Livestock Research for Rural Development 15 (1) 2003 | Citation of this paper |
This study was conducted in five different agro-ecological regions in Ethiopia. A total of 250 households from 10 villages (two villages from each region) were involved in the study. The objectives were to assess the use patterns and value of chicken and chicken products and socio-economic functions of village chicken production in the study areas. A formal survey, using a structured questionnaire integrated with Participatory Rural Appraisal techniques relevant to rural chicken production system, was applied. In addition, a recall survey was conducted. Economic analysis based on the performance of breeding females from all the study areas was made.
The results from the analysis of
variance showed significant differences in use patterns of chicken and chicken products
among the different study regions. About 50, 27 and 23% of the eggs produced were reported
to be used for hatching, sale and home consumption, respectively, while 5.5, 3.8 and 3.1
birds were used for sale, replacement and consumption. A strong and inverse
correlation was evident between wealth status and use of chicken and chicken
products for sale and home consumption. The over all
Gross Return as percent of initial values and Gross Return per breeding female per year
were 67.5% and 12.48 Birr, respectively.
It is inferred that village
chicken production plays an important role in the supply of high quality protein to the
family food balance. However, based on the results of this study it contributes only about
32% of the animal protein needs of households.
Rising income and urbanisation
in many parts of the developing world caused a growing demand for animal products. The per
capita consumption of meat more than doubled in the developing world from 1967 to 1997,
with even more spectacular increase in the consumption of poultry (Delgado et al 1999).
Nevertheless, a typical person in the developing world still consumes on average only a
third as much meat as a typical person in the developed world. Poultry meat and egg
production accounted for more than 28% of the total animal protein produced world wide in
1997. The proportional contribution of poultry by the year 2020 is believed to increase to
40%, the major increase being in the developing world (Delgado et al 1999). Consequently, the quantity of
animal feed will increase to 26% of the cereal demanded by developing countries in 2020.
Reflecting the demand for an increased cereal production, particularly maize for animal
feed rather than for direct human consumption. Trends in poultry production and demand are
highest in Asian countries and lowest in Sub-Saharan Africa, due to the low overall
economic development in the region (Delgado et
al 1999). Sub-Saharan Africa is the only region in which both number and proportion
of malnourished children has been constantly rising in the past years and expected to
rise, rather than fall, over the next 20 years. According to Rosegrant et al (2001) one-third of all children in
sub-Saharan Africa continue to go to bed hungry and have their mental and physical
development compromised by the ravages of hunger.
Poultry occupies a unique
position in terms of its contribution to the provision of high quality protein food to
rural smallholder farming families in Africa (Sonaiya et al 1999) and particularly in Ethiopia
(Tadelle 1996; Tadelle and Ogle 2001). There are only few
alternative animal protein sources available. There are also few cultural or religious
taboos that stand against the consumption of eggs and poultry meat in most countries. Both poultry meat and eggs enrich and contribute
to a well balanced diet to satisfy human needs. Village poultry could be particularly
important in improving the diet of young children in Sub-Saharan Africa. To date there are
no detailed studies conducted targeting comprehensive description of use patterns of
chicken and chicken products and understanding the associated socio-economic conditions,
the roles and function of local chicken as well as production constraints which will have
considerable relevance in view of envisaging future research and development directions
and strategies. Thus, the present study was conducted with the objectives of understanding the use patterns of chicken and chicken
products, socio-economic functions of birds and related constraints
This study was conducted in
five different agro-ecological regions of Ethiopia namely, Tilili, Horo,
Chefe, Jarso
and Tepi. Two market sheds per region and one
village per market shed consisting a total of 250 households were included in the study.
The selection of market sheds was made on the basis of information from previous studies
regarding the importance of sub-regional poultry markets and in consultation with experts
from Regional Agricultural bureaux. A total of 10 market sheds, each of which supply
chicken and chicken products to a sub-regional market and urban centre, were selected. The
assumption was that markets allow measurement of diverse functions of village poultry for
assessing opportunities and perspectives of village poultry. Villages were selected and
considered for the present study if chicken production exists in the village economy, no
prior improvement programs (distribution of exotic birds) were undertaken and villagers
were willing to participate in the study. Villages from each market shed were also
selected in consultation with agricultural experts in sub regional bureaux.
A structured questionnaire integrated with Participatory Rural Appraisal methods relevant
to rural poultry production were used.
Information was gathered from individual farmers, extension officers, essential informants
and village groups. The exercises were aimed at assessing the perspectives of the poultry
production system, its function and importance in the socio-economic lives of the
community. In addition information on the poultry production and management system
(organisation, ownership, flock characteristics, flock performance, use patterns of
poultry products and production management) and other related issues of poultry production
(e.g. relationship between poultry keeping and wealth status of each household) were
gathered. Problems prevailing in chicken production in each of the study villages, and
opportunities for improving poultry production were assessed and attempts were made to
closely examine other socio-economic aspects such as cultural roles of poultry production
in the respective study areas.
Finally, a transect walk was
made involving 10 households in each of the 10 study villages. Close visits in and around
the residential quarters of the villages were then made in order to obtain first hand
observation on all aspects of poultry production in individual households, and to involve
women in the households since their participation in the village meetings and other data
collection activities were rather restricted. Based on the assumption that each woman
farmer has an idea of the performance of her chicken a recall survey was conducted to
establish specific hen performance history in relation to production and productivity in
addition, use patterns of poultry products were assessed.
At the
commencement of the work, an initial inventory was made in each household and the number
and history of each breeding female was recorded. The
initial value and gross return of the flock was calculated using mean market prices
reported by households. Separate prices were used for different age group of chicken. The
gross return was expressed first as a cash figure and then relative to the value of the
initial inventory and also to the number of breeding females at the start of the recall
period. Home consumed chicken were considered as sold and their market prices were
considered. A year round market price of birds with different age and sex during ordinary
and religious and festival market days were recorded in one representative market (Debre
Zeit) in the central Ethiopia. Mean market price for ordinary market days and four
important religious and traditional festival eve market prices were considered for the
analysis.
The
qualitative and quantitative data sets were analysed using appropriate statistical
analysis procedures. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 1996), a computer-based
statistical software program, was employed. Analysis of variance was carried out
on some of the parameters (SAS 1987). The Duncan Multiple Range Test (Duncan 1955) was
used to locate treatment means that were significantly different. Correlation analysis was
also made to depict the influence of wealth status on flock characteristics, performance
indicators, use patterns of chicken and chicken products, and income from chicken farming
(Steel and Torrie 1980).
The least squares means of use patterns
of chicken and chicken products in the five study regions are given in Table 1. Analysis
of variance showed the presence of a statistically significant (p<0.001) difference in
use patterns of chicken and chicken products between the different study regions in
Ethiopia. However, no significant effect of market sheds within each region was depicted.
Table 1. Least Squares Means (LSM±SE) of use pattern of eggs and chicken (more than 8 weeks of
age) in the households of the five study regions of Ethiopia |
||||||
Study
regions |
Use patterns |
|||||
Eggs (%) |
Chicken (number) |
|||||
Sales |
Consumption |
Hatching |
Sales |
Consumption |
Replacement |
|
Tilili | 26.5ab |
17.1c |
56.7a |
7.3a |
2.5b |
5.6a |
Horro | 24.7ab |
21.4bc |
54.2a |
4.8c |
3.0b |
2.9bc |
Chefe | 30.1a |
17.5c |
52.7 a |
6.1b |
2.5b |
4.1ab |
Jarso | 30.7a |
24.2b |
44.9b |
5.9bc |
2.9b |
4.0ab |
Tepi | 21.5b |
37.7a |
39.9b |
3.5d |
4.5a |
2.5c |
SE | 2.5 |
2.2 |
2.9 |
0.41 |
0.21 |
0.57 |
Sig. | * |
** |
** |
** |
*** |
** |
Overall mean | 26.6±1.3 |
23.3±0.9 |
50.1±1.3 |
5.5±0.18 |
3.1±.09 |
3.8±0.25 |
Means were derived from 50 households per region abcd Means within a column followed by different superscripts show the presence of significant differences Significance level: * P<0.05; ** P<0.01; *** P<0.001 |
In order of importance, eggs were used
for hatching, sale and home consumption while chicks produced were used for sale,
replacement and home consumption. About 50, 27 and 23% of the eggs produced were reported
to be used for hatching, sale and home consumption, and 5.5, 3.8 and 3.1 birds were used
for sale, replacement, and consumption, respectively. Unlike the other four regions, which
followed the above trend, in the Tepi region,
eggs produced were used for hatching, home consumption and sale while chicks produced were
used for consumption, sale and replacement, respectively in decreasing order of
importance. Farmers from the Tepi region reported the lowest sale and the
highest home consumption of chicken and chicken products.
Highest proportions of eggs were sold in Jarso
and Chefe regions, whereas the highest
number of chickens sold were reported in the Tilili region.
A significant (p<0.05) and an inverse correlation (r = -0.22) was evident between
proportion of consumption and sale of eggs, showing a decrease in proportion of eggs
consumed at home with an increase in proportion of eggs sold by households, respectively
(Table 2).
Table 2. Correlation coefficients between flock characteristics, performance indicators and use patterns of village chicken production in Ethiopia | |||||||
|
Proportion of eggs consumed |
Proportion of eggs sold |
Proportion of
eggs set |
Number of eggs incubated |
Number of chicken consumed |
Number of chicken sold |
Wealth status |
Proportion of eggs sold | -0.22b |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proportion of eggs hatched | -0.58b |
-0.67 a |
|
|
|
|
|
Number of eggs/set | -0.05 NS |
-0.03 NS |
0.06 NS |
|
|
|
|
Number of chicken consumed | 0.26 b |
-0.07 NS |
-0.16 NS |
0.14NS |
|
|
|
Number of chicken sold | -0.29 a |
0.22 b |
0.03 NS |
0.12 NS |
-0.17 NS |
|
|
Wealth status of the HH | 0.37 a |
-0.20 b |
-0.12 NS |
0.01 NS |
0.34 a |
-0.14 NS |
|
Income from chicken farm | -0.25 b |
0.07 NS |
0.13 NS |
0.04 Ns |
-0.45 a |
0.27 a |
-0.48 a |
Significance level a P<0.01; b P<0.05; NS non-significant, HH household |
In all the study regions, households also kept birds for purposes other than for reproduction, sale, and consumption, in particular for their socio-religious functions at home. The plumage colour, sex, comb type, feather cover and age of the bird used were very important for socio-religious functions, as was the commitment of an individual to a particular spiritual being or a cosmic force, season and traditional and/or religious festival. Farm households from the study areas mentioned the socio-cultural role of birds and corresponding financial benefits as an important source of cash income from sales of birds. During group discussions, farmers mentioned colour, comb type and feather cover of birds as important selection criteria since very high market values are attached to these characters during socio-religious festivals. Special colour, comb type and down feather colour with corresponding sex and age in particular traditional and religious festivals fetch higher prices in the market as compared to the prices of the bird with the same colour, comb type and down feather colour in normal market days. The means and ranges of market prices of live chicken and eggs in ordinary market days and eves of four festival markets in Debre Zeit town (located in central Ethiopia) are presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Mean and ranges of market prices of live chicken and eggs in ordinary market days and market days on eves of four festivals in Debre Zeit, Ethiopia (2000/2001) | |||||
Market time |
Price of birds
(by age and sex) and eggs (Birr*/unit) |
||||
Mature male |
Mature female |
Growers |
Eggs |
||
Ordinary weekly market days | 11.9±2.7 (7-20)** |
8.0±1.9 (5-18) |
5.4±1.2 (3.5-10) |
0.31±0.04
(0.25-0.40) |
|
Market days of eves of festivals | |||||
-Eth. new year (Sept 12) | 21.5±4.3 (12.5-30) |
13.4±3.2 (9-25) |
9.0±1.9 (5-15) |
0.45±0.06 (0.29-0.50) |
|
-Meskel (Sep. 30) | 22.3±4.0 (15-30) |
13.7±3.0 (10-20) |
9.3±2.0 (7-16) |
0.46±0.05 (0.33-0.50) |
|
-X-mass | 21.4±3.9 (13-30) |
13.7±3.6 (6-25) |
9.1±2.4 (5-15) |
0.45±0.06 (0.29-0.50) |
|
-Easter | 24.7±3.8 (12.5-33) |
15.3±4.3 (8-32.5) |
10.2±3.0 (5-18) |
0.46±0.07 (0.29-0.66) |
|
Mean percentage increase of prices in festival markets (%) | 88.9 |
75.3 |
74.1 |
46.8 |
|
8.50 Birr is equivalent to 1 USD ** Ranges; *** Figures in bracket represents number of birds from which means were derived **** Figures in bracket represents number of sellers from which means were derived |
Mean percentage increase of prices in
festival markets were in decreasing order for mature male,
mature female, growers and eggs. In some
cases, live birds were also kept at home for spiritual uses, and never intended for
consumption. If the bird is female, she was allowed to lay eggs, which were not consumed,
but sold in the market and the money used to buy non consumable items. Apart from these
beliefs, traditional "healers"
prescribed a sacrifice or keeping a live bird at home for example, to ensure a safe
journey, to cure a sick person in the family etc. Sacrificed animals are usually consumed,
but some members of the family, often women, refuse to eat the meat. Birds of exotic
origin and naked necks were not accepted for sacrifice. Households except from Jarso market sheds, reported to invite special
guests to partake of the popular dish " doro
wat", which contains both chicken meat and eggs and is considered to be one of
the most exclusive national dishes in the country.
Mean values of reproductive
performance of breeding females of local chicken ecotypes under farmers'
management in Ethiopia over a period of one year are presented in Table 4. Economic
analysis was made based on the performance of breeding females from all the study areas.
The overall Gross Return as percent of initial values and Gross Return per breeding
female per year were 67.5% and 12.5 Birr, respectively.
Gross Return was highly
affected by survival rate of chicken. The mean age of breeding females in reproduction
were reported to be 3.9 years ranging from 2.5 to 5 years. The lowest was reported in the Tilili market shed and the highest in the Tepi market shed, respectively.
Table
4.
Mean
values of reproductive performance of breeding females of local chicken ecotypes under farmers
management in Ethiopia over a period of one year (2000/2001) |
||||||||
Study
regions |
|
Reproductive performance of breeding females |
Financial
value (Birr)* |
|||||
Mean No**.of breeding females/hh |
Mean No of hatchs per hen/ year |
Mean No. of chicks/ hatch |
Mean No of chicks survived (8 wks) |
Initial value (IV) |
Gross return (GR) |
GR as % of
IV |
GR
per breeding female |
|
Tilili (50) *** | 8 |
2.9 |
9.5 |
5.0 |
137.60 |
116.00 |
84.30 |
14.50 |
Horro (50) | 5 |
2.8 |
8.9 |
4.2 |
88.00 |
58.80 |
66.80 |
11.7 |
Chefe (50) | 4 |
3.0 |
9.8 |
4.9 |
72.40 |
58.80 |
81.20 |
14.70 |
Jarso (50) | 5 |
2.1 |
9.3 |
5.1 |
95.00 |
53.55 |
56.40 |
10.71 |
Tepi (50) | 4 |
2.3 |
8.9 |
4.6 |
82.00 |
42.32 |
51.60 |
10.58 |
Overall mean (250) | 5 |
2.6 |
9.3 |
4.8 |
92.50 |
62.40 |
67.50 |
12.48 |
* 8.50 Birr is equivalent to 1 USD, ** No. Number, *** Figures in bracket represents number of households from which means were derived |
Live birds and eggs are
usually sold in local markets, to civil servants and occasionally to middlemen for retail
in the larger towns and cities of the market sheds. In Tilili, Horro and Chefe regions, most of the middlemen were students
from the same and/or the surrounding villages. The estimated distance of the marketplace
from the villages varies from 1-7 km with an average of 2.8 km. According to farm
households, the largest off-take rates from the flock occur particularly during holidays
and festivals and during the onset of disease outbreaks. The latter is meant to prevent or
minimise expected financial losses from high morbidity and mortality. In such
circumstances prices fall dramatically due to the high supply compared to demand. At
times, nearly all the birds brought to a market should be sold at available price. This is
mainly exercised, as part of a precautionary measure to prevent introduction of disease(s)
to flocks at farm site from markets. Farmers also sell birds and eggs in order to meet
their cash requirement for small household expenditures.
The present study revealed that women have considerable knowledge about poultry and poultry production more than their men counterparts. In all the 10 study villages, it was found that it is mostly the women who own and manage the birds and control the cash generated from sales. Next in the picture come children and then men. The wealth status of the villagers influenced chicken production in the study areas. There was no statistically discernible (p>0.05) variation between wealth status and number of birds owned by households. However, it was learned that households with different wealth status have different objectives for keeping poultry and have different use pattern and management practices. On the one hand, wealthier families keep birds as a sideline activity and much of the products were used at home with only smaller proportion for sale. On the other hand, the poorer ones keep birds as a means of income generation through sales, and devote more time and effort to their management. These assertions were further confirmed by the significant (p<0.01) and negative correlation (r = -0.48) between wealth status and cash income from chicken farming. About 30.8, 23.2, 29.6 and 16.4% of the households, respectively, were earning a cash income of >300, 200-300, 100-200 and less than 100 Ethiopian Birr (1 USD=8 Ethiopian Birr) per year from sales of live chicken and eggs (Table 5).
Table 5. Mean percentage of households by wealth status and annual cash income from chicken farming in 250 households from five Agro-ecological regions in Ethiopia |
|||
|
Wealth status of the household |
||
Income from sales (Birr) |
Rich |
Medium |
Poor |
Tilili |
|
|
|
<100 |
30 |
43 |
12 |
100-200 |
10 |
17 |
24 |
200-300 |
20 |
17 |
29 |
>300 |
40 |
61 |
35 |
Horro |
|
|
|
<100 |
67 |
31 |
33 |
100-200 |
22 |
39 |
40 |
200-300 |
11 |
19 |
13 |
>300 |
- |
12 |
13 |
Chefe |
|
|
|
<100 |
20 |
- |
19 |
100-200 |
- |
21 |
25 |
200-300 |
60 |
24 |
63 |
>300 |
20 |
55 |
50 |
Jarso |
|
|
|
<100 |
25 |
23 |
7 |
100-200 |
50 |
48 |
47 |
200-300 |
25 |
26 |
33 |
>300 |
- |
3 |
13 |
Tepi |
|
|
|
<100 |
25 |
3 |
- |
100-200 |
50 |
28 |
8 |
200-300 |
25 |
35 |
15 |
>300 |
- |
35 |
77 |
Grand mean |
|
|
|
<100 |
16 |
||
100-200 |
30 |
||
200-300 |
23 |
||
>300 |
31 |
||
The criteria used in determining the wealth status of households as rich, medium and poor was considering the heads of cattle, land, number of coffee trees, the quality and number of Chat (Catha edulis) trees, income from off-farm activities etc owned by the household and based on the information from the key informants about the household. A household in the rich category in one location might be medium in the other location. |
Discussion
Although
it was difficult to determine the most important purpose due, for example, to the
difficulty in comparing the spiritual benefit of sacrifice with the financial benefit of
sale, based on the results of this study, indigenous chicken and chicken products have
direct use as sale, consumption and reproduction and equally the cultural, social and
religious functions of indigenous chicken types were important in all the study sites. The
most rational strategy for conserving livestock breeds is to ensure that they remain a
functioning part of the farm production system. Based on the results of this study, that
is certainly true for indigenous chicken as an important part of a balanced farming
system, conserving in their production environment is recommended but incorporating the
cultural and religious functions of indigenous chicken types is believed to play a role to
this end.
Adult productivity and educational attainment
depends, to a considerable extent, on the health and nutrition condition during early
childhood. An IFPRI report by Delgado (1999) showed that a healthy adult with a
nutritionally adequate diet has a higher level of economic productivity in both own-farm
production and labour market than the one who eats and keeps less well.
Poultry occupy a unique
position in terms of their contribution to the provision of high quality protein food to
rural smallholder farming families in Africa (Sonaiya et al 1999). There are only few
alternative animal protein sources available. There are also few cultural or religious
taboos that stand against the consumption of eggs and poultry meat in the study areas. Both poultry egg and meat enrich and contribute to
a well balanced diet to satisfy human needs. However, based on the results of this study,
the amount of egg and chicken consumed by farm households in the study areas is generally
below the needs for animal protein. According to Smith (1990) an average adult human needs
about 65g of protein a day of which only 10% needs to be protein of animal origin. Village
poultry could be particularly important in improving the diet of young children in
Sub-Saharan Africa in which currently inhabits about 33 million malnourished children,
which are below five years old (Rosegrant et al 2001) and responsible for deaths of
millions. Even though this discussion is being
made without a household nutrition survey and assuming that the farm households could get
their 50% animal protein requirements from other foods of animal origin e.g. milk and milk
products; one egg or 40g of poultry meat could provide animal protein needed to supply the
remaining 50% of essential amino acids to one person for two days. Provision of one egg
per person per two days would necessitate a production of 182 eggs per individual per
year. If a similar amount of protein could be
provided from chicken meat one 1.5 kg bird per person would be needed every two months.
The results of the present
study showed that a typical family in the study villages consists of one nourishing
mother, a man and four children aged 1, 5, 9 and 11. The total animal protein
requirements/day/family would, therefore, be 28.9g, 50% of which could be obtained from
three 50g eggs (6.1g protein/egg) a day or one 1.5 kg chicken (25g protein/100g chicken
meat) consumed by the family each week. Based
on the current number of hens and their productivity status, and assuming that all eggs
produced per year will be used for home consumption plus the number of chicken consumed by
farm households, it can be projected that a scavenging poultry flock could provide as much
as 50% of the animal protein requirements, which is sufficient to satisfy requirements for
only 120 days. From this depiction based on the prevailing production levels, it is
possible to satisfy only about 32% of the annual animal protein requirements for rural
families. Is that possible to increase the contribution of the present system to the
family food supply system?
It would appear that simple
changes in management practices (e.g. preferential provision of feed to newly hatched
chicks), home remedies (e.g. in door management of chicks) and including attention to
small details (e.g. control of predators) are believed capable of bringing losses well
below the reported high mortality and in turn improve the offtake rate from traditional
chicken farming. It is inferred that improving the offtake from traditional chicken
production as goal starting with changing the genetic potential which does not make sense,
if not harmful, through cockerel exchange programme or by using improved breeds before
showing the producers the possibility of breaking the cycle through vaccination against
Newcastle Disease, improving the husbandry aspect and curbing the very high chick
mortality is senseless. Above all it is important to make poultry producers aware that
there are options and that is possible to increase the benefits from local birds with
small additional inputs and improvements in management as the first step for improvement,
then thinking about breeding strategy to improve the genetic potential of the local birds.
This evolutionary development of the
present system to a more productive and efficient one is outlined by Bessei (1987) and
Sonaiya (1990). Local
farmers understanding and knowledge about poultry production can be used as a base to
further endeavours to this end.
Bessei W 1987 Tendencies of World poultry production. 3rd
international DLG symposium on poultry production in hot climates. June 20-24, 1987,
Hameln, Federal Republic of Germany,
Delgado C, Rosegrant M, Steinfeld H, Ehui S, and Courbois C, 1999 Livestock to 2020 the next revolution. Food, Agriculture and the Environment Discussion Paper 28.
Duncan D B 1955 Multiple range test and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11:1-42.
Rosegrant M, Michael S Paisner, Siet Meijer and Julie Witcover 2001 Global Food Projections to 2020. Emerging Trends and Alternatives. Washington DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
SAS (Statistical Analysis Systems) 1987 SAS/STAT user's guide, release 6.04. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC.
Smith A J 1990 The integration of rural production into the family food supply system. CTA-Seminar proceedings on Smallholder Rural Poultry Production 9-13 October 1990, Thessaloniki, Greece, 1: 15-128.
Sonaiya E B 1990 The systems approach to rural
poultry development. In: Sonaiya E.B. (editor). Rural Poultry in Africa:Proceedings of an
International workshop on rural poultry development in Africa, 13-16 November, 1989,
Ile-Ife, Nigeria, ANRPD, Ile-Ife, p 24-28.
Sonaiya E B, Branckaert R D S and Gučye E F 1999 Research and development options for family poultry. First INFPD/FAO Electronic Conference on Family Poultry: 7 December 1998 - 5 March 1999. http://www.fao.org/ag/aga/agap/lpa/fampo1/Intropap.htm
SPSS. (1996) Statistical Package for social Sciences. SPSS user's guide 10.0. SAS Institute Inc., Cary NC.
Steel R G D and Torrie J H 1980 Principles and procedures of statistics, 2nd edn., McGraw- Hill, New York, 633pp.
Tadelle D 1996 Studies on village poultry production systems in the central highlands of Ethiopia. M.Sc Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, pp 70.
Tadelle D and Ogle B 2001 Village poultry production systems in the central highlands of Ethiopia. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 33(6), 521-537.
Received 2 October 2002; Accepted 20 January 2003