Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T06:15:22.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of variety and preservation method of cassava leaves on diet digestibility by indigenous and improved pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Khieu Borin
Affiliation:
Centre for Livestock and Agriculture Development, CelAgrid UTA-Cambodia, Kandal village, Rolous Commune, Kandal Stung District, Kandal Province, PO Box 2423 Phnom Penh 3, Cambodia
J. E. Lindberg
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7024, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
R. B. Ogle*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7024, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
*
Get access

Abstract

Digestibility and nitrogen (N) balance studies were carried out on the leaves of short-term (ST) and long-term (LT) varieties of cassava, preserved by sun-drying and grinding into a meal or by ensiling. The cassava leaf meal and ensiled leaves (471 and 373 g/kg total diet dry matter, respectively) were mixed with palm syrup and palm oil, to give the experimental diets CLM and CLS, respectively. Four Mong Cai (MC) (17·2 (s.e. 2·61) kg) and four Landrace × Yorkshire (L×Y) (41·5 (s.e. 2·12) kg) male castrate pigs were used. The experiment was designed as a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial, with breed, cassava variety and processing method as factors.

The hydrogen cyanide (HCN) levels of the fresh cassava leaves of ST (545 mg/kg dry matter (DM)) and LT (408 mg/kg DM) varieties were reduced by proportionately 0·63 and 0·33, respectively, after sun-drying and by 0·78 and 0·77, respectively, after ensiling. Intake was higher for DM, crude protein (CP) and organic matter (OM) (P < 0·001) and neutral- and aciddetergent fibre (NDF and ADF) and crude fibre (CF) (P <0·01) in CLM than in CLS. There was a breed by processing method interaction for CF intake (P < 0·05). The coefficient of total tract apparent digestibility (CTTAD) was higher in CLS than in CLM for DM, CP, OM and CF (P < 0·001) and NDF and ADF (P < 0·01). The MC pigs digested ADF (P < 0·01) and CF (P < 0·001) more effectively than L×Y pigs but there was no difference (P > 0·05) in the digestibility of other nutrients or DM. There was a breed by cassava variety interaction for ADF digestibility and breed by processing method for CF digestibility (P < 0·01). Daily N intake and faecal N were higher (P < 0·001) in CLM than in CLS. Urinary N was lower in CLS than in CLM (P < 0·05) and in L×Y than in MC pigs (P < 0·001). N utilization (N retained per unit intake) was higher for CLS than CLM (P < 0·001) and in L×Y than in MC pigs (P < 0·001). It is concluded that ensiling is a more effective method than sun-drying for reducing HCN in cassava leaves after 60 days re-growth, and also results in higher digestibility of DM and dietary components than sun-drying. However, the bulkiness of the silage limits intake. The MC pigs digested dietary fibre more efficiently than the L×Y pigs, whereas the L×Y pigs utilized N more efficiently than the MC pigs.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Association of Of. cial Analytical Chemists. 1990. AOAC official methods of analysis, 15th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
Bach Knudsen, K. E. and Hansen, I. 1991. Gastrointestinal implications in pigs of wheat and oat fractions. 1. Digestibility and bulking properties of polysaccharides and other major constituents. British Journal of Nutrition 65: 217232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cadavid, L. F., El-Sharkawy, M. A., Acosta, A. and Sanchez, T. 1998. Long-term effects of mulch, fertilization and tillage on cassava grown in sandy soils in northern Colombia. Field Crop Research 57: 4556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conn, E. E. 1994. Cyanogenesis – a personal perspective. Acta Horticulturae 375: 3143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggum, O. L. 1970. The protein quality of cassava leaves. British Journal of Nutrition 24: 761769.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elliott, R. and Kloren, W. R. L. 1987. The use of sugar in diets for monogastrics. Recent advances in animal nutrition in Australia 1987 (ed. Farrell, D. J.), pp. 290296. University of New England, Publishing Unit, Armidale.Google Scholar
Fevrier, C., Bourdon, D. and Aumaitre, A. 1992. Effects of level of dietary fibre from wheat bran on digestibility of nutrients, digestive enzymes and performance in the European Large White and Chinese Meishan pig. Journal Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 68: 6072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freire, J. P. B., Peiniau, J., Cunha, L. F., Almeida, J. A. A. and Aumaitre, A. 1998. Comparative effects of dietary fat and fibre in Alentejano and Large White piglets: digestibility, digestive enzymes and metabolic data. Livestock Production Science 53: 3747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fibre analyses (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). USDA agricultural handbook no. 379, Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Kemp, B., Hartog den, L. A., Klok, J. J. and Zandstra, T. 1991. The digestibility of nutrients, energy and nitrogen in Meishan and Dutch Landrace pigs. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 65: 263266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyriazakis, I. and Emmans, G. C. 1995. The voluntary feed intake of pigs given feeds based on wheat bran, dried citrus pulp and grass meal, in relation to measurements of feed bulk. British Journal of Nutrition 73: 191207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDonald, P., Edwards, R. A., Greenhalgh, J. F. D. and Morgan, C. A. 1995. Animal nutrition, fth edition. Longman Scientific and Technical, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
McDonald, P., Henderson, A. R. and Heron, S. J. E. 1991. The biochemistry of silage, second edition. Chalcombe Publications, Kent.Google Scholar
Minitab, . 2000. Statistical software version 1331. User's guide to statistics. Minitab Inc., USA.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1998. Nutrient requirements of swine, tenth revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Ndindana, W., Dzama, K. and Ndiweni, P. N. B. 2002. Digestibility of high. bre diets and performance of growing Zimbabwean indigenous Mukota pigs and exotic Large White pigs fed maize based diets with graded levels of maize cobs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 97: 199208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neito, R., Miranda, A., García, M. A. and Aguilera, J. F. 2002. The effect of dietary protein content and feeding level on the rate of protein deposition and energy utilization in growing Iberian pigs from 15 to 50 kg body weight. British Journal of Nutrition 88: 3949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ocampo, A. and Lean, I. J. 1999. Palm oil (Elaeis guineensis, Elaeis oleifera): a review: an efficient and sustainable energy source in pig production. Pig News and Information 20: 89N96N.Google Scholar
Phuc, B. H. N., Ogle, B. and Lindberg, J. E. 2000. Effect of replacing soybean protein with cassava leaf meal in cassava root meal based diets for growing pigs on digestibility and N retention. Animal Feed Science and Technology 83: 223235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravindran, G. and Ravindran, V. 1998. Changes in the nutritional composition of cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) leaves during maturity. Food Chemistry 27: 299309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravindran, V. 1993. Cassava leaves as animal feed: potential and limitations. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 41: 4553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravindran, V., Kornegay, E. T. and Rajaguru, A. S. B. 1987. Influence of processing methods and storage time on the cyanide potential of cassava leaf meal. Animal Feed Science and Technology 17: 227234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodriguez, L. and Preston, T. R. 1997. Local feed resources and indigenous breeds: fundamental issue in integrated farming systems. Livestock Research for Rural Development 9: (2) 1997. http : //www/cipav. org. co/lrrd/lrrd2/2/sarria. htmGoogle Scholar
Souffrant, W. B. 2001. Effect of dietary fibre on ileal digestibility and endogenous nitrogen losses in the pig. Animal Feed Science and Technology 90: 93102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundaresan, S., Amma, C. S. E. and Nambisan, B. 1987. Bitterness in cassava in relation to cyanoglucoside content. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 57: 3740.Google Scholar
Tewe, O. 1994. Indices of cassava safety for livestock feeding. In Cassava safety (ed. Bokanga, M., Essers, A. J. A., Poulter, N., Rosling, H. and Tewe, O.), ISHS Acta Horticulturae 375.Google Scholar
Tewe, O. O. and Iyayi, E. A. 1989. Cyanogenic glycosides. In Toxicants of plant origin, vol. II. Glycosides (ed. Cheeke, P. R.), pp. 4360. CRS Press.Google Scholar
Undersander, D., Mertens, D. R. and Thiex, N. 1993. Forage analysis procedures. National Forage Testing Association, Omaha.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B. and Lewis, B. A. 1991. Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 35833597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zicarelli, L., Piccolo, V., Nizza, A., Intriere, F. and Perrucci, G. 1979. Indagini sui coefficienti di digeribilità apparente in alcune popolazioni suine meridionali prevalentemente alimentate con sottoprodotti agricolo-industriali diffusinel Mezzogiorno. Zootecnicae Nutrizione Animale 5: 103109.Google Scholar