English - McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crop Research Program

McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crops Research Project No: 06-741 

Development and promotion of Alectra resistant cowpea cultivars for 

smallholder farmers in Malawi and Tanzania 

Edited by: 

A M Mbwaga ARI Uyole, Tanzania 

Joseph Hella Sokoine University of Agriculture, Tanzania 

J. Mligo Ilonga Research Institute, Tanzania 

V. Kabambe Bunda College University of Malawi 

September 2009 

1 

2009

Project Team 


Institution Name 

Tanzania 

Uyole Agricultural Research Institute, PO 

Box 400, Mbeya 

Ilonga Agricultural Research Institute, PO 

Box 33, Kilosa 

Sokoine University of Agriculture 

PO Box 3007, Morogoro 

Dodoma Rural District Council 

PO Box 1089, Dodoma 

Dr A M Mbwaga (Pathologist & Project Leader) 

~ Dr J K Mligo (Cowpea breeder) 

~ M. Mchomvu (Home Economics) 

~ Dr Joseph Hella (Agric. Economist) 

~ G. Martin (MSc Student) 

~ D. Muywanga (District Agricultural and Livestock 

Officer) 

~ Ms Mwamba (Subject Matter specialist) 

Singida Rural District Council ~ B. Manento (DALDO) 

~ L. Sakwera (Crops specialist) 

Iringa Rural District Council 

PO Box 290 

INADES Formation, Tanzania 


Bunda College, University of Malawi, PO 

Box 219, Lilongwe 

Chitedze Research Station 

PO Box 158, Lilongwe 

Department of Crop Production, Ministry of 

Agriculture. PO Box 1035, Capital City, 

Lilongwe 

International Institute of Tropical 

Agriculture. C/O Lambourne Ltd, 26 

Dingwall Rd, Croydon CR9 3EE, UK 

~ P. Mphwewe (DALDO) 

~ Mrs Nyalusi (Crops Specialist) 

A. Katunzi (Director & Training specialist) 

Malawi 

~ Dr V Kabambe (Weed Scientist, Senior Lecturer & 

project coordinator for Malawi) 

~ T Chilongo (Agricultural Economist) 

~ Dr J. Bokosi, (Plant Breeder) 

~ Dr A Mangwela (Food scientist) 

~ Ms Kazila. (MSc Student) 

~ William Henderson Harawa 

~ BSc Student in Agricultural Economics 

~ Mr E Mazuma (Pathologist & National Commodity Team 

Leader, Pulse Research) 

~ Ms C Mtambo. Entomologist and Chief Crop Protection 

Officer 

Nigeria 

Boukar Ousmane (Breeder) IITA Kano Nigeria 

2 

2009


Table of Contents 

Page 

Summary VI 

Introduction 2 

Project objectives 2 

Summary of research activities 2 

Objective 1. Development of high yielding A. vogelii resistant cowpea varieties 2 

Objective 2. Promotion of high yielding A. vogelii resistant cowpea varieties 13 

Implications of the research findings 15 

Annex 1 Tanzania Country Report 17 

Annex 2: Cowpea Utilization in Iringa and Dodoma Regions, Tanzania 23 

Annex3: Malawi Country Report 32 

3 

2009


Summary: 

The parasitic weed Alectra vogelii is a wide spread constraint to cowpea production in semi-arid areas 

of Southern Africa, where the crop is an important source of protein for resource poor farmers. A 

project aiming to develop and promote Alectra resistant cowpea cultivars was initiated in Malawi and 

Tanzania. Farmer research groups have been established in cowpea growing areas of both countries 

and have been focusing on evaluation of cowpea lines for adaptation, yield, resistance to Alectra and 

processing and utilization of cowpea grain for three seasons now. Initial studies of farmers and market 

trader’s preferences in both countries Malawi and Tanzania indicate that large white to-cream seed 

types are most favored. Growers also need plant types that produce copious foliage for spinach and for 

preservation for consumption in the dry season. Cowpea germplasm collected from local institutions, 

farmers and the breeding program at the International Institute of Agriculture (IITA) Nigeria was 

evaluated. In Tanzania this season farmers have selected from five promising to three lines for their 

yield performance, Alectra resistance and earliness. Selected cowpea lines included IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, 

IT99K-573-1 and TZA 263. These lines are now being multiplied at Ilonga Agricultural Research 

Institute for planting by more farmers on a large scale next season.In Malawi line IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 

was selected the best in terms of Alectra resistance, yield and grain size and is being earmarked for 

release. Parallel to this work some of these materials have been analyzed for macro and micro-nutrient 

content at Sokoine University of Agriculture Tanzania (see next section below). Post-graduate student 

projects on production, utilization and marketing of cowpea were completed in Tanzania last year, but 

there are still to be completed at Bunda College in Malawi. 

The processing of cowpea especially into grain was found to be a laborious work for women. Using 

tradition method of preparing - for example buns (Bagia) - a woman had to sleep late and to wake up 

around four in the morning ready to prepare Bagia. After introduction of new ways of preparing flour 

women are now it takes less than an hour to prepare Bagia, hence there is a lot of time saving. This can 

enable each member of the family to prepare Bagia for the children each morning. It has also been 

observed that dehuled grain can store for a long time without getting attacked by bruchids. The dehuled 

grain also cooks fast compared to grain. This is hoped to increased usage of cowpea grain at family 

level. 

Studies on micronutrients included also the frequency uptake of cowpea products by farmers in 

sampled villages of Iringa and Dodoma Tanzania Minerals of nutritional importance that were 

analyzed included iron, zinc and calcium; results indicated that, there was twice much calcium in leaves 

than in cowpea grains and almost 40 times as much iron. Since iron and zinc levels in cowpea leaves 

have shown to be significantly higher than the levels in cowpea grains, creating more awareness and 

encouraging the utilization of cowpea leaves will contribute in alleviating micronutrient deficiencies 

from cheap sources especially from resource-poor families. The variety that was best with regards to 

all minerals was IT99K‐7‐21‐2‐2‐1. The cowpea lines that were best with regards to crude protein and 

fats content were IT97K499‐8 and IT99K‐721‐2‐2‐1. 

4 

2009


Introduction: 

Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) is a crop of major importance to the nutrition of poor rural households in 

the drier and sub-humid region of Southern Africa, where diets tend to be overly reliant on starchy foods 

such as millet, sorghum, maize and cassava. The addition of even a small amount of cowpea ensures the 

nutritional balance of the diet and enhances the protein quality by the synergistic effect of high protein 

and high lysine from cowpea and high methionine and high energy from cereals. Hence cowpea grain is 

an inexpensive, high quality source of protein and its vitamin-rich leaves are eaten as spinach. Women 

particularly value cowpeas, which help them to bridge the "hunger months" prior to the main cereal 

harvest also it adds cash to the household after selling the grain and dried leaves. It has to be noted that 

cowpea is mainly a women crop. 

On-farm cowpea yields are extremely low, averaging 319 kg/ha in Tanzania and 388 kg/ha in Malawi. 

Use of late maturing cultivars, low plant density and insect damage are widely recognized as important 

constraints to improved cowpea production under on-farm conditions. Less well appreciated is the 

importance of the parasitic weed Alectra vogelii, which attaches itself to the roots of cowpea plants and 

interferes with the plants' ability to obtain water and nutrients. Recently-released improved cowpea 

cultivars that are earlier maturing and more tolerant to key insect pests and diseases are especially 

susceptible to Alectra attack, experiencing up to 50% yield reductions. A. vogelii is widespread from the 

Northern Province of South Africa, through Central Africa to Kenya and across West Africa to Mali. In 

Tanzania, A. vogelii is common in Mwanza, Shinyanga, Dodoma, Iringa, Mtwara and Ruvuma regions, 

while in Malawi, it is common in Lilongwe, Dowa and districts in central Malawi, the lower lying, drier 

areas of the southern region and the Blantyre/Shire Highlands 

Project objectives 

The general objective of the project is to improve cowpea productivity on A. vogelii-infested land in 

Malawi and Tanzania by introducing Alectra resistance into cowpea cultivars that are also early 

maturing, pest/disease tolerant and high yielding. The specific objectives are to develop high yielding A. 

vogelii resistant cowpea cultivars and then to promote them in both countries, Malawi and Tanzania. 

SUMMARY OF RESEARCH ACTIVITIES: 

Objective 1: Development of high yielding Alectra vogelii resistant cowpea varieties 

In year three of the project further studies have been undertaken to consolidate breeding through transfer 

of resistance to Alectra from the resistant lines (donor parents) into the commercial released varieties 

(recurrent parents) which are susceptible to Alectra by using a backcross method to improve the 

released varieties both in Malawi and Tanzania. Farmers groups established continued to be 

strengthened through training and participation in joint activities both within and outside their villages. 

Farmers in study villages continued to conduct on farm evaluation of the promising cowpea lines with 

commercially released varieties as checks. This year, 10 promising lines in Tanzania and five lines in 

Malawi were evaluated by farmers based on their own suitability criterion. In year three, project team 

continued to develop partnerships with farmer groups thus allowing continued on farm trials and 

availing useful data to research for making informed decisions in on-station breeding programmes. 

Through exchange visits and joint design of cowpea breeding programme, research collaboration 

between Malawi and Tanzania was increased and capacity was enhanced through farmer group training 

and graduate (BSc. and MSc.) students training. Details of activities undertaken on the outputs that the 

project had planned to address during the 2008/09 season (year 3) are presented in the individual county 

reports in the Annexes. A highlight of this work is as follows 

Output 1.1: Producer and consumer preference in cowpea identified 

The activities under this output were completed in year 1 and 2 and are found in annual report of 2008. 

5 

2009


Output 1.2: Capacity of cowpea farmers, especially women enhanced 

In Tanzania farmer groups have expanded from 6 to 8 and emphasis of the training was on the new 

farmer groups. Similarly two farmer groups were added in Malawi. The training given to the new farmer 

groups was on group formation, leadership and writing a group constitution. Training was also 

conducted on seed production using demonstration plots. 

Participatory Video shooting was one of the new activities introduced to farmers this season starting in 

Tanzania. Two farmer groups from Kikombo village (12farmers) in Dodoma and Mangalali village (14 

farmers) in Iringa region participated in the participatory video shooting training course. , The outcome 

has shown to be very effective in empowering farmers to document activities they are undertaking in the 

project. Their participation at CoP3 in Bagamoyo Tanzania was very evident and has created a 

motivation for them to undertake more of these documentation of project activities. 

Output 1.3: Cowpea lines resistant to A vogelii identified 

Assembling of cowpea germplasm: 

The collection of cowpea germplasm was conducted in year one, where cowpea accessions were 

obtained from IITA, Bihawana farmers Training Centre, National Pant Genetic Resource Centre and 

Ilonga Agricultural Research Station. These were evaluated for adaptability and Alectra resistance 

starting in the same year one. In Malawi the germplasm used came from IITA and from their national 

collection and Chitedzi Research Institute. 

On-station screening of cowpea cultivars for Alectra resistance 

In Tanzania, this activity started in 2007 growing season and the promising lines were tested to more 

Alectra infested sites. This year the trials were planted at three on-station locations which included 

Ismani, Bihawana Training Centre and Hombolo research station. Cowpea lines planted were those 

from last season showing promising Alectra resistance and farmers had already selected some of them 

as the best lines. These lines included IT99K-21-7-2-2-1, IT99K-573-1, IT97K-818-35, IT89KD-288, 

TZA 263, IT97K-819-118, IT97K-499-8, IT97K-499-38, IT00K-1207 and B301. VULI-2 and FAHARI 

were included as local checks. The materials were planted at a plot size of 3m x 4m, 4 rows per plot and 

replicated four times. Data recorded included; plant stand count at harvest, Alectra count per plot and 

yield per plot (kg/plot). Yield data was computed to yield in kg per ha. 

Generally weather condition was not very good for the crop, because rains started late and were erratic. 

Dodoma suffered the most for all the crops and this affected the crop establishment and Alectra 

infestation. From the test cowpea materials, only cowpea line IT97K-499-38 and B301 supported zero 

Alectra counts at three locations. (Table1). Other lines supported low Alectra plants as compared to the 

susceptible checks (Vuli-2 and Fahari) or TZA 263, and IT99K-573-2-1.The susceptible varieties 

(released commercial varieties) are being improved by incorporating resistance to Alectra by backcross 

method. At present the work is at backcross three progressing into backcross four, this will be followed 

by selfing then screening for resistance to Alectra. 

Table 1: Average infestation of cowpea entries with Alectra vogelii (Alectra count/3x4m) at three 

locations at 12 weeks after planting 2009: 

Cowpea Entries Ismani Bihawana Hombolo Mean Comments 

FC 

Alectra 

count/sites 

IT99K-7-21-2-2 0.0 3.8 0.0 1.3 Late emergence of 

Alectra 

IT99K-573-2-1 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.6 Late emergence of 

Alectra 

IT97K-499-8 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 

IT97K-818-35 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.3 

6 

2009


IT97K-819-118 0.0 4.5 0.0 1.5 

IT97K-499-38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

IT89KD-288 0.0 26.3 0.0 8.8 

IT00K-1207 0.8 1.8 0.0 0.9 

IT96D-733 0.0 42.0 0.0 14.0 

B301 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

TZA 263 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 Farmers selected 

for large grain 

Vuli 2 3.0 48.3 0.3 17.2 Commercial 

released varieties 

Fahari 7.5 34.3 1.0 14.3 Commercial 

released varieties 

Mean 0.87 12.73 0.15 7.58 

SE 0.41 2.98 - 

Range: 0-16 0-74 0-3 

In Malawi five of entries selected for further testing based on Alectra resistance, farmer preferences on 

grain characteristics and according to evaluations conducted in the last two years were planted at 

Chitedze and Bunda College. The trial’ design was complete block design, with 4 replicates. The trial 

plots had 5 rows, 4 m long and 0.75 m apart. Other traits evaluated included: grain yields and yield 

components (e.g. seed per pod,), days to flowering and maturity and disease incidences. 

Screening for Alectra resistance, entries IT 97K-825-15; IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 and IT 99K-494-6 recorded 

least number of Alectra counts (Table 2). Entries IT99K-494-6 (1369kg/ha), IT82E-16 (1786kg/ha) and 

Sudan 1(1827kg/ha) recorded high yield and the same entries showed larger number of seeds per pod 

than other entries 

Table 2: Alectra counts m -2 taken after flowering at all the trial sites in Malawi 

Entrycode & name Bunda Lisasadzi Ngwangwa Mpokwa Rivirivi Chitedze Mean 

IT98K-503-1 1.35 0.50 3.33 0.6 0.0 0.05 0.97 

IT97K-825-15 0.08 0.70 0.60 0.03 0.08 0.25 0.29 

T99K-7-21-2-2-1 0.25 1.38 1.46 0.11 0.0 0.17 0.56 

IT99K-494-6 0.00 0.60 1.02 0.04 0.03 0.0 0.28 

Sudan-1 5.82 3.56 4.03 0.86 0.0 0.58 2.48 

IT82E-16 6.25 6.70 2.86 0.96 0.14 0.0 2.82 

Farmers’ local 2.80 1.14 3.29 - 0.03 0.11 1.23 

Mean 2.36 2.08 2.43 0.44 0.04 0.17 1.25 

P


The plots planted were 4m by 4m and the yields and Alectra counts were collected from the whole plot. 

With assistance from Village Extension Officers farmers were able to collect data and evaluate the 

materials based on their own set criterion. 

As discussed earlier, rainfall distribution was a major problem. It started late and erratic; hence there 

was very poor crop establishment especially in Iringa and Dodoma region. Singida received well 

distributed rainfall but there was a serious outbreak of cut worms on legumes in that region. The Alectra 

infestation was only reported on commercially released varieties and local cultivars, the other lines were 

observed free from the parasitic weed. The average highest cowpea yield was recorded from Singida 

region followed by Iringa and last Dodoma as presented in Table 3. 

Table 3: The yield (kg/ha) performance of the 5 cowpea lines tested at five Villages, in Tanzania 

2009 

Cowpea line Farmer group managed to harvest from their plots of cowpea 

Mkungugu Iringa Kikombo Dodoma Msungua Singida 

IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 600 222 600 

IT99K 573-2-1 720 440 600 

IT97K 818-35 200 389 800 

IT89KD 288 400 333 200 

TZA 263 280 167 1200 

VULI-2 560 - 600 

FAHARI 800 - 760 

Village Local- 200 - 530 

Mean 470.0 310.2 661.3 

On-farm evaluation of cow pea lines (responses from farmers) 

Results of the on farm evaluation of selected cultivars was conducted in five participating villages; 

Msungua and IKhanoda (Singida region), Kikombo (Dodoma region), Mkungugu and Mangalali (Iringa 

region) based on the criterion they identified during the 2008 growing season i.e. resistance to Alectra, 

diseases/insects/pests, high yielding, large white to cream coloured seed, early maturity, production of 

many and tender leaves, drought resistance. These criteria were matched with five lines presented in 

Table 4. 

Table 4: Five best lines selected in 2008 evaluation session 

Lines Line description based on 2008 selection 

IT 99K 7-21-2-2 average seed size, early maturity, resistant to Alectra, high yielding, white 

coloured seed, 

IT 99K 573-1-1 Slightly late maturing, resistant to Alectra, average seed size, good seed colour, 

high yielding 

1T 97K 818-35 Late maturity, resistant to Alectra 

1T 89KD 288 Late maturity, high yielding, resistant to Alectra, normal seed colour, 

TZA 263 Late maturity, resistant to Alectra, good colour, large seeded 

Results indicated that line TZA263, followed by IT 99 K-7-21-2-2-1 and IT 99K-573-1-1 suited 

farmers’ social, economic and cultural interest. Based on these findings, lines TZA 263, IT 99K-7-21-2- 

2-1 and IT 99K-573-1-1 are to be increased for distribution to many farmers for further evaluation in 

2010 season. Initial process to establish descriptors for these lines for possible inclusion in the National 

Performance Trials (NPT) towards variety releases will be initiated. 

On farm evaluation in Malawi was conducted in Riviri, Bunda College, Mngwangwa, Mpokwa 

Khuvinda village, Mpokwa Chibisa village, and Lisasadzi. Seven entries involving four lines IT98K- 

8 

2009


503-1, IT97K-825-15, IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT99K-494-6, and two released varieties Sudan -1, IT82E-16 

and one farmers’ local cultivar were evaluated against five main criteria, which are; seed size, plant 

type, early maturity, insect resistance and disease resistance. Note that varieties Sudan -1 and IT82E-16 

were included for counterchecking with introduced lines. Preliminary description of the lines is 

presented in Table 5. 

Table 5: Brief descriptions of the entries under evaluations in 2008/09 season, Malawi. 

Code Name Description 

5 IT98K-503-1 Has good yield on overall, medium seed size, very good Alectra vogelii 

resistance 

37 IT97K-825-15 Good Alectra resistance, fair yield, medium seed size, low farmer 

preference 

9 IT99K-7-21-2-2- Best Alectra resistance in ’07, ‘07/08, good seed size, medium seed size, 

1 

good yield 

21 IT99K-494-6 Medium yield, good Alectra resistance in ‘06/07, ‘07/08, medium seed size, 

low farmer preference 

53 Sudan -1 Released variety, good resistance to Alectra and good yielder in ‘07/08 

52 IT82E-16 This is a released variety. Yielded second best across sites in 07/08. Poor 

resistance to A. vogelii. Well liked by farmers. 

54 Farmers’ local Collected from around trial sites, usually bushy and long maturing. 

Results of analysis show preference on the following order. Sudan 1 is most preferred followed by 

IT82E-16, IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT98K-503-1 and IT99K-494-6. Lines IT97K-825-15 followed by 

farmers’ local are less preferred as indicated above. Since Sudan 1 and IT82E-16 are already released, 

varieties IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT98K-503-1 and IT99K-494-6 may be considered for further genetic 

perfection on-station with a possibility of releasing them commercially starting with line IT99K-7-21-2- 

2-1. 

Geographic variability in host response to A. vogelii 

Studies undertaken in pot experiment at Long Ashton UK indicate that at a species level there 

are 3 strains of Alectra by host range: 

1. Alectra from Singida attaches and emerges on cowpea and groundnut but not on mung or common 

bean. 

2. Alectra from Bihawana and probably Ismani attaches and emerges on cowpea, groundnut, common 

bean but not on mung bean 

3. Alectra from Malawi sites attaches and emerges on cowpea, groundnut, common bean and mung 

bean. 

Within cowpea, patterns of virulence were also observed to be evident: Alectra from all sites in both 

countries emerges on IT36E-16 and TZA 263 but not on B301. 

1. Alectra from Bunda and Kasungu emerges on ITK1207, IT97K 818-35, IT97K819-118 and IT 

99K7-21-2-2-1 

2. Alectra from Zomba emerges on ITK1207, IT97K 818-35, IT97K819-118 but not on IT 99K7-21- 

2-2-1 (this result for IT 99K7-21-2-2-1 same as in 2008 pot trial). 

3. Alectra from Singida and Ismani does not emerge on ITK1207, IT97K 818-35, IT97K819-118 and 

IT 99K7-21-2-2-1 (result for Singida same as in 2008 trial) 

4. Alectra from Bihawana emerges on IT 99K7-21-2-2-1 but not on ITK1207, IT97K 818-35 and 

IT97K819-118. 

In Tanzania it appears that Alectra from Singida has a narrower species host range and less virulent on 

the cowpea lines tested than Alectra from other sites. Bihawana Alectra provides a "universal" test for 

9 

2009


the three Tanzania sites. From this study the cowpeas that are resistant at Bihawana are also resistant at 

Singida and Ismani. 

In Malawi it appears that Alectra from Bunda and Kasungu are similar but different to Zomba. 

It has to be also noted that the Alectra samples we have from Malawi are different from the parasite 

collected further south near Blantyre as in trials some time back at Long Ashton this attacked B301 

(Mainjeni, 1999). 

It has been more confusing to find the result for IT81D-994 as this was resistant to all samples in 2008. 

There must be something went wrong with the samples delivered to Long Ashton this year. 

The most reliable method for characterization of these strains would be to go for using molecular 

markers. 

Reference: 

Mainjeni, C. E. (1999) The host range of Alectra vogelii Benth. From Malawi and resistance in common 

bean and cowpea. Msc. Thesis, University of Bath, UK. pp 83. 

Table 6: Response of 11 cowpea, one mung bean, one bambara groundnut and two groundnut lines to 

five accessions of A.vogelii. 

Alectra accession 

Zomba Malawi (ex cowpea) Bunda Malawi (ex groundnut) Kasungu Malawi (ex groundnut) 

Line Emerged No of 

reps 

Cowpea 

Un‐ 

emerged 

Emerged No. of 

reps 

10 

Un‐ 

emerged 

Emerged No. of 

reps 

2009 

Un‐ 

emerged 

IT86E‐16 19.3 + 9.7 3 3 19.3 + 17.5 3 3 20.3 + 4.6 3 3 

B301 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 1 

TZA‐263 19 + 8.7 3 3 14.7 + 7.3 3 3 8.3 + 5.9 3 3 

IT00K‐1207 2.3 + 1.9 2 3 9 + 2.1 3 3 5.7 + 3.2 2 3 

IT81D‐994 1.3 + 0.7 2 3 1.3 + 0.9 2 3 0.3 + 0.3 1 3 

IT97K‐818‐35 1.3 + 1.3 1 3 2.7 + 1.8 2 3 3.3 + 2.8 2 2 

IT97K‐819‐118 0.7 + 0.7 1 3 3.3 + 2.4 2 3 1 + 0.6 2 2 

IT99K‐7‐21‐2‐2‐ 

1 

Common bean 

0 0 3 0.7 + 0.2 2 3 0.7 + 0.3 2 3 

Kabalabala 1.7 + 1.7 1 NR 0 0 NR 2.7 + 2.2 2 NR 

Maluwa 4.3 + 2.2 2 3 3 + 0.8 3 3 4 + 2.5 3 3 

Masaka 1.0 + 0.6 2 3 5 + 4 2 3 3 + 1.7 2 3 

Mung bean 

Ex Tanzania 1.7 + 1.7 1 2 4 + 0.8 3 3 2.0 + 0.6 2 3 

Groundnut 

Chalimbana 0.7 + 0.7 1 NR 0.3 + 0.3 1 NR 1.3 + 1.3 1 NR 

CG7 2 0.5 + 0.4 1 NR 1.7 + 0.9 2 NR 2 + 1 2 NR 

1 Only one replicate pot established. 2 Only two replicate pots established, NR = not recorded yet. 

Table 6 continued. 

Singida Tanzania (ex cowpea) 

Alectra accession 

Bihawana Tanzania (ex cowpea) Ismani Tanzania (cowpea) 

Line Emerged No of Un‐ Emerged No. of Un‐ Emerged No. of Un‐ 

Cowpea 

reps emerged 

reps emerged 

reps emerged 

IT86E‐16 13.3 + 

3.5 

3 3 9.3 + 6.8 3 3 3 + 0 3 3


B301 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

TZA‐263 3.3 + 1.5 3 3 0.7 + 0.3 2 3 0.3 + 0.3 1 2 

IT00K‐1207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

IT81D‐994 0 0 1 2 2 

1 1 0.3 + 0.3 1 

IT97K‐818‐ 

35 

0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 

IT97K‐819‐ 

118 

0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 

IT99K‐7‐21‐ 

2‐2‐1 

Common 

bean 

0 0 2 

0.7 + 0.3 

2 

2 0 0 1 

Kabalabala 0 0 NR 0 0 NR 0 0 NR 

Maluwa 0 0 2 1.3 + 0.3 3 3 0.3 + 0.3 1 2 

Masaka 

Mung bean 

0 0 3 2 + 1 3 3 0.3 + 0.3 1 2 

Ex Tanzania 

Groundnut 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Chalimbana 0.7 + 0.7 1 NR 0 0 NR 0 0 NR 

CG7 0 0 NR 0 0 NR 0 0 NR 

NB: Mean number emerged stems per pot (+ S.E.) at 97 days after sowing. For entries with no emerged 

A. vogelii, the number of replicate pots with unemerged parasite attachments is shown. No standard 

errors are shown when there were less than three pots per cowpea/A. vogelii combination. 

Output 1.4: Collaboration in cowpea research increased in Southern Africa 

Project activities are leading to increased capacity in cowpea research in Malawi and Tanzania and the 

strengthening of collaboration between institutions in both countries. Within the project, two researchers 

Abubakar Mzanda from Tanzania and Dr Vernon Kabambe from Malawi participated in a week long 

statistics training course offered by McKnight Foundation at Centre for Agricultural Research 

Development (CARD)Bunda College University of Malawi June 15-22, 2009. 

• Two project staff – Drs J.P. Hella and V Kabamabe attended ASARECA review workshop on 

climate change. The workshop was held at Naivasha Kenya. 

• A paper titled “assessment of Cowpea Marketing Efficiency: A case study of selected regions in 

Tanzania” by Gabriel, M.; Hella, J.P. and Mbwaga, A.M was presented at the Annual 

Agricultural Economists Society of Tanzania (AGREST) held in Zanzibar and will appear in 

AGREST conference series Vol. 8. (in press). The proceedings will be ready within and outside 

the country. Mr Gabriel Martin’s got financial support from the project for his MSc research work 

• Group dynamics training was conducted for all the farmers in the two participating villages in 

Mgwangwa. The training was conducted in August 2009. The training was provided on group 

leadership and operation. This group strengthening included membership and responsibilities, 

constitution, networking and fund raising to sustain the groups. 

• During the season an undergraduate student (Ms Elida Kazira )undertook a study on cowpea time 

of planting x variety x density trial titled - Farmer Participatory Selection of Alectra Resistant 

Cowpea Varieties in Selected Districts of Malawi). The student has submitted her thesis for 

examination. 

• Participatory video workshop was held at INADES Dodoma, where two extension staff from the 

projects sites Dodoma and Iringa respectively participated and these also went back and trained 

farmers from the groups at Mangalali Iringa (14 farmers) and Kikombo in Dodoma (12 farmers) 

11 

2009


Output 1.5: Project Monitored and evaluated 

To accomplish Activity 1.5.2 (Review progress against M & E criteria each year) monitoring and 

evaluation activities were conducted in Tanzania and Malawi as planned. The objective was to evaluate 

on going on-farm and on station cowpea project activities and crossing work in screen house. 

The monitoring and evaluation for Tanzania was done in three regions (Iringa, Dodoma, and Morogoro) 

from 27 th to 30 th April, 2009 with participants including Ambonesigwe Mbwaga (Project Leader) ARI, 

Uyole Mbeya Tanzania, Joseph Mligo (Breeder) ARI, Ilonga Kilosa Tanzania; Vernon Kabambe (Weed 

specialist) Bunda College, Lilongwe, Malawi; James Bokosi (Breeder) Bunda College, Lilongwe, 

Malawi; Boukar Ousmane (Breeder,) IITA Nigeria. On-farm visits were done in regions of Iringa and 

Dodoma, whereas on-station visits were done at Ismani (Iringa region), Bihawana (Dodoma region and 

at Ilonga research institute (Morogoro region). Crossing for cowpea varieties to improve resistance to 

Alectra is being conducted. 

In Malawi, monitoring and evaluation was conducted from 15 th to 20 th March 2009. The team was 

composed of Drs Joseph Mligo (cowpea breeder), Ambonesigwe Mbwaga (Project team leader), Charlie 

Riches (CoP Liaison Officer) and Malawian counterparts comprising Dr Vernon Kabambe (Country 

project leader), Mosses Mamiliro (Breeder, and James Bokosi (Breeder). For On –farm activities 7 

cowpea cultivars of which 5 were experimental lines for Alectra resistance (IT99K-494-6, IT99K-7-21- 

2-2-1, IT 97K 825-15, Bunda 1, IT98K503-1) one commercially released variety (IT 82E-16) were 

monitored in Lilongwe district in Ngwangwa Extension Planning Area (EPA), Kasungu district in 

Lisasi EPA, Zomba district in Mpokwa EPA and Balaka district in Rividivi EPA, Also seed 

multiplication of experimental cowpea lines such as TZA 263 (from Tanzania) and IT 81D-994. Seed 

increase also included IT98K-503-1, IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT99K-494-6, IT97K-825-15, Sudan 1 and 

IT82E-16. 

For on-station activities, the team visited Bunda college experimental site where seed multiplication of 

experimental cowpea lines which have shown Alectra resistance was being conducted. The 

performances of the materials were good and were at flowering stage in addition to seed multiplication 

activities at Bunda. 

Overall M&E team observed the following 

• Weather variability (especially drought) is an overriding problem for cowpea production. The 

team recommended the collaboration with the Tropical Legumes II project of IITA and try to 

incorporate both traits (Alectra resistance and drought tolerance) in the current breeding 

programme. 

• Although IT97K-825-15 had the least Alectra infestation at all on-farm sites it was the least 

preferred by the farmers. At all sites farmer’s variety was the latest, and it had not even 

flowered when all the other entries were maturing. 

• It was noted that only early maturing varieties were most preferred, forgetting the advantage of 

late maturing varieties for not having other traits such as prolonged availability of leaves as 

relish. This suggests that there is a need to evaluate the materials according to maturity groups. 

• The good production practices should be incorporated in the screening of the varieties against 

Alectra. Hence, there is need to expose the groups involved in the project to all these production 

practices. 

• There is a need to evaluate the materials according to maturity group: early, medium and late 

because farmers’ selections are dictated and influenced by time to maturity 

• The backcrossing programme at Ilonga will continue to backcross 6 by October 2010, while at 

Bunda will be at back cross 4. Request for extension of the project should be initiated early 

2010 

Overall the team noted good progress which are being made and high enthusiasm among stakeholders 

especially farmers who are conducting on-farm demonstrations 

12 

2009


Objective 2: Promotion of high yielding A. vogelii resistant cowpea varieties 

With the continuation of the on-farm trials/demonstration component of the project efforts to increase 

awareness of the problem of A. vogelii and approaches to management continued in year 3. Work 

implemented included farmers field exchange visits, participation in national agricultural shows, training 

on preparation of different cowpea recipes and some market studies in Malawi 

Output 2.1: Farmer and extension awareness of .A. vogelii and use of resistant cultivars enhanced 

In the implementation of the above mentioned output, two activities were conducted in Tanzania, these are 

farmer field days and exchange visits and participation in 2009 National Agricultural show. With respect to 

exchange visit, twelve farmers from Mangalali (Ari Mpya Group) visited Mkungugu (Fahari research 

group) and later both visited Ismani On-station trials in Iringa. The objective of the farmer exchange visit 

was for farmers from Mangalali to share experiences with other farmers on principles of cowpea 

production, processing and utilization and to be acquainted with on station cowpea lines screening work. At 

the research station farmers participated in evaluation of 14 cowpea screening materials planted. Four 

cowpea farmers of the CCRP project from Singida rural district (two from Msungua and two from 

Ikhanoda) were sponsored by their district council and attended the National Agricultural Show between 1 st 

and 8 th August 2009 in Dodoma. Promising cowpea lines and associate processed products of cowpea from 

their group were displayed. 

In Malawi, farmers from Mngwangwa EPA, on their own accord, organized themselves and participated at 

a District Agriculture Fair held in the same EPA in June 2009. The farmers demonstrated a range of 

cowpea products based on the training made by the project and shared this with participants. In addition, 

the project team participated at a national agriculture fair, alongside the Crop Science Department. Again, 

the focus of the exhibit was on utilization. The exhibits attracted a lot of attention from participants 

Output 2.2a: Nutritional status of farmers improved 

To accomplish output 2.2 above, activity 2.2.2: (Develop/modify/ demonstrate cowpea products) was 

undertaken. The primary objective was to promote the utilization of cowpea in Tanzania. Specifically was 

to train farmers on the processing of cowpea grains into dhal, preparation of cowpea dishes (snack bites 

from cowpea flour “bagia’); and to perform sensory evaluation and organoleptic tests. The training was 

conducted in eight villages namely Msungua, Ikhanoda, and Nduu in Singida region, Kikombo and 

Mpunguzi in Dodoma region and Mkungugu, Ilambilole and Mangalali in Iringa region. The villages were 

purposively selected as a result of their involvement in a project on “Improvement of cowpea productivity 

on Alectra Vogelii infested land in Tanzania. A one day workshop was conducted in each project village 

and farmers were trained on improved cowpea technologies. The trainings were based on demonstrations, 

hands-on trials and printed materials (brochures for cowpea recipes). Farmers participated in the validation 

of five recipes for cowpea value addition. Sensory and organoleptic tests were carried out, where by 

farmers were required to rank and find out the most preferred types of ”bagia”. The five types of bagia 

were made using different recipes. The recipes were translated into Swahili language for better 

understanding by farmers. 

Table 7: Cowpea snack product recipes 

Type of 

Materials/ingredients 

Bagia 

1. Bagia asilia Cowpea dhal/flour, salt, cooking oil, water 

2. Bagia asilia na viungo Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, garlic, onions and water 

3. Bagia; viungo na hamira Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, onions, garlic, yeast and water 

4. Bagia; viungo na mayai Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, garlic, onions, eggs and water 

5. Bagia; viungo, mayai na hamira Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, onions, garlic, eggs, yeast and 

water 

13 

2009


In Malawi where farmers already have advanced knowledge on preparation of different 

cowpea/groundnut recipes, in areas where cowpea seed was provided, farmers were encouraged to use 

their cowpea to practice the different recipes which they learned from the project 

B: Cowpea Utilization in Iringa and Dodoma Regions 

Per capital consumption of 40‐200gms of cowpea grains were found to be 84% in Iringa and 94% in 

Dodoma, while per capital consumption for cowpea leaves (10‐500 grams) were 95% in Iringa and 

100% in Dodoma, respectively. More than 50% of households in Iringa and Dodoma consumed cowpea 

once to three times a week. The leaves are consumed fresh especially during wet season and in dried 

form during lean/dry season. Almost all farmers in the two regions consume cowpea leaves 

Macro‐ and micro‐ element analysis 

Analysis of the improved cowpea cultivars showed relatively higher protein levels of 24% to 26% and 

8% to 11% fat content. Similarly the improved cowpeas were relatively high in calcium, iron, and zinc. 

However, considerable mineral variation was found among the analyzed cowpeas varieties. 

Surprisingly, local cowpea cultivar had comparable high mineral calcium, zinc and iron concentrations 

compared with the improved varieties. This shows that apart from other merits that the improved 

cowpeas might have over local varieties such as higher yielding and resistance to certain diseases and 

pests, still nutritionally they are equally good. (See Annex 2) 

Output 2.3: Option for community-based cowpea seed production and increased farmer access to 

seed identified 

The seed availability is a big issue because commercial companies are not interested in producing seeds 

of low volume crops like sorghum, pearl millet bambara nuts and cowpea. To accomplish Activity 2.3.2 

{Train farmers to produce seed (QDS) for commercial use}, farmers were given basic training in 

community seed production covering four main topics namely Organization of seed production in 

Tanzania (L 1), Attributes of seed quality (L 2), Cowpea Seed Production (L 3) touching base on issues 

related to site selection for cowpea seed production, land preparation, choice of varieties to be planted 

according to days to maturity, and plant spacing depending on variety growth habit, crop husbandry 

practices such as pest management, rouging of off types, harvesting, seed conditioning, seed storage and 

seed sampling and testing for quality attributes. Table 8 present numbers of participants to on-farm seed 

production 

Table 8:. Participants to on-farm seed production for project participating farmers 

Region District Village Nane of 

No. of Topics Covered 

Research Group participants L1 L2 L3 

SINGIDA Singida Msungua Mshikamano 10 X X X 

rural Ikhanoda Mfwenji 20 X X X 

Nduu Matumaini 21 X X X 

DODOMA Dodoma Kikombo Ushirika 11 X X 

rural Mpunguzi Twende na 

wakati 

10 X X 

IRINGA Iringa Mkungugu Ari mpya 10 X X 

rural Mangalali Fahari 14 X X 

In Malawi, the project provided small packs of seed of 0.5 kg each to all project participating farmers at 

Mpokwa, Mngwangwa EPA (about 60 farmers at each EPA) and Kasungu. The objective was to create 

awareness on cowpea production. Subsequently, a follow-up training was conducted on pest 

management, to grow cowpea intensively (as sole crop) and to practice pest management and observe 

14 

2009


results. Farmers were monitored and they managed to get good crops and yields and were motivated to 

produce cowpeas. These farmers have been advised to store some of their seeds so that they can plant 

more cowpeas next season. They were also trained on principles of cowpea seed production during field 

days and visits. 

Output 2.4: Cowpea marketing opportunity identified 

In Malawi, cowpea market value chain workshops which brought representatives of cowpea producers, 

middlemen and traders were conducted in Lilongwe and Zomba in August 2009. The workshops were 

held to establish the linkages between cowpea producers (farmers) with the markets and to identify 

increased marketing opportunities. The workshop revealed that there are six big business traders who 

buy cowpea seeds (ADMARC, Rab Processors, Mulli Brothers, Agora, Grain Traders Association, and 

Transglobe) most of them paced emphasis on large seeded grain types as preferences. 

In Tanzania, the workshop was not held due to poor cowpea yields as a result of poor rainfall; hence 

farmers had nothing to offer to the traders. It is scheduled for May 2009 in Dodoma 

A paper - Gabriel, M. M.; Hella, J.P. and Mbwaga, A.M (2008) Assessment of Cowpea Marketing 

Efficiency: A case study of selected regions in Tanzania” will appear in the forthcoming AGREST 

conference proceedings Vol. 8 which is in press. Plan is underway to publish a paper in an international 

Journal for wider circulation. This is the first paper on cowpea marketing published in Tanzania 

Implication of the research findings 

During the past year, the project partners have built on work begun in year 1 and 2 to strengthen farmer 

groups, establish on farm trials and demonstrations, to take forward a cowpea-breeding programme, 

cowpea marketing stakeholders and to finalize marketing studies for Malawi. Crossing programme to 

incorporate resistance to Alectra into released commercial varieties has reached backcross 3 going in 

backcross 4 in Tanzania and backcross 2 in Malawi (due to delayed start in Malawi) These 

achievements will allow the project to move forward with next stage of the agreed work plan to 

undertake activities in the following ways; 

1. The project continues to support capacity building of farmer groups especially those new ones so 

that they are well informed about the aims of the project. Providing short term benefits for group 

membership should encourage continued participation in trials and other project activities. 

2. Crossing programme will continue up to backcross 6 by November 2010 in Tanzania, while in 

Malawi will be at backcross 4 because of late start. 

3. Wide scaling out identified Alectra resistant cowpea lines for Tanzania are three lines 

TZA 263, IT 99K-7-21-2-2-1 and IT 99K-573-1-1 and in Malawi are entries IT97K-825-15, 

IT99K-494-6 and IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 

4. Market studies have been completed in Tanzania and a stakeholders meeting will be conducted next 

financial year and in Malawi data is being analysed, a separate report will be prepared. Preliminary 

results were shared during the value chain workshops held in Lilongwe and Zomba respectively 

5. Farmer groups continued to be equipped with knowledge on QDS production and eventually. It is 

envisaged that QDS seed be bought by the project and then re-packed and farmers be given each 

member of the group give five new farmers of his choice to produce grain which can then be 

marketed by the group with aim to increase volume of grain production and hence increase grain for 

market at the same time popularize the varieties to more farmers. 

6. Since iron and zinc levels in cowpea leaves have shown to be significantly higher than the levels in 

cowpea grains, creating more awareness and encouraging the utilization of cowpea leaves will 

15 

2009


contribute in alleviating micronutrient deficiencies from cheap sources especially for resource-poor 

families. 

7. The new line, which was best with regards to all minerals, was IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 while the best 

with regards to crude protein and fats content were IT97K499-8 and IT99K-7212-2-1. The later has 

been selected by farmers for its earliness in both countries Tanzania and Malawi (Item 3 above). It 

will be one of the potential candidate to be promoted for release in both countries Malawi and 

Tanzania 

16 

2009


Annex 1: Tanzania Annual Report 

Development and promotion of Alectra resistant cowpea cultivars for smallholder farmers in 

Malawi and Tanzania 

Edited by: 

Dr Ambonesigwe M Mbwaga: Uyole Agricultural Research Institute, Box 400 Mbeya 

Dr Joseph Mligo: Ilonga Agricultural Research Institute, Box 33 Kilosa, Morogoro 

Dr Joseph Hella: Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro 

September 2009 

1 

2009


Tanzania Project Team 

Uyole Agricultural Research Institute Dr A M Mbwaga (Pathologist & Project Leader) 

PO Box 400, Mbeya 

Ilonga Agricultural Research Institute Dr J K Mligo (Cowpea breeder) 

PO Box 33, Kilosa 

Dodoma Rural District Council 

D Muywanga (District Agricultural and Livestock 


Officer) 

Ms Stella Mwamba (Subject Matter specialist) 

Singida Rural District Council N Mosha (DALDO) 

L Sakwera (Crops specialist) 

Iringa Rural District Council 

P Mphwewe (Crop specialist) 

PO Box 290 

INADES Formation, Tanzania 

A. Katunzi (Director & Training specialist) 


TOSCI P.O BOX 1056, Morogoro Mwakitwange (Seed Technologist) 

Photo: Cowpea Seed production plot at Mpunguzi village in Dodoma, Tanzania 2009 

2 

2009


Introduction: 

The rainfall amount and distribution during the 2008/09 season was poor in most dry areas of Tanzania. 

Also there was an outbreak of cut warms at seedling stage especially in Singida, where farmers had to 

re-plant legumes more than twice until they ran out of seed. This has led to poor harvest of the crop. The 

two outputs 1.1 and 1.2 mentioned below were covered in year one and year 2. 

Output 1.1: Producer and consumer preferences for traits in cowpea identified 

This out put has been completed in year two 

Output 1.2: Capacity of cowpea farmers, especially women enhanced 

Three new more farmer groups were formed this season, one from each district of Singida, Dodoma and 

Iringa. These are from Nduu village (21 members) in Singida, Mpunguzi (10 members) in Dodoma and 

Ilambilole (8 members) in Iringa. Some preliminary training has been undertaken, mainly group 

formation, seed production and processing and utilization of cowpea. 

Output1.3.0: Cowpea lines resistant to A. vogelii identified 

1.3.1: To assemble cowpea germplasm: 

The collection of cowpea germplasm was conducted in year one, where cowpea accessions were 

obtained from IITA, Bihawana farmers Training Centre, National Pant Genetic Resource Centre and 

Ilonga Agricultural Research Station. These were evaluated for adaptability and Alectra resistance 

starting in the same year one. 

1.3.2 On-station screening of cowpea cultivars for Alectra resistance 

Introduction: Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) is a crop of major importance to the nutrition of poor rural 

households in the drier and sub-humid regions of Eastern and Southern Africa, where diets tend to be 

overly reliant on starchy foods such as millet, sorghum, maize and cassava. Cowpea grain is an 

inexpensive, high quality source of protein and its vitamin-rich leaves are eaten as spinach. Women 

particularly value cowpeas, which help them to bridge the "hunger months" prior to the main cereal 

harvest, also it adds cash to the household after selling the grain, dried leaves and cookies like bagia 

(buns). Farmers grow local long duration cowpea cultivars, which produce low yield due to a number of 

reasons including Alectra infestation. In odder to improve the productivity of cowpeas in these areas, 

there was a need to introduce cowpea cultivars, which are high yielding, resistant to pests including 

Alectra and preferred by consumers both for market and for household use. The introduction of 

accessions was to asses for their resistance to Alectra. This activity started by this project in 2006/2007 

growing season and the promising lines were tested to more Alectra infested sites. These sites were 

Ismani in Iringa region; Bihawana Farmer Training Centre and Hombolo Research station both in 

Dodoma. For the second season 2007/2008 the cowpea lines were again planted at the same sites of 

Ismani, Bihawana FC and Hombolo to confirm their performance in terms of Alectra resistance and 

yield. Promising lines for Alectra resistance and yield were identified. In the third season 2008/2009, the 

promising lines were planted again at these Alectra hot spots for further confirmation of resistance to 

Alectra and for yield performance. 

Material and methods: The trial was planted at three on station locations which included Ismani, 

Bihawana Training Centre and Hombolo research station. Cowpea lines planted were those from last 

season showing promising Alectra resistance and farmers had already selected some of them as the best 

lines. These lines included IT99K-21-7-2-2-1, IT99K-573-1, IT97K-818-35, IT89KD-288, TZA 263, 

IT97K-819-118, IT97K-499-8, IT97K-499-38, IT00K-1207, B301 and VULI-2, FAHARI as local 

checks. The materials were planted at a plot size of 3x4m, 4 rows per plot and replicated four times. 

Data recorded were plant stand count at harvest, Alectra count per plot and yield per plot (g/plot). Yield 

data was computed to yield in kg per ha. 

3 

2009


Results and discussions: Generally weather condition was not very good for the crop, because rains 

started late and erratic. Dodoma suffered the most for all the crops and this affected the crop 

establishment and Alectra infestation. The trial at Hombolo was mistakenly planted at a site where 

almost there was no Alectra infestation, only few Alectra plants were observed on susceptible cowpea 

checks Vuli-2 and Fahari. Looking at the susceptible checks high infestation of Alectra was observed at 

Bihawana Training Centre followed by Ismani. From the test cowpea materials only cowpea line 

IT97K-499-38 and B301 supported zero Alectra counts at both 

locations Ismani and Bihawana (Table 3.1). Other lines supported very low Alectra plants as compared 

to the susceptible checks Vuli-2 and Fahari. 

4 

2009 

Fig. 1 Cowpea field highly infested by Alectra at 

Bihawana Farmers training Centre Dodoma, 

2009 

Cowpea yield on average was observed highest at Hombolo followed by Bihawana FC and last was at 

Ismani. From the test cowpea lines, line IT99K-573-2-1 produced the highest average yield 

(735.6kg/ha) across sites followed by line IT97K-819-118 (647.3kg/ha). These lines also gave the 

highest yield from the test cowpea lines in 2008 season (Project Annual report 2008). Test line TZA 263 

was severely infected with a bacterial disease called bacterial blight especially at Ismani and Hombolo; 

in some of the plots almost all plants died due to the disease 

Fig. 2 Cowpea line TZA 263 attacked by a bacterial 

disease likely to be Bacterial blight (Xanthomonas 

vignicola)


Table 1.Average Infestation of cowpea entries with Alectra vogelii (Alectra count/3x4m) at three 

locations at 12 weeks after planting 2009: 

Cowpea Entries Ismani Bihawana 

FC 

Hombolo Mean Alectra 

count across 

5 

sites 

Comments 

IT99K-7-21-2-2 0.0 3.8 0.0 1.3 Late emergence of Alectra 

IT99K-573-2-1 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.6 Late emergence of Alectra 

IT97K-499-8 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 

IT97K-818-35 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.3 

IT97K-819-118 0.0 4.5 0.0 1.5 

IT97K-499-38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

IT89KD-288 0.0 26.3 0.0 8.8 

IT00K-1207 0.8 1.8 0.0 0.9 

IT96D-733 0.0 42.0 0.0 14.0 

B301 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

TZA 263 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 Farmers selected for large 

grain 

Vuli 2 3.0 48.3 0.3 17.2 Commercial released varieties 

Fahari 7.5 34.3 1.0 14.3 Commercial released varieties 

Mean 0.87 12.73 0.15 

SE 0.41 2.98 - 

Range: 0-16 0-74 0-3 

Table 2: Yield (kg/ha) of cowpea entries at Alectra vogelii hot spot at three locations, 2009 

Cowpea Entries Ismani Bihawana Hombolo mean yield Comments 

FC 

across sites 

IT99K-7-21-2-2 372.8 527.1 568.7 489.6 Farmers selected for 

earliness 

IT99K-573-2-1 309.4 927.1 970.4 735.6 Farmers selected for yield 

IT97K-499-8 410.2 643.7 753.9 602.6 

IT97K-818-35 432.3 525.0 608.2 521.8 

IT97K-819-118 590.8 677.1 674.0 647.3 

IT97K-499-38 362.5 409.6 604.2 458.8 

IT89KD-288 413.9 639.6 773.5 609.0 

IT00K-1207 262.9 545.8 515.2 441.3 

IT96D-733 404.6 302.1 514.3 407.0 

B301 164.8 952.1 789.2 635.4 

TZA 263 265.6 525.0 386.6 392.4 Large grain but severely 

infected by Bacterial blight 

disease. 

Vuli 2 212.7 354.1 867.3 478.0 

Fahari 209.8 554.2 745.6 503.2 

Mean 331.70 583.24 674.68 

SE 29.44 35.15 27.86 

Range: 92.5- 108.3- 236.6- 

791.7 1542.0 1198.0 

1.3.3a: On-farm evaluation of cowpea lines for Alectra resistance and yield: 

2009


Introduction: Most farmers are growing long duration trailing type of cowpea, and mostly around their 

homestead. They are mainly for getting leaves and few pods. The grain yields are usually very low due 

to low yield potentials of the cultivars and farmers do not spray against insect pests at flowering and 

podding, hence, most of the pods are lost. In addition, the local varieties are very susceptible to Alectra 

vogelii. The introduction of early, Alectra resistant and high yielding cowpea varieties will improve the 

nutritional status and increase income to the households by selling extra produced grain. There is high 

potential market for cowpea and for improving household nutritional status. 

Material and Methods: Due to shortage of cowpea seeds, five villages were selected for evaluation of 

five best selected cowpea lines from last season for Alectra resistance, adaptation and yield. 

Commercially released varieties Vuli-2 and Fahari were added and their village local checks. The 

villages involved were Mangalali and Mkungugu (Iringa region), Kikombo in Dodoma and other two 

villages were Msungua and Ikhanoda in Singida rural district. 

The plots planted were 4m by 4m and the yields and Alectra counts were collected from the whole plot, 

which were separated by one meter. Farmers wanted to have larger plots, but we were limited with 

amount of seed. With their chairman and secretary of the group and with assistance from extension 

officers farmers were able to collect data and evaluate the materials according to their criterion 

Results and discussion: As discussed under section 3.1 rains distribution was a major problem. It was 

late and erratic; hence there was very poor crop establishment such that many of farmers just managed 

to get few cowpea pods especially in Dodoma and Iringa sites. The other problem observed in Singida 

was for unforeseen outbreak of cut worms, which occurred at germination of the crop. Some farmers 

had to replant more than two times until they ran out of seed. In Singida rainfall started on time and it 

was relatively evenly distributed as compared to Dodoma and Iringa rural districts. The Alectra 

infestation was only reported on commercial and local cultivars, the other lines were observed free from 

the weed pest 

The yields recorded on few farmers who managed to get a crop are as presented in Table 3.. The 

average highest cowpea yield obtained was from Singida rural followed by Iringa and last Dodoma rural 

district. 

Table 3: The yield (kg/ha) performance of the 5 cowpea lines tested at five Villages, in Tanzania 2009 

Cowpea line Farmer groups ir 

Mkungugu Kikombo Msungua 

Iringa Dodoma Singida 

IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 600 222 600 

IT99K 573-2-1 720 440 600 

IT97K 818-35 200 389 800 

IT89KD 288 400 333 200 

TZA 263 280 167 1200 

VULI-2 560 - 600 

FAHARI 800 - 760 

Village Local 200 - 530 

Mean 470.0 310.2 661.3 

1.3.3b: Farmer Participatory Cowpea Lines Evaluation 

Introductions: Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp), is one of the African indigenous most important 

leguminous crops. It is mostly grown in tropical countries for various uses and is a cheap source of 

vegetable protein. The crop is well adapted to relatively dry and stressful growing conditions of the 

marginal land, but produces excellent nutritive value (Singh et al., 1997). It is a drought tolerant crop 

and recently, there has been an increasing demand of cowpeas in the human diet, as well as for income 

generation. It thus provides solution for periodic hunger in semi-arid region of Tanzania 

6 

2009


This is the second season that the on farm evaluation of most promising lines of cowpea has been 

conducted in five villages namely; Msungua and Ikhanoda (Singida region), Kikombo (Dodoma region) 

and Mangalali and Mkungugu (Iringa region). Building from the 2008 evaluation, objectives of the 2009 

evaluation were as follow: 

~ To revisit the 2008 results 

~ To revisit evaluation criteria used in 2008 

~ To evaluate cowpea lines planted in 2009 

~ To make informed conclusion to guide for the subsequent on farm evaluation 

This brief presents the outcome evaluation of farmers’ trials in five villages in the above mentioned 

districts 

Method: The evaluation mission comprised Dr A.M. Mbwaga (Pathologist), Dr J.K. Mligo (Legume 

breeder) and Dr J.P. Hella (Agricultural Economist). As in 2008, the team participated in the on-farm 

evaluation in all villages for a period between 17 th and 24 th May 2009. In 2008 evaluation involved 

traversing with farmers in all five villages in each plot planted with a known variety of cowpea. Farmers 

were then requested to list, based on their own experience, the criteria which govern them to value and 

prefer particular varieties than another variety. Although main criteria varied across villages, but mostly 

hanged on high yield, early maturity, resistant to pests including Alectra, big sized seed and white to 

cream colour. 

Observations 

Criteria for selecting cowpea cultivar by villages in 2008 

Table 4 present the criterion used by farmers to rank different cowpea lines. The results were almost the 

similar in all villages. Good and more preferred lines are those associated with high yielding, early 

maturity, pest/disease (including Alectra) and drought resistant, large and white/cream seed colour. 

Table 4: Criteria for selecting different cowpea lines by village 

Msungua Ikhanoda Kikombo Mkungugu Mangalali 

Early maturity High yielding High yielding High yielding High yielding 

Resistance to Alectra, Early maturity Drought Large seeds Large seeds 

diseases/insects/pests 

resistance 

High yielding varieties 

with many leaves 

Cream color Early maturing Early maturity Early maturing 

Brown color Alectra Resistant to Tolerant to Alectra 

resistant Alectra Alectra tolerance 

Big size- seeds Big size seed Cream Seed Reddish seed Drought 

color 

colour 

resistance 

Large seeds Plenty green 

leaves 

Cowpea lines preferred by farmers in target villages 2008 

Based on criteria highlighted in Table 4 above, in May 2008, farmers evaluated 14 lines including the 

commercial released varieties i.e. Vuli-2 and Fahari and locally grown cultivars named by the respective 

village name. List of cowpea lines evaluated in 2008 is presented in Table 5 below: 

Table 5: List of cowpeas line planted and evaluated in 2008 season 

No Lines/cultivar 

1 IT 99K-7-21-2-2-1 

2 IT 99K-573-1-1 

3 IT 97K-499-8 

4 IT 97K-818-35 

5 IT 97K-819-118 

6 IT 97K-499-38 

7 

2009


7 IT 89KD-288 

8 IT 00K-1207 

9 IT96D-733 

10 B 301 

11 TZA 263 

12 Vuli-2 

13 Fahari 

14 Farmer’s variety 

(Msungua/Ikhanoda/Kikombo/Makungugu/Mangalali) 

Table 6: Cowpea lines selected by each participating farmer Group in 2008 based on criteria in 

Table 4 

# Msungua Ikhanoda Kikombo Mkungugu Mangalali 

1 IT99K-7-21-2-2 TZ A263 IT 00K-1207 TZA 263 IT 99K-7-21-2-2 

2 IT97K-499-8 IT99K-7-21-2-2 IT97K-818-35 IT 99K-573-1-1 IT 97K-499-8 

3 IT99K-573-1-1 IT97K-818-35 IT97K-499-38 IT 97K-499-8 IT 97K-819-118 

4 IT00K-1207 IT97K-499-38 IT96D-733 IT 89KD-288 TZA 263 

5 IT97K-818-35 IT99K-573-1-1 B301, IT 97K-499-38 IT 99K-573-1-1 

6 IT97K-499-38 IT97K-499-8 T99K-573-1-1, IT 97K-818-35 IT 97K-499-38 

Ranking for 2009 

At the beginning of the season, five out of 14 lines planted in 2008 were selected for planting at 

farmers’ plots. The lines selected for the current year was based in farmers’ own expression as indicated 

in Table 6 above. Lines presented for further evaluation and reasons advanced by farmers are as 

presented in table 7 below 

Table 7: Cowpea lines selected for on-farm experiment in 2009 

# Lines Varieties 

1 IT 99K 7-21-2-2 average seed size, early maturity, resistant to Alectra, high yielding, 

white cream coloured seed, 

2 IT 99K 573-1 Slightly late maturity, resistant to Alectra, average seed size, white 

cream seed colour, high yielding 

3 1T 97K 818-35 Late maturity, resistant to Alectra 

4 1T 89KD 288 Late maturity, high yielding, resistant to Alectra, white cream seed 

colour, 

5 TZA 263 Late maturity, resistant to Alectra, reddish brown colour, large seeded 

Msungua -Village, Singida 

In Msungua village, 16 farmers participated at the on-farm evaluation. Results are as presented in Table 

8 below. Line IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 was the most preferred and IT89KD288 was the least preferred line. 

Table 8: Pair-wise ranking for Msungua village 

Lines 1 2 3 4 5 Result Rank 

IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 1 1 1 1 4 1 

IT 99K 573-1-1 2 2 2 3 2 

1T 89KD 288 4 5 0 5 

1T 97K 818-35 5 1 4 

TZA 263 2 3 

8 

2009


Ikhanoda-Village, Singida 

At Ikhanoda village, 12 farmers participated at the on-farm evaluation and results are as presented in 

Table 9 below. Line TZA 263 was the most preferred while IT 89KD 288 was the least preferred line. 

Table 9: Pair-wise ranking for Ikhanoda village 


IT 99K 7-21-2-2 1 1 1 5 3 2 

IT 99K 573-1-1 2 2 5 2 3 

1T 97K 818-35 4 5 1 4 

1T 89KD 288 5 0 5 

TZA 263 4 1 

Kikombo village, Dodoma 

In Kikombo village, 6 farmers participated at the on-farm evaluation and results are as presented in 

Table 10 below. Line TZA 263 was the most preferred but IT 89KD 288 was the least preferred line. 

Table 10: Pair-wise ranking for Kikombo village 


IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 3 2 

IT 99K 573-1 1 2 3 

1T 97K 818-35 1 2 1 4 

1T 89KD 288 1 2 3 0 5 

TZA 263 5 5 5 5 4 1 

Mkungugu –Ismani, Iringa 

In Mkungugu village, 10 farmers belonging to Ari Mpya farmer research group participated at the onfarm 

evaluation. Results are as presented in Table 11 below. Line TZA 263 was the most preferred and 

IT 97K 818-35 was the least preferred line. 

Table 11: Pair-wise ranking for Mkungugu village 


IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 1 1 1 5 3 2 

IT 99K 573-1 2 2 5 2 3 

1T 97K 818-35 4 5 0 5 

1T 89KD 288 5 1 4 

TZA 263 

Mangalali - Iringa 

5 1 

For unforeseen reasons it was not possible to evaluate the materials on day the team visited Mangalali 

village. When the farmers from Managalali visited Ismani research station, they were given opportunity 

to evaluate replicated trial planted with 14 lines including those planted at their own plots at Mangalali. 

The results are as presented in Table 12 below, where TZA 263 was ranked the best line followed by 

IT99K-7-21-2-2. 

Table 12: Ranking of the cowpea lines by Mangalali farmers at Ismani research Station 2009 

No Cowpea line Number of Number of Ranking of the Comment 

participants farmers selected cowpea line 

1 TZA-263 26 24 1 Each farmer 

2 IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 20 2 

was given a 

3 B 301 9 3 

chance of 

4 ITOOK-1207 8 4 

selecting only 

5 

6 

IT96D-733 

IT89KD-288 

8 

6 

4 

5 

best three 

cowpea lines 

7 IT99K-573-1 3 6 

9 

2009


Conclusion 

The main objective of the field visitation was to evaluate farmer managed experiments in all study 

villages. Based on the approach and criteria agreed by the farmers, final rank on 5 lines introduced to 

them is presented in Table 10. The most preferred line is TZA, 263, followed by IT 99 K-7-21-2-2-1 

and IT 99K-573-1-1. Position four and five were contested between line IT 89KD-288 and IT 97K 818 

which were scored by two villages in the same positions. After revisiting some inherent characteristics 

of the lines as scored by same farmers in 2008, line IT 89KD-288 was relatively batter on same traits 

such as early maturity and leave sizes which are lacking in IT 97K-818. Thus IT 89KD-288 was ranked 

4 th while IT 97K-818 was ranked 5 th . as indicated in Table 10 

Table 10: Farmer preference with respect to 5 introduced cowpea LINES 

Villages Rank in order of preference 

1 st 2 nd 3 rd 4 th 5 th 

Msungua IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 IT 99K 573-1-1 TZA 263 1T 97K 818-35 IT 89KD 288 

Ikanoda TZA 263 IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 IT 99K 573-1-1 IT 97K 818-35 IT 89KD 288 

Kikombo TZA 263 IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 IT 99K 573-1-1 IT 97K 818-35 IT 89KD 288 

Mkungugu TZA 263 IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 IT 99K 573-1-1 IT 89KD 288 IT 97K 818-35 

Mangalali TZA 263 IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 1T89KD-288 IT99K-573-1 1T 97K 818-35 

Rank (1) TZA 263 

(2) 

IT 99K 7-21-2-2-1 

(3) 

IT 99K 573-1-1 

(4) IT 89KD 288 

(5) IT 97K 818-35 

Based on these findings, lines TZA 263, IT 99K-7-21-2-2-1 and IT 99K-573-1-1 are to be increased for 

distribution to many farmers for more evaluation. For these lines, initial process to establish descriptors 

for these lines for possible inclusion in the National Performance Trials (NPT) towards variety release 

should be started. 

1.3.4 Targeted crosses 

Tanzania cowpea crossing program 

In 2007 report 130 cowpea accessions were screened for Alectra resistance. 10 accessions could not 

support emergence of Alectra. The identified accessions that could not support emergence of Alectra 

plants were classified as resistant to Alectra. These were crossed to the desirable parents (the released 

varieties which are: Fahari, Tumaini, Vuli-1 and Vuli-2) with the aim of transferring the Alectra 

resistance into these released varieties. Since resistance to Alectra is conditioned by a single gene, a 

backcross method was used to transfer of resistance. At present the screening (September, 2009) is at 

backcross three plants. The resistant plants will be identified while they are still flowering, thus the 

resistant backcross three plants will be backcrossed to the desirable parents to obtain backcross four 

seed which will be planted and selfed then followed by screening for resistance to Alectra. This process 

will continue up to backcross six at which it is expected a single chromosome segment carrying the 

desired gene will have been incorporated into the desired parents. Planting of backcross four seed will 

be conducted in early November 2009. The selfed backcross four seed will be planted in late February 

2010 for screening again for resistance to Alectra and resistant plants backcrossed to the desired parent 

to produce backcross five seed. Backcross five seed will be planted for selfing in early May 2010 and 

the selfed backcross five seed will be planted for screening for Alectra resistance in early august 2010. 

Resistant plants will be backcrossed to desirable parent in October 2010 to produce backcross six seed. 

Backcross six seed will be selfed ready for evaluation for Alectra resistance and yield on Alectra 

infested fields in season 20010/011 with the expectation that the project will be extended. 

10 

2009


Table 14: Backcross three crosses in the screen house at ARI-Ilonga by September 2009 

Cross number Pedigree 

17 (B301 x Vuli-1) x Vuli-1 

30 (IT 97K-499-8 x Vuli-2) x Vuli-2 

38 (Tumaini x IT96D-733) x Tumaini 

48 (ITK-499-8 x Tumaini) x Tumaini 

Output 1.4: Collaboration in cowpea research increased in Southern Africa 

Activity 1.4.1: Across site evaluation (PL to visit programme in Malawi) 

A trip to Malawi was made from 15 th to 20 th March 2009 to evaluate Cowpea/Alectra project activities 

The team was composite of Drs Joseph Mligo cowpea breeder, Ambonesigwe Mbwaga Project team 

leader and Charlie Riches, CoP liaison officer and met by the Malawian project team that was 

composite of Dr Vernon Kabambe country project leader, Mosses Mamiliro (breeder) ,and James 

Bokasi (breeder) 

The evaluation tour for Tanzania was done in three regions (Iringa, Dodoma, and Morogoro) from 27 th 

to 30 th April, 2009. The tour involved visiting seed multiplication, on-farm, on-station, and crossing 

programme. The team comprised of the following: 

Ambonesigwe Mbwaga (Project Leader) ARI, Uyole Mbeya Tanzania 

Joseph Mligo (Breeder) ARI, Ilonga Kilosa Tanzania 

Vernon Kabambe (Striga specialist) Bunda College, Lilongwe, Malawi 

James Bokosi (Breeder) Bunda College, Lilongwe, Malawi 

Boukar Ousmane (Breeder,) IITA Nigeria 

Activity 1.4.2: Student projects 

For Tanzania an MSC student working on a project “Assessment of cowpea marketing efficiency; A 

case of selected regions of Tanzania” was completed and the student graduated November 2008. 

In Malawi an MSc student working on a project “Farmer Participatory Selection of Alectra Resistant 

Cowpea Varieties in Selected Districts of Malawi”. The thesis has been submitted to examiners for 

review. In addition in Malawi an BSc student is undertaking a study on “Cowpea variety x time of 

planting x density” 

Activity 1.4.3: Paricipation in CCRP "community of practie 

Three researchers, one extensionist and one farmer from the project attended CoP2 in Maputo 

Mozambique in October 2008. In CoP3 in Bagamoyo Tanzania 4 researchers and 4farmers from project 

sites attended 

Activity 1.4.4: End of project stakeholder’s workshop (location to be determined later) 

Output 1.5: Project monitored and evaluated 

Activity 1.5.1. Establish project level M & E criteria 

(done during partners meeting in Mbeya at the inception of the project) 

Activity1.5.2. Review progress against M & E criteria each year 

Introduction: A trip to Malawi was made from 15 th to 20 th March 2009 to evaluate Cowpea/Alectra 

project activities. 

The team was composed of Drs Joseph Mligo cowpea breeder, Ambonesigwe Mbwaga Project team 

leader and Charlie Riches( CoP- liaison officer) and met by the Malawian project team that was 

composed of Dr Vernon Kabambe country project leader, Mosses Mamiliro( breeder), and James 

Bokosi (breeder). 

The objective of the visit were 

To evaluate on going on-farm cowpea activities, on station project activities and crossing work in screen 

house 

11 

2009


On –farm activities: On farm activity included evaluation of 7 cowpea cultivars of which 5 were 

experimental lines for Alectra resistance (IT99K-494-6, IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT 97K 825-15, Bunda 1, 

IT98K503-1) one commercially released variety (IT 82E-16) and a farmer’s variety at each project site. 

The project sites included Lilongwe district in Ngwangwa Extension Planning Area (EPA), Kasungu 

district in Lisasi EPA, Zomba district in Mpokwa EPA and Balaka district in Rividivi EPA. 

Lilongwe district 

Ngwangwa Extension Planning Area (EPA) 

a. Mazila village: A farmer research group in Ngwangwa was composited of 30 members but due to 

shortage of cowpea seed only four farmers planted the 7 cultivars. The general performance of the 

cultivars was very poor which resulted in poor pod setting. The possible reasons are: the soil fertility 

looked very poor, also it appeared to have had high insect incidences. 

The Alectra infestation was very high especially on the released variety (IT 82E-16) and Bunda 1. Less 

infestation was observed on IT97K-825-15, IT99K-494-6 and IT99K-7-21-2-2-1. 

b. Mpondela: Here the group was able to visit field of one farmer. There was good performance of all 

the entries planted and there was no Alectra observed in all of the seven entries. 

Kasungu District 

Lisasi EPA 

Sikondeyani village: Five farmers planted the trial. The trial performance was very good compared to 

those of Ngwangwa EPA. This may be due to good soils and relatively good rain Although nearby fields 

planted with cowpea had very high Alectra infestation but the infestation levels in the trials was 

relatively low and late emergency for this reason the grain yield was not much affected. Farmers 

selected IT82E-16 and Bunda 1 as the best varieties in terms of yield and earliness. 

Zomba district 

Mpokwa EPA 

Khuvinda village: There was good performance of the cowpea lines with very low Alectra infestation. 

Out of the seven entries, two entries (IT82E-16 and Bunda 1) were selected by farmers to be the best 

due to their earliness and good pod setting. Although the released variety IT82E-16 is a short duration 

variety, farmers were not aware of such type of the variety. This emphasizes the need to carry out more 

demonstrations to create awareness to more farmers. 

Balaka district: 

Rivirivi EPA: This is the only area where farmers were not organized in a formal farmer research group. 

The demonstrations were very good and planted along the road side for everybody to see. Alectra 

infestation was very low. As in other villages, here farmers also selected the early maturing varieties as 

the best cultivars. 

Bunda College: Activities here included, seed multiplication of experimental cowpea lines which have 

shown Alectra resistance. These included TZA 263 (from Tanzania) and IT 81D-994. Seed increase also 

included IT98K-503-1, IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT99K-494-6, IT97K-825-15, Sudan 1 and IT82E-16. The 

performances of the materials were good and were at flowering stage. The materials for crossing were 

planted in screen house and were at vegetative stage. Some of them had supported Alectra emergence 

already, which were recommended to be removed out of the experiment because they had shown 

susceptibility to Alectra. 

Lessons learnt: 

12 

2009


Although IT97K-825-15 had the least Alectra infestation at all on-farm sites it was the least preferred by 

the farmers. At all sites farmer’s variety was the latest, and it had not even flowered when all the other 

entries were maturing. 

It was noted that only early maturing varieties were most preferred, forgetting the advantage of late 

maturing varieties for having other traits such as prolonged availability of leaves as relish. This suggests 

that there is a need to evaluate the materials according to maturity groups. 

Cowpea and pigeon pea as the main source of vegetable protein in the project target sites; it was 

observed that early maturity of the cowpea bridge the hunger period of February/March, while waiting 

for the pigeon pea to mature late in the season. 

Wrap up: 

- Released varieties showed better yields than test lines 

- Early maturing varieties save as source of food in hunger periods 

- Seed system for cowpea is very poor 

- More cowpea seed should be sent to Balaka and Kasungu districts as there is high demand for seed 

of the improved varieties. 

- Farmers in Rivirivi recommended forming farmer research groups for better access by researchers 

and extension staff as compared to individual isolated farmers 

TANZANIA 

27 th -30 th April, 2009 

Introduction: The monitoring and evaluation tour for Tanzania was done in three regions (Iringa, 

Dodoma, and Morogoro) from 27 th to 30 th April, 2009. The tour involved visiting seed multiplication, 

on-farm, on-station, and crossing activities. The objective was to monitor progress in implementing 

agreed strategies and action plans for the project. This report gives information on sites/farmers/stations 

visited, varieties evaluated, team observations and way forward. 

The monitoring and evaluation team comprised the following: 

Ambonesigwe Mbwaga (Project Leader) ARI, Uyole Mbeya Tanzania 

Joseph Mligo (Breeder) ARI, Ilonga Kilosa Tanzania 

Vernon Kabambe (Striga specialist) Bunda College, Lilongwe, Malawi 

James Bokosi (Breeder) Bunda College, Lilongwe, Malawi 

Boukar Ousmane (Breeder,) IITA Nigeria 

On-farm visits: A number of farmers groups were visited in the two regions (Iringa, and Dodoma). In 

general farmers were required to plant five IITA lines and two locally released varieties (Fahari and 

Vuli-2). The two released varieties showed to be more adapted and performed consistently well across 

locations despite the prevalence of drought in many locations. The major problem is that they are both 

susceptible to Alectra. In a participatory variety trial conducted at Mpunguzi, Dodoma region, farmers 

selected IT 00K-126-3 as the best entry despite being susceptible to Alectra. Many of the farmers 

visited showed dedication to running the on-farm trials. 

On-station visits: The first on-station trial visited was at Ismani. The trial had 14 entries replicated four 

times. Each plot had five rows of four meter length. Although drought had an impact the performance 

of the entries was far better than the farmers’ fields. Alectra pressure was not as high as the previous 

year. This could have been due to the prolonged dry spell during the growing season. Vuli-2 and Fahari 

performed very well despite sustaining some Alectra plants. Except for the two check entries the rest 

had no Alectra emergence. The second trial was at Bihawana (Bihawana farmers training centre). The 

entries were similar to those planted at Ismani but four extra entries. Rainfall distribution was not good. 

The site received a mere 250 mm (normal 330 -488 mm) of rainfall between February (151.3mm) and 

March (98.8mm) and poorly distributed. This site had the heaviest infestation of Alectra and is good for 

13 

2009


screening. High insect population was observed at this site as compared to the other sites. Vuli-2 

looked good but not outstanding. Entry IT 573-1 doing well and B301 though small seeded. Crop 

management was very good despite drought. IT99K 573-1 and B301had no Alectra in all four 

replicates. Two entries, IT99K-7-21-2-2-1 and TZA 263 had only one Alectra plant in one replication. 

The third on-station trial was at Hombolo. The entries were same as those planted at Ismani and 

Bihawana. The planting date was 16 th January, 2009 and germination occurred on 4 th February, 2009 

because of lack of rain after planting. However the Alectra pressure was not high. Field management 

was good and the entries performed well. 

Seed production: A major objective of this activity was to teach farmers on how to produce quality 

seed. The first seed multiplication activity visited in Iringa was at a community plot known as. Three 

varieties were planted (Fahari, Vuli-2, and local cultivar). The varieties were planted on 25 th February, 

2009 and entries were just starting to flower. The isolation distance was 2.5 meters and crop looked 

very clean. Dimethoate was used to control aphids. The soil was quite sandy. Farmers claim late 

planting was due to late land preparation because other farmers contributed late for hiring oxen used for 

land preparation. There was poor effort in labelling entries. 

The second visit was at Mpunguzi, Dodoma region. Two farmers planted one variety (Fahari) on 2 nd 

February, 2009. One farmer had a poor field but the other one managed the crop well (one acre) and will 

harvest a good yield despite the drought. 

Cowpea crossing programme at ARI Ilonga 

The visit to see crossing programme was only to Ilonga research institute where the crossing for cowpea 

varieties to improve resistance to Alectra is being conducted. This station is in Kilosa district. The 

research mandate includes other crops such as maize, sorghum, soybean, sunflower, cotton, pearl millet 

besides cowpea. The crossings were done in a screen house and involved commercially released 

varieties as recurrent parents in a backcrossing program such as Tumani, Fahari, ,Vuli-1 and Vuli-2. 

Aphid infestation is a major problem in the screen house. Backcross 3 seed had been harvested ready for 

planting to make backcross 4. 

WAY FORWARD/RECOMMENDATIONS: 

Drought (rainfall, poor distribution and low amounts) has been an overriding problem this season. We 

commend the collaboration the project is undertaking along with the tropical legumes II project of IITA. 

The project should therefore incorporate both traits (Alectra resistance and Drought tolerance). An 

analysis of medium term climatic data (20-25 years) would be important to determine the frequency of 

rainfall events (e.g. start dates, dry spells and rainfall amounts). This can help to determine the 

important drought traits in plant (e.g. earliness or resilience). The good production practices should be 

incorporated in the screening of the varieties against Alectra. Hence, there is need to expose the groups 

involved in the project to all these production practices. There is a need to evaluate the materials 

according to maturity group early, medium and late because farmers’ selections are dictated and 

influenced by time to maturity. The experiences observed from this project and TLII project indicate 

that the overriding preference trait is seed size; large seeded types are more liked than small seeded 

types. Thus this should be taken care in our project. The backcrossing programme at Ilonga will 

continue to backcross 6 by October 2010, while at Bunda will be at back cross 4. Request for extension 

Objective 2: Promotion of high yielding A. vogelii resistant cowpea cultivars 

Output 2.1 Farmer and extension awareness of Alectra vogelii and use of resistant cultivars 

Activity 2.1.1: Develop leaflets on crop management and ultilization of cowpea, pre-test and print 

A draft leaflet on “Recipes for cowpea products” was provided to farmers in each project site. These 

were produced in Kiswahili for better understanding by farmers. It emphasized on the different ways of 

cowpea utilization, recipes and methods of de-hulling whole cowpea grain to produce dhal that can be 

converted into other value-added products such as dhal, stew and snack products like “bagia”. This 

14 

2009


leaflet has been printed out for further dissemination of the technologies. The leaflet on crop 

management is to be produced next cropping season 

Activity 2.1.2a: Farmer exchange visits and field days across project sites 

Farmer exchange visit involved twelve farmers from Mangalali (Ari Mpya Group) visited Mkungugu 

(Fahari Group) farmer Research Group and also at Ismani On-station trials in Iringa. These were also 

accompanied by their extension officers from the respective villages and from the district. The objective 

of the farmer exchange visit was farmers from Mangalali to get experiences from other farmers on 

principals of cowpea production, processing and utilization as well as how to manage farmer group and 

then compare with the way they do in their own group. Also jointly went to research station to learn new 

materials and management at the research station. 

15 

2009 

Fig.3. Farmers discuss with their host 

about seed production at research plot 

of Mangalali Research Group, 2009 

At Ismani research station, farmers from both Mkungugu and Mangalali participated at evaluation of the 

14 cowpea screening materials planted. The outcome from their selection of the lines according to their 

criterion is shown in the Table-15Below. 

Table 15: Ranking of the cowpea lines planted at Ismani Research station 2009 

No Cowpea line Number of Number of Ranking of Comment 

participants farmers selected the cowpea 

line 

1 TZA-263 26 24 1 Each farmer was 

2 IT99K-7-21-2- 

20 2 

given a chance 

2-1 

of selecting only 

3 B 301 9 3 

best three 

4 ITOOK-1207 8 4 

cowpea lines 

5 IT96D-733 8 4 

6 IT89KD-288 6 5 

7 IT99K-573-1 3 6 

Table 16: Ranking of cowpea by Ari Mpya Farmer Research Group Mkungugu 2009 

No Cowpea line Number of Number of Ranking of Comment 

participants farmers who the cowpea 

selected line 

1 TZA-263 23 21 1 Each farmer was 

2 IT99K-7-21-2- 

17 2 given a chance 

2-1 

of selecting only 

3 IT89KD-288 17 2 best three 

4 B 301 9 3 cowpea lines 

5 IT99K-573-1 5 4 

At both sites farmers chose two best cowpea lines, which are TZA 263 for large grain size and IT99K-7- 

21-2-2-1 for its earliness.


Activity 2.1.2b Farmers participate at National Agricultural Show in Dodoma 2009: 

Two farmers from each of the farmer groups Msungua (Mshikamano FRG) and Ikhanoda (Mfwenji 

FRG) organized by the District Council represented their farmer groups at National Agricultural show, 

which took place in Dodoma from 1-8 August 2009. The farmers displayed their cowpea varieties and 

products processed from cowpea such as bans. This was a good motivation for the farmers. 

Output 2.2: Nutrition status of farmers improved 

Activity 2.2.1 Inventory of recipes of cowpea products 

This activity was undertaken in 2007/08 and completed and made a basis for the following activities 

Activity 2.2.2a: Develop/modify / demonstrate cowpea products: 

Introduction: Cowpea (Vigina unguiculata) is an important food legume and an integral part of 

traditional cropping systems in the semi arid regions of the tropics (Ryan et al, 1984). Although 

indigenous to Southern Africa, cowpeas has spread world wide and is extensively cultivated in semiarid 

and consumed in many regions of Africa including Tanzania. 

Farmers in the project sites produce many varieties of legumes particularly cowpeas, which are 

important for food and cash income for household. Thus make leguminous crops rank second after 

cereals such as maize and sorghum. Cowpea is a preferred staple food and its desirability reflects the 

fact that the leaves, immature pods, fresh seeds, green pods and dry grains can be eaten or marketed. 

The dry grains are commonly eaten whole or can be milled and consumed in numerous traditional main 

snack foods (E. Sarakikya, 1996). Cowpea grains as well as the vegetable parts, make major nutritional 

contributions to diets. Nutritionally, cowpea plays a critical subsistence role in the diets of many 

households by providing nutrients that are deficient in cereals. 

In order to add value, cowpea grains need to be processed. The processing of cowpea grains improves 

palatability, digestability, acceptability, reduced cooking time and increases market value of products 

made from dhal. This section therefore, sought to improve cowpeas utilization through nutrients 

addition to different products. 

The main objective of this study was to promote the utilization of cowpea in Tanzania. 

• Train farmers on the processing of cowpea grains into dhal 

• Preparation of cowpea dishes (snack bites from cowpea flour “bagia’) 

• Perform sensory evaluation tests. 

Expected outputs 

• Smallholder farmers’ capacity and capability on ways of using processed cowpea products built. 

• Smallholder farmers, skills and knowledge in value addition on cowpea products enhanced and 

strengthened 

• Cowpea products utilization promoted 

• Nutrition status for the families in project sites improved 

Methedology 

Study area 

The training was conducted in Msungua, Ikhanoda, and Nduu in Singida region, Kikombo and 

Mpunguzi in Dodoma region and Mkungugu, Ilambilole and Mangalali in Iringa region. The sites were 

purposively selected as a result of their involvement in a project on “Improvement of cowpea 

productivity on Alectra Vogelii infested land in Tanzania. 

Materials used 

Materials used to perform and conduct this study include, flip charts, board, cowpea grains, cowpea 

flour, cowpea dhal, ingredients such as onions, garlic, eggs, chilies, cooking oil and salt. 

16 

2009


Approach 

A participatory research approach of working with organized village farmer groups was adopted. These 

included participatory research models such as demonstrations, displays and training through hands-on 

experience. Appreciative problem solving methods were used to encourage farmers learn, explore and 

practice new skills and knowledge. 

Sample size 

The number of farmers in each group varied between 15-35 members. Level of women representation 

was 58 percent of the total number. The study participants were mainly smallholder farmers drawn from 

eight villages in three regions. These farmers provided the information on producers and consumers. 

These farmers mostly grew cowpeas for subsistence and they were the one who tackled the issue of 

consumer preference. Other participants included government officials, district and village extension 

officers. 

Training of farmers and local processors 

A one day workshop was conducted in each project area and farmers were trained on improved cowpea 

technologies. The trainings were based on demonstrations, hands-on trials and printed materials 

(bronchures for cowpea recipes). Farmers participated in the validation of five recipes for cowpea value 

addition. Sensory tests were carried out, where by farmers were required to rank and find out the most 

preferred type of”bagia”. The five types of bagia were made using different recipes (see Table 1). The 

recipes were translated into national language for better understanding. 

Table 18: Cowpea snack product recipes 

Bagia type Materials/ingredients 

1. Bagia asilia Cowpea dhal/flour, salt, cooking oil, water 

2. Bagia asilia na viungo Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, garlic, onions and water 

3. Bagia; viungo na hamira Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, onions, garlic, yeast and 

water 

4. Bagia; viungo na mayai Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, garlic, onions, eggs and 

water 

5. bagia; viungo, mayai na hamira Cowpea flour, salt, cooking oil, onions, garlic, eggs, 

yeast and water 

Common method used 

• Mix all the ingredients together 

• Add water and mix well 

• Make the dough by needing (allow the dough to rise by leaving it for 10-15 minutes) 

• Heat cooking oil until really hot. 

• Use spoon or hand to make the size of bagia you need and put the dough into the oil 

• Stir and cook until brown 

• Remove from oil and drain 

• Cool and pack for marketing or save for consumption. 

Farmers were equipped with skills and knowledge on quality control with emphasis on the storage 

techniques. Also they were informed about product grading/sorting, market requirements of quality, 

quantity and sustainability. The training also emphasized on the methods of de-hulling whole cowpea 

grain for dhal production that can be converted into other value added and snack products, such as 

“bagia”. The value added products are considered nutritious and sources of income generation. It was 

however, observed that the prevailing low production levels, lack of adequate and appropriate storage 

facilities constrained the sustainability of the niche markets. 

17 

2009


Dissemination of information 

A Leaflet on “Recipes for cowpea products” was provided to farmers in each project site. These were 

produced in Swahili for better understanding of farmers. It emphasized on the different ways of cowpea 

utilization, recipes and methods of de-hulling whole cowpea grain to produce dhal that can be converted 

into other value-added products such as dhal, stew and snack products like “bagia”. Value-added 

products are considered nutritious and sources of income generation. It was also observed that storage of 

cowpea grain was a big problem but dehulling the grains could improve storage up to many years. Also 

this reduces the labour involved in preparation by women, wherever they come to prepare Bagia. 

It is envisaged the disseminated materials can always be referred to by farmers/ processors in case of 

problem shooting long after the project expires. 

Results and Discussions 

Cowpea preference 

The study found that, the current type of cowpea grown in the project sites take more than two hours to 

cook. The smallholder farmers/consumers prefer cowpeas that cook in less than two hours. Hence 

training of cowpea grain processing into dhal as on alternative of reducing cooking time was important. 

Sensory evaluation 

“Bagia” samples were prepared using the above recipes. Each bagia type reflected to the type of recipe. 

At the time of testing the samples were coded 1,2,3,4, and 5 for bagia types made from recipes 1 to 5 

respectively. A panel of respective farmers, extension officers and village government leaders 

participated in the trial. They were given the five samples of bagia not simultaneously, one at a time and 

they were asked to assign preference score on products attributes including taste, texture and 

palatability. A pair-wise ranking method (Table19) was used to find out the most preferred bagia type. 

Panelists were asked to taste and rank the overall acceptability of the product in relation to that of the 

other four. Every sample was compared to each other by allowing every panelist to give opinion or rise 

up hands for most preferred sample. The scores of the quality attributes were done using the following 

rating scale; 

1 = excellent 

2 = very good 

3 = good 

4 = average 

5 = poor 

The overall acceptability was ranked from 1-5 (Table 19) 

Table 19; Ranked cowpea “bagia” 

Bagia type Rank 

1 5 

2 3 

3 4 

4 2 

5 1 

Table 2 shows that, bagia type 5 was the most preferred by farmers, while bagia type 1 was the least. 

This indicates that, bagia enriched with nutrients (type 5) came out as the most preferred as compared to 

“bagia asilia”(type 1), which was not enriched with nutrients (See Table 19). It is evident that, 

palatability and taste to a large extent is associated with nutrients enrichment. According to the panelist 

views, it is believed that if a product is palatable and nutritionally enriched, it is most likely to fetch 

more market than the reverse. Therefore value added products, apart from being nutritious they are 

considered palatable and sources of income generation. 

18 

2009


Table 20: Summary village score and rank data 

Bagia type Village scores and rank 

Singida region Dodoma region Iringa region 

Msungua Ikhanoda Nduu Kikombo Mpunguzi Mkungugu Ilambilole Mangalali 

S R S R S R S R S R S R S R S R S R 

1.Bagia asilia 0 4 0 5 0 5 4 1 0 3 0 5 0 5 0 5 0.5 3.5 

2. Bagi + 

viungo 

3.Bagia + 

viungo+hamira 

4. Bagia + 

viungo+ 

mayaia 

19 

2009 

Aver 

age 

Av. 

rank 

2 2 2 3 4 1 3 2 3 1 2 3 2 3 4 2 2.8 2.1 

1 3 1 4 1 4 0 5 1 2 1 4 1 4 1 4 0.9 3.8 

4 1 4 1 2 3 1 4 3 1 3 2 3 2 2 3 2.8 2.1 

5.Bagia + 

viungo+ mayai 

+ hamira 

4 1 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 1 4 1 5 1 3 1 3.4 1.5 

NB: S= Score, R= Rank 

Storage and storage insect pests: 

Cowpea grain is very susceptible to storage pests especially to bruchids hence store poorly. This has 

been one of the constraints that farmers do not keep much of their cowpea grains more than 6 months. 

On the other hand dehuled cowpeas are not infested by storage pests and can bee stored for a long time 

so long they are kept in a dry place. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Initially, cowpea production has mainly been for household use and limited sales to local/village 

markets. Thus by providing farmers with the technologies for use in the improvement of the processing 

of cowpea into dhal, this study has opened the community to new avenues for storing the cowpea 

products longer and obtaining income from the crop. 

By achieving the diversification of small-scale rural farmers’ incomes through adoption of appropriate 

post-harvest technologies and providing information on the value addition for cowpeas, the project has 

equipped farmers with means of enhancing their household incomes. This will be enhanced through 

better quality products which will ensure small-holder farmers’ ability to have market access for them. 

Additionally, through equipping farmers with knowledge and skills of improved handling, processing 

and utilization of cowpea products, the capacity of the rural communities in which the project has 

operated, to earn an income from similar processed products through value addition has been enhanced. 

Also the project has built the capacity of the rural small-scale cowpea farmers in working in groups and 

organizing themselves to produce necessary volumes and quality requirements cowpea grain which can 

meet market requirements. The project further enabled the farmers to change their perception of cowpea 

as a crop for household consumption and small scale production, to perceiving it as a possible income 

earner with potential to increase household incomes. 

However, this study highlighted the fact that, what is needed at times is change in attitude of farmers 

towards a crop in order to enable them increase its production and make an income from marketing its 

products. 

It is recommended that, farmer groups need to be facilitated and equipped with means to obtain storage 

facilities for large volumes of cowpea grains, especially since large quantities of grains are expected to 

be produced. 

Finally, it is recommended that, this study is replicated in other areas of the country and other crops 

characterized by low utilization base.


Way forward 

There a need to have a follow-up study to evaluate post-harvest technologies taught/taken to smallholder 

farmers in project sites. This will be a kind of monitoring and evaluation study, it may be done routinely 

to evaluate the rate of adoption of post-harvest technologies taught/taken to farmers. 

The study will include the following activities; 

• Post-harvest technologies taught 

• Cowpea handling, processing, storage utilization and marketing 

Indicators 

- Level and constraints limiting the use of technologies on cowpea handling, processing, storage, 

utilization and marketing 

- Processing methods 

- Storage techniques 

- Forms and rate of cowpea consumption at household and community levels 

- Cowpea preferences on for example product taste, texture, grain size, skin colour, type of 

products, etc 

- Cowpea marketing value chains 

- Types of value added cowpea products used and sold at the markets, at what type and level of 

markets, Access and market linkages established/existing 

- The general level, use and application of improved technologies. 

References 

Eva Pendeli Sarakikya, 1996, Tanzania Cook Book, Tanzania Publishing Limited, 

Dar es Salaam. 

J.K. Ryan, P.D. Bidinger, N. Prahlad Rao, p.Pushpamma, 1884, The Determinants of 

Indivicual Diets and Nutritional Status in six villages of South India, ICRISAT, India 

Activity2.2.2b: Analysis of nutrient content in cowpea grain and products 

Studies on micronutrients: Minerals of nutritional importance that were analyzed included iron, zinc 

and calcium; results indicate that, there was twice much calcium in leaves than in cowpea grains and 

almost 40 times as much iron. Since iron and zinc levels in cowpea leaves have shown to be 

significantly higher than the levels in cowpea grains, creating more awareness and encouraging the 

utilization of cowpea leaves will contribute in alleviating micronutrient deficiencies from cheap sources 

especially from resource-poor families. The variety that was best with regards to all minerals was 

IT99K‐7‐21‐2‐2‐1. The cowpea lines that were best with regards to crude protein and fats content 

were IT97K499‐8 and IT99K‐7‐21‐2‐2‐1. 

Output 2.3: Option for community-based cowpea seed production and increased farmer access to 

seed identified: 

Activity 2.3.1: Identification of seed multplication mechanism 

- Available sources of seed or classes of seed are 

- Breeder seed 

- Foundation seed 

- Certified seed 

- Quality Declared Seed (QDS) 

From these classes farmer groups or communities can produce QDS from foundation seed or certified 

seed. The produced QDS can only be sold within the district. However, only trained Farmer 

Groups/Farmers can be contracted by Agricultural Seed Agency (ASA) or any other seed company to 

produce certified seed that can be sold beyond the production area. 

20 

2009


Sub-Activity2.3.1.1: Train farmers to produce seed (QDS) for commercial use: 

Training of farmers on Seed Production (QDS) of Cowpea is very important because the crop saves 

many lives of people in drought prone areas of the semiarid areas where the crop is grown. The seed 

availability is a big issue because commercial companies are not interested in producing seed of low 

volume crops like sorghum, pearl millet bambaranuts and cowpea. For this reason it was embedded in 

the project to train farmers to produce their own seed which they can use themselves and sell to the 

neighbours and neighbouring villages. It is intended also that once these farmers have known the 

techniques of producing high quality seeds, they will later be contracted by the Agricultural Seed 

Agency (ASA) to produce certied seed to reach many farmers, and not within their district, but to more 

districts that grow the crop. 

Farmers were given training on the following main seed production areas: 

1. Organization of seed production in Tanzania (L 1): This lecture was given in order to expose farmers 

on the various institutions/stakeholders involved in the seed industry, where they are and what they are 

doing. It also intended to make them understand the seed classes produced in the country. 

Lecture components included the following: The roles of Agriculture Research Institutions (ARI’s), 

Agricultural Seed Agency (ASA), Seed companies, Farmer groups, Seed Certification Institute and 

Agriculture Extension Services Department, Seed production flow from ARI’s to Seed companies and 

to farmer groups and Seed classes recognized in Tanzania seed industry 

2. Attributes of seed quality (L 2): To make farmers understand the concept of seed quality and its 

implications in seed production, processing, storage and distribution. The lecture components included: 

Importance of seed as a basic input in agriculture production, Merits of improved varieties as a basic 

requirement for any variety before releasing to farmers and Seed quality aspects which are verifiable by 

already set standards by Seed Certification Institute such as genetic and physical purity, germination and 

seed health. 

3. Cowpea Seed Production (L 3): Being the core subject, farmers were trained on the techniques used 

in the production of cowpea seeds. More emphasis was put in the husbandry practices, which will 

enable them harvest high quality seed. 

Training components included: Land selection for cowpea seed production, Land preparation, Choice of 

varieties to be planted according to days to maturity, Plant spacing depending on whether a variety is 

determinate or indeterminate, Crop husbandry practices in general such as pest management, rouging of 

off types in seed production, timely harvesting, seed conditioning, safe seed storage and seed sampling 

and testing for quality attributes of the project should be initiated by 2010. 

Table 17: Summary topics covered by each Farmer Research Groups, 2009 

Region District Village F R G NO. of 

participants 

SINGIDA Singida 

district 

DODOMA Dodoma 

urban 

IRINGA Iringa 

district 

Topics Covered 

Topic Topic Topic 

1 2 3 

Msungua Mshikamano 10 X X X 

Ikhanoda Mfwenji 20 X X X 

Nduu Matumaini 21 X X X 

Kikombo Ushirika 11 X X 

Mpunguzi Twende na 

wakati 

10 X X 

Mkungugu Ari mpya 10 X X 

Mangalali Fahari 14 X X 

21 

2009


Output 2.4: Cowpea market opportunities identified 

Activity 2.4.1: Market survey 

The survey was completed 2008 and out of it a paper was presented at the 8 th Scientific Conference of 

the Agricultural Economics Society of Tanzania (AGREST) held at Visitors Inn Hotel, Zanzibar, 6 th -8 th 

October 2008’ 

Activity 2.4.2: Marketing chain stakeholders meeting 

The meeting was supposed to take place this year but due to poor cowpea harvest, farmers had nothing 

to offer to traders. This now has been rescheduled for next season hopping there will be good harvest for 

the crop as farmers have enough seed to plant during the season. 

22 

2009


Annex 2: Cowpea Utilization in Iringa and Dodoma Regions 

Dr. Peter S. Mamiro; Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro 

Dr Ambonesigwe. M. Mbwaga, ARI Uyole Mbeya 

Introduction 

Mature dry cowpeas are important in the diets of many population groups around the world. Africa 

alone accounts for 7.5 million hectares of the estimated world total area, of about 10 million hectares. 

Of the 7.5 million hectares, about 70% lies in West and Central Africa (Singh et al., 1996). This food 

legume is readily available, inexpensive and popular part of the traditional food system. Cowpeas 

(Vigna unguiculata L.Walp) along with other legumes are recognized as an important source of protein 

(Agazounon et al, 2004). However, their contribution to the overall diet and dietary mineral needs is less 

well known. For instance nutritional deficiencies of iron and zinc are often widespread in developing 

countries, where staple diets are frequently plant-based and consumption of expensive meat products is 

low. Cowpea is an annual legume, cultivated dried fresh grain and long stored dried grain being cooked 

while others are dehulled to remove the seed testa, then ground to obtain flour. The flour is used to 

make various dishes or recipes. The young and tender cowpea leaves are picked and eaten as relish 

along with the main staples. The grains and leaves are the source of carbohydrates, proteins, fats, 

vitamin A (ß-carotene), B and C, which are necessary for maintaining good health and fighting disease. 

Young cowpea leaves are consumed in at least 18 countries in Africa, and seven countries in Asia and 

the Pacific (Ahenkora et al., 1998). Cowpeas are among the top three or four leaf vegetables marketed 

and consumed (Barret, 1990). Cowpea also contains iron, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, copper, 

zinc and is high in dietary fibre (Sinha and Kawatra, 2005). The other vegetative parts of the cowpea 

plant after removal of the grain, are used as feed, forage, hay and silage for livestock. This paper 

reports on the extent of utilization of cowpeas and its contribution to the macro and micro nutrients to 

communities that cultivate and consume the legume. 

Methodology 

Survey 

A survey to determine the pattern of utilization of cowpea was conducted in Iringa and Dodoma region 

in Kalenga and Msinga villages respectively. The choice of these villages was undertaken in 

collaboration with government extension authorities from the two regions. The communities are well 

known for the production, selling and consumption of cowpeas. The two regions fall within two 

different agro ecological zones,. Iringa being a wet region located in the southern highlands zone and 

Dodoma being a semi arid region in the central zone. A simple structured questionnaire seeking 

information on the quantity and frequency of consumption of cowpeas and other foods at the homestead 

was administered to 511 randomly selected farmers. Samples of local cowpea varieties and products 

prepared from cowpeas were collected for analysis in a laboratory at Sokoine University of Agriculture. 

The processing and preparation steps of cowpea recipes and products were documented. 

Proximate analysis of the samples 

The food samples for chemical analysis were grounded to pass through a one millimeter screen in a 

Christy and Norris 20cm laboratory hammer mill. Dry Matter percentage (% DM) was determined by 

drying the sample in an oven at 103 ºC – 105 ºC for 24 hours. Crude protein percentage (% CP) was 

determined by Kjeldahl method AOAC method No. 920.87 (AOAC, 1995) with the Kjeltec auto 1030 

analyzer, whereby percentage Nitrogen obtained was used to calculate the % CP using the relationship: 

% CP = % N x 6.25 (FAO, 1995). Ether Extract percentage (% EE) was determined using the Soxtec 

System HT- extraction technique AOAC method No. 922.06 (AOAC 1995) and percentage ash (% 

minerals) was determined immediately after the dry matter determination by incinerating the samples in 

a muffle furnace at 550 ºC for four (4) hours. The ash was cooled in a desiccators and then weighed. 

Crude fiber percentage (% CF) was determined by using the fiber system and Weende method (AOAC 

23 

2009


1995). Nitrogen free extract percentage (% NFE) was calculated by differences as shown: % NFE = 100 

- (% moisture + % CP + % EE + % CF + % Ash). 

Total minerals 

Total mineral content of the samples was carried out after dry ash. The ash was dissolved in a solution 

of 1:1 ratio of H2O : HCL, in which the concentration of the final mixture was 6NHCL. Total iron, zinc 

and calcium were determined by atomic absorption spectrophotometry by AOAC method 970.12 No. 

(AOAC, 1995). 

Data analysis 

Data for minerals and proximate analysis were entered in SPSS 12.0 for windows computer software. 

Descriptive statistics was used to determine the measures of central tendency for each analyzed cowpea 

variety. An analysis of variance of the results was done at 95% confidence interval (P≤0.05) using 

Tukeys Honestly Significant Difference. Homogeneity test was performed to determine homogenous 

sets. 

Results 

Demographic characteristics of farmers 

There were 240 interviewed farmers in Iringa of whom 124 (52%) were males and 116 (48%) were 

females. In Dodoma 277 farmers were interviewed, 135 (49%) were males and 142 (51%) were females 

(Table 1). Farmer’s age ranged between 18 to 83 years with a mean of 45±15 years while in Dodoma 

the range was between 20 and 59 years with a mean of 35±7 years. In the two regions, the majority of 

the farmers had only studied up to class 7 (57% in Iringa and 88% in Dodoma) which is primary school 

level. However, 5% and 1% of interviewed farmers had no formal education in Iringa and 

Dodomarespectively. About 81% of the households in Iringa and 67% in Dodoma had up to six family 

members. 

Table 1 Characteristics of interviewed farmers in Iringa and Dodoma 

Parameter Category Iringa Dodoma 

n % N % 

Gender Male 124 51.7 135 48.7 

Female 116 48.3 142 51.3 

Education Class: 3-7 164 70.4 257 92.8 

Class 8-14 58 24.2 16 5.9 

No education 13 5.4 4 1.4 

Household size 1-6 members 192 80.8 183 66.8 

7-14 members 48 19.2 94 33.2 

Cowpea harvested, procured and utilization 

Most farmers (83% Iringa and 98% Dodoma) either grew and consumed their own cowpea, or obtained 

cowpea supplies from friends and relatives. Few of the farmers purchased cowpea for home 

consumption (Table 2). Farmers harvested an average of 75 kg of cowpeas per household with a range 

from 53 to 118 kg and the amount sold per household ranged from 4 to 73kg with an average of 25kg 

per household. The amount kept at home for consumption ranged from 36 to 97 kg with an average of 

52 kg. A substantial proportion of farmers prepared between 100 and 500 grams of cowpeas and 

between 100 and 1000 grams of cowpea leaves for household consumption depending on the household 

size. Per capital consumption ranged from 40 to 200 gm of cowpea grain for 84% of households in 

Iringa and 94% in Dodoma. At the same time per capital consumption for cowpea leaves ranged from 

10 to 500 grams by 95% of households in Iringa and 100% in Dodoma, respectively. 

24 

2009


On days when cowpeas are cooked in a household, the same relish will be eaten with either rice or stiff 

porridge during lunch, dinner and with breakfast the following morning. More than 50% of households 

in Iringa and Dodoma consumed cowpea at least once and up to three times a week (Table 2). Cowpea 

leaves were also prepared and eaten on separate days. The leaves are consumed fresh especially during 

wet season and in dried form during the lean or dry season. Almost all farmers in the two regions 

consume cowpea leaves. Most cowpea recipes included; relish eaten with rice or stiff porridge (ugali), a 

mixture of dehulled maize and cowpeas (kande) and most frequently the cowpea buns (bagia). 

Table 2: Farmers Responses on Cowpeas Utilization 


n % n % 

Ever eaten cowpea Yes 240 100 277 100 

How often eaten per day Twice 92 38.5 156 56.3 

Thrice 147 61.5 121 47.7 

How often eaten per week Once 77 32.1 28 10.1 

Twice 75 31.3 119 43.0 

Thrice 65 27.1 82 29.6 

Four Times 11 4.6 38 13.7 

Five Times 12 5 10 3.6 

Where the cowpea supplies are obtained Grow cowpea in my farm 124 51.7 131 47.3 

Purchase 

market 

from the 41 17.1 6 2.2 

Get from the neighbor 75 31.3 140 50.5 

How much cowpea is prepared in one 100-500gms 

meal 

137 57.1 115 76.9 

500-2000gms 103 42.9 64 33.1 

How much cowpea leaves are prepared 

in one meal 

100-1000gms 146 61.9 227 89.7 

1000-4000gms 90 39.1 26 11.3 

Consumed green cowpea leaves Yes 240 100 277 100 

Consume dry cowpea leaves Yes 152 63.3 271 97.8 

Time of cooking green cowpea leaves 5-15 minutes 105 44.3 53 20.6 

20 – 90 minutes 133 65.7 214 79.4 

Time of cooking dry cowpea leaves 5-15 minutes 26 45.6 44 37.9 

20 – 90 minutes 31 54.4 72 62.1 

How leaves re prepared Chop-wash -cook 23 9.7 155 56.0 

Wash-chop-cook 214 90.7 44 44 

Cowpea soup with ugali or rice Relish 229 28.8 267 29.2 

Cowpea boiled with maize as kande Mixed with Maize 219 27.5 195 21.4 

Cowpea roasted 17 2.1 44 4.8 

Roasted milled to flour to prepare 

porridge 

Cowpea Porridge 28 3.5 66 7.2 

Milled to flour for preparing bagia Cowpea Buns 97 12.2 121 13.3 

25 

2009



Milled after soaking to prepare bagia Cowpea Buns 129 16.2 184 20.2 

Cowpea grain consumption 40-200gms 201 83.8 252 93.0 

201-500 39 16.2 19 7.0 

Cowpea leaves consumption 10 – 500 gms 224 94.9 247 100 

500 - 1400 12 5.1 0 0 

Mineral Content 

Minerals of nutritional importance that were analyzed included; iron, zinc and calcium. Analysis 

showed that all varieties had significantly different (p


Table 4: Mineral content of local cowpea grain and leaves from Iringa and Dodoma 

Moisture 

(%) 

27 

Ash 

(%) 

Ca 

(mg/kg) 

Zn 

(mg/kg) 

Fe 

(mg/kg) 

Local Cowpea grain Dodoma 9.40 3.89 958.14 31.45 28.90 

Dehulled cowpeas Dodoma 10.28 4.32 363.78 28.00 25.02 

Cowpea Flour Dodoma 7.23 4.25 302.93 28.32 18.03 

Fresh Cowpea leaves Dodoma 5.59 6.28 1800.60 35.95 497.03 

Dry Cowpea leaves Dodoma 10.15 6.67 525.94 31.27 233.83 

Bagia Dodoma 35.35 3.01 893.08 13.67 16.34 

Local Cowpea grain Iringa 9.56 3.66 992.43 32.56 27.61 

Dehulled cowpeas Iringa 10.33 4.23 359.66 27.90 26.05 

Cowpea Flour Iringa 7.18 4.13 310.87 27.99 18.76 

Fresh Cowpea leaves Iringa 5.61 7.32 1809.63 36.13 499.52 

Dry Cowpea leaves Iringa 8.34 4.82 551.74 32.93 240.05 

Bagia Iringa 25.79 2.97 32.58 4.96 5.22 

Proximate composition 

Proximate analysis showed that the cowpea varieties with the highest crude protein content were 

IT97K499-8 (26.12%) IT99K-7212-2-1 (26%) and Tumaini (25.95%) Varieties with lowest iron 

included IT00K-1207 (22.01%) and TZA 263 (22.6%). For fats, IT97K499-8 (11.18%), IT99K-7212-2- 

1 (10.98%) and Fahari (10.33%) varieties had the highest levels while the lowest included IT97K819- 

118 (8.17%) and IT96D-733 

(8.34%). Highest fibre was observed in TZA 263 (17.2%) followed by IT97K819-118 (16.1%). The 

lowest in fibre were IT97K499-38 (12.34%), IT99K-7212-2-1 (12.53%) and VULI 2 (13.1%). Among 

the best new lines with regards to crude protein and fats content were IT97K499-8 and IT99K-7212-2-1. 

Table 5: Percent crude protein, fibre and content of 15 varieties of cowpeas 

Variety/Food component % DM %CP %CF %EE %NFE 

VULI 1 89.25 24.02 13.77 9.12 38.18 

IT99K573-1 88.92 23.32 14.51 8.36 38.85 

IT97K818-35 88.94 25.35 13.19 9.75 36.55 

IT96D-733 88.54 23.44 14.91 8.34 37.68 

IT89KD-288 88.93 24.08 14.23 9.11 37.64 

IT97K819-118 89.10 23.65 16.10 8.17 37.24 

FAHARI 89.29 25.46 13.45 10.33 35.86 

TUMAINI 89.13 25.96 13.83 9.89 35.23 

IT00K-1207 87.95 22.01 15.66 8.46 37.82 

IT97K499-8 88.41 26.12 12.34 11.18 34.70 

TZA263 89.21 22.60 17.21 8.86 36.45 

VULI 2 89.53 25.64 13.10 10.25 36.53 

IT97K499-38 88.93 25.14 13.27 10.13 36.41 

B301 90.11 23.75 14.85 8.39 38.85 

IT99K-721-2-2-1 89.68 26.00 12.53 10.98 35.89 

2009


Local Cowpea 90.77 22.22 10.37 5.38 48.52 

Dehulled Cowpea 90.84 24.40 2.11 4.83 56.96 

Dehulled Cowpea Flour 87.75 22.53 1.11 2.07 54.30 

Cowpea buns (Bajia) Iringa 92.15 18.81 3.60 14.31 51.95 

Washed cowpeas for preparing buns 91.65 19.43 3.49 8.37 56.40 

Cowpea buns (Bajia) Dodoma 91.44 19.72 3.84 12.52 51.58 

Cowpea leaves 91.49 22.04 16.82 1.60 44.75 

In comparison with the improved lines and varieties, local cowpeas have comparable levels of dry 

matter (91%), crude protein (22%) and nitrogen free extracts (48%) (Table 5). However, the levels of 

fats are relatively lower (5.4%) in comparison with the improved lines/ varieties ranging from 8% to 

11.2%. A similar trend is shown with cowpea leaves. Dehulling the cowpeas reduces crude fibre 

significantly with a gradual fall in fats. With regard to the cowpea buns from Iringa and Dodoma 

regions there was significant drop in crude protein and crude fibre but a very significant rise in fats 

(14.3%). 

Discussion 

Macro and micro nutrient content 

In the two surveyed regions it was revealed that cowpeas are produced by majority of the farmers and 

consumed to a relatively large extent by all respondents, which provides an indication of cowpea 

importance in the two communities. Similarly, the survey revealed that cowpeas are prepared and 

consumed in a number of ways, such as relish for stiff porridge and rice, mixed and boiled with dehulled 

or un-dehulled maize and cowpea buns. In both regions, the cowpea buns were important as they were 

also a source of income in a number of households. The buns however, appear to have lower iron and 

calcium, especially those from Iringa region. The calcium, zinc and iron content of the cowpea buns 

were about 32.6, 5.0 and 5.2 mg/kg, respectively. The buns from Dodoma region had comparatively 

higher levels of calcium (893.1mg/kg), zinc (13.7mg/kg) and iron (16.3mg/kg). This difference might 

emanatre from the method of preparation of cowpeas in Iringa in comparison to Dodoma. In Iringa the 

grains are dehulled and soaked for about three hours and then washed in flowing river water for about 

an hour. This procedure of washing in flowing river water is not practiced in Dodoma. It is thought that 

these minerals are largely lost during washing. 

With regard to the deep frying of the cowpea buns, though some nutrients such as proteins and crude 

fibre were significantly reduced (from average of 22% to 19% protein), in the process fats were 

significantly increased (from average of 5% to 14%), while nitrogen free extracts and dry matter 

remained stable. The oil increase is attributed to the sunflower oil used to deep fry the buns. The farmers 

also cultivate sunflower for home use and sale. Greater oil intake is better as daily activities require 

adequate energy supply. 

Analysis of the developed cowpea varieties showed relatively higher protein levels of 24- 26% and 8%- 

11% fat content. Similar results have been observed by Horax et al., (2004) where they found cowpea 

seed contained 20-25% protein and was rich in essential and non-essential amino acids. Asante et al. 

(2006) were investigating on 32 accessions of cowpea seeds, found protein and tannin contents ranging 

from 16.4-27.3% and 0.12- 2.38, respectively. In another study by Mgbemena et al. (2006) proximate 

analysis of various infested cowpea samples indicated increases in protein and crude fiber contents and 

decreases in moisture, ash, fats/oil and carbohydrates contents when compared with those of the 

uninfected samples. Percentage increases in protein and fiber contents ranged between 9.31-30.56%, 

and 1.24-15.11%, respectively while percentage decreases were, moisture (3.97-10.23%); ash (3.75- 

12.87%); fats/oil (1.43-10.00%); and carbohydrate (1.88-7.50%). 

28 

2009


Similarly the developed cowpeas were relatively high in calcium, iron, and zinc. However, 

considerable mineral variation was found among the analyzed cowpeas varieties. Similar study by 

Asante (2006) analyzing cowpea varieties found Ayiyi a cowpea variety with the highest calcium 

concentration of 2096.0 g/g and Zn was detected in only few varieties ranging from 1501.0 g/g to 

2071.0 g/g. Analysis of variance of the samples showed significant differences (p


satisfy daily requirements as the quantity eaten is inadequate. In the case of the developed varieties, 

which are higher yielding and resistant to Alectra, they will probably be accepted by the communities 

and the amount per capita of cowpeas consumed should increase provided they continue to cultivate the 

same area of land. 

Conclusion 

Cowpea grain and leaves are widely consumed in the two surveyed areas. The contribution of micro and 

macro nutrients is significant for both developed lines and local varieties but with leaves having greater 

mineral content than grain. Therefore awareness-raising within communities to consume more cowpea 

leaves is required. However the amount produced per household is low compared to requirements. 

Consequently cowpea intake per capita is low, and does not meet the RDA. However, since households 

in both areas still have ample land they should be encouraged to increase the area planted as well as 

planting higher yielding varieties in conjunction with preferred local varieties. This does however 

require further market investigation. 

Other important nutrients such as vitamins, amino acid profile and levels of ant-nutritional factors 

(tannins and phytates) should also be further investigated. The vitamins and amino acids influence in 

nutrition while the antinutritional factors influence on the bioavailability of the nutrients in the body. 

Acknowlegement 

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance from the McKnight Foundation, who 

facilitated successful survey and laboratory analysis of macro and micronutrients. 

References 

Agazounon, C., Coulibaly, O. and Houndekon, V. (2004) Analysis of of cowpea processing techniques 

into ‘atta’ in Benin. Bulletin de la recherché Agronomique du Benin. No. 46, September 2004. 

Ahenkora, K. Adu Dapaah, H. K. and Agyeman, A. (1998) Selected nutritional components and sensory 

attributes of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata [L.]Walp) leaves Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 52: 

221–229. 

AOAC (1995), Official methods of analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists methods, 

AOAC 16 th edition Nos. 963.13, 968.08, 970.12, 915.03, 920.87. Washington, D.C. 

Asante, I. K., Adu-Dapaah, H Addison (2006) Seed weight and protein and tannin contents of 32 

cowpea accessions in Ghana. Journal of Tropical Science, 44 (2): 77 – 79. 

Barret R. P. (1990) Legume species as leafy vegetables. In: Janick J, Simon J. E. (eds), Advances in 

new crops. Portland, OR: Timber Press, pp 391–396. 

Horax, R., Hettiarachchy, N. S., and Jalaluddin M. (2004).Preparation, characterization and functional 

properties of protein isolate from cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp.) Dept. of Food Science, 

Univ. of Arkansas, 2650 N. Young Avenue, Fayetteville, AR AR 72704, (2) Department of 

Agriculture, University of Arkansas, Pine Bluff, AR 71611. 

http://ift.confex.com/ift/2004/techprogram/paper_22759.htm.Accessed 19.09.2009. 

Mgbemena, I. C., Opara, F, N. and Iwuala, M. O. (2006) The effect of insect pest infestation on the 

nutritional composition of cowpea and maize. Department of Biotechnology, Federal University 

of Technology PMB 1526 Owerri, Nigeria International Journal of Natural and Applied 

Sciences 2 (2): 96-100, 2006. 

Mune Mune, M. A., Mbome, L. I. and Minka S. R. (2007) Improving the Nutritional Quality of Cowpea 

and Bambara Bean Flours for Use in Infant Feeding, Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 6 (6): 660- 

664 

Olaleke, A. M., Olorunfemi, O. and Akintayo, T. E. (2006) Compositional evaluation of cowpea (Vigna 

unguiculata) and scarlet runner bean (Phaseolus coccineus) varieties grown in Nigeria. 

International journal of food, agriculture and environment 4 (2): 39‐43. 

30 

2009


Singh B. B., Sharma B. M. and Chambliss O. L. (1996). Recent advances in cowpea breeding. In 

Proceedings of the Second World Cowpea Research Conference, 5–8 September 1995, Accra, 

Ghana. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria. 

Sinha, R. and Kawatra A. (2005) Effect of Processing on phytic acid and polyphenol contents of 

cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp. Plant Foods for human Nutrition, 58 (3): 1‐8. 

Wang, N., Hatcher, D.W., Toews, R. and Gawalko, E.J. (2009) Influence of cooking and dehulling on 

nutritional composition of several varieties of lentils (Lens culinaris) LWT ‐ Food Science and 

Technology, 42, (4): 842‐848. 

Weinberger, K., John Msuya, J. and Mamiro, P. (2004) Domestication of selected African indigenous 

vegetables in Tanzania – an ex‐ante impact assessment. AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center, 

pp22. 

31 

2009


Annex 3: Malawi annual report: 

Malawi annual report 2008-09 season (third year) 

Prepared by V.H. Kabambe, E. Kazila, A. Mangwela, J Bokosi 

CC Mtambo, T. Chilongo and E. Mazuma 

1. Field evaluation of promising varieties 

1.1 Sites and entries. 

On farm trials to evaluate performance and adaptation of outstanding lines were conducted in the 

2008/09 season. Trial sites were Bunda College in Lilongwe, Mgwangwa EPA in Lilongwe, Mpokwa 

EPA in Zomba, Rivirivi EPA in Balaka, Chitedze Research Station and Kasungu. Kusungu and Balaka 

are new sites which were added in order to consolidate the genotype x environment evaluation, which 

would provide strong evidence on adaptation zones for any new entry which we may have to formalize 

for release. Balaka is a low altitude site with low and erratic rainfall. Kasungu is a mid-altitude site 

with sandy soils. The rainfall was normal and fairly distributed for all sites (Table 1). 

Table 1. Mean monthly rainfall (mm) for the trial sites in 2008/09 season. 

Month Site 

Bunda Ngwangwa Rivirivi Chitedze 

October ‘08 18.5 0 3.0 45 

November ‘08 119.2 51 113.4 112 

December ‘08 177.1 147 242.1 116.4 

January ‘09 291.9 198 300.5 227.8 

February ‘09 174.0 152 145.1 121 

March ‘09 218.3 134 125.1 223.7 

April /09 28.0 71 6.3 18.1 

May ‘09 0 0 0 0 

Monthly total 1026.7 753 932.5 864 

Seven of entries selected for evaluation based on Alectra resistance, farmer’s preferences on grain 

characteristics and according to evaluations conducted in the last two years. Table 2 gives brief 

highlights about the entries based on preliminary yield evaluations. There were about 25 farmers at 4 

on-farm sites conducting the trial, each farmer acted as a replicate. At Chitedze and Bunda College the 

trials were complete block design, each with 4 replicates. The trial plots had 5 row plots, 4 m long and 

0.75 m apart. 

Table 2: Brief descriptions of the entries under evaluations in 2008/09 season, Malawi. 

Code Name Description 

5 IT98K-503-1 Has good yield on overall, medium seed size, very good Alectra 

vogelii resistance 

37 IT97K-825-15 Good Alectra resistance, fair yield, medium seed size, low farmer 

preference 

9 IT99K-7-21-2- Best Alectra resistance in ’07, ‘07/08, preferableseed size, , good 

2-1 

yield 

21 IT99K-494-6 Medium yield, good Alectra resistance in ‘06/07, ‘07/08, medium 

seed size, low farmer preference 

53 Sudan -1 Released variety, good resistance to Alectra and good yielder in 

‘07/08 

52 IT82E-16 This is a released variety. Yielded second best across sites in 07/08. 

32 

2009


Poor resistance to A. vogelii. Well liked by farmers. 

54 Farmers’ local Collected from around trial sites, usually bushy and long maturing. 

1.2 Screening for Alectra resistance. 

The sites at Ngwangwa and Kasungu had high infestation of Alectra, even though yields were good.. 

However, within the plots, spots that had high numbers of Alectra were causing stunted growth and 

wilting on cowpea plants. Observations on Alectra resistance showed that in sites with high pressure, all 

entries succumbed to the parasite, though differentilly. In lightly infested sites, some entries showed 

resistance (Table 3). .At Mngwangwa, where pressure was high, the same lines showed fair resistance. 

At Lisasadzi, with high Alectra pressure, entries IT97K-825-15 and IT99K-494-6 showed good 

resistance. At Bunda College, with high Alectra pressure, the same three lines showed resistance. On the 

overall, entry 21 (IT99K-494-6) and entry 9 (IT99K-7-21-2-2-1) were best for resistance with 0.28 and 

0.29Alectra plants m -2 respectively, and entry 21 having zero Alectra count at Bunda. Depending on 

yield and other results, one of these three could be released. However, all these have longer maturity 

periods. 

As these observations were done in presence of local extension and farmers, this gave a good 

opportunity to orient farmers to the Alectra problem and the objectives of the project. Since the entries 

in the trial were combination of early and late maturing types, the general farmers preference at all sites 

was for the early types IT82E-16 and Sudan 1. At Kasungu farmers particularly noted that IT97K-825- 

15 was undesired due to its late maturity, as it would need more rains. Some of the other reasons for 

preferences were grain size (large size preferred). 

Table 3 Alectra counts m -2 taken after flowering at all the trial sites 

Entrycode 

name 

& Bunda Lisasadzi Ngwangwa Mpokwa Rivirivi Chitedze Mean 

5=IT98K-503-1 1.35 0.50 3.33 0.6 0.0 0.05 0.97 

37=IT97K-825- 

15 

0.08 0.70 0.60 0.03 0.08 0.25 0.29 

9=IT99K-7-21-2- 

2-1 

0.25 1.38 1.46 0.11 0.0 0.17 0.56 

21=IT99K-494-6 0.00 0.60 1.02 0.04 0.03 0.0 0.28 

53=Sudan-1 5.82 3.56 4.03 0.86 0.0 0.58 2.48 

52=IT82E-16 6.25 6.70 2.86 0.96 0.14 0.0 2.82 

54=Farmers’ 

local 

2.80 1.14 3.29 - 0.03 0.11 1.23 

Mean 2.36 2.08 2.43 0.44 0.04 0.17 1.25 

P


traits in entry 9 and 21 can be reflected in the progenies. The project is so far promoting the released 

varieties into its outreach progammes. 

Results on number of plants/m 2 are shown in Table 5and they show that there were significant 

variations in plant establishment. Looking at yield data, entries 21, 52 and 53 which gave highest yields 

also had the best plant establishment. 

Table 4:. Grain yield kg/ha of cowpea entries at 6 trial sites in 2008/09. 

Entry Site Mean 

Lisasadzi Mpokwa Bunda Balaka Mgwangwa Chitedze 

5=IT98K-503-1 2034 461 1496 749 856 1667 1210 

9=IT97K-7-21-2- 

2-1 

1749 353 1665 903 543 1222 1073 

21=IT99K-494-6 2345 562 1846 1372 1114 972 1369 

37=IT99K-825- 1527 447 1276 589 796 1083 953 

15 

52=IT82E-16 1936 896 1631 2156 903 3194 1786 

53=Sudan-1 2328 1402 1728 2158 1070 2278 1827 

54=Local - 353 794 964 536 1861 902 

Mean 1936 681 1492 1270 831 1754 1327 

LSD 523 544 830 878 435 1340 

P


9=IT97K-7-21-2- 

2-1 

10.4 9.0 13.0 10.5 10.0 8.6 

21=IT99K-494-6 10.2 11.0 10.8 10.7 11.1 10.8 

37=IT99K-825- 

15 

8.8 10.5 10.7 10.2 10.6 10.2 

52=IT82E-16 13.8 13.4 11.5 15.0 14.1 13.5 

53=Sudan-1 16.2 17.0 14.8 17.2 16.1 16.3 

54=Local - - 16.0 16.0 10.0 14.0 

Mean 11.3 11.5 12.3 12.7 12.3 12.0 

P


54=Local 3.0 3.5 3.2 4.8 5.0 4.9 

Mean 2.5 3.4 3.0 3.7 5.9 4.8 

P 0.43 0.60 0.43 0.09 

LSD 0.88 1.0 2.40 1.7 

CV% 24 21 44 19 

Table 9. The effect of genotype on early and late season Cercospora leafspot Incidence (5 plants 

affected) and scores (scale 1=clean, 9=severe) of Chitedze Research Station. 

Entry Cercospora Incidence Cercospora leafspot infection 

Early Late Mean Early Late Mean 

5=IT98K-503-1 26.6 72.5 49.6 4.2 6.5 5.4 

9=IT97K-7-21-2-2-1 21.3 73.8 47.6 5.8 7.3 6.5 

21=IT99K-494-6 27.3 68.9 48.1 5.0 7.0 6.0 

37=IT99K-825-15 20.8 73.2 47.0 4.8 6.8 5.8 

52=IT82E-16 19.2 64.4 41.8 4.8 6.0 5.4 

53=Sudan 27.2 75.2 64.4 5.3 7.2 6.3 

54=Local 32.7 70.2 75.2 5.8 6.2 6.0 

Mean 25.0 71.2 48.1 5.1 6.7 5.9 

P 0.38 0.80 0.44 0.14 

LSD 13.3 15.2 1.6 1.0 

CV% 36 23 22 11 

1.5 Days to flowering and maturity 

The variations of cowpea entries on days to 50% flower and to maturity are shown in Table 10 and 11. 

Table 10 shows that on average plants flowered earliest at Mpokwa (46 days from planting), closely 

followed by Mngwangwa (47 days). Mean date to flowering was most delayed at Lisasadzi in Kasungu, 

mainly due to the influence of the local variety which took 89 days to flower. In general Sudan-1 was 

the earliest to flower across all sites, followed by IT82E-16. The local entry was the last to flower at 

Mngwangwa and Lisasadzi only. In general, there were small differences between flowering dates of the 

improved varieties (no more than 10 days), but the farmers highlighted that these differences were 

significant and important. Regarding days to maturity, the mean maturity period was shortest at 

Mpokwa and Balaka, which was expected. These sites are warmer and drier historically. Apart from 

the local entry, entries 9 and 37 had the longest maturity periods of about 77 days. This agrees with 

observations in the fields and farmers reasons for disliking the entries. Although these entries were late, 

they were inferior in yield compared to the early maturing released varieties. This further suggests good 

adaptability for the released varieties. 

Table 10. Effect of genotype on days to 50% flower at 5 sites, 2008/09 

Entry Mngwangwa Bunda Lisasadzi Mpokwa Balaka Mean 

5=IT98K-503-1 46 52 57 46 48 50 

9=IT97K-7-21-2-2-1 48 54 59 53 53 53 

21=IT99K-494-6 46 52 57 46 47 50 

37=IT99K-825-15 47 56 58 53 52 53 

52=IT82E-16 44 48 55 39 46 46 

53=Sudan-1 46 47 59 41 51 49 

54=Local 50 53 89 - 52 61 

Mean 47 52 62 46 50 51 

P


CV% 4 4 9 7 26 

Table 11 Effect of cowpea line on days to maturity at five sites, 2008/09 season. 

Entry Mngwangwa Bunda Lisasadzi Mpokwa Balaka Mean 

5=IT98K-503-1 79 82 73 64 61 72 

9=IT97K-7-21-2-2-1 80 83 76 73 70 76 

21=IT99K-494-6 80 82 71 65 60 72 

37=IT99K-825-15 83 88 72 74 69 77 

52=IT82E-16 74 75 60 59 66 67 

53=Sudan-1 74 74 68 60 69 69 

54=Local 80 83 107 - 68 84 

Mean 78 81 76 66 66 73 

P


Table 13. Proportion of farmers preferences of trial lines based on selected criteria 

Entry Criteria Site or village 

Bala Bunda Mngwa Mpokwa Mpokwa Lisaka 

ngwa Khuvinda CChibisa Sadzi 

vge Vge 

n 24 40 17 40 39 32 

5=IT98K-503-1 Seed size 4 100 100 90 10 34 

Plant type 0 100 100 5 0 59 

Early maturity 0 100 100 0 100 3 

Insect resistant 0 100 100 0 0 28 

Disease resistant 0 100 100 0 25 38 

9=IT97K-7-21-2-2- 

1 

Seed size 100 100 65 60 100 53 

Plant type 100 40 41 35 0 63 




21=IT99K-493-6 Seed size 100 25 71 55 60 50 

Plant type 4 0 88 0 26 81 




37=IT99K-825-15 Seed size 100 70 0 100 38 0 

Plant type 0 100 41 15 0 44 




52=IT82E-16 Seed size 71 35 91 75 28 59 

Plant type 100 40 100 100 49 63 



38 

2009 


Seed size 75 83 88 75 21 82 

53=Sudan Plant type 100 100 100 100 49 68 




Farmers local Seed size 100 50 0 65 39 19 

Plant type 100 0 0 100 41 19 




1.7 GENERAL DISCUSSION 

The results of the field test have been informative due to close association between yield data, yield 

components and agronomic traits. The interesting point is that the earlier maturing released varieties 

gave highest yields. In general, longer maturity varieties are expected to give higher yields, the reason 

for low yields could be low yield potential, or uncontrolled insect pest attack. The key observations on 

the entries are summarized in Table 14 below. All entries were equally prone to pests and diseases. The


high yields recorded under famer’s conditions are encouraging for them to grow cowpea for food and 

income generation. 

Table 14. Key traits and strengths of trial entries 

Entry Key traits and strength 

5=IT98K-503-1 Low yielder, medium maturity (64 days), disease prone, poor farmer 

preference, medium Alectra resistance 

9=IT97K-825-15 Large seed size, low yielder, good Alectra resistance, medium farmer 

preference, long maturity period (73 days), disease and pest prone 

21=IT99K-7-21-2-2- Good seed size, medium maturity (65 days), very good Alectra resistance, 

1 

prone to pests, earmarked for release. 

37=IT99K-494-6 Poor farmer preference, late maturity (74 days), very good Alectra 

resistance, poor yielder, prone to disease and insect pests 

52=Sudan-1 Low Alectra resistance, high yielder, small seeded, liked by farmers, early 

maturity, released variety 

53=IT82E-16 Low Alectra resistance, high yielder, small seeded, liked by farmers, early 

maturity, released variety 

54=Local Variable traits depending on source, largely late maturing, pest prone, 

medium yields 

2. INCORPORATION OF ALECTRA RESISTANCE INTO ADAPTED VARIETIES 

This work is in progress. The released lines are being upgraded to incorporate Alectra vogelii resistance. 

The donor lines for Sudan-1 are IT97K-820-18, IT99K-1060, IT99K494-6, IT97K-7-21-2-2-1, and 

IT93K-452-1. The donor linefor IT82E-16 is 1T81D-994. The work is at backcross 2 stage to be 

followed by selfing. 

3. COLLABORATIVE STUDENT WORK 

3.1 BSc student (Cowpea variety x time of planting x density trial) 

During the season an undergraduate student undertook a study on cowpea time of planting x variety x 

density trial. The objective was to determine how these factors interact to optimize crop yields with 

respect to rainfall and the need to plant late to avoid disease and insect pressure. Preliminary 

observations showed that early planting was the best for yield and less disease infection. This was 

because there was a dry spell soon after the first planting. This might have led to conditions not 

favourable for the build up of the diseases. 

3.2: MSC Student (Ms Elida Kazira - Farmer Participatory Selection of Alectra Resistant Cowpea 

Varieties in Selected Districts of Malawi).The student has submitted her thesis which is in the hands of 

examiner. 

4. CAPACITY BUILDING AND SCALING OUT OF IMPROVED COWPEA LINES 

4.1 Primary seed support 

The project provided small packs of seed of 0.5 kg each to all project participating farmers Mpokwa and 

Mngwangwa EPA (about 60 farmers at each EPA). Participating farmers in Kasungu were also given 

this support. Many farmers planted this in pure stand while others planted this in intercrop with maize. 

The objective of this program was to provide an experience for the farmers to grow cowpea intensively 

(as sole crop) and to practice pest management and observe results. Some of the farmers we monitored 

managed to get good yields and were motivated to produce cowpeas. We have helped these farmers to 

store some of their seeds so that they can plant more cowpeas next season. During field days and visits 

farmers were trained on principles of cowpea seed production. Farmers were also encouraged to use 

their cowpea to practice the different recipes which they learned from the project. 

4.2 Agriculture fair participation and sharing of cowpea recipes 

In June 2009 the farmers from Mngwangwa EPA, on their own accord, organized themselves to 

participate at a District Agriculture Fair held in the same EPA. The farmers demonstrated a range of 

39 

2009


cowpea products based on the training made by the project and shared this with participants (Figure 1). 

In addition, the project team participated at a national agriculture fair, alongside the Crop Science 

Department. Again, the focus of the exhibit was of utilization. The exhibits attracted a lot of attention 

from participants. 

Figure 1. Farmer group displays of cowpea recipes (left) and cross section of participants (right) 

at ADD – wide show in Lilongwe. 

4.3 Group dynamics training for farmers in Ngwangwa 

Group dynamics training was conducted for all the farmers in the two participating villages in 

Mgwangwa. The training was conducted in August 2009. The training was provided on group 

leadership and operation. This group strengthening included membership and responsibilities, 

constitution, networking and fund raising to sustain the groups. 

4.4 Workshops on cowpea market value chain 

Cowpea market value chain workshops were conducted in Lilongwe and Zomba in August 2009. These 

workshops were held following the conclusion of a market survey. As per project document, the, 

meetings were held to bring together representatives of cowpea producers, middlemen and traders. The 

objective was to link producers better to the market and identifies increased marketing opportunities. 

There were lead presentations made by project team theme leaders as follows:- a) a presentation on 

cowpea production trends, production requirements, cowpea agronomy, potential yields reasons for low 

yields in Malawi and cowpea storage Mr E. Mazuma; b) a presentation on cowpea utilization, including 

nutritional value, processing of leaves and grain, utilization as animal feed by Dr Mangwela and c) 

presentation on cowpea preferences and marketing by Mr Thabie Chilongo. At both venues there were 

representatives of farmers, government extension, NGO’s, agricultural input suppliers, traders and 

researchers. 

The workshop revealed that there are six big business traders who buy cowpea seeds (ADMARC, Rab 

Processors, Mulli Brothers, Agora, Grain Traders Association, and Transglobe). Many of them placed 

emphasis on large seeded grain types as preferences. A representative of ADMARC indicated that this 

season they have been instructed to buy large seeded cowpea only. The traders acknowledged that they 

don’t buy much cowpea, but that the markets were small as well thus can satisfy it. Some cowpea is 

sold locally (for cakes and cookie making) while most of it is exported. However, it was noted that most 

of the cowpeas are traded in local markets with no clear records on volumes and quality requirements. 

At the meetings we displayed a draft version of our booklet on cowpea production and utilization. The 

participants demanded speedy release of this book. The nutrition officers collected the draft copies for 

immediate use. The workshops also noted that there are many reasons for variety choice amongst 

40 

2009


farmers, such as maturity period, plant stature (whether climbing or creeper), seed size, stay green 

characteristics (for prolonged leaf harvesting), seed size and pest resistance. Participants resolved that 

some of these preferences were minor and suitable for backyard crop for home consumption. It was thus 

resolved that researchers should focus on high yield and pest resistance and commercially desirable 

traits such as large seeds. Farmers should be advised to plant small patches of local varieties for 

vegetables and green pods. 

At the Lilongwe Workshop the research team established links with IITA, which has just won a grant to 

work on cowpea. The initial collaboration will cover scaling out issues and market and preferences 

surveys. At the Zomba workshop we established a partnership with World Vision Area Development 

project officer to facilitate seed supply for groups of farmers for scaling out. They already have 

experience on community-based seed production. Similar relationships were established with the 

District Agriculture Development Officer for Phalombe. 

4.5 Cowpea market survey 

This work has been conducted and results are being analyzed, a separate report will be prepared. Very 

preliminary results were shared during workshops on cowpea market value chain. 

4.6. Policy workshop on seeds 

The Malawi country lead participated in a workshop bringing together relevant policy officials to 

discuss issues that can facilitate the scaling out of legume seed systems and Integrated Soil Fertility 

Management. The workshop was jointly organized by the McKnight Legume Best Bets and Seed 

Systems projects. 

The major policy issue on seed systems, which was a matter of concern, was the seed registration and 

certification process. The key concern was t based on the fact that process is too centralized. A seed 

grower is required to register at Chitedze Research Station, and only the same can certify. The 

registration fee is high, particularly for small holder farmers or community group whose cultivated area 

is 1-2 ha. The registration fees and inspection costs will erode profits. The argument was that legumes, 

self pollinated, have simple requirements for isolation, and rouging for disease and off-types can be 

done at District level. Any seed not going through the process cannot be packed and sold on shelves, 

then killing any entrepreneurship. The dissemination of legume seeds is directly linked ISFM because 

the same do make some N additions to soil. These concerns and other suggestion were raised for 

consideration by policy makers. 

5: Way forward 

Based on the above, the project team would like to make the following recommendations for future 

research action. 

1. Evaluate the lines again this season and earmark entry 21 for release owing to its good Alectra 

tolerance and medium yield 

2. Noting the lack of resistance to disease and pests across lines, to intensity the work on crop 

protection. This work should include clear definitions of critical minimum sprays required to 

keep pesticide costs and labour down. Also to intensity studies on use of botanical pesticides 

such as neem, moringa, Tephrosia vogelii and others. 

3. To refine the issues of time of planting in line with variety maturity periods in order to avoid 

pests and for drought management purposes. 

4. To intensify incorporation of resistance into the adapted lines and conduct adaptation trials. 

5. To extend primary seed support programme to all testing sites and to willing partners. 

6. To request for extension of the project with the objective of completing tasks above. To release 

new Alectra resistant at the end of renewal, as well as to establish a seed base to support the 

scaling out of the new varieties. 

41 

2009


42 

2009 

7. Continue with introgression of Alectra resistance in adapted cowpea varieties at Bunda College 

if extension of the project has been granted. At the end of the first phase we shall have reached 

backcross four.

McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crops Research Project No: 06‐741 

Team Report 



Project leader: Dr AM Mbwaga, ARI Uyole, Box 400 Mbeya, Tanzania. Email: ambwaga@yahoo.co.uk 

Team report for 2008 ‐ 2009 

Team activities 

Team members from Malawi and Tanzania had a number of opportunities to meet during the year. 

These included the CoP2 meeting in Maputo, Mozambique in October 2008. This event allowed 

representatives from each country to discuss progress and were followed up with a visit by the project 

leader Dr Mbwaga accompanied by Dr Mligo, legume breeder, Dr Charlie Riches (CoP- liaison officer) to 

Lilongwe in March 2009 and met by the Malawian project team that was composed of Dr Vernon 

Kabambe country project leader, Mosses Mamiliro (breeder), and James Bokosi (breeder). The team 

visited several project sites, which included Lilongwe district in Ngwangwa Extension Planning Area 

(EPA), Kasungu district in Lisasi EPA, Zomba district in Mpokwa EPA and Balaka district in Rividivi 

EPA where farmer groups are undertaking on‐farm trials with the project. The wrap up discussions at 

Bunda College, University of Malawi came up with the following observations/recommendations; - 

released varieties showed better yields than test lines, early maturing varieties save as source of food in 

hunger periods, seed system for cowpea is very poor, more cowpea seed should be sent to Balaka and 

Kasungu districts as there was high demand for seed of the improved cowpea varieties and lastly farmers 

in Rivirivi were recommended to form farmer research groups for better access by researchers and 

extension staff as compared to individual isolated farmers 

Representatives of project partner institutions travelled together to assess progress with project 

activities in Tanzania starting on 27 th April, 2009 in Iringa and ending on 30th April at Ilonga Agricultural 

Research Institute, Kilosa in Tanzania. Evaluation team members were: Joseph Mligo (Breeder, ARI 

Ilonga Kilosa Tanzania); Vernon Kabambe (co‐ordinator for Malawi, Bunda College Malawi); James 

Bokosi (Breeder, Bunda College of Malawi), Boukar Ousmane (cowpea breeder IITA Kano Nigeria) and 

Ambonesigwe Mbwaga (Project leader, ARI Uyole Mbeya Tanzania). The team was joined by Extension 

staff working with the project and other staff members at various sites in each district of Tanzania. From 

the evaluation it was noted that drought (rainfall, poor distribution and low amounts) has been an 

overriding problem this season. The team commended the collaboration the project is undertaking along 

with the tropical legumes II project of IITA. It was recommended to incorporate both traits (Alectra 

resistance and Drought tolerance) in the breeding programme. An analysis of medium term climatic data 

(20-25 years) would be important to determine the frequency of rainfall events (e.g. start dates, dry spells 

and rainfall amounts). This can help to determine the important drought traits in plants (e.g. earliness or 

resilience). The good production practices should be incorporated in the screening of the varieties against 

Alectra. Hence, there is a need to expose the farmer groups involved in the project to all these production 

practices. 

The experiences observed from cowpea/Alectra and TL II projects indicate that the overriding preference 

trait by farmers is seed size; large seeded are more liked than small seeded types. 

The backcrossing programme at ARI Ilonga will continue to backcross 6 by October 2010, while at 

Bunda College will be at back cross 4. There will be an urgent need to request for an extension of the 

project as the intended cowpea materials will have not reached the farmers at the end of the funding year 

2010.

McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crops Research Project No: 06‐741 

Team Report 

Insights and lessons learned 

During the monitoring tour the team found that the activities planned for 2009 were underway. This was 

continuation of activities started in year 1 and 2, including breeding for Alectra resistance and on-farm 

evaluation of promising cowpea lines, market surveys, cowpea processing and utilisation as well as new 

work on cowpea macro and micro nutrient analysis in cowpea products. Also introduced to the project 

was the training of farmers on seed production i.e. production of Quality Declared Seeds (QDS). 

There was an outbreak of cutworms on the demonstrations planted in Singida and this gave a learning 

lesson that cowpea seed should be dressed with insecticide to prevent damage by cutworms especially at 

two leaf stage. 

Variability was observed in the reaction of individual cowpea lines to Alectra across sites. Seed was 

therefore provided from a range of locations in both countries for a glasshouse screening trial at Long 

Ashton UK. This confirmed variability in the host range of parasite samples from Malawi and Tanzania 

At a species level there are 3 strains of Alectra by host range: Alectra from Singida in Tanzania attaches 

and emerges on cowpea and groundnut but not on mung or common bean. Alectra from Bihawana and 

Ismani in Tanzania attaches and emerges on cowpea, groundnut, and common bean but not on 

mung bean. Alectra from Malawi sites attaches and emerges on cowpea, groundnut, common bean and 

mung bean. Within cowpea, patterns of virulence are evident: Alectra from all sites in both countries 

emerges on IT36E-16 and TZA 263 but not on B301. There is need to confirm this by using 

biotechnology techniques. 

Three selected cowpea lines with traits farmers like, including IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT99K-753-1 and TZA 

267 are being increased under irrigation at Ilonga Research Station to be distributed to many farmers for 

wider evaluation in the 2009/2010 season 

Due to poor cowpea crop performance during this season, the intended market stakeholder’s meeting 

was postponed to next season in Tanzania but it was undertaken in Malawi and a report is being 

prepared. 

A paper titled “assessment of Cowpea Marketing Efficiency: A case study of selected regions in 

Tanzania” by Gabriel, M.; Hella, J.P. and Mbwaga, A.M was presented at the Annual Agricultural 

Economists Society of Tanzania (AGREST) held in Zanzibar and will appear in AGREST conference 

series Vol. 8. (in press). The proceedings will be ready within and outside the country. Mr Gabriel 

Martin’s got financial support from the project for his MSc research work




Cowpea Utilization in Iringa and Dodoma Regions 

Peter S. Mamiro 1 , A. M. Mbwaga 2 

Introduction 

Mature dry cowpeas are important in the diets of many population groups around the 

world. Africa alone accounts for 7.5 million hectares of the estimated world total area, of 

about 10 million hectares. Of the 7.5 million hectares, about 70% lies in West and Central 

Africa (Singh et al., 1996). This food legume is readily available, inexpensive and 

popular part of the traditional food system. Cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata L.Walp) along 

with other legumes are recognized as an important source of protein (Agazounon et al, 

2004). However, their contribution to the overall diet and dietary mineral needs is less 

well known. For instance nutritional deficiencies of iron and zinc are often widespread in 

developing countries, where staple diets are frequently plant-based and consumption of 

expensive meat products is low. Cowpea is an annual legume, cultivated dried fresh grain 

and long stored dried grain being cooked while others are dehulled to remove the seed 

testa, then ground to obtain flour. The flour is used to make various dishes or recipes. The 

young and tender cowpea leaves are picked and eaten as relish along with the main 

staples. The grains and leaves are the source of carbohydrates, proteins, fats, vitamin A 

(ß-carotene), B and C, which are necessary for maintaining good health and fighting 

disease. Young cowpea leaves are consumed in at least 18 countries in Africa, and seven 

countries in Asia and the Pacific (Ahenkora et al., 1998). Cowpeas are among the top 

three or four leaf vegetables marketed and consumed (Barret, 1990). Cowpea also 

contains iron, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, copper, zinc and is high in dietary fibre 

(Sinha and Kawatra, 2005). The other vegetative parts of the cowpea plant after removal 

of the grain, are used as feed, forage, hay and silage for livestock. This paper reports on 

the extent of utilization of cowpeas and its contribution to the macro and micro nutrients 

to communities that cultivate and consume the legume. 

Methodology 

Survey 

A survey to determine the pattern of utilization of cowpea was conducted in Iringa and 

Dodoma region in Kalenga and Msinga villages respectively. The choice of these villages 

was undertaken in collaboration with government extension authorities from the two 

regions. The communities are well known for the production, selling and consumption of 

cowpeas. The two regions fall within two different agro ecological zones,. Iringa being a 

wet region located in the southern highlands zone and Dodoma being a semi arid region 

in the central zone. A simple structured questionnaire seeking information on the quantity 

and frequency of consumption of cowpeas and other foods at the homestead was 

1 

1.Department of Food Science and Technology, Sokoine University of Agriculture, P. O. Box 3006, 

Morogoro, Tanzania. 

2 Uyole Agricultural Research Institute, Box 400, Mbeya, Tanzania




administered to 511 randomly selected farmers. Samples of local cowpea varieties and 

products prepared from cowpeas were collected for analysis in a laboratory at Sokoine 

University of Agriculture. The processing and preparation steps of cowpea recipes and 

products were documented. 

Proximate analysis of the samples 

The food samples for chemical analysis were grounded to pass through a one millimeter 

screen in a Christy and Norris 20cm laboratory hammer mill. Dry Matter percentage (% 

DM) was determined by drying the sample in an oven at 103 ºC – 105 ºC for 24 hours. 

Crude protein percentage (% CP) was determined by Kjeldahl method AOAC method 

No. 920.87 (AOAC, 1995) with the Kjeltec auto 1030 analyzer, whereby percentage 

Nitrogen obtained was used to calculate the % CP using the relationship: % CP = % N x 

6.25 (FAO, 1995). Ether Extract percentage (% EE) was determined using the Soxtec 

System HT- extraction technique AOAC method No. 922.06 (AOAC 1995) and 

percentage ash (% minerals) was determined immediately after the dry matter 

determination by incinerating the samples in a muffle furnace at 550 ºC for four (4) 

hours. The ash was cooled in a desiccators and then weighed. Crude fiber percentage (% 

CF) was determined by using the fiber system and Weende method (AOAC 1995). 

Nitrogen free extract percentage (% NFE) was calculated by differences as shown: % 

NFE = 100 - (% moisture + % CP + % EE + % CF + % Ash). 

Total minerals 

Total mineral content of the samples was carried out after dry ash. The ash was dissolved 

in a solution of 1:1 ratio of H2O : HCL, in which the concentration of the final mixture 

was 6NHCL. Total iron, zinc and calcium were determined by atomic absorption 

spectrophotometry by AOAC method 970.12 No. (AOAC, 1995). 

Data analysis 

Data for minerals and proximate analysis were entered in SPSS 12.0 for windows 

computer software. Descriptive statistics was used to determine the measures of central 

tendency for each analyzed cowpea variety. An analysis of variance of the results was 

done at 95% confidence interval (P≤0.05) using Tukeys Honestly Significant Difference. 

Homogeneity test was performed to determine homogenous sets. 

Results 

Demographic characteristics of farmers 

There were 240 interviewed farmers in Iringa of whom 124 (52%) were males and 116 

(48%) were females. In Dodoma 277 farmers were interviewed, 135 (49%) were males 

and 142 (51%) were females (Table 1). Farmer’s age ranged between 18 to 83 years with 

a mean of 45±15 years while in Dodoma the range was between 20 and 59 years with a 

mean of 35±7 years. In the two regions, the majority of the farmers had only studied up 

to class 7 (57% in Iringa and 88% in Dodoma) which is primary school level. However, 

5% and 1% of interviewed farmers had no formal education in Iringa and




Dodomarespectively. About 81% of the households in Iringa and 67% in Dodoma had up 

to six family members. 

Table 1 Characteristics of interviewed farmers in Iringa and Dodoma 


n % n % 

Gender Male 124 51.7 135 48.7 

Female 116 48.3 142 51.3 

Education Class: 3-7 164 70.4 257 92.8 

Class 8-14 58 24.2 16 5.9 

No education 13 5.4 4 1.4 

Household size 1-6 members 192 80.8 183 66.8 

7-14 members 48 19.2 94 33.2 

Cowpea harvested, procured and utilization 

Most farmers (83% Iringa and 98% Dodoma) either grew and consumed their own 

cowpea, or obtained cowpea supplies from friends and relatives. Few of the farmers 

purchased cowpea for home consumption (Table 2). Farmers harvested an average of 75 

kg of cowpeas per household with a range from 53 to 118 kg and the amount sold per 

household ranged from 4 to 73kg with an average of 25kg per household. The amount 

kept at home for consumption ranged from 36 to 97 kg with an average of 52 kg. A 

substantial proportion of farmers prepared between 100 and 500 grams of cowpeas and 

between 100 and 1000 grams of cowpea leaves for household consumption depending on 

the household size. Per capital consumption ranged from 40 to 200 gm of cowpea grain 

for 84% of households in Iringa and 94% in Dodoma. At the same time per capital 

consumption for cowpea leaves ranged from 10 to 500 grams by 95% of households in 

Iringa and 100% in Dodoma, respectively. 

On days when cowpeas are cooked in a household, the same relish will be eaten with 

either rice or stiff porridge during lunch, dinner and with breakfast the following 

morning. More than 50% of households in Iringa and Dodoma consumed cowpea at least 

once and up to three times a week (Table 2). Cowpea leaves were also prepared and 

eaten on separate days. The leaves are consumed fresh especially during wet season and 

in dried form during the lean or dry season. Almost all farmers in the two regions 

consume cowpea leaves. Most cowpea recipes included; relish eaten with rice or stiff 

porridge (ugali), a mixture of dehulled maize and cowpeas (kande) and most frequently 

the cowpea buns (bagia).




Table 2: Farmers Responses on Cowpeas Utilization 


n % n % 

Ever eaten cowpea Yes 240 100 277 100 

How often eaten per day Twice 92 38.5 156 56.3 

Thrice 147 61.5 121 47.7 

How often eaten per week Once 77 32.1 28 10.1 

Twice 75 31.3 119 43.0 

Thrice 65 27.1 82 29.6 

Four Times 11 4.6 38 13.7 

Five Times 12 5 10 3.6 

Where the cowpea supplies are obtained Grow cowpea in my farm 124 51.7 131 47.3 

Purchase from the market 41 17.1 6 2.2 

Get from the neighbor 75 31.3 140 50.5 

How much cowpea is prepared in one meal 100-500gms 137 57.1 115 76.9 

500-2000gms 103 42.9 64 33.1 

How much cowpea leaves are prepared in one 

meal 

100-1000gms 146 61.9 227 89.7 

1000-4000gms 90 39.1 26 11.3 

Consumed green cowpea leaves Yes 240 100 277 100 

Consume dry cowpea leaves Yes 152 63.3 271 97.8 

Time of cooking green cowpea leaves 5-15 minutes 105 44.3 53 20.6 

20 – 90 minutes 133 65.7 214 79.4 

Time of cooking dry cowpea leaves 5-15 minutes 26 45.6 44 37.9 

20 – 90 minutes 31 54.4 72 62.1 

How leaves re prepared Chop-wash -cook 23 9.7 155 56.0 

Wash-chop-cook 214 90.7 44 44 

Cowpea soup with ugali or rice Relish 229 28.8 267 29.2 

Cowpea boiled with maize as kande Mixed with Maize 219 27.5 195 21.4 

Cowpea roasted 17 2.1 44 4.8 

Roasted milled to flour to prepare porridge Cowpea Porridge 28 3.5 66 7.2 

Milled to flour for preparing bagia Cowpea Buns 97 12.2 121 13.3 

Milled after soaking to prepare bagia Cowpea Buns 129 16.2 184 20.2 

Cowpea grain consumption 40-200gms 201 83.8 252 93.0 

201-500 39 16.2 19 7.0 

Cowpea leaves consumption 10 – 500 gms 224 94.9 247 100 

500 - 1400 12 5.1 0 0




Content 

Minerals of nutritional importance that were analyzed in cowpea products included iron, 

zinc and calcium. Analysis showed that all varieties had significantly different (p




Table 4: Mineral content of local cowpea grain and leaves from Iringa and Dodoma 

Moisture 

(%) 

Ash 

(%) 

Ca 

(mg/kg) 

Zn 

(mg/kg) 

Fe 

(mg/kg) 

Local Cowpea Dodoma 9.40 3.89 958.14 31.45 28.90 

Dehulled cowpeas Dodoma 10.28 4.32 363.78 28.00 25.02 

Cowpea Flour Dodoma 7.23 4.25 302.93 28.32 18.03 

Fresh Cowpea leaves Dodoma 5.59 6.28 1800.60 35.95 497.03 

Dry Cowpea leaves Dodoma 10.15 6.67 525.94 31.27 233.83 

Bagia Dodoma 35.35 3.01 893.08 13.67 16.34 

Local Cowpea Iringa 9.56 3.66 992.43 32.56 27.61 

Dehulled cowpeas Iringa 10.33 4.23 359.66 27.90 26.05 

Cowpea Flour Iringa 7.18 4.13 310.87 27.99 18.76 

Fresh Cowpea leaves Iringa 5.61 7.32 1809.63 36.13 499.52 

Dry Cowpea leaves Iringa 8.34 4.82 551.74 32.93 240.05 

Bagia Iringa 25.79 2.97 32.58 4.96 5.22 

Can we explain the difference from the two sites 

Proximate composition 

Proximate analysis showed that the cowpea varieties with the highest crude protein 

content were IT97K499-8 (26.12%) IT99K-7212-2-1 (26%) and Tumaini (25.95%) 

Varieties with lowest iron included IT00K-1207 (22.01%) and TZA 263 (22.6%). For 

fats, IT97K499-8 (11.18%), IT99K-7212-2-1 (10.98%) and Fahari (10.33%) varieties had 

the highest levels while the lowest included IT97K819-118 (8.17%) and IT96D-733 

(8.34%). Highest fibre was observed in TZA 263 (17.2%) followed by IT97K819-118 

(16.1%). The lowest in fibre were IT97K499-38 (12.34%), IT99K-7212-2-1 (12.53%) 

and VULI 2 (13.1%). Among the best new lines with regards to crude protein and fats 

content were IT97K499-8 and IT99K-7212-2-1. 

Table 5: Percent crude protein, fibre and content of 15 varieties of cowpeas 

Variety/Food component % DM %CP %CF %EE %NFE 

VULI 1 89.25 24.02 13.77 9.12 38.18 

IT99K573-1 88.92 23.32 14.51 8.36 38.85 

IT97K818-35 88.94 25.35 13.19 9.75 36.55 

IT96D-733 88.54 23.44 14.91 8.34 37.68 

IT89KD-288 88.93 24.08 14.23 9.11 37.64 

IT97K819-118 89.10 23.65 16.10 8.17 37.24 

FAHARI 89.29 25.46 13.45 10.33 35.86 

TUMAINI 89.13 25.96 13.83 9.89 35.23 

IT00K-1207 87.95 22.01 15.66 8.46 37.82




IT97K499-8 88.41 26.12 12.34 11.18 34.70 

TZA263 89.21 22.60 17.21 8.86 36.45 

VULI 2 89.53 25.64 13.10 10.25 36.53 

IT97K499-38 88.93 25.14 13.27 10.13 36.41 

B301 90.11 23.75 14.85 8.39 38.85 

IT99K-7212-2-1 89.68 26.00 12.53 10.98 35.89 

Local Cowpea 90.77 22.22 10.37 5.38 48.52 

Dehulled Cowpea 90.84 24.40 2.11 4.83 56.96 

Dehulled Cowpea Flour 87.75 22.53 1.11 2.07 54.30 

Cowpea buns (Bajia) Iringa 92.15 18.81 3.60 14.31 51.95 

Washed cowpeas for preparing buns 91.65 19.43 3.49 8.37 56.40 

Cowpea buns (Bajia) Dodoma 91.44 19.72 3.84 12.52 51.58 

Cowpea leaves 91.49 22.04 16.82 1.60 44.75 

In comparison with the improved lines and varieties, local cowpeas have comparable 

levels of dry matter (91%), crude protein (22%) and nitrogen free extracts (48%) (Table 

5). However, the levels of fats are relatively lower (5.4%) in comparison with the 

improved lines/ varieties ranging from 8% to 11.2%. A similar trend is shown with 

cowpea leaves. Dehulling the cowpeas reduces crude fibre significantly with a gradual 

fall in fats. With regard to the cowpea buns from Iringa and Dodoma regions there was 

significant drop in crude protein and crude fibre but a very significant rise in fats 

(14.3%). 

Discussion 

Macro and micro nutrient content 

In the two surveyed regions it was revealed that cowpeas are produced by majority of the 

farmers and consumed to a relatively large extent by all respondents, which provides an 

indication of cowpea importance in the two communities. Similarly, the survey revealed 

that cowpeas are prepared and consumed in a number of ways, such as relish for stiff 

porridge and rice, mixed and boiled with dehulled or un-dehulled maize and cowpea 

buns. In both regions, the cowpea buns were important as they were also a source of 

income in a number of households. The buns however, appear to have lower iron and 

calcium, especially those from Iringa region. The calcium, zinc and iron content of the 

cowpea buns were about 32.6, 5.0 and 5.2 mg/kg, respectively. The buns from Dodoma 

region had comparatively higher levels of calcium (893.1mg/kg), zinc (13.7mg/kg) and 

iron (16.3mg/kg). This difference might emanatre from the method of preparation of 

cowpeas in Iringa in comparison to Dodoma. In Iringa the grains are dehulled and soaked 

for about three hours and then washed in flowing river water for about an hour. This 

procedure of washing in flowing river water is not practiced in Dodoma. It is thought that 

these minerals are largely lost during washing.




With regard to the deep frying of the cowpea buns, though some nutrients such as 

proteins and crude fibre were significantly reduced (from average of 22% to 19% 

protein), in the process fats were significantly increased (from average of 5% to 14%), 

while nitrogen free extracts and dry matter remained stable. The oil increase is attributed 

to the sunflower oil used to deep fry the buns. The farmers also cultivate sunflower for 

home use and sale. Greater oil intake is better as daily activities require adequate energy 

supply. 

Analysis of the developed cowpea varieties showed relatively high protein and fat in the 

levels of 24- 26% and 8%-11% respectively. Similar results have been observed by 

Horax et al., (2004) where they found cowpea seed contained 20-25% protein and was 

rich in essential and non-essential amino acids. Asante et al. (2006) were investigating on 

32 accessions of cowpea seeds, found protein and tannin contents ranging from 16.4- 

27.3% and 0.12- 2.38, respectively. In another study by Mgbemena et al. (2006) 

proximate analysis of various infested cowpea samples indicated increases in protein and 

crude fiber contents and decreases in moisture, ash, fats/oil and carbohydrates contents 

when compared with those of the uninfected samples. Percentage increases in protein and 

fiber contents ranged between 9.31-30.56%, and 1.24-15.11%, respectively while 

percentage decreases were, moisture (3.97-10.23%); ash (3.75-12.87%); fats/oil (1.43- 

10.00%); and carbohydrate (1.88-7.50%). 

Similarly the developed cowpeas were relatively high in calcium, iron, and zinc. 

However, considerable mineral variation was found among the analyzed cowpeas 

varieties. Similar study by Asante (2006) analyzing cowpea varieties found Ayiyi a cowpea 

variety with the highest calcium concentration of 2096.0 μg/g and Zn was detected in only few 

varieties ranging from 1501.0 μg/g to 2071.0 μg/g. Analysis of variance of the samples 

showed significant differences (p




With regard to cowpea leaves, it was observed that the leaves are consumed by almost all 

in the two communities surveyed. The young leaves are the ones normally picked, 

usually the first three or four from the cowpea plant. While some chop the leaves into 

small pieces before cooking, others boil the whole leaves. The leaves seem to have a big 

contribution with regard to calcium, iron and zinc. According to Schippers (1997) 

African Indigenous Vegetables (AIVs) play a highly significant role in food security of 

the under-privileged in both urban and rural settings. AIVs have traditionally taken an 

important role in African diets, being used both as medicine and as a vegetable. Many of 

these crops are highly nutritious, easy and cheap to grow. 

Results indicate that, there was twice as much calcium in leaves than in cowpea grains 

and almost 40 times as much iron. Similar results were observed by Weinberger et al. 

(2004) where indigenous vegetables showed high mineral levels. Since the iron and zinc 

levels in cowpea leaves have shown to be significantly higher than the levels in cowpea 

grains, creating more awareness and encouraging the utilization of cowpea leaves will 

contribute to alleviating micronutrient deficiencies from cheap sources especially in 

resource-poor families. However, it is also important to note that, vegetables that are 

common in a particular locality do not necessarily have values of iron contents that are 

comparable. For example, in a study by Weinberger et al. (2004) it was reported that 

cowpea leaves were identified and collected from four districts in Tanzania, their values 

were quite different varying from 179.0 mg in Kongwa, 66.0 mg in Singida, 77.5 mg in 

Muheza and 187.0 mg in Arumeru, per kg of edible portion. This is evident that the 

amount of minerals found in these vegetables does differ not only according to type of 

vegetable but also according to the place, location or district where they were obtained. 

This shows that the soil mineral content might have an influence in mineral uptake of the 

plants. This aspect can be further investigated. 

Adequacy of cowpea consumed in households 

As revealed in the results, the daily per capita consumption for the majority of the 

households surveyed ranged from 41 to 200 grams of cowpea, which means using the 

Atwater factors (4 kcal/g carbohydrates, 4 kcal/g protein and 4 kcal/g fats) an individual 

obtained about 135 to 658 kcal per day. Considering that a normal adult requires about a 

supply of 2500 kcal per day to perform moderate activities, the other amount of food 

eaten in conjunction with cowpeas such as rice or maize flour cannot fill the remaining 

gap. This shows that the amount of cowpeas consumed by most households does not 

satisfy daily requirements as the quantity eaten is inadequate. In the case of the developed 

varieties, which are higher yielding and resistant to Alectra, they will probably be 

accepted by the communities and the amount per capita of cowpeas consumed should 

increase provided they continue to cultivate the same area of land.




Conclusion 

Cowpea grain and leaves are widely consumed in the two surveyed areas. The 

contribution of micro and macro nutrients is significant for both developed lines and local 

varieties but with leaves having greater mineral content than grain. Therefore awarenessraising 

within communities to consume more cowpea leaves is required. However the 

amount produced per household is low compared to requirements. Consequently cowpea 

intake per capita is low, and does not meet the RDA. However, since households in both 

areas still have ample land they should be encouraged to increase the area planted as well 

as planting higher yielding varieties in conjunction with preferred local varieties. This 

does however require further market investigation. 

Other important nutrients such as vitamins, amino acid profile and levels of 

antinutritional factors (tannins and phytates) should also be further investigated. The 

vitamins and amino acids influence in nutrition while the antinutritional factors influence 

on the bioavailability of the nutrients in the body. 

Acknowlegement 

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance from the McKnight 

Foundation, who facilitated successful survey and laboratory analysis of macro and 

micronutrients. 

References 

Agazounon, C., Coulibaly, O. and Houndekon, V. (2004) Analysis of of cowpea 

processing techniques into ‘atta’ in Benin. Bulletin de la recherché Agronomique 

du Benin. No. 46, September 2004. 

Ahenkora, K. Adu Dapaah, H. K. and Agyeman, A. (1998) Selected nutritional 

components and sensory attributes of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata [L.]Walp) 

leaves Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 52: 221–229. 

AOAC (1995), Official methods of analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists 

methods, AOAC 16 th edition Nos. 963.13, 968.08, 970.12, 915.03, 920.87. 

Washington, D.C. 

Asante, I. K., Adu-Dapaah, H Addison (2006) Seed weight and protein and tannin 

contents of 32 cowpea accessions in Ghana. Journal of Tropical Science, 44 

(2): 77 – 79. 

Barret R. P. (1990) Legume species as leafy vegetables. In: Janick J, Simon J. E. (eds), 

Advances in new crops. Portland, OR: Timber Press, pp 391–396. 

Horax, R., Hettiarachchy, N. S., and Jalaluddin M. (2004).Preparation, characterization 

and functional properties of protein isolate from cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. 

Walp.) Dept. of Food Science, Univ. of Arkansas, 2650 N. Young Avenue, 

Fayetteville, AR AR 72704, (2) Department of Agriculture, University of 

Arkansas, Pine Bluff, AR 71611. 

http://ift.confex.com/ift/2004/techprogram/paper_22759.htm.Accessed 

19.09.2009.




Mgbemena, I. C., Opara, F, N. and Iwuala, M. O. (2006) The effect of insect pest 

infestation on the nutritional composition of cowpea and maize. Department of 

Biotechnology, Federal University of Technology PMB 1526 Owerri, Nigeria 

International Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences 2 (2): 96-100, 2006. 

Mune Mune, M. A., Mbome, L. I. and Minka S. R. (2007) Improving the Nutritional 

Quality of Cowpea and Bambara Bean Flours for Use in Infant Feeding, Pakistan 

Journal of Nutrition 6 (6): 660-664 

Olaleke, A. M., Olorunfemi, O. and Akintayo, T. E. (2006) Compositional evaluation of 

cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and scarlet runner bean (Phaseolus coccineus) 

varieties grown in Nigeria. International journal of food, agriculture and 

environment 4 (2): 39-43. 

Singh B. B., Sharma B. M. and Chambliss O. L. (1996). Recent advances in cowpea 

breeding. In Proceedings of the Second World Cowpea Research Conference, 5–8 

September 1995, Accra, Ghana. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture 

(IITA), Ibadan, Nigeria. 

Sinha, R. and Kawatra A. (2005) Effect of Processing on phytic acid and polyphenol 

contents of cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp. Plant Foods for human 

Nutrition, 58 (3): 1-8. 

Wang, N., Hatcher, D.W., Toews, R. and Gawalko, E.J. (2009) Influence of cooking and 

dehulling on nutritional composition of several varieties of lentils (Lens culinaris) 

LWT - Food Science and Technology, 42, (4): 842-848. 

Weinberger, K., John Msuya, J. and Mamiro, P. (2004) Domestication of selected 

African indigenous vegetables in Tanzania – an ex-ante impact assessment. 

AVRDC – The World Vegetable Center, pp22.

English - McKnight Foundation Collaborative Crop Research Program

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?