How Farmers Recognise Breeds: Evidence from Nili-Ravi Buffalo Rearers in India

How Farmers Recognise Breeds: Evidence from Nili-Ravi Buffalo Rearers in India | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article How Farmers Recognise Breeds: Evidence from Nili-Ravi Buffalo Rearers in India Gururaj Makarabbi, AISWARYA S., NAVNEET SAXENA, FC Tuteja This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9340421/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 11 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Livestock rearing anchors cultural identity and household sustenance in rural Punjab, where the Nili-Ravi buffalo continues to carry ecological and social importance despite the expanding preference for other high-yielding breeds. Farmer perceptions shape the continuity of this indigenous breed, yet these perception systems remain poorly represented in formal breeding and conservation frameworks. The study was conducted in the four districts of Punjab that host India’s only concentrated Nili-Ravi population—Firozpur, Tarn Taran, Amritsar and Gurdaspur—using a stratified random sampling plan covering eight blocks and 240 respondent households. Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) was applied to calibrate four farmer-defined traits, construct truth tables, test necessity conditions, and explore sufficiency configurations. Findings revealed that farmers engaged in different rearing systems interpret the breed through distinctly different perceptual logics. Only-Nili-Ravi rearers relied strongly on pinkish tongue, short forelimbs, and walled eyes as core identification cues, whereas mixed rearers managing both Nili-Ravi and Murrah prioritised Panch Kalyani due to the need for clearer visual differentiation across breeds. Configurational analysis showed that high breed recognition among Nili-Ravi-only rearers required combinations of pink tongue, short forelimbs, and walled eyes, while among mixed rearers, Panch Kalyani consistently emerged as the core condition. These results demonstrate that breed perception is context-dependent, shaped by herd composition, visual contrast, and experiential familiarity. The study suggests that conservation policy must integrate farmer-defined perceptual cues, periodically revisit breed descriptors, and design participatory extension strategies aligned with the recognition systems actually used by rearers in the field. Nili Ravi Panch Kalyani Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) Farmer perceptions Breed traits Participatory breed conservation Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Introduction Livestock rearing remains inseparable from the cultural life and livelihood systems of rural India, where buffaloes continue to shape identity, income, and local ecology (Chiariotti et al. 2025 ). Among the country’s diverse breeds, the Nili-Ravi holds a distinctive place as a marker of cultural heritage, adaptability, and indigenous resilience (Mathew and Mathew, 2023 ; Singh 2022 ). Even as high-yielding breeds like Murrah dominate commercial dairying, many farmers within the Nili-Ravi breeding tract continue to rear this breed because of its dependable milk yield, favourable fat content, docile temperament, and long-standing cultural value. Their preference reflects not only economic considerations but also a conscious commitment to sustaining an animal genetic resource embedded in local history and environment (Kumar and S, 2025). The long-term sustainability of such indigenous breeds relies as much on community perceptions and everyday decisions as on formal breeding interventions. Rural livestock keepers have historically acted as custodians of biodiversity, drawing on experiential and culturally transmitted knowledge that has evolved through generations of observation and practice (Kis et al. 2017 ). Their understanding of breed traits covering morphology, temperament, milk characteristics, and adaptive ability forms a folk taxonomy that guides breeding choices, husbandry practices, and the symbolic importance attributed to certain physical markers. Acknowledging these community-based perceptions and integrating them into breed development and popularisation efforts can help align scientific agendas with the lived realities of those who continue to conserve and nurture the Nili-Ravi buffalo. The Nili-Ravi buffalo, primarily found in north-western India and parts of Pakistan, represents one of the oldest and most distinct riverine buffalo breeds (Anas et al., 2023 ; Khan et al., 2023 ; Zhang et al., 2020 ). The breed is often recognized for its characteristic short forelimbs, walled eyes, white markings on the forehead, face, muzzle, legs, and tail, and a typically pinkish tongue (Anas et al., 2023 ). Breeders commonly refer to it as ‘Panch Kalyani,’ a term that signifies the presence of five auspicious white points (Vij & Tantia, 2005 ). Beyond physical appearance, these features are perceived as signs of purity, prosperity, and good fortune, embedding the Nili-Ravi within the cultural and spiritual landscape of rural households (Singh et al., 2024 ). The breed is not only valued for its aesthetic and cultural symbolism but also for its docile temperament, adaptability to diverse climatic conditions, and long lactation length, making it suitable for smallholder and mixed-farming systems (Desta, 2012 ;Clevland et al. 2000). However, in recent decades, the expansion of market-oriented dairying has led to a progressive replacement of local breeds by Murrah buffaloes, known for their high milk yield and better commercial performance (Tyagi et al., 2021 ). The economic logic driving this substitution often overlooks the ecological, genetic, and cultural functions of indigenous breeds. While Murrah buffaloes are preferred in intensive production systems, Nili-Ravi buffaloes continue to survive in traditional production environments, particularly among farmers who value their adaptability, longevity, and manageable nature (Kis et al., 2017 ). This juxtaposition between commercial viability and cultural continuity offers an important site to explore how local perceptions shape breed conservation decisions. From a breeder’s standpoint, the definition of Nili-Ravi is precise and standardised. The Panch Kalyani features, compact body, and distinct white markings are considered hallmarks of breed purity (Anas et al., 2023 ; Khan et al., 2023 ; Zhang et al., 2020 ). Yet, among farmers, especially those maintaining mixed herds of Nili-Ravi and Murrah, perceptions of breed quality are often more fluid. While some prioritize cultural and visual attributes, others focus on productive and reproductive performance. Such inter-group perceptual variations hold significant implications for breed improvement and conservation strategies. They indicate that breed identity is not merely a biological construct but also a socially negotiated category, reflecting local preferences, production goals, and the symbolic meanings attached to animals (Holloway et al., 2011 ). Understanding farmers’ perception of breed characteristics is essential for developing participatory strategies that support the propagation and popularisation of the Nili-Ravi buffalo. Conservation and improvement of the breed cannot be sustained through top-down genetic programmes or policy directives alone. Meaningful progress depends on integrating farmers’ experiential knowledge, preferences, and selection practices into community-centred breeding and conservation efforts. It requires a bottom-up understanding of how communities value and interact with their livestock. Farmers’ observations often capture subtle traits such as temperament, disease resilience, or feeding efficiency that may not be formally recorded but are critical for local adaptation. Involving farmers in identifying and describing such traits helps ensure that conservation priorities align with livelihood realities and cultural expectations (Bellon et al., 2015 ; Estrada-Carmona et al., 2014 ). Despite the acknowledged importance of community perspectives, systematic studies examining farmers’ perception of Nili-Ravi buffalo traits remain limited. Most existing research on indigenous buffalo breeds focuses on performance parameters, genetic diversity, or physical characterization, often overlooking the socio-cultural and perceptual dimensions that influence breed choice and maintenance (Kaushik, 2020 ; Alebachew, 2017 ; Jain & Muladno, 2009 ). This gap is particularly relevant in regions where both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes coexist, creating a dynamic interface between traditional and commercial production logics. Farmers who rear only Nili-Ravi buffaloes may attach symbolic or heritage-based value to the breed, whereas those maintaining mixed herds may evaluate it through a utilitarian lens considering milk yield, calving performance, and adaptability to market demands. Understanding these dual perceptions carries practical significance, as policy and extension initiatives aimed at promoting or conserving indigenous breeds often fall short when they prioritise biological notions of breed purity while overlooking the socio-cultural realities shaping rearing practices. Engaging local farmers in identifying, describing, and prioritizing traits can foster greater ownership and sustainability of conservation initiatives (Mills et al., 2017 ; Bellon et al., 2015 ). It also ensures that breed improvement programmes do not unintentionally erode the very characteristics that define a breed’s local identity. In this context, the present study explores how farmers perceive and define the distinguishing traits of the Nili-Ravi breed, with particular attention to differences between (a) farmers who exclusively rear Nili-Ravi buffaloes and (b) those who maintain both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals. The study hypothesizes that the two groups differ significantly in their trait preferences and the underlying rationale for breed selection. The specific objectives of the study are: To document farmers’ perception of the major identification traits of the Nili-Ravi buffalo. To compare the perception of breed characteristics between farmers only rear Nili-Ravi and farmers rear both Nili-Ravi and Murrah (mixed farms). To explore the socio-cultural and economic rationale behind farmers’ continued preference for Nili-Ravi buffaloes. To identify the implications of these perceptions for participatory breed popularisation, propagation and conservation, along with their relevance for extension strategies. This study situates the Nili-Ravi buffalo within the broader discourse on local knowledge, cultural heritage, and sustainable livestock management. It highlights that effective conservation is not merely a scientific exercise but a social process; one that must incorporate the lived experiences, beliefs, and aspirations of local communities. By understanding how farmers interpret and value the breed’s characteristics, the study provides an evidence base for participatory policies and interventions that can strengthen both biodiversity conservation and rural livelihoods. Material and methods Research Design The study adopted an ex post facto research design to analyse how farmers naturally identify the Nili-Ravi buffalo based on long-established experiential knowledge and morphological cues. Since the perceptions and recognition patterns already existed prior to the study, no manipulation or intervention was introduced. Instead, farmers’ existing breed identification abilities were documented and analyzed as they occurred in the real field context. Locale of Study and Sampling Plan A stratified random sampling technique was used for selecting the respondent households. The study was undertaken in Punjab, the only Indian state that maintains a substantial and historically recognized population of true-to-type Nili-Ravi buffaloes, with the breed concentrated primarily in Firozpur, Tarn Taran, Amritsar and Gurdaspur districts (Vij & Tantia, 2005). All four districts were therefore included in the sampling frame (Figure 1). From each district, two blocks were selected randomly—Ghull Khurd and Firozpur (Firozpur district), Attari and Amritsar (Amritsar district), Bhikiwind and Gandiwind (Tarn Taran district), and Batala and Gurdaspur (Gurdaspur district). From each block, 30 farmers were selected, giving a total sample of 240 respondents who were personally interviewed using a semi-structured, pre-tested schedule. Following data collection, the respondents were post-stratified into two groups i.e. only Nili-Ravi rearers and mixed rearers using the cumulative square root frequency method based on the breed composition they maintained. Overall, 45.42% of the farmers exclusively reared Nili-Ravi buffaloes, whereas 54.58% kept both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals and were classified as mixed rearers. District-wise distribution showed that 65%, 60%, 31.67% and 25% of farmers in Firozpur, Tarn Taran, Gurdaspur and Amritsar, respectively, belonged to the only Nili-Ravi category. Respondent inclusion adhered to explicit criteria. Farmers were categorised as only Nili-Ravi rearers if they owned at least one Nili-Ravi milch buffalo during data collection and were aware of other buffalo breeds. Mixed rearers were those who owned at least one Nili-Ravi and one Murrah milch buffalo and possessed similar breed awareness. These criteria ensured that participants had direct experiential knowledge of the breed traits under investigation and could provide meaningful insights into Nili-Ravi buffalo rearing and identification. Data collection Data collection was carried out in multiple stages to ensure that the identified traits genuinely reflected local understanding of the Nili-Ravi buffalo. Initially, a pilot survey was conducted in a non-sample area to familiarize the research team with the breed’s field-level characteristics and to validate the morphological traits commonly used by farmers for identification. Insights from this phase helped refine the trait list and ensured cultural and contextual appropriateness. Following the pilot phase, focus group discussions (FGDs) were organized with experienced buffalo keepers, breeders, and community elders. These discussions captured collective perceptions about the distinctiveness of Nili-Ravi features, the relevance of each trait in everyday identification, and the practical challenges encountered in distinguishing it from dominant breeds such as Murrah. The FGD inputs strengthened the conceptual clarity of the indicators used for fuzzy-set calibration. In the final stage, participants in the sample villages were asked to evaluate key Nili-Ravi traits such as short forelimbs, Panch Kalyani mark, pinkish tongue, and walled eye using a structured five-point scale to capture the strength of their recognition. Data Analysis Fuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) The study employed fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to examine how farmers’ perceptual judgments about morphological traits combine into recognizable patterns of Nili-Ravi breed identification (Pappas & Woodside, 2021). The calibration anchors presented in Table 1 define the thresholds used to convert qualitative farmer perceptions into fuzzy-set membership scores, reflecting varying degrees of recognition of breed-specific traits. Each physical characteristic traditionally associated with the Nili-Ravi buffalo such as short legs, Panch Kalyani: white markings on five body parts such as forehead, face, muzzle, legs & switch of the tail, pinkish tongue, and walled eye was rated on a five-point scale that captured the intensity of local identification (Figure 2: 2a, 2b, 2c & 2d). A score of 5 corresponded to full membership (0.95), indicating that the trait was perceived as a clear indicator of the Nili-Ravi breed, whereas a score of 1 denoted full non-membership (0.05), implying its absence or irrelevance in the identification process. The crossover point of 3 (0.50) represented the threshold of ambiguity, where farmers showed moderate or uncertain reliance on the trait for breed distinction. Table 1 Calibration Anchors for Fuzzy-Set Membership. Condition Full Membership (0.95) Crossover (0.50) Full Non-Membership (0.05) Description Short Legs (SL) 5 3 1 Shorter front legs typical of Nili-Ravi Panch Kalyani (PK) 5 3 1 Panch Kalyani: white markings on five body parts such as forehead, face, muzzle, legs & switch of the tail Pinkish Tongue (PT) 5 3 1 Pinkish tongue indicates breed purity Walled Eye (WE) 5 3 1 Distinctive walling in eyes Breed Identification (BI ) 5 3 1 Overall pattern recognition accuracy This calibration process illustrates how indigenous knowledge is expressed not as rigid categorical judgment but as a continuum of local reasoning shaped by experiential learning and collective observation. The inclusion of four distinct morphological cues reveals that farmers rely on a constellation of visual and behavioural indicators rather than a single trait to ensure breed purity. A truth table was then constructed, with each row representing a unique combination of causal conditions—indicating the presence or absence of high membership in short legs (SL), Panch Kalyani (PK), pink tongue (PT), and walled eyes (WE). Frequency and consistency thresholds screened empirically rare and inconsistent configurations. A minimum frequency threshold of one case supported initial exploration given the study’s unit of analysis, while consistency cut-offs for sufficiency were set at 0.80 for exploratory solutions and raised in robustness checks. Necessary-condition analysis preceded sufficiency testing. A condition was treated as necessary when consistency exceeded the accepted benchmark of 0.90 (Greckhamer et al., 2018). Coverage values were used alongside consistency to assess empirical relevance. Conditions failing necessity tests entered the sufficiency stage, where Boolean minimization yielded three solution types—complex, intermediate and parsimonious. Intermediate solutions guided substantive interpretation, since they balance empirical evidence and theoretical plausibility while avoiding overreliance on logical remainders. Core and peripheral conditions were identified by comparing intermediate and parsimonious solutions. Core conditions that appeared in both solutions were interpreted as central to the causal recipe; peripheral conditions that appeared only in the intermediate solution were treated as supporting but non-essential. Solution consistency and solution coverage were reported for each configuration to convey explanatory strength and empirical scope. Robustness checks included alternative calibration anchors (slightly stricter and more lenient crossover points), variation of consistency cut-offs (0.80–0.90), and re-running analyses with small changes to case aggregation (individual respondent vs aggregated district/sub-group). Stability of primary configurations across these checks supported the credibility of the findings. Results were interpreted through the lens of local husbandry practice and ethnographic observation, linking configurational outputs back to farmers’ everyday recognition heuristics and the breeder-defined Panch Kalyani standard. Findings Socio-economic Status of the Respondents The socio-economic characteristics of the respondents showed in the Table 2 indicate a broadly comparable profile between farmers who keeps only Nili-Ravi buffalo (Nili-Ravi rearers) and farmers who keeps both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes (mixed rearers), with subtle differences reflecting their production orientations. The average age of both groups was nearly identical (44.13 years for Nili-Ravi rearers and 44.19 years for mixed rearers), indicating that middle-aged farmers with long-standing experience primarily manage buffalo rearing in the study area. The educational status of respondents was moderate in both groups, with Nili-Ravi rearers reporting a slightly higher mean schooling duration (8.22 years) than mixed rearers (7.73 years). Family size was also similar across groups, averaging around five members, indicating comparable household labour availability for livestock-related activities. Landholding patterns revealed a noticeable divergence. Nili-Ravi rearers possessed larger average landholdings (7.25 acres) compared to mixed rearers (5.73 acres), suggesting relatively better access to agricultural resources among those exclusively maintaining the Nili-Ravi breed. A similar trend was observed in fodder production area, where Nili-Ravi rearers allocated 1.34 acres on average, marginally higher than the 1.22 acres reported by mixed rearers. The most distinct difference emerged in herd composition. Pure Nili-Ravi rearers maintained a larger average number of Nili-Ravi animals (8.17) compared to mixed rearers (5.15), whereas mixed rearers additionally kept an average of 4.70 Murrah buffaloes. This reflects a strategic diversification among mixed rearers, who integrate Murrah to meet commercial productivity expectations while retaining some Nili-Ravi animals for cultural or adaptive value. Annual income from buffalo farming was higher among mixed rearers (₹8,58,887.80) compared to Nili Ravi-only rearers (₹7,89,110.10). The inclusion of Murrah buffaloes widely acknowledged for higher milk yield likely contributed to this income difference. However, the wide income ranges in both groups indicate heterogeneity in management practices, resource access, and market linkages. Table 2 Socio-economic Status of the Respondents. S. No. Parameters Mean Nili Ravi rearers Mixed reares 1. Age (In years) 44.13 (18.00-76.00) 44.19 (20.00-70.00) 2. Education (No. of years spent in schooling) 8.22 (0.00-14.00) 7.73 (0.00-14.00) 3. Family size (In number) 5.11 (2.00-13.00) 5.00 (2.00-16.00) 4. Total Land holdings (Acres) 7.25 (0.50-25.00) 5.73 (0.50-22.00) 5. Area under fodder production (Acres) 1.34 (0.10-6.00) 1.22 (0.10-7.00) 6. Herd size (In number) Nili-Ravi 8.17 (1.00-62.00) 5.15 (1.00-44.00) Murrah 0.00 4.70 (1.00-26.00) 7. Income from buffalo farming per annum (Rs) 7,89,110.10 (93,500-44,15,900) 8,58,887.80 (1,25,100-40,16,400) Note: Figures in parenthesis indicates range value for the respective parameters Productive and Reproductive Performance of Buffaloes under Different Production Systems Productive and reproductive attributes of buffaloes reared under both Nili-Ravi and mixed rearing systems exhibited noticeable variation as given in table 3. Peak milk yield among Nili-Ravi rearers averaged 14.98 kg/day, slightly higher than the yield recorded by Nili-Ravi animals under mixed rearers (14.40 kg/day) and comparable to Murrah buffaloes (14.31 kg/day). Lactation length followed a similar trend, with Nili-Ravi rearers reporting a mean of 8.70 months, while Nili-Ravi in the mixed group averaged 8.43 months and Murrah averaged 8.13 months. The average age at first calving (AFC) for Nili-Ravi buffaloes was 42.08 months among Nili-Ravi rearers, which increased to 44.21 months in the mixed system. Murrah buffaloes showed an AFC of 41.44 months. Service period remained shortest for Nili-Ravi rearers at 2.72 months, compared to 3.07 months among mixed rearers, while Murrah buffaloes averaged 2.78 months. Calving interval was 14.79 months for Nili-Ravi rearers, increasing to 15.50 months under mixed rearing for the same breed, whereas Murrah buffaloes recorded 14.42 months. Dry period showed only minor fluctuations, ranging between 2.57 and 2.74 months across all groups. Average daily milk yield was highest in Nili-Ravi rearers (8.21 kg/day), followed by Nili-Ravi under mixed rearers (7.91 kg/day) and Murrah buffaloes (7.62 kg/day). Table 3 Productive and reproductive parameters. S. No. Parameters Nili Ravi Rearers Mixed reares Nili-Ravi Nili-Ravi Murrah Mean Mean Mean 1. Peak milk yield per day per buffalo (Kg) 14.98 (6.00-23.00) 14.40 (4.00-20.00) 14.31 (4.00-22.00) 2. Lactation length (In months) 8.70 (7.00-13.00) 8.43 (7.00-16.00) 8.13 (4.00-11.00) 3. Average Age at First Calving (AFC) (In months) 42.08 (36.00-49.00) 44.21 (36.00-49.00) 41.44 (34.00-48.00) 4. Service period (In months) 2.72 (2.50-4.00) 3.07 (2.00-4.00) 2.78 (2.00-7.00) 5. Calving interval (In months) 14.79 (12.50-17.00) 15.50 (13.00-18.00) 14.42 (12.50-17.00) 6. Dry period (In months) 2.69 (2.00-3.00) 2.57 (1.00-3.50) 2.74 (2.00-4.00) 7. Average milk yield per day per buffalo (Kg) 8.21 (3.29-12.60) 7.91 (2.19-10.96) 7.62 (2.19-10.96) Note: Figures in parenthesis indicates range value for the respective parameters Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Patterns The descriptive statistics and correlation results (Table 4a and 4b) reveal distinct perceptual patterns in breed identification between farmers rearing only Nili-Ravi buffaloes and those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah breeds. Among Nili-Ravi rearers, the overall mean value of 0.74 for Breed Identification (BI) indicates a consistently strong ability to recognise their animals based on morphological cues. The relatively high mean values for pinkish tongue (0.78), walled eye (0.72), and front short legs (0.73) suggest that these physical traits form the primary framework through which farmers perceive and classify breed purity. The Panch Kalyani (0.59), although a visible feature, shows lower salience, implying that single external marks are not considered decisive within herds that are visually homogeneous. Correlation results highlight pinkish tongue (r = 0.77) and front short legs (r = 0.69) exhibit the highest positive associations with overall breed identification, followed by walled eyes (r = 0.66). These associations indicate that Nili-Ravi rearers rely on a cluster of structural and colour-based cues rather than symbolic markings, reflecting a learned, experience-based form of recognition deeply rooted in their daily interaction with the herd. Table 4a Descriptive Statistics and Correlation among Conditions for Nili-Ravi rearers. Variable Mean SD SL PK PT WE BI SL 0.73 0.18 1 PK 0.59 0.15 0.46 1 PT 0.78 0.22 0.51 0.49 1 WE 0.72 0.24 0.37 0.41 0.52 1 BI 0.74 0.2 0.69 0.48 0.77 0.66 1 In contrast, the mixed rearers; those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals demonstrate a slightly lower mean for overall breed identification (BI = 0.72), yet a higher mean for Panch Kalyani (0.83), underscoring its greater cognitive weight in environments where visual overlap between breeds occurs. The correlation between Panch Kalyani and breed identification (r = 0.62) is notably stronger than in the Nili-Ravi-only group (r = 0.48), confirming that symbolic or colour-differentiated traits become critical when multiple breeds coexist. Pink tongue (r = 0.61) continues to play an important supporting role, though its relative importance diminishes slightly compared to pure Nili-Ravi contexts. These findings illustrate a shift from intrinsic physical recognition to comparative visual referencing among mixed rearers. The results suggest that local knowledge systems adapt dynamically to herd composition, reinforcing that farmers’ perception of breed identity is both situational and ecologically embedded. Table 4b Descriptive Statistics and Correlation among Conditions for Mixed rearers. Variable Mean SD SL PK PT WE BI SL 0.7 0.2 1 PK 0.83 0.13 0.43 1 PT 0.76 0.19 0.45 0.52 1 WE 0.68 0.23 0.39 0.48 0.5 1 BI 0.72 0.21 0.5 0.62 0.61 0.49 1 Necessary-Condition Analysis The necessary-condition analysis provides a finer understanding of the traits perceived as indispensable for breed identification among Nili-Ravi rearers and those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals. Among Nili-Ravi rearers (Table 5a), the conditions with consistency values above 0.90 specifically pinkish tongue (0.93) and front short legs (0.89) emerge as the most critical indicators for recognising breed purity. These traits, both structural and pigmentation-based, represent deeply internalised visual heuristics acquired through generational familiarity with Nili-Ravi buffaloes. The relatively high coverage values for pinkish tongue (0.79) and front short legs (0.75) further indicate that these features are widely used and consistently present among respondents’ recognition criteria. In contrast, the panch kalyani, though traditionally mentioned in breed standards, registers a lower consistency (0.65), implying it is neither a universal nor a reliable cue within homogeneous herds. The walled eye trait (consistency 0.87) plays a secondary, supportive role, possibly aiding in differentiation under low-light or distance-based observation. These findings highlight that among single-breed contexts, experiential familiarity allows farmers to rely on a constellation of physical traits rather than symbolic ones. For mixed rearers (Table 5b), the analytical pattern shifts markedly. The panch kalyani (consistency = 0.92; coverage = 0.77) becomes the most dominant and stable necessary condition for identifying Nili-Ravi animals when Murrah buffaloes coexist within the same household. The trait serves as a quick, contrasting visual cue, compensating for the overlapping morphologies between the two breeds. Front short legs (0.88) and pinkish tongue (0.90) retain importance but are comparatively less decisive, suggesting that when visual complexity increases, farmers prioritize high-contrast markers over subtle physical details. The walled eye trait (0.86) maintains moderate consistency but is less central in mixed contexts, perhaps due to the greater salience of external colour patterns. The contrast between the two groups reveals that perceptual ecology adapts to herd composition . Nili-Ravi rearers exhibit intra-breed literacy based on subtle morphological distinctions, while mixed rearers depend on inter-breed contrast cues such as panch kalyani. This divergence demonstrates how traditional knowledge evolves contextually by farmers calibrate their perceptual systems according to the diversity of their herds. This is an example of cognitive adaptation to local ecological realities , where breed recognition is not a fixed skill but a dynamic response shaped by environment, exposure, and purpose. Table 5a Necessary-condition analysis for High (BI) and Low (~BI) Breed Identification for Only Nili-Ravi rearers. Condition Presence (BI) Consistency Presence (BI) Coverage Absence (~BI) Consistency Absence (~BI) Coverage Short Legs (SL) 0.89 0.75 0.66 0.58 Panch Kalyani ( PK) 0.65 0.41 0.81 0.72 Pinkish Tongue (PT) 0.93 0.79 0.6 0.55 Walled Eye (WE) 0.87 0.7 0.64 0.6 Table 5b Necessary Conditions for High (BI) and Low (~BI) Breed Identification for Mixed Rearers. Condition Presence (BI) Consistency Coverage Absence (~BI) Consistency Coverage Short Legs (SL) 0.88 0.7 0.63 0.58 Panch Kalyani ( PK) 0.92 0.77 0.61 0.6 Pinkish Tongue (PT) 0.9 0.72 0.65 0.66 Walled Eye (WE) 0.86 0.68 0.67 0.62 Configurational Analysis for Breed Identification The configurational analysis revealed contrasting causal patterns for breed identification between only Nili-Ravi rearers and mixed rearers. Among Nili-Ravi rearers (Table 6a) , high breed identification (BI) was primarily linked to combinations of pinkish tongue (PT) , front short legs (SL) , and walled eye (WE) , with panch kalyani (PK) playing only a peripheral or even absent role. The consistency values above 0.9 across all configurations confirm that these physical cues are stable and reliable indicators of breed purity within single-breed herds. The presence of multiple high-consistency configurations (C1–C3) suggests that farmers draw upon multiple intra-breed cues rather than relying on a single trait, demonstrating an indigenous, experience-based taxonomy for recognizing authentic Nili-Ravi buffaloes. In contrast, mixed rearers (Table 6b) exhibited configurations in which the panch kalyani (PK) emerged as a core condition , while the relative importance of other traits such as pinkish tongue and front short legs was reduced. This pattern highlights a shift from intra-breed recognition to inter-breed contrast cues that help distinguish between breeds. In such contexts, visible and distinct features like white markings become the dominant perceptual reference for farmers to differentiate Nili-Ravi from Murrah animals. Overall, the fsQCA results indicate that farmers’ perceptual systems are context-specific and adaptive : single-breed rearers rely on subtle morphological and experiential cues, whereas mixed rearers prioritize visible markers that aid quick visual differentiation. These locally grounded recognition systems reflect how indigenous knowledge structures evolve in tandem with ecological and management realities, offering insight into the social ecology of breed identification within smallholder livestock systems. The comparison between the two groups demonstrates that while Nili-Ravi rearers prioritize pinkish tongue, front short legs, and walled eyes as within-breed identifiers, mixed rearers rely on both pinkish tongue and panch kalyani to distinguish Nili-Ravi from Murrah, reflecting perceptual adaptations shaped by their rearing context. Table 6a Configurational Solutions for High BI for Nili-Ravi Rearers. Conditions C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 Front Short Legs (SL) ● • ⊗ ⊗ White Mark (WM) ⊗ ⊗ • ⊗ ⊗ Pinkish Tongue (PT) ● ● ● ⊗ ⊗ Walled Eye (WE) • ● • ⊗ Solution coverage 0.68 0.62 0.59 0.55 0.51 0.49 Solution consistency 0.95 0.97 0.96 0.93 0.91 0.92 Table 6b Configurational Solutions for High BI for Mixed Rearers. Conditions C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 Front Short Legs (SL) ● • ⊗ ⊗ Panch Kalyani ( PK) ● • ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ Pinkish Tongue (PT) • ● • ⊗ ⊗ Walled Eye (WE) ● • ⊗ Solution coverage 0.68 0.62 0.59 0.55 0.51 0.49 Solution consistency 0.95 0.97 0.96 0.93 0.91 0.92 The analysis of configurational solutions for low perception (∼BI) among Nili-Ravi rearers (7a) revealed that the absence of pinkish tongue ( ∼PT) consistently appeared across all solutions, indicating that rearers who did not associate pinkish tongue with breed purity tended to exhibit lower perception about the distinctiveness of the breed. Three key causal pathways emerged. The first configuration ( ∼PT * ∼SL * ∼WE ) suggests that when pinkish tongue, front short legs, and walled eyes are all absent, the perceived breed distinctiveness diminishes markedly (consistency = 0.937). Similarly, the combination ( ∼PT * ∼PK * WE ) shows that the absence of pinkish tongue and panch kalyani, together with the presence of walled eyes, leads to a weaker perception (consistency = 0.945). The third configuration ( PK * ∼PT * ∼SL ) implies that even when panch kalyani is present, if pinkish tongue and front short legs are missing, breed perception remains low (consistency = 0.959). Across the parsimonious and intermediate solutions , the recurring conditions ( ∼PT * ∼SL ) and ( ∼PT * ∼WE ) confirm that the absence of these two traits plays a crucial role in weakening farmers’ perception of the Nili-Ravi breed’s purity. Overall, the results emphasize that pinkish tongue acts as a dominant within-breed identification cue , while traits like front short legs and walled eyes act as supporting cues that strengthen recognition. The neglect or absence of these phenotypic features collectively reduces breed-specific perception among exclusive Nili-Ravi rearers. Table 7a Table of Solutions for ~BI for Nili-Ravi Rearers. Model: ~BI = f (SL, PK, PT, WE) Complex solution Configuration Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency ~PT * ~SL * ~WE 0.52 0.18 0.937 ~PT * ~PK * WE 0.462 0.095 0.945 BI * ~PT * ~SL 0.248 0.038 0.959 Parsimonious solution Label Configuration Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency C4 ~PT * ~SL 0.598 0.172 0.904 C5 ~PT * ~WE 0.512 0.102 0.907 C6 ~ BI * ~PT 0.372 0.026 0.946 Intermediate solution Label Configuration Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency C4 ~PT * ~SL 0.598 0.16 0.906 C5 ~PT * ~WE 0.544 0.15 0.934 C6 ~ BI * ~PT 0.518 0.112 0.905 In contrast, among farmers who rear both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes(Table 7b), the results indicate a broader reliance on multiple visual cues. The dominant absence combinations particularly ( ∼PK * ∼PT * ∼SL ) and ( ∼PK * ∼PT * WE ) reveal that when both inter-breed cues (panch kalyani) and within-breed cues (pinkish tongue) are missing, perception levels about breed distinctiveness drop significantly (consistency values > 0.93). This reflects the challenge of differentiating Nili-Ravi buffaloes when multiple traits are either absent or overlap with those of Murrah. Another pathway ( PK * ∼PT * ∼WE * ∼SL ) highlights that even the presence of panch kalyani cannot compensate for the absence of key within-breed cues like pinkish tongue and front short legs. In the parsimonious and intermediate solutions , the repeated appearance of ( ∼PK * ∼PT ) and ( ∼PT * ∼WE ) configurations indicates that pinkish tongue remains the central perceptual anchor for identifying Nili-Ravi, but in mixed herds, the absence of panch kalyani further blurs this distinction. Thus, for mixed rearers, panch kalyani serve as inter-breed contrast cues , helping differentiate Nili-Ravi from Murrah, whereas pinkish tongue remains the strongest within-breed identification trait . Table 7b Table of Solutions for mixed rearers. Model: ~BI = f (SL, PK, PT, WE) Complex solution Configuration (logic term) Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency ~PK * ~PT * ~SL 0.544 0.192 0.933 ~PK * ~PT * WE 0.471 0.103 0.947 PK * ~PT * ~WE * ~SL 0.244 0.036 0.961 Parsimonious solution Label Configuration Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency C4 ~PK * ~PT 0.595 0.176 0.902 C5 ~PK * ~SL 0.518 0.095 0.905 C6 ~PT * ~WE 0.369 0.024 0.946 Intermediate solution Label Configuration Raw coverage Unique coverage Consistency C4 ~PK * ~PT 0.595 0.16 0.934 C5 ~PK * ~SL 0.544 0.16 0.934 C6 ~PT * ~WE 0.518 0.114 0.905 Discussion Breed identification is not merely a matter of phenotypic observation; it represents the intersection of scientific classification, local knowledge, and the lived experience of livestock rearers (Holloway & Morris, 2012). The present study gains importance within this interface, as it systematically examines how Nili-Ravi buffalo rearers perceive the defining morphological traits of their breed, and how these perceptions differ from those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals. Nili-Ravi, a riverine breed with deep cultural and economic roots in north-western India and Pakistan, has historically been defined by certain morphological standards commonly referred to as Panch Kalyani, encompassing white markings on the forehead, face, muzzle, legs, and tail (Anas et al., 2023; Khan et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2020). However, beyond these breeder-defined traits lies a layer of experiential cognition formed through generations of local observation, where farmers use subtle, situation-specific cues to identify and differentiate animals. Capturing this cognitive layer is critical, because it is these farmers not institutional breeders who maintain the genetic continuity of the breed under dynamic field conditions (Lauvie et al., 2015; Cleveland et al., 2005). In this context, the study holds particular significance for participatory livestock conservation and breed improvement programmes. Formal breed descriptions, though standardized, often fail to incorporate region-specific adaptive traits that farmers value for productivity, temperament, or cultural symbolism (Marsoner et al., 2018). By examining how farmers attribute meaning to physical features such as front short legs, walled eyes, pinkish tongue, and white markings, the study bridges the epistemic gap between formal phenotypic taxonomy and indigenous pattern recognition. The analysis demonstrates that breed perception is not static but contextually adaptive shaped by herd composition, production objectives, and socio-cultural attachment. Understanding this local logic helps design breed conservation strategies that are socially embedded rather than merely phenotypic or genetic. The study reveals distinct perceptual frameworks between Nili-Ravi-only rearers and those who maintain mixed herds with Murrah animals. Among exclusive Nili-Ravi rearers, the dominant identification cues are pinkish tongue, front short legs, and walled eyes. These traits are primarily structural and pigmentation-based, embedded within the herd ecology where visual homogeneity limits reliance on overt colour markings. The fsQCA show that pinkish tongue (consistency = 0.93) and front short legs (0.89) are indispensable cues, indicating a deeply internalized recognition pattern developed through generational familiarity. Walled eyes (0.87) supplement these cues, acting as secondary but reliable identifiers in conditions of partial visibility. The relatively lower weight accorded to white markings (consistency = 0.65) implies that single, externally visible cues do not carry high discriminative power when all animals share a similar visual template. In contrast, mixed rearers who manage both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes rely heavily on the white marks or Panch Kalyani for breed identification (consistency = 0.92). This trait functions as an inter-breed contrast cue, enabling quick visual differentiation between breeds that otherwise share several morphological features. While pinkish tongue (0.90) and front short legs (0.88) remain relevant, they are no longer decisive; rather, their importance becomes secondary to the high-contrast cues that can be perceived even from a distance. This pattern suggests a shift in perceptual ecology: where Nili-Ravi-only rearers develop intra-breed recognition based on nuanced physical cues, mixed rearers depend on inter-breed visual contrasts to navigate diversity within their herds. This divergence emphasizes a key principle of local cognition: perception is not only shaped by the physical attributes of animals but also by the comparative context in which those animals are reared (Greggor et al., 2014). When breeds coexist, the need for differentiation accentuates visible markers; when herds are homogeneous, familiarity privileges subtler structural cues (Holloway et al., 2011). The consistency of these configurations across analytic models strengthens the notion that farmers’ cognitive systems evolve dynamically with their husbandry environment. From a breeder’s perspective, the Nili-Ravi buffalo has long been characterized by its distinctive Panch Kalyani the five auspicious white markings viewed as a hallmark of breed purity. Animals with walled eyes, white facial markings, white switch, and white muzzle are traditionally considered the most desirable. This formal definition, however, arises from a standardization framework that prioritizes visible uniformity for registration and selection purposes. The present study, in contrast, highlights how farmers operationalize recognition differently in field settings. Among Nili-Ravi-only rearers, the importance of Panch Kalyani markings is diminished, not because they are unrecognized, but because other internal features such as tongue colour and leg structure serve as more dependable indicators of genetic authenticity. Farmers repeatedly emphasized that tongue colour and leg proportion are less prone to environmental alteration and hence more stable indicators. Such reasoning reveals a sophisticated local taxonomy that prioritizes reliability over symbolism. For mixed rearers, however, the symbolic importance of Panch Kalyani resurfaces, reflecting how external visibility acquires renewed significance when breeds coexist. Here, Panch Kalyani markings act not merely as identifiers but as boundary markers that preserve breed identity within multi-breed households. This dual reality one experiential, the other contrastive illustrates that breed standards are not fixed absolutes but negotiated realities mediated by ecological and social context. Recognizing these layered meanings allows breeding programs to integrate both scientific and local rationalities, aligning formal standards with field-level observation. The bubble thematic chart (Figure 3) encapsulates the socio-cognitive divide in farmers’ motivations for preferring Nili-Ravi buffaloes. Among Nili-Ravi-only rearers, cultural significance (31.8%) emerges as the most frequently cited reason for breed preference, followed closely by milk yield (32.1%) and docility (11.4%). The emphasis on cultural identity reflects the breed’s symbolic role within regional heritage, where Nili-Ravi buffaloes are associated with prestige, lineage, and community identity. The breed is not just a source of milk but a living emblem of continuity. For these farmers, maintaining purebred lines carries social meaning beyond economic calculus a form of cultural stewardship reinforced through ritual and local pride. In contrast, mixed rearers display a utilitarian orientation. Their dominant preferences higher milk yield (23.7%), longer lactation length (23.6%), and greater reproductive lifespan (21.2%) reflect performance-based valuation. For them, the Nili-Ravi buffalo’s utility lies in its productive efficiency rather than symbolic distinctiveness. Cultural importance ranks marginally (3.6%), indicating that economic rationality supersedes heritage sentiment. This transition from cultural to utilitarian reasoning mirrors the process of market integration, where livestock are increasingly viewed as production assets rather than community symbols. The visual distribution of bubble sizes on the thematic map therefore represents sociological shift in breed valuation. In homogeneous Nili-Ravi contexts, cultural embeddedness sustains the continuity of local lineages. In mixed systems, economic pragmatism reshapes preference structures. This dual logic has critical implications for extension and conservation efforts, as it implies that messages emphasizing productivity may resonate differently from those invoking heritage preservation depending on herd composition and livelihood dependence. The study demonstrates that breed identification is an ecologically grounded cognitive process, not an abstract set of morphological checklists. Farmers’ perceptual systems evolve as adaptive responses to their local rearing environment shaped by herd diversity, grazing patterns, and daily interaction. For single-breed rearers, high familiarity enables recognition based on subtle structural cues that outsiders may overlook. For mixed rearers, where multiple phenotypes coexist, perception shifts toward high-contrast visual cues to minimize misidentification. Such plasticity in perception underlines the importance of situating breed recognition within the socio-ecological context of husbandry. From a breeding policy standpoint, this insight stresses why farmer perspectives must inform formal breed characterization. Top-down classification systems that rely solely on phenotypic traits may overlook locally valued features that contribute to adaptation, resilience, or manageability (Pezzulo & Levin, 2016). For instance, traits such as docility, leg height, or tongue pigmentation though minor from a genetic viewpoint carry significant operational meaning for farmers handling animals daily. Integrating these perspectives ensures that breeding programs remain aligned with farmers’ realities, thereby enhancing adoption and sustainability. Moreover, perception-driven identification has implications for participatory breeding and conservation. Local farmers act as custodians of indigenous germplasm, and their cognitive frameworks shape which animals are retained, crossbred, or culled (Mathew & Mathew, 2023). Ignoring these frameworks risks undermining in-situ conservation by eroding the social knowledge that sustains breed continuity. Therefore, institutional breeding strategies should not only recognize the Panch Kalyani standards but also document the lived taxonomies employed by local communities. Collaborative validation of such traits can enhance the accuracy and inclusivity of breed documentation. Policy Implications 1. Breed Conservation through Participatory Decision-Making Policies should institutionalize community-based breed conservation committees that involve Nili-Ravi-only rearers, mixed rearers, and breeders in decision-making. This participatory approach will ensure that selection criteria reflect both scientific breeding goals and farmers’ cultural perceptions. Recognizing local farmers as “co-conservers” of indigenous genetic resources can strengthen conservation ethics and breed sustainability under changing agro-ecological conditions. 2. Integration of Cultural Valuation into Breed Improvement Programs Current breed improvement policies largely emphasize productivity traits such as milk yield and reproductive efficiency. However, the study highlights that Nili-Ravi-only rearers assign value to cultural and aesthetic traits like pinkish tongue, walled eyes, and front short legs—features that hold symbolic and traditional significance. Breed policies should therefore integrate cultural valuation frameworks into selection and breeding objectives, aligning scientific standards with locally meaningful attributes. 3. Participatory Extension and Farmer Training through B-FFS Introducing Breed Farmer Field Schools (B-FFS) as a national extension mechanism can help farmers engage directly with scientists and breeders. These schools would focus on participatory training in breed identification, trait evaluation, reproductive management, and record keeping. This co-learning model will bridge perceptual gaps between productivity-focused mixed rearers and culturally oriented Nili-Ravi rearers, strengthening the link between conservation and livelihood goals. 4. Development of Regional Breed Promotion Clusters Policy should promote regional breed promotion clusters in areas where Nili-Ravi buffaloes hold strong socio-cultural and adaptive value. These clusters can serve as focal points for skill development, value-chain integration (e.g., milk marketing under local breed labels), and demonstration of breed-specific resilience traits. This model would enhance both market visibility and social identity of the breed, motivating continued rearing among younger generations. 5. Documentation and Digital Mapping of Farmer-Defined Breed Traits To preserve traditional knowledge and aid in future breeding programs, policies must support the documentation, digital mapping, and geo-referencing of farmer-defined breed traits. Establishing an open-access Breed Perception Repository can help track regional variations in trait preferences, supporting both genetic characterization and socio-cultural heritage preservation. Integrating this with the National Livestock Mission’s database will ensure that farmers’ perceptions actively inform national breed conservation strategies. 6. Periodic Re-Evaluation of Breed Characteristics A systematic re-examination of Nili-Ravi breed characteristics at fixed intervals such as once every 20 years should be institutionalized to capture shifts emerging from climate pressures, management transitions, and farmer-led selection. Embedding this cyclical review within national breeding and conservation frameworks will ensure that both scientific descriptors and farmer-defined traits remain relevant, updated, and reflective of the evolving production environment. Conclusion The present study enriches the understanding of how breed identity is perceived and operationalized in rural livestock systems. By juxtaposing the perceptions of Nili-Ravi-only rearers with those managing mixed herds, it reveals that breed recognition is not fixed but dynamically adapted to ecological and social contexts. Nili-Ravi rearers rely on subtle morphological and pigmentation cues—pinkish tongue, short legs, walled eyes—anchored in familiarity and cultural continuity, whereas mixed rearers depend on visible contrast markers like white forehead markings to differentiate breeds within diverse herds. The divergence between these perceptual systems illustrates that local knowledge is fluid, responsive, and pragmatic. The findings also suggest that understanding farmers’ perception is crucial not only for documenting breed traits but for sustaining cultural heritage and local adaptation. The inclusion of farmer-defined criteria alongside breeder-defined standards like Panch Kalyani ensures that breed characterization remains contextually grounded and socially resonant. In essence, the perception of Nili-Ravi buffaloes embodies a dialogue between tradition and adaptation, between local cognition and scientific taxonomy. Recognizing and integrating these perceptions into formal breeding frameworks can strengthen participatory conservation, ensuring that breed improvement aligns with both ecological reality and cultural continuity. Limitations of the Study While the study offers important insights into the perceptual ecology of breed identification among Nili-Ravi and mixed rearers, certain aspects invite further exploration. The cross-sectional design captures farmer perceptions at a particular time, which, although valuable for understanding prevailing recognition systems, may not fully reflect how these perceptions evolve with changing breeding practices or exposure to institutional interventions. Future longitudinal studies could trace how sustained engagement with extension systems influences the continuity or transformation of trait preferences. The perceptual framework adopted in this study relies on farmers’ experiential reasoning rather than molecular or biometric validation. This choice was intentional to foreground local epistemologies; however, integrating molecular characterization in future research could help establish convergences between genetic purity and indigenous classification systems. The focus area of the study was geographically specific, situated in regions with active Nili-Ravi and Murrah rearing systems. While this enhances contextual accuracy, expanding the spatial scope could capture broader cultural and ecological gradients influencing breed valuation. Declarations Author’s contribution GM: Investigation, original draft writing and reviewing & editing. AS: Data analysis, original draft writing, reviewing & editing. NS: Conceptualisation, Supervision, resource mobilisation, and reviewing & editing. FCT: Investigation, reviewing and writing. All the authors have read and approved the final manuscript. Ethical Approval Ethical approval for the present study was waived by the Institute Ethics Committee (IEC) of ICAR–Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes (ICAR-CIRB), Hisar, India, as the research involved minimal-risk, non-invasive socio-economic data collection methods only. All procedures involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards and institutional guidelines of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), and adhered to the principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments. The exemption was granted on the grounds that the study did not involve any biological sampling, clinical procedures, or health-related interventions, and therefore posed no foreseeable risk to participants. No personally identifiable information, including names, addresses, or contact details, was collected from respondents. Participation was entirely voluntary, and participants were informed about the purpose of the study and their right to withdraw at any stage without any consequences. Complete anonymity and confidentiality of the data were strictly maintained, and all findings were reported only in aggregated form to prevent individual identification. Verbal Informed Consent Verbal informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study, during the data-collection period between June, 2022 and December, 2025. The IRB approved the use of verbal consent and granted a waiver of written or verbal documentation due to the study’s minimal risk and anonymized survey design. Participants were informed about the study purpose, procedures, voluntary nature of participation, the right to withdraw at any time without penalty, and data confidentiality protections. Clinical trial number Not applicable Consent to Publish Not applicable Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Acknowledgement The research was supported by Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Department of Agricultural Research and Education, Government of India. All the authors thank Director, ICAR-Central Institute for Buffalo Research, Hisar for providing fanatical facilities to conduct the research. Data availability The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Declaration of generative AI in scientific writing The generative AI (GPT-5) was used to improve grammar, clarity, and readability of the manuscript. The authors carefully reviewed and edited the content to ensure accuracy and take full responsibility for the final version of the paper. References Alebachew H (2017) On-Farm Phenotypic Characterization, Husbandry and Breeding Practices of Indigenous Cattle Breed In Selected Areas of Benishangul-Gumuz, Western Ethiopia . Doctoral dissertation submitted to Haramaya university. Anas M, Farooq M, Asif M, Ali WR, Mansoor S (2023) A novel insight into the identification of potential SNP markers for the genomic characterization of buffalo breeds in Pakistan. Ani 13(15): 2543. Bellon MR, Gotor E, Caracciolo F (2015) Conserving landraces and improving livelihoods: how to assess the success of on-farm conservation projects?. Inter J Agri Sust 13(2): 167-182. Chiariotti A, Borghese A, Boselli C, Barile VL (2025) Water Buffalo’s Adaptability to Different Environments and Farming Systems: A Review. Ani 15(11): 1538. Cleveland DA, Daniela S, Smith SE (2000) A biological framework for understanding farmers’ plant breeding. Econ Bot 54(3): 377-394. Desta TT (2012) Introduction of domestic buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) into Ethiopia would be feasible. Rene Agri F Sys 27(4): 305-313. Estrada-Carmona N, Hart AK, DeClerck FA, Harvey CA, Milder JC (2014) Integrated landscape management for agriculture, rural livelihoods, and ecosystem conservation: An assessment of experience from Latin America and the Caribbean. Landscape Urb Plan 129: 1-11. Greckhamer T, Furnari S, Fiss PC, Aguilera RV (2018) Studying configurations with qualitative comparative analysis: Best practices in strategy and organization research. Stra Org 16(4): 482-495. Greggor AL, Clayton NS, Phalan B, Thornton A (2014) Comparative cognition for conservationists. Tre Ecol Evol 29(9): 489-495. Holloway L, Morris C (2012) Contesting genetic knowledge-practices in livestock breeding: Biopower, biosocial collectivities, and heterogeneous resistances. Env Plan D: Soc Spa 30(1): 60-77. Holloway L, Morris C, Gilna B, Gibbs D (2011) Choosing and rejecting cattle and sheep: changing discourses and practices of (de) selection in pedigree livestock breeding. Agri Hum Val 28(4): 533-547. Jain AK, Muladno M (2009) Selection criteria and breeding objectives in improvement of productivity of cattle and buffaloes. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Kaushik Hans (2020) A study on enablers and challenges in adoption of technology by north Indian dairy farms a systems approach. Doctoral dissertation submitted to Dayalbagh Educational Institute (Deemed to be university), Agra, Uttar Pradesh. Khan A, Majid HA, Ali A, Ali A, Rizwan M, Ullah W, ... Ullah A (2023) Optimizing Conservation of Nili Ravi Buffaloes in Southern Region of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Phenotypic, Morphometric, and Productive Traits. J of Biores Manag 10(4): 2. Kis J, Barta S, Elekes L, Engi L, Fegyver T, Kecskeméti J, ... Szabó J (2017) Traditional herders’ knowledge and worldview and their role in managing biodiversity and ecosystem-services of extensive pastures. Knowing our lands and resources: indigenous and local knowledge of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe and Central Asia. Paris (France): UNESCO, 56-70. Kumar H, Girish PS (2025) Buffalo Breeds and Breeding Policies for Enhanced Meat Production: A Global Perspective. In Buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) Meat: Production, Processing and Quality . Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. 69-92. Lauvie A, Paoli JC, Moulin CH (2015) Managing local breeds: a dynamic connected to livestock farming systems that concerns different levels of organization. Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales 56: 119-125. Marsoner T, Vigl LE, Manck F, Jaritz G, Tappeiner U, Tasser E (2018) Indigenous livestock breeds as indicators for cultural ecosystem services: A spatial analysis within the Alpine Space. Eco Ind 94: 55-63. Mathew E, Mathew L (2023) Conservation of landraces and indigenous breeds: An investment for the future. In Conservation and sustainable utilization of bioresources. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. 291-321. Mills J, Gaskell P, Ingram J, Dwyer J, Reed M, Short C (2017) Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour. Agri Hum Val 34(2): 283-299. Pappas IO, Woodside AG (2021) Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA): Guidelines for research practice in Information Systems and marketing. Intern J Info Manag 58: 102310. Pezzulo G, Levin M (2016) Top-down models in biology: explanation and control of complex living systems above the molecular level. J Royal Soc Inter 13(124): 20160555. Singh KV (2022) Biodiversity and Conservation Status of Indigenous Livestock of India. In Biodiversity CRC Press. 143-155. Singh N, Banga HS, Malhotra P, Deshmukh S, Dutta N, Brar RS (2024) Scoping study of research trends on Nili Ravi buffalo applying scientometric analysis and network visualization. Buf Bul 43(1): 121-134. Tyagi SK, Mehrotra A, Singh A, Kumar A, Dutt T, Mishra BP, Pandey AK (2021) Comparative signatures of selection analyses identify loci under positive selection in the Murrah Buffalo of India. Front Gen 12: 673697. Vij PK, Tantia MS (2005) Status of Nili Ravi buffaloes in India. Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales 37: 75-81. Zhang Y, Colli L, Barker JSF (2020) Asian water buffalo: domestication, history and genetics. Ani Gen 51(2): 177-191. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviews received at journal 14 May, 2026 Reviews received at journal 02 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 02 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 01 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 01 May, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 30 Apr, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 29 Apr, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 27 Apr, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 22 Apr, 2026 First submitted to journal 22 Apr, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9340421","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":636062680,"identity":"ec228012-0567-4a0c-baaf-6c6523f75a9f","order_by":0,"name":"Gururaj Makarabbi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gururaj","middleName":"","lastName":"Makarabbi","suffix":""},{"id":636062681,"identity":"a301ebaf-ea57-4ae9-a7aa-052748c2ddec","order_by":1,"name":"AISWARYA S.","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"AISWARYA","middleName":"","lastName":"S.","suffix":""},{"id":636062682,"identity":"9589fd92-37df-4fdc-acc5-8bb41db7aa19","order_by":2,"name":"NAVNEET SAXENA","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"NAVNEET","middleName":"","lastName":"SAXENA","suffix":""},{"id":636062683,"identity":"8d484c29-bbfb-49f6-bb5e-a6b798a716db","order_by":3,"name":"FC Tuteja","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"FC","middleName":"","lastName":"Tuteja","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-04-07 06:25:44","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9340421/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9340421/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":108828846,"identity":"148c99a3-4d4c-4c49-99d8-613c8497e975","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-08 18:40:21","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":57737,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSampling plan\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9340421/v1/a79c6aa6f81f53241525a485.png"},{"id":108828848,"identity":"6e3d9123-6029-42e7-a0fd-a7c171d4ce0e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-08 18:40:24","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":1913111,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDistinguishing traits of the Nili-Ravi buffalo breed identified by respondents in the study area\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e(2\u003cstrong\u003ea): \u003c/strong\u003eWalled eye\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(2b): \u003c/strong\u003eShort front legs and white patches on the switch of the tail, forehead, muzzle and legs\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(2c): \u003c/strong\u003eNili-Ravi herd maintained by the farmers\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(2d): \u003c/strong\u003ePink tongue\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9340421/v1/28f49256b02e8db00137b401.jpeg"},{"id":108828843,"identity":"b677ba26-78a4-47a5-b9e4-aa78ea9f717a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-08 18:40:15","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":152994,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThematic bubble chart highlighting the reasons for preferring Nili-Ravi buffaloes\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9340421/v1/a9ce09609a753e582571ed70.jpeg"},{"id":109296011,"identity":"da795114-00a4-477d-9b4e-195a6527e49f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-15 08:44:08","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2571783,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9340421/v1/e4555c3d-3600-4352-9e90-119bb16d48fd.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"How Farmers Recognise Breeds: Evidence from Nili-Ravi Buffalo Rearers in India","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eLivestock rearing remains inseparable from the cultural life and livelihood systems of rural India, where buffaloes continue to shape identity, income, and local ecology (Chiariotti et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Among the country\u0026rsquo;s diverse breeds, the Nili-Ravi holds a distinctive place as a marker of cultural heritage, adaptability, and indigenous resilience (Mathew and Mathew, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Singh \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Even as high-yielding breeds like Murrah dominate commercial dairying, many farmers within the Nili-Ravi breeding tract continue to rear this breed because of its dependable milk yield, favourable fat content, docile temperament, and long-standing cultural value. Their preference reflects not only economic considerations but also a conscious commitment to sustaining an animal genetic resource embedded in local history and environment (Kumar and S, 2025). The long-term sustainability of such indigenous breeds relies as much on community perceptions and everyday decisions as on formal breeding interventions. Rural livestock keepers have historically acted as custodians of biodiversity, drawing on experiential and culturally transmitted knowledge that has evolved through generations of observation and practice (Kis et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Their understanding of breed traits covering morphology, temperament, milk characteristics, and adaptive ability forms a folk taxonomy that guides breeding choices, husbandry practices, and the symbolic importance attributed to certain physical markers. Acknowledging these community-based perceptions and integrating them into breed development and popularisation efforts can help align scientific agendas with the lived realities of those who continue to conserve and nurture the Nili-Ravi buffalo.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Nili-Ravi buffalo, primarily found in north-western India and parts of Pakistan, represents one of the oldest and most distinct riverine buffalo breeds (Anas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Khan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). The breed is often recognized for its characteristic short forelimbs, walled eyes, white markings on the forehead, face, muzzle, legs, and tail, and a typically pinkish tongue (Anas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Breeders commonly refer to it as \u0026lsquo;Panch Kalyani,\u0026rsquo; a term that signifies the presence of five auspicious white points (Vij \u0026amp; Tantia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). Beyond physical appearance, these features are perceived as signs of purity, prosperity, and good fortune, embedding the Nili-Ravi within the cultural and spiritual landscape of rural households (Singh et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The breed is not only valued for its aesthetic and cultural symbolism but also for its docile temperament, adaptability to diverse climatic conditions, and long lactation length, making it suitable for smallholder and mixed-farming systems (Desta, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e;Clevland \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e2000). However, in recent decades, the expansion of market-oriented dairying has led to a progressive replacement of local breeds by Murrah buffaloes, known for their high milk yield and better commercial performance (Tyagi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The economic logic driving this substitution often overlooks the ecological, genetic, and cultural functions of indigenous breeds. While Murrah buffaloes are preferred in intensive production systems, Nili-Ravi buffaloes continue to survive in traditional production environments, particularly among farmers who value their adaptability, longevity, and manageable nature (Kis et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). This juxtaposition between commercial viability and cultural continuity offers an important site to explore how local perceptions shape breed conservation decisions. From a breeder\u0026rsquo;s standpoint, the definition of Nili-Ravi is precise and standardised. The Panch Kalyani features, compact body, and distinct white markings are considered hallmarks of breed purity (Anas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Khan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Yet, among farmers, especially those maintaining mixed herds of Nili-Ravi and Murrah, perceptions of breed quality are often more fluid. While some prioritize cultural and visual attributes, others focus on productive and reproductive performance. Such inter-group perceptual variations hold significant implications for breed improvement and conservation strategies. They indicate that breed identity is not merely a biological construct but also a socially negotiated category, reflecting local preferences, production goals, and the symbolic meanings attached to animals (Holloway et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Understanding farmers\u0026rsquo; perception of breed characteristics is essential for developing participatory strategies that support the propagation and popularisation of the Nili-Ravi buffalo. Conservation and improvement of the breed cannot be sustained through top-down genetic programmes or policy directives alone. Meaningful progress depends on integrating farmers\u0026rsquo; experiential knowledge, preferences, and selection practices into community-centred breeding and conservation efforts. It requires a bottom-up understanding of how communities value and interact with their livestock. Farmers\u0026rsquo; observations often capture subtle traits such as temperament, disease resilience, or feeding efficiency that may not be formally recorded but are critical for local adaptation. Involving farmers in identifying and describing such traits helps ensure that conservation priorities align with livelihood realities and cultural expectations (Bellon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Estrada-Carmona et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the acknowledged importance of community perspectives, systematic studies examining farmers\u0026rsquo; perception of Nili-Ravi buffalo traits remain limited. Most existing research on indigenous buffalo breeds focuses on performance parameters, genetic diversity, or physical characterization, often overlooking the socio-cultural and perceptual dimensions that influence breed choice and maintenance (Kaushik, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Alebachew, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Jain \u0026amp; Muladno, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). This gap is particularly relevant in regions where both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes coexist, creating a dynamic interface between traditional and commercial production logics. Farmers who rear only Nili-Ravi buffaloes may attach symbolic or heritage-based value to the breed, whereas those maintaining mixed herds may evaluate it through a utilitarian lens considering milk yield, calving performance, and adaptability to market demands.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding these dual perceptions carries practical significance, as policy and extension initiatives aimed at promoting or conserving indigenous breeds often fall short when they prioritise biological notions of breed purity while overlooking the socio-cultural realities shaping rearing practices. Engaging local farmers in identifying, describing, and prioritizing traits can foster greater ownership and sustainability of conservation initiatives (Mills et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Bellon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). It also ensures that breed improvement programmes do not unintentionally erode the very characteristics that define a breed\u0026rsquo;s local identity. In this context, the present study explores how farmers perceive and define the distinguishing traits of the Nili-Ravi breed, with particular attention to differences between (a) farmers who exclusively rear Nili-Ravi buffaloes and (b) those who maintain both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals. The study hypothesizes that the two groups differ significantly in their trait preferences and the underlying rationale for breed selection.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe specific objectives of the study are:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo document farmers\u0026rsquo; perception of the major identification traits of the Nili-Ravi buffalo.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo compare the perception of breed characteristics between farmers only rear Nili-Ravi and farmers rear both Nili-Ravi and Murrah (mixed farms).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo explore the socio-cultural and economic rationale behind farmers\u0026rsquo; continued preference for Nili-Ravi buffaloes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo identify the implications of these perceptions for participatory breed popularisation, propagation and conservation, along with their relevance for extension strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study situates the Nili-Ravi buffalo within the broader discourse on local knowledge, cultural heritage, and sustainable livestock management. It highlights that effective conservation is not merely a scientific exercise but a social process; one that must incorporate the lived experiences, beliefs, and aspirations of local communities. By understanding how farmers interpret and value the breed\u0026rsquo;s characteristics, the study provides an evidence base for participatory policies and interventions that can strengthen both biodiversity conservation and rural livelihoods.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Material and methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study adopted an \u003cem\u003eex post facto\u003c/em\u003e research design to analyse how farmers naturally identify the Nili-Ravi buffalo based on long-established experiential knowledge and morphological cues. Since the perceptions and recognition patterns already existed prior to the study, no manipulation or intervention was introduced. Instead, farmers\u0026rsquo; existing breed identification abilities were documented and analyzed as they occurred in the real field context.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLocale of Study and Sampling Plan\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA stratified random sampling technique was used for selecting the respondent households. The study was undertaken in Punjab, the only Indian state that maintains a substantial and historically recognized population of true-to-type Nili-Ravi buffaloes, with the breed concentrated primarily in Firozpur, Tarn Taran, Amritsar and Gurdaspur districts (Vij \u0026amp; Tantia, 2005). All four districts were therefore included in the sampling frame (Figure 1). From each district, two blocks were selected randomly\u0026mdash;Ghull Khurd and Firozpur (Firozpur district), Attari and Amritsar (Amritsar district), Bhikiwind and Gandiwind (Tarn Taran district), and Batala and Gurdaspur (Gurdaspur district). From each block, 30 farmers were selected, giving a total sample of 240 respondents who were personally interviewed using a semi-structured, pre-tested schedule. Following data collection, the respondents were post-stratified into two groups i.e. only Nili-Ravi rearers and mixed rearers using the cumulative square root frequency method based on the breed composition they maintained. Overall, 45.42% of the farmers exclusively reared Nili-Ravi buffaloes, whereas 54.58% kept both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals and were classified as mixed rearers. District-wise distribution showed that 65%, 60%, 31.67% and 25% of farmers in Firozpur, Tarn Taran, Gurdaspur and Amritsar, respectively, belonged to the only Nili-Ravi category. Respondent inclusion adhered to explicit criteria. Farmers were categorised as only Nili-Ravi rearers if they owned at least one Nili-Ravi milch buffalo during data collection and were aware of other buffalo breeds. Mixed rearers were those who owned at least one Nili-Ravi and one Murrah milch buffalo and possessed similar breed awareness. These criteria ensured that participants had direct experiential knowledge of the breed traits under investigation and could provide meaningful insights into Nili-Ravi buffalo rearing and identification.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData collection\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData collection was carried out in multiple stages to ensure that the identified traits genuinely reflected local understanding of the Nili-Ravi buffalo. Initially, a pilot survey was conducted in a non-sample area to familiarize the research team with the breed\u0026rsquo;s field-level characteristics and to validate the morphological traits commonly used by farmers for identification. Insights from this phase helped refine the trait list and ensured cultural and contextual appropriateness. Following the pilot phase, focus group discussions (FGDs) were organized with experienced buffalo keepers, breeders, and community elders. These discussions captured collective perceptions about the distinctiveness of Nili-Ravi features, the relevance of each trait in everyday identification, and the practical challenges encountered in distinguishing it from dominant breeds such as Murrah. The FGD inputs strengthened the conceptual clarity of the indicators used for fuzzy-set calibration. In the final stage, participants in the sample villages were asked to evaluate key Nili-Ravi traits such as short forelimbs, Panch Kalyani mark, pinkish tongue, and walled eye using a structured five-point scale to capture the strength of their recognition.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFuzzy-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study employed fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to examine how farmers\u0026rsquo; perceptual judgments about morphological traits combine into recognizable patterns of Nili-Ravi breed identification (Pappas \u0026amp; Woodside, 2021). The calibration anchors presented in Table 1 define the thresholds used to convert qualitative farmer perceptions into fuzzy-set membership scores, reflecting varying degrees of recognition of breed-specific traits. Each physical characteristic traditionally associated with the Nili-Ravi buffalo such as short legs, Panch Kalyani: white markings on five body parts such as forehead, face, muzzle, legs \u0026amp; switch of the tail, pinkish tongue, and walled eye was rated on a five-point scale that captured the intensity of local identification (Figure 2: 2a, 2b, 2c \u0026amp; 2d). A score of 5 corresponded to full membership (0.95), indicating that the trait was perceived as a clear indicator of the Nili-Ravi breed, whereas a score of 1 denoted full non-membership (0.05), implying its absence or irrelevance in the identification process. The crossover point of 3 (0.50) represented the threshold of ambiguity, where farmers showed moderate or uncertain reliance on the trait for breed distinction.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1 Calibration Anchors for Fuzzy-Set Membership.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable style=\"width: 102%;border: none;\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCondition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFull Membership (0.95)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCrossover (0.50)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFull Non-Membership (0.05)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDescription\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShort Legs (SL)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShorter front legs typical of Nili-Ravi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePanch Kalyani (PK)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePanch Kalyani: white markings on five body parts such as forehead, face, muzzle, legs \u0026amp; switch of the tail\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePinkish Tongue (PT)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePinkish tongue indicates breed purity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWalled Eye (WE)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDistinctive walling in eyes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBreed Identification (BI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall pattern recognition accuracy\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis calibration process illustrates how indigenous knowledge is expressed not as rigid categorical judgment but as a continuum of local reasoning shaped by experiential learning and collective observation. The inclusion of four distinct morphological cues reveals that farmers rely on a constellation of visual and behavioural indicators rather than a single trait to ensure breed purity. A truth table was then constructed, with each row representing a unique combination of causal conditions\u0026mdash;indicating the presence or absence of high membership in short legs (SL), Panch Kalyani (PK), pink tongue (PT), and walled eyes (WE). Frequency and consistency thresholds screened empirically rare and inconsistent configurations. A minimum frequency threshold of one case supported initial exploration given the study\u0026rsquo;s unit of analysis, while consistency cut-offs for sufficiency were set at 0.80 for exploratory solutions and raised in robustness checks. Necessary-condition analysis preceded sufficiency testing. A condition was treated as necessary when consistency exceeded the accepted benchmark of 0.90 (Greckhamer et al., 2018). Coverage values were used alongside consistency to assess empirical relevance. Conditions failing necessity tests entered the sufficiency stage, where Boolean minimization yielded three solution types\u0026mdash;complex, intermediate and parsimonious. Intermediate solutions guided substantive interpretation, since they balance empirical evidence and theoretical plausibility while avoiding overreliance on logical remainders. Core and peripheral conditions were identified by comparing intermediate and parsimonious solutions. Core conditions that appeared in both solutions were interpreted as central to the causal recipe; peripheral conditions that appeared only in the intermediate solution were treated as supporting but non-essential. Solution consistency and solution coverage were reported for each configuration to convey explanatory strength and empirical scope. Robustness checks included alternative calibration anchors (slightly stricter and more lenient crossover points), variation of consistency cut-offs (0.80\u0026ndash;0.90), and re-running analyses with small changes to case aggregation (individual respondent vs aggregated district/sub-group). Stability of primary configurations across these checks supported the credibility of the findings. Results were interpreted through the lens of local husbandry practice and ethnographic observation, linking configurational outputs back to farmers\u0026rsquo; everyday recognition heuristics and the breeder-defined Panch Kalyani standard.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSocio-economic Status of the Respondents\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe socio-economic characteristics of the respondents showed in the Table 2 indicate a broadly comparable profile between farmers who keeps only Nili-Ravi buffalo (Nili-Ravi rearers) and farmers who keeps both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes (mixed rearers), with subtle differences reflecting their production orientations. The average age of both groups was nearly identical (44.13 years for Nili-Ravi rearers and 44.19 years for mixed rearers), indicating that middle-aged farmers with long-standing experience primarily manage buffalo rearing in the study area. The educational status of respondents was moderate in both groups, with Nili-Ravi rearers reporting a slightly higher mean schooling duration (8.22 years) than mixed rearers (7.73 years). Family size was also similar across groups, averaging around five members, indicating comparable household labour availability for livestock-related activities. Landholding patterns revealed a noticeable divergence. Nili-Ravi rearers possessed larger average landholdings (7.25 acres) compared to mixed rearers (5.73 acres), suggesting relatively better access to agricultural resources among those exclusively maintaining the Nili-Ravi breed. A similar trend was observed in fodder production area, where Nili-Ravi rearers allocated 1.34 acres on average, marginally higher than the 1.22 acres reported by mixed rearers. The most distinct difference emerged in herd composition. Pure Nili-Ravi rearers maintained a larger average number of Nili-Ravi animals (8.17) compared to mixed rearers (5.15), whereas mixed rearers additionally kept an average of 4.70 Murrah buffaloes. This reflects a strategic diversification among mixed rearers, who integrate Murrah to meet commercial productivity expectations while retaining some Nili-Ravi animals for cultural or adaptive value. Annual income from buffalo farming was higher among mixed rearers (₹8,58,887.80) compared to Nili Ravi-only rearers (₹7,89,110.10). The inclusion of Murrah buffaloes widely acknowledged for higher milk yield likely contributed to this income difference. However, the wide income ranges in both groups indicate heterogeneity in management practices, resource access, and market linkages.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2 Socio-economic Status of the Respondents.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"627\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS. No.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 249px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParameters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 299px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNili Ravi rearers\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMixed reares\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 249px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge (In years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(18.00-76.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(20.00-70.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 249px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEducation (No. of years spent in schooling)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(0.00-14.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(0.00-14.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 249px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFamily size (In number)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.00-13.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.00-16.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 249px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal Land holdings (Acres)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(0.50-25.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(0.50-22.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 249px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArea under fodder production (Acres)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(0.10-6.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(0.10-7.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 166px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHerd size (In number)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNili-Ravi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.17\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(1.00-62.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(1.00-44.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMurrah\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(1.00-26.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 80px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 249px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncome from buffalo farming per annum (Rs)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 148px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7,89,110.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(93,500-44,15,900)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 151px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8,58,887.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(1,25,100-40,16,400)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNote: Figures in parenthesis indicates range value for the respective parameters\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProductive and Reproductive Performance of Buffaloes under Different Production Systems\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eProductive and reproductive attributes of buffaloes reared under both Nili-Ravi and mixed rearing systems exhibited noticeable variation as given in table 3. Peak milk yield among Nili-Ravi rearers averaged 14.98 kg/day, slightly higher than the yield recorded by Nili-Ravi animals under mixed rearers (14.40 kg/day) and comparable to Murrah buffaloes (14.31 kg/day). Lactation length followed a similar trend, with Nili-Ravi rearers reporting a mean of 8.70 months, while Nili-Ravi in the mixed group averaged 8.43 months and Murrah averaged 8.13 months. The average age at first calving (AFC) for Nili-Ravi buffaloes was 42.08 months among Nili-Ravi rearers, which increased to 44.21 months in the mixed system. Murrah buffaloes showed an AFC of 41.44 months. Service period remained shortest for Nili-Ravi rearers at 2.72 months, compared to 3.07 months among mixed rearers, while Murrah buffaloes averaged 2.78 months. Calving interval was 14.79 months for Nili-Ravi rearers, increasing to 15.50 months under mixed rearing for the same breed, whereas Murrah buffaloes recorded 14.42 months. Dry period showed only minor fluctuations, ranging between 2.57 and 2.74 months across all groups. Average daily milk yield was highest in Nili-Ravi rearers (8.21 kg/day), followed by Nili-Ravi under mixed rearers (7.91 kg/day) and Murrah buffaloes (7.62 kg/day).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3 Productive and reproductive parameters.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"640\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS. No.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" rowspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cbr clear=\"all\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParameters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNili Ravi Rearers\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 246px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMixed reares\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNili-Ravi\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNili-Ravi\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMurrah\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeak milk yield per day per buffalo (Kg)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(6.00-23.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(4.00-20.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(4.00-22.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLactation length (In months)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(7.00-13.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(7.00-16.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(4.00-11.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAverage Age at First Calving (AFC) (In months)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(36.00-49.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(36.00-49.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(34.00-48.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eService period (In months)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.50-4.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.07\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.00-4.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.00-7.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCalving interval (In months)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(12.50-17.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(13.00-18.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(12.50-17.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDry period (In months)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.00-3.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(1.00-3.50)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.00-4.00)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 56px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" style=\"width: 209px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAverage milk yield per day per buffalo (Kg)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 128px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(3.29-12.60)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 124px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.19-10.96)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(2.19-10.96)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNote: Figures in parenthesis indicates range value for the respective parameters\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive Statistics and Correlation Patterns\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe descriptive statistics and correlation results (Table 4a and 4b) reveal distinct perceptual patterns in breed identification between farmers rearing only Nili-Ravi buffaloes and those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah breeds. Among Nili-Ravi rearers, the overall mean value of 0.74 for Breed Identification (BI) indicates a consistently strong ability to recognise their animals based on morphological cues. The relatively high mean values for pinkish tongue (0.78), walled eye (0.72), and front short legs (0.73) suggest that these physical traits form the primary framework through which farmers perceive and classify breed purity. The Panch Kalyani (0.59), although a visible feature, shows lower salience, implying that single external marks are not considered decisive within herds that are visually homogeneous. Correlation results highlight pinkish tongue (r = 0.77) and front short legs (r = 0.69) exhibit the highest positive associations with overall breed identification, followed by walled eyes (r = 0.66). These associations indicate that Nili-Ravi rearers rely on a cluster of structural and colour-based cues rather than symbolic markings, reflecting a learned, experience-based form of recognition deeply rooted in their daily interaction with the herd.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4a Descriptive Statistics and Correlation among Conditions for Nili-Ravi rearers.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"512\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePK\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePK\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, the mixed rearers; those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals demonstrate a slightly lower mean for overall breed identification (BI = 0.72), yet a higher mean for Panch Kalyani (0.83), underscoring its greater cognitive weight in environments where visual overlap between breeds occurs. The correlation between Panch Kalyani and breed identification (r = 0.62) is notably stronger than in the Nili-Ravi-only group (r = 0.48), confirming that symbolic or colour-differentiated traits become critical when multiple breeds coexist. Pink tongue (r = 0.61) continues to play an important supporting role, though its relative importance diminishes slightly compared to pure Nili-Ravi contexts. These findings illustrate a shift from intrinsic physical recognition to comparative visual referencing among mixed rearers. The results suggest that local knowledge systems adapt dynamically to herd composition, reinforcing that farmers\u0026rsquo; perception of breed identity is both situational and ecologically embedded.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4b Descriptive Statistics and Correlation among Conditions for Mixed rearers.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" align=\"\" width=\"512\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMean\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePK\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePK\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.43\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 65px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBI\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eNecessary-Condition Analysis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe necessary-condition analysis provides a finer understanding of the traits perceived as indispensable for breed identification among Nili-Ravi rearers and those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals. Among Nili-Ravi rearers (Table 5a), the conditions with consistency values above 0.90 specifically pinkish tongue (0.93) and front short legs (0.89) emerge as the most critical indicators for recognising breed purity. These traits, both structural and pigmentation-based, represent deeply internalised visual heuristics acquired through generational familiarity with Nili-Ravi buffaloes. The relatively high coverage values for pinkish tongue (0.79) and front short legs (0.75) further indicate that these features are widely used and consistently present among respondents\u0026rsquo; recognition criteria. In contrast, the panch kalyani, though traditionally mentioned in breed standards, registers a lower consistency (0.65), implying it is neither a universal nor a reliable cue within homogeneous herds. The walled eye trait (consistency 0.87) plays a secondary, supportive role, possibly aiding in differentiation under low-light or distance-based observation. These findings highlight that among single-breed contexts, experiential familiarity allows farmers to rely on a constellation of physical traits rather than symbolic ones.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor mixed rearers (Table 5b), the analytical pattern shifts markedly. The panch kalyani (consistency = 0.92; coverage = 0.77) becomes the most dominant and stable necessary condition for identifying Nili-Ravi animals when Murrah buffaloes coexist within the same household. The trait serves as a quick, contrasting visual cue, compensating for the overlapping morphologies between the two breeds. Front short legs (0.88) and pinkish tongue (0.90) retain importance but are comparatively less decisive, suggesting that when visual complexity increases, farmers prioritize high-contrast markers over subtle physical details. The walled eye trait (0.86) maintains moderate consistency but is less central in mixed contexts, perhaps due to the greater salience of external colour patterns. The contrast between the two groups reveals that \u003cstrong\u003eperceptual ecology adapts to herd composition\u003c/strong\u003e. Nili-Ravi rearers exhibit \u003cem\u003eintra-breed literacy\u003c/em\u003e based on subtle morphological distinctions, while mixed rearers depend on \u003cem\u003einter-breed contrast cues\u003c/em\u003e such as panch kalyani. This divergence demonstrates how traditional knowledge evolves contextually by farmers calibrate their perceptual systems according to the diversity of their herds. This is an example of \u003cstrong\u003ecognitive adaptation to local ecological realities\u003c/strong\u003e, where breed recognition is not a fixed skill but a dynamic response shaped by environment, exposure, and purpose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5a Necessary-condition analysis for High (BI) and Low (~BI) Breed Identification for Only Nili-Ravi rearers.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"103%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCondition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 16px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePresence (BI) Consistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePresence (BI) Coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAbsence (~BI) Consistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAbsence (~BI) Coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShort Legs (SL)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 16px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePanch Kalyani ( PK)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 16px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.81\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePinkish Tongue (PT)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 16px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.93\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWalled Eye (WE)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 16px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.87\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 19px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 21px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.64\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5b Necessary Conditions for High (BI) and Low (~BI) Breed Identification for Mixed Rearers.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"612\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCondition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePresence (BI) Consistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCoverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAbsence (~BI) Consistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCoverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShort Legs (SL)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.63\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePanch Kalyani ( PK)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.77\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.61\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePinkish Tongue (PT)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.72\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.66\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 168px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWalled Eye (WE)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 138px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.67\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 85px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eConfigurational Analysis for Breed Identification\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe configurational analysis revealed contrasting causal patterns for breed identification between only Nili-Ravi rearers and mixed rearers. Among \u003cstrong\u003eNili-Ravi rearers (Table 6a)\u003c/strong\u003e, high breed identification (BI) was primarily linked to combinations of \u003cstrong\u003epinkish tongue (PT)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003efront \u003cstrong\u003eshort legs (SL)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand \u003cstrong\u003ewalled eye (WE)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ewith\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003epanch kalyani (PK)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e playing only a peripheral or even absent role. The consistency values above 0.9 across all configurations confirm that these physical cues are stable and reliable indicators of breed purity within single-breed herds. The presence of multiple high-consistency configurations (C1\u0026ndash;C3) suggests that farmers draw upon \u003cstrong\u003emultiple intra-breed cues\u003c/strong\u003e rather than relying on a single trait, demonstrating an indigenous, experience-based taxonomy for recognizing authentic Nili-Ravi buffaloes. In contrast, \u003cstrong\u003emixed rearers (Table 6b)\u003c/strong\u003e exhibited configurations in which the \u003cstrong\u003epanch kalyani (PK)\u003c/strong\u003e emerged as a \u003cstrong\u003ecore condition\u003c/strong\u003e, while the relative importance of other traits such as pinkish tongue and front short legs was reduced. This pattern highlights a shift from \u003cstrong\u003eintra-breed recognition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eto\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003einter-breed contrast cues\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e that help distinguish between breeds. In such contexts, visible and distinct features like white markings become the dominant perceptual reference for farmers to differentiate Nili-Ravi from Murrah animals. Overall, the fsQCA results indicate that \u003cstrong\u003efarmers\u0026rsquo; perceptual systems are context-specific and adaptive\u003c/strong\u003e: single-breed rearers rely on subtle morphological and experiential cues, whereas mixed rearers prioritize visible markers that aid quick visual differentiation. These locally grounded recognition systems reflect how indigenous knowledge structures evolve in tandem with ecological and management realities, offering insight into the \u003cstrong\u003esocial ecology of breed identification\u003c/strong\u003e within smallholder livestock systems. The comparison between the two groups demonstrates that while Nili-Ravi rearers prioritize pinkish tongue, front short legs, and walled eyes as within-breed identifiers, mixed rearers rely on both pinkish tongue and panch kalyani to distinguish Nili-Ravi from Murrah, reflecting perceptual adaptations shaped by their rearing context.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6a Configurational Solutions for High BI for \u0026nbsp; Nili-Ravi Rearers.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConditions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC4\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC5\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC6\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFront Short Legs (SL)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e●\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWhite Mark (WM)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePinkish Tongue (PT)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e●\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e●\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e●\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWalled Eye (WE)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e●\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSolution coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 24px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSolution consistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 11px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6b Configurational Solutions for High BI for \u0026nbsp;Mixed Rearers.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConditions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC4\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC5\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eC6\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFront Short Legs (SL)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e●\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePanch Kalyani ( PK)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e●\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePinkish Tongue (PT)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e●\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWalled Eye (WE)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e●\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026bull;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026otimes;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSolution coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.62\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 28px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSolution consistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.95\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 12px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 10px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.92\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe analysis of configurational solutions for low perception (\u0026sim;BI) among Nili-Ravi rearers (7a) revealed that the \u003cstrong\u003eabsence of pinkish tongue (\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT)\u003c/strong\u003e consistently appeared across all solutions, indicating that rearers who did not associate pinkish tongue with breed purity tended to exhibit lower perception about the distinctiveness of the breed. Three key causal pathways emerged. The first configuration \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;SL *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;WE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e suggests that when pinkish tongue, front short legs, and walled eyes are all absent, the perceived breed distinctiveness diminishes markedly (consistency = 0.937). Similarly, the combination \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PK * WE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e shows that the absence of pinkish tongue and panch kalyani, together with the presence of walled eyes, leads to a weaker perception (consistency = 0.945). The third configuration \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003cstrong\u003ePK *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;SL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e implies that even when panch kalyani is present, if pinkish tongue and front short legs are missing, breed perception remains low (consistency = 0.959). Across the \u003cstrong\u003eparsimonious\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eintermediate solutions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e, the recurring conditions \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;SL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;WE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e confirm that the absence of these two traits plays a crucial role in weakening farmers\u0026rsquo; perception of the Nili-Ravi breed\u0026rsquo;s purity. Overall, the results emphasize that \u003cstrong\u003epinkish tongue acts as a dominant within-breed identification cue\u003c/strong\u003e, while traits like front short legs and walled eyes act as supporting cues that strengthen recognition. The neglect or absence of these phenotypic features collectively reduces breed-specific perception among exclusive Nili-Ravi rearers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable \u0026nbsp; 7a \u0026nbsp;Table of Solutions for ~BI for Nili-Ravi Rearers.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"515\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 515px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel: ~BI = f (SL, PK, PT, WE)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 515px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComplex solution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConfiguration\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRaw coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnique coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~SL * ~WE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.937\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~PK * WE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.462\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.095\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.945\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBI * ~PT * ~SL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.248\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.038\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.959\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 515px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParsimonious solution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLabel\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConfiguration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRaw coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnique coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~SL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.598\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.172\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.904\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~WE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.512\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.102\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.907\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~\u0026nbsp;BI * ~PT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.372\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.026\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.946\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 515px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIntermediate solution\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLabel\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConfiguration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRaw coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnique coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~SL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.598\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.906\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~WE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.544\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.934\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 136px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~\u0026nbsp;BI * ~PT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.518\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.112\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.905\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, among farmers who rear both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes(Table 7b), the results indicate a broader reliance on multiple visual cues. The dominant absence combinations particularly \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PK *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;SL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PK *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT * WE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ereveal that when both \u003cstrong\u003einter-breed cues (panch kalyani)\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003ewithin-breed cues (pinkish tongue)\u003c/strong\u003e are missing, perception levels about breed distinctiveness drop significantly (consistency values \u0026gt; 0.93). This reflects the challenge of differentiating Nili-Ravi buffaloes when multiple traits are either absent or overlap with those of Murrah. Another pathway \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003cstrong\u003ePK *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;WE *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;SL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e highlights that even the presence of panch kalyani cannot compensate for the absence of key within-breed cues like pinkish tongue and front short legs. In the \u003cstrong\u003eparsimonious and intermediate solutions\u003c/strong\u003e, the repeated appearance of \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PK *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;PT *\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026sim;WE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e configurations indicates that \u003cstrong\u003epinkish tongue remains the central perceptual anchor\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003efor identifying Nili-Ravi, but in mixed herds, the absence of panch kalyani further blurs this distinction. Thus, for mixed rearers, \u003cstrong\u003epanch kalyani serve as inter-breed contrast cues\u003c/strong\u003e, helping differentiate Nili-Ravi from Murrah, whereas \u003cstrong\u003epinkish tongue remains the strongest within-breed identification trait\u003c/strong\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 7b Table of Solutions for mixed rearers.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"553\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 553px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eModel: ~BI = f (SL, PK, PT, WE)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 553px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComplex solution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConfiguration (logic term)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRaw coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnique coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PK * ~PT * ~SL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.544\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.192\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.933\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PK * ~PT * WE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.471\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.103\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.947\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePK * ~PT * ~WE * ~SL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.244\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.036\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.961\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 553px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eParsimonious solution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLabel\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConfiguration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRaw coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnique coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PK * ~PT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.595\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.176\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.902\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PK * ~SL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.518\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.095\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.905\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~WE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.369\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.024\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.946\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd nowrap=\"\" colspan=\"5\" valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 553px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIntermediate solution\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLabel\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConfiguration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRaw coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnique coverage\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsistency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PK * ~PT\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.595\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.934\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PK * ~SL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.544\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.934\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 175px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eC6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e~PT * ~WE\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.518\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.114\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 96px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.905\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eBreed identification is not merely a matter of phenotypic observation; it represents the intersection of scientific classification, local knowledge, and the lived experience of livestock rearers (Holloway \u0026amp; Morris, 2012). The present study gains importance within this interface, as it systematically examines how Nili-Ravi buffalo rearers perceive the defining morphological traits of their breed, and how these perceptions differ from those maintaining both Nili-Ravi and Murrah animals. Nili-Ravi, a riverine breed with deep cultural and economic roots in north-western India and Pakistan, has historically been defined by certain morphological standards commonly referred to as Panch Kalyani, encompassing white markings on the forehead, face, muzzle, legs, and tail (Anas et al., 2023; Khan et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2020). However, beyond these breeder-defined traits lies a layer of experiential cognition formed through generations of local observation, where farmers use subtle, situation-specific cues to identify and differentiate animals. Capturing this cognitive layer is critical, because it is these farmers not institutional breeders who maintain the genetic continuity of the breed under dynamic field conditions (Lauvie et al.,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2015; Cleveland et al.,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2005). In this context, the study holds particular significance for participatory livestock conservation and breed improvement programmes. Formal breed descriptions, though standardized, often fail to incorporate region-specific adaptive traits that farmers value for productivity, temperament, or cultural symbolism (Marsoner et al.,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2018). By examining how farmers attribute meaning to physical features such as front short legs, walled eyes, pinkish tongue, and white markings, the study bridges the epistemic gap between formal phenotypic taxonomy and indigenous pattern recognition. The analysis demonstrates that breed perception is not static but contextually adaptive shaped by herd composition, production objectives, and socio-cultural attachment. Understanding this local logic helps design breed conservation strategies that are socially embedded rather than merely phenotypic or genetic.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study reveals distinct perceptual frameworks between Nili-Ravi-only rearers and those who maintain mixed herds with Murrah animals. Among exclusive Nili-Ravi rearers, the dominant identification cues are pinkish tongue, front short legs, and walled eyes. These traits are primarily structural and pigmentation-based, embedded within the herd ecology where visual homogeneity limits reliance on overt colour markings. The fsQCA show that pinkish tongue (consistency = 0.93) and front short legs (0.89) are indispensable cues, indicating a deeply internalized recognition pattern developed through generational familiarity. Walled eyes (0.87) supplement these cues, acting as secondary but reliable identifiers in conditions of partial visibility. The relatively lower weight accorded to white markings (consistency = 0.65) implies that single, externally visible cues do not carry high discriminative power when all animals share a similar visual template. In contrast, mixed rearers who manage both Nili-Ravi and Murrah buffaloes rely heavily on the white marks or Panch Kalyani for breed identification (consistency = 0.92). This trait functions as an inter-breed contrast cue, enabling quick visual differentiation between breeds that otherwise share several morphological features. While pinkish tongue (0.90) and front short legs (0.88) remain relevant, they are no longer decisive; rather, their importance becomes secondary to the high-contrast cues that can be perceived even from a distance. This pattern suggests a shift in perceptual ecology: where Nili-Ravi-only rearers develop intra-breed recognition based on nuanced physical cues, mixed rearers depend on inter-breed visual contrasts to navigate diversity within their herds. This divergence emphasizes a key principle of local cognition: perception is not only shaped by the physical attributes of animals but also by the comparative context in which those animals are reared (Greggor et al.,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2014). When breeds coexist, the need for differentiation accentuates visible markers; when herds are homogeneous, familiarity privileges subtler structural cues (Holloway et al.,\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e2011). The consistency of these configurations across analytic models strengthens the notion that farmers\u0026rsquo; cognitive systems evolve dynamically with their husbandry environment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom a breeder\u0026rsquo;s perspective, the Nili-Ravi buffalo has long been characterized by its distinctive Panch Kalyani the five auspicious white markings viewed as a hallmark of breed purity. Animals with walled eyes, white facial markings, white switch, and white muzzle are traditionally considered the most desirable. This formal definition, however, arises from a standardization framework that prioritizes visible uniformity for registration and selection purposes. The present study, in contrast, highlights how farmers operationalize recognition differently in field settings. Among Nili-Ravi-only rearers, the importance of Panch Kalyani markings is diminished, not because they are unrecognized, but because other internal features such as tongue colour and leg structure serve as more dependable indicators of genetic authenticity. Farmers repeatedly emphasized that tongue colour and leg proportion are less prone to environmental alteration and hence more stable indicators. Such reasoning reveals a sophisticated local taxonomy that prioritizes reliability over symbolism.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor mixed rearers, however, the symbolic importance of Panch Kalyani resurfaces, reflecting how external visibility acquires renewed significance when breeds coexist. Here, Panch Kalyani markings act not merely as identifiers but as boundary markers that preserve breed identity within multi-breed households. This dual reality one experiential, the other contrastive illustrates that breed standards are not fixed absolutes but negotiated realities mediated by ecological and social context. Recognizing these layered meanings allows breeding programs to integrate both scientific and local rationalities, aligning formal standards with field-level observation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe bubble thematic chart (Figure 3) encapsulates the socio-cognitive divide in farmers\u0026rsquo; motivations for preferring Nili-Ravi buffaloes. Among Nili-Ravi-only rearers, cultural significance (31.8%) emerges as the most frequently cited reason for breed preference, followed closely by milk yield (32.1%) and docility (11.4%). The emphasis on cultural identity reflects the breed\u0026rsquo;s symbolic role within regional heritage, where Nili-Ravi buffaloes are associated with prestige, lineage, and community identity. The breed is not just a source of milk but a living emblem of continuity. For these farmers, maintaining purebred lines carries social meaning beyond economic calculus a form of cultural stewardship reinforced through ritual and local pride. In contrast, mixed rearers display a utilitarian orientation. Their dominant preferences higher milk yield (23.7%), longer lactation length (23.6%), and greater reproductive lifespan (21.2%) reflect performance-based valuation. For them, the Nili-Ravi buffalo\u0026rsquo;s utility lies in its productive efficiency rather than symbolic distinctiveness. Cultural importance ranks marginally (3.6%), indicating that economic rationality supersedes heritage sentiment. This transition from cultural to utilitarian reasoning mirrors the process of market integration, where livestock are increasingly viewed as production assets rather than community symbols. The visual distribution of bubble sizes on the thematic map therefore represents sociological shift in breed valuation. In homogeneous Nili-Ravi contexts, cultural embeddedness sustains the continuity of local lineages. In mixed systems, economic pragmatism reshapes preference structures. This dual logic has critical implications for extension and conservation efforts, as it implies that messages emphasizing productivity may resonate differently from those invoking heritage preservation depending on herd composition and livelihood dependence.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study demonstrates that breed identification is an ecologically grounded cognitive process, not an abstract set of morphological checklists. Farmers\u0026rsquo; perceptual systems evolve as adaptive responses to their local rearing environment shaped by herd diversity, grazing patterns, and daily interaction. For single-breed rearers, high familiarity enables recognition based on subtle structural cues that outsiders may overlook. For mixed rearers, where multiple phenotypes coexist, perception shifts toward high-contrast visual cues to minimize misidentification. Such plasticity in perception underlines the importance of situating breed recognition within the socio-ecological context of husbandry. From a breeding policy standpoint, this insight stresses why farmer perspectives must inform formal breed characterization. Top-down classification systems that rely solely on phenotypic traits may overlook locally valued features that contribute to adaptation, resilience, or manageability (Pezzulo \u0026amp; Levin, 2016). For instance, traits such as docility, leg height, or tongue pigmentation though minor from a genetic viewpoint carry significant operational meaning for farmers handling animals daily. Integrating these perspectives ensures that breeding programs remain aligned with farmers\u0026rsquo; realities, thereby enhancing adoption and sustainability. Moreover, perception-driven identification has implications for participatory breeding and conservation. Local farmers act as custodians of indigenous germplasm, and their cognitive frameworks shape which animals are retained, crossbred, or culled (Mathew \u0026amp; Mathew, 2023). Ignoring these frameworks risks undermining in-situ conservation by eroding the social knowledge that sustains breed continuity. Therefore, institutional breeding strategies should not only recognize the Panch Kalyani standards but also document the lived taxonomies employed by local communities. Collaborative validation of such traits can enhance the accuracy and inclusivity of breed documentation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePolicy Implications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1. Breed Conservation through Participatory Decision-Making\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePolicies should institutionalize community-based breed conservation committees that involve Nili-Ravi-only rearers, mixed rearers, and breeders in decision-making. This participatory approach will ensure that selection criteria reflect both scientific breeding goals and farmers\u0026rsquo; cultural perceptions. Recognizing local farmers as \u0026ldquo;co-conservers\u0026rdquo; of indigenous genetic resources can strengthen conservation ethics and breed sustainability under changing agro-ecological conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2. Integration of Cultural Valuation into Breed Improvement Programs\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCurrent breed improvement policies largely emphasize productivity traits such as milk yield and reproductive efficiency. However, the study highlights that Nili-Ravi-only rearers assign value to cultural and aesthetic traits like pinkish tongue, walled eyes, and front short legs\u0026mdash;features that hold symbolic and traditional significance. Breed policies should therefore integrate cultural valuation frameworks into selection and breeding objectives, aligning scientific standards with locally meaningful attributes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3. Participatory Extension and Farmer Training through B-FFS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIntroducing Breed Farmer Field Schools (B-FFS) as a national extension mechanism can help farmers engage directly with scientists and breeders. These schools would focus on participatory training in breed identification, trait evaluation, reproductive management, and record keeping. This co-learning model will bridge perceptual gaps between productivity-focused mixed rearers and culturally oriented Nili-Ravi rearers, strengthening the link between conservation and livelihood goals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4. Development of Regional Breed Promotion Clusters\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePolicy should promote regional breed promotion clusters in areas where Nili-Ravi buffaloes hold strong socio-cultural and adaptive value. These clusters can serve as focal points for skill development, value-chain integration (e.g., milk marketing under local breed labels), and demonstration of breed-specific resilience traits. This model would enhance both market visibility and social identity of the breed, motivating continued rearing among younger generations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e5. Documentation and Digital Mapping of Farmer-Defined Breed Traits\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo preserve traditional knowledge and aid in future breeding programs, policies must support the documentation, digital mapping, and geo-referencing of farmer-defined breed traits. Establishing an open-access Breed Perception Repository can help track regional variations in trait preferences, supporting both genetic characterization and socio-cultural heritage preservation. Integrating this with the National Livestock Mission\u0026rsquo;s database will ensure that farmers\u0026rsquo; perceptions actively inform national breed conservation strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e6. Periodic Re-Evaluation of Breed Characteristics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA systematic re-examination of Nili-Ravi breed characteristics at fixed intervals such as once every 20 years should be institutionalized to capture shifts emerging from climate pressures, management transitions, and farmer-led selection. Embedding this cyclical review within national breeding and conservation frameworks will ensure that both scientific descriptors and farmer-defined traits remain relevant, updated, and reflective of the evolving production environment.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe present study enriches the understanding of how breed identity is perceived and operationalized in rural livestock systems. By juxtaposing the perceptions of Nili-Ravi-only rearers with those managing mixed herds, it reveals that breed recognition is not fixed but dynamically adapted to ecological and social contexts. Nili-Ravi rearers rely on subtle morphological and pigmentation cues\u0026mdash;pinkish tongue, short legs, walled eyes\u0026mdash;anchored in familiarity and cultural continuity, whereas mixed rearers depend on visible contrast markers like white forehead markings to differentiate breeds within diverse herds. The divergence between these perceptual systems illustrates that local knowledge is fluid, responsive, and pragmatic. The findings also suggest that understanding farmers\u0026rsquo; perception is crucial not only for documenting breed traits but for sustaining cultural heritage and local adaptation. The inclusion of farmer-defined criteria alongside breeder-defined standards like Panch Kalyani ensures that breed characterization remains contextually grounded and socially resonant. In essence, the perception of Nili-Ravi buffaloes embodies a dialogue between tradition and adaptation, between local cognition and scientific taxonomy. Recognizing and integrating these perceptions into formal breeding frameworks can strengthen participatory conservation, ensuring that breed improvement aligns with both ecological reality and cultural continuity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLimitations of the Study\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile the study offers important insights into the perceptual ecology of breed identification among Nili-Ravi and mixed rearers, certain aspects invite further exploration. The cross-sectional design captures farmer perceptions at a particular time, which, although valuable for understanding prevailing recognition systems, may not fully reflect how these perceptions evolve with changing breeding practices or exposure to institutional interventions. Future longitudinal studies could trace how sustained engagement with extension systems influences the continuity or transformation of trait preferences. The perceptual framework adopted in this study relies on farmers\u0026rsquo; experiential reasoning rather than molecular or biometric validation. This choice was intentional to foreground local epistemologies; however, integrating molecular characterization in future research could help establish convergences between genetic purity and indigenous classification systems. The focus area of the study was geographically specific, situated in regions with active Nili-Ravi and Murrah rearing systems. While this enhances contextual accuracy, expanding the spatial scope could capture broader cultural and ecological gradients influencing breed valuation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor\u0026rsquo;s contribution\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGM: Investigation, original draft writing and reviewing \u0026amp; editing. AS: Data analysis, original draft writing, reviewing \u0026amp; editing. NS: Conceptualisation, Supervision, resource mobilisation, and reviewing \u0026amp; editing. FCT: Investigation, reviewing and writing. All the authors have read and approved the final manuscript. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical Approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical approval for the present study was waived by the Institute Ethics Committee (IEC) of ICAR\u0026ndash;Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes (ICAR-CIRB), Hisar, India, as the research involved minimal-risk, non-invasive socio-economic data collection methods only. All procedures involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards and institutional guidelines of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), and adhered to the principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments. The exemption was granted on the grounds that the study did not involve any biological sampling, clinical procedures, or health-related interventions, and therefore posed no foreseeable risk to participants. No personally identifiable information, including names, addresses, or contact details, was collected from respondents. Participation was entirely voluntary, and participants were informed about the purpose of the study and their right to withdraw at any stage without any consequences. Complete anonymity and confidentiality of the data were strictly maintained, and all findings were reported only in aggregated form to prevent individual identification.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eVerbal Informed Consent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVerbal informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study, \u0026nbsp;during the data-collection period between June, 2022 and December, 2025. The IRB approved the use of verbal consent and granted a waiver of written or verbal documentation due to the study\u0026rsquo;s minimal risk \u0026nbsp;and anonymized survey design. Participants were informed about the study purpose, procedures, \u0026nbsp;voluntary nature of participation, the right to withdraw at any time without penalty, and data \u0026nbsp;confidentiality protections.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical trial number\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDisclosure statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research was supported by Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Department of Agricultural Research and Education, Government of India. All the authors thank Director, ICAR-Central Institute for Buffalo Research, Hisar for providing fanatical facilities to conduct the research.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of generative AI in scientific writing\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe generative AI (GPT-5) was used to improve grammar, clarity, and readability of the manuscript. The authors carefully reviewed and edited the content to ensure accuracy and take full responsibility for the final version of the paper.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlebachew H (2017) \u003cem\u003eOn-Farm Phenotypic Characterization, Husbandry and Breeding Practices of Indigenous Cattle Breed In Selected Areas of Benishangul-Gumuz, Western Ethiopia\u003c/em\u003e. Doctoral dissertation submitted to Haramaya university.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnas M, Farooq M, Asif M, Ali WR, Mansoor S (2023) A novel insight into the identification of potential SNP markers for the genomic characterization of buffalo breeds in Pakistan. Ani 13(15): 2543.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBellon MR, Gotor E, Caracciolo F (2015) Conserving landraces and improving livelihoods: how to assess the success of on-farm conservation projects?. Inter J Agri Sust 13(2): 167-182.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChiariotti A, Borghese A, Boselli C, Barile VL (2025) Water Buffalo\u0026rsquo;s Adaptability to Different Environments and Farming Systems: A Review. Ani 15(11): 1538.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCleveland DA, Daniela S, Smith SE (2000) A biological framework for understanding farmers\u0026rsquo; plant breeding. Econ Bot 54(3): 377-394.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDesta TT (2012) Introduction of domestic buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) into Ethiopia would be feasible. Rene Agri F Sys 27(4): 305-313.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEstrada-Carmona N, Hart AK, DeClerck FA, Harvey CA, Milder JC (2014) Integrated landscape management for agriculture, rural livelihoods, and ecosystem conservation: An assessment of experience from Latin America and the Caribbean. Landscape Urb Plan 129: 1-11.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGreckhamer T, Furnari S, Fiss PC, Aguilera RV (2018) Studying configurations with qualitative comparative analysis: Best practices in strategy and organization research. Stra Org 16(4): 482-495.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGreggor AL, Clayton NS, Phalan B, Thornton A (2014) Comparative cognition for conservationists. Tre Ecol Evol 29(9): 489-495.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHolloway L, Morris C (2012) Contesting genetic knowledge-practices in livestock breeding: Biopower, biosocial collectivities, and heterogeneous resistances. Env Plan D: Soc Spa 30(1): 60-77.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHolloway L, Morris C, Gilna B, Gibbs D (2011) Choosing and rejecting cattle and sheep: changing discourses and practices of (de) selection in pedigree livestock breeding. Agri Hum Val 28(4): 533-547.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJain AK, Muladno M (2009) Selection criteria and breeding objectives in improvement of productivity of cattle and buffaloes. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaushik Hans (2020) A study on enablers and challenges in adoption of technology by north Indian dairy farms a systems approach. Doctoral dissertation submitted to Dayalbagh Educational Institute (Deemed to be university), Agra, Uttar Pradesh. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhan A, Majid HA, Ali A, Ali A, Rizwan M, Ullah W, ... Ullah A (2023) Optimizing Conservation of Nili Ravi Buffaloes in Southern Region of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Phenotypic, Morphometric, and Productive Traits. J of Biores Manag 10(4): 2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKis J, Barta S, Elekes L, Engi L, Fegyver T, Kecskem\u0026eacute;ti J, ... Szab\u0026oacute; J (2017) Traditional herders\u0026rsquo; knowledge and worldview and their role in managing biodiversity and ecosystem-services of extensive pastures. Knowing our lands and resources: indigenous and local knowledge of biodiversity and ecosystem services in Europe and Central Asia. Paris (France): UNESCO, 56-70.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKumar H, Girish PS (2025) Buffalo Breeds and Breeding Policies for Enhanced Meat Production: A Global Perspective. In \u003cem\u003eBuffalo (Bubalus bubalis) Meat: Production, Processing and Quality\u003c/em\u003e. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. 69-92.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLauvie A, Paoli JC, Moulin CH (2015) Managing local breeds: a dynamic connected to livestock farming systems that concerns different levels of organization. Animal Genetic Resources/Resources g\u0026eacute;n\u0026eacute;tiques animales/Recursos gen\u0026eacute;ticos animales 56: 119-125.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarsoner T, Vigl LE, Manck F, Jaritz G, Tappeiner U, Tasser E (2018) Indigenous livestock breeds as indicators for cultural ecosystem services: A spatial analysis within the Alpine Space. Eco Ind 94: 55-63.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMathew E, Mathew L (2023) Conservation of landraces and indigenous breeds: An investment for the future. In Conservation and sustainable utilization of bioresources. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. 291-321.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMills J, Gaskell P, Ingram J, Dwyer J, Reed M, Short C (2017) Engaging farmers in environmental management through a better understanding of behaviour. Agri Hum Val 34(2): 283-299.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePappas IO, Woodside AG (2021) Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA): Guidelines for research practice in Information Systems and marketing. Intern J Info Manag 58: 102310.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePezzulo G, Levin M (2016) Top-down models in biology: explanation and control of complex living systems above the molecular level. J Royal Soc Inter 13(124): 20160555.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh KV (2022) Biodiversity and Conservation Status of Indigenous Livestock of India. In Biodiversity CRC Press. 143-155.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh N, Banga HS, Malhotra P, Deshmukh S, Dutta N, Brar RS (2024) Scoping study of research trends on Nili Ravi buffalo applying scientometric analysis and network visualization. Buf Bul 43(1): 121-134.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTyagi SK, Mehrotra A, Singh A, Kumar A, Dutt T, Mishra BP, Pandey AK (2021) Comparative signatures of selection analyses identify loci under positive selection in the Murrah Buffalo of India. Front Gen 12: 673697.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVij PK, Tantia MS (2005) Status of Nili Ravi buffaloes in India. Animal Genetic Resources/Resources g\u0026eacute;n\u0026eacute;tiques animales/Recursos gen\u0026eacute;ticos animales 37: 75-81.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang Y, Colli L, Barker JSF (2020) Asian water buffalo: domestication, history and genetics. Ani Gen 51(2): 177-191.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-sustainability","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"disu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Sustainability](https://www.springer.com/43621)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Sustainability","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Nili Ravi, Panch Kalyani, Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), Farmer perceptions, Breed traits, Participatory breed conservation","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9340421/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9340421/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eLivestock rearing anchors cultural identity and household sustenance in rural Punjab, where the Nili-Ravi buffalo continues to carry ecological and social importance despite the expanding preference for other high-yielding breeds. Farmer perceptions shape the continuity of this indigenous breed, yet these perception systems remain poorly represented in formal breeding and conservation frameworks. The study was conducted in the four districts of Punjab that host India\u0026rsquo;s only concentrated Nili-Ravi population\u0026mdash;Firozpur, Tarn Taran, Amritsar and Gurdaspur\u0026mdash;using a stratified random sampling plan covering eight blocks and 240 respondent households. Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) was applied to calibrate four farmer-defined traits, construct truth tables, test necessity conditions, and explore sufficiency configurations. Findings revealed that farmers engaged in different rearing systems interpret the breed through distinctly different perceptual logics. Only-Nili-Ravi rearers relied strongly on pinkish tongue, short forelimbs, and walled eyes as core identification cues, whereas mixed rearers managing both Nili-Ravi and Murrah prioritised Panch Kalyani due to the need for clearer visual differentiation across breeds. Configurational analysis showed that high breed recognition among Nili-Ravi-only rearers required combinations of pink tongue, short forelimbs, and walled eyes, while among mixed rearers, Panch Kalyani consistently emerged as the core condition. These results demonstrate that breed perception is context-dependent, shaped by herd composition, visual contrast, and experiential familiarity. The study suggests that conservation policy must integrate farmer-defined perceptual cues, periodically revisit breed descriptors, and design participatory extension strategies aligned with the recognition systems actually used by rearers in the field.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"How Farmers Recognise Breeds: Evidence from Nili-Ravi Buffalo Rearers in India","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-05-08 18:39:21","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9340421/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-14T05:02:01+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-02T07:32:49+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"156262491398803212712786137142260465622","date":"2026-05-02T07:10:35+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"84276667004014216205935539963730523072","date":"2026-05-02T07:03:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"196926126787903507840848996142938933133","date":"2026-05-02T03:30:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"176021402024163191503498519534883374535","date":"2026-05-01T04:02:34+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"233658900302774201507132305958052665447","date":"2026-04-30T04:48:52+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-04-30T03:02:27+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-04-27T05:32:01+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-04-22T08:38:40+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Sustainability","date":"2026-04-22T08:17:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-sustainability","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"disu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Sustainability](https://www.springer.com/43621)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Discover Sustainability","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1c6e4ff1-f9d3-4284-a207-c35bff259aed","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 8th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-14T05:02:01+00:00","index":40,"fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-02T07:32:49+00:00","index":38,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"156262491398803212712786137142260465622","date":"2026-05-02T07:10:35+00:00","index":37,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"84276667004014216205935539963730523072","date":"2026-05-02T07:03:56+00:00","index":36,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"196926126787903507840848996142938933133","date":"2026-05-02T03:30:11+00:00","index":34,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"176021402024163191503498519534883374535","date":"2026-05-01T04:02:34+00:00","index":33,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"233658900302774201507132305958052665447","date":"2026-04-30T04:48:52+00:00","index":31,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"18","date":"2026-04-30T03:02:27+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-08T18:39:21+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-05-08 18:39:21","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9340421","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9340421","identity":"rs-9340421","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}