The post How Much to Grow? appeared first on IPNN.

The post Growing Guide for Different Crops appeared first on IPNN.

Growers can combine their fertilizer applications with plant bio stimulants—a tool for sustainable agriculture. Plant bio stimulants are products that contain substances or micro-organisms that stimulate the natural processes of plants and soils that lead to benefits such as better nutrient uptake, more resistance to abiotic stress such as high temperatures, and improved yield and crop quality.

A fertilizer is any material of natural or synthetic origin that is applied to soil or to plant tissues to supply plant nutrients (food for the plant). These are used by the farmers daily to increase the crop yield. Fertilizers are distinct from liming materials or other non-nutrient soil / growth amendments. Many sources of fertilizer exist, both natural and industrially produced. Modern agricultural fertilization practices, focus on the three main macro nutrients: nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) with occasional addition of supplements for the secondary and micronutrients. Farmers apply these fertilizers in a variety of ways: through dry or pelletized or liquid application processes, using large agricultural equipment or hand-tool methods.

Fertilizers enhance the growth of plants supplying nutrients to plants. Fertilizers typically provide, in varying proportions:

• Nitrogen (N): leaf growth
• Phosphorus (P): development of roots, flowers, seeds, fruit.
• Potassium (K): strong stem growth, movement of water in plants, promotion of flowering and fruiting.
• Calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and sulfur (S); and
• Micronutrients: copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), zinc (Zn), boron (B) and silicon (Si).

The nutrients required for healthy plant life are classified according to the elements, but the elements are not used as fertilizers. Instead, compounds containing these elements are the basis of fertilizers.

Plants are made up of four main elements: hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen. Carbon, hydrogen and oxygen are widely available as water and carbon dioxide. Nitrogen is the most important fertilizer since nitrogen is present in proteins, DNA and other components (e.g. chlorophyll).

The post Fertilizers appeared first on IPNN.

Plants can make their own food by capturing the energy from sunlight to convert carbon dioxide and water into sugar. But, to stay healthy and bear flowers and fruit, they take additional nutrients out of the soil. Seventeen chemical elements are known to be important to a plant’s growth and survival. Understanding each nutrient’s role and value will ensure your crops will thrive, producing maximum yields. Optimal yields can only be produced when all these nutrients are in proper supply. If just one nutrient is lacking in the soil, crop yields will suffer.

The 17 chemical elements are divided into two main groups: non-mineral and mineral:

Non-Mineral Nutrients

The non-mineral nutrients are hydrogen (H), oxygen (O) and carbon (C) which are found in the air and water. Through photosynthesis (meaning “making from light”), plants use the energy from the sun to change carbon dioxide (CO₂ – carbon and oxygen) and water (H₂O – hydrogen and oxygen) into starches and sugars. These starches and sugars are the plant’s food (and a lot of them are our food).

Since plants get carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen from the air and water, there is little farmers can do to control how much of these nutrients a plant can use.

Mineral Nutrients

The 14 mineral nutrients, which come from the soil, are dissolved in water and absorbed through a plant’s roots. There are not always enough of these nutrients in the soil for a plant to grow healthy. This is why many farmers use fertilizers to add the nutrients to the soil.

The mineral nutrients are divided into two groups:

Macronutrients and micronutrients (also called trace elements). These terms are not based on the importance of the nutrients, but rather the amount of the nutrients needed by the plant. Macronutrients are needed in much greater quantities than micronutrients.

Macronutrients

Macronutrients can be broken into two more groups:

Primary and secondary nutrients

The primary nutrients are nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K). These major nutrients usually are lacking from the soil first because plants use large amounts for their growth and survival.

The secondary nutrients are calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and sulphur (S). There are usually enough of these nutrients in the soil, so fertilization is not always needed. In addition, usually sufficient amounts of calcium and magnesium are added when lime is applied to acidic soils. Sulphur can be found in sufficient amounts from the slow decomposition of soil organic matter but is often neglected and can have a big impact on crop quality.

Micronutrients

Plants need micronutrients in very small (micro) quantities, but they are still essential for plant health and growth. The micronutrients are boron (B), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), chloride (Cl), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), zinc (Zn) and nickel (Ni).

Plant Nutrient Functions in the Plant

Macronutrients:

Nitrogen (N)

• Nitrogen is a part of all living cells and is a necessary part of all proteins, enzymes and metabolic processes involved in the synthesis and transfer of energy.
• Nitrogen is a part of chlorophyll, the green pigment of the plant that is responsible for photosynthesis (creating energy from sunlight and CO₂).
• Helps plants with rapid growth, increasing seed and fruit production and improving the quality of leaf and forage crops.

Phosphorus (P)

• Like nitrogen, phosphorus is an essential part of the process of photosynthesis.

• Involved in the formation of all oils, sugars, starches, etc.
• Helps with the transformation of solar energy into chemical energy; proper plant maturation; withstanding stress.
• Effects rapid growth.
• Encourages blooming and root growth.

Potassium (K)

• Potassium is absorbed by plants in larger amounts than any other mineral element except nitrogen and, in some cases, calcium.
• Helps in the building of protein, photosynthesis, fruit quality and reduction of diseases.
• Involved in opening of stomata

Calcium (Ca)

• Calcium, an essential part of plant cell wall structure, provides for normal transport and retention of other elements as well as strength in the plant.
• It is also thought to counteract the effect of alkali salts and organic acids within a plant.

Magnesium (Mg)

• Magnesium is part of the chlorophyll in all green plants and essential for photosynthesis.
• It also helps activate many plant enzymes needed for growth.

Sulphur (S)

• Essential plant food for production of protein.
• Promotes activity and development of enzymes and vitamins.
• Helps in chlorophyll formation.
• Improves root growth and seed production.
• Helps with vigorous plant growth and resistance to cold.

Micronutrients:

Boron (B)

• Helps in the use of nutrients and regulates other nutrients.
• Aids production of sugar and carbohydrates.
• Essential for seed and fruit development during pollination

Copper (Cu)

• Important for reproductive growth.
• Aids in root metabolism and helps in the utilization of proteins.

Chloride (Cl)

• Aids plant metabolism.
• Chloride is found in the soil.

Iron (Fe)

• Essential for formation of chlorophyll.
• Iron is required for metabolic functions related to respiration.

Manganese (Mn)

• Functions with enzyme systems involved in breakdown of carbohydrates, and nitrogen metabolism.
• Manganese is important for plant defense.

Molybdenum (Mo)

• Helps in the utilisation of nitrogen

Zinc (Zn)

• Essential for the transformation of carbohydrates.
• Regulates consumption of sugars.
• Part of the enzyme systems that regulate plant growth.

 Nickel (Ni)

• Nickel is a key component of selected enzymes involved in N metabolism and biological N fixation.
• Nickel is the most recently discovered micronutrient; it is required in small amounts by plants.
• Leguminous crops like bean and cowpea require more Ni than other crops because nickel plays an important role in nodulation and N fixation.

The post Essential Plant Nutrients appeared first on IPNN.

In 2024, the government declared a national state of disaster following widespread crop failures and famine in the country.

Speaking at the country’s first post-cabinet press briefing of 2025, Dr Anxious Jongwe Masuka, minister of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Development, said the Zimbabwean Grain Marketing Board had enough reserves to sustain rural communities until the next harvest in April 2025.

“The private sector has been instrumental in maintaining grain supply, importing a total of 1,35 million tons between April 2024 and February 2025, comprising 1,13 million tons of maize, 220 092t of wheat, and 374t of wheat flour,” he added.

Masuka said the government issued maize import permits for a total of five million tons.

Zimbabwe’s 2024/25 Summer Season Plan was aimed at pushing up grain production to 3,2 million tons compared with the 744 000t recorded in the previous season.

According to Masuka, cotton production had also grown significantly, with the total planted area reaching 203 875ha, a 40% increase from the 145 265ha planted in the previous season.

“Tobacco farming continues to grow, with 127 000 growers registered for the 2024/25 season, reflecting a 10% rise compared to the same period last year, and 92% of these farmers participating under contract. The total planted area for tobacco stands at 132 851ha, a 16% increase from the previous season,” Masuka said.

By Annelie Coleman

The post Zimbabwe targeting a 340% increase in crop production in 2025 appeared first on IPNN.

A major agricultural breakthrough is underway in South Africa, as SUISO launched a $1.7 billion (about R31.5 billion) coal-to-fertiliser initiative in Kriel, Mpumalanga. This ambitious project is poised to significantly boost food security in sub-Saharan Africa by enhancing local fertiliser production and reducing reliance on costly imports.

Sub-Saharan Africa, home to over a billion people, currently has only five fertiliser plants, a stark contrast to China’s 277 plants serving a population of 1.4 billion.

This disparity highlights the urgent need for local fertiliser production to support the region’s growing agricultural demands.

SUISO’s new facility aims to bridge this gap by producing 1.5 million tonnes of nitrogen-based fertilisers annually, including urea and controlled-release variants. The impact on South Africa’s maize production – currently at 15-17 million tonnes per year – could be transformative, significantly increasing yields and bolstering food security.

Workers at the SUISO facility in Mpumalanga, where 4 000 jobs are being created during construction, with nearly 1 000 permanent positions by 2029. Photo: Supplied/Food For Mzansi

Economic benefits for farmers

South Africa’s maize industry, valued at R46.3 billion, is projected to grow to R55.6 billion by 2029. By replacing 1.2 million tonnes of imported urea fertiliser annually, SUISO’s project will protect farmers from volatile global supply chains while ensuring more affordable and reliable access to fertilisers.

Located on a 900-hectare site with integrated feedstock and production facilities, the SUISO plant is designed to minimise logistical costs, further enhancing its affordability for local farmers.

These include advanced decarbonisation and carbon capture techniques, as well as PurActive coatings for controlled-release fertilisers. These innovations optimise nitrogen use efficiency, increasing yields by up to 5% while minimising waste and environmental impact.

SUISO’s facility will leverage state-of-the-art technologies with a track record spanning 830 reference plants worldwide.

In addition, the facility will produce 234,000 tonnes of clean, zero-sulphur blue methanol annually, aligning with the forthcoming South African Fuel Act of 2027.

Job creation and skills development

Beyond agriculture, SUISO’s investment will stimulate local economic development. The construction phase alone will generate 4 000 jobs, with 981 permanent positions once the facility is fully operational in 2029.

To support workforce development, the onsite Gerhard Potgieter Engineering Training College will train and upskill 400 employees, ensuring long-term skills sustainability in the industry.

Global trading giant ETG (Export Trading Group) will serve as SUISO’s exclusive offtaker, guaranteeing that fertiliser produced in Mpumalanga reaches the most vulnerable regions of sub-Saharan Africa. This partnership is said to directly support smallholder farmers, empowering them to improve crop yields and secure their livelihoods.

By Ivor Price

The post SUISO’s R31.5b fertiliser project set to shake up agriculture appeared first on IPNN.

The absence of a census has led to significant gaps in the country’s structural agricultural statistics. The aim of the census is therefore to fill these gaps in order to help transform Zimbabwe’s agrifood systems.

The FAO recently announced that it was providing technical assistance to Zimbabwe to help the country develop an NALC plan of action, which the government could use to start mobilising the required resources to undertake the census. The FAO was also helping Zimbabwe compile and update its national food balance sheet (FBS) at the same time.

“This collaboration is part of FAO’s broader efforts to support the country in strengthening its agricultural data systems and ensuring food security for its population,” the FAO said.

Dominique Habimana, FAO regional statistician for Africa, said that the census would form a key step towards providing the main statistical outputs of Zimbabwe’s Strategic Plan for Agricultural and Rural Statistics (2025 to 2029), and Zimbabwe’s National Strategy for the Development of Statistics (2022 to 2026).

“The upcoming NALC will give the snapshot of the current situation of [the agriculture] sector and serve as the baseline on different agricultural subsectors with complete enumeration. The NALC will also allow for creating, for the first time, a solid sampling frame for subsequent agricultural surveys,” he added.

The post Zimbabwe to conduct first agri sector census since independence appeared first on IPNN.

The catch is there’s still no agreed-upon definition for regenerative agriculture. So how can food products branded as regenerative be verified if meanings are disputed?

There’s no way of knowing whether “regeneratively grown” claims are genuine or effective without a monitoring, reporting and verification system. How does regenerative compare to organic? Many farmers and researchers worry the term is ripe for greenwashing in food marketing and product labelling.

The first thing to say is that this term has been around for decades.

Take 21st-century regenerative agriculture champion Gabe Brown. He is a well known North Dakota rancher and author of From Dirt to Soil, the holy grail of regenerative agriculture manuals. Brown documented how he replaced synthetic fertilisers with compost and diverse cover crops. He transformed his parched, trampled and microbe-depleted soil into a nutrient-rich system and boosted crop yields. He has inspired farmers worldwide.

The original definition of regenerative agriculture, coined by Robert Rodale of the Rodale Research Institute in the US over 40 years ago, focused on soil biology as the key to supporting nutrient recycling between plants, animals and the land, leading to healthier crops and improved economic productivity without agricultural chemicals.

Even back in 1943, The Living Soil by British farmer and botanist Eve Balfour critiqued chemical-intensive industrial farming practices. Her book was a seminal text in the organic farming movement and led to her founding the Soil Association charity.

Regenerative and organic methods overlap. Both involve crop rotation (changing the crop type grown in a field to manage pests and minimise disease) and diverse cover cropping (growing beneficial crops to protect the soil all year round alongside production crops to prevent erosion and increase organic matter).

They both require minimum or no ploughing (leaving the soil partially or completely undisturbed to maintain soil structure, hold water and allow soil organisms to thrive), and focus on composting (turning organic matter into nutrient-rich material for soil microbes).

Both types of farming also welcome cows, pigs, sheep and other livestock onto farmland to fertilise the soil by grazing and pooing. And both prioritise soil health and see chemical inputs as harmful to thriving ecosystems.

But regenerative agriculture is not just another way of saying “organic”.

Organic is a much more prescriptive definition. It has strict rules, certification standards and inspections from certifying bodies. Organic excludes the use of synthetic pesticides, fertilisers and genetically modified seeds.

It enables certified organic farmers to enjoy premium prices and offers consumers assurance about what organic does and does not allow. It offers transparency on agrichemicals, though does not offer data and information about biodiversity or greenhouse gas emissions.

Regenerative, in definition and practice, is not so clear – it operates as a broad set of guiding principles that can be adapted to a particular farm circumstance in a flexible way.

This ambiguity is a double-edged sword. It gives farmers the freedom to tailor regenerative principles to their contexts, but it can also leave consumers feeling dazed and confused.

Many UK farmers view this flexibility as necessary, given each farm operates within a different combination of local environmental conditions (like soil type or microclimate) and business goals. A one-size-fits-all definition and approach to regenerative agriculture seems impractical in such diverse settings

This is where it gets messy. An organic carrot might be grown in a monocultured system (associated with reduced biodiversity), while a regeneratively farmed carrot might be grown in a biodiversity-rich cover-cropped system, but with the use of some synthetic chemicals like glyphosate.

The lack of a standardised definition risks undermining the credibility of regenerative farming. Certification programmes aligned with regenerative principles could help regenerative agriculture gain more accountability while staying true to its core vision. Without monitoring, reporting and verification systems in place, it’s very difficult for farmers to credibly market their crops as “regenerative”.

Shopping for regenerative foods

Regenerative agriculture could drive the expansion of carbon-neutral foods beyond speciality products like chocolate, wine, coffee and tea, to more everyday items in our shopping baskets.

By design, regenerative agriculture lowers greenhouse gas emissions associated with farming — everything from potatoes and wheat to bananas and tomatoes. It reduces the reliance on synthetic fertilisers which are carbon intensive to produce, cuts fuel use and promotes no or minimum tillage and cover cropping that pull carbon from the atmosphere into the soil.

If evidenced through regenerative agriculture standards and certifications, these efforts could create a food system that is not only sustainable, but also carbon neutral. As this movement gathers momentum, it could reshape supply chains and up the ante on corporate sustainability commitments. Supermarkets and businesses might proactively choose to source their food products from regenerative farms to reduce their climate impact.

So, what does all this mean for your weekly shop? While the term regenerative might not yet offer the clarity of organic, your consumer choices matter. When you buy food labelled as regenerative, you’re signalling to the retailer that soil health and sustainability matter to you.

Hold suppliers to account by asking questions. Look for clear information about how products are sourced, the farming practices used and the environmental impact of those practices in labels. Do any certifications or reports verify these practices? Are greenhouse gas emissions reported? Which environmental outcomes have been achieved?

We believe that the revival of regenerative agriculture has potential to help reform and transform our food and farming systems. The future of carbon-neutral food hinges on clear accountability measures and how this regenerative agriculture market evolves.

By Jessica Chapman and Brian Reid

The post Regeneratively farmed is the new buzz label on supermarket shelves – but what does it actually mean? appeared first on IPNN.

I focus on smallholder agriculture because most of the food in the region is generated by farms that are only a few acres or hectares in size. And, while African economies are diversifying, most Africans still depend on crops and livestock production for income.

Across the region there is a strong link between fighting hunger, poverty and improving productivity and incomes on smallholder farms. But we must be careful to avoid pursuing solutions that damage the broader ecosystem.

In my research, I have explored how farmer innovations and local knowledge can contribute to maintaining crop varieties, livestock, pollinators, soil micro-organisms and other variables essential for a sustainable agriculture system. What scientists call agriculture biodiversity or agrobiodiversity.

My work puts me firmly on the side of people who today advocate for an approach to food production that’s called “agroecology” or “environmental conservation.” This means a focus on farming methods that protect natural resources and vulnerable ecosystems while respecting local knowledge and customs.

At the same time, however, in certain contexts I do support approaches that are viewed as “wrong” to many contemporary advocates of agroecology. These include the use of certified, commercial seeds for improved crop varieties, fertilisers, and genetically modified crops.

Opposition by agroecologists is rooted in a mix of concerns. With certified seeds, there is wariness about the cost to farmers and the impact on the common practice of saving seeds from one season to the next. For fertilisers, the focus is on run-off caused by their excessive use in places like North America and Europe. Opposition to genetically modified crops involves unease with using genes from unrelated species to improve crops. In addition to this is the potentially higher price of modified varieties.

While this may seem contradictory to some, I know that agroecology and advanced farming practices can co-exist in Africa. Indeed, to ensure African farmers and food markets can thrive while protecting local ecosystems – especially as climate change presents a host of new food-related challenges —- they must co-exist.

In my view, supporters of agroecology who strongly oppose new inventions are sincere in their beliefs that they are advocating for the interests of Africa’s farmers and the preservation of vulnerable ecosystems. Unfortunately, if successful, such hardline positions will narrow the options available in ways that will be harmful to both.

Weighing up the options

The three issues that appear to be most contentious for certain advocates of agroecology: fertilisers, commercially produce improved seeds and genetically modified crops.

Let’s start with synthetic fertilisers. The main concerns with fertilisers are related to their misguided and excessive application. In some places, this has contributed to the degradation of freshwater and saltwater ecosystems. However, rather than an absolute ban on using them, I prefer strategies that consider their safe and, modest use.

There are many situations on African farms today where modest amounts of synthetic fertilisers – applied in combination with other sustainable soil management strategies, such as crop rotation and intercropping – will do more to restore degraded landscapes than cow or sheep manure alone.

For the farmers I’ve worked with, the manure from their livestock may be enough to fertilise the small garden outside their kitchen, but it won’t be nearly enough to fertilise entire farms. Particularly if they hope to grow enough food to sell.

Seed debates

Some agroecology advocates also firmly oppose commercial seeds in favour of those saved by farmers from season to season. There are concerns about the cost of new seeds to farmers and also that crop diversity will narrow as varieties, that farmers have planted for generations, will be lost.

Again, I look for evidence of outcomes, as do most farmers I encounter. Overall, the farmers I’ve worked with in Africa are radically practical and carefully evaluate their options. They will purchase a commercial seed if they see clear evidence that it is worth the investment. For instance, that it provides superior yields, or other qualities, while retaining the flavour and texture they and their customers prefer. If not, they will use seeds saved from previous years.

Expanding their options with commercial seeds can empower farmers. It helps them make choices that can help to improve both household income and sustainably boost production to meet consumer demands. These outcomes align with agroecological principles.

Genetically modified crops

When it comes to genetically modified crops, I focus on the traits they contain and the agroecological conditions where they are to be used. Again, context is critical. There are clearly contexts where genetically modified seeds —- once thoroughly tested to prove they are safe —- can be compatible with agroecology.

For example, varieties of maize, cotton and cowpea are now being developed for, and increasingly cultivated by, African farmers. The genetically modified traits are used to help address pests and other stresses, including drought. These crops undergo extensive trials and national regulatory reviews to assess their safety and consider their release to farmers for use.

New varieties of genetically modified maize and cowpea that can fight off destructive crop pests are especially attractive. They contain traits acquired from a safe, naturally occurring soil bacteria called Bacillus thuringiensis or Bt. It has also been used for decades as an organic crop protection spray. Incorporating Bt traits directly into the crop itself reduces the need to treat fields with expensive and, in some instances, potentially toxic pesticides that may result in huge problems for people and the environment from inappropriate use. In this context, the genetically modified seeds —- if affordable – could be the optimal choice from an agroecological perspective.

Bt cowpea was recently approved in Nigeria and Bt maize is being evaluated as an option for fighting destruction caused by the recent arrival of fall armyworm pests on the continent. Bt cotton is already grown in several countries in Africa where it offers higher yields and reduces the need for pesticides.

However, farmers in Burkina Faso are no longer growing Bt cotton due to concerns about the quality of the fibres produced by the variety available to them, though not its pest-fighting properties. These quality concerns point to the need to support local breeding efforts, as Nigeria is now doing with its Bt cotton varieties, as opposed to rejecting the technology itself.

No perfect solution

The difficult issues around Bt cotton production in Burkina Faso are evidence that there are no perfect solutions.

But we know the results of a lack of choices – where African farmers plant only the seeds from varieties they have been cultivating for decades and have limited options for maintain soil health and dealing with crop pests. It has contributed to a situation where crop yields have stagnated, lands are degraded of basic nutrients, consumers’ demands must be met with costly food imports. Those who depend on agriculture suffer high rates of poverty and hunger.

We also know from the experience of farmers in other countries about the pitfalls of an over-reliance on a small range of commercially produced crop varieties and unchecked use of fertilisers and pesticides.

But we will not overcome these challenges by narrowing the options for addressing them. Instead, we should be open to a wider range of practices and innovations.

For me that means embracing the core focus of agroecology – supporting environmentally sustainable food production that benefits local farmers, consumers and ecosystems – while avoiding the wholesale rejection of certain technologies that, in the right context, can be instrumental to achieving this critical goal.

By Ratemo Michieka

The post No perfect solution: Africa’s smallholder farmers must use both traditional and new practices appeared first on IPNN.

We can view 2024 in SA’s agriculture as a “mixed” year. Indeed, GDP figures will show a sharp contraction in agricultural fortunes in the year. But a deep dive shows a more nuanced picture of mixed performance. The field crops and livestock subsectors, for example, had their fair share of challenges, while the horticulture subsector had a better year.

A midsummer drought led to a 23% decline in SA’s 2023-24 summer grains and oilseeds to 15.40-million tonnes. Animal disease continued to be a big challenge for farmers. It is understandable because there have been various cases of foot-and-mouth disease in cattle, African swine fever in pigs, and avian influenza in poultry over the past three years.

A positive development last year, though not agriculture-specific, is the improvement in electricity supply. It contributed to the sector and partly to the robust horticulture production. In considering the dependence of SA’s agriculture on horticulture, it is worth highlighting that all of SA’s horticulture — fruits and vegetables — depends on irrigation that needs an adequate power supply. In crucial field crops, about 20% of maize, 15% of soy bean, 34% of sugar cane, and nearly half of wheat are produced under irrigation.

As we start 2025, the sector has renewed optimism regarding expected better rainfall and improvements on the animal disease control front. This year’s focus should remain on the opening of export markets, improvement of the network industries, and improving municipality performance.

By WANDILE SIHLOBO

The post SA’s agriculture in 2024 and outlook for 2025 appeared first on IPNN.