# Prevalence and Socioeconomic Impact of Striga (Striga hermonthica) in Sorghum Producing Areas of East and West Hararghe Zones, Oromia, Ethiopia

Authors: Lemma Degebasa; Taye Tessema; Zelalem Bekeko; Ketema Belete
Journal: International Journal of Agronomy
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

Striga is one of the biotic constraints limiting the production and productivity of sorghum in tropical Africa, particularly in Ethiopia. A field survey was conducted in the eastern and western Hararghe zones in six districts in the 2019 cropping season to investigate the prevalence and socioeconomic impact of the weed. Random sampling was employed to collect the field and socioeconomic data. Data were collected on Striga counts per meter square and per plant, awareness and impression of farmers, prevalence, management used, severity, and collective actions to manage Striga. The data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 20. The results showed that two Striga species,Striga hermonthica and Striga asiatica, were observed. However, S. hermonthica was more prevalent than S. asiatica in all the surveyed locations, and its occurrence differed among locations. The maximum levels of S. hermonthica occurrence were recorded at Kile-besidimo (92%), Edobaso (85%), Kufakas (82%), Kotora (80%), Homacho Riana (78%), Bal’ina arba (74%), Dire gudina (72%), Bishan babile (66%), Qufa (65%), Oda Anesso (48%), Ijakechu (45%), Umer kulle (40%), Homacho Eba (38%), and Tofik (35%). Less level of Striga occurrence was recorded at Bareda (29%), Haro Adii (27%), Jiru gemachu (25%), and Homacho dayo (23%) Striga per meter square in assessed fields. S. hermonthica resulted in an estimated yield reduction of 0 to 80% in the surveyed areas. This causes higher economic loss and incurs social instability in the region. According to the farmers, hand weeding, legume intercropping, crop rotation, and resistance varieties were the most popular control measures to reduce Striga infestations. From this survey, it can be concluded that S. hermonthica is easily disseminated by different dispersal mechanisms and the major constraint of sorghum production in both zones. Therefore, it can be recommended that integrated management options be employed to reduce Striga infestation and the socioeconomic impact of Striga in the future.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) is highly adapted to diverse environmental conditions and a vital crop to foods of poor people where drought causes regular failures of other crops in the semiarid tropics [1]. It is frequently produced by smallholder farmers in Africa [2]. Sorghum is the third major cereal crop in Ethiopia and is cultivated in drought-prone areas of the country. It is well known for its adaptability and diversity and is cultivated over different agroecological areas [3, 4]. Sorghum is one of the main significant crops produced as food insurance in eastern Ethiopia, where the climate is categorized by inconsistent rainfall and drought [5]. Its productivity is 2.3 tons/hectars, which is below its genetic potential due to edaphic and biotic factors affecting sorghum production in Ethiopia [6]. The main limiting factors for this lower productivity are pests, low soil fertility, and drought. Among the pests, the parasitic weed (Striga) is the main biotic factor affecting the production and productivity of sorghum in Ethiopia [7]. Striga is supposed to originate around the border of Ethiopia and Sudan (Nubia), where it causes high yield losses in all cereal crops. Although Striga is common in Africa, it currently inhibits sorghum production globally [5]. The sorghum yield loss due to Striga alone was estimated at US $7 billion in sub-Saharan Africa, and the Ethiopian share was $75 million [8] annually. In many countries, Striga infestation has expanded with a resulting decline in food production [1]. The losses attributed to Striga weed range between 30% and 100% in most areas [9] and are often aggravated by low soil fertility. Striga invades the susceptible host while increasing the Striga soil seed bank and crop exudates stimulates Striga seed germination and ever increases the reduction of yields [10]. Crop yield losses between 65% and 100% due to Striga are common in heavily infested fields in cereal production in Ethiopia [11, 12]. A single Striga plant can produce more than 100,000 seeds. This makes its control too difficult. A great number of seeds will be returned to the soil, increasing the seed bank if Striga plants are allowed to flower and seed. The problem of Striga is related to the cropping system, which contributes to reducing soil fertility and increasing the soil seed bank of Striga [13].In Ethiopia, Striga is a severe menace to subsistence food production and food security [5]. Striga hermonthica is the main challenge among parasitic weed species to sorghum production in eastern Ethiopia [14], particularly in Hararghe. In this area, drought, low soil fertility, and monocropping are major problems. Striga causes a sorghum yield reduction of 65% in moderate to heavy infestations [15]. Many studies have been conducted on the management of Striga in different parts of Ethiopia. However, knowledge of Striga prevalence, distribution, and socioeconomic constraints on sorghum production in the eastern and western Hararghe zones was not assessed and documented. Such information suggests interventions that may help create awareness among agricultural communities and improve good agronomic practices for Striga management that have not been specified. Thus, the objective of this study was to investigate the prevalence and socioeconomic impact of Striga infestation in sorghum growing areas of the eastern and western Hararghe zones, Ethiopia.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. Description of the Surveyed Area

A field survey was conducted from mid-September to November 2019 in the east and west Hararghe zones. The eastern Hararghe zone is located at GPS coordinates of 8°48’28.9008” N and 41°36’4.2516” E, and the western Hararghe zone is located at latitudes of 8°39’59.99” N and longitudes of 40°29’59.99” E. Six districts, namely, Bible, Fedis, Kurfachalle, Gemechis, Habro, and Darolabu, were selected due to high Striga infestation and the major sorghum-producing areas in the zones (Figure1). According to basic data from the national meteorology service agency, the agro-climatic conditions of the surveyed areas include lowland, midland, and highland areas.Figure 1
Map of the surveyed districts in the 2019 cropping season.The average annual rainfall ranges from 710 mm for the lowland area to nearly 1,150 mm for the highland areas. The erraticism of rainfall from time to time and its often irregular distribution throughout the cultivation periods provide a wide range of climatic variabilities that challenge farmers.


### 2.2. Field Survey

A survey of Striga prevalence was conducted in six selected districts in both zones. The sample points were at every 2 km interval, and the purposive sampling method was used in 1 m × 1 m quadrants in a zigzag manner. Fifty fields per district and 15 sampling points per field were taken. The abundance of Striga at each sample point was determined by calculating the number of fields infested divided by the total number of fields observed and described as a percentage [16].Prevalence% = (Number of Striga fields infested/total number of fields observed)∗ 100.The yield loss was determined based on the emerged Striga number per sorghum plant. Yield loss in farmers’ fields was estimated following the method of [17] as follows: L = 100 × 0.124 × SN, where L = percent yield loss and SN = emerged Striga number per plant.


### 2.3. Assessment of Socioeconomic Impact

The socioeconomic impact assessment covered the major sorghum-producing areas of the eastern and western Hararghe zones in six districts, mainly the villages of Homacho Riana, Homacho Dayo, Homacho Eba, Kufakas, Qufa, Bareda, Oda Anesso, Kotora, Haro Adii, Kile-besidimo, Bishan Bible, Tofik, Edobaso, Umerkulle, Bal’ina arba, Dire gudina, Ijakechu, and Jiru gemachu. Seven hundred twenty growers were nominated for the formal survey assessing the socioeconomic impact of Striga from all districts, and 120 growers were nominated from each district (Table1). As per the study, the study sites from which the farmers were selected were chosen purposefully by considering high, medium, and non-Striga infestation sites. Based on this, the respondent farmers were categorized into three strata. The first strata consisted of farmers from high Striga-infested sites; the second strata consisted of farmers from medium Striga-infested sites; and the third stratum consisted of farmers from non-Striga-infested sites. Forty farmers were selected from each stratum. Both men and women were interviewed to obtain the required information from each respondent’s stratum, and women accounted for 21% of the total sample size. The work burden of each gender varied within the community. Men largely participated in agricultural activity compared to women in the selected area. Women in the surveyed area spent more time performing household and market-related activities. Accordingly, more information was obtained from men related to their farm activities and provided adequate information about Striga problems for this study (Table 2).Table 1
Sample size in the Striga-focused areas of the east and west Hararghe zones in the 2019 cropping season.
Respondent categoryMenWomenOverall sampleN%N%N%High infestation3080102040100Medium infestation2878122240100No infestation2678142240100Total84793621120100N = sample size per district, six districts ∗ 120 = 720.Table 2
Farmers’ responses on Striga severity, disadvantage, and advantage in percentage.
VillagesSeverityDisadvantageAdvantageStd. deviationH/RianaHighly severe35518.93H/DayoSevere40023.09H/EbaSevere40023.09KufakasHighly severe32816.65QufaSevere40023.09BaredaSevere40023.09Oda anessoSevere40023.09KotoraHighly severe33717.38H/AdiiSevere40023.09Kile-besidimoHighly severe301015.27Bishan babileSevere40023.09TofikSevere40023.09EdobasoHighly severe31915.95UmerkulleSevere34618.15Bal’ina arbaHighly severe32816.65Dire gudinaHighly severe33717.39Ij/kechuSevere36419.73Jiru gemachuSevere40023.09


### 2.4. Data Collection

Data on the abundance of Striga in the area, severity of Striga, other advantages and disadvantages of Striga, dispersal mechanisms of Striga, the effect of Striga on crop plants, awareness and impression of farmers, sorghum production constraints, control methods used by communities to manage Striga, and willingness of the community for collective actions to manage Striga were collected.


### 2.5. Data Analysis

The questionnaire was coded, and the data were entered into a computer for analysis. IBM SPSS Statistics version 20 and Excel were used to summarize the information and analyze the data. A universal approach was followed to develop intervention measures that take the entire social, economic, and agroecological environment of the communities into account.


## 2.1. Description of the Surveyed Area

A field survey was conducted from mid-September to November 2019 in the east and west Hararghe zones. The eastern Hararghe zone is located at GPS coordinates of 8°48’28.9008” N and 41°36’4.2516” E, and the western Hararghe zone is located at latitudes of 8°39’59.99” N and longitudes of 40°29’59.99” E. Six districts, namely, Bible, Fedis, Kurfachalle, Gemechis, Habro, and Darolabu, were selected due to high Striga infestation and the major sorghum-producing areas in the zones (Figure1). According to basic data from the national meteorology service agency, the agro-climatic conditions of the surveyed areas include lowland, midland, and highland areas.Figure 1
Map of the surveyed districts in the 2019 cropping season.The average annual rainfall ranges from 710 mm for the lowland area to nearly 1,150 mm for the highland areas. The erraticism of rainfall from time to time and its often irregular distribution throughout the cultivation periods provide a wide range of climatic variabilities that challenge farmers.


## 2.2. Field Survey

A survey of Striga prevalence was conducted in six selected districts in both zones. The sample points were at every 2 km interval, and the purposive sampling method was used in 1 m × 1 m quadrants in a zigzag manner. Fifty fields per district and 15 sampling points per field were taken. The abundance of Striga at each sample point was determined by calculating the number of fields infested divided by the total number of fields observed and described as a percentage [16].Prevalence% = (Number of Striga fields infested/total number of fields observed)∗ 100.The yield loss was determined based on the emerged Striga number per sorghum plant. Yield loss in farmers’ fields was estimated following the method of [17] as follows: L = 100 × 0.124 × SN, where L = percent yield loss and SN = emerged Striga number per plant.


## 2.3. Assessment of Socioeconomic Impact

The socioeconomic impact assessment covered the major sorghum-producing areas of the eastern and western Hararghe zones in six districts, mainly the villages of Homacho Riana, Homacho Dayo, Homacho Eba, Kufakas, Qufa, Bareda, Oda Anesso, Kotora, Haro Adii, Kile-besidimo, Bishan Bible, Tofik, Edobaso, Umerkulle, Bal’ina arba, Dire gudina, Ijakechu, and Jiru gemachu. Seven hundred twenty growers were nominated for the formal survey assessing the socioeconomic impact of Striga from all districts, and 120 growers were nominated from each district (Table1). As per the study, the study sites from which the farmers were selected were chosen purposefully by considering high, medium, and non-Striga infestation sites. Based on this, the respondent farmers were categorized into three strata. The first strata consisted of farmers from high Striga-infested sites; the second strata consisted of farmers from medium Striga-infested sites; and the third stratum consisted of farmers from non-Striga-infested sites. Forty farmers were selected from each stratum. Both men and women were interviewed to obtain the required information from each respondent’s stratum, and women accounted for 21% of the total sample size. The work burden of each gender varied within the community. Men largely participated in agricultural activity compared to women in the selected area. Women in the surveyed area spent more time performing household and market-related activities. Accordingly, more information was obtained from men related to their farm activities and provided adequate information about Striga problems for this study (Table 2).Table 1
Sample size in the Striga-focused areas of the east and west Hararghe zones in the 2019 cropping season.
Respondent categoryMenWomenOverall sampleN%N%N%High infestation3080102040100Medium infestation2878122240100No infestation2678142240100Total84793621120100N = sample size per district, six districts ∗ 120 = 720.Table 2
Farmers’ responses on Striga severity, disadvantage, and advantage in percentage.
VillagesSeverityDisadvantageAdvantageStd. deviationH/RianaHighly severe35518.93H/DayoSevere40023.09H/EbaSevere40023.09KufakasHighly severe32816.65QufaSevere40023.09BaredaSevere40023.09Oda anessoSevere40023.09KotoraHighly severe33717.38H/AdiiSevere40023.09Kile-besidimoHighly severe301015.27Bishan babileSevere40023.09TofikSevere40023.09EdobasoHighly severe31915.95UmerkulleSevere34618.15Bal’ina arbaHighly severe32816.65Dire gudinaHighly severe33717.39Ij/kechuSevere36419.73Jiru gemachuSevere40023.09


## 2.4. Data Collection

Data on the abundance of Striga in the area, severity of Striga, other advantages and disadvantages of Striga, dispersal mechanisms of Striga, the effect of Striga on crop plants, awareness and impression of farmers, sorghum production constraints, control methods used by communities to manage Striga, and willingness of the community for collective actions to manage Striga were collected.


## 2.5. Data Analysis

The questionnaire was coded, and the data were entered into a computer for analysis. IBM SPSS Statistics version 20 and Excel were used to summarize the information and analyze the data. A universal approach was followed to develop intervention measures that take the entire social, economic, and agroecological environment of the communities into account.


## 3. Results and Discussion

The results from the field survey showed that two Striga species were observed. These wereS. hermonthica and S. asiatica. S. hermonthica was the most prevalent in all the districts compared to S. asiatica (Table 3). S. hermonthica expands most on sorghum fields. In general, S. hermonthica was extremely distributed and affected sorghum production. However, the infestation level of S. hermonthica per meter square varies among sites. In the surveyed villages (Kile-Besidimo (92%), Edobaso (85%), Kufakas (82%), Kotora (80), Homacho Riana (78%), Bal’ina arba (74%), and Dire gudina, (72%)), farmers’ fields were most affected in the area, and medium S. hermonthica infestation was observed in Bishan Babile (66%), Qufa (65%), Oda Anesso (48%), Ijakechu (45%), Umerkulle (40%), Homacho Eba (38%), and Tofik (35%) in each district. In contrast, a small number of Striga infestations were perceived at Bareda (29%), Haro Adii (27%), Jiru gemachu (25%), and Homacho Dayo (23%) Striga per meter square in the assessed fields (Table 3). The reasons for the increasing S. hermonthica infestation might be due to pressure on land use for continuous cropping of cereal crops without rotation, soil moisture stress, drought, and infertile soils. The outcome of this survey was in agreement with the research conducted by [18], who stated that Striga infestation is steadily increasing as a result of monocropping of cereal crops. In addition, [19] stated that Striga generally prefers infertile soils in semiarid tropical areas, and their seeds are well adapted to hot, dry conditions, remaining dormant until rain. Similarly, [20] also described that Striga infestation is correlated with low soil fertility and that improved soil fertility would lead to a reduction in the infestation.Table 3
Striga hermonthica infestation per meter square in six districts of the east and west Hararghe Zone 2019 cropping seasons.
Villages (sites)NP (%)MinimumMaximumMeanStd. deviationStd. errorVarianceDire gudina5072347558.2610.2851.455105.788Ijakechu5045246445.3212.5171.770156.671Jiru gemechu5025145936.3210.8221.530117.120Umerkulle5040106542.3812.3821.751153.302Bal’ina arba5074307055.309.2981.31586.459Edobaso5085348976.089.9181.40398.361Bishan babile5066277054.0611.5161.629132.629Tofik5035105938.0410.3471.463107.060Kile-besidimo5092809990.264.416.62519.502Homacho riana5078307050.5411.1081.571123.396Homacho eba503885529.7612.2051.726148.962Homacho dayo502375628.8012.6021.782158.816Kufakas5082276852.1610.8391.533117.484Qufa506596033.3613.4251.899180.235Bareda5029116230.4410.4341.476108.864Oda anesso5048105334.4613.7211.940188.253Kotora5080306551.008.5261.20672.694Haro adii502785827.9212.9751.835168.361Valid N (listwise)50N : total number of fields observed and P : prevalence%.


### 3.1. Striga Count per Plant in Farmers Field

More Striga counts per plant were recorded from Kile-Besidimo (6 Striga/plant), Edobaso (6 Striga/plants), Kufakas (6 Striga/plants), Kotora (5 Striga/plants), H/Riana (5 Striga/plants), Bal’ina arba (5 Striga/plants), Dire gudina (5 Striga/plants), Bishan Babile, (4 Striga/plants), Qufa (4 Striga/plants), Oda Anesso (4 Striga/plants), Umer kulle (4 Striga/plants), Ijakechu (3 Striga/plants), Homacho Eba (2 Striga/plants), and Tofik (2 Striga/plants) villages, whereas fewer Striga were recorded from Bareda (2), H/Adii (2), Jiru gemachu (1), and Homacho Dayo (1) villages (Figure2). This could be due to S. hermonthica infecting cereals, mainly sorghum, by parasitizing its root. This assessment is in agreement with [21], who studied the infestation S. hermonthica and S. asiatica in cereal crops. This result is also in agreement with the finding of [22], who reported that sorghum and S. hermonthica have a long coevolutionary history. Similarly, [23] stated that the life cycle of the parasite is highly harmonized with that of the host, right from germination to maturity.Figure 2
Assessment of estimated sorghum yield loss in surveyed districts.


### 3.2. Assessment of Socioeconomic Impact

The yield loss of sorghum due toS. hermonthica across surveyed villages was estimated to range between 0% and 80%. The mean estimated yield loss across farmers’ fields among villages varied depending on the intensity of infestation. High estimated yield losses ranging from 31% to 80% occurred in high Striga-infested villages, whereas less estimated mean yield loss ranging from 0% to 30% occurred in less Striga-infested villages (Figure 2). This result is in agreement with [4], who indicated that yield losses of 65% to 100% in Sudan and Ethiopia, which are common in severely damaged fields, but total losses can occur when Striga attacks are compounded by drought. Yield losses caused by Striga are often significant, and infestation by Striga usually results in substantial yield reduction, often surpassing 65% in heavily infested fields. As indicated by [10], crop yield losses up to 100% are possible on susceptible sorghum varieties under more Striga infestation. Similarly, [24] observed that Striga infests two-thirds of the arable land of Africa and constitutes the largest single biological cause of crop damage in Africa. This result also agrees with the finding of [25], who stated that Striga is a devastating parasite that affects the host prior to its emergence from the soil and may cause yield losses in cereals ranging from 15% to 100% under favorable conditions. In addition, [26] stated that the major sorghum growing areas in all regions of Ethiopia are highly infested by Striga and up to 65% yield loss of sorghum was observed.


### 3.3. Severity of Striga

Among the surveyed households, fewer growers explained that Striga can be used for animal feeding. Nevertheless, many of the respondents said that Striga has no advantage and that they have not used it for multiple purposes (Table3). As a consequence of this detrimental effect of Striga, it reduces crop yield and shelter for pests and diseases. In general, the severity of disadvantage dominates its advantage in the study area (Table 2). Therefore, due to the high infestation of Striga maximum sorghum yield loss occurred. This assessment was in agreement with [21], who studied S. hermonthica and S. asiatica infestation in cereal crops and caused significant yield loss. In addition, [27] Striga is a common parasitic weed that alone reduces yields of cereal crops by more than 50%. In addition to its parasitic devastating impacts, S. hermonthica is a well-known medicinal plant [28]. In African traditional medicine, it has been widely used as a remedy for many ailments.


### 3.4. Farmers’ Responses to the Rate of Striga Dispersal and Its Effect on Host Crops

Based on farmers’ responses and actual observations,S. hermonthica was common throughout the surveyed area and extended from the east Hararghe to the west Hararghe zones in six districts. The seeds of Striga easily disseminate from one place to another by different dispersal mechanisms and longevity without loss of viability. A large number of respondents said the wind, animals, water runoff (flood), and contaminated crop seed with Striga seed dominated the dispersal means because farm crops are harvested at the time when the Striga weed had flowered. This increases the rate of Striga dispersal and wider distribution in each district (Figure 3). This result agrees with the finding of [29], who stated that over time, Striga spread to new areas by human beings through the tools used for land preparation and weeding. Similarly, [30] reported that Striga seeds are also spread by animals moving from one field to another for grazing purposes. This has culminated in a complex system of spreading the weed to new areas, thus reducing the crop yield of farmers who are not aware of the devastating effect.Figure 3
Farmers’ responses on the dispersal rate ofStriga hermonthica in surveyed districts.According to farmers’ responses,S. hermonthica has marked effects on the growth and yield of its host crops. The parasite is more damaging and devastating under drought and low soil fertility conditions. The respondents said, during agronomic practices, it is difficult to thin sorghum seedlings due to Striga attaching to the root of sorghum. This assessment is in agreement with [31], who explained that the Striga life cycle is subterranean, growing completely at the expense of its host and that the parasite inflicts most of its damage to the host during this phase of its life cycle. Symptoms displayed by infected hosts include stunting, reduction of internode expansion, wilting, chlorosis, and decreased growth and yield. According to the figure, most respondents gave high infestation (increasing, medium, and low) rates of Striga in each district.


### 3.5. Farmers’ Awareness on the Status of Soil Fertility

Based on the farmers’ responses and actual observations, the soil fertility in the surveyed area was categorized as high, medium, and low soil fertility. Accordingly, fewer respondents explained that the soil fertility in the surveyed area was medium, and the majority of the growers said the soil fertility was low (Table4), which is favorable for Striga invasion. The assessment is promising by [18, 20], who explained that high Striga infestation occurred due to infertile soils. Thus, a large number of Striga infestations existed across all the study sites under low soil fertility and drought conditions. This judgment is also in agreement with the findings of [32], which indicated that Striga infestation is intensely related to the decline in soil fertility.Table 4
Farmers’ responses to the soil status and season in which Striga infestation was worst during the 2019 cropping season.
VillagesNumber of respondentsInfertile soil and dry seasonFertile soil and long rain seasonFertile soil and short rain seasonStd. deviationVarianceH/Riana40380218.65347.7H/Dayo40360420.91437H/Eba40400023.09533Kufakas40370321.43459Qufa40400023.09533Bareda40340619.93397Oda anesso40360420.91437Kotora40340619.93397H/Adii40320819.04362.7Kile-besidimo40350520.41416.7Bishan babile40360420.91437Tofik40330719.48379Edobaso402801217.59309Umerkulle403001018.26333Bal’ina arba402901117.90320.7Dire gudina40320819.04362.7Ij/kechu40340619.93397Jiru gemachu40350520.41416.7Valid N (listwise)40


### 3.6. Farmers’ Response to Sorghum Production Constraints

In the surveyed area, the majority of growers explained the constraints that influence sorghum production. Among the constraints that contributed to low sorghum yields, shortage of rain (drought), low soil fertility, pests (Striga, insects, diseases, and birds), and less availability of production inputs, Striga caused serious yield losses in sorghum in all studied districts. The importance of this parasitic weed was attributed to its high occurrence due to the production of large numbers of seeds per plant and multiple dispersal mechanisms [12]. Moderate infestations were reported by some farmers, probably those who practiced regular weeding and agronomy. Some of the respondents ranked that shortage and lack of awareness on production inputs.Overall, in the studied districts, Striga-infested areas had low soil fertility. Such environmental conditions are consistent with the explanations of [33], who stated that low sorghum yields in eastern Africa were associated with nutrient deficiencies, drought, Striga, and stem borers. These severity constraints are different from district to district and within a district (Figure 4). Similarly, [34] also observed that S. hermonthica causes severe constraints in cereal crop production in the SSA by parasitizing the roots of the host crop. It has a wide host range, including many food and fodder crops, although the major damage caused by this parasite is to staple crops of the rural poor in the African savanna sorghum.Figure 4
Farmers’ responses on the sorghum production constraints in the surveyed sites.


### 3.7. Farmers’ Perception of Factors in Hindering the Appropriate Management of Striga

In general, higher percentages of the respondent farmers in the surveyed area were not adequately aware of the use of moisture conservation practices, inadequate resistant crop varieties, crop rotation, and lack of labor (Figure5). In addition, these farmers have insufficient information about Striga seed banks, and sowing legumes can minimize Striga infestation for the next crop. This result agrees with the findings of [35], who reported that the use of legume crops as rotational crops with cereals to reduce the Striga seed bank through suicidal germination can be one of the components of integrated Striga management.Figure 5
Growers opinion on factors hindering Striga control.


### 3.8. Farmers’ Responses to the Strategies in the Management of Striga

#### 3.8.1. Farmers’ Perception on Striga Control

In the surveyed areas, the majority of the respondents believed that the Striga affected the sorghum immediately after its emergence from the ground. Hand weeding, crop rotation, adjusting planting date, legume intercropping, and resistant crop varieties were some of the managing mechanisms reported by the farmers for reducing Striga infestations. Therefore, there are several methods to combat Striga. This result is in agreement with [36], who stated suitable agricultural practices for Striga management. Similarly, [37] also showed that crop rotation and intercropping were good mechanisms to reduce Striga infestations, considering the limited resource base of small-scale subsistence farmers in sub-Saharan Africa.The majority of the farmers used hand weeding in their sorghum fields to reduce Striga infestation. Farmers tried to manage Striga without consideration of the growth stage of the parasite; some weeded before flowering, while others after flowering. Weeding after flowering of the parasite may contribute to increased subsequent infestations. In line with this finding, [38] also stated that hand weeding reduced the incidence of Striga and increased the grain yield in western Kenya. Similarly, [39] reported that hand weeding was one of the most popular techniques to control Striga in some communities in West Africa. However, as much as it seems to be easy to practice and straightforward approach to interrupt the life cycle of the parasite, it has some serious drawbacks. Striga weed emerges 5–6 weeks after planting, and it takes another 3 weeks for the Striga plants to be large enough to be uprooted [29].Based on farmers’ perceptions, no management measures were practiced at any of the surveyed sites. In line with this finding, the integration of multiple control methods provides advantages over the application of each method in isolation and can provide sustainable control over a wide range of biophysical and socioeconomic environments [30]. However, each control measure was categorized as the most significant or very effective, partially effective, and no effective control measures for Striga in the surveyed area, as follows (Figure 6).Figure 6
Farmers’ responses on methods used to prevent/control Striga.


### 3.9. Willingness of the Community for Collective Actions to Manage or Prevent Striga

The household respondents in the surveyed area agreed with various Striga management systems/plans, such as integrated Striga control, crop rotation, legume intercropping, use of herbicide, and hand weeding before flowering, and they promised to restrict different mechanisms by which Striga was distributed from one field to another field (Table5).Table 5
Willingness of the farmers for collective actions to manage Striga in the future.
Control methodsDistrictsPercentiles255075Legume intercroppingBabile11.0012.0013.00Darolabu11.0012.0013.00Fedis13.0014.0015.00Gemachis7.0010.0015.00Habro9.0010.0011.00Kurfachale8.0011.0012.00Use of herbicideBabile5.006.007.00Darolabu7.007.008.00Fedis4.004.006.00Gemachis4.005.006.00Habro4.005.006.00Kurfachale5.006.006.00Integrated Striga controlBabile8.008.009.00Darolabu5.005.006.00Fedis7.009.0010.00Gemachis7.007.009.00Habro6.007.008.00Kurfachale8.008.0010.00Hand weedingBabile8.0011.0012.00Darolabu10.0011.0013.00Fedis10.0011.0011.00Gemachis10.0013.0015.00Habro10.0011.0012.00Kurfachale12.0012.0013.00Crop rotationBabile3.003.004.00Darolabu3.004.005.00Fedis1.002.003.00Gemachis3.004.005.00Habro6.007.008.00Kurfachale2.003.004.00The respondent farmers also promised to change their regularly growing crops from susceptible hosts to Striga-resistant cultivars. The majority of respondent farmers absolutely promised to use integrated Striga control mechanisms at the surveyed sites (Table5). This has allowed farmers to have a variety of options to control the parasite, including the use of legume crops, hand weeding, appropriate fertilizer applications, crop rotation, intercropping, and resistant crops [23, 30]. This result also agrees with the finding of [40], who developed several promising control strategies that directly affect the Striga.


## 3.1. Striga Count per Plant in Farmers Field

More Striga counts per plant were recorded from Kile-Besidimo (6 Striga/plant), Edobaso (6 Striga/plants), Kufakas (6 Striga/plants), Kotora (5 Striga/plants), H/Riana (5 Striga/plants), Bal’ina arba (5 Striga/plants), Dire gudina (5 Striga/plants), Bishan Babile, (4 Striga/plants), Qufa (4 Striga/plants), Oda Anesso (4 Striga/plants), Umer kulle (4 Striga/plants), Ijakechu (3 Striga/plants), Homacho Eba (2 Striga/plants), and Tofik (2 Striga/plants) villages, whereas fewer Striga were recorded from Bareda (2), H/Adii (2), Jiru gemachu (1), and Homacho Dayo (1) villages (Figure2). This could be due to S. hermonthica infecting cereals, mainly sorghum, by parasitizing its root. This assessment is in agreement with [21], who studied the infestation S. hermonthica and S. asiatica in cereal crops. This result is also in agreement with the finding of [22], who reported that sorghum and S. hermonthica have a long coevolutionary history. Similarly, [23] stated that the life cycle of the parasite is highly harmonized with that of the host, right from germination to maturity.Figure 2
Assessment of estimated sorghum yield loss in surveyed districts.


## 3.2. Assessment of Socioeconomic Impact

The yield loss of sorghum due toS. hermonthica across surveyed villages was estimated to range between 0% and 80%. The mean estimated yield loss across farmers’ fields among villages varied depending on the intensity of infestation. High estimated yield losses ranging from 31% to 80% occurred in high Striga-infested villages, whereas less estimated mean yield loss ranging from 0% to 30% occurred in less Striga-infested villages (Figure 2). This result is in agreement with [4], who indicated that yield losses of 65% to 100% in Sudan and Ethiopia, which are common in severely damaged fields, but total losses can occur when Striga attacks are compounded by drought. Yield losses caused by Striga are often significant, and infestation by Striga usually results in substantial yield reduction, often surpassing 65% in heavily infested fields. As indicated by [10], crop yield losses up to 100% are possible on susceptible sorghum varieties under more Striga infestation. Similarly, [24] observed that Striga infests two-thirds of the arable land of Africa and constitutes the largest single biological cause of crop damage in Africa. This result also agrees with the finding of [25], who stated that Striga is a devastating parasite that affects the host prior to its emergence from the soil and may cause yield losses in cereals ranging from 15% to 100% under favorable conditions. In addition, [26] stated that the major sorghum growing areas in all regions of Ethiopia are highly infested by Striga and up to 65% yield loss of sorghum was observed.


## 3.3. Severity of Striga

Among the surveyed households, fewer growers explained that Striga can be used for animal feeding. Nevertheless, many of the respondents said that Striga has no advantage and that they have not used it for multiple purposes (Table3). As a consequence of this detrimental effect of Striga, it reduces crop yield and shelter for pests and diseases. In general, the severity of disadvantage dominates its advantage in the study area (Table 2). Therefore, due to the high infestation of Striga maximum sorghum yield loss occurred. This assessment was in agreement with [21], who studied S. hermonthica and S. asiatica infestation in cereal crops and caused significant yield loss. In addition, [27] Striga is a common parasitic weed that alone reduces yields of cereal crops by more than 50%. In addition to its parasitic devastating impacts, S. hermonthica is a well-known medicinal plant [28]. In African traditional medicine, it has been widely used as a remedy for many ailments.


## 3.4. Farmers’ Responses to the Rate of Striga Dispersal and Its Effect on Host Crops

Based on farmers’ responses and actual observations,S. hermonthica was common throughout the surveyed area and extended from the east Hararghe to the west Hararghe zones in six districts. The seeds of Striga easily disseminate from one place to another by different dispersal mechanisms and longevity without loss of viability. A large number of respondents said the wind, animals, water runoff (flood), and contaminated crop seed with Striga seed dominated the dispersal means because farm crops are harvested at the time when the Striga weed had flowered. This increases the rate of Striga dispersal and wider distribution in each district (Figure 3). This result agrees with the finding of [29], who stated that over time, Striga spread to new areas by human beings through the tools used for land preparation and weeding. Similarly, [30] reported that Striga seeds are also spread by animals moving from one field to another for grazing purposes. This has culminated in a complex system of spreading the weed to new areas, thus reducing the crop yield of farmers who are not aware of the devastating effect.Figure 3
Farmers’ responses on the dispersal rate ofStriga hermonthica in surveyed districts.According to farmers’ responses,S. hermonthica has marked effects on the growth and yield of its host crops. The parasite is more damaging and devastating under drought and low soil fertility conditions. The respondents said, during agronomic practices, it is difficult to thin sorghum seedlings due to Striga attaching to the root of sorghum. This assessment is in agreement with [31], who explained that the Striga life cycle is subterranean, growing completely at the expense of its host and that the parasite inflicts most of its damage to the host during this phase of its life cycle. Symptoms displayed by infected hosts include stunting, reduction of internode expansion, wilting, chlorosis, and decreased growth and yield. According to the figure, most respondents gave high infestation (increasing, medium, and low) rates of Striga in each district.


## 3.5. Farmers’ Awareness on the Status of Soil Fertility

Based on the farmers’ responses and actual observations, the soil fertility in the surveyed area was categorized as high, medium, and low soil fertility. Accordingly, fewer respondents explained that the soil fertility in the surveyed area was medium, and the majority of the growers said the soil fertility was low (Table4), which is favorable for Striga invasion. The assessment is promising by [18, 20], who explained that high Striga infestation occurred due to infertile soils. Thus, a large number of Striga infestations existed across all the study sites under low soil fertility and drought conditions. This judgment is also in agreement with the findings of [32], which indicated that Striga infestation is intensely related to the decline in soil fertility.Table 4
Farmers’ responses to the soil status and season in which Striga infestation was worst during the 2019 cropping season.
VillagesNumber of respondentsInfertile soil and dry seasonFertile soil and long rain seasonFertile soil and short rain seasonStd. deviationVarianceH/Riana40380218.65347.7H/Dayo40360420.91437H/Eba40400023.09533Kufakas40370321.43459Qufa40400023.09533Bareda40340619.93397Oda anesso40360420.91437Kotora40340619.93397H/Adii40320819.04362.7Kile-besidimo40350520.41416.7Bishan babile40360420.91437Tofik40330719.48379Edobaso402801217.59309Umerkulle403001018.26333Bal’ina arba402901117.90320.7Dire gudina40320819.04362.7Ij/kechu40340619.93397Jiru gemachu40350520.41416.7Valid N (listwise)40


## 3.6. Farmers’ Response to Sorghum Production Constraints

In the surveyed area, the majority of growers explained the constraints that influence sorghum production. Among the constraints that contributed to low sorghum yields, shortage of rain (drought), low soil fertility, pests (Striga, insects, diseases, and birds), and less availability of production inputs, Striga caused serious yield losses in sorghum in all studied districts. The importance of this parasitic weed was attributed to its high occurrence due to the production of large numbers of seeds per plant and multiple dispersal mechanisms [12]. Moderate infestations were reported by some farmers, probably those who practiced regular weeding and agronomy. Some of the respondents ranked that shortage and lack of awareness on production inputs.Overall, in the studied districts, Striga-infested areas had low soil fertility. Such environmental conditions are consistent with the explanations of [33], who stated that low sorghum yields in eastern Africa were associated with nutrient deficiencies, drought, Striga, and stem borers. These severity constraints are different from district to district and within a district (Figure 4). Similarly, [34] also observed that S. hermonthica causes severe constraints in cereal crop production in the SSA by parasitizing the roots of the host crop. It has a wide host range, including many food and fodder crops, although the major damage caused by this parasite is to staple crops of the rural poor in the African savanna sorghum.Figure 4
Farmers’ responses on the sorghum production constraints in the surveyed sites.


## 3.7. Farmers’ Perception of Factors in Hindering the Appropriate Management of Striga

In general, higher percentages of the respondent farmers in the surveyed area were not adequately aware of the use of moisture conservation practices, inadequate resistant crop varieties, crop rotation, and lack of labor (Figure5). In addition, these farmers have insufficient information about Striga seed banks, and sowing legumes can minimize Striga infestation for the next crop. This result agrees with the findings of [35], who reported that the use of legume crops as rotational crops with cereals to reduce the Striga seed bank through suicidal germination can be one of the components of integrated Striga management.Figure 5
Growers opinion on factors hindering Striga control.


## 3.8. Farmers’ Responses to the Strategies in the Management of Striga

### 3.8.1. Farmers’ Perception on Striga Control

In the surveyed areas, the majority of the respondents believed that the Striga affected the sorghum immediately after its emergence from the ground. Hand weeding, crop rotation, adjusting planting date, legume intercropping, and resistant crop varieties were some of the managing mechanisms reported by the farmers for reducing Striga infestations. Therefore, there are several methods to combat Striga. This result is in agreement with [36], who stated suitable agricultural practices for Striga management. Similarly, [37] also showed that crop rotation and intercropping were good mechanisms to reduce Striga infestations, considering the limited resource base of small-scale subsistence farmers in sub-Saharan Africa.The majority of the farmers used hand weeding in their sorghum fields to reduce Striga infestation. Farmers tried to manage Striga without consideration of the growth stage of the parasite; some weeded before flowering, while others after flowering. Weeding after flowering of the parasite may contribute to increased subsequent infestations. In line with this finding, [38] also stated that hand weeding reduced the incidence of Striga and increased the grain yield in western Kenya. Similarly, [39] reported that hand weeding was one of the most popular techniques to control Striga in some communities in West Africa. However, as much as it seems to be easy to practice and straightforward approach to interrupt the life cycle of the parasite, it has some serious drawbacks. Striga weed emerges 5–6 weeks after planting, and it takes another 3 weeks for the Striga plants to be large enough to be uprooted [29].Based on farmers’ perceptions, no management measures were practiced at any of the surveyed sites. In line with this finding, the integration of multiple control methods provides advantages over the application of each method in isolation and can provide sustainable control over a wide range of biophysical and socioeconomic environments [30]. However, each control measure was categorized as the most significant or very effective, partially effective, and no effective control measures for Striga in the surveyed area, as follows (Figure 6).Figure 6
Farmers’ responses on methods used to prevent/control Striga.


## 3.8.1. Farmers’ Perception on Striga Control

In the surveyed areas, the majority of the respondents believed that the Striga affected the sorghum immediately after its emergence from the ground. Hand weeding, crop rotation, adjusting planting date, legume intercropping, and resistant crop varieties were some of the managing mechanisms reported by the farmers for reducing Striga infestations. Therefore, there are several methods to combat Striga. This result is in agreement with [36], who stated suitable agricultural practices for Striga management. Similarly, [37] also showed that crop rotation and intercropping were good mechanisms to reduce Striga infestations, considering the limited resource base of small-scale subsistence farmers in sub-Saharan Africa.The majority of the farmers used hand weeding in their sorghum fields to reduce Striga infestation. Farmers tried to manage Striga without consideration of the growth stage of the parasite; some weeded before flowering, while others after flowering. Weeding after flowering of the parasite may contribute to increased subsequent infestations. In line with this finding, [38] also stated that hand weeding reduced the incidence of Striga and increased the grain yield in western Kenya. Similarly, [39] reported that hand weeding was one of the most popular techniques to control Striga in some communities in West Africa. However, as much as it seems to be easy to practice and straightforward approach to interrupt the life cycle of the parasite, it has some serious drawbacks. Striga weed emerges 5–6 weeks after planting, and it takes another 3 weeks for the Striga plants to be large enough to be uprooted [29].Based on farmers’ perceptions, no management measures were practiced at any of the surveyed sites. In line with this finding, the integration of multiple control methods provides advantages over the application of each method in isolation and can provide sustainable control over a wide range of biophysical and socioeconomic environments [30]. However, each control measure was categorized as the most significant or very effective, partially effective, and no effective control measures for Striga in the surveyed area, as follows (Figure 6).Figure 6
Farmers’ responses on methods used to prevent/control Striga.


## 3.9. Willingness of the Community for Collective Actions to Manage or Prevent Striga

The household respondents in the surveyed area agreed with various Striga management systems/plans, such as integrated Striga control, crop rotation, legume intercropping, use of herbicide, and hand weeding before flowering, and they promised to restrict different mechanisms by which Striga was distributed from one field to another field (Table5).Table 5
Willingness of the farmers for collective actions to manage Striga in the future.
Control methodsDistrictsPercentiles255075Legume intercroppingBabile11.0012.0013.00Darolabu11.0012.0013.00Fedis13.0014.0015.00Gemachis7.0010.0015.00Habro9.0010.0011.00Kurfachale8.0011.0012.00Use of herbicideBabile5.006.007.00Darolabu7.007.008.00Fedis4.004.006.00Gemachis4.005.006.00Habro4.005.006.00Kurfachale5.006.006.00Integrated Striga controlBabile8.008.009.00Darolabu5.005.006.00Fedis7.009.0010.00Gemachis7.007.009.00Habro6.007.008.00Kurfachale8.008.0010.00Hand weedingBabile8.0011.0012.00Darolabu10.0011.0013.00Fedis10.0011.0011.00Gemachis10.0013.0015.00Habro10.0011.0012.00Kurfachale12.0012.0013.00Crop rotationBabile3.003.004.00Darolabu3.004.005.00Fedis1.002.003.00Gemachis3.004.005.00Habro6.007.008.00Kurfachale2.003.004.00The respondent farmers also promised to change their regularly growing crops from susceptible hosts to Striga-resistant cultivars. The majority of respondent farmers absolutely promised to use integrated Striga control mechanisms at the surveyed sites (Table5). This has allowed farmers to have a variety of options to control the parasite, including the use of legume crops, hand weeding, appropriate fertilizer applications, crop rotation, intercropping, and resistant crops [23, 30]. This result also agrees with the finding of [40], who developed several promising control strategies that directly affect the Striga.


## 4. Conclusion

Sorghum is the most commonly produced among the cereals grown in the surveyed area and a stable food crop for the local people, butS. hermonthica is creating a challenge for sorghum production. This survey indicated that S. hermonthica was distributed over all the surveyed areas. However, its abundance was not even across the sites. The expansion of S. hermonthica was greater on farmlands with moisture stress areas. Striga caused serious yield loss and major constraints on sorghum at all the studied sites. Currently, S. hermonthica has increased, and the significance of its spread has had negative impacts on the local people. To improve its negative influence, many of the growers tried to manage it by different control techniques; however, its dissemination increased over time because the seeds of Striga were easily disseminated by different dispersal mechanisms and seed longevity, and some farmers did not use all integrated Striga management systems. As a result, the local people become unsecured food and affect their socioeconomic activities. The assessment of Striga abundance, distribution and socioeconomic impact, and its management was inadequate in scope and geographical coverage. Therefore, detailed investigations should be conducted to cover wider sorghum-growing regions and integrated Striga management options should be recommended to reduce Striga infestation and the socioeconomic impact of Striga in the future.



---

*Source: 8402280-2022-02-14.xml*