Silage Quality of Rations Based on in situ Sorghum-Indigofera
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2017.168.174Keywords:
Composition, in situ ration, intercropping, silage, varietiesAbstract
Background: Intercropping involves growing two or more crops on the same piece of land to produce rations for livestock, particularly ruminants. In this study, the silage quality of in situ rations produced from Sorghum intercropped with Indigofera was evaluated to determine which Sorghum variety produced the best silage. Methodology: The pH, Neutral Detergent Fiber (NDF), Acid Detergent Fiber (ADF), ammonia-N (N-NH3), Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA) and total bacteria in silage for use in situ rations were verified. Experiments were conducted using a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with three replications of three factors: (1) Sorghum variety (Patir-37 and Citayam-33), (2) Indigofera composition (30, 40 and 50% Indigofera ) and (3) Microbial inoculant (Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus casei and non-microbial inoculant). Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and HSD test. Results: For all rations tested, the pH and N-NH3 values indicated good ensilage. Rations that included the Sorghum variety Citayam-33 had lower pH and N-NH3 production relative to those with Patir-37. In whole crop silages, the inoculants did not significantly affect fermentation. Meanwhile, rations with higher amounts of Indigofera (up to 50%) had lower NDF and ADF. Conclusion: Together the results show that in situ rations made from intercropped Sorghum and Indigofera ensilage well and different compositions can be obtained directly from intercropped fields to produce rations that improve ruminant performance.
References
Ullah, M.A., N. Hussain, H. Schmeisky and M. Rasheed, 2015. Improving fodder quality of panicum grass through intercropping of legumes and their inoculation. Pak. J. Agric. Res., 28: 223-230.
Paulson, J., M. Raeth-Knight and J. Linn, 2008. Grass vs. legume forage for dairy cattle. Forage Focus-Dairy-December 2008, University of Minnesota, Minnesota.
Sriagtula, R., P.D.M.H. Karti, L. Abdullah, Supriyanto and D.A. Astuti, 2016. Growth, biomass and nutrient production of brown midrib sorghum mutant lines at different harvest times. Pak. J. Nutr., 15: 524-531.
McDonald, P., R.A. Edwards, J.F.D. Greenhalgh, C.A. Morgan, L.A. Sinclair and R.G. Wilkinson, 2010. Animal Nutrition. 7th Edn., Prentice Hall, Harlow, England.
Hassen, A., N.F.G. Rethman, Z. Apostolides and W.V. Niekerk, 2008. Forage production and potential nutritive value of 24 shrubby Indigofera accessions under field conditions in South Africa. Trop. Grasslands, 42: 96-103.
Abdullah, L., 2010. Herbage production and quality of shrub Indigofera treated by different concentration of foliar fertilizer. Media Peternakan, 33: 169-175.
Abdullah, L., 2014. Prospektif agronomi dan ekofisiologi Indigofera zollingeriana sebagai tanaman penghasil hijauan pakan berkualitas tinggi. Pastura, 3: 79-83.
Suharlina, D.A. Astuti, Nahrowi, A. Jayanegara and L. Abdullah, 2016. Nutritional evaluation of dairy goat rations containing Indigofera zollingeriana by using in vitro rumen fermentation technique (RUSITEC). Int. J. Dairy Sci., 11: 100-105.
Mobasser, H.R., M.R. Vazirimehr and K. Rigi, 2014. Effect of intercropping on resources use, weed management and forage quality. Int. J. Plant Anim. Environ. Sci., 4: 706-713.
Reiber, C., R. Schultze-Kraft, M. Peters, P. Lentes and V. Hoffmann, 2010. Promotion and adoption of silage technologies in drought-constrained areas of Honduras. Trop. Grasslands, 44: 231-245.
Jalc, D., A. Laukova, M.P. Simonova, Z. Varadyova and P. Homolka, 2009. Bacterial inoculant effects on corn silage fermentation and nutrient composition. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 22: 977-983.
Zhang, L., C.Q. Yu, M. Shimojo and T. Shao, 2011. Effect of different rates of ethanol additive on fermentation quality of napiergrass (Pennisetum purpureum). Asian-Austr. J. Anim. Sci., 24: 636-642.
Muck, R.E., 2010. Silage additives and management issues. Proceedings of the Idaho Alfalfa Forage Conference, February 16-17, 2010, Burley, Idaho, USA., pp: 49-55.
Chatterton, N.J., K.A. Watts, K.B. Jensen, P.A. Harrison and W.H. Horton, 2006. Nonstructural carbohydrates in oat forage. J. Nutr., 136: 2111S-2113S.
Thomas, M.E., J.L. Foster, K.C. McCuistion, L.A. Redmon and R.W. Jessup, 2013. Nutritive value, fermentation characteristics and in situ disappearance kinetics of sorghum silage treated with inoculants. J. Dairy Sci., 96: 7120-7131.
EFSA., 2013. Scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of iron compounds (E1) as feed additives for all species: Iron chelate of amino acids, hydrate, based on a dossier submitted by Zinpro Animal Nutrition Inc. EFSA J., Vol. 11.
Ardiansyah, K.G. Wiryawan and P.D.M.H. Karti, 2016. Silage quality of sorghum harvested at different times and its combination with mixed legumes or concentrate evaluated in vitro. Med. Peternakan, 39: 53-60.
Lettat, A., F. Hassanat and C. Benchaar, 2013. Corn silage in dairy cow diets to reduce ruminal methanogenesis: Effects on the rumen metabolically active microbial communities. J. Dairy Sci., 96: 5237-5248.
Brusetti, L., S. Borin, A. Rizzi, D. Mora, C. Sorlini and D. Daffonchio, 2008. Exploration of methods used to describe bacterial communities in silage of maize (Zea mays) cultivars. Environ. Biosafety Res., 7: 25-33.
Sakhawat, I., 2011. The effect of silage quality on gross energy losses. Degree Project 360, Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Science.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 The Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
