Feedlot performance of Ogaden dromedary camels fed urea-treated maize stover and concentrate mixture

Moges Dereje, Mengistu Urge, Getachew Animut¹ and Mohammed Y Kurtu

Haramaya University, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, School of Animal and Range Sciences, P.O.Box 138, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia
mogesdr@yahoo.com
¹ Agricultural Transformation Agency, P.O.Box 708, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Abstract

This study evaluated feedlot performance of dromedary camels under different levels of concentrate supplementation. A total of fifteen intact 24 - 30 months of age Ogaden camels with initial body weight of 162.8±25.4 kg (Mean±SD) were used for 120 days feeding experiment. The camels were blocked according to their initial body weight and allotted randomly to three dietary level treatments in a randomized complete block design. The experimental feed was urea (5%) treated maize stover (UTMS) basal diet fed ad libitum and a supplement consisting wheat bran (66%), Noug (Gizotia abyssinica Cass.) seed cake (13%), sorghum grain (20%) and mineral-vitamin premix (1%). The supplementary diet was offered to the camels in amount of 0.5 (Low), 1.0 (Medium) and 1.5 (High) percent of body weight.

Differences were observed in roughage, total DM and CP intakes, respectively, for Low, Medium and High levels of supplements. Daily body weight gain was lower for the Low supplement group as compared to the other treatments. Camels with High level of supplementation produced higher hot carcass weights as compared to the Low supplemental level, but values for Medium supplemental level were similar with the other two treatments. Groups supplemented with High and Medium level resulted in the best economic return as compared to the Low level. The marginal rate of return indicated that each additional Birr per cost increment resulted in 1.00, 2.91 and 0.21 Birr benefit for the Low, Medium and High levels, respectively. As a result, the medium level has proved to be the most profitable level of supplementation indicating that ad libitum UTMS feeding and concentrate supplementation with 1% of body weight can be used as a profitable feeding system for feedlot camel fattening.

Key words: body weight change, feed intake, non carcass component, supplementation

Introduction

The world camel population (more than 21 millions) is not a significant number (1%) compared to other domestic herbivore species. However, camels represent 12% of the domestic herbivore biomass in African arid countries (Faye 2008). Ethiopia, one of the major camel rearing countries, has 4.53 million camels (MoA 2014), of which the majority are found in the arid and semi-arid eastern rangelands (CSA 2007). Dromedary camels around the world are raised in areas characterized by high ambient temperatures, recurrent drought and heavy burden of diseases and parasites. These areas are not suitable for crop production and less suitable for production of other livestock species. Hence, camel plays a significant role as a primary source of subsistence and high quality food producer at comparatively low cost (Knoess 1977; Yagil 1982; Yousif and Babiker 1989) in these areas than other livestock species due to their tolerance to the harsh environments prevailing in the rangelands. They also play role as wealth accumulation, means of transport and social status symbol for the herders (Harren 1999). With the rapid growth of human population, land degradation and global warming, the importance of camel in arid areas is assumed to increase in the coming decades.

Camel meat is an important source of food for communities living in and around the vast drylands of many camel rearing areas. Globally camel meat represents about 1.0% of the world meat production, which is about 530,474 tons (FAOSTAT 2013), but information are very complex to collect since the major camel meat data are from the informal market. Moreover, urbanization and sedentarisation that are occurring in recent years have increased the demand for camel meat. Health benefits associated with camel meat consumption, which is attributed to its low fat and cholesterol content compared with other meat animals (Mukasa-Mugerwa 1981; Dawood and Al-Alkanhal 1995) is another factor contributing to the increased demand for camel meat. Camel meat is also alluded to have value in the treatment of diseases, such as hyperacidity, hypertension, pneumonia and respiratory diseases, and as an aphrodisiac (Kurtu 2004). The meat quality characteristics from young camels that are comparable with beef (Kadim et al., 2008) are another attraction for consumers. North African and Middle East countries such as Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman and Qatar have a slaughter rate of more than 20%, which is not compatible with the simultaneous growth of camel population in these countries (Kadim et al 2013). Hence, these countries import live camels to meet the domestic camel meat demand and to offset the fast declining camel population of their own. In China, the high slaughter rate (30.4%) could explain the sharp decline in its camel population since no camel importation is taking place (Kadim et al 2013). On the other hand, in the Horn of Africa, the slaughter rate is much lower. For instance it is 3.7% for Somalia, 4.2% for Ethiopia, 5% for Sudan, 6.4% for Djibouti and 6.7% for Kenya (Kadim et al 2013). Thus, there is a huge export market for live camels or meat from the Horn of Africa to the North African and Middle East countries.

Ethiopian is in close proximity to camel importing countries, which is an opportunity to be exploited (Aklilu 2011). However, despite the significant number of camel population, the benefits camels contribute to the societies and the growing social changes in the pastoral areas of Ethiopia are low. Moreover, information about the impact of improved management practices, particularly of feeding management on growth performance of dromedary camels in Ethiopia are lacking. In other areas, expansion of modern camel feedlot with intensification of the fattening management based on locally available feed resources is becoming one of the growing trends. In the Horn of Africa, the dressing percentage can reach up to 59% and the carcass weight up to 300 kg. Under traditional conditions, the daily growth rate for one-year dromedary camel in Djibouti is 190 – 310 g/day. In more intensive conditions, it can reach up to 440-580 g/day (Faye et al 1992). In Australia, a gain of 1100 g/day was reported (Faye 2008). For feedlot study conducted on young Sudanese dromedary camels, daily weight gain ranged 591-815 g and daily dry matter (DM) intake was 3.99 - 4.35 kg (Turki et al 2007). The results of these studies justify that better husbandry practices and improved feeding can improve performance of camel. The present study was conducted to investigate feedlot performance of young camels fed urea treated maize stover ad libitum and supplemented with different levels of concentrate mixture.

Materials and methods

Location and description of the study area

The experiment was conducted at Haramaya University camel Farm located at Erer Guda, Babile district, located 545 km south east of Addis Ababa at 9^o, 14’ N latitude and 42^o, 14’E longitude. The altitude ranges 1300–1600 meter above sea level. Average annual rainfall is 450 mm with bi-modal nature, from March to April and from July to October. The temperature ranges between 17 and 31 ^oC (Tamire 1986).

Animals and management

Fifteen growing Ogaden type intact male dromedary camels were used for the experiment. The camels were 24-30 months of age with initial live body weight of 162.8±25.4 kg (mean±SD) at the start of the experiment. The camels were quarantined for 2 weeks during which they were ear tagged, de-wormed against endo-parasite with a broad-spectrum anti-helmentic [albendazole (repeated after three months)], sprayed against ecto-parasite with acaricides (vetacidin 20% EC) every week and vaccinated for pasteurelosis and anthrax based on the recommendation of veterinarians. Just before adaptation period, the animals were weighed using digital electronic weighing bridge (TRU-TEST, Tru-Test Limited, Auckland, New Zealand. www.tru-test.com), arranged in a descending order, and divided into 5 groups of three animals each based on their initial body weight and each of them was randomly allocated to one of the three feeding regimes. During the 2 weeks adaptation period, all animals were given access to the supplementary feeds starting with small quantity at the beginning and ending up to the full recommended amount per day. Animals were housed individually in shaded floor pens for the duration of the experiment. All management procedures of the experimental animals were carried out according to the institution and international guidelines for animal welfare.

Feeds and feeding

The maize stover used in the present experiment was obtained from Haramaya University farm and it is from mixed variety. The maize was planted with 100 kg/ha diammonium phosphate (DAP) and top-dressed with 100 kg/ha urea fertilizers. After the grain bearing cob was harvested, the stover was cut at a height of approximately 30 cm above the ground. Tractor driven chopping machine was used to chop the stover to sizes of approximately 3-4 mm before urea treatment. The chopped stover was treated at the rate of 100 kg dry matter of the stover with 5 kg of urea in 100 liters of water (Dolberg 1992). The stover and the solution were thoroughly mixed on a polyethylene canvas and placed in concrete made trench silo of the university dairy farm, packed with tractor to ensure proper compaction to exclude air. After the required amount is filled, the pit was covered with plastic sheet and loaded with soil and stones and was left to incubate for 21 days. During the experiment, the pit was opened in one side and the amount of stover required for a few days were taken and packed and sealed in plastic lined bags and transported to the experimental site. The stover was aerated for a day in order to remove excess ammonia (Zhang and Qiaojuan 2002) and offered to the animals.

The concentrate mix consisted of wheat bran (66%), sorghum grain (20%), Noug seed cake (13%) and mineral-vitamin premix (1%) (Minerals: Calcium, Sodium and Magnesium; Trace elements: Iron, Copper, Manganise, Cobalt, Zinc, Iodin and Selenium; Vitamins: Vitamin A, Vitamin D3 and Vitamin E; Anti-oxidants: BHT and Ethoxyquin). The experiment had a duration of 14 days adaptation and 120 days of feedlot period. Animals consumed the treated stover ad libitum at 20% refusal rate and the concentrate according to the pre-designed treatment. The adjustment for stover and concentrate offer was made once a week and following each weight gain measurement, respectively throughout the experimental period. Daily feeds were offered in two meals at 08:00 and 18:00 hours. Water was offered to the animal twice every day in a bucket and animals were allowed to drink free choice. The amounts of feed offered and refusals were recorded daily for each experimental animal to determine feed intake, as a difference between the offered and refused.

The concentrate supplement was formulated according to the recommendation of Wardeh (2004) to have a content of 10 MJ metabolizable energy (ME) and 508 g crude protein (CP)/kg DM to meet the requirement of a 250 kg dromedary camel growing at the rate of 0.75 g/day. The grain sorghum and Noug seed cake were coarsely ground before mixing the ingredients. Representative feed samples were collected from the offered per week and pooled for the entire experimental period. After thorough mixing, the pooled samples were sub sampled and dried at 60 ^oC, ground to pass through 1mm mesh size and stored in an air tight plastic bags pending chemical analysis.

Experimental design and treatments

A randomized complete block design (RCBD) was used for the experiment. At the end of the quarantine period the camels were grouped into 5 blocks of three animals each based on their initial body weight. Animal within a block were randomly allocated to one of the 3 feeding regime namely: urea treated maize stover (UTMS) fed ad libitum and supplemented with concentrate mix at 0.5(Low), 1(Medium) and 1.5% (High) body weight.

Body weight change

Body weights of the camels were taken at 2 weeks interval after overnight feed withdrawal starting at 0800 hour and before the morning meal. The mean daily weight gains were calculated as difference between the final and the initial weight of each camel divided by the total number of the experimental days. The feed conversion efficiency was calculated by dividing the mean daily weight gain by the amount of daily DM consumed by the camel.

Evaluation of the carcass and non-carcass components

At the end of the feedlot experiment, all 15 camels were weighed after 12 hour of feed and water withdrawal and slaughtered following the halal procedure for carcass evaluation. After bleeding, the animals were denecked, skinned and eviscerated. After dressing and eviscerating the non-carcass components were removed and categorized into total edible offal component (TEOC) (Liver, Kidneys, Heart, Stomach, Intestine, Blood, Tongue, Diaghragm, Tail and Hump fat) and total non edible offal components (TNEOC) (Hide, Lungs + trachea, Head, Four feet, Spleen, Penis + testicles, Esophagus, Urinary bladder, Gut fill and Total internal fat). The empty body weight was calculated as the difference between slaughter weight and gut content. Dressing percentages were calculated as proportion of hot carcass weight to slaughter weight and empty body weight.

Chemical analysis of the feedstuffs

Duplicate samples of each feedstuff were analyzed according to the procedures of AOAC (1990) for DM, ash and nitrogen (N) and CP was calculated as N x 6.25. Acid detergent fiber (ADF) was analyzed according to Robertson and Van Soest (1981) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) according to the procedure of Van Soest et al (1991). Nitrogen free extract (NFE) was calculated by difference according to Dhont and Berghe (2003). Metabolizable energy (ME) contents of the feed stuffs were calculated according to MAFF (1975) and Ellis (1980).

Partial budget analysis

Partial budget analysis was performed to evaluate the profitability of feeding UTMS supplemented with three levels of concentrate mix by considering the variable costs. Three experienced animal dealers estimated the selling price of each experimental camel. The difference in sale and purchase price was considered as total return (TR) in the analysis. Net return was calculated as Total return – Total variable cost; and that of Marginal rate of revenue as ∆Net return/∆ Total variable cost (Upton 1979).

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using the one way analysis of variance procedure of SAS software (SAS 2008). The model for data analysis was: Y_ij= µ + t_i + b_j + e_ij, where Y_ij: the response variable, µ: overall mean, t_i: treatment effect, b _j: block effect and e_ij: random error. Differences between treatment means were separated using Duncan’s multiple-range test (Duncan 1955) at P < 0.05.

Results and discussions

Chemical composition of the feeds

Nutrient compositions of ingredients used for the formulation of the experimental diet (Table 1) are within the range reported earlier from our laboratory and elsewhere (Yoseph et al 2011; Hirut 2011; Getahun 2014; Mohamed et al 2015; Woyessa et al 2013). The CP content of UTMS increased by 2.3 folds compared to the untreated maize stover (UnTMS). This is in agreement with that reported by Dias-da-Silva et al (1988) for maize stover treated with 6% urea. The CP values of the feedstuffs used for the present experiment were higher than a threshold required for optimum function of rumen microorganisms (Whiteman 1980). Good sources of readily fermentable energy source, such as sorghum grain, are very important for efficient rumen microbial protein synthesis (Van Soest 1994) and to enhance animal performance when non-protein nitrogen sources such as urea is provided in the diet. The concentrate mix, as expected, had moderate source of CP, which is comparable with that used by Turki et al (2007) (16.5%), but higher than used by Hashi and Kamoun (1995) (15.8%) in concentrate ration used for fattening camels.

Feed intake

The daily concentrate DM, total CP, and total DM intakes were increased (p < 0.001) but daily roughage DM intake and roughage: concentrate ratio decreased (p < 0.001) as the level of concentrate supplement increased (Table 2). Similar result was reported by Farghaly (2009) in fattening camels consumed urea (5%) and molasses (10%) treated rice straw basal diet ad libitum and supplemented with concentrate at a level of 1, 1.5 and 2% of body weight. The increased total CP intake with increasing level of supplementation was expected since the animals consumed almost all the daily concentrate offered. The increase in DM intake of camels at higher level of concentrate supplementation could be linked to the high provision of diet rich in protein and energy, which have boosted microbial digestion (Bonsi et al 1996; Van Soest et al 1991) that might have lead to rapid emptying of the digesta from the gut. The total DM intake of the camels in the current study were much higher than that reported by Hedi and Khemais (1990), which range from 2.73 to 2.88 kg for supplemented growing Tunisian camels. The low roughage DM intake at higher level of concentrate supplement could be attributed to the high intake of the supplement DM as a proportion of total DM intake which resulted to greater substitution rate of the roughage by the concentrate (Topps 1997). Depressed roughage intake with increasing level of concentrate supplementation also was reported for calves and steers (McCullough 1970; Leaver 1973). The overall increase in intake with supplementation is very important since feed intake is a key factor that determines animal productivity.

Body weight change

There were differences in average daily bodyweight gain among the camels supplemented with different levels of concentrate (Table 3). The average daily body weight gain increased (p< 0.05) with increasing level of supplemental concentrate. The difference in gain was 18, 34 and 5% between Low and Medium, Low and High, and Medium and high levels of supplementation indicating lower difference in gain between the medium and higher level of supplement, which have an economic implication although the high level of supplement showed greater potential for weight gain. Even though moderate rates of live weight gain can be obtained in camels supplemented with lower level of concentrate, the result shows that better animal performance require higher levels of supplementation with feed that contain balanced nutrients. In this regard, Kamoun (1995) reported that camel fed high level of dietary supplements rich in protein and energy gained more body weight (550 g/day) than camels fed only mangroves.Turki et al (2007) also reported a daily gain of 0.82, 0.59 and 0.68 kg for camels fed roughage and green fodder basal feed ad libitum and supplemented with commercial feed, cotton seed cake, and groundnut cake, respectively indicating that camels respond to quality concentrate feed. The daily weight gains displayed at all levels of the supplementation in current study were higher than that reported by Eltahir et al (2011) who obtained 0.62 and 0.61kg/day for fattening camels supplemented with molasses and sorghum grain, respectively and consumed sorghum stover ad libitum. Similar pattern of body weight gain for growing steers and heifers fed UTMS and a supplement consisting maize bran was reported by Munthali et al (1991). The Medium supplemented group displayed better (p< 0.05) feed conversion efficiency than the Low group but the High group did not statistically differ from the other groups implying that medium level of supplement promoted more unit of weight gain with relatively lower unit of feed. Generally final body weight, daily body weight gain and feed conversation efficiency of the Medium and High levels of supplementation indicates that camels are economically and biologically better responsive to medium level of supplementation, and supplementation of concentrate beyond a certain level to camels may not be feasible for economical production of camel meat.

Carcass yield

Consistent to final bodyweight, slaughter weight and empty bodyweight of camels were unaffected by treatments (Table 4). High level of concentrate supplementation yielded higher hot carcass weight than Low level of supplementation, but differences between the Medium supplemental level and other treatments were not significant (Table 4). The carcass weights of the current study were within the 125-400 kg range reported for camel (Kadim and Mahgoub 2013). The mean carcass weight (144.6 kg) and carcass weight range (129.5-155.4 kg) of the camels in the current study, were lower than that of fattened Tunisia camels (mean = 231kg) (range = 150–343kg) (Kamoun 1995) and (mean = 168.1 kg) (Bakkar et al 1999). However, the current values were higher than the range of 119.5–132.5 kg reported for young fattened Arabian camels (El-Gasim and El-Hag 1992). Lower values of dressing percentages were observed for the Low level of supplementation as compared to the other treatments. Dressing percentages on the bases of slaughter body weight amd empty body weight ranged 47.2–62.8% and 53.1–74.7%, respectively which were within the range reported in previous camel fattening work (Yousif and Babiker 1989). Comparable values were also reported for feedlot managed young (6-9 month old) male Majaheen (59.4%), Woldoh (57.9%), Suffr (58.8%), and Sho’l (60.0%) camel breeds of Saudi Arabia slaughtered after 204 days (El-Waziry et al 2012). However, Mahgoub et al (2014) reported lower values of dressing percentage (45.8-48.7%) for growing fatten Omani male camels fed a basal diet of rhodes grass hay supplemented with concentrate feed. These differences could be attributed to the differences in breed and overall management conditions during the experimental period.

Non carcass components

None of the supplement levels did bring considerable change on edible and non-edible carcass components (Table 5). However, camels in the Low treatment had slightly higher (p=0.084) weight of stomach than the other two treatments, which could be an attribute of digestion of more roughage that required more size and capacity of stomach when compared to the other two higher concentrate supplemental groups. The weight of total non-edible carcass component (TNECC) was much higher than the weight of total edible carcass component (TECC). Values recorded in the present study were comparable to those reported by Eltahir et al (2011) for Sudanese dromedary camels fed molasses and sorghum grain based fattening diets. The gut fill followed by the hide were the heaviest proportions registered under the TNEOC. With no mention about the gut fill in their paper, Mahgoub et al (2014) noted the hide to contribute the highest proportions of the EBW (8.8–9.5%), which was higher than the value for the present study (7.2-8.2%). The differences could be attributed to the exclusion of the hide on the lower fore and hind shanks and the head in the current study, but considered to be part of the hide in Mahgoub et al (2014) study.

Partial budget analysis

For the purpose of economic evaluation, partial budget analysis of the study is indicated in Table 6.

Camel fed Low supplement level had the lowest net return while camels in High supplement recorded the highest net return (Table 6). However, the marginal rate of return indicated that each additional cost (Birr) per camel resulted in 1.00, 2.91 and 0.21 Birr benefit, respectively, for Low, Medium, and High groups. As a result, the Medium supplemental level was proved to be the most profitable supplement level as compared to the other two.

Conclusion

• Roughage DM intake was depressed as the level of concentrate supplementation increased. The lower level of supplementation resulted in lower total DM and CP intakes, daily body weight gain, and feed conversion efficiency than the higher levels. Camels fed the High and the Medium level of supplements displayed superior hot carcass weight and dressing percentages than those fed the Low level of supplement.
  
  
• Supplementation did not bring considerable change on edible and non-edible carcass components.
  
  
• The partial budget analysis indicated that supplementation of camels at the rate of 1% of body weight could result to a better profit margin than the other two levels.
  
  
• In conclusion, feeding UTMS ad libitum and supplementation of concentrate mixture of grain and industrial byproduct at 1% of body weight can be used as a profitable feeding system for feedlot camel fattening.

Acknowledgments

The first author is grateful to SIDA Haramaya University project PhD Scholarship Program for sponsoring the study. Haramaya University and Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research are also acknowledged for partial financial support.

References

Aklilu Y 2011 Shifting Sands: The Commercialization of Camel in Mid-Altitude Ethiopia and Beyond. Feinstein International Center, Tufts University. http://fic.tufts.edu/assets/shifting_sands.pdf

AOAC 1990 Official Method of Analyses, 15th ed. AOAC Inc., Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Bakkar M N, Basmaeil S M and Hamam A A 1999 Meat production and quality: two unique properties of young camels. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on the Camel Calf, Ouarzazate, Morocco, 24-26 October, 1999. pp. 218. Retrieved on 13 January 2016 from http://remvt.cirad.fr/cd/EMVT00_2.PDF

Bonsi M L K, Tuah A K, Osuji P O, Nsahlai V I and Umunna N N 1996 The effect of protein supplement source or supply pattern on the intake, digestibility, rumen kinetics, nitrogen utilization and growth of Ethiopian Menz sheep fed teff straw. Animal Feed Science and Technology 64 (1): 11-25. Retrieved on 10 October 2015 from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0377840196010486/1-s2.0-S0377840196010486-main.pdf?_tid=8894c90c-20be-11e6-a0c2-00000aacb35e&acdnat=1463991518_9c1ea9d91cc4f9ee1371c938b2e4909f

CSA (Central Statistical Authority) 2007 Agricultural Sample Survey, Volume II, Report on Livestock and Livestock Characteristics, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Dawood A and Alkanhal M A 1995 Nutrient composition of Najdi-Camel Meat. Meat Science, 39, 71-78. Retrieved on 13 February 2016 from http://ac.els-cdn.com/0309174095800085/1-s2.0-0309174095800085-main.pdf?_tid=075ec8e6-20bf-11e6-983d-00000aab0f27&acdnat=1463991731_4e244c62e9231dcb8880a0983b8ccd56

Dhont J and Berghe E V 2003 Analytical Techniques in Aquaculture Research Laboratory of Aquaculture and Artemia Reference Center, Ghent University, Belgium. Retrieved on 13 January 2013 from http://www.aquaculture.ugent.be/Education/coursematerial/online%20courses/ATA/analysis/NFE.htm

Dias-Da-Silva A A, Ferreira A M and Guedes C V M 1988 Effects of moisture level, treatment time and soya bean addition on the nutritive value of urea treated maize stover. Animal Feed Science Technology 19: 67-77.

Dolberg F 1992 Progress in the utilization of urea-ammonia treated crop residues: Biological and socio-economic aspects of animal production and application of the technology on small farms. Livestock Research for Rural Development 4(2): 20-31. Retrieved on 6 January 2015 from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd4/2/dolberg.htm

Duncan D B 1955 The multiple range and multiple F-test. Biometrics, 11(1), 1-42. Retrieved on 30 January 2016 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3001478?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Ellis N 1980 The Nutrient Composition of Sudanese Animal Feeds: Northern and Central Sudan; Compiled by N. Ellis. Bulletin 1. Central Animal Nutrition Research Laboratory, Kuku, Khartoum North. Appendix 1, 19p.

Eltahir I E, Mohamed A M, El Khidir O A and Atta M 2011 Feedlot performance and carcass characteristics of Sudan dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius) fed on molasses and sorghum grain based diets. Journal of Camelid Science 4: 70–78.

El-Gasim E A and El-Hag G A 1993 Characteristics of the Arabian camel. Camel News Letter (9), 20–24. The Arab center for the studies of Arid Zones and Dry Lands-Damascus (Syria).

El-Waziry A M, AL-Owaimer A N, Basmaeil S, Metwally H and Suliman G M 2012 Carcass characteristics and meat quality in four Saudi camel breeds. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 11 (17): 3100-3104.

FAOSTAT 2013 FAOstat database. Retrieved on April 27, 2016 from http://faostat3.fao.org/download/q/qa/e

Farghaly M S 2009 Productive performance of fattening Sudanese camel calves under different feeding regimes. Mansoura University Journal of Agricultural Sciences , Vol. 34(8): 8719-8726.

Faye B, Saint-Martin G, Cherrier R, Ruffa A, Chacornac J P and Genest M 1992 The influence of high dietary protein, energy and mineral intake on deficient young camel: I. Changes in metabolic profiles and growth performance. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A: 102(2), 409-416

Faye B 2008 The production potential and importance of camels, camelids in the world. Program and Extended Abstracts WBC / ICAR Satellite Meeting on Camelid Reproduction. In: Peter Nagy; Gyula Huszenicza; Judit Juhasz (Eds.). Workshop conducted at Barlang (“Cave”) Hall Budapest Zoo & Botanical Garden Budapest, Hungary July 12 – 13, 2008.

Getahun K Y 2014 Effect of concentrate supplementation on performances of Ethiopian lowland afar and blackhead Ogaden lambs. Animal and Veterinary Sciences; 2(2): 36-41. Retrieved on 7 September 2016 from http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/avs

Hedi A and Khemais K 1990 Intake, digestion and feeding behaviour of the one-humped camel stall-fed straw-based diets. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 2 (2) 1990. Retrieved on 13 January 2013 from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd2/2/abdouli.htm

Harren U J 1999 The commercial sale of camel milk from pastoral herds in the Mogadishu hinterland, Somalia. Pastoral development network. Overseas Development Institute, pp. 1-23.

Hashi A M and Kamoun M 1995 Feed requirements of the camel. In : Tisserand J.-L. (ed.). Elevage et alimentation du dromadaire . Zaragoza : CIHEAM, 1995. p. 71-80 (Options Méditerranéennes: Série B. Etudes et Recherches; n. 13). Retrieved on 10 January 2016 from http://om.ciheam.org/article.php?IDPDF=95605343

Hirut Y, Solomon M and Mengistu U 2011 Effect of concentrate supplementation on live weight change and carcass characteristics of Hararghe Highland sheep fed a basal diet of urea-treated maize stover. Retrieved on 13 January 2013 from Livestock Research for Rural Development 23 (12) 2011

Kadim I T, Mahgoub O, Al-Marzooqi W, Al-Zadgali S, Annamali K, and Mansour M H 2006 Effects of age on composition and quality of muscle Longissimus thoracis of the Omani Arabian camel (Camelus dromedarius). Meat Science 73(4), 619–625. Retrieved on 13 January 2016 from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0309174006000726/1-s2.0-S0309174006000726-main.pdf?_tid=d9c792f0-20f5-11e6-b155-00000aacb35d&acdnat=1464015277_825a1ce807ae6248d61a8bffd3f0c3d4

Kadim I T, Mahgoub O and Purchas R W 2008 A review of the growth, and of the carcass and meat quality characteristics of the one-humped camel (Camelus dromedarius). Meat Science. (73) 619–625. Retrieved on 11 June 2014 from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0309174008000491/1-s2.0-S0309174008000491-main.pdf?_tid=903c4904-20f6-11e6-bcac00000aacb361&acdnat=1464015583_ae233e7dc089604d8b75c79d73e5640a

Kadim I T, and Mahgoub O 2013 Camel Meat and Meat Products. In: Kadim, I.T., Mahgoub, O., Faye, B. and Farouk, M.M. editors, Camel carcass quality, CAB International, Oxfordshire, UK and Bostan, USA. pp 98-112 (Chapter 8).

Kadim I T, Mahgoub O, Al-Marzooqi W, Khalaf S K and Raiymbek G 2013 Composition, quality and health aspects of the dromedary (Camelus dromedarius) and bactrian (Camelus bacterianus) camel meats: a review. Sultan Qaboos University Research Journal-Agricultural and Marine Sciences, 18, 7-24. Retrieved on 13 July 2015 from http://www.cabi.org/cabdirect/FullTextPDF/2014/20143245475.pdf

Kamoun M 1995 Dromedary meat: production, qualitative aspects and acceptability for transformation. Option Mediterraneennes. Serie B, Etudes et Recherches 13, 105–130.

Knoess K H 1977 The camel as a meat and milk camel. World Animal Review, 22: 139.

Kurtu M Y 2004 An assessment of the productivity for meat and carcass yield of camel (Camelus dromedarious) and the consumption of camel meat in the Eastern region of Ethiopia. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 36, 65-76.

Leaver J D 1973 Rearing of dairy cattle. 4. Effect of concentrate supplementation on the live weight gain and food intake of calves offered roughages ad libitum. Animal Production 17(01):43-52.

MAFF 1975 Energy allowances and feeding systems for Ruminants. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Technical Bulletin 33. London, Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, UK.

Mahgoub O, Kadim I T, Al-Marzooqi W, Al-Lawatia S A and Al-Abri A S 2014 Non-carcass components in omani camels (Camelus dromedarius) raised under various levels of feed intake. Journal of Camel Practice and Research, Volume: 21, Issue: 1, p 35-40.

McCullough T A 1970 A study of the effect of supplementing a concentrate diet with roughages of different quality on performance of Friesian steers. I. Voluntary food intake and food utilization. The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 75(02):327-335.

MoA (Ministry of Agriculture) 2014 Ethiopian Livestock Master Plan (LMP): Roadmaps for growth and transformation (2015-2020). Developed by the Livestock Master Plan team. Livestock Resources Development Sector. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 72p.

Mohamed A, Urge M and Gebeyehu K 2015 The Effect of Replacing Maize with Sorghum on Carcass Characteristics and Economic Feasibility on Commercial Broiler Chicken. Poultry, Fishery and Wildlife Science 3:130. Retrieved on 16 January 2016 from http://www.esciencecentral.org/journals/446X-1000130.php?aid=53485

Mukasa-Mugerwa E 1981 The camel (Camelus dromedaries): a bibliographical review. ILCA monograph 5, International Livestock Centre for Africa, P.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 147 pp.

Munthali J T K, Jayasuriya C N and Bhattachrya A N 1991 Effects of urea treatment of maize stover and supplementation with maize bran or urea-molasses block on the performance of growing steers and heifers. In proceeding of the joint feed resource networks workshop held in Gaborone, Botswana 4-8 March 1991.

Robertson J B and Van Soest P J 1981 The detergent system of analysis. In: W.P.T. James and O. Theander, Editors, The Analysis of Dietary Fibre in Food, Marcel Dekker, New York, Basel, pp. 123–158 (Chapter 9).

SAS (Statistical Analysis System) 2008 SAS Version 9.1. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC, USA.

Tamire H 1986 Retrospects and Prospects of Agricultural Research and Extension. Part II. Developments of Research Stations, Alemaya University of Agriculture, Alemaya, Ethiopia.

Topps J H 1997 Forage legumes as protein supplement to poor quality diets in the semi-arid tropics. In: Wallace, R.J. and Lahlou-kassi, A. (eds.). Rumen Ecology Research Planning. Proceeding of a workshop held at the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), 13-18 March 1994, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. pp. 183-190.

Turki I Y, Ahmed R M, Agab H and Tagaddin M 2007 Feedlot Performance of Dromedary Camel (Camelus dromedaries) Calves fed different Dietary Regimes. In Proceeding of the First Scientific Workshop (Camels), Sudan University of Science and Technology, Sudan pp. 13-15.

Upton M 1979 Farm Management in Africa: The Principle of Production and Planning. Oxford University Press, Great Britain. pp. 282-298.

Van Soest P J 1994 Nutritional Ecology for the Ruminants (second ed.), Comstock Publishers Association, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA, London.

Van Soest P J, Robertson J B and Lewis B A 1991 Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, pp. 3583–3593.

Wardeh M F 2004 The nutrient requirements of the dromedary camel. CARDN, Journal of Camel Science, Vol.1, 37-45. Retrieved on 13 January 2013 from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.137.2350&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=44

Whiteman P C 1980 Tropical pasture science. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 392.

Woyessa F, Tolera A and Diba D 2013 Feed Intake, Digestibility and Growth Performance of Horro Lambs Fed Natural Pasture Hay Supplemented Graded Level of Vernonia Amygdalina Leaves and Sorghum Grain Mixture. Science, Technology and Arts Research Journal April-June 2013, 2(2): 30-37. Retrieved on 2 November 2015 from http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.4314%2Fstar.v2i2.98870

Yagil R 1982 Camels and camel milk. FAO Animal Production and Health. Publications Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy (No. 26).

Yoseph M, Mengistu U, Mohammed Y K and Merga B 2011 Effect of strategic supplementation with different proportion of agro-industrial by-products and grass hay on body weight change and carcass characteristics of tropical Ogaden bulls (Bos indicus) grazing native pasture. African Journal of Agricultural Research Vol. 6(4), pp. 825-833. Retrieved on 9 August 2013 from http://www.academicjournals.org/AJAR.

Yousif O K and Babiker S A 1989 The desert camel as meat animals. Meat Science, 26(4) (1989), pp. 245–254.

Zhang Z and Qiaojuan Y 2002 Ammoniation of Crop Residues. Animal Production Based on Crop residues- Chinese experience. In: Guo T S, Manuel D S and Guo P Y (eds.) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Animal Production and Health Paper 149: 47-71.

Received 31 May 2016; Accepted 25 July 2016; Published 1 October 2016

Go to top