Cross-approaches for advising cassava trait-preferences for boiling

Figures & data

Table 1. Gender-disaggregated ranking of the most preferred local cassava varieties

Rank	Men (n = 31)	Women (n = 46)
1^st	Agric^1	Agric^1
2^nd	Dossi^2	Dossi^2
3^rd	Kpèkè^4	Attinwéwé^8
4^th	Agoula^7	Kpèkè^3
5^th	Ahotonontin*	Hanmadou/Gbomadou^6
6^th	Hanmadou/Gbomadou^5	Koléahonmè
7^th	Djègodotin	Agoula^4
8^th	Attinwéwé^3	Vobosabatché
9^th	Dèkpèmazé	Mandadô
10^th	Coletin	Hêhoado

Upper script number in a column is the rank attributed by opposite gender for common ranked varieties.

*Varieties without upper script number are not common for men and women.

Table 2. Rationale for planting some important cassava varieties

Motive (Reasons why preferred)	Preferred varieties (% of citation, N = 77)
	Agric	Dossi	Kpèkè	Attinwéwé	Agoula	Ahotonontin	Hanmadou/Gbomadou
Good production yield (many/big roots)	97.2	35.5	11.9	15.2	11.9	5.4	4.4
Market value (selling)	90.7	69.1	28.1	5.4	3.2	16.1	13.0
Home consumption	24.9	58.4	16.2	6.5	24.8	3.2	-
Processing into boiled cassava (ability and sensory)	30.3	82.1	15.2	16.2	27.0	11.9	-
Processing into Gari	57.4	23.8	29.1	16.2	-	6.5	37.8
Processing into others derived products (ablo, agnan, klacou, lafun, tapioca)	63.9	4.3	17.3	-	3.2	3.2	4.3
Short growth cycle (5–7 months)	8.6	2.2	2.2	-	-	8.7	-

Table 3. Quality characteristics of raw cassava prioritized by gender (% citation)

		High characteristic			Low characteristic
	Quality characteristics	Survey (N = 77)		Processing	Survey (N = 77)		Processing
		Men	Women	Women (N = 6)	Men	Women	Women (N = 6)
Raw cassava (in general)	Cracked peel	45.2	43.5	16.7	-	-	-
	Big size	32.3	28.3	-	-	-	-
	White flesh	22.6	23.9	-	-	-	-
	Many derived products	22.6	17.4	-	-	-	-
	Heavy root	19.4	28.3	-	-	-	-
	Good yield	9.7	-	-	-	-	-
	Medium size	9.7	-	-	-	-	-
	Many roots	-	15.2	-	-	-	-
	Red/pink/dark/black peel	-	-	66.7	-	-	-
	Peel do not stick to parenchyma	-	-	16.7	-	-	-
	Tough stem at the root proximal part	-	-	33.3	-	-	-
Raw cassava intended to boiled cassava	Cracked peel	48.4	41.3	-	-	-	-
	Sweet when raw	58.1	28.3	-	-	-	-
	White flesh	25.8	10.9	-	-	-	-
	Heavy root	22.6	13.0	-	-	8.7
	Medium size	12.9	-	-	-	-	-
	Easy to peel	-	28.3	-	-	-	-
	Smooth peel	-	17.4	-	51.6		-
	Bitter when raw	-	-	-	45.2	30.4
	Long root	-	-	-	41.9	28.3	-
	Fibrous flesh	-	-	-	32.3	6.5	-
	Yellow flesh	-	-	-	25.8	-	-
	Difficult to peel	-	-	-	-	10.9	-
	Red/pink/dark/black peel	-	-	100	-	-	16.7
	Peel appearance	-	-	16.7	-	-	16.7
	Presence of stripes	-	-	16.7	-	-
	Tough stem at the root proximal part	-	-	-	-	-	33.3

Table 4. Significant quality characteristics of boiled cassava identified during survey and processing diagnosis

Characteristics	Descriptors	Frequency (%, N = 83)
		High quality	Low quality
Appearance	White flesh	73.5^c	-
	Attractive	18.1c	-
	Yellow/yellowish flesh	-	26.5^c
	Dark/red/black flesh	-	13.8^b
Texture in touch	Crumbly/easy to break/soft	100^c	-
	Hard	-	42.2^c
	Fibrous	-	26.3^a
	Sticky between fingers	100b	-
Texture in mouth	Crumbly/easy to break/soft	72.3^c	-
	Difficult to chew	-	15.0^a
	Hard in the mouth	-	50^b
	Unpleasant to eat	-	66.7^b
Odour/aroma	Good smell/odour of cassava	74.4^c	50^c
Taste	Sweet/very sweet	75.9^c	-
	Good taste/very good	15.7c	-
	Slightly sweet	100b	-
	Tasteless	-	33.3^b
	Bitter^a	-	83.3^c
	Bitter aftertaste^b^c	-	16.7^b

^asurvey

^bprocessing

^csurvey and processing compilation

Figure 1. Principal component analysis on sensory characteristics of the five boiled cassava varieties.

Table 5. Overall liking score of boiled cassava as affected by cassava varieties and dwelling place of consumers

Dwelling place	Cassava varieties
	Dossi	Atinwéwé	Agric	Alanmandou	Koléahonmè
Rural area(n = 127)	7.9^a1	6.4^b1	5.0^c1	3.4^d1	2.7^e1
Urban area(n = 113)	8.0^a1	6.8^b2	5.2^c1	4.0^d2	2.7^e1
Rural and urban areas (n = 240)	8.0^a	6.6^b	5.1^c	3.7^d	2.7^e

Mean scores with different letters within the same row are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Mean scores with different numbers within the same column are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Table 6. Mean drops and penalty of overall liking of boiled cassava

Descriptors	Just—About-Right categories	Frequency (%)	Mean drops in overall liking^a	p-value^b	Penalty
White colour	Not white enough	34.7	1.7	<0.0001	0.6
	As I like	65.3
	Too white	0.0
Yellow colour	Not yellow enough	17.2	−0.2
	As I like	14.7
	Too yellow	68.1	1.4	<0.0001	0.9
Easy to break with the hand	Hard to break with hand	61.6	3.5	<0.0001	2.2
	As I like	38.3
	Too easy to slice with hand	0.2	−0.6
Crumbliness in the mouth	Not crumbly in the mouth	61.3	3.6	<0.0001	2.2
	As I like	38.4
	Too crumbly in the mouth	0.3	2.1
Sweet taste	Not sweet enough	23.4	2.8	<0.0001	0.7
	As I like	76.6
	Too sweet	0.0
Bitter taste	Not bitter enough	7.0	2.5
	As I like	6.2
	Too bitter	86.8	3.0	<0.0001	2.6

^aScore of liking loose for having a product “not-JAR categories”.

^bp-value indicates that mean drops in overall liking is significant based on 2-samples t-test.

Figure 2. Significant penalties of overall liking per percent of consumers for studied varieties.

Legend: Variety_ not JAR category based on sensory descriptor (ex: Ko_Too bitter).Varieties: Agric (Ag), Alanmandou (Al), Atinwéwé (At), Dossi (Do), Koléahomè (Ko).Sensory descriptors: white colour, yellow colour, easy to break with the hand, crumbly in the mouth, sweet taste, bitter taste.Not JAR categories: too weak (Not enough), too strong (Too much).