Cargando…
Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination
Farmers in developing nations encounter high postharvest losses mainly attributable to the lack of modern techniques for threshing, cleaning, grading, and grain storage. Mechanized handling of grain in developing countries is rare, although the technology is effective against insects and pest infest...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7023111/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31936838 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/insects11010050 |
_version_ | 1783498173747036160 |
---|---|
author | Darfour, Bernard Rosentrater, Kurt A. |
author_facet | Darfour, Bernard Rosentrater, Kurt A. |
author_sort | Darfour, Bernard |
collection | PubMed |
description | Farmers in developing nations encounter high postharvest losses mainly attributable to the lack of modern techniques for threshing, cleaning, grading, and grain storage. Mechanized handling of grain in developing countries is rare, although the technology is effective against insects and pest infestations. The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of five grain handling techniques that have the ability to reduce postharvest losses from insect infestation. The five methods were metal silo plus all accessories (m. silo + acc.), metal silo only (m. silo), woven polypropylene plus phosphine (w. PP. + Phos.), woven polypropylene only (w. PP.), and Purdue Improved Crop Storage bags only (PICS). The functional unit used was handling 1 kg of maize grain. The cost analysis of each technique was calculated based on equations using a spreadsheet. The annual capital and operational costs of handling using m. silo + acc. or m. silo were very high, unlike the PICS, w. PP. + Phos., or w. PP. The annual capital and operational costs decreased as production scale increased. Food security (due to reduced insects and pest infestations) and financial prospects of farmers can improve when the grain is mechanically handled with m. silo + acc. or m. silo. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7023111 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70231112020-03-12 Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination Darfour, Bernard Rosentrater, Kurt A. Insects Article Farmers in developing nations encounter high postharvest losses mainly attributable to the lack of modern techniques for threshing, cleaning, grading, and grain storage. Mechanized handling of grain in developing countries is rare, although the technology is effective against insects and pest infestations. The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of five grain handling techniques that have the ability to reduce postharvest losses from insect infestation. The five methods were metal silo plus all accessories (m. silo + acc.), metal silo only (m. silo), woven polypropylene plus phosphine (w. PP. + Phos.), woven polypropylene only (w. PP.), and Purdue Improved Crop Storage bags only (PICS). The functional unit used was handling 1 kg of maize grain. The cost analysis of each technique was calculated based on equations using a spreadsheet. The annual capital and operational costs of handling using m. silo + acc. or m. silo were very high, unlike the PICS, w. PP. + Phos., or w. PP. The annual capital and operational costs decreased as production scale increased. Food security (due to reduced insects and pest infestations) and financial prospects of farmers can improve when the grain is mechanically handled with m. silo + acc. or m. silo. MDPI 2020-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7023111/ /pubmed/31936838 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/insects11010050 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Darfour, Bernard Rosentrater, Kurt A. Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination |
title | Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination |
title_full | Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination |
title_fullStr | Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination |
title_short | Cost Assessment of Five Different Maize Grain Handling Techniques to Reduce Postharvest Losses from Insect Contamination |
title_sort | cost assessment of five different maize grain handling techniques to reduce postharvest losses from insect contamination |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7023111/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31936838 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/insects11010050 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT darfourbernard costassessmentoffivedifferentmaizegrainhandlingtechniquestoreducepostharvestlossesfrominsectcontamination AT rosentraterkurta costassessmentoffivedifferentmaizegrainhandlingtechniquestoreducepostharvestlossesfrominsectcontamination |