Author
Listed:
- Dan Quee
- Joseph Sarkodie-Addo
- Stephanie Duku
- Alusaine Samura
- Abdul Conteh
- Jenneh Bebeley
- Janatu Sesay
Abstract
A study on economic evaluation of some weed management strategies and herbicide residues analysis on roots of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) was conducted during 2014 and 2015 cropping season in Kumasi, Ghana. Cost and benefits were computed from the use of two manual weedings (hoeing and cutlassing), two pre-emergence herbicides (Butachlor 60% EC and Terbulor 500 EC) with two-supplemenatary hoe weeding, weed-free and weedy check. These were evaluated using two varieties of cassava, Ampong (Early branching) and Dokuduade (Late branching). The treatment was a factorial laid out in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replicates. Partial farm budgeting were used for economic analysis of data and herbicide residues analysis in roots of cassava were determined using Gas Chromatography-Electron Capture Detector (GC-ECD). Results showed that Terbulor 500 EC with two supplementary hoe weeding was more economical, profitable and beneficial than those other treatments applied in the production of cassava. In addition, the average concentration of Terbulor 500 EC (0.003 mg/kg) and Butachlor 60% EC (0.001 mg/kg) residues in roots of cassava varieties were below the maximum residue limit (MRL) of 0.01 mg/kg set by Ghana Standards Authority for cassava. In conclusion, Terbulor 500 EC with two supplementary hoe weeding was more effective and financially rewarding and both herbicides had lower residual effects on cassava.
Suggested Citation
Dan Quee & Joseph Sarkodie-Addo & Stephanie Duku & Alusaine Samura & Abdul Conteh & Jenneh Bebeley & Janatu Sesay, 2016.
"Economic Evaluation of Weed Control and Herbicide Residues on Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) in Ghana,"
Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(7), pages 1-47, June.
Handle:
RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:8:y:2016:i:7:p:47
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
JEL classification:
- R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
- Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:8:y:2016:i:7:p:47. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.