Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36649264›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Indiscriminate slaughter of pregnant goats for meat in Enugu, Nigeria: Causes, prevalence, implications and ways-out.

Patience C Ugwu, Emmanuel O Njoga, Ugochinyere J Njoga, Chinwe J Aronu, Everest O Atadiose, Chinwe E Okoli, Onyinye S Onwumere-Idolor, Festus E Ajibo, Nichodemus N Azor, Sunday N Bernard and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Drivers of zoonoticOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025
    Article
  9. Systematic review and meta-analysis ofOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Patience C UgwuDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Emmanuel O NjogaDepartment of Veterinary Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0002-2333-7584
Ugochinyere J NjogaDepartment of Veterinary Obstetrics and Reproductive Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Chinwe J AronuDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Everest O AtadioseDepartment of Veterinary Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Chinwe E OkoliDepartment of Veterinary Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Abuja, Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Nigeria.
Onyinye S Onwumere-IdolorDepartment of Animal Production, Faculty of Agriculture, Delta State University of Science and Technology, Ozoro, Delta State, Nigeria.
Festus E AjiboDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Enugu State Polytechnic, Enugu, Nigeria.
Nichodemus N AzorDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Enugu State Polytechnic, Enugu, Nigeria.
Sunday N BernardDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Ikenna E OziokoDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Ikechukwu S EzeDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.
Festus O AbonyiDepartment of Animal Health and Production, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe indiscriminate slaughter of pregnant goats (SPGs) undermines meat production and food security especially in developing countries. It also connotes animal cruelty, depletion of goat population and may enhance the spread of zoonotic pathogens inhabiting the female reproductive tract during carcass processing. Consequently, this study determined the causes and prevalence of slaughtering pregnant goats for meat in Enugu, Nigeria. The study also estimated the economic losses associated with SPGs, discussed the negative public health consequences and suggested the ways-out.

methodsStructured, validated and pilot-tested questionnaire was used to ascertain the reasons for SPGs for meat among 78 willing and randomly selected respondents. The questionnaire survey was conducted in the form of interview. Pregnancy statuses of the goats slaughtered were ascertained by visual inspection and palpation of the eviscerated and longitudinally incised uteri and the horns for macroscopic evidence of pregnancy. Ages of the dams were estimated by dentition method. Estimation of the gestational age was performed by crown-rump length method. The study lasted for six months, comprised of three months (December to March) during the dry/hot season and another three months (May to August) during the wet/rainy season. Economic loss estimation was based on the current monetary values of a matured (30 kilogram) goat and one kilogram of chevon in Enugu, Nigeria; which was determined through market survey. Pearson's Chi-square test was used to determine whether there were significant (P<0.05) statistical associations between SPGs and age and season.

resultsMajor reasons adduced for SPGs were: economic hardship (41%), ignorance of the goat's pregnancy status (21%), increased demand for chevon (13%) and feed scarcity during drought (11%). Of the 1,658 does examined during the six months study, 589 (35.5%) were pregnant. The majority (876/1658, 52.8%) of the female goats slaughtered were in their active reproductive age of ≤ 4 years, while 782 (47.2%) were aged > 4 years. Similarly, majority (1007/1658, 60.7%) of the does/nannies were slaughtered during the dry/hot season. A total of 907 foetuses at first (n = 332, 36.6%), second (n = 486, 53.6%) and third (n = 89, 9.8%) trimesters of gestation were recovered from the 589 PGs. Singleton, twin and triplet pregnancies were observed in 312 (53%), 236 (40%) and 41 (7%) PGs, respectively. About ₦34.44 million ($83,390) would have been earned if the foetuses were born alive and raised to maturity. Additionally, 19,136 kg of chevon, valued at ₦47,841, 000 ($115,838), which would have accrued from the wasted foetuses was also lost.

conclusionConsidering the economic, zoonotic and livestock production implications of this work, frantic efforts to reduce SPGs in Enugu, Nigeria is imperative. This could be achieved through advocacy, goat farmers' enlightenment, ante-mortem pregnancy diagnosis, provision of subsidized feed materials during the dry season and strict enforcement of the Nigerian Meat Edict law, which proscribes unapproved slaughter of gravid animals. These measures may improve food safety and security, improve goat reproduction and production, reduce protein malnutrition, limit dissemination of zoonotic pathogens during carcass processing and hence protect public health in Nigeria.

Indexed as

GoatsMeatAnimalsFemaleNigeriaParturitionPregnancyPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID36649264
PMCPMC9844864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.