92–9146–819–3 CGIAR is a global agricultural research partnership for a food-secure future. Its research is carried out by 15 research centres in collaboration with hundreds of partner organizations. cgiar.org The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) works to improve food and nutritional security and reduce poverty in developing countries through research for efficient, safe and sustainable use of livestock. Co-hosted by Kenya and Ethiopia, it has regional or country offices and projects in East, South and Southeast Asia as well as Central, East, Southern and West Africa. ilri.org Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio- economic value and diseases IL R I R E S E A R C H R E P O R T 121 ii Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases A synthesis of literature on camel population, production and reproductive performance, socio-economic value and diseases as part of the Global Burden of Animal Diseases (GBADs) program Bekele Megersa1, Wudu Temesgen2, Kebede Amenu2, Wondwosen Asfaw 4, Solomon Gizaw2, Buke Yussuf3 and Theodore Knight-Jones2 1.College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia 2.International Livestock Research Institute, Ethiopia 3.International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya 4.Independent consultant July 2024 ©2024 International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) ILRI thanks all donors and organizations which globally supports its work through their contributions to the CGIAR Trust Fund This publication is copyrighted by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). It is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. To view this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0. Unless otherwise noted, you are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format), adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) for any purpose, even commercially, under the following conditions: ATTRIBUTION. The work must be attributed, but not in any way that suggests endorsement by ILRI or the author(s). NOTICE: For any reuse or distribution, the licence terms of this work must be made clear to others. Any of the above conditions can be waived if permission is obtained from the copyright holder. Nothing in this licence impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights. Fair dealing and other rights are in no way affected by the above. The parts used must not misrepresent the meaning of the publication. ILRI would appreciate being sent a copy of any materials in which text, photos etc. have been used. Editing, design and layout—ILRI Editorial and Publishing Services, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Cover photo—ILRI/Fiona Flintan ISBN: 92–9146–819–3 Citation: Megersa, B., Temesgen, W., Amenu, K., Asfaw, W. Gizaw, S., Yussuf, B. and Knight-Jones, T. 2024. Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases. ILRI Research Report 121. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). Patron: Professor Peter C. Doherty A. C, FAA, FRS Animal scientist, Nobel Prize Laureate for Physiology or Medicine–1996 Box 30709, Nairobi 00100 Kenya Phone +254 20 422 3000 Fax+254 20 422 3001 Email ilri-kenya@cgiar.org ilri.org better lives, better planet through livestock ILRI is a CGIAR research centre Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Phone +251 11 617 2000 Fax +251 11 667 6923 Email ilri-ethiopia@cgiar.org ILRI has offices in East Africa • South Asia • Southeast and East Asia • Southern Africa • West Africa http://CGIAR Trust Fund https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 iiiCamels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Contents Abbreviations and acronyms vi Acknowledgements vii Executive summary viii 1 Background 1 2 Methods 3 3 Results and discussion 4 3.1 Camel population and trends 4 3.2 Ecotypic, phenotypic and genetic diversity of Ethiopian camels 6 3.3 Production performances of camels in Ethiopia 7 3.4 Reproduction performances of camels 14 3.5 Camel and camel product marketing and product prices 17 3.6 Camel diseases 18 3.7 Mortality of camels by different age and sex groups 23 3.8 Economic value of camels 24 3.9 Miscellaneous bottlenecks to camel production in Ethiopia 30 4 Conclusion 31 5 References 32 6 Annexes 42 Annex 1: Description of formula and parameters 42 Annex 2: Diseases 44 iv Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Tables Table 1. National and regional camel population of Ethiopia based on CSA data (2004–2020) 5 Table 2. Daily and lactation milk yields of camels in Ethiopia 9 Table 3. Meat production performances of camels in Ethiopia 12 Table 4. Reported reproductive performance of camels in Ethiopia 16 Table 5. Camel mortality by age and sex groups based on survey and outbreak reports 24 Table 6. Livestock population, numbers of sales and slaughters in TLU based on CSA 2020 estimates 26 Table 7. Gross value of camels and camel products in Ethiopia 29 Annexes Table I: Descriptions of parameters used for economic (output) value calculations 43 Table I. Brucellosis prevalence in camels in Ethiopia 44 Table II. Mastitis prevalence in camels in Ethiopia 44 Table III. Prevalence of viral diseases in camels in Ethiopia 45 Table IV. Tuberculosis prevalence in camels in Ethiopia 45 Table V. Trypanosome infections in camels in Ethiopia 46 Table VI. Prevalence of major parasites of camels in Ethiopia 46 Table VII. Livestock biomass as number of heads and TLU based on CSA 2020 data 47 Table VIII. Constraints to camel production reported from pastoral areas of Ethiopia 48 vCamels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Figures Figure 1. Annual population growth rate of camels and other ruminants between 1993 and 2020, based on FAO data. 5 Figure 2. Trends in camel milk and meat production as annual total in Ethiopia, FAO 1993–2020. 12 Figure 3. Camels contributing draught power in Ethiopia (Source: online pictures). 13 Figure 4. Camels by various purposes based on average of CSA data in 2019 and 2020. 14 vi Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Abbreviations and acronyms CATT Card agglutination test for trypanosomiasis CCE Camel contagious ecthyma CSA Central Statistical Authority of Ethiopia ETB Ethiopian birr FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FAOSTAT The Food and Agriculture Organization’s Corporate Statistical Database LMISET Livestock Market Information System of Ethiopia MERS-CoV Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus TLU Tropical livestock unit (equivalent to 250 kg) USD United States dollar viiCamels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Acknowledgements This literature review updating information on Ethiopian camels was commissioned by the Global Burden of Animal Diseases (GBADs) program as part of the Ethiopian case study. GBADs is led by the World Organization for Animal Health and the University of Liverpool, with the Ethiopian case study implemented by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). GBADs is supported through the Grant Agreement Investment ID INV-005366 by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock and the CGIAR initiative on Sustainable Animal Productivity for Livelihoods, Nutrition and Gender Inclusion (SAPLING). A full list of the members of the GBADs themes can be accessed here: www.animalhealthmetrics.org/acknowledgements. Inputs used in the literature review included published literature, institutional databases and information collected from selected towns. All contributions are much appreciated. https://animalhealthmetrics.org/ https://animalhealthmetrics.org/ https://www.ilri.org/ https://www.ilri.org/ https://animalhealthmetrics.org/acknowledgements/ viii Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Executive summary This review synthesizes literature on camel demography, productive and reproductive performances, diseases and contributions to Ethiopian households and national economy. The information generated is key in filling knowledge gaps on camel resources, production, and marketing constraints and potential. The review was commissioned by the Global Burden of Animal Diseases program (GBADs). This report is based on a review of published scientific literature, unpublished reports and institutional databases of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Central Statistical Agency (CSA) of Ethiopia and the Livestock Market Information System of Ethiopia (LMISET). Additionally, camel product market prices were collected from selected towns through local government staff. Camels are indispensable for the livelihood and survival of pastoral communities in arid environments of Ethiopia, where feed/water resources are scarce and droughts recur. For pastoralists, camels are the most valued and prestigious animal species, used as bride price, payment for blood compensation and are gifts of high honour. Their resilience to drought makes them the animal of choice in view of climate change. Ethiopia has huge potential for camel production given its vast lowland areas (60% of the landmass) and large pastoral communities inhabiting the arid and semi-arid environments. The national camel population increased from 7,702,493 heads in 2019 to 8,145,790 heads in 2020, accounting for 11% of the Ethiopian livestock biomass in tropical livestock units (TLU). As an adaptation strategy to changing climatic and rangeland conditions, the number of households engaged in camel rearing and their herd size has increased over time. Camel keeping has also expanded into cattle-dominated areas such as Oromia and Southern Ethiopia regions. Camels are generally slow-breeding animals with an average annual herd growth rate of 5–10%. Age at first parturition varies between 47 and 68 months, and calving intervals are 18–26 months for Ethiopian camels. Breeding females have annual calving rates of 43–62%. The total lifetime calf production per breeding female may range from 2.5 to 3.5 calves on average. However, most cross-sectional survey studies often overestimate the lifetime fertility rate to be 8–11 calves per female without considering early culling. Though camels are currently reared as multipurpose animals (milk, meat, transportation, source of cash income and living assets), they were likely originally domesticated for food production in arid and semi-arid regions. They produce an average of four litres of milk per day and 1,438 litres per lactation, which is relatively high given the environments they typically inhabit. The Ethiopia annual camel milk production estimates for 2020 by FAO (243,429 tonnes) and CSA (2.43 million tonnes) differ significantly due to differences in the number of camels reported by the two institutions. The CSA result is consistent with estimates from identified literature reviews (2.48 million tonnes per year). Camel milk marketing is largely traditional, with inadequate milk standardization and quality controls, and is constrained by adulteration, low quality and seasonal price fluctuations. https://animalhealthmetrics.org/ ixCamels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Camels are generally not ideal meat animals due to their late maturation and slow breeding, although they have some good attributes such as large body size, higher dressing percentage and a high proportion of lean meat. Camels take long to mature to an optimum carcass since they reach full maturity and maximum weight at the age of seven. The average live body weight, carcass weight and dressing percentage of camels were estimated to be 394 kg, 206 kg and 53%, respectively. Male camels weigh more (442 kg versus 380 kg) and have a higher carcass yield (204 kg versus 179 kg), and dressing percentage (55% versus 50%) than females. Ethiopia’s annual meat production is estimated at 24,888 tonnes from 124,440 animals slaughtered (CSA 2020). Camels account for 8% of commercial offtake and 10% of slaughtered animals. Based on CSA (2020) production coefficients and current market prices, the national gross offtake value of camels is estimated to be worth ETB 20 billion (380 million USD; 1 USD was ETB 52.5 in October 2022). A wide range of health problems, including infections, nutritional deficiencies and physical trauma, pose major challenges to the performance of camels in Ethiopia. However, much of the literature on camel health problems has been based on epidemiological surveys and serological evidence, resulting in the lack of a clear understanding of the disease burden attributed to specific diseases. Many camel health problems and their causes, including sudden death, remain mysterious. Among the important diseases are trypanosomiasis, camel pox, respiratory infection complex, mastitis, internal parasites, mange mite and tick infestations. Diseases like mastitis have a significant impact on animal health and welfare, in addition to reducing milk production and affecting food security. Other diseases with zoonotic importance––such as rabies, anthrax, brucellosis, tuberculosis, toxoplasmosis, sarcocystis, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), Q fever and Rift Valley fever–– have also been reported in Ethiopian camels. Episodes of ‘sudden death syndrome’ have frequently devastated camel herds but no pathogen has been confirmed as the causative agent. Ethiopian camels have been marginalized and do not receive sufficient attention in the national research and development agenda, nor do they receive regular health care and vaccination. They are regarded as pastoral animals and receive limited support from national systems. Their population and contribution to the national economy have been greatly underestimated, and little is known about their production practices and constraints, including health problems, compared to other livestock species. Various authors have identified feed and water scarcity, animal diseases, insufficient veterinary services, drought and market problems as the top constraints to camel production. Mobility and rearing camels, which thrive well in arid environments, are the main strategies that pastoralists use to cope with the scarcity of feed/water resources and recurrent droughts in their arid environments. However, administrative boundaries imposed between regions of different ethnic groups and/or between clans within a region often restrict their movements and foraging radius. Camels are adaptable animals that provide milk, meat, transportation, cash income and assets for the livelihood and survival of pastoral communities in arid areas. They produce a significant amount of milk throughout a yearlong lactation period and are highly valuable as household assets, providing a source of revenue and fulfilling various cultural purposes. However, pastoral camel production in Ethiopia faces various constraints, including diseases, and camel resources are underutilized. This review provides updated information on Ethiopia’s camel resources, the challenges in production, processing and marketing of camel products, and their realized and potential contributions to the household and national economy. 1Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases 1 Background The pastoral areas of Ethiopia account for 60% of the national landmass and are home to about 12% of the human population. In this area, the risk of heavy livestock losses due to recurrent droughts presents one of the most serious threats to pastoralists’ livelihoods and the national economy, particularly the export trade since almost all the export camels and sheep/goats are sourced from these areas. Droughts have been estimated to occur every 5–6 years in the southern rangeland (Desta and Coppock 2002; Megersa et al. 2014b) with increasing frequency and severity due to climate change. Thus, pastoralists experienced 5–7 drought episodes during the past three decades and lost about half of their herds, particularly cattle, which are highly vulnerable to drought-related feed and water shortages (Megersa et al. 2014b). As part of drought mitigation, herders are rearing more camels and small ruminants, which are more drought- tolerant (Megersa et al. 2014a). Camels feed on scanty vegetation and tolerate water shortages in arid environments, making them resilient to droughts while still producing milk even during extended dry periods. As a result, camels are being introduced in previously cattle-dominated territories such as Borana, Guji, and south Omo in response to climate change and variability, and rangeland degradation. The Afar and Karayu pastoralists, who preferred to raise cattle in the past, are also now primarily keeping camels and small ruminants (Gebru et al. 2008). According to Wilson (2020), camels might have been present in Ethiopia at least as early as 100 AD, as evidenced from rock paintings in a cave at Laga Oda. A camel tooth found in Axum is dated about 500 AD, whereas the paleontological discovery of a molar tooth and a metatarsal bone dated at 2.6 million years appear to be the first camel remains recognized in eastern Africa. Tefera and Abebe (2012) suggested that camels were introduced in Ethiopia around 1000 BC and linked the event to the Queen of Sheba’s visit to Israel’s King Solomon with a caravan of riches. Ethiopia has huge potential for camel production, with an estimated 8.1 million heads in 2020 (CSA 2020). However, despite their essential contribution to the livelihood of pastoralists and to the national economy, including through the export of live animals, camels are neglected in the national research and development agenda. They do not receive regular animal health care services and are often excluded from regular vaccination programs against prevailing infectious diseases, whereas cattle and small ruminants in the same geographic areas are often vaccinated. Due to their high mobility, conventional stationary veterinary clinics often cannot reach herds in remote foraging areas and most health care activities are carried out by the herders themselves (Megersa 2010). Consequently, camels are often viewed as a reserve of the pastoral community, and their contribution to the national economy is greatly underestimated (Alary and Faye 2016). The pastoral production system is characterized by extensive mobile animal management systems with low input and low output. Unlike other domestic animals, the camel is multipurpose and can be used for milk, meat, transportation, racing, tourism, draught power for agricultural production, beauty contests and parade shows (Tefera and Abebe 2012; 2 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Wilson 2020). Milk production is the principal production objective of camel rearing in Ethiopia; camel milk is a valuable source of food and cash income, and a core element of pastoralist culture (Kebede et al. 2015). Camels produce more milk for a longer period (about 12 months of lactation) than any other species in arid environments and provide a constant supply of milk for families during long droughts (Farah et al. 2007; Tefera and Abebe 2012). Under pastoral management in Ethiopia, reported daily milk yields are 1.5–10 litres, corresponding to annual lactation yields ranging from 540 to over 3,600 litres (Mirkena et al. 2018). Camel milk has high contents of protein (2.7–4.5%), fat (2.9–5.2%), minerals such as calcium, and vitamin C, and is traditionally used to treat several diseases as well as help build the immune system (Farah et al. 2007). Several factors have been reported to affect the milk production potential of camels, including management practices, health care, seasonal feed availability, parity, lactation stage (Bekele et al. 2002; Getahun and Kassa 2002; Megersa et al. 2008), infectious diseases, internal and external parasites (Megersa 2010), and udder infections (Badaso et al. 2019). Herd productivity is affected by high calf mortality, ranging from 12.4% in Afar (Keskes et al. 2013b) and 15–20% in Borana area (Megersa et al. 2008; Muluneh et al. 2022) to 45% in eastern Ethiopia (Getahun and Kassa 2002). Women play a crucial role in the organization and daily operation of the camel milk supply chain and generate petty cash from the sale of about three quarters of the milk produced. The cash managed by the women is used to buy essential household food items such as sugar, tea and spices. Milk marketing is predominantly informal and is constrained by several factors, including hot climatic conditions, lack of cooling and storage facilities at milk vending sites, unhygienic milking and handling, and knowledge gaps in hygiene practices (Farah et al. 2007; Amenu et al. 2019; Machan et al. 2022). In general, identifying constraints, including disease burdens, in camel production is vital for improving herd productivity and economic contribution at the national and household levels. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive review of published and unpublished literature on camel demography, productivity, economic value and constraints, including disease burden, with the purpose of providing baseline information to inform further research and development of camels in Ethiopia. 3Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases 2 Methods The data and information presented in this narrative review were compiled from different sources. The major source was a detailed review of published scientific articles and unpublished reports from various websites. The literature search was conducted in August and September 2022. The search terms reports included ‘camel’ or ‘one-humped camel’ or ‘dromedary’ or ‘Arabian camel’ or ‘Ethiopia’. Articles were mainly searched in Google Scholar, PubMed and Web of Science. Camel demography data were compiled from two databases: (1) The Food and Agriculture Organization’s Corporate Statistical Database (FAOSTAT) livestock datasets from 1993 to 2020, and (2) Ethiopia’s Central Statistical Agency (CSA) agricultural sample survey reports from 2004 to 2020. The FAOSTAT datasets were generated from official reports of the national statistics offices of the ministries of agriculture or ministries of livestock in camel-rearing countries as well as FAO’s own estimates. The CSA annual livestock sample surveys until 2018 covered all regions of Ethiopia that have a sedentary rural agricultural population, whereas only two of the five zones in Afar and three of the nine zones in Somali pastoral regions were covered. However, the 2019 and 2020 surveys covered all enumeration areas, including all zones in the pastoral regions of Somali and Afar. CSA livestock survey reports from 2004 to 2020 were downloaded from the CSA website (CSA 2004 to CSA 2020). Town-specific live animal market price data were obtained from the Ethiopian Livestock Market Information System website (LMISET 2022). Animal product prices for milk (price per litre) and meat (price per kg) were collected by contacting veterinarians working in camel-rearing areas. The author’s own knowledge and observations acquired over 20 years of working in pastoral areas––providing animal health services, conducting research on camel health and production, and sharing the profound knowledge and experience of camel herders throughout Ethiopia––were also used. Formulas and equations used to estimate various parameters are presented in Annex 1. 4 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases 3 Results and discussion 3.1 Camel population and trends The world camel population is estimated to be about 35.5 million heads, of which over 80% are found in Africa, with 60% of the population being in the Horn of Africa. The eight top camel-rearing countries (Somalia, Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Niger, Mauritania, Chad and Mali) are also found in Africa. Population growth varies from a slight to rapid increase in most African countries (except for Egypt, Libya and Morocco), while a declining trend has been observed in Asia and Near East countries (Faye 2020). Out of the 46 countries that have declared that they have a camel population, only half have official data from their respective national statistics offices of the ministries of agriculture, whereas others have population data estimated by FAO. In both cases, the population figures are mostly rough estimates as camel censuses are costly and are rarely conducted. Dromedary camels are the major animal species that sustain the livelihoods and food supply of millions of pastoral communities inhabiting the arid and semi-arid areas of Ethiopia. This environment accounts for about two-thirds of the country’s landmass and is home to a large human population and livestock resources. Camels are produced mainly in six regional states of Ethiopia, namely Somali, Afar, Oromia, Tigray, Amhara and, recently, the South Nation Nationalities Peoples Region, with the eastern and southeastern parts of the country being the heartland of the camel population. The major camel-keeping societies in the country include Afar, Somali, Oromo (Karayu, Gabra, Boran, Guji and other clans), Kunama, Raya and Irob (Tefera and Abebe 2012; Mirkena et al. 2018). FAOSTAT (2020) provides data on the Ethiopian camel population for the period 1993–2020, based either on FAO estimates (1993–2004) or official national reports from the Ministry of Agriculture (2005–2018). FAO also used imputation methodology for 2019 and 2020 camel data estimations, and the CSA compiled camel data from 2004 to 2020 from its agriculture sample surveys (Table 1). In both datasets, a high fluctuation of the annual population was observed. Analysis of the FAOSTAT data revealed an annual population growth rate of 4.75%, with more than five-fold growth from 1993 (320,000 heads) to 2020 (1,637,223 heads). The camel population growth rate was higher than that of goats (4.3%), sheep (3.9%) and cattle (2.7%), as shown in Figure 1. FAO’s estimate of the camel population growth rate is at the lower end or slightly outside of the estimated range of 5–10% for camels under traditional husbandry practices (Faye 2020). Ethiopia’s camel population has often been underestimated (Tefera and Abebe 2012; Behnke 2014), mainly due to the limited geographical coverage of the CSA annual agriculture sample surveys. Mainly covering the sedentary rural agricultural population of the country, these surveys regularly exclude pastoral areas. The main reason for this exclusion is the environmental challenges of the camel biosphere (environmental, social and cultural conditions) where camels are highly mobile, scattered over the vast arid environment and not subjected to mandatory vaccination, which makes accurate census difficult and costly (Faye 2015). 5Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases However, marginalization of camel pastoralism is also to blame for the underestimation of the camel population. Accounting for the missing data from pastoral areas that were not covered by the 2005 CSA surveys which covered only 40% and 33% of the administrative zones in Afar and Somali regions, respectively, the Livestock Development Master Plan Study (LDMPS) (Shapiro et al. 2015) and Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (MoFED 2005), estimated the camel population to be 2,293,100 (LDMPS) and 2,466,400 (MoFED) heads in 2005. This was more than five times the CSA figure (436,600) for the same year (Behnke, 2014). The MoFED estimates may be considered with caution as its estimates of 2,289,200 in 1997 and 2,293,800 in 2008 resulted in a very low estimated annual growth rate of 0.02%, which is much lower than the estimates from all other studies. Figure 1. Annual population growth rate of camels and other ruminants between 1993 and 2020, based on FAO data. Table 1. National and regional camel population of Ethiopia based on CSA data (2004–2020) Year National Tigray Afar Amhara Oromia Somali Others† 2004 458,576 32,651 99,833 14,266 139,830 166,264 5,732 2005 436,622 32,777 112,131 14,678 121,970 149,073 5,993 2006 616,396 33,794 143,750 31,911 131,242 266,239 9,460 2007 1,009,040 34,448 142,357 47,026 447,688 331,563 5,958 2008 759,696 32,552 171,514 50,506 255,328 242,943 6,853 2009 930,908 33,378 275,371 50,989 290,698 273,133 7,337 2010 1,102,119 34,205 379,228 51,472 326,069 303,323 7,822 2011 979,319 35,946 276,630 55,626 310,463 290,849 9,805 2012 915,518 52,541 270,402 60,576 264,175 260,695 7,129 2013 1,098,312 87,163 335,039 64,389 268,089 332,150 11,482 2014 1,102,119 34,205 379,228 51,472 326,069 303,323 7,822 2015 1,164,106 55,921 434,291 66,364 239,357 354,275 13,898 2016 1,209,321 54,348 474,146 71,194 299,422 295,076 15,135 2017 1,418,457 43,332 650,040 151,143 315,432 249,475 9,035 2018 1,760,870 52,905 1,118,981 35,682 294,110 249,475 9,717 2019 7,702,493 46,436 1,162,311 49,467 294,331 6,132,350 17,598 2020 8,145,790 46,436 1,258,971 44,774 292,908 6,489,702 12,999 †Others include herds from Dire-Dawa, Harari and South Omo (South Region). 6 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases The CSA data showed fluctuating regional and national population growth trends between 2004 and 2020. Afar and Somali herds showed an increasing trend, with an abrupt increase in 2019 and 2020, resulting in Somali and Afar regions accounting for 54% and 25% of the camel population from 2004 to 2020, whereas Oromia Region accounted for only 15%. The abrupt increase in the two regions also resulted in a sharp increase in the national camel population between 2019 and 2020. The above figures significantly deviate from a previously estimated proportion of 42% in Somali, 34% in Afar and 24% in Oromia regions at a time when all camels in Afar and Somali regions were not included in CSA data (Wilson 2020). Still, the Oromia camels were also not well accounted for in the recent CSA reports, given the current increasing trend of camel keeping in the region. Thus, the observed declining or no population growth in Oromia is far from the reality. In fact, camel production is increasingly being adopted in several zones of the region, and a population increase can be expected. Reports on camel populations from other administrative areas (such as Dire Dawa, South Omo and Harari regions) were inconsistent (and sometimes missing) throughout the reporting period. The population growth trend is slightly higher for females and animals aged four years or more, whereas a lower trend was observed for young camels, specifically between 2006 and 2014. CSA reported a four-fold increase of camel population estimates in Ethiopia, from 1,760,870 heads in 2018 to 7,702,493 in 2019 and 8,145,790 in 2020. The reason given was that most of the pastoral areas were covered in the recent surveys but not included in earlier surveys, and that the reported four-fold population increase was largely an artefact of the survey process. The actual increase, considering the survey years where all zones in the pastoral areas were included in the sample censuses, was 5.76% (from 7,702,493 in 2019 to 8,145,790 in 2020). Such an upsurge of camel numbers is also not uncommon for other countries. For example, massive recent increases in camel populations have been reported in Chad and Kenya (Faye 2020). Thus, increased adoption of camel herding among pastoralists in Ethiopia is not surprising as an adaptation strategy against climate change (e.g. recurrent droughts) and rangeland ecological changes (increased bush encroachment) that disfavoured cattle production (Megersa et al. 2014b). Socio-cultural changes are also among the driving factors for the expansion of camels into new territories and integration of camels into peri-urban dairy production, as their milk is increasingly being utilized in urban centres. Generally, there is evidence of a decline in the cattle population, whereas the numbers of camels and goats have increased in pastoral areas of Ethiopia (Behnke 2014), with camel rearing expanding into cattle territories such as Borana, Guji, Arsi-Bale, Hararghe and South Omo zones. An increase in the camel population by 10–25% over the last 20 years in Gode, Jigjiga, Shinille, Mille and Amibara has been noted by Yosef et al. (2013), whereas major increases (up to 500%) have been observed in the Borana area between 1976 and 2011 (Megersa et al. 2014b). The increase in camel populations is the result of increases in both the number of camel-rearing households and their herd size. An increased shift from highly vulnerable to resilient species, such as from cattle to goats (Seo et al. 2009) or from cattle to camels (Faye et al. 2012), has been documented in other African countries. 3.2 Ecotypic, phenotypic and genetic diversity of Ethiopian camels Dromedary camels were perhaps originally domesticated for milk production approximately 4,000 years ago in the southern Arabian Peninsula, possibly in the present territories of Yemen and Oman (Wilson, 1998). Since then, they have undergone various morphological, phenotypical and genetic changes. They possess a wide range of genetic biodiversity and have evolved into several breeds that have been selected according to the herders’ own 7Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases needs and breeding goals. Thus, some camel breeds that were used for work might have developed into good draught animals, while others that were used for long journeys in desert in caravans, also known as the ‘ships of the desert’, have now evolved into good race animals. Most other breeds have been developed to ensure food supply in the arid environment and have become good dairy animals (Faye 2015). Information on camel breed characterization is very scarce in Ethiopia, except for attempts by scholars such as Getahun and Kassa (2002), who categorized Somali camels into the Agoweyn and Ayuune subgroups based on physical attributes (body size and coat colour) and production parameters (milk, lactation length, loading, speed and breeding). Tefera and Abebe (2012) also classified camels into four groups based on their coat colour, conformation and production performance (milk, meat, dual purpose and baggage camels). Tadesse et al. (2014) observed the highest morphological diversity between the Afar and Somali ecotypes, with superior morphological measurements among Somali populations compared to the Afar ecotypes. The authors further classified camels from the two regions into seven subpopulations, of which Jigjiga and Hoor camels were categorized as dairy camels while Liben and Gelleb as meat camels (Tadesse et al. 2014; 2015). An in-depth study by Legesse et al. (2022) examined morphometric and genetic variables between subpopulations/breeds and within a subpopulation/breed among eight pastoralist-designated breeds of camels in Somali, Afar and Oromia regions and identified two ecotypes (Afar and other ecotypes) based on the morphometric data. However, genetic analysis did not identify any unique genetic lineage, perhaps due to the limited genotype data used in the study. The above authors observed two major geographical clusters: cluster 1 (Jigjiga, Issa, and Afar) located in the northeastern of the country, and cluster 2 ecotypes in the south (Borana, Ayden and Hoor), while other ecotypes (Kerreyu and Liben) were admixed. Tadesse et al. (2019) further investigated the genetic diversities and population structures of six camel subpopulations in Afar and Somali regions and observed high genetic diversities in the study camels, with most of the variations observed within population (92%) and low differentiations between populations (8%). The authors reported four clusters; two Afar and two Somali camels, namely, (1) Jigjiga with Mille, (2) Gelleb with Amibara, (3) Liben and (4) Hoor as separate subpopulations. In general, information on Ethiopian camel genetic characterization is vitally important to understand the genetic basis underlying camel phenotypic and production traits and physiological features for selective breeding as dairy and meat types. 3.3 Production performances of camels in Ethiopia 3.3.1 Milk production potential of camels Camels produce more milk for a longer period than any other livestock species in arid environments, where milk is the most important product and a valuable food source for humans (Wilson 1998; Farah et al. 2017). Milk production can vary significantly with management practices, healthcare, breed of camels, seasonal feed availability, milking frequency, parity, lactation stage and disease challenges (Bekele et al. 2002; Belay and Getahun 2002; Megersa et al. 2008). Camel milking often begins three days after calving (Bekele et al. 2002). After allowing a calf to stimulate milk letdown by suckling, two men standing on opposite sides of the camel extract the milk quickly by hand into a milking vessel, commonly made of wood or plastic. Men customarily do the milking among Afar and Somali pastoralists (Bekele et al. 2002; Keskes et al. 2013; Kebede et al. 2015; Tadesse et al. 2015), whereas women can also take part in milking among Borana and Karayu communities (Amante et al. 2014). The preference for men in camel milking mainly stems from cultural beliefs and the high value given to camels (Mirkena et al. 2018). 8 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Additionally, as camels are milked in a standing position and milk letdown is for a short period, a lot of energy is required to extract the milk quickly and sufficiently before milk letdown ceases. The number of milkings per day (milking frequency) may range from one to four (Bekele et al. 2002) or one to five (Kebede et al. 2015). In most studies, 50–60% of the herders milk their camels twice a day (morning and evening), whereas about a third of them milk three times a day (Getahun and Kassa 2002; Hussen et al. 2008; Seifu 2009; Keskes et al. 2013; Gebremichael et al. 2019). In other studies, milking twice a day (over 85% of herders) is more common (Mebratu et al. 2017; Bekele et al. 2018). The number of milkings per day may vary depending on several factors: season and feed availability, supply and demand for milk, stage of lactation, quantity of milk produced per head, number of lactating camels, and availability of other food for the households (Schwartz and Dioli 1992). Since milking frequency has a significant effect on the quantity of milk offtake (Bekele et al. 2002), optimum milk yield can be achieved when camels are milked 4–6 times a day (Wernery 2003). It is difficult to estimate the daily milk yield of camels under pastoral management and compare the results from various studies given the high variability of milking frequency. The presence of suckling calves also confounds the accurate estimation of daily offtake (Bekele et al. 2002). Under the traditional production system, a calf is used to stimulate milk letdown from the mammary glands so lack of stimulation can significantly reduce the milk yield or even lead to its termination. In such cases, herders use various methods of inducing continued milk production, such as by presenting calf skin to the dam, covering a foster calf with the skin of the dead one, forcing or tricking the dam to accept a fostering calf and massaging the udder. However, reports regarding the impact of calf death on milk yield are contradictory in literature as Bekele et al. (2002) found a significant reduction in milk yield while Baars and Kebebew (2005) reported a higher milk yield from dams with calf death compared to those with living calves. Slaughtering of calves at birth, mainly males, is also practised by Afar pastoralists (Keskes et al. 2013b) and Ceeldheer herders in Somalia (Elmi 1989) to harvest more milk for human consumption. Different authors reported a wide range of average daily milk yield (litre/kg) per head for the Ethiopian camel population, including 2.5 by Tefera and Gebreab (2001), 4.1 (Bekele et al. 2002), 5.2 by Seifu (2009) and 7.5 by Baars and Kebebew (2005). Estimates of lactation yields also vary considerably among reports. Reported average lactation yields varied between 975 (Tefera and Gebreab 2001) and 3,360 litres (Wosene 1991), with corresponding daily yields of 2.5 and 8 litres, respectively. Average lactation length across studies ranged from 10 to 14 months, varying from as low as 6 months to as high as 24 months. Table 2 provides a summary of the milk yield of 16 studies, with an average daily and lactation milk yield of 4.5 litres per day and 1,737.5 litres per lactation. Excluding five reports with lactation yield higher than 2,000 litres, the daily yield, lactation length and lactation yield were averaged at 3.9 litres, 12.5 months and 1,437.7 litres, respectively. In pastoral systems, lactation length as long as 24 months may sometimes be preferred by herders to ensure a sustainable, but small, milk production throughout the year. Tefera and Abebe (2012) also noted the pastoralists’ preference for a long calving interval to ensure prolonged milk supply for their families. Shorter calving interval with females getting pregnant early in the lactation period could shorten the lactation period up to five months, affecting milk supply and calf survival (Megersa et al. 2008). Additionally, excess milk is often wasted in a subsistence production system, as milk is perishable and may not be fairly marketed. Except for a few studies (Bekele et al. 2002; Baars and Kebebew 2005), milk yield estimates were mostly based on cross-sectional studies, herders’ recalls or records of a few animals, which partly contributed to the high 9Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases variability among the study findings. A longitudinal study by Bekele et al. (2002), recording milk yields of 61 lactating camels once a week from October 1997 to January 2000, found an average daily milk yield and lactation offtake of 4.14 kg and 1422 kg, respectively. Baars and Kebebew (2005) reported a higher average daily yield of 7.5 litres and a lactation yield of 2,104 litres from 30 lactating camels monitored for 19 months (March 1996 to September 1997). FAO estimated about 243,429 tonnes of fresh camel milk production from 273,516 lactating animals (16.7% of the camel population) in 2020, resulting in an average yield of 890 kg of milk per head per year (FAOSTAT 2020). A significantly higher camel milk production of 2.43 billion litres (about 2.48 billion kg or 2.43 million tonnes) was estimated by CSA of Ethiopia for the same year due to the large number of milking animals, approximately 3.3 million lactating camels (CSA 2020). CSA estimated a lower average lactation yield of 771 kg per animal per year compared to the 980 kg estimated by FAO. The FAO data also indicated increasing trends in the number of milk animals and total milk production from 1993 to 2020 (Figure 2). Estimates from both CSA and FAO were lower than the average lactation yield of 1,438 litres computed from the 11 selected studies (Table 2), with lactation yields below 2,000 litres. CSA’s estimate of annual milk offtake is comparable to the literature- pooled data of 1,438 litres per lactation. Table 2. Daily and lactation milk yields of camels in Ethiopia Authors/Source Study area Daily min. Daily max. Daily average Lactation length (m) Lactation yield (L) Gebremichael et al. 2019 Afar 2.0 6.0 4.2 12 1,512 Hussen et al. 2008 Mieso 3.9 7.1 5.5 15.5 2,550.5 Bekele et al. 2002 Somali 1.3 6.8 4.1 13.2 1,382 Getahun and Kassa 2002 Somali 3.2 4.5 3.8 14.0 1,561.2 Tefera and Gebreab 2001 Afar 1.0 4.0 2.5 13.0 975 Baars and Kebebew 2005 Somali 5.0 11.5 7.5 9.4 2,104 Megersa et al. 2008 Borana 4.3 7.6 5.4 12.5 2,025 Wosene 1991 Somali 8.0 10.0 8.0 14.0 3,265 Tadesse et al. 2015 Somali, Afar 2.7 4.9 2.9 13.8 1,540 Seifu 2009 Somali 1.0 10.0 5.2 12.8 1,933 Kebede et al. 2015 Somali 1.2 5.2 3.2 13.0 2,040 Demissie et al. 2017 Gursum, Babile  4.8 10.0 1,391 Keskes et al. 2013 Somali 1.7 4.4 3.8 11.5 1,314.5 Keskes et al. 2013b Afar 3.0 7.6 5.3 12.0 1,908 Gramay and Ftiwi 2018 Afar 2.4 3.3 2.9 13.8 1,200.6 Mohammed et al. 2015 Somali 1.0 6.0 3.1 12.0 1,098 Average 4.5 12.7 1,737.5 m: month, L: litres, average value was used for more than one daily milk yield or lactation yield in a study, and yields reported in kg were converted to litres using specific gravity of 1.029 for camel milk. Camel milk is commonly believed to have a therapeutic effect on disorders such as gastritis, asthma, diabetes, tuberculosis, urinary problems, hepatitis, jaundice, common cold and diarrhoea (Mehari et al. 2007; Asresie and Kurtu 2014). Unlike in other countries e.g. Kenya (Musinga et al. 2008), the conversion of camel milk into value- added products such as cheese, butter and cream has not been successful in Ethiopia. Camel milk is generally consumed raw at the household level as a whole fluid milk, milk tea or traditionally fermented milk. Fresh milk is kept for some days to produce a traditionally fermented product with low pH and sour taste to prolong the shelf life. A few milk processing plants that pasteurize and pack camel milk have recently been established in eastern Ethiopia. 10 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases 3.3.2 Meat production performance and dressing percentage of camels Camels can utilize all forage resources available in arid and semi-arid environments, and they have relatively good feed conversion efficiency. They have a large body size, higher dressing percentage,and high-quality lean meat (Kadim et al. 2013). Camel meat compares favourably with other livestock in carcass yields and quality. The quality of camel meat from young animals (below five years) is comparable to beef in taste and texture. However, meat quality decreases, getting tougher, with age. Globally, the average percentage of slaughtered camels has increased steadily, ranging from 5 to 7%, with a higher slaughtering rate in live animal importing countries (Faye 2014). In general, camels are not considered ideal meat type animals due to their low reproductive rate and late age at maturity. Therefore, their meat is often considered a by-product of other camel production systems such as milk production. Camel meat mainly comes from old males and females that have been culled. Faye (2014) noted that the proportion of slaughtered culled adult females outnumbered that of adult culled males (28% vs 7.7%). Information on camel slaughter for home consumption is very rare in the literature. It is not affordable to slaughter a camel for home consumption of meat, except during occasional events and cultural obligations such as funerals, weddings and religious ceremonies, in addition to emergence slaughter due to fatal health problems (Getahun et al. 2005; Seifu 2009; Guya and Neme 2015). Besides the high value of a camel, its meat is too much to be consumed at family level, as meat preservation facilities are lacking. A study on household-level camel slaughter in Somali Region (38 male and 42 female respondents) showed that camels were mostly sacrificed during religious ceremonies (43.7%) and slaughtered as an emergency (45.0%), while a negligible proportion (1.3%) was slaughtered for home consumption (Getahun et al. 2005). The estimated annual slaughter rate for home consumption, camel meat output and per capita meat consumption were 3%, 18,964 kg and 19.8 kg, respectively. A lower camel slaughter rate (0.9%) for home consumption has also been reported from the Borana area (Megersa et al., 2008). Information on camel meat production, marketing and consumption is scarce in Ethiopia, and the camel meat data are mostly from the informal market. It can be surmised that increased urbanization and settlement in small towns of communities with pastoral backgrounds, which has been increasingly evident in recent years, might have led to an increased demand for camel meat. A camel abattoir has been established in the Akaki area of Addis Ababa and supplies camel meat to the Somali community and other Muslims living in the city. The limited literature available on meat production suggests that adult camels are regularly slaughtered (at least once a week) at municipal abattoirs of small towns such as Dire Dawa, Jigjiga, Samara, Asayita and Harar, and the meat sold at butcher shops in respective towns (Kurtu 2004; Guya and Neme 2015; Kurtu et al. 2017). According to Kurtu (2004), the total number of camels slaughtered is 2,750 at Jigjiga and 524 in Harar in one year, i.e. 229 and 44 animals per month, respectively. Camel slaughter and meat utilization also vary from area to area due to cultural restrictions; for example, a considerable proportion of Borana do not slaughter camels or consume their meat (Gebisa 2015). Live weight, carcass yield and dressing percentage of camels depend on age, sex, breed and feeding condition. Somali camels are generally large and heavy, whereas Afar ecotypes are small and light (Tadesse et al. 2019; Legesse et al. 2022). From the literature, the average live weight (442 kg versus 380 kg) and carcass yield (204 kg versus 179 kg) were higher for male animals than females (Table 3). Male camels had a higher dressing percentage (55%) compared to females (50%). The carcass dressing percentages of camels are in the range of 45 to 55% and exceptionally up to 60%. Total carcass composition is about 66% muscle, 20% bone and 12% fat, with the fat being mainly from the hump (Wosene et al. 2002; Kurtu 2004; Tekele and Tesfay 2013; Kurtu et al. 2017). 11Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Camel meat is highly preferred among the Somali community due to its juiciness, flavour, leanness and perceived medicinal value, while it is the second and third preference for consumers in Dire Dawa and Harar, respectively (Kurtu 2004; Kurtu et al. 2017). Tenderness, leanness, flavour and medicinal values were reported as meat quality indicators among pastoralists in eastern Ethiopia (Kurtu et al. 2017). Because of its low intra-muscular fat content, camel meat is a valuable animal-source food in low-cholesterol diets. Various meat preservation methods have traditionally been used to prolong the shelf life of camel meet. Somalis boil the meat to reduce the water content and water activity of the meat, in addition to adding butter and salt to enhance the flavour and taste. The meat, locally called ‘muqmad’ or ‘muremure’, is hung to dry then cubed and has a shelf life of up to six months (Guya and Neme 2015; Kurtu et al. 2017). Lean camel meat contains about 78% water, 19% protein, 3% fat and 1.2% ash, with a small amount of intramuscular fat. The meat has essential amino acids comparable to beef, lamb and goat meat. It is leaner, with more moisture and less fat, than beef. The low levels of saturated fat in camel meat are advantageous in minimizing the risk of atherosclerosis, obesity, hypertension and cancer due to their effect on plasma cholesterol levels (Wilson, 2020). The quality of camel meat from younger animals (below three years) is comparable to cattle, and meat becomes tough, less palatable and of inferior quality with increasing age (Kadim 2008). Although camel carcasses may provide ample quantities of quality meat, the meat is commonly perceived as tough, coarse, watery and sweetish in taste compared to other animals. Camels are often exposed to pre- slaughter stress (long-term stress), including poor nutrition, rough handling and long transportation, causing depletion of muscle glycogen and resulting in a high ultimate pH, as wells as dry and firm muscles. Muscle structure, glycogen concentration, collagen content, solubility and the activities of proteases and their inhibitors are the most important physiological parameters affecting meat tenderness. The myofibrillar system of camel muscle retains a considerable quantity of water in the meat. Thus, the volume and weight of camel meat are reduced by 44.3% and 48.2% after boiling in water for 40 minutes (Kadim et al. 2008). Camel slaughtering practices at abattoirs were reported to violate some of the basic humane and halal requirements, including cruelly cutting the Achilles tendon of hind legs, severing the neck with more than one stroke, sharpening knives and slaughtering animals in front of others waiting slaughter, and pre-slaughter water deprivation (Seid et a. 2017). Camel slaughter in villages or at home generally complies with religious requirements. The painful camel handling practices among abattoir workers prior to slaughter (short-term stress) leads to excessive use of glycogen and high production of lactic acid at slaughter, resulting in low-pH, pale, soft and exudative meat. This calls for awareness creation for abattoir workers engaged in camel slaughter regarding humane handling of camels and its implication on meat quality. The contribution of camel meat to total livestock meat production is generally low at national and global levels. For example, in 2010 the share of camel meat was about 9%, whereas small ruminants and cattle accounted for 70% and 21% of the total meat produced (Bereda et al 2016). The estimated total meat production of 24,888 tonnes in 2020, with 200 kg meat per head of 124,440 camels, reported by CSA (2020) is lower than FAO estimates of a total of 39,768 tonnes of meat production per year, considering 221,463 slaughtered animals producing 180 kg meat per animal (FAO 2020). Meat production and estimated number of meat animals available for slaughter increased from 1993 to 2020 (Figure 2), while the percentage of meat animals did not show an increment. Kadim and colleagues (2013) reported much lower slaughter rates for the Horn of Africa: 3.7% for Somalia, 4.2% for Ethiopia, 5% for Sudan, 6.4% for Djibouti and 6.7% for Kenya. 12 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Table 3. Meat production performances of camels in Ethiopia Authors Study area Live wt. (m) Live wt. (f) Live wt. (Av) Carcass wt. (m) Carcass wt.(f) Carcass wt. (av) Dressing % (m) Dressing % (f) Dressing % (Av) Wosene 1991 Ogaden 612 463 537.5             Kurtu et al. 2017 Somali     335     186.4     56 Kurtu 2000 Somali     400     211     53 Getahun and Bruckner 2000 Somali     431     237     55 Dereje et al. 2016 Ogaden     255 144.6     55.0   55 Mehari et al. 2007 Babile 435.2 378.0 406.6 235 191.4   54.0 50.6 52.4 Mehari et al. 2007 Kebribeyah 407.0 401.7 404.4 220.1 203.5   54.1 50.7 52.4 Kurtu 2004 Eastern 465.8 335.7 422.3 252.3 170.0 211.2 54.0 50.7 52.3 Wosene et al 2002 Dire Dawa     443     233.4     52.7 Tekele and Tesfay Afar 292.0 320.0 306 166 152.0 159.0 56.8 47.5 52.0 Average 442.4 379.7 394.1 203.6 179.2 206.3 54.8 49.9 53.4 Wt.: weight in kg, m: male, f: female, av: average Figure 2. Trends in camel milk and meat production as annual total in Ethiopia, FAO 1993–2020. 3.3.3 Live weight of camels by age and sex groups Calf birth weight is an indicator of the meat production potential of a camel, as heavier calves, if managed well, grow faster and have a heavier body weight at weaning and maturity. Several factors affect the birth weight of calves, including genetic factors, the nutritional and health status and parity of the dam, calf sex and season of year. Malnutrition of the dam during the last phase of gestation reduces the birth weight of camel calves and further causes a low growth rate (weight gain) in young and adult camels (Kadim et al. 2013). Information on birth weight and the weight of different age groups is rarely available for Ethiopian camels. Tefera and Abebe (2012) reported average weights of 34 kg at birth, 131–134 kg at one year, 211– 249 kg at two years, 273 kg at three years, and 294–336 kg at four years of age. Generally, birth weights vary slightly among male and female calves and range from 31 to 45 kg. For instance, average birth weights of 39 kg for male and 36 kg for female calves has been reported for Sudanese herds (Bakheit et al. 2009). 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 year meat tonnes milk tonnes milk animals slaughtered animals 13Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Camel calves double their birth weight within one month and attain an average weight gain of 250 g/day up to 6 months (Gitao 2006). The growth rate is fast at 24–30 months of age, beyond which it declines with increasing age (Kadim et al. 2013). As camels mature slowly, the maximum live weight is attained at the age of 7–8 years. In a monitoring study of growing camels between the age of 1 and 2 years in Ethiopia (Zeleke and Bekele 2000), minimum and average daily weight gains of 50 g/day and 63 g/day, respectively, were recorded. In a supplementary feeding trial in Ogaden (Dereje et al. 2016) with young camels aged 24–30 months supplemented with concentrate feeds, live weight ranging from 245 to 265 kg and a mean carcass weight of 144.6 kg (range 129.5–155.4 kg) were recorded. The authors found that camels whose feed was supplemented at high levels had the highest net return, with the medium supplemental level (concentrate mix at 1% body weight) being the most profitable. This sheds light on the profitability of feedlot camel fattening that considers the physiology and metabolism of the animal. The average live weight of adult male Somali camels in Jigjiga and Shinile were 486 and 384 kg, respectively, and the corresponding adult female weights were 427 ± 62.2 kg and 326 ± 62.9 kg, respectively (Getahun and Bruckner 2000). However, Tekle and Tesfay (2013) reported a slightly lower mean body weight in males (292 kg) than in females (320 kg) in Afar. This could probably be the result of mature male animals with good body condition often being sold out, and camels from agro-pastoral areas being heavier than those from pastoral production systems. 3.3.4 Draft power and transportation Camels have provided a wide range of draught power functions since their domestication, and perform as well as other draught animals such as oxen and horses. Primarily, they serve as pack animals for herders, carrying water, household goods, firewood, people and young animals, particularly while moving camps during seasonal migrations (Figure 3). Commercially, male camels are mostly used to transport salt blocks from the lowlands of Afar to the highlands of Tigray and Amhara regions, building materials, grains and many other goods from urban centres to villages (Mehari et al. 2007; Seifu 2009). They are also used to lift water for irrigation from boreholes, rotate sesame oil mills and plough farmland (Figure 3). Figure 3. Camels contributing draught power in Ethiopia (Source: online pictures). 14 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Figure 4. Camels by various purposes based on average of CSA data in 2019 and 2020. Mehari et al. (2007) observed the regular and occasional types of services provided by camels in Kebribeyah to be transportation (95%), packing (90%) and ploughing (96%), whereas in agricultural areas like Babilie, camels are engaged in ploughing (27.5%), packing (92.5%), transportation (87.5%) and traction (10%). Mehari et al. (2007) noted that a camel’s ploughing ability equals that of a pair of oxen. The use of camels for ploughing has been occasionally observed in Yabello and Jigjiga areas of Ethiopia (Wilson 2020), though it seems to have declined over time. The CSA official agricultural sample survey reports for 2019 and 2020 showed that transportation utility is the second most important use of camels (the main purpose for 19% of camels) after milk (the main purpose for being kept for 46% of camels in Ethiopia) while the least common utility of camels is draught power (0.4%) (Figure 4). In border areas, camels are important means of transport that connect Ethiopia to neighbouring countries (e.g. Somali, Djibouti and Kenya) regardless of accessibility by road, and play a big role in the transaction of contraband goods as well as legal commercial operations. Camel renting for transportation of goods and people is a further source of income for pastoral communities. Camels walk at an average speed of about 4 km/hour and can carry loads up to one third of their body weight over 60 km per day. In a country like Ethiopia with a limited road network and insufficient transportation facilities as well as undulating and inaccessible landscapes, the contribution of camels as a pack animal is crucial and determines the survival of pastoralists in arid environments. The ownership of camels also determines the settlement pattern and browsing/grazing radius of herders from the water sources and ultimately affects the productivity of their herds, while herders without camels have limited resources close to water points. Although camels are multipurpose animals and vital for pastoral communities, the traditional camel farming system is gradually shifting to specialized production systems such as peri-urban semi-intensive camel dairying, which could be an opportunity for intensive camel production through improved management systems. However, the new system could threaten the role of camels as multipurpose animals (transportation, draft power etc.) for pastoralists. 3.4 Reproduction performances of camels Camel breeding practices are mostly characterized by an uncontrolled mating system due to herds mixing in grazing areas and the absence of breeding plans among the herders. Bekele et al. (2018) estimated that only 15Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases a small proportion of herders attempt to adopt controlled mating and select breeding bulls. Since camels are generally kept as multipurpose animals, most herders do not intend to improve a specific economic trait through selective breeding. Setting breeding objectives for a specific production system is vitally important to improve desired attributes that ultimately optimize tangible economic values such as production, reproduction, fitness and disease tolerance traits (Mirkena et al. 2018). Literature on the purposes of camel keeping puts milk production as the top priority production objective for most pastoralists in Ethiopia (Tadesse et al. 2014). The main production objectives of herders in Borana were milk production, income generation from the sale of live animals, transportation and meat production, in ranking order (Megersa 2014). A herd structure with a higher proportion of females (over 60%) reflects the importance of milk production and reproduction (Bekele and Kebebew 2002; Getahun and Kassa 2002; Megersa et al. 2008). Camel herd structure in Afar region, with 22.7% males and 77.3% females, indicates that dairy production and reproduction are primary objectives of camel rearing. About one third of camels below four years old in Afar are males, whereas in the age group over four years, the ratio of males to females falls to about one to four (Wilson 2020). As animal age increases, the ratio of male to female camels declines due to early age culling of calves or increased male calf mortality and commercial offtake. Selection is mainly done for breeding bulls rather than females. Direct selection criteria for the bulls include body size, colour and appearance. Bulls are also selected on indirect criteria based on their male and female pedigree for production and reproduction traits such as milk production, growth performances and the history of producing more female rather than male calves (Getahun and Kassa 2002; Woldearegay et al. 2014; Mirkena et al. 2018). The expected female-bearing potential of a bull is evaluated through the calving history of its female progeny and if the desired trait is not realized within three consecutive years, the bull would be culled from breeding and used for draught purposes (Mirkena et al. 2018). Breeding animals can also be selected for their tolerance to drought and diseases, and physical strength. A selected bull is kept in a herd to satisfactorily serve 40–100 females (Bekele and Kebebew 2002). According to Keskes et al. (2013b), most of the Afar herders (98%) keep only one breeding male per herd, and 87% of the herders use their own bull for breeding purposes. There is a strong hierarchical relationship between a dominant male and other subordinate males, which eventually lose libido and go out of rut (Wilson 1995). Thus, only the dominant male has the chance of mating all females that are in oestrus. A female camel accepts a male during the mature follicular stage, and ovulation occurs 36–48 hours after mating. It is worth noting that keeping a dominant breeding bull for a prolonged production period has been associated with inbreeding problems. Inbreeding remains a challenge to reproductive performances in pastoral herds as camel herders have a low level of knowledge about the negative effects of keeping a bull for many years and allowing it to sire its own sibling or progeny (Tadesse et al. 2019). Camels have a seasonal reproductive function; most of the breeding occurrs around the end of wet seasons, with the availability of ample browsing and improved nutrition that triggers reproductive function (Bekele and Kebebew 2002). In monitored camel herds, 84.85% of the mating and 86.36% of the calving were recorded during the wet season, which coincides with the seasonal feed availability (Bekele and Zeleke 2001). The major breeding and calving season extends from April to August and a minor breeding season occurs in October and November in the Borana area (Megersa et al. 2008), and during the wet season between May and September in the eastern part of the country (Zeleke and Bekele 2000; Getahun and Kassa 2002). It is also not uncommon to find few matings (15%) and calvings (14%) occurring during the dry season (Bekele and Zeleke 2001). Breeding males that are commonly used for mating, but not for transportation, can be sexually active throughout the year if they are in good condition and forage is available, as can the females (Elmi 1989). 16 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Annual calving rates ranging from 42.5% to 62% have been reported by various authors in Ethiopia (Bekele and Zeleke 2000; Getahun and Kassa 2002; Megersa et al. 2008). The average and range of reproductive performance of camels calculated from research reports from Ethiopia are presented in Table 4. Most of the reported reproductive parameters for Ethiopian camels are comparable with reports from other countries, such as annual calving rate of 47% and calving interval of 25.5 months for herds in Kenya (Wilson 1995) and calving rates of 33–46% in the Somali, 19–44% in the Gabra and 8–86% in the Rendille camel populations in Kenya (Kaufmann 2005). Reproductive performance can be improved with good management and healthcare. It has been reported that calving interval could be as short as 13–15 months in Mali, 12 months in southern Morocco and 18 months in a Kenyan ranch (Wilson 1995). Similarly, ages at first calving of 63.0, 68.4 and 58.4 months, and calving intervals of 27.3, 28.0 and 28.4 months have been reported for the Rendille, Gabra and Somali herds in Kenya (Kaufmann 2005). In more intensive camel husbandry systems in Saudi Arabia, the mean age at first calving was 52 months and the calving interval was 20 months (Abbas et al. 2000). Females that were kept with males from birth to maturity in a Kenyan ranch had an average age at first parturition of 54 months (Wilson 1995). Although early sexual activity following delivery is commonly noticed in females (Megersa et al. 2008), mating is intentionally prevented by herders, owing to its negative effects on milk yield, lactation length and calf survival. Moreover, early pregnancy also has adverse effects on the condition of females and subsequently threatens the long-term sustainability of the herd. In general, seasonal feed availability, long lactation anestrus and infectious diseases are among the factors that contribute to prolonged calving intervals. A breeding bull can be kept in a herd for up to 22 years, while females can be bred for about 25 years, during which about 10 calves can be produced (Getahun and Kassa 2002). However, the average total lifetime calf production (fertility rate) considering all breeding females in a herd may range from 2.5 to 3.5 calves, indicating that many of the females in a herd are infertile. Data generated from cross-sectional studies often overestimate the number of calves produced per female without taking early culling into account (Table 4), ranging calves per female at 8–11, which can only be attained by a few breeding females that are kept in herds for a prolonged period. Under pastoral management, only a small proportion of female camels may remain fertile until the age of 25 years, during which time they may produce a maximum 8 to 10 calves (Mirkena et al. 2018) and as many as 11 calves (Getahun and Kassa 2002). Table 4. Reported reproductive performance of camels in Ethiopia Authors Location †Age at first mating (m) Age at first mating (f) Age at first calving Number of services per pregnancy Calving rate (%) Calving interval (months) Fertility rate Bekele and Zeleke 2000 Somali       1.4 42.7     Baars and Kebebew 2005 Somali         62.2 19.1   Tefera and Gebreab 2001 Afar   56.4 61 1.8 54 25.8 8 Getahun and Kassa 2002 Jigjiga 78 56.4 68.4   54.6 22 11.6 Getahun and Kassa 2002 Shinile 74.4 50.4 50.4   42.5 28 11.2 Mohammed et al. 2005 Somali 66 46.8 62.4     23.5   Bekele et al. 2018 Borana 66 50.4 62.4     23.4 10 Gebissa et al. 2015 Borana 66.7 54.7 59.88     17.73 11.9 Keskes et al 2013 Somali     62.2 1.8   23.3 9.8 Keskes et al 2013b Afar 64.8 47.6   1.6   26 11 Average   69.3 51.8 61.0 1.7 51.2 23.2 10.5 †Ages are in months. 17Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases 3.5 Camel and camel product marketing and product prices Livestock production objectives often aim to optimize a specific animal product for commercial purposes. However, pastoral camel production is not primarily aimed at producing for the market (Wilson 2020). Camel products include milk, meat, hides and skins, and manure, some of which are mainly intended for home use. The use of some products, such as hides and skins, and manure, is not yet well known so they are simply disposed of. Thus, milk and meat are the two important commodities in the camel value chain that can be produced for market as well as for home consumption. The commercial offtake of camel herds in Ethiopia were estimated as 3.7% (Megersa et al. 2008), 4.7% (Zeleke and Bekele 2000) and 4.85% (Keskes et al. 2013), which is in line with the figures of Schwartz and Dioli (1992) for East Africa. Male animals generally dominate the offtake numbers. Female animals represented 32.9% of the offtake, mainly due to diseases (30%), old age (41.4%) and poor production performances (28.6%), with nearly all the culling measures being selling (99%) (Keskes et al.,2013). However, the major reasons for culling female camels in the Afar area were diseases (35.8%), old age (31.6%), poor productivity (18.9%) and infertility (11.6%). Keskes et al. (2013) also reported that 81% of breeding females at least aborted once in their reproductive life. 3.5.1 Milk marketing As camel milk is not well integrated into national dairy markets, the official milk production and marketing data could be unreliable (Faye 2009). The camel milk marketing system in Ethiopia is also predominantly traditional and fragmented due to the lack of proper milk standardization, grading, inspection and licensing. According to Demissie et al. (2017), adulteration, poor quality, varying seasonal demand and price fluctuations are the major constraints of camel milk marketing. Formal export of camel milk may vary between 1,600 and 2,500 litres per day, although a large proportion of the milk is informally exported to neighbouring countries such as Somaliland through the Jigjiga/Togochalle border route (Bereda et al 2016; Demissie et al. 2017), and to Djibouti and Kenya through Moyale Town. The share of camel milk marketed was estimated to be 77.8% (Demissie et al. 2017) and 72.3% (Hussien et al. 2011) of the total household-level production, implying a larger proportion of camel milk offtake. 3.5.2 Camel hide/skin Hides and skins are important export commodities in Ethiopia. However, there is no information on the economic significance of camel hides as a commercial or household-use commodity. As it is not demanded by any leather industries in the country or elsewhere, little attention is given to camel hide collection, quality improvement and processing. An intact hide cannot be produced under traditional slaughtering practices as flaying is commonly done by incising along the back line, then taking off the hide in small pieces, unlike for other ruminants (Guya and Neme 2015). In most cases, it is not properly flayed and processed so it is simply disposed of for scavenging carnivores (Guya and Neme 2015). To some extent, herders may process camel hides locally to manufacture leather strips, water containers, shoes and belts (Wilson 2020). There is also a lack of information on the physical properties of camel hide, which renders it less important in the face of a lucrative market and increasing demand for leather products. Camel hide contains more fat than cattle hide and small ruminant skin so unless it is removed properly, it rots easily (Foxwell, 1999). 18 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases The volume of camel hide production per year is also limited as a raw material for a commercial leather industry. Camel hide could have been an important source of cash income for pastoralists if due attention was given to its production, processing (flaying and curing) and marketing, including popularization to the leather industry. 3.6 Camel diseases Camel diseases are not well known compared to diseases of other domesticated species. However, there is a growing interest in camel research as well as advances in science and technology that have demonstrated the high susceptibility of camels to several infectious agents (Abbas and Omer 2005; Wilson 2020). Most of the literature findings in Ethiopia have been based on epidemiological surveys; serological evidence and direct diagnostic proof of pathogens with clinical disease is still lacking. Thus, many camel health problems and causative agents of various diseases and sudden death incidents remain mysterious (Bekele 1999; Roger et al. 2000; Megersa et al. 2012b; Arega et al. 2021). In particular, the aetiology and epidemiology of most viral diseases are not well documented and await further investigation (Gelaye et al. 2016; Arega et al. 2021). For instance, the detection of antibodies against 10 viruses in 120 camel serum samples demonstrated that camels in Ethiopian and elsewhere are either susceptible to or carriers of a wide range of viral pathogens (Melak et al. 2016). Determining whether camels are clinically susceptible to those infectious agents or act as reservoir hosts for viral pathogens affecting other livestock sharing the same environment or their role in maintaining zoonotic pathogens is vitally important for better prevention. More importantly, being victims of marginalization, Ethiopian camels suffer from a plethora of diseases, including preventable ones, and health problems such as mechanical injuries and nutritional deficiency disorders (Megersa 2010; Wilson 2020). Among diseases with clinical pathology, trypanosomiasis, camel pox, respiratory infection complex, mastitis, internal parasites, mange mite and tick infestations are the top camel health concerns of herders in Ethiopia (Megersa 2010; Tefera and Abebe 2012). Trypanosomiasis Camel trypanosomiasis (locally known as ‘sura’) is a debilitating disease that results in poor body condition, emaciation and eventually death. The disease also causes a drop in milk production and possibly abortion in pregnant females. Several studies have investigated the occurrence of camel trypanosomiasis in Ethiopia (Annex 2 Table V), mainly based on parasitological and serological examinations (Richard 1979; Lemecha et al. 2008; Ashenafi et al. 2009; Kassa et al. 2011; Tadesse et al. 2012). Shiferaw (2018) conducted a meta-analysis of 11 articles and estimated a pooled prevalence of 9.2% (95% CI: 7.1, 11.8) with maximum and minimum prevalence of 30.7% (Ashenafi et al. 2009) and 2.0% (Regassa et al. 2018), respectively. The major variation in the prevalence was rooted in the diagnostic tests used. For example, Regassa et al. (2015) reported trypanosomiasis in a cohort of 399 camels ranging from 2% to 24% using five tests: 2% by thin blood smear, 24.1% with card agglutination test for trypanosomiasis (CATT), 21.3% with RoTat, 1.2% with PCR, 9.5% with 18S PCR, and 7.8% with ITS-1PCR. Thus, parasitological methods have shortcomings of low sensitivity, while serological tests are either less specific or unable to distinguish between past and current infections. 19Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases Gastrointestinal (GIT) parasites Studies have shown that about 80% of the camels studied (Annex 2 Table VI) harbour heavy parasitic burdens which are either specific to camels or shared with other ruminants. Based on faecal and postmortem examination, Richard (1979) estimated that 92% of the camels examined in various parts of Ethiopia harboured about 14 helminth species and hydatid cysts. Bekele (2002) recorded a higher prevalence in the long rainy season than in the short dry seasons (82.6% vs 66.0%), in females than males (77.6% vs 64.8%) and in older than young animals (83.9% vs 59%). A higher nematode load was observed during the wet period compared to the dry period (Megersa 2010), perhaps due to increased developmental activity of nematodes during the wet period. Hydatidosis, a serious public health and animal health problem and a major cause of organ condemnations in Ethiopia, has been widely reported from camels, with prevalence varying between 23% (Debela et a. 2015) and 65% (Gizachew et al. 2013). The effect of gastrointestinal tract parasitism is generally underestimated and not regularly treated. Infection can lead to diarrhoea, poor body condition, weakness and reduced milk production, with more adverse effects on young animals. Thus, strategic deworming of camels with a broad spectrum anthelmintic, during dry and wet periods, would improve the health and welfare of the animals in addition to breaking the life cycle of helminthic parasites. A trial on the efficacy of three drugs (ivermectin 0.2 mg/kg, albendazole 10 mg/kg and levamisole 10 mg/kg) revealed a substantial reduction of nematode egg counts in animals treated with ivermectin (94%) and albendazole (93%) while a lower egg count reduction (79%) was observed for levamisole (Demelash et al. 2014). In another trial using albendazole (n=25), ivermectin (n=25), foecal egg count reduction of 99.8% with albendazole but unsatisfactory effect (31.4%) with ivermectin was recorded in Borana (Megersa 2010). External parasites Camel mange, caused exclusively by Sarcoptes scabie var cameli, is the most commonly prevalent (Annex 2 Table VI) and highly contagious disease, with overall prevalence ranging from 11 to 35% (Dinka et al. 2010; Megersa et al. 2012b; Feyera et al. 2015; Teshome et al. 2021). Mild cases of infection might be underreported due to the difficulty of detecting the mites in skin scrapings boiled with 10% potassium hydroxide (Tefera and Abebe 2012). The disease is highly damaging to camels, with high severity in young and female animals. Severely affected animals are often in poor body condition and are concurrently infected with other skin diseases (Megersa 2016). The disease persists throughout the year and is often more prevalent and severe during the dry periods. Infection tends to spread more quickly during cold weather due to excessive growth of animal coats. It also spreads when animals huddle together and congregate at watering points. Sarcoptic mange is a burrowing mite that penetrates deep into the skin and leads to pruritus, irritation, development of papules, hairless areas and scab formation (Schwartz and Dioli 1992; Megersa et al. 2012b). Affected animals frequently rub themselves against trees or posts, reducing feeding time and resulting in loss of body condition and productivity, in addition to facilitating the spread of infestation to other body parts and to healthy animals (Schwartz and Dioli 1992). Feyera et al. (2015) treated clinical cases using diazinon and ivermectin and observed a significant improvement of both body condition and clinical scores with ivermectin, whereas diazinon improved only the clinical score. Thus, improving herd management and treating infected camels, particularly during feed shortages, may reduce the disease burden and further minimize the spread of sarcoptic mange infection within herds. Tick burdens as high as 96.6–98.2% and 12–48 ticks per camel (Megersa et al. 2012b; Tomassone et al. 2012; Kiros et al. 2014; Elias et al. 2020) have been reported in Ethiopia. Ticks are reported throughout the year, with 20 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases a higher load during the wet season than the dry period due to suitable climatic factors (high humidity and lower temperature) and good vegetation cover that favour the growth and survival of ticks at all developmental stages (Bekele and Zeleke 2004; Megersa 2016). Ticks are blood-sucking parasites and are of high economic importance in camels besides causing tick paralysis and being responsible for tick-borne diseases and damage to teats, resulting in udder infection (Tomassone et al. 2012). They cause consistent irritation and tick worry to animals, leading to rubbing against trees and subsequent traumatic wounds and reduced feed intake. The most common tick species reported to infest camels in Ethiopia include Rhipicephalus pulchellus, Rhipicephalus pravus, Amblyomma gemma, Amblyomma variegatum, Hyalomma dromedarii, Hyalomma rufipes and Boophilus decolouratus (Zeleke and Bekele 2004; Dinka et al. 2010; Megersa et al. 2012b; Tomassone et al. 2012). Mastitis Camel mastitis is also of paramount importance owing to its impact on animal health and welfare in addition to being responsible for a reduction in milk production and affecting food security. The availability of ample literature on mastitis also suggests its importance (Annex 2 Table II). Findings of 23 studies showed that mastitis prevalence varies from 17% (Abdel Gadir et al. 2006) to 76% (Seifu and Tefesse 2010), with an estimated aggregated prevalence of 34.5% (1,464 cases out of 4,248 animals). Given the prevailing poor veterinary service in pastoral areas and absence of early treatment of cases, camel mastitis leads to chronic cases, often blocked teat canals, resulting in permanent loss of milk production and early culling of the animals. Abera et al. (2010) reported that about one third of the study camels had at least one blind teat and only 57.9% of the animals possessed four viable teats for milk production. Camel pox Camel pox has been reported by herders as one of the top camel diseases in Ethiopia (Megersa 2010; Keskes et al. 2013; Ayelet et al. 2013; Aregawi et al. 2018). It is the most important infectious and contagious disease of camels, affecting young (between 6 months and 2 years old) as well as adult animals. Clinical signs include fever, enlarged lymph nodes, and skin lesions on the head, eyelids, nostrils, ears, neck, limbs, genitalia, mammary glands, and perineum (Megersa, 2010). Camel pox virus is genetically related to the variola virus, the causative agent of smallpox, so it is regarded as of zoonotic importance. The disease is commonly reported during the wet period and causes severe infections to young calves and pregnant females (Megersa 2010; Wernery and Kaaden 2002; Aregawi et al. 2018). Affected young camels often manifest diarrhoea, which may result in death. Cases of pox outbreaks and associated mortalities have been commonly reported from camel rearing areas of Ethiopia (Annex 2 Table III). For instance, morbidity of 14.2% and case fatality of 6.2% was reported in Borana (Megersa 2010), whereas Ayelet et al. (2013) observed a 3.8% infection rate (a total of 36 camel pox cases) in Afar and Jigjiga. A higher prevalence of camel pox (35.7%) and contagious ecthyma (21.4%) infection was reported in calves during the short rain season compared to the dry period (Megersa 2014). Camel contagious ecthyma Camel contagious ecthyma (CCE) commonly occurs in young camels in Ethiopia, though it is not well documented except for a few clinical case reports (Megersa 2010) and viral detection (Gelaye et al. 2016; Diba et al. 2022). CCE is mainly a disease of young camels less than one year old and is caused by a parapox virus, resulting in pustular lesions around the mouth, lips, muzzles, and swelling of the eyelids, buccal cavity and head. 21Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases CCE is less severe than camel pox, and the disease usually passes without causing death. Diba et al. (2022) have estimated the morbidity and mortality rates attributed to CCE to be 20% and 6.3%, respectively. A similar magnitude of mortality (6.6%) has also been reported from Sudanese herds (Khalafalla et al. 1994). However, it is important to note that as the two diseases may manifest similar clinical signs (lesions on the face) and co-infections exist, differential diagnosis based on clinical examination is challenging. For instance, eight field samples that were submitted for camel pox detection were found to be CCE virus, while two samples collected on suspicion of camel pox were found to be co-infected by both camel pox and CCE viruses (Gelaye et al. 2016). Miscellaneous skin lesions Skin lesions due to abscesses, traumatic wounds and infectious diseases (camel pox and contagious ecthyma, sarcoptic mange and dermatomycosis) are quite common in camels (Megersa 2010; Tefera and Abebe 2012; Wilson 2020) and often affect an animal concurrently. Camels often suffer from traumatic wounds varying from abrasions to deep laceration. Wounds are inflicted by faulty-fitting harnesses, animal bites (wild animals and camels themselves) and sharp objects. Harnesses are not adjustable to the fluctuating camel body condition and hump size (due to feed scarcity and diseases) and cause abrasive wounds and sores (Tefera and Abebe). Subcutaneous and lymph node abscesses are also among the common health problems affecting camels. Among the skin diseases, contagious skin necrosis is a lesion characterized by necrosis, abscessation and sinus formation in different parts of camel skin and reported to be associated with salt deficiency. The lesion usually begins as a small nodule and swollen painful area, then develops a well-demarcated necrotic centre which sloughs off, exposing an ulcerated, purulent or haemorrhagic layer underneath. It may sometimes heal spontaneously over a few months but often does not respond to antimicrobial treatment. Contagious skin necrosis is assumed to be associated with salt deficiency though controlled studies are not available to support this assumption (Schwartz and Dioli 1992). Various bacterial pathogens such as Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus spp, Corynebacterium pyogenes, Nocardia cameli, Actinomyces spp and Erysipelothrix have been commonly isolated from typical lesions (Domenech et al. 1977; Richard 1979; Wilson 2020). Systemic and zoonotic diseases Among the infectious zoonotic diseases that occur in camels, rabies (Osman et al. 2021), anthrax (Richard 1979), brucellosis (Tadesse 2016), tuberculosis (Asmare et al. 2020), toxoplasmosis (Gebremedhin et al. 2014), sarcocystis (Woldemeskel and Gumi 2001), MERS-CoV (Shirato et al. 2019), Q fever and Rift Valley fever (Ibrahim et al. 2021) were reported from Ethiopian camels. Of these diseases, rabies, anthrax and Rift Valley fever can cause acute infections and severe clinical forms, which may lead to mortality in humans. Anthrax infection in camels results in oedematous swellings similar to the symptoms in equine. The disease occurs as an acute or peracute form. Richard (1979) reported serious outbreaks of anthrax in camels in Ethiopia, with clinical signs including oedematous swelling of the head, throat and neck, causing difficulty in breathing and swallowing. The spores of Bacillus anthracis may remain alive in the soil for several years, becoming a source of infection for the animals. Brucellosis has been the most reported camel disease (Annex 2 Table I) based on serological evidence since early reports by French scholars such as 5.5% by Richard (1979) and 4.6% by Domenech (1977). Seroprevalence ranging from 0.53% (Gesesse et al. 2014) to 12.4% (Wakjira et al. 2022) has been reported based on CFT or c-ELISA as confirmatory test. Using meta-analysis of 15 articles, Tadesse (2016) estimated a pooled prevalence of 2.9%, with the highest prevalence of 4.8% (n=4301) for Afar camels, followed by 2.0% (n=2886) for Somali 22 Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases and the lowest seroprevalence of 1.2% for Borana camels (n=7783). The present estimate (Annex 2 Table I) of aggregated seroprevalence, based on 23 articles and 19,463 camel samples, is 3.4% (95% CI: 3.1, 3.7%). Evidence of an association of brucellosis prevalence with reproductive disorders such as abortion, stillbirth and retained foetal matter is limited (Tassew and Kassahun 2014). The incidence of abortion in camels due to brucellosis is lower than in other ruminants (Megersa et al. 2005; Wernery 2013). The disease is of more public health importance given the tradition of raw camel milk consumption and high contact between herders and their animals. Tuberculosis is also being increasingly reported in camels, with 8.2% pooled prevalence (Annex 2 Table IV) based on comparative intradermal tests and postmortem examination of the tubercle lesions (Asmare et al. 2020). The intra-dermal tuberculin skin test has been a test of choice for field diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis in live animals but it is not well standardized and validated for camels (Jibril et al. 2018). Mamo (2011) investigated lung lesions of 906 camels and observed a 10% prevalence from which two Mycobacterium bovis and 18 non-tubercles mycobacteria were isolated. Viral diseases Camels are either susceptible to or carriers of a wide range of viral pathogens (Annex 2 Table III). Melaku et al. (2016) carried out serological tests for 11 viruses related to reproduction disorders and detected 10 of them, with a relatively high seroprevalence for bluetongue virus (76.7%), Akabane virus (46%), bovine parainfluenza virus 3 (51%), and Japanese encephalitis virus (40.2%). The finding suggests the existence of infection with the viruses or due to cross-reaction with other viruses having a common antigen. A high seroprevalence of influenza D virus (5.9 – 90.5% based on three strains) has been detected in apparently healthy camels in Ethiopia, which may imply the role of camels as a reservoir host of influenza D virus (Murakami et al. 2019). Similarly, high seroprevalence of MERS-CoV (over 70%) has been reported from camels in Ethiopia, with no information on the human cases unlike in Middle Eastern countries. Shirato and colleagues (2019) have sequenced the MERS-Cov virus isolate and found differences between the strains from the Middle East and Ethiopian camels, which may account for the absence of human MERS-CoV cases in Ethiopia. Eye problems Eye problems and night blindness (2.8%) due to vitamin A deficiency were rarely reported from camels in Ethiopia (Megersa 2010). Night blindness (nyctalopia) has been reported from camels in Sudan (Agab et al. 1993) and Eritrea (Gebrehiwet 1999). Agab and Abbas (1999) reported its prevalence in 7.5% of camels, which peaked during the dry season. Camels may also lose vision primarily due to traumatic incidents including blows, thorn shrubs on which they browse and other foreign bodies. Excessive rubbing due to irritation by flies, ticks, sarcoptic mange and pruritic diseases can lead to eye injuries with further complication caused by bacterial infections. Mineral and vitamin deficiencies Information on mineral and vitamin deficiency and related health problems is lacking in camels in Ethiopia except for a few clinical observations. Hypocalcaemia, locally known as ‘chachabsa’ (the one that breaks up), has been observed in camel herds in Borana area of Ethiopia, affecting 2.2% of breeding females during late pregnancy (Megersa 2010). It affects high milk-producing animals and manifests as hindquarter paralysis, lameness, inability to walk and recumbence like milk fever in dairy cattle. Cases of hypocalcaemia have also been observed in camel herds in Kenya (Dirie and Abdurrahman 2003) and Iran (Esmaeili et al. 2022). 23Camels in Ethiopia: An overview of demography, productivity, socio-economic value and diseases The bent neck or wry neck syndrome––‘shimbri’ or ‘shimriki’––a condition of unknown causes, was observed in camels (Megersa 2010). The syndrome has been associated with vitamin B deficiency based on responses of the cases to vitamin B treatments (Wilson 1998). Affected animals move aimlessly, fall frequently, are unable to stand properly and become recumbent. Since the animal is unable to feed properly, it starves, becomes debilitated and eventually dies. The disease has been also reported from Sudan (Agab and Abbas 1999) and Kenya (Dirie and Abdurrahman 2003). An outbreak of muscular dystrophy due to vitamin E / selenium deficiency, causing mortality of 25 camels was reported from intensive farms in the Canary Islands, Spain (Corbera et al. 2002). Observed clinical signs include weakness, reluctance to move, muscular rigidity, progressive opisthotonus, stiff gait, difficulty standing, ataxia, recumbent position, respiratory distress and death. Similarly, hypomagnesemia tetany has been observed in camel calves in Saudi Arabia, with affected calves showing tetany, star gazing and episodes of convulsions with erected ears and tail (Shoeib et al. 2019). Studies have demonstrated evidence of camels suffering from vitamin and mineral deficiency disorders, resulting in clinical disorders or toxicity like other ruminants. Thus, the health problems related to nutritional deficiency require further investigation and implementation of feasible intervention measures. 3.7 Mortality of camels by different age and sex groups The high mortality rate is the major challenge of pastoral camel husbandry in Ethiopia and elsewhere in Africa. In particular, the high calf mortality rate, as high as 30–45% (Tuffa and Baars 1998; Getahun and Kassa 2002; Hussen 2008; Fentie 2016) reported from pastoral herds is the major constraining factor to camel productivity and herd growth. The major causes of camel calf morbidity and mortality include diarrhoea, naval infections, septicaemia, respiratory infection and camel pox (Megersa 2014; Muluneh et al. 2022). Enteric infections (diarrhoea), septicaemia conditions and respiratory infections are responsible for a higher proportion of early mortalities (Megersa 2014; Muluneh et al. 2022) and require intensive health care and good calf management. Camel calf mortality figures as high as 20.4% (Zeleke and Bekele 2000), 15–20% (Megersa et al. 2008), 45% (Getahun and Kassa 2002) and 16% (Muluneh et al. 2022) have been reported for camel herds in Ethiopia. Studies in Kenya also reported camel calf mortality to be 22–32% (Kaufmann, 2003), with female calf mortality ranging from 20% to 30%. Such high camel calf mortality ultimately lowers herd productivity and population growth. Table 5 provides a summary of mortality figures by age and sex groups in which higher mortalities were reported for calves than immature and adult animals but no difference was observed between male and female animals. Comparative mortality data for different age groups and sexes are generally very limited for herds in Ethiopia except for a few outbreak reports. Most of the studies focused on calf mortality compared to adult animals (11 reports for calves versus 4 studies for adults). Hence, aggregated calf mortality is averaged to be 24%, which could be a typical mortality sta