aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa productivité des ovins et

49

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AGRI 2001, 29: 49-59

Productivité des ovins et des caprins de Race Locale élevésdans des conditions semi-intensives aux Antilles françaises

G. Alexandre, M. Mahieu & G. Aumont

Unité de Recherches Zootechniques, INRA Antilles-Guyane, Domaine Duclos Petit-Bourg 97170,Guadeloupe, French West IndiesE-mail: [email protected]

Résumé

Le potentiel de production du moutonMartinik et de la chèvre Créole deGuadeloupe a été évalué en station. Lesconditons d’élevage semi-intensives étaientbasées sur un rythme de 3 mises-bas en 2 ans,sur l’utilisation de pâturages irrigués etfertilisés, exploités à fort chargement animal(1.6 t/ha) et en rotation et sur l’applicationd’une prophylaxie rigoureuse et adaptée. Lesbrebis Martinik et les chèvres Créole sontcaractérisées par une très bonne fertilité(85 vs 92%), une prolificité élevée (1.7 vs 2.1) etune mortalité pré-sevrage réduite (10 vs 16%)qui les classent parmi les meilleurs génotypestropicaux. La chèvre Créole présentecomparativement à la Brebis Martinik unesupériorité quant à sa productivité numériqueannuelle: 2.90 vs 2.17 jeunes/femelle à lanaissance ou 2.44 vs 1.97 au sevrage. Le mêmeparamètre rapporté à l’unité de surface variede 174 à 87 jeunes/ha à la naissance, ou de147 à 78 au sevrage, respectivement pour leschèvres et les brebis. A l’inverse, le systèmeovin génère une productivité pondéralelargement supérieure à celui des caprins avec27.9 vs. 19.5 kg de jeunes sevrés/femelle/anou encore 1 400 vs 1 130 kg de jeunes produitspost-sevrage/ha/an. D’autres paramètressont présentés dans le papier et unediscussion est menée sur l’intérêt respectif desdeux espèces pour le développement de laproduction de viande en zone tropicale. Eneffet le système allaitant est prometteur avecune productivité, quelle que soit l’espèceanimale, de 1.3 t de jeunes sevrés/ha/an.

Summary

This work deals with the assessment ofproductivity of local small ruminant breeds inthe French West Indies. On-station conditionswere semi-intensive with improved generalhusbandry (high frequency of matings, goodculling policies, adequate feeding levels andregular prophylaxis) and the use of irrigated,fertilized, high stocked (1.6 t/ha/year) androtative pastures. Creole goats of Guadeloupeand Martinique ewes exhibited goodperformance levels, higher than other tropicalgenotypes. As far as numerical productivityindexes are concerned, goats showed higherresults than sheep, up to 2.90 vs 2.17offspring/female at birth or up to 2.44 vs1.97 at weaning. The same parameters relatedto surface unit were 174 vs 87 young/ha atbirth and 147 vs 78 at weaning, respectivelyfor goat and sheep. On the contrary, indexescalculated on the weight basis, were in favourof sheep. For individual performances or atthe flock level, for pre- or post-weaningperiods or all-year long, a sheep intensivesystem displayed higher levels of weightproductivity than did that of a goat one:27.9 vs 19.5 kg weaned offspring/female/y or1 400 vs 1 130 kg fattened animals/ha/y;respectively for sheep and goat. Otheradvantages are discussed. The relativeadvantages of both species are presented withthe aim of increasing meat production in thetropical zone and in limited land resourceconditions.

Key-words: Martinik sheep, Criollo goat,Productivy indices, Semi-intensive productionsystem, Humid tropics.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

50Productivite des petits ruminants des Antilles Francaises

Figure 1. Carte des Antilles françaises.

Introduction

Dans la Caraïbe les populations d’ovins et decaprins s’élèvent à 810 milles têtes et à2.8 millions de têtes, respectivement(FAO, 1997). La production est obtenue engrande partie, dans le cadre de systèmesd’élevage extensifs et au sein de petites unitésde production (Devendra et Mc Leroy, 1982).Les ressources principales sont les pâturagesnaturels et les parcours arbustifs. L’intérêt despetits ruminants en zone tropicale est reconnudepuis longtemps pour l’exploitation dezones difficiles marginalisées, la fourniture deproduits divers et variés orientés versl’autoconsommation ou vers les marchés deproximité et l’apport de revenuscomplémentaires dans l’économie familiale(Devendra et Mc Leroy, 1982; Alexandre et al.,1991; Leimbacher, 1996). De nombreuxfacteurs limitants affectent les niveaux deproduction obtenus: incidences climatiquescontraignantes, faible valeur alimentaire desfourrages tropicaux, fortes chargesparasitaires. Cependant dans le cas desAntilles françaises, le marché de viande des

caprins et des ovins pour une consommationfestive est suffisamment rémunérateur pourjustifier l’intensification de ce type d’élevage(Alexandre et al., 1997c). Les résultatsenregistrés depuis près de 20 ans par l’institutnational de la recherche agronomique (INRA)en Guadeloupe sur caprins et en Martiniquesur ovins montrent la capacité des génotypeslocaux à valoriser la production fourragère età répondre à l’intensification. Cet articles’appuie sur une synthèse des différentesdonnées d’élevage et aboutit à une évaluationdes productivités numérique et pondérale desgénotypes locaux dans leur systèmed’élevage. En conclusion il tente de montrerleur intérêt respectif pour l’augmentation dela production de viande dans la Caraïbe.

Materiels et Méthodes

La Guadeloupe et la Martinique, îlesfrançaises de la Caraïbe (16.1°N; 61.6°W et14.4°N ; 61.0°W, respectivement), reportéessur la figure 1, sont caractérisées par unclimat tropical humide. Les élevagesexpérimentaux où ont été conduits les

http://dad.fao.org/cgi-dad/$cgi_dad.dll/world?534,cen

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

51

Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 29, 2001

Alexandre et al.

travaux sont situés dans la zone sèche desîles. Le climat de ces régions est marqué parune saison sèche de 6 mois où il tombe moinsde 70 mm de pluie par mois. Les thèmes derecherche que l’INRA a développés sur lachèvre Créole en Guadeloupe et sur lemouton Martinik concernaient lareproduction, l’alimentation, la pathologie etla génétique.

Animaux et mode d’élevage

Les génotypes locaux se sont développés àpartir de races africaines et européennes. Lachèvre Créole de Guadeloupe (Figure 3 et 5)exploitée exclusivement pour la viande, estune race de petite taille et est originaire del’Afrique de l’Ouest (voir synthèse deAlexandre et al., 1999). Le mouton appartientaux génotypes à poils où figurent le WestAfrican, le Blackbelly de Barbade(Figure 2 et 4) ou le Pelibuey de Cuba.Récemment, a été créée la race "OvinMartinik" des Antilles françaises (Leimbacher,

1996). Les deux espèces ne présentent aucunarrêt saisonnier de leurs activités ovariennes(Chemineau et al., 1991). C’est pourquoi unsystème de 3 mises-bas en 2 ans a été suiviavec l’emploi de l’effet mâle qui est appliquéavec succès depuis plus de 20 ans. Troispériodes de reproduction ont été choisies,durant la saison sèche (mi-Mars à mi-Avril), lasaison intermédiaire (mi-Juillet à mi-Aout) etla saison humide (mi-Novembre àmi-Décembre). Les chevreaux et les agneauxétaient sevrés entre 2 à 3 mois d’âge. Uneprophylaxie régulière a été appliquée :détiquage toutes les 2 semaines etdéparasitage tous les mois pour les jeunessous la mère et tous les 1.5 ou 2 mois pour lesjeunes sevrés et les adultes.

Pour les deux espèces, le troupeauexploitait toute l’année, selon le systèmerotatif, des pâturages de Digitaria decumbensfertilisés et irrigués. Les âges de repousse dufourrage ont varié entre 35 ou 28 joursavec 7 jours de présence/parcelle. Seules leschèvres allaitantes ont reçu une

Figure 2. Brebis Martinik à poils du type Black Belly.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


complémentation durant leur cycle dereproduction. L’aliment du commerce avait0.86 UFL et 135 g PDIN/kg matière sèche. Lesniveaux d’apports ont varié en fonction desexpérimentations. Durant le stade decroissance post-sevrage aucunecomplémentation n’a été distribuée. Lesmoutons en allaitement ou en croissancen’ont jamais été complémentés.

Données et indices de productivité

Un contrôle de performances a été appliquérégulièrement sur les troupeauxexpérimentaux et a permis la constitution debases de données pour chaque espèces’étalant sur plus de 15 ans. Les donnéesindividuelles ont été analysées selon unmême principe mais séparément pour leschèvres Créole par Alexandre et al., (1997a, b)et pour l’ovin Martinik par Mahieu et al.,(1997a, b). Différentes analyses de varianceavec le modèle linéaire général de SAS ont étémenées. Les principales sources de variationétaient l’année, la saison de mise-bas, la

parité, la taille de portée et le sexe desanimaux. Les moyennes corrigées desprincipales performances animales des deuxespèces ont été utilisées pour cette présenteétude selon les procédures suivantes.La productivité des troupeaux et dessystèmes évaluée fréquemment dans le casdes ovins a été calculée aussi pour les caprinsselon différentes méthodes revues par Galal etYounis (1988). La méthode de déterminationde la productivité numérique (PN) s’est baséesur les valeurs de fertilité, de prolificité et deviabilité. La PN à la naissance (PNN) adécompté le nombre de jeunes nés viables, laPN au sevrage (PNS) a pris en compte laviabilité au sevrage. La prise en compte del’intervalle entre mise-bas a permis derapporter la PN à l’échelle de l’année. La PNs’exprime en nombre de jeunes nés ousevrés/femelle mise à la reproduction/an. Laproductivité pondérale (PP) s’est calculée àpartir de la PN multipliée par le poids vif desjeunes soit à la naissance pour la PP à lanaissance (PPN) ou au sevrage pour la PP ausevrage (PPS). Ces différents indices ont été

Figure 3. Chèvres Créoles de Guadaloupe sur paturage.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

53


Alexandre et al.

calculés relativement au poids métabolique dela femelle. A l’échelle du système de pâturage,les différentes PN et PP ont été rapportées àl’unité de surface exploitée par les différentstroupeaux selon les espèces et les stades deproduction.

Afin de permettre la comparaison entre lesmodes d’élevage ovin et caprin, les coûtsd’alimentation complémentaire des chèvresCréoles allaitantes ont été déterminés durantun cycle de reproduction puis rapportés àl’année. L’équivalent en valeur de la vente dechevreaux sevrés nécessaires à couvrir cesfrais supplémentaires a été déterminé. Lenombre ou le poids de chevreaux concernésont été déduits de la productivité numériqueou pondérale brute de départ.

Résultats

Performances individuelles

Le poids adulte de la brebis Martinik est plusélevé que celui de la chèvre Créole:45 vs 28 kg poids vif (PV). Les taux de fertilitéet de prolificité ont atteint 85% vs 92% et 170%vs 210 % chez les brebis et les chèvres,respectivement (Tableau 1). Les taux demortalité présevrage étaient de 10.4 vs 15.7,respectivement. Les poids moyens à lanaissance et au sevrage (effectué à 70 et82 jours chez les agneaux et les chevreaux,respectivement), ainsi que les différents gainsmoyens quotidiens post sevrage des mâles etdes femelles sont présentés dans le tableau 1

Productivité du troupeau

Les productivités numériques à la naissanceet au sevrage ont atteint 2.17 vs2.90 jeunes nés/femelle/an et 1.94 vs2.44 jeunes sevrés/femelle/an chez les brebis

Figure 4. Brebis Martinik avec suite au paturage.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


et les chèvres, respectivement (Tableau 2).Durant la période pré-sevrage lesproductivités pondérales étaient de 27.9 vs19.5 kg PV de jeunes sevrés/femelle/an. Cesmêmes variables rapportées au poidsmétabolique de la femelle ont représenté1.60 vs 15.8 kg PV dejeunes sevrés/PV0.75femelle/an,respectivement.

La prise en compte du coût del’alimentation des chèvres Créole allaitantes apermis de corriger la productivité pondérale

du troupeau caprin qui n’était plus que de16 kg PV de chevreaux/chèvre/an(Tableau 2).

Productivité du système pâturé

La productivité numérique annuellerapportée à l’unité de surface du systèmepâturé par chacun des troupeaux était de87 vs 174 jeunes nés et de 78 vs 147 jeunessevrés/ha/an dans le système ovin et caprinallaitant, respectivement (Tableau 3). Laproductivité pondérale pré-sevrage des deux

Tableau 1. Performances de reproduction et de croissance des ovins* Martinik et des caprins**Créole de Guadeloupe élevés en conditions semi-intensives au pâturage (moyennes desestimées des modèles).

Espece Ovin Martinik

(Mahieu et al, 1997a,b)

Chèvre Créole

(Alexandre et al, 1997a,b)

Poids vif femelle adulte(kg)

45 28

Fertilitémises-bas/femelles enlutte

0.85 0.92

Prolificitéjeunes/mise-bas

1.7 2.1

Mortalité pré-sevrage (%) 10.4 15.7

Production de laitg/j/kgPV0.75 femelle

92 103

Poids de naissance (kg)Mâle

3.85

Femelle

3.66

Mâle

1.84

Femelle

1.66

GMQ 10-30 jours (g) 190 175 91 86

Poids au sevrage (kg) 15.2 13.5 8.21 7.53

Age au sevrage (jours) 70 70 82 82

GMQ post-sevrage*** (g) 99 84 36 34

* Les brebis sont élevées strictement a l’herbe, sur pâturage de Pangola avec une chargeanimale de 1400 Kg PV/ha.** Les chèvres sont élevées dans le même système de pâturage de. Pangola avec une chargeanimale de 1600 kg/ha, avec de plus une complementation de 26 UFL/fem/cycle dereproduction*** Les agneaux et les chevreaux sont élevés strictement à base de Pangola avec une chargerespective de 900 et de 1200 kg PV/ha pour une durée d’engraissement respective de 4 et de 8mois.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

55


Alexandre et al.

espèces était similaire et a atteint le niveautrès élevé de 1.4 T de jeunes agneaux ouchevreaux sevrés/ha/an. Durant la périodepost-sevrage, la productivité pondérale desovins a surpassé celle des caprins avec1 400 vs 1 130 kg PV/ha/an, respectivement(Tableau 3).

Discussion

Une productivité très élevée enconditions semi-intensives

Quelle que soit l’espèce, les modes d’élevagesemi-intensifs mis en oeuvre en stationexpérimentale permettent l’expression dupotentiel de production de ces génotypeslocaux rustiques et aboutissent à desproductivités très élevées. Ce sont des casrarement reportés dans la littérature tropicale(voir les synthèses de Devendra & McLeroy,1982; Gonzalez-Stagnaro, 1983 ; Wilson etal., 1985). Il est vrai que l’irrigation despâturages permet de s’affranchir desproblèmes de disponibilités alimentaires etd’augmenter très nettement le chargement.L’augmentation de productivité permise parl’irrigation est considérable: 26.8 vs 18.8 kg

d’agneaux sevrés/brebis/an pour un systèmepâturé irrigué comparativement à un systèmesec (Mahieu, 1991).

La comparaison des deux espèces montreque pour les indices de productiviténumérique la chèvre Créole de Guadeloupeest supérieure à la brebis Martinik avec plusde 174 chevreaux nés/ha/an par exemplecontre 87 agneaux nés/ha/an. En effet, lesperformances de reproduction de la chèvresont plus élevées que celles de la brebis. Cesconclusions sont en concordance avec cellesde nombreux auteurs dans la Caraïbe(Gonzalez-Stagnaro, 1983; Chemineau et al.,1991). Néanmoins, les taux de mortalitéprésevrage quoique très en deçà des valeursrapportées dans la zone tropicale (jusqu’à50%) par Wilson et al., (1985) ou par Aumontet al., (1997), augmentent dans le systèmecaprin intensif au pâturage (15.4 % vs 10.4 %).Selon Aumont et al., (1991), ce pourrait être dûaux risques élevés d’infestation parasitairefréquemment associés aux systèmes pâturésintensifs d’élevage de petits ruminants baséssur l’emploi de l’irrigation et l’application decharge animale élevée. Il est à noter que lacharge a atteint (60 vs 40 femelles/ha/an)dans le système caprin comparativement ausystème ovin. Un chargement plus élevépourrait conduire à une disponibilité

Tableau 2. Productivités numérique et pondérale calculées à l’échelle du troupeau chez lesovins Martinik et les caprinsCréole de Guadeloupe élevés en conditions semi-intensives aupâturage.

Espèce Ovin Martinik Chèvre CréoleProductivité numérique à la naissance (PNN)jeunes/femelle/an

2.17 2.90

Productivité numérique au sevrage (PNS)jeunes/femelle/an

1.94 2.44

Productivité pondérale à la naissance (PPN)kg sevrés/ femelle/an

31.5 22.5

Productivité pondérale au sevrage (PPS)kg sevrés/ femelle/an

27.9 19.5

PPS rapportée au poids métaboliquekg sevrés/ PV0.75femelle

1.60 1.58

PPS corrigée pour le coût alimentairekg sevrés/ femelle/an

28 16

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


alimentaire moindre et des incidencesparasitaires plus marquées. Par ailleurs, lephénomène pourrait être accru en raison de lasensibilité supérieure des caprins auxstrongles gastro-intestinaux comparativementaux ovins (Aumont et al., 1997).

Alors que les indices de productiviténumérique des caprins dépassent ceux desovins, la situation est inverse pour lesproductivités pondérales. Quels que soient lesstades de production (allaitant oupost-sevrage) et l’échelle considérés (individu,troupeau ou système entier), les ovinsprésentent une productivité pondérale plusélevée que celle des caprins. Ce pourrait êtrelié au poids de naissance ou aux niveaux deGMQ plus élevés (2 fois plus) pour l’ovinMartinik que pour le caprin Créole deGuadeloupe. En revanche, les valeursexprimées relativement au poids métaboliquedes deux espèces sont quasi similaires (1.6 kgde jeunes sevrés/PV 0.75 femelle/an).

Il est à noter que l’engraissement des ovinsà l’herbe ne nécessite que 4 mois contre 8mois aux caprins. A l’échelle temporelle et

spatiale les ovins surpassent les caprins quinécessitent davantage de surface pourpermettre l’élevage d’un nombre supérieur dejeunes sevrés (147 vs 78 sevrés/ha/an). Dansnotre mode d’élevage, le système pâturécaprin était très certainement trop chargé avec1 200 kg PV/ha/an comparativement à900 kg PV/ha/an pour le système ovin.

Une comparaison plus complète devraitêtre menée en prenant en compte lesconditions de marché de la viande demoutons et la viande de cabris. Cette dernièreest très prisée sur le marché antillais et estpayée près de 3 fois plus chère.

Mais de grosses variations dans lesfermes privées.

Des contrôles de performances en fermes ontété appliqués régulièrement en fin desannées 80. Pour les caprins, les valeurs defertilité annuelle, de prolificité et de mortalitéprésevrage ont varié de 118 % à 140 %, de130 à 185 % et de 5 à 43 %, respectivement

Figure 5. Chèvre Créole agée de 13 ans à la 18ème mise bas.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

57


Alexandre et al.

Tableau 3. Productivités numérique et pondérale calculées à l’échelle du système pâturé chez lesovins Martinik et les caprins Créole de Guadeloupe élevés en conditions semi-intensives aupâturage.

Espèce Ovin Martinik Chèvre CréoleProductivité numérique à la naissance(jeunes/ha/an)

87 174

Productivité numérique au sevrage(jeunes/ha/an)

78 147

Productivité pondérale au sevrage(kg sevrés/ha/an)

1 250 1 385

PPS corrigé pour le coût alimentaire(kg sevrés/ ha/an)

1 250 1 140

PP post-sevrage(kg PV/ha/an)

1 400 1 130

Tableau 4. Niveaux de productivités des ovins Martinik et des caprins Créole obtenus en fermes etvariations observées selon les espèces, les milieux et modes d’élevage aux Antilles françaises.

Contrôles de performances en fermes (4 années)Ovin Martinik(Leimbacher &Tatareau 1991)

Chèvre Créole(Leimbacher & Pensédent 1991)

Nombre de femellesreproductives (fermes)

500(6)

250(5 )

Productivité num. à lanaissance

1.47 - 2.37 1.93 - 2.37

Productivité num. au sevrage 1.23 - 2.26 1.35 - 2.11

Productivité du troupeau d’ovins Martinik selon le niveau de complémentation dans une fermeprivée (Isabeth-Moreau 1998 ; 6 mois, 166 brebis)

Niveau de complémentation 0 kg/tête/jour 0.3 kg/tête/jourMortalité présevrage (%) 19 9Productivité présevrage (kg)agneaux sevrés/femelle/an

12.8 17.9

Productivité des chèvres Creole (nombre chevreaux/mère) selon le système de pâturage dans lesfermes guadeloupéennes (Alexandre & Borel, 1988; 3 ans, 11 éleveurs, 475 chèvres)

Continu Rotatif A l’attache1.25 0.86 1.64

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


(Leimbacher et Pensédent-Herblon, 1911). Lesproductivités numériques au sevrage desfermes classées les meilleures ont surpassé de56 % les plus mauvaises (Tableau 4). Pour lesovins les performances de reproductionétaient de 107 % à 131 % de fertilité annuelle,de 120 à 190 % de prolificité et de 8 à 52 % demortalité présevrage (Leimbacher et Tatareau,1991). Les écarts entre les meilleures et lesmauvaises fermes ont atteint 84 % (Tableau 4).Les niveaux atteints en stationcomparativement à ceux observés en fermesmontrent les progrès à accomplir. Il apparaîtbien qu’il existe des marges de manoeuvreencore importantes pour augmenter lesproductivités des systèmes d’élevage avec desanimaux de race locale sur la base del’amélioration des conditions d’élevage. Enfermes en Martinique, l’apport decompléments aux brebis pendant la lactationaugmente les productivités pondérales ausevrage de près de 39 % (Isabeth-Moreau,1998 ; Tableau 4, données recalculées). EnGuadeloupe, la mauvaise maîtrise des modesde pâturage en fermes diminue laproductivité numérique au sevrage pour unecampagne de reproduction, de 1.64 pour lesystème traditionnel à 0.86 chevreauxsevrés/mère pour le système rotatif(Alexandre et Borel , 1988 ; Tableau 4).

Conclusions

Ces systèmes d’élevage testés à l’échelle de lastation expérimentale sont très hautementproductifs. Ils sont basés sur le potentielgénétique élevé des races locales de petitsruminants - mouton Martinik et chèvre Créolede Guadeloupe – et sur l’amélioration desconditions d’élevage. Ces dernièress’appuient sur un rythme de reproductionélevé, sur une politique de réforme correcte,sur une alimentation adéquate et sur uneprophylaxie rigoureuse. Ce sont destechniques d’élevage à la portée de nombreuxéleveurs de la zone. La fertilisation etl’irrigation des pâturages permettent unemeilleure qualité et régularité del’alimentation et autorisent une intensificationde l’utilisation de l’espace. En conséquence, il

y a de réelles opportunités de développementde la production de viande de petitsruminants aux Antilles et dans la Caraïbe.Cependant, la transférabilté du systèmeirrigué INRA, considéré dans l’absolu, estcritiquable et il conviendrait d’éviter destransferts de technologies inadéquates. Desadaptations aux situations locales de chaquepays sont nécessaires; elles reposentnotamment sur l’exploitation judicieuse deressources alimentaires locales telles que lessous-produits ou les arbres fourragers trèsbien étudiés dans la zone latino-américaine.Les principales conclusions de ce travailargumentent en faveur d’une intensificationraisonnée des systèmes de production etsurtout sur une valorisation des ressourcesanimales et végétales locales.

Références

Alexandre, G., Aumont ,G., Fleury, J.,Coppry, O., Mulciba, P. & Nepos A. 1997a.Production semi-intensive au pâturage decaprins à viande en zone tropicale humide.Inra Prod. Anim., 10 (1), 43-53.

Alexandre, G., Aumont, G., Fleury, J.,Mainaud, J.C. & Kandassamy, T. 1997b.Performances zootechniques de la chèvreCréole allaitante de Guadeloupe. Inra Prod.Anim., 10 (1), 7-20.

Alexandre, G. & Borel, H. 1988.Production des petits ruminants auxAntilles 2. Premiers résultats d’élevage dansles fermes privées guadeloupéennes. Bull.Agron. Antilles-Guyane, 8, 10-16.

Alexandre, G., Borel, H., Matheron, G.& Remy, C. 1991. Elevages caprins enGuadeloupe. Rev. Elev. Med. Vet. Pays trop.(special issue), 27-40.

Alexandre, G., Leimbacher, F. &Aumont, G. 1997c. Etude du secteur productifde la filière des petits ruminants aux Antilles.Document de travail INRA-URZ, pp. 53.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

59


Alexandre et al.

Aumont, G., Gruner, L. & Berbigier, P.1991. Dynamique des populations de larvesinfestantes des strongles gastro-intestinauxdes petits ruminants en milieu tropicalhumide. Conséquences sur la gestion despâturages. Rev. Elev. Med. Vet. Pays trop.1991 (spécial issue), 123-132.

Aumont, G., Pouillot, R., Simon, R.,Hostache, G., Barré, N. & Varo, H. 1997.Parasitisme digestif des petits ruminants desAntilles françaises. Inra Prod. Anim. 10 (1),79-90.

Chemineau, P., Mahieu, M., Varo, H.,Shitalou, E., Jego, Y., Grude, A. &Thimonier, J. 1991. Reproduction des caprinset des ovins Créoles de Guadeloupe et deMartinique. Rev. Elev. Med. Vet. Pays trop.(special issue), 45-50.

Devendra, C. & Mc Leroy, G.B. 1982.Goat and sheep production in the Tropics.Trop. Agric. Series, Longman, pp. 271.

FAO. 1997. Annuaire de la production.vol. 51.

Galal, E.S.E. & Younis, A. A. 1988.Methods of evaluating productivity of nativesheep under both research farm andproducers conditions. In "Small ruminantsresearch and development in the Near East"2-4, Novembre 1988, Cairo, Egypt, 184-191.

Gonzalez-Stagnaro, C. 1983.Comportamiento reproductivo de las razaslocales de rumiantes en el tropico americano.In «Reproduction des ruminants en zonetropicale». INRA Publications, 20, 1-80.

Isabeth-Moreau, L. 1998. Lacomplémentation de moutons au pâturagedans un élevage traditionnel de la Martinique.DESS Gestion des systèmesagro-sylvo-pastoraux en zones tropicales,pp. 46.

Leimbacher, F. 1996. La sélection duMouton Martinik. INRA-CRAG Unité deRecherches Zootechniques, pp. 22

Leimbacher, F. &Pensédent-Herblon, J. 1991. Evolution desrésultats du contrôle de performances caprineen Guadeloupe. Rev. Elev. Med. Vet. Paystrop. (special issue), 63-68.

Leimbacher, F. & Tatareau, J.C. 1991.Evolution des résultats du contrôle deperformances des ovins à la Martinique. Rev.Elev. Med. Vet. Pays trop. (special issue),69-74.

Mahieu, M. 1991. Production ovine surpâturage de Digitaria decumbens Stent.irrigué ou non. Résultats technico-économiques. Rev. Elev. Med. Vet. Pays trop.(special issue), 17-22.

Mahieu, M., Aumont, G. &Alexandre, G. 1997; Elevage intensif desovins tropicaux à la Martinique. Inra Prod.Anim.10 (1), 21-32.

Mahieu, M., Aumont, G., Michaux, Y.,Alexandre, G., Archimède, H., Boval, M. &Theriez, M. 1997. L’association d’ovins et debovins sur prairies irriguées à laMartinique.Inra Prod. Anim.10 (1), 55-65.

Wilson, R.T., Peacock, C.P. &Sayers, A.R. 1985. Preweaning mortality andproductivity indices for goats and sheep on aMasai group ranch in south-central Kenya.Anim Prod. 41, 201-206.

61

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AGRI 2001, 29: 61-69

Résumé

Le rapport Danchin/Lauvergne de mai 2000qui traitait de la situation actuelle de la chèvredu Rove est analysé par un acteur passionnéde sauvegarde de la race. La Rove est unechèvre qui, en Provence, accompagnait jadisles troupeaux ovins transhumant à pied. Poursa sauvegarde deux axes de travail sontactuellement privilégiés: 1) l’accès aux primespour les bergers des troupeaux qui nettoientavec leurs dents les pare-feux forestierspermettant l’accès des intervenants contre lesfeux de forêt et 2) la recherche de débouchéspour la viande de cabris lourds, uniqueproduit commercialisable puisque les chèvresdébroussailleuses ne produisent pas de lait.Des solutions sont en vue avec la mise enplace de CTE (contrats territoriauxd’exploitation) pour le premier point et lamontée en puissance d’une entreprisebouchère locale pour le second. Toutes cesactions vont dans le sens d’une gestionécologique et économique bien comprise destroupeaux Rove existant encore. Elle combinela conservation d’une ressource génétiquedomestique, une contribution à la protectionde la forêt contre le feu, la production d’uneviande saine car élaborée à partir d’une florearbustive sauvage et la sauvegarde d’emploisdans des zones menacées par ladésertification des campagnes.

Summary

This paper reports the point of view of aperson who is passionately interested in thesafeguard of the Rove goat breed, on the

A propos d’un rapport sur la Chèvre duRove en Provence

F. Poey d’Avant

Président d’Ovicaprinae de Provence, 1, rue Fontanette,Saint-Tropez (Var), 83990 France

report by Danchin and Lauvergne ofMay 2000. The paper dealt with the presentsituation of the endangered Rove goat, abreed which was formerly used in sheeptranshumance in Provence, France, leadingthe sheep to and from mountain grazings.Two directions of safe-keeping are presentlydeveloped: 1) a better access of the shepherdsto public lands and subsidies for cleaning fuelbreaks with their flocks, 2) the search for anappropriate trading of goat meat which is theonly marketed product of these goats whichare not milked. Solutions consist of thedevelopment of CTE (Territorial contracts ofexploitation) for the first point and the rise oflocal slaughter activities for the second. Theseactivities fit in with a proper ecological andeconomic management of the still remainingRove herds, combining the conservation oflocal domestic genetic resources with acontribution to the safe keeping of anendangered forest environment, theproduction of healthy meat from a feedingbased on the flora of wild woods and thesafeguarding of employment in zones indanger of rural exodus

Key words: Goat, Genetic conservation, Rovebreed, Provence.

Editors' note

This note reports on a unique example of a privatesustained conservation experience of anendangered goat breed, in its natural habitat.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

62Chèvre du Rove en Provence

Introduction

Sous le patronnage de l’Institut de l’Élevage deParis et de mon association1 une missiond’information a enquêté en avril dernier sur lasituation actuelle de la chèvre du Rove enProvence-Alpes-Côte-d’Azur2 . Le rapport demission3 est parvenu à l’éditeur d’AGRI quim’a prié de le commenter pour les lecteurs desa revue. J’accède bien volontiers à sademande en le remerciant de faire appel à unacteur passionné de la sauvegarde de la racedu Rove.

Je suis d’autant mieux disposé à écrire leprésent article que, depuis quelques années,je sais que le mot boucher vient précisémentde bouc4 . Cela atteste la grande importancede la viande de chèvre pour nos ancêtres.

En ce qui me concerne je fais tout monpossible non seulement pour que l’on mettesur le marché une viande provenant de laconsommation de végétaux forestiers qui,évidemment, n’ont pas grand chose à voir

avec les fourrages transgéniques, actuel objetd’un débat écologique, que l’on économisesur la mise en œuvre de moyens

1Ovicaprinae de Provence, association sans buts lucratifsrégie par la loi française de 1901 dont les statuts ont étédéposés à la sous-préfecture de Draguignan (Var) endécembre 1990; en 1999 l’association comptait 100membres résidant principalement dans la région de StTropez.

2La région Provence-Alpes-Côte-d’Azur (PACA) est unerégion de programme française située au sud-ouest del’hexagone; elle comprend les départements des Alpes-de-Haute-Provence des Alpes maritimes, des HautesAlpes, des Bouches-du-Rhône, du Var et du Vaucluse.

3Le rapport de C. Danchin et J.J. Lauvergne paru en mai2000.

4D’après Bloch et Von Wartburg (1975 : 79). le boucherétait : “celui qui abat les boucs; ce mot désignait peut-êtred’abord le serf chargé dans les grands domaines d’abattre lesjeunes boucs destinés à la consommation sur place, un seulbouc adulte suffisant pour un grand troupeau de chèvres,formation qui a éliminé à peu près complètement lesreprésentants du latin macellarius ”

Figure 1. Le troupeau Rove Dahl/Del Olmo à Allemagne-en-Provence, le 26 avril 2000.

http://dad.fao.org/cgi-dad/$cgi_dad.dll/world?405,eur

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

63


F. Poey d’Avant

lourds (giro-broyeurs, Canadairs) et que l’onsauve quelques emplois de berger.

La race du Rove

Comme les auteurs du rapport je doisrappeler tout d’abord que la race du Rove estune émanation de populations caprinesoccupant la Provence et, plus généralement, lepourtour de la Méditerranée depuis fortlongtemps. La particularité de la Rove estd’avoir été spécialisée en tant que chèvreaccompagnatrice des ovins transhumants .

Ces troupeaux de brebis se déplacent à lafin du printemps depuis les basses terreslittorales situées au sud de la région vers lenord, dans les Alpes où ils estivent. Au coursde ces déplacements qui s’effectuaient à piedjusqu’aux années soixante de ce siècle chaquetroupeau s’adjoignait un petit noyau caprinavec des boucs castrés dits menons préposés

Figure 2. Troupeau du Plan de Suvière patronné par l’association Ovicaprinae de Provenceet conduit par le berger Joël Cotton, le 25 avril 2000: un menon.

à l’entraînement de la masse ovine et deschèvres en lactation pour alimenter lesagneaux orphelins.

Une fois la transhumance à pied abolie parla généralisation du transport automobile lesjours de la race du Rove étaient évidemmentcomptés. C’est donc à juste raison que l’amiJean Blanc - disparu au début de cette année -a tiré la sonnette d’alarme5 .

La transhumance ovine en Provenceremonte à quelques siècles seulement et laRove hivernait dans la région et se ressourçaitlocalement. De ce fait, la Rove ne s’écarte pasbeaucoup génétiquement de la population

5Dans un article de 1972 dans lequel l’appellation Roveapparaissait pour la première fois.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Figure 3. Les missionnaires dans le troupeau Dahl/Del Olmo à Allemagne- en-Provence le26 avril 2000: de gauche à droite Richard Del Olmo, Coralie Danchin, Arnika Dahl(Présidente de l’ADCR) et J.J. Lauvergne.

Figure 4. A Cogolin avec le Président F. Poey d’Avant le 25 avril 2000: de gauche à droiteA. Le Cam (responsable logistique de la mission), F. Poey d’Avant et C. Danchin.



○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

65


F. Poey d’Avant

locale existant encore et connue sous le nomde Commune de Provence, d’ailleurs elle-mêmefortement menacée6 .

Il y a quand même un point sur lequel laRove se distingue des populations locales,c’est le développement plus marqué de soncornage7 qui faisait l’objet de toute l’attentiondes bergers transhumants lors du choix desreproducteurs. On note également danscertains troupeaux une tendance à lastandardisation de la robe.

Toutes ces notions sont bien connues desacteurs locaux de l’élevage caprin mais il nefallait pas manquer une occasion de lesrappeler à un public plus large.

Historique de la Sauvegardede la Race

Les efforts de conservation de la Rove ont étéinitiés et orchestrés pendant 20 ans par leregretté Alain Sadorge fondateur en 1971 del’Association de Défense des Caprins du Rove(ADCR).

Alain Sadorge avait bénéficié à l’époque del’appui du Parc naturel régional de Camarguepour constituer au Mas du Pont du Rousty untroupeau pépinière Rove. Il a pu ensuitedéployer ce troupeau ddans le Parc naturelrégional du Luberon dans le cadre d’unprogramme d’entretien biologique despare-feux, sur le territoire de la commune dela Bastide-des-Jourdans (Vaucluse). Notons aupassage que ce programme a sans doute été lepremier du genre à être soutenu en Francepar les pouvoirs publics: Office National desForêts, Parc naturel du Luberon, Institutnational de la Recherche agronomique, régionPaca, Université de Provence, communesetc… Ce programme était malheureusement àdurée déterminée et, au bout de trois ans, fin1987, Alain Sadorge s’est retrouvé sans pointde chute.

C’est alors que je lui ai proposé de s’établirsur ma proprété au Plan de Suvière(commune de Collobrières, Var) et de joindreson troupeau au mien, de manière àpérenniser l’existence d’un troupeau Rovevoué au débroussaillage, à la production de

viande et à la conservation de la race enconjugant son action à la mienne quiremontait à 1971. L’affaire a prospéré jusqu’àla mort subite de Sadorge en 1990.

À ce moment là j’ai continué à exercerquelque temps encore la fonction de Présidentde l’ADCR (dont Sadorge était le secrétaire)jusqu’à ce que les éleveurs professionnelsreprennent eux-mêmes la gestion de leur race.Je me suis alors consacré uniquement augouvernement de ma propre association(Oviscaprinae de Provence) créée en 1990comme il a été dit, de manière à prolongerl’oeuvre menée avec Sadorge en mainteant untroupeau dans ce coin des Maures. Je doisdire que, jusqu’à présent, je n’ai pas été déçupar mes sociétaires.

Pour sa part l’ADCR, dont l’état-major estactuellement basé dans le département desAlpes-de-Haute-Provence, continue àassumer les responsabilités administratives dela défense de la race.

Le Débroussaillage

La première action de terrain que le rapportdécrit et encourage pour la sauvegarde de larace est le débroussaillage des pare feux.Cette rubrique est illustrée par les activités dutroupeau patronné par mon association quiest à l’œuvre dans une zone considéréecomme zone rouge. par la DFCI (Défensecontre l’incendie) du Var, un des départementsfrançais les plus sujets aux feux de forêt .

6Comme le montre un autre rapport de Coralie Danchin(1999). Douze ans plus tôt Lauvergne et al. (1987)estimaient même que, si aucune mesure de sauvegarden’était prise, la Commune Provençale était condamnée àdisparaître à l’horizon 2000.

7La longueur des cornes en race Rove a été étudiée àpartir des données du troupeau du Plan de Suvière. Lavaleur asymptotique de la longueur de corne chez lesmâles est de 90 cm, elle est inférieure à celle dubouquetin (103 à 107 cm) mais supérieure à celle deboucs italiens communs (50 à 60 cm), les cornes deschèvres adultes mesurent 44 cm dépassant en longueurcelles des bouquetins femelles (17 à 29 cm), Lauvergneet al. (1998).

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Il faut alors savoir que les acteurs au sol dela DFCI pour le massif des Maures - enl’occurrence les responsables forêt du SIVOM(Syndicat intercommunal à vocation multiple)du Pays des Maures basé à Cogolin - ont encharge le nettoyage des pare-feux forestiersavec, comme premier impératif, unaménagement permettant en tous temps et entous lieux l’intervention des pompiers sansmettre en danger leur vie.

Or il se trouve que les bergers ne peuventpas se conformer à un cahier des charges tropstrict pour des actions de nettoyage. Qu’à celane tienne précisent les responsables deCogolin on leur délimitera des périmètresd’intervention sur lesquels ils iront quand ilsvoudront et quand ils pourront.

C’est d’ailleurs bien ce qui se passe déjapour notre troupeau du Plan de Suvière mais,pour le moment, ses vacations ne sont pas

rétribuées et, jusqu’à présent, nos effortsauprès des autorités pour obtenir une justerétribution sont restés vains. Il s’agit donc depallier à cette injustice, ce que l’on nouspromet dans le cadre de Contrats territoriauxd’exploitations, les fameux CTE, qui se mettentlentement en place en France.

Dans le cadre de tels CTE les responsablesforêt du SIVOM vont évaluer le travail dutroupeau, faire rétribuer le berger et sedébrouiller pour intervenir sur les zones nonnettoyées. Au coût actuel du nettoyagemécanique et manuel, le SIVOM estlargement gagnant.

Voila qui est bien parler. Je me rallieentièrement à ce point de vue et je ferai toutpour que le berger et les responsables locauxconstituent et fassent avancer le dossier CTEdont l’examen nous est promis pour la fin del’an 2000.

Figure 5. Visite à la SOVICAL de Forcalquier le 26 avril 2000 : de gauche à droiteC. Danchin, M. Aquilué (gérant de la société), J.-M. Patoureaux (salarié de VIVALOR,association de soutien de la SOVICAL) ) et J.J. Lauvergne.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

67


F. Poey d’Avant

La Commercialisation desProduits

La recherche de débouchés commerciauxpour les cabris des troupeaux de chèvres àviande que sont les troupeaux Rove est ladeuxième action préconisée dans le rapport.

Après avoir souligné les difficultés de lacommercialisation des produits carnés del’élevage en PACA qui handicapent fortementles troupeaux débroussailleurs qui neproduisent pas de lait le rapport décrit la miseen place d’un acteur viande: la SARL (sociétéà responsabilité limitée) SOVICAL (Société desviandes de qualité) créée fin 1999 à Forcalquierdans le département desAlpes-de-Haute-Provence et qui montelentement en puissance

Ayant été sollicité pour que monassociation prenne des parts sociales dans laSOVICAL je n’ai pas hésité à le faire, avec

l’appui de mon Conseil d’administration. Lebut est d’exercer un certain contrôle sur lagestion et de s’assurer que les produitscaprins sont bien collectés, abattus, contrôlésdans les normes et commercialisés à un prixrémunérateur.

Bien sûr la SOVICAL est une petiteentreprise mais les tonnages à traiter restentmodestes. Quoiqu’il en soit nos amis del’ADCR (la Présidente Arnika Dahl et RichardDel Olmo, basés à Allemagne-en-Provence,dans les Alpes-de-Haute-Provence) - auxquelsd’ailleurs les missionnaires ont rendu visite -soutiennent une telle entreprise.

De plus, pour valoriser l’écoulement descabris de nos troupeaux débroussaillant quisont élevés sous la mère bien au-delà de l’âgeauquel l’élevage laitier se débarasse de sesjeunes animaux, la SOVICAL se propose delancer un nouveau produit carné sur lemarché, le cabri lourd de Provence (de 20 à30 kg en vif).

Figure 6. Réunion au siège de la FRÉCAP: de gauche à droite M. Maurel (FRÉCAP),L. Escoffier (technicien caprin des Bouches-du-Rhône) et A. Gouiran, vice-président del’ADCR et auteur d’un ouvrage récemment paru sur la Rove.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Autre Initiative Positive

Le rapport se termine sur une autre notepositive. À Manosque, lors de la réunion desmissionnaires avec les responsables desorganismes techniques et professionnelscaprins de Provence, ces derniers, jusqu’alorstrès orientés vers le développement qualitatifet quantitatif de la production fromagère, ontpromis d’apporter un soutien plus marqué àla chèvre à viande. Comme première mesure il a été convenu deprocéder à un indispensable recensement deséleveurs et des reproducteurs Rove avec,comme maître d’œuvre, l’Institut de l’Élevage.

En Conclusion

On ne peut que se réjouir des perpectivesouvertes par le rapport que nouscommentons tout en constatant que lasituation est paradoxale en France où, depuistrois siècles, on ne fait que lutter pourinterdire la forêt à la chèvre tout en luidéniant le statut d’espèce bouchère. Onsemble revenir à des conceptions plusécologiques qui, un moment, avaient faitdéfaut8 .

Est-ce à dire que les actions analysées etencouragées par le rapport Danchin/Lauvergne soient une panacée pour les autresraces caprines menacées dans la zoneméditerranéenne ? Non sans doute mais, ànos yeux, elles jalonnent une démarcheécologico-économique à quadruple fin:conservation d’un stock génétique menacé,participation biologique à l’entretien et laprotection de l’environnement, fournitured’une viande de qualité et sauvegarded’emplois dans des zones qui ont tendance àse désertifier.

Dans une telle perspective les clés de laréussite sont la coordination des initiativesprivées avec celles émanant des pouvoirspublics et la constance dans les efforts.La coordination est actuellement en bonnevoie et la constance dans l’effort ne fait pasdéfaut.

Remerciements

Je suis redevable à Coralie Danchin et àJ.J. Lauvergne de leur assistancerédactionnelle. Ils m’ont également fourni lesphotos de la figure 1 qui illustre leur mission.En outre J.J. Lauvergne a eu la gentillesse demettre à ma disposition sa documentation, cequi a permis de donner plus de rigueur à monpropos .

Note de la Rédaction

Coralie Danchin (Institut de l’élevage, 149rue de Bercy 75595 Paris Cédex) et J.J.Lauvergne (bât 211, CRJ/INRA, 78 352 Jouy-en- Josas, France) nous signalent que leurrapport sera envoyé à tous ceux qui leur enferont la demande écrite.

Références

Blanc, J. 1972. Sauvegarde des espècesdomestiques, espèce caprine, race du Rove.Ethnozootechnie 8, 5-6.

Bloch, O. & Wartburg, W. Von. 1975.Dictionnaire étymologique de la languefrançaise. Presses Universitaires de France,Paris, pp. 682.

Danchin, C. 1999. Race caprineCommune Provençale, situation au 31 octobre1999. CR N°2878, Institut de l’Élevage, Paris,pp. 10 + annexes.

Danchin, C. & Lauvergne, J.J. 2000.Rapport de mission sur la situation de la racecaprine du Rove en Provence-Alpes-Côted’Azur, avril 2000. Institut de l’Élevage etLaboratoire de Génétique factorielle del’INRA, Paris et Jouy-en-Josas, pp. 8.

8Un tableau de la politique caprine des pouvoirspublics en France sous l’ancien régime a été dressé parSolakian (1988) : ils étaient des ennemis systématiqueset pas toujours bien inspirés de la présence de chèvresen forêt. Selon cet auteur les incohérences d’une tellepolitique qui a perduré jusqu’à nos jours sont criantes.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

69


F. Poey d’Avant

Lauvergne, J.J., Renieri, C. &Audiot, A. 1987. Estimating erosion ofphenotypic variation in a French goatpopulation. J. Hered., 78, 307-314.

Lauvergne, J.J., Bouchel, D. &Minvielle, F. 1998. Étudemorpho-biométrique de la chèvre du Rove.

III. Longeur de corne (LC) dans les deuxsexes et indices de dimorphisme sexuel ducornage (IDSC). Rev. Méd. Vét., 149, 141-148

Solokian, D. 1988. De la gestion deschèvres en France au XVIIIe siècle.Ethnozootechnie, 41, 33-45.

71

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AGRI 2001, 29: 71-78

Phenotypic characterisation of nativechicken lines in South Africa

E. van Marle-Köster & N.H. Casey

Animal and Wildlife Sciences, Faculty of Natural & AgriculturalSciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa

Summary

Native chicken lines in South Africa areassociated primarily with rural households. Aprogramme was established only as recentlyas 1994 to conserve the different lines foundin South Africa. As no scientific data wasavailable on the production traits of theselines, a research trial was conducted todescribe them phenotypically in terms of theirgrowth, carcass traits and egg production.Four different native lines, the Koekoek,Naked Neck, Lebowa-Venda and Ovambochicken were included in the study.Significant differences were observed amongthe lines, which means that the lines could bedescribed as different native lines in terms oftheir phenotypic traits. The Ovambo chickenhad the best growth performance, while theKoekoek showed the highest performance foregg production. Although production is poorin comparison with commercial lines, thecontribution of these birds to household foodsecurity and application in low-input systemsshould be recognized and furtherinvestigated.

Résumé

Les races de poules originaires d’Afrique duSud sont surtout associées à l’habitat rural. Cen’est qu’en 1994 qu’on a établi un programmede conservation des différentes racesd’Afrique du Sud. Comme il n’existaitaucunes données scientifiques sur lescaractéristiques de production de ces races, ona entrepris des projets de recherches pour lesdécrire de manière phénotypique en fonction

de leur croissance, des caractéristiques de leursquelette et de leur production d’oeufs. On ainclus dans l’étude 4 différentes racesindigènes: la poule koekkoek, la poule à counu, la poule du Lebowa-Venda et la pouleOvambo. On a observé des différencesimportantes parmi les races, ce qui signifiequ’on peut les considérer comme des racesindigènes différentes en fonction de leurscaractéristiques phénotypiques. La pouleOvambo montrait la meilleure performancede croissance des races, alors que la poulekoekoek avait la meilleure performance dansla production d’oeufs. Bien que leurproduction soit faible en comparaison desraces commerciales, la contribution de cesvolatiles à la sécurité alimentaire des foyersruraux et leur application dans des systèmesde basse production devraient être reconnueset demande des études plus approfondies.

Keywords: Native chickens, Phenotype, Growthand carcass traits, Egg production, Food security.

Introduction

The introduction of chicken to Africa is notwell documented. Skeletal remains found inQasr Ibrim, Egypt, indicated that chickenswere present in 332 BC, while the earliestremains in Sub-Saharan Africa can be tracedto the late 5th Century AD (MacDonald andEdwards, 1993). Domesticated chickens wereintroduced most probably to South Africa bytraders on route to India and by Europeansettlers during the early 15th and16th centuries. It is therefore difficult toconfirm the origin of the so-called native orlocal chicken lines presently found in South

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

72Native chicken lines in South Africa

Africa. These chickens are kept for eggs andmeat and are associated mainly with ruralhouseholds. It was only as recently as 1994that the chickens’ potential contribution tohousehold food security was recognized, aswell as it being a poultry genetic resource thatshould be conserved for posterity.

A programme was established at theAgricultural Research Centre (Poultry SupplyUnit) at Irene, with the aim of conserving thegene pool of all the different native lines andto promote their application in rural foodproduction. The populations consist ofdifferent lines that were collected in differentgeographical locations in South Africa andNamibia. As no scientific data were availableon the production potential of these chickenlines, trials were conducted in order toprovide a phenotypic characterization withthe different lines and to test for differences ingrowth, carcass traits and egg production.

Material and Methods

Description of the native lines

The Potchefstroom Koekoek has been usedwidely by farmers in South Africa forhousehold egg production for many years.The breed originated from a cross between theBlack Australorp and the White Leghornduring the 1950s, at the former PotchefstroomAgricultural College. The Plymouth Rock waslater included into the breeding programmeand eventually the Koekoek was registered asa South African breed with the South AfricanPoultry Association in 1976 (Viljoen, 1986).These birds have a characteristic black andwhite speckled colour pattern. The bargene, asex-linked gene, is inherited by males, whichcan be easily distinguished having light greybars on the feathers, while the females aredarker (Figure 1). The Koekoek is classified asa heavy breed, with the adult bodyweightvarying between 3 and 4 kg for cocks and2.5 and 3.5 kg for hens. The skin colour isyellow (Viljoen, 1986).

The Naked Neck chicken was introducedto South Africa most probably via the earlytraders from Malaysia. These chickens carry

the major gene Na- for Naked Neck and haveapproximately 30 percent less feathers thanchickens without the Naked Neck gene.Chickens that are homozygous for theNa-gene have no feathers on the neck area,while the heterozygous chickens have a littletuft of feathers on the lower portion of theneck. The Naked Necks of South Africa arevery colourful, with white, red and blackcombinations (Joubert, 1996) (Figure 2).

The first recording of the Lebowa-Vendachickens was made during 1979 in Venda inthe Northern Province. These birds are foundmostly in this area, which is in the mostnorthern part of South Africa, borderingZimbabwe. The name Lebowa-Venda isassociated with the two largest ethnic groupsliving in the Northern Province. TheLebowa-Venda chickens have white and blackor white and brown plumage with shades ofdark green on the feather tips (Joubert, 1996)(Figure 3).

The Ovambo was found originally in therural areas of Namibia and Ovambo. Its namerefers to the geographical area, where theywere distinguished by the local people as agroup of chickens native to the area. Thesechickens have predominantly dark red, brownand black feathers. They are aggressive andcapable of flying to avoid predators (Joubert,1996) (Figure 4).

Production evaluation

Trials were carried out at the HatfieldResearch Farm of the University of Pretoria toprovide base-line data for growth and eggproduction for the different lines. Groups of160 Koekoek, 113 Naked Neck, 120Lebowa-Venda and 105 Ovambo chickenswere tested for growth over a period of11 weeks. A commercial broiler line, the Cobbwas included as a benchmark. Males andfemales were not separated. Birds were keptin an environmentally controlled house andreared on commercial rations. A vaccinationprogramme, recommended by the Faculty ofVeterinary Science at the University of

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

73


van Marle-Köster & Casey

Pretoria for small farming enterprises, wasfollowed. Body weight and feed intake perpen were recorded on a weekly basis.

At the end of the growth period, ten birdsof each line were selected, weighed andslaughtered. Chickens were electricallystunned and killed by manualexsanguination. Feathers, viscera and headswere removed and carcasses were storedat -40°C until dissected. Live weight andcarcass weight with and without viscera andheads were recorded. Carcasses were thawedbefore dissection and the feet and abdominalfat were removed. The weights of theM. pectoralis and M. supracoracoid, as well asthe appendicular and axial skeleton wererecorded. The dissected carcasses, whichincluded the muscle, bone, fat, skin and feetwere ground with a mincer to obtain ahomogenous sample for a proximate analysis.

At completion of the growth trial of11 weeks, the females were kept and raisedup to 18 weeks of age. Twenty-four females ofeach of the native lines were randomlyselected for evaluation of egg production. TheAmberlink (commercial layer type) wasincluded as a benchmark. A natural ventilatedhouse, equipped with a battery system wasused, where the hens were kept in separatecages in order to record individual eggproduction. Hens were fed on a commerciallayer’s mash. Egg production per day per henand egg mass were recorded for 51 weeks.Live weight was recorded when placed in thebattery at 20 weeks of age and again atmarketing at the end of production (70 weeksof age). Mortality was recorded during thegrowth and egg production trials.

Differences among lines for growth andcarcass traits were tested using a GeneralLinear Model (GLM) procedure of SAS® . Achi-squared test was done to test forsignificant differences among all lines for eggproduction.

Results and Discussion

Significant differences were found among thenative lines for the production traitsevaluated. For growth, the Ovambo chickens

had the heaviest average weight (1.18 kg),followed by the Koekoek (1.1 kg) and theNaked Neck (1.06 kg), while theLebowa-Venda had a significantly lowergrowth, only reaching an average weight of0.937 kg at 77 days of age (Table 1). The totalfeed intake was very similar for all the lines(3.61-3.72 kg), except for the Lebowa-Vendachickens which had a lower intake of 3.39 kgduring the study period. Feed efficiency ratiosvaried from 3.0 for the Ovambo to 3.6 for theLebowa-Venda. (Table 1). These lines haveadapted to their natural environment andgrow and produce accordingly. Their growthis poor in comparison to the commercial Cobbline. As a consequence of the comparativelypoor growth rate, it will not be profitable tofeed males for broiler production purposes.

However, the growth performance ofthese South African local lines was similar tothose of other native or indigenous linesevaluated in similar conditions in Malaysiaand Malawi. The Malaysian village fowl hadan average weight of 1.1 kg at 15 weeks of age(Ramlah, 1996) and the Malawi local chickenweighed 2.1 kg at 20 weeks of age (Safalaoh etal., 1996).

The native lines seem to differ distinctly infeeding behaviour from the Cobb broiler. Thenative chickens had difficulty feeding fromthe feeding troughs during the first week andfeed was provided on flat cardboard. Thenative lines also spent much more timefeeding around the feeding troughs as well asscavenging in the pen. This behaviour mayhave an influence on their performance. Theseresults were obtained for an intensive systemwith adequate nutrition, housing and diseasecontrol. A poorer performance could beexpected if they were left to scavenge,although the type of feed while scavenging incombination with their genetic potential toutilize poor feed should also be considered.

All the native lines had a higher dressingpercentage than the Cobb broiler. TheOvambo had the highest dressing percentage(79.6 percent) and the other local lines showeda dressing percentage of 75 percent, followedby the commercial Cobb line with a dressingpercentage of 70 percent. The lines differed

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Table 1. Initial and final weights, cumulative feed intake and feed conversion for the differentchicken lines over a period of 11 weeks.

KoekoekNakedneck

Lebowa-Venda Ovambo Cobb

No. of chickens 160 113 120 105 150Initial weight in grams 35.43 35.49 33.47 27.02 0.40Final weight in grams(11 weeks)

1 114 1 062 937 1 183 2.00*

Total feed intake (g) 3 680 3 720 3 390 3 610 4 100Feed conversion ratio 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.0 2.0

*Cobb was slaughtered at 6 weeks of age.

Table 2. Least squares means and standard errors for dressed carcass weight (DCW) (g), percentage muscle,percentage breast muscle, percentage fat, percentage skin and percentage bone.

Chicken lineDressed carcassweight (g)* ± SE

Muscle(%)

Fat(%)

Skin(%)

Bone(%)

Breastmuscle

%/DCW%

Koekoek 831.6abc±35.9 54.9ac±0.81 1.2ac±0.47 10.6a±0.5 33.2a±0.9 17.0ac±0.5Naked Neck 795.6cd±35.9 54.9c±0.80 1.8a±0.40 11.7ab±0.5 31.5a±0.9 18.0c±0.5Lebowa-Venda 703.9d±35.9 53.0b±0.80 0.4C±0.40 10.3a±0.5 36.2b±0.9 15.2d±0.5Ovambo 939.8e±37.5 51.9ab±0.80 2.5a±0.40 12.1cb±0.5 33.5a±0.9 15.9ab±0.5Cobb 1 405.0f±37.5 55.2d±0.80 6.5d±0.40 14.2bd±0.5 24.1c±0.9 20.4d±0.8

*Dressed carcass weight: head and viscera removed. Variables with different superscripts differ significantly (P<0.05).

Table 3. Total number of eggs, mean weight (g) for eggs produced (51 weeks), average henweight and productivity ratio for the Koekoek, New Hampshire, Naked Neck, Lebowa-Vendaand Ovambo.

Line Totaleggs/hen

Mean eggweight (g); ±SE

Average henweight (g)

Productivityratio2

Koekoek 204 52.1± 0.09 2 100 6.1Naked Neck 139 49.8 ± 0.120 1 650 4.7Lebowa-Venda 122 50.9 ± 0.120 1 900 3.81Ovambo 91 43.8 ± 0.18 1 900 2.5Amberlink 311 58.7 ± 0.068 2 250 9.9

1Based on 43 weeks of production.2Calculated as number of eggs x mean weight/average hen weight 75

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

75



Figure 1. Potchefstroom Koekoek chickens.

Figure 2. Naked Neck chickens.

http://dad.fao.org/cgi-dad/$cgi_dad.dll/world?477,afr


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Figure 3. Lebowa-Venda chickens.

Figure 4. Ovambo chickens.



○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

77



(P<0.05) from each other for dressed carcassweight (Table 2). For the native lines theOvambo had the highest dressed carcassweight, but not the highest percentage breastmuscle. The percentage of bone was relativelyhigh for all the native lines (31.5-36.2 percent),especially if compared to the broiler line withonly 24.1 percent (Table 2). The higher bonepercentage in the native lines may beassociated with their adaptation to flight andscavenging.

Chemical analyses indicated that nativelines had a higher protein (42.2-46.1 percent)and lower fat (28.8-36 percent), while thereverse was true for the Cobb (CP 39.9 percentand CF 40.6 percent). Among the native linesthe Ovambo (36 percent CF) and Naked Neck(34.9 percent CF) had a higher percentage offat, while the Koekoek and Lebowa-Vendaonly had 28 percent fat.

The native lines reached sexual maturity(age at first egg) between 16 and 22 weeks ofage. The Ovambo started laying at 16 weeks,but also stopped laying by 61 weeks of age,while the other lines laid up to 72 weeks ofage. Literature indicates that native fowlswere found to reach sexual maturity, onaverage, at 23 weeks of age (Horst, 1997;Nahm, 1997).

The colour of the eggs produced werebrown for the Koekoek, Lebowa-Venda andAmberlink (commercial layer) and cream tolight brown for the Ovambo and Naked Neck.Egg production for the native lines variedfrom 203 for the Koekoek to 91 for theOvambo hens (Table 3). Egg productionfigures reported in literature varies from25-150 eggs per hen per year depending onthe production system applied. Eggproduction of the South African lines comparewell with the Fayoumi (141) and Dandarawi(128), native lines of Egypt (Horst, 1991). TheKoekoek, Lebowa-Venda and Naked Neckhens laid a medium sized egg (52.1 g, 50.9 gand 49.8 g), while the eggs of the Ovambohens were small (43.8 g). The average weightsfor the hens over the production period were2.1 kg for the Koekoek, 1.65 kg for the NakedNeck, 1.9 kg for the Lebowa-Venda and 1.9 kgfor the Ovambo. The Lebowa-Venda, which

had the poorest growth up to 11 weeks,eventually showed compensatory growth andbecame robust with final weights of up to2.2 kg at the end of production. These lineshave the potential to produce between 4.2 kg(Ovambo) and 10.6 kg (Koekoek) of eggs peryear for the household and cull hens can besold for income or slaughtered for meat. Eggweight and average weight75 of the hen can beused to calculate a productivity ratio (Horst etal., 1996). The Koekoek and Naked Neck hadthe best productivity ratio of the native linesindicating the most potential for eggproduction (Table 3).

The mortality was less than 3 percent forthe Naked Neck, Lebowa-Venda, Ovamboand New Hampshire chickens during thegrowth trial. The Koekoek had the highestmortality of 6 percent. The mortalitiesoccurred between day one and day seven ofage for all the lines. During the eggproduction trial mortality varied from0 percent for the Naked Neck, 4 percent forthe Lebowa-Venda to 20 percent for theKoekoek, New Hampshire and Ovambo hens.Mortality was mainly due to poor adaptationto the battery system, as post mortemsshowed no signs of disease.

Despite their lower productivity, thecontribution of these lines to household foodsecurity is not underestimated. A relativelylarge section of the South African populationis dependent always on a form of low-inputagriculture for household food security. Thesenative lines can play an important role as arelatively affordable protein source.Production for low-input and scavengingsystems with these native lines should beinvestigated.

Conclusion

The native lines found in South Africa differsignificantly in their production traits and it ispossible to distinguish them as different linesaccording to their phenotypic differences(colour and production traits). Theirproduction also compared well with othernative and indigenous lines found indeveloping countries.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


References

Horst, P. 1991. Native fowl as areservoir for genomes and major genes withdirect and indirect effects on the adaptabilityand their potential for tropically orientatedbreeding plans – A Review. 1991. AnimalResearch and Dev. Institut fürWissenschaftliche Zusammenarbeit. FederalRepublic of Germany. 33: 63-79.

Horst, P. 1997. Project Coordinator.Compendium of results of the EEC-ResearchProject, No. TS3-CT92-0091. Final Workshopat M’Bour, Senegal. 12 December 1997, 14-18.

Horst, P., Mathur, P.K. &Valle Zarate, A. 1996. Breeding policies forspecific tropical environments usingappropriate combination of major genes. Proc.World’s Poultry Congress, New Delhi, India.2–5 September 1996. 1: 663-640.

Joubert, J.J. 1996. Personnelcommunication. Agricultural ResearchCentre, Private Bag X2, Irene. South Africa.

MacDonald, K.C. & Edwards, D.N.1993. Chickens in Africa: the importance ofQasr Ibrim. Antiquity. 67(256): 584-589.

Nahm, K.H. 1997. Korean Native Ogolfowl. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 53:71-77.

Ramlah, A. H. 1996. Performance ofvillage fowl in Malaysia. World’s PoultryScience Journal, 52: 75-79.

SAS system. 1999. SAS Institute (Pty) Ltd,93 Central Street, PO Box 2837, Houghton2041, South Africa.

Safalaoh, A.C.L., Kadigi, H.J.S. &Phoya, R.K. 1996. Growth performance andcarcass characteristics of male BlackAustralorp, Dwarf Malawi local chicken andtheir crosses from 8-20 weeks of age. UiswaRes J. Agric. Sci. and Tech. 1(1): 61-67.

Viljoen, W.C.J. 1986. Hoenderrasse.Pluimvee A2/ Boerdery in Suid-Afrika.Department of Agriculture, Pretoria. SouthAfrica. 1-8.

79

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

AGRI 2001, 29: 79-90

Origin and characteristics of the Maltese Black-Bronze Turkey

J.G. Mallia

Institute of Agriculture, University of Malta, Msida MSD 06, Malta

Summary

The Maltese Black-Bronze Turkey is apreviously undescribed, rustic breed of turkeyraised exclusively in backyard conditions. Thebroad-breasting trait (prevalence,P=100 percent), “bronzing” on the rump andtail (P=100 percent) and “wild type” wingmarkings (P=78 percent) were present. Theaverage weight (AW) and standard error (SE)and weight range (WR) of turkeys (N=50) at12 weeks, 20 weeks and 24 weeks of age wasof 3.34 ± 0.04 kg and WR = 2.80-3.80 kg,8.14 ± 0.09 kg and WR = 7.10-9.10 kg,10.37 ± 0.10 kg and WR = 9.40-11.70 kg,respectively.

The AW ± SE and WR of a skinned, excisedbreast muscle (P. major and P. profunduscombined) and of a skinned leg of turkey at24 weeks was of 1.37±0.08 kg andWR=1.05±1.65 kg and 0.98±0.08 kg andWR=0.9-1.10 kg, respectively. There were nomortalities during the study (P=0 percent)and no birds were condemned at slaughter(P=0 percent) at 24 weeks. Although growthrates were not as fast as commercial strainsraised in industrial conditions, carcass qualityand conformation were good. Persons (N=2)visually assessing meat colour found only2 percent breast muscle to be darker than thatof industrially-raised turkey. However, poorintra-rater agreement and inter-rateragreement for darkness of breast muscleindicated that it was indistinguishable fromthe breast muscle of industrially raised birds.When only feed costs were included, the priceper kg live weight was of US$ 0.99, US$ 0.74and US$ 0.98 for 12, 20 and 24 weeks of age,respectively. Raising this breed of turkey for20 weeks appears to be the most profitableage for marketing under small-scale

semi-intensive conditions, but it is slowergrowing than industrial birds as the latterreach 8-16 kg at 14–20 weeks. A questionnairebased on 322 respondents identified that therewas a high, but unsatisfied demand forslower growing turkeys raised in “morenatural” backyard conditions (P=89 percent).The Maltese Black-Bronze Turkey had thenecessary characteristics to fill this nichemarket.

Resumen

El pavo Maltese Black-Bronze pertenece a unaraza rústica no descrita hasta la fecha que secría únicamente en condiciones de corral.Encontramos la característica de pecho amplio(normalmente P=100%) y de “tipo silvestre”de alas (P=78%). El peso medio (PM) y ladesviación estándar (DE) así como el rankingde peso (RP) de esta raza (N=50) a 12, 20 y24 semanas es de 3,34±0,04 y RP=2,80-3,80 kg,8,14±0,09 kg y RP=7,10-9,10 kg, 10,37±0,10 kgy RP=9,40-11,70 kg, respectivamente.

El PM±DE y RP de tallo de músculo depecho sin piel (P. major y P. profunduscombinados) y de una pata sin piel de pavode 24 semanas fue de 1.37±0,08 kg y elRP=1,05±1,65 kg y 0,98±0,08 kg yRP=0,9-1,10 kg, respectivamente. No hubomortalidad durante el estudio (P=0%) y nofue necesario llevar ningún animal almatadero (P=0%) con 24 semanas. A pesar deque la media de crecimiento no fue tan altacomo para las razas comerciales criadas encondiciones industriales, la calidad de la canaly la conformación fueron buenas. Laspersonas (N=2) que controlaron visualmenteel color de la carne encontraron sólo un 2% demúsculo del pecho más oscuro que en lospavos criados industrialmente. Sin embargo,

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

80Maltese Black-Bronze Turkey

la falta de acuerdo “intra-rater” e “inter-rater”sobre el color oscuro del músculo del pechoindicó que era imposible distinguirlo de losanimales criados industrialmente. Siconsideramos sólo los costes alimentarios, elprecio por kg vivo fue de US$ 0,99, US$ 0,74 yUS$ 0,98 para 12, 20 y 24 semanas,respectivamente. Criar este tipo de raza depavo durante 20 semanas parece sea elperíodo más interesante económicamentepara mercados, en condiciones semiintensivas en pequeña escala, pero crece másdespacio que los animales criadosindustrialmente ya que éstos alcanzan 8-16 kgen 14-20 semanas. Una encuesta basada sobre322 respuestas identificó que existía una alta,pero no satisfecha demanda, de pavos decrecimiento más lento pero en condiciones“más naturales” de corral (P=89%). El pavoMaltese Black-Bronze posee las característicasnecesarias para cubrir esta demanda delmercado.

Kew words: Meleagris gallopavo mexicana,Meleagris gallopavo silvestris, Carcasscharacteristics, Carcass disposition, Cost analysis,Roman and Maltese rooster, Doondyan.

Introduction

Turkeys are still widely raised in backyardconditions, particularly in the countries on theMediterranean southern shoreline andislands. They have retained their popularityas a backyard bird as many parts of thesouthern Mediterranean basin are also notserviced by large industrial-type turkeyfarms. Relatively little work in thecharacterization and evaluation of geneticresources of local poultry has been carried out(Traoré, 1999), yet turkeys are widely kept inseveral parts of the world and represent anundervalued genetic resource with substantialpotential for use in many regions. It istherefore important to identify the origin anddescribe relatively unknown populations ofturkeys that thrive in non-industrialconditions of management. How may theMaltese Turkey fit in with the first turkeysbrought to Europe from Mexico?Domesticated turkeys (Meleagris gallopavomexicana) were brought to Britain in 1821-1824by the Spanish and the first English PoultryShow of 1845 had a single class for turkeys(Anon, 1971). Subsequent selection resulted inNorfolk and Cambridgeshire and also a strainwith pure white feathers (Brown, 1906).However, several colours (black, brown andred) and white were already observed in

Figure 1. The position of Malta in the Mediterranean sea.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

81


Mallia

Mexico by the Spaniards (Sahagun, 1938, inSchorger, 1964) and are still present incontemporary Mexican turkey populations(Mallia, 1998a). The Spanish were alsoresponsible for disseminating Mexicanturkeys in the rest of Europe and much of theMediterranean. Malta had strong historicalties with Spain and France through theKnights of the Order of St John. The positionof the Maltese Islands within theMediterranean basin is shown in figure 1. Thepopulation of black-bronze turkeys in thisstudy may therefore represent a relictpopulation of birds originating from the initialdistribution of turkeys in the 1800s by theSpanish (Anon, 1971). Specimens from thisline were subsequently out-bred at someunknown, more recent stage, with turkeyshaving the broad-breasting (BB) trait. Howdid the BB trait, present in the population ofMaltese Turkeys arise? Around 1830-1840,European stock (probably the Norfolk Black)was crossed with M. g. silvestris in the USA, toproduce the Bronze and Narragansett breeds(Myrick, 1902, in Brown, 1906). Selection forgreater size and weight and feather markingsresulted in the American Mammoth Bronze(AMB) Turkey (Myrick, 1902, in Brown, 1906).The AMB probably had little impact on theMexican or “Spanish-type” turkeypopulations in Europe and was replaced bybroad-breasted (BB) turkeys introduced to theUSA from Britain in the 1930s (Crawford,1990). BB turkeys had a better carcassconformation and all industrial strains weredeveloped from this nucleus of turkeys.Further intense selection for larger musclemass and adaptability for industrialconditions have resulted in only one breed,the Broad-Breasted White (large white) beingof international importance (Sponenberg et al.,2000). Despite its success in industrialconditions, it is totally inappropriate forraising in backyard conditions.

In developing countries the backyardpoultry sector represents the backbone onwhich a sustainable well-adaptedsemi-commercial subsector could beprogressively developed (Sonaiya et al., 1999).Therefore, birds in this study were raisedunder a small-scale intensive system andincluded details common to the standard

methods of raising “backyard” turkeys in theMaltese Islands. The main aim of this paper isto report on the origin and performancepotential of a previously undescribed localpopulation of turkeys in Malta when raised ina small-scale intensive system.

Materials and Methods

Fifty male six-week old local turkeys werepurchased from growers raising poultry inbackyard or small-scale intensive systems ofmanagement. They were ringed foridentification and randomly allocated to fivecontiguous pens within the same shed, tenbirds per pen.

Strict biosecurity measures were adoptedand persons attending the turkey flock hadno contact with any other poultry. Pens wereconstructed in a new stone shed (unheated) inwhich no other poultry had ever been raised.Caution was taken to exclude the presence ofother domestic animals, rodents and theubiquitous Spanish sparrow (Passerhispaniolensis). The flooring of the pens was ofconcrete to exclude the possibility of contactof the turkey poults with earth and regularlycovered in fresh sawdust; apertures had wirescreens placed across them. Feed and waterwere placed in sealed containers to furtherexclude the presence of rodents, wild birdsand insects.

The turkeys were watered and fed adlibitum on starter pellets from age six to eightweeks, grower pellets from age nine toeighteen weeks and finisher pellets from agenineteen to twenty-four weeks. They wereweighed weekly for the entire duration of thestudy. All data were entered into a databasefile (Statistix v.4.1, St Paul, Minnesota).Weight gain was studied in conditions of aconstant day length of 12 hours, establishedby means of a time-switch regulatedneon-tube light source. The flock was closelymonitored for the presence of disease,particularly the presence of “poor-doers”.After the final weighing at the age of 24weeks, birds were euthanased by means ofcervical dislocation and exsanguinated. Anecropsy was performed by a veterinary

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


pathologist on all turkeys in the flock. Thegross lesions were described and organolepticproperties of the carcass evaluated. Theweight of the deboned breast (Pectoralis majorand Pectoralis profundus combined) and leg(including femur, patella, tibia, fibula andassociated muscles) were also recorded. Aone-way analysis of variance was conductedon the turkey flock (pen being the“treatment”) as a possible “pen effect” on theweights was present at 12, 20 and 24 weeks,respectively. Descriptive statistics and costsincurred to raise the turkeys for all three ageswere also investigated (Quattro Pro, Version5.0, Scotts Valley, CA, USA). As weightmeasurements for the three ages wereconducted on the same population of50 turkeys, the Bonferroni approach was usedto control the overall level of significance.This method accounts for the greater chanceof declaring a significant difference due to thelarger number of tests (three) beingperformed on the same group of turkeys.Thus, α* = α/n, where α* is theBonferroni-corrected level of significance, α isthe desired level of significance (P = 0.05)and n is the number of tests performed on thesame sample of turkeys (Shoukri and Edge,1996).

Two persons visually assessed the meatcolour within 15 minutes of slaughter(P. major and Gastrocnemius lateralis). Thefollowing technique used for muscle colourevaluation was based on that suggested byMallia (1998b) and was chosen to avoid areaswith prominent connective tissue that maybias colour evaluation. Therefore, the P. majorwas skinned and immediately the ventralaspect was assessed, 2.5 cm from theproximal extremity of the muscle and theG. lateralis was assessed 2 cm from the medial,distal aspect of the Iliotibialis cranialis. Thecolour scale adopted, ranging from unity toseven, was as follows: 1 (markedly light),2 (moderately light), 3 (slightly light),4 (normal), 5 (slightly dark), 6 (moderatelydark), 7 (markedly dark). Samples weretagged for identification and each raterevaluated the same meat sample twice (the“intra-rater agreement”, to see if the same

rater’s second evaluation agreed with thefirst; the sample identification was changed sothat the previous score would not bias thesecond rating). The agreement between colourevaluation of the two different persons(raters) was also assessed (“inter-rateragreement”), both raters being unaware of theother’s ratings. A mathematical computation,Cohen’s kappa statistic, 6 (Cohen, 1960) wasused to assess the agreement. This statisticwas divided into categories based onguidelines suggested by Landis and Kock(1977). Therefore, agreement for the meatcolour of a sample was said to be “poor” for acomputation of 0.01-0.20, “fair” when itranged from 0.21-0.40, “moderate” from0.41-0.60, “substantial” from 0.61-0.80 and“almost perfect” from 0.81-1.00.

A preliminary assessment of themarketability of this type of turkey wasperformed by means of a telephone-basedquestionnaire administered to 350 randomlychosen households from the local telephonedirectory. A household was defined as aminimum of one or more persons living in thesame premises, of which at least one personwas non-vegetarian. Questions asked wereaimed at identifying the availability andconsumer preferences for turkey meat inMalta and are summarized in table 1.

Results

Carcass characteristics

The turkeys had a moderate to markedbroad-breasting trait, with ample “dimpling”over the sternum (prevalence, P=100 percent).They also had relatively shorter legs(P=100 percent) and a calmer temperamentthan other backyard populations, forexample, those described in Central America(Mallia, 1998a, Mallia, 1999a). There was littlevariation in plumage type: all were“black-bronze”, this colour form having amainly black plumage (Figure 2) and“bronzing” (Figure 3) only on the rump andtail (P=100 percent). Most specimens also hada varying degree of “wild type” lightmarkings on the wing primaries

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

83


Mallia

Table 1. Results of questionnaire to assess acceptance and marketibility of backyard, andindustrially-raised turkeys in Malta (based on 322 respondents).

1. Do you consume turkey meat? (one answer only)yes (100%) no (0%)

2. Do you eat turkey outside the Christmas period? (one answer only)yes , > 5 times (0%) occasionally (4%) no (96%)

3. How do you purchase turkey? (one answer only)frozen, industrially-raised (58%)fresh/processed, industrially-raised (32%)fresh/processed, semi-intensive/backyard (8%)purchased live, semi-intensive/backyard (2%)

4. What would be your ideal purchase choice for turkey? (one answer only)frozen, industrially-raised (0%)fresh/processed, industrially-raised (11%)fresh/processed, semi-intensive/backyard (86%)purchased live, semi-intensive/backyard (3%)

5. (Dis)advantage (%) of purchasing frozen/processed, industrially-raised turkeys?price (D 100%, A 0%) availability (D 0%, A 100%)meat quality (D 47%, A 53%) meat safety (D 46%, A 54%)

6. (Dis)advantage of purchasing fresh/processed, industrially-raised turkeys?price (D 100%, A 0%) availability (D 0%, A100%)meat quality (D 23%, A 77%) meat safety (D 43%, A 57%)

7. (Dis)advantage of purchasing fresh/processed, semi-intensive/backyard systems?price (D 5%, A 41%, ?54%) availability (D 83%, A 3%, ?14meat quality (D 0%, A 100%) meat safety (D 4%, A 96%)

8. (Dis)advantage of purchasing live turkeys, from a semi-intensive/backyard system?Price (D 2%, A 36%, ? 62%) availability (D 98%, A 2%, )meat quality (D 0%, A 100%) meat safety (D 3%, A 97%)

9. Any feather colour preference for a live turkey? (one answer only)white (2%) coloured (37%) no preference (61%)

10. Any concerns over very small feathers on carcass?white feathers yes (42%) no (58%)coloured feathers yes (44%) no (56%)

11. Would you purchase a carcass that is:markedly dark** yes (0%) no (100%)markedly light ** yes (0%) no (100%)moderately dark*** yes (12%) no (88%)moderately light*** yes (14%) no (86%)slightly dark**** yes (87%) no (13%)slightly light**** yes (89%) no (11%)irregularly coloured yes (0%) no (100%)

* D = disadvantage, A = advantage, ? = do not know. ** Visibly different in colour*** Careful viewing reveals moderate difference in colour**** Only comparison with other carcasses reveals slight colour difference

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Figure 1. Malta backyard turkey, 20 weeks of age.

Figure 2. Malta backyard turkey with with bronze markings on rump, tail andwings.



○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

85


Mallia

(P=78 percent). The plumage of the poults isshown in figure 4 and is predominantly blackeven at eight weeks of age.

A one-way analysis of variance showedthat there was no significant difference(P<0.05) among the weight of turkeys in thefive pens at 12 weeks of age. There were alsono significant differences at 20 weeks (P<0.05)and 24 weeks (P<0.05) of age for turkeyshoused in different pens. As there was nosignificant difference among weights indifferent pens (i.e. the weight of turkeys indifferent pens was not distorted by the effectof being in different pens), descriptivestatistics were based on the summed weightsof all 50 turkeys. The average weight (AW)and standard error (SE) of a turkey at12 weeks of age was of 3.34±0.04 kg, with arange of weights from 2.80-3.80 kg. At20 weeks of age, the AW±SE was of8.14±0.09 kg, with a weight range of7.10-9.10 kg. At 24 weeks of age, the AW±SEwas of 10.37±0.10 kg, with a range of weightsfrom 9.40-11.70 kg. The AW±SE for the entirelength of the study are summarized in table 2.

The AW ± SE of a skinned, excised breastmuscle (P. major and P. profundus combined)of turkeys slaughtered at 24 weeks was of1.37±0.08 kg, with a weight range of1.05-1.65 kg. The AW±SE of a skinned leg atthe same age of slaughter was 0.98±0.08 kg,with a weight range of 0.9-1.10 kg.

None of the breast and leg samples(0 percent) were considered to be moderatelyor markedly dark (with respect to the samemuscle groups from industrially-raised birds)by evaluators A or B. Evaluator A onlyclassified two and eight percent of breast andleg samples, respectively, as slightly darkerthan normal when evaluated twice. EvaluatorB only classified two and ten percent of breastand leg samples, respectively, as slightlydarker than normal when evaluated twice.Evaluators A and B did not classify as“slightly dark” any of the same breasts(0 percent) and only two percent of legs.Therefore, evaluator A showed only moderateagreement (6) when evaluating the samebreast samples twice (intra-rater agreement);evaluator B also only showed moderateagreement. Intra-rater agreement of evaluatorA for leg colour could not be assessed due tolimitations of the mathematical computations.Evaluator B showed substantial agreementwhen evaluating the same leg samples twice(intra-rater agreement). The agreement onbreast and leg colour between the twoevaluators (inter-rater agreements) rangingfrom poor to fair was almost absent. Nosamples were classified as moderately dark ormarkedly dark and agreement as to whichsamples were slightly dark was rathermodest. This suggests that the colourdifferences between the meat samples in thestudy and those regularly available

Table 2. Average weight (kg) of turkeys from 6- 24 weeks of age (n=50;SE = standard error)

Age (weeks) AW ± SE Age (weeks) AW ± SE (kg)6 0.61 ± 0.00 16 6.05 ± 0.027 0.92 ± 0.01 17 6.39 ± 0.038 1.27 ± 0.01 18 6.87 ± 0.039 1.84 ± 0.02 19 7.35 ± 0.0410 2.13 ± 0.02 20 8.14 ± 0.1011 2.80 ± 0.04 21 8.83 ± 0.0712 3.34 ± 0.04 22 9.40 ± 0.0913 3.94 ± 0.02 23 9.76 ± 0.1414 4.70 ± 0.04 24 10.37 ± 0.1015 5.30 ± 0.04

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


(i.e. industrially raised synthetic strains ofturkeys) were negligible. The difference wasso subtle that the same evaluator rarelyidentified the same meat sample twice as, forexample, “slightly dark”.

Disease and carcass disposition

The flock had no mortalities (0 percentincident rate) up to the day of slaughter at24 weeks. There were no signs of depression,loss of appetite or any other symptoms ofpossible on-going syndromes for the entireduration of the study. All had moderate tosevere superficial traumatic lesions on thehead, especially the snood and caruncleturkeys (100 percent incident rate); althoughhaemorrhage was widespread, the lesionswere not complicated by infection and wereleft untreated. Mild to moderate bilateralopacity of the anterior thoracic air sacks,compatible with early-stage airsacculitis waspresent in two turkeys (four percent incidentrate). Unlike several other strains ofbroad-breasted bronze turkeys, crooked keelswere not observed (0 percent incident rate).

Deep pectoral myopathy (DPM) and dark,firm, dry (DFD) carcasses were not observedat necropsy (0 percent incident rate).

Airsacculitis lesions were localized to theanterior thoracic air sacks and were very mildwith no consolidation of exudate. No other airsacks or associated bones, such as theclavicular air sac and humerus, were involvedby the process. Furthermore, there were nosigns of systematic involvement and lesionscompatible with septicaemia. Due to the mildnature and localization of the lesions thesecarcasses were therefore considered fit forconsumption after the removal of the affectedparts, based on the criteria of Agriculture andAgrifood Canada and the United StatesDepartment of Agriculture (Herenda andFranco, 1996).

Cost analysis and marketing

The costs necessary for raising the 50 poultsto three different ages were assessed:12, 20and 24 weeks of age. The cost incurred for thesix-week chicks was of US$150 (US$3 a head);this was constant for cost calculations at allthree ages. Bales of litter (sawdust) werepurchased at US$9 per bale; five bales (US$45)

Figure 3. Malta backyard turkey, 8 week.


○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

87


Mallia

were necessary if slaughtered at 12 weeks,eight bales (US$72) for slaughter at 20 weeksand US$10 bales (US$90) when slaughtered at24 weeks. The cost of feed concentrate was ofUS$0.3 per kg, therefore, 550 kg (US$165)were necessary to raise the poults to12 weeks, 1 000 kg (US$300) up to 20 weeks ofage and 1 700 kg (US$510) for slaughter at24 weeks. Heat costs for raising of poultsunder this system of management wereabsent. Person-hour (labour) costs were notfactored in, as rearing usually occurs under“family poultry” systems of management.

The cost per kg (live weight) wascalculated for all three age groups andincluded: (i) chick price, litter and feed;(ii) chick price and feed; and (iii) feed only.When chick price, litter and feed wereincluded, the price per kg live weight was ofUS$2.16, US$1.28 and US$1.45 for12, 20 and24 weeks of age, respectively. When the costof the litter was excluded, the price per kglive weight was of US$1.89, US$1.11 andUS$1.27 for 12, 20 and 24 weeks of age,respectively. When only feed costs wereincluded, the price per kg live weight was ofUS$0.99, US$0.74 and US$0.98 for12, 20 and24 weeks of age, respectively. Marketing ofblack-bronze broad-breasted turkeys appearsto be the most profitable at 20 weeks of agewhen raised in small-scale semi-intensiveconditions.

The questionnaire to assess acceptance andmarketability of small-holder rearedblack-bronze turkeys had a high percentage ofrespondents (92 percent). Results from thequestionnaire indicated that turkey meat iswidely consumed (100 percent ofparticipants), but most (96 percent) only ate itaround Christmas time. Most people boughttheir turkey frozen (58 percent) or fresh,processed industrially raised birds(32 percent); few bought semi-intensive orbackyard turkeys (ten percent), of which onlytwo percent were purchased live. In directcontrast, most people (89 percent) thoughtthat the “ideal” turkey purchase was oneraised in semi-intensive or backyard systemsof management.

Frozen industrially raised turkeys werepurchased because of their availability(100 percent). However, almost half theparticipants had concerns regarding thequality and safety of the meat and allcommented that the price was not favourable.Fresh, processed, industrially raised turkeyshad similar comments, except that manyparticipants (77 percent) reported favourablyabout meat quality.

Fresh, processed, turkey raised insemi-intensive or backyard systems wasconsidered to be safe (96 percent) and of goodquality (100 percent). Most participants didnot think (83 percent) or know (14 percent) ifit was readily available. Almost half(41 percent) thought the price was favourable,but more than half (54 percent) had no idea ofthe price. The purchase of live turkeys raisedin semi-intensive or backyard systems ofmanagement had a similar response, butalmost all persons (98 percent) were uncertainabout the availability of live turkeys fromsmall-holder growers. Results aresummarized in table 1.

Discussion

The backyard turkeys in this study were, atbest, only comparable in weight toindustrially raised commercial hybrids at20 weeks of age. Even at this age, they onlyreached the lower end of the weight scalerange, as the hybrids reach eight to 16 kg(17-35 lb) at 14 to 20 weeks (Anon, 1987).Clearly, this population of turkeys should notbe grown for more than 20 weeks, unless themarket specifically requires a heavier bird.However, the backyard turkeys are utilizedfor “non-industrial” semi-intensive orbackyard systems of management and caneasily find use in certain communities. Forexample, in Mexico a slower growing, butwell-fleshed carcass is highly esteemedbecause of the richer flavour of the meat(Mallia, 1998a) and the questionnaire in thisstudy also indicated an appreciation for thequality of meat from slower-growingbackyard turkeys. Artificial selection hasresulted in the P. major of domesticated

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


turkeys exhibiting 90-100 percent alpha-whitefibres, with the remaining fibres beingalpha-red (Wiskus et al., 1976); but selectionfor rapid growth, increased breast width ormuscle mass resulted in situations wheresome metabolic or anatomical limits wereexceeded (Wilson et al., 1990). It is possiblethat the Maltese Black-Bronze lies in anintermediate position between the (fully) BBindustrial strains of turkeys and non-BBMexican turkeys. Although double muscled,they appear to be slower growing thanindustrial birds and less prone to metabolicdisorders such as deep pectoral myopathy(Siller, 1985) and dark, firm, dry (DFD) meat(Mallia, 1998b). Although not assessed in thisstudy, the (microscopic) damage to muscletissue due to rapid growth of BB turkeys,such as loosely packed, rounded anddegenerating fibres in breast and leg muscles(Wilson et al., 1990; Mallia,1998b) would herebe expected to be modest as the BB trait wasnot extreme. This damage may be due to thesmaller proportion of connective tissue fibresand supporting cells and tissues for themuscle fibres, interfering with normal cell-to-cell relationships (Wilson et al., 1990, Siller,1985). Indeed, the growth of intramuscularconnective tissue does not keep pace with thegrowth of pectoralis fibres (Swatland, 1990).This may also explain why breast meat fromheavier turkeys tends to be more tender thanthat from lighter birds (Grey, 1989) and whyno consumers commented on any particulartoughness of meat from these moderatelyheavy turkeys.

A dark feathered, “naturally-grown”turkey was also seen to be more appropriateas a “special occasion” gastronomic speciality.This is particularly important, as thequestionnaire clearly showed that althoughmany people in the country consume turkey,this is almost exclusively around theChristmas period. Production costs may bereduced by using a local and/or cheapersource of litter (e.g. old newspapers), oreliminating the use of litter beyond a certainage, once the birds are hardened off. As thepoults hatch in the height of the dry season,they are hardened off by the time the wet

season starts, therefore, they may be allowedto graze outdoors, reducing feed and littercosts. Social acceptance of “family-grown”turkeys, as evidenced by the questionnaire,was very marked, however, productavailability was surprisingly lacking andthere is a clear opportunity for developmentof this niche market.

Conclusions

The Maltese name for turkey is “doondyan”(dundjan), probably a corruption of theFrench “dindon”. The population of turkeysfrom which specimens in this study wereobtained are known locally as “dundjanmalti” in the local language and “MalteseTurkey” or simply “the Maltese” in English.

Although French has never been thelanguage of Malta, the country has stronghistorical ties with several European countriesthrough the Order of St John. The Frenchname was therefore “imported” with the birdsand altered so as to be more pronounceablelocally. However, Malta also had strong linkswith Algeria, Egypt and Tunisia, earlier thiscentury when thousands of Maltese werestationed there (Attard, 1989) and it is alsopossible that this was an additional route (tothat of Spain and France) for turkeys intoNorth Africa. It is interesting to note that inEgypt the name for turkey is (usually) “DeekRumi” (“Roman rooster”) and “Dindi”,however it is also known as “Deek Malti”(“Maltese rooster”). Some people use theseterms interchangeably, whereas others insistthat the term “Deek Malti” was originallyreserved for a strain of turkeys that wasdistinctly heavier than other strains(populations) present in Egypt (Mallia,personal observations, 1999). The heavy traitmay be linked to the BB trait observed in therelict population still present in Malta, asidentified by this study. The former mixing of“Deek Malti” with other strains present inEgypt (“Deek Rumi”, “Dindi”) may thereforerepresent an outbreeding strategy to“upgrade” the local stock of turkeys in Egypt.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

89


Mallia

“Improved” stock from Europe maytherefore have reached parts of North Africavia Malta through Maltese emigrants, forexample, birds that are larger and with somedegree of broad-breasting. Turkeys however,with other favourable traits, such as ecotypesthat were better adapted for living in a hot,dry Mediterranean climate, may also havebeen brought to Malta from North Africa byreturning Maltese emigrants. This may havecombined rustic characteristics with goodproduction traits such as broad-breasting.This breed or ecotype of turkey may thereforebe an ideal candidate for projects involvingthe raising of poultry by small-holders innon-industrial conditions.

It is hoped that the population of turkeysdescribed in this paper will be safeguardedand utilized in a manner similar to the BlackMaltese chicken described recently (Mallia,1999b) that now benefits from an in-situconservation project (Mallia, 1999c) at theAgriculture and Research Centre (Malta). It ishoped that the Maltese Turkey, which ishardy and rustic, but also has a good growthrate and favourable carcass traits(broad-breasting), will also be preserved andutilized in a similar manner.

References

Anon, 1971. British poultry standards,3rd Edn. Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd.,Oxford; 298 pp.

Anon, 1987. Guide to farm practice inSaskatchewan: poultry factsheets No. 6,turkeys. <http://eru.usask.ca/saf_corp/livestok/poultry/turkey.htm> SaskatchewanAgriculture and The University ofSaskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.

Attard, L.E. 1989. Man and means: thegreat exodus (1918-1939). PublishersEnterprises Group (PEG) Ltd., Marsa, Malta,pp. 23-29.

Brown, E. 1906. Races of domesticpoultry. Edward Arnold, London, pp. 136-139.

Cohen, J. 1960. A co-efficient ofagreement for nominal scale. Educational andPsychological Measurement, 20: 37-46.

Crawford, R.D. 1990. Poultry Breedingand Genetics. Amsterdam, Elsevier, pp. 1123.

Grey, P. 1989. Turkey meat texture. InNixey, C. & Grey, T.C. (Ed.), Recent advancesin turkey science, Butterworths, London,England, pp. 241-245.

Landis, J. & Koch, G. 1977. Themeasurement of observer agreement forcategorical data. Biometrics, 33: 159-174.

Mallia, J.G. 1998a. Indigenous domesticturkeys of Oaxaca and Quintana Roo, Mexico.Animal Genetic Resources Information, 23:69-78.

Mallia, J.G. 1998b. Epidemiologicalstudies of cyanosis in poultry in southernOntario. PhD thesis, Department ofPopulation Medicine, Ontario VeterinaryCollege, University of Guelph, Guelph,Canada, pp. 173.

Mallia, J.G. 1999a. Observations onsmallholder “family poultry” units in parts ofCentral America and sustainabledevelopment opportunities. FirstINFPD/FAO Electronic Conference on FamilyPoultry: 7 December 1998-5 March 1999.Theme: “The Scope and Effect of FamilyPoultry Research and Development”.<http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGA/AGAP/lps/fampo/Intropap.htm>, FAO, Rome.

Mallia, J.G. 1999b. The Black Maltese: aMediterranean, light breed of poultry. AnimalGenetic Resources Information, 24: 41-48.

Mallia, J.G. 1999c. In-Situ conservationof the Black Maltese and performanceevaluation under a small-scale intensivesystem. First INFPD/FAO ElectronicConference on Family Poultry:7 December 1998-5 March 1999. Theme: “The

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○


Scope and Effect of Family Poultry Researchand Development”. <http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGA/AGAP/lps/fampo/Intropap.htm>, FAO,Rome.

Schorger, A. 1964. The wild turkey.University of Oklahoma Press, Norman,Oklahoma, pp. 625.

Shoukri, M.M. & Edge, V.L. 1996.Statistical methods for health sciences. CRCPress Inc., Boca Raton, Florida. pp. 258.

Siller, W.G. 1985. Deep pectoralmyopathy: a penalty of successful selectionfor muscle growth. Poultry Sci. 64: 1591-1595.

Sonaiya, E.B., Branckaert, R.D.S. &Guèye, E.F. 1999. Research and developmentoptions for family poultry. First INFPD/FAOElectronic Conference on Family Poultry:7 December 1998–5 March 1999. Theme: “TheScope and Effect of Family Poultry Researchand Development”. <http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGA/AGAP/lps/fampo/Intropap.htm>, FAO,Rome.

Sponenberg, D.P., Hawes, R.O.,Johnson, P. & Christman. C.J. 2000. Turkeyconservation in the United States. AnimalGenetic Resources Information, 27: 59-66.

Swatland, H.J., 1990. A note on thegrowth of connective tissues binding turkeymuscle fibres together. Can. Inst. Technol. J.23: 239-241.

Traoré, A., 1999. Requirements forfamily poultry development. First INFPD/FAO Electronic Conference on Family Poultry:7 December 1998-5 March 1999. Theme: “TheScope and Effect of Family Poultry Researchand Development”. <http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGA/AGAP/lps/fampo/Intropap.htm>, FAO,Rome.

Wilson, B.W., Nieberg, P.S. &Buhr, R.J. 1990. Turkey Muscle Growth andFocal Myopathy. Poultry Sci. 69: 1553-1562.

Wiskus, K.J., Addis, P.B. & Ma, R.T-I.1976. Distribution of beta-red, alpha-red andalpha-white fibres in turkey muscles. PoultrySci. 55: 562-572.

91

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Reports of selected meetings


Ten French scientists under the leadership ofMr François Etevenon, President of theFrench National Federation of Goat Farmersassisted by a technical committee of scientistsfrom 23 countries and an organizingcommittee staged from 15-21 May 2000, the7th International Conference on Goats held inTours in the scenic centre of North-westernFrance’s tourism in the centre of the intensiveFrench goat farming and goat cheeseindustry.

Thus, the 7th International Conference onGoats was held in a region, where dairy goatscontribute much to the welfare of people. TheConference Proceedings, published in twovolumes with a total of 1 049 pages contain78 full-length papers, mostly in English butwith some in French with English summaries.Copies of the Proceedings can be obtainedfrom the Conference Secretary, Dr. Y. Chabert,Institut de l’Elevage, 149 rue de Bercy, ParisCedex 12, France 75595; Fax.: +33-1-4004-5280;e-mail: [email protected].

The full-length papers were presented in12 plenary sessions, covering• Goats and sustainable development;• Technology transfer;• Transgenesis;• North-South relationships;• Nutrition and feeding strategies;• Genetics and selection;• Pathology;• Production systems;• Reproduction;• Economic and social issues;• Quality of milk and dairy products; and• Meat, hair and skin products.

The Proceedings also contain 101 papers,which were presented in 16 Roundtablediscussions, covering• Contribution of women to goat production;• Goat genome;• Mother-young relationships;• Detection and prevention of mastitis;• Goat farming and the environment;• Integrated control of nematode parasites;

• Detection and prevention of CAEV;• Meat production in the tropics and

sub-tropics;• Main diseases in hot climates;• Specificity and quality of goat products;• Goat milk as a health food;• Organization of goat research;• Genetic resources: present use and

prospects;• Publishing research results;• Effects of European sanitary policy on

dairy farms and products; and• Feeding strategies in arid rangelands.

Finally, the Proceedings also containabstracts of four of the seven SatelliteSymposia on• Results and prospects of European projects

on small ruminants in Africa;• Organization and development of a local

goat industry;• Partnerships for development in goat

activity: review of achievements in variouscountries;

• Goat milk quality for cheese making;• Semen and embryo preservation and

evaluation;• Reproduction in the tropics and

sub-tropics; and• Applied genetic programmes for dairy

goats.In addition to these papers, there were

293 posters presented by the Conferenceparticipants which are also contained in theProceedings. The Conference in additionconducted on a separate day, sevensimultaneous technical visits and all-dayworkshops on• Caprine genetics;• The goat industry in the local

Poitou-Charentes region;• Businesses processing goat’s milk;• The technology of milk and cheese

production;• Reproduction;• Feeding and the system of farming; and• Pathology.

Seventh International Conference on "Goats in Retrospect"Tours, France, 15-18 May 2000

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

92Reports of selected meetings

For the interest of the general public, therewere goat exhibits on the street in front of theConference Centre, to “get the congress out ofthe classroom”, including dairy and Angoragoats, products, Angora shearing, a children’sworkshop on how to enjoy goat products anda farmers’ market. During the weekend ofthis full week of goat science and activities,there was in a neighbouring town a two day“Cheese Fair” with a cheese contest, goatmeat products and goat cheeses for sale in abig farmers’ market throughout severalstreets, together with folk group parades andfamily entertainment. Throughout theConference, each breakfast, lunch and dinnerfeatured many delicious goat cheeses. Tomake the Conference even more complete,two post-Conference tours were added, onefor four days to Bordeaux and another foreight days, east through the centralmountains to Provence and Monaco.

The post-Conference four-day excursionhad an especially interesting programme,visiting the international CAPRIGENE A.I.

Centre, which has an intensive buck provingprogramme, semen collection, processing andfrozen embryo supply for over1 000 participating goat breeders, over2 300 goat farmers with milk recordingsystems and more than 400 000 annual goatinseminations. Three goat farms were alsovisited.

More than 800 participants from more than70 countries attended the Conference withmore than 200 accompanying persons. Themoving spirit behind the entire programmewas Dr. Pierre Morand-Fehr, Director of GoatResearch at the French Ministry ofAgriculture, who deserves much praise.During the Conference he was elected as thenew President of the International GoatAssociation, succeeding Dr. Adel Aboul Naga,for the next four years, which will include theholding of the next International GoatConference to be held at the PretoriaUniversity in the Republic of South Africa inthe year 2004.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

93


Reports of selected meetingsReports of selected meetings

The objective of the Workshop was to explorethe relevance of animal genetic resources(AnGR) to breeding programmes in differentanimal production systems.With a still increasing world population on ashrinking acreage of arable land, overallproductivity has to increase to satisfy risingneeds. In developed countries, market forceshave led to improved breeds leaving lessperforming ones behind. In contrast, in thedeveloping world the introduction of“improved” breeds generally failed but stillleaving indigenous breeds threatened due toindiscriminate crossing. Breeds in thedeveloped world tend to be evaluated on thebasis of market requirements, while those inthe developing world usually have othercriteria besides marketing.

A series of three papers dealt with theAnGR in high input systems for egg, meat(pigs) and dairy milk production. It isgenerally accepted that the current breedingpopulations contain all the genetic variabilityrequired for future breeding work. There issome concern about the within populationvariability which leads to the view that theincrease of inbreeding should be kept belowone percent per generation. Given the largedifferences in the production level betweencurrent production populations and breeds atrisk, it seems highly unlikely that they will beable to contribute to current breedingprogrammes in any substantial way. Thiswould leave as reasons for conservation thegeneral insurance aspect, scientific interestand cultural considerations. As a result, thespeakers took the view, that breedconservation ought to be a public concerngoing beyond the financial prowess andresponsibility of the breeding companies ororganizations.

All contributions dealing with low inputsystems showed a very different focus ofconservation of genetic resources. Here, it is

seen as a vital pre-requisite for geneticimprovement of production populationswhereas in the high input systems it isviewed as a more moral obligation.

The 12 countries covered in the Asianperspective represent about one third of theworld’s breeds. So far, breed improvementhas been mostly focussed on the importationof semen. The F1 tends to perform higher thanthe indigenous breeds. However, systematiccross-breeding programmes require structuresthat usually do not exist in the countries.Furthermore, decisions for the introduction ofbreeding material are influenced by dubiouseconomics like externalizing costs or useoutput as criterion instead of analyzing thecomplete production system. Additionally,research results tend to be ignored in manycases, in particular, by decision-makers.

This aspect was also stressed in the AfricanPerspective: “conservation is appealing only ifit results in economic benefit”. Moleculargenetic techniques are seen here as aninstrument to enhance characterization andutilization of animal genetic resources. TheSouth America Perspective gave a number ofbreeding programmes with breeds in use thatare specifically adapted to the low intensitytropical environment. On the other hand,high input systems also played their role inthe South American sub-continent. Manyadapted breeds are used in well establishedbreeding programmes with the introductionof the Zebu being a good example ofutilization of a genetic resource also for lowinput systems.

In the global strategy for the managementof AnGR in lower-input productionenvironments as presented from the FAOperspective, evaluation and utilization ofadapted local breeds play the most importantrole. The necessity for improved animalproductivity is required by the increase inhuman populations in the low input areas ofthe world.

World EXPO-Workshop on "Animal Breedingand Animal Genetic Resources"

Mariensee, Germany, 17-18 July 2000

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

94Reports of selected meetings

The Symposium reviewed the historicaldevelopment of the dairy sector in theMediterranean, its present status andachievements in satisfying the needs of thegrowing population and changes in marketconditions as well as challenges and prospectsfor the future.

The Symposium identified a variety oftechnically viable and scientifically soundpolicy options, as well as major fieldsrequiring more in-depth scientific researchand development of new sustainabletechnologies. It confirmed the readiness of thescientific community of the Region tocontinue serving the sector and providing itwith new solutions and horizons.

During the last decade, the dairy sector ofthe Mediterranean Basin, representing onesixth of the global cow, half of sheep and onequarter of goat milk production, was markedby a slight decrease in the total production inthe northern part of the basin, mainly due tothe saturation of the market and measuresundertaken within the EU CommonAgricultural Policy and a dynamic growth inthe South. A number of countries of the Southbasin have reached self-sufficiency in milkproduction, while others are still importingmilk and dairy products. The Symposiumnoted with satisfaction the contribution ofresearchers, technicians and farmers fromcountries of the South and East banks of theMediterranean in increasing dairy productionand thus, contributing to the welfare offarmers and consumers in their respectivecountries. Participants of the Symposiumunderlined the need for the continuousexchange of experience and informationamong professionals and policy-makers fromall countries of the Region.

In reviewing prospects for futuredevelopments, the Symposium analyzedproduction potential, socio-economic factors,including trends in demand for dairy

EAAP Mediterranean Symposium on "Prospects forsustainable dairy sector in the Mediterranean"

Hammamet, Tunisia, 26-28 October 2000

products and the capacity of the sector tocontribute to sustainable rural development,as well as available technologies, institutionalframework and human resources.

In spite of problems related to the shortageof water, the Region is endowed withproduction potential sufficient to meet all oralmost all future increased demand for themajor part of dairy products arising frompopulation growth, urbanization and changesin nutritional habits.

The role of dairy products in theMediterranean diet, the healthiest in theworld, should be maintained by improvingquality and safety of typical local products.These products should be registered andprotected in order to safeguard their place inthe future markets and their role in producingincome to farming population by linkingthese products to local breeds and traditionaltechnologies. Science and research were calledupon to contribute to the improvements inproductivity of local breeds and in quality oftheir products.

The available technologies for intensive,semi-intensive and extensive productionsystems and the existing institutionalframework, research education, extensionsystems, organization of the sector, althoughrequiring continuous adjustments andimprovements, have proved to be in aposition to meet variety of demands andchallenges for future development. In thisrespect, the Symposium called for an increasein research for the semi-intensive farmingsystems in the South (e.g. local feed base,productivity of local breeds of cattle, sheep,goats, quality of local products) and emergingissues connected with changes in agriculturalpolicies in the North. It emphasized theimportance of producer associations asrepresentatives of interests of the sector andpartners in the policy dialogue and inidentification of research needs.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

95


Reports of selected meetingsReports of selected meetings

Following the mandate of the Commission onGenetic Resources for Food and Agriculturein 1999, and the recommendations of theIntergovernmental Technical Working Groupon Animal Genetic Resources for Food andAgriculture in September 2000, FAOorganized The Global Training of Trainers’Workshop in Rome, from 26 February to3 March 2001, as a key step in developing theFirst Report on the State of the World’s (SoW)Animal Genetic Resources (AnGR). Theworkshop developed a core of trained expertsfor use in the Regional Training Workshopsthroughout planned to occur in all regionsduring the second half of 2001, and asinternational consultants assisting needycountries to develop both their capacity andtheir Country Reports.

Workshop:• Reviewed the components of the Global

Strategy for the Management of FarmAnGR, and the mandate and context of theSoW-AnGR report;

• studied the process for the development ofthe Country Report on the SoW-AnGR, asa strategic policy document;

• became fully familiar with the Guidelinesand the Background Questions, theirfunction and purpose;

• examined and commented on the pre-prototype version of the DAD-IS SoW-AnGR Module, being developed to assistcountries further develop their AnGRNetwork, their SoW-AnGR Databank aswell as their Country Report;

• considered how best to efficiently andeffectively carry out their tasks as trainersand consultants.Twenty five 25 participants from all

regions, along with FAO staff and supportingconsultants attended the workshop. Groupsof participants were organized in order to:• analyze and discuss the key elements of

DAD-IS SoW-AnGR Module;• to evaluate the tabulation tools;• to propose added explanations for better

use of the Guidelines and BackgroundQuestions;

• to develop a checklist for the preparationof the Country Report; and

• to propose the programme for both theRegional Training Workshop and the FirstCountry Workshop.Participants were very positive about the

country-driven approach to the developmentof the SoW-AnGR Process which is beingtaken by FAO. They firmly agreed that thedevelopment of the Country Reports, of theplanned Strategic Priority Actions Report andof the first Report on the SoW-AnGR itselfprovides an important opportunity forcountries to increase awareness of theimportant role played by AnGR for food andagricultural services, to further develop theircapacity to manage AnGR and to obtain thenecessary support and funding for this action.

FAO Global Training of Trainers’ Workshoppreparing for the SoW-AnGR Process

Rome, 26 February-3 March 2001

97

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

World Watch List for Domestic AnimalDiversity (WWL-DAD: 3) issued by FAO andthe United Nations Environment Programme(UNEP) consists of 43 chapters in four partsand four annexes. This third edition containssummary results of the analysis of thirtymammalian and avian species, together withtheir wild relatives and feral populations.WWL-DAD: 3 is the result of ten years of datacollection in 170 countries, covering6 500 breeds of domesticated mammals andbirds. The publication provides informationon existing viable breeds, breeds that exist butin dangerously low numbers (TheEndangered Breed List) by region andcountry, information on breeds on the vergeof extinction (The Critical Breed List) anddetails of domestic animal breeds that arealready extinct (The Extinct Breed List). Thebook also provides documentation on thewild relatives of domestic animal species andan introduction to the issue of feralpopulations associated with domestic animaldiversity. When reading the book, the readershould bear in mind the FAO definition of“breed” and “region”; on the other hand, oneshould recall that the information on breedswas provided by the country/regionsthemselves.

An important aspect of the book is theanalysis of trends in domestic animaldiversity since the publication of the firstedition in 1995. WWL-DAD: 3 also providesthe communication coordinates of theNational Co-coordinators for theManagement of Animal Genetic Resourcesidentified by their respective governments.

World Watch List for Domestic Animal Diversity, 3rd EditionB.D. Scherf (Editor),

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,V.le delle Terme di Caracalla 1, 00100 Rome, Italy. Published in 2001

ISBN: 95-5-104511-9pp. 725

The information in the book is easilyaccessible. The size of the pages is A4 and thebook includes 50 figures, 33 photographs andsix plates, all in colour and 20 tables.

The material in WWL-DAD: 3 makes itessential reading for those concerned with themanagement of animal genetic resources andconservation of biodiversity.

www.fao.org/dad-is

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

98

Buffalo contributes significantly to theeconomies of many countries and there is aneed for establishing guidelines andstandards for recording that can beuniversally applicable.

Bearing in mind that buffalo recordingis still not practised in many developingcountries, the aim of this Workshop was topromote buffalo milk recording systems byconsidering the already existing experiencesof buffalo recording activities and by givingan opportunity to the participating experts todiscuss the constraints, requirements andbenefits of implementing standardized milkrecording systems for buffalo.

Experts from fifteen countriesprepared case studies describing theexperience of animal recording, particularlyfor buffalo, in their country. These casestudies served as a basis for the discussionheld during the two day Workshop, held inBled, Slovenia, from 16 to 17 May 2001.

Objectives of the Workshop were to:• encourage buffalo recording in developing

countries and to make possible thecomparison of animal productivity indifferent production systems;

• contribute to the international collaborationfor the development of buffalo production;

• increase the awareness of the value ofrecording systems for the management ofthe breed; and

• promote the use of records to evaluate therank of animals, improve farmmanagement systems and increase thebenefits of farming.

This ICAR Technical Series no. 4includes the 15 Case Studies presented, theWorkshop Discussion and theRecommendations and Guidelines agreedupon.

Animal Recording for Improved Breeding and ManagementStrategies for Buffaloes

ICAR Technical Series no. 4B. Moioli, J. Mäki-Hokkonen, S. Galal & M. Zjalic (Editors)

Proceedings of the Workshop held in Bled, Slovenia, 16-17 May 2000.Published in 2001

ISSN: 1563-2504ISBN: 92-95014-00-6

www.icar.org

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

99

Hungary was among the first countries torecognize the necessity of conserving thegenetic diversity present in the graduallydisappearing animal population. TheGovernment of Hungary has providedfinancial support for the conservation worksince the early 1960s. Most of the endangeredpopulations were kept on state farms andcooperatives. The early 1990s have broughtabout considerable changes in the formerEastern-block countries, among others, thebegining of the privatization of theabove-mentioned farms. This process hascreated a new situation, the Government hashad to take further measures to rescue the oldnative species and breeds. The new projecttoday concerns not only the so called genereserve populations, but also those breedswhich have been recently developed, but dueto their lower production capacity, they arenot competitive in the present economicconditions (Hungarian Simmental cattle forexample).

Old Hungarian animals and their shorthistory are presented in this book togetherwith photographs of excellent quality. A shortdescription of the characteristics of each breedis followed by the discussion of the possibleways for their profitable utilization (forexample commercial crossing).

An interesting part of the book is thepresentation on Hungarian dogs, fishes anddoves.

The aim of this book is not only thepresentation of the old Hungarian animals,but also to draw attention to the necessity oftheir conservation.

Eleven örökség - Régi magyar háziállatok(Live Heritage - Old Hungarian Domestic Animals)

I. Bodó (Editor)Agroinform Publishing and Printing House Ltd.,

Budapest, Hungary(Text in Hungarian). Published in 2000

ISBN: 963-502-720-6pp. 125

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

100

Health and welfare of domestic animals is aprominent issue in society and in all publicdiscussions on animal production. The publicis concerned about the health and welfare ofproduction animals, the lack of individualcontrol, the large group sizes and hightechnology input. As a response,governments have been integratingrequirements about animal welfare, use ofmedication and product safety in national andinternational regulations. Parallel to this,more and more producers of animal productsclaim to meet specific health and welfarestandards and these products are marketed ase.g. ‘safe’ with respect to human health or as‘animal friendly produced’. Moreover,supermarkets take advantage of the need for‘high quality food’ by developing specifichealth and welfare standards. Such standardsmay be diverse and well above the legallyrequired standards to accommodate nichemarkets.

As a consequence of these developments,there is an increasing need for methods tomeasure and monitor health and welfare, tocontrol the (quality of) production (ISO,HACCP) and to certify farms that complywith health and/or welfare requirements oftheir customers. This need is not only relatedto existing housing systems; bothgovernments and the society want to have aninsight into the health and welfare aspects ofnew, alternative housing systems precedingintroduction into practice.

The above-mentioned issues were coveredin three sessions of the Commission onAnimal Health and Management of the EAAPheld in The Hague; ‘Management of Healthand Welfare’ (Parts I and II) and ‘Alternative

housing systems for pigs and laying hens’.This publication presents a selection of theoral presentations in these sessions, whichgive a broad overview of the differentperspectives on how management andcertification systems as well as new housingsystems can contribute to a society andconsumer-accepted animal husbandry.

Improving health and welfare in animal productionEAAP publication no. 102

J. H. Blokhuis, E. D. Ekkel & B. Wechsler (Editors)Proceedings of a workshop held in The Hague 21-24 August 2000

Wageningen Pers, P.O. Box 42, 6700AA Wageningen, The NetherlandsPublished in 2001. ISBN: 9074134866

ISSN: 0071-2477pp. 130

www.eaap.org

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

101

Animais do descobrimento.Reças domésticas da história do Brasil

(Animals of the Discovery.Domestic breeds in the history of Brazil)A. Mariante da Silva & N. Cavalcante (Editors)

EMBRAPA, Recursos Genéticos e BiotecnologiaParque Estação Biólogica, W5 Norte, 70770-900 Brasilia DF, Brazil

Published in 2000Phone: +55-61-4484700; www.cenergen.embrapa.br

(Text in Portuguese and English)pp. 230

In the context of the commemorations of the500 years of the discovery of Brazil, theMinistry of Agriculture and Supply, throughthe Brazilian Company of AgriculturalResearch (Embrapa), has edited this book ondomestic animals in Brazil which did not existin the country before the arrival of thePortuguese.

This book, written in Portuguese,recuperates the importance of domesticanimals in art and culture and shows thehistory of their arrival in Brazil, as well astheir development over the last five centuries.Submitted to a detailed process of naturalselection, the breeds brought from the IberianPeninsula acquired unique adaptivecharacteristics, such as rusticity and resistanceto diseases in the differentBrazilian habitats.

As a result ofcross-breeding, these breedsknown as “crioulas” were littleby little, substituted by breedsbrought from other lands andtoday the greater part of thesebreeds is threatened withextinction.

The origin of these localbreeds goes back to thehistorical roots of Brazil, whentheir ancestors were broughtover by the colonizers at thedawn of the discovery and iswell documented in this book,with clear Portuguese andEnglish texts. Notwithstanding

their lower productivity levels, these breedsare extremely well adapted to tropicalconditions and particularly to the variousBrazilian ecosystems where they have beensubmitted to a long natural selection process.

The present work intends to rescue thecenturies-long history of the animals of Brazil,from the time of their arrival up to the presentday, as well as to design future proceduresand determine the conservation prospects ofthe various endangered breeds.

Extremely good and large photos, takenfrom historic pictures, easily transport thereader into the times of the colonization aswell as deeply inform on the varioushistorical breeds of the country.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

102

This short book presents the Italian BreedersAssociation (AIA) activities carried out forcattle, sheep and goats, horse and otherdomestic animals, in the field of breeding,husbandry and genetic improvement.

Firstly, a presentation of the Italiannational production system is discussed,together with the demonstration of theeconomic relevance of the sector within thenational economic frame. A summarizeddescription of the organization and structureis then introduced, with the explanation ofexisting national and internationalcooperation.

Activities performed with exotic cattlebreeds (Holstein, Jersey) and with numerouslocal genetic resources (Chianina,Marchigiana, Romagnola, Maremmana,Podolica, Piemontese, Italian Brown, ItalianRed and White) are also presented, with adescription of each association involved andclear photos of the most represented animals.

The same expositive structure is repeatedwhen the operations involving pigs andbuffalo are mentioned, showing the aims ofthe herd book for each breed and thedescription of national genetic resources. Thenumerous Italian sheep and goat breeds arealso presented with bright photos andproductive/reproductive characteristics.

This book certainly makes the animalproduction context in Italy morecomprehensible to all and allows to lay thefoundations for future and more consolidatedtechnical and economic relations with thoseinterested

Italian animal productionAIA, Associazione Italiana Allevatori,

Via Tomassetti 9, 00161 Rome, Italy. Published in 2000pp.65

With this volume, AIA and its system alsointend to establish a dialogue with economicand technical partners and institutions thatoperate in the area of animal production inother countries.

www.aia.it

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

103

This publication originated from a meeting ofthe Animal Resources Subnetwork of theFAO/CIHEAM Cooperative ResearchNetwork on Sheep and Goats, held inZaragoza, 18-20 November 1999. Theobjectives of the Meeting were the revisionand definition of the genetic improvementobjectives for sheep and goats, from thetechnical and economic point of view, indifferent countries and productive situationsof the Mediterranean area and in othernon-Mediterranean European countries.

The Meeting was attended by 26participants from Algeria, Croatia, Cyprus,France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Spain, Tunisiaand Turkey and 18 reports were given on thesubject. In some, very precise results werepresented based on analysis of technical andeconomic data obtained in a large number offlocks.

During the meeting it was demonstratedthat for dairy sheep the milk yield is thetechnical index that most widely affects theeconomic profitability of the farm while thereproductive performances may alsoconsistently influence this profitability insome production systems. For meat sheep,litter size appears to be the most importanttrait for farm profitability although othertraits such as lamb growth may be moreimportant and appropriate for geneticimprovement in some harsh conditions. Onthe contrary, when the litter size is large afteran intensive selection, the uniformity of littersizes around the desired optimum may be an

Analysis and definition of the objectives in geneticimprovement programmes in sheep and goats. An economic

approach to increase the profitabilityOptions Méditerranéennes no. 43

D. Gabiña (Editor)Proc. of the Meeting of the Sub-Network on Genetic Resources of the

FAO-CIHEAM Inter-Regional Cooperative Research and DevelopmentNetwork on Sheep and Goats , held in Zaragoza 18-20 November 1999

CIHEAM, Apartado 202, 50080 Zaragoza, SpainPublished in 2000. ISSN: 1016-121-X ISBN: 2-85352-218-0

pp. 140 Price 150 FF

objective for breeding instead of increasingprolificacy. In dairy goats it has been shownthat selection schemes based on artificialinsemination have, in general, a higher socialinternal rate of return than those based onnatural service, the latter frequently beingnegative or close to zero.

www.iamz.ciheam.org

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

104

Management of animal genetic diversity at community levelI. Koehler-Rollefson (Editor)

and

Incentive measures appropriate to enhance the conservationand sustainable use of agribiodiversity

E. Thies (Editor)Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)

P.O. Box 5180, 65726 Eschborn, Germany. Published in 2000

Both of the two booklets refer to theconservation of agro-biodiversity, carried outthrough the responsible use of economic andnatural resources.

The first one deals with local livestockbreeds that are crucial for sustaining rurallivelihoods by producing a wide range ofproducts while requiring relatively low levelsof input. Thus, their maintenance isecologically more sustainable and they entaila lower work load for women in comparisonto improved breeds.

The second booklet analyzes whetherincentive measures designed for thepromotion of conservation andsustainable use of naturalresources are transferable toagrobiodiversity and if so, whichones. For this purpose, existingactivities that apply incentivemeasures in developmentcooperation have been evaluatedwith regard to their design,implementation and impact.

www.gtz.de

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

105

Editorial Policies andProcedures

The mission of the Animal Genetic ResourcesInformation Bulletin (AGRI) is the promotionof information on the better use of animalgenetic resources of interest to food andagriculture production, under the GlobalStrategy for the Management of Farm AnimalGenetic Resources. All aspects of thecharacterization, conservation and utilizationof these resources are included, in accordancewith the Convention on Biological Diversity.AGRI will highlight information on thegenetic, phenotypic and economic surveyingand comparative description, use,development and maintenance of animalgenetic resources; and on the development ofoperational strategies and procedures whichenable their more cost-effective management.In doing this AGRI will give special attentionto contributions dealing with breeds andprocedures capable of contributing to thesustainable intensification of the world’smedium to low input productionenvironments (agro-ecosystems), whichaccount for the substantial majority of theland area involved in livestock production;the total production of food and agriculturefrom livestock; and of our remaining farmanimal genetic resources.

Views expressed in the paper published inAGRI represent the opinions of the author(s)and do not necessarily reflect those of theinstitutions which the authors are affiliated,FAO or the Editors.

The suitability of manuscripts forpublication in AGRI is judged by the Editorsand reviewers.

Electronic publication

AGRI is available in full electronically on theInternet, in addition to being published inhard copy, at:<< http://www.fao.org/dad-is>>

Types of Articles

The following types of articles are publishedin AGRI.

Research articles

Findings of work on characterization,conservation and utilization of farm animalgenetic resources (AnGR) in well describedproduction environments, will be consideredfor publication in AGRI. Quality photographsof these genetic resources viewed in theprimary production environment to whichthey are adapted, accompanying themanuscripts are encouraged.

Review articles

Unsolicited articles reviewingagro-ecosystems, country-level, regional orglobal developments on one or more aspectsof the management of animal geneticresources, including state-of-the-art reviewarticles on specific fields in AnGR, will beconsidered for publication in AGRI.

Position papers

Solicited papers on topical issues will also bepublished as deemed required.

Other published material

This includes book reviews, news and notescovering relevant meetings, training coursesand major national, regional and internationalevents and conclusions and recommendationsassociated with the outcomes of these majorevents. Readers are encouraged to send suchitems to the editors.

Guidelines for Authors

Manuscript submission

Manuscripts prepared in English, French orSpanish with an English summary and

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

106

another summary in either French or Spanish,should be submitted to AGRI Editor, AGAP,FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100Rome, Italy. Alternatively a manuscript maybe sent as a WinWord Electronic Mailattachment to < [email protected] >. Photographs,coloured or black and white, and figures mustbe always sent by mail.

Manuscripts should be typeddouble-spaced and with lines numbered inthe left margin. All pages, including those ofreferences, tables etc., must be consecutivelynumbered. The corresponding author isnotified of the receipt of a manuscript.

For manuscripts that are accepted afterrevision, authors are encouraged to submit alast version (3½” disc format) in Word 6.0 forWindows of their revised manuscript alongwith the printed copy.

Preparation of the manuscript

The first page of the manuscript must includethe running head (abbreviated title), title,names of authors, institutions, full addressesincluding postal codes and telephone numberand other communication details (fax, e-mail,etc.) of the corresponding author. Therunning head not exceeding 45 charactersplus spaces, should appear at the top of page1 of the manuscript entirely in capital letters.The title of the manuscript is typed in upperand lower case letters. The title should be asbrief as possible not exceeding 150 characters(including spaces) with species names whenapplicable. Authors, institutions andaddresses are in upper and lower case italics.There is one blank line between the title andthe authors. Addresses are typed as footnotesto the authors after leaving one blank line.Footnotes are designated numerically. Twolines are left below the footnotes.

Headings

Headings of sections, for example Summary,Introduction, etc., are left-justified. Leave twoblank lines between addresses footnotes andSummary and between the heading Summaryand its text. Summary should not exceed 200

words . It should be an objective summarybriefly describing the procedures and findingsand not simply stating that the study wascarried on such and such and results arepresented, etc. Leave one line between thesummary text and Keywords which is writtenin italics as well as the keywords themselves.All headings of sections (14 regular) andsub-sections (12 regular) are typed bold andpreceded and succeeded by one blank lineand their text begins with no indention. Theheading of a sub-subsection is written initalics, and ends with a dot after which thetext follows on the same line. Keywords comeimmediately after the summaries. Theyshould be no more than six, with no “and” or“&”.

Tables and figures

Tables and figures must be enclosed with thepaper and attached at the end of the textaccording their citation in the document.Photos will not be returned

Tables

Tables, including footnotes, should bepreceded and succeeded by 2 blank lines.Table number and caption are written, abovethe table, in italics (12) followed by a dot, thenone blank line. For each column or line title orsub-title, only the 1st letter of the 1st word iscapitalized. Tables should be numberedconsecutively in Arabic numerals. Tables andcaptions should be left justified as is the text.Use horizontal or vertical lines only whennecessary. Do not use tabs or space-bar tocreate a table but only the appropriatecommands.

Figures

Figures including titles and legends should bepreceded and succeeded by two blank lines.Figure number and title are written, below thefigure, in italics (12) and end with a dot. Theterm figures includes photos, line drawings,maps, diagrams etc.

All the submitted diagrams, must be

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

107

accompanied with the original matrix of thedata used to create them. It is stronglyadvised to submit diagrams in Word 6.0 orExcel 5.0. Figures should be numberedconsecutively in Arabic numerals.

References

Every reference cited in the text should beincluded in the reference list and everyreference in the reference list should havebeen mentioned in the text at least once.References should be ordered firstlyalphabetically by the first author’s surnameand secondly by year.

Example for reference in a periodical is:Köhler-Rollefson, I., 1992; The camel

breeds of India in social and historicalperspective. Animal Genetic ResourcesInformation 10, 53-64.

When there are more than one author:Matos, C.A.P., D.L. Thomas, D. Gianola,

R.J. Tempelman & L.D. Young, 1997; Geneticanalysis of discrete reproductive traits insheep using linear and nonnlinear models: 1.Estimation of genetic parameters 75, 76-87.

For a book or an ad hoc publication, e.g.,reports, theses, etc.:

Cockril, W.R., (Ed), 1994; The Husbandryand Health of the Domestic Buffalo. FAO,Rome, Italy, pp 993.

For an article in the proceedings of ameeting:

Hammond, K., 1996; FAO’s programmefor the management of farm animal geneticresources. In C. Devendra (Ed.) Proceedingsof IGA/FAO Round Table on the GlobalManagement of Small Ruminant GeneticResources, Beijing, May 1996, FAO, Bangkok,Thailand, 4-13.

Where information included in the articlehas been obtained or derived from a WorldWide Web site, then quote in the text, e.g.“derived from FAO. 1996” and in theReferences quote the URL standard form:

FAO, 1996; Domestic Animal DiversityInformation System <http://www.fao.org/dad-is/>, FAO, Rome

Prof. Galal left FAO on the 1st February 2000 for Cairo (Ain ShamsUniversity, Faculty of Agriculture, Animal Production Dept.).

There is no change in the editorial responsibility of AGRI.

For all future manuscript dispatch and correspondence regardingAGRI, please use the following mailbox:

[email protected]

Thanks for the collaboration

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

108

Normes et règles éditoriales

L’objectif du Bulletin d’Information sur lesRessources Génétiques Animales (AGRI) estla vulgarisation de l’information disponiblesur la meilleure gestion des ressourcesgénétiques animales d’intérêt pour laproduction alimentaire et agricole, d’après lesrecommendations de la Stratégie Mondialepour la Gestion des Ressources Génétiquesdes Animaux Domestiques. Tous les aspectsrelatifs à la caractérisation, la conservation etl’utilisation de ces ressources seront pris enconsidération, suivant les normes de laConvention pour la Biodiversité.

AGRI désire diffuser de l’information surla génétique, les enquêtes phénotypiques etéconomiques et les desciptions comparatives,l’utilisation et la conservation des ressourcesgénétiques animales, ainsi que touteinformation sur le développement destratégies opérationnelles et de normes quipuissent permettre une meilleure gestion dela relation coût/efficacité. C’est pour cela queAGRI prendra spécialement en considérationtoutes les contributions référées aux races etaux normes capables de permettre uneintensification durable des milieux(agroécosystèmes) à revenus moyens et basdans le monde; qui comprennent la majeurpartie des terres consacrées à l’élevage, à laproduction totale des aliments et l’agricultureprovenants de l’élevage; et tout ce qui restecomme ressources génétiques des animauxdomestiques.

Les opinions exprimées dans les articlespubliés dans AGRI appartiennent seulementaux auteurs et donc ne représentent pasnécessairement l’opinion des instituts pourlesquels ils travaillent, la FAO ou les éditeurs.

L’opportunité ou non de publier un articledans AGRI sera jugée par les éditeurs et lesréviseurs.

Publication électronique

En plus de sa version imprimée, la versiontotale de AGRI se trouve disponible surInternet, sur le site:<<http://www.fao.org/dad-is/>>

Types d’articles

Les articles suivants pourront être publiés surAGRI:

Articles de recherche

Seront prises en considération pour leurpublication sur AGRI les études sur lacaractérisation, la conservation et l’utilisationdes ressources génétiques des animauxdomestiques (AnGR) accompagnées d’unebonne description du milieu. On encourageles auteurs à envoyer des photographies debonne qualité qui montrent les races enquestion dans leur milieu naturel deproduction.

Révisions

Occasionnellement, des articles contenant unerévision des agroécosystèmes, au niveaunational, régional ou mondial, avec un ouplusieurs aspects se rapportant à la gestiondes ressources génétiques animales, ycomprises les mises à jour des différenteszones de AnGR, seront pris en considération.

Articles spécifiques

Ponctuellement, des articles sur des thèmesspécifiques pourront être demandés pour lapublication d’éditions spéciales.

Autre matériel pour publication

Ceci comprend la révision de livres, nouvelleset notes de réunions importantes, cours deformation et principaux évènementsnationaux, régionaux et internationaux; ainsique les conclusions et recommendations parrapport aux objectifs des ces principauxévènements. Les auteurs sont priés d’envoyerce genre de matériel aux éditeurs.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

109

Guide pour les auteurs

Présentation du manuscript

Les articles se présenteront en anglais,français ou espagnol, avec un résumé enanglais et sa traduction en français ou enespagnol; et seront envoyés à l’éditeur deAGRI, AGAP, FAO, Viale delle Terme diCaracalla, 00100 Rome, Italie. L’autrepossibilité est d’envoyer l’article par courrierélectronique avec le document adjoint enversion WinWord à <[email protected]>. Lesphotographies, en couleur ou en blanc et noir,seront toujours envoyées par courrier normal.

Les manuscripts se présenteront à doubleinterligne et avec le numéro correspondant àchaque ligne sur la marge gauche. Toutes lespages seront numérotées, y comprises cellesavec les références bibliographiques, lestableaux, etc. L’auteur recevra une lettre luidonnant bonne réception de son document.

Lorsqu’un article, après sa révision, seraaccepté, on demandera à l’auteur d’envoyer laversion finale révisée sur disquette (format31/2”) en Word 6.0 x Windows, ainsi qu’unecopie sur papier.

Préparation du manuscript

Sur la première page du manuscript onindiquera le titre de l’article en abrégé, le titreet noms des auteurs, des institutions, lesadresses complètes (y compris code postal etnuméro de téléphone); ainsi que tout autremoyen de contact tel que fax, e-mail, etc. avecl’auteur principal. Le titre abrégé ne devra pasdépasser les 45 caractères, plus les espacesnécessaires, et s’écrira sur la partie supérieurede la page 1 du manuscript en majuscules. Letitre en entier du manuscript sera écrit enmajuscules et minuscules; il devra être aussibref que possible, sans dépasser les 150caractères (y compris les espaces nécessaires),et avec l’indication des noms des espèces. Lesnoms des auteurs, des institutions et lesadresses seront en italique et en lettresmajuscules et minuscules. On laissera unespace en blanc entre le titre et les noms desauteurs. Les adresses seront indiquées comme

des notes à pied de page pour chacun desauteurs après avoir laissé un espace en blancaprès les noms. Chaque note de pied de pagesera numérotée. On laissera deux espaces enblanc après les adresses.

Titres

Les titres de chaque chapitre, par exampleRésumé, Introduction, etc. seront alignés àgauche. Laisser deux espaces en blanc entreles notes de pied de page avec les adresses etle Résumé, et entre le titre Résumé et le textequi suit. Le résumé ne devra pas dépasser les200 mots. Il s’agira d’un résumé objectif quifasse une brève description des processusutilisés et des résultats obtenus, et non pasune simple présentation du travail réaliséavec une description générale des résultats.Laisser un espace en blanc entre la fin dutexte du résumé et les mots-clés, qui serontécrits en italique ainsi que le titre Mots-clés.Les mots-clés seront au maximum six et il nedevra pas y avoir de “et” ou “&”. Tous lestitres principaux de chapitre (14 regular) etsous-chapitre (12 regular) seront en gras avecun espace en blanc avant et après. Le textecommencera sans retrait. Un titre à l’intérieurd’un sous-chapitre s’écrira en italique, suivid’un point, avec le texte à continuation.

Tableaux et figures

Les tableaux et les figures iront à la fin dutexte en suivant l’ordre d’apparition dans letexte. Les photographies ne seront pasdévolues aux auteurs.

Tableaux

Les tableaux, y compris les notes de pied depage, devront avoir un espace en blanc avantet après. Le numéro du tableau et le titres’écriront sur la partie supérieure en italique(12) avec un point à la fin et un espace enblanc en dessous. Sur chaque colonne, titred’en-tête ou sous-titre, seulement la premièrelettre du premier mot sera en majuscule. Lestableaux et leur titre seront alignés à gauche,ainsi que le texte. Les lignes verticales et

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

110

horizontales seront utilisées seulement sinécessaires. Ne pas utiliser les tabs ou la barrede séparation pour créer un tableau.

Figures

Les figures, y compris les titres et leslégendes, seront précédés et suivis de deuxespaces en blanc. Le numéro de la figure et letitre s’écriront sur la partie supérieure enitalique (12) avec un point à la fin. Sous larubrique figure on trouvera lesphotographies, les graphiques, les cartes, lesdiagrammes, etc. Dans le cas desdiagrammes, la matrice originale avec lesdonnées utilisées pour son élaboration devraêtre envoyée. On recommande l’utilisation deWord 6.0 ou Excel 5.0 pour la présentationdes diagrammes.

Références

Toute référence présente dans le texte devraapparaître sur la liste des références, etchaque référence de la liste aura été citée aumoins une fois dans le texte. Les référencesiront en ordre alphabétique du nom del’auteur, suivi de l’année. Example dans le casd’une référence sur une revue:

Köhler-Rollefson, I.,1992; The camel breedsof India in social and historical perspective.Animal Genetic Resources Information 10,53-64.

Lorsqu’il s’agit de plus d’un auteur:Matos, C.A.P., D.L. Thomas, D. Gianola,

R.J. Tempelman & L.D. Young, 1997; Geneticanalysis of discrete reproductive traits insheep using linear and nonnlinear models:1. Estimation of genetic parameters 75, 76-87.

Dans le cas d’un livre ou d’une publicationad hoc, par example un rapport, une thèse,etc.:


S’il s’agit d’un acte d’une réunion:Hammond, K., 1996; FAO’s programme

for the management of farm animal geneticresources. In C. Devendra (Ed.) Proceedingsof IGA/FAO Round Table on the GlobalManagement of Small Ruminant GeneticResources, Beijing, May 1996, FAO, Bangkok,Thailand, 4-13.

Lorsque l’information contenue dansl’article ait été obtenue ou dérive d’un siteWorld Wide Web, il faudra mettre le texteentre guillemets; par example “tiré de la FAO.1996” et indiquer dans les Références la formestandard URL:


Le Prof. Galal a quitté la FAO le 1er février 2000 pour aller au Caire(Ain Shams University, Faculty of Agriculture, Animal Production Dept.).

Aucun changement n’a eu lieu en ce qui concerne la responsabilité éditorialepour AGRI.

Pour tout envoi de manuscripts ou correspondence au sujet d’AGRI, vous êtesprié d’utiliser l’adresse suivante:

[email protected]

Merci pour votre collaboration

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

111

Reglas y normas editoriales

El objetivo del Boletín de Información sobreRecursos Genéticos Animales (AGRI) es ladivulgación de la información sobre unamejor gestión de los recursos genéticosanimales de interés para la producciónalimentaria y agrícola, siguiendo la EstrategiaMundial para la Gestión de los RecursosGenéticos de los Animales Domésticos. Todoslos aspectos referidos a la caracterización, laconservación y el uso de estos recursos serántomados en consideración, de acuerdo con laConvención sobre la Biodiversidad.

AGRI publicará información sobregenética, encuestas fenotípicas y económicasy descripciones comparativas, uso, desarrolloy conservación de los recursos genéticosanimales, así como sobre el desarrollo deestrategias operacionales y normas quepermitan una gestión más eficaz de la relacióncosto/eficacia. Por ello, AGRI prestaráespecial atención a las contribucionesreferidas a razas y normas capaces decontribuir a la intensificación sostenible de losmedios (agroecosistemas) con ingresos medioy bajos en el mundo, que comprenden casi lamayor parte de las tierras dedicadas a laproducción ganadera; la producción total dealimentos y agricultura provenientes de laganadería; y el resto de los recursos genéticosde animales domésticos.

Los puntos de vista expresados en losartículos publicados en AGRI son solamentelas opiniones de los autores y, por tanto, noreflejan necesariamente la opinión de lasinstituciones para las cuales trabajan dichosautores, de la FAO o de los editores.

La oportunidad o no de publicar unartículo en AGRI será juzgada por los editoresy revisores.

Publicación electrónica

Además de su publicación impresa, la versióníntegra de AGRI se encuentra disponibleelectrónicamente sobre Internet, en el sito:<<http://www.fao.org/dad-is/>>

Tipos de artículos

Serán publicados en AGRI los siguientes tiposde artículos:

Artículos sobre investigación

Se tomarán en consideración para supublicación en AGRI los estudios sobre lacaracterización, conservación y uso de losrecursos genéticos de los animales domésticos(AnGR) con una buena descripción delentorno. Se agradecerá el envío de fotografíasde calidad que presenten a las razas encuestión en su ambiente natural deproducción.

Artículos de revisión

Se podrán tener en consideraciónocasionalmente aquellos artículos quepresenten una revisión de losagroecosistemas, a nivel nacional, regional omundial, con el desarrollo de uno o másaspectos referidos a la gestión de los recursosgenéticos animales, incluidas las revisionessobre el estado actual de las distintas áreas deAnGR.

Artículos específicos

Se solicitarán puntualmente artículos sobretemas específicos para ediciones especiales.

Otro material para publicación

Incluye la revisión de libros, noticias y notasreferidas a reuniones importantes, cursos deformación y principales eventos nacionales,regionales e internacionales, así comoconclusiones y recomendaciones relacionadascon los objetivos de estos principales eventos.Se invita a los lectores a enviar este tipo dematerial a los editores.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

112

Guía para los autores

Presentación del manuscrito

Los artículos se presentarán en inglés, francéso español, junto con un resumen en inglés ysu traducción en francés o español, y seenviarán al editor de AGRI, AGAP, FAO,Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Roma,Italia. Otra posibilidad es enviar el artículopor correo electrónico adjuntando eldocumento en versión WinWord a<[email protected]>. Las fotografías, a color o enblanco y negro, se enviarán siempre porcorreo normal.

Los manuscritos se presentarán con dobleespacio y con el número correspondiente acada línea en el margen izquierdo. Todas laspáginas serán numeradas, incluidas las de lasreferencias bibliográficas, cuadros, etc. Elautor recibirá una notificación sobre larecepción de su documento.

En el caso de aceptación de un artículodespués de su revisión, se solicitará al autoruna versión final de su artículo revisado endisquete (formato 31/2”) en Word 6.0 xWindows, así como una copia impresa delmismo.

Preparación del manuscrito

En la primera página del manuscrito seindicará el título abreviado del artículo, títulosy nombres de los autores, instituciones,direcciones completas (incluido código postaly número de teléfono); así como otros mediosde contacto tales como fax, e-mail, etc., delautor principal. El título abreviado no deberásobrepasar los 45 caracteres más los espacioscorrespondientes, y aparecerá en la partesuperior de la página 1 del manuscrito enmayúsculas. El título entero del manuscritoviene escrito en mayúsculas y minúsculas.Dicho título debe ser lo más breve posible yno sobrepasar los 150 caracteres (incluidos losespacios necesarios), con los nombres de lasespecies, si necesario. Los nombres de losautores, instituciones y direcciones seescribirán en cursiva y en letras mayúsculas yminúsculas. Se dejará una línea en blanco

entre el título y los nombres de los autores.Las direcciones se escribirán como notas depie de página de cada autor después de dejaruna línea en blanco entre los nombres y éstas.Cada nota de pie de página con la direcciónvendrá indicada numéricamente. Se dejarándos líneas en blanco después de lasdirecciones.

Títulos

Los títulos de cada sección, por ejemploResumen, Introducción, etc., vienen alineadosa la izquierda. Dejar dos líneas en blancoentre las notas de pie de página con lasdirecciones y el Resumen y entre el títuloResumen y el texto que sigue. El resumen nodeberá exceder de 200 palabras. Deberá ser unresumen objetivo que describa brevemente losprocesos y logros obtenidos, y no unapresentación de cómo se ha llevado a cabo elestudio y una descripción genérica de losresultados. Dejar una línea en blanco entre elfinal del texto del resumen y las palabrasclave, que se escribirán en cursiva así como eltitulo Palabras clave. No deberán ser más deseis y no deberán contener “y” o “&”. Todoslos títulos principales de capítulo (14 regular)y subcapítulo (12 regular) serán en negrita eirán precedidos y seguidos de una línea enblanco. El texto correspondiente empezará sinsangrado. Un título dentro de un subcapítulose escribirá en cursiva e ira seguido de unpunto con a continuación el textocorrespondiente.

Cuadros y figuras

Los cuadros y las figuras se incluirán al finaldel texto siguiendo el orden de cita dentro delmismo. Las fotografías no serán devueltas asus autores.

Cuadros

Los cuadros, incluidas las notas de pie depágina, deberán ir precedidos y seguidos pordos líneas en blanco. El numero del cuadro ysu título se escribirán en la parte superior encursiva (12) con un punto al final y seguido

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

113

de una línea en blanco. En cada columna otítulo de encabezamiento o subtítulo, sólo laprimera letra de la primera palabra irá enmayúscula. Los cuadros irán numerados deforma consecutiva con números árabes. Loscuadros y sus títulos se alinearán a laizquierda, así como el texto. Se utilizaránlíneas horizontales o verticales sólo cuandosea necesario. No utilizar tabuladores o labarra espaciadora para crear un cuadro.

Figuras

Las figuras, incluidos los títulos y leyendas,irán precedidas y seguidas de dos líneas enblanco. El número de la figura y el título seescribirán en la parte superior en cursiva (12)con un punto al final. La palabra figuraincluye las fotografías, los gráficos, los mapas,los diagramas, etc. En el caso del diagrama seenviará la matriz original con los datosutilizados para crearlo. Se recomiendaencarecidamente la utilización de Word 6.0 oExcel 5.0 para la presentación de losdiagramas.

Referencias

Toda referencia presente en el texto deberáaparecer en la lista de referencias y, de lamisma manera, cada referencia de la listadeberá haber sido citada por lo menos unavez en el texto. Las referencias deben ir enorden alfabético del apellido del autor,seguido por el año.

Ejemplo en el caso de una referencia deuna revista:

Köhler-Rollefson, I.,1992; The camel breedsof India in social and historical perspective.Animal Genetic Resources Information 10,53-64.

Cuando se trata de más de un autor:Matos, C.A.P., D.L. Thomas, D. Gianola,

R.J. Tempelman & L.D. Young, 1997; Geneticanalysis of discrete reproductive traits insheep using linear and nonnlinear models:1. Estimation of genetic parameters 75, 76-87.

En el caso de un libro o de una publicaciónad hoc, por ejemplo informes, tesis, etc.:


Cuando se trate de un artículo dentro delas actas de una reunión:

Hammond, K., 1996; FAO’s programmefor the management of farm animal geneticresources. In C. Devendra (Ed.) Proceedingsof IGA/FAO Round Table on the GlobalManagement of Small Ruminant GeneticResources, Beijing, May 1996, FAO, Bangkok,Thailand, 4-13.

Cuando la información contenida en elartículo haya sido obtenida o derive de unsito World Wide Web, poner el texto entrecomillas; por ejemplo “sacado de la FAO.1996” e indicar en las Referencias la formaestándar URL:


El Prof. Galal dejó la FAO el 1 de febrero del 2000 para ir al Cairo (AinShams University, Faculty of Agriculture, Animal Production Dept.).

No ha habido ningún cambio en cuanto a la responsabilidadeditorial de AGRI.

Se ruega enviar los manuscritos o la correspondencia relativa a AGRI a ladirección siguiente:

[email protected]

Gracias por su colaboración

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa productivité des ovins et

Documents