\documentclass[english,german]{scrartcl}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{geometry}
\geometry{verbose,a4paper,tmargin=1.75cm,bmargin=2cm,lmargin=2cm,rmargin=2cm,headheight=0.8cm,headsep=0.5cm,footskip=0.5cm}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{url}
\urlstyle{same}
\newcommand\email{\begingroup \urlstyle{same}\Url}\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{units}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{wasysym} % enable use of \permil instead of \textperthousand
\usepackage{marvosym}
\usepackage{arabtex}
\usepackage{hyphenat}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{mdwlist}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\relax}
\usepackage{index}
\newindex{key}{kdx}{knd}{Keywords}
\newindex{author}{idx}{ind}{Authors}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
\fancyfoot{}
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
%\usepackage[activate]{pdfcprot}
%\usepackage[owner=Tapioka, print=true, copy=true, edit=false, annotate=false,set]{pdfcrypt}
%encryption: not supported any more (since pdftex 1.10)
\usepackage[pdftex]{thumbpdf}
\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}
\hypersetup{pdftitle={Factors Influencing Milk Production and Quality in a Smallholder Dairy Farmers Group in Kenya},pdfauthor={Samuel Nato, Joseph Matofari, Bockline Bebe, Christian Hülsebusch},pdfsubject={Tropentag 2016: Abstract},pdfkeywords={Dairy farmer group, milk quality, smallholder dairy},pdfpagemode=None,colorlinks=true}
\else
\usepackage{ae}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\fi
\begin{document}
\ifpdf
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2016.jpg}}}
\else
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2016.eps}}}
\fi
\hfill
\parbox[b]{13.4cm}{\centering \large{\textbf{Tropentag, September 18-21, 2016, Vienna, Austria}}\\[1ex] \Large{``Solidarity in a competing world ---\\fair use of resources''\\[2ex]}}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\Large{\textbf{Factors Influencing Milk Production and Quality in a Smallholder Dairy Farmers Group in Kenya\footnote{\textbf{Contact Address:} Samuel Nato, Egerton University, Dept. of Dairy, Food Science and Technology, P.O Box 536-20115, Egerton, Kenya, \mbox{e-mail}: \email{nato@tum.ac.ke}}\\[0.8ex]}}
\normalsize{\textsc{Samuel Nato$^{1}$, Joseph Matofari$^{1}$, Bockline Bebe$^{1}$, Christian Hülsebusch$^{2}$}}
\end{center}
\begin{itemize*}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{1}$Egerton University, Dept. of Dairy, Food Science and Technology, Kenya}}}
\item[]{\small{\textit{$^{2}$German Institute for Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture (DITSL), Germany}}}
\end{itemize*}
\index[author]{Nato, Samuel}
\index[author]{Matofari, Joseph}
\index[author]{Bebe, Bockline}
\index[author]{Hülsebusch, Christian}
\begin{center}
\vspace{1.1cm}
\textbf{Abstract}
\begin{abstract}
\normalsize{
Introduction: Smallholder dairy farmers in Kenya face challenges producing quality milk for formal markets. This study determined factors influencing milk production and quality for a smallholder dairy farmer group formed in Mukinduri, Nakuru County, Kenya in the framework of a larger transdisciplinary project (BMBF GlobeE-ReLOAD). Methodology: Information on feeding, milking practices, cow characteristics that may affect milk yield and quality, and milk market outlet were collected in November 2014 (end of short rainy season). Milk samples taken at milking from 22 cows were tested for total viable counts (TVC), coliform counts (CC), butter fat (BF), protein, lactose, milk"=solids-non"=fat (MSNF), density and titratable acidity (TA). Results: All the milking persons cleaned the udder with warm water and wiped off residual water before milking and there was no significant difference in milk quality based on water source for udder cleaning. Mean TVC and CC was log10 3.42$\pm$\unitfrac[0.52]{cfu}{ml} and log10 1.38$\pm$\unitfrac[1.47]{cfu}{ml} respectively which met Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS) requirement for raw cow milk ($<$log10 \unitfrac[5.3]{cfu}{ml} TVC for grade 1 milk, and $<$log\unitfrac[103.0]{cfu}{ml} CC for very good quality milk). Mean daily milk yield per cow was 6.72$\pm$3.9 litres with a mean of 4.66$\pm$\mbox{1.33\,\%} BF, 2.99$\pm$\mbox{0.23\,\%} protein, 4.46$\pm$\mbox{0.34\,\%} lactose, 8.19$\pm$\mbox{0.64\,\%} MSNF, 1.028$\pm$\unitfrac[0.002]{g}{ml} density, and 0.18$\pm$\mbox{0.03\,\%} lactic acid (LA) equivalent. There was no association of type of feed combination with milk yield and composition. The mean BF content met the KEBS standard for raw cow milk ($>$\mbox{3.25\,\%}) but  MSNF and TA fell short of the standard ($>$\mbox{8.5\,\%} MSNF and $<$\mbox{0.17\,\%} LA equivalent). Milk yield reduced significantly with length of lactation period but BF increased significantly. However, there was no significant difference in milk quality based on market outlet.  Discussion and conclusion: Farmers' milking routine resulted in good quality milk. MSNF fell below the standard due to low protein content of the milk. This could be remedied by feeding interventions such as silage and marginal strategic feed supplementation. Time series data on milk quality throughout lactation would be useful for smallholder farmers to determine the optimum lactation period of their cows for increasing profitability and meeting KEBS standards. }

\vspace{0.5cm}
\end{abstract}
\end{center}
\noindent \textbf{Keywords:} Dairy farmer group, milk quality, smallholder dairy
\index[key]{Dairy farmer group}
\index[key]{Milk quality}
\index[key]{Smallholder!dairy}
\end{document}
