A farmer is observing his teff field planted with the row seeder (Dagnent Amare (Bahir Dar Agricultural Mechanization and Food Science Research Center))

Teff row planting (Ethiopia)

Teff bemesmr mezrat (Amharic)

Description

Teff row planting is an agronomic practice used to place Teff seeds (very small size) in rows of about 20cm apart and at predetermined depth with sufficient cover of firm soil.

Teff is a staple crop in Ethiopia and used to make 'Injera'. Teff is commonly planted in broadcast technique with a seed rate of 25-30 kg per hectare. This practice results in high competition for nutrient and water, lodging and low productivity (on average 1 ton/ha). Teff row planting is a newly adopted planting method applied for small size seeds of Teff grain. The row planting technique reduces the seed rate from 25kg/ha to 5-8 kg per hectare, ease the weed management, reduce lodging problem, and lessen plant density and then competition for sunlight, nutrient and water. It is practiced on Teff growing soils except on heavy clay soils or Vertisols where it is difficult to prepare defined rows due to the extreme swelling nature of the soil under near saturation moisture condition. However, under optimum soil moisture (45-50%) it is possible to place seeds in row using manual seed drill in black soils with clay texture. The technique is not perfectly working on stony fields. Seed application is possible using locally available plastic bottles with needle size opening to drop seeds, and newly manufactured seed drill pulled by one person.

Purpose of the Technology: The main purpose to practice Teff row planting is to reduce plant density or population per unit area and thereby increase productivity. It also aim to reduce the lodging problem. Additional advantage of row planting for small grain crop, there is some extent of labor reduction for weeding to some extent.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Teff row planting technique applies on fine seed bed after 3-5 tillage frequency using local ard plough called maresha pulled by pair of oxen. Once the seed bed is finely prepared, first using local adopted application tools like plastic bottles or hand metering the farmer prepares seed rate of 5-8 kg per hectare mixed with proportional sand (approximately seed to sand ratio of 1:3) - it is difficult to manage uniform application and even distribution by applying the seed alone. He applies along the row and step on to cover the seed and compact it. Similarly, fertilizer is applied in the same way. Second option, after the preparation of fine seed bed, seed application is facilitated using drum type manual seed drill (of weight 21 kg) manufactured by Bahir Dar Agricultural Mechanization and Food Science Research Center (BAMFSRC) having 3 rows of 20cm apart, average depth and width of planting furrow equals to 3.6 cm and 6.4 cm and operating at field capacity of 0.06ha/hr. The drill can apply 3-6 kg/ha seed rate and pulled by one person. At tillering stage urea is top dressed. The technique requires 50-60 person days per hectare to apply seed and fertilizer using hand metering/bottles compared to 2-4 person days per hectare using drum type seed drill. Labor requirement for weeding is also reduced by using row planting than broadcast method.

Natural / human environment: Teff grows on wider environment of altitude range 1800-2600 m above sea level. It performs well with annual rainfall of 750-850 mm and temperature of 10-27 degree Celsius. In fact, there are varieties with short growing period adapted under low rainfall conditions. The row planting technique applies commonly on red clay soils having high water holding capacity. The technique potentially applies on slopes ranging from 0-10% with low stone cover.

Teff row planting using manual seed application or hand metering technique can easily be practiced by households having large family labor. Farm households who used the manual seed drill of drum type should have the capacity to afford the seed drill and able to buy fertilizer. Teff is produced for food and market. It has a good price for sale.

Although teff has high market price in country as well as an emerging export market potential, it is produced annually by subsistence farmers. The land holding is small to meet their family food demands. Their wealth condition ranges poor to average characterized with low agricultural advisory, market and water supply services and inadequate infrastructures. Energy supply is relied on biomass energy. Rural education and health services are improved. Rural unemployment and landless populations are at high rates. In general, the well being of the rural people is under poor condition.

Location

Location: Bahir Dar Zuria, Mecha, Yilmana Densa, and Dembecha, Amhara, Ethiopia

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • n.a.

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. 0.1-1 km2)

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction
A farmer is operating the row teff seeder (Dagnent Amare (Bahir Dar Agricultural Mechanization and Food Science Research Center))

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping
    Number of growing seasons per year: 1
  • Grazing land
    • Livestock is grazing on crop residues
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • physical soil deterioration - Pc: compaction, Pk: slaking and crusting
SLM group
  • n.a.
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A1: Vegetation/ soil cover

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
A sketch describing Teff row planting

Location: Aba Gerima, Debre Mewi, Debre Yacob, Gosh Learning. West Gojam/ Amhara Region

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high (Because of its small seed size, the method requires knowledge of the soil where it performs well and at what depth the seed is placed so that there is high germination and minimizing lodging problem)

Technical knowledge required for land users: high (The land user has to develop capacity and skills on the specific soil and slope conditions where row planting performs well, spacing of rows, depth of furrow and seed quantity per unit area.)

Main technical functions: improvement of surface structure (crusting, sealing), increase of biomass (quantity), Reduction of plant population and competition effect

Secondary technical functions: improvement of topsoil structure (compaction)

Agronomic measure: Row planting
Material/ species: Teff seeds
Quantity/ density: 3-6kg/ha
Remarks: Spacing between rows is 20cm

Mineral (inorganic) fertilizers
Material/ species: Urea and DAP
Quantity/ density: 100 kg/ha
Remarks: for each type of fertilizer
Author: Gizaw Desta, WLRC

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: ETH BIRR
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 20.0 ETH BIRR
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 3.00
Most important factors affecting the costs
The implementation costs are subject to change due to fluctuation in seasonal labor demand, price of fertilizer, price of iron to construct seed drill, and inflation
Establishment activities
  1. Drum type row teff seeder (with 3 rows) (Timing/ frequency: None)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (ETH BIRR) Total costs per input (ETH BIRR) % of costs borne by land users
Equipment
machine use pc 1.0 71.0 71.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 71.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 3.55
Maintenance activities
  1. Tillage (Timing/ frequency: Annually after onset of rain, 4-5 times)
  2. Seeding (Timing/ frequency: After the soil gets sufficient moisture annually)
  3. Weeding (Timing/ frequency: 2-3 times per season)
  4. Harvesting (Timing/ frequency: Annually at maturity period (Nov-Dec))
  5. Threshing (Timing/ frequency: Annually during slack period (Dce-Jan))
  6. Transporting and storing grain and straw (Timing/ frequency: Annually during slack period)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (ETH BIRR) Total costs per input (ETH BIRR) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
labour 1.0 318.0 318.0 100.0
Equipment
animal traction 1.0 266.0 266.0 100.0
Plant material
seeds 1.0 4.5 4.5 100.0
fertilizer 1.0 150.0 150.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 738.5
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 36.92

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Thermal climate class: subtropics
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Yes
  • No

Occurrence of flooding
  • Yes
  • No
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
x
good
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

poor
x
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
x
good
markets

poor
x
good
energy

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good
financial services

poor
x
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
x
increased

Quantity before SLM: 1.2 ton/ha
Quantity after SLM: >2.7 ton/ha

fodder production
decreased
x
increased

Quantity before SLM: 2.4 ton/ha
Quantity after SLM: 5 ton/ha

fodder quality
decreased
x
increased

animal production
decreased
x
increased

farm income
decreased
x
increased

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
x
improved

Improved teff agronomic knowledge
None
x
None

Ecological impacts
surface runoff
increased
x
decreased

soil moisture
decreased
x
increased

soil crusting/ sealing
increased
x
reduced

soil compaction
increased
x
reduced

pest/ disease control
decreased
x
increased

Off-site impacts

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Since the new technology (Teff row planting) requires high human labor while placing seeds using hand metering or plastic bottles (locally adopted) to apply the seeds, the land users perceived that the cost of labor is high and can not be affordable using family labor alone. Until they developed experience the return may be considered as slightly positive. However, if the land users adopt to use the manual drum type seed drill the return is very positive and positive as compared to the establishment and recurrent costs, respectively.

Climate change

Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local rainstorm

not well at all
x
very well
drought

not well at all
x
very well
Other climate-related consequences
reduced growing period

not well at all
x
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Yes
  • No
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • There is yield advantage both grain and straw

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? The technique needs an improved tool to reduce labor demand. It has to be supported with improved varieties and agronomic practices
  • It requires small amount of seed
  • According to some farmers it avoids the usual practice called trampling of seed bed by livestock after sowing the seed
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Teff row planting can bring 30-50% yield advantage compared to the broadcasting method of planting

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? The yield advantage can be sustained by using an integrated or package of Teff production technologies such as improved teff varieties, recommended fertilizer, pesticides and weeding
  • It reduces three to four times the amount of seed required using the broadcasting method

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? This advantage can be enhanced or continue to sustain by using an improved low cost seed drills
  • The technology eases the weeding practice without damaging the plants

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Appropriate low cost weeders or herbicides can be used to further enhance the technique
  • The technology reduces damage due to lodging problem along with the use of selected Teff varieties having strong stem

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? This can be sustained if supported with further research in the depth of seed placement and genetic improvement
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • The implement has relatively low stability to make straight rows. Improving the workmanship will solve the problem
  • Non uniform seed application if pulling speed not constant Proper seed bed preparation and removal of stones will solve the problem
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Uniform application and distribution of small amount of seed (as low as 5kg) in rows of 20cm apart become challenging compared to the broadcasting technique This can be overcome by continuous skill development through practice and training
  • The small number of plant populations or vigorous growth of teff plants favor the shoot fly damage. Application of chemicals will control shootfly

References

Compiler
  • Gizaw Desta Gessesse
Editors
Reviewer
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Jan. 28, 2014
Last update: Sept. 10, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • (Unpublished Report, 2013): Technical Evaluation and Selection of Suitable Teff Seed Drill in Amhara Region, by team of Researchers in ARARI, Bahir Dar Mechanization and Food Science research Center and Lecturers from Bahir Dar University:
  • Dereje Gorfu and Eshetu Ahmed (unpublished). Crops and Agro-ecological Zones of Ethiopia. Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research:
  • http://www.worldbank.org/html/cgiar/newsletter/Sept97/10tef.html:
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International