Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

The role of local adaptation in sustainable production of village chickens


Village chickens are ubiquitous in smallholder farming systems, contributing to household, local and national economies under diverse environmental, economic and cultural settings. However, they are raised in challenging environments where productivity is low while mortality is high. There is much interest in utilizing indigenous genetic resources to produce a chicken that is resilient to its environment, while at the same time providing the basis of an economically sustainable enterprise. Globally, however, a wide variety of interventions have so far proved unable to deliver sustainable improvements. Here we show that regional differences in trait preferences and parasite burden are associated with distinct chicken gene pools, probably in response to interactions between natural and human-driven (economic and social) selection pressures. Drivers of regional differences include marketing opportunities, cultural preferences, agro-ecologies and parasite populations, and are evident in system adaptations, such as management practices, population dynamics and bird genotypes. Our results provide sound multidisciplinary evidence to support previous observations that sustainable poultry development interventions for smallholder farmers, including breeding programmes, should be locally tailored and designed for flexible implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Location of the study regions and potential distribution models constructed separately for each breed and projected onto the other.
Fig. 2: Ownership and usage of chickens in the two study regions.
Fig. 3: Household income from chicken production in two regions of Ethiopia.
Fig. 4: Manhattan plots displaying the GWAS results for ascarid and lice infection in two regions of Ethiopia (Horro and Jarso).
Fig. 5: Sustainable chicken production intervention framework.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The bioclimatic variables that used in this study are available from ‘WorldClim’ ( The land cover variable data are available from the ‘Harmonized World Soil Database’ ( All other data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.


  1. Mack, S., Hoffmann, D. & Otte, J. The contribution of poultry to rural development. Worlds Poultry Sci. J. 61, 7–14 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alders, R. G. & Pym, R. A. E. Village poultry: still important to millions, eight thousand years after domestication. Worlds Poultry Sci. J. 65, 181–190 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Decision Tools for Family Poultry Development (FAO, 2014).

  4. Bagnol, B. SADC Planning Workshop on Newcastle Disease Control in Village Chickens (eds R. G. Alders & P. Spradbrow) (Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, 2000).

  5. Ahlers, C. et al. Improving Village Chicken Production: a Manual for Fieldworkers and Trainers ACIAR Monograph No. 139 (Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, 2009).

  6. Dwinger, R. H. & Unger, H. in Improving Farmyard Poultry Production in Africa: Interventions and their Economic Assessment 1–9 (International Atomic Energy Agency, 2006).

  7. Pica-Ciamarra, U. & Dhawan, M. A Rapid Rural Appraisal of the Family-Based Poultry Distribution Scheme of West Bengal, India Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative (PPLPI) Research Report (FAO, 2009).

  8. Sonaiya, E. B. Constraints to adoption and sustainability of improved practices in scavenging poultry systems. Family Poultry Commun. 21, 34–43 (2012).

  9. Khobondo, J. O. et al. Genetic and nutrition development of indigenous chicken in Africa. Livestock Res. Rural Dev. 27, 122 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Saleque, M. A. & Mustafa, S. Landless women and poultry: the BRAC model in Bangladesh. In Livestock Feed Resources within Integrated Farming Systems (eds F. Dolberg & P. H. Petersen) 37–55 (FAO, 1996).

  11. FAO Poultry in the 21st century: avian influenza and beyond. In Proc. Int. Poultry Conf. (eds O. Thieme & D. Pilling) (FAO, 2008).

  12. Report on Livestock and Livestock Characteristics (Private Peasant Holdings) (Central Statistical Agency, 2010/2011).

  13. Dessie, T. & Jobre, Y. A review of the importance and control of Newcastle disease in Ethiopia. Ethiop. Vet. J. 8, 71–81 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Poultry Sector Country Review (FAO, 2008).

  15. Dinka, H., Chala, R., Dawo, F., Bekana, E. & Leta, S. Major constraints and health management of village poultry production in Rift Valley of Oromia, Ethiopia. Am. Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 9, 529–533 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mazengia, H., Bekele, S. T. & Negash, T. Incidence of infectious bursal disease in village chickens in two districts of Amhara Region, Northwest Ethiopia. Livestock Res. Rural Dev. 21, 214 (2009).

  17. Dana, N., van der Waaij, L. H., Dessie, T. & van Arendonk, J. A. Production objectives and trait preferences of village poultry producers of Ethiopia: implications for designing breeding schemes utilizing indigenous chicken genetic resources. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 42, 1519–1529 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Thompson, J. & Scoones, I. Addressing the dynamics of agri-food systems: an emerging agenda for social science research. Environ. Sci. Policy 12, 386–397 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brown, B. J., Hanson, M. E., Liverman, D. M. & Merideth, R. W. Global sustainability: toward definition. Environ. Manag. 11, 713–719 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gibson, R. B. Specification of Sustainability-Based Environmental Assessment Decision Criteria and Implications for Determining “Significance” in Environmental Assessment (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, 2001).

  21. Fresco, L. O. Challenges for food system adaptation today and tomorrow. Environ. Sci. Policy 12, 378–385 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Desta, T. T. et al. Signature of artificial selection and ecological landscape on morphological structures of Ethiopian village chickens. Anim. Genet. Resour. 52, 17–29 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mengesha, M. & Tsega, W. Phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of indigenous chickens in Ethiopia: a review. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 6, 5398–5404 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Imsland, F. et al. The rose-comb mutation in chickens constitutes a structural rearrangement causing both altered comb morphology and defective sperm motility. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002775 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Psifidi, A. et al. Genome-wide association studies of immune, disease and production traits in indigenous chicken ecotypes. Genet. Sel. Evol. 48, 74 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bettridge, J. The Epidemiology and Ecology of Infectious Diseases in Ethiopian Village Chickens and the Role of Co-infection in Infection Risk. PhD thesis, Univ. Liverpool (2014).

  27. Storck, H., Emana, B., Adenew, B., Borowiecki, A. & W/Hawariat, S. Farming Systems and Farm Management Practices of Smallholders in the Hararghe Highlands (Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk Kiel, Kiel, 1991).

  28. Permin, A. & Hansen, J. W. Epidemiology, Diagnosis and Disease Control of Poultry Parasites (FAO, 1998).

  29. Bishop, S. C. & Wooliams, J. A. On the genetic interpretation of disease data. PLoS ONE 5, e8940 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bishop, S. C., Doeschl-Wilson, A. B. & Woolliams, J. A. Uses and implications of field disease data for livestock genomic and genetics studies. Front. Genet. 3, 114 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hudson, P. J., Dobson, A. P. & Newborn, D. Prevention of population cycles by parasite removal. Science 282, 2256–2258 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Pavlidis, P., Živković, D., Stamatakis, A. & Alachiotis, N. SweeD: likelihood-based detection of selective sweeps in thousands of genomes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 2224–2234 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Horns, F. & Hood, M. E. The evolution of disease resistance and tolerance in spatially structured populations. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1705–1711 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Queenan, K. et al. An appraisal of the indigenous chicken market in Tanzania and Zambia. Are the markets ready for improved outputs from village production systems? Livestock Res. Rural Dev. 28, 185 (2016).

  35. Aklilu, H. A., Udo, H. M. J., Almekinders, C. J. M. & Van der Sijpp, A. J. How resource poor households value and access poultry: village poultry keeping in Tigray, Ethiopia. Agric. Syst. 96, 175–183 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Tadelle, D., Million, T., Alemu, Y. & Peters, K. J. Village chicken production systems in Ethiopia: 2. Use patterns and performance valuation and chicken products and socio-economic functions of chicken Livestock Res. Rural Dev. 15, 10 (2003).

  37. Calloway, D. H. et al. Village Nutrition in Egypt, Kenya and Mexico: Looking Across the CRSP Projects (Univ. California, Berkeley, 1992).

  38. Marangoni, F. et al. Role of poultry meat in a balanced diet aimed at maintaining health and wellbeing: an Italian consensus document. Food Nutr. Res. 59, 27606 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Halderman, M. The Political Economy of Pro-Poor Livestock Policy-making in Ethiopia. Pro-Poor Livestock Policy (PPLPI) Initiative Working Paper No. 19 (FAO, 2004).

  40. Wondmeneh, E. et al. Village poultry production system: perception of farmers and simulation of impacts of interventions. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 11, 2075–2081 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Smallholder Poultry Production — Livelihoods, Food Security and Sociocultural Significance. Smallholder Poultry Production Paper No. 4 (FAO, 2010).

  42. Vaarst, M., Steenfeldt, S. & Horsted, K. Sustainable development perspectives of poultry production. Worlds Poultry Sci. J. 71, 609–620 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zussman, R. People in places. Qual. Sociol. 27, 351–363 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Timmermans, S. & Berg, M. Standardization in action: achieving local universality through medical protocols. Soc. Stud. Sci. 27, 273–305 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Seeds, Diversity and Development — Key Concepts (FAO, 2014).

  46. Gregory, N. G. & Robins, J. K. A body condition scoring system for layer hens. New. Zeal. J. Agr. Res. 41, 555–559 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Clayton, D. H. & Drown, D. M. Critical evaluation of five methods for quantifying chewing lice (Insecta: Phthiraptera). J. Parasitol. 87, 1291–1300 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Bettridge, J. M. et al. Infection-interactions in Ethiopian village chickens. Prev. Vet. Med. 117, 358–366 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Luu, L. et al. Prevalence and molecular characterisation of Eimeria species in Ethiopian village chickens. BMC Vet. Res. 9, 208 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Lapage, G. Veterinary Parasitology (Oliver & Boyd, London, 1956).

  51. Soulsby, E. J. L. Helminths, Arthropods and Protozoa of Domesticated Animals 7th edn (Bailliere & Tindall, London, 1982).

  52. Smith, L. M. & Burgoyne, L. A. Collecting archiving and processing DNA form wildlife samples using FTA databasing paper. BMC Ecol. 4, 4 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Kranis, A. et al. Development of a high density 600K SNP genotyping array for chicken. BMC Genomics 14, 59 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Gregory, R. D. & Woolhouse, M. E. J. Quantification of parasite aggregation: a simulation study. Acta Trop. 54, 131–139 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Poulin, R. The disparity between observed and uniform distributions: a new look at parasite aggregation. Int. J. Parasitol. 23, 937–944 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. lme4: linear mixed-effects models using ‘Eigen’ and S4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, 2013);

  58. Peterson, A. T. Predicting species geographic distributions based on ecological niche modeling. Condor 103, 599–605 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P. & Schapire, R. E. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Modell. 190, 231–259 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Hijmans, R. J., Cameron, S. E., Parra, J. L., Jones, P. G. & Jarvis, A. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int. J. Climatol. 25, 1965–1978 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Harmonized World Soil Database v.1.2 (FAO, 2012);

  62. Hijmans, R. J., Phillips, S., Leathwick, J. & Elith, J. Species Distribution Modeling R package v.1.1-4 (2017);

  63. Desta, T. T. Phenomic and Genomic Landscape of Ethiopian Village Chicken. PhD thesis, Univ. Nottingham (2015).

  64. Gautier, M. & Vitalis, R. rehh: an R package to detect footprints of selection in genomewide SNP data from haplotype structure. Bioinformatics 28, 1176–1177 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Aulchenko, Y. S., Ripke, S., Isaacs, A. & van Duijn, C. M. GenABEL: an R library for genome-wide association analysis. Bioinformatics 23, 1294–1296 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Purcell, S. et al. PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81, 559–575 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhou, X. & Stephens, M. Efficient multivariate linear mixed model algorithms for genome-wide association studies. Nat. Methods 11, 407–409 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references


We thank the Chicken Health for Development project team members and the farmers and development agents in the Jarso and Horro districts for their assistance; D. Hume and G. Banos for helpful comments on drafts of the manuscript; and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Scottish Government for providing funding for the ‘Reducing the impact of infectious disease on poultry production in Ethiopia’ project under the Combating Infectious Diseases of Livestock for International Development (CIDLID) program (BB/H009396/1, BB/H009159/1 and BB/H009051/1). J.M.B., T.D. and O.H. are supported by CGIAR fund donors

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



R.M.C., O.H., P.W., P.K. and T.D. conceived and designed the research; J.M.B., Z.G.T., T.T.D. and P.K. undertook field sampling; A.P., T.T.D., P.K. and O.H. performed genomic analysis; J.M.B. and R.M.C. undertook statistical analysis of epidemiological data; Z.G.T. and R.M.C. undertook statistical analysis of socio-economic data; M.L.-J. performed ecological niche modelling; R.M.C., J.M.B., A.P. and O.H. wrote the paper with inputs from other authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert M. Christley.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplemental Information

Supplementary Notes 1–3, Supplementary Tables 1–7, Supplementary Figures 1–5, Supplementary References 17

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bettridge, J.M., Psifidi, A., Terfa, Z.G. et al. The role of local adaptation in sustainable production of village chickens. Nat Sustain 1, 574–582 (2018).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing Microbiology

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Microbiology newsletter — what matters in microbiology research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Microbiology