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

net/publication/316477710

Weed Research in Sorghum and maize

Conference Paper · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

2 1,380

6 authors, including:

Fasil Reda Kiros Meles

11 PUBLICATIONS   115 CITATIONS   
Mekelle University College of Dryland Agriculture and Natural Res…
13 PUBLICATIONS   127 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Tamado Tana
University of Eswatini
114 PUBLICATIONS   1,071 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Does Crop Commercialization Improve Rural Households Livelihood in Ethiopia? View project

maize-common bean/lupine intercrop productivity and profitability in maize-based cropping system of Northwestern Ethiopia View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kiros Meles on 26 April 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Increasing Crop Production
Through Improved
Plant Protection

Volume I

Edited by
Abraham Tadesse

Jointly organized by PPSE and EIAR

Sponsored by the USAID-Ethiopia and BTC through MoARD

MoARD
 Increasing Crop Production
Through Improved
Plant Protection

Volume I

© PPSE, 2008
ISBN 978-99944-53-28-3
All rights reserved.
Edited by
Abraham Tadesse

Presented at the 14th Annual Conference of

the Plant Protection Society of Ethiopia (PPSE)
19-22 December 2006, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Page layout: Simachew Manaye and Abebe Kirub

Cover design: Abraham Tadesse

Citation:
Abraham Tadesse (ed.). 2008. Increasing Crop Production through Improved Plant
Protection – Volume I. Plant Protection Society of Ethiopia (PPSE), 19-22 December
2006. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. PPSE and EIAR, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 598 pp.
 Fasil Reda1, Matias Mekuria2, Kiros Meles3, Kassahun Zewdie4,
Rezene Fessehaie4 and Tamado Tana5
1
Melkassa Research Center, EIAR, P.O. Box 436, Nazreth. 2Awasa Research Center, P.O. Box
61Awasa. 3Mekelle Research Center, P.O. Box – 231, Mekelle. 4 Holeta Research Center, EIAR,
P.O. Box 2003, Addis Abeba. 5 Alemaya University of Agriculture, P.O. Box 138, Dire Dawa

Sorghum and maize are staple food crops in Ethiopia. The crops are grown
under a wide range of environmental conditions. Over 8 million hectares of land
is allocated for food crops from which over 9 million t of harvest is produced
annually (Table 1). Cereals account for over 80% of the cultivated area and
90% of total production in the country (CSA, 2002). Tef, maize, sorghum,
wheat and barley are the five major cereal crops. Sorghum occupies 1.3 million
ha and maize 1.7 million ha, representing 17% and 22% of the area devoted to
cereal production, respectively (CSA, 2001). Among the cereals, maize is
ranked first in production and productivity (Table 2).

! " ! #

$% & '( &) * %( '

" * * % % &% %&
+ ( $ $ ) )& %
& ( * ( ,
- . - /0

1 0/

# "
& () %* %)$ *
2 3 % * ) & ) )& '(
- )) &* ( ()& &
4 )* % )% (% %
5 / &%' & *'( '
2 )'$ %& * ) $ %
+ ' *& '* $
%$)$ $( * *$ )
- . - /0

Nearly all of the grain from sorghum and maize is used for human
consumption, and the crops are major sources of energy and protein for millions
 4 3
of people in Ethiopia. For instance, about 80% of sorghum grain is used for
making injera (sorghum is second to tef as the preferred cereal for making
injera, [a fermented pancake like bread]), 10% home brewed beverages (Areke,
Bordie and Tella) and the rest goes into making different food products (nifro,
genfo, kitta, kollo and weaning foods). The leaves and stalks of sorghum and
maize are preferred feed sources for animals. The stalk is used for construction
and fuel wood.

Weeds have a more direct influence on humans more than any other pest in
developing countries like Ethiopia. Weeds not only cause severe crop losses but
also compel farmers and their families to spend a considerable amount of their
time weeding. Unfortunately, this is a common feature observed in sorghum
and maize growing areas of Ethiopia. Loss assessment studies revealed that the
crops are highly sensitive to weed competition, especially during their early
growth stage. It is documented that uncontrolled weed growth leads to at least
44% and 30% yield loss in maize and sorghum, respectively (Stroud, 1989).
The parasitic weed Striga on average causes 50–60% loss and often the damage
is greater on maize.

The continuing losses due to weeds inequitably distributed across agro-

ecosystems. Shifts in weed flora in response to weed management and
environmental degradation attest to the need to develop systems of weed
management that are sustainable. Although, considerable effort has been made
to study weeds and develop strategies to reduce their impact, lack of capacity
allowed only limited range of research areas to be addressed. To promote a
more holistic view on weeds and develop consolidated weed management
research programs, past work has to be thoroughly reviewed and appropriate
strategies designed and executed.

This paper reviews weed management research experiences on maize and

sorghum in the past 20 years, with the aim of highlighting the current status and
future prospects for the relatively young discipline.

The weed flora of maize and sorghum is highly diverse and is composed of a
wide range of grass and broadleaf weeds and sedges including parasitic and
invasive species (Table 3. )
 6
) 2 7 3

6 / - 8 / 9
:
:
:
:
::
:
::
::
::
" :
::
" ::
" ::
5 :
::
" ::
" ::
1 1 " :
/ " ::
" ::
:
8 :
! " :
;/ ! :
+< "# ! " :
" 1 # :
" $ 5 :
" ! :
:
" ::
" :
% " ::
:
::
$ ! " :
& ::
' ! ::
' ( :
' ::
" / "# ::
$ ::
" $ :
= :
- ' ::
' :
' ::
- % ::
) ::
::
::
; . > 0 ">- 7 / 0">"
::: , ? / 0 :: , 2 / 0:,8
 4 3
Inappropriate cropping practices and deteriorating environmental conditions
have contributed to the occurrence of complex weed problems. The maize and
sorghum belt of the country is infested with hard-to-control sedge and grass
weeds (e.g., Rottboellia cochinchinensis) and parasitic weeds such as Striga.
The lowlands are invaded by alien invasive species–Parthenium hystrophorous,
Prosopis juliflora and Lantana camara. The troublesome perennial grasses –
Digitaria abyssinica, Cynodon spp. and Pennisetum spp. represent serious
challenge in degraded environments.

In Tigray, complex weed problem represents serious threat to subsistence crop

production (IAR, 1994; Ibrahim, 1996). A wide range of weed flora was
recorded from 34 peasant associations in 17 weredas (districts) representing
highland, mid-altitude and lowland ecologies. However, only 12 were widely
distributed, and among these, Striga hermonthica, Cynodon dactylon,
Acanthospermum hispidum and Brachiaria eruciformis were found to be the
most problematic weeds. A follow up survey specifically on Striga showed that
the parasitic weed problem increases in magnitude as one moves from South
through the eastern part to the West in the Region (G/Medhin et al., 1998).

A diagnostic survey was conducted in the Region to identify and prioritize crop
and resource management problems (Esilaba et al., 1998). Ninety percent of the
farmers interviewed identified Striga as the major constraint to cereal
production, 87% expressed the feeling that infestation is increasing, and 52% of
them associated the Striga problem with declining soil fertility. The farmers
indicated seed, farm implements, water erosion and animals as agents of weed
seed dispersal. A separate survey conducted in 1997 established Striga
hermonthica as the widest spread parasitic weed species in Ethiopia. The
overall Striga incidence rate in the 310 maize fields surveyed was 41%. Pawe
and Dhera were registered as the highest (95%) and least (1%) infested districts,
respectively (Wondimu et al., 2001).

Sorghum is susceptible to weed competition at its early stage of growth because

the seedlings start weak and frail. Sorghum has also lower water requirement
than most weeds. This means that weeds with higher water requirements tend to
take up more water per unit of dry mater produced. Thus, they interfere with the
growth of crop. It is well established that weeds cause yield loss during certain
crop growth stages and controlling weed during such a period is essential.
Knowledge of critical weed densities and the critical period of competition can
help the farmer make the most efficient use of labor, resulting in an overall
saving of time and cost of weed control.
 6
Two sets of field experiments were conducted at two sites representing lowland
and intermediate altitude for two years in eastern Ethiopia to determine the
influence of Parthenium weed density and duration of competition on grain
yield of sorghum. In the first set of experiments, weed densities of 0, 3, 7, 13,
27, 53 and 100 plants per square meter were considered. Yield loss was
severely affected as Parthenium weed density increased. It was observed that
even very low density of 3 plants per square meter resulted in a high yield loss
(69%). Due to differences between sites and years, however, it was not possible
to specify meaningful threshold densities for weeding. The critical period for
weed control (the period over which weeding had the greatest benefit on yield)
were 19–69 and 40–57 days after emergence of sorghum in 1999 and 2000,
respectively at intermediate altitude location (assuming an acceptable loss of
10%). In the lowland, however, it ranged from emergence to 61 and 66 days,
indicating more severe competition at this site. The substantial variation in
yield, and yield loss between sites and years illustrates the problems of
establishing accurate recommendations for threshold densities of Parthenium
and critical periods in small scale, rain-fed agriculture (Tamado et al., 2002).

Keeping maize weed free for the cropping season was essential to attain the
highest possible yield. The cost of weeding increased and grain yield declined
as the time of weed removal was delayed. Yield loss due to the presence of
weeds during the first 6, 9 and 12 weeks after emergence (DAE), and for the
entire growing season were 36, 61, 80 and 85%, respectively (Assefa, 1999).
However, it was found that early weeding at 20–25 DAE could be sufficient to
bring about significant increase in yield compared to the control at two
locations: Melkassa and Wolenchiti (Tilahun et al., 1990). On the un-weeded
control plots, up to 69% yield loss was recorded. At Asossa, competition was
severe during the first six weeks (IAR, 1988). At Awassa, the critical period of
weed competition was between 31 and 49 DAE (Mengistu et al., 2005). The
authors recommended two weedings at the start and end of the period to reduce
significantly the competitive effect of weeds significantly.

In a host range experiment, nine S. hermonthica populations collected from

different hosts, locations, and one each of S. asiatica, S. aspera and S. forbesii
were tested on selected crop and weedy species (Fasil and parker, 1990).
Sorghum was generally more sensitive than the other test entries to most of the
S. hermonthica populations and S. asiatica. Among the weedy entries, the wild
relatives of sorghum (Sorghum arundinaceum and Rottboellia cochinchinensis)
supported greater number of Striga shoots, suggesting that these probably were
among the primary alternative hosts from which infestation spread to new crops
and locations.
 4 3
In a virulence study, conducted using an in vitro system, nineteen Striga
population samples collected from different host crops and areas of Tigray
Region were evaluated against two resistant sorghum varieties (SRN-39 and P
9401). Results showed that significant variability exists in virulence among
populations occurring in the Region (Fasil, 2002). Nine populations were able
to establish and develop on the resistant sorghum varieties at significantly
higher numbers. Most of the virulent populations originated from the
southeastern parts of the region where there was a long history of crop culture
and thus selection pressure on both the host and the parasite.

Low input agriculture is a common feature of food production in the country.

Because of the limited resource base, the subsistence farming community relies
on hand weeding for the control of weeds. However, because of overlap of farm
operations, farmers either leave their farms un-weeded or perform weeding late
in the season. Experience has shown that proper timing of the weeding
operation is critical to maximize benefits. According to the findings, crops are
particularly sensitive to weed interference in the first four weeks of
establishment, and early weeding during this period significantly enhances crop
yield performance.

One to two hand weeding is recommended in dry areas where sorghum and
maize are important (Stroud, 1989). However, a study conducted on sorghum
revealed that three times weeding at monthly interval gave the highest yield of
2700 kg ha-1. Weeding once at 25–30 days after emergence, or when the crop
reaches 15 cm height, leads to a comparable yield gain of 2500 kg ha-1.
Weeding late, i.e., at grain filling stage, resulted in a heavy crop loss. This was
due to loss of moisture from the soil at the time when the crop was badly in
need of moisture for grain filling (Stroud, 1989). A study was conducted at
Bako on sorghum to compare the recommended twice weeding at 25–30 and
55–60 days after planting with farmers practice for grain yield and labor saving
advantages (Gemechu and Legesse, 1989). Results showed that average labor
requirement for recommended hand weeding was less compared to farmers’
practice (425 vs. 554 hrs/ha). There was no significant difference in grain yield
between the recommended (2.7 t ha-1) and the farmer’s practice (3.4 t ha-1).
However, the second weeding under the recommended practice coincided with
the time when labor is in high demand for other farm operations. During that
period, the labor requirement for the recommended hand weeding was 226
hours per hectare but only 15 ox hours plus 127 labor hours per hectare for
 6
farmer’s practice. It was assumed that this could be the reason why farmers
preferred their traditional practice rather than the recommended one. Thus, it
was suggested that the second weeding is replaced with inter-row cultivation.

On-station and on-farm experiments were conducted by Bako Agricultural

Research Center during 1989–1993 cropping seasons using the open-pollinated
maize variety Beletech as a test crop (Rezene et al., 1993). Different frequency
of ox cultivation, hoeing, and hand pulling were compared. Two times inter-
row ox cultivation (at the 4–5 and 7–8 leaf stages) supplemented by one time
hoeing at the 4–5 leaf stage and hand pulling at the 7–8 leaf stage gave the most
efficient control. The highest maize grain yield of 4.8 t ha-1 was obtained from
inter-row ox cultivation and hoeing at 4–5 leaf stage, supplemented by ox
cultivation and hand pulling at 7–8 leaf stage. In another experiment at Bako,
the recommended hand weeding practice, weeding at 25–30 and 55–60 days
after planting, was verified on farmer’s field for yield, labor requirement and
compatibility with current cropping practices. Although the grain yield
difference between the recommended practice and the control was not
significant, the former was more economical and required 129-man hours per
hectare less labor. A single early weeding was sufficient to obtain optimum
yield and the highest cost: benefit ratio. Two times weeding was critical on
maize in Awassa to maximize yield benefits (IAR, 1989). At Jimma 2 hand-
weeding or hoeing at 2 and 4 weeks after emergence was most effective.
However, at Metu, 3 hand-weeding or hoeing at 2, 4 and 6 weeks after
emergence was necessary to adequately control weeds and improve yield
significantly (Tilahun and Tesfa, 1989). At Abobo, timely weed control was
more important than frequency of weeding. There was no significant difference
between one, two and three times weeding on grain yield (Woldeyesus and
Aderajew, 1991).

The only case where early weeding does not seem to have such an obvious
effect is on parasitic weeds. The yield gain from early weeding of a striga
infested cereal is often insignificant. Although it is difficult to improve yield
performance, however, efficiency could be enhanced and economic advantages
could be gained from late weeding. It was shown that late weeding of Striga
(after flowering) requires less than half of the time needed for early pulling
(Parker, 1988). Furthermore, late pulling is more manageable as one has to
remove only flowering striga plants. Early weeding leads to re-sprouting of
more shoots from underground buds – further aggravating the problem. Hand
pulling of striga plants is the most feasible control approach for the small-scale
subsistence farming community.
 4 3

An experiment was conducted on maize both on-station and on-farm at Bako

Research Center during 1989, 1990 and 1993 cropping seasons. Eleven
treatments, including weedy check, inter-row ox cultivation, hoeing, and hand
pulling were compared (Rezene et al., 1993). Slashing at flowering was
uniformly applied for all treatments except the weedy check. The dominant
weeds recorded were Guizotia scabra, Bidense pilosa, Setaria spp., Cynodon
dactylon and Commelina spp. The results indicated that hoeing and hand
pulling offered an efficient control of these weeds. Two times inter-row
cultivation (at 4–5 and 7–8 leaf stages of the crop) supplemented by one time
hoeing (4–5 leaf stage) and hand pulling (7–8 leaf stage) gave the most efficient
control. The combined analysis over three years for grain yield indicated that
there was a statistically significant difference (P<0.0001) among treatments.
The year by treatment interaction was not statistically significant, indicating the
consistency of results across years. The location by treatment interaction within
years was highly significant, indicating a differential effect of treatments across
locations. The weed biomass and maize grain yield were negatively correlated
(r = -0.375) (P<0.001). The highest maize grain yield of 4.8 t ha-1 was obtained
from one inter-row ox cultivation and one hoeing at 4–5 leaf stage
supplemented with one inter-row ox cultivation and one hand pulling at 7–8
leaf stage. The yield level obtained from the treatment was significantly higher
compared to farmers practice. The farmers considered one hoeing at 4–5 leaf
stage and one ox-cultivation at 7–8 leaf stage supplemented with hand weeding
as the best method for controlling weeds in maize. However, mostly, such a
practice is never employed due to labor shortage. Inter-row ox cultivation at 4–
5 leaf stage combined with one hand pulling at 7–8 leaf stage produced the
highest net benefit of Birr 1903 ha-1.

An experiment was conducted at Abobo Research Center, in Gambella Region,

to look at the growth and yield response of maize to tillage practices and to
compare a pre-emergence herbicide with different hand weeding regimes
(Wondimu et al., 2001). Gesaprim combi herbicide at the rate of 3.5 kg a.i. ha-1
kept the crop weed free throughout the season. Furthermore, it was less costly.
The herbicide treatment was considered particularly appropriate for Gambella
Region where labor is in short supply. A non-significant difference was
observed between the conventional (disk plough and harrow) and no tillage
systems at Bako (Getachew, 1989). Grain yield was not significantly affected
by pre-planting spraying of Glyphosate and Paraquate in zero tillage. A
preliminary study at Awassa indicated that zero tillage was at least as good as
conventional tillage when Glyphosate (3.5 l product ha-1) and Paraquat (4.5 l
product ha-1) were applied to control weeds. At Ambo, weed density was lower
 6
when tillage was performed with mould board plough than disk plough and disk
harrow (Rezene et al., 1993). An experiment was conducted at Melkassa during
1987 and 1989 to examine the right time to perform shilshalo (mid-season
cultivation) for sorghum. Generally, growth and yield were enhanced when
shilshalo was performed at 6–8 leaf stage of the crop (Birhane et al., 1991).

The labor and oxen power requirement, weed control efficiency and level of
possible crop damage of a wheel hoe weeder implement were assessed at Bako
Research Center. The wheel hoe weeder saved 75 hours of manual labor per
hectare and 13 oxen-pair hours per hectare compared to farmers’ weeding
practice. The experiment revealed that the wheel hoe weeder could control 85%
of the weed species. The implement was particularly effective on properly tilled
light soils (Asfaw and Abdissa, 1991).

At Ambo, yield differences between hand weeding and herbicide (Primagram at

2 kg a.i. /ha) treatments was higher when nitrogen (N) and phosphorous (P)
were applied through broadcasting at high rates of 120/120 and 200/200 N/
P2O5 kg ha-1, respectively. This difference was not evident when the N/ P2O5
fertilizer was banded. Interestingly, the herbicide controlled weeds better and
enabled the maize crop to use fertilizer efficiently under broadcasting. At Bako,
application of 75/75 kg ha-1 N/P2O5 between maize rows resulted in a denser
weed population, whereas band application favored early maize growth (SPL,
1988).

Striga is less damaging and often less severe in fertile soils and the critical
element among the nutrients is widely believed to be nitrogen. Ammonium
sulfate and nitroform were compared to organic sources (chicken manure, peat
and organic soil) in a pot experiment (Ahmed and Parker, 1988). Nitrogen from
both mineral fertilizers and organic manure delayed the emergence of Striga.
There was no influence of organic matter on Striga in the absence of associated
nitrogen. The earlier field experiments at Humera and Kobo were inconclusive,
but showed at least some reduction of the parasitic weed infestation from
application of N. The more recent investigations indicated that the effect of N
could vary across varieties. Although nitrogen significantly reduced Striga
infestation on Gambella 1107 and N13, its effect was more consistent on ICSV-
1006 and ICSV-1007 (Babiker and Fasil, 1991). Results of another experiment,
designed to develop integrated nutrient management strategy confirmed that the
combined use of 41 kg N ha-1 and 30 t ha-1 of manure led to significant
reduction in infestation and considerable increase in sorghum yield (Esilaba et
 4 3
al., 2000). Further experience showed that the outcome from the use of the
nitrogen input depended on weather patterns and inherent fertility of a given
location (Fasil, 2002). The beneficial effect of N was consistent in the
northwestern lowlands of Tigray where there was adequate rainfall and less
impoverished soil. On the other hand, mixed results were obtained and no
obvious benefit was gained from the use of the input, especially the higher
recommended rates (41/46 N/P2O5), in the dry highlands in the northeast.

At Jimma and Metu, the yield response of two maize composites (UCA and
UCB) to hand weeding frequency was similar (Tilahun and Tesfa, 1989). At
Bako (Asfaw et al., 1990) and Nazreth (Aleligne et al., 1992), farmers observed
variability among varieties in their competitive ability with weeds. An early
maturing, short variety Guto was rated as a poor competitor compared to an
improved relatively taller varieties: Bako Composite, KCC, and KCB.

A sorghum variety screening trial for Striga asiatica resistance was conducted
at Gumaide (Gamo Gofa) in 1987. Twenty-eight improved and local sorghum
varieties and one pearl millet variety (Serere Composite) were compared with
CK 60 (susceptible sorghum variety) and Medium Dishkaro (local susceptible
sorghum check). Although infestation was not uniform, it was evident that
some of the local varieties exhibited resistance. Particularly impressive was the
variety Short Kulisha (IAR, 1986). Similar experiment was conducted with 12
sorghum cultivars at Konso Wereda in 2000–2002 cropping seasons.

The most outstanding sorghum varieties from the earlier work on resistance
screening were SAR-24, ICSV-1006, ICSV-1007, Framida, and N-13 (Fasil,
1999). These varieties were resistant to Striga hermonthica populations
occurring in the major sorghum producing areas, and suffered relatively less
damage. However, most of these varieties often showed inferior agronomic
performance compared to the locals, especially under Striga free conditions.
Successful attempts were made, later, to improve the agronomic quality of these
genotypes through crossing. Subsequently, some progenies that exhibited
resistance and quality traits were identified and used by the national sorghum
improvement project. In recent years, advances that are more significant have
been made in collaboration with Purdue University in the USA. Varieties of
tropical origin, combining superior agronomic quality and resistance to S.
hermonthica, were developed by Purdue University and widely tested in the
lowland and mid-altitude areas of Ethiopia. This successful endeavor led to the
release of two resistant varieties: P9401 (Gobiye) and P9403 (Abshir). These
varieties are productive and combine excellent grain quality and drought
 6
tolerance – two essential attributes in the drought affected, Striga prone areas of
the country. In a separate experiment, Wondimu et al., (2001) reconfirmed the
resistance of P9401, P9403, SRN-39 and two other local varieties, Ayefere-
Asfachew and Wotere.

Intercropping is a potentially viable, low-cost technology, which enables us to

address the two important and interrelated problems of low sol fertility and
Striga. Identifying the optimal spatial and temporal arrangements, and selection
of effective, compatible and adapted legume crops, depending on the natural
endowments of localities and existing populations of Striga, is an important
prerequisite. At Sirinka, one row of legume (cowpea and haricot bean) with
every two rows of sorghum was an optimum arrangement in terms of reduction
in Striga hermonthica incidence and increase in cereal yield (Fasil et al., 1997).
At Adibakel, dry highland location in Tigray, the same planting arrangement of
sorghum and cowpea was superior in crop productivity and Striga control.
Intercropping had rather detrimental effect on yield performance of sorghum
and showed no obvious suppressive effect on Striga, under non-fertilized
conditions at Sheraro, in the northwestern lowlands of Tigray (Fasil, 2002).
Fertilizer use was eminent and inorganic fertilizer alone improved crop
performance and suppressed Striga at the site. In another environment, in
Tigray, alternate row planting of sorghum and legumes with staggered planting
of the crops (sowing of legume intercrops 3 to 4 weeks after the cereal), was
more productive and led to overall reduction in infestation, over two seasons.
On the other hand, a trial conducted at Konso during 2001/2 cropping season
revealed that sorghum and pigeon pea intercropping led to considerable
reduction in Striga asiatica infestation (SARI, 2003). Those findings suggest
the need for developing site-specific recommendations on intercropping.

At Pawe, an experiment was conducted during the 1998 season with the
objective of identifying a trap crop and pattern of intercropping to control
Striga hermonthica in maize (Kassa et al., 2001). Three trap crops (cowpea,
soybean and groundnut) were intercropped with hybrid maize variety BH-140
in three planting patterns: alternate row planting, within row interplanting, and
broadcast mixed planting. Sole maize was used as a check. Results showed that
there was no difference among the three trap crops on S. hermonthica
emergence, Striga count at harvest and Striga count/maize plant. However,
highly significant variations were observed for planting patterns on the above
three parameters measured. The interaction effect between planting pattern and
variety was not significant. The highest Striga count was recorded from
alternate row planting. Among the three systems of planting, alternate row
planting of maize and groundnut registered the highest number of Striga
 4 3
emergence followed by maize-cowpea and maize-soybean alternate row
planting. The lowest Striga emergence was observed from the broadcast
planting pattern, which could be attributed to minimum direct contact between
component crops and the parasite in this arrangement. Among the three trap
crops, groundnut was the best trap crop. Maize (HB-140) and groundnut
(Manipintar) within row alternate planting gave the highest maize grain yield
1.5 t ha-1 followed by maize soybean broadcast planting (1.3 t ha-1).

The effect of crop rotation on weed control and grain yield of maize was
studied in Awassa (Tenaw, 1991). It was confirmed that crop rotation was
effective in suppressing weeds. Crop rotation led to shift in weed composition
and substantial reduction of weed density. Maize yield was improved by 41%
when the crop followed sunflower, soybean, and tef.

Rotation of infested land into non-susceptible crops or into fallow is

theoretically one of the simplest solutions for parasitic weed control, but it is
also one that is neither simple nor acceptable (Parker and Riches, 1993).
Farmers are usually reluctant to break the cereal production cycle. Cognizant of
this fact, a five-year experiment was initiated to explore at least possible
benefits of yearly alternate cropping of sorghum and annual legumes over the
existing system of cereal monoculture under striga infested conditions (Fasil
and Wondimu, 2001). The final year results showed that yearly rotation of
sorghum with either cowpea or haricot bean resulted in significantly higher
cereal yields but failed to lead to concomitant reduction in striga infestation.
The main lesson from the exercise was that the time interval between cereal
cropping has to be sufficiently long for a rotation program to be effective
against striga.

In a trial conducted to compare the effect of two planting dates (May and July)
and catch cropping with Sudan grass on Striga infestation in sorghum at Harbu,
it was shown that catch cropping could be useful to reduce parasitic weed
infestation (Parker, 1988). The infestation level on the susceptible sorghum
variety IS 9302 following Sudan grass was five-fold lower even though this did
not result in significant differences in yield.
 6

Two series of experiments were conducted at Bako Research Center between

1982 and 1986 to compare the performance of atrazine and atrazine +
metholachlor mixtures at 1:1 and 1.7:3.3 ratio of kg a.i./ha with two hand
weeding and no weeding for weed control, crop safety and grain yield in
sorghum (Dawit and Rezene, 1990). In the first experiment, terbutryne and
EPTC + safener (N, N-dially-2,2-dichloroacetamide) were considered and in
the second series linuron, dicamba and alachlor were included. Herbicides in
the first experiment were applied without sorghum seeds being protected
(dressed) with herbicide safener CGA – 43089 (cynomethoxmino-benza-cet-
nitrile). In the second series, sorghum seeds were either protected or
unprotected with safener. Predominant weeds were Eeusine indica, Commelina
spp., and Guizotia scabra. Atrazine gave good control of broadleaf weeds,
caused no visible damage to sorghum, and yielded comparably with atrazine +
metolachlor mixture. The weeded check produced two-fold increase in yield
compared to the untreated check. Atazine + metolachlor mixture gave effective
control of Eleusine indica, but in the absence of safener especially, at 2.0 a.i. kg
ha-1; there was mild crop damage (reduced germination and population density
at early stage). This was largely prevented by seed dressing with CGA-43089.
The use of atrazine + metolachlor mixtures is justifiable where grass weeds are
inadequately controlled by atrazine but safener need to be applied to ensure
crop safety. EPTC + safener resulted in severe damage to sorghum and
inadequate weed control. Terbutryne, linuron and dicamba + alachlor, though
safe to sorghum, were unsatisfactory in terms impact on weeds.

A follow up study was carried out at Melkassa using two atrazine-based

herbicides: Primagram 500 FW and Gesaprim 500 FW (± sorghum safener) at
different rates of application. Primagram without safener (3, 4 and 4.5 ha-1)
caused severe damage. Seed treatment with safener reduced the level of
phytotoxicity caused by the herbicide. Crop yield performance was also
improved substantially with the use of safener. On the other hand, Gesaprim
was effective with and without safener and damage to the crop was minimal at
all rates of application. It was concluded that weeds can be effectively
controlled with the use of Primagram with safener and Gesaprim. Recently, a
chemical control investigation was carried out against a major weed of sorghum
– Sonchus arvensis in Derashe special wereda (SPL, 1988). Primagram (5 ha-1)
and 2,4-D (2 ha-1) were most effective herbicides. Because of superior efficacy
and improved crop productivity, however, 2,4-D is recommended for use
against the weed.
 4 3
A range of herbicides was tested for weed control in maize at Awassa during
1984–986 cropping seasons. The highest yield (5.4 t ha-1) and better control of
weeds was achieved from Bladex and atrazine mixture (2 kg product per
hectare) even though treatment differences were not statistically significant
(IAR, 1986). The agronomic and economic benefits of the application of
Gesaprim 500 FW (atrazine), Primextra 500 FW (atrazine + metolachlor at
1.7:3.3 ratio) and the standard herbicide Primagram 500 FW (atrazine +
metolachlor at 1:1 ratio), all at 2 kg a.i./ha, was studied at Awassa (Yohannes et
al., 1999). Gesaprim controlled the major broadleaved weeds more effectively
and produced higher maize yield and higher net benefit than the other herbicide
and hand weeding treatments. Thus, it was recommended as a cheaper and more
effective alternative to replace the standard herbicide in Awassa area where
broadleaved weeds are prevalent. Early studies from Bako showed combined
application of pendemethalin (1.65 kg a.i./ha) + atrazine (0.75 kg a.i./ha) and
atrazine + metolachlor at 1:1 ratio (2.0 kg a.i./ha) was effective. Particularly,
the former, unlike other herbicide mixtures, offered adequate control of grass
weeds (SARI, 2003).

There are a number of herbicides registered for the control of Parthenium

elsewhere, and where appropriate, chemical control could be considered as one
viable option in Ethiopia. A preliminary investigation was conducted at Werer
Research Center to determine the effectiveness of four pre-emergence
herbicides: Dyanam 500 FW (350 g/l atrazine + 200 g/l flumetralin), Primextra
TZ 500 FW (200 g/l terbutylazine + 300 g/l metolachlor), Gesaprim combi 500
FW (250 g/l atrazine + 250 g/l terbutryne), Stomp 330 EC (330 g/l
pendimethalin) and two had weeding (Kassaahun et al., 1999). There was
significant difference between the herbicides tested. The lowest weed
population was registered from Primextra TZ 500 FW and Gesaprim combi
sprayed plots. The herbicides effectively suppressed the emergence of
Parthenium for more than two months.

Chemicals are one of the most important weed control methods in modern
maize production (SARI, 2003). The complementarities of manual and
chemical control justify the need for the selection of promising herbicides. An
experiment was conducted at Bako during the 1996–1998 cropping seasons to
select pre and post emergence herbicides for the control of Cyperus spp. and
other weeds in maize (Kassa et al., 2001). Maize variety BH-660 was used in
the study. The treatments were Laddok (bentazone 200 g.l + atrazine 200 g/l) at
3 l product per hectare, Laddok (bentazone 200 g/l + atrazine 200 g/l) at 4 l
product/ha, Alazine 35/20 SE (alachlor 350 g/l + atrazine 200 g/l) at 5 l product
per hectare, Basagran (bentazone 480 g/l) at 3 l product per hectare, Basagran
(bentazone 480 g/l) at 4 l product per hectare, Primagram Gold 660 SC (alfa
metolachlor 290 g/l + atrazine 290 g/l) at 4 l product per hectare and twice hand
 6
weeding for three consecutive years. The pre-emergence herbicides offered
effective control of all weeds, whereas post emergence herbicides controlled
broadleaf weeds only. Laddock effectively controlled the target weed, Cyperus
spp. It was concluded that Primagram Gold and Alazine could be successfully
used to manage weeds in maize in Bako area.

A similar experiment was undertaken at Melkassa Research Center, Wolenchiti,

and Ziway during 1997–1998 cropping seasons (Kassa et al., 2001). Katumani
was the maize variety used in the experiment. Annual weeds were dominant
across all testing sites. Moisture stress and insect problem suppressed yield
performance of maize. Nevertheless, it was apparent that the pre-emergence
herbicides, alachlor + atrazine at 2.2 and 2.75 kg a.i./ha and alfa-metolachlor at
1.32 and 1.98 kg a.i./ha gave superior control of both broadleaf and grass
weeds. However, the post-emergence herbicide bentazone + atrazine at both
rates (1.2 and 1.6 kg a.i/ha) was effective only on broadleaf weeds and
moderately effective on Cyperus spp. Overall, Primagram gave on average 3.4
t/ha followed by Gesaprim with 3.3 t/ha. Primagram was more effective in
controlling grass and broadleaf weeds. Gesaprim was not effective in
controlling grass weeds. Herbicides showed promising results in terms of
saving labor during the farmers’ busiest period. It was shown that Primagram
and Gesaprim application required 448 and 406 less labor hours hectare
compared to farmers practice.

The effectiveness of various combinations and rates of post and pre-emergence

herbicides were compared for their effect on weeds and productivity of maize
hybrid, BH 140 during 1995–1997 under irrigation at Werer (Kassaahun, 1998).
Two hand weeding at 35–40 and 55–60 days after crop emergence and the
herbicide, Primextra TZ 500 FW effectively controlled major weeds – Sorghum
arundinaceum, Echinochloa colona, Zelya pentandra, Portulaca oleraceae,
Corchorus olitorius and Boerhaavia erecta. The author recommended that
depending on the severity of infestation the herbicide could be widely used at
the rate of 4 and 5 l ha-1 to manage weeds in Awash Valley area.

Integrated crop and weed management methods were compared in a trial at

Melkassa. Among the single methods employed, recommended weeding
produced 72% higher grain yield (IAR, 1988). Combined use of row planting
and recommended weeding produced 108% and 144% higher grain and straw
yield, respectively, compared to the control (farmer’s practice).
 4 3
Tamado et al. (2002) reported hand hoeing twice and combined use of smother
crop with one hand hoeing significantly reduced Parthenium biomass at
lowland sites with severe weed infestation. Repeated application of 2,4-D was
equally effective in adequately controlling the weed at the same site. Growing
cowpea as a smother crop reduced Parthenium biomass, but it significantly
reduced grain yield, leaf area index, plant height, and biomass of associated
sorghum. Under the conditions of moisture stress, cowpea (that was used as
smother crop) was too suppressive to sorghum. It was concluded that two times
hand-hoeing was effective in providing adequate control of Parthenium and
substantially improving sorghum yield compared to smother crop or 2,4-D.

Research results demonstrated that integrated use of weed control and crop
management practices could enhance productivity of sorghum and suppress
Striga (Fasil et al., 1997). At Sirinka, a treatment consisting of row planting,
mineral fertilizer (42 kg N ha-1) and 2,4-D herbicide (1 ha-1) led to 40%
increase in cereal yield and appreciable reduction in Striga infestation,
compared to the control (broadcast planting, no fertilizer and early weeding;
farmer’s practice). Combined use of row planting, fertilizers and hand pulling
(during flowering) registered 48% higher grain yield and over 50% reduction in
Striga shoot counts compared to the farmer’s practice at Adibakel, in Tigray
Region. While studying indigenous Striga management practices, it was
observed that farmers traditionally employ a variety of measures including
relatively better performing varieties, dry and late planting, inter-row
cultivation and hand weeding to cope up with the scourge (G/Medhin et al.,
1998b).

!
Weed science research has been a widely neglected field up until recently. This
was especially so with sorghum and maize research, which caters for the two
crops of the truly subsistence, low input agriculture of the dry lowlands.
Nevertheless, research efforts made so far have produced highly valuable set of
technologies, knowledge and information, on which further research work could
be based. But the fact is there still remain quite a number of gaps and
challenges that need to be addressed to alleviate the complex weed problem in
the coarse grain producing areas of the country. Some of the challenges faced at
present are

• The growing importance of invasive weeds such as Parthenium, is becoming a

source of major concern. Although it has been over two decades since the
noxious weed was first reported, there is no concerted nation-wide effort
targeted at mitigating the problem;
 6
• Striga is breaking ecological and host range barriers and spreading to new areas
infesting a whole range of new crops. The national research system did not build
the necessary capacity needed to cope up with the highly diverse problem of
Striga. It is very difficult to make headway in the fight against parasitic weeds
depending on technologies generated from field research alone. The field
research has to be backed with research conducted under controlled conditions;
• The weed problem is getting worse in the country. Invasive, hard to control
weed species are spreading at an alarming rate. Intensive effort is required to
improve our knowledge on the biology and ecology of these species before
considerations could be made of containment strategies;
• Weed science research has so far focused on limited aspects: surveys, loss
assessment studies, and chemical control mainly due to lack of trained human
power. There is great need to diversify the lines of investigations followed,
paying greater attention to less explored areas (biological control, cropping
systems etc.) and employing new tools in science (GIS, modeling, bio-
technology etc.);
• The surveys carried out so far were often not very focused and general in nature.
More targeted survey activities will be needed to establish current and future
trends of weed problems, and generate more comprehensive information on
agricultural, socio-economic and health impact of particularly the noxious and
invasive species; and
• The chemical control studies emphasized screening of products for sole
application rather than as part of an integrated weed management approach.
Working on rate and time of application of herbicides is something virtually all
research centers seem to be encouraging very aggressively. Use of chemicals for
weed control should be considered as a last resort especially for the small-scale
agriculture system in this country. Therefore, greater emphasis should be given
to generating and promoting comprehensive package of technologies that are
sustainable and that could effectively address the complex problem of weeds.

Efforts have to be made to boost the productivity of maize and sorghum. One
way of achieving this is through effective management of weeds, which are
among the major production constraints. It is imperative to adopt a strategy,
which integrates research, extension and development for a holistic approach to
the problem of weeds. Future work in this regard should therefore emphasize:

• Identification and characterization of most problematic weeds in maize and

sorghum;
• Studying the biology and ecology of major weed species;
• Developing integrated management approaches including tillage; cropping
systems; mechanical, biological, and manual control. Research has to break
away from the long held tradition of conducting research on single component or
 4 3
factor of production. Developing integrated crop and weed management
methods through multi-disciplinary approach should be the central theme in
future research undertakings;
• Involving the farming community in weed science research and development
using new participatory approaches such as farmer research group (FRG) and
farmer field school (FFS) should receive due emphasis;
• Comprehensive assessment and analysis of the prospects and opportunities for
the promotion of improved weed management in low input farming systems
should be pursued more strongly in the future;
• Efforts need to be made to create better awareness on the weed problem in the
country in general and the dry lowland areas where sorghum and maize are
important through training and sensitization activities; and
• Ensure that weed science discipline is adequately represented in the university
curricula around the country so that young people can take up and build a career
in this important area to strengthen national capacity.

Weeds were and still are the most pressing problem to the subsistence farming
community more than any other category of pests. The problem is particularly
acute in the mid and low altitude areas where sorghum and maize are staple
food crops and are exacerbated by the recurrent drought and unabated natural
resource degradation. It would be helpful to adopt a much broader view and
treat weeds as part of an ecosystem to arrive at a holistic solution(s) for the
problem. Well thought out integrated crop, soil and pest management
approaches have to be made available to cope with the growing problem of
weeds. The desired national goal of addressing production shortfalls to ensure
food security demands a holistic approach to minimize the impact of abiotic and
major biotic factors such as weeds. Therefore, concerted efforts have to be
made to select and integrate compatible and effective technologies into
packages that would enable to deal with the dynamic changes in weed flora,
which will occur in the future due to changes in cropping and crop management
practices.

Greater attention should be rendered to creating the necessary capacity in weed

research and extension to effectively deal with the weed problem in sorghum
and maize growing areas because, very often, there are hardly any other
alternative crops in these areas and the two crops are the source of livelihood
for the farming community. Furthermore, the weed problem in the country in
general and the sorghum and maize areas in particular is growing from bad to
worse. Invasive alien weed species such as Parthenium and Prosopis are
already causing havoc across ecologies due to their eminent threat to agriculture
 6
and biodiversity. Establishing strong and well-organized weed science research
is of paramount importance to face up to the challenge.

Due emphasis should be given to the wealth of indigenous knowledge and build
on those to develop more viable technologies that are within reach to the great
majority of resource poor farmers. There are indications that many traditional
and low input production systems have ecologically sound basis and built-in
risk aversion techniques. In many instances where scientists have had the
patience to understand the principles on which smallholder farmers base their
practices, these production practices have been seen to provide important
conceptual framework for small-scale production systems (Akobundu, 1998).

Ahmed Sherif and C Parker. 1988. Effect of nitrogen sources and organic matter on Sorghum
bicolor L. Moench. and Striga hermonthica (Del.) Benth. Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural
Sciences 8:19-35.
Akobundu O I. 1998. Basic elements for improved weed management in the developing
countries. Report on expert consultation on weed ecology and management. FAO. 22–24
September 1997. Rome.
Aleligne Kefyalew, Tilahun Mulatu and Senayit Regassa. 1992. Preference of farmers for maize
varieties: A case study in the Nazreth area. Research Report No, 19. IAR, Addis Ababa:
IAR.
Asfaw Negassa and Abdissa Gemeda.1991. Verification of the weed control performance of
wheel hoe on maize in farmers fields around Bako. In: Rezene Fessehaie (ed.). Proceedings
of the 9th Annual Conference of EWSC. 9–10 April 1991. Addis Ababa.
Asfaw Negassa, Benti Tolessa, S Franzel, Gemechu Gedeno and Legesse Dadi. 1990. On-farm
research and the development of early maturing maize variety. Research Report No. 9,
IAR, Addis Ababa, IAR.
Assefa Teferu. 1999. Weed incidence and control in the major crops at Asossa: An overview.
Pp. 146-161. In: Fasil Reda and D.G. Tanner (eds.). Arem 5: 14–26.
Babiker A.G.T. and Fasil Reda. 1991. Recent advances in Striga research in Sudan and
Ethiopia. In: Ransom JK, LJ Musselman, AD Worsham and C Parker (eds.). Proceedings
of the fifth symposium on parasitic weeds. CYMMIT, Nairobi, Kenya.
Birhane Biru, Nigussie Tesfa-Michael and Habtamu Admassu. 1991. Appropriate cultural
practices for dryland farming areas of Ethiopia. In: Reddy, M.S. and Kidane Georgis (eds.).
Proceedings of the 1st national workshop on dryland farming research in Ethiopia. 26–28
November 1991. Nazreth, Ethiopia.
CSA (Central Statistical Authority). 2001. Report on forecast of area and production of major
crops for 2001/2. Statistical Bulletin No. 257. Addis Ababa, December 2001.
CSA. 2002. Statistical abstract for 2001. Addis Ababa, March, 2002.
Dawit Mulugetta and Rezene Fessehaie. 1990. Chemical control of weeds in maize. In: Parker
C. and Rezene Fessehaie (eds.). Proceedings of the 6th Annual Meeting of EWSC. March
31–April 1, 1988. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Esilaba, A.O., Fasil Reda, Ransom, JK, Wondimu Bayu, G/Medhin W/Wahid and Beyenesh
Zemichael. 2000. Integrated nutrient management strategies for soil fertility improvement
and Striga control in northern Ethiopia. African Crop Science Journal 8(4): 403–410.
 4 3
Esilaba, A.O., Tilahun Mulatu, Fasil Reda, Ransom, J.K., G/Medhin W/Wahid, Adane Tesfaye,
Ibrahim Fitwi and Gobena Abate. 1998. A diagnostic survey on Striga in the northern
Ethiopian highlands. Arem 4: 13-27.
Fasil Reda. 1999. Striga research in Ethiopia: achievements and future prospects. In: Habtu
Assefa (ed.). Proceedings of the 25th Anniversary Conference of Nazreth Agricultural
Research Center. 20–23 September 1995. Nazreth.
Fasil Reda. 2002. Striga hermonthica in Tigray (northern Ethiopia) – Prospects for control and
improvement of crop productivity through mixed cropping. PhD Thesis. Free University,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Fasil Reda and C. Parker. 1990. A host range study of different Striga samples and Alectra
vogelli. Pp. 75–81. In: Parker C. and Rezene Fessehaie (eds.). Proceedings of EWSC 6th
Annual Meeting. 31 March – 1 April 1988. Addis Ababa: EWSC.
Fasil Reda, G/Medhin W/Wahid, Beyenesh Zemichael and Wondimu Bayou. 1997. An
integrated approach to the control of Striga in sorghum. Pest management Journal of
Ethiopia 1: 43-49.
Fasil Reda and Wondimu Bayou. 2001. Striga hermonthica control through long-term crop
rotation in sorghum-based cropping system in northern Ethiopia. In: Fer AP Thalouarn,
DM Joel, LJ Musselman, C Parker and JAC Verkleij (eds). Pp. 304. Proceedings of the 7th
International Parasitic Weed Symposium. Nantes, France.
G/Medhin W/Wahid, Beyenesh Zemichael and Ibrahim Fitiwi. 1998a. The status of Striga
problem in Tigray. Arem 4: 28–36.
G/Medhin W/Wahid, Fasil Reda and Beyenesh Zemichael 1998b. Indigenous Striga
management systems of farmers in Tigray: An overview. Arem 4: 37–45.
Gemechu Gedeno and Legesse Dadi. 1989. Verification of hand weeding recommendation for
maize under farmers’ conditions in Bako. In: Rezene Fessehaie (ed.). Proceedings of the 7th
EWSC Annual Conference. 13–14 April 1989. Addis Abeba, Ethiopia.
Getachew Alem. 1989. A review of minimum tillage research in Ethiopia. Pp. 57-73. In:
Ahmed Sherif, C Parker, A Stroud and Rezene Fessehaie (eds.). Problems and priorities for
weed science in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. EWSC.
IAR. 1988. Asossa Research Center progress report for 1986–1988. Addis Ababa: IAR.
IAR. 1986. Awasa Research Center progress report for 1986. Addis Ababa: IAR.
IAR. 1989. Awasa Research Center progress report for 1989. Addis Ababa: IAR.
IAR. 1994. Mekelle Research Center progress report for 1986–1987. Addis Ababa: IAR.
IAR. 1987. Nazreth Research Center progress report for 1987. Addis Ababa: IAR.
IAR. 1988. Nazreth Research Center progress report for 1988. Addis Ababa: IAR.
Kassa Yihun, Tolessa Debele, Tolera Abera and Giref Sahile. 2001. Review of weed research in
maize in Ethiopia. In: Mandefro Nigussie, D.G. Tanner and S. Twumasi-Afriye (eds.).
Proceedings of the 2nd National Maize Workshop of Ethiopia. 12–16 November, 2001.
Kassahun Zewdie. 1998. Pre- and post-emergence herbicides for irrigated maize in Ethiopia. Pp
331–333. Maize Production Technology for the Future: Challenges and Opportunities.
Proc. of the 6th Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Maize Conference, 21–25 September
1998, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. CIMMYT and EARO.
Kasahun, Zewdie, Olani Nikus and Tefera Asamenew. 1999. Evaluation of pre-emergence
herbicides for the control of Parthenium hysterophorus in sorghum. Arem 5: 130-137.
Mengistu H/Georgis, Mengistu Hulluka and Matias Mekuria. 2005. Determination of the
critical period of weed control and the effect of mixed weed population on maize (Zea
mays) yield and yield components. Arem 6: 57-68.
Parker, C. 1988. Review of Striga studies in Ethiopia up to 1986. In: Rezene Fessehaie and C
Parker (eds.). Proceedings (Problems and control of parasitic weeds in Ethiopia) of the
Second Ethiopian Weed Science Workshop. 29–30 September 1988, Addis Abeba,
Ethiopia.
 6
Parker C, and CR Riches, 1993. Parasitic weeds of the world: Biology and control. CAB
International. Wallingford.
Rezene Fessehaie, Woldeyesus Sinebo, Aliye Hussien and Asfaw Negassa. 1993. Weed control
research on maize in Ethiopia: A review. Pp. 42–73. In: Proceedings of the 1st National
Maize Workshop of Ethiopia, 5–7 May 1992, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. IAR/CIMMYT,
Addis Ababa.
SARI, 2003. Awassa Research Center Progress Report for 2003. SARI.
SPL (Scientific Phyto-pathological Laboratory). 1988. Progress report for 1987/88. Ambo,
Ethiopia.
Stroud, A. 1989. Weed management in Ethiopia: An extension and training manual. FAO,
Rome.
Tenaw Workayehu. 1991. Effect of crop rotation on weed control and grain yield of maize. In:
Rezene Fessehaie (ed.). Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference of EWSC. 9–10 April
1991. Addis Ababa.
Tilahun Mulatu, Teshome Regassa and Franzel, S. 1990. On-farm research in Nazreth area:
Experiences in developing technologies for smallholders. Rsearch report No. 8. IAR: Addis
Ababa.
Tilahun Tadious and Tesfa Bogale. 1989. Optimum number of hand weeding for maize
production. Sebil 2: 18–19.
Woldeyesus Sinebo and Aderajew Hadis.1991. Tillage and weed control effects on weed
growth and yield of maize at Abobo. In: Rezene Fessehaie (ed.). Proceedings of the 9th
Annual Conference of EWSC. 9–10 April 1991. Addis Ababa.
Wondimu Bayu, Selomon Binor and L. Admasu. 2001. Tolerance of sorghum landraces and
varieties to Striga (Striga hermonthica) infestation in Ethiopia. Acta Agronomica
Hungarica 49(4): 343–349.
Yohannes Lemma, Taye Tessema, J.K. Ransom and Belayneh Admasu. 1999. Incidence and
distribution of Striga in Ethiopia. In: Fasil Reda and D.G. Tanner (eds.). Arem 5: 66–74.

View publication stats