.
2010
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic
parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
Drs. J. Visser
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine
Utrecht University, the Netherlands
Supervisors
Dr. R.J. Veeneklaas
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine
Utrecht University
Utrecht, the Netherlands
Dr. M.A.S. Harun
Faculdade Veterinária
Universidade Eduardo Mondlande
Maputo, Mozambique
Dr. F. Vilela
Estãçao Zoótecnica da Angónia
Ulongue, Mozambique
j.visser3@students.uu.nl
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
1
1. Abstract
The aim of this research was to evaluate the impact that animal traction has on health,
reproduction and physiology of cows by evaluating a project that started in 2008. The
purpose of the project was to stimulate the use of cows on the land and to achieve a calving
interval of 18 months or less. This research is the follow up of this project.
This was done by questionnaires at local farmers in Angonia and physical examinations of a
group of project cows compared to a control group. Most farmers in this area only use their
cattle for transport and they only use bulls or oxen, while cows are much more efficient to
use. Many farmers in Angonia supplement the feeding of their cattle, especially during the
dry season. This occurs more often at farmers that use their cattle for traction as well.
Working cows have to be fed a higher amount of energy or get supplements to cover for
their higher energy demand. If not, the work output will not be affected, but reproduction
may get impaired. The most important reason for death of cattle but also to call for a
veterinarian is diseases. Especially tick borne disease are a major concern, especially during
the wet season. The calving interval of the project cows does not differ from the control
group, though this is only based on 6 calves. There is also no significant difference when
asking the farmers about the calving interval. When these working cows are fed with a
sufficient amount of energy to cover for their maintenance, reproduction and work output,
work does not have to reduce reproductive performance.
The parameters PCV, haemoglobin and total protein were measured in the blood of working
and non-working cows and compared to the value that was measured in January 2009.
There was a significant increase in PCV and haemoglobin in the project cows compared to
the control group because of the high oxygen demand in working animals.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
2
Contents
1
Abstract
1
2
Introduction
3
3
Background
Draught animals in Mozambique
Breeds
Cows vs oxes
4
4
The Project
6
5
Materials and Methods
Questionnaire
Reproduction
Physiology
8
6
Results
11
Feeding
Health
Reproduction
Physiology
7
Discussion
Feeding
Health
Physiology
Reproduction
17
8
Conclusions
21
9
References
22
Annex 1
Annex 2
Questionnaire
Physiology
24
31
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
3
2. Introduction
Agriculture is the most important source of income in large parts of Mozambique. Many
farmers still work their land by hand, whilst working with draught animals can make work
much more efficient. However, farmers often do not know how to work with animals or they
are afraid what effect it might have on the cows health and reproduction. In the North
Zambesia area, according their tradition they only use animal traction for transport and not
for working the land.
The aim of this study was to evaluate what impact animal traction has on health and
reproductive capacity of cows, but also to stimulate the development of agriculture.
To evaluate this impact following parameters were measured:
 Health:
diseases, feeding, body condition score
 Physiology:
PCV, haemoglobin, total protein, parasites in feces and blood
 Reproduction:
reproductive status, calving, abortion, calving interval
To find out what effects work has on the cows in the Angonia area, a research in Central
Mozambique was done. Beforehand, a questionnaire was made for a group of farmers to
gather information about their cattle’s health and reproduction. To evaluate the
reproductive status rectal examination were performed. There were also blood and fecal
samples taken to investigate them in the laboratory.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
4
3.
Background
Draught animals in Mozambique
Cows kept in rural areas in Africa are kept for meat, milk and draught. They give the farmer
financial security, because they can be sold. They also give social status.
They have to perform their tasks at the same time to maximize the economic profit of the
animal. A study in 1995 by Starkey found that in the more remote rural areas of South Africa,
40-80% of the small farms makes use of some kind of animal traction1.
Animal traction was extremely important for the farmers, especially in the beginning of this
century. Later in the twentieth century more and more technology was developed and used
by the larger, often white, farmers, replacing most of the use of animal traction. Because of
the expense of these machines and the lack of infrastructure in the more remote areas, most
attempts to introduce machinery to smaller local farmers failed. Because so many new
technologies for agriculture were developed this century, animal traction became a
neglected subject for many years, until the oil prices went up in the 1970s.
Mozambique is one of the main developing countries in sub-saharian Africa. Mozambique,
and especially the Tete province, suffered from a civil war for 17 years that ended in 1992.
Because of this war, many people lost their properties and also their cattle. Since 1992, the
area had to regain itself.
In Mozambique, agriculture is the most important food source and source of income for the
families in the rural areas of Central Mozambique. Most farmers that own cattle are in crop
farming as well. In a study by the Ministry of Agriculture of Mozambique they found that the
possession of animals used for animal traction plays an important role in family income,
because they can increase crop yields.2.
Besides income, owning cattle is a form of prestige as well. Owners sometimes do not even
use cattle, but it makes an important social contribution. Also, the animals are worth quite a
lot of money, so if the farmer needs money cattle can be sold.
Due to social traditions and lack of money for machinery, most farmers in Angonia still work
their land by hand. They have worked their land by hand for centuries. Besides this, working
with animal traction is considered to be a male activity. Women are normally not involved in
animal traction, but they are responsible for the most other farm activities.
If a pair of cattle could be used for ploughing, the farmers could save time or cultivate a
larger area. The weeding is a job of the women, but because they do this by hand it takes
more time. Because they have to weed a larger area when cattle is used for ploughing, this
work is the limiting factor in area size.
Another important factor why they do not use animals for working the land is the purchase
and maintenance of the cattle and the implements.
1
Starkey et al 1995 Animal traction in South Africa: overview of the key issues Animal traction in South Africa:
empowering rural communities p. 17-30
2 Ministry of Agriculture
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
5
Breeds
There are several different breeds of cattle in Mozambique; the Bovine Tete, Landim and
Angoni. In the Tete province the main breed found is the Angoni cow. The Angoni cow is the
only Zebu type existing in Mozambique. This breed can also be found in the eastern province
of Zambia and Malawi. The cows are fairly small with an average weight of 200 kg. They have
a well developed hump that has a thoracic location.
Fig. 3.1 Angoni cattle, Mozambique
The use of cows versus the use of oxes
Either oxes or cows can be used for animal traction. In Angonia, it is very unusual to use
cows for traction. Farmers use either bulls or oxes for traction. They only keep cows for the
production of calves. Very few farmers use their cows for milk production. This is because
these cows only produce about 5 litres milk per day, which is just enough for the calve.
Another reason is tradition and habits, nobody uses their cows for milk production. One
reason for using only oxes and bulls is that they normally have them anyway, besides the
cows. So if they can choose they use the cows for calves and the bulls for draught. Another
reason for that is that they are afraid for a reduction of fertility of the cows when they use
them for traction.
There are several advantages to using cows for traction. One of them is that they serve
multiple purposes; they can draught, produce milk and have calves. Second, because of this
multiple purpose, they are more profitable all year round, so they are very efficient.
Oxes can only be used for traction but have to be fed all year round as well, so their
economic profit is lower. Also the oxes have to compete with the cows for grass, especially
in the dry season. The farmers have to keep more cattle, which will cause a decrease of
availability of land for crop production.
There are also disadvantages of using cows. There is one time of the year when they cannot
work, that is in late pregnancy and early lactation. Also, it is not entirely sure what effect
work has on reproduction3. Because the Angoni cattle is a quite small breed and the cows
are even smaller then the bulls, many people believe that the work output of the cows is less
than that of bulls or oxen and maybe enough to be used for draught, but there is no
scientific proof for this.
3
Schie, B.M.T. 1999, Draught cattle in Mozambique: Effect of training and excercise on muscle and blood
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
6
3.
The Project
In 2008 a project was designed by the Veterinary Faculty, part of the Eduardo Mondlande
University in Maputo. This project was implemented by the IIAM (Instituto Investigagação
Agrária de Moçambique) situated in Ulongue Angonia4. The project covered three test
area’s; Angonia, which is located in Central Mozambique, and Changalane and Chobela,
which are located in the Maputo province in Southern Mozambique. This report will further
focus on the project in Angonia.
The aim of this project was to stimulate the use of cow traction in working the land. The goal
is to get a calving interval of 18 months or less in working animals.
The project started in November 2008 for the duration of 24 months. When the project
finishes, the farmers can continue themselves in using the animals on the land. The results
will be evaluated yearly. This project was financed by USAID.
For the project in Angonia, 10 female cows were selected by the local veterinarian. All cows
were born in 2004 and their weight ranged from 221 kg to 285 kg. All cows had a body
condition score (BCS) of 3 out of 5.
All cows were fertilized and placed at the selected farmers when they were in late state
pregnancy. Each cow had a calve after placing, one of them died 3 days after partus for other
reasons, to make sure that each cow is able to produce a calve. All 10 cows were trained by
the IIAM to be used for animal traction while they were pregnant, so they were comfortable
pulling a plough or cart when placed.
Five poor local farmers were selected to participate in the project. All of these farmer were
inexperienced in the use of cattle for animal traction before. Four of these farmers have a
woman as head of the household, the fifth person was a man and he is also the local chief.
Each farmer got 2 cows, because cows used for animal traction always work in pairs. Each
calve these cows get will be given to other farmers without any cattle, to expand the project
to more farms.
The selected farmers for this project are rural households living in the villages Ndundu and
Matawere in Angonia. They all need agriculture for their food supply. Before the start of this
project all of these farmers cultivated their land by hand and they did not own any cattle.
At the property of each of the 5 farmers, an area of 0,25 hectare was selected as a test area.
The farmers had to use this area to grow maize and use the cows to cultivate the land. Most
important was that they used the pair of cows for ploughing, but if possible they could also
use them for weeding, as this is the most time consuming activity.
They also had to use organic and inorganic fertilizer for the maize. The fertilizer and one
plough to share were given to the farmers.
4
Harun M, 2009, Participativa dos Aspectos Agronómicos, Socio-Económicos e Fisiológicos do Uso de Vacas das Raças
Angone (Bos indicus) e Landim (Bos taurus) na Tracção Animal, Programa de Bolsas Competitivas para Investigacao Agraria
em Mocambique
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
7
A couple of months after the start of the project, the situation was evaluated by Mohamed
Harun and Julio Come in January 2009. At that stage all cows have had a calve and had an
empty uterus, but active ovaria.
By giving one plough and 2 trained cows to each of the 5 selected farmers, they solved the
problem the farmers have in purchasing these. They stimulated the farmers to use the pair
of cows and the plough on the land, to show them that the efficiency can be improved.
This research is a follow up of the evaluation done in January 2009. Again, the group of
project cows is compared to other farmers with cattle and to a control group at the research
station.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
8
4.
Materials and Methods
The present research was done in and around the rural town of Ulongue.
Ulongue is the district capital of Angonia, an area located on a plateau (altitude 700m1655m) 5 in the Tete province, in Central Mozambique. The households that will be
interviewed are living in smaller villages surrounding Ulongue, namely Ndundu, Matawere,
Nhanhale, Chizungu, Zamadenga and Chiphole. The research station itself is also situated in
Ulongue
Questionnaire
For the purpose of this research, 15 cattle owning households were questioned. These
households were subdivided into three groups:
1. Using female cattle for animal traction on the land – 5 households. This group is the
project group, so each household owns 2 cows for working the land.
2. Using bulls and oxes for transport, female cows only for producing calves –
5 households
3. Owning bulls and cows, but don’t use animal traction – 5 households
The was also a fourth group that functioned as a control group. This group consisted of 10
cows located at the research station, but because they were not used in this part of the
research, they are not included.
A questionnaire was made containing about 70 questions about the subjects Feeding, Health
and Reproduction.
The technician covering this area had to come to give his permission and to arrange the
interviews. The technician of this area is called Domingus Paulo. Also, two translators had to
come. The questionnaires were written in English. Most of the questions contained 4 or 5
possible answers already, and one open option. This was done because it is very hard to
perform any statistics on open questions, because the possible answers differ too much.
Each possible answer was coded beforehand.
Reproduction
To get a clearer view about the reproductive situation of the cows in relation to animal
traction, questions about reproduction were included in the questionnaire, such as age of
first calve and average number of calves. They were also asked to give the range of their
average calving interval. Of course all data concerning calves from the project cows are
known, but not from the other farmers, that is why the questions were included.
For the physical part of the reproduction, two groups were made:
1. Cows that are used for traction (project group) – 10 cows
2. Cows not used for traction (control group) – 10 cows
5
Perfil do Distrito de Angónia Província de Tete, República de Moçambique, Ministério da Administração
Estatal, 2005
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
9
The 10 cows from group 1 are the cows from the project mentioned earlier. These cows are
used for working the land. The 10 cows from group 2 are cows from the research station
IIAM in Ulongue, Angonia. These cows are not used for traction, but only to produce calves.
At nights they stay at the research station, but during the day a shepherd takes them out to
drink at the river and for grazing for about 8 hours.
Selection of the cows from group 2 was random, but all cows were about the same age as
the cows from group 1, all born in 2004. All cows are physically able to produce a healthy
calve.
The cows from group 1 were pregnant or just had their first calve at the time of placing, all
of them had one calve and were empty in January 2009. The date of their partus was known.
Using rectal examination their current reproductive status was investigated. Also, the
farmers were asked about calves born.
Rectal examinations were also done of the cows in group 2 to state their reproductive
condition.
At the research station there are records available to see how many calves each cow had
and their date of partus.
Physiology
In the questionnaire also questions were asked about Feeding and Health. To establish some
other parameters the two groups mentioned in Reproduction were used again.
Blood
From all these 20 cows two tubes of blood were collected using Vacutainers®6. From each
cow, one EDTA vacutainer (purple) and one vacutainer without anti-coagulant (red) was
taken. The blood was taken from the medial caudal vein in the tail.
The tubes were stored at first in a cool box and were processed that same afternoon.
The ten cows from group 1 were inspected in January 2009 as well, because they participate
in the project. Therefore, it was possible to compare the values for packed cell volume (PCV),
haemoglobin and total protein between January 2009 and now.
The blood was processed under field conditions in the laboratory in Ulongue. Because of
limitations of the laboratory, only the most practical parameters could be measured.
- PCV measuring was done manually, using 2 capillairy tubes of EDTA blood from each
sample, a centrifuge and haematocrit meter. The capillairs were centrifuged for 8
minutes at 10 000 revolutions per minute (RPM) to separate the blood layers. Then
the value of the red blood cells was read from a haematocrit meter. The volume of
packed red blood cells divided by the total volume of the sample gives the PCV.
Double capillairs were taken to prevent errors. It also is easier in keeping the balance
in the centrifuge. The mean PCV of each sample was written down.
-
6
7
Haemoglobin was measured using Hemocue®7. The microcuvette was applied to the
specimen. Because of capillary action, 10 µL was drawn in the cuvette. The right
amounts of the reagents are present in the microcuvette and mixed with the blood
automatically.
BD Vacutainer® PPT™ - PLASMA PREPARATION TUBE by Becton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, NJ USA
B-Hemoglobin / Hb 201+ / Hb 201 DM , HemoCue SA (Pty) Ltd by SAMED
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
10
After wiping of the cuvette with paper, the cuvette was placed in the cuvette holder
and inserted into the Hemocue. The haemoglobin value could be read from the
display after about 20 seconds. The Hemocue works automatically, the portable
photometer passes light through the blood sample in the microcuvette and measures
the absorbance of methaemoglobinazide
-
Total protein was measured from the tube containing blood without coagulant. These
tubes were first centrifuged for 10 minutes. After that, the serum was sucked out
using a pipette. One drop of this serum was placed on a refractometer and the value
could be read. Again, two measurements were done from each sample and the mean
value was written down
From one drop of blood from the EDTA tube, a blood smear could be made. The blood smear
was fixated with methanol for 5 minutes. Then Giemsa 10% was added for coloring for 30
minutes. Then wash and dry the smear and interpret it using a microscope. Possibly present
bloodparasites could be detected this way. Finding even one parasite means the animal is ill.
All bloodsmears were taken back to Utrecht University to be examined microscopically.
Feces
Apart from the blood samples fecal samples were also taken from these 20 cows. These
samples were collected straight from the rectum and were taken to the laboratory the same
day. From each sample, 4 gram of feces was made smaller and diluted in 14 mL of a
saturated sugar solution. Then the bigger parts were taken out using a sieve. Then some of
this diluted feces was taken out using a pipette and inserted on both sides of a McMaster
plate, 0,15 mL on each side. Using a microscope, the eggs present in each sample were
counted and characterized. To calculate the number of eggs per gram feces (EPG) of cattle,
this number had to be multiplied this with 25. An EPG >500 was marked as mildly infected,
and >1000 severely infected8.
SPSS
To process these data, a database for the questionnaire and the physiological values was
made and statistics done using SPSS 13.0 for Windows.
For the questionnaire, tables of frequencies, percentages and graphs were made. To
compare the difference in calving interval between the project group and the control group
a Chi-square test was used. A Chi-square test was also used to compare farmers in
supplementing their animals.
For the physiological values the mean and standard deviation was calculated. To compare
the values of the project cows for PCV, haemoglobin and total protein in January 2009 with
the values in September 2010 a paired and independent T-tests were used. Normally, for
values from the same group in different moments in the Paired T-test is used, unless the
correlation is too low. Then an Independent test is used. To compare values between
different group, an Independent test is always used, so to compare between the project
group and the control group an independent T-test was used. Significance is at the 0,05 level
of probability.
8
Merck Veterinary Manual, 9th Edition 2008, Internal Parasite Diagnosis in Livestock
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
11
5. Results
Feeding
When the cattle is not at work or not working at all, they go out grazing with a shepherd and
stay in a small outside paddock with a wooden fence during the night. They can drink from
the river twice a day, when they go out and when they come in. During the night they get
extra food, especially in the dry season. When asked, most farmers do give their cattle extra
food next to the grazing.
Out of the 15 farmers interviewed, 73,3% of them said to supplement their cattle. Most
common used supplements are salt, elephant grass, hay and leaves of beans and maize.
Many farmers also feed their cattle a grass that they dry in a special way called medda. In
this way the grass on the inside stays dry to prevent it from getting rotten.
Figure 5.1 ‘medda’
When in the working season, the animals work 3 to 5 hours a day. When they are not
working, they can graze for about 10 hours a day.
Of the 10 farmers that use their cows for traction, they all feed their cows extra when they
are working.
A difference between groups that turned up from the questionnaire is that out of 15 farmers
who do not use animal traction 80% feed their cattle less during the dry season. In farmers
that use animal traction it is 50%. When performing a Chi-square test to see if there is a
significant difference, the value is 0,264. Since this value exceeds 0,05, the difference is not
significant.
Do you feed your cattle less
du ring t he dry sea son?
no
No use o f AT
fre quen cy
pe rcenta ge
Use AT
fre quen cy
pe rcenta ge
To tal
fre quen cy
pe rcenta ge
yes
To tal
1
4
5
20 ,0%
80 ,0%
10 0,0%
5
5
10
50 ,0%
50 ,0%
10 0,0%
6
9
15
40 ,0%
60 ,0%
10 0,0%
Table 5.1 use of cattle and supplementation during dry season
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
12
Health
In the questionnaire every cattle-owning farmer was asked how the condition of the cattle
changed during the year. Every farmer gave about the same answer. The lack of food for the
animals during the dry season presents itself as a yearly dip in body condition around
August. Of course, for farmers it is quite hard to score their animals, so they will judge their
body condition on degree of muscles and fat and on prominently seen bones.
The rainy season starts every year in the end of November. It continues to rain until March,
that is when the dry season starts. From April/May on, because of the drought, there is less
and less to graze for the cattle, so their body condition will begin to decrease.
The cows that participated in the project were scored at three different moments. The first
one before the start of the project, in 2008, the second time in January 2009, and the last
one in September 2010, at the end of the project.
Eartag
BCS start in
2008
BCS January
2009
BCS September
2010
125A/ 7101 3
2.5
2,5
51A/ 7138
3
3,0
3,0
39B / 7108 3
3,0
4,0
121A/ 7147 3
2,5
3,0
114A/ 7126 3
3,0
3,0
116A / 7106 3
2,5
3,0
29B / 7127 3
2,5
3,0
24B / 7100 3
2,5
3,0
133A / 7131 3
2,5
2,5
1B / 7112
3
3,0
3,0
Table 5.2 Body condition score (BCS) project cows
The farmers were asked if they even consult a veterinarian and if so, for what reason.
Farmers that use their cows for traction, call in for veterinary help more often than farmers
who do not use animal traction. A reason for this might be that trained animals are more
expensive than untrained ones, so people are prepared to invest more money in them for
veterinary care as well to keep them healthy. Reasons to call for veterinary help are mostly
diseases. Out of the 10 farmers that use their cattle for traction, 80% called a veterinarian
for that reason. Only 20% of the farmers that do not use animal traction call a veterinarian
for diseases. The main problem are tick born diseases, 33% of the households mention this
as the main reason for death of the cows. Other reasons that animals got sick or died were
lack of food and accidents, but people never call a vet for these problems.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
13
Reproduction
The questionnaire also contained questions about calving, calving problems and abortions.
At the farmers that were interviewed, there were no or very few problems with calving ,they
seldom have to help. This is because heifers are quite old when they get their first calve, so
their body is fully grown. The calves are also quite small, so problems with calving are rare.
None of the questioned farmers have had any calving problems. They also don´t see many
abortions, but abortion in early pregnancy is often not noticed.
There were no abortions mentioned in the cows that were used for traction, but these cows
have had only 1 or 2 calves yet. In group 2 and 3 four farmers (40%) mentioned abortions,
but for an unknown reason. They don’t call for a veterinarian when it does happen.
When asked farmers believe that using pregnant animals for draught is bad for the foetus. At
the start of the project the pregnant animals were trained to pull a plough and that did not
have any negative impact on the pregnancy, so this is not always true.
The average age of heifers when they get their first calve is 4 years old. 80% out of 15
farmers said their heifers start calving at that age. The other 3 farmers average age of first
calve is 2,5 years old, these 3 farmers were all in group 1, so in the project group.
There were also questions asked about the average calving interval to compare working and
non-working cows. The results can be found in the table below.
Ca lving interval
non -working cows
freq uency
percenta ge
wo rking cows
freq uency
percenta ge
To tal
freq uency
percenta ge
1-1 ,5 ye ar
1,5 -2 ye ars
4
5
>2 years
1
To tal
10
40, 0%
50, 0%
10, 0%
100 ,0%
0
4
1
5
,0%
80, 0%
20, 0%
100 ,0%
4
9
2
15
26, 7%
60, 0%
13, 3%
100 ,0%
Table 5.3 Calving interval
The calving interval of most animals is between 18 to 24 months. In the group that works
their land by hand there is also 40% that has a calving interval between 12 to 24 months.
When using a Chi-square test to compare these intervals, it can be concluded that these
values are not significantly different.
The calving interval of the project cows was calculated because these exact data are known,
but only 4 out of 10 cows had their second calve. The mean calving interval calculated from
these 4 is 657 days, so just over 21 months.
The calving intervals of the cows in the control group were also calculated. All results can be
found in the tables below.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
14
Eartag
Owner
Town
First calve
Second calve
Calving Interval
125A
51A
39B
121A
114A
116A
29B
24B
133A
1B
Manuel Johane
Manuel Johane
Demetria Isac
Demetria Isac
Martinha Paulo
Martinha Paulo
Maria Lurdes
Maria Lurdes
Donota Chirima
Donota Chirima
Ndundu
Ndundu
Ndundu
Ndundu
Ndundu
Ndundu
Ndundu
Ndundu
Matawere
Matawere
02/09/2008 5F
12/08/2008 6F
11/01/2009
25/12/2008
2008 (1/11/08)*
24/10/2008 4F
04/08/2008 2F
12/08/2008 3F
29/09/2008 †
02/08/2008 1F
(8-9 m pregnant)
(8-9 m pregnant)
16/07/2010 1f
(8-9 m pregnant)
14/08/2010 2f
(8-9 m pregnant)
07/2010
08/2010
(8-9 m pregnant)
(8-9 m pregnant)
MEAN
551 days
±652 days
±695 days
±730 days
657 days
SD 77,53 days
Table 5.4 Project cows sept 2010
*Estimated date
Eartag Year of
Birth
137 A 2004
65 B
2004
51 B
2004
7B
2004
68 B
2004
54 B
2004
144 A 2004
36 B
2004
47 B
2004
136 A 2004
1st calve
2nd calve
14-05-2010
23-10-2009
01-01-2008
15-06-2010
03-08-2009
19-06-2010
02-06-2009
MEAN
Date coming
14-06-2009
Date coming
19-07-2009
08-06-2010
Table 5.5 control group sept 2010
Calving interval
Coming
Coming
… days
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
15
Of all cows in group 1 and 2 the reproductive status was evaluated using rectal
examinations. The results can be found in the pie charts below.
Project group
Control group
Table 5.6 Reproductive status sept 2010
Physiology
The individual values that were found for PCV can be found in annex 2.
First, the values were compared for Packed Cell Volume (PCV) of the project cows on the
two different moments in time. The correlation in PCV values between January 2009 and
September 2010 was <0,5, so an Independent T-test was used instead of a Paired T-test.
When comparing the groups there is a significant lower PCV in the control group.
There is a highly significant (<0,01) lower PCV in the control group when compared to the
project group.
The control group of 2009 and the control group of 2010 were not the same group, but the
animals were randomly selected from the same pool of animals, so the mean values for the
different parameters should not differ. To check this, an Independent Samples Test was also
done on these two groups. There is a significant decrease in PCV. This tendency of both the
project cows and the control group to have a lower value of PCV in 2010 than in 2009 is
probably due to measuring in different times of the year. The same goes for haemoglobin
and total protein.
The same was done for haemoglobin and total protein. For haemoglobin and total protein
the correlation was also <0,5 so I used an Independent T-test. For haemoglobin, the
difference is highly significant (P<0,01). The following table contains the means and standard
deviations of the groups.
Parameter
PCV (%)
Hb (g/dl)
TP (g/dl)
Table. 5.7
Project group
2009 n=10
36,10ᴬ ±3,05
13,53ᴬ ±1,51
9,46ᴬ ±0,34
Control group
2009 n=10
33,55ᴬ ±2,61
13,04ᴬ ±1,12
9,55ᴬ ±0,67
Project group
2010 n=10
32,50ᴮ ±3,07
11,59ᴮ ±1,07
8,58ᴮ
±1,14
Control group
2010 n=10
26,55ᶜ
±3,19
9,24ᶜ
±1,25
8,40ᶜ
±0,58
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
16
The blood smears were taken back to Utrecht University to be looked at using a microscope.
Tick-born diseases are the most common reason in this area for health problems with cattle.
Most of these parasites can be diagnosed using blood smears. Even the finding of a single
parasite labels the animal as ill.
The following tables will be filled in once the bloodsmears are looked at, probably April
2011.
Eartag
Parasites blood
Number
Type
Coming
Coming
125 A / 7101
Coming
51 A / 7138
Coming
39 B / 7108
121 A / 7147 Coming
114 A / 7126 Coming
116 A / 7106 Coming
Coming
29 B / 7127
Coming
24 B / 7100
133 A / 7131 Coming
Coming
1 B / 7112
Table 5.8 Bloodsmear examination project group
Parasites blood
Number
Eartag
Coming
137 A
Coming
65 B
Coming
51 B
Coming
7B
Coming
68 B
Coming
54 B
Coming
144 A
Coming
36 B
Coming
47 B
Coming
136 A
Table 5.9 Bloodsmear examination control group
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Type
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
Coming
For the second part of physiology, fecal samples were taken from all cows of the project
group and control group. All individual values can be found in annex 2. Strongyloidea is the
most commonly seen parasite in this area. There is also some Eimeria present. As can be
read from the table, no animals suffer from a severe infection. In the case of Strongyloidea,
the highest value in the project group was 200 eggs per gram feces. In the control group this
was 300 EPF. For Eimeria the maximum was 50 EPF for both groups.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
17
6. Discussion
People in this area are very bound to their traditions. The farmers are not easy to change
their habits. They have always believed that traction is very bad for reproduction of the
cows. There are some farmers that do posses cattle but not use them for traction at all.
Tradition is one of the main reasons for this phenomenon.
The people are used to this, they know how it works and they have never used animal
traction for ploughing.
In general, only 15 cattle-owning households were questioned. That are not many
households to base conclusions on, but enough to get a indication of the situation. Only 5
households that use cows were questioned, and this group is also the only group that uses
cattle to work the land. This is the group that was financed by the project. It would have
been better to question more farmers, but because the group using cows on the land
covered only 5 households, the other groups were kept the same size for comparison. Other
reasons were that there wasn´t money to finance more farmers and not enough time to
question more farmers. It would have also been better to include a group that uses cows,
but only for transport. The reason that this group was not included is simply because that
there are no other farmers that use cows for traction.
Feeding
It has been found that draught animals have a 10% higher food intake compared to nonworking animals9. However, if the cows are fed a lower quality food, this intake is not
sufficient for female cows to cover for their energy requirement for work and reproduction,
especially during early lactation 9, because the energy demand is highest here, especially
when combined with working. These female cows that are used for draught and reproduce
as well, should get a better quality food (at least 8 MJ ME/kg DM) to cover their energy
requirement or they should get a supplementation. Of the farmers that were asked for this
research, 80% supplemented the food of their cows.
Research has proved that reproduction and the production of milk is affected if diets do not
give a sufficient amount of energy. It does not affect work output, but the weight loss will
cause a decreased reproduction capability and milk production. A possible explanation for
this is that glucose utilisation by skeletal muscle is not influenced by other conditions,
whereas pregnancy and lactation are.10. This weight loss will be of importance once the loss
exceeds 15% or more. A loss of 15% of the weight led to an impaired ovarian activity, this
was reported in female buffaloes11. Even so, there is a significant negative difference in post
partum reproductive activity in cows that have a lower body condition score at time of
calving. A possible explanation might be that because of the depletion of nutrients and body
9
Zerbini E, Gemeda, T, 1994, Effects of work on dry matter intake, milk production and reproduction in multipurpose cows fed low quality
roughage. Livestock Research for Rural Development, Vol 6 (2)
10
Pethick et al, 1991, Exercise in merino sheep - the relationships between work intensity, endurance, anaerobic threshold and glucose
metabolism. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 42(4):599-620
11 Teleni E et al, 1989, The effect of depletion of body reserve nutrients on reproduction in Bos indicus cattle, Draught Animal Power Project
Bulletin, 8:10 James Cook University, Townsville AU
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
18
reserve the body signals that non-vital functions, such as ovarian activity, should be kept on
a low level, so the cow will not return to cyclicity.
As can be read from the body condition score table, the body condition score stays on an
average of 3 on the three moments of measuring. This indicates that the body condition of
the cows has not changed because of the work so the food they are receiving contains
enough energy to cover for the work output and for reproduction. It is important to keep a
good body condition score, especially around time of calving, because a low body condition
score can delay the return to cyclicity post partum.
It is still uncertain if work has an impact on milk production and reproduction of female
animals that do get an adequate nutrition. In Ethiopia, it has been established that even
supplemented draught cows have a greater postpartum interval between calving and
conception12. This occurs because working in early lactation can still cause a delay in
returning to cyclicity, despite of adequate nutrition, thus lengthening the calving interval.
Other research projects concluded that if cows are well fed, work should not have an
adverse effect on reproduction.13 For example, when comparing supplemented working
cows and supplemented non-working cows, there is an significant lengthening of the
interval until conception in working cows. However, when comparing conception rate at 365
days post partum, there is no difference14. The difference in returning to cyclicity and in
conception rate is much bigger when comparing working and non-working nonsupplemented cows, indicating the importance of supplementation15.
A study of Zerbini et al. in 199310 and 19945 found that a decrease in plasma glucose from
55,5 to 50,0 mg/dl due to supplementation vs non-supplemented caused a decrease in
probability for conception with a factor of 4.
Working cows already have a lower plasma glucose compared to non-working cows, which
leads to a decrease of probability for conception with 2. This fall in plasma glucose can also
cause failure of implantation of the embryo in the uterine wall.
It has also been shown that once conception and implantation has occurred, work does not
influence pregnancy16, so cows can work without negative effects to their foetus. When
training the pregnant working cows, no negative effects were seen also.
It has still not entirely made clear what effect the training and animal traction has on
reproductive aspects in cows. However, it is obvious that both work efficiency and
reproductive processes should be maximised. To ensure this the female animals used for
traction should receive an adequate energy input to support them. To stimulate the farmers
12
Agyeman K et al, 1991, Effects of work on reproductive and productive performance of crossbred dairy cows in the
Ethiopian Highlands, Tropical Animal Health Production, 23, 241-249
13 Lawrence, PR, Lawrence, K., Dijkman, J.T., Starkey, P.H., 1990, Proceedings of the fourth workshop of the West Africa
Animal Traction Network, Research for Development of Animal Traction, in West Africa, Nigeria, July 1990
14 Zerbini E et al, 1999, The potential of cow traction in the East African Highlands, published in: Meeting the challenges of
animal traction (ATNESA) 199-211
15 Zerbini E et al, 1993, Effect of work and diet on progesterone secretion, short luteal phases and ovulations without estrus
in postpartum F1 crossbred dairy cows, Theriogenology Vol 40 (3): 571-584
16
Gemeda T et al, 1995, , Effect of draught work on performance and metabolism of crossbred cows. 1. Effect of
work and diet on body weight change, body condition, lactation and productivity. Animal Science 60: 361-367
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
19
in Angonia to use their female animals, they should also be taught about proper feeding of
pregnant and lactating animals if efficiency of the animal is to be maximised.
Health
In southern Africa, so in Mozambique as well, tick borne diseases are a serious threat. These
diseases are the main reason farmers ask the help of a veterinarian. Ticks are a vector for
many bacteria and it is hard to prevent and diagnose these diseases. In this area they see a
lot of Babesia, Theileria and Anaplasma in their cattle. These three organisms can be seen
inside of the erythrocytes on a blood smear. Trypanosome also occurs, but they are located
inside the white blood cells. There are also problems with Rickettsia, but this micro
organisms cannot be seen on a blood smear. As soon as the blood smears are looked at in
Utrecht, these results will be discusses.
The parasitic investation in the tested cattle seems to be very low, because there is a low
incidence of Strongyloidea.
Reproduction
Three out of five farmers in the project group said the age of heifers to get their first calve is
2,5 years, while all other farmers said it is 4 years. The reason for this early age is probably
because the project cows were fertilized before going to the farmers.
From the questions that were asked to the farmers, the calving interval has the tendency to
be shorter in non-working animals, however most animals have a calving interval between
18 and 24 months, regardless of if they are working or not. The bias towards the shorter
interval in non-working cows is not significant, so no conclusions can be drawn out of this.
From the questionnaire it turned out that 60% of the calving intervals are between 18-24
months. The mean of the calving intervals of the four working cows that had a second calve
was just over 21 months, so they do not have a prolonged calving interval.
From the cows in group 1 and 2 the exact intervals were calculated, however there were
only 6 animals that had a second calve. (Still compare project cows calving interval with
control group interval, wait for partus data.)
Since the aim of the project is to reach a calving interval of 18 months or less in working
cows, work still needs to be done in teaching the farmers how to work with pregnant
animals. Especially the period when the embryo has to implant in the uterine wall seems to
be critical. From the questionnaire it came up that farmers do not use their cows for 6
months postpartum. This is not necessary, it is only harmful for the reproduction to use the
cow for work during early lactation. If the body condition and nutritional status of the cow is
good, there is no problem with working.
When looking at the pie charts stating the reproductive status of the cows, it stands out that
the status of the project group, which are working cows, looks much better than the control
group. It was expected that the control group would do better, with higher percentages of
pregnant animals or at least active ovaria. Instead, only the control group has some cows
with inactive ovaria. A possible explanation for this might be that most of the cows from the
control group had a calve quite recently. Besides that, it would have been better to select 10
cows for the control group of which also 4 cows had a 2nd calve, or use the same control
group as the research in 2009 used.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
20
Physiology
A research that has been done in 1999 found that the resting PCV, so before start of the
work, had the tendency to be higher after the animal got used to working. This tendency can
already be seen after as little as 8 days of work. However, these results were not
significant17. This rise in PCV can be explained as a mechanism of the body to adapt to a
larger energy output and higher demand of oxygen that has to be transported to the
muscles. That same goes for a rise in haemoglobin.
There are many different opinions about interpretation of PCV values. There are also reports
about animals in training that show no increase in resting PCV, but do show an increase in
resting haemoglobin18. Another research showed that even during work, the PCV can
change. During work in cattle, the PCV decreases, which is a strange observation because in
other working animals it is common to see it increase19. This may also be due to different
regulation in different animals of the PCV.
When comparing 2009 and 2010 values for PCV and haemoglobin, a decline can be seen,
also in the control group. This decrease is significant as well in both groups. A possible
explanation for this might be that the blood samples were taken in different times of the
year. The reference value of PCV for cattle is 24 to 36%. For haemoglobin it is between 8-15
g/dl20
There are no significant differences in total protein values. Proteins are synthesized primarily
in the liver. The protein synthesis is related to the nutritional status of the animal, so food
deficiencies can cause a low total protein. This can also be caused by other factors, such as
hepatic disease and hemorrhagia.
Albumin concentration counts for approximately 50% of the total amount protein in the
blood. Albumin levels are positively related to reproductive performance21.
The reference value for total protein is 6,9 to 8,9 g/dl8.
17
Schie, BMT et al,. 1999, Draught cattle in Mozambique: Effect of training and excercise on muscle and blood
18
Robertson, ID et al 1996, Haematological and biochemical values in 12 Standardbred horses during training,
Australian Equine Veterinarian 14 (2), 72-76
19
Ask MH for reference
20 Merck Veterinary Manual, 9th Edition 2008, table 6 Hematologic Reference Ranges
21 Contreras, P. 2000 Indicadores do metabolismo proteico utilizados nos perfís metabólicos de rebanhos. In: Perfil metabólico em
ruminantes: seu uso em nutrição e doenças nutricionais, Porto alegre – Brasil, Gráfica da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
21
7. Conclusions
The most important conclusion that can be drawn from this follow up evaluation is that work
does not necessarily reduce reproductive performance. It is very important for the farmer to
notice a decreasing body condition score as early as possible to be on time to intervene, as a
low body condition score might lengthen the calving interval. For a farmer, it is not easy to
score the body condition of their animals, because this score is dependent on multiple
factors, such as amount of fat and muscles. A farmer will notice the animal getting skinnier
and see the bone more pronounced. All these factors can influence the calving interval in a
negative way.
It has also been shown that supplementation is very important for working female animals,
because their energy demand is higher than that of oxen. As ovarian activity will be the first
thing that will be impaired when nutrition is not adequate, it is important to feed them good
quality food.
From the physiology part can be concluded that in working animals the PCV rises, to cope
with the higher oxygen demand in the muscles. Accordingly, the haemoglobin rises also.
When meeting the needs of a working cow, it is more profitable to use them than to use
oxen or bulls, because of their multiple purposes. It is important to keep on evaluating this
project to see if the farmers keep using the cows, and to see if other people start to copy this
once they see the benefits and the efficiency.
With this project farmers were stimulated to use cows on the land and to improve the
efficiency. Eventually they can expand their land and produce more. Also, because the calves
of these cows will be given to other farmers without cattle, more farmers can start to use
cows to cultivate the land.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
22
8. References
Agyeman K, Astatke A, Anderson FM, Wolde, W, 1991, Effects of work on reproductive and
productive performance of crossbred dairy cows in the Ethiopian Highlands, Tropical Animal Health
Production, 23, 241-249
Chimonyo M, Kusina NT, Hamudikuwanda H, Nyoni O, 2000, Reproductive performance and body
weight changes in draught cows in a smallholder semi-arid farming area of Zimbabwe, Tropical
Animal Health and Production, Vol 32(6) p.405-415
Contreras, P. 2000 Indicadores do metabolismo proteico utilizados nos perfís metabólicos de
rebanhos. In: Perfil metabólico em ruminantes: seu uso em nutrição e doenças nutricionais, Ed.
González, F. H. D., Barcellos, J. O., Ospina, H., Ribeiro, L. L. O., Porto alegre – Brasil, Gráfica da
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.
Gemeda T, Zerbini E, Wold, AG, Demissie D, 1995, Effect of draught work on performance and
metabolism of crossbred cows. 1. Effect of work and diet on body weight change, body condition,
lactation and productivity. Animal Science 60: 361-367
Harun M, 2009, Participatory investigation of agronomic, socioeconomic, and physiological aspects of
the use of angone (Bos indicus) and landim (Bos taurus) cattle species in animal traction /
Investigação Participativa dos Aspectos Agronómicos, Socio-Económicos e Fisiológicos do Uso de
Vacas das Raças Angone (Bos indicus) e Landim (Bos taurus) na Tracção Animal
Programa de Bolsas Competitivas para Investigacao Agraria em Mocambique
ONLY ABSTRACT AVAILABLE IN ENGLISH
Lawrence, P.R., Lawrence, K., Dijkman, J.T., Starkey, P.H., 1990, Proceedings of the fourth workshop
of the West Africa Animal Traction Network, Research for Development of Animal Traction, in West
Africa, Nigeria, July 1990
Merck Veterinary Manual, 9th Edition 2008, published by Merck & Co., Inc. Whitehouse Station, NJ,
USA
Ministério da Administração Estatal, 2005, Perfil do Distrito de Angónia Província de Tete, República
de Moçambique
Minstry of Agriculture, Mozambique
Pethick DW, Miller CB, Harman NG, 1991, Exercise in merino sheep - the relationships between work
intensity, endurance, anaerobic threshold and glucose metabolism. Australian Journal of Agricultural
Research 42(4):599-620
Robertson, ID, Bolton JR, Mercy AR, Stewart BJ, Fry J, Sutherland J, 1996, Haematological and
biochemical values in 12 Standardbred horses during training, Australian Equine Veterinarian 14 (2),
72-76
Schie, BMT, Harun, MAS, Veeneklaas RJ, Evers, ME, 1999, Draught cattle in Mozambique: Effect of
training and excercise on muscle and blood
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
23
Starkey P, Jaiyesimi-Njobe F, Hanekom D, 1995 Animal traction in South Africa: overview of the key
issues Animal traction in South Africa: empowering rural communities p. 17-30
Teleni E, Boniface AN, Sutherland S Entwistle KW, 1989, The effect of depletion of body reserve
nutrients on reproduction in Bos indicus cattle, Draught Animal Power Project Bulletin, 8:10 James
Cook University, Townsville AU
Zerbini E, Gemeda, T, 1994, Effects of work on dry matter intake, milk production and reproduction in
multipurpose cows fed low quality roughage. Livestock Research for Rural Development, Vol 6 (2)
Zerbini E, Gemeda T, Azage T, Gebre WA, Franceschini R, 1993, Effect of work and diet on
progesterone secretion, short luteal phases and ovulations without estrus in postpartum F1 crossbred
dairy cows, Theriogenology Vol 40 (3): 571-584
Zerbini E, Wold AG, Feeding Dairy Cows For Draught, Chapter 8
Zerbini E, Wold, AG, Shapiro, BI, 1999, The potential of cow traction in the East African Highlands,
published in: Meeting the challenges of animal traction (ATNESA) 199-211
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
24
Annex 1
Questionnaire
1. Date: ……../………./………………
2. Name of the Interviewer: ………………………………………………………..
3. Village: ……………………………………………………………………………………..
4. Which of the following species do you have?
4.1. Cattle If you don’t own any cattle, move to question 13
4.2. Goat
4.3. Sheep
4.4. Donkey
4.5. Poultry
4.6.
Other:………………
5. How many animals per species do you have?
5.1. Cattle:…………………………..
5.2. Goat:……………………………..
5.3. Sheep:…………………………..
5.4. Donkey:…………………………
5.5. Poultry:………………………….
5.6. Others:………………………….
6. How do you work your land?
6.1. By hand
6.2. Using animal traction
7. If you own any cattle, what is the breed of the cows that you own?
7.1. Angoni
7.2. Lundin / Nguni
7.3. Bovine Tete
8. How many cows does your family currently have?
8.1. Old Cows (>2 or more calves):…………….
8.2. Young cows (1 or two calves):……………..
8.3. Heifer(older than one year):………………
8.4. Calf:……………………………………………
9. Who is the owner of the cows?
10. Who is the care-taker of the cows?
11. How many hectares do you own?
Questions no 1-12 are meant to establish what kind of household it is the interviewee lives in and
what kind of animals they have.
12. Do you think animal traction is important aspect when you want to expand?
12.1.
Yes
12.2.
No
This question is meant to find out if this particular farmer thinks animal traction is an important
factor for the future and if they have the ambition to enlarge their farm.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
25
13. Do you use animal traction?
13.1.
Yes
13.2.
No
14. If yes: Why do you work with animal traction?
14.1.
More production
14.2.
Quicker work
14.3.
Better work
14.4.
No other possibility
14.5.
Other:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
15. If no: Why do you do not work with animal traction? After this question you can move to
question 50
15.1.
Afraid for the reproduction of the animal
15.2.
Afraid of the bad influences of the health of the animal
15.3.
The implement is too expensive
15.4.
Do not know how what to do
15.5.
We don’t have animals that can be used for traction, they are too small
15.6.
We like it the way it is
15.7.
Other:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Questions 13-15 were asked to see if and if so why they do or do not use animal traction.
16. Since when do you work with animal traction?
16.1.
All my life
16.2.
After we expanded our farm
16.3.
Other:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question asked to know how much experience they have in using traction and how to interpret
following data.
17. What kind of animal do you use for traction?
17.1.
Cow
17.2.
Ox
17.3.
Horse
17.4.
Donkey
17.5.
Other: ……………………………………………
18. What kind of jobs do you do with animal traction
18.1.
For transport for products
18.2.
Ploughing
18.3.
Weeding
18.4.
Other:……………………………………………
19. If you don’t use cows for ploughing, why not?
19.1.
Type of soil
19.2.
Animals are too small
19.3.
Implement problems, like too heavy for the cow
19.4.
We never used it
19.5.
We don’t have the knowledge
19.6.
Used to the way it is, that is good
Questions 17-19 were asked to find out what animals they use and for what tasks.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
26
20. Who works with the animal?
20.1.
A trained female person in the family.
20.2.
A trained male person in the family
20.3.
Many different people in the family, it depends.
20.4.
Other:………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
21. How many hours a day does the cow have to work?
21.1.
2-4 hours
21.2.
4-6 hours
21.3.
6-8 hours
21.4.
>8 hours
22. Which cows do you use for animal traction?
22.1.
Bulls
22.2.
Young cows
22.3.
Old Cows
22.4.
Heifer
22.5.
Other:……………….
Control question
23. For what reason?
23.1.
Bulls are stronger
23.2.
Bulls do not get calves
23.3.
Young cows are easier to train
23.4.
Old cows are calmer
23.5.
Heifers do not have calves yet
23.6.
Other: ……………………………………
Control question
24. At what age of the cow do you start with animal traction?
24.1.
More or less one year
24.2.
After the heifer calved
24.3.
Other:
To find out if they can work more efficient by starting earlier
25. Who trains the animal?
37.1
The one who will work with him
37.2
A special person who only work with the animal
37.3
Nobody special
37.4
Other:………………………….
Control question
26. How much time does it take to train the animal to start working?
26.1.
1 week
26.2.
1-2 week
26.3.
2-4 weeks
26.4.
4-6 weeks
26.5.
6-8 weeks
26.6.
>8 weeks
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
27
27. What do the cows eat?
27.1.
Grass
27.2.
Everything he can find but nothing extra
27.3.
Other supplements:………………….
27.4.
Other:…………….
28. How many hours a day can the cow graze?
29. When do the cows eat?
29.1.
Before work
29.2.
After work
29.3.
Morning and/or evening
29.4.
Other:
30. Do the animals get more feed when they have to work?
30.1.
Yes
30.2.
No
31. Do the cows get less food in the dry season?
31.1.
Yes
31.2.
No
Questions 27-31: to find out if they get adequate nutrition or should get (more) supplements
32. Where can the cows get their water?
32.1.
River
32.2.
Well
32.3.
Other: ………………………
33. What is the quality of the water?
34. How much can the cows drink?
34.1.
Unlimited
34.2.
…. Times a day
35. How many animals die in one year, on average:
35.1.
None
35.2.
One
35.3.
Two
35.4.
Three
35.5.
Other:
36. At what age do cows die on average?
36.1.
< half a year
36.2.
Half a year- 1 year
36.3.
1-2 years
36.4.
>older than 2 years
37. In what season do most cows die?
37.1.
Wet season
37.2.
Dry season
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
28
38. What are the main reasons for the death of the cows?
38.1.
Diseases like……………………………………
38.2.
Predators
38.3.
Lack of food
38.4.
Calving
38.5.
Other:
39. Do you ever consult a veterinarian?
39.1.
Yes
39.2.
No
40. For what reason?
40.1.
Diseases
40.2.
Reproduction problems
40.3.
High mortality (epidemic)
41. What is the condition for the animals in the following month on a scale from 1-5?
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Questions 35-41: to find out what health problems they have during the year.
42. What is more important to you, animal traction or getting more calves?
42.1.
Animal traction, for transport and working the land
42.2.
Breeding calves
42.3.
Other:…………………………………
To find out what their goal is
43. Where do you get your bulls?
43.1.
My own breeds
43.2.
Bulls from neighbor villages to prevent inbreeding.
43.3.
Other:…………………..
44. How long do you use your bulls?
44.1.
0-2 years
44.2.
>2 years
44.3.
Other:………………………
45. How often do abortions occur?
46. Do you know for what reason?
Questions 43-46: to find out who they manage the reproduction and if there are problems
47. At what age do most cows get their first calve?
47.1.
1-2 year
47.2.
2-3 years
47.3.
> 3 years
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
29
48. Do you regulate the age the cows get pregnant for the first time?
48.1.
No, they are all together and regulate it themselves
48.2.
Yes,………………………………………………………………………...
49. After birth of a calf of a cow, when do you start with animal traction again?
49.1.
Directly
49.2.
After two weeks
49.3.
After a month
49.4.
After two months or longer
50. How much time passes between two calves on average?
50.1.
<1 year
50.2.
1- 1 ½ years
50.3.
1½ - 2 years
50.4.
More than 2 years
51. Did one of the cows from the testgroup(project) get a calve since you got it?
51.1.
Yes, 1calves
51.2.
Yes,2 calves
51.3.
No
52. Is one of the cows from the testgroup(project) pregnant now?
52.1.
Yes
52.2.
No
53. How many calves do most cows get?
53.1.
1
53.2.
2-3
53.3.
4-5
53.4.
More than 6
54. Do you do anything different in feeding pregnant cows?
54.1.
Different food like……………………………………….
54.2.
More food
54.3.
No difference
55. Do you ever supplement the feeding of the pregnant cows?
55.1.
Yes………………………………………………………………..
55.2.
No
56. Do pregnant cows have to work as well?
56.1.
No
56.2.
Yes, but until … weeks of pregnancy
56.3.
Yes, but less hard and less often…………………………………………………………………….
56.4.
Yes, there is no difference
57. After how long does the cow start working after calving?
57.1.
Straight away
57.2.
A week to a month
57.3.
After a month
Questions 47-57: to find out if there is anything that can be done different to shorten the calving
interval and get more calves.
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
30
58. Do you have problems with calving?
58.1.
Not much
58.2.
Yes, sometimes they need help
58.3.
Yes, they often need help
59. What kind of problems do you see with calving?
59.1.
Too big
59.2.
Wrong positions
59.3.
Dead calf
59.4.
Other: …………………………….
60. Do you ever consult a veterinarian for reproduction problems?
60.1.
Yes
60.2.
No
61. For what reason?
61.1.
Difficulty getting pregnant
61.2.
Difficulty giving birth
61.3.
Diseases of the pregnant cow
61.4.
Diseases of the newborn calf
61.5.
Other: …………………..
62. Do you use your cows for milk production as well?
62.1.
Yes
62.2.
No
63. Do you see any change in milk production when cows start working?
63.1.
Yes, they give less (how much less?)………………………………………………………………..
63.2.
No
64. Do you feed the cows more right after calving?
64.1.
Yes
64.2.
No
65. If yes, what do you feed them and how much?
Questions 58-65: to find out if there are problems and what can be done to solve them.
66. Name of the interviewee:………………………………………………………..
67. Sex of the interviewee: F/M
68. Age of the interviewee: ……………………………………………………………
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
31
Annex 2
Physiology
HAEMATOCRIT TABLES
No.
Eartag
PCV jan
PCV sep
2009 (%)
2010 (%)
1
125 A / 7101
34,5
35,0
2
51 A / 7138
39,0
30,5
3
39 B / 7108
38,5
35,5
4
121 A / 7147
34,5
38,0
5
114 A / 7126
36,0
29,0
6
116 A / 7106
32,5
29,5
7
29 B / 7127
32,0
34,5
8
24 B / 7100
35,0
30,5
9
133 A / 7131
42,0
32,5
10
1 B / 7112
36,0
30,0
MEAN
36,00
32,50
Table x.x PCV (%) project group
Eartag
PCV control
control
group jan
group jan
2009 (%)
2009
66A
37,0
91A
29,0
135A
34,5
63A
35,0
142A
33,0
97A
33,5
54B
32,5
72A
30,0
137A
34,0
9B
37,0
MEAN
26,55
Table x.x PCV (%) control group
Eartag
control
group sep
2010
137 A
65 B
51 B
7B
68 B
54 B
144 A
36 B
47 B
136 A
MEAN
PCV control
group sep
2010 (%)
24,0
32,0
28,5
27,0
26,0
24,0
23,5
29,0
22,0
29,5
33,55
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
32
HAEMOGLOBIN TABLES
No.
Eartag
Hb jan 2009 Hb sep
(g/dl)
2010
(g/dl)
1
125 A / 7101
13,1
11,5
2
51 A / 7138
12,7
9,8
3
39 B / 7108
14,8
13,1
4
121 A / 7147
14,8
13,1
5
114 A / 7126
14,6
12,0
6
116 A / 7106
10,7
11,4
7
29 B / 7127
12,1
12,0
8
24 B / 7100
13,4
11,7
9
133 A / 7131
15,8
11,1
10
1 B / 7112
13,3
10,2
MEAN
13,53
11,59
Table x.x Hb (g/dl) project group
Eartag
Hb control
control
troup jan
group jan
2009 g/dl
2009
66A
14,1
91A
11,5
135A
14,5
63A
12,8
142A
12,6
97A
12,8
54B
12,4
72A
11,7
137A
13,2
9B
14,8
MEAN
13,04
Table x.x Hb (g/dl) control group
Eartag
control
group sep
2010
137 A
65 B
51 B
7B
68 B
54 B
144 A
36 B
47 B
136 A
MEAN
Hb control
group sep
2010 g/dl
9,9
11,4
9,7
9,1
8,6
7,9
8,1
9,3
7,6
10,8
9,24
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
33
TOTAL PROTEIN TABLES
No.
Eartag
TP jan 2009 TP sep 2010
(g/dl)
(g/dl)
1
125 A / 7101
9,8
7,8
2
51 A / 7138
9,0
8,9
3
39 B / 7108
9,0
10,4
4
121A / 7147
9,6
9,7
5
114 A / 7126
9,6
6,3
6
116 A / 7106
9,4
7,9
7
29 B / 7127
9,6
8,2
8
24 B / 7100
9,8
8,6
9
133 A / 7131
9,8
8,7
10
1 B / 7112
9,0
9,3
MEAN
9,46
8,58
Table x.x Total Protein TP (g/dl) project group
Eartag
TP control
Eartag
control
troup jan
control
group jan
2009 g/dl
group sep
2009
2010
66A
9,6
137 A
91A
9,4
65 B
135A
9,2
51 B
63A
9,0
7B
142A
8,9
68 B
97A
9,0
54 B
54B
9,6
144 A
72A
11,0
36 B
137A
9,4
47 B
9B
10,4
136 A
MEAN
9,55
MEAN
Table x.x Total Protein TP (g/dl) control group
TP control
group sep
2010 g/dl
9,0
9,1
7,2
7,9
8,5
8,4
8,9
8,4
8,0
8,6
8,40
Effects of animal traction on reproductive and physiologic parameters of cows in Angonia, Mozambique
34
PARASITOLOGY
Eartag
Parasites feces EPG
Type
Number
125 A / 7101 Strongyloidea
50
51 A / 7138
Strongyloidea
25
Eimeria
50
39 B / 7108
Strongyloidea
50
121 A / 7147 Strongyloidea
114 A / 7126 Strongyloidea
100
Neoscaris vitelarum
75
116 A / 7106 Strongyloidea
100
Eimeria
50
29 B / 7127
24 B / 7100
Strongyloidea
100
Eimeria
25
133 A / 7131 Strongyloidea
200
1 B / 7112
Strongyloidea
50
Table x.x Fecal examination project cows, September 2010
Eartag
Parasites feces EPG
Type
Number
137 A
Strongyloidea
50
Eimeria
50
65 B
51 B
Strongyloidea
75
7B
Strongyloidea
25
68 B
Strongyloidea
100
Other
50
54 B
Strongyloidea
300
Eimeria
25
144 A
Strongyloidea
150
36 B
Strongyloidea
75
47 B
Strongyloidea
50
136 A
Strongyloidea
125
Table x.x Fecal examination control group, September 2010