• Contact Us
    • Send Feedback
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Journal and Journal Articles
    • Journal and Journal Articles
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Journal and Journal Articles
    • Journal and Journal Articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    Whole Repository
    CollectionsIssue DateRegionCountryHubAffiliationAuthorsTitlesSubject
    This Sub-collection
    Issue DateRegionCountryHubAffiliationAuthorsTitlesSubject

    My Account

    Login

    Welcome to the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture Research Repository

    What would you like to view today?

    Comparing fresh root yield and quality of certified and farmer-saved cassava seed

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Journal Article (1.316Mb)
    Date
    2024-09-06
    Author
    Yabeja, J.W.
    Manoko, M.L.K.
    Legg, J.
    Type
    Journal Article
    Review Status
    Peer Review
    Target Audience
    Scientists
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract/Description
    Formal systems supporting the delivery of high-quality cassava seed are being established in several key cassava producing countries in Africa. Questions remain, however, about the value of certified cassava seed when compared to seed which is recycled multiple times, which is standard farmer practice. A study was therefore conducted to compare fresh cassava root yields of high-quality seed (HQS) versus farmer-saved (recycled) seed (FSS) for three widely grown improved cassava varieties in Tanzania namely: Mkuranga1, Kiroba and Mkombozi. Field experiments were established in two sites in different agricultural zones: Mkuranga (Coast Zone) and Maruku (Lake Victoria Zone). Four HQS sources (pre-basic, basic, certified, quality-declared), collectively referred to as HQS, were compared with FSS with respect to cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) foliar and root incidences, fresh root yield, marketable fresh root yield, and usable fresh root yield for each variety in the two locations. Results showed that foliar CBSD incidence in FSS was significantly greater than it was for HQS in Mkuranga1 and Kiroba varieties but not for Mkombozi. CBSD root incidence was on average six times more in FSS than in HQS. When comparing FSS with the specific certified seed treatment (CS), 25.8% of the roots were unusable due to CBSD root necrosis for FSS, compared to only 3.7% for CS. CS gave an overall fresh root yield which was 7.5 t/ha more than FSS, representing an 80.6% increase. Yield benefits derived from planting HQS were similar for Kiroba (+80.7%), Mkombozi (+81.3%) and Mkuranga1 (+79.5%), as well as across each of the four HQS classes. When also considering losses arising from severe CBSD root necrosis, the overall yield benefit arising from using CS when compared to FSS was 135%. The average estimated income gain for this increase was US$ 2279/ha, which is many times the estimated cost of obtaining certified seed. These results highlight the value of high quality seed systems and the potential gains that farmers can realize from planting high quality certified seed rather than recycling existing crops.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2024.106932
    Multi standard citation
    Permanent link to this item
    https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12478/8645
    IITA Authors ORCID
    Juma Yabejahttps://orcid.org/0009-0004-2702-7796
    James Legghttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4140-3757
    Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2024.106932
    Research Themes
    Biotech and Plant Breeding
    IITA Subjects
    Cassava; Crop Systems; Farm Management; Farming Systems; Food Security; Plant Diseases; Plant Production
    Agrovoc Terms
    Certified Seed; Economic Benefit; Yield; Tanzania; Cassava
    Regions
    Africa; East Africa
    Countries
    Tanzania
    Hubs
    Central Africa Hub
    Journals
    Crop Protection
    Collections
    • Journal and Journal Articles5286
    copyright © 2019  IITASpace. All rights reserved.
    IITA | Open Access Repository