Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
JM Turk, U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington, DC, USA
Published by Elsevier Inc.
Glossary
Agropastoralists Producers who practice sedentary
farming as well as temporary migration with livestock.
Caprinae Of or relating to goats.
Fat-tail or fat-rump sheep Domestic breeds of sheep
found in North Africa, the Middle East, East and Central
Asia; fat stored in the rump and tail is reserve source of
energy during periods of sheeps nutritional stress; also used
as food for humans.
Hair sheep Breeds found in hot, arid regions; hair fibers
outnumber amount of wool fiber, resulting in shorter and
smoother hair coat.
Mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acid (mtDNA) The
genetic material (DNA) contained cell structures important
for creating energy; mtDNA is inherited only from females.
Origins of Small Ruminants
Evolution and Genetic Diversity
Studies of the earliest known existence of sheep and goats are
based on Eurasian fossils 15–18 million years ago. During the
late Miocene period, Caprinae evolved rapidly. It is one of the
bovid subfamilies and species within it can be found across
most of the world. Owing to its evolution in Eurasian moun-
tainous regions, Caprinae species can tolerate temperature
extremes occurring in such ecoregions (Estes, 1991; Hernandez-
Fernandez and Vrba, 2005; Vrba and Schaller, 2000).
Lines of descent and ancestries between wild and domestic
goats are clearer than those between wild and domestic sheep.
Mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acid (mtDNA) research has
been used to track the domestication of both species. Such
studies have revealed differences between diverse wild goat
species and domesticated ones. Because there is no mtDNA
recombination in females, genetic studies of samples revealed
three ancestral lines with each having one set of chromosomes
different from the other. Using these studies, researchers de-
duced that female Bezoar goats, the major contributor of
modern goats, were captured during three separate times in
three geographically separate locations, each one contributing
to the formation of the early domestic populations. Even after
thousands of years of interbreeding, mtDNA sequences
from diverse wild species remain phylogenetically distinct
(MacHugh and Bradley, 2001; Luikart et al., 2001). Further
research concluded that there are six lineages in Europe and
Asia (Sardina et al., 2006).
Where wild and domestic sheep are located within the
same region, they can also interbreed, but unlike goats, sheep
usually do not revert to a feral state. Moreover, unlike goats,
researchers have not yet defined a precise lineage from wild
to domestic sheep (Hiendleder et al., 2002), although three
122 Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems, Volume 5
Pastoralism Pastoralists migrate in set patterns taking
with them their flocks as well as family members.
Phylogenetic Relating to the development or evolution of
a particular group of organisms.
Phylogeographic Relating to study of the processes
controlling geographic distribution of lineages by
constructing the genealogies of populations and genetics.
Urial Subspecies of wild sheep; most notable feature is the
enormous curling horns on the rams.
Zoonotic diseases Diseases that can be passed from
humans to animals and vice versa; tuberculosis is an
example.
major and distinct lineages were defined by DNA and mtDNA
studies using European, African, and Asian domestic sheep
(Pedrosa et al., 2005).
Lineages were classified as Type A (Asian), Type B (Euro-
pean), and Type C (from modern sheep of Turkey or China).
Another study determined that a Bronze Age sheep in China
was Type B, leading researchers to conclude that it may have
been introduced sometime in the fifth millennium (Guo et al.,
2005).
Scientists believe that these lineages descended from a
different wild species of the genus Ovis (Ovis gmelini spp.) in
the Fertile Crescent. This genus is highly polymorphic and
includes several Eurasian wild sheep that may be ancestors of
domestic breeds. There are several hypotheses about domestic
sheep descending from wild ancestors. Origins include the
European and Western Asian mouflon, the Asian urial, and the
Asian argali. Asiatic mouflon continue to live in Asia Minor
and Southern Iran, whereas European mouflon can be found
on the Mediterranean islands of Sardinia and Corsica.
Although the urial had been considered to be the pro-
genitor of the majority of current domestic sheep breeds,
including the hair sheep of Africa and Asia, domestic sheep
of India and the Far East are more closely related to the argali;
both urial and argali were found to differ from other Ovis
species in their number of chromosomes. This conflicts with
the hypothesis of direct relationships, and further phylo-
genetic studies confirmed the absence of such evidence
(Hiendleder et al., 2002). In addition, more research showed
major differences between the genetics leading to two pos-
sible explanations. One is the possibility that a heretofore
unknown species or subspecies of wild sheep influenced the
subsequent evolution of domestic breeds (Hiendleder et al.,
2007). Another conjecture relates domestic sheep breeds
with multiple captures of wild mouflon over time (Meadows
et al., 2007).
doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-52512-3.00160-1
 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
Phylogenetic studies have led researchers to conclude that
the Asiatic (Ovis orientalis) species of mouflon is the progenitor
of Ovis aries. The original geographic range of wild sheep is the
Middle East or Central or Western Asia (Williams). This has
led to the theory that the European mouflon could be one of
the ancient sheep breeds that reverted to the feral state, rather
than a wild sheep that became domesticated (Ensminger and
Parker, 1986). Past literature often cites the mouflon as the
ancestor.
Climate, specifically temperature and level of precipitation,
most likely influenced the regions where small ruminants
evolved. In comparison with sheep, goats are more adapted to
a harsher environment with conditions of greater aridity, lower
quality forages, and less water availability.
History of Domestication
The earliest known domestication of small ruminants occurred
in the Near East approximately 11 000 years ago during the
Neolithic era (Zeder, 2008), although it is posited that some
domestication began before this period based on archeological
findings in different locations. Evidence of animal domesti-
cation dates to the last glacial period when humans began
to practice settled agriculture, including animal production for
meat and milk. Sheep are reputedly the first species to be
domesticated for meat consumption.
Researchers conclude that during the early Neolithic per-
iod, when animal domestication emerged as an agricultural
practice, there were different animal management strategies
specific to geographic and sociocultural practices. Zoo
archeological analyses of ancient caprine bones and teeth have
been used to differentiate animals that were domesticated
versus those of wild animals that might have been hunted
(Arbuckle, 2008). Goats can revert to feral conditions if the
chance permits, which provides a way to document genetic
changes.
As human populations expanded, people began to migrate,
taking livestock with them westward from Mesopotamia
(the Fertile Crescent) into Eurasia. Tracing the routes from the
Neolithic period when the earliest evidence arises, human
migration flowed into Europe along two major routes – the
Mediterranean and the Danubian (Hiendleder et al., 2007).
Sheep
Archeological, genetic, and phylogeographic research provide
evidence that most sheep domestication occurred approxi-
mately 10 500 years ago in Western Asia and that the species
most likely was domesticated three separate times in the Fertile
Crescent (Western Iran and Turkey) – in Syria and Iraq. It has
been posited that dogs, the first animals to be domesticated,
most likely factored into the sheep domestication process.
Ancestral species of wild sheep can be found extending
from China to Western Europe and by 3500 BC several breeds
had been established in ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt
(Budiansky, 1999).
After domestication in Western Asia, humans migrated
with sheep through the Sinai into Northern Africa. Artifacts
show that sheep were kept in ancient Egyptian society seven to
eight thousand years ago (Blench and MacDonald, 1999).
123
However, different environments between North and South
interrupted or prevented the gene flow.
The dispersal across Eurasia and Africa happened by sep-
arate migratory paths. The first migration period included the
mouflon and other primitive breeds, whereas the second mi-
gration period included animals with more productive traits. It
is most likely that these sheep shaped the majority of current
breeds (Chessa et al., 2009). However, between the early and
the late Bronze Age periods (3000–1200 BC), sheep breeds
evolved and spread through the Western Asian region
(Ensminger and Parker, 1986). Four ancestral species of wild
sheep have been identified. They are: the mouflon of Europe,
the Middle East (Asia Minor), and Western Iran; the urial of
Western Asia and Afghanistan; the argali of Central Asia; and
the bighorn of Northern Asia and North America (Pereira et al.,
2009).
As sheep became more domesticated and raised under
containment, morphological changes occurred; body size de-
creased, females lacked horns, and there were larger percent-
ages of young animals indicating planned breeding. The
characteristics of wild species, such as lack of aggression and
high reproduction rates, were considered of merit (Budiansky,
1999). Economically important traits, such as wool type
and milk production, became selection factors. Selection for
wool might have begun approximately 6000 BC (Ensminger
and Parker, 1986; Weaver, 2005) according to archeological
evidence from statues found at sites in Iran (Hyams, 1972),
although there is a lack of evidence that wool was used for
clothing at that early date (Smith et al., 1997).
Archeological sites with early evidence for sheep domesti-
cation include Iran (Ali Kosh, Tepe Sarab, and Ganj Dareh,
which is one of the earliest settlements in the Middle East),
Iraq (Shanidar, Zawi Chemi Shanidar, and Jarmo), Turkey
(Cayonu, Asikli Hoyuk, and Catalhoyuk, which is one of the
oldest civilizations on record), and China (Dashanqian).
Goats
The earliest evidence of goat domestication is recorded at
10 000–11 000 years ago. They were adapted from a wild
species, Capra aegargus, by Neolithic farmers. Like sheep, they
were valued for milk, meat, hair, bone, and sinew for clothing
as well as manure used for fuel. Goat remains have been found
at archeological sites in Western Asia, such as Palestine
(Jericho), Russia (Choga), Turkmenistan (Djeitun), and Turkey
(Cayonu), which allows domestication of the goats to be
dated at between 6000 and 7000 BC.
Unlike sheep, tracing the lineage of goats by mtDNA re-
search has been more definite. Recent research has proposed
that all current goat breeds can be traced to a small number of
wild animals and then domesticated in two primary regions –
Turkey's Euphrates River valley during 11 000 before present
(bp) and Iran's Zagros Mountains during 10 000 bp (Zeder
and Hesse, 2000). Other domestication sites include Pakistan's
Indus Basin (9000 bp), Turkey (Cayonu – 8500–8000 BC),
Syria (8000–7400 BC), Israel (Jericho – 7500 BC), and Jordan
(Ain Ghazal – 7600–7500 BC) (Fernández et al., 2006).
Goats were reportedly introduced into Northern Africa with
human migration from the Near East, although questions
arose over time regarding their origins. To genetically charac-
terize the indigenous goat population, one study combined
124 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
mtDNA and Y chromosome loci from a population on the
northwestern fringe. Sequence analyses coupled with 2000
published mtDNA sequences showed a striking level of ma-
ternal and paternal lineage diversity. Further studies concluded
that there was a strong genetic relationship between Northwest
African and Near Eastern goat populations (Pereira et al.,
2009). Crossbreeding over time has resulted in several hun-
dred goat breeds today ranging from high-altitude mountains
to arid and semiarid deserts.
Animal Population Densities
Based on the FAO's Statistical database (United Nations,
2010), the total number of small ruminants globally equaled
1 987 453 552. Of this total, sheep numbered 1 077 762 456
and goats numbered 909 691 096. The Asian region as a
whole contained 50% of the world total. Of the 50% of
the world total, 59% were goats and 42% were sheep. Within
Asia, the subregion of Southern Asia had the highest percent-
age of animals (24%), of which 33.5% were goats and 16%
were sheep. Africa held 31% of the world total (34% goats
and 28% sheep) and within Africa, the subregion of Western
Africa had 10.9% of total small ruminants, of which 8.6%
were sheep followed by Northern Africa subregion with total
of 8.6% small ruminants, of which 10% were sheep. Goats
predominated in three of five regions in both Asia and Africa
where the mixed crop–livestock production system prevails.
The following list delineates total numbers and percentages.
World – 1 987 453 552 total small ruminants
• Sheep¼1 077 762 456 (54% of total)
• Goats¼ 909 691 096 (46% of total)
Asia – 994 069 195 (50% of world total)
• Sheep¼454 703 708 (42% of world total sheep)
• Goats¼ 539 365 487 (59% of world total goats)
Eastern Asia – 317 086 887 (16% of world total)
• Sheep¼148 682 613 (13.8%)
• Goats¼ 168 404 274 (18.5%)
Southern Asia – 477 368 749 (24% of world total)
• Sheep¼171 718 980 (16%)
• Goats¼ 305 659 769 (33.5%)
Southeast Asia – 38 188 990 (1.92% of world total)
• Sheep¼11 715 175 (1.1%)
• Goats¼ 26 473 815 (2.9%)
Central Asia – 57 123 723 (2.9% of world total)
• Sheep¼46 817 000 (4.3%)
• Goats¼ 10 306 723 (1.1%)
West Asia and the Middle East – 104 300 846 (5% of world
total)
• Sheep¼75 769 940 (7%)
• Goats¼ 28 530 906 (3.1%)
Africa – 609 022 313 (31% of world total)
• Sheep¼299 031 760 (28%)
• Goats¼ 310 890 553 (34%)
Northern Africa – 171 368 910 (8.6% of world total)
• Sheep¼110 021 270 (10%)
• Goats¼ 23 254 000 (2.6%)
Eastern Africa – 150 324 039 (7.6% of world total)
• Sheep¼58 775 230 (5.5%)
• Goats¼ 91 548 809 (10%)
Southern Africa – 40 324 744 (2% of world total)
• Sheep¼ 28 716 710 (2.77%)
• Goats¼ 11 626 034 (1.3%)
Western Africa – 215 749 920 (10.9% of world total)
• Sheep¼ 92 635 850 (8.6%)
• Goats¼ 2 114 070 (1.3%)
Central Africa – 32 136 700 (1.6% of world total)
• Sheep¼ 8 882 700 (0.01%)
• Goats¼ 23 254 000 (2.6%)
(United Nations, 2010).
Predominant Breeds
Native breeds of small ruminants most predominant in the
geographic regions where they are found are also known by
local names and may be found in more than one region. Uses
of the breeds are for meat, milk, and fiber, listed in parentheses
after the breed names. The countries that are included in these
regions are based on the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization FAOSTAT website list, and details of specific
breeds can be found in the list of relevant websites section at
the end of the article.
East Asia – Cambodia, China, Mongolia, North Korea, South
Korea, and Taiwan
• Sheep – Altay (meat); Karakul and Kazakh (meat and
fiber); and Khalka (meat, wool, and milk)
• Goats – Dagris, Baladi, and Shami (meat)
Central Asia – Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Re-
public of Georgia, Russian Federation, Turkmenistan, Tajiki-
stan, and Uzbekistan
• Sheep – Akhar Merino, Sargin (wool); Adal (meat and wool)
• Goats – Orenburg, Altay (mohair); Adal (meat and fiber)
Southeast Asia – Bangladesh, Bhutan, East Timor, India,
Indonesia, Laos, Nepal, Pakistan, Malaysia, Myanmar
(Burma), the Philippine Islands, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and
Vietnam
• Sheep – Arabi, Balkhi, Araghi, Baluchi dumda, and Karakul
(meat and wool); Kandahar Gadik and local Javanese thin
tailed; Priangan of West Java; and fat-tailed sheep of East
Java (meat)
• Goats – Barbari, Boer, Jamnapuri, Kabuli, Kandahari,
Tahiki, Watani, and Zaraby (meat and milk)
Western Asia and the Middle East – Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Israel,
Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria,
Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen
• Sheep – fat-tail – Arabi; Awassi (milk); Baluchi; Ghezel;
Karakul; Taleshi, (wool); thin tail – Damani (meat, milk,
and wool); Waziri (meat and wool); Assaf (meat and milk);
and Balki (meat)
• Goats – Baluchi, Baladi, and Damascus (Shami) (meat)
Northern Africa – Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, South
Sudan, the Sudan, Tunisia, and Western Sahara
• Sheep – Algerian Arabi; Uda; the Sudan; Tunisian Barbary –
hair sheep (meat); Rahmani (meat, milk, and wool)
• Goats – Nubian (meat and milk)
Southern Africa – Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa,
and Swaziland
 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
• Sheep – fat tailed – Blackhead Persian; Danakil (Adal);
Damara; Dorper; Meatmaster; Pedi; Van Rooy; Zulu (meat);
Dohne Merino; South African Meat Merino (meat and
wool); Namaqua Afrikaner; and Ronderib Afrikaner (Cape
fat tail) (meat and pelts)
• Goats – Boer; White Savannah; Nguni; Pedi (meat); and
Angora (mohair)
Eastern Africa – Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya,
Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Reunion,
Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, Uganda, the United Republic of
Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe
• Sheep – Adal; Berbera Blackhead; Danakil; Masai (Red
Masai); Tanganyika Short tailed; East African Fat-tailed type
– hair sheep (meat)
• Goats – East African (meat); Galla (Bora and Somali)
(milk); Kenyan dual purpose goat (meat and milk);
Nubian (meat, milk, and hides)
Western Africa – Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, cote
d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia,
Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, and Senegal
• Sheep – Uda; Cameroon Sheep – hair sheep (meat); Peul;
Bali-Bali; Maure; Guinea Long legged; West African Long
legged – hair sheep (meat and milk)
• Goats – Djallonké (African, West African Dwarf, and Afri-
can Pygmy); Chevre Naine, Chevre de Casamance, Hausa,
Kosi, Mossi, Cameroon Grassland, Kirdi, and Kirdimi
(meat); Boer; Guinean goats (meat); Sahelian (Fulani and
Tuareg) (milk, meat, and skins)
Characteristics and Species Differences
Environmental changes over the centuries have influenced
human and animal movements as well as adaptation and
coping strategies. Many morphological differences of small
ruminants evolved with their domestication as breeding for
specific traits became important. Hair or wool sheep, fat- or
thin-tail sheep, and fat-rumped sheep are examples as are
breeds of goats that produce dairy, meat, or specialized fiber,
such as cashmere or mohair.
In tropical regions of Africa and Southeastern Asia, hair
sheep are most common.
As all sheep have a mix of hair and wool fibers, the dif-
ference between hair and wool sheep is the ratio between the
two kinds of fibers the animal contains. This ratio depends
on the origin and the climate in which the stock is produced.
In more arid and hotter regions, hair fibers outnumber the
amount of wool fibers, resulting in a shorter and smoother
hair coat with very little wool. In colder climates, the opposite
ratio occurs, producing a greater number of wool fibers versus
hair fibers. Difference in management relates to labor required
for shearing (wool sheep) versus combing or natural shedding
(hair sheep). There are also differences in traits and charac-
teristics of hair versus wool sheep, for example, hair sheep
have lower reproduction efficiency but higher tolerance for
arid climatic conditions without major loss of productivity
and survival ability when feeds are limited or of low nu-
tritional value (Bradford and Fitzhugh, 1983).
In extremely arid regions, such as Mongolia, Northern
India, Pakistan, Western China, Central Asia, the Near East, the
125
Middle East, and Southern and Eastern Africa, some sheep
breeds have survived since 2400 BC. The unusual characteristic
is the high level of fat stored in the rump and tail, which is
a reserve source of energy during periods of nutritional stress
for the sheep as well as a food product for human use. For this
reason, fat-tail sheep are rapidly replacing the native thin-tail
breeds in Indonesia, especially on the island of Java.
As with sheep, goats in arid/semiarid climates or other
extreme environments exhibit characteristics that enable them
to survive and thrive where temperate climate breeds might
not. In pastoral societies where livestock are produced on
rangelands of variable forage quantity and quality, goats can
survive in harsh or degraded environments by maintaining
body condition during feed or water shortages. They are able
to walk for very long distances in search of food and exhibit
ability to find and assimilate browse that sheep or cattle
cannot use. Females have low abortion and stillbirth rates,
produce strong kids at birth that aids in survival rates, and
produce good yields of milk. A combination of such traits
provides a level of protection against other risks in the pro-
duction system (Fitzhugh and Bradford, 1989).
Although most domestic goats are produced at lower alti-
tudes, a few breeds produced for fiber, specifically pashmina or
cashmere, are raised at high altitudes where extremely cold
winters prevail. The high Himalayas and the Gobi desert
in both Inner Mongolia and Mongolia are such regions. The
Pashmina or Changra breed thrives in this environment.
The inner wool (cashmere) grows in the winter and is shed
in the spring when it is collected and spun. One characteristic
of this breed that is different from sheep and other goat breeds
is that it eats both grass and grass roots. As a result, mis-
managed grazing of large herds can produce significant
environmental damage.
Behavior
One common behavioral difference between goats and most
sheep breeds is the instinct for sheep to bunch together for
mutual protection. Sheep are more clannish than goats due to
a strong gregarious tendency and innate need for protection
where natural predators can be found. If cornered, sheep may
try to escape or maintain an aggressive behavior posture. Goats
are more inquisitive than sheep and explore their surround-
ings independently rather than as a herd. They display a more
assertive behavior than sheep and are less likely to run from
apparent danger.
Feeding habits
Most breeds of sheep are selective grazers due to their ana-
tomical split-lip structure that enables them to thrive in en-
vironments that have variable forages. Taste buds develop
in the fetal stage and the lamb begins to nibble available
feeds soon after birth. Depending on the production system,
the availability of forage or feed varieties may be limited,
thus reducing the choices sheep have. However, some
breeds, such as Dorper, Meatmaster, and Blackhead Persian,
are nonselective and tend to browse like goats. This enables
them to access a higher level of nutrition than other breeds
and be productive in environments where other breeds might
not survive.
126 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
Sheep thrive in monoculture pastures, whereas goats
require forage variety. Hence, they browse to select a diet
that includes tree or shrub leaves, twigs, grasses, weeds, and
roughages, often climbing up trees to access the leaves or
standing on hind legs to reach lower hanging branches. They
tolerate bitter tasting plants better than sheep (which may
account for browsing forages more bitter than grasses) as well
as reject urine or feces-tainted forages. Like camels, goats can
tolerate limited water intakes, whereas sheep require a more
consistent supply. When temperatures reach the 100 1F mark
(38 1C), goats pant less than sheep, thus reducing moisture
loss through sweating as well as feces and urine elimination
(Devendra, 1989).
Genetics
Tropical ruminant breeds vary in genetic potential for a variety
of traits. Positive traits include heat tolerance, disease, and
parasite resistance. Some examples include the Red Masai
sheep, which is genetically resistant or less prone to infestation
with intestinal worms; Uda sheep of Northern Nigeria, which
are much less susceptible to foot rot; and the Dorper, the
second most common breed in South Africa, has low sus-
ceptibility to internal and external parasites. The West African
Dwarf goat, the predominant breed of the humid tropics from
southern West Africa through Central Africa, is trypanoto-
lerant. The Savanna goat is heat and pest tolerant, adapts to
mixed climates, needs little management, and has a natural
resistance to tick-borne diseases, such as heartwater and other
external parasites. Similarly, the Djallonké breed is trypano-
tolerant and resistant to parasitic diseases.
As noted, fat-tail sheep breeds are tolerant of extreme
aridity, whereas cashmere breeds of goats are adapted to an
extremely cold environment.
Smallholder Production Systems
Classification of Systems
In developing countries, the term ‘smallholder’ is used to
describe producers with limited resources, i.e., resource-poor
or subsistence farmers. This definition may differ among
countries and agroecological zones as economic strata exist
within all production systems (Dixon et al., 2004). In terms of
agricultural systems, the three most basic resources are land,
labor, and capital. Access to inputs and supplies are additional
necessities.
Pastoralists could be classified as resource-poor producers
as they provide labor for raising livestock but rarely own the
land their livestock graze on. However, not all pastoralists are
resource poor. Livestock are their capital and have been termed
a living savings account. This section applies the resource-poor
or smallholder producer definition to pastoralists as well as
to nonpastoralists, given that the majority of them fit the
definition.
Livestock production systems in developing countries are
commonly described by the ecosystem conditions in which
the animals are raised. Several production systems can be
found within the same country depending on the environ-
ment, ecology, and human population size as well as on
economic and sociocultural factors that promote or inhibit
specific livestock species from being produced. Management
practices, including gender roles, differ according to system as
does the nutrition of livestock, reproduction rates, and health
challenges. Climate change is impacting traditional systems,
and the interactions among livestock and environmental and
human health (including human nutrition) is dynamic. Pro-
duction systems are changing as producers adapt to climatic
changes or adopt coping methods to preserve their traditional
practices as best as they can.
Regional environmental conditions are used to define
livestock production systems.
The primary livestock production systems and the en-
vironments in which they are found are:
• pastoralism/agropastoralism (extensive, rangeland based/
partially settled) – arid and semiarid zones;
• integrated mixed crop–livestock (crop-based) – humid/
subhumid zones;
• intensive (large numbers of animals in confined con-
ditions) – temperate zones; and
• periurban/urban (around or in cities or slums) – humid/
subhumid zones and temperate zones.
The geographic regions where these environmental zonal
systems are located are:
• arid/semiarid zone – North and West Africa, East Asia
(Mongolia), South America (Andean Mountain range or
Altiplano), Western USA, and Northern Australia;
• humid/subhumid zone – parts of Africa (coastal zones and
southern region), South and Latin America (northern An-
dean mountain range), and South Asia; and
• temperate zone – Americas, Europe/Eastern Europe, and
New Zealand.
The focus of this section is on smallholder produc-
tion systems in the arid/semiarid zones of North and West
Africa and of East Asia and the humid/subhumid zones
of coastal zones and southern region of Africa and of South,
Southeast, and Central Asia extending into parts of the
Middle East.
Each of the production systems includes sheep and goats,
although populations vary depending on culture, uses for
their products (meat, milk, fiber or skins, manure, generation
of household income, or barter), climate, input availability
including service delivery (such as animal health), and avail-
ability of labor. Because many breeds are adapted to harsh
environmental conditions and can convert lower quality
forages into usable products, the species fill an important
need in developing country smallholder production systems.
They are used to diversify risk from failing crop harvests
or lack of feed for large ruminants due to drought or floods
or from economic shocks resulting from low prices for
crops. Because they reproduce more quickly than cattle, they
provide a quick return to investment (Gutierrez, 1985).
The two most commonly found systems in developing
countries of the Asian and African regions are pastoralism/
agropastoralism or mixed crop–livestock systems in the
humid/subhumid zones. Pastoralism involves grazing larger
size herds or flocks than mixed crop–livestock systems where
animals most commonly are confined (Safilios, 1983).
 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
Pastoralism/Agropastoralism
Extensive, rangeland based/partially settled – arid/semiarid
climate
Description of system
Both the northern and southern hemispheres contain arid and
semiarid desert climates. These are defined as areas with short
growing seasons where rainfall ranges from 0–300 mm to
300–600 mm, respectively. Owing to intense dry heat and
light winds moisture evaporates quickly. Average air tem-
perature is 16 1C. Arid deserts cover 12% of the Earth's land
surface (Lohmann et al., 1993).
A semiarid climate predominates in regions between the
arid deserts and more humid climates. Average temperatures
are 24 1C (43 1F) and annual precipitation varies from less
than 10 cm (4 in.) (Lohmann et al., 1993) in the driest regions
to 50 cm (20 in.) in the moister grassland steppes of Eurasia in
the Ukraine and east into Russia. Semiarid conditions also
exist in colder highland climates, such as the Andean Moun-
tain range in South America, Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa, and
the Tibetan Himalayas.
Seasonal migration is an important characteristic of pas-
toralism because it enables access to forage as well as breaks up
crusted soils as herds/flocks transit the land. Small ruminants
are combined with large ruminants (cattle or camels de-
pending on location) to diversify risk. However, sheep may
compete with cattle or wild sheep or other herbivores for
limited grazing resources.
Air temperature and rainfall determine the ecology of arid
and semiarid ecosystems and thus influence the use of the
land. Intense heat, low levels of readily available water often at
great distance between sources, and lack of forage or grasses
affect the smallholder's choices of species and breeds of small
ruminants that can be raised in the region. A producer's lack of
access to higher quality feed, animal health supplies, technical
advice, and availability of markets for the livestock influence
decision making, adoption of new practices, or adaptation to
situations unfavorable to increasing numbers of animals or
improved genetics.
Pastoralism is an important production system in the
drylands – nearly half of the land area of sub-Saharan Africa
and one-third of the world's land surface. It contributes sig-
nificantly to food security in the Horn of Africa and a source of
livelihood for approximately 200 million people worldwide
(Nori et al., 2005).
Although there is no annual census of global pastoral/
agropastoral populations, it has been estimated that approxi-
mately 120 million produce livestock worldwide, of which
approximately 42% reside in sub-Saharan Africa. The Sudan,
Somalia, and Ethiopia contain the largest populations. How-
ever, in some countries pastoralists represent the majority of
the population (Rass, 2006). The number of animals raised by
these populations varies with climate, the availability of water,
and forage. As of 2010, Western Africa had a larger number
and proportion of small ruminants than Eastern Africa (Uni-
ted Nations, 2010).
Geographic location, social organization, national govern-
ment policies, national economic status, and evolutionary
history of people and animals combine as parameters that
influence production practices. Pastoralists migrate in set
127
patterns taking with them their flocks as well as family
members, moveable shelters, and food. Agropastoralists are
partially settled and produce a small amount of crops to feed
the family members that remain at the household while other
members migrate.
Livestock management practices
Pastoralist managerial practices include movement and mi-
gration with livestock; supplementing livestock with feeds
when necessary and if feeds are available; coping or adapting
to extreme weather variations; determining whether to sell
animals during crises; and disease management if technical
assistance or supplies are available, accessible, and affordable.
Sociocultural practices of pastoral communities serve to bond
related families and provide a foundation for protection
or compromise when others compete for rangeland forage
and water.
Gender roles are well defined irrespective of whether they
are pastoralists or agropastoralists. An agropastoralist family
divides during specific seasons, leaving the women and young
children at the residence, whereas men and older boys migrate
with flocks in search of forage and water. Women and young
children often raise a few sheep and goats within the house-
hold area. Social norms in pastoral societies confer small
ruminant management as well as milking, milk processing and
sales, and use of milk for domestic consumption on women.
Women may also be traders or marketers of small ruminants,
although this depends on their level of business knowledge
and the latitude of societal norms in their subculture. These
might include whether or not they are allowed to own or have
access to livestock assets, their status as single or married
women, whether or not they head the household due to ab-
sence of a spouse, and the predominant roles of the men in
their subculture (Sikana et al., 1993; Ridgewell and Flintan,
2007; Aklilu and Catley, 2009).
Livestock nutrition
Zonal ecology determines primary feeds or forage that varies
by location. Both sheep and goats shift preference from forage
classes and grasses in the wet season to browse in the dry
season. Trees, shrubs, subshrubs and grass, moist, broad leaf,
wooded savannah, and dry thornbush scrub are among forage
browsed by goats in this agroclimate. As grazers, sheep are
more limited in forage selection depending on the geographic
areas and ecosystem in which they are raised. Seasonality and
the availability of grasses or browse may influence a pastor-
alist's mix of species in the herd (Sidahmed, 1996).
Livestock reproduction
Pastoralists are extremely familiar with the animals in their
herds/flocks and employ identification systems similar to
large-scale producers in nonpastoral systems. Selection factors
include animal body size, level of milk production, drought
tolerance, and parent and grandparent features. One study in
Northern Kenya documented the intricate memory system
some producer groups used (Mbuku et al., 2010). Record
keeping also includes dates of birth, castration, new stock,
weaning, culling, performance, and health (Ayantunde et al.,
2007). Ear notching and coat color are two physical means of
identification.
128 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
Certain groups select animals for breeding based on body
size and milk yield, whereas drought tolerance, fertility,
mothering ability, and prolificacy are less important. Other
producer groups consider large body size, drought tolerance,
and offspring quality as important but fertility, meat or milk
production, and mothering ability as less significant. There-
fore, although producers may use similar criteria for selecting
breeding stock, they differ in which traits are most important
for individual consideration. A high level of productivity, al-
though important, is not always the most significant factor.
Some breeds or types are recognized for specific products and
are selected primarily to produce meat (e.g., South African
Boer, Galla, and East African goats), milk (e.g., Somali and
Jamunapari), or fiber (cashmere). One important drawback to
selecting for high productivity traits is that such animals may
exhibit lower resistance to disease or adaptability to long
droughts and decreased availability of water or forage.
Livestock health challenges
In this production system, primary health challenges are: Peste
de petite ruminant (PPR), brucellosis (primarily in goats),
circling disease, helminths, Q fever, contagious caprine
pleuropneumonia (CCPP – a major disease of goats), capri-
pox, ticks and tick-borne diseases, tsetse flies and trypanoso-
miasis, anaplasmosis, babesiosis, and cowdriosis. Vaccines and
medications are in use for many of the diseases, but pastor-
alists may not be able to access or afford them. Weather events,
such as prolonged and more frequent droughts, aberrant
rainfall, or flooding, are occurring more frequently and un-
expectedly, resulting in higher numbers of livestock displace-
ments, sickness, and death. These events are creating
microenvironments that are optimal for disease pathogens or
vectors to occur where they have not been found before, for-
cing livestock and producers to confront greater health chal-
lenges than in the past.
Integrated Mixed Crop–Livestock and Periurban Production
Systems
Crop-based – Humid/subhumid climate
Description of systems
Humid and subhumid climatic zones include tropical forests
and savannas, where seasonal changes result in very wet and
very dry seasons, and boreal and deciduous forests. Tempera-
tures range from 16–18 1C (60–64 1F) in the savannas and
rainforests to 31 1C (56 1F) in deciduous forests. Although
boreal forests are considered to be humid, one exception is
Western Siberia where precipitation is low, thus creating a
subhumid or semiarid climate type. There is a wide swing in
temperature through the year with lows of  25 1C (  14 1F)
and highs of 16 1C (60 1F). Referencing the Koppen–Geiger
climate classification system, annual precipitation varies
widely depending on geographic location and ecosystem from
a high of 262 cm (103 in.) in rainforests to 0.25 cm (0.1 in.) in
savannas.
The Amazon Basin, Congo Basin of equatorial Africa, and
the East Indies from Sumatra to New Guinea are all classified
as humid/subhumid tropical rainforests. Savannas are found
in India, Indochina, West Africa, Southern Africa, South
America, and the north coast of Australia. Northern China and
Central and Eastern Europe contain deciduous forests. Boreal
forest climates are in Central and Western Alaska, Canada,
from the Yukon Territory to Labrador, and in Eurasia, from
Northern Europe across all of Siberia to the Pacific Ocean.
Small ruminants can be found in all of these regions.
Increasing urbanization has led to income inequities, eco-
nomic insecurity, and urban poverty, forcing some small-
holder producers to earn income from off-farm labor,
although opportunities may be limited. To supplement such
income smallholder producers may raise small ruminants as a
secondary activity for household food security. Because of
their small sizes and lower cost of production than cattle,
sheep and goats fit the limited resource base of urban and
periurban households (Waters-Bayer, 1995). Smallholders
prefer to raise goats because they require less management and
are hardier than sheep. Because they are browsers, goats forage
widely and are able to meet their nutritive needs, albeit at
suboptimum levels at times (Wilson, 1991). A common rea-
son that households often need cash is to pay school fees,
healthcare, or unanticipated emergencies. In some societies,
small ruminants are kept for religious or social reasons. For
example, Muslims prefer sheep for religious festivals when
rams are slaughtered to provide meat for the household. Other
social occasions include naming ceremonies and birthday
celebrations.
Like other production systems, urban/periurban livestock
producers face economic sociocultural and institutional con-
straints. Availability, access to, and affordability of inputs,
supplies, and technical services may constrain smallholder
producers scaling up their enterprises. Other important factors
are land tenure, access to markets, lack of credit or working
capital, and other forms of assistance when needed.
Credit is very often a major limiting factor for building or
improving infrastructure for animals, for purchasing add-
itional numbers of animals, or for buying routinely used
animal health products. Unless rural banks are established and
are accessible by community members, producers often lack
collateral required by financial institutions. In addition, pro-
ducers may encounter difficulties in repaying loans due to low
rates of return on their investments.
Livestock management practices
The importance of small ruminants in this production system
is similar to the pastoral/agropastoral system. However,
management practices differ in that the flocks/herds are much
smaller due to the land base on which they are raised; the
greater availability of water and forage, including crop by-
products; and their affordability compared with a large ru-
minant. However, there is still competition with other farm
undertakings for land, capital, and labor (Gutierrez, 1985). If
tethered or confined there is a need to bring fresh grasses or
legumes to the animals, thus requiring an individual who has
time, energy, and strength to do so. This work often falls on
women and children. The alternative is to use a controlled
grazing system that also requires a shepherd who often is a
child (Coop, 1986).
Because dairy goats are easy to handle, women and
children assume their management. Management duties
that women perform include milking animals, sale of dairy
 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
products, castrating, delivery and attending to the newborn,
and animal sanitation, including housing if used. In some
societies, women sell the animals and use the returns for
household needs, although the purchase of new stock remains
the responsibility of the male in the household.
Owing to raising a small number of animals often in
confinement, the cut-and-carry system for forage is a relatively
common practice in periurban/urban systems but requires
extra nonfamily labor that may fluctuate seasonally if family
members cannot meet the need. Animal and human popu-
lation density in the locality, cost of animal housing, avail-
ability of marginal lands for grazing or foraging, and whether
natural pasture is available factor into the level of confinement
under which small ruminants are raised. Similar to the mixed
crop–livestock system, management decisions are made by the
head of the household, usually the man, or if the animals are
owned by an absentee landlord, by the owners themselves.
Women or children are responsible for sanitation of animals,
feeding troughs, and animal housing, but hired labor or family
members of lower social status may also be employed.
Livestock nutrition
Mixed crop–livestock and periurban/urban production are
traditional systems in the humid/subhumid tropics. Different
patterns of crop production as well as the type of crops, in-
cluding trees such as palm oil, coconuts, or rubber, enable
producers to use crop residues and stubbles while providing
organic fertilizer (dung and urine) to the land. In Southeast
Asia, grazing animals under tree crops in association with
tropical legumes adds value by increasing soil fertility, con-
trolling waste herbage thereby decreasing the need for herbi-
cides, and adding a second profitable element to the system
(Devendra, 1986).
Many households keep only a few animals; thus, feeding is
more labor intensive. Animals may be tethered in areas of
intensive crop cultivation or confined to the household and
fed various crop residues when available, in addition to grasses
or shrub/tree leaves that are cut and carried to them (Deven-
dra, 1986). Where families have access to grazing, for example,
along roadsides or marginal field areas, more extensive grazing
is practiced. Families may combine their flocks/herds during
the day under management of an unpaid family member or
shepherd who returns them to the households in the evening.
Cereal cultivation of maize, rice, and wheat provides
stubble, and other residues may include sweet potato vines or
sugarcane tops, although the level of nutrition is general.
Supplementing the diet with tree leaves, pods, and seeds, es-
pecially leguminous ones like leucaena, cassava, jackfruit,
acacia species, sesbania, and gliricidia, adds additional nutri-
ents (Devendra, 1983; Hutagalong, 1981).
Livestock reproduction
Because producers in mixed crop–livestock systems rely on
both crops and livestock for household income generation,
raising small ruminants that are highly productive is important
to management decisions. The type of species, cost of animals,
products derived from the species, access to markets, consumer
demand for the products, availability of labor, availability and
access to technical services, and inputs all contribute to a
producer's ability to maintain a viable farming enterprise.
129
Sheep and goats fill an economic niche but must be pro-
ductively profitable. This requires breeding stock that can add
value to a household herd or flock as well as a level of tech-
nical understanding about livestock nutrition and health.
In the periurban/urban system, the primary source of
household income is off-farm work. Small ruminants act as a
repository for rural capital (‘living savings bank’) and provide a
high return on investment (often more than 10%). In poor
households, livestock – especially small ruminants – are a key
means of managing risk, protecting savings, and offer insurance
against drought and crop failure due to changes of climate
patterns. Successfully breeding the household's limited stock
serves to reduce the expense of purchasing replacement animals.
Livestock health challenges
The humid/subhumid climate in which these production
systems occur is ideal for parasite and disease vector multi-
plication and spread. High ambient temperature and humidity
create an environment conducive to internal and external
parasites, bacteria, fungi, mosquitoes, and flies that act as
disease vectors. Genetic characteristics often limit disease re-
sistance and weak management practices can provoke disease
transmission.
Small ruminants are subject to a daunting list of diseases
and parasites. Viral and bacterial diseases include: PPR, CCPP,
Rift Valley fever, sheep pox, salmonellosis, brucellosis, an-
thrax, hemorrhagic septicemia, heartwater, schistosomasis,
Nairobi sheep disease, enzootic abortion of ewes, foot-and-
mouth disease, bluetongue, Crimean–Congo hemorrhagic
fever, pneumonic pasteurellosis, contagious pustular derma-
titis, coccidiosis, tetanus, black quarter (Clostridium chauvoei),
botulism, enterotoxemia, contagious ecthyma, caseous lym-
phadenitis, hypocalcemia, mastitis, transit tetany, foot rot, and
trypanosomiasis. Some indigenous breeds are tolerant of try-
panosomiasis, such as the West African dwarf sheep and goats
and East African goats (OIE Documents Database).
Internal parasites include helminths that cause Hae-
monchus contortus, liver fluke, roundworms, lung worms,
tapeworms, nasal bot, and bloat. Common external parasites
are ticks, fleas, lice, and mites.
In periurban/urban production systems, zoonotic diseases
become more significant when livestock are raised close to
household premises, or within the household dwelling itself.
Lack of food safety standards also exacerbate human health
threats. Traditional producers are aware of the role of man-
agement in disease avoidance and control but may lack the
ability to prevent their occurrence (Ntifo-Siaw and Ghartey,
1988). Zoonotic diseases are particularly important, especially
brucellosis, tuberculosis, animal-sourced foodborne gastro-
enteritis, Tenia solium neurocysticercosis, and Mycobacterium
bovis tuberculosis. The Fasciola, Entamoeba, and Giardia species
and Balantidium coli are especially significant in these systems
(Kagira and Kanyari, 2001). Both humans and livestock are
vulnerable to the diseases these parasites transmit (Harper and
Penzhorn, 1999; Kanyari et al., 2009).
Values of Small Ruminants
Livestock represent diversified values – sociocultural, en-
vironmental, economic, and nutritional – and not all of these
130 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
can be measured in hard numbers. Nor can one value be
equated with another, particularly across cultures and eco-
systems. Livestock serve as critical components for poverty
alleviation, for conflict mitigation, prevention, and resolution.
In some societies animals represent social value, for example,
status in the community often based on the number of ani-
mals a household owns. Instead of a dowry payment by the
bride's family, a practice once widespread in the West, some
cultures use cattle, sheep, and goats as bride price. Payment is
made by the groom's family to secure the woman's hand in
marriage.
But they also serve as a valuable entry point for promoting
gender equity in rural areas. Women play an important role in
livestock management through animal genetic selection,
milking, processing, and marketing as care providers, feed
gatherers, and birth attendants. Identifying and supporting
women's roles as livestock owners, processors, and users of
livestock products and strengthening their decision-making
power and capabilities are key aspects of promoting women's
economic and social empowerment.
Smallholder producers benefit at various economic levels
by keeping small ruminants. Small ruminants produce meat,
milk, fiber, and hides. The levels of production and economic
importance of these products vary among regions, especially in
the developing countries. Sheep and goats are often cited as a
hedge against natural disasters, economic shocks, and rising
food prices, particularly in situations of small or failed crop
harvests. They fill nutritional and economic gaps and are a
coping mechanism until the next cropping season. Dairy sheep
and goats can produce enough milk for household use as well
as supply local markets, and the nutritional values are almost
equivalent to cow milk, although compositions vary by breed,
animal, and point in the lactation period. However, sheep
milk is higher in fat, energy, sugars (lactose), and calcium
and slightly lower in water (U.S. Department of Agriculture,
2012). Small ruminants produce meat, milk, fiber, and hides.
The levels of production and economic importance of these
products vary among regions, especially in the developing
countries.
Production trends in the developing countries parallel
consumption trends. The FAO estimated that in 2010 de-
veloping countries would produce 143 million tons of meat.
Of this volume, 45% would be pork, 25% poultry, 23% beef,
and 7% mutton or lamb and goat meat. Yet, as a group, de-
veloping countries were expected to increase net meat imports
twentyfold, amounting to 11.5 million tons in 2020. Of net
meat imports, beef was expected to constitute 46%, poultry
30%, pig meat 13%, and sheep and goat meat 11%.
Total sheep and goat milk production globally amounted
to 27 465 619 ton in 2010 (United Nations, 2010). Of this
total, 49% was produced in the Asian region and 44% in the
African region. Global sheep and goat meat production during
the same period totaled 60 285 054 ton, of which Asian region
countries produced 7.5% and African region countries pro-
duced 4.7%. The top five countries producing these products
were located in Asia and Africa and the majority, if not all, of
the milk and meat was produced by smallholders.
Positive environmental values, especially those of raising
livestock on the range and grasslands, include mineral and
nutrient cycling; enabling soil conditions for storing soil
carbon, water cycling and/storage (grass/vegetative cover can
capture 50–80% more water than bare ground), and im-
proving the diversity of grasses by dispersing seeds and
breaking up the soil crust. In pastoral societies, livestock
consume forage on lands that cannot produce crops, thus
changing these areas into food-producing landscapes. Sixty-
five percent of global dryland area is grassland used for live-
stock production by 800 M people (Mortimore et al., 2009).
Pastoralists graze livestock on lands that cannot produce
crops, thus turning them into food-producing landscapes.
Grasslands represent major terrestrial carbon stock, are ap-
proximately half the emerged ice-free world, and represent
approximately 70% of world's agricultural area. Good land
management results in reduced risk of drought and floods,
greater permeability, and increased water-holding capacity in
soils, both of which are examples of direct benefits up- and
downstream. In fragile environments as are found in arid/
semiarid ecoregions, goats add value to the grazing system due
to their ability to browse forage species, including weeds, that
other species do not.
Nutritional value
Animal source foods (ASF) reinforce household food security.
One of the most difficult and least accounted values of live-
stock is the nutritional merit of ASF. From the early 1970s
to the 1990s, meat and milk consumption in developing
countries grew by more than twice the increase seen in de-
veloped countries and more than half as large as the increase
in cereal consumption resulting from the Green Revolution.
Developing countries now consume close to half of the global
meat supply.
On a global basis, foods of animal (including fish) origin
provide approximately 17% of the energy and more than 35%
of the dietary protein for humans. In rural areas of developing
countries, diets of children are primarily crop based and often
deficient in vitamin A, vitamin B12, riboflavin, calcium, iron,
and zinc. ASF contain more bioavailable levels of essential
minerals and vitamins and provide concentrated sources of
energy and fat, vitamin B12, riboflavin, vitamin A, vitamin E,
iron, zinc, calcium, and vitamin D. Vitamin A in its usable
form and vitamin B12 is present only in animal source foods.
Animal proteins are 20–30% more digestible than plant pro-
teins (96–98% vs. 65–70%) and contain higher, more bio-
available levels of essential minerals and vitamins. Vitamin A
in its usable form and vitamin B12 are present only in ASF.
Vitamin A is an important micronutrient for the cognitive and
physical development of children (Murphy and Allen, 2003).
See also: Slum Livestock Agriculture
References
Aklilu, Y., Catley, A., 2009. Livestock Exports from the Horn of Africa: AnAnalysis of
Benefits by Pastoralist Wealth Group and Policy Implications. Medford, MA:
Feinstein International Center, Tufts University.
Arbuckle, B., 2008. Revisiting Neolithic caprine exploitation at Suberde. Journal of
Field Archaeology 33, 219–236.
Blench, R., MacDonald, K.C., 1999. The Origins and Development of African
Livestock. London. Routledge.
 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems
Bradford, G.E., Fitzhugh, H.A. (Eds.), 1983. Hair sheep: A general description. In:
Hair Sheep of Western Africa and the Americas. A Genetic Resource for the
Tropics. A Winrock International Study. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp. 3−22.
Budiansky, S., 1999. The Covenant of the Wild: Why Animals Chose Domestication.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Chessa, B., Pereira, F., Arnaud, F., et al., 2009. Revealing the history of sheep
domestication using retrovirus integrations. Science 324, 532–536.
Coop, I.E., 1986. Sheep and goats in the village. Increased production and
utilization of pasture and forage. In: Timon, V.M., Hanrahan, J.P. (Eds.), FAO
Animal Production and Health Paper (FAO), no. 58. Expert Consultation on
Increasing Small Ruminant Production, Sofia, Bulgaria, 8−12 July 1985. Rome,
Italy: FAO, pp. 52–60.
Devendra, C., 1986. Prospects for developing small ruminant production in humid
tropical Asia. In: Timon, V.M., Hanrahan, J.P. (Eds.), FAO Animal Health and
Production Paper (FAO), no. 58. Expert Consultation on Increasing Small
Ruminant Production, Sofia, Bulgaria, 8−12 July 1985. Rome, Italy: FAO,
pp. 184–198.
Devendra, C., 1989. Comparative aspects of digestive physiology and nutrition in
goats and sheep. Paper presented at the Satellite Symposium on Ruminant
Physiology and Nutrition in Asia, VII International Symposium on Ruminant
Physiology, August 28−September 1, 1989. Sendai, Japan: Japan Society of
Zootechnical Science.
Dixon, J., Tanyeri-Abur, A., Wattenbach, H., 2004. Framework for analyzing impacts
of globalization on smallholders. In: Dixon, J., Taniguchi, K., Wattenbach, H.,
Tanyeri-Arbur, A. (Eds.), Smallholders, globalization and policy analysis: ASGF
Occasional Paper (FAO), no. 5. Rome, Italy: Agricultural Support Systems
Division, FAO, pp. 7–18.
Ensminger, M.E., Parker, R.O., 1986. Sheep and Goat Science, fifth ed. Danville, IL:
The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc.
Estes, R.D., 1991. The Behavior Guide to African Mammals: Including Hoofed
Mammals, Carnivores, Primates. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Fernández, H., Hughes, S., Vigne, J.-D., et al., 2006. Divergent mtDNA lineages of
goats in an early Neolithic site, far from the initial domestication areas. In: Bar-
Yosef, O. (Ed.), Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Washington,
DC: PNAS, pp. 15375–15379.
Fitzhugh, H.A., Bradford, G.E. (Eds.), 1989. In: Hair Sheep of Western Africa and the
Americas: A Genetic Resource for the Tropics. A Winrock International Study.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Guo, J., Du, L.S., Ma, Y.H., et al., 2005. A novel maternal lineage revealed in sheep
(Ovis aries). Animal Genetics 36 (4), 331–336.
Gutierrez, A.N., 1985. Economic constraints on sheep and goat production in
developing countries. In: Timon, V.M., Hanrahan, J.P. (Eds.), Proceedings, FAO
Animal Production and Health Paper (FA), no. 58. Expert Consultation on
Increasing Small Ruminant Production, Sofia, Bulgaria, 8−12 July 1985. Rome,
Italy: FAO, pp. 138–147.
Harper, C.K., Penzhorn, B.L., 1999. Occurrence and diversity of coccidia in
indigenous, Saanen and crossbred goats in South Africa. Veterinary Parasitology
82, 1–9.
Hernandez-Fernandez, M., Vrba, E.S., 2005. A complete estimate of the phylogentic
relationships in Ruminantia: A dated species-level supertree of the extant
ruminants. Biological Review 80, 269–302.
Hiendleder, S., Kaupe, B., Wassmuth, R., Janke, A., 2002. Molecular analysis of
wild and domestic sheep questions current nomenclature and provides evidence
for domestication for domestication from two different subspecies. Proceedings of
the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 269 (1494), 893–904.
Hiendleder, S., Mainz, K., Plante, Y., Lewalski, H., 2007. Analysis of mitochondrial
DNA indicates that domestic sheep are derived from two different ancestral
maternal sources: No evidence for contributions from urial and argali sheep.
Journal of Heredity 89 (2), 113–120.
Hutagalong, R.I., 1981. The use of tree crops and their by-products for intensive
animal production. In: Smith, A.J., Gunn, R.G. (Eds.), Intensive Animal
Production in Developing Countries., pp. 151–184.
Hyams, E., 1972. Animals in the Service of Man. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott.
Kagira, J.M., Kanyari, P.W.N., 2001. The role of parasitic diseases in
causing mortalities in small ruminants in a highly productive area of
Central Province, Kenya. Journal of South Africa Veterinary Association 72,
147–149.
Kanyari, P.W.N., Kagira, J.M., Mhoma, R.J., 2009. Prevalence and intensity of
endoparasites in small ruminants kept by farmers in Kisumu Municipality, Kenya.
Livestock Research for Rural Development 21, 1–10.
Lohmann, U., Sausen, R., Bengtsson, I., et al., 1993. The Köppen climate
classification as a diagnostic tool for general circulation models. Climate
Research 3, 177–193.
131
Luikart, G., Gielly, L., Excoffier, L., et al., 2001. Multiple maternal origins and weak
phylogeographic structure in domestic goats. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the USA 98, 5927–5932.
MacHugh, D.E., Bradley, D.G., 2001. Livestock genetic origins: Goats buck the
trend. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 98 (10),
5382–5384.
Mbuku, S.M., Kosgey, I.S., Kahi, A.K., 2010. Identification systems and selection
criteria for small ruminants among pastoralist communities in northern Kenya:
Prospects for a breeding programme. Tropical Animal Health and Production 42
(7), 1487–1492.
Meadows, J.R., Cemal, I., Karaca, O., et al., 2007. Five ovine mitochondrial lineages
identified from sheep breeds of the near East. Genetics 175 (3), 1371–1379.
Mortimore, M., Anderson, S., Cotula, L., et al., 2009. Dryland opportunities: A new
paradigm for people, ecosystems and development. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
London: IIED; Nairobi: UNDP/DDC.
Murphy, S.P., Allen, L.H., 2003. Nutritional importance of animal source foods.
Journal of Nutrition 133, 3932S–3935S.
Nori, M., Switzer, J., Crawford, A., 2005. Herding on the brink: Towards a global
survey of pastoral communities and conflict. An occasional paper from
the IUCN Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy. Gland:
IUCN.
Ntifo-Siaw, E., Ghartey, N.K.T., 1988. Traditional animal husbandry in farming
communities: A preliminary study of three ecological zones of southern Ghana.
In: Proceedings of the 18th and 19th Animal Science Symposia. Accra, Ghana:
Ghana Animal Science Association.
Pedrosa, S., Uzun, M., Arranz, J.-J., et al., 2005. Evidence of three maternal
lineages in near eastern sheep supporting multiple domestication events.
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 272 (1577),
2211–2217.
Pereira, F., Queirós, S., Gusmão, L., et al., 2009. Tracing the history of goat
pastoralism: New clues from mitochondrial and Y chromosome DNA in North
Africa. Molecular Biology and Evolution 26 (12), 2765–2773.
Rass, N., 2006. Policies and strategies to address the vulnerability of pastoralists in
Sub-Saharan Africa. Living from Livestock: Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative.
PPLPI Working Paper No. 37. Rome: FAO.
Ridgewell, A., Flintan, F. (Eds.), 2007. Gender and Pastoralism.Volume II:
Livelihoods and Income Development in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: SOS
Sahel.
Safilios, R.C., 1983. Women in sheep and goat production and marketing. FAO
Expert Consultation on Women in Food Production. ESH/WIFP/83/8. Rome, Italy:
FAO.
Sardina, M.T., Ballister, M., Marmi, J., et al., 2006. Phylogenetic analysis of Sicilian
goats reveals a new mtDNA lineage. Animal Genetics 37 (4), 376–378.
Sidahmed, A.E., 1996. The rangelands of arid and semi-arid areas: Challenges and
hopes for the 2000s. Keynote address to Symposium D, Range Management to
the International Conference on Desert Development in the Arab Gulf Countries.
IFAD Technical Working Paper No. 29. Kuwait: Kuwait Institute for Scientific
Research.
Sikana, P.M., Kerven, C.K., Behnke, R.H., 1993. From subsistence to specialized
commodity production: Commercialization and pastoral dairying in Africa.
Pastoral Development Network Paper 34d. London: Overseas Development
Institute.
Smith, B., Aseltine, M., Kennedy, G., 1997. Beginning Shepherd's Manual, second
ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2012. National Agricultural Library.
Washington, DC: National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Nutrient
Data Library.
United Nations, 2010. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Rome, Italy:
FAOSTAT.
Vrba, E.S., Schaller, G.B. (Eds.), 2000. Antelopes, Deer and Relatives. New Haven &
London: Yale University Press.
Waters-Bayer, A., 1995. Living with livestock in town: Urban animal husbandry and
human welfare. Keynote paper presented at the Eighth International Conference of
Institutions of Tropical Veterinary Medicine. Livestock Production and Diseases
in the Tropics: Livestock Production and Human Welfare. Berlin, Germany.
Leusden, the Netherlands: ETC Foundation.
Weaver, S., 2005. Sheep: Small-Scale Sheep Keeping for Pleasure and Profit.
Burroughs Irvine, CA: Hobby Farm Press, an imprint of BowTie Press, a division
of BowTie Inc.
Wilson, R.T. (Ed.), 1991. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper. Rome: FAO.
Zeder, M.A., 2008. Domestication and early agriculture in the Mediterranean Basin:
Origins, diffusion, and impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
PNAS 105 (33), 11597–11604.
132 Small Ruminants in Smallholder Integrated Production Systems

Zeder, M.A., Hesse, B., 2000. The initial domestication of goats (Capra hircus) in http://www.sheep101.info
the Zagros Mountains 10,000 years ago. Science 28 (7), 2254–2257. Sheep General Information.
http://www.sheepandgoat.com
Sheep Production.
Relevant Websites http://www.unep.org
United Nations Environment Program.
http://merckvetmanual.com http://fao.org
Animal Diseases. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.
http://www.britannica.com http://www.ifad.org
Britannica Encyclopedia. United Nations International Fund for Agricultural Development.
http://www.dagris.ilri.org http://usaid.gov
U.S. Agency for International Development.
International Livestock Research Institute.
http://usda.gov
http://www.sciencepub.net/nature U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Scientific Articles. http://worldbank.org
http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds World Bank.
Sheep Breeds.