↓ Skip to main content

Preferential traits for breeding Nguni cattle in low-input in-situ conservation production systems

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

1 Facebook page


16 Dimensions

Readers on

48 Mendeley
Preferential traits for breeding Nguni cattle in low-input in-situ conservation production systems
Published in
SpringerPlus, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-2-195
Pubmed ID

Obert Tada, Voster Muchenje, Kennedy Dzama


A cross-sectional study was conducted in communal and small-scale Nguni cattle enterprises to determine preferential traits for improvement under low-input cattle breeding programs. Forty-one farmers participated in ranking six specific traits of breeding bulls and cows. Kruskal-Wallis test and ordinal logistic regression were used to determine mean ranks of traits and odds ratios of predictors (enterprise ownership, gender, farmer age, education level, agriculture training) on specified trait ranks, respectively. Preferential traits for breeding bulls were in the order; aggression and mating behaviour (1.86), tick and disease resistance (1.90), body condition score (2.69), scrotal circumference (4.52), body size and conformation (4.71) and coat colour (5.02). For breeding cows,preferential order were; tick and disease resistance (1.55), reproductive efficiency (2.02), body condition score (3.14), body size and conformation (4.21), coat colour (4.74) and milk yield (5.31). Less old farmers (< 50 years) and those from communal enterprises preferred bull coat colour more than scrotal circumference. Farmers with primary education and those with formal agriculture training had the least odds ratio estimates on the poorly ranked bull coat colour. The informally trained farmers, older age group (> 50 years), females and those from small-scale enterprises had odds ratio estimates less than one for the sixth ranked milk yield in Nguni cows. It was concluded that trait preference in breeding bulls and cows is significantly influenced by socio-economic and demographic factors. It is recommended to consider farmer preferences in trait selection and designing communal breeding programs.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Uganda 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 25%
Researcher 9 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 54%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 13 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 April 2013.
All research outputs
of 3,628,675 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
of 742 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 84,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,628,675 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 742 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 84,970 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.