522013

ISSN 2078-6336ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCESan international journal

RESSOURCESGNTIQUES ANIMALESun journal international

RECURSOS GENTICOS ANIMALESuna revista internacional

ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES RESSOURCES GNTIQUES ANIM

ALES RECURSOS GENTICOS ANIMALES

FAO52

2013

CONTENTS

Editorial ..............................................................................................................................................................i

Morphological traits of duck and geese breeds of West Bengal, IndiaSandip Banerjee ..................................................................................................................................................1

Signature of artificial selection and ecological landscape on morphological structures of Ethiopian village chickensT.T. Desta, T. Dessie, J. Bettridge, S.E. Lynch, K. Melese, M. Collins, R.M. Christley, P. Wigley, P. Kaiser, Z. Terfa, J.M. Mwacharo & O. Hanotte ............................................................................................17

Population history and genetic variability of the American Shire horseT.D. Stephens & R.K. Splan ..............................................................................................................................31

Morphological characterization of indigenous sheep in Southern Regional State, EthiopiaAberra Melesse, Sandip Banerjee, Admasu Lakew, Fekadu Mersha, Fsahatsion Hailemariam, Shemlis Tsegaye & Tafesse Makebo..................................................................................................................39

Multivariate analyses of morphological traits in Algerian goats, Stif, north-eastern AlgeriaM. Dekhili, M. Bounechada & I. Mannalah ....................................................................................................51

Microsatellite-based genetic evaluation of Ghumusar goats of Orissa, IndiaPriyanka Mishra, Ayesha S. Ali, S.P. Dixit, R.A.K. Aggarwal, P.S. Dangi, Neha Tyagi, S.K. Dash & N.K. Verma ..................................................................................................................................59

Morphological characterization of the Azikheli buffalo in PakistanM. Khan, I. Rahim, H. Rueff, S. Jalali, M. Saleem, D. Maselli, S. Muhammad & U. Wiesmann ....................65

On-farm phenotypic characterization of indigenous cattle populations of Gamo Goffa zone,Southern EthiopiaChencha Chebo, Workneh Ayalew & Zewdu Wuletaw ......................................................................................71

Morphological characterization of Achai cattle in sedentary and transhumant systems in PakistanM. Saleem, I. Rahim, S. Jalali, H. Rueff, M. Khan, D. Maselli, U. Wiesmann & S. Muhammad ....................83

Mammary immunity of White Park and Highland cattle compared with Brown Swiss and Red HolsteinD. Sorg, E. Fandrey, K. Frlich, H.H.D. Meyer & H. Kliem ............................................................................91

Vechur cattle from extinction to sustainabilitySosamma Iype ................................................................................................................................................105

Cross-breeding cattle for milk production in the tropics: achievements, challenges and opportunitiesE. Galukande, H. Mulindwa, M. Wurzinger, R. Roschinsky, A.O. Mwai & J. Slkner ..................................111

Breeding structure and genetic variability of the Holstein Friesian dairycattle population in KenyaT.K. Muasya, K.J. Peters & A.K. Kahi ............................................................................................................127

Breeding management and assessment of Curraleiro cattle in Northeastern BrazilP.A. Salles, V.V. Barbosa, C.M. de Sousa, G.R. Medeiros, L.L. Rocha & M. Weller ......................................139

The domestic livestock resources of Turkey: sheep breeds and cross-breeds and their conservation statusOrhan Yilmaz, Firat Cengiz, Mehmet Ertugrul & R. Trevor Wilson ..............................................................147

Recent Publications ......................................................................................................................................165

20786336_52-0.qxd 4/30/13 11:46 AM Page 1

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product donot imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or developmentstatus of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimi-tation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products ofmanufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these havebeen endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature thatare not mentioned.The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO.

Les appellations employes dans ce produit dinformation et la prsentation des donnesqui y figurent nimpliquent de la part de lOrganisation des Nations Unies pour lalimenta-tion et lagriculture (FAO) aucune prise de position quant au statut juridique ou au stadede dveloppement des pays, territoires, villes ou zones ou de leurs autorits, ni quant autrac de leurs frontires ou limites. La mention de socits dtermines ou de produits defabricants, quils soient ou non brevets, nentrane, de la part de la FAO, aucune appro-bation ou recommandation desdits produits de prfrence dautres de nature analoguequi ne sont pas cits.Les opinions exprimes dans ce produit dinformation sont celles du/des auteur(s) et nerefltent pas ncessairement les vues ou les politiques de la FAO.

Las denominaciones empleadas en este producto informativo y la forma en que apare-cen presentados los datos que contiene no implican, por parte de la Organizacin de lasNaciones Unidas para la Alimentacin y la Agricultura (FAO), juicio alguno sobre lacondicin jurdica o nivel de desarrollo de pases, territorios, ciudades o zonas, o de susautoridades, ni respecto de la delimitacin de sus fronteras o lmites. La mencin deempresas o productos de fabricantes en particular, estn o no patentados, no implica quela FAO los apruebe o recomiende de preferencia a otros de naturaleza similar que no semencionan.Las opiniones expresadas en este producto informativo son las de su(s) autor(es), y noreflejan necesariamente los puntos de vista o polticas de la FAO.

FAO encourages the use, reproduction and dissemination of material in this informationproduct. Except where otherwise indicated, material may be copied, downloaded andprinted for private study, research and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercialproducts or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgement of FAO as the sourceand copyright holder is given and that FAOs endorsement of users views, products orservices is not implied in any way.All requests for translation and adaptation rights, and for resale and other commercial userights should be made via www.fao.org/contact-us/licencerequest or addressed to copy-right@fao.org. FAO information products are available on the FAO website(www.fao.org/publications) and can be purchased through publications-sales@fao.org.

La FAO encourage lutilisation, la reproduction et la diffusion des informations figurantdans ce produit dinformation. Sauf indication contraire, le contenu peut tre copi,tlcharg et imprim aux fins dtude prive, de recherches ou denseignement, ainsique pour utilisation dans des produits ou services non commerciaux, sous rserve que laFAO soit correctement mentionne comme source et comme titulaire du droit dauteur et condition quil ne soit sous-entendu en aucune manire que la FAO approuverait lesopinions, produits ou services des utilisateurs.Toute demande relative aux droits de traduction ou dadaptation, la revente ou dautres droits dutilisation commerciale doit tre prsente au moyen du formulaire enligne disponible www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request ou adresse par courriel copyright@fao.org. Les produits dinformation de la FAO sont disponibles sur le site webde la FAO (www.fao.org/publications) et peuvent tre achets par courriel adress pub-lications-sales@fao.org.

La FAO fomenta el uso, la reproduccin y la difusin del material contenido en este produc-to informativo. Salvo que se indique lo contrario, se podr copiar, imprimir y descargar elmaterial con fines de estudio privado, investigacin y docencia, o para su uso en productoso servicios no comerciales, siempre que se reconozca de forma adecuada a la FAO comola fuente y titular de los derechos de autor y que ello no implique en modo alguno que laFAO aprueba los puntos de vista, productos o servicios de los usuarios.Todas las solicitudes relativas a la traduccin y los derechos de adaptacin as como a lareventa y otros derechos de uso comercial debern dirigirse a www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request o a copyright@fao.org. Los productos de informacin de la FAO estndisponibles en el sitio web de la Organizacin (www.fao.org/publications) y puedenadquirirse mediante solicitud por correo electrnico a publications-sales@fao.org.

ISBN 978-92-5-007523-5 (print/version imprime/edicin impresa)E-ISBN 978-92-5-007524-2 (PDF)

FAO 2013

Editor-in-ChiefB. Scherf

EditorsS. Galal; I. Hoffmann

Animal Genetic Resources is an international journal pub-lished under the auspices of the Animal Genetic ResourcesBranch of the Animal Production and Health Division, Foodand Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).Ressources gntiques animales est un journal interna-tional publi sous les auspices de la Sous-Division desressources gntiques animales de la Division de la produc-tion et de la sant animales, Organisation des NationsUnies pour lalimentation et lagriculture (FAO).Recursos genticos animales es una revista internacionalpublicada bajo los auspicios de la Subdivisin de losRecursos Genticos Animales de la Divisin de Producciny Sanidad Animal, la Organizacin de las Naciones Unidaspara la Alimentacin y la Agricultura (FAO).

Print edition and institutional subscriptions / ditionimprime et abonnements pour institutions / Edicinde la impresin y suscripciones institucionales: Salesand Marketing Group, Office of Knowledge Exchange,Research and Extension, FAO, Viale delle Terme diCaracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy; Fax: (39) 06 5705 3360;E-mail / courrier lectronique / correo: Publications-Sales@fao.org or through FAO sales agents / ou auprsdes agents de vente des publications de la FAO / o atravs de los agentes de venta de la FAO.Online edition: Cambridge University Press onlineplatform at www.journals.cambridge.org/agr. Please visitthe homepage to access the fully searchable text withreference linking and also to submit your paper electroni-cally. The electronic version is also available in the libraryof the Domestic Animal Information System DAD-IS atwww.fao.org/dad-is.dition en ligne: Plateforme virtuelle de CambridgeUniversity Press accessible sur www.journals.cambridge.org/agr. Veuillez consulter la page daccueil pour accderaux textes qui contiennent des liens de rfrence et donttout le contenu peut tre recherch; ainsi que poursoumettre vos articles par voie lectronique. La versionlectronique est aussi disponible dans la bibliothque duSystme dinformation sur la diversit des animauxdomestiques, DAD-IS accessible sur www.fao.org/dad-is.Edicin en lnea: Plataforma en lnea de CambridgeUniversity Press (www.journals.cambridge.org/agr). Porfavor, visite la pgina inicial para acceder a la publicacin,en la que pueden llevarse a cabo bsquedas textuales yse proporcionan enlaces a las referencias, y tambin parasometer sus artculos electrnicamente. La versin elec-trnica est tambin disponible en la biblioteca delSistema de Informacin sobre la diversidad de losanimales domsticos, DAD-IS a www.fao.org/dad-is.Technical enquiries and individual subscriptions /Renseignements techniques et abonnements indi-viduels / Consultas tcnicas y suscripciones individ-uales: Editor-in-Chief, Animal Genetic Resources Branch,FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy;Fax: (39) 06 5705 5749; E-mail / courrier lectronique /correo: AnGR-Journal@fao.orgSubmission of manuscripts / Soumission desmanuscrits / Envo de los manuscritos electronically via /lectroniquement travers / electrnicamente a travs de:http://journals.cambridge.org/action/manuscriptSubmission?jid=AGRInstructions for contributors / Instructions aux collab-orateurs / Instrucciones para los colaboradores see /voir / ver:http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayMoreInfo?jid=AGR&type=ifc

Editorial Advisory BoardEditor-in-Chief: B. Scherf, Animal Genetic Resources Branch, FAOEditors: S. Galal; I. HoffmannEditorial Board: L. Alderson

J.S. BarkerI. CurikH. JianlinJ. MuellerO. MwaiC. NimbkarD. NkrumahD. NotterK. PeriasamyD. SteaneE. vanMarle-Koster

The following is the address for each of the members of the Editorial Advisory Board.Beate Scherf, Animal Production Officer, Animal Genetic Resources Branch, Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations (FAO), Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 1, 00153 Rome, Italyemail: beate.scherf@fao.orgSalah Galal, Animal Production Department, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ain Shams, P.O. Box 68,Hadaeq Shubra 11241, Cairo, Egypt email: sgalal@tedata.net.egIrene Hoffmann, Chief, Animal Genetic Resources Branch, Food and Agriculture Organization of the UnitedNations (FAO), Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 1, 00153 Rome, Italy email: irene.hoffmann@fao.orgLawrence Alderson, Rare Breeds International, 6 Harnage, Shrewsbury, Shropshire SY5 6EJ, UK email:lawrence@clltd.demon.co.ukStuart Barker, University of New England; Honorary Professor University of Queensland, 114 Cooke Road,Witta, Maleny, Qld 4552, Australia email: sbarker@une.edu.auIno Curik, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zagreb, Svetosimunska 25,10000 Zagreb, Croatia e-mail: icurik@agr.hrHan Jianlin, Institute of Animal Science (IAS), Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 2, Yuan Ming,Yuan Xi Lu, Haidian District, Beijing 1000193, P.R. China email: h.jianlin@cgiar.orgJoaquin Mueller, National Institute of Agricultural Technology (INTA), CC 277, Valle Verde, San Carlos deBariloche, 8400 Rio Negro, Argentina email: jmueller@bariloche.inta.gov.arOkeyo Mwai, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), P.O. Box 30709 Nairobi 00100, Kenya email:o.mwai@cgiar.orgChanda Nimbkar, Animal Husbandry Division, Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute, P.O. Box 23,Phaltan, Maharashtra, India email: chanda.nimbkar@gmail.comDonald Nkrumah, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 440 5th Ave North, P.O. Box 23350, Seattle, WA 98102,United States of America email: Donald.Nkrumah@gatesfoundation.orgDavid Notter, Department of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and StateUniversity, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA email: drnotter@vt.eduKathiravan Periasamy, Technical Officer, Animal Production and Health Section, Seibersdorf Laboratory,Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture, International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA), Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100, A-1400 Vienna, Austria email: K.Periasamy@iaea.orgDavid Steane, 99 Moo 7, Baan Rong Dua, Tha Kwang, Saraphi, Chiang Mai 50140, Thailand email: david-steane@hotmail.comEste vanMarle-Koster, Department of Animal & Wildlife Sciences, Faculty of Natural & Agricultural,Sciences, University of Pretoria, 0002 Pretoria, South Africa email: este.vanmarle-koster@up.ac.za

20786336_52-0.qxd 4/30/13 11:46 AM Page 2

Editorial

Intergovernmental meeting

The Seventh Session of the Intergovernmental TechnicalWorking Group on Animal Genetic Resources for Foodand Agriculture took place in Rome in October 2012.1

As discussed in the editorial of volume 51, one of themain tasks facing the Working Group was to review pro-gress made in the implementation of the Global Plan ofAction for Animal Genetic Resources2. The WorkingGroup welcomed the substantial progress made, butacknowledged that gaps remain to be addressed, particu-larly in terms of improving collaboration and the fundingof activities. Detailed information can be found in thedocument Synthesis progress report on the implementationof the Global Plan of Action for Animal GeneticResources 2012,3 which was prepared for the WorkingGroups meeting.

The information presented in the Synthesis progress reportwas also used to prepare a set of three posters:

1. Strategic priorities of the Global Plan of Action forAnimal Genetic Resources4

(overview of the strategic priorities of the Global Plan ofAction at national, regional and global levels);

2. Status of implementation of the Global Plan of Actionfor Animal Genetic Resources5

(indicators for each strategic priority at national, regionaland world levels); and

3. Colour scheme expressing levels of implementationof the Global Plan of Action for Animal GeneticResources6

(colour scheme used to illustrate the indicators).

The Working Groups agenda also included the prep-aration and timing of an update of The State of theWorlds Animal Genetic Resources for Food andAgriculture. It had been foreseen that a second reportwould be presented to the Commission on GeneticResources for Food and Agriculture in 2017, 10 yearsafter the rst report was published. However, because ofthe heavy workload scheduled for the CommissionsSixteenth Regular Session in 2017, the Working Groupwas asked to consider the possibility of advancing thepreparation of the second report by two years, i.e. recom-mending that the Commission request FAO to present the

report to the Commissions Fifteenth Regular Session in2015, which would mean having a draft ready for reviewby the Working Group in late 2014. The WorkingGroup recommended that the Commission agree to thisschedule. This volume of Animal Genetic Resourceswent to press before the Commissions meeting in Aprilat which the Working Groups recommendation was tobe considered.

The second report, whether presented in 2015 or later,would be regarded very much as an update of the rstreport, presenting the changes that have occurred duringthe intervening years in the status of animal geneticresources and their management, as well as the latest scien-tic developments in relevant elds. Reporting burdensplaced on countries would be kept to a minimum andinformation on the state of animal genetic resources man-agement at national level obtained via specic question-naires rather than by requesting more elaborate countryreports of the type prepared for the rst report.

The Working Groups agenda also included a review ofimplementation of the Funding Strategy for theImplementation of the Global Plan of Action for AnimalGenetic Resources (the meeting coincided with theannouncement of the rst set of projects chosen to receivesupport under the Funding Strategy);7 the roles ofsmall-scale livestock keepers in the conservation and sus-tainable use of animal genetic resources; targets and indi-cators for animal genetic resources; the status and trends ofmicro-organisms for ruminant digestion; and a review ofthe outcomes of the First Session of the CommissionsWorking Group on Access and Benet Sharing.

Thirty years of the Commission

As well as being a potentially busy year for the inter-national animal genetic resources community, 2013 isalso the thirtieth anniversary year of the Commission.Founded in 1983 as the Commission on Plant GeneticResources for Food and Agriculture, the Commissioncan look back on a long series of achievements, includingthe negotiation of the International Treaty on Plant GeneticResources for Food and Agriculture and the preparation ofState of the World Reports and Global Plans of Action inthe plant and animal genetic resources sectors. TheCommissions work has expanded from its initial focuson crops, rst to animals (livestock) and later to forests,aquatic genetic resources, and invertebrates and micro-

1 http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/026/mf227e.pdf2 www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1404e/a1404e00.htm3 http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/026/me636e.pdf4 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/GPA.pdf5 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/Indicator.pdf6 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/Trafc_light.pdf 7 http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/genetics/Funding_strategy.html

i

Animal Genetic Resources, 2013, 52, iii. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2013doi:10.1017/S2078633613000118

organisms. Links between the various sectors of geneticresources and their roles in the provision of ecosystemservices are receiving ever greater attention in theCommissions work, particularly in light of the plannedpreparation of a report on The State of Biodiversity forFood and Agriculture.

Journal archive

Readers may be interested to learn that CambridgeUniversity Press has made all back issues of AnimalGenetic Resources available on its web site,8 which alsofeatures a powerful search tool.

8 http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayBackIssues?jid=AGR

ii Editorial

ditorial

Rencontre intergouvernementale

La Septime Runion du Groupe de Travail TechniqueIntergouvernemental sur les Ressources Zoogntiquespour lAlimentation et lAgriculture sest tenue Romeen Octobre 2012.1 Comme il a t dit dans lditorial duvolume 51, une des principales tches que le Groupe deTravail a d confronter a t celle dexaminer les progrsraliss dans la mise en uvre du Plan dActionMondial pour les Ressources Zoogntiques.2 Le Groupede Travail a fait bon accueil au substantiel progrsralis, en admettant cependant quil existe encore deslacunes combler, notamment en ce qui concernelamlioration de la collaboration et du nancement desactivits. Pour plus de dtails, veuillez consulter le docu-ment Synthesis progress report on the implementation ofthe Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic Resources 2012 (Rapport intrimaire de synthse sur la mise enuvre du Plan dAction Mondial pour les RessourcesZoogntiques 2012),3 qui a t prpar pour larunion du Groupe de Travail.

Linformation prsente dans le Rapport intrimaire desynthse a aussi t utilise pour prparer un ensemblede trois afches :

1. Strategic priorities of the Global Plan of Actionfor Animal Genetic Resources4 (Priorits stratgiquesdu Plan dAction Mondial pour les RessourcesZoogntiques; vue densemble des prioritsstratgiques du Plan dAction Mondial aux chellesnationale, rgionale et mondiale);

2. Status of implementation of the Global Plan of Actionfor Animal Genetic Resources5 (tat de mise enuvre du Plan dAction Mondial pour les RessourcesZoogntiques; indicateurs pour chaque prioritstratgique aux niveaux national, rgional et mondial); et

3. Colour scheme expressing levels of implementationof the Global Plan of Action for Animal GeneticResources6 (chelle de couleur reprsentant les degrsde mise en uvre du Plan dAction Mondial pour lesRessources Zoogntiques; chelle de couleur utilisepour illustrer les indicateurs).

La prparation et planication dune mise jour de Ltatdes Ressources Zoogntiques pour lAlimentation etlAgriculture dans le Monde taient aussi lagendadu Groupe de Travail. Il a t prvu de prsenter undeuxime rapport la Commission des Ressources

Gntiques pour lAlimentation et lAgriculture en 2017,dix ans aprs la publication du premier rapport.Toutefois, en raison de la lourde charge de travailprogramme pour la Seizime Runion Ordinaire de laCommission en 2017, il a t demand au Groupe deTravail de prendre en considration la possibilit davancerla prparation du deuxime rapport de deux ans,cest--dire de conseiller la Commission quelle sollicite la FAO de prsenter le rapport lors de la QuinzimeRunion Ordinaire de la Commission en 2015, ce quiimpliquerait quune bauche serait soumise lexamendu Groupe de Travail vers la n de lanne 2014. LeGroupe de Travail a recommand la Commission dac-cepter cette programmation. Ce volume de RessourcesGntiques Animales a t mis sous presse avant larunion de la Commission du mois davril, au cours delaquelle la recommandation du Groupe de Travail devaittre examine.Quil soit prsent en 2015 ou ultrieurement, le deuximerapport constituera une mise jour du premier rapportdautant plus quil prsentera les changements survenusentre-temps pour ce qui est de ltat des ressourceszoogntiques et leur gestion et les derniersdveloppements scientiques dans les domaines perti-nents. La charge de travail que reprsente la rdactiondes rapports pour les pays serait rduite un minimum,linformation sur ltat de la gestion des ressourceszoogntiques lchelon national tant obtenue par lebiais de questionnaires spciques plutt quen demandantaux pays dlaborer des rapports dtaills du genre de ceuxprpars pour le premier rapport.

Les points suivants taient aussi lagenda du Groupe deTravail: une rvision de la mise en uvre de la Stratgie deFinancement pour la mise en application du Plan dActionMondial pour les Ressources Zoogntiques (la rencontrea concid avec lannonce de la premire srie de projetsslectionns pour recevoir le soutien de la Stratgiede Financement);7 les rles des petits leveurs dans laconservation et lutilisation durable des ressourceszoogntiques; objectifs et indicateurs pour les ressourceszoogntiques; situation et tendances en ce qui concerneles micro-organismes intervenant dans la digestion chezle ruminant; et une rvision des rsultats de la PremireRunion du Groupe de Travail de la Commission surlAccs et le Partage des Avantages.

Trente ans de la Commission

En plus dtre une anne potentiellement occupe pour lacommunaut internationale des ressources zoogntiques,

1 http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/027/mf227f.pdf2 http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1404f/a1404f00.htm3 http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/026/me636e.pdf4 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/GPA.pdf5 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/Indicator.pdf6 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/Trafc_light.pdf 7 http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/fr/genetics/Funding_strategy.html

iii

Animal Genetic Resources, 2013, 52, iiiiv. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2013doi:10.1017/S207863361300012X

lanne 2013 marque le trentime anniversaire de laCommission. Fonde en 1983 sous le nom deCommission des Ressources Phytogntiques pourlAlimentation et lAgriculture, la Commission peut regar-der en arrire sur une longue srie de russites, parmi les-quelles la ngociation du Trait International sur lesRessources Phytogntiques pour lAlimentation etlAgriculture et la prparation de Rapports sur ltatMondial et Plans dAction Mondiaux dans les domainesdes ressources phytogntiques et zoogntiques.Initialement focalis sur les cultures, le travail de laCommission sest tendu par la suite aux animaux(llevage), puis la sylviculture, aux ressourcesgntiques aquatiques et enn aux invertbrs et micro-organismes. Ltablissement de liens entre les diffrents

secteurs des ressources gntiques ainsi que leur rledans la prestation de services aux cosystmes retiennentde plus en plus lattention de la Commission, en particulieren vue de la prparation projete dun rapport sur Ltat dela Biodiversit pour lAlimentation et lAgriculture.

Archives du journal

Les lecteurs seront peut-tre curieux dapprendre que tousles numros antrieurs de Ressources Gntiques Animalessont disponibles sur le site web de Cambridge UniversityPress,8 qui est aussi quip dun puissant moteur derecherche.

8 http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayBackIssues?jid=AGR

iv ditorial

Editorial

Encuentro intergubernamental

La Sptima Reunin del Grupo de Trabajo TcnicoIntergubernamental sobre los Recursos Zoogenticos parala Alimentacin y la Agricultura se celebr en Roma enOctubre de 2012.1 Tal y como se coment en el editorialdel volumen 51, una de las principales tareas que abordel Grupo de Trabajo fue la revisin de los progresos alcan-zados en la aplicacin del Plan de Accin Mundial sobrelos Recursos Zoogenticos.2 El Grupo de Trabajo acogicon agrado el considerable progreso realizado, peroadmiti que quedan carencias por cubrir, en concreto enmateria de mejora de la colaboracin y del nanciamientode las actividades. El documento Synthesis progress reporton the implementation of the Global Plan of Action forAnimal Genetic Resources 2012 (Informe de sntesisde los progresos realizados en la aplicacin del Plan deAccin Mundial sobre los Recursos Zoogenticos 2012),3 que fue preparado para la reunin del Grupo deTrabajo, recoge una informacin ms detallada.

La informacin presentada en el Informe de sntesis de losprogresos realizados tambin ha sido usada para prepararun conjunto de tres psteres:

1. Strategic priorities of the Global Plan of Action forAnimal Genetic Resources4 (Prioridades estratgicasdel Plan de Accin Mundial sobre los RecursosZoogenticos; resumen general de las prioridadesestratgicas del Plan de Accin Mundial a nivel nacio-nal, regional y mundial);

2. Status of implementation of the Global Plan of Actionfor Animal Genetic Resources5 (Estado de aplicacindel Plan de Accin Mundial sobre los RecursosZoogenticos; indicadores para cada prioridadestratgica a nivel nacional, regional y mundial); y

3. Colour scheme expressing levels of implementation ofthe Global Plan of Action for Animal GeneticResources6 (Escala de color de referencia para elgrado de implementacin del Plan de Accin Mundialpara los Recursos Zoogenticos; escala de color usadapara ilustrar los indicadores).

En la agenda del Grupo de Trabajo tambin se incluyeronla preparacin y planicacin de una actualizacin de LaSituacin de los Recursos Zoogenticos Mundiales parala Alimentacin y la Agricultura. Se ha previsto lapresentacin de un segundo informe a la Comisin deRecursos Genticos para la Alimentacin y la

Agricultura en 2017, diez aos despus de la publicacindel primer informe. No obstante, debido a la fuerte cargade trabajo programada para la Decimosexta ReuninOrdinaria de la Comisin en 2017, se ha pedido alGrupo de Trabajo que considere la posibilidad de adelantardos aos la preparacin del segundo informe, es decir reco-mendar a la Comisin que pida a la FAO que el informe sepresente en la Decimoquinta Reunin Ordinaria de laComisin en 2015, lo cual signicara que habra quetener un borrador listo para ser revisado por el Grupo deTrabajo a nales de 2014. El Grupo de Trabajo aconsejque la Comisin aceptara esta programacin. Este volumende Recursos Genticos Animales fue llevado a la imprentaantes del encuentro de la Comisin del mes de abril, en elcual se deba considerar la recomendacin del Grupo deTrabajo.El segundo informe, ya sea presentado en 2015 o poster-iormente, supondr en gran medida una actualizacin delprimer informe puesto que presentar los cambios acaeci-dos, en los aos de intervalo, en el estado de los recursoszoogenticos y en su ordenacin, as como los ltimosdesarrollos cientcos en los campos pertinentes. Lacarga que supone para los pases la elaboracin deinformes sera reducida a un mnimo. As, la informacinsobre la situacin de la gestin de los recursoszoogenticos a nivel nacional sera recabada a travs decuestionarios especcos en vez de solicitando a lospases informes detallados como los que se prepararonpara el primer informe.

La agenda del Grupo de Trabajo tambin contempl unarevisin de la implementacin de la Estrategia deFinanciacin para la aplicacin del Plan de AccinMundial sobre los Recursos Zoogenticos (el encuentrocoincidi con el anuncio del primer conjunto de proyectosseleccionados para ser apoyados por la Estrategia deFinanciacin);7 el papel de los pequeos ganaderos en laconservacin y uso sostenible de los recursoszoogenticos; metas e indicadores para los recursoszoogenticos; situacin y tendencias respecto de los micro-organismos relacionados con la digestin de los rumiantes;y una revisin de los resultados de la Primera Reunin delGrupo de Trabajo de la Comisin sobre el Acceso y laDistribucin de Benecios.

Treinta aos de la Comisin

Adems de ser un ao potencialmente atareado para lacomunidad internacional de los recursos zoogenticos,2013 es tambin el ao del trigsimo aniversario de laComisin. Fundada en 1983 como la Comisin de

1 http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/027/mf227s.pdf2 http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1404s/a1404s00.htm3 http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/026/me636e.pdf4 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/GPA.pdf5 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/Indicator.pdf6 ftp://DADnet:Mobile45@ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/reserved/dad-net/Trafc_light.pdf 7 http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/es/genetics/Funding_strategy.html

v

Animal Genetic Resources, 2013, 52, vvi. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2013doi:10.1017/S2078633613000131

Recursos Fitogenticos para la Alimentacin y laAgricultura, la Comisin puede volver la vista atrssobre una larga serie de logros, incluida la negociacindel Tratado Internacional sobre los RecursosFitogenticos para la Alimentacin y la Agricultura y lapreparacin de Informes sobre la Situacin Mundial yPlanes de Accin Mundial en los sectores de los recursostogenticos y zoogenticos. El mbito de trabajo de laComisin se ha ido expandiendo, desde su enfoque inicialsobre los cultivos, a los animales (la ganadera), en primerlugar, y posteriormente a la selvicultura, a los recursosgenticos acuticos y a los invertebrados y microorganis-mos. La vinculacin de los diferentes sectores de los recur-sos genticos as como sus roles en la prestacin de

servicios a los ecosistemas estn centrando cada vez msel trabajo de la Comisin, sobre todo en vista de la pla-neada preparacin de un informe sobre La Situacin dela Biodiversidad para la Alimentacin y la Agricultura.

Archivo de la revista

Los lectores pueden estar interesados en saber que todoslos nmeros anteriores de Recursos Genticos Animalesestn disponibles en la pgina web de CambridgeUniversity Press,8 la cual cuenta tambin con un potentemotor de bsqueda.

8 http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayBackIssues?jid=AGR

vi Editorial

Morphological traits of duck and geese breeds ofWest Bengal, IndiaSandip BanerjeeB-1/87, KALYANI, Nadia, West Bengal, India, Pin-741235. Presently: School of Animal and Range Sciences,Hawassa University, Ethiopia

SummaryThe study pertains to phenotypic characterization of some breeds of duck (common white duck and Indian runner duck), Muscovyducks (black and white feathered and sepia feathered) besides two breeds of geese (white and brown feathered and white feathered)reared in the state of West Bengal (India). The study was conducted at ve locations of the state and comprised 1395 ducks and600 geese. The data were analysed statistically using mainly descriptive statistics, the differences in mean were analysed usingDuncans multiple range test. Both qualitative and quantitative traits were considered in the study. The qualitative traits were shankcolour, bill colour, colour of the feathers, skin colour, egg shell colour, the presence or absence of beans, body carriage, bill typeand colour of the eyes, while the quantitative traits included in the study were weight of the ducks and weight of the eggs. Some pro-duction traits such as numbers of eggs laid per year and dressing percentage of the drakes and ganders of each breed too have beenstudied. The ducks and geese are raised under semi-intensive management system and mostly depend on scavenging for their nutri-tional needs. This results in poor egg production and at times loss of stock because of diseases. The study regarding average egg pro-duction indicated that the Muscovy ducks and the geese have poor egg production, whereas the Indian runner followed by the commonwhite duck are potentially the best. The ducks are important source of earnings for the small holder farmers and are raised both for meatand eggs, while the geese are reared mostly for ornamental purpose. However, the populations of the ducks are fast dwindling becauseof avian inuenza in the region and because restocking is mostly being carried out with less adapted Khaki Campbell ducks. This hap-pens mainly because the government farms that were responsible for providing the ducklings for restocking maintain Khaki Campbellducks and do not have the parental stock of the native duck breeds, while restocking of the Muscovy ducks and geese are carried out bythe rearers themselves. There are also no prevailing breeding programmes to conserve, select, maintain and distribute the native breedsof duck and geese. Hence, it is of earnest importance to conserve the avian genetic resources before the population dwindles further.

Keywords: duck, geese, egg production, phenotypic characterization, West Bengal, India

RsumLtude se rapporte la caractrisation phnotypique de quelques espces de canard (le canard blanc commun et le canard de coureurindien), Muscovy esquive (le noir et le blanc aux plumes et spia aux plumes) outre deux espces doies (le blanc et le marron auxplumes et blancs aux plumes) a lev dans ltat de Bengale douest (lInde). Ltude a t dirige cinq emplacements de ltatet compris de 1395 canards et 600 oies. Les donnes ont t statistiquement analyses utilisant la statistique descriptive, lesdiffrences dans les moyens ont t analyses utiliser Duncan le test de Gamme Multiple. Traits qualitatifs et quantitatifs ont tconsidrs dans ltude. Le trait qualitatif tait la couleur de jambe, la couleur de facture, la couleur des plumes, la couleur depeau, pousser la couleur de coquille, la prsence ou labsence de haricots, la calche de corps, facturent le type et la couleur desyeux, pendant que les traits quantitatifs inclus dans ltude taient le poids des canards et le poids des oeufs. Quelques traits de pro-duction savoir. les nombres doeufs pos par an et habiller le pourcentage des canards et les jars de chaque espce a t aussi tudi.Les canards et les oies sont levs le systme de direction en dessous demi intensif et dpendent surtout de rcuprer pour leursbesoins nutritifs. Ceci a pour rsultat la production pauvre doeuf et la perte de temps de du stock en raison des maladies.Ltude quant la production doeuf de moyenne indique que le canard de Muscovy et les oies ont la production doeuf pauvre ocomme le coureur indien suivi par le canard blanc commun est potentiellement le meilleur. Les canards sont la source importantede gains pour les petits agriculteurs de support et sont levs pour la viande et les oeufs pendant que les oies sont surtout levespour le but dcoratif. Toutefois, les populations des canards diminuent rapidement en raison de la grippe davian dans la rgion etque le regarnir est surtout excut avec les canards de Campbell de moins de Kaki adapt. Ceci a t principalement excut parceque les fermes de gouvernement qui taient responsables de fournir les canetons pour regarnir maintiennent les canards deCampbell de Kaki et nont pas le stock parental des espces de canard natales en regarnissant pour les canards de Muscovy et lesoies sont excut par le rearers se. Il ny a pas aussi prvaloir lve des programmes pour prserver, choisit, maintient et distribuerles espces natales de canard et les oies. Donc; cest dimportance srieuse pour prserver lavian les ressources gntiques avantque la population diminue plus ample.

Mots-cls: canard, oies, production dufs, caractrisation phnotypique, le Bengale Occidental, Inde

Correspondence to: S. Banerjee, B-1/87, Kalyani, Dist: Nadia, West Bengal, India.emails: sansoma2003@yahoo.co.in; sansoma2003@gmail.com

1

Animal Genetic Resources, 2013, 52, 116. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2013doi:10.1017/S2078633612000793

ResumenEl estudio pertenece a la caracterizacin fenotpica de algunas castas de pato (pato blanco comn y pato indio de corredor), Muscovyagacha (blanquinegro emplumado y la sepia emplum) aparte de dos castas de gansos (blanco y marrn emplum y blanco emplum)cri en el estado de Bengala Occidental (India). El estudio fue realizado en cinco posiciones del estado y comprendido de 1395 patos y600 gansos. Los datos fueron analizados utilizando estadsticamente la estadstica descriptiva, las diferencias en el medio fueron ana-lizadas utilizar prueba Mltiples de Gama de Duncan. Ambos rasgos cualitativos y cuantitativos fueron considerados en el estudio. Elrasgo cualitativo fue color de zanca, color de cuenta, el color de las plumas, color de piel, incita color de esqueleto, la presencia o laausencia de alubias, el coche del cuerpo, factura tipo y color de los ojos, mientras los rasgos cuantitativos incluidos en el estudio fueronpesos de los patos y el peso de los huevos. Algn v.gr. de rasgos de produccin. nmeros de huevos colocados por ao y vestir por-centaje de los patos y gansos de cada casta tambin ha sido estudiado. Los patos y los gansos son levantados bajo sistema medio inten-sivo de gestin y dependen en su mayor parte de la barrer para sus necesidades nutricionales. Esto tiene como resultado la produccinpobre de huevo y a veces prdida de acciones debido a enfermedades. El estudio con respecto a la produccin de huevo de promedioindica que el pato de Muscovy y los gansos tienen la produccin pobre de huevo donde como el corredor indio seguido por el patoblanco comn es potencialmente el mejor. Los patos son fuente importante de ganancias para los pequeos granjeros de poseedor y sonlevantados para carne y huevos mientras los gansos son criados en su mayor parte para propsito decorativo. Sin embargo, las pobla-ciones de los patos menguan rpidamente debido a la gripe aviar en la regin y que la reabastecer es llevada a cabo en su mayor partecon patos menos adaptados de tela de uniforme Campbell. Esto fue llevado a cabo principalmente porque las granjas del gobierno quefueron responsables de proporcionar los patitos para la reabastecer mantienen que patos de tela de uniforme Campbell y no tienen lasacciones paternales de las castas nativas de pato al reabastecer para los patos de Muscovy y gansos son llevados a cabo por el rearers smismos. No hay tambin prevalecer que cra programas para conservar, seleccionar, mantener y distribuir las castas nativas de pato ygansos. de ah; es de la importancia seria de conservar los recursos genticos aviares antes que la poblacin menge adicional.

Palabras clave: pato, gansos, produccin de huevos, caracterizacin fenotpica, Bengala Occidental, India

Submitted 11 May 2012; accepted 16 November 2012

Introduction

The state of West Bengal is situated between 212524and 271315 N latitudes and 854820 and 895304E longitudes. The state shares its borders withBangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal and four other Indianstates, such as Orissa, Jharkhand, Assam and Sikkim.

The climate of the state is predominantly hot and extre-mely humid except for the Northern hilly district ofDarjeeling. The state has the highest population densityin the country and it is estimated that a total of 72 percentof the human population of the state reside in the ruralareas. The residents in the rural areas depend on agricul-ture and allied activities for their livelihood (NABCONS2010). Most of the farmers have small land holdings andthus small-scale poultry plays a substantial role in ensuringfood security for the family besides assisting in povertyreduction. The villages in the state have water bodiesthat serve multiple purposes (source of water for drinking,bathing and also washing clothes and utensils) for majorityof the residents. According to Besbes (2009), globally theducks contribute 11 percent and geese 9 percent of the glo-bal poultry sector. However, in spite of the signicantlyhigh contribution of the indigenous ducks to the ruraleconomy (especially in the coastal regions) of India,research and developmental studies on indigenous duckand geese breeds are by and large at its infancy.Tixier-Boichard, Ayalew and Jianlin (2008) suggestedthat characterization and inventory of poultry geneticresources are needed in countries where clearly denedpoultry breeds are yet to be identied; hence properly

designed scientic studies on indigenous duck and geesebreeds of India need to be prioritized.

According to the reports of DAHDF (2006), the state ofWest Bengal has the highest duck population in India.The annual increase in duck population in West Bengalbetween 1997 and 2003 indicate that the annual growthrate for the native breeds/types was assessed to be 22.67percent, while there was a reduction of 40.3 percent inthe numbers of exotic duck breeds. The national trendregarding the growth of the ducks too indicated similartrend (19972003), while the numbers of native ducksincreased by 21.35 percent, those of the exotic onesdecreased by 65.87 percent during the same periodDAHDF (2006). The state of West Bengal also possesses75 percent of the total layer type duck breeds in thecountry; in spite of having such a large population, theaverage number of eggs per duck is slightly lower thanthose of the national average of 106 eggs per year,which may be attributed to the genotypes and managementof the ducks and geese. Most of the rearers belong to econ-omically challenged section of the society and are unableto provide much needed balanced nutrition, proper man-agement and health services. Still the state contributedaround 70 percent of the total number of duck eggs con-sumed in the country which may be attributed to thelarge duck population as mentioned earlier. The ducksare mostly seen foraging in such water bodies whichmay be privately owned or even communal in nature.The ducks are reared both for their meat and eggs, while

2 S. Banerjee

geese are mostly reared for ornamental purpose althoughsome people do consume geese meat.

However, there has since been a reduction in the number ofnative duck population in many districts of the WestBengal because of the outbreak of avian inuenza in2007 and again in 2008. The outbreak of this diseaseresulted in culling of all domesticated avian species. Therestocking was later carried out by introduction of exoticduck breeds (mainly Khaki Campbell) under the guidanceof the authorities of Animal Resources DevelopmentDepartment. The restocking has resulted in dilution ofthe duck genetic resources in the state in general and inthe affected areas in particular.

The contribution of the ducks can be assessed by the fact thatalmost every rural household have a couple of them andduck eggs fetch higher price compared with those from thehens. The other reason why the native ducks are preferredover the exotic duck breeds is because their eggs fetch higherprice. Traditional cuisines prepared of duck eggs and meat isconsidered as delicacies by the residents of the state. Theeggs of the native duck breeds are preferred by the consu-mers for their taste, pigmentation and suitability for tra-ditional cuisines. The eggs of the geese and that of theMuscovy ducks are seldom consumed by the rearers as theeggs are mostly used for restocking purpose.

The observation nds analogy with the observations ofHalder, Ghoshal and Samanta (2007) from West Bengaland Gajendran and Karthickeyan (2009) from TamilNadu, India, FAO (2011). The preference of nativeducks over the improved breeds and hybrids has alsobeen reported by Jalil, Begum and Nahar (1993) andRehman et al. (2009).

Materials and methods

The study was conducted in ve districts of West Bengalnamely Midnapur (East) (MID), 24 Parganas (South) (24P (S)), 24 Parganas (North) (24 P (N)), Nadia (NAD)and Murshidabad (MUR) (Table 1). The three gram pan-chayats (local administrative bodies) were selected ran-domly from each district. Thereafter, villages within agram panchayat were selected purposively keeping inmind the fact that no ducklings of exotic types were dis-tributed in the selected villages by the local authorities inthe near past. The households selected for interviewswithin the villages too were selected purposively keepingin mind that the owner reared only the native ducks, thehouses having exotic or even seem to be cross-bredducks were not included in the survey and the adjacenthouses from where the ocks can intermingle were alsonot taken into consideration. This led to few numbers ofhousehold per village. The families who had recently pro-cured native ducks from nearby markets or received themas gifts from acquaintances too were not taken intoaccount. The percentage of different duck and geese breeds

in the study vis--vis the total duck population as a wholein the areas studied is presented in Table 2.

The result of the study comprises both qualitative andquantitative traits of 1395 ducks and 600 geese of variousbreeds which were/are reared in the studied villages. Thedescription of qualitative traits considered in this studywere assessed according to the guidelines suggested byManuel (2008). The qualitative traits studied were shankcolour (white, blue and yellow), bill colour (pink white,orange, yellow, white and brown), colour of the feathers(specic colours or mixed), skin colour (white, yellow orgrey), egg shell colour (white, cream or blue), the presenceor absence of beans and colour of beans (white, black ordark brown), shape of bill (uniform or saddle), body car-riage (horizontal, slight upright or upright) all of whichwere recorded through visual observation, while the quan-titative traits were weight of the ducks and weight of theeggs. The age of the ducks was not considered as a par-ameter in the study and only adult ducks were consideredfor the quantitative traits. The results in Tables 3 and 4have been presented separately for drakes and ducks andalso ganders and geese because this would help the auth-orities to make separate selection strategies for males andfemales. This is also because the selection intensity forthe two sexes differs; hence such information would beuseful for further conservation and breeding programmes.

The rearers were interviewed using a pretested questionnairewhich pertained to the prevalent duck husbandry practices inthe different study areas; the questionnaire also included thequestions pertaining to housing feeding, watering, diseasemanagement/treatment, marketing of the eggs and ducks,role of different family members in duck husbandry prac-tices, breed preferences for eggs and meat purposes, averagenumber of eggs laid by a duck, hatchability and mortality.The price of the ducks and eggs were also taken into con-sideration to assess the importance of the ducks among therearers. The ducks, geese and the eggs were weighed onan electronic balance with an error margin of 0.5 g. Thedressing percentage was assessed by slaughtering the drakesand ganders followed by hot water scalding and eviscerationof the gut contents including the skin. The dressing percen-tage was calculated according to the method suggested bySahin and Yardimci (2009). The results were analysed stat-istically using SPSS v-12 for Windows (2003), the meansand standard deviations (SD)/standard errors (SE) were com-puted using descriptive statistics, the means for the quantitat-ive traits were compared using Duncans Multiple RangeTest and the values were considered signicant at p < 0.05.

Results and discussions

Duck husbandry practices in the study areas

The common duck (locally known as desi/Pati hans),(Figure 1) has no denite feather colour pattern and thecolour of the bill too varies from duck to duck. This

Morphological traits of duck and geese breeds of West Bengal, India 3

Table1.

Locationof

thestudyzonesandnumberof

duckssurveyed

undereach

studysite.

District

Nam

eof

thepanchayat

Number

ofducksand

geese

Tem

perature

Latitude

Longitude

Altitude

Num

bersof

ducks

Reference

MID

(East)

1Mahishadal

Itam

ogra-2,L

akshya-1,A

mritberia,B

etkundu

andNatshal-2

385

(0739.0C

)highly

humid

2211N

8759E

4m

amsl

784

442a

(48.02%)

29788b

DARAH

(2006a)a

MUR

1.Beldanga

Andulberia-1,

Begunbari,Mohula-2,

Dadpur

andDebkundu

382

(1838.5C

)highly

humid

235560

N

883218

E19

mam

sl1410503a

(97.19%)

166

620

DARAH

(2006b)

b

24P(S)

1Joynagar.

Mazilp

ur

Thakurchak,

BaharuandBhagabanpur

279

(1037.5C

)highly

humid

221033

N

88254E

2m

amsl

1913

040a

(66.67%)

72314b

DARAH

(2006c)c

2.Basanti

Basantitown

195

221121

N

884014

E1m

amsl

88508b

24P(N

)1.

Jaguli

Amdanga,Kam

pa,CaklaandMaricha

347

(1837.5C

)highly

humid

225558

N

883218

E10

mam

sl2016202a

(47.99%)

90717b

DARAH

(2006d)d

NAD

1Haringhata

Birohi-1,

Fatehpur,Mollaberiaand

Nagurukhra-1

407

(1837.5C

)highly

humid

225860

N882860

E10

mam

sl716

194a

(96.02%)46

021b

DARAH

(2006e)e

2.Chakdah

Madanpur-1,

Sim

urali-2

234

60N

8831E

10m

amsl

51694b

Note:

a Num

berof

nativ

educksin

thedistrict.T

hevalues

inparenthesesindicatethepercentage

ofthenativ

efowlsvis--vistotald

uckpopulatio

nin

thestudyarea.bEstim

ated

ducksin

thepanchayatsstudied.

mam

sl:

metersabovemeansealevel;DARAH:Directorate

ofAnimal

Resources

andAnimal

Health

,Governm

entof

WestBengal.

Table2.

Num

berof

respondents,theirage,theirexperience

inrearingducksandaveragenumbersof

ducksperhousehold

selected.

District

Numberof

householdsinterviewed

Sex

ofthe

respondent

Age

oftherespondent(years)(m

eanSD)

Average

number

ofyearsrearing

(years)ofducksandgeese/household

(meanSD)

Average

numbersof

(heads)of

ducksandgeese/household

(meanSD)

Male

Fem

ale

Male

Fem

ale

Ducks

Geese

Ducks

Geese

MID

(East)

458

3732.510.2

(2253)

37.97.2(1860)

5.62.3(3

9)

4.22.6(2

9)

5.22.3(2

8)

2.51.5(1

6)

MUR

5012

3834.38.6(1852)

4210.4

(2165)

6.25

4.2(2

10)

3.81.6(1

10)

4.52.7(2

7)

3.71.2(2

5)

24P(S)

6515

5039.511.2

(2252)

39.59.9(2363)

7.72.1(4

9)

5.51.5(2

8)

4.72.6(2

7)

2.41.4(1

4)

24P(N

)40

634

37.512.2

(1955)

29.216.5

(1658)

8.73.3(4

12)

4.72.4(2

7)

7.22.6(3

9)

2.10.8(1

3)

NAD

5510

4533

15.4

(1752)

33.114.3

(1555)

8.94.3(3

14)

5.81.5(3

7)

4.73.3(2

9)

2.61.3(1

5)

Average

1041

35.4

36.3

7.4

4.8

5.3

2.7

Note:

Valuesin

parenthesesindicate

therangeof

values.

4 S. Banerjee

Table3.

Percentagesof

differentphenotypes

ofducksin

thestudyarea.

Districts

SadaPatihans

Runner

Com

mon

duck

Muscovy

black

andwhite

Muscovysepia

Geese

whiteand

brown

Geese

white

Exotics

and

cross-breds

Drake

Duck

Drake

Duck

Drake

Duck

Drake

Duck

Drake

Duck

Gander

Geese

Gander

Geese

Drake

Duck

MID

(East)

16.2b

22.1a

0.05

0.08

45.75a

40.2a

3.2d

4.7e

0.0

0.0

8.9c

9.7b

11.4d

12.2c

14.15a

11.02a

MUR

19.2a

20.5b

0.0

0.0

41.7b

39.3a

6.9c

9.5d

1.7d

1.3c

10.5a

11.2a

12.2c

13.7b

7.8b

4.5b

24P(S)

15.5b

18.1c

0.0

0.0

35.1c

32.5c

12.7a

15.5a

3.3c

3.7b

10.2a

10.6a

14.7a

14.9a

8.5b

1.7c

24P(N

)19.1a

20.2b

0.0

0.0

35.2c

36.6b

9.9b

10.5c

4.1b

5.3a

10.7a

10.9a

13.9b

13.8b

7.1b

2.7c

NAD

18.5a

21.0b

0.0

0.0

35.9c

31.5c

10.2b

13.2b

5.5a

5.7a

9.3b

9.8b

14.1a

15.9a

6.5b

2.9c

Totalaverage

17.7

20.4

0.05

0.08

36.8

36.0

8.6

10.7

3.7

4.0

1010.4

13.3

14.1

8.9

4.6

a,b,c,dValueswith

differentsubscriptsacross

columns

differ

signicantly,P0.05

Black 20.00 24.00Horns Completely brown 34.26 29.63 (3)

2 = 0.54 >0.05Black 51.85 51.85Brown with black tips 09.26 11.11Black with brown tips 04.63 07.41

Muzzle White 55.55 51.85 (3)2 = 0.17 >0.05

Black 15.74 18.53Black and white 14.81 14.81Black-pigmented to whitish-pigmented 13.90 14.81

Forelegs White below knee 75.00 70.37 (2)2 = 0.96 >0.05

Completely white 10.19 07.41Black and white 14.81 22.22

Hind legs White below hock 65.74 59.26 (2)2 = 0.41 >0.05

Completely white 14.82 18.52Black and white 19.44 22.22

Hoof Brown 60.19 55.55 (2)2 = 0.22 >0.05

Black 37.04 40.75Brown with black striation 2.77 03.70

Figure 2. Azikheli cow.

Morphological characterization of Azikheli buffalo 67

Results

Physical characteristics

No signicant differences were observed between cowsand bulls (Table 2). Figures 2 and 3 show examples ofthe Azikheli cow and bull, respectively.

Morphometric characteristics

Table 3 shows that Azikheli cows have a signicantly largerheart girth, wider forehead, longer horns and longer neckthan bulls. On the other hand, bulls have a signicantlylonger body, thicker horns and neck, and larger hoovesthan cows. Horns are at laterally, and directed backwardsand slightly upwards without twisting. The upward curveis variable and gives the horn a sickle or semi-sickle appear-ance. This is a specic characteristic of the Azikheli breed.

Discussion

Buffaloes show a variety of coat colours, with most riverinebuffaloes being black to ashy grey (Soysal et al., 2007),while the coat colour of swamp buffaloes ranges fromgrey to completely black, with very few having a whitecoat (Miao et al., 2010). The common buffalo breeds ofPakistan are predominantly black (Khan et al., 2005) withonly occasional occurrence of brown coats (8 percent) inNili-Ravi and Kundi buffalo (Maqsood, 1980). A darkcoat causes heat intolerance because it absorbs a greatdeal of solar radiation and this is one of the reasons whydark-coated breeds wallow in swamps (Marai & Haeeb,2010). The dominant brown coat colour (62.04 percent) inAzikheli seems to be an adaptation to the mountainousenvironment, where swamps are not available.

The farmers of the area prefer Sra Chargai (a brown coatcolour with a completely white forehead) to Sra Tikai (abrown coat colour with a white spot on forehead).

The non-signicant difference between the colour patternsof various body parts of the Azikheli cow and bull may bedue to the prevalence of natural selective forces over socialpreferences in determining coat colour in bovines (Seoet al., 2007).

Information on morphological characteristics is helpful inensuring effective management and conservation of animal

Figure 3. Azikheli bull.

Table 3. Mean values ( SEM) of morphometric measurements(cm) of Azikheli.

Variables Cow Bull

Heart girth 191.36 1.26 177.68 3.76***Body length 140.39 0.94 147.89 2.60***Height at withers 131.35 0.57 130.01 0.78NS

Height at hip bone 123.41 0.41 124.08 0.67NS

Width of head between horns 22.74 0.27 22.15 0.47NS

Width of head between eyes 20.37 0.13 19.43 0.32***Ear length 21.39 0.18 22.80 0.23NS

Ear width 16.46 0.12 16.86 0.21NS

Face length 52.45 0.2 52.67 0.55NS

Horn length along greater curvature 42.52 1.02 35.7 1.36***Horn length along smaller curvature 27.55 0.82 21.62 0.68***Horn circumference at base 22.60 0.22 25.12 0.41***Horn circumference in middle region 20.13 0.22 20.83 0.31NS

Horn circumference below tip 7.63 0.13 7.13 0.21NS

Neck length 42.57 0.37 40.50 0.57*Neck circumference 89.60 0.61 97.32 1.81***Loin length 35.97 0.36 34.55 0.55NS

Chine 45.95 0.54 46.76 0.80NS

Rump length 41.45 0.31 42.03 0.39NS

Rump width 51.03 0.37 50.43 0.59NS

Height of front leg below knee 30.34 0.25 31.34 0.43NS

Height of hind leg below hock 46.27 0.32 47.51 0.38NS

Height of pastern 5.92 0.11 5.65 0.14NS

Hoof circumference 51.26 0.38 53.53 1.00*Tail length 71.39 1.04 67.38 1.58NS

NS, non-signicant.*P < 0.05, ***P < 0.01.

Table 4. Comparison of morphometric measurements (cm) of Azikheli and Nili-Ravi.

Characteristics Azikheli Nili-Ravia,b

Cow Bull Cow Bull

Heart girth 191.36 1.26 177.68 3.76 215225 225226Body length 140.39 0.94 147.89 2.60 145149 159165Height at withers 131.35 0.57 130.01 0.78 125135 135137

aKhan, Younas & Hanjra (1982), Ranjhan & Pathak (1993), Borghese & Moioli (2005).bValues for morphometric measurements of Nili-Ravi are in ranges.

68 M. Khan et al.

genetic resources with a view to obtaining phenotypicallypure local genetic resources for future selection and breedimprovement strategies (Yakubu et al., 2010). Berthoulyet al. (2009) recorded heart girth, body length, height at with-ers, neck circumference, ear length and thorax depth asappropriate variables to differentiate the local Vietnameseswamp buffalo population from other buffalo breeds. ForPakistani buffalo breeds, such information is limited toheart girth, body length and height at withers, hence com-parative measurements shown in Table 4 are limited tothese three parameters.

Comparison of these parameters between the two breedsreveals that the body size of Azikheli is smaller than thatof Nili-Ravi, a breed that is well adapted to life in theplains. Owing to their low maintenance requirements(Ibrahim & Brannang, 2001), smaller animals are consideredless susceptible to fodder shortages (Hall, 1998) and are ableto move more easily and rapidly on mountain slopes (Oumaet al., 2004). As the Azikheli is native to mountain valleyswith high seasonal uctuations in the availability of feedresources, its smaller body size can be interpreted as anadaptive trait to fodder uctuations, as well as to grazingin mountain terrain and transhumance. Sexual size dimorph-ism has been observed in the present study, with a longerbody of the bull, whereas the cow has a large heart girthsize and wider head at the eyes.

Conclusion

Given its small body size and brown coat colour, it appearsthat the breed is well adapted to mountain slope grazing andvariable availability of feed resources. Differentiatingcharacteristics of the Azikheli include the dominant browncoat colour and the sickle-shaped horns. In view of climatechange and the likelihood of an increase in the frequency ofextreme weather events in mountain regions in particular,livestock breeds like the Azikheli could prove to be a valu-able resource for mountain dwellers in terms of adaptationto such weather extremes. The morphometric characteristicsdescribed here provide a basic description of the breed, butstudies on genotypic characteristics and plans for in situparticipatory conservation of the Azikheli are suggestedmeasures to secure its appropriate conservation.

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted within the framework of theJoint Research Partnership funded by the Swiss NationalScience Foundation (SNSF) and the Swiss Agency forDevelopment and Cooperation (SDC). It was also con-ducted within the framework of the Swiss NationalCentre of Competence in Research (NCCR) NorthSouth: Research Partnerships for Mitigating Syndromesof Global Change. The NCCR NorthSouth is co-fundedby SNSF and SDC, and the participating institutions.

References

Ayalew, W., Rischkowsky, B., King, J.M. & Bruns, E. 2003.Crossbreds did not generate more net benets than indigenous goatsin Ethiopian smallholdings. Agricultural Systems, 76: 11371156.

Berthouly, C., Rognon, X., Van, T.N., Berthouly, A., Hoang, H.T.,BedHom, B., Laloe, D., Vu Chi, C., Verrier, E. & Maillard, J.C.2009. Genetic and morphometric characterization of a localVietnamese Swamp Buffalo population. Journal of Animal Breedingand Genetics, 127: 111.

Bhatia, S. & Arora, R. 2005. Biodiversity and conservation of Indiansheep genetic resources: an overview. Asian-Australasian Journal ofAnimal Science, 18: 13871402.

Borghese, A. & Moioli, B. 2005. Buffalo breeds and management sys-tems. In A. Borghese ed., Buffalo Production and Research, theState of the Art of Research, Development, Products and Market ofBuffalo Species in the World, pp. 6970, REU Technical Series 67,FAO Regional Ofce for Europe, Rome.

FAO. 1986. Animal Genetic Resources Data Banks. 2. Descriptor Listsfor Cattle, Buffalo, Pigs, Sheep and Goats. FAO Animal Productionand Health Paper 59/2, Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations, Rome (available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/ah760e/AH760E00.pdf).

Hall, S.J.G. 1998. Traditional livestock in semi-arid north easternZimbabwe: Mashona cattle. Tropical Animal Health andProduction, 30: 351360.

Hassen, F., Bekele, E., Ayalew, W. & Dessie, T. 2007. Genetic variabil-ity of ve indigenous Ethiopian cattle breeds using RAPD markers.African Journal of Biotechnology, 6: 22742279.

Ibrahim, A. & Brannang, E. 2001. Growth performance of crossbreddairy cattle at Asella livestock Farm, Arsi Ethiopia. EthiopianJournal of Science, 24: 3549.

Khan, A.N. & Atta-ur-Rahman. 2010. Causes and environmentalimpacts of ood hazards: a case study of sample villages, Swat valley,Pakistan. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Congress of theIslamic World Geographers (ICIW92010), University of Sistan andBaluchistan, Zahidan, Iran (1416 April 2010).

Khan, B.B., Younas, M. & Hanjra, S.H. 1982. Breeds and Types ofLivestock in Pakistan. 2nd edition, Department of LivestockManagement, University of Agriculture Faisal Abad, Pakistan, pp. 24.

Khan, B.B., Younas, M., Riaz, M. and Yaqoob, M. 2005. Breeds ofLivestock in Pakistan. Department of Livestock Management,University of Agriculture, Faislabad, Pakistan, pp. 26.

Khan, M.S., Khan, M.A., Ahmad, S. & Mahmood, S. 2007. Geneticresources and diversity in Pakistani sheep. International Journal ofAgriculture and Biology, 9: 941944.

Khan, M., Rahim, I., Rueff, H., Saleem, M., Maselli, D., Mohammad,S. & Wiesmann, U. 2011. Conserving indigenous animal geneticresources as a coping strategy to adapt to climate change: theAzikheli buffalo in northern mountains of Pakistan. LivestockResearch for Rural Development, 23, (available at http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd23/12/khan23246.htm)

Khler-Rollefson, I., Rathore, H.S. & Mathias, E. 2009. Local breeds,livelihood and livestock keepers rights in South Asia. TropicalAnimal Health and Production, 41: 10611070.

Maqsood, M. 1980. Development of Asian buffaloes breeds and types.Journal of Animal Science, 2: 6064.

Marai, I.F.M. & Haeeb, A.A.M. 2010. Buffalos biological functions asaffected by heat stress: a review. Livestock Science, 127: 89109.

Morphological characterization of Azikheli buffalo 69

Miao, Y., Wu, G., Wang, L., Li, D., Tang, S., Liang, J., Mao, H., Luo,H. & Zhang, Y. 2010. The role of MC1R gene in buffalo coat color.Science China Life Science, 53: 267272.

Mwacharo, J. M., Okeyo, A.M., Kamande, G.K. & Rege, J.E.O. 2006.The small East African shorthorn zebu cows in Kenya. 1: linearbody measurements. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 38:6574.

Ouma, E., Abdulai, A., Drucker, A. & Obare, G. 2004.Assessment of farmer preferences for cattle traits in smallholdercattle production systems of Kenya and Ethiopia. In:Proceedings of the Deutscher Tropentag Conference onInternational Agricultural Research for Development, 57October 2004, Berlin, Germany.

Ranjhan, S.K. & Pathak, N.N. 1993. Text Book on Buffalo Production,3rd edition, Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi, India.

Seo, K., Mohanty, R.T., Choi, T. & Hwang, I. 2007. Biology of epider-mal and hair pigmentation in cattle: a mini review. VeterinaryDermatology 18: 392400.

Soysal, M.I., Tuna, Y.T., Gurcan, E.K., Ozkan, E., Kok, S.,Castellano, N., Cobanoglu, O. & Barone, C.M.A. 2007.Anatolian water buffaloes husbandry in Turkey: preliminary resultson somatic characterization. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 6(Suppl. 2): 13021307.

Yakubu, A., Salako, A. E., Imumorin, I.G., Ige, A.O. & Akinyemi,M. O. 2010. Discriminant analysis of morphometric differentiationin the West African Dwarf and Red Sokoto goats. South AfricanJournal of Animal Science, 40: 381387.

Zarate, A.V. 1996. Breeding strategies for marginal regions inthe tropics and subtropics. Animal Research and Development, 43:99118.

70 M. Khan et al.

On-farm phenotypic characterization of indigenouscattle populations of Gamo Goffa zone,Southern EthiopiaChencha Chebo1, Workneh Ayalew2 and Zewdu Wuletaw31Department of Animal Sciences, Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia; 2National Agricultural Research Institute, Lae MP 411, PapuaNew Guinea; 3Sustainable Land Management, GIZ, Ethiopia

SummaryAn exploratory survey of local cattle populations of Gamo Goffa Zone in south-western Ethiopia was conducted between April 2011and May 2012 to identify and phenotypically characterize cattle populations. Ten focus group discussions with key informants as wellas phenotypic data from sample mature animals were used to generate data, including quantitative trait data from 560 animals and quali-tative trait data from 867 animals. Findings from focus group discussions revealed that, even if local cattle are found widely distributedthroughout the study area, they are not known by any common name or breed type. Results from analysis of variance (ANOVA) oncontinuous variables showed signicant (P < 0.0001) differences between sites. Tukeys multiple mean comparison test showed thateach quantitative traits were signicant (P < 0.0001) for sites. Chi-square test was also signicant (P < 0.0001) for most of the categ-orical variables per sites. Based on a discriminant analysis, sample populations were classied into their respective sites with overallhitting rate was 63.15 percent for females and 74.89 percent for males. Canonical discriminant (CANDISC) analysis showed quanti-tative traits and Mahalanobis distances between sites were signicant (P < 0.0001). The stepwise discriminant (STEPDISC) analysisfor both populations showed that most variables had signicant (P < 0.0001) power in explaining phenotypic variation. These infor-mation from focus group discussions and phenotypic variation analyses led to identication of two cattle populations that deemedto be distinct breed types (Gamo highland and lowland). Thus, indigenous cattle population of the study area was not homogenouson their phenotypic features, and further genetic characterization should be done to conrm their genetic distinctiveness.

Keywords: phenotypic characterization, indigenous cattle populations, Gamo Goffa Zone, Southern Ethiopia

RsumDavril 2011 mai 2012, une tude prospective des populations bovines locales de la rgion du Gamu-Gofa dans le sud-ouest delthiopie a t mene pour identier et caractriser phnotypiquement les populations bovines. Dix groupes focaux de discussion,munis dinformateurs cls ainsi que de donnes phnotypiques provenant des animaux adultes de lchantillon, ont t utiliss pourgnrer linformation, y comprises des donnes quantitatives de 560 animaux et des donnes qualitatives de 867 animaux. Les con-clusions des groupes focaux de discussion ont rvl que, bien que les bovins locaux fussent largement distribus dans lairedtude, le btail ntait connu ni par un nom commun ni par un type racial. Les rsultats de lanalyse ANOVA des variables continuesont montr des diffrences signicatives (P < 0,0001) entre les localisations. Pour chacune des variables quantitatives, le test de Tukeyde comparaisons multiples a dcel des diffrences signicatives (P < 0,0001) entre les localisations. Le test chi-carr a aussi t sign-icatif (P < 0,0001), pour ce qui est de leffet de la localisation, pour la plupart des variables catgorielles. Daprs lanalyse discri-minante, les populations chantillonnes ont t classes dans leurs respectifs emplacements avec un taux global de russites de63,15 pour cent pour les femelles et de 74,89 pour cent pour les mles. Lanalyse discriminante canonique a retrouv desdiffrences signicatives (P < 0,0001) entre localisations pour les variables quantitatives et les distances de Mahalanobis. Pour lesdeux populations, lanalyse discriminante pas pas stepwise a montr que la plupart des variables a contribu de faon signicative(P < 0,0001) expliquer la variation phnotypique. Linformation des groupes focaux de discussion et les analyses de la variationphnotypique ont conduit identier les deux populations bovines considres comme tant deux types raciaux diffrents (terres hauteset terres basses du Gamo). Ainsi, les caractristiques phnotypiques de la population bovine indigne de laire dtude nont pas thomognes, la caractrisation gntique serait donc poursuivre an de conrmer les diffrences gntiques.

Mots-cls: caractrisation phnotypique, populations bovines indignes, rgion du Gamu-Gofa, Sud dthiopie

ResumenEntre abril de 2011 y mayo de 2012 se realiz un estudio prospectivo de las poblaciones de ganado bovino local de la regin de Gamo-Gofa en el suroeste de Etiopa con el n de identicar y caracterizar fenotpicamente las poblaciones bovinas. Se usaron diez gruposfocales de discusin, provistos con informadores clave as como con datos fenotpicos muestreados en animales adultos, para generarinformacin, incluyendo datos de variables cuantitativas de 560 animales y datos de variables cualitativas de 867 animales. Las con-clusiones de los grupos focales de discusin revelaron que, si bien el ganado bovino local estaba ampliamente distribuido por el rea de

Correspondence to: Chebo Chencha, Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia, P.O. Box1145, email: zuma.ranch@yahoo.com

71

Animal Genetic Resources, 2013, 52, 7182. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2013doi:10.1017/S207863361200046X

estudio, el ganado no era conocido por ningn nombre comn ni tipo racial. Los resultados del anlisis ANOVA de las variables con-tinuas mostraron diferencias signicativas (P < 0,0001) entre emplazamientos. Para cada una de las variables cuantitativas, la prueba decomparacin mltiple de Tukey mostr que hubo diferencias signicativas (P < 0,0001) entre emplazamientos. La prueba Chi-cuadradotambin fue signicativa (P < 0,0001) entre emplazamientos para la mayora de las variables categricas. En base al anlisis discrimi-nante, las poblaciones muestrales fueron clasicadas en sus respectivos emplazamientos con una tasa global de aciertos de 63,15 porciento para las hembras y 74,89 por ciento para los machos. El anlisis discriminante cannico mostr que las variables cuantitativas ylas distancias de Mahalanobis eran signicativamente (P < 0,0001) distintas entre emplazamientos. Para ambas poblaciones, el anlisisdiscriminante por pasos stepwise mostr que la mayora de las variables contribuyeron de forma signicativa (P < 0,0001) a explicarla variacin fenotpica. La informacin de los grupos focales de discusin y los anlisis de la variacin fenotpica llevaron a laidenticacin de dos poblaciones bovinas que fueron consideradas como dos tipos raciales distintos (tierras altas y tierras bajas deGamo). As, la poblacin bovina autctona del rea de estudio no fue homognea en sus rasgos fenotpicos, con lo que se deberaproseguir con la caracterizacin gentica para conrmar sus diferencias genticas.

Palabras clave: caracterizacin fenotpica, poblaciones bovinas autctonas, regin de Gamo-Gofa, Sur de Etiopa

Submitted 2 June 2012; accepted 1 October 2012

Introduction

Ethiopia is believed to have the largest livestock popu-lation in Africa. Results of the latest livestock populationcensus showed about 53.4 million heads of cattle (CSA,2010/11), without including cattle populations of threezones of Afar and six zones of Somali Regions. Themajority (99.26 percent) of the cattle population are localbreeds, which are found in rural areas under subsistencemode of farming. Cross-bred and pure exotic cattleaccounted for about 0.64 and 0.1 percent, respectively(CSA, 2010/11).

Apart from the large cattle population widely distributedthroughout the country, the multiple production and ser-vice functions of cattle are crucial in the livelihoods offarmers and pastoralists. They serve as sources of milk,meat, hide, draft power and manure as well as contributeto nutrient recycling at the farm level (Getachew andGashaw, 2001). Moreover, at the level of the nationaleconomy, the livestock sector contributes 26 percent ofthe agricultural gross domestic product (GDP) and 12 per-cent to the national GDP (CSA, 2008/09).

Based on the available information as summarized inDomestic Animal Genetic Resources Information System(DAGRIS) database (DAGRIS, 2011) there are 33 recog-nized indigenous cattle breeds in Ethiopia. Lately somemore breed types have been identied and reported, suchas the Wegera, Dembia and Mahibere-silassie breeds inthe north-west (Wuletaw, 2004), Abergalle and Irob cattlebreeds in the north (Zerabruk and Vangen, 2005), GojjamHighland zebu and Fogera breeds in the central highlands(Getachew, 2006) and Wollo Highland, Raya Sanga andAfar Sanga in the north-east (Tadesse, 2005). However,only a small number of recognized cattle breed typeshave a fair description of their physical appearance, indi-cations of their level of production, reproduction and gen-etic attributes (Ayalew et al., 2004). Owing to lack ofspecic information, cattle of the present study area aregenerally referred to in the existing literature as Goffa

zebu or Goffa Dwarf (Epstein, 1971; Payne and Hodges,1997; Rege and Tawah, 1999). This does not reect thecurrent phenotypic diversity of the cattle populations inthe Gamo Goffa zone of south-western Ethiopia.

Phenotypic as well as genetic characterization of indigen-ous livestock genetic resources provides the basis for anylivestock development intervention. Clearly, sustainableutilization of local breeds is the best means of conservingthese genetic resources. The rst essential step towardssustainable utilization of these resources is to identify themajor breed types, establish their population size as wellas their geographical distribution and describe their typicalqualitative and quantitative phenotypic traits (Negussieand Ayalew, 2002). On that basis, the present study wasconducted to survey local cattle types in the Gamo Goffazone to test the general hypothesis that the local cattlepopulations of this zone are phenotypically homogenous.

Materials and methods

Description of study area

This study was conducted in Gamo Goffa zone of south-western Ethiopia. Gamo Goffa zone is one of 13 zonesof the Southern Nations, Nationalities and PeoplesRegional State (SNNPRS) and consists of 15 rural districtsand two town administrations. It is situated near the centreof the region around 557671N latitude and 36373798E longitude. Its general elevation ranges from 600to 3500 m asl; it receives 6001600 mm rainfall perannum and annual temperature ranges from 10C to 34C (Gamo Goffa zone ARDD, 2010). Agro-ecological fea-tures of each study sites are presented in Table 1 below.

The topography of the zone is characterized by undulatinglandscapes that favour the existence of different climaticzones. The total human population of the zone was

72 C. Chebo et al.

reported as about 1.6 million (CSA, 2008/09) with a popu-lation density of 80 inhabitants per km2.

The farming practices are mainly mixed croplivestocksystems, with crops being more dominant in the higheraltitude areas and livestock being more signicant in low-land areas. According to CSA (2010/11), the estimatedlivestock population and beehives of Gamo Goffa zonewere 1 438 752 cattle, 800 704 sheep, 336 941 goats,128 054 equines, 1 050 744 chickens and 60 996 beehives.

Study population

Indigenous cattle populations in the Gamo Goffa zone andhouseholds keeping cattle constitute the study population.

Sample size and sampling method

To dene the sampling frame, available background infor-mation on the existence of phenotypically unique cattlepopulations in Gamo Goffa zone was surveyed throughsingle rapid exploratory eld visits to the study areacoupled with focus group discussions and review of avail-able secondary information. Based on that information, 15rural districts of the study zone were categorized into threegroups matching three presumably distinct cattle popu-lation types. These were cattle populations of highlands,mid altitude areas and the lowland area. Three sample dis-tricts (Bonke, Chencha and Boreda) from highlands andtwo districts (Arba-Minch-Zuria and Mirab-Abaya) fromlowlands were selected for actual data collection. Cattlepopulations of the mid-altitude areas did not show distinctfeatures that make them different from those of the high-land and lowland areas, and instead appeared to have inter-mediate features of other two types. Therefore, sampleswere not taken from mid-altitude districts. Five study dis-tricts were selected purposively taking into account thedominant agro-ecological zone of the districts, localknowledge on cattle population types and size of the cattlepopulation.

Linear body measurements were taken from 560 matureanimals that were randomly selected from herds of repre-sentative households. Data on qualitative body form andshape were taken from a total of 867 animals (Table 2).The target number of sample cattle for a study site was50100 adult cows and about 30 bulls (FAO, 2012).Local cattle populations from similar agro-ecology wereconsidered as similar in their phenotypic features, whichwere later veried by outcomes of focus group discussions.

In order to base the phenotypic characterization on themature body size of sample populations, morphometricmeasurements were taken from animals of at least 3years of known age, or those with all their milk teetherupted (i.e. full mouth). Elders, village leaders and indi-viduals with extensive knowledge on unique history ofexisting cattle populations were selected in consultationwith local agricultural extension workers for focus groupdiscussions.

Data collection methods

Focus group discussionPreliminary eld visits were made after gathering second-ary data from local livestock extension staff about the typeand distribution of indigenous cattle types in the studyarea. Then key informant focus group discussions wereheld with representatives of farmer groups, extensionstaff and the district administration ofcers. A total often focus group discussions were held two per site,each having 812 farmers plus a representative of theextension staff. The researcher facilitated the discussionat all sites. The main points for discussion included indi-genous knowledge about history of origin and introductionof existing cattle types, distinctive features of the cattletypes as well as their desirable and undesirable character-istics, utility and status of the existing cattle populationsand other information related to indigenous cattle.

Observations and linear body measurementsMajority of both quantitative and qualitative variablesrecorded in this study were adapted from the standardcattle breed descriptor list of FAO (2012). In addition,FAO (1984, 1986) cattle breed descriptor lists that wereextensively reviewed and applied in Ethiopia (Wuletaw,

Table 1. Description of the study sites.

Districts/sites Altitude (m) Temperature (C) Rainfall (mm) Agro-ecology

Bonke 6313400 10.824.5 8411600 Highland (majority)Chencha 10013500 10.522.5 12011600 HighlandBoreda 14002600 10.227.5 8501500 HighlandArbaminch Zuria 6001500 1232.6 8011350 LowlandMirab Abaya 6501600 12.633.5 6001300 Lowland

Table 2. Sample sizes by study site.

Sites Quantitativetraits

Qualitativetraits

Focus groupdiscussions

heldMale Female Male Female

Bonke 34 76 60 100 2Chencha 37 88 55 115 2Boreda 36 70 59 120 2Arbaminch Zuria 36 76 65 120 2Mirab-Abaya 42 65 59 114 2Total 185 375 298 569 10

On-farm phenotypic characterization of indigenous cattle populations 73

2004; Tadesse, 2005; Taye, 2005) were considered and anal list of variables was developed.

Depending on FAO (2012) guideline and identied cattlepopulation type, their distribution in the study area, 185mature adult males (both intact and castrated) and 375 hei-fers and cows were randomly selected for morphometricmeasurements. Therefore, a total of 569 female and 298male cattle were sampled for recording their qualitativetraits. A total of 16 qualitative traits were observed: coatcolour pattern, coat colour type, facial prole, muzzle col-our, presence of horn, horn shape, horn orientation, earshape, ear orientation, rump prole, facial prole, humpshape, hump location, naval ap size, udder size and teatsize. Similarly, 15 quantitative traits were measured indifferent age categories of adult animals. Quantitative traitsconsidered include: body length, height at wither, heartgirth, neck length, ear length, tail length, horn length, pel-vic width, hump length, hock circumference, canon bonecircumference, dewlap width, preputial sheath width, muz-zle circumference and navel ap length. Measurementswere taken from each trait using textile tape measurementin centimetre unit. Heart girth was measured in the earlymorning before the animals were taken to grazing andwatering areas.

Data management and statistical analysisAll data were entered, cleaned and managed using MSExcel worksheet. Box plots, scatter plots and tests ofnormality were done to check normality of quantitativevariables prior to taking data to analysis.

Information compiled from focus group discussions wassummarized and synthesized to describe the origin, distri-bution, major characteristics and status of the respectivecattle populations.

Qualitative data collected were subjected to the frequencyprocedure of SAS (2002) version 9.0. Chi-square testswere employed to test for the difference between the fac-tors of interest between sites. The pair-wise comparisonsfor each of the categorical variables across sites based onP-value were derived from Bonferronis correction(Petrie and Watson, 1999).

The importance of each quantitative variable in explainingphenotypic differences between sample cattle populationsof the ve sites was examined using the generalized linearmodel (GLM) of SAS (2002). The generated site leastsquares means of each of the variable were then comparedusing Tukeys test of multiple comparison (Klockars,Hancock and McAweeney, 1995). Considering knownphysiological differences among female and male animalsin the measured quantitative variables, data were analysedseparately for the two sex groups. The following modelwas used for analysing quantitative phenotypic variationbetween the female sample populations by consideringsite and parity as xed main effects:

Yijk = m+ Si + Pj + eijk ,

where Yijk is the observed value of the linear bodymeasurements, is the overall mean, Si is the xed effectof site i (i = 1. . .5), Pj is the xed effect of parity j ( j =1. . .3), where parity was categorized as 02 = 1, 34 = 2and >4 = 3, and eijk is the residual erro