Influence of Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae) Density on Millet Yield [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br. (Poaceae)] in Eastern South East Niger

Full text

Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 15, 1540-1550
https://www.scirp.org/journal/as
ISSN Online: 2156-8561
ISSN Print: 2156-8553
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 Dec. 30, 2024 1540
Agricultural Sciences
Influence of Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae)
Density on Millet Yield [Pennisetum glaucum
(L.) R. Br. (Poaceae)] in Eastern South East
Niger
Mahamane Adamou, Adamou Ibrahim Maman Lawali, Abdourazak Alio Moussa,
Toudou Daouda Abdoul‑Karim, Adamou Aboubacar Kolafane, Douma Soumana,
Inoussa Maman Maarouhi, Mahamane Ali, Bakasso Yacoubou
Laboratoire GeVaBioS, Département de Biologie, Faculté des Sciences et Techniques, Université Abdou Moumouni de Niamey,
Niamey, Niger
Abstract
Large scale cereal farming faces many problems in the
West African Sahel. One
of the constraints to large-
scale cereal production is competition from weeds.
The problem of controlling weeds in millet fields is an
obstacle to increasing the
area sown. In addition to that,
there is a scarcity of studies that looked at the
impacts of ruderal weed such as legume ruderal weed on the yield of cereal like
pearl millet which is of staple food in Niger. The present study, carried out in
the Department of Illéla, located in the east-southeast of Niger, aims to deter-
mine the density of
Cassia
mimosoides
that can influence millet production.
Our experimental design was a randomized Fisher block with four replications.
Each block comprises a control and five treatments. Our study focused on meas-
uring certain production parameters, namely millet plant height and yield of
millet plants. The tolerant density can be estimated at four
Cassia mimosoides
plants per square meter. A one factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used
to compare the production obtained according to the type of treatment at P ≤
0.05. Beyond this critical value, the weed starts to interfere with the millet from
the fifth week onwards (period of interference). The results showed the sensitiv-
ity of seedlings under the influence of
Cassia mimosoides
plants. The best yields
were obtained in the control plots (2375 Kg/ha). Millet grain yield decreased
with increasing
Cassia mimosoides
density. Plots with low
Cassia mimosoides
densities produced more millet (plots with 2 plants/m2 of
Cassia mimosoides
:
T1
= 1500 Kg/ha at P ≤ 0.05) than those with high densities (plots with 20
plants/m
2
of
Cassia mimosoides
: T10 = 168.75 Kg/ha at P ≤ 0.05). The difference
How to cite this paper:
Adamou, M.,
Lawali,
A.I.M., Moussa, A.A., Abdoul‑Ka-
rim
, T.D., Kolafane, A.A., Soumana, D.,
Maarouhi
, I.M., Ali, M. and Yacoubou, B.
(20
24) Influence of
Cassia mimosoides
L.
(Fabaceae) Density on Millet Yield [
Pen-
nisetum glaucum
(L.) R. Br. (Poaceae)] in
Eastern South East Niger
.
Agricultural Sci-
ences
,
15
, 1540-1550.
https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2024.1512086
Received:
November 19, 2024
Accepted:
December 27, 2024
Published:
December 30, 2024
Copyright © 20
24 by author(s) and
Scientific
Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution International
License (CC BY
4.0).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Open Access

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1541
Agricultural Sciences
in the average yield of pearl millet between the control and the treatment T1 is
875 kg/ha and that of the control and treatment T10 is 2206.25 kg/ha. The results
showed that the cycle of reproduction of the local variety “Guèreguera”
is 98
days (from July 12, 2023 to October 25, 2023). These findings of this study com-
plete the efforts of developing weed control techniques in pearl millet fields
densely populated with
Cassia mimosoides
.
Keywords
Influence,
Cassia mimosoides
, Yield, Millet, Niger
1. Introduction
Pearl millet [
Pennisetum glaucum
(L.) R. Br.] is the main cereal crop in the Sahel.
This is because it is adapted to the difficult conditions of arid and semi-arid zones
Soumaila [1]. Pearl millet provides the food base for some 200 million inhabitants
of tropical arid and semi-arid zones Goudiaby
et al.
[2]. In Niger, millet constitutes
the staple food of the mainly rural population and livestock Soumaila [1]. Moreover,
pearl millet is grown on more than 65% of the sown area and accounts for 75% of
the country’s total cereal production Institute for Development Research [3]. Pearl
millet is grown in all production zones in Soumaila [1].
Production is estimated at 2.147.000 tonnes for 6.140,000 hectares in 2021 FAO
STAT [4]. Despite its recognized importance, millet cultivation is faced with cli-
matic variations, pests and diseases, high input costs and a lack of expertise in
cultivation techniques.
Among these difficulties, weediness is a major one. The presence of weeds ex-
erts strong pressure on crop development Pageau
et al.
[5]. Weeds’ competition
with crops for water, light, nutrients and space could have a direct negative effect
on yield Ipou Ipou [6].
In Niger,
Cassia mimosoides
is one of the major weeds of annual crops. This
weed aggressively invades several crops, notably millet. It is difficult to control,
and to date there are no effective control techniques available. To achieve food
self-sufficiency for growing populations, it is essential to focus on the factors of
good cereal production, including production techniques (Ipou Ipou [6], Ma-
hamane [7]).
It is with this in mind that the present study was conducted in the Department
of Illéla, located in the south-east of Niger. Despite the increase in cultivated areas,
millet production is low due to the regular and accelerated decline in yields, one
of the causes of which is believed to be weed pressure. Average estimates of cereal
crop loss due to weeds are between 90% and 100% in some years (Chikoye
et al.
[8]
; Mahamane [9]).
In the current context, where weed control is made difficult by the often costly
and ineffective management of weeds, how can we achieve good weed control in
millet crops in order to improve yields? This study, whose general objective is to

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1542
Agricultural Sciences
evaluate the density of
Cassia mimosoides
plants that could influence the agro-
nomic characteristics of the millet crop, aims to respond to this concern. The aim
is to compare the influence of
Cassia mimosoides
plants on the height growth of
millet plants and their impact on millet yield.
2. Study Methods
2.1. Study Area
This study was carried out in the Department of Illéla, one of the departments of
the Tahoua region located in the east-southeast of Niger (Figure 1). The depart-
ment covers an area of 6933 km2 or 0.54% of the national territory of Dillo [10].
The population of the Illéla Department is estimated at 366704 (Institut National
de Statistique du Niger [11]). It is an agro-pastoral zone with rainfall ranging from
300 to 600 mm Dillo [10]. The vegetative growth period varies between 75 and
100 days. Soils planted with millet are essentially dune soils, poor in organic mat-
ter, phosphorus and nitrogen. They are leached, very poorly structured and do not
facilitate good water retention for crops (Médecins Du Monde [12]). Intercrop-
ping of pearl millet with cowpea constitutes the dominant farming system in the
study area. Fallow land is tending to disappear. Farmers use almost no agricultural
inputs Dillo [10].
Figure 1. Map of study area (MAG/EL [13]).
2.2. Sampling Design and Choice of Study Site
The study site was chosen at the suggestion of the village farmers. They felt that
the site was easy to explore thanks to the existence of a good road network.
2.3. Determination of Cassia mimosoides—Millet Competition
Several methods can be used to characterize competition between weeds and

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1543
Agricultural Sciences
crops. These include the additive method, the series of alternative options, the
systematic treatment method and others. The additive method is the most widely
used in weed interference experiments. It involves maintaining a constant crop
density and varying the weed density (Cousens [14]; Radosevich [15]; Olivier and
Buchanan [16]). In this study, the treatment consisted of varying the density of
Cassia mimosoides
(0, 8 ... and 80) per plot. No fertilizer was applied to any of the
plots. None of the plots were fertilized, in keeping with the growing conditions of
pearl millet growers in the study area (few growers apply fertilizer here).
2.4. Experimental Design
The experimental design was a randomized Fisher block with four (4) replications
(Figure 2).
Each block contains one (1) control and five (5) treatments (Figure 2(a)). The
usable surface area is 238 m2. The elementary plot covers an area of 4 m2 (2 m × 2
m) and is composed of two (2) crop lines, one meter (1 m) apart. Each cultivation
line is located 50 cm from the boundary of the elementary plot and comprises four
(4) bunches 40 cm apart (Figure 2(b)). Each plot contains five (5) millet plants.
The distance between plots within the same block is one meter (1 m), and two
meters (2 m) between blocks. On each elementary plot, there are forty millet
plants. The number of
Cassia mimosoides
plants varies from 8 to 80 (Table 1).
Figure 2. Experimental design.
Table 1. Number of plants of
Cassia mimosoides
within the basic parcels.
Treatments
TM
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Number of
Cassia
mimosoides
plants
0 8 16 24 56 80
Densitities (plants/m
2
)
0
2
4
6
14
20
TM: Control parcel; Numbers 1; 2; 3; 7 and 10 assigned to
Cassia mimosoides
and repre-
senting, respectively, the numbers of plants of
Cassia mimosoides
around a pocket of pearl
millet.

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1544
Agricultural Sciences
2.5. Test Conduct
Plowing of the elementary plots was carried out manually three (3) weeks after
sowing. During the plowing of the treatment plots, we eliminated all weeds other
than
Cassia mimosoides
sown around the millet holes. On the other hand, for the
control plots we only retained the millet plants. Weeding is renewed every two (2)
weeks until harvest.
Pearl millet and
Cassia mimosoides
seeds were sown on the same day (July 12,
2023 at 7:48 am) on the experimental plots. Millet ears were harvested on October
25, 2023 at 8:14 am.
2.6. Data Collection
The height growth and development of millet plants was monitored from sowing
to harvesting of the millet ears. Parameters such as the height of millet plants, the
number of branches of
Cassia mimosoides
and the grain yield of millet were taken
into account. Thus, from the different densities of
Cassia mimosoides
plants, the
average height of millet plants and the average plot dry weight were determined.
Pearl millet is generally more tolerant of variability, climate change and water
stress. The study focused on the local millet variety “Guèreguéra”. This variety is
mainly cultivated by local populations. It is the staple food of the local population.
This local variety of pearl millet is a subsistence crop. “Guèreguera” is cultivated
by all farmers (there is no farmer without a field of millet in this locality).
Moreover, the study focused on
Cassia mimosoides
for the following reasons:
• it is cited by the local population as one of the major weeds of this terroir,
• it is one of the most harmful weeds in pearl millet cultivation,
• it often causes fields to be abandoned.
2.7. Statistical Analysis
Average millet plant height, number of branchings of
Cassia mimosoides
branches
and average millet kernel weight were compared for each treatment studied as a
function of the density of
Cassia mimosoides
plants around the millet patches.
Results were analyzed using R software version 4.4.1.
A one-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA1) was used to compare the produc-
tion obtained according to the type of treatment. To carry out the ANOVA, vari-
ances were first checked for normality and equality. When a significant difference
was observed between treatments and the control, or between treatments, the
ANOVA was completed by multiple comparisons using Duncan’s test. This test al-
lows us to rank the average heights or number of branches of
Cassia mimosoides
branches or the average weights as a function of
Cassia mimosoides
densities. The
smallest significant difference between these parameters was set at P ≤ 0.05.
3. Results
3.1. Effect of Cassia mimosoides on Height Growth of Millet Plants
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan’s test (5% threshold) of the average

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1545
Agricultural Sciences
height of millet plants at the first week showed that there was no significant dif-
ference between the control and the different treatments, with p = 0.01. In fact, all
the young millet plants (emergence stage) are almost the same height, with an
average of 7.28 cm (Table 2).
Table 2. Comparison of average height of pearl millet plants at 7 days after sowing (DAS).
Treatments
TM
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Average
S .D
T. E
Average
height (cm)
7.35a 7.30a 7.27a 7.27a 7.25a 7.22a 7.28 2.00 N.S
a: average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly different
according to the Duncan test at 5%; S.D. standard deviation; T.E. treatment effect; N.s. not
significant difference at probability 0.001.
On the other hand, analysis of millet plant heights at week 4 shows a highly
significant difference between the control and the treatments. Millet plant perfor-
mance is characterized by three classes of average millet plant height. This analysis
revealed that the three classes are: a, b and c. Class a is characterized by millet
plants from the TM control measuring 67 cm in height. Class b includes millet
plants from treatment T1, with an average height of 54.12 cm. Finally, class c con-
tains millet plants from treatments T2, T3, T7 and T10. The corresponding mean
heights are 38 cm, 32 cm and 27 cm (Table 3).
Table 3. Comparison of average height of pearl millet plants at 28 days after sowing (DAS).
Treatments
TM
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Average
S .D
T. E
Average
height (cm)
67.00a 54.12b 38.00c 32.00c 29.00c 27.00c 41.19 13.72 ***
a.b.c: average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly different
according to the Duncan test at 5%; S.D. standard deviation; T.E. treatment effect; ***:
highly significant difference at probability 0.001.
An analysis of millet plant heights at week 14 revealed five groups of average
plant heights: a, b, c, cd and d. Class a includes the heights of millet plants from
the TM control, averaging 282 cm. The average height of the millet plants in this
class is the greatest of the heights of the millet plants measured at week 14. Class
b is characterized by the heights of millet plants from treatment T1, with an aver-
age height of 173 cm. Class c comprises the heights of millet plants from treatment
T2, averaging 96 cm.
Class cd is made up of millet plants from treatments T3 and T7, averaging 87cm
and 82cm respectively. Class d comprises millet plants from treatment T10. The
average height of millet plants is 66 cm. The average height of the millet plants
was 7.28 cm in the first week and 41.18 cm in the fourth week. This corresponds
to 131 cm in week 14. In addition, the millet plant heights of the TM control had
the highest value in each week’s ranking. T1 treatment millet plant heights were
second highest overall. The heights of millet plants from treatments T2, T3, T7

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1546
Agricultural Sciences
and T10 form the same category (c) at week 4. This category is subdivided into
three classes (c, cd and d) at week 14. Analysis of variance of millet plant heights
shows no significant difference between the four blocks of experimental plots (Ta-
ble 4).
Table 4. Comparison of average height of pearl millet plants at 98 days after sowing (DAS).
Treatments
TM
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Average
S .D
T. E
Average height
(cm)
282a 173b 96c 87cd 82cd 66d 131.00 66.33 ***
a.b.c.cd.d: average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly dif-
ferent according to the Duncan test at 5%; S.D. standard deviation; T.E. treatment effect;
***: highly significant difference at probability 0.001.
3.2. Trend in Branch Density of Cassia mimosoides Branches
Table 5 shows the results of the analysis of variance and Duncan’s test at the 5%
threshold for the mean number of branches produced by
Cassia mimosoides
branches
.
The analysis shows that the treatment effect is highly significant, with
p = 0.01. Branch production of
Cassia mimosoides
plants in plots T2, T3, T7 and
T10 showed a decrease compared with branch production of
Cassia mimosoides
plants in plot T1. We distinguish four homogeneous categories of branch multi-
plication in
Cassia mimosoides
: categories a, b, c and d. Category a includes the
average number of branches on
Cassia mimosoides
plants in plot T1, which is
143.50 branches/m2. Category b refers to the average number of branches on
Cas-
sia mimosoides
plants in treatment T2, corresponding to 110.25 branches/m2.
Class c refers to the average number of branches on
Cassia mimosoides
plants in
treatments T3 and T7, corresponding to 72.50 branches/m2 and 60.75 branches/m2
respectively. Finally, class d represents the average number of branches on
Cassia
mimosoides
plants in treatment T10, with 31.25 branches/m2. The number of
branches produced decreases from T1 to T10 (Table 5).
Table 5. Comparison numbers of branches of plants of
C. mimosoides.
Treatments
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Average
S .D
T. E
Number of
branches of
Cassia
mimosoides
143a 110.25b 72.50c 60.75c 31.25d 83.65 15.74 ***
a.b.c.d: average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly different
according to the Duncan test at 5%; S.D. standard deviation; T.E. treatment effect; ***:
highly significant difference at probability 0.001.
3.3. Effect of Cassia mimosoides Density on Millet Yield
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan test performed on the weight of
harvested maize showed a highly significant difference (p = 0.001). This analysis
revealed that the five groups yield were: a, b, bc, c and d (Table 6). Group d

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1547
Agricultural Sciences
includes the performance of pearl millet plants from the treatments of high den-
sity of
Cassia mimosoides
per experimental plot (T10). This group shows the av-
erage value in the lowest (168.75 kg/ha) corn. Yield of group «c» is represented by
density T 7 with an average weight of 1000 kg/ha.
Yields of groups b and bc contain treatments with weak densities of
Cassia
mimosoides
which are, respectively, T1 with an average weight of 1500 kg/ha, T2
with 1225 kg/ha and T3 with 1125 kg/ha. Statistical analysis revealed no significant
differences between the yields of the group “bc”, that is to say, the T2 treatment
with an average weight of pearl millet of 1225 kg/ha and T3 with an average of
1125 kg/ha. Indeed, the average yield in dry pearl millet-grain per hectare is higher
in the control representing the group “a” with 2375 kg/ha.
The average weight of the grains of pearl millet of 5 treatments is 1003.75 Kg/ha.
The difference in the average yield of pearl millet between the control and the
treatment is 1371.25 kg/ha. The difference in the average yield of pearl millet be-
tween the control and the treatment T1 is 875 kg/ha and that of the control and
treatment T10 is 2206.25 kg/ha. Table 7 summarizes the results with respect to
the performance.
Table 6. Comparison of average weights of pearl millet with respect to treatments.
Treatments
TM
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Average
S.D
T. E
Average
weight
(Kg/ha)
0.95a 0.6b 0.49bc 0.45bc 0.4c 0.06d 0.49 0.20 ***
a.b.bc.c.d: average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly dif-
ferent according to the Duncan test at 5%; S.D. standard deviation; T.E. treatment effect;
***: highly significant difference at probability 0.001.
Table 7. Change in the average weight of pearl millet with different treatments in Kg/ha.
Treatments
TM
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Average
S.D
T. E
Average
weight
(Kg/ha)
2375 1500 1225 1125 1000 168.75 1232.29 501.04 ***
a.b.bc.c.d: average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly dif-
ferent according to the Duncan test at 5%; S.D. standard deviation; T.E. treatment effect;
***: highly significant difference at probability 0.001.
3.4. Change in Number of Millet Plants as a Function of
Cassia mimosoides Density
Table 8 presents the results of the analysis of variance and Duncan’s test at the 5%
threshold, on the number of millet plants as a function of the weeding period
.
The
analysis shows that the treatment effect is significant, with
p-value
= 0.023. The
number of millet plants in the TM control plots (49.50 plants/m2) was the highest.
Plots T1 (38.50 plants/m2) and T2 (37.50 plants/m2) had approximately the same
number of millet plants at harvest. Plots T10 (31 plants/m2) had the lowest num-
ber of millet plants at harvest (Table 8).

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1548
Agricultural Sciences
Table 8. Comparison of average numbers of millet plants in 98 DAS.
Treatments
TM
T1
T2
T3
T7
T10
Average
S .D
T. E
Number of
millet plants
49.50a 38.50b 37.50b 36.25bc 34.25cd 31.00d 37.87 4.12 ***
a. b. bc. cd. d: average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly
different according to the Duncan test at 5%; S.D. standard deviation; T.E. treatment effect;
***: highly significant difference at probability 0.001.
4. Discussion
The study of the effect of
Cassia mimosoides
on the height growth of millet plants
revealed that there was no significant difference between the control and the treat-
ments in the first week. The effect of
Cassia mimosoides
densities was therefore
not sufficient to hinder the height growth of millet plants, but was tolerable. These
results are in line with those achieved by Mahamane [7], who showed that maize
plants, despite the influence of
Rottboellia cochinchinensis
densities, measured
the same height in the first week of cultivation.
However, from the fifth week onwards, significant differences appeared be-
tween the heights of millet plants in the control and treatment treatments. These
differences remained significant until harvest. This shows that the local
Guèreguéra variety used can tolerate the effect of
Cassia mimosoides
plant density
during the first five weeks of cultivation, at a density of around four (4) plants/m2
(treatment T2). Beyond this threshold density, millet plants become vulnerable to
competition from
Cassia mimosoides
plants. This explains why weed density has
a significant influence on crop damage. Furthermore, in the work of Mahamane
[7], the threshold density is 4 plants/m2 of
Rottboellia cochinchinensis
. This
means that the nuisance density varies according to the crop and weed present.
A study of the evolution of millet plant heights over time indicates that low-
density
Cassia mimosoides
plants establish competition for a short period and
have little effect on millet height growth and yield. However, the slowdown in
height growth and reduction in yield increases when
Cassia mimosoides
plants
with a large number of branch branches are allowed to compete for longer.
These results are similar to those of Mahamane [7] and Kouakou [17], who
showed that the effect of weed density depends strongly on the length of time
spent in the fields. This reveals that the depressive effect of
Cassia mimosoides
also affects the speed of height growth of millet plants.
The infestation of
Cassia mimosoides
on the local Guèreguéra variety had a
greater impact on yield, with the weight of the control far exceeding that of the
treatments. In fact, the greater the density of
Cassia mimosoides
, the lower the
yield.
Cassia mimosoides
infestation leads to yellowing and death of millet plants
at densities greater than four (4) plants/m2.
This is in line with the study of Mahamane [7] conducted on the observations
on
Rottboellia cochinchinensis
infestation in maize crops in central-eastern Côte
d’Ivoire and those of Dugje
et al.
[18] in cowpea production in West Africa. Losses
to millet production caused by
Cassia mimosoides
plants were 36.84% for

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1549
Agricultural Sciences
treatment T1 and 92.89% for treatment T10. This is in line with observations by
Mahamane [7] showing 44.41 % for the treatment of one (1) plant of
Rottboellia
cochinchinensis
per millet bunch and 89.28 % for the treatment of ten (10) plants
of
Rottboellia cochinchinensis
per millet bunch in plots infested by this weed.
The low millet yield obtained in our study is also due to the month-long inter-
ruption of rainfall and to attacks by animal pests (worms, insects and birds) and
fungi.
5. Conclusions
This study has enabled us to observe and understand the behaviour of
Cassia
mimosoides
in the cultivation of the local variety (Guèreguéra) of millet.
However, competition from
Cassia
mimosoides
plants on millet plants is toler-
ant for the first four weeks, with a nuisance threshold of 4 plants/m2. Beyond this
critical value,
Cassia mimosoides
causes millet plants to slow down or even stop
growing. Even in low densities,
Cassia mimosoides
are undesirable for millet
crops.
Our results therefore confirm that weeds are one of the main constraints affect-
ing agricultural food production worldwide, and particularly in developing coun-
tries.
The infesting power of
Cassia mimosoides
is especially edifying in terms of mil-
let yield losses, where we obtained an average of 48.11% production loss compared
with the clean control. The cycle of reproduction of the local variety «Guèreguera»
is 98 days (from July 12, 2023 to October 25, 2023).
For the purposes of this study, we note that the local variety (Guèreguéra) used
is sensitive to the competitive effect exerted by
Cassia mimosoides
. This weed has
the power to invade, enabling it to conquer space and establish itself as a repressive
weed in millet crops.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
References
[1] Soumaila, S.I. (2024) Amélioration de la tolerance au stress hydrique du mil
[
Pennisetum glaucum
(L.) R. Br] au Niger: Effet de l’application foliaire du bore.
Thèse de doctorat unique, Université Abdou Moumouni de Niamey, Niger.
[2] Goudiaby, M.F., Sarr, I. and Sembène, M. (2018) Source of Resistance in Pearl Millet
Varieties against Stemborers and the Ear Head Miner.
Journal of Entomology and
Zoology Studies
, 6, 1702-1708.
[3] Institute for Development Research (2009) Le mil, Aliment du futur au Sahel. Fiche
N°325, Juillet 2009, p. 2.
https://www.inter-reseaux.org/ressource/le-mil-aliment-du-futur-au-
sahel/#:~:text=Le%20mil%20est%20la%20base,et%20aux%20habitudes%20alimenta
ires%20traditionnelles
[4] FAO STAT (2022) Données de l’alimentation et de l’agriculture.

M. Adamou et al.
DOI:
10.4236/as.2024.1512086 1550
Agricultural Sciences
[5] Pageau, D., Lajeunesse, J. and Lafond, J. (2006) Influence de la densité de semis sur
la productivité du pois sec cultivé sous un climat frais.
Canadian Journal of Plant
Science
, 87, 41-48. https://doi.org/10.4141/P06-057
[6] Ipou Ipou, J. (2005) Biologie et écologie de
Euphorbia heterophylla
L. (Euphorbiaceae)
en culture cotonnière, Au nord de la Côte d’Ivoire. Ph.D Thesis, Cocody University.
[7] Mahamane, A. (2013) Influence de la densité de
Rottboellia cochinchinensis
(Loureiro)
W. Clayton (Poaceae) sur le rendement de
Zea mays
L. (Poaceae) dans le Département
de M’Bahiakro (Centre-Est de la Côte d’Ivoire). DEA Thesis from Cocody University,
51.
[8] Chikoye, D., Manyong, V.M. and Ekeleme, F. (2000) Characteristics of Speargrass
(
Imperta cylindrica
) Dominated Fields in West Africa: Crops, Soil Properties, Famer
Perceptions and Management Strategies.
Crop Protection
, 19, 481-487.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-2194(00)00044-2
[9] Mahamane, A. (2018) Gestion des mauvaises majeures en cultures vivrières et
evaluation de l’efficacité biologique de quelques methods de désherbage en culture de
maïs (
Zea mays
L. Poaceae) dans la Région du Iffou (Centre-Est de la Côte d’Ivoire).
Ph.D Thesis, Cocody University, 180.
[10] Dillo, S. (2020) A la découverte d’Illéla (Tarihi). Edition L’Harmattan, 322.
[11] Institut National de Statistique du Niger (2011) Recensement general de la population.
23. https://www.stat-niger.org/?page_id=500
[12] Du Monde, M. (2014) Evaluation de la couverture et de l’accessibilite du programme
de nutrition de medecins du monde (MDM) dans le district sanitaire d’illela
département d’illela, Région de Tahoua, Niger, 56.
https://www.coverage-monitoring.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Rapport-
SQUEAC-MDM_Niger_Illela-2014.pdf
[13] MAG/EL (2019) Rapport d’Etude d’impact Environnemental et Social du Sous-Projet
Intégré Communal pour une Agriculture Intelligente face au Climat (SPIC-AIC)
d’Illéla. 101.
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/fr/154071562822631154/pdf/Rapport-d-
Etude-d-Impact-Environnemental-et-Social-pour-Ill%C3%A9la.pdf
[14] Cousens, R. (1991) Aspects of the Design and Interpretation of Competition (Inter-
ference) Experiments.
Weed Technology
, 5, 664-673.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890037X00027524
[15] Radosevich, S. (1987) Methods to Study Interactions among Crops and Weed.
Weed
Technology
, 1, 190-198. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890037X00029523
[16] Oliver, R. and Buchanan, G. (1986) Weed Compétition and Economic Threshold. In:
Camper, N.D., Ed.,
Research Methods in Weed Science
, Southern Weed Science So-
ciety, 71-97.
[17] Kouakou, N.J. (2017) Importance relative des mauvaises herbes de la culture du maïs;
impact de
Rottboellia cochinchinensis
(Loureiro) W. Clayton (Poaceae) sur la
production du maïs (
Zea mays
L.) à M’Bahiakro au Centre-Est de la Côte d’Ivoire.
Ph.D Thesis, Cocody University, 167.
[18] Dugje, I.,
et al.
(2009) IITA, Ibadan, Nigeria.
https://www.feedipedia.org/node/21139