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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Designing, testing and implementing diffusion, marketing and institutional arrangements to enhance seed delivery (tailored to various client needs); • Enhancing local capacity to produce, deliver, store and market seed; and • Enhancing local-level awareness of released varieties (demand creation). Locations and partners The target locations selected for chickpea activities in India included two districts (Kurnool and Prakasam) of Andhra Pradesh and two districts (Dharwad and Gulbarga districts) of Karnataka states in southern India. All activities were carried out in partnership with NARES in target locations. The following were the key project partners: • ICRISAT, Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh; • Acharya NG Ranga Agricultural University (ANGRAU), Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh; • University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad (UAS-D), Karnataka; • University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur (UAS-R), Karnataka; • National Seed Corporation (NSC); • State Farms Corporation of India Limited (SFCI); • Andhra Pradesh State Seed Development Corporation (APSSDC); and • Karnataka State Seed Corporation (KSSC). The following key scientists were involved in project activities from the partner institutes: ICRISAT Objective 1 Objective 5 and 8.5 MCS Bantilan, P Parthasarathy Rao, GD Nageswara Rao and R Padmaja Pooran Gaur, CLL Gowda, ShaileshTripathi(up to April 2010), Arvaind Jukanti (from May 2010) Suresh Pande, HC Sharma, Vincent Vadez, L Krishnamurthy, GV Ranga Rao, and Rajeev Varshney NARS Partners State Objective Districts/ Townships Andhra Pradesh (AP) Karnataka (KA) Objective 1 Objective 5 and 8.5 Objective 1 Objective 5 and 8.5 Kurnool & Prakasam Kurnool Prakasam Gulbarga & Dharwad Gulbarga Dharwad Scientists Dr. K Suhasini (ANGRAU, Hyderabad), V Jayalakshmi (RARS-Nandyal, Kurnool), A Trivikrama Reddy (RARS-Nandyal, Kurnool) & P Muniratnam (RARS-Nandyal, Kurnool) Y Satish (ARS-Darsi) & Y Koteshwar Rao (RARS-Lam) Dr. G N Kulkarni (UAS, Dharwad), Dr. V R Kiresur (UAS, Dharwad) DM Mannur (ARS-Gulbarga) PM Salimath (UAS-Dharwad) RARS=Regional Agricultural Research Station; ARS=Agricultural Research Station; UAS=University of Agricultural Sciences 158 Engaging Smallholder Farmers | Tropical Legumes II Project
Socio-Economics/Targeting Situation and outlook A number of biotic and abiotic factors limit realization of yield potential, besides the lack of availability of improved seed to farmers. The slow growth of chickpea yield in India can be attributed to: (i) the shift in crop area from favorable to marginal environments; (ii) the slow uptake of improved varieties and other production technologies; and (iii) its cultivation on poor soils under erratic rainfall conditions. Trade in chickpea is relatively robust and has been growing over time. Close to 10% of the total chickpea produced in 2003-05 entered the international market. Trade statistics indicate a demandsupply imbalance for pulses in Asia. While the quantum of chickpea exports from Asia doubled between 1981 and 2007, overall the region remains a net importer. The increased import demand has induced countries such as Australia and Canada that traditionally did not grow chickpea to emerge as significant exporters now. Demand and supply projections of chickpea under the business-as-usual scenario for India and Asia corroborate the fact that in the near future, domestic production is unlikely to catch up with growing demand. If current trends in per capita income and production were to continue, by 2020 India’s demand for chickpea would increase to 10 million MT worsening India’s net trade situation. The scope of raising chickpea production in Asia through area expansion alone is extremely limited. Therefore the main challenges for research and development are to bridge the gap between actual and attainable yield by enhancing farmers’ access to good quality inputs, improved technologies and information; improve the competitiveness of pulse crops through domestic incentives related to production, marketing, processing prices in line with cereals and competing crops; and achieve a technological breakthrough that not only overcomes yield barriers but also provides effective protection against insect pests and diseases, and tolerance to moisture stress. Baseline survey and adoption studies Socio-economic and demographic composition of the farmers The summary details of selected districts for both control and treatment villages for baseline survey are presented in Table 7-1. Table 7-1: Survey districts and villages for Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka State District Treatment village Control village Andhra Pradesh Kurnool Pulimaddi (30)* Brahamanapalli (15) Mitnala (30) Munagala (15) Balapanoor (30) Rasulpet (15) Prakasam Chirakurapadu (30) Payidipadu (15) Kollavaripalem (30) Bodavada (15) Chirvanauppalapadu (30) Maddirala (15) Karnataka Dharwad Harobelawadi (30) Kabbenur (15) Shirkol (30) Hansi (15) Kumaragoppa (30) Yemnur (15) Gulbarga Kurikota (30) Bhushangi (15) Farhatabad (30) Honnakirangi (15) Gotur (30) Bennur (15) *Figures in parenthesis indicate number of farmers selected in that village Progress of Phase 1 159
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 16 and 17:
Table 1-2: continued Variety code (
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 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:
232 Engaging Smallholder Farmers |
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:
252 Engaging Smallholder Farmers |
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?