Research Article

Significance and Implications of Farming Practices, Knowledge and Methods of Disease Management in Developing Countries: A Case Study of Peach Farmers in Pakistan

Palwasha1, Siraj-ud-Din1 and Muhammad Fahim2*

1Department of Botany, University of Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan; 2Centre for Omic Sciences, Islamia College, University Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan 25120.

Received | August 16, 2021; Accepted | October 30, 2021; Published | March 17, 2022

*Correspondence | Muhammad Fahim, Centre for Omic Sciences, Islamia College, University Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan 25120; Email: fahim@icp.edu.pk

Citation | Palwasha, S.U. Din and M. Fahim. 2022. Significance and Implications of farming practices, knowledge and methods of disease management in developing countries: A case study of peach farmers in Pakistan. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 38(2): 595-610.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2022/38.2.595.610

Keywords | Peach small farms, Insect pest, Disease management, Northwest Pakistan

Copyright: 2022 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Introduction

Production and marketing are the two pillars of agriculture that are inextricably intertwined with each other and their synergistic impact on agriculture lead to economic development. However, due to lack of education, availability of quality agricultural inputs and emergence and re-emergence of pests and diseases due to climate change, have badly affected the developing countries in both these areas (Peters et al., 2014). Farmers’ knowledge and practices play a key role in mitigating these issues and in order to ensure sustainability in agriculture production. In developing countries, however, the lack of education and lack of awareness about biotic and abiotic stresses, often leads to endemics that reduces crop profitability and ultimately the farmers’ start abandoning certain crops and fruits (Sommer et al., 2013).

Horticulture sector can provide opportunities to increase income, alleviate hunger and poverty and reduces socio-economic problems (Alam and Mujtaba, 2002). Several projects have been implemented by local and foreign donors in Malakand Division, in Pakistan for promotion of horticulture due to the diversified topography, agro-climatic conditions, good quality irrigation water and better soil type. Considering the scope and importance of fruits the government started Fruit Maximization Project in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (KP) to promote the multiplication of fruits with the support of Swiss government i.e., The Pak/Swiss Malakand Fruit and Vegetable Development Project (MFVDP) and Pak-Swiss Project for Horticultural Promotion (PHP). Emphasis was given to the small landless farmersand women (Ali et al., 2003). A number of peach cultivars i.e., Indian Blood (8-A), Spring Crest, Elberta etc. were introduced in Malakand Division as a part of the project (Ahad et al., 1999; Ayaz et al., 2001). Ever since, the most promising peach cultivars have been widely adapted and cultivated in the Malakand Division, despite the fact that these varieties were prone to diseases and pests (Ayaz et al., 2001). Monocropping over three decades has further exacerbated the production constraints. No evaluation- or follow-up study were conducted to evaluate the extent to which fruit production and multiplication has been done in the project area and to figure out how the new introduction of fruits crops have led to emergence and reemergence of pests and diseases. Moreover, the gaps in knowledge and practices of the farmers in Malakand Division, are widely unknown and has resulted in reduction of crop productivity due to the frequent outbreaks of pests and diseases. The low level of growth in fruit production in general and peach fruit production in particular shows that there is great room for improvement through improved management practices to maximize yield and improve the socio-economic status of the growers (Akçay and Uzunöz, 2006). Due to pre- and post-harvest diseases; improper storage and poor supply chain more than 40 per cent of the peaches produced, are wasted (Ahmada et al., 2021). As a result, the per hectare production of fruit orchard is much lower when compared to other countries across the world (Bakhsh et al., 2006; Memon et al., 2015). Over the past three decades there has been a major upward shift in production per unit area for China (17.5tonnes from 2.5 tonnes) and Turkey (15tonnes increased from 12.5 tonnes), while in Pakistan a downward trend has been recorded (Figure 1), where the production has been reduced to as low as 5 tonne /ha from 10 tonnes (AMIS, 2021). There are many reasons behind this downward trend including lack of awareness of farmers, ignorance of policy makers and technological deficiency etc. (Ali et al., 2008).

The quality and quantity of peach is further affected by weather, biotic stresses and abiotic stress, pre and post-harvest crop management, variety grown as well as the production techniques used by the growers. The knowledge, attitude, infrastructure and resources are identified as factors contributing to post harvest losses. Numerous studies have addressed the sustainability issues, lack of farmers’ know how and poor implementation of sustainable practices in major peach producing areas of Malakand Division, KP. Pakistan. However federal Government needs to initiate several steps to channelize these abundant quantities of fruits and vegetables to the international market and fetch back higher returns to the country (Ahmada et al., 2021; Ali et al., 1994). This study was designed to determine the knowledge and disease management

 

practices of farmers in northwest Pakistan. Our results have implication for fruit production in Pakistan specifically and elsewhere in developing countries in general.

Materials and Methods

Universe of the study

Environmental Protection department divided Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (KP) in three zones like Northern, Central and Southern zones. The Northern zone covers Hindu Kush and Western Himalayas ranges. District Swat, Buner, Dir upper, Dir lower, Shangla and Chitral which are favorable agro-ecological zones for Peach growth. All peach growers in five peach growing districts of Malakand division were considered for the studies (Khan et al., 2018).

The study sample

Comprehensive surveys were conducted in five districts of northern areas of Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (KP) to investigate the epidemiology and management of insects-fungal diseases in peach orchards. Eleven locations were randomly selected from Swat, nine from Dir, seven from Chitral, five from Shangla and four from Buner (Figure 2). About 36 respondent were evaluated for knowledge and practices for pests and disease management in peach orchards.

Data collection

Questionnaire was used for collection of data from the respondent. Data were arranged in excel file and analyzed through SPSS software. Descriptive statistics including percentages based on the number of farmers were evaluated. Chi-square test was used to check the association between geographical locations and major variables of interest (Khalil et al., 2014).

 

Results and Discussion

Ownership

The data indicated that in all districts the interviewed peach growers had the prestige of land and orchard ownership (P<0.05). A significantly high percentage of the respondents (67%) were land owners as compared to tenants or lease growers (33%). In Swat and Chitral districts, almost all peach growers (100%) were land owners, while in Buner, Dir and Shangla districts the ownership was reduced to 25%, 33% and 40%, respectively (Figure 3a).

Education level

The educational level of the farmers is one of the crucial determinants of farmer’s level of adoption of new technology. There were significant differences (P< 0.05) between the levels of education in different districts. The farmers in the Malakand Division (district Swat), peach growers did not pursue even the formal education (18%), 55% had only secondary school (SSC) level while only 27% of the farmers attained SSC or above level of education. In district Dir, 33% were illiterate, 56% went to primary school and 11% were at having SSC level or above. Similarly, in district Shangla 40% were illiterate and 60% attained primary level of education while in district Chitral 72% have no education, 14% were having primary and matric level. In district Buner illiteracy was 50%, only 25% achieved primary and matric level. This data pointed out that the respondent must be educated to higher level so that they may have the knowledge about the use of proper techniques. Among the five districts, Swat has the highest literacy rate followed by Dir, Buner, Chitral and Shangla (Figure 3b).

Source of irrigation

Irrigation system in Pakistan is one of the largest irrigation system all over the world. It stretches throughout Pakistan and is backbone of crop production and sustainable growth. Approximately three fourth of the land is cultivated under this largest canal system and is considered as the best substitute for the shortage of rainfall (Usman, 2016).

There was a significant association (P < 0.05) of districts with irrigation source. The main sources of irrigation in all five districts of Malakand Division were rivers, springs and some areas were partially rainfed. Among the different irrigation types, largest numbers of areas were (58%) irrigated with river water followed by (25%) spring irrigation and about 17% were partially rainfed. In district Swat, highest percentage (73%) of fields were irrigated through river, which is also the highest value among all five districts of Malakand division followed by 56% in district Dir and Chitral while lowest 40% were observed in district Shangla. Similarly, 27% and 44% fields were partially rainfed in district Swat and Chitral while 43% orchards were spring irrigated in district Dir followed by 60% and about 50% in shangla and Buner (Figure 4a) respectively.

Intercropping

Intercropping in peach orchards showed significant effect (P < 0.05) in all districts. In Malakand Division, farmers intercropped Peach orchard with Hordeum vulgare, Pennisetum typhoides and Sorghum bicolor L. About 42% orchards were without any other crop while 25% were intercropped with Pennisetum, 19% with Hordeum vulgare and 14% with Sorghum bicolor L. Among the districts, Swat was leading (100%) with

 

no intercropping followed Buner (50%). In district Dir, 56% fields were intercropped with Hordeum vulgare and 44% with pennisetum typhoides. Additionally, in district Shangla 56% were intercropped with Pennisetum typhoides, 20% with Hordeum vulgare and Sorghum bicolor L. while in Chitral district intercropping with Sorghum bicolor L. were noted at 43% locations whereas in 14% fields intercropping was done with Pennisetum typhoides and Hordeum vulgare. In district Buner, 25% orchards were found intercropped with Pennisetum typhoides and sorghum bicolor L. (Figure 4b). To our knowledge, little research study has been conducted to determine the effect of intercropping mostly on limitations of flowering, fruiting and fruit production of growing trees within varying agro-climatic circumstances (Figure 4b).

Varieties

The data about different varieties used in five districts of Malakand division shown in Figure 4c. In different districts, Elberta (No. 6) was common (25 %) followed by (19%) Indian Blood (No. 8), a late season variety, whereas the least common (17%) were both NJC84 (No. 5) and spring crest which are considered as mid and early varieties respectively. Late season variety Maria Delezia were grown at 11% localities. In district Swat the most popular peach varieties were Indian Blood (No. 8) and NJC 84 (No. 5) (46% and 27% growers respectively). In district Dir, maximum (56%) growers reported variety Elberta (No. 6), while 22% were growing Maria delezia (No. 7) and Indian Blood (No. 8). In district Shangla early variety Carmen (No. 4) was reported by 80% growers and only 20% were having NJC 84 (No. 5). In district Chitral 86% growers reported early variety Spring Crest and 14% Elberta (No. 6) while in district Buner two varieties NJC 84 (No. 5) and Elberta (No. 6) were reported by 50% growers.

Farmer’s Knowledge about Pests/ diseases

Data regarding knowledge about pest and diseases mentioned in Figure 5a and 5b showed significant

 

relationship (P<0.05) in all districts. When enquired about the diseases 36% farmers had no knowledge about specific diseases in their peach orchards (Figure 5a and 5b). The most frequently reported diseases were Blossom blight (20% of respondent and brown rot (19 %). Other infections of pronounced economic significance have been sour rot and peach scab reported by 11% and 8% respondent, respectively. With respect to insect pest’s management, again 36% farmers had no idea about insects. Of the farmers interviewed, 20% reported fruitflies that caused serious losses in production. Up to 19% declared infestations of aphids, 11% reported San Jose scale while, thrips and mites were mentioned by 8% and 7% of respondents respectively.

Insect pest management

It is revealed from the survey that farmers were using different insecticides for management of pests. They had confusion over the name of active ingredients, implying that a single active ingredient might be repeatedly used with different commercial names. The most commonly used insecticides were having synthetic pyrethroids and organophosphates as active ingredients. Eleven active ingredients were used to control thrips, mites, fruitflies, aphids and San Jose Scale.

Thrips: Figure 6a that shows the lack of effective thrips management due to lack of awareness (P>0.05). Among the farmers interviewed in district Chitral and Shangla, 100% orchards were without any treatment. In district Buner, 75% were without any treatment while 25% were treated with dimethoate. In district Dir 89% fields were given no treatment while 11% were treated with Admiral (pyriproxyfen). In district Swat 36% orchards were not given any treatment, 18% were treated with dimethoate and 46% with Admiral (pyriproxyfen).

Mites: The Figure 6b shows the data regarding mites management in five districts of malakand division. It was found that except Swat, the mite management is either poorly practiced or there is lack of awareness or resources (P<0.05). The grower’s response revealed that maximum (100%) orchards without any treatment were found in district Chitral. In district Buner 75% were with no treatment while 25% were treated with Curacran (profenfose). Almost, 60% orchards were with no treatment in district Shangla and 40% were treated with Aldrin while in district Dir 67% orchards were without treatment, 22% with Curacran (profenfose) and 11% were treated with Larsbin (chlorpyrifose). Similarly, in district Swat 9% orchards had no treatment, 36% were given Larsbin (chlorpyrifose) treatment and 27% with Curacran (profenfose) and Aldrin respectively.

Aphids: In Pakistan, Peach cultivation originated in Swat and pesticide companies are more active due to big market as compared to other districts. Therefore, it is not surprising to observe that Aphid management in Swat district and to some extent in Dir district, is more widespread as compared to other districts (Figure 6c and Table 2). Grower’s response revealed that maximum (100%) orchard were without treatment for aphids in district Chitral and Buner, while in district Shangla 80% were with no treatment and 20% were treated with dimethoate. In district Dir maximum (67%) orchards were without treatment followed by 11% and 22% treated with dimethoate and Furadan (Carbofuron). In district Swat 18% orchards were without any treatment while 55% were treated with dimethoate followed by 27% were given treatment with Furadan (Carbofuron) (Figure 6c).

 

San jose scales: A pattern of San Jose Scale management, similar to aphids’ was observed in all districts (Figure 6d and Table 2). In Malakand Division, no systematic San Jose Scale management was carried out. The growers response revealed that 100% orchards were without treatment in district Chitral, followed by district Shangla (80%), although 20% peach orchards were treated with winter foliol oil. In district Buner 75% orchards were not given any treatment whereas 25% were treated with Decis (deltamethrin). The percentage of untreated orchards in district Dir was 44% while 26% were treated with winter foliol oil and 30% with Chillas (Cypermethrin). Similarly in district Swat 55% were treated with winter Foliol oil while in 45% Decis(deltamethrin) was used.

Fruitflies: Fruitflies are considered as a serious pest in fruits and vegetables in Malakand Division. The use of chemicals for its management existed, to a varying degree in all districts (P<0.01).

The farmers’ feedback revealed that maximum number of orchards (36%) were without any treatment while 25% were treated with metasystox (Oxydemeton methyl), 17% each were treated with dipterex (Trichlorphon) and buzzer (Cypermethrin). 6% of the orchards were given treatment with Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) which is banned in Pakistan but still was in use. Highest 60% orchards in shangla and 55% in Swat were treated with metasystox (Oxydemeton methyl) and Dipterex (Trichlorphon) respectively. Another important finding that Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) (29%) was still used in district Chitral (Figure 6e).

 

Table 1: Chi-squared test, Association of districts with education, ownership, irrigation, intercropping and varieties.

	Pearson chi square value	Df	P-value
Education level	24.072a	12	0.020*
Ownership	18.225a	4	0.001**
Source of irrigation	16.675a	8	0.034*
Intercropping	38.600a	12	0.000**
Varieties	73.059a	20	0.000**
Knowledge about pests	31.7a	20	0.046*
Knowledge about fungal diseases	31a	20	0.04*

 

Table 2: Geographic (Districts-Wise) Association With Imperative Determinants Of Pest Management By Peach Fruit Growers in the Target Population.

Insects Pests	Pearson Chi Square value	Df	P-value
Thrips	16.088a	8	0.041*
Mites	23.253a	12	0.026*
Aphids	18.274a	8	0.019*
Fruitflies	37.606a	16	0.002**
San Jose scale	26.343a	8	0.001**

 

Management of fungal diseases. For the effective control of both insect and disease it is essential to apply pesticides using appropriate method and in right dose. It was revealed during the survey that respondents were completely unaware about the proper time of pesticide application. They applied pesticides at all stages of growth. Farmers reported the use of several active ingredients to control blossom blight, Aspergillus rot, Alternaria rot, Peach Scab, Sour rot and Brown rot. A total of twenty seven fungicides belonging to the classes of benzimidazoles, strobilurins and triazoles being used and were recorded while conducting the survey.

Blossom Blight: The Figure 7a, illustrate data of blossom blight management in the peach orchards. Highly significant relation (P < 0.01) was noted in all districts where farmers in districts like Swat and Dir had significant awareness of the control measures and tools, while in the rest of districts the measures were scares of below effective level.

Again it was revealed that no control measures were taken against blossom blight in district Chitral. In district Buner 75% orchards were without any treatment whereas in 25% orchards plants were sprayed with Metalaxyl+ Mancozeb P4L. In shangla only 40% orchards were treated with Amistar Top (Azoxystrobin in combination with difenconazol) to control blosson blight. In district Dir 45% orchards were not receiving any treatment, 33% were sprayed with Metalyxal+ Mencozeb P4L while 11% orchards were treated with Cabrio Top (pyraclostrobin), and Amistar Top (azoxystrobin + difenconazol). Metalyxal+ Mancozeb P4L were applied in 37 % of the orchards, 36% were treated with Cabriotop (pyraclostrobin) and 27% with Amistar Top (azoxystrobin +difenconazol).

Aspergillus Rot: Data about management of Aspergillus rot disease in peach orchards showed highly significant relation for fungicide use (P<0.01) in Swat and Dir Districts. Again no control measures were taken in all the orchards of district Chitral to control Aspergillus. In district Shangla Kocide (copper hydroxide +inert ingredients) was used in 20% areas while in the rest of the orchards no treatment was given., In district Buner 50% orchards were without treatment, 25% were treated wtih Contaf Plus (pyraclostrobin) and kocide. In addition district Dir were 33% orchards were with no treatment followed by 33% with kocide and Contaf Plus (pyraclostrobin) while in district Swat 37% orchards treated with thiophanate methyl, 27% with kumulus and kocide, 9% with Contaf Plus (pyraclstrobin) (Figure 7b).

 

Alternaria Rot: Grower’s response showed that in district chitral 86% orchards were without any treatment and 14% were treated with Armure (Propiconazole + Difenoconazole). In district Shangla 80% were without treatment, only 20% received treatment with Armure (Propiconazole + Difenoconazole). In district Buner 75% orchards were untreated and 25% were treated with Captnazol (Captan + hexaconazol). In district Dir 45% fields received no treatment, 33% were treated with thiophanate methyl and 11% with Armure (Propiconazole + Difenoconazole) and Captnazol (Captan + hexaconazol) while in district Swat 18% orchards were without any treatment followed by 46% treated with Captnazol (Captan + hexaconazol) and 36% with Armure (Propiconazole + Difenoconazole) (Figure 7c and Table 3).

Peach Scab: Grower’s revealed that in district chitral 86% orchards were without treatment and 14% were using Champion (Copper sulfate) to control peach scab. In Shangla 40% growers were no using any control measures whereas 40% used Champion (Copper sulfate) and 20% treated their orchards with Capnazol (Captan + hexaconazol). In district Buner 25% were without treatment, 50% were treated with Topsin-M and 25% with Capnazol (Captan + hexaconazol). In district Dir 22% orchards were without treatment, 34% were treated with Capnazol (Captan + hexaconazol), 33% and 11% were treated with Success (Chlorthalonil) and Champion (Copper sulfate) repectively. In district Swat 18% fields were without treatment, 28% were treated with Champion (Copper sulfate) and 27% with Capnazol (Captan + hexaconazol) whereas 18 and 9% orchards were treated with Score (Difenconazol + other) and Success (Chlorthalonil) respectively (Figure 7d and Table 3).

Sour Rot: In district Chitral 86% orchards were without any treatment and only 14% were treated with Tegula (tebuconazol) to control sour rot. 40% of the orchards in district Shangla,were without any treatment, 40% were treated with Tilt (propiconazol) and 20% with Tegula (tebuconazol). In district Buner 50% orchards were without treatment, 25% were treated with Tegula (tebuconazol) and rest of the 25% were treated with Recado. In district Dir 34% orchards were without treatment, 33% were treated with Rovral (iprodine), 22%with Recado (Azoxystrobin, Difenconazol) and only 11% with Tecto (thiabendazole). In case of district Swat 37% were treated with Tegula (tebuconazol) followed by 27% with Tecto (thiabendazole) and 18% each with Recado (Azoxystrobin, Difenconazol) and Tecto (thiabendazole) respectively (Figure 7e and Table 3).

 

Table 3: Geographic (Districts-Wise) Association with Imperative Determinants Of Fungal Disease Management By Peach Fruit Growers in the Target Population.

Fungal diseases	Pearson Chi Square value	df	P-value
Blossom blight	24.984a	12	0.015*
Aspergillus Rot	34.220a	16	0.005**
Alternaria Rot	23.489a	12	0.024*
Peach scab	37.586a	20	0.010*
Sour Rot	34.980a	20	0.020*
Brown rot fruit stage	50.712a	32	0.019*

 

Brown Rot Fruit Stage: Survey results revealed that in district chitral 86% orchards were without any treatment and 14% were treated with thiophanate methyl. 40% of orchards were not given any treatment in district Shangla, 40% were treated with Contaf Plus (hexaconazol) and 20% with Score (difenconazole). In district Buner 50% were without treatment followed by 25% with Contaf Plus (hexaconazol) and 25% with thiophanate methyl. In district Dir 11% orchards were without any treatment, 56% were treated with Spectrum (propiconazol), 11% each with Tilt, Contaf Plus (hexaconazol) and thiophanate methyl. In district Swat 28% were treated with Nanok followed by 27% with Contaf Plus (hexaconazol), 18% with thiophanate methyl, 9% with each Top Guard, Evito and Tilt respectively (Figure 7f and Table 3).

Lack of education, non-availability of quality agricultural inputs and emergence and re-emergence of pests and diseases due to climate change are the reasons why developing countries lagging far behind compared to developed countries in achieving sustainable development goals (Mugambiwa and Tirivangasi, 2017). Among these, farmers’ knowledge and practices play a key role in mitigating these issues, in order to ensure sustainability in agriculture production. In 1980s, Pakistan took initiatives to improve the horticulture sector with support from Swiss government, in Malakand Division, KP, Pakistan (Figure 1). New improved peach cultivars were introduced and evaluated for improved productivity (Ahmad, 1985). However, due to the lack of follow-up studies and the natural course of emergence and re-emergence of diseases has led to a quick decline in peach production in recent years (Figure 1). Systematic studies to understand the production dynamics are lacking due to several factors, including terrorism (Ali, 2010; Khalid, 2020) and global crises (Papaioannou et al., 2020). Secure and legal land ownership offer an opportunity to the farmer for more incentives, including risk free investment and easy access to agriculture credit (Chalamwong and Feder, 1986; Feder, 1987).

In Malakand Division, peach growers were mostly owners (i.e., Swat and Chitral districts), while in Buner, Dir and Shangla districts the ownership was 25%, 33% and 40%, respectively. The production per unit area was 9.7, 6.4, 9.07, 11.37 and 7.38 tonnes/ha for Buner, Chitral, Dir, Shangla and Swat, respectively (Anonymous, 2020). Feder (1978) proposed that ownership insecurity causes lower farm productivities because investment incentives are absent and access to credit is limited. However, in our case, the landownership in Swat and Chitral ranked the highest (100%) while on the basis of production per unit area, Swat and Chitral ranked the lowest i.e., 4th and 5th. Therefore, it is assumed that the factors contributing to low productivity in peach is equally affecting the owners and the tenants. Peach growers in all districts had access to pesticides, fertilizers and other inputs. However, the lack of knowledge, poor financial status and lack of swift access to agriculture credit due to its complex process, results in dependence of small-scale farmers on local agrochemical business. Although, soil fertility as whole is not the contributing factor to low productivity, but the deficiency of micronutrients is a major issue for agriculture sector. The use of pesticides increased from 23,212 tons in 1994 to over 69,897 tons in 2002 (Bao et al., 2019). Regrettably, even during 1980s to the 1990s, a large number of chemicals were introduced in the agricultural region of Punjab, Pakistan. The selling and marketing of pesticides has been shifted from the government to the private companies which resulted in five times more use of chemicals within a short span of only one year, that too without any major effects on crop yields. In peach orchards, farmers are applying as high as 24 applications of pesticides in a single season (Fazal Maula, Personal Communication). This alone point towards the increase in various types of cancers in Swat district (Ejaz et al., 2004; Salam et al., 2021). As a result, the private sector was misdirected and coaxed to use unnecessary fertilizers (NPK) that adds to the input cost. Regarding irrigation types, there have been more cases (58%) of river irrigation in all districts followed by 25% spring and about 17% were partially rainfed (Figure 4a; Table 1). In all peach growing areas, water availability is the least of the problems and is met from rivers, followed by natural springs etc (Akbar, 2020).

Education and training enhance farmers’ ability and willingness to make successful changes to their management practice that leads to national economic well-being and growth. In peach growing zone of Malakand Division, highest literacy rate was observed in Swat district where the high school/matriculates were 55%, while illiteracy rate was highest in district Chitral (72%) (Figure 3b; Table 1). Lack of education and poor economic status of the tenants may be one of the contributing factor to lower productivity (Flood, 2010). A substantial increase crop productivity requires formal trainings of the farmers in agriculture technology and food security. Crop statistics of KP (Anonymous, 2020) revealed that despite highest literacy rate, the production per unit area in Swat district was lowest (7.38 tonnes/ha) as compared to Buner, Dir and Shangla (9.7, 9.0 and 11.35 tonnes/ha, respectively) (Anonymous, 2020). Although, the disease pressure and pests may be the leading factor, but training through farmer field schools (FFS) and technology transfer projects can play a crucial role in the better control of plant diseases and in the growth of agriculture. In Malakand Division, FFS activities for farming community about modern techniques and guidance to increase productivity in agriculture, is scarce. Therefore, despite formal school and college education, high post-harvest losses and low productivity in agriculture are perhaps due to poor management and farmers’ lack of knowledge. Countries with higher levels of income generally have higher levels of education; human capital, which includes both formal education and informal on-the-job training, is a major factor in explaining differences in productivity and income level between countries (Hicks, 1987). Famer’s information about pest control and improved production is only possible through education and agricultural trainings. For Peach growers, training programs through Farmer Field Schools (FFS) can be an effective strategy to minimize yield losses in peach (Kilpatrick, 2000) and is evident from such activities in different crops in various parts of Pakistan (Ali and Haider, 2012; Bajwa et al., 2008; Butt et al., 2015; Mallah and Korejo, 2007).

Intercropping is not only sustainable and environmentally friendly but also offers economic benefits to both small scale farmers and commercial agriculture. The practice in young orchard, before fruit bearing stage can be beneficial for the small scale farmers. The intercropping becomes impracticable in fully grown, fruit bearing orchards. Despite this fact, a higher percentage of farmers (58%) still practiced growing Pennisetum (25%), Hordeum vulgare (19%) and Sorghum bicolor (14%) mainly as feed for domestic cattle (Figure 4b; Table 1). Studies have described positive, neutral, and negative treatment effects on yield (Zhang and Li, 2003). Unfortunately, few studies have examined how intercropping practices influence farm income. There is no evidence that yields and gross income for intercropping treatments increase when leguminous intercropping combinations are practiced, however, it can be advantageous for sustainable agricultural practice (Himmelstein et al., 2017). We believe that replacement of monocot forage with legume crops can have dual impact i.e., overcoming nitrogen deficiency and providing feed to the cattle (Giller, 2001).

Farmers in general (36%) have no knowledge about specific diseases in their peach orchards (Figure 5a and 5b). With respect to insect pest’s management, farmers in general (36%) have no knowledge about insects. During the survey 20% farmers reported fruitflies, causing losses in production whereas 19% declared infestations of aphids, 11% reported San Jose scale, whereas thrips and mites were mentioned by 8% and 7% of respondents respectively. Among diseases, the most frequently reported diseases were Blossom blight (20% of respondent) and brown rot (19 %). Other infections of pronounced economic significance have been sour rot and peach scab according to 11% and 8% respondent respectively.

Peach is highly susceptible to a multitude of pests and diseases (Williams and Crocker, 2000) thus necessitating the use of agrochemical for insect/disease management. In recent years, fruitflies and Peach rot have been ranked as the most serious pest in fruits and vegetable (Solangi et al., 2011). Fruit breeding is a long and complex process (Byrne, 2001) and require persistent efforts and substantial investments. In the absence of host resistance, the management practices mostly rely on agro-chemical i.e., fungicide and pesticides. However, the practice of synthetic pyrethroids and organophosphates, alone is a major concern, since these classes of pesticides are known threat to environment and human (Nicolopoulou-Stamati et al., 2016). unjudicial use (Commission, 2012) of these agrochemicals have detrimental impact, not only on the environment but also on human and other organism (Uddin, 2018). In this study, we found that in some districts e.g., Chitral the lack of formal education or knowledge about pests, diseases and their management can reduce the economic return (Figure 5; Tabl 1) Peach is highly perishable fruit and post-harvest losses can be serious, if fruits are exposed to pests and diseases in orchards. Bad handling, poor storage, poor transportation, and the involvement of large numbers of intermediaries and the lack of information about better preservation methods are the break-up of these losses due to poor management facilities and practices (Kader, 2009).

For the safety of humans and environment, pests and diseases should be managed through good phytosanitary and cultural practices. The correct pruning and sanitation tactics are adequate alone to control damage to peach fruits in small farming especially in earlier spring, and are the basis of integrated pest management (IPM) strategy. Early harvesting and removal of affected plant parts helps to reduce fruit damage and the entry of harmful insects into peach orchards. These findings are in correlation with results of (Iqbal, 2005) and (Haye, 2016; Hussain, 2003). In addition, removal of weeds is much more than simple control strategy because it competes for water and nutrients with peach plants. Our findings are in agreement with those of (Fadamiro, 2009). Alternative control measures i.e., proper net covers, yellow sticky traps etc. are just being introduced in various peach growing areas, however, the adaptation and wide use will take its course (Miller et al., 2021).

Fungal pathogens can infect pre- and post-harvest fruit, resulting in significant damage. These fungi are all heterotrophic and need water for growth (Adaskaveg et al., 2008). Since, torrential rain and hailstorm are common during March, April, July and August (Nizami et al., 2020) in Malakand Division therefore, it can be assumed that dampness and humidity can provide conducive environment for fungal pathogens, enhancing disease incidence and severity in Peaches. Farmers were generally unaware of various diseases. Their understanding that the flower drying and drop (blossom blight) and fruit rots was commendable, however, they were not aware of the causal agent and proper control measure. Various fungicides are available to inhibit the development of stone fruit rot and can lead to effective control, especially of blossom blight (Sholberg, 2008). Farmers reported the use of several active ingredients to control blossom blight, Aspergillus rot, Alternaria rot, Peach Scab, Sour rot and Brown rot. A total of twenty seven fungicides belonging to the classes of benzimidazoles, strobilurins and triazoles were recorded (Figure 7a-f; Table 3). Brown rot fungi are dominated by the benzimidazole group of fungicides, including Benomyl, Carbendazim, Thiabendazole and Thiophanate-methy (Hetherington, 2005).

In developing countries, more poisoning cases are reported due to mishandling, bad implementation practices and inadequate management of pesticides (Bhanti, 2004). In addition, the use of certain classes of fungicides could lead to an increased severity of infection by other fungi or pests that are not explicitly targeted. The use of benomyl and related fungicides to combat Monilinia, for example, can lead to Rhizopus peach fruit infection (Koffman, 1975). Due to health and environmental issues, chemical fungicides, widely used to manage post-harvest diseases, are frequently checked (Sarks, 1995; Warlop, 2007). Owing to potential toxicological threats, some fungicides are no longer used for post-harvest treatment or have been entirely withdrawn from the market (Adaskaveg, 2002). Synthetic fungicides for post-harvest applications are banned in many European countries, such as France and Italy (Bonaterra et al., 2003; Gregori, 2007; Warlop, 2007).

It is evident that continuous monocropping, and lack of introduction of new peach cultivars, the production per unit area in Swat district has drastically reduced over the two decades, however, Swat district still enjoys the highest production owing to the area on which peach orchards are grown. The results of this survey on peach production practices in the region of northwest Pakistan have undoubtedly highlighted that peach trees are vulnerable to insect, pest and diseases. Survey results revealed that farmers are generally less aware of the pathogens affecting their orchards, and have no idea of management practices. Growers are more addicted to expensive chemicals.

The following public mediations should be considered to encourage the peach development sector in northwest Pakistan. (1) Training farmers to improve their knowledge of pests and diseases 2) farmers need training to increase technical knowledge, and also need finance and pure chemical products for better protection. (3) Strict supervision of sellers of pesticides to provide peach farmers with simple and standard information to prevent confusion between pesticides and active ingredients. 4) They should be made aware of bio-control and there is a need to track the pest population periodically, in particular at the peak time of insect / pest emergence, in order to encourage bio-control rather than chemicals. Together with the experts from Plant Pathology and Entomology, the role of Extension worker will be a key in this perspective. It is possible to begin pathological laboratory research in order to find the most promising solutions for micro-level infestation control. However, requirements to understand farmers’ perception and knowledge should be recognized that could be served for better adaptation of technology regarding integrated pest management (Hashemi and Damalas, 2010).

To cater for the need of peach growers, research system play a role in providing technological knowledge and advice on pest and disease management. However, with an overlapping and over-active private agrochemical companies, the farmers are lefts in the middle of nowhere and confused about management of various pests and disease. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate impact of Pak-Swiss Malakand Fruit and Vegetable Development Project and Pak-Swiss Project for Horticultural Promotion MFVDP/PHP on Peach production and understand current knowledge and practices by peach growers to control diseases in Peach and highlight the factors contributing to peach production decline.

Novelty Statement

This the first comprehensive analysis of Peach production constraints faced by peach farmers in Malakand Division.

Author’s Contribution

Palwasha: Performed interviews and collected and analysed the data.

Siraj-ud-Din: Prepared and reviewed the first draft.

Muhammad Fahim: Conceived and planned the experiments, edited and approved the final manuscript and supervised the research.

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

References

Adaskaveg, J., Schnabel, G. and Förster H. 2008. Diseases of peach caused by fungi and fungal-like organisms: biology, epidemiology and management. Peach Bot. Prod. Uses, 352-406. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845933869.0352

Adaskaveg, J.E. and Forster, H. 2002. New detection and management practices for brown rot of peach in California. Acta Horticult., 592 :637-643. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2002.592.87

Ahad, S., Shah, M., Khan, J. and Ilyas, M. 1999. Identification of exotic late maturing peach variety for high altitude zones in Malakand division [Pakistan]. Sarhad J. Agric., 15(6): 549-550.

Ahmad, I. 1985. Cultivar selection and performance of stone fruits in Pakistan, II International Workshop on Temperate Zone Fruits in the Tropics and Subtropics. 199: 77-82. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1987.199.20

Ahmada, K., Khan, M.A.N.A. and Sarward, A. 2021. Quality Deterioration of Postharvest Fruits and Vegetables in Developing Country Pakistan: A Mini Overview. Asian J. Agric. Food Sci., (ISSN: 2321–1571) 9. https://doi.org/10.24203/ajafs.v9i2.6615

Akbar, G. 2020. Problems and potential of agriculture for improving livelihood in Malakand Division, Pakistan. Pak. J. Agric. Res., 33: 351-361. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjar/2020/33.2.351.361

Akçay, Y. and Uzunöz, M. 2006. An investment analysis of peach and cherry growing in the middle black sea region of Turkey. J. Agric. Food Inf., 7:57-65. https://doi.org/10.1300/J108v07n01_06

Alam, S. and Mujtaba, S. 2002. Pakistan profile and its horticultural scenario. NIA, Tandojam, Pakistan, April:22-28.

Ali, A. 2010. Economic cost of terrorism. Strateg. Stud., 30:157-170.

Ali, B., Zamin, M. and Rahman, M. 2003. Assessing the Role of Project for Horticultural Promotions (PHP) Extension and Training Materials in the Solution of Horticultural Problems in the Target Area (A Case Study of Malakand Division). Asian J. Plant Sci., 2003: 578-581. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2003.578.581

Ali, M., Arifullah, S., Memon, M.H. and Salam, A. 2008. Edible Oil Deficit and Its Impact on Food Expenditure in Pakistan [with Comments]. Pak. Dev. Rev., 531-546. https://doi.org/10.30541/v47i4IIpp.531-546

Ali, M. and Haider, M.S. 2012. An analysis of Farmer Field School (FFS) as a potential source of advanced technology dissemination among the farmers of district Faisalabad, Pakistan. OIDA Int. J. Sustain. Dev. 3:65-70.

Ali, T. and Khan S.A., Malik, N.H., Ahmad, M. and Saleem I. 1994. Investigation into some common factors which affect agricultural Research and Extension work in developing countries. Pak. J. Agric., Vol 31.

AMIS. 2021. Agriculture Marketing Information Service, Directorate of Agriculture (Economics and Marketing) Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan. pp. www.amis.pk (accessed on September 12, 2021).

Anonymous. 2020. Crop Statistics Khyber Pukhtunkhwa 2019-20, in: A. L. a. C. D. Crop Reporting Services (Ed.), Government of KPK, Peshawar.

Ayaz, M., Ijaz, A. and Ahad, F.S. 2001. Comparison of exotic peach varieties at two different altitudes in upper and lower Swat. J. Biol. Sci., 1:324-325. https://doi.org/10.3923/jbs.2001.324.325

Bajwa, M., Ahmad, M., Ali, T. and Iqbal, M.Z. 2008. Effectiveness of farmers field school (FFS) approach for information dissemination of agricultural technology in Punjab. J. Agric. Res., 46(3): 291-297.

Bakhsh, K., Hassan, I. and Akhter, M.S. 2006. Profitability and cost in growing mango orchards. J. Agric. Soc. Sci., 2:1813-2235.

Bao, Y.Z., Liu, T.X., Duan, L.M., Wang, G.L. and Tong, X. 2019. Simulation of evapotranspiration for the mobile and semi-mobile dunes in the Horqin Sandy Land using the Shuttleworth-Wallace model. Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao 30:867-876.

Bhanti, M., G. Shukla, and A. Taneja. 2004. Contamination levels of Organochlorine pesticides and farmers’ knowledge, perception, practices in rural India: A Case Study.. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 73:787-793. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-004-0496-8

Bonaterra, A., Mari, M., Casalini, L. and Montesinos, E. 2003. Biological control of Monilinia laxa and Rhizopus stolonifer in postharvest of stone fruit by Pantoea agglomerans EPS125 and putative mechanisms of antagonism. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 84:93-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1605(02)00403-8

Butt, T.M., Gao, Q. and Hussan, M.Z.Y. 2015. An analysis of the effectiveness farmer field school (FFS) approach in sustainable rural livelihood (SRL): The experience of Punjab-Pakistan. Agric. Sci., 6:1164. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.610111

Byrne, D. 2001. Peach breeding trends: a world wide perspective, V International Peach Symposium, 592: 49-59. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2002.592.5

Chalamwong, Y. and Feder, G. 1986. Land Ownership Security and Land Values in Rural Thailand, XF2006260546.

Commission, P. 2012. Chapter 8: Agriculture and Food Security in Annual Plan 2013- 14. Pakistan. In: Planning Commission, Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform. Annual Plan 2013-14. Planning Commission, Ministry of Planning, Development and Reform,Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan. .

Ejaz, S., Akram, W., Lim, C.W., Lee, J.J. and Hussain, I. 2004. Endocrine disrupting pesticides: a leading cause of cancer among rural people in Pakistan. Exp. Oncol., 26:98-105.

Fadamiro, H., R. Boozer, C. Akotsen-Mensah, K. Rice and J. Jacobi. 2009. Crop Profile for Peaches in Alabama. 12p.

Feder, G. 1987. Land ownership security and farm productivity: Evidence from Thailand. J. Dev. Stud., 24:16-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388708422052

Flood, J. 2010. The importance of plant health to food security. Food Secur., 2:215-231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-010-0072-5

Giller, K.E. 2001. Nitrogen fixation in tropical cropping systems CABI. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851994178.0000

Gregori, R.B., F. Fantuzzi, E. Neri, F. Mari, M. and Bertolini, P. 2007. Effects of food additives on postharvest brown rot of stone fruit. (COST action 924). Novel approaches for the control of postharvest diseases and disorders. Proceedings of the International Congress, Bologna, Italy, 3-5 May, 2007. :438-442.

Hashemi, S.M. and Damalas, C.A. 2010. Farmers’ perceptions of pesticide efficacy: reflections on the importance of pest management practices adoption. J. Sustain. Agric. 35:69-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2011.530511

Haye, T.G., P. Cuthbertson, A.G.S., Wang, X.G., Daane, K.M., Hoelmer, K.A., Baro, O.C. Zhang, J.P. and Desneux, N. 2016. Current SWD IPM tactics and their practical implementation in fruit crops across di_erent regions around the world. J. Pest. Sci., 89: 643–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-016-0737-8

Hetherington, S.D. and Harday, S. 2005. Mangrove mountain stone fruit field day report. Coastal fruitgrowers’ newsletter.

Hicks, N. 1987. Education and economic growth, Economics of Education, Elsevier. pp. 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-033379-3.50022-X

Himmelstein, J., Ares, A., Gallagher, D. and Myers, J. 2017. A meta-analysis of intercropping in Africa: impacts on crop yield, farmer income, and integrated pest management effects. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 15:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2016.1242332

Hussain, I., R. Sakthivadivel, U. Amarasinghe, M. Mudasser and D. Molden. 2003. Land and water productivity of wheat in the western Indo-Gangetic plains of India and Pakistan: A comparative analysis. International Water Management Institute Research Report 65. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute.

Iqbal, M. and M. Ahmad. 2005. Science & technology based agriculture vision of Pakistan and prospects of growth. In: Pakistan Society of Development Economists (PSDE) 20th Annual General Meeting (AGM) on Regional Co-operation and Economic Growth 2005, Marriott Hotel.

Kader, A.A. 2009. Handling of horticultural perishables in developing vs. developed countries, VI International Postharvest Symposium. 877:121-126. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2010.877.8

Khalid, A. 2020. Impact of Terrorism on The Economy of Pakistan. Pakistan Vision 21:404.

Khalil, I., Idrees, M., Rabi, F., Rehman, S., Bostan, N. 2014. An investigation into the problems of peach growers in district Swat. J. Agric. Biol. Sci., 9: 427-434.

Khan, A., Ali, S., Shah, S.A. and Fayaz, M. 2018. Impact of temperature and precipitation on net revenue of maize growers in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric., 34: 729-739. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2018/34.4.729.739

Kilpatrick, S. 2000. Education and training: Impacts on farm management practice. J. Agric. Educ. Extension, 7:105-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/13892240008438811

Koffman, W. and Kable, P.F. 1975. Improved control of brown rot in harvested sweet cherries by triforine dip treatments. Plant Dis. Rep., 59: 586-590.

Mallah, G.H. and Korejo, A.K. 2007. Establishment of integrated pest management (IPM) in cotton through farmer field school (FFS) in Sakrand, Sindh, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot., 39: 2693-2697.

Memon, M.H., Khan, K., Abbass, M.Y., Khan, G. and Kamal, M.A. 2015. Impediments to Technology Adoption: A Case Study of Peach Production in District Swat, Pakistan. J. Manage. Sci., 9.

Miller, V., Giles, J., Khan, M., Mumtaz, H., Savelli, A. and Grosjean, G. 2021. Climate-Smart Agriculture in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. CSA Country Profiles for Asia.

Mugambiwa, S.S. and Tirivangasi, H.M. 2017. Climate change: A threat towards achieving ‘Sustainable Development Goal number two’ (end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture) in South Africa. Jàmbá: J. Disaster Risk Stud., 9:1-6. https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v9i1.350

Nicolopoulou-Stamati, P., Maipas, S., Kotampasi, C., Stamatis, P. and Hens, L. 2016. Chemical pesticides and human health: the urgent need for a new concept in agriculture. Front. Public Health, 4:148. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00148

Nizami, A., Ali, J. and Zulfiqar, M. 2020. Climate Change is Real and Relevant for Sustainable Development, An Empirical Evidence on Scenarios from North-West Pakistan. Sarhad J. Agric., 36: 42-69. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2020/36.1.42.69

Papaioannou, G., Mohammed, A.M., Despoudi, S., Saridakis, G. and Papadopoulos, T. 2020. The role of adverse economic environment and human capital on collaboration within agri-food supply chains. Int. J. Inf. Manage., 52:102077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102077

Peters, K., Breitsameter, L. and Gerowitt, B. 2014. Impact of climate change on weeds in agriculture: a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev., 34:707-721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-014-0245-2

Salam, M., Alam, F., Hossain, M.N., Saeed, M.A., Khan, T., Zarin, K., Rwan, B., Ullah, W., Khan, W. and Khan, O. 2021. Assessing the drinking water quality of educational institutions at selected locations of district Swat, Pakistan. Environ. Earth Sci., 80: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-021-09595-6

Sarks, Y. and Barkai-golan, R. 1995. Aloe vera gel activity against plant pathogenic fungi. Postharvest Biol. Technol., 6: 159-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/0925-5214(94)00051-S

Sholberg, P. and Kappel, F. 2008. Integrated management of diseases caused by fungi, phytoplasma and bacteria. Integr. Manage. Plant Pest. Dis. 3:3-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8571-0_1

Solangi, B.K., Sultana, R., Wagan, M.S. and Ahmed, N. 2011. Repellent action of botanical pesticides against fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata Saunders in laboratory. Pak. J. Entomol., 26:41-45.

Sommer, R., Bossio, D., Desta, L., Dimes, J., Kihara, J., Koala, S., Mango, N., Rodriguez, D., Thierfelder, C. and Winowiecki, L. 2013. Profitable and sustainable nutrient management systems for East and Southern African smallholder farming systems challenges and opportunities: A synthesis of the Eastern and Southern Africa situation in terms of past experiences, present and future opportunities in promoting nutrients use in Africa.

Uddin, M.K. 2018. Agrochemicals and Environmental Risks. Environ. Policy Law, 48:91-96. https://doi.org/10.3233/EPL-180055

Usman, M. 2016. Contribution of Agriculture Sector in the GDP Growth Rate of Pakistan. J. Glob. Econ., 4:184. https://doi.org/10.4172/2375-4389.1000184

Warlop, F.B. 2007. Relevance of hot water treatments for decay control. (COST action 924) Novel approaches for the control of postharvest diseases and disorders. Proceedings of the International Congress, Bologna, Italy, 3-5 May, 2007. 134.

Williams, J. and Crocker, T. 2000. Peaches and nectarines for Florida. Univ. of Florida Extension Institute of Food and Agricultural Science, Gainesville, Florida, CIR D 299:10.

Zhang, F. and Li, L. 2003. Using competitive and facilitative interactions in intercropping systems enhances crop productivity and nutrient-use efficiency. Plant Soil, 248:305-312. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022352229863