ArticleHeliyon2024
Selection criteria and husbandry practices of indigenous chicken producers in Northwest Ethiopia.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was conducted to identify the selection criteria and husbandry practices of chicken producers in different agro-ecological zones of Northwest Ethiopia as input for designing a breeding program. The study employed a purposive selection of districts and peasant associations with high indigenous chicken potential. The study areas were stratified based on the major agro-ecologies (highland, midland, and lowland). A total of 360 households were included in the study, and data on chicken breeding practices, selection criteria, and reproductive performance were collected and analyzed using SPSS software. In all agro-ecologies, egg production was prioritized by chicken owners when choosing female chickens. For male chickens, plumage color (index = 0.27), appearance (index = 0.24), and growth rate (index = 0.23) were the main selection factors. Farmers kept chickens primarily to generate cash through the sale of eggs and live animals (male chickens). There was a significant difference (p < 0.01) among agro-ecologies in nutritional management and housing of chickens. Chicken flock composition showed a highly significant difference (p < 0.001) among agro-ecologies, except layers. Most of the farmers had their own cock born in the flock. Chicken owners found in all agro-ecologies were practicing culling unwanted chickens. All the reproductive performance traits have shown a highly significant (p < 0.001) difference among agro-ecologies. A relatively higher inbreeding coefficient (0.18) was obtained in the highland agro-ecology compared to midland (0.16) and lowland (0.12). The study highlighted the importance of designing breeding programs that align with farmers' production objectives and trait preferences based on specific agro-ecologies for sustainable increases in chicken productivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.