I’m afraid I’m going to be a nay-sayer again. Here’s a quote from an otherwise very worthy piece on the Gates Foundation website trying to link what’s happening at the G20 and in the CGIAR reform process and other high-level stuff with the needs of “35 year old Oumou, who lives in Sadore village in Niger, struggling to feed her 5 children due to unpredictable harvests from her husband’s millet farm.” ((Note, by the way, that Sadore is where ICRISAT has its Sahelian Centre, and if anywhere in Niger should be benefiting from agricultural research, it is there.))
…Oumou’s group could plant hardy Apple of the Sahel (10 times the vitamin C of ordinary apples and rich in calcium, iron, and phosphorus) and Moringa trees (whose leaves contain 4 times the vitamin A in carrots, 4 times the calcium and double the protein in milk, and 3 times the potassium in bananas).
I don’t have much of a problem with the use of a vernacular name for Ziziphus in such a piece. You might ask why use Moringa then, but that seems to have become widely accepted as the common name for Moringa oleifera. What I do have a little problem with is comparing its vitamin C content with apples, a crop that is of no relevance to the Sahel. But that’s a rhetorical flourish on the part of the writer, I guess. Apple of the Sahel vs ordinary apple. Geddit? Let’s let that pass.
I personally think “10 times the vitamin C of ordinary apples” is borderline misleading, even if it were a useful comparison, though that is excusable too. Quick googling gave a range of 44-133 mg/100g pulp for a few “ber” varieties and 7-40 mg/100g pulp for a few apple varieties. So the range of ratios is about 1-20, so let’s call it 10 on average. Fine. But who cares about averages? In a piece about how research can help the Sahelian smallholder, why not grasp with both hands the opportunity of at least pointing out that Oumou could be helped to identify the most nutritious varieties? Dropping the agrobiodiversity ball — no, that’s not it: not even recognizing it as a ball — is what I find it hard to forgive.
Maybe what is required is to contextualise the availability and popularity of the different food products. It might be an issue of the apple being popular and easily available on the market and yet at a cost while the apple of sahel could be less popular and yet adapted to the local envrionment and equally of more nutritious.
What I want to say here may not be appropriate to the topic but the matter of fact is ; many times we do not give importance to the locally available produce. We tend to incline towards more popular produce.