Four pairs of Deoni bullocks were fed only with sorghum and concentrate supplement (Control group – T0) and followed by urea molasses mineral block (UMMB) plus control diet (Treatment group – T1) to study the effect of UMMB on nutrient utilization for 21 days each. The DMI in T1 group was significantly ( ) increased (6.0 v/s 7.1 kg/d/h). The average intake of UMMB (kg/d) was 0.54 in bullocks of treatment group. The intake of OM, CP, CF and NFE were also significantly increased ( ) when compared to control group. The digestibility of DM, OM and CF were improved significantly () and DCP content of the diet was increased from 5.30 in T0 group to 6.22 in T1 group. It was concluded that UMMB supplementation in Deoni bullocks improved nutrient intake, digestibility and DCP content of the diet in sorghum based feeding system.
Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) is a subsistence crop grown by small farmers and the nutritive value of stover is assessed by their level of digestible nutrients, intake and efficiency of utilization of absorbed nutrients. Energy requirement for maintenance in cattle and buffaloes can almost be met with sorghum stover alone and further improvement in intake and digestibility due to treatment could be beneficial in meeting the production requirement to some extent. (Joshi et al, 1988; Prasad et al., 1993). Supplementary feeding of urea molasses mineral blocks (UMMB) is one of the methods of improving the productivity of livestock under poor quality roughage based feeding system as UMMB provides a constant source of degradable nitrogen throughout the day and promote growth of rumen microbes in ruminants (Greenwood et al., 2000; Ramesh et al., 2009). Hence the study was conducted in Deoni bullocks fed with sorghum stover and UMMB as supplement to know its effect on nutrient utilization.
Materials and Methods
Two feeding trials were conducted on four pairs of Deoni bullocks (B.Wt. 350-400kg; Age; 5-7 yrs) for 21 days each which included one week adjustment period, one week observation period and the last week collection period. In the first trial, the bullocks were fed only ad libitum sorghum stover and 2 kg concentrate supplement (T0) (Maize-20, Wheat bran-20, Rice polish-10, GNC-25, Green gram chunni-10, Red gram chunni-10, Limestone powder-2, salt-2 and Mineral mixture-1 kg) whereas in the subsequent second trial, bullocks were fed the control diet with free choice of UMMB (T1). The feed intake, dry matter intake, energy intake and UMMB intake were recorded daily during the trial. The feed samples and the dung samples collected during the study were subjected for proximate analysis (AOAC, 1995) and detergent system of fiber analysis (Georing and Van Soest, 1970). The data was analyzed statistically through switch over design according to Snedecor and Cocheren (1965).
Results and Discussion
The chemical composition of concentrate supplement (CS), sorghum straw and UMMB are given in Table 1. The CP, NFE and TA content of UMMB were 30, 42 and 20% respectively. The CP content of UMMB was higher than the values reported by Ramesh, et al. (2009) where as equal to the values reported in various studies (Zile et al. 2005; Zile et al. 2007).
Table 1. Chemical composition (% DM basis) of concentrate supplement, sorghum stover and UMMB.
|Particulars||Concentrate Supplement||Sorghum Stover||UMMB|
Table 2. Average intake of nutrients (kg/d) and UMMB (kg/d) in Deoni bullocks.
|Concentrate Supplement||1.92 ±0.01||1.92 ±0.01|
|Sorghum Stover||4.08a ± 0.25||4.64b ± 0.27|
|UMMB||0.00||0.54 ± 0.07|
|Total DMI||6.00a ± 0.25||7.10b ± 0.33|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||1.58a±0.15||1.87b±0.18|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||1.38a±0.07||1.64b±0.12|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||0.15a±0.01||0.19b±0.01|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||0.03±0.0||0.04±0.0|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||0.44a±0.02||0.50b±0.03|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||0.76a±0.04||0.90b±0.05|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||0.87±0.05||0.97±0.07|
|Per 100kg B.wt.||0.52±0.03||0.58±0.03|
Table 3.Nutrient digestibility (%), density (%) and intake (Kg/d) (%) in Deoni bullocks.
|DM||63.56a ± 1.90||66.13b ± 1.19|
|OM||68.24a ± 1.94||70.08b ± 1.43|
|CP||57.20 ± 4.47||59.65 ± 3.48|
|EE||72.47 ± 3.10||72.75 ± 3.54|
|CF||61.66a ± 2.63||64.82b ± 2.28|
|NFE||73.92 ± 1.63||75.10 ± 1.28|
|NDF||58.83 ± 2.56||60.45 ± 1.83|
|ADF||57.34 ± 1.87||57.88 ± 2.05|
|DCP||5.30a ± 0.57||6.22b ± 0.42|
|TDN||62.08 ± 1.83||63.31 ± 1.35|
|ME, MJ/kg diet||9.40 ± 0.26||9.57 ± 0.20|
|TDN||3.72a± 0.13||4.50b ± 0.19|
|ME, MJ/d||56.32a ± 1.99||67.96b ± 2.84|
The average intake of nutrients and UMMB are given in Table 2. The DMI from sorghum stover (4.08 v/s 4.68 kg/d/h) and the total DMI (6.0 v/s 7.1 kg/d/h)were significantly increased in UMMB fed group. The average intake of UMMB (kg/d) was 0.54 in T1 group which was higher than the intake of buffaloes (0.309 kg/d) and jersey cows (0.284 kg/d) in the experiment conducted by Ramesh et al. (2009). The significantly (P≤0.01) improved DMI in T1 group in this study was similar to the results of Chauhan et al. 1997; Zile et al. 2007; Ramesh et al. 2009). The intake of OM, CP, CF and NFE were also significantly increased over control group due to UMMB supplementation. These findings were corroborated with the findings of studies on different species on crop residue based feeding system (Chauhan et al., 1997; Greenwood et al., 2000; Ramesh et al., 2009).
The significant increase in digestibility of DM, OM and CF in T1 group and non significant increase in CP, EE and NFE digestibility indicated that UMMB supplementation has helped in improving the fiber digestibility due to optimized rumen fermentation (Zile et al., 2005; Ramesh et al., 2009). The DCP content of the diet was improved significantly from 5.30 in T0 group to 6.22 in T1 group where as no significant difference was observed in TDN content of the diet. However, DCP and TDN intake were significantly higher in T1 group.
Hence, it was concluded that the improved nutrient intake, digestibility and nutrient density of the diet in working animals supplemented with UMMB definitely increase the working efficiency of the animals besides reducing the cost of feeding.
AOAC. 1995. Official Methods of Analysis, 16th ed. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem., Washington, DC. USA.
Chauhan TR, Gupta R, Dahiya SS and Punia BS. 1997. Effect of supplementing urea molasses blocks in the ration of buffaloes on nutrient utilization and milk production. Indian Journal of Animal Science. 67:418-421.
Goering HK and Van Soest PJ. 1970. Forage Fibre Analyses (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications). Agriculture Handbook No. 379, ARS, USDA Washington, DC, USA.
Greenwood RH, Titgemeyer EL and Drouillard JS. 2000. Effect of base ingredient in cooked molasses blocks on intake and digestion of prairie hay by beef steers. Journal of Animal Science. 78:167-172.
Joshi AL, Prabhu UH and Sampath SR. 1988. Treatment and supplementation of finger millet and sorghum straws. In: Fibrous crop residues as animal feed (Edts. Kiran Singh and JB Schiere) Proceedings of International workshop of SRS, NDRI, Bangalore. pp.17-23.
Prasad CS, Sampath KT, Rai SN and Joshi AL.1993. Physical, chemical and morphological characteristics of slender and coarse straws and response to urea treatment. In: Feeding of ruminants on fibrous crop residues (Edts. Kiran Singh and JB Schiere) Proceedings of Indo Dutch project. Pp. 320-335.
Ramesh BK, Thirumalesh T and Suresh B.N. 2009. Effect of feeding urea mineral molasses block on milk production, milk composition and onset of estrus in dairy animals. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition. 26:322-326.
Snedecor EW and Cochran WG. 1968. Statistical Methods. 6th edn. Iawa state. Univ. Press. Ames. Iawa. USA.
Zile S, Sihag, Chahal SM and Punia BS. 2007. Effect of urea molasses mineral blocks on nutrient utilization in buffaloes. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition. 24:72-74.
Zile S, Sihag, Punia BS and Nand Kishore. 2005. Effect of feeding urea molasses mineral blocks on nutrient utilization, milk production and its composition in buffaloes. Indian Buffalo Journal .3:39-42.