Ethnoveterinary knowledge documentation through extension interactions for integrating traditional animal healthcare

Introduction

Roughly three-quarters of rural households in South Asia keep livestock, yet formal veterinary services reach fewer than 30% regularly [1] . This gap has preserved rich traditions of ethnoveterinary medicine predating modern veterinary science by centuries. Ethnoveterinary knowledge (EVK) refers to local practices, beliefs, and remedies used by farming communities to maintain animal health [2] . Despite widespread use, this knowledge remains largely undocumented and risks being lost as older generations pass on [3] . Agricultural extension agents interact regularly with farming households, creating natural opportunities to observe and record traditional practices [4,5] . Yet extension systems have historically focused on transferring modern technologies rather than capturing local knowledge [6] . Recent scholarship calls for participatory models recognizing farmers as knowledge holders [7] . Integrating validated EVK into advisory content could improve relevance, reduce treatment costs, and preserve cultural heritage [8] . This research documented EVK through extension interactions in Mymensingh district and assessed pathways for integrating traditional practices into advisory frameworks [9] .

Research area description

Mymensingh district lies in north-central Bangladesh (24.75°N, 90.41°E), with mean annual rainfall of 2,174 mm and temperatures from 12°C to 36 °C. The district supports dense livestock populations of cattle, goats, and poultry [10] . Traditional animal healthcare practices remain common in remote sub-districts where veterinary clinics are sparse.

Material and Methods

Material

The research covered 276 livestock-keeping households from four sub-districts of Mymensingh, selected through multi-stage random sampling. A structured questionnaire captured demographics, livestock holdings, and EVK practices. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 traditional healers identified through snowball sampling. Participatory group discussions (n=12) facilitated crossvalidation of reported remedies [11] .

Methods

Data collection ran from June 2021 through August 2022 at Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh. Extension agents (n=18) received two-day training on EVK documentation protocols. Knowledge documentation followed a standardized format recording remedy name, ingredients, preparation, dosage, target ailment, and efficacy [12] . Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests; qualitative data were coded thematically. Documentation rates were compared using independent t-tests [13] . Ethics approval was granted (Protocol BAU-REC-2021-048, May 2021). www.extensionjournal.com

Ethical considerations

The BAU Research Ethics Committee approved this research (Protocol BAU-REC-2021-048, 20 May 2021). All participants provided oral informed consent in Bengali.

Traditional healers were assured documented knowledge would be attributed to community ownership. Participants could withdraw without consequence. Digestive disorders accounted for the largest share (28.7%), with plant-based remedies dominating wound management (78.6%) and digestive categories (72.0%). Trained agents documented more practices per agent (6.8 vs. 4.1) and achieved higher detail completeness (82.4% vs. 58.3%).

Results

Comprehensive interpretation

The 87 documented practices revealed a structured knowledge system organized around recognizable ailment categories, with 43 plant species identified. Chi-square analysis showed significant association between knowledge source and ailment type (χ2=18.74, df=8, p=0.016).

Discussion

Elderly farmers being the primary EVK source (34.7%) reinforces concerns about knowledge erosion as older generations age without documentation [3] . Trained agents achieving higher documentation rates supports the argument that EVK capture requires specific skills beyond standard training [14] . The concentration of plant-based remedies for digestive and wound categories aligns with McCorkle's [2] observation that herbal treatments cluster around ailments with visible symptoms.

The pathway model provides a structured approach for moving from raw knowledge to validated advisory content. But integration faces challenges including validation costs, liability concerns, and conflicts with veterinary regulatory frameworks [15,16] . Extension systems treating EVK as an add-on rather than core function are unlikely to sustain such efforts [17] .

Limitations

This research was limited to one district, so findings may not represent EVK diversity across Bangladesh. The crosssectional design captured current knowledge but didn't track knowledge loss over time. Efficacy validation was beyond this investigation's scope.

Conclusion

This research documented 87 distinct ethnoveterinary practices across five ailment categories through extension interactions in Mymensingh, Bangladesh. Elderly farmers and traditional healers together accounted for over 60% of documented knowledge sources. Training extension agents in EVK documentation protocols significantly improved both quantity and quality of captured knowledge. The integration pathway offers a practical framework for incorporating validated traditional practices into extension advisory services, potentially improving animal healthcare access for resource-poor livestock keepers.

Acknowledgement

Acknowledgements Funding sourcesThis research was supported by institutional funds from Bangladesh Agricultural University. Institutional supportThe authors acknowledge facilities and support from the Department of Agricultural Extension at Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh.

References

1. Ahuja V, Rajasekhar M, Raju R. Animal health for poverty alleviation: A review of key issues for South Asia. Livestock Policy Discussion Paper. 2008;13:1-28.
2. McCorkle CM. An introduction to ethnoveterinary research and development. Journal of Ethnobiology. 1986;6(1):129-149.
3. Mathias E. Ethnoveterinary medicine: Harnessing its potential. Veterinary Bulletin. 2004;74(8):27-37.
4. Swanson BE, Bentz RP, Sofranko AJ. Improving Agricultural Extension: A Reference Manual. Rome: FAO; 1997.
5. Chambers R, Pacey A, Thrupp LA. Farmer First: Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research. London: Intermediate Technology Publications; 1989.
6. Qamar MK. Modernizing national agricultural extension systems: A practical guide for policy-makers. Rome: FAO; 2005.
7. Leeuwis C. Communication for Rural Innovation: Rethinking Agricultural Extension. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 2004.
8. Katerere DR, Luseba D. Ethnoveterinary Botanical Medicine: Herbal Medicines for Animal Health. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2010.
9. Islam MA, Hossain MM, Siddiqui MAR. Livestock production and management in Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Animal Sciences. 2015;9(4):141-156.
10. BBS. District Statistics 2019: Mymensingh. Dhaka: Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics; 2020.
11. Sillitoe P. The development of indigenous knowledge: A new applied anthropology. Current Anthropology. 1998;39(2):223-252.
12. Martin GJ. Ethnobotany: A Methods Manual. London: Chapman and Hall; 1995.
13. Patton MQ. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2002.
14. Tabuti JRS, Dhillion SS, Lye KA. Ethnoveterinary medicines for cattle in Bulamogi county, Uganda. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2003;88(2-3):279-286.
15. Wanzala W, Zessin KH, Kyule NM, Baumann MPO, Mathia E, Hassanali A. Ethnoveterinary medicine: A critical review of its evolution. International Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 2005;4(2):141-158.
16. Mishra D. Cattle and buffalo diseases in the Eastern Terai region of Nepal: Ethnoveterinary perspectives. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 2009;41(7):1175-1181.
17. Moreki JC, Poroga B, Dikeme R, Seabo D. Ethnoveterinary medicine practices among livestock farmers in central district of Botswana. Journal of Animal Science Advances. 2012;2(suppl 3):388-395.
18. Pieroni A, Howard P, Volpato G, Ferrara RF. Crosscultural ethnobiology in the western Balkans. Human Ecology. 2004;32(4):435-463.
19. Raziq A, de Verdier K, Younas M. Ethnoveterinary treatments by dromedary camel herders in Pakistan. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine. 2010;6:16.