Journal Search Engine

ISSN : 1225-8504(Print)
ISSN : 2287-8165(Online)

Journal of the Korean Society of International Agriculture Vol.33 No.3 pp.240-246
DOI : https://doi.org/10.12719/KSIA.2021.33.3.240

Increase in Egg Production in Households using Low Cost Rations as Feeds for Indigenous Chickens in Kenya

Innocent Kariuki^*†, Soonsung Hong^**

, Sukwon Kang^**

, Geoffrey Ngae^*, Kee Jong Kim^***, Salome Nyaga^****, Nicholas Mwangi^*, Alice Kanyotu^*****, Murimi Nyaga^******

^*KALRO-Food Crops Research Centre – Muguga, P.O. Box 30148-00100, Nairobi, Kenya
^**KOPIA Africa Team, Technical Cooperation Bureau, RDA, Jeonju, 54875, Korea
^***KOPIA-Kenya Centre, P.O. Box 13987-00800, Nairobi, Kenya
^****Tharaka Nithi County Livestock Office, P.O. Box 10-60406, Kathwana, Kenya
^*****Manyatta sub-county Livestock Office, P.O. Box 672-60100, Embu, Kenya
^******Embu County Livestock Office, P.O. Box 36-60100, Embu, Kenya

^† Corresponding author (Phone) +254721422978 (E-mail) iwkariuki2002@gmail.com

Received May 24, 2021 Review June 11, 2021 Accepted September 8, 2021

Abstract

The low productivity of indigenous chickens in Kenya and other parts of the world is partly attributed to poor management practices, in particular the lack of proper healthcare, poor housing and nutrition. However, studies have shown that poor nutrition is a major factor that contributes to the low growth rate and egg production in chickens. The objective in this study was to demonstrate and promote Ration A and B, for laying hens, to enhance egg production and household incomes. During the period 1 July 2018 to 31 March 2021, farmer groups interested in chicken production were selected in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties. The criteria used in the selection of the farmer groups was chicken numbers, level of investment in chicken housing and equipment, interest in feed mixing, cohesion of farmer group, level of education and age of group members. Each farmer group was assigned a facilitator/ extension officer who trained its members on various aspects of chicken production with special emphasis on Ration formulation, mixing and feeding of laying hens. After mixing the Rations, samples were collected for chemical composition analysis so as to assess whether the Rations mixed met Kenya Bureau of Standards [KEBS] (2014) quality standards. At least three farmers within a group feeding the mixed Ration A or B to laying hens were selected to assess egg production. Prior to feeding on the Ration A or B, the same batch of birds in a farm was fed on commercial layers feed and egg production assessed. The results showed that (i) 3,968 farmers in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties mixed and used 136,683 kg of Ration A and B to feed their laying hens, (ii) there was a 44.3% and 45.5% increase in egg production in households using Ration A and B, respectively, to feed their laying hens compared to commercial feeds.

Key Words : Rations A and B , laying hens , egg production , household incomes , Kenya

케냐의 소규모 농가에서 저비용 사료 이용에 따른 토종 닭 사육농가의 계란 생산 증가

이노슨트 카리우키^*†, 홍순성^**

, 강석원^**

, 지오프리 응개^*, 김기종^***, 살롬 응야가^****, 니콜라스 므완기^*, 앨리스 칸요투^*****, 무리미 응야가^******

^*케냐농업연구청-식량연구센터–무구가, P.O. Box 30148-00100, 나이로비, 케냐
^**KOPIA 아프리카팀, 기술협력국, 농촌진흥청, 전주, 54875, 대한민국
^***KOPIA 케냐센터, P.O. Box 13987-00800, 나이로비, 케냐
^****타라카 니티 축산사무소, P.O. Box 10-60406, 카트와나, 케냐
^*****축산사무소 만야타 분소, P.O. Box 672-60100, 엠부, 케냐
^******엠부 축산사무소, P.O. Box 36-60100, 엠부, 케냐

초록

키워드 :

This article has been cited by 0 article in crossref

Cited-By

Funding:

INTRODUCTION

Agriculture is key to Kenya's economy, contributing 26 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Kariuki et al., 2013;FAO, 2021), of which poultry trade represents 30% (Nyaga, 2007). The agriculture sector was one of the first to fully devolve the function of service provision to the county governments underscoring the importance of county governments' role in ensuring food security.

In the Kenyan poultry industry, domestic chicken comprises 98% of the total estimated population of 32 million birds. Furthermore, indigenous chickens are 76% of the total chicken population and produce 58% and 46% of the total meat and eggs, respectively (Kingori et al., 2010a), whose demand is rising due to urbanization and human population increase. The livestock sub-sector and the poultry industry contribute about 9% and 2%, respectively, of the GDP. It was reported that every rural Kenyan household keeps indigenous chickens with an average flock size of 12 (CTA, 2007;Kingori et al., 2010a). The poultry industry also has many players and linkages including farmers, input suppliers, feeds manufacturers, breeders, transporters, processors, traders, relevant professionals and consumers each playing a role that adds value in the various stages within the poultry value chain (FAO, 2008, 2011;Carron et al., 2017).

The productivity of indigenous chicken under free range production system is 66 eggs/hen/year and mature live weights of 1.2-1.4 kg/bird compared to 300 eggs/hen/year and live weights of 1.8-2.5 kg/bird for exotic chicken (Okitoi et al., 2000). However, well-fed indigenous chicken can produce in excess of 150 eggs/hen/year (Okitoi et al., 2008). Kingori et al. (2010b) reported that indigenous chicken lay eggs in 3-4 cycles per year, each consisting of 12-20 eggs, translating to 36-80 eggs/hen/year.

This was proven during implementation of the Korea Program for International Cooperation in Agricultural Technology (KOPIA)-Kenya project titled “Formulation, Testing and Promotion of Feeds for Improving Indigenous Chicken Productivity under Semi-intensive/Intensive Production Systems” from 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2018. In the study, Ration A and B gave comparable egg production but were cheaper than commercial laying chicken feeds bought from shops in the Kenyan market (KOPIAKALRO Joint Projects 2017 Annual Report, unpublished data). A follow-up KOPIA-Kenya project titled “Demonstration and Promotion of Feeds for Enhancing Indigenous Chicken Productivity under Semi-intensive/Intensive Production Systems”, reported here, demonstrated and promoted Ration A and B to enhance chicken productivity and household incomes.

The objective of this study was to assess egg production in farms using Ration A or B to feed their laying hens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Area and Participating Farmer Groups

The study was carried out in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties that are located in Kenya as shown in Fig. 1. Embu County is located within latitudes 0° 09’ 12” South and 0° 55’ 08” South and longitudes 37° 18’ 32” East and 37° 56’ 19” East and covers an area of 2,821 km². The study area in Embu County comprised of Manyatta, Runyenjes, Mbeere North and Mbeere South sub-counties. Tharaka Nithi County is located within latitudes 0° 04’ 07” North and 0° 27’ 12” South and longitudes 37° 57’ 57” East and 38o 18’ 23” East. It covers an area of 2,609 km². The study area in Tharaka Nithi County comprised of Chuka, Igambang’ombe, Muthambi and Maara sub-counties.

Farmer groups interested in chicken production were selected in the two counties. The criteria used in the selection of the farmer groups was; cumulative total chicken numbers owned by all individual group members, level of investment in chicken housing and equipment by individual group members, interest in feed mixing, cohesion of group, level of education and age of members (KOPIAKALRO Joint Projects 2019 Annual Report, unpublished data). Table 1 presents the number of farmer groups per county that the project worked with during the period under reference, the number of members/farmers and their gender.

Ration Mixing

Each farmer group was assigned a facilitator/extension officer who trained the farmer group members on various aspects of chicken production with special emphasis on Ration formulation, mixing and feeding of laying hens. The farmer groups mixed the pre-determined quantities of either Ration A or B according to the formula (Table 2). The choice of which ration a farmer group mixed was dependent on the availability of ground maize as Ration A required 59% maize, while Ration B required 39% maize. Hence, when maize was available in plenty, a farmer group opted to mix Ration A. Table 2 also shows that Rations A and B were cheaper than commercial feed for laying hens.

The calculated chemical composition of Ration A and B is shown in Table 3. The expected chemical composition of commercial feed for laying hens as per Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS) (2014) is also shown in Table 3.

The mixing of Ration A or B was carried out, under guidance of the facilitator/extension officer, at the meeting venue of the farmer group. After mixing the rations, samples were collected for chemical composition analysis so as to assess whether the rations mixed by the farmer groups met KEBS (2014) quality specifications.

Data Collection

For each mixing, at least three farmers within a farmer group were selected to collect data on egg production. The number of eggs laid per day for 10 days was recorded in a pre-designed data collection form as the farmers fed the mixed Ration A or B to their laying hens separated from the rest of the flock. In order to obtain fertile eggs, a farmer maintained a ratio of cocks: hens of 1:10 under total confinement (intensive production system) in a chicken house (Wachira et al., 2016). Prior to feeding on either Ration A or B, the number of eggs laid per day for 10 days from the same batch of birds was also recorded, while feeding on commercial layers feed in the three farms. Prior to statistical analysis, the egg production data for each farm were standardized to number of eggs laid by 10 hens per day.

Statistical Analysis

Since layer type, age of birds, management practices, period of data collection, etc. varied between farmers, there was need to use a frequency distribution-free statistical analysis procedure for analysis of egg production data. Hence, the Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test, a non-parametric testing procedure was used to test if there were significant differences between egg production (No. of eggs/10 hens/ day) before and during feeding of Ration A or B. The p-value < 0.05 was regarded as statistically significant.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Quantity of rations mixed by farmer groups

Table 4 presents the amount of the rations mixed by the farmer groups in the two counties during the period 1 July 2018 to 31 March 2021. The results indicate that a total of 3,968 farmers in the two counties, were trained/mixed/ used Ration A and B to feed their laying hens. The farmer groups in Embu county mixed 95,370 kg of rations compared to the farmer groups in Tharaka Nithi county that mixed 41,313 kg of rations. It is worth noting that the farmer groups in Embu county had more farmers (2,774) compared to the farmer groups in Tharaka Nithi county that had 1,194 farmers. Overall, 136,683 kg of rations was mixed.

Quality of the Rations Mixed by Farmer Groups

Table 5 presents the results of chemical composition of the feed samples, collected after mixing the rations by farmer groups, compared to commercial feeds and the KEBS (2014). All the samples of Ration A and B mixed in both counties met the KEBS of not less than 88% dry matter and not more 25% ash. However, only the commercial feeds from Embu county met the KEBS of not less than 15% crude protein. Furthermore, none of the samples (Ration A, Ration B or commercial feeds) met the KEBS (2014) of not more than 7.5% crude fiber. Nonetheless, the quality of Ration A and B did not impair egg production as shown in Tables 6 and 7.

Egg production by laying hens before and during feeding on Rations A and B

The Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme (ASDSP) (2014a) reported that local indigenous chicken produced 39 eggs/hen/year, while improved indigenous chicken produced 120 eggs/hen/year in Tharaka Nithi County. Likewise, the ASDSP (2014b) reported that local indigenous chicken produced 48 eggs/hen/year, while improved indigenous chicken produced 160 eggs/hen/year in Embu County. Local indigenous chicken produced 30- 80 eggs/hen/year, while improved indigenous chicken produced 80-240 eggs/hen/year in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties (KOPIA-KALRO Joint Projects 2016 Annual Report, unpublished data).

Tables 6 and 7 present egg production by laying hens before and during feeding on Ration A or B, respectively.

In the Table 6, the results showed significant differences in a number of egg produced during feeding on Ration A in Embu (7.22 vs. 5.07) and Tharaka Nithi (8.22 vs. 5.65), respectively (P<0.05). The improvement of egg production was 42.3% and 45.6%, respectively.

And also, egg production of hens feeding with Ration B improved statistically significant in Embu (7.26 vs. 4.91) and Tharaka Nithi (7.09 vs. 5.23), respectively (P<0.05). The mean improvement was about 46% in Ration B compared to commercial feeds.

Interestingly, Ration A and B did not meet the KEBS (2014) on the minimum crude protein % and maximum crude fiber % (Table 5), the rations still increased egg production when compared to the commercial feeds used to feed the laying hens (Table 6 and 7). The results would imply that the crude protein % of Ration A and B was sufficient for egg production, in the laying chickens used in this study (Kingori et al., 2010a). Furthermore, the high crude fiber % of the mixed feeds at farm level did not impair egg production, since birds also consume green plants like kales (Brassica oleracea) that contain high levels of crude fiber percent.

The high egg production in this study is probably due to different chicken breeds and slightly better management accorded to the birds in comparison to a previous study (KOPIA-KALRO Joint Projects 2017 Annual Report, unpublished data), whereby Ration A and B recorded egg production of 46.3% and 48.2%, respectively in Embu county. Similarly, Ration A and B recorded egg production of 51.8% and 41.1%, respectively in Tharaka Nithi county (KOPIA-KALRO Joint Projects 2017 Annual Report, unpublished data). Elsewhere, Ndegwa et al. (1996) recorded an egg production of 41.1%, while Kingori et al. (2014) registered an egg production of 46.2 percent.

CONCLUSIONS

In summaries, 3,968 farmers in both counties, mixed and used 136,683 kg of Ration A and B to feed their laying hens. There is growing interest and demand for training in mixing and feeding on the two Rations owing to performance of the farmers’ chickens when fed on the rations. There was a 44.3 % and 45.5% increase in egg production using Ration A and B, respectively, to feed laying hens compared to feeding on commercial feeds. The increase in egg production when using Rations A and B, that are cheaper than commercial feeds for laying hens, translate to increased household incomes.

적 요

케냐에서 토종 닭의 낮은 생산성은 부분적으로 열악한 관리 관행, 특히 적절한 건강 관리, 열악한 사육장 및 영양 부족 때문으로 알려져 있다. 이 연구의 목표는 케냐에서 산란계를 위한 신배합사료 배합 가능성 확인과 신배합사료 식 A와 B의 급이를 통한 계란 생산성을 분석하고자 하였다.

1. 2018년 7월 1일부터 2021년 3월 31일까지 Embu 및 Tharaka Nithi 카운티에서 닭 생산에 관심이 있는 농부 그룹 을 선정하였다. 농부 그룹 선정에 사용 된 기준은 닭의 수, 닭 사육 및 장비에 대한 투자 수준, 사료 혼합에 대한 관심, 농가 집단의 응집력, 교육 수준 및 집단 구성원의 연령 등 이 었다.
2. 총 3,968명의 농업인이 산란계를 위한 신배합사료 식 A와 B에 따른 사료조제 및 이용에 참여하였으며, 총 136,683 kg의 배합 사료를 조제하였다. Embu 지역에서는 2,774명의 농업인이 53,770 kg을, Tharaka Nithi 지역에서는 1,194명의 농업인이 41,313 kg의 신배합사료를 각각 조제하였다.
3. 신배합사료 식 A와 식 B가 케냐 표준 국 [KEBS] (2014)의 품질 표준을 충족하는지 평가하기 위해 사료 영양 성 분을 분석한 결과, 신배합사료 식 A와 식 B, 상업용 사료 모 두 건물중(dry matter) 이 88%이상으로 표준을 충족 하였고, 최대 25% 이하의 회분(ash), 15% 이상의 조단백질(crude protein) 과 7.5% 이하의 조섬유(crude fiber) 기준과 대부분 부합하였다.
4. 신배합사료 식 A와 시판용 사료를 급여한 산란계 10마리 의 일일 평균 계란 생산량을 비교한 결과 Embu 지역에서는 7.2개와 5.1개, 그리고 Tharaka Nithi 지역에서는 8.2개와 5.7 개로 유의적으로 높은 생산성 차이가 확인되었다.
5. 신배합사료 식 B와 시판용 사료를 급여한 산란계 10마리 의 일일 평균 계란 생산량을 비교한 결과 Embu 지역에서는 7.3개와 4.9개, 그리고 Tharaka Nithi 지역에서는 7.1개와 5.2 개로 유의적으로 높은 생산성 차이가 확인되었다.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by the project: “Demonstration and Promotion of Feeds for Enhancing Indigenous Chicken Productivity under Semi-intensive/Intensive Production Systems”. We are grateful for the financial support of the South Korean Government through the Korea Program for International Cooperation in Agricultural Technology (KOPIA), Rural Development Administration (RDA), Republic of Korea. The Director-General, Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO) and the Centre Director, FCRC-Muguga are acknowledged for their smooth facilitation and logistical support to the research project. We appreciate the tireless efforts of the laboratory staff at FCRC-Muguga. We also register our appreciation to the Chief Officers in charge of Livestock and Fisheries, County ASDSP Coordinators, County Directors of Livestock production, Sub-county livestock production officers, livestock extension staff who facilitated the farmer groups and farmer group members in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties.

Figure

Fig. 1.

Map showing the KOPIA-Kenya project study areas in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties in Kenya

Table

Table 1.

Number of farmer groups/members that the project worked with during the period 1 July 2018 to 31 March 2021

Table 2.

Ingredients to make Rations A and B and comparison of cost with commercial feeds for laying hens

Table 3.

Calculated chemical composition of Rations A and B and expected chemical composition of commercial feed for laying hens as per KEBS (2014)

Table 4.

Summary of rations mixed in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties during the period 1 July 2018 to 31 March 2021

Table 5.

Chemical composition of rations mixed by farmer groups compared to that of commercial feeds and standards set by KEBS (2014)

Table 6.

Egg production by hens before and during feeding on Ration A in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties

Table 7.

Egg production by hens before and during feeding on Ration B in Embu and Tharaka Nithi counties

Reference

Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme (ASDSP).2014a. Volume 1: Household Baseline Survey Report. Tharaka Nithi County. Government of Kenya.
Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme (ASDSP).2014b. Volume 1: Household Baseline Survey Report. Embu County. Government of Kenya.
Carron, M. , Alarcon, P. , Karani, M. , Muinde, P. , Akoko, J. , Onono, J. , Fèvre, E.M. , Häsler, B. , Rushton, J. 2017. The broiler meat system in Nairobi, Kenya: Using a value chain framework to understand animal and product flows, governance and sanitary risks. Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 147:90–99.
CTA.2007. Improved Practices in Rearing Indigenous Chickens; The ACP-EU Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA). CTA Pract. Guid. Ser. No. 4.
FAO.2008. Poultry Sector Country Review-Kenya. Rome. //ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/ai379e/ai379e00.pdf.
FAO.2011. A Value Chain Approach to Animal Diseases Risk Management – Technical Foundations and Practical Framework for Field Application. Animal Pro. Rome. http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2198e/i2198e00.pdf.
FAO.2021. FAO in Kenya: Kenya at a glance. http://www.fao.org/kenya/fao-in-kenya/kenya-at-a-glance.
Kariuki, S , Onsare, R. , Mwituria, J. , Ng’etich, R. , Nafula, C. , Karimi, K. , Karimi, P. , Njeruh, F. , Irungu, P. , et al.2013. FAO/WHO project report–improving food safety in meat value chains in Kenya. Food Prot. Trends. 33:172–179.
Kenya Bureau of Standards.2014. Compounded poultry feeds – Specification. Kenya Standard KS 61:2009 (ICS 65.120).
Kingori, A.M. , Tuitoek, J.K. , Muiruri, H.K. , Wachira, A.M. 2010a. Effect of Dietary Crude Protein Levels on Egg Production, Hatchability and Post-Hatch Offspring Performance of Indigenous Chickens. International Journal of Poultry Science. 9:324-329.
Kingori, A.M. , Wachira, A.M. , Tuitoek, J.K. 2010b. Indigenous Chicken Production in Kenya: A Review. International Journal of Poultry Science. 9:309-316.
Kingori, A.M , Wachira, A.M. , Tuitoek, J.K. 2014. Influence of Energy Intake on Egg Production and Weight in Indigenous Chickens of Kenya. International Journal of Poultry Science. 13:151-155.
Ndegwa, J.M. , Kimani, C.W. , Siamba, D.N. , Ngugi, C.N. , Mburu, B.M. 1996. On farm evaluation of improved management practices on production performance of indigenous chickens. Oct-December quarterly report. NAHRC Naivasha, Kenya.
Nyaga, P.N. 2007. Good biosecurity practices in small scale commercial and scavenging production systems in Kenya: Strategies for the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases including Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Eastern Africa. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Okitoi, L.O. , Kabuage, L.W. , Muinga, R.W. , Mukisira, E.A. , Badamana, M.S. 2008. Nutrition and feeding strategies for indigenous chickens in extensive management systems: A review. East African Agricultural and Forestry Journal. 74:59- 69.
Okitoi, L.O. , Ondwassy, H. , Obali, M. , Linyonyi, A. , Mukisira, E.A. , De Jong, R. 2000. The potential on-farm impact of appropriate technologies on productivity of indigenous chicken in Western Kenya. In: Proceedings of the 7th Biennial Scientific Conference. 13th-17th November 2000. KARI Headquarters, Nairobi, Kenya.
Onono, J.O. , Alarcon, P. , Karani, K. , Muinde, P. , Akoko, J.M. , Maud, C. , Fevre, E.M. , Häsler, B. , Rushton, J. 2018. Identification of production challenges and benefits using value chain mapping of egg food systems in Nairobi, Kenya. Agricultural Systems. 159:1-8.
Wachira, A.M. , Mwangi, D.M. , Muinga, R.W. , Wangui, G. , Muhia, P. 2016. Chicken Farming Manual (Second Edition). Published by Poultry Research Institute of National Institute of Animal Science and KAFACI Secretariat. Republic of Korea. ISBN 978-89-480-4147-7 93520.