The grazing behaviour of Maasai cattle was influenced by season, area and grazing orbit. In a grazing day the cattle spent 1, 8, 14, 15 and 62 percent of their time drinking, ruminating, resting, walking and grazing respectively. The mean length of the grazing day of Maasai cattle is defined, as from the time they left their bomas in the morning until they returned for the night; this duration was 10.8 plus or minus 0.6 and and 10.4 plus or minus 0.6 hours for cattle and calves respectively. The mean grazing orbit was 15.5 and 10.8 km for adult cattle and calves respectively. A vibracorder proved quite accurate in timing cattle activities

Semenye, P.P.

CGSpace

  Grazing behaviour of Maasai cattleP.P. SemenyeP.O. Box 252, Maseno, Kenya IntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionConclusionsAcknowledgementsReferencesAbstractThe grazing behaviour of Maasai cattle was influenced by season, area and grazing orbit. In agrazing day, the cattle spent 1, 8, 14, 15 and 62% of their time drinking, ruminating, resting,walking and grazing respectively. The mean length of the grazing day of Maasai cattle isdefined, as from the time they left their bomas in the morning until they returned for the night;this duration was 10.8 ± 0.6 and 10.4 ± 0.6 hours for cattle and calves respectively. The meangrazing orbit was 15.5 and 10.8 km for adult cattle and calves respectively. A vibracorderproved quite accurate in timing cattle activities.IntroductionDaily intake of grazing cattle is determined by the product of time spent grazing, the rate ofbiting and forage intake per bite (Hodgson, 1982). It therefore follows that grazing timeinfluences intake directly, while other grazing habits such as drinking, ruminating, playing andresting may influence intake either positively or negatively. In Africa pastoral herdsmanexercise, a major influence on the grazing behaviour of their cattle through herding. Byherding, man decides when and where cattle are to go for grazing. So the skill of a herdsmancoupled with environmental factors are the determinants of a successful grazing day in termsof forage intake.The endeavour to understand the grazing behaviour of the Maasai cattle was part of a study ofthe Maasai pastoral production system. This study was initiated by the International LivestockCentre for Africa (ILCA). The study was carried out in three group ranches which wereselected on the bases of their ecology and development gradients in Kajiado District, Kenya.Materials and methodsThe five-minute method was used to study grazing behaviour, as suggested by Hancock(1953) and used by Lampkin et al. (1958) at Muguga, Kenya. At the end of each five-minuteperiod, an observation was made and the behaviour of each selected animal recorded.Behaviour activities recorded were: species of grass or browse grazed, resting while eitherstanding or lying, ruminating while standing or lying, walking and drinking. With the exceptionof the species grazed, the other behaviour patterns were confirmed if they continued for ten ormore seconds.In theory, a total of 144 observations could be made from 7.05 to 19.05 hours which is thenormal daylight period in Kenya at this latitude. However, the grazing period does not alwaysextend over the entire daylight period, but rather is modified according to the schedule andneeds of the individual livestock owner. In each herd, three animals were selected accordingto the role each cow appeared to play in the herd: the herd leader, an ordinary cow and alaggard. Each animal selected was followed by one observer during the entire grazing day.The observers used pedometers to monitor the distance covered during each grazing day. Atthe end of each day, the distance walked was taken as the average of the three pedometersused. Pedometers were calibrated regularly against a known distance. A vibracorder wasused as described by Stobbs (1970) to monitor total time spent actively, in grazing, walking,drinking and ruminating. For statistical analysis, SPSS and least squares procedures ofHarvey (1977) were used.ResultsGrazing Day LengthThe mean length of the grazing day of Maasai cattle, defined as from the time they left theirbomas in the morning until they returned for the night, was 10.8 ± 0.6 and 10.4 ± 0.6 hours foradult cattle and calves respectively. The difference between the adults and the calves of 0.4hour was not significant (P>0.05).Although the 28 grazing days recorded by the five-minute method and the vibracorder did notoverlap entirely, the latter also recorded an average of 10.6 ± 0.8 hours. During greenseasons grazing days were longer than during dry ones; the averages for the green and thedry were 11.1 ± 0.4 and 10.3 ± 0.8 hours respectively but the difference was not significant (P> 0.05). The measurements of the grazing day with an ordinary watch and the vibracorderwere very similar and the differences between them were within the experimental error. Avibracorder had the advantage over human observers that, once the instrument was set with achart covering seven days' records, it needed no further handling until the expiry of the sevendays. The vibracorder also recorded night activities between 18.30 to 07.30 hours. Theaverage duration of night activity for the green and dry seasons was 2.0 ± 1.3 hours and theseasonal difference was not significant (P>0.05). The night activity was assumed to be mainlyrumination. Total time spent ruminating on the average was 2.8 hours divided into 2 hours atnight and 0.8 hours during the day.Distance Walked per Grazing DayThe mean distance walked per grazing orbit was 15.5 ± 5.0 and 10.8 ± 4.8 km for adult cattleand calves respectively. Hence adult cattle walked 4.7 km more than calves. The differencewas 36% of the overall mean and significant (P<0.05). This difference in walking distancebetween the calves and the adult cattle was due to grazing management. Calves grazed inreserved areas near the homestead (Olopololi), while the adults utilised the communal grazingareas. Calves had more opportunity for high intake since in the homestead herbage wasrelatively more abundant than in the communal areas, necessitating less walking in search offorage. For the adult cattle, the distance walked was dependent on the herder's skills, on thegrazing orbit followed, and whether it was a watering day or not.Specific Grazing HabitsThe overall percentage time spent in a grazing day in specific activities were 1, 8, 14, 15 and62% in drinking, ruminating, resting, walking and grazing respectively. The percentage timespent was different between seasons, areas and grazing orbits and there were significantinteractions of season x area and season x grazing orbit.Seasonal effects were highly significant (P<0.01) while animal type was not (P>0.05) for anyof the activities. The coefficient of variations of the activities were large, and they ranged from23 to 98.Table 1 presents various activities as affected by seasonal changes. More time was spentdrinking in the green than in the dry and the dry/green seasons. Cattle ruminated less in thegreen than in the other two seasons, while rumination time during the day was 8% longer inthe dry than in the green season. Cattle rested 13% of the day longer in the dry than in thegreen or dry/green seasons, but they walked for a longer period in the green and dry/greenthan dry season. Proportion of time spent on grazing was longest in the green season (66%),followed by dry/green (62%) and 57% for the dry season.Ratios between rumination and grazing time were 1:8, 1:9, 1:17 and 1:5 for the overall mean,dry/green, green and dry respectively. Although this calculation of the rumination to grazingtime ratio was only for the day-light period when viewed together with Table 1, a trendemerged linked to forage quantity and intake. Grazing and ruminating times appeared to beinterrelated; low quality forage in the dry season resulted in longer ruminating and shortergrazing (intake) time, while the reverse was found in the better conditions of the green season.It is accepted that intake is limited by forage quality. But in this production system, it appearedthat rumination time was negatively related to intake.Table 1. Percentage of grazing day spent on different activities by season.Season N Drinking Ruminating Resting Walking GrazingOverall mean 611 8 14 15 62(6) (48) (84) (90) (372)(0.1) (0.8) (1.4) (1.5) (6.1)Dry/greenFeb/Mar 1983 211b 7a 13a 17a 62ab(6) (42) (78) (102) (372)(0.1) (0.7) (1.3) (1.7) (6.2)Green May/June 1983 283a 4c 8b 19a 66a(18) (24) (48) (114) (396)(0.3) (0.4) (0.8) (1.9) (6.6)Dry Sept/Oct 1983 121b 12b 21c 9 57(6) (72) (126) (54) (342)(0.1) (1.2) (2.1) (0.9) (5.7)abc Except for the overall means other means having no superscript letter incommon differ at the P£ 0.05. (In brackets = time in hours).DiscussionThat the vibracorder can be used successfully to record grazing time (Stobbs, 1970) wasconfirmed in this present study. It has many obvious logistics advantages over observers withwatches. It is a tool that could be used to compare herdsman and their herds. The vibracorderwas also effective in recording time spent on rumination during the night. Therefore the totalruminating time was calculated by adding the night time recorded by the vibracorder to that ofthe day time recorded by observers. The total ruminating time in 24 hours of 2.8 hours fell atthe lower end of the range of 2.5 to 10.4 hours, reported by Harker et al, (1953) and vanSoest (1982).Maasai cattle walked shorter distances than pastoral Fulani cattle in northern Nigeria studiedby van Raay and de Leeuw (1974) who recorded daily averages ranging from 16 to 30 km.Maasai cattle walked less because of better grazing resources due to the bimodal rainfall anda greater degree of sedentarisation and a closer spacing of water sources, all leading to alesser need for walking.The percentage time spent grazing of 62% or 6.7 hours was intermediate between timesreported for herded cattle (65 to 89%, Semenye 1981; Otchere, 1986) and non-herded cattle(55%, Harker et al., 1953; Lampkin et al., 1958; Lampkin and Quarterman, 1962).Lack of significant difference between animal types within a single herd means that thebehaviours for the three different categories were similar. In a situation where cattle are notherded, similarity between the categories is less likely. Where cattle are herded the influenceof the herder dominated the individual expression of cattle. However, when it came tobehaviour on which the herder had less influence such as rumination, significant differencesbetween grazing areas were observed due to differences in forage quality and wateravailability. Rumination time is known to vary with the forage quality (Hancock, 1953; vanSoest, 1982), which varied across areas and seasons.More time was spent drinking in the green season, when there was plenty of surface water.Reasons have been advanced above for expecting longer rumination periods in the dryseason when forage was at its lowest quality. Since they had access to forage of high qualityand plenty of water in the green season, cattle should enjoy more resting time instead of less.However, it is possible that more resting occurred in the dry/green and dry seasons than in thegreen because of higher prevailing temperatures and the desire of either the cattle or theherder to avoid unnecessary effort. With increasing temperature, cattle rest for longer periodsby seeking shade. The trials of Lampkin and Quarterman (1962) with steers at Muguga andMariakani with temperatures below and above 30°C respectively, showed that time spentunder the shade was much greater in the hotter environment. A similar seasonal trend inwalking time was observed, but it should be noted that in the dry season cattle devoted theirentire walking time simply to walking whereas in other seasons grazing and walking occurredsimultaneously in some instances. Cattle grazed for the shortest time in the dry season, whenquantity and quality of forage were lowest but spent a relatively longer period in rumination.ConclusionsThe Maasai herdsman herded their cattle with great skill despite severe limitations of livestockfacilities such as adequate water sources, troughs and dips; and lack of paddocks andperimeter fences. The need for increasing the length of the grazing day to enhance intake wasuppermost in their minds. However, due to predators this was not possible, hence the totalgrazing time coincided with sunrise and sunset.Rumination time was found to vary with the forage quality. Therefore, in dry seasons longerrumination time necessitated by poor forage quality could limit intake.A vibracorder timing of grazing days was found to be as accurate as watch timing. Due to theconvenience of a vibracorder over observers, it is an ideal tool for grazing behaviour studies.AcknowledgementsThe author wishes to thank ILCA for funds supporting this research, the pastoralists forallowing me to study their cattle, Drs. A. Carles, A. Said, J. Lambourne and Mr. P. de Leeuwfor advice and guidance, Messrs. P. Chara, E. Rugema, T. Tukai and E. Wacira for their goodwork as field assistants and Ms. P. Pacha for typing the manuscript.ReferencesHancock, J. 1953. Grazing behaviour of cattle. Animal Breed Abstr. 21:1.Harker, K.W., Taylor, J.I. and Rollinson, D.H.L. 1953. Studies on habits of zebu cattle. I.Preliminary observations on habits on grazing habits. Journal Agric. Sci. 44:13.Harvey, W.R. 1977. User's guide for least-squares and maximum likelihood computerprogram. Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.Hodgson, J. 1982. Ingestive behaviour in herbage intake handbook 6, 113.Lampkin, G.H., Quarterman, J. and Kidner, M. 1958. Observations on the grazing habits ofgrade and zebu steers in a high altitude temperate climate. J. Agric. Sci. 50:211.Lampkin, G.H. and Quarterman, J. 1962. Observation on the grazing habits of grade and zebucattle. II. Their behaviours under favourable conditions in the tropics. J. Agric. Sci. 57:119.Otchere, E.O. 1986. Traditional cattle production in the subhumid zone of Nigeria. In: R. vonKaufmann, S. Chater and R. Blench (eds), Livestock systems research in Nigeria's subhumidzone. Proceedings of the second ILCA/NAPRI Symposium, Kaduna, Nigeria, 29 October-2November 1984. ILCA, Addis Ababa. pp. 110-140.Semenye, P.P. 1981. Practical application of range areas monitoring. Proceedings of theAnimal Production Society of Kenya 13, 28.Stobbs, T.H. 1970. Components of grazing behaviour of dairy cows on some tropical andtemperate pastures. Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 10:299.van Raay, H.G.T. and de Leeuw, P.N. 1974. Fodder resources and grazing management in asavanna environment: an ecosystem approach. Samuru Research Bulletin No. 224, Zaria,Nigeria.van Soest, P.J. 1982. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. O & B Books, Inc., Corvallis,Oregon.  

Grazing behavior of Maasai cattle

https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/10568/50015/1/Grazing_behavior.pdf

Grazing behavior of Maasai cattle

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CGSpace