Potential of sugarcane silage with different concentrate supplementation for growing male crossbred dairy cattle
2001
Pacia, R.B. | Lopez, R.R.
The response of growing animals to sugarcane silage as the sole source of roughage supplemented by four dietary rations was studied using sixteen 1 1/2 to 2 years old crossbred Holstein x Red Sindhi bulls. A randomized complete block design was used involving four treatments replicated four times. The four treatments were as follows: 1 - sugarcane silage + molasses-urea mixture; 2 - sugarcane silage + corn-copra meal ration; 3 - sugarcane silage + sorghum-copra meal ration; and 4 - sugarcane silage + rice bran-copra meal -dried poultry manure ration. The dry matter yield of sugarcane is remarkably high compared to corn and other pasture species. However, percent total digestible nutrients (TDN) is much lower than corn but comparable to pasture grasses. Because of the unequaled production of dry matter, the TDN yield of sugarcane per unit area is more than any other pasture crops. Results of the feeding trial showed no significant differences in the daily dry matter, total digestible nutrients and crude protein intake of the animals. However, significant differences were observed in terms of feed conversion efficiency and average daily gain. Digestion trials were conducted using four yearling crossbred Holstein x Red Sindhi bulls. Only three treatments were conducted, namely: 1 - sugarcane silage alone; 2 - sugarcane silage + molasses-urea mixture; and 3 - sugarcane silage rice bran - copra meal-dried poultry manure ration. Results of the digestion trials showed significant differences among treatments in digestible protein, fat, fiber and nitrogen-free-extract. However, no significant differences were observed in terms of total digestible nutrients. Economic analysis based on daily feed cost and cost per unit gain showed significant differences between treatments. The cost of feed to have 1 kg liveweight gain was lowest in Treatment 4, P4.66, followed by Treatment 3, P5.79 and 2, P6.69. No figure was placed on the cost per unit gain of Treatment 1 because the animals lost weight.
Показать больше [+] Меньше [-]Ключевые слова АГРОВОК
Библиографическая информация
Эту запись предоставил University of the Philippines at Los Baños