International Journal of Genetics 4(1): 04-10, 2014 ISSN 2222-1301 © IDOSI Publications, 2014 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.ijg.2014.4.1.8523

A Phenotypic and Genetic Characterized Indigenous Chicken Ecotypes in

Addis Getu and Aschalew Tadesse

Department of Animal Production and Extension, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Gondar, Ethiopia

Abstract: Review was conducted in Ethiopia during the year of 2014 to identify phenotypic and genetic characterized indigenous chicken ecotypes in Ethiopia. The data stated that poultry is a name given to domesticated birds kept by humans for eggs, meat and feathers. Thus domesticated poultry species are originated from the genus Gallus domestics. In Ethiopia except chickens, the others are found in their natural habitat. Thus domesticated chickens ecotypes are characterized in both phenotypic and genetic methodologies. Based on phenotype about 17 indigenous chicken ecotypes are identified and characterized. Among phenotypic characterized chickens are Chefe, Jarso, Tilili, Horro, Tepi, Gelila, Debre-Elias, Melo-Hamusit, Gassay, , , Farta, Konso, Mandura, Sheka, Naked neck, Gugut and Gasgie. Whereas some of the phenotypic characterized chickens ecotypes are additionally identified their genetic variation using molecular characterization methods such as Debre- Elias, Melo- Hamusit, Tilili, Gassay and Naked Neck. Those indentified chicken ecotypes have their own unique morphological and genetic characteristics. Thus chicken ecotypes are providing important opportunities for increasing protein production and income generating for smallholders having short generation interval and high rate of productivity. Production system of those identified chicken were majorly traditional extensive type. Diseases, predators, lack of market facility, shortage of feed and poor extension service were the major barriers of production system of identified chickens. Generally chicken with different genetic and phenotypic character must be identified to conserve and protect from genetic erosion and dilution.

Key words: Indigenous Chickens Phenotypic Character Genetic Character

INTRODUCTION depend on chicken production [4]. About 60 % of East African identified and characterized chicken population Ethiopia takes the lead in livestock populations in found in Ethiopia which is played a significant role in Africa and get way of domestic animals migrated from human nutrition and as a source of cash income [5]. Asia to Africa [1]. Bushman [2] reported that world’s However, the distribution and density of chickens are chicken population was estimated about 16.2 billion of varying from place to place and found in most parts of the which 71.6 % were found in developing countries which country suitable for human settlement. Still these large were producing 67, 718, 544 metric tons of chicken meat populated indigenous chickens are found in extensive and 57, 861, 747 metric tons of hen eggs. Whereas in production system [6]. Those indigenous chickens are Ethiopia the population was estimated about 49.3 million characterized by poor in performances than exotic of which 97.3 %, 2.32% and 0.38% were indigenous, exotic chickens [7]. There is no well developed breeding practice and hybrid, respectively which were producing 72,300 of chicken production in Ethiopia. However, farmers metric tons of chicken meat and 78,000 metric tons of hen follow their own breeding practice through selection eggs [1]. Such poultry species contributed important based on some criteria to increase meat and egg socio-economic roles for food securities, generating production [8, 9]. Tadelle [10] reported that in the central additional cash incomes and religious/cultural reasons [3]. high lands of Ethiopia, introduction of exotic breeds were Due to this reason many of the world’s rural poor are practiced. Nevertheless, their effects on upgrading of the

Corresponding Author: Addis Getu, Department of Animal Production and Extension, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Gondar, Ethiopia.

4 Intl. J. Genet., 4(1): 04-10, 2014 village chicken performances have been minimal. This is characterization, most scientists stated that Ethiopian because the programs were planned without participation indigenous chickens are none descriptive type and they of farmers, with no parallel improvement of feeding, are closely related to the red Jungle fowl and vary in housing and health care [7, 10]. To improve the plumage color, comb type, body conformation and performance of indigenous chicken identification of weight [8]. They are characterized by slow growth rate, available genetic resource is important [11]. Some late sexual maturity and low production as well as researchers [3, 8, 12] have made both phenotypic and reproductive performance [16]. In Ethiopia, limited genetic characterization of indigenous chicken ecotypes attention has been given to local chicken for identification in some parts of Ethiopia. The above mentioned authors and characterization the available genetic resources of were put their document in a separate and unorganized non-descriptive chicken ecotypes and now researchers form. So comprehensive documentation of chicken done their researches at its basic stage for the recognition genetic resources in general, describing local chicken and conservation [8]. Because of their large population types, constraints and variations in particular was size and wide distribution, only small portion of Ethiopian mandatory for the review. Therefore, this review was indigenous chicken are identified and characterized carried out to identify phenotypically and genetically [3, 7, 8, 15]. Those identified chickens are taken their name identified and characterized chicken ecotypes in Ethiopia. based on their niches like, Chefe, Jarso, Tilili, Horro and Tepi [17], Gelila, Debre-Elias, Melo-Hamusit, Gassay, Origin and Domestication of Chickens: The Tilili, Horro, Guangua and Mecha [8] and Farta, Konso, domesticated chicken (Gallus gallus, 2n = 78) is believed Mandura, Horro and sheka [15] and based on their to be descended from the wild Indian and Southeast plumage color the indigenous chicken ecotypes named as Asian red jungle fowl [8]. The evolutionary history of the Tikur, Key, Gebsima, Netch, Serrano, Libework, Teterma, domestic fowl development was characterized in to three Tikur-Teterma and Key -Teterma [7] were the major most known phases. The first phase is started with the chicken ecotypes found in different part of Ethiopia evolution of the genus Gallus, the second emergence of (Table 1). the domestic fowl from its progenitors and lastly the appearance of the large number of the current breeds, Molecular Characterized Indigenous Chicken Ecotypes: varieties, strains and lines [6]. The domestication of fowl Basically Ethiopian indigenous chickens ecotypes are in the region of the Indus valley is believed to have not well characterized genetically but not more than two occurred by 2000 BC [13], but more recent archaeological researchers were conducted their research in molecular evidences showed that a much earlier domestication characterization of indigenous chicken. Among those occurred in China 6000 BC [14]. Four species of Gallus Halima [8] was characterized Tilili, Melo-Hamusit, have been considered as progenitors of the Debere-Elias and Gassy with the title of phenotypic and domesticated fowls were Gallus Gallus (Red jungle fowl), genetic characterization of indigenous chicken Gallus Lafayette (Ceylon jungle fowl), Gallus sonnerrati populations in Northwest Ethiopia and Tadelle [3] was (Grey jungle fowl) and Gallus varius (Green jungle fowl) characterized Naked Neck (Melata) in the title of and all found in regions of Southeast Asia [8]. The red phenotypic and genetic characterization of local chicken jungle fowl is one of the oldest domesticated birds and its ecotypes in Ethiopia. In contrast to using morphological popularity quickly spread to Europe. Oddly enough, its traits and/or measurements for characterization, original popularity till the beginning of the 19th century DNA-based methods are independent of environmental was not for meat but for game of cockfighting and use in factors and provide useful information about genetic religious rituals [15]. The utilization of poultry for meat diversity [8]. This holds particularly true for DNA- and eggs came into picture during the 20th century when profiling methods, which is based on the polymerase the poultry industry developed as a commercial industry Chain Reaction (PCR) and microsatellite markers [3, 8]. [8]. Microsatellites have been used in a number of studies to address the biodiversity in commercial as well as rare Phenotypically Characterized Indigenous Chicken breeds. Microsatellites are stretches of DNA that consist Ecotypes: Phenotypic characterization is a systematic of variable number tandem repeats (VNTRs) of a simple documentation of the distinct qualitative and quantitative sequence of nucleotides or loci (2 to 4 bases). Simple nature of an animal with their production environment tandem repeats exhibit a considerable degree of [11]. Therefore based on the concept of phenotype polymorphism in the genome of many eukaryotic cells [3]

5 Intl. J. Genet., 4(1): 04-10, 2014

Table 1: The Phenotypically identified and characterized local chicken ecotypes Identified Ecotypes Peculiar feature Dominant location Reference Jarso Red plumage color, no black eye color. East Hararghe zone [16, 17] Tepi Naked neck, black eye, single combed red skin Tepi [17] Tilili Pea comb, lack of shank feather. West zone [8] Gelila Plain head, pea comb, yellow shank color, lack of shank feather. [8] D/Elias Plain head, pea comp and v-shaped comb, do not have shank feather [8] M/Hamusit Crest head shape, all ecotypes (57%) pea except strawberry, lack of shank feather yellow shank color. [8] Gassay Crest head shape, all ecotypes (57%) pea except strawberry, lack of shank feather yellow shank color. South Gondar zone [8] Guangua Crest and plain head, pea comp, no shank feather, yellow shank Agew Awi zone [8] Mecha Plain and crest head shape, pea comp West Gojjam zone [8] Horro Flat head shape, pea comb type, blocky body yellow shank color. East Welega zone [8,15] Farta Crest head shape, pea comp type. Blocky body shape and yellow shank South Gondar zone [8, 15] Konso Flat head shape, pea comb type, blocky body shape, yellow shank SNNP region [15] Sheka Flat head, pea comb, blocky body shape, yellow shank color. SNNP region [15] Mandura Crest head, pea comb type, blocky body type and yellow shank color. Amahara, Gumuz, [8,15] Agew and Oromia Gugut Muffed, absent of wattle in hen Tache Armacheho [6] Gasgie Long necked and red in color [6] Nacked Neck Aggressive, absent of feather at neck Quara [6]

Table 2: The molecular characterized chicken ecotype in Ethiopia Ecotypes Number of allele per locus Reference Methods used for Genetic characterization Debere-Elias 6.29 [8] PCR Melo-Hamusit 6 [8] DNA extraction Tilili 5.57 [8] Gel electrophoresis Gassay 10 [8] Microsatellite marker Naked Neck [3] Not specified

Table 3: Performance of indigenous chicken ecotypes Traits Performance Reference Study site Aafe 217 days [25] HUCA Aafsm 169 days [4] South Ethiopia Egg/year 45 [22] WADU Egg/year 34 [23] Asella 37.5 [8] North west Ethiopia 56.5 [9] Ethiopia Egg/cultch 12-13egg/clutch [7] Fogera District Hatchability% 82.83 [26] Bure District Fertility% 78.6 [26] Bure District and are dispersed in the entire genome. The basic units of used tools such as genetic markers (restriction fragment the simple tandem repeats consist of small numbers of length, microsatellite marker, restriction endonucleatase base pairs (i.e. CAC, GATA, GACA etc. The PCR enzymes, heat-stable DNA Polymerase enzyme and PCR technique is a primer extension reaction for amplifying machine for molecular characterization of local chicken specific nucleic acids in vitro [18]. The sources of DNA ecotypes Naked Neck (Table 2). used in PCR reaction can be genomic DNA from whole blood or tissue, or forensic specimens and ancient Performances of the Characterized Chicken Ecotypes: biological sample. PCR is a powerful technique that allows Diverse environmental conditions and different cultural amplifying DNA sequence millions of times in just a few orientations have contributed to the observed genetic hours [19]. From the above real world Halima [8] was used variations of chickens [18]. In Ethiopia many researchers tools such as PCR machine, restriction endonucleatase recorded that performances of indigenous chickens are enzymes (DNA based markers ) for molecular well adapted to the tropics, resistant to poor management, characterization of local chicken ecotypes of Debre-Elias, feed shortages, tolerate to diseases and provide Melo-Hamusit, Tilili and Gassay whereas Tadelle [3] was better test of meat and eggs than exotic chicken [20].

6 Intl. J. Genet., 4(1): 04-10, 2014

However, they are poor performance in terms of egg size, Characterized Chickens and its Production Systems: slow growth rate, late maturity and slow age at first The rural poultry population in most African countries mating, small clutch size and hatchability [7, 19, 21]. accounts for more than 60 percent of the total national Various reports in different site showed that the poultry population [27]. However, inadequate attention quantitative traits performance of local chickens is varied has been given to evaluate these resources or to set up because of genotype (additive and dominant) and realistic and optimum breeding goals for their environmental effect which produced 30 to 60 improvement. As a result some of the animal genetic eggs/hen/year [22] at (WADU), 34 eggs /hen/year [23] at resources of Africa are endangered, unless urgent efforts Asella, 18-57 eggs/year/ hen [8] at Northwest Amhara, are taken to characterize and conserve [15]. The majority 12-13egg/cultch [7] at Fogera, 10.05 ± 0.15egg/cultch [21] of livestock genetic diversity is found in the developing at Bure and the other recent study reported that local world where documentation is scarce and risk of chicken eggs laid ranges from 53-60 egg/hen/year [24] at extinction is highest and increasing. Particularly, it is North-West Ethiopia. Therefore local chickens need estimated that 35 % of mammalian breeds and 63 % of relatively less environmental modification and highly avian breeds are at risk of extinction [11]. In Ethiopia genetic improvement to achieve increased productivity poultry production systems show a clear distinction [24]. between the traditional, low input system on the one side and modern production systems using relatively Major Causes of Variation and Identification Methods advanced technology on the other hand [19]. The of Characterized Chicken: Causes of variation is traditional poultry production system comprises of those typically generated from genetically and environmentally indigenous chickens and characterized by small flock size, variation between populations including number of low input and output and periodic devastation of the flock factors involved as natural and managemental aspect by disease [28]. There is no separate poultry house and considering artificial selection, mutation, migration and the chickens live in family dwellings together with human non-random mating [8]. While breeding domesticated beings, there is no purposeful feeding of chickens and animals, man has strongly forced the accumulation of scavenging is almost the only source of diet and there genetic differences between breeds and populations by is no designed selection and controlled breeding [10]. isolating and selecting them for favorable traits. The successes of the hatching and brooding process Therefore, to set up efficient conservation and depends on the maternal instinct of the broody hen and utilization measures reliable information about genetic prevalence of predators in the area, such as birds of prey, differences between individuals, populations and pets and some wild animals, all of which are listed as the breeds are required. Quantitative assessment of genetic major causes of premature death of chicks in Ethiopia [4]. diversity within and among populations is an i mportant tool for decision making in genetic Opportunities of Chicken Production: Indigenous conservation and utilization plans [3]. The most widely chickens provide major opportunities for increased used method to quantify these genetic diversities is protein production and income for smallholders and have utilizing phenotypic characters (morphological) and good adaptive potential [27, 31]. Chickens have a short molecular markers [3, 8]. The variation is adjusted by generation interval and a high rate of productivity. phenotypic markers as cheap and easy to apply but they They can also be transported with ease to different areas are subjected to environmental influences due to the and are relatively affordable and consumed by the rural nature of the qualitative and quantitative traits to be poor people as compared with other farm animals such as considered [8]. Similarly, protein polymorphisms/ cattle and small ruminants [7]. Chickens also play a biochemical markers have been applied to estimate the complementary role in relation to other crop livestock genetic variation within and among chicken activities. Indigenous chickens are good scavengers as populations [15].The diversity of the local chickens that well as foragers and have high levels of disease tolerance, are reported mostly on phenotypes including adult body possess good maternal qualities and are adapted to harsh weight, egg weight, reproduction performance and conditions and poor quality feeds as compared to the immune responses to various diseases [3, 8]. Limited exotic breeds [8]. reports have addressed the genetic diversity of the indigenous chickens [17] with the primary aim to Major Challenges: Reported challenges during understand the extent of genetic variation within and characterization were prevalence of disease, lack of proper among population. housing system and predation [8]. The main causes of

7 Intl. J. Genet., 4(1): 04-10, 2014 death were seasonal outbreaks of Newcastle disease for were the main constants of production. Finally the present chicken [7] and trypanosomosis for cattle [32]. In addition review investigation was recommended the following to Newcastle diseases, coccidiosis and fowl typhoid are important points: the major cause for chicken mortality [7, 29] followed by predator [8]. Village chicken production in Ethiopia Further research should be done to show diversity of characterized by lack of separate house prepare for their phenotypic and genetic characters within and chicken [8, 7, 21, 9]. This exposes the chicken to predator between the Ethiopian chicken ecotypes. and infectious diseases [7]. Predations were the major Phenotypic characterization of indigenous chicken constraints in village chicken production [8, 24, 29]. Wild should be supported by genetic characterization birds (Chilfit) were the first major and dangerous types of methods. predators followed by “Aner” and wild cat [29]. Access of market for those indigenous chickens should be emphasized. Management System and Feeding: Productive Protection of those chickens from genetic dilution performance of village chickens was relatively low and erosion should be emphasized. because of genetic and non-genetic factors [7]. Training for both farmers and extension staff Production losses due to poor chicken management focusing on disease control, improved housing and (feeding, housing and health care) were disclosed in Bure feeding, marketing system should be performed. district [29]. The nutritional status of local laying hens from chemical analysis of crop contents indicated that REFERENCES protein was below the requirement for optimum egg production [8]. The deficiency is more series during the 1. CSA, 2011. Report on live stock and livestock short rainy season and dry seasons [30]. characteristics. Central stastical authority, Addis Ababa, pp: 190. Market System: The price of live chickens and eggs 2. Bushra, B., 2012. The status of indigenous village fluctuate seasonally, more demand on holidays and at the chicken production and marketing system in Ethiopia. end of fasting seasons at that time the price increase M SC.Thesis, Addis Ababa University. [8, 29]. In human methods of transporting chicken and egg 3. Tadelle, D., 2003. Phenotypic and genetic to market create physical injury and other complications characterization of local chicken ecotypes in Ethiopia. on the chickens and eggs that reduce the quality of PhD Thesis, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany, products [7]. pp: 209. 4. Solomon, D., 2007. Suitability of hay-box CONCLUSION brooding technology to rural household poultry production system. Jimma University College of Generally Ethiopian identified chicken ecotypes are Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine Jimma Ethiopia, originated from red jangle fowl from south East Asia. pp: 1-2. Small portion of chicken ecotypes identified and 5. Mekonnen G. Egziabher, Teketel Forsido, Alemu characterized. Among those chicken ecotypes Tilili, Tepi, G. Wold, Z. Dagnatchew and Addis Anteneh, 1991. Jarso, Gelila, Debre-Elias, Melo- Hamusit, Gassy, The Ethiopian livestock industry: retrospect and Guangua, Mecha, Horro, Farta, Konso, Sheka, prospects. Proc. 3rd National Livest. Improvement Mandura, Gugut, Gasgie and Naked Neck are Conference, Institute of Agricultural Research, Addis phenotypically identified chicken ecotypes in Amhara, Ababa, Ethiopia. SNNP, Oromia and Binishangule Gumuz region. Whereas 6. Addis, H., W. Zewdu and M. Hailu, 2014. Breeding molecular characterized chicken ecotypes are Debere- practice and objective of indigenous chicken in North Elias, Melo-Hamusit, Gassay, Tilili and Naked Neck. Wollo, Amhara, Ethiopia. International Journal of Those identified chicken ecotypes show a large variation Live Stock Production, 5: 15-22. in body position, plumage color, comb type and 7. Bogale, K., 2008. In-situ characterization of local productivity. Increased protein production and income of chicken ecotypes for functional traits and smallholders is the most important opportunities of the productions stems in Fogera Woreda, Amhara characterized chicken ecotypes production. Prevalence of regional state. A Thesis submitted to Haramaya disease, lack of proper housing system and predation University. Ethiopia, pp: 123.

8 Intl. J. Genet., 4(1): 04-10, 2014

8. Halima, H.M., 2007. Phenotypic and genetic 19. Meseret, M., 2010. Characterization of village chicken characterization of indigenous chicken populations in production and marketing system in Gomma woreda, Northwest Ethiopia. PhD Thesis, South Africa Jimma zone, Ethopia.M.SC. Thesis, Jimma University, university of Free State. In Ethiopia. Ethiopia, pp: 110. 9. Fisseha, M., T. Azage and D. Tadelle, 2010. 20. Tadelle, D. and B. Ogle, 2001. Village poultry Indigenous chicken production and marketing production Systems in the central highlands of systems in Ethiopia, characteristics and opportunities Ethiopia. Tropical Animal Health Proceeding, for market-oriented envelopment’s working paper 33: 521-537. No.24; Improving Productivity and Market, Success 21. Fisseha, M., 2009. Studies on production and (IPMS) of Ethiopian Farmers Project, International marketing system of local chicken ecotypes in Bure Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), pp: 66. Woreda, North west Amhara. M.Sc. Thesis, Hawassa 10. Tadelle, D., 1996. Studies on village poultry University, Hwassa, Ethiopia, pp: 166. production systems in the central highlands of 22. Kidane, H., 1986. Performance of F1cross breeds. Ethiopia. M.Sc Thesis, Swedish University of Welaita Agricultural Development Unit. Animal Agricultural Sciences. husbandry and breeding. Welaita Sodo, Ethiopia. 11. FAO, 2011. Draft guide lines on phenotypic Bulletin, 4(33). characterization of animal genetics resource. Food 23. Brannang, E. and S. Person, 1990. Ethiopian animal and agriculture organization, on genetic resources for husbandry and Breeding in the Tropics and food and agriculture Rome, pp: 6. Sub- tropics. Humboldt University of Berlin, 12. Negusie, D., D. Tadelle, L.H. Vanderwaaij and Germany. Uppsala, Sweden, 12 bulletins, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute J.A.M. Van Arendok, 2010. Morphological feature of (IPGRI), Rome, Italy. indigenous chicken population of Ethiopia. Animal 24. Fisseha, M., M. Abera and D. Tadelle, 2010. Genetic Resources, 46: 11-23. Assessment of village chicken production system 13. Duguma, R., 2006. Phenotypic characterization of and evaluation of the productive and reproductive some indigenous chicken ecotypes of dale, Wonso performance of local chicken ecotype in Bure district, and Loka Abaya woredas of southern Ethiopia. MSC, North West Ethiopia. African Journal of Agriculture Thesis. Hwassa University, pp: 95. Research, 5: 1739-1748. 14. Aklilu, H., 2007. Village poultry in Ethiopia; 25. Fassil, B., T. Adnoy, H.M. J. Gjøen and A. Girma, Socio-technical analysis and learning with farmers. 2010. Production Performance of Dual Purpose PHD. Thesis, Wagningen University Netherlands. Crosses of Two Indigenous with Two Exotic Chicken 15. Nigussie, D., 2011. Breeding programs for indigenous Breeds in Sub-tropical Environment, Department of chicken in Ethiopia: analysis of diversity in Animal and Range Sciences, College of Agriculture, production systems and chicken populations. PhD Hawassa University, Ethiopia, pp: 702-708. Thesis, Wageningen University, the Netherlands, 26. Fisseha Moges, Abera Mellesse and Tadelle Dessie., pp: 148. 2010. Assessment of village chicken production 16. Eskindir, A., K. Kefelegn and D. Tadelle, 2013. system and evaluation of the productive and Phenotypic characterization of chicken in Ethiopia. reproductive performance local chicken ecotype in International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Bure district, North West Ethiopia. African Journal of Multidisplinary Studies, 1: 24-32. Ethiopia. Agricultural Research, 5(13): 1739-1748. 17. Tadelle, D., T. Million, Y. Alemu and K.J. Peters, 2003. 27. Sonaiya, E.B., 1997. African network on rural Poultry Village chicken production system in Ethiopia. development: Progress Report. Use pattern and performance evaluation and 28. Mammo, M. and T. Wudu, 2011. Phenotypic and chicken products and socio-economic factions of genetic characteristics of indigenous chickens in chicken. Live stock Resource Rural Development, Ethiopia. African Journal of Agriculture Research, 15(1): 208. 6: 5398-5404. 18. Besbes, B., 2009. Genotype evaluation and breeding 29. Mekonnen, G., 2007.Characterization of small holder of poultry for performance under suboptimal poultry production and marketing system. M.Sc. village conditions. World’s Poultry Science Journal, Thesis, Awassa College of Agriculture, Hawassa 65: 260-271. University, pp: 95.

9 Intl. J. Genet., 4(1): 04-10, 2014

30. Aemu, Y. and D. Tadelle, 1997. The status poultry 32. Tewodros, F., T. Mitiku, M. Tadegegn and research and development in Ethiopia, research bullet C. Mersha, 2012. Prevalence of bovine in No.4, poultry commodity research program trypanosomosis and distribution of vectors in Hawa Debeezeit Agriculture research center. Alemaya Gelan District, Oromia Region, Ethiopia. Global University of Agriculture, pp: 62. Veterinarian, 9(3): 297-302, ISSN 1992-6197. 31. Addis, G and B. Malede, 2014. Effect of gene segregations on existed performance of chicken ecotypes in Ethiopia, review. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 21(4): 675-680, ISSN 1990-9233.

10