Pest control for the storage of cowpea by small scale farmers in SSA towards participation in action-research.

Pest control for the storage of cowpea by small scale farmers in SSA

towards participation in action-research

The project

• Organisations – DfID– NRI, MOFA, SARI,

NGOs, Farmers unions…

• Duration• Research to

Action-research & Participatory research

• Cowpea (Black-eye bean)– Traditional - widespread– Beans, leaves, fodder– Adapted – drought, poor soil

• Storage on farm• Pest damage• Adapted solution

– Effective– Safe– Affordable– Acceptable

Location

SSA

Ghana

Northern region

Rainy season: July - September

Dry season

Dry season: November - May

Tamale market

Cowpea with damage

Cowpea and bruchid

Callosobruchus maculatus

Surveys

• Damage on stored cowpea• Farmers coping strategy• Control methods

On-farm surveys

• Northern Ghana• Farmers’ stores

• Surveys– monthly

assessments– dry season– % damage– 2 years

0

25

50

75

100

Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

% d

ama

geSurveys

0

10

20

30

40

Nu

mb

er

of fa

rmer

s af

fect

ed

Damage on stored cowpea in the Northern Region during the storage season 96-97

0

25

50

75

100

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Surveys Damage on stored cowpea in the Northern Region

during the storage season 97-98: 131 farmers

0

25

50

75

100

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug

Surveys Farmers stop storage – variation of damage

(131 farmers)

On-farm trials

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Surveys: control methodsused on cowpea

TreatmentRegio

nMean % damage

Number of

farmers

Cypermethrin / sun dried

NR 66.2 1

Phosphine / Cypermethrin

NR 60.1 1

Cypermethrin NR 45.3 8

Sumicombi (Fenitrothion + Fenvalerate)

NR 44.5 4

sun dried NR 40.5 1

not treated NR 36.2 9

Cypermethrin / Sumicombi

NR 36.0 2

Napthalene NR 23.4 2

Phosphine NR 17.4 5

Mix with ash, no heat: heated over fire later

UER 7.8 1

Mix with ash UER 7.4 2

Heat over fire and mix ash

UER 6.2 31

Heat over fire and mix ash and orange peel

UER 3.5 1

Type of treatment Treatment RegionMean % damage

Number of farmers

Not treated - NR 6.0 12

- UER 4.5 1

Actellic 2% dust NR 16.7 1

(Pirimiphos methyl) 25% emulsifiable concentrate NR 9.1 1

Dry materials Mixed with wood ash UER 3.4 2

mixed Mixed with ash and kul-enka UER 2.1 1

Kimkim mixed with seed UER 0.9 2

Water based Immerse in warm water UER 5.7 1

ash Immerse in ash in warm water UER 1.4 1

Steamed ash in water, pored over bambara, dried

UER 1.3 3

Immerse in warm water, dry, mix in ash UER 0.6 3

dawadawa Dawadawa seed boiled in water, poured over grain

UER 10.7 3

Dawadawa seed boiled in water, poured over grain, coat with ash

UER 0.1 1

Dawadawa seed and kimkim boiled in water, poured over grain

UER 3.2 1

kimkim Dipped in boiled kimkim water NR 2.5 12

Immerse in kimkim boiled water UER 6.4 5

Immerse in kimkim and neem leaves boiled water

UER 26.5 1

Immerse in kimkim boiled water, dry, mix with ash

UER 1.2 2

Immerse in kimkim boiled water, dry, UER 0.6 5

shea butter Soak in shea butter waste water NR 2.0 6

Immerse in water in which shea butter dissolved

UER 1.6 2

neem & orange peel Added orange peel to water with neem UER 0.0 1

On-station trials

Test of control methods

• From surveys:– Ash– Chilli– Shea nut butter– Shea nut residue– Plant extracts

• From literature:– Hermetic storage– Solarisation

Solarisation

0

11:16 11:46 12:16 12:46 13:16 13:46 14:16 14:46

Time of day

57.3

Th

resh

old

(d

eg

ree

s C

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Te

mp

era

ture

(d

eg

ree

s C

)

cowpea 1-2cm cowpea 5cmbambara 1-2cm bambara 5cmambient

On-farm trials

On-farm test of control methods

• Selected from on-station results

• Set-up after harvest

• Monthly assessment of damage during dry season

• Control: no treatment– 20 farmers– 20 kg– bag

1999 trial

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %H

erm

etic

So

laris

atio

n

So

laris

atio

n+

Sh

ea

nu

t

Sh

ea

nu

t

Kim

-kim

Co

ntr

ol

Ash

Ch

illi

Pa

lag

a

Pe

rce

nta

ge

da

ma

ge

Average damage increase after 2 months of storage (with SEM)

2000 trial

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

90 %

100 %

Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Per

cent

age

dam

age

Control

Hermetic

Paddy ash

Palaga

Shea butter

Solarisation

Solar. in pots

Solar. Monthly

Solar. Paddy ash

Solar. Shea butter

Farmers trials

Would farmers use or recommend the treatment?

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

Control Solar. + ash

Solar. Monthly

Solar. + shea

yes

no

Results

On-farm trials 2001. Average damage (with SEM) at the end of the storage period

0

20

40

60

80

100

Control Solar. + ash

Solar. monthly

Solar. + shea

Per

cen

tag

e d

am

ag

e April

May

June

Farmers' perceptions of the treatment used

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

Control Solar. + ash

Solar. Monthly

Solar.+ shea

v. good

good

OK

not good

Num

ber

of

resp

on

den

ts

Germination tests

7 87 10

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Control Solar. + ash

Solar.Monthly

Solar. +shea

Per

cen

tag

e s

eed

s g

erm

inat

ing

(w

ith n

umb

er

of

farm

ers

test

ing)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Ran

k o

f ge

rmin

atio

n te

st

am

on

g c

rite

ria

Extension

Two locations

Uganda

Conclusions

• Viable solution?– Cost– Scaling up– Follow up

• Learning process– Collaborative work - decentralisation– From academic research to farmers

participatory research…