Assessment of the Post-Harvest Chicken Egg Handling Practices in Gamo and Konso Zones of South Ethiopia

Year : 2025 | Volume : 14 | Issue : 03 | Page : 61 69
By

Tafesse Kanko Karra,

Ayano Abera Gage,

Mekete Manjura Suntebo,

  1. Poultry Associate Researcher, Arba Minch Agricultural Research Center, Livestock Research Directorate, Arba Minch, South Ethiopia
  2. Poultry Associate Researcher, Arba Minch Agricultural Research Center, Livestock Research Directorate, Arba Minch, South Ethiopia
  3. Poultry Associate Researcher, Arba Minch Agricultural Research Center, Livestock Research Directorate, Arba Minch, South Ethiopia

Abstract

The study was conducted starting from September to December 2024 in two districts of South Ethiopia with the objective of assessing the prevailing post-harvest chicken egg handling practices, storage materials, duration of storage, and marketing in the rural household. An aggregate of 120 family units were selected randomly from selected peasant area and interviewed by pre-tested questionnaires. The collected data were analyzed by Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, 2010) version 20, software. Producers in the area kept few to large chickens flock size to fulfill multiple roles, generating income, and ensuring household food security. The flock size in Karat zuria, and Boreda was 3.39±0.30 and 3.22±0.23 chickens per household, respectively. The average number of eggs produced by indigenous chicken per year in an average of four production clutches was 58.76±0.69 and 61.05±0.75 eggs in the Karat Zuria and Boreda woreda, respectively. Most respondents stored eggs for about 7–14 days and more than 14 days was also common before being used up in both districts. Plastic materials were widely used as eggs storage containers. Frequently, eggs produced at home were used for marketing rather than consumption and incubation in both districts. Purchased eggs’ quality was evaluated typically by shaking. Due to suitable weather conditions, better hatchability, fewer disease and parasite infestations and better feed resource availability, most of the respondents (61.54%) performed egg incubation during the dry season in Boreda. A greater proportion of the respondents in both districts were selling their chicken eggs at village markets depending on their personal money requirements. The majority of respondents prefer eggs from the local chicken than exotic chicken. In the end, family poultry producers’ egg handling practices plays a significant role in the quality of the egg from farm to fork in the chicken farming community. However, consumers have been getting fewer quality eggs from chickens due to traditional ways of egg handling practices that require further investigation to evaluate and recommend the best storage material and duration

Keywords: Egg handling, storage containers, storage duration, chickens, South Ethiopia

[This article belongs to Research & Reviews : Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology ]

How to cite this article: Tafesse Kanko Karra, Ayano Abera Gage, Mekete Manjura Suntebo. Assessment of the Post-Harvest Chicken Egg Handling Practices in Gamo and Konso Zones of South Ethiopia. Research & Reviews : Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology. 2025; 14(03):61-69.
How to cite this URL: Tafesse Kanko Karra, Ayano Abera Gage, Mekete Manjura Suntebo. Assessment of the Post-Harvest Chicken Egg Handling Practices in Gamo and Konso Zones of South Ethiopia. Research & Reviews : Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology. 2025; 14(03):61-69. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/rrjoast/article=2025/view=234722

References

  1. Melesse A, Worku Z, Teklegiorgis Y. Assessment of the prevailing handling and quality of eggs from scavenging indigenous chickens reared in different agro-ecological zones of Ethiopia. J Environ Occup Sci. 2013;2(1):1–8.
  2. Lemlem A, Tesfay Y. Performance of exotic and indigenous poultry breeds managed by smallholder farmers in northern Ethiopia. Livest Res Rural Dev. 2010;22(7).
  3. Alemu Y, Tadele D. The status of poultry research and development in Ethiopia. Research Bulletin No. 4. Debre Zeit: Poultry Commodity Research Program, Debre Zeit Agricultural Research Center, Alemaya University of Agriculture; 1997. 6 p.
  4. Tsegaye B, Gudina TV, Alemseged HN. Evaluation of management practices and marketing systems of village chicken in Ethiopia. Afr J Trop Agric. 2014;2(10):105–10.
  5. Boreda Woreda Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Office. Annual report. Boreda, Gamo Zone, Ethiopia; 2019.
  6. Central Statistical Agency. Report on livestock and livestock characteristics, Agricultural Sample Survey 2016/17 (2009 E.C.). Statistical Bulletin No. 585, Vol. II. Addis Ababa: Central Statistical Agency; 2017.
  7. Hanusová E, Hrnčár C, Hanus A, Oravcová M. Effect of breed on some parameters of egg quality in laying hens. Acta Fytotechn Zootechn. 2015;18(1):20–4.
  8. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Family poultry development: issues, opportunities and constraints. Animal Production and Health Working Paper No. 12. Rome: FAO; 2014.
  9. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Poultry sector: Ethiopia. FAO Animal Production and Health Livestock Country Reviews No. 11. Rome: FAO; 2019.
  10. Moges F, Mellesse A, Dessie T. Assessment of village chicken production system and evaluation of the productive and reproductive performance of local chicken ecotype in Bure district, North West Ethiopia. Afr J Agric Res. 2010;5(13):1739–48.
  11. Halima H, Neser FWC, Van Marle-Koster E, De Kock A. Village-based indigenous chicken production system in north-west Ethiopia. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2007;39:189–97.
  12. Roberts JR. Factors affecting egg internal and egg shell quality in laying hens: a review. J Poult Sci. 2004;41(3):161–77.
  13. Kassa B, Tadesse Y, Esatu W, Dessie T. On-farm comparative evaluation of production performance of tropically adapted exotic chicken breeds in western Amhara, Ethiopia. J Appl Poult Res. 2021;30:100194. doi:10.1016/j.japr.2021.100194.
  14. Konso Zone Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Department. Annual report. Konso Zone, Ethiopia; 2022.
  15. Yitbarek MB. Performance evaluation of local chicken at Enebsie Sar Midir Woreda, Eastern Gojjam, Ethiopia. Glob J Agric Food Sci Res. 2014;1(2):1–8.
  16. Nigussie D, Van der Waaij LH, Dessie T, Van Arendonk JAM. 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. 2010;42:1519–29.
  17. Markos S, Belay B, Dessie T. On-farm performance evaluation of three local chicken ecotypes in Western Zone of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. J Biol Agric Healthc. 2015.
  18. Singh M, Mollier RT, Paton RN, Pongener N, Yadav R, Singh V, et al. Backyard poultry farming with improved germplasm: sustainable food production and nutritional security in fragile ecosystem. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2022;6:962268. doi:10.3389/fsufs.2022.962268.
  19. Lemma S, Terefe T, Abebe B. Assessment of the prevailing chicken egg storage materials and length at rural household in different agro ecology of Eastern Ethiopia. Agric For Fish. 2019;8(2):54–63. doi:10.11648/j.aff.20190802.15.
  20. Sonaiya EB. Direct assessment of nutrient resources in free-range and scavenging systems. Worlds Poult Sci J. 2004;60(4):523–35.
  21. Dessie T, Ogle B. Village poultry production systems in the central highlands of Ethiopia. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2001;33(6):521–37.
Regular Issue Subscription Original Research
Volume 14
Issue 03
Received 11/10/2025
Accepted 04/11/2025
Published 24/12/2025
Publication Time 74 Days

Login

My IP

PlumX Metrics

Support