Pig multiplier units and artificial insemination at farmers’ fields: Success, impact and constraints

SUNIL  KUMAR; RAFIQUL  ISLAM; PRANTIK  DEKA; PRIYAJOY  KAR; KESHAB  BARMAN; P J  DAS; VIVEK KUMAR  GUPTA

doi:10.56093/ijans.v95i12.172738

Authors

SUNIL KUMAR ICAR-National Research Center on Pig, Rani, Guwahati, 781 131, Assam
RAFIQUL ISLAM ICAR-National Research Center on Pig, Rani, Guwahati, 781 131, Assam
PRANTIK DEKA ICAR-National Research Center on Pig, Rani, Guwahati, 781 131, Assam
PRIYAJOY KAR ICAR-National Research Center on Pig, Rani, Guwahati, 781 131, Assam
KESHAB BARMAN Animal Science Division, ICAR-HQ, New Delhi
P J DAS ICAR-National Research Center on Pig, Rani, Guwahati, 781 131, Assam
VIVEK KUMAR GUPTA ICAR-National Research Center on Pig, Rani, Guwahati, 781 131, Assam

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v95i12.172738

Keywords:

Artificial Insemination, Farming, Impact, Multiplier, Pig

Abstract

Small-scale scavenging pig farming is less economically viable and meets individual demands only. To meet the country's demands, establishment of pig multiplier units and the popularization of artificial insemination (AI) at farmers’ fields are essential. In the present study, 44 households were provided with interventions such as knowledge scale-up on piggery, AI, and essential veterinary aids, along with one-time physical incentives. The success, farmers’ attitudes, impact, and constraints were assessed for the establishment of pig multiplier units and use of AI in these units. Comparative production performance and economics from AI to natural breeding were
also assessed separately. In results, a total of 26 farmers (59.09%) were successful while 18 farmers (40.90%) were unsuccessful in establishing the multiplier units. Pig farmers (%) had a medium to high level of favorable attitude towards the establishment of multiplier units (55.36% to 32.64%) and the use of AI (50.25 % to 42.35%). After interventions of pig multiplier units and AI, a significant (p<0.05) improvement in average herd size, sale of piglets, net income, B:C ratio, reduction in the cost of production and mortality was observed. In comparison to natural breeding, AI interventions were found to be significantly (p<0.05) more productive and cost-effective. The most common constraints faced by farmers were high feed cost, doorstep availability of semen dose/boar, distance and
timely artificial or natural service. In conclusion, pig multiplier units and AI in pigs were cost-effective technologies to propagate and repopulate pigs to meet the demands of piggery stakeholders.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmed K, Ahmed N, Kalita D and Barman D. 2017. Housing practices for small scale pig production in rural communities of Assam. International Journal of Chemical Studies 5(3): 519–521.

Allport, G W. 1935. Attitudes. In A Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 798–844). Edited by C. Murchison. Clark University Press, Worcester, MA, United States.

Am-in N, Tantasuparuk, W and Techakumphu, M. 2010. Comparison of artificial insemination with natural mating on small holder farms in Thailand, and the effects of boar stimulation and distance of semen delivery on sow reproductive performance. Tropical animal Health and Production 42(5): 921–924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-009-9508-3

Ansari MA, Prakash N, Baishya LK, Punitha P, Yadav J S, Sharma P K and Ansari MH.2013. Comparative study on conventional and improved integrated farming systems for sustainable production, income generation and employment opportunity among the tribal farmers in hilly regions of

Manipur. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 83(7):765–772.

Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, 20th Livestock Census.2019. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Govt. of India, New Delhi. (https://dahd.gov.in).

Chauhan A, Patel B H M, Maurya R, Kumar S, Shukla S and Kumar S. 2016. Pig production system as a source of livelihood in Indian scenario. International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology 5(4): 2089-2096.

Diekman A B and Eagly A H. 2008. Of men, women, and motivation: A role congruity account. In J. Y. Shah and W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 434–447). The Guilford Press., New York, USA.

Edwards A L. 1957. Techniques of attitude scale construction.1–28. Irvington publishers, Inc, New York. USA DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/14423-001

Garrett, HE and Woodworth R S. 1981. Statistical in Psychology and Education. Ninth Indian Reprint. Vakil, Feffer and Simons Pvt Ltd, Bombay, India.

Haldar A, Das D, Saha B, Pal P, Das S, Das A and Datta M. 2017. Small holder pig farming for rural livelihoods and food security in North East Indian. Journal of Animal Research 7(3): 471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5958/2277-940X.2017.00070.5

Hodel C, Nathues H and Grahofer A. 2021. Effect of housing conditions, management procedures and traits of the external male reproductive tract on the sexual behaviour of natural mating boars. Theriogenology 167: 44–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2021.03.003

HP News Service. December 21, 2022 Pig multiplier farm inaugurated in EWKH (Eastern West Khasi Hills) (https://highlandpost.com)

Johnson L A, Weitze K F, Fiser P and Maxwell W M C. 2000. Storage of boar semen. Animal Reproduction Science 62(1–3): 143–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4320(00)00157-3

Kadirvel G Kumaresan, A Das, A Bujarbaruah, K M Venkatasubramanian, V and Ngachan S V. 2013. Artificial insemination of pigs reared under smallholder production system in northeastern India: success rate, genetic improvement, and monetary benefit. Tropical Animal Health DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-012-0277-z

and Production 45(2): 679–686.

Khalifa T, Rekkas C, Samartzi F, Lymberopoulos A, Kousenidis K and Dovenski T. 2014. Highlights on artificial insemination

(AI) technology in the pigs. Macedonian Veterinary Review 37(1): 5–34.

Kumar P Ganesh and Ratnakar R. 2011. A Scale to Measure Farmers’ Attitude towards ICT-based Extension Services. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education 11(1): 109–112.

Kumar S, Islam R, Chanda A, Das P J, Banik S, Barman K and Gupta V K. 2024. Biostimulatory effects of boar seminal gel, saliva and semen on sexual behavior of young boars, gilts and sows. Systems Biology in Reproductive Medicine 70(1): 59–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19396368.2024.2314548

Kumar N, Deepak S, Anand K, Mayank C, Ashutosh K, Monika K and Priscilla K. 2025. Constraints faced by farmers in pig rearing management practices in Lalitpur district of Uttar Pradesh. International Journal of Agriculture Extension and Social Development 8(4S): 109–112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33545/26180723.2025.v8.i4Sb.1834

Kumaresan A, Bujarbaruah K M, Pathak K A, Chhetri B, Das S K, Das A and Ahmed S K. 2007. Performance of pigs reared under traditional tribal low input production system and chemical composition of non-conventional tropical plants used as pig feed. Livestock Science 107(2–3): 294–298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.12.007

Kumaresan A, Bujarbaruah K M, Pathak KA, Das A and Bardoloi R K. 2009. Integrated resource-driven pig production systems in a mountainous area of Northeast India: production practices and pig performance. Tropical Animal Health and Production 41(7): 1187–1196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-008-9299-y

Likert R. 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology 22(140): 55.

Mohakud SS, Hazarika RA, Sonowal S, Bora DP, Talukdar A, Tamuly S and Lindahl JF. 2020. The extent and structure of pig rearing system in urban and peri-urban areas of Guwahati. Infection Ecology and Epidemiology 10(1): 1711576. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2020.1711576

NAP, 2017. National Action Plan on Pig. Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Government of India.(https://dahd.gov.in).

NLM, 2021. National Livestock Mission Schemes. Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Government of India (https://nlm.udyamimitra.in).

Pooja U, Balusami C, Murugan, SS, Abraham J, George S and Pramod K. 2024. Evaluation of pig farmer’s constraints in different agro-climatic zones of Kerala. The Indian Veterinary Journal 101(12): 15–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.62757/IVA.2024.101.12.15-19

Saikia AK, Gogoi G and Neog M. 2019. Constraints analysis of small scale pig farming in Dhemaji District of Assam. Journal of Krishi Vigyan7(2): 40–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5958/2349-4433.2019.00008.4

Sharma PR, Singh M, Sinha PK, Mollier RT and Rajkhowa DJ. 2020. Factors for adoption of artificial insemination technology in pig: evidence from small-scale pig production system. Tropical Animal Health and Production 52(6): 3545–3553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-020-02391-7

Singh M and Mollier RT. 2020. Artificial insemination in pig, its status and future perspective in India. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 90(9): 1207–1212. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v90i9.109324

Singh M, Mollier RT, Pongener N, Patton RN, Yadav R, Chaudhary JK and Mishra VK. 2022. Effect of artificial insemination in comparison to natural mating on the reproductive performance and profitability of smallholder pig production system in Indian Himalaya. Frontiers in DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.1067878

Sustainable Food Systems 6: 1067878.

Singh M, Mollier R T, Sharma P R, Baishya S K, Sangtam M and Rajkhowa D J. 2020. Growth and reproductive performance of Rani breed of pig in various agro-climatic condition of Nagaland. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 90(12): 1644–1648. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v90i12.113204

Singh M, Sharma P R, Mollier R T, Ngullie E, Baisyha S K and Rajkhowa D J. 2019. Tribal farmers’ traditional knowledge and practices of pig farming in Nagaland. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 89(3): 329-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v89i3.88099

Thomas R, Singh V and Gupta V K. 2021. Current status and development prospects of India’s pig industry. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 91(4): 255-268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v91i4.114325

Thurstone L L. 1946. The measurement of Attitude. Americam Journal of Sociology, Chicago Uni. Press: 39-50.

Visalvethaya W, Tantasuparuk W and Techakumphu M. 2011. The development of a model for artificial insemination by backyard pig farmers in Thailand. Tropical Animal Health and Production 43(4): 787-793. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-010-9764-2