Is there unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Sub-Saharan Africa? A systematic review of four selected species

Oguche, Maria; Kariuki, Juliet; Birner, Regina; Chagunda, Mizeck Article — Published Version Is there unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Sub-Saharan Africa? A systematic review of four selected species Food Security Provided in Cooperation with: Springer Nature Suggested Citation: Oguche, Maria; Kariuki, Juliet; Birner, Regina; Chagunda, Mizeck (2024) : Is there unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Sub-Saharan Africa? A systematic review of four selected species, Food Security, ISSN 1876-4525, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, Vol. 17, Iss. 1, pp. 161-183, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-024-01503-7 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/318879 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Vol.:(0123456789) Food Security (2025) 17:161–183 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-024-01503-7 REVIEW Is there unrecognized potential inneglected livestock species inSub‑Saharan Africa? Asystematic review offour selected species Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa MariaOguche1 · JulietKariuki1,2· ReginaBirner2· MizeckChagunda1,3 Received: 28 February 2024 / Accepted: 20 October 2024 / Published online: 18 November 2024 © The Author(s) 2024 Abstract Over the recent years, Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has seen an increase in population growth, urbanization, and per capita income. As a result, there has been a corresponding increase in the demand for animal source foods. In order to meet this demand, most countries have resorted to intensifying the production of conventional livestock. However, this increase in production comes with several environmental, nutritional, gender-related and economic challenges that are a rising concern. It is therefore imperative to explore the comparative advantages and disadvantages of other livestock species, which are currently consumed in SSA but are not recognised in widely adopted policies. Herein, using a novel conceptual framework, we present a systematic review of four selected neglected species, namely, grasscutter, guinea fowl, guinea pig, and rabbit. The review was conducted following the checklist for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), and 89 sources of literature were included. The results highlight that embracing these neglected livestock species could confer several benefits, including an enriched nutritional profile (high-quality protein, low fat, high dressing percentage), increased gross economic returns, environmental sustainability, and sustained empowerment of minority groups, especially women. Overall, this review shows the untapped nutritional and socio-economic potential of neglected livestock species, which, if incorporated into mainstream production, could improve food security and reduce unemployment in SSA. Keywords Food Security· Nutrition· Rural households· Animal-sourced Food· Environmental sustainability 1 Introduction Livestock plays an important role in promoting food security in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) (McDermott etal., 2010; Traoré etal., 2018). Livestock contributes approximately 40% of the agricultural gross domestic product (GDP), ranging from 10 to 80% in individual African countries (Malabo Montpellier Panel, 2020). The demand for livestock in SSA has been on a steady rise and is expected to continue to grow substantially due to increasing human population, urbanization, and raising incomes (Balehegn etal., 2021). The expansion and intensification of livestock could be employed as an important strategy for reducing poverty and hunger, including the “hidden hunger” that is caused by micronutrient deficiency (Herrero etal., 2014; Molina-flores etal., 2020). Using this potential of livestock is particularly important in Sub-Saharan Africa, where, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), over 270 million people * Maria Oguche [email protected] Juliet Kariuki j.kar[email protected] Regina Birner [email protected] Mizeck Chagunda Mizec[email protected] 1 Animal Breeding andHusbandry intheTropics andSubtropics, University ofHohenheim, 70599Stuttgart, Germany 2 Social andInstitutional Change inAgricultural Development, University ofHohenheim, 70599Stuttgart, Germany 3 Centre forTropical Livestock Genetics andHealth, University ofEdinburgh, Easter Bush Campus, MidlothianEH259RG, UK 162 M.Oguche et al. are undernourished, making the continent the most foodinsecure region in the world (FAO etal., 2024). Although the term livestock has been used mainly for ruminants, the FAO definition of livestock entails terrestrial, domesticated animals raised in an agricultural setting to provide traction or produce commodities such as meat, milk, eggs, hides, fibres and feathers (FAO, 2024). While increasing livestock consumption has the potential to improve human nutrition and combat poverty, the expansion and intensification of livestock production involves far-reaching trade-offs. The notable expansion and intensification of conventional livestock species, that is cattle, sheep, goats, pigs and poultry, has over the last two decades, resulted in several undesirable consequences, including indirect changes in land use, overuse of antibiotics, and excessive water consumption (Herrero etal., 2009; McDermott etal., 2010; World Economic Forum, 2019). Additionally, increased livestock production has led to higher global greenhouse gas emissions because of the methane emissions generated from enteric fermentation in ruminants (Davis etal., 2015), in addition to the emissions caused by livestock-induced land use change. Moreover, unregulated grazing has negatively affected the fragile Sahelian and its neighbouring Savannah landscapes (Herrero etal., 2009). Furthermore, increasing consumption of red meat from conventional livestock is associated with a range of health complications, such as coronary heart disease, cancer, and stroke (Mehrabi etal., 2020). In view of these trade-offs in livestock development, the question arises whether unconventional or neglected livestock species have a potential to address some of these trade-offs in Sub-Saharan Africa. The following arguments have been made in the literature in favour of such livestock species: nutritional advantages of low cholesterol with high protein content (Ibitoye etal., 2019; Moreki & Seabo, 2012a, 2012b; Yildrim, 2014), substantial economic feasibility (Kale etal., 2016; Serem etal., 2013) and empowerment opportunities (Adedeji etal., 2015; Lammers etal., 2009; Niba etal., 2012). In spite of such potential advantages, the economic significance of such species is often discounted, as they are generally assumed to be less profitable than the conventional livestock species. Additionally, poor institutional structures, unsupportive policies, and the lack of buy-in from both public and private sectors have limited the utilization of these species as alternative animal-sourced food (Ebegbulem, 2018; Gono etal., 2013a; Kosgey & Okeyo, 2007). Moreover, there is no standardized name for this category of species, and compared toplant breeding, animal breeding generally receives less funds, further contributing to the underutilization of non-conventional livestock (Assan, 2013). Consequently, there has been increased effort to advocate for more production of these neglected livestock species (Assan, 2014; Kosgey & Okeyo, 2007; Otte & Knips, 2005). In spite of these calls for promoting neglected livestock species, there are knowledge gaps on whether neglected livestock species would, in fact, help to address the tradeoffs involved in livestock intensification outlined above. The answer may well be context-specific, implying that the comparative advantage of neglected livestock depends on local environmental and socio-economic conditions. Instead of calling for a general promotion of neglected livestock species, a “best-fit” approach (Birner etal., 2009)1 may be justified, which implies that neglected livestock species should be promoted under conditions where they in fact have comparative advantages over conventional livestock species. To contribute to the goal of identifying “best-fit” approaches for neglected livestock species, this paper presents a systematic review of the literature on four neglected livestock species. The paper is based on a novel conceptual framework, which makes it possible to identify the specific advantages and disadvantages of neglected livestock species by comparing them with conventional livestock species that have broadly similar production goals. The four neglected species covered in this paper are guinea fowl (Numida meleagris), grasscutters (Thryonomys swinderianus), guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus), and rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). They have been purposely selected to cover different animal groups (birds and mammals), represent different levels of domestication, and display differences in nutritional profile from conventional livestock species. Moreover, these four species have been studied moreextensively than other neglected livestock species in the same animal groups, providing a relatively rich empirical database, thus serving as suitable case study examples for the broader question of neglected livestock in Sub-Saharan Africa. This paper is structured as follows. Section2 presents the conceptual framework used for this study, starting with a note on the terminology. Section3 describes the methodological approach, which followed the “Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis” (PRISMA). Section4 presents the findings, which are discussed in Sect.5. The last section presents conclusions and policy implications. 2 Conceptual framework 2.1 A note onterminology To develop the conceptual framework for this study, it was important to first understand the concept of neglected 1 A “best-fit “ approach was suggested in a widely quoted paper on agricultural advisory services (Birner etal., 2009), which argued that the comparative advantages and disadvantages of different types of advisory services depend on contextual factors. The term “best-fit” is used here in a similar sense, arguing that the comparative advantages and disadvantages of neglected livestock species depend on contextual factors. 163 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa animal species by defining terms commonly used with livestock. For this purpose, we drew parallels to terms that have already been established for neglected and underutilized species of crops (NUCS) (see appendix Table2). Several terms have been used for crops, mainly to describe neglected but nutritious and environmentally robust crop species (Padulosi etal., 2019). The terms used include “neglected”, “traditional”, “indigenous”, “new/future”, and “orphan” crop species (Mabhaudhi etal., 2017a, 2017b). Before a consensus was reached by collaborative efforts of various international organizations and research bodies. notably, Biodiversity International, FAO and the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) on the term “orphan crops”, also known as “Neglected and underutilized species (NUS) “, terms such as “minor”, “forgotten”, “neglected”, and “underutilized” crops were used separately (Chivenge etal., 2015). None of the literature sources that we reviewed used the terms “neglected” and/or “underutilized” in livestock research. The findings also reveal the lack of a standardized and universally recognized name for the categories of livestock reviewed herein, which was not the case for neglected crops. For example, while there exists an African Orphaned Crops Consortium for neglected crops, there is no such institution for underutilized livestock species. Such institutions have promoted the development of universally acclaimed terms for underutilized crop species, when there are still no standardized names for neglected livestock. Food security was the main motivating factor for the establishment of a consortium and consensus definition of underutilized crops (Hendre etal., 2019; Padulosi etal., 2013). According to the Oxford and Merriam-Webster dictionary, the word/verb “neglected” means “not receiving proper attention; disregarded; suffering a lack of proper care.” Using the consensus about NUS in crops as guidance, we propose the term “Neglected Livestock Species” for the case of livestock as a general term that accounts for multiple characteristics of the species. The terms “microlivestock” or “mini-livestock”, which are used for livestock the literature (see Appendix Table2), appear less suitable, since they refers to body size only and do not capture aspects of underutilization or neglect. Moreover, there are also conventional animal species with small body size, such as chicken. “neglected”, as indicated in the dictionary definition quoted above, better captures the characteristics of the livestock species that are the focus of this paper. 2.2 Structure oftheconceptual framework The conceptual framework shown in Fig.1 was developed as basis for analysing the reviewed articles, drawing parallels from similar research focusing on NUS in crops (Conti etal., 2019; Ebert, 2014). The framework identifies the five distinct bio-physical characteristics of the neglected livestock species, which are assessed in comparison to conventional species to determine to what extent the neglected livestock species have comparative advantages or disadvantages. The characteristics include feeding behaviour, prolificacy, efficiency, disease resistance and nutritional profile of the animal products. The comparative advantages or disadvantages can be economic, social and environmental in nature. Comparative economic disadvantages are possible reasons for the neglect of a species, whereas comparative environmental and social advantages may not reduce neglect, if those advantages are positive external effects, such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions per unit of output. Comparative advantages that are “merit goods” will also not reduce neglect, since they are by definition not fully appreciated by consumers. Products of neglected livestock species may have a superior nutritional profile, e.g., they may have a nutrient content, but this will not increase the demand for such products of the respective neglected livestock species, if consumers are unaware of it. As indicated in the framework, the neglect of a species may also follow from prevailing policy interventions. For example, if publicly funded breeding programs focus on conventional livestock species only, the resulting improved performance of conventional species will increase their comparative advantage over time, thus contributing to the neglect of other species. Therefore, this review also explored the possible interventions and policy implications that may increase the utilization of these species in livestock enterprises while at the same time decreasing the comparative disadvantages. With regard to the increasing demand for livestock mentioned in the introduction, it is important to assess how comparative advantages or disadvantage will change, when the production system is being intensified, which typically requires higher capital inputs, especially in form of improved feed. One can hypothesize that species with small body size will have a comparative advantage for resource-poor households, since they acquire relatively less capital. Sheep and goats are known to fit better into resource-poor households than cattle, and this argument can be extended to livestock species of still smaller body size, such as rabbits or guinea pigs. Hence, the comparative advantages and disadvantages of neglected versus conventional species depend on frame conditions, such as the wealth status of the households, which is indicated by the “frame conditions” arrow in the conceptual framework (Fig.1). Another frame condition that influences the comparative advantage or disadvantage of different species is the availability of local fodder sources. For example, the scavenging feeding behaviour of a species such as guinea fowl will only have a comparative advantage in a natural environment where scavenging is possible. 164 M.Oguche et al. In the following, the framework depicted in Fig.1 will guide both the choice of the neglected livestock species to be included to the review. 3 Methodology We conducted a systematic review of existing literature on neglected livestock, published between 1990 and December 2020. The selection criteria for the species, identification of search terms, the literature search and the exclusion conditions are highlighted in the following sections. 3.1 Selection criteria forthespecies According to vom Brocke etal. (2009) the first step in a literature review is to have a broad understanding of what is already known about the subject, region, or location in question. Therefore, we conducted a search of these animal groups; poultry, rodents and other mammals, which have been categorized as neglected livestock species within SSA. We identified a range of species based on evidence in the literature that they are kept less frequent than conventional livestock and differ from conventional livestock terms of the characteristics identified in the framework: feeding behaviour, prolificacy, efficiency, disease resistance and nutritional profile of the animal products. Within the three groups, we identified the species for which most literature is available. For instance, the guinea fowl was more represented in literature compared to other neglected poultry such as quails, pigeons, or doves. In addition, we took the level of domestication into account so as to include the entire range from fully domesticated species to those that are yet to be domesticated. Based on these criteria, the following four species within the animal groups were purposely selected: For the group of the rodents, the grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) (as non-domesticated species) and the guinea pig/Cavies (Cavia porcellus) was selected. Among the group of the other mammals, the rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) was selected and in the poultry group, the choice was the guinea fowl (Numida meleagris), as already indicted above. For the comparison, conventional livestock species were selected as follows: similar animal groups of birds and mammals; products and services they offer and the characteristics as outline above for the neglected livestock species. 3.2 Literature search andexclusion The initial search used to select the species led to the identification of relevant keywords (Appendix Table3) and the development of a profile of existing terminologies that best describe neglected livestock species, associated benefits, • • • • • • • • • • • • Increase Decrease Fig. 1 Conceptual framework 165 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa barriers to farming as well as their potential socio-economic and nutritional benefits. The following databases were used to identify relevant literature: ResearchGate, Scopus (Elsevier), Semantic Scholar, World Bank, Springer, PubMed, and FAO. These databases were selected following key principles from the “Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis” (PRISMA) checklist criteria (Liberati etal., 2009), with the aim of generating and synthesizing information on both existing and novel neglected livestock species (Lesnikowski etal., 2011). In addition, we used organizational databases, such as those from Biodiversity International, the World Economic Forum, and the African Union—InterAfrican Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR). We also obtained information from congresses and livestock associations, such as the World Rabbit Association. The Boolean search strings were used with a combination of themes such as “Micro-Livestock” AND “Africa OR Sub-Saharan Africa”, and “food security” AND “neglected livestock species (grasscutters OR rabbits OR guinea fowls OR guinea pigs)”. Literature searching and screening of materials was conducted between May 2020 to January 2021 and included only publications made in English between 1990–2020. The year 1990 was chosen based on the assumption that very few studies, if any, on this topic, were published before then. From the search, 1,262 articles/publications were generated and they consisted of journal articles, conference papers, abstracts or executive summaries, organizational publications, governmental reports, technical documentations, and theses (Fig.2). We excluded 17 non-English publications, 32 duplications as well as titles and abstracts, and the remaining 1,213 sources were subjected to further screening based on the following two criteria: 1. The role of the species in promoting food security, and other socio-economic and nutritional metrics. 2. Specific focus on SSA. Of the 1,213, 706 pieces of literature were excluded from this screening step. A full article screen was then conducted, and this further excluded 418 articles. A total of 89 articles (see appendix Table4) that matched the inclusion criteria were finally selected for a detailed qualitative synthesis of neglected livestock species. Notably, a final screening step was introduced to group these articles into two categories. The first category focused on at least one of the neglected species of interest (grasscutters, rabbits, guinea fowls, and guinea pigs), while the second focused on underutilized crops, to help draw comparisons to neglected livestock species. This review included non-peer-reviewed literature to help address the gaps in existing publications and provide both comprehensive insights and data that are lacking in peer-reviewed journals (Hopewell etal., 2007; Mahood etal., 2014; Schöpfel, 2010). Overall, 83% (74 articles) of the articles focused on at least one of the four neglected livestock species of primary focus in this study, while 17% (15 articles) included NUS crops, which we used to compare with the unconventional livestock species of interest herein. With regard to species, articles on the grasscutter were the most abundant. From the selected articles, the terminologies used to describe these neglected and underutilized species (crops or animals) were reviewed. Fig. 2 Flow chart showing the distribution of literature and selection process for the studies 166 M.Oguche et al. 4 Results 4.1 Descriptive overview ofreviewed literature A total of 74 reviewed articles/publications about the neglected livestock species of interest were used for the descriptive statistical analyses shown in the subsequent sections. 4.1.1 Scope ofliterature Figure3 illustrates the number and geographical distribution of the reviewed literature. Of all the reviewed articles, 13 reported findings from SSA in general, 10 reported results from across developing regions of the world, and 51 were specific to various SSA countries. Generally, it was observed that the species’ popularity in various SSA regions, largely contributed to the geographical distribution of the relevant literature. For instance, literature on the grasscutter mostly involved case studies from Nigeria and Ghana, suggesting that the species is native to Western Africa. On the other hand, literature on the guinea pig mostly clustered around Central African nations such as Cameroon. However, publications on the guinea fowl and rabbit were distributed across the continent, encompassing West, East, and Southern Africa. 4.1.2 Type ofstudy The study designs, methodologies and types of the reviewed articles were also examined (Fig.4). Case studies ranked highest at 51% (n = 38), while cross-sectional studies based on surveys accounted for 4% (n = 3) of all the articles. A total of 38% (n = 28) of the articles were literature reviews while the remaining 7% (n = 5) applied a combination of methodologies. 4.1.3 Production systems In view of the relevance of intensification for the comparative advantage or disadvantage of a livestock species from a “best-fit” perspective (see Sect.2), we classified the production systems to which the articles referred according to their intensity. Figure5 presents the findings, indicating the terms used to describe the level of intensity in the reviewed literature. Almost half (47%, n = 35) of the reviewed papers did not mention of a production system. For the other half, the review showed that neglected livestock species covered by the papers were more frequently reared in either intensive or semi-intensive systems than in extensive (free-range) or mixed systems. 20% (n = 15) of the articles involved intensive systems, where the species are kept in husbandry conditions that are conducive for high performance, such as confined modern houses, feeding with commercial feeds and provision of regular health interventions (Yeboah, 2009; Fon etal., 2014; Mustafa etal., 2015; Asuk etal., 2017). Three of the four species included into the review were produced under this system, namely grasscutters, rabbits, and guinea pigs. However, given that grasscutters are naturally wild species, most papers referred to this intensive system as subjecting the animals to “captivity” (Adu etal., 1999; Jori etal., 2005; Yeboah, 2009). The semi-intensive system was also referred to as “backyard village” or “smallholder system”. 19% (n = 14) of the papers referred to this system, which involves providing livestock sheds for the night alongside with feed and/or water. In addition, the animals are allowed to search for their own feed (Adu etal., 2017; Avornyo etal., 2016; Moreki & Seabo, 2012a, 2012b). This system was reported to be common with guinea fowls, guinea pigs and Fig. 3 Geographic and individual country distribution of species-specific literature in Africa 167 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa rabbits. The extensive (free-range) system, reported in 10% (n = 7) of the reviewed articles, is one where the species fend for themselves without confinement. This system was mainly common with the guinea fowls (Balma & Richard, 2016; Ebegbulem, 2018; Gono etal., 2013a, 2013b; Houndonougbo etal., 2017). The mixed system, reported in 4% (n = 3) of the reviewed articles, is one where the production of one or more species of livestock is explicitly mixed with crop farming (Molinaflores etal., 2020; Niba etal., 2012), notwithstanding that neglected livestock species may typically kept by households that also grow crops. Although the system could sustainably be employed for the production of guinea pigs, guinea fowl, and rabbits, it was impractical with the grasscutter which is considered an agricultural pest for cereals or other crops (Jori etal., 2005; Yeboah, 2009). Finally, in 20% (n = 15) of the articles, where the production system was termed intensive, the species were kept for research purposes and not with the aim of commercialization or household consumption. 4.2 Comparative advantages anddisadvantages ofneglected livestock 4.2.1 Comparative advantages The reviewed literature provides evidence that the four species under review have comparative advantages in terms of their nutritional profile. The meat from all the selected species is reported to be rich in nutrients, by virtue of its high protein content and low cholesterol levels, making it suitable for consumption by all age groups (Adedeji etal., 2015; Akinola etal., 2015; Moreki & Seabo, 2012a, 2012b; Yiva etal., 2014). In addition, grasscutter meat is reported to be Fig. 4 Distribution of the reviewed articles based on the type of study 51% 4% 38% 7% Literature distributionbased on type of study Case studies Cross-sectional studies Literaturereview Mixedmethods Fig. 5 Proportions of the different types of production systems reported in the reviewed literature 10% 19% 20% 47% 4% Producon systems Extensive (free-range) system Semi-intensive ( backyard village or small-holder) system Intensive ( capvity) system Not menoned Mixed farming system 168 M.Oguche et al. exceptionally delicious (Ibitoye etal., 2019) and is generally preferred by the local population over the less expensive options such as lamb, chicken, beef or pork (Annor etal., 2014). Furthermore, compared to broilers, guinea fowl meat is reported to have lower levels of fat (Madzimure etal., 2011). Consistently, Moreki and Seabo, (2012a, 2012b) reported that guinea fowl meat and eggs are higher in protein and lower in fat, compared to chicken meat. The low cholesterol levels and high protein content in guinea pig meat makes it valuable than chicken, beef, and lamb. Additionally, there is no record of religious restrictions to their consumption, as is often the case with pork (Lammers etal., 2009; Yiva etal., 2014). The literature also provides evidence that the neglected species under review provide income generation opportunities and economic benefits, since the price of their meat and eggs that farmers are able to receive is generally higher compared to that of conventional livestock products. For instance, grasscutter meat is more expensive than beef, chicken, mutton, pork, or chevon in West Africa (Yeboah, 2009). In addition, Benjamin etal., (2009) reported that, in Northern Nigeria, grass cutters were sold in families of five (one male and four females) at a much higher price than the equivalent price of a single male adults would be, indicating additional income opportunities. Rabbits were shown by The Peace Corps (2014) and by Ume & Ezeano, (2017) to be economically profitable than other livestock as they thrive on lower-quality feeds but still produce better-quality meat and fur. In a gross margin analysis conducted by Adedeji etal. (2015), rabbit production was shown to be desirably profitable in Nigeria. The high returns on investment that were reported from rabbit and guinea pig production were attributed to the high prolificacy and short gestation periods inherent of these species (Kale etal., 2016; Lammers etal., 2009). Furthermore, Balma and Richard (2016) conducted a benefit–cost ratio analysis and showed that the average net returns from guinea fowl sales are substantially higher. These economic benefits could help in maintaining food security in times of crisis, especially for vulnerable groups such as women and children. The review provides evidence that the species under review have comparative advantages in terms of feeding behaviour, since their feed can often be sourced locally (Adu etal., 2017; Mailafia etal., 2011; Moreki & Seabo, 2012a, 2012b), further solidifying the case that their increased production would be a suitable strategy to improve family nutrition. These species were also shown to be capable of adapting to various climatic conditions, making their production more sustainable (Adu etal., 2017; Ebegbulem, 2018; National Research Council, 1991). A similar observation was made for the guinea pig whose feed is much cheaper than that required for other livestock species (Niba etal., 2012). According to the conceptual framework, disease resistance can also provide comparative advantages. The review indicated that, in particular, guinea fowl was found to be more resistant than chicken to most poultry diseases, such as the Newcastle disease (Ebegbulem, 2018). This increases the comparative advantage of guinea fowl to resource-poor farmers, who have more limited access to proper veterinary services than better-off farmers. The literature review also indicates social advantages of neglected livestock species, as the production of these livestock species has been shown to promote women empowerment. The relatively small body weight of the respective species fallows for easy handling with little requirement for manpower and space (Yiva etal., 2014; Adedeji etal., 2015). This makes these livestock species suitable for being handled by women. This in turn provides alternative sources of income to sustain their household (Moreki & Seabo, 2012a, 2012b; Niba etal., 2012; Serem etal., 2013). Furthermore, some governmental and non-governmental organizations use rabbit production as a platform and strategy for women empowerment (Adedeji etal., 2015; Kale etal., 2016; Oseni & Lukefahr, 2014). In Cameroon, for example, the Heifer Project International-Cameroon rabbit project (HPI-CAM) is reported to have increased the number of women-run rabbit projects in a bid to promote gender awareness and the social status of women (Niba etal., 2012). Additionally, all the four species have other comparative social advantages as they are reported to play significant socio-cultural roles in the society, because they are used for dowry payments, traditional medicine, decoration, and artwork (AU-IBAR, 2012; Akinola etal., 2015; Ebegbulem, 2018). For example, in the Southern part of Ghana, grasscutter hair or fur is used for decoration, and the teeth are used in place of cowries for traditional card reading (Folitse & Manteaw, 2019). The literature review also identified some comparative environmental advantages of neglected livestock species. Grasscutters – in spite of their name—are none-grazers and therefore pose no risk of environmental degradation resulting from overgrazing, which is a major concern with ruminant livestock (Yeboah, 2009). Moreover, these species produce nutrient-rich by-products such as dung and droppings which are considered a richer source of manure than that obtained from some of the conventional livestock. For instance, The Peace Corps, (2014) reported that rabbit manure can be applied directly to plant and/or roots without the risk of plant burn, which is commonly observed when poultry manure is used. However, these advantages vary across species and may not necessarily be consistent among them. 4.2.2 Comparative disadvantages The reviewed literature revealed several comparative disadvantages, which constitute barriers to the production of 175 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa Appendix3 Table 4 List of literature reviewed S/N Authors Title Year Date accessed 1 Jori, F., Edderai, D., & Houben, P Potential of rodents for minilivestock in Africa 2005 03/05/2020 2 Fon, Dorothy E Felix, Meutchieye Niba, a T A Gender Perspective of Cavy Farmers’ Livelihood Analysis for the Western Highlands of Cameroon 2014 03/05/2020 3 Moreki, John Cassius Mpho, Kennedy Manyeula, Freddy A survey on rabbit production in the city of Gaborone, Botswana 2019 26/01/2021 4 Hendre, P. S., Muthemba, S., Kariba, R., Muchugi, A., Fu, Y., Chang, Y., Song, B., Liu, H., Liu, M., Liao, X., Sahu, S. K., Wang, S., Li, L., Lu, H., Peng, S., Cheng, S., Xu, X., Yang, H., Wang, J., … Jamnadass, R African Orphan Crops Consortium (AOCC): status of developing genomic resources for African orphan crops 2019 11/05/2020 5 African Union Inter-African Bureau For Animal Resources Breeding (AU-IBAR) Breeding of guinea fowls as a viable option for increased poultry production in Africa 2012 03/05/2020 6 Ibitoye, O., Kolejo, O., & Akinyemi, G Burgeoning and Domestication of Grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) in a Post-Ebola Era: A Reassessment of its Prospects and Challenges in Nigeria 2019 03/05/2020 7 Yiva, C. H., E, F. D., Felix, M., & Niba, A. T Cavies for income generation, manure for the farm and meat for the table 2014 03/05/2020 8 Houndonougbo, P. V., Bindelle, J., Chrysostome, C. A. A. M., Hammami, H., & Gengler, N Characteristics of Guinea fowl breeding in West Africa: A review 2017 03/05/2020 9 Avornyo F K, Salifu S, Panyan E K, Al-Hassan B I, A. M. and Y. F Characteristics of guinea fowl production systems in northern Ghana. A baseline study of 20 districts in northern Ghana 2016 02/06/2020 10 Serem, J. K., Wanyoike, M. M., Gachuiri, C. K., Mailu, S. K., Gathumbi, P. K., Mwanz, R. N., Kiarie, N., & Borter, D. K Characterization of Rabbit Production Systems in Kenya 2013 04/05/2020 11 Mustafa, M. O., Akinyemi, I. G., Adewale, M. I., Odeleye, O. A., & Abdulazeez, F. I Comparative Assessment of Growth Structure and Litter Size of Grasscutter (Thryonomys Swinderianus Temminck, 1872) Bred in Captivity 2015 18/01/2021 12 Isaac, O. G., & Chiedu, U. C Comparative evaluation of nutritional values of guinea fowl, duck and quail eggs 2016 03/05/2020 13 Gono, R. K., Dube, J., Sichewo, P. R., & Muzondiwa, J. V Constraints and Opportunities to Guinea Fowl Production in Zimbabwe: A Case Study of the Midlands Province, Zimbabwe 2013 03/05/2020 14 Gono, R. K., Dube, J., Sichewo, P. R., & Muzondiwa, J. V Constraints and Opportunities to Rabbit Production in Zimbabwe: A Case Study of the Midlands Province, Zimbabwe 2013 25/01/2021 15 Niba, A. T., Meutchieye, F., Fon, D., Laisin, A. G., Taboh, H., Njakoi, H., Bela Tomo, A., Maass, B. L., Djikeng, A., & Manjeli, Y Current situation of cavy production in Cameroon: Challenges and opportunities 2012 11/07/2020 16 Moreki, J., & Seabo, D Current status, challenges and opportunities of rabbit production in Botswana 2012 26/01/2021 17 Mabhaudhi, T., Chimonyo, V. G. P., Chibarabada, T. P., & Modi, A. T Developing a Roadmap for Improving Neglected and Underutilized Crops: A Case Study of South Africa 2017 11/05/2020 18 Wilson, R. T Domestic Livestock in African Cities: Production, Problems and Prospects 2018 02/05/2020 19 Ume, S., & Ezeano.c Economics of Rabbit (Oryctolagus Cuniculus) Production in IVO Local Government of Area of Ebonyi State 2017 25/01/2021 176 M.Oguche et al. Table 4 (continued) S/N Authors Title Year Date accessed 20 Adeniji, A. A Effects of feeding three protein sources with or without fishmeal supplementation on the performance of growing grasscutters 2008 18/01/2021 21 Jamnadass, R., Mumm, R. H., Hale, I., Hendre, P., Muchugi, A., Dawson, I. K., Powell, W., Graudal, L., Yana-Shapiro, H., Simons, A. J., & Van Deynze, A Enhancing African orphan crops with genomics 2020 11/05/2020 22 Anang, B. T., Awuni, J., & Mustapha, A Factors affecting the adoption of grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) farming in Sunyani Municipality, Brong Ahafo Region, Ghana 2011 03/05/2020 23 G.F. Kouassi, G.A. Koné, M. Good, Maryline Kouba Factors Impacting Guinea Fowl (Numida meleagris) Production in Ivory Coast 2011 21/01/2021 24 FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations Promoting neglected and underutilized crop species 2019 11/05/2020 25 FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations Regional Workshop on Neglected and Underutilized Species for Zero Hunger: Status, Progress and Way Forward 2017 26/01/2021 26 Yeboah, C. A Features and profitability of the domestic grasscutter production in the Brong Ahafo region 2009 03/05/2020 27 Danso, B., Cann, R., Danso, B. A., Cann, R., Tsindi, A., & Ayenan, M. A. T Feeding Africa: Role of neglected and underutilized crops species (NUS) 2019 11/05/2020 28 Padulosi, S., Thompson, J., & Rudebjer, P Fighting poverty, hunger, and malnutrition with neglected and underutilized species: needs, challenges and the way forward 2013 05/07/2020 29 Adir, Vink Backyard grasscutter keeping 2014 23/07/2020 30 G. Uarrota, V., de Fatima Moreira de Bairros, A., Gindri, D., Santini Leolato, L., Camargo de Andrade, G., Nerling, D., Stefen, D., Arijama, M., Henriques Razão, E., & Rocha, M From Neglected and Underutilized Crops to Powerful Sources of Vitamin A: Three Case Studies of Mozambican Cultivated Tacca leontopetaloides, Cowpea, and Cassava 2019 11/05/20 31 E. Fallou Guèye Gender issues in family poultry production systems in low-income food-deficit countries 2016 21/01/2021 32 Akinola, L., Etela, I., & Emiero, S Grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) Production in West Africa: Prospects, Challenges and Role in Disease Transmission 2015 03/05/2020 33 Owen, O. J., & Dike, U. A Grasscutter (Thyonomys Swinderianus) Husbandry in Nigeria: A Review of the Potentialities, Opportunities and Challenges 2012 03/05/2020 34 Bello Y., B. M. and I Grasscutter cultivation and uses: issues and challenges. A study of selected local government areas in Edo state, Nigeria 2012 18/01/2021 35 Aluko, A. F., & Salako, A. E Grasscutter: A Review of the Habitat, Feeds and Feeding, Behaviour and Economic Importance 2015 03/05/2020 36 Akuru, E. A., Dim, C. E., Ozioko, C. M., & Ugwu, S. O. C Growth performance of grasscutters fed diets containing Moringa oleifera leaf meal and/or soybean meal 2017 18/01/2021 37 Fayenuwo JO, Akande M, Taiwo A A, Adebayo A O, Saka J O, Lawal BO, T. A. K. and O. P. O Guidelines for grasscutter rearing 2003 18/01/2021 38 Saina, H Guinea Fowl (Numidia Meleagris) Production Under Smallholder Farmer Management in Guruve District, Zimbabwe 2005 20/09/2020 39 Moreki, J. C., & Seabo, D Guinea fowl production in Botswana 2012 21/01/2021 40 Manjeli, Y., Tchoumboue, J., Njwe, R. M., & Teguia, A Guinea-pig productivity under traditional management 1998 22/01/2021 41 Hendre, P., & Deynze, A. van How a consortium is changing Africa’s food systems. – African Orphan Crops Consortium 2015 26/01/2021 177 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa Table 4 (continued) S/N Authors Title Year Date accessed 42 Mfuko, A Income Generation by Housewives through Rabbit Keeping Project at Mwanslugali Mtaa in Kibaha Town Council 2017 04/05/2020 43 Fonteh, F. A., Niba, A. T., Kudi, A. C., & Awah-Ndukum, J. T. and J Influence of weaning age on the growth performance and survival of weaned guinea pigs 2005 23/01/2021 44 FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations Invisible guardians-Women manage livestock diversity 2012 03/05/2020 45 Mwalukasa, L. N Management, Productivity and Socio-Economic Attributes of Guinea Pigs in Njombe District 2009 14/01/2021 46 Hardouin, J Minilivestock: from gathering to controlled production 1995 17/01/2021 47 USFDA Minor Use/Minor Species | FDA 2020 13/07/2020 48 Assan, N Narrowing the socio-economic gender gap through empowerment of women in micro livestock farming: Opportunities and challenges 2014 03/05/2020 49 Blench, R Neglected Species, Livelihoods and Biodiversity in Difficult Areas: How Should the Public Sector Respond? 1997 02/05/2020 50 Yildrim, A Nutrition of Guinea Fowl Breeders 2014 03/07/2020 51 Agwunobi, L. N., & Ekpenyong, T. E Nutritive and economic value of guinea fowl (Numida meleagris) production in developing countries 1990 21/01/2021 52 Assan, N Original article Promoting micro livestock farming to enhance animal product supply in sub–Saharan Africa 2013 02/05/2020 53 Folitse, B. Y., & Manteaw, S. A Perceptions of grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) farmers on production technologies in the Agona West Municipality, Central Region—Ghana 2019 17/01/2021 54 Ebert, A. W Potential of underutilized traditional vegetables and legume crops to contribute to food and nutritional security, income and more sustainable production systems 2014 11/05/2020 55 Conti, M. V., Campanaro, A., Coccetti, P., De Giuseppe, R., Galimberti, A., Labra, M., & Cena, H Potential role of neglected and underutilized plant species in improving women’s empowerment and nutrition in areas of sub-Saharan Africa 2019 11/05/2020 56 Benjamin, U., Akintemi, A., & Ijeomah, H Problems and prospects of grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) farming in Ibadan, Nigeria 2009 17/01/2021 57 R B B Ayagirwe, F Meutchieye, Y. M. and B. L. M Production systems, phenotypic and genetic diversity, and performance of cavy reared in sub-Saharan Africa: a review 2018 03/05/2020 58 Ikpeze, O., & Ebenebe, C Productive Performance of The Grasscutter (Rodentia: Thryonomyidae) Reared Under Three Different Housing Systems 2005 18/01/2021 59 Ebegbulem, V. N Prospects and challenges to guinea fowl (Numida meleagris) production in Nigeria 2018 03/05/2020 60 Mabhaudhi, T., Chimonyo, V. G. P., Hlahla, S., Massawe, F., Mayes, S., Nhamo, L., & Modi, A. T Prospects of orphan crops in climate change 2019 11/05/2020 61 Oseni, S. O., & Lukefahr, S. D Rabbit production in low-input systems in Africa: Situation, knowledge and perspectives—A review 2014 04/05/2020 62 S.D. Lukefahr and P R. Cheeke Rabbit project development strategies in subsistence farming systems 1991 04/05/2020 178 M.Oguche et al. Table 4 (continued) S/N Authors Title Year Date accessed 63 Lammers, P. J., Carlson, S. L., Zdorkowski, G. A., & Honeyman, M. S Reducing food insecurity in developing countries through meat production: The potential of the guinea pig (Cavia porcellus) 2009 03/05/2020 64 Annor, S. Y., Ahunu, B. K., Aboagye, G. S., Boa-Amponsem, K., & Cassady, J. P Relative economic value estimates of grasscutter production traits 2014 17/01/2021 65 P G Addo, B Awumbila, E. A. and N.-A. A Reproductive characteristics of the female grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) and formulation of colony breeding strategies 2007 18/01/2021 66 Adu, E. K., Alhassan, W. S., & Nelson, F. S Smallholder Farming of the Greater Cane Rat, Thryonomys swinderianus, Temminck, in Southern Ghana: A Baseline Survey of Management Practices 1999 17/01/2021 67 Balma, Y. I., & Richard, N. Y Socio-economic attributes of guinea fowl production in two districts in Northern Ghana 2016 21/01/2021 68 Mabhaudhi, T., Chimonyo, V. G. P., & Modi, A. T Status of underutilised crops in South Africa: Opportunities for developing research capacity 2017 11/05/2020 69 Nuwanyakpa, M., Lukefahr, S. D., And D. G., & Ngoupayou, J. D The current stage and future prospects of guinea pig production under smallholder conditions in West Africa 1997 03/05/2020 70 Asuk, S., Ogogo, A. U., Okeke, A. N., & Ebina, B. J Nutrient content and palatability of captive bred and wild grasscutter meat 2017 17/01/2021 71 M Nuwanyakpa, S D Lukefahr, D. G. and J. D. N The current stage and future prospects of guinea pig production under smallholder conditions in West Africa; 2. Cameroon case 1997 03/05/2020 72 Molina-flores, B., Manzano-baena, P., Coulibaly, M. D., & Bedane, B The role of livestock in food security, poverty reduction and wealth creation in West Africa 2020 07/01/2021 73 Opara, M. N The Grasscutter I: A Livestock of Tomorrow 2010 03/05/2020 74 E K Adu, A Asafu-Adjaye, B. A. H. and J. K. N The grasscutter: an untapped resource of Africa’s grasslands 2017 03/05/2020 75 Morales, E The Guinea Pig in the Andean Economy: From Household Animal to Market Commodity. In Source: 1994 03/05/2020 76 Adu, I. I. A.-R. and Y. E The role of the rural farmer in guinea fowl Numida meleagris value chain, a case study of the Tolon district 2017 03/05/2020 77 Cawthorn, D.-M., & Hoffman, L. C The role of traditional and non-traditional meat animals in feeding a growing and evolving world 2014 02/05/2020 78 J C Moreki, R, D., & B, P The role of village poultry in food security and HIV/AIDS mitigation in Chobe District of Botswana 2010 04/05/2020 79 Chivenge, Pauline Mabhaudhi, Tafadzwanashe Modi, Albert T Mafongoya, Paramu The potential role of neglected and underutilised crop species as future crops under water scarce conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa 2015 11/05/2020 80 Kouakou, N. D. V., Speybroeck, N., Assidjo, N. E., Grongnet, J. F., & Thys, E Typifying guinea pig (Cavia porcellus) farmers in urban and peri-urban areas in central and southern Côte d’Ivoire 2011 11/07/2020 81 Madzimure, J., Saina, H., & Ngorora, G. P. K Market potential for guinea fowl (Numidia meleagris) products 2011 03/05/2020 82 Mailafia, S., Onakpa, M., & Owoleke, O Problems and prospects of rabbit production in Nigeria—a review 2011 04/05/2020 83 National Research Council Microlivestock: Little-Known Small Animals with a Promising Economic Future 1991 03/07/2020 84 Assan, N Micro-Livestock Farming and Food Security in Sub Saharan Africa 2014 02/05/2020 179 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge the efforts of our reviewers for their meaningful feedback and donors for their commitment towards agricultural research to improve food security. We are grateful for funding from the “Program of Accompanying Research for Agricultural Innovation” (PARI), which is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Data Availability The authors confirm that all data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article andits supplementary information files in the appendices. Should any raw data files be needed in another format theyare available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Declarations Conflict of interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial or non-financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. References Adedeji, O. A., Osowe, C. O., & Folayan, J. A. (2015). Socio-Economic characteristic and profitability analysis of rabbit production in Ondo State, Nigeria. European Journal of Physical and Agricultural Sciences, 3(3), 10–19. Adu, E. K., Alhassan, W. S., & Nelson, F. S. (1999). Smallholder Farming of the Greater Cane Rat, Thryonomys swinderianus, Temminck, in Southern Ghana: A baseline survey of management practices. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 31(4), 223–232. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1023/A: 10052 67110 830 Abdul-Rahman, I. I., & Adu, Y. E. (2017). The role of the rural farmer in guinea fowl Numida meleagris value chain, a case study of the Tolon district. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 29(4), 1–3. African Union Interafrican Bureau For Animal Resources Breeding AU-IBAR. (2012). Breeding of guinea fowls as a viable option for increased poultry production in Africa. p 2–4. Retrieved May 3, 2020 from https:// auibar. org/ Akinola, L., Etela, I., & Emiero, S. (2015). Grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) Production in West Africa: Prospects, challenges and role in disease transmission. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 6(4), 196–207. https:// doi. org/ 10. 9734/ ajea/ 2015/ 14194 Aluko, A. F., & Salako, A. E. (2015). Grasscutter: A review of the habitat, feeds and feeding, behaviour and economic importance. American Journal of Research Communication, 3(9), 96–107. Table 4 (continued) S/N Authors Title Year Date accessed 85 The Peace Corps A complete handbook on backyard and commercial rabbit production 2014 25/01/2021 86 Kale, P., Kitilit, J., & Kebeney, S Rabbit production practices among smallholder famers in Kenya 2016 04/05/2020 87 Dalle Zotte, A Perception of rabbit meat quality and major factors influencing the rabbit carcass and meat quality 2002 25/01/2021 88 Finzi, A Raising rabbits for food security 2000 02/05/2020 89 Adedeji O. A., Osowe C.O., F. J. A Socio-Economic Characteristic and Profitability Analysis of Rabbit Production in Ondo State, Nigeria 2015 04/05/2020 180 M.Oguche et al. Anang, B. T., Awuni, J., & Mustapha, A. (2011). Factors affecting the adoption of grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) farming in Sunyani Municipality, Brong Ahafo Region, Ghana. Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 2(3), 43–48. Annor, S. Y., Ahunu, B. K., Aboagye, G. S., Boa-Amponsem, K., & Cassady, J. P. (2014). Relative economic value estimates of grasscutter production traits. International Journal of Livestock Production, 5(8), 137–146. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5897/ IJLP2 013. 0180 Assan, N. (2013). Original article promoting micro livestock farming to enhance animal product supply in sub saharan Africa. Scientific Journal of Biological Sciences, 2(12), 232–243. https:// doi. org/ 10. 14196/ sjbs. v2i12. 1063 Assan, N. (2014). Micro-livestock farming and food security in Sub Saharan Africa Micro-Livestock farming and Food Security in Sub. Journal of Animal Production Advances, 4(44), 374–387. Asuk, S., Ogogo, A. U., Okeke, A. N., & Ebina, B. J. (2017). Nutrient content and palatability of captive bred and wild grasscutter meat. International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research, 5(1), 12-17. https:// doi. org/ 10. 15739/ IJAPR. 17. 002 Avornyo, F. K., Salifu, S., Panyan, E. K., Al-Hassan, B. I., Ahiagbe, M., & Yeboah, F. (2016). Characteristics of guinea fowl production systems in northern Ghana. A baseline study of 20 districts in northern Ghana. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 28(8), 1–2. Balehegn, M., Kebreab, E., Tolera, A., Hunt, S., Erickson, P., Crane, T. A., & Adesogan, A. T. (2021). Livestock sustainability research in Africa with a focus on the environment. Animal Frontiers, 11(4), 47–56. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ af/ vfab0 34 Balma, Y. I., & Richard, N. Y. (2016). Socio-economic attributes of guinea fowl production in two districts in Northern Ghana. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 11(14), 1209–1217. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5897/ ajar2 015. 10258 Benjamin, U., Akintemi, A., & Ijeomah, H. (2009). Problems and prospects of grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) farming in Ibadan, Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and the Social Sciences, 4(2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 4314/ joafss. v4i2. 33742 Birner, R., Davis, K., Pender, J., Nkonya, E., Anandajayasekeram, P., Ekboir, J., Mbabu, A., Spielman, D., Horna, D., Benin, S., & Cohen, M. (2009). From best practice to best fit: A framework for designing and analyzing pluralistic agricultural advisory services worldwide. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 15(4), 341–355. Blench, R. (1997). Neglected species, livelihoods and biodiversity in difficult areas: How should the public sector respond? ODI Natural Resources Paper, 23. Retrieved May 2, 2020 from http:// dlc. dlib. india na. edu/ dlc/ handle/ 10535/ 3833 Cawthorn, D.-M., & Hoffman, L. C. (2014). The role of traditional and non-traditional meat animals in feeding a growing and evolving world. Animal Frontiers, 4(4), 6–12. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2527/ af. 20140027 Conti, M. V., Campanaro, A., Coccetti, P., De Giuseppe, R., Galimberti, A., Labra, M., & Cena, H. (2019). Potential role of neglected and underutilized plant species in improving women’s empowerment and nutrition in areas of sub-Saharan Africa. Nutrition Reviews, 77(11), 817–828. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ nutrit/ nuz038 Chivenge, P., Mabhaudhi, T., Modi, A. T., & Mafongoya, P. (2015). The potential role of neglected and underutilised crop species as future crops under water scarce conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(6), 5685–5711. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ ijerp h1206 05685 Davis, K. F., Yu, K., Herrero, M., Havlik, P., Carr, J. A., & D’Odorico, P. (2015). Historical trade-offs of livestock’s environmental impacts. Environmental Research Letters, 10(12), 125013. Dwyer, W., Ibe, C. N., & Rhee, S. Y. (2022). Renaming Indigenous crops and addressing colonial bias in scientific language. Trends in Plant Science, 27, 1189–1192. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tplan ts. 2022. 08. 022 E K Adu, A Asafu-Adjaye, B. A. H. and J. K. N. (2017). The grasscutter: an untapped resource of Africa’s grasslands. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Retrieved May 3, 2020 from http:// www. lrrd. org/ lrrd29/ 3/ jnya2 9047. html Ebegbulem, V. N. (2018). Prospects and challenges to guinea fowl (Numida meleagris) production in Nigeria. International Journal of Avian & Wildlife Biology, 3(2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 15406/ ijawb. 2018. 03. 00083 Ebert, A. W. (2014). Potential of underutilized traditional vegetables and legume crops to contribute to food and nutritional security, income and more sustainable production systems. Sustainability (Switzerland), 6(1), 319–335. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su601 0319 FAO. (2020). The future of livestock | Africa Sustainable Livestock 2050 | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available at https:// www. fao. org/ inaction/ asl20 50. Accessed20 Aug 2021. FAO. (2024). Livestock Systems| Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available at https:// www. f ao. org/ lives t ocksyste ms/ en/. Accessed08 Sept 2024. FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 2024. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2024 – Financing to end hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all its forms. Rome. Retrieved from https:// doi. org/ 10. 4060/ cd125 4en Fayenuwo JO, Akande M, Taiwo A A, Adebayo A O, Saka J O, Lawal BO, T. A. K. and O. P. O. (2003). Guidelines for grasscutter rearing. Technical Bulletin. IAR &T., Ibadan. 2003, pp. 38. Folitse, B. Y., & Manteaw, S. A. (2019). Perceptions of grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) farmers on production technologies in the Agona West Municipality, Central Region - Ghana. Ghana Journal of Agricultural Science, 54(1), 47–55. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4314/ gjas. v54i1.5 Fon, D. E., Felix, M., & Niba, A. T. (2014). A Gender Perspective of Cavy Farmers’ Livelihood Analysis for the Western Highlands of Cameroon. Global Journal of Biology, Agriculture & Health Sciences, 3(2), 113–121. Ghana Ministry of Food and Agriculture. (2016). Ghana-livestockdevelopment-policy-and-strategy. Available at https:// www. fao. org/ faolex/ resul ts/ detai ls/ en/c/ LEXFAOC1 69291 Gono, R. K., Dube, J., Sichewo, P. R., & Muzondiwa, J. V. (2013a). Constraints and opportunities to Guinea Fowl production in Zimbabwe: A case study of the Midlands Province, Zimbabwe. International Journal of Science and Research, 2(3), 236–239. Available at https:// www. resea rchga te. net/ profi le/ RobertGono/ publi cation/ 25685 2204 Gono, R. K., Dube, J., Sichewo, P. R., & Muzondiwa, J. V. (2013b). Constraints and opportunities to Rabbit production in Zimbabwe: A case study of the Midlands Province, Zimbabwe. International Journal of Science and Research, 2(9), 365–369. Available at https:// www. resea rchga te. net/ profi le/ RobertGono/ publi cation/ 25684 8101 Hardouin, J. (1995). Minilivestock: From gathering to controlled production. Biodiversity and Conservation, 4(3), 220–232. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ BF000 55969 Hendre, P. S., Muthemba, S., Kariba, R., Muchugi, A., Fu, Y., Chang, Y., Song, B., Liu, H., Liu, M., Liao, X., Sahu, S. K., Wang, S., Li, L., Lu, H., Peng, S., Cheng, S., Xu, X., Yang, H., Wang, J., … Jamnadass, R. (2019). African Orphan Crops Consortium (AOCC): status of developing genomic resources for African orphan crops. In Planta (Vol. 250, Issue 3, pp. 989–1003). Springer Verlag. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s0042501903156-9 Herrero, M., Thornton, P. K., Gerber, P., & Reid, R. S. (2009). Livestock, livelihoods and the environment: Understanding the tradeoffs. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 1(2), 111–120. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. cosust. 2009. 10. 003 181 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa Herrero, M., Havlik, P., McIntire, J., Palazzo, A., & Valin, H. (2014). African livestock futures: Realizing the potential of livestock for food security, poverty reduction and the environment in Sub-Saharan Africa (p. 118). Geneva: Office of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General for Food Security and Nutrition and the United Nations System Influenza Coordination (UNSIC). Hopewell, S., McDonald, S., Clarke, M. J., & Egger, M. (2007). Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (2), MR000010. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ 14651 858. MR000 010. pub3 Houndonougbo, P. V., Bindelle, J., Chrysostome, C. A. A. M., Hammami, H., & Gengler, N. (2017). Characteristics of Guinea fowl breeding in West Africa: A review. Tropicultura, 35(3), 223–230. https:// doi. org/ 10. 25518/ 22958010. 1283 Ibitoye, O., Kolejo, O., & Akinyemi, G. (2019). Burgeoning and Domestication of Grasscutter (Thryonomys swinderianus) in a Post-Ebola Era: A Reassessment of its Prospects and Challenges in Nigeria. World Scientific News, 130, 216–237. www. world scien tific news. com Isaac, O. G., & Chiedu, U. C. (2016). Comparative evaluation of nutritional values of guinea fowl, duck and quail eggs. Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology, 10(1), 57–59. https:// doi. org/ 10. 9790/ 240210115 759 Jamnadass, R., Mumm, R. H., Hale, I., Hendre, P., Muchugi, A., Dawson, I. K., Powell, W., Graudal, L., Yana-Shapiro, H., Simons, A. J., & Van Deynze, A. (2020). Enhancing African orphan crops with genomics. Nature Genetics, 52. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ s415880200601-x Jori, F., Edderai, D., & Houben, P. (2005). Potential of rodents for minilivestok in Africa. Ecological implications of minilivestock: potential of insects, rodents, frogs, and snails. Enfield: Science Publishers, 25–45. Retrieved May 3, 2020 from https:// www. resea rchga te. net/ publi cation/ 26637 2129 Kale, P., Kitilit, J., & Kebeney, S. (2016). Rabbit production practices among smallholder famers in Kenya. In Fifth African Higher Education Week and RUFORUM Biennial Conference, Cape Town, South Africa 14(14) (pp. 803–809). Kosgey, I. S., & Okeyo, A. M. (2007). Genetic improvement of small ruminants in low-input, smallholder production systems: Technical and infrastructural issues. Small Ruminant Research, 70(1), 76–88. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. small rumres. 2007. 01. 007 Lammers, P. J., Carlson, S. L., Zdorkowski, G. A., & Honeyman, M. S. (2009). Reducing food insecurity in developing countries through meat production: The potential of the guinea pig (Cavia porcellus). Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 24(2), 155–162. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ S1742 17050 90025 43 Lebov, J., Grieger, K., Womack, D., Zaccaro, D., Whitehead, N., Kowalcyk, B., & MacDonald, P. D. M. (2017). A framework for One Health research. One Health, 3, 44–50. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/J. ONEHLT. 2017. 03. 004 Lesnikowski, A. C., Ford, J. D., Berrang-Ford, L., Paterson, J. A., Barrera, M., & Heymann, S. J. (2011). Adapting to health impacts of climate change: a study of UNFCCC Annex I parties. Environmental Research Letters, 6(4), 044009. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1088/ 17489326/6/ 4/ 044009 Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine 6(7). https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pmed. 10001 00 Mabhaudhi, T., Chimonyo, V. G. P., Chibarabada, T. P., & Modi, A. T. (2017a). Developing a roadmap for improving neglected and underutilized crops: A case study of South Africa. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8, 2143. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpls. 2017. 02143 Mabhaudhi, T., Chimonyo, V. G. P., Hlahla, S., Massawe, F., Mayes, S., Nhamo, L., & Modi, A. T. (2019). Prospects of orphan crops in climate change. Planta 250(3), 695–708. Springer Verlag. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s0042501903129-y Mabhaudhi, T., Chimonyo, V. G. P., & Modi, A. T. (2017b). Status of underutilised crops in South Africa: Opportunities for developing research capacity. Sustainability, 9(9). MDPI AG. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su909 1569 Madzimure, J., Saina, H., & Ngorora, G. P. K. (2011). Market potential for guinea fowl (Numidia meleagris) products. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 43(8), 1509–1515. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s112500119835-z Mahood, Q., Van Eerd, D., & Irvin, E. (2014). Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: Challenges and benefits. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(3), 221–234. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ jrsm. 1106 Mailafia, S., Onakpa, M., & Owoleke, O. (2011). Problems and prospects of rabbit production in Nigeria - a review. Bayero Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 3(2). https:// doi. org/ 10. 4314/ bajop as. v3i2. 63213 Malabo Montpellier Panel. 2020. Meat, milk and more: Policy innovations to shepherd inclusive and sustainable livestock systems in Africa. Malabo Montpellier Panel Livestock Report. Dakar, Senegal: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); and AKADEMIYA2063. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2499/ 97808 96293 861 Manjeli, Y., Tchoumboue, J., Njwe, R. M., & Teguia, A. (1998). Guinea-pig productivity under traditional management. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 30(2), 115–122. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1023/A: 10050 99818 044 McDermott, J. J., Staal, S. J., Freeman, H. A., Herrero, M., & Van de Steeg, J. A. (2010). Sustaining intensification of smallholder livestock systems in the tropics. Livestock Science, 130(1–3), 95–109. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. livsci. 2010. 02. 014 Mehrabi, Z., Gill, M., van Wijk, M., Herrero, M., & Ramankutty, N. (2020). Livestock policy for sustainable development. Nature Food, 1(3), 160–165. https:// doi. or g/ 10. 1038/ s430160200042-9 Molina-flores, B., Manzano-baena, P., Coulibaly, M. D., & Bedane, B. (2020). The role of livestock in food security, poverty reduction and wealth creation in West Africa. In Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4060/ ca838 5en Morales, E. (1994). The Guinea Pig in the andean economy: From household animal to market commodity. Source: Latin American Research Review, 29(3), 129–142. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ S0023 87910 00355 61 Moreki, J., & Seabo, D. (2012a). Current status, challenges and opportunities of rabbit production in Botswana. Online Journal of Animal and Feed Research, 2(2), 177–181. Moreki, J. C., & Seabo, D. (2012b). Guinea fowl production in Botswana. JOurnal of World’s Poultry Research, 2(1), 1–4. Mustafa, M. O., Akinyemi, I. G., Adewale, M. I., Odeleye, O. A., & Abdulazeez, F. I. (2015). Comparative Assessment of Growth Structure and Litter Size of Grasscutter (Thryonomys Swinderianus Temminck, 1872) Bred In Captivity. Journal of Natural Sciences Research 5(15), www. iiste. org ISSN. www. iiste. org National Research Council. (1991). Microlivestock: Little-Known Small Animals with a Promising Economic Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https:// doi. org/ 10. 17226/ 1831 Niba, A. T., Meutchieye, F., Fon, D., Laisin, A. G., Taboh, H., Njakoi, H., Bela Tomo, A., Maass, B. L., Djikeng, A., & Manjeli, Y. (2012). Current situation of cavy production in Cameroon: Challenges and opportunities. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 24(11), 7. Opara, M. N. (2010). The Grasscutter I: A Livestock of Tomorrow. Research Journal of Forestry, 4(3), 119–135. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3923/ rjf. 2010. 119. 135 182 M.Oguche et al. Oseni, S. O., & Lukefahr, S. D. (2014). Rabbit production in lowinput systems in Africa: Situation, knowledge and perspectives - A review. World Rabbit Science, 22(2), 147–160. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4995/ wrs. 2014. 1348 Otte, J., & Knips, V. (2005). Livestock development for Sub-saharan Africa. Pro-poor Livestock Policy Initiative: A living from Livestock, Harare, Zimbabwe. Retrieved December 4, 2020 from http:// www. fao. org/3/ bp306e/ bp306e. pdf Owen, O. J., & Dike, U. A. (2012). Grasscutter (Thyonomys Swinderianus) Husbandry in Nigeria: A review of the potentialities, opportunities and challenges. Journal of Environmental Issues and Agriculture in Developing Countries, 4(1), 104–111. Padulosi, S., Thompson, J., & Rudebjer, P. (2013). Fighting poverty, hunger and malnutrition with neglected and underutilized species: needs, challenges and the way forward. In Bioversity International. Retrieved July 5, 2020 from https:// cgspa ce. cgiar. org/ handle/ 10568/ 68927 Padulosi, S., Phrang, R., & Rosado-May, F. J. (2019). Supporting Nutrition Sensitive Agriculture through neglected and underutilized species: Operational framework (p. 44). Rome: Bioversity International and IFAD. Rege, J. E. O., Marshall, K., Notenbaert, A., Ojango, J. M. K., & Okeyo, A. M. (2011). Pro-poor animal improvement and breeding - What can science do? Livestock Science, 136(1), 15–28. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. livsci. 2010. 09. 003 Republic of Kenya, Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Irrigation, & State Department for Livestock. (2019). Draft national livestock policy. Available at https:// repos itory. kippra. or. ke/ handle/ 12345 6789/ 483 Saina, H. (2005). Guinea fowl (Numidia meleagris) production under smallholder farmer management in Guruve District, Zimbabwe. Master of Philosophy thesis, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe. Retrieved September 20, 2020 from http:// cites eerx. ist. psu. edu/ viewd oc/ downl oad? doi= 10.1. 1. 533. 4654& rep= rep1& type= pdf Schöpfel, J. (2010). Towards a Prague definition of grey literature. In Twelfth International Conference on Grey Literature: Transparency in Grey Literature. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ 00220 41101 10878 41 Serem, J. K., Wanyoike, M. M., Gachuiri, C. K., Mailu, S. K., Gathumbi, P. K., Mwanz, R. N., Kiarie, N., & Borter, D. K. (2013). Characterization of Rabbit Production Systems in Kenya. Journal of Agricultural Science and Applications, 02(03), 155–159. https:// doi. org/ 10. 14511/ jasa. 2013. 020304 The Peace Corps. (2014). A complete handbook on backyard and commercial rabbit production. Peace Corps, Information Collection and Exchange. Retrieved January 25, 2021 from https:// pclive. peace corps. go v/ pclive/ index. php/ pcliveresou rces/ resou rcelibra ry/ 1281r0041compl etehandb ookbacky ardrabbitprodu ction/ file Traoré, S. A., Reiber, C., Megersa, B., & Zárate, A. V. (2018). Contribution of cattle of different breeds to household food security in southern Mali. Food Security, 10(3), 549–560. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s125710180795-2 Ume, S., & Ezeano, C. (2017). Economics of Rabbit (Oryctolagus Cuniculus) Production in in Ivo Local Government of Area of Ebonyi State. International Journal of Research and Review, 4(1): 126-136. https:// www. ijr rj our nal. com/ IJRR_ Vol.4_ Issue.1_ Jan20 17/ IJRR0 020. pdf United Nations Environment Programme and International Livestock Research Institute - UNEP&ILRI (2020). Preventing the Next Pandemic: Zoonotic diseases and how to break the chain of transmission. Nairobi, Kenya. Retrieved from https:// www. cbd. int/ doc/c/ 084c/ e8fd/ 84ca7 fe0e1 9e699 67bb9 fb73/ unepsasbsttasbi02en. pdf. USFDA. (2020). Minor Use/Minor Species | FDA. Retrieved July 13, 2020 from https:// www. fda. gov/ animalveter inary/ devel opmentappro valproce ss/ minorusemi norspeci es vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Niehaves, B., Riemer, K., Plattfaut, R., & Cleven, A. (2009). “reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process” (2009). ECIS 2009 Proceedings. 161. Retrieved June 20, 2020 from https:// aisel. aisnet. org/ ecis2 009/ 161 World Economic Forum. (2019). Meat: the Future series options for the livestock sector in developing and emerging economies to 2030 and Beyond. January, 28. Retrieved May 28, 2021 from www. wefor um. org Yeboah, C. A. (2009). Features and profitability of the domestic greasscutter production in the Brong Ahafo region. Science, 92. A thesis submitted to the school of graduate studies Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana, Kumasi. Retrieved May 3, 2020 from http:// ir. knust. edu. gh/ bitst ream/ 12345 6789/ 287/1/ Featu res% 20and% 20Pro fitab ility% 20of% 20Dom estic% 20Gra sscut terMain% 20Work. pdf Yildrim, A. (2014). Nutrition of Guinea Fowl Breeders. The 8th Asian Poultry Conference, January 2007, 1–8. Retrieved July 3, 2020 from https:// www. resea rchg a te. ne t/ publi cation/ 20333 0598 Yiva, C. H., Fon, D., Felix, M., & Niba, A. T. (2014). Cavies for income generation, manure for the farm and meat for the table. Scholarly Journal of Agricultural Science, 4(5), 260–264. Maria Oguche Maria Oguche is a PhD candidate and research assistant at the department of Animal Breeding and Husbandry in the Tropics and Subtropics, Hans-Ruthenberg Institute at the University of Hohenheim. Maria holds a Bachelor and Master’s in Agricultural economics. Her professional and research interests are in the field of livestock research including food security, sustainable livestock production systems, climate change impacts, gender and household nutrition. Dr. Juliet Kariuki Juliet Kariuki holds a Ph.D. in Agricultural Sciences, a Master of Arts degree in Environment, Culture, and Society, and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Sociology. Her post-doctoral research focuses on understanding the social dimensions of livestock management mostly in sub-Saharan Africa with a focus on gender and equity. Specifically, she has worked on gendered dimensions in livestock breeding, marketing, risk management, and natural resource management. She has experience in conducting qualitative and quantitative research to understand the interand intrahousehold dynamics of men and women in livestock-dependent households. 183 Unrecognized potential in neglected livestock species in Africa Prof. Dr. Regina Birner Regina Birner is Chair of Social and Institutional Change in Agricultural Development at the University of Hohenheim, Germany. Her research focuses on policies, governance and institutions that are essential for global food security and agricultural development. Gender is a cross-cutting concern of her research. She has more than 25 years of empirical research experience on smallholder farming systems in Africa, Asia and Latin America and has published widely in this field. Her latest research deals with digital innovations in agriculture. Regina Birner is a member of the Advisory Council on Agricultural Policy of the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) and she was a member of the Advisory Council on Bioeconomy of the German Federal Government. She is also advising international organizations, including the World Bank and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Prof. Dr. Mizeck Chagunda Mizeck Chagunda is the Director of Centre for Tropical Livestock Genetics and Health (CTLGH) and Chair of Tropical Livestock Genetics, University of Edinburgh. Prior to that, he was a Chair of Animal Breeding and Husbandry in the Tropics and Subtropics at the University of Hohenheim. Prior to joining the University of Hohenheim, Prof. Chagunda was with Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC) in the UK. Previously, Prof. Chagunda worked at the University of Aarhus in Denmark and LUANAR in Malawi after obtaining his doctorate degree at the University of Göttingen in Germany. Prof. Chagunda is a Quantitative Geneticist who is interested in the use and integration of knowledge and technologies from different fields in order to contribute towards developing efficient agricultural systems that improve productivity, human health and sustainable livelihoods while protecting the environment.