Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:03:11.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surveying animal genetic resources to manage biodiversity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2010

John A. Woolliams ,
D. Pilling  and
B. Scherf
John A. Woolliams*
Affiliation:
The Roslin Institute & R(D)SVS, University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
D. Pilling
Affiliation:
Animal Production and Health Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153Rome, Italy
B. Scherf
Affiliation:
Animal Production and Health Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153Rome, Italy
*
Correspondence to: J.A. Woolliams, The Roslin Institute, University of Edinburgh, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK. email: [email protected]
Get access

Summary

There is a wide international consensus that there is an urgent need to compile national inventories of animal genetic resources, supported by periodic monitoring of trends and threats, to underpin their effective management. This paper gives an overview of how to set about this task, primarily through national strategies but also through ad hoc surveys. It is important to establish stakeholder involvement at an early stage of setting up the national strategy so that the surveys can be made more effective and the emergent actions can be more readily implemented. There are a wide variety of tools available for surveying and monitoring, ranging from mapping expeditions to household surveys and censuses, encompassing methods associated with rapid rural appraisals. Tools have different strengths and weaknesses and their relative cost effectiveness will depend on objectives. Performing a baseline survey is a key step because it serves as a reference point for future monitoring; however, to be cost effective, more rudimentary surveys may be needed beforehand to establish reliable design parameters. Calibration of one method to another is an important task when several methods are being used for monitoring. Planning and design, communication, sensitive field work, data management and an analysis appropriate to the objectives are all necessary elements of a successful survey.

Résumé

Au plan international, il est largement convenu que, pour soutenir une gestion efficace des ressources zoogénétiques, il est très urgent de dresser des inventaires nationaux accompagnés du suivi périodique des tendances et des menaces. Ce document présente les façons d'entreprendre cette tâche, essentiellement par le biais des stratégies nationales, mais également par le biais d'enquêtes spéciales. Il est important de définir l'engagement des parties prenantes à un stade précoce de l'organisation de la stratégie nationale pour que les enquêtes puissent se faire de façon plus efficace et que les actions qui en résultent soient mises en œuvre plus rapidement. Plusieurs outils différents sont disponibles pour les enquêtes et le suivi, des expéditions cartographiques aux enquêtes et au recensement des ménages, englobant les méthodes associées aux évaluations rurales rapides. Les outils ont des forces et des faiblesses différentes et leur rentabilité relative dépendra des objectifs. La réalisation d'une enquête initiale est une étape fondamentale car elle sert de point de référence pour le suivi; toutefois, pour assurer sa rentabilité, des enquêtes plus rudimentaires pourraient être nécessaires à l'avance pour établir des paramètres conceptuels fiables. L'étalonnage d'une méthode par rapport à une autre est une tâche importante lorsque plusieurs méthodes sont utilisées pour le suivi. La planification et la conception, la communication, les travaux délicats de terrain, la gestion des données et une analyse appropriée des objectifs sont tous des éléments nécessaires d'une enquête couronnée de succès.

Resumen

Hay un amplio conceso a nivel internacional acerca de que existe la urgente necesidad de reunir inventarios nacionales de recursos zoogenéticos, apoyados por la supervisión periódica de las tendencias y las amenazas, para respaldar la gestión eficaz de los mismos. Este documento ofrece una visión general acerca de cómo emprender esta tarea, fundamentalmente a través de estrategias nacionales, pero también por medio de encuestas diseñadas específicamente para este fin. Es importante determinar la participación de las diferentes partes interesadas en una fase inicial de la creación de la estrategia nacional, para que las encuestas puedan ser realizadas de la forma más eficaz posible y las acciones de urgencia sean implementadas más fácilmente. Existe una gran variedad de herramientas disponibles para la supervisión y el seguimiento, que van desde asignación de expediciones a las encuestas de familias y censos, que abarca métodos asociados con la rápida evaluación de las zonas rurales. Las herramientas tienen fortalezas y debilidades y su relativa relación coste-rendimiento dependerá de los objetivos. La realización de una encuesta de partida es un paso clave, dado que sirve de punto de referencia

Keywords

livestock breedsmonitoringinventoriesrural appraisaltoolsthreat managementrisk managementRaces d'animaux d'élevagesuiviinventairesévaluation ruraleoutilsgestion des menacesgestion des risquesRazas de ganadosupervisióninventariosvaloración ruralherramientasgestión de las amenazasgestión del riesgo
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales , Volume 47 , July 2010 , pp. 23 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ABRMC. 1989. Buying market research (keynote guide). LondonGoogle Scholar
Andriolo, A., Piovezan, U., da Costa, M.J.R.P., Laake, J. & Duarte, J.M.B. 2005. Aerial line transect survey to estimate abundance of Marsh Deer (Blastocerus dichotomus) (Illiger, 1815). Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol., 48(5): 807–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayalew, W., van Dorland, A. & Rowlands, J. eds. 2004. Design, execution and analysis of the livestock breed survey in Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia. Addis Ababa and Nairobi, Oromia Agricultural Development Bureau and International Livestock Research Institute.Google Scholar
Bayliss, P. & Yeomans, K.M. 1989. Correcting bias in aerial survey population estimates of feral livestock in northern Australia using the double-count technique. J. Appl. Ecol., 26(3): 925–933.Google Scholar
Bourn, D., Wint, W., Blench, R. & Woolley, E. 1994. Nigerian livestock resources survey. World Anim. Rev., 78 (available at www.fao.org/ag/aga/agap/FRG/FEEDback/War/t1300b/t1300b0g.htm#nigerian%20livestock%20resources%20survey).Google Scholar
Conroy, C. 2001. Participatory situation analysis with livestock keepers: a guide. Pune, India, BAIF, and Chatham, UK, Natural Resources Institute (available at www.smallstock.info/research/reports/R7359/LivestockPA_Manual.pdf).Google Scholar
Conroy, C. 2005. Participatory livestock research – a guide. London, Intermediate Technology Development Group.Google Scholar
Dorward, A., Anderson, S., Nava, Y., Pattison, J., Paz, R., Rushton, J. & Sanchez Vera, E. 2005. A guide to indicators and methods for assessing the contribution of livestock keeping to the livelihoods of the poor. London, Department of Agricultural Sciences, Imperial College (available at www.smallstock.info/research/reports/R7823/R7823-guide.pdf).Google Scholar
FAO. 1993. Rapid appraisal methods for coastal communities, by Townsend, P.. Rome, Italy (available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/field/006/ad477e/ad477e00.pdf).Google Scholar
FAO. 2000. Manual on participatory epidemiology – method for the collection of action-oriented epidemiological intelligence, by Mariner, J.C. & Paskin, R.. Rome, Italy, Animal Health Manual No. 10 (available at www.fao.org/docrep/003/X8833E/x8833e00.htm).Google Scholar
FAO. 2005. SEAGA Livestock guide: planning with a gender and HIV lense. Rome (available at www.fao.org/sd/seaga/downloads/en/livestocken.pdf).Google Scholar
FAO. 2007. Global plan of action for animal genetic resources and the Interlaken Declaration. Rome, Italy (available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1404e/a1404e00.pdf).Google Scholar
FAO. 2009. Preparation of national strategies and action plans for animal genetic resources. FAO Animal Production and Health Guidelines. No. 2. Rome, Italy (available at www.fao.org/docrep/012/i0770e/i0770e00.htm).Google Scholar
FAO. 2010. Breeding strategies for sustainable management of animal genetic resources. FAO Animal Production and Health Guidelines. No. 3. Rome, Italy (available at: www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1103e/i1103e.pdf).Google Scholar
Government of Pakistan. 2006. Pakistan livestock census 2006. Lahore, Pakistan, Agricultural Census Organization (available at www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/aco/publications/pakistan-livestock-cencus2006/lsc2006.html).Google Scholar
Kirsopp-Reed, K. & Hinchcliffe, F. eds. 1994. Livestock. RRA Notes 20 (available at www.planotes.org/pla_backissues/20.html).Google Scholar
LDG. 2003. The livestock and poverty assessment methodology. A toolkit for practitioners. Reading, UK, Livestock Development Group, University of Reading (available at www.smallstock.info/research/reports/R7359/LivestockPA_Manual.pdf).Google Scholar
LPPS & Köhler-Rollefson, I. 2005. Indigenous breeds, local communities. Documenting animal breeds and breeding from a community perspective. Sadri, India, Lokhit Pashu-Palak Sansthan (available at www.pastoralpeoples.org/docs/ikab.pdf).Google Scholar
Marriott, F.H.C. & Wint, W. 1985. Sampling procedures and statistical methodology used in low level aerial surveys. An appraisal. Report to ILCA, PO Box 2468, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Saint Hellier, Jersey, UK, Resource Inventory and Management (available at http://ergodd.zoo.ox.ac.uk/download/reports/marrioitand%20wint85.doc).Google Scholar
Marsland, N., Wilson, I., Abeyasekera, S. & Kleih, U. 2001. Combining quantitative (formal) and qualitative (informal) survey methods. Socio-Economic Methodologies for Natural Resources Research. Best Practice Guidelines. Chatham and Reading, UK, Natural Resources Institute and University of Reading (available at www.reading.ac.uk/SSC/publications/guides/qqa.pdf).Google Scholar
Ogutu, J.O., Bhola, N., Piepho, H.-P. & Reid, R. 2006. Efficiency of strip- and line-transect surveys of African savanna mammals. J. Zool., 269(2): 149–160.Google Scholar
Peres, C.A. 1999. General guidelines for standardizing line-transect surveys of tropical forest primates. Neotrop. Primates, 7(1): 11–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowlands, J., Nagda, S., Rege, E., Mhlanga, F., Dzama, K., Gandiya, F., Hamudikwanda, H., Makuza, S., Moyo, S., Matika, O., Nangomasha, E. & Sikosana, J. 2003. A report to FAO on the design, execution and analysis of livestock breed surveys – a case study in Zimbabwe. Nairobi, Kenya, International Livestock Research Institute (available at http://agtr.ilri.cgiar.org/Library/docs/FAOAndILRIZimbabewReport.pdf).Google Scholar
Zulu, F.A., Simoongwe, V. & Zulu, D.N. 2003. Final report on farm animal breed survey in Zambia. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Department of Veterinary and Livestock Development. FAO/SADC programme on management of farm animal genetic resources. Mazabuka, Zambia, National Focal Point (available at http://dad.fao.org/cgi-bin/getblob.cgi?sid=-1,50005963).Google Scholar