|Livestock Research for Rural Development 31 (12) 2019||LRRD Misssion||Guide for preparation of papers||LRRD Newsletter||
Citation of this paper
This study aimed to evaluate milk production of 3 local camel breeds (Arabi, Kenani and Deali) reared under semi-intensive system as influenced by season (summer, autumn and winter). A total number of 6755 milk yield samples were collected from daily milk production records of 21 multiparous female lactating camels in their early lactation. Marked seasonal changes in the ambient temperature (Ta ºC), relative humidity (RH %) and rainfall (mm) was recorded. Milk production influenced significantly (P<0.0001) by camel breed, season and the interaction between camel breed and season. Significantly (P<0.0001) higher milk production was recorded by Arabi breed (2380±2 litre, mean: 6.3±0.3 litre/day) compared to Kenani and Deali breeds (2024±1 litre mean: 5.9±0.3 and 1994±1 litre mean: 5.3±0.3 litre/day, respectively). A significant (P<0.0001) higher mean value of milk production was recorded by Arabi breed during autumn (6.6±0.6 litre/day) compared to the respective breeds (5.6±0.5 and 5.2±0.6 litre/day). Arabi breed can be considered as a main dairy breed in camel reared under semi-intensive farms in Sudan.
Keywords: camel, breed, milk production, season
In few last decades, the potential changes in temperature, rainfall and wind patterns associated with the global climate change have been observed to have a dramatic influence on the distribution of animals, nutritive value and chemical composition of pasture plants (FAO 2016). The mentioned environmental changes were reported to have a significant impact on livestock health and productivity, distribution and prevalence of diseases and influence feed quantity and quality (Abdelatif and Elnageeb 2014; FAO 2016).
Camels are recognised as suitable species for sustainable livestock production in arid and semi-arid areas (Eisa and Mustafa 2011; Faye 2013) due to their capability to survive and producing milk under harsh, hot and dry environments (Schwartz 1992; Bekele et al 2002; Raziq et al 2008). Therefore, camels have been proposed as an alternative part of the solution to confront the rapid climatic change (Faye 2015; Al Jassim and Veerasamy 2015).
Sudan is one of the largest countries in the world populated by dromedary camels (4845 million heads, FAOSTAT 2019) in which camels are concentrated in the main two regions: the Eastern region in Butana and the red sea hills, and Western region in Darfur and Kordofan (Faye et al 2011). Camels in Sudan are mainly kept under traditional management system as a source of milk, meat, and as pack and riding animal (Bakheit et al 2015; Shuiep et al 2014); however, El Zubier and Nour (2006) and Babiker and El Zubeir (2014) described camel husbandry and practices under intensive and semi-intensive systems in pre-urban area of Khartoum State.
Milk production of camels varied depending on the region (Kamoun and Jemmali 2012), breed (Elkhair et al 2017), season (Zeleke 2007; Nagy et al 2017; Elkhair et al 2017), stage of lactation (Al-Saiady et al 2012; Nagy et al 2017; Hadef et al 2018) and production system (Dowelmadina et al 2015; Bakheit et al 2015; Mostafa et al 2017). In Sudan, milk production of the camels has been considered to be 5-10 kg/day (Agab 1993). In Sudan, seasonal variations in milk production of camels have been reported by Salman (2002) and Elkhair et al (2017) who reported higher milk production during the rainy season and lower values during summer. However, few data is available regarding the interaction between camel breed, season and milk production under semi-intensive system. Therefore, the study aimed to provide additional and useful information on the effect of camel breed and season on milk production under semi-intensive system in Khartoum State, Sudan.
The study was carried out at Camel Research Centre, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Khartoum (Shambat, Khartoum state, Sudan) during 3 seasons: summer, autumn and winter (July 2012-June 2013). Shambat area (Latitude 15° North, 32 ͦ Longitude East) was described by Andrews (1948), Smith (1949) and Harrison and Jackson (1958) as a part of Acacia desert scrub.
The mean values of maximum and minimum ambient temperature (Ta°C) rainfall (mm) and relative humidity (RH %) during the experimental period was obtained from Shambat Meteorological Unit, Khartoum State (Figure 1).
|Figure 1. Meteorological data obtained during the study period at Shambat area, Khartoum State, Sudan|
Twenty one multiparous lactating camels in their early lactation were used. The animals were reared under semi-intensive system. The lactating camels were maintained on grazing grass and herbs and browsing shrubs and trees for two hours daily (9-11 am) on an open areas surrounding the farm until mid-day and then they were kept inside the farm for milking and supplement feeding, which was consisted of a mixture of traditional ingredients: crushed Sorghum bicolor, groundnut cake, molasses, and Sorghum lactabiocolor (Abu 70) as roughages. The animals had free access to fresh water.
A total number of 6755 milk yield samples were collected from daily milk production records of 3 local breeds: Arabi, Kenani and Deali. The milk yield was determined by milking front teats 2 times per day while the other 2 teats were left for suckling calves (University farm milking protocol). The total milk yield for whole udder was estimated by multiplying milk production from the two teats by two.
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS for Windows version 20. The statistical measurements were estimated using General Linear Model (GLM) procedures. ANOVA tests (Levine’s Test and Post Hoc Test) were used to assess the possible significant differences among camel breeds and seasons. The differences among the means were determined using Duncan multiple range test. The mean difference was considered significant at p ≤0.05.
|Figure 2. Natural grazing and browsing pattern of the lactating camels at Shambat area|
The majority of the plant species (14) were shrubs, small trees and trees, which indicated that the lactating camels were selected browser rather than grazer due to their superior anatomical adaptation for browsing. Similar results have been observed by Amin et al (2005) who concluded that the anatomical adaptations of camels such as the mobile and prehensile split upper lip, the long tongue, the horny nature of the oral cavity, the stretched neck and the extended head enabled camels to browse more than to graze. Furthermore, the consumption of different parts of plants by the lactating camels could be attributed that the lactating camels try to select a part of the plant (leaves, young twigs, pods, inflorescence and fruits) with higher nutritive values to meet their lactation requirement. Alkali et al (2017) stated that energy expenditure and transfer of nutrients through lactation in camels increase their selectivity for food sources rich in nitrogen, sodium or calcium.
|Table 1. Plants selected by lactating camels during natural browsing at Shambat area (Scientific names of plants has been reviewed by African Plant Database, 2014)|
|Family||Botanical name||Local name||Habit||Part (s) consumed|
|Amaranthaceae||Amaranthus viridis L.||Lisan El Teir||Herb||Leaves|
|Aristolochiaceae||Aristolochia bracteolata Lam.||Um Gelagel||Herb||Leaves|
|Asteraceae||Sonchus asper (L.) Hill.||Moleita||Herb||Leaves and stems|
|Balanitaceae||Balanites aegyptiaca (L.) Delile.||Higeleeg||Tree||Leaves|
|Boraginaceae||Cordia sinensis Lam.||Andrab||Small tree||Leaves and fruits|
|Capparidaceae||Capparis deciduas Forssk. Edgew||Tundub||Shrub||Young twigs and ripe fruits|
|Fabaceae||Indigofera oblongifoliaForrsk||Dahassir||Herb||Leaves and pods|
|Fabaceae Sub family: Caesalpinioideae||Parkinsonia aculeate||Sesban abu Shoka||Shrub or small Tree||Leaves and inflorescences|
|Fabaceae Sub family: Mimosoideae||Acacia laeta R. Br. ex Benth.||Subahi||Shrub||Young twigs and leaves|
|Fabaceae Sub family: Mimosoideae||Acacia mellifera (Vahl) Benth.||Kiter||Shrub||Young twigs and leaves|
|Fabaceae Sub family: Mimosoideae||Acacia nilotica (L.) Willd. ex Delile subsp. nilotica||Sunt||Tree||Young twigs, leaves, inflorescence|
|Fabaceae Sub family: Mimosoideae||Acacia seyal (Del.) var. seyal.||Talih Ahmer||Tree||Young twigs, leaves, inflorescence & immature pods|
|FabaceaeSub family: Mimosoideae||Faidherbia albida (Delile) A. Chev.||Haraz||Tree||Young twigs, leaves, inflorescences & pods|
|Fabaceae Sub family: Mimosoideae||Prosopis juliflora (Sw.) DC.||Mesquite||Shrub||Young twigs, leaves, inflorescence & immature pods|
|Meliaceae||Khaya senegalensis (Desr.) A. Juss.||Mahogani||Tree||Young twigs and leaves|
|Poaceae||Cyndon dactylon (L.) Pers||Nageela||Grass||Leaves and stems|
|Rhamnaceae||Ziziplus spina -christi||Sidir||Shrub or small tree||Young twigs, leaves and fruits|
|Salvadoraceae||Salvadora persica L.||Arak||Shrub||Leaves and ripe fruits|
Milk production data Table 2 shows that milk production influenced significantly (P<0.0001) by camel breed, season and the interaction between camel breed and season. Significantly (P<0.0001) higher milk production was recorded by Arabi breed (2380±2 litre, mean: 6.3±0.3 litre/day) compared to Kenani and Deali breeds (2024±1 litre mean: 5.9±0.3 and 1994±0.9 litre mean: 5.3±0.3 litre/day, respectively).
|Table 2. Milk production of 3 local camel breeds under semi-intensive system, Khartoum State, Sudan|
|Parameter||Breed||Level of significance||P- value|
|Arabi||Kenani||Deali||Breed||Season||Breed × Season|
|Daily milk production (litre)||6.3 a±0.3||5.9 b±0.3||5.3 c±0.3||***||***||***||0.0001|
|Total milk production (litre)||2380 a±2||2024 b±1||1994 c±1||***||***||***||0.0001|
|a, b, c Means within the same row bearing different superscripts are significantly different at ***P<0.0001|
|Figure 3. Effect of breed on milk production of dromedary camel under semi-intensive system|
In the present study, Arabi breed represents higher milk production compared to the respective breeds, which attributed to the variations on the genetic potential for milk production between the three breeds. The significant influence of camel breed on milk production is in agreement with those reported previously by other investigators (Gaili et al 2000; Riyadh et al 2012; Dowelmadina and El Zubeir 2014; Elkhair et al 2017). Furthermore, the significant higher milk production during autumn season could be attributed to the forage and water availability, supplementary diets, health care that oriented to lactating camels used. Similar has been reported by Tekle and Tesfay (2013) who stated that higher mean value of daily milk production was recorded during the rainy season in Ethiopia. Many researchers found that season had significant impact on milk production in camels (Bakheit et al 2008; Shuiep et al 2008; Musaad et al 2013; Nagy et al 2017; Elkhair et al 2017).
The climatic data obtained in the present study revealed that the higher ambient temperature recorded during summer season was accompanied by a significant lower (P<0. 0001) milk production. On the other hand, the results presented in Figure 2 indicated that Arabi and Kenani breeds showed approximately equal values of milk production during summer compared to Deali breed. This pattern of response can be explained by both Arabi and Kenani continue to produce milk under hot summer conditions; however, Kenani breed showed a significant drop in milk production during autumn and winter seasons compared to Arabi breed. Therefore, the present study recommends Arabi breed to be considered as the main breed for camel milk production in semi-intensive farms in Sudan.
The authors thank Camel Research Centre authorities, University of Khartoum (Sudan), for their assistance during the experimental work. We would like to extend our thanks to the staff of Sudan Meteorological Authority, Khartoum and Shambat Unit for their collaboration.
Abdelatif A M and M E Elnageeb 2014. Impact of Climate Change on Livestock Welfare and Productivity in Sudan: Assessment and Alleviation. Proceedings of the International Conference: Veterinary Education, Professional Development and Community Service, 19-21 January 2014, Khartoum, Sudan.
African Plant Database 2014 www.ville-ge.ch/musinfo/bd/recherche.php.
Agab H 1993 Epidemiology of camel diseases in Eastern Sudan with emphasis on brucellosis. MVSc. Thesis, University of Khartoum.
Al Jassim R and Veerasamy S 2015 Review paper: Climate change and camel production: impact and contribution. Journal of Camelid Science, 8: 1–17.
Alkali H A, Muhammad B. F., Njidda, A. A., Abubakar, M. and Ghude, M. I. (2017). Relative forage preference by camel (Camelus dromedarius) as influenced by season, sex and age in the Sahel zone of north western Nigeria. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 12(1):1-5. http://www.academicjournals.org/AJAR.
Al-Saiady M Y, Mogawer H H, Faye B, Al-Mutairi S, Bengoumi E, Musaad M and Gar-Elnaby A 2012 Some factors affecting dairy she-camel performance. Emirate Journal of Food and Agriculture, 24(1):85-91.
Amin A S A, Abdoun K A and Abdelatif A M 2007 Seasonal variation in botanical and chemical composition of plants selected by one-humped camel (Camelus dromedarius). Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 10(6): 932-935.
Andrews F W 1948Vegetation of the Sudan, In Agriculture in the Sudan (ed. J.D. Tothill), Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Babiker W I A and El Zubeir I E M 2014 Impact of husbandry, stages of lactation and parity number on milk yield and chemical composition of dromedary camel milk. Emirate Journal of Food and Agriculture, 26: 333-341
Bakheit S A, Faye B, and Ibrahim I E 2015 Effect of improving management system on camel milk production. University of Kordofan Journal of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, 2(2): 13-22.
Bakheit S A, Majid A M and Abu-Nikhila A M 2008. Camels (Camelus dromedarius) under pastoral systems in North Kordofan, Sudan: Seasonal and parity effects on milk composition. Journal of Camelid Science, 1: 32-36.
Bekele T, Zeleke M and Baars R M T2002 Milk production performance of the one humped camel (Camelus dromedaries) under pastoral management in semi-arid eastern Ethiopia. Livestock Production Science, 76: 37-44.
Dowelmadina I and El Zubeir I E M 2014 Impact of Management Systems and Breeds on Milk Yield and Herd Structure of Dromedary Camel. Proceedings of International Conference: Research on Food Security, Natural Resource Management and Rural Development, 17-19 September 2014 Prague, Czech Republic.
Dowelmadina I M M, E l Zubeir I E M, Arabi O H M H and Abaker A D 2015 Performance of she camels under traditional nomadic and semi-intensive management in Sudan. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 27(6), Article #107. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd27/6/dowe27107.htm
Eisa M O and Mustafa A B 2011 Production systems and dairy production of Sudan camel (Camelus dromedarius): A review. Middle- East Journal of Science Research 7(2):132-135.
El Zubeir I E M and Nour E M 2006 Studies on some management practices in pre-urban areas of Khartoum State, Sudan. International Journal of Dairy Science, 1:104-112.
Elkhair N M, Ahmed M H and Abdelatif A M 2017 Influence of season and breed on monthly milk production of dromedary camels reared under semi-intensive system. Journal of Camel Practice and Research, 24(3):229-234.
FAO 2016 Climate change and food security: risks and responses. www.fao.org
FAOSTAT 2019 FAO STAT online statistical service. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QA December 20, 2018.
Faye B 2013 Camel farming sustainability: the challenges of the camel farming system in the XXIth century. Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(12), 74-82.
Faye B 2015 Role, distribution and perspective of camel breeding in the third millennium economies. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture, 27 (4): 318-327
Faye B, Abdelhadi O M A, Ahmed A I and Bakheit S A 2011 Camel in Sudan: future prospects. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 23 (10) 2011, Article #219. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd23/10/faye23219.htm
Gaili E S E, Al-Eknah M M and Sadek M H 2000 Comparative milking performance of three types of Saudi camels (Camelus dromedarius). Journal of Camel Practice and Research, 7(1):73-76
Hadef L, Aggad H, Hamad B, Saied M 2018 Study of yield and composition of camel milk in algeria. Scientific study & Research Chemistry & Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology, Food Industry, 19 (1):1 – 11.
Harrison M N and Jakson J K 1958 Ecological classification of the vegetation of the Sudan. Sudan Forestry Department Bulletin, No.2:1-45.
Kamoun M and Jemmali B 2012 Milk yield and characteristics of Tunisian camel. Journal of Animal. Science, 1:12-13.
Mostafa T H, El-Malky O M, Abd El-Salaam A M and Nabih A M 2017 Some studies on milk production and its composition in Maghrebi she-camel under farming and Traditional pastoral systems in Egypt. International Journal of Horticulture and agriculture 2(2):1-9.
Musaad A M, Faye B and Al-Mutairi S E 2013 Seasonal and physiological variation of gross composition of camel milk in Saudi Arabia. Emirate Journal of Food and Agriculture, 25(8):618-624.
Nagy P, Fabri Z N, Varga L, Reiczigel L and Juhasz J 2017 Effect of genetic and non-genetic factors on chemical composition of individual milk samples from dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius) under intensive management. Journal of Dairy Science, 100:8680–8693.
Raziq A, Younas M and Kakar M A 2008 Camel a potential dairy animal in difficult environments. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 45(2):263-267
Riyadh S A, Faris F A, Elsyed I, Mohammed A A, Ahmad S and Moez A 2012 Effects of production system, breed, parity, and stage of lactation on milk composition of dromedary camels in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Animal Veterinary Advances, 11:141-147.
Salman M 2002 Some husbandry aspects in the Butana area in Eastern Sudan. MSc Thesis, University of Khartoum, Sudan
Schwartz H J 1992 Introduction. The camel (Camelus dromedarius) in Eastern Africa. H Schwartz and M Dioli (eds). In: The one-humped camel in eastern Africa. A pictorial guide to diseases, health care and management. Verlag Josef Margraf, Federal Republic of Germany. pp 1-7.
Shuiep E S, El Zubeir I E M and Yousif I A 2014 Socioeconomic aspects of rearing camels under two production systems in Sudan. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 26 (11), Article #208. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd26/11/shui26208.html
Shuiep E S, El Zubeir I E M, El Owni O A O and Musa H H 2008 Influence of season and management on composition of raw camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk in Khartoum State, Sudan. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems, 8:101-106.
Smith J 1949 Distribution of tree species in the Sudan in relation to rainfall and soil texture. Ministry of Agriculture. Sudan Government. Bull. Vol. 4
Tekle T and Tesfay Y 2013 Production potential of camels (Camelus dromedarius) under pastoral and agro-pastoral systems in north Afar, Ethiopia. Livestock Research for Rural Development 25 (12) 2013, Article #215. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd25/12/tekl25215.htm
Zeleke Z M 2007 Non-genetic factors affecting milk yield and milk composition of traditionally managed camels (Camelus dromedarius) in Eastern Ethiopia. Livestock Research for Rural Development 19 (6), Article #85. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd19/6/zele19085.htm
Received 31 October 2019; Accepted 1 November 2019; Published 2 December 2019
Go to top