Show simple item record

dc.contributorDevkota, Krishnaen_US
dc.contributorAcharya, Salinen_US
dc.contributorShrestha, Reshaen_US
dc.contributorMcDonald, Andrewen_US
dc.creatorDevkota Wasti, Minaen_US
dc.date2018-01-11en_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-10T15:30:29Z
dc.date.available2020-04-10T15:30:29Z
dc.identifierhttps://mel.cgiar.org/dspace/limiteden_US
dc.identifier.citationMina Devkota Wasti, Krishna Devkota, Salin Acharya, Resha Shrestha, Andrew McDonald. (11/1/2018). Establishing the value of modern seed storage methods for wheat in diverse production ecologies in Nepal. Journal of Stored Products Research, 76, pp. 71-76.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/11006
dc.description.abstractIn the developing-country context of Nepal, farmers often incur seed losses of 15–30% due to improper storage. To evaluate the efficacy and costs of modern storage alternatives, experimental trials were set up among ten farmers each in two contrasting ecologies, i.e. Palpa (hills) and Rupandehi (terai plains) districts of Nepal in 2013. Several wheat seed storage options were contrasted including farmer practices (FP) such as reused fertilizer bags, polythene bags, household metal containers, and mud bins. Modern storage methods that were evaluated included plastic bags (with and without pesticide), metal bins, and hermetic ‘SuperGrain bag’ (SGB). Seed quality and losses were assessed after six months of storage (May–October) with parameters such as grain moisture content, insect damage, seed germination, and seedling vigor. The overall quality of seed with FPs was lower in the hills than in the terai plains. Among the treatments, SGBs were more effective in maintaining acceptable seed moisture levels, controlling insect damage (<1%), preserving germination (>90% lab, >65% field), and promoting seedling vigor. Metal bins and plastic bags without pesticide had higher insect damage (7–15%) compared to FP and plastic bags with pesticide (2–5%). In terms of storage costs, SGBs were comparable with the farmers' storage methods ($5–6 per 100 kg seed storage). Our findings demonstrate that SGBs are better at maintaining seed quality and more economical than not only FP but also the other modern storage methods evaluated in this study across production ecologies in Nepal.en_US
dc.formatPDFen_US
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier (12 months)en_US
dc.rightsCC-BY-4.0en_US
dc.sourceJournal of Stored Products Research;76,(2018) Pagination 71,76en_US
dc.subjectinsect infestationen_US
dc.subjectsupergrain bagen_US
dc.subjectseed moistureen_US
dc.titleEstablishing the value of modern seed storage methods for wheat in diverse production ecologies in Nepalen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
cg.creator.idDevkota Wasti, Mina: 0000-0002-2348-4816en_US
cg.creator.ID-typeORCIDen_US
cg.subject.agrovocgerminationen_US
cg.subject.agrovocseed qualityen_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas - ICARDAen_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Maize and Wheat Improvement Center - CIMMYTen_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Rice Research Institute - IRRIen_US
cg.contributor.funderCGIAR System Organization - CGIARen_US
cg.date.embargo-end-dateTimelessen_US
cg.coverage.regionSouthern Asiaen_US
cg.coverage.countryNPen_US
cg.contactm.devkota@cgiar.orgen_US
cg.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2018.01.002en_US
dc.identifier.statusTimeless limited accessen_US
mel.impact-factor1.954en_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
Disclaimer:
MELSpace content providers and partners accept no liability to any consequence resulting from use of the content or data made available in this repository. Users of this content assume full responsibility for compliance with all relevant national or international regulations and legislation.
Theme by 
@mire NV