Advertisement

Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 50, Issue 1, pp 121–128 | Cite as

Farmers’ breeding practices and traits of economic importance for indigenous chicken in RWANDA

  • J. MahoroEmail author
  • T. K Muasya
  • F. Mbuza
  • J. Mbuthia
  • A. K. Kahi
Regular Articles

Abstract

Data on breeding practices and traits of economic importance for the indigenous chicken (IC) were collected through personal interviews using structured questionnaires and direct observations of chicken management practices. The study was conducted from November 2015 to January 2016 in Rwamagana, Rulindo, Ruhango, Kicukiro and Muhanga districts of Rwanda. Data were collected and analysed through computation of indices, which represented a weighted average of all rankings of a specific trait. Spearman’s non-parametric rank correlation was calculated for ranking of traits of economic importance to indicate the directional effects. The results on chicken ecotypes and their attributes showed that prolificacy, mature weight, disease tolerance, egg number and heat tolerance were highly preferred. The dwarf ecotype was most abundantly reared (38.84%) and considered to be significantly smaller and to have poorer growth rate, but to have better prolificacy than other indigenous chicken ecotypes. Selection of breeding cock and hen was based on disease tolerance, body weight at sexual maturity, body size and growth rate. In addition, for hen, mothering ability and egg fertility (Fer) were considered. Indices for the traits perceived by farmers as of primary economic importance were egg yield (0.093), disease tolerance (0.091), high growth rate (0.089), prolificacy (0.088), high body weight (0.087) and egg fertility (0.083). The most important traits considered by the marketers were body weight (BW), disease tolerance (Dtol), plumage colour (Pcol), egg yolk colour (EYC), meat quality (MQ), growth rate (GR) and egg yield (EY) whereas for consumers, meat quality, egg yolk colour, egg yield, body weight and growth rate were considered. Among traits perceived as important by farmers, a positive and significant correlation was found between BW and GR and Fer. Correlation was moderate for BW and prolificacy, drought tolerance (Drtol), Dtol and EYC. BW was negatively correlated with temperament (Temp), heat tolerance, Pcol and egg shell colour (ESC). Regarding marketers and consumers’ preference rank correlation, positive and significant correlation was between BW and GR and MQ. As such, appropriate ecotypes (indigenous chicken) which have these characteristics need to be identified and utilised more based on their performance and adaption to the environment conditions to ensure efficient IC production.

Keywords

Breeding practices Indigenous chicken Trait preferences Rwanda 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful for the financial support offered by the Kingdom of the Netherlands through the Nuffic project (NICHE RWA/173) of the MSc programme for Janvier Mahoro. We also recognised the immense support of the Government of Rwanda through the College of Agriculture, Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine (CAVM) of the University of Rwanda and Egerton University for the provision of facilities. We acknowledged the good collaboration showed by farmers, marketers and consumers of ICs in this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. Abeykoon, M. N. D. F., Weerahewa, J., Silva, G. L. L. P. (2013). Determinants of Market Participation by Indigenous Poultry Farmers: A Case Study in Anuradhapura District in Sri Lanka. Tropical Agricultural Research, 24(4), 347–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Addisu, H., Zewdu, W., Hailu, M. (2014). Breeding practice and objective of indigenous chicken in North Wollo, Amhara regional State, Ethiopia. International Journal of Livestock Production, 5(1), 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajayi, F.O., Agaviezor, B.O. and Wihioka, S.N. (2013). Haemoglobin Genotypes in the Nigerian Indigenous Chicken in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria. International Journal of Advanced Biological Research, 3(1), 13–16.Google Scholar
  4. Akinola, L. A. F., Essien, A. (2011). Relevance of rural poultry production in developing countries with special reference to Africa. Worlds Poultry Science Journal, 67, 697–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bett, H. K., Bett, R. C., Peters, K. J., Kahi, A. K., Bokelmann, W. (2011). Estimating farmers’ preferences in selection of indigenous chicken genetic resources using non-market attributes. Animal Genetic Resources, 49, 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cochram, W. G. 1963. Sampling techniques, 2nd Ed.; New York: John Wiley and Sons. Inc.Google Scholar
  7. Dana, N., van der Waaij, L. H., Dessie, T., van Arendonk, J. A. M. (2010). Production objectives and trait preferences of village poultry producers of Ethiopia: Implications for designing breeding schemes utilizing indigenous chicken genetic resources. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 42(7), 1519–1529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gabanakgosi, K., Moreki, J. C., Tsopito, C. M., Nsoso, S. J. (2013). Impact of family chickens on the livelihoods of people living with HIV and AIDS in four villages of Botswana. Journal of World’s Poultry Research, 3(July 2012), 43–53.Google Scholar
  9. Getu, A. (2014). Review work on farmer trite preferences for their breeding objectives of local chicken ecotypes in Ethiopia. Global Journal of Poultry Farming and Vaccination, 2(2), 116–120.Google Scholar
  10. Getu, A., Alemayehu, K., Wuletaw, Z. (2014). Phenotypic characterization of indigenous chicken ecotypes in North Gondar Zone, Ethiopia. Global Veterinaria, 12(3), 361–368.Google Scholar
  11. Hailu, A., Wuletaw, Z., Mazengia, H. (2013). Breeding practice and objective of indigenous chicken in North Wollo, Amhara regional State, Ethiopia. International Journal of Livestock Production, 5, 15–22.Google Scholar
  12. IBM Corp. Released 2013. IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, Version 22.0 Armonk: IBM corp.Google Scholar
  13. Khobondo, J. O., Muasya, T. K., Miyumo, S., Okeno, T. O., Wasike, C. B., Mwakubambanya, R., Kahi, A. K. (2015). Genetic and nutrition development of indigenous chicken in Africa. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 27(7).Google Scholar
  14. Kingori, A. M., Wachira, A. M., Tuitoek, J. K. (2010). Indigenous chicken production in Kenya: A review. International Journal of Poultry Science, 9(4), 309–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Magothe, T. M., Muhuyi, W. B., Kahi, A. K. (2010). Influence of major genes for crested-head, frizzle-feather and naked-neck on body weights and growth patterns of indigenous chickens reared intensively in Kenya. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 42(2), 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Magothe, T. M., Okeno, T. O., Muhuyi, W. B., Kahi, A. K. (2012). Small-Scale Family Poultry Production Indigenous chicken production in Kenya: I. Current status. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 68, 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sanka Y. D., Mbaga, S. H. (2014). Evaluation of Tanzanian local chicken reared under intensive and semi-intensive systems: I. Growth performance and carcass characteristics. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 26, Article #127. Retrieved September 23, 2017, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd26/7/sank26127.htm
  18. Mbuthia, J. M., Rewe, T. O., Kahi, A. K. (2015). Analysis of pig breeding management and trait preferences in smallholder production systems in Kenya. Animal Genetic Resources, 56, 111-117. Google Scholar
  19. Moges, F., Mellesse, A., Dessie, T. (2010). Assessment of village chicken production system and evaluation of the productive and reproductive performance of local chicken ecotype in Bure district, North west Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(13), 1739–1748.Google Scholar
  20. Mtileni, B. J., Muchadeyi, F. C., Maiwashe, A., Chimonyo, M., Mapiye, C., Dzama, K. (2012). Influence of socioeconomic factors on production constraints faced by indigenous chicken producers in South Africa. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 45(1), 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. NISR. (2011). Integrated household living conditions survey. EICV3 THEMATIC REPORT Agriculture. Kigali. Retrieved from https://microdata.statistics.gov.rw/index.php/catalog/36
  22. Okeno, T. O., Kahi, A. K., Peters, K. J. (2011). Breed selection practices and traits of economic importance for indigenous chicken in Kenya. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 23, Article #209. Retrieved September 23, 2017, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd23/10/oken23209.htm
  23. Okeno, T. O., Kahi, A. K., Peters, K. J. (2012). Characterization of indigenous chicken production systems in Kenya. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 44(3), 601–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Padhi, M. K. (2016). Importance of Indigenous Breeds of Chicken for Rural Economy. Scientifica, 2016(Article ID 2604685), 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pym, R. A. E. (2010). The role of the world’s poultry science association (WPSA) in support of poultry production in developing countries. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Australian Poultry Science Sumposium, Sydney, New South Wales, 1-3rd February 2010.Google Scholar
  26. Rakhmanin, V. O., Gennari, P. (2014). FAO Statistical Yearbook 2014, 130. Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:No+Title#0
  27. SAS Institute Inc. 2002. Base SAS® 9.3. Procedures Guide, Help and Documentation, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 2002-2004. All rights reserved.Google Scholar
  28. Tada, O., Muchenje, V., Dzama, K. (2013). Preferential traits for breeding Nguni cattle in low-input in-situ conservation production systems. SpringerPlus, 2(1), 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yakubu, A., Abimiku, H. K., Musa-Azara, I. S., Idahor, K. O., Akinsola, O. M. (2013). Assessment of flock structure, preference in selection and traits of economic importance for domestic Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) genetic resources in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 25(1).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Animal Breeding and Genomics Group, Department of Animal ScienceEgerton UniversityEgertonKenya
  2. 2.Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Animal Production, College of Agriculture, Animal Sciences and Veterinary Medicine (CAVM)University of RwandaNyagatareRwanda

Personalised recommendations