Using farm typology to understand banana Xanthomonas wilt management in Rwanda

Figures & data

Figure 1. Study area map: surveyed districts and villages overlaid on agroecological zones.

Table 1. Main characteristics of studied districts (NISR, 2017.).

District	Cultivated area (ha)	Proportion of Banana land (%)	The area occupied by banana (ha)	The area occupied by the cooking Banana (ha)	The area occupied by the beer banana Area (ha)
Burera	28100	8,3	2341	806	1317
Rulindo	25146	31,2	7835	1613	4182
Gatsibo	52860	30,8	16307	8365	5227
Kayonza	48857	31,4	15318	11540	2497
Gisagara	28867	34,0	9802	2146	6218
Muhanga	30565	43,8	13394	1760	9051
Karongi	21361	39,6	8465	797	6793
Rubavu	17153	5,6	953	683	187

Figure 2. PCA scree plot (A), the optimal number of clusters (B) cluster dendrogram (C), and clustering results on a factor map (D).

Table 2. Correlation matrix between principal components and variables used.

Variable	Comp.1	Comp.2	Comp.3	Comp.4	Comp.5
Nutrition diversity	0.34	−0.26	0.57	0.22	0.23
Number of visits by extension agent	0.13	-	0.08	0.52	−0.63
Education years	0.16	−0.39	0.35	0.16	0.60
Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU)	0.15	−0.24	0.55	0.08	−0.19
Prop. of land for C. banana	0.76	0.45	−0.15	-	-
Prop. of C. banana consumed	0.52	0.18	−0.39	0.32	0.33
Prop. of C. banana sold	0.68	0.42	0.17	−0.21	-
Prop. of land for B. banana	−0.54	0.61	0.24	0.31	0.18
Prop. of B. banana consumed	−0.18	0.19	−0.25	0.46	0.25
Prop. of B. banana sold	−0.56	0.51	0.39	0.11	-
Banana income	0.32	0.44	0.44	−0.30	-
People talked to	0.34	−0.10	-	0.51	−0.23
Eigenvalues	2.34	1.56	1.41	1.17	1.11
Cumulative % Variance	19.5	32.6	44.3	54.0	63.3

Key: Prop. = Proportion, C. banana =Cooking banana, B. banana =Beer banana, Comp. =Component. Note: The bolded values are those with correlation coefficients equal to or above 0.4 and indicate the variable with which the component is most strongly associated. Dashes indicate simply that the variable doesn’t contribute to the principle component.

Table 3. Cluster (farm types) descriptions and naming.

Types	Variables	Mean in category	Overall mean	v.test	p.value
Type1 (Beer- banana farmers)	Prop. of B. banana sold	0.8 ± 0.4	0.3 ± 0.5	19.4	***
	Prop. of Land for B. banana	0.4 ± 0.2	0.3 ± 0.3	16.8	***
	Prop. of B. banana consumed	0.1 ± 0.1	0.3 ± 0.2	6.4	***
	Number of extensions	1.5 ± 1.6	0.7 ± 0.8	−2.0	*
	Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU)	0.8 ± 0.9	0.7 ± 0.9	−2.6	*
	Education years	5.6 ± 6.1	3.1 ± 3.3	−3.1	**
	People talked to	4.8 ± 10.6	12.3 ± 29.4	−4.2	***
	Nutrition diversity	4.7 ± 5.1	1.8 ± 2.0	−5.1	***
	Prop. of C. banana consumed	0.0 ± 0.2	0.2 ± 0.3	−9.1	***
	Prop. of C. banana sold	0.0 ± 0.1	0.1 ± 0.3	−9.6	***
	Prop. of C. banana consumed	0.0 ± 0.1	0.1 ± 0.2	−11.2	***
Type2 (Livestock-based farmers)	Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU)	1.1 ± 0.9	1.1 ± 0.9	3.4	**
	Education years	6.6 ± 6.1	3.3 ± 3.3	2.9	**
	Nutrition diversity	5.4 ± 5.1	2.1 ± 2.0	2.5	*
	Banana income*10000 (Rwf)	0.2 ± 7.0	1.2 ± 24.5	−4.9	***
	Prop. of B. banana consumed	0.0 ± 0.1	0.0 ± 0.2	−5.6	***
	Prop. of C. banana consumed	0.0 ± 0.2	0.2 ± 0.3	−7.8	***
	Prop. of C. banana sold	0.0 ± 0.1	0.0 ± 0.3	−8.3	***
	Prop. of Land for C. banana	0.0 ± 0.1	0.1 ± 0.2	−8.4	***
	Prop. of Land for B. banana	0.0 ± 0.2	0.1 ± 0.3	−12.4	***
	Prop. of B. banana sold	0.0 ± 0.4	0.1 ± 0.5	−14.3	***
Type3 (Cooking- banana farmers)	Prop. of Land for C. banana	0.4 ± 0.1	0.3 ± 0.2	20.6	***
	Prop. of C. banana sold	0.4 ± 0.1	0.3 ± 0.3	18.8	***
	Prop. of C. banana consumed	0.5 ± 0.2	0.3 ± 0.3	17.8	***
	Banana income*10000 (Rwf)	15.4 ± 7.0	40.9 ± 24.5	5.8	***
	People talked to	17.6 ± 10.6	45.6 ± 29.4	3.9	***
	Nutrition diversity	5.5 ± 5.1	1.9 ± 2.0	2.9	**
	Prop of Land for C. banana	0.1 ± 0.2	0.2 ± 0.3	−5.3	***
	Prop of B. banana sold	0.2 ± 0.4	0.4 ± 0.5	−6.3	***

Key: Prop. = Proportion, C. banana =Cooking banana, B. banana =Beer banana, *10000 =the value is multiplied by 10,000, Rwf = Rwandan franc (1 USD = ~ 1060 RWF). Values represent means (±standard deviation). Significant levels: *p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.0.

Table 4. Log odds and standard error (in parentheses) for the binary logistic regression model for adoption of BXW prevention and control innovations by farm types.

Category	Method	Cooking banana farmers	Livestock-based farmers	Constant
Prevention	Know male bud removal	0.6*** (0.2)	0.7*** (0.2)	0.8*** (0.1)
	Know disinfection of tools	0.6*** (0.2)	0.4** (0.2)	−0.2 (0.1)
	Know removal of roaming animals	0.4* (0.2)	0.7*** (0.2)	−1.8*** (0.2)
	Used male bud removal	0.8*** (0.2)	0.7*** (0.2)	0.5*** (0.1)
	Used disinfection of tools	0.4** (0.2)	0.3 (0.2)	−0.5*** (0.1)
	Used removal of roaming animals	0.5 (0.3)	0.8*** (0.3)	−2.5*** (0.2)
	Did not prevent	−1.2** (0.5)	−0.1 (0.3)	−2.3*** (0.2)
Control	Know complete mat uprooting	0.1 (0.2)	0.2 (0.2)	0.6*** (0.1)
	Know single diseased stem removal	0.1 (0.2)	0.3 (0.2)	−1.1*** (0.1)
	Know other	−0.6** (0.3)	−0.3 (0.3)	−1.6*** (0.2)
	Used complete mat uprooting	−0.4* (0.2)	0.1 (0.2)	−1.1*** (0.1)
	Used single diseased stem removal	0.4* (0.2)	0.3 (0.2)	−1.7*** (0.2)
	Used other	0.1 (0.3)	0.8*** (0.3)	−2.4*** (0.2)

Key: Significant levels: *p<0.1; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01.

Table 5. Alternatives to one-size-fits-all policies for BXW management in Rwanda.

Farm type	Innovation for BXW prevention	Innovation for BXW control	Extension mechanism	Capacity development
Beer-banana farmers	None	CMU	Extensions agent-based (a formal mechanism), farmer promotors-based mechanism	Advanced awareness of prevention, strengthening internal networks, raising the capacity of farmer promotors
Livestock-based farmers	Male bud removal, Removing of roaming animals	Other	Farmer-to-farmer (internal, informal interactions), farmer promotors-based mechanism	Awareness of SDSR as BXW control, raising the capacity of farmers’ opinion leaders and farmer promotors
Cooking-banana farmers	Male bud removal, disinfection of tools	SDSR	Farmer-to-farmer (internal, informal interaction), farmer promotors-based mechanism	Awareness of prevention and CMU, raising the capacity of farmers’ opinion leaders and farmer promotors

Table A1. Descriptive statistics of clusters.

Variable category	Variable name	Beer banana farmers	Livestock-based farmers	Cooking banana farmers
Household characteristics	Years of education	5.6 ± 3.1^b	6.6 ± 3.3^a	6.1 ± 3.6^ab
	Age of head of household	49.9 ± 14.8^a	48.7 ± 13.3^a	49.0 ± 12.9^a
	Family size	5.1 ± 2.2^b	5.8 ± 2.2^a	5.3 ± 2.1^ab
	Nutritional diversity	4.7 ± 1.8^b	5.4 ± 2.1^a	5.5 ± 1.9^a
	Banana income × 10000 (RWF)	6.3 ± 14.3^b	0.2 ± 1.2^c	15.4 ± 41.0^a
	Total land (ha)	0.9 ± 0.2^a	0.9 ± 0.3^a	0.8 ± 0.3^a
Livestock endowment	Number of cows	1.0 ± 1.0^a	1.2 ± 1.1^a	1.0 ± 1.0^a
	Number of sheep	0.2 ± 0.7^ab	0.3 ± 0.9^a	0.1 ± 0.6^b
	Number of goats	0.9 ± 1.4^b	1.3 ± 2.1^ab	1.4 ± 2.1^a
	Number of pigs	0.3 ± 0.6^a	0.7 ± 3.9^a	0.3 ± 0.9^a
	Number of rabbits	0.2 ± 1.0^a	3.9 ± 50.7^a	0.2 ± 1.0^a
	Number of chicken	1.3 ± 2.5 ^a	2.2 ± 4.9 ^a	1.9 ± 4.9 ^a
Access to extension	Number of extension visits/2 yrs	1.5 ± 0.7^b	1.6 ± 0.8^a	1.6 ± 0.9^a
	Number of training sessions/2 yrs	1.4 ± 0.7^b	1.4 ± 0.7^b	1.6 ± 0.9^a
	People talked to (on BXW/2 yrs)	4.8 ± 12.3^b	11.5 ± 23.4^a	17.6 ± 45.7^a
	People advised (on BXW/2 yrs)	1.3 ± 6.5^b	5.0 ± 11.4^a	5.6 ± 18.0^a

Key: *10000 = the value is multiplied by 10,000; RWF = Rwandan franc (1 USD ~ 1060 RWF). Values represent means (± standard deviation). Means with the same letter are not significantly different from each other (p < 0.05) according to one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test.

Table

Household head education level	BXW occurence2
Gender household head	BXW occurence6
Age household head	BXW neighbors
Household head marital	Owned device radio
Household head off farm activities	Owned device TV
Household head gender	Owned device smartphone
Household head education	Owned device feature phone
Off farm income	Owned device basic phone
Banana income	Owned device pc
Total land ha	Owned device tablet
Banana plots	Owned device laptop
Banana land ha	Owned device none
Livestock cattle	Own phone smart
Livestock goats	Own phone basic
Livestock pigs	Own phone none
Livestock chicken	People talked to
Count cattle	People advised
Count goats	Trained
Count pigs	Trained by RAN
Count chicken	Trained by NGO
Banana type beer	Other trained entity
Banana type cooking	Not trained
Banana type dessert	Trainings received
Banana type plantain	Extension unreached
Banana type hybrid	Extension received
Banana type unknown	Member FFS group
Banana intercrop	Member Twigire group
Land owned banana unit	Member women’s group
Land owned banana	Member cooperative
Beer banana land prop	Member none
Beer banana consumed prop	Member other
Beer banana sold prop	Nutrition diversity
Beer banana income	Tropical livestock unit (TLU)
Off farm income	Banana income by category
BXW experience	Banana produced by category
BXW recent	Banana consumed by category

NISR. (2017). Seasonal agricultural survey report, 2017. NISR, Season A.

 Google Scholar