Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T23:40:42.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PRODUCTION SYSTEM-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES IN FARMERS' DEMAND FOR GREATER YAM (DIOSCOREA ALATA) VARIETAL ATTRIBUTES IN ORISSA STATE, INDIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 August 2009

P. SETHURAMAN SIVAKUMAR ,
M. NEDUNCHEZHIYAN ,
S. PARAMAGURU  and
R. C. RAY
P. SETHURAMAN SIVAKUMAR*
Affiliation:
Regional Centre of Central Tuber Crops Research Institute, P.O. Dumduma HBC, Bhubaneswar – 751 019, Orissa, India
M. NEDUNCHEZHIYAN
Affiliation:
Regional Centre of Central Tuber Crops Research Institute, P.O. Dumduma HBC, Bhubaneswar – 751 019, Orissa, India
S. PARAMAGURU
Affiliation:
Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Orissa University of Agriculture & Technology, Bhanjanagar-761126, Orissa, India
R. C. RAY
Affiliation:
Regional Centre of Central Tuber Crops Research Institute, P.O. Dumduma HBC, Bhubaneswar – 751 019, Orissa, India
*
†Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Greater yam (Dioscorea alata), a popular crop in India, is cultivated widely in Orissa state, India. In spite of the availability of several improved varieties, farmers preferred the local landraces. An investigation was carried out to identify whether the varietal preferences of yam farmers in two production systems, subsistence and commercial, were different. While the subsistence farmers demanded the yam varieties adaptable to a wide range of soils, the commercial farmers preferred the anthracnose-resistant cultivars. This study demonstrated that the farmers' varietal preferences were highly influenced by the production systems. Identifying the convergence/divergence of varietal preferences across production systems can help breeders to develop the high impact varieties.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , October 2009 , pp. 469 - 482
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

Abraham, K., Edison, S., Unnikrishnan, M., Sheela, M. N., Vimala, B., Sreekumari, M. T. and Naskar, S. K. (2006). Tuber crop varieties released by the Central Tuber Crops Research Institute. Technical Bulletin Series 24. Thiruvananthapuram, India: Central Tuber Crops Research Institute.Google Scholar
Anantharaman, M. and Ramanathan, S. (2002). Participatory on-farm evaluation of yam varieties by tribal farmers. Journal of Root Crops. 28:52–54.Google Scholar
Conover, W. J. (1999). Practical Non-parametric Statistics. 3rd edition. New York, USA: Wiley.Google Scholar
Courtois, B., Bartolome, B., Chaudhary, D., McLaren, G., Misra, C. H., Mandal, N. P., Pandey, S., Paris, T., Piggin, C., Prasad, K., Roy, A. T., Sahu, R. K., Sahu, V. N., Sarkarung, S., Sharma, S. K., Singh, A., Singh, H. N., Singh, D. N., Singh, N. K., Singh, R. K., Singh, S., Sinha, P. K., Sisodia, B. V. S. and Takhur, R. (2001). Comparing farmers and breeders rankings in varietal selection for low-input environments: A case study of rainfed rice in Eastern India. Euphytica 122:537–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production (2006). A profile on agriculture in Orissa 2006. Bhubaneswar, India: Statistics Section. Directorate of Agriculture and Food Production, Government Of Orissa.Google Scholar
Field, A. (2000). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS for Windows. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Hosmer, D. W. and Lemenshow, S. (1989). Applied Logistic Regression. New York, USA: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Krishnapillai, M. V. (2005). Women's role in the conservation of yam genetic resources in Yap Island. Paper presented at the IRFD World Forum on Small Islanf Developing States: Challenges, Prospects and International Cooperation for Sustainable Development held at University of Mauritius, Port Louis, Mauritius, 10–11, January 2005.Google Scholar
Nedunchezhiyan, M., Byju, G. and Naskar, S.K. (2006). Effect of intercrops and planting pattern on incidence of anthracnose, productivity potential and economics of greater yam (Dioscorea alata). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 76:132–134.Google Scholar
Nindjin, C., Otokoré, D., Hauser, S., Tschannen, A., Farah, Z. and Girardine, O. (2007). Determination of relevant sensory properties of pounded yams (Dioscorea spp.) using a locally based descriptive analysis methodology. Food Quality and Preference 18:450–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otegbayo, B., Aina, J., Asiedu, R. and Bokanga, M. (2006). Pasting characteristics of fresh yams (Dioscorea spp.) as indicators of textural quality in a major food product ‘Pounded Yam’. Food Chemistry 99:663–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramanathan, S., Anantharaman, M., Sheela, M.N., and George, James. (2006). Production system diagnosis of yams in Kerala and Tamil Nadu. In Root and Tuber Crops in Nutrition, Food Security and Sustainable Environment, 331–336 (Eds. Naskar, S. K., Nedunchezhiyan, M., Rajasekhrara Rao, K., Sivakumar, P. S., Ray, R. C., Misra, R. S., and Mukherjee, A.). Bhubaneswar, India: Regional Centre of Central Tuber Crops Research Institute.Google Scholar
Vernier, P. and Dansi, A. (2000). Participatory assessment and farmers knowledge on yam varieties (D. rotundata) in Benin. In Proceedings of Twelfth Symposium of the International Society for Tropical Root Crops (ISTRC): Potential of Root Crops for Food and Industrial Resources. 360–365. (Eds. Nakatani, M., and Komaki, K.). Ibaraki, Japan: International Society for Tropical Root Crops.Google Scholar
Zannou, A. (2006). Socio-economic, agronomic and molecular analysis of yam and cowpea diversity in the Guinea-Sudan transition zone of Benin. PhD thesis Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Zannou, A., Richards, P. and Struik, P.C. (2006). Knowledge on yam variety development: insights from farmers' and researchers’ practices. Knowledge Management for Development Journal 2:30–39.Google Scholar