Uganda's response to Maize Lethal Necrosis (MLN) in the country.

1. Achievements and Challenges:
Country experiences of response for
management and control of MLN in
Uganda
Stephen Byantwale on behalf of UG-Team

2. Presentation Outline
• Introduction
• National MLN Task Force
• Achievements
• Challenges
• Lessons Learnt

3. Introduction
• Government of Uganda prioritized Maize in the
Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP)
2010/11-2014/15– currently producing 4.2million MT
(2014) with a target of 7.5 million MT by 2017.
• MLN was first reported in 2012 and since then has posed
a significant challenge to the crop.
• Uganda benefited from the FAO sub-regional technical
cooperation project, TCP/SFE/3405,”Regional response
for management and control of Maize Lethal Necrosis
Disease in Eastern Africa.”
• Uganda was allocated/received USD 103,000 to undertake
activities in line with the expected project outputs.

4. MLN National Task Force
Name Title Institution
Stephen Byantwale Ag. Commissioner, Department
of Crop Protection/Chair
MAAIF
Robert Karyeija Commissioner MAAIF
Godfrey Asea Principal Research Officer/
Director
NaCRRI
GeoffreyTusiime Senior Lecturer Makerere University
Charles Lwanga Kasozi Research Officer NaCRRI
Beatrice Namaloba Senior Agric Officer MAAIF
Nelson Masereka Executive Director Uganda Seed
Traders Association
Rodeyn Nicolai Manager NASECO seeds Co.
David Kutunga Senior Agric Inspector,
Epidemics
MAAIF

5. Output 1: Institutional Coordination
• National MLN task forces established and
functional
o Project Coordination: Department of Crop Protection,
MAAIF and NARO
o MLN Technical Taskforce constituted
o Two National Stakeholder Workshops held
o Participated in regional plant pests and disease
platform meetings in Kigali and Nairobi
• A National strategy on management and control of
MLN in Uganda (2015-2020) was developed

6. Output 2.0: Status of MLN spread and capacity
for monitoring occurrence
• Rapid surveillance missions conducted to
determine the extent of spread of the disease
and/or establish the severity of the disease.
• Disseminated rapid surveillance data to
relevant stakeholders.
• Conducted Training of extension staff (100) on
MLN

7. Output 2.0: Status of MLN spread and capacity
for monitoring occurrence
 16 districts surveyed in 2
seasons
• Field disease incidence
variable among districts
• Field Incidence of MLN
was highest 2014A
(31.7%) than in first
season 2015 A(31.0%)
and second season
2014B(15.8%).

8. Incidence MCMV in different affected districts

9. Capacity for MLN diagnosis and detection strengthened
• 604 samples (Sorghum and Napier grass) collected
• DAS-ELISA, lateral flow assays (LFA) kits procured
• Samples assayed independently for MCMV and SCMV
• Highest incidence of MCMV in 2014B
• 100 extension and seed company staff trained

10. Output 3: Knowledge and skills to mitigate MLN
enhanced
.
• 10 radio talk shows and 2 TV shows were
conducted in 2014/2015 in affected and non-
affected areas
• Promotion of appropriate crop production and
management practices (Next Slides)

11. Training and demonstration of best-bet practices
• On- farm testing and
fields of best-bet
varieties- CKH100773
and Bazooka in
Tororo, Busia,
Bulambuli, Bugiri
• Demonstration of MLN
management practices
in Manafwa, Tororo
and Busia
• 6 Field days in eastern
Uganda

12. Entry Name Yield Ears/ Husk Grain Grain Plant MLN(%)
t/ha Rank Plant Cover Text Moist Aspect
1 CKH10773 3.9 1 0.95 5.1 1.5 15.8 2.8 2.68
2 Longe6H 3.6 2 1.03 5.5 1.5 15.0 2.8 6.25
3 Longe9H 3.2 4 1.08 8.8 1.8 15.0 3.0 4.42
4 Longe10H 3.3 3 1.06 5.4 2.0 15.7 3.0 4.84
Mean 3.49 3 1.03 6.2 1.7 15.4 2.9 4.55
LSD
(0.05)
0.79 1 0.15 3.8 0.6 1.3 0.7
CV 7.12 4.71 19.2 10.5 2.6 7.1 46.7
p ns ns ns ns ns ns *
Min 3.19 1 0.95 5.1 1.5 15.0 2.8 2.68
Max 3.85 4 1.08 8.8 2.0 15.8 3.0 6.25
Performances and demonstration of CKH10773 in 2 farmer managed sites in
MLN areas in 2014B

13. Developed and distributed information and training materials (1000
copies each of brochures, leaflets and 150 Training Manuals)

14. Challenges
• Delayed implementation of the project
• Insufficient information on seed transmission at the
beginning of the project
• Continuous maize cropping – different stages
• ineffective control of movement of seed and grain
from affected areas
• Inadequate resources for effective and routine
surveillance and monitoring
• Inadequate control of seed moving across borders
• Weak extension system

15. Lessons learnt
• Involvement of multidisciplinary stakeholders along the
value chain is key to management MLN
• Seed contributes significantly to spread of MLN
• Training and awareness about field diagnosis and
control has helped to limit the disease spread
• Experience from disease epidemics such as BBW,
CBSD and MLN national task forces have guided
Ministry to now put in place a National Plant Protection
and Health Technical Committee as provided for in Plant
Protection and Health Act, 2015

16. END
Thank you for your
attention!