Indigenous chicken production in the South and South East Asia

R C Bett¹, A K F H Bhuiyan², M S Khan³, G L L P Silva⁴, Le Thi Thuy⁵, S C Sarker², M N D Abeykoon³, Thi T H Nguyen⁵, S Sadef³, E Kariuki, I Baltenweck, J Poole, O Mwai and M N M Ibrahim

International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), P. O. Box 30709-00100, Nairobi, Kenya
rawlynce@yahoo.com
¹ Department of Animal Production, University of Nairobi, P.O. Box 30197-00100, Nairobi, Kenya
² Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU), Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Mymensingh 2202, Bangladesh
³ University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan
⁴ Department of Animal Science, University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka
⁵ National Institute of Animal Husbandry, Hanoi, Vietnam

Abstract

This study documents the indigenous chicken (IC) production systems and subsequently assesses the contribution of the IC breeds/ecotypes to the livelihoods of farmers in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam. A total of 1125 households keeping chicken participated in this study between 2009 and 2011.

All four countries had similar production systems for IC; most IC flocks were raised under the free range system of production, which increased their vulnerability to predation, diseases, poor feeding and inadequate husbandry management. The results show that exits due to mortality were higher than those to other causes such as livelihoods (sales and income), food and nutrition. Chicken flock sizes and production performance also varied significantly across the countries. The main reasons for keeping IC was for home consumption and as an extra income generation activity in addition to the main income activities such as crop farming and off-farm. These reasons were influenced mainly by sources of income of the households, chicken flock sizes and management practises. Understanding these farming system characteristics and their benefits to IC production is thus essential in the development of a holistic breeding and conservation program.

Keywords: breeding and conservation programs, foraging, production systems, scavenging

Introduction

According to reports from the Departments of Statistics and Livestock Production, and Ministries of Agriculture in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam, agriculture contributes 11 to 26% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), out of which livestock contributes between 6 and 52% (Department of Senses and Statistics 2012; Government of Pakistan 2012). Specifically, livestock contributes to better incomes, livelihood assets and nutrition to livestock keepers, hence offering a good opportunity for improved food security and health in this region. However, gender roles along the livestock value chain and household decision-making in resource allocation, technology adoption, marketing and consumption varies among countries. There may be a great potential to use indigenous livestock species as a way for reducing inequities in access to resources, income generation and nutrition in the region.

South and South East Asia is endowed with a variety of indigenous chickens (IC) breeds/ecotypes which not only contribute tangible benefits (meat and eggs etc.), but also intangible benefits (savings and dowry payments etc.) to households. The IC have unique combinations of adaptive traits that best respond to the pressures of the local environment in which they have evolved. They have acquired important traits such as disease resilience; heat tolerance and the ability to utilize poor quality scavenge feeds, attributes essential for achieving sustainable production in low input-output production systems. In Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam, farmers who are dependent on IC raise a large number of breeds/ecotypes. However, poor productivity of the IC coupled with high mortality rates due to predation and seasonal outbreak of diseases is increasingly leading to loss of IC diversity or accelerated loss of diversity. This trend has also worsened over time by the negative perception of farmers and policy makers’ towards IC associated with lack of knowledge on the value of maintaining the diversity and their production potential. In addition, the importance of the IC has often been undervalued with the focus mainly directed towards the physical benefits while limited attention has been given to the social roles and biodiversity services which are key factors in the in situ conservation of indigenous livestock species (FAO 2007). Basic information about the production systems and valuable IC breeds/ecotypes is needed, as is the capacity to prioritize, monitor and manage them at both scientific and farm operational levels (ILRI 2011). The objectives of this study was to document IC production systems and assess the contribution of IC breeds/ecotypes to the livelihoods of farmers in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.

Materials and Methods

Study sites

The study was conducted between 2009 and 2011 in four countries in South and South East Asia namely; Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Pakistan. Two study sites were selected in each country on the basis of availability of IC and their diversity. Each site consisted of three to four villages. Maps showing the location of the selected sites can be accessed on the projects website http://fangrasia.org/.

Sampling

This is part of a larger study encompassing ‘control households’ keeping chicken, goats and pigs in four countries. This study reports data from the chicken-owning households only. A summary of the households selected in each country; Bangladesh (345), Sri Lanka (226), Vietnam (363) and Pakistan (191) are given in Table 1. A total of 1125 households keeping chicken participated in the household survey.

Data management

Database design and data entry of the surveys was done in Microsoft office (MS Access). MS Access is user friendly and provides sufficient data validation tools to support high-accuracy data entry with limited data cleaning requirements. Similar databases were used across all four countries.

Data analysis

Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical procedures in the STATA software (www.stata.com). Tests of statistical significance of particular comparisons were done with Chi-square (χ ²) tests for comparisons of two proportions within a country, and Marascuillo procedure in Minitab for comparisons of multiple proportions, across countries (www.minitab.com). The Post-Hoc Tukey’s HSD test was used for simple comparison of means. The effects of farming system characteristics on the decision to keep chickens for home consumption (Model I; response = 1 if households keep chicken for home consumption and 0 if they do not) and as a source of income (Model II; response = 1 if households keep chicken as a source of income and 0 if they do not) were determined using logistic regression models. The explanatory variables used for these models are listed in Table 2.

Results

Chicken farming system characteristics across countries

Chicken breeds/ecotypes kept and preference

The village (Deshi/ Desi) chicken breeds were the most dominant breeds/ecotypes of chicken in all countries (Table 1.1., Annex 1). The Naked neck and Long leg ecotypes were also common in Sri Lanka. The Ri, Ho, Dong Tao and Choi chicken breeds in Vietnam; Frizzled feathered in Sri Lanka; and Aseel and Fayoumi in Pakistan were specific to these countries.

Production systems, feeding and breeding practises

Production systems were defined based on the management (housing/no housing) of chicken during the day and at night (Table 3). Two systems of production; free range and confined were identified in all the four countries. Confined was further split into two; those with and without roofs. Free range system of production was practised by the majority of chicken keeping households during the day, whereas confined (with roof) was common at night in all countries. Surprisingly, a considerable proportion (12%) of all households keeps chicken under free range system at night; the highest proportions were found in Bangladesh (25%) and in Sri Lanka (15%).

At country level, free range differed significantly with confined system of production (with and no roof) in all the countries during the day (Table 3). A similar trend was also observed between free range and confined systems at night, except in Vietnam and Pakistan. At regional level ( significance levels not shown), free range and confined (with roof) systems of production differed significantly between Bangladesh and the rest of the countries at night. Apart from scavenging, the other main sources of feed available for chicken was kitchen waste in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Vietnam, and cereal grains in Pakistan (Table 3). Commercial feeds were also purchased for chicken by farmers in Sri Lanka (37%) and Vietnam (46%). There were significant differences among the different chicken feed resources used within countries (χ²).

The use of kitchen waste differed significantly with grains (56.3, P<0.01) and commercial feeds (16.7, P<0.01) in Bangladesh; kitchen waste and grains (3.27, P<0.1), and grains and commercial feeds (14.2, P<0.01) in Sri Lanka; kitchen waste and grains (17, P<0.01), and grains and commercial feeds (6.08, P<0.05) in Vietnam; and commercial feeds with kitchen waste (4.27, P<0.05) and grains (5.43, P<0.05) in Pakistan. The findings from across countries (significance levels not shown) indicate that use of kitchen waste, grains and commercial feeds were significantly different between Vietnam and the rest of the countries, except with Bangladesh when grains was the main source of feed for chicken.

Natural uncontrolled breeding was practised by more than 75% of households in all countries. There were significant differences (χ²) between natural controlled breeding and natural uncontrolled breeding in Bangladesh (195, P<0.01), Sri Lanka (88.1, P<0.01), Vietnam (248, P<0.01) and Pakistan (91.5, P<0.01). At regional level, natural controlled mating differed significantly between Vietnam and the rest of the countries.

Reasons for keeping chicken

The main reason for keeping chicken in all the countries was for home consumption. The highest number of households was registered in Vietnam (95%) and the lowest in Sri Lanka (73%). The majority of the households also kept chicken as a source of income with the lowest proportions reported in Sri Lanka (14%). Very few households in all countries kept chicken for social roles, except in Pakistan which was significantly different from the other countries (significance levels not shown). Similarly, across country comparisons indicate that keeping chicken for home consumption in Sri Lanka and as source of income in Vietnam differed significantly with the other countries.

Chicken flock sizes and Tropical Livestock Units (TLU)

The mean number of chicken kept by farmers in Sri Lanka (58±18.7) and Vietnam (45±3.09) was higher than those estimated in Bangladesh (10±0.48) and Vietnam (7±0.41) (Table 4). The same trend was also observed when these numbers were standardized using Tropical Livestock Units (TLU). However, unlike the average flock size, the highest TLU was estimated in Vietnam because the three common ecotypes (Ho, Dong Tao and Choi) have compact bodies and are heavy in size. Comparison of flock sizes and TLUs between Sri Lanka and Vietnam, and the rest of the countries differed significantly, but not with each other.

Off-take and mortality rates

Off-take and mortality rates were highest in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and lowest in Pakistan (Table 4). Off-take rates were always higher than mortality rates because the former accounts for all exits of chicken for a specified period (the last 12 months) prior to the survey. The difference between the two values therefore, provides estimates of exits for others purposes (sale, slaughter, gifts etc.) other than deaths due to predation, diseases and other natural causes. The results show that exits due to mortality were higher than those to other causes such as livelihoods (sales and income), food and nutrition. In addition, there were significant differences in off-take rates between Bangladesh versus Pakistan, and mortality rates between Bangladesh versus Vietnam and Pakistan.

On-farm chicken productivity

The average field productivity estimates for all breeds/ecotypes in each country and the total averages across countries are presented in Table 4. A positive correlation between production traits; number of days per clutch, number of eggs per clutch and number of clutch per year was observed. Chicken mature weights, both males and females, also displayed a similar pattern. On average, chicken breeds/ecotypes in Sri Lanka and Pakistan had significantly higher number of days per clutch as well as higher egg and clutch numbers, while higher and significant chicken mature weights were estimated in Vietnam. The average age at first laying (months) was higher and significantly different for chicken breeds/ecotypes in Vietnam (7.1±0.11) when compared to chicken in Bangladesh (6.1±0.95) and Pakistan (6.3±0.11). Estimate for this trait was also relatively higher in Sri Lanka (6.5±0.38), but not significantly different from the rest of the countries. No clear association between this trait and other correlated traits such as age of culling (male and female) was established.

The effects of farming system characteristics on the reason for keeping chicken for home consumption and as a source of income

Several farming system characteristics were found to influence either positively or negatively, and at different significant levels, the household’s decision to keep chicken for home consumption, (Table 5). Majority of the chicken farmers in Vietnam keep local chicken breeds for home consumption (Table 4). This was clearly depicted by the significant and positive effect (P<0.01, Model I) of Country3 on the reason for rearing chicken for home consumption. In addition, watering (Wateronce and Waterown) and feeding practises for chicken (Feed-grains) had positive and significant effects on the response. Other variables such as primary activities of the farmers (Primary3) and farm housing (Greater-3rms) also positively influenced (P<0.05) keeping chicken for household consumption.

Chicken Tropical Livestock Units (ChickenTLU) and use of commercial concentrates (Feed-conc) as a feed resource for poultry negatively and significantly (P<0.01, Model I) influenced the reason for keeping chicken for home consumption. Other factors such as source of income from other livestock species (Liv-income), household farm housing (Nb-rms), and chicken housing and management system (House-night3) negatively and significantly (P<0.1, Model I) influenced keeping chicken for household consumption. This implies that farmers deriving income from other livestock species and with investments on farm facilities especially housing, commercial feeds and large flock sizes are less likely to keep chicken for home consumption.

The effect of farming system characteristics on the reason for keeping chicken as a source of income is presented in Table 5, Model II. As expected, source of income from other livestock species(Liv-income), chicken Tropical Livestock Units (ChickenTLU),use of commercial concentrates ( Feed-conc) as a feed resource for poultry and presence of natural controlled breeding practises (Breeding2) were positive and significant (P<0.01, Model II).

The reason for keeping chicken as a source of income was negative and significantly influenced by chicken keeping households in Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Pakistan (P<0.01, Model II).Income from the farm, excluding livestock (Farmincome) and households keeping other livestock (Liv-other)also contributed negatively to this reason. This implies that farmers deriving most of their household income from farm activities and other livestock species were not likely to keep chicken for the same objective. In addition, variables such as household size and supplementation of chicken with grains had negative and significant effects (P<0.05, Model II) on keeping chicken as a source of income.

Discussion

Challenges and opportunities to indigenous chickens (IC) production systems

In developing countries, two major classification of chicken production systems namely; commercial intensive and the village poultry systems can be identified depending on the form of inputs, outputs, and the breeds involved (Gondwe and Wollny 2007; Gueye 2009). The exotic chicken (broilers and layers) are mainly kept under the commercial intensive systems while the indigenous chicken are kept under the village poultry systems. All four countries (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Pakistan) had similar production systems for indigenous chicken populations. Free range was the most practised system of production during the day and unexpectedly, during the night in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. The dominance of free range systems concurs with other studies reported in developing countries of Africa (Dana et al 2010; Hailemariam et al 2010; Moges et al 2010; Okeno et al 2012) and Asia (Bhuiyan et al 2005; Farooq et al 2004; Gawandeet al 2007; Gunaratne et al 1993; Premasundara and Silva 2004; Sanjeewa et al 2011). Free range system is a typical low input-output system of production where birds scavenge for food during the day and are confined at night (Muchadeyi et al 2004; Udo et al 2006). Birds kept under this system are frequently under threats from, inter alia, poor feeding, inadequate husbandry management, diseases and predation. The risks are even higher when farmers do not house and/or supplement birds at their most vulnerable stage (chicks between 0 to 3 months old) and at night, as revealed in this study. This explains the high exists of chicken due to mortalities rather than for other purposes such as livelihoods (sales and income), food and nutrition, reported in all the countries in this study. These observations concur with earlier reports on village chicken production systems in developing countries (Biswas et al 2008; Chandrasiri et al 1994; Pickworth and Morishita 2007; Wickramaratne et al 1993, 1994, 1996). Free range systems of production for IC can be improved through provision of better healthcare and husbandry practises notably housing, breeding and supplementary feeding (Anjum et al 20008; Kingori et al 2010; Ochieng et al 2011; Rashid et al 2004; Sabuni et al 2010;Wickramaratne et al 1993, 1994). This can be achieved through enhancing capacity building and providing support services such as veterinary and animal health-care, extension, information exchange and credit facilities to chicken farmers. Preventive treatment/vaccination (Kitalyi 1998), housing and supplementary feeding of chicks within the first 3 months of age to reduce losses due to predation, diseases, starvation and other natural causes is also highly recommended.

Natural uncontrolled breeding was practised predominantly in all the countries except in Vietnam. Farmers in the selected chicken site in Vietnam have relatively small land sizes with perimeter fences, which confine free range chicken within the farm households. Presence of such farm facilities coupled with a higher proportion of farmers with good housing for chicken might explain the natural controlled mating practised in this country. In addition, the main chicken breed (Ho) is an integral part of Vietnam social and cultural traditions and the breed is kept for annual traditional festival. This breed has a well-functioning “Ho Chicken Farmers Association” that also oversees breeding and maintenance of the breed purity. The other countries need to follow suit and facilitate establishment of chicken farmers associations (on-going as part of the project interventions) to act as a framework for farmers to access support services and capacity building.

IC breeds/ecotypes, characteristics and attributes

Different types of IC can be identified based on the phenotypic attributes in the four countries (Table 1.1), though this varies from country to country (see http://fangrasia.org/ for more information). The Normal village chicken (Deshi/Desi), Naked neck, Long leg, Crown chicken (Crown), Frizzled feathered, Aseel and Fayoumi were common in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. The Normal village chickens have different plumage colours such as red, brown, black or multicolour. The Naked neck ecotypes do not have feathers in neck area. The Long leg ecotypes have longer legs than usual. The Crown chickens have feathered combs whereas the Frizzled feathered have plumage feathers that are curled and abnormal. The Aseel have compact body shape, heavy in size, small pea comb, fatty shanks and long spurs. The Fayoumi are white and black in appearance and small in size. In Vietnam, the RI is small in size and has multi-coloured feathers; and the Ho, Dong Tao and Choi have compact body and heavy in size and long legs. In addition, mature cocks and hens have black/dark red and soil/light grey plumage colours, respectively.

The indigenous chicken flock sizes/TLUs and production performance varied significantly across the countries. Average flock sizes per household ranged from 7 to 58, and the TLUs from 0.06 to 0.33. Large flock sizes and TLUs estimated in Sri Lanka and Vietnam can be attributed to commercial poultry farming by some of the farmers in the selected study sites. Estimates of flock sizes for village chicken within this range have also been reported by other studies (Gunaratne et al 1994; Iqbal and Pampori 2008; Islam and Nishibori 2009; Okeno et al 2012; Sanjeewa et al 2011). The average number of days per clutch, number of eggs per clutch and number of clutches per year were significantly higher in Sri Lanka and Pakistan. The estimated number of days per clutch varied from 15.1-27.1, the number eggs per clutch from 12.9-23.9 and the number of clutches per year from 3.1-4.2. In agreement with this findings, reports in literature indicate that the number of eggs per clutch and number of clutches per year for village chicken vary widely across countries and breeds/ecotypes, ranging from 6-20 and 1.1-4.5, respectively (Alders et al 2009; Iqbal and Pampori 2008; Missohou et al 2002; Okeno et al 2012; Olwande et al 2009).

The body weights of the IC at maturity were higher and significantly different in Vietnam from the rest of the countries. This could be attributed to the type of chicken breeds/ecotypes kept in this country. Generally, the Ho, Dong Tao and Choi chicken breeds/ecotypes, as described earlier, have compact body size, long legs and heavy in size compared to the rest of the breeds/ecotypes in other countries. Mature weights for chicken breeds/ecotypes in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan compare well with those reported in the literature (Iqbal and Pampori 2008; Islam and Nishibori 2009; Wickramaratne et al 1993).

Implication of farming systems characteristics on IC production

An essential component in practical breed improvement and conservation programs is conservation of the IC genetic resources through utilization. The IC was mainly kept for home consumption and as an extra income generation activity in addition to the main income activities such as crop farming and non-farm. The main sources of income, IC flock sizes and management practises greatly influenced the main reasons for keeping chicken. Understanding these farming system characteristics and their benefits to IC production is thus essential in the development of a holistic breeding and conservation program.

Another important aspect in these programs is linking them to value chains, and determining the linkages between conservation and utilization of IC to market participation (Bett et al 2011). This will inform the different kinds of interventions needed for enhancing the performance of the chain, and thereby improve the livelihoods of the producers through sustainable use of the IC genetic resources. However, utilization and subsequent conservation of IC populations in these countries will entirely depend on the ability of farm households to decide on and implement appropriate breeding strategies (Wollny 2003).

Conclusion

• Basically, all the four countries (Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Vietnam and Pakistan) had similar systems of production for indigenous chicken.
  
  
• Most chicken flocks were raised under the free range system of production, which increased their vulnerability to predation, diseases, poor feeding and inadequate husbandry management. In addition, exits due losses of chicken to mortalities was higher than those used for other purposes such as livelihoods (sales and income), food and nutrition.
  
  
• The main reasons for keeping chickens were for home consumption and as an extra income generation activity in addition to the main income activities such as crop farming and non-farm. These reasons were influenced mainly by sources of income of the households, chicken flock sizes and management practises. The indigenous chicken flock sizes and production performance varied significantly across the countries.

Acknowledgements

This publication has been prepared within the framework of the UNEP/GEF project “Development and Application of Decision-support tools to conserve and sustainably use genetic diversity in indigenous livestock and wild relatives” The Global Environment Facility (GEF), the world’s largest public funder of international environmental projects, is supporting this initiative led by Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) is coordinating the project at regional level with implementation support from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Working in the four partner countries the project addresses ways to secure and improve livelihoods of poor livestock keepers through utilization and conservation of indigenous FAnGR and their wild relatives.

References

Alders R G, Spradbrow P B and Young M P 2009 Village chickens, poverty alleviation and the sustainable control of Newcastle disease. In: Proceedings of an International Conference held in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, 5–7 October 2005. ACIAR Proceedings No. 131, pp 235.

Anjum M S and Khan S H 2008 Effect of different energy protein ratio on the performance of Desi native chickens during growing phase. Asian Journal of Poultry Science 2(1):42-47.

Bett, H K, Bett R C, Peters K J, Kahi A K and Bokelmann W 2012 Linking Utilisation and Conservation of Indigenous Chicken Genetic Resources to Value Chains. Journal of Animal Production Advances 2(1):33-51.

Bhuiyan, A K F H, Bhuiyan M S A and Deb G K 2005 . Indigenous chicken genetic resources in Bangladesh: current status and future outlook. Animal Genetic Resources 36,73-84.

Biswas P K, Uddin G M N, Barua H, Roy K, Biswas D, Ahad A and Debnath N C 2008 Survivability and causes of loss of broody-hen chicks on smallholder households in Bangladesh. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 83, 260–271.

Chandrasiri A D N, Gunaratne S P, Wickramaratne S H G and Roberts J 1994 The egg and meat production potential of village chickens under scavenging system. In: Proceedings of the 7th AAAP Animal Science Congress, Bali, Indonesia, II, 73-75.

Dana N, van der Waaij L, Dessie T and van Arendonk J, 2010. Production objectives and trait preferences of village poultry producers of Ethiopia: implications for designing breeding schemes utilizing indigenous chicken genetic resources. Tropical Animal Health and Production 42,1519–1529.

Department of Senses and Statistics 2012 Annual Accounts 2012, Department of Senses and Statistics, Colombo, Sri Lanka.

Farooq M, Shakir M K, Mian M A, Mussawar S, Durrani F R and Cheema A 2004 Status of backyard chicken reared by women in Chitral, Pakistan. Pakistan Veterinary Journal 24(2), 82-86.

Gawande S S, Kalita N, Barua N and Saharia K K 2007 Indigenous chicken farming in rural conditions of Assam, India. Family Poultry 17(1-2), 15-29.

Gondwe T N and Wollny C B A 2007 Local chicken production system in Malawi: Household flock structure, dynamics, management and health. Tropical Animal Health and Production 39,103–113.

Government of Pakistan 2012 Pakistan Economic Survey. http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1112.html

Gueye E F 2009 The role of networks in information dissemination to family poultry farmers. World Poultry Science Journal 65,115–124.

Gunaratne S P, Chandrasiri A D N, Mangalika Hemalatha W A P and Roberts J 1993 Feed resource base for scavenging village chickens in Sri Lanka. Tropical Animal Health and Production 25, 249-257.

Gunaratne S P, Chandrasiri A D N, Wickramaratne S H G and Roberts J 1994 The utilisation of scavenging feed resource base for village chicken production. In: Proceedings of the 7th AAAP Animal Science Congress, Bali,Indonesia, II, 67-68.

Hailemariam M, Mulatu D, Kelay B and Berhan T 2010 Assessment of the nutritional status of indigenous scavenging chickens in Ada’a district, Ethiopia. Tropical Animal Health and Production 42, 123–130.

Iqbal S and Pampori Z A 2008 Production potential and qualitative traits of indigenous chicken of Kashmir. Livestock Research for Rural Development 20 (182).

Islam M A and Nishibori M 2009 Indigenous naked neck chicken: a valuable genetic resource for Bangladesh. World Poultry Science Journal 65, 125–138.

Missohou A, Dieye P N and Talaki E 2002 Rural poultry production and productivity in southern Senegal. Livestock Research for Rural Development 14 (2).

Muchadeyi F C, Sibanda S, Kusina N T, Kusina J and Makuza S 2004 The village chicken production system in Rushinga District of Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural Development 16(6).

Kitalyi A J 1998 Village chicken production systems in rural Africa: household food security and gender issues. Animal Production and Health Paper, No. 142. Rome, Italy:FAO.

Kingori A M, Wachira A M and Tuitoek J K 2010 Indigenous chicken production in Kenya: A Review. International Journal of Poultry Science 9, 309–316.

Moges F, Mellesse A and Tadelle D 2010 Assessment of village chicken production system and evaluation of the productive and reproductive performance of local chicken ecotype in Bure district, Northwest Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research 5, 1739–1748.

Ochieng J, Owuor G, Bebe B O and Ochieng D O 2011. Effect of management interventions on productive performance of indigenous chicken in Western Kenya. Livestock Research for Rural Development 23(114).

Okeno T O, Kahi A K, Peters K J 2012 Characterization of indigenous chicken production systems in Kenya. Tropical Animal Health and Production 44, 601-608.

Olwande P O, Ogara W O, Okuthe S O, Muchemi G, Okoth E, Odindo M O and Adhiambo R F 2010. Assessing the productivity of indigenous chickens in an extensive management system in southern Nyanza, Kenya. Tropical Animal Health and Production 42,283–288.

Pickworth C L and Morishita T Y 2007 Common External Parasites in Poultry: Lice and Mites. Ohio State University Extension Fact Sheet, Veterinary Preventive Medicine, 18, 03.

Premasundara A S and Silva L P 2004 The state of conservation of farm animal genetic resources (chapter 5). In: The state of Animal Genetic Resources in Sri Lanka. Chandrasiri, A. D. N. A joint publication of the Department of Animal Production and Health, Peradeniya and the Office of the FAO representative in Sri Lanka and Maldives, Colombo (ISBN 955-1136-00-4).

Rashid M M, Islam M N, Roy B C, Jakobsen K and Lauridsen C 2004 Effect of dietary supplementation of energy and protein on production performance and egg quality of scavenging crossbred hens in rural areas under tropical conditions. Livestock Research for Rural Development 16 (8)

Sabuni A, Mbuthia P G, Maingi N, Nyaga P N, Njagi LW, Bebora L C and Michieka J N 2010 Prevalence of ectoparasites infestation in indigenous free ranging village chickens in different agro-ecological zones in Kenya. Livestock Research for Rural Development 22(11).

Sanjeewa M N, Liyanage R P, Vidanarachchy J K and Silva L P 2011 Association between egg production and body morphology of some village chicken ecotypes in Sri Lanka . In: Proceedings of University Research Sessions of University of Peradeniya 2011. Vol. 16, P 44 (ISSN: 1391-4111,ISBN: 978-955-589-154-7).

Udo, H M J, Asgedom A H and Viets T C 2006 Modelling the impact of interventions on the dynamics in village poultry systems. Agricultural Systems 88, 255-269.

Wickramaratne S H G, Gunaratne S P and Chandrasiri A D N 1993 Growth performance of village chickens under different feeding systems. Tropical Agricultural Research 5, 359-367.

Wickramaratne S H G, Gunaratne S P, Chandrasiri A D N and Roberts J 1994 Chick mortality in scavenging village chickens in Sri Lanka. In: Proceedings of the 7th AAAP Animal Science Congress, Bali, Indonesia II, 71-72.

Wickramaratne S H G, Gunaratne S P, Chandrasiri A D N and Roberts J A 1996 Nutrient utilization efficiency of village chickens under different feeding systems. In: Proceedings of the 18th AAAP Animal Science Congress, Japan 2, 226-228.

Wollny C B A 2003 The need to conserve farm animal genetic resources in Africa: should policy makers be concerned? Ecological Economics 45, 341-351.

Annex 1.

Received 25 July 2014; Accepted 17 November 2014; Published 1 December 2014

Go to top