See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/257424027

Post-harvest damage to stored grain by rodents in village environments in

Laos

Article  in  International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation · August 2013

DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2012.12.018

CITATIONS READS

14 272

3 authors, including:

Peter Brown
The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
94 PUBLICATIONS   1,850 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Peter Brown on 28 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 82 (2013) 104e109

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ibiod

Post-harvest damage to stored grain by rodents in village

environments in Laos
Peter R. Brown a, *, Alex McWilliam b, Khamouane Khamphoukeo c
a
CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
b
Wildlife Conservation Society, Lao People’s Democratic Republic
c
National Agricultural and Forestry Research Institute, Vientiane, Lao People’s Democratic Republic

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Rodents can cause significant damage to grain stores in developing countries, affecting food security and
Received 4 October 2012 income of small-holder farmers. This study assessed a method to measure the losses caused by rodents to
Accepted 20 December 2012 grain stores in rural upland areas of Laos, where black rats, Rattus rattus, are the main rodent pest species.
Available online
Known amounts of grain were put into metal bowls, placed inside farmer grain stores, and monitored
every 2 wk after harvest for a dry and wet season rice crop. There were 2.5e3.0 droppings and 1.4e2.2
Keywords:
hairs per 100-g sample. There was a positive relationship between the number of fecal droppings and
Black rat
hairs from within the bowls and from samples from the grain stores. Weight loss was 10.3% in the dry
Grain store
Laos
season and 7.4% in the wet season. There was a weak but positive relationship between fecal droppings
Post-harvest losses and weight loss. It was not possible to ascribe rodent damage to environmental or hygiene conditions.
Rattus rattus Loss by rodents was calculated at 117 kg, which could feed a Lao household for 1.5 months. Improve-
Rice ments in the methodology are needed to control for interference with the bowls. An experimental
approach is suggested to examine potential factors that might influence rodent damage.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction wasted time and effort by producers in growing, maintaining, and

Farmers in developed and developing countries expend a great
deal of effort in growing crops for their own household consump-
tion or for income generation, only for the crops to be damaged by
pests. Thus there is a need to reduce the losses caused by pests
during the growth of a crop but also after the crop has been har-
vested, to increase food security and household income. Pre-
harvest losses due to weeds, diseases, and insects have received
the majority of attention in terms of scientific research and
extension activities, whereas post-harvest losses have received
comparatively little attention. Post-harvest losses by rodent pests
have not been adequately reported (Cao et al., 2002).
The post-harvest losses caused by pests are likely to be equiv-
alent to pre-harvest losses (Macdonald, 2001; Cao et al., 2002;
Singleton, 2003). Post-harvest grain losses across all developing
countries have been conservatively estimated at 10e15%, and when
combined with quality losses these could represent a total loss in
dollar value at market of 25e50% (Rickman, 2002). This is an
important although often unacknowledged issue because of the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ61 2 6246 4086; fax: þ61 2 6246 4094.
E-mail address: Peter.Brown@csiro.au (P.R. Brown).
harvesting a crop. It involves not only the quality and quantity of
grain damaged, but the additional efforts that are not recognised.
Rodents cause damage to stored food through direct damage,
wastage, and contamination (Drummond, 2001) and so affect both
grain quantity and quality. Further deterioration to damaged food
can occur through moulds and bacteria. Quantitative losses occur
through grain wastage between actual harvest and delivery to the
consumer. There are remarkably few studies quantifying post-
harvest losses caused by rodents. In cold stores in India, Rattus
rattus damaged up to 65% of jute bags containing oranges and up to
30.5% of oranges were damaged by the rats (Ahmad et al., 1993). In
grain markets in Pakistan, an estimated 40 R. rattus per grain shop
caused a 740-kg loss per shop annually through rodent consump-
tion, contamination, spillage, and waste (Ahmad et al., 1995). A
recent study by Mdangi et al. (2013) of R. rattus damage to maize in
Tanzania highlighted a novel technique of measuring rodent
damage by counting damaged seeds, percentage weight loss, and
number of rodent droppings. They estimated damage of up to 34%
in traditional open cribs. Qualitative losses occur through the
decreased value of grain due to spoilage caused by grain dis-
colouration or blemishes, inefficient processing, and physical
contamination. Contamination increases the risk of spread of a
range of disease-causing organisms, including Salmonella bacteria,

0964-8305/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2012.12.018
 P.R. Brown et al. / International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 82 (2013) 104e109
Leptospira spp., and Giardia spp. (Drummond, 2001). Reducing
losses caused by rodents will alleviate problems with hunger,
particularly for undernourished people (Meerburg et al., 2009b).
Poor and small farm holders in developing countries, such as
Laos, are often more susceptible to these types of losses because
they have the least access to knowledge and equipment for pro-
cessing grain and storing it safely, and they are reliant on the stored
grain for their food. The culture of ethnic groups in Laos is strongly
based around the growth of rice (Oryza sativa), which is therefore a
significant crop (Schiller et al., 2006). The farming system in Laos is
based primarily on a subsistence production system for rain-fed
upland rice and other crops. Farmers need to secure enough grain
to provide sufficient food for their household until the next harvest
is ready (Schiller et al., 2006). Furthermore, levels of poverty are
linked to levels of food sufficiency, primarily rice (Schiller et al.,
2006). During rice shortages, rural households do not have access
to money or credit to purchase food and often resort to hunting and
gathering. Farmers build their own grain stores, often located near
their houses or surrounding their villages. These are made of
bamboo or wood, with a range of modifications in an attempt to
reduce rodent-, insect-, and other disease-related problems in the
stored food.
There is little information on the losses caused by rodents to stored
grain in Laos (Singleton and Petch, 1994). Nevertheless, farmers
generally recognize this as being a significant problem and rate the
damage to stored grain as equal to, or greater than, the field losses
(Harman, 2003). In four upland villages (spread across four provinces)
where systematic trapping was conducted (Khamphoukeo et al.,
2003), members of the “house rat” group (Rattus rattus complex; see
Aplin et al., 2011) were consistently trapped in and around grain
stores. A survey of almost 400 farmers in the upland farming systems
of Laos showed that 92% of respondents had problems with rodents
in their grain stores (Brown et al., 2007; Brown and Khamphoukeo,
2007, 2010).
The purpose of this study was: (1) to evaluate a method for
assessing damage to grain stores post-harvest in a rural subsistence
farming area in a developing country; and (2) to document losses
by rodents and examine the influence of a range of environmental
factors that might contribute to the rodent damage in upland vil-
lages of Laos. We used a method developed by Belmain et al. (2005)
for assessing rodent losses from village rice stores in Bangladesh,
and modified by Mdangi et al. (2013) for assessing rodent losses to
stored maize in Tanzania; this is a method that allows control
over data collection while still using the environment of a farmer’s
store.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study site
This study was conducted in six villages in Luang Namtha
province, in the north of Laos (20 570 N,101 240 E) (Nam Ngyen, Hua
Khoua, Bom Pieng, Nam Thoung, Pa Poua, and Don Moune). The area
represented a typical farming system in the mountainous region of
northern Laos where there was a mix of lowland and upland crop-
ping with small villages scattered throughout the area. Farmers
typically grow crops in the nearby fields, then move their harvested
products into storage buildings within or next to the village. These
rice stores are often owned by an individual household and
accommodate harvested rice from the previous cropping season for
consumption. Rice stores also regularly act as a general storage area
for farming equipment and other produce. In addition, livestock
such as ducks, chickens, pigs, cows, or buffalo are often housed
under the rice store. The rice store is often a freestanding hut-like
construction positioned on stilts adjacent to the family home. In
105
some cases the rice store is attached to the house, or is located on an
outdoor deck that is attached to the house. The construction of Lao
rice stores is varied. The roof, walls, floor, and stilts can be of differing
materials such as bamboo (either woven or in strips, and sometimes
patched with dung), wood, woven rattan grass, corrugated tin, and
wire. The hut itself may be the storage container, although more
often the hut contains a large box or cylinder that stores the rice.
Each rice store has a small door for access.
Many farmers are aware of post-harvest losses caused by ro-
dents and have implemented protection measures to minimize
rodent access to their storages structures. These protection mea-
sures most often take the form of a “rat cap,” a metal or wooden cap
placed at the top of each stilt, or a “rat guard,” a metal sheet that is
wrapped around each stilt.
The method used in this study was based on the method
developed by Belmain et al. (2005). After receiving permission from
the owners, ten rice stores at each of the six villages were selected
to participate in the study. These rice stores were selected at
differing locations within each village and were of varying con-
struction. Traits of the rice stores and surrounding environments
were recorded (see below). Two aluminium bowls were placed in
each store. These bowls were filled to within 3 cm of the top lip
with rice (2e3 kg) from the farmer’s store. The bowls were posi-
tioned so that the contents were at a similar level as the sur-
rounding grain store. The bowls were placed on the periphery of
the store interior, as this is where rodents most actively feed. Using
an electronic balance, the weight of each bowl, and the rice it
contained, was recorded prior to the bowls’ being placed in the
store. The weight of the two bowls was monitored over time along
with contamination caused by rodents due to droppings and hairs.
One bowl was left completely open to allow access by rodents and
the other was covered with 5-mm wire mesh to prevent rodents
from feeding on the rice it contained. The purpose of the closed
bowl was to calculate the rice moisture loss or gain and then factor
this into the weight of the rice in the open bowl for analysis. The
closed bowl also served to control for any loss or damage due to
insects. Farmers promised not to add or subtract any rice from the
bowls inside the rice store so that accurate measurements of
weight and contamination could be made. In this area of Laos
farmers grow both dry-season and wet-season rice, so this study
was conducted over two seasons. For this study, the dry season ran
from January to May 2006, after the harvest of the dry season crop,
and the wet season ran from June to September 2006, after the
harvest of the wet season crop.
2.2. Sampling protocol
During the dry season and the wet season, each rice store in the
villages was visited every 2 wk until all the grain was depleted in
the grain store. During each visit bowls were removed from the rice
store and the weight of each was recorded using an electronic
balance. Following this, 100-g samples of rice were taken from both
the open and closed bowls, and from the farmer’s rice store. For
each bowl the sample was taken by gathering the top l cm layer of
rice into the centre of the bowl and then scooping it out. The rice
store sample was always taken randomly from the periphery of the
store. These samples were then individually spread out on a white
plastic sheet and the number of rodent droppings and hairs was
recorded from each.
The assessment of loss was calculated from a surface area
measurement. The loss derived from the sampling bowls was
multiplied up to the surface area of the grain stores. At each sam-
pling period, the surface area and depth of rice grain in the stores
was measured. The combination of surface area and volume
allowed us to calculate losses.
106 P.R. Brown et al. / International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 82 (2013) 104e109

The environmental condition of the rice stores was qualitatively 14

(a) Dry season
assessed using a 5-point scale to describe the suitability for habi- 12 Bowl
tation or access by rodents to feed on the stored grain. The cate- 10 Store
gories were:

Droppings per 100 g sample

8
6
1. Very poor: conditions ideal for rodents. Cover and harbour 4
plentiful, possibly food and water and little or no disturbance. 2
About as bad as it gets. 0
2. Poor: conditions slightly less ideal for rodent infestation than 12
(b) Wet season
category 1.
10
3. Average: conditions providing some cover for rodents, but not
8
much.
6
4. Fairly good: conditions tidy and clean, but could still be
4
improved.
2
5. Excellent: conditions providing no opportunities for rodent
0
populations to live. Very tidy, clean, and open. Nam Ngyen Hua Khoua Bom Pieng Nam Thoung Pa Poua Don Moune

Some other characteristics of the grain store were recorded that Village
were thought to influence rodent populations and therefore rodent Fig. 1. Rodent droppings per 100-g sample (mean  SE) from the dry and wet seasons
damage, including the presence of trees near the grain stores, for each of the six study villages. The dry season was January to May 2006 and the wet
overhanging branches, and the presence of cats. season was June to September 2006.

2.3. Statistical analysis
Data collected for the dry and wet seasons contained a number
of irregular weights, and dropping and hair counts. In cases in
which there was a large increase or decrease in the weight of the
open bowl over time, these stores were eliminated from the final
analysis. Some stores showed a consistent weight loss up to a point
and then a large increase or decrease. The data from these stores
were used up to the point at which the irregularity occurred.
Similarly, stores that showed large irregularities in contamination
levels over time were eliminated from analysis. After the elimina-
tion of stores with irregular data, 36 stores were used for the dry
season analysis and 35 stores for the wet season analysis. Data on
hairs and droppings are presented first to demonstrate that the
sampling method represented the grain store as a whole; then
rodent losses were calculated. The data for counts of droppings and
hairs, and percentage weight loss, were ln transformed for analysis.
An analysis of variance was performed for six traits of rice stores
that may affect the final end-of-season weight loss. These factors
were: season (wet, dry), the presence of cats (yes, no), trees within
a 3-m radius (yes, no), branches overhanging (yes, no), hygiene
index (1e5), and the presence of local protection measures (yes,
no). Results are presented as mean  standard errors. Analyses
were conducted in SigmaPlot Version 12.
3. Results
number of droppings found in samples taken from bowls
(F5,258 ¼ 3.812, P ¼ 0.005, Fig. 1a). During the wet season there were
2.98  0.83 droppings/100 g of rice. A significant difference was
found between villages for number of droppings found in samples
taken from bowls (F5,269 ¼ 6.656, P < 0.001, Fig. 1b). There was a
positive relationship between the number of droppings in the
bowls compared to the store for both the dry season
(y ¼ 0.260x þ 0.302; R2 ¼ 0.117, F1,262 ¼ 34.85, P < 0.01) and the wet
season (y ¼ 0.355x þ 0.265; R2 ¼ 0.199, F1,273 ¼ 67.89, P < 0.001).
There was an over-representation of droppings in two of the vil-
lages during the dry season compared to all other sites. We were
therefore reasonably confident that what we were observing in the
bowls was representative of the grain store as a whole.
3.3. Hairs
During the dry season there were 2.14  0.77 hairs/100 g of rice.
A significant difference was found between villages for number of
hairs found in samples taken from bowls (F5,257 ¼ 3.25, P ¼ 0.012,
Fig. 2a). During the wet season there were 1.36  0.35 hairs/100 g of
rice. A significant difference was found between villages for
12
(a) Dry season
10 Bowl
Store
8
6
Hairs per 100 g sample

3.1. Basic characteristics of farmer grain stores 4

2
Grain stores were approximately 2.4 m long, 2.1 m wide, and 0
1.7 m high, with an approximate volume of 8.6 m3. They were (b) Wet season
10
approximately 1.6 m off the ground. Roofs were constructed mainly
8
with wire mesh (35%), bamboo (31%), or bamboo with dung (23%);
very few used corrugated tin (2%). Walls were constructed with 6
bamboo (46%), wood (25%), or bamboo with dung (19%). Floors were 4
constructed with bamboo (56%) or wood (44%). The supporting posts
2
were mainly wood (96%), with some constructed using bamboo (4%).
0
The variation in construction was too great for analysis.
Nam Ngyen Hua Khoua Bom Pieng Nam Thoung Pa Poua Don Moune

3.2. Fecal droppings Village

Fig. 2. Rodent hairs per 100-g sample (mean  SE) from the dry and wet seasons for
During the dry season there were 2.49  1.11 droppings/100 g of each of the six study villages. The dry season was January to May 2006 and the wet
rice. A significant difference was found between villages for season was June to September 2006.
 P.R. Brown et al. / International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 82 (2013) 104e109 107

25 Table 1
(a) Dry season Analysis of variance summary table showing main factors used in analysis of rat
20 damage to stored grain in grain stores in Laos.
Pa Poua
Hua Khoua
d.f. Sum of sq Mean sq F value Pr(F)
15 Bom Pieng
Nam Thoung Cat 1 2.650 2.649 3.031 0.0870
Don Moune
10 Season 1 2.727 2.727 3.112 0.0827
Weight loss of rice (%)

Nam Ngyen
Village 5 5.144 1.029 1.177 0.3317
5 Trees 1 0.916 0.916 1.049 0.3102
Branches 1 1.584 1.584 1.813 0.1835
0 Hygiene 3 3.285 1.095 1.253 0.2992
(b) Wet season Protection 1 0.108 0.108 0.123 0.7269
20 Residuals 57 49.814 0.874

15
10
5 There was a weak but positive relationship between the per-
0 number of droppings per 100-g samples from open bowls for both
2 4
Two week period
Fig. 3. Cumulative weight loss (%  SE) of rice from open bowls from the dry and wet
seasons from six villages over 2-wk periods. Values are derived after a 14-wk period of
storage from 10 household replicates per village. The dry season was January to May
2006 and the wet season was June to September 2006.
number of hairs found in samples taken from bowls (F5,264 ¼ 6.378,
P < 0.001, Fig. 2b). There was a positive relationship between the
number of hairs in the bowls compared to the store for both the dry
season (y ¼ 0.5199x þ 0.176; R2 ¼ 0.340, F1,258 ¼ 132.64, P < 0.001)
and the wet season (y ¼ 0.438x þ 0.143; R2 ¼ 0.300, F1,268 ¼ 114.64,
P < 0.001). There was an over-representation of hairs in two of the
villages during the dry season compared to all other sites.
3.4. Cumulative weight loss from open bowls
Taking into account the changes in weight of the closed bowls
compared to the open bowls did not enhance the analysis, so open
weights only were used to examine rodent losses. During the dry
season there was an average weight loss from the open bowls of
10.3% (range 4.5e15.8%). Villages did not differ significantly in
overall weight loss (F5,29 ¼ 2.446, P ¼ 0.058, Fig. 3a). Overall weight
loss was about 286.5 g from a bowl. During the wet season there
was an average weight loss from the open bowls of 7.4% (range 3.4e
13.7%). Villages did not differ significantly in overall weight loss
(F5,31 ¼ 1.316, P ¼ 0.283, Fig. 3b). Overall weight loss was about
184.2 g from a bowl.
centage weight loss calculated at the end of the season and the mean
6 8 the dry season (y ¼ 0.493x þ 2.127; R2 ¼ 0.123, F1,33 ¼ 4.63, P < 0.05)
and the wet season (y ¼ 0.216x þ 1.559; R2 ¼ 0.160, F1,35 ¼ 6.65,
P < 0.05, Fig. 4). There were many data points where the percentage
weight loss was high but few droppings were observed.
3.5. Effect of rice-store characteristics on weight loss of rice
None of the factors that were examined significantly influenced
the amount of grain lost from stores (village, trees within 3 m,
overhanging branches, hygiene index, or local protection measures;
Table 1). There were no grain stores with a hygiene index of 5.
Weight loss was slightly less where cats were present (7.65%  1.19
SE, n ¼ 55) compared to where cats were absent (11.02%  2.42 SE,
n ¼ 16), but this difference was not statistically significant (Table 1),
and weight loss was greater in the dry season (9.20%  1.33 SE,
n ¼ 36) compared to the wet season (7.60%  1.72 SE, n ¼ 35), but
this was not statistically significant either (Table 1).
4. Discussion
Farmers in the upland environments of Laos lose 10.3% of their
stored grain to rats during the dry season and 7.3% during the wet
season. This is equivalent to around an 8.8% loss of stored rice over 9
months. Extrapolated to an annual basis, this equals approximately
11.7% of stored rice lost to rodents yearly. If a farmer stores 1000 kg
of rice, this equates to a 117-kg loss. The wholesale market value of

60 60
(a) Dry season (b) Wet season
Droppings per 100 g sample
Droppings per 100 g sample

50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

Weight loss of rice (%) Weight loss of rice (%)

Fig. 4. Relationship between percentage weight loss of rice and number of droppings per 100-g sample from open bowls for the (a) dry season (n ¼ 35) (linear regression:
y ¼ 0.493x þ 2.127; R2 ¼ 0.123) and (b) wet seasons (n ¼ 37) (linear regression: y ¼ 0.216x þ 1.559; R2 ¼ 0.160). Shown are linear regressions (thick solid black line), 95% confidence
intervals (grey dashed lines), and 95% prediction intervals (grey solid lines).
108 P.R. Brown et al. / International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 82 (2013) 104e109
rice in Laos is approximately 1500 Kip/kg (U.S.$0.16/kg). Thus on a
yearly basis an individual farmer in the upland environments of
Laos loses approximately U.S.$18.79/tonne of stored rice. Consid-
ering the low GDP per capita for Laos, this represents a substantial
amount of lost income. The loss of 117 kg would equate to the
consumption of rice for 1.5 months for an average household of 5.9
people (National Statistics Center of the Lao PDR, 2005) (based on
the per capita consumption of rice of 160 kg/yr (International Rice
Research Institute, 2012)).
This study was conducted at a time when the population
abundance of the rodents was low to moderate in the surrounding
fields. It is likely that in years when rodent numbers are high, for
example during bamboo masting events (nuu khii outbreaks), los-
ses in grain stores can be up to 100% (Douangboupha et al., 2010).
The method used to assess rodent losses to grain stores in a rural
subsistence context in a developing country appeared to be
reasonably successful. We were able to quantify losses caused by
rodents, but we were unable to clearly understand the factors that
might influence rodent damage. There are many factors that
potentially govern the level of rodent damage to grain stores, and it
is perhaps only through experimental manipulation of these factors
that we start to understand them and ultimately to make clear
recommendations for ways to reduce the losses. We were surprised
not to see a clear pattern of rice damage in relation to an ordinal
hygiene index and suggest that a more rigorous assessment of grain
store construction, environment, and the hygiene index be devel-
oped. The study by Mdangi et al. (2013) on rodent damage to stored
maize was clearly able to examine the effect of different storage
structures, but we were unable to.
Reducing rodent infestation in these grain stores might also
reduce disease transfer to humans and livestock, particularly
through contamination from urine and feces. Potential rodent-
borne diseases include bacterial diseases (murine typhus, salmo-
nellosis, leptospirosis) and protozoal diseases (toxoplasmosis),
among others (Phongmany et al., 2006; Pomkerd et al., 2008;
Meerburg et al., 2009a). One method of reducing rodent population
abundance and rodent-caused losses would be for households to
implement intensive daily trapping using rat traps. This was a
successful method employed in food stores in Mozambique
(Belmain et al., 2003).
Like any field-based study, the storage grain loss study experi-
enced a number of constraints, which affected the final outcomes of
the study. The major constraint was access to the individual rice
stores within each village. A majority of farmers lock the door to
their household rice store. It was often difficult locating the farmer
or getting another family member to open the grain store. Pur-
chasing and providing locks to farmers improved access.
Another constraint was the ability to control the weights of
bowls placed within rice stores. Each data point relies on the pre-
vious and next point to provide relevance. The weight of bowls
within some rice stores sometimes changed dramatically, with both
increases and decreases seen. Farmers enter these stores on an
almost daily basis to take sufficient rice for daily food consumption.
Through this disturbance, they often added or subtracted sub-
stantial amounts of rice from each bowl inadvertently. Although
individual farmers may have been informed about the purpose and
methodology of the study, this may not have been passed on to
other household members who had access to the rice store. In
extreme cases it was found that bowls were removed from rice
stores and the rice they contained had been used to feed livestock.
We suggest that improvements are needed in the routine
monitoring of the bowls, that better measurement of environ-
mental conditions of the grain stores be developed, and that more
rigorous comparison of the different construction types of the grain
stores be undertaken (the variation in rice store construction was
too great to analyse separately). An experimental approach to
testing hypotheses about hygiene, construction, and other envi-
ronmental conditions is recommended for future studies.
Acknowledgements
We sincerely thank the farmers who took part in this study. We
also thank Sonekham, Inwan, Peng, and Kham Puu for their
enthusiastic support in the field. This research was funded by the
Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (project
ADP 2004/016) and CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems. AMcW was a
recipient of an Australian Youth Ambassador for Development
scholarship through AusAID.
References
Ahmad, N., Prashad, V.R., Malhi, C.S., 1993. Deterioration of food in cold stores
caused by Rattus rattus and its control e a case study. International Biodeteri-
oration and Biodegradation 32, 305e312.
Ahmad, E., Hussain, I., Brooks, J.E., 1995. Losses of stored foods due to rats at grain
markets in Pakistan. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation 36,
125e133.
Aplin, K.P., Suzuki, H., Chinen, A.A., Chesser, R.T., ten Have, J., Donnellan, S.C.,
Austin, J., Frost, A., Gonzalez, J.P., Herbreteau, V., Catzeflis, F., Soubrier, J.,
Fang, Y.-P., Robins, J., Matisoo-Smith, E., Bastos, A.D.S., Maryanto, I., Sinaga, M.H.,
Denys, C., Van Den Bussche, R.A., Conroy, C., Rowe, K., Cooper, A., 2011. Multiple
geographic origins of commensalism and complex dispersal history of black
rats. PLoS ONE 6, e26357.
Belmain, S.R., Meyer, A.N., Timbrine, R., Penicela, L., 2003. Managing rodent pests in
households and food stores through intensive trapping. In: Singleton, G.R.,
Hinds, L.A., Krebs, C.J., Spratt, D.M. (Eds.), Rats, Mice and People: Rodent Biology
and Management. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research,
Canberra, pp. 440e445. ACIAR Monograph 96.
Belmain, S.R., Aplin, K.P., Hossain, M., Meyer, A., Azad, A.K., Hossain, M.M., Mian, Y.,
Bachchu, A.A., Hoque, A., Mohammad, N., Baker, A., Islam, S.M., Roy, R.,
Haque, M.S., Islam, M.S., Shafali, R.B., Harun, M., Kadri, N.I., Singleton, G.R.,
Hassanuzzaman, A.T.M., Kamal, N.Q., 2005. Ecologically-based Rodent Manage-
ment for Diversified Rice-Based Cropping Systems in Bangladesh. Final Technical
Report R8184 (ZA0503). University of Greenwich, Chatham, UK. Available at:
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/r4d/PDF/Outputs/CropProtection/R8184_FTR.pdf.
Brown, P.R., Khamphoukeo, K., 2007. Farmers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices
with respect to rodent management in the upland and lowland farming sys-
tems of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Integrative Zoology 2, 165e173.
Brown, P.R., Khamphoukeo, K., 2010. Changes in farmers’ knowledge, attitudes and
practices after implementation of ecologically-based rodent management in the
uplands of Lao PDR. Crop Protection 29, 577e582.
Brown, P.R., Khamphoukeo, K., Sonekham, Invanh, Simone, Vison, Chanthi,
Khamphamy, Lanfeuang, McWilliam, A., Kingkeo, S., 2007. Development of ro-
dent management strategies for the upland farming system in Lao PDR. Lao
Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 15, 124e145.
Cao, D., Pimentel, D., Hart, K., 2002. Postharvest food losses (vertebrates). In:
Pimentel, D. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Pest Management. Marcel Dekker, pp. 648e649.
Douangboupha, B., Singleton, G.R., Brown, P.R., Khamphoukeo, K., 2010. Rodent
outbreaks in the uplands of the Lao PDR. In: Singleton, G.R., Belmain, S.R.,
Brown, P.R., Hardy, B. (Eds.), Rodent Outbreaks: Ecology and Impacts. Interna-
tional Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines, pp. 99e111.
Drummond, D.C., 2001. Rodents and biodeterioration. International Biodeteriora-
tion and Biodegradation 48, 105e111.
Harman, D., 2003. Indigenous Rodent Management in Upland Laos. Report to the
Australian Centre of International Agricultural Research, Canberra, Australia, 50 p.
International Rice Research Institute, 2012. World Rice Statistics. Online at: http://
ricestat.irri.org:8080/wrs/ (accessed 26.05.12.).
Khamphoukeo, K., Douangboupha, B., Aplin, K.P., Singleton, G.R., 2003. Pest and
non-pest rodents in the upland agricultural landscape of Laos: a progress
report. In: Singleton, G.R., Hinds, L.A, Krebs, C.J., Spratt, D.M. (Eds.), Rats, Mice
and People: Rodent Biology and Management. Australian Centre for Interna-
tional Agricultural Research, Canberra, pp. 284e289. ACIAR Monograph 96.
Macdonald, D.W. (Ed.), 2001. The New Encyclopaedia of Mammals. Andromeda,
Oxford, UK.
Mdangi, M., Mulungu, L.S., Massawe, A.W., Eiseb, S., Tutjavi, V., Kirsten, F.,
Mahlaba, T., Malebane, P., Maltitz, E.V., Monadjem, A., Dlamini, N.,
Makundi, R.H., Belmain, S.R., 2013. Assessment of rodent damage to stored
maize (Zea mays L.) on smallholder farms in Tanzania. International Journal of
Pest Management 59, 55e62.
Meerburg, B.G., Singleton, G.R., Kijlstra, A., 2009a. Rodent-borne diseases and their
risks for public health. Critical Reviews in Microbiology 35, 221e270.
Meerburg, B.G., Singleton, G.R., Leirs, H., 2009b. The year of the rat ends e time to
fight hunger! Pest Management Science 65, 351e352.
 P.R. Brown et al. / International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 82 (2013) 104e109
National Statistics Center of the Lao PDR, 2005. Chapter 3: Household Character-
istics. Online at: http://www.nsc.gov.la/Products/Populationcensus2005/
PopulationCensus2005_chapter3.htm (accessed 26.05.12.).
Phongmany, S., Rolain, J.-M., Phetsouvanh, R., Blacksell, S.D., Soukkhaseum, V.,
Rasachack, B., Phiasakha, K., Soukkhaseum, S., Frichithavong, K., Chu, V.,
Keoloungkhot, V., Martinez-Aussel, B., Chang, K., Darasavath, C.,
Rattanavong, O., Sisouphone, S., Mayxay, M., Vidamaly, S., Parola, P.,
Thammavong, C., Heuangvongsy, M., Syhavong, B., Raoult, D., White, N.J.,
Newton, P.N., 2006. Rickettsial infections and fever, Vientiane, Laos. Emerging
Infectious Diseases 12, 256e262.
Pomkerd, P., Khoprasert, Y., Virathavone, P., Thoummabouth, M., Sirisak, O.,
Jäkel, T., 2008. Factors explaining the abundance of rodents in the city of
View publication stats
109
Luang Prabang, Lao PDR, as revealed by field and household surveys. Inte-
grative Zoology 3, 11e20.
Rickman, J.F., 2002. Grain quality from harvest to market. Value-Addition to Agri-
cultural Products, 9th JIRCAS International Symposium, pp. 94e98.
Schiller, J.M., Hatsadong, Dounhsila, K., 2006. A history of rice in Laos. In:
Schiller, J.M. (Ed.), A History of Rice in Laos. International Rice Research Insti-
tute, Los Baños, Philippines, pp. 9e28.
Singleton, G.R., 2003. Impacts of Rodents on Rice Production in Asia. International
Rice Research Institute, Los Baños, Philippines. p. 30.
Singleton, G.R., Petch, D.A., 1994. A Review of the Biology and Management of
Rodent Pests in Southeast Asia. ACIAR Technical Reports No. 30. ACIAR,
Canberra.