Relationship of procedures and methodologies to hypotheses.

<p>Relationship of procedures and methodologies to hypotheses.</p

The distribution of livestock typologies in the four Chiefdoms.

<p>Typologies were defined as follows: no animals of any kind (Type 1); few animals, mostly poultry (Type 2); moderate number of animals, mostly poultry (Type 3); few animals, mixed small and large livestock species (Type 4); and moderate to large number of animals, mixed small and large livestock species (Type 5).</p

Examining the association between livestock ownership typologies and child nutrition in the Luangwa Valley, Zambia

<div><p>Objective</p><p>To investigate the association between livestock ownership and dietary diversity, animal-source food consumption, height-for-age z-score, and stunting among children living in wildlife “buffer zones” of Zambia’s Luangwa Valley using a novel livestock typology approach.</p><p>Methods</p><p>We conducted a cross-sectional study of 838 children aged 6–36 months. Households were categorized into typologies based on the types and numbers of animals owned, ranging from no livestock to large numbers of mixed livestock. We used multilevel mixed-effects linear and logistic regression to examine the association between livestock typologies and four nutrition-related outcomes of interest. Results were compared with analyses using more common binary and count measures of livestock ownership.</p><p>Results</p><p>No measure of livestock ownership was significantly associated with children’s odds of animal-source food consumption, child height-for-age z-score, or stunting odds. Livestock ownership Type 2 (having a small number of poultry) was surprisingly associated with decreased child dietary diversity (β = -0.477; p<0.01) relative to owning no livestock. Similarly, in comparison models, chicken ownership was negatively associated with dietary diversity (β = -0.320; p<0.01), but increasing numbers of chickens were positively associated with dietary diversity (β = 0.022; p<0.01). Notably, neither child dietary diversity nor animal-source food consumption was significantly associated with height, perhaps due to unusually high prevalences of morbidities.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>Our novel typologies methodology allowed for an efficient and a more in-depth examination of the differential impact of livestock ownership patterns compared to typical binary or count measures of livestock ownership. We found that these patterns were not positively associated with child nutrition outcomes in this context. Development and conservation programs focusing on livestock must carefully consider the complex, context-specific relationship between livestock ownership and nutrition outcomes–including how livestock are utilized by the target population–when attempting to use livestock as a means of improving child nutrition.</p></div

Summary of generalized linear mixed effect model (maximum likelihood estimates) assessing the effects of livestock ownership typology on odds of child stunting (n = 804)^†.

<p>Summary of generalized linear mixed effect model (maximum likelihood estimates) assessing the effects of livestock ownership typology on odds of child stunting (n = 804)<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0191339#t008fn002" target="_blank">^†</a>.</p

Typical pica substances.

<p>Typical pica substances.</p

A close-up photograph of the sample in which the sample number is also visible is highly recommended.

<p>Ideally, a ruler should be included in the picture for scale.</p

The context of the source of pica samples should be documented with photography, such as this soil sample from a building site in Zanzibar, Tanzania.

<p>The context of the source of pica samples should be documented with photography, such as this soil sample from a building site in Zanzibar, Tanzania.</p

Unadjusted associations between various measures of livestock ownership and stunting, dietary diversity, or animal source food consumption.

<p>Unadjusted associations between various measures of livestock ownership and stunting, dietary diversity, or animal source food consumption.</p

Characteristics of the five livestock ownership typologies.

<p>Characteristics of the five livestock ownership typologies.</p

The distribution of livestock typologies in the four Chiefdoms.

<p>Typologies were defined as follows: no animals of any kind (Type 1); few animals, mostly poultry (Type 2); moderate number of animals, mostly poultry (Type 3); few animals, mixed small and large livestock species (Type 4); and moderate to large number of animals, mixed small and large livestock species (Type 5).</p