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

net/publication/298480078

Review on Striga Weed Management

Article · March 2016

CITATIONS READS

27 7,451

1 author:

Berhane Sibhatu Gebregziabher

Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research
19 PUBLICATIONS   146 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Plant Breeding and genetics for quality trait improvement View project

Natural Variation Analysis and Candidate Gene Identification of Tocopherol Compositions in Soybean View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Berhane Sibhatu Gebregziabher on 17 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VOL 2, ISSUE 2, pp: 110-120 (ISSN: 2455-1716) Impact Factor 2.4 MARCH-2016

Review Article (Open access)

Review on Striga Weed Management

Berhane Sibhatu*
Department of Agronomy, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Mehoni Agricultural Research Center

ABSTRACT- Striga is a major constraint affecting sorghum, maize, other cereal crops, sugar cane and legume crops
production in sub Saharan Africa. Striga may result in complete crop loss under the worst of conditions. Prodigious seed
production, prolonged viability of the seeds and the subterranean nature of the early stages of parasitism make the control
of the parasite by conventional methods difficult if not impossible. The increasing incidence of Striga has been attributed
to poor soil fertility and structure, low soil moisture, intensification of land use through continuous cultivation and an
expansion of cereal production. Many potentially successful approaches developed to control this weed include using
resistant/tolerant varieties, sowing clean seeds that are not contaminated with Striga seeds, rotating cereal hosts with trap
crops that induce abortive germination of Striga seeds, intercropping, applying organic and inorganic soil amendments
such as fertilizer or manure, fumigating soil with ethylene, applying post emergence herbicides, push-pull technology and
using biological control agents. Based on some studies, the interaction of tied-ridging with N fertilizer and resistant
varieties; cereal-legume intercropping and its interaction with N fertilizer revealed low Striga infestation. No single
management option has been found effective across locations and time. Hence, an integrated Striga management
approach, currently, offers the best possibility for reducing impact at the farm level.
Key Words- Intercropping, Integrated pest management, Fertilizer, Management options, Striga
-------------------------------------------------IJLSSR-----------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION
Agriculture remains the main source of food and provides In Ethiopia, about 85% of the population depends on
the primary source of livelihood for 36% of the world’s agriculture out of which over 90% still rely on rain-fed
total workforce [1]. In Asia and the Pacific, 40 to 50% of agriculture for their livelihood [2].
the workforce derives its livelihood from agriculture, while The majority of the population in the Arid and Semi-arid
in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) two-thirds of the working areas depend on agriculture and pastoralism for
population still makes their living from agriculture. subsistence. These activities face many constraints due to
predominance of erratic rainfall patterns, torrential rainfall
* which is majority lost to run-off, high rate of evapotranspi-
Address for Correspondence:
Berhane Sibhatu* ration further reducing yields, weeds growing more
Department of Agronomy vigorously than cultivated crops and competing for scarce
Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research reserves of moisture, low organic matter levels and high
Mehoni Agricultural Research Center variables responses to fertilizers [3].
Fax: +251-347770021, P.O.Box: 71, Maichew, Ethiopia Among the major pests of agricultural crops, weeds alone
caused severe yield losses ranging from as low as 10% to
as high as 98% of total crop failure in the dry land regions.
Received: 17 Jan 2016/Revised: 14 Feb 2016/Accepted: 27 Feb 2016
It should be emphasized that yield losses caused by weeds
http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved
Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

could vary from crop to crop and from region to region for millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.), and sugarcane (Saccharum
the same crops, in response to many factors that include: officinarum L.) and rice (Oriza sativa L.) [10].
weed pressure, availability of weed control technology, cost STRIGA BIOLOGY
of weed control and level of management practices [4]. Striga plants have green opposite leaves, bright irregular
From the parasitic weeds, Striga spp. are fairly wide spread flowers with corolla tube slightly bent at the middle. The
in semi-arid regions crops including certain legumes, flowers are pink, red, white or yellow. There is a consider-
maize, pearl millet, sorghum, other cereal crops and sugar able variation in flower color. The plant is characterized by
cane production. Small holder farmers are the most affected herbaceous habit, small seeds and parasitism. The seeds of
by the Striga problem because they have limited ways and S. hermonthica are extremely small, about 0.2 X 0.3mm,
means of controlling it. The increasing incidence of Striga weighing about 0.7µg. They are generally dispersed by
has been attributed to poor soil fertility and structure, mois- water, wind, cattle, and man .The number of seeds per
ture stress, intensification of land use through continuous capsule ranges from 700 – 1800 depending on the species.
cultivation and an expansion of cereal production The seeds can remain viable in the field for as long as
[5-6]. Most Striga infested areas are characterized by 14-20 years .The minimal length of the life cycle of the
agricultural production systems exhibiting low parasite, from germination to seed production comprises an
productivity. average of 4 months [10].
DISTRIBUTION AND HOST RANGE OF Since Striga is a parasitic weed the seedlings cannot sustain
STRIGA themselves on their own resources for particular long after

Striga has been given the common name of "witchweed" germination. Therefore, they need to find a host root

because it attaches itself to the roots of the host plant thus shortly after germination and the germination needs to be

depriving it (the host) of water and nutrients. Striga spp. perfectly timed with the presence of a host root. Exogenous

(witch weeds) belongs to the family Orobanchaceae [7]. germination stimulants called strigolactones are produced

Economically important Striga species are reported from by the host’s root and also by some non-host (usually

more than 50 countries, especially from East and West referred to as trap crops) roots (Gossypium sp.). They are

Africa and Asia [8]. S. hermonthica is common throughout plant hormones which inhibit shoot branching [11] but also

northern tropical Africa and extends from Ethiopia and signals to seeds of parasitic weeds such as Striga to start

Sudan to West Africa. It also extends from the western germinate. Strigolactones are also involved in other

Arabian region southwards into Angola and Namibia [6]. physiological processes such as abiotic response and the

S. asiatica has a wider distribution and is found throughout regulation of the plants structure is also regulated by

semi-arid areas of tropical and subtropical Africa, Asia and strigolactones. Strigol, a synthetic compound belonging to

Australia [6]. Nigeria, Sudan, Ethiopia, Mali and Burkina the strigolactones, was first isolated from cotton

Faso are heavily affected counties in Africa [9]. (Gossypium sp.) and is used as a germination trigger for

The host range is almost wide and besides the cultivated Striga [12]. When the seed have been germinated the

cereals, it attacks many of the wild grasses. The traditional seedling can live for 3 to 7 days without a host. After that it

crops in the African savanna attacked by the parasite are will die if it is not attached to a root and there has been able

sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L., maize (Zea mays L.), pearl to create a parasitic link to that particular root. The seedling
finds its way to the host root by chemical signals and then

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

creates a xylem-to-xylem connection between the seedling ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF STRIGA

and the root. However, the seedlings cannot be at a greater Although there are more than 35 species, only three species
distance from the root than 2 to 3 mm to find its way there. are recognized as economically important [15].
When the seedlings have attached to the root it grows S. hermonthica (Del.) Benth and S. asiatica (L.) Kuntze are
underground for 4-7 weeks before they emerge and are the two most widespread and the most economically signif-
actually seen in the field. One plant can host many Striga icant species that parasitize on sorghum (Sorghum bicolor
plants and Striga affects the plant mostly before its L. Moench), pearl millet (Pennisetumglaucum L.), maize
emergence. The symptoms are however hard to distinguish (Zea mays L.) and rice (Oryza sativa L.), whereas
from symptoms caused by drought, lack of nutrients and S. gesnerioides (Willd.) Vatke attacks crops such as cowpea
other diseases [10]. (Vignaunguiculata L. Walp.) and peanut (Arachishypogaea
Subsequent to germination, which occurs in close L.) [16]. Of these species Striga hermonthica is the most
proximity of the host roots, a haustorium (organ of serious biotic problem to cereal production [10]. S. hermon-
attachment and a physiological bridge between the host and thica is a debilitating root parasite. It causes damage in two
the parasite) is produced on perception of a host-derived ways, first by competition for carbon and nutrients and
chemical signal [13]. Haustorium initiation, which second through physiological interactions, and metabolic
represents the switch from the vegetative to the parasitic processes the bulk of which is unknown [17].
mode of life, occurs on or near the host. The haustorium The effect of Striga damage on crops is a reduction in yield.
attaches, penetrates the host root and establishes connection The extent of yield loss is related to the incidence and
with the host xylem. Following attachment, the parasite severity of attack, the host’s susceptibility to Striga,
remains subterranean for six to eight weeks [13]. During environmental factors (edaphic and climatic) and the
this period, the parasite is completely dependent on its host management level at which the crop is produced [18]. Its
and is most damaging. Generally, the below ground and effects on crops range from stunted growth, through wilt-
above ground development of Striga is shown in the life ing, yellowing, and scorching of leaves, to lowered
cycle of Striga (Figure 1.). yields and death of many affected plants. A report by [9]
indicated that annual sorghum losses attributed to Striga in
SSA are estimated at 22-27% and specifically at 25% in
Ethiopia, 35% in Nigeria, and 40% in Mali. In terms of
monetary value, the annual cereal losses due to Striga are
estimated at US$7 billion in SSA. In Ethiopia, Mali and
Nigeria, the annual losses are estimated at US$75 million,
US$87million and US$1.2 billion respectively [9]. In
Sudan, more than 500,000 hectares under rain fed
cultivation are heavily infested by Striga, which commonly
results in yield losses of 70–100% and thus severe Striga
infestation can result in complete crop failure [10].
Fig 1 : General life cycle of Striga species
Source: Striga Research Methods [14].

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OPTIONS OF operations. A lot of studies have been reported mainly on
STRIGA the effect of intercropping and fertilizer against Striga as

[19] opined that Striga is a particular problem in areas with follows.

low moisture and where soil fertility is being eroded A. Intercropping practice on Striga management
through increased population pressure, decreased use of Weed control is an important aspect in intercropping

fallow and minimal use of organic or inorganic fertilizer. because chemical control is difficult once the crops have

Most importantly, it mostly affects the livelihoods of poor emerged. A study by [20] showed that intercropping maize

subsistence farmers in cereal-based agricultural systems in with legumes considerably reduced weed density in the

Africa. Prodigious seed production, prolonged viability of intercrop compared with maize pure stand due to decrease

the seeds and the subterranean nature of the early stages of in the available light for weeds in the maize-legume inter-

parasitism make the control of the parasite by conventional crops, which led to a reduction of weed density and weed

methods difficult if not impossible [10]. Several measures dry matter yield compared with sole crops. Similarly, [21]

have been tried and adopted for control of Striga. Many demonstrated that intercropping maize or sorghum with the

potentially successful approaches developed to control this fodder leguminous Desmodium uncinatum (Jacq.) DC. and

weed include using resistant/tolerant varieties, sowing D. intortum (Mill.) Urb, significantly reduced S. hermon-

clean seeds that are not contaminated with Striga seeds, thica infestation and increased grain yield. Similar studies

rotating cereal hosts with trap crops that induce abortive in Kenya indicate that intercropping with cowpeas between

germination of Striga seeds, intercropping, applying organ- the rows of maize significantly reduced Striga numbers

ic and inorganic soil amendments such as fertilizer or when compared to within the maize rows [22]. Moreover,

manure fumigating soil with ethylene, hoeing and hand finger millet (Eleusinecoracana) intercropped with green

pulling of emerged Striga, applying post emergence herbi- leaf desmodium (Desmodium intortum) reduced Striga

cides, push-pull technology and using biological control hermonthica counts in the intercrops than in the monocrops

agents [10]. Generally, the approaches can be grouped in to [23]. [24] also reported related findings on sorghum-

four independent Striga control options, namely cultural, cowpea intercropping where Striga emergence was lower

chemical, genetic, and biological. under intercrops than sole crops. Generally, various studies

Cultural management practices have shown that intercropping cereals, mainly with
legumes such as cowpea (Vignaunguiculata), peanut
Effective control of Striga has been difficult to achieve
(Arachis hypogaea) and green gram (Vigna radiate) can
through conventional hand or mechanical weeding as the
reduce the number of Striga plants [25]. Potentially, they
parasite exerts its greatest damage bewitching the crop
might be acting as traps crops, stimulating suicidal Striga
before its emergence above ground, and providing evidence
germination or the microclimate under the crop canopy
for host plant infection. Many of the traditional control
may be altered and interfere with Striga germination and
methods, including crop rotation, soil fertility, trap and
development [26]. It is also hypothesized that nitrogen
catch cropping, intercropping, hand-pulling and fertiliza-
fixed by the legumes might interact with Striga growth, as
tion are still in vogue [10]. Still these practices are not
increasing the amount of available nitrogen can reduce
adopted by farmers. Because they are perceived by poor
Striga densities [27].
farmers as unaffordable or uneconomical, labor intensive,
impractical, or not congruent with their other farm

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

B. Fertilizer application on Striga management contains 18% N and 46% P2O5, high availability of P in
As Striga is more favor in less fertile soil, a system that DAP might lead to less production of strigolactones.
would improve soil fertility to increase yield as well as However, direct suppressing effect of N on Striga spp.
reduce Striga infestation will be also of double advantage. cannot be neglected [36].
Good soil management practices involving the use of crop The high and increasing cost of mineral fertilizers and low
residues and organic manure have been effective control purchasing power of small scale farmers have necessitated
measure against Striga. [28] observed that Striga infestation investigating the efficacy of fertilizer application at low to
decreased with increasing organic matter of the soil and very low levels. The use of very low doses of mineral
that organic matter content seemed to be the most impor- fertilizers and their placement near the planting hole, a
tant factor which preserved the soil fertility. Since soil technology termed ‘microdosing’, have been shown to re-
microbial biomass flourishes better in a medium rich in duce application rates and thus cost of fertilizer per surface
organic matter, organic or inorganic soil amendments may area, while still improving crop yields [37]. Microdosing of
increase soil suppressiveness to Striga spp. and also DAP may prove to be an efficient and cost effective option
improve soil conditions to increase yield of subsequent to reduce S. hermonthica damage in sorghum in SSA, par-
cereal. Different research findings were reported by ticularly in combination with other control options, such as
authors. According to [29], 55-82% reduction in number intercropping, use of organic fertilizer and hand pulling of
and weight of S. hermonthica recorded due to application S. hermonthica at flowering to achieve integrated S. her-
of N using urea in Niger. [30] also reported that N monthica management [35].
fertilizers altered assimilate partitioning in favour of the ear Genetic resistance
and increased maize grain yield and reduced Striga count Striga resistance is the ability of the host root to stimulate
by 64%. Similarly, the study of [31] conducted in North Striga germination but at the same time prevent attachment
east Nigeria showed a reduction in Striga infestation and of the seedlings to its roots or to kill the seedlings when
damage with the application of N fertilizer on maize varie- attached. The use of resistant crop cultivars is the most
ties. Striga infestation was significantly reduced at 120 kg economically feasible and environmentally friendly means
N ha-1 in the early variety and 60 and 120 kg N ha-1 in late of Striga control. In East Africa, the most promising new
varieties. [32] noted that, the nitrogenous compound ferti- approach to Striga control is the use of resistant cultivars
lizer which contains urea considerably suppressed germina- (e.g. of sorghum). Striga resistant cultivars have been bred
tion of S. hermonthica when applied during conditioning. in a number of crops. However, cultivars with immunity to
The germination of S. hermonthica seed is associated with Striga have not been found in all host crops. The
the secretion of germination stimulants by host plants. The host/parasite relationship is governed by a series of steps
secretion ultimately depends upon the nutrient status of the involving stimulation of germination, haustorium initiation,
soil [33]. It has been demonstrated that under N and P penetration of the host root, connection to the host xylem
deficiency, host plants secrete high amounts of germination and concurrent growth [38].
stimulants into the rhizosphere, while supply of sufficient Many cereals are found to be naturally resistant to Striga
N and P reduces this secretion [34, 35]. Research studies e.g.; rice, sorghum and some genotypes of maize. A
showed that the effect of N was less pronounced than the resistant plant stimulates germination of Striga but it does
effect of P on strigolactones secretion. As DAP fertilizer not allow it to attach to the root. Study in Striga infested

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

areas revealed cultivation with resistant crops results in The main strategy for control is accordingly to reduce the
fewer Striga plants and higher crop yield than a seed bank of Striga in the soil by stimulating the seeds to
non-resistant genotype of the cultivated plant would do germinate in the absence of host plants [45]. This can be
[39]. achieved by:
Biological control 1) Planting a Poaceous trap crop (susceptible cereal or
Biological control is generally defined as the deliberate use grass) which is ploughed in a few weeks after sowing
of living organisms to suppress, reduce or eradicate a pest before the weeds mature and set seed;
population [40]. Means of biological control of weeds 2) Sowing crops which stimulate germination, but are not
include herbivorous insects, microorganisms specially parasitized, for several seasons (e.g. sunflower, groundnut,
fungi, and smothering plants. The insects that attack Striga soybean);
can be classified according to the site damaged into 3) Treating the soil with ethylene which simulates the
defoliators such as Junonia spp., gall forming as Smicronyx chemical substances which exude from host roots and sti-
spp., shoot borers as Apanteles spp., miners as Ophiomyia mulate germination.
Strigalis, inflorescence feeders as Stenoptilodestaprobanes Integrated Striga management
and fruit feeders as Eulocastra spp. [41]. Twenty eight No single management option has been found effective
fungi and two bacteria were found to be associated with across locations and time. An integrated Striga manage-
Strigahermonthica in Sudan. Among the fungi, only Fusa- ment approach, currently, offers the best possibility for
rium nygamai and Fusarium semitectum var. majus showed reducing impact at the farm level. Many reports on Striga
potential to be used as bio-agents for the control of Striga management suggested the combined use of cultural
[42]. agronomic practices, herbicides, host plant resistance,
Chemical control fertilization, trap cropping, germination stimulants and
Various chemicals including herbicides, fumigants (e.g, biological control [46]. Control is most effective if a range
methyl bromide) and germination stimulants (e.g, ethylene) of practices are combined in to a program of integrated
have been reported as means of control of Striga [43]. Her- Striga control (ISC) that can provide sustainable control
bicides like Imazapyr and pyrithiobac applied as seed over a wide range of biophysical and socio-economic
dressing to maize were reported to give efficient control of environments [47,31]. [47] found that ISC that combined
the parasite [44]. The excellent control capacity of the rotation of Striga resistant maize, trap crops and fertilizer
herbicides is most likely due to their relatively long application reduced the Striga soil seed bank by 46% and
persistence in the rhizosphere. Furthermore, multi-location increased crop productivity by 88% while [48] showed that
testing showed that this herbicide provided excellent early these practices reduced Striga infestation and damage on
season control of both S. asiatica and S. hermonthica and farmers’ fields and increased productivity by more than
could increase yield 3 to 4-fold in heavy infested fields 20%. Likewise, a report by [31] showed that applying N
[44]. fertilizer may not be feasible as a stand-alone solution to
Emerged Striga plants can be successfully killed with managing purple witch weed in cereals because of the high
common herbicides. However, much damage is done by the cost of fertilizer, but the combined use of N fertilizer and
fully parasitic young plants before emergence, so such Striga tolerant / resistant maize and sorghum varieties has
herbicide treatments do not necessarily reduce yield losses. shown promise in the west African Savanas. Furthermore,

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

an experiment conducted in Niger State on two varieties of

maize (Jo-98 and local) intercropped with soya bean and groundnut at three level of N application (0, 50 and 100kg N
ha-1) showed highly significant (P = 0.01) effect on the severity of Striga infestation [49]. Accordingly, resistant variety
Jo-98 showed less severity of Striga and its interaction with N fertilizer at 100kg ha-1 as well as its intercropping
decreased Striga infestation as compared to local (susceptible) (Table 1).
An integrated management approach, if properly designed, using a combination of suitable control measures, has the
potential to provide a lasting solution to Striga problems. [10] reported that soil fertility and soil moisture management
should be an integral part of any Striga control strategy. A similar study by [50] pointed out that species of Striga were
controlled by using the resistant variety, fertilizer and tied ridges on farms of eastern Ethiopia which had long been
abandoned due to Striga infestation. According to Table 2, species of Striga were controlled by using the resistant variety,
fertilizer and tied ridges on farms; whereas, the local cultivar had severe infestations where the average yield of the
resistant variety was 1718 kg ha-1 as against only 216 kg ha-1 from the local variety. The Striga-infested local varieties
died, failed to produce a head or had very small heads. [51] also added that treatment combination that included resistant
variety, fertilizer and tied ridge gave significantly higher yield followed by one that combined local variety with fertilizer
and tied ridging in North wolloat Sirinka and Kobo sites.
Table 1: Effect of variety, intercropping and nitrogen rate interaction on the severity of Striga infestation
(%)
Intercropping/ Maize Variety Nitrogen rate (kgNha -1 )
0 50 100 Mean

Maize only (J0-98) – Resistant 62.2 39.2 9.4 36.9

Maize only (Local) –Susceptible 82.2 40.4 30.4 51.0

J0-98 + Soyabean 19.4 14.2 6.8 13.5

Local + Soyabean 50.1 20.8 10.8 27.2

J0-98 + groundnut 13.2 6.2 4.3 7.9

Local + Groundnut 45.2 19.3 7.6 24.0

N-rate mean 45.4 23.4 11.6 -

F-LSD (0.01) for comparing variety (V) means = 20.6; F-LSD (0.01) for comparing intercropping (I) means = 14.9; F-LSD (0.01) for comparing V x I interaction =
42.4

Source: Intercrops With Trap Crops, Nitrogen Fertilization for Striga hermonthica (Del.) Benth Control at Niger State
[49].

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

Table 2: Striga count and sorghum yield as influenced by variety, fertilizer and tied ridge
Treatment Striga count/m2 Yield (kg/ha)

Babile Fedis Gursum Babile Fedis Gursum

Improved variety with fertilizer and tied 1 2 4 1467 1740 1947

ridge
Improved variety without fertilizer and 2 3 5 1200 980 1244
tied ridge
Local variety with fertilizer and tied ridge 140 151 170 122 235 290

Local variety without fertilizer and tied 266 181 288 98 148 130
ridge

Striga count against treatment and yield against treatment were significant at p ≤ 0.01. Striga count against location and
yield against location were not significant
Source: Distribution of two Striga species and their relative impact on local and resistant sorghum cultivars in East
Ethiopia [50].
[7] Matusova R, Rani K, Verstappen FWA, Franssen MCR, Beale
REFERENCES
MH and Bouwmeester HJ. The strigolactone germination
[1] FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization). Investing in
stimulants of the plant- parasitic Striga and Orobanche spp.
Sustainable Agricultural Intensification. The Role of Conser-
are derived from the carotenoid pathway. Plant Physiology,
vation Agriculture.A Framework for Action. Technical re-
2005; 139: 920- 934.
port: 2008.
[8] Aly R. Conventional and biotechnological approaches for
[2] Alemie A, KeesstraSD and Stroosnijder L. A new
control of parasitic weeds. Invitro Cell. Dev. Biol- Plant,
agro-climatic classification for crop suitability zoning in
2007; 43:304- 317.
northern semi-arid Ethiopia.Agricultural and Forest Meteor-
[9] AATF (African Agricultural Technology Foundation). Feasi-
ology, 2010; 150: 1057–1064.
bility Study on Striga Control in Sorghum. African Agricul-
[3] CASL. Arid and Semi-arid lands: characteristics and impor-
tural Technology Foundation, Nairobi: 2011: ISBN 9966-
tance. Community Adaptation and Sustainable Livelihoods:
775-12-9.
2006.
[10] Babiker AGT. Striga: The Spreading Scourge in Africa. Re-
[4] Rezene F and Etagegnehu GM. Development of Technology
gul. Pl. Grow. and Devel, 2007; 42: 74-87.
for the Dryland Farming Areas of Ethiopia (Reddy, N.S. and
[11] Gomez-Roldan V, Fermas S, Brewer PB,Puech-Pagès V, Dun
Giorgis, Kidane Eds.). Proc. of 1st Nat. Workshop on Dryland
EA, Pillot JP, Letisse F, Matusova R, Danoun S, Portais JC,
Farming Res. in Ethiopia, 1994; 26-28 Nov. 1991.
Bouwmeester H, Bécard G, Beveridge CA, Rameau C, and
[5] Parker C. Observations on the current status of Orobacheand
Rochange SF. "Strigolactone inhibition of shoot branching".
Striga problems worldwide. Pest ManagSci, 2008; 65: 453-
Nature, 2008; 455:180-194.
459.
[12] Cardoso C, Ruyter-Spira C, Bouwmeester HJ. Strigolactones
[6] Gethi JG and Smith ME. Genetic responses of single crosses
and root infestation by plant-parasitic Striga, Orobanche and
of maize to Striga hermonthica (Del.) Benth and Striga asia-
Phelipanche spp. Plant Sci, 2010; 180:414-420.
tica (L.) Kuntze. Crop Sci, 2004; 44: 2068- 2077.

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

[13] Babiker AGT, Butler LG, Ejeta G and Woodson WR. [24] Fasil R, Verkleij JAC, and Ernst WHO. Intercropping for the
Ethylene biosynthesis and strigol-induced germination of Improvement of Sorghum Yield, Soil Fertility and Striga
Strigaasiatica. Physiol. Plant, 1993; 88: 359-365. Control in the Subsistence Agriculture Region of Tigray
[14] Berner DK, Winslow MD, Awad AE, Cardwell KF, Mohan (Northern Ethiopia).Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science,
Raj DR, and Kim SK.(eds.). Striga Research Methods: A 2005; 191:10—19
nd
manual 2 edition.International Institute of Tropical [25] Carsky RJ, Berner DK, Oyewole BD, Dashiell K and Schulz
Agriculture, PMB 5320, Ibadan, Nigeria: 1997. S. Reduction of Striga hermonthica parasitism on maize
[15] Ejeta G, LG Butler and AGT Babiker.New Approaches to the using soybean rotation. International Journal of Pest
Control of Striga.Striga Research at Purdue Universi- Management, 2000; 46:115–120.
ty.Research Bulletin, 1993; 991:27. [26] Parker C and Riches CR. Parasitic Weeds of the World:
[16] Oswald A. Striga control technologies and their dissemina- Biology and Control. Wallingford CAB International: 1993,
tion. Crop Protection, 2005; 24: 333-342. p:332.
[17] Press MC and Scholes JD. Current status and future pros- [27] Pieterse AH, JA Verkleij. Effect of Soil Condition on Striga
pects for management of parasitic weeds (Striga and Oro- Development –a Review .In: JK Ransom, LJ Musselman,
banche). In: CR Riches (ed.). The World’s Worst Weeds. AD Worsham and C Parker (Eds.), Striga. Proceedings of the
Brighton, British Crop ProtectionCouncil. Proc. of an Int. Fifth International Symposium of Parasitic Weeds, April
Symp: 2001: pp. 71- 90. 1991. CIMMYT, Nairobi, Kenya: 1991, pp: 329-339.
[18] Esilaba AO. Options for Striga management in Kenya [28] Vogt W, Saurborn J and Honisch M. Strigahermonthica,
.Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya: distribution and infestation in Ghana and Togo on grain
2006. crops. In: Ransom JK, Musselman LJ, Worsham AD and
(19). De Groote H, Wangare L, Kanampiu F, Odendo M and Parker C (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International
Friesen D. Potential markets for herbicide resistant maize Symposium on Parasitic Weeds. CIMMYT, Nairobi, Kenya:
seed for Striga in Africa. Back ground paper for a poster 1991: pp. 272-277.
presented at the European Asso. Of Agric Economists [29] Hess DEand Ejeta G. Effect of cultural treatment on infesta-
congress, Copenhagen, Denmark: 23-27 August, 2005. tion of Striga hermonthica(L.) Benth (Scrophulariaceace).
[20] Bilalis D, Papastylianou P, Konstantas A, Patsiali S, In: Weber HC and Forstreuter W (eds.). Proceedings of the
Karkanis A and Efthimiadou A. Weed-suppressive effects of fourth international; symposium on parasitic flowering
maize-legume intercropping in organic farming. Int J Pest plants. Phillips University, Marburg Germany: 1987, p:
Manag, 2010; 56:173-181. 367375.
[21] Khan ZR, Pickett JA, Hassanali A, Hooper AM and Midgea [30] Mumera LM and Below FE .Role of nitrogen in resistance to
CAO. Desmodium species and associated biochemical traits Striga parasitism of maize.In: Esilaba AO, F Reda, Ransom
for controlling Striga species: Present and future prospects. JK, WondimuBayu, GebremehdinWoldewahid and Beye-
Weed Research, 2008; 43: 302- 306. neshZemichael. Integrated Nutrient Management Strategies
[22] Odhiambo GD, and Ransom JK. Effect of dicamba on the For Soil Fertility Improvement and Striga Control in North-
control of Striga hermonthica in maize in western Kenya. ern Ethiopia.African Crop Science Journal, 1993; 8 (4): 403-
African Crop Science Journal, 1993; 1:105-110. 410.
[23] Midega CAO, Khan ZR, Amudavi DM, Pittchar J and Pick- [31] Kamara AY, Ekeleme F, Menkir A, Chikoye D and Omoigui
ett JA. Integrated management of Striga hermonthicaand ce- LO. Influence of nitrogen fertilization on the performance of
real stem borers in finger millet [Eleusinecoracana (L.) early and late maturing maize cultivars under natural infesta-
Gaertn.] through intercropping with Desmodiumintortum. In- tion with Striga hermonthica. Archives of Agronomy and Soil
ternational Journal of Pest Management, 2010; 56:145-151. Science,2009; 55(2):125–145.

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

[32] Dzomeku IK and Murdoch AJ.Effects of prolonged [40] BoyetchkoSM. Innovative application of microbial agents
conditioning on dormancy and germination of Striga for biological weed control. In: KG Mukerji, BP Chamola
hermonthica.Journal of Agronomy, 2007; 6:29-36. and RKUpdahyay (eds.). Biotechnological Approaches in
[33] Jamil M, Charnikhova T, and Cardoso C. Quantification of Bio control of Plant Pathogens. Kluwer Academic Plenum,
the relationship between strigolactones and Striga hermon- New York, USA: 1999: pp. 73-97.
thica infection in rice under varying levels of nitrogen and [41] Kroschel J. Analysis of the Striga problem, towards joint
phosphorus. Weed Research, 2011; 51:373–385. action. In: J Kroschel, H Mercer-Quarshie, and J Sauerborn
[34] Lopez-Raez JA, Charnikhova T, Gomez-Roldan V. Tomato (eds). Advances in Parasitic Weed Control at On-farm Level,
strigolactones are derived from carotenoids and their 1:13–26. Joint Action to Control Striga in Africa. Marggraf-
biosynthesis is promoted by phosphate starvation. New Verlag, Weikersheim, Germany: 1999.
Phytologist, 2008; 178:863–874. [42] Zahran EB. Biological Control of Striga hermonthica (Del.)
[35] Jamil M, Kanampiu FK, Karaya H, Charnikhova T and Benth. Using Formulated Mycoherbicides Under Sudan
Bouwmeester HJ.Striga hermonthica parasitism in maize in Field Conditions. Ph.D Thesis, University of Hohenheim,
response to N and P fertilizers.Field Crops Research, 2012; Germany: 2008, pp:143.
134, 1–10. [43]Egley GH, Eplee RE and Norris RS. Discovery and testing of
[36] Simier P, Constant S, and Degrande D. Impact of nitrate ethylene as a witchweed germination stimulant. In: PF Sand,
supply in C and N assimilation in the parasitic plant Striga RE Eplee, and RG Westbrooks (eds). Witch weeds Research
hermonthica (Del.) Benth (Scrophulariaceae) and its host and Control in the United States. Weed Science Society of
Sorghum bicolor L. Plant Cell and Environment, 2006; America Campaign, 1990; 37-45.
29:673–681. [44] Kanampiu FK, Kabamble V, Massawe C, Jasia L, Friesen D,
[37] Tabo R, Bationo A, Gerard B. Improving cereal productivity Ransom JK and Gressel J. Multi-site, multi-season field tests
and farmers’ income using a strategic application of fertiliz- demonstrate that herbicide seed-coating, herbicide-resistance
ers in West Africa. In: A Bationo, B Waswa, JKiharaand maize controls Striga spp. and increases yield in several
JKimetu (eds). Advances in Integrated Soil Fertility African countries. Crop Prot, 2003; 22: 697 - 706.
Management in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges and Oppor- [45] Hesammi E. Striga and Ways of Control.Intl.J.Farm and
tunities. Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: 2007, 201– Alli.Sci, 2013; 2(3):53-55. (http://ijfas.com/wp-
208. content/uploads/2013/02/53-55.pdf). Accessed on April 21,
[38] Butler LG. Chemical Communication between the Parasitic 2014.
Weed Striga and its host crop, a new dimension in [46] Marley PS, Aba DA, Sheboyan JAY, Musa R and Sanni A.
allelo-chemistry, In: Ml Dakshini and FA Einhelling (eds). Integrated management in Striga hermonthica in sorghum
Allelopathy: Organisms, Processes, and Application. ACS using a mycoherbicide and host plant resistance in the Nige-
Symposium Series 582, American Chemical Society. Wash- rian Sudano-Sahelian Savanna. Weed Res, 2004; 44: 157 –
ington DC., USA: 1993, .158-168. 162.
[39] Rodenburg J, Bastiaans L, and Kropff MJ. Characterization [47] Franke AC, Ellis-Jones J,Tarawali G, Schulz S, Hussaini
of host tolerance to Striga hermonthica.Euphytica. In: Lars- MA, Kureh I, White R, Chikoye D, Douthwaite B, Oyewole
son M. Soil fertility status and Striga hermonthica infestation BD and Olanrewaju AS. Evaluating and scaling-up inte-
relationship due to management practices in Western Kenya. grated Strigahermonthica control technologies among far-
(MSc Thesis Online publication: http://stud.epsilon.slu.se), mers in northern Nigeria. Crop Protection,2006; 25:868–
SLU, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2006; 878.
(http://stud.epsilon.slu.se/4488/1/larssonm120704.pdf).Acces
sed on April 21/2014

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

Int. J. Life. Sci. Scienti. Res., VoL 2, Issue 2

[48] Kamara AY, Chikoye D, Ekeleme F, Omoiguil O and Dugje

IY.Field performance of improved cowpea cultivars under
natural infestation with Striga gesneroides.International
Journal of Pest Management,2008; 54(3):189–195.
[49] Mamudu AY. Intercrops With Trap Crops, Nitrogen Fertili-
zation For Striga hermonthica (Del.) Benth Control At Niger
State. International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science Invention, 2013; 2(5):64-69.
[50] Temam T. Distribution of two Striga species and their rela-
tive impact on local and resistant sorghum cultivars in East
Ethiopia. Wiley Inter Science, Trop. Sci, 2006; 46(3), 147–
150. DOI: 10.1002/ts.70. Accessed on April 21, 2014.
[51] Gebisa E and Gressel J (Eds).Integrating New Technologies
For Strigacontrol: Towards Ending the Witch-Hunt.World
Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Singapore: 2007, p:345.

http://ijlssr.com IJLSSR © 2015 All rights are reserved

View publication stats