Applied and Environmental Soil Science

Applied and Environmental Soil Science / 2022 / Article

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 |Article ID 4738416 |

Tilahun Gisila Abebe, Mohan Rao Tamtam, Amare Ayalew Abebe, Kitaw Abraham Abtemariam, Tewodros Geremew Shigut, Yared Abate Dejen, Endayehu Gebeyhu Haile, "Growing Use and Impacts of Chemical Fertilizers and Assessing Alternative Organic Fertilizer Sources in Ethiopia", Applied and Environmental Soil Science, vol. 2022, Article ID 4738416, 14 pages, 2022.

Growing Use and Impacts of Chemical Fertilizers and Assessing Alternative Organic Fertilizer Sources in Ethiopia

Academic Editor: Kalpana Bhatt
Received12 Nov 2021
Accepted28 Jan 2022
Published20 Mar 2022


This paper reviews relevant facts and statistics about the benefits and impacts of the growing use of chemical fertilizer with a focus on soil fertility, crop productivity, and alternative sources of biofertilizers. Agriculture in Ethiopia is the main source of the economy, and it is the key contributor of the export value and provider of raw materials to processing industries. However, Ethiopian agronomical production is characterized by low output, lack of infrastructure, and low level of technology and is enormously dependent on rainfall availability. In Ethiopia, soil fertility reduction is evolving as a serious contest causing low crop yields, and research findings reported that, at the country level, nutrient balance indicated a depletion rate of 122 kg N ha−1 yr−1, 13 kg P ha−1 yr−1, and 82 kg K ha−1 yr−1. To control soil fertility depletion, primarily fertilizers are used as the source of essential plant nutrients. In Ethiopia, the use of chemical fertilizers to increase crop production was low relative to other developing countries; however, now, it is steadily increasing. Urea and diammonium phosphate are common practices for maintaining soil fertility. Chemical fertilizer consumption increased from 12 kg/ha in 1996 to 36.2 kg/ha in 2018. The main cereals’ production increased from 16.5 quintal/ha in 2009 to 23.94 quintal/ha in 2018.

1. Introduction

With the worldwide human population continuously growing, increasing crop production without experiencing a distractive impact on the environment is the main contest that agriculture is currently facing [14]. Agriculture plays a significant role for developing nations that have agricultural land. The rapid rise of the human population determines a growing demand for food and water, which results in higher energy usage and, therefore, the use of nonrenewable resources [3, 5, 6]. In Ethiopia, agriculture is the primary source of human welfare and economic growth [7, 8] and the main contributor to the economy. It accounts for about 37% of the gross domestic product of the country and is a source of living for over 70% of the country’s population [7, 9], and exports are dominated by agricultural products [10]. However, the production is categorized by low productivity, survival orientation, low level of technology, low level of inputs (fertilizer and pesticide), lack of road and market institutions, and extreme susceptibility to rain inconsistency [11].

2. Food Security Challenge in Ethiopia

Food security remains challenging for most developing countries in Africa, including Ethiopia [4, 12, 13]. On average, agricultural productivity in Africa is lower than that in other regions [14]. For food self-sufficiency, crop productivity growth is vital for stimulating growth in other parts of the economy [3, 4, 15]. Subsequently, agriculture is the key source of raw materials to food processing, beverage, and textile industries [16]. Increasing area farming land is no longer a feasible strategy to feed the growing population [17]. Hence, intensification strategies to increase crop productivity while protecting the environment have become essential to attaining agricultural growth, food needs, and nutrition security [3, 17, 18]. Furthermore, many constraints hamper agricultural productivity in Ethiopia; among the key factors, soil fertility depletion is one [16]. To increase crop production needs cumulative effort to use endorsed fertilizers, enhanced crop variety, and control of crop pest diseases [18]. However, agriculture largely depends on the increasing use of chemical fertilizers [19]. Fertilizer’s consumption growth is dependent on the expansion of the human population [20].

Soil has been subjected to severe nutrient deficiency triggered by natural and man-made factors [16, 21]. Therefore increasing agricultural productivity requires a range of measures, including appropriate use of fertilizer, crop protection innovations, and improved seeds [16, 22]. Largely cereal-based mixed crop-livestock systems dominate Ethiopian rain-fed agriculture [9]. The major cereal crops, teff, wheat, maize, barley, and sorghum, represent about 96% of total cereal production [21]. Additionally, vegetables and fruits are also one of the rapidly expanding agricultural markets in Ethiopia [23].

2.1. Agricultural Productivity and Soil Depletion

Soil fertility reduction is the main contest that causes serious food insecurity and poverty [24]. Increasing crop productivity remains the most feasible pathway for achieving the great challenge of feeding 9.8 billion people by 2050 [25]. Nowadays, effective soil fertility amendment strategies are one of the most essential needs for increasing soil fertility [24, 26] because soil nutrient deficiency is one of the major limiting factors for cereal crop yield reduction [21]. Soil infertility is evolving as a serious problem causing low crop yields and food insecurity in the country [7, 21, 24, 27, 28]. Ethiopia faces the highest rates of nutrient depletion in sub-Saharan Africa [21, 28]. At the state level, findings on nutrient balance indicated a depletion rate of 122 kg N ha−1 yr−1, 13 kg P ha−1 yr−1, and 82 kg K ha−1 yr−1 [29], which were rated twofold as high as the average nutrient reduction rate for sub-Saharan African [27]. The reduction of soil fertility has led to reduced crop productivity in most African countries, including Ethiopia [30,31]. Poor soil fertility management and continuous cropping increase soil nutrient depletion and reduction of organic matter [9]. Management of soil fertility has been a great problem for farmers for thousands of years [32].

To increase soil fertility, fertilizers (organic, inorganic, or their integration) are used as the source of plant nutrients [7]. Increasing soil fertility through fertilizer application is the common way of modern agricultural practice [33]. Fertilizers are substances applied to the soil to supply essential nutrients to the plant tissue to increase the growth and yield the plants [30, 32, 34]. Furthermore, it could be organic or inorganic and natural or synthetic that supplies plants with the necessary nutrients for plant growth and optimum yield [35]. The use of chemical fertilizers like urea (46% N) and diammonium phosphate (DAP: 18% N, 46% P2O5) is the common practice in Ethiopia [28].

3. Essential Plant Nutrients

Researchers all over the world have dedicated substantial devotion to the science of plant nutrition [36]. Plant nutrient sources are the most important controlling factor for growth and productivity [36]. Plants mainly need about 17 nutrients for optimal growth and productivity [25] and are mainly made up of four main elements (hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen) [32]. Plant nutrients can be categorized into macronutrients and micronutrients (Table 1).

Nutrients supplied by water and airNutrients supplied by the soil
NonmineralPrimary macronutrientSecondary macronutrientMicronutrients

Carbon (C)Nitrogen (N)Calcium (Ca)Zink (Zn)Iron (Fe)
Hydrogen (H)Phosphorus (P)Magnesium (Mg)Chlorine (Cl)Manganese (Mg)
Oxygen (O)Potassium (K)Sulfur (S)Boron (B)Cobalt (Co)
Molybdenum (Mo)Nickel (Ni)

Source: [32].

Many fertilizer producers provide plant macronutrients individually or in mixtures with the soil, and the application of macronutrient fertilizers commonly affects nutrient accessibility to plants [37]. Nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, and sulfur are essential plant macronutrients [32, 37]. NPK-containing fertilizers are the three primary macronutrients [32, 38]. Macronutrients are needed in large amounts, and they are limiting plant growth and development in soil systems.

The type of fertilizer depends on the available nutrient content specified in terms of fractions of nitrogen (N), phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), and potash (K2O). The shortage of important nutrients, specifically nitrogen (N) and phosphorous (P), is the most significant factor limiting crop yield [39].

3.1. Nitrogen

Nitrogen is a building block of proteins and genetic material, and it is the nutrient that is necessary for the proper growth and development of living organisms [5]. Nitrogen (N) is the most used nutrient, and N fertilizer has long been a critical component of agriculture, currently accounting for over 50% of the world’s food production [25, 30, 40]. Though plentiful nitrogen gas (N2) exists in the ambient air, crops can only take either ammonia (NH3) or nitrogen oxides (NOx) such as nitrate and nitrite , which are the major components of nitrogen fertilizers [41]. Nitrogen fertilizers are substantial for worldwide food self-reliance, primarily for Africa, where the nitrogen input is low [42]. Nitrogen and phosphorus are essential nutrients for plant growth, and subsequently, the use of these nutrients as chemical fertilizers has been growing since the green revolution in the 1960s and controls crop yield [43]. The supply of N is presently limitless because of the production of urea by the Haber Bosch process [44]. World plant nutrients production increases within the proportion of urea in world N production that the production is about 40% of all N fertilizers produced [45]. The comparison of increasing use of nitrogen fertilizer for different regions is given in Figure 1.

3.2. Phosphorus

Phosphorus is indispensable for plant growth, is often a key limiting nutrient in agriculture, and has no substitute in food production [46, 47]. Securing sufficient P will be critical for future food security [46]. Phosphorus is a vital element required in relatively large quantities for the development of plants, which are usually derived from a nonrenewable phosphate rock resource [4851]. Globally, about 50–60% of the phosphorus-based fertilizer need is attained by mineral fertilizer [52]. Phosphate rock deposits are limited, and there is a serious concern about the accessibility and cost of phosphate rock in the future [44]. The demand for phosphorus resources other than nonrenewable P rock has driven the development of several phosphorus recovery technologies [48]. For instance, the recovery of phosphate from waste material has been getting ample attention these days [53]. The comparison of increasing use phosphorus containing fertilizers for different regions is given in Figure 2. The common commercial phosphorus fertilizers are monoammonium phosphate (MAP), diammonium phosphate (DAP), and triple superphosphate (TSP) [45, 48].

3.3. Potassium

Potassium (K) plays multifunctional activities in plants, related to enzyme activation, osmotic adjustment, turgor generation, cell expansion, and regulation of membrane electric potential [54]. Plants uptake K as the cation (K+), and various sources of K are available in soils or provided as fertilizers, including potassium chloride (KCl), potassium nitrate (KNO3), potassium sulfate (K2SO4), and potassium carbonate (K2CO3) [54, 55]. The quality or grade of potassium fertilizers is expressed as a percentage of potassium oxide (K2O) equivalent.

3.4. Micronutrients

Micronutrients are required in lesser quantities, in parts-per-million (ppm) [32], and are usually present in adequate amounts in most soils, but their availability may be limited due to a variety of circumstances, and most micronutrients are more available when the soil pH is below 7 [37]. The shortage of micronutrients in the human diet is a global problem and could be caused by soil-related constraints, excessive tillage, and other harmful agricultural management practices [56].

4. Crop Production and Chemical Fertilizer Consumption

4.1. The Growing Use of Chemical Fertilizer

Fertilizers can be classified as chemical/mineral and organic. Chemical fertilizers are produced by the fertilizer industry, are mainly nitrogen, phosphate, and potash [57], and have significantly sustained the increasing population of the world [58]. Chemical fertilizers are widely considered a major option for addressing the crisis of nutrient depletion and sustaining food production [7]. However, these fertilizers are expensive due to the cost of production (cost of raw materials and the cost of capital) [59]. They are extensively used to enhance crop yield [60]; in several agricultural systems, numerous macronutrients dissolve quickly in the soil and supply the nutrients to the plants in large amounts [58]. Currently, there is an increase in the consumption of chemical-based fertilizers to meet the demand of high deficiency of nutrients in the soil [34]. Optimal use of synthetic fertilizer is vital for improving ecosystem services of any food production system while avoiding potential negative environmental impacts [61]. Worldwide mineral fertilizer consumption is steadily increasing in response to the growing population and increased demand for food crops and nonfood crops [62]. The application of synthetic fertilizers in Ethiopia is still very low [61]. However, the use of chemical fertilizers is increasing steadily. The major source of fertilizer sales in Ethiopia has been urea and DAP since the 1960s, and there has been no change in the composition of the use of fertilizers in Ethiopian agriculture until 2014/15 cropping season [16]. Due to the unbalanced use of fertilizer, the loss in soil fertility is also significant in Ethiopia. Diammonium nitrate (DAP) has been gradually substituted by NPS in the past two years to meet the sulfur demand of most of the Ethiopian soils [16]. The import quantity of fertilizer is increasing; main diammonium nitrate, urea, and NPS (nitrogen-phosphate fertilizer with sulfur) are imported in Ethiopia.

In developed countries like Western Europe and the USA, fertilizer use intensity is up to 288 kg/ha on average [22]. However, in developing countries like Ethiopia, consumption is very low. According to Sheahan and Barrett [63], findings on six African countries show that synthetic fertilizer use is the highest in Malawi (146 kg/ha), followed by Nigeria (128 kg/ha), Ethiopia (45 kg/ha), Tanzania (16 kg/ha), Niger (2.5 kg/ha), and Uganda (1.2 kg/ha). In general, Ethiopian fertilizer application (kg/ha) is lower than that in most developing countries (Figure 3).

Researchers and policymakers in many developing countries widely recognize the importance of agricultural growth policies and accelerating the growth of food production by increasing the use of chemical fertilizers and chemical pesticides as a means to raise agricultural productivity [64,65]. For instance, the mean total nitrogen input to croplands increased from 19 kg N ha−1 yr−1 in (1961–1965) to 42 kg N ha−1 yr−1 in (2010–2017) for SSA [30]. According to Elrys et al. [42], African nitrogen consumption will reach 154 kg N ha−1 yr−1 in 2050. As shown in Figure 3, the nitrogen fertilizer consumption of Ethiopia is below sub-Saharan Africa. However, it steadily increased from 9.3 in 2002 to 23.5 in 2018 (Figure 4).

In Ethiopia, chemical fertilizer is primarily used in cereal production [38], and about 60% of the farm households use chemical fertilizers, but a huge percentage only use small quantities [38]. The farm households used about 28.2 kg of urea per ha and 36.7 kg of DAP per ha [66], mostly for teff, sorghum, wheat, and maize production, and cereal production may account for 90% of fertilizer use with most of the remaining applied to pulse, oilseed, and nongrain crops [22, 67].

4.2. Major Crop Types Cultivated in Ethiopian

Crop production is a major food production ecosystem in most of Africa [61]. From various crops species (cereals, oilseeds, pulses, vegetables, root crops, and fruits), the production of cereal grains is critical for food security [3]. Cereals are important crops in Ethiopia and cover the largest share of household production [68], and smallholders are responsible for producing a substantial share of the region’s crops. Cereals crops such as teff, wheat, maize, sorghum, and barley are the main of Ethiopia’s agriculture and food economy, accounting for about three-quarters of the total area cultivated (Figure 5) and consumption activities [68, 70]. The report of the year 2020/21 Meher season crop production survey indicated that a total cropland area of about 12,979,459.91 hectares is covered by grain crops (i.e., cereals, pulses, and oilseeds), from which a total volume of about 341,828,693.39 quintals of grains is obtained, from private peasant holdings [69].

As labeled on Table 2, from the total grain crop area, 81.19% (10,538,341.91 hectares) was under cereals. Teff, maize, sorghum, and wheat took up 22.56% (about 2,928,206.26 ha), 19.46% (about 2,526,212.36 ha), 12.94% (1, 679, 277.06 ha), and 14.62% (1,897,405.05 ha) of the grain crop area, respectively [69].

Crop typeArea (hectares)Production (quintals)Yield

Grain crops12,858,63812,979,460335,103,036341,828,69326.0626.34
Finger millet455,580480,34311,259,57912,030,16424.7125.04
Root crops248,223.82307,295.8046,380,932.7956,216,815.32186.85182.94
Fruit crops115,533.76161,470.828,347,071.2214,192,409.1872.2587.89

Source: [69].
4.2.1. Fertilizer Use and Crop Yield

Previous to the beginning of the twentieth century, almost all increases in crop manufacturing occurred as a result of increases in the area cultivated, but later to the end of the century, almost all increases were coming from increases in land productivity [64, 71]. Adding chemical fertilizers to the crop plays a major part in the production per hectare and the intensification of the agricultural yield [72]. According to FAO (2013), in the year 2000, the world consumption of fertilizer components, nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), was 64.9, 25.9, and 18.2 kg ha-1, respectively, which increased to 85.8, 33.2, and 20.4 kg ha-1, respectively, in the year 2014 [45].

Most of the African development strategies include efforts to increase the productivity of smallholder farmers [73]. The intensification of crop-based agriculture has been associated with a sharp increase in the use of chemical fertilizers [15, 74]. The use of fertilizers remains very low in sub-Saharan Africa [61], though the increased use of fertilizer has huge potential to increase crop yields [22, 36, 61].

Assessment of field studies has shown that fertilizer use is critical to growing crop productivity [4]. Fertilizer consumption (kg/ha of arable land) is increased from 12 kg/ha in 1996 to 36.2 kg/ha in 2018 (Figure 6), and agricultural association sources revealed that cereal yield recorded significant growth in Ethiopia for the last decades [68]. Primary cereals yield increased from a level of 10.3 quintals/ha in 1999 to 16.5 quintals/ha in 2009, the growth has been found [68], and 23.94 quintal/ha was reported in 2018 (Figure 7).

Chemical fertilizers are relatively inexpensive, have high nutrient contents, and are rapidly taken up by plants [75]. However, the use of excess fertilizer can result in several problems, such as soil nutrient loss, surface water and groundwater pollution, soil acidification or basification, and reductions in useful microbes [75, 76].

Modern agricultural practices have emphasized the large use of fertilizer, and this strategy has truly improved grain yields in many nations in the last three decades. However, repeated and excessive use of chemical fertilizers additionally led to a decline in crop yields and soil fertility [77]. Hence, the current agricultural trends emphasize finding alternatives to nonrenewable chemical fertilizers due to huge procurement costs and environmental contamination [76]. The search for an effective process for the formulation of an eco-friendly, low-cost, and competent organic fertilizer is hence in-demand [26].

5. Organic Fertilizer Sources

Organic fertilizers are naturally existing sources that are recycled plant or animal-derived matter that contains a reasonable amount of plant nutrients [32, 57, 78, 79]. Organic fertilizers can improve the soil microbial community and soil preservation capacity and increase nitrogen utilization efficiency, soil fertility, and, ultimately, the quality of agricultural products [76, 80]. The use of solid organic manure for the formulation of eco-friendly compost could be an effective alternative to improve soil fertility [26,81]. Alternative nutrient-rich organic sources that are available to farmers are not widely promoted [7]. Organic fertilizers are low-cost, renewable sources of plant nutrients that support chemical fertilizers [75, 76].

Scholars recommend that organic farming is becoming more and more popular [81], and it is the fastest-growing sector in the agriculture inputs, although only about 1% of the world’s agricultural area is covered by organic farming [82]. The application of organic fertilizer is beneficial to improving the quality of cultivated land [83]. Organic agriculture has appeared as a substantial area worldwide because of the rising demand for safe and healthy food and long-term sustainability and concerns on environmental pollution related to unselective use of agrochemicals [84]. Some of the benefits of organic fertilizers are soil preservation, conservation of soil fertility, reduction of water pollution (groundwater, rivers, and lakes), minimizing utilization of nonrenewable external inputs, and improving product yield and quality [79]. Nutrient cycles are closed with the aid of composting, mulching, green manuring, and crop rotation [85].

5.1. Compost

Compost is the product formed by the biodegradation of organic matter (yard waste, animal manure, and food waste) with the help of microorganisms (mainly bacteria, fungi, and actinomycetes) [8689]. Composting of organic materials is spontaneous biological decomposition, resulting in a stable product and contamination-free for crop cultivation [90, 91]. Usage of biowaste produced from human excretion has been utilized for agriculture since ancient times [92]. Compost contributes an important role in the improvement of the physical, chemical, and microbiological properties of the soil [90]. Manure has many limitations, such as low nutrient content and slow breakdown, and is a means of weeds seed spreading and several nutrient compositions depending on its organic materials, compared to chemical fertilizers. Manure has multiple benefits due to the supply of nutrients, including micronutrients, increased soil nutrient availability due to increased soil microbial activity, the decomposition of harmful elements, soil structure improvements and root development, and increased soil water availability [75]. Application of organic fertilizer sources such as crop residues and manure for smallholder farmers in Ethiopia is limited due to competitive uses for animal fodder and household energy [29].

5.2. Vermicompost

Vermicompost is an emerging technology for fast decomposition and stabilization product of active organic biomass material formed from the interactions between microorganisms and earthworms (red wrigglers, white worms, and earthworms), which is one of the important components of sustainable organic fertilizer and it is quite rich in plant nutrients [87, 89, 93, 94]. Due to the growth of population urban areas, solid left-over production is growing rapidly, making garbage pollution a serious problem [89], and that can be utilized for sustainable land restoration practices by converting into plant nutrients.

5.3. Bone and Blood Meal

Bone and blood meals are the main fertilizers allowed to be used in organic farming [79]. In the processing of animal products, approximately 40–60% of materials are used for food production, and the rest can be utilized for soil amendment [6]. Blood mill and bone meals are good sources of phosphorus, potassium, nitrogen, and calcium source. Bone meal decomposes slowly and releases phosphorus gradually [79]. Bones are the concentrated form of phosphorus captured in the form of animal waste [6]. Dry cattle blood from slaughterhouses can be used as an organic fertilizer because it contains about 10%–13% organic nitrogen [79].

5.4. Biochar

Biochar is produced through the pyrolysis of biomass by thermochemical decomposition of biomass with a temperature of about less than 700°C in the limited supply of oxygen [95], and the main products of pyrolysis are synthetic gas, biooil, and biochar [9699]. It is a process in which biomass resources such as agricultural residue, food processing waste, solid waste, animal waste, and municipal sludge are thermally decomposed in oxygen-free environmental conditions [100]. Moreover, it is an alternative and relatively safer method for handling organic waste with additional advantages such as extracting useable energy and soil amendment organic fertilizer [98].

Biochar improves the physical properties of soil by enhancing its water-holding capacity, moisture levels, and oxygen content [79, 99, 101]. Furthermore, chemical properties, such as contaminant fixation and carbon sequestration, are also improved [102]. At the same time, biochar leads to changes in soil microbial abundance and diversity [96, 99, 101, 103]. It is currently being assessed as a better soil amendment compared to other organic materials like animal manure to improve soil quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions [79, 96, 103]. Production and application of biochar are feasible in terms of raw material as it mostly uses waste materials and does not involve any sophisticated process. Therefore, improving phosphate by improved biobased biochar is perceived by the authors as one of the sustainable solutions.

5.5. Sewage Sludge

The amount of industrial waste is increasing and may be considered a potential source of organic matter for soil [104]. Sludge is the solid by-product of sewage sludge generated after wastewater treatment in the sewage treatment plant and is produced worldwide [88, 104106]. The treatment of domestic and industrial wastes in sewage plants produces large amounts of sludge. Sewage sludge contains high levels of main nutrients and contains organic matter and macro- and micronutrients; this product has been long used in agriculture and horticulture to improve soil fertility [107, 108]. The chemical composition and properties of sewage sludge are highly dependent on the wastewater origin. Sewage sludge ashes can be a good source of fertilizer phosphorus in comprising fertilizer formulations [5]. Moreno et al. [104] reported that sewage sludge showed a potential lower environmental impact in terms of mineral N release and a higher impact in terms of CO2 emission. Subsequently, it is a capable source of phosphorus [51].

5.6. Biofertilizer

Biofertilizers are produced by living microbial inoculants of bacteria, algae, or fungi alone or in combination, and they enhance the accessibility of nutrients to the plants through their root system [109111]. Biofertilizer is the use of soil microorganisms to increase the availability and uptake of mineral nutrients for plants [112]. Currently, biofertilizers have emerged as a highly potent alternative to chemical fertilizers due to their eco-friendly, easy to apply, nontoxic, and cost-effective nature. Biofertilizers materials greatly contribute to the success of organic farming improving soil fertility and are valuable for increasing crop productivity [113]. Moreover, biofertilizers are considered as an alternative to chemical fertilizers in modern vegetable production [109, 110]. Biofertilization aims to accelerate the microbial processes, which supplement the availability of nutrients that can be easily assimilated by plants, and to increase the number of useful microorganisms in the soil. Currently, nitrogen-solubilizing biofertilizers represent the biggest part of the global biofertilizer market, followed by phosphate solubilizing biofertilizers [111]. The use of bacteria that solubilize inorganic phosphates is an important method for increasing the utilization efficiency of phosphates [114].

6. Integrated Fertilization

Soil organic matter (SOM) is central to soil function and quality [115]. Organics, biological, and inorganic fertilizers play a crucial role in improving crop yield and soil properties [116]. As a result, the mixture of chemical fertilizer with organic materials showed great potential for soils with low levels of organic matter [115, 117]. The majority of the researches recommends a combination of inorganic, organic, and biological fertilizers, which constitute an important component of integrated nutrient management and sustainable agriculture [118, 119]. Combined fertilization is an advisable practice to improve nutrient availability and microbial activity, preserve soil fertility, and control soilborne disease [115, 120, 121]. Expanding combined use of biofertilizer produces the best effects, and organic fertilizers alone cannot withstand the required crop production [75, 78]. Due to low plant absorption (10–30%), phosphate solubilizing bacteria are capable of making P available to plants from both inorganic and organic sources [122]. Integrated application of biochar and nitrogen fertilizers increases plant growth and yield. Biochar may improve the nitrogen use efficiency due to an increase in the cation exchange capacity and giving an increase in water-holding capacity. Sarfraz et al. [123] reported that the maximum value of nitrogen use efficiency (65%) was observed when N at the rate of 50% and biochar at the rate of 1% were applied in the soil.

Comparable plant growth and yield responses have been stated from soil amended with fertilizer blends [124, 125]. The joint application of NPK plus manure enhanced the maximum adsorption capacity of phosphorus [126]. According to Damodar Reddy et al. [120], the combined phosphorus source through fertilizer and manure was greater than their sole application in improving the soil P fertility status. Furthermore, Körschens et al. [127] reported that, on average of 350 yield comparisons, combined mineral and organic fertilization resulted in a 6% yield benefit compared with mineral fertilization alone. The summary of the advantages of integrated fertilizer application is shown in Figure 6.

7. Health and Environmental Effect of Chemical Fertilizers

Synthetic fertilizer plays an important role in increasing soil fertility and crop productivity [128, 129]. However, excessive and continuous use of fertilizers accumulates contaminants in the soil to a level harmful to the environment (air pollution, soil acidification and degradation, and water eutrophication) [129132]. Among inorganic fertilizers, phosphate fertilizers are the major source of contaminants because phosphate fertilizers are mainly produced from apatite; it usually contains small concentrations of heavy metals, on average 11, 25, 188, 32, 10, and 239 mgkg−1 of arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), palladium (Pd), and zinc (Zn), respectively [57, 130, 131]. For instance, Morari et al. [57] reported that the acceptable soil concentrations of Cd and Cr are 2 and 100 mg kg−1, respectively. Continuous use of phosphate fertilizers leads to the accumulation of these and other heavy metals that may cause toxicity to plants and contaminate the food supply [133]. Health problems due to heavy metal contamination are of global concern [134]. Among the heavy metals, lead (Pb) and cadmium (Cd) have serious adverse effects on plant growth and human and animal health when ingested [134]. For instance, cadmium is reported to be carcinogenic and highly toxic to humans and animals [135].

In most regions, about 20–70% of the fertilizer is lost to the environment as dissolved nutrients, greenhouse gases, and other pollutants [136]. The low effectiveness of nutrient assimilation causes serious problems because of environmental protection [137]. Mineral fertilizer compounds migrate from soil to water ecosystems as a result of erosion and rinsing out. It causes accelerated contamination and eutrophication of surface and sea waters [137139]. From applied nitrogenous fertilizers to the soil, only 50% is used by the plants [140], and more than half of the N-fertilizer produced each year is lost to the broader environment [139]. From this loss, 2%–20% is lost through evaporation, 15%–25% reacts with organic compounds in the soil, and the remaining 2%–10% penetrates surface and groundwater [127]. Subsequently, 50–70% of the environmental pollution with nitrogen compounds comes from agricultural areas’ water outflows [137].

8. Conclusion

Modern agricultural practices have emphasized the massive use of chemicals, and this strategy has improved grain yields in several nations within the last decades. However, continual and excessive use of chemical fertilizers additionally led to a decline in crop yields and soil fertility. Therefore, the current agricultural experience concentrates on searching for changes to nonrenewable chemical fertilizers because of immense prices and environmental contamination. The discovery of an efficient method for the formulation of an eco-friendly, low price, and competent organic fertilizer is an essential task for the future agricultural development of the globe. Several types of research suggest that a mixture of inorganic, organic, and biological fertilizers represents a very important part of integrated nutrient management and property agriculture. Developing countries like Ethiopia should concentrate on sustainable sources and ways of soil fertility preservation and amendment in addition to chemical fertilizers. Sustainable soil fertility becomes the means to prove the increasing population’s food security and keeping the environment.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are statistically valid and available from all authors upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Tilahun Gisila Abebe generated the idea and overall contents of the paper and wrote the final paper by combining each section. Mohan Rao Tamtam and Amare Ayalew Abebe edited the final paper. Kitaw Abraham Abtemmaryam, Tewodros Geremew Shigut, Yared Abate Dejen, and Endayhu Gebeyhu Haile contributed equally to writing draft content.


  1. K. Chen, T. P. M. Fijen, D. Kleijn, and J. Scheper, “Insect pollination and soil organic matter improve raspberry production independently of the effects of fertilizers,” Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 309, Article ID 107270, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. W. Grzebisz, R. Gaj, G. F. Sassenrath, and J. M. Halloran, “Fertilizer use and wheat yield in central and eastern European countries from 1986 to 2005 and its implication for developing sustainable fertilizer management practices,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 43, no. 18, pp. 2358–2375, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. B. A. Stewart and R. Lal, “Increasing world average yields of cereal crops: it’s all about water,” Advances in Agronomy, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, vol. 151, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. W. M. Stewart and T. L. Roberts, “Food security and the role of fertilizer in supporting it,” Procedia Engineering, vol. 46, pp. 76–82, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. K. Chojnacka, K. Moustakas, and A. Witek-Krowiak, “Bio-based fertilizers: a practical approach towards circular economy,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 295, Article ID 122223, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. A. Saeid and K. Chojnacka, “Fertlizers: need for new strategies,” Organic Farming: Global Perspectives and Methods, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. E. Elka and F. Laekemariam, “Effects of organic nutrient sources and NPS fertilizer on the agronomic and economic performance of haricot bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in Southern Ethiopia,” Applied and Environmental Soil Science, vol. 2020, Article ID 8853552, 9 pages, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. T. B. Sisay, “Review on perception and adaptation strategies of smallholder farmers to climate change in Ethiopia,” International Affairs and Global Strategy, vol. 25, no. 1, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. Y. Berhanu, A. Angassa, and J. B. Aune, “A system analysis to assess the effect of low-cost agricultural technologies on productivity, income and GHG emissions in mixed farming systems in southern Ethiopia,” Agricultural Systems, vol. 187, Article ID 102988, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. D. Negash and B. Israel, “Optimizing fertilizer use within an integrated soil fertility management framework in Ethiopia,” Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, pp. 52–66, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. T. B. Urgessa, “Review of challenges and prospects of agricultural production and productivity in Ethiopia,” Journal of Natural Sciences Research, vol. 4, no. 18, pp. 70–77, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  12. J. Kihara, G. Nziguheba, S. Zingore et al., “Understanding variability in crop response to fertilizer and amendments in sub-Saharan Africa,” Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 229, pp. 1–12, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. L. Mozumdar, “Agricultural productivity and food security in to progress agricultural production and increased agricultural productivity is requisite to ensure self-sufficiency in food, which is the first constituent of food security,” Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 35, no. 1-2, pp. 53–69, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  14. D. F. Larson and D. Zerfu, “Incomplete markets and fertilizer use: evidence from Ethiopia. Policy research working paper 5235,” 2010, View at: Google Scholar
  15. M. Morris, V. A. Kelly, R. J. Kopicki, and D. Byerlee, “Fertilizer use in African agriculture,” Fertilizer Use in African Agriculture, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. IFDC, “Assessment of fertilizer consumption and use by crop in Ethiopia. FUBC Ethiopian Final Report,” 2015, View at: Google Scholar
  17. V. Theriault and M. Smale, “The unintended consequences of the fertilizer subsidy program on crop species diversity in Mali,” Food Policy, vol. 102, Article ID 102121, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. N. Thakur, S. Kaur, P. Tomar, S. Thakur, and A. N. Yadav, “Microbial biopesticides: current status and advancement for sustainable agriculture and environment,” New and Future Developments in Microbial Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. X. Cui, L. Guo, C. Li, M. Liu, G. Wu, and G. Jiang, “The total biomass nitrogen reservoir and its potential of replacing chemical fertilizers in China,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 135, Article ID 110215, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. W. J. Zhang and X. Y. Zhang, “A forecast analysis on fertilizers consumption worldwide,” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, vol. 133, no. 1–3, pp. 427–434, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. M. Workineh, “Impact of application of organic fertilizer on production of some cereal crops: a review,” Academic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Research, vol. 8, pp. 214–226, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. J. U. I. Agbahey, H. Grethe, and W. Negatu, “Fertilizer supply chain in Ethiopia: structure, performance and policy analysis,” Afrika Focus, vol. 28, no. 1, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. World Bank, “World development report 2008: agriculture for development. Washington, DC. © World Bank,” Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol. 53, no. 9, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  24. E. Martey, J. K. M. Kuwornu, and J. Adjebeng-Danquah, “Estimating the effect of mineral fertilizer use on land productivity and income: evidence from Ghana,” Land Use Policy, vol. 85, pp. 463–475, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. C. O. Dimkpa, J. Fugice, U. Singh, and T. D. Lewis, “Development of fertilizers for enhanced nitrogen use efficiency - trends and perspectives,” The Science of the Total Environment, vol. 731, Article ID 139113, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. S. Majee, G. Halder, D. D. Mandal, O. N. Tiwari, and T. Mandal, “Transforming wet blue leather and potato peel into an eco-friendly bio-organic NPK fertilizer for intensifying crop productivity and retrieving value-added recyclable chromium salts,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 411, Article ID 125046, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. W. Ejigu, Y. G. Selassie, E. Elias, and M. Damte, “Integrated fertilizer application improves soil properties and maize (Zea mays L.) yield on Nitisols in Northwestern Ethiopia,” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 2, Article ID e06074, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. E. Elias, P. F. Okoth, and E. M. A. Smaling, “Explaining bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) yield differences by soil properties and fertilizer rates in the highlands of Ethiopia,” Geoderma, vol. 339, pp. 126–133, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. A. Haileslassie, J. Priess, E. Veldkamp, D. Teketay, and J. P. Lesschen, “Assessment of soil nutrient depletion and its spatial variability on smallholders’ mixed farming systems in Ethiopia using partial versus full nutrient balances,” Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 108, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. A. S. Elrys, E.-S. M. Desoky, M. A. Alnaimy, H. Zhang, J.-b. Zhang, and Z.-c. Cai, “The food nitrogen footprint for African countries under fertilized and unfertilized farms,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 279, Article ID 111599, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. T. Kusse, T. Balemi, and T. Abera, “Effect of integrated application of poultry manure and chemical NP fertilizers on growth, yield and yield components of highland maize variety on vertisol at ambo university on station, Ethiopia,” International Journal of Sustainable Agricultural Research, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 183–197, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. S. Shahena, M. Rajan, V. Chandran, and L. Mathew, “Conventional methods of fertilizer release,” Controlled Release Fertilizers for Sustainable Agriculture, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2021a. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. I. L. Kadigi, J. W. Richardson, K. D. Mutabazi et al., “The effect of nitrogen-fertilizer and optimal plant population on the profitability of maize plots in the Wami River sub-basin, Tanzania: a bio-economic simulation approach,” Agricultural Systems, vol. 185, Article ID 102948, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. P. Deepika and D. Mubarak Ali, “Production and assessment of microalgal liquid fertilizer for the enhanced growth of four crop plants,” Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology, vol. 28, Article ID 101701, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. T. D. Habtamu Deribe, Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, vol. 6, no. 11, 2016.
  36. S. Iqbal, H. I. Tak, A. Inam, A. Inam, S. Sahay, and S. Chalkoo, “Comparative effect of wastewater and groundwater irrigation along with nitrogenous fertilizer on growth, photosynthesis and productivity of chilli (capsicum annuum L.),” Journal of Plant Nutrition, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 1006–1021, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. J. C. Cole, M. W. Smith, C. J. Penn, B. S. Cheary, and K. J. Conaghan, “Nitrogen, phosphorus, calcium, and magnesium applied individually or as a slow release or controlled release fertilizer increase growth and yield and affect macronutrient and micronutrient concentration and content of field-grown tomato plants,” Scientia Horticulturae, vol. 211, pp. 420–430, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. M. M. Rashid, M. Jahan, and K. S. Islam, “Impact of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium on Brown planthopper and tolerance of its host rice plants,” Rice Science, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 119–131, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. K. Tadesse, D. Habte, W. Admasu et al., “Effects of preceding crops and nitrogen fertilizer on the productivity and quality of malting barley in tropical environment,” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 5, Article ID e07093, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. S. T. Holden, “Fertilizer and sustainable intensification in sub-saharan Africa,” Global Food Security, vol. 18, pp. 20–26, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. H. Wu, G. K. MacDonald, J. N. Galloway et al., “The influence of crop and chemical fertilizer combinations on greenhouse gas emissions: a partial life-cycle assessment of fertilizer production and use in China,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 168, Article ID 105303, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. A. S. Elrys, M. S. Metwally, S. Raza et al., “How much nitrogen does Africa need to feed itself by 2050?” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 268, Article ID 110488, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. M. Calabi-Floody, J. Medina, C. Rumpel et al., “Smart fertilizers as a strategy for sustainable agriculture,” Advances in Agronomy, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, vol. 147, 1st edition, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. C. J. Dawson and J. Hilton, “Fertiliser availability in a resource-limited world: production and recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus,” Food Policy, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. S14–S22, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. M. N. Khan, M. Mobin, Z. K. Abbas, and S. A. Alamri, “Fertilizers and their contaminants in soils, surface and groundwater,” Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, vol. 1–5, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. I. Álvarez-Manzaneda, N. Laza, F. B. Navarro, E. M. Suárez-Rey, M. L. Segura, and I. de Vicente, “Assessing the viability of recovered phosphorus from eutrophicated aquatic ecosystems as a liquid fertilizer,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 285, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. S. Z. Sattari, A. F. Bouwman, K. E. Giller, and M. K. Van Ittersum, “Residual soil phosphorus as the missing piece in the global phosphorus crisis puzzle,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 109, no. 16, pp. 6348–6353, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. A. Bogdan, C. O’ Donnell, A. A. Robles Aguilar et al., “Impact of time and phosphorus application rate on phosphorus bioavailability and efficiency of secondary fertilizers recovered from municipal wastewater,” Chemosphere, vol. 282, Article ID 131017, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. J. Buates and T. Imai, “Assessment of plant growth performance and nutrient release for application of phosphorus-loaded layered double hydroxides as fertilizer,” Environmental Technology & Innovation, vol. 22, Article ID 101505, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. M. Jastrzębska, M. K. Kostrzewska, and K. Treder, “Phosphorus fertilizers from sewage sludge ash and animal blood have no effect on earthworms,” Agronomy, vol. 10, no. 4, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. O. Krüger and C. Adam, “Phosphorus in recycling fertilizers-analytical challenges,” Environmental Research, vol. 155, pp. 353–358, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. J. Lienert and T. A. Larsen, “High acceptance of urine source separation in seven European countries: a review,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 556–566, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  53. J. Jena, T. Das, and U. Sarkar, “Explicating proficiency of waste biomass-derived biochar for reclaiming phosphate from source-separated urine and its application as a phosphate biofertilizer,” Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, vol. 9, no. 1, Article ID 104648, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. S. Hartati, Suryono, and D. Purnomo, “Effectiveness and efficiency of potassium fertilizer application to increase the production and quality of rice in entisols,” IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 142, no. 1, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. M. Hasanuzzaman, M. H. M. B. Bhuyan, K. Nahar et al., “Potassium: a vital regulator of plant responses and tolerance to abiotic stresses,” Agronomy, vol. 8, no. 3, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. G. Izydorczyk, U. Sienkiewicz-Cholewa, S. Baśladyńska, D. Kocek, M. Mironiuk, and K. Chojnacka, “New environmentally friendly bio-based micronutrient fertilizer by biosorption: From laboratory studies to the field,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 710, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. F. Morari, G. Vellidis, and P. Gay, “Nitrogen Cycle, Fertilizers, and N Loss Pathways,” 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  58. M. Sarwar, J. K. Patra, A. Ali, M. Maqbool, and M. I. Arshad, “Effect of compost and NPK fertilizer on improving biochemical and antioxidant properties of Moringa oleifera,” South African Journal of Botany, vol. 129, pp. 62–66, 2021. View at: Google Scholar
  59. World Bank, Factors Affecting Supply of Fertilizer in Sub-Saharan Africa. Transport, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA, 2006.
  60. S. A. S. Sadat Darakeh, W. Weisany, M. Diyanat, and R. Ebrahimi, “Bio-organic fertilizers induce biochemical changes and affect seed oil fatty acids composition in black cumin (Nigella sativa Linn),” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 164, Article ID 113383, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. J. Nyamangara, J. Kodzwa, E. N. Masvaya, and G. Soropa, “The role of synthetic fertilizers in enhancing ecosystem services in crop production systems in developing countries,” The Role of Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Food Systems, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2019. View at: Google Scholar
  62. J. Huang, C. Xu, B. G. Ridoutt, X. c. Wang, and P. a. Ren, “Nitrogen and phosphorus losses and eutrophication potential associated with fertilizer application to cropland in China,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 159, pp. 171–179, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. M. Sheahan and C. B. Barrett, “Ten striking facts about agricultural input use in Sub-Saharan Africa,” Food Policy, vol. 67, pp. 12–25, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. W. M. Mwangi, “Low use of fertilizers and low productivity in sub-Saharan Africa,” Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 135–147, 1996. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  65. B. Negatu, H. Kromhout, Y. Mekonnen, and R. Vermeulen, “Use of chemical pesticides in Ethiopia: a cross-sectional comparative study on knowledge, attitude and practice of farmers and farm workers in three farming systems,” Annals of Occupational Hygiene, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 551–566, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. L. Riesgo, K. Louhichi, and S. Gomez Paloma, “modelling farm-household level impacts of fertilizer subsidy programs on productivity and food security: the case of Ethiopia,” in Proceedings of the 2016 AAAE Fifth International Conference, vol. 1–16, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, September 2016. View at: Google Scholar
  67. K. Endale, Fertilizer Consumption and Agricultural Productivity in Ethiopia, Ethiopian Development Research Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2011.
  68. G. A. Abegaz, “Cereal productivity in Ethiopia: an analysis based on ERHS data,” Ethiopian Journal of Economics, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 1–27, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  69. CSA, The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Central Statistical Agency Report on Area and Production of Crops, CSA, Seattle, WA, USA, 2021.
  70. A. Seyoum Taffesse, P. Dorosh, and S. A. Gemessa, “Crop production in Ethiopia: regional patterns and trends,” Food and Agriculture in Ethiopia: Progress and Policy Challenges, Article ID 9780812208, pp. 53–83, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  71. V. W. Ruttan, “Productivity growth in world agriculture: sources and constraints,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 161–184, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  72. F. Crista, M. Boldea, I. Radulov et al., “The impact of chemical fertilization on maize yield,” Research Journal of Agricultural Science, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 172–177, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  73. D. F. Larson, K. Otsuka, T. Matsumoto, and T. Kilic, “Should African rural development strategies depend on smallholder farms? An exploration of the inverse-productivity hypothesis,” Agricultural Economics, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 355–367, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  74. M. Hazenbosch, S. Sui, B. Isua et al., “Using locally available fertilisers to enhance the yields of swidden farmers in Papua New Guinea,” Agricultural Systems, vol. 192, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  75. S. H. Han, J. Y. An, J. Hwang, S. B. Kim, and B. B. Park, “The effects of organic manure and chemical fertilizer on the growth and nutrient concentrations of yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera Lin.) in a nursery system,” Forest Science and Technology, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 137–143, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  76. M. Hafez, A. I. Popov, and M. Rashad, “Integrated use of bio-organic fertilizers for enhancing soil fertility–plant nutrition, germination status and initial growth of corn (Zea Mays L.),” Environmental Technology & Innovation, vol. 21, Article ID 101329, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  77. S. Koushal and P. Singh, “Effect of integrated use of fertilizer, fym and biofertilizer on growth and yield performance on soya bean Glycine max (L) merill,” vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 193–197, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  78. E. T. Epule, C. R. Bryant, C. Akkari, and O. Daouda, “Can organic fertilizers set the pace for a greener arable agricultural revolution in Africa? Analysis, synthesis and way forward,” Land Use Policy, vol. 47, pp. 179–187, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  79. H. Shaji, V. Chandran, and L. Mathew, “Organic fertilizers as a route to controlled release of nutrients,” Controlled Release Fertilizers for Sustainable Agriculture, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  80. C. Chinnadurai, G. Gopalaswamy, and D. Balachandar, “Impact of long-term organic and inorganic nutrient managements on the biological properties and eubacterial community diversity of the Indian semi-arid Alfisol,” Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 531–548, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  81. X. Liu, G. Ren, and Y. Shi, “The effect of organic manure and chemical fertilizer on growth and development of Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni,” Energy Procedia, vol. 5, pp. 1200–1204, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  82. E. Jotautiene, V. Bivainis, R. Zinkeviciene, and A. Aboltins, “Assessment of organic granulated manure fertilizers frictional properties,” Engineering for Rural Development, vol. 17, pp. 1539–1544, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  83. B. Li and Y. Shen, “Effects of land transfer quality on the application of organic fertilizer by large-scale farmers in China,” Land Use Policy, vol. 100, Article ID 105124, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  84. S. S. Mahdi, G. I. Hassan, S. a. Samoon, H. a. Rather, S. a. Dar, and B. Zehra, “Bio-fertilizers in organic agriculture,” Journal of Phytology, vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 42–54, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  85. M. Kanda, G. Djaneye-boundjou, K. Wala et al., “World’ s largest science, technology & medicine open access book publisher advances in analytical methods for organophosphorus pesticide detection,” Environmental Systems Research, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 36–42, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  86. S. Gao, D. Lu, T. Qian, and Y. Zhou, “Thermal hydrolyzed food waste liquor as liquid organic fertilizer,” The Science of the Total Environment, vol. 775, Article ID 145786, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  87. A. Jack and J. Thies, “Compost and vermicompost as amendments promoting soil health,” Biological Approaches to Sustainable Soil Systems, Books in Soils, Plants, and the Environment, CRC, Boca Raton, FL, USA, pp. 453–466, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  88. W. Philipp and L. E. Hoelzle, “Waste management in Europe,” Encyclopedia of Meat Sciences, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, vol. 2, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  89. S. Singh, M. Khwairakpam, and C. N. Tripathi, “A comparative study between composting and vermicomposting for recycling food wastes,” International Journal of Environment and Waste Management, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 231–242, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  90. Ó. J. Sánchez, D. A. Ospina, and S. Montoya, “Compost supplementation with nutrients and microorganisms in composting process,” Waste Management, vol. 69, no. 26, pp. 136–153, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  91. N. Soobhany, “Insight into the recovery of nutrients from organic solid waste through biochemical conversion processes for fertilizer production: a review,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 241, Article ID 118413, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  92. N. Kishor, S. Kale, and P. S. Agrawal, “Use of fertilizers derived from urine as a plant growth regulator,” Materials Today Proceedings, vol. 32, pp. 504–509, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  93. A. Atik, “Effect of different concentrations of vermicompost (biohumus) on the root collar diameter and height growth contribution/originality,” Journal of Forests, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 29–36, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  94. A. Mondal, L. Goswami, N. Hussain et al., “Detoxification and eco-friendly recycling of brick kiln coal ash using Eisenia fetida: a clean approach through vermitechnology,” Chemosphere, vol. 244, Article ID 125470, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  95. T. M. Agbede, “Effect of tillage, biochar, poultry manure and NPK 15-15-15 fertilizer, and their mixture on soil properties, growth and carrot (Daucus carota L.) yield under tropical conditions,” Heliyon, vol. 7, no. 6, Article ID e07391, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  96. I. Fatima, M. Ahmad, M. Vithanage, and S. Iqbal, “Abstraction of nitrates and phosphates from water by sawdust- and rice husk-derived biochars: their potential as N- and P-loaded fertilizer for plant productivity in nutrient deficient soil,” Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis, vol. 155, Article ID 105073, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  97. A. Pathy, J. Ray, and B. Paramasivan, “Challenges and opportunities of nutrient recovery from human urine using biochar for fertilizer applications,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 304, Article ID 127019, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  98. S. G. Lusiba, J. Odhiambo, R. Adeleke, and S. Maseko, “The potential of biochar to enhance concentration and utilization of selected macro and micro nutrients for chickpea (Cicer arietinum) grown in three contrasting soils,” Rhizosphere, vol. 17, Article ID 100289, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  99. Y. Zhou, S. Qin, S. Verma et al., “Production and beneficial impact of biochar for environmental application: a comprehensive review,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 337, Article ID 125451, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  100. J. Lee, A. K. Sarmah, and E. E. Kwon, “Production and formation of biochar,” Biochar from Biomass and Waste: Fundamentals and Applications, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 3–18, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  101. A. R. L. Albuquerque, R. S. Angélica, A. Merino, and S. P. A. Paz, “Chemical and mineralogical characterization and potential use of ash from Amazonian biomasses as an agricultural fertilizer and for soil amendment,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 295, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  102. N. Parker, W. A. Agyare, E. Bessah, and L. Amegbletor, “Biochar as a substitute for inorganic fertilizer: effects on soil chemical properties and maize growth in Ghana,” Journal of Plant Nutrition, vol. 44, no. 11, pp. 1539–1547, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  103. A. A. N. Katakula, W. Gawanab, F. Itanna, and H. A. Mupambwa, “The potential fertilizer value of Namibian beach-cast seaweed (Laminaria pallida and Gracilariopsis funicularis) biochar as a nutrient source in organic agriculture,” Scientific African, vol. 10, Article ID e00592, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  104. T. Moreno, M. Graziella, B. Elena et al., “Agro-industry sludge as a potential organic fertilizer for prompt nitrogen release,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 48, no. 9, pp. 999–1007, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  105. S. Assefa and S. Tadesse, “The principal role of organic fertilizer on soil properties and agricultural productivity,” Agricultural Research & Technology: Open Access Journal, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 1–5, 2019. View at: Google Scholar
  106. A. Grobelak, K. Czerwińska, and A. Murtaś, “General considerations on sludge disposal, industrial and municipal sludge,” Industrial and Municipal Sludge: Emerging Concerns and Scope for Resource Recovery, pp. 135–153, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  107. M. Jamil Khan, M. Qasim, and M. Umar, “Utilization of sewage sludge as organic fertiliser in sustainable agriculture,” Journal of Applied Sciences, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 531–535, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  108. B. Rodriguez-Morgado, I. Gomez, J. Parrado, A. M. Garcia-Martinez, C. Aragon, and M. Tejada, “Obtaining edaphic biostimulants/biofertilizers from different sewage sludges. Effects on soil biological properties,” Environmental Technology, vol. 36, no. 17, pp. 2217–2226, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  109. G. Jain, “National seminar “role of biological sciences in organic farming” role of micronutrients in potato cultivation,” Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 49–52, 2019. View at: Google Scholar
  110. M. Kumar and K. Kumar, “Role of bio-fertilizers in vegetables production: a review,” Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 328–334, 2019. View at: Google Scholar
  111. M. Mącik, A. Gryta, and M. Frąc, “Biofertilizers in agriculture: an overview on concepts, strategies and effects on soil microorganisms,” Advances in Agronomy, vol. 162, pp. 31–87, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  112. H. Muraleedharan, S. Seshadri, and K. Perumal, “Biofertilizer (Phosphobacteria). Biofertilizer,” 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  113. S. Barman, S. Das, and S. S. Bhattacharya, “The prospects of bio-fertilizer technology for productive and sustainable agricultural growth,” New and Future Developments in Microbial Biotechnology and Bioengineering: Microbial Biotechnology in Agro-Environmental Sustainability, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  114. M. R. Sarikhani, N. Aliasgharzad, and B. Khoshru, “P Solubilizing potential of some plant growth promoting bacteria used as ingredient in phosphatic biofertilizers with emphasis on growth promotion of Zea mays L,” Geomicrobiology Journal, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 327–335, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  115. Z. Liu, Q. Rong, W. Zhou, and G. Liang, “Effects of inorganic and organic amendment on soil chemical properties, enzyme activities, microbial community and soil quality in yellow clayey soil,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 3, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  116. N. Basak, B. Mandal, A. Datta et al., “Impact of long-term application of organics, biological, and inorganic fertilizers on microbial activities in rice-based cropping system,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 48, no. 20, pp. 2390–2401, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  117. W. Wang, D. Y. F. Lai, C. Wang, T. Pan, and C. Zeng, “Effects of rice straw incorporation on active soil organic carbon pools in a subtropical paddy field,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 152, pp. 8–16, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  118. A. R. Fallah Nosratabad, H. Etesami, and S. Shariati, “Integrated use of organic fertilizer and bacterial inoculant improves phosphorus use efficiency in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) fertilized with triple superphosphate,” Rhizosphere, vol. 3, no. February, pp. 109–111, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  119. A. Khaliq, M. K. Abbasi, and T. Hussain, “Effects of integrated use of organic and inorganic nutrient sources with effective microorganisms (EM) on seed cotton yield in Pakistan,” Bioresource Technology, vol. 97, no. 8, pp. 967–972, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  120. D. Damodar Reddy, A. Subba Rao, K. Sammi Reddy, and P. N. Takkar, “Yield sustainability and phosphorus utilization in soybean-wheat system on Vertisols in response to integrated use of manure and fertilizer phosphorus,” Field Crops Research, vol. 62, no. 2–3, pp. 181–190, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  121. R. Tao, Y. Liang, S. A. Wakelin, and G. Chu, “Supplementing chemical fertilizer with an organic component increases soil biological function and quality,” Applied Soil Ecology, vol. 96, pp. 42–51, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  122. A. M. Komarek, S. Drogue, R. Chenoune et al., “Agricultural household effects of fertilizer price changes for smallholder farmers in central Malawi,” Agricultural Systems, vol. 154, pp. 168–178, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  123. R. Sarfraz, A. Shakoor, M. Abdullah, A. Arooj, A. Hussain, and S. Xing, “Impact of integrated application of biochar and nitrogen fertilizers on maize growth and nitrogen recovery in alkaline calcareous soil,” Soil Science & Plant Nutrition, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 488–498, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  124. C. Celestina, P. W. G. Sale, C. Tang, and A. E. Franks, “Organic and inorganic amendments did not affect microbial community composition in the bulk soil differently but did change the relative abundance of selected taxa,” European Journal of Soil Science, vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 796–806, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  125. N. Chauhan, N. K. Sankhyan, R. P. Sharma, J. Singh, and Gourav, “Effect of long-term application of inorganic fertilizers, farm yard manure and lime on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) productivity, quality and nutrient content in an acid alfisol,” Journal of Plant Nutrition, vol. 43, no. 17, pp. 2569–2578, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  126. W. Ahmed, H. Jing, L. Kailou et al., “Impacts of long-term inorganic and organic fertilization on phosphorus adsorption and desorption characteristics in red paddies in southern China,” PLoS One, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2021. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  127. M. Körschens, E. Albert, M. Armbruster et al., “Effect of mineral and organic fertilization on crop yield, nitrogen uptake, carbon and nitrogen balances, as well as soil organic carbon content and dynamics: results from 20 European long-term field experiments of the twenty-first century,” Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 1017–1040, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  128. D. Emmanuel, E. Owusu-Sekyere, V. Owusu, and H. Jordaan, “Impact of agricultural extension service on adoption of chemical fertilizer: implications for rice productivity and development in Ghana,” NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, vol. 79, pp. 41–49, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  129. C.-c. Ning, P.-d. Gao, B.-q. Wang, W.-p. Lin, N.-h. Jiang, and K.-z. Cai, “Impacts of chemical fertilizer reduction and organic amendments supplementation on soil nutrient, enzyme activity and heavy metal content,” Journal of Integrative Agriculture, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 1819–1831, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  130. L. Al Attar, M. Al-Oudat, K. Shamali, B. Abdul Ghany, and S. Kanakri, “Case study: heavy metals and fluoride contents in the materials of Syrian phosphate industry and in the vicinity of phosphogypsum piles,” Environmental Technology, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 143–152, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  131. E. Thomas and J. Omueti, “The effect of phosphate fertilizer on heavy metal in soils and Amaranthus caudatus,” Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 145–149, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  132. S. Wu, B. Thapa, C. Rivera, and Y. Yuan, “Nitrate and nitrite fertilizer production from air and water by continuous flow liquid-phase plasma discharge,” Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, vol. 9, no. 2, Article ID 104761, 2021b. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  133. A. Branzini and M. S. Zubillaga, “Comparative use of soil organic and inorganic amendments in heavy metals stabilization,” Applied and Environmental Soil Science, vol. 2012, Article ID 721032, 7 pages, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  134. P. N. Mwilola, I. Mukumbuta, V. Shitumbanuma et al., “Lead, zinc and cadmium accumulation, and associated health risks, in maize grown near the kabwe mine in Zambia in response to organic and inorganic soil amendments,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 17, no. 23, pp. 1–15, 2020. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  135. B. G. Luckett, L. J. Su, J. C. Rood, and E. T. H. Fontham, “Cadmium exposure and pancreatic cancer in South Louisiana,” Journal of Environmental and Public Health, vol. 2012, Article ID 180186, 11 pages, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  136. C. Qiao, L. Liu, S. Hu, J. E. Compton, T. L. Greaver, and Q. Li, “How inhibiting nitrification affects nitrogen cycle and reduces environmental impacts of anthropogenic nitrogen input,” Global Change Biology, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1249–1257, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  137. K. Lubkowski, “Environmental impact of fertilizer uses and slow release of mineral nutrients as a response to this challenge,” Polish Journal of Chemical Technology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 72–79, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  138. J. R. Follett, R. F. Follett, and W. C. Herz, “Environmental and human impacts of reactive nitrogen,” Advances in Nitrogen Management for Water Quality, Soil and Water Conservation Society, Ethiopia, pp. 1–37, 2010, View at: Google Scholar
  139. P. M. Kopittke, E. Lombi, P. Wang, J. K. Schjoerring, and S. Husted, “Nanomaterials as fertilizers for improving plant mineral nutrition and environmental outcomes,” Environmental Sciences: Nano, vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 3513–3524, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  140. O. Van Cleemput, F. Zapata, and B. Vanlauwe, “Guidelines on nitrogen management in agricultural systems,” Guidelines on Nitrogen Management in Agricultural Systems, vol. 29, pp. 19–125, 2008. View at: Google Scholar

Copyright © 2022 Tilahun Gisila Abebe et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

No related content is available yet for this article.
 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

No related content is available yet for this article.

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.