1. Knowledge and perceptions of smallholder dairy farmers of cattle disease burdens in selected agro- ecological zones of Uganda H. Kirunda, F. Kabi N. Muwereza, T. Kabuuka, H. Kirunda, F. Kabi, N. Muwereza, T. Kabuuka, J.W. Magona and G. Lukwago NARO Scientific Conference, 1 st – 3 rd October, 2012 Imperial Botanical Beach Hotel, Entebbe, Uganda

2. Introduction Dairy production contributes 45% of the 9% that the livestock sector adds to the national GDP(UBOS, 2007) Dairy production contributes 45% of the 9% that the livestock sector adds to the national GDP(UBOS, 2007) In Uganda indigenous cattle accounts for 82.7% (Okidi et al., 2004) of the 11.4m cattle kept (UBOS/MAAIF, 2009) In Uganda indigenous cattle accounts for 82.7% (Okidi et al., 2004) of the 11.4m cattle kept (UBOS/MAAIF, 2009) The other proportion (17.3%) of the total dairy herd is comprised of crossbreed and exotic cattle (UBOS, 2009) The other proportion (17.3%) of the total dairy herd is comprised of crossbreed and exotic cattle (UBOS, 2009) Dairy production and productivity have remained low partly due to disease infections in livestock (NDP, 2010) Dairy production and productivity have remained low partly due to disease infections in livestock (NDP, 2010) Uganda annually loses US$ 86.3m due to animal diseases, mainly as a result of high morbidity (58%) and mortality (30%) (Wozemba and Nsanja, 2008) Uganda annually loses US$ 86.3m due to animal diseases, mainly as a result of high morbidity (58%) and mortality (30%) (Wozemba and Nsanja, 2008)

3. Introduction Tick-borne infections are the greatest limitations (Okello- Onen et al. 1994 and are still widely prevalent in Uganda (Rubaire-Akiiki et al., 2004, Ochaido et al., 2009) Tick-borne infections are the greatest limitations (Okello- Onen et al. 1994 and are still widely prevalent in Uganda (Rubaire-Akiiki et al., 2004, Ochaido et al., 2009) Other endemic diseases are trypanosomiasis (Waiswa and Katunguka, 2004), mastitis (Byarugaba et al., 2008) and brucellosis (Makita et al., 2011) Other endemic diseases are trypanosomiasis (Waiswa and Katunguka, 2004), mastitis (Byarugaba et al., 2008) and brucellosis (Makita et al., 2011) Among other key challenges is calf mortality and helminthosis (Ocaido et al., 2009) Among other key challenges is calf mortality and helminthosis (Ocaido et al., 2009) This study sought to establish the current disease burden in smallholder dairy farming systems as perceived by farmers This study sought to establish the current disease burden in smallholder dairy farming systems as perceived by farmers

4. Methodology

5. Study design  This cross-sectional study was conducted in purposively selected districts of Jinja, Kiruhura and Katakwi  These lie in the L. Victoria Basin (LVB), Western Rangelands (WR) and Eastern Semi Arid Zone (ESAZ) (Mwebaze, 1999)  50 households were selected per district using systematic random sampling procedures  Questionnaires were administered 150 farm households to seek farmers’ perceptions on animal health parameters

6. Study design cont’d  Based on the perceptions, diseases were ranked based on reported level of severity using a scale of 1 to 3  All diseases with average severity of ≤ 2 were taken as the most important diseases in the AEZ In order to validate the content of data generated using the questionnaire, the content validity ratio (CVR) (1975) was used The mean CVR across items was used as an indicator of overall test content validity

7. Data processing and analysis Cross tabulation and graphic drawings were done using SPSS Cross tabulation and graphic drawings were done using SPSS Linear Discriminant analysis (Huberty, 1994) in XLSTAT (2011) was conducted to; Linear Discriminant analysis (Huberty, 1994) in XLSTAT (2011) was conducted to; 1.Establish diseases common to each AEZ 2.Establish existence of significant effects (p<0.05) of season, age and breed on disease parameters: Severity Severity Prevalence Prevalence Morbidity Morbidity Mortality Mortality Treatment costs Treatment costs

8. processing and analysis Data processing and analysis Multivariate Analysis of Variance in PAST Software was used to establish influence of AEZs on diseases/conditions Multivariate Analysis of Variance in PAST Software was used to establish influence of AEZs on diseases/conditions Means were separated using the Wilk’s lambda tests Means were separated using the Wilk’s lambda tests Scatter plots were drawn and biplots fitted to show the correlations Scatter plots were drawn and biplots fitted to show the correlations

9. Key findings

10. Proportions of reproduction conditions in different cattle breeds Reproduction problemsAEZsExoticCrossIndigenous Calf survival (%)ESAZ47.110054.8 LVB90.995.871.4 WR77.382.389.2 Overall73.882.973.0 Abortions (% out of total served) ESAZ2003.7 LVB000 WR9.13.51.4 Overall9.33.42.1 Still births (% out of total served) ESAZ000.9 LVB000 WR30.11.49.5 Overall261.356.61 Calves born with deformities (%) ESAZ000.9 LVB000 WR1.71.00 Overall1.50.940.3

11. Percent seasonal prevalence of diseases Disease/ condition ESAZWRLVB Long rainsShort rains Long rainsShort rains Long rainsShort rains Abortion57.142.9100.00.0-- Anaplasmosis--90.010.0-- Babesiosis33.366.771.428.6-- Brucellosis40.060.0---- Calf pneumonia100.00.0100.00.0-- Calf scours85.714.3100.00.0100.00.0 CBPP a --25.075.0-- ECF b 75.025.041.758.3100.00.0 Eye infection----0.0100.0 FMD c 100.00.060.040.0-- Foot rot100.00.066.733.3100.00.0 Fascioliasis75.025.066.733.3100.00.0 Mastitis53.346.763.236.8100.00.0 Milk fever----0.0100.0 PGE d ----100.00.0 RFM e 100.00.0--100.00.0

12. Diseases with highest morbidity ESAZWRLVB DiseaseAverage severity DiseaseAverage severity DiseaseAverage severity ECF1.5ECF1.5ECF1.3 Mastitis2 1.7Mastitis1.7 Calf scour2Calf pneumonia 1Calf Scour2 FMD2 1.8Liver fluke1.5 Abortion2 1Eye infection2 Liver fluke2Anaplasmosis1.3Milk fever2

13. ESAZ LVB WR Prevalence of abortion, mastitis and milk fever in the three agro-ecological zones

14. Disease severity and prevalence in different seasons The season significantly (p<0.05) influenced the severity, morbidity, mortality and treatment costs   Severity was reportedly similar in both short and long rains (1.6)   Morbidity was higher in long (4.5) than short rain season (3.1)   Mortality was higher in long (0.7) than short rains (0.6)   Average costs of treatment were higher in short (US$ 22) than long rains (US$ 17) each of three months period

15. Disease severity, mortality and average cost of treatment per AEZ

16. In the LVB, ECF and mastitis had; In the LVB, ECF and mastitis had;  The highest morbidity (1.9; 3.7)  The highest severity (1.33; 1.33)  The highest mortalities (0.42; 0.33) and  The treatment costs (US$ 15; US$ 16) per a quarter a year

17. Disease severity, mortality and average cost of treatment per AEZ In the ESAZ, fascioliasis, mastitis and abortion had; In the ESAZ, fascioliasis, mastitis and abortion had;  The highest severity (2; 2; 2)  The highest morbidity (16; 4.4; 5.5) ECF had the highest treatment cost (US$ 18) ECF had the highest treatment cost (US$ 18)

18. Disease severity, mortality and average cost of treatment per AEZ In the WR, mastitis, FMD and ECF had; In the WR, mastitis, FMD and ECF had;  The highest severities (1.9; 1.8 and 1.5) and  The highest morbidity (4.0; 4.2; 3.2) FMD and ECF had the highest mortalities (1.5; 1.2) FMD and ECF had the highest mortalities (1.5; 1.2) Highest treatment costs/three months were for ECF (US$ 26) and babesiosis (US$ 17) Highest treatment costs/three months were for ECF (US$ 26) and babesiosis (US$ 17)

19. Disease severity, mortality & average cost of treatment Disease severity, morbidity, mortality and treatment costs were significantly different (p<0.05) among the different breed of cattle in the three AEZs Disease severity, morbidity, mortality and treatment costs were significantly different (p<0.05) among the different breed of cattle in the three AEZs Severity was 1.9 in indigenous, 1.5 in exotics and 1.3 in crosses Severity was 1.9 in indigenous, 1.5 in exotics and 1.3 in crosses Morbidity: indigenous (5.5), crosses (4.1), exotics (2.3) Morbidity: indigenous (5.5), crosses (4.1), exotics (2.3) Mortality: crosses (1.0), indigenous (0.7) and exotics (0.1) Mortality: crosses (1.0), indigenous (0.7) and exotics (0.1) Treatment costs: crosses (US$ 25), indigenous (US$ 17) and exotics (US$ 11) Treatment costs: crosses (US$ 25), indigenous (US$ 17) and exotics (US$ 11)

20. Disease severity, mortality & average cost of treatment for different age groups Age of cattle had significant effect (p<0.05) on severity, morbidity, mortality and treatment costs in all AEZ Age of cattle had significant effect (p<0.05) on severity, morbidity, mortality and treatment costs in all AEZ Severity: mature cattle (1.6) and infants (1.4) Severity: mature cattle (1.6) and infants (1.4) Morbidity: mature cattle (4.5) and young (3.2) Morbidity: mature cattle (4.5) and young (3.2) Mortality: young cattle (1.0) and mature (0.6) Mortality: young cattle (1.0) and mature (0.6) Treatment costs: young cattle (US$ 19) compared to mature (US$ 18) Treatment costs: young cattle (US$ 19) compared to mature (US$ 18)

21. Acknowledgements  Government of Uganda  EAAPP/NARO  NaLIRRI  District Local Governments (Jinja, Kiruhura, Katakwi)  Farmers (Jinja, Kiruhura and Katakwi)

22. Thank you for listening!