Comparative evaluation of six storage methods for postharvest preservation of cowpea grain

Several technologies reputedly minimize losses of stored cowpea grain to bruchid beetles on low resource farms in Africa. Side by side comparison of these different postharvest storage methods can provide the basis for deciding which performs best. We compared six different technologies for cowpea storage: (1) grain mixed with ash; (2) mixed with sand; (3) fumigated with phostoxin; (4) admixed with the stems and leaves of Boscia senegalensis (Pers) Lam ex Poir, a potential botanical insecticide; (5) disinfested using a solar heater, and; (6) hermetically sealed in triple-layer plastic bags. Sampling was done at thirty-day intervals over five months of storage. Counts were made of (i) adult emergence holes, (ii) dead larvae and (iii) surviving bruchid larvae and adults. Controls, which consisted of infested cowpea grain stored in cloth bags, were damaged extensively. Boscia senegalensis-treated grain suffered similar severe damage. All other treatments suppressed bruchid population increases as was evident from the much lower counts of emergence holes and lower numbers of surviving or dead insects.

► Six different technologies used in Africa for storage of cowpea grain were compared.
► Solarization, storage in ash, sand, airtight plastic bags, or with phostoxin preserved grain well.
► Co-storage of grain with the botanical Boscia senegalensis was ineffective.