Loading...

Agricultural Science Digest

Effect of pH on Soil Chemical Properties and Maize Performance in Abakaliki, Nigeria

DOI: 10.18805/ag.DF-409    | Article Id: DF-409 | Page : 337-340
Citation :- Effect of pH on Soil Chemical Properties and Maize Performance in Abakaliki, Nigeria.Agricultural Science Digest.2022.(42):337-340
J.N. Nwite, A.J. Ajana, I. Alinchi nwitejamesn@yahoo.com
Address : Department of Soil Science and Environmental Management, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources Management, Ebonyi State University, P.M.B 053 Abakaliki, Nigeria.
Submitted Date : 22-09-2021
Accepted Date : 4-12-2021
First Online:

Abstract

Background: Low soil productivity in Nigeria and Africa sub sahara is considered as one of the major causes of food insecurity and under nutrition. This area is considered among the most regions affected by acidity on soil nutrients optimization. Despite of its severity, there is limited knowledge about limiting effect of pH on nutrients availability and maize yield in the state. Evolving a technology that does not depend on traditional system of amendment for pH assessment for increased soil productivity must first of all go through a good knowledge of the nature and distribution of soil studied. The present study aimed to evaluate three pH (4, 7 and 9) values on soil chemical properties in the state and assess maize performance under these conditions in order to control and manage pH related problems. 
Methods: In the field-laboratory investigation during 2018-2019 at different localities of Ebonyi State were surveyed. Three sampling localities were selected based on geographical situation, climate and local condition. In the laboratory, the soil samples of natural stock collected were processed for mean pH values and confirmed with pH meter using standard laboratory method. Maize was used as test crop to assess effect of pH on its performance. 
Result: Our investigations in Ebonyi State have allowed us to inventory three pH values. Among the inventoried pH values, some are regarded adverse for soil productivity. The implication of soil pH on nutrients availability and maize performance was discussed. The current work will be a complementary contribution of detailed study of effect of pH on soil productivity.

Keywords

Chemical properties Evaluate pH Soil Yield

References

  1. Akamigbo, F.O.R. (2010). Soils: Fundamental Methods of Soil Resource Survey, Classification, Interpretation and Application. University Press Publishers Ltd, Bookshop Bank Building Complex, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. pp 1-53.
  2. Ammal, U.B., Mathan, K.K., Mathimairaja, S. (2001). Effect of different levels of rock phosphate-suphur granule on yield and nutrient availability. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 5: 166-170.
  3. Aruna, M.A. (2017). The effect of pH on soil bacteria. Assessed online jcl in Microblnfec.
  4. Biswas, T. D. and Mukherjee, S.K. (2008). Textbook of Soil Science 2nd (ed). Tata Mcgraw-Hil Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi pp 190-200.
  5. Bremner, J.M. and Mulvaney, C.S. (1982). Total Nitrogen. In:  Methods of Soil Analysis. [Page, A.L., Miller, R.H. and Keeny, D.R. (eds)]. Part 1, ASA, Madison, Wisconsin, America p365.
  6. Dora, N. (2019). The role of soil pH in plant nutrient and soil remediation. Applied and Environmental Soil Science. 10: 1-9.
  7. Hao, J.H., Lv, S.S., Bhattacherya, S. and Fu, J.G. (2017). Germination response of four alien congeneric Amaranthus species to environmental factors. PLOS ONE. 12: e0170297. DOI:10:1371/journal.poneo/70297. 
  8. Iyere-Usiahon, P.N.O. and Jayeoba, O.J. (2018). Effect of pH on Bacteria Population in Selected Sites of Esan Northeast, Edo State. Proceedings of 42nd Annual Conference of Soil Science Society of Nigeria, Ibadan. pp 180-187.
  9. Jiang, Y., Li, Y., Zeng, Q., Wei, J. and Yu, H. (2017). The effect of soil pH on plant growth, leaf chlorophyll fluorescence and mineral element content of two blueberries. Acta Horticulture. 1180: 269-276. 
  10. Kumbhare, N.V., Dubey, S.K., Nain, M.S. and Bahal, R. (2014). Microanalysis of yield gap and profitability in pusles and cereals. Legume Research. 37: 532-536.
  11. Lonceric, Z., Karalic, K., Popvic, B., Rastija, D. and Vuk Obratovic, M. (2008). Total and plant available micronutrients in acidic and calcareous soils in croatia. Cereal Research Communication. 36: 331-334.   
  12. Mbah, C.N., Mbagwu, J.S.C. and Anikwe, M.A.N. (2001). Effect of four animal wastes on soil chemical properties and maize dry matter yield. Journal of Agriculture, Food Technology and Environment 1: 129-132.
  13. Mbah, C.N., Nwite, J.N., Njoku, C. and Nweke, I.A. (2010). Response of maize (Zea mays L.) to different rates of wood-ash application in acid ultisol in Southeast Nigeria. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 5(7): 580-587.
  14. Minasny, B., Hang, S.Y., Harteminks, A.E., Kim, Y.H. and Kang, S.S. (2016). Soil pH increase under paddy in South Korea between 2000 and 2012. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 221: 205-213. 
  15. National Programme for Agriculture and Food Security (NPAFS), (2010). Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Report on Agricultural Production Survey pp. 1-76. 
  16. Nelson, D.W. and Sommers, I.E. (1982). Total Organic Carbon and Organic matter. In: Methods of soil Analysis, part 2. Chemical and Microbiological properties 2nd (ed). Agronomic series, No 9 ASA-SSSA, Madison, Wisconsin p 570. 
  17. Nimet (2016). Weather data for Abakaliki; National Meteorological Institute, Oshodi, Lagos, Nigeria pp 1-5.
  18. Nweke, I.A. and Nsoanya, I.N. (2013). Soil pH as an indices for effective management of soils for crop production. International Journal of Technology and Scientific Research. 2(3): 2277-8616.
  19. Okonkwo, C.I., Nwite, J.N., Onyibe, C., Nweke, I.A. and Mbah, C.N. (2011). Animal manures mineralization and plant nitrogen uptake in an ultisol in Abakaliki, Southeast, Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Biological Science. 2(5): 125-128. 
  20. Page, A.I., Miller, R.H. and Keeny, D.R. (1982). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2, 2nd (ed). Monograph, ASA, Madison, Wisconsin P. 98.
  21. Pansu, M. and Gautheyrou, J. (2003). L’analyse du sol, mineralogiqueet minerale. Berlein; Heidelberg New: Springer-Verlag.
  22. Peech, M. (1965). Hydrogen Ion Activity. In: Methods of Soil Analysis. [Black, C.A. (ed)]. American Society of Agronomy. 9(2): 914-926.       
  23. Pinoliya, K.K., Dotaniya, M.L. and Mathur, A.K. (2013). Role of Phosphorus and Iron in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) lap Lambert Academic Publisher, Germany.  
  24. Rao, F. and Tel, D. (1982). Automated and semi-automated methods for soil and plant analysis, 11TA. Manual series. 17: 15-25.
  25. Rodolfo, G., Roberto, A., Chiara, M., Sarah, C. and Sandra, C. (2018). Effect of soil pH on the growth, reproductive investment and pollen allergenicity of Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. Frontal Plant Science. 9: 1-24. 
  26. Statistical Analysis System (SAS), (1985). User’s Guide 1985 (ed). Statistical Analysis System Institute Inc. Cary, N.C.
  27. Tessmer, O.L., Jiao, Y., Cruz, J.A., Kramer, D.M. and Chen, J. (2013). Functional approach to high-throughput plant growth analysis. BMC System Biology 7: S17. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-7-36-S17. 
  28. Turner, J.A. (1928). Relation of the distribution of certain Compositae to the hydrogen-ion concentration of the soil. Bulletin Torry Botany Club. 55: 199-213.

Global Footprints