Farmers’ perceptions regarding artificial insemination services in Punjab, Pakistan

Hafiz Amjad Ali Rana, M. Iftikhar, M. A. Wattoo, M. Bilal
{"title":"Farmers’ perceptions regarding artificial insemination services in Punjab, Pakistan","authors":"Hafiz Amjad Ali Rana, M. Iftikhar, M. A. Wattoo, M. Bilal","doi":"10.33687/IJAE.009.02.3539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A considerable number of livestock farmers are still practising natural matting for their animals instead of the Artificial Insemination (AI) technique. This study aimed to determine the various insemination procedures being used by farmers and the reasons for their rejection or acceptance in rural areas of Punjab. A cross-sectional dataset of 400 randomly selected livestock herders from two purposefully selected districts, Rahim Yar Khan and Muzaffargarh, was used. We used Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) to apply crosstab and t-test to the collected data. Findings infer that the AI technique was preferred by 60.5% of farmers particularly for cows whereas 75% of farmers preferred the natural matting process for buffalo (75.0%). The quality of AI service provided by public and private technicians was rated at an average level. For the natural matting process of their animals’ farmers were heavily (73.8 %) dependent on fellow farmers for sourcing a bull. Farmers viewed both private and public sector technicians equally skilled in performing AI. However, the high cost of semen (x=4.07±1.17) and unskilled technicians (x=4.05±1.17) were the key obstacles in wake of the effectiveness of AI. Poor record of the bull (x=4.12±1.14) and non-availability of bull (x=3.93±1.23) were the prominent plights associated with natural matting. Statistically, a significant difference was found concerning the cost of insemination (t=16.058), breed type (t =20.403) and milk or meat production potential (t=24.480) while inseminating the cow or buffalo. This study concludes that it should be obligatory for the farmers to maintain a record of natural matting through the bull. For AI, semen quality should be ensured with the synergistic association among institutions. The concerned institutions must develop a strategy to eradicate unregistered and non-qualified quack technicians","PeriodicalId":22617,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Agricultural Extension","volume":"26 1","pages":"163-170"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Agricultural Extension","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33687/IJAE.009.02.3539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A considerable number of livestock farmers are still practising natural matting for their animals instead of the Artificial Insemination (AI) technique. This study aimed to determine the various insemination procedures being used by farmers and the reasons for their rejection or acceptance in rural areas of Punjab. A cross-sectional dataset of 400 randomly selected livestock herders from two purposefully selected districts, Rahim Yar Khan and Muzaffargarh, was used. We used Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) to apply crosstab and t-test to the collected data. Findings infer that the AI technique was preferred by 60.5% of farmers particularly for cows whereas 75% of farmers preferred the natural matting process for buffalo (75.0%). The quality of AI service provided by public and private technicians was rated at an average level. For the natural matting process of their animals’ farmers were heavily (73.8 %) dependent on fellow farmers for sourcing a bull. Farmers viewed both private and public sector technicians equally skilled in performing AI. However, the high cost of semen (x=4.07±1.17) and unskilled technicians (x=4.05±1.17) were the key obstacles in wake of the effectiveness of AI. Poor record of the bull (x=4.12±1.14) and non-availability of bull (x=3.93±1.23) were the prominent plights associated with natural matting. Statistically, a significant difference was found concerning the cost of insemination (t=16.058), breed type (t =20.403) and milk or meat production potential (t=24.480) while inseminating the cow or buffalo. This study concludes that it should be obligatory for the farmers to maintain a record of natural matting through the bull. For AI, semen quality should be ensured with the synergistic association among institutions. The concerned institutions must develop a strategy to eradicate unregistered and non-qualified quack technicians
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
巴基斯坦旁遮普农民对人工授精服务的看法
相当多的畜牧农民仍在为他们的动物进行自然配种,而不是人工授精(AI)技术。这项研究旨在确定旁遮普农村地区农民正在使用的各种人工授精程序以及拒绝或接受这些程序的原因。本研究使用了一个横断面数据集,其中包括400名随机选择的牲畜牧民,他们来自拉希姆亚尔汗和穆扎法尔加尔两个有目的地选择的地区。我们使用社会科学统计软件包(SPSS)对收集的数据进行交叉表和t检验。研究结果表明,60.5%的农民更喜欢人工智能技术,尤其是对奶牛,而75%的农民(75.0%)更喜欢对水牛进行自然铺地处理。公共和私人技术人员提供的人工智能服务质量被评为平均水平。由于牲畜的自然配毛过程,农民(73.8%)严重依赖其他农民寻找公牛。农民们认为私营和公共部门的技术人员在执行人工智能方面同样熟练。然而,精液的高成本(x=4.07±1.17)和技术人员的不熟练(x=4.05±1.17)是人工智能有效性之后的主要障碍。牛记录差(x=4.12±1.14)和牛不可得(x=3.93±1.23)是自然消绒的突出问题。在奶牛或水牛授精过程中,授精成本(t=16.058)、品种类型(t= 20.403)和产奶或产肉潜力(t=24.480)存在统计学差异。本研究的结论是,农民应该有义务通过公牛保持自然垫地的记录。在人工授精方面,应通过机构间的协同合作来保证精液质量。有关机构必须制定一项战略,消除未注册和不合格的庸医技术人员
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Veganic Agriculture in the United States: Opportunities for Research, Outreach, and Education Lessons Learned from the Development of the North Carolina Extension Master Food Volunteer Program Designing Educational Newsletter Interventions: An Example That Supported Grandfamilies’ Physical Wellness Needs 4-H Youth Development Programming in Indigenous Communities: A Critical Review of Cooperative Extension Literature Scenario Planning for Resilient Agricultural Systems: A Process for Engaging Controversy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1