A Case Study - Springer Link

Environmental Management (2012) 50:352–364 DOI 10.1007/s00267-012-9883-9

Conservation of Socioculturally Important Local Crop Biodiversity in the Oromia Region of Ethiopia: A Case Study Kebu Balemie • Ranjay K. Singh

Received: 19 August 2010 / Accepted: 14 May 2012 / Published online: 24 June 2012 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Abstract In this study, we surveyed diversity in a range of local crops in the Lume and Gimbichu districts of Ethiopia, together with the knowledge of local people regarding crop uses, socio-economic importance, conservation, management and existing threats. Data were collected using semistructured interviews and participant observation. The study identified 28 farmers’ varieties of 12 crop species. Among these, wheat (Triticum turgidum) and tef (Eragrostis tef) have high intra-specific diversity, with 9 and 6 varieties respectively. Self-seed supply or seed saving was the main (80 %) source of seeds for replanting. Agronomic performance (yield and pest resistance), market demand, nutritional and use diversity attributes of the crop varieties were highlighted as important criteria for making decisions regarding planting and maintenance. Over 74 % of the informants grow a combination of ‘‘improved’’ and farmers’ varieties. Of the farmers’ varieties, the most obvious decline and/or loss was reported for wheat varieties. Introduction of improved wheat varieties, pest infestation, shortage of land, low yield performance and climate variability were identified as the principal factors contributing to this loss or decline. Appropriate interventions for future conservation and sustainable use of farmers’ varieties were suggested.

K. Balemie Institute of Biodiversity Conservation (IBC), P.O. Box 30726, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia e-mail: [email protected] R. K. Singh (&) Division of Technology Evaluation and Transfer, Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, E5, Zarifa Farm, Kachwa Road, Karnal, Haryana 132001, India e-mail: [email protected]

123

Keywords Management and conservation Farmers’ varieties Local communities Crop diversity Threats to crop diversity

Introduction Ethiopia is one of the Vavilovian centers of crop genetic diversity in the world, with very high genetic diversity in four of the world’s widely grown food crops (wheat, barley, sorghum and peas), in three of the world’s most important industrial crops (linseed, castor bean, cotton) in the world’s most important cash crop (coffee), and in food crops of national and local importance (tef, finger millet, noug, sesame and enset) (Abebe 1992). The existence of this diversity is largely due to agro-ecological heterogeneity, climatic variability, interaction of crops with their wild relatives coupled with farmers’ cultural practices and socio-economic factors (Melaku 1988; Abebe 1999). Genetic diversity benefits local farming systems in nutrient recycling, improved productivity by raising yield stability, pest and disease control, and increasing adaptability to climatic stress while providing nutrient rich foods and meeting other livelihoods (GRAIN 1999). RAI (1997) further noted that local crop varieties are lower cost and more reliable choices for many small-scale farmers operating under adverse farming conditions such as low soil fertility and prolonged drought. A number of studies have proved the important role played by local farmers’ varieties in plant breeding and sustainable agricultural development (Ram and others 2006; Rathore and others 2005; Rongbai and others 2001; Song and others 2005; Srinivasan and Gnanamanickam 2005). Today, crop diversity has faced a global threat from various factors, including expansion of modern ‘‘improved’’ varieties (Lori

Environmental Management (2012) 50:352–364

1998; Singh and others 2011), shortage of land, pest infestations and climate change (Bayush 2007; Kebu 2011). Despite their benefits, the introduction of modern rice and wheat varieties in Asian countries (Yunita 1997; RAI 1997) and the diffusion of hybrid maize varieties into the Americas are resulting in negative effects. In Ethiopia, a number of landraces, especially of wheat, barley, pulses and legumes have faced genetic erosion from expansion of improved/modern varieties (Melaku 1988; IBCR 2003). The same process continues as new, more uniform varieties are released into farming communities. For example, in a recent study Bayush (2007) reported 77 % loss of formerly existing wheat landrace diversity due to a number of factors, but mainly expansion of ‘‘improved’’ wheat varieties. In most cases, the loss of genetic diversity is accompanied by erosion of indigenous knowledge about landraces and their production (RAI 1997). While the loss of crop diversity threatens the world’s food supplies, the erosion of indigenous knowledge threatens the human capacity to produce, maintain and further enhance genetic diversity (Amanor and others 1993; Singh and others 2011). Thus, the preservation of the farmers’ varieties also helps retain associated indigenous knowledge, which could be lost if the varieties disappeared. This concern is particularly valid in Vavilov centers, where crops were originally domesticated and have evolved over thousand years (Fassil and others 2001). Considering the importance of farmers’ varieties, of the complex farming practices in sustainable agriculture and of maintaining the integrity of socio-cultural systems, the present study was undertaken in the Lume and Gimbichu Districts in the Oromia Region of Ethiopia with the following objectives: (1) to ascertain local crop diversity conserved by farmers, with special emphasis on crops with high levels of diversity; (2) to explore farmers’ knowledge on socio-cultural and management aspects of their crop varieties; (3) to identify the existing threats that cause decline or loss of these varieties; and (4) to suggest possible interventions to help preserve local crop genetic resources and associated knowledge.

Methods Study Areas The Lume and Gimbichu Districts are located in Oromia Regional State of Ethiopia (Fig. 1), situated between latitudes 39°000 –39°220 E and longitudes 8° 250 –9°110 N (CDE and MOA 1999). The topography of both Lume and Gimbichu includes plains, hills, and valleys. Three traditional agro-climatic zones are identified in these districts: gammoojjii (lowland, altitude B1,500 [masl], semi-arid and

353

hot climate); badda-daree (mid-altitude 1,500 \ 2,000 [masl], sub-humid and warm climate); and baddaa (highland, altitude [2,000 [masl], humid and cool climate). The majority of the areas fall within badda-daree (mid-altitude). The soils are predominantly black (kotichaa, carii) and light textured (gamboree). Rainfall distribution is unimodal with high mean annual precipitation between June and September. Mean annual temperature of the higher elevation areas varies between 10 and 15 °C; at mid-altitude the mean annual temperature averages 15–20 °C; and at lower elevation, the mean annual temperature varies between 20 and 25 °C. The majority of inhabitants of the study areas are Oromo people who are one of Cushitic speaking Indigenous Peoples in East Africa. These people have a traditional institution known as the Geda system, which guides the religious, socioeconomic and natural resource management activities of the people. The existing faunal and floral diversity of the Oromia Region indicate a possible role of Oromo cultural practices in biodiversity management. Rainfed agriculture is the mainstay of most households and the average farm size is around 1.5 ha. Mixed livestockcrop production is the major production system. Tef, wheat, chickpea, grass pea, field pea and lentils are the main crops grown in mid and higher altitudes, while sorghum and maize are the dominant crops grown in lowland areas. In Lume, tef production extends over most of the cultivated lands while wheat, lentils and chickpea dominate cultivation in the Gimbichu district. Cattle, sheep, goats and equines are the major components of livestock and support household livelihoods. Data Collection Nineteen Peasant Associations (PAs), administrative units within each district, were selected based on agro-climatic/ agroecological zones, crop distribution and road accessibility. Data were collected from a total of 167 male and female informant farmers aged between 25 and 80 years. Most of the farmers contacted were household heads with different socioeconomic backgrounds. They have no formal schooling and very few of them have basic formal adult education. The participants were selected with the help of local administrators and Development Agents (DAs) based on their willingness and availability during our field survey. Within each PA, 8–10 informants were interviewed regarding the diversity of farmers’ varieties, uses of the varieties, management and factors contributing to the decline or loss of crop varieties. Semi-structured interviews and group discussions were employed to obtain the information as described in Martin (1995). Field visits were conducted to document the distributions and morphological features of reported varieties. Preference

123

354


Fig. 1 Location of study districts on map of Ethiopia

rankings were exercised by 12 key informants to determine principal threats to farmers’ varieties. Direct matrix ranking was used to enumerate use diversity of farmers’ varieties and determine relative preference of the crops/ varieties for each use, following Martin (1995). Prior informed consent (PIC) was obtained from community chief of the selected areas, who gave permission for us to access information on local crop varieties from community members and to publish these collected data. Data Analysis Data gathered through semi-structured interviews, group discussions and preference ranking were analyzed using various descriptive statistics. The dataset from a use diversity matrix was subjected to principal component analysis (PCA) in Past computer software to determine variation in relative preference to specific uses for each crop.

123

Results and Discussion Crop Diversity and Distribution The study documented 28 crop varieties within 12 crop types (Table 1). Of these, wheat (Triticum turgidum) and tef (Eragrostis tef) were found to have high intra-specific diversity, with 9 and 6 varieties respectively. This indicates a crucial role for farmers’ knowledge and cultural practices in maintaining varietal diversity. Some of these varieties mature rapidly; others tend to be more nutritious and/or adapted to grow better in relatively infertile soils. Each crop variety has a vernacular local name, denoting maturity time, color, origin/seed source, yield or other distinguishing features. For example, karaa debi’aa, means ‘‘back home from a road’’, to express early maturity of the variety; ayboo meaning ‘‘cheese’’, is applied to a variety that looks like cheese; salaloo, is a variety that originally came from Selale province. Such information encoded in


355

Table 1 List of farmers’ varieties Common name

Local name

Botanical name

Agro-ecological zones

Tef

Xafii maaynaa qola diimaa

Eragrostis tef

Highland, 2,000–2,160 masl

Xafii maaynaa qola adii

Eragrostis tef

Mid to highland, 2,000–2,160 masl

Xafii hadhoo

Eragrostis tef

Low to highland, 1,500–2,160 masl

Xafii diimaa

Eragrostis tef

Highland 2,000–2,160 masl

Xafii karaa debi’aa

Eragrostis tef


Xafii buniynii

Eragrostis tef


Qamadii gajaa (lokoo)

Triticum turgidum


Qamadii jalaloo

Triticum turgidum


Qamadii salaloo

Triticum turgidum


Qamadii galanoo

Triticum turgidum


Qamadii gabree Qamadii arandatoo

Triticum turgidum Triticum turgidum

Mid to highland, 2,000–2,160 masl Mid to highland, 2,000–2,160 masl

Qamadii bawundee

Triticum turgidum


Qamadii bukuraa

Triticum turgidum


Qamadii ayboo (kuluboo)

Triticum turgidum


Shumburaa adii

Cicer arietinum


Shumburaa dimaa

Cicer arietinum


Atara adii

Pisum sativum


Atara burree

Pisum sativum


Bean

Baqelaa

Vicia faba


Lentil

Misira

Lens culinaris


Grass pea

Gayoo

Lathyrus sativus


Barley

Garbuu adii

Hordeum vulgare


Garbuu guraacha

Hordeum vulgare


Fenugreek

Abishii

Trigonella foenum-graecum

Mid- to highland, 2,000–2,160 masl

Linseed

Talbaa

Linum usitatissimum


Sorghum Maize

Mishingaa/Zangadaa Boqoloo

Sorghum bicolor Zea mays

Lowland, 1,500 masl Lowland, 1,500 masl

Wheat

Chickpea Field pea

vernacular names can provide valuable insights that inform scientific investigations (Dorp and Rulkens 1993). The study documented crops of three major agro-climatic zones (lowland, mid-altitude and highland). The number and types of crop varieties documented at midaltitude and highland differed to some extent from those documented from the lowland zone (Table 1), evidently due to the specific requirements of the crops or crop varieties in terms of soil type, moisture, temperature and other climatic factors. In terms of area planted, wheat, lentil, chickpea, fenugreek and grass pea cover the highest acreages at mid- and highlands of Lume and Gimbichu. In addition, maaynaa tef varieties are cultivated more at the intermediate altitude level of Lume. According to informants, these crops perform better in black (kotichaa and carii) soils, which have high moisture and intermediate temperature compared with gamboree, a relatively light textured but less fertile soil most common in the lowland regions. Most of the crops and crop varieties grown in these two agro-ecological areas are legumes, and would be

expected to have contributed to soil fertility through their nitrogen-fixing bacteria. Crops such as barley, sorghum, maize, and some tef and wheat varieties were documented growing in gamboree soil of the lowland agro-climatic zone. Use Diversity and Socioeconomic Importance The people of the study region, like those of other local communities in other parts of Ethiopia, use farmers’ varieties for a range of purposes and socio-economic applications including medicine, market goods and feed sources. These varieties are also used in preparing local dishes, including pancakes, porridge, bread (leavened and unleavened), roasted and boiled grains and soup (see Table 2). These dishes can be prepared from a single crop or from a combination of different crops. The PCA has differentiated the crops having high preference for specific use in particular dishes. The PCA analysis revealed that the first two principal components

123

123 Triticum turgidum Triticum turgidum Triticum turgidum Triticum turgidum

Qamadii arandatoo

Qamadii bawundee

Qamadii bukuraa

Ayboo (kuluboo)

Garbuu adii

Barley

Hordeum vulgare

Lathyrus sativus

Lens culinaris

Misira

Gayoo

Lentil

Grass pea

Vicia faba

Baqelaa

Bean

Pisum sativum Pisum sativum

Atara adii Atara burree

Cicer arietinum

Triticum turgidum

Qamadii gabree

Cicer arietinum

Triticum turgidum

Qamadii galanoo

Shumburaa dimaa

Triticum turgidum

Qamadii salaloo

Shumburaa adii

Triticum turgidum

Eragrostis tef

Xafii buniynii

Qamadii jalaloo

Eragrostis tef

Xafii karaa debi’aa

Triticum turgidum

Eragrostis tef

Xafii diimaa

Qamadii gajaa (lokoo)

Eragrostis tef

Xafii hadhoo

Field pea

Chickpea

Wheat

Eragrostis tef Eragrostis tef

Xafii maaynaa Qola adii

Tef

Botanical name

Xafii maaynaa Qola diimaa

Local name

Crops’ name

Table 2 Lists of farmers’ varieties, growing time and uses

20–30 June

Aug 27–Sep 7

Aug 27–Sep 7

1–10 July

1–10 July 1–10 July

Aug 27–Sep 7

Aug 27–Sep 7

12–22 July

12–22 July

20–30 Aug

20–30 Aug

20–30 Aug

20–30 Aug

20–30 Aug

20–30 Aug

20–30 Aug

12–22 July

12–22 July

22–30 July

22–30 July

12–22 July

12–22 July

Sowing time

Sep 20–Oct 15

Nov 15–Dec 15

Nov 15–Dec 15

1–30 Oct

1–30 Oct 1–30 Oct

Nov 15–Dec 15

Nov 15–Dec 15

25 Oct–Nov 10

Oct 25–Nov 10

Nov 15–Dec 20

Nov 15–Dec 20

Nov 30–Dec 20

Nov 15–Dec 20

Nov 15–Dec 20

Nov 15–Dec 20

Nov 15–Dec 20

Oct 25–Nov 10

Oct 25–Nov 10

Nov 15–Dec 20

Nov 15–Dec 20

Oct 30–Nov 20

Oct 30–Nov 20

Maturity time

Pancake; porridge; bread; qincee; roasted grain

Roasted and boiled grain; sauce

Roasted and boiled grain; sauce; cash source

Roasted and boiled grain; sauce

Roasted and boiled grain; sauce; cash source Roasted and boiled grain; sauce



Pancake; porridge; qincee; anababaroo; cacabssaa; bread; roasted and boiled grain; cash source




Pancake; porridge; qincee; anababaroo; cacabssaa; bread; roasted and boiled grain

Pancake; porridge; anababaroo; cacabssaa; bread; roasted and boiled grain

Pancake; porridge; qincee; anababaroo; cacabssaa; bread; roasted and boiled grain; local beer farsoo, alcoholic liquor araqee

Pancake; porridge; qincee; anababaroo; cacabssaa; bread; roasted and boiled grain; local beer farsoo, alcoholic liquor araqee

Unleavened bread; medicinal for bone and anemia Pancake; porridge; qincee; anababaroo; cacabssaa; bread; roasted and boiled grain; local beer farsoo, alcoholic liquor araqee

Pancake; porridge; anababaroo; cacabssaa;

Pancake; porridge; anababaroo; cacabssaa; unleavened bread; medicinal for broken bone and anemia

Pancake; porridge; anababaroo; cacabssaa; medicinal for broken bone and anemia

Pancake; porridge; bread; unleavened bread; cash source

Pancake; porridge; unleavened bread; cash source

Pancake; porridge; unleavened bread; cash source

Cultural/socio-economic values

356 Environmental Management (2012) 50:352–364

Boqoloo Maize

Zea mays

April 30–May 30

Sep 22– Oct 15

Pancake; bread; roasted grain; local beer farsoo, alcoholic liquor araqee Pancake; porridge; bread; roasted grain; for local beer farsoo, alcoholic liquor araqee

Sauce, medicinal for stomachache; cash source 5–15 Nov

Oct 15–Nov 5 April–May

20–30 June Linum usitatissimum Talbaa

Mishingaa/Zangadaa

Linseed

Sorghum

Sorghum bicolor

Sauce; for stomachache, for feeding young babies; as cash source 15–30 Dec Aug 27–Sep 7 Trigonella foenum-graecum Abishii Fenugreek

Pancake; porridge; bread; qincee; roasted grain; local beer farsoo, alcoholic liquor araqee Sep 20–Oct 15 Hordeum vulgare Garbuu guraacha

20–30 June

Botanical name Local name Crops’ name

Table 2 continued

Sowing time

Maturity time

Cultural/socio-economic values


357

(PCs) explain over 77 % of the variation of relative preference of farmers’ varieties in preparation of particular dishes. The loading of the variables (crop types) on the two principal component axes revealed preference/importance of a crop for making specific dishes (Fig. 2). Crops such as tef, wheat and barley also showed positive loadings on the first axis (PC1), implying their preference in making quality dishes such as bread, porridge, pancake cacabssaa, anababaroo and beverages. The strong positive loading of wheat and barley on the first axis also shows the importance of these grains in preparing qincee (a thick porridge, often enriched with butter or oil when consumed), bread, roasted and boiled grain. Faba beans, field peas and chickpeas showed positive loading on the second axis (PC2), indicating their preference in making sauce, and roasted and boiled grains. On the other hand, grass peas and lentils have strong negative loading on the first principal component, indicating lesser importance of their associated uses. The results indicated that the qualities of dishes vary with crop varieties used in their preparation. Each crop or crop variety has a particular significance in the food culture as a source of daily dishes and drinks for special events such as traditional, religious and other social occasions (Bayush 2007). Singh (2007) and Yadugiri (2010) further noted that farmers at either individual or community levels conserve crops’ varieties to meet medicinal, nutritional and cultural needs. Crops such as wheat, chickpea and barley were used for the best quality of mildly roasted grains, commonly served alone or in mixtures as breakfast during the coffee ceremony. Crops like faba bean and field pea are preferred for making sauce, or waxii, often served with pancakes. Tef and barley are best preferred for porridges. Another cultural dish known as qincee is made best from coarsely grounded barley grains and is preferred as a breakfast food. In addition, the local people use wheat in the preparation of qincee. Some specific crop varieties, for example red-seeded tef varieties such as buninyii, karaa debi’aa and xafii dimaa are highly preferred to prepare anababaroo and cacabssaa (unfermented thin, dehydrated grounded pancakes enriched with butter), which is commonly served during special occasions such as wedding ceremony. Similarly, red-seeded tef and black-seeded wheat varieties (gajaa, gabree, salaloo and jalaloo) are highly appreciated for their best gastronomic qualities such as malt, taste, smell and high nutrient content. Most of the informants (over 75 %) reported that eating the dishes prepared from these varieties slow down one’s hunger for many hours, and thus it was believed to be particularly helpful for farmers who stay working in the fields for long working hours. Possibly the red and black seeded varieties are higher in proteins or complex carbohydrates that would be more slowly digested than simple

123

358 Fig. 2 Principal component analysis (PCA) of relative importance of farmers’ varieties. Abbreviation: Tef = tef; Wh = wheat; Chp = chickpea; Fen = fenugreek; Grp = grass pea; Len = lentil; Bea = faba bean; Fip = field pea; Bar = barley; Lis = linseed; Pac = pancacke; Bd = bread; Por = porridge; Boil = boiled grain; Roa = roasted grain; Cac = cacabssaa; Ana = anababaroo; Sau = sauce; Bev = beverage; Qin = qincee; Med = medicinal; Fod = fodder; Mub = mud binder


3.2

2.4

1.6

0.8

-3.6

-2.4

-1.2

1.2

2.4

3.6

4.8

6

-0.8

-1.6

-2.4

-3.2

-4

sugars and starches. Among the beverages, local beer (farsoo) and liquors of higher alcohol content (araqee or katikalaa) are prepared from malt of barley, wheat, sorghum and maize. These beverages are prepared during holiday seasons, festivals, social gatherings and social labor-pooling works (daboo). In many urban and rural villages, a number of people, often women, are engaged in the business of making these beverages. The black-seeded barley and wheat varieties are preferred as having the best brewing quality. The suitability of individual varieties to satisfy quality and taste requirements is an important selection criterion in preparing the highest quality dishes. In another dimension, farmers grow market crops to help meet household expenditures including agricultural inputs. White-seeded wheat and tef varieties, field peas, lentils and chickpeas are major cash crops, with high market prices. In the Lume district, 66 out of 74 informants reported that white-seeded maaynaa and hadhoo tef varieties, because of their attractive appearance, have a high demand at urban markets. In particular, maaynaa varieties were grown for the market rather than home consumption. The market price of 100 kg white-seeded tef varieties was between 60 and 65 USD, compared to 45–50 USD for red-seeded tef. Of the legumes, lentils fetch a high market price, 40–45 USD/100 kg, as compared with 25–30 USD/100 kg for chickpeas and field peas. Similarly, in Gimbichu, most of those interviewed indicated that they grow white-grained farmers’ wheat varieties (bawundee, kulubboo, bukuraa, arandatoo) along with various ‘‘improved’’ varieties for sale. The price of 100 kg white-seeded varieties was

123

between 40 and 45 USD, which was still higher in price as compared to black-seeded varieties. The land allocated for growing these cash crops varied with the landholdings available to different households. In parallel, crop-residues are the major cattle feed source for dry and rainy seasons. The straws of tef, grass pea and lentil are high quality forage and made a significant contribution to household incomes. Tef straw in particular is a highly nutritious animal feed, preferentially fed to lactating cows and working oxen (Seifu 1997). The annual sale of tef straw was estimated between 129 and 172 million Ethiopian birr (Seifu 1997), which corresponds to 7–10 million US Dollars. Furthermore, this straw is widely used as a binder of mud for plastering local houses, as well as for lining grain storage bins and as bedding materials (Seifu 1997; Kebebew 2003). Ethnomedicinal Importance Over 60 % of the informants reported that crops such as red tef varieties, linseed, fenugreek and barley had nutraceutical (food as medicine) importance. Boiled linseed and fenugreek are taken to cure stomach complications. The local people recommend consumption of red seeded tef varieties for healing broken bones. It might be a clue that the red-seeded varieties are rich in calcium, phosphorus and protein. Red-seeded tef is also fed to women after childbirth. Abraham and other (1980) cited in Seifu (1997) noted that tef contains high iron mineral due to its contaminants, acquired during threshing on the ground. Thus,


it is suggested that local feeding of tef to women protects them from being anemic, which might occur due to loss of blood during delivery or menstruation. Furthermore, a medical survey on hookworm associated anemia in some parts of north Ethiopia showed a low prevalence of the disease among tef staple consumers than for others (Kebebew 2003). Hence, a lower incidence of anemia in areas of tef consumption seems to be correlated with the richness of iron in tef varieties. On the other hand, crops like grass pea (Lathyrus sativus), when consumed too much, were reported to have toxic effects (paralysis of legs) (Murthi and others 1964; Manna and others 1999). Lathyrus sativus is known to contain a neurotoxin compound, which affects receptors in central nervous system and, by doing so, causes neurolathyrism, a disease resulting from consumption of some grass pea varieties for prolonged periods. It occurs particularly during times of famine (Peter 1992). According to informants, Lathyrus sativus seeds are less toxic when consumed roasted or boiled than raw. A non-protein amino acid, b-N-Oxalylamino-L-alanine (BOAA), present in Lathyrus sativus seeds is responsible for the paralyzing effect (Murthi and others 1964; Manna and others 1999). Although this species has been banned from cultivation in many countries, there is every possibility of its use as part of diet during adverse conditions as when other crops fail (Manna and others 1999). Seed Selection, Procurement and Maintenance It is known that farmers have location specific knowledge and skills for selecting and maintaining crop varieties. The selection involves a range of socio-economic, morphologic and gastronomic qualities (Melaku and Hailu 1993). In the present study, 77 % of the informants reported that seed selection is practiced for crops such as wheat, tef, barley, sorghum and maize. The selection is done at threshing yards or on-farm, focusing on superior individuals in terms of stem and panicle/spike height and size, grain color and size, maturation periods, seed bulk, panicle/spike density and overall health of the plants. The panicles or spikes of the selected varieties are separately harvested, dried, carefully threshed and the seeds or grains saved for replanting. Like farmers in other parts of the world (Louette and others 1997; Subedi and others 2003; Singh and others 2006; Biodiversity International 2010), farmers in the study areas also procure seed mainly through an informal seed supply system. It is worth noting that where farmers maintain their own networks of seed exchange, crop diversity maintained or conserved in communities is strongly influenced by farmers’ decisions and provisioning of seed stocks (Singh 2007; Singh and others 2010). The

359

majority (80 %) of informants reported that they use their own saved seed to plant for the next growing cycle. However, when farmers lack saved seed or preferred varieties, they procure it through purchase from the market or from neighbors. Seed exchanges (4 %) and loans (1 %) are least practiced among friends and closest relatives (Fig. 3). In all cases, vital information on preferred varieties is disseminated from farmer-to-farmer through various social networks and forums (e.g., social gatherings for religious purposes, meeting of farmers’ association, conflict reconciliation and weekly market). The existence of such social networks might indicate the degree of farmers’ involvement in the maintenance of crops. It is also worth noting that migrants, marriage with someone from outside the community and outside job opportunities play an important role in seed exchange, especially over long distances (Sthapit and Jarvis 1999). As reported by Singh and others (2012), such seed flow and exchange is one of the mechanisms through which diversity enters into farming systems. In addition, public seed supply interventions have assisted informal seed practices. For example, community seed banks in Lume and Chefe Donsa districts have been supplying some landrace varieties to farmers groups and have supported the local seed systems (IBCR 2003). On the other hand, state-owned seed enterprises (Ethiopian seed industry) and private improved seed multipliers (different Unions) provide access to improved seed supply and associated inputs. The government fosters the use of improved seeds through its agricultural extension program. According to Zewdie and others (2008), the share of formal seed supply in Ethiopia is estimated between 10 and 20 %. The same authors further noted that high seed prices, late delivery and poor infrastructure are among the biggest constraints affecting formal seed supply to smallholder farmers. Lipper and others (2006) and Gebremedhin and others (2006) further discussed seed availability and accessibility as important constraints that farmers face in Purchase 15%

Exchange 4% Loan 1%

Own saving 80%

Fig. 3 Proportion of informal seed sources/network

123

360

Status of Improved Varieties Over the past few decades, genetically ‘‘improved’’ crop varieties developed by the national and international agricultural research centers have been introduced into many parts of the country, displacing farmers’ varieties (IBCR 2003). In most cases, the government policies supported and fostered the use of improved varieties and technologies to boost food production and ensure food self-sufficiency at the household level. The varieties have been present in the study areas since the early 1970s, partly due to their accessibility and proximity to agricultural research centers and to local demand. According to our informants, these introduced improved varieties had proved success and benefited farmers for short periods. However, most of them could no longer sustain their initial success. As a result, farmers discarded them from production. According to Tolera and others (2005) and Bayush (2007), performance of improved wheat is more sensitive to scientifically improved crop management practices (land preparation, variety selection, seed quality, recommended dose of fertilizers, pesticides, weedicide and irrigation) which is limited among many small-scale farmers. The study revealed that the proportions of improved wheat varieties were higher compared with others (Fig. 4).

123

14 12

No of varieties

No. of Farm. Var.

10

No. of Imp. Var.

8 6 4 2 linseed

Lentils

Chickpea

Field pea

Barely

Bean

Grass pea

Fenugreek

Wheat

0 Tef

choosing crops and varieties to plant/cultivate. By and large, the flow of seeds/varieties through both formal and informal seed systems may enhance gene flow among varieties and contribute to crop development, in turn meeting farmers’ needs, at least in part. On the other hand, farmers’ maintenance of crops and crop varieties changed according to attributes such as agronomic performance (yield, pest resistance, longevity under farmers’ storage conditions), gastronomic preference and use diversity. This result agrees with findings reported in Singh and others (2006). As well, men’s and women’s knowledge about the attributes of the varieties was important in determining decisions to maintain or grow a particular variety. According to most (88 %) informants, men make the decision as to which crop variety to cultivate, although in most cases, women play a consultation role regarding attributes such as dish quality, taste, ease of food preparation, flour quantity, cooking time and other related gastronomic traits of the varieties. In related studies, Bayush (1997), Singh (2007) and Singh and others (2010) noted that where households are headed by men, the women’s role in decision making is less apparent due to cultural norms and the patriarchal family system. However, historical accounts suggest that women are the guardians of garden crops. They also participate in most of the field cropping (sowing, weeding, harvesting and gathering activities) and seed maintenance (cleaning, storage/saving).


Types of crop

Fig. 4 Comparison of number of farmers’ and improved varieties Abbreviation used Farm. Var. farmers’ varieties, Imp. Var. Improved varieties

Over 12 improved wheat varieties (isreel, kokrit, garardoo, Inkoy, kuubsaa, paven, haraa, kililtoo, dashen, kenyaa, buhee and ejeree) were introduced into the study areas in different years. A recent market seed supply study in the East Shewa zone, including the present study areas, also found 90 % improved wheat varieties (Yonas and others 2008). This implies a worrying threat to farmers’ varieties and associated indigenous knowledge and cultural practices. A number of improved tef varieties had also been released from Debrezeit tef research center (Seifu 1997). However, some, like maaynaa have become farmers’ varieties, perhaps due to their long local usage. Of course, through selection and unintended crossbreeding, these improved varieties might have adapted to local conditions over time, thus and becoming farmers’ varieties, or landraces. With regards to adoption of different seed, the majority (74 %) of informants reported that farmers grow both improved and locally developed farmers’ varieties. However, the proportion of these varieties grown varies from crop to crop. For example, about 87 % of studied farmers in Gimbichu reported that they grow improved wheat varieties. The reasons given include relatively low yield performance of the farmers’ varieties and increased access or availability of improved wheat varieties. Furthermore, the improved varieties were promoted more by extension workers. A previous study also reported that, in 100 % of farmers in Lume and 96 % of farmers in Gimbichu grow improved durum wheat varieties (Negatu and others 1994, cited in Efrem and others 2000). Some of the names and promotional sayings applied to the improved varieties also encourage their adoption. For example, kuubsaa, meaning ‘‘satisfying in yield’’, is a local name given to an improved wheat variety known for its high yield. Farmers have also a song related to kuubsaa: ‘‘Yaa gabaree qubsa hinqotu hamma shigariin si dhotuu’’, literally meaning ‘‘cultivate


kuubsaa, high yielding improved wheat varieties instead of suffering from hunger’’. In sum, improved wheat varieties are widely grown and pose more of a threat to local wheat landraces as compared with other introduced improved crop varieties.

Pest Management Practices Pest infestation is the second principal factor next to introduction of improved varieties contributing to the decline of farmers’ varieties. Four crop pests (aphids, cutworm, weevil and weeds) were identified in the study area and were considered as major production constraints. Serious infestation and damage by aphids and cutworm of young seedlings of lentils, chickpea, wheat, fenugreek and field pea were observed during field visits. Similarly, weevils have caused considerable damage to most crops. In order to avert some of the pest problems, farmers practice crop rotation, hand weeding and regulation of planting times or sowing dates. They practice crop rotation mainly to improve soil fertility and control weedy pests. Experiences from other countries (Saxena and others 1989), however, witnessed the use of crop rotation for the prevention of soil pests such as nematodes. According to informants, early sowing helps to manage kuxituu (cutworms), which attack crops like chickpea, lentils and fenugreek by cutting the underground parts of the crops at early developmental stages. Farmers normally sow these crops in early September when the soil is not muddy, and of a soft and easily workable texture. However, farmers noticed a high prevalence of cutworms at this time, implying that it is a suitable time for growth, reproduction, easy movement and growth formation in the soil of these larvae. Realizing the prevalence of cutworms, farmers corrected planting time to between mid- and late August. A possible explanation for the difference is that during midto late August, the black vertisol soil, which is suitable for growing legumes like lentils, chickpea and grass pea, is muddy and sticky so that it impedes the free movement and then base formation of cutworms. A related study demonstrated that early planting significantly contributed to increasing grain yield (Kumar 1984; Nderitu and others 1990). In general, scrutiny of the literature on indigenous pest control methods revealed that such cultural practices are cost effective, easily implemented, and have no adverse effects on the environment (Singh 2001). However, integration of such practices with other pest control methods after scientific validation needs to be encouraged to reduce pest problems (Das and others 1999; Singh 2008), thereby improving crop productivity and maintaining local varieties in their agroecosystems.

361

Communal and Institutional Regimes Relating to Conservation of Farmers’ Varieties Conservation of farmers’ crop varieties is of particular importance to the more marginal and diverse agricultural environments where improved varieties have had much less success (Bayush 2007; Singh and others 2010, 2011; Kebu 2011). However, some farmers’ varieties are getting out of production system or have declined because of various factors. Ranking of the factors identified by key informants revealed that expansion of improved varieties followed by pest infestation were the principal threats. Other factors such as shortage of land, low performance of farmers’ varieties and climate change have contributed to the decline or loss of farmers’ varieties. Informants reported that about four farmers’ varieties of wheat (arandatoo, lokoo, jalaloo, and kulubboo) were hardly maintained or had been lost due to a combination of these factors. In a related study, Bayush (2007) reported 77 % loss of formerly available wheat landrace diversity in the east Shewa zone, which is included our study area. The remaining farmers’ varieties of wheat were also vulnerable to the same threats. Cognizant of the threat to farmers’ varieties, the Institute of Biodiversity Conservation had constructed 12 community seed banks with financial support from global environment facility (GEF). Two of the seed banks were built in Lume (at the Ejere site) and Gimbichu (at the ChefeDonsa site) districts targeting the on-farm conservation of landraces such as durum wheat, chickpea, field pea, grass pea, fenugreek, faba bean and lentils (Table 3). The onfarm conservation started by assessment and collection of declining and locally lost landraces from farmers themselves and purchased from markets. The acquired varieties were conserved in the community seed banks. The conservation of locally adapted farmers’ varieties in community seed banks was aimed to ensure the sustained provision of useful crop variability to the community. Following seed acquisition and conservation, a crop conservator association (CCA) was organized to manage the community seed banks and sustain on-farm conservation of farmers’ varieties/landraces. Members of the association and other interested farmers were able to access the seeds conserved in seed banks for planting purposes but with minimal seed loan (Table 4). The community seed banks had access to some plots of land for multiplication of the conserved varieties to overcome seed shortage. Ethio-organic seed action (EOSA), a local NGO, is currently working with the crop conservator farmers on durum wheat and other crops, linking them with markets of agro-industrial processing (e.g., a pasta and macaroni factory). Indeed, such market linkage encourages farmers to maintain their varieties as long as they get benefits from them. However, much work and support remain to enable

123

362


Table 3 Total holding of community seed bank of farmers’ varieties (landraces) during 2002/2003 cropping season Crop type

Amount of seed in Quintal (100 kg)

Number of beneficiaries (farmers)

Ejere

Ejere

Chefe Donsa

Chefe Donsa

Male Wheat

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

130.8

221.1

252.0

37.0

289.0

317.0

42.0

359.0

Grass pea

39.5

28.6

127.0

18.0

145.0

55.0

4.0

59.0

Chick pea Field pea

37.4 12.2

17.5 00.0

136.0 44.0

13.0 4.0

149.0 48.0

45.0 00.0

5.0 00.0

50.0 00.0

Faba bean

6.5

10.0

21.0

5.0

26.0

27.0

2.0

29.0

Lentil

4.2

00.0

17.0

3.0

20.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

Fenugreek

3.0

0.5

10.0

00.0

10.0

9.0

2.0

11.0

233.7

277.7

607.0

80.0

687.0

453.0

55.0

508.0

Total

Source IBCR 2003 Table 4 Local farmers’ varieties distributed to farmers by loan during 1997/1998 to 2002/2003 cropping seasons Site

Years

Amount of seed in Quintal (100 kg) Wheat

Ejere

Chefe Donsa

Pulse

Number of beneficiaries (farmers) Total

Wheat

Pulse

Total

1997–1998

16.0

8.0

24.0

80.0

76.0

156.0

1998–1999

55.0

22.0

77.0

266.0

174.0

440.0

1999–2000

71.0

21.0

92.0

286.0

156.0

442.0

2000–2001

177.0

33.0

210.0

596.0

192.0

788.0

2001–2002

186.0

153.0

339.0

572.0

730.0

1302.0

2002–2003

130.8

102.9

233.7

289.0

389.0

678.0

1999–2000

8.0

4.0

12.0

51.0

29.0

80.0

2000–2001

10.0

5.0

15.0

58.0

35.0

93.0

2001–2002

135.6

12.1

147.7

190.0

46.0

236.0

2002–2003

221.1

56.6

277.7

402.0

106.0

508.0

Source IBCR 2003

farmers to meet the standard quantity and quality parameters required by agro-industrial processors.

Future Scope and Sustainability of Farmers’ Conserved Varieties It has been argued that agricultural productivity based on traditional farming, without the use of improved technologies and access to external inputs, will not be able to keep pace with a need for surplus food production to feed the growing human population (Pretty 2009). The dilemma of needing to produce more food while conserving the genetic resource base is becoming a complex issue (Gupta 1991a, b, 1997). Indeed, the struggle against poverty and hunger cannot be won without conservation and sustainable use of genetic resources. Thus, there should be a trade-off in using the ‘‘improved’’ crops and farmers’ varieties. For instance, the use of farmers’ varieties can be encouraged on more marginal lands with minimal inputs where the improved

123

varieties have had much less success (IBCR 2003; Bayush 2007). The decline or loss of farmers’ varieties can be avoided when scientific evidence, cultural and social frames, and institutional interests are aligned together (Ladle and Jepson 2008). Significantly, validation and genetic refinement in existing farmers’ varieties can give a significant lead to conservation in the current scenario of socioeconomic and climatic changes (Singh and others 2010, 2011). The current growing demand for organically produced products can be considered as an opportunity for continued production and conservation of farmers’ varieties (Abebe 1999; Gupta 1997; Bee 2005). Ethiopia, being the centre of origin and diversity of many different crops, has a considerable potential for growing high quality organic crops. For example, the smallholder Oromia Organic Coffee Farmer Cooperative Union (OOCFUC) has been exemplary in this regard (IBCR 2003). Such experiences might be utilized for other crop varieties, which would require the organization of smallholder groups to produce a required quantity and quality products that can pass international market standards and requirements.


Conclusion This study revealed that farmers have maintained and conserved their own crop varieties through careful selection and adaptation according to environmental and human preferences. Certainly, farmers’ knowledge and cultural practices were crucial for decision-making regarding the conservation and maintenance of these varieties. Despite their contribution in seed flow and maintenance of these landraces, most informal seed supply sources, except farmers saving their own seeds, were declining in the study areas. Efforts to stop genetic erosion and loss of these local crops and varieties must therefore also focus on recovery of farmers’ knowledge and cultural practices, and strengthening farmer-to-farmer seed supply systems. The study found that many valuable farmers’ varieties have been lost due to factors such as expansion of externally sourced genetically ‘‘improved’’ varieties. Accordingly, rescue collection missions for endangered local landraces are urgently needed in the study region and other areas with similar problems of crop diversity loss. A flexible strategy that seeks both increased production and conservation of farmers’ varieties by developing local crop improvement strategies and production techniques should be encouraged to meet conservation and production demands. Self-help groups (SHGs) to promote organic crop production and neutraceutical and functional foods using farmers’ crop varieties would help to promote and perpetuate these genetic resources. Such activities, and networking with agro-tourism initiatives promoting traditional agriculture to tourists from many parts of the world could be one of the ways to advance the conservation status of local crop varieties. To this effect, policy support for conservation and sustainable use of farmers’ varieties in food markets, especially in organic food production, is instrumental. Acknowledgments The first author would like to acknowledge informant farmers in Lume and Gimbichu Districts for showing their willingness to share their empirical knowledge on crop genetic resource use and management. The Development Agents (DAs), Agriculture Office officials and local administrators in the study areas are grateful for their cooperation during field gathering. The Institute of Biodiversity Conservation (IBC) is acknowledged for financing field data collection of the study. The editorial contributions and language improvement made by Prof. Nancy J. Turner, School of Environmental Studies, University of Victoria, BC, Canada for this article is gratefully acknowledged.

References Abebe D (1992) Current status of plant genetic resource in Ethiopia. Conservation of plant genes. Academic Press Inc., London, pp 273–285 Abebe D (1999) In situ conservation: The Ethiopian experience. In: Almekinders C, Bruinsma W, Minderhoud M, Huibers-Govaert

363 I, Reijntjes C (eds) Seeds for agro-biodiversity. Leusden, 15: 30–31 Abraham B, Admasu A, Ogbai M (1980) Critical study of the iron content of tef (Eragrostis tef). Ethiopian Medicinal Journal 18:45–52 Amanor K, Wellared K, de Boef W, Bebbington A (1993) Cultivating knowledge. Genetic diversity, farmer experimentation and crop research. In: De Boef W, Amanor K, Wellard K, Bebbington A (eds) Cultivating knowledge: genetic diversity, farmer experimentation and crop research. Intermediate Technology publications, London, pp 1–13 Bayush T (1997) The role of women in farmers’ variety enhancement and utilization. In: Fassil K, Abebe D, Seyfu K (eds) Proceeding of the first joint meeting of the national project advisory and overseeing committee (NPAOC) Coordinating Unit and Partner Institutions. Biodiversity Institute, Addis Ababa Bayush T (2007) Incentives for on-farm conservation in a center of diversity: A case study of durum wheat (Triticum turgiddum L.) landraces from East Shewa, Central Ethiopia. Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB), Norway Bee Honey (2005) Recipe contests: rewarding culinary creativity. Honey Bee 16(4):8–11 Biodiversity International (2010) Saving seeds in Sahel: improving lives through biodiversity research. Available [http://www2. bioversityinternational.org/Publications/1284/AR07-Sahel.asp] Accessed on 08 Aug 2010 Center for Development and Environment and Ministry of Agriculture CDE & MOA) (1999) Soil conservation and research programme (SCRP) database file, vol II, Ethio-GIS. MOA, CDE, University of Bem Switzerland, Ethiopia Das P, Das SK, Mishra A (1999) Validation of indigenous technological knowledge. A validation report of ITK for Zone VI. ICAR Zonal Unit, JNKVV, Jabalpur, pp 2–9 Dorp M, Rulkens T (1993) Farmer crop selection criteria and gene bank collection in Indonesia. In: De Boef W, Amanor K, Wellard K, Bebbington A (eds) Cultivating knowledge: genetic diversity, farmer experimentation and crop research. Intermediate Technology Publication, London, p 225 Efrem B, Hirut K, Getachew B (2000) Durum wheat in Ethiopia: an old crop in an ancient land. Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research, Addis Ababa, p 68 Fassil K, Yemane T, McNeilly T (2001) Diversity of durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) at in situ conservation sites in North Shewa and Bale Ethiopia. Journal of Agriculture Science 136:383–392 Gebremedhin B, Smale M, Pender J (2006) Determinants of cereal diversity in villages of northern Ethiopia. In: Smale M (ed) Valuing crop biodiversity, on-farm genetic resources and economic change. CABI, Wallingford, pp 177–191 GRAIN (1999) Biodiversity in agriculture: policy issues. In: Almekinders C, Bruinsma W, Minderhoud M, Huibers-Govaert I, Reijntjes C (eds) Seeds for agro-biodiversity. Leusden, 15:8–9 Gupta AK (1991a) Why does poverty persist in regions of high biodiversity?: a case for indigenous property right system. Paper presented In: International Conference Property Right and Genetic Resources, Sponsored by IUCN, UNEP and ACTS at Kenya, June 10–16 Gupta AK (1991b) Biodiversity, poverty and intellectual property rights of third world peasants: a case for negotiating global understanding. In: Swaminathan MS, Jana S (eds) Biodiversity: implications for global food security. MaC Millan Press, Madras, pp 236–256 Gupta AK (1997) Managing ecological diversity, simultaneity, complexity and change: an ecological perspective. Working paper no. 825, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, p 115–119

123

364 Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research (IBCR) (2003) A dynamic farmer-based approaches to the conservation of Ethiopia’s plant genetic resource project. Terminal Report, Addis Ababa Kebebew A (2003) Phenotypic and molecular diversity in the Ethiopian Cereal, Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter]: implication on conservation and breeding. Dissertation, Swedish University of Agricultural Science Kebu B (2011) Management and uses of farmers’ varieties in southwest Ethiopia: a climate change perspective. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 10(1):133–145 Kumar R (1984) Insect pest control with special reference to African agriculture. Edward Arnold Ltd, London, p 298 Ladle RJ, Jepson P (2008) Towards a biocultural theory of avoided extinction. Conservation Letters 1:111–118 Lipper L, Cavatassi R, Winter P (2006) Seed supply and the on-farm demand for diversity: a case study from eastern Ethiopia. In: Smale M (ed) Valuing crop biodiversity, on-farm genetic resources and economic change. CABI, Wallingford, pp 233–250 Lori AT (1998) Cultivating diversity. Agrobiodiversity and food security. World Resources Institute, Washington DC, pp 16–65 Louette D, Charrier A, Berthaud J (1997) In situ conservation of maize in Mexico: genetic diversity and maize seed management in a traditional community. Economic Botany 51:20–38 Manna PK, Mohanta GP, Valliappan K, Manavalan R (1999) Lathyrus and lathyrism: a review. Int J Food Prop 2(3):197–203 Martin GJ (1995) Ethnobotany: a method manual. Chapman & Hall, London Melaku W (1988) Diversity and the genetic resource base. Ethiopian Journal of Agriculture Science 10(1–2):39–52 Melaku W, Hailu M (1993) Liking genetic resource conservation to farmers in Ethiopia. In: De Boef W, Amanor K, Wellard K, Bebbington A (eds) Cultivating knowledge, genetic diversity, farmer experimentation and crop research. Intermediate Technology Publication, London, pp 78–84 Murthi VVS, Seshadri TR, Venkitasubramanian TA (1964) Neurotoxic compounds of the seeds of Lathyrus sativus. Phytochemistry 3(1):73–78 Nderitu JH, Kayumbo HY, Mueke JM (1990) Bean fly infestation on common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in Kenya. Insect Science and its Application 11:35–41 Negatu W, Muwangi W, Tesema T (1994) Cultural practice and varietal preferences for durum wheat by farmers of Ada, Lume, and Gimbichu Woredas of Ethiopia. Research Report Series No. 1, Alemaya University of Agriculture, Debre zeit, Agricultural Research center, Debre zeit Peter B N (1992) What molecular mechanisms cause the signs and symptoms of neurolathyrism? In: Abstract of the second international lathyrism conference in Ethiopia, held from 16 to 17 Dec 1992 Pretty J (2009) Can ecological agriculture feed nine billion people? Monthly Review. Available http://monthlyreview.org/091123 pretty.php Accessed July 2010 Ram T, Majumder ND, Mishra B (2006) Dhanrasi, a new lowland rice variety with Oryza rufipogon genes for improving yield potential and resistance to biotic stresses. International Rice Research Notes 13(1):13–14 Rathore R, Gauri VS, Kaushik RP, Chauhan RS (2005) Oryza rufipogon: a possible source of novel resistance specificities against rice blast (porthe grisea). Current Science 89(3):443–447 Rongbai L, Xueyi Q, Sumei W, Pandey MP, Pathak PK, Qing L, Fenguan H, Shanyu L (2001) Inheritance of resistance to brown planthopper in an Oryza rufipogon (Griff.)-derived line in rice. Current Science 80(11):1421–1423 Rural Advancement International (RAI) (1997) Human nature: Agricultural biodiversity and farm based food security, Canada, p 99

123

Environmental Management (2012) 50:352–364 Saxena KN, Okeyo A, Seshu Reddy KV, Omolo EO, Ngode L (1989) Insect pest management and socio-economic circumstances of small-scale farmers for food crop production in western Kenya: a case study. Insect Science and Its Application 10:443–462 Seifu K (1997) Tef. Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 12. Institute of Plant Genetic and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/ International Plant Genetic Resource Institute, Rome Singh RK (2001) Indigenous knowledge for the pest management of soybean crop. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor 8(1):29–30 Singh RK (2007) Indigenous agricultural knowledge in rainfed rice based farming systems for sustainable agriculture: learning from Indian farmers. In: Boon EK, Hens L (eds) Indigenous knowledge systems and sustainable development: relevance for Africa. Kamla Raj Enterprises, New Delhi, pp 101–110 Singh RK (2008) Farmers wisdom in insect pest management. Indian Journal of Extension Education 44(3&4):110–113 Singh RK, Sureja AK, Singh D (2006) Amta and amti (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.)-cultural and agricultural dynamics of agrobiodiversity conservation. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 5(1):151–157 Singh RK, Dwivedi BS, Tiwari R (2010) Learning and testing the farmers’ knowledge: conservation of location specific indigenous paddy varieties. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 9(2):361–365 Singh RK, Turner NJ, Pandey CB (2011) ‘Tinni’ rice (Oryza rufipogon Griff.) production: an integrated sociocultural agroecosystem in eastern Uttar Pradesh of India. Environ Manage. doi:10.1007/s00267-011-9755-8 Singh R, Singh A, Bhardwaj R (2012) Namdung (Perilla ocymoides): a bioculturally rich plant in food and livelihood security of Adi women in Arunachal Pradesh, Eastern Himalaya. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 11(1):143–149 Song ZP, Li B, Chen JK, Lu BR (2005) Genetic diversity and conservation of common wild rice (Oryza rufipogon) in China. Plant Species Biology 20(2):83–92 Srinivasan B, Gnanamanickam G (2005) Identification of a new source of resistance in wild rice, Oryza rufipogon to bacterial blight of rice caused by Indian strains of Xanthomonas oryzae pv Oryzae. Current Science 88(8):1229–1231 Sthapit BR and Jarvis D (1999) Participatory Plant breeding for onfarm conservation. In: Almekinders C, Bruinsma W, Minderhoud M, Huibers-Govaert I, Reijntjes C (eds) Seeds for agrobiodiversity. Leusden, 15: 40–41 Subedi A, Chaudhary P, Baniya BK, Rana RB, Tiwari RK, Rijal DK, Sthapit BR, Jarvis DI (2003) Who maintains crop genetic diversity and how?: implications for on-farm conservation and utilization. Culture and Agriculture 25(2):41–50 Tolera A, Girma WT, Daba F, Hassan Y, Gemechu K (2005) Evaluation of improved wheat varieties under different management practices in Eastern Wellega Highlands Ethiopia. Pakistan Journal of Biological Science 8(6):849–854 Yadugiri VT (2010) Assamese rice variety that needs no cooking. Current Science 98(1):15 Yonas S, Belay S, Zewdie B (2008) The farmer-based seed production and marketing scheme: lesson learnt. In: Thijssen MH, Bishaw Z, Beshir A, de Boef WS (eds) Farmers, seeds and varieties: supporting informal seed supply in Ethiopia. Wageningen International, Wageningen Yunita T Winarto (1997) Maintaining seed diversity during the Green Revolution. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor 5(3):3–6 Zewdie B, Yonas S, Belay S (2008) The status of Ethiopian seed industry. In: Thijssen MH, Bishaw Z, Beshir A, de Boef WS (eds) Farmers, seeds and varieties: supporting informal seed supply in Ethiopia. Wageningen International, Wageningen