Camelids: new players in the international animal production context

Abstract

The Camelidae family comprises the Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus), the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius), and four species of South American camelids: llama (Lama glama), alpaca (Lama pacos) guanaco (Lama guanicoe), and vicuña (Vicugna vicugna). The main characteristic of these species is their ability to cope with either hard climatic conditions like those found in arid regions (Bactrian and dromedary camels) or high-altitude landscapes like those found in South America (South American camelids). Because of such interesting physiological and adaptive traits, the interest for these animals as livestock species has increased considerably over the last years. In general, the main animal products obtained from these animals are meat, milk, and hair fiber, although they are also used for races and work among other activities. In the near future, climate change will likely decrease agricultural areas for animal production worldwide, particularly in the tropics and subtropics where competition with crops for human consumption is a major problem already. In such conditions, extensive animal production could be limited in some extent to semi-arid rangelands, subjected to periodical draughts and erratic patterns of rainfall, severely affecting conventional livestock production, namely cattle and sheep. In the tropics and subtropics, camelids may become an important protein source for humans. This article aims to review some of the recent literature about the meat, milk, and hair fiber production in the six existing camelid species highlighting their benefits and drawbacks, overall contributing to the development of camelid production in the framework of food security.

Full text

REVIEWS
Camelids: new players in the international animal production context
Mousa Zarrin
1
&José L. Riveros
2
&Amir Ahmadpour
1,3
&André M. de Almeida
4
&Gaukhar Konuspayeva
5
&Einar Vargas-
Bello-Pérez
6
&Bernard Faye
7
&Lorenzo E. Hernández-Castellano
8
Received: 30 October 2019 / Accepted: 22 December 2019
#Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract
The Camelidae family comprises the Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus), the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius), and
four species of South American camelids: llama (Lama glama),alpaca(Lama pacos)guanaco(Lama guanicoe), and vicuña
(Vic ugna vicu gna). The main characteristic of these species is their ability to cope with either hard climatic conditions like those
found in arid regions (Bactrian and dromedary camels) or high-altitude landscapes like those found in South America (South
American camelids). Because of such interesting physiological and adaptive traits, the interest for these animals as livestock
species has increased considerably over the last years. In general, the main animal products obtained from these animals are meat,
milk, and hair fiber, although they are also used for races and work among other activities. In the near future, climate change will
likely decrease agricultural areas for animal production worldwide, particularly in the tropics and subtropics where competition
with crops for human consumption is a major problem already. In such conditions, extensive animal production could be limited
in some extent to semi-arid rangelands, subjected to periodical draughts and erratic patterns of rainfall, severely affecting
conventional livestock production, namely cattle and sheep. In the tropics and subtropics, camelids may become an important
protein source for humans. This article aims to review some of the recent literature about the meat, milk, and hair fiber production
in the six existing camelid species highlighting their benefits and drawbacks, overall contributing to the development of camelid
production in the framework of food security.
Keywords Dromedary camel .Bactrian camel .South American camelids .Meat .Milk .Hair fiber
Introduction
The Camelidae family descends from animals living in North
America during the Eocene period (45 million years ago).
Camels’ancestors migrated to South America and across the
Bering Strait into Central Asia, which has resulted in Old
World camels (Bactrian and dromedary camels) and New
World camels (South American camels; SAC). Thus, camel
evolution has been recently addressed using molecular tech-
niques by Manee et al. (2019).
According to Payne and Wilson (1999), camels in central
Asia evolved into the domestic Bactrian camel (Camelus
bactrianus) and wild Bactrian camel (Camelus bactrianus
ferus), being both of them commonly known as two-humped
*Lorenzo E. Hernández-Castellano
lhc@anis.au.dk
1
Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Yasouj
University, Yasouj 75918-74831, Iran
2
Departamento de Ciencias Animales, Facultad de Agronomía e
Ingeniería Forestal, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile,
7820436 Santiago, Chile
3
Department of Biological Engineering, Utah State University,
Logan, UT 84322, USA
4
Linking Landscape, Environment, Agriculture and Food (LEAF),
Instituto Superior de Agronomia, Universidade de Lisboa,
1349-017 Lisbon, Portugal
5
Department of Biotechnology, Al-Farabi Kazakh National
University, Almaty, Kazakhstan 050040
6
Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health
and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen,
1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
7
UMR SELMET, CIRAD-ES, Campus International de Baillarguet,
34398 Montpellier cedex, France
8
Department of Animal Science, AU-Foulum, Aarhus University,
Blichers Allé 20, Postboks 50, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
Tropical Animal Health and Production
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-019-02197-2

camels. Currently, wild Bactrian camels subsist in secluded
desert areas such as the Gobi Desert in China. Domesticated
Bactrian camels have been reared in several countries in
Central Asia, where they played a primary role in transporting
the goods. Currently, these animals are also used for meat,
milk, and hair fiber production. Domestic Bactrian camels
are distributed from Turkey to Mongolia (Fig. 1). The one-
humped camel or dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius)
evolved from animals similar to Bactrian camels (Burger et al.
2019). Dromedary camels are essentially domestic, and they
are distributed in Asia and Africa, from East India to Morocco
(Fig. 1). In addition, dromedary camels are distributed in the
Canary Islands (Spain) and Central Australia (Fig. 1).
Dromedaries are used to provide work and transport in addi-
tion to meat, milk, and hair fiber production. Dromedary
camels are also used for races in the Persian Gulf region and
as pack animals in tourist activities in the Canary Islands
(Spain) or Australia.
In South America, guanaco (Lama guanacoe) and vicuña
(Vicugna vicugna) are the two wild SAC species. The estimat-
ed population is about 650,000 and 250,000 animals, respec-
tively (FAOstat 2019). The domestication of guanacos and
vicuñas led to the establishment of the domestic SAC species,
llama (Lama glama) and alpaca (Vicugna pacos), respectively.
According to FAOstat (2019), there are about 5 million llamas
and 4.5 million alpacas in South America. Llamas are used as
pack animals by Andean native communities. In addition,
llamas are also used for meat production. Alpacas are mostly
used for the production of fine fibers. South American camels,
notably alpacas, have been introduced in other countries,
namely Australia and New Zealand where they are used for
fiber production. These animals are very popular as pets and
show animals in Europe, Canada, and the USA.
Camels have very interesting physiological and adaptive
traits (Gerken 2010;Alhidaryetal.2018; Hoter et al. 2019).
Indeed, Bactrian and dromedary camels are particularly well
adapted to arid environments (Wu et al. 2014). Some of these
traits are (a) adipose tissue located in the hump that can be
mobilized in case of food scarcity, (b) long and bushy eye-
lashes to protect eyes from sand and sun daylight, (c)
occludable nostrils to avoid sand entrance and reduce the
amount of water lost during the respiration process, (d)
adapted limbs for sandy conditions, and (e) efficient physio-
logical mechanisms to mitigate heat stress and dehydration.
South American camels have also very interesting physiolog-
ical traits (Wheeler 1995; Vaughan and Tibary 2006; Jiménez
et al. 2010). These include (a) tolerance to hypoxia, which
allows them to live at very high altitudes; (b) soft footpads
adapted to mountain and rocky conditions; (c) thick and iso-
lating hair fiber to protect from cold temperatures; and (d)
specific behavioral traits such as kicking and spitting rumen
fluid as a protection mechanism against predators. In addition,
Bactrian, dromedary, and South American camels have also a
digestive system adapted to consume large amounts of fibrous
and thorny plants (Dehority 2002). As these species have a
three-chamber foregut, they are commonly classified as
pseudoruminants (Dehority 2002).
Despite the important role of Old and New World camels in
the livelihood, food security, and economy of the local com-
munities, these species have never been considered major
players in the international animal production context.
However, changes associated to climate change may modify
this scenario in the near future. The objective of this review is
to describe major features of Old and New World camels as
production animals, particularly in their main productive per-
spectives (i.e., meat, milk, and hair fiber) and to highlight the
Fig. 1 Distribution map of the different camel species (domestic Bactrian camel, wild Bactrian camel, dromedary camel, alpaca, llama, vicuña and
guanaco)
Trop Anim Health Prod

potential and opportunities of using camels in the international
animal production context.
Bactrian camels
Bactrian camels (Camelus bactrianus), also known as double-
humped camels, differ from dromedary camels by the number
of humps and the ecosystem where they are raised (Fig. 2). As
dromedary camels, Bactrian camels are used for meat and
milk production. In addition, Bactrian camels are also used
for hair fiber production. The number of Bactrian camels is
reduced compared with dromedary camels (1 million vs. 34
million animals, respectively; FAOstat 2019). However, in
some countries such as Kazakhstan, the number of Bactrian
camels represents 85% ofthe total camel population (Imamura
et al. 2017). Bactrian camels are raised mainly in Mongolia
(435,000 heads), China (323,000), Kazakhstan (194,000),
Uzbekistan (18,000), and Russia (6400). However, Bactrian
camels are also present in other countries such Kirgizstan,
Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Pakistan, India, Turkey, and
Ukraine.
Meat production perspectives
Adult Bactrian camels weight 700–800 kg in case of females,
and up to 1250 kg in case of males (Saipolda 2004). In 2017,
about 36,700 tons of Bactrian camel meat was produced, be-
ing China (20,668 tons), Mongolia (7122 tons), Kazakhstan
(6617 tons),Uzbekistan (2120 tons), and Russia (179 tons)the
main leading producers (FAOstat 2019).
Most of the literature regarding meat composition in
Bactrian camels is in Russian (Terentyev 1975), Mongolian
(Indra et al. 2003), Kazakh (Moussaiev et al. 2007), or
Chinese (Zhao et al. 2004). However, recent studies published
in English showed that Bactrian camel meat contains 17.0–
21.0% protein, 1.80–3.80% fat, and 0.90–1.10% minerals
(Raiymbek et al. 2015;Raiymbeketal.2018). Compared with
other livestock species, meat from Bactrian camels contains
similar protein levels to those from chickens (21.4%), lambs
(20.8%), pigs (20.5%), and veals (20.2%), although meat fat
content in Bactrian camels is lower than those from lambs
(4.40%) and pigs (5.41%) and similar to chickens (3.08%)
and veals (2.87%) (Hernández-Castellano et al. 2013; Cobos
and Díaz 2015).
Regarding the amino acid profile, Bactrian camel meat
contains similar levels of methionine (6.72%); lower concen-
trations of glutamate (6.78%), serine (1.66%), histidine
(3.55%), tyrosine (2.23%), and tryptophan (0.37%); and
higher concentrations of aspartate (12.2%), arginine
(7.48%), proline (13.1%), isoleucine (6.07%), and leucine
(15.3%) compared with dromedary meat (6.78, 7.49, 3.10,
6.09, 5.34, 0.52, 7.93, 5.80, 9.65, 4.91, and 11.7%, respective-
ly) (Raiymbek et al. 2015). Additionally, Bactrian camel meat
contains higher levels of methionine, leucine, and aspartate
compared with other species such as those from beef cattle
(2.20, 8.50, and 8.90%, respectively), lambs (2.40, 7.20, and
8.60%, respectively), and pigs (2.60, 7.60, and 8.80%, respec-
tively) (Ahmad et al. 2018).
Regarding the fatty acid (FA) profile, polyunsaturated fatty
acid (PUFA) levels are lower in Bactrian camel meat (9.60%)
compared with dromedary camel meat (17.7%), while similar
monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA) levels have been
Fig. 2 Domestic Bactrian camel
(Kazakhstan)
Trop Anim Health Prod

described for Bactrian and dromedary camels (35.4 and
37.9%, respectively) (Raiymbek et al. 2019). Specifically,
Bactrian camel meat contains lower levels of palmitic acid
(26.9%) and palmitoleic acid (3.20%) and higher levels of
myristic (8.60%), oleic (29.8%), and linoleic acid (10.0%)
than dromedary camel meat (29.0, 8.60, 8.10, 26.7, and
7.50%, respectively) (Raiymbek et al. 2019). In addition, cho-
lesterol concentrations in Bactrian camel meat are slightly
higher (0.54 g/kg) than those from dromedary camel meat
(0.49 g/kg). Compared with other livestock species, meat from
Bactrian camels contains higher levels of palmitic acid and
lower levels of oleic acid compared with meat from beef cattle
(25.0 and 36.1%, respectively), lambs (22.2 and 32.7%, re-
spectively), and pigs (23.2 and 32.8%, respectively). Linoleic
acid levels in meat from Bactrian camels are lower than those
from beef cattle and lambs (2.40 and 2.70%, respectively) and
higher than those from pigs (14.2%) (Wood et al. 2004).
Dairy production perspectives
In 2017, Bactrian camels produced about 21,000 tons of milk
(FAOstat 2019). While the Bactrian camel population repre-
sents 2.70% of the total amount of Old World camels world-
wide, milk production from these camels only represents
1.80% of the total milk produced by Old World camels.
Milk yield in Bactrian camels differs among countries. For
instance, Bactrian camels yield about 300 kg (17-month
lactation) in Mongolia (Saipolda 2004), being 2 to 4 kg/day
the highest milk yield in the lactation peak (Indra et al. 2003).
In China, Bactrian camels yield 0.25 to 1.50 kg/day in addi-
tion to the milk consumed by the calf (Zhang et al. 2005),
which represents about 645 kg per lactation (Surong 2019).
Higher milk yields have been recorded in those Bactrian
camels raised in Kazakhstan (850–1700 kg; Baimukanov
et al. 2017) and Russia (1827 kg; Indra et al. 2003).
However, milk yield in Bactrian camels is lower than drome-
dary camels. In a recent study, Baimukanov et al. (2017)de-
scribed lower milk yields in Bactrian camels (1270 kg/year)
than dromedary camels (3601 kg/year). Hybridization be-
tween Bactrian and dromedary camels is commonly per-
formed in these countries to increase milk yields from camels
(Faye and Konuspayeva 2012). For instance, Baimukanov
et al. (2017) described how milk production in Bactrian and
dromedary hybrids ranged from 2251 to 2927 kg/year.
Despite low milk yields, consumption of Bactrian camel
milk is prevalent in Central Asia (Accolas et al. 1978;
Konuspayeva and Faye 2011). Regarding the nutritive aspects
of Bactrian camel milk, Faye et al. (2008) showed that
Bactrian camel milk contains 6.67% fat, which is similar to
the fat content in sheep milk from sheep (6.39%) and higher
than the fat content in goat and cow milk (4.47 and 3.26%,
respectively) (Hernández-Castellano et al. 2016). The fatty
acid profile of Bactrian camel milk is characterized by caprylic
(0.53%), lauric (1.24%) myristic (15.4%), iso-heptadecanoic
(0.55%), and oleic (18.8%) acids (Konuspayeva et al. 2008).
Compared with other species, milk from Bactrian camels con-
tains lower caprylic and lauric acids compared with milk from
goats (2.92 and 4.52%, respectively), sheep (1.87 and 3.99%,
respectively), and cows (1.39 and 3.64%, respectively).
However, oleic levels in milk from Bactrian camels are similar
to those found in milk from goats (18.7%) and lower to those
found in milk from sheep and cows (20.2 and 22.4%, respec-
tively) (Markiewicz-Keszycka et al. 2013). Cholesterol con-
centrations in milk from Bactrian camels are higher
(0.37 mg/kg) (Konuspayeva et al. 2008) than in cow milk
(0.81 mg/kg) (Faye 2015). In addition, Faye et al. (2008)
showed that Bactrian camel milk contains high concentrations
of vitamin C (0.18 g/L), calcium (1.30 g/L), and phosphorus
(1.07 g/L).
Hair fiber production perspectives
Besides its use for working (i.e., pulling and carrying heavy
goods) or sportive activities (i.e., races), Bactrian camels are
also reared for hair fiber production, especially in Mongolia
and China (Chapman 1991). Hair fiber from Bactrian camels
is very thin fine (20–23 μm), similar to that of merino wool,
and it is considered a high-quality natural fiber. One of the
main Bactrian camel breeds used for hair fiber production is
the Alxa Bactrian camel (China), with a production of hair
fiber about 5–6 kg in females and up to 12.5 kg in males.
Hair fiber from this breed is characterized by long and strong
fiber and light color (Surong 2019). In recent years, produc-
tion of hair fiber from Bactrian camels has been considerably
increased due to high demand by Europe and North America
(Faye 2015).
Dromedary camels
Dromedary camels (Fig. 3) represent 95% of all Old World
camels (Faraz et al. 2019). Most dromedary camels are dis-
tributed in the Horn of Africa, the Middle East, Pakistan,
India, and the harsh and arid areas of North and West Africa.
Dromedary camels are used for meat, milk, and hair fiber
production as well as for transportation and agriculture labors
(Faraz et al. 2013).
Meat production perspectives
Dromedary camels’capability to use low-quality feeds has
made them one of the main animal protein sources in several
tropical countries (Faraz et al. 2019; Hernández-Castellano
et al. 2019). Based on its importance, several studies have
focused on dromedary camel meat quality and composition
(Kadim et al. 2008; Kadim et al. 2014). Dromedary camel
Trop Anim Health Prod

calves are born with approximately 35 kg BW; however, this
value fluctuates based on breed and region (Kadim et al.
2014). Average daily gain in dromedary camel calves is lower
than dairy calves and limited to 500 g/day. Adult dromedary
camels can weigh up to 650 kg BW (7–8 years old).
Depending on the slaughtering age, dromedary carcasses can
range from 125 to 400 kg with a carcass dressing ranging from
55 to 70% (Kadim et al. 2014).
Intramuscular fat in meat from dromedary camels ranges
from 5.20–7.00% (Dawood and Alkanhal 1995; Al-Owaimer
2000; Kadim et al. 2006). However, intramuscular fat content
is affected by animal age, and therefore higher intramuscular
fat percentages are observed in meat from 5- to 8-year-old
dromedary camels (10.5%) than from 1- to 3-year-old drom-
edary camels (4.40%). Dromedary camel meat contains more
PUFA than beef cattle (Dawood and Alkanhal 1995). As
showed by Rawdah et al. (1994), the FA profile in dromedary
camel meat is based 51.5% saturated fatty acids (SFA), 29.9%
MUFA, and 18.6% PUFA. The most abundant fatty acids in
dromedary camel meat are palmitic acid (26.0%), oleic acid
(18.9%), and linoleic acid (12.1%) (Rawdah et al. 1994). In
addition, dromedary camel meat contains lower cholesterol
(0.50 g/kg) than other livestock species such as beef cattle
(0.59 g/kg), sheep (0.71 g/kg), and goat (0.63 g/kg) (El-
Magoli et al. 1973; Kadim et al. 2008; Kadim et al. 2013).
Meat protein content in dromedary camel is similar to beef
cattle (22.7 and 22.5%, respectively; Ahmadpour et al. 2014).
Among the essential amino acids, lysine and leucine are the
most abundant (8.45 and 8.41 g/16 g N, respectively) and
methionine the less abundant (2.41 g/16 g N; Dawood and
Alkanhal 1995).Similarvalueshavebeenreportedforbuffalo
meat (Ziauddin et al. 1994).
Based on these facts, dromedary camel meat is considered
a healthy animal meat source (Schönfeldt and Gibson 2008)
and its consumption might reduce the risk of suffering athero-
sclerosis, obesity, and hypercholesterolemia, and decline the
risk of cancer (Chizzolini et al. 1999).
Dairy production perspectives
Among domestic animals, dromedary camels need to over-
come extreme climate conditions for generation and preserva-
tion of the offspring. Nourishing young calves in harsh cli-
mate conditions characterized by feed and water scarcity has
increased the research interest on camel milk biosynthesis and
composition.
Despite milk production in dromedary camels being low,
this milk is extremely important in arid places, being an ex-
cellent source of proteins for humans living in such areas
(Konuspayeva et al. 2009). Average dromedary milk yield is
not very consistent and rarely exceeds 25 kg/day (Nagy and
Juhasz 2016). The absence of genetic selection, lack of uni-
form milking method, and use of traditional rearing systems
are some of the factors that affect the wide variation among
animals (Wernery et al. 2004; Wernery 2006; Wernery et al.
2006).
Dromedary camels have longer lactation periods than dairy
cows, and they may last up to 24 months (Yagil and Yagil
2000; Wernery 2006). In the last 20 years, milking machines
specifically designed for dromedary camels have caused in-
creased milk yield as well as improved milk hygiene (Wernery
2006; Wernery et al. 2006; Ayadi et al. 2018). Based on a
meta-analysis published by Konuspayeva et al. (2009), drom-
edary camel milk contains on average 3.35% protein, 3.82%
Fig. 3 Dromedary camel (Iran)
Trop Anim Health Prod

fat, 4.46% lactose, 0.79% ash, and 12.5% dry matter.
Interestingly, water content in dromedary camel milk is simi-
lar to human milk (Wernery 2006; Zibaee et al. 2015), and
remains constant under extreme heat-stress conditions
(Wernery 2006;AlhajandAlKanhal2010). However, there
are other factors such as physiological stage, feeding condi-
tions, milk yield, genetic and/or health status that may affect
milk quality and composition in dromedary camels (Musaad
et al. 2013).
Milk proteins are considered one of the main allergens for
humans (Rona et al. 2007; Vargas-Bello-Perez et al. 2019).
For instance, β-casein, β-lactoglobulin, lactoferrin, and im-
munoglobulins from cow milk are common allergens for in-
fants (Khalesi et al. 2017;Matietal.2017). Dromedary camel
milk is characterized by reduced β-caseins content and the
absence of β-lactoglobulin, which contributes to the reduced
allergy in dromedary camel milk consumers (Konuspayeva
et al. 2009). Ehlayel et al. (2011) showed 80% children (6–
12 months old) with cow milk allergy showing no allergy to
camel milk.
Regarding fatty acids, dromedary camel milk is character-
ized by reduced short-chain FA and increased long-chain FA
compared with cow milk (Zibaee et al. 2015). Thus, the high
content of PUFA (5.60%) and MUFA (39.9%) in dromedary
camel milk contributes to enhance the positive effects on hu-
man health (Narmuratova et al. 2006; Konuspayeva et al.
2008). The main fatty acids present in dromedary camel milk
are oleic (28.4%), palmitic (21.2%), stearic (13.8%), and
myristic (12.1%), respectively. Dromedary camel milk is also
rich in both lipo- and hydro-soluble vitamins, such as vitamin
A, E, D, B, and C (Kumar et al. 2015; Zibaee et al. 2015). For
instance, dromedary camel milk contains 34.2 mg/L of vita-
min C, being this concentration 3 to 5 times higher than in
milk from dairy cows (Stahl et al. 2006). In addition, drome-
dary camel milk contains higher insulin concentrations
(52.0 U/L) than cow milk (16.3 U/L) (Singh 2001). Based
on this fact, Agrawal et al. (2005) suggested that consumption
of dromedary camel milk could have beneficial effects in pa-
tients suffering diabetes (type II). Besides its nutritional prop-
erties, dromedary camel milk also contains antibacterial and
antiviral enzymes such as lactoferrin, lactoperoxidase, ca-
seins, peptidoglycan recognition protein, N-acetyl-
glucosaminidase, lysozymes, and immunoglobulins (Kumar
et al. 2016).
Hair fiber production perspectives
Hair fiber is another valuable product obtained from drome-
dary camels. Although all other camelids produce higher qual-
ity hair fiber than dromedary camels, hair fiber from drome-
dary camels is highly appreciated by consumers because of its
luster, softness, warmth, and natural color (Sharma and Pant
2013). However, these characteristics are affected by age as
young dromedaries produce thinner and softer hair fiber than
adults. Dromedary camel hair fiber is mainly used for clothes,
veils, carpets, and blankets (Yam and Khomeiri 2015). In ad-
dition to hair fiber, dromedary camels provide long hair, com-
monly used for clothes manufacturing.
South American camelids
South American camelids (SAC) are widely distributed in
South America, being alpacas (Lama pacos; Fig. 4a), llamas
(Lama glama;Fig.4b), and vicuñas (Vicugna vicugna;
Fig. 5a) distributed from Ecuador to northern Argentina and
Chile, while guanacos (Lama guanicoe; Fig. 5b) are found
from southern Peru and Paraguay to Argentina and Chile
(Saeed et al. 2018). In addition, animal production systems
in the Peruvian and Bolivian Altiplano are mostly based on
llamas and alpacas (Fernández-Baca 2005).
South American camels have exceptional physiological
characteristics that allow them to adapt to adverse environ-
ments (Gerken 2010). Due to the adaptability to the environ-
ment, they have been raised as livestock species for meat,
milk, and fiber production.
Meat production perspectives
Meat from llamas and alpacas is one of the major protein
sources for Andean rural communities (Perez et al. 2000).
Llama and alpaca meat is rich in iron and zinc (32.6 and
44.4 mg/kg, respectively) (Polidori et al. 2007). In addition,
meat from llamas and alpacas is low in fat (0.49 and 2.05%,
respectively) and cholesterol (0.51 to 0.56 g/kg, respectively),
especially if compared with meat from other livestock species
(Cristofanelli et al. 2004). Moreover, meat from alpacas con-
tains 51 g SFA/100 g of total intramuscular fat and 2.05 g n−3
fatty acids/100 g of total intramuscular fat (Salva et al. 2009).
These facts are particularly attractive for local and internation-
al markets, representing a substantial income for small- and
medium-scale local producers (Mamani-Linares and Gallo
2014). Technological quality parameters such as carcass pH
and temperature, drip loss, thawing loss, expressible juice,
total cooking loss, evaporating cooking loss, and cooking drip
loss in alpaca and llama meat are similar to those reported for
conventional meats (Salva et al. 2009; Mamani-Linares and
Gallo 2014). Several studies performed in Australia have re-
ported that alpaca carcasses have low fat covering which
makes these carcasses susceptible to cold-induced shortening
during processing (Smith et al. 2015). Therefore, these car-
casses are commonly aged up to 10 days and electro stimulat-
ed to improve tenderness.
Interestingly, slaughtering age and gender do not affect
alpaca meat color. Thus, meat from these animals has
unique color characteristics. According to the CIELab
Trop Anim Health Prod

system, alpaca meat has a characteristic color (L* 38.3; a*
11.7 and b* −0.78), which could be used to detect frauds,
especially in markets with meat from multiple species
(Smith et al. 2016). Based on the above-mentioned facts,
SAC meat production has a high growth potential in the
near future (Smith et al. 2019).
One of the main limitations for the production and com-
mercialization of meat from SAC is the presence of macro-
scopic Sarcocystis aucheniae cysts (1–5 mm cysts), which
leads to carcass refusal by the sanitary authorities and/or de-
valuation of its commercial value (Franco et al. 2018).
Consumption of infected raw or undercooked meat can
Fig. 5 Vicuña (A1 and A2;
Ecuador) and guanaco (B1 and
B2; Chile)
Fig. 4 Alpaca (A1 and A2; Chile)
and llama (B1 and B2; Ecuador)
Trop Anim Health Prod

furthermore cause foodborne illness to the consumers in the
form of gastroenteritis and diarrhea (Franco et al. 2018). This
is therefore an important issue to address in order to increase
the value and importance of this meat in the Andean markets.
Cristofanelli et al. (2004) suggested that improving breed-
ing systems of SAC would be a suitable strategy to stimulate
the economy in the Andean regions. These authors reported
that compared with alpaca, llama has higher BW (46 vs. 63 kg
at 25 months of age, respectively), warm carcass weight (24
vs. 31 kg, respectively), cold carcass weight (23 vs. 30 kg,
respectively), carcass length (71 vs. 130 cm, respectively),
length of hind leg (70 vs. 75 cm, respectively), and length of
front leg (60 vs. 68 cm, respectively). Therefore, llama seems
to be better suited for meat production in the Andean countries
than alpacas. Accordingly, alpaca production systems should
focus on fiber, and then use animals that need to be replaced
for meat production.
Hence, SAC meat production should be promoted at the
local South American markets as an alternative product in
pastoral systems with limited growth potential. This is of par-
ticular importance in high-altitude regions where conventional
livestock species such as cattle or sheep cannot cope so well.
In the rest of the World (excluding Australia), SAC are used as
pets, and consequently, meat consumption from these animals
is not expected to grow significantly in the future.
Dairy production perspectives
Milk yields in SAC are very low compared with dairy cows
(Larico-Medina et al. 2018). However, milk from SAC con-
tains higher protein, fat, and lactose levels than cow milk,
which makes this type of milk very interesting for dairy prod-
ucts manufacturing. Alpaca milk has on average 3.68% fat,
4.53% protein, and 6.00% lactose contents (Chad et al. 2014),
while llama milk has on average 4.70% fat, 4.23% protein,
5.93% lactose contents (Riek and Gerken 2006). Similarly,
vicuña milk contains 4.8% fat, 4.30% protein, and 7.05%
lactose while guanaco milk has 5.50% fat, 5.00% protein,
and 5.44% lactose (Medina et al. 2019).
Regarding fatty acid profile in milk from SAC, Medina
et al. (2019) found that all of them contain less than 1% of
short-chain fatty acids. Within SFA, palmitic acid was the
most abundant (> 25%), followed by stearic acid (> 10%)
and myristic acid (> 10%) in all SAC species. Interestingly,
levels of rumenic acid, also known as conjugated linoleic acid,
in milk from these species range from 1.05–1.64%. Rumenic
acid is a unique FA that can only be found in both milk and
meat from ruminants. This fatty acid has received particular
attention due to the positive effects on human health (Vargas-
Bello-Perez and Larrain 2017). Despite the studies mentioned
above, data on the nutritional quality of SAC milk is scarce.
Due to its potential as an alternative to cow milk, researchers
should focus on describing the nutritional properties of SAC
milk and its impact on human health (Pauciullo and Erhardt
2015).
Hair fiber production perspectives
In SAC, hair fiber harvesting does not require advanced tech-
nology. This fact makes that fiber production represents one of
the main economic incomes in productive systems with low
primary productivity, such as the Andean highlands and
Patagonia (Lichtenstein and Vila 2003). Domestic SAC, espe-
cially alpacas, have a wide variety of coat colors, which makes
the species valuable for fiber production. Among all possible
colors, white is the most valuable for the industry.
Consequently, current breeding strategies are focused on
selecting those animals producing white fibers (Anello et al.
2019).
Fiber production from SAC is focused on alpacas, with also
some relevant fiber production from Guanacos and Vicuñas.
There are several factors such as age, breed, and fiber color
that affect fiber diameter (higher in darker fleece) (McGregor
and Butler 2004). For instance, llama fiber can be classified as
baby (< 19 μm; 4.60% of the total production), super thin (19–
21.9 μm; 43.4% of the total production), thin (22–24.9 μm;
35.8% of the total production), medium (25–29 μm; 13.6% of
the total production), and thick (> 30 μm; 2.60% of the total
production) in Argentina (Frank et al. 2006). In New Zealand
and Australia, the diameter of alpaca hair fiber ranges from
28.0 to 31.9 μm and from 17.7 to 46.6 μm, respectively
(Wuliji et al. 2000; McGregor and Butler 2004).
The main limitations of fiber production in these species
are the length of the wick and the presence of a double fiber
layer. Consequently, it is necessary to perform a dehairing
fleece processing which causes around 45% production losses
(Frank et al. 2006). This fact requires actions to improve in-
dustrial processing and to optimize harvest and selection of
the fleece to minimize losses due to fiber processing (Frank
et al. 2006).
Concluding remarks
Camelids are among the most adaptable domestic animals.
Indeed, these animals are well adapted to harsh ecosystems
such as the African, Asian, or Australian deserts (dromedary
camels), the central Asian plains and deserts (Bactrian camels)
or the Andean mountains and the Altiplano plateaus (SAC). In
such regions, these animals are essential for the economy and
food security of local populations.
In the near future, climate change might decrease agricul-
tural areas for animal production worldwide. In these condi-
tions, extensive animal production would have to be limited to
some extent to semi-arid rangelands. In such regions, camels
will become an important protein source for humans.
Trop Anim Health Prod

Furthermore, their adaptation traits would lead to more sus-
tainable animal production systems with reduced greenhouse
gas emissions compared with conventional livestock species
and fewer needs for animal production inputs such as infra-
structures, water, and feed supplementation during feed scar-
city periods. In this review, we have focused on the major
aspects related to meat, milk, and fiber production in the four
domestic camel species (i.e., Bactrian camel, dromedary cam-
el, llama, and alpaca) as they will become important players in
the international animal production context.
Acknowledgments Authors acknowledge Mariana Castro (Instituto
Superior de Agronomia, Lisbon University, Portugal) for the graphical
work in Fig. 1, as well as Antonio Morales-delaNuez (Consejo Superior
de Investigaciones Científicas, Spain) for kindly providing pictures in
Figs. 4b1, 4b2, 5a1, and 5a2.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
References
Accolas, J.P., Deffontaines, J.P., and Aubin, F., 1978. Le lait et les
produits laitiers en République Populaire de Mongolie, Le lait,
575-576, 278–286
Agrawal, R.P. et al., 2005. Camel milk as an adjunct to insulin therapy
improves long-term glycemic control and reduction in doses of in-
sulin in patients with type-1 diabetes A 1 year randomized con-
trolled trial, Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, 68, 176–177
Ahmad, R.S., Imran, A., and Hussain, M.B., 2018. Nutritional
Composition of Meat. In: M.S. Arshad (ed), Meat Science and
Nutrition, 2018, (IntechOpen, Pakistan), 61–77
Ahmadpour, A. et al., 2014. Comparison of the quality and chemical
composition of camel meat and beef, Proceedings of the 6th
Iranian Animal Science Congress Tabriz, Iran, 2014.
Al haj, O.A., and Al Kanhal, H.A., 2010. Compositional, technological
and nutritional aspects ofdromedary camel milk, International Dairy
Journal, 20, 811–821
Alhidary, I.A., Alsofi, M.A., Abdoun, K.A., Samara, E.M., Okab, A.B.,
and Al-Haidary, A.A., 2018. Influence of dietary chromium yeast
supplementation on apparent trace elements metabolism in growing
camel (Camelus dromedarius) reared under hot summer conditions,
Tropical Animal Health and Production, 50, 519–524
Al-Owaimer, A.N., 2000. Effect of dietary Halophyte Salicornia bigelovii
Torr on carcass characteristics, minerals, fatty acids and amino acids
profile of camel meat, Journal of Applied Animal Research, 18,
185–192
Anello, M., Daverio, M.S., Silbestro, M.B., Vidal-Rioja, L., and Di
Rocco, F., 2019. Characterization and expression analysis of KIT
and MITF-M genes in llamas and their relation to white coat color,
Animal Genetics, 50, 143–149
Ayadi, M., Musaad, A., Aljumaah, R.S., Matar, A., Konuspayeva, G.,
Abdelrahman, M.M., Abid, I., Bengoumi, M., and Faye, B., 2018.
Machine milking parameters for an efficient and healthy milking in
dairy camels (Camelus dromedarius), Journal of Camel Practice and
Research, 25, 81–87
Baimukanov, D., Akimebekov, A., Omarov, M., Ishan, K., Aubakirov,
K., and Tlepov, A., 2017. Productive and biological features of
Camelus bactrianus-Camelus dromedarius in conditions of
Kazakhstan, Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias, 89, 2058–
2073
Burger, P.A., Ciani, E., and Faye, B., 2019. Old World camels in a modern
world - a balancing act between conservation and genetic improve-
ment, Animal Genetics, IN PRESS. https://doi.org/10.1111/age.
12858
Chad, E.K., DePeters, E.J., Puschner, B., Taylor, S.J., and Robison, J.,
2014. Preliminary investigation of the composition of alpaca
(Vicugna pacos) milk in California, Small Ruminant Research,
117, 165–168
Chapman, M.J., 1991. Camels, Biologist, 38, 41–44
Chizzolini, R., Zanardi, E., Dorigoni, V., and Ghidini, S., 1999. Calorific
value and cholesterol content of normal and low-fat meat and meat
products, Trends in Food Science Technology, 10, 119–128
Cobos, A., and Díaz, O., 2015. Chemical Composition of Meat and Meat
Products. In: P.C.K. Cheung (ed), Handbook of Food Chemistry,
2015, (Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin, Heidelberg), 1–32
Cristofanelli, S., Antonini, M., Torres, D., Polidori, P., and Renieri, C.,
2004. Meat and carcass quality from Peruvian llama (Lama glama)
and alpaca (Lama pacos), Meat Science, 66, 589–593
Dawood, A.A., and Alkanhal, M.A., 1995. Nutrient composition of
Najdi-camel meat, Meat Science, 39, 71–78
Dehority, B.A., 2002. Gastrointestinal tracts of herbivores, particularly
the ruminant: Anatomy, physiology and microbial digestion of
plants, Journal of Applied Animal Research, 21, 145–160
Ehlayel, M., Bener, A., Abu Hazeima, K., and Al-Mesaifri, F., 2011.
Camel milk is a safer choice than goat milk for feeding children
with cow milk allergy, ISRN Allergy, 2011, 391641
El-Magoli, S.B., Awad, A.A., and El-Wakeil, F.A., 1973. Intramuscular
lipid chemistry of beef and camel Longissimus dorsi muscle,
Egyptian Journal of Food Science, 1, 75–84
FAOstat 2019. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home
Faraz, A., Mustafa, M.I., Lateef, M., Yaqoob, M., and Muhammad, Y.,
2013. Production potential of camel and its prospects in Pakistan,
Punjab University Journal of Zoology, 28, 89–95
Faraz, A., Waheed, A., Mirza, R.H., and Ishaq, H.M., 2019. The camel-a
short communication on classification and attributes, Journal of
Fisheries and Livestock Production 7, 289
Faye, B., 2015. Role, distribution and perspective of camel breeding in
the third millennium economies, Emirates Journal of Food and
Agriculture, 27, 318–327
Faye, B., and Konuspayeva, G., 2012. The sustainability challenge to the
dairy sector- The growing importance of non-cattle milk production
worldwide, International Dairy Journal, 24, 50–56
Faye, B., Konuspayeva, G., Messad, S., and Loiseau, G., 2008.
Discriminant milk components of Bactrian camel (Camelus
bactrianus), dromedary (Camelus dromedarius) and hybrids, Dairy
Science and Technology, 88, 607–617
Fernández-Baca, S., 2005. Situación actual de los camélidos
sudamericanos en Perú, Regional TCP project TCP/RLA/2914
“Support to the breeding and utilization of South American
Camelids in the Andean Region”. In: F. University Cayetano
Heredia and CONACS of Perú (ed. FAO, Rome, Italy)
Franco, C.D., Romero, S., Ferrari, A., Schnittger, L., and Florin-
Christensen, M., 2018. Detection of Sarcocystis aucheniae in blood
of llama using a duplex semi-nested PCR assay and its association
with cyst infestation, Heliyon, 4, e00928
Frank, E.N., Hick, M.V.H., Gauna, C.D., Lamas, H.E., Renieri, C., and
Antonini, M., 2006. Phenotypic and genetic description of fibre
traits in South American domestic camelids (llamas and alpacas),
Small Ruminant Research, 61, 113–129
Gerken, M., 2010. Relationships between integumental characteristics
and thermoregulation in South American camelids, Animal, 4,
1451–1459
Trop Anim Health Prod

Hernández-Castellano, L.E., Morales-delaNuez, A., Moreno-Indias, I.,
Torres, A., Sánchez-Macías, D., Capote, J., Castro, N., and
Argüello, A., 2013. Carcass and meat quality determination as a tool
to promote local meat consumption in outermost regions of Europe,
Journal of Applied Animal Research, 41, 269–276
Hernández-Castellano, L.E., Almeida, A.M., Renaut, J., Arguello, A.,
and Castro, N., 2016. A proteomics study of colostrum and milk
from the two major small ruminant dairy breeds from the Canary
Islands: a bovine milk comparison perspective, Journal of Dairy
Research, 83, 366–374
Hernández-Castellano, L.E., Nally, J.E., Lindahl, J., Wanapat, M.,
Alhidary, I.A., Fangueiro, D., Grace, D., Ratto, M., Bambou, J.C.,
and de Almeida, A.M., 2019. Dairy science and health in the tropics:
challenges and opportunities for the next decades, Tropical Animal
Health and Production, 51, 1009–1017
Hoter, A., Rizk, S., and Naim, H.Y., 2019. Cellular and Molecular
Adaptation of Arabian Camel to Heat Stress, Frontiers in Genetics,
10, 588
Imamura, K., Salmurzauli, R., Iklasov, M.K., Baibayssov, A., Matsui, K.,
and Nurtazin, S.T., 2017. The distribution of the two domestic camel
species in Kazakhstan caused by the demand of industrial
stockbreeding, Journal of Arid Land Studies, 26, 233–236
Indra, P., Maratch, A., and Batsoor, L., 2003. Mongol camel, (Mongolian
State Univ. Agric. Publ.)
Jiménez, P., Evelyn, C., Martín Espada, C., and Cid Vázquez, M.D.,
2010. South American Camelids: Classification, Origin and
Characteristics Revista Complutense de Ciencias Veterinarias, 4,
23–36
Kadim, I.T., Mahgoub, O., Al-Kindi, A., Al-Marzooqi, W., and Al-Saqri,
N.M., 2006. Effects of transportation at high ambient temperatures
on physiological responses, carcass and meat quality characteristics
of three breeds of Omani goats, Meat Science, 73, 626–634
Kadim, I.T., Mahgoub, O., and Purchas, R.W., 2008. A review of the
growth, and of the carcass and meat quality characteristics of the
one-humped camel (Camelus dromedaries), Meat Science, 80, 555–
569
Kadim, I.T., Al-Karousi, A., Mahgoub, O., Al-Marzooqi, W., Khalaf,
S.K., Al-Maqbali, R.S., Al-Sinani, S.S.H., and Raiymbek, G.,
2013. Chemical composition, quality and histochemical characteris-
tics of individual dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) muscles,
Meat Science, 93, 564–571
Kadim, I.T., Mahgoub, O., and Mbaga, M., 2014. Potential of camel meat
as a non-traditional high quality source of protein for human con-
sumption, Animal Frontiers, 4, 13–17
Khalesi, M., Salami, M., Moslehishad, M., Winterburn, J., and Moosavi-
Movahedi, A.A., 2017. Biomolecular content of camel milk: A tra-
ditional superfood towards future healthcare industry, Trends in
Food Science and Technology, 62, 49–58
Konuspayeva, G., and Faye, B., 2011. Identité, vertus thérapeutiques
et allégation santé : les produits fermentés d’Asie Centrale. In:
C.C.d.l.d. Monde (ed), Les cahiers de l’OCHA 2011, Pari s,
France), 135-145
Konuspayeva, G., Lemarie, E., Faye, B., Loiseau, G., and Montet, D.,
2008. Fatty acid and cholesterol composition of camel's (Camelus
bactrianus, Camelus dromedarius and hybrids) milk in Kazakhstan,
Dairy Science and Technology, 88, 327–340
Konuspayeva, G., Faye, B., and Loiseau, G., 2009. The composition of
camel milk: A meta-analysis of the literature data, Journal of Food
and Composition Analysis, 22, 95–101
Kumar, Y.K., Rakesh, K., Lakshmi, P., and Jitendra, S., 2015.
Composition and medicinal properties of camel milk: a review,
Asian Journal of Dairy and Food Research, 34, 83–93
Kumar, D., Chatli, M.K., Singh, R., Mehta, N., and Kumar, P., 2016.
Antioxidant and antimicrobial activity of camel milk casein hydro-
lysates and its fractions, Small Ruminant Research, 139, 20–25
Larico-Medina, H., Fernández-Ruelas, E., Rodrigo-Vargas, Y., Machaca-
Ticona, P., Roque-Huanca, B., Sumari-Machaca, R., Chui-Betancur,
H., and Olarte-Daza, C., 2018. Queso de leche de alpaca: una nueva
alternativa, Revista de Investigaciones Veterinarias del Perú, 29,
848–857
Lichtenstein, G., and Vila, B., 2003. Vicuna use by Andean communities:
An overview, Mountain Research and Development, 23, 197–201
Mamani-Linares, L.W., and Gallo, C.B., 2014. Meat quality, proximate
composition and muscle fatty acid profile of young llamas (Lama
glama) supplemented with hay or concentrate during the dry season,
Meat Science, 96, 394–399
Manee, M.M., Alshehri, M.A., Binghadir, S.A., Aldhafer, S.H.,
Alswailem, R.M., Algarni, A.T., AL-Shomrani, B.M., and AL-
Fageeh, M.B., 2019. Comparative analysis of camelid mitochondri-
al genomes, Journal of Genetics, 98, 88
Markiewicz-Keszycka, M., Czyżak-Runowska, G., Lipińska, P., and
Wójtowski, J., 2013. Fatty acid profile of milk - A review,
Bulletin- Veterinary Institute in Pulawy, 57, 135
Mati, V.L.T., Bicalho, R.S., and Melo, A.L., 2017. Exploring possibilities
for an alternative approach in experimental schistosomiasis
mansoni: the peritoneal cavity of mice, Acta Parasitologica, 62,
178–187
McGregor, B.A., and Butler, K.L., 2004. Sources of variation in fibre
diameter attributes of Australian alpacas and implications for fleece
evaluation and animal selection, Australian Journal of Agricultural
Research, 55, 433–442
Medina, M.A., Van Nieuwenhove, G.A., Pizarro, P.L., and Van
Nieuwenhove, C.P., 2019. Comparison of the nutritional value and
fatty acid composition of milk from four South American camelid
species, Canadian Journal of Zoology, 97, 203–209
Moussaiev, Z., Torekhanov, A., and Seidalyev, B., 2007. Camel farming
[in Kazakh], Bastaou Pub, Almaty (Kazakhstan), 126 p. (ISBN
9965-413-72-X)
Musaad, A.M., Faye, B., and Al-Mutairi, S.E., 2013. Seasonal and phys-
iological variation of gross composition of camel milk in Saudi
Arabia, Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture, 25, 618–624
Nagy, P., and Juhasz, J., 2016. Review of present knowledge on machine
milking and intensive milk production in dromedary camels and
future challenges, Tropical Animal Health and Production, 48,
915–926
Narmuratova, M., Konuspayeva, G., Loiseau, G., Serikbaeva, A.,
Barouh, N.,Montet, D., and Faye, B., 2006. Fatty acidscomposition
of dromedary and bactrian camel milk in Kazakhstan, Journal of
Camel Practice and Research, 88, 327–340
Pauciullo, A., and Erhardt, G., 2015. Molecular Characterization of the
Llamas (Lama glama) Casein Cluster Genes Transcripts (CSN1S1,
CSN2, CSN1S2, CSN3) and Regulatory Regions, Plos One, 10,
e0124963
Payne, W.J.A., and Wilson, R.T., 1999. An introduction to animal hus-
bandry in the tropics, (Blackwell Science, Oxford Oxfordshire;
Malden, MA)
Perez, P., Maino, M., Guzman, R., Vaquero, A., Kobrich, C., and
Pokniak, J., 2000. Carcass characteristics of llamas (Lama glama)
reared in Central Chile, Small Ruminant Research, 37, 93–97
Polidori, P., Renieri, C., Antonini, M., Passamonti, P., and Pucciarelli, F.,
2007. Meat fatty acid composition of llama (Lama glama) reared in
the Andean highlands, Meat Science, 75, 356–358
Raiymbek, G., Kadim, I., Konuspayeva, G., Mahgoub, O., Serikbayeva,
A., and Faye, B., 2015. Discriminant amino-acid components of
Bactrian (Camelus bactrianus) and Dromedary (Camelus
dromedarius) meat, Journal of Food and Composition Analysis,
41, 194–200
Raiymbek, G., Kadim, I., Al-Amri Issa, S., Alkindi Abdulaziz, Y., Faye,
B., Khalf, S.K., Kenenbay, S.I., and Purchas, R.W., 2018.
Concentrations of nutrients in six muscles of Bactrian Camelus
Trop Anim Health Prod

bactrianus camels, Journal of Camel Practice and Research, 25,
109–121
Raiymbek, G., Faye, B., Kadim, I.T., Serikbaeva, A., and Konuspayeva,
G., 2019. Comparative fatty acids composition and cholesterol con-
tent in Bactrian (Camelus bactrianus) and dromedary camel
(Camelus dromedarius) meat, Tropical Animal Health and
Production, 51, 2025–2035
Rawdah, T.N., Elfaer, M.Z., and Koreish, S.A., 1994. Fatty-Acid
Composition of the Meat and Fat of the One-Humped Camel
(Camelus-Dromedarius), Meat Science, 37, 149–155
Riek, A., and Gerken, M., 2006. Changes in Llama (Lama glama) milk
composition during lactation, Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 3484–
3493
Rona, R.J., Keil, T., Summers, C., Gislason, D., Zuidmeer, L., Sodergren,
E., Sigurdardottir, S.T., Lindner, T., Goldhahn, K., Dahlstrom, J.,
McBride, D., and Madsen, C., 2007. The prevalence of food allergy:
A meta-analysis, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 120,
638–646
Saeed, M.A., Rashid, M.H., Vaughan, J., and Jabbar, A., 2018.
Sarcocystosis in South American camelids: The state of play
revisited, Parasites and Vectors, 11, 146
Saipolda, T.,2004. Mongolian camels. In:R. Cardellino, A. Rosati and C.
Mosconi (eds), Current Status of Genetic Resources, Recording and
Production Systems in African, Asian and American Camelids,,
2004, Sousse, Tunisia,), 73–79
Salva, B.K., Zumalacarregui, J.M., Figueira, A.C., Osorio, M.T., and
Mateo, J., 2009. Nutrient composition and technological quality of
meat from alpacas reared in Peru, Meat Science, 82, 450–455
Schönfeldt, H., and Gibson, N., 2008. Changes in the nutrient quality of
meat in an obesity context, Meat science, 80, 20–27
Sharma, A.,and Pant, S., 2013. Studies on camel hair-merino wool blend-
ed knitted fabrics, Indian Journal of Fibre and Textile Research, 38,
317–319
Singh, R., 2001. Annual Report of National Research Centre on Camel.
2001, (National Research Centre on Camel:, Rajasthan, India.),
Smith, M.A., Bush, R.D., Thomson, P.C., and Hopkins, D.L., 2015.
Carcass traits and saleable meat yield of alpacas (Vicugna pacos)
in Australia, Meat Science, 107, 1–11
Smith, M.A., Bush, R.D., van de Ven, R.J., and Hopkins, D.L., 2016.
Effect of electrical stimulation and ageing period on alpaca (Vicugna
pacos) meat and eating quality, Meat Science, 111, 38–46
Smith, M.A., Nelson, C.L., Biffin, T.E., Bush, R.D., Hall, E.J.S., and
Hopkins, D.L., 2019. Vitamin E concentration in alpaca meat and
its impact on oxidative traits during retail display, Meat Science,
151, 18–23
Stahl, T., Sallmann, H.-P., Duehlmeier, R., and Wernery, U., 2006.
Selected vitamins and fatty acid patterns in dromedary milk and
colostrum, Journal of Camel Practice and Research, 13, 53–57
Surong, H., 2019. Introduction to the Bactrian camel population. 2019,
(Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Alashan, China),
Terentyev, S.M., 1975. Meat productivity. In: S.M. Terentyev (ed), Camel
rearing, 1975, (Kolos Publ., Moscow, Russia), 105-124
Vargas-Bello-Perez, E., and Larrain, R.E., 2017. Impacts of fat from ru-
minants' meat on cardiovascular health and possible strategies to
alter its lipid composition, Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture, 97, 1969–1978
Vargas-Bello-Perez, E., Marquez-Hernandez, R.I., and Hernandez-
Castellano, L.E., 2019. Bioactive peptides from milk: animal
determinants and their implications in human health, Journal of
Dairy Research, 86, 136–144
Vaughan, J.L., and Tibary, A., 2006. Reproduction in female South
American camelids: A review and clinical observations, Small
Ruminant Research, 61, 259–281
Wernery, U., 2006. Camel milk, the white gold of the desert, Journal of
Camel Practice and Research, 13, 15–26
Wernery, U., Juhasz, J., and Nagy, P., 2004. Milk yield performance of
dromedaries with an automatic bucket milking machine, Journal of
Camel Practice and Research, 11, 51–57
Wernery, U., Joseph, S., Tarello, W., and Theneyan, M., 2006. Serological
response of houbara bustards to an H5N1 vaccine, The Veterinary
Record, 158, 840
Wheeler, J.C., 1995. Evolution and Present Situation of the South-
American Camelidae, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society,
54, 271–295
Wood, J.D., Richardson, R.I., Nute, G.R., Fisher, A.V., Campo, M.M.,
Kasapidou, E., Sheard, P.R., and Enser, M., 2004. Effects of fatty
acids on meat quality: a review, Meat science, 66, 21–32
Wu, H.G., Guang, X.M., Al-Fageeh, M.B., Cao, J.W., Pan, S.K., Zhou,
H.M., Zhang, L., Abutarboush, M.H., Xing, Y.P., Xie, Z.Y.,
Alshanqeeti, A.S., Zhang, Y.R., Yao, Q.L., Al-Shomrani, B.M.,
Zhang, D., Li, J., Manee, M.M., Yang, Z.L., Yang, L.F., Liu, Y.Y.,
Zhang, J.L., Altammami, M.A., Wang, S.Y., Yu, L.L., Zhang, W.B.,
Liu, S.Y., Ba, L., Liu, C.X., Yang, X.K., Meng, F.H., Wang, S.W.,
Li, L., Li, E.L., Li, X.Q., Wu, K.F., Zhang, S., Wang, J.Y., Yin, Y.,
Yang, H.M., Al-Swailem, A.M., and Wang, J., 2014. Camelid ge-
nomes reveal evolution and adaptation to desert environments,
Nature Communications, 5,
Wuliji, Davis, Dodds, Turner, Andrews, and Bruce, 2000. Production
performance, repeatability and heritability estimates for live weight,
fleece weight and fiber characteristics of alpacas in New Zealand,
Small Ruminant Research, 37, 189–201
Yagil, Y., and Yagil, C., 2000. The lack of a modulating effect of non-
genetic factors (age, gonads and maternal environment) on the phe-
notypic expression of the salt-susceptibility genes in the Sabra rat
model of hypertension, Journal of Hypertension, 18, 1393–1399
Yam, B.A.Z., and Khomeiri, M., 2015. Introduction to Camel origin,
history, raising, characteristics, and wool, hair and skin: A Review,
Research Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Management, 4,
496–508
Zhang, H., Yao, J., Zhao, D., Liu, H., Li, J., and Guo, M., 2005. Changes
in chemical composition of Alxa bactrian camel milk during lacta-
tion, Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 3402–3410
Zhao J., Liu M. and Zhang H., 2004. Segmentation of longissimus dorsi
and marbling in ribeye imaging based on mathematical morphology,
Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 20,
144–146
Ziauddin, K.S., Mahendrakar, N.S., Rao, D.N., Ramesh, B.S., and Amla,
B.L., 1994. Observations on Some Chemical and Physical
Characteristics of Buffalo Meat, Meat Science, 37, 103–113
Zibaee, S.,Hosseini, S.M.A.-R., Yousefi, M., Taghipour, A., Kiani, M.A.,
and Noras, M.R., 2015. Nutritional and Therapeutic Characteristics
of Camel Milk in Children: A Systematic Review, Electronic
Physician, 7, 1523–1528
Publisher’snoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Trop Anim Health Prod