Publications

The ranking of genotypes (i.e., breeds and breed crosses) for economic performance depends on the production circumstances of the herd and the criteria for economic evaluation. In this study, the effects of evaluation criteria and production circumstance are quantified using data from the literature on six genotypes. The economic evaluation criteria measured at herd level included lifetime profit and lifetime profit expressed per day of calving interval, per day of productive lifetime, per day of total herd life, per unit of milk, and per unit of feed energy. Four production circumstances were studied; these circumstances included constraints on the output of milk and on herd use of concentrates, roughages, and both concentrates and roughages. Profit was determined based on the sale of milk, calves, cull cows, and heifers and the expenses incurred for concentrates and roughages, animal deaths, milking time, interest, and other inputs.Results indicate that production circumstances and evaluation criteria largely influence the ranking of genotypes and, therefore, the outcome of economic comparisons. The genotype that ranks the best under a certain criteria and circumstance ranks differently when these situations are altered. In economic comparisons of genotypes aimed at offering recommendations for implementation in smallholder dairy production systems in the tropics, the choice of the evaluation criteria should be determined by the limitation or constraint that characterizes the area where the genotypes are to produce or are currently producing. For example, for situations in which feed availability is limiting, genotypes should be ranked on total profit per unit of feed energy.The ranking of genotypes (i.e., breeds and breed crosses) for economic performance depends on the production circumstances of the herd and the criteria for economic evaluation. In this study, the effects of evaluation criteria and production circumstance are quantified using data from the literature on six genotypes. The economic evaluation criteria measured at herd level included lifetime profit and lifetime profit expressed per day of calving interval, per day of productive lifetime, per day of total herd life, per unit of milk, and per unit of feed energy. Four production circumstances were studied; these circumstances included constraints on the output of milk and on herd use of concentrates, roughages, and both concentrates and roughages. Profit was determined based on the sale of milk, calves, cull cows, and heifers and the expenses incurred for concentrates and roughages, animal deaths, milking time, interest, and other inputs.Results indicate that production circumstances and evaluation criteria largely influence the ranking of genotypes and, therefore, the outcome of economic comparisons. The genotype that ranks the best under a certain criteria and circumstance ranks differently when these situations are altered. In economic comparisons of genotypes aimed at offering recommendations for implementation in smallholder dairy production systems in the tropics, the choice of the evaluation criteria should be determined by the limitation or constraint that characterizes the area where the genotypes are to produce or are currently producing. For example, for situations in which feed availability is limiting, genotypes should be ranked on total profit per unit of feed energy.

The ranking of genotypes (i.e., breeds and breed crosses) for economic performance depends on the production circumstances of the herd and the criteria for economic evaluation. In this study, the effects of evaluation criteria and production circumstance are quantified using data from the literature on six genotypes. The economic evaluation criteria measured at herd level included lifetime profit and lifetime profit expressed per day of calving interval, per day of productive lifetime, per day of total herd life, per unit of milk, and per unit of feed energy. Four production circumstances were studied; these circumstances included constraints on the output of milk and on herd use of concentrates, roughages, and both concentrates and roughages. Profit was determined based on the sale of milk, calves, cull cows, and heifers and the expenses incurred for concentrates and roughages, animal deaths, milking time, interest, and other inputs.Results indicate that production circumstances and evaluation criteria largely influence the ranking of genotypes and, therefore, the outcome of economic comparisons. The genotype that ranks the best under a certain criteria and circumstance ranks differently when these situations are altered. In economic comparisons of genotypes aimed at offering recommendations for implementation in smallholder dairy production systems in the tropics, the choice of the evaluation criteria should be determined by the limitation or constraint that characterizes the area where the genotypes are to produce or are currently producing. For example, for situations in which feed availability is limiting, genotypes should be ranked on total profit per unit of feed energy.The ranking of genotypes (i.e., breeds and breed crosses) for economic performance depends on the production circumstances of the herd and the criteria for economic evaluation. In this study, the effects of evaluation criteria and production circumstance are quantified using data from the literature on six genotypes. The economic evaluation criteria measured at herd level included lifetime profit and lifetime profit expressed per day of calving interval, per day of productive lifetime, per day of total herd life, per unit of milk, and per unit of feed energy. Four production circumstances were studied; these circumstances included constraints on the output of milk and on herd use of concentrates, roughages, and both concentrates and roughages. Profit was determined based on the sale of milk, calves, cull cows, and heifers and the expenses incurred for concentrates and roughages, animal deaths, milking time, interest, and other inputs.Results indicate that production circumstances and evaluation criteria largely influence the ranking of genotypes and, therefore, the outcome of economic comparisons. The genotype that ranks the best under a certain criteria and circumstance ranks differently when these situations are altered. In economic comparisons of genotypes aimed at offering recommendations for implementation in smallholder dairy production systems in the tropics, the choice of the evaluation criteria should be determined by the limitation or constraint that characterizes the area where the genotypes are to produce or are currently producing. For example, for situations in which feed availability is limiting, genotypes should be ranked on total profit per unit of feed energy.

A study was undertaken in a semi-arid area of Kenya between August 1991 and June 1993 to evaluate the effects of anthelmintic treatment using ivermectin before or during the rains, on performance of mixed sheep and goat flocks, in comparison with an untreated flock. Performance parameters measured included age and weight of dams at first parturition, parturition intervals, body weights of dams and offspring, and birth weights, growth rates, and mortality rates of offspring. Among these parameters, birth weights and growth rates of offspring were found to be significantly improved by the treatment administered before the rains compared with the other two treatments. Mortality was lower in lambs and kids with high birth weights. Treatment, either before or during the rains, significantly reduced the faecal egg output and improved body weight, packed cell volume and flock fertility. Liveweight was confirmed to be a better measure of sexual maturity than age. It was further shown that lambs and kids, born of dams at their first lambing or kidding, experienced higher mortality rates than lambs and kids born of dams in their second and subsequent parturitions. Overall, treatment with ivermectin before the onset of rains was equal to or better, in terms of the performance parameters measured, than treatment during the rains, whilst treatment compared with no treatment increased performance in almost all of the parameters measured.