Ed Rege & Karen Marshall achieving more with available technologies Animal breeding for poverty...
-
Upload
sharyl-rose -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Ed Rege & Karen Marshall achieving more with available technologies Animal breeding for poverty...
Ed Rege & Karen Marshall
achieving more with available technologies
Animal breeding for poverty impact:
Context - demographics
One billion people involved in animal farming
Domestic animals supply 30% of total human requirements for food and agriculture
70% (630 m) rural poor depend on livestock for livelihoods
Rapidly growing livestock markets create income-generating opportunities
Context – opportunities & challenges
Opportunities
Livestock revolution:• Increased demand• Growing livestock markets• Expanding post-production value addition• Increased regional trade opportunities
Creative use of existing & emerging technology • e.g. AI, sexed semen, mobile telephony
Biofuel impacts: ‘Will ‘foraging livestock’ be more competitive?
Context – opportunities & challenges
Challenges
Rapid changes in production systems, markets, policy, other institutions
Supermarket revolution
• Creates longer value chain, and higher food quality standards (also employment opportunity!)
Climate change: demand for adapted genetics
New institutions and institutional arrangements are required (& emerging!)
• NGOs, CBOs, private service providers e.g. agrovets), PPPs, etc
Both public & private sector action is required for animal breeding to impact on poverty
‘Breeding’ as used in the paper
All actions intended to improve, produce, deliver and sustain genotypes, appropriate for the objectives of the target livestock keeper/producer
Focus of this paper - 1
Crop-livestock (& cut-and-carry) systems where genetic interventions can make a difference
Pastoral & semi-pastoral systems in which adaptation is critical
Focus of this paper - 2
Crop-livestock (& cut-and-carry) systems• Medium to high, reliable, rainfall
• Individual/family enterprises
• Limited land
• Medium to high productivity breeds
Focus• Productivity improvements
• Appropriate genotypes and sustainable replacement strategies
• Reliable services provision – e.g. AI, vet, credit
Focus of this paper - 3
Pastoral & semi-pastoral systems• Large herds/flocks
• Dictates of climate
• Mobility
• Indigenous breeds
• Strong community values
Focus• Restocking strategies (‘genetic maintenance’)
• Breeding strategies emphasizing adaptive attributes
• Sire exchange or sharing strategies – using community structures
Two short- to medium-term high potential impact areas (in all
systems)
Identification and facilitating evaluation/testing of proven genotypes from elsewhere
Facilitating sustainable availability of ‘high demand genotypes’ (e.g. F1, ¾, 5/8 dairy heifers, crossbred gilts)
1 Within-breed selection will NOT meet short- to medium-term needs for
poverty impact
Slow progress versus rapid system changes
• small herds, high mortalities, low fertility, long L etc.
• lack of performance recording
• lack of institutional frameworks & infrastructure
Multiple trait objectives: traits often have low h2
• due to trait complexity (e.g. disease resistance, other adaptive attributes)
• also high environmental noise (VE)
2 New genomics approaches, such as marker-based selection, will have limited impact on
smallholders
Marker-assisted selection• Multiple QTLs with small effects
• QTLs in experiments not applicable in field situations
• Lack of working breed improvement frameworks
• In dairy: only low to moderate improvements reported – without economic benefits (e.g. Spelman et al., 2007)
Marker-assisted introgression, more promising but• Requires significant time, resources & delivery infrastructure
Other breed-improvement alternatives not fully exploited, and may have higher probability of success
3 Community-based approaches are over-sold
Top down ‘cooperatives’ are viewed with suspicion
‘Pastoral model’ of collective animal management has a solid social basis & works well – is an opportunity!
Community based models for breeding are not well demonstrated – major institutional issues remain unresolved
Privately run nucleus as sources of breeding material – certified seed model? – need serious consideration
‘Sire camps’ or ‘sire rotations’ or private AI overseen by self-created and regulated ‘groups’ hold promise
4 Conservation approaches can propagate poverty
Keeping adapted, but low producing breeds, in changing systems is unattainable
Indigenous breeds in the hands of
farmers should be facilitated to evolve at a pace commensurate with system changes
Farmers ready to exit livestock keeping should be facilitated to do so
Farmers and the private sector consider breeds/genotypes as a means of production – a technology• focus should be on making breeds ‘work for them’
Breeds as a natural resource for future generations (i.e. conservation) should be a public sector responsibility
In situ conservation will only happen if:• breeds are supported by the market• farmers are compensated (by public sector) for keeping non-profitable
breeds
Ex situ action is urgently needed for breeds at risk• public sector responsibility?• regional approach?
4 Conservation approaches can propagate poverty
5 Absence of perfect data/tools is NOT the major constraint: inaction
IS!
You can proceed by e.g.
• Using available estimates of genetic parameters
• Using qualitative measures / subjective scoring/ranking
• Private sector (nucleus) breeding (akin to commercial seed model)
• Breeding objectives based on farmer preferences, choice experiments, etc
• Application of independent culling levels
Start with manageable program and move towards more optimal situation as capacity / data builds
6 Pro-poor animal improvement is NOT necessarily about
breeding
It should comprise:• Understanding system changes and implications
• Providing knowledge to enable poor farmers to adapt to these changes
• Providing access to relevant market information
• Creating (policy) environments that enable the poor to participate along the livestock value chain
• Facilitating/developing institutional arrangements (including private sector) that empower farmers to make and implement decisions
Set the stage for genetic improvement (including introduction of alternative genetics)
7 New genetics, introduced or created, can be a pathway out of
subsistence
Introduced genetics
• N’Dama in central Africa
• Sahiwal in Kenya;
• Buffaloes in humid areas of LAC
Created genetics
• Dorper sheep
• Jamaica Hope
• Cuban Siboney
• Crossbred dairy cattle in highland Kenya (a fading opportunity?)
Animal germplasm has been successfully imported from Asia & Africa to LAC: similar approaches could work in Africa
Opportunities: • N’Dama in tsetse infested areas
of eastern Africa
• Kenana and Butana for milk in other parts of Africa
• Brazilian ‘dairy’ zebu breeds (e.g. Gir, Guzera) into Africa and Asia
• Wider use of the Boran in Africa?
7 New genetics, introduced or created, can be a pathway out of
subsistence
Boran cattle
Requirements:
• (On-farm) characterization to identify the most appropriate genotype
• Use of technologies to assist introduction & on-going evaluation
• Sustainable sources of breeding material – private sector role
• Appropriate agreements, consistent with international conventions and other instruments
7 New genetics, introduced or created, can be a pathway
out of subsistence
8 Available reproductive technologies offer promise
Reproductive technologies can be used now, and support new technologies when available
AI services can provide appropriate breeding material to farmers – currently not fully exploited
Estrus synchronization to scale up operations
High demand for breeding females can be met through use of AI, sexed semen, IVET, via private sector CSM• dairy cattle in eastern Africa (e.g. Ethiopia, Kenya)• pigs in south-east Asia (e.g. Vietnam)
Concluding comments
Use old science in new ways and places
Use new science to address old problems
• e.g. understanding co-evolution of livestock with environments
Match interventions to production system: understand systems
Researcher’s should act as catalysts and facilitators providing options to farmers to make decisions based on scientific evidence
Need for breeders to think out of the box!