Examining the effect of Feedlot versus Free- Range cattle management on Botswana beef quality through sustainability assessment, post-mortem examinations, and SWOT analysis.

Examining the effect of Feedlot versus Free- Range cattle management on Botswana beef quality through sustainability assessment, post-mortem examinations, and SWOT analysis. | 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 Examining the effect of Feedlot versus Free- Range cattle management on Botswana beef quality through sustainability assessment, post-mortem examinations, and SWOT analysis. Brianna Parsons, Joshuah Makore, Boisy Motube, Gregory Thato Rakobe, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4508724/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 10 Mar, 2025 Read the published version in Tropical Animal Health and Production → Version 1 posted 5 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract African agriculture faces triple threats of climate change, population growth and inequality, necessitating agricultural research which examines sustainability holistically across social, economic, and environmental trade-offs. We examined meat quality from Botswana’s beef sector, by comparing management practices of feedlot finished beef versus free-range pasture management in three ways. First, we assessed competing but overlapping factors of environmental, economic, and social sustainability in the beef sector. Second, we used abattoir post-mortem examinations and compared 25 feedlot cattle and 22 free-range cattle across factors including: carcass dress mass (CDM), sex, carcass grade, fat color, conformation, dentition, carcass and offal postmortem decisions, and reasons for the decisions. We present a conceptual framework that portrays sustainability trade-offs between social, economic, and environmental factors, all constrained and influenced by geo- and socio-political and economic structures. Feedlot animals had a significantly higher CDM (p = 0.0001) at 237.56 kg ± 6.98 (Mean ± SEM) and higher incidences of lung, liver, and spleen condemnation rates at 72%, 40%, and 16% respectively compared to free-range cattle. Free-range CDM was 184.50kg ± 7.44 with higher (p = 0.0260) small and large tripe condemnation rate at (36%). Lastly, we examine sustainability trade-offs for feedlot and free-range cattle management through a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) analysis. With these nuanced research findings, one can envision multifaceted solutions to address cattle farming challenges in Botswana, including reducing disease burdens in feedlot cattle herds while also implementing pasture management and resiliency strategies for free-range cattle herds to improve animal nutrition and productivity. beef feedlot free-range meat quality sustainability Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 1. Introduction African agriculture and food systems are under threat, needing to produce more food for a growing population (Ritchie et al., 2023 ; United Nations, 2023 ) with environments under threats of climate change including increased droughts, flooding, heat, and wildfires, across regions. Botswana like much of Southern Africa, is expected to experience the largest increases in temperature, greater than the global mean temperature increase projected by 2050, evidence presented and known since the United Nations Climate Change Conference COP17 in 2011 (Akoon et al. 2011 ). Similarly, climate change is projected to cause a 10% decline in rainfall across Southern Africa by 2050 (IPCC 2014). The net impact of agriculture – a sector contributing to climate change, while also very fragile to the effects of climate change – is about the how, how we grow food . As a social service and economic sector with ecosystem impacts, agriculture touches many of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, a set of 17 key goals for global wellbeing we are in grave jeopardy of not achieving by the target year 2030 (United Nations, 2022 ). With these looming and already felt challenges, the time for action for sustainable agricultural transformation led by the people and their values is now. The Botswana beef sector is globally renowned, containing over 1.7 million head of cattle (International Trade Administration, 2024 ) and with the ninth largest market share of countries exporting beef to the European Union (Chatibura, 2023 ). Cattle rearing was the backbone of Botswana’s economy in the pre-colonial period and remains a critical part of the rural economy, experiencing significant government investment over the last decades to develop infrastructure, marketing, and veterinary services in support of the sector (Darkoh & Mbaiwa, 2002 ). Seswaa (pounded beef), the national dish of Botswana, pays tribute to the unique taste of Botswana beef as well as the Setswana culture of cattle raising across the savanna, bush, and semi-arid landscape of the country. Many attribute the unique taste of Botswana beef to free-range pastured cattle consuming the native and indigenous plants of the nation (Sunday Standard Reporter, 2023 ). We wanted to understand how cattle production systems in Botswana impact meat quality, as well as whether the production systems are ‘sustainable’ under the ongoing impacts of climate change. To do so, we compared feedlot managed cattle to free-range pasture managed cattle at abattoir post-mortem examination, looking at factors including weight, age, fat quality, and carcass and organ condemnation rates. We share results from 47 examined cattle and discuss possible reasons for differences, including nutrition and animal health. We speculate on production system and sustainability trade-offs and the implications for Botswana’s agricultural sector at large. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1 Botswana beef sector conceptual framework on sustainability We assessed competing but overlapping factors of environmental, economic, and social sustainability in the Botswana beef sector. We applied sustainability concept, principles, and definitions as reviewed by Ruggerio, 2021 and considered differences across production systems of feedlot and free-range grazing in Botswana to create a conceptual framework for beef cattle sustainability in Botswana. Traditional free-range grazing predominates and accounts for over 80% of the total cattle population (Darkoh & Mbaiwa, 2002 ), while commercial production represents 1% of all farms, holding 8% of total farmland area, and producing 20% of the country’s cattle (FAO, 2005 ; International Trade Administration, 2024 ; USAID LandLinks, 2024 ). Beef export sales to the E.U. are primarily facilitated by the Botswana Meat Commission (BMC), a parastatal-run abattoir and marketing body (Darkoh & Mbaiwa, 2002 ). Both cattle management approaches are affected by climate change, but the landless farmers relying on communal lands which often lack pasture management strategies suffer the most intense consequences of both a changing climate and the ‘tragedy of the commons’ through overgrazing of cattle. Drought is the major climate change concern, leading to bushfires with increased periods of high heat with minimal rainfall. However, other land use changes, including protected lands of approximately 45% of the country’s total land mass and mining related changes impact farming resiliency strategies (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2024 ). 2.2 Comparison of Feedlot versus Free-range cattle at postmortem We compared carcasses of cattle raised in a feedlot with those from free-range management to determine whether there were differences owing to nutrition and management of the animals. Feedlot cattle are fed a grain-based diet and kept on smaller areas of land, whereas free-range animals are reared on pasture. We collected post-mortem examination reports from the Botswana Multispecies Abattoir over May-July 2023. Postmortem reports were entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for 25 feedlot cattle and 22 free-range cattle. Collected data included: management type, carcass dress mass, bull/heifer, fat color, conformation, dentition, carcass and offal detention, and reasons for detention. This data was analysed using SAS to perform ANOVA, chi-square, and Fishers’ exact tests to examine differences between the two groups. 2.3 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) Analysis of Botswana beef sector A Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) analysis of Botswana beef sector was carried out comparing Feedlot to Free-range cattle management. Considerations included cattle productivity and profitability, feed costs, reliability of feed source, resilience during global turbulence, disease conditions and impact of climate change. The concept of food sovereignty, the right of all peoples to culturally appropriate, healthy, and nutritious foods, as well as the right of ownership of agricultural production systems (La Via Campesina, 2008 ), was factored into the analysis. This analysis compliments the sustainability framework by considering how feed availability impacts cattle productivity and acknowledging that each system has its own distinct challenges, namely pasture quality degradation for free-range cattle and reliance on imported grains and feed for feedlot raised cattle. 3. Results 3.1 Botswana beef sector conceptual framework on sustainability By examining literature on sustainability challenges for Botswana beef production, we conceptualized sustainability trade-offs in accordance with Ruggerio 2021 , and present a framework of sustainability for the Botswana beef sector (Fig. 1 ). The framework represents sustainability trade-offs between social, economic, and environmental factors, all constrained by geo-and socio-political and economic structures. This framework illustrates how farm production decisions necessitate sustainability trade-offs, which are determined both by values, norms, economics, and power structures. Cattle feeding is an important sustainability decision – influenced by economic and environmental factors, and resulting in threats, challenges, and opportunities for each system. Feedlots rely on imported corn and soybean feeds, increasing producers’ uncertainty as an increasingly turbulent world affects grains availability and pricing. Free-range pasture systems, on the other hand, rely on rainfed agriculture (and often communal lands), which are increasingly challenged by the intersections of climate change, overgrazing and issues of land access. The sustainability framework in Fig. 1 facilitates an understanding of the complex interconnectivity of the various sustainability challenges for Botswana’s beef sector. 3.2 Comparison of Feedlot versus Free-range cattle at postmortem The effect of finishing beef cattle in a feedlot as compared to free-range pasture rearing was determined by comparing abattoir postmortem findings of the two groups of animals. There was a significant difference (p = 0.0001) between the carcass dressed mass (CDM) of cattle from the feedlot compared to cattle from free-range with feedlot cattle weighing 53 kg more (Table 1 ). Feedlot cattle attained a higher grade of prime significantly (p = 0.0001) more than free-range cattle that were graded grade 1 or grade 2 but not prime. Factors that affect grade are age which is determined by dentition, conformation, and fat colour. There was no significant difference (p = 0.1634) in dentition between the two groups of cattle. For free-range cattle 64% had 0 teeth, 27% 1–6 teeth, and 9% 8 teeth, whereas for feedlot cattle 84% had 0 teeth, 16% 1–6 teeth, and 0% 8 teeth. Feedlot cattle were significantly (p = 0.0001) different from free-range cattle for fat colour and carcass conformation (Table 2 ). The former had 100% white fat whilst the latter had 59% no fat, 27% coloured fat, and 14% white fat. Feedlot cattle had 100% good conformation and free-range cattle had 23% poor, 50% fair and 27% good conformation. The abattoir serves to remove meat that is not fit for human consumption from the food chain. The abattoir also carries out disease surveillance for the livestock sector. None of the carcasses in the current study were condemned. The heart of one feedlot animal was condemned for infestation with Cysticercus bovis (Table 3 ). There were no significant differences (p = 0.2375) in the number of carcasses, heads, hearts, and tongues that were detained between the two groups of cattle. The sole reason for detention across feed types was infestation with beef measles (Cysticercosis bovis ). The outcome of offal inspection is condemnation, detention, or being passed as fit for human consumption (Table 4 ). The decision to condemn organs differed (p < 0.05) between the two management groups for all organs except small intestine. Feedlot cattle had higher incidences of condemned liver, spleen, and lung, while free-range cattle had higher incidences of condemned small and large tripe. Livers of feedlot cattle were condemned significantly more at 72% than those of free-range cattle at 12% (Table 4 , Fig. 2). Contamination and pathology were reasons for condemnation in feedlot and not in free-range cattle. Spleens of feedlot cattle were condemned significantly more at 16% (p = 0.03) than those of free-range cattle at 0% (Table 4 , Fig. 3). Condemnation of feedlot cattle spleens was attributable to contamination and pathology whereas in free-range cattle the reason was parasites. Lungs of feedlot cattle were condemned significantly more at 72% (p < 0.001) than those of free-range cattle at 0% (Table 4 , Fig. 4). Condemnation of lungs was attributable to pathology under Feedlot and parasites under free-range cattle. Small and large tripe of free-range cattle was condemned significantly more at 38% (p < 0.03) than that of feedlot cattle at 16% (Table 4 , Fig. 5). The reasons for condemnation varied with tripe from free-range cattle being condemned mostly for parasites and less so for pathology whereas feedlot cattle tripe was condemned mostly for pathology and less so for contamination. Thus, parasites were a much more important factor in free-range cattle compared to feedlot cattle in determining condemnation of tripe. Condemnation of small intestines did not differ (p = 0. 2975) between the cattle groups (Table 4 , Fig. 6). Condemnation was attributable to contamination and pathology in feedlot cattle whereas parasites and pathology were under responsible for condemnation in free-range cattle. 3.3 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) Analysis of Botswana beef sector. Sustainability considerations for the Botswana beef sector were classified according to a SWOT analysis, presented in Table 5 . The SWOT analysis compliments the sustainability framework in Fig. 1 , highlighting how food sovereignty and sustainability research is defined by trade-offs, in this case, the trade-offs between intensive (feedlot) management and disease pressures, as well as between feed type, costs, resiliency, and animal productivity (weight gain). Feedlot systems showed larger carcass weights, a reliance on imported grains to feed cattle, and higher rates of organ condemnation (liver, lung, spleen), whereas free-range cattle had smaller carcass weights due to declining native pasture qualities. Feed costs as well as carcass weights affect profitability of the sector, resulting in various strategies for cattle raising. One must note these trade-offs are impacted by global economic markets and political systems, as evidenced by the trade-offs around imported or native feeds. Table 1 Mean Carcass Dressed Mass, Grade and Dentition Frequencies for Feedlot versus Free-range Cattle. Parameter Feed type Feedlot Free - range P-value Carcass Dressed Mass (CDM) (kg ± s.e.m*) 237.56 ± 6.98 184.50 ± 7.44 < 0.0001 Grade 1 0 17 < 0.0001 2 0 5 Prime 25 0 Dentition 0 tooth 21 14 0.1634 1–6 teeth 4 6 8 teeth 0 2 *s.e.m = standard error of the mean Table 2 Frequencies of Fat Colour and Carcass Conformation for Feedlot versus Free-range Cattle. Parameter Feed type Feedlot Free - range P-value Fat colour None 0 13 < 0.0001 Cream or yellow 0 6 White 25 3 Carcass Conformation Poor 0 5 < 0.0001 Fair 0 11 Good 25 6 Table 3 Frequencies of postmortem decision of Carcass, Head, Tongue, and Heart for Feedlot versus Free-range Cattle. Parameter Feed type Feedlot Free - range P-value Carcass post-mortem Detained 1 3 0.2375 Passed 24 19 Reason for detention of Carcass C. bovis 1 3 0.2375 None 24 19 Head post-mortem Detained 1 3 0.2375 Passed 24 19 Reason for detention of Head C. bovis 1 3 0.2375 None 24 19 Tongue post-mortem Detained 1 3 0.2375 Passed 24 19 Reason for detention of Tongue C. bovis 1 0 0.3430 None 24 22 Heart post-mortem Condemned 1 0 0.3331 Detained 1 3 Passed 23 19 Reasons for post-mortem decision of Heart Contamination 1 0 0.3331 C. bovis 1 3 Fit for human consumption 23 19 Table 4 Frequencies of postmortem decision of liver, spleen, lung, small and large tripe and small intestine condemnation for Feedlot versus Free-range cattle. Parameter Feed type Feedlot Free - range P-value Liver post-mortem Condemned 10 2 0.0158* Detained 0 3 Passed 15 17 Spleen post-mortem Condemned 4 0 0.0312* Detained 0 3 Passed 21 19 Lung post-mortem Condemned 18 0 < 0.0001** Detained 0 3 Passed 7 19 SL Tripe post-mortem Condemned 4 8 0.0260* Detained 0 3 Passed 21 11 Small intestine post-mortem Condemned 7 5 0.2975 Detained 0 2 Passed 18 15 *Significance of < 0.05 and **significance of < 0.01 Table 5 Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) analysis for feedlot versus free-range cattle management in Botswana Feedlot Free-range Strengths - Large carcass weight = higher revenues - Production efficiency economic model effective under current economic systems - Stable cattle nutrition compared to pasture systems - Low feed costs - Relies on native feeds ◊ some resiliency during periods of global turbulence - Botswana Government offers various supports for farmers across cattle production systems, such as subsidies, grants, and veterinary services Weakness - Reliance on imported feed – volatility in availability and pricing ◊ affects feed costs - High rates of organ condemnation - Declining pasture qualities (with evidence of parasitisation) leading to lower slaughter weights - Smaller carcass weights = lower revenues Opportunity - Reduce disease conditions in feedlot ◊ understand the trade-off consequences for productivity as ways to reduce disease conditions can decrease productivity (ex. reduce crowding / overstocking) - Managing cattle to ‘manage’ pastures (ex. 'regenerative agriculture’ / ‘regenerative grazing’), strategic grazing practices to restore soil/pasture quality. - Other communal pasture management strategies to improve forage quality - Market segments demanding organic and grass-fed beef Threats - Changes in global markets impacting global export market access or grain importation and pricing - Climate change impacting health of intensively managed animals at higher risk of disease spread from close animal conditions (ex. infectious and zoonotic diseases, heat stress) - Climate change causing continued pasture degradation. - Climate change impacting health of animals (heat stress, infectious/ zoonotic disease) - Vulnerability to predators and theft 4. Discussion Our study examined meat quality from Botswana’s beef sector, an intangible cultural heritage of the nation, by comparing management practices of feedlot finished beef versus free-range pasture management and examining trade-offs. Animal productivity, animal disease, and farmer profitability all exist on an interactive continuum, creating trade-offs dependent on the management system (Breure et al., 2024 ; Kanter et al., 2018 ; Thomson et al., 2019 ). African Agriculture, including the beef sector, needs to be sustainable. Our assessment concurs with Ruggerio, 2021 with regard to recognising that sustainability is the outcome of competing but overlapping factors of environmental, economic, and social nature all influenced by geo- and socio-political and economic structures. Free-range cattle were significantly thinner than feedlot cattle, and feedlot cattle had higher incidences of lung, liver, and spleen condemnation both of which are impacted by management style. It is not surprising that free-range cattle were thinner and had fewer ‘good’ conformation carcasses than feedlot, where the production goal is to raise and fatten animals to slaughter weight in short periods of time, often relying on imported concentrate feeds (corn, soybean) to do so. Free-range management, on the other hand, utilizes native pasture systems to feed cattle. In Botswana, communal pasture quality has been declining for some time, the result of overgrazing and climate change affecting rainfall patterns (Mogomotsi et al., 2020 ). Significant variability in rainfall patterns has been reported over the last decade, affecting the livelihoods of those dependant on rainfed agriculture (O. E. Kgosikoma et al., 2015 ; O. O. Kgosikoma et al., 2012 ; Mogotsi et al., 2013 ). It is therefore unsurprising that free-range cattle were thinner at slaughter, as they suffered the consequences of climate change on pasture quality. Differences in fat color and composition between free-range and feedlot cattle can also be attributed to management. Various studies have shown grass-fed cattle have fat more yellow in color (Leheska et al., 2008 ), with evidence that grain feeding through feedlot causes changes in fat color, becoming more white colored over feedlot feeding time (Strachan et al., 1993 ). Differences in diet contribute to the different fat color profiles between feedlot (white fat) and free-range cattle (yellow/cream fat), while the lack of fat in free-range cattle can be attributed to poor pasture quality causing severe undernutrition. Feedlot cattle had higher rates of lung, liver, and spleen condemnation, another consequence of differences in management systems. Close conditions of animals in feedlot management system increase the cattle’s susceptibility to a variety of infectious diseases, as well as increase in stress levels allowing subclinical illnesses opportunity to proliferate. We suspect high levels of respiratory disease across feedlot cattle as 72% of feedlot cattle sampled in our study had condemned lungs after inspection (18 of the 25 feedlot cattle). Similarly, 40% and 16% of feedlot cattle sampled had condemned livers and spleens, respectively, after inspection. The liver and spleen serve detoxification roles, so it can be theorized that feedlot animals have some level of clinical and/or subclinical disease. Free-range cattle, on the other hand, had higher levels of small and large tripe condemnation with 38% of sampled cattle condemned (8 condemned out of 21 sampled cattle) predominately due to parasites, a management consequence from grass-feeding. The sole reason for whole carcass detention across feed types was infestation with beef measles (Cysticercosis bovis ). Beef measles is endemic to Botswana with national prevalence rates of 6.2% and significant variation in prevalence across districts (Mazhani et al., 2022 ). Bovine cysticercosis is caused by the larval stage of the human parasitic tapeworm, Taenia saginata . Thus, C. bovis is of major concern both for public health and economic profitability for the beef sector (Mazhani et al., 2022 ). Carcasses with more than ten cysts are condemned. Carcasses with less than ten cysts are detained and undergo cold treatment before being passed as fit for human consumption. In addition, the presence of cysts downgrades both carcasses and offal at a cost to the farmer and abattoir alike. Food sovereignty is the right of all peoples to culturally appropriate, healthy, and nutritious foods, as well as the right of ownership of agricultural production systems (La Via Campesina, 2008 ). Under this approach, the values, needs and culture of Botswana should determine how to prioritize efforts to improve agricultural production and food availability across the country. With this in mind, we condensed major trade-offs between feedlot and free-range cattle raising to show strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for each system. This analysis compliments the sustainability conceptual framework by providing specific details on how sustainability trade-offs affect beef production systems in Botswana. Importantly, both production systems are impacted by climate change, which highlights the need for the research community to contribute to strategies for beef resilience. Further research should explore various management options and clearly define the ‘pros and cons’ and economic consequences of each system to help the relevant stakeholders (farmers, policymakers, agricultural professionals) make informed decisions regarding investment, management, research, policy, and programs for the betterment of Botswana agriculture. Similarly, additional research is needed on effective communal pasture management strategies to help address the needs and concerns of Batswana farmers relying on the traditional, cultural practices of raising cattle on pasture. 5. Conclusions We conclude that animal productivity, animal disease, and beef sector profitability all exist on an interactive continuum, creating trade-offs dependent on the management system. Feedlot compared to Free-range cattle management reveals productivity and economic trade-offs for each system represented by higher CDM and higher liver, lung, and spleen condemnation for Feedlot cattle and lower CDM and lower liver, lung, and spleen condemnation for Free-range cattle. The trade-offs become clear when the cattle farming systems are subjected to a SWOT analysis. Declarations Competing Interests: The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. (see Line 378) Funding: This research was funded in-kind by the efforts of the authors. Open access publication costs are supported by an institutional partnership with the University of Pennsylvania. Author Contributions: BP, GTR, SSR, and BM: conceptualized the study. BM: data collection. JM: statistical calculations. BP, SSR, JM, GTR, BM: Interpreted results. SSR, JM: prepared results section and conducted several revisions of full manuscript. BP: first draft and several revisions of full manuscript. All authors read, revised, and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgements: We are thankful for the support of the Botswana Ministry of Agriculture to conduct this study! A Global Engagement Fund award by Penn Global supports ongoing research led by Dr. Brianna Parsons, which first brought her to Botswana and facilitated collaborations with the authorships team. Data Availability : The datasets generated and analyzed during this study are available for public access in the Supplementary Information References Akoon, I., Archer, E., Colvin, C., Davis, C., Diedricks, G., Engelbrecht, F., Vincent, K., Cull, T. (2011). Climate risk and vulnerability: A handbook for Southern Africa. Accessed at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236144201_Climate_risk_and_vulnerability_A_handbook_for_Southern_Africa Breure, T. S., Estrada-Carmona, N., Petsakos, A., Gotor, E., Jansen, B., & Groot, J. C. J. (2024). A systematic review of the methodology of trade-off analysis in agriculture. Nature Food, 5 (3), 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-024-00926-x Chatibura, D. M. (2023). Beef as intangible cultural heritage in Botswana: A documentary review. Journal of Ethnic Foods, 10 (1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42779-023-00199-y Convention on Biological Diversity. (2024). Botswana—Country Profile . Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. https://www.cbd.int/countries/profile?country=bw Darkoh, M. B. K., & Mbaiwa, J. E. (2002). Globalisation and the Livestock Industry in Botswana. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 23 (2), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9493.00123 FAO. (2005). AQUASTAT Country Profile—Botswana . International Trade Administration. (2024, February 28). Botswana—Agricultural Sectors . https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/botswana-agricultural-sectors Kanter, D. R., Musumba, M., Wood, S. L. R., Palm, C., Antle, J., Balvanera, P., Dale, V. H., Havlik, P., Kline, K. L., Scholes, R. J., Thornton, P., Tittonell, P., & Andelman, S. (2018). Evaluating agricultural trade-offs in the age of sustainable development. Agricultural Systems, 163 , 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.09.010 Kgosikoma, O. E., Mojeremane, W., & Harvie, B. (2015). The impact of livestock grazing management systems on soil and vegetation characteristics across savanna ecosystems in Botswana. African Journal of Range & Forage Science, 32 (4), 271–278. https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2015.1008042 Kgosikoma, O. O., Mogotsi, K., & Makhabu, S. W. (2012). Cattle Productivity and Nutritional Limitation in the Semi-Arid Makgadikgadi Region of Botswana . La Via Campesina. (2008). Food Sovereignty for Africa: A Challenge at Fingertips . https://viacampesina.org/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2008/03/Food-sovereignty-for-Africa-2007.pdf Leheska, J. M., Thompson, L. D., Howe, J. C., Hentges, E., Boyce, J., Brooks, J. C., Shriver, B., Hoover, L., & Miller, M. F. (2008). Effects of conventional and grass-feeding systems on the nutrient composition of beef. Journal of Animal Science, 86 (12), 3575–3585. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0565 Mazhani, B., Masitha, E., Ntwaetsile, M., Thutwa, K., & Sehularo, K. (2022). Distribution of bovine cysticercosis prevalence in the southeastern districts of Botswana from 2015 to 2016. Veterinary World, 15 (2), 368–373. https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2022.368-373 Mogomotsi, P. K., Sekelemani, A., & Mogomotsi, G. E. J. (2020). Climate change adaptation strategies of small-scale farmers in Ngamiland East, Botswana. Climatic Change, 159 (3), 441–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02645-w Mogotsi, K., Nyangito, M. M., & Nyariki, D. M. (2013). The role of drought among agro-pastoral communities in a semi-arid environment: The case of Botswana. Journal of Arid Environments, 91 , 38–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2012.11.006 Ritchie, H., Rodés-Guirao, L., Mathieu, E., Gerber, M., Ortiz-Ospina, E., Hasell, J., & Roser, M. (2023). Population Growth. Our World in Data . https://ourworldindata.org/population-growth Ruggerio, C. A. (2021). Sustainability and sustainable development: A review of principles and definitions. Science of The Total Environment, 786 , 147481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147481 Strachan, D. B., Yang, A., & Dillon, R. D. (1993). Effect of grain feeding on fat colour and other carcass characteristics in previously grass-fed Bos indicus steers. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 33 (3), 269–273. https://doi.org/10.1071/ea9930269 Sunday Standard Reporter. (2023, February 27). Feedlotting could ‘undermine Botswana beef’s positioning as a premium brand’ | Sunday Standard . https://www.sundaystandard.info/feedlotting-could-undermine-botswana-beefs-positioning-as-a-premium-brand/ Thomson, A. M., Ellis, E. C., Grau, Hé. R., Kuemmerle, T., Meyfroidt, P., Ramankutty, N., & Zeleke, G. (2019). Sustainable intensification in land systems: Trade-offs, scales, and contexts. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 38 , 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.04.011 United Nations. (2022). The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2022 . https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2022/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2022.pdf United Nations. (2023). Global Issues: Population . United Nations; United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/population USAID LandLinks. (2024). Botswana . https://www.land-links.org/country-profile/botswana/ Supplementary Files BotswanaMeatStudyGrainvPasturedataset1FINAL.xlsx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 10 Mar, 2025 Read the published version in Tropical Animal Health and Production → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Major revision with re-assessment 22 Aug, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 25 Jul, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 18 Jul, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 03 Jun, 2024 First submitted to journal 31 May, 2024 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-4508724","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":328673684,"identity":"b0cd35c2-35fe-4d87-a07d-f6291a6cae9e","order_by":0,"name":"Brianna Parsons","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8481-1975","institution":"University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Brianna","middleName":"","lastName":"Parsons","suffix":""},{"id":328673685,"identity":"3f66e935-af79-4357-8798-76d3e7dadfc4","order_by":1,"name":"Joshuah Makore","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Botswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Joshuah","middleName":"","lastName":"Makore","suffix":""},{"id":328673686,"identity":"6e2c0020-2aa2-4561-a38e-45b3d34e93da","order_by":2,"name":"Boisy Motube","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Multispecies Abattoir Botswana","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Boisy","middleName":"","lastName":"Motube","suffix":""},{"id":328673687,"identity":"d6a4ace7-3125-4101-a1ab-4fcb0703f4d8","order_by":3,"name":"Gregory Thato Rakobe","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Botswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gregory","middleName":"Thato","lastName":"Rakobe","suffix":""},{"id":328673688,"identity":"d00226b2-dc8b-4062-9ef2-5647b639241b","order_by":4,"name":"Solomon Stephen Ramabu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Botswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Solomon","middleName":"Stephen","lastName":"Ramabu","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-05-31 11:50:13","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4508724/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4508724/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-025-04355-1","type":"published","date":"2025-03-10T15:58:08+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":62394416,"identity":"9facbca8-c648-43e6-b1c9-d7c3daac0db4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-13 16:40:38","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":67787,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSustainability Diagram showing competing but overlapping factors of environmental, economic, and social sustainability all influenced by geo- and socio-political and economic structures. Adapted from (Ruggerio, 2021)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/3cde2ef7168591baab8b8f1c.png"},{"id":62395291,"identity":"3f6a131a-3da6-4952-9edc-5f8bb3be2f93","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-13 16:56:38","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":25080,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/7282fcbe0bc5edad21717521.png"},{"id":62394422,"identity":"1523e4d4-f6b9-43ae-aed1-ea2f03710a43","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-13 16:40:38","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":23922,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/70c82c8513cf5308590e382c.png"},{"id":62394840,"identity":"78ea46ef-7b8c-45de-a274-07c2639c793d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-13 16:48:38","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":26390,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/404087b9b27ea443e5923429.png"},{"id":62394417,"identity":"ac4edd1d-5bc9-4e6a-8c9a-43fc5a8bcf87","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-13 16:40:38","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":24023,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/5bdfd972be1f7be8d253ce9c.png"},{"id":62394841,"identity":"55bcd7c0-9901-41ec-adba-47dc0129175e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-13 16:48:38","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":27707,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/a889123c7620fd5063bbdcb7.png"},{"id":78688999,"identity":"c25b7001-06e5-4b94-97b2-fe3e9c8bab9b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-03-17 16:09:56","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1171837,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/6e17ec16-384a-47a4-9315-7b4c1cc50f67.pdf"},{"id":62394419,"identity":"cdbe465b-03cf-433d-8335-19bc340a193b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-13 16:40:38","extension":"xlsx","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":18395,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"BotswanaMeatStudyGrainvPasturedataset1FINAL.xlsx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4508724/v1/39fc49859cd6a784932a5b6a.xlsx"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Examining the effect of Feedlot versus Free- Range cattle management on Botswana beef quality through sustainability assessment, post-mortem examinations, and SWOT analysis.","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAfrican agriculture and food systems are under threat, needing to produce more food for a growing population (Ritchie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; United Nations, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) with environments under threats of climate change including increased droughts, flooding, heat, and wildfires, across regions. Botswana like much of Southern Africa, is expected to experience the largest increases in temperature, greater than the global mean temperature increase projected by 2050, evidence presented and known since the United Nations Climate Change Conference COP17 in 2011 (Akoon et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, climate change is projected to cause a 10% decline in rainfall across Southern Africa by 2050 (IPCC 2014). The net impact of agriculture \u0026ndash; a sector contributing to climate change, while also very fragile to the effects of climate change \u0026ndash; is about the how, \u003cem\u003ehow we grow food\u003c/em\u003e. As a social service and economic sector with ecosystem impacts, agriculture touches many of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, a set of 17 key goals for global wellbeing we are in grave jeopardy of not achieving by the target year 2030 (United Nations, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). With these looming and already felt challenges, the time for action for sustainable agricultural transformation led by the people and their values is now.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Botswana beef sector is globally renowned, containing over 1.7\u0026nbsp;million head of cattle (International Trade Administration, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) and with the ninth largest market share of countries exporting beef to the European Union (Chatibura, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Cattle rearing was the backbone of Botswana\u0026rsquo;s economy in the pre-colonial period and remains a critical part of the rural economy, experiencing significant government investment over the last decades to develop infrastructure, marketing, and veterinary services in support of the sector (Darkoh \u0026amp; Mbaiwa, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). \u003cem\u003eSeswaa\u003c/em\u003e (pounded beef), the national dish of Botswana, pays tribute to the unique taste of Botswana beef as well as the Setswana culture of cattle raising across the savanna, bush, and semi-arid landscape of the country. Many attribute the unique taste of Botswana beef to free-range pastured cattle consuming the native and indigenous plants of the nation (Sunday Standard Reporter, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe wanted to understand how cattle production systems in Botswana impact meat quality, as well as whether the production systems are \u0026lsquo;sustainable\u0026rsquo; under the ongoing impacts of climate change. To do so, we compared feedlot managed cattle to free-range pasture managed cattle at abattoir post-mortem examination, looking at factors including weight, age, fat quality, and carcass and organ condemnation rates. We share results from 47 examined cattle and discuss possible reasons for differences, including nutrition and animal health. We speculate on production system and sustainability trade-offs and the implications for Botswana\u0026rsquo;s agricultural sector at large.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Botswana beef sector conceptual framework on sustainability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe assessed competing but overlapping factors of environmental, economic, and social sustainability in the Botswana beef sector. We applied sustainability concept, principles, and definitions as reviewed by Ruggerio, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e and considered differences across production systems of feedlot and free-range grazing in Botswana to create a conceptual framework for beef cattle sustainability in Botswana. Traditional free-range grazing predominates and accounts for over 80% of the total cattle population (Darkoh \u0026amp; Mbaiwa, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e), while commercial production represents 1% of all farms, holding 8% of total farmland area, and producing 20% of the country\u0026rsquo;s cattle (FAO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; International Trade Administration, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; USAID LandLinks, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Beef export sales to the E.U. are primarily facilitated by the Botswana Meat Commission (BMC), a parastatal-run abattoir and marketing body (Darkoh \u0026amp; Mbaiwa, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). Both cattle management approaches are affected by climate change, but the landless farmers relying on communal lands which often lack pasture management strategies suffer the most intense consequences of both a changing climate and the \u0026lsquo;tragedy of the commons\u0026rsquo; through overgrazing of cattle. Drought is the major climate change concern, leading to bushfires with increased periods of high heat with minimal rainfall. However, other land use changes, including protected lands of approximately 45% of the country\u0026rsquo;s total land mass and mining related changes impact farming resiliency strategies (Convention on Biological Diversity, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Comparison of Feedlot versus Free-range cattle at postmortem\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe compared carcasses of cattle raised in a feedlot with those from free-range management to determine whether there were differences owing to nutrition and management of the animals. Feedlot cattle are fed a grain-based diet and kept on smaller areas of land, whereas free-range animals are reared on pasture. We collected post-mortem examination reports from the Botswana Multispecies Abattoir over May-July 2023. Postmortem reports were entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for 25 feedlot cattle and 22 free-range cattle. Collected data included: management type, carcass dress mass, bull/heifer, fat color, conformation, dentition, carcass and offal detention, and reasons for detention. This data was analysed using SAS to perform ANOVA, chi-square, and Fishers\u0026rsquo; exact tests to examine differences between the two groups.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) Analysis of Botswana beef sector\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) analysis of Botswana beef sector was carried out comparing Feedlot to Free-range cattle management. Considerations included cattle productivity and profitability, feed costs, reliability of feed source, resilience during global turbulence, disease conditions and impact of climate change. The concept of food sovereignty, the right of all peoples to culturally appropriate, healthy, and nutritious foods, as well as the right of ownership of agricultural production systems (La Via Campesina, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), was factored into the analysis. This analysis compliments the sustainability framework by considering how feed availability impacts cattle productivity and acknowledging that each system has its own distinct challenges, namely pasture quality degradation for free-range cattle and reliance on imported grains and feed for feedlot raised cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Botswana beef sector conceptual framework on sustainability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy examining literature on sustainability challenges for Botswana beef production, we conceptualized sustainability trade-offs in accordance with Ruggerio \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e, and present a framework of sustainability for the Botswana beef sector (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The framework represents sustainability trade-offs between social, economic, and environmental factors, all constrained by geo-and socio-political and economic structures. This framework illustrates how farm production decisions necessitate sustainability trade-offs, which are determined both by values, norms, economics, and power structures. Cattle feeding is an important sustainability decision \u0026ndash; influenced by economic and environmental factors, and resulting in threats, challenges, and opportunities for each system. Feedlots rely on imported corn and soybean feeds, increasing producers\u0026rsquo; uncertainty as an increasingly turbulent world affects grains availability and pricing. Free-range pasture systems, on the other hand, rely on rainfed agriculture (and often communal lands), which are increasingly challenged by the intersections of climate change, overgrazing and issues of land access. The sustainability framework in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e facilitates an understanding of the complex interconnectivity of the various sustainability challenges for Botswana\u0026rsquo;s beef sector.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Comparison of Feedlot versus Free-range cattle at postmortem\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe effect of finishing beef cattle in a feedlot as compared to free-range pasture rearing was determined by comparing abattoir postmortem findings of the two groups of animals. There was a significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0001) between the carcass dressed mass (CDM) of cattle from the feedlot compared to cattle from free-range with feedlot cattle weighing 53 kg more (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Feedlot cattle attained a higher grade of prime significantly (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0001) more than free-range cattle that were graded grade 1 or grade 2 but not prime. Factors that affect grade are age which is determined by dentition, conformation, and fat colour. There was no significant difference (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.1634) in dentition between the two groups of cattle. For free-range cattle 64% had 0 teeth, 27% 1\u0026ndash;6 teeth, and 9% 8 teeth, whereas for feedlot cattle 84% had 0 teeth, 16% 1\u0026ndash;6 teeth, and 0% 8 teeth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFeedlot cattle were significantly (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0001) different from free-range cattle for fat colour and carcass conformation (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The former had 100% white fat whilst the latter had 59% no fat, 27% coloured fat, and 14% white fat. Feedlot cattle had 100% good conformation and free-range cattle had 23% poor, 50% fair and 27% good conformation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe abattoir serves to remove meat that is not fit for human consumption from the food chain. The abattoir also carries out disease surveillance for the livestock sector. None of the carcasses in the current study were condemned. The heart of one feedlot animal was condemned for infestation with \u003cem\u003eCysticercus bovis\u003c/em\u003e (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). There were no significant differences (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.2375) in the number of carcasses, heads, hearts, and tongues that were detained between the two groups of cattle. The sole reason for detention across feed types was infestation with beef measles (Cysticercosis \u003cem\u003ebovis\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe outcome of offal inspection is condemnation, detention, or being passed as fit for human consumption (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The decision to condemn organs differed (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) between the two management groups for all organs except small intestine. Feedlot cattle had higher incidences of condemned liver, spleen, and lung, while free-range cattle had higher incidences of condemned small and large tripe.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLivers of feedlot cattle were condemned significantly more at 72% than those of free-range cattle at 12% (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;2). Contamination and pathology were reasons for condemnation in feedlot and not in free-range cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpleens of feedlot cattle were condemned significantly more at 16% (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03) than those of free-range cattle at 0% (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;3). Condemnation of feedlot cattle spleens was attributable to contamination and pathology whereas in free-range cattle the reason was parasites.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLungs of feedlot cattle were condemned significantly more at 72% (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) than those of free-range cattle at 0% (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;4). Condemnation of lungs was attributable to pathology under Feedlot and parasites under free-range cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSmall and large tripe of free-range cattle was condemned significantly more at 38% (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.03) than that of feedlot cattle at 16% (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;5). The reasons for condemnation varied with tripe from free-range cattle being condemned mostly for parasites and less so for pathology whereas feedlot cattle tripe was condemned mostly for pathology and less so for contamination. Thus, parasites were a much more important factor in free-range cattle compared to feedlot cattle in determining condemnation of tripe.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCondemnation of small intestines did not differ (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0. 2975) between the cattle groups (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;6). Condemnation was attributable to contamination and pathology in feedlot cattle whereas parasites and pathology were under responsible for condemnation in free-range cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) Analysis of Botswana beef sector.\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSustainability considerations for the Botswana beef sector were classified according to a SWOT analysis, presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e. The SWOT analysis compliments the sustainability framework in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, highlighting how food sovereignty and sustainability research is defined by trade-offs, in this case, the trade-offs between intensive (feedlot) management and disease pressures, as well as between feed type, costs, resiliency, and animal productivity (weight gain). Feedlot systems showed larger carcass weights, a reliance on imported grains to feed cattle, and higher rates of organ condemnation (liver, lung, spleen), whereas free-range cattle had smaller carcass weights due to declining native pasture qualities. Feed costs as well as carcass weights affect profitability of the sector, resulting in various strategies for cattle raising. One must note these trade-offs are impacted by global economic markets and political systems, as evidenced by the trade-offs around imported or native feeds.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Carcass Dressed Mass, Grade and Dentition Frequencies for Feedlot versus Free-range Cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFeed type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFeedlot\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFree\u003c/b\u003e-\u003cb\u003erange\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eP-value\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarcass Dressed Mass (CDM) (kg\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;s.e.m*)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e237.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e184.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrade\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrime\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDentition\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 tooth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.1634\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u0026ndash;6 teeth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 teeth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e*s.e.m\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;standard error of the mean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrequencies of Fat Colour and Carcass Conformation for Feedlot versus Free-range Cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFeed type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFeedlot\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFree\u003c/b\u003e-\u003cb\u003erange\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eP-value\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFat colour\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCream or yellow\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhite\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarcass Conformation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePoor\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFair\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGood\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrequencies of postmortem decision of Carcass, Head, Tongue, and Heart for Feedlot versus Free-range Cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFeed type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFeedlot\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFree\u003c/b\u003e-\u003cb\u003erange\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eP-value\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarcass post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2375\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReason for detention of Carcass\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. bovis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2375\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHead post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2375\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReason for detention of Head\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. bovis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2375\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTongue post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2375\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReason for detention of Tongue\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. bovis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.3430\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHeart post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCondemned\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.3331\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReasons for post-mortem decision of Heart\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eContamination\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.3331\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eC. bovis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFit for human consumption\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrequencies of postmortem decision of liver, spleen, lung, small and large tripe and small intestine condemnation for Feedlot versus Free-range cattle.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFeed type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFeedlot\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFree\u003c/b\u003e-\u003cb\u003erange\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eP-value\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiver post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCondemned\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0158*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpleen post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCondemned\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0312*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLung post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCondemned\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001**\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSL Tripe post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCondemned\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0260*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSmall intestine post-mortem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCondemned\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.2975\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDetained\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePassed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e*Significance of \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 and **significance of \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) analysis for feedlot versus free-range cattle management in Botswana\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFeedlot\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFree-range\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrengths\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Large carcass weight\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;higher revenues\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Production efficiency economic model effective under current economic systems\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Stable cattle nutrition compared to pasture systems\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Low feed costs\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Relies on native feeds \u0026loz; some resiliency during periods of global turbulence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Botswana Government offers various supports for farmers across cattle production systems, such as subsidies, grants, and veterinary services\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWeakness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Reliance on imported feed \u0026ndash; volatility in availability and pricing \u0026loz; affects feed costs\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- High rates of organ condemnation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Declining pasture qualities (with evidence of parasitisation) leading to lower slaughter weights\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Smaller carcass weights\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;lower revenues\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOpportunity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Reduce disease conditions in feedlot \u0026loz; understand the trade-off consequences for productivity as ways to reduce disease conditions can decrease productivity (ex. reduce crowding / overstocking)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Managing cattle to \u0026lsquo;manage\u0026rsquo; pastures (ex. 'regenerative agriculture\u0026rsquo; / \u0026lsquo;regenerative grazing\u0026rsquo;), strategic grazing practices to restore soil/pasture quality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Other communal pasture management strategies to improve forage quality\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Market segments demanding organic and grass-fed beef\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThreats\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Changes in global markets impacting global export market access or grain importation and pricing\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Climate change impacting health of intensively managed animals at higher risk of disease spread from close animal conditions (ex. infectious and zoonotic diseases, heat stress)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Climate change causing continued pasture degradation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Climate change impacting health of animals (heat stress, infectious/ zoonotic disease)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e- Vulnerability to predators and theft\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"1\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur study examined meat quality from Botswana\u0026rsquo;s beef sector, an intangible cultural heritage of the nation, by comparing management practices of feedlot finished beef versus free-range pasture management and examining trade-offs. Animal productivity, animal disease, and farmer profitability all exist on an interactive continuum, creating trade-offs dependent on the management system (Breure et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Kanter et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Thomson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). African Agriculture, including the beef sector, needs to be sustainable. Our assessment concurs with Ruggerio, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e with regard to recognising that sustainability is the outcome of competing but overlapping factors of environmental, economic, and social nature all influenced by geo- and socio-political and economic structures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFree-range cattle were significantly thinner than feedlot cattle, and feedlot cattle had higher incidences of lung, liver, and spleen condemnation both of which are impacted by management style. It is not surprising that free-range cattle were thinner and had fewer \u0026lsquo;good\u0026rsquo; conformation carcasses than feedlot, where the production goal is to raise and fatten animals to slaughter weight in short periods of time, often relying on imported concentrate feeds (corn, soybean) to do so. Free-range management, on the other hand, utilizes native pasture systems to feed cattle. In Botswana, communal pasture quality has been declining for some time, the result of overgrazing and climate change affecting rainfall patterns (Mogomotsi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Significant variability in rainfall patterns has been reported over the last decade, affecting the livelihoods of those dependant on rainfed agriculture (O. E. Kgosikoma et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; O. O. Kgosikoma et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Mogotsi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). It is therefore unsurprising that free-range cattle were thinner at slaughter, as they suffered the consequences of climate change on pasture quality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDifferences in fat color and composition between free-range and feedlot cattle can also be attributed to management. Various studies have shown grass-fed cattle have fat more yellow in color (Leheska et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e), with evidence that grain feeding through feedlot causes changes in fat color, becoming more white colored over feedlot feeding time (Strachan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e). Differences in diet contribute to the different fat color profiles between feedlot (white fat) and free-range cattle (yellow/cream fat), while the lack of fat in free-range cattle can be attributed to poor pasture quality causing severe undernutrition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFeedlot cattle had higher rates of lung, liver, and spleen condemnation, another consequence of differences in management systems. Close conditions of animals in feedlot management system increase the cattle\u0026rsquo;s susceptibility to a variety of infectious diseases, as well as increase in stress levels allowing subclinical illnesses opportunity to proliferate. We suspect high levels of respiratory disease across feedlot cattle as 72% of feedlot cattle sampled in our study had condemned lungs after inspection (18 of the 25 feedlot cattle). Similarly, 40% and 16% of feedlot cattle sampled had condemned livers and spleens, respectively, after inspection. The liver and spleen serve detoxification roles, so it can be theorized that feedlot animals have some level of clinical and/or subclinical disease. Free-range cattle, on the other hand, had higher levels of small and large tripe condemnation with 38% of sampled cattle condemned (8 condemned out of 21 sampled cattle) predominately due to parasites, a management consequence from grass-feeding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sole reason for whole carcass detention across feed types was infestation with beef measles (Cysticercosis \u003cem\u003ebovis\u003c/em\u003e). Beef measles is endemic to Botswana with national prevalence rates of 6.2% and significant variation in prevalence across districts (Mazhani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Bovine cysticercosis is caused by the larval stage of the human parasitic tapeworm, \u003cem\u003eTaenia saginata\u003c/em\u003e. Thus, \u003cem\u003eC. bovis\u003c/em\u003e is of major concern both for public health and economic profitability for the beef sector (Mazhani et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Carcasses with more than ten cysts are condemned. Carcasses with less than ten cysts are detained and undergo cold treatment before being passed as fit for human consumption. In addition, the presence of cysts downgrades both carcasses and offal at a cost to the farmer and abattoir alike.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFood sovereignty is the right of all peoples to culturally appropriate, healthy, and nutritious foods, as well as the right of ownership of agricultural production systems (La Via Campesina, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Under this approach, the values, needs and culture of Botswana should determine how to prioritize efforts to improve agricultural production and food availability across the country. With this in mind, we condensed major trade-offs between feedlot and free-range cattle raising to show strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for each system. This analysis compliments the sustainability conceptual framework by providing specific details on how sustainability trade-offs affect beef production systems in Botswana.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eImportantly, both production systems are impacted by climate change, which highlights the need for the research community to contribute to strategies for beef resilience. Further research should explore various management options and clearly define the \u0026lsquo;pros and cons\u0026rsquo; and economic consequences of each system to help the relevant stakeholders (farmers, policymakers, agricultural professionals) make informed decisions regarding investment, management, research, policy, and programs for the betterment of Botswana agriculture. Similarly, additional research is needed on effective communal pasture management strategies to help address the needs and concerns of Batswana farmers relying on the traditional, cultural practices of raising cattle on pasture.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eWe conclude that animal productivity, animal disease, and beef sector profitability all exist on an interactive continuum, creating trade-offs dependent on the management system. Feedlot compared to Free-range cattle management reveals productivity and economic trade-offs for each system represented by higher CDM and higher liver, lung, and spleen condemnation for Feedlot cattle and lower CDM and lower liver, lung, and spleen condemnation for Free-range cattle. The trade-offs become clear when the cattle farming systems are subjected to a SWOT analysis.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCompeting Interests:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. (see Line 378)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research was funded in-kind by the efforts of the authors. Open access publication costs are supported by an institutional partnership with the University of Pennsylvania.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contributions:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBP, GTR, SSR, and BM: conceptualized the study. BM: data collection. JM: statistical calculations. BP, SSR, JM, GTR, BM: Interpreted results. SSR, JM: prepared results section and conducted several revisions of full manuscript. BP: first draft and several revisions of full manuscript. All authors read, revised, and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgements:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe are thankful for the support of the Botswana Ministry of Agriculture to conduct this study! A Global Engagement Fund award by Penn Global supports ongoing research led by Dr. Brianna Parsons, which first brought her to Botswana and facilitated collaborations with the authorships team.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eData Availability\u003c/b\u003e: The datasets generated and analyzed during this study are available for public access in the Supplementary Information\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAkoon, I., Archer, E., Colvin, C., Davis, C., Diedricks, G., Engelbrecht, F., Vincent, K., Cull, T. (2011). Climate risk and vulnerability: A handbook for Southern Africa. Accessed at: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/236144201_Climate_risk_and_vulnerability_A_handbook_for_Southern_Africa\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236144201_Climate_risk_and_vulnerability_A_handbook_for_Southern_Africa\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBreure, T. S., Estrada-Carmona, N., Petsakos, A., Gotor, E., Jansen, B., \u0026amp; Groot, J. C. J. (2024). A systematic review of the methodology of trade-off analysis in agriculture. Nature Food, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(3), 211\u0026ndash;220. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-024-00926-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s43016-024-00926-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChatibura, D. M. (2023). Beef as intangible cultural heritage in Botswana: A documentary review. Journal of Ethnic Foods, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1), 41. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s42779-023-00199-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s42779-023-00199-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eConvention on Biological Diversity. (2024). \u003cem\u003eBotswana\u0026mdash;Country Profile\u003c/em\u003e. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.cbd.int/countries/profile?country=bw\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.cbd.int/countries/profile?country=bw\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDarkoh, M. B. K., \u0026amp; Mbaiwa, J. E. (2002). Globalisation and the Livestock Industry in Botswana. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(2), 149\u0026ndash;166. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9493.00123\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1467-9493.00123\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFAO. (2005). \u003cem\u003eAQUASTAT Country Profile\u0026mdash;Botswana\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eInternational Trade Administration. (2024, February 28). \u003cem\u003eBotswana\u0026mdash;Agricultural Sectors\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/botswana-agricultural-sectors\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/botswana-agricultural-sectors\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKanter, D. R., Musumba, M., Wood, S. L. R., Palm, C., Antle, J., Balvanera, P., Dale, V. H., Havlik, P., Kline, K. L., Scholes, R. J., Thornton, P., Tittonell, P., \u0026amp; Andelman, S. (2018). Evaluating agricultural trade-offs in the age of sustainable development. Agricultural Systems, \u003cem\u003e163\u003c/em\u003e, 73\u0026ndash;88. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2016.09.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.agsy.2016.09.010\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKgosikoma, O. E., Mojeremane, W., \u0026amp; Harvie, B. (2015). The impact of livestock grazing management systems on soil and vegetation characteristics across savanna ecosystems in Botswana. African Journal of Range \u0026amp; Forage Science, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(4), 271\u0026ndash;278. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2015.1008042\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2989/10220119.2015.1008042\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKgosikoma, O. O., Mogotsi, K., \u0026amp; Makhabu, S. W. (2012). \u003cem\u003eCattle Productivity and Nutritional Limitation in the Semi-Arid Makgadikgadi Region of Botswana\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLa Via Campesina. (2008). \u003cem\u003eFood Sovereignty for Africa: A Challenge at Fingertips\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://viacampesina.org/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2008/03/Food-sovereignty-for-Africa-2007.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://viacampesina.org/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2008/03/Food-sovereignty-for-Africa-2007.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeheska, J. M., Thompson, L. D., Howe, J. C., Hentges, E., Boyce, J., Brooks, J. C., Shriver, B., Hoover, L., \u0026amp; Miller, M. F. (2008). Effects of conventional and grass-feeding systems on the nutrient composition of beef. Journal of Animal Science, \u003cem\u003e86\u003c/em\u003e(12), 3575\u0026ndash;3585. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0565\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2527/jas.2007-0565\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMazhani, B., Masitha, E., Ntwaetsile, M., Thutwa, K., \u0026amp; Sehularo, K. (2022). Distribution of bovine cysticercosis prevalence in the southeastern districts of Botswana from 2015 to 2016. Veterinary World, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(2), 368\u0026ndash;373. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2022.368-373\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.14202/vetworld.2022.368-373\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMogomotsi, P. K., Sekelemani, A., \u0026amp; Mogomotsi, G. E. J. (2020). Climate change adaptation strategies of small-scale farmers in Ngamiland East, Botswana. Climatic Change, \u003cem\u003e159\u003c/em\u003e(3), 441\u0026ndash;460. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02645-w\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10584-019-02645-w\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMogotsi, K., Nyangito, M. M., \u0026amp; Nyariki, D. M. (2013). The role of drought among agro-pastoral communities in a semi-arid environment: The case of Botswana. Journal of Arid Environments, \u003cem\u003e91\u003c/em\u003e, 38\u0026ndash;44. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2012.11.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jaridenv.2012.11.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRitchie, H., Rod\u0026eacute;s-Guirao, L., Mathieu, E., Gerber, M., Ortiz-Ospina, E., Hasell, J., \u0026amp; Roser, M. (2023). Population Growth. \u003cem\u003eOur World in Data\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://ourworldindata.org/population-growth\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://ourworldindata.org/population-growth\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuggerio, C. A. (2021). Sustainability and sustainable development: A review of principles and definitions. Science of The Total Environment, \u003cem\u003e786\u003c/em\u003e, 147481. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147481\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147481\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStrachan, D. B., Yang, A., \u0026amp; Dillon, R. D. (1993). Effect of grain feeding on fat colour and other carcass characteristics in previously grass-fed Bos indicus steers. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(3), 269\u0026ndash;273. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1071/ea9930269\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1071/ea9930269\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSunday Standard Reporter. (2023, February 27). \u003cem\u003eFeedlotting could \u0026lsquo;undermine Botswana beef\u0026rsquo;s positioning as a premium brand\u0026rsquo; | Sunday Standard\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.sundaystandard.info/feedlotting-could-undermine-botswana-beefs-positioning-as-a-premium-brand/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.sundaystandard.info/feedlotting-could-undermine-botswana-beefs-positioning-as-a-premium-brand/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThomson, A. M., Ellis, E. C., Grau, H\u0026eacute;. R., Kuemmerle, T., Meyfroidt, P., Ramankutty, N., \u0026amp; Zeleke, G. (2019). Sustainable intensification in land systems: Trade-offs, scales, and contexts. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e, 37\u0026ndash;43. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.04.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cosust.2019.04.011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUnited Nations. (2022). \u003cem\u003eThe Sustainable Development Goals Report 2022\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2022/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2022.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2022/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2022.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUnited Nations. (2023). \u003cem\u003eGlobal Issues: Population\u003c/em\u003e. United Nations; United Nations. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.un.org/en/global-issues/population\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/population\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUSAID LandLinks. (2024). \u003cem\u003eBotswana\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.land-links.org/country-profile/botswana/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.land-links.org/country-profile/botswana/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":true,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"tropical-animal-health-and-production","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"trop","sideBox":"Learn more about [Tropical Animal Health and Production](https://www.springer.com/journal/11250)","snPcode":"11250","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11250/3","title":"Tropical Animal Health and Production","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"beef, feedlot, free-range, meat quality, sustainability","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4508724/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4508724/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eAfrican agriculture faces triple threats of climate change, population growth and inequality, necessitating agricultural research which examines sustainability holistically across social, economic, and environmental trade-offs. We examined meat quality from Botswana\u0026rsquo;s beef sector, by comparing management practices of feedlot finished beef versus free-range pasture management in three ways. First, we assessed competing but overlapping factors of environmental, economic, and social sustainability in the beef sector. Second, we used abattoir post-mortem examinations and compared 25 feedlot cattle and 22 free-range cattle across factors including: carcass dress mass (CDM), sex, carcass grade, fat color, conformation, dentition, carcass and offal postmortem decisions, and reasons for the decisions. We present a conceptual framework that portrays sustainability trade-offs between social, economic, and environmental factors, all constrained and influenced by geo- and socio-political and economic structures. Feedlot animals had a significantly higher CDM (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0001) at 237.56 kg\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.98 (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SEM) and higher incidences of lung, liver, and spleen condemnation rates at 72%, 40%, and 16% respectively compared to free-range cattle. Free-range CDM was 184.50kg\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.44 with higher (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0260) small and large tripe condemnation rate at (36%). Lastly, we examine sustainability trade-offs for feedlot and free-range cattle management through a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) analysis. With these nuanced research findings, one can envision multifaceted solutions to address cattle farming challenges in Botswana, including reducing disease burdens in feedlot cattle herds while also implementing pasture management and resiliency strategies for free-range cattle herds to improve animal nutrition and productivity.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Examining the effect of Feedlot versus Free- Range cattle management on Botswana beef quality through sustainability assessment, post-mortem examinations, and SWOT analysis.","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-08-13 16:40:33","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4508724/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Major revision with re-assessment","date":"2024-08-22T15:14:43+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"","date":"2024-07-25T13:03:34+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-07-18T10:02:34+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-06-04T01:08:36+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Tropical Animal Health and Production","date":"2024-05-31T07:50:08+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"tropical-animal-health-and-production","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"trop","sideBox":"Learn more about [Tropical Animal Health and Production](https://www.springer.com/journal/11250)","snPcode":"11250","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11250/3","title":"Tropical Animal Health and Production","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1fbb7c15-03fa-442d-a49f-a194aac2f07f","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 13th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-03-17T16:03:35+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-4508724","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-025-04355-1","journal":{"identity":"tropical-animal-health-and-production","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Tropical Animal Health and Production"},"publishedOn":"2025-03-10 15:58:08","publishedOnDateReadable":"March 10th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-08-13 16:40:33","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s11250-025-04355-1","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-025-04355-1","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4508724","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4508724","identity":"rs-4508724","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}