Characterization of production system of Sudanese camel breeds

I A Ishag and M-K A Ahmed*

Department of Animal production, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Sinnar,
P. O. Box 11174, Khartoum, Sudan
Abu_elharith2006@yahoo.com
* Department of Genetics and Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Production,
University of Khartoum.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to attempt to illuminate the conditions under which camels are raised and to identify breeding goals of camel owners, husbandry practices and production constraints as an essential step towards the development of a sustainable breed improvement programme. A set of detailed structured questionnaires were used to collect information from camel breeding areas (Sinnar, Gadaref, Gezira and North Kordofan states).

The camels are a major component of the agro-pastoral system and are the dominant livestock species in parts of those states. The majority of camel owners in Sinnar, Gedaref and North Kordofan states indicated livestock breeding to be their main activity, while camel owners in Gezira state considered that both livestock and crop farming were their main activity. Camels have multi-functional roles in different production systems. Sales of animals are important for obtaining regular cash income, in addition to sales of agricultural crops, while milk production is used only for home-consumption. The serious production constraints which were defined by camel owners include lack of feeds, disease prevalence and water shortage. The priority of camel owners for genetic improvement was for a dual purpose animal (meat and milk production) rather than a specialized animal. However, racing ability also received some consideration.

Key words: Production systems

Introduction

Camels are an important livestock species in the arid and semi-arid zones in Asia and Africa. Camels contribute significantly to the livelihood of the pastoralists and agro-pastoralists living in the fragile environments of the deserts and semi deserts of Asia and Africa. The camel population in Sudan was estimated to be 3.908 millions heads (Ministry of Animal Resources 2005). They are well adapted to the local environmental conditions and can survive in zones which are prohibitive for other livestock species. They occupy a geographical zone to the north of latitude 14º N in the west and 16º N in the east (Wilson 1984).  

The camels of Sudan belong to the species Camelus dromedarius, and are owned and raised by nomadic tribes. Camel herders migrate north in the wet season and south during the dry season. Camels in the Sudan are classified as pack (heavy) and riding (light) types according to the function they perform. These traits were probably developed as a result of selection applied by the various camel owning tribes. The Sudanese heavy type camels constitute the majority of the camels kept by nomads in Sudan. Within this group two subtypes can be identified on the basis of conformation and tribal ownership: The Arab and Rashaidi camels. The Arab camel may be further subdivided into Light Pack, Big Arabi and Heavy Arabi. On the other hand, the riding camels are restricted to the north-east of the country between the Nile and Red Sea. The two main recognized riding types are Anafi and Red Sea Hills (Bishari) camels (El-Fadil 1986).

The increasing human population pressure and declining per capita production of food in Africa precipitated an urgent need to develop previously marginal resources, such as the semi-arid and arid rangelands, and to optimize their utilization through appropriate livestock production systems among which camel production is certainly the most suitable (Schwartz 1992). Despite the camel's considerable contribution to food security in semi dry and dry zones, and its being a major component of the agro-pastoral systems in vast pastoral areas in Africa and Asia, little is known about its production potential and production systems compared to other domestic animals. However, most previous research conducted on camels was oriented towards diseases, reproductive physiology and characterization (Mehari et al 2007). The available information on camel production potential and production systems especially in Sudan is inadequate.         

This study was carried out in four regions of camel breeding in western, central and eastern Sudan, with the objective of clarifying the conditions of production systems and to identify breeding goals, husbandry practices and production constraints as an essential step towards the development of a sustainable breed improvement program.    
 

Materials and methods

Sampling and questionnaire methodology

The survey was conducted through a questionnaire and guided interviews with camel owners in selected regions of the camel habitat. Four states were selected: Sinnar and Gezira states in central Sudan, Gedaref state in eastern Sudan and North Kordofan state in western Sudan.

A set of detailed structured questionnaires were prepared and used to collect information from a total of 103 camel owners in different states in interview conducted over single visit (Table 1). The questionnaires were pre-tested to check clarity and appropriateness of the questions. Some of the information collected during interviews was supported by observation. The questionnaires were designed to obtain information on general household characteristics, livestock and herd structure, herd management, breeding practices, disease prevalence, production objectives, feeding management and production constraints. 

Data analysis

The SPSS statistical computer software (SPSS for windows, release 15.0, 2006) was used to analyze the data. The analysis was implemented separately for camel owners of each state or region. Results are represented mainly in the form of descriptive tabular summaries. Chi-square, contingency table for independence was run for comparison between regions. Analysis of variance was also conducted for milk production and reproduction traits.

Results

General household information

Most camel owners were illiterate followed by those were completed primary school, while university graduates were fewer -- less than 2% (Table 2)

The majority of camel owners owned camel, sheep and goat; followed by those who owned camel, cattle, goat and sheep; then those who owned camel and sheep (Table 3). However, few of them owned camel and cattle or camel and goat or camel, cattle and sheep. The chi-square test for independence was found to be significant (χ² =59.0, P < 0.001).

 The majority of camel owners indicated that their main activity was livestock breeding; followed by those their main activity both livestock breeding and farming; while small number of them said that the farming was the main activity (Table 4). Significant differences (χ² = 23.2, P > 0.001) were found between regions in the main activities of interviewees.

The questionnaire survey showed the majority of respondents in studied regions grew crops (Table 5). The Chi-square test revealed insignificant (χ² = 3.64, P > 0.05) differences between regions. Sorghum and Sesame were the main crops grown by respondents in Sinnar, Gedaref and Gezira states. However, camel owners in North Kordofan grew Groundnuts and Roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa) in addition to Sorghum and Sesame. Less than fifty percent of respondents reported that they sold crops within the past 12 months. The differences between regions in percentages of respondents who sold crops within the past 12 months were insignificant (χ² = 2.3, P > 0.05).

 Management systems and migrations during past year

The majority of camel owners adopted a sedentary management system, followed by those owners adopted a nomadic system, while lowest of them adopted a transhumant system (Table 6). Moreover, the results showed that the highest percentage of the nomadic system was found in North Kordofan and Sinnar. On the other hand, the transhumant management system was found only in Gedaref. Significant differences were reported between camel owners in the type of camel management system adopted (χ² = 36.2, P < 0.05).

Most camel owners migrated with their animals during the last 12 months ( Table 7); in search of pasture and water and escaping from insects in the rainy season. Chi-square tests revealed insignificant differences between respondents in their migration during last 12 months (χ² = 7.18, P > 0.05).

Livestock herd size and camel herd composition

The results (analysis of variance) revealed that the regions have insignificant effect on the herd size of each species (Table 8). The average camel herd size in surveyed areas was 75.3 heads, the highest camel herd size was found in Gedaref state, followed by North Kordofan then Sinnar; while the Gezira had the smallest camel herd size. The highest cattle herd size was recorded in Gedaref while the smallest size recoded was in Gezira state. The average sheep flock size was found to be 158 heads. The largest flock size was recorded in Sinnar, followed by Gedaref and Gezira. However, North Kordofan state recorded the lowest sheep flock size. The results revealed that the average goat flock size in studied areas was 46.5 heads, the highest flock size was found in Gedaref state, followed by North Kordofan, Sinnar, while camel owners in Gezira had the lowest goat flock size. Always the camel herd was managed or herded by two persons, the oldest one called (Alrayes) who is the main herder, while the youngest one called (Angeeb) who is an assistant.

The percentage of she-camels in this study was 45.8% while the percentage of mature males was 3.1 (Table 9). Generally the female camels contribute about 74.0% of the total herd size. The young male and female calves (< 1 year) have almost similar percentages. The percentage of growing females (< 4 years) was greater than the percentage of growing males. Castrated animals were found only in North Kordofan state. The analysis of variance showed that region had insignificant influence on herd composition.

Camels sold, bought and died

Majority of camel owners sold animals within the 12 months preceding the survey period (Tables 10 and 11). The highest number of sold animals was recorded in Gedaref state, followed by Sinnar, North Kordofan, while the lowest number was recorded in Gezira state. The camels were sold for various reasons; in Gedaref state the camels were sold in order to buy sorghum residues after harvesting (straw), pay taxes and to cover family needs. The reasons in Gezira were to solve agricultural financial problems, pay taxes, cover family needs, buy breeding females (after selling male camels) and buy sorghum residues. In addition to the previous reasons, treating of animals and covering cost of camel herder were reported in Sinnar state. Chi-square test revealed insignificant differences between camel owners who sold or bought camels within the past year. The majority of camel owners did not buy animals within the last 12 months preceding the survey period. The largest number of animals bought was in North Kordofan followed by Gedaref, while the smallest numbers were recorded in Gezira and Sinnar. Generally, breeding purposes was the main reason for buying camels in all the studied areas (numbers of female camels bought more than males). Insignificant differences were found in numbers of camel sold or bought between regions.

 About the half of respondents reported that some of their camels died within the last 12 months (Table 12). The highest percentage of them was found in Sinnar state followed by Gezira Gedaref, while the lowest percentage recorded was in North Kordofan state. Regarding the number of dead camels, the Gedaref state ranked first with animals, followed by Sinnar then North Kordofan, while, the lowest percentage was found in Gezira state. Chi-square tests revealed insignificant differences between numbers of interviewees who had dead camels in the surveyed regions (χ² = 5.73, P > 0.05). Diarrhea of young calves (1-12 months) was the main cause of losses in camel herds in the studied areas. However, other diseases e.g. trypanosomiasis, internal worms, bloat and pneumonia were also important. Fractures, wounds and snake bites were also reported in different regions as a common factor in camel losses.   

 Breeding practices

The majority of camel owners kept breeding male camels (Table 13). Chi-square tests indicated insignificant differences between the numbers of camel owners who kept breeding camels in the studied regions. The results also revealed that the average number of breeding camels was 1.55 camels per herd, the largest number was found in Gezira state, followed by North Kordofan then Gedaref, while the lowest percentage was recorded in Sinnar state (Table 13). Camel owners who did not keep breeding camels reported the small size of herd and death of breeding camel as the main reasons for absence of a breeding camel. Two breeding seasons were identified in the surveyed regions: One in autumn (July - Oct.) and the other in winter (Nov. - Feb.). In herds with two breeding camels, the first was activated in the autumn breeding season and the other was used in the winter breeding season. The majority of breeding camels belonged to the pack type (Arabi camel and Rashaidi). However, in Gedaref, Gezira and Sinnar states breeding camels belonged to the riding type (Anafi and Bishari) were also observed.

 Majority of camel owners reported that the source of breeding camels was their own herds, then those purchased the breeding camel from the market, while small numbers said the breeding camel was from another herd (Table 14). The results showed that the average age of selection was 3.19 years; the significantly younger age of selection was recorded in Gedaref state, followed by North Kordofan then Gezira. A significantly older age of selection was found in Sinnar state. Also, the results (Table 14) showed that the average age of keeping breeding camels in the herd in the surveyed areas was 15.3 years. A significantly lower age was reported in Gedaref, and a significantly higher age of keeping was found in the Gezira state. The interviewees reported that the age of sexual maturity of breeding camels ranged between 6 and 8 years.

About the half of camel owners sold male camels that were not selected for breeding purposes, followed by those used camels for various purposes such as packing, drought power and riding, then those owners sold males as castrate camels (Table 15). While few of owners left male camels in the herd. However, the differences between regions were significant (χ² = 26.3, P < 0.01).

The majority of camel owners reported that they select replacement breeding camel from own herd, followed by those selected it from other herds, while only 4% of owners purchased replacement breeding camels from markets (Table 16). The majority of interviewees explained that they select the son of former breeding camel to become the new replacement breeding camel. Dam reproduction and milk performance, sire performance, body size, conformation of animal selected, grazing behavior, health and vigor were the most important characteristics for camel owners when selecting breeding camels of pack types (Arabi and Rashaidi camel). However, dam and sire performance, shape of animal selected and racing ability were the most important properties for camel owners when selecting breeding camels of the riding types (Anafi and Bishari).

The study showed that the improvement of camel for milk and meat production is ranked first, then the improvement for meat and for milk and racing (Table 17). The improvement of camels for racing only ranked last. The majority of camel owners in Sinnar and North Kordofan were improved their camels for meat and milk production. In Gezira state the majority of interviewees improved their camels for milk and racing. Significant differences were found between respondents of surveyed regions in goals of camel improvement (χ² = 74.6, P< 0.01).

 The majority of camel owners in studied regions stated that they have plans to improve their camels (Table 18). The half of them reported that they improve camel production by selection of the best breeding camel followed by those improve their camels by selection and feeding together. However, few proportions of them said that they improve camels by feeding.

Milk production and reproductive performance

The results showed that the camels of Gedaref states produced insignificantly more milk, followed by Gezira then Sinnar while North Kordofan she-camels produced an insignificantly lower amount of milk (Table 19). The camel owners reported that camels produced the highest milk yield in autumn because of the abundance of lush pastures and sufficient water. Rashaidi tribe milked their camels twice a day. However, other tribal groups milked their camels 3-4 times a day. The results of this study showed that the average lactation length in Sudanese camels was 11.5 months, the camels of Sinnar state lactated a significantly shorter period than those of Gedaref, Gezira and North Kordofan states.

The results revealed that the age at first calving and calving interval were influenced by regions, but the number of services per conception and age for keeping she-camels in the herd were not affected (Table 20).

 Purposes of keeping camels

Of the interviewees, 56.3% said that the keeping of camels is a way of life; followed by those said they keep camels because they cost little and their revenues are high; then those reported that they keep camels because they are drought tolerant and perform well in extremely dry years (Table 21). However, few of interviewees reported that they kept camel as a reservoir of wealth. Chi-square test observed significant differences between interviewees of surveyed areas in objectives of camel keeping (χ² = 42.8, P < 0.001). Income from sale of animals, milk for home consumption, insurance against financial crises and investment opportunity were also reported as reasons of camel keeping.

Feeding and watering

The majority of camel owners considered that the feeding and water supply respectively were important constraints to their herd production (Table 22). Significant differences were found between camel owners of studied regions who considered that feeding was a constraint to herd production and those who disagreed (χ² = 31.0, P < 0.001), but there were no significant differences between camel owners in considering water supply as a constraint (χ² = 6.89, P > 0.05). The camels depend mainly on grazing and browsing, but in Gedaref and Gezira the weak animals were fed concentrates (Sorghum grains and cakes) in the dry season. Minerals (salt) were commonly used as a nutritional additive in surveyed areas.

Animal health and camel production constraints

Data of Table 23 shows the incidence of diseases during the past 12 months and sources of veterinary help available. The majority of respondents reported the incidence of diseases within the 12 months preceding the survey. The highest percentage was reported by respondents of Sinnar state followed by those of Gezira, Gedaref state, while the lowest percentage was reported by respondents of North kordofan. Insignificant differences were observed between respondents of studied regions in disease incidence (χ = 1.84, P > 0.05). Also results revealed that the majority of camel owners in surveyed areas found veterinary help from drug suppliers, followed by those found help from private services, then those found the veterinary help from government services (Table 23). Insignificant differences were found between respondents of studied regions in disease incidence (χ² = 14.1, P > 0.05). 

 Mange, ring worms, pneumonia, trypanosomiasis, anthrax, external parasites (ticks and lice), internal parasites (worms) and calf's diarrhea were prevalent diseases in the studied areas (Table 24). Trypanosomiasis was reported as the most important disease by camel owners in Sinnar, Gedaref and in North Kordofan states. In contrast camel owners in Gezira state reported that the mange was the most important disease. Chi-square tests showed significant differences between camel owners for important diseases reported (χ² = 96.6, P < 0.001).

Lack of livestock feed was mentioned as the most important constraint by most of the camel owners in Gedaref, Gezira and North Kordofan (Table 25). Disease was the second most important constraint, but it ranked as the most important constraint in Sinnar state. Water shortage was also considered as a constraint by camel owners in Sinnar and North Kordofan. A small portion of camel owners in the surveyed areas mentioned that labour, capital, taxes and lack of security were important constraints. Chi-square tests showed significant differences between interviewees in their choice of serious constraints which influence camel production in surveyed areas (χ² = 79.0, P < 0.001).

 Discussion

Camels are a major component of the agro-pastoral systems in arid and semi arid zones, in addition to other species (sheep, goat and cattle). In the northern part of the camel belt in Sudan the annual rainfall is relatively low (semi desert) and limited cultivation is practiced to meet all or part of the family requirements, while in the southern part of the camel's belt the annual rainfall is relatively moderate (poor savannah).

This study revealed that the interviewees bred mixed species of animals in surveyed areas. Few of them bred only camel, while the majority bred camel with sheep and goat. The highest percentage of camel owners who bred camel, sheep and goat were found in North Kordofan state because the environment in this region is very harsh and more suitable for these animals rather than cattle. The variety of species raised allows for optimum use of the available scant vegetation. Sheep and goats thrive in years of good rainfall while camels are the mainstay in years of poor or below average rainfall. The highest percentage of respondents owning cattle was found in Sinnar state; this region is the homeland of Kenana cattle, and is located in the southern part of the camel's belt. It is rich in vegetation and suitable for cattle breeding. The study showed that the majority of camel owners considered livestock breeding to be their main activity, followed by those raising livestock and farming and then those considered that the farming was their main activity. On the other hand; the most of camel owners cultivated crops during the 12 months preceding the conduct of the survey, while few of them sold crops in the same period. The shortage of rainfall might be the reason behind the small percentage of camel owners who sold crops. These findings indicate that camels are kept in a mixed crop-livestock production system and that they are the most important component of the agro-pastoralist system in Sudan.

Three camel production systems were found in the studied areas of Sudan: Nomadic, transhumant and sedentary system. The nomadic system was adopted by respondents mainly found in Sinnar and North Kordofan state; this finding is similar to that reported by Al-Khouri and Majid (2000). Small proportion of camel owners adopted a semi-nomadic or transhumant system, and those were exclusively found in Gedaref state (eastern Sudan). This finding is in agreement with the reports of Al-Khouri and Majid (2000); Bakheit (1999) and Abbas et al (1992). The majority of camel owners in this study adopted a sedentary management system, and most of them were observed in Gezira, Gedaref and Sinnar states, this is agree with that found by Al-Khouri and Majid (2000). These three management systems were also reported in Pakistan (Aujla et al 1998). The results of this study revealed that the majority of respondents migrated with their herds during the past year in response to availability of grazing and water supplies and escaping from insects. Similar findings were also reported by Al-Khouri and Majid (2000); Wardeh (1989); Abbas et al (1992) and Agab and Abbas (1993).     

The average camel herd size in this study was found to be 75.3 heads. This finding is reasonably close to that reported by Ali (1998), but it is not that reported by Koheler-Roollefson et al (1991) and Djelloli and Saint Martin (1991). The female camels contribute about 74% of the total herd size. This result is similar to that reported by Ali (1998); but it is higher than that found by Wilson (1984). Where mature females contribute 45.8% of total herd size; this value was relatively smaller than that observed by Ali (1998) and Algayli et al (1998). Differences in camel herd size and herd structure are probably a reflection of the differences between regions in the availability of feed and water. They may also reflect the degree of development of local markets and the extent to which camel production has developed into an economic venture rather than a way of life.

The results showed that the most of respondents sold camels during the 12 months preceding survey time. The highest percentage of respondents who sold camels was observed in Gedaref state because the Rashadi tribe members in this state always sell growing males in contrast with other tribal groups who keep male camels for longer periods. The Rashaidi herders are involved in brisk cross border trade with neighbouring countries and that makes them more sensitive to market demand and more likely to sell and buy animals. Few of respondents bought camels during past year, the majority of camels bought being females for breeding purposes, herd replacement and to build up herd size. The results also showed that the interviewees reported camel death during the past 12 months. The highest percentage of reported deaths was in Sinnar state, while the highest absolute number of camels lost was reported in Gedaref state. The excessively high numbers of reported deaths in these two regions are related to the prevalence of serious diseases such as Trypanosomiasis and calf diarrhea.

There was a total lack of a recording system in all studied areas. None of the interviewees reported that he recorded the performance or health status of his herd. The influence of the high cost of keeping a male breeding camel in a small herd was observed in this study. The selection of breeding camels at a young age before maturity was also noted. The technique by which the Rashaidi tribe in Gedaref state prevent the increase of inbreeding was by shortening the herd life of the male breeding camels and in this manner prevent sires from serving their daughters.         

The lactation length in this study is in close agreement with the previous findings of Mehari et al (2007) and Farah (1996). However, the estimate of lactation length in this study is shorter than that reported by Schwartz and Walsh (1992), but shorter lactation length than the estimate found in the present study was reported by Alemayehu (2001). The milking frequency in the present study ranged between 2 to 4 times in a day. This finding is in reasonable agreement with the finding of Mehari et al (2007). The estimated mean daily milk yield during the early stage of lactation in this study was similar to that reported by Mehari et al (2007), while the estimated daily milk yield during middle and end of lactation were lower than that reported by Mehari et al (2007).

Results of this study showed that the majority of respondents improved their camels for both meat and milk production. These findings are not different from the findings of Algayli et al (1998). The majority of camels in the Sudan belong to the pack type (Arabi and Rashaidi camels); the Arabi camel has a wide geographic distribution in the Sudan due to its good performance for meat and milk. Wardeh (2004) in his new classification of camels placed the Arabi camel in the class of dual purpose animals (meat and dairy production). In this study, most camel owners had plans to improve their camels' production but this planned improvement did not have any scientific basis.  

The statement that camel raising was a way of life was the manner in which most owners explained the purpose of camel keeping in this study, The low cost of camel keeping and the fact that camels are drought tolerant animals able to survive in severe conditions compared to other livestock were also offered as reasons for keeping camels. None of the respondents stated the sale of camel milk as an objective of camel keeping, but camel milk was used for home-consumption. 

Generally, feed and water supply were considered as constraints in different regions, but were considered to be most serious in Gezira and Gedaref states. This is probably due to the decrease in available range land as a result of the encroachment of mechanizing agriculture on traditional pastures in these two regions. Most of the income of camel owners was spent on the purchase of crop residues in Gezira and Gedaref states. The camel owners in other regions (Sinnar and North Kordofan) solve the shortage of feed and water by adopting a long migration route to the south.

Most respondents in all studied areas reported disease incidence during the past 12 months. The highest percentage incidence was observed in Sinnar state. Trypanosomiasis was found to be the important camel disease in Sinnar, Gedaref and North kordofan; while the mange was observed as an important disease in Gezira state. Trypanosomiasis is an endemic disease in the southern part of the camel belt. The migration pattern of camel owners of Sinnar, Gedaref and North Kordofan state maintain the transmission cycle between the parasite and vector. On the other hand, the study revealed a deficiency in government veterinary services in comparison with private veterinary services and drug suppliers. This is attributed to the policy of liberalization of the economy and the sudden shift from complete government sponsorship to private veterinary services which provide care at market prices (El-Sammani et al 1999). As a result, the high cost of veterinary services and drugs put the services beyond the reach of poor herders in rural areas (Musa 2007).

Conclusions

• Camels play an important role in the livelihood of people found in dry and semi dry zones, and have potential for greater contribution through better health management, feeding and genetic improvement.

• Further studies and research to identify the genetic potential of Sudanese camels for milk and meat production and racing ability are needed to use the information in different programs of genetic improvement.

• A functional recording system is an important component of genetic improvement. Such a system was not observed in the studied areas and it is extremely important to encourage camel owners to keep records.

• Unfavorable production conditions (lack of feeds, shortage of water, diseases prevalence and lack of security) were defined.

• The priority of genetic improvement objective among camel owners was for dual purpose animals (meat and dairy production), while racing ability was given little consideration.

• A genetic improvement programme for camel breeds could be built on indigenous practices and knowledge through additional support by government authorities.

References

Abbas B, Chabeuf N, Saint-Martin G, Bonnet P, Millairid A, Bashir H and Musa M E 1992 Camel Pastoralim in Butana and Northern Sudan. Nomadic People, 31: 64-84.

Agab H and Abbas B 1993 Epidemiological studies on camels diseases in eastern Sudan:  http://www.fao.org/docrep/X1700T/x1700t06.htm

Alemayehu G 2001 Breeding programs and evaluation of semen characteristics of camels in the central rift valley of Ethiopia. An MSc. Thesis presented to the School of Graduate studies of Alemaya University.

Algayli A, Alakanah M M and Mansour H 1998 Systems and aspects of camel production in Saudia Arabia. Arab agricultural research journal 2,1: 108-129

Ali M S 1998 Some husbandary aspects of camels in the Butana area in eastern Sudan. M.Sc. thesis faculty of Animal production, University of Khartoum.

Al-Khouri F and Majid A M 2000 Camels in Sudan: Ecolology, Production Systems, Characterization and Herd Dynamics. The Camel Applied Research and Development Network CARDN/ACSAD/Camel/ P96/2000, Damascus.

Aujla K M, Jasara A W and Munir M 1998 The socio-economics profile of camel herders in South-western Mountains Areas of Pakistan. Proceedings of the third annual meeting for animal production under arid condition. Vol. 2:154-174.

Bakheit S A 1999 Studies on milk production and composition of camels (Camelus dromedarius) under nomadic system. M.Sc. thesis. Faculty of Animal Production, University of Khartoum.

Djelloli M S and Saint Martin G 1991 Productivity and economy of camel breeding in Tunisia. Proc. 1^st international camel conference. Tobouk. Libya, 209-212.

El-Fadil S A 1986 Study on the mechanism of resistance to camel diseases. Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Agricultural Science. George­August-university, Gottingen.

El-Sammani M O, Zaroug M and Awad F 1999 Review of OXFAM/ Livestock Programme. OXFAM U.K., Khartoum, Sudan

Farah Z 1996 Camel milk properties (SKAT). Swiss federal institute of Technology ETH-Zentrum, LFO, CH-8092 Zurich. pp.67.

Kohler-Rellefson I, Musa B E and Fadl Achmel M 1991 The camel pastoral system of the Southern Rashaidi in eastern Sudan. Nomadic people, 29.

Mehari Y, Mekuriaw Z and Gebru G 2007 Potentials of camel production in Babilie and Kebribeyah woredas of the Jijiga Zone, Somali Region, Ethiopia. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 19 (4). http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd19/4/meha19058.htm

Ministry of Animal Resources 2005 Department of Statistics and Information, Khartoum-Sudan.

Musa L M-A 2007 Characterization and utilization of dairy cattle in Sudan. Ph.D. thesis. Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin.

Schwartz H J and Walsh M G 1992 The productive potential of the camel. In: Schwarz H J and Dioli M 1992 The one-humped camels (Camelus dromedarius) in Eastern of Africa: A pictorial guide to diseases, health care and management. Verlag Josef, Scientific books D-6992 Weikersheim Federal Republic of Germany.

Schwartz H 1992 The camel (Camelus dromedarius) in Eastern Africa. In: Schwarz H J and Dioli M 1992 The one-humped camels (Camelus dromedarius) in Eastern of Africa: A pictorial guide to diseases, health care and management. Verlag Josef, Scientific books D-6992 Weikersheim Federal Republic of Germany. 

Wardeh M F 1989 Arabian Camels: Origin, Breeds and Husbandary. Al-Mallah Publ., Damascus. 500 pp. (Arabic).

Wardeh M F 2004 Classification of the Dromedary Camels. Journal Camel Science. 1:1-7.

Wilson R T 1984 The camel. Longman group limited, Essex, U.K. 158-159.

Received 11 October 2010; Accepted 3 December 2010; Published 6 March 2011

Go to top