Regional Wheat Research for Development

Regional Wheat Research for Development Edited by

Tadesse Dessalegn

East African Agricultural Productivity Project Wheat Regional Center of Excellence

የኢትዮጵያ የግብርና ምርምር ኢንስቲትዩት

Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research

Regional Wheat Research for Development

Proceedings of the 3rd Regional Wheat Progress Review and Planning Workshop, 15-19 September 2014, Adama, Ethiopia

© Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, 2015

Copyeditor: Abebe Kirub

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations

2

Words from ASARECA

3

Genotype by Environment Interaction and Yield Stability in Bread Wheat Genotypes in East Africa

6

Evaluation of Spring Bread Wheat Advanced Lines across Different Environments of Tanzania

15

Responses of Bread Wheat Genotypes to Fertilizer and Seed Rates Arsi Zone, Ethiopia

24

Responses of Bread Wheat Varieties to N and P Moist and Humid Midhighland Vertisols of Arsi Zone, Ethiopia

35

Monitoring of Major Foliar Diseases of Wheat in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda

46

Evaluation of Herbicides in Wheat

55

Developing and Introducing Pre-Harvest Implements

61

Developing and Fabricating Small-scale Wheat Thresher

69

Disseminating Improved Wheat Technology through Pre-Extension Demonstration in Ethiopia

72

Determinants of Farmers’ seed demand for improved wheat varieties in Ethiopia: A Double Hurdle Model Approach

84

Enhancing Adoption of Improved Wheat Technologies, Innovations and Management through Dissemination, Up-Scaling and Knowledge Management

94

Wheat Production Efficiency in Major Producing Areas of Ethiopia

103

Developing manually-operated single row precision Wheat-Cum-Fertilizer planter

112

Distribution, Physiologic Races and Reaction of Wheat Cultivars to Virulent Races of Leaf Rust in Southeastern Zone of Tigray, Ethiopia

125

Durum Wheat Research and Achievements

140

Yield and Yield Stability of Bread Wheat Genotypes in Lowland Irrigated Areas

149

Evaluation of Bread Wheat Genotypes for Yield and Yield Components in Irrigated Lowland Areas

155

Closing Remarks

159

List of participants

161

1

Acronyms and Abbreviations AFrII AMMI APPRC ARARI ASARECA ASV BBM CADDP CIMMYT DRRW EAAPP EIAR EoI ESMP FARA FIG FREG GEI GTP ICARDA IPCA IPMP KARLO MARC MMT MRR NEPAD NIR NRI RCoE SNNP SSA T&D USAID

African Innovation Innovative Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction Ambo Plant Protection Research Center Amhara Region Agricultural Research Institute ( Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in East and Central Africa AMMI stability values Broad Bed Maker Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center) Durable Rust Resistance in Wheat Eastern Africa Agricultural Productivity Project Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research Expression of Interest Environmental and Social Management Plan Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa Farmer innovation grant system, Farmer Research Extension Group genotype by environmental interaction Growth and Transformation Plan International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas Interaction Principal Component Axis Integrated Pest Management Plan Kenya Agricultural Research and Livestock Organization Mekele Agricultural Research Center Million Metric Tons Marginal Rate of Return New Partnership for Africa Development Near Infrared Reflectance Natural Resources Institute Regional Center of Excellence Southern Nation Nationalities People Sub-Saharan Africa Training and Dissemination United States Agency for International Development

WRCoE

Wheat Regional Center of Excellence

2

Words from ASARECA Vincent Akulumuka1 and Apophia Muhimbura2 1 EAAPP Program Manager; ASARECA-Uganda 2 Environmental and Social Safeguard Specialist; ASARECA-Uganda

What is expected from the reviews: Reviews of the regional projects implemented under the RCoEs jointly by researchers from the 4 EAAPP implemeting countries is an annual event which track the implementation progress of the past one year. The wheat review is the last commodity reviewed in 2014. Others reviewed included project under dairy RCoE, which took place in May 13-15, 2014, followed by projects under rice RCoE in July 16-18, 2014 and projects under cassava RCoE in July 28-30, 2014. It should be noted that these reviews are the last carried out in phase I of EAAPP. The main expectations from the 2014 wheat review included: 

 

Monitor regional integration in terms of seeing how regional projects are clearly demonstrating regional dimensions such as addressing regional priorities, demonstration of RCoE leadership in ensuring the agreed designs are followed, communication among research team is enhanced, fostering information sharing, and regional projects have clear focus on the “end products” such as new varieties, innovative technology pathways, clear strategy for publishing results into journals and other media; Quality of presentation in terms of visibility, clarity, content, andengaging the audience; and Reflection and way forward

The Roles of RCoEs Experience gathered from the past reviews show that the roles and responsibilities of the RCoE are somewhat forgotten and hence a need for reminders is apparent. In that respect, the agreed roles and responsibilities of the Wheat RCoE developed in November 2012 during the Mid Term Review Implementation Support Mission was shared again to the scientists and development specialists present in this review. It was agreed for the Wheat RCoE to: o o o o o o

Lead in the development of wheat technologies; Coordinate the implementation of all projects' activities; Provide training to scientists and other stakeholders; Enhance access of proven technologies by other countries; Ensure sharing of information and knowledg across countries; and Strengthen linkages with national, regional and international institutions

Planning, implementing and reviewing projects It was felt important to also revert to the agreed steps to follow when planning, implementing, reviweing and concluding regional projects. This is thought important because EAAPP phase I is coming to a close and transition to phase II is yet uncertain. Thus, the steps agreed by wheat stakeholders in 2012 were:     

Identifying regional priority areas with participation of partner countries; Developing concept notes on identified priority areas; Approving regional projects using the agreed procedures under the RCoE; Implementation of the projects; and Reporting in the reviews and other fora

Features of regional projects Alongside the planning and review process, also agreed on were the key features qualifying the regional projects as: 

they should be implemented in more than one EAAPP implementing country;

3

  

they should demonstrate the potential for improving regional intergration; they should have potential for spill-overs; they should have potential for building new strategic partnerships and in addition they should have potential to positively impact on economic growth, social welfare, natural resource management, and capacity building

Roles and responsibilities of Principle Investigators under Wheat RCoE Principle Investigators are key in spearheading the implementation of the regional projects so as to ensure implementers are on track. In that respect, it was felt necessary to remind them of their roles and responsibilities and more so as the project comes close to the end of Phase I. The roles are:      

Coordinating project planning and implementation; Monitoring implemetation to achieve set objectives and results and promote(?) the findings to wider stakeholders; Developing practical linkages amongst project implementation teams; Enhancing information and knowledge sharing; Organizing meetings and training sessions; and Preparing technical reports

End of EAAPP Phase I Evaluation As EAAPP comes closer to the end of phase I, it is a pre-requisite to carry out an independent end of phase I evaluation. The workshop participants were informed that a consulting firm formed by the Natural Resources Institute (NRI) of the University of Greenwich (UoG) based in the United Kingdom had won the award for carrying out the evaluation. NRI/UoG had teamed up with the African Innovation Iniative (AfrII) based in Kampala Uganda. The consulting firm had its first inception meeting in Naivasha during the 8th EAAPP mission wrap-up and had one on one discussion with Kenya, Ethiopia and Tanzania teams. The focus of the evaluation will include the following:  

Undertaking the economic analysis and assessing the implemnted projects paying attention to the number of direct and inderect beneficiaries reached, and quantities of benefit accrued Assessing EAAPP performance in meeting its project Development Objectives (PDO) as stipulated in its results framework. Key Performance Indicators at PDO level are: o o o o o o



rate of change in regional specialization and collaboration in agricultural research; rate of increase in information and knowledge transfer across national boundaries; rate of change in adoption of new technologies; rate of change in increase of land areas with seed of improved cultivars; increase in productivity at farm level over control technology; and level of stakeholders satisfaction with technologies and innovation

Generating key lessons learned that could be used to inform the design of EAAPP Phase 2.

Transition of EAAPP from Phase I to Phase II Workshop participants were informed that the High Level Leaders (Permanent Secretaries, Principal Secretaries, State Minister) of the four countries implementing EAAPP are highly satisfied with the implementtion progress the project is achieving. The leaders registered this statement during the 3rd EAAPP Regional Steering Committee meeting held in Bahar Dar Ethiopia in February 2014. In that meeting, the leaders agreed to submit the Expression of Interest (EoI) to the World Bank for phase II. Kenya and Tanzania have submitted, Ethiopia’s EoI is with the Ministry of Finance for approval and submission to the Bank and Uganda is at advanced stage of submission. No official communication has come from the World Bank concerning Phase II. Meanwhile, during the conclusion of the 8th EAAPP mission by the World Bank and ASARECA, it was recommended that countries should apply for a No Cost Extension (NCE) to meet the following: 

Bridging the gap between Phases I and II;

4

 

Providing opportunity for the implementing countries to document achievements, success stories and lessons learned; and Developing a strategy for continuity of the initiated activities in case Phase II does not materialize

It was noted that there was significant progress in compliying with ESS with the:    

National Action plans submitted for Kenya, Ethiopia and Uganda; EIA for civil works carried out across the region; ESS instruments development improved but still lacking especially for Ethiopia; and The compliance rating had improved from 0% at the beginning of 2013 and stood as follows:

RCoE Wheat

Civil works 55

Regional projects 42

Rice

70

59

64% - Somewhat Compliant

Dairy

75

69

72% - Compliant

Cassava

68

61

64% - Somewhat Compliant

Compliance rating 48% - Not Compliant

Comment All regional projects screened but no ESMP or IPMP submitted. EIA done though approval certificates not seen. Half yearly report had minimal ESS content All regional projects screened, not all ESMP and IPMP submitted. EIA done. Half yearly report had minimal ESS content All regional projects screened and all ESMP / IPMP submitted though one was not yet complete. EIA for civil works done. Needed to improve ESS content in the half yearly report to align it with the national action plan All regional projects screened, one ESMP not yet submitted. EIA for civil works done though approval certificates not seen. Half yearly report had minimal ESS content

There was need to improve on:   

Reporting on the status of implementation of the national action plans; Development and implementation of the ESS instruments - most especially for Ethiopia; and Implementation of recommendations for EIA for civil works

5

THEME 1

Germplasm Enhancement, Variety Development, and Breeder Seed Production Genotype by Environment Interaction and Yield Stability in Bread Wheat Genotypes in East Africa Zerihun T1*, Dawit A1, Habtemariam Z1, Njau P2, Mohammed A3 and Muluken B4 Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), P.O. Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 2Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO), Private Bag (20107) Njoro, Kenya 3Oromia Agricultural Research Institute (OARI), Ethiopia 4Amhara Regional Agricultural Research Institute (ARARI), Ethiopia 1Ethiopian

Abstract The existing heterogeneous agroecology in eastern Africa emphasizes the importance of a robust and efficient variety testing scheme to identify stable and widely adapted varieties in the region. Twenty-six elite bread wheat genotypes were evaluated to estimate the magnitude of genotype by environmental interaction (GEI) and yield stability under different environments. The varieties were tested at nine environments in 2013, i.e., eight in Ethiopia and one in Kenya. The experiment was laidout in alpha lattice design with three replications. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) and AMMI stability values (ASV) were computed. The main effects of environments, genotypes and GEI were highly significant (p