Ethiopian Journal of Animal Production Volume: 5 Number: 1 2005 ISSN: 1607-3835 Official Journal of the Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP) Ethiopian Journal of Animal Production An Official Journal of the Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP) Aims and Scope: The Ethiopian Journal of Animal Production is a peer reviewed journal publishing original basic and applied research articles, short communications, technical notes, review articles dealing with livestock and livestock related issues. Although the journal focuses on livestock production in Ethiopia, papers from similar agro-ecological regions of the world are welcomed. EDITORIAL BOARD Editor-in-Chief: Azage Tegegne, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Associate Editor: Fesseha Gebreab, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Addis Ababa University, P.O. Box 34, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Assistant Editors: Alemayehu Mengistu P.O. Box 62291, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Alemu Yami, Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Center, P.O. Box 32, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Getachew Gebru, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Markos Tibbo, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Secretary: Workneh Ayalew, International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Editorial Manager: Mengistu Alemayehu, EARO, Holetta Agricultural Research Centre, P.O.Box 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Assistant Editorial Manager: W/ro Diribua Kelelaw, ESAP, P.O. Box 80019, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Alemu Gebre Wold Holetta Agricultural Research Centre, Ethiopia A. Pearson University of Edinburgh, UK Beyene Chichaibelu, Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Centre, Ethiopia Bekele Shiferaw ICRISAT, Hydrabad, India C. Peacock FARM Africa, London, UK E. Rege ILRI, Nairobi, Kenya J. Reed University of Wisconsin, USA J. Stuth Texas, A&M University, USA K. Peters Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany K. W. Entwistle The University of New England, Australia K. Zessin Free University Berlin, Germany S. Ehui World Bank, Washington DC, USA Tilahnu Sahlu Langston University, Oklahoma, USA Tefera GebreMeskel FARM Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Tsegaye Habtemariam Tuskegee University, Alabama, USA EJAP is published by the Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP) This issue is sponsored by the Ethiopian Science and Technology Commission ©Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP) EJAP ISSN: 16107-3835 Volume 5, Number 1 2005 No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher. Cover page by Wossene Abay EJAP Vol 5 (1) ISSN: 1607-3835 Contents Estimates of Crossbreeding Parameters for Egg Laying Performance of Crossbreed Chickens at Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Million Tadesse, Tadelle Dessie and Negussie Dana.......................................................1 Phenotypic Characterization of Goat Types in Northwestern Ethiopia Getinet Ameha, B.P.Hegde, Bekele Taffese, Enyew Negusse and Workneh Ayalew..............................................................................................................................13 Mortality and Reported Clinical Signs in Horro Sheep at Smallholder Farms in East Wollega and West Shoa Zones, Ethiopia Gemeda Duguma, Takele Kumsa, Ulfina Galmessa, Solomon Abegaz and Gebregziabher Gebreyohannes.......................................................................................33 Age and Season Related Changes in Semen Quality of Horro Bulls Ulfina Galmessa, Mulugeta Kebede, Gebregziabher Gebreyohannes, Gizaw Kebede, Jirenga Dessaleng and Alganesh Tola..............................................................43 Effect of Two Types of Housing and Levels of Feeding on Voluntary Feed and Water Intakes, and Associated Changes in Body Weight and Body Measurements of Crossbred Female Calves in Winter Season Yibrah Yacob, S.S. Grewal and R S Yadav.....................................................................53 Comparative Feeding Values of Leucaena Pallida and Noug Cake (G. Abyssinica) for Fattening Horro Steers Tesfaye Lemma, Gebregziabher Gebreyohanes, Chala Merera, Jiregna Desalegn, Girma Aboma and Diriba Geleti....................................................................67 Days to First Service, Conception Rate and Service Period of Indigenous and Crossbred Cows in Relation to Postpartum Body Weight Change at Bako, Ethiopia Gebregziabher Gebreyohannes, Azage Tegegne, M.L.Diedhiou and B.P. Hegde................................................................................................................................77 The Performance of Naked Neck and Their F Crosses with Lohmann White and 1 New Hampshire Chicken Breeds Under Long-Term Heat Stress Conditions Aberra Melesse, S. Maak and G von Lengerken.............................................................91 Characterization and Classification of Potential Poultry Feeds in Ethiopia Using Cluster Analyses Negussie Dana and Alemu Yami....................................................................................107 Grassland Development Optionsn (Short Communication) Alemayehu Mengistu......................................................................................................125 Information for Contributors..............................................................................................133 Eth. J. Anim. Prod. 5(1)- 2005: 1-12 Estimates of Crossbreeding Parameters for Egg Laying Performance of Crossbreed Chickens at Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Million Tadesse*, Tadelle Dessie and Negussie Dana Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Centre P. O. Box 32, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Abstract Crossbreeding parameters were estimated for egg production performance of indigenous Ethiopian and White Leghorn chicken and their crosses at Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Centre, Ethiopia. The GLM procedure of SAS (1997) was used to estimate the contribution of additive genetic and heterotic effects in the crossbreds. Results obtained on average monthly egg production indicate that individual breed additive and heterotic effects were large and significant. Breed additive effects of 5, 13, 14 and 13 eggs/chicken, and individual heterotic effects of 5, 6, 4 and 3 eggs/chicken were obtained for the first three, four to six, seven to nine and ten to twelve months of laying periods, respectively. For total egg production breed additive effects of 24, 73, 118 and 118, and individual heterotic effects of 12, 23, 46 and 45 eggs/chicken were obtained for the first three, six, nine and twelve months of laying periods, respectively. Breed additive effect for average daily egg production was estimated to be 0.44 for both first six and twelve months of laying periods and individual heterotic effect of 0.19 eggs for the first 6 months and 0.12 eggs/chickens for the first 12 months of laying periods. Maternal breed additive and heterotic effects were not significant in all cases. In general egg production performance of the crossbred chickens was largely determined by breed additive genetic effect and the contribution of the heterotic effects was small. Keyword: Crossbreeding, Chicken, additive effects, heterotic effects, egg production, Ethiopia. Introduction Poultry production in Ethiopia shows a clear distinction between traditional, low input systems and modern, more intensive systems with a relatively improved housing, feeding, breeding, marketing and processing * Corresponding author Million Tadesse et al./ Eth. J. Anim. Prod. 5(1)- 2005: 1-12 (Alemu, 1995). The traditional system of poultry production, which has come to be known as "balanced farming", is characterised by its low input and a corresponding low output (Tadelle et al., 2000). In Ethiopia, the egg laying performance of indigenous chickens is reported to be low under farmers’ management conditions. (Bigbee, 1965; MOA, 1980; and Kidane, 1980). However, under improved conditions, a maximum of 100 eggs per chicken per year has been reported (Teketel, 1986, Abebe, 1992 and Negussie, 1999). The major constraints that limit poultry productivity are diseases, poor feeding and management practices, and the low genetic potential of indigenous chicken (Alemu and Tadelle, 1997 and Tadelle et al., 2000). One way of improving the productivity of indigenous chickens for egg production is through crossbreeding with exotic chickens that are known for higher egg production. Such crossbreeding has widely been used as method to combine the high egg production of exotic breeds with the adaptability of indigenous breeds. Apart from the additive contribution of each breed to meet those requirements, there are also large non additive heterotic effects in egg yield and fertility traits which combine to result in high total productivity of the first generation (F ) of these crosses (Cunningham and 1 Syrstad, 1987). In study of genetic effect on egg production in diallel mating system of six white Leghorn strains, a marked increase in genetic variance and heterotic effect with environmental variance were observed (Laris-Erik Liljedahal (1994) Earlier reports on the performance of crossbred chickens for egg production traits showed that crossing with 62.5% indigenous-White Leghorn proportions were found to be superior to other crossbreds (25% and 50% crosses), (DZARC, 1991; Joseph, 1995 and Mekonnen, 1998.) However, information on additive genetic and heterotic effects is lacking. The objective of this paper was therefore, to estimate the individual and maternal additive genetic and heterotic effects for egg production traits in crossbred chickens and to predict the performance of different breed groups using estimated crossbreeding parameters. Materials and Methods Study area Data used for the present study was obtained from a crossbreeding experiment conducted on indigenous Ethiopian Chickens with White Leghorn breed at Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Centre (DZARC), in central 2 Million Tadesse et al./ Eth. J. Anim. Prod. 5(1)- 2005: 1-12 highlands of Ethiopia. The centre is located about 45 km Southeast of Addis Ababa at an altitude of about 1900 meters above see level, with an annual rainfall of 849 mm. The daily mean temperature ranges from 9 to 27 0C with an overall mean of 19.10C. Experimental flock and breeding program About 2000 day old White Leghorn chicks were purchased from state owned commercial poultry firm in Addis Ababa in 1992. At the same time about 150 indigenous Ethiopian Chickens were bought from Cheffe Donsa market (Central highland of Ethiopia). These were housed in deep litter system of housing and in each house they were provided with waterer and feeder. The study flock was fed on recommended starter, grower and layer rations, and both fed and water was offered ad libtum. In the mating system practised in the centre, the White Leghorn males were mated with indigenous female and indigenous male with Leghorn female to produce F female chickens. The reciprocal produced F female chickens were 1 1 mated to either pure WLH or indigenous cocks to produce 3/4 WLH and 1/4 WLH crosses, respectively. The 5/8 WLH crosses were produced by either mating 1/4 WLH females to pure White Leghorn males or by mating 3/4 WLH females to F1 males. The 5/8 WLH and 3/8 indigenous were also mated to produce the 50% White Leghorn crosses. The reciprocal crosses were produced to test the difference in performance between reciprocal crosses and indigenous chicken Data was recorded on group basis because there was no egg collection nest for individual chicken at the time of the experiment. Data analysis A total of 453 records from 2443 chickens were used to estimate individual and maternal additive genetic and heterotic effects on egg production traits. The General Linear Model (GLM) of SAS (1997) was used for data analysis. Chickens of different breed groups were hatched over five years (1992-1996) and two seasons. For evaluation of the effect of seasons on egg production traits, the months of the year were grouped into two seasons: dry season covering the first part of dry season from October to December and second part of dry season from January to February. The main rainy season is from June to September and the short rainy season falls between March and April. Some of experimental groups (batches and genotypes) had their production recorded only during the first few months of laying while others had for 12 months. Thus, the number of observations after 6 months of laying period 3 Million Tadesse et al./ Eth. J. Anim. Prod. 5(1)- 2005: 1-12 was much smaller. To include as many breed groups and batches within breed groups as possible in the analysis, the egg laying performance over the first three, six, nine and twelve months of laying periods was considered to estimate crossbreeding parameters. The coefficients of expected breed content and heterozygosity in birds were used as covariant to obtain estimates of the individual and maternal additive and heterotic effects using similar procedure to those of Robison et al., (1980), Hirooka and Bhutyan (1995), and Kahi et al., (1995). Heterozygosity with respect to genes of two breeds was calculated as the expected proportion of genes from the sire and dam. For example, the expected heterozygosity with respect to local (L) and Leghorn (WLH), HI was calculated as (Gs WLH L *Gd ) + (Gs *Gd ) where the superscript s and d denote that the genes WLH WLH L come from the sire and dam, respectively. Similarly expected heterozygosity with respect to two breeds were calculated for the genotype of the dam of individual and were denoted HM as before (Akbas et al., 1993). Thus the WLH model included effects for GI , HI , GM , HM as well as the WLH WLH WLH WLH environmental effects described above except breed groups. The breed groups and coefficients for expected effects of breed content and heterotic are shown in Table 1. It is assumed that the performance of each breed was affected by individual additive genetic effect (GI ), the individual heterotic (HI ), WLH WLHL maternal additive genetic effect (GM ) and the maternal heterotic effect WLH (HM ). The effect of recombination loss was ignored in this study, because WLHL available breed group are limited for all traits and these effects cannot be separated. For evaluation of genetic parameters the following statistical model was used: Yijkl = M + Yi+ Sj + Pk +GIWLHX1 + HIX2 + GMWLHX3 + HMX4 + +eijkl where: M = intercept (general level of indigenous chickens) GI = individual genetic effect of White Leghorn as deviation from WLH indigenous chickens. HI = individual heterotic effect. WLHL GM = maternal additive genetic effect of White Leghorn as deviation from WLH indigenous chickens. HM = maternal heterotic effect. WLHL X = proportion of genes from White Leghorn. 1 4