Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 44, Issue 7, pp 1403–1410 | Cite as

Factors affecting yield and composition of camel milk kept under desert conditions of central Punjab, Pakistan

  • Sibtain Ahmad
  • Muhammad Yaqoob
  • Muhammad Qamar Bilal
  • Muhammad Kasib KhanEmail author
  • Ghulam Muhammad
  • Li-Guo Yang
  • Muhammad Tariq
Original Research


This study was planned to study the herd composition, farming system, and reproductive traits and to evaluate the effect of season, stage of lactation and parity on milk production, and composition of camels kept under pastoral environment of central Punjab, Pakistan. Based on purposive sampling method, 50 herds belonging to small, medium, and large-sized herds were selected. From these herds, 1,137 she-camels were entered in this study and their composite milk samples were collected and analyzed through standard procedures to determine the milk yield and percentages of milk contents. The results showed that the male camels constituted a lesser percentage (p < 0.05: 43.08; 380/882) in the total herd composition compared to that of she-camels (56.92; 502/882). The mean daily milk yield was 8.17 ± 0.09 L and mean percentage of fat was 3.79 ± 0.13%, protein was 3.66 ± 0.07%, lactose was 5.15 ± 0.09%, ash was 0.81 ± 0.02%, acidity was 0.20 ± 0.01%, solids not fat (SNF) was 9.63 ± 0.15%, total solids was 13.42 ± 0.21, and moisture was 86.58 ± 0.43. Mean daily milk yield was significantly higher (p < 0.01) during rainy season followed by winter season, warm dry summer, and hot summer season. Milk fat and protein contents were the highest in hot dry summer, while lactose contents were higher during rainy season. The stage of lactation and parity confirmed to impinge significantly (p < 0.01) on protein, lactose, and SNF. The present study will be helpful to design measures for the eradication of reproductive constraints and for the improvement of milk yield and composition in order to make camel rearing an economical proposition.


Herd profile Reproductive performance Stage of lactation Parity Lactose 



The authors thank to the staff of the Dairy Laboratory, Department of Livestock Management, and National Institute of Food Science and Technology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad for providing technical assistance.


  1. Ahmad S, Yaqoob, M., Hashmi, N., Ahmad, S., Zaman, M.A. and Tariq, M., 2010. Economic importance of camel: unique alternative under crisis. Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 30, 191–197Google Scholar
  2. Al-Eknah, M.M., 2000. Reproduction in Old World camels, Animal Reproduction Science, 60, 583–592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Kanhal, H.A. and Al-Haj, O.A., 2010. Compositional, technological and nutritional aspects of dromedary camel milk—A review, International Dairy Journal, 20, 811-821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Almutairi, S.E., 2000. Evaluation of Saudi camel calves’ performance under an improved management system, Revue d’élevage et de médecine vétérinaire des pays tropicaux, 53 (2), 219–222Google Scholar
  5. Almutairi, S.E., Boujenane, I., Musaad, A. and Awad-Acharari, F., 2010. Non-genetic factors influencing reproductive traits and calving weight in Saudi camels, Tropical Animal Health and Production, 42, 1087–1092PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Al-Sultan, S.I. and Mohammed, A.M., 2007. The effects of the number of lactations on the chemical composition of camel milk, Journal of Camel Practice and Research, 14(1), 61–63Google Scholar
  7. Bakheit, S.A., Majid, A.M.A. and Nikhala, A.M.M.A., 2008. Camels (Camelus dromedarius) under pastoral systems in North Kordofan, Sudan: Seasonal and parity effects on milk composition, Journal of Camelid Science, 1, 32–36Google Scholar
  8. Bekele, T., Zeleke, M. and Baars, R.M.T., 2002. Milk production performance of the one humped camel (Camelus dromedarius) under pastoral management in semi-arid eastern Ethiopia, Livestock Production Science, 76, 37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Economic Survey of Pakistan, 2010. Economic Advisor’s Wing, (Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad)Google Scholar
  10. El-Hatmi, H., Girardet, J., Gaillard, J., Yahyaoui, M.H. and Attia, H., 2004. Characterisation of whey proteins of camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk and colostrums, Small Ruminant Research, 70, 267–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. El-Zubeir, Ibtisam, E.M. and Nour Ehsan M., 2010. Studies on some camel management practices and constraints in pre-urban areas of Khartoum state, Sudan, International Journal of Dairy Science, 5, 276–284Google Scholar
  12. FAO, 2010. FAOSTAT, FAO Statistics Division, FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  13. Farah, Z. and Fischer, A., 2004. The camel (Camelus dromedarius) as a meat and milk animal: handbook on product and processing, (Vdf Hochschulverlag,
  14. Haddadin, M.S.Y., Gammoh, S.I. and Robinson, R.K., 2008. Seasonal variation in the chemical composition of camel milk in Jordan, Journal of Dairy Research, 75(1), 8–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Iqbal, A., Gill, R.A. and Younas, M., 2001. Milk composition of Pakistani camel (Camelus dromedarius) kept under station/farmer’s conditions, Emirates Journal of Agriculture Science, 13, 7–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jasra, A.W., Aujla, K.M., Khan, S.A. and Munir, M., 1999. Socio-economic profile of camel herders in Balochistan, Pakistan, International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 1(3), 159–162Google Scholar
  17. Kaufmann, B.A., 2005. Reproductive performance of camels (Camelus dromedarius) under pastoral management and its influence on herd development, Livestock Production Science, 92, 17–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Khanna, N.D., Rai, A.K. and Tandon, S.N., 2004. Camel breeds of India, Journal of Camel Science, 1, 8–15Google Scholar
  19. Kouniba, A., Berrada, M., Zahar, M. and Bengoumi, M., 2005. Composition and heat stability of Moroccan Camel milk, Journal of Camel Practice and Research, 12(2), 105–110Google Scholar
  20. Mehari, Y., Mekuriaw, Z. and Gebru, G., 2007. Potentials of camel production in Babilie and Kebribeyah woredas of the Jijiga Zone, Somali Region, Ethiopia, Livestock Research for Rural Development, 19, (4), (retrieved from,
  21. Mehta, S.C. and Sahani, M.S., 2009. Reproductive performance of Indian camel breeds, Indian Journal of Animal Science, 79(2), 210–211Google Scholar
  22. Musa, H.H., Shuiep, E.S., Ibtissam, El-Zubier, E.M. and Chen, G.H., 2006. Some reproductive and productive traits of camel (Camelus dromedarius) in Western Sudan, Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 5(7), 590–592Google Scholar
  23. Population Census Organization, 2009. District Census Reports, (Statistics division, Ministry of Economic Affairs and statistics, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan)Google Scholar
  24. Petrie, A. and Watson, P., 1999. Statistics for Veterinary and Animal Science, (Blackwell Science, London, UK)Google Scholar
  25. Raghvendar, S., Shukla, S.K., Sahani, M.S. and Bhakat, C., 2004. Chemical and physico-chemical properties of camel milk at different stages of lactation. In: Proceeding of International Conference on Saving the Camel and people’s Livelihoods, Building a multi-stakeholder platform for the conservation of the camel in Rajasthan, 23-25 November, Lokhit Pashu-Palak Sansthan, Sadri, Rajasthan, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  26. Raziq, A., 2009. Portrayal of camelids in pastoral economy of North-eastern herders of Balochistan, (PhD thesis, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan)Google Scholar
  27. Shabo, Y., Barzel, R., Margoulis, M. and Yagil, R., 2005. Camel Milk for Food Allergies in Children, Immunology and Allergies, 7, 796–798Google Scholar
  28. Shuiep, E.S., El-Zubier, I.E.M., El-Owni, O.A.O. and Musa, H.H., 2008. Influence of season and management on composition of raw camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk in Khartoum state, Sudan, Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems (ISSN: 1870-0462), 8(1), 101–106Google Scholar
  29. SPSS ver. 16, 2007. User’s guide published Chicago, (SPSS Inc., ISBN 1568273908)Google Scholar
  30. Thrusfield, M., 2007. Veterinary Epidemiology, (Blackwell Science Limited, U.S.A), 180–181Google Scholar
  31. Wehr, H.M. and Frank, J.F., 2004. Standard Methods for the Examination of Dairy Products. (American Public Health Association, Washington, DC), 75-76, 370-384Google Scholar
  32. Wernery, U., Juhasz, J. and Nagy, P., 2004. Milk yield performance of dromedaries with an automatic bucket milking machine, Journal of Camel Practice and Research, 11(1), 51–7Google Scholar
  33. Yagil, R. and Etzion, Z., 1983. Lactation in drought areas: in Shual, Development in Ecological and Environmental quality, 11, 22-30Google Scholar
  34. Zeleke, Z.M., 2007. Non-genetic factors affecting milk yield and milk composition of traditionally managed camels (Camelus dromedarius) in Eastern Ethiopia, Livestock Research for Rural Development, 19, (6), (retrieved from,

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sibtain Ahmad
    • 1
    • 4
  • Muhammad Yaqoob
    • 1
  • Muhammad Qamar Bilal
    • 1
  • Muhammad Kasib Khan
    • 2
    • 5
    Email author
  • Ghulam Muhammad
    • 3
  • Li-Guo Yang
    • 4
  • Muhammad Tariq
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Livestock ManagementUniversity of AgricultureFaisalabadPakistan
  2. 2.Department of ParasitologyUniversity of AgricultureFaisalabadPakistan
  3. 3.Department of Clinical Medicine and SurgeryUniversity of AgricultureFaisalabadPakistan
  4. 4.Key Laboratory of Agricultural Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction Science, Ministry of EducationHuazhong Agricultural UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  5. 5.College of Veterinary Medicine/ State Key Laboratory of Agricultural MicrobiologyHuazhong Agricultural UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations