Video Upload Options

1. Introduction

The bean fly is considered economically important even at low densities due to its feeding behaviour, life stage, and the young stems of the plants it attacks^[1] . For instance, internal feeding by bean fly larvae, which bore into and destroy stem tissue, results in wilting and plant death. Breeding efforts have identified resistance sources and potential resistance genes on chromosome Pv01 ^[2][3], vital for marker-assisted breeding approaches to enhance resistance. However, successful deployment and adoption of resistant varieties into farming systems requires involving farmers in defining the breeding goals and subsequent selections to ensure the new cultivars meet their needs and preferences.

2. Farmers’ Awareness and Damage from Bean Fly

Farmer awareness of bean fly did not show a statistically significant difference among the respondents (ꭕ2 = 1.250; p =0.535) across the three provinces. This indicates that farmer awareness of the bean fly was consistently high across provinces and did not vary significantly by location. Among the three surveyed provinces, it was noted that in Manicaland Province, all interviewed farmers were aware of the pest, while only a small percentage (3%) of farmers in Masvingo and Midlands were not aware of the pest.

Number of respondent farmers who were (not) aware of the bean fly pest in the three provinces in Zimbabwe

Df = degrees of freedom, ꭕ2 = chi-square value

3. Factors that Influence Farmers’ Awareness of the Bean Fly

To determine the factors influencing farmers’ awareness of the bean fly, a multiple linear regression model was calculated. In the model, farmers’ awareness of the bean fly and its associated damage was modelled, along with gender, experience in bean production, access to extension services, farmers’ involvement in bean seed production programs, and level of education.

4. Regression Analysis of Farmers’ Awareness of Bean Fly and its Damage in three Selected Provinces in Zimbabwe

The results of a multiple regression analysis on factors affecting farmers’ awareness of the bean fly and its associated damage in Zimbabwe are summarised in Table 8. The extent and value of the selected variables were ascertained using the variance increase factors (VIFs) and tolerance indices. If VIF values are >10, there are multiple relations between variables^[5]. In the present findings, the VIF values for all variables are < 10, suggesting that there are no multiple relations between the variables. In addition, if tolerance values are > 0.10, there are no multiple relations between the selected variables. The tolerance values computed in this study are > 0.10, suggesting that there are no multiple relations among the variables. In addition, it was computed that none of the correlation coefficients exceeded 0.80, suggesting that there are no multiple relations among the variables. Overall, the present analysis detected a lack of multiple relations between the assessed variables on the awareness of the bean fly and its damage. The absolute value of the Beta (β), indicates the order of importance of the selected independent variables. The variable with the highest β value is relatively more important than the others. The findings show that access to extension services and years of experience in bean production made the highest contributions, followed by the level of education. Gender was non-significant and had the smallest contribution to the model, with a coefficient of determination of 0.50. In summary, the multiple regression analysis revealed that education, experience in bean production, and access to extension significantly (p<0.05) influenced farmers' awareness of the bean fly

5. Control Methods of the Bean Fly in the Study Areas

There are significant differences (P<0.05) in the bean fly control methods used by the respondent farmers across the study areas. Predominantly, the respondent farmers reported use of crop protection chemicals (28%) and cultural practices (33%) such as ridging, fertilizer application, and crop rotation, to control bean fly in the three provinces in Zimbabwe. About 2% of respondents were unaware of any control method, and 2% were unaware of the pest and its damage.

6. Availability of Bean Fly-Tolerant Varieties in the Study Areas

The availability of bean fly-tolerant varieties was assessed by interviewing sampled farmers to determine which bean varieties they cultivated were tolerant of the pest. The findings revealed that no bean fly-resistant varieties were reported by the respondents or in their marketplaces.^[6]

The results of this study show that the majority of farmers (97.9%) were aware of the bean fly. These results further support the implementation of integrated pest management using chemical sprays (28%) and cultural practices (33%), including fertiliser application, crop rotation, and earthing up. Similar findings were reported in Malawi, where farmers identified chemical insecticides as the most effective and efficient control method^[1], followed by cultural practices such as intercropping, early planting, and varietal mixtures. However, continued pesticide use has several challenges, including pesticide resistance, non-selective damage to other valuable insects, and environmental pollution ^[2][3]. Improved varieties are grown by farmers, but the current study revealed that no bean fly-resistant varieties are available on the market, with similar conclusions drawn in Malawi. Therefore, the study reveals an urgent need to enhance efforts to develop bean varieties resistant to bean fly damage and incorporate traits preferred by farmers to boost common bean production in East and Southern Africa (ESA).

The results of multiple linear regression revealed a stronger positive effect for the number of years in bean production, suggesting that greater experience in bean production is associated with better results. Additionally, access to extension services has a positive, significant effect, suggesting that increased extension support will lead to a corresponding rise in bean fly awareness. The level of education shows a very weak positive relationship with the level of bean fly awareness. This suggests that higher education may slightly increase awareness of the bean fly. Overall, the model indicates that experience in bean production and access to extension services are key positive predictors, as evidenced by their highest β values. Gender and level of education, however, do not demonstrate significant influence in this analysis. These findings suggest that practical efforts to increase extension access and leverage production experience could improve farmers' awareness of the bean fly. A similar study in Malawi found that important factors influencing awareness of bean fly included education, prior experience with bean fly, and the farmer's geographical location