6 research outputs found

    On-farm evaluation of effectiveness of improved postharvest handling of maize in reducing grain losses, mold infection and aflatoxin contamination in rural Uganda

    Get PDF
    Postharvest losses remain a challenge among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. The uses of hermetic storage containers  (hermetic bags and metallic silos), tarpaulin sheet (plastic sheet) and raised racks reduce postharvest deterioration of grain. This study evaluated the effectiveness of selected improved drying and storage postharvest technologies and practices in reducing maize grain postharvest losses among smallholder farmers in Kamuli and Apac districts, Uganda. The assessed improved storage technologies were hermetic bags and metallic silos against woven polypropylene bags (common farmer practice). For drying, use of tarpaulins and raised racks were assessed against drying on bare ground (common farmer practice). Grain quality and quantity were determined at harvest as well as during drying and six months of storage using Longe 10H variety. Mean quantitative losses, mold infection and aflatoxin level of maize at harvest were 13.72 ± 5.44%, 59.01 ± 17.97% and 1.21 ± 0.7 ppb, respectively for traditional practice. Improved drying and storage technologies resulted in significantly lower (p≤0.05) losses, mold infection and aflatoxin level than the common  farmer practices. Drying on bare ground (3.04 ± 1.50%) resulted in 1.94 times and 7.07 times higher quantitative losses than drying on  tarpaulins (1.56 ± 1.09%) and raised racks (0.43 ± 0.58%). By the sixth month of storage, polypropylene bag storage resulted in 3.7 times and 84 times higher quantitative losses (23.7 ± 5.11%) than hermetic bags (6.33 ± 5.41%) and metallic silos (0.28 ± 0.22%), respectively. Polypropylene bag storage also resulted in 4.4 times and 6 times higher aflatoxin levels (45.82 ± 20.88 ppb) than hermetic bags and metallic silos, respectively. The interaction effects of type of drying technology and storage technology used on aflatoxin levels at the end of the storage period was significant. The highest mold infection and aflatoxin levels were observed when drying was done on bare ground and storage was in polypropylene bags and by the sixth month of storage, mold infection was 90.54 ± 5.48% and average aflatoxin content was 53.47 ± 22.79 ppb. Storage in metallic silos was the most effective in controlling mold infection and aflatoxin contamination, regardless of drying practice, while storage in polypropylene bags was the least effective. From the results, improved drying and storage technologies and practices were found to reduce postharvest maize losses, mold infection and aflatoxin level by over 50%. Use of raised drying racks and storage in metallic silos was found to be the most effective combination in maintaining maizequality and reducing postharvest losses. Key words: Aflatoxins, maize quality, mold infection, grain storage, postharvest losse

    Increasing flood risk awareness and warning readiness by participation – But who understands what under ‘participation’?

    Get PDF
    Participation is an often-demanded process in disaster risk reduction (DRR). However, it is often unclear who understands what under this term. International organizations such as the United Nations have promoted participation in their DRR strategies since the 1980s, but further research is needed on its opportunities and limitations. Here we highlight what is understood by participation according to different actors and various international contexts. This study was motivated by a workshop where flood-risk and resilience experts from 14 countries perceived the nature of participation and the lack of its implementation differently. To unravel the multitude of these perspectives, 27 expert interviews were conducted in seven countries: Belgium, Germany, Indonesia, Iran, Nepal, Pakistan and Peru between March and August 2020. Results show that constraints on the conduction of participation are not only related to the specific country context but differ even within countries. Limitations such as capacities and willingness to participate as well as the role and importance of participation are common issues across the investigated contexts and countries

    Statistical design and analysis in trials of proportionate interventions: a systematic review

    Get PDF
    Background: In proportionate or adaptive interventions, the dose or intensity can be adjusted based on individual need at predefined decision stages during the delivery of the intervention. The development of such interventions may require an evaluation of the effectiveness of the individual stages in addition to the whole intervention. However, evaluating individual stages of an intervention has various challenges, particularly the statistical design and analysis. This review aimed to identify the use of trials of proportionate interventions and how they are being designed and analysed in current practice. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science and PsycINFO for articles published between 2010 and 2015 inclusive. We considered trials of proportionate interventions in all fields of research. For each trial, its aims, design and analysis were extracted. The data synthesis was conducted using summary statistics and a narrative format. Results: Our review identified 44 proportionate intervention trials, comprising 28 trial results, 13 protocols and three secondary analyses. These were mostly described as stepped care (n=37) and mainly focussed on mental health research (n=30). The other studies were aimed at finding an optimal adaptive treatment strategy (n=7) in a variety of therapeutic areas. Further terminology used included adaptive intervention, staged intervention, sequentially multiple assignment trial or a two-phase design. The median number of decision stages in the interventions was two and only one study explicitly evaluated the effect of the individual stages. Conclusions: Trials of proportionate staged interventions are being used predominantly within the mental health field. However, few studies consider the different stages of the interventions, either at the design or the analysis phase, and how they may interact with one another. There is a need for further guidance on the design, analyses and reporting across trials of proportionate interventions
    corecore