Final version of Tropical Legumes II Project Report for Phase 1 - icrisat

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 1-2: continued Variety code (local name) Year Country On-farm yield (Kg per Ha) Yield advantage over check (%) ICGV 0035 0Ψ 2010 India 1827 55 ICG 9346 2010 Niger 956 52 RRB 2010 Niger 720 36 Fleur 11 2010 Niger 694 33 J11 2010 Niger 1453 68 ICGV-SM- 01711 (Nachningwea 09) Β 2009 Tanzania 1800 88 ICGV-SM-01721 (Masasi 09) Β 2009 Tanzania 1500 56 ICGV-SM-83708 (Mnanje 09) Β 2009 Tanzania 1600 78 ICGV-SM-99555 (Managaka 09) Ψ 2009 Tanzania 1400 55 ICGV-SM-99557 (Naliendele 09) Ψ 2009 Tanzania 1400 55 ICGV-SM 01513 2011 Mozambique 1450 61 ICGV-SM 01514 2011 Mozambique 1520 69 ICGV-SM 99541 2011 Mozambique 1530 70 ICGV-SM 99568 2011 Mozambique 1380 53 CG 7 2011 Mozambique 1400 56 JL 24 2011 Mozambique 1370 52 Pigeonpea ICPH 2671 (Pushkal) χ 2008 India 2500 27 ICEAP 00850 2009 Kenya 1457 12 ICEAP 00936 2009 Kenya 1380 10 ICEAP 00557 (Mwaiwathu Alimi) 2009 Malawi 1192 28 ICEAP 01514/15 2011 Malawi 1430 59 ICEAP 00020 2011 Mozambique 1630 30 ICEAP 00040 2011 Mozambique 1680 34 ICEAP 00554 2011 Mozambique 1870 50 ICEAP 00557 2011 Mozambique 1960 56 Soybean EAI 3600 2009 Kenya 1276 NA Gazelle 2009 Kenya 1149 NA Nyala 2009 Kenya 1119 NA Black Hawk 2009 Kenya 1004 NA Hill 2009 Kenya 989 NA TGx 1740-2F (DPSB8) 2010 Kenya 1000 7 TGx 1895-33F (Tikolore) 2010 Kenya 1500 8 TGx 1740-2F 2011 Malawi 2248 38 TGx 1835-10E* 2008 Nigeria 834 25 TGx 1904-6F 2009 Nigeria 3034 24 TGx 1987-10F* 2010 Nigeria 1626 9 TGx 1987-62F (DPSB19)* 2010 Nigeria 1567 5 TGx 1937-1F (Olima) 2011 Mozambique 2585 29 TGx 1485-1D (Sana) 2011 Mozambique 2619 30 TGx 1908-8F (Wima) 2011 Mozambique 2670 33 TGx 1904-6F (Zamboane) 2011 Mozambique 2733 36 TGx 1740-2F (Wàmini) 2011 Mozambique 2838 41 δ desi type; λ kabuli type; Ψ Spanish type; β Virginia bunch; * resistant to rust; NA= not available 6 Engaging Smallholder Farmers | Tropical Legumes II Project
Seed Production and Delivery Systems The seed production and delivery system team has identified more than two dozen types of seed production models across target countries. Eight, eight and 10 seed production systems have been reported for Breeder/Foundation Seed, Certified Seed, and Other Quality Seed production systems in the target countries (Table 1-4). Systems varied from country to country (Figure 1-2). NARS research centers are responsible for Breeder and Foundation Seed production across target countries, with the exception of Tanzania, where public sector with contact farmers is responsible for production of these classes of seed. IARCs produce Foundation Seed (FS) directly in six of the nine target countries; public sector with contract farmers produces Foundation Seed in four of the nine countries. Individual farmers and farm groups, agricultural universities, IARCs with contract farmers, and small private seed companies also produce FS in one or more countries of the TL II target countries. Figure 1-2: Importance of seed production systems in selected countries Certified Seed (CS) is largely produced by the private sector and farmers groups, depending on the country (Table 1-4). Small-scale farmers, the public sector with contract farmers and public sector seed firms are also known to be part of the CS production system. Agricultural universities produce CS only in Nigeria. Individual seed producers are engaged in Other Quality Seed (OQS) production in seven of the nine countries (Table 1-4). Farmers’ groups/unions/cooperatives and community-based seed system farmer groups operating by themselves produce OQS in five and four of the nine countries, respectively. NGOs facilitate the production of OQS in Ethiopia and Kenya. Schools, NGOs directly, the PDKV model, farmers involved in payback system, seed village, and government supported non-certified seed production models are also practiced in one country each. It has been observed that there is no much enthusiasm by large seed companies to engage in grain legume seed production because of low margin of profit, as farmers could recycle their own saved seed for up to five years. Much attention is therefore paid to strengthening community-based and farmer level seed production systems. A total of 16 seed delivery models have been identified in the nine target countries. These too varied from country to country. Kenya (7), Ethiopia (6), and Tanzania (5) have the largest number of models; Malawi (4), India (3), Niger (3), Nigeria (3), Mali (2), and Mozambique (2) have fewer numbers, as shown in Table 1-4. Progress of Phase 1 7
Page 1 and 2: Tropical Legumes II Project TROPICA
Page 3: TROPICAL LEGUMES II Tropical Legume
Page 6 and 7: Seed Production and Delivery System
Page 8 and 9: Seed production and delivery system
Page 10 and 11: NARES NASFAM NASSPA NPT NSC NSO NSS
Page 12 and 13: TL II was implemented in 10 target
Page 14 and 15: country governments in agricultural
Page 18 and 19: Table 1-3: Seed production and deli
Page 20 and 21: As stated earlier in this chapter,
Page 22 and 23: Table 1-5: Graduate degree students
Page 24 and 25: Ndjeunga J, Ibro A, Cisse Y, Ben Ah
Page 26 and 27: Project background Groundnut is one
Page 28 and 29: Table 2-2: Performance of ICGV 0035
Page 30 and 31: Table 2-6: Performance of ICGV 9111
Page 32 and 33: Table 2-11: Results of 255 paired c
Page 34 and 35: Table 2-16: Groundnut seed of vario
Page 36 and 37: Infrastructure facilities For effic
Page 38 and 39: Project sites Tamil Nadu The presen
Page 40 and 41: In Karnataka, the PDKV model was pr
Page 42 and 43: Training course A total of four tra
Page 44 and 45: Background The yield of groundnut i
Page 46 and 47: Table 3-2: Groundnut production tre
Page 48 and 49: In order of importance, the largest
Page 50 and 51: Table 3-5: Results of pair-wise com
Page 52 and 53: Finally, the variety choices are co
Page 54 and 55: hybridization techniques, design of
Page 56 and 57: Figure 3-2: The Malawi model of the
Page 58 and 59: Tanzania TL II has contributed to t
Page 60 and 61: Annex 3-2: Performance of Virginia
Page 62 and 63: Annex 3-4: Regional elite groundnut
Page 64 and 65: 54 Engaging Smallholder Farmers | T
Page 66 and 67:
The European Union still remains th
Page 68 and 69:
Table 4-2: Proportion of households
Page 70 and 71:
Table 4-4: Amount requested, amount
Page 72 and 73:
Table 4-6. Comparison of groundnut
Page 74 and 75:
The use of other inputs (credit, in
Page 76 and 77:
A PVS evaluation was launched in pi
Page 78 and 79:
Table 4-10: Locations and contact f
Page 80 and 81:
Table 4-11: Mean pod yield (kg per
Page 82 and 83:
99511 (Table 4-12). Most important
Page 84 and 85:
Table 4-15: Evaluation of groundnut
Page 86 and 87:
A 10-day intensive training worksho
Page 88 and 89:
Seed production of all classes A to
Page 90 and 91:
Testing seed marketing strategies A
Page 92 and 93:
Area Global trends in area under co
Page 94 and 95:
Figure 5-3 shows that Nigeria made
Page 96 and 97:
much greater deficits. Under this s
Page 98 and 99:
and other inputs. • Popular varie
Page 100 and 101:
Mozambique Soybean seed multiplicat
Page 102 and 103:
dry savanna regions, where the bulk
Page 104 and 105:
Number of demonstration plots in ea
Page 106 and 107:
Mozambique Many farmers have shown
Page 108 and 109:
Table 5-7: Number of days to flower
Page 110 and 111:
most efficient and IT99K-7-21-2-2 w
Page 112 and 113:
Table 5-11: Ten SNPs converted and
Page 114 and 115:
Strengthening capacity of national
Page 116 and 117:
Infrastructure development at NARS
Page 118 and 119:
in Mali, 107.3 MT in Mozambique, an
Page 120 and 121:
produced over the first phase of th
Page 122 and 123:
Lessons learned TL II cowpea seed s
Page 124 and 125:
Phase I Social Sciences research in
Page 126 and 127:
The consequences are that the impro
Page 128 and 129:
about half of area share of land al
Page 130 and 131:
Figure 6-3: Average area (ha) per h
Page 132 and 133:
single lingering bottleneck on whic
Page 134 and 135:
In Kenya, the small seed pack appro
Page 136 and 137:
Summary, process gains and people r
Page 138 and 139:
Fast-Tracking and Technology Genera
Page 140 and 141:
Figure 6-6: Distribution of PVS sit
Page 142 and 143:
Table 6-12: Yields of fast track bu
Page 144 and 145:
Table 6-15: Farmer evaluation of in
Page 146 and 147:
While the fast track entries were r
Page 148 and 149:
Technology generation Mechanistic s
Page 150 and 151:
60 50 Rainfall Pan evaporation Maxi
Page 152 and 153:
16, and the advantage of some ALB l
Page 154 and 155:
Number of degree training students
Page 156 and 157:
Number of NARS technicians trained
Page 158 and 159:
Rain-out shelter in CIAT-Colombia T
Page 160 and 161:
Impact assessment and enhancement P
Page 162 and 163:
Annex 6-2: TL IIEthiopia: decentral
Page 164 and 165:
154 Engaging Smallholder Farmers |
Page 166 and 167:
farmers for enhancing their awarene
Page 168 and 169:
• Designing, testing and implemen
Page 170 and 171:
Andhra Pradesh The overall sample s
Page 172 and 173:
Prakasam district: Crops grown in P
Page 174 and 175:
Constraints in adoption of chickpea
Page 176 and 177:
Cost-benefit analysis for chickpea
Page 178 and 179:
Identification of farmer-and-market
Page 180 and 181:
Table 7-6: Breeder Seed of differen
Page 182 and 183:
Capacity building Knowledge empower
Page 184 and 185:
Table 7-15: Training of local seed
Page 186 and 187:
• In addition to yield, maturity
Page 188 and 189:
Introduction Chickpea is grown in E
Page 190 and 191:
Chickpea seed access The first majo
Page 192 and 193:
Grades and standards About 75% of t
Page 194 and 195:
Table 8-6: Varieties used in PVS tr
Page 196 and 197:
private sector lacks the incentive
Page 198 and 199:
• LZARDI-Ukiriguru: Land along wi
Page 200 and 201:
• Establishing functional legume
Page 202 and 203:
Table 9-1: Farmers’ preferred var
Page 204 and 205:
Table 9-3: Baby trials conducted in
Page 206 and 207:
Table 9-5: Reaction of pigeonpea li
Page 208 and 209:
TL II focuses on farmer-participato
Page 210 and 211:
Production of Breeder, Foundation,
Page 212 and 213:
Mahaboobnagar and Ranga Reddy distr
Page 214 and 215:
(Table 9-9 Continued) Particular To
Page 216 and 217:
Chichewa) and Tanzania (Swahili). O
Page 218 and 219:
Available technologies Although imp
Page 220 and 221:
and Chitedze in Malawi showed that
Page 222 and 223:
Table 10-6: Various classes of qual
Page 224 and 225:
Awareness activities Farmers’ fie
Page 226 and 227:
Annex 10-1: Target locations for pi
Page 228 and 229:
Adoption studies Adoption studies f
Page 230 and 231:
3.5 Yields (Tonnes/hectare) 3.0 2.5
Page 232 and 233:
Supply of important traits by the i
Page 234 and 235:
and marketing organization in Malaw
Page 236 and 237:
Table 11-3: Grain and fodder yields
Page 238 and 239:
Table 11-9: Communities and famers
Page 240 and 241:
Table 11-14 Average performance of
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Table 11-16: Soybean Breeder’s Se
Page 246 and 247:
Table 11-19: Grain yield (kg per ha
Page 248 and 249:
Table 11-23: F3 Segregating populat
Page 250 and 251:
At TSBF-CIAT in Kenya, a study was
Page 252 and 253:
Number of NARS scientists trained T
Page 254 and 255:
Improved access to markets Improved
Page 256 and 257:
Total 107.3 259.0 609.0 975.3 246 E
Page 258 and 259:
utilization and marketing. In Niger
Page 260 and 261:
Annex 11-2: Tobit Model estimate of
Page 262:
show all

Final version of Tropical Legumes II Project Report for Phase 1 - icrisat

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?