Research Article | | Peer-Reviewed

Investigating Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] Yield and Yield Components Under Sowing Method and Inorganic Fertilizer Application in Guduru District, Western Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia

Received: 13 November 2025     Accepted: 28 November 2025     Published: 26 December 2025
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

Tef (Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter) is the main cultivated cereal crops in Ethiopia. The grain and straw of tef has more values than other cereal crops. However, the actual yield of tef is below its potential which mainly due to poor soil fertility, high seeding rate and inappropriate sowing method. Due to these constraints the study was carried out on the farmers’ field at two sites, namely, Gabate and Kobo, in 2012 in Guduru district with the objective to investigate the effect of fertilizer types and sowing methods of varying seeding rate on yield components and yield of tef. The treatments were made from 3 fertilizer types (DAP, NPKSZn and control) and 2 sowing methods (row and broadcast) which arranged in RCBD and replicated three times. The result of the study revealed that DAP and NPKSZn fertilizers gave statistically at par and increased panicle lengths of tef by 35.83 and 37.91% at Gabate and by 27.11 and 31.13% at Kobo, respectively, over unfertilized plots. Minimized seeding rate-row sowing method produced 6.12 and 6.50% more panicle length at Gabate and Kobo, respectively over high seeding rate-broadcast sowing method. Broadcast sowing method under DAP and NPKSZn applications gave the highest and at par lodging percentage over row sowing method whereas the more and similar effective tillers number per plant were recorded under row sowing method using DAP and NPKSZn at both sites. Application of DAP and NPKSZn under row sowing method produced significantly the highest and similar yields (3189.67 and 3250.33 kg ha–1 at Gabate, and 3164.00 and 3222.67 kg ha–1 at Kobo, respectively). The partial budget analysis also showed that row sowing under DAP application provides maximum net profit (197825.6 ETB) with MRR (948.46%). Therefore, tef production using DAP under row sowing-minimized seeding rate provides the highest yield and yield components and also economically profitable treatment combination. Thus, farmers of the study area will benefit using minimized seeding rate-row sowing method under DAP application. The result implies that field evaluation of the selected treatment combination should be done to verify the finding at multi-locations and years.

Published in American Journal of Plant Biology (Volume 10, Issue 4)
DOI 10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13
Page(s) 94-106
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Guduru, Tef, Row Sowing, Broadcasting, Seed Rate, Fertilizer Type

References
[1] CSA (Central Statistics Agency) 2022a. Agriculture sample survey 2021/2022 (2014 E. C.). Statistical bulletin, report on report on area and production of major crops (private peasant holdings, Meher season). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Pp. 19−20.
[2] Tadele, E. and Hibistu, T. 2021. Empirical review on the use dynamics and economics of teffin Ethiopia. Agriculture & Food Security, 10: 1-13.
[3] Vavilov, N. I., 1951. The origin, variation, immunity and breeding of cultivated plants. Chronica Botanica., 13: 1-351.
[4] Gugsa, L., Getachew, B. and Seyfu, K. 2001. The cytogenetic of tef. Narrowing the Rift: Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc) Trotter] research and development. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Tef Genetics and Improvement, Oct. 16-19, Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia, Pp: 49-57.3-7.
[5] Abel, Debebe, 2005. Performance of F4 progenies and Association among yield and yield related traits in tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc) Trotter). MSc. Thesis, Haramaya University, Ethiopia.
[6] Lakew, A. and Berhanu, T. 2019. Determination of seeding rate and inter-row spacing on theyield of tef (EragrostistefZucc. Trotter) in the dryland areas of Wag Lasta, North Eastern Amhara, Ethiopia. Archives of Agriculture and Environmental Science, 4(1): 69-74.
[7] Abreham, A., Tolera, A. and Tadesse, D. 2020. Response of Teff [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] Varieties to Blended NPS Fertilizer Rates on Yield and Yield Components in Hidhabu Abote District, North Showa. American Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, 20(3): 152-164.
[8] Hailu Tefera and Seyfu Ketema, 2001. Production and importance of tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc) Trotter] in Ethiopian agriculture. In: Hailu Tefera, Getachew Belay and Mark Sorrels(ed). Tef research and development proceeding of the “International work shop on tef genetics and improvement”, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia, 16-19 October, 2000.
[9] Barretto, R., Buenavista, R., Lou, J. Wang, S., Prasad, P. and Siliveru, K. 2021. Teff (Eragrostistef) processing, utilization and future opportunities: A review. International Journal of Food Science and Technology. 56: 3125–3137.
[10] Yang, M., Fang, Y., Sun, D. and Shi, Y. 2016. Efficiency of two nitrification inhibitors (dicyandiamide and 3, 4-dimethypyrazolephosphate) on soil nitrogen transformations andplant productivity: A meta-analysis. Scientific reports, 6(1): 22075.
[11] Dereje, G., Alemu, D., Adisu, T. and Anbessa, B. 2018. Response of yield and yield components of Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] to optimum rates of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer rate application in Assosa Zone, Benishangul Gumuz Region. Ethiopian. Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 28(1): 81–94.
[12] Ethio-SIS (Ethiopian Soil Information System) 2014. Soil Analysis Report Agricultural Transformation Agency, EthioSIS (Ethiopian Soil Information System), Addis Abeba, Ethiopia.
[13] Habtamu, A., Heluf, G., Bobe, B., and Enyew, A. 2014. Fertility status of soils under different land Uses at Wujiraba Watershed, North-Western Highlands of Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 3(5): 410-419.
[14] Natanael, S., Ismail, S. and Fábio, R. 2016. Decomposition and nutrient release of leguminous green manure species in the Jaguaribe-Apodi region, Ceará, Brazil. Soil Science, 46(6): 970-975.
[15] Laekemariam, F. 2015. Soil Spatial Variability Analysis, Fertility Mapping and Soil Plant Nutrient Relations in Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia. PhD Dissertation. Graduate School, Haramaya University, Harar, Ethiopia.
[16] Tilahun, A. and Tamado T. 2019. Growth, yield component and yield response of durum wheat (Triticumturgidum L.) to blended NPS fertilizer supplemented with N rates at Arsi Negelle, Central Ethiopia. African Journal of Plant Science, 13(1): 9-20.
[17] Kefyalew Endale 2011. Fertilizer Consumption and Agricultural Productivity in Ethiopia. Ethiopian Development Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[18] Ballock, A., Soomro, M. and Javed, A. 2002. Optimum Plant Density for High Yield in Rice (Oryza sativa L.). Asian Journal of Plant Science. 1(1): 25-27.
[19] Minten, B., Tamru, S., Engida, E. and Kuma, T. 2016. Transforming staple food valuechains in Africa: The case of teff in Ethiopia. Journal of Developmental Study, 52(5): 627-645.
[20] Abraham, R. 2015. Achieving food security in Ethiopia by promoting productivity of future world food tef: A review. Advanced Plants and Agriultural Research, 2(2): 00045.
[21] Vandercasteelen, J., Dereje, M., Minten, B. and Taffesse, S. 2016. Row planting teff in Ethiopia: Impact on farm-level profitability and labor allocation. International Food PolicyResearch Institute. IFPRI. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[22] Tareke Berhe, 2010. Productivity of tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] New approach with dramatic results (unpublished). Report Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[23] PSE (Population Senescence of Ethiopia), 2022. Population and housing senescence of Ethiopia, Addis Anbaba, Ethiopia.
[24] HGWZARDB (HoroGuduruWollega Zone Agricultural and Rural Development Buraeau), 2011. Annual report of agriculture and rural development Depatment. Horo-GuduruWollegaZone, Shambu.
[25] Berry, P. M., M. Sterling, J. H. Spink, C. J. Baker, R. Sylvester-Bradley, S. J. Mooney, A. R. Tams, Ennos, R., 2004. Understanding and reducing lodging in cereals. Advanced in Agronomy, 84: 217–271.
[26] Gomez K. A., and A. A. Gomez, 1984. Statistical procedure for agricultural research, 2nded. John Willey and Sons, New York.
[27] SAS (Statistical Analysis System) 2004. SAS/STAT User's Guide: Version 9.4thedn. SASInstitute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.
[28] CIMMYT (International Centre for Maize and Wheat Improvement) 1988. From Agronomic Data to Farmer Recommendations: An Economics Training Manual. Completely revised edition. Mexico, DF. 79 p.
[29] Murphy, H. F., 1968. A report on fertility status and other data on some soils of Ethiopia. Collage of Agriculture HSIU. Experimental Station Bulletin No. 44, Collage of Agriculture: Pp. 551.
[30] Jones J. B., 2003. Agronomic Handbook: Management of Crops, Soils, and their Fertility, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, USA. Pp. 218–221.
[31] Xavier, F. and Das, O. 2009. Phosphorus fractionation in sandy soil under organic agriculture in Northeastern Brazil. Geoderma, 151: 417–423.
[32] Horneck, D., Sullivan, D., Owen, J. and Hart, J. 2011. Revised Soil Test InterpretationGuide.
[33] Berhanu, D. 1980. The physical criteria and their rating proposed for land evaluation in the highland region of Ethiopia. Land Use Planning and Regulatory Department, Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Pp. 16−19.
[34] Gete, Z., Getachew, A., Dejene, A. and Shahid, R. 2010. Fertilizer and Soil Fertility Potential in Ethiopia: Constraints and opportunities. IFPRI, Ethiopia. Pp. 1–42.
[35] Hazelton, P. and Murphy, B. 2007. Interpreting soil test results: What do all the numbersmean? 2nd Edition. CSIRO Publishing. 152 p.
[36] FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) 2006. Scaling Soil Nutrient Balances Fertilizerand Plant Nutrition, Bulletin No. 16. FAO, Rome, Italy. Pp. 57–58.
[37] Moreira, A. and Fageria, N. 2010. Liming influence on soil chemical properties, nutritionalstatus and yield of Alfalfa grown in acid soil. RevistaBrasileira de Ciˆencia do Solo, 34: 1231–1239.
[38] Fageria, N. K., and., and Stone, L. F. 2008. Micronutrient deficiency problem in SouthAmerica. In: Alloway, B. J. (Ed.), Micronutrient Deficiencies in Global Crop Production. Springer, New York, pp. 245–266.
[39] Minale, L., Alemayehu, A., Tilahun, T. and Marye, B. 2004. The response of tef nitrogen and phosphorus application at Bichena and Yilmana-Densa areas, North-western Ethiopia, Crop Science society of Ethiopia 9CSSE), 2004. Sebil. vol. 10 proceedings of the tenthconference, 19-21, June 2004, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[40] Tamirat, W., 2021. Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc)] grain yield response to nitrogen fertilizer rates in East Badewacho district, Hadiya Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Cogent Food and Agriculture.
[41] Sisay, T., Getachew, A. and Abebe, Z. 2021. Effect of Sowing Methods and Seeding Rateson Growth, Yield and Yield Components of Tef (EragrostisTef) in Ebinat Districts, SouthGondar, Ethiopia. International Journal of Science, Technology and Society, 9(3): 142-148.
[42] Kakar, M. and Ali, A. 2001. Effect of NP levels, Seed rates and Row spacing on wheat. Pakistan Journal of Biological Science. 3: 45-54.
[43] Wolde, T., Abera, H. and Fanuel, L. 2024. Boosting Tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter)) Yield through the Use of Different Inter-Row Spacing and Seeding Rates. Advances in Agriculture, 2024: 1-11.
[44] Vandercasteelen, J., Mekdim Dereje, B. Minten and Alemayehu Seyoum 2014. Perceptions, impacts and rewards of row planting of tef. Ethiopia Strategy Support Program, ESSP Working Paper 65, IFPRI-ESSP, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[45] Tilaye, A., Esubalew, B., Yematw, C. and Webayehu, G. 2025. Evaluation of seed rate andsowing methods on seed quality, yield and seed multiplication ratio of tef (Eragrostistef) under nitosol and vertisol in Amhara region. Discover Sustainability.
[46] Tanveer, S. K., I. Husshsain, M. Sohail, N. S. Kissana and S. G. Abbas. 2003. Effect of different planting methods on yield and yield components of wheat. Asian Journal of PlantSciences 2(10): 811-813.
[47] Hakan, G., Tugce Ozdogan, C., Aleksandar, S., Zeljko and Dzeletovic, S. 2020. Effect of Different Sowing Dates on the Grain Yield And Some Yield Characteristics of Teff [Eragrostis Teff (Zucc.) Trotter]. Turkish Journal Of Field Crops, 25(2): 107-113.
[48] Okubay, G., Response of Teff (Eragrostis tef) to Different Rates of Slow Release and Conventional\Urea Fertilizers in Vertisols of Southern Tigray, Ethiopia. Advances in Plants & Agriculture
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Feyissa, R. L., Fantaye, K. T., Eshetu, M. D. (2025). Investigating Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] Yield and Yield Components Under Sowing Method and Inorganic Fertilizer Application in Guduru District, Western Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. American Journal of Plant Biology, 10(4), 94-106. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Feyissa, R. L.; Fantaye, K. T.; Eshetu, M. D. Investigating Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] Yield and Yield Components Under Sowing Method and Inorganic Fertilizer Application in Guduru District, Western Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. Am. J. Plant Biol. 2025, 10(4), 94-106. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Feyissa RL, Fantaye KT, Eshetu MD. Investigating Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] Yield and Yield Components Under Sowing Method and Inorganic Fertilizer Application in Guduru District, Western Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. Am J Plant Biol. 2025;10(4):94-106. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13,
      author = {Refissa Leta Feyissa and Kindei Tesfaye Fantaye and Mintesinot Dessalegn Eshetu},
      title = {Investigating Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] Yield and Yield Components Under Sowing Method and Inorganic Fertilizer Application in Guduru District, Western Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia},
      journal = {American Journal of Plant Biology},
      volume = {10},
      number = {4},
      pages = {94-106},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajpb.20251004.13},
      abstract = {Tef (Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter) is the main cultivated cereal crops in Ethiopia. The grain and straw of tef has more values than other cereal crops. However, the actual yield of tef is below its potential which mainly due to poor soil fertility, high seeding rate and inappropriate sowing method. Due to these constraints the study was carried out on the farmers’ field at two sites, namely, Gabate and Kobo, in 2012 in Guduru district with the objective to investigate the effect of fertilizer types and sowing methods of varying seeding rate on yield components and yield of tef. The treatments were made from 3 fertilizer types (DAP, NPKSZn and control) and 2 sowing methods (row and broadcast) which arranged in RCBD and replicated three times. The result of the study revealed that DAP and NPKSZn fertilizers gave statistically at par and increased panicle lengths of tef by 35.83 and 37.91% at Gabate and by 27.11 and 31.13% at Kobo, respectively, over unfertilized plots. Minimized seeding rate-row sowing method produced 6.12 and 6.50% more panicle length at Gabate and Kobo, respectively over high seeding rate-broadcast sowing method. Broadcast sowing method under DAP and NPKSZn applications gave the highest and at par lodging percentage over row sowing method whereas the more and similar effective tillers number per plant were recorded under row sowing method using DAP and NPKSZn at both sites. Application of DAP and NPKSZn under row sowing method produced significantly the highest and similar yields (3189.67 and 3250.33 kg ha–1 at Gabate, and 3164.00 and 3222.67 kg ha–1 at Kobo, respectively). The partial budget analysis also showed that row sowing under DAP application provides maximum net profit (197825.6 ETB) with MRR (948.46%). Therefore, tef production using DAP under row sowing-minimized seeding rate provides the highest yield and yield components and also economically profitable treatment combination. Thus, farmers of the study area will benefit using minimized seeding rate-row sowing method under DAP application. The result implies that field evaluation of the selected treatment combination should be done to verify the finding at multi-locations and years.},
     year = {2025}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - Investigating Tef [Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter] Yield and Yield Components Under Sowing Method and Inorganic Fertilizer Application in Guduru District, Western Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia
    AU  - Refissa Leta Feyissa
    AU  - Kindei Tesfaye Fantaye
    AU  - Mintesinot Dessalegn Eshetu
    Y1  - 2025/12/26
    PY  - 2025
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13
    T2  - American Journal of Plant Biology
    JF  - American Journal of Plant Biology
    JO  - American Journal of Plant Biology
    SP  - 94
    EP  - 106
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2578-8337
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajpb.20251004.13
    AB  - Tef (Eragrostistef(Zucc.) Trotter) is the main cultivated cereal crops in Ethiopia. The grain and straw of tef has more values than other cereal crops. However, the actual yield of tef is below its potential which mainly due to poor soil fertility, high seeding rate and inappropriate sowing method. Due to these constraints the study was carried out on the farmers’ field at two sites, namely, Gabate and Kobo, in 2012 in Guduru district with the objective to investigate the effect of fertilizer types and sowing methods of varying seeding rate on yield components and yield of tef. The treatments were made from 3 fertilizer types (DAP, NPKSZn and control) and 2 sowing methods (row and broadcast) which arranged in RCBD and replicated three times. The result of the study revealed that DAP and NPKSZn fertilizers gave statistically at par and increased panicle lengths of tef by 35.83 and 37.91% at Gabate and by 27.11 and 31.13% at Kobo, respectively, over unfertilized plots. Minimized seeding rate-row sowing method produced 6.12 and 6.50% more panicle length at Gabate and Kobo, respectively over high seeding rate-broadcast sowing method. Broadcast sowing method under DAP and NPKSZn applications gave the highest and at par lodging percentage over row sowing method whereas the more and similar effective tillers number per plant were recorded under row sowing method using DAP and NPKSZn at both sites. Application of DAP and NPKSZn under row sowing method produced significantly the highest and similar yields (3189.67 and 3250.33 kg ha–1 at Gabate, and 3164.00 and 3222.67 kg ha–1 at Kobo, respectively). The partial budget analysis also showed that row sowing under DAP application provides maximum net profit (197825.6 ETB) with MRR (948.46%). Therefore, tef production using DAP under row sowing-minimized seeding rate provides the highest yield and yield components and also economically profitable treatment combination. Thus, farmers of the study area will benefit using minimized seeding rate-row sowing method under DAP application. The result implies that field evaluation of the selected treatment combination should be done to verify the finding at multi-locations and years.
    VL  - 10
    IS  - 4
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • Sections