A study of the effects of storage methods on the quality of maize and household food security in Rungwe District, Tanzania.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A sample of 260 farm households that were randomly selected in Katumba ward, Rungwe district, Tanzania were studied for the effects of storage methods on the quality of maize grain and household food security using qualitative and quantitative methods.Maize storage problems, amounts of maize that farm households harvested and amounts of maize that farm households lost to pests per year, food security status and farm households' perceptions concerning their food security status were investigated using face -to -face semi -structured and structured interviews.Common storage methods that farm households used to store maize and the dietary importance of maize were investigated through interviews, seasonal calendars and the matrix for scoring and ranking.The quality of maize was investigated through conducting mycological analysis and through investigating levels of insect infestation using the incubation method on maize samples collected from a sub-sample of 130 farm households at harvest and after five months of storage period.It was found that farm households in Katumba ward preferred maize meal rather than other types of food that provide bulk such as rice and green bananas/plantains.Maize contributed 66.8 % -69.5 % of the total energy and 83 -90 % of the total protein required per day, and farm households stored maize using roof and sack storage methods.It was also found that 34.5 % of 2323 tonnes of maize that were harvested per annum in Katumba ward were lost to pests during storage.Fusarium, Diplodia, Aspergillus and Penicilliums species were identified as the main fungal pathogens that attacked stored maize.Sitophilus zeamais, Sitotroga cerealella and rodents were also identified as the main maize storage pests.About 25 % of the maize samples that were collected at harvest and 93 % of the maize samples that were collected from the same farm households after five months of storage were infested by either Sitophilus zeamais or Sitotroga cerealella or both.Maize samples from the two storage systems had an average number of 80 insect pests per 120 maize kernels (or 51 g of maize), amounting to 1569 insects per kg.The high levels of insect infestation reduced the amount of maize that could have been available to the farm households and subjected stored maize to fungal infections and subsequent contaminations, thus, rendering the farm households vulnerable to food insecurity.Furthermore, it was also found that most of the infestation of maize by insect pests and moulds in Katumba ward occurred during storage, and that farm households were not well informed concerning maize storage and xiv 5.3.8The farm households' rating of roof and sack storage methods with respect to their capacity to protect stored maize from insect pests, rodents and moulds .........
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».