Evaluating Nutritional Values of Selected Grass Species in Chaffe area,Hawassa, Ethiopia

Publish Year: 1399
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: English
View: 45

This Paper With 7 Page And PDF Format Ready To Download

  • Certificate
  • من نویسنده این مقاله هستم

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این Paper:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_GJSAR-8-2_003

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 23 بهمن 1402

Abstract:

This study was conducted to evaluate nutritive value of grass species inChaffe communally grazing area.According to thefocus group discussion, three grass species (Pennisetumclandestinum, Chlorisgayana and Cynedemdactylon) were selected for chemical composition evaluation due to their preference for animals in this area. The variables recorded were dry matter (DM), ash, crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), and acid detergent lignin (ADL).Data on these values were subjected to the general linear model (GLM) procedure of SAS statistical package and usedTukey test means comparison procedure to separate difference among species. As seen from this study, DM values were ۹۵.۰۹%, ۹۴.۲۳% and ۹۵.۱۱% forPennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayana, and Cynedemdactylon, respectively and showed no variation among species (p>۰.۰۵). Current finding indicated ۱۶.۳۴%, ۱۲.۴۰% and ۱۲.۵۶% ash percentage forPennisetumclandestinum,Chlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively and seen variation(p<۰.۰۵) among species. It was also seen from current finding that CP values obtained ۱۳.۰۳%, ۹.۲۱% and ۸.۰۱% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively were significantly different (p<۰.۰۵) among three grass species. Similarly, fiber contents (NDF ۵۷.۲۳%, ۶۶.۰۶% and ۶۲.۳۴% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively; ADF ۲۶.۳۳%, ۳۲.۲۷% and ۳۳.۴۱% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively and ADL ۴.۴۳%, ۶.۱۸% and ۶.۳۲% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively) indicated significant variation (p<۰.۰۵) among grass species. However, Pennisetumclandestinum showed better quality among selected three grass species;according to standard the present study revealed high levels ofdetergent fibers for all three selected native grasses used mainly as forage for livestock in this area. So, this indicates need of improved forage and supplementary feed for livestock reared in this area to obtain better production for farmers from their animals.This study was conducted to evaluate nutritive value of grass species inChaffe communally grazing area.According to thefocus group discussion, three grass species (Pennisetumclandestinum, Chlorisgayana and Cynedemdactylon) were selected for chemical composition evaluation due to their preference for animals in this area. The variables recorded were dry matter (DM), ash, crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), and acid detergent lignin (ADL).Data on these values were subjected to the general linear model (GLM) procedure of SAS statistical package and usedTukey test means comparison procedure to separate difference among species. As seen from this study, DM values were ۹۵.۰۹%, ۹۴.۲۳% and ۹۵.۱۱% forPennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayana, and Cynedemdactylon, respectively and showed no variation among species (p>۰.۰۵). Current finding indicated ۱۶.۳۴%, ۱۲.۴۰% and ۱۲.۵۶% ash percentage forPennisetumclandestinum,Chlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively and seen variation(p<۰.۰۵) among species. It was also seen from current finding that CP values obtained ۱۳.۰۳%, ۹.۲۱% and ۸.۰۱% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively were significantly different (p<۰.۰۵) among three grass species. Similarly, fiber contents (NDF ۵۷.۲۳%, ۶۶.۰۶% and ۶۲.۳۴% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively; ADF ۲۶.۳۳%, ۳۲.۲۷% and ۳۳.۴۱% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively and ADL ۴.۴۳%, ۶.۱۸% and ۶.۳۲% for PennisetumclandestinumChlorisgayanaand Cynedemdactylon, respectively) indicated significant variation (p<۰.۰۵) among grass species. However, Pennisetumclandestinum showed better quality among selected three grass species;according to standard the present study revealed high levels ofdetergent fibers for all three selected native grasses used mainly as forage for livestock in this area. So, this indicates need of improved forage and supplementary feed for livestock reared in this area to obtain better production for farmers from their animals.

Authors

Maticha Korato

Department of Animal Science, Bonga University

Teramaj Abebe

Department of Animal Science, MekdelaAmba University

مراجع و منابع این Paper:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این Paper را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود Paper لینک شده اند :
  • Adugna, T. (2007). Feed Resources for Producing Export Quality Meat ...
  • Alemayehu, M and Sissay, A. (2003). Integrated Livestock Development Project ...
  • Alemayehu, M. (1997). Conservation based forage development for Ethiopia: Institute ...
  • Alemayehu, M. (2006). Forage resource profile of Ethiopia. FAO forage ...
  • Ali, S. (2004). The effect of stubble height, Row spacing ...
  • ARC. (1985). The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Agriculture Research ...
  • Association of Official Analytical Chemists, (1990). Official methods of Analysis. ...
  • Birnin-Yauri H.B. Birnin- Yauri U.A., Maigandi S.A., and Mohammed A.A., ...
  • Chepape, RM., Mbatha, KR., and Luseba, D. (2011). Local use ...
  • Crowder, L.V. and Chmeda, M.R. (1982). Tropical grassland husbandry. Longman, ...
  • Dessie, G. (2007). Forest decline in south central Ethiopia: Extent, ...
  • Dirriba, G., Mekonen, H., Ashenafi M. and Adugna, T. (2012). ...
  • Eshete, G. (2002). An assessment of feed resources, their management ...
  • Gashaw, M. and Defar, G. (2017). Livestock feed resources, nutritional ...
  • Luseba, D. and Vander Merwe, D. (2006). Ethnoveterinary medicine practices ...
  • Mannetje, Lt. (1978). Measuring quality of grassland vegetation.In: Lt` Mannetje ...
  • McDonald, P., Edwards, Greenhalgh, J.F. and Morgan, C.A. (1995). Animal ...
  • Moleele NM (1998) Encroacher woody plant browses as feed for ...
  • Norton, BW. (1982). Difference between species in forages quality. In: ...
  • Seyoum, B., Getinet, A., Abate, T, and Dereje, F. (2001). ...
  • Taye, B. (2004). Effect of days of harvesting on yield ...
  • Terefe, A. Solomon, M. and Lisanework, N. (2008). Management and ...
  • Teshome, A., Abule, E. and Lisanework, N. (2012). Evaluation of ...
  • Van Soest, PJ. and Robertson, JB. (1985). Analysis of forage ...
  • Van Soest, P. J. and J.B. Robertson, and B. A. ...
  • Yihalem, D. (2004). Assessment of Botanical Composition and Stage of ...
  • Zinash S. and Seyoum B. (1991). Utilization of Feed Resources ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع