Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 83, Issue 1, pp 75–87 | Cite as

Certification of agroforestry tree germplasm in Southern Africa: opportunities and challenges

  • B. I. Nyoka
  • O. C. Ajayi
  • F. K. Akinnifesi
  • T. Chanyenga
  • S. A. Mng’omba
  • G. Sileshi
  • R. Jamnadass
  • T. Madhibha
Article

Abstract

The lack of high quality agroforestry tree germplasm has long been recognized as one of the major challenges to widespread adoption of agroforestry in Southern Africa. Productivity levels realized in operational scale plantings are far less than those demonstrated in research and this has been partly blamed on the use of germplasm of unknown quality and low productivity potential. The lack of high quality germplasm is attributable to the absence of regulations to govern its production in the countries promoting agroforestry. Most of the agroforestry tree germplasm is sold or distributed without regard to its genetic, physiological and physical quality. Given these challenges, in this paper, we reviewed crop seed certification in general and tree germplasm certification in the USA, Europe, India, Southern Africa and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with a view to find potential similarities with agroforestry tree germplasm. Only three countries in sub-Saharan Africa (Burkina Faso, Madagascar and Rwanda) were found to have tree germplasm certification: the OECD Forest Seed and Plant certification scheme. From the review, it is possible to establish agroforestry tree germplasm quality control systems, more so in countries that already have tree seed centres and tree seed regulations. A simple agroforestry tree germplasm certification scheme, based on the FAOs Quality Declared Seed (QDS) with truth-in-labelling is recommended. Three germplasm categories (audit, select and genetically improved) are recommended as a start. Furthermore, countries will need to develop new or amend existing agricultural seed policies and regulations to include agroforestry tree germplasm certification under QDS. Finally, germplasm quality standards for the selected agroforestry trees species in the respective countries will need to be developed.

Keywords

Germplasm quality Certification Quality Declared Seed Truth-in-labelling 

References

  1. Ackzell L (2002) On the doorstop to new legislation on forest reproductive material: policy framework and legislation on trade with forest reproductive material. For Genet Resour 30:52–53Google Scholar
  2. Akinnifesi FK, Chilanga TG, Mkonda A, Kwesiga F, Maghembe JA (2002) Domestication of Uapaca kirkiana in Southern Africa: preliminary results of screening provenances in Malawi and Zambia. In: Rao MR, Kwesiga FR (eds) Proceedings of the regional agroforestry conference on agroforestry impacts on livelihoods in Southern Africa: putting research into practice. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Nairobi, pp 85–92Google Scholar
  3. Akinnifesi FK, Sileshi G, Mkonda A, Ajayi OC, Mhango J, Chilanga T (2008) Germplasm supply, propagation and nursery management of Miombo fruit trees. In: Akinnifesi FK, Leakey RRB, Ajayi OC, Sileshi G, Tchoundjeu Z, Matakala P, Kwesiga FR (eds) Indigenous fruit trees in the tropics: domestication, utilisation and commercialisation. CABI International, Wallingford, pp 341–368Google Scholar
  4. Akinnifesi FK, Ajayi OC, Sileshi G, Chirwa PW, Chianu J (2010) Fertilizer trees for sustainable food security in the maize-based production systems of East and Southern Africa: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 30(3):615–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andreasen L, Boland D (1996) Getting better tree germplasm into the hands of smallholder farmers in developing countries—some lessons from agriculture. Forest Genetic Resources No. 24. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnes RD (1984) A multiple population breeding strategy for Zimbabwe. In: Barnes RD, Gibson GL (eds) Provenance and genetic improvement strategies in tropical forest trees. Commonwealth Forestry Institute, Oxford and Forest Research Centre, Harare, pp 619–632Google Scholar
  7. Barnes RD, Nyoka BI, Gapare WJ (1997) The Zimbabwe Forest Genetics Programme, part I: philosophy, strategies, principles, procedures and techniques. Forestry Commission, HarareGoogle Scholar
  8. Barnes RD, Marunda CT, Maruzane D, Zirobwa M (1999) African Acacias: genetic evaluation: Phase II. Final Report of the DFID Forestry Research Scheme R6550. Oxford Forestry Institute and Zimbabwe Forestry CommissionGoogle Scholar
  9. Bray RA, Ibrahim T, Palmer B, Schlink AC (1993) Yield and quality of Gliricidia accessions at two sites in the tropics. Trop Grassl 27:30–36Google Scholar
  10. Cobbina J, Atta-Krah AN (1992) Forage productivity of Gliricidia accessions on tropical alfisol. Trop Grassl 26:248–254Google Scholar
  11. Duguma B, Mollet M (1997) Provenance evaluation of Calliandra calothyrsus Meissner in the humid lowlands of Cameroon. Agrofor Syst 37:45–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. EU (2000) Council Directive 1999/105/EC of 22 December 1999 on the marketing of forest reproductive material. Off J Eur Commun, 15.1.2000 L 11/17. 24 p. Available on: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2000:011:0017:0040:EN:PDF
  13. FAO (2006) Quality declared seed system. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations Plant Production and Protection Paper No. 185. 245 p. Available on: http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0503e/a0503e00.htm
  14. Gopal M, Pattanath PG (1979) Certification of forest reproductive material in India—revised scheme, 1979. Coordinator Indo-Danish Project on Seed procurement and Tree Improvement, Saifabad Hyderabad, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  15. Granqvist B (2009) Is Quality declared seed production an effective and sustainable way to address Seed and Food Security in Africa? http://knowledge.cta.int/en/Dossiers/Demanding-Innovation/Demanding-Innovation/Articles/. Accessed Jan 2011
  16. Graudal L, Lillesø J-PB (2007) Experiences and future prospects for tree seed supply in agricultural development support—based on lessons learnt in Danida supported programmes 1965–2005. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  17. Hackleman JC, Scott WO (1990) A history of seed certification in the United States and Canada. Association of Official Seed Certification Agencies, RaleighGoogle Scholar
  18. Hove L, Chakoma C, Nyathi P (1999) The potential of tree legume leaves as supplements in diets for ruminants in Zimbabwe. In: Holness DH (ed), Proceedings of a joint ZSAP/FAO workshop held in Harare, 25–27 Oct 1999Google Scholar
  19. Karachi M, Lema N, Sabas E, Shirima D (1994) Growth, biomass production and plant mortality of seven Sesbania sesban var. nubica and three Sesbania macrantha accessions at Tumbi, Tanzania. Forest Ecol Manag 64(2–3):153–159Google Scholar
  20. Kindt R, Lillesø J-PB, Mbora A, Muriuki J, Wambugu C, Frost W, Beniest J, Aithal A, Awimbo J, Rao S, Holding-Anyonge C (2006) Tree seeds for farmers: a toolkit and reference source. World Agroforestry Centre, NairobiGoogle Scholar
  21. Koskela J, Vinceti B, Dvorak W, Bush D, Dawson I, Loo J, Kjaer ED, Navarro C, Padolina C, Bordács S, Jamnadass R, Graudal L, Ramamonjisoa L (2010) The use and exchange of forest genetic resources for food and agriculture. Background Study Paper No. 44. Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  22. Kwesiga F (1994) Performance of fifteen provenances of Gliricidia sepium in eastern Zambia. For Ecol Manag 64:161–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kwesiga F, Akinnifesi FK, Mafongoya PL, McDermott MH, Agumya A (2003) Agroforestry research and development in Southern Africa during the 1990s: review and challenges ahead. Agrofor Syst 59:173–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lal P, Dogra AS, Dabral SL (2008) Need for an institutional and regulatory mechanism for certification of forest reproductive material. Study commissioned by the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE)Google Scholar
  25. Lewis V, Mulvany PM (1997) A typology of community seed banks. NRI Project A0595. Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, KentGoogle Scholar
  26. Lillesø J-PB (2007) Workshop on agroforestry tree seeds for farmers. Forest and landscape Denmark. Working Paper No. 19. University of Copenhagen, HørsholmGoogle Scholar
  27. Mafongoya PL, Chintu R, Chirwa TS, Matibini J, Chikale S (2003) Tephrosia species and provenances for improved fallows in Southern Africa. Agrofor Syst 59:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mangold RD, Bonner FT (2008) Certification of tree seeds and other woody plant materials. In: Bonner FT, Karrfalt RP (eds) The woody plant seed manual, Agriculture Handbook 727, Chapter 6. USDA Forest Service, Washington, pp 117–124Google Scholar
  29. Matimati I, Maasdorp BV, Hove L (2009) On-farm productivity of Acacia angustissima, Calliandra calothyrsus and Leucaena leucocephala in a subhumid area in Zimbabwe. Afr J Range Forage Sci 26(2):75–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mkonda A, Akinnifesi FK, Swai R, Kadzere I, Kwesiga FR, Maghembe JM, Saka J, Lungu S, Mhango J (2002) Towards domestication of ‘wild orange’ Strychnos cocculoides in Southern Africa: a synthesis of research and development efforts. In: Rao MR, Kwesiga FR (eds) Proceedings of the regional agroforestry conference on agroforestry impacts on livelihoods in Southern Africa: putting research into practice. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Nairobi, pp 67–76Google Scholar
  31. Nanson A (2001) The New OECD Scheme for the Certification of Forest Reproductive Materials. Silvae Genet 50(5/6):181–187Google Scholar
  32. NASSP (2005) NAMIBIA: Draft Seed Policy. National Agricultural Support Services Programme (NASSP) Report No. x/2003. Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Forestry, Government of Namibia, WindhoekGoogle Scholar
  33. Nyoka BI, Mng’omba SA, Akinnifesi FK, Ajayi OC, Sileshi G, Jamnadass R (2011) Agroforestry tree seed production and supply systems in Malawi. Small-Scale For. doi:10.1007/s11842-011-9159-x
  34. OECD (2009) Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Scheme for the Certification of Forest Reproductive Material Moving in International Trade. OECD Forest Seed and Plant Scheme. Established by the Council Decision C(2007)69 of 20 June 2007 and subsequently amended by the Council Decisions C(2008)120, C(2008)184, C(2008)185, C(2008)186Google Scholar
  35. Ramadhani T, Otsyina R, Franzel S (2002) Improving household incomes and reducing deforestation using rotational woodlots in Tabora district, Tanzania. Agric Ecosyst Environ 89:229–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rudolf PO (1974) Tree-seed marketing controls. In: Schopmeyer CS (ed) Technical Coordinator. Agriculture Handbook No. 450. USDA Forest Service, Washington, pp 153–166Google Scholar
  37. SADC SSN (2008) Technical agreements on harmonization of seed regulations in the SADC region. Southern Africa Development Community Seed Security Network. SADC, GaboroneGoogle Scholar
  38. Schrumpf BJ, Pfeifer KM (1993) Certification of forest reproductive materials. Proceedings, Northwest Seed Orchard Managers Association 1992/1993 Winter Workshop, Wilsonville, 27–28 Jan 1993Google Scholar
  39. Venkatesan V (1994) Seed systems in sub-Saharan Africa: issues and options. Discussion Paper No. 266. Technical Department, Africa Region. World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  40. Wanyancha JM, Mills WR, Gwaze DP (1994) Genetic variation in Acacia albida and its agroforestry potential in Zimbabwe. For Ecol Manag 64(2/3):127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. I. Nyoka
    • 1
  • O. C. Ajayi
    • 1
  • F. K. Akinnifesi
    • 1
  • T. Chanyenga
    • 2
  • S. A. Mng’omba
    • 1
  • G. Sileshi
    • 1
  • R. Jamnadass
    • 3
  • T. Madhibha
    • 4
  1. 1.World Agroforestry Centre, ICRAF-Southern Africa Regional ProgrammeLilongweMalawi
  2. 2.Forest Research Institute of MalawiZombaMalawi
  3. 3.World Agroforestry CentreNairobiKenya
  4. 4.Forest Research Centre, Forestry CommissionHarareZimbabwe

Personalised recommendations