Evaluation of 12-month interval methods for estimating animal-times at risk in a traditional African livestock farming system

Demographic parameters are useful for assessing productivity and dynamics of tropical livestock populations. Common parameters are the annual instantaneous hazard rates, which can be estimated by m/T (where m represents the number of the considered demographic events occurred during the year and T the cumulated animal-time at risk). Different approaches are encountered in the literature for computing T from on-farm survey data. One crude approach (“the 12-month interval approach”) only uses estimations of herds’ sizes at beginning and end of the year and aggregated counts of demographic events over the year. I evaluated the potential biases in using four 12-month interval methods (M1–M4) to estimate T. Biases were evaluated by comparing the 12-month estimates to gold-standard values of T. Data came from long-term herd monitoring on cattle and small ruminants in extensive agro-pastoral systems. Animal-times at risks were correctly estimated in average by methods M1, M2 and M4 (average relative biases <=6% in absolute values), except for adult-male small ruminants. For young animals, M2 and M4 showed equivalent biases. M2 is simple to implement and has the advantage of being applicable for any age-group, although M4 is only applicable for young animals. M3 was highly biased and I do not recommend it. Although accurate in average, 12-month interval methods showed highly variable biases. This variability results from interactions between the dates delimiting the 12-month interval and the distributions of the demographic events over time. This phenomenon is particularly important for the adult-male small ruminants. Based on the bias variability observed in the study, the user of 12-month interval methods has to remember that they only provide approximate results and that they cannot completely replace the gold-standard approaches.