Academic literature on the topic 'Dairy farms – Zimbabwe'

Mastitis is a global challenge for the dairy industry and mastitogenic bacteria play a critical role among other causes. Many mastitogenic bacteria are becoming resistant to single or combination antibiotic therapy, making mastitis cases difficult to cure. Nevertheless, there is insufficient evidence on the occurrence and antibiotic resistance patterns of mastitogenic bacteria in commercial dairy and communal farms in the Midland Province of Zimbabwe that might support a holistic approach to mastitis mitigation. A cross-sectional study aimed to isolate and evaluate the antibiotic susceptibility patterns of mastitogenic bacteria from cattle with clinical mastitis was conducted. A total of 164 milk samples were analyzed, of which 36.6% (60) samples were collected from commercial farmers, and 63.4% (104) came from communal farmers. The samples were cultured on standard media and sensitivity patterns of the identified bacteria were tested against 14 antibiotics using the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method. All milk samples from communal farms were positive for mastitogenic bacteria compared to 88% (53) of mastitogenic positive milk samples from commercial farms. The most common microorganisms from all the 157-mastitogenic positive milk samples were Staphylococcus aureus (37.5%) and Escherichia coli (23.3%). The highest resistance was observed against Penicillin, Erythromycin, Ampicillin, and Lincomycin, whereas most isolates were susceptible to Sulphamethoxazole, gentamycin, neomycin, kanamycin, cloxacillin, ertapenem, ceftriaxone, Amp-Ampicillin, amikacin, vancomycin, and tetracycline. Futher research to investigate the significance of resistant mastogenic bacteria in terms of Veterinary costs, production losses and potential public health transmission of antibiotic resistant mastogenic bacteria is recommended

The study investigated the perceptions of milk producers on milk quality and safety. Randomly selected large-scale farmers (n=158) and small-scale farmers (n=186) were surveyed using semistructured questionnaires. An ordinal logistic regression was used to estimate the probability of farmers considering milk quality and safety important. Large-scale farmers were 3 times more likely to consider that breed affects milk quality compared to their small-scale counterparts. Farmers aged over 30 years were 3 times more likely to indicate that hygiene affected milk quality. The likelihood of milk transportation affecting its quality was 4 times higher in small-scale farmers compared to large-scale producers. Postmilking contamination of milk was perceived to occur during transportation by small-scale farmers, whilst commercial farmers ranked storage as the important source of contamination after milking. Udder diseases were ranked first by large-scale farmers while small-scale farmers ranked milking environment as the major cause of milk spoilage. The likelihood of milk safety being important was two times higher in large farms compared to small-scale farms. Intervention programmes on milk safety should mainly target small-scale dairy farmers since they are less concerned about milk quality and safety.

A cross-sectional study was conducted to detect the presence ofSalmonellaspp.,Candida albicans,Aspergillusspp., and antimicrobial residues in raw milk (n=120) and processed cow milk (n=20) from smallholder dairy farms from three sites in Zimbabwe. Culture and isolation ofSalmonellaspp.,C. albicans, andAspergillusspp. were performed using selective media, while antimicrobial residues were detected by a dye reduction test. NoSalmonella, butC. albicans(17.5%; 21/120),Aspergillusspp. (0.8%; 1/120), and antimicrobial residues (2.5%; 3/120) were detected from raw milk.C. albicanswas isolated from all three sites, whileAspergillusspp. and antimicrobial residues were detected from sites 1 and 3, respectively. From processed milk, onlyC. albicans(5%) was isolated whileAspergillusspp. and antimicrobial residues were not detected. These results suggested low prevalence ofSalmonellaspp. andAspergillusspp. and a relatively high prevalence ofC. albicansin raw milk from the smallholder farms. The potential public health risks ofC. albicansand the detected antimicrobial residues need to be considered. Thus, educating farmers on improving milking hygiene and storage of milk and establishing programmes for monitoring antimicrobial residues may help to improve the safety of milk from smallholder farms.

The study investigated the effect of structural conditions of milk processing facilities and food safety systems on E. coli and coliform presence in buttermilk. Milk records collected by Dairy Services Zimbabwe (DSZ) from large-scale dairy milk processors (n=12) and small-scale farms (n=15) were analysed. Binomial logistic regression was used to estimate the likelihood of E. coli or coliforms being present in cultured buttermilk as a function of the hygiene level and structural adequacy of the processors. The likelihood of having E. coli and coliforms in cultured milk from processors with poor sanitary premises was two times higher than that from processors with good sanitary premises (P<0.05). Milk processors that used unfiltered water were 1.77 times more likely to produce cultured buttermilk contaminated with E. coli (P<0.05). Processors without food safety systems like hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) systems were more than twice likely to produce cultured buttermilk contaminated by E. coli and coliforms (P<0.05). Poor structural condition of roofs, windows, insect-proof screens, and drainage in small- and large-scale processing facilities results in production of cultured buttermilk that is contaminated by E. coli and coliforms.

PhDRDV
Institute for Rural Development
As has been the case in Eastern and Southern Africa, Zimbabwe continues to regard smallholder dairy farming as a viable strategy for reducing poverty and malnutrition, especially in rural areas. Although the country has since the early 1980s been promoting smallholder dairy development, available literature does not provide a clear picture of the extent to which the specific livelihoods of rural communities in terms of human, social, physical and financial capitals, have improved. Nor is there knowledge on its negative contribution to the farmers’ livelihoods. Thus, this study was undertaken to critically analyse the contribution of smallholder dairy farming towards the livelihoods of rural households using the Nharira dairy scheme as a focal area. The DfiD sustainable livelihood framework was used to build this understanding. Apart from characterizing the farmers, the contribution of smallholder dairy farming towards social, physical, human, natural and financial capitals was investigated. A sequentially integrated mixed methods approach was used. This was divided into two phases, which were quantitative and qualitative in nature. Results from the first phase were used to inform and design the second study. A census of the 21 active smallholder dairy farmers in Nharira, and management committee of the Nharira dairy processing plant was conducted. A household-focused questionnaire, key informant interviews, participatory mapping, record review, Global Positioning System (GPS) locating and focus group discussions were used to collect data. A tape recorder, GPS locator and camera were used as assistive devices during data collection. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse qualitative data and interpret participatory maps. Livelihood capital indices were derived per household and used to complement descriptive statistics as part of quantitative data analysis. A social capital index was computed for each household using collective action, empowerment, groups and networks, and trust and solidarity as its components. Resource stocks and access were the building blocks of the natural capital index. Income, savings and investments, and access to funding were used to derive the household financial capital index. Contribution of dairy farming to productive equipment (such as cattle herd size) and basic infrastructure (such as quality of housing) were used to calculate the physical capital index. The index for human capital was obtained taking into account education, workforce and employment, enabling environment, and health and wellness. Equal weights were applied to the components when deriving the household livelihood indices because each one of them was considered to be substantially important for sustainable livelihoods. The quantitative data were stored and analysed using the International Business Machines (IBM) Statistical iii Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 24. Pearson correlation coefficients, means and standard deviations were calculated. Most of the farmers (65 %) were female. Approximately, 95 % of the women farmers were literate. Only 1 % of the farmers were youth (< 35 years old), a situation that threatened the sustainability of smallholder dairy farming. A daily smallholder dairy farming routine was derived using the focus group and participatory mapping results. This showcased the various daily activities and linked them with the household members actively involved. Smallholder dairy farming was found to be labour intensive. This might deter the farmers from diversifying into other livelihood strategies. Smallholder dairy farming was observed to have strengthened financial, human, natural, physical and social capitals in the local households. However, the respective indices of 0.59 and 0.52 for social and natural capitals, suggested that smallholder dairy farming impacted on these more than any other. Even though social capital was strong, further reinforcement through improved smallholder dairy farming activities was still vital because of its power of enhancing access to other forms of livelihood capitals. Human and physical capitals had the least index scores of 0.48 and 0.47, respectively. On average, the overall household livelihood capital index as a result of smallholder dairy farming was 0.51. One of the study respondents supported the positive contribution in the following way, ‘’Zvakanakira dairy hatingazipedzi. Tinotoda zuva rese” (There are many positive things that we attribute to our involvement in smallholder dairy farming. Narrating these demands considerable time). It was concluded that smallholder dairy farming significantly strengthened livelihood capitals of households involved in it. The results of the current study suggest that smallholder dairy farming is a viable option for improving household livelihood capitals. Thus, establishment of dairy farming schemes in rural areas should be promoted. However, the participation of youth in smallholder dairy farming as enterprise owners deserves attention because it threatens sustainability of the sector. An integrated multiple angle view encompassing technical, social, institutional, economic and organizational ideas of the impact of dairy farming as a livelihood strategy on household capital portfolio was provided. Moreover, application of the sustainable development framework to understanding the smallholder dairy farming context at household level was a novel way of understanding the local realities. Lastly, a set of variables that can be utilised to measure livelihood capitals of households involved in smallholder dairy farming-related activities was distilled.