T he revolution in sequencing technologies has enabled fast and relatively inexpensive genome information (Metzker, 2010 Abbreviations: AMMI, additive main effect and multiplicative interaction; a top10 , mean relatedness of the top10 individuals in the validation set to those in the training set; AYT, advanced yield trial; BLUE, best linear unbiased estimator; BLUP, best linear unbiased predictor; CMD, cassava mosaic disease; CMDI, cassava mosaic disease incidence; CV-CR, cross-validation close relatives; CV-GE, crossvalidation genotype × environment; CV-Random, random crossvalidation; CV-Random_Half, cross-validation scheme in which a randomly chosen half of the observations are used; CV-noCR, cross-validation no close relatives; DM, root dry matter content; GS, genomic selection; G×E, genotype × environment; GBS, genotyping by sequencing; MAS, marker-assisted selection; MCBBI, mean cassava bacterial blight incidence; PYT, preliminary yield trial; RCBD, randomized complete-block design; RKHS, reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; top10, 10 most closely related individuals; UYT, uniform yield trial.
Vegetatively propagated crop (VPC) seed tends to remain true to varietal type but is bulky, often carries disease, and is slow to produce. So VPC seed needs to be handled differently than that of other crops, e.g., it tends to be sourced locally, often must be fresh, and it is less often sold on the market. Hence, a framework was adapted to describe and support interventions in such seed systems. The framework was used with 13 case studies to understand VPC seed systems for roots, tubers, and bananas, including differing roles and sometimes conflicting goals of stakeholders, and to identify potential coordination breakdowns when actors fail to develop a shared understanding and vision. In this article, we review those case studies. The framework is a critical tool to (a) document VPC seed systems and build evidence; (b) diagnose and treat coordination breakdown and (c) guide decision-makers and donors on the design of more sustainable seed system interventions for VPCs. The framework can be used to analyze past interventions and will be useful for planning future VPC seed programs. ARTICLE HISTORY
Development of high yielding and disease resistant cassava varieties, coupled with the promotion of efficient processing technologies, was the principal intervention aimed at changing the cassava subsector in Nigeria. National research and extension programs in Nigeria and IITA have been spearheading efforts to disseminate these varieties alongside improving farmer's access to processing machineries. Several Research-for-Development (R4D) projects were implemented to this effect between early 1980 to date. This paper investigated the effects of improved cassava varieties and processing technologies on adopting households. It also attempts to test and establish the link between adoption of improved cassava varieties and access to processing technologies. The data used in this paper come from a sample household survey of 952 households conducted in four regions of Nigeria. The results showed that in all the study sites farmers grow mixture of improved and local cassava varieties. They process cassava at home using small processing machines and also using services of commercial processors. The most common processed cassava products were found to be garri and fufu. Adopters of improved cassava varieties have higher cassava yield of 16 tons/ha compared to 11 ton/ha for non-adopters. There was also significant yield variation between villages that participated (15 tons/ha) in research for development (R4D) training and those which did not (13 tons/ha). The bivariate probit model estimates showed a strong relationship between adoption of improved cassava varieties and farmers' access to grating machines. Moreover, farmers that were members of either community organizations or cooperative organizations had a higher tendency of using improved varieties than others, suggesting that the introduction of new cassava varieties would be enhanced by farmers' access to processing facilities and services. Moreover, training of farmers and processors through R4D programs has led to increased use of improved technologies.
A diagnostic survey was conducted in 2002-03 to determine the status of cassava mosaic begomoviruses in Nigeria and to ascertain if the virulent Ugandan variant of East African cassava mosaic virus (EACMV-Ug2) was present. Of the 418 farms visited, 48% had cassava with moderately severe or severe symptoms, whereas 52% had cassava with mild symptoms. These distributions were at random. Of the 1,397 cassava leaf samples examined, 1,106 had symptoms. In polymerase chain reaction tests, 74.1% of the symptom-bearing samples tested positive for African cassava mosaic virus (ACMV) alone, 0.3% for EACMV alone, 24.4% for mixed infections by the two viruses, and 1.2% did not react with any of the primers used. The two viruses also were detected in 32% of the 291 symptomless plants and in the whitefly vector samples. EACMV-Ug2, Indian cassava mosaic virus, and South African cassava mosaic virus were not detected in any of the whitefly or leaf samples. Most farms had ACMV in single infection as well as in mixed infections with EACMV. Most doubly infected plants showed severe symptoms. Two biological variants of ACMV were identified based on symptom expression on cassava in the field. ACMV and EACMV were detected in the leguminous plant Senna occidentalis (L.) Link and the weed Combretum confertum Lams.; these are new natural hosts of the viruses. Although the virulent EACMV-Ug2 was not detected, the occurrence of variants of ACMV and a high proportion of mixed infections by ACMV and EACMV, which could result in recombination events such as the one that produced EACMV-Ug2, demands appropriate measures to safeguard cassava production in Nigeria.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.