Home⇛Annals of Tropical Research⇛vol. 45 no. 2 (2023)

Digestibility of fortified sugarcane-top pellets supplemented with concentrates and Arachis pintoi leaf meal in goats

Mae Ann S. Tongol | Lolito C. Bestil

 

Abstract:

An in vivo digestibility trial was conducted to assess the digestibility of fortified sugarcane top (SCT)-based pellets supplemented with concentrates and at varying ratios. Arachis pintoi (Pinto peanut) Six female goats were randomly assigned to six different treatments: T1-concentrate at 1.25% of BW, T2-concentrate at 1.00% of BW and A. pintoi at 0.25% of BW, T3- concentrate 0.75% of BW and A. pintoi at 0.50% of BW, T4-concentrate at 0.50% of BW and A. pintoi at 0.75% of BW, T5- concentrate at 0.25% of BW + A. pintoi at 1.00% of BW and T6-A. pintoi at 1.25% of BW, all in dry matter (DM) basis. The feeding trial was repeated four times with 7 day intervals as replicates. Feed intake and fecal output were recorded and samples were analysed for dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF). Nutrient digestibility were computed and data were subjected to one-way analysis of variance for a randomized complete block design while pairwise comparison of treatment means was done using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference Test. Results show that the ratio of concentrate and A. pintoi at 0.75% and 0.50% of BW, DM basis, significantly increased the digestibility of fortified sugarcane topbased pellets in goats, thus maximizing its utilization.



References:

  1. Alemu T. 2020. Review on sheep and goat management practices, constraints, opportunities and marketing systems in Ethiopia. International Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences 5(2):144-169
  2. AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis (15th edn). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC
  3. Ben-Ghedalia D, Yosef E & Est MY. 1989. The effects of starch- and pectin-rich diets on quantitative aspects of digestion in sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology 24(3-4):289-298
  4. Bestil LC and Espina DM. 1992. DM Intake and digestibility of selected forage legumes in fresh and dried forage from some adaptable legume species. Philippine Journal of Veterinary and Animal Science 18(4):137-139
  5. Cravens WW. 1981. Plants and Animals as Protein Sources. Journal of Animal Science 53(3):817-826
  6. Coleman SW and Moore JE. 2003. Feed quality and animal performance. Field Crops Research 84(1-2):17-29
  7. Dijkstra J, Boer H, Van Bruchem J, Bruining M & Tamminga S. 1993. Production and absorption of volatile fatty acids in the Rumen. Livestock Production Science Volume 39(1):61-69
  8. Gendley MK, Singh P & Garg AK. 2002. Performance of crossbred cattle fed with chopped green sugarcane tops and supplemented with wheat bran and lentil chuni concentrates. Asian-Autralasian Journal of Animal Sciences 15(10): 1422-1427
  9. Goering HK and Van Soest PJ. 1970. Forage Fiber Analyses: Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications. Agriculture Handbook No. 379, US Agricultural Research Service, University of Virginia
  10. Kawashima T, Sumamal W, Pholsen P, Chaithiang R, Boonpakdee W, Kurihara M & Shibata M. 2002. Feeding value of sugarcane stalk for cattle. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 15(1):55-60
  11. Khamseekhiew B, Liang JB, Wong CC & Jalan ZA. 2001. Ruminal and intestinal digestibility of some tropical legume forages. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 14(3):321-325
  12. Khattab IM, Salem AZM, Abdel-Wahed AM & Kewan KZ. 2013. Effects of urea supplementation on nutrient digestibility, nitrogen utilisation and rumen fermentation in sheep fed diets containing dates. Livestock Science 155(2-3): 223-229
  13. Kutty KPA and Prasad DA. 1980. Studies on improving nutritive value of sugarcane tops with urea or dried poultry waste by ensiling techniques. Indian Journal of Animal Science 50(2):189-193
  14. Leng RA. 1990. Factors affecting the utilization of ‘poor-quality’forages by ruminants particularly under tropical conditions. Nutrition Research Reviews3(1):277-303
  15. Mahala AG, Mokhtar AMS, Amasiab EO & AttaElmnan BA. 2013. Sugarcane tops as animal feed. International Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Soil Science 3(4):147-151
  16. McDowell LR. 1996. Feeding minerals to cattle on pasture. Animal Feed Science and Technology 60(3-4):247-271
  17. McGuire DL, Bohnert DW, Schauer CS, Falck SJ & Cooke RF. 2013. Daily and alternate day supplementation of urea or soybean meal to ruminants consuming low quality cool-season forage: I- Effects on efficiency of nitrogen use and nutrient digestion. Livestock Science 155(2-3):205-213
  18. Minson DJ. 2012. Forage in ruminant nutrition: Animal feeding and nutrition. Elsevier, USA
  19. Nguyen QS, Dinh VB, Le VL & Preston TR. 1995. Studies on the use of dried pressed sugar cane stalk and fresh peeled sugar cane stalk for rabbits. Livestock Research and Rural Development 7(11). Accessed from http://www.Irrd.org/ lrrd7/2/4.htm
  20. Olafadehan OA and Adewumi MK. 2009. Productive and reproductive performance of strategically supplemented free grazing prepartum Bunaji cows in the agropastoral farming system. Tropical Animal Health and Production 41:1275-1281
  21. Orden EAE, Cruz M, Espino AN, Battad ZM, Reyes RG, Orden MEM, Frias NO, Gibe G, Del Rosario NA & Villar EC. 2014. Pelletized forage-based rations as alternative feeds for improving goat productivity. Tropical Grasslands-Forrajes Tropicales 2(1):108-110
  22. Patil VM. 2013. Department of Livestock Production and Management. Veterinary College, Karnataka Veterinary, Animal and Fisheries Sciences University, Nandinagar, Bidar
  23. Preston TR and Leng RA. 1987. Matching ruminant production systems with available resources in the tropics and sub-tropics. Penambul Books, Australia
  24. Rapetti L and Bava L. 2008. Feeding management of dairy goats in intensive systems. In Cannas A and Pulina G (eds) Dairy Goats Feeding and Nutrition. CAB International, Wallingford, UK
  25. Sahu S, Babu LK, Karna DK, Behera K, Kanungo S, Kaswan S, Biswas P & Patra JK. 2013. Effect of different level of concentrate supplementation on the periparturient growth performance of Ganjam goat in extensive system. Veterinary World 6(7): 428- 432 doi:10.5455/vetworld.2013.428-432
  26. Sampaio CB, Detmann E, Paulino MF, Valadares Filho SC, de Souza MA, Lazzarini I, Rodrigues- Paulino PV & de Queiroz AC. 2010. Intake and digestibility in cattle fed low- quality tropical forage and supplemented with nitrogenous compounds. Tropical Animal Health and Production 42:1471-1479
  27. Sarnklong C, Cone JW, Pellikaan W & Hendriks WH. 2010. Utilization of rice straw and different treatments to improve its feed value for ruminants: A review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 23(5):680-692
  28. Schneider BH and Flatt WP. 1977. The evaluation of feeds through digestibility experiments. University of Georgia Press, USA
  29. Snitwong C, Mangmichai S, Klingason K, Intharasomchai T & Manidul C. 1983. The performance of buffaloes fed on dehydrated sugarcane tops with and without fresh left as a protein supplementation. Rep. Div. Anim. Nutr. Department of Livestock, Bangkok, Thailand
  30. Upton M. 1984. Models of improved production systems for small ruminants. In Sumberg JE and Cassaday K (eds) Sheep and Goats in Humid West Africa (pp55-67). Proceedings from the Workshop on Small Ruminant Production Systems in the Humid Zone of West Africa, Ibadan, Nigeria, 23-26 January 1984. International Livestock Centre for Africa, Ababa, Ethiopia
  31. Worku A, Getachew A, Mengistu U & Kefyalew G. 2015. Effect of different levels of dried Sugar Cane tops inclusion on the performance of Washera sheep fed basal diet of Grass Hay, Ethiopia. Journal of Advances in Dairy Research 3(2):1-5 
  32. Yuangklang C, Wanapat M & Wachirapakorn C. 2005. Effects of pelleted sugarcane tops on voluntary feed intake, digestibility and rumen fermentation in beef cattle. Asian- Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 18(1): 22-26

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic