




































 

 

 
26 

† Corresponding author 
© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

 

SUITABILITY OF TEMPERATE AND TROPICAL CROSSBRED DAIRY 

CATTLE UNDER PERI-URBAN PRODUCTION SYSTEM IN BANGLADESH 

 

NU Siddiquee1† --- M.A.Wadud2 --- MSA Bhuiyan3 --- AKMA Rahman4 --- 

M.R.Amin5 --- AKFH Bhuiyan6 

1, 3 6 Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics 

2Department of Dairy Science, Bangladesh Agricultural University 

 4Department of Medicine,, Bangladesh Agricultural University 

5Faculty of Agro Based Industry, University Malaysia Kelantan, Malaysia Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh 

Bangladesh  

 

ABSTRACT 

Suitability of temperate and tropical crossbred dairy cattle under peri-urban production system was 

investigated.The  study was conducted during a period from April, 2010 to March, 2013 in peri -urban 

dairy production system of Mymensingh district. The available dairy crossbred genotypes were 50% 

Holstein Friesian(HF)  , 62.5% HF (5/8HF), 75% HF (3/4HF).A total of 103 households, possessing 

358 lactating cows were selected where two different management environments were applied:  (i) 

Intervention (E1) group and (ii) Non-intervention (E2) group. There were a total of 158 cows registered 

from 58 households in E1 and a total of 200 non-registered cows from 145 households in E2.  Average daily 

milk yield was 8.11±0.24 kg, it is higher in 62.5% HF genotype (8.60±0.41 kg) compared to 50% 

HF(8.32±0.42 kg) and 75% HF (7.42±0.42 kg). However, the intervention group (E1) was more 

efficient with an average of 9.85 ±0.39 than non intervention group (E2) with6.38±0.28 kg. The highest 

milk yield in 180 days was found (1550±74 kg) at 62.5 % HF and lowest (1339±76) at 75% HF 

genotype.  Against, G×E interaction effects were not significant on total milk yield (TMY) and daily milk 

yield though effect of environment was highly significant (P<0.001). The shortest dry period was found in 

50% (89±2.53 days) and highest in 75% HF cross cows (102±2.72 days). The shortest age at first heat 

was found in 50 % (28±0.28) and highest in 75% (36±0.29) months. The shortest age at fist calving was 

found in 50% HF (37±0.30) and highest was in 75% HF (45±0.32) month. The shortest calving interval 

was found in 50% HF (378±8.63) and highest was in 75% HF (438±10.53) days. The shortest post-

partum heat period found in 62.5% (91±3.31) days and highest in 75% HF (109±3.72) days. The lowest 

number of services per conception found in 62.5% (1.42±0.07) and highest in75% (1.64±0.08) HF cross 

genotype. Conception rate was found shortest in 50% (71±2.66) and highest in 75% 80±2.52Holstein 

Friesian cross cows. In case of reproductive performances (number of services per conception, conception rate, 

Animal Review 
2014 Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 26-36 
ISSN(e): 2409-6490 
ISSN(p): 2412-3382 
© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

 
 
 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
27 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

age at first heat, age at first calving, dry period, calving interval), genotype,  environment  and  G x E  

interaction had highly significant effects (P<0.001). Therefore, it can be concluded that for reproduction 

50% HF crossbred cows and for production both 50% and 62.5% HF crossbred cows are suitable in small 

holder peri-urban dairying system.   

Keywords: Holstein friesian crossbred cows, Peri-urban system, Tropical region, Reproduction traits, Milk yield, 

Genotype by environment interaction. 

 

Contribution/ Originality 

This study contributes in the existing literature to inventive estimates of genotype by 

environment interactions to recommend appropriate crossbred cattle genotype to help 

Bangladeshi farmer for higher milk yield in the peri-urban area. This study uses new estimation 

of methodology to use  herd book keeping,  following breeding policy properly, Feeding 

management, Farmers training, proper recording system, etc .  

 

1. INTRODUCTION 

In order to increase milk production in the tropical region of the world, cattle crossbreeding 

programs have long been used as one of the main strategies and temperate breeds have been 

introduced in many developing countries. To meet an increasing demand for milk, the livestock 

sector in Bangladesh is undergoing rapid changes and intensive production expands by preferring 

a certain range of high-output dairy genotypes. Genetic improvement of indigenous populations 

in the tropics through pure breeding (selection) is an extremely slow process because of poor 

infrastructure and organization among local small-holder dairy farmers. The first choice of means 

for genetic improvement should be use of a superior tropical breed for upgrading. Improvement of 

indigenous zebu populations through upgrading with Bos Taurus breeds have to be carefully 

considered taking into account the perspective of not only well performing F1cows but also the 

establishment of a sustainable system in later generations.  But in order to maximize overall 

profitability, the herd must have appropriate combination of genetically high potential breeds 

along with better feeding, management and healthcare practices [1]. 

The existing cattle breeding policy of the country is a two-tier system which kept provision 

of dairy development in the country using both i) high yielding variety (HYV) cattle which are 

crossbred e.g. ½ Holstein Friesian- ½ Local, and ii) important indigenous dairy cattle types / 

breeds e.g. Red Chittagong, Pabna, Munshigonjetc. But high proportion crossbreds are not 

suitable for their maximum performance in our local environmental condition rather they need 

extra feed and other management of its origin, but our farmers are not able to provide these 

management. In addition, no attempt has yet been made in Bangladesh know the degree of 

interaction between genotype and environment (G×E). As a result, different productive and 

reproductive problem arises in these crossbreds such as late puberty, lower conception rate, lower 

milk yield, late pregnancy, anestrous, increased calf mortality, various diseases etc. An estimation 

of G x E in various traits can there after help designing appropriate measure to avoid the said 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
28 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

problems because the said improvement can be limited due to genotype by environment 

interaction. 

In the village condition, farmers are not able to develop the dairy production. The major 

constrains are choice of species, breeds, availability of animals, smart feeding management, 

improved breeding,  reproduction, animal health care, management of manure, organized  

marketing system, marketing outlet, capacity of investment. These constraints provide major 

opportunity to challenge research and develop to increase dairy production. Nowadays, in peri-

urban area peoples are very much interested of rearing the crossbred cows for more profitable 

business because of easy marketing and available resource management.  In Bangladesh, a peri-

urban area refers to a transition or interaction zone, where urban and rural activities are 

juxtaposed, and landscape features are subject to rapid modifications, inducing by human 

activities. The present study was therefore carried out to reveal the suitability of temperate and 

tropical crossbred cattle in peri-urban dairy production system of the country.  

 

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 

2.1. Place of Study 

This work was carried out at the peri-urban farmers‟ herds of Mymensingh district within 

seven kilometers around the Artificial Insemination Centre, Department of Animal Breeding and 

Genetics, Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU).                      

 

2.2. Source of Experimental Data 

The research data of the present study were collected from an on-going project titled 

“Production of HYV vis-à-vis Indigenous Seed Bulls to Support Smallholder Dairying in 

Bangladesh”, supported by Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Bangladesh 

Agricultural University (BAU), Mymensingh from April, 2010 to March, 2013 to evaluate 

productive and reproductive performances of available Holstein Friesian (HF) crossbred. An 

in-depth data collection format was prepared for collecting information on individual cows 

(mainly Holstein – Local crossbreds of different grade) in the project area. A total of 103 

households, which 358 lactating cows were selected where two different environments):  (i) 

Intervention (E1) group- where year round inputs and services such as vaccination,  de-worming 

(thrice in a year), AI using superior semen, fodder seeds and cuttings, necessary treatment, 

medicine, feces test, feeding and management advice, testing for tuberculosis (TB) and mastitis, 

management tools for mastitis control were provided on routine basis; and (ii) Non-intervention 

(E2) group-where farmers provided their animals with conventional practices.. From the study 

area a total of 158 cows were selected from 58 households on the basis of intervention group and 

200 cows were taken in non-intervention group. Data on a total of 158 lactating cows were 

collected from Holstein Friesian x Local crossbred cows. All cows were registered and every cow 

had an ID number. Non intervention group was unregistered and cows had no ID number and 

management system was traditional. 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
29 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

2.2.1. Data Structure 

The number of records in 
various traits according to 
parity, environment and 
genotype are presented in 
Table 1Trait 

Environment                Genotype (%HF) 

Intervention 
(E1) 

Non-
intervention 
(E2) 

50 62.5 75 

AFH (m) 197 150 117 131 99 
AFC (m) 197 150 117 131 99 
DP (day) 149 196 118 131 99 
CI (day) 150 198 118 131 99 
NSC (no.) 150 200 118 131 99 
CR (%) 150 98 84 76 88 
180DMY (kg) 75 140 74 78 67 
DMY(kg) 75 140 74 78 67 

AFH= Age at first heat (month), AFC=Age at first calving (month), DP=Dry period (day), CI= Calving interval (day), NSC= Number of 

service per conception, CR= Conception rate (%), DMY=Daily milk yield (kg)  

 

2.3. Herd Book Opened 

A small book, where detailed information (e .g. ID no. date of birth, sire, dam, date of 

maturity, production performance, reproduction efficiency, disease incidence, vaccination schedule 

etc.) of  an animal is being recorded in written form. Herd books were opened for every registered 

cows / heifers in the working area. 

 

2.4 Farmer’s Training 

Training on scientific cattle husbandry, record keeping and dairy production system was 

offered to the elite cattle owners. Copies of “Cattle Rearing Manual” was prepared and 

distributed among the farmers as ready reference. Capacity building of a total of 210 farmers in a 

total of 4 training sessions were conducted to date.Repeated trainings on the importance, contents 

and methods of maintaining Herd book were arranged for both the Animal Recorder and the 

farmers. 

 

2.5. Feeding and Management Practices 

Feeding and management practices followed at the farmers' herd were almost uniform 

throughout the year. Most of the crossbred animals concentrate fed were supplied twice / 

thrice daily in the morning and evening and composed of rice polish, wheat bran, bran of 

legumes and oil cakes. Among concentrates, wheat bran (29.6% for cow), oil cake (25.23% for 

cow), rice polish (18.38% for cow) are highly preferred. Rice straw was used as bulk basal feed 

with some green grasses and concentrates. Very few (around 5%) farmers' fed fresh fodder to 

their crossbred cows and road side grasses. It is also important to mention here that green 

grass supply was not on ad libitum basis because of the unavailability and seasonal fluctuations 

in the availability of green grass during different seasons of the year. 

 

 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
30 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

2.6. Milk Production Recording 

Test day (morning and evening) milk yield data were recorded on fortnightly basis. 

Moreover, all lactation parameters of elite cows were being recorded properly. Alongside, all 

other information demanded by the Herd book such as pedigree, date of birth, weight at birth, age 

and weight at weaning and maturity, disease incidence etc were being recorded through periodic 

visit to farmers‟ home by animal recorder who maintained data with the assistance of animal 

owner. 

 

2.7. Daily Milk Yield 

To get daily milk yield the whole lactation period was divided into start of lactation, peak of 

lactation and end of lactation with duration. Then the average daily milk yield was calculated 

using the following equation. 

"Total" milkyield = x1y1 +x2y2+x3y3  

Where,  

y1= milk yield at the start of lactation 

y2= milk yield at the peak of lactation 

y3= milk yield at the end of lactation 

x1, x2 and x3 denote the interval lengths of the different stages of lactation (start, peak and end)  

and they were summed up to lactation length.   

Adjusted daily mean milk yield =
                    

          
 

The average daily milk yield (DMY) of a cow was measured by: 

 

 Total milk produced in a lactationlactation 

DMY         =                                         Total number of days in the given lactation 

 

2.8. Estimation of Genotype by Environment Interaction (G × E) 

The G ×E estimation of age at first calving, number of service per conception, age at first 

calving, parity, dry period, calving interval, lower conception, milk yield,  increased calf mortality, 

various diseases etc. in dairy crossbred cattle (between Local  and Holstein Friesian) were 

measured taking two environments into consideration described above. In this study, factorial 

analysis of variance using a linear model, with an environmental factor, a genetic factor and 

interaction effect between the two factors, was fitted with genetic and interaction effects as 

random effects. 

 

 

 
 
180DMY (kg)  = 

Sum of all test day yield 
× 180 Number of test day records 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
31 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

3.1. Age at First Heat (AFH) 

Table 1 shows the least squares means (±SE) of reproductive traits of Holstein-Friesian 

crossbred cows. Age at first heat of overall Holstein-Friesian crossbred of the present study 

was 30.96±0.18 months which is higher than the findings of Majid, et al. [2]   which was 26 

months whereas, Al-Amin and Nahar [3] found an AFH of 25 months) and very similar to 

intervention group (25.39±0.23 months) of present study.  In ½ HF (50%) and (5/8) HF 

crossbred (62.5% inheritance) AFH were 28.03±0.28 and 28.69±0.25 moths which are almost 

same. But in ¾ HF (75%), it is higher (36.16±0.29 months). It was also evident that temperate 

crossbreds come into maturity at an earlier age than the breeds of tropical environment. In case of 

first heat, highly significant (P<0.001) of G x E interaction and genotype was observed.  

 

Table-1. Least squares means (±SE) of reproductive traits of Holstein-Friesian crossbred cow 

 
1Parity-calving parity; Environment-based on proper feeding, good management& health care (intervention) and conventional feeding and 
management (non-intervention); Genotype- based on % of genetic material contents;  GXE- interaction between genotype and 
environment; 2NSC- number of services per conception; CR- conception rate; AFH-age at first heat; AFC-age at first calving; *-significant 
at 0.05 level (P<0.05); **- significant at 0.01 level (P<0.01); ***- significant at 0.001 level (P<0.001); NS- non significant (P>0.05); Figures 
in the parenthesis indicate the number of observation; Means with uncommon superscripts in the same column differed significantly 
(P<0.05). 

 

3.2. Age at First Calving (AFC) 

Tropical cattle are delayed to reach sexual maturity and though there may be some 

differences between breeds it is largely influenced by environment and especially poor nutrition, 

which can retard growth and development. In the majority of breeds age at first calving is 

generally about 36-48 months [4]. Age at first calving for some breeds in Indian cattle may be 

cited here on this context for comparisons by Taneja and Bhat [5]. They reported age at first 

calving for Kankrej, Sahiwal, Tharparkar, Red Sindhi, Gir, Hariana, Deoni, Ongole and Non-

descript cattle as 47±0.8, 40±0.2, 49±0.4, 42±0.6, 47±0.8, 53±0.3, 53±1.0, 40±0.4 and 59±2.5 

months, respectively. 

In the present study overall age at first calving was 40.00±0.17 months in HF crossbred 

cows, but in Intervention group it was 35±0.26 months which were more or less similar to 

37±3.21, 39±7.1, 36±3.48 months in Holstein Friesian crosscows according to, Sarder [6] 

and Islam, et al. [7], respectively in Bangladesh. But in non intervention group it was 45±0.23 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
32 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

months whereas results of Rokonuzzaman, et al. [8], Faruk, et al. [9], Al-Amin and Nahar 

[3]which are respectively 34.00±3.78, 33.00±2.32, 34.3 months are very similar to 

intervention group in this study. In the present study average AFC for 50%, 62.5%, and 75% 

HF crossbred cows were  respectively 37.30± 0.30, 38.00± 0.28 and 44.99± 0.32 months which 

are higher than studies reported above. 

 

3.3. Dry Period (DP) 

In present study, 50%, 62.5%and 75% HF cross cows had dry period of 88.99±2.53, 

90.66±2.42 and 102.19±2.72 respectively. Qureshi, et al. [10] in Pakistan found a dry period of 

89 days in 50 to 75% HF crossbred cows which are very close to the present findings of 50%, 

62.5% and 75% HF crossbred cows. It was found that the effect of genotype, environment, G x E 

interaction were highly significant (P<0.001). Early parity cows (Table 1) showed shorter dry 

period (90 days) than the later (6+) parity cows (106 days). The highest dry period was found at 

parity six+ (106 days) and lowest dry period found at first parity (90 days) as shown in Table 2. 

The dry period was slightly variable with the increase in parity but statistically non-significant 

(P>0.05) and could be considered as aging effect.   

It is generally believed that milk yield is affected by the preceding days of dry period. 

Considering the biological limits and economics of the operation involved, many workers in 

tropical and sub-tropical regions have set a range of 40-60 days as an optimum dry period for the 

perspective of cow's health and farmer‟s profit.  This also indicates that length of dry period is 

largely influenced by environment. Pointed out that some managers of the farm are inclined to 

dry off their animals earlier to improve the herd average, while other managers go on milking the 

cows as long as it is affordable. Emphasis should be given to select the animals on the basis of 

their production level and higher persistency of lactation, which should automatically lead to a 

decrease in dry period.  

 

3.4. Calving Interval (CI) 

In the present study, overall calving interval of HF crossbred cows was 403.37± 6.27 days 

.. In the present study, 50%, 62.5%, and 75% HF crossbred cows had CI of 378.13± 8.63, 

394.17± 8.73 and 437.80±10.53 days respectively. On the other hand, Majid, et al. [2] reported   

calving intervals of 484±11.50,   514±21.63 and 515±28.28 days, respectively in 50% Friesian 

(F1), 50% Friesian (F2) and 75% Friesian (F2) crossbred cows,   Qureshi, et al. [10] in Pakistan 

found a slightly higher calving interval of 390 days in 50% HF crossbred cows than the 

present study.  The effect of parity of cows on CI was non-significant (P>0.05) though 2nd 

parity cows had lowest CI with highest in parity 6+. This might be due to the practice of selective 

culling against slow breeders in later parities and the additional nutritional requirements of cows 

in early lactation life for growth. 

 

 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
33 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

3.5. Number of Services per Conception (NSC) 

The overall service per conception of HF crossbred cows found was 1.52±0.05 in the 

present study. Al-Amin and Nahar [3] and Hoque, et al. [11] found 1.50±0.1, 1.35±0.26 

which is nearly similar to our study. Analysis of variance shows that the number of services 

per conception is strongly related to the effect of the environment and its interaction with 

genotype (p <0.001) than the effect of genotype alone (p <0.05). 

The variations of services per conception from different workers for same as well as different 

breeds might be due to different genetic make-up, nutritional status of cattle, management, and 

failure in proper heat detection or efficiency of inseminator.  

 

3.6. Conception Rate (CR) 

Conception rate is an important factor affecting herd reproduction efficiency. The overall 

conception rate of present was 76±1.78. The conception rate depends on different genetic and 

non-genetic factors as cow herself, semen quality, time of insemination, proper heat detection, 

efficiency of inseminator, proper feeding management etc. Highest conception rate was found in 

this study in third parity (80%)but no significant difference compared with other parities 

(p>0.05).While Islam, et al. [7] reported significant effect (P<0.05) of conception rate on parity. 

It is evident by many workers that age has significant cause of variation for conception rate and is 

negatively associated with reproductive performance. But in this study age/parity did not show 

any significant variation on conception rate that could be due to habitual delayed age at puberty 

in tropical cross cattle that may lead to have retained reproductive efficiency up to senility begins. 

 

3.7. 180-Day Milk Yield (180DMY) 

The overall milk yield of 180 days was 1463± 44kg (Table 2). Al-Amin and Nahar [3] found 

the highest TMY observed in 50% HF was 1837±18 kg and L× SL was 1362±13 kg. Reported 

that TMY in L×F (1765 kg). In this study, 180-day milk yield (180DMY) of 50% HF, 62.5% and 

75% HF crossbred   were 1500.33 ±76.46, 1549.79±73.86, and 1339.00±75.83 kg respectively. 

The effect of genotype was non-significant but 62.5% crossbred had higher milk yield than 75% 

HF crossbred cows. In this study environmental effect was highly significant (P<0.001). In 

intervention group,   180DMYwas 1774.02±70.46 kg and non- intervention group it was 

1152.06±51.13 kg.  The G×E interaction was non-significant (P>0.05).  The variations of 

lactation milk yield within and between breeds among different authors might obviously be due to 

animals of different origin, genetic make-up, lactation duration, feeding, management, 

environments, sample size etc. 

 

3.8. Daily Milk Yield (DMY) 

In this study, overall average daily milk yield was 8.11±0.24 kg and in 50% HF, 62.5% HF and 

75% HF crossbred genotypes it was 8.32±0.42, 8.60±0.41 and 7.42±0.42 kg respectively. The 

intervention and non-intervention group had yields of 9.85±0.39 and 6.38±0.28.respectively 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
34 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

(Table 2) which was statistically significantly different (P<0.001). Molee, et al. [12] in Thailand 

reported a daily milk yield of  11.84 kg  in < 80% HF crossbred cows which slightly higher 

than present study results. Mohamed-Khair, et al. [13] reported daily milk yield of 50%, 

62.5% and 75% HF crossbred cows were 9.77±0.30, 9.57±0.35 and 10.17±0.49 liters, 

respectively; which are almost similar with intervention group (9.85±0.39) of the present 

study.  The effect of G x E was non-significant (P>0.05). 

 

Table-2. Least squares means (±SE) of milk yield traits as affected by genotype and environment 

Factors Milk production traits 

180 day milk yield (kg) Daily milk yield (kg) 

Genotype NS NS 
50% HF 1500.33±76.46 (74) 8.32±0.42 (74) 

62.5% HF 1549.79±73.86 (78) 8.60±0.41 (78) 
75% HF 1339.00±75.83 (67) 7.42±0.42 (67) 
Environment *** *** 
Intervention 1774.02a±70.46 (75) 9.85a±0.39 (75) 
Non-intervention 1152.06b±51.13 (144) 6.38b±0.28 (144) 
G×E NS NS 
Overall mean 1463.04±43.53 (219) 8.11±0.24 (219) 

NS-Non-significant (P<0.05); ***-Significant (P<0.001); Figures in the parenthesis indicate the number of observation; Means with 

uncommon superscripts in the same column differed significantly (P<0.05); CV-co-efficient of variation; HF-Holstein-Friesian; G×E- 

Interaction between genotype and environment 

 

4. CONCLUSION 

The specific trait leads to the need for additional research to determine the effect of genotype 

by environment interaction. Inventive estimates of genotype by environment interactions to 

recommend appropriate crossbred cattle genotype to help Bangladeshi farmer for higher milk 

yield in the peri-urban area The present study indicates that the performance of 50% HF 

crossbred genotype are acceptable for the reproduction and 50% and 62.5% HF crossbred cows 

are acceptable for production under smallholder peri-urban dairying system in Bangladesh . The 

study concludes that the performance of available selected dairy genotypes crossbreds were 

favorable for the farmers Finally, herd book based farmer‟s participatory system might be one of 

the best ways to support small holder dairying in Bangladesh. 

 

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

This piece of work is a part of SPGR funded sub-project titled „‟Production HYV vis-à-vis 

Indigenous Seed Bulls to Support Smallholder Dairying in Bangladesh‟‟ whose financial support is 

gratefully acknowledged.  

 

REFERENCES 

[1] A. Bhuiyan, "Research on characterization, conservation and improvement of red Chittagong 

Cattle of Bangladesh," Final Technical Report of the USDA Funded Project, 2008. 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
35 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[2] M. A. Majid, T. N. Nahar, A. I. Talukder, and M. A. Rahman, "Factors affecting the reproductive 

efficiency of crossbred cows," Bangladesh Journal of Livestock Research, vol. 2, pp. 18-22, 1995. 

[3] M. Al-Amin and A. Nahar, "Productive and reproductive performance of non-descript (Local) and 

crossbred dairy cows in costal area of Bangladesh," Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 

vol. 2, pp. 46-49, 2007. 

[4] J. Maule, The cattle of the tropics. Edinburg, U.K.: University of Edinburg Centre for Tropical 

Veterinary Medicine, 1990. 

[5] V. Taneja and P. Bhat, "Milk and beef production in tropical environments," In 3rd World 

Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Lincoln, Nebraska, July 1986, 1986. 

[6] M. J. U. Sarder, "A comparative study on reproductive performance of cross-bred dairy cows at 

greater rajshahi district," Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, vol. 5, pp. 679-685, 2006. 

[7] M. N. Islam, M. M. Rahman, and S. Faruque, "Reproductive performance of different crossbred 

and indigenous dairy cattle under small holder farming condition in Bangladesh," Online Journal of 

Biological Sciences, vol. 2, pp. 205-207, 2002. 

[8] M. Rokonuzzaman, M. R. Hassan, S. Islam, and S. Sultana, "Productive and reproductive 

performance of crossbred and indigenous dairy cows under smallholder farming system," Journal of 

Bangladesh Agricultural University, vol. 7, pp. 69–72, 2009. 

[9] O. M. Faruk, M. H. Emran, and M. M. Hassan, "Productive and reproductive performance of 

crossbred and indigenous dairy cows under rural conditions in Comilla, Bangladesh," Journal of 

Zoology Rajshahi University, vol. 26, pp. 67-70, 2007. 

[10] M. S. Qureshi, J. M. Khan, IHkhan, R. A. Chaudhry, K. Ashraf, and B. D. Khan, "Improvement in 

economic traits of local cattle through crossbreeding with Holstein-Friesian semen," Pakistan 

Veterinary Journal, vol. 22, pp. 21-26, 2002. 

[11] M. A. Hoque, M. R. Amin, and M. S. Hussen, "Dairy potential of Pabna cows and crossbreds with 

Sahiwal and Friesian and within and between breed sire effect," Asian-Australian Journal of Animal 

Sciences, vol. 12, pp. 161-164, 1999. 

[12] A. B. Molee, P. Bundasak, Kuadsantiat, and P. Mernkrathoke, "Suitable percentage of holstein in 

crossbred dairy cattle in climate change situation," Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, vol. 

10, pp. 828-831, 2011. 

[13] A. A. Mohamed-Khair, T. B. Ahmed, L. A. Musa, and K. J. Peters, "Milk production and 

reproduction traits of different grades of zebu x friesian crossbreds under semi-arid conditions," 

Archive fuerTierzucht, Dummerstorf, vol. 50, pp. 240-249, 2007. 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

[1] A. Bhuiyan, "Production of genetically potential breeding bulls for cattle development in 

Bangladesh," Keynote Paper Presented at the National Workshop- 2007 on Breed Up Gradation 

Through Progeny Testing Project, Government of Bangladesh, BIAM Conference Hall, Dhaka, 

2007b. 



Animal Review, 2014, 1(2): 26-36 

 

 
36 

© 2014 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 

[2] A. K. F. H. Bhuiyan, "Cattle breeding and improvement strategy in Bangladesh- past, present and 

future," Presented at a National Seminar Organized by the Directorate of Livestock Services, 

Government of the People‟s Republic of Bangladesh, 1997a. 

[3] E. P. Cunningham and O. Syrstad, "Crossbreedng bosindicus and bostuarus for milk production in  

the tropics," FAO Animal Production and Health, p. 68, 1987. 

[4] M. N. Haque, S. A. Aziz, S. Chanda, M. I. Hossain, and M. A. Baset, "A study of the milking and 

reproductive performances of indigenous cattle at urban area of Bangladesh," Pakistan Journal of 

Biological Sciences, vol. 5, pp. 97-100, 2002. 

[5] S. S. Islam and A. K. H. Bhuiyan, "Performance of crossbred Sahiwal cattle at the Pabna milk shed 

area in Bangladesh," Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Sciences, vol. 10, pp. 581-586, 1997. 

[6] J. Mwacharo and J. Rege, "On-farm characterization of the indigenous small East African 

Shorthorn Zebu cattle (SEAZ) in the Southeast Rangelands of Kenya," Animal Genetic Resources 

Information, vol. 32, pp. 73-86, 2002. 

[7] T. N. Nahar, M. Islam, and M. A. Hasnath, "A comparative study on the performances of F1 

crossbred cows under rural conditions," Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Sciences, vol. 5, pp. 435-

438, 1992. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Views and opinions expressed in this article are the views and opinions of  the author(s), Animal Review shall not be responsible or 
answerable for any loss, damage or liability etc. caused in relation to/arising out of  the use of  the content. 

 

 

 


