Free ranging indigenous chickens (Gallas domesticus) seasonal time budgets

R Mwembe, D Nkomboni, Z Nengomasha*, G Sisito and M Kufa

Department of Research and Specialist Services
Matopos Research Institute P Bag K5137 Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
rmwembe@gmail.com
* ARDRA Africa Regional Office,
Advent Hill, Magadi road-Orgata Rongai, P Bag Mbangatha, 00503 Nairobi, Kenya

Abstract

A study was carried out at Matopos Research Institute to observe how free ranging indigenous chicken budget their daily time in early winter and late summer. The objective of the study was to understand how fundamental daily activities vary with season and chicken strain. The data were analysed as a two season (late winter and early summer) by three-bird strain (Naked neck, Spotted and Red) factorial structure in a completely randomised design.

The chickens allocated more of their time to feeding during late summer than in early winter. By contrast, more time was allocated to reproduction during early winter  than late summer. The Red chicken strain displayed more reproduction activities compared to the naked neck and spotted types. All chicken strains had high locomotion, displayed less cleaning activities and drinking during early winter than late summer. In conclusion, time allocated to feeding and reproduction varied with time and chicken strain. It can be inferred that the quality of the scavenging feed resource base improved as it gradually progressed from summer into the winter. However, monitoring the time budgets coupled with crop content analysis can improve the understanding of the scavenging feed resource base variability hence improving the effectiveness of supplementation regimes and chicken productivity.

Keywords: behaviour, extensive system, intensive system, scavenging, feed

Introduction

There are two major chicken production systems in Zimbabwe, the intensive and extensive systems. The intensive system is a high investment system aiming at profit maximisation. Meat and eggs from large flocks of hybrid chickens are destined for lucrative markets in towns. On the other hand, the extensive system is a low investment system with small flock size of indigenous chickens kept for both economic and social purposes (Mapiye et al 2008). At a regional scale, Mapiye et al (2008) estimated that 70% of the chickens in Sub-Sahara Africa are kept under the extensive production system. According to Maphosa et al (2004), 90% of the households in Zimbabwe kept indigenous chickens under the extensive production system. Women owns 95% of these chickens.

The extensive chicken production system in smallholder set up has a number of advantages over the intensive system. These advantages include low capital requirements, minimum management and inherent tolerance of the indigenous chickens to harsh conditions. In addition, the productions system is relatively organic producing cheap and high quality proteins (Wattanachant et al 2004; Brankaert 2001; FAO 1987). Most importantly, the chickens are a liquid asset and allow owners to convert them into cash (Muchadeyi et al 2004). Therefore, the extensive indigenous production has the potential to improve food security and alleviate poverty in developing countries at large.

Many authors however, point to a number of constraints that limit the productivity of the extensive chicken production system and nutrition is the major one (Roberts and Gunaratne 1992). The indigenous chickens scavenge from the scavenging feed resource base (SFRB) (Maphosa et al 2004; Roberts and Gunaratne 1992). Different feed elements are found in SFRB that include grains, insects, kitchen waste and green plants. Nevertheless, the quality and quantity of the scavenging feed resource base has a temporal and spatial variation hence the diet of the chickens (FAO 2009; Taddelle and Ogle 2001).

Supplementing with homegrown feeds has the potential to alleviate this nutrition problem (Ogle et al 2004; Taddelle and Ogle 2001). For effectiveness, the supplementation regimes should be a function of the scavenging feed resource base quality and quantity (Mapiye et al 2008), at a finer scale. This study therefore aimed at determining time budget of the three types of indigenous chickens in two seasons to infer on the scavenging feed resource base condition.

Material and methods

Study site

The study was done at Matopos Research Institute, 30 km South of Bulawayo adjacent to the Matopos National Park in Zimbabwe. The geographical position is longitude 28⁰ 30′S and latitude 20⁰23′E at an altitude of 1340m. The institute is located in agro-ecological zone IV, a semi-arid region that experiences variable and erratic rainfall (Vincent and Thomas 1961). The area receives 600 mm average annual rainfall between October and April with the temperatures ranging from 20.9⁰C in June to 29.4⁰C in October (Moyo et al 2011).

The size and floristic composition of the local scavenging feed resource base

The SFRB was approximately 2.9 hectares and the floristic composition was Heteropogon contortus, Setaria spp, Themeda triandra, Bothriochloa insculpta, Eragrostis spp, Eleusine indica, Cynodon dactylon, and Chloris virgatta. The forbs included Boerhavior diffuser, Sida alba, Leucas martinicensis, Achyranthes aspera and Amaranthus hybridus.

Chicken strains identification

Three chicken strains differentiated by the colour of the plumage and distribution were observed. The chicken strains were the naked neck (BIT1), red strain (BIT2) and spotted (BIT3). The naked neck strain lacks feathers in the entire neck region. According to Horst (1998), the gene is dominant and associated with improved fitness to survive in the tropics. A mixture of greyish and black spots identifies the spotted type called Koekoek in South Africa (Makhafola 2012). The Red type is characterised by the light red colour feathers in hens, predominantly red and dark in the wings and tail in cocks.

Chicken selection

Fifteen hens, 5 from each chicken strain were randomly selected based on tag identification number from a population of 15 per strain. The chosen hens were identified with coloured tags representing numbers from one to five. The flock were let out to scavenge at 0630 hours in the morning, observations commenced at 0700 hours and the hens were penned at 1630 hours. Water was provided ad-libitum but without feed supplements during the observation. .

Data collection

A scanning observation method was used to study the indigenous chicken behaviour. The hens were observed in two seasons (SSN); the late summer (SSN1) and early winter (SSN2) for 20 days, and 7.5 hours per day in each season. The observers rapidly scanned the chickens recording the activity done by tagged chickens, time, and location of a chicken or group of chickens (Ferket and Gernat 1992; Altmann 1973)

Experimental design

The experimental design was a two seasons (SSN) by three bird strains (BIT) (2*3) factorial treatment structure in a completely randomised design.

Data analysis

Routine chicken activities were grouped into eight common activities. These include cleaning (CLN), drinking (DRNK), locomotion (LMN), feeding (FD), resting (RST), playing (PLY), sound (SND) and reproduction (RDCTN). The data were analysed using GenStat Release 7 (2003) at a 5% significant level. Least significant difference mean separation technique was used to further separate means.

Statistical Model

У_ikј=µ + α_i + β_ј + (α β) _iј +e_ijk

У_iјk=k^th time proportion of the i^th bird strain in the j^th season

µ= Overall mean

α_i = average effect of i^th bird strain (BIT) (1.2.3)

β_ј = average effect of j^th season (1.2)

(α β)_iј = average effect of i^th BIT and j^th SSN

E_ijk = unexplained variation

Results

Chicken strain-season interaction

Generally there was a bird strain-season interaction on time proportions allocated to drinking (DRNK), feeding (FD) and reproduction (RDCTN) activities (Table 1).  Naked neck and red strains significantly decreased the time allocated to drinking; more in late summer and less in early winter. The spotted strain slightly increased its time allocation as the season changed from late summer to early winter.

All strains significantly decreased feeding activities as the season changed from late summer to early winter. The Red strain had the highest decrease from 0.591 to 0.292, followed by the naked neck from 0.580 to 0.428 and lastly spotted strain from 0.595 to 0.508 from late summer to early winter respectively. Conversely, reproduction activities increased as the season changed from late summer to early winter with the highest change observed in the Red strain, followed by naked necks and lastly spotted strain.

However, the interaction had no significant effects on time proportions allocated to cleaning (CLN), locomotion (LMN), playing (PLN), resting (RST) and sound (SND) by all bird strains.

Seasonal effects

Seasonal time proportions spent by the chickens on the different activities are presented in table 2. Season significantly affected time allocated to drinking, cleaning, feeding, locomotion, playing and reproduction by the chickens (Table 2). More cleaning, drinking, feeding and playing activities were observed in late summer (SSN1) than early winter (SSN2) while an inverse was observed for locomotion and reproduction. No significant change was observed in the time the chickens spent on resting and sound activities due to season.

Chicken strain effects

For all the activities studied only reproduction and feeding activities were affected by chicken strain (Table 3). Different bird strains had different time proportions allocated to reproduction and feeding activities. The spotted and naked neck strains allocated a significantly higher amount of time to feeding activities than the red strain. Contrary, red strain had a significantly more time allocated to reproduction than the naked neck and the spotted bird strain. But all strains spent similar time on cleaning, drinking, locomotion, playing, resting and sound activities.

Discussion

Seasonal effects had a huge impact on how free ranging indigenous chicken budgeted the foraging time compared to the interaction and the strain effects. Among the eight groups of activities studied, a change in season significantly affected six groups at a much higher significant level (Table 2) compared to three and two affected by the interaction and strain respectively (Tables 1 and 3). The effects can be attributed to the biseasonal nature of the study area. Season affects the quality of the scavenging feed resource base through influencing feed composition, availability and distribution. In response, animals switch to a foraging behaviour that maximise survival under the prevailing environmental conditions (Manning et al 1992). Change in time allocated to locomotion and feeding by the indigenous chickens with change in season (Table 2) is evidence to change in foraging behaviour. Understanding this relationship between the conditions of the scavenging feed resource base and foraging behaviour can allow season specific interventions. This has a potential to improve productivity of the extensive indigenous chicken production system

Feeding time in poultry is a function of digestible dietary energy intake (Ferket and Gernat 2006). Green herbaceous plants that dominate the scavenging feed resource base during the late summer have more fibre associated with reducing digestibility in chickens (Okitoi et al 2009). On the other hand, the herbaceous plants seed and ants that dominate the scavenging feed resource base during the early winter have more digestible energy and proteins (Taddelle and Ogle 2000). Therefore, the chickens spent more time feeding during the late summer season compared to the early winter in order to compensate for nutrients insufficiency (McDonald et al 2002; Manning and Dawkins 1992). Furthermore, high time proportion allocated to locomotion during the early winter means increased searching time indicating the presence of productive patches within the scavenging resource base.

The change in time proportion allocated to reproduction with season also reflects the high productivity of the early winter scavenging feed resource base compared to the summer. Energy drives all biochemical processes in an animal with energy for maintenance as a priority compared to other processes like reproduction (Degen 1994). The chickens spent more time on reproduction activities during the early winter than the late summer season. This means the scavenging feed resource base provided extra nutrients to invest on other biological processes hence season specific supplementation may increase indigenous chicken productivity (Okitoi et al 2009).

Chicken strain had a marked effect on feeding and reproduction time only (Table 3). Reproduction potential however is a genetic trait while the nature of incubation in chickens reduces feeding time. The spotted type reproduced more followed by the naked neck and lastly the red strain (Tables 1 and 3). The results suggest that the spotted bird strain have a low nutrients demand for maintenance or is a good forager compared to the naked neck and red strain  but this needs further evaluation.

Conclusion

• All strains allocated more time on feeding in late summer than early winter and allocated more on reproduction during early winter than summer.

  
  

• Early winter scavenging feed resource base was superior compared to the summer in terms of quality and quantity of the available feed. Feeding and reproduction time budgets were negatively associated in indigenous chickens.

  
  

• An effective supplementation regime should take into account the season, physiological state and age of the chicken.

Recommendations

On-farm studies are required to eliminate the bias created by the Research Institute management conditions and in addressing issue of scale for conclusive results and effective interventions. Crop content analysis should be done to come up with proper feed formulations for different seasonal supplementation regimes.

Acknowledgement

Acknowledgement goes to Mr B Tavirimirwa for editing the manuscript. Special thanks go to K Mafu and K Nyarenda for partaking in the data collection process.

References

Altmann J 1973 Observational study of behaviour: sampling methods. Allee laboratory of animal behaviour, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. pp 258-261

Brankaert E G 2001 Transfer of technology in poultry production for developing countries. Sustainable Development Department, FAO, Rome.

FAO 2009 Good practices in small scale Poultry Production: A manual for trainers and producers in east Africa. FAO ECTAD Reginal Unit Eastern Africa, Nairobi, Kenya. pp20-53.

FAO 1987 Report on the expert consultation on rural poultry production development in Asia, Dhaka, and Bangladesh 23-28 March 1987. Animal Production and Health Division Publications 274415. Rome.

Ferket P and Gernat G A 2006 Factors that affect feed intake of meat birds: A review. International Journal of poultry Science 6(10):905-911.

GenStat Release 7.1 2003 Lawes Agricultural Trust.

Horst P 1998 Native fowl as a reservoir for genomes and genes with direct and indirect effect on production adaptability. In proceeding, 18^th World Poultry Congress, Nagoya, Japan, 4-9 September 1998, p 105.

Makhafola M B, Umesiobi D O, Mphaphathi M L, Masenya M B and Nedambale T L 2012 Characterisation of sperm cell motility rate of Southern African indigenous cockerel semen following analysis by sperm class analyser. Journal of Animal science advances 2(4):416-424.

Manning A and Dawkins M S 1992 An introduction to animal behaviour 2^rd ed: Cambridge University press.

Maphosa T, Kusina J T, Makuza S and Sibanda S 2004 A monitoring study comparing production of village chickens between communal (Nharira) and small scale commercial (Lancashire) farming in Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural Development 16(48): http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd16/7/maph16048.htm

Mapiye C, Mwale M, Mupangwa J F, Chimonyo M, Forti R and Mutenje M J 2008 A research review of village chicken production constraints and opportunities in Zimbabwe. Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Science. 21(11):1680-1688.

McDonald P, Edwards R A, Grenhalp F D and Morgan C A 2002 Animal Nutrition, 6^th edition. Pearson education limited Edinburg gate, Harlow, Essex CM202JE, England

Muchadeyi F C, Sibanda S, Kusina N T, Kusina J F and Makuza S 2005 Village chicken flock dynamics and the contribution of chickens to household livelihood in a smallholder farming in Zimbabwe. Tropical Animal Health and Production 37(4):333-334.

Moyo B, Dube S, Moyo C and Nesamvumi E 2011 Heavily stocked 5-paddock rotational grazing effects on cross-bred Afrikaner steers performances and herbaceous vegetation dynamics in a semi-arid veld of Zimbabwe. African Journal of Agriculture Research 6(10):2166-2174.

Ogle B D, Minh D V and Lindberg J E 2004 Effects of scavenging and protein supplement on the feed intake and performance of improved pullets and laying hens in northern Vietnam. Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Science 17(11):1553-1561.

Okitoi L O, Kabuage L W, Muinga R W and Badamana M S 2009 The performance response of scavenging chickens to nutrient intake from scavengeable resources and from supplementation with energy and protein. Livestock research for rural development Volume 21 article#179: http://www.lrrd.org//lrrd21/10/okit21179.htm

Roberts J A and Gunaratne S B 1992 The scavenging feed resource base for village chickens in developing countries. In proceedings, 19^th World poultry Congress; 20-24 September 1992, Amsterdam, Netherlands 1:822-825.

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.

Tadelle D and Ogle B 2000 Nutritional status of village poultry in the central highlands of Ethiopia as assessed by analysis of crop content. Ethiopia Journal Agricultural Science 17:47-57.

Watttanachant S, Benjakul S and Ledward D A 2004 Composition, colour and texture of Thai indigenous and broiler chicken muscles. Poultry Science 83:123-128.

Vincent V and Thomas R G 1961 An agricultural survey of Southern Rhodesia. Part 1 Agro-ecological survey. Government Printers, Salisbury; Rhodesia

Received 18 June 2013; Accepted 20 September 2013; Published 1 January 2014

Go to top