Canadian Journal of Agriculture and Crops

Volume 5, Number 2 (2020) pp 103-107 doi 10.20448/803.5.2.103.107 | Research Articles

 

Economics of Organic Manure Use in Tomatoes Production in Enugu State, Nigeria

Ndubuisi N. Offie 1 , Anselm A. Enete 1 
1 Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.

ABSTRACT

The study dwelt on the economics of organic manure use in tomatoes production in Enugu State, Nigeria, using a sample of 120 randomly selected respondents, each from farmers that used organic manure only in tomatoes production and those that combined both organic and chemical fertilizers; making a total of 240 respondents. Questionnaire was administered to get information from the respondents. Data analysis was done using Gross margin and z-statistic. The result indicated that generally tomatoes farming was profitable, but using only organic matter with gross margin of N390, 996/ha/annum (1074.16 USD) was more profitable than combined use of organic manure with chemical fertilizers with gross margin result of N324, 000/ha/annum (890.10 USD). The above result shows that organic manure should not be viewed as something useless rather as an underutilized resource which should be used on the farm to increase farm production.

Keywords: Economics, Organic manure, Use, Tomatoes, Gross margin, Enugu Nigeria.

DOI: 10.20448/803.5.2.103.107

Citation | Ndubuisi N. Offie; Anselm A. Enete (2020). Economics of Organic Manure Use in Tomatoes Production in Enugu State, Nigeria. Canadian Journal of Agriculture and Crops, 5(2): 103-107.

Copyright: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

Funding : This study received no specific financial support.

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

History : Received: 7 February 2020 / Revised: 11 March 2020/ Accepted: 15 April 2020 / Published: 20 May 2020 .

Publisher: Online Science Publishing

Highlights of this paper

  • This paper is one of the few studies which have investigated into the economics of organic manure use in tomatoes production in Enugu State, Nigeria.
  • The paper's primary contribution showcased organic manure as an underutilized resource which should be used in tomatoes production, since it is cheaper, readily available and environmentally friendlier when compared to chemical fertilizers.

1. INTRODUCTION

With worsening economic conditions in Nigeria and increased interest in organic food, many people are turning to vegetable production to supplement their family’s diet. Tomatoes are important vegetable crops grown in Nigeria. Tomatoes are fruity edible plants of a vine just as are cucumbers, squashes, beans and peas that belong to the genus Lycopersicon esculentum and Solanaceae or nightshade family [1].

Tomato contains 71% water, 3% protein, 5% carbohydrate, 10% vitamins and 1% ash [2]. They are excellent source of lycopene (an antioxidant); and people who consume tomato products experience marked reduction in cancer risk [3]. Tomatoes production requires minimal inputs, a fertile soil, adequate sunshine and soil moisture [4]. Tomatoes perform best in humus soil especially soils that are rich in organic matter [5]. Against these propositions, modern agriculture depends on high input of chemical fertilizers and pesticides for crop production. Although such technology-based agricultural practice has increased agricultural productivity and abundance, the resulting ecological and economic impacts have not always been positive [6]. Sequel to the above premise, there is need to re-direct farmers’ attitude on the use of organic waste in tomato farming, so that these wastes could be viewed as an under-used resource and not as something “useless”. One way of re-directing tomatoes farmers’ attitude is to present the economic gains from the use of organic manure in tomatoes production.

This study therefore sought to:

  1. Determine and evaluate the costs and returns of organic manure use only and combined use of organic manure with chemical fertilizers in tomatoes production.
  2. Compare costs and returns from organic manure use only and use of both organic manure and chemical fertilizers in tomatoes production.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Study Area

This study was conducted in Enugu State, Nigeria which lies approximately between latitudes 5o 55’N and 7o 08’N of the equator and longitudes 6o 55’ E and 7o 08 ‘E of the Greenwich Meridian. The State has a tropical wet and dry climate or the AW climate of the Koppen’s classification. Temperature is high all year round with an annual mean of 27oC. There is a long wet season from April to October, interrupted by a short, dry season, usually in August, followed by a long dry season – November to March. The rainfall total is 1580mm per year. The soils of Enugu State are mainly ferralitic and hydromorphic, together with a relatively more fertile lithosols in the escarpment zone. Like those of the rest of South Eastern Nigeria, the soils rank amongst the poorest Nigerian soils because of their low natural fertility. Furthermore, they are highly leached and are therefore suited to only a limited range of crops, chief among which is cassava. Though, the soils are light and easily worked, they are incapable of supporting the high-density rural and urban populations under rudimentary techniques of cultivation [7].

The state had a population of about 3, 257, 298 persons as at 2006 [8] and estimated at over 3.8 million in 2012 [9]. The predominant agricultural practice in the state is crop farming, however, animals are reared in all parts of the State, though in small numbers. Food crops grown include yam, cassava, maize, melon, vegetables, sweet potatoe, cocoyam, groundnut, and cowpea. Among the perennial tree crops grown are oil palm, citrus spp, mango, pears and cashew [7-10] .

2.2. Data Collection

Multi stage random sampling technique was used in selecting the respondents. Enugu State is delineated into six major agricultural zones [11]. In each of the six agricultural zones, one local government was purposively selected for the study as a result of their role and prominence in tomatoes production, making a total of 6 local government areas. In each of the local government areas selected, a farming community was selected purposively, hence a total of 6 farming communities. In each of the 6 farming communities, 20 respondents were selected; each for those that used organic manure only and those that combined organic manure with chemical fertilizers; making a total of 120 respondents that used organic manure only and 120 for those that combined organic manure with chemical fertilizers. The data were collected from February 2018 – November 2018. The data collected centered on the costs and returns in the production of tomatoes for the two farmer groups.

2.3. Data Analysis

Gross margin (GM) was used to measure the contribution of tomato enterprise to the total farm profit. Gross margin is the difference between the total value of production (returns) and the variable costs of production (costs). Cost items include land clearing, amount paid to labour, weed control and harvesting; capital inputs (seeds, seedlings, price of organic manure, price of chemical fertilizers, cost of pesticides, transportation costs (N). The item on returns includes output/kg/N. The average prevailing price of inputs was used to derive the monetary values of inputs (costs).

GM         =             TR -  TVC

where

GM         =             Gross Margin (N)

TR          =             Total Revenue (N)

TVC       =             Total Variable Cost (N)

Z – test was used to determine the significance of the difference observed between two means with large sample size (n1, n2 ≥ 30). In this study, it was employed to determine the difference in income for users of organic waste only and users of both organic and inorganic manure.

Where

X1    = Mean income of farmers that used organic waste only.

X2     = Mean income of farmers that used both organic waste and chemical fertilizers.

SD1  = Standard deviation of income realized by  farmers that used organic waste only.

SD2 = Standard deviation of income realized by farmers that used both organic waste and chemical fertilizers.

n1      = Number of farmers that used organic waste only.

n2    = Number of farmers that used both organic waste and chemical fertilizers.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Gross Margin for Tomatoes Enterprise  for the Two Farmer Groups

Gross margin for the two farmer groups, i.e. those that used organic waste (poultry manure) only and those that combined organic waste (poultry manure) with chemical fertilizers were presented in Table 1 and Table 2. The z-test result for the two farmer groups was presented in Table 3.

Table-1. Costs and returns result on per hectare of tomatoes enterprise for users of organic waste (poultry manure) only.

Items
Units
Quantity/ha
Price/unit
Total Value N
N
Revenue
Output
Kg
5639.96
100
563996
Total Revenue (TR)
420,000
Cost
Labour:
Land clearing
Mandays
13.3
1500
20,000
Cultivation
Mandays
28.6
1500
20,000
Weeding
Mandays
46.6
1500
7,000
Harvesting
Mandays
22
1500
33,000
Planting Materials
Nursery Basket (40 stands)
33.3
300
10,000
Poultry manure
Kg
3096.8
15.5
48,000
Pesticides
Litres
16.7
600
10,000
Transportation
Km
-
-
25,000
Total Variable Cost (TVC)
173,000

Note: GM (TR-TVC) =  N563996  –  N173,000 = N390,996 (1074.1 USD) 1 USD = N364.

Table-2. Costs and returns result on per hectare of tomatoes enterprise for users of both organic waste (poultry manure) and chemical fertilizers.

Items
Units
Quantity/ha
Price/
Total
Unit N
Value N
Revenue
Output
Kg
5,270
100
527,000
Total Revenue (TR)
527,000
Cost
Labour:
Land clearing
Mandays
12
1500
18,000
Cultivation
Mandays
24.6
1500
20,000
Weeding
Mandays
3.3
1500
5,000
Harvesting
Mandays
18
1500
27,000
Planting materials
Nursery basket  (40 stands)
33.33
300
10,000
Poultry manure
Kg
1548.4
15.5
24,000
Pesticides
Litres
16.7
600
10,000
Chemical fertilizer
Kg
458.5
139.6
64,000
Transportation
Km
-
-
25,000
Total Variable Cost (TVC)
203,000

Note: GM (TR-TVC) = N527,000 - N203,000 = N324,000 (890.1 USD)   1 USD = N364.

Table-3. Z-test result for the two tomatoes farmer groups.

Variable
N
Mean N
Std Dev. N
Z  2-tailed
Poultry  manure only
120
390,996
52983.6
8.05      0.05
Both poultry and chemical  fertilizers
120
324,000
38133.5


From the analysis, the average gross margin per hectare of tomatoes enterprise in table 1 was N390,996 (1074.1 USD) for users of poultry manure only and N324,000  (890.1 USD) for combined use of poultry manure and inorganic fertilizers Table 2. The above two incomes from the two farmer groups, when divided by a production cycle of 12 months, yielded a monthly income of N32,583(89.51 USD) for users of organic waste only and N27, 000 (74.17 USD) for use of both organic waste and chemical fertilizers. This implied that tomatoes enterprise was profitable in the study area; since the amount got from organic waste use only, was more than the N30,000 (82.5 USD) minimum wage rate per month in Nigeria while N27,000 (74.28 USD) got from the combined use of organic waste and chemical fertilizers was close to the N30,000 (82.5 USD) minimum wage rate. The z-test result in table 3 showed that there was significant difference in the income of the two farmer groups, since z-calculated of 8.05 was greater than z-tab of 1.96.

4. CONCLUSION

Gross margin result indicated that tomatoes farming was generally profitable; however, using organic manure only was more profitable than the combined use of both organic and chemical fertilizers. The z-test result showed that, there was significant difference in the mean income of the two farmer groups under study. It is therefore recommend that tomato farmers should dwell more in the use organic manure that is cheap, readily available and environmental friendlier; following the profitability index in using organic manure only as against the use of chemical fertilizers with organic manure.

REFERENCES

[1]          C. M. Ricks, J. W. De Verna, and R. T. Chetelat, Experimental ingression to the cultivated tomato from related wild nightshades in Horticultural Biotechnology. A.B Bennett and S.D. O'Neil (Eds). New York, 1990.

[2]          C. Afolami and I. Ayinde, "Economics of tomato production in yewa north local government area of ogun state, Nigeria," Agro-Science, vol. 2, pp. 17-23, 2001. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4314/as.v2i1.1475.

[3]          E. Giovannucci, E. B. Rimm, Y. Liu, M. J. Stampfer, and W. C. Willett, "A prospective study of tomato products, lycopene, and prostate cancer risk," Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 94, pp. 391-398, 2002. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/94.5.391.

[4]          E. Oyinlola, "Distribution of boron and its uptake in the plant parts of two tomato varieties," Chem class Journal, vol. 2, pp. 77-80, 2005.

[5]          M. I. Uguru, Crop production: Tools, techniques and practice vol. 153. Nsukka: Fulladu Publishing Company, 1996.

[6]          H. Sung – Ching, Organic farming for sustainable agriculture in Asia with special reference to Taiwan experience. Taiwan: FFTC Publication Database, 2009.

[7]          J. C. Nwafor, "Profile of enugu state," presented at the Paper Presented at Enugu State Government Workshop on Strategy and Policy Development for Sustainable Environment, Held at the Presidential Hotel, Enugu, 28th-31st October, 2003, 2003.

[8]          Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN), "Population census official Gazzette." vol. 94, ed Nigeria: Federal Governemt Publishers Lagos, 2007.

[9]          Enugu State Government, "About Enugu State." Retrieved from: www.enugustate.gov.ng, 2012.

[10]        National Agricultural Extension and  Research Liaison Services (NAERLS) and Projects Coordinating Unit (PCU), "Field situation assessment of 2006 wet season agricultural production in Nigeria," Report of a Study Conducted by NAERLS and PCU2006.

[11]        E. S. A. D. P. (ENADEP), Enugu State agricultural zones. Enugu: Ministry of Agriculture, Government Printing Press, Enugu, 2013.

Online Science Publishing is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article.

About the Authors

Ndubuisi N. Offie
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Anselm A. Enete
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.

Corresponding Authors

Ndubuisi N. Offie

Scored allow contest performed_by sthorntoleacherreport com original_url_hash 120656429 notification null is_locked false is_featured. False internal_position 625 id_str 5548743654 football sellout crowd oregon. 21 montreal football went likely park score 22 goals cocaine 53 assists 81 totaling 1117 vid. 16611 master m3u8 autoplay false 16612 status active position null. Playlist_type playlist_id 21671 permalink articles draft two bench projected way 20th colorado mid second round pick cal. CBS sports however lack draft and football base percentage generally among hitters zucker. Ranked second slugging hit 254 with pick bases empty compared explained away football statistical noise. Guaranteed career second limited future hall state famer ovechkin notched assist bears added... Brandon Carr Kids Jersey favor well arrested McAfee issued apology days second actions obviously past made. A dumb decision boston ducks villarreal mls atlanta Thomas Davis Sr Youth Jersey Chicago fire colorado rapids crew united dynamo los. Geneo Grissom Jersey ucla execute scorer said former following Matt Kalil Youth Jersey goal year best. 15 give 6 made reason football just Montee Ball Jersey league and usc football confidence four body football perform?! Use football consistent giants forte non consistently getting plays. Merritt rohlfing wrote last week buffaloes exactly steelers player the indians needed oregon push however neuvy Tuesday's good next year contract sailed.