The willingness of broiler farmers in the Gauteng province to adopt alternative feeds made from amaranthus and sorghum

Abstracts in English, Tsonga and Afrikaans

In broiler production, feeding constitutes the highest variable cost accounting for up to 70% of the total production cost. As a result, broiler farmers have a challenge of high feed costs. High feed costs are influenced by increasing prices of feed ingredients, especially energy and protein sources. Therefore, there is a need to develop affordable chicken feed made from alternative energy and protein sources. This study aimed to assess broiler farmers’ acceptability of alternative chicken feeds made from amaranthus and sorghum as energy and protein sources in the Gauteng Province. The objectives of the study were to profile farmers’ socio-demographic characteristics; to determine the operation and production characteristics of broiler enterprises; to determine farmer’s willingness to adopt alternative chicken feed made from amaranthus and sorghum as energy and protein sources; to ascertain factors influencing farmer’s willingness to adopt alternative feeds made from amaranthus and sorghum as energy and protein sources, respectively; and to identify the challenges experienced by broiler farmers. The study was conducted in Gauteng using a quantitative research approach and survey design. Data were collected from 70 broiler farmers through telephonic interviews using a semi-structured survey instrument (questionnaire). The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 27 was used to analyse quantitative data. Descriptive statistics, Kendall’s Tau, Pearson Correlation, Ordered Logistic Regression, Binomial test, Friedman’s test and Wilcoxon signed ranks test were used to analyse the data. Themes, codes, frequencies and percentages were used to analyse qualitative data from open-ended questions. The findings of the socio-demographic characteristics of respondents showed that the majority (95.7%) of the respondents were married black African men (52.9%) above 55 years of age with nine years of farming experience. Most of the respondents (94%) had a basic formal education; in addition, about 50% owned their farmland privately, with an average size of 11.17 ha. One-third of the respondents depended on self-employment opportunities as their main source of income while the majority (54.3%) had an annual net farm income of between R10 000 and R90 000. The annual net farm income had a positive and significant correlation with gender, the carrying capacity of a poultry house and the number of production cycles per annum. It was also found that most (>50%) farmers had inadequate access to market and government services (extension and subsidised feed). The study further revealed that, on average, broiler farmers had two chicken houses with a carrying capacity of 1 804 and a 7.6% mortality rate per cycle. On average, the number of production cycles were five; and the respondents utilised about 122 feedbags per annum. The majority (73%) of the respondents preferred the pellets feed form. The respondents achieved an average chicken live weight of 1.9 kg and anticipated an average weight of 2 kg. Moreover, farmers travelled 20 km on average to the nearest feed store. The number of chicken houses, the number of production cycles per year and the anticipated chicken live weight were positive and significant predictors of farmers’ willingness to adopt alternative chicken feeds made from amaranthus and sorghum. The study found that most respondents (90%) were willing to adopt alternative chicken feed made from amaranthus and sorghum as a source of energy and protein, respectively. The overall results of the mean rank showed that the accessibility of chicken feed (MR=1) was the most important attribute associated with the adoption of alternative chicken feed, followed by the desired chicken attributes (MR=2) and the affordability attributes (MR=3). The results of Friedman’s test revealed that there was a statistically significant difference (p<0.01) between the three variables (desired attributes, affordability and accessibility). The Wilcoxon sign rank test discovered that farmers were significantly willing to adopt alternative chicken feed made from amaranthus and sorghum if it was more accessible than enabling them to achieve the desired chicken attributes. In addition, a significant number of broiler farmers were willing to adopt alternative chicken feed if it was more accessible rather than affordable. The mean rank results of accessibility variables showed that the most important factors are lower transport costs to buy feed, feed accessible at any time of the day and easily accessible supplier location attributes. The variables scored the same mean rank (MR=1). On the other hand, the important predicting variables for chicken attributes and affordability were live weight and the reduced number of feedbags purchased variables, respectively. Farmers’ willingness to adopt chicken feed made from amaranthus and sorghum was positively and significantly (p<0.05) influenced by their number of chicken houses, number of production cycles per annum, and anticipated chicken live weight. The results showed the main challenges experienced by broiler farmers were high feed costs; low-quality feed; lack of access to markets; high transport costs; inadequate nutrients in feeds; low-profit margins; a high mortality rate; and reduced live weight. Based on the results of the current study, it is recommended that young people should be encouraged to participate in broiler farming activities. Again, the alternative feed made from amaranthus, and sorghum should be accessible to increase broiler farmers’ adoption rate. Since the research is continuous, it is also recommended that an experiment be conducted to compare the performance of conventional chicken feed against non-conventional chicken feed made from amaranthus and sorghum, and the cost analysis of both.

Ka go tsweletso ya dikgogo tsa nama, go fepa go akaretsa karolo ya godimodimo ya ditshenyagalelo tse di balelwago go diphesente tse 70% tsa palomoka ya ditshenyagalelo tsa tsweletso. Ka lebaka leo, barui ba dikgogo tsa nama ba na le tlhotlo ya ditshenyagalelo tsa godimo tsa phepo ya dikgogo. Ditshenyagalelo tsa godimo tsa phepo di huetsa ke theko ya godimo ya ditswaki tsa phepo, kudu methopo ya enetsi le proteine. Ka gona, go na le tlhokego ya go hlama phepo ya dikgogo ye e dirilwego go tswa go methopo ye mengwe ya enetsi le proteine. Thuto ye e be e ikemiseditse go sekaseka kamogelo ya barui ba dikgogo tsa nama ya diphepo tse dingwe tsa dikgogo tse di dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro bjalo ka methopo ya enetsi le proteine ka profenseng ya Gauteng. Maikemisetso a dinyakisiso tse e be e le go hlalosa dipharologanyo tsa dipalopalo tsa barui; go hlatha dipharologanyo tsa ditshepediso le ditsweletso tsa dikgwebo tsa dikgogo tsa nama; go laetsa go ikemisetsa ga barui go amogela diphepo tse dingwe tsa dikgogo tse di dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro bjalo ka methopo ya enetsi le proteine; go kgonthisisa mabaka ao a huetsago barui go amogela diphepo tse dingwe tseo di dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro bjalo ka methopo ya enetsi le proteine, ka go fapana ga tsona; le go hlatha ditlhohlo tseo di itemogelwago ke barui ba dikgogo tsa nama. Dinyakisiso tse di dirilwe ka Gauteng ka go somisa tebelelo ya boleng ya go dira dinyakisiso le tshekatsheko. Datha e kgobokeditswe go tswa go barui ba dikgogo tsa nama ba 70 ka dipoledisano tsa mogala ka go somisa sediriswa sa tshekatsheko ya tekolonyakisiso (lenaneopotsiso). Go somisitswe karolo ya 27 ya Sediriswa sa go Bala Dipalopalo sa Mahlale a Leago (SPPS) go sekaseka datha ya boleng. Dipalopalo tse di hlalosago, Kendall’s Tau, Pearson Correlation, Ordered Logistic Regression, teko ya Karolopedi, teko ya Friedman le diteko tsa maemo a saennwego tsa Wilcoxon di somisitswe go sekaseka datha. Dihlogotaba, dikhouto, dikelo le diphesente di somisitswe go sekaseka datha ya boleng go tswa go dipotsiso tse di ka botsosoloswago. Dikutollo tsa dipharologanyo tsa dipalopalo tsa bakgathatema di bontshitse gore bontsi bja bakgathatema e be e le banna ba bathobaso ba Maafrika bao ba nyetswego (52.9%) ba mengwaga ya ka godimo ga ye 55 bao ba nago le maitemogelo a mengwaga ye senyane ya borui. Bontsi bja bakgathatema (94%) ba be ba na le thuto ya motheo ya semmuso; go tlaleletsa se, ba e ka bago ba diphesente tse 50% ba be ba na le naga ya polasa ya bona ya praebete, moo naga yeo e lego bogolo bja tekano ya dihektara tse 11.17 ha. Teetharong ya bakgathatema e be e ithekgile ka dibaka tsa go ipereka bjalo ka mothopo wa bona wo mogolo wa letseno mola bontsi (54.3%) ba be ba na le palomoka ya letseno la ngwaga ka ngwaga la polasa la magareng ga R10 000 le R90 000. Palomoka ya letseno la ngwaga ka ngwaga la polasa le be le na le tswalano ye botse le ye bohlokwa le bong, bokgoni bja ntlo ya dikgogo bja go rwala palo ye e itsego ya dikgogo gammogo le palo ya ditsweletso tsa dikgogo ka ngwaga. Go hweditswe gape gore bontsi (>50%) bja barui ba be ba se na phihlelelo ye e lekanego go mmaraka le ditirelo tsa mmuso (katoloso le thuso ya ditshelete tsa diphepo). Thuto e utollotswe gape gore, ka setlwaedi, barui ba dikgogo tsa nama ba be ba na le dintlo tse pedi tsa dikgogo tseo di nago le bokgoni bja go rwala dikgogo tse 1 804 le tekano ya diphesente tse 7.6% tsa tekano ya go hwa ga dikgogo go tsweletso ye nngwe le ye nngwe. Ka kakaretso, go bile le tekano ya ditsweletso tsa dikgogo tse hlano ka palo; ebile bakgathatema ba somisitse mekotla ya phepo ye e ka bago 122 ngwaga ka ngwaga. Bontsi (73%) bja bakgathatema bo ratile mokgwa wa go fepa ka tshomiso ya didiriswa tse di bitswago diphelete. Bakgathatema ba fihleletse tekano ya boima bja kgogo ye e phelago bja 1.9 kg gomme ba letela gore bo fihlelele tekano ya boima bja 2 kg. Go feta fao, barui ba ile ba sepela dikilometara tse 20 ka kakaretso go ya lebenkeleng la kgauswi la go hwetsa phepo. Palo ya dintlo tsa dikgogo, palo ya ditsweletso tsa dikgogo ngwaga ka ngwaga le boima bjo bo letetswego bja dikgogo tse di phelago e be e le dintlha tse botse le tse bohlokwa tsa barui gore ba akanye go ikemisetsa go amogela diphepo tsa dikgogo tse dingwe tseo di dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro. Nyakisiso e hweditse gore bontsi bja bakgathatema (90%) ba be ba ikemiseditse go amogela diphepo tsa dikgogo tse dingwe tseo di dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro bjalo ka mothopo wa enetsi le proteine, ka go fapana ga tsona. Dipoelo ka kakaretso tsa maemo a magareng di bontshitse gore phihlelo ya diphepo tsa dikgogo (MR=1) e be e le ntlha ye bohlokwa kudu yeo e amanago le go amogelwa ga diphepo tse dingwe tsa dikgogo, gwa latelwa ke ntlha ya nyakego ya dikgogo (MR=2) gammogo le ntlha ya go rekega ga diphepo (MR=3). Dipoelo tsa teko ya Friedman di utollotswe gore go be go na le diphapano tse bohlokwa tsa dipalopalo (p<0.01) magareng ga dintlha tse tharo (ntlha ya nyakego, go rekega le phihlelelo). Teko ya maemo a maswao a Wilcoux e utollotswe gore barui ba be ba ikemiseditse kudu go amogela diphepo tse dingwe tsa dikgogo tse di dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro ge e le gore di be di fihlelelega go feta go ba kgontsha go fihlelela dintlha tsa dikgogo tse di nyakegago. Go tlaleletsa se, palo ya go bonala ya barui ba dikgogo tsa nama ba be ba ikemiseditse go amogela diphepo tse dingwe tsa dikgogo ge e le gore di be di rekega go feta go fihlelelega. Dipoelo tsa maemo a magareng a dintlha tsa phihlelelo di bontshitse gore mabaka a bohlokwa kudu ke ditshenyagalelo tsa fase tsa dinamelwa go reka diphepo, diphepo tse di fihlelelegago ka nako efe goba efe ya letsatsi gammogo le lefelothekiso la moabi wa diphepo yo a fihlelelegago ga bonolo. Dintlha di fihleletse maemo a magareng a go swana a (MR=1). Ka go le lengwe, dintlha tse bohlokwa tse di akantswego e be e le boima bja dikgogo tsa go phela le phokotso ya nomoro ya mekotla ya phepo ye e rekilwego, ka go fapana ga tsona. Go ikemisetsa ga barui go amogela diphepo tsa dikgogo tse di dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro go be go hlohleleditswe ka tsela ye botse le ye bohlokwa (p<0.05) ke palo ya bona ya dintlo tsa dikgogo, palo ya ditsweletso tsa dikgogo ngwaga ka ngwaga, le boima bja dikgogo tse di phelago bjo bo letetswego. Dipoelo di bontshitse gore ditlhohlo tse kgolo tseo di itemogetswego ke barui ba dikgogo tsa nama e be le theko ya godimo ya diphepo tsa dikgogo; diphepo tsa boleng bja fase; go hloka phihlelelo ya mebaraka; ditshenyagalelo tsa godimo tsa dinamelwa; ditswaki tsa diphepo tse di sa lekanego; dipoelo tsa fase tsa go dira letseno la tlaleletso; maemo a godimo a go hwa ga dikgogo; gammogo le go fokotsega ga boima bja dikgogo tse di phelago. Go ya ka dipoelo tsa nyakisiso ya bjale, go eletswa gore baswa ba swanetse go hlohleletswa go tsea karolo mesomong ya borui bja dikgogo tsa nama. Gape, diphepo tse dingwe tse di dirilwego go tswa go morogo, le mabelethoro di swanetse go fihlelelwa go oketsa tekano ya godimo ya kamogelo ya barui ba dikgogo tsa nama. Ka ge nyakisiso e tswela pele, go eletswa gape gore go dirwe teko ya go bapetsa tshepediso ya phepo ya dikgogo ya setlwaedi kgahlanong le phepo ya dikgogo ye e sego ya setlwaedi yeo e dirilwego go tswa go morogo le mabelethoro, gammogo le tshekatsheko ya ditshenyagalelo tsa bobedi bja diphepo.

In braaihoenderproduksie is voeding die hoogste veranderlike koste en dit is verantwoordelik vir tot 70% van die totale produksiekoste. Gevolglik is hoë voedingskoste ’n uitdaging vir braaihoenderboere. Hoë voedingskoste word beïnvloed deur ’n toename in voedingsbestanddele, veral energie- en proteïenbronne. Daar is dus ’n behoefte om bekostigbare hoendervoer te ontwikkel wat vervaardig word uit alternatiewe energie- en proteïenbronne. Hierdie studie is daarop gerig om braaihoenderboere se aanvaarding van alternatiewe hoendervoer wat van amaranthus en sorghum as energie- en proteïenbronne gemaak word, te assesseer in die Gauteng-provinsie. Die doelwitte van die studie was om boere se sosiodemografiese eienskappe te profileer; om die werking- en produksie-kenmerke van braaihoender-ondernemings te bepaal; om boere se gewilligheid om alternatiewe hoendervoer aan te neem wat gemaak word van amaranthus en sorghum as energie- en proteïenbronne te bepaal; om vas te stel wat die faktore is wat ’n invloed het op boere se gewilligheid om alternatiewe hoendervoer aan te neem wat gemaak word van amaranthus en sorghum as energie- en proteïenbronne, onderskeidelik; en om die uitdagings te identifiseer wat deur braaihoenderboere ervaar word. Die studie is uitgevoer in Gauteng deur gebruik te maak van ’n kwantitatiewe navorsingsbenadering en peilingsontwerp. Data is ingesamel by 70 braaihoenderboere deur telefoniese onderhoude met gebruik van ’n semi-gestruktureerde peilingsinstrument (vraelys). Die “Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)”, weergawe 27, is gebruik om die kwantitatiewe data te ontleed. Beskrywende statistieke, “Kendall’s Tau”, Pearson se korrelasie, geordende logistiese regressie, biomiese toets, Friedman se toets en Wilcoxon se toets van betekende range is gebruik om die data te analiseer. Temas, kodes, frekwensies en persentasies is gebruik om kwalitatiewe data van die ope vrae te ontleed. Die bevindings van die sosio-demografiese kenmerke van die respondente het getoon dat die meerderheid getroude, swart Afrika-mans is bo die ouderdom van 55 jaar met nege jaar se ondervinding in boerdery. Die meeste van die respondente (94%) het ’n basiese formele opvoeding gehad; verder het sowat 50% getoon dat hulle in private besit was van hulle landbougrond, met ’n gemiddelde grootte van 11.17 hektaar. Een-derde van die respondente was afhanklik van selfwerksaamheidsgeleenthede as hulle hoofbron van inkomste, terwyl die meerderheid (54.3%) ’n jaarlikse netto plaasinkomste van tussen R10 000 en R90 000 gehad het. Die jaarlikse netto plaasinkomste het ’n positiewe en beduidende korrelasie met geslag, die dravermoë van ’n hoenderhuis en die aantal produksiesiklusse per jaar. Daar is ook gevind dat die meeste boere (>50%) nie genoegsame toegang tot mark- en regeringsdienste (uitbreiding en gesubsidieerde voeding) het nie. Die studie het verder getoon dat braaihoenderboere gemiddeld twee pluimveehokke met ’n dravermoë van 1 804 hoenders en ’n sterftesyfer van 7.6% per siklus het. Die gemiddelde produksiesiklusse was vyf, en die respondente het 122 voersakke per jaar gebruik. Die meerderheid (73%) van die respondente het die korrelvoedingsvorm verkies. Die respondente het ’n gemidddelde lewende gewig per hoender van 1.9 kg bereik en ’n gemiddelde gewig van 2 kg verwag. Daarby het boere gemiddeld 20 km gereis na die naaste voedingspakhuis. Die aantal pluimveehokke, die aantal produksiesiklusse per jaar en die verwagte lewende gewig van die hoenders was positiewe en beduidende voorspellers van boere se gewilligheid om alternatiewe hoendervoer gemaak van amaranthus en sorghum aan te neem. Die studie het bevind dat die meeste respondente (90%) gewillig was om alternatiewe hoendervoer aan te neem wat van amaranthus en sorghum gemaak is as ’n bron van energie en proteïen, onderskeidelik. Die algehele resultate van die gemene rang het getoon dat die toeganklikheid van hoendervoer (MR=1) die belangrikste eienskap is geassosieer met die aanneming van alternatiewe hoendervoer, gevolg deur die gewenste hoendereienskappe (MR=2) en die bekostigbaarheidseienskappe (MR=3). Die resultate van Friedman se toets het onthul dat daar ’n statisties beduidende verskil (P<0.01) is tussen die drie veranderlikes (gewenste kenmerke, bekostigbaarheid en toeganklikheid). Die Wilcoxon se toets van betekende range het onthul dat boere beduidend gewillig was om alternatiewe hoendervoer gemaak van amaranthus en sorghum aan te neem indien dit meer toeganklik was om hulle in staat te stel om te voldoen aan die gewenste hoendereienskappe. Verder was ’n beduidende aantal braaihoenderboere gewillig om die alternatiewe hoendervoer aan te neem indien dit meer toeganklik eerder as bekostigbaar is. Die gemene rang-resultate van toeganklikheidsveranderlikes het getoon dat die belangrikste faktore laer vervoerkoste om voeding te koop, voeding wat enige tyd van die dag toeganklik is, en maklik toeganklike verskaffersligging-eienskappe is. Die veranderlikes het dieselfde gemene rang aangeteken (MR=1). Daarenteen was die voorspellende veranderlikes vir hoender-eienskappe en -bekostigbaarheid lewende gewig en die verminderde aantal veranderlikes vir aangekoopte voersakke, onderskeidelik. Boere se gewilligheid om hoendervoer gemaak van amaranthus en sorghum aan te neem was positief en beduidend (p<0.05) en beïnvloed deur die aantal pluimveehokke, aantal produksiesiklusse per jaar, en die verwagte lewende gewig van die hoenders. Die resultate het getoon dat die hoof uitdagings wat deur braaihoenderboere ervaar word, insluit die hoë koste van voer; lae-gehalte voer; gebrek aan toegang tot markte; hoë vervoerkoste; onvoldoende nutriënte in voer; lae-wins marge; ’n hoë sterftesyfer; en verminderde lewende gewig. Gebaseer op die resultate van die huidige studie word daar aanbeveel dat jong mense aangemoedig moet word om deel te neem aan braaihoenderboerdery-aktiwiteite. Weereens, die alternatiewe voer gemaak van amaranthus en sorghum moet toeganklik wees om braaihoenderboere se aannemingssyfer te verhoog. Aangesien die navorsing aaneenlopend is, word daar ook aanbeveel dat ’n eksperiment uitgevoer moet word om die verrigting van gewone hoendervoer teenoor nie-gewone hoendervoer gemaak van amaranthus en sorghum te vergelyk, asook die koste-analise van beide soorte voer.

Agriculture and  Animal Health

M.Sc. (Agriculture)