Vermicomposting: an effective liquid fertilizer and biopesticide [Kenya]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: William Akwanyi
- Editors: George Onyango, Innocent Faith, Noel Templer
- Reviewers: William Critchley, Rima Mekdaschi Studer
technologies_6685 - Kenya
View sections
Expand all Collapse all1. General information
1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology
Key resource person(s)
land user:
Mururi Wamunga Job
Welthungerhilfe farmer
Kenya
SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:
Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Soil protection and rehabilitation for food security (ProSo(i)l)Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Alliance Bioversity and International Center for Tropical Agriculture (Alliance Bioversity-CIAT) - Kenya1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT
The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:
Yes
1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology
Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?
No
Comments:
Farmers who have used vermicompost and vermijuice have recorded good harvests and there are no adverse impacts on their farms.
1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)
2. Description of the SLM Technology
2.1 Short description of the Technology
Definition of the Technology:
Vermicomposting is an on-farm waste management strategy where worms are used for biodecomposition of wastes to produce a natural liquid fertilizer and pesticide.
2.2 Detailed description of the Technology
Description:
Vermitechnology is biodecomposition of wastes using worms such as red wigglers. It includes vermicomposting (production of compost) and vermiculture (production of worms to ensure sustainability of the enterprise).
A vermicomposting structure is installed under shade and covered with a black polythene sheet to protect worms from the heat of the sun, and to prevent volatilization of nitrogen. The structure itself can be made by cutting a 60 cm radius and 120 cm height drum into two halves lengthwise. The half to be used must be thoroughly cleaned of oil or chemical residue. A hole is drilled at one end of the half drum for the installation of a tap. A base is made using wooden rails fastened on wooden posts using nails. The container is angled at 30° with the outlet pipe or tap on the lower side to allow free flow of leachate/ vermijuice. Materials are introduced in the half drum, including a gunny sheet covering the entire inside surface and ends hanging outside on the edges of the drum, a 7 cm layer of small stones followed by a 0.5 cm layer of sand on the stones, 10 cm layer of bedding materials on the sand, and 10 cm layer of worm food (kitchen and/ or animal wastes) on the bedding material. 20 litres of water are evenly sprinkled on the worm food. The worms and casts are introduced and evenly spread on the food. A bucket is placed at the outlet to collect drops of vermijuice.
Bedding materials include maize cobs, chopped maize straw, agroforestry tree bark, husks, old cartons and paper, and sugarcane bagasse. Temperature and humidity are checked by a thermometer and a hydrometer respectively. However, temperature can be checked by hand also. It is advisable that food (waste) is decomposed before being added onto the bedding material to maintain the temperature within the desired range of 15 - 20°C. Worms coil at the top of the material whenever temperatures go higher. Humidity is often higher in culture bins than in composting beds. Hence, more leachate in culture bins than in composting beds. However, humidity content in both culture bins and composting beds should not exceed 60% since the worms can take in a lot of water and die.
Feeding of the worms is done every 2 weeks where a mixture of 1 kg of chopped fresh tithonia, 3 kg of fresh cow dung, and 3 kg of cooked maize meal (“ugali”) is added and evenly spread on the decomposing material. Collected juice is returned to the system every 2 weeks for a period of 2 months. After the 2 months, the juice will be ready for use as folia fertilizer and pesticide. The casts become ready manure after about 2.5 - 3 weeks. It is harvested by dividing the container into 2 equal halves widthwise and not introducing food to the upper half to make the worms concentrate on materials on the lower half. The worm-free compost on the upper part is completely removed to be used as manure. The remaining material containing the worms is spread uniformly in the half drum. Worm food is then added evenly spread on top.
The system described above produces about 30 kg of ready-to-use compost and about 10 litres of vermijuice in 3 months. Provided that all inputs are available, a farmer can produce vermicompost and vermijuice 4 times from the same system in a year i.e., 40 litres of vermijuice and 120 kgs of ready-to-use compost in a year. Normally, a one-acre (0.4ha) farm requires about 20 tonnes of compost for planting maize. Vermijuice is mixed with water in the ratio of 1 part of vermijuice to 10 parts of water when required as a folia fertilizer and in the ratio of 1 part of vermijuice to 5 parts of water when required as a pesticide. 20 – 30 litres of vermijuice can be applied to a 0.4 ha farm. However, the amount required for fertilizer varies from farm to farm depending on the conditions of the soil and the crop(s) to be grown. It is important that soil testing is done to determine the conditions of the soil to ensure that the compost is added at the correct rate.
Vermicomposting requires less space and less maintenance labour compared to normal composting. It takes a shorter time to get compost from vermicomposting than from normal composting. On the other hand, large farms would require the installation of several vermicomposting units in order to meet the farm demand. The choice of either technology or both depends on a number of factors, including the size of the farm, the amount of compost required, the time required to produce the compost, etc.
2.3 Photos of the Technology
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
Kenya
Region/ State/ Province:
Kakamega County in western Kenya
Further specification of location:
Matora A Village, Ebukuti Sub-location, Manyala Location, Marama South Ward, Butere Sub-county
Specify the spread of the Technology:
- applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area
Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?
No
Comments:
The are no protected areas within the area i.e., sub-county
Map
×2.6 Date of implementation
Indicate year of implementation:
2017
2.7 Introduction of the Technology
Specify how the Technology was introduced:
- through projects/ external interventions
Comments (type of project, etc.):
ProSoil project under WHH as the implementing partner
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology
- improve production
- create beneficial economic impact
3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied
Land use mixed within the same land unit:
Yes
Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):
- Agro-silvopastoralism
Cropland
- Annual cropping
- Perennial (non-woody) cropping
- Tree and shrub cropping
Annual cropping - Specify crops:
- cereals - maize
- legumes and pulses - beans
- root/tuber crops - sweet potatoes, yams, taro/cocoyam, other
- vegetables - leafy vegetables (salads, cabbage, spinach, other)
- vegetables - other
Annual cropping system:
Maize/sorghum/millet intercropped with legume
Perennial (non-woody) cropping - Specify crops:
- banana/plantain/abaca
- fodder crops - grasses
- passiflora - passion fruit, maracuja
Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:
- avocado
- fruits, other
- mango, mangosteen, guava
- papaya
Number of growing seasons per year:
- 2
Specify:
Crops planted during long and short rain seasons.
Is intercropping practiced?
Yes
If yes, specify which crops are intercropped:
Maize and beans
Is crop rotation practiced?
Yes
If yes, specify:
Some sections of the farm are left fallow during the short rains to allow for soil regeneration.
Grazing land
Intensive grazing/ fodder production:
- Improved pastures
Animal type:
- cattle - dairy and beef (e.g. zebu)
- goats
- poultry
Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?
Yes
If yes, specify:
Cattle dung and poultry droppings are used as inputs in vermicomposting. Compost is applied on soil where livestock fodder is planted.
Products and services:
- economic security, investment prestige
- eggs
- meat
- milk
Species:
cattle - dairy and beef (e.g. zebu)
Count:
2
Species:
goats
Count:
3
Species:
poultry
Count:
4
Comments:
There are assorted trees on the farm, and these provide litter that is an input in composting.
3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?
Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?
- No (Continue with question 3.4)
3.4 Water supply
Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
- mixed rainfed-irrigated
Comments:
Crops are planted all year round due to availability of irrigation water from Eshiatukha and Luanda streams which supplement rain water.
3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs
- integrated soil fertility management
- integrated pest and disease management (incl. organic agriculture)
- waste management/ waste water management
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
agronomic measures
- A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
- A6: Residue management
A6: Specify residue management:
A 6.3: collected
Comments:
Some plant residues, especially leaves are collected and used as input in vermicomposting.
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
chemical soil deterioration
- Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
- Ca: acidification
- Cp: soil pollution
- Cs: salinization/ alkalinization
biological degradation
- Bp: increase of pests/ diseases, loss of predators
Comments:
Compost and vermijuice stabilize soil pH and have potential to suppress some soil-born plant pathogens that would have caused plant diseases.
3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation
Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
- prevent land degradation
- reduce land degradation
Comments:
Prevents pathogens
4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):
The drawing above is of a half drum; 60 cm radius and 120 cm height.
The half drum is supported on rails fastened on wooden posts using nails.
The half drum is positioned in a slanting manner at 30° to the horizontal level to enable free flow of the juice.
The outlet of the vermijuice is on the lower side.
Materials introduced in the half drum include the following: a gunny sheet covering the entire inside surface and ends hanging outside on the edges of the drum; 7 cm layer of small stones followed by a 0.5 cm layer of sand on the stones, 10 cm layer of bedding materials on the sand, and 10 cm layer of worm food on the bedding material. The worm food material are determined by the required soil nutrients e.g., banana trunk for potassium (K)-rich manure and/ or vermijuice, crushed eggs for calcium (Ca)-rich, and tithonia for nitrogen (N)-rich.
The worms and cast are introduced and evenly spread on the food.
A bucket is placed at the outlet to receive dropping vermijuice.
Author:
William Akwanyi
Date:
30/01/2023
4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:
- per Technology unit
Specify unit:
A half drum vermicomposting unit as described in 2.2
Specify dimensions of unit (if relevant):
0.17 cubic metres
other/ national currency (specify):
KES
If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:
122.95
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:
300
4.3 Establishment activities
Activity | Timing (season) | |
---|---|---|
1. | Construction of vermicomposting unit, inclusive shed | Before procuring worms |
2. | Adding materials | Before procuring worms |
3. | Introduction of worms | After completion of construction |
Comments:
The system described above produces about 30 kg of ready-to-use compost and about 10 litres of vermijuice in 3 months. The farmer should have the structure ready with all materials except food for the worms before procuring the worms.
4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment
Specify input | Unit | Quantity | Costs per Unit | Total costs per input | % of costs borne by land users | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Labour | Construction of the vermicomposting structure | |||||
Labour | Construction of shade over the vermicomposting structure | |||||
Equipment | Hammer | |||||
Equipment | Hand saw | |||||
Equipment | Tape measure | |||||
Plant material | Bedding material | |||||
Fertilizers and biocides | Worms in cast | |||||
Fertilizers and biocides | Kitchen or animal wastes | |||||
Construction material | Half drum | |||||
Construction material | Gunny sheet | |||||
Construction material | Nails | |||||
Construction material | Iron sheets | |||||
Other | Gravel | |||||
Other | Sand | |||||
Other | Water |
If you are unable to break down the costs in the table above, give an estimation of the total costs of establishing the Technology:
7000.0
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:
The ProSoil project provided the worms
Comments:
The farmer was unable to break down the costs of the listed items. The costs refer to the equipment described in 2.2. The cost is in Ksh/ KES equivalent to 56.93 USD.
4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities
Activity | Timing/ frequency | |
---|---|---|
1. | Monitoring humidity and temperature | Daily |
2. | Feeding | Biweekly |
3. | Watering | Biweekly |
4. | Predator control | Daily |
5. | Harvesting compost | Every 2.5 - 3 months |
6. | Collection of vermijuice | Daily |
Comments:
Temperature and humidity are checked by a thermometer and a hydrometer respectively.
4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)
If you are unable to break down the costs in the table above, give an estimation of the total costs of maintaining the Technology:
2000.0
Comments:
The farmer was unable to break down the costs of the listed items. The cost is in Ksh/ KES equivalent to 16.27 USD.
4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs
Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:
Rate of man-days vary from one place to another. It is not easy to attach monetary value to some of the input e.g., wastes and water.
Exchange rate for January 2023, source: European Commission/ InfoEuro online at https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/procedures-guidelines-tenders/information-contractors-and-beneficiaries/exchange-rate-inforeuro_en
5. Natural and human environment
5.1 Climate
Annual rainfall
- < 250 mm
- 251-500 mm
- 501-750 mm
- 751-1,000 mm
- 1,001-1,500 mm
- 1,501-2,000 mm
- 2,001-3,000 mm
- 3,001-4,000 mm
- > 4,000 mm
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:
1300.00
Specifications/ comments on rainfall:
Monthly rainfall variability is high with some months such as January recording less than 5 mm of total rainfall.
Indicate the name of the reference meteorological station considered:
Kakamega Meteorological Station
Agro-climatic zone
- humid
The climate in the area favours most agricultural activities.
5.2 Topography
Slopes on average:
- flat (0-2%)
- gentle (3-5%)
- moderate (6-10%)
- rolling (11-15%)
- hilly (16-30%)
- steep (31-60%)
- very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
- plateau/plains
- ridges
- mountain slopes
- hill slopes
- footslopes
- valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
- 0-100 m a.s.l.
- 101-500 m a.s.l.
- 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
- 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
- 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
- 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
- 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
- 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
- > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:
- not relevant
Comments and further specifications on topography:
The farm is located at an area that is lower in altitude compared to other areas in the larger area. The altitude of the farm is 1,319 meters above sea level.
5.3 Soils
Soil depth on average:
- very shallow (0-20 cm)
- shallow (21-50 cm)
- moderately deep (51-80 cm)
- deep (81-120 cm)
- very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
- medium (loamy, silty)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):
- coarse/ light (sandy)
Topsoil organic matter:
- medium (1-3%)
If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.
Soil pH of most farms in the area ranges from moderately acid (4) to moderately alkaline (7).
5.4 Water availability and quality
Ground water table:
5-50 m
Availability of surface water:
good
Water quality (untreated):
poor drinking water (treatment required)
Water quality refers to:
both ground and surface water
Is water salinity a problem?
No
Is flooding of the area occurring?
No
Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:
There are several boreholes in the area and according to interviews with some borehole owners, the depts are not more than 50 metres.
5.5 Biodiversity
Species diversity:
- medium
Habitat diversity:
- medium
Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:
The area has high agrobiodiversity since most farms are under crops and trees.
5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology
Sedentary or nomadic:
- Semi-nomadic
Market orientation of production system:
- mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
Off-farm income:
- > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
- average
Individuals or groups:
- individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
- manual work
Gender:
- women
- men
Age of land users:
- middle-aged
- elderly
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:
The farmer uses the land together with his other family members.
5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology
- < 0.5 ha
- 0.5-1 ha
- 1-2 ha
- 2-5 ha
- 5-15 ha
- 15-50 ha
- 50-100 ha
- 100-500 ha
- 500-1,000 ha
- 1,000-10,000 ha
- > 10,000 ha
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
- medium-scale
Comments:
Farmers with more than 2 ha in the area are considered to have large pieces of land since there is high level of land fragmentation in the area.
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- individual, titled
Land use rights:
- leased
- individual
Water use rights:
- open access (unorganized)
Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?
No
Specify:
Each landowner has full control of the way he/ she wants to use his/ her land.
Comments:
The farmer has an official title deed for his piece of land. He also leases other people's pieces of land for farming. Water in the streams such as Eshiatukha and Luanda and springs is freely accessed without restrictions. There is a borehole in the neighbourhood, and the managers of this borehole have set rules for accessing the water thereat.
5.9 Access to services and infrastructure
health:
- poor
- moderate
- good
education:
- poor
- moderate
- good
technical assistance:
- poor
- moderate
- good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
- poor
- moderate
- good
markets:
- poor
- moderate
- good
energy:
- poor
- moderate
- good
roads and transport:
- poor
- moderate
- good
drinking water and sanitation:
- poor
- moderate
- good
financial services:
- poor
- moderate
- good
Comments:
The above rating varies from one village to the other.
6. Impacts and concluding statements
6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown
Socio-economic impacts
Production
crop production
Quantity before SLM:
3
Quantity after SLM:
8
Comments/ specify:
Number of 90Kg bags of maize harvested per acre of land. Based on estimate by the farmer.
crop quality
Comments/ specify:
Not easy to quantify by the farmer. Based on estimate by the farmer.
fodder production
Quantity before SLM:
3
Quantity after SLM:
5
Comments/ specify:
Number of harvesting cycles in one season. Based on estimate by the farmer.
fodder quality
Comments/ specify:
Not easy for the farmer to quantify. Based on estimate by the farmer.
animal production
Quantity before SLM:
2
Quantity after SLM:
6
Comments/ specify:
Amount of milk in litres from one cow. Based on estimate by the farmer.
risk of production failure
Quantity before SLM:
70
Quantity after SLM:
10
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the probability of crops failing to do well in any season.
land management
Comments/ specify:
Not easy for the farmer to quantify. Land management has been eased because use of manure from vermicomposting improves the soil structure making it easier to plough.
Income and costs
expenses on agricultural inputs
Quantity before SLM:
10,000
Quantity after SLM:
0
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the amount of money in KES spend on fertilizers. The farmer no longer purchases fertilizers.
farm income
Quantity before SLM:
2,000
Quantity after SLM:
50,000
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the amount of money earned from sell of farm produce. Currently, he sells manure, worms, and vermijuice and also offers services in construction of vermicomposting structures.
diversity of income sources
Quantity before SLM:
3
Quantity after SLM:
5
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the number of farm products that the farmer sells to earn income. Based on estimate by the farmer.
Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
Quantity before SLM:
4
Quantity after SLM:
1
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the number of months when there in no food in the house and the household has to purchase all food required in the house.
SLM/ land degradation knowledge
Comments/ specify:
Based on estimate by the farmer.
Ecological impacts
Soil
soil moisture
Quantity before SLM:
10
Quantity after SLM:
20
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the percentage of moisture content in the soil during the dry season.
soil cover
Quantity before SLM:
40
Quantity after SLM:
80
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the farmer's estimation of soil cover on his farm.
soil organic matter/ below ground C
Quantity before SLM:
2
Quantity after SLM:
4
Comments/ specify:
Soil organic matter has increased due to use of manure.
acidity
Comments/ specify:
Based on estimate by the farmer.
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals
Vegetation cover
Quantity before SLM:
20
Quantity after SLM:
50
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the farmer's estimated vegetation cover at his farm.
plant diversity
Quantity before SLM:
3
Quantity after SLM:
8
Comments/ specify:
Quantity refers to the number of crops that the farmer establishes on his farm.
beneficial species
Comments/ specify:
There are earthworms at the farm.
habitat diversity
Comments/ specify:
Not easy for the farmer to quantify.
6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown
impact of greenhouse gases
Comments/ specify:
Not easy to quantify. Compost improves carbon sequestration in the soil.
Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):
No recorded data is available for reference. All are estimates based on the farmer's explanation or as given by him.
6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
Biological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it? | |
---|---|
epidemic diseases | very well |
6.4 Cost-benefit analysis
How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:
positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:
very positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
Comments:
Use of vermicompost and vermijuice reduces the farmer's dependence on inorganic fertilizers and pesticides.
6.5 Adoption of the Technology
- 1-10%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):
The project was implemented in the entire ward. Very few farmers have vermicomposting structures.
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
- 0-10%
Comments:
Most farmers are not implementing yet they were taken through the vermicomposting training by the ProSoil project.
6.6 Adaptation
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
Yes
other (specify):
Design
Specify adaptation of the Technology (design, material/ species, etc.):
The farmer does not fit taps on the composting structures as outlets for the vermijuice since someone can accidentally close the tap and forget to open, especially during humidity checking leading to high humidity which can cause the death of the worms.
6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view |
---|
It is an agribusiness venture. |
It is a source of manure and pesticide. |
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view |
---|
Compost and vermijuice can be sold to earn income. |
Structures can be made from locally available material. |
6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view | How can they be overcome? |
---|---|
Not effective for large scale farming. | Establishment of many bigger structures. |
The technology is not common among many farmers. | Need for increased awareness creation among farmers, especially on proper knowledge on composting. |
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view | How can they be overcome? |
---|---|
Possible death of worms due to unfavourable temperature and humidity. | Ensure regular checking of temperature and humidity. |
7. References and links
7.1 Methods/ sources of information
- field visits, field surveys
One visit at one farm
- interviews with land users
One farmer interviewed at his farm. Follow-up on phone.
- interviews with SLM specialists/ experts
ProSoil team and project implementers from Welthungerhilfe consulted.
- compilation from reports and other existing documentation
Kakamega County Integrated Development Plan, 2018-2022 and online sources reviewed.
When were the data compiled (in the field)?
30/01/2023
Comments:
One field visit and several follow-up consultations.
7.2 References to available publications
Title, author, year, ISBN:
Kakamega County Integrated Development Plan, 2018-2022
Available from where? Costs?
Free download at https://kakamega.go.ke/public-participation-county-development-plans/
7.3 Links to relevant online information
Title/ description:
Vermicompost Suppression of Pythium Aphanidermatum Seedling Disease: Practical Applications and an Exploration of The Mechanisms of Disease Suppression
URL:
https://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/handle/1813/31195/alh54.pdf;sequence=1
7.4 General comments
1. Provide a function to be able to link the documented SLM to similar work that has been documented in other databases e.g., LandPortal, UNCCD, etc.
2. Some of the impacts (section 6) cannot be quantified.
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
No links
Modules
No modules