Wudpecker Journal of Agricultural Research ISSN 2315-7259

Vol. 2(9), pp. 256 - 262, September 2013 2013 Wudpecker Journals

Village chicken production systems in Metekel zone,

Northwest Ethiopia
Solomon Zewdu*, Binyam Kassa, Bilatu Agza and Ferede Alemu
Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), P.O. Box -2003, Ethiopia.

*Corresponding author email address: szaltaye@gmail.com.

Accepted 29 August 2013

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Metekel zone, Northwest of Ethiopia to assess village
chicken production systems, productive and reproductive performance of village chicken and
identifying constraints to village chicken production. Stratified random sampling technique was
used to select 160 farming households and administer a pre-tested and structured questionnaire.
The average flock size per household was 13.68±0.62. Only 48% of chicken owners prepared a
separate overnight houses/shelters for birds. The average age of indigenous pullets and cockerels
at first mating was 5.2±1.16 and 5.44±1.3 months, respectively. The total number of
clutches/hen/year was 4.29±0.17 with an average of 13.56±0.26 eggs/clutch. The average egg
hatchability was 84.74%. Seasonal disease outbreaks, mainly Newcastle disease, and predation
were the major causes of chicken loss in the districts. Household division of labor engages women
more on various chicken husbandry activities. Respondents prioritized lack of credit service, limited
skill of management practices and low productivity of the local chicken as major constraints to
chicken production. Thus, technical and institutional interventions are very crucial to alleviate the
prevailing constraints and transform the existing traditional/subsistence chicken production system
to semi-commercial production system in the study area.

Keywords: village chicken production systems, Metekel, Ethiopia.

INTRODUCTION

In most developing countries rural poultry play
significant roles of improving the nutritional status,
income, food security and livelihood of many
smallholders (Abubaker et al., 2007; Alders and Pym,
2009). In Ethiopia, village chickens are an integral
component of the farming system of nearly all rural
families, and they account for about 99% of the poultry
production system (Tadelle et al., 2003) and for more
than 90% of the chicken and egg output of the country
(Nigussie et al., 2010).
Village chicken production fits quite well with the
conditions of rural households due small feed cost,
space requirement and low price of the animals
(Solomon, 2003). In addition, the local chicken sector
constitutes a significant contribution to human livelihood
by being affordable sources of animal protein and
contributes significantly to food security of poor
households (Reta, 2009).
Despite its importance, village chicken production
system in Ethiopia is generally characterized by poor
performance of local chicken in terms of egg
production, small egg size, slow growth rate, late
maturity, an instinctive inclination to broodiness and
high mortality of chicks (Teketel, 1986; Aberra, 2000;
Nigussie et al., 2003; Solomon, 2003). On the other
hand, local chickens are known for their ability to resist
disease, thermo-tolerance, good egg and meat flavor,
hard eggshells, high fertility and hatchability (Aberra,
2000).
According to Besbes (2009) and Hunduma et al.
(2010), changing production systems and
indiscriminate cross-breeding are the major treats to
indigenous breeds. Recently, efforts are being made to
increase the productivity of indigenous chickens of
Ethiopia through selective breeding (Nigussie et al.,
2010). According to Solkner et al. (1998), success of
such breeding programs on village chicken requires
defining the production environment and identifying
breeding practices, production objectives and trait of
choice of rural farmers. Moreover, to design appropriate
development intervention programs on village chicken
production, characterization of the production system
and understanding the socio-economic implications are
crucial (Gueye, 1998; Pedersen, 2002).
Due to poor agricultural extension service, however,
there is no documented information pertaining to the
resource base, productivity and management of the
chickens and the constraints in the study area. The
objective of the study was to assess production system,
productive and reproductive performance of village
chickens and to identify production constraints in
Metekel zone.
257 Wudpecker J. Agric. Res.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study area and sampling procedure
The study was conducted in Metekel zone of
Benishangul Gumuz Regional State, Northwest
Ethiopia. About 80% of the zone is characterized by
having sub-humid and humid tropical climate. The
topography of the zone presents undulating hills slightly
sloping down to low land Plateaus having an altitude
range from 600-2800 meters above sea level.
According to Engda (2000) the surrounding of Metekel
zone has a wide climatic range varied from hot to warm
moist lowlands (M1) and hot to warm sub humid
lowlands (SH1) agro-ecological zones.
To obtain the sample households, a three stage
stratified sampling technique was employed. First,
based on criteria related to altitude, land use system,
district’s situation in representing the zone, ethnic group
and socio-cultural settings and ease of accessibility,
four districts namely Guba (700 masl), Pawe (1120
masl), Dibate (1200 masl), and Wombera (2400 masl)
were chosen for the study. From each district 5 Villages
or Kebeles were chosen at random. From each village
8 households were randomly chosen to reflect the
existing tribal settlements giving a total of 40
households per district.
Source of data and analytical technique
Data were collected using multiple subject formal
survey using a pre-tested, structured questionnaire.
Data collected include: household characteristics
(family size, farmland holding and chicken flock size per
household) and various performance related
parameters of chickens (age at first mating, number of
clutches per year, clutch length, eggs/hen per year and
inter clutch). Qualitative and quantitative data sets were
analyzed statistically using Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS) software, version 20.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Socio-economic characteristics and respondents
profile
The interviewed households were from Amhara
(28.13%), Gumuz (25%), Shinasha (22.5%), Oromo
(13.75%) and others (10.63%) like Kemebata, Agew,
Tigre, Wolayita and Hadiya nationality. Results showed
that from the total of 160 households’ interviewed
69.4% were males and 31.6% were females. The
average age of the respondents was 41.02 years. The
mean family size was 4.06 members per household.
Overall, 61.25% of the households were followers of
the Orthodox Christian church and the rest 33.13,
5.63% were Muslims and Protestants, respectively. Out
of the total household members found in the 160
2
households, 30.07 and 12.04% of the household
members had primary, and secondary school and
above education, respectively. The rest 39.65% of the
household members had no formal education and
18.05% could read and write.
The average landholding per household was
2.49±0.19 ha which is higher than the 1.28 ha reported
by Halima (2007) in Northwest Ethiopia, and the
national average of 1.02 ha (EEA, 2002). The
proportion of land allocated to crop production and
grazing was 76.1 and 21.3% of the total farm size
respectively, indicating the major proportion of land
owned by the households was used for crop
production.
The remaining 2.6% of the land is occupied by
trees/fruits and living quarters. In the study area, the
average livestock holding per household was 9.41±0.77
cattle, 8.12±1.05 goats, 5.17±1.05 sheep, 1.17±0.12
mule, 1.42±0.08 donkey, and 13.68±0.62 chickens.
Livestock are kept as sources of draft power; milk,
meat, skin and hides, and they are also the main
sources of income and are closely linked to the social
and cultural lives of the community.
Gender involvement in village chicken management
Decision-making, ownership and division of labor on
chicken production in the households of the study area
are shown in Figure 1. Gender involvement of the study
area is similar to the report of Mcainsh et al. (2004) and
Leta and Endalew (2010) who indicated that most of
the time the women and children are responsible for
chicken rearing, while the men are responsible for other
off- farm activities in Zimbabwe and Ethiopia
respectively. The results of the study showed that
decision on activities to be made including selling of
eggs and chicken was mainly made by men (61%)
followed by consulting among men and women
(16.35%), and women (12.58%).
All family members in the household participated in
chicken management practices, although the level of
participation varied. Men were mainly responsible for
construction of shelters, while women were mainly
responsible for activities like cleaning, provision of
water and selling of eggs and chicken. Children were
also participated in the various chicken husbandry
activities by their own or together with other family
members.
According to Fetsum et al. (2009), in the study area,
although both husband and wife have equal ownership
over their livestock, culturally men are empowered to
give final decisions, however women have full access
to market and control over benefits from sales of
chicken, butter and eggs. As village chickens are easily
managed within homesteads, they can easily be
managed by women, thus participating women in
chicken production programs increases both production
efficiency as well as women’s income (Aboul-Ella,
1992; Kitalyi, 1998).

Figure 1. Decision making, ownership and division of labor on village chicken husbandry in Metekel Zone, Ethiopia.
Farming system
The results of the study showed that the respondents’
entire are occupied in agricultural activities dominated
by mixed crop-livestock production, which accounts
94.2% of the farmers and the rest 5.8% were involved
only in livestock production. Village chicken production
is an important component of the mixed farming
system. Type of crops grown in the study area vary with
the agro-ecological zone and includes cereals (maize,
sorghum, finger millet, wheat and teff), oil crops
(sesame, Niger seed and groundnuts), pulses (mainly
haricot beans and soya beans), vegetables, fruits
(mainly mango and papaya) and root crops (mainly
potato and sweat potato).
Flock structure
In the present study the average flock size was
13.68±0.62 (range 11.75-17.2) birds per flock (Table 1).
The survey result obtained in the current study is
similar to the work done by Gueye (1997), and Leta and
Endalew (2010), who reported average flock size of 13
birds for African village households and Mid Rift Valley
of Ethiopia, respectively. Chicken population in Pawe
district appears to have significantly (p<0.05) the
highest in all age groups followed by Dibate and
smaller population was recorded in Wombera and
Guba districts. The flock structure in the study area is
comparable with results of Kitalyi (1998), who reported
on average 3.49 hens, 1.31 cocks, 1.66 growers and
2.87 chicks for village flocks of Ethiopia.
The age structure indicates that chicks are the
highest population and as the age of the chicken
increase the population number decreases. Male adult
chickens have smaller proportion than adult female
chickens as they are frequently marketed, when the
female ones are retained for egg production. Farmers
were incubating eggs by natural means (broody hens)
Zewdu et al. 258
to raise their own replacement stock.
Purposes of chicken production
The results from this study as identified and prioritized
by the respondents showed that purposes of chicken
production were for cash income (98.6%), household
consumption (95.2%), extra farm activity (82.8%), job
opportunity (60%), use of chicken for cultural/religious
ceremonies (39.3%), and to use them as a gift (20%).
According to Moges et al. (2010) sale of live chicken
was the first important function of rearing chicken in
Fogera (77.8%) and Dale (43.7%) districts of Ethiopia.
Chicken husbandry practices
Feeds and feeding
Scavenging was the major feeding system in the
study area. However, the farmers were found to
supplement their chickens occasionally with household
refuse and grains (mainly paddy rice, maize and
sorghum) during dry (92.5%) and rainy (7.5%) seasons
(Table 2).
Overall, 83.6% of the respondents were feeding their
chicken flock in group and the rest 16.4% of the
respondents fed separately to the different age classes
of chickens. Results also showed that 48.7, 33.6 and
17.7% of the farmers provide supplementation for
chickens in the morning before scavenge, at any time
of the day and both in the morning before scavenge
and at any time of the day, respectively. As a result of
supplementing their chickens, most of the farmers
(65.4%) observed improvement in egg and meat
production and earned better market price, while the
rest observed only increased egg production (18.8%),
meat production (7.5%) and market price (3.8%).
According to Gunaratne et al. (1993), small amounts of
259 Wudpecker J. Agric. Res.

Table 1. Chicken flock structure by district and flock size (Mean±SE) per household in four districts of Metekel
zone, Ethiopia.

District
Chicken age group Grand mean
Pawe Dibate Wombera Guba
Chicks 0-8 weeks of age 6.68±0.94 6.17±0.58 3.6±0.65 4.05±0.77 5.12±0.38
Pullets 8-20 weeks of age 3.3±0.37 2.4±0.18 2.23±0.35 2.95±0.32 2.72±0.16
Cockerel 8-20 weeks of age 2.18±0.3 1.52±0.11 1.88±0.23 1±0.19 1.64±0.11
Layers > 20 weeks of age 3.28±0.44 2.12±0.19 1.92±0.18 2.85±0.31 2.54±0.15
Cocks >20 weeks of age 1.78±0.35 1.65±0.41 2.13±0.67 1.03±0.26 1.64±0.23
a ab b b
Total fock size 17.2±1.46 13.88±0.91 11.75±1.25 11.88±1.12 13.68±0.62
Means with different superscripts within a row are significantly different (P < 0.05).

Table 2. Feed resources and feeding practice of chickens in four districts of Metekel zone, Ethiopia.

District Total
Variables
Pawe Dibate Wombera Gublack Percent
Practice of supplementation (yes) 97.5 80 97.5 94.9 92.5
Feeds used for supplementation
Maize grain 77.5 55 77.5 47.5 64.4
Sorghum grain 72.5 42.5 62.5 95 68.1
Rice (paddy rice) 27.5 0 0 0 6.9
Broken maize, sorghum and rice grains 20 12.5 42.5 10 21.3
Spoiled grains 10 20 40 10 20
Food left over 57.5 52.5 50 35 48.8
Kitchen left over 7.5 0 57.5 10 18.8
Change due to supplementation (yes) 87.2 58.8 92.3 97.5 84.9
Season for shortage of grain supplements
Rainy season (May-October) 87.5 100 100 82.5 92.5
Dry season (November-May) 12.5 0 0 17.5 7.5

strategically administered supplements are likely to
increase production and minimize mortality once the
other constraints have been tackled.
Results revealed that 92.5% of the households
provide water for their chickens' regularly. Water
sources used by the households in the study area were
river (30.5%), spring (20.8%), tap water (19.5%), well
water (12.3%) and in different combinations of these
sources (16.9%).
Housing
Only 48% of the respondents constructed separate
houses for their birds; the other 52% kept in various
overnight sheltering places. Results also showed that
houses/night shelters were made using locally available
materials such as bamboo for making ceilings (86.7%),
mud blocks and hat (11.1%), a house made of iron
sheet roof (1.5%) and basket made of bamboo (0.7%).
The sites are secure overnight places to protect from
predators. According to Bell and Abdou (1995), large
proportion of village poultry in most African countries is
lost due to nocturnal predators.
Breeding
Results revealed that 63.1% of the respondents were
trying to improve the genetic potential of local chicken
through selection based on egg production history
(59.4%), body weight (44.3%) and feather colour
(25.5%). Selection were made on males (55.2%),
females (20%) and both male and females (24.8%).
Nigussie et al. (2010) reported that beside other
quantitative traits, morphologic traits such as plumage
color and comb type have significant economic values.
In addition to selection, 37.1% households were
upgrading the genetic potential of the local chicken
through crossbreeding with exotic breeds. Exotic
breeds used for crossbreeding include Rhode Island
Red (RIR) (82.5%), White Leghorn (WL) (5.3%) and
both RIR and WL (12.3%). The farmers had these
exotic birds mainly from Woreda agricultural office as
poultry extension packages to improve the productivity
of local chickens.
Performance of village chickens
Production performance
The average age of indigenous pullets and cockerels at
first mating was 5.2±1.16 and 5.44±1.3 months
respectively (Table 3). These findings are comparable
with the 5 and 7 months reported by Halima (2007) and
Moges et al. (2010) for indigenous birds in Northwest
Ethiopia. The female chicken is generally reported to
 Zewdu et al. 260

Table 3. Production performance of local chickens in four districts of Metekel zone, Ethiopia.

District Grand
Variables
Pawe Dibate Wombera Guba mean
st abc b abc c
Average age of cockerels at 1 mating (months) 5.41±1.53 5.83±1.37 5.51±1.14 4.92±0.90 5.44±1.30
st a a a a
Average age of local pullets at 1 mating (months) 5.22±1.18 5.26±1.10 5.42±1.26 4.9±1.09 5.2±1.16
a ab ab b
Average number of eggs/hen/ clutch 14.72±0.64 13.98±0.59 13.46±0.42 12.15±0.37 13.56±0.26
a b b b
Number of clutches/hen/ year 6.11±0.49 4.00±0.29 3.38±0.18 3.79±0.12 4.29±0.17
a b b b
Total egg production/hen/ year 93.19±6.79 56.03±4.74 45.38±2.79 46.10±2.03 59.51±2.66
a a a a
Weaning age (weeks) 7.49±0.56 9.55±0.77 9.00±1.26 8.03±0.48 8.51±0.40
a a a a
Reproductive life span of hens (year) 3.82±0.38 3.49±0.27 3.41±0.24 3.53±0.20 3.56±0.14
a a a a
Reproductive life span of male chicken (year) 4.53±0.43 3.92±0.26 3.18±0.15 3.51±0.22 3.79±0.15
a,b,c
Least square means with different superscripts within a raw are significantly different (P < 0.05)

Table 4. Hatchability and brooding performance of indigenous hens (using medium and large size broody hens), in four districts
of Metekel Zone, Ethiopia.

District
Variables Total
Pawe Dibate Wombera Guba
Choice of broody hen size
Large body size 84.8 90.5 87.5 85.7 87
Medium body size 15.2 9.5 12.5 14.3 13
Source of egg for brooding
Home laid 80 90 92.3 100 90.6
Hatchability by medium body size broody hen
Number of eggs set 12.73±0.36 11.65±0.39 12.86±0.45 10.30±0.34 11.8±3.21
Hatchability % 82.38 79.04 76.68 74.76 78.62
Hatchability by large body size broody hen
Number of eggs set 15.21±0.37 14.88±0.40 16.91±0.47 12.40±0.47 14.74±0.25
Hatchability % 89.1 82.81 80.91 84.41 84.74

mature late with values ranging from 6 months in Mali
and Nigeria (Sonaiya, 1989), 7 months in Tanzania
(Katule, 1992), 8 months in Sudan (Wilson, 1979), and
7 to 9 months in Benin (Assan, 1990).
The average egg production per hen per clutch of
local hens, under existing farmer management
condition, was 13.56±0.26 (range 12.15-14.72). The
number of clutch periods recorded per year was
4.29±0.17 (range 3.38-6.11) giving a total of 59.51±2.66
(range 45.38-93.19) per hen per year (Table 3). The
number of eggs per clutch found in the current study
falls within the range (9–19 eggs/clutch) reported by
Halima (2007) in Northwest Ethiopia. Moges et al.
(2010) also reported similar values, 15.7, 13.2 and
14.9eggs/hen/clutch and total egg production/hen/year
of 60, 53 and 55, in Bure, Fogera and Dale districts of
Ethiopia, respectively.
Reproductive performance
Data on hatchability and brooding performance of
indigenous hens are presented in Table 4. Over all, in
the four districts, the average number of eggs set per
hen was 14.74±0.25 (range 12.40-16.91) with a
hatchability of 84.7%. The average number of eggs set
for natural incubation and hatchability percentage in
this study are in agreement with the report of Moges et
al. (2010). These authors reported 13 eggs (ranged 7–
22) with hatchability percentage of 82.6 and 89.1 at
Bure and Dale districts of Ethiopia, respectively.
Results revealed that 82.5, 47.5, 38.5 and 12.5%
village chicken owners in Pawe, Dibate, Wombera and
Guba, respectively, have a culture of selecting broody
hens for egg incubation purposes. Overall, 87 and 13%
of the respondents used large and medium body size
as a selection criterion for broody hens. Similarly, a
study by Moges et al. (2010) showed that 66.7% of the
respondents use large body size as a selection criterion
for broody hens in Fogera district of Ethiopia.
Constraints on village chicken production
Diseases, mainly Newcastle, and predation were the
major constraints in all areas surveyed. Other
constraints included the lack of technical information,
capital and credit services to expand production
through improved feeding, and housing. Both incidence
of chicken disease and predator attack were found to
be higher in the wet season (May to November) than in
the dry season (October to April). Newcastle disease
(Serkalem et al. 2005) and predator attack (Halima,
2007) have also been reported as a major constraints
to chicken production in central and Northwest Ethiopia.
Moreover, due to low productivity of village chickens,
98.1% of the farmers indicated their interest towards
having exotic breeds. Although 37.5 % households
261 Wudpecker J. Agric. Res.
crossbred the locals with exotic breeds, due to poor
management practices in terms of feeding, housing and
health provision, the farmers didn’t achieve sustainable
improvements from the improved exotic breeds and/or
the cross-breeds. A study by Kitalyi (1998) also
indicated that there have not been major changes in the
production levels of village chickens as a result of such
cross-breeding programs for various reasons.
Conclusion and Recommendation
The results of the present study show that village
chicken plays a significant role in the livelihood of the
farming community of Metekel zone. It serves as
source of income and as an affordable source of animal
protein, and chickens are also used in many social and
cultural or religious ceremonies. As in the other parts of
the country, the productivity of village chicken in the
study area is generally low. Newcastle disease followed
by predator attack was the major constraints to chicken
production in the study area. Other constraints included
lack of capital and credit service to expand their
chicken production, poor management practices on
feeding, housing and disease control, lack of technical
information and low productivity of the local chicken.
Together, these factors resulted in low level of
productivity and decreased the direct benefit of the
farmers. To alleviate the prevailing constraints and
transform the existing traditional/subsistence village
chicken production system to a semi-commercial one,
intervention options need to base on the production
systems and identify and prioritize constraints in the
study area.
Acknowledgments
We thank district’s agriculture office experts and key
informants of the community in the study area for
understanding and passing the purpose of the project
to the subordinates down to livestock farmers to the
Kebele level. We are also grateful to the interviewed
farmers for their active participation in sharing their
knowledge and time.
REFERENCES
Aberra M (2000). Comparative studies on performance
and physiological responses of Ethiopian indigenous
(‘Angete-melata’) chicken and their F1 crosses to
long term heat stress. PhD thesis. Martin-Luther
University, Halle-Wittenberg, Berlin, Germany. 182
pp.
Aboul-Ella S (1992). Women of the developing
countries and their role in poultry. In Proceedings,
19th World Poultry Congress, Amsterdam, the
Netherlands, 20–24 September 1992. 2:697-700.
Abubakar MB, Ambali AG, Tamjdo T (2007). Rural
6
chicken production: Effects of gender on ownership,
and management responsibilities in some parts of
Nigeria and Cameroon. Int. J. poultry Sci., 6(6):413-
416.
Alders RG, Pym RAE (2009). Village poultry: still
important to millions, eight thousand years after
domestication. Worlds Poultry Sci. J., 65(2):181-190.
Assan BE (1990). Lelevage Villageois de la Volaille en
Republique du Benin: Situation Actuelle. CTA
seminar, proc on smallholder rural poultry production,
Thessaloniki, Greece, 2:17-26.
Bell JG, Abdou I (1995). Dynamics of village poultry
production in the Keita region of Niger. Nig. J. Anim.
Prod., 22:141-144.
Besbes B (2009). Genotype evaluation and breeding of
poultry for performance under suboptimal village
conditions. World’s Poultry Sci. J., 65:260-27.
EEA (Ethiopia Economic Association) (2002). Land
tenure and agricultural development in Ethiopia.
Ethiopia Economic Policy Research Institute, Addis
Ababa.
Engda M (2000). Agro-climatic classification of
Ethiopia. Ethiopian J. Nat. Resour. 2(2): 115-135.
Fetsum S, Solomon Z, Mikias D, Yigremachew S,
Demeke M, Gizachew W, Yeshi C (2009). Gender
Based Participatory Rural Appraisal of Farming
Systems in Wombera, Bullen and Guba Woredas. In
Gender Differentials for Planning Agricultural
Research. Proc. of the Workshop on Gender Analysis
in Agricultural Research. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, pp:
161-187.
Gueye EF (1997). Diseases in Village Chickens:
Control through Ethno-veterinary Medicine. ILEIA
Newsletter, 13(2):20-21.
Gueye EF (1998). Village egg and fowl meat production
in Africa. World’s Poultry Sci. J., 54:73-86.
Gunaratne SP, Chandrasiri ADN, Mangalika Hemalatha
WAP, Roberts JA (1993). Feed resource base for
scavenging village chickens in Sri Lanka. Trop. Anim.
Health and Prod., 25:249-257.
Halima H (2007). Phenotypic and genetic
characterization of indigenous chicken populations in
North-West Ethiopia. PhD thesis. Faculty of natural
and agricultural sciences, department of animal,
wildlife and grassland Sciences. University of the
Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.
Hunduma D, Regassa C, Fufa D, Endalew B, Samson
L (2010). Major constraints and health management
of village poultry production in rift valley of Oromia,
Ethiopia. American-Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci.,
9:529-533. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Katule AM (1992). Study on the potential value of
indigenous chickens to Tanzania. African Network for
Rural Poultry Development Newsletter, 2:4.
Kitalyi AJ (1998). Village chicken production systems in
rural Africa. Rome, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the
Leta S, Endalew B (2010). Survey on Village Based
Chicken Production and Utilization System in Mid Rift
Valley of Oromia, Ethiopia. Global Veterinaria

5(4):198-203.
Mcainsh CV, Kusina J, Madsen J, Nyoni O (2004).
Traditional chicken production in Zimbabwe. World’s
Poultry Sci., 60: 233-246.
Moges F, Azage T, Dessie T (2010). Indigenous
chicken production and marketing systems in
Ethiopia: Characteristics and opportunities for
market-oriented development. IPMS (Improving
Productivity and Market Success) of Ethiopian
Farmers Project Working Paper 24. Nairobi, Kenya,
ILRI.
Nigussie D, Alemu Y, Tadelle D, Samuel W (2003). On-
station and on-farm evaluation of the ‘hay-Box chick
brooder’ using different insulation materials at Debre
Zeit Agricultural Research Center and Denbi village,
Adaa woreda. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual
conference of the Ethiopian Society of Animal
Production (ESAP), August 21-23, held in Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia. pp. 211-216.
Nigussie D, Van der Waaij LH, Dessie T, Van Arendonk
JAM (2010). Production objectives and Trait
preferences of village poultry producers of Ethiopia:
implications for designing breeding schemes utilizing
indigenous chicken genetic resources. Trop. Anim.
Health Prod. 42:1519-529.
Pedersen C (2002). Production of semi-scavenging
chickens in Zimbabwe. PhD thesis. Royal Veterinary
and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark.
213pp.
Serkalem T, Hagos A, Zeleke A (2005). Sero-
prevalence study of Newcastle disease in local
chickens in central Ethiopia. International Journal of
Applied Research Vet. Med., 3(1):25-29.
Zewdu et al. 262
Solomon D (2003). Growth performance and survival of
local and White Leghorn chickens under scavenging
and intensive systems of management in Ethiopia.
Livestock Research for Rural Development (15)11
www.Irrd.org/Irrd15/11/deme1511.htm.
Sonaiya EB, Olori VE (1989). Village chicken
production in Southwestern Nigeria. In proceedings of
an International workshop on Rural Poultry
Development in Africa, 13-16 November 1989, IIE-Ife,
Nigeria, pp: 243-247.
Tadelle D, Million T, Alemu Y, Peters KJ (2003). Village
chicken production systems in Ethiopia: Use patterns
and performance valuation and chicken products and
socio-economic functions of chicken. Livestock
Research for Rural Development (15):1.
Teketel Forsido (1986). Studies on the meat production
potential of some local strains of chicken in Ethiopia.
PhD thesis. JL University of Giessen, Germany.
210pp.
United Nations, FAO Animal Production and Health
paper No. 142:81.
Wilson RT (1979). Studies on the Livestock of Southern
Darfur, Sudan. VII. Production of Poultry under
Simulated Traditional Conditions. Trop. Anim. Health
Prod., 11:143-150.