Home  ›  International Journals Beef Cattle Breeding With System of Indepedence

International Journals Beef Cattle Breeding With System of Indepedence

Written By Monday, May 30, 2022 Add Comment Edit

sustainability-logo

Article Menu

/ajax/scifeed/subscribe

Review

Genetic Improvement of Local Cattle Breeds in West Africa: A Review of Breeding Programs

by ane,2 , 3 , 2,four , 1 , one,2 , 2 , four , 4 , ii , 5 , 6 , 2,* and 2

one

Institut du Développement Rural (IDR), Université Nazi Boni (UNB), BP 1091 Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso

ii

Sectionalisation of Livestock Sciences, Department of Sustainable Agricultural System, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Gregor-Mendel Street 33, A-1180 Vienna, Republic of austria

3

Unité de Formation et de Recherche en Sciences et Technologies (UFR/ST), Université Norbert Zongo, BP 376 Koudougou, Burkina Faso

four

Institut de fifty'Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA), BP 8645 Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

5

Research Found of Wildlife Ecology, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Savoyenstrasse ane, 1160 Vienna, Austria

six

International Livestock Enquiry Institute (ILRI), PO Box 30709, Nairobi 00100, Kenya

*

Author to whom correspondence should exist addressed.

Academic Editor: Roswitha Baumung

Received: vii December 2020 / Revised: 1 February 2021 / Accepted: two February 2021 / Published: 17 February 2021

Abstract

Cattle are 1 of the about important livestock species in West Africa, providing multiple services to farmers and contributing to national economies. Various convenance strategies have been implemented to raise their productivity and have improved farmer livelihoods. This review describes cattle breeding experiences across Westward Africa, spanning the Due north'Dama breed in Mali, Senegal, and Republic of the gambia to the breeds Azawak Zebu, Fulani Zebu, and taurine Baoulé in Burkina Faso. The principal objectives of nigh convenance programs have been to optimize meat and milk operation of taurine and Zebu cattle as well every bit trypanotolerance of taurine cattle. In some cases, "closed nucleus" schemes have proven limited and so have evolved into "open nucleus" schemes. Recent community-based breeding programs accept shown hope. The major challenges of convenance programs remain defining realistic convenance objectives and securing the involvement of stakeholders. All the strategies reviewed here have been funded externally within development or enquiry projects that are often too brusk to yield tangible genetic improvement, and whether they will continue beyond those projects is uncertain. This review highlights the need for continuing government support to ensure the sustainability of local cattle convenance programs.

ane. Introduction

Approximately 300 million heads of cattle are reared in Africa, representing near one fifth of the world'southward cattle population [1]. In 2017, West Africa alone was home to approximately 74.3 one thousand thousand heads of cattle [2]. Cattle play major social, economic and cultural roles on the continent. They represent a major source of protein (milk and meat) as well as fertilizer and fuel (manure), and they provide draft power for crop farming [3]. Cattle product contributes substantially to African farmers' livelihoods.

Sub-Saharan Africa is abode to a big population of indigenous cattle [4], which consist of 150 ethnic breeds supplemented past another xxx introduced exotic and commercial composites [five,6]. In West Africa, 63 local and 23 exotic cattle breeds have been reported [vii]. Ethnic breeds, which have long adapted to local environmental weather, are a unique reservoir of genetic resources for the continuous improvement of livestock productivity in Africa and elsewhere [8]. Withal, most of these breeds show low productivity, which may reverberate a lack of exploitation of their genetic potential as well as inadequate nutrition, wellness services and management [9]. Every bit a result, the production of cattle-derived appurtenances such every bit milk is grossly insufficient to meet growing demand in various countries, necessitating the import of dairy products.

To meliorate cattle productivity in West Africa, diverse convenance strategies and policies have been implemented. Like several other developing countries, West African nations have mostly adopted centralized breeding schemes entirely managed by governments with minimal, if any, participation of farmers [10,11]. However, few cattle breeding programs in Sub-Saharan Africa accept been successful [4]. Previous studies investigated cattle breeding programs implemented in the expanse, with trypanotolerant N'Dama cattle in Senegal, Republic of mali, and The gambia [12,xiii,14,xv,16,17,18,19,20]. Other breeding schemes involving those and other breeds have likewise been implemented but analyzed in less depth [21,22]. This highlights the need for a comprehensive review of all major breeding programs in West Africa.

To accost this gap, the current review consists of 3 parts. First, it provides an overview of cattle breeds, traits and production systems in the region. 2nd, information technology describes in item 6 historical and ongoing convenance programs with local cattle breeds, based on scientific publications and unpublished project reports (see Supplementary Materials). To supplement written documents, nosotros conducted informal discussions via email with authorities technicians in the Ministry building of Livestock Resources of Burkina Faso, too equally with extension workers and former employees of some projects. For each breeding program, the review aims to provide context, breeding objectives, breeding schemes applied, and genetic progress achieved. In the case of Northward´Dama genetic improvement programs in Senegal and Mali (Cases 1 and ii), the description provided here is largely a translation from French publications [15,17].

2. Review of Cattle Breeds and Genetic Comeback Programs

2.1. Cattle Breeds, Traits, and Production Systems in West Africa

The origin, characteristics, and distribution of African cattle are well documented [1,4,5,23,24]. Breeds tin be subdivided into the humped Bos indicus, the humpless Bos taurus and the following three combinations: Sanga, which is a stable cross of Bos indicus × Bos taurus; Zenga, a stable cantankerous of Sanga × B. indicus; and recently derived blended lines, including crosses with exotic temperate breeds [8]. Cattle distribution in Africa depends primarily on socio-economic and environmental factors, such equally use of animals for pulling/towing, religious and cultural preferences, availability of feed, pressure from disease and parasites, and environmental [25].

Most cattle product in West Africa occurs in the Sahel, which serves as a geographic and ecoclimatic "bridge" between the Sahara and southern savannas. This surface area represents a unique geo-climatic territory including very different ecological areas within a few hundred kilometers [26]. Historically, thirteen Zebu breeds have inhabited the dry savanna zone and Sahelian belt, while 11 taurine breeds (Longhorn N´Dama, Kuri and Shorthorn breeds) take been widely distributed beyond the moist savanna and sub-humid coastal forest belt [v,8]. Nonetheless, this distribution has been irresolute as frequent droughts in the Sahel have driven pastoralists to migrate with their Zebu to humid and sub-humid areas [26,27,28,29,xxx]. Nowadays, Zebu are widely distributed across different agro-ecological areas of West Africa (Tabular array i). One assay [31] has described the following xiii local Zebu cattle breeds in seven countries belonging to the area known equally "Centre International de Recherche-Développement de l´Elevage en Zone Subhumide": Northward'Dama, Kouri, Baoulé-Somba grouping, Lagoon cattle grouping, Azawak Zebu, Maure Zebu, Touareg Zebu, Goudali Zebu, Bororo Zebu, White Fulani Zebu, Djelli Zebu, Fulani Sudanese Zebu and Gobra Zebu (Toronke). All these local breeds serve mainly for beef product but for other purposes as well [iv,v].

Indigenous breeds are the foundation for cattle product in this continental region. They are resistant to diseases and drought, can walk long distances and survive on poor pastures, and show good fertility [40]. Farmers exploit these adaptive traits to use the animals for pulling/towing work and for producing milk and meat [5]. Surveys signal that farmers derive not only these benefits from their cattle, simply they also utilize the animals for ceremonies and for dowries, and for producing fertilizer (manure) and hides [22,30,41,42].

Taurine cattle are found by and large in the tsetse-infested southern Sudano-Guinean surface area of West Africa, reflecting their tolerance of trypanosomiasis [43,44]. Reared in sedentary systems, taurine cattle are used mostly for meat, socio-cultural needs and pulling/towing power, except for N´Dama cattle, which in some regions are also used to produce milk. Zebu cattle, which are kept in pastoral and agropastoral systems, are used more than for milk production considering of their higher productivity [22,30]. Nevertheless, farmers in various areas rear multiple cattle breeds in mixed herds in order to benefit from their complementarity. For example, Baoulé cattle are sometimes preferred to Zebu because of their greater disease resistance and grazing ability, while Zebu are preferred to Baoulé because of their higher milk yield, larger size and fecundity, faster growth and stronger traction ability [45,46].

2.2. Genetic Improvement Programs of Local Breeds in Due west Africa

The dissimilar experiences of breeding programs involving local cattle breeds in Westward Africa are summarized in Table ii. This listing, which is not exhaustive but instead reflects the availability of documentation, includes "closed nucleus", "open nucleus", "dispersed nucleus" and community-based breeding programs originally implemented inside the framework of research and development projects. Closed nucleus schemes carry out genetic improvement efforts exclusively at primal stations and distribute improved animals to farmers. Open nucleus programs rely on central stations but also bring in promising animals from farmers' herds [47,48]. Dispersed nucleus schemes carry out genetic improvement in herds of elite farmers, from which breeding animals are distributed to other farmers [48]. In community-based convenance programs, farmers keep all breeding animals and the best immature animals are selected for breeding in a communal mode, with back up from experts [49]. This review does not include traditional breeding practices implemented by pastoralist and transhumant herder societies in West Africa.

two.ii.1. Case 1: North´Dama in Senegal

Context and breeding objectives: This plan was set up in 1972 in Casamance and Kolda, in the southern sub-humid area of Senegal, with funding from the "Fonds Africain de Coopération (FAC)" and the authorities. The breeding objective was to amend beef performance of N´Dama cattle [15,17], which were selected considering of their cultural and socio-economical importance equally a course of savings, dowry, insurance and gifts. To involve farmers and their objectives in the program, an Open Nucleus Genetic Improvement Organization was adopted in 1991. Milk performance and trypanotolerance were included as breeding objectives [17]. Still, trypanotolerance was not directly considered in the option procedure [15]. Since 2008, the program has been funded by the African Evolution Bank and the Nutrient and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in the context of the "Projet de Gestion Durable du Bétail Ruminant Endemique (PROGEBE)" (Sustainable Management of Endemic Ruminant Livestock Project). Milk production, beefiness performance and trypanotolerance have been maintained as primary objectives.

Breeding scheme: Several convenance schemes accept been implemented since 1972. The current phase of the program started in 2008 as a 3-tier open nucleus scheme consisting of a selection unit and a reproduction unit consisting mainly of herds of farmers in a cooperative of North´Dama cattle breeders (CASE N'Dama) and a dissemination unit (village herds) [16]. One of the operational objectives has been to keep a breeding unit with 200 females and 4 males with a modify in inbreeding rate per generation of ∆F = 0.039. This organisation allows introduction and performance testing of 12- to 24-calendar month-one-time bulls from village herds. In contrast to previous schemes, this plan has allowed farmers to participate through their cooperative by providing candidates for the breeding unit, managing reproduction units and disseminating improved animals.

Pick process: in the current open up nucleus system, two preselection steps are performed before the final selection when bulls are 36 months erstwhile. Bulls 6–eighteen months old are eligible for preselection based on torso weight, and bulls weighing more than 150 kg at xviii months are preselected. Performance of preselected bulls is tested from xviii to 36 months based on daily gain. Originally the selection criteria were meant to include hematocrit values as an indicator of trypanotolerance, but this was never implemented. The breeding plan claims indirect selection for trypanotolerance due to the positive correlation (0.forty–0.70) between hematocrit and growth. Best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) indicates genetic gain of 0.43 kg per yr for weight at 36 months, while heritability estimates are 0.07 for birth weight and 0.12 for weight at 36 months.

2.2.ii. Instance 2: Due north´Dama Cattle in Mali

Context and breeding objectives: genetic improvement of N´Dama cattle started in 1975 with the objective of improving and conserving trypanotolerant N'Dama cattle in their environment, particularly with respect to beef performance. Originally restricted to a authorities ranch, the system has since been implemented at diverse locations. Like Case 1, the current form of Case 2 began in 2008 with funding from the African Development Bank and the FAO through PROGEBE [15,17].

Breeding scheme: a closed nucleus breeding arrangement based on mass selection was implemented on the ranch from 1981 to 1986. Feed and budgetary limitations in the ranching organisation led to a shift toward participatory direction involving livestock technical services and farmers. Equally a result, selected animals on the ranch were transferred to village farms between 1991 and 1993 in order to test their adjustability to hamlet conditions and strengthen farmer participation in the pick procedure by including their objectives and practices. This dissemination procedure was based on a contractual system in which farmers had to return the same number and sex of animals to the ranch after 10 years. A selection scheme based on an open up hamlet nucleus was established, but the program failed because of financial difficulties. In 2008, PROGEBE implemented a new center based on an open up nucleus selection scheme. The animals previously loaned to farmers were used to reconstitute the choice unit at the "Centre de Conservation et de Multiplication du Bétail Ruminant Endemique de Médina Diassa (CCMD/BRE)" (Owned Ruminant Livestock Reproduction Middle).

Selection process: animals were selected based on coat color and conformation. Unblemished fawn animals with massive, stocky conformation were preferred. Animals meeting these conditions were selected based on their daily gain between 8 and 18 months, as long as their weight at 18 months exceeded 150 kg. Trypanotolerance was included in the selection process, and low drug absorption was screened as an auxiliary trait.

two.2.3. Case 3: N´Dama Cattle in the Gambia

Context and convenance objectives: the program started in 1995 at the International Trypanotolerance Center [12,13,14,19,xx]. The aim was to meliorate the welfare of the livestock owners and their families through improve performance and increased livestock productivity (Bosso, 2006). The programme was funded by the Bundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit (BMZ) of Deutschland from 1994 to 1998, by the FAO until 2000, by the European union through the project "Programme de Concertation de Recherche-Développement de l´Elevage en Afrique de l´Ouest (PROCORDEL)" (Livestock Research-Development Concertation Program in West Africa) until 2008, and since then by the African Development Bank and FAO through PROGEBE [xv,17]. The breeding objectives of increasing meat and milk production without compromising cattle adaptation and resistance to disease were defined in a participatory way with farmers [xix,20,51].

Breeding scheme: an open nucleus scheme was adopted involving 3 units and selection units in one area with moderate tsetse wing prevalence (Kenaba) and one surface area with high tsetse prevalence (Bansang). Favorable atmospheric condition at the Kenaba option unit of measurement led to good nascency and weaning rates. Trypanotolerance and adaptation were tested in Bansang.

Selection process: since 2008, a complex selection index has been used that includes growth performance of young bulls and their relatives. At Kenaba, calves were selected based on their daily gain from 0 to 12 months. After weaning, selected calves were transferred to Bansang for performance testing, where the best bulls were selected using an alphabetize that took into business relationship their daily gain from 15 to 36 months and the milk productivity of their dams [14]. Each year, the 2 all-time bulls and 55 best females replaced the males and females in the convenance unit. The second-best bulls were sent to reproduction units, while non-selected bulls were sold to butchers. Option was carried out in a participatory way by staff from the National Agronomical Research System and by farmers. Genetic monitoring using BLUP showed annual genetic gain of 0.40 kg and heritabilities of 0.48 for trunk weight at 12 months and 0.28 for weight at 36 months.

two.2.4. Case 4: Azawak Zebu Cattle in Burkina Faso

Context and convenance objectives: in the 1990s, programs have been promoted in Burkina Faso to enhance local dairy production (and thereby reduce milk and dairy product imports), exploit the genetic potential of local breeds, increment the consumption of animal proteins by rural populations and increase farmers' income. Between 2000 and 2015, the development project "Projet de Soutien a la Diffusion du Zebu Azawak" (Project to Support the Dissemination of Azawak Zebu) was implemented with funding from the Belgium Technical Cooperation (BTC) to improve local dairy product. Pure Azawak Zebu were introduced and continuously backcrossed with the local Fulani Sudanese Zebu. The final phase (2011–2015) of the 3-phase project was funded by the BKF program of the Luxembourg Development Cooperation and focused on restoration of degraded pastures. The final phase was carried out at 11 sites (communes) in the Sahel region (Dori, Djibo, Yalgo, Gorom-Gorom, Bajni, Taparko, Arbinda, Kelbo, Pobe-Mengao) and central region (Ziniaré and Ouagadougou) of Burkina Faso. The overall project involved 329 farmers and about 2400 animals. Farmers at each site were organized into xi Azawak Zebu brood associations, which together made up the National Wedlock of Azawak Zebu Breeders (see Supplementary Materials 1). The stated goals of the programme were to increase the population of Azawak Zebu, institute a participatory genetic improvement strategy, optimize animal management to increase milk and meat production, and improve the skills of farmers.

Convenance scheme: a dispersed nucleus scheme was implemented [48,49]. Pure Azawak Zebu were subjected to within-brood selection, while Azawak and Fulani Sudanese Zebu were subjected to assimilation crossbreeding involving Azawak Zebu bulls.

Option process: pure Azawak Zebu bulls 9–12 months old were recruited for operation testing at a central station that was equipped to perform bogus insemination. Testicle size, breast girth, trunk weight and libido were recorded, and the bulls were trained for sperm collection. Sperm quality was evaluated. Bulls at thirty months of historic period were ranked according to a selection index based on daily gain and libido, then selected by a committee including technicians and farmers. The best bulls were selected and reintroduced into herds as sires, while non-selected and crossbred bulls were destocked. From the offset of the program until the terminate of the 2d stage, the numbers of pure Azawak Zebu increased by 20%; F1 crosses, 364%; F2 crosses, 500%; and pure Fulani Zebu, 483%. The increase in number of pure Fulani Zebu reflected the recruitment of females for crossbreeding. Absorption crossbreeding was judged effective because the prevalence of this genotype in herds decreased from 65.eight% in 2004 to 51.eight% in 2007. In addition, F3 crossbreds appeared in the breeding population. Nascence weight was significantly smaller (p < 0.05) for pure Fulani Zebu (xviii.ix ± three.four kg) than for pure Azawak Zebu (xx.five ± 3.4 kg), F1 crossbreds (20.6 ± 3.vii kg), and F2 crossbreds (xx.nine ± ii.four kg). Milk yield during 186 days of lactation was 625 ± 198 kg for pure Azawak Zebu, 516 ± 218 kg for F1 crosses and 560 ± 220 kg for pure Fulani Zebu [50].

2.2.v. Case 5: Sudanese Fulani Zebu Cattle in Burkina Faso

Context and convenance objectives: Fulani Sudanese Zebu cattle, the most important breed of Burkina Faso, has traditionally been kept in the Sahel region, and the cattle are well adjusted to the harsh environmental conditions in that location. However, traditional breeding practices appear to have reduced productivity (run across Supplementary Materials 2 and 3). Use of bulls for as long as 7–8 years and selection of replacement bulls from amid offspring in the same herd are thought to take increased inbreeding levels. In general, cows with low milk yield were not milked but instead returned to reproduction early, resulting in calving intervals of 12–18 months, shorter than the intervals of 18–24 months for cows producing more milk, which as well reflects lactation anestrus. Failure to exclude individuals with low milk production led to an increase in offspring from such cows. In response to this situation, a genetic improvement strategy was implemented through the evolution project "Projet d´Appui au développement du Zebu Peulh au Sahel" (Projection to Back up the Development of Fulani Zebu in the Sahel), funded by the BTC and implemented past Veterinarians without Borders Belgium in collaboration with "Association Nodde Noto", a local not-governmental arrangement (NGO). The project began in the province of Oudalan in 2005 and operated until 2018. Its objective was to combine farmers' traditional knowledge with technical selection criteria to set up a convenance program that would control inbreeding and improve the productivity of Fulani Zebu. In item, the project aimed to increment milk yield per moo-cow per lactation, fertility, and the number of weaned calves per cow per twelvemonth (see Supplementary Materials 2 and 3). Pick criteria were determined in a participatory mode, and farmers came upwardly with a long list of possible traits. The project team, representatives of the Ministry of Livestock Resources, and farmers ranked the animals and kept the most important ones. For bulls, the preferred traits were milk production of the dam, body size, head and neck profile, large ears, long tail, and good conformation. For females, the preferred traits were milk production, docility, big pelvis, big and well-stock-still udder, long and soft teats, abdomen size and fertility.

Breeding scheme: this project implemented a dispersed nucleus convenance system [48,49]. The selection unit was elite farmers whom the projection team had selected because their herds contained top-breeding females with good maternal lines, they employed expert husbandry practices and they were willing to adopt the projection strategy and follow its rules. Farmers in the reproduction unit were selected by farmers' organizations. The projection started with 28 farmers in the selection unit and with 233 convenance cows and only 6 bulls that met the project'due south criteria for good breeding. The project also purchased additional bulls to supply all 28 herds. A performance testing unit was planned for rearing young bull candidates for selection, simply this proved technically difficult and unappealing to farmers, who preferred to keep the immature candidates in their own herds. In the end, farmers were allowed to keep their young bulls, and local barns were congenital for periodically testing young candidate performance.

Selection process: a controlled mating organization was implemented in the selection unit, involving top females from good maternal lines and selected bulls. Offspring performance was recorded and young bulls were ranked into 4 groups based on an alphabetize that took into business relationship growth, size, and sex. The acme bulls (group 1) were distributed to the farmers in the breeding unit; grouping 2 animals, to farmers for reproduction; and grouping 3, to farmers who were not part of the breeding program. Group four animals were fattened and sold on the marketplace. A option committee of three farmers and four representatives from the Ministry of Livestock Resources and other professional organizations oversaw balderdash selection.

two.2.6. Case half dozen: Baoulé Cattle and Baoulé ten Zebu Crossbreds in Burkina Faso

Context and breeding objectives: Baoulé cattle, locally called Lobi, are the well-nigh of import taurine breed in Burkina Faso. Similar many West African taurine breeds, the modest but trypanotolerant Baoulé in the hot, humid agroclimatic areas of the country is under pressure considering of indiscriminate crossbreeding with Zebu. Since 2016, community-based breeding programs have been implemented for local Baoulé cattle and crossbreds in southwestern Burkina Faso [21,22]. These programs were funded by the Austrian Development Agency through the project "Local cattle breeds of Burkina Faso—Characterization and sustainable use" (LoCaBreed) of the Austrian Partnership for Higher Instruction and Research and Development. 1 of the goals of this research and development project was to implement sustainable breeding programs to preserve and improve local cattle breeds. Iii convenance programs were implemented in three communities, each with a different production system, involving altogether 100 farmers and 2000 animals. One breeding programme involved pure Baoulé cattle in a sedentary system and the native community in the commune of Bouroum-Bouroum, another involved crossbreds in a sedentary organisation and a native community in Loropeni, and the 3rd involved crossbreds in a transhumant arrangement and a migrant community in Kampti. A participatory arroyo was used to define breeding objectives: farmers were surveyed about their trait preferences and how they ranked their own herd animals [22]. These investigations showed that body size was the virtually important selection criterion, indicating that farmers were interested in productive traits. As a result, the programs aimed to improve torso size by selecting for weight at a given age and daily proceeds.

Convenance scheme: village breeding schemes were implemented according to the customs-based arroyo [49], which encourages strong participation of farmers at all stages, from design to implementation. The hamlet herd was considered the unit of pick, and only immature males were selected.

Option process: Body weight of immature bull candidates was recorded once and again 6 months later. A general linear model (GLM) was used to examine body weight and weight proceeds over fourth dimension, accounting for the linear and quadratic furnishings of age. An alphabetize was calculated that every bit weighted electric current, age-corrected body weight and growth during the previous six months. Animals were classified into three groups based on this index, and animals that were heavier and/or growing faster for their age were ranked higher. Trypanotolerance was not included in the selection index; faster-growing immature bulls were causeless to be more trypanotolerant [21]. To give farmers full participation in selection, selection committees in each locality comprised three local men, two women and one person younger than 25. Committees were provided with weight and growth data for each of the 3 groups of bulls, then they were asked to choose the best bull from each group and to explicate their choices. By 2020, iii rounds of selection involving 200 candidates were performed, leading to the selection of 70 animals that were distributed for breeding.

iii. Discussion

3.1. Context, Breeding Objectives and Selection Criteria

In Due west Africa, modern efforts at animal genetic improvement began when colonial settlers with intimate knowledge of specialized breed performance carried out crossbreeding with domestic livestock [52]. However, the sustainability of crossbreeding in Due west Africa was called into question when these projects faltered for lack of funding and the disability of crossbreds to adapt to deteriorating feed quality and to local diseases. As a result, attention shifted abroad from crossbreeding toward pure breeding in club to exploit the adaptive features of local breeds [52]. Amidst the breeding programs covered in the present review, the earliest started in the 1970s in Senegal and Mali, and the various programs have involved local Zebu and taurine cattle and have relied on within-breed selection (N´Dama, Fulani Sudanese Zebu, Baoulé), crossbreeding (Baoulé × Zebu) or breed substitution (Azawak Zebu).

Many livestock improvement programs in developing countries have failed because they did not permit farmers to participate in the setting of breeding objectives [53,54,55]. Taking into account farmers' knowledge and preferences about breeding goals is essential for breeding programs that target extensive smallholder production, where animals are kept for a multifariousness of purposes [49] and where economic considerations are not necessarily the but criterion, in contrast to conventional market-oriented breeding programs [56]. In traditional systems, defining realistic, feasible and measurable convenance objectives that reverberate beneficiaries' diverse needs is a challenge. The main breeding objectives for the programs in the present review accept been meat and milk production as well equally trypanotolerance (Table 2). These objectives were gear up later investigating farmers' trait preferences in a participatory fashion at the beginning of breeding programs involving Fulani Zebu, Baoulé and crossbreds in Burkina Faso or Due north´Dama cattle in The Gambia [xx,22]. In contrast, the objective of improving beef performance in programs involving N´Dama cattle in Mali and Senegal was decided without involving farmers. Nevertheless, the program in Senegal later included milk as a breeding objective based on farmers' interest [17], although this goal may have been less realistic given the breed'southward low milk performance.

In addition to productive traits, disease resistance was considered in programs involving N´Dama, Baoulé and crossbred cattle in Burkina Faso. However, breeding programs included this trait in different ways. In Mali and Senegal, the accent was on coat colour, given that coat color may be more or less attractive to tsetse flies and so can influence trypanotolerance [57]. However, a written report of Ethiopian cattle has questioned whether coat color or coat pattern influence risk of tsetse infection [58], contrary to pop perception. Indeed, fitness traits associated with disease resistance are difficult to clarify and select for, even in sophisticated breeding systems [59]. In the breeding program in The Republic of the gambia, young balderdash candidates were reared in tsetse-infested areas. In Senegal and in the Burkina programs involving Faso Baoulé and Zebu × Baoulé crossbreds, selection took into account the positive correlation between growth and disease resistance: young bulls showing good growth performance were assumed to be more than trypanotolerant.

Among the diverse traits preferred by farmers, it is important to focus on a few that represent breeding goals and are heritable and easy to measure [53]. In the convenance programs in Burkina Faso involving Sudanese Fulani and Azawak Zebu, the breeding traits were either besides numerous (Azawak Zebu), or they were difficult to measure, such as libido.

Promotion of expert breeding practices can help reduce inbreeding, merely this may be overambitious for convenance programs in West Africa, where farmers in extensive production systems typically do not tape pedigrees. The Fulani Zebu program in Burkina Faso meant to command inbreeding, merely the inbreeding level of the population was never analyzed. Nevertheless, inbreeding levels of local cattle in certain parts of Burkina Faso have proven to be lower than expected [lx].

three.ii. Breeding Schemes and Choice Processes

This review covered open nucleus, dispersed nucleus, and hamlet breeding programs (Table 2). In the N´Dama cattle programs in Senegal and Mali, practical constraints led systems to evolve from airtight to open up nucleus. Open up nucleus breeding allows animals to menses betwixt the nucleus and local population in both directions, while the closed scheme allows animals to flow merely from the nucleus into the population. Nucleus programs can allow accurate recording of functioning in developing countries where such recording does non normally occur on farms [61]. Nevertheless, nucleus programs require acceptable infrastructure and technical input to operate sustainably [62]. Many such programs in developing countries have failed for lack of sustainable support and involvement of the community [53,54,55]. The success of a nucleus plan in West Africa involving Djallonke sheep reinforces this point: the programme enjoyed potent support from the government and other sources, and the community participated actively [63].

In closed nucleus programs, maintaining and feeding animals in the convenance unit is costly, which led to the failure of such initiatives in Mali and Senegal. Furthermore, farmers in those programs were not willing to bring their best animals to the breeding unit at the central station [48], which was too the case of farmers in the Sudanese Fulani Zebu program in Burkina Faso, who ultimately were allowed to keep the bull candidates in their herds. Dispersed nucleus systems, in contrast, may exist less expensive considering animals are handled and managed past the farmers themselves. Working with a dispersed nucleus of interested farmers to distribute genetic proceeds to the hamlet population can make the convenance programme more visible to the last beneficiaries [49].

A potential disadvantage of nucleus schemes is that improvement of local breeds in inquiry stations may non be fully transferred to farmers´ herds and flocks. This has led many breeding programs to involve farmers and producers in defining convenance goals and selection criteria [52]. This arroyo was adopted with Baoulé cattle and Baoulé × Zebu crossbreds in Burkina Faso as a outcome of shortcomings of previous approaches and successes with community-based convenance programs involving goats and sheep in Eastern and Cardinal Africa [61,64,65,66,67,68,69,70]. Indeed, several studies recommend community-based breeding programs for traditional, depression-input smallholder farming systems [x,eleven,48,49,52,54]. In contrast to a conventional top-down strategy, a customs-based approach involves farmers in all steps of implementation in lodge to take into account indigenous knowledge of breeding practices and objectives. Typically, these programs characteristic a single tier, with no distinction betwixt convenance and production units considering all farmers involved are both breeders and producers [70]. In the community-based program involving Baoulé and Baoulé × Zebu in Burkina Faso, farmers were securely involved at various stages of implementation. This design exploited the potential of the village herd to provide a large number of breeding candidates and intense selection.

3.3. Interest of Stakeholders and Farmers

The sustainability of efforts to manage animal genetic resource depends largely on the participation of a wide range of stakeholders, public and private [71], including government, research organizations, NGOs, funding institutions and associations of breeders and livestock keepers [xviii,48,71,72]. Research organizations provide scientific back up for setting convenance goals, for conducting genetic and economic assessments, and for developing new techniques and technologies. Governments, NGOs, and funding institutions provide financing, subsidies and capacity-building to enable farmers and their associations to manage breeding programs, monitor genetic progress and preserve breeds [18,71]. The six cases in the nowadays review varied in the extent of stakeholder involvement. In the programs involving N´Dama cattle, inquiry institutions were heavily involved in setting convenance objectives, and in conducting genetic assessments with BLUP, which led to adjustments in the breeding schemes. In Burkina Faso, the national inquiry institute INERA and the Eye de Multiplication des Animaux Performants (CMAP) ("Center for Reproduction and Dissemination of Improved Animals") were involved in the breeding programs with Azawak and Fulani Zebu cattle, while two universities and one research constitute in Burkina Faso collaborated with ii universities in Austria to conduct the programs involving Baoulé and Baoulé × Zebu crossbreds. These institutions helped define breeding objectives and select convenance animals even in the absence of genetic evaluation. Such efforts can contribute straight to building chapters amidst the next generation of specialists, reflected in the doctoral students who worked on the breeding programs involving North'Dama cattle in The Gambia or involving Baoulé and Baoulé Zebu crossbreds in Burkina Faso.

This collaboration highlights the potential for institutions in developed countries to build chapters in developing countries. Nevertheless, lack of capacity is not the just obstacle. Even though CMAP has the ability to perform bogus insemination, this technology has non been used in whatsoever of the cattle breeding programs in Burkina Faso. This highlights the range of non-scientific and non-technical factors that tin can interfere with the implementation of new strategies and tools of genetic improvement. These factors can include weak direction and excessive bureaucratic constraints [72,73].

The success of breeding programs depends on active participation not simply of government and other institutional stakeholders, but also of farmers. The breeding programs in the nowadays review involved local farmers to different extents. The N´Dama convenance program in The Gambia and the programs in Burkina Faso involved farmers in the pick of breeding animals. Pick committees in the community-based programs involving Baoulé and Baoulé × Zebu crossbreds took into consideration various social actors, including women, in livestock activities. Associations of breeders can contribute to self-maintenance and sustainability of convenance programs, but many areas lack such organizations [72]. In most of the breeding programs in the present review, breeders' associations helped identify candidates for selection and helped disseminate selected animals. Developing countries should facilitate and promote the creation of cooperatives, associations, or other customs-level organizations of livestock keepers and should grant them advisable powers to play an important part in managing animal genetic resource [71]. External back up from various stakeholders is oftentimes necessary to initiate convenance programs, merely governmental support is necessary to ensure their long-term sustainability [49,71].

3.4. Access to Market and Funding

The ultimate objective of any breeding program is to improve farmers' incomes and livelihoods, and several studies in West Africa identified income generation as a key reason for farmers to proceed cattle [22,thirty,33]. Unfortunately, we were unable to identify any official reports or inquiry studies that assessed whether the breeding programs in this review had improved beneficiaries' livelihoods, despite the fact that the programs in Mali and Senegal began in the 1970s. Convenance programs in West Africa should take a holistic approach that includes the entire livestock value chain, from production to market place. Thus, such programs should tackle the challenges that confront farmers who wish to accept their cattle to market place. For example, many breeders may not go to market because livestock prices are dictated past local traders who may give little consideration to performance [74]. The breeding programs in the present review did non sufficiently emphasize the market. Creating strong linkages betwixt farmers and the market may encourage farmers to adopt new technologies and techniques in veterinary intendance and nutrition likewise as use meliorate germplasm [74]. This could in turn improve convenance programs.

All the convenance programs reviewed here were funded by outside donors and implemented as development or research projects. Consequently, some of these programs ended when the projection lifecycle came to a close, such as the programs involving Fulani and Azawak Zebu in Burkina Faso. Similarly, many breeding programs involving goats and sheep in Brazil stopped for lack of resource [72]. Local governments in developing countries often neglect to provide financial support to continue successful breeding programs [62,72]. Deficient interest from the public sector and inertia of farmers waiting for public support contribute to lack of investment in breeding programs [72]. Genetic improvement programs should be considered long-term investment projects, which crave essential input, stiff institutional support, and sufficient funding from authorities to sustain operations [48,74]. Farmers themselves might even help fund breeding programs if they derived sufficient economic benefit from them.

iv. Conclusions

In this study we reviewed cattle breeding programs in West Africa by focusing on half-dozen cases involving local breeds implemented within the last iv decades, whose main objectives were increasing meat and milk production also as disease resistance. Context, convenance objectives, and implementation were analyzed, including breeding scheme, selection process, stakeholders, outcomes, limitations and lessons learned. The main challenge in all cases was definition of articulate and realizable convenance objectives, which is ordinarily the case in extensive production systems. Different schemes including open up nucleus and dispersed nucleus were applied with diverse levels of farmers' involvement. Most of these programs were sponsored by external funding through evolution or research projects, and some programs stopped after the projects' lifespan. Most projects involved several stakeholders such every bit NGOs, enquiry institutions, universities, farmers' organizations, and genetic improvement centers, but in some cases their role was express. Our review shows that successful, sustainable cattle breeding programs in West Africa require stiff, continuing support from local governments and other stakeholders. In return, such breeding programs con contribute essentially to national economies and farmers´ livelihoods by improving genetic resources.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/thirteen/4/2125/s1. 1. Capitalization Written report of the Projection to Support the Dissemination of Azawak Zebu Phase II (French); 2. Report of the 1st workshop of the genetic comeback monitoring committee of the Sudanese Fulani Zebu project on the validation of the convenance animals' selection criteria (French); three. Report of the second workshop of the genetic improvement monitoring committee of the Sudanese Fulani Zebu project (French).

Writer Contributions

Conceptualization: J.S., M.W., O.A.M., A.S., S.O.-K., P.A.B., A.T., One thousand.Thou. and D.O. Methodology: J.S., Thou.W. and D.O. Information drove: D.O. Writing: D.O. and J.S. Visualization: J.South., M.Westward., O.A.K., A.Due south., Due south.O.-K., P.A.B., A.T., G.M., D.O., North.Grand., B.Y., B.Z.-T. and M.S. Review-Editing: J.S., Thousand.Westward., O.A.G. and A.Southward. Supervision: J.S., M.Due west., O.A.1000., A.Due south., S.O.-K., P.A.B., A.T. and G.Chiliad. All authors have read and approved the terminal version of the manuscript for publication.

Funding

This research was funded by the Austrian Evolution Agency (ADC) through the Austrian Partnership Program in High Didactics and Inquiry for Evolution (APPEAR) projection 120 (LoCaBreed: Local Cattle Breed of Burkina Faso-Characterization and Sustainable Apply).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Non applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Non applicative.

Acknowledgments

Nosotros would like to give thanks all the authors whose inquiry findings contributed to this review. We are particularly grateful to Bognana Rigobert Taunsi, Konkobo Bernard and Doulkoum Eugène, erstwhile employees of the convenance projects involving Azawak and Fulani Zebu in Burkina Faso who provided valuable literature and information.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Dessie, T.; Mwai, O. The Story of Cattle in Africa: Why Diversity Matters; International Livestock Research Institute, Rural Assistants of the South korea and the African Union-InterAfrican Bureau for Beast Resources: Nairobie, Republic of kenya, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  2. FAOSTAT FAO Statistical Database. 2019. Available online: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/ (accessed on 12 August 2020).
  3. Mwai, O.; Hanotte, O.; Kwon, Y.-J.; Cho, S. Africa Indigenous Cattle: Unique Resources in Rapidly Changing World. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 28, 911–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Rewe, T.O.; Herold, P.; Kahi, A.K.; Zarate, A.V. Convenance indigenous cattle genetic resources for beefiness production in Sub-Saharan Africa. Agriculture 2009, 38, 317–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Rege, J.East.O.; Yapi-Gnaore, C.5.; Tawah, C.L. The indigenous domestic ruminant genetic resources of Africa. In Proceedings of the 2nd All Africa Briefing on Animal Agriculture, Pretoria, South Africa, 1–four April 1996; pp. 57–75. [Google Scholar]
  6. Rege, J.E.O.; Tawah, C.Fifty. The land of African cattle genetic resources Two. Geographical distribution, characteristics and uses of present-24-hour interval breeds and strains. Anim. Genet. Resour. Inf. 1999, 25, one–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. DAD-IS FAO's Domestic Animal Variety Information. 2019. Available online: http://www.fao.org/dad-is/en (accessed on 12 August 2020).
  8. Hanotte, O.; Tawah, C.L.; Bradley, D.G.; Okomo, K.; Verjee, Y.; Ochieng, J.; Rege, J.E.O. Geographic distribution and frequency of a taurine Bos taurus and an indicine Bos indicus Y specific allele amongst sub-saharan African cattle breeds. Mol. Ecol. 2009, 9, 387–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Gamaniel, I.B.; Egahi, J.O.; Addass, P.A. Effect Year of Calving and Parity on the Productive and Performance of Holstein Friesan Cows in Vom Nigeria. Asian J. Res. Anim. Vet. Sci. 2019, four, ane–8. [Google Scholar]
  10. Haile, A.; Wurzinger, M.; Mueller, J.; Mirkena, T.; Duguma, Grand.; Mwai, O.; Sölkner, J.; Rischkowsky, B. Guidelines for Setting up Community-Based Sheep Convenance Programs in Ethiopia; ICARDA-Tools and Guidelines No.1: Aleppo, Syrian arab republic, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  11. Haile, A.; Wurzinger, G.; Mueller, J.P.; Mirkena, T.; Duguma, G.; Rekik, M.; Mwacharo, J.; Mwai, O.; Sölkner, J.; Rischkowsky, B. Guidelines for Setting Up Customs-Based Pocket-size Ruminants Breeding Programs in Ethiopia; ICARDA-tools and Guidelines No.1: Beirut, Lebanon, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bosso, N.A.; Van der Waaij, Due east.H.; Kahi, A.K.; Van Arendonk, J.A.M. Genetic analysis of N'Dama cattle breed choice schemes. Livest. Res. Rural Dev. 2009, 21, 135. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bosso, N.A. Genetic Comeback of Livestock in Tsetse Infested Surface area in West Africa. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen Academy, Wageningen, Kingdom of the netherlands, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  14. Bosso, N.A.; Corr, North.; Nie, 1000.; Autumn, A.; Van der Waaij, Eastward.H.; Van Arendonk, J.A.M. The Northward'Dama cattle genetic improvement programme: A review. Anim. Genet. Resour. Inf. 2007, forty, 65–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Camara, Y. Analyse Sociotechnique et Organisationnelle du Program de Sélection du Bovin N'Dama au Sénégal. Ph.D. Thesis, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  16. Camara, Y.; Moula, Due north.; Sow, F.; Sissoko, M.M.; Antoine-Moussiaux, Due north. Analysing innovations among cattle smallholders to evaluate the adequacy of convenance programs. Animal 2018, xiii, 417–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Camara, Y.; Sissoko, M.Thou.; Sall, G.; Farnir, F.; Antoine-Moussiaux, Northward. Program de sélection du bovin North'Dama en Afrique de l'Ouest: Cas du sénégal, du Mali et de la Gambie. Cah. Agric. 2020, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Camara, Y.; Sow, F.; Govoeyi, B.; Sissoko, M.K.; Antoine-Moussiaux, North. Stakeholders involvement in cattle-convenance program in developping countries: A Delphi survey. Livest. Sci. 2019, 228, 127–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dempfle, Fifty.; Jaitner, J. Example report about the Due north'Dama convenance programme at the International Trypanotolerance Centre (ITC) in the Gambia. In ICAR Technical Series No. iii; The International Committee for Animal Recording: Rome, Italian republic, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jaitner, J.; Corr, N.; Dempfle, L. Ownership blueprint and management practices of cattle herds in The Gambia: Implication for a breeding programme. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2003, 35, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ouédraogo, D.; Soudré, A.; Oudéraogo-Koné, Southward.; Yougbaré, B.; Zoma, B.Fifty.; Tapsoba, Due south.A.R.; Mészáros, G.; Burger, P.; Khayatzadeh, N.; Wurzinger, M.; et al. Selection of breeding bulls in community-based cattle breeding programs in Burkina Faso. Bull. Anim. Health Prod. Afr. 2020, 68, 103–111. [Google Scholar]
  22. Ouédraogo, D.; Soudré, A.; Ouédraogo-Koné, S.; Zoma, B.L.; Yougbaré, B.; Khayatzadeh, Northward.; Burger, P.A.; Mészáros, G.; Traoré, A.; Mwai, A.O.; et al. Breeding objectives and practices in iii local cattle breed production systems in Burkina Faso with implication for the design of breeding programs. Livest. Sci. 2020, 232, 103910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Rege, J.R.O. Shorton Cattle of Due west and Cardinal Africa. IV. Productions Characteristics. World Anim. Rev. 1994, 78, 33–43. [Google Scholar]
  24. Kim, M.; Kwon, T.; Dessie, T.; Yoo, D.; Mwai, A.O.; Jang, J.; Sung, S.; Lee, S.; Salim, B.; Jung, J.; et al. The mosaic genome of ethnic African cattle as a unique genetic resource for African pastoralism. Nat. Genet. 2020, 52, 1099–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Blench, R. Traditional Livestovk Breeds: Geographical Distribution and Dynamics in Relation to the Ecology of West Africa; Overseas Development Establish: London, UK, 1999; p. 69. [Google Scholar]
  26. Traoré, A.; Koudandé, D.O.; Fernandez, I.; Soudré, A.; Granda, V.; Alvarez, I.; Diarra, S.; Diarra, F.; Kaboré, A.; Sanou, M.; et al. Geographical assessment of body measurements and qualitative traits in West African cattle. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2015, 47, 1505–1513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Jabbar, K.A.; Swallow, B.M.; D'Ieteren, G.D.Yard.; Busari, A.A. Farmer preferences and market values of cattle breeds of West and Cardinal Africa. J. Sustain. Agric. 1998, 12, 21–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kamuanga, M.; Tano, K.; Pokou, Grand.; Jabbar, G.A.; Swallow, B.; D'ieteren, K. Faremres' preferences of cattle breeds, their market place values and prospects for improvement in West Africa: A summary review. In Proceedings of the 25th Coming together of the International Scientific Council for Trypanosomiasis Research and Command (ISCTRC), Mombasa, Kenya, 27 September–2 Oct 1999; pp. 271–298. [Google Scholar]
  29. Boutrais, J. The Fulani and cattle breeds: Crossbreeding and heritages strategies. Africa 2007, 77, 18–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Traoré, South.A.; Markemann, A.; Reiber, C.; Piepho, H.P.; Valle Zarate, A. Production objectives, traits and breeds preferences of farmers keeping Due north'Dama, Fulani Zebu and crossbreed cattle and implication for breeding programs. Beast 2017, xi, 687–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Belemsaga, D.M.A.; Lombo, Y.; Thevenon, Southward.; Sylla, S. Inventory analysis of Due west African cattle breeds. In Applications of Cistron-Based Technologies for Improving Beast Product and Wellness in Developing Countries; Springer: Dordrecht, The netherlands, 2005; pp. 167–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gréma, Thou.; Traoré, A.; Issa, M.; Hamani, K.; Abdou, Chiliad.; Fernandez, I.; Soudré, A.; Alvarez, I.; Sanou, Thou.; Tamboura, H.H.; et al. Morphological cess of Niger Kuri cattle using multivariate methods. S Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 47, 505–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Dossa, L.H.; Vanvanhossou, F.U.S. The indigenous Somba cattle of the hilly Atacora region in N-West Republic of benin: Threatsand opportunities for its sustainable employ. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2016, 48, 349–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Alkoiret, I.T.; Yari, H.Chiliad.; Gbangboche, A.B.; Lokossou, R. Reproductive Performance and Milk Product of Girolando Cows in the Ranch of Kpinnou, South-West of Benin Republic. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 2011, 10, 2588–2592. [Google Scholar]
  35. Tijjani, A.; Utsunomiya, T.Y.; Ezkwe, G.A.; Nashiru, O.; Hanotte, O. Genome Sequence Assay Reveals Selection Signatures in Endangered Trypanotolerant West Africa Muturu Cattle. Front. Genet. 2019, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Moussa, G.M.A.; Issa, M.; Traoré, A.; Gréma, M.; Hamani, Thousand.; Fernandez, I.; Soudré, A.; Alvarez, I.; Sanou, M.; Tamboura, H.H.; et al. Morphological assessment of the Zebu Bororo (Wodaabé) cattle of Niger in the West African zebu framework. Arch. Anim. Brood 2017, lx, 363–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Umar, D.Due south.B.; Nwagu, B.I.; Umar, U.A.; Rufina, O.O.; Saleh, I.; Onotu, S.I.; Ugwu, 50. On-station Performance Evaluation of Indigenous Breeds of Cattle for Dairy Production Systems in Nigeria. Asian J. Res. Agric. For. 2020, v, thirty–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Marshall, K.; Tebug, S.; Salmon, Grand.R.; Tapio, M.; Juga, J.; Missou, A. Improving dairy cattle productivity in Senegal. ILRI Policy Brief: Nairobie, Kenya. 2017, 22. [Google Scholar]
  39. Ngono, E.P.J.; Lassila, L.; Missohou, A.; Marshall, K.; Tapio, Grand.; Tebug, S.F.; Juga, J. Milk product traits among indigenous and crossbred dairy cattle in Senegal. Afr. J. Food Agric. Nutr. Dev. 2018, eighteen, 13572–13587. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ahozonlin, C.G.; Koura, B.I.; Dossa, Fifty.H. Determinants of Crossbreeding Practices by Cattle Farmers in Due south Benin, W Africa: Implications for the Sustainable Use of the Indigenous Lagune Cattle Population. Sustain. Agric. Res. 2019, 8, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ejlertsen, M.; Poole, J.; Marshall, K. Traditional breeding objectives and practices of caprine animal, sheep and cattle smallholders in The The gambia and implications in relation to the design of breeding interventions. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2013, 45, 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Yakubu, A.; Dahloum, 50.; Gimba, E.Thousand. Smallholder cattle farmers' breeding practices and trait preferences in a tropical Republic of guinea savanna agro-ecological zone. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2019, 51, 1497–1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Soudré, A.; Ouédraogo-Koné, S.; Wurzinger, Grand.; Müller, S.; Hanotte, O.; Ouédraogo, A.Thou.; Sölkner, J. Trypanosomosis: A priority disease in tsetse-challenged areas of Burkina Faso. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2013, 45, 497–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Silbermayr, One thousand.; Li, F.; Soudré, A.; Müller, South.; Sölkner, J. A Novel qPCR Assay for the Detection of African Animate being Trypanosomosis in Trypanotolerant and Trypanosusceptible Cattle Breeds. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2013, 7, e2345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Tano, Thou. Genetic Preferences of Smallholders and Trypanotolerant Cattle in Southern Burkina Faso. Ph.D. Thesis, Univesity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  46. Tano, M.; Kamuanga, Yard.; Faminow, Thousand.D.; Eat, B. Using conjoint analysis to estimate farmer'due south preferences for cattle traits in Westward Africa. Ecol. Econ. 2003, 45, 393–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gicheha, M.K.; Kosgey, I.S.; Bebe, B.O.; Kahi, A.Yard. Evaluation of the efficiency of alternative two-tier nucleus breeding systems designed to ameliorate meat sheep in Kenya. J. Anim. Brood. Genet. 2006, 123, 247–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Kahi, A.G.; Rewe, T.O.; Kosgey, I.S. Sustainable communitybased organizations for the genetic improvement of livestock in developing countries. Outlook Agric. 2005, 34, 261–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mueller, J.P.; Rischkowsky, B.; Haile, A.; Philipsson, J.; Mwai, O.; Besbes, B.; Valle Zarate, A.; Tibbo, Thou.; Mirkena, T.; Duguma, G.; et al. Community-based livestock breeding programs: Essentials and examples. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2015, 132, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Tamboura, H.H.; Gnanda, B.I.; Kaboré, A.; Traoré, A. Bilan Des Acquis du Program D'amélioration Génétique Mis en Place Dans le Core du Projet de Soutien à la Diffusion du Zébu Azawak (PSDZA) Phase II; INERA: Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 2008; p. 61. [Google Scholar]
  51. Steglich, M.; Peters, K.J. Agro-pastoralists' trait preference in N'Dama cattle: Participatory methods to assess breeding objectives. In Proceedings of the seventh Earth Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Product, Montpellier, France, 19–23 Baronial 2002. [Google Scholar]
  52. Madalena, F.E.; Agyemang, One thousand.; Cardellino, R.C.; Jain, G.L. Genetic comeback in medium-to low-input systems of animate being production. In Proceedings of the seventh Earth Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Product, Montpellier, France, 19–23 Baronial 2002. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sölkner, J.; Nakimbugwe, H.; Valle Zarate, A. Assay of Determinants for Success and Failure of Village Breeding Programmes. In Proceedings of the 6th Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Armidale, NSW, Australia; 1998; Book 25, pp. 273–280. [Google Scholar]
  54. Sölkner, J.; Grausgruber, H.; Okeyo, A.1000.; Ruckenbauer, P.; Wurzinger, Chiliad. Convenance objectives and the relative importance of traits in plant and animal convenance: A comparative review. Euphytica 2008, 161, 273–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wurzinger, G.; Sölkner, J.; Iniguez, 50. Important aspects and limitations in considering community-based breeding programs for low-input smallholder livestock systems. Pocket-size Rumin. Res. 2011, 98, 170–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Goddard, Thou.E. Consensus and contend in the definition of breeding objectives. J. Dairy Sci. 1998, 81, 6–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Stein, J. Trypanotolerance and Phenotypic Characteristics of Iv Ethiopian Cattle Breeds. Ph.D. Thesis, Swedish University of Agriculture Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  58. Stein, J.; Ayalew, West.; Rege, Due east.; Mulatou, W.; Lemecha, H.; Tadesse, Y.; Tekle, T.; Philipsson, J. Trypanosomosis and phenotypicfeatures of four indigenous cattle breeds in an Ethipian field study. Vet. Parasitol. 2011, 178, xl–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Heringstad, B.; Klemetsdal, G.; Ruane, J. Selection for mastitis resistance in dairy cattle: A review with focus on the sistuation in the Nordic countries. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2000, 64, 95–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ouédraogo, D.; Oudéraogo-Koné, S.; Yougbaré, B.; Soudré, A.; Zoma-Traoré, B.; Mészáros, G.; Khayatzadeh, N.; Traoré, A.; Sanou, One thousand.; Mwai, A.O.; et al. Population construction, inbreeding and admixture in local cattle populations managed by community-based breeding programs in Burkina Faso. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2020. (Newspaper in Production). [Google Scholar]
  61. Guangul, A.S. Design of Customs-Based Breeding Programs for Two Idigenous Goats Breed in Ethiopia. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Natural Resource and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  62. Kosgey, I.S.; Baker, R.50.; Udo, H.M.J.; van Arendonk, J.A.M. Successes and failures of small ruminant convenance programmes in the tropics: A review. Pocket-size Rumin. Res. 2006, 61, 13–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yapi-Gnaoré, C.V. The open nucleus breeding programme of the Djallonke sheep in Côte D'Ivoire. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Developing Breeding Strategies for Lower Input Animal 712 Production Environments, Bella, Italy, 22–25 September 1999. [Google Scholar]
  64. Duguma, G.; Mirkena, T.; Haile, A.; Okeyo, A.M.; Tibbo, M.; Rischkowsky, B.; Sölkner, J.; Wurzinger, M. Identification of smallholder farmers and pastoralists' preferences for sheep convenance traits: Choice model approach. Anim. Int. J. Anim. Biosci. 2011, 5, 1984–1992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Mirkena, T.; Duguma, G.; Willam, A.; Wurzinger, M.; Haile, A.; Rischkowsky, B.; Okeyo, A.Yard.; Tibbo, Chiliad.; Sölkner, J. Community-based alternative breeding plans for ethnic sheep breeds in four agro-ecological zones of Ethiopia. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2012, 129, 244–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Mirkena, T. Identifying Breeding Objectives of Smallholders/Pastoralists and Optimizing Customs-Based Breeding Programs for Adapted Sheep Breeds in Ethiopia. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  67. Duguma, M. Participatory Definition of Convenance Objectives and Implementation of Customs-Based Sheep Breeding Programs in Ethiopia. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Republic of austria, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  68. Nandolo, W.; Wurzinger, M.; Gabor, Thousand.; Van Tassell, C.; Gondwe, T.; Mulindwa, H.; Lamuno, D.; Sölkner, J. Identification of breeding objectives in customs based goat breeding programmes in Malawi 2016. Acta Agric. Slov. 2016, 5, 104. [Google Scholar]
  69. Kaumbata, W.; Banda, L.; Mészáros, G.; Gondwe, T.; Woodward-Greene, Thou.J.; Rosen, D.B.; Van Tassell, P.C.; Sölkner, J.; Wurzinger, M. Tangible and intangible benefits of local goats rearing in smallholders farms in Republic of malaŵi. Pocket-sized Rumin. Res. 2020, 187, 106095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Gizaw, S.; Abebe, A.; Bisrat, A.; Zewdie, T.; Tegegne, A. Defining smallholders' sheep breeding objectives using farmers trait preferences versus bio-economic modelling. Livest. Sci. 2018, 214, 120–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Leroy, M.; Baumung, R.; Notter, D.; Verrier, E.; Wurzinger, Thousand.; Scherf, B. Stakeholder involvement and the direction of creature genetic resources across the globe. Livest. Sci. 2017, 198, 120–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Lobo, R.N.B. Opportunities for investment into modest ruminant convenance programmes in Brazil. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2019, 136, 313–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Ducrocq, 5.; Laloe, D.; Swaminathan, Chiliad.; Rognon, 10.; Tixier-Boichard, M.; Zerjal, T. Genomics for Ruminants in Developing Countries: From Principles to Practices. Front. Genet. 2018, 9, 251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Gowane, G.R.; Kumar, A.; Nimbkar, C. Challenges and opportunities to livestock convenance programmes in India. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2019, 136, 329–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Table 1. West African native cattle breeds: geographic distribution, acme at withers and torso weight.

Table 1. West African native cattle breeds: geographic distribution, height at withers and torso weight.

Type Breed Surface area/Countries HWM HWF BWM BWF References
Taurine N´Dama Guinea, Mali, Senegal, Republic of the gambia, Côte d´Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Republic of benin 95–120 90–115 220–360 180–300 [15,26,xxx,32]
Baoulé/Lobi Côte d´Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana 100–106 90–103 160–300 150–240 [v,26,31,32]
Kouri Niger, Nigeria 140–180 126–145 500–750 360–450 [5,26,31,32]
Lagunaire Republic of benin 89–106 85–103 180–280 165–262 [5,26]
Somba Republic of benin, Togo 89–106 85–103 150–215 115–185 [23,31,33]
Bourgou Republic of benin - 112.1 - - [26,34]
Muturu Nigeria, Benin 85–95 83–93 - - [5,25,35]
Kuri Niger, Nigeria 140–180 126–145 500–750 360–450 [5,32]
Zebu M´Bororo Burkina Faso, Nigeria, Mali, Republic of benin, Niger 128.iv 122.1 - - [26,31,36]
Azawak Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, Benin 128–135 122–130 350–500 300–410 [5,26,31]
White Fulani Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Republic of benin, Ghana 130–152 118–138 425–665 250–380 [five,31,37]
Sudanese Fulani Burkina Faso, Bénin, Côte d´Ivoire, Republic of mali, Togo 120–138 115–126 280–345 248–300 [5,26,31,36]
Goudali Nigeria, Niger, Republic of benin, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Mali - 178.two - 388.42 [31,37]
Gobra Senegal, Mali 130–144 124–140 300–350 250–300 [5,31,38,39]
Maure Mauritania, Senegal, Mali, Niger, Côte d´Ivoire 125–140 110–128 250–700 250–350 [5,31,38,39]

Table 2. Six local cattle breeding programs in Westward Africa.

Table two. Six local cattle breeding programs in West Africa.

N´Dama in Senegal Northward´Dama in Mali N´Dama in the Republic of the gambia Azawak Zebu in Burkina Faso Fulani Zebu in Burkina Faso Baoulé and Baoulé x Zebu Crosses in Burkina Faso
Period 1972–ongoing 1975–ongoing 1994–ongoing 2000–2015 2005–2018 2016–ongoing
Breeding objectives Meat, milk and trypanotolerance Meat and trypanotolerance Meat, milk and trypanotolerance Milk Milk and control of inbreeding Meat and trypanotolerance
Animals selected Males and females Males Males and females Males Males and females Males
Selection criteria Females: milk performance. Males: body weight at 18 months and daily gain from 18–36 months Glaze color, Body weight at eighteen months, Daily proceeds from 18–36 months Females: milk performance in the 100 first days of lactation. Males: daily gain from 0–x months and 15–35 months Daily gain and libido at 30 months Females: ain maternal line milk performance. Males: daily gain and libido at xxx months Body weight at three–5 years, Daily proceeds until 6 months
Breeding scheme Open nucleus Open up nucleus Open nucleus Dispersed nucleus Dispersed nucleus Village breeding
Number of tiers 3 3 three 2 ii 1
Location of nucleus Public research center Public genetic comeback middle Public research center Breeders' farms Elite farms in villages no nucleus
Size of nucleus 200 females
4 males		 not reported non reported not reported 233 females
28 males		 not reported
Recording site Station Station Station Station Farm Farm
Genetic evaluation BLUP in 2012 In 1984 BLUP in 2007 No No Phenotype deviation
Participation of farmers Breeding, reproduction, and dissemination units Reproduction and dissemination units Reproduction and broadcasting units Broadcasting unit of measurement Selection criteria, Pick based on recorded performance (choice committee) Selection criteria, Option based on recorded performance (option committee)
Stakeholders involved NGO, National inquiry heart NGO, National genetic improvement center, Regime extension service NGO, National research center NGO, National genetic improvement center, National inquiry found NGO, Farmers´ organization, Ministry of livestock resource and extension services, Genetic improvement eye National and foreign partner universities, National research plant, Government extension services
Breeders´ association Yeah No Yes Yes Yes Beingness fix
References [15,16,17,18] [fifteen,16,17,eighteen] [12,13,xiv,nineteen,20] Project reports [fifty] Project reports [21,22]

Publisher's Annotation: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

andersoncourand.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/2125/htm

0 Response to "International Journals Beef Cattle Breeding With System of Indepedence"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel