Cattle production systems characteristics and their influence on antimicrobial use, alternatives, and resistance in Nigeria

Cattle production systems characteristics and their influence on antimicrobial use, alternatives, and resistance in Nigeria | 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 Cattle production systems characteristics and their influence on antimicrobial use, alternatives, and resistance in Nigeria Ismail Ayoade Odetokun, Jadesola Ajao, Nma Bida Alhaji, Rodiat Olabisi Omotoso, and 11 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9233752/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 12 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Nigerian cattle production ranks 6th in Africa and 16th globally, constituting an important livelihood for many of its population. However, several health challenges affect the productivity of cattle herds, influencing antimicrobial use (AMU) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). In this study, we attempt to characterise the cattle production system and its influence on health management practices. We also examined factors influencing farmers’ use of antimicrobials and antimicrobial alternatives (vaccines, ethnoveterinary remedies, etc.) A mixed-methods approach, comprising semi-structured questionnaires (n = 736) and stakeholder focus group discussions, was employed. Results The majority of cattle production (78%) is extensive, with a median of 50 cattle per herd. Diseases of major burden are mastitis, gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases. Animal health was predominantly self-managed by farmers rather than using government or private veterinary services. Less than 5% of farmers regularly vaccinate their herds. Farmers reported difficulties accessing effective vaccines and largely relied on government veterinarians for immunisation services. Para-veterinarians are regularly consulted for treatment due to a reported unavailability of licensed veterinarians. More farmers used antibiotics (51%) than ethnoveterinary remedies (27%) within the last three months. Farmers stated they used herbs for diseases with limited effective antimicrobial options, such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) and contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP). 53% of farmers never used ethnoveterinary remedies primarily due to low awareness and difficulty in procuring herbs. Farmers also indicated that they were beginning to lose ethnoveterinary knowledge previously passed down from older generations due to an increasing dependence on antimicrobials. Farmers have poor knowledge and attitudes regarding the impact of AMU in cattle and the risk of AMR. Conclusions Future research should focus on identifying and preserving ethnoveterinary knowledge through culturally appropriate means. Efforts should be made to assess the efficacy of available herbs. Access to governmental veterinary services, agricultural extension agents, and vaccines should be improved for farmers. Finally, available legislation surrounding AMU should be implemented more rigorously, and antibiotic sales by unlicensed drugstores must be strictly regulated. antibiotic alternatives mastitis cattle production farmers resistance herbs Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Highlights - The most common diseases affecting cattle are FMD, CBPP, and mastitis. - Antibiotics (51%) are more frequently used than ethnoveterinary remedies (27%) in health management. - Farmers’ use of vaccines is affected by a lack of access to effective vaccines. - 53% of farmers reported non-use of ethnoveterinary remedies primarily due to difficulty in procuring herbs - Antibiotics are freely accessible and used without prescription by farmers. 1. Background Cattle production plays a crucial role in maintaining global economic balance and sustaining the livelihoods of millions of families worldwide. Nigeria is a major cattle producer in Africa, with an estimated cattle population of 18 to 22 million, including about 1.5 million dairy cows and 13.3 million beef cattle ( 1 ). Nigeria’s cattle production systems range from pastoral herding of locally bred cattle on natural pastures to an intensive confinement system with formulated feed for crossbred cattle ( 2 ). The pastoral system (run by pastoralists from the Fulani tribe) accounts for approximately 90% of Nigeria’s cattle production ( 3 ). Cattle production in Nigeria is constrained by a wide range of health challenges. Endemic diseases of significant economic burden include African animal trypanosomiasis (AAT), bovine tuberculosis, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP), and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) ( 1 ). Cows also suffer from mastitis, a leading health problem that causes substantial reduction in milk production, increased culling rates, and loss of replacement stock for farmers ( 4 – 6 ). Mastitis persists in two forms: clinical and subclinical. Clinical mastitis manifests as physical changes in the udder and milk and is thus the more obvious form. On the contrary, subclinical mastitis is not physically detectable. However, it is associated with higher milk production losses and is more prevalent, being confirmed in 89.50% of dairy cattle in one Nigerian local government area ( 6 ). Generally, disease outbreaks in Nigerian cattle are further exacerbated by the predominant production characteristics in the country. The pastoral system consists of long-distance cattle transhumance and free-range grazing, factors which facilitate disease transmission between herds ( 3 , 7 – 9 ). There is also limited access to vaccinations and veterinary services, reducing farmers’ capability to institute preventive measures and/or mitigate disease outbreaks with effective strategies before substantial morbidity and mortality occurs ( 8 , 9 ). Disease challenges are usually managed by Nigerian cattle farmers through the administration of self-prescribed antimicrobials, particularly antibiotics. In this regard, antimicrobial overuse is common, triggered by factors such as high frequency of disease outbreaks, poor governmental regulatory control guiding nonprescribed antimicrobial use (AMU), and farmers being unfamiliar with correct dosage prescriptions. Alhaji et al. (2023) reported that over 75% of beef cattle farmers in Northern Nigeria did not follow any sort of antimicrobial dosage instructions prior to use, and 84% of semi-intensive farms did not observe withdrawal periods ( 10 ). In high-income countries with stricter regulations, high AMU is still prominent, fuelled predominantly by recurrent disease outbreaks. For instance, mastitis disease is estimated to account for 60–70% of AMU in dairy cattle ( 11 – 13 ). In low-to-middle income countries (LMICs), including Nigeria, levels of AMU are further increased through the use of antibiotics as growth promoters and prophylactics. For instance, 24% of cattle pastoralists in North-Central Nigeria reported using antimicrobials to prevent mastitis in lactating cows ( 14 , 15 ). The overuse and misuse of antimicrobials have fuelled the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), a major global health threat across the human, animal, and environmental sectors ( 15 ). AMR reduces the efficacy of existing antimicrobials against prevalent infectious diseases, rendering humans and animals susceptible to microbial infections and largely increasing mortality rates. This significantly undermines current bioscientific progress in terms of microbial therapy ( 16 ). In Nigeria, it was found that 11.9% of milk isolates from mastitic cows contained methicillin‑resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), a resistant bacterium also prevalent in humans, albeit with possible strain differences ( 17 ). While antimicrobial misuse can be partly constrained in LMICs like Nigeria through improved regulations, the threat of AMR also necessitates unique solutions against the complex problem of AMR. One of such potential solutions is the discovery and use of antimicrobial alternatives (ATAs) in health management for cattle production. ATAs include a variety of tools and strategies that allow for the prevention or treatment of diseases without using antibiotics. These include relatively popular strategies such as vaccination and biosecurity, but relatively novel strategies, including bacteriocin, nanopeptides, and phage therapy ( 18 ). Studies in China and Ireland have observed that bacteriocin administration provided some level of efficacy towards the prevention and treatment of bovine mastitis ( 19 , 20 ). Currently, there are very few studies being conducted in Nigeria to assess the effectiveness of these novel ATAs in the health management of cattle. However, Nigerian farmers have traditionally been known to employ ethnoveterinary remedies such as medicinal plants in ruminant health management ( 21 ). This practice of using medicinal plants is also prevalent among other countries worldwide ( 3 , 21 ). A Chinese review of herbal medicinal products noted that, in addition to possessing antibacterial activity, some herbs also improve growth performance and meat quality through their antioxidant properties ( 22 ). A recent review on Nigerian ethnoveterinary practices documented several plants presently being used to manage cattle diseases, including AAT and FMD. The majority of these plants, however, remain poorly documented, with insufficient information regarding their use and factors influencing farmers’ choice of them. However, a review on ethnoveterinary remedies in Nigeria identified that there was possible distrust on farmers’ parts regarding ATAs, due to the ease and proven effectiveness of conventional antimicrobials ( 21 ). Generally, there are clear evidence gaps regarding the use and acceptability of ATAs in Nigeria, as well as factors influencing farmers’ choices between antibiotics and available ATAs. This study presents an explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach aimed at exploring the cattle production characteristics in Nigeria, while understanding how these may shape health management decisions and the use of antimicrobials and ATAs. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Study area and sample size : This study was conducted in two predominantly cattle-farming states in North-Central Nigeria: Kwara and Niger (Fig. 1 ). Kwara is located between latitude 8° 05’ N and 10° 05’ and longitude 2° 50’ E to 6° 05’ E, while Niger lies approximately between 8° 00′ N and 11° 30′ N latitude and 3° 30′ E to 7° 40′ E longitude. The target populations were cattle farmers, herders, and farm workers within the study area. The sample size was determined to be 321 per state using OpenEpi, based on a 50% proportion, a 6% margin of error at 95% confidence interval, with a 20% attrition rate, and a design effect of 1 (for cluster surveys). Ultimately, a total of 736 respondents were recruited in both states for the questionnaire survey. A multistage random sampling was implemented, with the first stage involving a selection of three Agricultural Development Zones (ADPs) from each state. Thereafter, the following pastoral communities and organised farm settings from ADPs were randomly selected: Amoyo, Lajiki, Amberi/Ijagbo, Ajase-Ipo, Kaiama, Ilesha Baruba, Okuta, Kageji, Fufu, Afon, Oke Oyi, and Tafatafa (in Kwara State), Bida, Agaie, Bosso, Edati, Gbako, Gurara, Katcha, Lapai, Lavum, Agwara, Mokwa, and Suleija from Niger State. Finally, 30–31 cattle herders were randomly selected from each community. 2.2. Questionnaire administration, quantitative data management, and analysis A semi-structured questionnaire was developed and consisted of five sections: (a) farmers’ socio-demographics, (b) farm characteristics, (c) livestock management practices, (d) animal health management practices, and (e) knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) of AMU and AMR (Additional File 1). The questionnaire was developed in English and conducted by researchers who were bilingual or trilingual as English/Yoruba, English/Fulani, English/Fulani/Yoruba speakers. The questionnaire was piloted in one pastoral community (n = 10 participants), after which necessary changes were made before full deployment in the field. Data was collected between January 2025 and May 2025 through face-to-face interviews, and responses were recorded on paper or electronic forms, depending on available Internet connection. Responses were checked daily for completeness and subsequently input into KoboToolbox (v.2.024.36) with validation checks to minimize entry errors. Data analysis began with an initial data cleaning on Microsoft Excel, during which missing values and logical inconsistencies were identified. The cleaned data were then imported into R (v. 4.5.1) and summarised through descriptive statistics. Findings were summarised with frequencies, proportions, averages, and ranges. For the KAP section, a total of 4 knowledge questions, 10 attitude questions, and 12 practice questions were asked. Knowledge questions were scored 1 and 0 for ‘Yes’ and ‘No,’ respectively. Attitude questions were scored on a 3-point Likert scale to assess the level of agreement (0 = Disagree/ I don’t know, 1 = Neutral, 2 = Agree). A similar pattern was used for attitude questions (0 = Not likely, 1 = Likely, 2 = Most likely). Negative questions were scored in reverse. This led to a total maximum section of 4, 20 and 24 for K, A and P respectively. To enable relative comparison within the study group, we obtained a data driven cutoff using the mean, consistent with other KAP studies ( 23 , 24 ). The above-mean section included scores above the population mean (≥ 1.22 for knowledge, ≥ 9.25 for attitudes, and ≥ 9.34 for practices). As questions were all scored with whole numbers, this translated to ≥ 2 for knowledge, ≥ 10 for attitudes, and ≥ 10 for practices. Based on this categorical grouping, KAP results were further subjected to inferential analysis. First, Pearson’s chi-square test was conducted to determine associations between the demographics of farmers and KAP scores. Afterwards, KAP categories with significant associations at the p < 0.05 level were included in a multivariate logistic regression model to examine the independent effects of each association. 2.3. Focus group discussion (FGD), qualitative data management, and analysis After the analysis of the survey data, FGD was conducted in October 2025 to provide further insights and as a means of methodological triangulation. This involved the recruitment of 23 stakeholders, including farmers, veterinarians, para-veterinarians, and butchers/meat vendors. Stakeholders were purposely selected to ensure demographic diversity in terms of gender, age, herd size, and state of origin. Participants were split into three round tables; for each table, a trained moderator was assigned to lead the discussion with the aid of an interview guide. A co-moderator/note taker was taking notes and, when possible, recording the conversation for each table. Before discussions, consent was obtained from all participants, and confidentiality assurances were communicated. The questions asked focused on disease prevalence and farmers use of antimicrobials and ATAs (Additional File 2). ATAs here are defined as any substance other than antimicrobials used for the prevention and treatment of diseases (vaccines, ethnoveterinary remedies, other materials). Alternative therapeutic agents are agents employed only for treatment only (e.g., ethnoveterinary herbal remedies). Audio recordings were transcribed manually and with the use of the TurboScribe software. Supplementary notes from the co-moderator captured nonverbal cues and group dynamics. Thereafter, analysis was conducted based on Braun and Clarke’s guide to reflexive thematic analysis ( 25 ). Analysis was deductive, with a semantic coding approach. First, transcripts were read multiple times to allow for data familiarisation. Initial codes were generated by two independent researchers. Afterwards, researchers came together to search for potential themes. Final themes were decided on after multiple rounds of discussions and reflections. A systems map was created using Lucidchart to illustrate the interactions between these themes and how they influenced farmers’ health management decisions. 3. Results 3.1. Demographic Characteristics The demographic characteristics of 736 respondents are summarised in Table 1 , and the geographic distribution in Fig. 2 . More than half of the respondents (56.8%) were aged between 31 and 50 years. Most respondents (97.7%) were male. Most (70.1%) had no formal education, and 88.0% were farm owners. More than 90% of farmers had herds of less than 75 animals, with a median of 49 animals per herd. Table 1 Demographic characteristics of respondents. Demographics Number (%) (n = 736) Age (Years) 60 years 56 (7.61) Gender Male 719 (97.69) Female 17 (2.31) State Kwara State 338 (45.92) Niger State 398 (54.08) Level of Education No formal education 516 (70.10) Primary School 95 (12.91) Secondary School 67 (9.10) Tertiary Education 58 (7.89) Role on Farm Owner 411 (55.84) Owner and manager 237 (32.20) Manager 39 (5.30) Worker 49 (6.66) Number of years in cattle farming ≤ 10 177 (24.05) 11–20 194 (26.36) 21–30 195 (26.49) 31–40 108 (14.67) > 40 62 (8.42) Herd size of animals ≤ 25 150 (20.38) 26–50 249 (33.83) 51–75 178 (24.18) 75–100 91 (12.36) > 100 68 (9.24) 3.2. Farm Characteristics and Husbandry Practices Almost all farmers (99.1%) kept indigenous cattle in their herds, while relatively few (11.6%) kept foreign crossbreds. Herds were typically composed of more females than males, with cows above reproductive age (> 2 years) comprising the largest herd segment (Additional File 3). Herds (67%) were mostly kept in an open-housing system without protective netting, and most (78%) were reared in an extensive grazing system (Table 2 ). More farmers (57.1%) sourced replacement animals solely from their herds rather than purchasing new stock. Less than a quarter of participants reported having farm records such as feeding, reproduction, or vaccination records. Table 2 Husbandry practices of farms Husbandry practices n (%) Housing systems Open housing system without netting 493 (66.98) Open housing system with netting 211 (28.67) Closed housing system 32 (4.35) Feeding practices Extensive system 574 (77.99) Semi-intensive system 131 (17.80) Intensive system (total mixed ration) 31 (4.21) Purchase replacement animals? Yes 316 (42.93) No 420 (57.07) Use of community grazing lands Yes 331 (44.97) No 405 (55.03) Record keeping Feeding 95 (12.91) Reproduction 157 (21.33) Veterinary Health Products 11 (15.08) Vaccination programs 159 (21.60) 3.3. Prevalent Diseases and Health Management Practices Gastrointestinal diseases, respiratory diseases, and mastitis were identified as the most prevalent diseases affecting cattle over the last year by 41, 36, and 23% of farmers, respectively (Additional File 4). Gastrointestinal diseases experienced were helminth infections such as fasciolosis, while respiratory diseases included FMD and CBPP. Farmers lost a lot of money to diseases, due to loss in animal value and treatment costs. A farmer said of mastitis: “(The cow was initially at a) ₦900,000 purchase price but we sold at ₦600,000 because of mastitis.” – R08, Cattle farmer. Treating mastitis cost farmers an average of ₦4,807 per case, while CBPP was reported to cost an average of ₦3,033. Fasciolosis cost farmers ₦13,500 per case. Only 49.5 and 0.9% of farmers had vaccinated their animals against CBPP and FMD, respectively (Table 3 ). 50.8% of farmers reported that they took no action to prevent mastitis in their herd. 44.7% of farmers stated they believe mastitis occurred due to poor management, while 39.5% were not certain of the cause. To detect diseases, most farmers (> 75%) relied on personal experience and physical observation, with much less dependence (< 25%) on veterinary or para-veterinary services (Fig. 3 ). Table 3 Health management practices reported by study participants. Health management n (%) Frequency of herd vaccination Never 218 (29.62) Sometimes 484 (65.76) Always 34 (4.62) Vaccination against specific diseases Contagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia (CBPP) 365 (49.59) Anthrax 347 (47.15) Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) 7 (0.95) Methods used to protect animals from mastitis Nothing 374 (50.82) Proper management 314 (42.80) Conventional treatment (antibiotics) 25 (3.40) Local alternative treatment 22 (2.99) Methods used to currently detect mastitis (multiple responses) Observation 710 (96.48) Laboratory tests 41 (5.58) Actions taken when mastitis is suspected Consult a veterinarian or para-veterinarian 310 (42.12) Use self-prescribed antibiotics 164 (22.28) Local alternative treatment 100 (13.57) Isolate affected animal 29 (3.94) Cull affected animal 3 (0.41) Nothing 139 (8.89) What farmers do with milk from animals under treatment with antibiotics (n = 646) Use it (consumption, sales, calves) 440 (72.76) Discard it 179 (27.71) Do you know any alternative therapeutic agents? Yes 205 (27.85) No 531 (72.15) Do you use alternative therapeutic agents? Yes 203 (27.58) No 388 (52.72) I can’t remember 145 (19.70) Use of animal health service providers over the last three months Yes 376 (51.08) No 360 (28.92) Antibiotic self-prescription over the last three months Yes 377 (51.22) No 280 (38.05) I can’t remember 79 (10.73) 51.1% of farmers had consulted different animal service providers at least once within the last three months. Figure 4 summarises the health provider, service rendered, and the frequency of consultations. Health providers were mostly consulted for treatment services rather than vaccination or other preventive services. For vaccination and preventive treatment, farmers relied largely on government veterinarians. For treatment, farmers relied mostly on para-veterinarians and drugstore vendors. Most farmers (51.2%) had self-prescribed antibiotics to their herds over the last three months. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were oxytetracycline (35.6%), tylosin (32.9%), and penicillin (21.2%) (Fig. 5 ). Farmers often purchased these drugs from livestock markets and unlicensed para-veterinarians, but also from veterinary doctors and licensed veterinary stores (Additional File 5). The cost of antibiotics ranged from ₦15,000 to ₦45,000. The majority of farmers (72.8%) continued to consume and sell milk from cows undergoing antibiotic treatment. 20.7% of farmers had used herbal plants for therapeutic treatment within the past three months. Herbs used included dongoyaro (Hausa name for neem plant or Azadirachta indica ), bitterleaf ( Vernonia amygdalina), àgánwò/kahi/modachi (Yoruba, Fulani, Hausa names for mahogany hardwood), Gapde (Hausa name for African birch), Bagaruwa (Hausa name for thorny acacia), Kadanya (Hausa name for shea butter tree), and ígí ìpín (Yoruba name for sandpaper tree). Table 4 presents some of the herbs identified and the diseases farmers utilised them against. Two farmers described their use of mahogany hardwood in treating mastitis here: “We use modachi (the Hausa name). We dry the stem and seeds, then pound them till it becomes powder and add ginger. We put it in the (nostrils) of lactating cows.” - R15, cattle farmer. “The tree is called àgánwò in Yoruba and it’s very bitter. We will grind it and mix it with salt and give it orally. It prevents mastitis.” - R18, cattle farmer. Table 4 Herbs used by farmers and corresponding diseases treated. Herbs Scientific name Therapeutic uses Àgánwò or African mahogany Khaya senegalensis Mastitis, CBPP, trypanosomiasis, and tuberculosis Kadanya or shea butter tree Vitellaria paradoxa CBPP, trypanosomiasis, and tuberculosis Gapde or African birch Anogeissus leiocarpa FMD Bagaruwa or thorny acacia Vachellia nilotica FMD Ígí ìpín or sandpaper tree Ficus exasperata Mastitis Agents such as ash, shea butter, chicken faeces, and heat were also used for treatment. Generally, ATAs were used in ways that differed among farmers. Two farmers said these when speaking of using ash to treat mastitis: “Sometimes, we use ash. We soak it in water overnight and we allow (the sick cows) to drink it (…) When you soak the ash overnight, it will settle, and then you separate the water and give (the cows) that water.” – R18, Cattle farmer “We also use ash, but hot ash. We will move it close to the udder and spread water on it so the fumes that come up can waft towards the udder.” – R20, Cattle farmer. A minority of farmers (1.4%) refused to divulge the names of the herbs, stating that it was confidential information and could not be revealed. Others stated that they learnt of them from preceding generations but they had forgotten: “ My father taught me [about the herbs] but I forgot.” - Questionnaire respondent . 52.7% of farmers stated that they did not use alternative therapeutics such as herbs and aforementioned agents. The most popular reasons given for this included their not being easily available (51.8%) and their being difficult to administer (26.8%). (Fig. 6 ). 3.4. Knowledge, Perceptions, and Practices (KAP) of Farmers towards antibiotics and AMR Generally, farmers demonstrated unsatisfactory KAP regarding ABU and AMR (Table 5 ). Among the most significant findings on knowledge, only 28% of farmers had heard of the terms ‘antibiotics’ and ‘AMR’, and even fewer (21%) were aware that mastitis could be caused by antimicrobial-resistant pathogens. Table 5 KAP scores of farmers. KPP Total obtainable score Mean score of respondents Satisfactory 1 n (%) Unsatisfactory n (%) Knowledge 4 1.22 290 (39.40) 466 (60.60) Attitude 20 9.25 242 (32.88) 494 (67.12) Practice 24 9.34 329 (44.70) 407 (55.30) 1 Satisfactory score ≥ mean score of respondents, and unsatisfactory score < mean score of respondents. Regarding attitudes, 55.6% believed that antibiotics were not effective for treating diseased animals (Fig. 7 ). 46.7% of farmers agreed that antibiotic overuse could lead to AMR, and 33.0% agreed AMR could become a problem in their herds. A significant portion (39.5%) believed that antibiotic use (ABU) in animals improved their own personal health. Only 26.6% of farmers agreed that the use of antibiotics in animals should be reduced. Regarding practices, participants stated that they were most likely to use antibiotics after noticing disease symptoms in their herd (62.1%), an increase in morbidity (52.5%), and a mortality rate (52.3%) (Fig. 8 ). Farmers were also most likely to use antibiotics after a recommendation from a veterinarian (46.1%). Factors that influenced farmers the least included antibiotics availability (28.7%) and cost (25.7%). Gender was the only sociodemographic variable not significantly associated with KAP of participants (Additional File 6 ). In the multivariate model, farmers with primary (OR: 3.37, 95% CI: 2.01–5.74, p < 0.001) and tertiary (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.04–3.69, p = 0.038) levels of education were more likely to have higher knowledge than farmers with no formal education (Table 6 ). Farmers with 30–40 years of experience in ruminant farming had better attitudes towards antibiotic use than farmers with less than ten years of experience (OR: 6.19, 95% CI: 2.96–13.40, p < 0.001). Farmers with secondary levels of education had better practices than farmers without formal education (OR: 1.97, 95% CI 1.08–3.63, p = 0.027). Table 6 Multivariate Analysis for KAP in participants. Variables Category Knowledge Attitudes Practices OR (95% CI) p-value OR (95% CI) p-value OR (95% CI) p-value Age (years) < 20 r r r 21–30 1.63 (0.37–8.63) 0.530 0.132 1.29 (0.29–5.86) 0.735 31–40 1.14 (0.26–6.06) 0.866 0.136 0.79 (0.18–3.61) 0.752 41–50 1.21 (0.27–6.59) 0.812 0.74 (0.15–4.36) 0.170 0.90 (0.20–4.21) 0.886 51–60 1.15 (0.24–6.51) 0.864 0.94 (0.18–5.71) 0.155 0.72 (0.15–3.50) 0.671 > 60 0.53 (0.09–3.47) 0.486 1.49 (0.24–10.80) 0.217 0.73 (0.13–4.08) 0.716 State Kwara r r r Niger 1.00 (0.68–1.47) 0.991 0.17 (0.11–0.25) 0.248 1.02 (0.70–1.48) 0.928 Level of Education No formal education r r r Primary School 3.37 (2.01–5.74) < 0.001 0.98 (0.59–1.64) 0.949 1.43 (0.86–2.38) 0.166 Secondary School 1.11 (0.595–2.05) 0.738 0.10 (0.54–1.83) 0.995 1.97 (1.08–3.63) 0.027 Tertiary Education 1.95 (1.04–3.69) 0.038 0.83 (0.44–1.55) 0.554 1.04 (0.55–1.95) 0.903 Role on Farm Owner r r r Owner and manager 0.86 (0.60–1.24) 0.424 1.07 (0.75–1.54) 0.697 1.03 (0.73–1.46) 0.874 Manager 0.82 (0.38–1.71) 0.597 0.77 (0.36–1.63) 0.505 0.58 (0.27–1.22) 0.158 Worker 0.73 (0.36–1.44) 0.371 0.72 (0.36–1.40) 0.341 0.75 (0.38–1.46) 0.402 Number of years in ruminant farming ≤ 10 r r r 11–20 1.20 (0.74–1.94) 0.456 1.04 (0.65–1.66) 0.868 0.71 (0.44–1.13) 0.152 21–30 1.05 (0.60–1.84) 0.866 0.69 (0.40–1.19) 0.181 0.90 (0.53–1.55) 0.706 31–40 1.00 (0.35–2.01) 0.996 6.19 (2.96–13.40) 40 2.12 (0.81–5.66) 0.130 1.19 (0.74–5.02) 0.185 1.65 (0.65–4.24) 0.296 Herd size of animals ≤ 25 r 26–50 0.81 (0.38–1.71) 0.339 0.96 (0.61–1.49) 0.844 1.06 (0.69–1.64) 0.793 51–75 1.27 (0.77–2.08) 0.351 1.12 (0.68–1.86) 0.650 1.20 (0.73–1.96) 0.472 75–100 1.02 (0.56–1.88) 0.943 1.17 (0.63–2.18) 0.617 1.16 (0.64–2.11) 0.623 > 100 0.59 (0.29–1.16) 0.130 1.42 (0.74–2.75) 0.290 1.76 (0.94–3.31) 0.079 3.5. Factors affecting farmers' use of antimicrobials and ATAs: Themes uncovered from the FGDs relate to trust, effectiveness, availability and awareness. Figure 9 represents these factors and how they affect farmers’ use of ATAs and antibiotics. Farmers were willing to purchase imported, more costly antimicrobials from verified stores rather than locally made antimicrobials from drugstore vendors, as long as it guaranteed a successful treatment. One farmer said: “The [drugstore] sellers buy one bottle of antibiotics and [dilute] it to [make] ten [bottles]. The [antibiotics] are [also] poorly stored. If you don’t buy [imported] antibiotics, you won’t get [good] results.” - R09, cattle farmer. Farmers also purchased different antimicrobials and mixed them to create what was considered a more effective dose, as stated here: “We buy drugs [when we have diseases]: oxytetracycline, tylosin, [antiparasitic] dewormers. But if it does not work, we give a mixture [of all the drugs] and we administer it again. We can mix diminazene aceturate and long-acting oxytetracycline. The best [treatment] is [the] mixture of drugs.” – R23, Cattle farmer. Traditionally, Fulani pastoralists utilized herbal remedies for treating various conditions. However, most farmers interviewed (Fulanis and non-Fulanis) heavily relied on antibiotics as opposed to herbs in the present day. Some farmers stated that this was as a result of the popularity of antibiotics: “The bottled drugs (antibiotics) have made us forget [the knowledge we had about herbs previously].” - R01, cattle farmer. Antibiotics were noted by some farmers to now be declining in efficacy, prompting more farmers to adopt herbs. A farmer stated: “[Antibiotics for mastitis] don’t work anymore and that’s why we use [herbal] methods of treatment.” – R15, Cattle farmer. For viral diseases with no antimicrobial treatment options (FMD and CBPP), farmers were driven to use herbal remedies. One farmer said: “During one CBPP outbreak, for me it killed almost 40 cows. There is no conventional treatment for it. Then one Fulani (herdsman) came and recommended a [herb]. The [herb] cured and prevented [CBPP] […] No [cow] died again. Now, I don’t bother with conventional drugs. Once it is [a case of] CBPP, I just use herbs.” – R16, Cattle farmer. Many farmers were not always aware of the right herbs to use for specific diseases or where to obtain them. This usually caused them to stick to antimicrobials, as in this account: “For me, I prefer herbal [methods]. But sometimes, it is difficult to get the herbs. So I use conventional drugs first, and then, when I get the herbs, I use them. The conventional [drugs] are easy to get.” – R18, Cattle farmer Another factor affecting farmers’ use of herbs was a lack of awareness of formulating the proper dosage. One farmer said: “Sometimes we have dosage issues [with the herbs]. So when you use it, for example, bitterleaf, when you use it in excess, it can cause bloating.” - R18, Cattle farmer. Vaccines were sometimes avoided because of cold chain inadequacies that rendered them inactive. One farmer said: “We have to be careful of vaccines [for FMD] because you will discover that most [of the available vaccines] are just inactive, maybe due to their preservation.” - R11, Cattle farmer. Regarding animal healthcare providers, farmers identified veterinarians, unlicensed para-veterinarians, and Fulani herdsmen. Veterinarians were not always accessible, leading some farmers to rely on para-veterinarians: “I [used to] consult a veterinarian, but he is no longer [in the community], so I take pictures [whenever I have diseases] and send them to a para-veterinarian [for treatment advice].” - R01, Cattle farmer. While some farmers stated that they found veterinarians’ treatments unreliable, other farmers trusted them and their prescribed antimicrobials, as this quote states: “I consult doctors because I believe doctors should know much about animals. Despite the fact that our Fulani herders have concoctions […], I consult doctors because I believe in their expertise and training.” – R07, Cattle farmer. Para-veterinarians were considered untrustworthy due to their regular use of fake, dangerous, and expired drug mixtures, which were sometimes disastrous to the health of the animals. One farmer stated: “ We don’t take risks for cattle. If we are not sure of what [disease] we are dealing with, we call our vets. We don’t call those [para-veterinarians] because they’ll kill your animals.” – R12, Cattle farmer. Fulani herdsmen were trusted, particularly by both non-Fulani and younger Fulani farmers who did not know how to obtain herbs themselves. One farmer said: “The Fulani herdsman we [consulted] before regularly used herbs (for our animals) and it works [...] I don’t know the name of the herbs he uses.” - R02, Cattle farmer. However, Fulani herdsmen did not usually share their knowledge, limiting farmers’ awareness of these herbs. One farmer said: “Our Fulani herder doesn’t disclose his concoction to us. He is very secretive.” - R12, Cattle farmer. 4. Discussion Our study provides new insights into cattle production characteristics in North-Central Nigeria, as well as their influence on farmers’ use of antibiotics and ATAs. Most farmers were male, had no formal education, and owned herds of about 50 animals. Consistent with our findings, other studies report male predominance in cattle rearing ( 26 , 27 ). Cattle is chiefly produced by Fulani pastoralists in Northern Nigeria. In this region, gender and societal expectations constrain women’s participation in cattle rearing. Low levels of formal education have likewise been reported in other studies ( 27 – 28 ). The children of pastoralists are often recruited as rearers when they are quite young, and the frequent movement during grazing makes it difficult for them to also enrol into formal education ( 27 , 28 ). Similar to our findings on herd size, Olafedan et al. ( 29 ) reported an average cattle herd of 28 among cattle farmers in South-Western Nigeria. Smaller herd sizes allow farmers to easily move around with their animals while grazing ( 29 ). Cattle farmers often walk long distances with their herds, sometimes migrating to southern states during dry seasons when pasture is scarce in the north ( 29 , 30 ). Such migratory journeys often expose cattle to diseases more prevalent in Southern Nigeria, including trypanosomiasis ( 30 ). Farmers mostly kept local breeds of cattle rather than foreign crossbreds, consistent with findings from other studies ( 29 , 31 , 32 ). This may reflect the tolerant nature of local breeds to weather conditions and endemic diseases in Nigeria, as well as the lack of access to artificial insemination (AI) technology necessary to breed foreign cattle, ( 27 , 31 – 33 ). In our study, cows of reproductive age were the largest herd segment in most farms. This is likely due to farmers sourcing replacement stock primarily from their herds, thus requiring as many cows as possible for generational continuity. In addition, keeping more female cows maximises the milk production capacity of the herd ( 29 ). Record-keeping was recorded as generally low, similar to other studies ( 27 ). This is not surprising, as a low level of formal education evidently translates to fewer written records. The lack of consistent records would make it difficult for farmers to maintain consistent vaccination schedules or implement more modern techniques such as AI ( 31 ). Several diseases were commonly experienced within herds, especially CCPP, FMD, and mastitis. These diseases led to devastating economic consequences due to mortality, loss of animal value, and treatment costs. Similarly, previous studies record high losses due to FMD and CBPP every year ( 34 , 35 ). Our findings demonstrate low vaccination rates for these two diseases among farmers, despite their being locally produced by the National Veterinary Research Institute ( 36 , 37 ). Farmers largely depended on government veterinarians for vaccination, contrary to their regular practices of consulting para-veterinarians and drugstore vendors for treatment. This implies that vaccines are majorly accessible through government officials, and there are possible supply chain gaps that prevent para-veterinarians and drugstore vendors obtaining them. Similarly, a study by Sopeju et al. ( 8 ) reports that the majority of veterinary drugstores across Nigeria do not retail vaccines due to the difficulties in maintaining a cold chain in a climate with unstable electricity, as well as the long-distance travel required to procure them. Therefore, farmers’ reports of a lack of access to veterinarians (including government veterinarians) will likely translate to a lack of effective vaccines. However, the vaccination rates for CBPP were much higher than for FMD. This might be due to the CBPP control strategy launched by the Nigerian government in 2022 under the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). Among other goals, this scheme aims to vaccinate 90% of Nigerian cattle annually till 2027 ( 36 ). Yet, less than 50% of farmers reported receiving the vaccines for their herds, suggesting a prevalent access gap. As remarked by farmers, FMD and CBPP did not have effective conventional remedies. Thus, herds infected with them will suffer from severe mortality. There is an urgent need to increase the vaccination supply for these diseases to improve animal health outcomes. Regarding mastitis, farmers did not institute preventive measures against this disease despite the high morbidity. This finding contrasts with observations in Ireland, where over 95% of dairy farmers reported implementing preventive measures against mastitis, including post-milking teat disinfection, spraying and dipping ( 38 ). In our study, a significant portion of farmers were not clear of the cause of mastitis. This likely led to farmers not being aware of what preventive strategies to institute. Conversely, Irish farmers' adoption of mastitis preventive measures was highly influenced by a national mastitis control programme in 2011 called CellCheck, where recommendations were delivered directly to farmers by local advisors ( 38 , 39 ). Currently, no such programmes exist for mastitis in Nigeria, and there has been no record of similar mastitis preventive programmes in the past. To diagnose diseases, farmers relied on physical observation and experience. Veterinary services were said to be scarce, prompting their self-reliance. Similarly, Suleiman et al. report that poor access to veterinary facilities and high cost drove farmers to manage diseases themselves ( 30 ). Though other studies have observed that cattle pastoralists generally have good knowledge of clinical manifestations of endemic diseases, an overwhelming reliance on physical signs for diagnosis will likely lead to cases of misdiagnosis and underreporting of diseases ( 30 ). For instance, more than 95% of farmers detected mastitis primarily through physical observation, implying that almost all cases of subclinical mastitis are not accounted for by farmers. This is particularly concerning, as a previous Northern Nigerian study reported that subclinical mastitis was nine times more prevalent than clinical mastitis within a community ( 6 ). Thus, there might be several diseases affecting the health and productivity of cattle in Nigeria unobserved by farmers, but manifesting through lower milk losses and less feed conversion efficiency. This indicates that the output yield in this sector has yet to be maximised to its full potential. ABU by farmers was high, particularly oxytetracycline, tylosin and procaine penicillin. Similarly, Alhaji et al. ( 10 ) reported that penicillins and tetracyclines were one of the most commonly used classes of antibiotics on beef farms in Northern Nigeria. Tetracyclines and penicillins have been classified as Highly Important Antimicrobials (HIAs) by the World Health Organisation (WHO) due to their relevance in treating bacterial infections in humans and animals ( 40 , 41 ). Tylosin belongs to the antibiotic class of macrolides and has also been classified as a CIA ( 40 ). Several recommendations guide the veterinary use of these antibiotics as prescribed by WOAH, including non-use for prophylactic and growth-promoting purposes, and the necessity of antimicrobial susceptibility testing prior to their use for therapeutic purposes ( 42 ). Most farmers surveyed did not follow these recommendations, bearing grave implications for AMR. While our study did not query farmers on dosages administered, the general dependence on self-medication suggests that these antibiotics are often under- or over-dosed. Another study in Northern Nigeria observed that 67% of farmers did not abide by any particular prescription recommendations, but rather used drugs arbitrarily ( 43 ). Farmers also combined antibiotics with antiparasitics and administered these in a single shot in order to improve drug effectiveness. These practices were said to be encouraged by para-veterinarians. Some farmers noted that “antibiotics do not work anymore”, implying that these practices most likely contribute to a high level of resistance development within the animal herds and might translate to resistance transfer to humans through pathways of contamination and food consumption. This risk is highest for cattle farmers themselves, as they often stay in close contact with their herds ( 10 , 43 ). A contributing factor to the high self-prescription of antimicrobials was farmers’ ready access to antibiotics, as they could purchase them easily from drugstore markets, licensed veterinary stores, or even import foreign brands. This is despite the existence of regulations in Nigeria banning the sale of antimicrobials without prescriptions as well as the use of veterinary antimicrobials by unlicensed personnel ( 44 ). Our finding suggests weak enforcement of antimicrobial stewardship regulations. Due to the lack of veterinarians, farmers resorted to self-medication or sought advice from para-veterinarians. Para-veterinarians are unlicensed professionals who often engage in dangerous practices that contribute to antimicrobial misuse or endanger the health of the animal. While some farmers stated they distrusted them, para-veterinarians were still the most highly sought for treatment advice as per our findings, indicating that most farmers had no other viable options. Farmers’ KAP towards AMR further reveals how misuse may be shaped by farmers’ current knowledge and perceptions. Only 28% of farmers had heard of AMR before, while 40% believed that antibiotic use in animals improved the farmers’ health. Similarly, a previous study observed that 52% of nomadic pastoralists across Nigeria were not aware of AMR or antimicrobial residues ( 45 ). Holistically, the easy access of farmers to self-prescribed antimicrobials, reliance on unlicensed para-veterinarians, and low awareness of AMR all contribute to the risky and dangerous practices adopted by farmers. High costs of antibiotics did not affect farmers’ purchase and utilisation of the drugs. Rather, farmers expressed willingness to buy the most effective drugs if they guaranteed effective treatment. Farmers were likewise willing to consult veterinarians, though paying a higher price for consultation when compared with self-medication. Our finding contrasts with another study in Nigeria, where small-scale poultry farmers were unwilling to consult veterinarians to save costs ( 46 ). As observed in our study, the losses cattle farmers faced due to reduced animal value are considerably greater than the costs of treatment. Thus, they are likely more willing to pay for veterinary services when compared to other animal farmers. However, this is hindered by the availability of veterinary and diagnostic services. Farmers relied on a wide array of ATAs for treating diseases, including herbal plants, ash, and chicken faeces. Several studies in Nigeria have documented the use of ethnoveterinary remedies for the management of animal diseases ( 21 , 47 ). Traditionally, Nigerian pastoralists have employed herbs and other materials in the management of their cattle herd ( 47 ). Some of the plants identified in this study, such as bitterleaf and African mahogany plants, have also been documented to possess antimicrobial properties and are promising therapeutic options for prevalent bovine diseases ( 48 – 50 ). Our finding also highlights the use of chicken faeces and ash for mastitis, which have both been documented to have antiviral activity against poultry viruses under laboratory conditions. ( 51 , 52 ). While there have been no current studies testing the efficacy of these materials against cattle diseases, farmers' use of them suggests that there may be a level of effectiveness demonstrated. Through reports obtained from farmers, however, ATAs were primarily used to relieve physical symptoms, such as the hardness of the udder observed in mastitis. It is unclear, however, whether these treatments led to a significant reduction in microbial load, especially as methods of use varied among farmers and most farmers likely stopped treatment as soon as physical symptoms abated. Future studies are indicated to determine the efficacy of ATAs identified in this study against cattle diseases, as well as the most effective methods of use. More than half of farmers surveyed did not use alternative therapeutic agents. This was mostly attributed to a difficulty in obtaining the right herbs or preparing the right dosages. Due to this, some farmers consulted Fulani herdsmen for health management advice. However, they were usually secretive with knowledge about the herbs. Similarly, another study noted that Fulani pastoralists prefer to retain their knowledge within the family, passing it down to succeeding generations verbally ( 21 ). From our findings, farmers of the present generation are forgetting the knowledge passed on to them due to a greater dependence on antimicrobials, consistent with other studies ( 47 ). This indicates that knowledge about ethnoveterinary remedies for cattle production is at risk of becoming eroded. Without intentional efforts to preserve and record this knowledge, it might be permanently lost. Less than 10% of farmers believed that alternative therapeutics were not as effective as antimicrobials. Thus, the major hindrance to farmers’ adopting herbs appears to be a lack of information regarding herbs and their use, rather than negative perceptions about effectiveness. Therefore, efforts to preserve and share knowledge will likely translate to greater use of herbs and less reliance on antimicrobials. Limitations: Reports on herd prevalence collated in this study were based on farmers’ reports. As farmers relied on physical observations for disease diagnosis, some diseases may be under- or overreported. This method was used to get a full picture of farmers’ attitudes and beliefs that influenced their health management practices. 5. Conclusions and Recommendations There was a high reliance on antimicrobials over ATAs (vaccines, herbs, household materials). Factors that contributed to this discrepancy included a lack of access to effective vaccines, low awareness about effective herbal options and how to procure them, and unrestricted access to nonprescribed antimicrobials. In addition, reduced access to veterinary services caused farmers to depend on self-medication and unlicensed para-veterinarians, increasing the potential of AMR development. Based on these findings, we recommend the following: ( 1 ) increasing the number of official governmental veterinarians assigned to cattle-dense regions in Nigeria, ( 2 ) strengthening the implementation of regulations that restrict the purchase and distribution of nonprescribed antimicrobials by unlicensed personnel ( 3 ) improve vaccine delivery channels through the use of agricultural extension agents targeting cattle pastoralists, ( 4 ) undertake participatory research with Fulani communities to identify culturally sensitive methods of preserving ethnoveterinary knowledge ( 5 ) conduct more studies identifying herbs utilised by pastoralists in Nigeria, assessing their efficacy, and determining effective dosage formulations, ( 6 ) researching methods to improve the ease of access of herbs to farmers. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the University of Ilorin Ethical Review Committee (UERC) (UERC Approval Number: (UERC/ASN/2024/2915). Ethical approval was also obtained from Royal Holloway University of London (Application ID 4210). This research was conducted in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki (53). Informed consent was obtained from the participants before enrolment in the study. Farmers were made aware that they could refuse to answer any question or opt out anytime during the data collection process. Consent for publication Participants were made fully aware that their responses would be published and consent in this regard was obtained prior to their enrolment in the study. Availability of data and materials The data that support the findings of this study are obtainable from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Funding This work was carried out with financial support from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada, and the Global AMR Innovation Fund (GAMRIF), part of the UK Government’s Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). (Grant number: 110337) Authors' contributions I.A.A., M.E., and A.A. secured the funding I.A.A., M.E.,N.B.A., V.O.A. supervised the project and the writing T.O.I., , J.J.A., R.O.O., M.I.A., I.A.A., O.A.A. wrote the first publication draft T.O.I., J.J.A., R.O.O., M.I.A., I.A.A., O.A.A., M.E., I.A.A., N.B.A., collected the data for the project. J.J.A., R.O.O. analysed the data and compiled all tables and figures. All authors reviewed the manuscript Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank our study participants for being a part of the study. References FMARD. Nigeria livestock roadmap for productivity, improvement and resilience. 2021. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/nig228496.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026. Cecilia N, Victor O, Kemisola A, Adeola O. Technical efficiency of beef cattle production technologies in Nigeria: a stochastic frontier analysis. Afr J Agric Res. 2016;11(51):5152–61. Cole J, Adetona MA, Basiru A, Jimoh WA, Abdulsalami S, Ade-Yusuf RO, et al. Climate change, land use, and the decline in traditional Fulani cattle practices: drivers of antimicrobial resistance in Kwara, Nigeria. Challenges. 2024;15(4):41. Gussmann MK, Steeneveld W, Kirkeby CT, Hogeveen H, Nielen M, Farre M, et al. Economic and epidemiological impact of different intervention strategies for clinical contagious mastitis. J Dairy Sci. 2019;102(2):1483–93 Abebe R, Markos A, Abera M, Mekbib B. Incidence rate, risk factors, and bacterial causes of clinical mastitis on dairy farms in Hawassa City, southern Ethiopia. Sci Rep. 2023;13:10945. Zailani JH, Sanusi M, Shehu ML. Prevalence of mastitis of dairy cows in Kanam Local Government Area of Plateau State, Nigeria. Niger J Anim Prod. 2022;49:461–8. Hussaini J, Tjørnehøj K, Zamani M, Lazarus DD, Mshelbwala PP, Ularamu HG, et al. Complex circulation of foot-and-mouth disease virus in cattle in Nigeria. Front Vet Sci. 2020;7:466. Sopeju AE, Onoja G, Abiodun VT, Peters AR. Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccine market survey at agro-veterinary stores in rural and peri-urban areas of Nigeria. Gates Open Res. 2025;9:40. Mwacalimba K, Kimeli P, Tiernan R, Mijten E, Miroshnychenko T, Poulsen Nautrup B. Diseases of economic importance in feedlot cattle in sub-Saharan Africa: a review with a focus on existing and potential options for control. Animals. 2025;15(1):97. Alhaji NB, Haruna AE, Isola TO, Odetokun IA, Lawal-Adebowale OA, Olaniran AO, et al. Antimicrobial usage and associated residues and resistance emergence in smallholder beef-cattle production systems in Nigeria: a One Health challenge. Vet Res Commun. 2023;47(1):233–45. Ashraf A, Imran M. Causes, types, etiological agents, prevalence, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, effects on human health and future aspects of bovine mastitis. Anim Health Res Rev. 2020;21(1):36–49. Cobirka M, Tancin V, Slama P. Epidemiology and classification of mastitis. Animals. 2020;10(12):2212. Jamali H, Barkema HW, Jacques M, Lavallée-Bourget EM, Malouin F, Saini V, et al. Invited review: incidence, risk factors, and effects of clinical mastitis recurrence in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2018;101(6):4729–46. Alhaji NB, Aliyu MB, Ghali-Mohammed I, Odetokun IA. Survey on antimicrobial usage in local dairy cows in North-central Nigeria: drivers for misuse and public health threats. PLoS One. 2019;14(12):e0224949. Van Boeckel TP, Brower C, Gilbert M, Grenfell BT, Levin SA, Robinson TP, et al. Global trends in antimicrobial use in food animals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(18):5649–54. Friedman ND, Temkin E, Carmeli Y. The negative impact of antibiotic resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2016;22(5):416–22. Anueyiagu KN, Benson NP, Daniel J, Nze C, Esilonu JT. Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in bovine subclinical mastitis in Jos South Local Government Area of Plateau State, Nigeria. Eur J Vet Med. 2022;2(6):7–11. Kour S, Sharma N, Balaji N, Kumar P, Soodan JS, Santos MV, et al. Advances in diagnostic approaches and therapeutic management in bovine mastitis. Vet Sci. 2023;10(7):449. doi:10.3390/vetsci10070449. Twomey DP, Wheelock AI, Flynn J, Meaney WJ, Hill C, Ross RP. Protection against Staphylococcus aureus mastitis in dairy cows using a bismuth-based teat seal containing the bacteriocin, lacticin 3147. J Dairy Sci. 2000;83(9):1981–88. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(00)75075-2. Cao LT, Wu JQ, Xie F, Hu SH, Mo Y. Efficacy of nisin in treatment of clinical mastitis in lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2007;90(8):3980–85. doi:10.3168/jds.2007-0153. Ayoola MO, Ogunlakin AD, Oguntunji AO. Status of ethno-veterinary medicine in the management of dairy animals in Nigeria. J Anim Health Prod. 2025;13(1):88–105. Abdallah A, Zhang P, Zhong Q, Sun Z. Application of traditional Chinese herbal medicine by-products as dietary feed supplements and antibiotic replacements in animal production. Curr Drug Metab. 2019;20(1):54–64. doi:10.2174/1389200219666180523102920. Getu A, Solomon T, Fikre N, Eyasu E, Fufa Y, Tazebachew M, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding antimicrobial resistance and associated factors among healthcare workers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2025;2025:5354292. doi:10.1155/cjid/5354292. Wangmo K, Dorji T, Pokhrel N, Dorji T, Dorji J, Tenzin T. Knowledge, attitude, and practice on antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance among the veterinarians and para-veterinarians in Bhutan. PLoS One. 2021;16(5):e0251327. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0251327. Braun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis: a practical guide. London: Sage Publications; 2021. Agboola AF, Ojo OA, Famakinwa M, Williams SO. Gender involvement of sedentary Fulani in dairy farming practices in Osun State, Nigeria. Contemp Agric. 2020;69(3–4):73–80. doi:10.2478/contagri-2020-0010. Umar YA, Abu IA, Sani MH, Idi S, Owoade EO. Gender analysis of cattle farmers’ participation in cattle production in Bauchi and Yobe States, Nigeria. Asian J Agric Ext Econ Sociol. 2023;41(9):637–46. doi:10.9734/ajaees/2023/v41i92085. Olaniran SO. Community and cultural influence on child schooling: a case study of the Fulani people of Nigeria. J Soc Policy Issues. 2024;4(2):54–59. doi:10.58835/jspi.v4i2.244. Olafadehan OA, Adewumi MK. Livestock management and production system of agropastoralists in the derived savanna of South-west Nigeria. Trop Subtrop Agroecosystems. 2010;12:685–91. Suleiman A, Jackson EL, Rushton J. Challenges of pastoral cattle production in a sub-humid zone of Nigeria. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2015;47:1177–85. doi:10.1007/s11250-015-0845-0. Rasak B, Asamu F, Arisukwu O, Iwelumor O, Oyekola I, Oyeyipo E, et al. Prospects and constraints of cattle farming business in Kwara State, Nigeria. In: Proc Int Conf Sci Eng Bus Sustain Dev Goals (SEB-SDG). 2023;1:1–9. doi:10.1109/SEB-SDG57117.2023.10124580. Roessler R. Selection decisions and trait preferences for local and imported cattle and sheep breeds in peri-/urban livestock production systems in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Animals. 2019;9(5):207. doi:10.3390/ani9050207. Yusuf OJ, Adesina OM, Apata DF, Ayanda IF, Ishola H, Ajibade LA. Cattle farmers’ attitude towards artificial insemination technology in Kwara State, Nigeria. Tanz J Agric Sci. 2024;23:301–12. doi:10.5897/tjas2024.0445. Bolajoko MB. Biosecurity and economic impact of major diseases of livestock among rural farmers in Plateau State, Nigeria: a pilot study. J Vet Biomed Sci. 2023;5:74–86. doi:10.5897/jvbs2023.0123. Alhaji NB, Babalobi OO. Economic impacts assessment of pleuropneumonia burden and control in pastoral cattle herds of North-central Nigeria. Bull Anim Health Prod Afr. 2017;65:235–48. Danladi J. CBPP control strategy in Nigeria (an overview). WOAH SGE country presentation 2024. 2024;1–16. Makoshi M, Oladimeji Y, Rekwot G, Hussaini A. Assessment of factors influencing level of adoption of NVRI vaccine among cattle farmers in North-Central Nigeria. Niger Agric J. 2023;54(2):36–41. Uí Chearbhaill A, Boloña PS, Ryan EG, McAloon CI, Burrell A, Upton J. Survey of farm, parlour and milking management, parlour technologies, SCC control strategies and farmer demographics on Irish dairy farms. Ir Vet J. 2024;77:8. doi:10.1186/s13620-024-00267-y. More SJ, McAloon C, Silva Boloña P, O’Grady L, O’Sullivan F, McGrath M, et al. Mastitis control and intramammary antimicrobial stewardship in Ireland: challenges and opportunities. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:748353. doi:10.3389/fvets.2022.748353. World Health Organization. WHO list of medically important antimicrobials: a risk management tool for mitigating antimicrobial resistance due to non-human use [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2024. Available from: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/gcp/who-mia-list-2024-lv.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026. Akinyemi KO, Fakorede CO, Amisu KO, Wareth G, El-Diasty MM, Al-Gaabary MH, et al. Human and animal brucellosis in Nigeria: a systemic review and meta-analysis in the last twenty-one years (2001–2021). Vet Sci. 2022;9(8):384. doi:10.3390/vetsci9080384. World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). WOAH list of antimicrobial agents of veterinary importance (January 2025) [Internet]. Paris: WOAH; 2025. Available from: https://www.woah.org/app/uploads/2021/06/202501-en-woah-trd-list.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026. Alhaji NB, Isola TO. Antimicrobial usage by pastoralists in food animals in North-central Nigeria: the associated socio-cultural drivers for antimicrobials misuse and public health implications. One Health. 2018;6:41–47. doi:10.1016/j.onehlt.2018.11.001. Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC); Federal Ministries of Agriculture, Environment and Health. Antimicrobial use and resistance in Nigeria: situation analysis and recommendations. NCDC AMR Report 2017. 2017;1–158. Available from: https://ncdc.gov.ng/themes/common/docs/protocols/56_1510840387.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026. Olasoju MI, Abdullahi UM, Afolabi KM, Shittu AM, Oyedeji O. Knowledge and practice of cattle handlers on antibiotic residues in meat and milk in Kwara State, Northcentral Nigeria. PLoS One. 2021;16(9):e0257249. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0257249. Al-Mustapha AI, Adetunji VO, Heikinheimo A. Risk perceptions of antibiotic usage and resistance: a cross-sectional survey of poultry farmers in Kwara State, Nigeria. Antibiotics. 2020;9(7):378. doi:10.3390/antibiotics9070378. Nodza GI, Chah JM, Ugwu DS, Anosa GN, Okoye JO, Ume SI, et al. Ethno-veterinary practice for the treatment of cattle diseases in the eastern highlands of Nigeria. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2022;24:1–16. Kaseke TB, Chikwambi Z, Gomo C, Mashingaidze AB, Murungweni C. Antibacterial activity of medicinal plants on the management of mastitis in dairy cows: a systematic review. Vet Med Sci. 2023;9(6):2800–19. doi:10.1002/vms3.1268. Kuevi DNO, Foli F, Tsegah E, Salia S, Glover W, Adinortey MB, et al. Vernonia amygdalina leaf extract shows in vitro antischistosomal activity against both juvenile and adult Schistosoma mansoni at 100 μg/mL. J Trop Med. 2024;2024:8074291. doi:10.1155/2024/8074291. Adeyemi OO, Oladiji AT. Evaluation of the anthelmintic activity of Khaya senegalensis extract against gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep: in vitro and in vivo studies. Vet Parasitol. 2006;137(1–2):157–62. doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.01.024. Thammakarn C, Ishida Y, Suguro A, Takeda Y, Okamoto S, Cho J, et al. Inhibition of infectious bursal disease virus transmission using bioceramic derived from chicken feces. Virus Res. 2015;204:6–12. doi:10.1016/j.virusres.2015.04.010. Ruenphet S, Punyadarsaniya D, Jantafong T, Takehara K. Stability and virucidal efficacies using powder and liquid forms of fresh charcoal ash and slaked lime against Newcastle disease virus and avian influenza virus. Vet World. 2019;12(1):1–6. doi:10.14202/vetworld.2019.1-6. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191–4. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files AdditionalFile1Questionnaire.docx AdditionalFile2InterviewGuide.docx AdditionalFile3Herdcharacteristics.docx AdditionalFile4DiseasePrevalence.png AdditionalFile5Sourceofantibiotics.jpg AdditionalFile6Bivariatestatistics.docx GraphicalAbstract.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviews received at journal 09 May, 2026 Reviews received at journal 28 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 13 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 12 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 12 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 10 Apr, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 06 Apr, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 03 Apr, 2026 Editor invited by journal 31 Mar, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 27 Mar, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 27 Mar, 2026 First submitted to journal 26 Mar, 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-9233752","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":618915750,"identity":"70c5cf9a-405c-4397-9e15-e832ba7bdd6c","order_by":0,"name":"Ismail Ayoade Odetokun","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ilorin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ismail","middleName":"Ayoade","lastName":"Odetokun","suffix":""},{"id":618915751,"identity":"566e4541-d515-4084-8aba-4837ad8e5080","order_by":1,"name":"Jadesola Ajao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Royal Holloway University of London","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jadesola","middleName":"","lastName":"Ajao","suffix":""},{"id":618915752,"identity":"1d91f16a-f274-4516-b28e-66ba31813a56","order_by":2,"name":"Nma Bida Alhaji","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Federal University of Technology","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nma","middleName":"Bida","lastName":"Alhaji","suffix":""},{"id":618915753,"identity":"6a74909f-ed89-4ed8-b46e-28741532f99c","order_by":3,"name":"Rodiat Olabisi Omotoso","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ilorin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Rodiat","middleName":"Olabisi","lastName":"Omotoso","suffix":""},{"id":618915754,"identity":"ac52d566-4c8b-4925-b4d4-a098849bdcb0","order_by":4,"name":"Olayiwola Akeem Ahmed","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ilorin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Olayiwola","middleName":"Akeem","lastName":"Ahmed","suffix":""},{"id":618915755,"identity":"ad926eee-825b-40f1-9832-4dc76ba31eb1","order_by":5,"name":"Ismail Adewuyi Adeyemo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ilorin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ismail","middleName":"Adewuyi","lastName":"Adeyemo","suffix":""},{"id":618915756,"identity":"db7333c8-e3da-489a-a27c-5ef052e9e1d0","order_by":6,"name":"Tajudeen Opeyemi Isola","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ilorin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tajudeen","middleName":"Opeyemi","lastName":"Isola","suffix":""},{"id":618915757,"identity":"6a9b8246-6f10-484e-8a5c-24d77243504e","order_by":7,"name":"Musa Imam Abubakar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ilorin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Musa","middleName":"Imam","lastName":"Abubakar","suffix":""},{"id":618915758,"identity":"488cd3a0-2b44-4065-93f5-3fae1646c367","order_by":8,"name":"Ibrahim Adisa Raufu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ilorin","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ibrahim","middleName":"Adisa","lastName":"Raufu","suffix":""},{"id":618915759,"identity":"b9879085-85b4-4fe5-82ed-24ad59c0a17a","order_by":9,"name":"Victoria Olusola Adetunji","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Ibadan","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Victoria","middleName":"Olusola","lastName":"Adetunji","suffix":""},{"id":618915760,"identity":"d1d97e0f-ead6-4d58-a39f-4c1c4c6da59b","order_by":10,"name":"Jennifer Cole","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Royal Holloway University of London","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jennifer","middleName":"","lastName":"Cole","suffix":""},{"id":618915761,"identity":"b8055bb9-f146-4956-9654-e1249f090c57","order_by":11,"name":"Elsabagh Mabrouk","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nigde Omer Halisdemir University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Elsabagh","middleName":"","lastName":"Mabrouk","suffix":""},{"id":618915762,"identity":"dc494e9e-1b06-4dcd-9c14-944c1d300ed0","order_by":12,"name":"Elena Garcia Fruitós","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Institut de Recerca i Tecnología Agroalimentaries (IRTA)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Elena","middleName":"Garcia","lastName":"Fruitós","suffix":""},{"id":618915763,"identity":"3f6cd2c6-3cce-4547-9ca0-b41db37ae86a","order_by":13,"name":"Anna Aris","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Institut de Recerca i Tecnología Agroalimentaries (IRTA)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Anna","middleName":"","lastName":"Aris","suffix":""},{"id":618915764,"identity":"1f9f70f6-dc41-400e-86c4-fc046d95528a","order_by":14,"name":"Mahmoud Eltholth","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Royal Holloway University of London","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mahmoud","middleName":"","lastName":"Eltholth","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-03-26 11:53:50","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9233752/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9233752/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":106533809,"identity":"387f4b26-5a1b-4bce-a8e6-1e9bd35d2461","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:55","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":184701,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMap of Nigeria showing the study areas\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/bc297b3615d7ff97609b2e66.jpeg"},{"id":106533811,"identity":"5fdae1be-c568-436b-8408-667afb86ce6c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":267954,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eGeographical distribution of respondents.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/9bbfacc489ea2d70365e12af.jpeg"},{"id":106725040,"identity":"c8cd8d67-f4b7-467c-8ee3-4c8022859f16","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-12 18:31:09","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":122593,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMethods for disease diagnosis used by farmers.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/4b54e997636c44632956c6ba.png"},{"id":106533820,"identity":"b860bad9-5a98-48e6-a7cb-7d74de1995cf","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":118666,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAnimal health service providers used over the last three months according to services provided. Frequency here represents the number of times farmers consulted health providers for their services.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/5f56a96a3a4af55f69a932f8.png"},{"id":106724659,"identity":"7e2aa504-2a98-491d-8dfe-ae4ffbc968a0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-12 18:29:01","extension":"jpeg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":165751,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAntibiotics and alternatives used by farmers over the last three months.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/d38494dba5d7509914f29773.jpeg"},{"id":106533821,"identity":"59f2a910-4f02-4b82-8748-6bd977f58f1e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":94392,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eReasons why farmers do not use herbal ATAs (n = 388).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/58aa7e8537a24721003e3f52.png"},{"id":106533817,"identity":"33b94d51-8341-492b-91fc-6543c97c7802","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":264982,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eAttitudes regarding the use of antibiotics and AMR.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/a23cb05eb84a62cd9da4534a.png"},{"id":106533818,"identity":"c4a02433-3ab2-45d2-9e3b-cc166e366a4d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":127289,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFactors influencing farmers’ antibiotic practices in their herd.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage9.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/712564d4a8a23874abe09e8e.png"},{"id":106533819,"identity":"a38e2f11-f722-46df-baab-7aa7e965ff40","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":508732,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe interactions of factors affecting farmers’ use of antibiotics and ATAs. Positive arrows (+) indicate a positive causal relationship between the preceding and the succeeding factor. Negative arrows (-) represent the opposite. ATAs include herbal remedies, vaccines, and agents utilised by the farmers as earlier described. Para-vets include all unlicensed professionals whom farmers consulted for animal health services that resulted in the administration of antimicrobials. Fulani herdsmen include traditional pastoralists from the Fulani tribe who were sometimes employed by both Fulani and non-Fulani farmers to herd and treat their animals with herbal remedies.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage10.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/1cc8cb134b2574716d168c9e.png"},{"id":106727576,"identity":"a52024bb-ecbc-4e5a-bf30-2cbd6cc2332b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-12 18:39:24","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2895385,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/f8d492af-6a07-44b7-90a8-07635e85e0fe.pdf"},{"id":106533810,"identity":"6db04597-eecb-41b1-a517-f6bf086f3ecc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:55","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":476543,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AdditionalFile1Questionnaire.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/774a17a0e5dd483911293a23.docx"},{"id":106725990,"identity":"cc286552-b30e-49ee-84fb-fef2beb246d5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-12 18:34:48","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":12190,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AdditionalFile2InterviewGuide.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/a3cbe39733e54f734a3ba498.docx"},{"id":106533816,"identity":"c23c48ff-4652-44a7-8be9-f2530fca8d28","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"docx","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":14639,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AdditionalFile3Herdcharacteristics.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/2149d770b3629b03f7acba83.docx"},{"id":106533813,"identity":"75652be0-54af-4777-a741-a5af9cd0c9e8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":136187,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AdditionalFile4DiseasePrevalence.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/5fa4f23f090ab510415bf703.png"},{"id":106533822,"identity":"7e6bbd50-4b5f-4fff-a7d1-6a4dc682a2a9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":80759,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AdditionalFile5Sourceofantibiotics.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/904a67c86c216ef7041bc915.jpg"},{"id":106533815,"identity":"224f4c79-9619-4bd5-8c06-3f6e45667f59","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"docx","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":468363,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"AdditionalFile6Bivariatestatistics.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/f43a62f32a1f9dc21963eb26.docx"},{"id":106533823,"identity":"7b22791e-8b8a-4733-847d-f3fd743e6f05","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-09 14:58:56","extension":"docx","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":293005,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"GraphicalAbstract.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9233752/v1/19b87d22c90f554ca4c86eaa.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Cattle production systems characteristics and their influence on antimicrobial use, alternatives, and resistance in Nigeria","fulltext":[{"header":"Highlights","content":"\u003cp\u003e- The most common diseases affecting cattle are FMD, CBPP, and mastitis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Antibiotics (51%) are more frequently used than ethnoveterinary remedies (27%) in health management.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Farmers\u0026rsquo; use of vaccines is affected by a lack of access to effective vaccines.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- 53% of farmers reported non-use of ethnoveterinary remedies primarily due to difficulty in procuring herbs\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e- Antibiotics are freely accessible and used without prescription by farmers.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"1. Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eCattle production plays a crucial role in maintaining global economic balance and sustaining the livelihoods of millions of families worldwide. Nigeria is a major cattle producer in Africa, with an estimated cattle population of 18 to 22\u0026nbsp;million, including about 1.5\u0026nbsp;million dairy cows and 13.3\u0026nbsp;million beef cattle (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Nigeria\u0026rsquo;s cattle production systems range from pastoral herding of locally bred cattle on natural pastures to an intensive confinement system with formulated feed for crossbred cattle (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The pastoral system (run by pastoralists from the Fulani tribe) accounts for approximately 90% of Nigeria\u0026rsquo;s cattle production (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Cattle production in Nigeria is constrained by a wide range of health challenges. Endemic diseases of significant economic burden include African animal trypanosomiasis (AAT), bovine tuberculosis, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP), and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Cows also suffer from mastitis, a leading health problem that causes substantial reduction in milk production, increased culling rates, and loss of replacement stock for farmers (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR5\" citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Mastitis persists in two forms: clinical and subclinical. Clinical mastitis manifests as physical changes in the udder and milk and is thus the more obvious form. On the contrary, subclinical mastitis is not physically detectable. However, it is associated with higher milk production losses and is more prevalent, being confirmed in 89.50% of dairy cattle in one Nigerian local government area (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGenerally, disease outbreaks in Nigerian cattle are further exacerbated by the predominant production characteristics in the country. The pastoral system consists of long-distance cattle transhumance and free-range grazing, factors which facilitate disease transmission between herds (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR8\" citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e). There is also limited access to vaccinations and veterinary services, reducing farmers\u0026rsquo; capability to institute preventive measures and/or mitigate disease outbreaks with effective strategies before substantial morbidity and mortality occurs (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisease challenges are usually managed by Nigerian cattle farmers through the administration of self-prescribed antimicrobials, particularly antibiotics. In this regard, antimicrobial overuse is common, triggered by factors such as high frequency of disease outbreaks, poor governmental regulatory control guiding nonprescribed antimicrobial use (AMU), and farmers being unfamiliar with correct dosage prescriptions. Alhaji \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2023) reported that over 75% of beef cattle farmers in Northern Nigeria did not follow any sort of antimicrobial dosage instructions prior to use, and 84% of semi-intensive farms did not observe withdrawal periods (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). In high-income countries with stricter regulations, high AMU is still prominent, fuelled predominantly by recurrent disease outbreaks. For instance, mastitis disease is estimated to account for 60\u0026ndash;70% of AMU in dairy cattle (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR12\" citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e). In low-to-middle income countries (LMICs), including Nigeria, levels of AMU are further increased through the use of antibiotics as growth promoters and prophylactics. For instance, 24% of cattle pastoralists in North-Central Nigeria reported using antimicrobials to prevent mastitis in lactating cows (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e). The overuse and misuse of antimicrobials have fuelled the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), a major global health threat across the human, animal, and environmental sectors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e). AMR reduces the efficacy of existing antimicrobials against prevalent infectious diseases, rendering humans and animals susceptible to microbial infections and largely increasing mortality rates. This significantly undermines current bioscientific progress in terms of microbial therapy (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e). In Nigeria, it was found that 11.9% of milk isolates from mastitic cows contained methicillin‑resistant \u003cem\u003eStaphylococcus aureus\u003c/em\u003e (MRSA), a resistant bacterium also prevalent in humans, albeit with possible strain differences (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile antimicrobial misuse can be partly constrained in LMICs like Nigeria through improved regulations, the threat of AMR also necessitates unique solutions against the complex problem of AMR. One of such potential solutions is the discovery and use of antimicrobial alternatives (ATAs) in health management for cattle production. ATAs include a variety of tools and strategies that allow for the prevention or treatment of diseases without using antibiotics. These include relatively popular strategies such as vaccination and biosecurity, but relatively novel strategies, including bacteriocin, nanopeptides, and phage therapy (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e). Studies in China and Ireland have observed that bacteriocin administration provided some level of efficacy towards the prevention and treatment of bovine mastitis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e). Currently, there are very few studies being conducted in Nigeria to assess the effectiveness of these novel ATAs in the health management of cattle. However, Nigerian farmers have traditionally been known to employ ethnoveterinary remedies such as medicinal plants in ruminant health management (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e). This practice of using medicinal plants is also prevalent among other countries worldwide (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e). A Chinese review of herbal medicinal products noted that, in addition to possessing antibacterial activity, some herbs also improve growth performance and meat quality through their antioxidant properties (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e). A recent review on Nigerian ethnoveterinary practices documented several plants presently being used to manage cattle diseases, including AAT and FMD. The majority of these plants, however, remain poorly documented, with insufficient information regarding their use and factors influencing farmers\u0026rsquo; choice of them. However, a review on ethnoveterinary remedies in Nigeria identified that there was possible distrust on farmers\u0026rsquo; parts regarding ATAs, due to the ease and proven effectiveness of conventional antimicrobials (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGenerally, there are clear evidence gaps regarding the use and acceptability of ATAs in Nigeria, as well as factors influencing farmers\u0026rsquo; choices between antibiotics and available ATAs. This study presents an explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach aimed at exploring the cattle production characteristics in Nigeria, while understanding how these may shape health management decisions and the use of antimicrobials and ATAs.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.1. Study area and sample size\u003c/b\u003e:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted in two predominantly cattle-farming states in North-Central Nigeria: Kwara and Niger (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Kwara is located between latitude 8\u0026deg; 05\u0026rsquo; N and 10\u0026deg; 05\u0026rsquo; and longitude 2\u0026deg; 50\u0026rsquo; E to 6\u0026deg; 05\u0026rsquo; E, while Niger lies approximately between 8\u0026deg; 00\u0026prime; N and 11\u0026deg; 30\u0026prime; N latitude and 3\u0026deg; 30\u0026prime; E to 7\u0026deg; 40\u0026prime; E longitude.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe target populations were cattle farmers, herders, and farm workers within the study area. The sample size was determined to be 321 per state using OpenEpi, based on a 50% proportion, a 6% margin of error at 95% confidence interval, with a 20% attrition rate, and a design effect of 1 (for cluster surveys). Ultimately, a total of 736 respondents were recruited in both states for the questionnaire survey. A multistage random sampling was implemented, with the first stage involving a selection of three Agricultural Development Zones (ADPs) from each state. Thereafter, the following pastoral communities and organised farm settings from ADPs were randomly selected: Amoyo, Lajiki, Amberi/Ijagbo, Ajase-Ipo, Kaiama, Ilesha Baruba, Okuta, Kageji, Fufu, Afon, Oke Oyi, and Tafatafa (in Kwara State), Bida, Agaie, Bosso, Edati, Gbako, Gurara, Katcha, Lapai, Lavum, Agwara, Mokwa, and Suleija from Niger State. Finally, 30\u0026ndash;31 cattle herders were randomly selected from each community.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Questionnaire administration, quantitative data management, and analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA semi-structured questionnaire was developed and consisted of five sections: (a) farmers\u0026rsquo; socio-demographics, (b) farm characteristics, (c) livestock management practices, (d) animal health management practices, and (e) knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) of AMU and AMR (Additional File 1). The questionnaire was developed in English and conducted by researchers who were bilingual or trilingual as English/Yoruba, English/Fulani, English/Fulani/Yoruba speakers. The questionnaire was piloted in one pastoral community (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10 participants), after which necessary changes were made before full deployment in the field.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eData was collected between January 2025 and May 2025 through face-to-face interviews, and responses were recorded on paper or electronic forms, depending on available Internet connection. Responses were checked daily for completeness and subsequently input into KoboToolbox (v.2.024.36) with validation checks to minimize entry errors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eData analysis began with an initial data cleaning on Microsoft Excel, during which missing values and logical inconsistencies were identified. The cleaned data were then imported into R (v. 4.5.1) and summarised through descriptive statistics. Findings were summarised with frequencies, proportions, averages, and ranges. For the KAP section, a total of 4 knowledge questions, 10 attitude questions, and 12 practice questions were asked. Knowledge questions were scored 1 and 0 for \u0026lsquo;Yes\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;No,\u0026rsquo; respectively. Attitude questions were scored on a 3-point Likert scale to assess the level of agreement (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Disagree/ I don\u0026rsquo;t know, 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Neutral, 2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Agree). A similar pattern was used for attitude questions (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Not likely, 1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Likely, 2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Most likely). Negative questions were scored in reverse. This led to a total maximum section of 4, 20 and 24 for K, A and P respectively. To enable relative comparison within the study group, we obtained a data driven cutoff using the mean, consistent with other KAP studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e). The above-mean section included scores above the population mean (\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;1.22 for knowledge, \u0026ge; 9.25 for attitudes, and \u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;9.34 for practices). As questions were all scored with whole numbers, this translated to \u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;2 for knowledge, \u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;10 for attitudes, and \u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;10 for practices. Based on this categorical grouping, KAP results were further subjected to inferential analysis. First, Pearson\u0026rsquo;s chi-square test was conducted to determine associations between the demographics of farmers and KAP scores. Afterwards, KAP categories with significant associations at the \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 level were included in a multivariate logistic regression model to examine the independent effects of each association.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Focus group discussion (FGD), qualitative data management, and analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the analysis of the survey data, FGD was conducted in October 2025 to provide further insights and as a means of methodological triangulation. This involved the recruitment of 23 stakeholders, including farmers, veterinarians, para-veterinarians, and butchers/meat vendors. Stakeholders were purposely selected to ensure demographic diversity in terms of gender, age, herd size, and state of origin. Participants were split into three round tables; for each table, a trained moderator was assigned to lead the discussion with the aid of an interview guide. A co-moderator/note taker was taking notes and, when possible, recording the conversation for each table. Before discussions, consent was obtained from all participants, and confidentiality assurances were communicated. The questions asked focused on disease prevalence and farmers use of antimicrobials and ATAs (Additional File 2). ATAs here are defined as any substance other than antimicrobials used for the prevention and treatment of diseases (vaccines, ethnoveterinary remedies, other materials). Alternative therapeutic agents are agents employed only for treatment only (e.g., ethnoveterinary herbal remedies).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAudio recordings were transcribed manually and with the use of the TurboScribe software. Supplementary notes from the co-moderator captured nonverbal cues and group dynamics. Thereafter, analysis was conducted based on Braun and Clarke\u0026rsquo;s guide to reflexive thematic analysis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e). Analysis was deductive, with a semantic coding approach. First, transcripts were read multiple times to allow for data familiarisation. Initial codes were generated by two independent researchers. Afterwards, researchers came together to search for potential themes. Final themes were decided on after multiple rounds of discussions and reflections. A systems map was created using Lucidchart to illustrate the interactions between these themes and how they influenced farmers\u0026rsquo; health management decisions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Demographic Characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe demographic characteristics of 736 respondents are summarised in Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, and the geographic distribution in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. More than half of the respondents (56.8%) were aged between 31 and 50 years. Most respondents (97.7%) were male. Most (70.1%) had no formal education, and 88.0% were farm owners. More than 90% of farmers had herds of less than 75 animals, with a median of 49 animals per herd.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDemographic characteristics of respondents.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDemographics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber (%) (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;736)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge (Years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9 (1.22)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u0026ndash;30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e113 (15.35)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31\u0026ndash;40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e216 (29.35)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41\u0026ndash;50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e202 (27.45)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51\u0026ndash;60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e140 (19.02)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;60 years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e56 (7.61)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e719 (97.69)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17 (2.31)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eState\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKwara State\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e338 (45.92)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNiger State\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e398 (54.08)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevel of Education\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo formal education\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e516 (70.10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrimary School\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95 (12.91)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSecondary School\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e67 (9.10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTertiary Education\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58 (7.89)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRole on Farm\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOwner\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e411 (55.84)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOwner and manager\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e237 (32.20)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eManager\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e39 (5.30)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWorker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49 (6.66)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of years in cattle farming\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e177 (24.05)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u0026ndash;20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e194 (26.36)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u0026ndash;30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e195 (26.49)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31\u0026ndash;40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e108 (14.67)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e62 (8.42)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHerd size of animals\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e150 (20.38)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u0026ndash;50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e249 (33.83)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51\u0026ndash;75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e178 (24.18)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u0026ndash;100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e91 (12.36)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68 (9.24)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Farm Characteristics and Husbandry Practices\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlmost all farmers (99.1%) kept indigenous cattle in their herds, while relatively few (11.6%) kept foreign crossbreds. Herds were typically composed of more females than males, with cows above reproductive age (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2 years) comprising the largest herd segment (Additional File 3). Herds (67%) were mostly kept in an open-housing system without protective netting, and most (78%) were reared in an extensive grazing system (Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). More farmers (57.1%) sourced replacement animals solely from their herds rather than purchasing new stock. Less than a quarter of participants reported having farm records such as feeding, reproduction, or vaccination records.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHusbandry practices of farms\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHusbandry practices\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003en (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHousing systems\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOpen housing system without netting\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e493 (66.98)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOpen housing system with netting\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e211 (28.67)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eClosed housing system\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32 (4.35)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFeeding practices\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eExtensive system\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e574 (77.99)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSemi-intensive system\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e131 (17.80)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIntensive system (total mixed ration)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31 (4.21)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePurchase replacement animals?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e316 (42.93)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e420 (57.07)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUse of community grazing lands\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e331 (44.97)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e405 (55.03)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRecord keeping\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFeeding\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e95 (12.91)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReproduction\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e157 (21.33)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVeterinary Health Products\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (15.08)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVaccination programs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e159 (21.60)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Prevalent Diseases and Health Management Practices\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGastrointestinal diseases, respiratory diseases, and mastitis were identified as the most prevalent diseases affecting cattle over the last year by 41, 36, and 23% of farmers, respectively (Additional File 4). Gastrointestinal diseases experienced were helminth infections such as fasciolosis, while respiratory diseases included FMD and CBPP. Farmers lost a lot of money to diseases, due to loss in animal value and treatment costs. A farmer said of mastitis: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;(The cow was initially at a) ₦900,000 purchase price but we sold at ₦600,000 because of mastitis.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R08, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e Treating mastitis cost farmers an average of ₦4,807 per case, while CBPP was reported to cost an average of ₦3,033. Fasciolosis cost farmers ₦13,500 per case.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOnly 49.5 and 0.9% of farmers had vaccinated their animals against CBPP and FMD, respectively (Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). 50.8% of farmers reported that they took no action to prevent mastitis in their herd. 44.7% of farmers stated they believe mastitis occurred due to poor management, while 39.5% were not certain of the cause. To detect diseases, most farmers (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;75%) relied on personal experience and physical observation, with much less dependence (\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;25%) on veterinary or para-veterinary services (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHealth management practices reported by study participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHealth management\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003en (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency of herd vaccination\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNever\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e218 (29.62)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSometimes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e484 (65.76)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlways\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e34 (4.62)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVaccination against specific diseases\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eContagious Bovine Pleuropneumonia (CBPP)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e365 (49.59)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnthrax\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e347 (47.15)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFoot-and-mouth disease (FMD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (0.95)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMethods used to protect animals from mastitis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNothing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e374 (50.82)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProper management\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e314 (42.80)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConventional treatment (antibiotics)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25 (3.40)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLocal alternative treatment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22 (2.99)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMethods used to currently detect mastitis (multiple responses)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eObservation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e710 (96.48)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLaboratory tests\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41 (5.58)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eActions taken when mastitis is suspected\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConsult a veterinarian or para-veterinarian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e310 (42.12)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUse self-prescribed antibiotics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e164 (22.28)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLocal alternative treatment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100 (13.57)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIsolate affected animal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29 (3.94)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCull affected animal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 (0.41)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNothing\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e139 (8.89)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhat farmers do with milk from animals under treatment with antibiotics (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;646)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUse it (consumption, sales, calves)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e440 (72.76)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDiscard it\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e179 (27.71)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo you know any alternative therapeutic agents?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e205 (27.85)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e531 (72.15)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo you use alternative therapeutic agents?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e203 (27.58)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e388 (52.72)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI can\u0026rsquo;t remember\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e145 (19.70)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUse of animal health service providers over the last three months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e376 (51.08)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e360 (28.92)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAntibiotic self-prescription over the last three months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e377 (51.22)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e280 (38.05)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI can\u0026rsquo;t remember\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e79 (10.73)\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\u003e51.1% of farmers had consulted different animal service providers at least once within the last three months. Figure\u0026nbsp;4 summarises the health provider, service rendered, and the frequency of consultations. Health providers were mostly consulted for treatment services rather than vaccination or other preventive services. For vaccination and preventive treatment, farmers relied largely on government veterinarians. For treatment, farmers relied mostly on para-veterinarians and drugstore vendors.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMost farmers (51.2%) had self-prescribed antibiotics to their herds over the last three months. The most frequently prescribed antibiotics were oxytetracycline (35.6%), tylosin (32.9%), and penicillin (21.2%) (Fig. \u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). Farmers often purchased these drugs from livestock markets and unlicensed para-veterinarians, but also from veterinary doctors and licensed veterinary stores (Additional File 5). The cost of antibiotics ranged from ₦15,000 to ₦45,000. The majority of farmers (72.8%) continued to consume and sell milk from cows undergoing antibiotic treatment.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.7% of farmers had used herbal plants for therapeutic treatment within the past three months. Herbs used included \u003cem\u003edongoyaro\u003c/em\u003e (Hausa name for neem plant or \u003cem\u003eAzadirachta indica\u003c/em\u003e), bitterleaf (\u003cem\u003eVernonia amygdalina), \u0026agrave;g\u0026aacute;nw\u0026ograve;/kahi/modachi\u003c/em\u003e (Yoruba, Fulani, Hausa names for mahogany hardwood), \u003cem\u003eGapde\u003c/em\u003e (Hausa name for African birch), \u003cem\u003eBagaruwa\u003c/em\u003e (Hausa name for thorny acacia), \u003cem\u003eKadanya\u003c/em\u003e (Hausa name for shea butter tree), and \u003cem\u003e\u0026iacute;g\u0026iacute; \u0026igrave;p\u0026iacute;n\u003c/em\u003e (Yoruba name for sandpaper tree). Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e presents some of the herbs identified and the diseases farmers utilised them against. Two farmers described their use of mahogany hardwood in treating mastitis here:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We use modachi (the Hausa name). We dry the stem and seeds, then pound them till it becomes powder and add ginger. We put it in the (nostrils) of lactating cows.\u0026rdquo; - R15, cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;The tree is called \u0026agrave;g\u0026aacute;nw\u0026ograve; in Yoruba and it\u0026rsquo;s very bitter. We will grind it and mix it with salt and give it orally. It prevents mastitis.\u0026rdquo; - R18, cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHerbs used by farmers and corresponding diseases treated.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHerbs\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eScientific name\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTherapeutic uses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026Agrave;g\u0026aacute;nw\u0026ograve;\u003c/em\u003e or African mahogany\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKhaya senegalensis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMastitis, CBPP, trypanosomiasis, and tuberculosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eKadanya\u003c/em\u003e or shea butter tree\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eVitellaria paradoxa\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCBPP, trypanosomiasis, and tuberculosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGapde\u003c/em\u003e or African birch\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnogeissus leiocarpa\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFMD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eBagaruwa\u003c/em\u003e or thorny acacia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eVachellia nilotica\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFMD\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026Iacute;g\u0026iacute; \u0026igrave;p\u0026iacute;n\u003c/em\u003e or sandpaper tree\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eFicus exasperata\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMastitis\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\u003eAgents such as ash, shea butter, chicken faeces, and heat were also used for treatment. Generally, ATAs were used in ways that differed among farmers. Two farmers said these when speaking of using ash to treat mastitis:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Sometimes, we use ash. We soak it in water overnight and we allow (the sick cows) to drink it (\u0026hellip;) When you soak the ash overnight, it will settle, and then you separate the water and give (the cows) that water.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R18, Cattle farmer\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We also use ash, but hot ash. We will move it close to the udder and spread water on it so the fumes that come up can waft towards the udder.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R20, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eA minority of farmers (1.4%) refused to divulge the names of the herbs, stating that it was confidential information and could not be revealed. Others stated that they learnt of them from preceding generations but they had forgotten: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eMy father taught me [about the herbs] but I forgot.\u0026rdquo; - Questionnaire respondent .\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52.7% of farmers stated that they did not use alternative therapeutics such as herbs and aforementioned agents. The most popular reasons given for this included their not being easily available (51.8%) and their being difficult to administer (26.8%). (Fig. \u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Knowledge, Perceptions, and Practices (KAP) of Farmers towards antibiotics and AMR\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGenerally, farmers demonstrated unsatisfactory KAP regarding ABU and AMR (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). Among the most significant findings on knowledge, only 28% of farmers had heard of the terms \u0026lsquo;antibiotics\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;AMR\u0026rsquo;, and even fewer (21%) were aware that mastitis could be caused by antimicrobial-resistant pathogens.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKAP scores of farmers.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKPP\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal obtainable score\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean score of respondents\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSatisfactory\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003en (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnsatisfactory\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003en (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e290 (39.40)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e466 (60.60)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAttitude\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e242 (32.88)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e494 (67.12)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePractice\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.34\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e329 (44.70)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e407 (55.30)\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\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eSatisfactory score\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;mean score of respondents, and unsatisfactory score\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;mean score of respondents.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegarding attitudes, 55.6% believed that antibiotics were not effective for treating diseased animals (Fig. \u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). 46.7% of farmers agreed that antibiotic overuse could lead to AMR, and 33.0% agreed AMR could become a problem in their herds. A significant portion (39.5%) believed that antibiotic use (ABU) in animals improved their own personal health. Only 26.6% of farmers agreed that the use of antibiotics in animals should be reduced. Regarding practices, participants stated that they were most likely to use antibiotics after noticing disease symptoms in their herd (62.1%), an increase in morbidity (52.5%), and a mortality rate (52.3%) (Fig. \u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). Farmers were also most likely to use antibiotics after a recommendation from a veterinarian (46.1%). Factors that influenced farmers the least included antibiotics availability (28.7%) and cost (25.7%).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender was the only sociodemographic variable not significantly associated with KAP of participants (Additional File 6\u003cstrong\u003e).\u003c/strong\u003e In the multivariate model, farmers with primary (OR: 3.37, 95% CI: 2.01\u0026ndash;5.74, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and tertiary (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.04\u0026ndash;3.69, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026thinsp;=\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;0.038) levels of education were more likely to have higher knowledge than farmers with no formal education (Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Farmers with 30\u0026ndash;40 years of experience in ruminant farming had better attitudes towards antibiotic use than farmers with less than ten years of experience (OR: 6.19, 95% CI: 2.96\u0026ndash;13.40, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Farmers with secondary levels of education had better practices than farmers without formal education (OR: 1.97, 95% CI 1.08\u0026ndash;3.63,\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.027).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMultivariate Analysis for KAP in participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKnowledge\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAttitudes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePractices\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOR (95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOR (95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOR (95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep-value\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge (years)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u0026ndash;30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.63 (0.37\u0026ndash;8.63)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.530\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.132\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.29 (0.29\u0026ndash;5.86)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.735\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31\u0026ndash;40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.14 (0.26\u0026ndash;6.06)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.866\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.136\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.79 (0.18\u0026ndash;3.61)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.752\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41\u0026ndash;50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.21 (0.27\u0026ndash;6.59)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.812\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.74 (0.15\u0026ndash;4.36)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.170\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.90 (0.20\u0026ndash;4.21)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.886\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51\u0026ndash;60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.15 (0.24\u0026ndash;6.51)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.864\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94 (0.18\u0026ndash;5.71)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.155\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.72 (0.15\u0026ndash;3.50)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.671\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;60\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.53 (0.09\u0026ndash;3.47)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.486\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.49 (0.24\u0026ndash;10.80)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.73 (0.13\u0026ndash;4.08)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.716\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eState\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKwara\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNiger\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00 (0.68\u0026ndash;1.47)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.991\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.17 (0.11\u0026ndash;0.25)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.248\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.02 (0.70\u0026ndash;1.48)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.928\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLevel of\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEducation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo formal education\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrimary School\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.37 (2.01\u0026ndash;5.74)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.98 (0.59\u0026ndash;1.64)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.949\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.43 (0.86\u0026ndash;2.38)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.166\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSecondary School\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.11 (0.595\u0026ndash;2.05)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.738\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.10 (0.54\u0026ndash;1.83)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.995\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1.97 (1.08\u0026ndash;3.63)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.027\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTertiary Education\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1.95 (1.04\u0026ndash;3.69)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.038\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83 (0.44\u0026ndash;1.55)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.554\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.04 (0.55\u0026ndash;1.95)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.903\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRole on\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFarm\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOwner\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOwner and manager\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86 (0.60\u0026ndash;1.24)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.424\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.07 (0.75\u0026ndash;1.54)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.697\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.03 (0.73\u0026ndash;1.46)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.874\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eManager\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82 (0.38\u0026ndash;1.71)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.597\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.77 (0.36\u0026ndash;1.63)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.505\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.58 (0.27\u0026ndash;1.22)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.158\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWorker\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.73 (0.36\u0026ndash;1.44)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.371\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.72 (0.36\u0026ndash;1.40)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.341\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75 (0.38\u0026ndash;1.46)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.402\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNumber of years in ruminant farming\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026le; 10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u0026ndash;20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.20 (0.74\u0026ndash;1.94)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.456\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.04 (0.65\u0026ndash;1.66)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.868\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.71 (0.44\u0026ndash;1.13)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.152\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u0026ndash;30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.05 (0.60\u0026ndash;1.84)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.866\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.69 (0.40\u0026ndash;1.19)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.181\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.90 (0.53\u0026ndash;1.55)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.706\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31\u0026ndash;40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.00 (0.35\u0026ndash;2.01)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.996\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e6.19 (2.96\u0026ndash;13.40)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55 (0.28\u0026ndash;1.08)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.085\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.12 (0.81\u0026ndash;5.66)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.130\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.19 (0.74\u0026ndash;5.02)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.185\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.65 (0.65\u0026ndash;4.24)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.296\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHerd size of animals\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26\u0026ndash;50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.81 (0.38\u0026ndash;1.71)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.339\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.96 (0.61\u0026ndash;1.49)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.844\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.06 (0.69\u0026ndash;1.64)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.793\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e51\u0026ndash;75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.27 (0.77\u0026ndash;2.08)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.351\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.12 (0.68\u0026ndash;1.86)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.650\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.20 (0.73\u0026ndash;1.96)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.472\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e75\u0026ndash;100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.02 (0.56\u0026ndash;1.88)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.943\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.17 (0.63\u0026ndash;2.18)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.617\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.16 (0.64\u0026ndash;2.11)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.623\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59 (0.29\u0026ndash;1.16)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.130\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.42 (0.74\u0026ndash;2.75)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.290\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.76 (0.94\u0026ndash;3.31)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.079\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5. Factors affecting farmers\u0026apos; use of antimicrobials and ATAs:\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThemes uncovered from the FGDs relate to trust, effectiveness, availability and awareness. Figure 9 represents these factors and how they affect farmers\u0026rsquo; use of ATAs and antibiotics.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers were willing to purchase imported, more costly antimicrobials from verified stores rather than locally made antimicrobials from drugstore vendors, as long as it guaranteed a successful treatment. One farmer said:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;The [drugstore] sellers buy one bottle of antibiotics and [dilute] it to [make] ten [bottles]. The [antibiotics] are [also] poorly stored. If you don\u0026rsquo;t buy [imported] antibiotics, you won\u0026rsquo;t get [good] results.\u0026rdquo; - R09, cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFarmers also purchased different antimicrobials and mixed them to create what was considered a more effective dose, as stated here:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We buy drugs [when we have diseases]: oxytetracycline, tylosin, [antiparasitic] dewormers. But if it does not work, we give a mixture [of all the drugs] and we administer it again. We can mix diminazene aceturate and long-acting oxytetracycline. The best [treatment] is [the] mixture of drugs.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R23, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTraditionally, Fulani pastoralists utilized herbal remedies for treating various conditions. However, most farmers interviewed (Fulanis and non-Fulanis) heavily relied on antibiotics as opposed to herbs in the present day. Some farmers stated that this was as a result of the popularity of antibiotics:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;The bottled drugs (antibiotics) have made us forget [the knowledge we had about herbs previously].\u0026rdquo; - R01, cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAntibiotics were noted by some farmers to now be declining in efficacy, prompting more farmers to adopt herbs. A farmer stated:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;[Antibiotics for mastitis] don\u0026rsquo;t work anymore and that\u0026rsquo;s why we use [herbal] methods of treatment.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R15, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor viral diseases with no antimicrobial treatment options (FMD and CBPP), farmers were driven to use herbal remedies. One farmer said:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;During one CBPP outbreak, for me it killed almost 40 cows. There is no conventional treatment for it. Then one Fulani (herdsman) came and recommended a [herb]. The [herb] cured and prevented [CBPP] [\u0026hellip;] No [cow] died again. Now, I don\u0026rsquo;t bother with conventional drugs. Once it is [a case of] CBPP, I just use herbs.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R16, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMany farmers were not always aware of the right herbs to use for specific diseases or where to obtain them. This usually caused them to stick to antimicrobials, as in this account:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;For me, I prefer herbal [methods]. But sometimes, it is difficult to get the herbs. So I use conventional drugs first, and then, when I get the herbs, I use them. The conventional [drugs] are easy to get.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R18, Cattle farmer\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnother factor affecting farmers\u0026rsquo; use of herbs was a lack of awareness of formulating the proper dosage. One farmer said:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Sometimes we have dosage issues [with the herbs]. So when you use it, for example, bitterleaf, when you use it in excess, it can cause bloating.\u0026rdquo; - R18, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVaccines were sometimes avoided because of cold chain inadequacies that rendered them inactive. One farmer said:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;We have to be careful of vaccines [for FMD] because you will discover that most [of the available vaccines] are just inactive, maybe due to their preservation.\u0026rdquo; - R11, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegarding animal healthcare providers, farmers identified veterinarians, unlicensed para-veterinarians, and Fulani herdsmen. Veterinarians were not always accessible, leading some farmers to rely on para-veterinarians:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I [used to] consult a veterinarian, but he is no longer [in the community], so I take pictures [whenever I have diseases] and send them to a para-veterinarian [for treatment advice].\u0026rdquo; - R01, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWhile some farmers stated that they found veterinarians\u0026rsquo; treatments unreliable, other farmers trusted them and their prescribed antimicrobials, as this quote states:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I consult doctors because I believe doctors should know much about animals. Despite the fact that our Fulani herders have concoctions [\u0026hellip;], I consult doctors because I believe in their expertise and training.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R07, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePara-veterinarians were considered untrustworthy due to their regular use of fake, dangerous, and expired drug mixtures, which were sometimes disastrous to the health of the animals. One farmer stated:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eWe don\u0026rsquo;t take risks for cattle. If we are not sure of what [disease] we are dealing with, we call our vets. We don\u0026rsquo;t call those [para-veterinarians] because they\u0026rsquo;ll kill your animals.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; R12, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFulani herdsmen were trusted, particularly by both non-Fulani and younger Fulani farmers who did not know how to obtain herbs themselves. One farmer said:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;The Fulani herdsman we [consulted] before regularly used herbs (for our animals) and it works [...] I don\u0026rsquo;t know the name of the herbs he uses.\u0026rdquo; - R02, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHowever, Fulani herdsmen did not usually share their knowledge, limiting farmers\u0026rsquo; awareness of these herbs. One farmer said:\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Our Fulani herder doesn\u0026rsquo;t disclose his concoction to us. He is very secretive.\u0026rdquo; - R12, Cattle farmer.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur study provides new insights into cattle production characteristics in North-Central Nigeria, as well as their influence on farmers\u0026rsquo; use of antibiotics and ATAs. Most farmers were male, had no formal education, and owned herds of about 50 animals. Consistent with our findings, other studies report male predominance in cattle rearing (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e). Cattle is chiefly produced by Fulani pastoralists in Northern Nigeria. In this region, gender and societal expectations constrain women\u0026rsquo;s participation in cattle rearing. Low levels of formal education have likewise been reported in other studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e). The children of pastoralists are often recruited as rearers when they are quite young, and the frequent movement during grazing makes it difficult for them to also enrol into formal education (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e). Similar to our findings on herd size, Olafedan \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e) reported an average cattle herd of 28 among cattle farmers in South-Western Nigeria. Smaller herd sizes allow farmers to easily move around with their animals while grazing (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e). Cattle farmers often walk long distances with their herds, sometimes migrating to southern states during dry seasons when pasture is scarce in the north (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e). Such migratory journeys often expose cattle to diseases more prevalent in Southern Nigeria, including trypanosomiasis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFarmers mostly kept local breeds of cattle rather than foreign crossbreds, consistent with findings from other studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e). This may reflect the tolerant nature of local breeds to weather conditions and endemic diseases in Nigeria, as well as the lack of access to artificial insemination (AI) technology necessary to breed foreign cattle, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR32\" citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e). In our study, cows of reproductive age were the largest herd segment in most farms. This is likely due to farmers sourcing replacement stock primarily from their herds, thus requiring as many cows as possible for generational continuity. In addition, keeping more female cows maximises the milk production capacity of the herd (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e). Record-keeping was recorded as generally low, similar to other studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e). This is not surprising, as a low level of formal education evidently translates to fewer written records. The lack of consistent records would make it difficult for farmers to maintain consistent vaccination schedules or implement more modern techniques such as AI (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral diseases were commonly experienced within herds, especially CCPP, FMD, and mastitis. These diseases led to devastating economic consequences due to mortality, loss of animal value, and treatment costs. Similarly, previous studies record high losses due to FMD and CBPP every year (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e). Our findings demonstrate low vaccination rates for these two diseases among farmers, despite their being locally produced by the National Veterinary Research Institute (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e). Farmers largely depended on government veterinarians for vaccination, contrary to their regular practices of consulting para-veterinarians and drugstore vendors for treatment. This implies that vaccines are majorly accessible through government officials, and there are possible supply chain gaps that prevent para-veterinarians and drugstore vendors obtaining them. Similarly, a study by Sopeju \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e) reports that the majority of veterinary drugstores across Nigeria do not retail vaccines due to the difficulties in maintaining a cold chain in a climate with unstable electricity, as well as the long-distance travel required to procure them. Therefore, farmers\u0026rsquo; reports of a lack of access to veterinarians (including government veterinarians) will likely translate to a lack of effective vaccines. However, the vaccination rates for CBPP were much higher than for FMD. This might be due to the CBPP control strategy launched by the Nigerian government in 2022 under the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). Among other goals, this scheme aims to vaccinate 90% of Nigerian cattle annually till 2027 (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e). Yet, less than 50% of farmers reported receiving the vaccines for their herds, suggesting a prevalent access gap. As remarked by farmers, FMD and CBPP did not have effective conventional remedies. Thus, herds infected with them will suffer from severe mortality. There is an urgent need to increase the vaccination supply for these diseases to improve animal health outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding mastitis, farmers did not institute preventive measures against this disease despite the high morbidity. This finding contrasts with observations in Ireland, where over 95% of dairy farmers reported implementing preventive measures against mastitis, including post-milking teat disinfection, spraying and dipping (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e). In our study, a significant portion of farmers were not clear of the cause of mastitis. This likely led to farmers not being aware of what preventive strategies to institute. Conversely, Irish farmers' adoption of mastitis preventive measures was highly influenced by a national mastitis control programme in 2011 called CellCheck, where recommendations were delivered directly to farmers by local advisors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e). Currently, no such programmes exist for mastitis in Nigeria, and there has been no record of similar mastitis preventive programmes in the past.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo diagnose diseases, farmers relied on physical observation and experience. Veterinary services were said to be scarce, prompting their self-reliance. Similarly, Suleiman \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e report that poor access to veterinary facilities and high cost drove farmers to manage diseases themselves (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e). Though other studies have observed that cattle pastoralists generally have good knowledge of clinical manifestations of endemic diseases, an overwhelming reliance on physical signs for diagnosis will likely lead to cases of misdiagnosis and underreporting of diseases (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, more than 95% of farmers detected mastitis primarily through physical observation, implying that almost all cases of subclinical mastitis are not accounted for by farmers. This is particularly concerning, as a previous Northern Nigerian study reported that subclinical mastitis was nine times more prevalent than clinical mastitis within a community (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Thus, there might be several diseases affecting the health and productivity of cattle in Nigeria unobserved by farmers, but manifesting through lower milk losses and less feed conversion efficiency. This indicates that the output yield in this sector has yet to be maximised to its full potential.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eABU by farmers was high, particularly oxytetracycline, tylosin and procaine penicillin. Similarly, Alhaji \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e) reported that penicillins and tetracyclines were one of the most commonly used classes of antibiotics on beef farms in Northern Nigeria. Tetracyclines and penicillins have been classified as Highly Important Antimicrobials (HIAs) by the World Health Organisation (WHO) due to their relevance in treating bacterial infections in humans and animals (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e). Tylosin belongs to the antibiotic class of macrolides and has also been classified as a CIA (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e). Several recommendations guide the veterinary use of these antibiotics as prescribed by WOAH, including non-use for prophylactic and growth-promoting purposes, and the necessity of antimicrobial susceptibility testing prior to their use for therapeutic purposes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e). Most farmers surveyed did not follow these recommendations, bearing grave implications for AMR. While our study did not query farmers on dosages administered, the general dependence on self-medication suggests that these antibiotics are often under- or over-dosed. Another study in Northern Nigeria observed that 67% of farmers did not abide by any particular prescription recommendations, but rather used drugs arbitrarily (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e). Farmers also combined antibiotics with antiparasitics and administered these in a single shot in order to improve drug effectiveness. These practices were said to be encouraged by para-veterinarians. Some farmers noted that \u0026ldquo;antibiotics do not work anymore\u0026rdquo;, implying that these practices most likely contribute to a high level of resistance development within the animal herds and might translate to resistance transfer to humans through pathways of contamination and food consumption. This risk is highest for cattle farmers themselves, as they often stay in close contact with their herds (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA contributing factor to the high self-prescription of antimicrobials was farmers\u0026rsquo; ready access to antibiotics, as they could purchase them easily from drugstore markets, licensed veterinary stores, or even import foreign brands. This is despite the existence of regulations in Nigeria banning the sale of antimicrobials without prescriptions as well as the use of veterinary antimicrobials by unlicensed personnel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e). Our finding suggests weak enforcement of antimicrobial stewardship regulations. Due to the lack of veterinarians, farmers resorted to self-medication or sought advice from para-veterinarians. Para-veterinarians are unlicensed professionals who often engage in dangerous practices that contribute to antimicrobial misuse or endanger the health of the animal. While some farmers stated they distrusted them, para-veterinarians were still the most highly sought for treatment advice as per our findings, indicating that most farmers had no other viable options. Farmers\u0026rsquo; KAP towards AMR further reveals how misuse may be shaped by farmers\u0026rsquo; current knowledge and perceptions. Only 28% of farmers had heard of AMR before, while 40% believed that antibiotic use in animals improved the farmers\u0026rsquo; health. Similarly, a previous study observed that 52% of nomadic pastoralists across Nigeria were not aware of AMR or antimicrobial residues (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e). Holistically, the easy access of farmers to self-prescribed antimicrobials, reliance on unlicensed para-veterinarians, and low awareness of AMR all contribute to the risky and dangerous practices adopted by farmers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh costs of antibiotics did not affect farmers\u0026rsquo; purchase and utilisation of the drugs. Rather, farmers expressed willingness to buy the most effective drugs if they guaranteed effective treatment. Farmers were likewise willing to consult veterinarians, though paying a higher price for consultation when compared with self-medication. Our finding contrasts with another study in Nigeria, where small-scale poultry farmers were unwilling to consult veterinarians to save costs (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e). As observed in our study, the losses cattle farmers faced due to reduced animal value are considerably greater than the costs of treatment. Thus, they are likely more willing to pay for veterinary services when compared to other animal farmers. However, this is hindered by the availability of veterinary and diagnostic services.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFarmers relied on a wide array of ATAs for treating diseases, including herbal plants, ash, and chicken faeces. Several studies in Nigeria have documented the use of ethnoveterinary remedies for the management of animal diseases (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e). Traditionally, Nigerian pastoralists have employed herbs and other materials in the management of their cattle herd (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e). Some of the plants identified in this study, such as bitterleaf and African mahogany plants, have also been documented to possess antimicrobial properties and are promising therapeutic options for prevalent bovine diseases (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR49\" citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e). Our finding also highlights the use of chicken faeces and ash for mastitis, which have both been documented to have antiviral activity against poultry viruses under laboratory conditions. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e). While there have been no current studies testing the efficacy of these materials against cattle diseases, farmers' use of them suggests that there may be a level of effectiveness demonstrated. Through reports obtained from farmers, however, ATAs were primarily used to relieve physical symptoms, such as the hardness of the udder observed in mastitis. It is unclear, however, whether these treatments led to a significant reduction in microbial load, especially as methods of use varied among farmers and most farmers likely stopped treatment as soon as physical symptoms abated. Future studies are indicated to determine the efficacy of ATAs identified in this study against cattle diseases, as well as the most effective methods of use.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore than half of farmers surveyed did not use alternative therapeutic agents. This was mostly attributed to a difficulty in obtaining the right herbs or preparing the right dosages. Due to this, some farmers consulted Fulani herdsmen for health management advice. However, they were usually secretive with knowledge about the herbs. Similarly, another study noted that Fulani pastoralists prefer to retain their knowledge within the family, passing it down to succeeding generations verbally (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e). From our findings, farmers of the present generation are forgetting the knowledge passed on to them due to a greater dependence on antimicrobials, consistent with other studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e). This indicates that knowledge about ethnoveterinary remedies for cattle production is at risk of becoming eroded. Without intentional efforts to preserve and record this knowledge, it might be permanently lost. Less than 10% of farmers believed that alternative therapeutics were not as effective as antimicrobials. Thus, the major hindrance to farmers\u0026rsquo; adopting herbs appears to be a lack of information regarding herbs and their use, rather than negative perceptions about effectiveness. Therefore, efforts to preserve and share knowledge will likely translate to greater use of herbs and less reliance on antimicrobials.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLimitations: Reports on herd prevalence collated in this study were based on farmers\u0026rsquo; reports. As farmers relied on physical observations for disease diagnosis, some diseases may be under- or overreported. This method was used to get a full picture of farmers\u0026rsquo; attitudes and beliefs that influenced their health management practices.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusions and Recommendations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThere was a high reliance on antimicrobials over ATAs (vaccines, herbs, household materials). Factors that contributed to this discrepancy included a lack of access to effective vaccines, low awareness about effective herbal options and how to procure them, and unrestricted access to nonprescribed antimicrobials. In addition, reduced access to veterinary services caused farmers to depend on self-medication and unlicensed para-veterinarians, increasing the potential of AMR development. Based on these findings, we recommend the following: (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) increasing the number of official governmental veterinarians assigned to cattle-dense regions in Nigeria, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) strengthening the implementation of regulations that restrict the purchase and distribution of nonprescribed antimicrobials by unlicensed personnel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) improve vaccine delivery channels through the use of agricultural extension agents targeting cattle pastoralists, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) undertake participatory research with Fulani communities to identify culturally sensitive methods of preserving ethnoveterinary knowledge (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) conduct more studies identifying herbs utilised by pastoralists in Nigeria, assessing their efficacy, and determining effective dosage formulations, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) researching methods to improve the ease of access of herbs to farmers.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical approval for the study was obtained from the University of Ilorin Ethical Review Committee (UERC) (UERC Approval Number: (UERC/ASN/2024/2915).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEthical approval was also obtained from Royal Holloway University of London (Application ID 4210). This research was conducted in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki (53). Informed consent was obtained from the participants before enrolment in the study. Farmers were made aware that they could refuse to answer any question or opt out anytime during the data collection process.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were made fully aware that their responses would be published and consent in this regard was obtained prior to their enrolment in the study.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data that support the findings of this study are obtainable from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis work was carried out with financial support from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada, and the Global AMR Innovation Fund (GAMRIF), part of the UK Government\u0026rsquo;s Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). (Grant number: 110337)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026apos; contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI.A.A., M.E., and A.A. secured the funding\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI.A.A., M.E.,N.B.A., V.O.A. supervised the project and the writing\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eT.O.I., , J.J.A., R.O.O., M.I.A., I.A.A., O.A.A. wrote the first publication draft\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eT.O.I., J.J.A., R.O.O., M.I.A., I.A.A., O.A.A., M.E., I.A.A., N.B.A., collected the data for the project.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJ.J.A., R.O.O. analysed the data and compiled all tables and figures.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors reviewed the manuscript\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to thank our study participants for being a part of the study.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFMARD. Nigeria livestock roadmap for productivity, improvement and resilience. 2021. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/nig228496.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCecilia N, Victor O, Kemisola A, Adeola O. Technical efficiency of beef cattle production technologies in Nigeria: a stochastic frontier analysis. Afr J Agric Res. 2016;11(51):5152\u0026ndash;61.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCole J, Adetona MA, Basiru A, Jimoh WA, Abdulsalami S, Ade-Yusuf RO, et al. Climate change, land use, and the decline in traditional Fulani cattle practices: drivers of antimicrobial resistance in Kwara, Nigeria. Challenges. 2024;15(4):41.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGussmann MK, Steeneveld W, Kirkeby CT, Hogeveen H, Nielen M, Farre M, et al. Economic and epidemiological impact of different intervention strategies for clinical contagious mastitis. J Dairy Sci. 2019;102(2):1483\u0026ndash;93\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAbebe R, Markos A, Abera M, Mekbib B. Incidence rate, risk factors, and bacterial causes of clinical mastitis on dairy farms in Hawassa City, southern Ethiopia. Sci Rep. 2023;13:10945.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZailani JH, Sanusi M, Shehu ML. Prevalence of mastitis of dairy cows in Kanam Local Government Area of Plateau State, Nigeria. Niger J Anim Prod. 2022;49:461\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHussaini J, Tj\u0026oslash;rneh\u0026oslash;j K, Zamani M, Lazarus DD, Mshelbwala PP, Ularamu HG, et al. Complex circulation of foot-and-mouth disease virus in cattle in Nigeria. Front Vet Sci. 2020;7:466.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSopeju AE, Onoja G, Abiodun VT, Peters AR. Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccine market survey at agro-veterinary stores in rural and peri-urban areas of Nigeria. Gates Open Res. 2025;9:40.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMwacalimba K, Kimeli P, Tiernan R, Mijten E, Miroshnychenko T, Poulsen Nautrup B. Diseases of economic importance in feedlot cattle in sub-Saharan Africa: a review with a focus on existing and potential options for control. Animals. 2025;15(1):97.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlhaji NB, Haruna AE, Isola TO, Odetokun IA, Lawal-Adebowale OA, Olaniran AO, et al. Antimicrobial usage and associated residues and resistance emergence in smallholder beef-cattle production systems in Nigeria: a One Health challenge. Vet Res Commun. 2023;47(1):233\u0026ndash;45.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAshraf A, Imran M. Causes, types, etiological agents, prevalence, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, effects on human health and future aspects of bovine mastitis. Anim Health Res Rev. 2020;21(1):36\u0026ndash;49.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCobirka M, Tancin V, Slama P. Epidemiology and classification of mastitis. Animals. 2020;10(12):2212.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJamali H, Barkema HW, Jacques M, Lavall\u0026eacute;e-Bourget EM, Malouin F, Saini V, et al. Invited review: incidence, risk factors, and effects of clinical mastitis recurrence in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2018;101(6):4729\u0026ndash;46.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlhaji NB, Aliyu MB, Ghali-Mohammed I, Odetokun IA. Survey on antimicrobial usage in local dairy cows in North-central Nigeria: drivers for misuse and public health threats. PLoS One. 2019;14(12):e0224949.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVan Boeckel TP, Brower C, Gilbert M, Grenfell BT, Levin SA, Robinson TP, et al. Global trends in antimicrobial use in food animals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(18):5649\u0026ndash;54.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFriedman ND, Temkin E, Carmeli Y. The negative impact of antibiotic resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2016;22(5):416\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAnueyiagu KN, Benson NP, Daniel J, Nze C, Esilonu JT. Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in bovine subclinical mastitis in Jos South Local Government Area of Plateau State, Nigeria. Eur J Vet Med. 2022;2(6):7\u0026ndash;11.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKour S, Sharma N, Balaji N, Kumar P, Soodan JS, Santos MV, et al. Advances in diagnostic approaches and therapeutic management in bovine mastitis. Vet Sci. 2023;10(7):449. doi:10.3390/vetsci10070449.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTwomey DP, Wheelock AI, Flynn J, Meaney WJ, Hill C, Ross RP. Protection against Staphylococcus aureus mastitis in dairy cows using a bismuth-based teat seal containing the bacteriocin, lacticin 3147. J Dairy Sci. 2000;83(9):1981\u0026ndash;88. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(00)75075-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCao LT, Wu JQ, Xie F, Hu SH, Mo Y. Efficacy of nisin in treatment of clinical mastitis in lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2007;90(8):3980\u0026ndash;85. doi:10.3168/jds.2007-0153.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAyoola MO, Ogunlakin AD, Oguntunji AO. Status of ethno-veterinary medicine in the management of dairy animals in Nigeria. J Anim Health Prod. 2025;13(1):88\u0026ndash;105.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAbdallah A, Zhang P, Zhong Q, Sun Z. Application of traditional Chinese herbal medicine by-products as dietary feed supplements and antibiotic replacements in animal production. Curr Drug Metab. 2019;20(1):54\u0026ndash;64. doi:10.2174/1389200219666180523102920.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGetu A, Solomon T, Fikre N, Eyasu E, Fufa Y, Tazebachew M, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding antimicrobial resistance and associated factors among healthcare workers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2025;2025:5354292. doi:10.1155/cjid/5354292.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWangmo K, Dorji T, Pokhrel N, Dorji T, Dorji J, Tenzin T. Knowledge, attitude, and practice on antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance among the veterinarians and para-veterinarians in Bhutan. PLoS One. 2021;16(5):e0251327. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0251327.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBraun V, Clarke V. Thematic analysis: a practical guide. London: Sage Publications; 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAgboola AF, Ojo OA, Famakinwa M, Williams SO. Gender involvement of sedentary Fulani in dairy farming practices in Osun State, Nigeria. Contemp Agric. 2020;69(3\u0026ndash;4):73\u0026ndash;80. doi:10.2478/contagri-2020-0010.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eUmar YA, Abu IA, Sani MH, Idi S, Owoade EO. Gender analysis of cattle farmers\u0026rsquo; participation in cattle production in Bauchi and Yobe States, Nigeria. Asian J Agric Ext Econ Sociol. 2023;41(9):637\u0026ndash;46. doi:10.9734/ajaees/2023/v41i92085.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOlaniran SO. Community and cultural influence on child schooling: a case study of the Fulani people of Nigeria. J Soc Policy Issues. 2024;4(2):54\u0026ndash;59. doi:10.58835/jspi.v4i2.244.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOlafadehan OA, Adewumi MK. Livestock management and production system of agropastoralists in the derived savanna of South-west Nigeria. Trop Subtrop Agroecosystems. 2010;12:685\u0026ndash;91.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSuleiman A, Jackson EL, Rushton J. Challenges of pastoral cattle production in a sub-humid zone of Nigeria. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2015;47:1177\u0026ndash;85. doi:10.1007/s11250-015-0845-0.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRasak B, Asamu F, Arisukwu O, Iwelumor O, Oyekola I, Oyeyipo E, et al. Prospects and constraints of cattle farming business in Kwara State, Nigeria. In: Proc Int Conf Sci Eng Bus Sustain Dev Goals (SEB-SDG). 2023;1:1\u0026ndash;9. doi:10.1109/SEB-SDG57117.2023.10124580.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRoessler R. Selection decisions and trait preferences for local and imported cattle and sheep breeds in peri-/urban livestock production systems in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Animals. 2019;9(5):207. doi:10.3390/ani9050207.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eYusuf OJ, Adesina OM, Apata DF, Ayanda IF, Ishola H, Ajibade LA. Cattle farmers\u0026rsquo; attitude towards artificial insemination technology in Kwara State, Nigeria. Tanz J Agric Sci. 2024;23:301\u0026ndash;12. doi:10.5897/tjas2024.0445.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBolajoko MB. Biosecurity and economic impact of major diseases of livestock among rural farmers in Plateau State, Nigeria: a pilot study. J Vet Biomed Sci. 2023;5:74\u0026ndash;86. doi:10.5897/jvbs2023.0123.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlhaji NB, Babalobi OO. Economic impacts assessment of pleuropneumonia burden and control in pastoral cattle herds of North-central Nigeria. Bull Anim Health Prod Afr. 2017;65:235\u0026ndash;48.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDanladi J. CBPP control strategy in Nigeria (an overview). WOAH SGE country presentation 2024. 2024;1\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMakoshi M, Oladimeji Y, Rekwot G, Hussaini A. Assessment of factors influencing level of adoption of NVRI vaccine among cattle farmers in North-Central Nigeria. Niger Agric J. 2023;54(2):36\u0026ndash;41.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eU\u0026iacute; Chearbhaill A, Bolo\u0026ntilde;a PS, Ryan EG, McAloon CI, Burrell A, Upton J. Survey of farm, parlour and milking management, parlour technologies, SCC control strategies and farmer demographics on Irish dairy farms. Ir Vet J. 2024;77:8. doi:10.1186/s13620-024-00267-y.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMore SJ, McAloon C, Silva Bolo\u0026ntilde;a P, O\u0026rsquo;Grady L, O\u0026rsquo;Sullivan F, McGrath M, et al. Mastitis control and intramammary antimicrobial stewardship in Ireland: challenges and opportunities. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:748353. doi:10.3389/fvets.2022.748353.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWorld Health Organization. WHO list of medically important antimicrobials: a risk management tool for mitigating antimicrobial resistance due to non-human use [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2024. Available from: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/gcp/who-mia-list-2024-lv.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAkinyemi KO, Fakorede CO, Amisu KO, Wareth G, El-Diasty MM, Al-Gaabary MH, et al. Human and animal brucellosis in Nigeria: a systemic review and meta-analysis in the last twenty-one years (2001\u0026ndash;2021). Vet Sci. 2022;9(8):384. doi:10.3390/vetsci9080384.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWorld Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). WOAH list of antimicrobial agents of veterinary importance (January 2025) [Internet]. Paris: WOAH; 2025. Available from: https://www.woah.org/app/uploads/2021/06/202501-en-woah-trd-list.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlhaji NB, Isola TO. Antimicrobial usage by pastoralists in food animals in North-central Nigeria: the associated socio-cultural drivers for antimicrobials misuse and public health implications. One Health. 2018;6:41\u0026ndash;47. doi:10.1016/j.onehlt.2018.11.001.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC); Federal Ministries of Agriculture, Environment and Health. Antimicrobial use and resistance in Nigeria: situation analysis and recommendations. NCDC AMR Report 2017. 2017;1\u0026ndash;158. Available from: https://ncdc.gov.ng/themes/common/docs/protocols/56_1510840387.pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2026.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eOlasoju MI, Abdullahi UM, Afolabi KM, Shittu AM, Oyedeji O. Knowledge and practice of cattle handlers on antibiotic residues in meat and milk in Kwara State, Northcentral Nigeria. PLoS One. 2021;16(9):e0257249. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0257249.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAl-Mustapha AI, Adetunji VO, Heikinheimo A. Risk perceptions of antibiotic usage and resistance: a cross-sectional survey of poultry farmers in Kwara State, Nigeria. Antibiotics. 2020;9(7):378. doi:10.3390/antibiotics9070378.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNodza GI, Chah JM, Ugwu DS, Anosa GN, Okoye JO, Ume SI, et al. Ethno-veterinary practice for the treatment of cattle diseases in the eastern highlands of Nigeria. Ethnobot Res Appl. 2022;24:1\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKaseke TB, Chikwambi Z, Gomo C, Mashingaidze AB, Murungweni C. Antibacterial activity of medicinal plants on the management of mastitis in dairy cows: a systematic review. Vet Med Sci. 2023;9(6):2800\u0026ndash;19. doi:10.1002/vms3.1268.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKuevi DNO, Foli F, Tsegah E, Salia S, Glover W, Adinortey MB, et al. \u003cem\u003eVernonia amygdalina\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eleaf extract shows in vitro antischistosomal activity against both juvenile and adult Schistosoma mansoni at 100 \u0026mu;g/mL. J Trop Med. 2024;2024:8074291. doi:10.1155/2024/8074291.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAdeyemi OO, Oladiji AT. Evaluation of the anthelmintic activity of \u003cem\u003eKhaya senegalensis\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eextract against gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep: in vitro and in vivo studies. Vet Parasitol. 2006;137(1\u0026ndash;2):157\u0026ndash;62. doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.01.024.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eThammakarn C, Ishida Y, Suguro A, Takeda Y, Okamoto S, Cho J, et al. Inhibition of infectious bursal disease virus transmission using bioceramic derived from chicken feces. Virus Res. 2015;204:6\u0026ndash;12. doi:10.1016/j.virusres.2015.04.010.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRuenphet S, Punyadarsaniya D, Jantafong T, Takehara K. Stability and virucidal efficacies using powder and liquid forms of fresh charcoal ash and slaked lime against Newcastle disease virus and avian influenza virus. Vet World. 2019;12(1):1\u0026ndash;6. doi:10.14202/vetworld.2019.1-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWorld Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191\u0026ndash;4. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053.\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":"bmc-veterinary-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Veterinary Research](http://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"12917","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/12917/3?","title":"BMC Veterinary Research","twitterHandle":"@BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"antibiotic, alternatives, mastitis, cattle, production, farmers, resistance, herbs","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9233752/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9233752/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eBackground\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNigerian cattle production ranks 6th in Africa and 16th globally, constituting an important livelihood for many of its population. However, several health challenges affect the productivity of cattle herds, influencing antimicrobial use (AMU) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). In this study, we attempt to characterise the cattle production system and its influence on health management practices. We also examined factors influencing farmers’ use of antimicrobials and antimicrobial alternatives (vaccines, ethnoveterinary remedies, etc.) A mixed-methods approach, comprising semi-structured questionnaires (n = 736) and stakeholder focus group discussions, was employed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResults\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe majority of cattle production (78%) is extensive, with a median of 50 cattle per herd. Diseases of major burden are mastitis, gastrointestinal and respiratory diseases. Animal health was predominantly self-managed by farmers rather than using government or private veterinary services. Less than 5% of farmers regularly vaccinate their herds. Farmers reported difficulties accessing effective vaccines and largely relied on government veterinarians for immunisation services. Para-veterinarians are regularly consulted for treatment due to a reported unavailability of licensed veterinarians. More farmers used antibiotics (51%) than ethnoveterinary remedies (27%) within the last three months. Farmers stated they used herbs for diseases with limited effective antimicrobial options, such as foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) and contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (CBPP). 53% of farmers never used ethnoveterinary remedies primarily due to low awareness and difficulty in procuring herbs. Farmers also indicated that they were beginning to lose ethnoveterinary knowledge previously passed down from older generations due to an increasing dependence on antimicrobials. Farmers have poor knowledge and attitudes regarding the impact of AMU in cattle and the risk of AMR.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConclusions\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFuture research should focus on identifying and preserving ethnoveterinary knowledge through culturally appropriate means. Efforts should be made to assess the efficacy of available herbs. Access to governmental veterinary services, agricultural extension agents, and vaccines should be improved for farmers. Finally, available legislation surrounding AMU should be implemented more rigorously, and antibiotic sales by unlicensed drugstores must be strictly regulated.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Cattle production systems characteristics and their influence on antimicrobial use, alternatives, and resistance in Nigeria","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-09 14:58:37","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9233752/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-09T22:53:37+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-04-28T08:09:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"297837759382833198139372669798330391861","date":"2026-04-13T16:20:33+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"96520849626025846279178746270601100340","date":"2026-04-13T00:57:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"308985201198153408904453505362049082275","date":"2026-04-12T18:20:34+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"297353534967686224548432755081973428621","date":"2026-04-10T16:13:44+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"5604839322161914894430686223190493465","date":"2026-04-06T09:30:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-04-03T08:52:07+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2026-03-31T11:13:22+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-03-27T12:06:45+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-03-27T12:06:06+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Veterinary Research","date":"2026-03-26T11:48:13+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-veterinary-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Veterinary Research](http://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"12917","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/12917/3?","title":"BMC Veterinary Research","twitterHandle":"@BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"31489dc6-2708-4c9c-9777-9ebd9a896d74","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 9th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-05-09T22:53:37+00:00","index":54,"fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-09T14:58:37+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-09 14:58:37","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9233752","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9233752","identity":"rs-9233752","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}