UNIVERSITY OF BUEA

FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE AND VETERINARY MEDICINE

DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMIC AND APPLIED MOLECULAR SCIENCES

PROGRAMME: PLANT HEALTH MANAGEMENT

Course: PHM 598: BSc Research Project in Plant Health Management

TOPIC

Effect of different cassava varieties on the incidence and severity of African cassava

mosaic geminivirus, plant height and the whitefly ( Bemisia tabaci ) insect vector

infestation of cassava (Manihot esculenta) in Buea, Cameroon.

BY

DIOMO NDOLI KARL

(AV17A003)

SUPERVISOR:

THOMAS E. NJOCK, PhD

Associate Professor of Plant Virology.

AUGUST, 2021
 DEDICATION

This piece of work is dedicated to God Almighty for being my source of inspiration,

protection and grace in accomplishing this piece of work.

i
 CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that, this work entitled ‘’Effect of different cassava varieties on the

incidence and severity of African cassava mosaic geminivirus, plant height and the whitefly

(Bemisia tabaci) insect vector infestation of cassava (Manihot esculenta) in Buea,

Cameroon’’ is the original work of Diomo Ndoli Karl (AV17A003) of the Department of

Agronomic and Applied Molecular Sciences, in the Plant Health Management speciality.

Sign:________________________ Date:________________

Thomas E.Njock PhD

Associate Proffessor of Plant Virology

(Supervisor)

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My sincere and heartfelt gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Thomas E. Njock (Associate

Proffessor), for his endless effort and support, above all guidance to me during this research

project.

A big thanks to Dr. Okolle Justin for providing me with necessary materials for this research.

I am equally grateful to all the staff of the Faculty of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine for

provision of land and tools for this research.

I am grateful to my parents Mr Donaldson Ndoli and Mrs Gwendoline Dunga for both their

financial and moral support throughout my study.

I appreciate Rev. Enow Andrew Nso for his spiritual guidance and prayers towards my

studies.

I am grateful to the following persons, Cecilia Nesoa, Ngemenya Joel, Mr and Mrs Ngwane

for their encouragements and Mr. Kum Yanik Fuh for his excellent works on my data

analysis.

iii
 ABSTRACT

This study investigated the effect of different cassava varieties on the incidence and severity

of African cassava mosaic geminivirus disease, plant height and the whitefly insect vector

infestation of cassava between March and June, 2021 to determine the resistance status of

four different varieties of cassava against ACMV disease. The four varieties included, a

highly resistant (TME419), resistant (8034), moderately susceptible (Local red) and a

susceptible (Ekona red). The experiment was a completely randomised design with 16

experimental units and 4 replicates. Each experimental unit measured a 3 m x 3 m bed size.

Data collection began two weeks after emergence of the first leaves. Disease incidence and

severity were assessed through visual observation of symptoms and whitefly abundance was

done by counting the adult whiteflies on the underside of leaves of six cassava plants and

average number of the adult whitefly taken. The data was subjected to analysis of variance

(ANOVA) using SPSS version 25 and mean separation was done using Duncan’s multiple

range test (DMRT) p= 0.05. Disease incidence and severity were influenced more on the

resistant variety (8034) and susceptible variety (Ekona red), plant height was highest in the

moderately susceptible variety (Local red: 50.16 %, P>0.05), whitefly infestation was more

on the resistant (8034) and the susceptible (Ekona red) varieties. There was a significant

difference (P>0.05) for the measured parameters. The study concluded that disease incidence,

severity, whitefly infestation and plant height were affected over time and thus recommended

that more resistant cassava varieties to ACMV disease be developed.

Keywords: Cassava, whitefly, incidence, severity, whitefly infestation and plant height.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION………………………………………………………………………………...i

CERTIFICATION…………………………………………………………………………….ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………………………………………………………iii

ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................................iv
LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................vii
List of Tables..........................................................................................................................viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................ix
CHAPTER ONE........................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................1
1.1 The cassava plant.................................................................................................................1
1.2 Problem Statement and Justification………………………………………………………3

1.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS..............................................................................................3

1.4 OBJECTIVES.....................................................................................................................4
Main objective............................................................................................................................4
Specific objectives……………………………………………………………………………..4
CHAPTER TWO.......................................................................................................................5
LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................................................................5
2.1 Origin of Cassava................................................................................................................5
2.2 Classification of cassava.....................................................................................................5
Genus – Manihot mill.................................................................................................................6
Species- Manihot esculenta Crantz............................................................................................6
2.3 Botany of cassava................................................................................................................6
2.4 Geographic distribution and................................................................................................7
2.5 Production of cassava..........................................................................................................7
2.6 Toxicity and safety of cassava............................................................................................8
2.7 The African Cassava Mosaic Disease; Incidence and Severity..........................................9
2.8 Pest Build up, climate and micro-climatic conditions:.....................................................11
2.9 Cassava Cultivation...........................................................................................................11
Site selection and soil requirement..........................................................................................11
2.9.5 Importance of cassava.....................................................................................................13
2.10 The cassava varieties........................................................................................................14

v
CHAPTER THREE..................................................................................................................18
MATERIALS AND METHODS.............................................................................................18
3.1 The Experimental site........................................................................................................18
3.2 Experimental Design.........................................................................................................20
3.3 Land Preparation, Field Layout And Planting..................................................................21
3.5 Data collection..................................................................................................................22
3.6 Disease incidence (DI)......................................................................................................22
3.7 Disease severity (DS)........................................................................................................22
3.8 Vegetative growth.............................................................................................................24
3.9 Data Analysis....................................................................................................................24
CHAPTER FOUR....................................................................................................................25
RESULTS................................................................................................................................25
CHAPTER FIVE…………………………………………………………………………......33

DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………………..33

References……………………………………………………………………………………36
Appendix……………………………………..........................................................................38

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1. TOP CASSAVA PRODUCING COUNTRIES IN THE

WORLD……………………………….8

Figure 2. Picture of TME 419 habit………………………………………………………….15

Figure 3:Picture of resistant 8034 habit……………………………………………………...15

Figure 4:Picture of moderately susceptible local red variety habit…………………………..16

Figure 5: Picture of susceptible Ekona red variety habit……………………………………..17

FIGURE 6. Location of Buea in Fako division, southwest region of Cameroon………………

19

Figure 7: Experimental design showing the experimental plots……………………………..20

FIGURE 8. AFRICAN CASSAVA MOSAIC SCORING

SCALE…………………………......................23

Figure 9. . A histogram showing cassava plant height two weeks after planting…………....25

Figure 10. Histogram of cassava plant height four weeks after planting………………….....26

Figure 11. Histogram of cassava plant height six and eight weeks after planting……….......27

Figure 12. A histogram showing mean whitefly abundance 2-8 weeks after planting……....28

Figure 13. Graph of incidence of ACMD on cassava varieties over time………………….29

Figure 14. . Graph of disease severity for all plants over time………………………………30

Figure 15. Histogram showing disease severity index for diseased plants…………..............31

Figure 15. Graph showing severity index of diseased plants over time……………………..32

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: ACRONYMS AND TREATMENTS, T TYPE……………………………………………21

TABLE 2: THE MEASUREMENT SCALE FOR SCORING DISEASE SEVERITY ON CASSAVA PLANT…

23

Table 3: Cassava height (cm) weeks after planting………………………………………....25

Table 4: Mean whitefly abundance of cassava varieties……………………........................28

Table 5: Disease severity index of all plants……………………………………………..…38

viii
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ACMV African Cassava Mosaic Geminivirus

CaCESA Cassava Diseases in Central, Eastern and Southern Africa

CBSD Cassava Brown Streak Disease

CMD Cassava Mosaic Disease

CMG’s Cassava Mosaic Geminiviruses

CMV Cassava Mosaic Virus

EACMV-UG Ugandan Variant of the Eastern Africa Cassava Mosaic Virus

EACMV East African Cassava Mosaic Virus

EACMCV East African Cassava Mosaic Cameroon Virus

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

GDP Gross Domestic Product

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development

WAP Weeks after Planting

ix
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 The cassava plant

Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) is a perennial shrub in the family Euphorbiaceae grown

primarily for its storage roots which are eaten as a vegetable. The cassava plant is a woody

plant with erect stems and spirally arranged simple lobed leaves with petiole (leaf stems) up

to 30 cm in length. The plant produces petal-less flowers on a raceme. The edible roots of the

plant are usually cylindrical and tapered and are white, brown or reddish in colour. Cassava

can reach 4 m in height and is usually harvested 9-12 months after planting. Cassava may

also be referred to as Brazilian arrow roots, manioc, tapioca and the origin of the plant is

unknown. The plant is not known to occur in the wild but may have first been cultivated in

Brazil. It is the third largest source of food carbohydrates in the tropics, after rice and maize

(FAO, 2020). It is a major staple food in the developing world, providing a basic diet for over

a billion people (FAO, 2020; Rosenthal et al., 2012; Ola Ogunyinka et al., 2020). It is one of

the most drought tolerant crops capable of growing on marginal soils (Ola Ogunyinka et al.,

2020; CaCESA, 2015).

Cassava is eaten as a vegetable and is considered to be toxic in the raw form (CaCESA,

2010-2015), which is why it must be cooked before being consumed. The roots have a variety

of applications, some of which include the production of flour, starch or ethanol.

Cassava leaves can supply a good source of vitamins and proteins which can also be

consumed after cooking. Cassava hay is used as animal feed and it plays a role in the

production of adhesives, textiles and cosmetics.

In 2018, the global production of cassava root was 278 million tonnes with Nigeria as the

world’s largest producer, having 21 % of the world total, other major growers include,

1
Thailand, D.R Congo (FAOSTAT, 2018). Cameroon is ranked 16 th for worldwide cassava

production. Cassava is one of the leading crops regarding annual yield both for cash and food

crop categories. It contributes 1.7 % of the GDP (FAOSTAT, 2015).

Promoting the production of cassava in Cameroon is one amongst government priorities for

increased agricultural productivity (FAOSTAT, 2015). Cassava is cultivated mostly in the

East, west, south, southwest, centre and northwest regions of Cameroon. It serves the

function of people’s primary food and source of income; locally it can be consumed in

processed form as garri, fufu, bobolo, miondo, mintoumba and more (Ognakossan et al.,

2016). Cassava has a carbohydrate content of approximately forty times higher than that rice

and 20 % more than maize (Nyerhovwo, 2004).

The peasant farmers have long recognized the importance of intercropping cassava as a

farming practice in the tropics. Intercropping is widely practiced by small-scale farmers as a

strategy for increasing crop yields, crop diversity and stability of crop production (Gomez &

Gomez, 1983). In the humid tropics, maize is traditionally grown in intercrop with cassava

(Agboola et al., 1971; Fagbamiye, 1977; Ikeorgu et al., 1984). Maize is a staple crop and one

of the most important sources of carbohydrate. It is the basis for food security in some of the

world’s poorest regions in Africa (International Plant Biotechnology outreach, 2017), where

it is consumed as dry fermented dough; often roasted, used in corn porridge and in the

livestock industry.

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT AND JUSTIFICATION

Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) is a staple crop in sub-Saharan Africa, where it provides

food security (Assion Sétu Mivedor et al., 2020), and according to Westby, (1991); Oyewole

et al., 2019, the majority (88 %) of cassava produced in Africa is used for human food, with

over 50 % used in the form of processed products, other uses are as animal feed and for

2
industrial purposes (starch, ethanol) are as yet very minor. However, cassava is vulnerable to

pests and diseases that can cause heavy yield losses. Insect pests such as the whiteflies

(Bemisia tabaci) and mealybugs (Phenaccocus manihoti), and diseases caused by viruses and

phytoplasmas, affect the production of cassava worldwide. Of the viral diseases, Cassava

mosaic disease (CMD) and Cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) are the most widespread,

severely affecting at least 50 % of the cassava crop in Africa (FAO, 2019).

Mivedor et al., 2020, reported that cassava production in Africa is severely constrained by

pests and diseases that cause high yield losses. Among these, cassava mosaic disease (CMD),

which occurs wherever cassava is grown, is the most economically-damaging disease of

cassava caused by African cassava mosaic geminiviruses (ACMV) (Family Geminiviridae,

Genus Begomovirus) transmitted by the whitefly vector Bemisia tabaci.

Several studies on cassava mosaic virus disease have been carried out in Cameroon such as

field experiments on cassava mosaic virus disease and the reversion phenomenon in

susceptible and resistant cassava cultivars (Fondong et al., 2000 ). However, incidence and

severity of ACMD of cassava has not been documented especially in Buea municipality.

1.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

Null hypothesis (H0):

There is no significant difference on the incidence and severity of ACMV disease, plant

height and the whitefly insect vector infestation of the different cassava varieties.

Alternative hypothesis (Ha):

There is a significant difference on the incidence and severity of ACMV disease, plant height

and the whitefly insect vector infestation of the different cassava varieties.

3
1.4 OBJECTIVES

Main objective

To investigate the resistance status of different cassava varieties on the incidence and severity

of African cassava mosaic geminivirus, plant height and the whitefly insect vector infestation

of cassava crop in Buea.

Specific objectives

o To assess the incidence and severity of African cassava mosaic disease.

o To quantify the whitefly insect vector abundance on the different cassava varieties

o To compare the physiological growth characteristics of the cassava varieties.

o To identify which variety of cassava is the most resistant and susceptible to Africa

Cassava Mosaic Disease.

4
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Origin of Cassava

Cassava was first introduced to the Africa continent, close to the mouth of the Congo River

by Portuguese explorers and traders from Brazil, South America in the course of the 16th and

17th centuries. From there it was diffused by Africans, to many parts of sub-Saharan Africa

over a period of two to three hundred years (IFAD/FAO, 2005). It belongs to the family

Euphorbiceae that also includes other commercially important plants like castor bean

(Ricinus communis L.) and rubber (Havea bransiliensis L.). Cassava and some 90 other

species make up the genus Manihot, and it is the only widely cultivated member of this

genus. In Cameroon, cassava (Manihot esculenta) is cultivated in all five agro-ecological

zones, particularly in the humid forest zones, with an annual production estimated at 4.5

million tons cultivated on 215000 hectares. Over 70 % of this production is from smallholder

farmers who use mainly local varieties that yield less than 10 tons/ha. Farmers in Fako

Division in the South-West region of Cameroon often faced difficulties on which variety to

plant as cassava is mostly attacked by the whitefly-transmitted geminivirus, thus causing

cassava mosaic disease.

2.2 Classification of cassava

Kingdom - Plantae

Subkingdom - Tracheobionta

Superdivision- Spermatophyta

Division - Magnoliophyta

Class - Magnooliopsida

Subclass - Rosidae

Order - Euphorbiales

5
Family - Euphorbiaceae

Genus - Manihot mill

Species - Manihot esculenta Crantz

2.3 Botany of cassava

Botanically, cassava is a woody perennial shrub, which grows from 1 m to 5 m in height. It

has large, spirally arranged, lobed leaves of very variable forms. The shrubs produce several

tuberous roots as reserves made of up to 35 % starch which may reach up to 1 m in length

and together may weigh up to 40 kg. Cassava produces small, regular female and male

flowers in small clusters. The shrub produces a form of non-fleshy fruit capsule (Ognakossan

et al., 2016). The edible roots of the plant are usually cylindrical and tapered and are white,

brown or reddish in colour. Cassava is not usually easy to loot in large quantities because of

the labour for harvesting and the need to carry heavy roots from the field coupled with the

processing requirements, and so will continue to be available even after temporary

displacement of the household. Cassava roots are more than 60 % water. However, their dry

matter is very rich in carbohydrates, amounting to about 250 kg to 300 kg for every tonne of

fresh roots (FAO Rome, 2013). When the root is used as food, the best time to harvest is at

about 8 to 10 months after planting; a longer growing period generally produces a higher

starch yield.

A mature cassava root may range in length from 15 cm to 100 cm and weigh 0.5 kg to 2.5 kg.

Circular in cross-section, it is usually fattest at the proximal end and tapers slightly towards

the distal portion. It is connected to the stem by a short woody neck and ends in a tail similar

to a regular fibrous root and the central pith constitutes the bulk of the root and is primarily a

storage parenchyma harbouring a multitude of xylem vessels. A thin layer of cambium

mainly responsible for the root expansion surrounds the storage parenchyma whose cells

6
accumulate large starch granules. At the centre of the parenchymal tissue, the primary xylem

is organised in a fibrous vascular bundle (FAO, 2020).

2.4 Geographic distribution and

According to FAO (2013), by the 1800s it was being grown along Africa’s east coast and in

Southern Asia. Farming of cassava expanded considerably in the 20th century, when it

emerged as an important food crop across sub-Saharan Africa and in India, Indonesia and the

Philippines. It is grown today by millions of small-scale farmers in more than 100 countries,

from American Samoa to Zambia, under a variety of local names: Mandioca in Brazil, Yucca

in Honduras, Ketela Pohon in Indonesia, Mihogo in Kenya, Akpu in Nigeria and Sắn in

Vietnam.

2.5 Production of cassava

IFAD/FAO (2005) reported that the world production of cassava is in Africa where it is

cultivated in around 40 countries, stretching through a wide belt from Madagascar in the

southeast to Senegal and Cape Verde in the northwest. Approximately 75 percent of Africa's

cassava output is harvested in Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Tanzania

and Mozambique.

7
 50,000,000
45,000,000
40,000,000
35,000,000
30,000,000
Production(tons)

25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
0
n il a n d o a a a i e a a d
eni raz odi roo lan ng han Indi esi law iqu geri ani ilan Nam
B B b e i n Co G o n a b i n z a t
m m a d M am N Ta Th Vie
Ca Ca a m DR In oz
in M
Ch
Area(country)

Figure 1: Top cassava producing countries in the world.

(Source; FAOSTAT 2017)

2.6 Toxicity and safety of cassava

Cyanogenesis, the ability of plants to produce, under some circumstances, the toxic hydrogen

cyanide (HCN), exists in over 2000 plant species belonging to more than 100 families. In all

species so far examined, HCN is never produced and stored at any stage of plant growth.

Cassava produces two cyanogenic glucosides, linamarin and lotaustralin, in about 10 to 1

ratio. The amino acids valine and isoleucine are the precursors used in the synthesis of

linamarin and lotaustralin respectively. The metabolic pathway for converting valine to

linamarin has been elucidated by Koch et al.,1992.

Koch (1933) states that, in his opinion, "bitter'-tasting roots are invariably poisonous,

whereas "sweet"-tasting roots may be either innocuous or poisonous. He also says that the

bitter taste is more pronounced when the roots are raw than when they are cooked, taste tests

should therefore always be carried out on the raw roots, the mouth being thoroughly rinsed

8
out with fresh water after each test, Bolhuis (1954), characterized cassava varieties based on

the organoleptic descriptors 'sweet' and 'bitter' and associated bitter/sweet varieties with

high/low levels of cyanogenic glucosides. Nevertheless, recent surveys in Africa have shown

that farmers associate bitterness of cassava roots with toxicity (Chiwona-Karltun, in press).

CAC/RCP 73-2013, reported that, the potential cyanide content in cassava varies with the

variety of cassava, the environmental conditions in which it is grown (e.g. drought) and time

of harvest. Varieties with low cyanide content have been developed and might be useful in

reducing occurrence of hydrogen cyanide in cultivated cassava. Where bitter cassava varieties

are used then adequate post-harvest processing is essential. Harvesting should be done at the

appropriate time because studies have shown increased cyanide in late harvested cassava.

Processing is effective in reducing cyanogenic compound content to minimum concentrations

when done appropriately. Inadequate or poor processing as sometimes occurs during famine

and periods of social stress or the rush to market can lead to high residues of HCN in the final

product.

2.7 The African Cassava Mosaic Disease; Incidence and Severity

Cassava mosaic disease (CMD) is prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa (Cours-Darne et al., 1968;

Hahn et al., 1980). It is the major disease of cassava in Cameroon (P. Lava Kumar et al.,

2010) and other African countries. In Africa the disease is caused by the African cassava

mosaic virus (ACMV) and the East African cassava mosaic virus (EACMV) (Bock and

Woods, 1983; Hong et al., 1993). Studies by Fondong et al., (2000) confirmed the occurrence

of the African cassava mosaic virus (ACMV), East African cassava mosaic Cameroon virus

(EACMCV and the East African cassava mosaic virus (EACMV) in cassava mosaic disease

aetiology.

9
The CMD is caused by a group of Begomoviruses that belongs to the family Geminiviridae

(Harrison 1985) and transmitted Bemisia tabaci commonly known as the whitefly. CMD

symptoms are easily recognised by appearance of characteristic leaf mosaic while most

severe symptoms results in stunning growth and extreme reduction of leaf surface and with

consequent reduction in root yield. Cassava mosaic Geminviruses are transmitted in

consistent manner by the whitefly (Storey et al.,1938; Dubern, 1994) while stem cuttings as

planting material remain the primary source of CMD dissemination.

2.7.1 Incidence of Cassava mosaic disease

Thresh et al., 1997, stated that the incidence of CMD is highly variable and range from 15 %

-50 % and the overall incidence of CMD is 50 % to 60 % and diseased plants sustain losses

of up to 40 %. It has been estimated that losses in Africa range from 15 % -20 %, equivalent

to 12-23 million tons compared with actual production of 73 million tons (Kenneth Gara

mabsa, 2007). Legg and Thresh (2004) put losses in Africa at 19 to 27 million tons. In

Cameroon, CMD incidence in fields ranges from 11.1 % to 83.3 % as follows; single

infections of ACMV and EACMV/EACMCV, and mixed infections of ACMV with

EACMV/EACMCV were detected in, respectively, 57.1 %, 4.2 % and 23.0 % (P. Lava

Kumar et al., 2010).

2.7.2 Severity of Cassava mosaic disease

Uganda in the 1990s suffered a severe outbreak of CMD which led to low cassava output in

Uganda. This severe form of the disease was caused by a virulent strain of East African

Cassava Mosaic Virus EACMV known as the Ugandan variant (EACMV – UG2) (Pita et al.,

2001a). The disease severity becomes extreme when EACNV – UG2 and ACMV co-infect

cassava (Harrison et al. 1997). Recent publications (Fondong et al., 2000; Ogbe at al., 1999;

Pita et al., 2001b; winter, 1998) have confirmed the spread of EACMV – UG2 into other

African countries: Cameroon, Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Ghana, and DRC.

10
2.8 Pest Build up, climate and micro-climatic conditions:

Cool climate and micro-climatic conditions around and within crops influence insect-vector

activity; hence enhanced pathogens spread and therefore increase in disease/epidemics.

Wind-blown rain or splashes transmit certain diseases.

2.9 Cassava Cultivation

Site selection and soil requirement

Sites favourable to growing cassava have the following characteristics:

• Dense vegetation with lots of dead leaves which increase soil fertility as they decompose.

• A light, deep soil of good texture. Sandy and clay soils are less suitable for growing

cassava. A flat or slightly sloped site to prevent erosion that may destroy the humus-rich top

soil (Justin Kouakou et al. 2016)

2.9.1 Site preparation

In regions where farmers cultivate larger areas of cassava, they traditionally plough the fields

with oxen or water buffaloes, usually in one or two passes (FAO. 2013). For manual

cultivation, clear the land and dig the soil. For heavy soils, carry out any mounding or

ridging.

2.9.2 Selection of cuttings

To ensure uniform growth, harvest the stems about a week before setting and store them in

the shade, in a well-ventilated area. The cuttings should be taken at the time of planting or on

the day before. Each cutting should have 5–7 dormant buds. Collect the cuttings of 20 cm to

30 cm long from the central portions of the brown healthy stems at around 12 months old.

Avoid any significantly hardened or tender stems. Healthy crops can be identified by their

11
strong stems and branches, lush foliage, stems and leaves showing little damage from

diseases or pests (Justin Kouakou et al. 2016).

2.9.3 Density and planting

Three factors are important for planting: the planting period, the planting density and the

position of the cuttings. Plant spacing of between 1.5 m x 1 m to 1 m x 1 m for single

cultivation and 2 m x 2 m with intercropping, with maize, plantain, arrow leaf elephant ear

and legumes such as black nightshade, the cuttings are planted horizontally, diagonally or

vertically, with one or two cuttings per placement. The best method is to push them in

sideways up to ¾ of their length, with the knots pointing upwards. Positioning the knots

upside down reduces the yield. Planting sideways favours the consolidation of the roots into

one area and results in a grouping of tubers, which makes harvesting easier.

2.9.4 Maintenance of the crop

Replacing missing plants as required and removing the fragile shoots at the end of the third

month and only keeping the most vigorous shoots.

• Combatting weeds by hoeing two or three times:

- First hoeing: 3 to 4 weeks after planting

- Second hoeing: 1 to 2 months after first hoeing

- Third hoeing: at the start of the second year.

• Make a 10 cm ridge 5 to 6 weeks after planting.

12
2.9.5 Cassava harvesting

One of the major positive attributes of cassava is that it does not have a specific harvesting

period. Roots may be harvested any time between six months and two years after planting.

The harvest involves cutting stems at a height of 25 cm to 34 cm from the ground using a

machete and removing the tubers, making sure not to damage them. This can be done by hand

if the soil is light or using a hoe. For human consumption, harvesting usually takes place at

about 8 to 10 months; for industrial uses, a longer growing period generally produces a higher

root and starch yield. Once harvested, roots can be consumed directly by the farm household,

fed to livestock or sold for processing into a wide array of value-added products, ranging

from coarse flour to high-tech modified starch gels.

2.9.6 Importance of cassava

 Food for direct consumption

Young cassava leaves are regularly picked and cooked for human consumption in several

African countries, notably Cameroon (kwem), the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia

and the United Republic of Tanzania (kisanvu). The tender leaves contain up to 25 percent

protein, on a dry matter basis, and are a valuable source of iron, calcium, and vitamins A and

C3 (FAO 2013).

In Africa, grated roots are fermented before being roasted on a hot plate to produce a

granulated flour called garri, or sun-dried and milled into flour, which is mixed with water to

produce a stiff dough called fufu.

Production of cassava sticks (Miondo, Bobolo, and Mintoumba) in Cameroon and also the

traditional production of cassava beer and cassava spirit in other countries.

13
  Industrial uses

Countries such as Thailand and China, much of the native cassava starch are further

processed to make a range of modified starches, for incorporation in food products or use as

feedstock for production of sweeteners, fructose, alcohol and monosodium glutamate (FAO,

2013).

 Animal feed

Both the roots and leaves of the cassava plant can be used as on-farm animal feed or as an

ingredient in commercial animal feed.

 Renewable energy

Cassava currently contributes to only a small part of production, but demand from China is

growing rapidly following its decision to no longer use cereals to produce biofuel (FAO,

2013).

2.10 The cassava varieties

2.10.4 TME 419: It is a cassava variety that grows up straight developed by IITA. It has a

narrow green shiny leaf and grows to an average height of 4 meters with a light brown

stalk. The tuber has a medium neck, white or brown coloured fleshed and cream

brown rind. The stem diameter is medium to large and short internodes (averagely 5.6

cm). TME 419 has a 12 months growth cycle with an average of 4 tubers and mean

weight of 1kg per plant. It is a new variety which is resistant to multiple cassava

diseases and pests for example the African cassava mosaic virus (ACMV) and the

cassava green mite. TME 419 perform best in rich loamy soils that is well drained and

water requirements of between 150 mm to 200 mm of rain and temperature range of

average from 21 to 35 0C.

14
Figure 2. Picture of TME 419 habit.

2.10.5 8034: It is a cassava variety with vegetative cycle of 9 to 12 months. It has greenish

petiole and a cream coloured periderm. The tuber of 8034 is white in colour. It first

branches can grow to height ranging from 30 to 50 cm. It is well adapted to humid

forest zones of altitude less than 1000 m.

Figure 3. Picture of 8034 habit.

15
2.10.6 Local red: Its vegetative cycle is 12 months with the following morphological

features; the storage root peel colour is cream and the root flesh is white in colour.

The height at first branching is less than 1 m, storage root length is about 60 cm and

an average girth size of approximately 20 cm. The petiole is completely red in colour.

Local red has a dry matter content of 38 % and with a marketable yield of

approximately 23 ton/ha.

Figure 4. Picture of Local red habit.

2.10.7 Ekona red: Its first branching height is less than 1m and petiole colour is reddish

green. Storage root size length is about 75 cm and girth of about 30 cm, root flesh is

white in colour and peel colour is cream.

16
Figure 5. Picture of Ekona red habit.

17
 CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 The Experimental site

This study was conducted from March to July, at the Teaching and Research Farm of the

Faculty of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, University of Buea. The site is located at the

foot of mount Cameroon, in the southwest region of Cameroon. It is situated between

latitudes 4°3′N and 4°12′N and longitudes 9°12′E and 9°20′E, (Ngosong et al., 2018; Tanyi

et al., 2017). Buea is located in the eastern slopes of mount Cameroon between latitudes

3o27`E and 4o27`N and longitude 8o58`E and 9 o25`E and an elevation of about 500 m to 1000

m above sea level (Egbe et al., 2013). The upper elevation of the town tends to be cold and

cloudy, while the lower elevation is much warmer and less humid having a mountainous

terrain with fertile volcanic soils suitable for agriculture.

Buea has a mono-modal rainfall regime with less pronounced dry season and 86 % relative

humidity. The dry season is from November to March with a mean annual rainfall of 2800

mm, and means monthly air temperature ranging from 19 to 30 °C. Soil temperature at 10

cm depth decreases from 25 to 15 °C with increasing elevation from 200 m to 2200 m

respectively, above sea level (Ngosong et al., 2018; Tanyi et al., 2017)

Agriculture in this area highly depends on rain, just few farmers go for irrigation or cultivate

during the dry season (Folifac et al., 2009). The soil is derived from weathered volcanic rocks

dominated by silt, clay and sand (Manga et al., 2014). Below is the map of Fako division

where the experimental site is located.

18
Figure 6: Location of Buea in Fako division, southwest region of Cameroon

19
3.2 Experimental Design

The experimental layout was a completely randomised design, comprising of four treatments

and four replicates giving a total of 16 experimental units measuring 3 m x 3 m (9 m 2) each.

Alleys of 0.5 m within experimental units in the same row and 1 m separation between

replicates in the same column while the experimental plot was surrounded by a buffer zone of

2 m. A total surface area of 15 m x 17.5 m was measured with a measuring tape, and mapped

out using ropes and pegs.

2m
3m

3m

1m

2m

1m

0.5m
2m

Figure 2: Experimental Design

Figure 7: Experimental design showing the experimental plots.

Table 1: Acronyms and treatments

20
Codes Cassava variety

T1 TME419

T2 8034

T3 Local red

T4 Ekona red

3.3 LAND PREPARATION, FIRLD LAYOUT AND PLANTING.

The land was prepared locally using a cutlass and a hoe. A piece of land measuring 15 m x

17.5 m was measured and pegged round where sticks and ropes were used to mark the

borders. It was then cleared using a cutlass and the plant debris raked out of the area. Leaving

out a buffer zone of 2 m round, and with the aid of a hoe, 16 beds were raised of dimension 3

m x 3 m with an average height of 22 cm – 25 cm leaving out 0.5 m alleys within beds on the

same row and 1m alleys between beds on same column.

Planting of the cassava cuttings measuring on average 25 cm was done at a spacing of 1 m x

1 m which was measured and pegged prior to planting, leaving out 25 cm spaces from the

edges of the beds thus having a population density of 9 plants per bed. The cuttings were

planted diagonally, with one cutting per stand.

3.4 Maintenance of the cassava crop.

Weeding was done mechanically using a hoe and a cutlass to remove weeds which competed

with the cassava for nutrients, space and light, may also serve as breeding site for other pests.

Old and dried cassava leaves were pruned and taken out of the farm, fragile shoots of the

cassava were removed, keeping only the most vigorous shoots.

21
Earthen up the plants with soil after each weeding to avoid exposure of plants roots, which

could cause deleterious effects on the crops such as reduced water and nutrients uptake.

3.5 Data collection

Data was collected on plant height, insect vector infestation, incidence and severity

symptoms of cassava mosaic disease. The adult whitefly population was assessed on each

sampled plant by counting the number of whiteflies on six topmost leaves.

Whitefly abundance = Number of whitefly insects counted

3.6 Disease incidence (DI)

Four weeks after planting the cassava cuttings, visual observation was performed on the

leaves of the cassava plants for visible symptoms of mosaic. Disease incidence was then

recorded as percentage of infected plants. Disease Incidence as the presence or absence of

disease (percentage of infected leaves on the plant) and was calculated using the formula;

Disease Incidence (%) = Number of leaves with symptoms X 100

Per plant Total number of leaves on plant assessed

3.7 Disease severity (DS)

Severity of symptoms on individual plants was rated on a scale from 1 to 5 according to

percentage of leaf lamina with yellowing and mosaic. Six randomly selected plants per plot

were observed and disease severity was calculated according to the formula below.

Disease Severity = n x v / KN

Where, (n) = Number of leaves in each scoring scale, (v) = Numerical values of symptoms

ratings. (N) = Total number of leaves per plant, (K) = Maximum numerical value of symptom

rating.

22
Table 2: the measurement scale for scoring disease severity on cassava plants

Disease rating Severity of symptoms for whole-plant

1 No disease
2 Mild chlorosis with entire leaf appearing normal
3 Mosaic with 1/3 of leaf base distorted
4 Mosaic with 4/5 of leaf affected or distorted
5 Leaf distortion/ reduced almost to vein

Figure 8. African cassava mosaic virus-infected cassava leaves depicting the

disease(ACMD) severity scoring scale 1-5: 1= no symptoms; 2= a mild chlorotic pattern

over the entire leaf while the latter appears green and healthy; 3= a moderate mosaic

pattern throughout the leaf, narrowing, and distortion in the one-third of the leaflets;

4= severe mosaic, distortions in the two-thirds of the leaflets and general reduction in

leaf size; and 5= severe mosaic and distortion in the entire leaf.( Source: Njock, T. E et

al., 2007, Limitation in detecting African cassava mosaic geminivirus in the lignified tissues

of cassava stems.)

23
4.5 Vegetative growth

Plant growth was measured weekly by measuring plant height of six randomly selected

plants. Measurements on plant height were achieved with the use of a flexible measuring tape

graded in centimetres.

4.6 Data Analysis

Data sets were subjected to statistical analysis using IBM SPSS statistics 2017 version 25.

Comparisons were made between mean cassava mosaic disease incidence, whitefly numbers

and severity scores for different varieties using One-way ANOVA. Dependent variables such

as those of vegetative parameters, percentages of whitefly infestation, disease incidence

index, disease severity index were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA, p = 0.05).

Mean comparisons of each treatment (n= 4) were performed by using Duncan’s multiple

range test (DMRT).

24
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

Table 3. Mean cassava plant heights (cm) in weeks after planting.

Variety Two weeks Four weeks Six weeks after Eight weeks

after planting after planting planting after planting

Variety 1 7.66±1.11b 14.16±1.35b 30.58±0.56bc 42.83±3.77b
Variety 2 5.91±0.80a 13.67±1.73b 29.54±1.48ab 43.37±2.32b
Variety 3 8.12±0.81b 17.62±0.62c 33.29±2.46c 50.16±1.60c
Variety 4 5.08±0.77a 10.02±0.28a 26.29±3.27a 32.00±2.40a
Mean height within the same column with same letters are not significantly different

according to Duncan multiple range test P<0.05

7
mean cassava height/cm

0
Variety 1 Variety 2 Variety 3 Variety 4
variety

Fig 9. A histogram showing cassava plant height two weeks after planting.

Bars with different letter are significantly different according to DMRT, P<0.05.From the

table above cassava height ranged from 5.02 to 8.12 cm which differed (ANOVA: F= 10.22,

P=0.001) significantly with moderately susceptible variety( T3) having the highest mean

value followed by the highly resistant variety(T1) in the descending order of moderately

25
susceptible, highly resistant, resistant(T2) and highly susceptible(T4) ,which was

significantly different (p<0.05) amongst the varieties according to Duncan multiple range

test.

20

18
17.62
16

14
14.16
13.67
12

10 Series 1
8

0
Variety 1 Variety 2 Variety 3 Variety 4

Fig 10. A histogram showing cassava plant height four weeks after planting.

Bars with different letters are significantly different according Duncan multiple range test

P<0.05. Cassava varieties height ranged from 10.02 to 17.62 cm four weeks after planting

and differed (ANOVA: F=28.592, P<0.05) significantly. Varieties height ranged in the

descending order of moderately susceptible (T3), highly resistant (T1), resistant (T2) and

highly susceptible (T4) with a significant (p<0.05) difference according to Duncan multiple

range test between the varieties.

26
 60 six WAP

8 WAP
50
mean cassava height/ cm

40

30

20

10

0
Variety 1 Variety 2 Variety 3 Variety 4
variety

Fig 11. A histogram showing cassava plant height six and eight weeks after planting

Bars on the same week with different letters are significantly different according to DMRT,
P<0.05
From the sixth week plant height ranged from 26.29 to 33.29 cm and 32.00 to 50.16 cm in the

eighth week and was significantly different with an (F= 6.919, P<0.05) in the sixth week and

(F=32.226, P<0.05) in the eighth week and differed significantly between the varieties

according DMRT, P<0.05.

27
Whitefly abundance: The whitefly abundance varied highest on the resistant variety on the

figure below especially 4 WAP (weeks after planting).

60

50
mean whitefly abundance

40

30 Variety 1
Variety 2
Variety 3
20 Variety 4

10

0
2nd WAP 4th WAP 6th WAP 8th WAP
Variety

Fig 12. A histogram showing means whitefly abundance 2-8 weeks after planting.
Bars with different letter(s) on the same week are significantly different according to DMRT,
P<0.05
Mean whitefly abundance

Variety 2WAP 4WAP 6WAP 8WAP

Variety 1 9.25a 20.75a 19.25bc 5.00a
Variety 2 18.50b 57.00b 22.25c 12.50b
Variety 3 11.25a 16.75a 13.00b 40.75c
Variety 4 28.75c 37.25ab 4.50a 5.00ab
Table 4: Mean whitefly abundance of cassava varieties

Means on the same week column with different letter(s) are significantly different according

to DMRT, P<0.05

Disease incidence (% mean±SD)

28
 35

30

25
Disease incidence (%)

20

15

10

0
2wap 4wap 6wap 8wap

Fig 13. Graph of incidence of ACMD on cassava varieties over time.

Bars on the same week with different letter(s) are significantly different according to DMRT,

P<0.05.

From the second week after planting disease incidence ranged from 4.6 to 28.1 and differed

(F= 6.01, P=0.01) significantly. Mean disease incidence across the different treatments is in

the order of T2, T3, T4 and T1 with a significant different (P<0.05) according to Duncan

multiple range test. From the 4th to the 8th weeks no significant different was observed

(P>0.05).

Disease severity index of all plants.

29
Table 5: Disease severity index of all plants

Treatment 2WAP 4WAP 6WAP 8WAP

T1 28.72±6.3 34.35±3.1 33.27±3.1 35.92±2.02
T2 53.85±9.3 66.45±8.5 77.85±15.8 81.72±11.17
T3 33.44±6.3 43.30±8.7 29.80±3.4 44.40±11.6
T4 61.05±4.1 71.32±2.1 71.50±12.3 76.47±7.13

Severity for all plants over time

90
80
70
Severity index (%)

60
50 T1
40 T2
T3
30 T4
20
10
0
Weeks after planting

Fig 14. Graph of disease severity for all plants over time.

From the results of the graph disease severity is seen to be highest on the 8034, resistant
variety (T2, 80 %) and the Ekona red, susceptible variety (T4, 73 %), followed by the
moderately susceptible variety then the resistant TME 419 variety.

Severity Index for diseased plants

30
 100
severity index for diseased plants (%)

90
80
70
60 T1
50 T2
40 T3
T4
30
20
10
0
2wap
4wap
6wap
8wap
WEEKS

Fig 15. A histogram showing disease severity index for diseased plants.

Bars on the same week with the different letters are significantly different according to

DMRT, P<0.05.Bars shows that disease severity is highest mostly for the resistant variety

and the highly susceptible variety especially the fourth and sixth week after planting.

Diseased plants severity over time

31
 100

90

80

70

60
T1
% severity

50 T2
T3
40 T4

30

20

10

0
2wap 4wap 6wap 8wap

Fig 16. Graph showing severity index of diseased plants over time

CHAPTER FIVE

32
 DISCUSSION

This work described a field experiment in which African cassava mosaic geminivirus

(ACMV) disease incidence, severity whitefly infestation and plant height in different cassava

varieties were assessed in shoots arising from nodes of stem cuttings. Cassava varieties

included, highly resistant, resistant, moderately susceptible, highly susceptible.

Geminivirus disease incidence or infection status was determined by scoring the symptomatic

leaves of the different varieties of cassava on a scale of 1-5: 1= no symptoms; 2= a mild

chlorotic pattern over the entire leaf while the latter appears green and healthy; 3= a moderate

mosaic pattern throughout the leaf, narrowing, and distortion in the one-third of the leaflets;

4= severe mosaic, distortions in the two-thirds of the leaflets and general reduction in leaf

size; and 5= severe mosaic and distortion in the entire leaf.

Symptoms of cassava mosaic geminivirus disease incidence on plant leaves were recorded

more severe on leaves of the resistant variety (8034, 28 %,) and moderately susceptible (local

red, 23 %), then followed by the susceptible (Ekona red, 21 %), and the highly resistant

variety (TME 419, 4.9 %).

This implied that the resistant variety 8034 contrary to its status was more of a susceptible,

rather than resistant, genotype to infection .The findings of this study therefore portrayed that

the genotype or variety 8034 was most readily vulnerable to ACMV by the whitefly vectors

and the environmental factors such as cold climatic conditions, as compared to its counterpart

varieties of the moderately susceptible, less moderately susceptible and virus resistant TME

419. The low disease incidence recorded in the variety TME 419 is consistent with Hahn et

al., 1989, who reported that ACMV spreads slowly and is of restricted distribution in resistant

cultivars.

33
Geminivirus disease severity infection status was assessed as index of severity for all plants

and index of severity for diseased plants and was determined by scoring the symptomatic

leaves of the different varieties of cassava on the same scale as that of disease incidence.

Symptoms of cassava mosaic geminivirus disease severity for all plants and diseased plants

were found to be more severe on leaves of the resistant variety 8034 (T2; 81.72 %) followed

by the highly susceptible variety (T4), moderately susceptible (T3) and the highly resistant

variety (T1). The low severity of the virus in the resistant variety is due to slow rate of

infection by the ACMV virus which is restricted in resistant cultivars, Hahn et al., 1989.

The plants grew taller due to availability of sufficient soil fertility of a high nitrogen content,

which is the principal nutrient element responsible for vegetative growth, leading to the early

sprouting of leaves, increased leaf area development, rapid canopy closure that suppressed

the existence of weeds growing by shading their seedlings and reducing soil moisture loss

hence good micro climate for plant growth. Heights of plants showed significant difference

amongst the different varieties of cassava from moderately susceptible (T3, 50 %), highly

resistant variety (T1, 42 %) and resistant variety (T2, 43 %) both showing no significant

difference and lastly the susceptible variety (T4, 32 %). Since plant height was not significant

in all plants, this may have been due to the ACMV concentration in the stem cuttings of the

different varieties which effectively helped in suppressed the growth rate of the susceptible

variety (T4, 32 %). Heights of the highly resistant variety (T1) and moderately susceptible

variety (T3) were more, probably due to the low concentration of ACMV geminivirus.

Whitefly infestation increased at start of experiment and was higher in the varieties of

resistant 8034, (T2) and susceptible Ekona red (T4). At the 8 th week after planting, the

whitefly abundance dropped probably due to the unfavorable climatic condition that followed

34
in June characterized with enormous rainfall which might not be favorable to the vector

whitefly (Bemisia tababci). As indicated by the results it can be inferred that, varieties most

affected by whitefly infestation tended to be more affected with ACMV disease and thus

reduced plant height of the resistant 8034, and susceptible Ekona red variety.

In conclusion, the results showed that the cassava mosaic geminivirus disease incidence and

severity was influenced by the infestation of whitefly vector (Bemisia tabaci) and climatic

conditions in the area of cultivation. Also from the results, it can be deduced that plant height

of the different varieties was affected by the disease incidence and severity of the various

cassava varieties .TME 419 tended to be most resistant, than any of its counterpart varieties,

the resistant variety 8034 coded for its resistance to the ACMV disease tended to be the

variety most affected by the disease. Local red variety was found to be moderately resistant to

ACMV disease while variety Ekona red remained the very most susceptible to ACMD. The

various varieties showed different symptoms of ACMV disease contrary to their

characteristics that were initially assigned .It can therefore be concluded that cassava varieties

can thus be influenced by the environment factors, such as; climate, under which they are

cultivated. The local Buea environmental conditions could have affected the activity of the

whitefly pest, Bemisia tabaci, which is a potential carrier of the ACMV disease. It is

therefore recommended that more production of resistant cassava varieties be produced by

research institutions in the country and made available to farmers, which will lead to breaking

the barriers of peasant cassava farming in the country.

35
 REFERENCES

 Ogbe F.O. (2001). Survey of cassava begomoviruses in Nigeria and the response of

resistant cassava genotypes to African cassava mosaic Begomovirus infection. Ph.D.

Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.

 Oluwole OO, Adio MA (2013). Design and construction of a batch cassava

peeling machine. Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Automation 3(1): 16-21.

 Oyewole MF, Eforuoku F (2019).Value addition on cassava waste among processors

in Oyo State, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension 23(3):135-146.

 Ola Ogunyinka1 and Adedayo Oguntuase (2020). Analysis of cassava production and

processing by various groups in support of cassava value chain in the south west of

Nigeria.

 Justin Kouakou, Samuel Nanga Nanga, Catherine Plagne-Ismail, Aman Mazalo Pali

& Kukom Edoh Ognakossan, (2016). Cassava production and processing.

 Ogbe F.O, Dixon A.G.O.1 and Hughes J (2007). Towards the control of a severe form

of cassava mosaic disease in Nigeria: diagnostic survey for cassava mosaic

begomoviruses.

 Alexandre Bouniol, Laure Prin, Rachid Hanna, Apollin Fosto, and Geneviève Fliedel

(2017). Assessment of the processability of improved cassava varieties into a

traditional food product (“baton” or “chikwangue”) in Cameroon.

 Central, eastern and southern Africa (CaCESA) Strategic programme framework

(2010–2015). Cassava diseases in Africa a major threat to food security.

 P. Ntawuruhunga, G. Okao-okuja, A. Bembe1, M. Obambi, J. C. Armand Mvila and

J.P. Legg (2007). Incidence and severity of cassava mosaic disease in the

Republic of Congo.

1
 Kenneth Gaza Mabasa (2007). Epidemiology of cassava mosaic disease and

molecular characterization of cassava mosaic viruses and their associated whitefly

(bemisia tabaci) vector in South Africa.

 Getachew Gashaw, Tesfaye Alemu and Kassahun Tesfaye (2014). Evaluation of

disease incidence and severity and yield loss of finger millet varieties and mycelial

growth inhibition of Pyricularia grisea isolates using biological antagonists and

fungicides in vitro condition.

 Kamal Sharma and Raj Shekhar Misra (2011). Molecular approaches towards

analyzing the viruses infecting maize (Zea mays L.) 3(1), pp. 1-17, January 2011.

 L. V. Madden and G. Hughes, 1999. Sampling for plant disease incidence.

Phytopathology 89:1088-1103

 Feleke P, Kulakow G, Asumugha A, Adebayo A, Manyong V (2017). The cassava

monitoring survey in Nigeria final report. IITA, Ibadan, Nigeria. ISBN 978-978-

8444-81-7. P. 66.

 S.A. Akinbade, R. Hanna, A. Nguenkam, E. Njukwe, A. Fotso, A. Doumtsop, J.

Ngeve, S.T.N. Tenku and P. Lava Kumar (2010). First report of the East African

cassava mosaic virus-Uganda (EACMV-UG) infecting cassava (Manihot esculenta) in

Cameroon.

 Fukuba,H.,Igarashi, O., Briones,C.M $ Mendoza, E.M.T. 1982.Determination and

detoxification of cynide in cassava and cassava products.Philipp. J.Crop Sci.,

 Seif AA (1981). Transmission of cassava mosaic virus by Bemisia tabaci. Plant Dis.

 Thresh JM, Fishpool DC, Otim-Nape GW, Fargette D (1994). African cassava mosaic

geminivirus: an underestimated and unsolved problem.

 Njock, T. E . and R. N. Ndip, 2007, Limitation in detecting African cassava mosaic

geminivirus in the lignified tissues of cassava stems.

2
APPENDIX 1

3
APPENDIX 2

4
APPENDIX 3