Agriculture policy research in Uganda gets $5 million grant

The Netherlands’s Government is investing $5 million to support a four-year research on policies seeking to improve agriculture productivity in Uganda.

The project dubbed Policy Action for Sustainable Intensification of Ugandan Cropping Systems will be hosted by the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture in Uganda, together with the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, Economic Policy Research Centre and the International Food Policy Research Institute.

The research will be carried out in south western highlands for Irish potatoes and Lake Kioga plains of eastern Uganda for rice. The two zones are characterised by high population pressure, small farm sizes of less than two hectares with no option for expansion, making traditional farming unsustainable.

IITA’s country repressive Piet Van Asten said the research aims to ensure that the evidence on constraints and opportunities for intensification of two cropping systems are gathered and communicated, zonal investment plans are prepared and owned by key stakeholders as well as actions are initiated for the removal of bottlenecks in national polices relevant to agricultural intensification.

“We believe that PASIC will generate vital knowledge and evidence for decision makers to plan public investments and attract responsible private entities,” Mr. Piet said.

Mr. Piet said PASIC will focus on major constraints hampering effective agriculture policy actions including fragmentation of the roles and mandates in the agriculture sector, largely due to establishment of several autonomous agencies in the agriculture ministry, insufficient funding, inadequate human resources, lengthy policy formulation and implementation as well as duplication of programmes.

The project will mainly target small holder farmers who have the capacity to intensify production through improved agronomic practices, market-oriented production or increased use of inputs.

Dutch Ambassador to Uganda Alphons Hennekens said the country’s improved agriculture productivity lies in the intensification of cropping systems by using fertilisers, improved seeds, good agronomic practices and attracting investors for buying farmers produce.

Uganda’s rice production currently stands at 250 metric tonnes per year despite of the high demand for the crop that has nearly doubled, said Agriculture Minister Tress Bucyanayandi, adding that Irish potato production has also remained low.

IITA is a Nigerian based non-profit agriculture organisation started in 1967,   working with other partners to enhance crop quality and productivity, reduce producer and consumer risks, and generate wealth from agriculture, with the ultimate goals of reducing hunger, malnutrition and poverty.

IITA's research-for-development focuses on addressing the development needs of tropical countries across Africa.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EAC now eyes promoting aquaculture even as fish in Lake Victoria surges

The East African Community is now eyeing at promoting aquaculture in the region to boost food security and export earnings even as fish in Lake Victoria starts to increase.

EAC’s Deputy Secretary General Jessica Eriyo said the secretariat is developing a programme that will encourage farmers in the region embrace fish farming.

“So far, we have brought together experts on aquaculture across the region and development partners including Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency to look at the opportunities, challenges and to come up with some measures to address those challenges,” Ms. Eriyo said.

Ms. Eriyo said the secretariat has met twice with the stakeholders to work on the programme expected to be rolled out next year.

Ms. Eriyo said the new progamme is expected to boost the region’s export fish earnings given that the demand for fish within and outside the region especially Europe continues to grow.

Aquaculture, which involves cultivating fresh water and saltwater populations of fish under controlled conditions as opposed to catching fish in the wild, is one of the world’s fastest growing sources of animal protein, projected to raise 33 percent over by 2020, to reach to 79 million tonnes, says Food and Agricultural Organisation report 2012 on the State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture.

EAC states exports most of its fish to Italy, Lebanon, Jordan, Belgium, Netherlands, United Arab Emirates, Spain, Greece, and France. Other importers includes; Turkey, China, Australia, Hong Kong, Egypt, and the United States of America.

Dr. Oliva Mkumbo, the programme's focal person at the Jinja –based Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation (LVFO) told The EastAfrican that whereas fishing sector in Lake Victoria is showing signs of recovery, a lot is still needed to curb illegal fishing especially of Nile Perch as well as promote aquaculture in the region.

 “There’s a sign of recovery but not that significant,” Dr. Mkumbo said, adding that not only illegal fishing is hampering the growth of the region’s fishing  sector  but also those using illegal fishing gears.

LVFO data shows that fish export earnings from three East African Countries-Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania- registered a 17 per cent growth in earnings in 2012 citing strict measure to curb illegal fishing and high prices at the international market.

 However, LVFO and fish exporters and exporters in the region could not state changes in prices on the international market due to continued price fluctuations on different markets.

The region exported 74,540 tonnes last year worth $340.7 million compared with 56, 040 tonnes worth $291 million exported in 2011.

In spite of the continued growth trend of the region’s fish export earnings between 1992 and 1998, the sector has since then undergone numerous challenges including illegal fishing and market shocks that have continued to affect the region’s export earnings.

For instance, the region’s fish export earnings declined from $ 130.6 million in 1998 to $ 122.7 million in 1999 when the European Union banned fresh fish imports from eastern Africa because of the cholera epidemic that hit Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania. The export volumes also declined from 61, 900 tonnes in 1998 to 49,600 tonnes in 1999.

And between 2008 and   2011, the regions export volumes as well as earnings also decline tremendously from 71.700 tonnes worth $ 323.4million to merely 56,000tonnes worth $ 291 million due to illegal fishing and the effects of the euro-crisis.

The effects of the 2008 global financial crisis led to a decline in demand for fish in Europe in as countries tried to put in measures to meet the rising cost of living.

This year, the total world’s fish production, according to FAO, is projected to reach over 160 million tonnes.

Fish production is projected to reach 161.2 million tonnes by the close of 2013, showing a 2.9 per cent growth compared with 2012 whereas the value of exports is expected to grow by two per cent to $ 130.8billion.

 

Low yields could force region to adopt GM crops

In spite of ongoing campaigns against growing genetically modified crops in East Africa, the effects of climate change, pests and diseases as well as rapid population growth could see farmers in the region embrace GM crops as soon as biotechnology laws are passed.

Scientists who gathered in Kampala on September 27 to mark 10 years of the existence of the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) said farmers in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Burundi must grow GM crops alongside their conventional crops if the region is to achieve food security.

AATF is a not-for-profit organisation that promotes public-private partnerships for access to and delivery of appropriate agricultural technologies for sustainable use by smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa.

Yonah Baguma, a principal research officer at the National Agricultural Research Organisation in Uganda said conventional crop breeding has proven unsuccessful in making crops to diseases and pests.

“We as scientists embarked on using biotechnology in developing resistant planting materials because conventional methods proved futile,” said Dr Baguma.

READ: East African scientists defend work on GMOs

Sterile crops

Dr Baguma added that some crops such as cassava and bananas are difficult to breed for resistance using conventional methods as they are sterile, and thus do not produce fruits.

So far, Uganda has approved and carried out field trials on banana to test black sigatoka disease resistance (2007-2009); two trials to evaluate Bacterium throngesis and roundup ready cotton (2009-2010); a trial to test cassava mosaic virus resistance (2009-2010); and two ongoing trials to test banana bio-fortified with vitamin A and iron, to test resistance to banana bacterial wilt.

READ: Ugandan scientists to start trials on GM potato for resistance against blight

The scientists are also carrying out confined field trials on GM maize to test their resistance to stem borer and drought as well as Irish potato to test resistance to Phytophthora infestans, the fungus that causes potato blight.

This puts Uganda at the helm of carrying out confined field trials on GM crops in different parts of the country.

Kenya is carrying out confined field trials on cassava to test for resistance against cassava mosaic virus, cotton for insect resistance and maize to test drought and insect resistance. The country’s scientists are also carrying out research on sweet potato for disease resistance as well as bio-fortified sorghum enhanced with vitamin A, zinc and iron.

Commercialisation

Kenya is working towards commercialising GM cotton by next year after successful field trials showed the crop’s ability to cushion farmers against high production costs. Uganda projects to commercialise the crop in 2017. Tanzania, Burundi and Rwanda are yet to start trials on GM crops.

The GM cotton variety is resistant to pests and diseases, which have contributed to low yields.

In Africa, only South Africa, Egypt, Burkina Faso and Sudan have commercialised GM crops, according to the Global Status of Commercialised Biotech/GM Crops: 2012 report released by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications.

Until 2008, South Africa was the only country in Africa that allowed the commercial cultivation of GM crops, such as maize, cotton and soybeans.

In the same year, Egypt started growing small quantities of GM maize, followed by Burkina Faso, which allowed GM cotton. Last year, Sudan allowed growing of GM cotton.

South Africa accounts for nearly all of the three million hectares of GM crop plantings in Africa, dwarfing the 129,000 hectares in a largely GM-free Europe but still a tiny fraction of the 170 million hectares of global GM crops.

Globally, more land in developing countries is under GM crops compared with industrialised countries, for the first time since the introduction of the technology two decades ago, the report said.

“Out of the 28 countries that planted GM crops in 2012, 20 were developing and eight were industrial countries, compared with 19 developing and 10 industrial countries in 2011,” said the report, signifying a major shift by farmers to growing GM crops.

Many African countries are currently at different stages of enacting biosafety legislation, ranging from functional, interim and “work-in-progress” national biosafety frameworks.

Uganda GMO maize trials shows promising results

Results from the ongoing confined trials in Uganda on genetically modified maize that is resistant to the stem-borer are having promising results with the transgenic lines planted early this year showing complete resistance to the pest.

Ugandan scientists introduced Bacillus Thuringiensis, a naturally occurring soil bacterium that protects crops against pests, to maize stock obtained from South Africa to create resistance to the devastating stalk-borers (Chilo partellus and Busseola fusca). The trials are part of a three-year research project under the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project that started in 2008.

WEMA is a sub-regional, public-private partnership project between the Nairobi-based African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) and national agro-research systems of five sub-Saharan African countries — Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique and South Africa.

Michael Otim, the principal project investigator at the National Crop Resources Research Institute, Namulonge, told The EastAfrican that all the eight lines of GM maize planted in the confined field trial at the foothill of Mt Rwenzori, western Uganda, have proved resistant to the pest compared with the 12 lines of non-GM maize.

Dr Otim said the next phase will involve a second trial at Namulonge in central Uganda.

Stalk-borers are a class of pest made up of a number of moth species that lay their eggs at night on the underside of emerging leaves of young maize plants.

The larvae, or caterpillars, that hatch from the eggs, quickly make their way inside the plant, where they feed on the crop undisturbed.

Scientists say stalk-borers in Uganda are currently rampant in Kasese, western Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania; causing at least 20 per cent crop loss for farmers every year.

Scientists say if the research on the GM maize proves successful in the subsequent trials, the crop could be commercialised in the country by 2017 subject to the enactment of the biotechnology law.

Commercial release

The National Biosafety Bill, which intends to introduce biotechnology seeds and allow commercial release of GM products from ongoing research into the market, is currently before parliament for approval.

Uganda’s trials on BT maize are being carried out in tandem with those for transgenic drought-resistant (DT) maize as well as stalk-borer resistance using conventional methods.

Kenya is also carrying out confined fields trials on the GM maize resistant to the pest at the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute.

Research on GM maize in Uganda comes at a time when some countries including South Africa are battling with the pest even after resorting to GM maize that is supposed to be resistant to it.

Last year, stalk-borer was discovered feeding on GM maize in South Africa even after farmers applied the refugee land strategy in managing the new generation of hard-to-kill pests.

Interview with Mark Lynas, Anti GM activist turned Pro-GM supporter.

 

The fear for consuming genetically modified foods in sub-Saharan Africa is being imported from abroad, Europe in particular. Billions of dollars are now going in funding NGO’s engaged in promoting fear and superstition about GM foods. ISAAC KHISA and STEVE MBOGO caught up with Mark Lynas during his tour in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania under the auspices of Open Forum of Agricultural Biotechnology to give lecturers on GM foods and here are the excerpts:



Mark Lynas

Presently many African countries do not allow growing of GM crops except South Africa, Burkina Faso, Egypt and now Sudan, citing lack of legal frameworks. What needs to be done to necessitate easy adoption of the GM crops?

 

There are two things that need to happen. One is that regulatory frameworks need to be established, like the Biosafety Bill now being considered by Parliament in Uganda. This would give the scientists the legal context they need to proceed with their important work, rather than being in a state of constant political uncertainty.

The second thing that needs to happen is for the general public to be better informed about the technology - all the lies about GM crops making you sterile, incorporating genes from pigs and so on need to be more aggressively confronted. People need to understand that these crops are identical to others except for the single genetic change which scientists are aiming for, such as resistance to diseases or drought. The misconceptions must be tackled.

There have been views by a section of people proposing the GM foods be identified with labelling as it is demanded by some countries in Europe. Do GM and non-GM foods differ in appearance or taste? What is your comment on this?

I visited the GMO cassava which is in field trials at National Crops Resources Research Institute in Namulonge - the cassava is identical to any other, except that it is much healthier because it seems to be successfully resisting the disease. People should go and see this for themselves. The same goes for the banana, although I cannot say for sure because you are not allowed to taste them yet! I ate some GMO papaya recently in the US and it was the nicest I have ever had - even better than the paw paw here in Uganda!

As to labelling, I think that would be completely unworkable here in Uganda, where 80 percent or more of food is sold in open air markets. Once the food is assessed as safe, people should just treat it like any other and stop listening to scare stories.

As you have clearly stated that they look and even taste better than organic crops, why have people especially in Sub Saharan African continued to fear consuming GM foods?

Because this fear is imported from abroad, Europe in particular. There are billions of dollars now going in funding to the NGOs which are promoting fear and superstition about GM foods. Being an NGO activist is a lucrative professional career choice, which can make more money than going into business. NGO people claim to be 'instant expert' and to be always included in major decisions as 'civil society'. I would question the legitimacy of many of these organisations. Also this is a great waste of talent, because there are real challenges that these NGOs should be focusing on - like protecting forests and biodiversity, reducing the terrible traffic pollution that is causing cancer and so on.

What are the likely consequences if developing countries failed to move faster and adopt the growing of GM crops?

Clearly GM crops are not the single solution. They may not even be the most important - farmers need to have irrigation, fertilisers and better roads so they can take surplus produce to market without it being spoiled and wasted. But if GM banana and cassava are prohibited, for example, then it is likely these crops will be lost from much of eastern and central Africa because of the bacterial and viral diseases that are affecting them - they simply will be wiped out, removing a major staple food source for tens of millions of people. There are no naturally resistant banana varieties to the bacterial wilt disease, so they will all die. This would clearly be very bad news for food security.

Over the years, you have been renowned anti-GM activists, an environmental writer, who even went ahead to form a movement against the GM crops. Why have you changed your mind now? Have you been bribed or what informed your decision?

I am always asked this because people want an excuse to try to attack me personally rather than to engage with the science or my arguments. I have never received any money from any company involved in the GM business, and I never will. My change of heart came about because I wanted to be a better science communicator and a better environmentalist - and you do not achieve that by fighting against scientific facts.

What should developing countries especially sub-Saharan Africa do given that there are so many controversies surrounding GM crops especially those proposing as well as those opposing it?

The controversy is fake. One, one side you have activists peddling lies and misinformation, which they get from the Internet or from their donors in Europe. On the other there are scientists who make very cautious statements because they want to stick to the facts. It is very much like climate change, where one side you have those who deny the science, and on the other people who try to assess the situation rationally.

Based on your research and having involved in GM issues for a longtime, do you think GM crops are the solution to food shortages in sub-Saharan Africa and is it the right time for Africa to resort to GMOs?

That is up to different African countries to decide. But I would suggest that their decisions would be better made on facts rather than on fiction. It would always be too simplistic to say that GM crops are "the solution", but all other things remaining equal, if you are in a drought and you have a drought-tolerant GM maize then you will likely get a better harvest. If you are in an area badly affected by cassava brown streak virus and you want to grow this crop for food security, you will be better off with a GM variety which is resistant to the disease. And so on for banana and the other crops which are being proposed.

The anti-GM activists, including yourself before you changed your mind have argued that GM crops have both health as well as environmental hazards. What is your take on this; what is your evidence to show that foods from GM crops are safe?

It is not 'my' evidence which is the issue - I am not a scientist. I have not personally tested these crops (except to eat GM foods in various countries without fear, of course) so I insist that people who are unsure should get their information from the experts rather than the activists. It is the same as if you maybe have an illness, and all of the doctors say you should have treatment, but a taxi driver says you should forget about it and take the chance. Who would you trust? Those who know what they are talking about because they have sufficient training or the uninformed person? On GM, the experts say it is completely safe: all the major relevant scientific institutions in the world have issued statements to that effect. Even so, you have to look at these things on a case by case basis - different techniques are used in different plants which could have different effects. That is why they are so extensively tested in field trials and so on before being released. But for the last 10 years with billions of people eating GM foods across the whole world, no-one has even had a headache - that is why this is a fake controversy. Food is food.

Could you comment on the issue that growing GM crops will enslave farmers in developing countries as they will be forced to buy seeds every planting season and hence creating markets for the multinational companies such as Monsanto and Syngenta. Is this what is likely to happen if farmers resort to growing GMO’s?

This is nonsense. It is another myth which will not die. The cassava which is being developed will be able to be propagated like any other, as will the banana. So once farmers have it, it will remain in their control. All this language about 'farmer enslavement' comes from activists who do not want African farmers to be able to access modern technology and romanticise the 'traditional' agriculture which is currently failing to feed people and leaving millions with malnutrition.

How do you look at the future of GM crops in Africa? Do you think growing GM crops is likely to speed up population growth in developing countries given that there will be enough food and the vicious cycle of food shortage continues?

I find the population growth argument abhorrent and immoral. You should always aim to feed people, having enough food is a human right. You should not keep people in near starvation to try to stop them having more children. Maybe we should just stop vaccination campaigns so that children all die before they can grow up? That would also reduce population growth. It would also be a crime against humanity.

Now that you are a supporter of GM crops, what is your view on those against the GM foods in Uganda and other developing countries?

I am not pro-GM, I am pro-choice. All the farmer leaders I have met in Uganda say they would like the choice to decide for themselves what to grow, and not be dictated to by foreign-sponsored activists. If they want to stay with the traditional seeds, then farmers have that right. No-one is going to come onto their farms and stop them saving their own seed. But the truth is they will then continue to have very low yields and to remain in food insecurity. With improved seeds (I am thinking even of hybrids, not necessarily GMO), yields of things like maize can be four times what you get from the traditional varieties. So farmers who want them also have that right. Africa very quickly adopted mobile phones and the internet, so the idea that places like Uganda are not "ready" for modern technology in agriculture is I think reactionary and patronising.

Who is Mark Lynas?

Mark Lynas is a British author, journalist and environmental activist who focus on climate change and GMOs. Formerly, he was against GM foods before changing to become pro-GM crops.

He is the author of several books on the subjects. In November 2009 Mark was appointed advisor on climate change to the President of the Maldives, Mohammed Nasheed, and was involved in the Maldives’ effort to be the first carbon neutral country on Earth by 2020, and its role in the international climate change process, until Nasheed was deposed in a military coup on 7 February 2012.

He is a frequent speaker around the world on climate change, biotechnology and nuclear power. He is a Visiting Research Associate at Oxford University’s School of Geography and the Environment, a member of the advisory board of the science advocacy group Sense About Science, and is a member of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Emerging Technologies, which produces an annual top 10 list of the technologies with most potential to change the way we all live. Ends

Asareca to start climate-smart agriculture in East Africa

 

The Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (Asareca), plans to rollout climate-smart agriculture projects in East Africa starting next year to cope with the effects of climate change on food security.

 

Speaking during a regional workshop on research and policy related to climate change adaptation in sub-Saharan Africa in Nairobi, Hezron Mogaka, manager of natural resources management at Asareca, said farmers in the region risk heavy losses in coming years if they are not assisted to cope with the new climatic trends.

 

“At the moment, our communities have their own traditional ways of dealing with climate change. However, given that it is changing so rapidly, the communities don’t have real mechanisms for adaptations and so the rate at which climate change is changing is faster compared with the rate of adaptation,” Dr Mogaka said.

 

Dr Mogaka said farmers in the region are incurring losses due to crop failure resulting from drought, landslides as well as loss of livestock in Kenya, Tanzania and some parts in Uganda.

 

Climate-smart agriculture, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, refers to the “agriculture that sustainably increases productivity, resilience, reduces or removes greenhouse gas emissions (mitigation), and enhances achievement of national food security and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)”

 

Whereas UN summit agreed in 2010 to limit the rise in global temperatures to 2 degrees by 2020, there are signs that it could even double, according to the Paris-based International Energy Agency —having a negative impact on not only crops and livestock production but also on the spread of pests and diseases.

 

Officials at Asareca say they plan to mobilise funds for the climate-smart agriculture projects starting next year across the region.

 

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the World Bank estimate the costs of adaptation at between $41 billion and $170 billion per year by 2030, globally.

 

Adaptation cost

 

In the agriculture sector alone, the annual costs of climate change adaptation required in developing world agriculture as estimated by the International Food Policy Research Institute at between $7 billion and $8 billion per year, while the UNFCCC estimates the costs of adapting agriculture to climate change to be from $11.3 billion to $12.6 billion per year by 2030.

 

The East African nations mainly depend on rain-fed agriculture with over 70 per cent of the population employed in the sector.

 

However, Dr Emma Liwenga, a climate change consultant, said despite extensive climate change adaptation research in the East African region, there is still little evidence regarding how the generated knowledge is made useful or integrated into the agriculture sector.

Uganda to start trials of Genetically Modified Irish Potato

Scientists in Uganda will soon start confined trials of genetically modified strains of Irish potato designed to be resistant to Phytophthora infestans, the fungus that causes potato blight, now devastating the crop in the west of the country.

Dr Andrew Kigundu of Kawanda Agricultural Research Laboratories told The EastAfrican that laboratory tests on the GM potato shows signs of resistance against the disease and it is now time to be transferred to the natural environment for further trials.

“Data from our lab experiments shows that a combination of R-genes from wild potatoes have different levels of resistance to the disease, leading to crop immunity,” said the lead scientist.

Seeking approval

Dr Kigundu added that, with assistance from their Kenyan counterpart, Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, the centre is now seeking approval from Uganda’s National Biosafety Committee to carry out confined field trials. He said two potato varieties, each with 12 lines, have so far been identified for confined field trials.

If approved, the late blight-resistant Irish potato will become the latest crop to undergo trials for the genetically engineered strains in Uganda, even as scientists in the country continue to differ over the proposed law to regulate production and commercialisation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The trials will be conducted at Kachwekano Zonal Agricultural Research and Development Institute in south-western Uganda.

The National Biosafety Bill, which intends to introduce biotechnology seeds and allow commercial release of GM products from ongoing research into the markets, is before parliament.

Uganda has already approved and carried out a field trial on banana to test black sigatoka disease resistance (2007-2009); two trials to evaluate Bacillus thuringiensis  (a naturally occurring soil  bacteria that protects crops against crop pests) and roundup ready cotton (2009-2010); a trial to test cassava mosaic virus resistance (2009-2010); and two ongoing trials to test banana bio-fortified with vitamin A and iron, and also testing resistance to banana bacterial wilt.

Though some of the studies on GM crops have been completed, the crops cannot be released for commercial production.

Causing losses

Abel Arinaitwe, a pathologist at the Kachwekano institute, said late blight is one of the major diseases of economic importance to potato production in Uganda, causing yield losses of 40 to 70 per cent.

Potato blight has rapidly progressed over the potato-growing areas of Kenya and Uganda since it was first reported in East Africa in 1941, according to CropLife Foundation. The disease is greatly affecting Irish potato production in south-western Uganda.

The initial symptom of blight is a rapidly spreading, watery rot of leaves, which soon collapse, shrivel and turn brown.

If unchecked

In humid weather, a fine white fungal growth may be seen around the edge of the lesions on the underside of the leaves.

If unchecked, the disease reaches the tubers, which develop a reddish-brown decay below the skin, firm at first but soon developing into a soft rot as the tissues are invaded by bacteria. Early attacks of blight may not be visible on tubers but any infected tubers will rot in store.

Uganda’s scientists to use phytoremediation in restoring Queen Elizabeth National Park

 

Uganda’s scientists plans to restore Queen Elizabeth National Park through planting trees deemed to be resistant to mineral pollutants with a view to maximise their potentials for phytoremediation. 

Phytoremediation is the direct use of green plants and their associated micro-organisms to stabilise or reduce contamination with organic and inorganic pollutants in soils, sledges, sediments, surface water, or ground water. 

The Lead Researcher, Prof Hannington Oryem-Origa said tree species; Eucalyptus grandis and two legume species; Leucaena glauca and Cassia siamea, are currently under confined trials in the copper tailings dams in Kilembe and in the pyrite trail in Queen Elizabeth National Park both in Kasese District, Western Uganda. 

Eucalyptus trees under confined trials in Queen Elizabeth National Park.

 “These two areas have been contaminated by heavy metals as a result of dumping of wastes generated from the mining of copper from Kilembe Mines between 1956 and 1982. The estimated amount of pollutants dumped in Kilembe area is about 15 million metric tonnes,” Prof Oryem-Origa said.

 Prof Oryem-Origa said conditions in the tailings dams in Kilembe area and the pyrite trail in Queen Elizabeth National Park are acidic and inhibit the growth of ordinary plants.

 The pyrite materials originally consisted of metal suphides which were oxidized resulting in the production of sulphuric acid. The acidic pyrite was then spread into the Park area by storm water and at one time covering a total area of about 150 hectares within Queen Elizabeth National Park, threatening the survival of biodiversity.

 Queen Elizabeth National Park covers 1978 square kilometres, with its position providing a magnificent view of the rift valley floor that occupies Lakes Edward and Gorge.

  The Park is believed to have the highest biodiversity ratings in country with over 500 different bird species and about 100 mammal species.

 According to Uganda Wildlife Authority, Queen Elizabeth National Park is the country’s third highest revenue earner after Bwindi Impenetrable National Park and Murchison Falls National Park in Uganda.

Prof Oryem-Origa said their interest was to use trees of economic value to people which could be periodically harvested and transported away from the polluted habitats while gradually removing the pollutants.

 In addition to growing fast, these tree species can also send deep roots into the soil and extract heavy metals from the polluted habitat as they grow because they exhibit some degree of tolerance or resistance to acidity and drought.

 “It is in the process of repeated tree harvesting that the trees will be taking away heavy metals that include lead, cadmium, copper, cobalt, nickel, manganese and iron among others from the polluted soil and ultimately leading to its restoration to the original state,” Prof Oryem-Origa said.

A section of pyrite trail in Queen Elizabeth National Park in Uganda

 Prof Oryem-Origa added that there will also be an element of phytostabilisation of the polluted soils-a subset of phytoremediation- where growing trees reduce heavy metal mobility by root adsorption and precipitation resulting from growing the pollutant resistant trees.

 Prof Oryem-Origa said if the new technology succeeds, then the planted tree in Queen Elizabeth conservation area will be cut down and completely removed to permit the indigenous vegetation to regenerate in the restored areas.

 The scientists also expect to use the same technology in restoring vegetation in other mineral polluted environments countrywide.

 Though the new development is good news for the restoration of the Park, Uganda Wildlife Authority believes that the selected tree species may not be allowed in the park at the moment as they seem to be exotic.

 “While the development is a good initiative, I am only worried that the proposed plant species seem to all be exotic species and would not be accepted inside the national park,”  said Mr. Charles Tumwesigye, a chief conservation manager at UWA. 

Mr. Tumwesigye said the scientists need to identify indigenous plant species that are resistant to mineral pollutants and they would be happy to work with them.

 In the early 2000s, scientists successfully applied shallow rooted plant species like Spear Grass (Imperata cylindrica), Barmuda Grass or Common Star Grass (Cynodon dactylon), Kodo Grass (Paspalum scrobiculatum), Bulrush millet (Typha latifolia) and Copper ferns in the pyrite trail in Queen Elizabeth National Park to restore the natural vegetation.

 However, the tested shallow-rooted plants improved only shallow depths of the soil in the pyrite trail.

 It is on this basis that Uganda’s scientists have embarked on new technology that could possibly help restore the polluted soil permanently.

 The project is being conducted by Makerere University in collaboration with Sorderton University in Sweden.

 

Uganda, Kenya set to release drought tolerant maize varieties for the market

Farmers in Kenya and Uganda could soon start growing conventional drought-tolerant maize once they are approved for commercialisation by the respective regulatory authorities.

This follows several advanced field trials that have been held to test the non-GM maize varieties in Embu, Machakos, Naivasha, and Kakamega in Kenya and Kasese in Uganda.

Counter the effects
Dr Sylvester Oikeh, the project manager, Water Efficient Maize for Africa (Wema) , said one line of the crop is at the final stage of approval and more than 25 others are at different stages of the national performance trials in Kenya compared with eight lines in Uganda.

“The varieties have been undergoing field trials in various parts of Kenya since 2009 and will be available to farmers during the 2013 short-rains season subject to final approvals from the Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service,” he said.

He added that like many other countries in Africa, Kenya and Uganda are affected by drought conditions and thus the new maize varieties will help farmers counter the effects that affect their yields.
Maize is the most widely grown staple crop in East Africa.

It is also an important animal feed. According to the National Agricultural Research Organisation (Naro), per capita total maize consumption ranges from 28 kilogrammes a year in Uganda to 125 kilogrammes a year in Kenya.

However, the yields remain low, fluctuating around 1.5 tonnes per hectare in Uganda and 2.3 tonnes per hectare in Kenya, due to a combination of factors including drought, pests and diseases.

Made progress
Dr Godfrey Asea, team leader of Cereals Programme at the National Crops Resources Research Institute, said the drought-tolerant maize in Uganda will either be released to farmers at the end of this year or early next year.

“So far, we have made progress because we now have a number of crops (maize) in the pipeline for release of about eight hybrids lines. They are in the final stages of testing and we hope that the exercise will be completed this year and apply for the release either late this year or early next year,” Dr Asea said.

Release varieties
He added that the release of the new maize variety to the farmers will solve the effects of drought that affects the crops during flowering. Uganda’s Agriculture Seeds and Plant Act requires research institutions to apply for a release of planting materials to the National Plant Variety Committee.

===============================
ABOUT WEMA

The Water Efficient Maize for Africa project aims to address effects of drought and insect pressure in a cost-effective way for smallholder farmers. The goal is to make these varieties available royalty-free through seed companies, with African Agricultural Technology Foundation as the coordinating agency.

CIMMYT and Monsanto are the other partners, working with the Kari and Naro. Kenya produces about 2.7m tonnes per year compared to Uganda’s 1.9m tonnes

The development of drought tolerant maize by WEMA is also being implemented in Tanzania, Mozambique and South Africa