Phase 2

Indigenous crop development in sahelian area of  Burkina Faso

An alternative for on-farm agrobiodiversity management for local seed security


(BURKINA FASO)

PHASE II, 2000-2003

ACTIVITIES PLANNED


Crop biology and agronomic traits of local landraces

Crop improvement through PVS/PPB

Participatory variety selection and/or plant breeding is one of the T/lines important activities of the second phase of the project. The aim of this activity is to concentrate on the genetic evaluation using material of landraces that will enhances participatory plant selection through the direct involvement of farmers.

Sampling of germplasm for PVS/PPB on-farm
  • Conduction of agromorphological study in farmers’ fields to consolidate farmers’ criteria used in crop selection ;
  • Train farmers to enhance PVS/PPB ;
  • Conduct PVS/PPB with farmers ;
  • Use of on-farm agrobiodiversity richness to lever the informal seed production.
Seed supply systems and techniques of seed multiplication

After the vegetal material has been identified to be used by farmers, the need to consolidate seed supply system as at the beginning of 2001 information on on-farm agrobiodiversity management and its impact on seed supply system will have been identified and research experiment set for implementation:
  • On-farm seed technology an grain quality study;
  • Conduct farmers seed production;
  • Marketing of local seed to enhance households food security;
  • Seed supply techniques.
On-farm agroecosystem and crop production
  • On-farm conservation and use of agrobiodiversity in the context of traditional agroecosystems ;
Capacity building and seed management
  • Research on methods to build local genebanks.
Results obtained

Farmers cultivars naming according to selection criteria

Every local variety has a local/vernacular name. A cultivar identified through its local name becomes a variety identified in the germplasm management through the years. Names of cultivars are more often related to:
  • the plant morphology (height, shape, color, type of development, grain size, glumes color and the way they cover the grain) ;
  • the agronomic characters (days to flowering and to mature, flowering number, yield) ;
  • environmental adaptation (type, resistance/tolerance to pests, diseases, birds, etc..) ;
  • economic value (suited for market, earliness in maturity providing food for the time before harvesting period and avoiding animals sale).
These examples show that agromorphological and physiological characters are the most determinate in naming compared to those related to transformation, economic value and cycle.

Consistency in variety names

A better understanding of the consistency in the names of varieties will come after the diversity analysis is completed. The question is how does the farmer name and describe his local varieties. How consistent is the naming system since it is based on the way the agromorphological and physiological characters are perceived by a farmer of a specific ethnic group. This perception is highly variable. So, is it possible for farmers of the same village, the same tribe, the same region or site to give the same name to a variety ?

Based on the same criteria, farmers of another region can identify the same variety? Preliminary results represented in the following tables will try to answer the above questions. From these results, six main conclusions can be drawn:
  • Based on 1-2 characteristics, varieties are given names that can vary from one site to another but scarcely within the same village or household. Difference between villages comes from languages used to name the cultivars. Pokmiougou and Fibmiougou are two different names of the same variety. Because at Thiougou the glume is called "poko" and named "fiba" at Tougouri, hence two different names are given describing the same feature in different languages.
  • Following the above results, it appears absolutely important to determine whether varieties with same name and for characteristics are genetically identical. For this purpose indicators of genetic diversity should be set. Anthropological as well as molecular genetic methods can be used. Multilocus genetic diversity, allelic research, specific environmental adaptation and diversity localisation scale are methods that can allow genetic diversity assessment.
  • To determine on farm varietal diversity quality and distribution, it is necessary to determine similarities and differences between varieties (at household, village, ethnic and regional level).
Assessment of the diversity on-farm

Research results show that farmers use agro-morphological characters to nominate local cultivars. Those farmers are the first actors of agricultural biodiversity IN SITU Conservation. They will remain the "focal point in conservation and utilisation of genetic resources". As reported by BROWN (1999), in situ conservation on-farm maintains the ethnobotanical context of species. This indigenous knowledge and know-how as regard to farming systems are maintained and produce results such as diversity in local varieties names. But, few information exists on local knowledge utilisation dynamics.

The farmer would identify any appearance of a new diversity in a population through its agromorphological characters. This new diversity would be named based on 1-2 criteria related to it. Furthermore, those criteria will be used to identify and select this new individual, and choose its conservation mechanisms. The number of different varieties gives a measure of diversity according to farmers, with criteria based on agromorphological characters meeting the farmer's needs.

But, how to genetically state that a allogamous plant is a true local variety (Louette, 1999).

Therefore, we should assess genetic diversity on-farm through a clear understanding of the number of varieties and the agromorphological characteristics. One of those characteristics is the phenotype that results from the gluotype environment intersection. Thus, this type of criteria cannot be used as a direct measure of genetic diversity. For this reason, based on the name given by the farmer, all names were sorted according to language, the naming criteria and more important characteristics.

Training of farmers, technicians, investigations and observers came out with the following results:
  • Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS): 9 technicians, 32 farmers from Pobé-Mengao site (Ouahigouya) and 4 observers.
  • Participatory Seed Production (PSP): 8 extension agents from the FNGN, 3 technicians and 18 farmers. The trainees should give a feed back to the farmers of their site of origin. The training program was not completed because it was planned to take place at the beginning of the rainy season.
  • Variety purity survey : 17 agents and 42 farmers were trained during 10 sessions in the field. During those 10 sessions, researchers, technicians and farmers worked together.
During 11 other sessions, the farmers themselves practised in their field school. Ten other sessions involved technicians and farmers.

Impact of the PVS training on farmers behaviour

Following the training sessions related to plant reproduction, isolation and purity assessment, all farmers understood the necessity of having a seed plot. It is now clear to them that purity screening can give them clean, pure and healthy seeds.

Therefore, they decide to practice using not only on their individual fields but also on their PVS plot one on another common field.

FARMERS CRITERIA IN PARTICIPATORY VARIETY SELECTION AND PARTICIPATORY PLANT BREEDING

Varietal selection and/or participatory varietal choice on-farm

A participatory method made of several ways was adopted :

  • Collection and characterisation of farmers varieties based on their criteria;
  • Ranking farmers preferred criteria, categorise farmers varieties based on those criteria and allow them to select varieties from the over all germplasm;
  • Assisting farmers with the selected varieties for seed production;
  • Considering the preferred characteristics not found in the selected varieties but possessed by other cultivars in the same site or in another location;
  • Planning the transfer of the selected character into the selected variety but lacking that trait.
Farmers varietal selection

Based on scoring, two ranking methods were used for varieties in each village - the preferential ranking by pairs and the simple score ranking. Fifteen farmers were used per village. Twelve of them were randomly selected and the last 3 were the pre-selected ones for the project experiments in each village.

Ranking 1: Preferential ranking by pairs

Using this method, varieties were ranked by pairs it is easy to realise on-farm because it is easily understood an applied by farmers who are asked to choose between 2 varieties only.

Ranking 2: Simple preferential ranking

The total number of scores given to all varieties by a farmer should be 10. This comes to giving 10 points to the best varieties.

The following observations were made:

  • varietal preferences vary between locations although the varieties tested the same in those sites. Example : Balbou is preferred at Titao whereas 50 km further at Pobé-Mengao, it is Gaouga that is selected, with Naato the second choice in the two sites. Farmers from Tougouri selected "bagkema" even if they recongnize some good traits to some other cultivars.
  • In all sites there has been an outstanding variety with a score 2 to 3 times the score of the second one.
  • The variety Naato is ranked second of the millet cultivars in this site. It was planted by 224 farmers of the 500 farmers interviewed at Pobé-Mengao. Naato is planted by 209 farmers at Bougouré, 234 at Noufoundou, 422 at Kaďn, 182 at Zoomogo and 162 farmers at Yambassé. Naato was always ranked second in all other sites while the first choice varies between sites.
This result shows how important it is to set a breeding program in order to improve the farmers preferred variety.

Summary of farmers varietal choices

Using a preferential ranking method we were able to determine farmers varietal preferences for each crop in each village. A variety is considered choice N° 1, 2 or 3 if more than 65 % of the farmers interviewed and all the 3 projects farmers rank that variety at that position. The N° 1 variety appeared to be the preferred one for many reasons including its utilisation. Nevertheless, farmers do plant the N°2 and/or N° 3 to compensate for the N°1 lacking characteristics.

White sorghum

Varieties Kurbuli Fibmiugu, Baning pelga, Pokmiugu et Zuwoko represented farmers first choice regardless of sites or villages. Second choices were varieties Komban guembongo, Kobnaba (variety introduced by extension agents). These varieties were all early maturing. Varieties such as Belko, Gambré and Bukariga were listed at the bottom even though some farmers liked them for specific reasons.

Gambré was classified as N° 3 because of its attractive black color. But some farmers do like it for its flour.

The variety named Mercaim is widely adopted by farmers because of its resistance to drought. This variety was recently introduced by religions groups at the site N° 2 (Tougouri) where farmers of villages such as Toeyogdin, Namassa and Tougouri have positively appreciated it during the 2000-2001 rainy season.

Finally, it should be noticed that some variety names are synonymous. During previous studies, we have considered the same varieties, Kurbuli Fibmiugu, Baning pelega, Pokmiugu and Zuwoko. A PPS at Tougouri and Thiougou sites should involve this variety as the second choices of each site.

Red sorghum

Largely planted in the site N° 3, red sorghum provide farmers with food and money. A PPS program in this site should emphasise the improvement of the choice N° 1 (Zuwoko) involving the desired characters found in cultivars such as Zugilga, Cadre and Konkosumbuga.

OTHER CROPS
  • Millet : Each village has its particular preference : At Titao, the preferred variety is Balbou, at Pobé-Mengao and Noufoundou the choice is Gaougo; the choice at Tougouri is Bagkema. PPS program in those sites should involve those cultivars list above.
  • Groundnut: Farmers unanimously prefer the cultivar Guiongo. It should be the basis of any PPS program that will eventually involve varieties such as Dalaura, Boussanga and Bonga.
  • Okra: All farmers tended to conserve all the okra cultivars because of its importance as food, medicinal and also as a marketable crop.
  • Cowpea: Traditional cultivars were all outranked by the improved varieties. Any PPS should take advantage of the INERA Cowpea breeding material and then involve farmers for the final varietal selection.
TENTATIVE VARIETAL SELECTION PROGRAMME

The method we used allowed ranking of farmers desires and facilitated planning of a PPS programme. For each village/site selection criteria, donor and recurrent varietal parents were identified. Farmers skills and needs can be put together with conventional plant breeding methods to create better materials.

One question is: will the use donors' parents to improve the first choice of the farmer create a better cultivar. Will not the farmer have tendency to keep that only one variety? What about diversity conservation?