Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020 Assessment and Prioritization of Major Camel Diseases in Selected Areas of Afar Regional State, Samara,

Wossene Negash1*, Nuru Seid1 & Fikru Gizaw1

1College of Veterinary Medicine, Samara University, P.O. Box, 132, Samara, Ethiopia. 1*Email: [email protected]

Article Received: 11 December 2019 Article Accepted: 07 February 2020 Article Published: 17 March 2020

ABSTRACT

A cross sectional study was carried out from January to July 2014 GC in an attempt to assess and prioritize major camel diseases and identify risk factors in the selected areas of . Camel owners’ interview and retrospective data analysis were the study methods employed. Relevant collected data were organized, filtered and fed into Microsoft Excel sheet and further analyzed using SPSS statistical tools at P< 0.05. Descriptive statistics was carried to determine frequencies of camel diseases camel. Based on descriptive statistics, the study identified and prioritized 16 camel diseases. Chi-Square analysis was computed to measure the degree of association between disease occurrence and risk factors (age, sex, study area and season). Binomial and multinomial logistic regression analyzes were computed at P<0.05 to measure the significance of associated risk factors on disease occurrence. Statistically significant variations (P<0.05) were observed for sex, seasons, age, and study sites on the occurrence of disease with exception kebeles (P>0.05). Though the study duly has revealed numerous diseases of the camel, the actual existence (laboratory based confirmation) and epidemiology of each disease still demands further investigative studies. Therefore, this study recommends further and continued research activities or confirmatory investigations on the present findings to be conducted including specific sample collection and laboratory identification of etiologies of each disease combined with careful epidemiological studies. Keywords: Camel, Survey, Disease Frequency, Afar Region.

1. INTRODUCTION

Geographically situated in the northeastern part of the country, Afar region is located between 39o34’ and 42o28’ East Longitude and 8o49’and 14o30’North Latitude (CSA, 2008). The region shares common international boundaries with the state of Eritrea in the north-east and in the east, as well as regional boundaries with the Regional States of Tigray in the north-west, Amhara in the south-west, in the south and Somali in the south-east. The Afar regional state comprises 5 administrative zones, 32 districts and 331 kebeles (PFE, 2009) where the region is situated in the Great Rift Valley of East Africa.

There are four distinct seasons in the region, namely, Kerma (summer), Hagay (autumn), Gilele (winter) and Sugum (spring) and climatically characterized by an arid and semi-arid climate with low and erratic rainfall. The annual temperature and rainfall in the region is 30-50°C and 200-600mm, respectively. The altitude in the region ranges from 100-1000 meters above sea level (Berhanu, 2008). The production system of the region is pastoralism (90%) and agro-pastoralism (10%).

The northern part of Afar Region is a semi-desert with thorny species of shrubs and acacia; further south in the Awash valley, steppe vegetation is dominant. Both ecological stages are facing bush encroachment with Prosopisjuliflora (Woyane) (Piguet, 2001). Major crops cultivated in the region include cereals, maize, sorghum, teff, pulses and oilseeds (CSA, 2009/ 2010).

The total population is estimated to be 1,493,409 (PFE, 2009) and total estimated livestock population included 2,336,488 heads of cattle 4,267,969 head of goats, 2,463,632 head of sheep, 852,016 head of camels and 187,287 head of equines that support the region and contribute to the national economy (ARS, 2010).

For pastoral community, livestock is the most important economic factor influencing all other socio-political and cultural activities. However, benefit from livestock sector remained marginal which could be attributed to

23 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020 inadequate year round feed resources, losses from widespread diseases interacting with a lack of adequate veterinary services, pastoral conflict, poor management under which they are served, low genetic potential for milk production of the indigenous livestock breeds and poor access to input and output market services and inadequate institutions (Assegid, 2000; Garry, 2001).

The primary challenge for the region’s community has remained to be livestock diseases including pasteurollosis, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CCPP and CBPP), foot and mouse disease, anthrax, PPR, bloody diarrhea, skin and lung diseases and internal and external parasites and others (Save the children, UK, 2008; MOA, 2004; Gelagay, 1996; Asfaw and Sintaro, 2000).

Research based reliable organized and prioritized livestock disease information is unavailable. Experiences have shown that (Coppock, 1994) information on animal health had been focus of research. However, knowing the type and extent of the common and/or major health problems is very important to livestock owners. Veterinarians and researchers can assist further study of epidemiological study on diseases of livestock the development of herd health strategies and the selections of possible interventions (Radiostatis, et al., 1994; Damte, 2003).

Significant seasonal migrations within the vast lowlands are leading factors for spread of many endemic and epidemic livestock diseases. According to some studies, livestock diseases accounted for more than 50% of the total mortality in the lowlands (Coppock, 1994). Disease, therefore, reduces household food consumption both directly and indirectly.This situationnecessitates urgently identifying those livestock diseases followed by designing of appropriate control and prevention strategies.

This general scenario holds true also for camels in Afar region. Unavailability of organized and prioritized camel diseases in the region has instigated research activity aimed at generation of preliminary data on camel diseases.

Therefore, the objectives of this study were to

 Assess and prioritize major camel diseases in the study areas

 Identify risk factors associated with camel disease occurrence

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Description of the study areas

The study was carried out from January to August, 2014 in an attempt to identify and prioritize major camel diseases on six selected Afar region districts. Three districts (Asaita, and ) and three districts (, Dewew and ) were selected from Zone 1 and 5, respectively.

In Zone 1, as of 2007 census, the total human and camel population was estimated to be 421,790 and 319,402, respectively. Maize, rice, groundnut and chickpea were major crops cultivated in Zone 1. On the other hand, in Zone 5, the census study carried out at the same time of the year indicated the total human and camel population to be 183,701 and 87, 020, respectively. Maize, sessame, masho, groundnut, chickpea, and rice to be major crops and green pepper, tomato, Onion, and sweet potato to be major vegetables in Zone 5. Four seasons circulate in the region each year: Kerma (summer), Hagay (Autumn), Gilele (winter) and Sugum (Spring).

24 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020

2.2. The study population

The study was conducted on local domestic camels reared by Afar pastoral and agro-pastoral camel owners. Camels of all age groups and sex were included in the study.

2.3. The study design

The study was carried out applying a cross sectional study design. Methodologically, questionnaire and retrospective data analysis were used to generate the required information. Two zones of the region (Zone 1 and zone 5) were selected randomly. Three districts selected from each zone and three kebeles in turn selected of each district. Eight camel owners selected of each kebele for interview. As a result, 144 camel owners interviewed. Retrospective data of five years (2009-2013 GC) collected of six selected veterinary clinics in the study districts.

2.4. Sampling methods and sample size determination

A combination of both probability and non-probability sampling methods were applied in the study. Zones (zone 1 and 5), districts and kebeles were purposively selected based on the accessibility of selected study areas, study population density and argo-ecologic differences. From Zone 1, three districts (Asaita, Dubti and Chifra) and Zone 5, three districts (Telalak, Dawe and Dalifage) were purposively selected. Similarly, three kebeles from each selected district were in turn selected purposively. However, interviewees per each selected kebele were selected using simple random sampling method. The total number of interviewees (sample size) required for this study was determined using a formula given by (Thrusfield, 1995).

2 2 N= [1.96 Pexp (1-Pexp)] /d

(Where N= Sample size, Pexp= Expected prevalence, d= Absolute precision).

In determining the total number of samples to be taken, the absolute precision was taken to be 0.05 and expected prevalence of 0.5. Substituting variables the formula has provided the total sample to be 384. However, due to information redundancy observed during the study period, the total number of interviewees to be taken was reduced from 384 to 144 which indirectly fixed the selection of eight (8) camel owners/respondents to be randomly selected of each study kebeles.

2.5. Study methodology

Two complementary study methods (questionnaire and retrospective data analysis) were parallelly carried out to generate combined possible valid information.

Questionnaire survey

Prior to administration of questionnaires, the study questionnaires were carefully drafted and structurally organized and pretested. Each questionnaire paper comprised of nine pages and 21 targeted questions written in English language. During the study period, 144 questionnaires papers were prepared and administered to 144 randomly selected different livestock owners (both adult men and women). Translating English to and then to Afar local language, each camel owner was asked for the 21 specific questions pertaining to camel disease conditions. The same study questionnaire formats were used in all study areas.

25 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020

Retrospective data collection

To support validity of questionnaire outputs, retrospective data of five years (2009-2013 GC) were also collected from six selected veterinary clinics present in the six selected districts using a separate type of paper format prepared for this purpose. This was assumed to increase the validity and truth of the respondents’ responses or to correlate clinical data with community responses.

2.6. Data management and analysis

Raw data collected of camel owners and veterinary clinical records were organized and fed into Microsoft excel software to organize and filter for further advanced software analysis by Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS, Version 15.0, 2005). Descriptive statistics was conducted to determine the frequency (priority) of diseases of camels and other related rates of zones, districts, age groups, sex and seasons. Chi-square test was employed to assess the existence of association between disease occurrence and risk factors. Both binomial and multinomial logistic regression analyzes were performed to evaluate the significance of association between disease occurrence and risk factors.

3. RESULTS

A total of 144 livestock owners were interviewed and identified 16/15 camel diseases as prioritized in Table 2. The community responses on the camel diseases were also further supported by analysis of five years’ retrospective data records from six selected veterinary clinics in the study districts. On the basis of etiologic agents, camel diseases reported in the current study could be categorized into six major groups: Bacterial, parasitic, fungal, viral, unknown etiology and miscellaneous diseases as shown in the following table (Table 1).

Table 1: Summary of camel disease by etiology

Frequency and disease category by etiology/causative agent

Livestock

species

Bacterial (%) Bacterial (%) Viral (%) Fungal (%) Parasitic Miscellaneous (%) (%) Unknown Camel 4 (25) 2 (12.5) 1(6.25) 3 (18.75) 3(18.75) 3(18.75)

Identified camel diseases and related findings

The study identified 16 potential camel diseases based on the responses of 144 camel owners and retrospective data analysis of six selected veterinary clinical records (Table 2).

26 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020

Table 2. Total frequency of camel diseases

Diseases

Local name Scientific name Frequency (%)

Kirbi Fasciollosis 11 (3.27 )

Sole/Tuffo/waydolele Pasteurollosis 8 (2.38 )

Kahu/ Gosom Respiratory problems 90 (26.79)

Geremole Trypanosomosis 48 (14.29)

Ambrarisso/Korboda Camel pox 23 (6.84)

Agara Meange 46 (13.7 )

Galidele Camel wound 11 (3.27 )

Surato Nasal discharge 13 (3.87)

Angubiack/Duduba Mastitis 6 (1.79 )

Begikefna Constipation 5 (1.49 )

Sandera Orf 29 (8.63 )

Arewegit PPR 3 (1 )

Ladore/Geno Anthrax 2 (0.6 )

Slaitu Twisted neck syndrome 34 (10.1 )

Gublo CBPP 6 (1.79)

Hama Ringworm 1(0.3 )

200

150

100

179 Frequency 157

50

0 Zone 1 Zone 5 Zone

Figure 1: A bar graph indicating total frequency of camel diseases by zone

27 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020

The Chi-Square analysis indicated that there was a statistically significant difference between the two zones (Zones 1 and 5) (P = 0.000).

Figure 2: A bar chart illustrating total frequency of camel diseases by district

The occurrence of camel diseases between districts studied indicated a significant difference statistically (P=0.000).

100

80

60

91 Frequency

40

68

61

53

42 20

19

2 0 Gilele/Winter Sugum/Spring kerma/Summer Hagay/Autumn All seasons Kerma and Gilele and Sugum Hagay Seasons

Figure 3: A bar graph indicating the seasons in which diseases occur most. A statistically significant difference (P<0.05) was also observed among seasons.

Figure 4. A bar graph illustrating total frequency of camel diseases by age

28 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020

In an attempt to investigate the effect of age as risk factor on disease occurrence, statistically significant difference (P= 0.000) was observed using Chi-Square analysis.

Analysis of sex as factor indicated a statistically significant association (P=0.000) with disease occurrence. On the other hand, a statistical analysis has made for kebeles revealing the absence of statistically significant association (P= 0.851) with the occurrence of disease (Table 2).

Table 3: Summary of risk factors and their association of risk with camel diseases occurrence

Variables Frequency (%) P-value

Zone Zone 1 157 (46.72) 0.000

Zone 5 179 (53.27)

Telalak 69 (20.54) 0.000

Chifra 56 (16.67)

District Dubti 72 (21.43)

Asaita 29 (8.6)

Dawe 62 (18.45)

Dalifage 48 (14.29)

Male 13 (3.87) 0.000

Sex Female 36 (10.71)

Both sex ( mixed) 287 (85.42)

Gilele 91(27.08) 0.000

Sugum 53 (17.8)

Season Hagay 2 (0.6)

Kerma 68 (25.6)

Kerma and sugum 61(18.2)

Gilele and hagay 19 (5.7)

All seasons 42 (12.5)

Young 61 (18.15)

Adult 20 (6)

Old 10 (3)

29 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020

Age groups Young and old 24 (7.14) 0.000

Adult and young 27 (8)

Adult and old 59 (17.56)

All age groups 135 (40.18)

Kebeles 18 kebeles 0.532

4. DISCUSSION

Combination of retrospective data and community interview findings has revealed 16 major camel diseases (Table 1) which were supposed to affect camel health and productivity. Dagnachew (1997) had conducted livestock disease survey on Zone 2 13 camel diseases which nearly agrees with the current findings. The local and scientific names of the diseases he reported in camel are also similar with little variations due to local differences in naming of the same disease. The more numerous disease lists reported in the present study in camels could be attributed more study area coverage (six selected districts) in contrast to a single study district he studied, Aba’ala district. Moreover, major diseases reported by Dagnachew (1997) were also reported by the present study.

More frequently observed in the present study was the camel complex respiratory problem (locally known as “Kahu” which ranks first in this study (90 (26.79%) and is etiologically a disease of with a complicated causative agent/s /which dictates the more seriousness of the disease in camels. This finding agrees with the reports of Zelleke Dagnachew (1997), in which this disease was ranked first in his study on Zone 2 of Afar region. Similarly, the result also agreed with reports of Ayeletet al. (2004) where complex respiratory disease is the major health problem in North Shoa, central Ethiopia. The rampancy of the problem might be associated with climatic stress, feed and water shortage, concurrent diseases, maltreatment (traditional) or drenching. As shown in Table 2, the second leading camel disease was found to be (48 (14.29%)) camel Trypanosomosis (locally termed” Geremole”). This disease was also reported by Tekle (2007) from Alamata district in even with elevated frequency. A study conducted by Dagnachew (1997) also ranked it fourth. Ecologic difference, sampling techniques /sample size and others could be assumed as the possible reasons for variations of the findings. The other challenging camel health situation was found to be camel ectoparasitic diseases, locally known as” Agara” which was ranked third (46 (13.17%)). The finding nearly agrees with the reports of Dagnachew (1997) who ranked it second from the diseases identified.

Many risk factors found to be significantly associated with camel disease occurrence (P<0.05). Study sites, sex and age of the animals, and season showed significant difference with respect to disease occurrence (Tables 3). Zonal and district level significant variations could be attributed to the difference in ecology, nutritional impact, camel breed type, geography and management practices though kebeles were found to have no impact on disease occurrence (P>0.05). Husbandry practices and breeds of animals kept could be probable reasons.Statistically significant variation (P<0.05) was observed among different age groups (Table 3). Young camels were frequently affected followed by older camels that could be attributed to strength of immunity in adult and followed by older

30 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020 camels. Urquhart, et al., 1996 and Melauncon, 1993 supported the current findings that young animals are severely affected than older animals, since they possess a higher ratio of accessible surface to body volume, inefficient grooming behavior and other defense capabilities/immunological maturity (Melauncon, 1993) as the animals get older and the development of acquired resistance due to repeated exposure. It was also observed that much lower frequency of diseases was observed in adult cattle compared to young and old once.

Sex of camels was found to influence occurrence of camel diseases statistically (P<0.05) where more frequency was identified in female animals compared to male animals. This may be due to the exposure of female animals to stress conditions, especially lactating and pregnant animals.

Season was found to influence significantly (P<0.05) the occurrence of diseases in camels. The current study found that majority of camel diseases occur in the season winter/gielele followed by summer /kerma season, thirdly in spring/sugum and least in the season autumn/hagay.

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Interview and retrospective data analysis methods were used and the study has revealed 16 potential camel diseases that are supposed to impact camel health and productivity along with their frequency of occurrence. Except kebeles, all factors (age and sex of animals, season and study sites) were found to influence disease occurrence.

Based on the findings, the following recommendations were forwarded

 Confirmatory investigations should be done on those identified diseases

 Extensive and continued epidemiological investigations on camel diseases should be launched besides disease identification and characterization

 Further continued studies on the remaining areas of the region must strongly and urgently be conducted

REFERENCES Afar region agricultural development bureau (ARADB), 2010: Regional information on agriculture, samara, Ethiopia.

Afar regional state (ARS), 2007: Afar region woreda level house and population census, samara, Ethiopia.

Asfaw, W. and Sintaro, T. 2000: The status of foot and mouth disease in Ethiopia, a growing concern. Ethiopian veterinary Epidemiology Newslatter. , Ethiopia Vol. I. Issue 2: 1-5.

Assegid, W. 2000: Constraints to livestock and its products in Ethiopia: Policy implications. DVM thesis, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Addis Ababa University, Debrezeit, Ethiopia.

Ayelet, G., Yigezu, L., Gelaye, E., Tariku, S. and Asmare, K. 2004: Epidemiologic and Serologic investigation of multifactorial respiratory diseases of sheep in Center high land of Ethiopia. Journal of applied research in Veterinary Medicine. 2 (4), 274-278.

Berhanu, A. 2008: Primary Animal Health care in Ethiopia. In: Primary Animal Health in the 21st century: Shaping the rules, Polices and Institutions. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, PP: 1-4.

31 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com

Middle East Journal of Applied Science & Technology (MEJAST)

(Peer Reviewed International Journal) Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 23-32, January-March 2020

Coopreck, D.L.1994: The Borenaplaute of southern Ethiopia. Synthesis of pastoral research, development and change, 1986-91.System study.International Livestock Center for Africa (ILCA), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.No.4.

CSA (Central Statistical Agency), 2009/2010: Agricultural sampling survey report on area and crop production, Addis Ababa.

CSA (Central Statistical Authority), 2008: Summary and statistical report of the 2007. Population and Housing Census. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Dagnatchew, Z., 1997: Traditional Veterinary Practices in Aba' AlaWereda, Zone 2, Afar region. Dryland Husbandry Project: Organization for Social Science Research in Eastem and Southern Africa (OSSREA). Ethiopia, Addis Ababa.

Damte, D. 2003: Major health problems of cattle and camel in the field and abattoir, around . DVM Thesis, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Addis Ababa University, DebreZeit, Ethiopia.

François Piguet , 2001: Assessments Missions report: UN-Emergencies Unit for Ethiopia Multi-Agency June and August Addis Ababa.

Garry, F., 2001: Integrated Livestock Management, Colorado State University: In proceedings of the 5th Western Dairy Management Conference Las Vegas, Nevada.

Gelagay, A. 1996: Epidemiological and serological investigation of multifactorial ovine respiratory disease and vaccine trials on the highland of North Shoa, Ethiopia, DVM thesis, AAU,FVM, DebreZeit.

Melauncon, J., 1993: Lice, Large Animal veterinarian, Mt. Morris, IL 61054-1497, Wessey Ave, USA.

Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), 2004: Monthly Disease Outbreak Report: In: national Animal Health Department Reports. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Radostits, D.M. BLOOD, D.C. AND Gay, C.C., 1994: Veterinary Medicine. A Textbook of diseases of cattle, sheep, pigs, goats and horses.8th ed. London.Bailliere Tindal. Pp. 748-785.

Save the Children-UK, DPPFSB, and DPPA, 2008: Livelihoods and vulnerabilities. An understanding of livelihoods in Afar Regional State, Ethiopia. Addis Ababa.

SPSS, Version 15.0,2005: Statistical packages for Social Sciences, SPSS, Inc. at www.spss.com

Tekle, Y., 2007: Major Animal Health Problems of Market Oriented Livestock Development in AlamataWoreda. DVM Thesis, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Addis Ababa University, DebreZeit, Ethiopia.

Thrusfield, M., 1995: Veterinary Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Blackwell Science Ltd. London.Pp 179-178.

Urquhart, G.M., Armour, J., Duncan, J. L., Dunn, A. M., and Jennings. F. W., 1996: Veterinary Parasitology, 2nd ed., Black well science Ltd, London, UK.

32 | P a g e ISSN (Online): 2582- 0974 Website: www.mejast.com