Post-Harvest Handling Practices and Losses for Legumes and Starchy Staples in Uganda

Abstract

High postharvest losses in developing countries negate the efforts geared towards improving food security. Poor produce quality including high prevalence of mycotoxin contamination is another significant problem. Appropriate postharvest handling and processing provide opportunities to reduce postharvest losses and improve food safety. This study was aimed at establishing the postharvest handling practices and estimating qualitative and quantitative postharvest losses for maize, millet, sorghum, beans, groundnuts, cassava, and sweet potatoes among farmers in 3 districts (Kamuli, Apac and Nakasongola) in Uganda, representing different agro-ecological zones. The study was done in late August 2014 after the first season harvests (June-August). Farmer interviews, focus group discussions and key informant interviews were used to collect data on postharvest loss estimates and postharvest handling practices. Samples of the different foods were collected and analyzed for physical quality characteristics, mould count and aflatoxin contamination using standard laboratory procedures. The results show predominance of rudimentary and inappropriate postharvest handling methods. Postharvest loss estimates were generally high, with values of 41%, 33%, 33%, 26%, 31%, 22%, 17% and 19% for maize, millet, sorghum, beans, groundnuts, cowpea, sweet potatoes and cassava respectively. The highest loss for all the crops was recorded at storage. Prevalence of aflatoxin contamination was 44%, 91%, 55%, 36%, 35% and 60% for maize, sorghum, groundnuts, millet, sweet potatoes and cassava respectively. Sorghum, maize and groundnuts were found to have the highest aflatoxin contamination levels. Chi-square test (p = 0.024, odds ratio = 5) showed that grain dried on bare ground had higher aflatoxin levels than that dried on a covered surface. The findings of this study reveal a serious need for postharvest interventions How to cite this paper: Tibagonzeka,

Exploring the potentials of underutilized grain amaranth (Amaranthusspp.) along the value chain for food and nutrition security: A review

“…The practice of efficient post-harvest management is very important for sustenance of the entire value chain of any crop. Post-harvest losses in Sub-Saharan Africa for cereal grain have been estimated at between 5% and 13% (FAO 2011; Tibagonzeka et al 2018). The amaranth grain just like any other cereal needs post-harvest management practices for the grain to remain viable, retain nutritional contents and command high market value.…”

“…For amaranth seed to be successfully stored, the moisture content after drying must not exceed 12%; any value above this will possibly promote growth of mold and reduce quality (Uganda National Bureau of Standards 2011). It is also important to store the grain in container on raised pallets to allow for heat exchange (Tibagonzeka et al 2018).…”

Development and performance evaluation of a Pedal Operated Seed Cleaner (POS-Cleaner)

“…Tight side tension is given by Eq. (7). Slack side tension is created on the section of the belt approaching the driven pulley.…”

“…According to FAO, WFP and IFAD [6], critical losses at the household level, an average of 67 kg of beans and 590 kg for maize are lost per year leading to an annual financial loss of US$ 14.5 and US$110 respectively. The Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry, and Fisheries (MAAIF) also partially attributes food insecurity in Uganda to poor post-harvesting handling [7]. Postharvest losses due to quality losses remains one of the most neglected paths through which grains are lost.…”

Smallholder Farmer Perceptions of Postharvest Loss and Its Determinants in Fijian Tomato Value Chains

“…Often, researchers attribute horticultural loss to a series of generic factors such as a lack of on-farm postharvest infrastructure, limited or discontinuous access to labour, poor transport systems, a lack of a cool chain, and general supply chain dysfunction [1,[12][13][14], reflecting wider thematic challenges experienced by smallholder horticultural farmers elsewhere [12]. There is also a perception that smallholder farmers are often disconnected from the market and consumers, and as a result are poorly informed as to the extent and causes of loss [15]. However, horticultural value chains in the South Pacific tend to be associated with very short transport distances (commonly less than 50 km) [9], involve small volumes of supply [6], with farmer access to good telecommunications services [16,17], and value chains that are often linked to a large network of road-side vendors and regional fruit and vegetable markets [6].…”