Establishment of a cashmere goat breeding scheme in Baft, Iran

Project Steering Committee Meeting
Improving Livelihoods of Small Farmers and Rural Women through
Value--Added Processing and Export of Cashmere, Wool and Mohair
Value
"Establishment
bl h
off a cashmere
h
goat
breeding
g scheme in Baft
Baft,, Iran"
Joaquín Mueller
National Institute for Agricultural Technology
Patagonia, Argentina
4 October 2011
2011, Dushanbe
Dushanbe, Tajikistan
Option 1 for genetic improvement
Ge
enetic
c meriit
Intervention
Selection
Random mating
No selection
Random mating
1. Retain male progeny from best females
2. Castrate other males
3. Select amongst retained males
Time / generations
Option 2 for genetic improvement
Ge
enetic
c meriit
Intervention
Selection
Structured mating
Nucleus
Base
No selection
Random mating
1. Mate best females with best males in a nucleus
2. Retain and select male p
progeny
g y of nucleus
3. Castrate other males
Time / generations
Advantages and disadvantages
Option
O
ti 11:
• Easy to implement in small flocks
• Requires involvement of all farmers and animals
Option 2:
• Higher
Hi h genetic
n tic p
progress
ss
• Requires management of a nucleus
For any
y breeding
g program
p g m
The challenges
The essentials
• Implementation
• Farmer involvement
• Sustainability
• Local extension support
• Initial financial support
• Out-scaling
g
• Technical advice
Background information
• Baft breeding station experience
• Production system survey (Oct 2009):
– Understand the nomad system
– Identify target animal population
– Identify target nomad farmers
• Fiber quality analyses (Apr 2010):
– Identify strengths and weaknesses of Baft cashmere
– Determine variability and distribution of key traits
Implementation of Baft cashmere
breeding system
• Initial breeding aim:
– Higher quality cashmere suitable for small
scale processing and for achieving higher
prices for raw fiber
• B
Breeding
din pl
plan
n options
pti ns dis
discussed:
ss d:
– With officials and professionals
– With nomad farmers
At Kerman Dept Agric
At AI Station
At CashmereFestival
At Breeding Station
Formally
Informally
With
nomads and
with
shepherds
Initially proposed system
a.
N l
Nucleus
(no--castration)
(no
b.
Base
1 buck
20+1 20+1
best 40
females
Breeding
station
best
local
buck
300-400
(castration)
Nomad family flock
a. Replacement of worse
buck in nucleus on progeny
test with nucleus born
male
b R
b.
Replacement
pl
m t of
f old
ld
nucleus females with
young nucleus or base
f
females
l
Selection criteria of participants
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interest
y
Location and accessibility
Quality of cashmere
Accept ear tagging of 40 best females
Accept separate mating of nucleus
Accept ear tag of progeny
p fleece sampling
p g
Accept
8 participants
and nomad guide
Selected
nomad
farmers
Further discussion on separate
F
p
mating
m
g
of nucleus and base females
• Option 1: Artificial insemination (0)
pr u
n efficiency
ff
n y / AI costs
– Reproduction
• Option 2: Separate grazing (3)
– Extra labor
• Option
p
3: Pen mating
g (5)
( )
– Fence costs
Nucleus management
g
calendar
• Mar/Apr
p 2010: Selection of foundation animals (visual)
(
)
• J
Jun/Jul
J 2010: First m
mating
g
• Nov/Dec 2010:
2010 First kidding
• Jan/Feb 2011: Fleece sampling of male candidates
• Apr/May 2011: Selection of replacements (index+vis.)
(index+vis )
• Jun/Jul 2011: Second mating
First round of buck replacement:
p
introducing a concept
Selection of buck replacement aided by fleece analyses of 10 males /age group /flock
Fleece analyses: Mean fiber diameter and down yield
Index: Sum of standardized deviations from age group means (1.2 mic = 14.9%)
Farmer selects “best” buck among top 3 indexed as replacement
Example for Mahmood Ghassemi’s 10 young male candidates:
Visual
acceptability
Tag
1304
1308
1306
1305
1309
1303
1302
1310
1301
1307
Average
Standard Deviation
Diameter
(mic)
18.8
20.6
20 1
20.1
19.0
20.8
21.0
22.3
21.6
21.9
22.0
20.8
12
1.2
Yield
(%)
89.1
91.5
80 0
80.0
54.8
75.0
70.4
64.7
53.2
55.4
52.0
68.6
14 9
14.9
Index
3.0
1.7
13
1.3
0.6
0.5
0.0
-1.5
-1.7
-1.8
-2.1
3.0 = (20.8-18.8)/1.2
+ (89.1-68.6)/14.9
Productivity
What next?
• Further discuss and adjust
j
breeding
g objective
j
– Traits
p
– Emphasis
• Make breeding system self-sustainable by
– Minimizing fiber analyses
– Minimizing recording
• Maximize genetic progress of
f whole
h l population
l
– Dissemination
Characteristics of Iranian Cashmere
Origin
Color
Down
weight
(g)
Down
diameter
(mic)
Down
length
(mm)
Price
(U /k
(US/kg
dehaired)
(5)
15.6
32-38
148
Chinese (1)
100% White 550-650
Mongolian (1)
60% White
600
16.0-16.8
40-45
128
Iranian (2)
White
287
19 7
19.7
54
110
Pamiri (3)
Various
16.1
50
(1) UNIDO (2011) and Waldron (2011)
(2) Our results
(3) McGegor (2011) – Average of several village flocks
(4) Schneider
S h id G
Group price
i iindex
d d
dehaired
h i d (30 J
June 2011)
Overall breeding
g objective
j
considering
g
nomad income is based on sale of
cashmere and meat
• Product value ($/kg):
g
– Reduce cashmere fiber diameter
– Maintain fiber length and white color
• Productivity (kg/animal):
– Increase cashmere weight, reproduction, bodyweight
• Adaptation to the environment (GxE):
– Survival, health, longevity, easy care, etc.
Estimation of cashmere weight
• Take
T k shorn
sh n fleece
fl
weight
i ht
• Take midside sample and:
1. Separate manually down from guard hairs,
calculate yield and multiply by fleece weight, or
2 Use
2.
Us OFDA and
nd consider
c nsid r fib
fibers
rs >30 mic ass guard
u rd
hair, use Wildman-Bray formula to calculate
yield and multiply by fleece weight
Cashmere yield calculation using
Wildman––Bray method
Wildman
Guard hairs
Freq
quency
Down fibers
10
20
Cashmere yield =
0
40
30
Fiber Diameter (mic)
50
60
nD*(mD2+sD2)*dD
nD*(mD2+sD2)*dD + nG*(mG2+sG2)*dG
Where n: number of fibers, m: FD mean, s: standard deviation, d: density
In any case fleece weight is a good
estimator of cashmere weight
Correlation = 0.78
Source: our data
… and weak relation between fleece
weight and fiber diameter
Correlation = 0.21
Fine and
heavy fleeces
Source: our data
It seems that in Raeini goats follicle
density
d
it (and/or
( d/ skin
ki size)
i ) iis responsible
ibl
for down weight instead of length or
diameter as elsewhere
Our results:
FW DW x Length FW DW x Diam
-0.04 -0.02
0.21 0.19
Diam x Length
-0.03
Proposed simplified selection scheme
Example for flock of 140 does, 7 bucks and 80% weaning rate
N l
Nucleus
Males
Females
Females
Males
Parents
2
40
100
5
Progeny
16
16
40
40
At weaning
Keep/tag 12
At shearing
Take fleece w.
Keep top 6
p
Take sample
At mating
•
•
•
•
B
Base
Select top for N
Next 2 for B
Castrate all
Select/paint top 10 for N
Next 25 for B
Separate mating of nucleus
Identification of nucleus male progeny
12 (6) ear tags and fleece weights
6 fiber diameter determinations
> pen or separate grazing
> not difficult
> use vet ear tag? Need scale
> ASRI lab?
What can we expect?
• A largely self-sustained improved buck
supply system for nomad flocks
• Higher fleece weights and lower cashmere
fiber diameter in nucleus and base flocks
• Nomad farmers sensitive to further genetic
i
improvement
t proposals
l and
d other
th project
j t
interventions
Breeding issues to address
• Test if p
proposed
p
design
g is optimum
p
• Test if nucleus is enough better than base
– Check selection differential (nucleus/total
females) -> samples already collected.
• Check value of including other traits
– Bodyweights, birth type
• Analyze use of external bucks
– Exchange
g bucks between flocks
– Bucks from breeding station
General issues to address which
influence breeding decisions
• See if a recording scheme can be managed and
linked to breeding station recording.
• See if flock structure can be adjusted to
produce higher
p
g
quality
q
y cashmere.
• See if cashmere quality is paid for.
• Develop a grading system accordingly.
accordingly
• Study optimum fiber collecting system -> study
on the
th way.
• Study effect of local value adding on breeding
objectives (emphasis on higher fiber length?)
Final reflection
The formation of these nucleus schemes is a
useful
f l ""rehearsal“
h
l“ f
for genetic
ti improvement
i
t
programs, and an opportunity to train
operators,
t
consolidate
lid t b
breed
d or strain
t i
genotypes while achieving genetic progress.