Multiplier pig units and Artificial Insemination at Farmers’ field in North East India: Assessment of Success, Impact and Constraints
6
Authors
-
Sunil Kumar
ICAR NRC ON PIG
-
Rafiqul Islam
-
Prantik Deka
-
Priyajoy Kar
-
Keshab Barman
-
PJ Das
-
Vivek Kumar Gupta
Keywords:
Artificial Insemination, Farming, Impact, Multiplier, PigAbstract
Small scale scavenging pig farming is less economic and meets the individual demands only. To meet the country demands, establishment of pig multiplier units and popularization of artificial insemination (AI) at farmers’ field is required. In the present study, 44 households were provided with interventions like knowledge scale up about piggery, AI, essential veterinary aids along with one time physical incentives. The success, farmers’ attitude, impact and constraints were assessed for establishment of pig multiplier units and about use of AI in the units. Comparative production performance and economics from AI to natural breeding was also assessed separately. In results, a total of 26 farmers (59.09%) were successful while 18 farmers (40.90%) were unsuccessful to establish the multiplier units. Pig farmers (%) had medium to high level of favorable attitude towards establishment of multiplier units (55.36% to 32.64%) and use of AI (50.25 % to 42.35%). After interventions of pig multiplier units and AI, significantly (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 significantly (p<0.05) more productive and cost effective. The most common constraints faced by farmers were high feed cost, door step availability of semen dose/boar, distance and time to get AI dose/boar to serve the females. In conclusion, pig multiplier units and AI in pig were cost effective technologies to propagate and repopulate the pigs to meet the demands of piggery stakeholders.
Downloads
References
20th Livestock Census, Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying 2019. (https://dahd.gov.in)
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). Clark University Press, United States.
Am-in N, Tantasuparuk, W and Techakumphu, M. 2010. Comparison of artificial insemination with natural mating on smallholder 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.org/10.1007/s11250-009-9508-3
Ansari M A, Prakash N, Baishya L K, Punitha P, Yadav J S, Sharma P K and Ansari M H. 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): 765-72.
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. Handbook of motivation science: 434-447.
Edwards A L. 1957. Techniques of attitude scale construction, 1, 1-28. Irvington publishers, INC, New York.
Garrett, H.E. 1981. Statistical in Psychology and Education. Vakil, Feffer and Simons Pvt Ltd, Bombay, India.
Haldar A, Das D, Saha B, Pal P, Das S, Das A and Datta M. 2017. Smallholder pig farming for rural livelihoods and food security in North East Indian. Journal of Animal Research 7(3): 471. doi: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.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.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 and Production 45(2): 679-686. doi.org/10.1007/s11250-012-0277-z
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. doi.org/10.14432/j.macvetrev.2013.09.001
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.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.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.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.12.007
Kumaresan A Bujarbaruah, K M Pathak, K A 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.org/10.1007/s11250-008-9299-y
Likert R. 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology 22 (140): 55.
Mohakud S, S Hazarika, R A Sonowal, S Bora, D P Talukdar, A Tamuly S and Lindahl J F. 2020. The extent and structure of pig rearing system in urban and peri-urban areas of Guwahati. Infection Ecology & Epidemiology 10(1): 1711576. 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, The Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Government of India (https://nlm.udyamimitra.in).
Pooja U Balusami, C Murugan, S S 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.org/10.62757/IVA.2024.101.12.15-19
Saikia A K, Gogoi G and Neog M. 2019. Constraints analysis of small scale pig farming in Dhemaji District of Assam. Journal of Krishi Vigyan 7(2): 40-45. doi:10.5958/2349-4433.2019.00008.4
Sharma P R, Singh M, Sinha P K, Mollier R T and Rajkhowa D J. 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.org/10.1007/s11250-020-02391-7
Singh M and Mollier R T. 2020. Artificial insemination in pig, its status and future perspective in India. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 90(9): 1207-1212.doi: 10.56093/ijans.v90i9.109324
Singh M, Mollier R T, Pongener N, Patton R N, Yadav R, Chaudhary J K and Mishra V K. 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 Sustainable Food Systems 6: 1067878. doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.1067878
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): 1644-48. doi: 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.
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.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.org/10.1007/s11250-010-9764-2
Submitted
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright of the articles published in The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences is vested with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, which reserves the right to enter into any agreement with any organization in India or abroad, for reprography, photocopying, storage and dissemination of information. The Council has no objection to using the material, provided the information is not being utilized for commercial purposes and wherever the information is being used, proper credit is given to ICAR.
How to Cite
