Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41936-025-00427-8 RESEARCH Post‑harvest conservation practices, related insect pests of stored pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L) R. Br.), and their management in northern Benin Tayé Obédatou Alagbe1, Yeyinou Laura Estelle Loko1*   , Innocent Djègbè2, Julien Gandjala1, Dieudonné Gavoedo1 and Manuele Tamò3  Abstract  Background  Pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) production has decreased over the years due to several con- straints, including insect pest attacks, which contribute to its status as neglected and underutilized species in Benin. In order to develop an integrated pest management strategy, we documented farmers’ post-harvest conservation practices, perceptions, and management of storage insect pests. Four hundred millet producers were surveyed using a semi-structured questionnaire in 76 villages in northern Benin. The entomofauna associated with stored pearl millet was identified by extracting samples from farmers’ storage structures and incubating them for a month in the laboratory. Results  Our results showed that farmers perceived insect pests as the most important constraint to pearl millet stor- age. Vernacular taxonomy and local nomenclature of insect pests of stored pearl millet varied among sociolinguistic groups. Four species of insects were associated with stored millet with the weevils Sitophilus oryzae L. and Sitophilus zeamais L. as the most important ones. Three storage structures (attic, bedroom, and store) and a storage tool (poly- propylene bags) were inventoried. Synthetic chemical insecticides were the most commonly used method for pro- tecting stored millet. Also, farmers employed four plants that repel and kill insects to safeguard stored pearl millet. A differential sensitivity of pearl millet varieties to storage insect attacks was reported with four potential resistant varieties. Some factors that influence the use of a pest management method were determined. Conclusions  The development of an integrated pest management needs to test the sensitivity of resistant varieties and the bioactivity of recorded insecticidal plants. The farmers’ perception suggests that the Souhoun n’nin gberenou landrace and the usage of bark of A. senegalensis and leaves of A. indica are the best ways to preserve millet for a long time. Raising awareness among pearl millet producers on good storage practices and the biological management of storage insect pests were recommended. Factors that influence the use of pest management methods must be integrated into the development of national strategies. Keywords  Storage constraints, Control methods, Varietal resistance, Determinants, Benin Open Access © The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creat​iveco​mmons.​org/​licen​ses/​by/4.​0/. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology *Correspondence: Yeyinou Laura Estelle Loko lokoestelle@yahoo.fr Full list of author information is available at the end of the article http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7310-1334 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1186/s41936-025-00427-8&domain=pdf Page 2 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 Background Pearl millet is a cereal native to tropical West Africa of particular interest in the current context of climate change due to its tolerance to drought (Das & Rakshit, 2016; Srivastava et al., 2022). This cereal, although rich in essential nutrients and having a high-energy value and considerable antioxidant properties (Mawuma et  al., 2022), remains a neglected and underutilized species in the Republic of Benin (Ben Romdhane et al., 2022; Dansi et  al., 2012). Indeed, pearl millet cultiva- tion remains mainly in northern Benin through tradi- tions and customs (Dagba et  al., 2014; Zannou et  al., 2022). In this region, a diversity of pearl millet is cul- tivated and some varieties have important nutritional qualities for the health and food security of local popu- lations (Dagba et al., 2014; Adéoti et al., 2017a). Despite its importance, pearl millet production in Benin has declined over the years from an estimated 40.75 tons per year in 2002 to 27.29 tons in 2020 (FAO, 2020). This decline in production is due to many con- straints, including post-harvest losses due to poor stor- age practices that favour insect pest infestations (Das & Rakshit, 2016; Adeoti et al., 2017b). Indeed, the damage caused by insect pests to stored pearl millet depends on the storage system used (Lale & Yusuf, 2000). How- ever, in Benin, other than the study conducted by Dagba et al. (2014) that mentioned the storage of millet in attics, gourds and bags, there is very little informa- tion on post-harvest practices used by local communi- ties. It is therefore necessary to document the practices related to post-harvest conservation of pearl millet in Benin in order to identify those that can be improved to enhance food security and farmer’ incomes (Njoroge et al., 2019). Insect pests are a major constraint to pearl millet stor- age due to their attacks, which cause significant losses and affect the nutritional quality of grains (Meenatchi & Loganathan, 2022). Stored millet is known to be attacked by a wide range of insects, including Rhyzopertha domi- nica Fab., and Sitophilus zeamais L. (Lale & Yusuf, 2000). These pests cause damage by feeding on grains, destroy germs and cause grain warming and consequently grain deterioration (Sharma et  al., 2007). Unfortunately, in Benin, little attention has been paid to insect pests in the stored pearl millet. Consequently, there has been no assessment of how farmers perceive insect pest infesta- tion and the extent of their damage. The main insect pests that require an integrated pest management method for stored pearl millet are presently unknown. Similarly, the traditional management practices for insect pests in stored millet are little known. Filling these gaps is crucial to develop an efficient integrated pest management strat- egy for sustainable conservation of pearl millet in Benin. This study therefore aimed to: (1) document pearl mil- let storage constraints and post-harvest practices; (2) document farmers’ perceptions of storage insect pests of pearl millet and their traditional management practices; (3) identify the diversity of insect pests associated with stored pearl millet and tolerant/resistant landraces; and (4) identify the sociodemographic factors influencing the use of a specific method to manage insect pests in stored pearl millet. Methods Study area and site selection The Republic of Benin is a country in West Africa located between the meridians 0°40’ and 3°45-East (longitude) and the parallels 06°15 and 12°25 North (latitude). Our study was carried out in northern Benin (Fig. 1), which is the main pearl millet growing region (Dagba et al., 2014; Adéoti et  al., 2017a, 2017b), which include 4 depart- ments (Alibori, Borgou, Donga, and Atacora). The north- ern region is characterized by the Sudanese climate with a single rainy season. The annual rainfall ranges from 1000 to 1200 mm/year, with a mean temperature around 28  °C. Ferruginous tropical and ferralitic soils are com- monly encountered. In the five agro-ecological zones that cover northern Benin (Fig. 1), vegetation types vary from wooded and shrubby savannah in the south, to her- baceous and shrubby savannah area in the north, and a sparse savannah in the far north (Ollabode et al., 2022). Pearl millet production statistics, accessibility, and a good coverage of the study area were the factors that led to the selection of seventy-six villages across 20 municipalities in the northern region (Fig. 1). Sampling To determine the sample size of pearl millet farmers to be interviewed for the study, the following formula (Dag- nélie, 1998) was utilized: where S is the number of surveyed pearl millet farmers and U2 1−∝/2 = 1.96 is the value of the normal random vari- able for a risk α equal to 0.05. The proportion of pear mil- let farmers (p = 0.99) was determined by considering the number of agricultural households in the north Benin (337,517), the number of households involved in cereal production (334,314), and a single person interviewed per household (Adebo et  al., 2018; INSAE, 2016; Loko et al., 2022). d is the 3% margin of expected error margin provided for any parameter to be estimated from the sur- vey. The minimum number of households needed to be surveyed was estimated to be 42.25. S = U2 1−∝/2 × p(1− p) d2 Page 3 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 Surveys Data were collected between May and September 2022. In each village, the farmers who were surveyed were those who cultivate and store millet. These farmers were chosen with the help of village chiefs or leaders of farmers’ organizations, but also by the “snowball” sampling method. This method consisted of sampling households based on recommendations from previously Fig. 1  Geographical localization of surveyed villages Page 4 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 interviewed millet-producing households. Four hun- dred millet producers were surveyed throughout the study area. The ethnic diversity led to the recruitment of interpreters locally to facilitate discussions and exchanges with farmers. After presenting the research objectives to the pearl millet producers, data were col- lected using questionnaires and participatory research methods (individual surveys and field visits). The data collected included the socio-demographic character- istic of households, storage constraints, storage struc- tures and places, millet storage practices, methods of conservation of millet seeds, farmers’ knowledge and perceptions of storage insect pests associated with pearl millet, as well as traditional management meth- ods. Farmers’ perception of the susceptibility of each cultivated pearl millet variety to storage insect pests was also documented, as well as the possibilities of val- orizing infested pearl millet. Identification of insects associated with stored pearl millet In each village surveyed, samples of pearl millet stored without insecticides were taken from the farmers’ storage structures according to the method described by Loko et al. (2019). In each storage structure, 500 g of pearl mil- let were collected at three different depths of the stock using an electronic scale. The samples were conserved in labelled plastic boxes (19 cm in height, 7 cm in diameter), and incubated for 1 month in the Laboratory of Applied Zoology and Plant Health (ZASVE) of the National High School of Applied Biosciences and Biotechnologies under ambient conditions (25 ± 2 °C, 75 ± 5% of relative humid- ity, and a photoperiod of 12:12 (L:D) h). Taxonomic identification keys of stored commodities were used to identify different recorded insect species after this period (Halstead, 1986; Kumar, 2017). The relative abundance of each insect species was determined by the ratio of num- ber of individuals of an insect species in the sample to the total number of insects in the sample. Data analysis The data collected were analysed using descriptive and multivariate statistics. A comparison of socio-demo- graphic variables across different agro-ecological zones was made using ANOVA for quantitative variables and chi-square tests for qualitative variables. The data was arc-sin transformed before the ANOVA to homog- enize variances. Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to identify the determinants or socio- demographic factors associated with the use of a specific method to manage insect pests in stored pearl millet. IBM SPSS version 23 was utilized for all analyses. Results Socio‑demographic characteristics The majority (87.5%) of the surveyed pearl millet pro- ducers were men. These farmers belong to six socio- cultural groups including Fulani (22%), Bariba (21.7%), Yoa-lokpa (17.5%), Ottamari (16.3%), Betamaribe (13%), and Dendi (9.5%). The majority of them were Muslims (56.5%). The percentage of respondents who were Christian and animist millet producers was 29.7% and 13.8%, respectively. Farming was the main activity of the surveyed households (94%), with experience in pearl millet production varying across the prospective agro-ecological zones (Table  1). The surveyed farmers in the extreme north-west and west of Atacora of Benin had significantly more experience in pearl millet pro- duction than those in other prospected zones. The aver- age age of the surveyed farmers was 41.2 ± 12.6  years. The yield of pearl millet mentioned by the surveyed farmers varied across the different prospected zones (Table 1). Pearl millet storage constraints, and solutions proposed by farmers The surveyed farmers revealed ten storage constraints for pearl millet (Fig. 2a). Insect attack was the main con- straint (66.2% of responses), followed by mouse attack (18%), and millet grain rot (11.8%). Some farmers also mentioned the inadequacy of storage structures (1.6%), humidity (0.6%), and rodent attacks (0.6%) as constraints. Only 0.3% of the surveyed millet producers mentioned moulds, bushfires, grain germination loss, and the lack of pesticides suitable for storage as constraints. The sur- veyed farmers proposed 19 solutions to overcome these constraints. The most popular responses included effi- cient insecticides (38.3%), winnowing (22.4%), and drying grains (21.5%). The rapid sale of millet (4.6%), the harvest on the right date (3.2%), the hygiene of storage structures (2.6%), the use of varietal resistance (1.8%), and the con- struction of stores (1.4%) were also among the solution proposed by farmers (Fig. 2b). Millet storage practices Pre‑storage practices Only a few surveyed farmers (35%) adopted the practice of pre-storage for pearl millet. The main reason for pre- storage of pearl millet was to ensure good drying of the millet seeds (89.2% of responses). Some farmers prac- ticed a pre-storage of pearl millet to facilitate ginning (4.3%), due to lack of time for conditioning the seeds (3.6%), and/or due to the distance between the field and the storage structures (1.5%), and/or due to the lack of Page 5 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 storage facilities (0.7%). Pre-storage was mostly done in the fields (82.9% of responses) or in homes (17.1%). Storage forms and structures The surveyed farmers adopted various forms and struc- tures for storage of pearl millet. The majority of them stored millet in the form of shelled maize kernels (82.1%), either in polypropylene bags (62.2%), jute bags (0.3%), or jars (0.3%). Only a few surveyed famers stored millet in the form of cobs with the husks (15.7%) or stripped cobs (2.2%) in the cribs (11.2%), and granaries (26%) (Fig. 3). The millet stored mainly in jute and polyethylene bags is generally stored in farmers’ houses (85% of responses), and stores (15%). Storage methods practices Due to the lack of storage structure, pearl millet is usu- ally stored with other foodstuffs by all the surveyed farm- ers. Maize was the most stocked commodity with pearl millet (36.2% of responses), followed by sorghum (26.2%), soybeans (15.4%), rice (6.5%), beans (5%), peanuts (4.2%), cassava chips (2.8%), yam chips (1.9%), Bambara groundnut (0.8%), fonio millet (0.5%), cowpea (0.3%) and sesame (0.2%). The great majority of the surveyed farm- ers (92.9%) regularly clean their storage structures and remove old pearl millet seeds from them after each agri- cultural campaign. Farmers’ perception of the stored time of pearl millet and factors that favur insect infestation The surveyed farmers in the study area preserved pearl millet for a short period (Fig.  4). For the great major- ity of the surveyed farmers (74.9%), the infestation of stored pearl millet by insect pests was observed dur- ing the first six months of storage (Fig.  4). Some farm- ers used heavily infested pearl millet grains, for animal (45.6% of responses) and human (25.8%) consumption. Some farmers throw them away (28.2%). Only a minority Table 1  Sociodemographic characteristics of the surveyed pearl millet farmers in the study area Zone I: Extreme North-Benin, Zone II: North-Benin, Zone III: South Borgou, Zone IV: West Atacora, Zone V: Central Benin cotton zone. Numbers followed by different letters showed a significant difference at 5%. ns: not significant Characteristics Zone I (N = 40) Zone II (N = 80) Zone III (N = 100) Zone IV (N = 120) Zone V (N = 60) Study area (N = 400) X2-test F-test P-value Gender (%) Male 39 71 88 101 51 350 (87.5) 5.356 ns – P = 0.253 Female 1 9 12 19 9 50 (12.5) Age (Years) Mean ± SD 38.5 ± 13.4 40.7 ± 13.5 39.0 ± 11.4 44.0 ± 12.5 41.4 ± 12.6 41.2 ± 12.6 – 2.790 ns P = 0.073 Experience (Years) Mean ± SD 20.1 ± 12a 11.1 ± 8.4b 12.05 ± 9.7b 22.7 ± 12.5a 11.25 ± 8.2b 15.7 ± 11.6 – 24.788*** P < 0.000 Quantity (t/ha) Mean ± SD 1.8 ± 1.2a 1.3 ± 1.0a 2.1 ± 2.1b 0.4 ± 0.3a 0,9 ± 1.8a 1.2 ± 1.5 – 25.891*** P < 0.000 Religion (%) Muslim 40 58 53 32 43 226 (56.5) 124.709*** – p < 0.000 Christian – 19 35 48 21 115 (29.7) Animist – 3 12 40 – 55 (13.8) Marital status (%) Married 39 74 92 112 59 376 9.668 ns P = 0.645 Single 1 6 8 8 1 24 Sociocultural group (%) Fulani 5 29 33 6 15 88 (22) 512.759*** – p < 0.000 Bariba – 44 24 1 18 87 (21.7) Yoa-lokpa – – – 50 20 70 (17.5) Ottamari – 4 20 40 1 65 (16.3) Betamaribe – 2 22 23 5 52 (13) Dendi 35 1 1 – 1 38 (9.5) Sources of income (%) Farming 38 78 89 115 58 378 (94.5) 15.216 ns – P = 0.509 Crafts – – 4 2 2 8 (2) Trade 2 2 7 3 – 14 (3.5) Page 6 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 of the surveyed farmers mixed infested grains with non- infested grains and then sold them at a low price (0.4%). The surveyed farmers mentioned eight factors that favour the attack of stored millet by insect pests (Fig. 5). Among them, the humidity of the storage place (34.8% of responses), non-use of insecticides (31.2%), storage time (15.7%), pearl millet variety (7.3%), and seed immature- ness (7%) were the most important. Vernacular nomenclature and folk taxonomy of insect pests of stored pearl millet Insect pests associated with stored millet had differ- ent names from one sociolinguistic group to another (Table  2). Fourteen different names of insect pests of stored pearl millet were identified across the study area. The names given to insects that are associated with stored pearl millet in the study area are meaningful. These meanings reflect, among other things, the damage caused (41.5% of responses), the pest species (18.8%), the mode of feeding (14.1%), and the insect colour (13.5%). Only a few names of insect pests were associated with the plant attacked (10.8%), and the stage of insect develop- ment (1.3%). The local taxonomy of insect pests associ- ated with stored pearl millet has a hierarchical structure with a low level of classification among different socio- linguistic groups in the study area. Farmers used five criteria to identify insect pests associated with stored pearl millet. Insect colour (53.9% of responses) and size (35.3%) are the main criteria for classifying these insects. Only 6.4% of the surveyed farmers associate this classifi- cation with the insect’ shape, 4.1% with the noise emitted during insect feeding, and 0.3% with the damage caused by these insect pests. Insects associated with stored millet and farmers’ perception of their damage At least one species of storage insect was found infesting all 76 samples of pearl millet incubated in the laboratory. Four insect pests were identified in the stored pearl mil- let in the study area (Table 3). The rice weevils, Sitophilus oryzae L., and Sitophilus zeamais L. (Coleoptera: Cur- culionidae) were found in samples from all the surveyed agroecological zones (Table 3). The prevalence of Rhyzo- pertha dominica F. (Coleoptera: Bostrichidae), and Tri- bolium spp. (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) was restricted respectively to two and four agroecological zones. The relative abundance of S. oryzae (df = 4, F = 1.735, P = 0.152), S. zeamais (df = 4, F = 1.827, P = 0.133), and Tribolium spp. (df = 4, F = 0.759, P = 0.555) did not vary significantly between agroecological zones. The north- Benin agroecological zone showed the greatest (df = 4, F = 35.035, P = 0.000) relative abundance of R. dominica comparatively to the extreme north-Benin zone. The sur- veyed farmers estimated that losses due to these insect pests can cause damage up to 25% (56.35% of farmers), 50% (9.9% of famers), 75% (6.1% of farmers), and 100% (3.5% of farmers) of stored pearl millet. Farmers’ methods for preventing insect pests from infesting stored millet The majority of the surveyed farmers (58.5%) did not use any methods to prevent insect pest infestation in the stored pearl millet. The remaining farmers (41.5%) took six measures to prevent the attack of stored pearl millet by insect pests. The majority of them (53.5% of responses) sprayed the storage structures with synthetic chemical insecticides. Some of the surveyed farmers iso- lated the bags of pearl millet from the ground (25.2% of responses) by placing them on wooden planks, bricks, plastic bags, etc. Some farmers sprinkled insect repel- lent and/or insecticide plant extracts (12.6%), as well as heated the granary (5.5%). Very few surveyed farmers ensured the maintenance of storage equipment (2.4%) and the reconstruction of the granary (0.8%) to prevent insect pest attacks. Farmers’ management of stored millet insect pests The survey revealed that 48.3% of farmers have adopted at least one method to reduce the infestation of insect Fig. 2  a Farmer’s perceptions of constraints related to stored millet, b proposal of solutions to the constraints listed Page 7 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 pests in the stored pearl millet. Synthetic insecticides were the most significant method (61.9% of responses). Most of the surveyed farmers used storage insecticides such as Percal 100 EC (41.7% of responses), Sofagrain (23.2%), and Bextoxin (12.6%) to protect stored pearl mil- let (Table  4). However, some pesticides (Lambda Super 2.5 EC, Termicot, and Rambo insect powder) that are not specifically designed for the management of storage insect pests have been used by 15% of the surveyed farm- ers. All synthetic insecticides were bought from local markets. To safeguard their stored pearl millet, some farmers (21.3%) employed insecticidal and repellent plants. The surveyed farmers used the bark of Annona senegalensis Pers., the leaves of Azadirachta indica A. Juss., and the fruit of Capsicum annuum L. as insecticides (Table  5). The surveyed farmers also used the wood ash of some Fig. 3  Pictures of some granaries used in northern Benin for the storage of pearl millet 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ≥ 18 Pe rc en ta ge o f r es po ns es Number of month Storage time Insect infestation Fig. 4  Farmers’ perception of pearl millet storage time and insect infestation period 0 10 20 30 40 Humidity of the storage place No use of pesticides Storage time Millet variety Seed immaturity Low grain drying No winnowing Heat 34.8 31.2 15.7 7.3 7 3.1 0.6 0.3 Percentage of responses Fig. 5  Farmers’ perception of factors favouring the attack of pearl millet by storage insect Page 8 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 plants (7% of the responses) as an insecticide to pro- tect stored pearl millet. The bark of Khaya senegalensis (Desr.) A. Juss. and those of Parkia biglobosa (Jacq.) R.Br. ex G. Don were used by the surveyed farmers as insect repellents. The use of varietal differential susceptibility (16.8%) is one of the management strategies developed by the sur- veyed farmers to reduce insect infestation in stored pearl millet. The long-cycle varieties (Souhoun n’nin gber- enou, 12 farmers), those with yellow (Zomonra, 18) and red seeds (Gbeï sonanrou, 8), and small-seeded varieties (Zoyouyous, 7) were perceived as resistant to storage insect attacks by the surveyed farmers. This resistance was attributed to their bitter seeds, low starch content, and small size. The surveyed farmers (12.8%) identified five varieties of pearl millet as highly susceptible to insect attacks. The white seed variety called Zokpéra (18 farm- ers) was the most listed, followed by the early variety (Tcho n’ta gbeï, 7 farmers), the large grain variety (Gbeï kaka, 7 farmers), the black colour seed variety (Gbeï wonka, 6 farmers), and the late variety (Tcho n’nin gbeï, 5 farmers). According to the surveyed farmers, the sweeter taste of these seeds (18 farmers), high starch content (13 farmers), early maturity of the seeds (7 farmers), and the Table 2  Vernacular nomenclature of insect pest associated with stored pearl millet (N = 304) Naming criteria Percentage of responses Local names Sociolinguistic groups Meaning Damage 41.5 Nafa Waama Destructor Edoudoura Ditamari Boukasse Lokpa Soubossi, Ikoudounan Yedoudoula Bétamaribé Minhoutchi Natimba Sansambé Lama Dress Yom Attic grinder Gouyoudji, Nonni Peulh Destroys everything into flour Species 18.8 Coconou Bariba Ant Doussou, Hannoris Dendi Cocor Bariba, Peulhs, Bô Insect Food mode 14.1 Boucassé Lokpa Sucking insect Colour 13.5 Coconou suanou Bariba Red insect Plant attacked 10.8 Bo-Nams Yom Millet insect Gbérékokonou Bariba Diyannu kokonu Bariba Grain insect Stage of development 1.3 Djonayaou Yom Caterpillar Table 3  Insect pests associated with stored pearl millet and their relative abundance in the study area N: Number of samples, NIS: Number of infested samples, RA: Relative abundance (average count in 500 g of pearl millet). Zone I: Extreme North-Benin, Zone II: North- Benin, Zone III: South Borgou, Zone IV: West Atacora, Zone V: Central Benin cotton zone Family Species Parameters Zone I (N = 6) Zone II (N = 24) Zone III (N = 14) Zone IV (N = 12) Zone V (N = 20) Study area (N = 76) Curculionidae Sitophilus oryzae L NIS 5 18 12 9 20 64 RA 44.8 ± 15.9 58.6 ± 19.8 37.0 ± 9.6 47.8 ± 10.4 59.3 ± 6.5 52.0 ± 6.9 Sitophilus zeamais L NIS 3 13 9 6 8 39 RA 19.0 ± 9.2 25.9 ± 5.8 47.1 ± 11.3 14.7 ± 4.8 22.9 ± 7.1 26.7 ± 3.6 Bostrichidae Rhyzopertha dominica F NIS 3 19 – – – 22 RA 17.3 ± 8.6 60.4 ± 7.4 – – – 20.4 ± 3.9 Tenebrionidae Tribolium spp. NIS 6 14 3 7 9 39 RA 12 ± 2.9 24.8 ± 13.4 6.3 ± 3.9 21.5 ± 8.2 11.5 ± 4.6 16.2 ± 4.4 Page 9 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 big size of the seed (5 farmers) justified the susceptibility of these varieties to storage insect pests. Determinants of the methods used to manage insect pests in stored pearl millet From the multinomial logistic analysis, it appears that 46.22% (pseudo R2 = 0.4622) of the variation concern- ing the control methods used to manage insects infesting stored pearl millet was explained by the variables of the model. A highly significant chi-square value (p < 0.000) revealed the strong explanatory power of the regression model. The results revealed that the religion (Christian or Muslim) negatively influenced the use of chemical and botanical pesticides by farmers to control stored millet insect pests (Table 6). Similarly, the storage of pearl millet with other cereals and the farmer’s age had a negative and a positive influence on the use of botanical pesticides. The use of chemical and botanical pesticides was posi- tively influenced by farming experience and pre-storage practices (Table 6). The use of integrated control methods was positively influenced by the farming experience and the storage time. However, the use of integrated control methods was negatively influenced by the religion, farm- ers’ age, and the storage of pearl millet with other cereals. Discussion In the study area, pear millet production was a male- dominated activity. Indeed, Adeoti et al. (2017b) showed that men were the most involved in on-farm activities for pearl millet production. The surveyed farmers in the extreme north-west and west of Atacora of Benin showed more experience in pearl millet production than those in other prospected zones. It is possible that the climate in these regions is more favourable for millet produc- tion. Furthermore, Clément (1997) notes that pearl mil- let is a crop that can compete against other plants. Pearl millet yields estimated by farmers in the study area are relatively low (0.4 to 2.1 t/ha) compared to those of coun- tries such as Azerbaijan (14.8 t/ha) and Mexico (14.7 t/ ha) (FAO, 2021). Consequently, actions such as the devel- opment of improved varieties adapted to local conditions Table 4  Chemical pesticides used by the surveyed farmers to protect stored pearl millet in the study area (N = 166) SIP: Storage insect pests; IPVC: Insect pests of vegetable crops; DU: Domestic use; II = Moderately hazardous (WHO. 2005); U = Unlikely to present acute hazard in normal use Commercial name Active ingredient Chemical classa Toxicological classb Target pests Percentage Percal 100 EC Permethrin 100 g/l Pyrethroids II SIP 41.7 Sofagrain Deltamethrin (0.05%) + Piri- miphos-methyl (1.5%) Pyrethroids + Organophosphate II SIP 23.6 Bextoxin Aluminium phosphide Salt P and Al U SIP 12.6 Lambda Super 2.5 EC Deltamethrin 25 g/l Pyrethroids II IPVC 10.2 Antouka Perméthrine (3 g/kg) + Piri- miphos-methyl (16 g/kg) Pyrethroids + Organophosphate II SIP 4.7 Rambo insect powder Permethrin 0.60% Pyrethroids II DU 3.2 Phostoxin Aluminium phosphide Salt P and Al U SIP 2.4 Termicot Chloropyriphos 20% EC Organophosphate II IPVC 1.6 Table 5  Insecticidal and repellent plants used for insect pests management in the stored pearl millet (N = 57) Plant used Local name (sociolinguistic group) Part used Effect Method of use Percentage of responses Annona senegalensis Bâtôkô (Bariba) Bark Insecticide Crush the bark and mix with the pearl millet 35.1 Azadirachta indica Haaduyey, Nimou (Bariba), Kitcho (Peulh, Lokpa), Kassiènan (Yom) Leaves Insecticide Mix the powder of the dried leaves with the pearl millet 28.1 Khaya senegalensis Kobou (Natimba) kouroubou (Waama), Bark Insect repellent Sprinkle the store with bark powder 21.1 Capsicum annuum Djonki (yom) Fruit Insecticide Mix the dried fruit powder with the pearl millet 7 Parkia biglobosa Donn (Baribas) Bark Insect repellent Crush the bark and mix with the pearl millet 1.7 Wood ash All plants Entire plant Insecticide Mix the ash with the pearl millet 7 Page 10 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 Ta bl e  6  Fa ct or s in flu en ci ng th e us e of a s pe ci fic m et ho d to m an ag e in se ct p es ts in s to re d pe ar l m ill et in th e st ud y ar ea Va ri ab le s M et ho ds u se d by fa rm er s fo r m an ag in g in se ct p es ts Sy nt he tic p es tic id es Bo ta ni ca l i ns ec tic id es Re si st an t v ar ie tie s In te gr at ed c on tr ol m et ho ds Co effi ci en t p va lu e Co effi ci en t p va lu e Co effi ci en t p va lu e Co effi ci en t p va lu e A ge (y ea rs ) 0. 02 8 0. 11 5 0. 04 8 0. 01 1* * −  0 .0 19 0. 28 8 −  0 .0 54 0. 01 5* * W om en (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) −  0 .2 81 0. 64 7 −  1 .2 16 0. 12 7 0. 43 3 0. 43 2 −  1 .7 81 0. 06 1 C hr is tia n (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) −  3 .5 56 0. 00 2* ** −  2 .7 54 0. 01 9* * 15 .5 82 0. 99 2 −  2 .7 87 0. 02 8* * M us lim (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) −  3 .9 58 0. 00 0* ** −  3 .6 56 0. 00 2* ** 16 .0 99 0. 99 1 −  3 .9 65 0. 00 1* ** Fa rm in g ex pe - rie nc e (y ea rs ) 0. 07 9 0. 00 0* ** 0. 07 7 0. 00 1* ** 0. 02 0 0. 37 3 0. 09 1 0. 00 0* ** M ai n ac tiv ity fa rm in g (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) −  6 .0 43 0. 99 8 17 .7 84 0. 99 8 13 .8 60 0. 99 6 −  6 .3 51 0. 99 9 Sh el le d m ai ze (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) 17 .1 91 0. 99 4 17 .0 88 0. 99 6 14 .6 48 0. 99 7 15 .7 92 0. 99 6 Po ly pr op yl en e ba gs (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) 13 .0 57 0. 99 9 19 .5 77 0. 99 6 14 .8 94 0. 99 6 13 .3 14 0. 99 8 Pr e- st or ag e pr ac tic es (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) 1. 67 5 0. 00 0* ** 1. 70 2 0. 00 1* ** −  0 .4 36 0. 36 6 0. 77 0 0. 26 6 St or ag e tim e (n um be rs ) 0. 68 2 0. 30 6 0. 04 2 0. 57 0 0. 05 0 0. 37 5 0. 19 4 0. 02 6* * Pe ar l m il- le t s to re d w ith  o th er ce re al s (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) −  0 .2 76 0. 61 3 −  1 .5 00 0. 00 9* ** 1. 00 7 0. 11 3 −  2 .7 69 0. 00 0* ** St or ag e lo ca - tio n m ai nt e- na nc e (1  =  Ye s, 0  =  N o) 30 .9 99 0. 98 2 16 .2 68 0. 99 4 0. 12 8 0. 88 5 14 .8 50 0. 98 6 Page 11 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 ** *S ig ni fic an t a t 1 % a nd * * 5% . a “N o co nt ro l” us ed a s th e ba se c at eg or y. W om an , a ni m is ts , m ar rie d, s in gl e, tr ad e, c ra ft , s tr ip pe d co bs , j ut e ba gs , j ar s w er e om itt ed b ec au se o f c ol lin ea rit y Ta bl e  6  (c on tin ue d) Va ri ab le s M et ho ds u se d by fa rm er s fo r m an ag in g in se ct p es ts Sy nt he tic p es tic id es Bo ta ni ca l i ns ec tic id es Re si st an t v ar ie tie s In te gr at ed c on tr ol m et ho ds Co effi ci en t p va lu e Co effi ci en t p va lu e Co effi ci en t p va lu e Co effi ci en t p va lu e Co ns ta nt −  5 4. 87 5 −  3 7. 75 8 −  6 5. 80 4 −  3 8. 91 5 N um be r of  o bs er va - tio ns 39 9 Lo g lik el ih oo d −  2 84 .6 22 04 LR c hi 2 (5 0) 48 9. 30 Pr ob  >  C hi 2 0. 00 00 Ps eu do R 2 0. 46 22 Page 12 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 should be taken to enhance the production of this cereal in the Republic of Benin. The surveyed farmers mentioned insect attacks as the most important constraints during pearl millet storage. Ghanaian producers have also mentioned the damage caused by insect pests as an important constraint to the storage of pearl millet (Tanzubil & Yakubu, 1997). Losses caused by insect pests are both quantitative and qualita- tive and were estimated at 17.1% of pearl millet stored for 7 months (Baoua et  al., 2015). The primary pests, S. zeamais, S. oryzae, and R. dominica across the study area were also mentioned as important pests of pearl millet in Nigeria (Lale & Yusuf, 2000), Senegal (Gueye & Delo- bel, 1999) and in West Africa in general (Gahukar, 1984). Similarly, the red flour beetle T. castaneum was found in Nigeria (Lale & Ajayi, 2000; Lale & Yusuf, 2000) and Niger (Baoua et  al., 2015) as the main secondary pest found in the pearl millet stored. The distribution of these storage insect pests varied across the study area and this could be due to the climatic conditions prevailing in the different prospected agro-ecological zones, storage practices and management (Kalsa et al., 2019). The pre- storage practiced by some surveyed farmers could exac- erbate infestations of pearl millet by these insect pests, as revealed by Mutungi et  al. (2019) on maize. In order to minimize losses caused by insect pests, it is crucial to raise awareness and train pearl millet producers in good pre-storage practices. In the study area, pearl millet was mainly stored in the form of grain in polypropylene bags, jute, granaries and cribs. Compared to grains stored in mud silos, clay pots, and underground pit storage systems, pearl mil- let stored in propylene bags is less likely to be attacked (Lale & Yusuf, 2000). According to Meenatchi and Loga- nathan (2022) and observed in the study area, pearl mil- let is primarily stored in the homes of farmers. This fact could be due to the lack of financial means of smallholder farmers to build storage structures. Consequently, pearl millet is stored with other commodities, which increases the damage caused by insects and the early infestation of stocks perceived by the surveyed farmers. In fact, it is known that pearl millet is susceptible to a wide spec- trum of insects that infest other cereals such as maize and sorghum (Lale & Ajayi, 2000). It is therefore urgent to establish an agricultural policy to support pearl millet producers and train them on good storage practices. Interviewed farmers displayed a strong inclination toward using synthetic pesticides. These products were sprayed in storage structures to prevent infestation, and their non-use was mentioned by many farmers as one of the important causes favouring the insect prolif- eration in stored millet. In addition, synthetic chemical pesticides were the main control method used by farm- ers to protect stored pearl millet. The use of products such as Phostoxin and Betoxin, which have as active ingredient aluminium phosphide, are among the most dangerous pesticides used for the stored food pro- tection (Eddleston, 2020). Indeed, aluminium phos- phide has caused the death of many people around the world (Hasabo et al., 2015; Sulaj et al., 2015, Deraz et  al., 2022). The use of synthetic pesticides that are not intended for the preservation of stored food was also revealed in the study area. Pearl millet producers should receive training from the Territorial Agricul- tural Development Agency (ATDA) on the risks asso- ciated with the misuse of pesticides on human health. A national policy must be implemented to prohibit the sale of these dangerous pesticides from local markets. In addition, the development of eco-friendly control methods for pest management on stored pearl millet is an urgent necessity. Some of the surveyed farmers used local plants with potential insecticidal or repellent effects to protect stored millet. Among these plants, the leaves of A. indica (Barre & Jenber, 2022; Ojuu et  al., 2023; Sin- tim & Ansah, 2023), fruits of C. annuum (Ashouri & Shayesteh, 2010; Cui et al., 2023), and essential oil of A. senegalensis (Ngamo et al., 2007) are already recognized as having an insecticidal effect on insect pests of stored pearl millet. Similarly, K. senegalensis (Sintim & Ansah, 2023) barks is known to have an insect repellent effect. Promoting and popularizing the use of these plants to protect stored pearl millet by farmers is necessary. The surveyed farmers also reported using the ashes of local plants to preserve pearl millet against storage insect pests. Besides some biochemical properties, ashes con- tains inert matter that fills the space between the grains and constitutes a barrier to the progress of female insects seeking to lay eggs (Stejskal et al., 2021). With regard to the development of improved varie- ties, breeders should take into account the perceptions of pearl millet producers regarding the susceptibil- ity of certain varieties. Farmers attributed the varietal sensitivity to insects to the sweet taste of pearl millet grains and their high starch content. In fact, the sen- sitivity of cereal grains such as maize (Demissie et  al., 2015; Ngom et al., 2020), rice (Gowda et al., 2019), and sorghum (Chuck-Hernández et  al., 2013) was signifi- cantly correlated with the amylose content, which is a basic compound that governs the resistance of pearl millet grains to insects (Meenatchi & Loganathan, 2022). The susceptibility of the four varieties of pearl millet (Souhoun n’nin gberenou, Zomonra, Gbeï sonan- rou, and Zoyouyous) mentioned as resistant to storage Page 13 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 insect pests must be explored and the most efficient must serve as basic material in breeding programmes. It is not surprising that religion has a negative impact on the use of pesticides by surveyed farmers. Indeed, Muslim and Christian farmers’ negative attitude to pes- ticide use could be explained by the harmfulness of chemical pesticides to human health and the environ- ment (Clements et  al., 2014; Hailu, 2017). Although holy books of both religions have mentioned various plant species that can be used as a means of controlling crop pests, their use is conditioned by doses that are not harmful to the environment (Clements et al., 2014; Hik- mawati, 2021). The positive effect of the farmers’ age on the use of botanical pesticides could be explained by the experience acquired over the years, which gives the old- est a better mastery of the plant species with insecticidal effects (Deng et al., 2016). However, since integrated pest management (IPM) is a modern practice (Dara, 2019), it is not surprising that farmers’ age negatively affects its use. It is evident from our results that the experienced and farmers practicing pre-storage use more synthetic insecticides. This trend could be explained by the fact that experienced farmers are more able to invest in food protection because they have greater accumulated per- sonal capital (Zhang et al., 2018). The storage time had a positive impact on the adoption of an integrated control method. Indeed, the abundance of insect pests increases with storage time (Jian, 2019), as well as the degrada- tion of chemical pesticides (Lorini & Filho, 2007), thus increasing the probability of adoption of an integrated control method by farmers. The integration of methods to combat storage pests is an effective practice (Morisson et  al., 2021) and must be popularized in the study area. According to the farmers, the Souhoun n’nin gberenou landrace and the use of A. senegalensis bark and A. indica leaves are the most effective methods for preserving mil- let for extended periods. Conclusions According to our study, the storage of pearl millet is largely hindered by the attack of insect pests. The rice weevil, S. oryzae, and S. zeamais were the most signifi- cant pests of stored pearl millet. Farmers use a variety of methods to overcome this constraint, with synthetic chemical pesticides being the primary method of con- trol. The insecticidal and repellent effects of plants used by producers for stock protection must be tested and the best ones popularized. Millet producers must receive training on good food storage practices. The resistance of millet varieties perceived by farmers as tolerant to stor- age insects must be evaluated and the most resistant vari- eties promoted. The socio-economic characteristics that influence the use of a pest management method must be taken into account when developing extension pro- grammes for integrated pest management methods. Abbreviation IPM � Integrated pest management Acknowledgements The authors thank the chiefs of the various surveyed villages for the mobiliza- tion of the pearl millet producers who participated in the survey. Thanks also to the pearl millet producers who shared their endogenous knowledge. Author contributions TOA contributed to collection the data and writing—original draft. YLEL was involved in conceptualization, methodology, funding, supervision, and review and editing. ID contributed to review and editing. JG and DG were involved in collection the data. MT contributed to review and editing. All authors have read and approved the manuscript. Funding Not applicable. Availability of data and materials Data that support the findings of this study are available in Figshare with the identifier https://​doi.​org/​10.​6084/​m9.​figsh​are.​24793​326. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Oral consent to participate in the survey was sought from each pearl millet producer prior to any comment. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Author details 1 Laboratory of Applied Zoology and Plant Health (ZASVE), National High School of Applied Biosciences and Biotechnologies (ENSBBA), Technologies, Engineering and Mathematics (UNSTIM), National University of Sciences, PO Box 14, Dassa‑Zoumé, Benin. 2 Département des Sciences de la Vie et de la Terre, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Natitingou, UNSTIM, Natitingou, Bénin. 3 International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Station du Benin, 08 BP 0932 Tri Postal, Cotonou, Benin. Received: 18 December 2023 Accepted: 5 January 2025 References Adebo, H. O., Ahoton, L. E., Quenum, F. J. B., Adoukonou-Sagbadja, H., Bello, D. O., & Chrysostome, C. A. A. M. (2018). Ethnobotanical Knowledge of Jute (Corchorus olitorius L.) in Benin. European Journal of Medicinal Plants., 26, 1–11. Adeoti, K., Djedatin, G., Ewedje, E., Toukourou, F., & Baba-moussa, F. (2017). Diversity status and traditional uses of pearl millet in Benin Northern. International Journal of Sciences., 6, 108–115. https://​doi.​org/​10.​18483/​ ijSci.​1399 Adéoti, K., Kouhoundé, S. H. S., Noumavo, P. A., Baba-Moussa, F., & Toukourou, F. (2017). Nutritional value and physicochemical composition of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) produced in Benin. Food Sciences of Food Sciences., 7(1), 92–96. https://​doi.​org/​10.​15414/​jmbfs.​2017.7.​1.​92-​96 Ashouri, S., & Shayesteh, N. (2010). Insecticidal activities of two powdered spices, black pepper and red pepper on adults of Rhyzopertha dominica (F.) and Sitophilus granaries (L.). Munis Entomology & Zoology, 5(2), 600–607. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.24793326 https://doi.org/10.18483/ijSci.1399 https://doi.org/10.18483/ijSci.1399 https://doi.org/10.15414/jmbfs.2017.7.1.92-96 Page 14 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 Baoua, I. B., Amadou, L., Abdourahmane, M., Bakoye, O., Baributsa, D., & Mur- dock, L. L. (2015). Grain storage and insect pests of stored grain in rural Niger. Journal of Stored Products Research, 64, 8–12. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 1016/j.​jspr.​2015.​04.​007 Barre, J., & Jenber, A. J. (2022). Evaluation of selected botanicals for the management of maize weevil (Sitophilus zeamais) on maize (Zea mays L.) grain under laboratory condition in Gabilay District Somaliland. Heliyon, 8, e11859. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​heliy​on.​2022.​e11859 Ben Romdhane, M., Riahi, L., Yazidi, R., Mliki, A., & Zoghlami, N. (2022). Cross transferability of barley nuclear SSRs to pearl millet genome provides new molecular tools for genetic analyses and marker assisted selection. Open Agriculture, 7(1), 668–678. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1515/​opag-​2022-​0132 Chuck-Hernández, C., Serna-Saldívar, S. O., & García-Lara, S. (2013). Susceptibil- ity of different types of sorghums during storage to Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky. Journal of Stored Products Research, 54, 34–40. https://​doi.​ org/​10.​1016/j.​jspr.​2013.​04.​003 Clément, J. C. (1997). Les variétés traditionnelles de mil en Afrique sahélienne: facteurs de stabilité et de variation. pp 133–142 in gestion des ressources génétiques des plantes en Afrique des savanes Bamako-Mali. ORSTOM. Fonds documentaire N°010017263. Clements, J. M., McCright, A. M., & Xiao, C. (2014). An examination of the “Greening of Christianity” thesis among Americans. Journal for the Scien- tific Study of Religion, 53(2), 373–439. Cui, S. F., Wang, J. W., Li, H. F., Fang, R., Yu, X., & Lu, Y. J. (2023). Microencapsula- tion of capsaicin in chitosan microcapsules: characterization, release behavior, and pesticidal properties against Tribolium castaneum (Herbst). Insects., 14, 1–27. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​insec​ts140​10027 Dagba, A. R., Missihoun, A. A., Adoukonou-Sagbadja, H., Houéhanou, T. D., Assogbadjo, A. E., Ahanhanzo, C., & Agbangla, C. (2014). Traditionnal knowledge on millet (Pennisetuum glaucum (L.) R. Br) genetic resources conservation in Benin: Local taxonomy and cultivar characteristics. Annales des Sciences Agronomiques, 18(2), 41–60. Dagnelie, P. (1998). Statistique théorique et appliquée. Tome 1: Statistique descriptive et bases de l’inférence statistique. De Boeck et Larcier, Brux- elles. pp. 517 Dansi, A., Vodouhè, R., Azokpota, P., Yedomonhan, H., Assogba, P., Adjatin, A., Loko, Y. L., Dossou-Aminon, I., & Akpagana, K. (2012). Diversity of the neglected and underutilized crop species of importance in Benin. The Sci- entific World Journal., 2012, 932947. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1100/​2012/​932947 Dara, S. K. (2019). The new integrated pest management paradigm for the modern age. Journal of Integrated Pest Management, 10(1), 1–9. https://​ doi.​org/​10.​1093/​jipm/​pmz010 Das, I. K., & Rakshit, S. (2016). Millets, their importance, and production con- straints. Biotic Stress Resistance in Millets, 2016, 3–19. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 1016/​b978-0-​12-​804549-​7.​00001-9 Demissie, G., Swaminathan, R., Ameta, O. P., Jain, H. K., & Saharan, V. (2015). Bio- chemical basis of resistance in different varieties of maize for their relative susceptibility to Sitotroga cerealella (Olivier) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research, 6(1), 1–12. Deng, A. L., Ogendo, J. O., Owuor, G., Bett, P. K., Omolo, E. O., Mugisha-Kamate- nesi, M., & Mihale, J. M. (2016). Factors determining the use of botanical insect pest control methods by smallholder farmers in the Lake Victoria basin, Kenya. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 3(5), 108–115. Deraz, R., Elrafey, D., & Mesallam, D. (2022). Acute aluminium phosphide poisoning in East Delta, Egypt: A growing public health problem over the last five years. Egyptian Society of Clinical Toxicology Journal, 10(1), 49–61. https://​doi.​org/​10.​21608/​esctj.​2022.​140273.​1009 Eddleston, M. (2020). Poisoning by Pesticides. Medicine., 48(3), 214–217. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​mpmed.​2019.​12.​019 FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2021. FAOSTAT Statistical Database. Rome. https://​www.​fao.​org/​stati​stics/​fr Gahukar, R. T. (1984). Insect pests of pearl millet in West Africa: A review. Tropical Pest Management, 30(2), 142–147. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09670​ 87840​93708​67 Gowda, G. B., Patil, N. B., Adak, T., Pandi, G. P., Basak, N., Dhali, K., & Rath, P. C. (2019). Physico-chemical characteristics of rice (Oryza Sativa L.) grain imparting resistance and their association with development of rice weevil, Sitophilus oryzae (L.) (Coleoptera:Curculionidae). Environmental Sustainability, 2(4), 369–379. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s42398-​019-​00087-9 Gueye, M. T., & Delobel, A. (1999). Relative susceptibility of stored pearl mil- let fonio to insect infestation. Journal of Stored Products Research, 35, 277–283. Hailu, F. (2017). Farmers perception of pesticide use and genetic erosion of landraces of tetraploid wheat (Triticum spp.) in Ethiopia. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 64, 979–994. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ s10722-​016-​0419-7 Halstead, D. G. H. (1986). Keys for the identification of beetles associated with stored products I: Introduction and key to families. Journal of Stored Products Research, 22, 163–203. Hasabo, G. (2015). Aluminum Phosphide, A Serious killer in Egypt. Journal of Forensic, Toxicology and Medicolegal Analysis, 1(1), 6–7. Hikmawati, H. (2021). Agricultural land, pesticides and habitus of muslim farm- ers in Ngawi regency. Muharrik Jurnal Dakwah dan Sosial, 4(2), 219–236. https://​doi.​org/​10.​37680/​muhar​rik.​v4i02.​975 INSAE (Institut National de la Statistique et de l’Analyse Économique). (2016). Principaux indicateurs sociodémographiques et économiques (RGPH-4, 2013). https://​insae.​bj/​stati​stiqu​es/ enquetes et recensements. Jian, F. (2019). Influences of stored product insect movements on integrated pest management decisions. Insects, 10(4), 100. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ insec​ts100​40100 Kalsa, K. K., Subramanyam, B., Demissie, G., Worku, A. F., & Habtu, N. G. (2019). Major insect pests and their associated losses in quantity and quality of farm-stored wheat seed. Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 29(2), 71–82. Kumar, R. (2017). Insect Pests of Stored Grain: Biology, Behavior, and Management Strategies. Waretown, NJ: Apple Academic Press. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1201/​ 97813​15365​695 Lale, N. E. S., & Ajayi, F. A. (2000). Suppressing infestation of stored pearl millet Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br. By Tribollium castaneum (Herbst) with insecticidal essential oilsin Maiduguri, Nigeria. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection., 107(4), 392–398. Lale, N. E. S., & Yusuf, B. A. (2000). Insect pests infesting stored pearl millet Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br. in northeastern Nigeria and their damage potential. Cereal Research Communications, 28, 181–186. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​1007/​BF035​43591 Loko, Y. L. E., Akohonwe, J., Toffa, J., Orobiyi, A., Assogba, P., Dansi, A., & Tamò, M. (2019). Farmers knowledge, perceptions and management of Kersting’s groundnut (Macrotyloma geocarpum Harms) insect pests in Benin. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology., 80, 41. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​ s41936-​019-​0113-3 Loko, Y. L. E., Gbemavo, C. D. S. J., Djedatin, G., Ewedje, E., Orobiyi, A., Toffa, J., Tchakpa, C., Sedah, P., & Sabot, F. (2022). Characterization of rice farm- ing systems, production constraints and determinants of adoption of improved varieties by smallholder farmers of the Republic of Benin. Sci- ence and Reports, 12, 3959. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1038/​s41598-​022-​07946-2 Lorini, I., & Filho, A. F. (2007). Integrated pest management strategies used in stored grain in Brazil to manage phosphine resistance. Donahaye, E.J., Navarro, S., Bell, C., Jayas, D., Noyes, R., Phillips, T.W. (Eds.) (2007) Proc. Int. Conf. Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products, Gold-Coast Australia. 8–13th August 2004. FTIC Ltd. Publishing, Israel. pp. 293–300 Mawouma, S., Condurache, N. N., Turturică, M., Constantin, O. E., Croitoru, C., & Rapeanu, G. (2022). Chemical composition and antioxidant profile of sor- ghum (Sorghumbicolor (L.) Moench) and pearl millet (Pennisetumglau- cum (L.) R.Br.) grains cultivated in the Far-North region of cameroon. Foods., 11(14), 2026. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​foods​11142​026 Meenatchi, R., & Loganathan, M. (2022). Millet Storage and Pest Management. In C. Anandharamakrishnan, A. Rawson, & C. K. Sunil (Eds.), Handbook of Millets - Processing, Quality, and Nutrition Status (pp. 49–61). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-​981-​16-​7224-8_3 Morrison, W. R., Scully, E. D., & Campbell, J. F. (2021). Towards developing areawide semiochemical-mediated, behaviorally-based integrated pest management programs for stored product insects. Pest Management Sci- ence, 77(6), 2667–2682. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​ps.​6289. Epub 2021 Feb 6 PMID: 33481331. Mutungi, C., Muthoni, F., Bekunda, M., Gaspar, A., Kabula, E., & Abass, A. (2019). Physical quality of maize grain harvested and stored by smallholder farm- ers in the Northern highlands of Tanzania: Effects of harvesting and pre- storage handling practices in two marginally contrasting agro-locations. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2015.04.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2015.04.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11859 https://doi.org/10.1515/opag-2022-0132 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2013.04.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2013.04.003 https://doi.org/10.3390/insects14010027 https://doi.org/10.1100/2012/932947 https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmz010 https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmz010 https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-804549-7.00001-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-804549-7.00001-9 https://doi.org/10.21608/esctj.2022.140273.1009 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mpmed.2019.12.019 https://www.fao.org/statistics/fr https://doi.org/10.1080/09670878409370867 https://doi.org/10.1080/09670878409370867 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-019-00087-9 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-016-0419-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-016-0419-7 https://doi.org/10.37680/muharrik.v4i02.975 https://insae.bj/statistiques/ https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10040100 https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10040100 https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315365695 https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315365695 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03543591 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03543591 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41936-019-0113-3 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41936-019-0113-3 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-07946-2 https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11142026 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-7224-8_3 https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6289 Page 15 of 15Alagbe et al. The Journal of Basic and Applied Zoology (2025) 86:7 Journal of Stored Products Research, 84, 101517. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ jspr.​2019.​101517 Ngamo, T. S. L., Ngantako, I., Ngassoum, M. B., Mapongmestsem, P., & Hance, T. (2007). Persistence of insecticidal activities of crude essential oils of three aromatic plants towards four major stored product insect pests. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 2(4), 173–177. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5897/​ AJAR.​90005​36 Ngom, D., Fauconnier, M. L., Malumba, P., Dia, C. A. K. M., Thiaw, C., & Sembène, M. (2020). Varietal susceptibility of maize to larger grain borer, Pros- tephanus truncatus (Horn) (Coleoptera; Bostrichidae), based on grain physicochemical parameters. Plos one, 15(4), e0232164. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​02321​64 Njoroge, A. W., Baoua, I., & Baributsa, D. (2019). Postharvest management prac- tices of grains in the Eastern Region of Kenya. J Agric Sci (Tor)., 11(3), 33. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5539/​jas.​v11n3​p33. Epub 2019 Feb 15 PMID: 33381246 PMCID: PMC7743974. Ojuu, D., Agolei, D. J., Amayo, R., Andiku, C., Alibo, D., & Turyasingura, G. (2023). Efficacy of neem and eucalyptus leaf powders for the management of maize weevil sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Curculioni- dae) in Dried Sweet Potatoes. International Journal of Plant & Soil Science, 35(20), 24–33. Ollabode, N., Tovihoudji, G. P., Yegbemey, R. N., Aihounton, D. G. B., Edja, H., Akponikpè, P. B. I., & Yabi, A. J. (2022). Facteurs determinant l’utilisation des engrais mineraux et organiques par les producteurs de mais en zones Soudanienne et soudano-sahelienne du nord-Benin. Agronomie Africaine, 34(2), 229–242. Sharma, H. C., Ashok, S., Alur, R., Reddy C. H., Jayaraj, K., Varaprasad, V.J., Vara- prasad Reddy, K. M., Belum, V. S., Reddy & Rai, K. N. (2007). Management of sorghum and Pearl Millet Pests in Bulk storage. Global Theme on Crop Improvement. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: 20 pp. Sintim, H., & Ansah, K. (2023). Effects of biopesticides extracted with a homemade solvent on stored maize protection. Agricultura Tropica et Subtropica, 56(1), 125–142. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2478/​ats-​2023-​0015 Srivastava, R. K., Yadav, O. P., Kaliamoorthy, S., Gupta, S. K., Serba, D. D., Choudhary, S., Govindaraj, M., Kholová, J., Murugesan, T., Satyavathi, C. T., Gumma, M. K., Singh, R. B., Bollam, S., Gupta, R., & Varshney, R. K. (2022). Breeding drought-tolerant pearl millet using conventional and genomic approaches: Achievements and prospects. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13, 781524. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpls.​2022.​781524 Stejskal, V., Vendl, T., Aulicky, R., & Athanassiou, C. (2021). Synthetic and natural insecticides: Gas, liquid, gel and solid formulations for stored-product and food-industry pest control. Insects., 12, 590. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​insec​ ts120​70590 Sulaj, Z., Drishti, A., Çeko, I., Gashi, A., & Vyshka, G. (2015). Fatal aluminum phos- phide poisonings in Tirana (Albania), 2009–2013. DARU J Pharm Sci, 23, 8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s40199-​015-​0090-0 Tanzubil, P., & Yakubu, E. (1997). Insect pests of millet in Northern Ghana. 1. Farmers’ perceptions and damage potential. International Journal of Pest Management, 43(2), 133–136. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09670​87972​28825 Zannou, O., Agossou, D. J., Miassi, Y., Agani, O. B., Aisso, M. D., Chabi, I. B., Yénoukounmè, E. P., Azokpota, P., & Koca, I. (2022). Traditional fermented foods and beverages: Indigenous practices of food processing in Benin Republic. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 27, 100450. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijgfs.​2021.​100450 Zhang, W., Kato, E., Bianchi, F., Bhandary, P., Gort, G., & van der Werf, W. (2018). Farmers’ perceptions of crop pest severity in Nigeria are associated with landscape, agronomic and socio-economic factors. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 259, 159–167. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​agee.​ 2018.​03.​004 Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in pub- lished maps and institutional affiliations. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2019.101517 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspr.2019.101517 https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR.9000536 https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR.9000536 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232164 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232164 https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v11n3p33 https://doi.org/10.2478/ats-2023-0015 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.781524 https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12070590 https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12070590 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40199-015-0090-0 https://doi.org/10.1080/096708797228825 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2021.100450 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2018.03.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2018.03.004 Post-harvest conservation practices, related insect pests of stored pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L) R. Br.), and their management in northern Benin Abstract Background Results Conclusions Background Methods Study area and site selection Sampling Surveys Identification of insects associated with stored pearl millet Data analysis Results Socio-demographic characteristics Pearl millet storage constraints, and solutions proposed by farmers Millet storage practices Pre-storage practices Storage forms and structures Storage methods practices Farmers’ perception of the stored time of pearl millet and factors that favur insect infestation Vernacular nomenclature and folk taxonomy of insect pests of stored pearl millet Insects associated with stored millet and farmers’ perception of their damage Farmers’ methods for preventing insect pests from infesting stored millet Farmers’ management of stored millet insect pests Determinants of the methods used to manage insect pests in stored pearl millet Discussion Conclusions Acknowledgements References