- Email: [email protected]
Grain storage losses in the traditional tribal settlements of Biligirirangana Hills, Karnataka, India
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jape
Grain storage losses in the traditional tribal settlements of Biligirirangana Hills, Karnataka, India
MARK
Nadur L. Naveenaa, Suryanarayana Subramanyab,⁎, Siddappa Settyc, V. Palanimuthub a b c
Department of Entomology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, India All India Coordinated Research Project on Post Harvest Engineering & Technology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, India Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment, Royal Enclave, Bangalore, India
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Infestation Storage loss Soliga tribe Biligirirangana Hills India
The forest dwelling tribal Soligas who reside at Biligirirangana Hills cultivate more than 30 different crops including pulses, cereals, millets and vegetable crops as a part of subsistence agriculture. They store more than 80% of their produce in their households for consumption. The present study examines the grain storage practices followed by Soligas and the extent of losses incurred by them, in a traditional agricultural setup. In all, 13 different storage structures used by Soligas were recorded. These included both traditional and modern structures. Among these, plastic oven sac was being used most widely, while Thenemane used for storing maize cobs was the least used structure by the Soligas. An evaluation of these storage structures for safe storage of grains revealed that, none of the traditional storage structures were found to be suitable for grain storage, as they had one or the other disadvantages like, not being moisture or insect or rodent proof. However, the modern structures like, the plastic bins were moisture and rodent proof, but they failed to provide protection against insects. Soligas adopted 10 different grain protection methods for safe storage of grains. Despite their use, the presence of insect infestation ranged from 32.14 to 56.41%. Callosobruchus theobromae was the most common stored grain insect found infesting fieldbean (Dolichos bean) that was stored in most of the settlements, while Tribolium castaneum was the rarest, found infesting only split pigeon pea (Cajanus cajana). The extent of grain damage ranged from 10 to 100% in the samples collected.
Introduction In India 60–70% of the food grains are stored on farms for variable periods, normally in traditional structures and at dangerously high moisture levels (Anon, 2013). Lack of proper storage infrastructure at farm level causes high wastage and loss in value of food grains (Chaturvedi and Anilraj, 2015). In the tribal and under-developed areas in northern Karnataka state (Raichur, Gadag, Koppala districts) of India, several grain storage structures were commonly used. These included jute bags, gumme (an outdoor structure made with bamboo strips or reeds, placed on a raised platform), hagevu (a simple pit lined ropes made of straw to prevent damage from moisture and in some cases, constructed as an indoor structure with stone walls; into which after filling the grain fully, paddy straw was spread on top as a thick layer and sealed with mud plaster), vadevu (a cylindrical structure made of mud) and earthen pots. Among these structures, earthen pot was the only rodent proof structure, while hagevu and vadevu were found to be insect proof (Anon, 1991). Similarly, lime is used to store maize cobs with husks in Philippines and Mexico, while in Honduras, it is used to ⁎
store maize grains (Groot, 2004). The forest dwelling tribal Soligas at the Biligirirangana Hills, practice subsistence agriculture for their livelihood. Soligas once used to cultivate as many as 35–40 different crops consisting of tubers, millets, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables and fruits (Muruli et al., 1998; Naveena, 2013) with a seed diversity of over 85 crop genotypes (Jadegowda, 2000). Soligas store grains both for food and seed purposes by following traditional methods. Under this scenario, the present study was carried out to find out the extent of loss of stored food grains in a traditional forest dwelling tribal community. Materials and methods Study area The Biligirirangana (after read as BR) Hills is found in the Chamarajanagara district of Karnataka State, India (Fig. 1). These hills form a point where the Western and the Eastern Ghats of India meet. This area has an undulating terrain, and network of valleys. The
Corresponding author at: All India Coordinated Research Project on Post Harvest Technology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, India. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (N.L. Naveena), [email protected] (S. Subramanya), [email protected] (S. Setty).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2017.04.002 Received 17 January 2017; Accepted 4 April 2017 Available online 07 April 2017 1226-8615/ © 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Korean Society of Applied Entomology, Taiwan Entomological Society and Malaysian Plant Protection Society.
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Lakshmipura
INDIA Karalakatte Putterammanadoddi
Karnataka
Yerekatte
Kaggalidoddi Puranipodu Manjigundi Kalyanipodu
Sigebetta Podu
Banglepodu
Muttugadagadde
Devarahalli
Keredimba
Bellata
Kawalikattedam
Gombegallu Nellikadaru
Navodaya Kannericolony
Jirigegadde
Buthanipodu Kadakalukandi
Bisilinakere
Atgulipura
Budipadaga
Bedguli
Monakaipodu Ardanaripura Hosapodudoddi
Srinivasapura Colony Total # of Podus Selected Podus
Fig. 1. Map of BR Hills showing the location of Podus selected for the study.
Collection of samples from Soliga households
elevation of the above mentioned hills range from 600 to 1800 m above mean sea level (MSL) surrounded by plains. The hill ranges run north to south in three ranges with an average elevation of about 1350 m (Anon, 2010). For centuries, the BR Hills has been a home for the native forest dwelling Soliga tribals (Somasundaram and Kibe, 1990; Ganeshaiah, 1998; Naveena et al., 2015). The BR Hills which was a wildlife sanctuary since 1974 has been declared as a Tiger Reserve in 2011 (Anon, 2016). Surveys were carried out at BR Hills during the study to understand the agricultural practices followed by the Soligas. This survey provided a baseline data on agriculture, viz., details of the crops grown in the past and present, cropping pattern, cropping system, cultivation practices, crop harvest and post-harvest practices as a part of a much larger study (Naveena, 2013). Particular attention was given to elucidate details on the storage of food grains, storage structures used and the safe grain storage practices, if any, followed by the Soligas in their households (Naveena, 2013).
Of the 57 Soliga Podus (small settlements where Soligas live) that are spread across 540 Sq. km. area of BR Hills, 30 Podus were selected for the study. The Podus were selected in such a way that, all the isolated Podus along with one or two Podus from those that occurred in clusters were selected for sampling (Naveena et al., 2015). At each selected Podu, Soliga households were visited to collect information on the type of grain stored, method of grain storage, storage structures used, length of storage period, insect infestation and its control methods employed were recorded. In addition, with permission of the Soligas, about 100 g of infested grain sample was collected in a polyethylene pouch. These samples were later transferred to the laboratory and stored in a plastic container to study the type of infesting insects and the extent of damage. The insects thus collected were preserved in small vials containing 70% alcohol for identification. Grains showing emergence holes of insects were treated as damaged grains.
679
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
overhead ropes. The third group included indoor and modern structures namely, plastic woven sac, metal bins, metal drums, steel box, steel bins, plastic pot and plastic box. The number of these storage structures used in a given Podu (Table 4) ranged from 1 to 6. Among the different structures observed, plastic woven sac was the most commonly used grain storage unit by Soligas, being used in 28 out of 30 selected Podus (93%), followed by gunny bags (16 Podus; 53% of selected Podus), mud pots (16 Podus; 53% of selected Podus), cloth bags (6 Podus; 20% of selected Podus) and maize cobs tied to overhead ropes within houses (8 Podus; 26% of selected Podus), while the least used structures were - thenemane (1 Podu; 3% of selected Podus) and plastic pot (1 Podu; 3% of selected Podus) followed by tins and metal drums (2 Podus each), steel bins (3 Podus; 10% of selected Podus), plastic box (4 Podus; 13% of selected Podus) and steel box (5 Podus; 16% of selected Podus) (Table 4). Thus, the plastic woven sacs were the most common structure used by Soligas, while the thenemane and the plastic pots were these lest used for grain storage (Fig. 5). The grains stored in these structures were infested by different stored grain insects (Table 4). An analysis of the grain samples from these storage structures indicated that the presence of insect infestation in different structures ranged from 31.11 to 70.06% (Table 4), indicating that the different structures used did not effectively aid in controlling insect infestation of grains stored in them. Highest infestation was found in grains stored in cloth bags (70.06%), followed by gunny bags (64.19%) and mud pots (53.27%).
Estimation of grain damage The extent of grain damage in collected grain samples was worked out by using the following formula
Per cent grain damage =
Number of damaged grains in the sample × 100 Total number of grains in the sample
Data analysis Simple statistics were used for the analysis of the data collected. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to classify the storage structures, by scoring them for parameters such as location (indoor or outdoor) and material used (mud, cloth, plant parts, bamboo, plastic or metal). Results Infestation of grains in Soliga households Samples of grains stored within the households of Soligas from the selected Podus revealed the occurrence of nine species of stored grain insects (SGI) infesting them. The grains sampled included fieldbean (Lablab purpureas (L.) Sweet), maize (Zea mays L.), greengram (Vigna radiata (L.) R. Wilczek), paddy (Oryza sativa L.), jowar (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench), horsegram (Macrotyloma uniflorum Lam), cowpea (Vigna sinensis (L.) Walp), split pigeonpea (Cajanus cajana L.), wheat (Triticum sp.), beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), peas (Pisum sativum L.) and blackgram (Vigna mungo L.). From the grains thus collected, the per cent grain damage was estimated. The extent of grain damage ranged from 10 to 100% (Table 1). The highest grain damage (100%) was recorded in fieldbean, jowar, maize and wheat at Bellata, Kannericolony, Karalakatte, Gombegallu, and Budipadaga. The least grain damage was recorded in fieldbean at Hosapodudoddi (10%), followed by Puranipodu (15%), Nellikadaru (16%), and Muttugadagadde (19%) (Table 1). The samples of a particular type of grain collected from different Podus were used to calculate mean and standard deviation of the extent of damage. The highest percentage of grain damage was observed in maize (79.36 ± 15.33), followed by wheat (71.00 ± 33.06), fieldbean (58.92 ± 30.25), greengram (53.50 ± 30.41), split pigeon pea (51.67 ± 24.03), rice (48.63 ± 29.15), beans (43.00 ± 21.21) and blackgram (36.50 ± 12.02) (Fig. 2). The SGI species infesting in these samples included Callosobruchus theobromae (49% of samples), Sitophilus zeamais (19%), S. oryzae (10%), Rhyzopertha dominica (8.0%), C. chinensis (4.0%), C. analis (4.0%), Tribolium castaneum (2.0%), Corcyra cephalonica (2.0%) and Carpophilus dimidiatus (2.0%). Among these insects, highest percentage of grain damage was caused by S. zeamais (78.60 ± 13.80) followed by C. dimidiatus (72.50 ± 10.61), C. theobromae (61.63 ± 29.35), S. oryzae (61.10 ± 36.81), R. dominica (59.25 ± 34.34) and T. castaneum (53.00 ± 00), while a least per cent of grain damage was caused by C. analis (21.50 ± 9.19), followed by C. chinensis (28.00 ± 00) (Fig. 3). Callosobruchus theobromae was the most common SGI found infesting fieldbean that was stored in most of the Podus, while T. castaneum was rare, found infesting split pigeonpea.
Evaluation of storage structures used by Soligas Among the storage structures used by Soligas, most of the traditional structures (thenemane, maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place, mud pots, bamboo basket, gunny bags and cloth bag) were not moisture proof, insect or rodent proof, nor were they airtight. However, maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place and mud pots gave partial protection from insects and rodents, respectively. The structures which were more recent ones i.e., modern structures (plastic woven sac, tin, metal drums, steel box, steel bins, plastic pot and plastic box) were moisture proof but were not insect proof. Plastic pots and plastic boxes were not rodent proof, but they had tight lids; while, plastic oven sac was neither airtight nor insect or rodent proof (Table 5). Grain protection measures used by Soligas The Soligas were observed adopting a total of 10 different grain protection methods across BR Hills. The methods followed included, frequent drying, mixing ash, smearing of red earth, mixing Kaadugeru (Semicarpus anacardium L.) seeds, use of the leaves of Vitex negundo L., mixing dry chillies (Capsicum annum L.), mixing ash of Terminalia crenulata Roth, mixing slaked lime powder and smearing Neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) or Castor (Ricinus communis L.) oil over the grains. Despite the use of these methods, it was found that insect infestation still persisted in up to 56% of the samples observed. Among the practices followed, mixing of T. crenulata ash of was observed to give considerable protection to grains (32.14% cases), followed by mixing of Kaadugeru seeds with grains (33.82% cases), coating the grains with Castor oil (35.14% cases) and mixing with ash (42.68% cases). The highest percentage of infestation was found in grains coated with red earth (56.41% cases), followed by the use of V. negundo leaves (56.07% cases) and mixing lime powder (47.83% cases) (Table 6).
Storage structures used by Soligas During the survey, it was found that the Soligas used 13 different types of storage structures (Table 2). These structures were scored for various parameters such as, location (indoor or outdoor) and material used (mud, cloth, plant material, plastic or metal) (Table 3). Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to classify these structures. The structures could thus be classified in to three major groups (Fig. 4). Thenemane was found to be the only outdoor structure used by Soligas. The second group included structures that were indoors and traditional namely, mud pots, cloth bag, bamboo basket, gunny bags and maize cobs tied to
Discussion During the present study, about 263 Soliga households from 30 Podus were contacted to know the grain storage practices being followed by them across BR Hills. It was found that, 13 different 680
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Table 1 Extent of grains damaged by different insects in different Podus. Sl. No.
Podusa
Infested grains
No. of samples collected
Insects found
Damage (%)
1
Lakshmipura
2
2
Karalakatte
3
Devarahalli
4
Bellata
5
Putterammanadoddi
6
Yerekatte
7
Navodaya
8 9 10
Kaggalidoddi Atgulipura Budipadaga
11 12 13 14
Hosapodudoddi Kawalikattedam Srinivasapura Jirigegadde
15
Puranipodu
16
Buthanipodu
17
Ardanaripura
18 19
Kannericolony Seegebettapodu
20
Manjigundi
21 22 23 24 25
Kalyanipodu Muttugadagadde Keredimba Banglepodu Gombegallu
26 27
Monakaipodu Bedguli
28
Nellikadaru
29
Kadakalukandi
Wheat Maize Fieldbean Maize Fieldbean Rice Pea Fieldbeans Greengram Maize Fieldbean Turdal (Split Pigeonpea) Blackgram Fieldbean Blackgram Greengram Fieldbean Maize Fieldbean pods Beans Maize Wheat Fieldbeans Fieldbean Maize Fieldbeans Turdal (Split Pigeonpea) Fieldbeans Maize Rice Maize Fieldbean Beans Fieldbeans Fieldbeans Rice Wheat Fieldbean Rice Maize Cowpea Fieldbean Turdal (Split Pigeonpea) Jowar Horsegram Fieldbean Maize Maize Fieldbean Maize Fieldbeans
R. dominica S. zeamais C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae S. oryzae C. theobromae C. theobromae C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae T. castaneum C. theobromae C. theobromae C. analis C. theobromae C. theobromae C. dimidiatus C. theobromae C. chinensis S. oryzae R. dominica C. theobromae C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae R. dominica C. analis S. zeamais C. cephalonica S. zeamais C. theobromae C. theobromae C. theobromae C. theobromae S. oryzae S. zeamais C. theobromae S. oryzae S. zeamais C. theobromae C. theobromae R. dominica S. oryzae C. chinensis C. theobromae S. zeamais, C. dimidiatus C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae
35.00 75.00 100.00 85.00 47.50 19.50 35.00 100.00 75.00 85.00 68.00 53.00 45.00 45.00 28.00 32.00 19.00 65.00 90.00 28.00 100.00 100.00 10.00 62.00 96.00 73.00 75.00 15.00 45.00 89.00 85.00 70.00 58.00 65.00 100.00 41.00 78.00 28.00 45.00 87.00 33.00 81.00 27.00 100.00 95.00 79.00 80.00 80.00 16.00 70.00 51.00
a
2 3
3
3
3
2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 3
2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1
Sample could not be collected from one of the Podus; N = 51samples.
120
Grain damage (%)
100
80
60
40
20
0 Maize
Wheat
Split pigeonpea Greengram
Beans
Blackgram
Fieldbean
Rice
Cowpea
Pea
Fig. 2. Extent of insect damage in different stored grains at BR Hills (Mean ± SD).Note: Mean and SD was not worked out for cowpea and pea due to lower number of samples.
681
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al. 100
Grain damage (%)
80
60
40
20
0 R. dominica
C. dimidiatus
S. oryzae
S. zeamais
T.castaneum
C. analis
C. chinensis
C. theobromae
Fig. 3. Extent of grain damage caused by different species of stored grain insects at BR Hills (Mean ± SD).Note: Mean and SD was not worked out for T. castaneum and C. chinensis as they occurred in only one sample.
grains, leading to increased insect and fungal activity that would eventually damage the grains and make the same unsuitable for consumption (Sinha and Watters, 1985), as observed in the grain storage practices of Soligas. Maize cobs set aside for seed purpose were stored by hanging cobs without removing the outer sheath, from the roof over the cooking area, (over an open wood fire stove) by 69% of Soligas, where, the smoke emanating from an open wood stove fumigated the seeds, preventing insect damage. A similar practice was being followed by farmers in Kwa Zulu-Natal (South Africa), who store maize cobs over the open wood fire (Chitja et al., 2004). Soligas adopted ten different grain preservation practices using locally available materials, plant parts and their own traditional knowledge to protect the grains from insect damage. Similarly, in Ethiopia alone, Tadesse and Eticha (1999) reported the prevalence of 25 traditional grain preservation practices for the safe storage of maize. Soligas use many plant species for the protection of grains. They use seeds of A. esculentum and ash of T. crenulata to protect the grains and are expected to act as anti-feedant and repellents against the stored grain insects. Nukenine et al. (2003) and Tapondjou et al. (2000) reported over 20 plant species having insecticidal properties in Cameroon, with most of them being employed in storage protection by rural farmers. Mixing of leaves and twigs of A. indica and V. negundo, appears to act as repellents against insects in the storage of grains (Groot, 2004; Schmutterer, 1990). Also, the castor oil used by Soligas could act as a good repellent, anti-feedent (Haghtalab et al., 2009) and an oviposition barrier (Rajapakse and VanEmden, 1997; Pacheco et al., 1995) against the stored grain insects and also the oil seems to interfere with breathing of the insects (Sepasal, 1997). Smearing of dry beans (pulses) with castor oil as seen with the Soligas, is very effective in controlling
storage structures were being used by the Soligas. These structures were used to store seeds/grains of pulses, cereals and millets grown by them. An evaluation of these structures for the safe storage of grains revealed that, none of the traditional storage structures were found to be suitable for safe storage of grains as they had one or the other type of disadvantages like, not being airtight, were neither moisture proof or insect or rodent proof. The structures which were more recent ones, had more tight lids and were rodent proof, but they failed to provide protection against insects (Table 5). This has been the case in all situations where a traditional or local method of grain storage has been practiced. Channal et al. (2004) also reported that in India, grains are stored in villages in different traditional storage structures that range from mud structures to modern bins. The Soligas used mud pots and bamboo baskets to store cereals (ragi, Jowar) and pulses (fieldbean, pigeonpea and beans), ropes and sticks to hang out the maize cobs. Use of such storage structures appears to be common in tribal and rural areas as, similar practices were observed in the tribal farmers (Gond, Korku, Baiga, Bharia, Bhilala and Saharia) in Hoshangbad and Chindwara districts of Madhya Pradesh, India, where they used a square or rectangular shaped earthen containers or bamboo baskets to store cereals and other coarse millets (Arjjumend, 2004). Soligas used Thenemane to store unhusked maize cobs. Similar structures like, mud rhombus and thatched rhombus were the common storage structures existing in Sudan Savannah zone of Nigeria for storing millets, sorghum, maize and cowpea (Adejumo and Raji, 2007). Thus, in many such situations, the grain storage practices followed were still very traditional, which did not address the need to tackle different sources of infestations namely, the field infestation and cross infestation (Subramanya et al., 1999; Cotton and Winburn, 1941), prevention of moisture migration to the grains stored (Pixton, 1982; Navarro et al., 1994), which resulted in increase in the moisture content of the stored
Table 2 Description of different storage structures. Sl. No.
Name of the structure
Description
01
Thenemane (Cob house)
02
Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes Mud pots Bamboo baskets Gunny bags Cloth bags Plastic woven sac Tins Metal drums Steel boxes Steel bins Plastic pots Plastic boxes
This is a small hut made of bamboo with a bamboo platform inside (1.5 to 2.0 m in height), used to store mainly the earheads of finger millet and maize cobs. Dried maize cobs along with their sheath are hung as a dense bundle above the cooking area, at about 3 m from the ground within a thatched hut. About 80–100 cobs are also tied to a rope and hung close to the roof above the cooking area. These earthen pots were commonly used by Soligas to store cereals, pulses and millets. This basket of about 60 cm height and 45 cm in diameter made out of bamboo and kept above the cooking area on a wooden plank. Made of jute, used to store various types of grains Bag stitched out of coarse cloth. Bags woven out of plastic, available commercially from nearest towns. Made of mild steel sheets, normally used to transport edible oils up to 15 kg. Empty cans are used for grain storage Made of mild steel sheets and with lids. Larger in size and with higher capacity. Made of steel, smaller in size, rectangular in shape with a lid. Capacity of up to 10 kg Made of steel with lids of different shapes with a capacity of up to 15 kg Pots made of plastics with a capacity of about 2–5 kg Made of plastics, rectangular in shape with a lid and a capacity of about 5–10 kg
03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
682
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Table 3 Classification of different storage structures used by Soligas at BR Hillsa. Storage structures
Location
Thenemane Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place Mud pots Bamboo basket Gunny bag Cloth bag Plastic woven bag Tins Metal drums Steel box Steel bins Plastic pot Plastic boxes a
Material used
Indoor
Outdoor
Non plastic
Plastic
Metal
Plant material
Mud
Cloth
+ + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + -
+ + + + + -
+ + +
+ + + -
+ + + + + -
+ -
+ -
Note: + = Yes; - = No.
In the present study, it was observed that, the grain infestation by insects was present in grains despite different protection methods adopted by Soligas. Maximum infestation was observed in pulses smeared with red earth, followed by the use of leaves of Vitex spp. and mixing of slaked lime powder. Analysis of grain samples collected from the Soliga households where they were stored in different storage structures and stored by using grain preservation practices revealed that, Soligas were unable to store their grains safely and incurred considerable grain loss, which may be up to 100% in certain Podus (Table 1). Thus, a detailed study of the grain storing practices by Soligas at BR Hills indicated that their grain preservation practices which are traditional do not help in any way to store their food grains safely. Keeping this in view, there is a need to improve the grain storage methods practiced by Soligas in BR Hills by educating them about sources of insect infestation, how to control the same, and on the use of proper storage structures like metal or plastic bins with tight lids that are insect and rodent proof, and also prevents moisture migration effectively.
bruchid beetles and the beans treated in this manner, could still germinate well, when used as seeds (Obeng and Amiteye, 2005; Dhaliwal and Singh, 2010). In Mali, both cereal and legumes are treated with castor oil to keep away the insect pests (Anon, 1997). Soligas use slaked lime powder to protect the pulses from pulse beetle. However, this method does not seem to be effective as, in spite of using slaked lime powder, 47.83% grain samples were still found to be infested. A maximum of 59.70% of Soligas in BR Hills were found to use ash (from firewood used for cooking) to protect most of the pulses for years. Similarly, Keyler (1996) observed that 88.00% of the farmers in the North Central Regions of Namibia use ash for the protection of stored pearl millet. In northern Cameroon, cowpeas are traditionally stored by mixing with ash (Anon, 1997). In Kenya maize and beans are mixed with ash (from the cooking fire) and stored up to 5 years without any infestation (Golob and Webley, 1980). Thus, in many cases, ash has proved more effective than Malathion @ 2% (Groot, 2004). A maximum of 91.63% of the Soligas in BR Hills practice frequent sun drying as a grain preservation technique (Table 5). If weather conditions are too cloudy, humid or even wet, then the crop will not dry sufficiently, resulting in significant losses due to subsequent insect infestation. Similar studies are reported by Nukenine (2010), where small scale African farmers rely on sun drying to protect their grains from insect damage.
Acknowledgements We wish to thank Dr. C. A. Viraktamath, Emeritus Professor, Insect
Plastic pot Plastic box Plastic woven sac Steel box Steel bins Tin Metal drums Gunny bags Cloth bag Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place Bamboo basket Mud pots Thenemane 0
5
10
15
Fig. 4. Classification of storage structures used by Soligas at BR Hills.
683
20
25
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Table 4 Extent of insect infestation in storage structures used by Soligasa. Sl. No.
Storage structuresa
No. of Podus using the structure
No. of Soliga households using the structure
Presence of infestation (%)
Food grains examined
1 2
1 8
12 180
41.67 48.89
Ragi, Maize Maize
3 4 5 6 7
Thenemane Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes Mud pots Bamboo baskets Gunny bags Cloth bags Plastic woven sacs
16 7 16 6 28
214 29 215 157 220
53.27 41.38 64.19 70.06 53.18
8 9 10 11 12 13
Tins Metal Drums Steel boxes Steel bins Plastic pots Plastic boxes
2 2 5 3 1 4
36 91 98 45 10 129
33.33 42.86 37.76 31.11 40.00 34.11
Pulses, Ragi, Jowar Fieldbean, Horsegram Ragi, Ginger, Turmeric, Maize Fieldbean, Maize, Hedda, Greengram Fieldbean, Maize, Jowar, Ragi, Cowpea, Beans, greengram Fieldbean, Ragi Ragi, Jowar, Pulses Fieldbean, Greengram, Cowpea Fieldbean, Ragi, Maize Fieldbean Beans, Fieldbean
a
Number of Soligas households sampled = 263. Table 6 Effectiveness of the grain protection practices adopted by Soligasa. Sl. No
Grain preservation practices
No. of Soligas using the practice
Presence of infestation (%)
1 2 3
Frequent drying Red earth smearing Mixing Slaked Lime powder Mixing Neem leaf Use of V. negundo Mixing S. anacardium seeds Mixing of dry chillies Mixing Ash of T. crenulata Mixing Ash Castor oil coating to grains
241 234 23
35.27 56.41 47.83
25 173 68
36.00 56.07 33.82
49 28
46.94 32.14
157 37
42.68 35.14
4 5 6 7 8 Fig. 5. Use of different storage structures in Soliga Podus and households.
9 10
Table 5 Evaluation of storage structures used by Soligas. a
Sl. No
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Storage structures
Thenemane Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place Mud pots Bamboo basket Gunny bags Cloth bag Plastic woven sac Tin Metal drums Steel box Steel bins Plastic pot Plastic box
Opening secured/ tight cover
Moisture proof
Insect proof
Rodent proof
No No
No No
No Yes
No No
No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No No No No No No No No No No No
Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Number of Soliga households contacted during the survey = 263.
Soliga field staffs of Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment at BR Hills are remembered for their assistance. The cooperation of the Soligas during the study period is greatly appreciated. References Adejumo, B.A., Raji, A.O., 2007. Technical appraisal of grain storage systems in the Nigerian Sudan Savannah. Agric. Eng. Int. CIGR J. 11 (9), 1–12. Anon, 1991. Research Digest. AICRP on Post Harvest Technology (1972–90). Research Technical Bulletin No. UAS/HPHT/91/19. University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Anon, 1997. Storage of Cowpeas in Ash. 32. Footsteps, Tear Fund, UK, pp. 1–16. Anon, 2010. Biligiri Rangana Hills. http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Biligirirangan_Hills (Accessed on 10th June, 2010). Anon, 2013. Global Food Waste Not, Want Not – Institution of Mechanical Engineers. http://infoagro.net/archivos_Infoagro/Seguridad/biblioteca/GlobalFood,WasteNot. pdf (Accessed on 9th March, 2016). Anon, 2016. Biligirirangana Hills. http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Biligirirangan_Hills (Accessed on 10th August, 2016). Arjjumend, H., 2004. Indigenous practices of post harvest storage among tribal communities of Central India. LEISA 8–9. Channal, G., Nagnur, S., Nanjayyanamath, C., 2004. Indigenous grain storage structures. LEISA 260. Chaturvedi, B.K., Anilraj, T.A., 2015. Agricultural storage infrastructure in India: an overview. J. Bus. Manag. 17 (5–II), 37–43. Chitja, J.M.T., Hendriks, S.L., Ortmann, G.F., Green, M., 2004. Impact of maize storage on rural household food security in Northern Kwazulu-Natal. Tydskrif vir Gesinsekologie en Verbruikerswetenskappe 32, 8–14. Cotton, R.T., Winburn, T.F., 1941. Field infestation of wheat by insects attacking it in farm storage. J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 14 (1), 12–15. Dhaliwal, R.K., Singh, G., 2010. Traditional food grain storage practices of Punjab. Indian
Biosystematics Unit, Department of Entomology, University of Agricultural Sciences (UAS), GKVK, Bangalore, for identification of stored grain insects. The present work was carried out as part of the research programme of All India Co-ordinated Research Project on Post Harvest Technology, UAS, Bangalore and The support provided by the head, AICRP on Post Harvest Technology, UAS, GKVK, Bangalore is acknowledged. The authors are thankful to the Karnataka State Forest Department for cooperation. The senior author (NLN) acknowledges University Grants Commission, New Delhi for awarding fellowship. The 684
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Nukenine, E.N., Mebanga, A.S., Nloga, N.A.N., Fontenille, D., Ncoutpouen, E., Tepamdi, M., 2003. In: Culicid diversity and plant materials used as mosquito repellents in northern Cameroon. Paper Presented at the 15th Conference of the African Association of Insect Scientists (AAIS) and the Entomological Society of Kenya, 9–13 June 2003. Kenya, Nairobi. Obeng, O.D., Amiteye, 2005. Efficacy of mixing vegetable oils mixed with primiphos methyl against the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky in stored maize. J. Stored Prod. Res. 41, 56–57. Pacheco, I.A., Fernanda, P.P.M., Castro, D., Paula, D.C., Lourencao, A.L., Bolonhezi, S., Barbieri, M.K., 1995. Efficacy of soybean and Castor oils in the control of Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) and Callosobruchus phaseoli (Gyllenhal) in stored chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L.). J. Stored Prod. Res. 31 (3), 221–228. Pixton, S.W., 1982. The importance of moisture and equilibrium relative humidity in stored products. Trop. Stored Prod. Info. 43, 16–29. Rajapakse, R., Vanemden, H.F., 1997. Potential of four vegetable oils and ten botanical powders for reducing infestation of cowpeas by Callosobruchus maculatus, C. chinensis and C. rhodesianus. J. Stored Prod. Res. 33, 59–68. Schmutterer, H., 1990. Properties and potential of natural pesticides from the neem tree, Azadirachta indica. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 35, 271–297. Sepasal, 1997. Use of Vegetable Oils in Beans. vol. 32: 9 Footsteps, Tear Fund, UK. Sinha, R.N., Watters, F.L., 1985. Insect pests of flour mills, grain elevators and feed mills and their control. In: Agriculture Canada Publication no. 1776. 290 Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Ottawa, Canada. Somasundaram, H.N., Kibe, R.V., 1990. Soliga – The Tribe and Its Stride. Vivekananda Girijana Kalyana Kendra, BR Hills. Subramanya, S., Ranganna, B., Bisht, B.S., 1999. Post-harvest management of pulse beetle - a review of research. In: Rep. No. UAS/PHT/99/30, pp. 1–95. Tadesse, A., Eticha, F., 1999. Insect pests of farm-stored maize and their management practices in Ethiopia. IOBC Bull. 23, 47–57. Tapondjou, A.L., Bouda, H., Fontem, D.A., Zapfack, L., Lontsi, D., Sondengam, B.L., 2000. Local plants used for traditional stored product protection in the Menoua division of the Western Highlands of Cameroon. IOBC Bull. 23, 73–77.
J. Tradit. Knowl. 9 (3) (562-530). Ganeshaiah, K.N., 1998. B.R. Hills – a geological chip of Western Ghats? In: Ganeshaiah, K.N., Uma Shaanker, R. (Eds.), Biligirirangaswamy Wildlife Sanctuary, Natural history, Biodiversity and conservation. Vivekananda Girijana Kalyana Kendra, Chamarajanagar, pp. 3–4. Golob, P., Webley, D.J., 1980. The Use of Plants and Minerals as Traditional Protectants of Stored Products. Tropical Products Institute, London, UK, pp. 235. Groot, I.D., 2004. Protection of Stored Grains and Pulses. Agromisa Foundation, Wageningen, pp. 78. Haghtalab, N., Shayesteh, N., Aramideh, S., 2009. Insecticidal efficacy of Castor and Hazelneut oils in stored cowpea against Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). J. Biol. Sci. 9 (2), 175–179. Jadegowda, M., 2000. Effect of FYM on maize and finger millet based intercropping systems at BR Hills. (M. Sc (Agri) thesis submitted to University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore). Keyler, S.K., 1996. Economics of the Namibian Millet Subsector. (Ph. D dissertation) Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA. Muruli, K.S., Ganeshaiah, K.N., Bhusan, S.P., 1998. Farming system by Soligas: the crops and the practices. In: Ganeshaiah, K.N., Uma Shanker, R. (Eds.), Biligirirangaswamy Wildlife Sanctuary, Natural History, Biodiversity and Conservation. Vivekananda Girijana Kalyana Kendra, Chamarajanagar, pp. 18–21. Navarro, S., Donahaye, E., Fishman, S., 1994. The future of hermetic storage of dry grains in tropical and subtropical climates. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Working Conference on Stored Product Protection, Canberra, Australia, 17–23 April 1994. Wallingford, CAB International, pp. 130–138. Naveena, N.L., 2013. Studies on Factors Influencing stored grain insect Infestations. In: Soliga Tribal Settlements of Biligirirangana Hills, Karnataka, India, (Ph.D. thesis submitted to University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, India). Naveena, N.L., Subramanya, S., Setty, S., 2015. Diversity and distribution of stored grain insects among the Soliga tribal settlements of Biligirirangana Hills, Karnataka, India. J. Stored Prod. Res. 62, 84–92. Nukenine, E.N., 2010. Stored Product Protection in Africa: Past, Present and Future. 425. Julius-Kuhn-Archiv.pp. 26–41.
685
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jape
Grain storage losses in the traditional tribal settlements of Biligirirangana Hills, Karnataka, India
MARK
Nadur L. Naveenaa, Suryanarayana Subramanyab,⁎, Siddappa Settyc, V. Palanimuthub a b c
Department of Entomology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, India All India Coordinated Research Project on Post Harvest Engineering & Technology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, India Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment, Royal Enclave, Bangalore, India
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Infestation Storage loss Soliga tribe Biligirirangana Hills India
The forest dwelling tribal Soligas who reside at Biligirirangana Hills cultivate more than 30 different crops including pulses, cereals, millets and vegetable crops as a part of subsistence agriculture. They store more than 80% of their produce in their households for consumption. The present study examines the grain storage practices followed by Soligas and the extent of losses incurred by them, in a traditional agricultural setup. In all, 13 different storage structures used by Soligas were recorded. These included both traditional and modern structures. Among these, plastic oven sac was being used most widely, while Thenemane used for storing maize cobs was the least used structure by the Soligas. An evaluation of these storage structures for safe storage of grains revealed that, none of the traditional storage structures were found to be suitable for grain storage, as they had one or the other disadvantages like, not being moisture or insect or rodent proof. However, the modern structures like, the plastic bins were moisture and rodent proof, but they failed to provide protection against insects. Soligas adopted 10 different grain protection methods for safe storage of grains. Despite their use, the presence of insect infestation ranged from 32.14 to 56.41%. Callosobruchus theobromae was the most common stored grain insect found infesting fieldbean (Dolichos bean) that was stored in most of the settlements, while Tribolium castaneum was the rarest, found infesting only split pigeon pea (Cajanus cajana). The extent of grain damage ranged from 10 to 100% in the samples collected.
Introduction In India 60–70% of the food grains are stored on farms for variable periods, normally in traditional structures and at dangerously high moisture levels (Anon, 2013). Lack of proper storage infrastructure at farm level causes high wastage and loss in value of food grains (Chaturvedi and Anilraj, 2015). In the tribal and under-developed areas in northern Karnataka state (Raichur, Gadag, Koppala districts) of India, several grain storage structures were commonly used. These included jute bags, gumme (an outdoor structure made with bamboo strips or reeds, placed on a raised platform), hagevu (a simple pit lined ropes made of straw to prevent damage from moisture and in some cases, constructed as an indoor structure with stone walls; into which after filling the grain fully, paddy straw was spread on top as a thick layer and sealed with mud plaster), vadevu (a cylindrical structure made of mud) and earthen pots. Among these structures, earthen pot was the only rodent proof structure, while hagevu and vadevu were found to be insect proof (Anon, 1991). Similarly, lime is used to store maize cobs with husks in Philippines and Mexico, while in Honduras, it is used to ⁎
store maize grains (Groot, 2004). The forest dwelling tribal Soligas at the Biligirirangana Hills, practice subsistence agriculture for their livelihood. Soligas once used to cultivate as many as 35–40 different crops consisting of tubers, millets, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables and fruits (Muruli et al., 1998; Naveena, 2013) with a seed diversity of over 85 crop genotypes (Jadegowda, 2000). Soligas store grains both for food and seed purposes by following traditional methods. Under this scenario, the present study was carried out to find out the extent of loss of stored food grains in a traditional forest dwelling tribal community. Materials and methods Study area The Biligirirangana (after read as BR) Hills is found in the Chamarajanagara district of Karnataka State, India (Fig. 1). These hills form a point where the Western and the Eastern Ghats of India meet. This area has an undulating terrain, and network of valleys. The
Corresponding author at: All India Coordinated Research Project on Post Harvest Technology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore, India. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (N.L. Naveena), [email protected] (S. Subramanya), [email protected] (S. Setty).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2017.04.002 Received 17 January 2017; Accepted 4 April 2017 Available online 07 April 2017 1226-8615/ © 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Korean Society of Applied Entomology, Taiwan Entomological Society and Malaysian Plant Protection Society.
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Lakshmipura
INDIA Karalakatte Putterammanadoddi
Karnataka
Yerekatte
Kaggalidoddi Puranipodu Manjigundi Kalyanipodu
Sigebetta Podu
Banglepodu
Muttugadagadde
Devarahalli
Keredimba
Bellata
Kawalikattedam
Gombegallu Nellikadaru
Navodaya Kannericolony
Jirigegadde
Buthanipodu Kadakalukandi
Bisilinakere
Atgulipura
Budipadaga
Bedguli
Monakaipodu Ardanaripura Hosapodudoddi
Srinivasapura Colony Total # of Podus Selected Podus
Fig. 1. Map of BR Hills showing the location of Podus selected for the study.
Collection of samples from Soliga households
elevation of the above mentioned hills range from 600 to 1800 m above mean sea level (MSL) surrounded by plains. The hill ranges run north to south in three ranges with an average elevation of about 1350 m (Anon, 2010). For centuries, the BR Hills has been a home for the native forest dwelling Soliga tribals (Somasundaram and Kibe, 1990; Ganeshaiah, 1998; Naveena et al., 2015). The BR Hills which was a wildlife sanctuary since 1974 has been declared as a Tiger Reserve in 2011 (Anon, 2016). Surveys were carried out at BR Hills during the study to understand the agricultural practices followed by the Soligas. This survey provided a baseline data on agriculture, viz., details of the crops grown in the past and present, cropping pattern, cropping system, cultivation practices, crop harvest and post-harvest practices as a part of a much larger study (Naveena, 2013). Particular attention was given to elucidate details on the storage of food grains, storage structures used and the safe grain storage practices, if any, followed by the Soligas in their households (Naveena, 2013).
Of the 57 Soliga Podus (small settlements where Soligas live) that are spread across 540 Sq. km. area of BR Hills, 30 Podus were selected for the study. The Podus were selected in such a way that, all the isolated Podus along with one or two Podus from those that occurred in clusters were selected for sampling (Naveena et al., 2015). At each selected Podu, Soliga households were visited to collect information on the type of grain stored, method of grain storage, storage structures used, length of storage period, insect infestation and its control methods employed were recorded. In addition, with permission of the Soligas, about 100 g of infested grain sample was collected in a polyethylene pouch. These samples were later transferred to the laboratory and stored in a plastic container to study the type of infesting insects and the extent of damage. The insects thus collected were preserved in small vials containing 70% alcohol for identification. Grains showing emergence holes of insects were treated as damaged grains.
679
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
overhead ropes. The third group included indoor and modern structures namely, plastic woven sac, metal bins, metal drums, steel box, steel bins, plastic pot and plastic box. The number of these storage structures used in a given Podu (Table 4) ranged from 1 to 6. Among the different structures observed, plastic woven sac was the most commonly used grain storage unit by Soligas, being used in 28 out of 30 selected Podus (93%), followed by gunny bags (16 Podus; 53% of selected Podus), mud pots (16 Podus; 53% of selected Podus), cloth bags (6 Podus; 20% of selected Podus) and maize cobs tied to overhead ropes within houses (8 Podus; 26% of selected Podus), while the least used structures were - thenemane (1 Podu; 3% of selected Podus) and plastic pot (1 Podu; 3% of selected Podus) followed by tins and metal drums (2 Podus each), steel bins (3 Podus; 10% of selected Podus), plastic box (4 Podus; 13% of selected Podus) and steel box (5 Podus; 16% of selected Podus) (Table 4). Thus, the plastic woven sacs were the most common structure used by Soligas, while the thenemane and the plastic pots were these lest used for grain storage (Fig. 5). The grains stored in these structures were infested by different stored grain insects (Table 4). An analysis of the grain samples from these storage structures indicated that the presence of insect infestation in different structures ranged from 31.11 to 70.06% (Table 4), indicating that the different structures used did not effectively aid in controlling insect infestation of grains stored in them. Highest infestation was found in grains stored in cloth bags (70.06%), followed by gunny bags (64.19%) and mud pots (53.27%).
Estimation of grain damage The extent of grain damage in collected grain samples was worked out by using the following formula
Per cent grain damage =
Number of damaged grains in the sample × 100 Total number of grains in the sample
Data analysis Simple statistics were used for the analysis of the data collected. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to classify the storage structures, by scoring them for parameters such as location (indoor or outdoor) and material used (mud, cloth, plant parts, bamboo, plastic or metal). Results Infestation of grains in Soliga households Samples of grains stored within the households of Soligas from the selected Podus revealed the occurrence of nine species of stored grain insects (SGI) infesting them. The grains sampled included fieldbean (Lablab purpureas (L.) Sweet), maize (Zea mays L.), greengram (Vigna radiata (L.) R. Wilczek), paddy (Oryza sativa L.), jowar (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench), horsegram (Macrotyloma uniflorum Lam), cowpea (Vigna sinensis (L.) Walp), split pigeonpea (Cajanus cajana L.), wheat (Triticum sp.), beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), peas (Pisum sativum L.) and blackgram (Vigna mungo L.). From the grains thus collected, the per cent grain damage was estimated. The extent of grain damage ranged from 10 to 100% (Table 1). The highest grain damage (100%) was recorded in fieldbean, jowar, maize and wheat at Bellata, Kannericolony, Karalakatte, Gombegallu, and Budipadaga. The least grain damage was recorded in fieldbean at Hosapodudoddi (10%), followed by Puranipodu (15%), Nellikadaru (16%), and Muttugadagadde (19%) (Table 1). The samples of a particular type of grain collected from different Podus were used to calculate mean and standard deviation of the extent of damage. The highest percentage of grain damage was observed in maize (79.36 ± 15.33), followed by wheat (71.00 ± 33.06), fieldbean (58.92 ± 30.25), greengram (53.50 ± 30.41), split pigeon pea (51.67 ± 24.03), rice (48.63 ± 29.15), beans (43.00 ± 21.21) and blackgram (36.50 ± 12.02) (Fig. 2). The SGI species infesting in these samples included Callosobruchus theobromae (49% of samples), Sitophilus zeamais (19%), S. oryzae (10%), Rhyzopertha dominica (8.0%), C. chinensis (4.0%), C. analis (4.0%), Tribolium castaneum (2.0%), Corcyra cephalonica (2.0%) and Carpophilus dimidiatus (2.0%). Among these insects, highest percentage of grain damage was caused by S. zeamais (78.60 ± 13.80) followed by C. dimidiatus (72.50 ± 10.61), C. theobromae (61.63 ± 29.35), S. oryzae (61.10 ± 36.81), R. dominica (59.25 ± 34.34) and T. castaneum (53.00 ± 00), while a least per cent of grain damage was caused by C. analis (21.50 ± 9.19), followed by C. chinensis (28.00 ± 00) (Fig. 3). Callosobruchus theobromae was the most common SGI found infesting fieldbean that was stored in most of the Podus, while T. castaneum was rare, found infesting split pigeonpea.
Evaluation of storage structures used by Soligas Among the storage structures used by Soligas, most of the traditional structures (thenemane, maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place, mud pots, bamboo basket, gunny bags and cloth bag) were not moisture proof, insect or rodent proof, nor were they airtight. However, maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place and mud pots gave partial protection from insects and rodents, respectively. The structures which were more recent ones i.e., modern structures (plastic woven sac, tin, metal drums, steel box, steel bins, plastic pot and plastic box) were moisture proof but were not insect proof. Plastic pots and plastic boxes were not rodent proof, but they had tight lids; while, plastic oven sac was neither airtight nor insect or rodent proof (Table 5). Grain protection measures used by Soligas The Soligas were observed adopting a total of 10 different grain protection methods across BR Hills. The methods followed included, frequent drying, mixing ash, smearing of red earth, mixing Kaadugeru (Semicarpus anacardium L.) seeds, use of the leaves of Vitex negundo L., mixing dry chillies (Capsicum annum L.), mixing ash of Terminalia crenulata Roth, mixing slaked lime powder and smearing Neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) or Castor (Ricinus communis L.) oil over the grains. Despite the use of these methods, it was found that insect infestation still persisted in up to 56% of the samples observed. Among the practices followed, mixing of T. crenulata ash of was observed to give considerable protection to grains (32.14% cases), followed by mixing of Kaadugeru seeds with grains (33.82% cases), coating the grains with Castor oil (35.14% cases) and mixing with ash (42.68% cases). The highest percentage of infestation was found in grains coated with red earth (56.41% cases), followed by the use of V. negundo leaves (56.07% cases) and mixing lime powder (47.83% cases) (Table 6).
Storage structures used by Soligas During the survey, it was found that the Soligas used 13 different types of storage structures (Table 2). These structures were scored for various parameters such as, location (indoor or outdoor) and material used (mud, cloth, plant material, plastic or metal) (Table 3). Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to classify these structures. The structures could thus be classified in to three major groups (Fig. 4). Thenemane was found to be the only outdoor structure used by Soligas. The second group included structures that were indoors and traditional namely, mud pots, cloth bag, bamboo basket, gunny bags and maize cobs tied to
Discussion During the present study, about 263 Soliga households from 30 Podus were contacted to know the grain storage practices being followed by them across BR Hills. It was found that, 13 different 680
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Table 1 Extent of grains damaged by different insects in different Podus. Sl. No.
Podusa
Infested grains
No. of samples collected
Insects found
Damage (%)
1
Lakshmipura
2
2
Karalakatte
3
Devarahalli
4
Bellata
5
Putterammanadoddi
6
Yerekatte
7
Navodaya
8 9 10
Kaggalidoddi Atgulipura Budipadaga
11 12 13 14
Hosapodudoddi Kawalikattedam Srinivasapura Jirigegadde
15
Puranipodu
16
Buthanipodu
17
Ardanaripura
18 19
Kannericolony Seegebettapodu
20
Manjigundi
21 22 23 24 25
Kalyanipodu Muttugadagadde Keredimba Banglepodu Gombegallu
26 27
Monakaipodu Bedguli
28
Nellikadaru
29
Kadakalukandi
Wheat Maize Fieldbean Maize Fieldbean Rice Pea Fieldbeans Greengram Maize Fieldbean Turdal (Split Pigeonpea) Blackgram Fieldbean Blackgram Greengram Fieldbean Maize Fieldbean pods Beans Maize Wheat Fieldbeans Fieldbean Maize Fieldbeans Turdal (Split Pigeonpea) Fieldbeans Maize Rice Maize Fieldbean Beans Fieldbeans Fieldbeans Rice Wheat Fieldbean Rice Maize Cowpea Fieldbean Turdal (Split Pigeonpea) Jowar Horsegram Fieldbean Maize Maize Fieldbean Maize Fieldbeans
R. dominica S. zeamais C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae S. oryzae C. theobromae C. theobromae C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae T. castaneum C. theobromae C. theobromae C. analis C. theobromae C. theobromae C. dimidiatus C. theobromae C. chinensis S. oryzae R. dominica C. theobromae C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae R. dominica C. analis S. zeamais C. cephalonica S. zeamais C. theobromae C. theobromae C. theobromae C. theobromae S. oryzae S. zeamais C. theobromae S. oryzae S. zeamais C. theobromae C. theobromae R. dominica S. oryzae C. chinensis C. theobromae S. zeamais, C. dimidiatus C. theobromae S. zeamais C. theobromae
35.00 75.00 100.00 85.00 47.50 19.50 35.00 100.00 75.00 85.00 68.00 53.00 45.00 45.00 28.00 32.00 19.00 65.00 90.00 28.00 100.00 100.00 10.00 62.00 96.00 73.00 75.00 15.00 45.00 89.00 85.00 70.00 58.00 65.00 100.00 41.00 78.00 28.00 45.00 87.00 33.00 81.00 27.00 100.00 95.00 79.00 80.00 80.00 16.00 70.00 51.00
a
2 3
3
3
3
2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 3
2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 1
Sample could not be collected from one of the Podus; N = 51samples.
120
Grain damage (%)
100
80
60
40
20
0 Maize
Wheat
Split pigeonpea Greengram
Beans
Blackgram
Fieldbean
Rice
Cowpea
Pea
Fig. 2. Extent of insect damage in different stored grains at BR Hills (Mean ± SD).Note: Mean and SD was not worked out for cowpea and pea due to lower number of samples.
681
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al. 100
Grain damage (%)
80
60
40
20
0 R. dominica
C. dimidiatus
S. oryzae
S. zeamais
T.castaneum
C. analis
C. chinensis
C. theobromae
Fig. 3. Extent of grain damage caused by different species of stored grain insects at BR Hills (Mean ± SD).Note: Mean and SD was not worked out for T. castaneum and C. chinensis as they occurred in only one sample.
grains, leading to increased insect and fungal activity that would eventually damage the grains and make the same unsuitable for consumption (Sinha and Watters, 1985), as observed in the grain storage practices of Soligas. Maize cobs set aside for seed purpose were stored by hanging cobs without removing the outer sheath, from the roof over the cooking area, (over an open wood fire stove) by 69% of Soligas, where, the smoke emanating from an open wood stove fumigated the seeds, preventing insect damage. A similar practice was being followed by farmers in Kwa Zulu-Natal (South Africa), who store maize cobs over the open wood fire (Chitja et al., 2004). Soligas adopted ten different grain preservation practices using locally available materials, plant parts and their own traditional knowledge to protect the grains from insect damage. Similarly, in Ethiopia alone, Tadesse and Eticha (1999) reported the prevalence of 25 traditional grain preservation practices for the safe storage of maize. Soligas use many plant species for the protection of grains. They use seeds of A. esculentum and ash of T. crenulata to protect the grains and are expected to act as anti-feedant and repellents against the stored grain insects. Nukenine et al. (2003) and Tapondjou et al. (2000) reported over 20 plant species having insecticidal properties in Cameroon, with most of them being employed in storage protection by rural farmers. Mixing of leaves and twigs of A. indica and V. negundo, appears to act as repellents against insects in the storage of grains (Groot, 2004; Schmutterer, 1990). Also, the castor oil used by Soligas could act as a good repellent, anti-feedent (Haghtalab et al., 2009) and an oviposition barrier (Rajapakse and VanEmden, 1997; Pacheco et al., 1995) against the stored grain insects and also the oil seems to interfere with breathing of the insects (Sepasal, 1997). Smearing of dry beans (pulses) with castor oil as seen with the Soligas, is very effective in controlling
storage structures were being used by the Soligas. These structures were used to store seeds/grains of pulses, cereals and millets grown by them. An evaluation of these structures for the safe storage of grains revealed that, none of the traditional storage structures were found to be suitable for safe storage of grains as they had one or the other type of disadvantages like, not being airtight, were neither moisture proof or insect or rodent proof. The structures which were more recent ones, had more tight lids and were rodent proof, but they failed to provide protection against insects (Table 5). This has been the case in all situations where a traditional or local method of grain storage has been practiced. Channal et al. (2004) also reported that in India, grains are stored in villages in different traditional storage structures that range from mud structures to modern bins. The Soligas used mud pots and bamboo baskets to store cereals (ragi, Jowar) and pulses (fieldbean, pigeonpea and beans), ropes and sticks to hang out the maize cobs. Use of such storage structures appears to be common in tribal and rural areas as, similar practices were observed in the tribal farmers (Gond, Korku, Baiga, Bharia, Bhilala and Saharia) in Hoshangbad and Chindwara districts of Madhya Pradesh, India, where they used a square or rectangular shaped earthen containers or bamboo baskets to store cereals and other coarse millets (Arjjumend, 2004). Soligas used Thenemane to store unhusked maize cobs. Similar structures like, mud rhombus and thatched rhombus were the common storage structures existing in Sudan Savannah zone of Nigeria for storing millets, sorghum, maize and cowpea (Adejumo and Raji, 2007). Thus, in many such situations, the grain storage practices followed were still very traditional, which did not address the need to tackle different sources of infestations namely, the field infestation and cross infestation (Subramanya et al., 1999; Cotton and Winburn, 1941), prevention of moisture migration to the grains stored (Pixton, 1982; Navarro et al., 1994), which resulted in increase in the moisture content of the stored
Table 2 Description of different storage structures. Sl. No.
Name of the structure
Description
01
Thenemane (Cob house)
02
Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes Mud pots Bamboo baskets Gunny bags Cloth bags Plastic woven sac Tins Metal drums Steel boxes Steel bins Plastic pots Plastic boxes
This is a small hut made of bamboo with a bamboo platform inside (1.5 to 2.0 m in height), used to store mainly the earheads of finger millet and maize cobs. Dried maize cobs along with their sheath are hung as a dense bundle above the cooking area, at about 3 m from the ground within a thatched hut. About 80–100 cobs are also tied to a rope and hung close to the roof above the cooking area. These earthen pots were commonly used by Soligas to store cereals, pulses and millets. This basket of about 60 cm height and 45 cm in diameter made out of bamboo and kept above the cooking area on a wooden plank. Made of jute, used to store various types of grains Bag stitched out of coarse cloth. Bags woven out of plastic, available commercially from nearest towns. Made of mild steel sheets, normally used to transport edible oils up to 15 kg. Empty cans are used for grain storage Made of mild steel sheets and with lids. Larger in size and with higher capacity. Made of steel, smaller in size, rectangular in shape with a lid. Capacity of up to 10 kg Made of steel with lids of different shapes with a capacity of up to 15 kg Pots made of plastics with a capacity of about 2–5 kg Made of plastics, rectangular in shape with a lid and a capacity of about 5–10 kg
03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
682
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Table 3 Classification of different storage structures used by Soligas at BR Hillsa. Storage structures
Location
Thenemane Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place Mud pots Bamboo basket Gunny bag Cloth bag Plastic woven bag Tins Metal drums Steel box Steel bins Plastic pot Plastic boxes a
Material used
Indoor
Outdoor
Non plastic
Plastic
Metal
Plant material
Mud
Cloth
+ + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + -
+ + + + + -
+ + +
+ + + -
+ + + + + -
+ -
+ -
Note: + = Yes; - = No.
In the present study, it was observed that, the grain infestation by insects was present in grains despite different protection methods adopted by Soligas. Maximum infestation was observed in pulses smeared with red earth, followed by the use of leaves of Vitex spp. and mixing of slaked lime powder. Analysis of grain samples collected from the Soliga households where they were stored in different storage structures and stored by using grain preservation practices revealed that, Soligas were unable to store their grains safely and incurred considerable grain loss, which may be up to 100% in certain Podus (Table 1). Thus, a detailed study of the grain storing practices by Soligas at BR Hills indicated that their grain preservation practices which are traditional do not help in any way to store their food grains safely. Keeping this in view, there is a need to improve the grain storage methods practiced by Soligas in BR Hills by educating them about sources of insect infestation, how to control the same, and on the use of proper storage structures like metal or plastic bins with tight lids that are insect and rodent proof, and also prevents moisture migration effectively.
bruchid beetles and the beans treated in this manner, could still germinate well, when used as seeds (Obeng and Amiteye, 2005; Dhaliwal and Singh, 2010). In Mali, both cereal and legumes are treated with castor oil to keep away the insect pests (Anon, 1997). Soligas use slaked lime powder to protect the pulses from pulse beetle. However, this method does not seem to be effective as, in spite of using slaked lime powder, 47.83% grain samples were still found to be infested. A maximum of 59.70% of Soligas in BR Hills were found to use ash (from firewood used for cooking) to protect most of the pulses for years. Similarly, Keyler (1996) observed that 88.00% of the farmers in the North Central Regions of Namibia use ash for the protection of stored pearl millet. In northern Cameroon, cowpeas are traditionally stored by mixing with ash (Anon, 1997). In Kenya maize and beans are mixed with ash (from the cooking fire) and stored up to 5 years without any infestation (Golob and Webley, 1980). Thus, in many cases, ash has proved more effective than Malathion @ 2% (Groot, 2004). A maximum of 91.63% of the Soligas in BR Hills practice frequent sun drying as a grain preservation technique (Table 5). If weather conditions are too cloudy, humid or even wet, then the crop will not dry sufficiently, resulting in significant losses due to subsequent insect infestation. Similar studies are reported by Nukenine (2010), where small scale African farmers rely on sun drying to protect their grains from insect damage.
Acknowledgements We wish to thank Dr. C. A. Viraktamath, Emeritus Professor, Insect
Plastic pot Plastic box Plastic woven sac Steel box Steel bins Tin Metal drums Gunny bags Cloth bag Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place Bamboo basket Mud pots Thenemane 0
5
10
15
Fig. 4. Classification of storage structures used by Soligas at BR Hills.
683
20
25
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Table 4 Extent of insect infestation in storage structures used by Soligasa. Sl. No.
Storage structuresa
No. of Podus using the structure
No. of Soliga households using the structure
Presence of infestation (%)
Food grains examined
1 2
1 8
12 180
41.67 48.89
Ragi, Maize Maize
3 4 5 6 7
Thenemane Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes Mud pots Bamboo baskets Gunny bags Cloth bags Plastic woven sacs
16 7 16 6 28
214 29 215 157 220
53.27 41.38 64.19 70.06 53.18
8 9 10 11 12 13
Tins Metal Drums Steel boxes Steel bins Plastic pots Plastic boxes
2 2 5 3 1 4
36 91 98 45 10 129
33.33 42.86 37.76 31.11 40.00 34.11
Pulses, Ragi, Jowar Fieldbean, Horsegram Ragi, Ginger, Turmeric, Maize Fieldbean, Maize, Hedda, Greengram Fieldbean, Maize, Jowar, Ragi, Cowpea, Beans, greengram Fieldbean, Ragi Ragi, Jowar, Pulses Fieldbean, Greengram, Cowpea Fieldbean, Ragi, Maize Fieldbean Beans, Fieldbean
a
Number of Soligas households sampled = 263. Table 6 Effectiveness of the grain protection practices adopted by Soligasa. Sl. No
Grain preservation practices
No. of Soligas using the practice
Presence of infestation (%)
1 2 3
Frequent drying Red earth smearing Mixing Slaked Lime powder Mixing Neem leaf Use of V. negundo Mixing S. anacardium seeds Mixing of dry chillies Mixing Ash of T. crenulata Mixing Ash Castor oil coating to grains
241 234 23
35.27 56.41 47.83
25 173 68
36.00 56.07 33.82
49 28
46.94 32.14
157 37
42.68 35.14
4 5 6 7 8 Fig. 5. Use of different storage structures in Soliga Podus and households.
9 10
Table 5 Evaluation of storage structures used by Soligas. a
Sl. No
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Storage structures
Thenemane Maize cobs tied to overhead ropes above the cooking place Mud pots Bamboo basket Gunny bags Cloth bag Plastic woven sac Tin Metal drums Steel box Steel bins Plastic pot Plastic box
Opening secured/ tight cover
Moisture proof
Insect proof
Rodent proof
No No
No No
No Yes
No No
No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No No No No No No No No No No No
Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Number of Soliga households contacted during the survey = 263.
Soliga field staffs of Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment at BR Hills are remembered for their assistance. The cooperation of the Soligas during the study period is greatly appreciated. References Adejumo, B.A., Raji, A.O., 2007. Technical appraisal of grain storage systems in the Nigerian Sudan Savannah. Agric. Eng. Int. CIGR J. 11 (9), 1–12. Anon, 1991. Research Digest. AICRP on Post Harvest Technology (1972–90). Research Technical Bulletin No. UAS/HPHT/91/19. University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. Anon, 1997. Storage of Cowpeas in Ash. 32. Footsteps, Tear Fund, UK, pp. 1–16. Anon, 2010. Biligiri Rangana Hills. http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Biligirirangan_Hills (Accessed on 10th June, 2010). Anon, 2013. Global Food Waste Not, Want Not – Institution of Mechanical Engineers. http://infoagro.net/archivos_Infoagro/Seguridad/biblioteca/GlobalFood,WasteNot. pdf (Accessed on 9th March, 2016). Anon, 2016. Biligirirangana Hills. http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Biligirirangan_Hills (Accessed on 10th August, 2016). Arjjumend, H., 2004. Indigenous practices of post harvest storage among tribal communities of Central India. LEISA 8–9. Channal, G., Nagnur, S., Nanjayyanamath, C., 2004. Indigenous grain storage structures. LEISA 260. Chaturvedi, B.K., Anilraj, T.A., 2015. Agricultural storage infrastructure in India: an overview. J. Bus. Manag. 17 (5–II), 37–43. Chitja, J.M.T., Hendriks, S.L., Ortmann, G.F., Green, M., 2004. Impact of maize storage on rural household food security in Northern Kwazulu-Natal. Tydskrif vir Gesinsekologie en Verbruikerswetenskappe 32, 8–14. Cotton, R.T., Winburn, T.F., 1941. Field infestation of wheat by insects attacking it in farm storage. J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 14 (1), 12–15. Dhaliwal, R.K., Singh, G., 2010. Traditional food grain storage practices of Punjab. Indian
Biosystematics Unit, Department of Entomology, University of Agricultural Sciences (UAS), GKVK, Bangalore, for identification of stored grain insects. The present work was carried out as part of the research programme of All India Co-ordinated Research Project on Post Harvest Technology, UAS, Bangalore and The support provided by the head, AICRP on Post Harvest Technology, UAS, GKVK, Bangalore is acknowledged. The authors are thankful to the Karnataka State Forest Department for cooperation. The senior author (NLN) acknowledges University Grants Commission, New Delhi for awarding fellowship. The 684
Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 20 (2017) 678–685
N.L. Naveena et al.
Nukenine, E.N., Mebanga, A.S., Nloga, N.A.N., Fontenille, D., Ncoutpouen, E., Tepamdi, M., 2003. In: Culicid diversity and plant materials used as mosquito repellents in northern Cameroon. Paper Presented at the 15th Conference of the African Association of Insect Scientists (AAIS) and the Entomological Society of Kenya, 9–13 June 2003. Kenya, Nairobi. Obeng, O.D., Amiteye, 2005. Efficacy of mixing vegetable oils mixed with primiphos methyl against the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky in stored maize. J. Stored Prod. Res. 41, 56–57. Pacheco, I.A., Fernanda, P.P.M., Castro, D., Paula, D.C., Lourencao, A.L., Bolonhezi, S., Barbieri, M.K., 1995. Efficacy of soybean and Castor oils in the control of Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) and Callosobruchus phaseoli (Gyllenhal) in stored chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L.). J. Stored Prod. Res. 31 (3), 221–228. Pixton, S.W., 1982. The importance of moisture and equilibrium relative humidity in stored products. Trop. Stored Prod. Info. 43, 16–29. Rajapakse, R., Vanemden, H.F., 1997. Potential of four vegetable oils and ten botanical powders for reducing infestation of cowpeas by Callosobruchus maculatus, C. chinensis and C. rhodesianus. J. Stored Prod. Res. 33, 59–68. Schmutterer, H., 1990. Properties and potential of natural pesticides from the neem tree, Azadirachta indica. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 35, 271–297. Sepasal, 1997. Use of Vegetable Oils in Beans. vol. 32: 9 Footsteps, Tear Fund, UK. Sinha, R.N., Watters, F.L., 1985. Insect pests of flour mills, grain elevators and feed mills and their control. In: Agriculture Canada Publication no. 1776. 290 Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Ottawa, Canada. Somasundaram, H.N., Kibe, R.V., 1990. Soliga – The Tribe and Its Stride. Vivekananda Girijana Kalyana Kendra, BR Hills. Subramanya, S., Ranganna, B., Bisht, B.S., 1999. Post-harvest management of pulse beetle - a review of research. In: Rep. No. UAS/PHT/99/30, pp. 1–95. Tadesse, A., Eticha, F., 1999. Insect pests of farm-stored maize and their management practices in Ethiopia. IOBC Bull. 23, 47–57. Tapondjou, A.L., Bouda, H., Fontem, D.A., Zapfack, L., Lontsi, D., Sondengam, B.L., 2000. Local plants used for traditional stored product protection in the Menoua division of the Western Highlands of Cameroon. IOBC Bull. 23, 73–77.
J. Tradit. Knowl. 9 (3) (562-530). Ganeshaiah, K.N., 1998. B.R. Hills – a geological chip of Western Ghats? In: Ganeshaiah, K.N., Uma Shaanker, R. (Eds.), Biligirirangaswamy Wildlife Sanctuary, Natural history, Biodiversity and conservation. Vivekananda Girijana Kalyana Kendra, Chamarajanagar, pp. 3–4. Golob, P., Webley, D.J., 1980. The Use of Plants and Minerals as Traditional Protectants of Stored Products. Tropical Products Institute, London, UK, pp. 235. Groot, I.D., 2004. Protection of Stored Grains and Pulses. Agromisa Foundation, Wageningen, pp. 78. Haghtalab, N., Shayesteh, N., Aramideh, S., 2009. Insecticidal efficacy of Castor and Hazelneut oils in stored cowpea against Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). J. Biol. Sci. 9 (2), 175–179. Jadegowda, M., 2000. Effect of FYM on maize and finger millet based intercropping systems at BR Hills. (M. Sc (Agri) thesis submitted to University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore). Keyler, S.K., 1996. Economics of the Namibian Millet Subsector. (Ph. D dissertation) Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA. Muruli, K.S., Ganeshaiah, K.N., Bhusan, S.P., 1998. Farming system by Soligas: the crops and the practices. In: Ganeshaiah, K.N., Uma Shanker, R. (Eds.), Biligirirangaswamy Wildlife Sanctuary, Natural History, Biodiversity and Conservation. Vivekananda Girijana Kalyana Kendra, Chamarajanagar, pp. 18–21. Navarro, S., Donahaye, E., Fishman, S., 1994. The future of hermetic storage of dry grains in tropical and subtropical climates. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Working Conference on Stored Product Protection, Canberra, Australia, 17–23 April 1994. Wallingford, CAB International, pp. 130–138. Naveena, N.L., 2013. Studies on Factors Influencing stored grain insect Infestations. In: Soliga Tribal Settlements of Biligirirangana Hills, Karnataka, India, (Ph.D. thesis submitted to University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore, India). Naveena, N.L., Subramanya, S., Setty, S., 2015. Diversity and distribution of stored grain insects among the Soliga tribal settlements of Biligirirangana Hills, Karnataka, India. J. Stored Prod. Res. 62, 84–92. Nukenine, E.N., 2010. Stored Product Protection in Africa: Past, Present and Future. 425. Julius-Kuhn-Archiv.pp. 26–41.
685