PARTNERSHIPS IN HIGHLANDS OF RWANDA UNDER INTEGRATED AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOR DEVELOPMENT (IAR4D) ARRANGEMENTS

The Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D) concept was proposed to respond to the failures of Agriculture Research and Development (ARD) systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. The key element of implementation and success of IAR4D was action sites called agricultural Innovation Platform (IPs) and their counterfactual sites. Social Network Analysis (SNA) is used to explain social relationships and partnerships. This study explored the patterns of agricultural partnerships among stakeholders in the highlands of Rwanda under IAR4D. Data were collected in action sites that included Mudende, Gataraga, Remera and Rwerere; and in their counterpart counterfactual sites that comprised of Bigogwe, Nyange and Gacaca. Results showed that in action sites, stakeholders were linked to different and diversified partners. Furthermore, many stakeholders were connected to several partners through agricultural partnerships, hence creating complex social networks with high density and degree of distribution. In the counterfactual sites, however, stakeholders were exclusively linked to the same kind of partners, and one stakeholder was connected to one partner through probably non-agricultural partnerships. These facts demonstrated that IAR4D created dense interfaces, significantly improved the networking system, and delivered technologies and innovations.Le concept de Recherche Agricole Int\ue9gr\ue9e pour le D\ue9veloppement (IAR4D) a \ue9t\ue9 propos\ue9 comme solution aux \ue9checs des syst\ue8mes Recherches Agricoles et D\ue9veloppement (ARD) en Afrique Sub-Saharienne. L\u2019\ue9l\ue9ment principal de la r\ue9ussite et du succ\ue8s d\u2019IAR4D \ue9tait l\u2019\ue9tablissement des sites d\u2019action appel\ue9s Plateformes Agricoles d\u2019innovation (IPs) ainsi que leurs sites t\ue9moins. L\u2019analyse du R\ue9seau Sociale (SNA) est utilis\ue9e pour expliquer les rapports et les relations sociaux des acteurs et des partenaires. La pr\ue9sente \ue9tude avait pour objectif d\u2019explorer les structures des relations socio-agricoles parmi les acteurs et les partenaires dans les hautes altitudes du Rwanda soumises \ue0 l\u2019IAR4D. Les donn\ue9es ont \ue9t\ue9 r\ue9colt\ue9es dans les sites d\u2019action comprenant\ua0: Mudende, Gataraga, Remera et Rwerere ainsi que dans leurs contreparties sites t\ue9moins incluant Bigogwe, Nyange et Gacaca. Les r\ue9sultats ont montr\ue9 que dans les sites d\u2019action, les acteurs \ue9taient associ\ue9s aux partenaires de natures diff\ue9rentes et un acteur \ue9tait li\ue9 \ue0 plusieurs partenaires a la fois. Dans les sites t\ue9moins par contre, les acteurs \ue9taient li\ue9s aux partenaires de m\ueames natures que ceux-ci et un acteur \ue9tait rarement li\ue9 \ue0 plus de deux partenaires. Ces faits ont montr\ue9 que l\u2019IAR4D a cr\ue9e un r\ue9seau socio-agricole tr\ue8s dense et sophistiqu\ue9 et ainsi a consid\ue9rablement am\ue9lior\ue9 le r\ue9seau socio-agricole. Par cons\ue9quent, l\u2019IAR4D peut \ueatre recommand\ue9 pour le transfert the technologies and des innovations agricoles

Combining ability for grain yield and silking of maize inbred lines derived from three open pollinated varieties released for mid altitudes of Rwanda: Comparison of Diallel and North Carolina Design II

Maize ( Zea mays L.) cropping systems have undergone extraordinary development in Rwanda during the past ten years, mainly due to the increase of agriculture productivity by the Crop Intensification Program (CIP). Consequently, there has been a shift from varieties from Open Pollinated Varieties (OPVs) to hybrid cultivars. The objective of this study was to estimate the general and specific combining abilities of inbred lines, developed from three OPVs released in mid-altitudes of Rwanda. Seventeen inbred lines were divided into female and male groups, and crossed using the North Carolina Design II (NCDII); while ten of them were crossed using Griffing\u2019s Diallel Method 4 (GDM4). The resulting crosses were evaluated at Cyabayaga, Rubona and Bugarama in Rwanda from October 2015 to March 2016. Results showed that additive and non-additive effects controlled grain yield, but non-additive effects were predominant whereas additive and maternal effects predominantly controlled silking. Six inbred lines (RML0006, RML0014, RML0015, RML0018, RM0017 and RML0010) had high general combining abilities (GCAs) for grain yield and negligible GCAs for silking; whereas ten crosses had specific combining abilities (SCAs) superior to 1.5 t ha-1 for grain yield and negligible SCAs for silking. These six inbred lines will also be used to predict and form maize synthetic varieties; while the ten crosses with best SCAs will be utilised for the developing maize hybrid varieties with high yields and reduced silking time.Le d\ue9veloppement de la culture du ma\uefs ( Zea mays L.) au Rwanda a connu un essor extraordinaire pendant les dix derni\ue8res ann\ue9es principalement \ue0 cause de l\u2019augmentation de la productivit\ue9 agricole par le Programme d\u2019Intensification des Cultures (CIP). Ce d\ue9veloppement a \ue9t\ue9 accompagn\ue9 par des changements de type de vari\ue9t\ue9, des Vari\ue9t\ue9s \ue0 Pollinisation Ouverte (OPVs) vers les hybrides. L\u2019objectif cette \ue9tude \ue9tait l\u2019estimation des aptitudes g\ue9n\ue9rales et sp\ue9cifiques \ue0 la combinaison des lign\ue9es de ma\uefs d\ue9velopp\ue9es dans trois OPVs adapt\ue9es aux moyennes altitudes. Dix-sept lign\ue9es ont \ue9t\ue9 divis\ue9es en deux groupes\ua0: le groupe des parents femelles et males. Puis, elles ont \ue9t\ue9 cross\ue9es suivant \u2018North Carolina Design II\u2019 (NCDII). Ensuite, dix lign\ue9es choisies ont \ue9t\ue9 cross\ue9es suivant le diall\ue8le de Griffing, 4\ue8me m\ue9thode (GDM4). Les croisements ont \ue9t\ue9 ensuite \ue9valu\ue9s dans trois sites\ua0: Cyabayaga, Rubona et Bugarama de D\ue9cembre 2015 jusqu\u2019en Mars 2016. Les observations ont port\ue9 sur les rendements en grains and le temps de floraison femelle. Les r\ue9sultats ont montr\ue9 que le rendement en grains \ue9tait contr\uf4l\ue9 par les effets additifs et non-additifs des g\ue8nes, mais les effets non-additifs \ue9taient dominants alors que la floraison femelle \ue9tait essentiellement contr\uf4l\ue9e par les effets additifs et maternels. Six lign\ue9es (RML0006, RML0014, RML0015, RML0018, RM0017 and RML0010) ont eu les hautes aptitudes g\ue9n\ue9rales \ue0 la combinaison (GCAs) pour le rendement en grains et les GCAs n\ue9gligeables pour le temps de floraison femelle alors que dix croisements ont eu les aptitudes sp\ue9cifiques \ue0 la combinaison (SCAs) sup\ue9rieures \ue0 1,5 t ha-1 pour le rendement en grains et les SCAs n\ue9gligeables pour la floraison femelle. Les lign\ue9es avec les meilleures GCAs vont \ueatre utilis\ue9es \ue0 la formation des vari\ue9t\ue9s synth\ue9tiques alors les croisements avec les meilleures SCAs vont \ueatre utilis\ue9s au d\ue9veloppement des vari\ue9t\ue9s hybrides de ma\uefs avec un haut rendement et une p\ue9riode de floraison femelle r\ue9duite

Agricultural innovation platform as a tool for development oriented research: Lessons and challenges in the formation and operationalization

The emergence of Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D) presents an opportunity to address any development problem. It involves innovative principles and an integrated research agenda while recognizing the need for greater organizational capacities among stakeholders in agriculture. Operationalization of IAR4D revolves around successful establishment and operation of an Agricultural Innovation Platform (AIP). Agricultural Innovation Platforms are being implemented in Lake Kivu Pilot Learning Site (LKPLS) of the Sub-Saharan Africa Challenge Programme, covering three countries (Uganda, Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo) with widely differing social political environments to address agricultural development challenges. This paper presents the processes, general guidelines lessons and experiences pertaining to “good practices” for organising and forming AIPs in the LKPLS. The life of AIPs covers three phases, namely; pre-formation, formation and post formation. The lessons and experiences are shared across 6 stages of AIP formation, namely; Identification of a research and developmental challenge(s), Site selection, Consultative and scoping study, Visioning and Stakeholder analysis, Development of action plans and Implementation of the action plans. Emerging lessons highlight AIPs as grounds and pillars for multi-level, multi-stakeholder interactions to identify, understand and address a complex challenge, concomitant emerging issues and learning towards achieving the agreed vision. Agricultural Innovation Platform formation is a dynamic, highly context specific process that incorporates all essential ingredients for successful innovation at once and provides an opportunity for local innovations to bear while at the same time nourishing on introduced innovations. In AIP formation, the recognition and value of indigenous knowledge and capitalization on prevailing policy, institutional setting and involvement of local leadership is vital. The form, nature and time taken by AIP formation process depends on both the conceptual and local context, quality of facilitation, socio-economic, culture, biophysical, political environment in which a common challenge and/or opportunity is identified and on the capacity of stakeholders to comprehend the Innovation Systems Approach (ISA). The process of AIP formation was faster in creating win-wins when market led. Strong leadership, strategic partnership, information flow, interactions and dealing with recurrent challenges during the AIP formation process are critical in fostering innovations. The major challenges included capacitating the stakeholders in requisite skills and dealing with persistent “handout-syndrome”

Assessment of aflatoxin and fumonisin contamination levels in maize and mycotoxins awareness and risk factors in Rwanda

Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites of fungi that are toxic to humans and animals when consumed in contaminated food and feed. The Rwandan climate conditions like steady temperature and sufficient rainfall favor the growth of fungi leading to high probability of mycotoxins contamination. Mycotoxins get into maize throughout the value chain from the field to processed products. Maize is  promoted in Rwanda under the Crop Intensification Program (CIP), for nutrition and food security. The aim of the study was to evaluate mycotoxins (Aflatoxin and fumonisin) levels in maize and assess awareness and factors associated with mycotoxin contamination in Rwanda. Maize samples (227 kg) from season B 2019 were collected in 15 Districts in five provinces of Rwanda after an interview with a representative of the household or cooperative using a structured questionnaire. The samples were analyzed for aflatoxin and  fumonisin using Reveal Q+ and AccuScan Gold Reader. From the interview, most of the respondents were not aware about aflatoxin (59.7 %) and 99 % did not know the effect of mycotoxins on human health. The average of aflatoxin contamination in surveyed districts was 6.69±13 μg/kg. In general, 90.4 % of samples scored below the limit of aflatoxin level regulated in East Africa/Kenya regulation standards (10 μg/kg). The levels of aflatoxin ranged between 0 and 100.9 μg/kg. The means aflatoxin levels within districts ranged between 1.36±0.5 μg/kg and 13.75±25 μg/kg. Among 9.6 % of the samples containing aflatoxins above the EU and Kenyan regulations standard limit, 5.7 % were above the US standards of 20 μg/kg. Within clusters, the level of aflatoxin more than 10 μg/kg was 5 %, 7 % and 18 % for stores, household and market samples, respectively. From the study, as mechanical damage of grains, moisture content of grains and the temperature of the store house increased, Aflatoxin level also increased. Fumonisin analyzed in maize ranged from 0 to 2.3 μg/g and only one sample from market showed a slightly higher level of fumonisin than the EU and US limit of 2 μg/g. More effort for aflatoxin mitigation is needed at the market level. Farmers need to be aware and taught how they can improve their agricultural system and more knowledge on mycotoxin control is needed. The results point to appropriate measures to recommend for control ofmycotoxins in Rwanda and awareness creation. Key words: AccuScan, Aflatoxin, Fumonisin, Fungal, Maize, Mycotoxins, Reveal Q+, Rwand

Institutional Innovations for Building Impact-oriented Agricultural Research, Knowledge and Development Institutions

The central development question in African agriculture is how to catalyze a more competitive, equitable and sustainable agricultural growth within the context of smallholder production systems, inefficient agricultural marketing, inefficient investments by private sector amidst degradation prone natural resources base (Lynam and Blackie, 1994; IAC, 2004; World bank, 2006 ). Concerted scholarly analyses of Science and Technology (S&T) strategies have given birth to Integrated Agricultural Research for Development (IAR4D) an organizing concept of the Innovation Systems Approach (ISA) as the promise holder. It is hypothesized that the generation, diffusion and application of impactful innovations critically depend on systemic integration of knowledge systems that promote communication, interaction and cooperation between agricultural research, education, extension, farmers, private sector and policy regulatory systems. This paper examines how the different institutional innovations arising from various permutations of linkages and interactions of ARD organizations (national, international advanced agricultural research centres and universities) influenced the different outcomes in addressing identified ARD problems. A multi-institutional, multi-disciplinary phased Participatory Action Research approach was used to pool knowledge to address outstanding and emerging challenges in three countries (DRC, Rwanda and Uganda) with 2, 16 and 24 years out of conflict, respectively) of the Lake Kivu Pilot Learning Site. A landmark institutional innovation was the participatory establishment of twelve (12) Innovation Platforms as tools for pooling knowledge across the agricultural business, education, research and extension systems. The knowledge “pool” was to generate, diffuse and apply innovations to reduce transactions costs and create value chain based “win-win” situations. A number of innovations (e.g. International Public Goods-IPGs, market binding contracts, registered brands and/or certification processes, diversity, density and quality of networks/collective action, bulking centres, ICT application and depth of knowledge pools) were initiated. There were major breakthroughs which included bringing on board non-traditional private sector and policy maker partners, overcoming the predominant “farmer handout syndrome”, building consensus and addressing common interest challenge. Making markets work, bringing various stakeholders including universities to the community and vice-versa, appreciation of indigenous knowledge system, propelling collective soil and water conservation and demand/utilization of technologies hitherto on-shelf were other very significant breakthroughs. Sustainable operations of the Innovation Systems knowledge “pool” nurturing institutional learning were ensured through the availability of a “functional body”. The body undertook the social enterprise of organizing farmers and traders, facilitating/brokering ARD organization linkages by using multi-media to build social capital to overcome emergent knowledge, credit, market, technology and resource degradation challenges under different policy regulatory systems

Effects of biofertilizer containing N-fixer, P and K solubilizers and AM fungi on maize growth: A greenhouse trial.

An in vitro study was undertaken to evaluate the compatibility of indigenous plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) with commonly used inorganic and organic sources of fertilizers in tea plantations. The nitrogenous, phosphatic and potash fertilizers used for this study were urea, rock phosphate and muriate of potash, respectively. The organic sources of fertilizers neem cake, composted coir pith and vermicompost were also used. PGPRs such as nitrogen fixer; Azospirillum lipoferum, Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria (PSB); Pseudomonas putida, Potassium Solubilizing Bacteria (KSB); Burkholderia cepacia and Pseudomonas putida were used for compatibility study. Results were indicated that PGPRs preferred the coir pith and they proved their higher colony establishment in the formulation except Azospirillum spp. that preferred vermicompost for their establishment. The optimum dose of neem cake powder