Performance Evaluation of Kuroiler and Sasso Chicken Breeds Reared under On-farm and On-station Management Conditions in Tanzania
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
A study was conducted to evaluate the effect of management, breed, and their interaction on growth performance, egg production, and survivability under on-station and on-farm management conditions in Tanzania. A total of 1200 chicks, 600 for each breed, Kuroiler, and Sasso of mixed sexes were used. Birds under on-station management were confined and fed commercial ration throughout the experiment while those under on-farm management were allowed to semi-scavenge and supplemented with available feeds in the household. Brooding was carried out on-station for six weeks. Thereafter, birds were sub-divided for on-station and on-farm evaluation where data on body weight, egg production traits, and survival rate were taken at different ages from week 6 up to 52. The General Linear Models procedure fitting management, breed, and interaction between management and breed was used to analyze the data. Results show that management conditions had a significant influence on the performance of the breeds. Birds reared on-station performed better in all traits measured than those reared on-farm. The general effect of the breed was significant only for hen-day egg production (HDEP %) and hen-housed egg production (HHEP) in favour of Sasso chickens. Similarly, Sasso was more efficient at converting feed to live body weight. Interactions between management and breed were observed for all traits except peak egg production rate and mortality rate. While Sasso performance was better than that of Kuroiler on body weight, age at first egg, HDEP, age at peak egg production, and HHEP under the on-station management system, their performance in these traits were similar under the on-farm management except for body weight and age at first egg where Kuroiler was superior to Sasso. The survivability was also higher for Kuroiler than for Sasso under both management systems. It is concluded that genotype by environment (GxE) interaction had significant effects on the performance of the two breeds thus, a need to consider such effect when promoting them for either on-station or on-farm rearing.
References
-
Aklilu, H., Almekinders, C.J.M., Udo, H.M.J and Van der Zijpp, A.J. (2007). Village poultry consumption and marketing in relation to gender, religious festivals and market access. Tropical Animal Health and Production 39, 165-168.
Google Scholar
1
-
MLFD (2015). Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development. Tanzania livestock modernization initiative. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development. Available: https://livestocklivelihoodsandhealth.org/wpcontent/uploads /2015/07/Tanzania_Livestock_Modernization_Initiative_July_2015.pdf.
Google Scholar
2
-
Permin, A. (2008). Good practices in small-scale poultry production: A manual for trainers and producers in East Africa. A Consultancy Report to FAO, FAO ECTAD Regional Unit Eastern Africa, Nairobi, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Google Scholar
3
-
Ali, K.O., Katule, A.M. and Syrstad, O. (2000). Genotype X Environment interaction for growing chickens: Comparison of four genetic groups on two rearing systems under tropical condition, Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A-Animal Sciences, 50(2), 65–71.
Google Scholar
4
-
Da Silva, M., Desta, S. and Stapleton, J. (2017) Development of the chicken sector in the Tanzanian Livestock Master Plan. Available: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/132697821.pdf.
Google Scholar
5
-
Sharma, J., Xie, J., Boggess, M., Galukande, E., Semambo, D. and Sharma S. (2015). Higher weight gain by Kuroiler chickens than indigenous chickens raised under scavenging conditions by rural households in Uganda. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 27(9).
Google Scholar
6
-
SASSO (2014). Coloured chicken genetics. Available: http://www.sasso.fr/coloured-chicken-genetics-for-organic-red-label-farmer-chickens.html.
Google Scholar
7
-
Ahuja, V., Dhawan, M., Punjabi, M. and Maarse, L. (2008). Poultry-based livelihoods of rural poor: Cast of Kuroiler in West Bengal. Research report document 012. South Asia Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Programme. Available: http: //www. drcsc.org/VET/ library/Animal/Bk–Poultry _Based _Livelihoods.pdf.
Google Scholar
8
-
Mengsite, F.W., Yitbarek, M.B. and Getachew, E. (2019). Productivity and Egg Quality Traits of Sasso T44 Chicken in North Showa Zone, Ethiopia. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 39 (3), 6478-6486.
Google Scholar
9
-
Sharma, J. (2011). A new breed: Highly productive chickens help raise Ugandans from poverty researcher at the Center for Infectious Diseases and Vaccinology at ASU’s Bio-design Institute. Available: https://asunews.asu.edu/ node/21034.
Google Scholar
10
-
North, M.O. (1984). Breeder Management. In Commercial Chicken Production Manual. The Avi. Publishing Company. Inc. Westport, Connecticut. 240-243, 298-321 pp.
Google Scholar
11
-
SAS (2009). Statistical Analytical System. User Guide for Personal Computers, Statistical Programme. Windows Version 9.2, SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC, USA.
Google Scholar
12
-
Lwelamira, J., Kifaro, G.C. and Gwakisa, P.S. (2008). On station and on-farm evaluation of two Tanzania chicken ecotypes for body weights at different ages and for egg production. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 3(12), 843-851.
Google Scholar
13
-
Magala, H., Kugonza, D.R., Kwizera, H. and Kyarisiima, C.C. (2012). Influence of management system on growth and carcass characteristics of Ugandan local chickens. Journal of Animal Science Advances 2(6), 558–567.
Google Scholar
14
-
Wondmeneh, E., Van der Waaij, E.H., Udo, H.M.J., Tadelle, D. and Van Arendonk, J.A.M. (2016). Comparison of different poultry breeds under station and on-farm conditions in Ethiopia. Livestock Science 183 (2016) 72–77. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2015.11.019.
Google Scholar
15
-
Bekele, F., Gjøen, H.M., Kathle, J., Ådnøy, T. and Abebe, G. (2009). Genotype X environment interaction in two breeds of chickens kept under two management systems in Southern Ethiopia. Tropical Animal Health and Production 41:1101–1114. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23665839.
Google Scholar
16
-
Kayitesi, A. (2015). Management systems and location effects on growth and carcass traits of Kuroiler and Local chickens. MSc Thesis. Makerere University, Uganda.
Google Scholar
17
-
Sanka, Y.D., Mbaga, S.H., Mutayoba, S.K., Katule, A.M. and Goromela, S.H. (2020). Evaluation of growth performance of Sasso and Kuroiler chickens fed three diets at varying levels of supplementation under semi-intensive system of production in Tanzania. Tropical Animal Health and Production 52(6), 3315-3322
Google Scholar
18
-
Kidie, H.A. (2019). Characterization of chicken production system and on-farm evaluation of introduced exotic chicken breeds in Gondar Zuria and Kalu districts of Amhara region, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis. Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Google Scholar
19
-
Bamidele, O., Sonaiya, E.B., Adebambo, O.A. and Dessie, T. (2019). On-station performance evaluation of improved tropically adapted chicken breeds for smallholder poultry production systems in Nigeria. Tropical Animal Health and Production. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-019-02158-9.
Google Scholar
20
-
Assefa, S., Melesse, A. and Banerjee, S. (2018). Egg production and linear body measurement traits of local and three exotic chicken genotypes reared under two agroecological zones. International Journal of Ecology and Ecosolution 5(2), 18-23.
Google Scholar
21
-
Sazzad, M.H. (1992). Comparative study on egg production and feed efficiency of different breeds of poultry under intensive and rural conditions in Bangladesh. Livestock Research for Rural Development 4(3): 65-69. Available:
Google Scholar
22
-
http://www.fao.org/ag/aga/agap/frg/lrrd/lrrd4/3/bangla1.htm.
Google Scholar
23
-
Goromela, E. H., Kwakkel, R. P., Verstegen, M. W. A. and Katule, A. (2006). Strategies to optimize the use of scavengeable feed resource base by smallholder poultry farmers. African Journal of Agricultural Research 1: 91-100. Available: http://www.academicjournals.org/AJAR.
Google Scholar
24
-
Knueppel, D., Peter, C., Ayubu, O.M., Peter, M., David, M. and Carol, C. (2009). Improving Poultry Production for Sustainability in the Ruaha Landscape, Tanzania. Wildlife Conservation Society, 24.
Google Scholar
25
-
Akhtar, N., Mahmood, S., Hassan, M. and Yasmeen, F. (2007). Comparative study of production potential and egg characteristics of Lyallpur Silver Black, Fayoumi and Rhode Island Red breeds of poultry, Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 27(4), 184–188.
Google Scholar
26
-
Singh, P., Kachroo, D., Thakur, N.P., Khajuria, V., Kumar, P., Kumar, M., and Kour, G. (2018). Comparative Performance of Vanaraja, Gramapriya, and Indigenous Desi Bird under Backyard System of Rearing in Jammu Province, India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 7(02), 101-105. Available: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.702.013.
Google Scholar
27
-
Olawumi, S.O. (2011). Study on pre-laying characteristics of three breeds of commercial layers in the Derived Savannah Zone of Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 14(23), 1061–1065.
Google Scholar
28
-
Kejela, Y. (2020). Production Performance of Chicken under Farmers’ Management and Their Roles at Urban Household Economy in Southern Ethiopia. Agricultural Sciences 11: 178-190.
Google Scholar
29
-
Getiso, A., Jimma, A., Asrat, M., Kebede, H.G., Zeleke, B. and Birhanu, T. (2017). Management practices and productive performances of Sasso chickens breed under village production system in SNNPR, Ethiopia. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare 7 (7): 120–135.
Google Scholar
30
-
Islam, R., Deka, C.K., Rahman, M., Deka, B.C., Hussain, M. and Paul, A. (2017). Comparative performances of Kuroiler, Rainbow Rooster and Indigenous birds under backyard system of rearing in Dhubri district of Assam. Journal of Rural and Agricultural Research 17 (1), 40 - 43.
Google Scholar
31
-
Abalaka G.O., Mkpado M. and Ugwu S.O.C. (2013). Rearing methods, seasons of the year, and survivability of rural poultry enterprise in Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture and Sustainability, 3(1), 27–55.
Google Scholar
32
-
Savory, C.J. (1995) Feather pecking and cannibalism. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 51: 215–219.
Google Scholar
33
-
Mwalusanya, N.A., Katule, A.M., Mutayoba, S.K. and Mtambo, M.M.A. (2002). Productivity of local chickens under village management conditions. Tropical Animal Health and Production 34: 405-416.
Google Scholar
34
-
Alem T (2014). Production and reproduction performance of rural poultry in lowland and midland agro-ecological zones of Central Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research 9(49):3531-3539.
Google Scholar
35
-
Fleming, D.S., Koltes, J. E., Markey, A.D., Schmidt, C.J., Ashwell, C.M., Rothschild, M.F., Persia, M.E., Reecy, J.M. and Lamont, S.J. (2016). Genomic analysis of Ugandan and Rwandan chicken ecotypes using a 600 k genotyping array. BMC Genomics 17: 407.
Google Scholar
36
-
Okumu, N.O. (2016). Genetic diversity and viral disease resistance of the indigenous chickens from selected areas in Kenya. MSc Thesis, Kenyatta University, Kenya.
Google Scholar
37
-
Mpenda, F.N., Lyantagaye, S.L. and Buza, J. (2020). Immune response following Newcastle disease immunization and growth performance of Kuroiler, broiler, and local Tanzanian chickens. International Journal of Livestock Production, 11(1), 1-7.
Google Scholar
38
Most read articles by the same author(s)
-
Lokoo Cbubby Mwaipopo,
Said H. Mbaga,
Efficiency of Artificial Insemination (AI) Technology in Different dairy Herd Management Systems in the Southern Highland Zone (SHZ) of Tanzania , European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences: Vol. 4 No. 2 (2022) -
Grace E. Ngogo,
Fadhili S. Guni,
Athumani S. Nguluma,
Management Systems and Productivity of Indigenous Chickens in Busokelo District, Mbeya Region, Tanzania , European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences: Vol. 5 No. 1 (2023) -
Lokoo Chubby Mwaipopo,
Said H. Mbaga,
Assessment of Preferable Breeding Method Use and Related Limitations under Smallholder Dairy Farmers’ Conditions: A Case Study in Selected Districts Southern Highland Zone of Tanzania , European Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences: Vol. 4 No. 2 (2022)