Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T20:16:33.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of multipurpose tree germplasm: the use of gas production and rumen degradation characteristics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. E. K. A. Siaw ,
P. O. Osuji  and
I. V. Nsahlai
D. E. K. A. Siaw
Affiliation:
International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA), PO Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
P. O. Osuji
Affiliation:
International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA), PO Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
I. V. Nsahlai
Affiliation:
International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA), PO Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The rumen degradation and gas production characteristics (methane, carbon dioxide) of leaves of 20 accessions of multipurpose trees (MPTs) from six genera: Acacia, Cajanus, Chamaecytisus (L. fil.) Link, Erythrina, Leucaena and Sesbania and some poisonous plants were investigated in vitro and in sacco in rumen fistulated cows fed on a diet of grass hay ad libitum supplemented with cotton seed cake. The degradation constants (i.e. the soluble fraction (a), the slowly degradable fraction (b) and the rate of degradation (c) and the potential degradability (a + b) (PD)) were calculated. The gas production constants were estimated following the equation: Volume = bg(1—e-cgt) where bg is gas production and cg is the rate of gas production. Between and within genus comparisons of degradability and gas production constants were done.

The soluble fraction (a) was significantly higher for Sesbania (59) (P < 0·05) than the other genera, which had values between 45·18 and 40·38 units. There were no significant differences in the slowly degradable fraction (b) between genera. Sesbania was degraded significantly faster (P < 0·05) than either Acacia, Leucaena or Cajanus. Similarly, the potential degradability was significantly higher (P < 0·05) for Sesbania (92·7) than for the other genera. Acacia was the least degradable genus.

Degradation characteristics were similar between species within the genera Acacia, Erythrina and Leucaena. However, within the Leucaena genus, L. revoluta had the highest soluble fraction (50·02) and the cross L. leucocephala × L. diversifolia had the lowest (29·24). L. leucocephala had the highest slowly degradable fraction (57·32) and L. revoluta had the lowest (42·37). L. leucocephala × L. pallida had the highest rate of degradability (0·0626) and L. pallida had the lowest (0·0221). L. leucocephala had the highest potential degradability (92·23) and the cross L. pallida × L. diversifolia the lowest (84–81).

Between the genera, more gas was produced from Sesbania than from any other genus. The effect of genus was significant (P <0·0003). On the other hand, the rate of gas production (cg) was higher with the genus Chamaecytisus than with any other genera (P < 0·0001). Although the two methods used agree in the position of a forage of a high degradability like Sesbania, they fail to agree on the relative positions of the forages of lower degradabilities. For some genera, drying of the tree foliage reduced the volume of gas produced, but increased the rate of gas production.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 120 , Issue 3 , June 1993 , pp. 319 - 330
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

REFERENCES

Ahn, J. H., Robertson, B. M., Elliott, R., Gutteridge, R. C. & Ford, C. W. (1989). Quality assessment of tropical browse legumes: tannin content and protein degradation. Animal Feed Science and Technology 27, 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aitchison, E., Gill, M., France, J. & Dhanoa, M. S. (1986). Comparison of methods to describe the kinetics of digestion and passage of fibre in sheep. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 37, 1065–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allison, M.J. (1985). In Plant Toxicology (Eds Seawright, A. A., Hegarty, M. P., James, L. F. & Keeler, R. F.), pp. 120–126. Yeerongpilly, Australia: Queensland Department of Primary Industries.Google Scholar
Bogdan, A. V. (1977). Tropical Pasture and Fodder Plants. London. Longman.Google Scholar
Cheeke, P. R. & Hull, L. R. (1985). Natural Toxicants in Feeds and Poisonous Plants. Westport, US: AVI Publishing Co.Google Scholar
French, M. H. (1949). Some use and misuse of shrubs and trees as fodder. East African Agricultural Journal 14, 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, H. T. B. (1985). Diseases and Parasites of Livestock in the Tropics, 2nd edn.Essex, England: Longman Group UK Limited.Google Scholar
Hegarty, M. P. (1964). Plant chemistry. In Some Concepts and Methods in Sub-Tropical Pasture Research. Bulletin 47 pp.154–158. Hurley: Commonwealth Bureau of Pastures and Field Crops.Google Scholar
Holmes, W. (Ed.) (1980). Grass, Its Production and Utilization. British Grassland Society. London: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
International Livestock Centre For Africa (1990). The use of fodder from multipurpose trees as sources of protein in diets for small ruminants: microbial metabolism of protein in the rumen. International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA). Annual Programme Report, p. 77.Google Scholar
Keeler, R. F., Van Kampen, K. R. & James, L. F. (Eds) (1978). Effects of Poisonous Plants on Livestock. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Le Houerou, H. N. (1980 a). Browse in Northern Africa. In Browse in Africa (Ed. Houerou, H. N. le), pp. 55–82. Addis Ababa: ILCA.Google Scholar
Le Houerou, H. N. (1980 b). Chemical composition and nutritive value of browse in tropical west Africa. In Browse in Africa (Ed. Houerou, H. N. le), pp. 261–297. Addis Ababa: ILCA.Google Scholar
Levin, D. A. & York, B. M. (1978). The toxicity of plant alkaloids: an ecogeographic perspective. Biochemical Systems and Ecology 6, 61—76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowry, J. B. (1990). Toxic factors and problems: methods of alleviating them in animals. In Shrubs and Tree Fodders for Farm Animals (Ed. Devendra, C.), pp. 76–90. IDRC Workshop Proceedings, Denpasar, Indonesia, 24–29 07 1989. Ottowa: IRDC.Google Scholar
Lyford, S. J. Jr, Smart, W. W. G., & Bell, T. A. Jr (1967). Inhibition of rumen cellulose digestion by extracts of Sericea lespedeza. Journal of Animal Science 26, 632–639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahyuddin, P., Little, D. A. & Lowry, J. B. (1988). Drying treatment drastically affects feed evaluation and feed quality with certain tropical forage species. Animal Feed Science and Technology 22, 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McSweeney, C. S., Stewart, C. & Pass, M. A. (1985). Treatment of lantana poisoning of cattle and sheep. In Plant Toxicology (Eds Seawright, A. A., Hegarty, M. P., James, L. F. & Keeler, R. F.), pp. 61–69. Proceedings of Australia-USA Poisonous Plants Symposium. Yeerongpilly, Australia: Queensland Department of Primary Industries.Google Scholar
McSweeney, C. S., Kennedy, P. M. & John, A. (1988). Effect of ingestion of hydrolysable tannins in Terminalia oblongata on digestion in sheep fed Stylosanthes hamata. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 39, 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehrez, A. Z. & Orskov, E. R. (1977). A study of the artificial fibre bag technique for determining the digestibility of feeds in the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88, 645–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menke, K. H., Raab, L., Salewski, A., Steingass, H., Fritz, D. & Schneider, W. (1979). The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 93, 217–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Academy of Sciences (1980). Tropical Legumes: Resources for the Future. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Nestel, B. & Macintyre, R. (Eds) (1973). Chronic Cassava Toxicity: Proceedings of an interdisciplinary workshop, London, England, 29–30 January 1973. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
Ogwang, B. H. & Bota, G. P. (1992). Plants poisonous to livestock in Swaziland. Africa Livestock Research 1, 15.Google Scholar
Oke, O. L. (1969). The role of hydrocyanic acid in nutrition. World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics 11, 170–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Orskov, E. R. & McDonald, I. (1979). The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, J. D., Soller, H. & Woodward, A. (1990). Fodder tree and straw diets for sheep: intake, growth, digestibility and the effects of phenolics on nitrogen utilisation. Animal Feed Science and Technology 30, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sas Institute (1985). Procedures Guide for Personal Computers, version 6 edition. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Seawright, A. A., Hegarty, M. P., James, L. F. & Keeler, R. F. (Eds) (1985). Plant Toxicology. Proceedings of Australia-USA Poisonous Plants Symposium. Yeerongpilly, Australia: Queensland Department of Primary Industries.Google Scholar
Silva, A. T. & Orskov, E. R. (1988). Fibre degradation in the rumens of animals receiving hay, untreated or ammonia-treated straw. Animal Feed Science and Technology 19, 277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skerman, P. J., Cameron, D. G. & Riveros, F. (1988). Tropical Forage Legumes. 2nd edn.Rome: FAO. STEEL, R. G. D. &Google Scholar
Torrie, J. H. (1980). Principles and Procedures of Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar
Van Eys, J. E., Mathius, I. W., Pongsapan, P. & Johnson, W. L. (1986). Foliage of tree legumes gliricidia, leucaena and sesbania as supplement to napier grass diets for growing goats. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 107, 227–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiegand, R. O. (1991). Tree leaves in the diet of small ruminants. MSc thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA.Google Scholar
Wilson, A. D. (1977). The digestibility and voluntary intake of the leaves of trees and shrubs by sheep and goats. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 28, 501–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, A. D. & Harrington, G. N. (1980). Nutritive value of Australian browse plants. In Browse in Africa (Ed. Hourou, H. N. Le), pp. 291–297. Addis Ababa: ILCA.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. & Reed, J. D. (1989). The influence of polyphenolics on the nutritive value of browse: a summary of research conducted at ILCA. ILCA Bulletin No. 35, 12 2–11, 1989.Google Scholar