Book Chapter Richard

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/320234151
Cassava cultivation, processing and potential uses in Ghana
Chapter · January 2017
CITATIONS READS
13 22,384
3 authors:
Richard Bayitse Ferdinand Tornyie

CSIR - Institute of Industrial Research CSIR - Council for Scientific and Industrial Research - Ghana
5 PUBLICATIONS 111 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 27 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Anne Belinda Bjerre

Danish Technological Institute
127 PUBLICATIONS 9,264 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
The MacroAlgaeBiorefinery – sustainable production of 3G bioenergy carriers and high value aquatic fish feed from macroalgae [MAB3] View project
Anaerobic digestion View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Richard Bayitse on 08 January 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

In: Handbook on Cassava ISBN: 978-1-53610-291-8
Editor: Clarissa Klein © 2017 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Chapter 16
CASSAVA CULTIVATION, PROCESSING AND

POTENTIAL USES IN GHANA
Richard Bayitse1,*, Ferdinand Tornyie1,†

and Anne-Belinda Bjerre2, , PhD ‡
1
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research,
Institute of Industrial Research, Accra, Ghana
2
Danish Technological Institute, Taastrup, Denmark
ABSTRACT
This review highlights the traditional and improved methods of cassava production
and processing in Ghana. It also explains the geographical distribution of cassava
production and utilisation. Facts and figures from agricultural production in Ghana is
used to analyse production trends as well as the contribution of cassava to Agricultural
Gross Domestic Production. Most importantly, cassava is a staple food crop and accounts
for about 152.9 kg per capita consumption. Making it one of the most processed crop
into gari, fufu powder and kokonte to increase its shelf life. Additionally, it can be used
as an industrial crop because of its high starch content. These process technologies have
contributed to the reduction of post-harvest losses in cassava production in Ghana. The
residue generated from cassava processing has a huge potential in biorefinery. The review
also brings into focus current research works in cassava residue utilisation, reviewing
technologies for converting this valuable feedstock which is a mixture of cassava peels,
trimmings and cuttings into sugar platform in a biorefinery for the production of major
products such as ethanol, lactic acid and protein.
INTRODUCTION
Cassava (Manihot esculenta Cralztz) is a starchy root crop which is an essential food
eaten mainly by developing countries. The root tuber and leaves are edible and serve as
*
rbayitse@gmail.com.
†
ferditor100@gmail.com.
‡
anbj@teknologisk.dk.
Complimentary Contributor Copy

314 Richard Bayitse, Ferdinand Tornyie and Anne-Belinda Bjerre
source of nutritional food for about 500 million people and more worldwide. It is an
important crop in developing countries because, it is a major food for households, drought
tolerant, fairly resistance to plant disease, and extremely flexible in its cultivation,
management requirements and harvesting cycles (FAO, 2002; Meridian Institute, 2009).
Cassava is said to be the highest producer of carbohydrates when it comes to staple crops.
According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), cassava is graded
fourth food crop in the developing countries, next to rice, maize and wheat (FAO, 2002).
Cassava which is consumed in all the 10 regions of Ghana was introduced from Brazil, to
the tropical areas of Africa by the Portuguese during the 16th and 17th centuries (Jones, 1959).
During its introduction in Ghana, it was grown around trading ports, forts and castles and it
was a major food that was eaten by slaves and the Portuguese as well. Around the second half
of the 18th century, cassava had become the most commonly grown and eaten by majority of
people along the coastlines of Ghana (Adams, 1957). Cassava cropping then spread from the
coastlines of the country to all over the country progressively until it became a major staple
food in most parts of the country following a serious drought in the year 1982/1983 when
most crops failed dramatically (Korang-Amoakoh et al., 1987). Cassava then became a
central food in Ghana that was eaten by various ethnic groups, processed in various forms.
Currently, cassava occupies an important position in Ghana's agricultural economy and
contribute about 46% of agricultural Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Cassava accounts for a
daily calorie intake of 30% in Ghana and is grown by almost every farming family (FAO,
2000). Cassava as a food security crop can be used in various forms. It can be eaten raw by
cooking, pounded into fufu or semi processed. Some processed forms include, gari, tapioca
and flour for konkonte. It is also used as animal feed. Gari is exported to neighboring West
African countries. Cassava is harvested at the farm and the tuber transported to a processing
facility. These process technologies have contributed to the reduction of postharvest losses in
cassava production in Ghana. The residue generated from cassava processing has a huge
potential in biorefinery because it can easily be hydrolysed by appropriate enzymes into
fermentable sugars.
PATTERN OF CASSAVA PRODUCTION

Ghana is the sixth producer of cassava (15,113,000MT) in the world in terms of value
and in terms of volume as in the year 2015, the third in Africa and the second among
producers of fresh cassava roots in West Africa (FAO, 2015). Cassava is cultivated in all the
10 regions of Ghana. The five leading producers by regions on average over the past three
years (2012-2014) included, Eastern: 4,307,372.22MT, Brong Ahafo: 3,460,907.08MT,
Ashanti: 2,435,915.22MT, Central: 1,813,888.18MT, Northern: 1,403,454.35MT. Average
area cropped per year between 1999 and 2004 was about 750,000 hectares, yielding about 10
million metric tonnes, increasing to 889,000 hectares in 2011 and producing 14 million metric
tonnes (SRID-MoFA, 2012). However, in 2012 the total land area for cultivation dropped to
869,000 hecares but with slight increase in yield to 14.5 million metric tonnes of cassava
increasing to 889,000 hectares of cultivated land in 2014 producing 16.5 million metric
tonnes of cassava (SRID-MoFA, 2012, 2014). The bulk of the nation's cassava is produced in

Cassava Cultivation, Processing and Potential Uses in Ghana 315
the south and middle part of Ghana, which accounts for roughly 78% of the total cassava
production. Currently, Eastern region is the largest producer of cassava in Ghana accounting
for 3 years average of 4.3 million metric tonnes spanning 2012-2014 (SRID-MoFA, 2014).
Mean annual growth rate of area planted with cassava increased by 1.24% between 2003-
2005 and 2006-2008 and a marginal decrease of 0.22% between 2009-2011 and 2012-2014
(SRID-MoFA, 2014). The decline is predicted to continue next year due to slight drought in
the Sub-Sahara African (SSA) region. This is a treat to Ghana’s food security being that
human population keeps increasing and cassava is a major staple food in the country (FAO,
2015).
CASSAVA CULTIVATION
Over the years, cassava has been recognised as a major crop in Ghanaian agricultural and
Africa in general. Although cassava was considered as a food security crop in most places
where it had not previously been grown, notably in dry areas and marginal lands, the focus
has gradually changed and it become a commercial crop for most farmers. This is due to the
ability of the crop to withstand drought and thrive under harsh conditions (FAO, 2002). The
major cassava planting season is mainly during the rainy season from April to November.
With the intervention of new varieties in Ghana, Cassava is harvested approximately 12
months after planting. The largest percentage of the cassava root harvest comes onto the
market in the early part of the wet season (May to July) before planting begins. Harvesting
during the dry season (November to March) is in small quantities (Sam & Deppah, 2009).
Mix cropping is common in Ghana and cassava is often mix cropped with maize, cocoyam,
yam and cowpea. The crop is also rotated with some of these mix crops when farmers observe
decline in soil fertility or productivity, the land is cropped to cassava for a period ranging
between 12 to 18 months after which the maize/cowpea rotation is resumed. The total land
area used for cassava cultivation increased by 18.5% since 2005. This increase in land use for
cassava cultivation is as a result of its importance for industrial applications (FAO, 2002).
Generally, the crop needs a warm and humid climate to grow with temperatures
averaging 25-27ºC. The tropical lowlands with altitude below 150 m with annual rainfall
from 500 mm to 5,000 mm are most suitable for higher root yield. Because the plant is
resistance to prolong drought it is able to thrive in regions where annual rainfall is low or
where seasonal distribution is irregular (USDA NRCS, n.d.). The crop is also able to grow on
poor and degraded soil because it can withstand low pH, high level of exchangeable
aluminum and low concentration of phosphorus in the soil matrix (Howeler, 2001). The agro-
ecological regions of Ghana have mean annual rainfall varying between 800 mm and 2,200
mm (SRID-MoFA, 2014) making them very suitable for cassava cultivation. The soil pH vary
from one ecological zone to the other but generally are in the range of 3.5 to 7.8. Ghana has a
tropical climate with wet and dry seasons. The rainfall distribution is bimodal in the Forest,
Transitional and Coastal Zones, giving rise to major and minor growing season; whiles
Guinea Savannah and Sudan Savannah have unimodal distribution resulting in a single
growing season (SRID-MoFA, 2014).

The land is prepared for planting before the major rain starts in June. The slash and burn
is carried out on virgin lands where planting is done for the first time. But lands which have
been cultivated before are cleared without burning before planting is done. Hoes are used to
make either small mounds or ridges for planting the cassava stick cuttings.
Cutlasses and hoes are also used for weeding and cutting of planting materials. Currently
tractors are not popularly used but with the inception of commercial farming, it is becoming a
very useful tool for cassava cultivation. Stem cuttings of 20 cm lengths with an average
weight of 0.085 kg/stem cutting are used as planting materials and are not pre-treated before
planting. For traditional farms, about 3,240 stem cuttings are used per hectare, whiles
commercial farms use 10,000 stem cuttings/hectare. Application of herbicides are not
common for cassava cultivation for now but may be used when commercial farming takes off
in full. Because cassava cultivation is rain fed, irrigation is not used for now. Mulching in
cassava cultivation is done basically by allowing the slashed grasses mostly Andropogon on
the field for some few days and then ploughed into the soil using hoes. This is done only once
before planting. In most of the traditional farms fertilizers are not applied, but with the
introduction of new concept, Integrated Crop Management (ICM), farmers are encouraged
and trained on fertilizer application to increase yield. Demonstration farms are set up to teach
farmers. Fertilizer application is done by using hand and containers. In cassava cultivation
pruning is not common or not done, but weeding is done at intervals to prevent weed growth.
When the plant is young this is done more frequently depending on the type of grass found at
the farm and when the plant is grown, the frequency is reduced and at full maturity, the farms
are not weeded. An average of 13 people are mostly involved in the cultivation of 1 hectare of
cassava farm using about 78 man hours.
CASSAVA VARIETIES DEVELOPED AND CULTIVATED IN GHANA

Over the years, there has been increase research of improved varieties of cassava in
Ghana. The National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) have released about 24
improved cassava varieties since 1993, which are high yielding, disease and pest resistant and
mature early. Currently, Crop Research Institute of Council for Scientific and Industrial
Research, Ghana, has released 11 improved varieties (CSIR-CRI, 2014). In Ghana, farmer’s
preference for the variety they choose for cultivation is based on; yield, in-soil storage
(longevity), disease resistance (Acheampong et al., 2013), utilisation purpose (multiple usages
or the food type the cassava will be processed into) and readily available as planting
materials. Nevertheless, new variety adoption by small scale farmers is very low leading to
low outputs and incomes. There is low adoptability of high yielding improved cassava
varieties in Ghana over the past 15 years due to low understanding of the varieties
(Acheampong et al., 2013) and their management practices, and availability of planting
materials. Farmer’s selection for varieties they cultivate is also based on the market value for
the various varieties. For examples there is high value for cassava varieties that are used for
preparing a local food called ‘fufu’ (pounded boiled cassava) because it is one of the
delicacies for Ghanaians especially those in the south.

FACTORS AFFECTING CASSAVA PRODUCTION

Cassava production is faced with serious biotic constraints, such as diseases and pests,
poor handling of planting materials, poor agronomic practices, limited technical know-how in
cropping new varieties and poor postharvest handling and processing. The major factor that
affects cassava production in SSA is pests of cassava; green mite and the variegated
grasshopper. The main diseases affecting cassava are cassava mosaic disease (CMD), cassava
bacterial blight, cassava anthracnose disease and root rot. In Africa, 50% of yield losses can
be attributed to pests, disease and poor cultivation practices (FAO, 2002).
Over the years, cassava production worldwide had been increasing remarkably at 4% p.a
overtaking world population growth, however, due to unfavourable weather conditions,
cassava production growth rate is predicted to reduce in 2015. This is probably going to be
the first time phenomenon in virtually ten years, which could lead to the SSA production
estimate of 163 million tonnes; a 3 million tonne drop from 2014. This drop over the SSA has
reflected in the 0.2% drop in cassava production in Ghana in the year 2014. The drop has
been partly attributed to El Niño and uncertain demand for cassava non-food products (FAO,
2013). Mechanisation, development of new technologies and new improve varieties of
cassava and making planting material available at the right time will strengthen cassava
production in the near future in Ghana. One of the main causes of low productivity of cassava
in Ghana is the continuous use of indigenous, low yielding crop varieties (FAO, 2002; SRID-
MoFA, 2014).
POLICY ON CASSAVA PRODUCTION IN GHANA

The Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA) is the lead ministry of Ghana government
that is tasked with the responsibility of developing and executing policies and strategies for
the development of the agriculture sector. Over the years, MoFA has been involved and
leading various agriculture policies to improve agriculture production in Ghana. A lot of
interventions have been made over the years by various organisations to develop cassava in
the country however, government policies relegated the crop in favour of export crops such as
cocoa, coffee and maize (Kleih et al., 2013). In the early 1930’s research works on cassava
was directed toward high yields, low HCN content and excellent cooking qualities.
Consequently, research and development (R&D) in cassava have focused on new high
yielding varieties and improved pest, disease and drought resistance varieties. Since 1984,
various projects have been rolled to improve cassava production in the country. Some of the
interventions included: Ecologically Sustainable Cassava Plant Protection (ESCaPP) project;
National Root and Tuber Crops Improvement Project (NTRCIP-1988) as a component of the
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) sponsored Ghana Smallholder
Rehabilitation and Development Programme (SRDP); National Agricultural Research Project
(NARP); Medium-Term Agricultural Development Project (MTADP) in 1991; Food and
Agriculture Sector Development Policy (FASDEP II) and the Medium Term Agriculture
Sector Investment Plan (METASIP 2010-15); Root and Tuber Improvement and Marketing
Programme (RTIMP) funded by IFAD and West African Agricultural Productivity
Programme (WAAPP) to mention few (Kleih et al., 2013).

CASSAVA HARVESTING AND PROCESSING

Cassava as a staple food crop in Ghana can be eaten fresh by boiling in water and or
pounded into traditional food called “fufu.” To achieve food security and to develop the agro-
based economy in the rural areas to improve their living conditions, processing of cassava
becomes very important. Cassava-based industrial food products have a potential of boosting
the local economy. For industrialisation of cassava, it is necessary to improve upon the
traditional methods of processing to improve the quality of product as well as to prolong the
shelf life. Cassava harvesting is full of drudgery especially during the dry season when the
soil is much firm and this has been a major constraint to commercial farmers. Cassava
harvesting is usually manual by; cutting stem about 0.75meters above ground/leaving it
uncut, the stem is held with both hands and pulled up to bring out the root from the soil. In
instances that some of the roots remains in the soil, a hoe or cutlass is use to dig them out.
In 2013, a mechanical cassava harvester called TEK mechanical harvester which is
tractor drawn device was introduced. The device was tested and functions much better in the
dry season when soils are much firmer, than during the wet season when soils are loose
(WAAPP/PPAAO, 2013). The technology is yet to be adapted for commercial purpose.
TRADITIONAL CASSAVA PROCESSING

Agro-processing activities in the rural levels are responsible for the preservation and
distribution of most of Ghana’s agricultural produce. These activities play a major role in the
post-harvest food system and are mainly carried out by rural women (IFAD, 2007) who
employ very old and reliable traditional techniques in the processing of root and tuber crops.
Traditional methods employed are simple and easy to use for their level of production. The
equipment used for the traditional processes are cheaper compared to what is used for modern
high technology processes. However, these traditional technologies produce products of
relatively low quality coupled with high labour (Dziedzoave, et al. 1999; Westby, 2002).
There are six (6) operational units involved in traditional cassava processing; peeling,
chipping, grating, fermentation, sieving and frying/drying/roasting.
PEELING
Cassava is peeled to remove none edible outer covering which is commonly known to
contain most of the toxic cyanogenic glucosides. Peeling is usually done manually with hand
using knife. Peeling is done either by slitting along the length of one side of the root with a
knife followed by using the fingers to roll back the peels from the fleshy portion of the root,
or by using the knife to slice the outer covering entirely from the flesh. Hand peeling is slow
and laborious but it is the only method available now and used for cassava peeling in Ghana.

Figure 1. Peeling of cassava by women at cassava processing facility at Bawjiase, Ghana.
CHIPPING
Chipping is done to reduce the thickness of the cassava tuber thereby exposing the
maximum surface area of the starchy flesh to facilitate quick drying. The drying process is
affected by the size of the slice. It is known that thick slices take much longer time to dry
because the rate of moisture diffusion from the inside is slower and the time for complete
drying is longer. Usually sun-drying systems are effective when the chips are dried by passing
air over them than by the direct effects of the sun’s rays. For efficient drying, the chip’s shape
should allow air to readily circulate through a large mass of them.
FERMENTATION AND WATER REMOVAL

Traditional operations normally combine both fermentation and water removal in one
unit operation. The grated mash is put into jute bags, baskets, or any perforated material that
allows water to drain and left to ferment for 1-5 days. During the fermentation, the sacks
containing the cassava mash are twisted tightly and put on wooden boards with heavy stones
pilled on them to press and remove the water (James et al., 2012; Quaye, Gayin, Yawson and
Plahar, 2009). The fermentation process can be reduced by adding a starter culture in the form
of seeding with previously fermented liquor. The fermentation process affects the quality of
the product in terms of taste, colour and texture and must be properly controlled.
GRATING
In traditional set up, grating is done manually with hand. But power operated graters of
different models are also manufactured locally and used. Hand grating is a cumbersome

operation and is normally done after washing and allowing excess water to drain from the
cassava flesh to prevent the cassava from being slippery during grating. The manual grater is
made up of galvanised metal sheet or a piece of flattened can or tin, punched with about 3mm
diameter nails leaving a raised jagged flange on the underside. This grating surface is fixed on
a wooden frame forming a dome shape or flat and the cassava pieces pressed against the
jagged side of the metal and rubbed vigorously with strong downward movements. It is not
possible to completely grate a whole cassava piece, 3% to 5% of the cassava had to be left un-
grated. A skilful person is able to produce only about 20 kg/hour (Quaye et al., 2009).
SIEVING
After pressing to remove the water, the relatively dry cassava mash is broken up and
sieved to remove the large lumps and fibre to obtain a homogenous product. This is done by
using sieves made from bamboo, palm leaves or raffia cane by rubbing and pressing the
broken lump on the sieve with the palm. Mechanical sieves are also available and used in
small commercial operations.
FRYING/ROASTING AND DRYING

Frying of gari is a combination of two processes namely; roasting and drying. At the rural
set up frying of gari is done in shallow aluminum pans, or in earthenware pans, over an open
wood fire. The sieved cassava mash is spread thinly in the pan in 2-4kg batches depending on
the size of the frying pan. A piece of calabash is often used to press the mash against the hot
surface of the pan but scraped quickly and stirred constantly to keep the material moving to
prevent it from burning until frying is completed at about 80° to 85°C. The quick heating
partially gelatinises the gari which is dried during frying. The process takes 30-35 minutes,
with the moisture content of the final product reduced to about 18% (Quaye et al., 2009).
GARI PROCESSING
Gari is one of the most popular processed cassava products in all the cassava producing
districts in Ghana. Traditional processing of gari from fresh cassava is made up of various
unit operations of peeling, washing, grating, pressing and fermentation, sieving and roasting.
The peeled tubers are washed thoroughly with water and grated by rubbing on the rough
surface of a perforated galvanised metal sheet fixed to a wooden board support. The grated
cassava mash is packed into jute bags and the open ends tied securely with rope. The loaded
bags are then packed on wooden racks and heavy stones placed on them to squeeze out the
starchy juice. After which fermentation is done for a period of about two days. The pressed
fermented dough is dried in the Sun and sieved with traditional sieves. The sieved grains are
roasted over fire in open cast iron frying pan with quick stirring until cooked and crisp. The
roasted mass is again sieved to remove lumps, and packaged for storage and marketing
(James et al., 2012; Quaye et al., 2009).

Figure 2. Frying of gari using improved cook-stove in Kete Krachi, Ghana.
“KOKONTE” PROCESSING
Traditional processing of cassava into “kokonte” requires less effort as compared to gari
processing. The peeled roots are cut into small pieces and dried in the sun for 3 -6 days,
depending on the sun’s intensity. Smaller pieces dry faster than the bigger one. Fermentation
is achieved during drying, and this provided the desired aroma to the dried product. The
potential of mould growth is reduced when drying is done rapidly. The dried product has a
long shelf life and could be stored for several weeks as whole chips. This intermediate
product is milled into flour and used in the preparation of a cooked traditional meal (Quaye et
al., 2009).
AGBELIMA PROCESSING
Traditional processing of cassava to fermented cassava dough is normally called
“agbelima.” The unit processes involved is similar to gari processing as described earlier but
the pressed and fermented product is not fried. This pressing and fermentation enhance the
storage properties of the dough but only for a few days. The fermented dough is used for the
preparation of Ghanaian dishes like (Akple or banku) and “Yakeyake.”

PRODUCT DEVELOPED WITH HIGHLY QUALITY

CASSAVA FLOUR (HQCF)
In Ghana, several products have been developed using HQCF. A composite proportion of
1:4 of HQCF to wheat flour is use to bake bread adding other ingredients like milk, sugar,
margarine, salt, nutmeg, baking powder etc. Pastries are made using cassava flour by
replacing 75% of wheat flour in sponge cakes and chiffon cakes, 50% in butter cakes and
cookies, and 25% in doughnuts and spaghetti. Noodles are also made from cassava flour by
replacing 25-50% of the rice starch used and it gives a softer and elastic nature to the noodles
(Dziedzoave et al., 2003). Cassava flour is used in the brewery industry to produce beer as in
the Root beer; a popular beer in Ghana. The HQCF is also used as binding agents in food and
plywood industry, and as adhesives to replace maize starch in starch-based adhesives.
INTEGRATED CASSAVA PROCESSING PLANT

Over the years, various cassava processing machines have been designed to aid in one or
two stages in the processing line. CSIR-Institute of Industrial Research, Ghana and other
institutions have been instrumental in design and manufacturing of cassava processing
machines with effort to integrate the various machines. An Integrated Cassava Processing
Plant is designed to process 10-25metric tones of fresh cassava tubers into traditional
fermented derivatives including gari, kokonte, agbelima vis-à-vis relatively new product of
unfermented high quality cassava flour. Another unique feature of the plant is the
incorporation of an animal feed processing unit that converts the cassava peels into animal
feeds supplements to promote rearing of goats, sheep, cows etc. Three main machine
incorporated into traditional process techniques to ensure production of unfermented high
quality cassava flour are dryer for drying the sieved fine dough into flakes, hammer mill for
milling and sieving the dried flour flakes and sifter to capture and finally sieve and grade the
finely milled unfermented high quality cassava flour (Hahn, 2006; Selormey, et al. 2006).
HOW THE INTEGRATED CASSAVA PROCESSING

PLANT TECHNOLOGY WORKS
The technology involves peeling of cassava manually and carefully to ensure total
removal of the peels without peeling off a greater portion of the flesh in which the starch
tissues are contained. The peeled cassava is washed thoroughly with clean water in three (3)-
segment washing trough. Grating is done with a diesel-engine driven horizontal shaft Grater
and/or a motorised vertical shaft Grater. The cassava mash can be fermented and used to
process gari. The cassava mash captured in jute sacks are pressed with the help of a single
manual screw and two double screw manual presses to dewater the cassava mash. The
pressed dough is fed into the horizontal shaft drum Grater to disintegrate dough into fine
granules and then sieved with a sieve which consists of a rotating drum with mesh. The
roughages retained by the screen are considered by-product and used mostly as animal feed.
The fine dough is dried with an electric dryer and after drying, the cooled flakes is fed into

the mechanise hammer mill consisting of stainless steel hammer. The milled flakes are drown
out of the hammer mill into a stainless steel hammer mill-blower-sifter-cyclone, falling by
gravity into a hopper of a sifter guided with a slide to avoid overloading. Medium and coarse
flour particles, which are not sieved are fed back into the hammer mill for further milling to
obtain the fine high unfermented cassava flour. To make kokonte, after peeling and washing
the cassava, the cassava is fed into motorises chipping machine to chip the cassava into
smaller sizes and dried using a hybrid solar dryer to form kokonte. The peels are roughly
milled and fed into a motorised feed mixing machine to make animal feed supplement
(Dziedzoav, et al., 2006; Selormey, et al., 2006).
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
Cassava roots are an excellent source of carbohydrates. However, this food source has
three major deficiencies: poor shelf-life, low content of protein and free amino acids, and high
content of the poisonous cyanogenic glucosides (CNG): linamarin (96%) and lotaustralin
(4%) (Cooke & Coursey, 1981). These cyanogens are distributed widely throughout the plant,
with large amounts in the leaves and the root cortex (skin layer) and, generally, smaller
amounts in the root parenchyma (interior). The designation of bitter and sweet varieties of
cassava depends on the associated levels of toxicity (Sundaresan et al., 1987). Consumption
of cassava products with high cyanogens levels may cause acute intoxications (Mlingi et al.,
1992), aggravate goiter (Bourdoux et al., 1982) and, in severe circumstances, induce paralytic
diseases (Tylleskar et al., 1992). To avoid dietary cyanide exposure, the glycosides and their
metabolites, collectively known as cyanogens, must be removed by processing before
consumption.
Available research data confirms that peeling, first substantial process step lowers
cassava toxicity, as the CNG distributed in large amounts in the root cortex (skin layer) is
removed (Cooke & Coursey, 1981). Additionally, grating of the pulp, as the second step in
processing, enables linamarin to have contact with its hydrolytic enzyme (linamarase),
resulting in hydrolysis and subsequent removal of the breakdown products (Sornyotha et al.,
2010).
Fermentation is another process operation which has been observed to detoxify cassava.
Fermentation experiment conducted by Lambri et al., (2013) confirmed that cultured
microorganism played significant role in cynogen detoxification in cassava. They further
concluded that yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, followed by Oenococcus oeni and
Lactobacillus plantarum V22 were more effective in degrading linamarin after 24 hours than
mixed cultures. These findings confirm the results of other researches (Tweyongyere &
Katongole, 2002), regarding the fermentation of cassava roots soaked in water in which
microbial growth was shown to be essential for the efficient elimination of cyanogens
(Westby & Choo, 1994).

POTENTIAL UTILISATION OF CASSAVA RESIDUES

Cassava is harvested at the farm and the tuber transported to a processing facility.
Cassava stalk and leaves are the major residues generated at the farm level. In 2014 about 3.7
million MT of cassava stalk was estimated to have been generated at farms using crop
residue ration of 0.192 (Koopmans & Koppejan, 1997; OECD/IEA, 2010; SRID-MoFA,
2014). Cassava stalk is used as planting material and excess is sometimes burnt or left at the
farm to decay. Stalks of new improved varieties are sold to farmers and in subsequent
years enough is generated and excess becomes waste. Cassava leaves are also used for
food by both humans and animals because of its nutritional value. Consumption of cassava
leaves by humans is limited, but that of animals is prominent in areas of livestock rearing
especially goats and sheep.
Cassava leaves are considered as a good source of supplementary protein which can be
used for preparing dishes in order to add variety to the diet as well as nutrition. The
digestibility and nutritional value of cassava leaves have been investigated by Eggum, (1970)
and Ravidran et al., (1987) who found it to be 80% for the protein in young leaves and
67% for the protein of older ones. Cassava leaves are good source of minerals. They are
particularly rich in Ca, Mg, Fe, Mn and Zn. They are also rich in ascorbic acid and vitamin A
and contain significant amount of riboflavin. But considerable losses of vitamins particularly
of ascorbic acid occur during processing (Ravindran, n.d.). Cassava leaf yields amounting to
as much as 4.60 MT dry matter per hectare may be produced as a by- product at root harvest
(Ravindran & Rajaguru, 1988).
Apart from cassava stalks and leaves generated at the farm levels, tons of cassava residue
are generated at processing facilities. The cassava residue is composed of peels and
trimmings. Peels normally consist of the thin pericarp and the thicker ring. Most processes
remove both the pericarp and the thicker ring along with some pulp adhered to the peels.
Analysis of the chemical composition of cassava peels indicates the following: dry matter
86.5–94.5%; organic matter 81.9–93.9%; crude protein 4.1–6.5%; hemicellulose and
cellulose 34.4%; and lignin 8.4% (Kongkiattikajorn & Sornvoraweat, 2011). The composition
of cassava residue make it a good resource for biorefinery. Composition analysis of the
cassava residue by Bayitse et al., (2015) indicated that 47.16% was made up of starch, 2.40%
protein and 83.41% glucose. Glucose is one of the major raw material in biorefinery and can
be used to produce ethanol, lactic acid, and lysine. Cassava peel has some amount of crude
protein as specified in composition analysis by Bayitse et al., (2015). The protein content of
the cassava peel can be enhanced using solid state fermentation to make it more valuable in
animal feed formulation.
Solid state fermentation of cassava residue with Trichoderma pseudokoningii was
conducted for 12 days. The fermentation was carried out at temperature of 24 °C and a pH of
5.0. Urea and ammonium sulphate were used as nutrient sources and moisture content varied
at 60 and 70%. Protein content of the unfermented cassava residue was increased from 8.4 to
12.5% when urea was used with initial moisture content of 70% w/v. This study showed that
a maximum of 48.1% protein enrichment was achieved using urea as a source of nutrient for
the growth of the fungi, whiles ammonium sulphate achieved 36.9% protein enrichment under
the same condition (Bayitse et al., 2015).

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of biorefinary process of cassava peel (Bayitse, et al., 2015).
ETHANOL PRODUCTION
Ethanol produced from lignocellulosic biomass is a potential alternative transportation
fuel to none-renewable fossil fuels. Currently, the prevalent technique for cellulosic ethanol
production is an enzyme based process because it is more environmentally friendly and
produces a better hydrolysis yield than acid hydrolysis. Therefore, present cellulosic ethanol
research is driven by the need to reduce the production cost (Mielenz, 2001). The enzyme
based process primarily includes three steps such as biomass pretreatment, enzymatic
hydrolysis and fermentation. Following the pretreatment, the enzymatic hydrolysis process
can be designed in various ways. It can be run separately; separate hydrolysis and
fermentation (SHF) or simultaneously; simultaneous saccharification fermentation (SSF). For
either process, the key cost element to consider is that of the enzyme (Saddler & Gregg,
1998). For this reason, it is important to use the enzymes as efficiently as possible by creating
a favourable environment in the hydrolysis step. This outcome could be realised by
optimising operation methods (batch, fed-batch or continuous) and process parameters such
as solid loading. In addition to enzyme concentration, solid loading is another important
physical parameter that can affect the efficiency of cellulose hydrolysis. Although low solid
loading could achieve high cellulose conversion, it would result in low yield of sugar
concentrations for fermentation and ethanol for distillation thereby increasing ethanol
recovery cost (Kongkiattikajorn, 2012). Also, low solid loading would increase both the
capital cost of equipment and the operation costs in order to reach certain ethanol production
capacity. Therefore, high solid loading is preferable and economically practical than low solid
loading. However, the problems of sugar inhibitions and mixing with high solid loading need
to be solved properly (Kongkiattikajorn, 2012).

In fed-batch fermentation, solids and/or enzymes are added into reactors stepwise and
solids are gradually degraded; thereby making the mixture more fluid creating adequate room
for more solids to be added (Koppram and Olsson, 2014). As a result, fed-batch is expected to
be a better procedure than batch on dealing with the situation of high solid loading and low
enzyme concentration. Additionally, fed- batch can generate high glucose concentration for
fermentation and finally yield high ethanol concentration for distillation resulting in
significantly decrease of ethanol production cost (Ballesteros et al., 2002).
Bacteria, yeasts and fungi are able to ferment xylose to ethanol. However, research
showed yeasts are favourable for producing higher ethanol yields from xylose than the others.
To date, the most extensively studied xylose- fermenting yeasts include Candida shehatae,
Pachysolen tannophilus and Pichia stipitis. C. shehatae and P. stipitis are the best native
ethanol producers from xylose, with yields approaching the theoretical maximum of 0.51 g
ethanol /g xylose (Chu & Lee, 2007).
The Baker's yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is normally accepted as safe microorganism
for use in industrial wine making, brewing and baking processes to produce ethanol and CO2
from fermentable sugars respectively (van Zyl et al.,1989). Glucose fermentation is an
anaerobic process that is used industrially for the production of ethanol with minimal
formation of biomass and glycerol. Despite the efficiency of S. cerevisiae in glucose
fermentation, it cannot utilise xylose effectively as a sole carbon source to ferment xylose to
ethanol despite having a full xylose metabolic pathway (Batt et al., 1986). Ethanol yields and
productivity from xylose fermentation by naturally occurring pentose-fermenting yeasts are
significantly lower than glucose fermentation by S. cerevisiae, suggesting that there is
considerable scope for improvement in xylose fermentation biotechnology (Chu & Lee,
2007).
Recently, Olanbiwoninu and Odunfa, (2015) hydrolysed cassava peel into fermentable
sugars using organic acid pre-treatment before enzyme hydrolysis. This process could add
additional cost to the fermentation process but this has shown the potential of bioconversion
of cassava peel into fermentable sugar. Bayitse et al., (2015) in their work to bioconvert
cassava peel into fermentable sugars, evaluated enzymatic hydrolysis of cassava peel using
cellulase and beta-glucanase enzymes and their mixtures at three different enzyme loadings
with time. The pH of the medium used for hydrolysis was 5 and the temperature was 50 °C.
They reported that efficiency of the hydrolysis using beta-glucanase was better than cellulase
and glucose recovery of 69% was realised when beta-glucanase dosage was increased to 10%
(v/w) at 48 h which rose to 73% at 120 h, releasing 11.19 g/l and 12.17 g/l of glucose
respectively. Less than 20% of glucose was hydrolysed at 10% (v/w) cellulase at 120 h
releasing 2.6 g/l glucose. The optimum experimental condition for hydrolysis of cassava peel
was established at 120 h when glucose recovery increased to 88% for enzyme mixture of 5%
(v/w) cellulase + 10% (v/w) beta-glucanase producing 14.67 g/l glucose in the hydrolysate.
To obtain high concentration of ethanol from cassava peel, Kongkiattikajorn, (2012)
pretreated cassava peel with acid to remove noncellulose components, and then subjected it to
simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF). An ethanol concentration as high as
7.62 g/L was realized with 2.5% dry matter (DM) using batch SSF, producing 84.34% overall
ethanol yield. He further investigated a fed-batch process using a high solid concentration.
Dry substrate was pretreated with steam and dilute sulfuric acid at 135°C under pressure of 15
lb/in 2, and then added at different amounts during the first 24 h, to yield a final dry matter
content of 20% (w/v). Fed batch SSF conditions with cellulase loading of 100 FPU/g,

xylanase 25 IU/g, pectinase 25 IU/g and amylase with amyloglucosidase loading of 50 and 75
U/g, respectively, yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) loading of 2 g/L and substrate
supplementation every 4 h yielded the highest ethanol concentration of 58.73 g/L after 72 h.
This corresponded to a 76.47% overall ethanol yield.
The upscale process for ethanol production using cassava peel was conducted by Bayitse
et al., (2015). They pretreated the cassava peel by wet milling followed by simultaneous
saccharification and fermentation. Their findings suggested that intermittent wet milling with
α-amylase has increased glucose concentration over five-fold from the initial concentration of
1.36 mg/L. Simultaneous saccharification using the optimal condition of enzymes
(amyloglucosidase, β-glucanase and cellulase) has increased the glucose concentration in the
hydrolysate from 5.5 g/L to 75.5 g/L after wet-milling. Fermentation was carried out for 72
hours, but the optimum was reached after 24 hours without additional nutrient supplements.
High-Performance Liquid Chromatography analysis of the fermented broth recorded 46.52
g/L of ethanol which represented 98% of theoretical ethanol yield.
LACTIC ACID PRODUCTION

Industrial scale production of lactic acid demands availability of sustainable cheap raw
materials with low level of contamination. Biomass as raw material in the form of starch
(corn, wheat, potato, cassava, rice and sweet sorghum) and lignocelluloses (corn cobs, waste
paper and woody materials) can be used as a substrate for fermentation of lactic acid (Oh et
al., 2005; Richter & Berthold, 1998).
Biomass from agricultural crop residues can be put into two major categories. The
primary category is obtained as a by-product of agricultural post-harvesting activities,
normally from the harvesting and processing of staple crops for domestic use. The
secondary category is generated from industrial processing of agricultural crops. Cereal
crop mills and food processing industries are directly involved in biowaste generation from
agricultural residues (Mohammed et al., 2013). Lactic acid production can be done either by
fermenting sugars or hydrolysates containing sugars. It can also be produced by converting
starchy or cellulosic materials using lactic acid producing microorganisms. Simultaneous
hydrolysis and fermentation with saccharifying enzymes is widely deployed. The use of
hydrolysate is preferred to refined sugars for solid state or submerged fermentation of lactic
acid (John et al., 2006).
The hydrolysis of starch or cellulose to sugar is a high energy utilisation process which
can increase the cost of production. Woiciechowski et al., (1999) in their study of
hydrolysis of cassava bagasse starch by acid and enzyme reported that, both methods were
quite efficient when considering one or the other parameter like the percentage of hydrolysis,
time and cost of the chemicals and energy consumption. Although acid hydrolysis is time
saving and cost effective, there is always a neutralising step after acid hydrolysis. This will
increase the level of salts in the medium and affect the microbial growth and production of
lactic acid.
Conventional fermentative production of lactic acid from starch materials requires a pre-
treatment process that involves gelatinisation and liquefaction, which is carried out at a
temperature between 90 and 130 °C for 15 min followed by long time enzymatic

saccharification to glucose at a higher temperature, and subsequent conversion of glucose to

lactic acid by fermentation.
Anuradha et al., (1999) conducted batch experiments to establish optimum operating
conditions for the simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF) of starch to lactic
acid using Lactobacillus delbrueckii. They developed a predictive model for SSF by
combining the kinetics of saccharification and fermentation. Their results showed that
saccharification rate was always higher for SSF than in simple saccharification (SS) at all
substrate concentrations.
Nwokoro, (2014) produced L-lactic acid using cultures of Rhizopus oligosporus and
Lacto- bacillus plantarum from cassava peel. He hydrolysed cassava peels for 1 hour in both
NaOH and HCl by boiling after which the hydrolysates were neutralised to a pH of 6.2. He
reported that there were proportional increase in reducing sugar with increasing
concentrations of alkali or acid. Higher concentration of reducing sugar (402 mg/g) was
realised in the acid hydrolysate as compared with 213 mg/g reducing sugar concentration in
alkali hydrolysate. He further added 0.5% ammonium sulphate solution to the hydrolysates
and inoculated with either single or mixed cultures of R. oligosporus and L. plantarum and
incubated for 48 hours for lactic acid production. He concluded that the best lactic acid
production of 50.2 g/100 g substrate was observed in a mixed culture fermentation of acid
hydrolyzed peels as compared with 36.4 g/100g substrate of alkali hydrolysed peels.
However, unhydrolysed cassava peels inoculated with a mixed culture of the microorganisms
produced only 4.6 g/100g substrate. His conclusion also buttress the point that the lactic acid
bacteria need reducing sugar to produce lactic acid.
Fibrous residue is a major waste produce during cassava starch extraction. Because of the
high starch content (60-65% on dry weight basis) and organic matter of cassava fibrous
residue (CFR), research has been conducted to utilise it for the production of lactic acid (LA)
in semi solid state fermentation using Mann Rogassa Sharpe medium containing [5% (wv (-
1))] CFR in lieu of glucose [2% (wv (-1))] as the carbon source. Response Surface
Methodology (RSM) was used to evaluate the effect of main variables, i.e., incubation period,
temperature and pH on LA production. The experimental results showed that the optimum
incubation period, temperature and pH were 120 hours 35 degrees C and 6.5, respectively.
Maximum starch conversion by Lactobacillus plantarum MTCC 1407 to LA was 63.3%. The
organism produced 29.86 g of (L+) LA from 60 g of starch present in 100 g of CFR. The LA
production yield was 49.76%. (Ray et al., 2009).
CONCLUSION
Cassava has been recognised as a major crop in Ghanaian agricultural systems and has
been grown in almost all the 10 regions in the country. The major cassava planting season is
mainly during the rainy season from April to November. With the intervention of new
varieties in Ghana, cassava is harvested approximately 12 months after planting. The bulk of
the nation's cassava is produced in the south and middle part of Ghana, which accounts for
roughly 78% of the total cassava production. Currently, Eastern region is the largest producer
of cassava in Ghana accounting for 3 years average of 4.3 million metric tonnes spanning
2012-2014. The total land area used for cassava cultivation increased by 18.5% since 2005.

This increase in land use for cassava cultivation is as a result of its importance for industrial
applications. Most importantly, cassava is a staple food crop and accounts for about 152.9 kg
per capita consumption, making it one of the most processed crop into gari, fufu powder,
Highly Quality Cassava Flour (used for bakery products) and kokonte to increase its shelf
life. Additionally, it can be used as an industrial crop because of its high starch content. These
process technologies have contributed to the reduction of post-harvest losses in cassava
production in Ghana. The residue generated from cassava processing has a huge potential in
biorefinery for the production of major products such as ethanol, lactic acid and protein.
REFERENCES
Acheampong, P., Owusu, V. and Gyiele K. N. (2013). 203-Farmers Preferences for Cassava
Variety Traits: Empirical Evidence from Ghana. In Fourth International Conference of
the African Association of Agricultural Economists (pp. 1–21). Hammamet, Tunisia.
Adams, C. (1957). Activities of Danish Botanists in Guinea 1738–1850. Transactions of the
Historical Society of Ghana III. Part 1.
Anuradha, R., Suresh, A. K. and Venkatesh, K. V. (1999). Simultaneous saccharification and
fermentation of starch to lactic acid. Process Biochemistry, 35(3-4), 367–375.
http://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-9592(99) 00080-1.
Ballesteros, M., Oliva, J. M., Manzanares, P., Negro, M. J. and Ballesteros, I. (2002). Ethanol
production from paper material using a simultaneous saccharification and fermentation
system in a fed-batch basis. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 18(6),
559–561. http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016378326762.
Batt, C. A., Carvallo, S., Easson, D. D., Akedo, M. and Sinskey, A. (1986). Direct evidence
for a xylose metabolic pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Biotechnol Bioeng, 28,
549–53.
Bayitse, R., Hou, X., Laryea, G., Aggey, M., Oduro, W., Selormey, G. and Bjerre, A.-B.
(2015). Ethanol process from biowaste c5 and c6. Brussels. Retrieved from
http://www.biowaste4sp.eu.
Bayitse, R., Hou, X., Bjerre, A.-B. and Saalia, F. K. (2015). Optimisation of enzymatic
hydrolysis of cassava peel to produce fermentable sugars. AMB Express, 5(1), 60.
http://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-015-0146-z.
Bayitse, R., Hou, X., Laryea, G. and Bjerre, A.-B. (2015). Protein enrichment of cassava
residue using Trichoderma pseudokoningii (ATCC 26801). AMB Express, 5(1), 80.
http://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-015-0166-8.
Bourdoux, P., Seghers, P., Mafuta, M., Vandrpas-Rivera, M., Delange, F. and Ermans, A. M.
(1982). Cassava products: HCN content and detoxification process. In E. A. Delange F,
Iteke FB (Ed.), Nutritional factors involved in the goitrogenic action of cassava (pp. 51–
58). Ottawa, Canada: IDRC-184e. IDRC.
Chu, B. C. H. and Lee, H. (2007). Genetic improvement of Saccharomyces cerevisiae for
xylose fermentation. Biotechnology Advances, 25(5), 425–441. http://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biotechadv.2007.04.001.

Cooke, R. D. and Coursey, D. G. (1981). Cassava: a major cyanide containing food crop. In
F. Vennesland, B; Conn, E; Knowles, C; Westley, J; Wissing (Ed.), Cyanide in biology
(pp. 93–114). London: Academic Press.
CSIR-CRI. (2014). The National Centre of Specialisation for Root and Tuber Crops
Research. (R. Baning, I.S, Adu-Donyinah, Ed.). Kumasi, Ghana.: CSIR-Crops Research
Institute.
Dziedzoav, N. T., Abass, A. B., Amoa-Awua, W. K. A. and Sablah, M. (2006). Quality
Management Manual for Production of High Quality Cassava Flour.
Dziedzoave, N. T., Ellis, W. O., Oldham, J. H. and Osei-Yaw, A. (1999). Subjective and
Objective assessment of agbelima (Cassava dough) quality. Food Control, 10(2), 63–67.
Dziedzoave, N. T., Graffham, A. J. and Boateng, E. (2003). Training manual for the
production of cassava-based bakery products. CSIR-FRI, Accra, Ghana.
Eggum, R. O. (1970). “The protein quality of cassava leaves.” Br. J. Nutr., 24, 761–768.
Retrieved from sciencedirect.com.
FAO. (2000). A review of cassava in Africawith country case studies on Nigeria, Ghana,the
United Republic of Tanzania, Uganda and Benin. Retrieved December 22, 2014, from
http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/ a0154e/A0154E01.htm.
FAO. (2002). Protein sources for the animal industry. FAO Expert Consultaion and
Workshop. http://doi.org/Expert Consultation and Workshop Bangkok, 29 April - 3 May
2002.
FAO. (2002). The State of Food and Agriculture. Rome.
FAO. (2013). Cassava Farmer Field Schools: Resource material for facilitators in sub-
Saharan Africa.
FAO. (2015). Food Outlook, Biannual report on global food markets.
Hahn, S. K. (2006). An overview of traditional processing and utilization of cassava in
Africa.
Howeler, R. H. (2001). Cassava mineral nutrition and fertilization. Cassava: Biology,
Production, and Utilization, 115–147. http://doi.org/10.1079/97 80851995243.0115.
IFAD. (2007). Improving marketing strategies in Central and West Africa. Rural Poverty
Portal,.
James, B., Okechukwu, R., Abass, A., Fannah, S., Sanni, L., Fomba, S. and Lukombo, S.
(2012). Producing Gari from Cassava: An illustrated guide for smallholder cassava
processors. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA): Ibadan, Nigeria.
John, R. P., Nampoothiri, K. M. and Pandey, A. (2006). Solid-state fermentation for l-lactic
acid production from agro wastes using Lactobacillus delbrueckii. Process Biochemistry,
41(4), 759–763. http://doi.org/10.1016/ j.procbio.2005.09.013.
Jones, W. O. (1959). Manioc in Africa. (F. R. Institute, Ed.). Stanford, USA: Stanford
University.
Kleih, U., Phillips, D. and Wordey, M. T. (2013). Cassava Market and Value Chain Analysis
Ghana Case Study Final Report (Anonymised version) February 2013, (January).
Retrieved from http://www.value-chains.org/dyn/bds/docs/859/GhanaCassavaMarket
Study-FinalFebruary 2013_anonym.pdf.
Kongkiattikajorn, J. (2012). Ethanol Production from Dilute-Acid Pretreated Cassava Peel by
Fed-Batch Simultaneous Saccharification and Fermentation. International Journal of the
Computer, the Internet and Management, 20(2), 22–27.

Kongkiattikajorn, J. and Sornvoraweat, B. (2011). Comparative Study of Bioethanol

Production from Cassava Peels by Monoculture and Co-Culture of Yeast. Kasetsart J.
(Nat. Sci.), 274, 268–274.
Koopmans, A. and Koppejan, J. (1997). Agricultural and forest residues generation,
utilisation and availability. Retrieved February 12, 2013, from
wgbis.ces.iisc.ernet.in/energy/ HC270799/RWEDP/acrobat/p_residues.pdf.
Koppram, R. and Olsson, L. (2014). Combined substrate, enzyme and yeast feed in
simultaneous saccharification and fermentation allow bioethanol production from
pretreated spruce biomass at high solids loadings. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 7(1), 54.
http://doi.org/10.1186/1754-6834-7-54.
Korang-Amoakoh, S., Cudjoe, R. A. and Adams, E. (1987). Biological control of cassava
pests in Ghana. Prospects for the integration of other strategies.
Lambri, M., Fumi, M. D., Roda, A. and De Faveri, D. M. (2013). Improved processing
methods to reduce the total cyanide content of cassava roots from Burundi. African
Journal of Biotechnology, 12(19), 2685–2691. http://doi.org/10.5897/AJB2012.2989.
Meridian Institute. (2009). Science and Innovation for African Agricultural Value Chains:
Lessons learned in transfer of technologies to smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan
Africa. New Growth International.
Mielenz, J. R. (2001). Ethanol production from biomass: technology and commercialization
status. Current Opinion in Microbiology, 4(3), 324–329. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-
5274(00)00211-3.
Mlingi, N. L. V., Poulter, N. H. and Rosling, H. (1992). An outbreak of acute intoxi-cation
from insufficiently processed cassava in Tanzania. Nutr. Res., 12, 677–687.
Mohammed, Y. S., Mokhtar, A. S., Bashir, N. and Saidur, R. (2013). An overview of
agricultural biomass for decentralized rural energy in Ghana. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 20, 15–25. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.11.047.
Nwokoro, O. (2014). Production of L-lactic acid from Cassava peel wastes using single and
mixed cultures of Rhizopus oligosporus and Lactobacillus plantarum. Chemical Industry
and Chemical Engineering Quarterly, 20(4), 457–461. http://doi.org/10.2298/CICEQ
130325027N.
OECD/IEA. (2010). Sustainable production of second-generation biofuels, potential and
perspectives in major economies and developing countries, Information paper. Retrieved
February 12, 2010, from www.iea.org/ papers/2010/second_generation_biofuels.pdf.
Oh, H., Wee, Y.-J., Yun, J.-S., Ho Han, S., Jung, S. and Ryu, H.-W. (2005). Lactic acid
production from agricultural resources as cheap raw materials. Bioresource Technology,
96(13), 1492–8. http://doi.org/10.1016/ j.biortech.2004.11.020.
Olanbiwoninu, A. A. and Odunfa, S. A. (2015). Production of Fermentable Sugars from
Organosolv Pretreated Cassava Peels. Advances in Microbiology, (February), 117–122.
Quaye, W., Gayin, J., Yawson, I. and Plahar, W. (2009). Characteristics of various cassava
processing methods and the adoption requirements in Ghana. Journal of Root Crops,
35(1), 59–68. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228308346_
Characteristics_of_Various_Cassava_Processing_Methods_and_the_Adoption_Requirem
ents_in_Ghana/file/9fcfd50fd8dea34263.pdf.
Ravidran, V., Kornegay, E. T., Rajaguru, A. S. B. and Notter, D. (1987). “Cassava leaf meal
as a replacement for coconut oil meal in pig diets.” Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture, 41, 45–53. Retrieved from sciencedirect.com.

Ravindran, V. and Rajaguru, A. S. B. (1988). “Effect of stem pruning on cassava root yield
and leaf growth.” Sri Lankan Journal of Agricultural Science, 24(2), 32–37. Retrieved
from sciencedirect.com.
Ravindran, V. (n.d.). Preparation of cassava leaf products and their uses as animal feeds.
Retrieved February 11, 2013, from Fao.org/ag/aga/agap/ frg/ahpp95/95111.pdf>.
Ray, R. C., Sharma, P. and Panda, S. H. (2009). Lactic acid production from cassava fibrous
residue using Lactobacillus plantarum MTCC 1407. Journal of Environmental Biology,
30(5 SUPPL.), 847–852.
Richter, K. and Berthold, C. (1998). Biotechnological Conversion of Sugar and Starchy Crops
into Lactic Acid. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 71(2), 181–191.
http://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.1998.0314.
Saddler, J. N & Gregg, D. (1998). Ethanol production from forest products wastes. In J..
Bruce, A and Palfreyman (Ed.), Forest products biotechnology (pp. 183– 207). London:
Taylor & Francis Ltd.
Sam, J. and Deppah, H. (2009). West African Agricultural Productivity Programme – Ghana
Baseline Survey Report.
Selormey, G., Amoah, J. Y. and Aggey, M. (2006). Diversification of
cassava(Manihotesculenta Crantz)utilization in Northern Ghana – A case study:
Integrated cassava processing pilot plant in Salaga-Kpembe.” In Proceedings of the 3rd
National Conference on Agriculture Engineering. Kumasi, Ghana.: Kwame Nkrumah
University of Science and Technology.
Sornyotha, S., Kyu, K.L. and Ratanakhanokchai, K. (2010). An efficient treatment for
detoxification process of cassava starch by plant cell wall-degrading enzymes. J. Biosc.
Bioeng., 109, 9–14.
SRID-MoFA. (2012). Agriculture in Ghana (Facts and figures 2012). Ministry of Food and
Agriculture. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/facts/2011/material/ICTFacts
Figures2011.pdf.
SRID-MoFA. (2014). Agriculture in Ghana (Facts and Figures). Ministry of Food and
Agriculture. Retrieved from http://facts/mofa.gov.gh/site/wp-content/uploads/.../mofa_
facts_and_figures.pdf.
Sundaresan, S., Nambisan, B. and Easwari Amma, C. S. (1987). Bitterness in cassava in
relation to cyano-glucoside content. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 57, 34–40.
Tweyongyere, R. and Katongole, I. (2002). Cyanogenic potential of cassava peels and their
detoxification for utilization as livestock feed. Vet. Hum. Toxicol., 44, 366–369.
Tylleskar, T., Banea, M., Bikangi, N., Cooke, R. D., Poulter, N. H. and Rosling, H. (1992).
Cassava cyanogens and konzo, an upper motoneuron disease found in Africa. Lancet,
339, 208–211.
USDA NRCS. (n.d.). Plant Guide. Louisiana and Pacific Islands. Retrieved from
<http://plants.usda.gov>.
van Zyl, C., Prior, B. A., Kilian, S. G. and Kock, J. L. (1989). D-xylose utilization by
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Journal of General Microbiology, 135(11), 2791–8. Retrieved
from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pubmed/2515242.
WAAPP/PPAAO. (2013). Mechanical cassava harvester. Retrieved July 28, 2016, from
www.waapp.org.gh.
Westby, A. and Choo, B. (1994). Cyanogen reduction during the lactic fermentation of
cassava. Acta Horticulturae, 375, 209–215.

Westby, A. (2002). Cassava utilization, storage and small-scale processing. In A. C. Hillocks,

R. J., Thresh, J. M. and Bellotti (Ed.), Cassava biology, production and utilization (pp.
281–300). Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.
Woiciechowski, A. L., Soccol, C. R., Ramos, L. P. and Pandey, A. (1999). Experimental
design to enhance the production of l-(+)-lactic acid from steam-exploded wood
hydrolysate using Rhizopus oryzae in a mixed-acid fermentation. Process Biochemistry,
34(9), 949–955. http://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0032-9592(99)00012-6.
View publication stats

Book Chapter Richard

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Book Chapter Richard

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Book Chapter Richard

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Cassava cultivation, processing and potential uses in Ghana

Chapter · January 2017

Richard Bayitse Ferdinand Tornyie

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Anne Belinda Bjerre

Anaerobic digestion View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

CASSAVA CULTIVATION, PROCESSING AND

Richard Bayitse1,*, Ferdinand Tornyie1,†

Complimentary Contributor Copy

PATTERN OF CASSAVA PRODUCTION

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

CASSAVA VARIETIES DEVELOPED AND CULTIVATED IN GHANA

Complimentary Contributor Copy

FACTORS AFFECTING CASSAVA PRODUCTION

POLICY ON CASSAVA PRODUCTION IN GHANA

Complimentary Contributor Copy

CASSAVA HARVESTING AND PROCESSING

TRADITIONAL CASSAVA PROCESSING

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Figure 1. Peeling of cassava by women at cassava processing facility at Bawjiase, Ghana.

FERMENTATION AND WATER REMOVAL

Complimentary Contributor Copy

FRYING/ROASTING AND DRYING

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Figure 2. Frying of gari using improved cook-stove in Kete Krachi, Ghana.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

PRODUCT DEVELOPED WITH HIGHLY QUALITY

INTEGRATED CASSAVA PROCESSING PLANT

HOW THE INTEGRATED CASSAVA PROCESSING

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

POTENTIAL UTILISATION OF CASSAVA RESIDUES

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

LACTIC ACID PRODUCTION

Complimentary Contributor Copy

saccharification to glucose at a higher temperature, and subsequent conversion of glucose to

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Kongkiattikajorn, J. and Sornvoraweat, B. (2011). Comparative Study of Bioethanol

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Westby, A. (2002). Cassava utilization, storage and small-scale processing. In A. C. Hillocks,

Complimentary Contributor Copy

View publication stats

You might also like