Research consultancy

EFFICACY OF COW DUNG ASH AND CHILLI PEPPER POWDER IN CONTROLLING BEAN BRUCHID IN STORED BEANS (Phaseolus vulgaris)

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

The global population is projected to reach 8.5 billion in 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050, and 10.9 billion in 2100 (Blakeney, 2019; UN, 2019). The rapidly increasing population in many developing countries has been attributed to decreasing death rates, and reduced infant mortality rates, among others (UN, 2019). The population of Latin America and the Caribbean tripled between 1950 and 2019, projected to reach 768 million in 2058. Australia and New Zealand, home to 30 million people in 2019, could see their population grow to 38 million in 2050 and 49 million in 2100 (UN, 2019). By 2100, Asia and Africa are expected to be home to a combined population of 9 billion out of the projected 11.0 billion people inhabiting Earth (FAO, 2014). In East Africa, Kenya’s population is projected to reach 66.45 million and increase further to 91.58 million in 2050 and 125.45 million in 2100 (UN, 2019). Uganda’s population is projected to be 130 million people by 2050 and estimated to reach 167 million by the end of the century, surpassing that of Egypt, the second largest populated country in Africa (Kaddodo Betty & PPD, 2011).

The demand for food by the rapidly increasing population remains a global concern for humankind (Kumar & Kalita, 2017). Many countries and other concerned organizations like World Food Programme and Food and Agricultural Organization have been directed towards raising food production to cater to the increasing population (Debouck et al., 2021; FAO et al., 2021). Despite the efforts of concerned bodies, storage pests have affected vital food (Affognon et al., 2015). Therefore, there is a need to meet the challenges of food demand, and the production of legume crops such as beans plays a central role in food security (FAO, 2018).

Common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L) are one of the most important food legumes in the world (CIAT, 1989; Soniia et al., 1999). Beans were domesticated in their center of origin, Latin America, where different races exist. It has been one of the primary staple foods in Latin American countries since pre-Columbian time and became one of Africa’s most vital food sources after its introduction (FAO, 2020). The leading producing country of beans in the world is Brazil, with total area coverage of 4-5 million hectares, followed by Mexico with approximately 1,900,000 ha and Central America with 700,000 ha (FAO, 2018). In sub-Saharan Africa, East Africa has the highest bean production of 1,297,000 tons per annum, and the largest producing countries include; Kenya, Uganda, and DRC (Kilimo & UNDP, 2012).

While beans are considered a low-status food, “the meat of the poor” (Soniia et al., 1999), it provides an essential source of protein and is third in the production of calories after maize and cassava (MAFAP, 2013). The poor highly value beans because a big part of the plant can be consumed; the grain can be eaten when fresh or dried. Its leaves are used as vegetables. In some parts of East Africa, beans grain consumption exceeds 50 kgs per person per annum, but this consumption capacity has been declining due to low income and storage losses caused by bruchids (Soniia et al., 1999)

Heavy losses to bean seeds have been due to bean bruchid weevil (Acanthoscelides obtectus) (Ebinu et al., 2016). These pests have also caused poor germination rates when bridging the gap in production based on seasonality and lower market value for bean seeds, thus causing food insecurity (Kembabazi, 2019). Farmers carry out fumigation using an imported chemical pesticide, Aluminum phosphide, to protect beans during storage  (Ngegba et al., 2022). However, fumigants have environmental and human health negative impacts making their use increasingly questionable by food practitioners. Industrial pesticides further exacerbate production costs for poor farmers. In this light, various authorities advocate for alternatives (Daglish et al., 2018). In some areas of Tanzania, farmers have employed Integrated Pest Management, which includes traditional insecticide and granary hygiene. However, the method has not been consistent due to scanty investigation of which traditional plants can be used (Mesele et al., 2019). Kilama (2021) used chilli leave powder and fruit powder in Uganda and found that “the highest mortality rate for bruchid in 144 hrs was 81.9 ±2.4, but he left other vital parts of chilli plant roots and bark. Nyamweha et al. (2018) reported moderate activity of cow dung ash with six bruchid weevils out of 20 bruchids after a long period of two weeks. This could be why cow dung ash only limits bruchid weevil movement but does not kill bean weevils immediately.    Despite international, regionally, and local intervention efforts, the problem of bruchid weevils in stored beans still exists. The combination of chilli pepper powder and cow dung ash on the bruchid weevils has not been tested. Therefore, this research aims to compare the efficacy of a combination of chili pepper powder and cow dung as alternative pesticides for controlling bean bruchids in stored beans.

1.2 Statement of the Research Problem

The production of beans in Uganda has increased recently, but the storage life has decreased because of bean bruchid weevils (Kembabazi, 2019). Bruchid weevils are suspected of causing a 40% loss of stored bean seeds in Uganda (Nyamweha et al., 2018). Furthermore, personal observation and interaction with farmers show high bean seeds distraction in local stores, schools, and homes by bean bruchid weevils. There are many oral and written stories, newspaper reports, press statements, and unsorted records regarding the development and progress in controlling bean bruchid weevils using ash from wood, rice husks, and legume straws (Kembabazi, 2019). However, limited achievements have been released.

No attempts have been made to assess the efficacy of a combination of cow dung ash and chili-pepper powder from leaves, fruits, roots, and bark in controlling bean bruchid weevils. Therefore, this study will assess the efficacy of a combination of cow dung ash and chili pepper powder from leaves, roots, bark, and fruits.

1.3.0 General Objective

To assess the efficacy of a combination of cow dung ash and chili-pepper powder in controlling bean weevil in stored beans.

1.3.1      Specific Objectives

(i) To determine the difference in the performance of leaves powder, fruit powder, bark powder, and roots of chili-pepper on the infestation of bean weevil on stored beans.

(ii) To determine the performance of the combination of different parts of a chili pepper plant in controlling bruchid weevil in stored beans.

(iii) To determine the effect of cow dung ash on bean weevil control

(iv) To evaluate the combination of cow dung ash and the different parts of chili pepper powder (leave, roots, bark, and fruit) on a population size of bean weevils.

1.4     Research questions

(i) What is the difference in the performance of chilli powder from leaves, roots, and bark fruit in controlling bean bruchid weevils?

(ii) What is the difference in the performance of the combination of chilli pepper parts in controlling bean bruchid weevils?

(iii) What is the effect of using cow dung ash in controlling beans bruchid weevils?

(iv) What is the effect of the combination of cow dung ash and chilli pepper powder from leaves, roots, bark, and fruits on the population dynamics of bruchid weevils?

1.5 Justification

The need for alternative means of controlling bruchid weevil has been an outcry by many farmers. If not done, the increasing population may lack food, farmers may lack seeds to plant when meeting the next production season, and local shops and schools may waste money buying infested beans. Combinations of the ingredients (chilli pepper and cow dung) that have already been experimented in controlling bruchid weevil is thought to increase the concentration of the components that will result in better efficacy and improvement of the storage of beans. The use of organic substances would substitute for the inorganic pesticide that farmers currently use, and this will save money.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Beans

Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) are legume plants that belong to several genera of the flowering plant family Fabaceae (Bitocchi et al., 2012). They are an essential edible crop in many parts of the world as food for man and livestock (Hayat et al., 2011). Beans evolved from wild plants growing as vines in the highlands of middle America and the Andes mountains, where more than 30 closely related varieties exist. However, only five are domesticated (De Ron et al., 2016). These included; Phaseolus polyanthus, Phaseolus coccineus, Phaseolus slunatus, Phaseolus pacutifolius, and Phaseolus vulgaris. Phaseolus vulgaris is the most grown species in the whole world (Cortés, 2013). The taxonomic classification of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) kingdom: planta, subkingdom: viridiplantae, Infrakingdom: streptophyta, super division: Embryophyta, division: Tracheophyta, subdivision: spermatophytine, Class: Magnoliopsida, super order: Rosanae, order: Fabales, Family: Fabaceae, Genus: Phaseolus and species: Phaseolus vulgaris L (kidney beans (Larson, 1938).

Beans can be cooked in many ways, including but not limited to frying, boiling, and baking, to be used in many dishes throughout the world (Zamindar et al., 2013). In East Africa, primarily Uganda, most varieties of beans grown are of intermediate form. These include Nambale, K 131 (1994), K 132 (1994), NABE 2(1995), NABE 3, and NABE 4 as bush types, whereas climbing types are NABE (Kilimo & UNDP, 2012). These varieties differ significantly in color, size, shape, fibrousness, and pod (Hosfield, 2001). Pods grown for dry, mature seeds produce pods that are too fibrous not to be eaten at any stage of development. In addition, bean seeds’ color ranges from white, pink, yellow, green, red, brown, purple, and black with different patterns. Seed shapes range from spherical, flattened, elongated, and kidney-shaped (Hosfield, 2001).

2.2 Nutritional benefits of beans

According to Soniia et al. (1999), beans contain proteins necessary for the body. They also contain fibers and several micronutrients, including but not limited to iron and magnesium (Kotue et al., 2018). Even though carbohydrates are also present in the seed coat of beans in small quantities, beans are a significant source of folate and reasonable quantities of vitamins, especially vitamins B and K (Hayat et al., 2011). The fiber from beans is essential to people as it protects them from heart diseases and high cholesterol levels, lowering high blood pressure and other digestive illnesses. Because of their low-fat content and low calories, it helps in the prevention of diabetes but also regulate high blood sugar that causes diabetes (Hayat et al., 2011). Magnesium and iron obtained from beans make borne stable. Vitamin B, once taken by a pregnant woman, prevents particular congenital disabilities, helps in cell division, and helps in the function of the nervous system  (Hayat et al., 2011).

2.3 Economic benefits

Different beans are of major economic significance to farmers (Myers & Kmiecik, 2017). Apart from acting as staple food crops in different regions and grown for substance purposes, it has gained commercial value in Uganda. From 2010-2013 beans were the most Agricultural commodity traded formally after maize and fish (Kilimo & UNDP, 2012). Because of that, beans earned the country 20.5 million, 21.2 million, and 19.3 million in 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, respectively (FAO et al., 2019; Kilimo & UNDP, 2012). On the other hand, beans have a symbiotic relationship with rhizobium bacteria which help to fix atmospheric nitrogen in the soil and help in the improvement of the soil conditions when mixed in rotation with cereal crops for about 10kgs by dry beans (Keyser & Li, 1992)

2.4 Constraints in bean production

Although beans have many advantages and can be grown in all parts of the world, they are the most susceptible crops to pests (FAO et al., 2019). more than 200-450 insect pests have been known to cause losses to beans from the field or stores (Silva et al., 2018). They include stem maggots and weevils, foliage beetles, flower thrips, pod borers, and sap suckers. However, Acanthoscelides obtectus inflict heavy losses on stored beans forcing farmers to sell them immediately after harvesting, which contributes to price decline and market seasonal price fluctuations (Ndakidemi & Mbega, 2017). Even though more than 28 storage insect pests have been reported to occur in stores, they are of minor importance to the stored products (Sarikarin et al., 1999).

Other constraints of bean production are lack of good agronomic practices, poor soils, lack of improved cultivars, low soil moisture, weed competition, drought, and environmental stress (Kilimo & UNDP, 2012). Unlike pests, those constraints can only affect beans much when they are still in the field, but pests like bruchid weevils can affect beans both in the field and in stores, which causes heavy losses in beans production (Thukur, 2012).

2.5 Beans bruchid weevil

Bean bruchid weevil (Acanthoscelides obtectus) is responsible for most of the storage damages of beans in stores (ADAPPT, 2013). The beetle belongs to the family (Bruchidae), now placed in the family Chrysomelidae, though they have historically been treated in a separate family. They are granivores and typically infest various bean seeds as they live inside a single seed (Kingsolver, 2004).

According to Creemers & Aranguiz (2019), about 1650-1831 species have been found in the Bruchinae family distributed worldwide, making Acanthoscelides obtectus cosmopolitan through mediated imports and exports of beans across the tropical and temperature regions. It is generally compact, oval-shaped, has a small head bent under, and total body size is about 1-22 mm; the color is usually black or sometimes brown with mottled patterns. However, their mandible may be elongated with a short snout. In addition, it has short first wings, not reaching the tip of the abdomen  (Thukur, 2012).

2.6 Damages caused by bruchid weevil on beans

Bean bruchid weevil is a severe storage pest (Govindan et al., 2020). They are the primary constraint in bean production, causing heavy losses on storage beans (Mesele et al., 2019). The weevils can infest beans in stores, rendering seeds unfit for human consumption. The massive population is commonly found in stores and warehouses where dry beans are taken after harvesting to meet the growing demand for the next season and reasonable market prices (Kilimo & UNDP, 2012). Because of these reasons, the life cycle of the bruchid weevil is adapted for reproductions within seeds (Alfageme et al., 2012). The larva bores into the seeds, feed, and pupates inside bean seeds, leaving around a window hole through which it emerges at the adult stage, which lowers the quality and viability and makes it less attractive in the market  (Abata & Ampofo, 1996).

2.7 Life cycle of the bean weevil

Bean bruchids undergo complete metamorphosis; Eggs, Larvae, Pupae, and Adults (Ahmed et al., 2018). Female weevils lay fertilized eggs on bean pods in the field, which hatches into larvae that enter bean seeds before harvesting (Hamani & Medjdoub-Bensaad, 2015). They are small beetles (3-5mm) grey, brown to reddish brown; females of the dry bean weevil lay eggs glued to the bean seeds, while the female of the Mexican bean weevil lay eggs scattered between the bean seeds (Effowe et al., 2010).

The fir^st instar larvae enter the bean seed, where it spreads most of its growing period. The final instar excavates just below the seed, and a window hole on the bean seed can detect larvae. Besides legume plants, bean weevil has been reported in other crop families like Malvaceae and Convolvulaceae(Hamani & Medjdoub-Bensaad, 2015).

2.8.0 Current management techniques used in controlling bean weevil

Some techniques have been developed to reduce the effect of bean weevil farmers experience during the storage of bean seeds due to bean weevil (Mesele et al., 2019). Currently, management techniques rely heavily on using chemicals, physical means, temperature modification, botanical modification, and biological agents (Cosmas et al., 2018). However, because of challenges small-scale farmers face, like shortage of finance technical knowledge, all these techniques have not been adopted (Shiferaw., 2020).

2.8.1 Fumigation method in controlling bean bruchid weevil

Fumigants are gases that penetrate the grains and kill insects on and in the grain (Johnson D.W. & Townsend L. H, 2016). Farmers put harvested bean seeds on boxes, sacks, bins, and granaries, piled them together in the corner of the house, or spread them on the house floor. Gases such as chloropicrin, hydrocyanic acid, and Ethylene dichloride are the most fumigants used on a large scale but need care (Daglish et al., 2018).

2.8.2 Use of biological method in controlling bean bruchid weevil

Ahmed et al. (2018) reported two parasitoids, Anisopteromalus Calandra and Eupelmus vuilletti which were effective on bruchid weevil control in combination with plant genetic enzyme (a- l analyses). In addition, the potential of the parasitoid known as Dinarmus basalis was evaluated on several occasions in Colombia, where five males and females per kg of bean seeds effectively controlled bean bruchid weevils (Alfageme et al., 2012). However, the controlling bean weevil biological method needs care mainly on the introduction of intensive research is needed (Mwanauta et al., 2015).

2.8.3 Temperature variation technique in controlling bean bruchid weevil

Temperature is one of the best methods to control bean weevils (Larson, 1938). Because the method does not have any residual effect on beans and the environment but kills storage pests as they are highly susceptible to freezing (Oosthuizen, 1935). Bean seeds can be freed of weevils by exposing them to a low-temperature range (Shepard, 1947). Exposure to low-temperature levels has been reported to storage pests like Sitophilus granarius and Sitophilus oryzae (Gupta et al., 2016). Temperature ranging between 120ºC to 130ºC exposed for eight hours or more will not affect seeds but have a high effect on storage pests (Tabu et al., 2012).

2.9 Use of cow dung ash and chill pepper powder

Cow dung is the undigested residue of consumed material that is Cow dung ash is obtained by drying cow dung under the sun and then burnt (Nyamweha et al., 2018). In India, people who reside in rural areas use cow dung to plaster walls and the floor of the house, and the smoke generated from burnt cow dung is applied as a mosquito repellent, which all reflects native knowledge (Gupta et al., 2016).

Plant products have been used for many years by small-scale farmers in parts of Africa to protect stored products from insect pests (Tabu et al., 2012). Farmers have reverted to using natural product extracts extracted from seeds, bark, fruits, leaves, roots, and flowers (Paneru & Shivakoti, 1970). According to Dougoud et al. (2019b), fruits powder from Mazedarch, black pepper, fruits and leaves of eucalyptus, croton, gratissilum,spirostychus Africana, acremonium neleguta seeds, capsicum nigrum seeds, Allium sativum bulbs and leaves of Zingiber officinale were employed singly or in combination as pest protectant in Nigeria (Ngegba et al., 2022). In Uganda, farmers reported chilli pepper as the most used Botanics in weevil control against bean weevil (Kilama, 2021). The benefits of using chilli pepper are its low cost and minimal health risk to men and the environment. Chill pepper is available in areas where Botanics for controlling storage pests are difficult to obtain (Ebinu et al., 2016). However, little work has been achieved on cow dung ash and chilli pepper powder obtained from leaves, roots, bark, and fruit levels that would give adequate protection against bruchid attack.

The use of botanicals as a pesticide in Agriculture started in ancient times in China, Egypt, Greece, and India many years ago (Yeswanth, 2021). Since their widespread, botanicals have been used to protect field and storage pests (Paneru & Shivakoti, 1970). Several plants have been used in many African countries like Nigeria, Zimbabwe, and Uganda (Amah et al., 2020). Over 100% of the farmers in these countries know botanicals or have used botanicals in storage pest control (Dougoud et al., 2019).

Kilama (2021) states that 49.2% of bean farmers in Uganda use fruits/seeds, and 38.9% use leaf powder to protect stored beans against weevils. Those typically involve simple form powder or aqueous extracts, most especially the use of a wide variety of Botanics for insect pest control, highlighted in many farmers surveys such as 34 Botanics being used by farmers around Lake Victoria basin in Uganda (Mugisha-Kamatenesi et al., 2008). With limited availability and the cost of synthetic pesticides for substances, most farmers consider Botanics the best alternative for storage pest controls.

There is evidence that some botanicals used in pest control are less toxic to man and none targeted species than conventional pesticides. Chilli-pepper powder obtained from leaves, roots, bark, and fruits mixed with cow dung ash to control bean weevil has not been evaluated. This research aims to address this knowledge gap

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Scope of the study

The study will not be restricted to any geographical area. However, experimental bean seeds will be obtained from a known farmer in Kumi District, near Kanyum Comprehensive Secondary School, where the experiment will be conducted. The study will focus only on the efficacy of cow dung ash and chilli pepper powder in controlling bean bruchid weevils. The study experiment shall be conducted for three months, from October 2022 to December 2022, and the finding shall be obtained at the end of the experiment.

3.2 Research design

A research design guides a researcher on which research methods to use to accomplish the study objectives. An experimental Randomized Complete Block Design (CRBD) will be used for the study. The randomized controlled experiment will allow for the rigor to determine whether a cause-effect relationship exists between treatments and outcomes. The study will ensure random allocation of treatments to the different blocks. In this research, RCBD is used because of its level of precision and numerous advantages. It allows for the homogeneity of the setup of the blocks. However, variation may likely exist between blocks, which is the basis for evaluation (Rudhra et al., 2022). This type of design is flexible with respect to the different number of treatments and blocks, and it provides more convincing results than that of a complete randomized design (CRD) due to the introduction of blocking, which allows the computation of unbiased error for specific treatment.

3.3.0 Collection of the chill pepper plant and Cow dung

Fresh chilli pepper plant’s plant parts (leaves, fruits, roots, and bark) will be collected from a known farmer’s garden between 28^th to 29^th September 2022. Different polyethylene peppers will be used to collect different chili plant parts. Personal protective equipment will be put on gloves, masks, and aprons. Mature parts used in this study will be harvested and sorted from other plant parts. The harvested parts will then be transported to a clean place in the school laboratory, where they are picked on subsequent days for drying

Fresh cow dung will be collected from the kraal of the indigenous cattle breeds owned by a local farmer in Kumi District near Kanyum Comprehensive Secondary School. The research will put on personal protective equipment like gloves, gum boots, and an apron before entering the cattle kraal. Only the fresh cow dung will be collected to take a uniform drying period, and no contamination will have occurred to destroy its quality. All the collected cow dung will be put in polyethylene paper and transported to the school laboratory, where it will be picked up in the subsequent days for drying.

3.3.1 Collection of bean bruchids

Live mature mixed-sex bean bruchids weevils will be collected from the infested bean store in Kumi District at Kanyum Comprehensive Secondary School from 4th October to 5^th October 2022. The researcher will get a clean container, and upon reaching the store, personal protective equipment like gloves, mask, and apron will be put on, and bruchids will be picked. After collecting the required number for this study, bruchids will be taken to Kanyum Comprehensive Secondary School Agricultural Laboratory. The bruchid’s colony will be maintained in both Laboratories at room temperature of 21°C to 28°C and relative humidity (RH), which will be measured by thermometer and hygrometer.

3.3.2 Collection of bean seeds

Bean seeds of the NABE 17 variety will be used in this study as they are commonly grown in Uganda (Lukas, 2018). The seeds will be bought from a known farmer in Kumi District near Kanyum Comprehensive Secondary School. This farmer will be chosen to have the ability for the researcher to monitor the harvesting, threshing, and pick the seeds before the insecticide is put. All the broken beans will be sorted from whole grain beans and then dried until the moisture content is reduced to normal. Clean seeds will be brought to Gulu University Multifunctional Research Laboratory and Kanyum Comprehensive Secondary School Agricultural Laboratory. They will be subjected to controlled heating in an oven at 40°C for four hours to ensure that existing eggs, larvae, or live weevils are dead. The heated beans will then be cooled at room temperature of 21°C to 28°C for 2 hours.

3.3.4 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Beans that have already been harvested and no synthetic chemicals dusted on them with no physical damage will be included in the experiment. Beans that ot yet been harvested mature in the garden or harvested, and synthetic chemicals dusted on them or broken or decaying will be excluded from the study.

3.4 Experimental design

Each treatment will have three replications in a Randomized Complete Block Design (Rosulu et al., 2022). A total of three blocks, each having three treatment levels(replicates), will be used to test for the efficacy of treatments for bean bruchid weevils.

The Randomized Complete Block Design.

Twenty adults live mixed sex bean bruchids will be counted and introduced to each container containing 10g of beans. Each sample will be subjected to a different treatment. Thirty-three containers will be used in the Randomized Complete Block Design experiment. The treatments levels (2g, 4g and 6g) will consist of weighed chilli pepper powder, cow dung ash, and a combination of chilli pepper powder and cow dung ash, and will be added to the beans and shaken until the seeds are fully coated. The control will consist of bean seeds and 10 introduced bruchids, but no chili pepper powder or cow dung ash will be added. The container that will allow experimental material will be put in transparent jars. The tips of jars will be perforated to allow airflow and to confine the bean bruchids in the jars.

3.5.0 Preparation of chili pepper and cow dung

The chili pepper parts and cow dung will be dried using clean materials under sunshine until the moisture content is reduced. The dried materials of chili pepper parts will be pounded using a mortar and pestle into powder. The powder will be stored in airtight plastic containers and put in a refrigerator at four °C to maintain the quality before application.

A clean iron sheet will be used where cow dung will be burnt to ash and left to cool. Cooled cow dung ash will be obtained and packed in a clean container to keep its quality before use as treatment.

3.5.1 Experimental containers and cods

Requ    ired transparent containers with lids will be bought from plastic shop. The containers will be cleaned with soap and water dried in Gulu University Biology laboratory. Dried containers will be perforated by patching holes in the lids and sides  and labelled

Cods will be generated that represents all treatments and blocks using masking tap and a marker like Root powder at treatment level one in block A (RP.1a), Bark powder at treatment level one in block A (Bp. 1a), leaf powder at treatment level one in block A (LP. 1a), combination of bark powder and cow dung ash (BP+CD. 1a) each of these will have replication at three levels of treatments in three blocks. 10g of bean sample will be weighed using digital balance and place in containers.

Three different levels of powders will be weighed and introduced separately into labelled containers.

For treatment level one each powder or powder combination will be introduced like 2g of single powder will be weighed. 1g each double powder combination will be weighed. For four powder combination 0.5g each will be weighed.

10 live mixed sex will be starved for one day in order to start feeding when introduced to the samples  and introduced to the container with weighed treatments and beans

3.5.2 Efficacy test

The set experiment will be monitored and checked on daily bases. The efficacy of the different treatments will be determined based on mortality rate, survival rate, emerged rate, eggs laid, and the number of holes made by bruchids per bean seed for 12 weeks (3 months).

3.6.0 Data quality control

Data quality control will be achieved by increasing control experiment blocking to reduce bias between blocks ensuring proper counting of bean bruchid weevil as either live, dead, young, or emerged, and counting number of holes made by weevils on bean seeds and egg laid. This will be observed by the researcher starting from the experiment setup, and the data obtained will be saved on Google drive with known pass ward

 3.6.1 Statistical analysis

Data obtained will be entered into a data collection sheet and transferred to Microsoft excel. One-way ANOVA statistical method will be used to test the efficacy of individual chili pepper parts on the sample within blocks, providing answers to Objective 1. The same analysis will be done on cow-dang ash to test its efficacy on the sample, thus providing answers to objective three since the two factors (powders in combination) will be applied to the samples to achieve objectives 2 and 4. If a considerable variation is released between blocks, a two-way ANOVA method will be used to test their efficacy on the bruchid population dynamics. Comparisons will be conducted using a least significant difference (LSD) test (p≤ 0.5).

3.7 Ethical consideration

The Gulu University Research Ethical Committee (GUREC) will seek ethical clearance to conduct the study. Permission letter shall be obtained from Gulu University Multifunctional Research Laboratory and Kanyum Comprehensive Secondary School laboratory to experiment.

The laboratory technicians and researchers will be protected by wearing Personal protective equipment like gloves, overalls, glasses, aprons, masks, gum boots, or closed shoes will be used to prevent the effect of chili pepper on their health. All used materials after every work will be washed and stored under safe custody to prevent the chilli pepper effect.

3.8 Limitations/Anticipated problems

The major anticipated problem will be block variation due to temperature and humidity. However, this will be solved by control and using one-way ANOVA in analysis, but where the variation will not be a result of blocking, a two-way ANOVA will be used

They may also be delays in conducting the laboratory experiment. The laboratory may not have all the necessary tools like containers, jars, thermometers, and hygrometers. However, this will be solved by talking to the laboratory assistant in time so that missing tools and equipment can be bought using the proposed budget.

REFERENCES

Abata, T., & Ampofo, K. (1996). Insect pests of beans in Africa: Their Ecology and Management. Annual Review of Entomology, 41(1), 45–73. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.41.010196.000401

ADAPPT. (2013). Management of cowpea weevil (callosobruchus maculatus F.) in stored cowpea (vigna unguiculatus L.) grains using wild basil (Ocimum americanum L.). In The First International Conference on Pesticidal Plants (ICIPI) (Issue January).

Affognon, H., Mutungi, C., Sanginga, P., & Borgemeister, C. (2015). Unpacking postharvest losses in sub-Saharan Africa: A Meta-Analysis. World Development, 66, 48–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.08.002

Ahmed, S. S., Naroz, M. H., Sahar Yassin Abdel-Aziz, M. A.-R. A. and, & Department, S. A.-S. (2018). Morphological, Molecular and Biological Studies on Common Bean Weevil Acanthoscelides obtectus (Say) in Egypt. Journal of Entomology, 16(1), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.3923/je.2019.30.38

Alfageme, F. A., Luthi, C., & Romeis, J. (2012). Characterization of digestive enzymes of bruchid parasitoids-initial steps for environmental risk assessment of genetically modified legumes. PLOS ONE, 7(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036862

Amah, N. E., Kojah, O. S., & Paul, A. H. (2020). Perceived Effects of ChilliPepper ( Capsicum nigrum ) in Controlling Cowpea Seed Store Weevil ( Callosobruchusmaculatus ) by Rural Farmers in Kanam Local Government Area , Plateau State , Nigeria. INTERNATIONAL Journal of Trend in Research and Development, 7(4), 1–8.

Aranguiz, A. A., & Creemers, J. (2019). Quick Scan of Ethiopia’s Forage Sub-Sector.  May, 68. https://edepot.wur.nl/504124

Bitocchi, E., Nanni, L., Bellucci, E., Rossi, M., Giardini, A., Zeuli, P. S., Logozzo, G., Stougaard, J., McClean, P., Attene, G., & Papa, R. (2012). Mesoamerican origin of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is revealed by sequence data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(14). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1108973109

Blakeney, M. (2019). Food loss and food waste: Causes and solutions. In Food Loss and Food Waste: Causes and Solutions. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788975391

CIAT. (1989). Beans Production Problems in the Tropics (H. F. S. and M. A. Pastor-Corrales (ed.); Second edi). Colombia.

Cortés, A. J. (2013). On the Origin of the Common Bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L .). American Journal of Plant Sciences, 4, 1998–2000.

Cosmas, P., John, C. T., Agathar, K., Ronald, M., Kufa, M., & Betty, C. (2018). Use of Botanical Pesticides in Controlling Sitophilus Zeamais (Maize Weevil) on Stored Zea Mays (Maize) Grain. Modern Concepts & Developments in Agronomy, 1(4). https://doi.org/10.31031/mcda.2018.01.000517

Daglish, G. J., Nayak, M. K., Arthur, F. H., & Athanassiou, C. G. (2018). Insect Pest Management in Stored Grain Gregory. In F. H. Arthur (Ed.), Recent Advances in Stored Product Protection. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56125-6

De Ron, A. M., González, A. M., Rodiño, A. P., Santalla, M., Godoy, L., & Papa, R. (2016). History of the common bean crop: Its evolution beyond its areas of origin and domestication. Arbor, 192(779). https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2016.779n3007

Debouck, D. G., Santaella, M., & Santos, L. G. (2021). History and impact of a bean ( Phaseolus spp ., Leguminosae , Phaseoleae ) collection. 2, 21–43. https://doi.org/10.46265/genresj.WJEU8358

Dougoud, J., Toepfer, S., Bateman, M., & Jenner, W. H. (2019). Efficacy of homemade botanical insecticides based on traditional knowledge. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 39(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-019-0583-1

Ebinu, J. A., Nsabiyera, V., Tim, M. O., Nkalubo, S. T., Ugen, M., Agona, A. J., & Talwana, H. L. (2016). Susceptibility to bruchids among common beans in Uganda. African Crop Science Journal, 24(3), 289. https://doi.org/10.4314/acsj.v24i3.6

Effowe, T., Amevoin, K., Nuto, Y., Mondedji, D., & Glitho, I. (2010). Reproductive capacities and development of a seed bruchid beetle, Acanthoscelides macrophthalmus, a potential host for the mass rearing of the parasitoid, Dinarmus basalis. Journal of Insect Science, 10(129), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1673/031.010.12901

FAO. (2014). Population growth, Urbanization and ageing. In The future of food and agriculture: trends and challenges. (Vol. 4, Issue 4). www.fao.org/publications%0Ahttp://www.fao.org/3/a-i6583e.pdf%0Ahttp://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/825826-1111044795683/20424536/Ag_ed_Africa.pdf%0Awww.fao.org/cfs%0Ahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4356839%0Ahttps://ediss.uni-goettingen.de/bitstream/han

FAO. (2018). Phaseolus beans Post- Harvest Operations. In Post-harvest Compendium. https://doi.org/10.1201/b22282-13

FAO. (2020). Statistical Year book. In World food and agriculture. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1329en

FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, & WHO. (2021). The state of food Security and Nutrition in the World. In Transforming food systems for food security, improved nutrition and affordable helathy diets for all. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb5409en

FAO, WFP, & IFAD. (2019). Food loss analysis : causes and solutions – The Republic of Uganda.

Govindan, K., Geethanjali, S., Douressamy, S., Pandiyan, M., & Brundha, G. (2020). Botanicals as Eco-Friendly Biorational Alternatives of Bio Insecticide against Callosobruchus Maculatus (F.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) Stored. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 9(6), 961–976. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.906.121

Gupta, K. K., Aneja, K. R., & Rana, D. (2016). Current status of cow dung as a bioresource for sustainable development. Bioresources and Bioprocessing, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40643-016-0105-9

Hamani, S., & Medjdoub-Bensaad, F. (2015). Biological cycle and populations dynamics of bean weevil Bruchus rufimanus ( Coleoptera : Bruchinae ) on two parcels : Vicia faba major ( Seville ) and Vicia faba minor ( Field bean ) in the region of Haizer ( Bouira , Algeria). International Journal of Geology, Agriculture and E, 3(2), 33–37.

Hayat, I., Ahmad, A., Masud, T., Ahmed, A., & Bashir, S. (2011). Nutritional and Health Perspectives of Beans Nutritional and Health Perspectives of Beans ( Phaseolus vulgaris L .): January 2015, 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2011.596639

Hosfield, G. L. (2001). Seed Coat Color in Phaseolus vulgaris L. : Its Chemistry and Associated Health Related Benefits. In Annual report of the Bean Improvement Cooperative (Vol. 44, Issue 1936). MI48824-1325

Johnson D.W. & Townsend L. H. (2016). Controlling Insects in Stored Grain | Entomology. In College of Agriculture, Food and Environment (ENTFACT-145). https://entomology.ca.uky.edu/ef145

Kembabazi, R. (2019). Evaluating the Efficacy of Ash Source and Ash Particle Size in controlling infection of bean bruchid (Acanthoscelides obtectus) in stored beans (phaseolus vulgaris). MAKERERE UNIVERSITY.

Keyser, H. H., & Li, F. (1992). Potential for increasing biological nitrogen fixation in soybean. Plant and Soil, 141(1–2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00011313

Kilama, A. (2021). Ethnobotanical survey of plants used in the production of stored beans against bean weevils in Nwoya district, Northern Uganda. Gulu Universty.

Kilimo, T., & UNDP. (2012). Development of Inclusive Markets in Agriculture and Trade ( DIMAT ). The Nature and Markets of Bean Value Chains in Uganda., 1–48. http://www.undp.org/content/dam/uganda/docs/UNDPUg_ PovRed_Value Chain Analysis Report Honey 2013 Report.pdf

Kingsolver Jm. (2004). Handbook of the Bruchidae of the United States and C anada. In Handbook of the Bruchidae of the United States and Canada (Vol. 2). United states AGRICULTURAL Research Service.

Kotue, T. C., Marlyne Josephine, M., Wirba, L. Y., Amelene, S. R. H., Nkenmeni, D. C., Kwuimgoin, Djote, W. N. B., Kansci, G., Fokou, E., & Fokam, D. P. (2018). Nutritional properties and nutrients chemical analysis of common beans seed. 3(2), 41–47. https://doi.org/10.15406/mojbm.2018.03.00074

Kumar, D., & Kalita, P. (2017). Reducing postharvest losses during storage of grain crops to strengthen food security in developing countries. Foods, 6(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6010008

Larson, A. O. (1938). The Bean weevil and the Southern cowpea weevil in Californias (No. 593; Issue 593).

Lukas, K. (2018). Maize markets in Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) in the Context of Climate Change. In The State of Agricultural Commodity Markets (SOCO) Background Paper. http://www.fao.org/3/CA2155EN/ca2155en.pdf

MAFAP. (2013). Review of food and agricultural policies in Uganda. MAFAP Country Report Series, 10(1), 65–74. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4675e.pdf

Mesele, T., Dibaba, K., & Mendesil, E. (2019). Farmers’ Perceptions of Mexican Bean Weevil, Zabrotes subfasciatus (Boheman), and Pest Management Practices in Southern Ethiopia. Advances in Agriculture, 2019, 1–10.

Mugisha-Kamatenesi, M., Deng, A. L., Ogendo, J. O., Omolo, E. O., Mihale, M. J., Otim, M., Buyungo, J. P., & Bett, P. K. (2008). Indigenous knowledge of field insect pests and their management around lake Victoria basin in Uganda. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 2(8), 342–348. http://www.academicjournals.org/AJest

Mwanauta, R. W., Mtei, K. M., & Ndakidemi, P. A. (2015). Potential of Controlling Common Bean Insect Pests (Bean Stem Maggot (Ophiomyia phaseoli), Ootheca (Ootheca bennigseni) and Aphids (Aphis fabae)) Using Agronomic, Biological and Botanical Practices i. Agricultural Sciences, 06(05), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.65048

Myers, J. R., & Kmiecik, K. (2017). Common Bean: Economic Importance and Relevance to Biological Science Research. 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63526-2_1

Ndakidemi, P. A., & Mbega, E. R. (2017). Botanical Pesticides in Management of Common Bean Pests : Importance and Possibilities for Adoption by Small-scale Farmers in Africa. Journal of Applied Life Science I Nternational, 12(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.9734/JALSI/2017/32503

Ngegba, P. M., Cui, G., Khalid, M. Z., & Zhong, G. (2022). Use of Botanical Pesticides in Agriculture as an Alternative to Synthetic Pesticides. Agriculture (Switzerland), 12(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12050600

Nyamweha, B. R., Gorret, K., & Ronald, N. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of cow dung ash and cow urine against bean bruchid beetles. Mountain of the Moon University.

Oosthuizen, M. J. (1935). The Effect of High Temperature on the Confused Flour Beetle – Marthinus Jacobus Oosthuizen – Google Books (107, Issue May).

Paneru, R. B., & Shivakoti, G. P. (1970). Use of Botanicals for the Management of Pulse Beetle (Callosobruchus maculatus F.) in Lentil. Nepal Agriculture Research Journal, 4(1989), 27–30. https://doi.org/10.3126/narj.v4i0.4860

Rosulu, H. O., Oni, M. O., I., O. T., & A, A. R. (2022). Efficacy of Chilli Pepper Capsicum frutescens (L.) for the Control and Management of Cowpea Weevil Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) Infesting Cowpea Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp in Storage Environment. East African Scholars Journal of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 5(2), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.36349/easjals.2022.v05i02.003

Rudhra, A., Charyulu, B., & Chakravarthula, N. (2022). Bayesian Approach for the Estimation of Missing Responses in Randomized Block Design. 20(January), 227–232.

Sarikarin, N., Srinives, P., Kaveeta, R., & Saksoong, P. (1999). Effect of Seed Texture Layer on Bruchid Infestation in Mungbean Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek. ScienceAsia, 25(4), 203–206. https://doi.org/10.2306/scienceasia1513-1874.1999.25.203

Shepard. (1947). Insects infesting stored grain and seeds. In Minnesota Bulletin (No. 340; Issue June).

Shiferaw. (2020). Common Bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L .) and the Bean Bruchid ( Zabrotes subfasciatus ): A Review. International Journal of Research in Agriculture and Forestry, 7(11), 21–31.

Silva, J. D. costa, Filho, J. E. G., Medeeiros, W. R., Neto, J. S. da silva, Franca, S. M. de, & Silva, P. R. R. (2018). Bean weevil biology in different hosts. Amazonian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 61, 2016–2019.

Soniia, D., Roger, K., & Sarah, K. (1999). Assessing the impact of bush bean varieties on poverty reduction in sub-Saharan Africa: evidence from Uganda. CIAT, Pan African Bean Research Alliance, 31, 21-pp.

Tabu, D., Selvaraj, T., Singh, S. K., & Mulugeta, N. (2012). Management of Adzuki bean beetle (Callosobruchus chinensis L.) using some botanicals, inert materials and edible oils in stored chickpea. Journal of Agricultural Technology, 8(3), 881–902.

Thukur, D. R. (2012). Taxonomy, distribution and pest status of indian biotypes of Acanthoscelides obtectus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Bruchinae) -A new record. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 44(1), 189–195.

2019. (2019). World Population Prospects. In Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Population Prospects 2019. (Issue 141). UN. https://population.un.org/wpp/Graphs/1_Demographic Profiles/Romania.pdf%0Ahttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12283219

Yeswanth. (2021). Prospects of plant extracts in progressive agriculture : A Review. 9(5), 142–154.

Zamindar, N., Baghekhandan, M. S., Nasirpour, A., & Sheikhzeinoddin, M. (2013). Effect of line , soaking and cooking time on water absorption , texture and splitting of red kidney beans. 50, 108–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0234-2

APPENDIX

Table I: Proposed Budget for research as of September 2022

Table II: Proposed work plan for research

Table III: Justifying study design for the experiment

Data collection sheet (chili pepper alone) – A

Data collection sheet (chili pepper alone) – B

Data collection sheet for the combination of chili paper parts – Table A

Data collection sheet for the combination of chili paper parts – Table B

Data collection sheet (cow dung ash alone) – A

Data collection sheet (cow dung ash alone) – B

Data collection sheet for the combination of cow dung ash and chili pepper powder from leaves, roots, bark, and fruit – A

Data collection sheet for the combination of cow dung ash and chili pepper powder from leaves, roots, bark, and fruit – B