Table 10.

Mean ranking^a of farmers’ perceptions on preventive measures for aflatoxin contamination

Causes	Ease of application	Cost	Effectiveness
Preharvest
Removal of stubble from previous crops	1.8 (0.1)b	2.3 (0.1)	2.1 (0.2)
Using resistant varieties	1.4 (0.0)	1.7 (0.0)	1.6 (0.0)
Selection of healthy seeds	1.4 (0.0)	2.1 (0.1)	1.6 (0.1)
Seed treatments with biological control	2.1 (0.2)	2.7 (0.2)	1.9 (0.1)
Seed treatments with chemical fungicide	1.4 (0.1)	2.0 (0.1)	2.0 (0.2)
Using crop rotation	2.0 (0.1)	2.4 (0.1)	2.1 (0.1)
Providing supplement irrigation	2.4 (0.2)	2.9 (0.2)	2.7 (0.2)
Control of pests and diseases	1.8 (0.0)	1.7 (0.0)	1.9 (0.0)
Postharvest
Avoiding mechanical damage during harvesting	1.9 (0.1)	2.7 (0.1)	2.2 (0.2)
Cleaning crops before storage	2.0 (0.1)	1.8 (0.1)	1.8 (0.1)
Fumigation of storage room	2.7 (0.2)	2.7 (0.3)	2.5 (0.2)
Using anti‐microbial agents	2.1 (0.1)	2.0 (0.2)	2.1 (0.1)
Kendal's correlation coefficient	0.00	0.02	0.01
Chi‐square	8.1	19.6	11.0
p‐Value	0.07	0.05	0.45
N	127

^aA five‐point scale ranking (1 =  strongly agree, 2 =  fairly agree, 3 =  neutral, 4 =  a little agree, and 5 =  not at all).

^bMean (standard deviation).