2018
DOI: 10.36062/ijah.57.1.2018.27-34
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Perception of dairy farmers regarding effectiveness of artificial insemination services of different dairy service delivery systems

Abstract: The perceived effectiveness of artificial insemination (AI) services offered by different dairy service delivery systems was studied in Namakkal district of Tamilnadu. A total of 120 respondents availing AI services from different dairy service delivery systems were selected using proportionate random sampling and data were collected and analyzed. Dairy co-operatives, private integrators, public departments, private veterinarians and para-veterinarians were the major AI service providers to the dairy farmers i… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
2
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
2
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…From the table 1, it is evident that breeding and reproduction services was predominantly provided by DAH&VS as perceived by large majority of the dairy farmers who had availed 'Artificial Insemination (A.I)'(87.25%) and 'Pregnancy Diagnosis (P.D) services' (90%) for their milch animals. Similar observation was seen in the findings of Mahalakshmi & Devi (2016) and Karthikeyan et al (2018) in availing breeding services. In the case of 'preventive services', majority of the dairy farmers availed 'vaccination services' (86%), 'deworming services' (89%) and 76 percent of the respondents opined that the department conducted 'periodic disease surveillance'.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…From the table 1, it is evident that breeding and reproduction services was predominantly provided by DAH&VS as perceived by large majority of the dairy farmers who had availed 'Artificial Insemination (A.I)'(87.25%) and 'Pregnancy Diagnosis (P.D) services' (90%) for their milch animals. Similar observation was seen in the findings of Mahalakshmi & Devi (2016) and Karthikeyan et al (2018) in availing breeding services. In the case of 'preventive services', majority of the dairy farmers availed 'vaccination services' (86%), 'deworming services' (89%) and 76 percent of the respondents opined that the department conducted 'periodic disease surveillance'.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…From the table 1 it could be observed that only one fourth of the respondents (A.I 31.50% and P.D 33.50%) availed 'breeding services and reproduction' and 'healthcare services'(Treatment 49% and surgery 28%) from private consultants since adequate breeding and health care services were provided by DAH&VS and DCS in the study area. This finding are in contrary with the findings of Karthikeyan et al (2018) which revealed that the large majority of respondents Organizing farmers 125(31.25) 180(45.00) 250(62.50) 126(31.50) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) meeting/demonstrations /field days and visits to exhibitions 3.…”
Section: Role Performed By Private Consultantscontrasting
confidence: 66%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Bansod et al, (2022) [3] reported majority of respondents (42%) reared more than 6 animals and 33.20% were reared 4-6 animals whereas 24.20% farmers reared 1-3 animals. Similar results were recorded by Karthikeyan et al (2018). However Singh et al (2021) [15] found 48.79% of respondent reared 3-4 animal fallowed by 38.48% up to 3 animals and only 12.73% were rearing 4 and above animals.…”
Section: Herd Sizesupporting
confidence: 72%
“…Upon interview, the partiicpants mentioned that there is no available AI service in their municipality and their Local Government Unit, does not promote AI. Farmers preferred the public departments through veterinary dispensary and sub-center artificial insemination service because it is cheap, quality and timely delivery of service coupled with better conception rate (Karthikeyan et al, 2018). The feelings of the farmers were generally neutral despite the favorable assessment of their opinions and behavioral intentions toward biotechnology use.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%