Trypanotolerance and Phenotypic Characteristics of four Ethiopian Cattle Breeds

Jennie Stein

ILRI-EIAR-SLU Workshop on Sharing Research Results on Trypanotolerance in Indigenous Cattle Breeds and Experiences of Community Based Breed Improvement of Indigenous Sheep in

Ethiopia—A Road Map for Implementation and Future R4DAddis Ababa, Ethiopia, 15-16 November 2011

Distribution

Sub-Saharan Africa

60 million heads ofcattle exposed to risk

3 million heads lost annually

Costs 1.34 billion USD annually

EthiopiaTrypanosomosis covers 15 % of all arable land

10 - 14 million heads of cattle exposed to risk

Trypanotolerance

Relative capacity of an animal to control the development of the parasites and to limit their pathological effects

Natural selection

Mostly West African B. taurus

Complex trait

Photo: Emelie Zonabend

West African N´Dama

The Ghibe Valley

Non-inhabited up to mid 80-ies due to trypanosomosis

Major efforts and research by ILRI and EIAR

Now: 10,000 farming families and 25,000 heads of cattle

Trypanosomosis still a large problem in the valley

Background

Ghibe/Tolley research station – EIAR and ILRIAimed at identifying trypanotolerant cattle breed(s)

among Abigar, Gurage, Horro and Sheko

Animals of the four breeds arrived in 2000

PhD-project proposal– EIAR, ILRI and SLUTo further investigate trypanotolerance and related

traits both in home area and at the Ghibe station

Main funding from Sida/SAREC

Breeds Investigated

Horro

Abigar

Sheko

Gurage

Kept in different parts of South-Western Ethiopia

Objective

Learn about farmers’ perceptionand knowledge regarding diseases,breeding and production

Determine level of trypanosomosisof the four breeds objectively

Compare breeds in same tsetseinfested environment (Ghibe)

Alternative opportunities to explore thegenes of a possibly trypanotolerant breed

Methods I – In the Field

Interview with farmers

4 breeds in the areas wherethey are normally kept

60 interviews per breed

Contained questions regarding:

Herd size and management, utility of cattle,constraints for cattle production,production and reproduction as well as diseases with a major focus on trypanosomosis

Trypanosomosis challengeAbigar

Gurage

Horro

Sheko

Methods II – In the Field

Sampling

Performed at peak challenge period

100 animals per breed

Blood: PCV and parasitaemia

Body measurements:Body lengthHeart girthHeight at withersBody Condition Score

Methods III – On Station

All breeds kept in the same tsetse infested environment in the Ghibe Valley 2000-2007

Monthly recordingsParasitaemia

PCV

Live weight

375 animals included

PCV – Home areas

Breed Overall Non infected Infected

Abigar 20.0 20.8 17.5

Gurage 22.7 23.1 21.2

Horro 26.2 27.2 21.3

Sheko 25.1 25.4 19.5

All breeds show a lower PCV when infectedHorro and Sheko have the best PCV

PCV – Experimental station

Breed Overall Non infected Infected

Abigar 24.1 24.6 22.4

Gurage 22.5 23.7 20.3

Horro 23.0 23.7 20.4

Sheko 24.6 24.9 21.3

All breeds show a lower PCV when infectedSheko has the best PCV

PCV

All breeds showed lower PCV when infected,both in home area and on experimental station

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

Sep-00 Sep-01 Sep-02 Sep-03 Sep-04 Sep-05 Sep-06

Mea

n PC

V (%

)

Non-infected

Infected

Infection Rate

Sheko best in all three categories

Home areasExp.

station

Breed

Treated within 3 weeks

Not treated

Treatm. per year

Abigar 40 % 22 % 3.8 8 %

Gurage 98 % - 24.1 16 %

Horro 12 % 9 % 3.6 12 %

Sheko 9 % 47 % 1.0 5 %

Gurage in most need for treatmentsLittle need for treatments in Sheko

Trypanocidal Treatments

Survival rate – Experimental station

Breed

Purchased Born at station

No. alive % No. alive %

Abigar 32 45 6 67

Gurage 22 48 9 50

Horro 41 76 42 70

Sheko 38 57 39 78

Horro and Sheko highest survival

Age 1st mating (yrs) Calving

Intervals (yrs)

Calves born / cow

(No.)Breed Male Female

Abigar 3.3 3.0 1.1 8.8

Gurage 4.8 4.6 2.2 5.7

Horro 4.0 3.6 1.3 5.6

Sheko 3.5 3.5 1.3 8.5Gurage have the worst reproductionAbigar and Sheko best reproduction

Reproductive characteristics – home areas

Reproductive characteristics – Experimental station

Abigar least favorable

Horro and Sheko best

BreedPurchased

females (No.)Calves born

(No.)Calves per

female

Abigar 64 9 0.14

Gurage 41 18 0.44

Horro 49 60 1.22

Sheko 62 50 0.81

Milk production

Home areas Exp. station

Breed

Lactation length

(months)

EstimatedTotal milk (l/lactation)

Total milk (l/lactation)

Abigar 7.8 527 271

Gurage 6.9 158 312

Horro 7.1 326 436

Sheko 8.8 627 397

Sheko and Abigar best in home areasSheko and Horro best on station

Body Size and Live Weight

Adult animalsAbigar and Horro largest

Gurage smallest

Calves born at stationSheko and Horro largest

Gurage smallest

Live Weight – purchased animals in Ghibe

Body Condition Score

Breed Overall Non infected Infected

Abigar 2.90 2.97 2.73

Gurage 3.06 3.06 2.95

Horro 3.60 3.62 3.53

Sheko 3.40 3.41 2.92

All breeds show a lower BCS when infectedHorro and Sheko show the best BCS

Conclusions

Gurage – Overall unfavorable characteristics

Abigar – Some good attributes but high parasitemia and low reproduction

Horro – Many favorable characteristics; survival

Sheko – The most favorable characteristics

Sheko is the most trypanotolerant!

Horro has also advantages!

Papers

I. Livestock keeper perception of four indigenous cattle breeds in tsetse infested areas of Ethiopia

II. Trypanosomosis and phenotypic features of four indigenous cattle breeds in an Ethiopian field survey

III. Production, reproduction and trypanotolerance in four Ethiopian cattle breeds kept on station in a tsetse infested area

Options for conservation and dissemination of genes of best breed(s) in tse-tse areas

- facts and issues for discussion

Jan Philipsson

Summary of trypanotolerance of breeds investigated

Horro

Abigar

Sheko

Gurage

- ?

- - -

+

+ + +

• Gurage – Overall unfavorable characteristics

• Abigar – Some good attributes but high parasitemia and low reproduction

• Horro – Many favorable characteristics; survival rate

• Sheko – The most favorable characteristics, but endangered breed

Summary of trypanotolerance of the breeds

Small number remaining (~ 2400 animals) Indiscriminate crossbreeding with highland

zebu is taking place Farmers´ perceptions about the breed and its

utilities – what needs to be improved?(management, services, market, breed characteristics)

Focus on breed conservation rather than breed improvement at this stage

Conservation of the Sheko breed neccessary

• Provision and support of NS bulls in the Sheko area• Provision of AI service with Sheko semen• Community based breeding program?• Nucleus herds, where also ET might be used?• Use of sexed semen?• Testing and selection of breeding animals?

Technology options for multiplication of the pure Sheko breed ?

• Crossbreeding Sheko with less tolerant breeds - multiplication of trypanotolerant genes more important/effective than spreading the Sheko breed itself

• Massive effects necessary to have impact - many bulls and good AI availability within the Sheko area as well as in other tse-tse infested areas

Technology options for more widespread use of

the Sheko breed ?

• How to spread to new areas?

• Farmers willingness to change breed - acceptance and demand

• Capacity building

• “Spreading the word” regarding Sheko genes

More widespread use of the Sheko breed ?

• Big population and good traits; > 3 million heads

• Crossing with Sheko to produce NS bulls for further crossbreeding with e.g. Gurage

• A way of amplifying the good genes of both breeds?

• Testing for trypanotolerance when selectingbreeding stock?

• Trypanotolerance of Sheko x Horro?

• Acceptance and logistics?

Possible use of Horro?

Sheko and Horro

Research and experience show the availabilty of two breeds doing well in tse-tse infested areas

Time to implement results for improved trypano- tolerance of cattle for improved livelihood of people

How to do it needs discussion and your active involvement!