Page 1 of 21

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 9, No. 5

Publication Date: May 25, 2022

DOI:10.14738/assrj.95.12240. Dedehouanou, H., Affokpon, A., Badou, A., Guenther, R. H., Mathew, R., Sit, T. L., Byrd, M. V., Pirzada, T., Pal, L., Khan, S. A., &

Opperman, C. H. (2022). Wrap & Plant Technology: An Innovative and Cost-Effective Method for Seed Yam Treatment for Nematode

Control in Fields. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(5). 39-59.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Wrap & Plant Technology: An Innovative and Cost-Effective

Method for Seed Yam Treatment for Nematode Control in Fields

Houinsou Dedehouanou

Houinsou Dedehouanou, Retired Professor

Faculty of Agricultural Sciences

University of Abomey-Calavi, 01BP 526 Cotonou, Benin

Antoine Affokpon

Faculty of Agricultural Sciences

University of Abomey-Calavi, 01BP 526 Cotonou, Benin

Antoine Badou

Centre of Agricultural Researches

Ever-lasting plants, National Institute of Agricultural

Researches of Benin, BP: 01 Pobe, Rep. of Benin

Richard H. Guenther

Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-7616, United States

Reny Mathew

Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-7616, United States

Tim L. Sit

Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-7616, United States

Medwick V. Byrd

Department of Forest Biomaterials

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-8005, United States

Tahira Pirzada

Department of Chemical and Bio Molecular Engineering

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-7905, United States

Page 2 of 21

40

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 9, Issue 5, May-2022

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Lokendra Pal

Department of Forest Biomaterials

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-8005, United States

Saad A. Khan

Department of Chemical and Bio Molecular Engineering

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-7905, United States

Charles H. Opperman

Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology

North Carolina State University, Raleigh

North Carolina 27695-7616, United States

ABSTRACT

In West Africa, seed yam represents an important source of nematode inoculums in

yam fields and a major cause of the disease perpetuation. To enhance nematode

control on yam (Dioscorea spp.), a pilot participatory field evaluation was

conducted in Benin on nematode control potential of abamectin-treated banana

paper (treatment A) using seed wrap method. An additional seed yam wrapped with

untreated paper (treatment B) is also considered. Both treatments A & B are then

compared to unwrapped seed yam representing the farmers’ practice (FP). In each

field, plots are arranged in a randomized complete block design with five replicates.

The effects of seed yam treatment on nematode control in fields, gustatory qualities

of yam tubers, and both social and profitability studies of the technology were

assessed. In the present paper, only the study related to the profitability based on

the Net Margin (NM) and the ratio Cost/Profit is presented. Results reveal

advantages of treatments A and B over (FP). In fact, production statistics from

treatments A and B are significantly higher than those from (FP). Based on the

"willingness to pay" approach, the profitability study shows that treatment A has a

Net Margin of approximately 153.7% that of (FP). Concerning the ratio Cost/Profit,

100 FCFA (West African CFA franc) spent in yam production using this new

technology generates around 79.3 FCFA against 59.9 FCFA for (FP). Despite the

success of this pilot study, input prices must be monitored before scaling up this

innovation to the other agro-ecological regions of Benin.

Key-words: Nematode control, Dioscorea spp., cost effectiveness, input prices, Wrap &

plant technology, Benin

INTRODUCTION

The targeted research seeks to improve agricultural productivity of yam, and therefore its

quality, although agricultural scientists admit that end-users in general and producers in

particular are more concerned with culinary and tasting advantages [1; 2]. It is then relevant to

involve the majority of end-users in perceptive evaluation of a new technology on yam in order

to assess performance at different phases: vegetative, harvest, food processing, and tasting.

From the beginning of the process - wrapping of seed yam cv. Klatchi with banana-fiber paper

impregnated with micro-doses of abamectin- to the end - various dishes made from yam, it

Page 3 of 21

41

Dedehouanou, H., Affokpon, A., Badou, A., Guenther, R. H., Mathew, R., Sit, T. L., Byrd, M. V., Pirzada, T., Pal, L., Khan, S. A., & Opperman, C. H.

(2022). Wrap & Plant Technology: An Innovative and Cost-Effective Method for Seed Yam Treatment for Nematode Control in Fields. Advances in

Social Sciences Research Journal, 9(5). 39-59.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.95.12240

should be clear and straightforward that the new technology overshadows farmers' practices.

However, as reference [3] put it, performance of an agricultural technology does not rely solely

on end-users' adoption model, but more importantly on so-called spatial and environmental

heterogeneities. Thus, piloting new agricultural practices on three different sites should not

only reveal end-users' sensitivities but also ecological variability [4]. The question here is not

if banana-fibre paper and abamectin are physically and financially accessible to farmers, but if

cost-effectiveness is ensured. The answer should be sought on both agricultural researchers

and farmers' sides before any kind of dissemination of the technology to producers. The team

of researchers seek to emphasize various advantages of the new agricultural practices with

respect to pest control and quality enhancement on the one hand and cost-effectiveness on the

other. The technical-economic analysis of agricultural innovation is used to assess the relative

advantage of wrapping of seed yam cv. Klatchi with banana-fibre paper impregnated with

micro-doses of abamectin over farmers' practices.

This paper is organized in four sections: assessment of perceptive adoption; materials and

methods; insights on the results; and discussion of the findings.

ASSESSMENT OF PERCEPTIVE ADOPTION

Perception and adoption of agricultural innovation

The system combining "zero" tillage with intermittent irrigation in order to control malaria in

rice-producing areas caught our attention for the interdisciplinary teamwork needed for the

development of new agricultural practices [5; 4]. This system showed that several disciplines

contribute to the making of the adoption process, each one looking at it through its own prism.

These disciplines include economics, sociology, agronomy, crop protection, and others.

Economists look at agricultural innovations with respect to the economic development of

societies. From such a view point, innovation is the meaning of progress, of sustainable growth,

and sustainable development. Accordingly, economic advantages explain adoption of

innovations [6].

Sociologists rather analyze circumstances that lead to adoption rather than the innovation

itself. For instance, references [7; 8; 9] were most involved in studying the performance of an

innovation. Reference [8] defined innovation as an idea, a practice, or an object that was

perceived to be new by individuals. The author suggested that innovation was relative and a

function of space, time, and actors. According to [10], spatial variability should be emphasized:

the so-called spatial and environmental heterogeneities [3]. Innovation was meant for problem

resolution in the society by the adoption of a new practice or a new good. Therefore, needs and

problems determined the adoption rates of innovations. That was the rationale of why, in the

search for solutions, [11] recommended priority ranking of the problems from the outset.

To the point of view of agronomists, they consider agricultural innovation to be a new practice,

a current but modified practice, or equipment that reduces work strains and allows

improvement of productivity [12].

Crop protectionists envision more the extent of damage to crops [13; 14] or to people [5]. As

soon as those damages are significantly reduced, the innovation has a potential to be adopted.