Determining Soil Nutrient Capacity to Update Fertilizer Recommendations Under Soil and Water Conservation Techniques in the Zondoma Watershed of Burkina Faso

  • S. Youl
  • J. Ouedraogo
  • S. K. Ezui
  • R. Zougmore
  • M. J. Sogbedji
  • A. Mando


The use of the model Quantitative Evaluation of Fertility of Tropical Soils (QUEFTS) was combined with on-farm experiments to evaluate soil nutrient status under soil and water conservation (SWC) techniques such as stone barriers and Zaï to update fertilizer formulae used in sorghum production in the northern part of Burkina Faso. Results from nutrient omission trials (NOT) carried out in farmers’ fields show clearly that phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) are the most limiting nutrients to sorghum production. SWC techniques affect soil nutrient status, nutrient exports and nutrient use efficiency. The average initial nitrogen fertility of these farms was 23.16 kg.ha−1 and 21.10 kg ha−1 under stone barriers and zaï respectively. Nitrogen exports reached an average of 28.05 kg ha−1 under stone barriers and 21.14 kg ha−1 under zaï. The average use efficiency for 1 kg of N was 40.11 kg of grain under stone barriers and 26.20 kg of grain under zaï. The results also show that the use of organic matter lowers the amount of mineral fertilizers needed for the same targeted yields. A basket of recommendations combined or not with organic matter was developed and evaluated for sorghum production. As a result, the formula (N29P11K13) was identified as the best option for sorghum grain production in this area under soil and water conservation (SWC) techniques.


QUEFTS Targeted yield Nutrient status Fertilizer recommendation Soil and water conservation techniques 



The authors of this study wish to thank the IFDC projects that have supported this work, namely IFAD grant 820 and 1174, and the USAID-Core project. They are grateful to the farmers of the Zondoma watershed, the INERA researchers and technicians for their availability and collaboration. The authors particularly acknowledge the support and facilitation provided by national extension structures (Regional department of agriculture). The many students who devoted their training time to this study are at the core of these positive achievements. Finally their thanks go to Mr. Paré Tahibou for his assistance in the field of cartography.


  1. Bationo, A., Waswa, B., Abdou, A., Bado, B. V., Bonzi, M., Iwuafor, E., Kibunja, C., Kihara, J., Mucheru, M., Mugendi, D., Mugwe, J., Mwale, C., Okeyo, J., Olle, A., Roing, K., & Sedogo, M. (2012). Overview of long term experiments in Africa. In A. Bationo, B. Waswa, J. Kihara, I. Adolwa, B. Vanlauwe, & K. Saidou (Eds.), Lessons learned from long term soil fertility management experiments in Africa (pp. 1–26). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Drabo, I. (2009). Evaluation participative de la capacité nutritive des sols et des bilans minéraux dans les exploitations agricoles du micro bassin versant du Zondoma, dans le nord du Burkina Faso. Institut du Développement Rural (IDR). Bobo-Dioulasso, Université Polytechnique de Bobo-Dioulasso.Google Scholar
  3. Hien, V., Youl, S., Traoré, O., Sanou, K., & Kaboré, D. (1992). Rapport de synthèse des activités du volet expérimentation du projet engrais vivriers 1986–1991: Résultats agronomiques et évaluations économiques des formules d’engrais à moindre coût pour les céréales. Ouagadougou, Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherche Agricoles (INERA).Google Scholar
  4. Jalloh, A., Sarr, B., Kuiseu, J., Roy-Macauley, H., & Sereme, P. (2011). Review of climate in West and Central Africa to inform farming systems research and development in the sub-humid and semi-arid agroecologies of the region. (CORAF/WECARD). Dakar: CORAF/WECARD.Google Scholar
  5. Jamieson, P. D., Porter, J. R., & Wilson, D. R. (1991). A test of the computer simulation model ARC-WHEAT1 on wheat crops grown in New Zealand. Field Crops Research, 27, 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Janssen, B. H. (2000). Nutrient management for sustainable soil fertility. Wageningen University: Wageningen. 180p.Google Scholar
  7. Janssen, B. H. (2003). Adaptation of the QUEFTS model to agro-ecological conditions and crops in West Africa. A report for IFDC-Africa. Sub-department of Soil Quality PE&RC:Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  8. Janssen, B. H., Guiking, F. C. T., van der Eijk, D., Smaling, E. M. A., Wolf, J., & van Reuler, H. (1990). A system for quantitative evaluation of the fertility of tropical soils (QUEFTS). Geoderma, 46, 299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Loague, K., & Green, R. E. (1991). Statistical and graphical methods for evaluating solute transport models: Overview and application. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 7, 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nziguheba, G., Tossah, B. K., Diels, J., Franke, A. C., Aihou, K., Iwuafor, E. N. O., Nwoke, C., & Merckx, R. (2009). Assessment of nutrient deficiencies in maize in nutrient omission trials and long-term fields experiments in the West African Savanna. Plant and Soil, 314(2009), 143–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pieri, C. (1989). Fertilité des terres de savanes. Bilan de trente ans de recherche et de développement agricole au sud du Sahara (p. 444). Montpellier: Ministère de la Coopération et du Développement, CIRAD-IRAT.Google Scholar
  12. Rao, K. V. (2012). Site-specific integrated nutrient management for sustainable rice production and growth (p. 71). Hyderabad: R. K. M. Portal.Google Scholar
  13. Roberts, T. L. (2007). Right product, right rate, right time and right place … the foundation of best management practices for fertilizer. In A. Kraus, K. Isherwood, & P. Heffer (Eds.), Fertilizer best management practices (pp. 29–32). Brussels: International Fertilizer Industry Association.Google Scholar
  14. Smaling, E. M. A., & Janssen, B. H. (1993). Calibration of QUEFTS, a model predicting nutrient uptake and yields from chemical soil fertility indices. Geoderma, 59, 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wopereis, M. C. S., Mando, A., & Vanlauwe, B. (2008). Agroecolgical principles of integrated soil fertility management- a guide with special reference to sub-saharan Africa. In Technical Bulletin IFDC-T-73. Muscle Shoals: IFDC.Google Scholar
  16. Yougbaré, H. (2008). Évaluation de la fertilité des terres aménagées en cordon pierreux, zaï et demi-lunes dans le bassin versant du Zondoma. Mémoire d’ingénieur du développement rural/Option Agronomie. Institut du Développement Rural (IDR). Bobo-Dioulasso, Université Polytechnique de Bobo-Dioulasso.Google Scholar
  17. Zougmoré, R. (2003). Integrated water and nutrient management for sorghum production in semi-arid Burkina Faso. Department of environmental sciences erosion and soil conservation group. Wagenigen University and Research Centre: Wageningen.Google Scholar
  18. Zougmoré, R., Gnankambary, Z., Guillobez, S., & Stroosnijder, L. (2002). Effect of stone lines on soils chemical characteristics under continuous cropping in semi-arid Burkina Faso. Soil & Tillage Research, 66, 47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zougmoré, R., Mando, A., & Stroosnijder, L. (2004a). Effect of soil and water conservation and nutrient management on soil-plant water balance in semi-arid Burkina Faso. Agricultural Water Management, 65, 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zougmoré, R., Mando, A., Stroosnijder, L., & Ouedraogo, E. (2004b). Economic benefits of combining soil and water conservation measures with nutrient management in semi-arid Burkina Faso. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 70, 261–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zougmoré, R., Ouattara, K., Mando, A., & Ouattara, B. (2004c). Rôle des nutriments dans le succès des techniques de conservation des eaux et des sols (cordons pierreux, bandes enherbées, zaï et demi-lunes) au Burkina Faso. Sécheresse, 15, 1–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Youl
    • 1
  • J. Ouedraogo
    • 2
  • S. K. Ezui
    • 3
  • R. Zougmore
    • 4
  • M. J. Sogbedji
    • 5
  • A. Mando
    • 6
  1. 1.International Fertilizer Development Center; North and West Africa DivisionIFDC, NWAFDOuagadougouBurkina Faso
  2. 2.Ministry of Agriculture and Hydraulic DevelopmentOuagadougouBurkina Faso
  3. 3.International Plant Nutrition InstituteIbadanNigeria
  4. 4.Program Management Committee, Regional Program LeaderCCAFS, ICRISAT-BamakoBamakoMali
  5. 5.Dean School of AgricultureUniversity of LoméLoméTogo
  6. 6.GRAD Consulting GroupOuagadougouBurkina Faso

Personalised recommendations