Tanzania Agricultural Research · dwarf cashew clones in ... Plant Breeders Right Legislation in Tanzania 15 WORKSHOPS/CONFERENCES Annual Conference and General ... processing …

Tanzania Agricultural

Research& TrainingNewsletter

Published by the Ministry of Agriculture Food Security and CooperativesDepartment of Research & Training P.O.Box 2066 Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

VOL. XIX, Nos. 1-4 DECEMBER 2004

ISSN 0856-3128

CONTENTSCOVER PHOTO

The Tanzania Agricultural Research & TrainingNewsletter is published qauarterlyby the Department of Research & Training, Ministryof Agriculture Food security & Cooperatives.The newsletter is a means of enhancingcommunication among Tanzania agricultural scientists,and disseminating scientific information especiallyrecent research findings to relevant users. It is alsoused for publication-exchange programme with otherscientific institutions within and outside Tanzania.

We invite contributions from the agriculturalscientists and those of the allied sectors in Tanzania.Such contributions should be in form of short articles(800 - 3000 words), workshop/conference reports,illustration materials and news items that will helpagricultural development in Tanzania. The articlesshould be original and authentic research findings orprogress reports about on going projects.

Please send contributions or any enquiries to:The Director of reseach& Training or theEditor, Research & Training NewsletterP.O. Box 2066 Dar es Salaam, TanzaniaTel: +255-22-2860326Fax: +255-22-2865312email: [email protected] URL: http://www.drd.mafs.go.tz

Editor: Richard Y. KasugaTypesetting & Layout: Richard Y. Kasuga

RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTS

New Released Crop Varieties 4

RESEARCH ARTICLES

Efficacy of botanical insecticides onSitophillus spp on Maize in theSouthern Highlands of Tanzania 6

Effects of Storage Period on SeedViability andGermination Capacity ofRice Cultivars in Tanzania 9

Performance of progenies of Braziliandwarf cashew clones inSouthern Tanzania 12

R & D NEWS

Progress of Agricultural SectorSupport Programme (ASSP)14

Plant Breeders Right Legislation inTanzania 15

WORKSHOPS/CONFERENCES

Annual Conference and Generalmeeting of the Soil Science Society ofEast Africa 17

ICT NEWS

Connected to the Internet? A few Tipsfor Effective Searching 18

The Ten Commandments of InternetSearching 20

RESEARCH ABSTRACT 21

DIRECTORY OF R & TINSTITUTIONS 24

MESSAGE FROM THE DIRECTOR 3

Pigeon peans is among important grain legume cropas a source of protein and income. In the abovephoto (left) a scientist demonstrates how to use ahand operated machine which was designed forprocessing pegion peans. Right photo shows one ofthe improved varieties of pigeon peas.

Photo by the Courtesy of Mr. Salvatory Kundi,Principal Agricultural Research Officer,Agricultural Research Institute Ilonga, Tanzania

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

ISSN 0856-3128

Message from the Director of Researchand Training

As 2004 came to a close, it is prudent tomake a recap of important issues thattranspired during the year which in one wayor another have had impact on our researchactivities. Admittedly, the year was the mostdifficult financially because the TanzaniaAgricultural Research Project (TARP II)which has been fundingresearch over the last sixyears came to an end. Thishappened at the time whenthe Government was notfully prepared to absorb thefinancial gap that wascaused by TARP IIculmination. As a result theDepartment decided not toinitiate new researchactivities but use the smallfunds available to maintainon going research projects.

However, there weremany research projectswhose funding was throughcollaborative arrangementwhich were not affected. Such projectsincluded those under ASARECA networksand TARP II SUA.

It is commendable that despitefinancial difficulties the volume of activitiesthat were undertaken was not affectedbecause many research projects write upswere prepared by scientists which enabledthem solicit funds from other sources. Thisprovided scientists with opportunity tointeract with other scientists abroad whichcreated avenues for sharing experiences toa larger extent to improve knowledge poolin the department.

Despite these efforts, particularly thespirit that has developed amongst scientists,to find alternative sources of funds, to someextent the funds cannot be used to addressproblems that are unique to our country.This shows the importance to have fundsfrom our budget that can be used to addressnational priorities. That is why; thegovernment has seen this dilemma andreached a decision of increasing the budgetallocation to research in the coming years.

It is also true that, the governmentbudget alone can not be enough to financebig research investments such asinfrastructures like those that wereimplemented under TARP II. In recognitionof TARP II achievements, follow upactivities under Agricultural SectorDevelopment Programme (ASDP) isplanned to carry out research in a wider

scope.Let me once again point out the

importance of publishing research findings,by taking advantage the various existingnational, regional and internationalpublications such as journals, newslettersand conference proceedings. I would also

like to assure you that thenumber of publicationspublished will be amongcriteria for selecting the bestscientists who will berewarded.

In making sure that ourresearch output are widelydisseminated, in the comingyears some funds will be setaside to facilitate scientist’sparticipation in national,regional and internationalconferences for presentationof research papers. On thesame weight, I take thisopportunity to remind everyscientist to contribute articles

to the R & T Newsletter. In addition mydepartment will continue to facilitate andmeet the costs of printing all documentsauthored by our scientists. Any manuscriptsfor books, booklets should be forwardedto my office for possible scrutiny andconsideration for printing support.

In winding up my message, let meconvey my sincere appreciations to allscientists and technicians who will havereached retirement age in the coming year.It was a great hour and privilege workingwith you and for that matter thecontributions you have made through outyour service in the public office is a treasureto all of us behind and we shall be followingon your footsteps. I wish you every successin your life outside the public service.

And for those scientists who have justjoined the research system I take thisopportunity to welcome you all and will doour best to make your stay enjoyable. Iunderstand there could be some difficultiesas your begin your new career, but withcommitment and patience, I am certain wewill all move together in our endeavour torevolutionalise agriculture through research.

With that note, I wish all of youevery success in your research agendas.

Dr. Jeremiah.M. Haki, PhD Director, DRT

MESSAGEMESSAGEMESSAGEMESSAGEMESSAGE

Research & Training Newsletter Vol. xix Nos. 1-4, Dec. 2004 3

Dr. J.M. Haki

New Released Crop Varieties of Cassava,Beans, Maize and Wheat

New varieties of cassava, common beans, maize andwheat were in December 2004 officially released forproduction in farmer’s fields. This was as a result ofa thorough evaluation of their performance in on-station and on-farm experiments. Normally a varietyqualifies for release when it has shown outstandingperformance for at least three years of on-stationand one-year in on-farm trials.

During on-farm experimentation, in addition toyield, disease and pest data, the variety must undergofarmers’ preference tests, which are considerednecessary for acceptability and adoption. It is alsomandatory to collect information on Distinctness,Uniformity and Stability (DUS), a test that isperformed by the Tanzania Official Seed CertificationInstitute (TOSCI). Any variety to quality for releaseit must be proven beyond doubts that it is Distinct,Uniform and Stable.

The release of new crop varieties is theresponsibility of the National Variety Release andSeed Certification Committee, which meets annually.Below is a synopsis of the characteristics of the newlyreleased varieties.

CassavaTwo cassava varieties namely, Kiroba and Hombolo95 were released as a result of an intensive breedingscheme of the Sugarcane Research Institute, Kibahaand Agricultural Research Centre, Hombolo. Theaim of the breeding programme was to obtain cassavavarieties, which produce high yields with resistanceto pests and diseases, especially those caused byvirus. Other important aspect was to have varietieswhich have acceptable agronomic factors and thatcan be grown in wide range of environments. Variety KirobaMajor distinguishingcharacteristics ofvariety Kiroba are:

• tolerance tocassava mosaicd i s e a s e(CMD),cassavabrown streakdisease (CBSD)and cassavagreen mite(CGM)

• it has high drymatter content

• it has mediummaturity period of 8-10 months

• it has long ground storability of 8-12 months• Its root biodegradation starts 7 days after

harvestingThe variety is acceptable by consumers and farmers,producing yield as high as 27t/ha of fresh roots under

optimum condition. It is recommended in lowlandswith warm humid and sub-humid areas with an altituderange of 10-1000 m.a.s.l.

Variety Hombolo 95The variety’s major distinguishing characteristics are:

• tolerance to cassava mosaic disease (CMD),cassava brown streak diseases (CBSD) andcassava green mites (CGM)

• moderately drought resistance• long in ground storability of 12-15 months• high ability of leaf retention• High dry matter content (29%)• matures at 10-12 months• Root biodegradation of 4 days after harvesting.

The variety is highly acceptable to consumers withyield potential of 18t/ha of fresh roots. The variety isrecommended in highlands warm semi arid areas ofTanzania with altitudes above 1000 m.a.s.l.

Phaseolus bean varietiesPhaseolus beanvarieties; Uyole04 and BILFA 16were developed atUyole AgriculturalResearch Institute.The varieties arethe result of effortsof the beani m p r o v e m e n tprogram that hasfor many yearsemphasized ond e v e l o p i n gvarieties with highyields anda g r o n o m i ccharacteristicsthat are acceptableto farmers andconsumers. The two varieties were released due toacceptable seeds type, palatability qualities andtolerance to some major bean diseases.

The Uyole 04 is a semi climber with mediumto large cream coloured seeds. It is tolerant to majordiseases beans such as rust and anthracnose. Theline cooks very fast and it is very palatable.

The recommended sowing dates would dependon the start and cessation of rains. For example inareas where rains end in April/May the recommendedplanting time would be early to mid March. In dryareas where irrigation is possible the recommendedplanting date is between April and July.

The recommended seed rate is 70-80kg/ha toattain a plant population of 200,000 plants/ha. The

RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTS

4 Research & Training Newsletter Vol. xix Nos. 1-4, Dec. 2004

variety is expected to attain maturity at105 days.Uyole 04 has the potential to produce yield of

2.2 to 3.0 t/ha and between 1.5 to 1.8 t/ha in farmers’fields. It is recommended in the Southern Highlandszone (SHZ) with altitude range of 800-2000 m.a.s.l.

The variety BILFA has a red mottle colour,medium size plum seed that is tolerant to majordiseases. green slightly small and abundant leaves;erect stem with 4-5 branches. Flowers are pink withwhite to cream pods at maturity. Seedlings are greenwhereas seeds have red kidney of medium size of31-32g/100 seeds.

The recommended sowing dates are similar toUyole 03. The variety has seed rate of 70-80 kg/ha,which is lower than Uyole 03 for the same plantpopulation of 200,000 plants/ha. Urafiki matures at80-84 days that is almost comparable to Uyole 03.

This variety is recommended in the SouthernHighlands zone in areas with altitude range of 1000-19000 m.a.s.l. The potential yield of the varietyranges from 2.0 to 2.5 t/ha and between 1.2 – 1.5 t/ha under farmers management.

MaizeV a r i e t yU H 6 3 0 3 :was releasedas a result ofthe SouthernHighlandsM a i z eImprovementProgramme( S H M I P )efforts toe n s u r econt inuedsupply ofgeneticallys u p e r i o rm a i z evarieties inorder to takeadvantage oft h efavourableagro-climaticconditions of the SH, for the benefit of maize growersin the zone.The maize variety UH6303 was the second in a series

of maize hybrids to be released to farmers in theSouthern Highlands in areas where GLS is now anendemic problem.On-station evaluation of UH6303 in several locationsof SHZ vividly showed its superiority over a numberof commercial maize hybrids currently on the market.The points of merit of the hybrid include the following:

• High grain yield potential and stability acrossvarying environmental conditions

• High level of tolerance to Grey Leaf Spotdisease.

• Good level of tolerance to Turcicum leafblight.

• Semi-flint grain texture and therefore, goodpounding ability.

• High consumer acceptability as demonstratedfrom farmer assessment during on-farmdemonstrations.

The variety’s distinguishing characteristics includewhite grain colour with semi-flint texture, a white cob,light pink of the silk, white tassels. The yield potentialof UH6303 is 9-10 t/ha at recommended plantpopulation of 45,000 plants/ha.

Wheat Variety SIFA was developed by the WheatImprovement programme of ARI- Uyole. The varietywas accepted for release after demonstrating manysuperior qualities such as high yields and tolerance to

diseases.The variety

has a potentialof producinggrain yieldsranging from4.5-5 tons/Haand takesapproximately100 days tor e a c hmaturity. As

far as diseases are concerned, the variety is tolerantto stripe and stem rust and Septoria blotch. The seedsare distinctively white and large, with good backingquality.

The variety is recommended to be grown inthe Southern Highlands and Northern Zone withinaltitude of 1700-2300 m.a.s.l

UH 6303 VARIETY SIFA

RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTSRESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTS


Efficacy of botanical insecticides onSitophillus spp on Maize in the Southern

Highlands of Tanzania1

Mkoga, Z.J.; Shetto, R.M.; Mkomwa, S.; Mwakimbwala, R.;Kabungo, D.A. and Ndegeulaya, D.

AbstractLocally prepared powders from leaves of Neem (Azadirachta indica), Artemisia afra, Targetesminuta, Vernonia amygdalina, and pods of Pilliostigma thoningii, tubers of Neurataneniamitis and roots of Zanha africana were tested against free and natural infestation of storageinsects of maize grain. The efficacy of the plant materials was compared to Actellic SuperDust, pyrethrum gist, pyrethrum marc and no insecticide treatments. The test materials wereadmixed with maize grains at a rate of 900g per 100kg of maize. The laboratory and on-farmexperiments showed that all the materials had high potency against Sitophillus spp. Thepotency against Sitophillus spp infestation varied between 86.3 and 97.7 per cent. On-farmexperiments showed inconsistent results whereby only Zanha africana maintained the efficacyagainst the common storage pests up to six months in storage. Other materials controlledinsects for up to three months of storage after which they deteriorated beyond threshold limits.The experiments have indicated the potential of the materials as natural protectants againststorage pests. However, further research on active ingredients,suitable formulation,appropriateextraction and procedures is needed to be able to make conclusions.

IntroductionSurveys conducted in the Southern Highlands ofTanzania indicate that between 42-80% of farmersuse industrial insecticides for grain storage(Ashimogo1995; Nyangali et al., 1986; Mkoga andShetto, 1995). However, many farmers do not usethe insecticides at the recommended doses andformulation. Recent studies have revealed a declininguse of the industrial insecticides in grain storageamongst farmers in the Southern Highlands. Thiscould be attributed to among other things, the poordistribution systems, high prices and increasingavailability of substandard storage insecticides in themarket. Consequently some farmers have resortedto the use of natural plant materials in protecting theircrops.

Plant materials, such as neem and pyrethrumextracts have been tested in other countries and foundto be effective in protecting crops against some pests(Stoll.1996; Grainge and Ahmed, 1988; Van Huis,1991; Raman et al., 1987). In developed countries,research is based on transferring the valuable plantmaterials in laboratories for perfection and forindustrial processing (Makokha, 1994).

Current efforts in Tanzania aim at exploringnatural plant materials establishing safe methods andeffective rates of application. Fourteen plant specieswith insecticidal properties have been identified as aresult of a series of surveys in the Southern Highlandof Tanzania (Mkoga et al., 1999). Laboratory andon-farm experiments were conducted in SouthernHighlands to assess the efficacy of the plant materialsbased on farmers’ formulations and practices. Thispaper presents results of this work and givesrecommendations for further research.

Materials and MethodsScreening experimentIn the screening experiment, storage pests Sitophillusspp were used as test insects. Twenty insects wereintroduced in each set of treatment in Petri disheswith a mixture of 5g of plant materials and maizegrain. The experiment was then set up in thelaboratory at room temperature of about 260C inRandomized Complete Block Design with threereplicates. Counts of dead and live Sitophillus spp.insects were recorded after 36 hours.On-Station storage experimentFresh mature leaves or flowers were harvested, driedunder shade and ground into fine powder. Tubers androots were chopped, dried and ground. Pyrethrummarc was applied in the form in which it was collected.In each treatment, 5kg of maize admixed with plantmaterials were put in a small gunny bag. The plantmaterials were applied at a rate of 900g per 100kg ofgrain maize whereas Actellic super dust was appliedat 100g per 100kg of grain maize. The trial was setand exposed to natural infestation in the laboratoryand assessment done at 6, 8, 9 and 11 months. Ateach assessment, about 150-200 grains of maize weresampled and analysed for damage at the same timerecording the number of live Sitophillus.On- farm ExperimentA total of eleven on-farm experiments wereconducted to assess the efficacy of some selectedinsecticidal plant materials in 22 villages in the SouthernHighlands of Tanzania. The villages were sampledfrom Iringa, Mufindi, Njombe, Songea, Sumbawangaand Chunya districts. The type of treatments in eachvillage was determined by the use and availability of

1 Uyole Agricultural Research Institute, P.O. Box 400 Mbeya, Tanzania

RESEARCH ARTICLESRESEARCH ARTICLESRESEARCH ARTICLESRESEARCH ARTICLESRESEARCH ARTICLES


plant materials in the locality. Fifteen locally preparedbotanical insecticides were tested. N. mitis was themain plant material tested in which ten out of fifteenmaterials were made from tubers of N. mitis. Thetubers were dug chopped, smashed, dried and thenground into fine powder.

The fresh leaves of neem and Targetes minutawere sun dried and ground to fine powder. In case of“Msegese” (Pilliostigunia thorningii) fresh podswere smashed, dried and ground to fine powder. RootBark Powder of ‘Livangavanga’ (Zanha africana)was also used as one of the test materials. Theefficacy of the plant materials was compared toActellic super dust and insecticide free treatments.A total of 134 farmers were involved in on farmexperiments. The treatments were put in 3kg packetsof gunny bags at a convenient place in the farmer’sfield under natural infestation. Assessments weremade every 3 months of the storage period.

Data AnalysisMeans of the efficacy of materials in differentlocations were determined. The proportion ofdamaged grains and counts of dead and live insects

were subjected to Arcsine and Square RootTransformation to normalize the variances. Datawere subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA)and mean separation was also done using Duncarismultiple range test.

Results and DiscussionThe laboratory screening indicates that all the plantmaterials killed the storage pest, Sitophillus spp. Thematerials that performed well were neem (97.7%),N. mitis (Ng’andangolo), (92.3%), (Nyongwe)(90.7%), V. amygdalina (‘Isogoyo) (80.7%) andpyrethrum marc (86.3%). However,“Likumbanguluwe” whose taxonomic identity is notyet known had the poorest performance (39.7%)

Fig. 1 Percentage of dead weevils in the screeening laboratory experiment

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Actellic super dust Neem N.mitis Pyrethrum gist Pyrethrum marc V. amygdalina Likumbanguluve No insecticideTreatments

Dea

d W

eevi

ls (%

)

Most plant materials were less effective in controllingSitophillus spp in the on-farm experiments. The plantmaterials controlled grain damage and insectinfestation only up to three months in storage.However, grain damage and insect infestation waslow even in the insecticide free treatment.

Treatment consisting of Zanha africanapowder maintained its effectiveness and controlledgrain damage of Sitophilus spp up to sixth month instorage. There was generally no significant difference(P<0.05) in grain damage and live infestation of plantmaterials tested on-farm.

There were differences in effectiveness ofbotanical insecticides in controlling maize weevilsbetween on-farm and on-station experiments. Resultsof most materials were promising in the on-stationcompared to on-farm trials. This may be due to bettercontrolled conditions available on-station as opposedto the on-farm set-up.

For example materials used in on-stationexperiments were well ground and sieved. Whereasmaterials used in on-farm experiments were preparedby farmers using local facilities and may not havebeen finely ground. On the other hand the efficacy

of N. mitis extracts varied widely in the on-farmexperiments. Different strains of plant species, timeand place of harvest may have influenced the variationin the efficacy of the materials. This is because theconcentration of active ingredients in most botanicalmaterials differs with climate, time and stage ofgrowth (Verd Court and Citrump, 1969). The otherreasons may include improper preparations and overdue shelf life.Neem leaves powder performed poorly probablybecause they contain less Azadirachtins than neemseeds (Tierto Niber et al. 1992). Cobbinah and Appiah– Kwarteng (1989), reported that neem leaf is a poorprotectant of maize against maize weevils ( S.zeamais).Similar results were reported in the controlof Plutella xylostella in cabbage (Przybyszewski,



1993) and other vegetable.Powders made from rootbarks of Z. africana was highly efficacious.However, use of this material is limited becauseextraction of roots entails killing of the plants, whichtake many years to establish. In that case severalplants may need to be cut down to produce enoughpowder to protect a few bags of grain.

Conclusions and RecommendationsThis study has confirmed the potential of botanicalinsecticides in the control of storage pests. Howeverat this point there is no concrete conclusion that canbe given because there is still a lot to be done to answerthe pertinent questions on the materials. This workhas only provided indicative results on theeffectiveness of the materials, identified potentialmaterials and issues for further research. Furtherinvestigation is required to get convincing results onthe use of P.thorningii in grain storage. Furtherexperiments on the use of neem in grain storage needto emphasize on neem seed extracts as they haveproved to be relatively more effective. Among thequestions needing further investigation include: Atwhat stage of growth is most appropriate to harvestthe active part of plant? What are the most activemodes, rates and application methods? What couldbe the safest preparation and application procedures?Above all studies are required on the quantities andqualities of active ingredients including toxicology,health hazards, safety to human beings andenvironmental impacts.

AcknowledgementsWe are indebted to the International DevelopmentResearch Centre IDRC, Nairobi office, InternationalFund for Agricultural Development-SouthernHighlands Extension Research and Financial ServicesProject (IFAD – SHERFSP) and TanzaniaAgricultural Research Project Phase II (TARP II)for their financial support. Gratitude are also due toD. Ndegeulaya, W. Tegambwage, L. Mwabenga fortheir role in data collection. Last but not least, wewould like to extend our appreciations to the farmersand every one who in one way or another contributedto the success of the study.

References

Ashimogo G. 1995. Peasant grain storage andmarketing in Tanzania: A case study of Maizein Sumbawanga District. Ph.D. Thesis, BerhinUniversity, German. pp. 369.

Cobbinah J.R. and Appiah-Kwarteng J. 1989.Effects of some neem products on storedmaize weevil, Stophilus zeamais (Motsch).Insect Science Applications 10: 89 - 92.

Grainge M. and Ahmed S. 1988. Hand book ofplants with pest-control properties. John Wiley& Sons, New York, N.Y., 1 – 470

Makokha F. 1994. West’s “Bio-Pirates” arecosting Africa millions in lost species revenue.In: The East African, Regional News,December 5 – 11, 1994, pp. 6.

Mkoga Z. J. and Shetto R. M. 1995. Postharvest grain systems project (Tanzania).Centre File: 3-p-88-0305. Final report submittedto IDRC, Nairobi, pp. 41.

Mkoga Z. J., Shetto R. M., Kabungo D.A. andNdegeulaya D. 1999. An inventory ofinsecticidal plants for field crops and grainstorage protection in the Southern Highlands ofTanzania.

Nyangali E. E., Wandema F. S. and NgonyaniH. K. 1986. Evaluation of food storage athousehold level in Rukwa Region. TanzaniaFood and Nutrition Centre (TFNC) Report No.1035. Dar es salaam.

Przybyszewski, J. 1993. The use of neem seedand leaf extracts to control lepidoptera pests ofcabbage in Kaedi Mauritania, West Africa.Tropical Science 33: 217 – 225.

Raman K. V., Booth R. H. and Palacios M.1987. Control of potato tuber mothPhthorimaea operculella (Zeller) inrosticpotatostores. Trop. Sci. 27: 275-194.

Stoll G. 1996. Natural crop protection in thetropics. Margraf Verlug, Weikersheim,Germany. pp.188.

Tierto Niber B., Helenivs J. and Varis A.L.1992. Toxicity of plant extracts to threestorage beetles (Coleoptera). Journal ofApplied Entomology, 113: 202 - 208.

Van Huis A. 1991. Biological methods of bruchidcontrol in the tropics: A review. Insect ScienceApplic. Vol 12.No. 1/2/3: p.87 – 102.

Verd Court B. and Citrump E. 1969. Commonpoisonous plants of East Africa. Collins. St.James Place. London.



Effects of Storage Period on SeedViability and Germination Capacity of

Rice Cultivars in TanzaniaZ.L. Kanyeka

1

AbstractThe aim of the study was to investigate the effects of storage period on the seed viability andgermination capacity of landraces and improved rice cultivars. Four landrace namely “Kihogo”,“Afaa Kikanganga”, “Shingo ya Mwali” and “India Rangi”; four improved cultivars namelyLine 88, TXD 85, Jaribu 220 and Supa were used in the study. The viability and germinationcapacity of the rice cultivars was monitored at an interval of 1-2 months, for the storage periodof 3 - 12 months after harvesting (3-12MAH). Significant differences (0<0.001) among cultivarswere revealed for germination capacity over the storage periods. Combined Analysis of varianceof four storage periods (3, 6, 7 and 8MAH) showed statistical differences (P<0.05) amongcultivars, storage periods and their interactions (P<0.001). The mean germination capacity of6, 7 and 8MAH storage periods were statistically higher than that of 3MAH. The trends ofgermination capacity of improved cultivars over storage periods were more diverse than thelandraces. Cultivar Supa had maximum and constant maximum germination capacity whereasJaribu 220-1-3-3-1 had the poorest germination capacity, loosing its viability within 5 months instorage. The landraces maintained their maximum germination capacity even under longerstorage period (5-11month) than the improved cultivars (5-9months).

IntroductionCultivating an estimated 0.5 million ha of rice area,Tanzania is the major producer and consumer of ricein the continental Eastern, Central and SouthernAfrican (ECSA) region (FAO, 2001). Smallholderfarmers cultivate over 90% of the rice area, largelyin rain fed lowland (74%) and upland (20%)ecosystems . After harvesting, the rice crop isnormally stored under normal storage conditions forat least 6-8 months.

The duration of seed viability of domestic cropsis a function of genotypes, dormancy mechanisms andstorage conditions. The conditions under which theseeds are stored always influence their viability andgermination capacity (Campbell et al 1997, Gardneret al., 1985). In case of grain legumes, seed viabilityis lost rapidly when stored in humid air temperaturesof 35oC and above (Salisbury and Ross 1992).

Rice seed induces dormancy in the process ofseed formation which takes some time before it isready for germination. After maturity the dormancyperiod differs greatly according to cultivars andstrains. These differences in the speed of seedgermination are hereditary and the factors responsiblefor that vary with aging of the seeds (Takahashi, 1997).For the newly harvested rice crop, the difference ingermination is attributed mainly to the embryo andthe seed coat (hull) (Sheshu and Sorrells, 1986).However, in storage, the difference in germination isonly caused by the seed coat (hull) factors (Takahashi1962; Tomar, 1984; Das 1985).

This study is part of the on-going research onthe diversity and genetic variability of rice germplasm

available in Tanzania. It was undertaken to provide aclear understanding of the effects of storage periodson viability and germination capacity of the ricecultivars.Materials and MethodsGermination capacity and viability of eight ricecultivars comprising of two groups were monitoredfor the period of twelve months in storage startingwith three months after harvesting (3MAH). The firstgroup comprised of four landraces; “Kihogo Red”,“Shingo ya mwali”, “Afaa kikanganga” and “IndiaRangi”. The second group consisted of four improvedcultivars, which are Line 88, TXD 85 Jaribu 220 andSupa.

The experiment was conducted in thelaboratory of the Department of Botany of theUniversity of Dar es Salaam from September 2000to October 2001. In the laboratory, the cultivars seedlots were stored at the normal storage conditions withtemperatures ranging from 24-280C. Thegermination capacity of the cultivars was monitoredat 1 - 2 months-intervals for 12 months.

The cultivars were seeded in petri dishes linedwith mesh cloth. For each cultivar, twenty-five seedsarranged in five lines were sown in each petri dish.The experiment was conducted in a CompletelyRandomized Block Design (RCBD) with threereplicates. Seeds were watered twice a day withdistilled water until the seventh day after germination.At the 4th and 7th day after seeding, the numbers ofgerminated and un-germinated seeds were recordedin each petri dish and the data was used to determinethe germination percentage of the cultivars: using a

1 Department of Botany, University of Dar Es Salaam P.O. Box 35060, Dar Es Salaam Tanzania. E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]



caliper, length of radicles and plumules of fiverandomly selected germinated seeds in each Petri dishwas also measured. These were recorded at 4MAHand 7MAH storage periods.

Analysis of Variance of germination capacity(percentage) of the cultivars for the data recorded at7 days after seeding was separately carried out foreach storage period. A Combined Analysis ofVariance of germination capacity for four storageperiods (3, 5, 7 and 8 MAH) was also done.

Means of germination capacity (percentage),length of radicles and plumules were compared usingDuncan Multiple Range Test (Gomez and Gomez1987).ResultsThe effect of storage periods on germination capacitywas highly significant (P<0.001) among the ricecultivars. Results for the combined analysis ofvariance of four storage periods (i.e. 3, 6, 7 and 8MAH) revealed significant differences (p<0.05)among cultivars and highly significant statisticaldifferences (p<0.001) among the storage periods andtheir interactions. These results indicate thatgermination capacity of both the landraces andimproved rice cultivars were influenced by ricegenotypes and storage periods. The dependence ofgermination capacity of cultivars on storage periodsis also reflected in the mean germination percent ofthe cultivars in the four storage periods (3, 6, 7 and 8MAH). The mean germination capacity of thecultivars showed no significant differences among thelong storage periods of 6, 7 and 8 months against theshort storage period of 3 months after harvesting.

Trends of germination capacity of the ricecultivars across storage periodsFigures 1a, 1b, 2a and 2b show the germination trendsof the two groups of rice cultivars as compared withthe storage periods. Irrespective of whether thegermination data was recorded at 4 or 7 days afterseeding the two groups of rice cultivars had differentpatterns of germination capacity across storageperiods.Improved rice cultivarsGermination capacity of all the improved cultivarsexcept Jaribu 220 increased with increasing storageperiods. At 7 days after sowing (7DAS), thegermination capacity of the cultivar Supa had thelowest rate. The germination capacity of the cultivarincreased from 80 per cent at 3MAH to a maximumof 98 per cent at the 11th month of storage. In thiscase cultivar Supa had a constant germination capacityacross the storage period which is advantageous torice farmers who for various reasons delay sowingof the crop.

Of the three progenies derived from crossesinvolving variety Supa as one of the parents, Line 88had the highest rate of germination, increasing from36 to 100 per cent in six months (Fig.2a). For bothgermination data recorded at 4 and 7DAS, thegermination capacity of Jaribu 220 decreaseddrastically at three months (3MAH) in storage andcompletely lost its viability at six months of storage

period (Fig. 2a & b). This drastic loss of germinationcapacity may possibly be due to high moisture contentat harvesting and poor storage condition of the seeds.

Germination data recorded at 7DAS (Fig. 2b)revealed that improved cultivars except Jaribu 220attained their maximum germination capacity between5-9 months of storage. This period coincides with rice-planting period that starts in December and ends inFebruary.LandracesLandraces had similar trends of germination capacityover the storage periods for data recorded at 4 and7DAS (Fig. 1a & b). Germination data recorded at4DAS, germination capacities of all landraces wereincreasing from 3MAH to 11MAH. (Fig1b).

The trend changed for germination datarecorded at 7 DAS (Fig 1a). At 3 months of storage(i.e. 3MAH), landraces had statistically differentgermination capacity whereby “India Rangi” and“Afaa Kikanganga” recorded the highest and lowestcapacities respectively. From the 5th to 11th monthsin storage, the germination capacity of all landracesleveled and subsequently decreased at varyingdegrees. “Shingo ya Mwali” and “Afaa Kikanganga”recorded the lowest germination capacities at12MAH (Fig1a).DiscussionComparing the two groups of cultivars, the improvedcultivars showed more variable germination capacitythan the landraces, which can possibly be attributedto the selection advantage and adaptation in thecountry’s rice ecosystems. Additionally, the landracesretained their maximum germination capacity for alonger storage period (i.e. 5-11 months) compared tothe improved cultivars (5-9 months).

Such characteristics have allowed farmers tosow the landraces late in the season without affectinggermination and crop establishment of direct-seededrice in rain fed lowland ecosystems. In the rain fedlowland rice ecosystems, farmers usually direct seed.The above characteristic of the landraces has enabledlate sowing without affecting germination or cropestablishment.

Optimum seed germination and seedlingestablishment of the rice crop also depend on seedquality and moisture content of seeds in storage. Theperiod of storing rice seeds of 6-7 months seems tocoincide with the maximum germination capacity ofmost landraces and some improved cultivars grownby farmers.ConclusionGenerally, depending on the seed quality at harvestingand seed moisture content at storage, farmers sowtheir rice seeds 6-7 months of storage after harvesting.This storage period seems to coincide with themaximum germination capacity of all the landracesand the improved cultivars, except Jaribu 220.

There is also a need to confirm the resultsobtained for an elite line Jaribu 220 in this study. It isalso appropriate to monitor the germination capacityof these groups of rice cultivars beginning soon afterharvesting so as to determine the degree of dormancyof the cultivars.



References

Campbell, N.A., Mitchell L.G and J.B. Reece1997. Biology; Concepts andConnections. Addison and W. Longman Inc.,New York

Das R.C. 1985. Role of hull in inheritance of seeddormancy in rice. Exptl. Genetics 1(2): 119-125.

FAO 2001. Bulletin of Statistics: 8 ½ FAO Rome,Italy..

Gardner, F.P., Pearce, R.B. and R. Mitchell1985. Physiology of crop plants. 1st ed.Iowa State University Press, Ames.

Gomez, K.A and A.A Gomez 1984. Statisticalprocedures for agricultural research. 2nd

ed.John Wiley & Sons,Inc.USA.Sheshu, D.V. and M.E. Sorrells, 1986. Genetic

studies on seed dormancy in rice. IRRI (ed.),Rice Genetics, pp: 269-382.

Takahashi, T. 1997. Inheritance of seedgermination and dormancy. In Science of theRice Plant Genetics. Vol. 3. Eds. T. Matsuo etal 1997. FAO Policy Center, Tokyo

Takahashi, T. 1962. Physio-genetical studies ongermination of rice seeds with specialreference to its genetic factors. Bull. Inst. Res.Tohoku University 14|:1-879 (J)

Tomar, J.B. 1984. Genetics of grain dormancy inrice (Oryza sativa L.) Genetica Algeria.38(4):443-446.



Figure 1a. Germination capacity of landraces over storage periods (7DAS)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

3 5 7 8 9 11 12Storage periods (months of storage)

Ger

min

atio

n (%

)KihogoShingoAfaaIndia rangi

Figure 2b. Germination capacity of improved cultivars over storage periods (7DAS)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

3 5 7 8 9 11 12Storage period (months of stirage)

Ger

min

atio

n (%

)

SupaJaribuLine 88Line 85

Figure 2a. Germination capacity of improved cultivars over storage periods

(4DAS)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

3 5 7 9 11Storage period ( months of storage)

SupaLine 88Line 85Jaribu

Figure 1b. Germination capacity of landraces over storage periods (4 DAS)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

3 5 7 9 11

Storage periods (months of storage)

KihogoIndia rangiShingoAfaa

Performance of progenies of Braziliandwarf cashew clones in

Southern Tanzania1

P. A. L. Masawe, S. Mfune and Z. MbundaAbstractHalfsib progenies of three Brazilian dwarf cashew clones were tested for their yield potentialand nut quality at Nachingwea in the Southern part of Tanzania. Yield and vegetative datawere recorded for a period of four years. Results show that yield and nut quality of CP09progenies is superior among the Brazilian dwarf genotypes. Nine halfsib progenies whichwere identified to have promising results in the trial have been earmarked for further evaluation.

IntroductionIn recent years, cashew (Anacardium occidentaleLinn) has become an important export crop andsource of revenue for many Tanzanians.Unfortunately most cashew trees in farmers’ fieldsconstitute unselected seeds of common cashew types(Masawe 1990; Mneney and Mantell 2002).

Cashew trees are highly heterozygous in theirgenetic makeup leading to variation in yields amongcashew trees (Mneney and Mantell 2002; Ohler 1979;Foltan and Ludders 1995). Vegetative propagation incashew started in 1990 (Bashiru 1997), to replaceseed propagation which is the dominant method inmost cashew growing countries. Recently CashewResearch Programme at ARI Naliendele acquiredimproved cashew clones and hybrids developed fromthe local and exotic germplasm.

Dwarf cashew allows high-density cultivationresulting into higher yields per unit area. High densitycultivation reduces farm operations such as pruning,control of insect-pests and diseases which could bevery expensive (Barros et al., 1984; Almeida et al.,1993; Cardoso et al., 1998). Most importantly dwarfcashew clones have big nuts which fetch high pricesin the market.

The identification of high yielding dwarf cashewtrees is useful in improving the nut quality of theexisting local germplasm. This paper presents theperformance of the half-sib progenies of the Braziliandwarf and suggests promising ones for furtherevaluation in the advanced germplasm trials.Materials and MethodsSeeds of Brazilian dwarf clones namely CP06, CP09and CP1001 were raised in polythene bags for fiveweeks and the seedlings transplanted in March 1993.The design was 4x4 Latin square, 2 replicates, at aspacing of 7 m within rows and 7 m between rowswith eight trees per plot. A local selected cashewclone AZA2 (Plates 1a-c) was used as control in thisexperiment.

Data on yield and vegetative measurementswere recorded from 1998 to 2001. The data on heightand canopy diameter used in the analysis wererecorded in 2002 season. Nut picking and weighingfrom each tree was carried out daily from September

to December of the review period. Statistical dataanalysis was conducted using SAS software package.Results and DiscussionThere was significant yield difference (P=0.005)between replicates in the four years of observation.However, the difference between clones on nut andkernel weight, percentage kernel weight and heightwas not significant. Overall, the yield performanceof genotypes AZA2 (3.77 kg/tree) and CP09 (3.42kg/tree) was the most outstanding. The genotypeshad same performance on the nut and kernel weightand percentage kernel weight. These results revealthat genotype CP09 is more promising among theBrazilian dwarf genotypes.

The assessment of individual progenies withingenotypes based on nut weight above 7g, kernelweight above 2g and percentage kernel weightgreater than 25 per cent shows that five progenies ofgenotype CP09, three progenies of genotype CP1001and only one progeny of genotype CP06 performedthe best in the trial.ConclusionThe progenies from genotypes CP09, CP1001 andCP06 showed promising performance in yield, nutweight, and kernel weight. These materials will befurther evaluated in the advanced yield trial. Sinceyield was based on single tree performance, thematerials will be evaluated to determine genetic andenvironmental influence on yield potential.

1 Naliendele Agricultural Research Institute, P.O. Box 509 Mtwara, Tanzania;Email: [email protected]

Plate 1a. A young flush of genotypes AZA2



123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234

Plate 1b. An inflorescence of genotypes AZA2 Plate 1c. Mature apples of genotype AZA2

ReferencesAlmeida J. I. L., Araújo F. E. and Lopes J. G.

V. 1993. Evaluçao do cajeiro anão precoce naEstação Expermenta de Pacajus, Cearã(Evaluation of early dwarf cashew at PacajuExperimetal Station). Tanzania

Barros L. M., Araújo F. E., Almeida J. I. L.and Teixeira L. M. S. 1984. A culturaa docajeiro anão) dwarf cashew crop). EPACEDocument 2. Fortaleza –CE Brazil.

Bashiru R.A. 1997. Studies on vegetativepropagation methods of cashew in Tanzania.Proc. Int. Cashew and Coconut ConferenceTanzania. Biohybrids Int. Ltd Reading, UK,302-308.

Cardoso J. E., Cavalcanti J. J. V., CavalcanteM.de J. B., Aragão M.do and Felipe E.M.1998. Genetic resistance of dwarf cashew(Anacardium occidentale L) to anthracnose,black molds and angular leaf spot. CropProtection 18 (1999): 23-27.

Foltan H. and P. Ludders, 1995. Flowering, fruitset and genotype compatibility in Cashew.Angew. Bot 69, 215-220.

Masawe P. A. L. 1990. The need for an improvedcashew genetic base in Tanzania. PlantGenetic Resources and Biotechnology.Proceedings of the first workshop held atArusha, Tanzania, January 16-20, 1990.

Mneney E. E. and Mantell S. H. 2002. ClonalPropagation of cashew (Anacardiumoccidenatle L.) by tissue culture. Journal ofHorticulture & Biotechnology, (200) 77 (6):649-657.

Ohler J.G. 1979. Cashew: Communication No.71. Department of Agricultural Research ofthe Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam.

With the aim to improve and sustain the Research & Training Newsletter;agricultura based commercial and other companies/institutions are invited toadvertise their products and services in this newsletter which has circulation withinand outside Tanzania.

Advertising rates are as follows:

1 Page TAS 100,0001/2 Page TAS 50,0001/4 Page TAS 30,000Inside Cover TAS 150,000Outside Cover TAS 200,000

For further details contact the Director of Research & Training, Ministry ofAgriculture Food Security & Cooperatives, P.O. Box 2066 Dar es Salaam, Tanzania



Progress of Agricultural Sector SupportProgramme (ASSP)

BackgroundIn order for the Agricultural Sector DevelopmentStrategy/Agricultural Sector Development Program(ASDS/ASDP) to be operational, the AgriculturalSector Lead Ministries (ASLMs) appointed Multi-stakeholder Task Forces (MTL) in early 2003.These were Task Force 1 (TF-1): Investment andImplementation at District and Field Level; TaskForce 2 (TF-2): Policy, Regulatory and InstitutionalFramework; Task Force 3 (TF-3): AgriculturalResearch, Extension, Information, Training, TechnicalServices and Empowerment; and Task Force 4 (TF-4): Crosscutting and Cross-sectoral Issues tooversee the detailed formulation of priority ASDPintervention areas.

On its part, TF-3 launched Working Groupsand support studies on Research, Extension, FarmerEmpowerment and Organizations, and Informationand Communication. In November 2003, theTF-3 recommended that reforms and futureoperations be based on a unified strategyencompassing both agriculture and livestockservices, while ensuring integration of the variouselements of agricultural services, in particularresearch, extension, information and communication,as well as training

In March 2004, a joint Government-Development Partner Programme Formulation Teamfinalised a Concept Paper, which outlined a possibleAgricultural Services Support Programme (ASSP)to induce agricultural services reforms and financeagricultural services within the ASDP framework.Endorsed by the Government in April 2004, theConcept Paper provided the basis for preparing theProgramme Document, provided detaileddescription and cost estimates of the componentsand specific interventions.

The final draft Programme Document wasfinalized and endorsed by the Government in July2004 and circulated to all the potential developmentpartners willing to support ASSP, including those inthe Food and Agricultural Sector Working Group(FASWOG). Even though all FASWOG memberswere requested to pledge their support for the ASSP,only the World Bank/IDA and the International Fundfor Agricultural Development (IFAD) had confirmedtheir support by 31 December 2004.

Progress Made as of December 2004While the Programme Formulation Team continuedwith stakeholder consultations, particularly at the

national level, the Programme was further reviewedand appraised, leading to loan negotiations andapproval.

Review and Appraisal of the ASSPImmediately after the Programme Document wasendorsed in mid-July 2004, IFAD appraised theProgramme in August 2004. At the same time, theWorld Bank/IDA reviewed the Programme inAugust 2004 with the intention of linking it with theintended sector-wide support within the ASDPframework.

Appointment of ASSP Facilitation TeamOne of the key activities on the part of theGovernment was the appointment of the key staffto oversee the implementation of the ASSP. Asdetailed in the Programme Document, theAgricultural Services Facilitation Team wassupposed to be in place immediately after theendorsement of the Programme Document, in orderto expedite the follow-up activities, such as thepreparation of the Programme Implementation Plan(PIP), among other activities. This was alsounderscored in the IFAD Appraisal Report and theWorld Bank/IDA Review Report of August 2004.

Since the key staff of the Facilitation Teamhad to be drawn from the ASLMs consultationsacross the Ministries was necessary and these ledto some delays. It had been anticipated that theASSP Facilitation Team would be in place by theend of August 2004.

Except for the Programme Manager/TeamLeader, who was appointed by MAFS in earlyDecember 2004, the process to recruit/second otherkey staff from other ASLMs i.e. Ministry ofCooperatives and Marketing (MCM), Ministry ofWater and Livestock Development (MWLD) andRegional Administration and Local Government(PO-RALG) is on going.

Development Partner SupportAs indicated above, only IFAD and the World Bank/IDA have confirmed their support to ASSP so far.

While IFAD has confirmed its support to theProgramme, a World Bank Appraisal Mission isplanned for February/March 2005, after whichdetails will emerge.

R & D NEWSR & D NEWSR & D NEWSR & D NEWSR & D NEWS


Plant Breeders Right Legislation inTanzaniaDr. A. Rutabanzibwa

1

Introduction

The Bill entitled “The Protection of New PlantVarieties (Plant Breeders Rights)” Act of 2002 wasenacted by Parliament of United Republic ofTanzania on 7th November 2002.

Plant Breeders Rights is an area of IntellectualProperty Rights (IPR) in Agricultural Innovations.Generally, intellectual property rights represent aspecialized area of property rights, which may bedivided into: (i) Industrial property (Patents,trader marks and special rights (e.g. Plant breeders’rights); (ii) Library and artistic property (copyrights,rights of performers, etc.)

Plant variety protection is often excluded fromlists of intellectual property rights categories. It isnevertheless a form of industrial property right,normally categorized under a sui generis system (asystem of its own or of a special right category).

This paper highlights the new legislation andcreates awareness to stakeholders for theimplementation of the Act.

Intellectual Property Right legislationThe Intellectual property law has the objectives to(i) provide legal rights to creators and innovators asa reward for investing time and energy in researchand for their consequential achievements; (ii) protectrights of originators thereby providing incentives forcreativity and innovation and for economic, socialand cultural progress; and (iii) provide a legalisedmechanism for the transfer of technology. Categoriesof intellectual property rights relevant to plants areTrademarks, Patents and Sui Generis i.e. PlantBreeders Rights.

Trade Marks have a small role, thoughimportant, as far as plants are concerned. Theyinclude (i) identification of plant products such asnewly developed seeds and genotypes seeds of aparticular enterprise, (ii) convey to customers anindication of the quality of the products; (iii) plantvariety traders may want to use trademarks of aparticular enterprise because of that enterpriseknown attributes or qualities.

Patents are industrial innovations which unlikePBR, patents were protected in Tanzania sincecolonial times under the “Patents Ordinance” of1939 (Cap. 217). They are now protected underthe “Patents (Registration) Act” (No. 1 of 1987 that

was operational through the GN. No. 262 of 1995.In some countries such as the United States ofAmerica, patents legislation is used to protect PlantBreeders Rights.

However, in Tanzania, under section 7(2) ofthe Patents Act, “plant or animal varieties oressentially biological processes for the productionof plants or animals, other than microbiological andproducts of such process” are not part of “invention”,according to the definition in the Act.

Importance of PBR legislation to Tanzania Plant Breeders’ Rights Legislation is important toTanzania because it:

• Assists in providing a sustainablecompensation to our breeders’ long years ofinvolvement in developing and testing newvarieties;

• Assists in controlling unauthorizedmultiplications of Government seeds;

• Provides an incentive to local (public andprivate) and international breeders to involvethemselves fully in plant varieties breeding inthe country;

• Facilitates technology generation and transferthrough shared breeding and licensing;

• Brings about revolution in the seed industryand hence contribute to the attainment of thenational goal of economic development andfood security.

To the contrary, in a situation where a countryoperates without a PBR legislation the following couldhappen:

• Breeders and seed traders from outside thecountry would be unwilling to bring into thecountry their naturally pollinated varieties; and,

• Government varieties bred in the countrywould be lost;

• There would be fewer opportunities fortechnological development or training in theseed industry;

• Farmers would continue to use lower qualityseeds and hybrids with low productivity.

PBR legislation and international obligationsTanzania is a member of the World TradeOrganization (WTO) in which Clause 27(3)(b) ofone of the agreements, namely Trade RelatedIntellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS)

1 Principal State Attorney, Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security



provides that:

“Members shall provide for the protection ofplant varieties either by patents or by andeffective sui generis system or by any combinationthereof”.

Countries which have plant breeders’ rightslegislation, are members to the International Unionfor the Protection of New Varieties of Plants(UPOV). The UPOV recognizes the need for plantbreeders to seek protection not only in the countryin which the variety was developed but also in allplaces with similar agro-economic conditions. Infuture Tanzania might decide to join UPOV for thebenefits of protecting its varieties beyond thecountry’s borders.

There are also initiatives at the East AfricaCommunity level (EAC) to harmonize PBRlegislation and establish a common list or register,which will eventually lead to what will be known as“East African Plant Varieties”. Kenya had PBRlegislation since 1975, now Tanzania has passed oneand the Uganda one is in its final stages.

PBR legislation and international concernsThe Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)There were concerns that the PBR legal requirementof “uniformity” and “stability” will reduce the numberof varieties and therefore affect the biodiversity ofthe country and right to access the material. Article16.4 of the CBD requires members to havelegislations that will facilitate joint development andtransfer of technology for the benefits of public andprivate sectors of the developing countries. PBRlegislation of Tanzania is one of the ways to fulfil theCBD agreement.

There were arguments that in the PBRlegislation there has to be safety provisions or in aseparate one, guiding against dangers of affectingbiodiversity and balancing the benefits of PBRagainst the potential risks. It was later decided thatseparate initiatives will be pursued to comply withthe CBD and that the PBR legislation should dealwith the intellectual property rights of new plantvarieties. The introduction of the National PlantGenetic Resource Centre is one of such initiatives.

The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Re-source for Food and AgricultureThe treaty aims at enforcing the CBD by protectingplant genetic resource from extinction as well ascountries and persons who possess them from losingthe benefits of this resource through in attention andexploitation. It has provision for ownership of

“traditional varieties” in the form of farmers’ rights.It also proposes development of a programme ofcompensation for contributions by the localcommunities in the conservation of plant varieties,which have led to the current knowledge, plantformulations and ecosystem conservation.

Although the PBR legislation or any otherlegislation for that matter has to consider the rolethe local communities have played as custodians ofthe varieties, which are used by breeders to developnew varieties, the PBR Act does not make aprovision for farmers’ rights or local community’srights. Legislation on Plant Genetic Resource forFood and Agriculture, Conservation andExploitation, will be prepared to take care of theserights.

The government policy on PBRThe enactment of the PBR legislation is within thenational vision and its goal of achieving food securityand economic development of a normal Tanzanianto a middle-income earner by the year 2025. Theagricultural policy and its implementation strategyprovide that the “the Ministry of Agriculture willsafeguard the plant breeders’ property rights, throughenactment of an appropriate legislation for Tanzania”(ALP, 1997). This policy statement has now beingrealised.

The way forwardThe PBR legislation will be in full force once thePresident assents and on publication in theGovernment Gazette by the Minister of Agricultureand Food Security. Meanwhile there are importanttasks to be undertaken by both the government andsector stakeholders. The government responsibilitiesare:

• Prepare regulations for implementation of thelegislation;

• Design the modality on administrativeenforcement of legislation;

• Establish the office of the Registrar of PBR;• Appoint the Registrar and other assistant

officers• Train Stakeholders on the implementation of

the PBR• Prepare legislation interpretation manuals;

Some of these tasks such as preparation ofregulations, establishment of the office andappointment of the registrar have been done. Themain tasks of stakeholders are:-

• Forming associations from which they canhave appointed representative to the PlantBreeders’ Right Advisory committee;

• Getting well acquainted with the legislation andregulation especially on their rights and duties.



Annual Conference and General meetingof the Soil Science Society of East Africa

Mary Lutkamu1

The 22nd Annual Conference and General meetingof the Soil Science Society of East Africa (SSSEA)was held from 29th November to 3rd December 2004at New Safari Hotel in Arusha. The theme of theconference was “Land Resource Management toenhance livelihood of land users in East Africa”.The Sub- themes included:

• Land Resources management to enhance and sustain soil productivity and food security• Scaling up of technologies for enhancing and sustaining soil productivity and food Security.• Soil and water conservation in relation to land productivity and food security.

The meeting was opened by Mr. Fulgence Saria, theDistrict Commissioner for Arusha and closed by Ms.Flora Matemu the District Administrative Secretaryfor Arusha District. A total of 90 papers werepresented in the conference including 2 keynotepapers, and 5 farmers presentations. Eighty-fiveparticipants from Uganda, Kenya and Tanzaniaattended the conference and these were drawn fromresearch institutions, universities and international soilrelated organizations operating in the East AfricaRegion. On 1st December 2004 there was anexcursion in which the participants had a chance tovisit small farmers’ farming practices and some landuse related problems; notably the consequences ofpoor land management at Kisongo and lake Manyara.The participants observed severe consequences ofpoor land management in Arumeru and MonduliDistricts (including gullies, salinization, lakesedimentation), and informed that similar degradationof land resources is being experienced also in Kenyaand Uganda. At its 22nd Annual General Meeting, theSSSEA came up with the following resolutions.

• That there scientists should use a holistic/integrated approach to deal with suchproblems at the catchment level; whereby allthe key stakeholders i.e. farmers/localcommunity, researchers, extension staff andgovernment leaders will be involved.Sensitisation of political and government leadersis essential in the whole process.

• That, problems on land resources should besolved jointly by the land users, governmentand political leaders, with the SSSEA providing

the necessary technical backstopping.• That there are certain areas of land resource

management in which researchers haveproduced useful technologies (e.g. use ofMinjingu rock phosphate, Rhizobia) for fertilityimprovement and that they should bedisseminated to farmers.

• That policy makers should be sensitised byresearchers on the technologies so that theycan assist in the formulation of enablingpolicies for promoting their uptake and toprovide the necessary financial support.

• That there are areas of land resourcemanagement that still require further researche.g. the effectiveness of open vs tied ridgesfor soil and water conservation and the useof human manure (night soil) for fertilityimprovement.

• That, scientists should work more on suchtechnologies to come up with conclusiveresults.

• That land users in different segments of acatchment are not well linked with each otherand are not aware of the consequences oftheir activities on the land resources of therespective segments of the catchment e.g.the abstraction of water resources forirrigation by farmers upstream, poor landhusbandry in the upper catchment areas etc.

• That, farmers should be sensitised throughtheir local leaders on the relationship betweenthe upstream and downstream segments ofthe catchment.

• That still large areas of the East Africanregion have not yet been adequatelycharacterized to rate their potential fordifferent uses.

• That, governments should put more financialresources to map land resources atappropriate scales for planning purposes.

• That communication between scientists,extensionists, farmers, policy makers andother stakeholders in the issues of landresources management is inadequate.

• That communication among the variousstakeholders in land resource managementshould be advocated and strengthened.

1 Assitant Director Natural Research Management Reserach, Department of Research &Training, P.O. Box 2066 Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

WORKSHOPS/CONFERENCESWORKSHOPS/CONFERENCESWORKSHOPS/CONFERENCESWORKSHOPS/CONFERENCESWORKSHOPS/CONFERENCES


Connected to the Internet? A few Tips forEffective Searching

The Internet is a network of networks, linkingcomputers to computers sharing of the TCP/IPprotocols. Each runs a software to provide or “serve”information and/or to access and view information.The Internet is the transport vehicle for theinformation stored in files or documents on anothercomputer. It is slightly incorrect to say a “documentwas found on the Internet.” Rather it would be morecorrect to say it was found through or using theInternet. Actually, an information is found in (or on)one of the computers that is linked to the Internet.

The World Wide Web (WWW) and itsfunctioningThe WWW incorporates all of the Internet servicesabove and much more. You can retrieve documents,view images, animation, video and listen to sound files,speak and hear voice, and view programs that run onpractically any software in the world, provided yourcomputer has the hardware and software to do thesethings. When you log onto the Internet using Netscapeor Microsoft Internet Explorer or some otherbrowsers, you are viewing documents on the WorldWide Web.Internet searchingFinding Web documents (Web “pages” or “sites”)

Barnabas Kapangecan be easy or difficult. This is in part due to thesheer size of the WWW, currently estimated tocontain 3 billion documents. It is also because theWWW is not indexed in any standard vocabulary.Unlike the library catalogs that use standardizedsubject headings to find books in most libraries, inweb searching you are always guessing what wordswill be in the pages you want to find or guessing whatsubject terms were chosen by someone to organize aweb page or site covering some topic.When you do what is called “searching the web,”you are NOT searching it directly. It is not possibleto search the WWW directly. The Web is the totalityof the many web pages, which reside on computers(called “servers”) all over the world. Your computercannot access all of them directly at the same time. What you are able to do through your computer is toaccess one or more of many intermediate search toolsavailable at any time. You search a search tool’sdatabase or collection of sites — a relatively smallsubset of the entire World Wide Web.Recommended Search StrategyThe purpose of thinking about your topic before youstart searching is to determine what terms tosearch for and what features you need to searchsuccessfully. The table below can help guide you inthe search:

ICT NEWSICT NEWSICT NEWSICT NEWSICT NEWS


Recommended Search Engines: Table ofFeaturesFor most searches, Google is the best place to start.It has one of the largest, if not the largest, databaseof Web pages, including many other types of Webdocuments (e.g., PDFs, Word or Excel documents,PowerPoints). Google’s popularity ranking often

makes pages worth looking at rise near the top ofsearch results. However, Google alone is notsufficient. Less than half the searchable Web is fullyindexed in Google. Teoma, Vivisimo (a meta-searchengine that indirectly searches three huge searchengine databases), or AlltheWeb



Finding Databases on Your Subject (TheInvisible Web)If you discover a database devoted to your field ofinquiry, it can be like striking gold. Databases exist

on all sorts of topics and for many purposes (social,scholarly, scientific, research, legal, commercial,trivial, ...) Here are some ways to hunt. Keep yourapproach VERY broad and general

The Ten Commandments of Internet SearchingThere are right ways — and wrong ways — of usingthe Internet as a search resource. Newcomers oftenmake the mistake of thinking that “everything” can befound on the net. Wizened information professionalsoften mistakenly believe that the Net is nothing but anonline cyberslum offering nothing of merit. The TenCommandments of Internet Searching

1. Know your search engine. Remembering thatonly a portion of all the websites is indexed bythe best search engines leads right into #2.

2. Use multiple search engines (or metacrawlers)3. Don’t count on being anonymous. Don’t forget

about those cookies!4. Search for sources, not just information. Look

for people you can call to get more detailedinformation.

5. Consider the source of what you find. Justbecause it is in print, doesn’t mean it’s true.

Information can be typed incorrectly or copiedfrom another source that was wrong. Orperhaps it is written just to be misleading.

6. Be prepared to spend some money to get thereally good stuff.

7. Ask, “Is there any reason to believe what Iwant is out there?” BEFORE going on-line.

8. Don’t use the Internet to do a databaseservice’s work.

9. Know your outcome. Searching or surfing?Searching has an outcome in mind. Surfingimplies enjoying the ride letting yourself betaken along where links lead you. Each hasits purpose — understand the difference.

10.Buy a timer. If you don’t watch yourself, youwill spend hours looking for something thatcan’t be found or you will end up surfinginstead of searching.



Evaluation of the potential of green manure andplant extracts for the control of witchweed (Strigaasiatica L. Kuntze) in upland rice (Oryza sativaL.)in Kyela,Mbeya Tanzania. Kayeke J. M. (2004).PhD Thesis Sokoine, University of Agriculture,Morogoro,Tanzania

Witcthweed (Striga asiatica) is a seriousproblem in upland rice in Kyela Tanzania. The use ofinorganic nitrogen fertilizer urea assures control ofthe weed. Resource poor farmers cannot adopt thetechnology due to unavailability and higher prices ofinorganic fertilizers. Therefore, the use of greenmanure available in upland rice fields will be a plausiblealternative. Three experiments were conducted toevaluate the potential of green manure and plantextracts for the control of Striga asiatica (L.) Kuntzeon upland rice (Oryza sativa L).The first experiment was to evaluate decompositionof green manure The second experiment was to determine the effectof green manure and inorganic fertilizer on Strigaand rice yield and The third experiment to determine the influence ofgreen manure and plant extracts on the germinationof Striga.

Decomposition of roots and shoots ofCrotolaria ochroleuca G. (sunhemp), Mimosainvisa L. (Colla), and Cassia obtusfolia L.(Sicklepod) was determined. Results showed that bythe 2nd week shoots had lost 51 per cent of the biomasswhile by the 6th week roots had lost 50 per cent ofthe biomass.

Then inorganic fertilizer urea at 0 N, 25 kg Nha-1 and 50 kg N ha-1 was superimposed in greenmanure plots. Generally, it was found that Strigainfestation was reduced by 100% while the yield ofrice increased from 1238 kg ha-1 to 2846 kg ha-1.However, the residual effect of green manures didnot reduce Striga but increased rice yield.

High benefit per unit cost was realised whenC. ochroleuca was combined with 50 kg N ha-1.Green manure application method of ploughing under,mulch was also superimposed with inorganic fertiliserurea (0 N, 25 kg N ha-1 and 50 kg N ha-1). Resultsshowed that there was no significant differencebetween mulch and ploughing under on Striga exceptin rice grain yield. Mulch was found to be moreeconomical than ploughing under.

The potential of green manure to stimulateStriga germination, plant extracts to suppress Strigagermination and application methods was alsodetermined in the laboratory and field. Strigagermination was found to be in the order C.ochroleuca> C. obtusifolia > M. invisa (both fieldand laboratory). Plant extracts were collected fromC. ochlroleuca, M. invisa, C. obtusifolia, Vernoniaamygdalina Del. (bitter leaf), Neuritanenia mitis,Dolichos kilimandcharicus and Gnidia kraussianaMeisn. (yellow heads). It was found that Striga seedgermination was reduced while D. kilimandcharicusand G. kraussiana were found to be effective insuppressing Striga seeds germination. Seed hardeningwas selected as a good application method.Crotalaria ochroleuca and C. btusifolia wererecommended for Striga control and improvementof soil fertility in Kyela.

Integrating conventional and participatoryresearch: Experiences from trials with ricefarmers in South eastern Tanzania. Elly MinaniKafiriti (2004)PhD Thesis Katholieke UniversiteitLeuven

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of the mostimportant food crops in South eastern Tanzania.However, production is very low, below an annualaverage of 40 thousand tones from an estimatedcultivated area of about 35 thousand hectares. Thisis in spite of the fact that South eastern Tanzania isendowed with a number of coastal valleys most ofwhich seem under utilized. Lack of improvedpreferred high yielding varieties, poor water and soilmanagement practices in irrigated fields are some ofthe factors to which farmers often attribute lowproduction.

The main objective of this study is to investigatemeasures that can contribute to enhance sustainableand increased rice production in irrigated fields ofSouth Eastern Tanzania. Conventional and FarmerParticipatory Research approaches were integratedto take on board farmers’ perceptions and knowledge.

From 2000 to 2002, agronomic field trials wereconducted in irrigated farmers’ fields of Kitere andKinyope villages, South eastern Tanzania. In order toget background information for trials on agronomicaspects of rice cultivation, the potentials andconstraints of coastal valleys were studied bycombining PRAs with conventional land evaluationmethods. Surveys were done in eight villages spreadover two valleys with a perennial stream and twowith a seasonal stream. Whereas the PRAs enabledto get insights into the variability within the villages,the parametric approach for land evaluation enabledto compare the soil suitability across the valleys. Theresults indicate that Vertisols occur more frequentlyin valleys with a seasonal stream, while Fluvisolsand Gleysols occur more frequently in valleys with aperennial stream. However, in terms of soil suitabilitythere were no statistically significant differencesbetween the valleys. Shortage of capital and labourare major constraints given by farmers for expandingthe cultivation of rice in the valleys. If farmers couldmake bunds and apply supplementary irrigation, yieldswould be increased substantially.

A simulation study conducted to establish thebenefits of bunds in rain fed lowland rice indicatesgrain yield can be increased up to 40%. However,the effect of bunds on yield is not pronounced onsoils with high percolation rate.

The agronomic characteristics of thirteenimproved rice varieties were compared with farmers’own ones. The main aims were to provide farmerswith new improved rice varieties and to identify theselection criteria farmers consider important inirrigated rice cultivation. Variation of the agronomiccharacteristics between the varieties was analyzedwith principal component analysis. Farmers evaluatedthe varieties at maturity prior to harvest and at post-harvest stages. The differences in structuralcharacteristics and grain characteristics werestatistically significant, while this was not the casefor the differences in yield. Nevertheless, farmerspreferred and selected varieties with short to mediummaturity period, which produce many tillers and

RESEARCH ABSTRACTRESEARCH ABSTRACTRESEARCH ABSTRACTRESEARCH ABSTRACTRESEARCH ABSTRACT


mature uniformly; and with long translucent aromaticgrains for their own use and marketing. This highlightsthe importance of farmers’ participation in varietydevelopment. If the conventional procedure forselecting varieties would have been followed, it isunlikely that breeders would have retained thesevarieties.

In collaboration with farmers, researchers’designed - farmers’ managed fertilizer trials wereconducted in-order to determine optimum nitrogenfertilizer rate for optimal rice yields in irrigated fields.Nitrogen rates tested were 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 kgN ha-1 whereas Azolla was compared with thefertilizer levels in Kitere villages where it is commonlyused. In conjunction with this, farmers tested fourlevels of nitrogen (0, 30, 60 and 90 kg N ha-1) in theirown fields under actual farmers’ management. Thisenabled evaluation of nitrogen fertilizer under differentbut realistic farmers’ circumstances. The resultsindicate that 50 kg N ha’ is the farmers’ optimumfertilizer rate for optimal rice grain yields in bothvillages. The findings further indicate that AzoIlacould complement inorganic nitrogen fertilizers forincreased rice grain yield. Non-experimental variablessuch as water management, time of planting, plantpopulation and weed management can influence theperformance of the fertilizer when trials are conductedunder pure farmers’ management.

The results of this study indicate that FarmerParticipatory Research shortens the research processand enhances acceptability and adoption of the results.However, without addressing some of the importantlimitations such as absence of subsidies and poor inputdistribution network fertilizer adoption in South easternTanzania is very unlikely. The implication for futurerice research in South eastern Tanzania is that a shiftin emphasis should be given to incorporate farmers’selection criteria in the breeding programme next totraditional criteria. Other soil management practicesincluding organic fertilizers need to be studied to givefarmers a wide range of options.

Adapting to change in banana-based farmingsystems of northwest Tanzania: The potentialrole of herbaceous legumes. Baijukya, F.P.(2004). PhD Thesis Wageningen University. TheNetherlands.

This study describes the changes and exploresopportunities for integrating herbaceous legumes, toact as an engine for maintaining the farming systemand ameliorating the fertility of soils of annual cropfields. The study showed that the grasslands areahave decreased over 50 years by 40 per cent whereasthat of annual crop fields increased by 225 per cent.Encroachment on grasslands reduced the ability offarmers to restore soil fertility through keeping oflivestock, thus diminishing the supply of manure. Thishad a consequence on nutrient balances whereby the

home gardens receiving manure, had positivebalances of N, P and K whereas the home gardensreceiving no manure had negative nutrient balances.Nutrient balances of annual crops were negativeparticularly with maize, indicating that they arevulnerable to impoverishment.Field experiments showed that the biomass, Naccumulation and N2-fixation varied among thelegume species. The performance of legumes wasregulated by the soil N and the soil pH. The non-forage species Tephrosia candida, Crotalariagrahamiana and the forage species Mucunapruriens and Macrotyloma axillare performed betteramong the tested legumes, and were selected byfarmers on the basis of biomass yield, weedsuppression and tolerance to pest and diseases.Laboratory experiments showed that the rate of Nrelease from decomposing legume residues dependedon the quality [(polyphenols + lignin)-to-N ratio, lignin-to-N ratio and lignin content] of residues, wherebyresidues with low (polyphenols + lignin)-to-N ratio,lignin-to-N ratio or lignin contents decomposed faster.Maize yield doubled or tripled when legume residueswere applied though the yield response to legumeresidues was limited when compared with theapplication of the recommended rate of mineral Nfertilisers (50 kg N ha’). It was further observed that,in short term, application of large quantities of legumeresidue (above 2 Mg ha-1) does not result to asignificantly higher maize yield. In the degraded soils,the biomass yield and N accumulation of legumespecies increased by 100 per cent when establishedwith farmyard manure and had higher residual effect(80%) on the yield of the subsequent maize. Mulchingwith legume residues was the best option to applylegume residues as it suppressed weeds in the maizecrop and had higher labour productivity.Field experiments with farmers showed that growingof legumes as improved fallows increase maize yieldand maintaines a positive N balance. However,growing legumes for fodder was in conflict with maizeproduction and N balance of annual crop fields.Modelling the experiments with a multiple goal linerprogramming (MGLP) model showed that legumescan act as an engine to maintain the farming systemby providing fodder to the cattle, hence manure tothe home gardens and ameliorating the fertility of soilsof annual crop fields as improved fallows. Farmershave different preferences on legumes and thereforethe choice of legumes to be introduced in the farmingsystem should be based on farmer productionobjectives. The main policy implication of the findingsis that promotion of legumes is best approached bytaking the socio-economic systems into account.These include securing other farm inputs andmarketing of farm produce with reliable and attractivemarkets.Key words: LAND USE CHANGES; HEBACEOUS LEGUMES; ADOPTABILITY; N2FIXATION; RESIDUAL EFFECT; LEGUMEMANAGEMENT; EXPLORATION OF OP-TIONS, NUTRIENT DEPLETED SOILSI



Maize-sesame intercropping in South eastTanzania: Farmers’ practices and perceptions,and intercrop performance. Mkamilo, G. S. 2004.Ph.D Thesis. Wageningen University, TheNetherlands

Farmers’ motives for adopting maize-sesameintercropping systems were studied concurrently withexperiments to evaluate the performance of themaize-sesame intercropping systems and to exploreoptions for improvement. About 90 per cent of thefarmers intercropped maize and sesame to diversifytheir cash income. All farmers consider maize as moreimportant crop, because it provides the basic foodrequirements of the household. The risk of cropfailure associated with growing sesame in pure standis an important reason for sesame intercropping withmaize. The intercropping also puts less demand onlabour and fertile land, both of which are limited insupply. Furthermore, maize and sesame arecompatible crops, which additionally contribute to therestoration of soil fertility and suppression of weeds.

Simultaneous sowing of maize and sesamecaused reductions in maize grain yield, of on average27 per cent. Yield reduction decreased with delayedinter-seeding times. Conversely, delayed seeding ledto significant reductions in the yield of sesame causedby a direct effect of sowing time and an increasedcompetition from maize. Based on a long-termaverage maize, sesame price ratio of 1:3.5,simultaneous sowing turned out to be the option withthe highest gross financial returns. At the same time,the study demonstrated that there are associated riskswith simultaneous sowing such as sesame seedmortality due to water logging and severe reductionsin maize grain yield (up to 60%). Farmers generallyintroduce sesame about two weeks after maize, toreduce those risks. This study showed however thatthe recently developed improved sesame varieties arenot very well suited for late introduction, due to theirpoor competitiveness. As sesame is mainly grown inintercrop, future breeding efforts should not onlyconsider characteristics as yield, seed colour and seedoil content, but should also take into accountcharacteristics such as competitive ability and growthduration, that determine the suitability of sesame inintercropping systems.

Density experiments revealed that maize wasmore competitive than sesame, but more importantlythe experiments also demonstrated that maize andsesame are partially complementary in resourceacquisition. Niche differentiation forms the basis fora yield advantage in intercropping. This observationconfirms the notion of farmers that maize and sesameare good companion crops. At both the relatively high

fertile site and the poorly fertile site, P/N ratios ofshoot tissue of maize and sesame were high (between1/1.5 and 1/6.4), indicating that nitrogen was a majorlimiting factor in the study area. At the low soil fertilitysite (Mkumba), both maize and sesame in pure standresponded significantly to N and NP-fertilization. Atthis site, the application of nitrogen fertilizer resultedin 2.5 and 3.6 fold increases compared to pure standyield of maize and sesame, respectively. In intercrop,N fertilization increased the dominant position of maizein the intercrop. Consequently, only maize benefitedfrom N fertilization. In the case of sesame, theadvantage of additional N was counterbalanced bythe presence of a more competitive maize crop.Nitrogen recovery was highest in the intercrop.

The results raised questions on the generalfertilizer recommendations, which advice to supplyN and P in nearly equal amounts. Studies on spatialarrangement showed that both in pure stand andintercrop, sesame seed yield was independent ofsowing method (row or broadcast). In the intercrop,grain yield of maize was affected by the method ofsowing sesame. When broadcasted sesame causedreductions in maize grain yield ranging from 53 to 69per cent. The yield reductions were only 19 to 55per cent with row sowing. Two to three maize plantsper station were found to be optimal in pure stand aswell as in intercrop. The latter result indicates thatfarmers’ practice of growing 2-3 plants per station issuperior to the institutional recommendation ofgrowing one plant per station.

The results of this study clearly indicate thatrecommendations for intercropping should be basedon intercropping research and cannot simply beextrapolated from results obtained with pure standsof the respective component crops. Efforts forbreeding improved varieties should also considerappropriate crops for use in intercropping systems.Furthermore, a proper analysis of the experimentalresults requires a thorough understanding of farmers’objectives and production constraints.

At the same time, an inventory of farmers’objectives and production constraints withoutexploring the options for improvement seemineffective. For these reasons it was recommendedthat future research projects should put emphasis onparticipatory research involing teams of socialscientists, technical scientists and farmers in theprocess of co-innovation to improve the well being offarmers and rural households.

Key words: Intercropping, farm householdobjectives, marginal factor of returns, cost-benefitanalysis, inter-seeding time, Land Equivalent Ratio,maize, sesame, niche differentiation, arrangement.



DIRECTDIRECTDIRECTDIRECTDIRECTORORORORORY OF R & Y OF R & Y OF R & Y OF R & Y OF R & T INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONS


DRT Head Office

DirectorDepartment of Research and TrainingMinistry of Agriculture Food security andCooperativesP.O. Box 2066 Dar es Salaam, TANZANIATel: +255-22-2865313/2865322/2865319/18/

20Fax: +255-22- 2865312Telex: 41246 KILIMO TZE-mail: [email protected]@kilimo.go.tzWebsite: http://www.drd.mafs.go.tzhttp://www.agriculture.go.tzPhysical address: Nelson Mandela/Kilimo Road,KILIMO II Building, 1st and 2nd Floors

Lake Zone

Zonal Director (L)ARI UkiriguruP.O. Box 1433 MWANZATel:255-28-25502 15 Fax: 255-28-2550214E-mail: [email protected]

PrincipalMATI UkiriguruP.O Box 1434 MWANZAE-mail: [email protected]: 255-28 2550215 255-28 2502555Fax: 255-28 2550214 255-28 2550169

Officer In chargeMaruku ARDIP.O.Box 127BukobaTel: 0282220721Email: [email protected] Highlands Zone

Zonal Director (SH), ARI UyoleP.O. Box 400 MBEYATel: 255-25-2510062 Fax: 255-25-2510065E-mail: [email protected],[email protected]

PrincipalMATI UyoleP.O. Box 2292 MBEYATel: 025 2510015E-mail: [email protected]

Officer In chargeKifyulilo Research Sub-stationP.O.Box 93, MufindiMobile: 0784373270

PrincipalMATI IgurusiP.O.Box 336. MBEYAMobile: 0744766884 or 0745040816

Northern Zone

Zonal Director (N)ARI SelianiP.O. Box 6024ARUSHATel:255-27-2503883/2505211/2505212Fax: 255-27-25023971/2548557E-mail: [email protected]

PrincipalHorticulture Research Institute TengeruP.O. Box 1253,Arusha, TanzaniaTel.: + 255 027 2553094 / 2553067Fax + 255 027 2553067Email: [email protected]

PrincipalKATC, MOSHIP.O. Box 1241 MOSHITel: 027 2752293 027 2754247 Fax: 027 2752293E-mail: [email protected]

Southern Zone

Zonal Director (S)ARI NaliendeleP.O. Box 509 MTWARATel:255-23-2333836 Fax:255-23-2333 141E-mail: [email protected]

DIRECTDIRECTDIRECTDIRECTDIRECTORORORORORY OF R & Y OF R & Y OF R & Y OF R & Y OF R & T INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONST INSTITUTIONS


PrincipalMATI MtwaraP.O. Box 121 MTWARATel: 023 2333837Telegrams: kilichuomtwaraE-mail: [email protected]

Central Zone

Zonal DirectorMakutupora Viticulture Research InstituteP.O. Box 1676 MPWAPWAE-mail: [email protected]

Officer In ChargeARI HomboloBox:Mobile: 0754751375Email:

Eastern Zone

Zonal Director (E)ARI IlongaP.O. IlongaKILOSA, MOROGOROTel:255-23-2623201 Fax: 255-23-2623284E-mail: [email protected]

PrincipalMATI IlongaP.O.Box 66 KILOSATel: 255-23-2623064Email: [email protected]

PrincipalNational Sugar Institute(NSI)KidatuP.O. Box 97 KIDATUTel: 255-23- 2626050Fax: 255-23-2626440Email: [email protected]

Deputy Zonal Director (E)ARI MlinganoP.O. Box 5088 TANGATel: 255-27-2647647/2647680 Fax: 255-27-

2642577E-mail: [email protected]

PrincipalMATI MlinganoP.O. Box 5051 TANGATel: 027 2642884E-mail: [email protected]

Officer In ChargeARI MikocheniP.O.Box 6226Tel: 255 22 2700161/601Dar es Salaam

Officer In ChargeARI KATRINPrivate Bag, IfakaraTel: 255 23 2625078Fax: 255 23 2625361

Officer In ChargeARI DakawaP.O.BoxTel: 255 23 2628677Fax: 255 23 2628677Email: [email protected]

Officer In ChargeSugar Research InstituteP.O. Box 30031, KibahaTel: 255 23 2402038Email: [email protected]

Western ZoneZonal Director (W)Agricultural Research Institute TumbiP.O. Box 306 TABORATel:255-26-2604142E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]

PrincipalMATI TumbiP.O. Box 603 TABORAE-mail: [email protected]

Documents

Tanzania Agricultural Research · dwarf cashew clones in ... Plant Breeders Right Legislation in Tanzania 15 WORKSHOPS/CONFERENCES Annual Conference and General ... processing …