Maize Production in Uganda: Variety Choice, Plant Population, Fertiliser Timing and Harvest Maturity

The direct answer

Four decisions set a maize crop before anything else matters: which variety you plant, how many plants you establish and how they are arranged, what nutrition the crop gets and when, and at what point you decide the crop is mature.

For the first, Uganda has an official reference. The National Agricultural Research Organisation publishes a variety allocation list, dated as of 15 October 2023 in the version reviewed here, which names released maize varieties with their NARO variety identification numbers and the seed companies licensed to sell them. That is the document to check a variety name against. It is a list of releases and licences, and it carries no yield potential, no maturity length and no disease resistance information, so it answers "is this a real released variety and who is licensed for it", not "which variety is best for me".

For the second, Uganda's standard extension manual is explicit. The MAAIF maize training manual for extension workers instructs: "To ensure proper spacing for a maize monocrop, mark out the field using marked strings at 75cm for spacing between rows. Plant two seeds per hole at every 60cm mark along the string. This takes 10kg of seed per acre and optimum plant population of 21,000 plants." It gives an alternative: "At a spacing of 75 cm (2.5 ft) by 30cm (1foot) and one seed per hole, the farmer still uses 10kg of seed per acre and optimum plant population of 21,000 plants."

Those figures do not reconcile with each other arithmetically, and this article says so rather than smoothing it over. The section below sets out exactly where the inconsistency lies and what to do about it.

For the third, the same manual states: "Rapid nitrogen uptake by the maize plant begins about 5 weeks after germination (30-40 days) and will continue up to 10 weeks." That is a statement about the plant's uptake physiology, and it is the basis for thinking about timing. It is not a top-dressing instruction, and the manual names no top-dressing product or rate.

For the fourth, the manual lists the indicators of physiological maturity, including the stalk and cob sheath turning brown, ears drooping, hard floury grain, a black layer at the kernel tip, and a moisture content between 18 and 24 per cent if a meter is available. The black layer and that moisture range are not the same event, and treating them as one is a common and costly error. The maturity section below separates them.

This article promises no yield. Every research yield figure in it is presented with the conditions the source states, and where the source omits conditions the article says so and treats the figure as weak.

Who this article is for

You grow maize in Uganda, on any scale from part of an acre upwards, and you want the agronomic decisions made deliberately rather than by habit or by whatever the input shop suggested. You may be deciding whether to buy hybrid seed, whether to change spacing, whether fertiliser is worth it on your field, or when to start harvesting.

The problem this article solves

The promise problem. Almost everything published about maize carries a yield claim. Yield claims without conditions are marketing, and they are the main reason farmers are disappointed by inputs that worked somewhere else.

The reconciliation problem. The country's standard extension manual gives spacing figures and a population figure that do not follow from each other. Nobody says so, and farmers who try to plant to both end up with neither.

The maturity problem. Physiological maturity, when the grain stops filling, and harvest moisture, when the grain is dry enough to handle, are different points separated by weeks. Confusing them causes either harvesting a crop that is still filling, or leaving a mature crop standing in the field, which is where a large part of Uganda's maize quality problem begins.

The fertiliser response problem. Fertiliser does not always pay, and the honest evidence on that is uncomfortable and important. It is set out below.

The decision you are making

For one field, for one season:

• Which variety, checked against the official released list, and whether it is hybrid, open pollinated or farm saved.
• What spacing and how many plants per hole, and therefore what population you are actually establishing.
• What nutrition the crop gets, in what form, at what timing, and whether it is justified on this field at all.
• When you decide the crop is physiologically mature, and separately when you harvest.

You are not deciding your yield. You are deciding the conditions under which the crop grows, and the yield follows from those conditions plus the weather.

Uganda-specific context

Where the variety list comes from

The NARO variety allocation list, in the version dated as of 15 October 2023, sets out varieties with columns for variety name, NARO variety identification number, the company allocated and the type of licence, with licence types including exclusive, semi-exclusive and non-exclusive. The maize entries in that version include Longe 5, Longe 5D, Longe 6H, Longe 7H, Longe 8H, Longe 9H, Longe 10H, Longe 11H, Myezi Mitatu, UH 5051, UH 5052, UH 5053, UH 5354, UH 5355, UH 5401, UH 5403, UH 5556, NAROMAIZE 731, NAROMAIZE 60IR, NAROMAIZE 61 also shown as UH5961, and NARO MAIZE 62, each with its own NARO variety identification number.

Two practical points. A variety name that does not appear on the official list should be questioned. And two entries in the version reviewed appear against the same identification number, which is most likely a transcription artefact in the published table rather than a substantive issue; it is noted here rather than resolved, because Falcon does not correct another institution's document.

What the list does not contain is as important as what it does. It carries no yield potential, no maturity length in days, no altitude range and no disease resistance. Those come from NARO itself, from the seed company's own material for that variety, and from your district production office. Ask for them by variety name and NVIN.

The seed system you are actually buying in

Research published in 2021 states that "Farmers in Uganda access approximately 85% of their seed from informal seed systems; largely through home-saved seed and local grain markets", within a wider sub-Saharan pattern in which "Smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa access 90% of their seed needs from informal seed systems". The same work records that "In Uganda, QDS is a recognized seed class produced by trained and registered farmer-led enterprises, with seed fields inspections by authorized district agricultural officers", and that by 2012 there were "about twenty-three Ugandan seed companies producing and selling mainly maize seed, as well as some legume and sunflower seeds."

A 2020 study for the integrated seed sector development programme in Uganda reported that "only 35% of sampled farmers had access to and used QDS at least for one season in the last four years", with 48.6 per cent use among programme beneficiaries against 23.3 per cent in the control group, and home-saved seed use at 32.8 per cent among beneficiaries against 51.2 per cent among non-beneficiaries.

What that means when you buy. Quality declared seed is a recognised class in Uganda sitting between certified seed and farmer-saved seed, produced by registered enterprises with district inspection. If you are buying maize seed, know which class you are buying, and buy from a source that can tell you.

Note also the national picture on input use. The Uganda Bureau of Statistics annual agricultural survey for 2019 reported that 25 per cent of agricultural households used improved seeds and 36.2 per cent used inorganic fertilizers.

Falcon located no verified Ugandan statistic on counterfeit seed, so none is stated here. The fertiliser quality verification article referenced at the end deals with how to check what you are buying.

The spacing and population figures, and the inconsistency in them

The MAAIF manual gives two configurations, both quoted in the direct answer above: 75 cm between rows with two seeds per hole every 60 cm, and 75 cm by 30 cm with one seed per hole. It states 10 kg of seed per acre and an optimum plant population of 21,000 plants for both.

Here is the problem, stated plainly. Both of those configurations put the same number of seeds on the ground: at 75 cm by 60 cm with two seeds per hole, and at 75 cm by 30 cm with one seed per hole, the seed spacing works out the same. That part is consistent. But the population that either configuration produces on a hectare basis is in the region of 44,000 plants per hectare, which is roughly 18,000 per acre, and the manual's stated 21,000 plants per acre corresponds to roughly 52,000 per hectare. The stated population does not follow arithmetically from the stated spacing.

A more recent Ugandan manual, produced in October 2025 by Farm Africa with AGRA, district local governments, JICA and MAAIF for eastern Uganda, reproduces essentially the same text: the same 75 cm and 60 cm spacing, the same 10 kg of seed per acre, the same 21,000 plants and the same 50 kg of DAP per acre. So the figures are consistent across two dated Ugandan sources, and inconsistent within each.

What to do about it. Do not try to satisfy both numbers. Plant to the spacing, because spacing is what you can actually execute in a field with a string and a hoe, and then count what you have. Count plants in a measured length of row at three or four places in the field about three weeks after emergence, work out your actual population per acre or per hectare, and record it against your yield. After two seasons that record tells you what population your field actually carries and whether changing it changes anything, which is a better answer than either published figure.

Report the arithmetic question to your district production office if you want it resolved. Falcon quotes the manual's numbers as the manual's numbers and does not present either as derived from the other.

What plant population research says, and how little of it is Ugandan

No Ugandan maize spacing or plant density trial was located during this research. That absence is the single biggest evidence gap in this article and it is why the counting method above matters.

Two foreign trials illustrate the shape of the question, and both are quoted with their conditions.

A Tanzanian study published in 2024 on optimal plant density of adapted maize varieties in low and mid-altitude ecologies of Tanzania noted that "The commonly recommended plant density is 44,444 plants/ha for decades. However, there is no recent study done to validate this practice if it optimizes productivity under current climate and soil fertility variability." It planted open pollinated varieties commonly grown by small scale farmers "in three different plant densities of 44,444, 53,333 and 66,666 plants per hector with inter and intra row spacings of 0.75mx0.3m, 0.75mx0.25m and 0.75mx0.2m respectively", and reported that "The overall site mean for grain yield was found to be 6.43t/ha, 7.31t/ha and 6.11t/ha for the plant density of 44,444plants/ha, 53,333plants/ha and 66,666plants/ha respectively."

That study does not state its fertiliser regime, its named varieties, its specific sites, its seasons or years, or its rainfall. Under the standard this article holds itself to, a yield figure without those conditions cannot be used as guidance. It is quoted to show the shape of the relationship, which is that yield rose from the lowest density to the middle density and fell again at the highest, in Tanzania, in open pollinated varieties, under conditions the paper does not describe. Do not plant to those numbers.

A South African two-year trial published in 2022 evaluated rainfed maize in semi-arid environments: "A 2-year field trial was conducted in South Africa during the 2017/2018 (Season 1) and 2018/2019 (Season 2) production seasons to evaluate growth and water use productivity of rainfed maize established at seven diverse plant population (20 000 to 60 000 plants ha-1) and row spacing (0.52 and 0.76 m) configurations." Its findings included that "In Season 1, with more uniform rainfall distribution, no biomass or yield benefits were found with increased plant population, except at 50 000 plants ha-1 at 0.76 m row spacing", that "In Season 2, plant populations at 0.76 m row spacing out yielded any given plant population at 0.52 m row spacing", and its conclusion that "The optimal plant population and row spacing will ultimately be a compromise between obtaining high maize grain yield and minimizing the potential for crop failure in semi-arid environments."

That is South Africa, under no-tillage, rainfed, in a semi-arid environment, in two named seasons, and the abstract does not name the hybrid or the fertiliser regime. Its value here is the conclusion rather than any number: optimum density is contingent on rainfall, and a higher population is a bet on a good season. In a Ugandan season where rainfall is uncertain, that is a real consideration, and the drought article referenced at the end deals with how to think about it before planting.

Fertiliser, and the honest evidence on whether it pays

This is where most maize advice becomes dishonest, so read this section carefully.

What the Ugandan manual says. For basal application the MAAIF manual states: "In case of poor soils, farmers should apply basal fertilizer (organic and or inorganic) at planting. Use only recommended fertilizers especially after testing your soils. Follow recommended application rates e.g. 50kg of DAP per acre (one bottle cup per hole) depending on initial soil fertility status, use crop specific fertilizers (blended fertilizers) where available". Note the two conditions embedded in that sentence: after testing your soils, and depending on initial soil fertility status.

On organic matter it states: "In one acre of well ploughed, use 4 to 6 tons. Organic manure should be applied during ploughing but should be well decomposed two to three months, and planting is done after two to three weeks from the date of application." For planting basins it states: "Put 1-2 drink cans of manure (400g) in each basin. This amounts to 4 tons of manure per acre" and "Put a small container (5-7 g) of compound fertilizer in each basin."

On nitrogen timing it states, as quoted above, that rapid uptake begins about five weeks after germination, given as 30 to 40 days, and continues up to ten weeks. The manual names no top-dressing product and gives no top-dressing rate. It does not say to apply urea, CAN or NPK at any point, and this article does not put words in it. The composting and organic matter article and the fertiliser types article referenced at the end deal with the products.

What the research says about whether it responds. A 2019 study of fertiliser response and nitrogen use efficiency in African smallholder maize farms reviewed 71 on-farm publications from Kenya and sub-Saharan Africa spanning 1986 to 2016, with nitrogen rates from 15 to 150 kg per hectare. It states that "Currently, blanket recommendations are provided across agro-ecological zones, although fertilizer response and nutrient use efficiency by maize crop are spatially variable", that "On average, the FR was 2, but it varied considerably from 1 to 28.5 (excluding outliers)", and, critically, that "In SSA, 18% of the plots were non-responsive plots with an FR < 1." It further reports that "available data on soil, climate and management factors could explain only a small part (< 33%) of the variation in FR and N-AE" and concludes that "strategies to refine fertilizer recommendation should include information on soil types and soil properties."

Read that carefully. A fertiliser response ratio below one means the fertilised plot did not out-yield the unfertilised plot. On roughly one plot in five across sub-Saharan Africa in that review, fertiliser did not pay in yield terms at all. That is not an argument against fertiliser. It is an argument against buying fertiliser blind, and it is precisely why the manual's own instruction says to test your soils first. The published soil testing article referenced at the end is the route.

That study is a review of Kenyan and wider sub-Saharan on-farm studies, not Ugandan trials, and it explains only a minority of the variation it found.

On split application, a counterintuitive regional result. A 2024 study on Nitisols of South Kivu in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo assessed nitrogen split application on maize. Urea at 100 kg per hectare "was applied in single, two, and three split-applications on three maize varieties for two cropping seasons", and the finding was that "The single N application at the 45th day after sowing presented the highest grain yield (5.5 t ha-1) compared to split-applications for both cropping seasons", with variety ZM 627 giving 5.4 and 5.8 tonnes per hectare in the 2017 and 2018 cropping seasons respectively.

Conditions: Nitisols, South Kivu in eastern DR Congo, urea at 100 kg per hectare, three varieties, the 2017 and 2018 seasons. That is not Uganda and it is one soil type in one region. It is quoted because it points the opposite way to the conventional advice to split nitrogen, and because a single result that contradicts the convention is a reason to test on your own field rather than to switch practice. Note also that the 45 day timing sits inside the uptake window the MAAIF manual describes, which is the one point where the Ugandan manual and this regional trial are consistent with each other.

On stacked inputs, an old Ugandan reference. A 2010 Ugandan research paper using data from the 2005/06 national household survey reported that "just 6, 1 and 3 percent of farming parcels planted with crops in Uganda used improved seed, fertilisers, and herbicides/fungicides respectively", and reported higher yields where improved seed and fertiliser were used together than where either was used alone. That is a 2010 publication using 2005/06 data, so it is around twenty years old, and it is quoted only for the structural point that inputs interact, not as a current Ugandan figure.

Ugandan yield statistics, and why they need care

The Uganda Bureau of Statistics annual agricultural survey for 2019 states: "The maize production in 2019 was 2.8 million tonnes, with an annual yield of 1.6 MT/Ha." The annual agricultural survey for 2020, published in December 2022, gives maize area at approximately 2.0 million hectares and yield at 2.2 metric tons per hectare.

Three cautions, all of which matter.

First, the two survey years differ materially, 1.6 against 2.2 tonnes per hectare one year apart, which is a very large movement for a national average.

Second, neither report states its yield measurement method. Falcon could not verify from either document whether the yields come from crop cutting or from farmer declaration. The 2020 report refers to farm declarations collected in post-harvest questionnaires; the 2019 report cites an international survey framework. Neither names the technique, and this article therefore asserts nothing about how the figures were produced.

Third, one production figure in the 2020 report as fetched appears to carry a unit error in the source text. It is not repeated here.

Use these figures for what they are: national averages of uncertain method, useful for understanding the scale of the sector and not for benchmarking your own field. The article on reading agricultural research referenced at the end deals with how to handle statistics of this kind.

The same 2019 survey reported that average holding size reached an average of 1.3 hectares per household, with 67 per cent of agricultural households operating less than 1 hectare of agricultural land. That is the scale at which most Ugandan maize decisions are actually made.

Step by step: the four decisions on one field

Step 1: choose the variety, and check it

Start with your own requirements, in this order: season length available on your farm, altitude, the main disease pressures in your area, and what you are growing the maize for. Then take candidate names to the official list and confirm they are released varieties with an identification number and a licensed company.

Then ask, by variety name and identification number, for what the list does not carry: maturity length in days, altitude range, disease resistance and any special requirement. Ask NARO, ask the seed company, and ask your district production office. If nobody can tell you the maturity length of a variety, you cannot plan the season around it.

Decide the seed class you are buying: certified, quality declared, or farm saved. Hybrid seed is not saved for replanting, and if you intend to save seed the variety choice changes accordingly.

Step 2: set the spacing and count what you actually get

Plant to a spacing you can execute accurately with a marked string, as the manual describes. The two configurations the manual gives are the row spacing at 75 cm with either two seeds per hole every 60 cm, or one seed per hole every 30 cm.

Then, about three weeks after emergence, count. Measure out a fixed length of row, count the plants in it, do this at three or four separate places in the field, average them, and convert to plants per acre or per hectare using your row spacing. Write the number down.

That number, and not any published figure, is your plant population. Record it every season against what the field produced, and you will learn more about your own optimum in three seasons than any trial from another country will tell you.

Step 3: decide nutrition on evidence, not on habit

Follow the manual's own condition and test your soils first. The published soil testing article referenced at the end covers how, and the fertiliser types article covers what is on the market and how to check quality.

Where organic matter is available, the manual's guidance is to apply during ploughing, well decomposed over two to three months, with planting two to three weeks after application, at 4 to 6 tons per acre on well ploughed land. The composting article referenced at the end deals with producing it.

On basal fertiliser the manual gives 50 kg of DAP per acre as an example rate, expressly qualified by soil testing and initial fertility status.

On timing, use the uptake window the manual describes: rapid nitrogen uptake beginning about five weeks after germination, given as 30 to 40 days, continuing to about ten weeks. Any nitrogen the crop is to use for grain formation has to be available in that window.

Test on your own field before changing practice at scale. Leave an unfertilised strip, or a differently timed strip, in the same field, and compare. That single practice answers the fertiliser response question for your soil, which the research says is the only place it can be answered.

Step 4: keep the crop clean through the critical period

The weeding decision belongs to the weed management article referenced at the end, and the critical period concept there is the reason early weeding matters more than late weeding. Pest decisions belong to the integrated pest management article, and fall armyworm specifically belongs to the published fall armyworm article. None of that is repeated here.

Step 5: read maturity properly, and separate it from harvest moisture

This is the step most often got wrong, so it has its own section below.

Step 6: hand over at harvest

At the point the cob leaves the field, this article stops. Drying, moisture management, shelling, sorting, storage and aflatoxin control are owned entirely by the published maize post-harvest and aflatoxin article, and that is where a very large share of Ugandan maize value is actually won or lost. Go there next.

Step 7: record the season

Variety and identification number, seed class and source, planting date, spacing planted, counted population, what nutrition was applied and when, rainfall, weeding dates, maturity date, harvest date and outcome. One page. This is what makes next season's decisions evidence-based.

Physiological maturity and harvest moisture are two different things

The MAAIF manual lists the indicators of physiological maturity as follows: the maize stalk system and cob sheath turn brown; ears begin to droop from the stalk and bend downwards; the grain is hard and has a floury texture when bitten; if a moisture meter is available, the grain moisture content is between 18 and 24 per cent; and grains form a black layer at the kernel tip.

The black layer itself is well described in the agronomic literature. A United States university extension explanation states that "the cells at the tip of the kernel or the cob attachment point, compress or collapse into a dense layer that visibly appears 'black'" and that "when these cells are no longer functioning and the 'black layer' is visible, the plant has reached physiological maturity." A United States commercial agronomy reference states that "The black layer forms when a layer of cells compress and turn dark where the kernel attaches to the cob", that it is "an indicator of physiological maturity", and that the barrier "stops movement of sugars into the kernel."

Now the conflict, and it is important. That same commercial agronomy reference reports that "Kernel moisture when black layer formed ranged from 32% for plants grown in the field to 76% for kernels developing under controlled lab conditions." So in field-grown maize in that reference, moisture at black layer was around 32 per cent, whereas the MAAIF manual lists 18 to 24 per cent among its maturity indicators.

These are not contradictory statements about the same event. They are two different points in time. Black layer marks the end of grain filling: nothing more moves into the kernel after it, and at that moment the grain is still wet. The 18 to 24 per cent range is a much drier grain, reached weeks later as the crop dries in the field, and it is a handling and harvest consideration rather than the moment of maturity.

Why this matters on a Ugandan farm.

Do not harvest before black layer in the hope of getting ahead of the weather or the birds. Grain filling is still happening and you are taking yield off the crop.

Do not use 18 to 24 per cent as the signal that the crop is mature, because by the time the standing crop reaches that moisture it has been mature for some time and has been exposed in the field throughout. Field exposure after maturity is where a large part of Uganda's maize quality and aflatoxin risk originates, and the published post-harvest and aflatoxin article deals with that.

The practical sequence is: watch for black layer to know the crop is made; then make the harvest timing decision as a separate question, weighing field drying against weather, pest and quality risk, using the post-harvest article's guidance.

Falcon located no Ugandan study on grain moisture at black layer under Ugandan conditions. The 32 per cent figure quoted is from a United States commercial agronomy reference and is used only to show that moisture at maturity is substantially higher than harvest moisture, not as a number to work to.

Decision framework: the four decisions and what actually drives each

Field record: the maize field file

The comparison strip row and the counted population row are the two that turn this file into evidence rather than a diary. Without them you have a record of what you did; with them you have a record of what worked.

Cost categories

Falcon publishes no prices, no gross margins and no profit figures. No current Ugandan price for seed, fertiliser, labour or grain was verified in this research, and prices vary by season, district and grade. The article on how farm-gate prices are formed, referenced at the end, deals with the price side.

• Land preparation, by hand, ox or tractor.
• Seed, which varies substantially by class and by hybrid or open pollinated.
• Organic matter, including its production or purchase and its transport and spreading.
• Basal fertiliser where a soil test justifies it.
• Any additional nutrition within the uptake window.
• Planting labour, which is higher for accurate string-marked spacing than for broadcast or approximate planting, and is worth the difference.
• Weeding labour, which is the largest labour item on most Ugandan maize fields.
• Crop protection, where a scouting decision justifies it.
• Harvest labour.
• Everything after harvest, which belongs to the post-harvest article and is a significant cost block in its own right.
• Soil testing, which is small relative to a fertiliser purchase made blind.

Common mistakes

1. Planting a variety whose maturity length nobody can tell you, so the season cannot be planned around it.
2. Buying a variety name that does not appear on the official released list.
3. Trying to satisfy both the spacing and the population figure in the extension manual, when they do not reconcile.
4. Never counting the actual plant population, so nobody knows what was established.
5. Copying a plant density from a foreign trial that does not state its fertiliser regime, varieties, sites, seasons or rainfall.
6. Buying fertiliser without a soil test, when the manual's own instruction is to test first and review evidence found around 18 per cent of sub-Saharan plots non-responsive.
7. Assuming a split nitrogen application is always better, when a regional trial on one soil type found a single application at 45 days after sowing gave the highest yield.
8. Applying nitrogen outside the uptake window the manual describes.
9. Applying manure that is not well decomposed, or planting immediately after applying it rather than after the interval the manual gives.
10. Harvesting before black layer and losing grain fill.
11. Treating 18 to 24 per cent grain moisture as the signal of maturity rather than as a drying stage.
12. Leaving a mature crop standing in the field longer than necessary, which is where field exposure risk accumulates.
13. Weeding late, when the weeding article's critical period explains why early weeding decides yield.
14. Benchmarking your field against a national average yield whose measurement method is not stated and which moved from 1.6 to 2.2 tonnes per hectare between two consecutive survey years.
15. Running no comparison strip, so that every season's fertiliser decision is a guess repeated.

Warning signs and escalation points

When this approach works and when it does not

It works when the variety is verified, the spacing is executed accurately, the population is counted rather than assumed, nutrition follows a soil test, timing sits within the uptake window, and maturity is read from the physical indicators.

It works when comparison strips are run, because that is the only way the fertiliser response question gets answered for your own soil.

It does not work as a yield formula. No agronomic decision set produces a yield independent of rainfall, and this article promises none.

It does not work without the post-harvest side. A well grown crop lost to poor drying and storage is a loss, and that side is owned by a separate article that you should read.

It is not a substitute for your district production office, NARO or a qualified agronomist on a specific field problem.

A low-risk first step

Do two things this season and nothing else new.

Count your plant population three weeks after emergence, at three or four places, and write the number down with the spacing you planted.

Leave one strip across the field with a different nutrition treatment from the rest, whether that is nothing at all, a different timing, or organic matter alone, marked so you can find it, and compare at harvest.

Those two actions cost almost nothing and they produce the only two pieces of information about your field that no publication can give you.

Limitations and professional-support triggers

Get professional support in these situations.

• Variety selection for a specific altitude, season length or disease pressure. NARO and your district production office.
• Interpreting a soil test and converting it to a nutrition plan. The soil testing article, and a qualified agronomist.
• Any pest or disease you cannot identify, and fall armyworm specifically, which has its own article and its own decision rules.
• Any chemical decision. The published safe pesticide use article, and no dose rate appears in this article.
• Persistent poor performance despite correct agronomy. A soil or diagnostic problem that needs a professional look at the field.

Six verification gaps in this article are disclosed rather than hidden.

First, no Ugandan maize spacing or plant density trial was located. The two density trials quoted are Tanzanian and South African, and the Tanzanian one does not state fertiliser regime, named varieties, sites, seasons or rainfall.

Second, the MAAIF manual's spacing and stated population do not reconcile arithmetically. The article quotes both as the manual's own figures and does not present either as derived from the other.

Third, neither Ugandan annual agricultural survey states its yield measurement method, and the two survey years differ materially.

Fourth, the manual names no top-dressing product or rate, and this article does not supply one.

Fifth, no Ugandan study of grain moisture at black layer was located, and the figure quoted is from a United States commercial agronomy reference.

Sixth, no verified Ugandan counterfeit seed statistic was located, so none is stated.

The variety list quoted is dated as of 15 October 2023, and NARO publishes updated versions. Check the current list rather than relying on the entries reproduced here.

Clear next actions

1. Take your candidate variety names to the current NARO variety allocation list and confirm each has an identification number and a licensed company.
2. Ask NARO, the seed company and your district production office for the maturity length, altitude range and disease resistance of the variety you intend to plant.
3. Decide and record the seed class you are buying.
4. Soil test before buying fertiliser, following the manual's own condition.
5. Plant to a string-marked spacing you can execute accurately, and record exactly what you planted.
6. Count the established population three weeks after emergence at three or four points and write the number down.
7. Leave one comparison strip with a different nutrition treatment, marked, and compare at harvest.
8. Watch for black layer to know the crop is made, then treat harvest timing as a separate decision and go to the published maize post-harvest and aflatoxin article for it.

Author

Falcon Foundation Ltd editorial team. Falcon Foundation Ltd is a privately owned Ugandan agricultural company established in 2013, registered in Uganda and operating land in Uganda across greenhouse crops, poultry, sheep, goats and beekeeping. This article covers four agronomic decisions on a maize field and hands over at harvest to the company's published post-harvest and aflatoxin article. It is general information only. It promises no yield and states no profit figure, it publishes no pesticide dose rate and recommends no product, and every research yield figure in it is quoted with the conditions its source states. It is not agronomic advice for a specific field, and it is not a substitute for your district production office, NARO, MAAIF or a qualified agronomist.