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

net/publication/226110363

Gum Arabic yield in differently managed Acacia senegal stands in western

Sudan

Article  in  Agroforestry Systems · June 2005

DOI: 10.1007/s10457-005-4162-x

CITATIONS READS

59 837

4 authors, including:

Mohamed El Mukhtar Ballal Mohamed Ahmed Elfadl

4 PUBLICATIONS   111 CITATIONS   
University of Helsinki
14 PUBLICATIONS   395 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Olavi Luukkanen
University of Helsinki
101 PUBLICATIONS   1,846 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

new project sugar cane production View project

Higher Education for Food Security and Environmental Sistainability in Eritrea (HEFSESE) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Ahmed Elfadl on 17 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Agroforestry Forum 共2005兲 63: 237–245 237
© Springer 2005

Gum arabic yield in differently managed Acacia senegal stands in western

Sudan

M.E. Ballal1, E.A. El Siddig2, M.A. Elfadl3,* and O. Luukkanen3

1
El Obeid Agricultural Research Station, P.O. Box 429, El Obeid, Sudan; 2Faculty of Forestry, University of
Khartoum, P.O. Box 32, Shambat, Khartoum North, Sudan; 3Viikki Tropical Resources Institute (VITRI), P. O.
Box 28, FIN ⫺ 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland; *Author for correspondence (tel.: +358-9-58619; fax:
+358-9-58646; e-mail: mohamed.elfadl@helsinki.fi)

Received 1 March 2003; accepted in revised form 4 March 2004

Key words: Natural stand, Non-timber tree product, Shifting cultivation, Stand type, Trees on farmland, Tree
tapping

Abstract

A comparative study of gum arabic yield trends per tree and picking in relation to stand management 共by farmers
and by researchers兲 and type 共natural and planted兲 was conducted at two locations in North Kordofan, Sudan, for
a three-year period. In addition, eight-year yield trends in relation to rainfall were compared based on the 1993–
2000 gum yield data from 1440 trees. Although the gum arabic yield followed the same trend over time in all
stands at both locations, the gum yield from farm stands, whether planted or natural, was 47% to 60% lower than
that from research stands. Late tapping reduced the gum yield by 40% and 50% at the two different locations,
respectively. Yield was highly affected by rainfall, correlating positively with annual rainfall in six of the eight
years of the study. These findings can be used for improving gum arabic yield through management interventions
and for predicting yield in relation to stand type, management regime and rainfall.

Introduction tively provided by farmers while tending such field

Gum arabic is an important natural product obtained
by tapping Acacia senegal 共L.兲 Willd. trees in natural
stands or plantations in the Sudan. However, as ob-
served by Seif El Din and Obeid 共1971兲, the area of
natural stands of this species has gradually declined.
These authors have shown that successful natural re-
generation, resulting from seeds dispersed from
mother trees, occurs on cultivated lands and supports
a traditional, sustainable shifting cultivation system.
In this system, 15–20 year old A. senegal trees are cut
and the land is then cultivated for 4–6 years with field
crops, thus forming a sequential tree-agricultural crop
shifting cultivation or bush fallow system 共Badi et al.
1989兲. Under this system, the chances for the tree
seeds to germinate and the resulting seedlings to es-
tablish themselves increase due to the protection ac-
crops as millet 共Pennisetum typhoides兲, sorghum
共Sorghum bicolor兲, sesame 共Sesamum indicum兲,
groundnuts 共Arachis hypogaea兲 and roselle “kerkadi”
共Hibiscus sabdariffa兲. Young A. senegal trees are also
managed by weeding and simple pruning. When soil
fertility decreases, agricultural production declines
and the land is left to revert to bush fallow. Trees in
abandoned fields are left unmanaged except against
wild fires and grazing by the large numbers of
domestic animals kept by the villagers and also
against illicit tree cutting. When the trees are 5 years
old, the farmers start to tap them for gum arabic pro-
duction until they reach the age when they are cleared
and the sequential agroforestry system continues. In
addition, coppice regeneration from stumps left after
clearing the land for cultivation is also an effective
238
mechanism for establishing new acacia stands 共El
Rasheed 1970; Seif El Din 1984兲.
Tree stands formed and managed by farmers under
this system are called gum gardens. These intensively
managed natural stands produce most of the gum ara-
bic harvested in the Sudan 共NAS 1980兲. The rationale
behind this agroforestry system is the improvement of
soil fertility, which follows a fairly long 共15 to 20
years兲 rotation or tree fallow period. In addition, aca-
cia plantations for gum production are also estab-
lished by the government, or by farmers with
government or donor support. In total, over 18,000 ha
of A. senegal have been planted with the participa-
tion of local communities in western Sudan.
Despite planting programmes, the area under A.
senegal cultivation, whether natural or planted, is de-
creasing due to the expansion and intensification of
agricultural activities. In fact, the deterioration of the
traditional bush fallow system is the result of reduced
land productivity caused by the combined effects of
excessive tree cutting, drought and desertification
共NKRDP 2001兲, coupled with the increase in rural
population and unfavourable socio-economic condi-
tions 共Barbier 2000兲. Year-to-year fluctuation and in-
stability in gum arabic production have also been
observed. Presently the major problem facing the gum
arabic industry in the Sudan is a lack of reliable in-
formation on gum arabic yields and yield trends that
can be used as a basis for monitoring gum arabic pro-
duction. Many authors 共ITC 1972; FAO 1978; NAS
1979; Muthana 1988; Badi et al. 1989兲 have
presented varying estimates of gum arabic yields.
These estimates contain little information on the types
of A. senegal stands or the systems of management
applied. In this respect, the International Institute of
Environment and Development and the Institute of
Environmental Studies 共IIED and IES 1989兲 have re-
ported that the total annual rainfall and its distribu-
tion, the minimum temperature that prevails during
tapping and picking, and the relative humidity at the
time of leaf fall are the main environmental factors
affecting gum arabic production. An increase in gum
yield with increasing rainfall has also been reported
by Bateson 共1988兲. Although the availability of rain-
fall data is clearly of paramount importance for pre-
dicting gum arabic yields, El Tom 共1986兲 has
emphasised the need for even more comprehensive
climatic data so as to facilitate the identification of
factors affecting the annual rainfall.
The aim of the present study was to determine and
analyse the gum arabic yield and its annual variations
in relation to differences in stand type and manage-
ment, including the timing and intensity of tapping,
so as to facilitate gum yield improvement. The ulti-
mate aim was to provide information needed for gum
arabic yield improvement and to offer new manage-
ment guidelines especially for the benefit of farmers.
Materials and Methods
The present study was conducted at Demokeya
共13°16⬘ N; 30°29⬘ E; Alt. 560 m兲 and El Himaira
共13°19⬘ N; 30°10⬘ E; Alt. 570 m兲 in western Sudan.
The Demokeya plantation, which is government
property, is managed by researchers, while the plan-
tation at El Himaira is a gum garden owned and
managed by farmers. The vegetation in the study area
is typical for the A. senegal savanna zone, which is
characterised by low annual rainfall, averaging about
300 mm, and monthly minimum and maximum tem-
peratures of about 20 °C and 35 °C, respectively
共IIED and IES 1989兲. Natural stands of A. senegal not
used for agricultural cropping exist at both sites.
A two-factor randomised complete block experi-
ment with three replications was set up in 1992 in the
12-year-old research plantation at Demokeya. The
experiment was continued for eight years from 1992
to 1999/2000. The two factors comprised the date and
intensity of tapping tested at six and eight levels, re-
spectively. Tapping was done each year, starting on 1
October and repeated every 15 days until 15 Decem-
ber. Tapping intensity corresponding to the number of
branches tapped, from one to eight branches per tree.
Each treatment combination was assigned to ten trees,
making a total of 1440 trees per site. A similar ex-
periment, with the same factors and experimental de-
sign, was conducted in the El Himaira gum garden,
which had originated from planted seedlings. The age
of this gum garden was the same as that of the
Demokeya plantation, but the experiment was started
in 1997 and continued for three years until 1999.
Similar experiments were also carried out in natu-
ral stands at both sites. When trees are 5–6 years old
共tree height about 2 m兲, they reach maturity and are
tapped. In these natural stands, trees are of different
age gradations, and each treatment was randomly as-
signed to five trees, making a total of 720 trees per
site. These experiments were started in 1997 and
continued up to the year 2000.
In all experiments, the first gum pick was collected
six weeks after each tapping. Six tapping dates were

selected for the purpose of experimentation, with the
first tapping done on 1 October, and the gum was
collected seven times following each tapping. Each
consecutive picking was done 15 days after the pre-
vious one. The procedure for tapping and time of col-
lection followed the standard guidelines set by the
Gum Research Division of the Agricultural Research
Corporation. The gum arabic yield per pick and treat-
ment combination was determined by weighing.
Rainfall data were collected at the Demokeya planta-
tion for the whole experimental period 共1992–2000兲.
Mstat-C 共Fischer, 1990兲 software was used in anal-
ysing the data for the combined factorial experiments.
For comparisons over years and locations, and to
compare data from both locations, only the data for
the last three years 共1997 to 1999兲 at Demokeya were
used in the analysis of variance. However, the com-
bined eight-year Demokeya data were presented in
graphical form. Duncan’s multiple range test 共DMRT兲
was used to separate the means, as appropriate.
Results
Trends in gum yield (g/pick)
A combined analysis of the plantation yield data re-
vealed highly significant 共P ⬍ 0.001兲 interactive ef-
fects between tapping date, year and location on gum
yield for each of the seven gum pickings. The aver-
age yield per pick for all tapping dates 共1 October to
15 December兲 at the Demokeya research plantation
was significantly higher 共P ⬍ 0.001兲 in the first five
gum pickings than that of the El Himaira planted gum
garden managed by farmers. In these pickings, the
average yield ranged from 19.0 to 57.0 and 12.0 to
25.0 g/pick at the Demokeya plantation and the El
Himaira planted gum garden, respectively 共Figure
1a兲. The overall average 共14.5 g/pick兲 at El Himaira
was about 47 percent of that 共31.0 g/pick兲 at Demok-
eya. The trend in the yield of natural stands was
similar to that found in plantations, but the yield was
lower. The overall natural stand average 共11.8 g/pick兲
at El Himaira constituted 69% of that 共17.0 g/pick兲 at
Demokeya.
On the other hand, the average yield 共g/pick兲 re-
sulting from early 共1 October to 1 November兲 tapping
was higher than the average yield for all tapping
dates. The overall early-tapping average 共20.9 g兲 for
the El Himaira planted gum garden managed by
farmers was 52% of that 共39.1 g兲 obtained in the
239
Demokeya research plantation. Natural stands gave
similar trends but with lower yield levels. The overall
average 共14.2 g/pick兲 at the farmer-managed El Hi-
maira natural stand was about 56% of that 共25.3g兲
obtained in the Demokeya natural research stand
共Figure 1b兲.
The general trend in yield per picking of late tap-
ping 共15 November to 15 December兲 shown in Fig-
ure 1c is similar to that observed for the early tapping,
but the actual yield was extremely low. An exception
was the overall average at Demokeya research plan-
tation, which yielded 23.0 g/pick. In contrast, the El
Himaira planted gum garden and the natural stands at
Demokeya and El Himaira all produced similar low
yields of only 9.2, 8.7 and 9.4 g/pick, respectively.
Overall, the general trend of yield as related to
picking was similar for planted and natural stands in
both sites. The yield increased from the first pick,
reached its peak in the second pick, decreased slightly
in the third pick, and then fell sharply thereafter.
Gum yield per tree in relation to tapping
The trends in gum arabic yields per tree as related to
the date of tapping in different types of stands at both
sites are presented in Figure 2. The general yield
trends irrespective of type of stand or site were quite
similar. The highest yield in all types of stands was
obtained in early 共1 October to 1 November兲
tappings. The overall average yield 共274.2 g/tree兲 at
the Demokeya research plantation was almost twice
as high as that 共137.7 g/tree兲 of the El Himaira
farmer-managed planted gum garden. The difference
in yield between natural stands at the two sites was
also high, but smaller than that observed in planted
stands. The Demokeya natural research stand pro-
duced an average yield 共174.0 g/tree兲 that was 75%
higher than that 共99.2 g/tree兲 observed in the farmer-
managed El Himaira natural stand.
At the Demokeya site the yield decreased sharply
by more than 40.0% with late 共15 November to 15
December兲 tapping, regardless of the type of stand.
At El Himaira, the decrease in yield between the 1
and 15 November tappings was also sharp, however
this decline was followed by stability in yield in the
later 共15 November to 15 December兲 tappings. The
reduction in average yield cause by late tapping was
about 50% and 34% for the planted gum garden and
the natural stand managed by farmers, respectively.
Tapping intensity 共number of branches tapped per
240

Figure 1. Gum arabic yield in plantations/gum gardens and natural stands under different management, as influenced by tapping dates in
western Sudan. a. Averages for all 共1 October to 15 December兲 tapping dates. b. Averages for early 共1 October to 1November兲 tapping dates.
c. Averages for late 共15 November to 15 December兲 tapping dates.
 241

Figure 2. Gum arabic yield in relation to tapping dates in plantations/gum gardens and natural stands under different types of management in
western Sudan.

Table 1. The interactions of tapping intensity and tapping date on gum yield at El Himaira natural stand in western Sudan.
Gum yield 共kg/ha兲
Tapping intensity
Tapping date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Mean
1 October 27.0a 23.5a 31.4a 33.1a 23.3a 31.0a 33.6a 31.1a 46.5
15 October 48.3abc 36.5bc 54.9ab 46.6abc 53.0ab 29.7c 64.2a 38.6bc 29.2
1 November 34.3c 43.9abc 38.0c 58.4ab 41.9bc 60.9a 36.0c 34.8c 43.6
15 November 21.2a 28.8a 27.6a 31.1a 35.7a 35.9a 26.6a 35.6a 30.3
1 December 26.0a 22.5a 28.4a 26.6a 35.7a 32.7a 23.5a 16.6a 26.5
15 December 12.5a 18.9a 20.7a 21.9a 21.7a 26.8a 18.6a 32.5a 21.7
Mean 28.3 29.0 33.5 36.3 35.2 36.2 33.7 31.5 32.97

tree兲 showed no significant effect on yield per pick in
any stand type at either site.
Generally speaking, increased tapping intensity in
our experiments resulted in higher yields. Our results
showed that tapping intensities of more than two
branches per tree produced yields that were about
equal to or greater than the overall average yield.
However, interactions of tapping intensity with any of
the other factors showed inconsistent results. Table 1
shows the interaction of tapping intensity and tapping
date on gum yield 共kg/ha兲 at the El Himaira natural
stand.
Trends in number of gum pickings
The interaction between the number 共transformed to
关兹共X ⫹ 0.5兲兴兲 of gum pickings done in planted or
natural stands and the three factors of location, year
and tapping date was highly significant 共P ⬍ 0.001兲.
The three-year averages 共Figure 3a兲 showed similar
trends with regard to the number of gum pickings for
the planted and natural stands. However, the planted
stands 共plantation or gum garden兲 gave higher aver-
ages of up to four pickings in connection with early
tapping, as compared to only three pickings that could
be performed in natural stands. Similarly, planted
stands gave a higher number 共about 3兲 of pickings
242
Figure 3. Effect of tapping date on number of gum pickings from Acacia senegal plantations/gum gardens and natural stands in western
Sudan. a. 3-year averages. b. One-year 共1998兲 averages.
with late 共1 November to 15 December兲 tappings, as
compared to about two pickings in natural stands. The
maximum number 共about 7兲 of pickings was obtained
from planted stands in the first year 共1997兲 of obser-
vation, as compared to a maximum of six pickings in
natural stands in that year. The trends in relation to
early or late tapping are also similar to those repre-
sented by the three-year averages 共Figure 3b兲.
Gum yield trends in relation to rainfall
The general trends in gum arabic yield 共per tree and
per hectare兲 in relation to the total annual rainfall at
the Demokeya research plantation are presented in
Figure 4. It can be seen that the gum yield per tree or
per unit of area followed the trends in rainfall over
the experimental period from 1993 to 1997 and in
1999. The first and last years gave significantly 共P ⬍
0.05兲 lower yields of only 27.9 and 26.3 kg/ha, re-
spectively. The highest yield 共145.3 kg/ha兲 was ob-
tained in the year of the highest 共463 mm兲 rainfall.
Years 2 and 5 gave similar yields 共90.1 and 90.8 kg/
ha兲 under correspondingly similar rainfall conditions
共299 and 298 mm, respectively兲. Year 7 共1999兲
showed an exceptional negative yield trend in relation
to rainfall.
Discussion
Gum arabic yields per picking followed a clear trend
irrespective of type of stand or location. Accordingly,
the yield reached its peak in the second picking, fol-
lowed by a steady decrease in the third, and then a

Figure 4. Gum arabic yield per tree and per hectare in relation to rainfall at Demokeya research plantation in western Sudan.
sharp decrease for the rest of pickings. Previous find-
ings 共GRD 共1968, 1979兲兲 based on one single year
have showed a similar increase in yield in the second
pick but then an unchanged yield in the pickings that
followed.
The interpretation of our results regarding predic-
tion of yield in view of the many variables measured
largely validates the idea that gum yield is related to
the age of the trees. In this connection, a series of
linkages between factors affecting tree growth or gum
production and age of the tree might have caused
trees of uneven age to react differently to the these
variables 共this does not mean that even-aged trees are
equally affected兲. It is true that our results could be
strongly influenced by this possibility, but they should
be interpreted within the context of the available ma-
terials, the factors we applied, the traits we measured
and the conditions under which the experiment was
executed. Other studies 共Abdel Rahman 2001兲 have
found that gum yield is low in trees 5 to 10 years of
age, increases to reach its peak at 15 years of age, and
then decreases at age 20 years.
Our experiments showed that the average yield 共g/
pick兲 from early 共1 October to 1 November兲 or late
共15 November to 15 December兲 tapping at a farmer-
managed planted gum garden was consistently lower
than that obtained in a research plantation. On the
other hand, the trend in yields from the natural
research stand at Demokeya was quite similar to that
243
of the research plantation at the same site, but the
yield was over 60% lower as compared to that from
the plantation. Similarly, the gum yield in the farmer-
managed natural stand was about 50% of that
observed in the natural research stand.
Farmers’ local experimentation and knowledge
gathering are not based on theoretical models and
mere research findings, but, emerge from their strong
interest in knowledge with practical local applica-
tions, especially knowledge that provides options for
improving peoples’ livelihood 共Friis-Hansen 1999兲.
Hence, it is important to know the factors that deter-
mine a farmer’s decision to adopt and modify tech-
nologies or interventions that are developed by
research. These factors could be either biophysical or
socio-economic or both. At present, when farmers are
producing 50% less, these could include such factors
as distance to the site and means of transport, access
to labour and its opportunity cost, family size, price
and marketing channel of gum, experience and con-
tact with researchers, and drought and abundance of
forage. Because animals are a more important source
of income in western Sudan than gum production, the
latter could be jeopardised by allowing livestock to
browse and graze inside A. senegal stands. Research
institutions, which are non-profit government entities,
are able to provide skilled labour and other inputs
otherwise not readily available to most farmers. They
are also able to provide protection against grazing and
244
natural fires. These features make for a major differ-
ence between farmer-managed and research-managed
operations. Taking these factors into consideration
may bridge the gap in yield and productivity between
research farms and farmers’ fields.
The findings of the present study, with respect to
yield levels and trends, could be used to estimate gum
arabic yields per picking, per tree or per unit area in
gum gardens/plantations and natural undisturbed
stands under different management regimes. This
could help in overcoming the instability and decline
in gum arabic production that have been described by
many authors 共e.g., IIED and IES 1989; Verbeken et
al. 2003兲 as the main problems facing the gum arabic
industry in the Sudan. In addition, the present results
could bridge the gap in information related to the ef-
fects of rainfall on gum arabic yield and yield trends.
As emphasised by Coppen 共1995兲, there is a need for
yield assessments on a per tree basis and for studying
the causes of variations in yield within and between
different sites.
As far as the effect of tapping date on gum yield is
concerned, the general yield trend observed in the
present study was similar for different types of stands
at the two sites studied. The highest yields were ob-
tained from early 共1 October to 1 November兲 tapping.
Overall yields from the stands managed by farmers
were up to 50% lower than those from the research
stands. The decrease in yield associated with late 共15
November to 15 December兲 tapping was about 40%
and 50% for the planted research and on-farm stands,
respectively. In natural stands the reduction in yield
caused by late tapping was 65% and 34% for research
and farmer-managed stands, respectively. These find-
ings can be used for yield estimation and for recom-
mendations on tapping dates. They can also be used
in on-farm demonstrations in order to improve the
yield with proper management so as to bridge the gap
in yield level between farm and research stands and
to clarify the factors that cause this variation.
The eight-year trend in yield obtained in the
research plantation studied here clearly demonstrated
that the gum yield generally in six out of eight years
studied was positively correlated with the total annual
rainfall received during the season preceding tapping.
This indicates that gum arabic yield could best be
predicted by use of total rainfall amount rather than
temporal rainfall variability, which has often been re-
ported as the factor that has the greatest impact on
annual crop growth and yield. This could be
explained by the fact that the greater root biomass of
A. senegal trees allows them to access more soil re-
sources, and temporal fluctuations ranging from days
to weeks have no significant impact on the morpho-
logical and physiological characteristics of many
deep-rooted and drought-tolerant tree species. In our
present study, total amount of rainfall explained a
large portion of variation in gum production, in sharp
contrast to the report of Le Houerou et al. 共1988兲 that
precipitation fails to provide a complete explanation
of the interannual patterns of net primary production
in arid lands.
Experience has shown that trees attacked by locusts
or subjected to heavy grazing produce little amounts
of gum. Hence, it is assumed that gum yield may be
highly correlated with the annual green biomass pro-
duction or its annual variations and trends. A high
correlation between the green biomass and annual to-
tal rainfall has been found in several studies
conducted in similar arid and semi-arid regions
共Hielkema et al. 1986; du Plessis 1999; Weiss 2001兲.
A similar analysis to that of rainfall was performed
to determine whether there is any correlation between
gum yield and prevailing maximum and minimum
temperature during tapping and picking 共data not
shown here兲. This analysis tended to produce corre-
lations that were lower than those associated with
rainfall.
Conclusions
The general trends in gum arabic yield in relation to
picking date are similar in different types of stands.
The yields increase from the first picking, reach their
peak in the second, and then decrease slightly in the
third pick and sharply thereafter. The average yield
共g/pick兲 from farmer-managed stands is lower than
that obtained from research-managed plantations or
natural stands. The highest yield per tree in all types
of stands is obtained in early 共1 October to 1 Novem-
ber兲 tapping. The effect of management is also clear:
the overall average yield at a research plantation is
twice as high as that obtained in a planted but
farmer-managed stand 共gum garden兲. The difference
in yield between natural stands under these two man-
agement types is also high but not as conspicuous as
found in planted stands. The eight-year trend in yields
observed in the research plantation clearly demon-
strates that the annual rainfall received in the season
immediately preceding tapping strongly and posi-
tively affects the gum yield.

Acknowledgements
This research was conducted as part of the Gum Ara-
bic Research Programme supported by the Agricul-
tural Research Corporation, Sudan. We wish to
express our sincere thanks to the researchers in El
Obeid, workers in Demokeya and farmers in Himaira
for discussions and technical support. We are also
grateful to the Academy of Finland for financial as-
sistance within the framework of the Project 共grant
78373兲 “Integrated Forest Resources Management for
Combating Desertification in Sudano-Sahelian Af-
rica”.
References
Abdel Rahman H.M. 2001. Effect of some growth parameters and
age on gum and seed yield of Acacia senegal plantations and
natural stands in North Kordofan. M.Sc. thesis, Faculty of For-
estry, University of Khartoum, Sudan, 73 p.
Badi K.H.M., Ahmed A.E. and Bayoumi A.M.S. 1989. The Forests
of the Sudan, Khartoum. Agricultural Research Council, Sudan,
148 p.
Barbier E.B. 2000. The economic linkages between rural poverty
and land degradation: some evidence from Africa. Agriculture,
Ecosystems and Environment 82: 355–370.
Bateson W., Umbadda S., Nour H.O. and Abdel Hai A.M. 1988.
Sudan’s gum arabic sector: analysis and policy options. Report
prepared for the United States Agency for International Devel-
opment.
Coppen J.J.W. 1995. Gums, resins and latexes of plant origin.
Non-Wood Forest Products 6. FAO, Rome, Italy, 142 p.
du Plessis W.P. 1999. Linear regression relationships between
NDVI, vegetation and rainfall in Etosha National Park, Namibia.
Journal of Arid Environments 42: 235–260.
El Rasheed M.A. 1970. The production and role of gum arabic in
the economy of the Sudan. Y Coedwigwr. 6共3兲: xxx.
El Tom M.A. 1986. Towards a drought-oriented climatic predic-
tion system in Western Sudan. Proceedings of ISLSCP confer-
ence. Rome, Italy.
FAO 1978. Forestry for local community development. Forestry
Paper 7. FAO, Rome, Italy, 114 p.
Fischer S.D. 1990. MSTAT-C Statistical Package. Michigan State
University, Michigan, USA.
Friis-Hansen E. 1999. The socio-economic dynamics of farmers’
management of local plant genetic resources. Centre for Devel-
opment Research 共CDR兲. Working paper 99.3. 44 p.
View publication stats
245
GRD 1968. Annual Report. Gum Research Division, El-Obeid,
Sudan.
GRD 1979. Annual Report. Gum Research Division, El-Obeid,
Sudan.
Hielkema J.U., Prince S.D. and Astle W.L. 1986. Rainfall and veg-
etation monitoring in the savanna zone of the democratic-repub-
lic of Sudan using the NOAA advanced very-high resolution
radiometer. International Journal of Remote Sensing 7: 1499–
1513.
IIED and IES 1989. Gum arabic belt rehabilitation in the Republic
of the Sudan: Stage 1 report. International Institute for Environ-
ment and Development 共IIED兲 and Institute of Environmental
Studies 共IES兲. IIED, London, UK, 360 p.
ITC 1972. The marketing of the principal water-soluble gums in
the producing countries and in the United States, the United
Kingdom, France and the Federal Republic of Germany. Inter-
national Trade Centre 共ITC兲, Geneva, Swiss.
Le Houerou H.N., Bigham R.L. and Skerbek W. 1988. Relation-
ship between the variability of primary production and the vari-
ability of annual precipitation in world arid lands. Journal of
Arid Environments 15: 1–18.
Muthana K.D. 1988. Gum arabic-the backbone of Kordofan Re-
gion, Sudan. Myforest 24共2兲: 95–98.
NAS 1979. Tropical legumes: Resources for the future. Report of
an Ad Hoc Panel of the Advisory Committee on Technology In-
novation, Board of Science and Technology for International
Development, Commission on International Relations, National
Research Council. National Academy of Sciences, Washington,
D.C., USA, 331 p.
NAS 1980. Firewood crops: shrub and tree species for energy pro-
duction. Vol. 1. National Academy of Sciences, Washington,
D.C., USA, 237 p.
NKRDP 2001. Baseline Survey Report, North Kordofan Rural De-
velopment Project-IFAD. El-Obeid, Sudan.
Seif El Din A. 1984. Agroforestry practices in the dry regions. At-
Tasahur, Vol. 2, 8-9.
Seif El Din A. and Obeid M. 1971. Ecological studies of the veg-
etation of the Sudan. The germination of seeds and establishment
of seedlings of Acacia senegal 共L.兲 Willd. under controlled con-
ditions in the Sudan. Journal of Applied Ecology 8: 191–201.
Verbeken D., Diereckx S. and Dewettinck K. 2003. Exudate gums:
occurrence, production, and applications. Applied Microbiology
and Biotechnology 63: 10–21.
Weiss E., Marsh S.E. and Pfirman E.S. 2001. Application of
NOAA-AVHRR NDVI time-series data to assess changes in
Saudi Arabia’s rangelands. International Journal of Remote
Sensing 22: 1005–1027.