A Community-Based Breeding Program as a Genetic Resource Management Strategy of Indonesian Ongole Cattle

Abstract

It is essential to manage genetic resources, especially in local livestock breeds, to establish an equilibrium among livestock, humans, and the environment for sustainable development in conservation. Genetic resource management is necessary to overcome challenges to increasing productivity while ensuring environmental sustainability and climate resilience. Attempts to overcome these challenges have led to the threat of genetic erosion through uncontrolled crossbreeding, particularly threatening the hybrid vigor of indigenous breeds, such as Indonesian Ongole cattle. Considering community-based breeding as a viable management strategy for systematic livestock breeding, this study aimed to design a community-based breeding program for Indonesian Ongole cattle. The profile of socio-ecological community and genetic resources were studied using a purposive random sampling technique within an effective population size as a case study; both the respondents and the objects of the study were investigated. The study revealed that indigenous knowledge and livelihood-supported institutions are crucial to genetic resource management practices in cattle breeding. These factors are shown to be strategic priorities when designing community-based breeding programs. This approach to design empowers local cooperatives to operate a community-based breeding program for Indonesian Ongole cattle by standardizing an integrated system for selecting incentive initiatives using big data.

1. Introduction

Indonesian Ongole cattle, named PO cattle, are one of the local cattle breeds that make up part of Indonesia’s natural resources; they are the result of “grading up” the Indonesian Zebu breed, which can be successfully crossed with other breeds, especially the taurine breed [1]. This potential for crossbreeding is vital for producing a hybrid vigor breed to increase productivity and contribute to global food security and nutrition for human well-being, which is a focal point of the UN Sustainable Development Goals [2]. Uncontrolled crossbreeding via artificial insemination (AI), and an increase in the slaughtering of productive cows to meet the demand for beef, may jeopardize the breed’s existence through genetic erosion [3,4]. Utilizing the breed exclusively within its own reproduction system (using on-farm conservation as a genetic resource management strategy) is essential to mitigating this threat; this is particularly pertinent to cattle, which are a vital livestock commodity in rural areas with suitable agroclimatic conditions, in addition to their social, cultural, and religious value [3,5].

This genetic resource is classified as biotic, as livestock originates in the biosphere. It is necessary to protect this genetic resource from depletion by exploring how management can influence the quality of life of present and future generations [2,5]. An on-farm conservation strategy was the management system chosen for this study, encouraging a multifaceted set of interventions to increase livestock production and employing a nucleus-based breeding system in livestock-breeding regions. This is a feasible strategy for sustainably conserving the livestock’s genetic resources, as it involves properly managing local genetic resources and strengthening local institutions to support breeding activities through active farmer participation [6,7]. Attention to biological, genetic, and cultural factors (such as those centered on the government’s contribution to establishing conservation policy and supporting the management of local resources) is essential for ensuring the sustainability of livestock development and genetic improvement as an effective on-farm conservation strategy in the region [7,8].

The purpose of the conservation activity was to construct a program centered on the development of sites with local livestock breed genetic resources facing challenges in their ability to provide nutritious and diverse food while simultaneously ensuring environmental sustainability and climate resilience [9]. The development of these sites is congruent with the development of the rural area, which is characterized by low-input systems with limited geographical boundaries; a community-based approach was vital for overcoming this constraint. Thus, community-based conservation (CBC) was considered as an approach to improve genetic resource management. CBC is defined as conservation effort that integrates the interests and opinions of the local community in undertaking biodiversity management activities to ensure the survival of sustainable ecosystems [10,11]. Hence, CBC links the development and engagement of the local community to their institutional participation as active stakeholders in natural resource management activities, which include the genetic resources of the local livestock breed as an expected end product [12,13].

The project initiated a “community-based breeding program” (CBBP), which engaged the community’s interest in maximizing the potential benefits of support schemes for their livelihoods and cultural values by means of the on-farm conservation strategy. These values were implemented by the community working together to manage local livestock’s genetic resources, which necessitated community–institution collaboration [14]. CBBPs can provide alternative methods to conserve local livestock’s genetic resources by utilizing and developing them as a viable approach to systematic livestock breeding in the context of low-input smallholder farming [15]. CBBPs can, thus, be designed and implemented as local livestock genetic resource management programs, with well-defined breeding objectives to increase productivity and sustain the livelihoods of their keepers while conserving unique genetic resources [16].

A CBBP for local livestock breeding—particularly for ruminant (cattle and related) livestock, a crucial livestock commodity in most developing countries, especially in Asia—warranted urgent design. The unique genetic resources of Indonesian cattle, notably PO cattle, made them viable candidates to be the subject of our case study, in conjunction with practices and routines for the management of agriculture and natural resources. These factors are influenced by climate, and socio-ecological parameters are also worth comparing. This study aimed to design a CBBP for natural resource management specific to the genetic resources of PO cattle. The results will contribute to the broader literature on the value of CBBPs for local cattle in conserving genetic diversity and their usefulness in improving community livelihoods when used as primary resource management strategies.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. The Study Region and Site Selection

This was a descriptive case study with an Indonesian breed resource site and a base population of PO cattle. The village of Napis, in the Bojonegoro regency in the Indonesian province of East Java, was chosen as the study site. This regency is regarded as one of the most vital national cattle production sites, as outlined in the establishment of priority commodity areas for beef cattle in accordance with Decree No. 472/Kpts/RC.040/6/2018 of the Minister of Agriculture on the Location of National Agricultural Areas [17]. According to a recent study, the majority of the beef cattle herds in Napis village, a forest community, are PO cattle. Napis village, with its agro-forestry ecology, is vital to the PO cattle population base in this regency. The forest encompasses approximately 4000 hectares, 79% of the total land area of this hamlet (49% teak forest and 30% seasonal forest). The remainder is agricultural land, including rainfed paddy fields, villages, highways, and rivers. The rainfed system is advantageous due to the area’s average annual rainfall (1239 mm), average temperature (28.38 degrees Celsius), average relative humidity (82.08%), average wind velocity (4.47 m/second), and average solar radiation (52.43%) [18].

2.2. The Study Methods

Study site selection was based on the presence of PO cattle suited to particular settings and production objectives, with both natural and human environmental factors playing a role in its conservation. Conservation of the base population, which is the genetic resource site in natural resource management of local livestock, can be achieved through a structured breeding program based on socio-ecological support of the base population. Monitoring the status of the base population and its existing breeds as genetic resources is essential for conserving the base population, and requires analysis of biological, genetic, and cultural factors. The population’s status reflects its history and the role of its phenotypical appearance in sustaining the breed’s population structure under selection for production traits in an agricultural environment [8].

Accordingly, these factors must be incorporated into a strategy for genetic resource management using a CBBP design. CBBP is a recognized strategy for systematic livestock breeding in low-input farming contexts, embracing the necessary dynamics in genetic resource management [15]. These dynamics reflect the interests and opinions of the local community, which serve as the drivers and motivations for elements of CBC [11,12,13].

Therefore, this study used a descriptive, cross-sectional, case-study design, examining data from a population without manipulating the participants’ circumstances or experiences. This observational design can describe the characteristics of a community but cannot determine cause-and-effect links among factors [19].

The PO cattle population was subdivided on the basis of the population’s characteristics, ensuring adequate population sizes. PO cattle characteristics were determined on the basis of the farmers’ unpublished data in each hamlet, including age, sex, vital phenotypic traits, lineage, and owner, which were validated during data collection. The effective population sizes of PO cattle were established prior to the selection of PO cattle for study and the identification of respondents by purposive random sampling. The effective population size is also vital to determine the level of genetic erosion on the basis of the rate of inbreeding.

A socio-ecological profile of the community and the genetic resource potential of the PO cattle at the study site was used to determine CBC factors in order to design the CBBP; a genetic resource management strategy was developed on the basis of the prioritized factors to meet the study objectives. The Quantitative Strategic Programming Matrix (QSPM) method, which is based on a SWOT-Analytic Hierarchy Process (SWOT-AHP) analysis employing numerical values, was used to determine these priorities. This form of quantitative analysis can identify and prioritize strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for the action plan [20]. The quantitative data for this study, such as the socio-ecological community profile and the genetic resource profile of the PO cattle, were evaluated using descriptive statistics.

2.3. Data Collection

Primary data on the socio-ecological community were collected using the triangulation method (semi-structured questionnaires, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews) [19]. These approaches focus on the characteristics of the respondents, their socio-economic circumstances, their ecological support circumstances, their business environment, and their breeding management practices, using an indigenous knowledge approach and a reliable survey instrument.

One hundred PO cattle keepers were selected using purposive random sampling; all participants kept the effective population size of PO cattle, were the head of their household, and had more than five years of cattle-breeding experience. Among these, one village chief and eleven hamlet chiefs were identified as key informants. Eighty-eight respondents completed the semi-structured questionnaires, and the twelve key informants participated in key informant interviews to verify and explore the answers. The twelve key informants also participated in focus group discussions to identify and evaluate internal and external CBC factors for genetic resource management strategies, which were used in designing the PO cattle CBBP.

The triangulation method was combined with the census method to validate the farmers’ unpublished data. These data were also used to determine the potential genetic profiles of PO cattle herds within effective population size. The group of farmers kept data on the PO cattle population and its phenotypic performance. Its members have been trained in recording data since 2011 by the PO cattle cluster program, which was started by the Central Bank, the government, and universities to provide a data bank for farmer groups.

The PO cattle’s population structure is crucial in investigating the risks of inbreeding and random drift and determining conservation status [21]. The essential aspects of population structure are actual population (N_a) and effective population size (N_e). N_a is used to determine N_e, which is one of the most significant parameters in evolutionary and conservation biology, containing relevant information for monitoring livestock diversity [22]. N_e also assists in predicting the loss of genetic diversity and fitness in small breeding populations, as well as the pattern and extent of genetic variation observed within populations [23]. On the basis of information from the PO cattle population, N_e was determined using the following procedure [24]:

N_e = (4N_smN_sf)/N_a,

(1)

N_a = N_sm + N_sf

(2)

N_e is used to estimate the rate of inbreeding (ΔF), indicating genetic extinction crisis status under current breeding management practices at the study site, using the following formula [24]:

ΔF = 1/(2N_e)

(3)

where N_a is the number of stud cattle in the population; N_sm is the number of PO stud (bulls); N_sf is the number of PO stud (cows); and N_e is the effective population size. The tabulation of secondary data on yearling weight was corrected using suitable formulas to an age of 360 days, as the yearling periods were not determined at the same time by the PO cattle keeper, using the following formula [25]:

$$\mathrm{YW}365=\left(\right((\mathrm{AYW} - \mathrm{WW}205)/\mathrm{AA})\times 160 + \mathrm{WW}205) (\mathrm{CFS})$$

(4)

where BW is birth weight measured within 24 h after birth; AA is actual age in days at weighing; AYW is weight measured at approximately 365 days of age; CFDA is the correction factor of the dam’s age; and CFS is the correction factor of the calf’s sex.

Additionally, the socio-ecological community profile and PO cattle genetic resource profile were determined as the alternative strategy formulas on the basis of the FGD results and conclusions which were agreed upon by the researchers and the key informants, implementing people-centered principles to design an effective conservation strategy for PO cattle. These results were classified as internal and external factors, namely IFE (Internal Factor Evaluation) and EFE (External Factor Evaluation) for scoring in the matrix table for the SWOT–AHP analysis. These score intersections were used to determine strategic priorities, using QSPM for hierarchal score ranking [20].

3. Results

3.1. The Potential Analysis Results

To achieve the study aims, the population structure and environmental support (as influenced factors of breeding management operations) must be identified, as it is the basis of a structured breeding program. Population structure is crucial in determining the genetic extinction status of a breed on the basis of its effective population size. Environmental support is determined from the socio-ecological profile on the basis of the population structure. From this point of view, the effective population size is necessary for determining (1) the genetic resource potential of PO cattle on the basis of data from the population (

Table 1. PO cattle population structure at Napis village *.

Hamlet Identity			Cattle Composition
No.	Name	Number of Owners	Male				Female				Total
			Calf	Young	Mature	Stud (Bull)	Calf	Young	Mature	Stud (Cow)
1.	Napis	123	36	30	6	3	38	36	71	24	244
2.	Dolog	99	35	28	3	2	20	40	67	21	216
3.	Doplang	146	53	35	6	9	42	60	59	81	345
4.	Windu	99	22	41	2	2	18	35	79	21	220
5.	Kalidandang	166	62	35	3	7	83	70	127	59	446
6.	Jubleg	80	22	5	0	2	28	8	81	18	164
7.	Pencol	76	9	12	5	3	20	26	53	22	150
8.	Daplangu	142	73	25	4	4	32	20	161	37	356
9.	Bagi	139	55	20	16	12	22	44	47	108	324
10.	Koripan	151	38	80	10	8	20	52	46	72	326
11.	Tawaran	176	75	60	7	5	52	72	131	47	449
Total		1397	480	371	62	57	375	463	922	510	3240

Source: The farmer groups’ data. * The study site.

) and (2) quantitative data on the respondents’ socio-ecological profile (

Table 2. Respondent profile for PO cattle breeding at Napis village *.

Profile		Respondents (N = 88)
		Total	%
Age	<35 years	13	14.77
	35–50 years	45	51.14
	50 years	30	34.09
Education level	Non-educated	23	26.14
	Elementary school	50	56.82
	High school	15	17.04
Livelihood	Farmer	69	78.41
	Trader	3	3.41
	Forest product craftsman	16	18.18
Land size coverage	<250 square meters	3	3.41
	250–2500 square meters	56	63.64
	>2500 square meters	29	32.95
Land use	Not used	1	1.14
	Pasture utilization	11	12.50
	Farming	76	86.36
PO cattle ownership	Own	52	59.09
	Rowdy	12	13.64
	Mixed ownership	24	27.27
Predominant income	Farming	75	85.23
	Cattle trading	3	3.41
	Mixed income	10	11.36
Farming type	Mixed farming	88	100.00
Supporting institution for
Household’s economic	Bank	71	80.68
	Cooperative	15	17.05
	Other	2	2.27
Trusted information source	Extension program	4	4.55
	Traditional/conventional	66	75.00
	News and social media	18	20.45
Social	Family	84	95.45
	Breeder/farmer group	4	4.55

* The study site.

).

N_a = 57 + 510 = 567,

(5)

N_e = (4 × 57 × 510)/567 ≈ 205

(6)

ΔF = 1/(2 × 205) = 0.0024 = 0.24%

(7)

It is also essential to profile existing PO cattle genetic resources based on the heritability value of cattle body conformations as another factor in the conservation strategy, as shown in

Table 3. PO cattle genetic resources profile at Napis village * (N = 169).

Trait	σ2a	σ2e	σ2p	h2	Status
Measured at birth
Body weight (kg)	16.04	4.00 × 10−8	16.04	1.00 (6.71 × 105)	3
Body length (cm)	25.43	5.78 × 107	25.43	1.00 (7.42 × 104)	1
Body height (cm)	27.44	5.78	33.22	0.83 (1.59)	1
Chest girth (cm)	47.13	7.64 × 107	47.13	1.00 (1.19 × 104)	1
Measured at yearling age
Body weight (kg)	925.20	255.16	1180.36	0.78 (0.54)	1
Body length (cm)	82.69	3.89 × 106	82.69	1.000 (4.27 × 104)	3
Body height (cm)	55.17	43.49	98.66	0.56 (0.47)	1
Chest girth (cm)	174.81	21.83	196.64	0.89 (0.55)	1

Source: The farmer groups’ data. * The study site; values in parentheses are standard error (SE), Status 1: optimization finished and terminated with a small gradient, Status 3: a lowest optimization point cannot be found [26].

.

PO cattle’s genetic resources were also profiled on the basis of the number of calves born, reflecting the genetic potential of their sires. This was determined on the basis of the body weight of the sires in relation to the number of calves born using different mating methods, as shown in

Table 4. The number of calves born in relation to the body weights of their sires at Napis village *.

Sire’s Code	Age (days)	Body Weight (kg)	Number of Calves Born	The Hamlet Coverage Area (Mating Method Used)
AR041-21461	2250	728	54	1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 (AI mating)
AQ078-21051	2370	783	48	1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11 (AI mating)
SS0915-21431	3660	668	53	1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11 (AI mating)
S-050131	1800	368	13	4, 5 (natural mating)
S-050231	2160	382	11	4, 5 (natural mating)
S-050331	720	360	11	4, 5 (natural mating)
S-100131	1890	381	5	10, 11 (natural mating)
S-110131	1440	323	10	10, 11 (natural mating)

Source: The farmer groups’ data. A total of 169 calves were born as paternal half-siblings, and 36 calves were born as full siblings. * The study site.

.

The ages and body weights of sires AR041-21461, AQ078-21051, and SS0915-2142 were determined using the frozen semen production record from the national AI center utilized for AI mating. In contrast, the ages and body weights of the sires utilized for breeding in hamlets were based on actual records. Age was recorded to capture increases in the sire’s producing period’s growing phase. Reflecting how cattle breeding is managed, body weight was chosen as the phenotypic performance trait for cattle selection from generation to generation.

The sires employed in the natural mating method in hamlet breeding must be assessed in light of underlying factors. A three-dimensional 2 × 2 × 2 contingency table and a log-linear model were used, employing maximum likelihood analysis for predicted frequency values (see

Table 5. The contingency table of the hamlet breeding trust level (N = 93).

PO Cattle Keeper’s Experience	Trust Level of the Hamlet Breeding	Hamlet Breeding Practiced Frequency	Maximum Likelihood Predicted Values for Frequencies
			Observed		Predicted		Residual
			Frequency	Std. Error	Frequency	Std. Error
5–15 years	High level	Always	26	4.33	26.08	4.28	−0.08
		Often	12	3.23	11.92	3.15	0.08
	Low level	Always	18	3.81	17.92	3.74	0.08
		Often	12	3.23	12.08	3.17	−0.08
>15 years	High level	Always	17	3.73	16.92	3.66	0.08
		Often	2	1.40	2.08	1.25	−0.08
	Low level	Always	5	2.18	5.08	2.08	−0.08
		Often	1	0.99	0.92	0.66	0.08

). It was hypothesized that the relationships between the experience of PO cattle keepers, levels of trust, and the frequency of hamlet breeding practice could explain the underlying factors.

3.2. Strategic Analysis Results

These potential analysis results must be used to create a genetic resource management strategy for PO cattle at the study site, aiming to conserve genetic resources in the PO cattle base population while incorporating the interests and perspectives of the local community regarding their livelihood. SWOT–AHP analysis with IFE and EFE matrices was used to determine this strategy.

Table 6. The Internal Factor Evaluation (IFE) matrix of SWOT analysis of the genetic resource management strategy for PO cattle.

Element	Internal Factor		Weight	Rating	Score
Strength	S–1	The essential role of indigenous knowledge in communities’ livelihoods	0.14	4	0.56
	S–2	The family institution predominates in local communities livelihoods	0.12	3	0.36
	S–3	Religion and culture predominate in communities’ livelihoods	0.12	3	0.36
	S–4	PO cattle ownership status as a conservation incentive	0.10	4	0.40
	S–5	PO cattle breeding as a conservation practice	0.14	4	0.56
	Total strength score		0.62	18	2.24
Weakness	W–1	The essential role of traditional/conventional informational institutions for PO cattle conservation practice	0.04	1	0.10
	W–2	The essential role of brotherhood financial institutions for emergency cash	0.06	1	0.08
	W–3	The essential role of farmer’s livelihoods in PO cattle conservation practice	0.10	2	0.20
	W–4	Conservation incentives as extra income	0.10	1	0.10
	W–5	Family members involved in PO cattle conservation practice	0.08	2	0.16
	Total weakness score		0.38	7	0.64
Total strength + weakness score			1.00	25	2.88
Internal score (strength − weakness)					1.60

shows the IFE matrix for SWOT analysis. SWOT analysis identifies the internal factors as strengths (S) and weaknesses (W).

Table 7. The External Factor Evaluation (EFE) matrix of SWOT analysis of the genetic resource management strategy for PO cattle.

Element	External Factor		Weight	Rating	Score
Opportunities	O–1	The cooperative predominates in the supporting socio-economic institutions	0.12	3	0.36
	O–2	Adaptable information technology predominates in supporting information institutions	0.08	3	0.24
	O–3	Side job roles in livelihood and PO cattle conservation	0.10	4	0.40
	O–4	Participation in forest management for livelihood and conservation	0.10	4	0.40
	O–5	Fewer institutions’ awareness of PO cattle conservation	0.10	3	0.30
	Total opportunities score		0.50	17	1.70
Threats	T–1	The essential role of the bank among supporting financial institutions	0.14	2	0.28
	T–2	The breeder/farmer group supporting production facilities	0.10	1	0.10
	T–3	Market price as a determinator of income	0.12	2	0.24
	T–4	The changing seasonal pattern with climate change	0.08	1	0.08
	T–5	PO cattle crossbreeding and technological adaptation as genetic erosion threats	0.06	2	0.12
	Total threats score		0.50	8	0.82
Total opportunities + threats score			1.00	25	2.52
External score (opportunities − threats)					0.88

represents the external environment in terms of opportunities (O) and threats (T) using the EFE matrix.

An internal score of 1.60 and an external score of 0.88 were determined for aggressive strategies in the first quadrants of the IFE and EFE matrices, respectively, and were placed on the positive X and Y axes. On the basis of the integration results for the five strength (S) elements and the five opportunity (O) elements in the SWOT analysis, five alternative aggressive strategies were developed. These alternative aggressive strategies focused on community-based issues. They included community-based institutions supporting socioeconomic livelihoods, a breeding program for structuring the production system, the impact of indigenous knowledge on the conservation of genetic diversity, improving technology, and community-based empowerment and participation, stimulating the system to enhance livelihoods and conservation. These alternative aggressive strategies are listed in

Table 8. Genetic resource management for PO cattle (aggressive strategies).

Internal Factor: Strength (S) Q1: S–O (Aggressive Strategy)
SO–1	Integrating the cooperative and the family into a community supporting livelihoods
SO–2	PO cattle-breeding program practiced with conservation incentives to increase the cooperative’s awareness
SO–3	PO cattle-breeding program based on indigenous knowledge and adaptable information technology
SO–4	Integrated PO cattle-production system, with base population conservation instituted in the local community’s economic institutions
SO–5	Revitalization of the local community, based on religion and culture, to support livelihood and conservation

and prioritized in

Table 9. The Quantitative Strategic Programming Matrix (QSPM) of the genetic resource management of PO cattle aggressive strategy at Napis village *.

Key Factor	Weight	SO–1		SO–2		SO–3		SO–4		SO–5
		AS	TAS	AS	TAS	AS	TAS	AS	TAS	AS	TAS
S–1	0.14	2	0.28	1	0.14	4	0.56	1	0.14	2	0.28
S–2	0.12	3	0.36	1	0.12	1	0.12	2	0.24	2	0.36
S–3	0.12	1	0.12	1	0.12	1	0.12	2	0.24	4	0.48
S–4	0.10	2	0.20	3	0.30	2	0.20	2	0.20	2	0.20
S–5	0.14	1	0.14	4	0.56	4	0.56	2	0.28	2	0.28
W–1	0.04	2	0.08	1	0.04	3	0.12	2	0.08	2	0.08
W–2	0.06	2	0.12	1	0.06	1	0.06	1	0.06	2	0.12
W–3	0.10	3	0.30	2	0.20	2	0.20	3	0.30	2	0.20
W–4	0.10	1	0.10	4	0.40	4	0.40	2	0.20	2	0.20
W–5	0.08	4	0.32	2	0.16	1	0.08	1	0.08	2	0.16
O–1	0.12	4	0.48	4	0.48	1	0.12	1	0.12	1	0.12
O–2	0.08	1	0.08	1	0.08	4	0.32	1	0.08	1	0.08
O–3	0.10	2	0.20	2	0.20	2	0.20	3	0.30	3	0.30
O–4	0.10	1	0.10	1	0.10	1	0.10	4	0.40	2	0.20
O–5	0.10	3	0.30	4	0.40	2	0.20	2	0.20	2	0.20
T–1	0.14	1	0.14	2	0.28	1	0.14	1	0.14	1	0.14
T–2	0.10	1	0.10	2	0.20	2	0.20	2	0.20	2	0.20
T–3	0.12	3	0.36	3	0.36	2	0.24	1	0.12	2	0.24
T–4	0.08	1	0.08	1	0.08	1	0.08	1	0.08	1	0.08
T–5	0.06	1	0.06	3	0.18	3	0.18	1	0.06	1	0.06
STAS		39	3.92	43	4.46	42	4.20	35	3.52	38	3.86
Rank		3		1		2		5		4

Note: * the study site.

using a QSPM matrix based on AHP analysis.

3.3. Designing PO Cattle CBBP

Table 10. The PO cattle CBBP design.

Step	Plan	Action
1	Define production system	Cow–calf operation production system using indigenous knowledge combined with adaptable information technology
2	Define breeding objectives	Produce a superior PO cattle breed, conserving genetic diversity while maintaining the base population
3	Determine recording criteria	Phenotypic performance and the implementation of a breeding management operating standard is digitalized and recorded for big data analysis
4	Determine selection system	Integrate a system of incentives initiatives using big data analysis to determine an incentive selection system and regulate the increase in the genetic resources while maintaining the base population
5	Design CBBP structure	Hamlet breeding schemes are designed on the basis of the selection system developed
6	Determine CBBP institution	The local cooperative is chosen as the CBBP institution
7	Determine CBBP evaluation	Periodic monitoring and evaluation: For genetic improvement and the conservation status For cooperative business strategy implementation and management

shows that a PO cattle-breeding program applying conservation incentives to improve the cooperative’s awareness (code SO-2) is the top-ranked PO cattle CBC strategy based on the STAS values. This result indicates that the PO cattle-breeding program must be specifically designed by the cooperative to ensure genetic resource conservation, with the cooperative as the community entity responsible for increasing conservation awareness and involvement. This strategy was chosen as the PO cattle CBBP.

The PO cattle CBBP design focuses on integrating PO cattle-breeding activities with base population conservation as a systemic production program, managed by the local cooperative as the community institution. This function is essential for developing broader business activities, increasing awareness of and participation in conservation activities, supporting institutional development, and strengthening fundraising efforts to meet the real needs of the community. These areas of emphasis are combined with an indigenous knowledge approach and information technology to create a community-based system promoting community empowerment and participation. Accordingly, this study proposes the PO cattle CBBP design shown in Table 10.

The CBBP structures the breeding programs on the basis of the hamlet breeding schemes. In general, the hamlet breeding schemes are designed on the basis of indigenous knowledge paired with adaptable information technology, combining one-tier and dispersed nuclei breeding schemes. The hamlet breeding schemes are described below.

• Scheme 1 (a one-tier hamlet breeding scheme)—This scheme establishes a hamlet-based nucleus flock to contribute selected sires to the breeding program, which are selected from the entire population. A selection system is used to determine the sires used by the community for hamlet breeding in each hamlet, implementing a system for selecting incentives.
• Scheme 2 (CBBP as a dispersed hamlet-based nuclei scheme)—This scheme is a continuation of Scheme 1. This scheme is designed to improve the genetics of the selected male studs in the breeding flock by establishing a nuclei-breeding village center in the CBBP’s institution area of authority. On the basis of their progeny’s performance, male studs are selected from across hamlets. The selected male studs are used in hamlet breeding according to the hamlet breeding scheme and also provide the elite bulls for AI and research, while the culled ones are sold to the market or slaughterhouse.

The two schemes are executed systematically. Schemes 1 and 2 are implemented as a structured breeding program in the PO cattle CBBP on the basis of the selection of incentives initiatives managed and regulated by the local cooperative. This regulates (a) the operating standards for breeding management required by the natural resource management strategy as the production system; (b) the recording of breeding management data for the breeding program database to support the integration of incentives initiatives into the system; and (c) the sires’ genetic improvements, maintaining superior male studs to standardize of superior PO cattle, meeting market demand and the government’s requirements for elite bull candidates for AI stations and research institutions.

Consequently, integrating systemic regulation into the PO cattle CBBP represents a genetic resource management system that can serve as a natural resource management strategy, utilizing a single coordinated policy; the local cooperative, as a CBBP institution, carries out these duties. Figure 1 depicts the PO cattle CBBP system served by the CBBP institution.

4. Discussion

To achieve the study’s objectives, a CBBP was designed as the development of a community-based strategy for local livestock. This is pertinent to cattle breeds, which are a vital livestock type in Asian communities, including PO cattle in Indonesia. East Java, a national beef cattle province, was selected as the study site for a case study on the most important priority areas for PO cattle, focusing on Napis village in the Bojonegoro regency. The beef cattle population at the study site (N_a value) represented 0.02% of Indonesia’s beef cattle population. The study site is known as a PO cattle genetic resource site, as mentioned in a previous study, which found no other cattle breeds in this site’s population [27].

N_a was used to determine the N_e value in order to estimate the eigenvalue for the rate of heterozygosity loss by calculating the inbreeding rate. This eigenvalue describes the characteristics of the population, which can be used to determine the role of conservation in mitigating genetic extinction [28]. The N_e value in this study, based on live population per generation at the study site, was 205, higher than the minimum N_e requirement of 50 animals per generation, indicating a 1% increase in inbreeding per generation. This value indicates that a larger population could tolerate more deleterious mutations due to low genetic drift; this can be expected in populations monitored and managed using the action plans when the N_e value decreases [29].

Using the inbreeding rate, the conservation status of PO cattle at the study site was determined to be 0.24%. This value indicates that the population’s increased rate of inbreeding might be mitigated if the rate of inbreeding could be reduced to less than 0.5% [30]. This value also shows that PO cattle are not in danger of going extinct because of the way they are currently bred, which is thought to have been managed across generations in order to conserve the genetic diversity of PO cattle and improve the well-being of the local community [31,32]. Genetic resource management based on history and phenotypic appearance has been shown to sustain the breed’s population structure and has considerable potential to be developed with well-defined breeding objectives, including biological, genetic, and cultural factors [8,16]. Our findings also indicate the feasibility of implementing the PO cattle CBBP design at the study site on the basis of the socio-ecological community profile and the genetic resource profile of the PO cattle as factors in the genetic resource management strategy.

This study revealed that socio-ecological communities’ profiles are contextual, with various institutional processes identified as drivers of community-based conservation and competence, relational, and autonomy identified as motivations for CBC [13]. These socio-ecological community profiles can drive the PO cattle farmer community to conserve PO cattle as an agrobiodiversity asset that sustains their livelihoods, reflecting the objectives and motivations of PO cattle breeding. These potential drivers of sustainability depend on the livestock keepers’ active participation and consideration of indigenous knowledge and the institutional setting [33,34].

The drivers of CBC are identified in an institutionally supported process determined by traditional resources, with the family as the center of the community’s social life, building trust in the bank as the institution supporting their household, considering the benefits and difficulties of the bank. The three profiles were described as the most profiled in Table 2. From this perspective, tradition, as a cultural value, is the fundamental source of information used to establish indigenous knowledge, passed down from generation to generation by the elders and believed to have a life-enhancing quality. As the family is the social focal point of the community, the elders’ advice must be followed, as it is seen as a historical success story. This also influences the broader use of banks to support the household economy through the existence of cash funding, even though the procedures and conditional requirements still constitute difficulties and obstacles.

Therefore, indigenous knowledge and the institutions that sustain families’ economic well-being were identified as drivers of PO cattle CBC. These reflect that the Indonesian community is shaped by its beliefs, which have been passed down from generation to generation as indigenous knowledge for navigating unpredictable circumstances and establishing a secure livelihood [35]. These drivers are consistent with the bio-cultural diversity theory, which states that indigenous knowledge and culture are closely linked to covered regions, natural resources, and ecosystems, so that both might be lost if one is lost [36]. These drivers are supported by motivations for community-based conservation based on the socio-ecological community profile in this study, such as using age, educational level, and livelihood to determine competence, utilizing land as relational to the ecosystem and achieving autonomy through production’s assets and income.

The majority of respondents were aged over 35, and their educational level was elementary school; farming was their chosen livelihood. The profile revealed limited recognition of their competence, as indigenous knowledge was their primary information source, especially in agricultural activities such as cattle breeding [37]. Although indigenous knowledge has been shown to lead to a balanced relationship between humans and the ecosystem (which, in the agricultural sector, often refers to the land being utilized), it is not widely recognized. The land coverage area predominantly used for agriculture, between 250 and 1500 square meters, illustrates this ecological approach, maximizing the land used in integrated farming to support the farmer’s livelihood [3]. This is revealed by the fact that the owner of the PO cattle owns the majority of the productive assets and that farming revenue is the primary source of family autonomy, with mixed farming as the farming type. Consistent with a prior study, this study demonstrates that PO cattle perform vital roles as assets for subsistence, providing savings, buffering, insurance, and cultural value [38].

This study’s socioecological community profile indicates the harmonious coexistence of agrobiodiversity resource management and PO cattle breeding in the agroforestry ecosystem of a forest village. The presence of PO cattle breeding is essential in characterizing the potential genetic resources to be managed in order to accomplish the objectives of this study. Therefore, it was important to profile PO cattle’s genetic resources from 169 half-siblings based on the traced pedigree of 205 PO cattle for one-generation pedigree data from birth to yearling age, measuring heritability using half-sibling analysis. Due to the lack of official or unofficial herd books, birth certificates, or tracebacks, this study’s pedigree data were determined by validating the sire and dam for each animal in the data banks of farmer groups [29,39].

The derivative-free restricted maximum likelihood (dfREML) procedure was used to estimate the variance components for direct genetic (σ²_e) and, thus, phenotypic variance (σ²_P) and heritability (h²), as shown in Table 3 [26]. Results indicated that estimation for some traits was terminated because an optimization minimum was not found (Status 3). Although heritability estimates for body weight, body height, and chest girth at yearling age fell within the parameter space, ranging from 0 to 1, non-significant results were obtained when the null hypothesis of heritability equal to zero was tested using a t-test.

These estimated heritability values were influenced by the increased use of the PO cattle semen straw for artificial insemination compared with natural mating with male studs [40], showing the sires’ excellent capacity to pass on genetic resources essential for genetic resource management. The semen used for AI mating produced by AI centers originated from proven bulls in breeding centers [16]. This was due to the increasing confidence of PO cattle keepers in AI mating and a steady decrease in the availability of top male studs that met their needs, which was related to the indigenous knowledge utilized in cattle selection and mating [37]. Bulls are still used in hamlet breeding, defined as mating carried out in hamlet-based communities, to overcome genetic–environment interaction problems, such as geographical, cultural, or economically marginalized [41,42].

This study also revealed that the community’s highest number of male studs originated from the fifth hamlet (Kalidandang), indicating that the fifth hamlet is a potential genetic resource site for top male studs. The existence of top male studs in the population is vital for genetic resource conservation and development, particularly for producing better offspring and maintaining hybrid vigor breeds, such as PO cattle [43]. The environment supports those top male studs’ genetic potential to achieve further advantages. These environmental supports revealed in this study show that hamlet breeding was practiced, utilizing indigenous knowledge based on the experiences of PO cattle-breeding managers across generations as custodians of these traditional local activities [44,45]. A positive residual value indicated a higher observed frequency than the expected frequency in the maximum likelihood analysis of predicted values for frequencies as a determining factor between trust level and observed frequency [46].

These analysis results can guide strategic interpretation of the internal and external scores in the SWOT-AHP analysis in order to rank five alternative aggressive genetic resource management strategies for PO cattle. A PO cattle-breeding program implemented using conservation incentives to increase cooperatives’ awareness was subsequently designated as the strategy with the highest priority. This strategy emphasized two critical points. First, a breeding program is critical for directing the production system by combining indigenous knowledge about conserving genetic diversity with technological initiatives in the design of selection initiatives [45,47]. Second, it is vital for the local cooperative to be expanded as a community-based institution to support the community’s livelihood by regulating the integrated system, including both the technological initiative and community empowerment in the design of incentives initiatives [48,49].

Consequently, a PO cattle CBBP was designed for the prioritized aggressive strategy for genetic resource management in PO cattle, expanding the functions of the business model and continuing the strategies of the local cooperative in determining the cow–calf operation production system using the breeding program [50]. This breeding program uses indigenous knowledge combined with adaptable information technology to produce a superior PO cattle breed based on hamlet breeding schemes structured to manage genetic resources while maintaining the base population. In the partnership system developed, these hamlet breeding schemes are structured to provide superior sires for utilizing in AI mating twice and in natural mating once, modifying the traditional mating pattern. This structure is the focal point for genetic resource management, allowing hybrid vigor breeds, such as PO cattle, to be conserved and developed. The superior PO cattle breed will be produced to meet market demand by expanding marketing initiatives and standardizing pricing, opening up a range of alternative marketing channels [51]; selected cattle will also be promoted as elite bull candidates for AI stations or research institutions.

To ensure implementation of the PO cattle CBBP design, an integrated action of governmental, non-governmental, and private institutions will be needed to support intervention in cattle-breeding management services, including in nutrition, health care, marketing, and social services [7]. In further studies, this might be presented as a pilot project for additional review, and evaluation could be modeled on the basis of biological, economic, and operational feasibility based on big data analysis [52]. This is required for Indonesia’s village breeding development program, which has been operating since 2005 [53], precisely for local cattle implementation. The Indonesian government’s guidance on village breeding management using the integrated village management system (IVMS) [54] also deserves consideration in a further study, in which the PO cattle CBBP can be analyzed in terms of its context, breeding objectives, and implementation [55]. These recommendations are essential for ensuring Asia’s agricultural transformation in the livestock sector, especially for local cattle as the vital livestock commodity in rural developments (and political constituencies) [9,38]. Natural resource management innovation through efficient and effective improvement of breeding program support systems, primarily in livestock-based sectors, could optimize stakeholder participation (particularly in rural communities), boost productivity, and ensure sustainability in bringing about the desired transformation.

5. Conclusions

A CBBP was designed to implement genetic resource management as an aggressive alternative natural resource management strategy to increase productivity and ensure sustainability, particularly for local livestock breeds, such as cattle in Asia. PO cattle were selected as a local livestock breed for a case study. The CBBP design employed incentives initiatives to promote conservation awareness in a local cooperative, which was the CBBP institution. This PO cattle CBBP design promotes (i) expansion of the functions of the local cooperative as the CBBP institution; (ii) a breeding program driven by an incentives initiative selection system for structuring the hamlet breeding schemes, combined with big data; and (iii) standardization of breeding management to conserve the base population while enhancing genetic diversity, utilizing indigenous knowledge for decision-making. The results of this study can help Indonesia and other developing countries, particularly in Asia, to implement genetic resource management for local livestock as a natural resource management strategy. Such strategies are an innovation to increase productivity and ensure sustainability, especially for local livestock breeds. This would help these countries address the many problems related to agricultural change in this region.