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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• In addition to yield, maturity duration and resistance to diseases, seed traits preferred by market (seed size, color and shape) were also given high wattage by the farmers in selection of improved chickpea varieties. Thus, market-preferred traits are also important for adoption and up-scaling for chickpea improved varieties; • The farmers’ preference for growing kabuli chickpea varieties largely depended on the price premium received over desi type; • Lack of proper cleaning, grading and storage facilities hampers seed production by individual farmers; and • The farmers were very keen to take seed production of improved varieties provided arrangement was made for procurement of seed through national/state seed corporations or other agencies. 176 Engaging Smallholder Farmers | Tropical Legumes II Project
Enhancing Chickpea Productivity and Production in Eastern and Southern Africa NVPRG Rao, Said N Silim, Franklin Simtowe (ICRISAT-Nairobi); Pooran M Gaur, CLL Gowda (ICRISAT- Patancheru); Emmanuel S Monyo (ICRISAT-Malawi); Asnake Fikre, Kebebew Assefa (EIAR-Debre Zeit, Ethiopia); Robert Kileo (LZARDI-Ukiriguru, Tanzania); Wilson M Thagana, Ngari Macharia (KARI- Njoro, Kenya) Summary The chickpea research and development activities were conducted in three ESA countries, namely, Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania with due involvement of NARS, ICRISAT-Nairobi, progressive farmers, NGOs, and all major stakeholders. The project was implemented in Gimbichu, Minjar-Shenkora, Moretna-Jiru, Dembia and Sodo weredas (districts) of Ethiopia; four districts of Tanzania, namely Misungwi, Kwimba, Shinyanga and Kishapu districts of Lake Zone; and the rift valley districts of Bomet and Nakuru in Kenya. The major success was on fast track release of nine chickpea varieties in the three target countries, viz., Ethiopia (1), Tanzania (4) and Kenya (4). The new releases in Tanzania are a landmark as this is the first official release of chickpea in the country; Kenya had only one variety released in 1986. Baseline studies indicated that most of the farmers rely on own-saved seed and access to seed of improved varieties is either through informal networks or relief seed. Very limited awareness on improved chickpea varieties existed, due to consistent failure of the public sector to supply good quality source seed, reluctance of the private sector to show interest in seed production, and most often seed is produced in high potential areas or areas with infrastructure for storage and processing, far away from its area of utilization, leading to high transaction costs. To overcome these constraints, investments have been made in Breeder and Foundation seed production, and proceeds from seed sales used to re-capitalize seed revolving funds to support subsequent seed production cycles. Foundation Seed has been marketed to private companies and NGOs for further seed production and dissemination. During the past four years (2007-10) a total of 31.7 MT Breeder Seed and 3,602 MT Foundation and Certified seed of farmer-preferred improved chickpea varieties were produced at research stations and farmers’ fields. A total of 186 farmers participatory varietal selection (PVS) trials by involving 6-11 pre-released/released varieties were involved along with farmer’ variety as a check, were conducted in Ethiopia (68), Tanzania (47), and Kenya (71), and 3,087 farmers (Ethiopia 2,611, Tanzania 318, and Kenya 569) participated. In addition, 525 field demonstrations in Ethiopia were organized to disseminate promising varieties and production technologies. During the PVS farmers came up with a number of preferred traits which facilitated short-listing of varieties for fast track release. In total, 25 field days were conducted in target locations of Kenya (11), Tanzania (8) and Ethiopia (6) with the participation of 2,523 farmers (Kenya: 855; Tanzania: 958; and Ethiopia: 710). During the field days farmers were asked to select preferred varieties along with preference criteria. In Kenya, demonstrated the utilization of chickpea products and elicited the feedback on most preferred chick based products and farmers rated githeri and stew as the preferred products. Several training programs were organized to improve the knowledge of farmers on chickpea seed production, crop and seed health, and seed processing aspects in which 6,205 farmers (4,829 in Ethiopia, 521 in Tanzania, and 855 in Kenya); 114 extension personnel also participated. An information bulletin was published on improved chickpea technologies and seed production in Ethiopia (both in English and Amharic). Twelve participants - four each from Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania - took part in a onemonth training course on “Chickpea Breeding and Seed Production” organized at ICRISAT-Patancheru during Jan-Feb 2008 and 2009. One MSc student from Ethiopia and two from Kenya are working on chickpea improvement research. Progress of Phase 1 177
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 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 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?