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

Name Institute ResponsibilityDr. 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

*NaLIRRI: National Livestock Resources Research Institute**NaCRRI: National Crops Resources Research Institute

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)

GULU

KOTIDO

LIRA

MUKONO

KITGUM

APAC

MASINDI

PADERARUA

MOROTO

HOIMA

BUGIRI

RAKAI

KALANGALA

MPIGI

MUBENDE

KAMULI

KUMI

MASAKA

KATAKWI

MAYUGE

KIBOGA

KIBAALE

NEBBI

SOROTI

KASESE

BUSHENYI

NAKAPIRIPIRIT

KYENJOJO

WAKISO

YUMBE

IBANDA

NAKASEKE

IGANGA

MOYO

ADJUMANI

ISINGIRO

KIRUHURA

LUWERO

PALLISA

NAKASONGOLA

KABALE

TORORO

MBALE

KAMWENGE

SEMBABULE

MBARARA

NTUNGAMO

KAYUNGA

KABAROLE

BUNDIBUGYO

RUKUNGIRI

JINJA

KAPCHORWA

KANUNGU

BUSIA

SIRONKO

KABERAMAIDO

KISORO

KAMPALA

N

90 0 90 180 Kilometers

Unsurveyed districts

Low

High

Medium

Water bodies

Infection levels

4

No disease

1. 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

Me

an

he

rba

ge

DM

yie

ld (

t/h

a/y

r)

Fig. 3: Effect of NSD on herbage yield

Districts

2. Current situation: Case of Masaka districtField 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-showsFarmers participate in NARO/NaLIRRI scientific

meetings, field days/workshopsPublications (leaflets, posters etc---)On-station trials----demonstrations on NSD symptoms &

control measures

Farmers use recommended agronomic practicesRouging and manure applicationRecommended 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

MediaPrivate 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

*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 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 & 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

Behavioural changes in partners (cont.)

Packaging & disseminating informationDissemination pathway (2007-2010) Number NaLIRRI Quarterly Reports 12 NaLIRRI Annual Reports 3 NARO Annual Reports 3 Project Semi-Annual reports 2 Project Annual reports 2 Survey reports 2 Posters 6 Leaflets (3 leaflets) 6000 Field days/workshops/Agric. shows 15 News articles 3 Scientific papers (In press) 2 Scientific conferences/workshops 5 Stakeholders’ workshop reports 4 Project Review & planning meetings 3

Stakeholders’ workshop

Agricultural shows

Scientific exhibitions: UNCST- Science Week Exhibition (2009)

Workshops, field days & on-station trials

4. Linkages and collaboration

Organization(s) RoleNAADS, HPI, Send-a-Cow; District extension staff; CBOs & farmer groups

Disseminate information Sensitize farmers on NSD

control methodsDDA & MADDO Milk processing & marketingNaRL-Kawanda Post harvest handling of milk

& milk productsMakerere University Train/Supervise students

Tropical Virus Unit, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, UK’ NaCRRI

Identification of vectors

East Africa Dairy Development Project

Disseminate information

KARI; ILRI; NBCP; NACRRI 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

1. Contributing to the basic understanding & control of NSD in Uganda (UNCST/MSI)-------1 PhD & 2 MSc students

2. Evaluation of Napier grass clones for genetic diversity, herbage dry matter yield and nutritive quality (MSc)- GoU/NaLIRRI

3. 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)

5. Development of Napier grass varieties tolerant to Napier stunt disease –EAAPP/World Bank New

6. 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

1. 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

1. Feedback workshops in 2 districts

2. Produce reports Half-Yearly Project report End of project report Feedback reporrs

3. MSc Student to submit Thesis by end of June

4. Disseminate research results (publications etc)

5. Identify partners e,g, NAADS to continue with dissemination of information

6. Source for funding to screen & breed for tolerance to NSD

9. Critical Research Areas1. Screen introduced varieties

(Kakamega?)

2. Breeding Napier grass varieties for resistance to NSD

3. Develop IPM strategies for NSD management

4. Identify & evaluate alternative forages

5. 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.