<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">AJPS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>American Journal of Plant Sciences</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2158-2742</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ajps.2023.146046</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">AJPS-126072</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Biomedical&amp;Life Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Agro-Morphological Characterization of a Collection of Fonio [&lt;i&gt;Digitaria exilis&lt;/i&gt; (Kippist.) Stapf.] Accessions from Burkina Faso
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Balma</surname><given-names>Patrice</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kabore</surname><given-names>Boukare</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kiebre</surname><given-names>Mariam</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kiebre</surname><given-names>Zakaria</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sanou</surname><given-names>Jacob</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bationo/Kando</surname><given-names>Pauline</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Laboratoire Biosciences, Unité de Formation et de Recherche en Sciences de la Vie et de la Terre, Université Joseph KI-ZERBO, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles/Farako-B&amp;amp;#241; (INERA/Farako-B&amp;amp;#241;), Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>20</day><month>06</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>14</volume><issue>06</issue><fpage>677</fpage><lpage>690</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>27,</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2023</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>27,</day>	<month>June</month>	<year>2023</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>30,</day>	<month>June</month>	<year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Considered as the oldest cereal, fonio (
  Digitaria exilis Stapf
  .
  ) is grown in
   West Africa for its therapeutic virtues, its nutritional and organoleptic qualities. It plays an important socio-cultural and economic role for the populations of western Burkina Faso. However, very few studies on the genetic diversity of fonio have been carried out. This study aims to contribute to a better knowledge of the diversity of Digitaria exilis in Burkina Faso using agro
  -
  morphological
   descriptors. Thus, 60 accessions of fonio collected from western Burkina Faso were characterized using 21 agro-morphological characters according to an Alpha Latice design with three replications. The study showed morphological variability for most of the qualitative and quantitative characters studied. Principal component analysis (PCA) explained 56.07% of the variability. Hierarchical cluster analysis split
  s
   the accessions of the collection into four clusters using seven characters. These characters can constitute basic criteria for differentiating fonio accessions in Burkina Faso. The accessions of Group 
  II
   have a long cycle and high production of grain
  ,
   while the accessions of Group 
  IV
   have a short cycle and low production of grain. The
   groups identified can serve as a starting point for fonio breeding in Burkina Faso.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>&lt;i&gt;Digitaria exilis&lt;/i&gt;</kwd><kwd> Agro-Morphological Variability</kwd><kwd> Accession</kwd><kwd> Burkina Faso</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Plant genetic resources are the key to food security and sustainable agricultural development. Indeed, climate change adaptation strategies are very costly for small family farms, which makes them very vulnerable. So, the diversification of crops appears as an alternative. The use of local varieties would constitute an opportunity for the populations because they occupy an important place in the diversification of plant resources [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref1">1</xref>] . Also, these so-called traditional varieties are genetically more diversified and better adapted to local conditions [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref2">2</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref3">3</xref>] and their preservation contributes to maintaining the genetic richness [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref4">4</xref>] . Among the important crops maintained by West African farmers, fonio (Digitaria spp.) is probably the oldest African cereal [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref5">5</xref>] . Well adapted to local pedoclimate conditions, fonio is tolerant to drought due to its C4 metabolism and contributes to ecological protection by guaranteeing good plant cover on fragile and undervalued soils [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref6">6</xref>] . In traditional West African agrosystems, fonio, in addition to occupying a privileged place [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref7">7</xref>] . It plays a decisive role in preventing lean season [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref8">8</xref>] . Since the beginning of the 21st century, nutritionists have paid particular attention to this food because it is very digestible for people with allergies, especially in the case of gluten intolerance. Fonio can, therefore, also contribute to nutritional balance, which is still a growing concern in many countries. As a result, it is increasingly in demand in the sub-region and developed countries.</p><p>In Burkina Faso, fonio is used in the preparation of many traditional African recipes such as couscous, porridge, t&#244;, and fatty fonio, which are often prescribed in the diet of some patients (diabetics) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref9">9</xref>] . However, compared to the main cereal crops (rice, maize, sorghum and millet), fonio remains a minor plant in the Burkinab&#232; agrarian system. It is mainly produced in the western part of the country. In addition, the arduous post-harvest treatment of fonio means that it is increasingly abandoned in some production areas. This could eventually lead to significant genetic erosion of the species in Burkina Faso. It is, therefore, necessary to preserve the local genetic resources of fonio and this requires knowledge of its genetic diversity. Indeed, genetic diversity studies carried out on cereals in Burkina Faso have mainly concerned maize [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref10">10</xref>] , millet [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref11">11</xref>] , rice [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref12">12</xref>] and sorghum [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref13">13</xref>] . These studies revealed significant variability at the level of morphological and molecular markers. However, the level of diversity and the structuring of this diversity of fonio grown in Burkina Faso remain very little known. The main objective of this study is the assessment of the agro-morphological variability of a collection of fonio produced in Burkina Faso. Specifically, the study aims at: 1) identifying the discriminating characters, 2) determining the relationships between the studied characters, and 3) establishing the level and structure of the diversity of the accessions created.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Genetic Material</title><p>The plant material consists of a collection of sixty accessions of fonio from the germplasm of the Biosciences Laboratory of the University Joseph KI-ZERBO. This germplasm was collected in 2020 in five provinces located in the west of Burkina Faso (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). 13 accessions were collected in the provinces of Houet, 11 accessions in K&#233;n&#233;dougou, 8 accessions in Como&#233;, 14 accessions in L&#233;raba and 14 accessions in Kossi.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Experimental Site</title><p>Experiments were carried out in 2020 and 2021 during the rain in Farako-B&#226; (research station of INERA), 11˚03'N and 4˚20'W. Farako-B&#226; is situated at 10 kilometres in the southwest. The soil texture is loamy-sandy on the surface to sandy-clay in depth. The climate is Sudano-Guinean type [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref14">14</xref>] . Climate conditions were practically identical during the two seasons. Indeed, the annual rainfall for 2020 on the site was approximately 1213.3 mm and August was the wettest month with 404.1 mm. During the year 2021, the annual rainfall was approximately 1205.4 mm and August was also the wettest month with 414 mm. The mean annual temperatures were 27.21˚C and 28.15˚C respectively in 2020 and 2021.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Experimental Design and Cultural Practices</title><p>Alpha Latice design with three replications was used for the study. Each entry</p><p>was sown on 4 rows of 3m length with. The space between rows was 20 cm. the space between replications was 2 m. For sowing, on each row, 4 g of seeds were sown with 8 g of sand previously mixed in a homogeneous way. Before sowing, the soil was plowed and then leveled. Weeding was done two times and fertiliser was applied at recommended doses 100 kg of NPK 14-23-14 (35 days after emergence) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref1">1</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Data Recording</title><p>Five plants per row were randomly selected by rejecting the border plants, to record quantitative data on characters viz, days to 50% emergence (days), days to 50% tillering (days), days to 50% flowering (days), days to 50% maturity (days), plant height at maturity (cm), total number of tillers per plant, total number of internodes, internodes length (cm), leaf length (cm), leaf width (cm), grouping of spikelets on pedicels, exertion of panicle length (cm), size of racemes (cm), total number of racemes per plant, 1000 grains weight (g), grains per accession weight (g) and dry biomass per accession weight (kg). Qualitative characters were scored through field observations and include stem color, leaf color, raceme color and grain color.</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Statistical Analysis</title><p>The analysis was carried out using the Excel 2013 spreadsheet and GenStat v4.10.3 (ANOVA) and Xlstat 2016.02 software (PCA, AHC). For the qualitative variables, a descriptive analysis through the frequency calculation of the different modalities was carried out. For the quantitative variables, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) for each year was performed in order to determine the discriminating variables in order to assess the level of variability. Subsequently, the relationships between the variables were highlighted through the Pearson correlation test. Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed to assess the association of the variables measured on the different axes. The clustering of accessions was done through the agglomerative hierarchical clustering (AHC) based on the Euclidean distance between individuals at the 5% threshold.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Phenotypic Variability Using Qualitative Characters</title><p>With the exception of leaf color (LCo) which was green for all accessions (100%), two modalities were observed for the rest of the qualitative variables studied. Thus, for the color of the stem, the majority (90%) of the accessions have green stems, and the minority (10%) have purple (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). Regarding raceme color (RCo), green (90%) and reddish (10%) racemes were observed (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>). As for the color of the unshelled grain (GCo), accessions with pale yellow grains (60%) and those with brown grains (40%) were highlighted (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Variation of the Quantitative Characters Studied</title><sec id="s3_2_1"><title>3.2.1. Mean Performance Characters Related to the Plant Cycle</title><p>The results of the analysis of variance show that of the four characters related to the plant cycle, only Days to 50% emergence did not permit to differentiate the accessions during the two seasons. Days to 50% flowering (P = 0.019) and Days to 50% maturity (P &lt; 0.0001) vary depending on the season (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_2"><title>3.2.2. Mean Performance Characters Related to the Vegetative System</title><p>The 10 characters related to the vegetative system permit to differentiate the accessions studied during the two seasons. The factor season was significant for all characters (P &lt; 0.0001) related to the vegetative system (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_3"><title>3.2.3. Mean Performance Characters Related to the Grain</title><p>Of the three characters related to the grain, only Grain weight per accession</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Results of the analysis of the variance of the characters related to the cycle of the plant and to the mean performance of the accessions during the two seasons and of the interaction season-accession</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Characters</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Season 1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Season 2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P-value between seasons</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P-value interaction accession*season</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DEM</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.02<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.23<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.943</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.364</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DTA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.09<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.04<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.834</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.998</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DFL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >62.52<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64.68<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.019</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.938</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DMA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >90.11<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94.63<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.748</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Legend: The means assigned the same letter in the same column or the same rows are not significantly different at the 5% level. Days to 50% emergence (DEM); Days to 50% tillering (DTA); Days to 50% flowering (DFL); Days to 50% maturity (DMA). *Significant difference between accessions (P &lt; 0.05).</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Results of the analysis of the variance of the characters related to the cycle of the vegetative system and to the mean performance of the accessions during the two seasons and of the interaction season-accession</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Characters</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Season 1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Season 2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P-value between seasons</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P-value interaction accession*season</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.59<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.52<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.882</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNI</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.77<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.13<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >INL (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.70<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41.55<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LLE (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.37<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.15<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LWI (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.48<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.54<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.42</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.85<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.42<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >RSP (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.78<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.43<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >EPL (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.40<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.13<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >PHM (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >72.94<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.07<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BIO (kg)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.61<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.18<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.922</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Legend: The means assigned the same letter in the same column or the same rows are not significantly different at the 5% level. Plant height at maturity (PHM); Total number of tillers per plant (TNT); Total number of internodes (TNI); Internodes length (INL); Leaf length (LLE); Leaf width (LWI); Exertion panicle length (EPL); Raceme size per plant (RSP); Total number of racemes per plant (TNR); Dry biomass weight (BIO). *Significant difference between accessions (P &lt; 0.05).</p><p>permit to differentiate accessions during the two seasons. However, it has varied from season (P &lt; 0.0001). The other characters do not discriminate accessions and do not vary according to the season (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2_4"><title>3.2.4. Structure of the Variability in the Collection</title><p>1) Principal Component Analysis</p><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> shows the eigenvalues and the percentage of variance for each axis. The four first axes explain 56.07% of the total variability. Six characters contribute the most to the achievement of axis 1 with 25.07% of total inertia. The most important are: total number of internodes (TNI) (r = 0.447), internodes length (INL) (r = 0.639), exertion of the panicle length (EPL) (r = 0.349), total number of racemes per plant (TNR) (r = 0.388), dry biomass (BIO) (0.316) and grains per row weight (GRW) (r = 0.426) which are positively correlated with this axis. Therefore, it can be referred to as the axis of production. At the level of axis 2, the characteristics which contribute the most to its achievement are: plant height at maturity (PHM) (r = 0.459), total number of tillers per plant (TNT) (r = 0.257), leaf length (LLE) (r = 0.373), days to 50% flowering (DFL) (r = 0.262) and days to 50% maturity (DMA) (r = 0.319) with 12.64 % of total variance. This axis can be defined as that of vegetative development and the cycle of the plant. Axes 3 and 4 provide additional information to that of axis 2 relating to vegetative development and the cycle.</p><p>2) Cluster Analysis</p><p>The dendrogram resulting from the cluster analysis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>) show a structuring of the sixty accessions in four morphological groups independently of their geographical origin. The four groups (GI, GII, GIII and GIV) consist respectively of 15, 12, 18 and 15 accessions.</p><p>Group I is characterized by plants with a long cycle (93 days), large size (66.2 cm), a high and an important number of internodes, an important number of racemes (3), a high grain weight (167.78 g) and a dry biomass high (2 kg). It is made up of fifteen accessions mainly from the province of K&#233;n&#233;dougou (5 accessions). Group II is characterized by plants with performances close to those of</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Results of the analysis of the variance of the characters related to the grain and to the mean performance of the accessions during the two seasons and of the interaction season-accessio</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Characters</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Season 1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Season 2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P-value between season</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P-value interaction accession*season</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GSP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.78<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.78<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.85</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.990</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GrW (g)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.53<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.54<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.99</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.991</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GWA (g)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >137.38<sup>b</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >136.16<sup>a</sup>*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;0.0001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.982</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Legend: The means assigned the same letter in the same column or the same rows are not significantly different at the 5% level. Spikelet grouping on pedicels (GSP); 1000 grain weight (GrW); Grain weight per accession (GWA). *Significant difference between accessions (P &lt; 0.05).</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Eigenvalues and percentage of variation expressed for the first three axes from 17 quantitative characters in PCA</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Characters</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >F1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >F2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >F3</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >F4</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >PHM</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.402</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.459*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNI</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.447*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.028</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.033</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.148</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.257*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.147</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >INL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.639*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.038</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.035</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.052</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >EPL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.349*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.097</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.099</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.121</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >RSP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.175</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.118</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.013</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.036</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.388*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.105</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.009</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.034</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LLE</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.209</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.373*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.110</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.047</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LWI</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.025</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.492*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GrW</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.060</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.075</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.056</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GSP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.233</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DEM</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.115</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.043</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.261*</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DTA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.024</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.053</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.304</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.009</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DFL</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.244</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.262*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.024</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.250</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DMA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.315</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.319*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.015</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.164</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BIO (kg)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.316*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.077</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.152</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GWR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.426*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.060</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.060</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Own value</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.262</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.149</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.638</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.484</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Variability (%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.072</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.642</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.634</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.727</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% cumulative</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25.072</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.714</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47.348</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56.075</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Legend: Days to 50% emergence (DEM); Days to 50% tillering (DTA); Days to 50% flowering (DFL); Days to 50% maturity (DMA); Plant height at maturity (PHM); Total number of tillers per plant (TNT); Total number of internodes (TNI); Internodes length (INL); Leaf length (LLE); Leaf width (LWI); Spikelet grouping on pedicels (GSP); Exertion panicle length (EPL); Raceme size per plant (RSP); Total number of racemes per plant (TNR); 1000 grain weight (GrW); Grain weight per row (GWR); Dry biomass weight (BIO). *Variables contributing the most to the formation of the indicated axes</p><p>Group I. However, it differs from Group I by its longer maturity cycle (94 days), and high grain weight (208.7 g) compared to Group I. It is composed of 12 accessions mainly from the province of L&#233;raba (5 accessions). Group III is made up of accessions with intermediate performance coming mainly from the province of Kossi (5 accessions). An addition, it differs from Group II by a low dry biomass (1.29 kg) and a low grain weight (123.8 g). Group IV is characterized by accessions with low agronomic performance and a short cycle. It contains 15 accessions mainly from the province of Kossi (7 accessions) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>).</p></sec></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>The characterization of the 60 accessions of fonio revealed significant phenotypic</p><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Mean values of characters per cluster for fonio collection in Burkina Faso</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >GII</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >GI</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >GIII</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >GIV</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Pr &gt; F</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >PHM (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64.89<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66.27<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61.95<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >59.50<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.024</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNI</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.67<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.74<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.30<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.15<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.041</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.32<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.86<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.86<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.49<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.359</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >INL (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.81<sup>bc</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39.29<sup>c</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.69<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.13<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >EPL (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.53<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.21<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28.19<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.21<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.091</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >RSP (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.23<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.37<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.20<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.63<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.254</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >TNR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.63<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.80<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.58<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.55<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.040</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LLE (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.70<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.24<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.74<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.35<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.312</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >LWI (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.51<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.51<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.50<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.52<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.636</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GrW (g)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.55<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.53<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.51<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.53<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.114</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GSP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.80<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.76<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.78<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.77<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.880</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DEM</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.15<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.27<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.16<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.12<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.655</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DTA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.36<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.52<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.44<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.199</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NDF</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65.33<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63.85<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63.06<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >62.61<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.295</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >DMA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94.09<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93.01<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >92.15<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >90.61<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.092</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BIO (kg)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.95<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.99<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.29<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.95<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GWR (g)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >208.79<sup>d</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >167.78<sup>c</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >123.81<sup>b</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66.167<sup>a</sup></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Legend: The means assigned the same letter in the same column or the same row are not significantly different at the 5% level. Days to 50% emergence (DEM); Days to 50% tillering (DTA); Days to 50% flowering (DFL); Days to 50% maturity (DMA); Plant height at maturity (PHM); Total number of tillers per plant (TNT); Total number of internodes (TNI); Internodes length (INL); Leaf length (LLE); Leaf width (LWI); Spikelet grouping on pedicels (GSP); Exertion panicle length (EPL); Raceme size per plant (RSP); Total number of racemes per plant (TNR); 1000 grain weight (GrW); Grain weight per row (GWR); Dry biomass weight (BIO).</p><p>variability. Indeed, the significant differences between the characters of the accessions, the high coefficients of variation for most characters as well as the presence of modalities for certain qualitative characters reflect the existence of morphological variability within the accessions. The different color patterns of racemes, grains and stems observed during this study are similar to those observed by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref1">1</xref>] within accessions of fonio in Niger based on grain color and stem color. According to these authors, this observed variability could be explained, in part, by the expression of one or more genes that govern these characters. Indeed, taking into account qualitative characters is very important in an agro-morphological characterization study insofar as these characters constitute characters of interest and selection criteria for the different actors. However, according to [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref15">15</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref16">16</xref>] , an important number of qualitative characters retained among the descriptors do not often allow fine differentiation of the varieties of cultivated plants.</p><p>The variability within the collection offers opportunities for fonio breeding in Burkina Faso. However, the highly significant effect of the rainy season-genotype interaction on the observed variability reflects the influence of pedoclimate factors on the morphological performance of the accessions of fonio studied. Indeed, fluctuations in temperature and rainfall during the two rainy seasons would have influenced this variability. Aliero and Morakinyo [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref17">17</xref>] have already reported that day length, temperature and relative humidity have variable effects on the vegetative and physiological development of fonio. Additionally, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref18">18</xref>] , on the study of the effect of the environment on the growth and yield characters of fonio accessions in Niger, revealed that the nature of the soil and the climate conditions influence the performance of the accessions of fonio.</p><p>The structuring of accessions independently of their geographical origin could be justified by the migratory flow of the population and the method of crop management, including seed exchanges between producers from one village to another neighboring or distant village which go that growers grow roughly the same accessions. Indeed, in addition to genetic factors, the level and structure of variability are generally influenced by non-genetic factors such as pedoclimate factors, population migration flows and crop management methods. Similar observations have been reported by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref19">19</xref>] , who revealed that peasant seed management methods, in particular exchanges of varieties between farmers, are the source of significant diversity between fonios grown in the commune of Boukoumb&#233; in Benin.</p><p>The morphological and phenological dissimilarities observed between the different phenotypic groups suggest that the accessions are maintained under very different evolutionary processes in their respective agroecosystem [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref1">1</xref>] . Agroecosystems are likely to exert highly variable selective pressures on genotypes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref20">20</xref>] as well as anthropogenic pressures [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref21">21</xref>] . Indeed, the mode of seed management by farmers, such as selective sorting, post-harvest cultivation techniques and agricultural practices, lead to a selection leading to the maintenance or even the creation of significant phenotypic diversity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref22">22</xref>] . Group I and Group III diversity with intermediate characteristics between early and late accessions could be the result of an adaptive process [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref1">1</xref>] . Fonio has not yet been the subject of real varietal selection and genetic improvement work in Burkina Faso, but the estimates made in this study could serve as a basis of comparison for subsequent investigations. Nevertheless, in Ivory Coast, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref23">23</xref>] obtained similar phenotypic characters such as days to flowering, days to maturity, total number of tillers per plant, total number of nodes, total number of panicles, total number of leaves at the main stem, the height of insertion of the panicle which contributes better to the discrimination of four groups in the discriminant factor analysis.</p><p>The role played by phenotypic descriptors in the structuring of local varieties of fonio in Burkina Faso is not surprising, because it is a usual agronomic character for structuring variability in cereals. This would be linked to the difficulty for farmers to distinguish varieties other than by cycle length, a central character in management practices. Previous studies, based on the characters used by farmers, in particular the cycle, had highlighted the importance of the cycle in the characterization ok the accessions of fonio. Sekloka et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref24">24</xref>] obtained slightly different results from ours. These authors highlighted two groups of fonio in Benin: an extra early group with a cycle of less than 90 days and a late group with more than 100 days. This observed difference could be explained by the fact that cultivars with cycle long are less appreciated by producers. According to [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref19">19</xref>] , very early cultivars mature during the rainy season and pose drying problems for growers. Similarly, cultivars that are too late do not manage to complete their cycle in good conditions.</p><p>The early accessions identified in this study are qualified as extra early to early according to the criteria proposed by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref25">25</xref>] . Late accessions with higher biomass yield can be selected for livestock feed purposes thanks to their high fodder productivity.</p><p>Moreover, the percentage of variance accumulated by the four main axes of the principal component analysis is low (56.07%). These results would reflect the absence of a strong genotypic and phenotypic organization between the accessions [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref26">26</xref>] . Similar results were obtained by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref23">23</xref>] in C&#244;te d’Ivoire on fonio and several authors on other species [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.126072-ref27">27</xref>] .</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>6. Conclusion</title><p>The agro-morphological characterization of accessions of Digitaria exilis shows the highlighted existence of diversity in Burkina Faso despite the narrowness of its area of cultivation. The results of this study have permitted to identify of important characters which permit to differentiate of the accessions, which are days to 50% flowering, days to 50% maturity, plant height at maturity, total number of tillers per plant, total number of internode, internodes length, leaf length, leaf width, exertion panicle length, total number of racemes per plant, grain weight per accession, and dry biomass weight. Since the role of local accessions in the plant resources of cultivated plants no longer needs to be demonstrated, particular attention must be paid to regions that ensure the sustainability of this source of variability. Thus, the characters analyzed can thus constitute basic criteria for differentiating the accessions of fonio of Burkina Faso and be used in studies of the morphological diversity of fonio in West Africa. The multivariate analyses have permitted to structure of the collection into 4 morphological groups. Exceptional morphotypes have been identified and could be considered as potential parents for future breeding work. It is mainly Nia4, Tou1, Nan1, Nia3, Nia6 which presented a high grain yield, Kan1, Com, Tap2, Tss1 and Bog1 presented a high dry biomass and Min1, Nou1, Bog1, Gbl2, Bor1, Dou2 presented a short cycle. However, taking agro-morphological characters only into account is not enough to produce a definitive and credible description. Indeed, the morphological characters, especially quantitative ones, are often strongly influenced by environmental factors. It is, therefore, important to do molecular analyses to invalidate or confirm the results obtained by the agro-morphological characterization.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Patrice, B., Boukare, K., Mariam, K., Zakaria, K., Jacob, S. and Pauline, B./K. (2023) Agro-Morphological Characterization of a Collection of Fonio [Digitaria exilis (Kippist.) Stapf.] Accessions from Burkina Faso. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 14, 677-690. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2023.146046</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.126072-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Saidou, S.I., Bakasso, Y., Inoussa, M.M., Zaman-Allah, M., Atta, S., Barnaud, A., Billot, C. and Saadou, M. (2014) Diversité Agro-Morphologique Des Accessions de Fonio [Digitaria exilis (Kippist.) Stapf.] Au Niger. International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences, 8, 1710-1729. https://doi.org/10.4314/ijbcs.v8i4.31</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brown, A.H.D. and Munday, J. (1982) Population-Genetic Structure and Optimal Sampling of Land Races of Barley from Iran. Genetica, 58, 85-96.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00056775</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ahmadi</surname><given-names> N.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Becquer</surname><given-names> T.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Larroque</surname><given-names> C. and Arnaud M. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1988</year>)<article-title>Genetic Variability of Rice (Oryza sativa L.) in Madagascar</article-title><source> Agronomia Tropical Maracay</source><volume> 43</volume>,<fpage> 209</fpage>-<lpage>221</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Frankel, O., Brown, A.H.D. and Burdon, J.J. (1995) The Conservation of Plant Biodiversity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 299.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Vodouhe, S.R., Zannou, A. and Achigan, D.E.G. (1998) Actes du Premier atelier sur la diversité génétique du fonio (Digitaria exilis) en Afrique de l’Ouest, Conakry, Guinée, du 4 au 6 aout 1998. Institut International des Ressources Phytogénétiques (IPGRI), Rome, 11.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cruz, J.F., Beavogui, F. and Drame, D. (2011) Le Fonio, une Céréale Africaine. Collection Agricultures tropicales en poche. Quae/Cta/Presses agronomiques de Gembloux, Versailles, 192 p. https://doi.org/10.35690/978-2-7592-1040-4</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Adoukonou-Sagbadja, H., Dansi, A., Vodouhè, R. and Akpagana, K. (2006) Indigenous Knowledge and Traditional Conservation of Fonio Millet (Digitaria exilis, Digitaria iburua) in Togo. Biodiversity &amp; Conservation, 15, 2379-2395.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-2938-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Blench, R.M. (2012) Vernacular Names for African Millets and other Minor Cereals and Their Significance for Agricultural History. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 8, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-012-0104-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Balma, P., Kabore, B., Kabre, V.N., Kiebre, M., Kiebre, Z., Sanou, J. and Bationo/Kando, P. (2022) Genetic Diversity and Indigenous Knowledge of Fonio (Digitaria exilis Stapf.) Produced in Burkina Faso. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 18, 840-849. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2022.16059</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wey, J. (1998) Etude de la variabilité du rendement du ma&amp;#239;s au Burkina Faso. Ph.D. Thesis, Institut National Polytechnique de Lorraine, Nancy, 200 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bougma, L.A. (2018) Etude de la diversité génétique des populations de mil [Pennisetum glaucum (l.) r. br.] cultivées au Burkina Faso dans le contexte du changement climatique. Ph.D. Thesis, Université de Ouagadougou, Ouagadougou, 148 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sie, M., Hesquiere, A. and miezan, K.M. (1999) Structure génétique des variétés traditionnelles de riz (oryza sp) du Burkina Faso. Agronomie Africaine, 11, 57-71.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sawadogo, N., et al. (2015) évaluation de la Diversité génétique des sorghos à grains sucrés [Sorghum bicolor (l.) moench] du Burkina Faso. Journal of Applied Biosciences, 84, 7654-7664. https://doi.org/10.4314/jab.v84i1.3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fontès, J. and Guinko, S. (1995) Carte de la végétation naturelle et de l’occupation du sol du Burkina Faso/ICIV. Université de Toulouse, Université de Ouagadougou, IRBET et MET.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sanni, K.A., Fawole, A., Ogunbayo, D., Tia, E.A., Somado, K.F., Sié, M., Nwilence, F.E. and Guei, R.G. (2010) Multivariate Analysis of Diversity of Landrace Rice Germplasm. Crop Science, 52, 494-504. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2010.12.0739</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">N’da, H.A., Akanvou, L., Akanvou, R. and Zoro Bi, A.I. (2014) Evaluation de la diversité agro-morphologique des accessions de ma&amp;#239;s (Zea mays L.) collectées en C&amp;#244;te d’Ivoire. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 20, 3144-3158.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Aliero, A.A. and Morakinyo, J.A. (2005) Photoperiodism in Digitaria exilis. African Journal of Biotechnology, 4, 241-243.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sani, S.I., Inoussa, M.M., Zaman-Allah, M., Atta, S., Barnaud, A., Billot, C., Bakasso, Y., Mahamane, A. and Mahamane, S. (2017) Effet de l’environnement sur les paramètres de croissance et de rendement des accessions du fonio [Digitaria exilis (Kippist.) Stapf.] au Niger. Revue Ivoirienne des Sciences et Technologie, 29, 87-106.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sekloka, E., Adoukonou-Sagbadja, H., Para&amp;#239;so, A.A., Kouega, Y.B., Bachabi, F.X. and Zoumarou-Wallis, N. (2015) Evolution de la diversité des cultivars de fonio pratiqués à Boukoumbé et environs. International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences, 9, 2446-2458. https://doi.org/10.4314/ijbcs.v9i5.16</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sadiki, M. and Jarvis, D. (2005) Conservation in situ de la diversité génétique des cultures par sa gestion à la ferme dans les agroécosystèmes marocains. Les Actes du BRG, 5, 445-464.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Robert, T., Luxereau, A., Mariac, C., Ali, K., Allinne, C., Bani, J., Beidari, Y., Bezan&amp;#231;on, G., Gayeux, S., Couturon, E., Dedieu, V., Sadou, M., Seydou, M., Seyni, O., Tidjani, M. and Sarr, A. (2004) Gestion de la diversité en milieu paysan: Influence de facteurs anthropiques et des flux de gènes sur la variabilité génétique des formes cultivées et spontanées du mil (Pennisetum glaucum ssp. glaucum) dans deux localités du Niger. In: Brenugat, V., Fridlansky, F., Marie, F. and Mitteau, M., Ed., Le Patrimoine Génétique: La Diversité et la Resource, BRG, Paris, 223-245.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Robert</surname><given-names> T.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Mariac</surname><given-names> C.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Allinne</surname><given-names> C.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Ali</surname><given-names> K.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Beidari</surname><given-names> Y.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Bezan&amp;#231;on</surname><given-names> G.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Couturon</surname><given-names> E.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Moussa</surname><given-names> D.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Sasou</surname><given-names> M.S.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Seydou</surname><given-names> M.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Seyni</surname><given-names> O.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> Tidjani</surname><given-names> M. and Luxereau A. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2005</year>)<article-title>Gestion des semences et dynamiques des introgressions entre variétés cultivées et entre formes domestiques et spontanées des mils (Pennisetum glaucum ssp. glaucum) au Sud-Niger</article-title><source> Les Actes du BRG</source><volume> 5</volume>,<fpage> 557</fpage>-<lpage>573</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Do, A.M., N’Da, H.A., Akanvou, L. and Sokoui, D.P. (2020) Caractérisation agromorphologique des accessions de fonio (Digitaria exilis) collectées au nord de la C&amp;#244;te d’Ivoire. Agronomie Africaine, 32, 169-182.  
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/aga/article/view/199634</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sekloka, E., Kanlindogbe, C., Biaou, S.S.H., Adoukonou-Sagbadja, H., Kora, A., Motouama, F.T., Seidou, M., Zinsou, V.A., Afouda, L. and Baba-Moussa, L. (2016) Agromorphological Characterization of Fonio Millet Accessions (Digitaria exilis Stapf.) Collected from Boukoumbé, Northwest of Benin. Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science, 8, 211-222.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Portères, R. (1976) African Cereals: Eleusine, Fonio, Black Fonio, Teff, Brachiara, Paspalum, Pennisetum and African Rice. In: Harlan, J., De Wet, J.M.J. and Stemler, A.B.L., Eds., The Origins of African Plant Domestication, Mouton, The Hague, 409-451. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110806373.409</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Idrissi, A. and Ouazzani, N. (2003) Apport des descripteurs morphologiques à l’inventaire et à l’identification des variétés d’olivier (Olea europaea L.). Bioversity International—FAO Issue No. 136, 1-10.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.126072-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Djè, Y., Heuertz, M., Ater, M., Lefebvre, C. and Vekemans, X. (2007) évaluation de la diversité morphologique des variétés traditionnelles de sorgho du Nord-Ouest du Maroc. Biotechnology, Agronomy and Society and Environment, 11, 39-46.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>