Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-dwch4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-24T03:07:57.347Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Farmer Participatory Crop Improvement. II. Participatory Varietal Selection, a Case Study in India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

A. Joshi  and
J. R. Witcombe
A. Joshi
Affiliation:
Krishak Bharati Cooperative Indo British Rainfed Farming Project (KRIBP), Dahod, Gujarat, 389151, India
J. R. Witcombe*
Affiliation:
Centre for Arid Zone Studies, University of Wales Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW, UK
*
‡ Author to whom correspondence should be addressed
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Farmer participatory varietal selection (PVS) was used to identify farmer-acceptable cultivars of rice and chickpea. Farmers' requirements in new crop cultivars (varieties) were determined, a search was carried out for released and non-released cultivars that matched these needs, and they were tested in farmer-managed, participatory trials. Farmer-acceptable cultivars were found amongst released material, but not among the recommended material for the area. Lack of adoption is, therefore, because resource-poor farmers have not been recommended or exposed to the most appropriate cultivars under the existing system of varietal identification and popularization. Adoption rates of cultivars would be improved by increased farmer participation, the systematic testing in zonal trials of locally popular cultivars to define their domains properly, a more liberal release system, and a more open system of providing seeds of new cultivars to farmers.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , October 1996 , pp. 461 - 477
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Barah, B. S., Binswanger, H. P., Rana, B. S. & Rao, N. G. P. (1981). The use of risk aversion in plant breeding; concept and application. Euphytica 30:451–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binswanger, H. P. & Barah, B. C. (1980). Yield Risk, Risk Aversion, and Genotype Selection: Conceptual Issues and Approaches. ICRISAT Research Bulletin 3. Hyderabad: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics.Google Scholar
CRRI. (1992). The Miracle Rice Varieties of India. Cuttack-753 006, India: Central Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Chambers, R. (1989). Institutions and practical change. Reversals, institutions and change. In Farmer First, 181–195 (Eds Chambers, R., Pacey, A. and Thrupp, L. A.). London: Intermediate Technology Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maurya, D. M., Bottrall, A. & Farrington, J. (1988). Improved livelihoods, genetic diversity and farmers' participation: a strategy for rice-breeding in rainfed areas of India. Experimental Agriculture 24:311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. (1993). National Catalogue of Varieties Notified and Denotified Under Section-5 of Seeds Act 1966. New Delhi: Department of Agriculture and Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.Google Scholar
Roy, J. K. (1989). Green Revolution through High Yielding Rice Varieties from CRRI Cuttack. Cuttack-753006, Orissa, India: Central Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Tunwar, N. S., & Singh, S. V. (1985). Handbook on Cultivars. New Delhi, India: Central Seed Committee, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.Google Scholar
Witcombe, J. R. (1988). Estimates of stability for comparing varieties. Euphytica 39: 11–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witcombe, J. R., Joshi, A., Joshi, K. D. & Sthapit, B. R. (1996). Farmer participatory crop improvement. I.: Varietal selection and breeding methods and their impact on biodiversity. Experimental Agriculture 32: 453–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar