Fulya ÖZDİL, Selçuk KAPLAN, Serdar GENÇ, Hasan BULUT, Selen YATKIN, Sezen ARAT, Eser Kemal GÜRCAN, Mehmet İhsan SOYSAL, Emel ÖZKAN ÜNAL

Determination of the morphometric characteristics of donkey (Equus asinus) populations reared in Turkey

This research aims to determine the morphometric characteristics of the donkey (Equus asinus) populations reared in Turkey. For this purpose, live weights and body measurements were collected from 500 donkeys. The donkeys were grouped according to the factors of color, age, sex, and province and the live weights (LW) (kg), withers heights (WH), rump heights (RH), body lengths (BL), chest circumferences (CC), chest depths (CD), front shank circumferences (FSC), head lengths (HL) and ear lengths (EL) (cm) of the donkeys were measured. In the study, the males were found to have higher values of live weight, withers height, rump height, and chest depth than the females (p < 0.05). Significant differences in the live weights of the donkeys were seen by province, age, color, and sex (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05). Significant differences were found among the age groups as well (p < 0.01). Accordingly, the least squares means of the animals aged 1–3 years, 4–5 years, 6–8 years, and 9 years and over for live weight were measured as 112.10 ± 3.11 kg, 141.54 ± 2.76 kg, 153.98 ± 2.42 kg, and 152.95 ± 2.34 kg, respectively. The least squares mean of live weights were also determined as significant between the female and male animals (138.08 ± 1.96 kg) and (142.21 ± 2.25 kg), respectively (p < 0.05). The highest correlation coefficient was calculated between live weight and body length among the donkeys (r = 0.83). Furthermore, the classical method (CM) and the fixed object photo (FOP) method were compared for photographed animals in the study. No difference in WH, RH, CD or HL was seen between the two methods (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the morphometric characteristics of the donkeys were determined and it was shown that the populations were not distinguished clearly from each other and that this was fundamentally due to the transitions among the donkey populations for long years.

PDF

___

1. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. TUİK Hayvancılık İstatistikleri 2021. Basın ve Halkla İlişkiler Müşavirliği Bilgi Edinme Birimi, Ankara, Türkiye; 2021 (in Turkish).
2. Anonymous. FAOSTAT, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy; 2021b.
3. Salimei E, Fantuz F, Coppola R, Chiofalo B, Polidori P, Varisco G. Composition and characteristics of ass’s milk. Animal Research 2004; 53: 67-78. doi: 10.1051/animres:2003049
4. Guo HY, Pang K, Zhang XY, Zhao L, Chen SW et al. Composition, physiochemical properties, nitrogen fraction distribution, and amino acid profile of donkey milk. Journal Dairy Science 2007; 90 (4): 1635-1643. doi: 10.15237/gida.GD16105
5. Simoni A, Drogoul C, Salimei E. Mechanical milking of equines: the European proposal. In: 61st Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production; Crete Island, Greece; 2010. pp.41, 23-27.
6. Kuger W, Grunenfelder HP, Borxham E. Donkey Breeds in Europe. Conservation Monitoring Institute for Rare Breeds, Switzerland; 2008.
7. Moehlman PD. Status and Action Plan for the African Wild Ass (Equus africanus). In: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan, Switzerland; 2002.
8. Grinder MI, Krausman PR, Hoffmann RS. Equus asinus, Mammalian Species 2006; 794: 1-9.
9. Güleç E. Eşek Yetiştiriciliği ve Önemi.1.Ed. Ankara; Anadolu At Irklarını Yaşatma ve Geliştirme Derneği Yayınları (Elde Basım) 2010, (in Turkish).
10. Yılmaz O, Ertuğrul M. Eşeğin (Equus asinus) evcilleştirilmesi, Iğdır Üniversitesi. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 2011; 1 (3): 111-115. (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
11. Yılmaz O, Wilson RT. The domestic livestock resources of Turkey: notes on donkeys, The Journal of Animal Plant Sciences 2013; 23 (2): 651-656.
12. Yılmaz O, Ertuğrul M. The morphologic traits of donkeys raised in east and southeast of Turkey. Hayvansal Üretim Dergisi 2012; 53 (1): 10-13.
13. Yılmaz O, Ertuğrul M. Türkiye’de yetiştirilen kimi tek tırnaklılara ait bazı morfolojik özellikler, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 2014; 2(2): 9-16 (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
14. Wilson DE, Reeder DM. Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. 2nd ed. Washington, USA: Smithsonian Institution Press; 1993.
15. Rubenstein DI. Family Equidae. In: Handbook of Mammals of the World, Vol. 2, Barcelona, Spain; 2011.
16. Sönmez R. Özel Zootekni. Ege Üniversitesi, Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları; İzmir, 1975 (in Turkish).
17. Nilipour AH, Butcher CD. Data collection is important in poultry integrations. Missed World Poultry 1997; 13 (8): 19-20.
18. Gürcan EK, Tuna YT, Soysal Mİ. Anadolu Mandalarının çeşitli vücut ölçülerine göre morfometrik karekterizasyonu. Journal of Tekirdağ Agricultural Faculty 2011; 8: 143-152. (in Turkish with an abstract in English).
19. Grashorn MA, Komender P. Breast muscle weight estimated by real-time ultrasonic scanner. Missed World Poultry 1991; 7 (6): 40-41.
20. Kök S. Keşan, İpsala ve Enez yöresi Boz Step sığırı yetiştiriciliği üzerine araştırmalar. MSc, Trakya Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimler Enstitüsü, Edirne, Türkiye, 1991 (in Turkish).
21. Doğaroğlu OK. Kasaplık sığırlarda canlı ağırlık ve çeşitli vücut ölçülerinin tahmininde görüntü işleme teknolojisi. MSc, Trakya Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Edirne, 2006 (in Turkish).
22. Düzgüneş O, Kesici T, Gürbüz F. İstatistik Metotlar. 2.ed. Ankara, Türkiye: Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları; 1993 (in Turkish).
23. IBM Corporation. SPSS for Windows. Base System User’s Guide, Version 18.0 Armonk, NY, USA: IBM Corp.;2013.
24. Folch P, Jordana J. Characterization, reference ranges and the influence of gender on morphological parameters of the endangered Catalonian donkey breed. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 1997; 17 (2): 102-111. doi:10.1016/S0737- 0806(97)80347-4
25. Kefena E, Beja-Pereira A, Han JL, Haile A, Mohammed YK et al. Eco-geographical structuring and morphological diversities in Ethiopian donkey populations. Livestock Science 2011; 141: 232-241.
26. Cecchi F, Ciampolini R, Ciani E, Manzanti E, Tancredi M et al. Morphological characterization of the Amiata donkey breed through the data reported in the engraphic register. Italian Journal Animal Science 2007; 6 (1): 70. doi: 10.1590/ rbz4720170310
27. Sargentini C, Tocci R, Lorenzini G, Gianangeli B, Martini A et al. Morphological characteristics of Amiata donkey reared in Tuscany. Italian Journal Animal Science 2009; 8 (Suppl. 2): 721-723. doi: 10.1590/rbz4720170310
28. Stanisic L, Dimitrijevic V, Simeunovic P, Lakic N, Radovic I et al. Morphological, biochemical and hematological characterization of endangered Balkan donkey breed. Acta Veterinary 2015; 65 (1): 125-136. doi: 10.1515/acve-2015-0010
29. John PA, Akpa GN, Tunji-Iyiola AO. Characterization of weaner donkeys in North West Nigeria using Morphometric traits. Nigerian Journal Animal Science 2017; (1): 36-49.
30. Labbaci M, Djaout A, Benyarou M, Ameur A, Gaounar SBS. Morphometric characterization and typology of donkey farming (Equus asinus) in the Wilaya of Tlemcen. Genetic Biodiversity Journal 2018; 2 (1): 60-72.
31. Ayad A, Aissanou S, Amis K, Latreche A, Iguer-quada M. Morphological characteristics of donkey (Equus asinus) in Kabyle area, Algeria. Slovak Journal Science 2019; 52 (2): 53- 62.
32. Mostafa MB, Abdelgalıl AI, Farhat SF, Raw Z, Kuvasiewicz LM. Morphometric measurements of the feet of working donkeys Equus asinus in Egyptian Journal Equine Science 2020; 31 (2):17-22. doi: 10.1294/jes.31.17
33. Hannani H, Bouzebda Z, Bouzebda-Afri F, Hannani A, Khemis MDEH. Morphometric characteristics of the extreme Eastern Algerian domestic donkey (Equus asinus), Folia Veterinaria 2020; 64 (1): 66-76. doi: 10.2478/fv-2020-0009
34. Khaleel AG, Lawal LA, Mudassir N, Hassan AM, Abdu MI et al. Morphometric characterization of Donkeys (Equus asinus) in Kudu Kano state for selective breeding and genetic conservation. Journal of Agrobiotechnology 2020; 11 (2): 12- 21. doi: 10.37231/jab.2020.11.2.216
35. Aluja AS, Tapia PG, Lopez F, Pearson RA. Live weight estimation of donkey in Central Mexico from measurement of thoracic circumference. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 2005; 37 (Suppl.1): 159-171. doi:10.1007/s11250- 005-9007-0