per
plant of maize in the environment.
For leaf length, (Table 2) no significant difference existed among the
Treatments for all the characters of maize studied. This indicated non influence
of weeding regime on maize. Leaf width was also similar to leaf length as not
significant difference existed among the characters in the area.

17

Number of cobs per plant, also shows no significant difference between


the Treatment, however Treatment 3 and Treatment 4 had the higher number of
cobs per plant in the experiment. Cob length however, showed significant
influence among the treatments studied. Treatment 4 produced the longest cob,
followed by Treatment 3, while the shortest cob length was obtained by
Treatment 1 and 2 respectively.
For Grain yield per plot also revealed significant difference among the
characters. The highest yield per plot was obtained by Treatment 4 with a mean
of 2.3kg, closely followed by Treatment 3, with a mean value of 2.2kg. The
least grain yield per plot was recorded by Treatment 2 with a mean value of
0.97kg per plot. The results above revealed that weeding regime had significant
influence on the grain yield of maize in the area. 100 seed weight was not
significantly influence by weeding regime.

18

CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary
This research on the influence of weeding regime on the growth and yield
of maize in Jalingo was conducted at the Teaching and Research Irrigation of
Farm of the Department of Crop Science Taraba State. College of Agriculture,
Jalingo during the dry season farming of 2016.
Data were collected on ten randomly sampled plants per plot and the
following parameters were collected plant height, stem girth, leaf length, leaf
width, number of leaves, number of cobs per plant, cob length, grain yield per
plot and 100 seed height. The result obtained revealed that significant difference
existed in some of the characters studied such as plant height, stem girth,
number of leaves, cob length and grain yield per plot.
5.2 Conclusion
This can be concluded that weeding regime had significant influence on
the growth and yield of maize as the plant has less competition with weed which
had influence on the plant.

19

5.3 Recommendations
i.

It is recommended that the farmers should adopt weeding twice on


maize farm as it is more economical when compared to thrice

ii.

weeding.
Chemical fertilizer should be made available to the farmers at

iii.

subsidize rate.
All farms should be kept weed free as weeds has detrimental effects
on the growth and yield of maize.

20

REFERENCES
Adediran, J. A. and V. A. Banjoko (2003). Comparative effectiveness of some
compost fertilizer formulations for maize in Nigeria. Nig. J. Soil Sci.,
13:42-48.
Agbato, S. O. (2003). Principles and Practices of crop production (pp. 57-62).
Oyo: Odumatt press publisher.
Anonymous (2009-10). Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan, Govt. of Pakistan,
Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Economic Wing,
Islamabad.
Aquino, P., F. Carrion, R. Calvo and D. Flores. (2001). Selected maize
statistics. In: Pingali, P.L. (ed.). 2001. CIMMYT 1999-2000 World
Maize Facts and Trends. Meeting world maize needs: Technological
opportunities and priorities for the public sector. Mexico, D.F.:
CIMMYT.
Asghar, A.A. Ali., Syed, W.H., Asif, M., Khaliq, T. and Abid, A.A. (2010)
Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea Mays L) Cultivars affected by NPK
Application in different proportion. Pakistan Journal of Science (Vol.
62. No. 4) PP 211-216.
Cannor, K.I, Agbogidi, O.M, and Okonmah, C.U.(2012), Growth and Yield of
Maize as influenced by Organic Manure type in a Niger Delta
Environment. International Journals of Agriculture and Rural
Development (IJARD) Vol. 15 (1) Owerri, PP. 818-824.
DIPA. (2006). Handbook of Agriculture: facts and figures for farmers, students
and all interested in farming. Directorate of Information and
Publications of Agriculture. Indian Council of Agricultural Research,
New Delhi, p. 435.
Donald, S.W. and Hamblin, N.A. (2006) The Comparative Study of the effect
of organic manure cow dung and inorganic fertilizer N.P.K on the
growth rate of maize (Zea Mays L). International Journal of Crop
Science. PP 89-97
Dutt, S. (2005). A Handbook of Agriculture (pp. 116-118). India: ABD
Publishers.
FAO. (2002). Fertilizer and the future. IFA/FAO Agriculture Conference on
Global food security and the role of Sustainability Fertilization. Rome,
Italy. 16th-20th March, 2003, pp. 1-2.
21

Fashina, A. S., K. A. Olatunji and K. O. Alasiri (2002). Effects of different


plant population and poultry manure on yield of Ugu (Telfairia
occidentalis) in Lagos State, Nigeria in Proceedings of the annual
Conference of Horticultural Society of Nigeria (HORTON), pp. 123127.
Fayenisin, O. (1993). Search for Improved maize varieties for farmers in
Nigeria. 3rd National Workshop of Maize Centre. NASPP, Ibadan
December, 6th - 10th 1976.
Galinat, W.E.,Mangeisdorf, P.C., and Mac Neish, R.S., (1988). Domestication
of corn science. 143, 538545. (SD-008)
Gordon, N.B. and Whitney, C. (1993). Nitrogen Management in furrow
irrigated ridge tilled corn. Journal of Production Agriculture. Vol. 6, PP
213-217.
Hitchcock, R. and Chase, T.(1971). Farming Systems in the Tropics: 5 th
Edition. Greenwood Publication. PP 65-90.
Hussan, E.O. Ridley, J.S., Copeland, L.O. and Okeleye, A. (2003) The effect of
nitrogen fertilizer source on dry matter accumulation and grain yields
of open pollinated maize. PP. 631-639. Boston Journal of Crop
Science, Idawo.
Iken, J. E., Anusa, A., & Obaloju, V. O. (2001). Nutrient Composition and
Weight Evaluation of some Newly Developed maize Varieties in
Nigeria. Journal of Food Technology, 7, 25-28.
International Food Biotechnology Council, (IFBC, 1990). Maize Research and
Production in Nigeria Institute of Agriculture, Moor Plantation. Ibadan,
Nigeria.
Kim S. K. (1997). Achievement, challenges and future direction of hybrid
maize research and product. In B. Badu-Apraku, M. O. Akoroda, M.
Oedraw & F. M. Quin (Eds.), Proceedings of Required Maize
Workshop May 99-june 2, 1995. IITA Cotonou, Benin Republic.
Mangel, U. (1978), Principles of Plant Nutrient. International Potash
Institute, Borne, Switzerland.
Muchow, H.A. and Davis, C.D. (1988). Effect of Fertilizer on cereals world
crops. PP 121.
National Research Council (USA). (1988). Quality Protein Maize. National
Academy Press. Washington, D.C., USA. 32
22

Obi, C. O., P. C. Nnabude and E. Onucha (2005). Effects of kitchen waste


compost and tillage on soil chemical properties and yield of Okra
(Abelmuschus esculentus), Soil Sci., 15:69-76.
Okoroafor, I.B, Okelola, Edeh, E.O., Nemehute, V.C., Onu, C.N, Nwaneri,T.C.
and Chinaka, G.I. (2013). Effect of Organic Manure on the Growth and
Yield Performance of Maize in Ishiagu, Ebonyi State, Nigeria. IOSR
Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science. E-ISSN: 2319-2380. PP
28-31. Retrieved from http://www.iosrjournals.org on 23rd June, 2016.
Olakojo, S. A., Ogundodede, B. A., & Kogbe, J. O. S. (1998). Evaluation of
Maize (Zea mays) Top crosses in a Rainforest Location. Biose res.
Comm, 11(2), 141-146.
Onwueme, I.C. (1978). Crop Science Classed Ltd. PP 166
Pingali, P.L. and Pandey, S. (2001). Meeting world maize needs: Technological
opportunities and priorities for the public sector. In: Pingali, P.L. (ed.).
2001. CIMMYT 1999-2000 World Maize Facts and Trends. Meeting
world maize needs: Technological opportunities and priorities for the
public sector. Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT.
Saeed, I. M., R. Abbasi and M. Kazim (2001). Response of maize (Zea mays)
to nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization under agro-climatic condition
of Rawalokol, Azad Jammu and Kaslim and Kashmir, Pak. J.
Biological Sci., 4: 949-952.
Sharma, U. C., A. N. Chaudhary and A. K. Khan. (1994). Effect of integrated
weed management on yield and nutrient uptake by rainfed rice in acid
soils of Nagaland. Indian Journal of Agronomy 39 (4): 553-556.
Sinclair, K. and Horic, S.R. (1989). Maize Cultivation and fertilization lock
wood Inc. Ltd London, PP. 65-74.
Sridhar, M.K.C. and Adeoje, G.O. (2003). Organic Minerals Fertilizer from
urban waste in the Nigeria field. Vol. 68, PP 91-111
Stefano, P., R. Dris and F. Rapparini (2004). Influence of growing conditions
and yield and quality of cherry. II. Fruit. J. Agric. And Env., 2:307-309.
Swanton, C.J. and S.F. Weise, (1991). Integrated Weed Management: The
rationale and approach. Weed Technol., 5: 657-663.
Uyovbisere, E.O., V.O. Chude and A. Bationo, (2000). Promising nutrient
ratios in the fertilizer formulations for optimal performance of maize in
the Nigerian Savanna. The need for a review of current
23

recommendations. Nig. J. Soil Res., 1: 29-34.


Vargas, K. Simpson, E.R and Uzo, I.B. (2000). Evaluation Principle in
Fertilizer. PP 24-37
Zeidan, M. S., Amany, A., & Balor El-Kramany, M. F. (2006). Effect of NFertilizer and lant Density on Yield and Quality of maize in Sandy Soil.
Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 2(4), 156161.

24

APPENDICES
Appendix 1: ANOVA Table for Plant Height
Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

109.66

54.83

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

2039.4

679.83

Fcal

Ftab

2.11

4.6

Fcal

Ftab

2.05

4.6

9
Err(r-1)(t-1)

1929.8

321.63

2
Total rt-1

11

2354.1

214.01

7
CV= 17.58%
*= Significant
**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant
Appendix 2: ANOVA Table for Stem girth
Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

0.43

0.21

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

17.63

5.87

Err(r-1)(t-1)

17.2

2.86

Total rt-1

11

21.27

1.93

CV= 1.65%
*= Significant

25

**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant

26

Appendix 3: ANOVA Table for Leaf Length


Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

110.23

55.11

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

34639.58 2.00

Err(r-1)(t-1)

34529.35

Total rt-1

11

825.09

Fcal

Ftab

4.6

75.00

CV= 14.38%
*= Significant
**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant

Appendix 4: ANOVA Table for Leaves per plant


Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

110.23

55.11

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

34639.58 2.00

Err(r-1)(t-1)

34529.35

Total rt-1

11

825.09

CV= 3.79%
*= Significant
**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant

27

75.00

Fcal

4.6

Ftab

Appendix 5: ANOVA Table for Leave Width


Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

0.29

0.14

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

240.62 80.20

Err(r-1)(t-1)

240.33 40.05

Total rt-1

11

11.48

Fcal

Ftab

2.00

4.6

Fcal

Ftab

2.40

4.6

1.04

CV= 14.38%
*= Significant
**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant

Appendix 6: ANOVA Table for Number of Cobs


Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

0.5

0.25

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

1.0

Err(r-1)(t-1)

2.5

4.16

Total rt-1

11

6.36

CV= 1.99%
*= Significant
**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant

28

Appendix 7: ANOVA Table for Cobs weight


Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

2.77

1.38

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

108.55 36.18

Err(r-1)(t-1)

105.78 17.63

Total rt-1

11

117.75 10.70

Fcal

Ftab

2.05

4.6

Fcal

Ftab

0.22

4.6

CV= 4.11%
*= Significant
**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant
Appendix 8: ANOVA Table for 100 seed weight
Source of Variation

Df

SS

MS

Rep (r-1)(3-1)

0.40

0.2

Trt(t-1)(4-1)

3.26

1.08

Err(r-1)(t-1)

2.86

4.76

Total rt-1

11

4.62

0.42

CV= 2.13%
*= Significant
**=Highly significant
NS=Not significant

29