Loading…
Farmer perception of impacts of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) and transferability of its management practices in Uganda
BackgroundThe Fall armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is now established across the African continent and is a highly polyphagous and destructive pest of many crops. In Uganda, FAW has become the major maize pest, causing heavy damage especially on shoots and growing point...
Saved in:
Published in: | CABI agriculture and bioscience 2023-04, Vol.4 (1), p.1-14, Article 9 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-c387416b6a86fe7f276ae1ae878b9c0fffba2fe171b5451aae8bfb1d6f47bf833 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-c387416b6a86fe7f276ae1ae878b9c0fffba2fe171b5451aae8bfb1d6f47bf833 |
container_end_page | 14 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | CABI agriculture and bioscience |
container_volume | 4 |
creator | Kalyebi, Andrew Otim, Michael H. Walsh, Tom Tay, Wee Tek |
description | BackgroundThe Fall armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is now established across the African continent and is a highly polyphagous and destructive pest of many crops. In Uganda, FAW has become the major maize pest, causing heavy damage especially on shoots and growing points. The objectives of this study were to: (i) document local farming practices that have been useful to manage FAW, (ii) establish farmers’ perspective on the time of FAW’s arrival to their localities, (iii) investigate the economic impact (yield) of FAW to maize farmers, (iv) establish the farmers’ perception on the current status of the FAW, and (v) document alternative practices used to manage the FAW and the perceived efficacies.MethodsA questionnaire survey was undertaken in November 2020 in Kamuli and Namutumba districts of Uganda and 99 farmers were interviewed to understand their profiles and perceptions about the FAW. A descriptive analysis of this data was undertaken to establish the socio-economic profiles and perceptions of the farmers.ResultsFarmers’ education levels in the two districts ranged from basic (completed primary education) to advanced (completed University degree), with most farmers having 10–30 years experience in growing maize (F = 20.8; df = 3,7; P = 0.0067), and with mainly small- and mid-sized production scales (F = 436.2; df = 2,5; P = 0.0002). Famers in Kamuli (98%) and Namutumba (96%) reported 25–50% yield losses due to FAW infestation that negatively impacted their income. We found a significantly higher percentage of farmers (84% and 92% in Kamuli and Namutumba districts, respectively), could correctly identify the FAW by its appearance (P |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/s43170-023-00150-w |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_d66aa6f76ba44208a4c30aded408ce53</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_d66aa6f76ba44208a4c30aded408ce53</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2848866438</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-c387416b6a86fe7f276ae1ae878b9c0fffba2fe171b5451aae8bfb1d6f47bf833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkc9qGzEQxpfQQoLjF8hJ0Et7WEfSarXKsZj8JdBD6rMYaUeOjHe1lWSMXyFPXdkuJacZZr75fQNfVd0wumBMydskGtbRmvKmppS1tN5fVFdcSl4LKsSXT_1lNU9pQynlLWP8Tl5VHw8QB4xkwmhxyj6MJDjihwlsTsfWwXZLiuawD3Eg39-m0IcpYwTi4m7ty10P5GVxvyBvg8_vPwiMPckRxuSKyPitz4cTsuAGGGGNA46ZTLEYeIuJ-JGs1uUIrquvxSzh_F-dVauH-9_Lp_r11-Pz8udrbQUXubaN6gSTRoKSDjvHOwnIAFWnzJ2lzjkD3CHrmGlFy6BsjDOsl050xqmmmVXPZ24fYKOn6AeIBx3A69MgxLWGWH7bou6lBJCukwaE4FSBsA2FHntBlcX2yPp2Zk0x_NlhynoTdnEs72uuhFJSikYVFT-rbAwpRXT_XRnVxwj1OUJdItSnCPW--QvyepFl</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2848866438</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Farmer perception of impacts of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) and transferability of its management practices in Uganda</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><creator>Kalyebi, Andrew ; Otim, Michael H. ; Walsh, Tom ; Tay, Wee Tek</creator><creatorcontrib>Kalyebi, Andrew ; Otim, Michael H. ; Walsh, Tom ; Tay, Wee Tek</creatorcontrib><description>BackgroundThe Fall armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is now established across the African continent and is a highly polyphagous and destructive pest of many crops. In Uganda, FAW has become the major maize pest, causing heavy damage especially on shoots and growing points. The objectives of this study were to: (i) document local farming practices that have been useful to manage FAW, (ii) establish farmers’ perspective on the time of FAW’s arrival to their localities, (iii) investigate the economic impact (yield) of FAW to maize farmers, (iv) establish the farmers’ perception on the current status of the FAW, and (v) document alternative practices used to manage the FAW and the perceived efficacies.MethodsA questionnaire survey was undertaken in November 2020 in Kamuli and Namutumba districts of Uganda and 99 farmers were interviewed to understand their profiles and perceptions about the FAW. A descriptive analysis of this data was undertaken to establish the socio-economic profiles and perceptions of the farmers.ResultsFarmers’ education levels in the two districts ranged from basic (completed primary education) to advanced (completed University degree), with most farmers having 10–30 years experience in growing maize (F = 20.8; df = 3,7; P = 0.0067), and with mainly small- and mid-sized production scales (F = 436.2; df = 2,5; P = 0.0002). Famers in Kamuli (98%) and Namutumba (96%) reported 25–50% yield losses due to FAW infestation that negatively impacted their income. We found a significantly higher percentage of farmers (84% and 92% in Kamuli and Namutumba districts, respectively), could correctly identify the FAW by its appearance (P < 0.0001). While FAW was officially reported in Uganda in 2016, farmers confirmed noticing damage symptoms similar to those caused by FAW as early as 2013 and 2014 in Namutumba and Kamuli districts, respectively. 98% of the farmers in Kamuli and 96% of those in Namutumba strongly agreed that FAW infestation reduced their income, while 74% in Kamuli and 86% in Namutumba also strongly considered the FAW as a threat to maize production (P < 0.0001). The majority of farmers (64% in Kamuli, 82% in Namutumba) still considered the FAW to be a very serious challenge to maize production in their localities, six years since officially being reported in Uganda. To manage the FAW, 84% and 90% of Kamuli and Namutumba respondents respectively, predominantly use chemical control methods. Other methods used also included cultural control practices (i.e., by regular weeding and handpicking), while the use of biological extracts (pepper, tobacco, Aloe-vera, Lantana, sisal) was evident though not common. Pheromones and biological control methods to manage FAW were not reported, although a farmer in Kamuli district reportedly observed weaver birds (Ploceus spp.) predating on the FAW in maize. A small number of farmers (ca. 4%) in both districts reportedly took no intentional action against FAW.ConclusionsThe farmers believe they can manage FAW if they have the appropriate and efficacious chemical insecticides as they are able to correctly apply them and follow recommended procedures. The farmers advocated for an area-wide approach as one of the best alternatives to manage this invasive pest.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2662-4044</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2662-4044</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s43170-023-00150-w</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: BioMed Central</publisher><subject>Agricultural economics ; Agricultural practices ; Agricultural production ; Agriculture ; Biological control ; Chemical control ; Control methods ; Corn ; Crop diseases ; Crop production ; Crops ; Cultural control ; Cultural pest management practices ; Documents ; Drought ; East Africa ; Economic analysis ; Economic impact ; Education ; Fall armyworm ; Farmers ; Impact analysis ; Income ; Infestation ; Insecticides ; Invasions ; Perception ; Pesticides ; Pests ; Pheromones ; Production costs ; Questionnaires ; Shoots ; Sisal ; Small scale maize production ; Spodoptera frugiperda ; Tobacco</subject><ispartof>CABI agriculture and bioscience, 2023-04, Vol.4 (1), p.1-14, Article 9</ispartof><rights>2023. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-c387416b6a86fe7f276ae1ae878b9c0fffba2fe171b5451aae8bfb1d6f47bf833</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-c387416b6a86fe7f276ae1ae878b9c0fffba2fe171b5451aae8bfb1d6f47bf833</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3108-9592</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2848866438/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2848866438?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kalyebi, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Otim, Michael H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walsh, Tom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tay, Wee Tek</creatorcontrib><title>Farmer perception of impacts of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) and transferability of its management practices in Uganda</title><title>CABI agriculture and bioscience</title><description>BackgroundThe Fall armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is now established across the African continent and is a highly polyphagous and destructive pest of many crops. In Uganda, FAW has become the major maize pest, causing heavy damage especially on shoots and growing points. The objectives of this study were to: (i) document local farming practices that have been useful to manage FAW, (ii) establish farmers’ perspective on the time of FAW’s arrival to their localities, (iii) investigate the economic impact (yield) of FAW to maize farmers, (iv) establish the farmers’ perception on the current status of the FAW, and (v) document alternative practices used to manage the FAW and the perceived efficacies.MethodsA questionnaire survey was undertaken in November 2020 in Kamuli and Namutumba districts of Uganda and 99 farmers were interviewed to understand their profiles and perceptions about the FAW. A descriptive analysis of this data was undertaken to establish the socio-economic profiles and perceptions of the farmers.ResultsFarmers’ education levels in the two districts ranged from basic (completed primary education) to advanced (completed University degree), with most farmers having 10–30 years experience in growing maize (F = 20.8; df = 3,7; P = 0.0067), and with mainly small- and mid-sized production scales (F = 436.2; df = 2,5; P = 0.0002). Famers in Kamuli (98%) and Namutumba (96%) reported 25–50% yield losses due to FAW infestation that negatively impacted their income. We found a significantly higher percentage of farmers (84% and 92% in Kamuli and Namutumba districts, respectively), could correctly identify the FAW by its appearance (P < 0.0001). While FAW was officially reported in Uganda in 2016, farmers confirmed noticing damage symptoms similar to those caused by FAW as early as 2013 and 2014 in Namutumba and Kamuli districts, respectively. 98% of the farmers in Kamuli and 96% of those in Namutumba strongly agreed that FAW infestation reduced their income, while 74% in Kamuli and 86% in Namutumba also strongly considered the FAW as a threat to maize production (P < 0.0001). The majority of farmers (64% in Kamuli, 82% in Namutumba) still considered the FAW to be a very serious challenge to maize production in their localities, six years since officially being reported in Uganda. To manage the FAW, 84% and 90% of Kamuli and Namutumba respondents respectively, predominantly use chemical control methods. Other methods used also included cultural control practices (i.e., by regular weeding and handpicking), while the use of biological extracts (pepper, tobacco, Aloe-vera, Lantana, sisal) was evident though not common. Pheromones and biological control methods to manage FAW were not reported, although a farmer in Kamuli district reportedly observed weaver birds (Ploceus spp.) predating on the FAW in maize. A small number of farmers (ca. 4%) in both districts reportedly took no intentional action against FAW.ConclusionsThe farmers believe they can manage FAW if they have the appropriate and efficacious chemical insecticides as they are able to correctly apply them and follow recommended procedures. The farmers advocated for an area-wide approach as one of the best alternatives to manage this invasive pest.</description><subject>Agricultural economics</subject><subject>Agricultural practices</subject><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Biological control</subject><subject>Chemical control</subject><subject>Control methods</subject><subject>Corn</subject><subject>Crop diseases</subject><subject>Crop production</subject><subject>Crops</subject><subject>Cultural control</subject><subject>Cultural pest management practices</subject><subject>Documents</subject><subject>Drought</subject><subject>East Africa</subject><subject>Economic analysis</subject><subject>Economic impact</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Fall armyworm</subject><subject>Farmers</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Income</subject><subject>Infestation</subject><subject>Insecticides</subject><subject>Invasions</subject><subject>Perception</subject><subject>Pesticides</subject><subject>Pests</subject><subject>Pheromones</subject><subject>Production costs</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Shoots</subject><subject>Sisal</subject><subject>Small scale maize production</subject><subject>Spodoptera frugiperda</subject><subject>Tobacco</subject><issn>2662-4044</issn><issn>2662-4044</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkc9qGzEQxpfQQoLjF8hJ0Et7WEfSarXKsZj8JdBD6rMYaUeOjHe1lWSMXyFPXdkuJacZZr75fQNfVd0wumBMydskGtbRmvKmppS1tN5fVFdcSl4LKsSXT_1lNU9pQynlLWP8Tl5VHw8QB4xkwmhxyj6MJDjihwlsTsfWwXZLiuawD3Eg39-m0IcpYwTi4m7ty10P5GVxvyBvg8_vPwiMPckRxuSKyPitz4cTsuAGGGGNA46ZTLEYeIuJ-JGs1uUIrquvxSzh_F-dVauH-9_Lp_r11-Pz8udrbQUXubaN6gSTRoKSDjvHOwnIAFWnzJ2lzjkD3CHrmGlFy6BsjDOsl050xqmmmVXPZ24fYKOn6AeIBx3A69MgxLWGWH7bou6lBJCukwaE4FSBsA2FHntBlcX2yPp2Zk0x_NlhynoTdnEs72uuhFJSikYVFT-rbAwpRXT_XRnVxwj1OUJdItSnCPW--QvyepFl</recordid><startdate>20230418</startdate><enddate>20230418</enddate><creator>Kalyebi, Andrew</creator><creator>Otim, Michael H.</creator><creator>Walsh, Tom</creator><creator>Tay, Wee Tek</creator><general>BioMed Central</general><general>BMC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3108-9592</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230418</creationdate><title>Farmer perception of impacts of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) and transferability of its management practices in Uganda</title><author>Kalyebi, Andrew ; Otim, Michael H. ; Walsh, Tom ; Tay, Wee Tek</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-c387416b6a86fe7f276ae1ae878b9c0fffba2fe171b5451aae8bfb1d6f47bf833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Agricultural economics</topic><topic>Agricultural practices</topic><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Biological control</topic><topic>Chemical control</topic><topic>Control methods</topic><topic>Corn</topic><topic>Crop diseases</topic><topic>Crop production</topic><topic>Crops</topic><topic>Cultural control</topic><topic>Cultural pest management practices</topic><topic>Documents</topic><topic>Drought</topic><topic>East Africa</topic><topic>Economic analysis</topic><topic>Economic impact</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Fall armyworm</topic><topic>Farmers</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Income</topic><topic>Infestation</topic><topic>Insecticides</topic><topic>Invasions</topic><topic>Perception</topic><topic>Pesticides</topic><topic>Pests</topic><topic>Pheromones</topic><topic>Production costs</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Shoots</topic><topic>Sisal</topic><topic>Small scale maize production</topic><topic>Spodoptera frugiperda</topic><topic>Tobacco</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kalyebi, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Otim, Michael H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walsh, Tom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tay, Wee Tek</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>CABI agriculture and bioscience</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kalyebi, Andrew</au><au>Otim, Michael H.</au><au>Walsh, Tom</au><au>Tay, Wee Tek</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Farmer perception of impacts of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) and transferability of its management practices in Uganda</atitle><jtitle>CABI agriculture and bioscience</jtitle><date>2023-04-18</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>14</epage><pages>1-14</pages><artnum>9</artnum><issn>2662-4044</issn><eissn>2662-4044</eissn><abstract>BackgroundThe Fall armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is now established across the African continent and is a highly polyphagous and destructive pest of many crops. In Uganda, FAW has become the major maize pest, causing heavy damage especially on shoots and growing points. The objectives of this study were to: (i) document local farming practices that have been useful to manage FAW, (ii) establish farmers’ perspective on the time of FAW’s arrival to their localities, (iii) investigate the economic impact (yield) of FAW to maize farmers, (iv) establish the farmers’ perception on the current status of the FAW, and (v) document alternative practices used to manage the FAW and the perceived efficacies.MethodsA questionnaire survey was undertaken in November 2020 in Kamuli and Namutumba districts of Uganda and 99 farmers were interviewed to understand their profiles and perceptions about the FAW. A descriptive analysis of this data was undertaken to establish the socio-economic profiles and perceptions of the farmers.ResultsFarmers’ education levels in the two districts ranged from basic (completed primary education) to advanced (completed University degree), with most farmers having 10–30 years experience in growing maize (F = 20.8; df = 3,7; P = 0.0067), and with mainly small- and mid-sized production scales (F = 436.2; df = 2,5; P = 0.0002). Famers in Kamuli (98%) and Namutumba (96%) reported 25–50% yield losses due to FAW infestation that negatively impacted their income. We found a significantly higher percentage of farmers (84% and 92% in Kamuli and Namutumba districts, respectively), could correctly identify the FAW by its appearance (P < 0.0001). While FAW was officially reported in Uganda in 2016, farmers confirmed noticing damage symptoms similar to those caused by FAW as early as 2013 and 2014 in Namutumba and Kamuli districts, respectively. 98% of the farmers in Kamuli and 96% of those in Namutumba strongly agreed that FAW infestation reduced their income, while 74% in Kamuli and 86% in Namutumba also strongly considered the FAW as a threat to maize production (P < 0.0001). The majority of farmers (64% in Kamuli, 82% in Namutumba) still considered the FAW to be a very serious challenge to maize production in their localities, six years since officially being reported in Uganda. To manage the FAW, 84% and 90% of Kamuli and Namutumba respondents respectively, predominantly use chemical control methods. Other methods used also included cultural control practices (i.e., by regular weeding and handpicking), while the use of biological extracts (pepper, tobacco, Aloe-vera, Lantana, sisal) was evident though not common. Pheromones and biological control methods to manage FAW were not reported, although a farmer in Kamuli district reportedly observed weaver birds (Ploceus spp.) predating on the FAW in maize. A small number of farmers (ca. 4%) in both districts reportedly took no intentional action against FAW.ConclusionsThe farmers believe they can manage FAW if they have the appropriate and efficacious chemical insecticides as they are able to correctly apply them and follow recommended procedures. The farmers advocated for an area-wide approach as one of the best alternatives to manage this invasive pest.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>BioMed Central</pub><doi>10.1186/s43170-023-00150-w</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3108-9592</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2662-4044 |
ispartof | CABI agriculture and bioscience, 2023-04, Vol.4 (1), p.1-14, Article 9 |
issn | 2662-4044 2662-4044 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_d66aa6f76ba44208a4c30aded408ce53 |
source | Publicly Available Content (ProQuest) |
subjects | Agricultural economics Agricultural practices Agricultural production Agriculture Biological control Chemical control Control methods Corn Crop diseases Crop production Crops Cultural control Cultural pest management practices Documents Drought East Africa Economic analysis Economic impact Education Fall armyworm Farmers Impact analysis Income Infestation Insecticides Invasions Perception Pesticides Pests Pheromones Production costs Questionnaires Shoots Sisal Small scale maize production Spodoptera frugiperda Tobacco |
title | Farmer perception of impacts of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) and transferability of its management practices in Uganda |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T07%3A20%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Farmer%20perception%20of%20impacts%20of%20fall%20armyworm%20(Spodoptera%20frugiperda%20J.E.%20Smith)%20and%20transferability%20of%20its%20management%20practices%20in%20Uganda&rft.jtitle=CABI%20agriculture%20and%20bioscience&rft.au=Kalyebi,%20Andrew&rft.date=2023-04-18&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=14&rft.pages=1-14&rft.artnum=9&rft.issn=2662-4044&rft.eissn=2662-4044&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s43170-023-00150-w&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2848866438%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-c387416b6a86fe7f276ae1ae878b9c0fffba2fe171b5451aae8bfb1d6f47bf833%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2848866438&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |