Next Article in Journal
Effect of Environmental Information Disclosure on the Financing Efficiency of Enterprises—Evidence from China’s Listed Energy Companies
Next Article in Special Issue
Physiological, Morphological and Biochemical Responses of Exogenous Hydrogen Sulfide in Salt-Stressed Tomato Seedlings
Previous Article in Journal
A Scoping Review of Pipeline Maintenance Methodologies Based on Industry 4.0
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effect of Biochar and Process Water Derived from the Co-Processed Sewage Sludge and Food Waste on Garden Cress’ Growth and Quality
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Participatory Assessment of Potato Production Systems and Cultivar Development in Rwanda

by
Jean Baptiste Muhinyuza
1,*,
Alphonsine Mukamuhirwa
1,
Marie Chantal Mutimawurugo
1,
Jean Damascène Mazimpaka
1,
Delitha Girumugisha Muhinyuza
2 and
Rodomiro Octavio Ortiz Rios
3
1
Department of Crop Science, College of Agriculture, Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, University of Rwanda, Musanze P.O. Box 210, Rwanda
2
Department of Economics, College of Business and Economics, University of Rwanda, Kigali P.O. Box 4285, Rwanda
3
Genetics and Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Science, SE-23422 Lomma, Sweden
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(24), 16703; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416703
Submission received: 18 October 2022 / Revised: 26 November 2022 / Accepted: 5 December 2022 / Published: 13 December 2022

Abstract

:
Potato cultivars grown in Rwanda are very old, low yielding and not amenable to food processing. High yielding and late blight tolerant cultivars for this country should be evaluated at different agro-ecozones prior to releasing them to farmers, who are yet to be integrated into potato breeding. The objectives of this study were to assess farmers’ preferred traits in potato cultivars and to gather knowledge from farmers about potato clones bred in Rwanda. Four respondents per village in 36 villages each for the districts of Musanze, Burera and Nyamagabe participated in the survey, whose questionnaire was about farm size, gender balance, land allocated to potatoes and other main crops, potato “seed” sourcing, potato production constraints and most important potato attributes. Potato was rated as the most important food and cash crop. ‘Kirundo’, ‘Cruza’, ‘Mabondo’ and ‘Victoria’ were the most popular cultivars. Among them, Mabondo’ was the most resistant to the oomycete Phytophthora infestans causing late blight. Potato production in Rwanda is limited by lack of improved cultivars, high temperature, drought, acidic soil, pathogens, insects, weeds, inadequate storage of tubers as planting material, post-harvest technology, low market price of tubers at harvest, lack of access to credit, climate change, and gaps such as inadequate fertilizer and fungicide applications. The most important cultivar attributes were high tuber yield, host plant resistance and high specific gravity or dry matter.

1. Introduction

Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.; 2n = 4x = 48 chromosomes) is among the four major food crops grown worldwide [1]. In terms of human consumption and total grown area, potato ranks third after wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and rice (Oryza sativa L.) [2,3]. Potato is first in total production among root and tuber crops (Dioscorea batatas Deene) [1]. The 100 potato growing states are located in the tropics and subtropics [4]. The total estimated area under potato production in the world is 17 584 000 hectares with a total production of 366 298 000 tons (Table 1) [5]. Asia is the largest potato producer with around 43% of global production, followed by Europe (38%), America (13%) and Africa (6%) (Figure 1) [5]. In Africa, Algeria is the leading potato producer, followed by Egypt, Malawi and South Africa, while Rwanda is the fifth-largest producer (Table 2). In Eastern and Central Africa (ECA), potato is an important food security crop [6]. Potatoes grow well in several parts of Rwanda but their production is concentrated at high altitudes (mainly above elevations of 1800 m above sea level), and two to three crops can be grown in a year. Small family farms grow potato along with beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and maize (Zea mays L.), and harvest on average almost 10 tons per hectare [7].
Potato provides various nutrients, and it may be an important source for enhanced nutrition to the growing population worldwide [2]. Its content of carbohydrates are high and it produces considerable energy with large amounts of protein and vitamins, especially vitamin C, as well as minerals such as P, Ca, Zn, K and Fe [5]. Such important nutritional value makes potato an efficient crop in combating malnutrition [5]. Based on its overall economic importance, the volume of potatoes produced and consumed worldwide has increased substantially [1,2].
Potato is, after banana, the second-most-important food crop of Rwanda (Table 3), where it also has an important role as a cash crop [5]. There are more than 70,000 potato farmers, grouped in 30 cooperatives, which harvest over 19,000 tons monthly towards the end of the cropping season [8]. ‘Kinigi’, ‘Kirundo’, ‘Mabondo’, ‘Cruza’, ‘Sangema’ are the most popular grown cultivars, among others (Table 4), in Rwanda. Recently, four new cultivars, namely, ‘Nkunganire’ (CIP 39280.84), ‘Twihaze’ (CIP 393371.58), ‘Izihirwe’ (CIP 396018.14) and ‘Ndeze’ (CIP 393280.84) from the International Potato Center (CIP) were released after field testing across sites and over years in the country [8]. Moreover, five locally bred cultivars (‘Twigire’, ‘Seka’, ‘Cyerekezo’, ‘Ndamira’, ‘Gisubizo’ and ‘Jyambere’ were included in the national performance trial (NPT) prior to their official release in 2020 [9]. The Rwanda Agriculture Board (RAB) potato sub-program began a local potato breeding program, with support from the Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) and CIP. Currently, RAB has advanced six elite potato breeding clones to the pre-release stage (Table 5) due to the following attributes: high yield and host plant resistance to the oomycte Phytophthora infestans causing late blight, which is the most devastating disease in the potato production system of Rwanda. This crossbreeding endeavor aims to evaluate farmers’ preferred potato attributes and to collect new genotypes for further evaluation in the different agricultural ecologies of Rwanda.

2. Materials and Methods

The highlands (>1800 m above sea level) of northwest Rwanda were mostly the target areas for this research along with Buberuka Highland region and the Nile-Congo Crest in the southwest. The chosen districts were Musanze in the highland of volcanic soils, Burera in the Buberuka area, and Nyamagabe within the Congo-Nile divide, which are main potato-growing sites in the country due to their soil fertility, land productivity, and suitable climates for this tuber crop (Figure 2), [9]. These sites have a bimodal rainfall pattern, i.e., short and long rains during October to mid-December and March to June, respectively [11]. Nonetheless, rainfall occurs almost always in these sites, thus allowing potato planting throughout the year. Their average annual temperature and rainfall are at 16 ºC and 1500 mm, respectively [11]. The main food crops cultivated in the selected districts are potato, maize, beans, wheat, peas, sorghum and vegetables.
The highland areas were selected following a purposive sampling procedure while considering their importance in potato production in the country [7]. We used random sampling to select villages and farmers therein with the assistance of the village leaders and extension workers. Hence, the survey involved 36 villages and 144 respondents in three districts and was conducted from February to April 2022. A questionnaire was used for farmers to provide information regarding their farm size, land allocated to potato and other crops, and source of potato-planting material. Data from the structured survey questionnaire along with secondary data from previous surveys and other reports were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

3. Results

Potato was grown throughout the year as a food and cash crop. Table 6 displays the time period that potatoes were grown and the number of times they were planted per year. Most farmers grew potato at least twice a year. Musanze was the first district that adopted potato, and thereafter were Nyamagabe and Burera. The number of respondents interviewed and the gender composition are presented in Table 7.
Land allocation: The land area for growing potatoes was larger than that used for other food crops. The average household land size was 1 ha, and 0.9 ha of this (90%) was used for farming (Table 8), of which 41.5 to 56.3% was for potato production (Table 9).
Tuber planting material sources and use of production inputs: The sources of potato tuber planting material in the study areas are presented in Table 10. Traders (39.6%) and open markets (36.1%) were the main sources for farmers to purchase their potato tubers for planting. Both research institutions and private enterprises had a minor role as planting materials providers (11.1% and 9.7%, respectively). There were few farmers (3.5%) who kept their own planting materials from their own potato tuber harvests.
Major production constraints: The participatory assessment revealed that the most important potato production constraints were the lack of access to credits for the growing season (mean score: 43.3), lack of suitable high yielding potato cultivars (42.3), insufficient tubers for use as clean planting materials (40.3) and cultivar susceptibility to P. infestans (39) (Table 11).
Importance of pests:Table 12 lists the most important potato pests as determined by farmers, who grouped them, with the assistance of the interviewer, into four categories: fungal diseases (mostly late blight), bacterial wilt, viruses, and insects. Late blight was the main pest in Musanze, while bacterial wilt was the most important pest affecting the crop in Burera. Bacterial wilt was the least important in Nyamagabe (Table 12). P. infestans caused significant crop damage (25–50%), whereas bacterial wilt and virus infections affected 26.5% and 26.6% of the crops, respectively (Table 13). Serious crop damage (i.e., >50%) was mostly due to bacterial wilt (31%) and late blight (18.2%) (Table 13).
Farmers’ preferred cultivars: Kirundo’, ‘Cruza’, ‘Mabondo’, ‘Victoria’, ‘Gikungu’ and ‘Sangema’ were the cultivars grown across the three districts included in the survey (Table 14). ‘Kirundo’ (mean score = 2.7), ‘Cruza’ (1.9), ‘Mabondo’ (1.8) and ‘Victoria’ (1.2) were the most important cultivars, but they did vary in their ranking across sites. ‘Rutuku’ was the most important cultivar grown in Burera, but this cultivar is a name given to all the cultivars with red skin. It could be ‘Kinigi’, ‘Victoria’ or ‘Gikungu’, which are the most important red cultivars available therein.
Late blight susceptibility in cultivars: Table 15 provides the ranking of cultivars according to their susceptibility to P. infestans. ‘Cruza’ was the least susceptible cultivar (mean score = 2.9), followed by ‘Mabondo’ (2.5) and ‘Kirundo’ (1.7) in the highland regions. ‘Kinigi’ and ‘Rutuku’ were, however, the least susceptible cultivars in Musanze and Burera, respectively, while ‘Cruza’ was the least susceptible in Nyamagabe.
Farmers’ preferred potato traits: The most important attributes sought by farmers are high tuber yield (mean score = 4.2), host plant resistance to pathogens and pests (3.6), and high specific gravity/dry matter content (3.4), though it could vary among districts (Table 16). Other important features of potato cultivars that farmers liked were early maturity (1.9) and dormancy period (1.1) (Table 16), as well as marketability, tolerance to poor soils, and big tubers with round shape (Table 17).

4. Discussion

Our research shows that potato is a main food security crop and source of cash income for rural households in Rwanda. Maize, beans, wheat, peas, vegetables and sorghum are other main food crops grown along with potato in this country, which remains one of the most densely populated worldwide. Landholdings are very small, with 1 ha as the average land size per farmer, who use more than 50% of it for producing potato. The main sources of tuber planting materials for the potato are traders and open markets. Farmers seldom had access to clean tuber planting materials, thus increasing the incidence and severity of important pathogens and pests affecting potato farming in Rwanda. Infected tuber planting materials spread pathogens and pests for this vegetatively propagated tuber crop. Selection for host plant resistance in newly bred cultivar and clean planting materials will likely lower both the incidence and severity of important pathogens and pests affecting potato in Rwanda.
Lacking access to credits for purchasing inputs during the cropping season or not having suitable high tuber yielding planting materials, as well as insufficient clean planting materials, the available cultigen germplasm susceptibility to P. infestans, the tuber dormancy period, low market prices, soil degradation, inaccessibility to fertilizers and pesticides were cited by farmers as their major limitations for achieving big potato harvests in Rwanda, where late blight remains the most important pest, as previously noted [11,12].
‘Kirundo’, ‘Cruza’, ‘Mabondo’, ‘Victoria’, ‘Gikungu’ and ‘Sangema’ are the leading cultivars grown in Rwanda, but some of them are susceptible to P. infestans. The cultivar ‘Mabondo’ is the least susceptible cultivar across the districts included in the survey, whereas ‘Victoria’ is the most susceptible, as also noted after many years of field testing by ISAR [11].
Potato farmers in Rwanda seek cultivars showing high and stable tuber yield, host plant resistance to pathogens (particularly P. infestans) and pests, and with high dry matter/specific gravity. Likewise, early maturity, short dormancy, marketability, tolerance to poor soils, large round tubers are also appreciated by farmers in this country.

5. Conclusions

The pro-active participation of farmers in potato breeding should be pursued because their engagement is important for selecting suitable breeding clones in cultivar development and ensuring the successful adoption of newly bred germplasm. Hence, farmers should be involved in the development of potato cultivars suiting their preferences.

Author Contributions

J.B.M. led the design of the study with co-authors’ inputs. He performed data recording and analysis, as well as led the writing of the manuscript. The other co-authors: D.G.M. and J.D.M. participated in data collection, and curation, A.M. and M.C.M. participated in interpreting the data analysis, while R.O.O.R. provided text and edits to the evolving manuscript drafts. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was partially funded by the University of Rwanda.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to University of Rwanda for the funding provided for the research from which the manuscript ensued. They also thank to the who took part in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funder had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Hawkes, J.G. Origins of cultivated potatoes and species relationships. In The Potato Crop: The Scientific Basis for Improvement, 2nd ed.; Bradshaw, J.E., Mackay, G.R., Eds.; Chapman & Hall: London, UK, 1994; pp. 3–42. [Google Scholar]
  2. CIP. Annual Report; Centro Internacional de la Papa: Lima, Peru, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  3. Haverkort, A.J.; Struik, P.C.; Visser, R.G.F.; Jacobsen, E. Applied biotechnology to combat late blight in potato caused by Phytophthora infestans. Potato Res. 2009, 52, 249–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Muthoni, J.; Shimelis, H.; Melis, R.; Kinyua, Z.M. Response of potato genotypes to bacterial wilt caused by Ralstonia solanacearum (Smith) (Yabuuchi et al.) in the tropical highlands. Am. J. Potato Res. 2013, 90, 301–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. FAO. Proportion of Potato Production by Region; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2021; Available online: http://faostat.fao.org (accessed on 17 October 2022).
  6. Kaguongo, W.; Kashaija, I.; Ntizo, S.; Kabira, J.N. Risk of uncontrolled importation of seed potato from Europe to East and Central Africa: What are the policy options. In Potato and Sweetpotato in Africa: Transforming the Value Chains for Food and Nutrition Security, Proceedings of the Based on African Potato Association 9th Triennal Conference, Naivasha, Kenya, 30 June–4 July 2013; Nyongesa, M., Wasilwa, L., Low, J., Wanjohi, L., Eds.; CABI International: Wallingford, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  7. Muhinyuza, J.B.; Shimelis, H.; Melis, R.; Sibiya, J.; Nzaramba, M.N. Participatory assessment of potato production constraints and trait preferences in potato cultivar development in Rwanda. Int. J. Dev. Sustain. 2012, 1, 358–380. [Google Scholar]
  8. MINAGRI. Annual Report; Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources: Kigali, Rwanda, 2021.
  9. Munyemana, A.; Von Oppen, M. La Pomme de Terre au Rwanda: Une Analyse D’une Filière a Hautes Potentialités; Centro Internacional de la Papa: Lima, Peru, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  10. Labarta, A.R. The genetic improvement of potato and sweetpotato in sub-Saharan Africa. In Diffusion of Improved Varieties in Africa (DIVA) Project Report on Objective 1; Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical: Cali, Colombia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  11. ISAR. Annual Report; Institut des Sciences Agronomiques du Rwanda: Kigali, Rwanda, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  12. Muhinyuza, J.B.; Nyiransengiyumva, S.; Nshimiyimana, J.C.; Kirk, W.W. The effect of the application frequency and dose of mancozeb on the management of potato late blight in Rwanda. J. Appl. Biosci. 2008, 3, 76–81. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Potato production by region (%). Source: [5].
Figure 1. Potato production by region (%). Source: [5].
Sustainability 14 16703 g001
Figure 2. Administrative map of Rwanda.
Figure 2. Administrative map of Rwanda.
Sustainability 14 16703 g002
Table 1. Potato area, production and yield by region (2021).
Table 1. Potato area, production and yield by region (2021).
RegionHarvested Area
(×1000 ha)
Production
(×1000 T)
Tuber Yield
(T ha−1)
Africa1,82825,02613.7
Asia9,325184,93719.8
Europe4,823109,78322.8
Latin America1,05120,16119.2
North America5,55026,39047.9
World17,584366,29820.8
Source: [5].
Table 2. Six largest potato-producing African states (2021).
Table 2. Six largest potato-producing African states (2021).
CountryTuber Harvest (T)
Algeria4,928,028
Egypt4,800,000
Malawi4,535,955
South Africa2,252,000
Rwanda2,240,715
Kenya2,192,885
Source: [5].
Table 3. Production of five major food crops in Rwanda.
Table 3. Production of five major food crops in Rwanda.
CommodityTuber Harvest (T)
Plantain and banana2,749,150
Potato1,789,400
Cassava1,377,210
Dry bean840,072
Sweet potatoes327,497
Table 4. List of potato cultivars released in Rwanda after breeding by CIP and ISAR.
Table 4. List of potato cultivars released in Rwanda after breeding by CIP and ISAR.
CultivarYear of ReleaseFirst Year NARS TestingCIP No. (or Other Source)Pedigree
‘Atzimba’19801972720,045‘Leona’ × PEN3PD-23
‘Montzama’19801972720,049‘Furore’ × (US129.2 ´× ‘Katahdin’)
‘Sangema’19801972800,949Mutation of ‘Rosita’
‘Muhabura’19801976
‘Bufumbira’19801976
‘Gahinga’19841980720,097Furore × Greta
‘Gasore’19841980800,955‘Gracilia’ × ‘Soraya’
‘Nseko’19841980720,05554-Q-2 × ‘Amarilla de Puebla’
‘Petero’19841980
‘Kinigi’19841980378,699.2‘Puca Toralapa’ × YY-1
‘Cruza 148’19851981720,118‘Montserrate’ × unknown
‘Mabondo’19881982800,983720097 × 378676.6
‘Kirundo’19891982
‘Turbo’19891982(SM 80-13)SM 69-17 × VE 74-45
‘Obelix’19891982(ZPC 77 L 55)‘Ostara’ × ‘Renska’
‘Ngunda’19921988381,395.1378,493.915 × Bulk Mexico
‘Mizero’19921987386,003.2BL-2.9 × R128-6
‘Gikungu’19921988387,233.24382,124.6 × India 1039
‘Mugogo’19921988383,140.637,493.738 × Bulk Plaisted
‘Nderera’19921984381,381.3378,493.915 × Bulk Precoz
‘Kigega´19921988383,120.14VHF-69.1 × Bulk Mexico
‘Victoria´19891996381,381.2378,493.15 × Bulk Precoz
Source: Labarta [10].
Table 5. List of six elite potato clones tested since 2012 that are in the pre-release stage.
Table 5. List of six elite potato clones tested since 2012 that are in the pre-release stage.
No.ParentageCodeTuber Yield (T/ha)
1‘Gikungu’ × 22M83RWPOT012.817.65
2‘Gikungu’ × 22M88RWPOT012.1221.12
3‘Gikung’ × 3M73RWPOT012.1624.84
4‘Kinigi’ × 22M85RWPOT012.2820.54
5‘Kinigi’ × Nderera M10RWPOT012.2924.40
6‘Nderera’ × 22M34RWPOT012.3121.02
Table 6. Potato production by district included in the survey.
Table 6. Potato production by district included in the survey.
DistrictNumber of Years Growing PotatoNumber of Times per Year Growing PotatoSize of the Largest Plot Growing with Potato (ha)
MeanMeanMean
Musanze1732
Burera1122
Nyamagabe1222
Table 7. The number of farmers interviewed and gender composition (percentage in brackets).
Table 7. The number of farmers interviewed and gender composition (percentage in brackets).
DistrictMaleFemaleTotal
Musanze27 (71.0)11 (29.0)38 (26.4)
Burera32 (57.1)24 (42.8)56 (38.9)
Nyamagabe28 (56.0)22 (44.0)50 (34.7)
Table 8. Average farm size and cultivated land per household.
Table 8. Average farm size and cultivated land per household.
DistrictTotal Farm Size (ha)Total Cultivated Land (ha)
MeanMean
Musanze0.50.3
Burera1.00.6
Nyamagabe1.41.0
Table 9. Importance of crops grown and their land per household.
Table 9. Importance of crops grown and their land per household.
CropIncome GenerationFamily Food Use
PercentageMean Area (ha)PercentageMean Area (ha)
Potato56.50.541.50.5
Maize13.60.223.10.2
Vegetables2.20.12.70.4
Peas3.90.34.30.2
Beans11.50.218.80.2
Wheat9.70.35.10.3
Sweet potato2.20.13.90.2
Bananas0.10.30.30.3
Sorghum0.30.20.30.2
Table 10. Source of potato tuber planting material.
Table 10. Source of potato tuber planting material.
Tuber Planting SourcesNumber of FarmersPercentage
Own field53.5
Trader5739.6
Open market5236.1
Private company149.7
Research institution1611.1
Table 11. Potato production constraints in three districts of Rwanda.
Table 11. Potato production constraints in three districts of Rwanda.
ConstraintDistrict
Musanze (N = 48)Burera (N = 48)Nyamagabe (N = 48)
MeanRankMeanRankMeanRankOverall MeanOverall Rank
Late blight susceptibility453275453394
Unclean tuber planting material43436242440.33
Poor storage facilities267353296306
Dormancy period32616828725.37
Low yield46234447142.32
Low price37526632531.75
Lack of fertilizers999913910.39
Lack of pesticides81091012109.710
inaccessibility to Credit47137146243.31
Soil degradation12820723818.38
Mean30.5 24.9 31.7 29.02
N: Number of farmers per district that participated in the survey.
Table 12. Major potato pests in three districts of Rwanda (Score: 0–5).
Table 12. Major potato pests in three districts of Rwanda (Score: 0–5).
PestsDistrict
MusanzeBureraNyamagabe
MeanRankMeanRankMeanRankOverall
Mean
Overall
Rank
Late blight4.012.023.013.01
Bacterial wilt3.023.011.042.32
Viral diseases1.031.032.021.33
Insect pests0.040.041.030.34
Overall Mean2.0 1.5 1.5
Table 13. Crop damage levels (%) due to potato pathogens across three districts of Rwanda.
Table 13. Crop damage levels (%) due to potato pathogens across three districts of Rwanda.
Type of DamageLate BlightBacterial WiltViruses
Complete crop loss9.15.65.7
Serious damage (+ 50%)18.231.014.7
Important damage (25–50%)29.826.526.6
Non-important damage (< 25%)29.624.336.4
Without damage13.312.616.6
Total100.0100.0100.0
Table 14. Potato cultivars grown in Rwanda (Score: 0–5).
Table 14. Potato cultivars grown in Rwanda (Score: 0–5).
CultivarDistrict
MusanzeBureraNyamagabe
MeanRankMeanRankMeanRankAverageRanking
‘Cruza’1.471.243.211.95
‘Mabondo’2.742.430.571.86
‘Makoroni’1.191.16--1.19
‘Kirundo’3.333.721.242.74
‘Victoria’1.0101.251.331.212
‘Gikungu’0.5141.070.480.617
‘Sangema’0.0150.4100.750.420
‘Petero’4.02----4.03
‘Kinigi’4.11----4.12
‘Nyirakabondo’0.912----0.914
‘Nyabizi’1.76----1.77
‘Bineza’1.011----1.013
‘IPP’0.813----0.816
‘Kigega’1.75--0.290.911
‘Rwishaki’1.38----1.210
‘Rutuku’--4.61--4.61
‘Mbumbe’--0.412--0.422
‘Nderera’--0.411--0.421
‘Mizero’--0.78--0.715
‘Makerere’--0.69--0.618
‘Gasore’----0.1100.123
‘Nyirangeli’----0.0110.024
Local----1.421.48
‘Mugogo’----0.560.519
‘Kenya’----0.0120.025
Table 15. Cultivar susceptibility to late blight in three leading potato-producing districts of Rwanda (Score: 0–5).
Table 15. Cultivar susceptibility to late blight in three leading potato-producing districts of Rwanda (Score: 0–5).
District
CultivarMusanzeBureraNyamagabe
MeanRankMeanRankMeanRankAverageRank
Mabondo3.322.631.632.54
Cruza2.164.412.212.93
Kirundo2.642.040.581.78
Victoria1.0110.0100.850.616
Sangema0.0150.380.940.417
Gikungu0.6121.070.670.713
Kigega1.19--0.390.714
Makoroni2.931.95--2.45
Kinigi4.51----4.51
Petero2.15----2.16
Nyirakabondo0.910----0.911
Bineza1.97----1.97
Nyabizi0.214----0.219
IPP0.313-- 0.318
Rwishaki1.38----1.310
Rutuku--4.22--4.22
Makerere--0.011--0.023
Nderera--0.86--0.812
Mizero--0.19--0.121
Gasore-- 0.660.615
Mugogo----0.0120.024
Nyirangeli----0.2100.220
Local----1.821.69
Kenya----0.1110.122
Table 16. Ranking of farmers’ preferred potato characteristics (Score: 0–5).
Table 16. Ranking of farmers’ preferred potato characteristics (Score: 0–5).
CharacteristicDistrict
MusanzeBureraNyamagabeOverall
MeanRankMeanRankMeanRankMeanRank
High yield4.214.414.114.21
Host plant resistance3.633.433.523.52
Good taste0.460.860.560.66
Short dormancy1.150.951.451.15
Early maturity1.942.042.041.94
High dry matter content3.823.722.733.43
Table 17. Most grown potato cultivars with their advantages and disadvantages as rated by farmers.
Table 17. Most grown potato cultivars with their advantages and disadvantages as rated by farmers.
DistrictCultivarsAdvantagesDisadvantages
Musanze, Burera and Nyamagabe‘Kinigi’, ‘Kirundo’, ‘Rutuku’ and ‘Mabondo’High tuber yield and dry matter content, marketability, host plant resistance to late blight, big tuber size and round tuber shapeSusceptibility to bacterial wilt
Musanze‘Petero’High tuber yield and dry matter contentSusceptibility to pathogens and pests
Musanze, Burera and Nyamagabe‘Cruza’High tuber yield, host plant resistance to pathogens, tolerance to poor acidic soilLow dry matter content, small-to medium tuber size, late maturity
NyamagabeLocalHost plant resistance to pathogens and pestsLate maturity, small tuber size, low yield
Musanze, Burera and Nyamagabe‘Victoria’High tuber yield, big tuber with round shape, early maturitySusceptible to pathogens, low dry matter content
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Muhinyuza, J.B.; Mukamuhirwa, A.; Mutimawurugo, M.C.; Mazimpaka, J.D.; Muhinyuza, D.G.; Rios, R.O.O. Participatory Assessment of Potato Production Systems and Cultivar Development in Rwanda. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416703

AMA Style

Muhinyuza JB, Mukamuhirwa A, Mutimawurugo MC, Mazimpaka JD, Muhinyuza DG, Rios ROO. Participatory Assessment of Potato Production Systems and Cultivar Development in Rwanda. Sustainability. 2022; 14(24):16703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416703

Chicago/Turabian Style

Muhinyuza, Jean Baptiste, Alphonsine Mukamuhirwa, Marie Chantal Mutimawurugo, Jean Damascène Mazimpaka, Delitha Girumugisha Muhinyuza, and Rodomiro Octavio Ortiz Rios. 2022. "Participatory Assessment of Potato Production Systems and Cultivar Development in Rwanda" Sustainability 14, no. 24: 16703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416703

APA Style

Muhinyuza, J. B., Mukamuhirwa, A., Mutimawurugo, M. C., Mazimpaka, J. D., Muhinyuza, D. G., & Rios, R. O. O. (2022). Participatory Assessment of Potato Production Systems and Cultivar Development in Rwanda. Sustainability, 14(24), 16703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416703

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop