Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T09:16:38.891Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EFFECT OF ORGANIC AND INORGANIC AMENDMENTS ON PRODUCTIVITY OF COCOA ON A MARGINAL SOIL IN SULAWESI, INDONESIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2017

SAHARDI MULIA
Affiliation:
Assessment Institute of Agricultural Technology, South Sulawesi, Makassar 90242, Indonesia
PETER J. MCMAHON*
Affiliation:
School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Eveleigh, New South Wales 2015, Australia
AGUS PURWANTARA
Affiliation:
Mars Indonesia, Jalan Kima 10, Makassar, South Sulawesi 90241, Indonesia
HUSSIN BIN PURUNG
Affiliation:
Mars Indonesia, Jalan Kima 10, Makassar, South Sulawesi 90241, Indonesia
FADJRY DJUFRY
Affiliation:
Indonesian Centre for Estate Crops Research and Development, Kampus Penelitian Pertanian, Bogor, West Java 16111, Indonesia
SMILJA LAMBERT
Affiliation:
Mars Australia, Ballarat, Victoria 3355, Australia
PHILIP J. KEANE
Affiliation:
School of Life Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3086, Australia
DAVID I. GUEST
Affiliation:
School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Eveleigh, New South Wales 2015, Australia
*
§§Corresponding author. Email: peter.mcmahon@sydney.edu.au
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Reduced soil fertility and damage from pests and diseases have contributed to a decline in productivity of cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) smallholdings in Sulawesi, Indonesia over the last decade. In a trial on a marginal, acidic soil in South Sulawesi, young PBC123 cocoa trees were supplied with compost, mineral fertiliser (NPK fertiliser and urea) or dolomite, alone and in combination. After 20 months, the trees supplied with compost were taller, flowered more profusely and had a five-fold higher dry bean yield than other treatments. Treatments had no impact on incidence of cocoa pod borer, Phytophthora pod rot and vascular streak dieback. All of the trees supplied with compost survived, while the control, mineral-fertiliser- and dolomite-treated trees had a mortality rate of 22–45% and symptoms of interveinal necrosis. Leaf concentrations of N, P and K were within the normal range in all treatments. In the control and mineral fertiliser treatments, leaf concentrations of Ca (0.28–0.30%) and Mg (0.11–0.15%) were deficient, but were higher in trees supplied with compost (0.78–1.21% and 0.26–0.29%, respectively). The Mg/K ratio in soil-exchangeable cations and leaves was increased three-fold by the combined compost/dolomite treatment. Supplying mineral fertiliser alone resulted in 3.3 cmol kg−1 exchangeable Al, compared to 2.2 cmol kg−1 in control soils. Since 10 kg tree−1 year−1 compost was supplied, a rate that is not practical on most cocoa smallholder farms, further investigation of cost-effective applications of organic matter in conjunction with appropriate formulations of inorganic fertilisers is recommended.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 
Figure 0

Table 1. Experimental treatments in the North Luwu trial.

Figure 1

Table 2. Macro- and micro-nutrient concentrations and other properties (mean of two samples) of the compost used in the North Luwu trial.

Figure 2

Figure 1. Effect of soil amendments on (a) tree height (cm) in May 2012 (light bars) when soil amendment treatments were commenced and January 2014 (dark bars) and (b) yield of dry beans (determined from 2014 to 2015) for all planted trees in which no allowance was made for tree death (light bars) or for surviving trees only (dark bars). All data shown are the means of four replicates. Soil amendments were as follows: A, control; B, mineral; C, compost; D, dolomite; E, mineral/compost; F, mineral/dolomite; G, compost/dolomite; H, all amendments. Means with the same letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05).

Figure 3

Table 3. Soil nutrient contents and other soil properties in topsoil (0–5 cm depth) at the North Luwu trial site and adjacent land under coconuts in 2011 (prior to establishing the trial).

Figure 4

Table 4. Effect of soil amendments on soil nutrient and Al concentrations, cation exchange capacity (CEC), base saturation (BS) and pH in the trial at Bone Bone 2 years after treatments A–H were first applied.

Figure 5

Table 5. Leaf nutrient contents of macro- and micro-nutrients (in italics) in cocoa trees in North Luwu in February 2013 (I) and June 2014 (II).

Figure 6

Table 6. Ratios of exchangeable soil cations and leaf macronutrients (determined in June 2014) in the soil amendment trial at North Luwu.

Figure 7

Figure 2. Incidence of low, moderate and severe (a) CPB and (b) PPR in pods harvested from cocoa trees in the soil amendment trial, North Luwu. The treatments included control (no amendment) (A), mineral fertiliser (B), compost (C) and dolomite (D) and combinations of these: mineral/compost (E), mineral/dolomite (F), compost/dolomite (G) and all three (H).The data shown are cumulative means (and SEM) of four replicates for harvests (conducted twice per month) from July 2013 to September 2015. For total CPB incidence, the same letter indicates that no significant difference (P = 0.05) was detected between the treatments, while total PPR incidence did not significantly differ between treatments.

Supplementary material: Image

Mulia et al supplementary material 1

Supplementary Figure

Download Mulia et al supplementary material 1(Image)
Image 20.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Mulia et al supplementary material 2

Mulia et al supplementary material

Download Mulia et al supplementary material 2(File)
File 25.6 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Mulia et al supplementary material 3

Supplementary Figure

Download Mulia et al supplementary material 3(Image)
Image 15.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

Mulia et al supplementary material 4

Mulia et al supplementary material

Download Mulia et al supplementary material 4(File)
File 21.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Mulia et al supplementary material 5

Mulia et al supplementary material

Download Mulia et al supplementary material 5(File)
File 24.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Mulia et al supplementary material 6

Mulia et al supplementary material

Download Mulia et al supplementary material 6(File)
File 16.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Mulia et al supplementary material 7

Mulia et al supplementary material

Download Mulia et al supplementary material 7(File)
File 21.4 KB