• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Napier Stunt and Smut Resistance Project: key achievements and outputs in Uganda

Napier Stunt and Smut Resistance Project: key achievements and outputs in Uganda



A presentation prepared by Jolly Kabirizi for the ASARECA/ILRI Workshop on Mitigating the Impact of Napier Grass Smut and Stunt Diseases, Addis Ababa, June 2-3, 2010.

A presentation prepared by Jolly Kabirizi for the ASARECA/ILRI Workshop on Mitigating the Impact of Napier Grass Smut and Stunt Diseases, Addis Ababa, June 2-3, 2010.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Napier Stunt and Smut Resistance Project: key achievements and outputs in Uganda Napier Stunt and Smut Resistance Project: key achievements and outputs in Uganda Presentation Transcript

    • Napier Stunt and Smut Resistance Project: Key Achievements and Outputs- Uganda Presented at the ASARECA/ILRI Workshop on Mitigating the Impact of Napier Grass Smut and Stunt Diseases, Addis Ababa, June 2-3, 2010 Dr. J. Kabirizi, Country Coordinator, National Livestock Resources Research Institute, Uganda
    • Project Research Team - Uganda *NaLIRRI: National Livestock Resources Research Institute **NaCRRI: National Crops Resources Research Institute Name Institute Responsibility Dr. Jolly Kabirizi *NaLIRRI Coordinate project activities Ms. Clementine Namazzi NaLIRRI Evaluate nutritive quality of Napier grass clones Dr. Titus Alicai **NaCRRI Plant Virologist/Advisor Mr. Erasmus Mukiibi (MSc student) NaCRRI Evaluate biomass yield of Napier grass clones
    • Introduction
      • Napier grass fodder is recommended as a basal forage in smallholder dairy systems (SHD) systems in Uganda.
      • Napier stunt disease (NSD) reported in >60% of the districts in Uganda (Fig.1), is a threat to the SHD industry.
    • Figure 1: Spread and level of infection of NSD in Uganda (Kabirizi and Alicai, 2010) Low High Medium Water bodies Infection levels No disease G U L U K O T I D O L I R A M U K O N O K I T G U M A P A C M A S I N D I P A D E R A R U A M O R O T O H O I M A B U G I R I R A K A I K A L A N G A L A M P I G I M U B E N D E K A M U L I K U M I M A S A K A K A T A K W I M A Y U G E K I B O G A K I B A A L E N E B B I S O R O T I K A S E S E B U S H E N Y I N A K A P I R I P I R I T K Y E N J O J O W A K I S O Y U M B E I B A N D A N A K A S E K E I G A N G A M O Y O A D J U M A N I I S I N G I R O K I R U H U R A L U W E R O P A L L I S A N A K A S O N G O L A K A B A L E T O R O R O M B A L E K A M W E N G E S E M B A B U L E M B A R A R A N T U N G A M O K A Y U N G A K A B A R O L E B U N D I B U G Y O R U K U N G I R I J I N J A K A P C H O R W A K A N U N G U B U S I A S I R O N K O K A B E R A M A I D O K I S O R O K A M P A L A N 9 0 0 9 0 1 8 0 K i l o m e t e r s o w i u v e e r b Unsurveyed districts u r v e
      • Highlights of surveys results
      • Study districts: Kabalore (highlands), Masaka (districts around Lake Victoria Crescent zone); Soroti (lowlands) & Busia (near Kenya boarder)
      • Constraints to Napier grass production were: land shortage, low yielding varieties & NSD.
      • Over 80% (n=120) of sampled Napier grass fields in Masaka district were affected by NSD .
      • Farmers had a mixture of improved and local varieties in the same field—all varieties affected.
      • Most widely grown cultivar was Pennisetum 99) ( Kawanda 4 x P. Typhoides hybrid).
      Key Achievements and Outputs
    • Highlights of results of survey results (cont)
      • Over 80% (n=171) of respondents in Kabalore & Soroti were not aware of NSD.
      • NSD incidence & severity were highest in Masaka & lowest in Busia (Fig. 2).
      • Farmers in Busia had acquired a new variety from Kenyan farmers.
      • NSD reduced fodder yield by >60% (Fig. 3).
      • Rouging was major method of disease control.
      • No reports of smut in study areas
      • Studies on biomass yield & nutritive quality conducted (to be presented by Erasmus & Clementine, respectively)
    • Fig. 2: NSD incidence (%) and severity (1-3) in study areas 1= no stunting, 2 = moderate stunting and 3 = severe stunting
    • Mean herbage DM yield (t/ha/yr) Fig. 3: Effect of NSD on herbage yield Districts
    • 2. Current situation: Case of Masaka district
        • Field visits & reports from farmers show a decline (20-40%) in NSD incidence due to:
        • Increasing importance of SHD as a source of income
        • Awareness creation by NaLIRRI through:
          • Media, local newspapers & farmer-talk-shows
          • Farmers participate in NARO/NaLIRRI scientific meetings, field days/workshops
          • Publications (leaflets, posters etc---)
          • On-station trials----demonstrations on NSD symptoms & control measures
          • Farmers use recommended agronomic practices
            • Rouging and manure application
            • Recommended harvesting techniques, weeding---
    • Effect of manure application on fodder yield & NSD incidence
      • Farmer reports & on-station trials have shown manure application most effective control measure----reduces (> 30%) NSD incidence & improves (>40%) fodder yield (Fig. 4).
        • Manure improves soil fertility----enhances plant growth-----plants become less susceptible to disease stress.
        • Manure interferes with multiplication & survival of disease organisms (Mugerwa, 2010). through:
          • Modification of the micro-environment or
          • Enhancement of natural enemies to disease causing organisms
    • Fig. 4: Effect of manure application on fodder yield and NSD incidence 2008 2009
    • NaLIRRI Media Private Sector Other researchers working on NSD Schools, DATICs NARS (Universities & Research Institutes) Farmers, CBOs, NGOs Extension Agents & Dairy Development Agencies Policy makers Donors` 3. Communication and Dissemination Key boundary partners identified
    • Behavioural changes in boundary partners *Boundary Partners are those individuals, groups, or organisations with whom the project interacted directly and with whom we anticipated opportunities for influence. * Boundary partner Indicators achieved Evidence and related indicators Farmers & farmer groups
      • Reported on NSD incidence
      • Adopted improved mgt techniques
      • Recorded a 20-40% improvement in fodder yield
      • Disseminated information to fellow farmers
      • Farmers using improved practices increased by >50%.
      • Increased demand for information, clean planting material &
      • alternative forages.
      • Over 10,000 farmers
      • attended workshops & visited agric. shows & project stalls
    • Behavioural changes in partners (cont.) Boundary partner Indicators achieved Evidence & related indicators Extension agents & media
      • Sensitized farmers & policy makers on NSD control measures.
      • Participated in workshops & agricultural shows
      • Farmers reported a reduction (40%) in NSD incidence
      Policy makers
      • Same as above
      • More funding under “Emerging issues”
      Universities,DATICs & schools
      • Trained students on control measures.
      • Participated in research on NSD & proposal development.
      • .
      • > 1,000 students visited trials
      • 100 youths trained
      • 3 MSc + 1 PhD
      • 1 project funded
    • Behavioural changes in partners (cont.) Boundary partner Indicators achieved Evidence and related indicators Researchers
      • Documented spread, incidence & severity of NSD in Uganda
      • Screened Napier grass clones for tolerance to NSD.
      • Conducted feedback workshops.
      • Sourced for funds
      • Monitored incidence and severity of NSD in >30 districts
      • Trials established at NaCRRI, NaLIRRI, DATICS & ZARDIs
      • Published guidelines & policy briefs
      • Over US $ 0.8m received
      NaLIRRI Hqs
      • Promoted & coordinated linkages
      • Monitored use of donor funds
      • Supported project with additional funding
    • Packaging & disseminating information Dissemination pathway (2007-2010) Number
      • NaLIRRI Quarterly Reports
      • NaLIRRI Annual Reports
      • NARO Annual Reports
      • Project Semi-Annual reports
      • Project Annual reports
      • Survey reports
      • Posters
      • Leaflets (3 leaflets)
      • Field days/workshops/Agric. shows
      • News articles
      • Scientific papers ( In press)
      • Scientific conferences/workshops
      • Stakeholders’ workshop reports
      • Project Review & planning meetings
    • Stakeholders’ workshop Agricultural shows
    • Scientific exhibitions: UNCST- Science Week Exhibition (2009)
    • Workshops, field days & on-station trials
    • 4. Linkages and collaboration Organization(s) Role NAADS, HPI, Send-a-Cow; District extension staff; CBOs & farmer groups
      • Disseminate information
      • Sensitize farmers on NSD control methods
      DDA & MADDO
      • Milk processing & marketing
      • Post harvest handling of milk & milk products
      Makerere University
      • Train/Supervise students
      Tropical Virus Unit, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, UK’ NaCRRI
      • Identification of vectors
      East Africa Dairy Development Project
      • Disseminate information
      • Collaboration on project activities
      ILRI-Addis Ababa
      • Source Napier grass clones
      UNCST/MSI/World Bank/DANIDA
      • Funded new NSD projects
      Government of Uganda
      • Additional funding
    • 5. Project outcomes
      • Farmers’ knowledge on NSD improved----farmers disseminate information in farmer & scientific workshops e.g. Mr. Ddaki
      • Reduction (20-40%) in NSD incidence--improved >40%) fodder yield.
      • Increased demand for clean planting materials & alternative feed resources
      • Increased funding
      • Capacity building
        • 1 PhD + 4 MSc students ( includes other NSD projects)
        • Technician trained at ILRI on NIRS (2009)
        • 2 technicians to be trained on Molecular diagnostics
        • Project management ----for scientists
    • Project outcomes (cont.) Approved research projects
      • Contributing to the basic understanding & control of NSD in Uganda (UNCST/MSI)-------1 PhD & 2 MSc students
      • Evaluation of Napier grass clones for genetic diversity, herbage dry matter yield and nutritive quality (MSc)- GoU/NaLIRRI
      • Evaluation of nutritive value and legume compatibility of Brachiaria mulato for fodder production in Uganda- DANIDA/World Bank/NaLIRRI---MSc
    • Approved research projects (cont.)
      • 4. Evaluation and utilisation of sorghum varieties and Tithonia diversifolia as alternative feed resources for smallholder cattle and goat farmers (GoU)
      • Development of Napier grass varieties tolerant to Napier stunt disease – EAAPP/World Bank New
      • On-farm evaluation of low value crop residues with improved diets – EAAPP/World Bank New (PhD)
    • 6. Lessons learned
      • NSD is still a threat to the dairy sector in Uganda---no tolerant variety—need to continue screening local and introduced varieties & evaluate IPM technologies e.g manure application.
      • Demand for alternative forages/feed resources has increased---need for more research.
      • No Napier head smut reported in Uganda---need for more studies.
    • Lessons learned (cont.)
      • Good collaboration among research team members is a key to successful implementation of project activities
      • Developing and managing effective partnership is difficult BUT very important in technology development & dissemination.
      • Policy makers & local leaders play a key role in the control of NSD--- & in sourcing for research funds.
    • Lessons learned (3)
      • Media is a key stakeholder in technology development & dissemination
      • Regular monitoring and feedback is important in
      • improving stakeholders’ skills & knowledge.
      • Farmer workshops, leaflets, newspaper articles, radio programmes are the most effective tools in disseminating technologies.
      • Empowering farmer leaders with monitoring skills reduces research costs and increases research outputs
      • The Research Perspective
      7. Proposed policy briefs “ Quarantines and movement restrictions of diseased materials would be a good policy tool to supplement recommended control measures BUT lack of enforcement renders it impracticable. This leaves the options: propagation and distribution of clean planting materials”.---- Dr. W. N. Nannyenya (Socio-economist, NaLIRRI)
    • 2. The Perspective of the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries- --Directorate of Animal Resource, Uganda “ Pasture and animal feed resources shall be improved through proper management and utilization of existing natural pastures and by introducing pasture and/or animal feeding interventions in existing natural pastures or crop-livestock farming systems while ensuring sustainable use of the feed resources”---- Mrs. (Rev.) S. Mwebaze, Assistant Commissioner, MAAIF)
    • 8. Proposed activities, June 2010
      • Feedback workshops in 2 districts
      • Produce reports
        • Half-Yearly Project report
        • End of project report
        • Feedback reporrs
      • MSc Student to submit Thesis by end of June
      • Disseminate research results (publications etc)
      • Identify partners e,g, NAADS to continue with dissemination of information
      • Source for funding to screen & breed for tolerance to NSD
    • 9. Critical Research Areas
      • Screen introduced varieties ( Kakamega?)
      • Breeding Napier grass varieties for resistance to NSD
      • Develop IPM strategies for NSD management
      • Identify & evaluate alternative forages
      • Evaluate effect of manure application & harvesting frequency on NSD incidence.
      Brachiaria mulato as alternative forage
    • Acknowledgements
      • Financial and technical support from:
      • Uganda Government
      • ASARECA & ILRI;
      • Director of Research, NaLIRRI.
      • Excellent cooperation from:
      • Project staff
      • NSD related project research teams
      • District extension staff & farmers
      • Policy makers and local leaders.