FARMERS' PERCEPTION OF THE STRIGA PROBLEM AND ITS CONTROL IN NORTHERN NIGERIA

Abstract

The parasitic angiosperms, Striga hermonthica and S. gesnerioides, obligate root parasites endemic in sub-Saharan Africa, constitute severe constraints to cereal and legume production in West and Central Africa. Over the years, a range of effective component technologies has been identified for Striga control in Africa. The potential of these technologies has been demonstrated under researcher-managed conditions. To promote farmer testing of the technologies, community workshops were conducted in 42 rural communities in Kaduna State, northern Nigeria. These revealed that agriculture was the main source of livelihood for most households. The three most important crops, maize, sorghum and pearl millet are attacked by S. hermonthica, regarded as the major constraint to crop production, often causing 70–100% crop loss. Farmers recognised two types of Striga damage (underground and aboveground), with greater damage being caused by underground Striga. Farmers attributed increasing incidence and severity of Striga damage to lack of capital, poor soil fertility, infestation of previously uninfested land by Striga seeds, and continuous cropping of host crops. The most widely used among the 15 existing Striga control techniques identified by the farmers were hoe weeding and hand pulling, application of inorganic fertilizer and manure, crop rotations, fallowing, and early planting. In assessing possible control measures farmers considered increased crop yield, reduced Striga reproduction and Striga emergence, greater crop vigour, and increased soil fertility as positive attributes. Negative attributes comprised increased labour requirement, higher costs, increased risk of crop damage or yield reduction, and lower quantity and quality of produce. Overall, a legume-cereal rotation was the most highly rated control option for S. hermonthica management evaluated by the farmers. The implications of these results are examined with respect to farmers' adoption and adaptation of Striga control options beyond the experimental plots.

Evaluation of ecologies and severity of Striga weed on rice in sub-Saharan Africa

“…In addition, Johnson et al (1997) showed that the proportion of 0. glaberrima and 0. sativa plants that appear stunted, is related to the number of Striga plants present. The increasing incidences and severity of Striga damage is linked to poor soil fertility which is due to lack of farm yard manure and inorganic fertilizers (Emechebe et al, 2004).…”

“…that infect rice:-S. hermonthica, S. asiatica, S. aspera and S. forbesii. In the rural communities of Northern Nigeria, it has been reported that crop yield losses due to S. hermonthica infections were about 70-100% (Emechebe et al, 2004). It has also been reported that crops can show resistance characteristic in one area and succumb in another because resistance can be broken by the existing biotypes (Gethi et al 2005).…”

“…Despite the efforts made to control the Striga problem, farmers have not adopted the control options developed (Oswald, 2005). This is one of the greatest tests to be synthesized by the researchers and unearth the reasons behind the farmers not embracing the preventive measures (Emechebe et al, 2004).…”

Testing the orthodoxies of land degradation policy in Swaziland

“…asiatica is widely regarded by scientists as a biological indicator of land degradation and its parasitic activities and impacts on the maize crop are well documented (for example, see Nickrent and Musselman 2000;Emechebe et al, 2004;Parker and Riches, 1993). It grows primarily in soils with low fertility levels, since it is a poor nitrogen metaboliser, yet its presence in the study area is indicative of a deeper land degradation and soil quality problem (Press and Gurney, 2000).…”

Learning to reduce degradation on Swaziland's arable land: enhancing understandings of Striga asiatica

“…One single wellestablished S. asiatica plant can produce more than 100 000 tiny seeds of approximately 0Á4 Â 0Á3 mm in size, each weighing between 15-26 mg (Mohamed et al, 1998). These are usually dispersed by wind and hydrological processes (Nickrent and Musselman, 2004), although the contamination of grain stocks, shared use of contaminated farm implements (Press and Gurney, 2000), and transfer by livestock are also important (Emechebe et al, 2004). The seeds can then remain dormant in the soil for up to 20 years before attacking the crop (Parker and Riches, 1993), though in field conditions, a dormancy period of 10-15 years is more common.…”