Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T18:58:19.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The donkey as a draught power resource in smallholder farming in semi-arid western Zimbabwe: 1. Live weight and food and water requirements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

E.M. Nengomasha ,
R.A. Pearson  and
T. Smith
E.M. Nengomasha
Affiliation:
Department of Research and Specialist Services, Matopos Research, Station P. Bag K 5137, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
R.A. Pearson
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Easter Bush, Roślin, Midlothian EH25 9RG
T. Smith*
Affiliation:
Department of Research and Specialist Services, Matopos Research, Station P. Bag K 5137, Bulawayo, Zimbabwe
*
†Present adddress: Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6AT.
Get access

Abstract

Three experiments were undertaken to assess the Zimbabwean donkey. In the first study, 191 male and 144 female working donkeys from Matopos, Nkayi and Matobo districts were weighed. Age, sex and coat colour were recorded and heart girth, umbilical girth, body length and height were measured. There were no differences (P > 0⋅05) in live weight, 142 and 141 kg, heart girth 115 and 115 cm, body length 89 and 90 cm and height 105 and 105 cm between males and females. This suggests that draught potential might be similar between the sexes. Heart girth was the best single predictor of live weight: live weight (kg) = heart girth (cm)2⋅83/4786 (R2 = 0⋅86). Donkeys were similar in size to others in Africa. In the second study, the voluntary dry-matter intake (DMI) of a poor quality hay was measured for 35 days in nine male (mean live weight 150 kg) and nine female donkeys (142 kg) allocated to one of three treatment groups: water available ad libitum, or given every 48 h, or every 72 h. There were significant differences in daily water (P < 0.001) and DMIs (P < 0.05): 8.5, 4.9 and 5.1l and 3.1, 2.8 and 2.7 kg for the three treatment groups, respectively. However even with restricted access to water, donkeys maintained a relatively high DMI. In the third experiment a 3 Х 3 Latin square was designed with three teams of four male donkeys each, either working (5 h/day) I no access to food (5 h/day); not working/no access to food (5 h/day) or not working/access to food 24 h/day, for 63 days. For working and non-working donkeys, there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in DMI, DM apparent digestibility and mean retention time (MRT) of hay. Time of access to food did not influence DMI. The apparent lack of response was attributed primarily to the poor quality of the hay.

Keywords

donkeysdigestibilityfood intakelive weightwater intakework
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 69 , Issue 2 , October 1999 , pp. 297 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1990. Official methods of analysis (15th edition). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bartholomew, P.W., Khibe, T., Little, D.A. and Ba, S. 1993. Effect of change in body weight and condition during the dry season on capacity for work of draft oxen. Tropical Animal Health and Production 25: 50–58.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K.L., Graham, N. McC. and Wainman, F.W. 1956. Some observations on the digestibility of food by sheep and on related problems. British journal of Nutrition 10: 69–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bliss, D.H. 1989. Parasites abroad. In The professional handbook of the donkey (ed. Svendsen, E.D.), pp. 95–100. The Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, UK.Google Scholar
Bwakura, T. 1994. Characterization of the Zimbabwean donkey (Equus asinus): its management, foraging behaviour and body characteristics. M.Sc. thesis, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zimbabwe.Google Scholar
Camac, R.O. 1989. Introduction and origins of the donkey. In The professional handbook of the donkey (ed. Svendsen, E.D.), pp. 1–8. The Donkey Sanctuary, Sidmouth, Devon, UK.Google Scholar
Central Statistics Office. 1997. Agriculture and livestock survey in Communal Lands 1994/95. Central Statistics Office, Harare, Zimbabwe.Google Scholar
Clapperton, J.L. 1964. The effect of walking upon the utilization of food by sheep. British Journal of Nutrition 18: 39–46.Google Scholar
Dill, D.B., Yousef, M.K., Cox, C.R. and Barton, R.G. 1980. Hunger versus thirst in the burro (Equus asinus). Physiology and Behaviour 24: 975–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eley, J.L. and French, J.M. 1993. Estimating the bodyweight of donkeys. Veterinary Record 132: 250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellis-Jones, J., Muvirimi, F., Nengomasha, E.M. and Msara, P. 1994. A rapid rural appraisal of Semukwe, Chikwanda and Sebungwe communal farming areas (with emphasis on the use of draught animals). Project working document no. 1. OD/94/20. Natural Resources International, Chatham, Kent, UK.Google Scholar
Goering, H.K., and Van Soest, P.J. 1970. Forage fiber analysis (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). Agricultural handbook no. 379. ARS, USDA, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Houpt, T.R. 1993. Water and electrolytes. In Dukes’ physiology of domestic animals, 11th edition, (ed. Swenson, M.J. and Reece, W.O.), pp. 9–21. Comstock Publishing Associates, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London.Google Scholar
Jones, N.L., Houpt, K.A. and Houpt, T.R. 1989. Stimuli of thirst in donkeys (Equus asinus). Physiology and Behaviour 46: 661–665.Google Scholar
Jones, P. 1991. Overcoming ignorance about donkeys in Zimbabwe — a case study. In Donkeys, mules and horses in tropical agricultural development (ed. Fielding, D. and Pearson, R.A.), pp. 311–318. Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Maloiy, G.M.O. 1970. Water economy of the Somali donkey. American journal of Physiology 219:1522–1527.Google Scholar
Mason, I.L. and Maule, J.P. 1960. The indigenous livestock of eastern and southern Africa. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham Royal, Buckinghamshire, UK.Google Scholar
Mathers, J.C., Baber, R.P. and Archibald, R.F. 1989. Intake, digestion and gastrointestinal transit time in Asiatic buffaloes and Ayrshire cattle given two contrasting diets and housed at 20°C and 33°C. journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 113: 211–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minitab Inc. 1994. Minitab for Windows version 10.5. State College, Pennsylvania, USA.Google Scholar
Mueller, P.J. 1996. Energy metabolism in the working donkey, Equus asinus. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Mueller, P.J. and Houpt, K.A. 1991. A comparison of the responses of donkeys (Equus asinus) and ponies (Equus caballus) to 36 hours of water deprivation. In Donkeys, mules and horses in tropical agricultural development (ed. Fielding, D. and Pearson, R.A.), pp. 86–95. Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Orton, R.K., Hume, I.D. and Leng, R.A. 1985. Effects of level of dietary protein and exercise on growth rates of horses. Equine Veterinary Journal 17: 381–385.Google Scholar
Pearson, R.A. and Merritt, J. 1991. Intake, digestion and gastrointestinal transit time in resting donkeys and ponies and exercised donkeys given ad libitum hay and straw diets. Equine Veterinary Journal 23: 339–343.Google Scholar
Pearson, R.A. and Ouassat, M. 1996. Estimation of the liveweight and body condition of working donkeys in Morocco. Veterinary Record 138: 229–233.Google Scholar
Reh, I. 1982. Animal husbandry and veterinary aspects. In Animal traction in Africa (ed. Muzinger, P.), pp. 67–132. Deutsche Geselleschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH, Eschborn, Germany.Google Scholar
Schmidt-Nielsen, K. 1964. Desert animals. Physiological problems of heat and water. Oxford University Press, UK.Google Scholar
Tutt, J.F.D. 1987. The examination of the mouth for age. In Veterinary notes for horse owners, 17th edition (ed. Hayes, M. and Horace, H. revised by Rossdale, P.D.), pp. 512–526. Stanley Paul, London.Google Scholar
Udén, P., Colucci, P.E. and Van Soest, P.J. 1980. Investigation of chromium, cerium and cobalt as markers in digesta. Rate of passage studies. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 31: 625–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, R.T. 1981. Distribution and importance of the domestic donkey in circum-Saharan Africa. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 2: 136–143.Google Scholar