| Original research | Peer reviewed |
Cite as:
Also
available as a PDF.SummaryObjectives: To assess the management practices of swine production and herd health and disease prevalence in Southeast Nigeria. Materials and methods: Fifty-four farms were conveniently selected from three states of Southeast Nigeria. Information on socio-economic characteristics of farmers (sex, occupation, educational status, and farming experience), management practices, and disease prevalence were collected. Samples were screened for ectoparasites (skin scrapings), trypanosomes and Brucella antibodies (blood samples), and helminth and cestode ova and coccidia oocysts (fecal samples). Results: Of 54 farm owners surveyed, 43% were exclusively farmers, 32% were in the buying and selling business, 17% were civil servants, and 6% were students. More men (89%) than women (11%) kept pigs, with the majority having a herd size of < 100 pigs. Most pigs were crosses between native and European breeds. Management was predominantly intensive (96%), with most of the barns built of cement blocks, with concrete floors and galvanized roofing sheets. Prevalences of 47%, 25%, 20%, and 0.95% were recorded for infection with coccidia, helminths, ectoparasites, and trypanosomes, respectively; 0.6% of pigs tested were positive for Brucella antibodies. Significant associations were noted between disease prevalence and litter size and management system, and between productivity and farmer’s educational level. Implications: In spite of the good productivity recorded in this study (farms having ≥ 6 pigs marketed per litter), efforts should be made to encourage better management practices to significantly reduce disease prevalence for better performance. Public-health risks associated with Brucella and trypanosome infections recorded in this study should not be neglected. | ResumenObjetivos: Evaluar las prácticas de manejo de la producción de cerdos, prevalencia de enfermedades, y la salud del hato en el Sureste de Nigeria. Materiales y métodos: Se seleccionaron convenientemente 54 granjas de tres estados del Sureste de Nigeria. Se colectó información sobre las características socioeconómicas de los productores (sexo, ocupación, nivel de educación, y experiencia en granja), prácticas de manejo, y prevalencia de enfermedades. Se analizaron muestras en busca de ectoparásitos (raspados de piel), anticuerpos contra tripanosomas y Brucella (muestras de sangre), huevecillos de helmintos y cestodos, y oocistos de coccidia (muestras fecales). Resultados: De 54 dueños de granjas encuestados, 43% eran exclusivamente productores, 32% estaban en el negocio de compra-venta, 17% eran funcionarios públicos, y 6% eran estudiantes. Más hombres (89%) que mujeres (11%) manejaban a los cerdos, teniendo la mayoría un tamaño de hato de < 100 cerdos. La mayoría de los cerdos eran cruzas entre razas nativas y Europeas. El manejo era predominantemente intensivo (96%), con la mayoría de los edificios construidos con bloques de cemento, pisos de concreto, y techo de lámina galvanizada. Se registraron prevalencias de 47%, 25%, 20%, y 0.95% para las infecciones de coccidia, helmintos, ectoparásitos, y tripanosomas, respectivamente; 0.6% de los cerdos analizados resultaron positivos a anticuerpos contra Brucella. Se encontraron asociaciones significativas entre la prevalencia de enfermedad y el tamaño de la camada y el sistema de manejo, y entre la productividad y el nivel de educación del granjero. Implicaciones: A pesar de la buena productividad registrada en este estudio (granjas con ≥ 6 cerdos vendidos por camada), deberían hacerse esfuerzos para fomentar prácticas para reducir significativamente la prevalencia de enfermedades para un mejor desempeño. Los riesgos de salud pública asociados con las infecciones de tripanosoma y Brucella registrados en este estudio no deben ser negados. | ResuméObjectifs: Évaluer les pratiques de régie de la production porcine de même que la santé des troupeaux et la prévalence de maladies dans le sud-est du Nigéria. Matériels et méthodes: Cinquante-quatre fermes dans trois états du sud-est du Nigéria ont fait l’objet d’un échantillonnage de convenance. De l’information sur les caractéristiques socio-économiques des éleveurs (sexe, occupation, le niveau de scolarité, l’expérience en élevage), sur les pratiques de régie et la prévalence de maladies ont été amassées. Les échantillons ont été vérifiés pour la présence d’ectoparasites (grattages cutanés), d’anticorps contre les trypanosomes et Brucella (échantillons de sang), et d’œufs d’helminthes et de cestodes ainsi que d’ookystes de coccidies (échantillons de fèces). Résultats: Parmi les 54 propriétaires de fermes interrogés, 43% étaient exclusivement des éleveurs, 32% des commerçants, 17% des fonctionnaires, et 6% des étudiants. Plus d’hommes (89%) que de femmes (11%) gardaient des porcs, et la majorité avait < 100 porcs ou moins. Les porcs étaient pour la plupart des croisements entre des races indigènes et Européennes. La gestion était à prédominance intensive (96%), et la plupart des fermes étaient construites en bloc de béton, avec des planchers en ciment et un toit de tôle. Des prévalences de 47%, 25%, 20%, et 0.95% ont été enregistrées, respectivement, pour les infections par les coccidies, les helminthes, les ectoparasites, et les trypanosomes; 0.6% des animaux testés avaient des anticorps contre Brucella. Des associations significatives ont été notées entre la prévalence de maladies et la taille de la portée et le système de régie, ainsi qu’entre la productivité et le niveau de scolarité de l’éleveur. Implications: Malgré la bonne productivité notée dans la présente étude (les fermes ayant ≥ 6 porcs mis en marché par portée), des efforts devraient être faits pour encourager de meilleures pratiques de conduite d’élevage afin de diminuer de manière significative la prévalence des maladies et améliorer les performances. Les risques en santé publique associés avec les niveaux d’infections par Brucella et les trypanosomes enregistrés dans la présente étude ne devraient pas être négligés. |
Keywords: swine, production characteristics, disease prevalence, herd-health management, Nigeria
Search the AASV web site
for pages with similar keywords.
Received: June 28, 2010
Accepted: September 24, 2010
Swine production plays a vital role in food security, poverty eradication, and employment generation in Nigeria.1 The pig population in Nigeria stands at 3.5 million animals,2 and in the past decade, the supply of pork for human consumption has expanded, compared to the supply of other meat.
Veterinary services are obtainable in the form of disease diagnosis and treatment, vaccination, and general advice on disease prevention and other management practices by government and private veterinarians, who are readily available. In humid Southeast Nigeria, pigs, poultry, small ruminants, and fish are the major sources of animal protein.3 Environmental restrictions due to the increasing human population, urbanization, and land use pressure have compelled most communities in Southeast Nigeria to begin to adopt intensive and semi-intensive systems of livestock production instead of the extensive (traditional) system of management.3 In the intensive management system, small-scale producers with a unit of approximately 50 pigs provide feed, housing (often concrete construction), and veterinary services for the pigs.4,5 In the semi-intensive management system, pigs are partly provided with feed, housing, and veterinary care, but are also left to scavenge within the neighborhood on domestic or agricultural waste. In the extensive (free-range or traditional) management system, pigs are left without housing to scavenge on domestic or agricultural waste within and outside the compound, without feed supplementation or veterinary care.6,7
Nigeria has the second largest population of pigs in Africa, which accounts for approximately 4.45% of the total meat supply in the country.8 The industry thrives very well under favorable conditions, especially in the Southern part of Nigeria,9 where ownership is largely restricted to small-holder farms averaging 20 to 50 pigs.10
In spite of these advantages, diseases and poor herd-health management practices pose significant challenges to efficient management and profitable swine production in developing countries of the world, including Nigeria.1,10,11 Low productivity (number of pigs marketed per litter) of pigs in Southeast Nigeria has been attributed to high piglet mortality, slow growth rate due to poor feed conversion ratio, and diseases such as helminthosis, coccidiosis, brucellosis, ectoparasitism, African swine fever, and trypanosomiasis.1,10,12 Insect vectors play a vital role in swine disease conditions through spread of blood parasites in their hosts.13 A preweaning mortality rate of 15% has been recorded in many backyard piggeries (small-holder farms) in Southeast Nigeria.14 Similarly, preweaning mortality rates of 29.3% and 44.8%, respectively, have been recorded for exotic and indigenous breeds within the first week of life of piglets in Nigeria.15
There is a paucity of information on the production characteristics, disease prevalence, and herd-health management practices adopted in swine production in Southeast Nigeria. This study was conducted to answer questions on production and herd-health management practices, disease prevalence, and methods of disease prevention, including the relationships between productivity and disease prevalence, management systems, and level of education of farmers in the study area.
Materials and methods
Approval for this project was given through the Enugu office of the Federal Department of Livestock and Pest Control Services of the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Nigeria, who evaluated the use of animals in this research.
Study area
The study was carried out in Anambra, Ebonyi, and Enugu States of Southeast Nigeria, which covered a total land area of 17,545 km2 and included a population of 16,395,755 (Figure 1). The Southeast geopolitical zone is located between latitudes 7°07'N and 3°90'N and longitudes 6°51'E and 8°30'E and includes Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo States. It is bounded in the north by Benue State, in the south by River State, in the east by Cross River and Akwa-Ibom States, and in the west by Delta State and the River Niger.16
Figure 1: Maps of Africa and Nigeria showing Southeast states where a survey was conducted on swine production and herd-health management practices, disease prevalence, and methods of disease prevention, and their relationships to the socio-economic characteristics of the farmers.  |
The area is ecologically diverse, although tropical forest and savanna predominate. The wet season lasts from April to October, with annual rainfall having a bimodal pattern with two cropping (planting and growing) seasons.16 June and September are the wettest months. The dry season occurs from late October to early April. The indigenous people of the Southeast are predominantly Igbo speaking and are involved in agriculture with two major farming activities, crop and livestock. Cassava and yam are the main crops cultivated in the Southeast; other crops of importance are maize, cocoyam, and plantain. In some locations, rice and oil palm have historically been important cash crops.
The major animal production activity in the area is poultry. Other livestock produced include pigs, goats, sheep, and on rare occasions, cattle. Livestock are valued as a source of meat (usually slaughtered during festivals or ceremonies) and cash. Small ruminants (sheep and goats) and pigs may be confined in barns. Animals are fed household scraps, tree foliage (commonly palm leaves for small ruminants), and the by-products of food processing or kitchen waste. Most pig breeding stock are crosses between the Nigerian indigenous pig breeds and Large White or Landrace.
Data collection
A study of production and herd-health management practices and disease prevalence in swine herds in different locations of Southeast Nigeria was conducted for a period of 5 months (March to July 2008). All farms included in the study had sows, and productivity was based on the number of pigs born alive or marketed per litter.
A multistage sampling procedure was used to select three states and nine local government areas. The three states, Anambra, Ebonyi, and Enugu, were selected from Southeast Nigeria using a simple random sampling technique (coin toss). Three local government areas from each state were similarly selected. Fifty-four farms from the selected local government areas were conveniently selected by their willingness to make their farms and farm records available to the researchers. A total of 20, 11, and 23 farms were sampled in Anambra, Ebonyi, and Enugu States, respectively.
The structured questionnaire used in data collection was designed to collect information on socio-economic characteristics of the farmers, such as sex, occupation, level of education and farming experience, swine-production and herd-health management practices, disease conditions (prevalence of diseases that directly affect productivity of pigs in the study area), and veterinary health-care services. Questions on whether the farms had experienced clinical signs compatible with African swine fever, eg, very high fever with huddling and shivering, reddening of the ear, flank, and tail areas, and leg weakness, were incorporated in the questionnaire. The contents of the questionnaire were transmitted to farmers who were unable to read or write in their native language, and their responses were recorded. Data from farm records were used to confirm the information obtained from respondents in some cases. A pilot survey was carried out to determine the number of farms and their herd sizes suitable for the study in each state of the region prior to the study. During the pilot survey, the farmers were informed of the purpose of the study and the need for their cooperation. Only farms that gladly welcomed the researchers and volunteered information needed were sampled. The responding farmers were assured of the confidentiality of the information supplied. The farmers were informed that they had the right to refuse to participate. However, participation was encouraged by the promise made during the pilot survey that the researchers would provide veterinary services to the farms after sampling, eg, advice on production and herd-health management problems when the study results were reported to the farms.
Skin scrapings were collected and screened for ectoparasites, while fecal samples were examined for helminth eggs and coccidia oocysts, and blood samples for trypanosomes and Brucella antibodies. Disease choice was based on prevalence in the study area.17,18
In each of the conveniently selected farms, a marker pen was used to serially number the pigs in the farm. These identification numbers were recorded on slips of paper which were mixed in a container: 10% of them were drawn from the container to determine which animals would be sampled.
Immediately after collection, fecal samples were examined grossly for adult roundworms and tapeworm segments. Samples were then transported on ice and later refrigerated at 4°C and analyzed within 8 hours of collection for helminth ova and coccidia oocysts using the simple egg floatation technique.19
A total of 540 pigs from the 54 farms (10 pigs per farm) were randomly selected by drawing their identification numbers from the container and examined for external parasites such as ticks, lice, fleas, and mites. However, there were cases where the researchers were unable to collect blood specimens from some of the selected pigs due to restraint difficulties. Skin scrapings from all pigs sampled were examined for ectoparasites as described by Hendrix and Robinson.20 These and all other tests were performed in the laboratories of Veterinary Parasitology and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria.
Blood samples were collected from 324 adult pigs randomly selected in the 54 farms sampled (six to 10 pigs per farm). For each pig, duplicate blood samples were collected: one into an evacuated blood vial containing ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) for identification of trypanosomes and another into an evacuated blood vial without anticoagulant for serological screening for Brucella antibodies. For diagnosis of trypanosomes in blood samples, the microhematocrit buffy coat technique was used to increase sensitivity of the test.21 Blood samples without anticoagulant were allowed to clot and sera were harvested and stored in a refrigerator until tested for Brucella antibodies. The serum samples were subjected to the rose Bengal plate agglutination test22 using Brucella abortus and Brucella melitensis antigens procured from the Veterinary Laboratory Agency (New Haw, Addle Stone, Surrey, UK). This is the commonly available test for Brucella antibodies used at the brucellosis unit in the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine of the University of Nigeria.
Trapping nets were set for 7 days in each farm sampled to capture insect vectors of trypanosomes, which were later identified.
Data analysis
The data collected were collated and the socio-economic characteristics of the farmers and production systems were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as means, frequencies, and percentages. A chi-square test was used to determine the significance of association between production management systems and productivity and presence or absence of disease. Chi-square tests were also used to determine the significance of association in the responses of farmers and ages of pigs at death, the significance of association between the presence or absence of disease and productivity, and the significance of association between productivity and level of education of the farmers. The proportion of pigs positive for each helminth parasite were compared by age category using a chi-square test. The analysis included all farms with sows. All analyses were performed using the SPSS package version 16.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc, Chicago, Illinois) at a 5% probability level.
Results
Most pigs in the study area were raised as a secondary source of income for the family (Table 1). Most of the pig owners were holders of First School Leaving Certificates, while 22% were secondary school leavers, and very few had no formal education. More men than women were in pig production (Table 1). The number of pigs marketed per litter was significantly higher in farms managed by educated farmers than those managed by less educated farmers (Table 2).
Table 1: Distributions of sex and occupational, educational, and farming experience of 54 farm owners responding to a questionnaire survey in Southeast Nigeria
* Sole farmers earned their livings exclusively by farming, having no other means of livelihood. |
Table 2: Relationship between level of education and productivity* in 37 pig farms that kept production records in Southeast Nigeria†
* Productivity = number of pigs marketed/litter. † One respondent per farm for the 37 farms that kept production records among the 54 farms included in this study. abc Values within a column with different superscripts differ significantly (P < .05; chi-square analysis). |
||||||||||||||||||||
The majority of farmers had a herd of < 100 pigs (Table 3). In addition to pig farming, approximately 65% of the pig farmers kept poultry, while 31% reared goats and sheep. Very few respondents reared pigs only, and none of the pig farmers in the study area reared cattle (Table 4).
Table 3: Herd size distribution in 54 pig farms surveyed in Southeast Nigeria*
* One respondent per farm. |
Table 4: Livestock species kept in 54 pig farms surveyed in Southeast Nigeria*
* One respondent per farm. |
Management systems were primarily intensive (52 farms, 96%), while two farms (4%) were managed semi-intensively. Approximately 93% of the pig farms had barns with concrete floors and 85% had galvanized roofing sheets. Most pig barns were screened with insect-proof wire nets (Table 5). Most respondents reported that swine production was profitable, and more than half were willing to expand production due to its profitability (Table 5). A minority used commercial feeds for their pigs, while many used kitchen and restaurant waste (Table 5). Most respondents complained that their pigs frequently experienced skin lesions suggestive of ectoparasitism (Table 5). None of the farmers observed clinical signs of an outbreak of African swine fever in their herds (Table 5). Almost all survey respondents indicated interest in receiving training in swine-farm management and disease prevention and control. Approximately 67% of farmers used protective clothing while on routine farm operations (Table 5). All farmers recorded mortality of pigs of all ages in their farms (Tables 5 and 6). Productivity in terms of number of pigs marketed per litter was significantly higher in intensively managed farms than in farms managed semi-intensively (Table 7).
Table 5: Farmers’ affirmative answers on pig production and disease prevention in 54 pig farms surveyed in Southeast Nigeria*
* One respondent per farm. † “Improved housing and sanitation” refers to farms with concrete floors, insect-proof
|
Table 6: Common age of death of pigs reported in 54 pig farms surveyed in Southeast Nigeria*
* One respondent per farm. abc Values within a column with different superscripts differ significantly (P < .05; chi-square analysis). |
Table 7: Effect of production management systems on reproductive performance of sows in 54 farms surveyed in Southeast Nigeria*
* Farmers were surveyed using a structured questionnaire. There were 52 intensively and two semi-intensively managed farms. Intensive management: farms with approximately 50 pigs provided with food, housing, and veterinary care; semi-intensive management: partial provision of housing, with pigs allowed to scavenge for food outside, especially in the day time, with or without veterinary care and feed supplementation. † Productivity = number of pigs marketed/litter. ab Values within a row with different superscripts differ significantly (P < .05; chi-square analysis). |
||||||||||||||||||||||
The prevalences of disease agents, based on laboratory analysis of samples submitted, are presented in Table 8. Almost half of the 232 fecal samples screened were positive for coccidia oocysts, and 25% were positive for helminth ova. Mange mites (Demodex) were detected in 20% of skin scrapings, while Brucella antibodies and Trypanosoma species were found in only two and three, respectively, of the blood samples screened. The prevalences of these etiologic agents were significantly higher in the 52 intensively managed farms than in the two semi-intensively managed farms (Table 8). The prevalence of trypanosomiasis was higher in semi-intensively managed farms than in farms managed intensively (Table 8). There was no significant association in the prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites among age categories of pigs sampled, except that significantly fewer pigs were positive for ascarid and trichuris eggs at > 6 months than earlier in life (Table 9).
Table 8: Disease prevalence and distribution in 54 farms in Southeast Nigeria*
* Prevalence and frequency based on laboratory analysis. The simple egg floatation technique was used for detection of helminth ova and coccidia oocysts in fecal samples collected from 10 pigs per farm. Skin scrapings from 10 pigs per farm were examined for ectoparasites using the Hendrix and Robinson method.21 Blood samples were collected from 6-10 pigs per farm. Trypanosomiasis was diagnosed by the microhematocrit buffy coat technique.22 Sera were tested for Brucella antibodies using the rose Bengal plate agglutination test using Brucella abortus and Brucella melitensis antigens.23 † Intensive and semi-intensive management systems described in Table 7. ab Values within a row with different superscripts differ significantly (P < .05; chi-square analysis). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 9: Distribution of helminth eggs among age categories of pigs in 54 pig farms surveyed in Southeast Nigeria*
* Fecal samples were collected from 10 pigs per farm and examined by simple fecal ab Values within a column with different superscripts differ significantly (P < .05; chi-square analysis). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The majority of farmers procured their breeding stock from reliable farms (farms with good records and that utilized veterinary services), and 19% acquired theirs from markets (open markets where livestock were displayed for sale by their owners for slaughter or breeding). Approximately 9% reared their own stock, a practice whereby at the age of 4 to 6 months, healthy gilts possessing at least 14 prominent teats and good body conformation were selected by the farmers from their stock. There were significant differences in the sources of replacement stock among farms (Table 10). On average, one or two boars were usually selected per 50 gilts as replacements.
Table 10: Sources of replacement stock in 54 pig farms surveyed in Southeast Nigeria*
* One respondent per farm. † Own stock: the practice of selecting as replacements healthy pigs with a history of good production within the same farm. abc Values within a column with different superscripts differ significantly (P < .05; chi-square analysis). |
The insects trapped were houseflies (Musca domestica), mosquitoes, fruit flies, and Glossina species.
Discussion
The predominance of men in swine production as observed in this study is in agreement with the findings of Oni and Yusuf23 and Adesehinwa et al,24 who reported that pig production is dominated by men in Southwest Nigeria. Though the proportion of part-time pig farmers recorded in this study (approximately 57%) is lower than the 78.0% reported in Kaduna State,25 this still implies that many people in other occupations are also involved in pig production as a source of additional income, probably due to its high rate of profitability. Over 31% of the respondents combined buying and selling of goods with pig farming. This points to the fact that pig production may be profitable. The second largest population of people in other occupations who were in swine production were civil servants. Swine production served as a way of diversifying their income base, since salaries were inadequate to meet family financial needs. In Southeast Nigeria, pigs are owned by both men and women, and ownership of pigs determines a man’s financial status, as evidenced by his financial capability.14 The majority of pig farmers view pig production as a source of income and as part of their tradition. Most farmers surveyed were experienced, and this might have improved their productivity and influenced their views that swine production is lucrative, and therefore they were willing to expand their operations. With better management and experience, swine production is highly profitable.26 Thus, there is much potential to be realized from such improvements in Nigeria.
The high rate of the respondents in this study who had formal education, compared to the low rate in those who had no formal education, agrees with the observations of Adesehinwa et al,24 who reported that a higher percentage of pig farmers in Oyo State of Western Nigeria had formal education. This development may be of assistance to extension officers for easy communication and understanding of extension messages, especially for application of new technology in swine production and management. Literate farmers might be more likely to adopt good husbandry and health-management practices. Education and training has been shown to improve business performance and returns of farmers.27 In other words, better trained and educated farmers might adopt better technology and management practices that will guarantee success and better returns on investment.
The herd sizes in this study are within the range reported by other researchers.8,14,26 A majority of respondents combined pig production with poultry farming. This may be due to the favorable climatic conditions of the Southeast that favor poultry and pig production. It might also be because poultry manure is used to feed grower and finisher pigs in Nigeria.28
The intensive management system and good housing with concrete floors and insect-proof wire netting adopted by the majority of pig farmers in the study may have been responsible for the good performance recorded by the farmers. This is contrary to the findings of Rekwot et al10 in Kaduna and Benue States in Northern Nigeria, where most pig farmers practiced a semi-intensive system in the day time, wherein pigs are allowed to scavenge, with supplementary feed given in confinement in the evening.
The respondents reported that most deaths of pigs in their farms occurred at ≤ 3 months of age. This is in agreement with the report of Ukoh et al15 in which preweaning mortality rates were 29.3% and 44.8%, respectively, in exotic and indigenous pig breeds in Nigeria. These high rates of mortality could be due to poor management practices.25
The questionnaire survey showed that all respondents recorded gastrointestinal parasites. This finding does not agree with the observations of Holmes,4 who reported few clinical signs of gastrointestinal parasitism and other infections in pigs reared under an intensive management system. Roepstorff and Nansen29 showed that the occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites of pigs and other infections is influenced by the type of production management system. In addition to this, poor management practices (such as inadequate hygiene, drug abuse and misuse, and poor housing and feeding), adverse weather conditions (including the tropical climate: high temperature and humidity), and low genetic potential, contribute to a high incidence of parasites and insect vectors.30 The high prevalence of gastrointestinal helminths, coccidia, and ectoparasites recorded in most of the farms studied confirms the endemic nature of these disease agents as causing major economic losses in pig production in Nigeria.10,31,32 Routine prophylactic measures against parasites as part of veterinary care in the farms studied might have helped reduce the parasitic load1 and subsequently boosted production.30
There was no significant association between the prevalence of gastrointestinal helminths and coccidia across age categories of pigs. This does not agree with the reports of Soulsby,33 Adejinni et al,34 Nganga et al,35 and Adebisi,1 who showed that the prevalence of these parasites increases with age.
Prevalence of brucellosis recorded in this study was low; however, the choice to survey the disease was based on the reports of abortion and infertility by the farmers in the study area prior to this study. The public health and economic implications of brucellosis necessitated its investigation for recommendations on prevention and control. The farmers in the study area recognized the seriousness associated with cases of brucellosis, suggesting that they are aware of its zoonotic potential. Secondly, the disease causes abortion and stillbirth in sows and orchitis and hygroma in boars. These conditions may affect productivity in affected farms and in farms that acquire replacement stock from them. Other species of animals, such as cattle and goats raised in close proximity to infected pigs, may also be affected.
Insect vectors such as the Glossina species found in this study area may transmit trypanosomes and also cause mechanical irritation and injuries.13 Wire netting of pens in many of the farms sampled may have been responsible for the low prevalence of trypanosomes. Fumigation and use of fly repellents may be of help in further reduction of insect vectors. The high human population density (167.5 people per km2) in Southeast Nigeria36 may have resulted in the location of pig farms predominantly in urban areas, which may not be conducive to survival of insect vectors (eg, tsetse fly and biting flies).
In conclusion, the intensive management system of swine production should be encouraged in Southeast Nigeria as it favored better productivity, but to reduce prevalence of disease, an effort should be made to improve management practices, for example, adequate nutrition, prophylaxis against parasites and microbial infections, and general biosecurity measures.
Implications
• Under the conditions of this study, education of pig farmers increases productivity (number of pigs marketed per litter).
• Under the conditions of this study, an intensive management system appears to favour productivity more than a semi-intensive management system.
• Under the conditions of this study, prevalence of strongyle, ascarid, and trichuris helminth infections do not vary with age among pigs in Southeast Nigeria except that fewer ascarid and trichuris eggs are found in pigs > 6 months of age.
• Under the conditions of this study, mortality rates among pigs in Southeast Nigeria are highest in piglets ≤ 3 months of age.
• Under the conditions of this study, an intensive management system seems to favour gastrointestinal parasitism and demodectic mange more than a semi-intensive management system.
• In the area of Southeast Nigeria in this survey, most pig farmers source their replacement stock from farms keeping health and production records and utilizing veterinary care.
Acknowledgement
We are grateful to the University of Nigeria administration and especially to the Senate Committee on Research Grants for funding this project (Senate Research Grant No. 07/21). The authors acknowledge the cooperation of the Directors of Veterinary Services in Anambra, Ebonyi, and Enugu States in the course of this study. We also appreciate the efforts of the Faculty Technologists and the Secretariat of the Department of Veterinary Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, for their roles in actualization of this study.
References
1. Adebisi OR. Gastrointestinal helminths and public health: Overview of a neglected sector. Internet J Vet Med. 2008;4(2). Accessed 29 July 2011.
2. Bourn D, Wint W, Blench R, Wooley E. Nigerian livestock resources survey. World Animal Review. 1994;78:49–58.
*3. Anonymous. Positive demand pattern for pork. Pig International Magazine. Mt Morris, Illinois: Watt Publishing Company; 1999;28:32–38.
4. Holmes DH. Systems of pig production. In: Coste R, Smith AJ, eds. The Tropical Agriculturalist. 1st ed. London, UK: Macmillan Press; 1991:16–22, 99-100.
5. Payne WJA. Pigs. In: An Introduction to Animal Husbandry in the Tropics. 4th ed. New York, New York: Longman Scientific and Technical; 1990:639, 666–672.
*6. Njoku PC. New strategies for sustained livestock and fish production in Southeast of Nigeria. In: Akubilo CJC, Marire BN, Omeke BCO, Chidubem IJ, eds. Proc Ann Cong of Nigerian Vet Med. Enugu, Nigeria. 1997:1–9.
*7. Marire BN. Stocking and management of pigs, sheep and goats in southeast Nigeria. In: Akubilo CTC, Marire BN, Omeke BCO, Chidubem IJ, eds. Proc Animal Health and Husbandry Workshop organized by the Veterinary Medical Association, Enugu State branch, Nigeria, in collaboration with the Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu, Nigeria; 1997:12–17.
*8. Adebambo AO. Evaluation of the genetic potential of the Nigerian indigenous pigs. In: Proc Second World Conf Genet Application. Madrid, Spain. 1982:133–138.
9. Balogun TF, Olumeyan DB. The position of swine in Nigeria’s livestock industry. Samara J Educ. 1998;2:8–15.
10. Rekwot PI, Abubakar YU, Jegede JO. Swine production characteristics and management systems of small holder piggeries in Kaduna and Benue states of North-central Nigeria. Nigerian Vet J. 2003;24(2):34–40.
11. Bawa GS. The prevalence of helminth parasites in pigs in Zaria. Nigeria J Anim Prod Res. 2004;19:61–67.
*12. Babatunde GM, Fetuga GL. Pig production in Nigeria: Possibilities and problems. In: Proc Agric Soc Nigeria. 1993;10:553.
13. Hill DS. The Economic Importance of Insects. London, UK: Chapman and Hall; 1996:65–99.
*14. Pathiraja N, Rekwot PI, Oyedipe EO, Alhassan WS, Dawuda PM. Studies on the pig production systems in Southern Zaria. In: Osinowo OA, Taiwo BBA, Njoku PC, Tegbe TSB, Umaru M, eds. Animal production in Nigeria. Proc Ann Conf Nigerian Soc Anim Prod. Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria. 1986:133–138.
15. Ukoh OJ, AtajaAM, Babatunde GM. Preliminary study of the incidence of pre-weaning mortality in exotic and West African dwarf pigs in Southern Nigeria. Revue d’Elevage et de Medicine Veterinaire des Pays Tropicaux.1994;47:329–332.
16. Resource Inventory and Management (RIM) Report on Nigerian Livestock, Vol. I-IV. Garki, Abuja, Nigeria: Federal Department of Livestock and Pest Control Services, Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development; 1993.
17. Dipeolu OO, Sellers KC. An investigation of the ectoparasites of indigenous pigs in a rural area of Southwest Nigeria. Bull Anim Health Prod Afr. 1970;25:142–148.
18. Onyekwodiri EO, Shoyinka SVO. A seven-year analysis of the prevalence and seasonality of livestock diseases in Eastern region of Nigeria. Bull Anim Health Prod Afr. 1984;32:237–242.
19. Zajac AM, Conboy GA. Fecal examination for the diagnosis of parasitism. In: Veterinary Clinical Parasitology. 7th ed. Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell; 2006:3–10.
20. Hendrix CM, Robinson ED. Common laboratory procedures for diagnosing parasitism. In: Diagnostic Parasitology for Veterinary Technicians. 3rd ed. St Louis, Missouri: Mosby Inc; 2006:227–242.
21. Murray M, Murray PK, McIntyre WIM. An improved parasitological technique for the diagnosis of African trypanosomiasis. Trans Royal Soc Trop Med Hygiene. 1977;71:325–326.
22. Morgan WJB, Mackinnon DJ, Gill KPW, Gover SQM, Norris PW. Standard Laboratory Techniques for the Diagnosis of Brucellosis. 2nd ed. Weybridge, England: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Central Veterinary Laboratory; 1978.
*23. Oni OA, Yusuf SA. The effects of farmers’ socio-economic characteristics on livestock production in Ibadan metropolis. Proc Conf Anim Sci Assoc Nigeria. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria. 1999:245–248.
24. Adesehinwa AOK, Makinde GEO, Ladele OI. Socio-economic characteristics of pig farmers as determinants of pig feeding pattern in Oyo state, Nigeria. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 2003;15:12.
25. Ajala MK, Adesehinwa AOK, Mohammed AK. Characteristics of smallholder pig production in Southern Kaduna, Kaduna State, Nigeria. Am Euras J Agric Environ Sci. 2007;2:182–188.
*26. Somoye OF, Fianu FK. A survey of pig production in Ogun State, Nigeria, Parts I and II. In: Adeyemi AO, Ogungbesam AM, Dada AO, eds. Proc Ann Conf Nigerian Soc Anim Prod. Usmanu Danfodio University, Sokoto, Nigeria. 1991.
27. Mishra KA, Wilson CH, Williams RP. Factors affecting the financial performance of new and beginning farmers. Agricultural Finance Review. 2009;69:160–179. doi:10.1108/00021460910978661.
28. Adesehinwa AOK, Obi OO, Makonjuola BA, Adebayo AO, Durutoye ES. Utilization of sun-dried on-farm generated poultry litter as a feed resource for growing-finishing pigs. Afr J Biotechnol. 2010;9:2821–2825.
29. Roepstorff A, Nansen P. Epidemiology and control of helminths infection in pigs under intensive and non-intensive productions system. Vet Parasit. 1998;54:69–85.
30. Loosi JK, Onyenuga VA, Babatunde GM. Animal production in the tropics. Proc Int Symp Anim Prod Trop. Ibadan, Nigeria: Heinemann Publishers; 1999:1–43.
31. Ikeme MM, Nduaka O. Pig parasites of Nigeria: III. Local pig industries in the plateau area of Northern Nigeria and their helminth problems at the peak of the rains. Bull Epizoot Dis Afr. 1974;22:349–355.
*32. Fayomi A, Egege SC, Mba AS. A study of gastro-intestinal parasites of swine in Zaria area, Nigeria. Proc Ann Conf Nigerian Soc Anim Prod. University of Calabar, Nigeria. 1988.
33. Soulsby EJL. Helminths, Arthropods and Protozoa of Domestic Animals. 7th ed. London, UK: Bailliere Tindall; 1988:142-258, 334–618.
34. Adejinni JO, Adedokun OA, Ayoade GO, Obadua AA. Intestinal helminth and protozoan parasites of pigs reared under intensive management system in Ibadan, Nigeria. Trop Vet. 2001;19:258–262.
35. Nganga CJ, Karanja DN, Mutune MN. The prevalence of gastrointestinal helminth infection in pigs in Kenya. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2008;40:331–334.
36. National Population Commission. Report of the 2006 Nigerian census submitted to the Federal Ministry of Interior, Abuja, Nigeria. 2006.
* Non-refereed references.