| Literature DB >> 30497497 |
Essohouna Modom Banla1,2, Daniel Kwadjo Dzidzienyo3, Ifie Elohor Beatrice3, Samuel Kwame Offei3, Pangirayi Tongoona3, Haile Desmae4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Groundnut is an important legume crop in Togo. However, groundnut yield has been steadily decreasing for decades as a result of lack of organized breeding program to address production constraints. Though, low yielding varieties and late leaf spot have been often reported as the most important constraints, there is no documented evidence. Identifying and documenting the major production constraints is a prerequisite for establishing a good breeding program with clearly defined priority objectives and breeding strategies. Thus, the objectives of this study were to identify groundnut production constraints and assess farmers' preferred traits.Entities:
Keywords: Breeding; Groundnut; Late leaf spot; Participatory rural appraisal; Survey; Varieties
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30497497 PMCID: PMC6267023 DOI: 10.1186/s13002-018-0275-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ethnobiol Ethnomed ISSN: 1746-4269 Impact factor: 2.733
Sites and the number of farmers interviewed during the survey
| Region | Village | Name of the community | Geographical location | No. of FGD | No. of farmers |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kara | Kpoloubal | Bassar | N 09.77990 | 1 | 20 |
| Binadjoub | Kabye | N 09.56500 | 1 | 20 | |
| Nampoch | Lamba | N 09.22001 | 1 | 20 | |
| Savanes | Yacle | Moba | N 10.29908 | 1 | 20 |
| Dore | Bissa | N 10.72191 | 1 | 20 | |
| Namo | Moba | N 10.33601 | 1 | 20 | |
| Centrale | Wassarabou | Kotocoli | N 08.95293 | 1 | 20 |
| Atibodo | Kabye | N 08.95458 | 1 | 20 | |
| Sonde | Kabye | N 08.562680 | 1 | 20 | |
| Maritime | Gboto | Ewe | N 06.67739 | 1 | 0 |
| Tabligbo | Ewe | N 06.588117 | 1 | 0 | |
| Total | 12 | 7 | 11 | 180 |
*No. of FGD number of focus group discussion
Fig. 1Map of Togo showing the surveyed area (ArcGIS 10.2.2)
Age of groundnut farmers interviewed in Togo
| Region | Village | Age | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| < 40 | 41–50 | 51–60 | > 61 | ||||||
| Num.* | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | ||
| Kara | Kpoloubal | 7 | 35 | 10 | 50 | 2 | 10 | 1 | 5 |
| Binadjoub | 8 | 40 | 6 | 30 | 4 | 20 | 2 | 10 | |
| Nampoch | 8 | 40 | 4 | 20 | 8 | 40 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total/mean | 23 | 38.33 | 19 | 33.33 | 14 | 23.34 | 3 | 5 | |
| Savanes | Yacle | 4 | 20 | 6 | 30 | 6 | 30 | 4 | 20 |
| Dore | 3 | 15 | 7 | 35 | 5 | 25 | 5 | 25 | |
| Namo | 4 | 20 | 6 | 30 | 6 | 30 | 4 | 20 | |
| Total/mean | 11 | 18.33 | 19 | 31.67 | 17 | 28.33 | 13 | 21.67 | |
| Centrale | Sonde | 4 | 20 | 10 | 50 | 6 | 30 | 0 | 0 |
| Kitambouli | 6 | 30 | 6 | 30 | 6 | 30 | 2 | 10 | |
| Wassarabou | 8 | 40 | 6 | 30 | 4 | 20 | 2 | 10 | |
| Total/mean | 18 | 30 | 22 | 36.67 | 16 | 26.67 | 4 | 6.66 | |
| Grand total/mean | 52 | 28.89 | 61 | 33.89 | 47 | 26.11 | 20 | 11.11 | |
*Num. = number; Perc. = percentage
Educational qualification and household size of groundnut farmers in Togo
| Region | Village | Qualification | Typical household | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Illiterate | Lit. tuition* | PS | SS | Degree | ||||||||
| Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | |||
| Kara | Kpoloubal | 9 | 45 | 6 | 30 | 4 | 20 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 9 |
| Binadjoub | 8 | 40 | 2 | 10 | 5 | 25 | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 7 | |
| Nampoch | 10 | 50 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 40 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
| Total/mean (%) | 27 | 45 | 8 | 13.33 | 17 | 28.33 | 8 | 13.34 | 0 | 0 | 7.33ab** | |
| Savanes | Yacle | 12 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Dore | 3 | 15 | 7 | 35 | 6 | 30 | 4 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 11 | |
| Namo | 12 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 6 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
| Total/mean (%) | 27 | 45 | 7 | 11.66 | 10 | 16.66 | 16 | 26.68 | 0 | 0 | 8.33a | |
| Centrale | Sonde | 9 | 45 | 4 | 20 | 3 | 15 | 4 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| Attibodo | 7 | 35 | 6 | 30 | 3 | 15 | 4 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
| Wassarabou | 6 | 30 | 7 | 35 | 4 | 20 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 6 | |
| Total/mean (%) | 22 | 36.66 | 17 | 28.33 | 10 | 16.67 | 11 | 18.34 | 0 | 0 | 6.33b | |
| Grand total/mean (%) | 76 | 42.22 | 32 | 17.78 | 37 | 20.55 | 35 | 19.45 | 0 | 0 | 7.33 | |
**Lit. tuition = literacy tuition; PS = primary school; SS=secondary school; Num. = number; Perc. = percentage
*Means within a column followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different
Sex and marital status of groundnut farmers in study area of Togo
| Region | Village | Sex | Marital status | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Married | Single | Widower | |||||||
| Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | Num. | Perc. | ||
| Kara | Kpoloubal | 15 | 75 | 5 | 25 | 20 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Binadjoub | 13 | 65 | 7 | 35 | 19 | 95 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |
| Nampoch | 4 | 20 | 16 | 80 | 20 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total/mean (%) | 32 | 53.33a* | 28 | 46.67 | 59 | 98.33 | 1 | 1.67 | 0 | 0b | |
| Savanes | Yacle | 18 | 90 | 2 | 10 | 18 | 90 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10 |
| Dore | 12 | 60 | 8 | 40 | 18 | 90 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 0 | |
| Namo | 13 | 65 | 7 | 35 | 15 | 75 | 2 | 10 | 3 | 15 | |
| Total/mean (%) | 43 | 71.66b | 17 | 28.33 | 51 | 85 | 4 | 6.67 | 5 | 8.33a | |
| Centrale | Sonde | 16 | 80 | 4 | 20 | 18 | 90 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| Attibodo | 11 | 55 | 9 | 45 | 19 | 95 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | |
| Wassarabou | 10 | 50 | 10 | 50 | 17 | 85 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total/mean (%) | 37 | 61.66ab | 23 | 38.33 | 54 | 90 | 5 | 8.33 | 1 | 1.67b | |
| Grand total/mean (%) | 112 | 62.22 | 68 | 37.78 | 164 | 91.11 | 10 | 5.56 | 6 | 3.33 | |
*Num. = number; Perc. = percentage
**Means within a column followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different
Fig. 2Educational qualification by gender (in percentage of interviewees)
Farm characteristics from the three regions of Togo
| Region | Village | Groundnut area range (ha) | Seed Source | % M.C.** | Sold Proportion (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smallest | Average | Largest | Market | Saved | Others | ||||
| Kara | Kpoloubal | 0.25 | 0.51 | 0.75 | 30.00 | 60.00 | 10.00 | 60.00 | 60.00 |
| Binadjoub | 0.25 | 0.71 | 2.00 | 45.00 | 50.00 | 5.00 | 95.00 | 75.5 | |
| Nampoch | 0.25 | 0.52 | 0.75 | 05.00 | 75.00 | 20.00 | 80.00 | 59.2 | |
| Mean | 0.25 | 0.58b | 1.16 | 26.67 | 61.67 | 11.66 | 78.33 | 64.90b | |
| Savanes | Yacle | 1 | 1.47 | 2.00 | 20.00 | 65.00 | 15.00 | 60.00 | 93.50 |
| Dore | 0.5 | 1.12 | 2.00 | 25.00 | 75.00 | 0.00 | 7.00 | 83.75 | |
| Namo | 1 | 1.47 | 2.00 | 30.00 | 70.00 | 0.00 | 53.00 | 93.50 | |
| Mean | 0.83 | 1.35a | 2.00 | 25.00 | 70.00 | 5.00 | 40.00 | 90.25a | |
| Centrale | Sonde | 0.25 | 0.77 | 2.00 | 85.00 | 5.00 | 10.00 | 35 | 82.50 |
| Attibodo | 0.25 | 0.53 | 1.00 | 65.00 | 25.00 | 10.00 | 40 | 93.6 | |
| Wassarabou | 0.25 | 0.49 | 1.00 | 45.00 | 40.00 | 15.00 | 30 | 88.75 | |
| Mean | 0.25 | 0.6b | 1.33 | 65.00 | 23.33 | 11.66 | 35 | 88.28a | |
| Grand Mean | 0.44 | 0.84 | 1.66 | 38.89 | 51.67 | 9.44 | 51.11 | 81.14 | |
**% M.C.: % mixed cropping
*Means within a column followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different
Fig. 3Total area cultivated and part for groundnut (ha) as estimated by interviewees
Fig. 4Source of groundnut seeds (in percentage of interviewees)
Fig. 5Proportion of groundnut sold (in percentage of interviewees)
Cultivated groundnut varieties and reported characteristics by farmers
| Region | Villages | Varieties | Groundnut characteristics |
|---|---|---|---|
| Savanes | Yacle | Ntifofo | |
| Koka | |||
| Soulare | |||
| SORAD | Big pods and grains | ||
| Dore | RMP12 | Small pods and grains | |
| T3 | |||
| Namo | SORAD | Big pods and grains | |
| Koumongou | |||
| Kara | Binadjoub | SOTOCO | Big pod and grains/low yield |
| Tchamba | |||
| Kpoloubal | Ngbengbeng | Small pods/low yield | |
| Djafo | |||
| Tchana | |||
| Nampoch | Smagbengbe | Small grains/low yield | |
| Oukandjassina | |||
| Tchana | |||
| Centrale | Sonde | Nale-Nale | 2 kernels per pod/low yield |
| Kitambouli | Lossoketo | Small pods/low yield | |
| Wassarabou | SORAD | Big pod and grains |
Farmers’ preferred characteristics of groundnut varieties in percentage
| Region | Village | Large pod size | Yield | High oil content | Drought | Red color | Disease resistance | Good taste | Early maturity | High no. seed/pod* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kara | Kpoloubal | 5 | 55 | 10 | 20 | 10 | – | – | – | – |
| Binadjoub | 5 | 90 | – | – | – | 5 | – | – | – | |
| Nampoch | 10 | 50 | – | 20 | – | – | 20 | – | – | |
| Mean (%) | 6.66 | 65 | 3.33 | 13.33 | 3.33 | 1.66 | 6.66 | – | – | |
| Savanes | Yacle | 30 | 60 | 10 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Dore | – | 75 | 25 | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Namo | 25 | 65 | 10 | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Mean (%) | 18.33 | 66.66 | 15 | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| Centrale | Sonde | 35 | 50 | – | – | – | – | – | 10 | 5 |
| Attibodo | – | 70 | – | – | – | 5 | – | 10 | 15 | |
| Wassarabou | – | 65 | – | – | – | 25 | – | – | 10 | |
| Mean (%) | 11.66 | 61.67 | – | – | – | 10 | – | 6.67 | 10 | |
| Grand mean | 12.22 | 64.44 | 6.11 | 4.44 | 1.11 | 3.33 | 2.22 | 2.22 | 3.33 | |
*High no. seed/pod, high number of pods per plant
Perception of farmers on constraints to groundnut production: percentage of times that constraints were mentioned
| Region | Village | Disease | Insects | Striga | Drought | Low yield | Labor | Lack of seed | Flooding | Soil fertility | No constraint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kara | Kpoloubal | 60 | 10 | 20 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 10 |
| Binadjoub | 25 | 35 | 20 | 5 | 10 | 5 | – | – | – | – | |
| Nampoch | 30 | 20 | – | 20 | 20 | – | – | – | – | 10 | |
| Mean | 38.33 | 21.66 | 13.33 | 8.33 | 10 | 1.66 | – | – | – | 6.66 | |
| Savanne | Yacle | 20 | 60 | – | 10 | – | – | 10 | – | – | – |
| Dore | 25 | 25 | – | 50 | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Namo | 20 | 60 | – | 10 | – | – | 10 | – | – | – | |
| Mean | 21.66 | 48.33 | – | 23.33 | – | – | 6.66 | – | – | ||
| Centrale | Sonde | 65 | 15 | – | – | – | – | 10 | 10 | – | – |
| Attibodo | 60 | 15 | – | – | 15 | – | – | – | 10 | – | |
| Wassarabou | 35 | 10 | – | – | 30 | – | – | 20 | 5 | – | |
| Mean | 53.33 | 13.33 | – | – | 15 | – | 3.33 | 10 | 5 | – | |
| Grand mean | 37.77 | 27.77 | 4.44 | 10.55 | 8.33 | 0.55 | 3.33 | 3.33 | 1.66 | 2.22 | |
Farmers’ perception of late leaf spot (LLS)
| Regions | Community | % of respondents aware of LLS symptoms | % of respondents aware the cause of LLS | % of respondents of available of control measure |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kara | Kpoloubal | 100 | 0 | 10 |
| Binadjoub | 100 | 10 | 0 | |
| Nampoch | 90 | 10 | 0 | |
| Total | 96.67 | 10 | 3.33 | |
| Savanes | Yacle | 100 | 60 | 0 |
| Dore | 100 | 50 | 0 | |
| Namo | 100 | 60 | 0 | |
| Total | 100 | 56.67 | 0 | |
| Centrale | Sonde | 95 | 70 | 0 |
| Attibodo | 85 | 30 | 0 | |
| Wassarabou | 90 | 55 | 0 | |
| Total | 90 | 51.67 | 0 | |
| Grand total | 95.55 | 39.44 | 1.11 | |
Fig. 6Farmers perception on the cause of LLS disease (figures are in percentage) a Kara; b Savanes; c Central; d Across the three regions
Correlation among social and farming system parameters
| Age | Household size | Sex | Land available | Education | Marital status | Groundnut land | Farmer exp | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | *** | * | ** | NS | NS | *** | *** | |
| Household size | 0.53 | NS | *** | NS | *** | NS | *** | |
| Sex | − 0.15 | − 0.08 | *** | *** | NS | *** | NS | |
| Land available | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.51 | *** | NS | *** | ** | |
| Education | 0.008 | 0.13 | 0.32 | 0.29 | NS | NS | NS | |
| Marital status | 0.19 | − 0.21 | 0.12 | − 0.07 | − 0.11 | * | ** | |
| Groundnut land | 0.19 | 0.04 | 0.36 | 0.63 | 0.12 | 0.15 | *** | |
| Farmers’ experience | 0.81 | 0.43 | 0.13 | 0.36 | 0.09 | 0.25 | 0.36 |
Significance codes:***0.001; **0.01; *0.05, NS non-significant