Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T03:53:59.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IDENTIFYING FARMERS’ PREFERENCES AND CONSTRAINTS TO PEARL MILLET PRODUCTION IN THE SAHEL AND NORTH-SUDAN ZONES OF BURKINA FASO

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 September 2018

INOUSSA DRABO ,
ROGER G. ZANGRE ,
ERIC Y. DANQUAH ,
KWADWO OFORI ,
JOHN R. WITCOMBE  and
C. TOM HASH
INOUSSA DRABO*
Affiliation:
Département Production Végétale, Institut de l'Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA), Ouagadougou, BP 476 Burkina Faso
ROGER G. ZANGRE
Affiliation:
Département Production Végétale, Institut de l'Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA), Ouagadougou, BP 476 Burkina Faso
ERIC Y. DANQUAH
Affiliation:
West Africa Center for Crop Improvement (WACCI), College of Basic and Applied Sciences, University of Ghana Legon, PMB L 30, Accra, Ghana
KWADWO OFORI
Affiliation:
West Africa Center for Crop Improvement (WACCI), College of Basic and Applied Sciences, University of Ghana Legon, PMB L 30, Accra, Ghana
JOHN R. WITCOMBE
Affiliation:
Centre for Advanced Research in International Agricultural Development (CARIAD), Bangor University, Gwynedd LL57 2UW, UK
C. TOM HASH
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), ICRISAT Sahelian Center, Niamey, BP 12404Niger
*
††Corresponding author: Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The low yield of pearl millet largely due to the low adoption of improved varieties substantiates the application of client-oriented plant breeding for pearl millet. Hence to enhance adoption, new varieties must correspond to farmers’ preferences and respond to the constraints prevailing in the production environments, participatory rural appraisals were conducted in two agro-ecological zones (Sahel and North-Sudan) to determine farmers’ preferences in the choice of varieties and to identify constraints to pearl millet production. The study revealed that the major production constraints are hierarchically drought, Striga, head miner, bird and downy mildew. Compact panicle, large grain size and non-bristle panicle were the most preferred traits in pearl millet across agro-ecological zones. Very long panicle and early maturity crop cycle were more preferred in the Sahel zone whereas, in the North-Sudan zone medium panicle length and medium maturity cycle were more preferred by farmers. Traits largely rejected by farmers were small grain size, narrow, loose and bristled panicle. Very few investigations were done to understand the raison of the low adoption of improved technologies in pearl millet. This study identified the major criteria of new pearl millet variety adoption by farmers. It is expected that breeding program must integrate these criteria in new pearl millet variety profiling to enhance adoption.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 55 , Issue 5 , October 2019 , pp. 765 - 775
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adesina, A. and Zinnah, M. M. (1993). Technology characteristics, farmer perceptions and adoption decisions: a tobit model application in Sierra Leone. Agricultural Economics 9:297–311.Google Scholar
Ceccarelli, S. and Grando, S. (2007). Decentralized-participatory plant breeding: An example of demand driven research. Euphytica 155(3):349–360.Google Scholar
Ceccarelli, S., Guimarães, E. P. and Weltzien, E. (2009). Plant Breeding and Farmer Participation. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
Dancette, C. (1983). Besoins en eau do mil au Senegal: adaptation en zone semi-aride tropicale. L'agronomie Tropicale 38(4):267–280.Google Scholar
Dao, A., Sanou, J., Gracen, V. and Danquah, E. Y. (2015). Indentifying farmers’ preferences and constraints to maize production in two agro-ecological zones in Burkina Faso. Agriculture & Food Security 4(1):1.Google Scholar
Drabo, I. (2016). Breeding Pearl Millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L) R. BR.) for Downy Mildew Resistance and Improved Yield in Burkina Faso. Ph.D. thesis, West Africa Centre for Crop Improvement, College of Basic and Applied Sciences, University of Ghana, Legon. 136 p.Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2016). FAOSTAT statistics database. Available at: http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/Q/QC/S [Accessed: April 2015].Google Scholar
Haussmann, B. I. G., Boureima, S. S., Kassari, I. A., Moumouni, K. H. and Boubacar, A. (2007). Mechanisms of adaptation to climate variability in West African pearl millet landraces–a preliminary. Journal of SAT Agricultural Research 3(1):1–3.Google Scholar
Kholová, J., Hash, C. T., Kumar, P. L., Yadav, R. S., Kovcová, M. and Vadez, V. (2010). Terminal drought-tolerant pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.] have high leaf ABA and limit transpiration at high vapour pressure deficit. Journal of Experimental Botany 61(5):1431–1440.Google Scholar
Omanya, G. O., Weltzien-Rattunde, E., Sogodogo, D., Sanogo, M., Hanssens, N., Guero, Y. and Zangre, R. (2007). Participatory varietal selection with improved pearl millet in West Africa. Experimental Agriculture 43(01):5–19.Google Scholar
Payne, W., Tapsoba, H., Baoua, I. B., Malick, B. N., N'Diaye, M. and Dabire-Binso, C. (2011). On-farm biological control of the pearl millet head miner: Realization of 35 years of unsteady progress in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 9(1):186–193.Google Scholar
Ramaiah, K. V. (1985). Hand pulling of Striga hermontica in pearl millet. International Journal of Pest Management 31(4):326–327.Google Scholar
Shapiro, S. S. and Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52(3–4):591–611. JSTOR 2333709. MR 0205384. p. 593. doi:10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591Google Scholar
Singh, S. D. (1995). Downy mildew of pearl millet. Plant Disease 79(6):545–550.Google Scholar
Singh, S. D., King, S. B. and Werder, J. (1993). Downy mildew disease of pearl millet. Information Bulletin no. 37. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics.Google Scholar
Sthapit, B. R., Joshi, K. D. and Witcombe, J. R. (1996). Farmer participatory crop improvement. III. Participatory plant breeding, a case study for rice in Nepal. Experimental Agriculture 32(04):479–496.Google Scholar
Sudisha, J., Amruthesh, K. N., Deepak, S. A., Shetty, N. P., Sarosh, B. R. and Shetty, H. S. (2005). Comparative efficacy of strobilurin fungicides against downy mildew disease of pearl millet. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 81(3):188–197.Google Scholar
Thakur, R. P., Sharma, R. and Rao, V. P. (2011). Screening Techniques for Pearl Millet Diseases. Information Bulletin No. 89. Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics.Google Scholar
Weltzien, E., Whitaker, M. L. and Anders, M. M. (1996). Farmer participation in pearl millet breeding for marginal environment. In Proceedings of a Workshop on Participatory Plant Breeding, 26–29 July 1995, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Witcombe, J. R., Gyawali, S., Sunwar, S., Sthapit, B. R. and Joshi, K. D. (2006). Participatory plant breeding is better described as highly client-oriented plant breeding. II. Optional farmer collaboration in the segregating generations. Experimental Agriculture 42(1):79–90.Google Scholar
Witcombe, J. R., Joshi, K. D., Gyawali, S., Musa, A. M., Johansen, C., Virk, D. S. and Sthapit, B. R. (2005). Participatory plant breeding is better described as highly client-oriented plant breeding. I. Four indicators of client-orientation in plant breeding. Experimental Agriculture 41(3):299–320.Google Scholar