indigenous sheep resources of ethiopia: types, …quantitative sheep breed descriptor list was used...
TRANSCRIPT
25
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
AGRI 2008, 43: 25-39
Summary
Ethiopia has a diverse sheep population,numbering 23.6 million, in parallel with its diverseecology, production systems and communities. Acomprehensive phenotypic and geneticcharacterization of Ethiopian sheep populationswas initiated in 2005 to provide a nationwideframework for the management of sheep geneticresources. In this paper, we describe the indigenoussheep types in terms of physical characteristics,eco-regional distribution and community affinity.We also present relationships of sheep types withagricultural production systems, andfarmers’/pastoralists’ assessment of their sheeptypes. Fourteen traditionally recognized sheep typeswere identified and physically described.
The sheep types could be categorized into fourgroups (sub-alpine short-fat-tailed, highlandlong-fat-tailed, lowland fat-rumped and lowlandthin-tailed) based on their ecological distribution,tail types (fat-tail versus thin-tail), tail form/shape,and fiber type. There is high morphological andecological diversity among the major sheep groupsas well as among the sheep types. There is also astrong relationship between sheep types, ethnicgroups and production systems. Assessment of thegenetic distinctiveness of the traditional sheep typesis important for developing rationalconservation-based improvement programs.Molecular genetic assessment of the populationstructure is a follow up activity.
Résumé
L’Ethiopie possède différentes populations ovines,23,6 millions, selon les différentes écologies,systèmes de production et communautés. En 2005 a
Indigenous sheep resources of Ethiopia: types, production systemsand farmers preferences
S. Gizaw1,2,3, H. Komen2, O. Hanotte4, J.A.M. Van Arendonk2
1Debre Birhan Agricultural Research Center, P.O.Box 112, Debre Birhan, Ethiopia2Animal Breeding and Genomics Centre, Animal Sciences Group, Wageningen University,
P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH, Wageningen, The Netherlands3International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
4International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi, Kenya
été mis en place un programme de caractérisationphénotipique et génétique des populations ovinesen Ethiopie dans le but de créer un cadre nationalpour la gestion des ressources génétiques ovines.Dans cet article nous décrivons les types d’ovinsindigènes du point de vue des caractéristiquesphysiques, de distribution eco-régionale, et affinitésentre communautés. Nous présentons également lesrelations des types d’ovins avec les systèmes deproduction agricole et une enquête menée parmi leséleveurs/pastoralistes. Nous avons identifié14 types traditionnels d’ovins qui sont décrits dupoint de vue physique.
Les différents types se divisent en 4 groupes:sous-alpine à queue grasse courte; haute montagneà longue queue grasse; plaine gras postérieur; etplaine queue fine, et selon leur distributionécologique, types de queues (queue grasse versusqueue fine), forme de la queue, et type de fibre. Ilexiste une grande diversité morphologique etécologique entre la plupart des groupes principauxovins ainsi qu’entre les types d’ovins même. Il existeaussi une forte relation entre les types d’ovins, lesgroupes ethniques et les systèmes de production.L’évaluation des différences génétiques des typesd’ovins traditionnels est importante pour ledéveloppement des programmes de conservationbasés sur l’amélioration. L’évaluation génétiquemoléculaire de la structure de la population seral’activité de suivi.
Resumen
Etiopía posee diversas poblaciones de ovinos,23,6 millones, que varían según la ecología, lossistemas de producción y las comunidades. En el2005 se inició un programa de caracterizaciónfenotípica y genética des las poblaciones ovinas enEtiopía con el fin de crear un marco nacional para
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
26Indigenous resources of Ethiopia
la gestión de los recursos genéticos ovinos. En esteartículo se describen los tipo de razas indígenasdesde el punto de vista de las características físicas,de la distribución eco-regional, y de las afinidadesentre comunidades. Presentamos también lasrelaciones de los tipos de ovinos con los sistemas deproducción agrícola y una encuesta realizada entrelos ganaderos y pastores.
Se han identificado 14 tipos tradicionales deovinos que se describen desde el punto de vistafísico. Los diferentes tipos se dividen en 4 grupos:sub-alpinos con cola gorda corta; alta montaña concola gorda larga; llanura con cuarto posterior graso;y llanura con cola delgada, y según su distribuciónecológica, tipos de cola (cola grasa versus coladelgada), forma de la cola y tipos de fibra. Existeuna gran diversidad morfológica y ecológica entrela mayor parte de los grupos principales de ovinosasí como entre los tipos de ovinos mismos. Tambiénhay une relación importante entre los tipos deovinos, los grupos étnicos y los sistemas deproducción. La evaluación de las diferenciasgenéticas de los tipos de ovinos tradicionales esimportante para el desarrollo de los programas deconservación basados en la mejora. La evaluacióngenética molecular de la estructura de la poblaciónserá una de las actividades de seguimiento..
Key words: Ethiopia, Sheep resources, Characterization,Physical characteristics.
Introduction
Ethiopia has a diverse indigenous sheeppopulation, numbering 23.6 million head (CSA,2006), in parallel with its diverse ecology,production systems and ethnic communities. At thenational level, sheep and goats account for about90% of live animals/meat (FAO, 2004) and 92% ofskin and hide (FAO, 1994) export trade value. At thefarm level, sheep contribute as much as 22-63% tothe net cash income derived from livestockproduction in the crop-livestock production system(Gryseels, 1988; Zelalem and Fletcher, 1993). In thelowlands sheep, with other livestock, are amainstay of pastoral livelihoods.
Characterization of sheep resources is aprerequisite for their rational utilization. Indeveloping regions, there exist types of farm animalspecies which owe their distinct identity to acombination of traditional ‘breeding objectives’ andgeographical and/or cultural separation by
communities which own them (Rege 2002). African(Epstein, 1971) and Ethiopian sheep (MOA, 1975)have been traditionally classified based on tail typeand fiber type because of the evolutionarysignificance of these characters. Galal (1983) andSisay (2002) described the physical characteristicsand eco-regional distribution of some of the sheeptypes in Ethiopia. However, earlier classificationsand descriptions were incomplete at a nationallevel. A comprehensive nationwide phenotypic andgenetic characterization of Ethiopian sheep wastherefore initiated in 2005. In this paper, wedescribe and synthesize the indigenous sheep typesin terms of physical characteristics, eco-regionaldistribution and ethnic affinity. We also presentrelationships of sheep types with agriculturalproduction systems, and farmers’/pastoralists’assessment of their sheep types.
Materials and Methods
An Ethiopian sheep breed survey was conducted in2005. Fourteen traditionally recognized,phenotypically distinct, and/orgeographically/ecologically isolated populationswere surveyed. Depending on the trait, 18 to40 full-mouth adult ewes from each populationwere sampled. The FAO (1986) qualitative andquantitative sheep breed descriptor list was used tocharacterize the populations phenotypically.Qualitative variables observed included coat color,fiber type, face profile, ear form, presence of horn,tail type and tail shape. Quantitative charactersmeasured were body weight, withers height, bodylength, heart girth, substernal height, ear length, taillength, tail width and hair length. Informationregarding flock size and composition was collectedthrough a questionnaire. Data on ewe litter size wascollected using farmer recall method. Farmers wereasked to recall the reproductive history of eachfull-mouth breeding female. Using the Rapid RuralAppraisal technique, informal group and keyinformant discussions with farmers and livestockexperts were conducted to gather information onbreed distribution, farmers’ assessments of theirsheep types and farming practices. In addition, wemade extensive field observations, reviews of greyand published literature and personalcommunications. Population estimates of sheeptypes were extracted, based on their geographicdistribution, from regional and zonal sheeppopulation estimates (CSA, 2005).
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
27
Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 43, 2008
Gizaw et al.
Results and Discussion
Sheep types
The fourteen sheep types were categorized into fourgroups (sub-alpine short-fat-tailed, highlandlong-fat-tailed, lowland fat-rumped, lowlandthin-tailed) based on their ecological distribution,geographic proximity, tail types and tailform/shape (short vs long). Earlier studies used tailtype (MOA, 1975) and eco-regional distribution(Sisay, 2002) to describe some of the sheep types.Inclusion of tail form/shape in the current studyenabled identification of two groups of fat-tailedsheep which differ in other importantcharacteristics.
Sub-alpine short-fat-tailed
Sub-alpine short-fat-tailed sheep inhabit acontiguous central-northern highland area
(2 000 - 3 600 m) between 9.11 and 14.59° N and36.31 and 39.81° E (Figure 1). The group includesseven sheep types (Figures 4 and 5) which arecharacterized by their short fat tail well above thehocks (Table 1). They are also characterized bysmall size (Table 2), coarse wool and low ewereproduction. Litter size ranges from 1.0±0.01 inMenz (Figure 4) to 1.09±0.05 in Farta. Theshort-fat-tailed Washera sheep are an exception. Itis short-haired, large-sized and prolific (littersize = 1.8). Hair coat is found in several EastAfrican fat-tailed sheep that have interbred withhairy thin-tailed sheep (Epstein, 1971).
Highland long-fat-tailed
The group is distributed over the southern andsouth-western mid-highlands (1 500 to 2 500 m)between 10.40 – 5.85° N and 34.50 – 40.29° E(Figure 1). The tail is fat and long reaching thehocks, broad at the base and upper third with a
Black Head Somali
Afar Menz
Horro Wollo
Arsi Tikur
Adilo Sekota
Bonga Semien
Gumz Farta
Washera LakeTana
— Regional state boundary
Somali
Oromia
Gambela
Amhara
Ben
isha
ngul
-
G
umz
Southern
Tigray
Afar
Figure 1. Geographic distribution of sheep types
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
28Indigenous resources of Ethiopia
Tab
le 1
. She
ep ty
pes
and
thei
r ec
olog
y, g
eogr
aphi
c di
stri
buti
on, d
isti
ngui
shin
g ph
ysic
al fe
atur
es a
nd p
opul
atio
n si
zes.
Shee
p ty
pes
Oth
er n
ames
E
colo
gy
Geo
grap
hic
dis
trib
utio
n Im
port
ant p
hysi
cal f
eatu
res1
Po
pula
tion
(0
00)
Sub-
alpi
ne s
hort
-fat
-tai
led
grou
p M
enz
Leg
egor
a, S
hoa,
A
byss
inia
n,
Eth
iopi
an
high
land
she
ep
Sub-
moi
st/d
ry,
sub-
alpi
ne
high
land
s (2
500
and
3
200
m);
Nor
th S
hoa
zone
of
Am
hara
Sta
te
Shor
t fat
tail
turn
ed-u
p at
end
; sm
all b
ody
size
; sho
rt-l
egge
d;
long
flee
ce w
ith
coar
se w
ool;
com
mon
ly b
lack
wit
h w
hite
p
atch
es, w
hite
, bro
wn,
whi
te w
ith
brow
n pa
tche
s; s
trai
ght-
face
d; h
orne
d m
ales
; sho
rt s
emi-p
end
ulou
s ea
rs w
ith
12%
ru
dim
enta
ry e
ars
in th
e po
pula
tion
. Kep
t by
Am
hara
co
mm
uni
ty
971.
4
Seko
ta
Tig
ray
high
land
, A
berg
elle
C
ool,
dry
/sub
-m
oist
hig
hlan
ds
(2 0
00 m
); se
mi-
arid
riv
er v
alle
y
Wag
Him
ra z
one
of
Am
hara
Sta
te a
nd
Tig
ray
Stat
e
Shor
t fat
tail
turn
ed-u
p at
end
and
fuse
d w
ith
mai
n pa
rt;
med
ium
-siz
ed; P
red
omin
antly
bro
wn
or w
hite
coa
t, fe
w b
lack
s w
ith
brow
n be
lly; w
hite
ani
mal
s ha
ve fi
ner
hair
or
woo
ly
ud
der
-coa
t; se
mi-
pen
du
lou
s or
rud
imen
tary
ear
s in
Wag
H
imra
and
Tig
ray,
pre
dom
inan
tly r
udim
enta
ry in
Tek
eze
valle
y. R
eare
d by
Age
w, T
igra
y an
d A
mha
ra c
omm
uni
ties
732.
3
Sem
ien
A
lpin
e m
ount
ains
(3
000
-4 0
00 m
) in
clud
ing
Sem
ien
Wild
life
park
;
Nor
th G
ond
ar z
one
of
Am
hara
Sta
te
(Deb
ark,
Dab
at,
Jana
mor
a, W
eger
a)
Shor
t fat
tail;
wel
l dev
elop
ed w
ooly
und
erco
at; p
lain
bro
wn,
p
lain
whi
te, b
row
n/w
hite
with
whi
te/b
row
n p
atch
es, p
lain
bl
ack
and
blac
k w
ith
brow
n be
lly; u
niqu
e lo
ng la
tera
lly s
pira
l ho
rn in
mal
es a
nd s
hort
hor
ns in
mos
t fem
ales
; lar
gest
of t
he
high
land
woo
led
she
ep. R
eare
d b
y A
mha
ra c
omm
unity
347.
6
Tik
ur
Su
b-al
pine
hi
ghla
nds
(3 0
00 m
)
Nor
th W
ollo
zon
e of
A
mha
ra S
tate
Sh
ort f
at ta
il; w
ooly
und
erco
at; P
redo
min
antl
y bl
ack
(60%
) co
at; s
mal
l bod
y si
ze; m
ajor
ity s
hort
sem
ipen
dul
ous
ears
, 24%
ru
dim
enta
ry e
ars.
Rea
red
by A
mha
ra c
omm
uniti
es
525.
3
Wol
lo
C
ood
hig
hlan
d
(2 0
00-3
200
m)
Sout
h W
ollo
zon
e of
A
mha
ra S
tate
Sh
ort-
fat-
tail
wit
h sh
ort t
wis
ted/
coile
d en
d, o
ccas
iona
lly
turn
ed u
p at
end
; Sm
all s
ize;
wel
l dev
elop
ed w
ooly
und
erco
at;
Pre
dom
inan
tly
blac
k, w
hite
or
brow
n, e
ithe
r p
lain
or
wit
h p
atch
es o
f whi
te, b
lack
or
brow
n; lo
ng h
air
wit
h w
ooly
u
nder
coat
; hor
ned
mal
es. R
eare
d b
y A
mha
ra c
omm
uniti
es
1 39
5.9
Fart
a
Sub-
moi
st
high
land
(2
000
-2 5
00 m
)
Sout
h G
ond
ar z
one;
G
ond
ar z
uria
, Bel
esa,
D
embi
a d
istr
icts
Shor
t fat
tail;
med
ium
siz
e; w
ooly
und
er c
oat;
Com
mon
ly
whi
te (3
7.5%
), br
own
(27.
5%) a
nd b
lack
wit
h br
own
belly
(1
5%),
whi
te/b
row
n w
ith
brow
n/w
hite
pat
ches
; mal
es a
re
horn
ed. R
eare
d b
y A
mha
ra c
omm
unit
ies
555.
6
Was
hera
A
gew
, dan
gilla
W
et, w
arm
er
mid
-hig
hlan
ds
(1 6
00-2
000
m)
Wes
t and
Eas
t Goj
am
and
Age
w A
wi z
ones
of
Am
hara
sta
te;
Dan
gur,
Mad
ura
and
Ale
fa T
aku
sa d
istr
icts
Shor
t fat
tail;
larg
e bo
dy
size
; sho
rt-h
aire
d; p
red
omin
antly
br
own;
bot
h m
ales
and
fem
ales
are
pol
led
; rea
red
by
Am
hara
an
d A
gew
com
mu
nitie
s
1 22
7.7
1 Coa
t col
ors
are
in o
rder
of f
requ
ency
in th
e po
pula
tion
.
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
29
Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 43, 2008
Gizaw et al.
Shee
p ty
pes
O
ther
nam
es
Eco
logy
G
eogr
aphi
c d
istr
ibut
ion
Impo
rtan
t phy
sica
l fea
ture
s1
Popu
lati
on
(000
) H
ighl
and
long
-fat-
taile
d gr
oup
A
dilo
Wet
, war
mer
m
id-h
ighl
and
(1
800
-2 0
00 m
)
Nor
th O
mo,
Der
ashi
e,
Ged
io a
nd A
mar
o zo
nes
of S
outh
ern
stat
e; s
ome
nort
hern
B
oren
a d
istr
icts
(1
300
– 2
400
m)
Lon
g fa
t tai
l; L
arge
siz
e; s
hort
-hai
red
; mal
es a
re s
hort
-ho
rned
and
18.
4% o
f ew
es a
re h
orne
d; p
red
omin
antl
y br
own
(943
%),
brow
n w
ith
whi
te p
atch
es (3
2%),
blac
k (1
6%),
blac
k (1
9%) a
nd b
lack
wit
h br
own
patc
h (9
%).
Rea
red
by
sout
hern
nat
iona
litie
s
407.
7
Ars
i-Bal
e
Mai
nly
wet
, coo
l an
d w
arm
er
high
land
s (2
000
-3 3
00);
sub-
moi
st
low
land
s
Ars
i, Ba
le, E
. Sho
a,
W. H
arer
ghie
zon
es,
som
e d
istr
icts
in
Bor
ena
zone
s of
O
rom
ia; H
adya
, G
ura
ge, K
emba
ta &
Si
dam
a zo
nes
Long
fat t
ail w
ith
twis
ted
end
in s
ome
anim
als;
med
ium
si
ze; h
airy
fibe
r, e
spec
ially
in a
dul
t ew
es, m
ales
hav
e m
inor
w
ool g
row
th in
som
e pa
rts
of b
ody;
Mal
es a
nd m
ost
fem
ales
(52%
) are
hor
ned
; Lar
ge s
ize;
coa
t col
ors
are
brow
n (3
5.1%
), br
own
wit
h w
hite
pat
ches
(24.
3%),
blac
k, w
hite
, an
d c
ombi
nati
ons
of a
bove
col
ors.
Rea
red
by
Oro
mo
com
mun
ities
6345
.1
Hor
ro
C
ool,
wet
hi
ghla
nds
(2 9
91
m) t
o hu
mid
m
id-h
ighl
and
s (1
600
m).
Eas
t Wel
ega,
Wes
t W
eleg
a, Il
luba
bor,
Ji
mm
a an
d W
est S
hoa
zone
s of
Oro
mia
, and
so
me
bord
erin
g G
ambe
lla a
nd
Ben
isha
ngu
l dis
tric
ts
Long
fat t
ail e
xten
din
g be
low
hoc
k, e
ithe
r st
raig
ht (5
1.4%
) or
coi
led/
twis
ted
(48.
6%) a
t the
tap
erin
g en
d; p
rom
inen
t fa
t tai
l in
mal
es; L
arge
, leg
gy a
nd p
rolif
ic; d
omin
ant c
olor
s ar
e br
own
and
faw
n, b
elly
is li
ghte
r es
peci
ally
in a
dul
t ew
es, l
ess
freq
uen
t are
bla
ck, w
hite
, bro
wn
wit
h w
hite
pa
tche
s; b
oth
sexe
s ar
e po
lled.
Rea
red
by O
rom
o,
Ben
isha
ngu
l and
Gam
bella
com
mun
ities
3409
.3
Bon
ga
Ges
ha, M
enit
Hum
id
mid
-hig
hlan
d
zone
(1
200
– 2
500
)
Kef
fa, S
heka
and
B
ench
zon
es o
f So
uthe
rn S
tate
Long
fat t
ail w
ith
stra
ight
tap
erin
g en
d (9
8.4%
); ha
ir s
heep
; L
arge
siz
e; p
red
omin
antl
y pl
ain
brow
n (5
7.9%
) or
wit
h bl
ack
(.9%
) or
whi
te (5
.3%
) sha
de,
pla
in w
hite
(10.
5%) o
r w
ith
brow
n pa
tche
s (1
0.5%
), an
d b
lack
(2.6
%);
both
sex
es
are
polle
d. R
eare
d b
y K
effa
, She
ka a
nd B
ench
com
mun
itie
s
517.
5
(... c
ontin
ued)
1 Coa
t col
ors
are
in o
rder
of f
requ
ency
in th
e po
pula
tion
.
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
30Indigenous resources of Ethiopia
Shee
p t
yp
es
Oth
er n
ames
E
colo
gy
G
eog
rap
hic
d
istr
ibu
tion
Im
por
tan
t p
hy
sica
l fea
ture
s1
Po
pu
lati
on
(000
) L
owla
nd
fat-
rum
ped
grou
p
A
far
Ad
al, D
anak
il
Mai
nly
ari
d
low
lan
d(<
1 00
0 m
);
mid
-hig
hla
nd
(1
200
–1 9
00 m
)
Afa
r st
ate;
bo
ard
erin
g
Tig
ray
, Am
har
a; E
. &
W. H
arer
gh
e an
d E
. Sh
oa
of
Oro
mia
Wid
e fa
t ta
il, i
n s
om
e la
rge
fat
tail
rea
chin
g b
elow
th
e h
ock
; hai
r fi
ber;
med
ium
siz
e; c
har
acte
rist
ical
ly
un
ifor
m c
ream
y w
hit
e/ b
eig
e co
at; r
ud
imen
tary
ear
; p
oll
ed; d
ewla
p. R
eare
d b
y A
far,
Am
har
a, t
igra
y
com
mu
nit
ies
681.
9
BH
S W
ank
e, O
gad
en,
Ber
bera
bla
ck
hea
d
Mai
nly
ari
d
low
lan
ds
(215
-900
m);
h
igh
lan
ds
(up
to
2
000
m)
Som
ali s
tate
; lo
wla
nd
s of
Bal
e,
Bor
ena
and
so
uth
O
mo
zo
nes
; par
t of
ea
st H
arer
gh
e
Sho
rt f
at r
um
p w
ith
a s
tum
py
ap
pen
dag
e; u
nif
orm
w
hit
e bo
dy
an
d b
lack
hea
d a
nd
nec
k; p
olle
d; c
onv
ex
face
, esp
ecia
lly
in m
ales
; sh
ort,
ou
twar
d f
orw
ard
d
roo
pin
g e
ar; w
ell d
evel
op
ed d
ewla
p. R
eare
d b
y
Som
al, O
rom
o, K
on
so a
nd
Sou
th O
mo
com
mu
nit
ies
906.
2
Low
lan
d th
in-t
aile
d gr
oup
Gu
mz
M
ois
t lo
wla
nd
s
(< 1
000
m)
Ben
ish
ang
ul-
Gu
mz
stat
e; l
owla
nd
s o
f N
orth
Go
nd
ar
Lon
g t
hin
tai
l; so
me
wh
at d
war
f; c
on
vex
fac
e p
rofi
le;
lon
g p
end
ulo
us
ear;
com
mo
nly
pla
in b
row
n o
r w
ith
p
atch
(39
.4%
), w
hit
e w
ith
bro
wn
or
blac
k p
atch
(21
%),
bl
ack
(15
.8%
), w
hit
e, b
lack
wit
h w
hit
e p
atch
, bro
wn
w
ith
bla
ck p
atch
; pol
led
. Rea
red
by
Gu
mz
and
Am
har
a co
mm
un
itie
s
50.9
(... c
ontin
ued)
1 Coa
t col
ors
are
in o
rder
of f
requ
ency
in th
e po
pula
tion
.
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
31
Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 43, 2008
Gizaw et al.
Tab
le 2
. Bod
y w
eigh
t (kg
) and
line
ar b
ody
mea
sure
men
ts (c
m) o
f ful
l-mou
th a
dult
ew
es (±
Sta
ndar
d D
evia
tion
). Sh
eep
type
N
o.
Bod
y w
eigh
t W
ither
s he
ight
B
ody
leng
th
Hea
rt
girt
h Su
bste
rnal
he
ight
E
ar
leng
th
Tai
l le
ngth
T
ail
wid
th
Hai
r le
ngth
A
dilo
36
28
.1±.
5 65
.5±.
4 62
.1±.
5 71
.8±6
35
.8±.
5 11
.7±.
5 28
.1±1
6.
7±.3
4.
4±.2
A
rsiB
ale
34
28.6
±.6
64.1
±.6
62.3
±.8
73.3
±.6
35.3
±.4
11.0
±.1
28.4
±.6
6.2±
.3
4.2±
.1
Bon
ga
38
34.2
±.8
66.7
±.6
69.4
±.5
73.5
±.7
36.4
±.4
9.8±
.2
25.9
±.9
8.1±
.3
2.9±
.1
Fart
a 39
28
.3±.
7 67
.9±.
5 65
.7±.
7 72
.0±.
7 37
.3±.
4 9.
9±.3
22
.9±.
8 9.
6±.2
7.
5±.3
G
umz
38
31.0
±.8
62.9
±.7
65.8
±.7
72.1
±.7
32.9
±.5
11.2
±.2
31.6
±.5
7.2±
.2
3.6±
.3
Hor
ro
37
35.4
±.8
70.0
±.6
71.6
±.6
76.9
±.8
38.1
±.4
10.8
±.2
35.6
±.6
9.9±
.3
2.6±
.1
Men
z 40
20
.1±.
3 57
.5±.
5 58
.5±.
4 65
.7±.
4 30
.9±.
3 6.
8±.4
17
.0±.
6 7.
9±.2
7.
9±.3
Se
kota
40
26
.6±.
7 62
.3±.
6 62
.2±.
6 69
.9±.
5 33
.5±.
4 4.
4±.5
19
.9±.
8 9.
5.3
6.5±
.5
Sem
ien
33
26.9
±.4
66.6
±.6
64.7
±.6
73.2
±.6
35.9
±.5
8.3±
.5
12.8
±.6
9.6±
.2
8.2±
.3
Afa
r 18
31
.0±1
63
.6±.
8 58
.3±.
8 70
.6±.
6 35
.6±.
6 3.
8±.4
19
.1±.
7 16
±.9
3.2±
.3
Tik
ur
34
25.4
±.6
64.1
±.6
63.6
±.6
69.7
±.6
35.9
±.5
6.8±
.5
17.3
±.6
8.9±
.3
7.4±
.3
Was
hera
44
32
.8±.
9 69
.4±.
3 66
.7±.
5 74
.1±.
6 38
.6±.
3 10
.6±.
1 n.
a n.
a 6.
3±.3
B
HS
22
27.9
±.8
63.3
±.6
59.9
±.9
71.5
±.6
35.1
±.6
9.6±
.4
14.7
±.6
14±.
9 4.
0±.3
W
ollo
37
21
.7±.
5 62
.7±.
6 61
.2±.
5 67
.6±.
5 34
.3±.
4 8.
7±.3
20
.4±.
6 7.
2±.2
7.
9±.4
n.
a.: d
ata
not a
vaila
ble.
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
32Indigenous resources of Ethiopia
Figure 2. Highland long-fat-tailed ewe (e.g. here is Horro sheep).
Figure 3. Highland long-fat-tailed rams (e.g. here is Horro sheep).
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
33
Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 43, 2008
Gizaw et al.
Figure 4. Sub-alpine short-fat-tailed ewe (e.g. here is Menz sheep).
Figure 5. Sub-alpine short-fat-tailed ram (e.g. here is Simien sheep).
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
34Indigenous resources of Ethiopia
Figure 6. Lowland thin-tailed ewes (e.g. here is Gumz sheep).
Figure 7. Lowland thin-tailed ram (e.g. here is Gumz sheep).
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
35
Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 43, 2008
Gizaw et al.
long tapering end. The group is large-sized(Table 2), short-haired, predominantly brown andprolific (litter size = 1.29±0.06 - 1.55±0.12).
The group includes Horro (Figure 2 and 3),Arsi-Bale, Bonga and Adilo. An earlier study (MOA,1975) described Horro as thin-tailed and Arsi-Balaas fat-tailed, while Galal (1983) and Epstein (1971)described Horro and Arsi-Bale as fat-tailed. Suchinconsistencies could be due to the unique tailshape in this group which could be the result ofinfluence from a thin-tailed ancestor.
Lowland fat-rumped
Afar and Black-Head-Somali (BHS) sheep constitutethe lowland fat-rumped group (Figures 8 and 9).BHS has been classed with the fat-tailed(Hilzheimer cited by Epstein, 1971) and fat-rumpedgroup (Epstein, 1971), while Galal (1983) describedthe tail as short and fat, with the rump being alsofatty. Adal (Adal and Afar are synonymous) sheepare also traditionally described as fat-tailed, butcategorized as fat-rumped (Epstein 1971). Ourobservation is that BHS be classified as fat-rumpedand Afar as fat-tailed sheep. Here, BHS and Afar areclassified under the same group as, from asystematic point of view, fat-rumped and fat-tailedsheep are more closely related than other sheep
types (Epstein, 1971). Physical characteristics anddistribution are given in table 1.
Lowland thin-tailed
This group is represented by a single population(Table 1) and is found adjacent to the thin-tailedsheep region of the Sudanese desert (Figures 6and 7). They are moderately prolific (littersize = 1.28±0.06).
Sheep types and production systems
For this study, the classification of livestockproduction systems by Alemayehu (www.fao.org)was adapted. There appears to be a strongrelationship between the sheep types andproduction systems (Table 3). Breeds with highgrowth rate and prolificacy, like Adilo and Bongasheep, are associated with tethering systems wherefew breeding ewes and/or fattening males are kept.Good milking and long-legged Black Head Somalisheep are suited to the nutrition and nomadic habitof the pastoral community. Flock size andcomposition by sheep types and production systemis presented in table 4.
Figure 8. Lowland fat-rumped ewe (e.g. here is BHS sheep).
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
36Indigenous resources of Ethiopia
Farmers’ assessment of sheep types
The farmers’/pastoralists’ assessment of theirsheep is presented in table 5. Farmers owninglarge-sized sheep with uniform coat color,particularly brown, valued their breed as good orexcellent. There is a tendency to select against blacksheep among the heterogeneous sub-alpine woolbreeds. This is due to a decreased market demandfor black sheep and black wool. The sub-alpinesheep types were evaluated as highly adapted to theharsh natural environment and low inputproduction systems. The socio-economic roles ofmost of the breeds were ranked as high. This isbecause of their high market value, including theexport market for BHS and Afar, and their role as asource of family food like milk among pastoralists.The importance of these roles for a given breed,
however, varies according to the production system.Under highland perennial/cash crop systems, forinstance, sheep contribute less to the farmlivelihood.
Conclusion
This study provided an overview of thecharacteristics of Ethiopian sheep. Fourmorphologically distinct categories of Ethiopiansheep were recognized: sub-alpine short-fat-tailed,highland long-fat-tailed, lowlandfat-rumped/tailed and lowland thin-tailed.Morphological diversity in Ethiopian sheep isrelated to ecological zones, ethnic communities andproduction systems. Assessment of the geneticdistinctness of the traditional sheep types is
Table 3. Sheep types and major sheep production systems in Ethiopia.
Characteristic features of production systems
Production systems Environment Main
products Scale of production and management Sheep breeds
Sub-alpine sheep-barley system
Sub-alpine (> 3000 m)
Meat, fiber, manure, skin; unreliable, long-season barley
Medium scale sheep production; Semi-intensive, low-input1
Simien2, Tikur2, Menz2, Wollo2, Farta3, Arsi-Bale4, Horro4
Highland cereal-livestock system
Highlands (1 500-3 000 m)
Mainly cereal cropping; meat, manure, skin
Small scale sheep production; semi-intensive, low-input
Washera2, Sekota2, Horro3, Arsi-Bale3, Wollo4, Farta2, BHS4
Highland perennial crop system
Highlands (1 500-2 000 m)
Mainly perennial cash crops (coffee, inset, khat); meat, skin
Minor sheep production; semi-intensive, low-input; some practice tethering
Bonga2, Adilo2, Horro3, Arsi-Bale3
Lowland crop-livestock system
Wet lowland (Up to 1 000 m)
Cereals, sesame, cotton; meat, skin
High level of livestock keeping; semi-intensive, low-input
Gumz2, Afar4, Arsi-Bale4, BHS4
Pastoral/agro-pastoral system
Semi-arid/arid (up to 1 000 m)
Meat, milk, skin; minimal or no cropping
Rangeland-based large-scale sheep production; extensive, low-input
Afar2, BHS2
1Based on feeding, veterinary care, housing. 2Major portion of or the whole sheep population is managed under the system. 3Significant portion of the sheep population is managed under the system. 4Minor portion of the sheep population is managed under the system. Source: based on Alemayehu (www.fao.org).
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
37
Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 43, 2008
Gizaw et al.
Table 4. Average flock size and flock structure.
Sheep type/production system No. of flocks
Average flock size
Average no. of ewes
Average no. of rams
Average no. of lambs
Alpine sheep-barley 50 23.32 13.95 1.22 5.91 Menz 19 25.89 16.94 1.45 4.71 Tikur 10 16.11 10.45 1.00 3.50 Wollo 12 16.40 10.40 1.20 6.00 Simien 10 9.21 5.80 0.25 2.50
Highland crop-livestock 53 10.37 5.90 0.47 3.01 Horro 29 9.43 5.31 0.34 2.10 Sekota 12 11.18 6.64 1.00 3.00 Farta 12 10.45 6.73 0.27 3.80 Washera Arsi-Bale 15 27.14 13.64 1.07 9.15
Highland perennial crop 53 3.45 1.77 0.02 1.64 Adilo 22 3.24 1.71 0.09 2.14 Bonga 31 3.60 1.80 0.07 1.44
Lowland crop-livestock 11 11.80 7.50 0.70 5.14 Gumz 11 11.80 7.50 0.70 5.14
Pastoral system 99 54.37 27.37 8.47 18.54 BHS 99 54.37 27.37 8.47 18.54 Afar n.a.
n.a.: data not available.
Figure 9. Lowland fat-rumped ram (e.g. here is BHS sheep).
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
38Indigenous resources of Ethiopia
Tab
le 5
. Far
mer
s’ a
sses
smen
t of s
heep
typ
es o
n ph
ysic
al, p
rodu
ctio
n an
d ad
apta
tion
trai
ts a
nd s
ocio
-eco
nom
ic im
port
ance
. T
rait
s/ty
pes
H
orro
M
enz
Seko
ta
Sim
ien
Fa
rta
Tik
ur
Gu
mz
Was
her
Wol
lo
Ad
ilo
Ars
i B
onga
B
HS
Afa
r C
olor
4
2 3
4 41
1
4 4
2 4
2 4
4 4
Ap
pea
ranc
e/si
ze
3 1
4 4
4 2
3 4
1 42
4
4 4
3 G
row
th r
ate
3 1
3 4
4 2
3 4
1 4
4 4
3 3
Fert
ility
4
4 4
3 3
4 2
4 4
3 4
4 3
4 P
rolif
icac
y 4
1 2
2 2
1 2
4 1
4 3
4 2
3 M
eat q
ual
ity
3 4
3 4
4 3
4 4
4 3
4 4
4 3
Skin
qu
alit
y 4
4 4
4 4
2 2
4 3
3 2
3 3
3 W
ool
n.a.
2
2
2 1
n.a.
n.
a.
1 n.
a.
1 n.
a.
n.a.
n.
a.
Tem
per
amen
t 4
3 4
3 4
4 4
4 4
2 1
4 4
4 M
othe
ring
abi
lity
4 3
2 3
4 2
2 4
4 4
4 4
4 4
Dis
ease
tole
ranc
e 2
3 3
4 4
3 2
3 3
2 4
2 4
4 H
ard
ines
s 2
4 4
4 4
4 3
2 4
2 4
2 4
4 M
arke
t val
ue
4 4
3 3
4 1
2 4
2 4
4 4
2 3
Soci
oeco
nom
ic
imp
orta
nce
H
H
H
H
H
I
N
H
H
N
H
N
H
H
1 =
Poo
r, 2
= A
vera
ge, 3
= G
ood
, 4 =
Exc
elle
nt.
H =
Hig
hly
impo
rtan
t, I =
Impo
rtan
t, N
= N
ot m
uch
imp
orta
nt.
n.a.
= d
ata
not a
pplic
able
. 1 A
ll co
at c
olor
s ex
cept
bla
ck w
ere
pre
ferr
ed.
2 Far
mer
s pr
efer
to h
ave
fatt
enin
g m
ales
wit
h lo
ng h
orns
, whi
ch m
ost A
dilo
ram
s la
ck.
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
39
Animal Genetic Resources Information, No. 43, 2008
Gizaw et al.
important for developing rationalconservation-based improvement programs.Molecular genetic assessment of the populationstructure is a follow up activity.
Acknowledgements
This project is funded by The NetherlandsFoundation for the Advancement of TropicalResearch (WOTRO). The project is a collaborationbetween Wageningen University and InternationalLivestock Research Institute (ILRI). We sincerelythank farmers and pastoralists who spared theiranimals and time for free for this study.
List of References
Alemayehu, M. Country pasture/forageresource profile, Ethiopia. www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/agricult/agp/agpc/doc/Counprof/Ethiopia, FAO,Rome, Italy.
CSA, Central Statistical Authority. 2003.Ethiopian Agricultural Sample Enumeration for theyear 2004/2005, Statistical Report on FarmManagement Practices, Livestock and FarmImplements, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
CSA, Central Statistical Authority. 2006.Ethiopian agricultural sample Survey. Vol II. Reporton livestock and livestock characteristics. StatisticalBulletin 388, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Epstein, H. 1971. The Origin of DomesticAnimals of Africa, Vol.2. Africana PublicationCorporation, New York, pp. 719.
FAO. 1994. Production Yearbook, Volume 48.FAO, Rome, Italy.
FAO. 2004. Livestock sector brief: Ethiopia.Livestock Information, Sector Analysis and PolicyBranch (AGAL).
FAO. 1986. Animal Genetic Resources DataBanks. 2. Descriptor Lists for Cattle, Buffalo, Pigs,Sheep and Goats. Animal Production and HealthPaper 59/2. FAO, Rome, Italy, pp. 96-129.
Galal, E.S.E. 1983. Sheep germplasm inEthiopia. Animal Genetic Resources InformationBulletin, 1/83, FAO, pp. 6-13.
Gryseels, G. 1988. Role of Livestock onMixed Smallholder Farms in the EthiopianHighlands: A case study from the Baso and WoranaWereda near Debre Berhan. Dissertation,Agricultural University of Wageningen, TheNetherlands.
MOA, Ministry of Agriculture-Ethiopia.1975. National policy on sheep research anddevelopment. Report of The Technical Committee.Mimeograph. MOA, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Rege, J.E.O. 2002. Defining livestock breedsin the context of community-based management offarm animal genetic resources. In: Animal geneticResources Virtual Library CD-ROM. GTZ, SACCARand ILRI, ILRI-Ethiopia.
Sisay, L. 2002. Phenotypic classification anddescription of indigenous sheep types in theamhara national regional state of ethiopia. MScthesis, Department of Genetics, University of Natal,Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.
Zelalem, A. & I.C. Fletcher. 1993.Smallruminant productivity in the centralhighlands of Ethiopia. Proceedings of the4th National Livestock Improvement Conference(NLIC), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 13-15 November,1991. IAR (Institute of Agricultural Research),Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.