IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF LACTATING BUFFALOES FED RATIONS CONTAINING BEAN FORAGE WASTE SILAGE
Etab R. I. Abd El-Galil; F.A. Salem;
Abstract
Fifteen lactating buffaloes average 620 ±0.500 kg live body weight were used in this experiment to determine their effects ondigestibility coefficients, nutritive value , some blood constituents and milk production and composition. In the experimental rations were formulated to contain clover silage, bean forage waste silage and combination from clover silage, bean forage waste silage with concentrate mixture (CFM) as the following :- G1 : 50% CFM + 50% clover silage (CS); (control ration). G2 : 50% CFM + 50% bean forage waste silage (BS). G3 : 50% CFM + 25 % clover silage (CS) and25% bean forage waste silage (BS).
Results could be summarized that clover silage (CS) contained low DM,OM, EE and NFE and CF percentage while it has high CP and ash contents compared with bean forage waste silage (BS) ; being (21.50 vs.29.00%), (87.70 vs.92.40%), (29.50 vs. 32.00%), (2.40 vs. 2.70 %), (37.30 vs.46.40 %), (18.50 vs.11.30 %) and (12.30 vs. 7.60%) on DM basis, respectively. A average values of digestion coefficients of DM, OM, CP, CF, EE and NFE were 53.50,55.50, 54.16 , 54.05, 53.06 and 56.48 % for the control ration (G1), 64.40, 67.82, 59.17, 59.35, 64.06 and 72.69 % for ration2 (G2) and 67.80, 70.30,73.80, 69.53, 66.47 and 74.35 % for ration 3 (G3), respectively. Significant differences (P<0.05) in DM, OM, CP, CF, EE and NFE digestibility coefficients in all treatments. The nutritive values as TDN % were 51.25, 63.96 and 68.24 % and DCP% were 7.83 and 7.83 and 9.85 for G1, G2 and G3 respectively. The TDN value for the G2 and G3 was significantly higher (P<0.05) than control ration while the DCP% for G3 was significantly higher (P<0.05) than those of G1 and G2. Average daily total dry matter intake (TDMI) was 16.77, 14.97 and 16.67 for buffaloes fed G1, G2 and G3, respectively. No significant differences were found between G1 and G3. The actual milk yield were 5.62, 6.21 and 6.26 kg/day and the corresponding values as 4% FCM were 7.95, 8.74 and 9.52 kg/day for lactating buffaloes fed G1, G2 and G3, respectively. Feeding buffaloes on G1 decreased milk yield and 4% FCM compared with those fed the G2 and G3. There were significant (P<0.05) differences between buffaloes fed silage ration (G2 and G3) and those fed G1. The average value of total solids,fat, solids not fat (SNF) , total protein, lactose, and ash percentage (%) were not influenced by feeding different treatments. There were are insignificant differences among treatments. However, nonsignificant difference (P<0.05) in yield of milk fat, protein and lactose between buffaloes fed silage rations and those fed control ration were found.The differences among treatments in the concentration of total protein, albumin and globulin in blood plasma were nonsignificant (P<0.05). While, it was significant for AST and ALT concentrations in the blood plasma.
This study concluded that using bean forage waste silage (BS) in G2 or clover silage (CS) and bean forage waste silage (BS) in G3 (1:1) in the rations of lactating buffaloes improve digestability,nutritive value, milk production and milk composition ,without side effect on blood parameters .
Results could be summarized that clover silage (CS) contained low DM,OM, EE and NFE and CF percentage while it has high CP and ash contents compared with bean forage waste silage (BS) ; being (21.50 vs.29.00%), (87.70 vs.92.40%), (29.50 vs. 32.00%), (2.40 vs. 2.70 %), (37.30 vs.46.40 %), (18.50 vs.11.30 %) and (12.30 vs. 7.60%) on DM basis, respectively. A average values of digestion coefficients of DM, OM, CP, CF, EE and NFE were 53.50,55.50, 54.16 , 54.05, 53.06 and 56.48 % for the control ration (G1), 64.40, 67.82, 59.17, 59.35, 64.06 and 72.69 % for ration2 (G2) and 67.80, 70.30,73.80, 69.53, 66.47 and 74.35 % for ration 3 (G3), respectively. Significant differences (P<0.05) in DM, OM, CP, CF, EE and NFE digestibility coefficients in all treatments. The nutritive values as TDN % were 51.25, 63.96 and 68.24 % and DCP% were 7.83 and 7.83 and 9.85 for G1, G2 and G3 respectively. The TDN value for the G2 and G3 was significantly higher (P<0.05) than control ration while the DCP% for G3 was significantly higher (P<0.05) than those of G1 and G2. Average daily total dry matter intake (TDMI) was 16.77, 14.97 and 16.67 for buffaloes fed G1, G2 and G3, respectively. No significant differences were found between G1 and G3. The actual milk yield were 5.62, 6.21 and 6.26 kg/day and the corresponding values as 4% FCM were 7.95, 8.74 and 9.52 kg/day for lactating buffaloes fed G1, G2 and G3, respectively. Feeding buffaloes on G1 decreased milk yield and 4% FCM compared with those fed the G2 and G3. There were significant (P<0.05) differences between buffaloes fed silage ration (G2 and G3) and those fed G1. The average value of total solids,fat, solids not fat (SNF) , total protein, lactose, and ash percentage (%) were not influenced by feeding different treatments. There were are insignificant differences among treatments. However, nonsignificant difference (P<0.05) in yield of milk fat, protein and lactose between buffaloes fed silage rations and those fed control ration were found.The differences among treatments in the concentration of total protein, albumin and globulin in blood plasma were nonsignificant (P<0.05). While, it was significant for AST and ALT concentrations in the blood plasma.
This study concluded that using bean forage waste silage (BS) in G2 or clover silage (CS) and bean forage waste silage (BS) in G3 (1:1) in the rations of lactating buffaloes improve digestability,nutritive value, milk production and milk composition ,without side effect on blood parameters .
Other data
Title | IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF LACTATING BUFFALOES FED RATIONS CONTAINING BEAN FORAGE WASTE SILAGE | Authors | Etab R. I. Abd El-Galil ; F.A. Salem | Keywords | Clover Silage , Bean forage waste Silage ,Buffaloes,nutritive value, digestability,milk production | Issue Date | 2015 | Publisher | Faculty of agriculture -Ain shams university | Journal | Egyptian J. Nutrition and Feeds (2014), 17 (3): 473-482. |
Attached Files
File | Description | Size | Format | Existing users please Login |
---|---|---|---|---|
2015.pdf | 1.16 MB | Adobe PDF | Request a copy |
Similar Items from Core Recommender Database
Items in Ain Shams Scholar are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.