Randomized trial assesses success and impact of pig multiplier units and artificial insemination on farmers' fields, highlighting economic benefits.
Small-scale scavenging pig farming is less economically viable and meets individual demands only. To meet the country's demands, establishment of pig multiplier units and the popularization of artificial insemination (AI) at farmers’ fields are essential. In the present study, 44 households were provided with interventions such as knowledge scale-up on piggery, AI, and essential veterinary aids, along with one-time physical incentives. The success, farmers’ attitudes, impact, and constraints were assessed for the establishment of pig multiplier units and use of AI in these units. Comparative production performance and economics from AI to natural breeding werealso assessed separately. In results, a total of 26 farmers (59.09%) were successful while 18 farmers (40.90%) were unsuccessful in establishing the multiplier units. Pig farmers (%) had a medium to high level of favorable attitude towards the establishment of multiplier units (55.36% to 32.64%) and the use of AI (50.25 % to 42.35%). After interventions of pig multiplier units and AI, a significant (p<0.05) improvement in average herd size, sale of piglets, net income, B:C ratio, reduction in the cost of production and mortality was observed. In comparison to natural breeding, AI interventions were found to be significantly (p<0.05) more productive and cost-effective. The most common constraints faced by farmers were high feed cost, doorstep availability of semen dose/boar, distance andtimely artificial or natural service. In conclusion, pig multiplier units and AI in pigs were cost-effective technologies to propagate and repopulate pigs to meet the demands of piggery stakeholders.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
KUMAR et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: