*

A AGRICULTURALG GROWTHP PROGRAM

—

Southern Agricultural Research Institute

Agricultural Growth Program II Crop Research Progress Report

(Feb. 2016 - Mid 2018)

Hawassa August 2018

Southern Agricultural Research Institute

Agricultural Growth Program II

Crop Research Progress Report

(Feb. 2016 - Mid 2018)

Hawassa August 2018

The report is technically compiled and edited at regional level by:

Waga Mazengia Otoro Olkie Yeyes Rezene Shitaye Chebula Agdew Bekele

AGP-II Focal Persons who compiled at center level:

Tesfaye Tadese Derebe Gemiyo Mekete Girma Kebede Gizachew Walellign Wotro Temesgen Laligo

Donors and oartners

Acknowledgements

The progress report of crop research activilies included in this document was conducted in 35

AGP II woredas from 2016 to 2018 funded by the World Bank and other partner donors

supporting Agricultural Growth Program II (AGP-II) through Ministry of Agriculture and

Natural Resource of Ethiopia. The contributions of SARI Research Center Directors, Work

Process Coordinators and Researchers were very important to implement the research activities.

AGP II woredas and zonal departments of Agriculture and Natural resource supported the

implementation of the research at kcbclc level. Moreover, South Agricultural Research Institute

(SARI), Bureau of Agriculture and Natural Resources and Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural

Research (EIAR) regularly reviewed and monitored the planning and the overall

implementations of activities. Moreover, the publication of this document was supported by the

World Bank and other partner donors.

Table of Contents

Contents Page

Acknowledgements....... .............................................................................................iii

Table of Contents....... .......................................... .......... ......................................... iv

List of tables.................................................................................................................ix

Tables

Page........................... .................. ................................................................................ix

List of figures......................................................... .....................................................xii

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1

I. PROGRESSES OF CROP RESEARCH ACTIVITIES IN 2016/17............................ 3

1. Effect o f maize common bean intercropping on land use efficiency and yield o f component cropsunder conventional and conservation tillage practices........................................................................................ 3

2. Participatory evaluation o f improved high land and mid land maize varieties.......................................... 4

3. Adaptation o f unproved lowland maize vaneties in different locations o f SNNPR................................. 6

4. Adaptation o f improved midland maize varieties in Basketo special and Melokoza woredas............... 9

5. Adaptation and demonstration o f improved highland maize varieties in south western parts o fSNNPR...................................................................................................................................................................... 11

6. Evaluation and demonstration o f integrated weed management methods for the control o f weeds inmaize..........................................................................................................................................................................12

7. Determination of irrigation interval for maize under small scale irrigation.............................................13

8. Demonstration o f push-pull technology for control o f maize and sorghum stalk borer in South OmoZone (maize in Dcbub Ari and sorghum in Bennatsemay woreda)................................................................13

9. Effect o f legume double cropping and N-fcrtilizeT application on yield and yield components ofmaize......................................................................................................................................................................... 14

10. Adaptation of improved lowland/mid land sorghum vaneties in south western parts o f SNNPR.... 15

11. Evaluation o f different weed management practices for controlling Acanthospemm hispidium on

sorghum yield and yield components...................................................................................................................16

12. Adaptation of improved sorghum vaneties for lowland areas o f Basketo special and Melokozaworedas.....................................................................................................................................................................17

13. Storage pest management options for sorghum and maize in South Omo Z one................................ 19

14. Adaptation trial o f lowland rice................................................................................................................... 20

15. Promotion o f finger millet variety in moisture stress areas o f Benatsemay woreda...........................21

16. Effect o f barley-wheat-faba bean- field pea rotation on performance o f wheat in South Omo zone 22

17. Adaptation and demonstration o f improved bread wheat varieties......................................................... 22

18. Evaluation and demonstration of integrated weed management methods for the control o f weeds inwheat.........................................................................................................................................................................26

19. Adaptation of improved food barley variety in South Omo zone........................................................... 27

20. Determination of appropriate nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer rate under different seed rate for

food barley...............................................................................................................................................................28

21. Adaptation and demonstration o f improved malt barley varieties in high land area of Kala Zone ..31

22. Adaptation and demonstration o f improved tef varieties in Bench Maji Zone..................................... 31

23. Participatory variety selection of recent tef varieties.................................................................................31

24. Adaptability test of recent laba-bean varieties............................................................................................32

25. Participatory evaluation of improved faba-bean varieties.......................................................................33

26. Participatory variety selection and adaptation trial of faba-bcan.............................................................36

27. Participatory evaluation of faba-bean for adaptation and grain yield .....................................................39

28. Evaluation on faba-bean variety against chocolate spot and rust...........................................................39

29. Adaptation and demonstration o f improved faba bean varieties in South Omo zone.......................... 40

30. Participatory evaluation/selection o f recently released chickpea varieties and adaptation trial......... 41

31. Adaptation trial o f released chickpea varieties for yield and disease and insect resistant.................. 45

32. Evaluation o f field pea varieties for grain yield and adaptation............................................................ 46

33. Screening o f chemicals against sesame seed bug on sesame in South Omo zone............................... 47

34 Participatory varietal selection of improved sesame varieties................................................................ 48

35. Sesame variety adaptation and demonstration............................................................................................50

36. Effect o f seed rate on yield and yield components of sesame.................................................................. 51

37. Effect o f inter and intra- row spacing on yield and yield attribution o f sesame (Sesamum indicium

L.) in Benna Tsemay Woreda, Southern Ethiopia.............................................................................................52

38. Evaluation of improved tomato varieties under irrigated agriculture in South Omo Zone.

Benatsemay Woreda..............................................................................................................................................54

39. Evaluation of improved onion varieties for bulb production under irrigation...................................... 54

40. Effect o f organic fertilizer application and spacing between plants on growth and yield of banana inMelokoza woreda, Southern Ethiopia.................................................................................................................55

41. Adaptation o f improved banana varieties................................................................................................... 55

42. Evaluation of improved potato varieties and fungicides application for the management o f late

blight potato fPhytophthora infestans, (Mont) de Bary] in Southern Ethiopia............................................56

43. Participatory variety sclcction of potato varieties.......................................................................................59

44. Study o f the adaptability o f hybrid and open pollinated eoffce varieties under different agro climatic

condition o f southern Ethiopia........................................... *..............................................................................63

45. Demonstration o f improved coffee management practices in coffee growing areas o f South Omo

Z one.........................................................................................................................>.............................................. 63

46. Intercropping o f coflee with Korarima (Aframomum korrarima) in south western Ethiopia..............64

47. Determination of the requirement of soil medium composition for seed rhizome production of

ginger plantlels under greenhouse conditions.................................................. ..................................................65

48. In vitro mass propagation o f bacterial wilt free gmger plantlels...............................................................65

II. P R O G R E S S E S OF C R O P R ESE A R C H A C TIV ITIES C O N D U C TED A FTER

P R O D U C T IO N C O N ST R A IN T A S S E S S M E N T (2017/18)........................................................ 67

1. CER EAL C R O P S IM P R O V E M E N T ..................................................................................................67

l Adaptation o f improved high land mai/e varieties in selected woredas o f Sheka zon e.........................67

2. Effects o f intra row spacing and nitrogen on growth and yield o f maize in Bursa and Arbegona areas

67

3. Evaluation o f maize with sequential intercropping ol common bean and chickpea............................... 68

4. Lowland rice varieties adaptation trial............................................................................................................ 69

5. Upland rice adaptation trial............................................................................................................................... 69

6 . Sorghum variety adaptation trial for mid-altitude areas of Melokoza and Basketo Special Woreda. 69

7. Adaptation o f improved lowland sorghum varieties in Kafa and Bench Ma ji zone...............................70

8. Adaptations of improved bread wheat varieties in high land area of Sheka zone................................... 70

9. Effects o f precursor crops and tillage on growth and yield o f bread wheat and component crops...... 70

10. Participatory evaluation and demonstration o f improved food barley varieties................................... 71

11. Determination o f optimum seed rate and inter row spacing for food barley (Ilordeum vulgare L.)

production in South Omo Zone.............................................................................................................................71

12. Participatory variety sclcction of food barley in high land areas of Mirab-Azerinet, Alicho, Gumer

and Endcgagn...........................................................................................................................................................71

13. Malt barley participatory variety selection in selected woredas of SNNPR..........................................72

14. Adaptation of improved lef varieties............................................................................................................ 72

15. Participatory evaluation and demonstration o f improved tcf varieties (Re-initiated activity)............73

16. Tef adaptation trial...................................................................................... 4.................................................73

ii . P U L S E , OIL A N D FIB BE R C R O P S IM P R O V E M E N T ........................................................ 73

17. Evaluation of released common bean varieties........................................................................................... 73

18. Participatory variety selection o f improved common bean varieties....................................................... 74

19. Participatory variety selection of improved ground nut varieties.............................................................74

20. Adaptation o f improved soybean varieties.....................................................................................................75

21. Determination o f seed rate for sesame......................................................................................................... 75

22. Adaptation trial o f sesame (Sesamum indicum.) varieties for low moisture area in Gurage zone.... 75

23. Participatory variety selection ofm ung bean.............................................................................................. 76

24. Adaptation study o f released mung bean varieties in Gorche district...................................................... 76

25. Evaluation o f plant density on faba bean yield and yield components....................................................76

26. Field pea adaptation trial................................................................................................................................. 77

27. Adaptation trial o f linseed varieties in South Omo Zone..........................................................................77

iii. ROOT AND TUBER CROPS IMPROVEMENT..................................................... 78

28. Participatory variety selection o f improved orange fleshed sweet potato vaneties in Basketo SpecialWoreda.......................................................................................................................................................................78

29. Adaptation and demonstration o f orange-11 eshed sweet potato varieties.................................................78

30. Adaptation o f sweet potato varieties in south western parts o f Ethiopia.................................................79

31 Scaling out o f integrated management o f bacterial wilt o f enset.............................................................. 79

32. Evaluation of potato varieties against late blight o f potato in selected AGP woredas o f Sidama andGedio zones...............................................................................................................................................................80

33. Evaluation o f plant population on tuber yield and yield component o f Irish potato........................... 80

34. Performance evaluation of Irish potato varieties in high land areas o f South Omo Zone, SNNPRS80

35. Demonstration o f potato ware house for reducing post-harvest losses in Silte and Gurage Zone.... 81

iv. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CROPS IMPROVEMENT........................................... 81

36. In vitro multiplication o f some selected banana (Musa spp.) cultivars through shoot lip culture ....81

37. Orchard establishment and scaling up o f banana varieties in South Omo Zone..................................83

38. Evaluation o f improved apple varieties in highland areas o f South Omo Zone, SNNPRS.................83

39. Evaluation o f improved onion varieties in Melokoza Woreda, Southern Ethiopia................................84

40. Adaptation o f improved garlic (Allium sativum \ ,.) varieties in Chena and Shewabench................... 84

41. Evaluation o f locally available and improved garlic cultivars against garlic rust in selected mid andhighland woredas o f Sidama and Gedio zone....................................................................................................84

42. Adaptation o f improved hot pepper (Capsicum species) varieties in Gojeb and Guraferda..............84

v. FOOD SCIENCE AND POST-HARVEST TECHNOLOGY......................................85

43. Demonstration o f harvesting material and simple post-harvest handing method for mango and

avocado fruits to major growing area o f Debub and Semen An W oredas....................................................85

44. Promotion o f common bean dishes in Basketo Woreda............................................................................ 85

45. Demonstration o f cassava food products...................................................................................................... 87

46. Development and demonstration o f kocho based food products..............................................................87

47. Evaluation and demonstration o f new food product o f enset, orange fleshed sweet potato and oatblends for alleviation o f nutritional insecurity.................................................................................................... 88

48. Production and popularization o f complementary food to children under two years in Silte Zone.. 89

49. Evaluation of nutritional status o f maize fermented meal by fortification with chickpea...................89

50. Enset food product processing technology selection and demonstration in Gurage and Silte Zones,

SNNPRG, Ethiopia...................................................................................................................................................90

VI. ADDRESSING THE THREE CROSS CUTTING ISSUES (GENDER, NUTRITION

AND CLIM ATE)............................................................................................................. 90

viii

List of tables

T a b le s P age

Table 1 Yield and land productivity response o f maize and common bean intercropping underconventional tillage and conservation tillage in Arbegona, Sidama zone...........................................................4

Table 2. Mean values o f agronomic trails o f midland maize varieties at Motikessa kebcle (Basketo special

woreda) during 2017 cropping season...................................................................................................................... 5Table 3. Mean values of agronomic traits o f midland maize varieties at Sasa kebcle (Basketo special

woreda) during 2017 cropping season...................................................................................................................... 5Table 4 . Mean values o f seven midland maize varieties at Belta kebcle (Basketo special woreda) during

2017 cropping season....................................................................................................................................................6

Table 5. Mean values o f different traits o f maize varieties at Salayish mender-3 (Mclokoza woreda)durmg 2017 cropping season...................................................................................................................................... 7Table 6 . Mean values o f agronomic traits o f maize varieties at Angila-4 (Basketo special woreda) during2017 cropping season....................................................................................................................................................7

Table 7. Mean grain yield & yield components oflow land maize varieties at Yeki & Gimbo (Gojeb)......8

Table 8. Mean grain yield (qt/ha) & yield components o f maize varieties in Me’enitgoldia (Bench Maji)

in 2016 & 2017 cropping season.................................................................................................................................8

fable 9. Mean values of agronomic traits o f midland maize varieties at Motikessa kebcle (Basketo specialworeda) during 2017 cropping season...................................................................................................................... 9

Table 10. Mean values o f agronomic traits o f midland maize varieties at Sasa kebcle (Basketo specialworeda) during 2017 cropping season.................................................................................................................... 10

Table 11. Mean values o f seven midland maize varieties at Belta kebcle (Basketo special woreda) during2017 cropping season..................................................................................................................................................10

Table 12. Mean grain yield & yield components o f highland maize varieties in Chena woreda 2017

cropping season............................................................................................................................................................12

Table 13. Mean grain yield o f maize as affected by weed practices in Basketo special woreda...................13

Table 14. The effect o f push-pull technology for the control o f stake borer in maize in Kako kebele........ 14

Table 15. The mean performance o f trails o f sorghum varieties in Yeki woreda during 2016 season.........15

Table 16. The effect o f weed control treatments on the sorghum grain yield and yield components, 2016

........................................................................................................................................................................................ 17

fable 17. The effect o f treatments on weed biomass in 2016 and 2017 cropping season..............................17Table 18. Performance o f sorghum varieties at Angila-3 (Basketo special woreda) in 2017........................ 18

Table 19. Responses o f sorghum varieties at Angila-4 (Basketo special woreda) in 2 0 1 7 ........................... 18

Table 20. Mean values treatment parameters at both Goldia and Sido kebcles................................................20

Table 21. Performance o f different lowland rice varieties at Gojeb testing site, 2017................................... 21

Table 22. Mean grain yield and yield related traits o f wheat varieties at Chena, 2016 .................................. 24

'Table 23 .Mean grain yield and yield related traits o f wheat varieties at Sheybcnch..................................... 24

Table 24. Pair-wise ranking o f the varieties on the selection criteria set by the fanners in..........................25

Table 25.Pair-wise ranking o f the varieties on the selection critena set by the farmers in Tocha woreda. 25

Table 26. Summary o f yield data in Konta and Tocha woredas............................................................................25

Table 27. Mean performance of wheat varieties at Shamabulikate. Semen An woreda in 2 0 1 6 .................... 26

Table 28.Growth parameter, yield components and grain yield o f food barley as affected by variety at

AykaSelmi kebelc. in Semen An woreda, in 2017............................................... ................................................... 27

Table 29. Interaction effect o f seed rate, N and P rates on gram yield o f food barley in Aliclio, 2016.......29

Table 30. Effect o f N and P rates on grain yield food barley at two locations m 20 1 6 .................................29

Table 31. Effect o f N and P rates on grain yield (Qt/ha) o f food barley under two different seed rates in at

Gumer in 2017 ..............................................................................................................................................................30

Table 32. Interaction effect o f N and P rates on grain yield (qt/ha) o f food barley at Gumer woreda.......30

fable 33. Mean grain yield and yield components o f tef varieties at Motikessa kebele (Basketo special

woreda) in 2017 ........................................................................i ................................................................................. 32

Table 34. Mean grain yield and yield components o f tef varieties at Zaba kebele (Basketo special woreda)

in 2 0 1 7 .............................................................................................................................................................................. 32

Table 35. Breeders’ evaluation of eight faba bean varieties in Konta district, 2016/2017............................... 34

Table 36. Ranking o f faba bean varieties using farmers' selection criteria [u=79 (male=62 Female=17

DA=2)] in two woredas.................................................................................................................................................35

Table 37. Mean responses o f six vaneties o f seven agronomic traits at Geta GM trial in 2016.................. 36

Table 38. Mean responses of six varieties of seven agronomic traits at Geta M trial in 2016.................... 36

Table 39. Mean responses of six varieties of 7 agronomic traits at Mierab Azernet grand mother trial in

2 0 1 6 .................................................................................................................................................................................. 37

Table 40. Mean responses o f six varieties o f 7 agronomic traits at Mierab Azemet mother tnal in 2016.37

Table 41. Mean responses o f six faba bean vaneties for seven agronomic traits at Alicho grand mothertrial in 2016......................................................................................................................................................................37

Table 42.Mean responses o f six faba bean varieties for agronomic traits at Alicho M trial in 2016............ 38

Table 43 .Mean responses o f six varieties o f seven agronomic traits at Gumer M trial in 2016.....................38

Table 44. Mean responses o f six varieties o f 7 agronomic traits at Gumer GM trial in 2 0 1 6 ........................38

Table 45. Mean Square Values for Growth parameters. Yield Components and Grain Yield o f faba bean

at Shama Bulket kebele in Semene An woreda, from 2016 to 2017................................................................. 41

Table 46. Growth parameters. Yield Components and Grain Yield o f faba bean as Affected by Variety at

ShamaBulket kebele, in Semen An woreda, from 2016 to 2 0 1 7 ........................................................................ 41Table 47. Participatory variety selection o f Desi chickpea based on fanners selection criteria in Tocha

woreda, n = 12 ..................................................................... ............................................................................................ 43Table 48. Mean grain yield (kg/ha) o f chickpea varieties at two locations....................................................... 44

Table 49. Mean grain yield (kg/ha) o f chickpea varieties for grandmother tna l.............................................. 44

I able 50. Mean o f four agronomic parameters for mother trial at Cheha..........................................................45

Table 51. Selection o f varieties based on farmers’ cntena.................................................................................... 45Table 52. Mean square value o f grain yield and yield components o f the field pea varieties for combined

analysis o f variance over two years (2016 and 2017).............................................................................................46

Table 53. Combined mean values o f grain yield and yield components o f field pea varieties...................... 47

fable 54. Ranking and grain yield of sesame vaneues from grandmother tnals at Konta, 2016..................48

Table 55. Pair-wise ranking o f farmers’ selection critena for sesame varieties in Konta woreda................ 49

Table 56. Direct matrix ranking evaluation o f sesame varieties by group o f fanners (n=23; male=19;

Female=4) and their assessment in Konta woreda................................................................................................. 49

Table 57. Pair-wise ranking o f sesame varieties by farmers in Konta woreda, 2016/2017........................... 50

Table 58. Grain yield and yield components o f sesame varieties in Menitgoldia, 2017................................. 51

Table 59. Mean grain yield against seed rates over two locations in Basketo special woreda......................52

Table 60. Mean performances o f sesame in response to inter and intra-row spacing in 2015....................... 53

Table 61. Mean performances o f sesame in response to inter and intra-row spacing in 2016....................... 53

Table 62.Mean performance o f five tomato varieties tested at Jinka on-station, 2016................................... 54

The experiment was planned to select better yielding onion varieties under irrigation condition in Bcnatsemay woreda using two improved onion varieties, namely, Nasik red, Nafis and one farmers’ variety. However, due to unexpected long-lasted drought in the area, the first year experiment was not undertaken. To commence the trial, the location was shifted to Jinka station. The result revealed that there was significance difference (P<0.05) between the local and improved varieties (Nasik red and Nafis) for

number o f plants and bulb biomass weight (Table 63). Variety Nafis yielded more than twice the yield of

the local variety. Hence, use o f variety Nafis can be recommended for Benathemay woreda and similar

agroecologies even though further testing is important by including different fertilizer recommendation, plant irrigation requirements and disease/ pest resistance potential to put the recommendation on strongbasis..................................................................................................................................................................................54

Table 63.The yield o f onion varieties as influenced by irrigation in W oito........................................................ 55

Table 64. The interaction of varieties and fungicide spray effect on the control o f late blight as expressedon yield and disease severity in 2016 and 2017 main cropping season.............................................................. 58Table 65. Average gross return, net return and MRR of potato over variety and fungicide combination in2016 and 2017 cropping seasons............................................................................................................................... 59

Table 66. Average potato yield (t/ha) in Konta Special Woreda (Genjigenet kebele).....................................60

Table 67. Average potato yield (t/ha) on fanner field in Dawro Z one...............................................................60

Table 68: Combined mean o f total fresh tuber yield for potato varieties in Dawro Zone.............................. 61

Table 69. Farmer’s preference ranking o f potato varieties in Konta Special Woreda....................................62

Table 70. Farmer’s preference ranking of the potato varieties in Tocha Woreda.............................................62

Table 71: Farmer’s preference Ranking o f Potato Varieties at Essera Woreda................................................ 62Table 72. Grain yield o f the component crops of maize-common bean-chickpea sequential intercropping

(Cheha 2017).................................................................................................................................................................. 68

Table 73. Sensory attributes o f common bean dishes and scoring using 5 point hedonic scale....................86

Table 74.Treatments.................................................................................................................................................... 88

Table 75.Treatments:................................................................................................................................................... 89

Figures Pages

Figure 1. Lowland mai/e Inals at Me’enitgoldiya and Melokoza woredas at dilYerent stages...................11

Figure 2. Maize seed treatment with chemicals......................................................................................................19

Figure 3. Bread wheat varieties in some farmers’ fields at Tocha (the left one), Konta (the middle and

right) and at Shcybench (below)............................................................................................................................... 26

Figure 4. Evaluation o f faba bean varieties by farmers and concerned stakeholders...................................... 33

Figure 5. Faba bean leal'chocolate spot symptom at Alicho Wuriro woreda................................................... 40

Figure 6. Field pea experimental field in Sheybench and Andracha woredas, 2017....................................... 47

Figure 7. Field view and farmers evaluating sesame varieties in Konta woreda. 2016...................................50

Figure 8. Sesame adaptation trial, Menitgoldia......................................................................................................51

Figure 9. Banana varieties at Salayesh 04 kebele in Melokoza woreda............................................................ 56

Figure 10. Participatory variety selection o f potato varieties in Konta, Esara and Tocha woredas................63

Figure 11. Pruning, dead wood removal, thinning o f unwanted branches, removal o f crisscross branches,

center clearing, and removal of uneconomic branches......................................................................................... 64

Figure 12. Fresh korarima at Gimbo woreda (Bonga ARC)................................................................................ 65Figure 13. Disease free ginger plantlets and recently planted ginger under lmgation at 0.25 ha land at

Kucha niche area.......................................................................................................- ................................................ 66

Figure 14. Field performances of maize at different growth stages in Bursa and Aibegona......................... 68

Figure 15. View o f maize at harvesting and chickpea at early growth stage.................................................... 69

Figure 16.Variety evaluation and discussion in progress during field day........................................................72Figure 17. Field view o f tef trial at different crop stage.......................................................................................73

Figure 18. Field view o f common bean at Wara wori (Tocha)........................................................................... 74

Figure 19. Field view o f sesame at Wara w ori...................................................................................................... 75Figure 20. Sweet potato seed increase plots at Areka on station........................................................................ 78

Figure 21. Theoretical and practical training on enset bacterial wilt management and protection............... 79

Figure 22. A=In vitro banana plantlets, B=plantlets ready for acclimatization, C=planllets ready for field

planting...................................................................................................................... - ................................................ 83

Figure 23 Number o f crop research activities by cross cutting issues...............................................................91

List of figures

INTRODUCTION

Agricultural sector plays a ccntral role in the economic and social life of the nation and is a

cornerstone of the economy in Ethiopia. About 80-85 percent of the people are employed in

agriculture, especially farming. The sector contributes about 40 percent of total GDP. Within

agriculture, some 60 percent of the output is from crops, with livestock and forestry producing

30 percent and 7 percent, respectively.

In Southern Nation’s Nationalities and Peoples Regional State (SNNPR), 90 percent of the total

population depends on agriculture as a source of home consumption, cash income, as industry

inputs and for export purpose. SNNPR is a large region in Ethiopia, 112,323.19 sq kms (CSA)

accounting for more than 10% of the country’s surface area. The population is estimated nearly

18 million; around a fifth of the country’s population (CSA, 2014). It is overwhelming rural,

with only 8% living in urban areas. The region is divided into 14 administrative zones, 133

woredas and 3512 kebeles, and its capital is Hawassa.

The Agricultural Growth Program (AGP-II) is operating in 157 w'oredas of Ethiopia and 35

woredas in SNNPRS in line with the second growth and transformation program (GTP-II) of the

country and the region. The research component of the AGP-II (component II) provides support

to the agricultural research system to enhance technology supply with the objective of

developing and promoting agricultural technologies for inclusive and sustainable market oriented

smallholder agricultural growth in potential areas of the country in a manner that addresses the

needs of women and youth. Five sub-components are addressed by the AGP-II component II of

the research system. These include: technology generation & adaptation in crop, livestock and

natural resource, pre extension demonstration and popularization of the adapted technologies,

source technology production, and capacity development to support the above sub-component.

The above mentioned sub components and each activity in sub component address the three

cross cutting issues: gender sensitive, climate smart and nutrition sensitive.

The major crops grown in high land region of project areas are cereal crops (maize, barley,

wheat, pulses (faba-bean and fieldpea), oil crop (linseed) root and tuber crops (enset and Irish

[1]

potato), fruits (apple), vegetables (local cabbage, carrot, head cabbagc, beet root, onion, and

garlic). Enset and food barely arc widely cultivated crops in all high land areas.

Whereas the major crops grown in mid land areas arc ccrcal crops ( maize, wheat tef sorghum,

barley, finger millet and rice), pulse crops (common bean, faba bean, pigeon pea, mung bean

and field pea), oil crops (linseed, ground nut and sesame), root and tuber crops (enset, taro,

sweet potato, cassava Irish potato, yam and taro), fruits (avocado, banana, mango, papaya, and

pineapple), coffcc and spiccs (coffee, ginger, turmeric) and vegetables (local cabbagc, head

cabbagc, onion, beet root, garlic, pepper, tomato, carrot and pumpkin) and industrial crop (sugar

canc), while the low land areas grow cereals (mai/c, sorghum, tef and pearl millet), pulse

(common bean, ground nut, cow pea and mung bean), oils crops (sunflower, sesame

groundnut,), root and tuber (taro, sweet potato, cassava, and enset), fruits (avocado, banana,

mango, lemon, citrus, pineapple and papaya) coffee and spices (coffee, korcrima, ginger,

turmeric, black cumin and white cumin) and vegetables (cabbages, onion, beet root, garlic, hoi

pepper, tomato and carrot) and fibber crop (cotton) were the major ones in rcspcctivc areas.

[2]

I. PROGRESSES OF CROP RESEARCH ACTIVITIES IN

2016/17

Lack of acccss to improved crop technologies and management practices coupled with climate

changes arc some of the major constraints in crop production in AGP II target woredas of the

region. The Crop research Directorate has proposed a total of 97 research activities supported by

AGPII project since December 2016. In 2016, 48 research activities were proposed and of these

activities, 25 were completed up to July 2018, 2 extended, 4 were terminated/ discontinued and

the rest 17 were ongoing. In 2017, production constraint assessment was undertaken in the

project woredas and additional 49 activities were initiated. So currently a total of 67 activities arc

ongoing including 2 of the extended activities. The detail progress of each activity is described

below.

1. Effect of maize common bean intercropping on land use efficiency and yield of component crops under conventional and conservation tillage practices

This activity was designed to evaluate the benefits oflegumes in cropping system on water use

cfficicncy, grain yield, land productivity and assess the change in soil physicochemical

properties due to conservation agriculture and system intensification in Arbcgona woreda. It was

executed for two years since March 2016. Intercropping has no significant cffcct on both mai/.c

and common bean yields. However, there was significantly highest sole maize yield over the

intercropped mai/c under both tillage practices. Generally, higher grain yield was observed to

conventional repeated tillage over the minimum tillage both in sole and intercropping (Table 1).

When we look at total LER of both crops, there was 41% and 35 % more land productivity for

conventional and minimum tillage, respectively over the sole cropping (Table 1). This result

invcteratcd the advantage of intercropping maize with common bean under both tillage practices

compared to the sole cropping practiccs.

[3]

Table 1 Yield and land productivity response of maize and common bean intercropping under conventional tillage and conservation tillage in Arbegona, Sidama zone

Treatments Maize Bean yield(kg/ha) LER LER TOTAL

yield(kg/ha) (Maize) (Bean) (LER)

MCN 3776 - 1 - 1

MCA 3743 - 1 - 1

M+BCN 3043 1495 0.81 0.60 1.41

M+BCA 2880 1412 0.77 0.58 1.35

BCN - 2505 - 1 1

BCA - 2419 - 1 1

cv% 21.77 13.41

LSD5% 896 321

2. Participatory evaluation of improved high land and mid land maize varieties

This activity was planned to identify and select the best performing maize variety/ies in Basketo,

Melekoza, Tocha, and Esera woredas of SNNPRS. Accordingly, the trial was conducted at

Melokoza and Basketo special woreda during 2017 mam cropping season. Seven improved

maize varieties (BH 543, BH 546, BH 547, BH 660, BH 661, SBRH and SPRH) were included

in the treatment and randomized complete block design (RCBD) was used with three

replications. The trial was successfully conducted in Basketo special woreda at three locations

(Motikessa, Sasa and Belta) but failed at Melokoza woreda due to low-moisture stress. The mean

values of yield and yield related traits are presented in Tables 2, 3 and 4 for Motikessa, Sasa and

Belta kebeles, respectively. The 2017 data indicated that maize varieties performed better at

Motikesa than Sasa and Belta kebele though the variation observed for grain yield among

varieties were non-significant for all locations. Averagely, all varieties poorly performed at Sasa

kebele indicating those varieties were grown out of the adaptation range. Hence, as the area is

lowland it is not appropriate to repeat in the same area. The trial will be repeated in 2018 (Belg

cropping season) to reach final conclusion and recommendation.

[4]

The other trial was conducted in Tocha and Esera and included only three improved maze hybrid

varieties (BH 546, BH 547 and BH 561) which were evaluated during the main seasons of 2016.

Variety BH-546 was selected both by farmers & researchers and recommended to be popularized

through PED for further dissemination.

Table 2. Mean v?lucs of agronomic traits of midland maize varieties at Motikcssa kebele(Basketo special woreda) during 2017 cropping season

Treatments TraitsGY (kg/ha) PH (cm) EH (cm) CL (cm)

BH543 8444 222.6 b 133.6 be 31.40 beBH546 8444 228.0 b 123.5 c 35.07abBH547 7956 212.6 b 128.0 c 36.87aBH660 6356 269.1 a 174.7 a 36.47aBH661 8622 260.5 a 153.0 ab 32.87abcSPRH 7289 218.5 b 114.3 c 31.33 beSBRH 5778 223.7 b 121.7 c 30.67 cMean 7555.6CV 22.3 6.9 9.3 7LSD NS 28.86 10.30 4.19G Y - grain yield, PH=plant height, EII=ear height, Cb=cob length

Table 3. Mean values of agronomic traits of midland maize varieties at Sasa kebele (Basketo special woreda) during 2017 cropping season

Treatment TraitsGrain yield (kg/ha)

Cob length (cm)

Ear height (cm)

Plant height (cm)

BH543 3333 24.67 116.3 197.7aBH546 3556 20.33 134.7 193.0aBH547 5111 22.00 132.3 237.7 bBH660 3333 21.33 129.0 237.7 bBH661 4889 23.33 122.7 206.3 abSPRH 3778 22.00 135.0 210.3 abSBRH 3778 23 125.3 199.3abMean 3968 22.38 127.9CV 30.0 14.1 14.7 11.5LSD NS NS NS 43.03

[5]

Table 4 . Mean v alues of seven midland maize varieties at Belta kebele (Basketo special woreda)during 2017 cropping season

Treatments TraitsGrain yield Plant height Ear height Cob length(kg/ha) (cm) (cm) (cm)

BH543 5200 227.4 b 143.1 be 25.93 abBH546 4956 242.0 b 135.7 be 25.73 abBH547 5778 229.1 b 145.1 b 30.20 aBH660 3778 264.2 a 182.2 a 27.53 abBH661 5356 268.9 a 175.7 a 28.93 aSPRH 5400 231.9 b 129.9 be 22.73 beSBRH 4889 224.6 b 124.3 c 19.07 c

Mean 5051CV 25.5 4.3 7.4 11.3LSD NS 18.51 19.46 5.166

3. Adaptation of improved lowland maize varieties in different locations of

SNNPR

The trial was conducted using eight improved lowland maize varieties: Melkasa-1, Melkasa-IQ,

Melkasa-2, Melkasa-3, Meikasa-4, Melkasa-6Q, Melkasa-7 & BH-! 40 (as check) at Melokoza

and Basketo special woredas during 2016 and 2017 cropping seasons. In the first-year (2016),

the experiment was failed due to low moisture stress, while the in second-year (2017), it was

successful in both woredas. Among the tested varieties, Melkassa-6Q gave the highest grain

yield (33 qt/ha) at Salayish mender-3 (Table 5) whereas Melkassa-3.gave the highest yield (29.7

qt/ha) at Angila-4 (Table 6). At both locations, the average yields were low mainly due to low

moisture stress and incidence of fall army worm. At Melekoza and Basketo the trial will be

repeated for one more season.

Similarly, the trial was conducted for two seasons (2016 & 2017) at Me’enitgoldia and Gimbo

(Gojeb) with five improved maize varieties (Melkasa-2, Melkasa-4, Melkasa-6, Melkasa-7 &

Gibe-2 and farmer variety) at three locations using randomized complete block design (RCBD)

with three replications. The highest yield was obtained from Gojeb for variety Gibe-2 (61 qt/ha)

followed by local (59.7 qt/ha) and Melkassa-4 (56.6qt/ha) (Table 8). In the second year, the yield

[61

data in Me’enitgoldia showed significant difference among varieties and the highest yield (56

qt/ha) was obtained from varieties Melkassa-4 followed by Gibe2 (55 qt/ha) (Table8),

Table 5. Mean values of different traits of maize varieties at Salayish mender-3 (Melokoza woreda) during 2017 cropping season

Treatment Traits

DM PH(cm) EH (cm) CL (cm) GY (kg/ha)

Melkassa-6Q 80.00c 192.7a 90.67ab 23.00ab 3307aMelkassa-7 74.67d 164.3ab 66.67cd 25.33ab 261Oab

Melkassa-2 90.33a 181 .Oab 79.33 be 23.33ab 2349abMelkass-4 82.67bc 167.0ab 73.00bcd 23.00ab 2275abMelkassa-3 85.33 b 172.0ab 80.67abc 22.00b 2033abMelkassa-1 74.00d 163.4ab 55.33d 20.67b 1917abCheck 84.67b 183.Oab 102.67a 22.33ab 1447abMelkassa-1 Q 76.00d 154.4b 58.67ed 21.67b 1407bMean 80.96 172.2 75.9 22.67 2168.CV 2.5 11.9 16.9 8.1 16.1LSD 3.52 35.78 22.47 3.2 611.1GY= grain yield, PH=plant height, EH= ear height, CL=cob length, DM= days to maturity

Table 6. Mean values of agronomic traits of maize varieties at Angila-4 (Basketo special woreda) during 2017 cropping seasonTreatment Traits

DM Pll(cm) EII (cm) CL- (cm) GY (kg/ha)Melkassa-3 85.00ab 169.3abc 86.93ab 20.73a 2973aMelkassa-4 83.33b 159.7bc 75.80b 15.87a 2586aMelkassa-7 79.33bcd 169.0abc 75.33b 17.80a 2485abMelkassa-2 90.00a 200.3a 96.33a 18.27a 2390abMelkassa-6Q 83.33b 147.0c 88.80ab 17.67a 1816 beMelkassa-1 73.67d 154.0bc 47.73c 21.80a 1815bcMelkassa-1 Q 75.67cd 178.7abc 55.00c 17.67a 1557cCheck(BH-140) 80.67bc 184.7ab 99.00a 17.53a 840 dMean 81.38 170.3 78.1 18.42 2058CV 4.6 12.6 10.5 20.6 - 18.7LSD 6.6 37.46 14.5 6.658 672.5

GY = grain yield in kilogram per hectare, PH =plant height in centimeter, EH= ear height in centimeter, CL=cob length, DM= days to maturity

[7]

Tabic 7. Mean grain yield & yield components of low land maize varieties at Ycki & Gimbo (Gojeb) _______________________Varieties Ycki, 2016 Gojeb, 2017

Grain Plant Ear 1000 Grain Plant Ear 1000yield height height seed yield height height seed(qt/ha) (cm) (cm) wt (qt/ha) (cm) (cm) wt

Mclkasa2 44.9a 207.40ab 28.4b 0.42ab 51.08c 190.66b 27.78b 0.4 labMclkasa4 44.4a I99.4ab 28.2abc 0.4 lab 56.65b 161.33bc 27.67b 0.43abMelkasa 6 37.3a 206ab 27.5abcd 0.4()b 46.74d 153.66c 27.5b 0.40abMclkasa 7 43.6a 188. lab 29.6a 0.40b 38.90e 172.00bc 27.45b 0.40bGibe 2 41.8a 212.1a 29.6a 0.42ab 60.97a 183.00bc 30.00a 0.40bLocal chcck 32.4a 213.6a 29.7a 0.42ab 59.68a 274.66a 29.15a 0.44aMeans 38.1 201.2 28.2 0.41 52.33 189.22 28.26 0.41

CV(%) 12.9 4.3 2.4 4.67 4.23 9.47 2.17 4.67LSD( 0.05) 24.7 77.7 0.46 0.02 4.03 32.0 1.11 0.03

Table 8. Mean grain yield (qt/ha) & yield components of maize varieties in Me’enitgoldia(Bench Maji) in 2016 & 2017 cropping season

Mean values 2016 Mean values 2017 MeanGrain Plant Ear 1000 Grain Plant Ear 1000 grain

Varieties yield height height seed yield height height seed yield(qt/ha) (cm) (cm) weight

(kg)

(qt/ha) (cm) (cm) weight

Melkasa2 52.44a 233.6ab 35ab 0.42ab 50.14b 2.445a 37.0ab 0.43ab 51Melkasa4 44.44ab 195.4abcd 38.8a 0.4 lab 55.80a 1.92e 35.0ab 0.40bc 50Melkasa 6 40ab 191.8abcd 35ab 0.40b 47.33b 1.79f 31.37b 0.39c 44Melkasa 7 32.4ab 174.8d 34.2ab 0.40b 40.13c 2.23c 36.80ab 0.39c 36Gibe 2 37.6ab 186.led 32.Sab 0.42ab 55.15a 2.30b 38.33a 0.44a 46Local 40ab 235.3a 34.Sab 0.42ab 42.0c 2.14d 37.07ab 0.40ccheck 41

Means 40.1 197.1 34.1 0.41 48.56 2.13 36.0 0.40CV(%) 15.8 7.4 7.5 4.2 5.0 0.4 9.15 3.72LSD(0.05) 40.9 216.8 6.7 0.03 4.42 0.02 6.0 0.02

[8]

This activity was planned to identify and select the best performing maize variety/ies in Basketo

and Melekoza, woredas of SNNPRS. Accordingly, the trial was conducted at Melokoza and

Basketo special woreda during 2017 main cropping season. Seven improved maize varieties (BH

543, BH 546, BH 547, BH 660, BH 661, SBRH and SPRH) were included in the treatment and

randomized complete block design (RCBD) was used with three replications. The trial was

successfully conducted in Basketo special woreda at three locations (Motikessa, Sasa and Belta)

but failed at Melokoza woreda due to low moisture stress. The mean values of yield and yield

related traits were presented in Tables 9, 10 &11 for Motikessa, Sasa and Belta kebeles. The data

in 2017 indicated that maize varieties performed better at Motikesa than Sasa and Belta kebcle

though the variations observed for grain yield among varieties were non-significant for all

locations. On average all varieties poorly performed at Sasa kebele. The trial was again planted

to reach conclusion and recommendation.

4. Adaptation of improved midland maize varieties in Basketo special andMelokoza woredas

Table 9. Mean values of agronomic traits of midland maize varieties at Motikessa kebele (Basketo special woreda) during 2017 cropping season

Treatments TraitsGrain yield Plant height Ear height Cob length(kg/ha) (cm) (cm) (cm)

BH543 8444 222.6 b 133.6 be 31.40 beBH546 8444 228.0 b 123.5 c 35.07abBH547 7956 212.6 b 128.0 c 36.87aBH660 6356 269.1 a 174.7 a 36.47aBH661 8622 260.5 a 153.0 ab 32.87abcSPRH 7289 218.5 b 114.3 c 31.33 beSBRH 5778 223.7 b 121.7 c 30.67 cMean 7555.6 233.6 135.5 33.52CV 22.3 6.9 9.3 7.0LSD NS 28.86 10.30 4.19

[9]

Tabic 10. Mean values of agronomic traits of midland maize varieties at Sasa kebele (Basketospecial woreda) during 2017 cropping season

Treatment TraitsGrain yield(kg/ha)

Cob length (cm)

Ear height(cm)

Plant height(cm)

BH543 3333 24.67 116.3 197.7aBH546 3556 20.33 134.7 193.0aBH547 5111 22.00 132.3 237.7 bBH660 3333 21.33 129.0 237.7 bBH661 4889 23.33 122.7 206.3 abSPRH 3778 22.00 135.0 210.3 abSBRH 3778 23 125.3 199.3abMean 3968 22.38 127.9 211.7CV 30.0 14.1 14.7 11.5LSD NS NS NS 43.03

Tabic 11. Mean values of seven midland woreda) during 2017 cropping season

maize varieties at Bella kebele (Basketo special

Treatments TraitsGrain yield (kg/ha)

Plant height (cm)

Ear height (cm)

Cob length (cm)

BH543 5200 227.4 b 143.1 be 25.93 abBH546 4956 242.0 b 135.7 be 25.73 abBH547 5778 229.1 b 145.1 b 30.20 aBH660 3778 264.2 a 182.2 a 27.53 abBH661 5356 268.9 a 175.7 a 28.93 aSPRH 5400 231.9 b 129.9 be 22.73 beSBRH 4889 224.6 b 124.3 c 19.07 cMean 5050.79 241.2 148.0 25.73

CV 25.5 4.3 7.4 11.3LSD NS 18.51 19.46 5.166

[101

Figure 1. Lowland maize trials at Me’enitgoldiya and Melokoza woredas at different stages

5. Adaptation and demonstration of improved highland maize varieties in south western parts of SNNPR

This activity was initiated to identify the best performing high land maize varsities for south­

western parts of SNNPR. Seven highland released maize varieties (Argene, Hora /Ambo 2synl/,

Wenchi /AMH-850/, Amh 854, Jibat /AMH-851/, BH-661 and farmer’s variety) were evaluated

at Chena and Andracha using randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three

replications At both locations, the first year (2016) trial was totally damaged by frost, while in

2017 the trial was conducted only at Chena woreda. The results showed that significant

[11]

difference was observed for grain yield and plant and ear height. The highest yield (53 qt/ha) was

obtained from Argene (Table 12).

Table 12. Mean grain yield & yield components of highland maize varieties in Chena woreda 2017 cropping season

Varieties Yield Plant Ear height 1000 seed(qt/ha) height (cm) (cm) weight (g)

Argene 53.1a 201.3de 41.0a 400aWenchi (AMH-854) 46.4ab 212.7cde 39.6ab 380aJibat (AMH-851) 30.9c 216.3cd 38.6ab 380aHora (Ambo 2synl) 39.3b 184.3e 33.6c 390aAmh 854 40.8b 253.0b 31.6c 380aBH-661 & 42.4b 235.7bc 35.6bc 370aLocal check 38.1bc 351.3a 36.0bc 350aMean 41.6 236.4 36.6 380CV(%) 10.86 6.62 6.44 7.54LSD (5%) 8.34 28.98 4.35 50

6. Evaluation and demonstration of integrated weed management methods for the control of weeds in maize

The trial was conducted in Melokoza and Basketo special woredas during 2017 cropping season

with the objective of evaluating and demonstrating different integrated weed control methods.

The experiment was conducted using RCBD with four replications in Basketo special woreda at

three locations. However, the crop failed at Melokoza woreda due to MLND and fall army worm

incidences. The mean values of yield in Basketo (Angila-4, Sasa and Motikessa kebeles) are

presented in Table 13. One-year data indicated that the crop performed nearly the same low yield

for all treatments in all locations. Therefore, the data were not satisfactory for confidential

recommendation due to the damage by MLND and American fall army worm. Hence, the

experiment will be repeated in 2018 cropping season to reach final recommendation and

conclusion.

[12]

Table 13. Mean grain yield of maize as affected by weed practices in Basketo special woreda

Treatments Mean gTain yield, kg/ha

Angla-4 Sasa Motikesa

One hand weeding (20-25 DAE*) 1770 167Oab 670 bTwo hand weeding (20-25 and 40-45 DAH) 2200 133Oab 990abPrimagram Gold (3 lt/ha) + One hand weeding 1840 2070a 1030ab(35-40 DAE)

Primagram Gold (3 lt/ha) + Two hand weeding 170 0 1970a 890ab(35-40 and 55-60 DAE)Farmers weeding practice (once weeding) 152 0 1000b 1170 aUn weeded (check) 139 0 130ab 1060ab

LSD (5%) NS 7.8 4.4CV (%) 7.9 14.2 10.0*DAE Days after emergence

7. Determination of irrigation interval for maize under small scale irrigation

This activity was conducted to determine irrigation interval for maize in Melokoza woreda

(Salaysh Mender-1) & Basketo woreda (Angila-3 kebele). The irrigation intervals were: 7 days,

14 days, 21days and farmers' practices. The experiment was replicated four times. The

experiment was started during 2017 cropping season. The long distance of the experiment site

from the main research center has made difficult the management of the treatments (irrigation

schedules) as planned. Therefore, the experiment was decided to be discontinued.

8. Demonstration of push-pull technology for control of maize and sorghum stalk borer in South Omo Zone (maize in Debub Ari and sorghum in Bennatsemay woreda)

The experiment was conducted to demonstrate push pull technology for control of maize stalk

Borers in Benna Tsemay Woreda on sorghum crop. To demonstrate this technology, three

treatments: the push-pull strategy, karate treated as standard check and Untreated (control) were

planted and evaluated. For the demonstration desmodium was planted on 10m xlOm plots

between sorghum rows and Napier grass planted in the periphery 1 m away from sorghum plants;

three rows of Napier grass was encirclcd using normal spacing of Napier grass. The result in

(Table 14) shows that the highest grain yield was obtained from plots under the push pull

[13]

strategy. It was around 3.85 tons per hectare that was 5% higher than farmers practice. The

incidence and severity of stalk borer was also significantly reduced in the push pull strategy

while around 90% of plants were attacked by the pest in the farmer’s practices. Farmers selected

the push pull strategy as the best stalk borer management practice. Farmers also suggested that

push pull technology did not require costly inputs and it is easily adoptable if they are supplied

with the seeds of desmodium and Napier grass.

Table 14. The effect of push-pull technology for the control of stake borer in maize in Kako kebele

Treatments

No of

sampled

plants

Number of

infected

plants

Number ofdeadhearts

Severity

(%)

Incidence

(%)

Grain

yield/ha/tone

Push pull 160 54 l 5 33.75 3.85

Standard 160 74 10 9 47.5 3.67

Check(karate)

Control 160 144 40 19.5 90 3

9. Effect of legume double cropping and N-fertilizer application on yield and

yield components of maize

The trial was conducted to determine the effect of double cropping of legume under maize and

N- fertilizer rate on growth and yield of maize in 2016 and 2017. It was conducted at Melekoza

and Basketo special woredas using different treatments consisting of two factors: double

cropping (common bean and mung bean with maize) and the rate of fertilizer application using

maize variety BH-140. However, due to Maize Lethal Necrosis Disease (MLNVD) and the

occurrence of fall army worm, the activity was not successful. In addition, maize and inter

cropped common bean matured at the same time and harvested simultaneously and this did not

allow to double crop the next crop (i.e. mung bean) under maize. Hence, the experiment will be

repeated in 2018 by modifying the activity as inter cropping rather than double cropping.

[14]

10. Adaptation of improved lowland/mid land sorghum varieties in south western parts of SNNPR

This activity was designed to identify adaptable and better performing sorghum variety/ies with

desirable characters among the released varieties (Teshalc, Dckcba, Dagim, Gercmcw, Gambella

1107, Mclkam, Local (farmer variety) as control) in low land agro ccology of Yeki woreda. In

the first year (2016) there was significant yield difference among varieties (Table 15). Varieties

Mclkam (62qt/ha) and Dckeba (49 qt/ha) performed significantly higher than the variety Teshalc

(36 qt/ha) but statistically had no significant difference with the local varieties which yielded 39

qt/ha. Farmers’ field day was organized to comc up with final recommendation. According to

farmer perception, Melkam ranked first followed by Gamblellal 107 and Dekeba, respectively,

mainly for their seed color, panicle and grain yield and height. The local variety showed high

lodging due to long height.

In the second year, the experiment was at field condition with good status. After the completion

of the data, recommendation will be made.

Table 15. The mean performance of traits of sorghum varieties in Yeki woreda during 2016 seasonVarieties Yield Plant Panicle height Panicic Panicle

(qt/ha) height (cm) (cm) weight (gm) yicld(gm)Teshale 35.58b 169.73ab 22.46a 221.13a 156.26dDckcba 48.97ab 117.60d 24.53a 247.30a 191.16cdDagim 43.43ab 158.33 27.26a 221.70a 304.46aGcrcmew 4l.43ab 140.00c 26.6oa 205.10a 155.60dGambellal 107 52.28ab 165.33 24.53a 313.60a 265.36abcMelkam 6 1.79a 148.00bc 28.40a 312.43a 284.40abLocal 39.17ab 181.20a 25.20a 223.30a 195.30bcdMean 46.10 181.20 25.97 249.22 221.79CV (%) 2.98 8.00 20.46 26.83 22.86LSD(0.05) 24.47 22.18 9.30 119.00 90.22

[15]

11. Evaluation of different weed management practices for controlling Acanthosperum hispidium on sorghum yield and yield components

The aim of the activity was to evaluate different weed management methods for controlling

Acanthosperum hispidium weed in Benatsemay woreda (Alduba and Kako kebeles). Six

treatments were compared in RCB design with three replications. The first year (2016) result at

Alduba kebele indicated significant difference on grain yield among treatments. However, the

yield difference among the weeding treatments (except the control) was not statistically

significant although the highest grain yield was recorded from hand weeding twice only and use

of 2,4-D alone (Table 16). The lowest grain yield was obtained from the control plots (farmers’

practice). The highest weed biomass was recovered from hand weeded at 21 and 35 days after

sowing (Table 17). The lowest weed biomass was obtained from plots treated with 2,4-D + hand

weeding 30 DAS.

Based on the data shown in the Table 16 and through cost benefit analysis of all the treatments,

treatment four that is spray of 2, 4 D at 21 DAS could be recommend as effective and

economical management option for the control of A. hispidum. Even though the use of herbicide

for weed management was not adopted in the area, the current experiment showed 2 ,4 D was the

best and economical alternative to hand weeding. 2, 4 D is widely available herbicide and it is

environmentally safe. The use of 2, 4 D also reduce the labor cost and is important to avoid

injury and damage to crops during cultivation besides that it is useful for moisture conservation

tillage practice.

[161

Table 16. The effect of weed control treatments on the sorghum grain yield and yield components, 2016______________________________________________________Treatment Plant height Crop biomass Grain Yield

(meter) (kg/ha) (kg/ha)Ti- control l.34 b 13055.56 b 739bT2 - Hand weeding Only 1.63 a 16500a 1630aT3~ 2,4-D + HW 30 DAS 1.48ab 12444.44b 1449aT4~ 2,4-D 1.51 ab 13500ab 1617aT5-Sorghum vs soybean + one hand weeding 1.63 a 15111.11ab 1466aT6 -Sorghum vs pigeon + one hand weeding 1.56 ab 13611.1 lab 1391aLSD o.o5 0.28 3138.2 415CV% 10.06 12.29 16.45

Table 17. The effect of treatments on weed biomass in 2016 and 2017 cropping season

Treatments Weed biomass (kg/ha), 2016

Weed biomass (kg/ha), 2017

Average weed biomass (kg/ha)

Control (hand weeding only (21 days) 905.55 796.3 850.9 abHand weeding only (21 & 35 DAE) 1000 981.5 990.7 a

2,4-D + hand weeding 30 DAS 346.30 259.3 302.8 c

2,4-D 365.4 388.9 377. labSorghum vs. soybean + one hand

405.55 351.9 378.7abweedingSorghum vs. pigeon + one hand weeding 865.5 907.4 886.4 abLSD o.o5

12. Adaptation of improved sorghum varieties for lowland areas of Basketo special and Melokoza woredas

This trial was implemented in Melokoza woreda and Basketo special woredas since 2016 with

the objective of evaluating the adaptability and performances of improved sorghum varieties

released for moisture deficit areas. In the experiment, eight sorghum varieties (Gubeye, Teshale,

76T1#23, Dekeba, Seredo, Meko, Melkam and farmers' variety) were used. The trial was

successfully conducted in Basketo special woreda but failed in Melokoza woreda due to bird

attack. The variation in grain yield was significantly different among varieties only for one

location i.e. Angila-3 of Basketo special woreda. At Angla-3 station, the varieties that gave

[17]

relatively higher yields were Teshalc, 76T1#23 and Seredo though the yield was lower than their

potential due to bird attack (Table 18). Whereas, in Angla-4 station, Teshale, Meko, 76T1#23

and Dekeba gave relatively better yield (Table 19). All improved varieties yielded less than their

potential attributed to several factors such as the improved varieties are early maturing and hence

susceptible to bird attack. Consequently, it is difficult to conclude the experiment and hence

recommended to repeat the experiment.

Tabic 18. Performance of sorghum varieties at Angila-3 (Basketo special woreda) in 2017

Treatment TraitsPlant height

(cm)Spike length (cm)

Tiller number per

plantGrain yield (kg/ha)

Teshale 229.5 a 29.27 a 0.3333 de 2898 a76Tl#23 124.5 cd 19.47 d 0.3333 de 2867 aSeredo 118.1 de 19.60 d 1.4667 a 2822 aDekeba 106.9 e 25.53 b 0.2000 e 1438 cGubiye 105.0 e 28.07 ab 0.5333 cd 1316 cMelkam 116.9 de 27.67 ab 0.6667 c 1289 cMeko 135.4 c 21.67 cd 0.4000 cde 1200 cLocal 168.3 b 22.53 c 1.0667 b 2096 bC V (% ) 5.9 6.6 30 17.4LSD (5%) 14.34 2.78 0.32 606.6

Table 19. Responses of sorghum varieties at Angila-4 (Basketo spccial woreda) in 2017

Treatment ParametersPlant height Spike length Tiller number per Grain yield(cm) (cm) plant (kg/ha)

Teshale 256.7 a 29.27 a 0.2667 c 2959Meko 181.2 c 21.67 cd 0.2000 c 294876T1#23 150.9 d 19.47 d 0.3333 be 2906Dekeba 126.3 e 25.53 b 0.5333 a 2645Seredo 123.7 e 19.60 d 0.5333 a 2456Melkam 149.1 d 27.67 ab 0.3333 be 2234Gubiye 111.5 f 28.07 ab 0.4667 ab 2054Local 205.3 b 22.53 c 0.2667 c 2251CV (%) 4.2 6.6 22.6 23LSD (5%) 12.11 2.78 0.14 NS

[18]

13. Storage pest management options for sorghum and maize in South Omo Zone

This activity was initiated to evaluate improved control methods of storage pests for sorghum in

Benatsemay woreda. It was expected to be started in 2016, however, due to shortage of

experimental materials, it was delayed for a year. It was started as of May 2017 at one kebele

under farmers’ storage condition with four farmers.

There was significant difference among treatments with regard to incidence of maize weevil in

both Sido and Goldia kebeles. The highest incidence was observed from seeds maintained with

farmers practice as shown in the Table 20. The lowest pest incidence was observed on maize

seeds maintained by treating the seeds with similar rate of 50g/qt. The incidence at this rate was

significantly lower than the rest of the treatments; however there was no significant difference

among other treatments.

In tenns of weevil attack severity, there was significant difference among experimental

treatments and although the highest severity was observed from seeds maintained with farmers

practices for four months and the second highest severity was observed from treatment four that

was seeds maintained for four months with treatment of Talic at rate of 50g/qt, whereas the

lowest severity was observed from maize seeds treated and maintained deltical at rate of 50g/qt.

at this rate the weevil attack was significantly lower than other treatments. The above result

revealed that deltical at rate of 50gm/qt had the highest control for reducing both pest incidence

and severity.

Figure 2. Maize seed treatment with chemicals

[19]

With regarded to 100 seed weight there was variation among treatments and the highest average

lOOseed weight throughout the storage period was observed from seeds maintained at deltical

which was significantly higher than the rust o f the treatments. The lowest 100 seed weight was

observed from seeds maintained at farmers practice. This weight was significantly lower than

seeds maintained on other practices.

With regard to seed weight loss after four months of storage period the lowest percent weight

loss was observed from seeds maintained with deltical 50gm/qt which was significantly lower

than other treatments, whereas the highest percent weight loss was observed from seeds

maintained with framers practice.

Table 20. Mean values treatment parameters at both Goldia and Sido kebeles

Treatment Pestincidence % (Ave.)

Severity (0-9) '

100 SW (Ave.)

PWL Type of damage

Tl= Sanitation 37.625a 4.125a 18.12b 22.72a Feeding

T2> Malathion 5% Dust @50g/qt 34a 4a 18.56b 20.92ab Feeding

T3> Deltical @50g/qt 9b 2b 20.75a 13.32b Feeding

T4:-Talic @50g/qt 43a 4.56a 17.375bc 27.60a Feeding

T5> Control (farmers practice) CV%

43.25a35

4.75a22.04

16.125c10.68

28.82a32

Feeding

Note: 100 SW = 100 seed weight, PWL = percent weight loss

14. Adaptation trial of lowland rice

This trial was proposed to identify and select the best performing rice variety/ies. The

experiment was implemented in Gimbo woreda using six improved varieties (Hiber, Ediget,

Demoze, Humera, X-JIGNA and ROJOMENA) and one local check (Farmers’ variety). The

experiment was conducted in 2016 and 2017. In 2016, however, the crop was devastated by

unpredicted low moisture stress that occurred after flowering stage. In 2017, the experiment was

conducted at Gojeb substation (Gimbo woreda) including seven lowland rice varieties. Yield and

yield component data were recorded. The result showed that the variation in grain yield among

[20]

varieties was highly significant (Table 21). The yield obtained from the variety ROJOMENA

was significantly higher than the yield obtained from the other varieties.

Table 21. Performance of different lowland rice varieties at Gojeb testing site, 2017

Variety PH PL FTPP NFTPP GY (kg/ha) TGW

Hiber 81.8c 18.led 6.8c 2.1a 1125.5e 61a

Ediget 90.8bc 17.6d 7.6cb 0.9b 1817.4cd 60a

Demoze 98.8ab 20.2bc 10.4a 1.9ab 1600.3de 58ab

Gumara 103.1a 20.5b 10. la 2.4a 2439.6bc 56.3ab

X-JIGNA 104.2a 22. lab 9.13abc 2.1a 1972.3cd 58.6ab

ROJOMENA 109.4a 23.7a 9.13abc 1.9ab 3691.6a 53.3b

Local 105a 21.6ab 9.3ab 2a 2834.6b 58.3ab

LSD 11.4 2.3 2.3 1.03 643.5 6.7

CV% 6.4 6.3 14.5 30 16.4 6.3.

PH, Plant height; PL, Panicle length; FTPP, Fertile tillers per plant; GY, Grain yield; TGW 1000 seed weight

15. Promotion of finger millet variety in moisture stress areas of Benatsemay woreda

The objective of the activity was to promote and popularize the released variety: Kako-1 which

was released by Jinka Agricultural Research Centre. In 2016, the variety was promoted in the

two AGP woredas (Benatsemay and Debub Ari). The crop was planted and demonstrated on

400m2 plot. Thirty six pastorals from Benatsemay and fifty fanners from Debub Ari participated

in the demonstration. Based on the participants’ evaluation and perception the variety was

accepted considering characters such as high number of tiller, early maturity, and yield

advantage over the standard cheek. The activity will be promoted to large scale production in the

woreda.

[21]

16. Effect of barley-wheat-faba bean- field pea rotation on performance of wheat in South Omo zone

This activity was conducted to determine the appropriate crop rotation sequence for sustainable

wheat based production in Semen Ari woreda in 2016.The trial was started and conducted in

2016 meher cropping season at Shamabulket kebele FTC. All the necessary data from wheat,

faba bean and field pea crops, except maize, were collected. Unfortunately the maize crop could

not grow and perform well because it was not compatible with the cropping season. In the

highlands, the maize planted in belg season took almost nine months to mature. So, it was agreed

to repeat the trial by replacing barley for maize crop. Thus the experiment was extended (2017-

2020). In 2017, the experimental crops were planted and found in good field status.

17. Adaptation and demonstration of improved bread wheat varieties

The activity was conducted to identify high yielding, widely adaptable and disease tolerant

variety/ies in high land areas: Sheybench, Chena, Debub Ari and Semen Ari, Konta and Tocha of

SNNPRS. Six different wheat varieties were tested in Debub-Ari and Semen Ari, whereas ten

released varieties were examined in Sheybench and Chena woredas. In all cases, local check was

included for comparison.

The first year result in Semen Ari and Debub Ari showed that the varieties Ogolocho, Wane and

Hidase varieties gave average yield of 56 qt/ha, 47 qt/ha and 39 qt/ha, respectively. Field visits

were conducted with all responsible experts and farmers. In the second year, the experimental

crop was planted and currently found at vegetative stage in all locations.

In Chena and Sheybench woredas, the crop established well in 2016, almost all of the varieties

were affected by yellow rust. The disease occurred at head initiation stage of the crop. Due to the

above problem all of the treatments showed low yield performance (Table 22 and 23). In the

second year, the experiment was also conducted in both locations including the newly proposed

location at Andracha (Getiba kebele) and the crop was harvested in all location. During regional

[22]

annual review of 2017, the first year data was suggested to be excluded because of low yield and

recommended to repeat the trial in 2018.

In Konta and Tocha, the experiment was conductcd using Shorma, Hidase, Huluka and farmers’

varieties. According to farmer’s evaluation (using pair wise ranking), Shorma and Hidase ranked

first in both woredas for overall criteria considered (Tables 24 &25). Local varieties at each

location were ranked last indicating that the need to replace them with the newly released

varieties

Statistical analysis indicated significant differences (P<0.05) among varieties for grain yield

(Table 26). The highest grain yield was recorded for variety Hidase which significantly out-

yielded all other varieties. The variety Hidase gave highest grain yield of 70.89 q/ha and 48.64

q/ha at Konta and Tocha, respectively. This was followed by Shorma in both locations. A very

low productivity, as low as average grain yield of 14.6qt/ha and 12.7qt/ha, was recorded for local

checks in Konta and Tocha, respectively. This indicates the need for the replacement of the local

variety by the new varieties.

In 2016, the trial was also conductcd at Shamabulkate FTC and Aykiselem kebeles with three

replications. Field day was held and farmers selected best varieties. The result at Shamabulkate

showed that variety Ogolcho (56 qt/ha), Wane (47 qt/ha) and Hidase (39 qt/ha) relatively gave

better grain yield (Table 27). In the second year, the experiment was conducted in Semen Ari

woreda at Aykeselema kebele and the crop was at booting stage.

[23]

Table 22. Mean grain yield and yield related traits of wheat varieties at Chena, 2016

Varieties Mean valuesGrain yield (ton/ha) Plant height (cm) Spike length

(cm)Tillernumber

Alidore 3.92a 70.7de 8.4ab 3.2a

Hoggana 4.55a 72.5cd 7.9b 2.9ab

Shorima 4.08a 78.1b 7.7b 2.9ab

Madawalabu 4.58a 77.9b 9.9a 2.87ab

Hidase 4.69a 69.4ef 7.8b 2.7ab

Huluka 5.82a 71.7de 8.3b 2.7ab

Kakaba 4.95a 74.3c 8.2b 2.7ab

Kingbird 4.94a 73.7cd 7.7b 2.7ab

Danda’a 4.92a 80.9a 8b 2.5b

Local check 3.27a 73.8cd 8.7ab 2.3b

Table 23.Mean grain yield and yield related traits of wheat varieties at Sheybench

Varieties Mean values

Grain yield (ton/ha)

Plant height (cm)

Spike length (cm)

Tiller#

Alidore 5.82bc 77.3b 7.1 be 12ab

Hoggana 4.8bc 78.9b 7.1 be 12.5a

Shorima 2.47d 92.5a 6.8c 9.9ab

Madawalabu 6.55ab 81.7ab 8.5a 11.3ab

Hidase 5.31abc 84.7ab 7.9ab 12.6a

Huluka 6.31abc 78.9b 7.9ab 10.7ab

Kakaba 4.89bc 82. lab 7.06bc 10.9ab

Kingbird 5.11bc 89ab 7.06bc 11.Bab

Danda’a 7.52a 89. lab 8.46a 12.7a

Local check 3.65cd 86.9ab 7.6abc 11.4ab

[24]

Table 24. Pair-wise ranking o f the varieties on the selection criteria set by the farmers in

Konta special woreda

Farmers selection criteria

Wheat Varieties

Shorma Hidase Huluka LocalCrop stand 1 2 3 4Spike length 2 1 3 4Early maturity 3 2 1 4Seed Quality 1 2 3 4Total score 7 7 10 16Mean scorc 1.75 1.75 2.5 4Rank 1 1 3 4

Table 25.Pair-wise ranking of the varieties on the selection criteria set by the farmers in Tocha woreda

Wheat VarietiesFarmers selection criteria Shorma Hidase Huluka LocalCrop stand 1 2 3 4Spike length 2 1 3 4Early maturity 3 2 1 4Seed Quality 1 2 3 4Total score 7 7 10 16Mean score 1.75 1.75 2.5 4Rank 1 1 3 4

Table 26. Summary of yield data in Konta and Tocha woredas

Bread wheat Average grain yield (qt/ha)varieties Konta Rank Tocha RankShorma 59.39b 2 44.07a 2Hidase 70.89* 1 48.64a 1Huluka 27.28c 3 26.85b 3Local 14.57d 4 12.71c 4LSD (%) 8.26 7.23CV 17.49 19.83

[25]

Table 27. Mean performance o f wheat varieties at Shamabulikate, Semen Ari woreda in 2016

Treatments/Varieties

Grain yield (qt/ha)

Biomass(ton/ha)

Yellow rust incidence (%)

Yellow rust severity (%)

Wane 47.4 lab 9.589 4.00d 0.00cDand’a 28.87cd 8.66a 100.00a 80.00aHongolo 28.16cd 8.57a 71.66b 31.66b

Ogolcho 55.97a 9.55a 2.33d 0.00cLemu 23.3 Id 7.00a 90.00ab 65.00aHidase 39.0bc 6.9 41.66c 15.00 beCV(%) 19 20 20 30R-square (%) 83 53Grand mean 37.12 8.39 51.6 31.94

Figure 3. Bread wheat varieties in some fanners’ fields at Tocha (the left one), Konta (the middle and right) and at Sheybench (below)

18. Evaluation and demonstration of integrated weed management methods for the control of weeds in wheat

This trial was conducted in 2017 at Melokoza woreda (at Toba and Dala Kebeles) with the

objective of evaluating and demonstrating different weed control methods to increase wheat

productivity and reduce yield loss due to weed. The experimem had five treatments (hand

weeding at 2 ,4 and 6 WAP, Pallas 45 OD + hand weeding at 5 and 7 WAP, Pallas 45 OD + hand

weeding at 7 WAP, farmers’ weeding practice and weedy check) laid out in RCBD at two

locations. The crop was harvested and data analysis was in progress.

19. Adaptation of improved food barley variety in South Omo zone

A field experiment involving six improved and one local food barley [Hordeum vulgare

(L.)‘Morex’l varieties was carried out in Semen Ari woreda in 2017 main cropping season to

identify the best performing variety for the highland areas of South Omo Zone. The food barley

varieties included in the field experiment were six improved (Gobc, Dimtu, Shege, HB1307,

EH 1493, Cross 41/98 and local check). Growth parameters and yield and yield components such

as plant height, spike length, 1000 seed weight and grain yield were collected (Table 28). The

analysis of variance in Table 28 showed that all the growth, yield and yield component traits

were significantly affected by variety. The maximum 1000 seed weight and highest grain yields

(3311.1, 2952.6 and 2943.6 kg ha'1) were recorded from the varieties Gobc, HB1307 and Shege,

respectively. Therefore, it can be tentatively concluded that use of the improved food barley

varieties such as Gobe, HB1307 or Shegeor is advisable and could be appropriate for food barley

production in the test area even though further testing is required to put the recommendation on a

strong basis.

"able 28.Growth parameter, yield components and grain yield of food barley as affected by

variety at AykaSelmi kebele, in Semen Ari woreda, in 2017.

PH SL TSW Grain Yield

Varieties

Gobe 72ab 21.13a 51.4a 3311.111a

IIB1307 72ab 14.20b 46.83ab 2952.604ab

Shege 65ab 13.93b 46.83ab 2943.576ab

EH 1493 76a 18.73a 43.83bc 2909.375ab

Cross41/98 70ab 14.26b 42.50bc 2849.653ab

Dimtu 54.6b 19.00a 41.83ab 2163.542 be

Local 68ab 15.00a 37.00d 1330.208c

CV (%) 14 11 7 17.8

Note: Means with the same letters within the colum ns are not significantly different at P <0.05. PH= plant height (cm), SL= spike length (cm), TSW= 100 seed weight (g), GY= Grain Y ield (kg ha’1)

[27]

This experiment was proposed to determine appropriate nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P)

fertilizer rates under different seed rates to maximize grain yield of food barley in Alicho-wuriro

and Gumer woredas. The experiment was carried out in the meher season of 2015 and 2016

cropping seasons. In both locations, the yield showed an increasing trend as NP fertilizer rate

increased.

At Alicho, the variation on grain yield was significant among treatments and the highest yield

was obtained from the interaction effect of 100 kg N/ha, 200 kg NPS/ha and seed rate of 120

kg/ha in 2016 (Table 29). The independent N and P effects and their interactions were also

significant (Tables 29 & 30). Similarly, at Gumer, the variation on gTain yield was significant

among treatments and the highest yield was obtained from interaction effect of 100 kg N/ha, 200

kg NPS/ha and seed rate o f 120 kg/ha for two years (2016 & 2017) (Table 20.4). The

independent N and P effects and their interactions were also significant (Tables 31& 32 ).

Therefore, from agronomic point of view, application of 100 kg N/ha. 200 kg NPS/ha with seed

rate of 120 kg/ha can be recommended for both locations and similar areas. However, economic

analysis needs to be conducted to come up with final applicable recommendation.

20. Determination of appropriate nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer rateunder different seed rate for food barley

[28]

Table 29. Interaction effect o f seed rate, N and P rates on grain yield of food barley in Alicho,2016

Fertilizer Seed rate (kg/ha)N rate (N kg/ha) P rate

(P20 ?kg/ha)120 180

0 0 40.07° 28.28119 49.72c'e 55.5 la’d38 40.17° 49.90de57 58.66a'c 58.08ab76 47.92de 51.91b’e

23 0 19.63* 18.93s19 39.5 le 51.35b°'°38 39.3 le 54.75a_e57 62.82ab 57.02a‘°76 59.88a'c 62.10a

46 0 16.73' 21.501"819 52.08b'd 47.80e38 49.46c'e 50.43c_c57 55.9 labcd 52.7 ibcde76 63.46a 48.34de

LSD 5% 10.71 7.43

Table 30. Effect of N and P rates on grain yield food barley at two locations in 2016

TreatmentsAlicho

Grain yield (qt/ha) Gumer

N rate (urea kg/ha) 0 46.89a 47.47b50 42.83 b 46.83b100 46.49a 50.593LSD (5%) 2.49 1.46

P rate (DAP kg/ha) 0 23.84° 37.09°50 45.73b 46.18b100 48.05b 45.18b150 53.703 57.23a200 55.67a 55.80aLSD (5%) 3.21 1.88

[29]

Table 31 Effect of N and P rates on grain yield (Qt/ha) of food barley under two different seed rates in at Gumer in 2017

Treatments120 kg/ha

Seed rates180 kg/ha

N rate (urea kg/ha) 0 23.85b 26.48b50 31.81a 34.84a100 33.77a 32.52aLSD 2.34 4.10CV(%) 17.53 17.53

P rate (NPS kg/ha) 0 21.62c 23.36c50 28.41b 24.68c100 31.28b 32.08b150 30.28b 36.1 lab200 37.45a 40.19aLSD 5% 3.02 5.29CV (%) 10.50 17.53

Table 32. Interaction effect of N and P rates on grain yield (qt/ha) of food barley at Gumer woreda

Fertilizer 2016 2017

Seed rate (kg/ha) Seed rate (kg/ha)N rate Prate 120 180 120 180(kg/ha urea) (kg/ha NPS)

0 0 39.95“ 36.29h 16.45r 19.05b50 46.94° 51.38®* 25.58e 20.63**100 46.56c 47.13f,? 22.91' 27.5 ldh150 62.213* 64.69*b 33.06od 28.47°'s200 62.2 r b 50.47* 21.25^ 36.78**

50 0 48.30° 32.29h 16.93f 29.83cf50 31.18° 52.19** 36.68cd 28.30**100 44.79° 58.00* 38.03bc 36.58*^150 47.36° 46.59* 25.16e 35.5 l a_d200 59.29b 59.30bc 42.25b 44.10*

100 0 61.51b 36.62h 31.50d 21.20“50 45.00° 46.05* 22.96c 25.11041100 46.22° 47.56* 32.91°“ 32.20^150 44.79d 56.89°* 32.61d 44.40*200 65.93* 65.69* 48.86* 39.70ab

Mean 50 47 30 31LSD 5% 4.21 5.87 5.87 9.17CV% 5.05 6.91 10.50 17.53

[30]

21. Adaptation and demonstration of improved malt barley varieties in high land area of Kafa Zone

This aim of this study was to identify better adapting varieties of malt barley for the study area.

The experiment was conducted in 2016 using six malt barley varieties and one farmers’ variety.

Until the heading stage, the field performance was excellent, but after this stage, the whole field

was devastated by leaf rust and frost and thus the first year experiment failed. The same crop

performance was observed in 2017 and therefore the activity was decided to be pended.

22. Adaptation and demonstration of improved tef varieties in Bench Maji Zone

This research activity was conducted to introduce and test the adaptability of improved tef

varieties in the selected areas. The experiment was started in 2016 with fourteen tef varieties in

Sheybench and Chena woredas. RCB design was used with three replications. Due to shoot fly

attack and frost incidencc the experiment failed in the first year (2016). In 2017, the experiment

was executed using 19 varieties. However, only two varieties including a local check showed

good performance but the other varieties missed before and after emergency.

23. Participatory variety selection of recent tef varieties

The experiment is being carried out in Basketo (Motikessa and Zaba kebcle) and Mclckoza

(Toba Kebele) woredas since July 2017 with the objective of selecting best performing tef

varieties through farmers’ participation. Seven tef varieties (Dagim, Quncho, Tesfa, Filagot,

Nigusie, Kora & Local check/farmers’ variety) were considered with three replications.

Statistical analysis showed that there was significant grain yield difference among released

varieties in Motikessa kebele. The variety Nigussie gave the highest yield (14 qt/ha), however, it

was not significantly different from the local variety which gave about 12 qt/ha (Table 31). In

Zaba kebele, variety Filagote gave the highest yield (13qt kg/ha) which was significantly higher

compared to the variety Nigussie which yielded lowest (10 qt/ha) (Table 34). In Melkoza (Toba

kebele), the experimental crop was not yet harvested and full data were not presented here.

[31]

Table 33. Mean grain yield and yield components of tef varieties at Motikessa kebele (Basketo special woreda) in 2017Treatments Traits

PH (cm) PL(cm) TN Grain yield (kg/ha)Dagim 121.0 ab 41.13 b 5.067 b 1192 abcQuncho 129.9 a 48.27 a 5.733 b 1088 beKora 118.3 be 42.73 ab 11.200 a 1239 abFilagote 104.5 d 32.93 cd 8.133 ab 1226 abcTesfa 111.3 cd 38.33 be 6.533 b 990 cNgussie 113.2 bed 39.80 b 6.467 b 1408 aLocal 106.3 d 30.33 d 7.000 b 1196 abcCV% 4.6 8.8 25.7 11.4LSD 5% 9.32 6.12 3.27 241.43

GY= grain yield, PIl=plant height, PN=paniclc length, TN=tiller number

Tabic 34. Mean grain yield and yield components of tef varieties at Zaba kebele (Basketo special woreda) in 2017Treatments Traits

PH(cm) PL(cm) TN(cm) GY(kg/ha)Dagim 98.13 39.00 7.800 1153 abQuncho 100.13 37.80 7.560 1172 abKora 94.67 34.20 6.840 1124 abFilagote 100.87 38.53 7.707 1317 aTesfa 94.80 36.40 7.280 1174 abNgussie 92.00 35.00 6.600 1023 bLocal 93.27 35.07 7.013 1244 abMean ? ? ? ?

CV% 20.8 18.8 12.2 12.1LSD 5% Ns NS NS 115.69

GY= grain yield, PH=plant height, PN=pamcle length, I N^tiller number

24. Adaptability test of recent faba-bean varieties

The experiment was conducted to identify high yielding and disease resistant/tolerant large

seeded faba bean varieties based on farmers’ preferences in Arbegona, Malga, Bursa, Gorche,

Buie and Gedeb woredas. Six released varieties including local check (farmers’ varieties) were

used in RCBD with three replications. It was conducted for two consecutive years (2016 and

[32]

2017). The experiment failed in the first year but properly conducted in the next year though the

data was not ready to submit.

25. Participatory evaluation of improved faba-bean varieties

The objective of this study was to identify high yielding and disease resistant faba bean varieties

in Tocha, Esera, and Konta woredas. The trial consisted of four varieties with one local check.

Farmer plots were considered as replications.

Table 35 shows researchers’ evaluation in Konta district for faba bean PVS. Researchers’

evaluated the varieties based on grain yield .The varieties revealed a distinct statistical variation

in grain yield and also there was significant difference among the faba bean varieties. Doshah

gave the highest grain yield (3581.8 kg ha'1), whereas Angacha-1 gave the lowest grain yield

(2577.6 kg/ha). On the other hand, the PVS result showed that there was significant difference

among the varieties for grain yield at Konta in 2016/2017.

Figure 4. Evaluation of faba bean varieties by farmers and concerned stakeholders

[33]

Table 35. Breeders’ evaluation of eight faba bean vaneties in Konta distnct, 2016/2017

Vaneties Grain yield (kg/ha)

Researchers Rank Fanners rank

Gabalicho 2977.66bc 5 4Degaga 2990.66b 4 2Dosha 3581.8a 1 3Tumsa 3074.2b 3 5Bobicho-04 3524.5a 2 1Moti 2936.2bc 6 6Angacha-1 2577.Id 8 8Local 2640.6cd 7 7G.mean 3077.8LSD(0.05) 348.5CV% 9.78

Farmers’ evaluation of the varieties: The farmers who evaluated the trial were representative

of the area farmers. These farmers were most interested in some of the parameters like stand

strength (lodging resistance), branch number/tillers, pod number, seed number, pod length,

maturity, chocolate spot resistance, aphid resistance, seed size, leaf shading (manure), seed color,

straw yield and grain yield (Table 36). Out of the fourteen different traits, farmers chose traits

that they often use when evaluating faba bean genotypes for adoption. Therefore, while farmers

consider many traits, there are a few traits that they often use and these traits need to be

identified. Earlier studies by Gurumu (2013) working on common bean and Wondimu (2016)

working on faba beans reported similar findings that farmers use a combination of a few traits

when evaluating new genotypes. At flowering, matunty stage and harvest, the farmers responded

positively to the faba bean varieties. There was a match between the results of farmers'

assessment and researchers evaluation. Farmers’ overall evaluations indicated that variety

Bobicho-04, Dosha, Degaga, Gabalico and Moti were the best among the tested faba bean

varieties (Table 36). The variety Angacha-1 showed poor performance and was least prefened by

farmers in most cases.

In general, farmers of Konta district selected faba bean variety Bobicho-04, Dosha, Degaga, and

Gabalicho as 1st, 2nd 3rd and 4th, respectively. The variety Angacha-1 have showed poor

performance in most cases and rejected by participant farmers.

[34]

Tabic 36. Ranking of faba bean varieties using farmers’ selection criteria |n=79 (male=62 Fcmalc=17 DA=2)J in two woredas

Faba bean varietiesSelection criteria Bobicho I)agaga Tumsa Moti Angacha-1 Gabalcho Dosha Local

Konta woredaStand strength 1 5 4 3 4 3 3 3

Branch number/tillers 3 1 4 5 4 4 4 2

Pod number 4 I 2 2 2 2 2 3

Seed number 1 1 4 1 4 4 4 3

Pod length 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1Maturity 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2

Chocolate spot 1 1 4 3 4 4 4 2

resistance Rust resistance 1 5 2 2 2 2 2 3

Aphid resistance 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 2

Seed si/e 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 2Leafshading 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1(manure) Seed Color 1 1 1 1 1 2 1Grain yield 4 3 3 4 5 1 1 8

Straw yield 3 2 3 1 5 2 2 5

Tocha woredaStand strength 2 4 4 4 4 3 1 3

Branch number/tillers 1 4 4 4 4 5 3 2

Pod number 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3

Seed number 1 4 4 4 4 1 1 3

Pod length 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3

Maturity 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2

Chocolate spot 1 4 4 4 4 3 1 2

resistance Rust resistance 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 3Aphid resistance 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 2

Seed size 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2Leaf shading 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1(manure) Seed Color 1 1 2 1 1 I 1 1Grain yield 3 1 1 3 5 4 2 4

Straw yield 2 2 2 3 5 1 3 5

Overall sum 4.8 59 68 69 78 66 53 73Average 1.71 2.11 2.43 2.46 2.79 2.36 1.89 2.61

Rank \ 3 6 5 8 4 2 7NB: Overall Score: (1-5) Scale; 1 Very Good, 2 ~ Good, 3 Average, 4 = Poor and 5 Very Poor; Where, SCS^selection criteria set by farmers

[35]

26. Participatory variety selection and adaptation trial of faba-bean

This study was aimed at identifying high yielding and disease resistant improved faba bean

varieties in Gumer, Mierab Azerinet, Alicho wuriro and Geta during 2016 and 2017 crop

seasons. Five released varieties [Moti, Dosha, Gebelcho, Hachalu and Tumsa with local check

(farmer’s varieties)] were tested. Farmers selected the varieties based on their criteria: grain

yield, seed size, seed color, and pod per plant, plant height and seeds per pod. Accordingly,

Tumsa and Moti at Geta, Tumsa at M/Azemet, Gebellcho at Alicho wuriro and Dosha, Tumsa

and Moti at Gumer were ranked as first preferences of farmers. Likewise, Gebelcho in Geta and

M/Azemet, Moti and Tumsa at A/Wuriro were ranked as second categories and are

recommended to be promoted as PED.

Table 37. Mean responses of six varieties of seven agronomic traits at Geta GM trial in 2016Varieties SPP(No) PH (cm) Biomass (kg) GY (qt/ha HI (%) SW(g)

Hachalu 23.7a 3.17b 5. lab 49.37 46.5c 73.3bc

Local 23.7a 3.5a 4.8abc 44.03 44.5c 72.3c

Dosha 26.3a 3.0b 4.2bc 48.12 55.3ab 79.3abc

Gebelcho 20.0a 3.0b 4.0c 40.0 48.6bc 83.7a

Moti 23.6a 3.25a 4.3bc 50.62 56.66a 82.0ab

Tumsa 21.5a 3.08b 5.2a 51.80 48.0 lbc 78.7abc

CV% 21.9 4.95 10.66 7.86 8.67 6.81

LSD5% 9.1ns 0.28 0.88ns 6.68 7.78 9.57ns

Table 38. Mean responses of six varieties of seven agronomic traits at Geta M trial in 2016Varieties PPP(no) SPP(No) PH (cm) BM(kg) GY (ql/ha) HI (%) SW(g)

Tumsa 29.92a 3.50a 153.0a 7.17a 38.8ab 39.26a 82.3a

Moti 23.83a 2.08b 150.75a 7.70a 43.0ab 41.37a 87.3a

Gebelcho 32.75a 3.25ab 150.58a 8.30a 54.57a 47.17a 88.3a

Dosha 26.58a 3.0ab 147.58a 7.50a 38.47b 45.43a 86.3a

Local 23.58a 3.08ab 147.25a 6.77a 40.5ab 43.35a 82.7a

Hachalu 29.17a 3.25ab 139.83a 7.0a 37.23b 38.53a 83.0a

CV% 19.24 10.61 7.99 18.7 21.4 13.28 8.19

LSD5% 6.67ns 0.61 21.56ns 2.52ns 16.37s 10.27ns 12.67ns

[36]

Tabic 39. Mean responses of six varieties of 7 agronomic traits at Mierab Azemet grand mother trial in 2016

Varieties PPP(no) SPP(No) PI I (cm) BM(kg) YIIA(ql/ha HI(%) SW(g)

Local 17.92a 2.92ab 107.75b 1.60b 12.50b 37.67a 72.3b

Dosha 16.0a 2.83ab 103.42b 1.67b 15.97b 46.06a 8L3ab

Gebclcho 15.8a 2.75b 111.58b 2.67a 24.31a 44.44a 89.0a

Moti 14.8a 3.08a 130.17a 2.80a 24.31a 41.37a 91.0a

Hachalu 12.9a 2.92ab 105.00b 1.87b 14.58b 37.92a 80.3ab

Tumsa 12.75a 2.75b 115.33ab 1.60b 11.81b 35.52a 78.7ab

CV% 22.4 6.38 8.06 15.69 19.92 15.06 8.92

LSD5% 6.06ns 0.33 16.6 0.57hs 6.17ns 10.96ns 13.16

Table 40. Mean responses of six varieties of 7 agronomic traits at Mierab A/emet mother tnal in 2016Varieties PPP

(no)SPP (No) PI I (cm) BIO (kg) YHA

(quintal/haHI(%) SW

(gram)

Hachalu 19.4a 3.0b 119.4ab 3.1a 21 Jab 44.5a 78.7a

Gebelcho 16.6ab 3.0b 131.3a 3.8a 26.8a 45.3a 74.0a

Moti 15.8ab 3.25a 126.6ab 3.0a 18. Oab 38.1a 79.7a

Dosha 15.7ab 3.0b 132.6a 3.3a 23.Sab 45.3a 75.0a

Tumsa 14.5ab 3.0b 122.2ab 3.2a 24.Oab 47.8a 83.3a

Local 13.7b 3.0b 109.3b 2.3a 13.9b 37.9a 80.0a

CV% 19.3 3.36 8.06 27.4 28.0 19.96 10.3

LSD5% 5.59 0.2 18.04 1.54 10.92 15.7 14.7

Table 41. Mean responses of six faba bean varieties for seven agronomic traits at Alicho grand mother trial in 2016Varieties PPP(no) SPP(No) PH (cm) BM(kg) GY(quintal/ha HI(%) SW(gram)Moti 17.17a 3.08a 138.67a 3.20a 31,39bc 47.7abc 88.3abDosha 15.42ab 2.75ab 124.0bc 3.50a 35.90ab 49.8ab 79.0bGebelcho 15.25ab 2.75ab 134.08ab 3.50a 32.78abc 45.0bc 94.3aHachalu 15.25ab 2.75ab 131.17abc 3.17a 37.50a 59.2a 83.5abTumsa 13.58bc 2.41b 137.17a 3.80a 28.47c 35.9c 85.7abLocal 11.58c 2.9 lab 118.42c 3.13a 37.50a 57.5ab 88.OabCV% 9.96 10.91 5.60 12.91 9.56 14.98 9.26LSD5% 2.63s 0.54ns 13.15s 0.79ns 5.83s 13.24s 14.37ns

[37]

Table 42.Mean responses of six faba bean varieties for agronomic traits at Alicho M trial in 2016

Varieties PPP SPP PH (cm) BM(kg) GY(ql/ha HI (%) SW(gm)

Dosha 16.5a 3.0c 124.6 5.3a 30.9ab 42.0abc 79.0b

Moti 16.3a 3.5a 141.9a 4.6a 28.3ab 44.6abc 88.3ab

Hachalu 15.lab 3.1bc 133.4ab 5.2a 34.5a 47.1a 83.0ab

Local 14.0ab 3.4ab 118.7c 4.9a 35.0a 51.0a 88.0ab

Tumsa 13.5ab 3.0c 138.8a 5.2a 25.8b 36.1a 85.7ab

Gebelcho 11.8b 2.8c 136.6a 5.2a 30.0ab 40.6bc 94.3a

CV% 15.66 5.99 4.87 13.68 12.9 12.93 7.83

LSD5% 4.14ns 0.34 11.73hs 1.26ns 7.20ns 10.25ns 12.30ns

Table 43.Mean responses of six varieties of seven agronomic traits at Gumer M trial in 2016

Varieties PPP(No.) SPP(No.) PH (cm) BIO(kg) YHA (ql/ha HI (%) SW(gram)

Hachalu 23.4a 2.9bc 91.3b 4.2a 25.5ab 45.0ab 75.7a

Dosah 21.0a 3.1abc 116.4a 4.9a 33.6a 49.1a 84.0a

Tumsa 20.2a 2.7a 113.6ab 4.3a 23.0b 39.2b 78.0a

Local 19.3a 3.4a 102. Sab 4.3a 28.9ab 47.0ab 81.3a

Moti 17.4a 3.4ab 117.0a 4.2a 28.2ab 48.8ab 81.3a

Gebelcho 16.9a 2.8c 108.4ab 4.5a 27.7ab 44.6ab 82.3a

CV% 12.2 9.1 12.2 18.7a 18.6 11.87 7.66

LSD 5% 4.55 0.51 24.09 1.51 9.4 9.85 11.13

Table 44. Mean responses of six varieties of 7 agronomic traits at Gumer GM trial in 2016

Varieties PPP (No.) SPP (No) PH (an) BM (kg) GY(ql/ha) HI (%) SW(gram)

Gebelcho 20.0bc 2.92b 145.67a 4.59a 46.87ab 48.98ab 97.3a

Hachalu 25.25ab 3.08ab 134.42a 4.56a 44.37b 47.15b 81.0b

Local 19.17bc 3.5a 133.50a 4.14a 45.0b 54.51a 85.3b

Moti 15.83c 3.3ab 132.25a 5.31a 55.62a 50.26ab 82.7b

Dosha 30.42a 2.92b 131.25a 4.77a 53.75ab 54.52a 81.3bD y Tumsa 17.08c 3.08ab 130.50a 5.04a 54.37ab 51.85ab 91.0b

CV% 24.0 8.07 11.51 14.6 11.42 6.76 7.28

LSD5% 1.19s 0.46 22.0 1.24 10.26 6.22 11.3 lhs

27. Participatory evaluation of faba-bean for adaptation and grain yield

This activity was proposed to identify high yielding and widely adapted faba bean varietal

options for Andracha. The experiment was conducted with eight released varieties including one

local check. In the first year (2016), the trial was not undertaken because improved seed supply

was delayed. But, in the second year (2017), the experiment was laid out in the field in Andracha

woreda and the crop growth stage was near to harvesting.

28. Evaluation on faba-bean variety against chocolate spot and rust

This trial was designed to evaluate ten faba bean varieties [Hachalu, Shalla, Gora, Obse, Walki,

Degaga, CN58, Moti, Dosha, Mosias, Gebelcho, Tumusa and Local (farmers' variety)] against

chocolate spot disease; and to identify appropriate varieties which are tolerant to chocolate spot

for different areas: Buie, Bursa, Arbegona, Gorche, Gumer, Mirab Azerinet, Alicho-Wuiro and

Geta woredas.

Data on faba-bean chocolate spot, rust and yield were collected and recorded for all areas. In

Gumer, Mirab Azerinet, Alicho-Wuiro and Geta woredas, the disease severities were also

estimated. Accordingly, the mean maximum chocolate spot and rust severity of 32.3% and

33.3%, respectively, was recorded on variety Doshaat at Alicho wuriro, whereas, the least

severity was recorded on varieties Buie 04 (21.7%) and Gora (19.7%). Likewise, the mean

chocolate spot and rust severity of 32.3% and 28.0% was recorded, respectively, on varieties

Dosha and Hachalu at Gummer, whereas the least severity was recorded for Gora (19.7%) and

for Buie 04 (21.7%). The highest yield (19.7qt/ha) was harvested from variety Buie 04 but the

lowest yield (14.5qt/ha) was from variety Dosha at Alicho wuriro. At Gumer, the highest yield

(38.9qt/ha) was harvested from variety Moti but the lowest yield (28.6qt/ha) was harvested from

variety Degaga.

Hachalu and Tumsa gave 27.7 qt/ha at Bursa, whereas Gebelcho yielded 36.4 qt/ha at Buie.

Similarly, at Malga, Mosisa gave the highest yield (35.1 qt/ha). The varieties mentioned above

[39]

were also moderately tolerant to chocolate spot and mst. Therefore, it can be concluded from the

results that those faba bean varieties, namely, Mosisa, Gebelcho, and Hachalu, with moderate

resistance to B. fabae infection and superior yield performance can be recommended to be used

in chocolate spot prone areas.

Figure 5. Faba bean leaf chocolate spot symptom at Alicho Wuriro woreda

29. Adaptation and demonstration of improved faba bean varieties in South Omo zone.

A field experiment involving five improved and one local faba bean [ Viciafaba{L.)] varieties was

carried out at Semen Ari woreda from 2016 to 2017 main cropping seasons to identify the best

performing variety for the highland areas of South Omo Zone. The faba bean varieties included

in the field experiment were five improved (Dosha, Tumsa, Gora, Gebelcho, Ashebeki) and one

local check. Growth parameters, yield and yield components were recorded. The two years

combined analysis of variance result showed that grain yield was significantly affected by

variety. The highest grain yields of 2814.4 and 2798.0 kg ha' 1 were recorded for the varieties

Dosha and Gore, respectively. Therefore, it could be concluded that use of the improved faba

bean variety of Dosha or Gore could be advisable and could be appropriate for faba bean

production in the test area even though further testing is required to put the recommendation on a

strong basis.

[40]

Tabic 45. Mean Square Values for Growth parameters, Yield Components and Grain Yield of faba bean at Shama Bulket kebele in Semene Ari woreda, from 2016 to 2017.

Source Degreeoffreedom

Plant height, cm

Podlength(cm),

Pods per plant

Seeds per pod

Grai yield kg ha' 1

Rep 2 20 4 .33* 0 . 44ns 0.33ns 0.44ns 840829ns

Variety 5 1088*** 3 _2 1 *** 41.533*** 0.378ns 796568*

Year 1 0.00ns 0.00ns 0.00ns 0.01ns 460648ns

Year* Variety 5 0 .00ns 0.00ns 0 .00ns 0.133ns 1934079***

*, ** and *** indicate significance at P< 0.05, P< 0.0] and P< 0.001. respectively and 'ns' indicate non­significant

Table 46. Growth parameters, Yield Components and Grain Yield of faba bean as Affected by Variety at ShamaBulket kebele, in Semen Ari woreda. from 2016 to 2017.

Plant height, cm

Pod length (cm).

Pods per plant Seeds per pod

Grai yield kg ha' 1

Vaneties

Dosha 108.00a 7.00a 16.33a 3.67 2814.453a

Gebelcho 84.67b 5.67bc 12.67b 4 2598.828ab

AShebike 84.6b 6 .00bc 10.67bc 4 2574.414ab

Gore 67.000c 6.33ab 10.33bc 3.67 2798.047ab

Tumsa 81.67b 5.33cd 10.00c 3.33 2244.141 be

Local 78.000b 5.00c 9.33c 3 1869.922c

CV(%) 9.13 9.6 16 10.9 19.13

LSD 5% ns

Note: Means with the same letters within the columns arc not significantly different at P <0.05.

30. P a rtic ip a to ry evalua tion /selection o f recen tly re leased ch ickpea varie ties

an d adaptation tr ia l

This trial was conducted to identify and sclcct better yielding chick pea variety through fanners’

participation at Tocha and Konta, Cheha and Enemoina Ener woredas. Farmer’s evaluated the

[411

performance of each variety at flowering and maturity on the basis of farmers’ evaluation

criteria.

Forty one farmers participated for chickpea variety selection at Tocha and Konta woredas.

Participants were comprised of 28 male and 13 female from both woredas. Farmers used their

preference criteria to select chickpea variety/ies. Accordingly, for Tocha and Konta woredas

variety Teketay ranked first followed by Dalota and Natoli, respectively (Table 47).

Experimental results showed that the variation in grain yield was significant among varieties

(Table 48). Varieties Teketay and Dalota gave superior yield in both locations. In general,

Teketay, Dalota and Natoli were well adapted and could be recommended for demonstration and

popularization for Tocha and Konta spccial woreda.

In Cheha and Enemoina Ener woredas, farmers participated in varietal selection both before and

after harvesting. In the grandmother trial in Enemoina Ener, variety Natoli (16.8 qt/ha) gave the

highest yield followed by variety Habru (15.4 qt/ha) and local (14.1 qt/ha) (Table 47). Likewise,

in Cheha, variety Natoli gave the highest yield (17.2 qt/ha) followed by Ejere (15.5 qt/ha) and

Arerti (10.8 qt/ha) while the lowest was from local variety (9 qt/ha). Variety Habru gave the

highest yield (16.8 qt/ha) in the mother trial in Cheha (Table 49). Based on farmers’ selection,

Ejere and Arerti ranked first and second respectively (Table 47). Based on both farmers’

selection and yield data, the first two varieties could be recommended to be promoted through

pre-extension demonstration.

[42]

Table 47. Participatory variety selection of Desi chickpea based on fanners selection criteria inTocha woreda, n=12

Selection criteria set by farmers ChickpeavarietiesMastwal Natoli Minijar Teketay Dalota Kutaye

Tocha woredaBranch number 2 1 4 5 3 2Vigority 2 5 1 3 4 2Plant height 4 5 4 2 3 4Seed size 4 5 5 5 3 1Pod number 4 5 4 5 5 4Earliness/maturity 5 5 3 5 4 5drought resistance 1 5 3 5 4 1Pest resistance 4 1 4 5 3 4Suitability for intercropping 4 5 3 4 4 4Straw yield 5 4 2 5 4 5Yield 4 4 5 5 5 4Konta woredaBranch number 2 3 4 5 4 2Vigority 2 4 1 3 5 2Plant height 4 3 4 2 5 4Seed size 1 3 5 5 5 2Pod number 4 5 4 5 5 2Earliness/maturity 5 4 3 5 5 5drought resistance 1 4 3 5 5 1Pest resistance 4 3 4 5 1 4Suitability for intercropping 4 4 3 4 5 4Straw yield 5 4 2 5 4 5Yield 4 5 5 5 4 4Sum 75 87 76 98 90 71Average 3.4 3.9 3.4 4.4 4.1 3.2Rank 5 3 4 1 2 6Note: "5" means very good and "1” means very poor.

[43]

Tabic 48. Mean grain yield (kg/ha) of chickpea varieties at two locations

Varieties Tocha woreda Konta woreda Combined

GY PI R GY PI R GY PI RMinjar 2302ab 9.6 3 274lab 15.7 3 2522ab 12.9 3Natoli 2064ab 4 2725ab 15.0 4 2394ab 7.2 4Dalola 2351a 11.9 2 2964a 25.1 2 2657a 18.9 2

Maslwal 1875bc 5 2067b - 5 1971b - 5Kutaye 1553c 6 510c - 6 1032c - 6

Tekelay 2449a 16.6 1 3204a 35.3 1 2827a 26.5 1

G. Mean LSD (5%) CV(5%)

2100439**11.49

2369886*20.5

223466216.0

* * highly significant at P < 0.01, *= significant at P < 0.05. Means with the same letter are not significantlydifferent; GY grain yield, PI percentage increase and R rank

Tabic 49. Mean grain yield (kg/ha) of chickpea varieties for grandmother trial

Variety Enamoriena-ener Chcha

Plantheight(cm)

PPP SW

(gm)

Yield(qt/ha)

Plantheight(cm)

Pod per plant(no.)

100 seed Yield per weight hectare (gram) (qu/ha)

Arerti 23.08c 42.92a 21.37bc 11.97c 41.91a 36.27b 11.53d 13.63b

Minjar 35.17b 38.52b 19.13bc 10.43c 35.25ab 44.5a 17.35c 10.82c

Natoli 27.58bc 37.83b 23.45b 16.79a 3 1.25b 44.02a 25.07ab 17.17a

Habru 22.58c 37.02bc 28.37a 15.37ab 25.75bc 35.0b 18.13c 10.23c

Local 60.33a 34.93c 11.57e 14.07b 21.10c 34.1b 23.73b 9.02c

Ejere 28.0bc 34.75c 17.10d 11.83c 18.58c 38.5ab 27.43a 15.55ab

CV 14.86 3.71 7.93 7.47 18.87 8.74 7.88 12.03

LSD 8.87 2.54 2.91 1.82 9.83 6.08 2.91 2.76

♦Means with the same letter are not significantly different where Gy=grain yield

[44]

Tabic 50. Mean of four agronomic parameters for mother trial at Cheha

Variety Plant height(cm) Pod per plant(No.)

100 seed weight(gram)

Yield (qu/ha)

Minjar 58.8a 32.03a 18.03c « 16c

Ejere 54. lab 15.08c 16.77c tS.IOC

Habru 5 0 .2 5 k 11.25c 28.57a 16.98a

Natoli 48.42c 24.92b 23.60b 9.57c

Local 47.0c 28. lab ll.lO d 13.33b

Arerti 46.42c 12.17c 22.501) 12.47b

CV 4.32 12.66 4.46 10.0

LSD 3.98 4.74 1.63 2.10

Table 51. Sclcction o f varieties based on farmers’ criteria

Number o f farmers scorcd for each variety in Cheha Woreda

Varieties Before harvesting Alter harvesting

Excellent V.good Good Excellent V. good Good Total Rank

Habru 0 0 0 2 3 2 7 4

Ejere 12 7 0 11 3 1 34 1

Local 7 6 7 0 0 3 23 3

Natoli 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 6

Minjar 0 0 0 1 0 4 5 5

Arerti 1 7 13 0 4 4 29 2

31. Adaptation trial of released chickpea varieties for yield and disease and insect resistant

This activity was initiated to sclcct best performing and disease and insect tolerant improved

chick pea varieties (namely Habru, Ejere, Arerti, Daloti, Minjar, Natoli and Fctenech) for

Basketo and Mclekoxa woredas. The activity was implemented in Basketo special woreda during

2016 cropping season but due to several factors (pest; pod borer) it was not successful. The lest

crop was replanted and harvested in 2017 and the data analysis was in progress.

[45]

32. Evaluation of field pea varieties for grain yield and adaptation

A field experiment involving six improved field pea (Pisumv sativum L.) varieties and one local

check was carried out at Ziag in Kebele on farmers plot in Shay bench woreda of Bench maji

zone for two years (2016 and 2017) in main cropping season under rain fed conditions to identify

high yielding field pea vanety/ies for target areas. The field pea varieties included in the field

experiment were Markos, Tegegnech, Adi, Gume, Burkitu, Megeri, and local check. The

experimental design was randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications.

Data were recorded on different parameters. The result of combined analysis of variance

revealed significant difference among the varieties, years and their interactions for seed number

per pod, thousand seed weight and days to maturity (Table 52). However, statistically significant

difference was not observed in variety-by-year interaction for grain yield, total number of pods

per plant and plant height. Varieties showed significant difference (p<0.001) in grain yield.

Highest grain yield was recorded for Burkitu (3718 kg ha’1), Tegegnech (3339 kg ha' 1 ) and

Gume (3200.16 kg ha'1) while the lowest grain yield obtained from Markos (2236 kg ha'1) and

Local check (2231.5 kg h a 1) (Table 53). Among varieties, Megeri matured early as compared to

other varieties while variety Adi matured late. Therefore, based grain yield and the performance

of other agronomic traits, varieties Burkitu, Tegenech and Gume were selected and suggested

for production in study area and other similar agro ecologies.

Table 52. Mean square value of grain yield and yield components of the field pea varieties for combined analysis of variance over two years (2016 and 2017)Source of variation

Days to flowering

Days to maturity

Plant Numberheight, cm °f total

pods per plant

Number of 1000 seed seeds per weight, gm pod

Grain yield, kg/ha

Variety 43.74*** 21.56** 693.2NS 29.45*** 0.67* 4788.4*** 2067657***

Year 64.38** 414.86*** 1.68NS 1.81NS 15.12*** 15429.2*** 141980“

Year* Variety 3.60NS 14.63* 530.47NS 2.18NS 0.29ns 3106.2*** 112299“Error 5.78 5.34 488.75 5.43 0.20 347.5 316169NS=Non-significant; *, ** & ***= Significant at the 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001, respectively

[46]

Table 53. Combined mean values of grain yield and yield components of field pea varieties

Variety Days to flowering

DTM Plantheight,cm

Number of total pods per plant

Numb er of seeds per pod

1000 seedweight,gm

Grain yield, kg/ha

Markos 80.50ab° ab

121.67 189.303 19.20° 3.73b 239.7b 2236°

Tegenech 77.66"1 cd

118.33197.86s 25.23a 4.03ab 258.7ab 3339a

Adi 81.16ab 122.17* 205.04a 21.83* 3.63b 245.2b 2582b°

Gume 78.66bcd abc

120.50205.15a 23 .10ab 4 .13ab 238.2b 3201.2*

Burkitu 77.16* bed

119.16205.263 23.23ab 4.46a 275.3a 3718a

Megeri 74.33e d

117.00 179.543 20.93bc 4.3 l a 199.5° 2497.42°

Local check 82 .16a ab

121.16 184.76* 19.26c 3.63b 200.0° 2231.5°

Means 78.80 120 195.27 21.82 3.99 236.64 2829.1

CV (%) 3.05 1.92 11.32 10.67 11.30 7.87 19.87

LSD(p<0.05) 2.85 2.74 ns 2.76 0.53 22.12 667Mean value with same letter indicates non significances among varieties

Figure 6. Field pea experimental field in Sheybench and Andracha woredas, 2017

33. Screening of chemicals against sesame seed bug on sesame in South Omo zone

The objective of the activity was to evaluate effective insecticides for control of sesame seed

bug. The study was proposed in 2016 but due to lack of material its implementation was delayed.

In 2017, all the materials were collected and the variety called Humera was sown in

[471

Bennatsemay woreda at Enchete kebele. The treatments will be applied at maturity stage of the

crop when the pest is expected to arrive.

34. Participatory varietal selection of improved sesame varieties

This activity was initiated to identify adaptable, high yielding and disease resistant sesame

variety (from released varieties for similar agro-ecologies) in Konta. The experiment was

implemented in the aforementioned location using Setit-1, Humera, Tate, Mehado-80, Abasena

and local (farmers' variety) varieties.

Based on farmers’ preference ranking (pair-wise and direct matrix), the most preferred variety

was Setiti-1 followed by Humera and Abasena varieties. The result of pairwise ranking using

farmers’ selection criteria indicated that grain yield, earliness to maturity, seed color and number

of capsule per plant, respectively, were the most important criteria to select the varieties (Table

55). This implies that the preferred sesame variety should have high grain yield, earliness, white

seed color, high number of capsule per plant and moreover better resistance to blight diseases.

The analysis of variance (Table 56) showed high significant differences (P<0.01) among sesame

varieties for grain yield (2016). Setiti-1 has the highest grain yield (783.5 kg/ha) but the local

check yielded comparatively the lowest grain yield (542.7 kg/ha). In the grandmother trial,

farmers' assessment matched with the result of researchers’ analysis for the first ranked variety

(Table 56). In general, Setiti-1, Humera and Abasena are found well adapted varieties to the test

woreda and can be demonstrated and popularized for farmers for wider use.

Table 54. Ranking and grain yield of sesame varieties from grandmother trials at Konta, 2016Varieties Grain yield (kg/ha) Researchers Rank Farmers rankSetiti-1 783.50a 1 1

Humera 713.00ab 3 2Mehado-80 708.00ab 4 6Local 542.75c 6 5Tate 695.25b 5 4Abasena 756.25ab 2 3Mean 699.79LSD(0.05) 86.372CV (%) 8.19

[48]

Tabic 55. Pair-wise ranking of farmers’ sclcction criteria for sesame varieties in Konta woreda

No SLC SS NC/PT PH DR CL SR EM SC OY Total Rank1 SS * NC/PT SS DR SS SR EM SS GY 3 6®2 NC/PT * NC/PT NC/PT NC/PT NC/PT EM SC GY 5 4»h

3 PH * DR CL SR EM s c GY 0 8*4 DR * DR DR EM SC GY 3 6th5 CL * SR EM SC GY 16 SR * SR SC GY 4 5*7 EM * EM GY 78 SC * GY 6 y 49 GY * 9 I*Where. SIX' selection criteria, SS Stand strength, NC /PT Number of capsule per plant, PH Plant height CE- Capsule length DR Diseases resistance SR Shattering resistance EM - Early Maturity SC= Seed color and GY= Grain yield

Tabic 56. Direct matrix ranking evaluation of sesame varieties by group of farmers (1*^23; m a le ^ ; Fcmalc=4) and their assessment in Konta woreda

Sclcction Sesame varietiesCriteria set by farmers

SS NC/PT PH DR CL SR EM GY Totalscore

Rank

Relative 3 3 2 2 1 1 3 3 3 - -weightSctiti-1 15(3) 9(3) 2(2) 10(5) 5(5) 4(4) 15(5) 15(5) 15(5) 90 1Humcra 9(3) 15(5) 10(5) 10(5) 5(5) 4(4) 12(4) 9(3) 12(4) m 2Tate 6(2) 6(2) 8(4) 4(2) 4(4) 4(4) 6(2) 6(2) 15(5) 59 4Mchado-80 3(1) 6(2) 8(4) 4(2) 4(4) 4(4) 6(2) 90) 12(4) 56 5Abasena 9(3) 15(5) 10(5) 10(5) 5(5) 4(4) 12(4) 9(3) 12(4) 86 2Local 6(2) 6(2) 8(4) 4(2) 4(4) 3(3) 12(4) 12(4) 12(4) 67 3Note: "5" means very good and " I means very poor numbers in parenthesis indicated the pertorroaflss rating value of each variety given from 1-5 (5 very good, 4= good,. 3 average, 2= poor and f =v«y poor) and flwwters »T*ttei? in the bold indicate total score o f a variety as per eacb selection criteria, »b*tb was rfatetm d by m uktp iym g tbs relative w eight of each selection criteria with that of the performance rating n m im m p&r&jdmt*, Where, SS - stand strength, NC FI Number of capsule per plant PH - plant bogfet CL= Capsule k»gtfc DF resistance SR Shattering resistance EM Early Maturity SC Seed color and G Y (Grato yieM

m

Table 57. Pair-wise ranking o f sesame varieties by farmers in Konta woreda, 2016/2017Varieties Setiti-1 HumeraSetiti-1 ♦

Humera Setiti-1 *Tate Setiti-1 HumeraMehado-80 Setiti-1 HumeraAbasena Setiti-1 HumeraLocal Setiti-1 Humera

Mehado-80 Abasena Local Score Rank

TateAbasena Abasena Tate Ix>cal

5 14 22 40 63 31 5

Figure 7. Field view and farmers evaluating sesame varieties in Konta woreda, 2016

35. Sesame variety adaptation and demonstration

The experiment was conductcd to test the adaptability and to demonstrate sesame varieties in

Mcnitgoldia woreda. Fourteen varieties, including local check, were considered in the

experiment. In the first year (2016), preliminary agronomic data were collected but the varieties

did not set seed due to fusarium wilt disease. However, the crop was successfully harvested and

the required data were collected in 2017. Statistical analysis showed significant yield difference

among varieties (Table 58). Humera-1 gave the highest grain yield (1386 kg/ha) followed by

local (1277kg/ha) and Scrkamo (1221 kg/ha). However, the yield difference among these three

varieties was not statistically significant. There was significant difference for yield components

among varieties.

[50]

Table 58. Grain yield and yield components of sesame varieties in Menitgoldia, 2017

TreatmentYield(kg/ha)

Plantheight(cm)

Capsule per plant

Seedcapsule

per Branch plant

per 1000 seed weight(gm)

Mahado-80 710dc 177.93ab 35.53d 56“ 3.66*b 4"Kelafo-74 640cf 180.2"b 30.6cd 54.73d 3.33,bc 3.5*bAbassena 9l6.4c 193.26" 38.53d 54.53 2 qbi>«(| 3.83"Serkamo 1220.69b 180.4"1’ 69.6" 64.7"bcd -̂nbed 3.5*bArgene 450.36h 183nb 29.6d 56.13cd 2 n̂bed 3.33*Adi 861.81° 183"b 43bcd 58.95lK'd 2,75bcd 3.3 7"bTate 813.7ct1 162.2b 58.93nbc 61bcd 3.46"b 3.5*bS 463.19^ 165.8b 28.26d 60.93bcd 2 gnbed 3.66*85 527.13fph 192.13" 29.33d 55.4cd 2.13cd 3.66*bE 605cfg 189.46" 63.93"b 54.6d 4" 3.33*Humera-l 1386.15* 170.81’ 79.73" be 3.8"b 3.83"Setite-1 880c 166.861’ 43.53bcd 62.86bcd 1.73d 3.33*Setite-2 1150.695 176.86"1’ 59g.be 67.33**’ 1.93d 3.33*local 1277.26ab 190.46* 72.93" 64.73*® 3.26*° 3bMean 841.64 179.51 48.18 60.27 2.97 3.5CV (%) 10.39 5.91 27 9.73 24.73 13.94LSD (5%) 142.83 17.62 21.28 9.58 1.23 Ns

Figure 8. Sesame adaptation trial, Menitgoldia

36. Effect of seed rate on yield and yield components of sesame

The experiment was undertaken to determine optimum seed rate for sesame production in

Basketo woreda. The treatments included seven seed rates and the sesame variety was Humcra-1.

Agronomic data were colicctcd and analyzed for the first year (2016) experiment. However,

there was no significant yield difference among seed rates. The reason might be the wilt disease

[51]

and shattering problem. For this reason it was suggested to extend the trial duration. The second

year (2017) data showed poor crop performance at both locations (Angila-3 and Angila-4) (Table

59). Thus it is difficult to make conclusion and the experiment needs to be repeated for

additional one year (2018).

Table 59. Mean grain yield against seed rates over two locations m Basketo special woreda

Treatment (kg/ha) Mean grain yield ( kg/ha)Angila -3 Angila-4

1 480 3602 360 3903 390 3804 380 3205 350 4006 370 3407 330 360

CV% 8.1 23.1LSD 5% NS NS

37. Effect of inter and intra- row spacing on yield and yield attribution of sesame (Sesamum indicium L ) in Benna Tsemay Woreda, Southern Ethiopia

Field experiments were carried out to investigate the effects of inter and intra row spacing on the

growth and yield of sesame {Sesamum indicium L.) in 2015 and 2016 cropping seasons. The

treatments consisted of nine treatments [a combination of intra-row spacing (10cm, 15cm and

20cm) and inter-row spacing (30cm,40cm and 50cm)] and was laid out in Randomized complete

block design with three replications. The plot size was 3m x 3m. Parameters measured include

number of capsule, number of branch per plant, seed yield per plot, 1000 seed weight among

others. The data collected were subjected to analysis of variance and the means were separated

using least significant difference (LSD). The result revealed that there was no significant effect

of spacing on number of capsule, number of branch per plant, seed yield per plot as well as 1000

seed weight and yield per hectare in both seasons. From the findings of this study, it is suggested

that 30 x 15cm spacing could be practiced in Benna-Tsemay woreda of Weito kebele. Based on

[52]

the results (Tables 60 & 61), it can be concludcd that, increasing the inter- and intra-row spacing

of sesame up to 20cmx30 cm yielded higher.

Table 60. Mean performances of sesame in response to inter and intra-row spacing in 2015

Treatment Plant height Branchnumber

Thousand

seed weight

(g)

Grain yield (kg/ha)

Biomass

(kg/plot)

30x10 2.14a 8.46ab 3.26 5.82bcd 5.6730x15 2.00ab 7.96abc 3.73 7.54ab 5.6730x20 1.88abc 6.3abcd 3.26 4.77cd 5.4040x10 1.59c 5.90cd 3.46 5.69bcd 6.3340x15 1.71c 5.1 Od 3.73 9.44a 4.6740x20 1.74bc 6.30bcd 3.70 6.72bc 6.0050x10 1.83abc 7.53abc 3.33 6.01 bed 5.33

50x15 1.76bc 8.10abc 3.36 5.78bcd 4.83

50x20 1.92abc 8.73a 3.23 3.82d 4.17

CV% 13 29 15 14 23LSD5% 0.35 2.4 Ns 2.21 Ns

Table 61. Mean performances of sesame in response to inter and intra-row spacing in 2016

Treatment Plant height Branch number 'ITiousand seed

weight (g)Grain yield (kg/ha)

30x10 1.76ab 4.83 14.00 7.15c30x15 1.89ab 7.06 12.83 6.54c30x20 2 .02ab 6.82 11.33 6.32c40x10 2.04ab 7.60 12.00 10.10b40x15 2.16a 7.60 14.33 7.35c40x20 1.87ab 7.33 13.00 10.96ab50x10 1.89ab 6.33 13.50 11.26ab

50x15 1.71b 7.26 13.50 12.48a50x20 1.91 ab 7.13 12.50 7.71c

CV% 13 29 15 14LSD0.05 0.43 Ns Ns 2.19

[53]

38. Evaluation of improved tomato varieties under irrigated agriculture in South Omo Zone, Benatsemay Woreda

This experiment was designed to evaluate performance of improved tomato varieties under

irrigated condition at Jinka Agricultural Research Center main station (Benatsemay woreda of

South Omo zone). In this experiment, four improved tomato varieties, namely, Melkasa Shoal,

Melkasa salsa, Chali, Fetan and one farmers’ variety were used. The result in 2016 revealed that

there was no significant variation among varieties for fruit diameter, average fruit yield per plot

and fruit weight (Table 62). The highest number of fruit per plant was observed for variety Chali

whereas; the lowest was for local variety. However, the highest fruit yield was obtained from

varieties Melka Salsa and Mclka Shola which can be recommended for production in the

production area. In the second year (2017), irrigation water dried due to drought and the

experiment was shifted to Jinka on-station. Yield and agronomic data collection are in progress.

Table 62.Mean performance of five tormtr varieties tested at Jinka on-station, 2016

Treatment Fruit number per plant

Fruit diameter (cm) Fruit Yield (Kg/ha)

Fetan 9.33 9.93 11101cChali 17.33 8.75 15566b

Mclka shola 11.66 10.22 19561b

Melka salsa 13.66 8.33 17354ab

Local 6.00 6.49 10302c

CV% 65 36 9

LSD 5% Ns Ns 2680

39. Evaluation of improved onion varieties for bulb production under irrigation

The experiment was planned to select better yielding onion varieties under irrigation condition in

Benatsemay woreda using two improved onion varieties, namely, Nasik red, Nafis and one

farmers’ variety. However, due to unexpected long-lasted drought in the area, the first year

experiment was not undertaken. To commence the trial, the location was shifted to Jinka station.

The result revealed that there was significance differer ••‘<0.05) between the local and

154]

improved varieties (Nasik red and Nafis) for number of plants and bulb biomass weight (Table

63). Variety Nafis yielded more than twice the yield of the local variety. Hence, use of variety

Nafis can be recommcndcd for Benathemay woreda and similar agroecologies even though

further testing is important by including different fertilizer recommendation, plant irrigation

requirements and disease/ pest resistance potential to put the recommendation on strong basis.

"able 64.The yield of onion varieties as influenced by irrigation in Woito

Varieties Plant height

(cm)

No. of plant/plot Bulb Yield

(kg/plot)

Biomass (kg/ha)

Nasik red 49.62a 23.75a 4.1a 5.9a

Nafis 47.903 30.25a 5.15a 7.1a

Local 43.053 12.50b 2 .12b 2.6b

CV (%) Ns 24.8 21.6 28.4

40. Effect of organic fertilizer application and spacing between plants on growth and yield of banana in Melokoza woreda, Southern Ethiopia

Tie aim of this experiment was to evaluate the effect of organic fertilizer and spacing on banana.

The experiment was conducted in Melekoza woreda. The treatments included combinations of

two factors |Factor-A: Intra row spacing (2m, 3m, & 4m) and factor-B: Organic Fertilizer Rate

(0, 80, & 160 ton/ha)]. The nine treatment combinations were Tj= 2m + 0, T2= 2m+ 80 ton,

T3=2m4T60 ton, T4=3m+0, T5=3m+80 ton, T6= 3m+160 ton,T7= 4m+ 0,T8= 4m+80 and T9=

4m+160. The experiment was laid out in RCBD design with three replications. Preliminary data

(agronomic and others) were been collected. The crop was at good field condition and agronomic

management and data collection were in progress.

41. Adaptation of improved banana varieties

The objective of the experiment was to select best performing banana varieties in terms of yield,

disease and pest resistance and other important traits for different woredas. In Melekoza woreda,

different banana clones screened from national variety trial (William-1, William Hybrid, Giant

[55]

Cavendish/Check, Paracido, Dinke-2, Chinese dwarf) were planted in 2016. The crop was at a

good field condition and necessary agronomic management practices and data collection were

carried out. Fungal diseases were identified by Arbaminch Plant Health Clinic and control

measure was taken as per the clinic’s recommendation.

Similarly, in South Omo zone, different banana varieties (Butuza. Giant Cavendish, Dwarf

Cavendish, Williams-1, Poyo, Grandnane and Robusta) were planted to distribute to farmers in

Benatsemay woreda. The suckers of the selected varieties (Giant Cavendish, Dwarf Cavendish

and Grandnane) were under multiplication for dissemination to different potential areas of the

woredas of South Omo zone.

Figure 9. Banana varieties at Saiayesh 04 kebele in Meloko/a woreda

42. Evaluation o f improved potato varieties and fungicides application for the management of late blight potato \Phytophthora infestans, (Mont) de Bary) in Southern Ethiopia

The activity was initiated to develop management options to control potato bacterial wilt and late

blight for locations such as Buie and Bursa. Due to late supply of planting materials of the

intended vaneties. this experiment was conducted only in one location in 2016. Late blight

caused by Phytophthora infestans, (Mont) deBary is an important disease of

potato (Solamim mbersolum) is a prevalent disease in all potato producing area of Ethiopia. A

[56]

field experiment was conducted for two consecutive years (2016 and 2017) under the main rainy

season. Two improved varieties having different level of resistance disease reaction, four

registered fungicides and two unsprayed plots (control). The experiment was laid out in RCBD

in factorial arrangement with three replications. The results showed that all fungicides

significantly reduced the infection of late blight as compared to unsprayed treatments in both

seasons. The two way interactions of varieties and fungicides showed significant difference in

controlling disease severity and increasing tuber yield in 2017. Fungicides Mattco (Metalaxyl-8

% + Mancozeb -64%) and Boss (Metalaxyl + Mancozeb) 72% WP significantly reduced severity

of the disease as compared to Bacticide (Copper Hydroxide) and Mancozeb (Diathane-M45) in

2017 cropping season. Whereas in 2016 the disease pressure was low and because of thist there

was no significant difference among fungicides. Depending on the fungicides efficacy and

varietal reactions to the disease 21.8 to30.5 t ha' 1 and 20 to 36.8 t ha' 1 tuber yield were obtained

from the sprayed plot in 2016 and 2017, respectively. On the other hand, from unsprayed plots,

10.6-18.6 t h a 1 and 8.8-17.4 yield was obtained in 2016 and 2017 cropping seasons,

respectively. The mean yield advantage of fungicide sprayed plots for both varieties was 62% as

compared to the unsprayed ones as shown in Table 64. The study confirmed that host resistance

level and fungicide efficacy played an important role in host-pathogen-fungicide interaction to

reduce the severity of late blight on potato. Therefore, it was confirmed that the combined effect

of growing moderately resistant cultivars with the application of fungicides Mateo at two spray

frequency in 10 days interval reduced the yield loss and the damage caused by late blight even

under high late blight severity.

[57]

Table 65. The interaction of varieties and fungicide spray effect on the control of late blight as expressed on yield and disease severity in 2016 and 2017 main cropping season

Varieties Fungicides Yield ft/ha) Disease seventv2016 Yield

loss (%)2017 Yield

loss (%)2016 2017

Bellete Bacticide 29.67a 2.63 32.55abc 11.60 2.3c 3.4cdeMateo 30.47a 0.00 36.84a 0.00 2.3c 2.4de

Boss 72% 29.07a 4.59 35.05ab 4.00 2.3c 2.3e

Mancozeb 27.46a 9.88 30.2cd 18.24 3.67c 4.13b

Unsprayed 18.63b 38.50 17.04f 53.74 4.5 b 5bGudenie Bacticide 25.87a 11.01 30. bed 3.00 3.67c 4.03bc

Mateo 29.07a 00 30.9bcd 00 3.33c 3.2cde

Boss 27.62a 4.99 29.76cd 12.07 3.67c 2.3cd

Mancozeb 21.82a 29.52 20.e 35.5 3.67c 4.87b

Unsprayed 10.63b 63.43 8.8 g 71.5 6a 8aC V ( % ) 16.6 18.6 22.2 10.3

B=Belete, G Gudene, mac mancozebe, mat mattico, bosbos-71, bact bacticide, co=control/unsprayed

Cost benefit analysis

As shown in Table 65, the marginal rate of return for application of Mancozeb, Bacticide, Mateo,

and Boss 72% at two frequency of spray on variety Belete is 1455%, 1663%, 2280%, -3893 %

respectively. In other words, investing one Ethiopian birr (ETB) to spray Mancozeb, Boss 72%

and Mateo on moderately resistant variety Belete worth 14.5, 16.6 and 22.8 extra net benefit.

Similarly, the marginal rate of return (MRR) for variety Gudenie at three frequency of sprays

using Mancozeb, Boss 72% and Matcois was about 1334, 443and 2778%, respectively. This also

shows that investing one ETB to spray Mancozeb, Boss 72%, Mateo, on variety Gudenie

resulted in about 13.34, 4.43 and 27.78 extra net benefit, respectively. MRR obtained by the

application of the fungicide Bacticide on both varieties was below zero (Table 65) indicating that

application of this fungicide is not suggested in controlling late blight disease of potato

especially on the tested varieties and locations.

Thus it is concluded that the selected fungicides should be incorporated in to package, as major

input for potato production at Bursa and other Woredas having similar agro ecological

conditions.

[58]

Table 66. Average gross return, net return and MRR of potato over variety and fungicide combination in 2016 and 2017 cropping seasons

VarietyFrequency o f spray Fungicides

Adjusted yield t ha'1

GrossRetum(EtB)

TVC(EtB) Net benefit

MRR(%)

0 Control 13.87 48552 0 48552 02 Mancozeb 23.22 81277 2100 79177 1458

Belete 2 Boss 72% 27.25 95379 2900 92478 1663

2 Mateo 28.61 100139 3100 97038 2280

2 Bacticide 26.44 92552 3300 89252 -3893

0 Control 8.25 28887 0 28887 03 Mancozeb 21.15 74048 3150 70898 1334

Gudenie 3 Boss 72% 23.01 80558 4350 76208 443

3 Mateo 25.48 89191 4650 84541 2778

3 Bacticide 24.59 86072 4950 81122 -11401 EtB - USD 0.04, Price of potato = 3.5 EtB kg-1, Gross Return = (MY) Marketable yield (t ha'1)* 3500 EtBTVC (Total variable cost) = (Cost of fungicide +Cost of spraying)/ha* frequency of spray, Net return = Gross return - TVC, MRR= Marginal Rate of Return

43. Participatory variety selection of potato varieties

The objective was to identify the best performing varieties through participatory selection for

Konta. This activity was proposed to include at least six improved potato varieties with local

check. But, due to lack of recently released varieties only Belete and Gudene varieties were

evaluated with local. These varieties were planted on one FTC and five farmers’ fields.

Agronomic data were collected and analysed. Both Belete and Gudenevarieties were selected as

alternative since their performances were good regardless of extended rainfall.

The mean tuber yield of variety Gudene, Belete and Local were 43.4, 39.2 and 28 ton per

hectare, respectively, in Konta Special Woreda (Table 67). This indicated that variety Gudene

has high tuber yield followed by Belete compared with local check. On the other hand, average

tuber yield of Gudene, Belete and Local were 66.92 t/ha, 47.42 t/ha and 39.35 t/ha, respectively,

in Gibra kebele of Tocha Woreda (Table 68). But in Medhanalem Kebele Gudene, had better

tuber yield (63.3 t/ha) followed by local check (43.37t/ha) compared with Belete variety (40.35

t/ha). Similarly, in Essera Woreda, the mean yield of Gudene and Belete in Bale kebele were

67.91t/ha and 55t/ha, respectively, but in Arsi-Angala kebele variety Gudene (61.22 t/ha) had

[591

better tuber yield followed by Belete (41.65 t/ha). In both kebeles of Essera woreda, local check

gave the least tuber yield performance compared with the improved nineties demonstrated.

Table 67. Average potato yield (t/ha) in Konta Special Woreda (Genjigenet kebele)

Variety (N=4)_________ Mean_________ Std. Error_______Minimum MaximumGudene 43.4 3.45 30.5 50.5Belete 39.2 5.2 18 45.5Local______________ 28_____________426___________ 145___________38Total 36.87 2.90 25.5 50.5

Table 68. Average potato yield (t/ha) on farmer field in Dawro Zone

Tocha Woreda Essera Woreda

Variety

Gibra Kebele (N=2)Medianalem kebele

,N=~5) Bale (N= 5) Arsi-angala Kebele (N=5)

Gud

ene

Bel

ete

Loca

l

Gud

ene

Bel

ete

Loc

al

Gud

ene

Bel

ete

Gud

ene

Bel

ete

Loc

al

Mean 66.92 47.42 39.35 63.3 40.35 43.37 67.91 55.00 61.22 41.6 30.3

Std.Error 7.90 9.98 0.35 6.6 10.73 6.50 3.70 5.09 7.75 3.6 2.5

Min. 58.97 37.40 39.00 52.0 28.0 31.0 63.0 45.6 40.56 33.1 26.9

Max. 74.88 57.40 39.70 75.0 62.0 53.0 75.2 63.0 77.06 48.7 35.3

The combined analysis of total fresh tuber yield for potato varieties in Dawro Zone (Table 69)

showed that the mean yield in Tocha woreda for variety Gudene (67.75 t/ha) and its maximum

fresh yield (marketable and unmarketable fresh yield) (75 t/ha) was higher than the variety

Belete which gave mean and maximum yield of 43.18 t/ha and 62 t/ha and the local check (41.76

t/ha, 53 t/ha), respectively.

Similarly, in Essera woreda, total fresh tuber yield performance for variety Gudene, Belete and

local check were 62 t/ha, 47.38 t/ha and 30.32 t/ha, respectively. In Both Tocha and Essera

Woredas, the variety Gudene hand high yield performance followed by Belete and local check.

[601

Table 69: Combined mean o f total fresh tuber yield for potato varieties in Dawro Zone

Tocha Woreda (N=5) Essera Woreda (N=7) Total

Variety Gudene Belete Local Gudene Belete Local Gudene Belete Local

Mean 64.75 43.18 41.76 62 47.38 30.32 63.2 45.63 37.47

Std.Error 4.496 6.896 3.72 5.38 3.82 2.53 3.529 3.5 3.64

Min. 52 28 31 40.56 33.7 26.9 41 28 27

Max. 75 62 53 77.06 63 35.27 77 63 53

Farm ers’ preference ranking for potato varieties

The farmers’ preference score per kcbclc was made by participant farmers and others who

evaluated the demonstration during field day. Tables 70,71 and 72 showed the mean score given

to each variety across the kcbcles. In Konta woreda, the mean scores of farmers’ selection

criteria ranged from 2.42 (local variety) to 4.25 (Belete variety) at Genjigenel kebele. The

highest score (5) recorded for tuber color, sweetness and marketability for Belete and 4 for tuber

size and tuber yield for Gudene. The local variety had poor score compared with the improved

varieties. However, the mean score for both varieties Gudene (3.3) and Belete (4.14) was good.

In Tocha Woreda, the average score given by farmers in Gibra kebele ranged from 2.42 (local

chcck) and 3.43 (Gudene) to 4 (Belete). The same was true for Mcdianalem kebele even though

there was some differences in mean score values. In Both kebeles of Tocha Woreda, farmers’

preferred the variety Belete for its earliness (early maturity), sweetness and disease resistance.

Gudene was selected secondly for its tuber size and tuber yield. Farmers preferred while tuber

color and larger tuber size. Similarly at Bale and Arsi-Angala kebeles of Essera Woreda, average

preference score for Gudene, Belete and local check was (3.4, 3.28), (4, 4.14) and (--, 2.71)

respectively. The variety Belete was selected for its earliness, sweetness, disease resistance

(relatively tolerant to bacterial wilt) and marketability followed by Gudene for its larger tuber

size and high tuber yield.

[61]

Table 70. Farmer’s preference ranking o f potato varieties in Konta Special Woreda

VarietyGenjigenet framers’ preference ranking

ER TS CL ST DR TY MR Overall Average RankGudene 3 4 3 3 2 4 4 23 3.3 2nd

Belete 3 3 4 5 4 3 5 29 4 1stLocal 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 17 2.42 3nd

ER= Earliness, TS = Tuber Size, CL= Tuber Color, ST=Sweetness, DR= Disease Resistance, TY= TuberYield, MR= Marketability; Scores:-l= very poor, 2= Poor, 3= Good, 4= Very Good 5 ^Excellent

Table 71. Farmer’s preference ranking of the potato varieties in Tocha Woreda

VarietyGibra kebele framers’ preference ranking

ER TS CL ST DR TY MR Overall Average RankGudene 3 5 3 3 2 5 3 24 3.43 2ndBelete 4 4 4 4 3 4 5 28 4 1stLocal 2 3 4 2 3 3 2 17 2.42 3nd

Medianalem kebele framers’ preference rankingGudene 3 4 3 3 2 4 3 22 3.14 2ndBelete 4 3 4 4 4 3 5 28 4 1stLocal 3 2 4 2 4 3 2 20 2.85 3nd

EM= Earliness, TS = Tuber Size, CL= Tuber Color, ST=Sweetaess, DR= Disease Resistance, TY= Tuber Yield, MR= Marketability; Scores >1= very poor, 2= Poor, 3= Good, 4= Very Good 5 =Excellent

Table 72: Farmer’s preference Ranking of Potato Varieties at Essera Woreda

VarietyER

Bala Kebele fanners’ preference rankingTS CL ST DR TY MR overall Average Rank

Gudene 3 5 3 3 2 5 3 24 3.4 2nd

Belete 4 3 4 5 4 3 5 28 4 1stArsi-Angala kebele farmers’ preference ranking

Gudene 3 5 3 3 2 4 3 22 3.28 2ndBelete 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 29 4.14 1stLocal 3 2 4 2 3 3 2 19 2.71 3rdEM= Earliness, TS = Tuber Size, CL= Tuber Color, ST=Sweetness, DR= Disease Resistance, TY= Tuber Yield, MR=Marketability; Scores:-1= very poor, 2= Poor, 3= Good, 4= Very Good 5 =Excellent

[62]

Figure 10, Participatory variety selection of potato varieties in Koota, Esara and Tocha woredas

44, Study o f the adaptability o f hybrid and open pollinated coffee varieties under different agro climatic condition of southern Ethiopia

This activity was planned evaluate adaptability of coffee varieties fer Arbe§ona; Malga and

Bursa woredas and similar agro-eeologieal areas in the region. For this experiment, four opeu

pollinated varieties Angafa (1377), Fayate (97,1), JCoti (852.57), and Odieha (79.4) were ©Gained

from Awada Sub-research Center, But it was not possible <o get seeds of hybrid varieties due to

seed shortage. Thus, seedling development is being earried out by using materials at band and

one farmers' variety si nee October 2017,

45, Demonstration of improved coffee management practices in coffee growing areas o f South Omo Zone

The activity was undertaken to demonstrate improved/effective management options in Bebub

Ari and Semen .Ari woredas. Ten willing farmers were selected in each kebele, faeh farmer

provided at least a coffee (arm to demonstrate stumping and pruning technologies. The

d̂emonstration was conducted in Pe&ub .Ari woreda delivering theoretical and practical training

lor % and 320 formers, respectively. On the selected farmers' plots, modem management

practices including stumping (on 320 mother coffee), pruning (280 mother tree) and de--

S4*ekering (120 mother coffees) were undertaken.- limifarfy, in §emen Ari, botb practical (416

isrmers) and theoretical trainings (.56 farmers) were given on the new practice and stumping on

m

340, pruning on 624 coffee plants and de-suckering on 200 mother coffee plants were.undertaken. Farmers' old coffee field was stumped during the dry season in between January and

February. Tree population adjustment, shade regulation, and other relevant field management

practices were applied along with the slumping and pruning activity. De-suckcring and other

field management practices were applied. Practical training was delivered for 8 kebeles in Debub

and Semen Ari woredas by involving 650 male and 150 female participants. Totally stumping,

pruning and dc-suckenng were done on 340, 624 and on 200 old and unproductive coffee trees,

respectively.

In the future, sucker selection and other field management practices, yield and yield component

data evaluation will be done through the season according to the recommendation. Follow up and

farmers’ filed day will be organized to demonstrate stumped and pruned fields.

I i

Figure 11. Pruning, dead wood removal, thinning of unwanted branches, removal of crisscross branches, center clearing, and removal of uneconomic branches

46. intercropping of coffee with Korarima (Aframomum korrarima) in south western Ethiopia

This experiment was started in 2015 main cropping season with the objective of determining

optimum intercropping ratio for coffee and korarima to improve the productivity o f land in

Bonga. Arabica coffee variety was intercropped with korarima (Aframomum korrarima) in

different ratios. The treatments were six: sole coffee, sole korarima, coffee to korarima 1:1,

[64]

coffee to korarima 2 :1, coffee to korarima 1:2 and coffee to korarima staggered planting.

Currently, data collection of coffee is in progress while korarima yield data collection was

completed for year 2016. Overall, the experiment was going on in a good condition.

Figure 12. Fresh korarima at Gimbo woreda (Bonga ARC)

47. Determination of the requirement of soil medium composition for seed rhizome production of ginger plantlets under greenhouse conditions

The experiment was designed to determine requirements of soil medium for seed rhizome

production of ginger plantlets under greenhouse condition using different proportions of forest

soil, red ash, coffee pulp and sand. Following the design, soil mix preparation as per treatments

and transplanting of the established plants was undertaken in the planned location. The soil

mixture composition of 2 :1:1 forest (top soil), coffee husk and sand, respectively, was found to

be better for the production of seed rhizome in terms of number of mini rhizomes that can be

detached for planting with active nodes that sprout.

48. In vitro mass propagation of bacterial wilt free ginger plantlets

This laboratory trial was conducted in tissue culture to produce large amount of disease free

ginger plantlets in vitro with in short time interval in Areka research ccnter tissue culture using

the protocol developed at Jimma Research Center. Currently, 7500 gmger plantlets were

produced by in-vitro propagation and available in growth room and about 3000 plantlets were

acclimatized under greenhouse and in growth room for rhizome propagation which is now at

maturity stage. So far, about 1.5 quintal of clean seed rhizome was produced from the tissue

[65]

culture seedlings under greenhouse condition at Areka Tissue Culture Laboratory. Niche

assessment for seed raising at field level was done and seed rhizome rose from tissue culture

plantlets were planted under irrigation at HumboEla small scale irrigation scheme for clean seed

multiplication and now it is in very good stand. The sample taken from the seed multiplication at

Humbo indicated that if clean material is grown at the area where ginger has not been produced,

the materials are disease free.

Figure 13. Disease free ginger plantlets and recently planted ginger under irrigation at 0.25 ha land at Kucha niche area

[66]

II. PROGRESSES OF CROP RESEARCH ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED AFTER PRODUCTION CONSTRAINT

ASSESSMENT (2017/18)

i. CEREAL CROPS IMPROVEMENT

1. Adaptation of improved high land maize varieties in selected woredas of Sheka zone

This trial was planned to identify the adaptability and performance of released maize varieties for

Andracha woreda of Sheka Zone. The experiment included six high land maize varieties:

Argene, Wenchi (AMH-850), Jibat (AMH-851), Hora (Ambo 2synl), BH-546, BH-661 along

the local varieties of the respective locations starting from 2017 main cropping season for two

consecutive years. Hence, the activity was conducted during the main seasons of 2017 but it

failed due to poor germination. The trial will be re-conducted in the coming cropping season.

2. Effects of intra row sp^cijig and nitrogen on growth and yield of maize in Bursa and Arbegona areas

This experiment was planned with the objective of identifying optimum spacing between plants

and nitrogen rate that maximize yield and yield components of highland maize in Gedio and

Sfdama during 2017 and 2018 main cropping season. The treatments were arranged in factorial

design (N with four levels 46, 92,138,184 N kg/ha combined with intra row spacing 40cm

(62,500 plants/ha), 35cm (71, 428 plants/ha), 30cm (83,333plants/ha) and 25 cm (100,000

plants/ha). BH-661 maize variety was used as a test crop. During 2017, the experiment was

conducted in both locations as per the plan. However, the experiments were affected by stalk

borer and insecticide Karate was applied on 22nd and 23rd of June in Bursa and Arbegona

woredas, respectively.

[67]

I firing urea application During grain filling

Figure 14. Field performances of maize at different growth stages in Bursa and Arbegona

3. Evaluation of maize with sequential intercropping of common bean and

chickpea

The objective of the experiment was to evaluate the performance of component crops and land

use efficiency of the system. The treatment included Sole maize (Variety BH-540), Sole

common bean (variety Hawassa Dume, Sole chick pea (variety Habru) and Maize + common

bean and maize + common bean+ chick pea (chick pea planted after harvesting haricot bean)

during 2017 and 2018 cropping season in Cheha and Enamor Ener, Yem special Woreda. The

experiment was conducted as per the plan during 2017 cropping season in all locations but failed

at Yem sp. Woreda due to wild life damage. Yield and yield component data were collected on

maize, common bean and chickpea. The average grain yield of the component crops is presented

in (Table 73). The data analysis is in progress and the full write up will be finalized in the next

year and the activity will be completed in 2018.

Table 73. Grain yield of the component crops of maize-common bcan-chickpea sequential intercropping (Cheha 2 0 1 7 )________________________________________________________Treatments Grain yield (Qt/ha)

Maize Common bean ChickpeaSole maize 74.72 - -Sole common bean - 27.37 -Sole chickpea - - 21.16Maize + common bean 69.31 25.95 -Maize +chickpea 73.36 - 18.73Maize +common bean +chickpea 71.59 22.26 16.39

168]

Figure 15. View of maize at harv esting and chickpea at early growth stage

4. Lowland rice varieties adaptation trial

The experiment was planned to evaluate the adaptability and performance of rice varieties for

low land areas of Gimbo (Gojeb sub-station). The varieties were lowland varieties and these

included Hibcr, Ediget, Dcmoze, Gumara, X-JIGNA, ROJOMENA and local check. The crop

was harvested and data recorded. Data analysis is in progress.

5. Upland rice adaptation trial

This activity was conducted at Melokoza woreda in 2017 cropping season with an objective of

evaluating the adaptability and performance of released upland rice varieties. The experiment

was conducted with seven released varieties with one standard check viz., fugera-1, Ncrica-4,

Hidassie, Nerical2, Adet, Getachaw and Andassa RCBD with three replications. But the trial

was failed due to windy rainfall after flowering. This trial will be repeated in meher season of

2018.

6. Sorghum variety adaptation trial for mid-altitude areas of Melokoza and Basketo Special Woreda

[69J

The experiment was planned to identify the adaptability and performance of the improved

sorghum for mid-altitude of Melokoza and Basketo woreda. The treatments included eight

different varieties: IS9302, Birmash, Baji, Geremew, 97 MW 6130, Lalo, Dano, and local. The

experiment was conducted for two consecutive years since 2016. However, its duration was

extended to 2018-2019.

7. Adaptation of improved lowland sorghum varieties in Kafa and Bench Maji zone

The experiment was intended to identify the adaptability and performance of the improved

varieties released for low-altitude areas at Menitgoldia and Gimbo during 2017-2018. The

treatment included six different varieties with one local check: Teshale, Dekeba, Dagim,

Geremew, Gambelall07, Melka and local varieties o f the respective locations. One year data

were collected from Menitgoldia and data were analysed. The experiment was not yet conducted

at Gojeb. The experiment will be conducted in both locations next year.

8. Adaptations of improved bread wheat varieties in high land area of Sheka zone

The activity was planned to evaluate the adaptability and demonstrate bread wheat varieties in

the high land area of Andracha woreda in Sheka zone during 2017 to 2018. The treatments

included 11 varieties with local check: Hogena, Kingbird, Huluka, Kakaba, Danda’a, Tsehay,

Hiudase, Ogolocho, Inseno, Shorima and local check.The activity was implemented successfully

at Andracha as per the plan in 2017.

9. Effects of precursor crops and tillage on growth and yield of bread wheat and component crops

The activity was planned to identify appropriate precursor crops for wheat and to determine

suitable tillage for wheat production in Gedio and Arbegona. The experiment was started in 2017

using Hidase wheat variety. The experiment is at a good condition. The remaining task is to

maintain the wheat residues on the fields of minimum tillage and growing the precursor plants.

[70]

10. Participatory evaluation and demonstration of improved food barley varieties

The activity was initiated to select the best adapted varieties of food barley for Tocha and Konta

woreda. The experiment included three improved food barley varieties (EH-1493, Cross-4198,

KB 1307) and farmers' variety. The first year trial was implemented on one FTC and four

framers’ field using RCBD design in 5m x 6m plot size. All agronomic data were collected and

aimers evaluated the varieties at maturity stage.

11. Determination of optimum seed rate and inter row spacing for food barley i Hordeum vulgare L.) production in South Omo Zone.

Tiis experiment was designed to determine optimum seed rate and inter row spacing to attain

maximum and economic yield for potato production in midland areas of South Ari woreda

during 2017 to 2018. The treatment was arranged in factorial design using row spacing of 20

cm, 30 cm and 40 cm and arranged with seed rates of 80 kg/ha, 95 kg/ha and 110 kg/ha. The First

year trial was conducted in 2017 meher cropping season at Shamabulkct kebele FTC in Semen

Ari woreda. Currently, the trial was on the field with good performance.

2. Participatory variety selection of food barley in high land areas of Mirab- Azerinet, Alicho, Gumer and Endegagn

This experiment was designed to select high yielding varieties of food barley for Mi/Azerinet,

.Alicho, Gumer and Endegagn woredas with active participation of farmers during 2017 to 2018.

Five improved food barley varieties (Tiret, Cross-41/98, EH-1493, Shege) and HB-1307 as a

check were used as treatments. At Mi/ Azerinet, the first year experiment was planted and

aimer’s field day was organized.

The variety EH-1493 was chosen by farmers for its field performance (spike length, Vigor, plant

height, straw, lodging resistance) before harvesting. The tested varieties showed different

responses to lodging. At this location, variety Tiret was found to be poor in resisting the lodging

[71]

problem Most farmers selected varieties EH-1493, Cross-41/98 and HB-1307 for highest

number of tillers, longest spike length, lodging resistance, and straw. The best yielder variety for

the location will be selected after harvesting and analysis.

Figure 16.Variety evaluation and discussion in progress during field day

13. Malt barley participatory variety selection in selected woredas of SNNPR

The experiment was proposed to avail options of malt barley varieties and to increase production

and productivity of malt barley in Malga, Buie and Bursa woreda during 2017 to 2018. The

varieties used in the treatment were HKBL 1512-5, Traveler, Grace, Singenta, HB-1963, and

HB-1964. The first year trial was started in 2017 and currently it was on field at a good

condition.

14. Adaptation o f improved tef varieties

The activity was planned to identify the adaptability and performance of the improved tef

varieties for Chcna and Sheybench woredas dunng 2017 to 2019 cropping season. The

treatments included 13 tef varieties (Quncho, Dukem, Ziquala, Enatit, Magna, Gibe, Tseday,

Simada, Key Tena, Gemechis, Boset Lakech, Kena and one local check). The first year trial

failed due to due to poor emergency. Hence, the trial will be conducted in the coming cropping

season as per the plan.

[72]

15. Participatory evaluation and demonstration of improved tef varieties (Re­initiated activity)

The activity was planned to evaluate and demonstrate improved tef varieties with the

participation of farmers in Konta and Esera woredas during 2017 to 2018. The varieties

compared were Boset, Kora, and Quncho and with one local check. The trial was conducted as

per the plan and currently it was in progressing.

16. Tef adaptation trial

The experiment was planned to evaluate the adaptability and select improved Tef varieties for

Cheha, Endegagn and Enemoina Ener specific locations during 2017 to 2018 cropping season.

The varieties included Kora, Cr-37, Simada, Magna, Dega-Tef, Dukem, Bosset, DZ- Cr-44, Key

tena and standard check variety Quncho. The experiment was conducted in all location as per the

plan and progressing without any problem.

Figure 17. Field view of tef trial at different crop stage

ii. PULSE, OIL AND FIBBER CROPS IMPROVEMENT

17. Evaluation of released common bean varieties

[73]

. i This experiment was planned to evaluate common bean varieties and select the adapted common

bean varieties during 2018-2019 cropping season for wider cultivation in Melokoza and Basketo

special woreda. The varieties included were SER-119, SER-125, Remeda, Hawassp Dume and

Nasir, with the respective local checks. The experiment will be conducted as per the plan in thej r

coming cropping season.

18. Participatory variety selection of improved common bean varieties

This particular activity was planned to evaluate the performance of improved common bean

varieties for Konta, Tocha and Esera through farmers’ participation during 2017 to 2018. The

varieties were SER-119, SER-125, NGMB-07, Remeda, Hawassa Dume and Nasir with local

checks of respective locations.

The trial was implemented as per the plan in randomized complete block design at the respective

location except Esera due to high rainfall.

------------------------------------------

Figure 18. Field view of common bean at Wara wori (Tocha)

19. Participatory variety selection of improved ground nut varieties

The trial was planned to evaluate the performance of released ground nut varieties through

participatory approach during 2017 to 2018 cropping season at Konta, Tocha and Esera. The

treatments included were Batisedi, Bulki, Lotte, Worerer-961, Worer -962, Worerer -963,

[74]

Worercr -964 with the respective location local check. The first year experiment was

implemented at Konta and Techa woreda. But, the trial failed at Konta (not germinated due to

rain fall shortage).

20. Adaptation of improved soybean varieties

This trial was planned with the aim of selecting high yielding and acceptable soybean varieties

adapted to Konta and Tocha during 2017 to 2018. The treatments included released varieties of

Belesa-95, AFGAT, GOZLEA, GEZO, WEGAYEN, and GISHAMA. The first year trial was

conducted as planned.

21. Determination of seed rate for sesame

This experiment was designed to determine the optimum seed rate for sesame in Tocha and

Esera during 2017 to 2018. The treatment included seed rates of 3, 4.5, 6, 7.5 and 9 kg/ha:, sown

in row with recommended row spacing. Planting of the trial was conducted in both locations as

per the proposal. Even if the trial was conducted as per the plan, farmers harvested and mixed up

the varieties before selection and data collection.

Figure 19. Field view of sesame at Wara wori

22. Adaptation trial of sesame {Sesamum indicum.) varieties for low moisture area in Gurage zone

This experiment was planned to evaluate the adaptation of sesame varieties for low moisture

areas of Cheha and Enemorina Ener during 2017 to 2018 cropping season including eight

[75]

improved varieties of sesame Setit-1, Humera-1, Barsan, Lidan, Obsa, Dicho, Ahadu and

Humera-1 as standard check. The first year trial was implemented in all locations, but failed due

to moisture stress. Therefore, the trial will be continued as per the plan.

23. Participatory variety selection of mung bean

This activity was proposed to evaluate the adaptation and farmers’ preference for released mung

bean varieties. It was conducted at Melokoza and Basketo speciai woredas including released

varieties using Randomized complete Block Design with three replications. The experimental

crop was currently planted and at seedling stage.

24. Adaptation study of released mung bean varieties in Gorche district

The trial was conducted to evaluate the adaptability of improved Mung bean varieties in low land

areas of Gorche woreda during 2017 to 2018. Three improved mung bean varieties Borda-1, N-

26 and Shewa Robit were planted at farmers’ field in two kebeles and one FTC of Gorche.

H owever, the performance of the trial was not good at all locations due to logging and

occurrence of insect and diseases due to excess rain fall. Therefore, it was decided to discontinue

the experiment as the location was not favorable for mung bean.

25. Evaluation of plant density on faba bean yield and yield components

This specific trial was planned to determine the optimum plant density (inter and intra-row plant

spacing) to attain maximum and economic yield for faba bean production in South Omo Zone

during 2017 to 2018.

The treatment combinations included inter row spacing of 30, 40 and 50 cm, and intra row

spacing of 10,15 and 20 cm, having a total of 9 treatments combinations:

1,30 cm inter RS * 20 cm intra RS 6,40 cm inter RS * 15 cm intra RS

2, 30 cm inter RS * 10 cm intra RS 7,50 cm inter RS * 20 cm intra RS

3, 30 cm inter RS * 15 cm intra RS 8, 50 cm inter RS * 10 cm intra RS

[76]

4.40 cm inter RS * 20 cm intra RS 9,50 cm inter RS * 15 cm intra RS

5.40 cm inter RS * 10 cm intra RS

The trial was conducted in 2017 cropping season at Debub Ari woreda (Weset, Gedir and

Senegal) and Semen Ari Woreda. The activity will be continued in the next season.

26. Field pea adaptation trial

The trial was planned to select the adapted high yielding field pea varieties. According to the

plan, The experiment was conducted in 2017 in four AGP 2 districts (Mirab Azemet, Endegagn,

Enemoina Ener and Yem Special Woreda) which are located in the mandate area of Worabe

Agricultural Research Centre. The treatments included seven released varieties, namely, Burkitu,

Gume, Bursa, Tegegnech, Adi, Megeri and Bilalo as test varieties and farmers’ cultivar was

included as a local check. The crop well performed at Mirab Azemet, Endegagn and Yem Sp

Woreda, whereas failed at Enemoina Ener district probably due to soil acidity.

The assumptions considered as the indicators to be soil acidity were:

• stunt growth and finally the death of plants including other crops around the trial at the

seedling stage (Figures 1 and 2),

• oat crop which can resist soil acidity was vigor at vegetative growth stage (Figure 3),

• there was no any disease or insect pests’ signs and symptoms on the crop.

Nevertheless, it should (will) be further investigated through soil laboratory for conformation. In

other three locations, the grain yield data showed that, except Mirab Azemet, there was no

significant difference among the genotypes.

27. Adaptation trial of linseed varieties in South Omo Zone

The activity was planned to evaluate the most adapted and best performing linseed varieties for

wider cultivation in Debub and Semen Ari from 2017 to 2018. The first year activity was

implemented in both locations using four varieties of linseed: Biltstar, Furtu, Jiituu, and Kassa-2

with one standard check. The first year trial failed. Thus, currently it was planned to repeat in the

coming cropping season.

[77]

iii. ROOT AND TUBER CROPS IMPROVEMENT

28. Participatory variety selection of improved orange fleshed sweet potato varieties in Basketo Special Woreda

The trial was planned to evaluate adaptable, high yielding, disease and insect pest resistant

orange fleshed sweet potato varieties for Basketo special woreda during 2018 to 2019 cropping

seasons. The treatments included: Kulfo, Tulla, Guntutie, Kabodie and Vita. The trial will be

conducted as per the plan in the coming cropping seasons.

29. Adaptation and demonstration of orange-fleshed sweet potato varieties

The trial was planned to evaluate adaptable, high yielding, disease and insect pest resistant

orange fleshed sweet potato varieties for Konta special woreda during 2018 to 2019 cropping

seasons. The treatments included: Orange fleshed varieties: Kulfo, Tulla, Guntutie, Kabodie and

Vita. The trial will be conducted as per the plan in the coming cropping seasons.

The planting materials were collected from breeder seed multiplication sites of Hawassa

Research Center and planted at Areka on station for seed increase. The trial will be conducted at

Konta in the coming cropping season

Figure 20. Sweet potato seed increase plots at Areka on station

178]

30. Adaptation of sweet potato varieties in south western parts of Ethiopia

The trial was planned to evaluate and select adaptable, high yielding, disease and insect pest

resistant sweet potato varieties for Ycki, Menitgoldia, Guraferda and Gojeb woreda during 2018

to 2019 cropping seasons. The treatments include: White fleshed: Awassa 83, Temesgen, Belela,

Beletech, Ogansegan, Cabude; Orange fleshed: Kulfo, Tulla, Guntutie, Kudadie, and Vita. The

trial will be conducted as per the plan in the coming cropping seasons. Currently sweet potato

seed multiplication was under way the trial will be conducted as per the plan in the coming

cropping season.

31. Scaling out of integrated management of bacterial wilt of enset

This activity was initiated to scale out integrated enset bacterial wilt management option at

Tocha and Konta woreda during 2016 to 2018. One kebele was selected from each woreda. From

each kebele farmers were selected based on some criteria (absence or presence of EBW on their

farm, model farmers, female farmers, elder farmers). Training on basic concept of epidemiology

& epidemiological factors of EBW pathogen (X.capestrice pv. musacearum) and on its

protection/management strategy was provided to zonal, woredas and kebele administrative, DAs

and farmers and the way of collection action. At both locations the message was given to all

trainees by their woredas Agriculture and Natural Resource Officers. At Tocha woreda, a total of

46 (25 male &21 female) farmers of “Gibira kebele” participated in the training. Again, at Konta

special woreda from “chaka bocha” kebele, a total of 36 (21 male and 15 female) farmers got the

training.

Figure 21. Theoretical and practical training on enset bacterial wilt management and protection

[791

32. Evaluation of potato varieties against late blight of potato in selected AGP

woredas of Sidama and Gedio zones

The activity was planned to evaluate recently released potato varieties against late blight and to

know the reaction of potato varieties to late blight disease in Bursa, Malga and Buie woredas in

the years 2017 and 2018. However, the activity was not started yet due to lack of planting

materials of the improved varieties..

33. Evaluation of plant population on tuber yield and yield component of Irish potato

The trial was planned to determine the optimum plant population and inter and intra-row plant

spacing to attain the maximum and economic yield of potato at midland areas of South Omo

Zone during 2017 to 2018 cropping season. The treatment includes the following combinations

of inter row spacing (75, 80 and 90 cm) and intra row spacing (30, 40, and 50 cm) having a total

of 9 treatments:

1, 75 cm inter RS * 30 cm intra RS 6, 80 cm inter RS * 50 cm intra RS

2.75 cm inter RS * 40 cm intra RS 7,90 cm inter RS * 30 cm intra RS

3.75 cm inter RS * 50 cm intra RS 8,90 cm inter RS * 40cm intra RS

4, 80 cm inter RS * 30 cm intra RS 9,90 cm inter RS * 50 cm intra RS

5, 80 cm inter RS * 40 cm intra RS

34. Performance evaluation of Irish potato varieties in high land areas of South Omo Zone, SNNPRS

The objective of the activity was to evaluate the best performing and disease and insect pest

tolerant variety during 2017 to 2018 cropping seasons in south Omo Zone. The treatment

included Horro, Laura, Jelly, Rumba, Belete, Gudanie, Dagim and Local varieties. Planting

material collection, site selection and land preparation were in progress and the experimnt will be

conducted in Semen Ari woreda in near future.

35. Demonstration of potato ware house for reducing post-harvest losses in Silte and Gurage Zone

This activity was proposed to evaluate appropriate storage time/duration for potato in ware house

to rcducc posl-harvcst loss and to demonstrate potato warehouse to farmers and traders during

2017-2018 in Mirab Azerinet, Geta, Alicho Wuriro and Endegagn woredas. However, similar

activity was already done previously in similar agroccology by Hawassa Agricultural Research

Centre. So the activity should be transferred to PED for the aforementioned areas.

iv. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CROPS IMPROVEMENT

36. In vitro multiplication of some selected banana (Musa spp.) cultivars through shoot tip culture

This activity was planned to deliver high yielding and quality banana plantlets to farmers in

Esera, Tocha, Konta special woreda and Jinka ARC during 2017 to 2019 cropping seasons. It

was conductcd at Areka Agriculture Research TC lab and propagation of previously initiated

variety (Poyo) was re-initiated for multiplication and initiation of new varieties was started. At

present, more than 250 plantlets were acclimatized out of which 100 suckers were delivered from

green house and also 264 suckers from previously acclimatized and field performed in other case

the multiplication was continued and around 2500 in vitro plantlets were in propagation.

Experiment-1: Surface sterilization experiment

This will be carried out to obtain sterilization procedure for banana decontamination. Healthy

sword sucker of 2-3 months will be taken and peeled off to expose the shoot tip to the size of

4cm in diameter and 5cm in length. Then, these explants will be surface sterilized using double

sterilization with different combinations of sodium hypochlorite to various times of exposure

inside the laminar flow hood. In each case, few drops o f tween-20, wetting agent, will be added

to sodium hypochlorite solution.

Tl: 1% Naocl (active ingredient) for 30min, followed by 2.5% Naocl for lOmin

T1: 2.0% Naocl (active ingredient) for 20min, followed by 2.0% Naocl for 15min

T2: 2.5% Naocl (active ingredient) for 15 min, followed by 2.5% Naocl for 15min

[81]

T3: 3.0% Naocl (active ingredient) for 15min, followed by 3.0% Naocl for lOmin

T4: 5% Naocl (active ingredient) for 15min, followed by 3.0% Naocl for lOmin

After each treatment, the explants will be rinsed four to five times using sterile distilled water to

remove all traces of sodium hypochlorite. Then, the explants will be trimmed using sterile

scalpel to final size 3 to 4 cm in length and 1 to 2 cm in diameter and cultured at conditioning

medium: MS (Murashige and Skoog, 1962) supplemented with 0.5mgr‘BAP. After 15 days,

culture free from contamination and survived, contaminated cultures, dead will be recorded.

Throughout this activity, the growth condition for culture will be temperature 24-26°C, light

intensity 1,500-2,000 lux and maintained at 16 h light/8h dark cycle.

Experiment-2: Culture initiation and multiplication

In this work shoot tip will be used as an explants. After surface sterilizing the explants using the

optimum sodium hypochlorite and time of exposure obtained in the sterilization experiment,

shoot tip explants will be cultured in shoot induction media which are consisted of MS medium

fortified with different combinations of cytokines (BAP and kinetin) and best performing media

combination will be identified for culture initiation.

T1: MS+ Omgl 'BAP (control) T4: MS+ 3mgr'BAP

T2: MS+ 1 mgl'1 BAP T5: MS+ 4m gl1BAP

T3:MS+2mgl‘1BAP

For shoot multiplication, shoots free from contamination will be transferred to MS media devoid

of plant growth regulators to avoid carry over effects. Then, after a month they will be

transferred to multiplication media, MS media containing different concentrations of BAP.

Tl:2mgr'BAP T3:6mgl''BAP

T2:4mgl'BAP T 4 :8mgl'‘BAP

Then, optimum shoot multiplication medium will be sorted out. The multiplied shoots will be

excised and transferred to MS media devoid of plant growth regulators for four weeks to avoid

carry over effect. Then, the micro-shoots will be transferred to root induction media.

Experiment-3: Rooting and acclimatization

In this experiment different medium supplemented with various combinations of axons will be

tested for rooting of shoots.

T1: V2 MS + 1 mgl'1 DBA T3: Yt MS + 3 mgl' IBA

T2: !4 MS + 2 mgl'1 DBA

[82]

Finally, primary and secondary hardening strategies will be tested for the produced plantlets.

Progress: propagation of previously initiated variety poyo was re-initiated for multiplication and

initiation of new varieties was also started. As progress more than 150 plantlets were

acclimatized and ready for field planting and also around 2000 in vitro plantlets were under

propagation.

Figure 22. A=In vitro banana plantlets, B=plantlets ready for acclimatization, C=plantlets ready for field planting

37. Orchard establishment and scaling up of banana varieties in South Omo Zone

This activity was intuited to establish orchards for sucker multiplication designed for constant

supply of planting materials and scaling up improved banana varieties to enhance banana

production for South Omo Zone (Benna Tsemay and Dacench woreda) during 2017 to 2020

cropping seasons. Two banana varieties (Dwarf Cavendish and Grandnine) were planted at Lobct

kebcle (Dacench Woreda) for sucker multiplication under irrigation and all the agronomic

practices were applied and currently the trial was in good condition..

38. Evaluation of improved apple varieties in highland areas of South Omo Zone, SNNPRS

This trial was planned to establish orchards for the best adapted varieties and demonstrate the

best adapted varieties to the highland areas of south Omo zone during 2017 to 2020 cropping

seasons. The treatments includes Williams Per, Ana, Grain smith. Royal gala, Craspin, Perinsisa,

C-p92, Jonah gored, B.R, Red delicious, Yataka. and Golden delicious. Planting material

[83]

collection, site selection and land preparation will be conducted in Semen Ari woreda in near

future.

39. Evaluation of improved onion varieties in Melokoza Woreda, Southern Ethiopia

The experiment was planned to evaluate and select adaptable and high yielder and disease and

insect pest resistance onion variety/ies. The treatment includes five varieties, namely, Rojo,

Bombay red, Nasik Red, Adama Red (standard check) and Nafis. Currently, the crop was at

harvesting stage.

40. Adaptation of improved garlic (Allium sativum L.) varieties in Chena and Shewabench

The trial was planned to evaluate the performance of improved garlic varieties for its yield,

disease and insect pest reaction for Chena and Shewabench woreda during 2017-2018. The

treatments include: Tr-l.Beshofitunech (W-014), Tr-2.Curifhi (G9-2). Tr-3.Tseday (G-493), Tr-4

(mn-98), Tr-5 with Local. Due to lack of treatments, the experiment was not conducted in both

locations. It is, therefore, planned to implement in coming cropping season.

41. Evaluation of locally available and improved garlic cultivars against garlic rust in selected mid and highland woredas of Sidama and Gedio zone

This experiment was initiated to select rust tolerant garlic cultivars for Buie, Arbegona and Bursa

woredas during 2017 to 2018 cropping seasons. Five locally available cultivars (Bursa-1,

Wondo-1, Arbegona-1, Bursa2, Bursa-3) and five improved cultivars (Tseday, Chefe, HL-

Deberezeit, Kurfite and Shashemene) were included for the evaluation. The first year trial was

implemented in all locations and data collection were in progress as planned.

42. Adaptation of improved hot pepper (Capsicum species) varieties in Gojeb and Guraferda

[84]

This activity was planned to identify the best performing, disease and insect pest resistant variety

of hot pepper for Gojeb and Guraferda woreda during 2017 to 2018. The treatment includes

MarekoFana, MelkaAwaze, MelkaZala, MelkaShote, Melkadima, MelkaEshete, Odaharo, Bako

local and local variety. The first trial was implemented in both locations and the performance

was good.The remaining tasks are going as per plan.

v. FOOD SCIENCE AND POST-HARVEST TECHNOLOGY

43. Demonstration of harvesting material and simple post-harvest handing method for mango and avocado fruits to major growing area of Debub and Semen Ari Woredas

This activity was planned to demonstrate harvesting material and effective post-harvest handing

method for mango and avocado fruits for major mango growing area of Debub and Semen Ari

Woreda during 2017. Kebeles from both woredas were selected considering relative land

coverage for mango plant and number of mango growers. Farmers were selected based on farm

land covered with mango, production status and willingness to participate in the research. In

Debub Ari woreda, 160 model farmers (83 female) and 12 development agents were trained on

the management of harvesting materials for mango and 113 harvesting materials were distributed

for the selected farmers. In the Semen Ari, the task will be under taken next.

44. Promotion of common bean dishes in Basketo Woreda

The activity was proposed to promote modem common bean dishes to improve the nutritional

status of farmers in Basketo woreda during 2017. For demonstration, 90 female farmers

participated. Common bean dishes prepared from the local kikwot, shirowot, soup and sambusa

were demonstrated and preference ranking method was used to rank the preference of farmers

based on different parameters like colour, taste, flavour and overall acceptability of the product.

Food samples were ranked and fu l was ranked first for all the sensory parameters and over all

acceptability. The reason behind was that for fu l preparation common bean need to be sorted,

[85]

washed, soaked for 24 hours and mixed with different flavor boosting such as salt, onion, oil,

garlic, processed hot pepper and these were prepared as sausage (sigo) before common bean was

cooked. Shiro was the least accepted dish based on sensory evaluation results. This was due to

lack of awareness on common bean shiro and one of the sensory parameter had negative effect

on shiro sensory acceptance. Shiro had beany flavor which is unpleasant taste and this taste is

mainly for legumes. This was the reason why shiro got the least acceptance among other

common bean dishes. About 90 female farmers (80%) of the total participants mentioned that

common bean dishes were acceptable and about 30 (20%) of the participants had less attitude on

common bean dishes in general acceptance.

“FuT ranked \sU “kikwet” 2nd’ “shiro” 3r(1 and “sambusa” ranked 4th. All the food samples

prepared from common bean got score above three from total of five-point hedonic scales. The

analysis indicated that among four food products prepared “fill” got highest acceptance by all

sensory parameters except its color. Next to “ful’\ “kik wet" ranked second by all sensory

parameters except for its taste. “Sambusa” and “shiro” ranked third and fourth respectively.

However, “sambusa” got highest in general acceptance than “shiro’ by taste, texture and odor

but it got least acceptance by its color.

Table 74. Sensory attributes of common bean dishes and scoring using 5 point hedonic scale

ParametersMean sensory scores of common bean dishes

Shiro Kikwet Sambusa Fui

Color 4.37 4.77 4.03 4.67Taste 4.17 4.70 4.47 4.83Texture 4.47 4.87 4.50 4.77Odor 4.30 4.77 4.57 4.90Over all acceptance 4.70 4.97 4.73 5.00Overall rank 3 2 4 1

Conclusion: Locally available common bean variety was selected and used for demonstration of

dishes which increase food choices and can add value for common bean. During promotion

farmers expressed their positive attitude on developing new dishes from common bean.

[86]

Recommendation: Promotion of common bean dishes can reduce protein malnutrition.

Therefore, it is better to promote common bean dishes for nutritionally vulnerable groups.

Awareness should be created for small holder farmers, cafeteria holders and consumers on

nutritional value of common bean. Further study should focus on effects of household processing

method on common bean anti-nutrient content. Pregnant women and women with children under

five need awareness on common bean importance in improving child nutrition. Pre extension

demonstration needed to promote modem common bean dishes.

45. Demonstration of cassava food products

This activity was planned to develop and demonstrate cassava food products, increase the

palatability and reduce the postharvest loss, during 2018 to 2019 at Tocha and Konta. Cassava

food products that includes: cassava flour, injera, bread, biscuit, kinetto, chips, porridge,

chechebisa were types of dishes planned to demonstrate and then promote to the selected

woredas. At each woreda, it was planned to train farmers from two female cooperatives (with 20-

30 members) on how to prepare cassava products. 20 farmers will be selected for sensory

evaluation (for taste, colour, flavour, texture and OA) to rank the acceptance level of the

products. The dishes will be prepared following the procedures designed using Chichu and

Hawassa -1 cassava. Currently the multiplication of both varieties is in progress.

46. Development and demonstration of kocho based food products

This activity was designed to develop and demonstrate kocho based food products during 2017-

2019 in Konta and Tocha. To make enset-based products such as biscuit, and kita and bread from

unfermented enset, wheat, and faba bean were planned to use as major raw materials. Additional

ingredients includes shortenings, sugar, salt, leavening agents, powder milk, and water. The

preparation of kocho products like biscuit, kita and bread supplemented with faba bean with

different proportion ratio involves the application of many processing and unit operations:

Currently, the activity was not started.

[87]

47. Evaluation and demonstration of new food product of enset, orange fleshed sweet potato and oat blends for alleviation of nutritional insecurity

This activity was designed to develop and demonstrate enset based food products, oat and orange

fleshed sweet potato (OFSP) blended to minimize proteins and vitamin A deficiency in selected

areas of Mirab Azerinet, Cheha, Enemorina Ener and Gumer Woredas during 2017 to 2018.

The study was planned to be carried out in FTC, Technical and Vocation colleges and at Wolkite

and Wachemo University Food Science Technology/Engineering laboratories. The proposed

product was to develop porridge from enset food products (bulla and kocho), oat and other major

ingredients.

Table 75.Treatments

BP % Ingredients

Bulla Kocho OFSP Oat

BPO 100 - - -

BP1 50 50 - -

BP2 50 30 10 10

BP3 40 30 15 15

BP4 30 30 20 20

OFSP: Orange-fleshed sweet potato.

Among major ingredients to develop porridge, a five month old kulfo variety orange-fleshed

sweet potato (OFSP) tubers were brought. The tubers were thoroughly sorted, washed, peeled,

sliced, soaked, drained, dried and ready to be milled into flour when porridge processing starts.

The materials necessary for preparation of porridge and sensory evaluation were purchased. The

selected kebeles were Jeremo (from Mierab A/cnnctina Bcrbere), Luke (from Cheha), Gomshe

(from Enemoina Ener) and Abekc (Gumer). The remaining activities arc in progress.

[88]

48. Production and popularization of complementary food to children under two years in Silte Zone

This activity was planned to minimize malnutrition of infants, evaluate the sensory acceptability

and the proximate composition of the prepared soup an popularize complimentary food blending

to child mothers during 2017-2018 in selected areas of Alicho Wuriro, Misirak Azerinet Berbere

and Mirab Azerinetina Berbere Woredas. The activity has two phases: Production evaluation of

the product, and demonstration and finally, proximate analysis and sensory evaluation will be

done.

'Table 76.Treatments:

BP % Blending Ingredients to prepare soupBarley Faba bean OFSP Sorghum Soybean

BP0 100% - - - -BP1 30 30 15 15 10BP2 30 25 15 15 15BP3 25 25 10 20 20BP4 20 20 15 25 20

Note: OFSP = orange-fleshed sweet potato

To produce the complementary food: barley, faba bean, OFSP chips, sorghum and Afgat soybean

variety were purchased to prepare the flour. The materials of complementary food producing and

inputs processing were purchased. The remaining activities arc in progress.

49. Evaluation of nutritional status of maize fermented meal by fortification with chickpea

The activity was planned to formulate and improve the quality and nutritive value of maize

fermented meal with chickpea and to determine sensory acceptability of maize fermented meal

with chickpea during 2018 -2018 in selected areas of Cheha, Gumer and Geta (FTC). The

treatments include three level of blending ratios 10:1 OOg as control, 11.12 g: 100 g (Bl), 25.00 g:

iOOg (B2) and 42.90 g: 100 g (B3)j and three fermentation time (Ohr, 12hr and 24hr). The major

inputs (maize and chickpea) necessary to develop the products were prepared. The materials used

[89]

to prepare maize fermented meal by fortification with chickpea were purchased. The remaining

activities are in progress.

50. Enset food product processing technology selection and demonstration in Gurage and Silte Zones, SNNPRG, Ethiopia

The activity was initiated to select and popularize efficient enset processing devices and increase

the quality of enset products and improve traditional enset processing to save time and energy of

women during 2017-2018 in selected areas of Gumer, Alicho Wuriro, Misirak Azerinetina

Berbere and Yem Special woredas.

Modified enset processing materials procuring was in progress. The materials which will be used

at the time of evaluating sensory acceptability of traditionally and modified processing methods

were procured. Kebele selection was done.

VI. ADDRESSING TH E THREE CROSS CUTTING ISSUES (GENDER, NUTRITION AND CLIMATE)

Addressing gender in agricultural research and extension project activities can result in increased

household income and wellbeing. Gender issues are a critical component of AGP project during

its design and planning and implementation by integrating gender in some of activities.

Research activities whose recommendations will not overburden women must be encouraged.

Gender-specific research involves understanding of gender issues and promotion of labor-saving

technologies for women which eases the time and labor burden for women and addressing the

distinctive needs of women. The provision of relevant information to female farmers customized

to their needs is important.

Increasing the production and consumption for a range of diverse nutrient dense food; and

diversification of crop, fruit and livestock production and improving post- harvest handling,

preservation and processing to improve availability of good nutritional quality and safe food and

[90]

developing and multiplication of seeds of high nutritional value to improve nutritional status are

considered as nutrition sensitive activity.

Climate-smart agriculture (CSA) is an integrated approach to managing landscapes cropland,

livestock, forests and fisheries that address the interlinked challenges of food security and climate

change. Smallholder agriculture is facing challenges because of a changing climate. So the

government of Ethiopia and the World Bank regard climate change and variability as mam

challenge for Ethiopia. AGP2 would contribute to this by mainstreaming Climate Smart

Agriculture (CSA) in all components. Accordingly, some of the planned research activities to

reduce the \-ulnerability of smallholder farmers are classified as climate smart agriculture

Generally, almost all crop research activities are categorized in to gender sensitive, nutrition

sensitive, climate smart and multipurpose (those addressings more than one crosscutting issue or

contribute to general production and productivity).

Gender Nutrition Clim ate Samrt MultipurposeSeusilive sensitive Agr.

Figure 23 Number o f crop research activities by cross cutting issues