Morphological measure of adult cattle population
The quantitative measures of some phenotypic traits of local cattle population are summarized in (Table 4).
The overall least squares means and standard error values of mouth circumference, horn length, ear length,
height at wither, body length, heart girth, pelvic width, tail length, rump height and cannon bone circumference
were 38.9±0.07cm, 22.8±0.42cm, 19.83±0.06 cm,114.5±0.2cm, 115.4± 0.2cm, 146±0.27cm, 36.5±0.09cm,
78.6±0.22cm, 115.8±0.25cm and 20.3±0.6 cm, respectively. All phenotypic measurements listed on the above
were significantly different (P<0.05) between male and female cattle. Most body measurements of cattle like
heart girth, body length, pelvic width, ear length, cannon bone circumference, mouth circumference and body
weight were also significant difference (P<0.05) among Low Land, High Land and Mid Land locations. The
possible reason for the difference may be agro ecological difference among districts. But horn length, tail length,
height at whither and rump height were did not shows significant difference (P<0.05) among the three agro
ecologies. Body length, chest girth, and wither height of the male cattle were measured to be 117.6±0.3,
151.8±0.44, and 116.25±0.4 cm, respectively. These measurements were found lower than body measurements
reported on the same sex for Boran cattle breeds [8], Mursi cattle breeds [20] and for Wollocattle [16] except
heart girth. But heart girth of this result was aligned with that reported [16] for Wollo cattle breed. Like other
local zebu cattle populations, the male and female of this result showed significantly different for most of
morphological measurements and all linear measurement male value greater than female’s. Different reports
revealed that the mean value of on-farm morphological traits measurement on local male and female cattle result
that males are usually greater than their counter female groups [21, 22, and 19]. Therefore cattle populations in
the study areas were varied with qualitative and quantitative traits from former findings of Fasil and Dereje [17,
16] respectively and there was no sufficient evidence to classify either of them.
Correlation between Body Weight and Linear Body Measurements
Pearson's correlation coefficient between body weight and linear body measurements for male and female
were calculated and presented in the (Table 5). In males all of linear body measurements have positive
association with body weight and strong association was found between body weight and chest girth (r=0.984),
whereas mouth circumference (r=0.56), tail length (r=0.5), pelvic width (r=0.55) and cannon bone circumference
(r=0.5) had moderate correlation with body weight. Wither height (r=0.44), body length (r=0.34), rump height
(r=0.32) and ear length (r=0.39) showed mild correlation with body weight. But horn length for both sex male
(r=0.12) and female (r=0.002) did not showed significant correlation with body weight. These linear body
measurements that showed moderate and mild correlation were may not significantly affected by the change in
body weight; hence, they are not more important in prediction of live body weight of the animal. In females also
all of linear body measurements have positive association with body weight and strong association was found
between heart girth and body weight. Rump height showed moderate correlation (r=0.50), with body weight.
Height at wither (r=0.28), body length (r=0.38), mouth circumference (r=0.44), tail length (r=0.48), pelvic width
(r=0.29) and cannon bone circumference (r=0.42)were showed mild correlation, whereas ear length (r=0.24) had
weak correlation with body weight. Generally as the result of correlation showed heart girth (chest girth) was the
most important than other linear body measurement for both male and female to estimate body weight.
Estimated Mature Body Weight of the Sample Population by sex
The estimated average mature body weight as used conversion of from heart girth were 300.7±4.3 for male
and 243.6± 2.3 kg for female with at rang of (214-388 kg) for male and (164-381kg) for female. These Variations
were observed among individuals which were compared to other local cattle [19] ranging from 196.9 to 333.6 for
females and from 178.1 to 428.2 kg for males. Based on the estimated body weight of the individual animals the
following linear regression equations (body weight on heart girth) were developed separately for both sexes.
Ym= -481.55 + 4.89x for bulls and
Yf = -405.22 + 4.64x for cows
Where:
Yf = estimated body weight of mature female cattle (kg)
Ym= estimated body weight of mature male cattle (kg)
x = heart girth.
To cite this paper: Tenagne A, Mekuriaw G and D Kumar. 2016. Phenotypic Characterization of Indigenous Cattle Populations in West Gojjam Administrative Zones,
136