Keywords: animal protein, food security, indigenous animals, mini-livestock, wildlife

Meat and Man: The Origins

Archeological evidence, including stone tools and butchery marks on fos-silized bones, suggests that early hominins adapted to an omnivorous diet more than 2.6 million years ago, supplementing their plant-based diets of fruits, seeds, and tubers with the meat and marrow from various wild animals

(Pobiner, 2013). This dietary modification appears to be linked with the evo-lution of the large human brain, which to function, requires a relatively greater proportion of the total energy budget than in other primates, therefore neces-sitating the addition of energy- and nutrient-rich meat sources (Leonard et al., 2007). These meat sources are believed to have originally been scavenged from the kills of more efficient predators, until such time as hunting skills developed around 500,000 years ago. One of the most momentous evolution-ary steps for humankind came many years later through the domestication of livestock animals, beginning with sheep and goats, then progressing to pigs, cattle, horses, donkeys, water buffalo, camelids, and later chickens (Magee et al., 2014; Mignon-Grasteau et al., 2005). The subsequent establishment of animal husbandry techniques enabled man to generate ample and reliable sources of meat, reducing the number of species from which this was derived, but simultaneously facilitating the acceleration of human population growth that has continued unabated ever since (Diamond, 2002).

Compared with the estimated 10 million people on earth at the time of agriculture development ca. 10,000 years ago, the world population today far exceeds 7 billion people. The current demand for meat is at an all-time high, driven predominantly by the developing world, where increasing populations, urbanization, and greater incomes have promoted the increased inclusion of animal proteins in the diet (Thornton, 2010). Meat production has consequently been forced to follow suit in almost every part of the globe (Figure 1), more than quadrupling over the last 50 years to reach 302 million tonnes in 2012 (FAOSTAT, 2014). As of 2012, there were more than 1.485 billion cattle in the world, 1.169 billion sheep, and at least 21 billion chickens. Cattle produced 63 million tonnes of meat in 2012, sheep 8.5 million tonnes, and goats 5.3 million tonnes, but these species were far outranked by pigs (109 million tonnes) and poultry (105 million tonnes; FAOSTAT, 2014). The demand for beef and mutton has largely declined over the last few decades, mainly due to their high prices, the perceived health concerns surrounding red meat consumption, and the associated food safety concerns (e.g., bovine spongiform encephalopa-thy in cattle; Kearney, 2010; Kanerva, 2013). While pig production has continued to increase, the production of poultry has shown the greatest and most rapid growth among the traditional livestock species, increasing almost 12-fold from 9 million tonnes in 1961 (Figure 2). Birds contrib-uting to the current world poultry production include turkeys (5 million tonnes), ducks (4 million tonnes), and guinea fowls and geese (ca. 2.8 mil-lion tonnes), but it has been the chicken, producing more than 92 million tonnes of meat and more than 1 billion eggs in 2012, that has become the most indispensable to commercial meat production. As with pigs, chick-

The role of traditional and non-traditional meat animals in feeding a growing and evolving worldDonna-Mareè Cawthorn* and Louwrens C. Hoffman*†

* Department of Animal Sciences, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7600, South Africa† South African Research Chair in Meat Science, hosted by the University of Stellenbosch in partnership with the University of Fort Hare and funded

by the Department of Science and Technology and administered by the National Research Foundation

Implications

• Although our hunter-gatherer ancestors relied on an enormous array of animal species to fulfil their protein requirements, only a handful of these were subsequently domesticated, and cattle, sheep, pigs, and chickens currently represent the main animals used for global meat production.

• In spite of various attempts to improve the productivity of these traditional livestock species, this sector is facing immense pressure to meet the increasing demand for animal protein from a growing human population, and the future situation will likely only be aggravated by global warming, water shortages, and land restrictions for livestock production.

• Various animals, such as goats, camels, yak, and water buffalo, have accompanied man for centuries, surviving in the harshest conditions and on sparse feed resources. Due to their outstanding adaptability, these species could become crucial for future food supply, as well as for socio–economic and environmental stability.

• While subsistence hunting undoubtedly threatens wildlife populations throughout the world, there are many wild animals that are abundant and even considered as pests that could play a pivotal role in improving food security. Larger prolific species that could be further exploited for meat production include kangaroo, wild pigs, and deer while “mini-livestock” species (e.g., rabbits and rodents) hold particular promise for becoming valuable com-mercial commodities for food use.

© Cawthorn and Hoffman.doi:10.2527/af.2014-0027

6 Animal Frontiers

ens have good feed conversion rates, fast growth rates, and minimal space requirements, meaning that they have been heavily utilized to supply the global demand for cheap protein (Sherman, 2002).

Industrialization and specialization have undoubtedly facilitated these enormous meat outputs, with the objectives of some in the U.S., for ex-ample, being to modernize farming and to “make every farm a factory” (Fitzgerald, 2003). Biotechnologies such as genetic modification (GM) have been applied to improve the yields of certain crops used to feed both humans and animals (Herrera-Estrella, 2000). Yields within the tradition-ally farmed livestock sector have been increased through selective breed-ing for desired production traits (e.g., larger sizes, faster growth rates, and hardiness). Selective breeding, as well as specialized rearing techniques, have also been applied to enhance meat quality and palatability attributes. Such interventions have often generated animals with greater fat contents than their wild progenitors but favored by certain groups of contemporary consumers, such as the modern varieties of intensely marbled Japanese Wagyu beef, which is produced from placid cattle kept in confinement, fed beer, and regularly massaged (Bingen and Bush, 2006). Livestock pro-ductivity has been additionally encouraged through advances in science, including the administration of hormones to stimulate growth and antibi-

otics to combat disease. However, as with the application of GM technolo-gies, there has been growing consumer resistance relating to the afore-mentioned interventions and the notion of intensive farming as a whole, with concerns extending from animal welfare to the pollution, carbon footprints, and water footprints associated with such systems (Napolitano et al., 2010; Hoffman and Cawthorn, 2013). Thus, while technological elaborations have made farmers immensely productive and have indeed transformed the face of agriculture, modern agrarian systems have con-currently disrupted finely balanced systems, contributed to environmental changes, and ultimately transformed the face of the earth. The fact further remains that, in spite of the very best efforts, more than 1 billion (>13%) people in the world still experience famine, hunger, and malnourishment on a daily basis, and this number is only growing (Ingram et al., 2010).

Meat and Man: Future Outlooks

Most food producers are likely well aware that the global human popula-tion is forecast to surpass 9 billion by 2050, necessitating more than a 50% increase in food productivity to meet these growing needs (Ingram et al., 2010). Livestock systems, however, currently occupy approximately 30% of

Figure 1. The contribution of individual countries to global meat production from selected traditional livestock species (Kalverkamp et al., 2014; reproduced under a Creative Commons License).

October 2014, Vol. 4, No. 4 7

the ice-free terrestrial surface area of the planet, and much of the best farm-land has long been under cultivation. Urbanization and biofuel production are reducing this land rapidly, and apart from additional forest clearing, which will lead to further habitat degradation and biodiversity loss, there is very little room for further expansion (Steinfeld et al., 2006). In addition to land restrictions for grazing and forage production, the future supply of meat from conventional livestock species will likely be additionally impacted by climate change, water shortages, carbon emission constraints, high feed prices, and environmental and welfare legislation (FAO, 2010; Thornton, 2010). All of these factors compound to present one of the biggest threats to food security and sustainable resource use that the human race has ever faced.

In the pursuit to circumvent this impending food crisis, the scientific com-munity has increasingly begun to focus on the role of “new” or non-traditional animals in supplying high quality protein for human consumption (Cooper, 1995). Potential meat producers have no boundaries of size or species: wild, semi-domesticated, or domesticated animals that can be used for meat con-sumption belong to every mammalian family and also encompass thousands of avian, reptilian, and amphibian species (Smil, 2002). Many of these species have long been used by indigenous people in diverse regions of the world for food (Figure 3), as well as agricultural products and for work purposes, with some being well suited to commercial utilization in terms of their sizes, constitutions, and husbandry requirements (Hoffman and Cawthorn, 2012).

Overlooked indigenous speciesOn much of the earth's surface that is too steep, too dry, too cold, or too

hot for crop production, pastoralists have for centuries herded large num-bers of goats, camels, yak, reindeer, llamas, and alpaca (Figure 3); using their animals to strategically and sustainably convert the most inhospitable scrub into food and energy (Blench, 2001). Developed through the ages, these animals have become exceptionally well adapted to sparse vegetation, harsh terrains, and extreme climatic conditions. Yaks (Bos grunniens and B.

mutus), for instance, which inhabit the mountain-ous regions and plateaus of central Asia, are the only large mammals able to graze at altitudes of 6,000 m above sea level, at temperatures as low as –40°C, surviving on scantly supplies of moun-tain feed, yet still remaining productive. The 13.3 million yaks found in Chinese territories produce around 226,000 tonnes of meat and more than 1.4 million tonnes of milk per annum while the 600,000 yaks in land-locked Mongolia provide up to one-half of the meat, milk, and butter of the country (Wiener et al., 2003; Gregory, 2007). The one-humped dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius), on the other hand, exhibit a num-ber of remarkable anatomical and physiological features that enable them to live, work, repro-duce, and yield meat and milk in the blistering hot deserts of northern Africa and eastern Asia. For one, these large herbivores far surpass any other large animals (Kadim et al., 2014) in terms of their adaption to heat and water deprivation (Bornstein, 1990). Further, their ability to store large fat deposits in their humps provides them with crucial energy in times of feed scarcity, as well as insulation from solar radiation. In spite of

the highly nutritious meat of the camel (Hoffman, 2008) and their symbi-otic relationship with man for thousands of years, camels have been largely neglected as economically productive animals with great potential for food production. A lack of effort in enhancing camel productivity has been one of the primary constraints in developing marketable camel meat products for worldwide supply (Kadim et al., 2013). Nonetheless, in the face of growing food insecurity, coupled with climate change and desertification, there is an urgent need to better utilize marginal and sub-marginal lands while improv-ing and stocking such species that thrive under severe environmental condi-tions (Lambrecht, 1983; Hoffman, 2008; Webb, 2014).

The goat (Capra aegagrus hircus), one of man’s most enduring sources of high-quality meat and milk, holds many advantages for poorer farmers and households in the developing world: they are small and cheap to keep, are amendable to a range of climatic conditions, and their efficient feed utilization and disease tolerance allows them to flourish on many natural re-sources left untouched by other domestic ruminants (Peters, 1987; Alexan-dre and Mandonnet, 2005). Although goats have been criticized for causing environmental degradation through overgrazing, when carefully controlled, they not only control bush encroachment, but these small ruminants also produce meat that is lean, nutritious, and acceptable under most religious convictions (Hoffman et al., 2002). Goat meat is highly prized and well accepted in many rural communities (particularly at ceremonial and festive occasions); however, factors that hinder its universal distribution and global acceptance include the problems of inconsistent supply and quality, the lack of an organized meat industry and marketing structures, as well as social stigmas surrounding the meat. Certain consumers inevitably link goats with poverty, see the meat as inferior, and associate it with lower-income classes, issues that need to be addressed in the marketing of this commodity (Mah-goub et al., 2012). Even so, the world goat population has increased much more rapidly (>100%) over the last 3 decades than those of cattle (19%) and sheep (3%) to reach more than 996 million in 2012 (FAOSTAT, 2014), re-

Figure 2. The quantity of meat produced globally from pigs, chickens, cattle, sheep, and goats between 1961 and 2011 (FAOSTAT, 2014), superimposed with the human population growth (UNDESA, 2013) over the same time period.

8 Animal Frontiers

flecting the emergence of goats as crucial livestock species. More than 90% of these animals are concentrated in Africa and Asia while only small num-bers are kept as specialty or exotic livestock in developed countries. While global goat meat production was officially reported at 5.3 million tonnes in 2012 (<2% of total global meat production), these figures probably underes-timate true production levels since the meat consumed in households or sold directly at the farm gate is not accounted for (Dhanda et al., 2003).

Of the non-traditional animals used for food production to date, the water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis; Naveena and Kiran, 2014) represents one of the most pertinent success stories. This large bovid, which has supported poor communities in Asia since time immemorial, has been a relatively late entrant into the global meat market, but its contribution is becoming increasingly sub-stantial (Cruz, 2010). India, being the home tract for 58% of the 200 million water buffalo in the world, has unsurprisingly led the growth in the buffalo meat sector, both in terms of supply and export (FAOSTAT, 2014). This coun-try, where the slaughter and consumption of cattle is a sensitive religious is-sue, produced more than 1.5 million tonnes of water buffalo meat in 2012 and saw its export volumes of the product increase by 50% since 2010 to exceed 1.1 million tonnes in 2013 (APEDA, 2014). Since the meat from water buf-falo has traditionally been derived from animals at the end of their working lives, there has been a public perception that it is dark and tough (Cruz, 2010).

However, water buffalo meat (or “carabeef”) from young animals is similar to that from young beef cattle in terms of its physicochemical, nutritional, functionality, and palatability characteristics, but it has a comparatively lower fat content favored by health-conscious consumers and good binding proper-ties preferred in processed meat manufacturing. Water buffalo thrive under harsh conditions, not only being resistant to disease, but also being able to draw nourishment from coarse feeds and crop residues not tolerated by cattle (Kandeepan et al., 2009). These animals thus show great potential for increas-ing meat production in tropical, sub-tropical, and warm temperate regions in developing and developed countries (NRC, 1981).

Looking to the wildAn inevitable progression in the quest to produce more protein has

been to look to wild animals and to investigate if some of these too can be harvested or farmed to increase meat production. The concept of using wild animals for food is by no means new, and their nutritional values and contributions to food security have been recognized and comprehensively reviewed (Hoffman and Cawthorn, 2012). The question of whether wild-life species should be further exploited and promoted as meat sources, however, remains tremendously complex and controversial (Cooper, 1995; Rao and McGowan, 2002; Milner-Gulland and Bennett, 2003).

Figure 3. Examples of ruminant production, by countries and main species (adapted from Kalverkamp et al., 2014; reproduced under a Creative Commons License).

October 2014, Vol. 4, No. 4 9

On one level, there is little doubt that subsistence hunting, much of it un-controlled and unsustainable, has led to the catastrophic decline and even deci-mation of numerous wildlife populations across the globe, from elephants to primates (Nasi et al., 2011). In particular, illegal hunting and the enormous “bushmeat” trade in Africa represents one of the most significant threats to the biodiversity of the continent. The annual bushmeat harvest in Central Africa alone is estimated at 5 million tonnes, which is more than 6 times the sustain-able rate (Fa et al., 2002, 2003). A further concern is that the establishment of captive populations for wildlife farming can present a continuous drain on wild populations. For example, the illegal capture and removal of wild Siamese crocodile (Crocodylus siamensis) to supply local farms has contributed to the extirpation of the species throughout much of its range (Mockin et al., 2005).

On another level, numerous wild game animals (e.g., antelope) have been effectively ranched in Africa under extensive management systems to produce meat that is highly sought (Saadoun et al., 2014) after for ex-port and local use, mainly due to its leanness, exotic appeal, and “organic” or “free-range” nature (Hoffman and Wiklund, 2006). Furthermore, the bison (Bison bison), which was driven to near extinction in a brief frenzy of over-hunting in the late 1800s (Galbraith et al., 2014), is now farmed successfully in North America, where the total bison population has been revived to more than 500,000 head (Boyd and Gates, 2006).

There has also been considerable interest in promoting the harvesting and/or rearing of those species that are plentiful in the wild or even considered as pests, which could represent valuable sources of food (Cooper, 1995). For instance, in parts of rural Australia, several prolific species of kangaroo have been condemned for damaging crops, degrading fragile rangelands(Spiegel and Wynn, 2014), and competing with livestock for grazing (Grigg and Pople, 2001). The commercial harvesting of these species from the wild is therefore permitted in certain Australian states, albeit under strict control and quota allocations, with the dual roles of mitigating the environmental impacts of the animal and providing incomes through meat and hide produc-

tion. Kangaroo meat has a strong flavor, is high in protein, and lean (ca. 2% fat; Hoffman and Cawthorn, 2012), while being exceptionally high in con-jugated linoleic acid (Schmid et al., 2006). Over the last 2 decades, both sci-entists and government advisors have advocated the potential for kangaroos to replace cattle and sheep for meat production in the rangelands of Australia with the prospective advantages of, amongst others, reducing greenhouse emissions (Garnaut, 2008; Wilson and Edwards, 2008; Cooney et al., 2009).

Deer too were considered pests in New Zealand following their uncon-trolled introduction into the country in the late 1800s (Wiklund et al, 2014). Today, however, the farming of these cervids has become a particularly well-established and scientifically advanced industry in the country (Char-donnet et al., 2002). New Zealand has the largest farmed deer population in the world (>1.1 million, 85% of which are red deer, Cervus elaphus) and dominates the global supply of farmed venison, exporting ca. 15,000 tonnes of the meat in 2011 with a value of NZ$ 211 million (DINZ, 2011).

Some wild suid species, including the wild boar (Sus scrofa) found pre-dominantly across Eurasia and the warthog (Phacochoerus africanus) of sub-Saharan Africa, have long been valued for food and recreational hunt-ing, but these animals have come to be regarded as nuisances to agricul-tural systems and threats to ecosystems in some regions. Nonetheless, given their rapid reproductive rates, outstanding adaptability, and highly nutritious meat, interest has been raised on the potential of these animals as farmed species (Zomborszky et al., 1996; Hoffman and Sales, 2007). The farming of wild boar has thus developed since the 1970s in Europe, Japan, and the USA, while the meat from warthogs is still exclusively obtained from wild populations (Roth and Gunter, 1996).

Small animals with big potentialWhile the sustainability and future of the entire bushmeat trade is dubi-

ous, the farming or backyard production of smaller wild animals and pests can help to alleviate this uncertainty and contribute to improving food secu-

rity, especially in developing countries (Hardouin et al., 2003; Hoffman and Cawthorn, 2012, 2013; Assan, 2013). The meat of lagomorphs (i.e., rab-bits, hares, and pikas) and rodents (Dalle Zotte, 2014) in particular, has long played a vital role in subsistence societies throughout the world where it is considered tasty, nutritious, and often supe-rior to that from conventional livestock (Roth and Gunter, 1996). Both groups of animals show great promise as meat producers due to their legendary reproductive capacities (short gestation periods, large litter sizes, and early sexual maturity), as well as their ability to survive on diverse diets and to reutilize their own digesta through coprophagy (Vietmeyer, 1991; Hirakawa, 2001). The breed-ing of rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) is already a thriving industry that produces more than 1.8 million tonnes of meat per annum, with China being the main producer (Poławska et al., 2013; FAOSTAT, 2014). Other candidate species for “mini-livestock” production have been reviewed (Vietmeyer, 1991; Hardouin, 1995; Hardouin et al., 2003; Assan, 2013) and comprise the cane rat (Thryonomys spp.), giant rat (Cricetomys gambi-anus), and the brush-tailed porcupine (Atherurus Th

inkS

tock

/Mik

eLan

e45

10 Animal Frontiers

africanus) in Africa, as well as the tenrec (Setifer setosus) in the Mascarene Islands. The rodents that have been identified as having production potential in Latin America include the capybara (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris), paca (Cuniculus spp.), agouti (Dasyprocta spp.), guinea pig (Cavia porcellus), and coypu (Myocastor coypus; FAO, 1996; Hardouin et al., 2003). Reptiles, frogs, giant snails, and caterpillars have also been recognized as having po-tential for mini-livestock production.

Conclusions

A rising wave of food insecurity threatens mankind as it becomes appar-ent that our ever-increasing demand for animal protein may well be at odds with the capacity of the planet to supply it. While meat eating is inevitabil-ity here to stay, the uncertainty lies in whether just a handful of species will be capable of feeding the growing human population and securing its income in the long term. The need to realize the potential of alternative meat producers is thus substantial. This was foreseen more than 50 years ago by Fraser Darling (1960) who stated that “...to exchange the wide spectrum of animals living in delicate adjustment to their habitat, for the narrowed spec-trum of 3 ungulates exotic to Africa—cattle, sheep, and goats—is to throw away a bountiful resource and a marvelous ordering of nature.”

A large number of prospective non-traditional meat producers have been introduced in this paper, and while it is not anticipated that these will solve the global food shortages in their entirety, they may well aid in decreasing the extent of current and future food shortages. Although a positive shift towards rearing non-traditional animal species has recently occurred among meat pro-ducers worldwide, there is still a gross under-valuation of their meat. This is partly due to old prejudices and the erroneous perception that this meat is of an inferior quality or nutritive value than that of traditional meat species. Indeed, the time for altering these misconceptions is ripe. The conditions for increasing the contribution of non-traditional species to global meat supply could be met, but such progress will likely only become possible with in-creased emphasis, research, and development of these sectors, with increased productivity, with a supply of meat products that are of a consistent quality and safety, with an efficient market and marketing channels, and with better communication on the quality and nutritive properties of the meat.

Acknowledgements

This work is based on the research supported by the South African Research Chairs Initiative of the Department of Science and Technology (DST) and National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa. Any opin-ion, finding, and conclusion or recommendation expressed in this material is that of the authors, and the NRF does not accept any liability in this regard.

Literature CitedAlexandre, G., and N. Mandonnet. 2005. Goat meat production in harsh environ-

ments. Small Rumin. Res. 60:53–66.APEDA (Agricultural & Processed Food Products Export Development Authority).

2014. Buffalo meat– export. www.apeda.gov.in/apedawebsite/six_head_prod-uct/animal.htm. Accessed May 11, 2014.

Assan, N. 2013. Promoting micro livestock farming to enhance animal product supply in Sub Saharan Africa. Sci. J. Biol. Sci. 2:232–243.

Bingen, R.J., and L. Bush. 2006. Agricultural standards: The shape of the global food and fiber system. Springer, Dordrecht.

Blench, R. 2001. You can’t go home again: Pastoralism in the new millennium. Overseas Development Institute, London.

Bornstein, S. 1990. The ship of the desert. The dromedary camel (Camelus drom-edarius), a domesticated animal species well adapted to extreme conditions of aridness and heat. Rangifer. 10:231–236.

Boyd, D.P., and C.C. Gates. 2006. A brief review of the status of plains bison in North America. J. West 45:15–21.

Chardonnet, P., B. D. Clers, J. Fischer, R. Gerhold, F. Jori, and F. Lamarque. 2002. The value of wildlife. Revue scientifique et technique-Office international des epizooties. 21: 15–52.

Cooney, R., A. Baumber, P. Ampt, and G. Wilson. 2009. Sharing Skippy: How can landholders be involved in kangaroo production in Australia? Rangeland J. 31:283–292.

Cooper, J.E. 1995. Wildlife species for sustainable food production. Biodivers. Conserv. 4:215–219.

Cruz, L.C. 2010. Trends in buffalo production in Asia. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 6:9–24.Dalle Zotte, A. 2014. Rabbit farming for meat purposes. Anim. Front. 4(4):62–67.Dhanda, J.S., D.G. Taylor, P.J. Murray, R.B. Pegg, and P.J. Shand. 2003. Goat meat

production: Present status and future possibilities. Asian-Australasian J. Ani-mal Sci. 16 12: 1842-1852.

Diamond, J. 2002. Evolution, consequences and future of plant and animal domes-tication. Nature 418:700–707.

DINZ (Deer Industry New Zealand). 2011. Deer Industry Statistics. http://deernz.org.nz. Accessed May 14, 2014.

Fa, J.E., D. Currie, and J. Meeuwig. 2003. Bushmeat and food security in the Con-go Basin. Environ. Conserv. 30:71–78.

Fa, J.E., C.A. Peres, and J. Meeuwig. 2002. Bushmeat exploitation in tropical for-ests: An intercontinental comparison. Conserv. Biol. 16:232–237.

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1996. Wildlife utilization in Latin America: Current situation and prospects for sustainable management. FAO Conservation guide 25. FAO, Rome.

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2010. The state of food and agriculture: Livestock in the balance. FAO, Rome.

FAOSTAT. 2014. Food and Agriculture Organisation Statistics Database. http://fao-stat3.fao.org/faostat-gateway/go/to/home/E. Accessed May 09, 2014.

Fitzgerald, D.K. 2003. Every farm a factory: The industrial ideal in American agri-culture. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven.

Fraser Darling, F. 1960. Wildlife in an African territory. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.Galbraith, J., A. Rodas-González, O. López-Campos, M. Juárez, and J. Aalhus. 2014.

Bison meat: Characteristics, challenges, and opportunities. Anim. Front. 4(4):68–73.Garnaut, R. 2008. The Garnaut climate change review. Glob. Environ. Change 13:1–5.Gregory, N.G. 2007. Animal welfare and meat production. CABI, Oxfordshire.Grigg, G.C., and A.R. Pople. 2001. Sustainable use and pest control in conser-

vation: Kangaroos as a case study. In: J.D. Reynolds, editor, Conservation of exploited species. Univ. Press, Cambridge. p. 403–423.

Hardouin, J. 1995. Minilivestock: From gathering to controlled production. Biodiv-ers. Conserv. 4:220–232.

Hardouin, J., E. Thys, V. Joiris, and D. Fielding. 2003. Mini-livestock breeding with indigenous species in the tropics. Livestock Research for Rural Develop-ment. www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd15/4/hard154.htm. Accessed May 12, 2014.

Herrera-Estrella, L.R. 2000. Genetically modified crops and developing countries. Plant Physiol. 124:923–926.

Hirakawa, H. 2001. Coprophagy in leporids and other mammalian herbivores. Mammal Rev. 31:61–80.

Hoffman, L.C. 2008. The yield and nutritional value of meat from African ungu-lates, camelidae, rodents, ratites and reptiles. Meat Sci. 80:94–100.

Hoffman, L.C., and D.M. Cawthorn. 2012. What is the role and contribution of meat from wildlife in providing high quality protein for consumption? Anim. Front. 2:40–53.

Hoffman, L.C., and D.M. Cawthorn. 2013. Exotic protein sources to meet all needs. Meat Sci. 95:764–771.

Hoffman, L.C., and J. Sales. 2007. Physical and chemical quality characteristics of warthog (Phacochoerus africanus) meat. Livestock Research for Rural Devel-opment. www.lrrd.org/lrrd19/10/hoff19153.htm. Accessed May 12, 2014.

Hoffman, L.C., R. Sheridan, and A.V. Ferreria. 2002. The carcass proximate and fatty acid composition of Boer goats and South African Mutton Merinos raised under intensive feedlot conditions. In Proceedings of the 48th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, August 1–6, Rome, Italy.

Hoffman, L.C., and E. Wiklund. 2006. Game and venison- meat for the modern consumer. Meat Sci. 74:197–208.

Ingram, J., P. Ericksen, and D. Liverman. 2010. Food security and global environ-mental change. Earthscan, London.

October 2014, Vol. 4, No. 4 11

Kadim, I.T., O. Mahgoub, and B. Faye. 2013. Camel meat and meat products. CABI, Oxfordshire.

Kadim, I.T., O. Mahgoub, and M. Mbaga. 2014. Potential of camel meat as a non-traditional high-quality source of protein for human consumption. Anim. Front. 4(4):13–17.

Kalverkamp, M.A., W. Bayer, S. Becheva, R. Benning, S. Börnecke, C. Chemnitz, K. Hansen-Kuhn et al. 2014. Meat atlas: Facts and figures about the animals we eat. Jointly published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Berlin and Friends of the Earth Europe, Brussels.

Kandeepan, G., S. Biswas, and R. S. Rajkumar. 2009. Buffalo as a potential food animal. Int. J. Livest. Prod. 1:001–005.

Kanerva, M. 2013. Meat consumption in Europe: Issues, trends and debates. Artec, Bremen.

Kearney, J. 2010. Food consumption trends and drivers. Philos. Trans. R. Soc., B. 365:2793–2807.

Lambrecht, F.L. 1983. Game animals: A substitute for cattle? Rangelands 5:22–24.Leonard, W.R., J.J. Snodgrass, and M.L. Robertson. 2007. Effects of brain evolu-

tion on human nutrition and metabolism. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 27:311–327.Mahgoub, O., I.T. Kadim, and E.C. Webb. 2012. Goat meat production and quality.

CABI, Oxfordshire.Magee, D.A., D.E. MacHugh, and C.J. Edwards. 2014. Interrogation of modern and an-

cient genomes reveals the complex domestic history of cattle. Anim. Front. 4(3):7–22. Mignon-Grasteau, S., A. Boissy, J. Bouix, J.M. Faure, A.D. Fisher, G.N. Hinch,

P. Jensen, P. Le Neindre, P. Mormède, P. Prunet, M. Vandeputte, and C. Beau-mont. 2005. Genetics of adaptation and domestication in livestock. Livest. Prod. Sci. 93:3–14.

Milner-Gulland, E.J., and E.L. Bennett. 2003. Wild meat: The bigger picture. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18:351–357.

Mockin, M.H., E.L. Bennett, and D.T. LaBruna. 2005. Wildlife farming: A viable alternative to hunting in tropical forests? WCS Working Paper No. 23. Wildlife Conservation Society, New York.

Napolitano, F., G. Girolami, and A. Braghieri. 2010. Consumer liking and willing-ness to pay for high welfare animal-based products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 21:537–543.

Nasi, R., A. Taber, and N.V. Vliet. 2011. Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins. Int. For. Rev. 13:355–368.

Naveena, B.M., and M. Kiran. 2014. Buffalo meat quality, composition, and process-ing characteristics: Contribution to global economy and nutritional security. Anim. Front. 4(4):18–24.

NRC (National Research Council, USA). 1981. The water buffalo: New prospects for an underutilized animal. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

Peters, K.J. 1987. Evaluation of goat populations in tropical and subtropical envi-ronments. ILCA Bull. 28:14–21.

Pobiner, B. 2013. Evidence for meat-eating by early humans. Nat. Educ. Knowl. 4(6):1.Poławska, E., R.G. Cooper, A. Jóźwik, and J. Pomianowski. 2013. Meat from alter-

native species—nutritive and dietetic value, and its benefit for human health—a review. CyTA-J. Food 11:37–42.

Rao, M., and P.J. McGowan. 2002. Wild-meat use, food security, livelihoods, and conservation. Conserv. Biol. 16:580–583.

Roth, H.H., and M. Gunter. 1996. Wildlife resources: A global account of economic use. Springer, Dordrecht.

Saadoun, A., M.C. Cabrera, A. Terevinto, and M. del Puerto. 2014. Why not a piece of meat of rhea, nutria, yacare, or vicugna for dinner? Anim. Front. 4(4):25–32.

Schmid, A., M. Collomb, R. Sieber, and G. Bee. 2006. Conjugated linoleic acid in meat and meat products: A review. Meat Sci. 73:29–41.

Sherman, D.M. 2002. Tending animals in the global village: A guide to interna-tional veterinary medicine. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia.

Smil, V. 2002. Eating meat: Evolution, patterns, and consequences. Popul. Dev. Rev. 28:599–639.

Spiegel, N.B., and P.C. Wynn. 2014. Promoting kangaroo as a sustainable option for meat production on Australia’s rangelands. Anim. Front. 4(4):38–45.

Steinfeld, H., P. Gerber, T. Wassenaar, V. Castel, M. Rosales, and C. de Haan. 2006. Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options. FAO, Rome.

Thornton, P.K. 2010. Livestock production: Recent trends, future prospects. Philos. Trans. R. Soc., B. 365:2853–2867.

UNDESA (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs). 2013. World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision. http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm. Accessed May 10, 2014.

Vietmeyer, N.D. 1991. Micro-livestock: Little-known small animals with a prom-ising economic future. National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

Webb, E.C. 2014. Goat meat production, composition, and quality. Anim. Front. 4(4):33–37.

Wiener, G., H. Jianlin, and L. Ruijun. 2003. The yak. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Thailand.

Wiklund, E., M. Farouk, and G. Finstad. 2014. Venison– meat from red deer (Cervus elaphus) and reindeer (Rangifer tarandus tarandus). Anim. Front. 4(4):55–61.

Wilson, G. R., and M. J. Edwards. 2008. Native wildlife on rangelands to minimize methane and produce lower-emission meat: Kangaroos versus livestock. Con-serv. Lett. 1:119–128.

Zomborszky, Z., G. Szentmihalyi, I. Sarudi, P. Horn, and C.S. Szabo. 1996. Nutri-ent composition of muscles in deer and boar. J. Food Sci. 61:625–627.

About the AuthorsLouw Hoffman was born on a cattle and pig ranch in Zimbabwe. He studied ani-mal sciences at Stellenbosch University. After completing his M.Sc. degree on pig meat quality attributes, he was employed as a researcher in aquaculture at Limpopo University. While there, he completed his Ph.D. on the meat quality of the cat-fish. Thereafter, he was employed as an academic and researcher at Stellenbosch University in the meat science discipline. Dr. Hoffman has published more than 160 scientific peer-reviewed research articles

in national and international journals, and 65 M.Sc. and 11 Ph.D. students have already completed their scientific investigations under his supervi-sion. His special research interest is in exotic meat (game and ostrich). Last year (2013), his research on game meat and its contribution to International knowledge was recognized internationally when the American Meat Science Association awarded him its International Lectureship Award. Hoffman is the incumbent of the highly competitive SARChI (South African Research Chair Initiative) Chair in Meat Science: Genomics to Nutriomics. This Chair allows him to focus primarily on research, and presently, he has 44 post-graduate students under his mentorship. He describes himself as a frustrated farmer who has no farm and is therefore an academic and researcher.Correspondence: lch@sun.ac.za

Donna Cawthorn obtained her B.SC. and M.Sc. degrees in food science (cum laude) at Stellenbosch University in South Africa in 2005 and 2007, respectively, where af-ter she completed a Ph.D. degree in food science, focused on the establishment of molecular methods for the identification of South African fish species. Her interest in meat science led her to join the Depart-ment of Animal Sciences (Stellenbosch University) as a post-doctoral fellow in 2012, where she still works. Her current foci are on animal forensics and DNA-

based species authentication. She has a particular passion for conservation and sustainability issues, and thus much of the latter work is directed towards the fisheries and the illegal bushmeat trade. Dr. Cawthorn has published more than 20 papers in peer-reviewed journals and has presented more than 50 oral presentations on her work. She was also the recipient of the IUFoST Young Scientist Award in 2012 and has received numerous awards for aca-demics and for her oral presentation skills.

12 Animal Frontiers