Study on Dairy Cattle, Breeding Management Practices in Milkshed and Non-milkshed Areas of Bikaner District (Rajasthan)

Dairy cattle plays an important role in agrarian economy in developing country and so more in India. Breeding management is one of the important aspects for genetic improvement in dairy cattle. The response of dairy cattle owners on the management of breeding practices in dairy cattle right from the breeds of the cattle maintained by cattle owner and the detection of cattle in heat to parturition. Thus, this investigation provides the data of breeding management practices followed by the livestock owners of milkshed and non-milkshed areas and analysis the effect of operation flood program in milkshed area of Bikaner district of Rajasthan in respect to dairy cattle breeding management practices.

In order to achieve the objectives of this study, a field survey was conducted. The information required to complete the study were collected from milkshed and non-milkshed villages of Bikaner district. The data was collected by using the pretested interview schedule by visit to their farm to take visual observations and actual measurements of the various desired aspects. The collected data was tabulated and subjected to various statistical methods to draw meaningful inferences.
 
Selection of the locale of research
 
The study was conducted in Bikaner district of Rajasthan because this district is considered as the Denmark of Rajasthan, more over the operation flood program was also going on in this district through Uttari Rajasthan Milk Union Limited (URMUL).
 
Selection of villages
 
A list of villages where operation flood program has been running was prepared with the help of Uttari Rajasthan Milk Union Limited and census reports. Three villages out of these were selected randomly, where operation flood program was running in milkshed area of URMUL denoted as villages of milkshed area. The selected villages were Nungesser, Palana and Barsingsar. Three villages from non-milkshed area in contiguity with the milkshed area which has similar social agro climatic environment were selected for comparison. The villages so selected were Udasar, Nal and Udyaramsar.
Selection of respondents
 
A list of livestock owners who possessed dairy animals in each of the selected villages was prepared with the help of village level worker (VLW) and secretary of the co-operative milk societies. Out of this list, 30 livestock owners were selected randomly for the study from each of the village thereby making to samples of 180 dairy cattle owners (90 from milk andshed area and 90 from non-milkshed area).
 
Construction of interview schedule
 
The required information was collected using a specially developed questionnaire (schedule) keeping in view the objectives of investigation. The questionnaire was designed to get information on breeding practices being followed for different categories of dairy animals and pre-testing of the schedule was done on two respondents of one village each from milkshed and non- milkshed areas. Pretesting helped in altering the contents and sequence of certain places and finalizing the procedure of filling the schedule.
 
Analysis of data and statistical test applied
 
The study of an exploratory nature, it was desirable to collect the data exhaustively. Only the data directly pertaining to dairy cattle breeding practices rather than to the peripheral aspects were analyzed. Basic statistical tool like frequency distribution, percentage, ratio, range, mean, standard error, were calculated to draw inferences, Chi-square test was applied for obtaining significant difference between two areas studied and significant difference between two means was tested by applying “t” test as per Snedecor and Cochran (1967).

The data was obtained from milkshed and non-milkshed areas regarding effect of operation flood program in respect to Breeds and breeding methods adopted presented in (Table 1) indicated that Rathi was the predominant indigenous breed 41.89% and 26.93% in milkshed and non-milkshed areas, respectively. Remaining were 44.95% and 64.20% non-descript, 13.14% and 8.87% crossbred (Holstein Friesian or Jersey crosses) found in milkshed and non-milkshed areas, respectively. Significantly higher percentage (32.22%) of dairy cattle owners adopted artificial insemination method of breeding in milkshed area, whereas only a small proportion (4.44%) of dairy cattle owners followed this practice in non-milkshed area. However, 21.11 and 76.67 per cent of dairy cattle owners depend on natural service in milkshed and non-milkshed areas respectively. Remaining 46.67 and 18.89 per cent adopted to both (natural and A.I.) methods of breeding in respective areas. It can be concluded that the cattle owners in milkshed area adopted the advanced technique of A.I. on a breeding method.
 

         
Impact of operation flood programme could most appreciably be seen on the improvement of breeds and breeding methods. Significantly (P≤ 0.01) higher percentage of Rathi and crossbreds were found in milkshed area with the low incidence of natural service in comparison to non-milkshed area having low percentage of pure and crossbred cattle with high incidence of natural service. This finding of present investigation match with the reports of Singh and Sharma (2011) concluded that a significant difference was found in level of adoption between members and non-members of dairy cooperatives societies regarding breeding practices of dairy animals in Udaipur district. Higher proportions of genetically superior animals were reported by Dhiman et al., (1990), Rajendra and Prabhaharan (1992). However, Singh et al., (2004), reported that the cattle development programme suffered on account of poor genetic potential of bull and the available facilities of breeding were not utilized properly in Tarikhet Block of Almora district of Uttaranchal. Yadav (1993) observed that a significantly higher (68.87%) proportion of respondents reported to natural service, while only 14.16% adopted A.I. Sharma (1993) observed that higher percentage of cattle keepers followed natural service of mating and Gandhi et al., (1998) reported that 10% of bovine population of our country was covered through A.I. The poor conception rate from A.I. under field condition is also the cause of concern, the poor animal keeper cannot afford to take the risk of an animal being empty, which would cause financial loss to him.                   
         
Table 2 indicates that bellowing, as a symptom of heat detection was known to majority (91.11% and 92.22%) of cattle owners, followed by mounting on other animal was known as symptom to 66.67% and 51.11% in milkshed and non-milkshed areas, respectively. Handa and Gill (1986), Sharma (1993) and Sharma (1996) also noticed that bellowing is the important symptoms of heat detection.
 

         
Table 3 reveals that a significantly higher percentage (54.11%) of dairy cattle owners in milkshed area get their cattle inseminated/crossed after 7-12 hours of detection of heat, whereas in non-milkshed area only 32.22% get their cattle inseminated/crossed after 7-12 hours of heat detection. It showed that in non-milkshed area cattle keepers were not aware of the fact the best time for insemination of cattle in heat is 10-12 hours after onset of heat (mid to end of estrus).  All the dairy cattle owners in milkshed area, who opted A.I. as a breeding tool brought their cattle to nearby dairy cooperative society centre or veterinary dispensary/ hospital to get the cow inseminated by veterinary staff. Whereas, in non-milkshed area the farmers get their cattle inseminated only in  veterinary dispensary/ hospital. Frozen semen was used for A.I. in milkshed as well as non-milkshed area. Invariably the semen of exotic bull was preferred by 20 and 10% dairy owners for A.I. of their cows in milkshed and non-milkshed areas, respectively. The operation flood program had statistically significant (P≤0.05) effect on milkshed area with respect to genetic improvement of their stock. About 13.13% dairy cattle owners in milkshed area also protected go for pregnancy diagnosis after 2-3 months of insemination, whereas only 8.89% livestock keepers in non-milkshed area had preferred it. Singh et al., (2007) reported that majority of the farmers did not prefer pregnancy diagnosis. Largely dairy cattle owners of both the areas do not take any extra care of pregnant cow. However, in some cases extra ration was given to pregnant dairy cattle. No assistance of veterinary staff was taken at the time of parturition but majority of them providing bedding. These observations were in accordance with the findings of Das (1981) who reported special care needed for pregnant animals in rural areas of Mizoram, Sharma (1993) also reported that special care of pregnant animals were not taken except giving them some extra ration in Udaipur district of Rajasthan. Similarly, Rajendra and Prabhaharan (1992) reported that only 43.33% respondents gave special care during in feeding of pregnant animals in Dharmpuri district of Tamil Nadu.
 

On the basis of the findings of the breeding management practices the operation flood programme had significant effect on breeds of cow maintained by the livestock keepers, breeding methods adopted, awareness in farmers to time taken after heat for insemination and extra ration given to advanced pregnant cow. It was found that majority of the respondent were adopting the improved breeding practices but there is some gap in adoption of A.I. and pregnancy diagnosis.