تولیدات دامی

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

پرسش‌های متداول

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

اخبار و اعلانات

بررسی ویژگی های شیمیایی و تغذیه ای سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی و تاثیر آن بر عملکرد بره های پرواری زندی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

گروه علوم دام و طیور، دانشکده فناوری کشاورزی، دانشگاه تهران، پاکدشت، ایران

10.22059/jap.2023.363118.623753

چکیده

به منظور بررسی ویژگی‌های شیمیایی و تغذیه‌ای سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی و تاثیر آن بر عملکرد بره‌های پرواری، از 24 راس بره نر زندی به مدت 75 روز در قالب طرح کاملا تصادفی استفاده شد. تیمارهای آزمایشی شامل شاهد (جیره پایه) و سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی (جایگزینی به میزان 20 درصد با کاه گندم و یونجه در جیره پایه) بودند. میزان ماده خشک، پروتئین خام، چربی خام، خاکستر، فیبر نامحلول در شوینده خنثی و فیبر نامحلول در شوینده اسیدی سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی به ترتیب 20، 11/8، 1/8، 8، 62 و 20/2 درصد تعیین گردید. پتانسیل تجزیه‌پذیری شکمبه‌ای ماده خشک و پتانسیل تولید گاز در شرایط آزمایشگاهی سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی پس از 96 ساعت انکوباسیون به ترتیب 83 درصد و 6/58 میلی‌لیتر در گرم ماده خشک برآورد گردید. استفاده از سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی در جیره بره‌های پرواری وزن پایانی و میانگین افزایش وزن روزانه را بهبود بخشید (0/05>P). استفاده از سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی باعث افزایش قابلیت هضم ماده خشک جیره گردید (0/05>P)، اما قابلیت هضم سایر مواد مغذی تحت تاثیر تیمارهای آزمایشی قرار نگرفت. فراسنجه‌های خونی شامل کلسترول، تری‌گلیسرید، HDLو LDL تحت تاثیر تیمارهای آزمایشی قرار نگرفتند به جز گلوکز که با تغذیه سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی کاهش یافت (0/05>P). تیمارهای آزمایشی هیچ تاثیر معنی داری بر صفات لاشه نداشتند. بر اساس نتایج حاصل از این مطالعه، استفاده از سیلاژ غلاف نخود فرنگی در جایگزینی با علوفه‌های رایج مانند کاه گندم و یونجه می‌تواند باعث بهبود عملکرد بره‌های پرواری و همچنین کاهش هزینه‌های پرورش گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The study of chemical and nutritional characteristics of pea (Pisum sativum L.) pod silage and its effect on the performance of finishing Zandi lambs

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Hamid Mousavi Esfiokhi
  • Mohammad Reza Sahlabadi
  • Behzad Khorrami

Department of Animal and Poultry Science, Faculty of Agricultural Technology, University of Tehran,, Pakdasht, Iran

چکیده [English]

In order to investigate the chemical and nutritional characteristics of pea pod silage (PPS) and its effect on the performance of fattening lambs, 24 Zandi male lambs (initial BW, 33.5 ±1.5 kg) were used in a completely randomized design over 75 days. Experimental treatments were: 1) control; (basal diet) 2- pea pod silage (PPS replaced wheat straw and alfalfa in the basal diet). The amount of dry matter (DM), crude protein, ether extract, ash, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber of PPS were determined 20, 11.8, 1.8, 8, 62 and 20.2 percent, respectively, and pH was 6.02. The rumen degradability potential of DM and in vitro gas production potential of PPS after 96 h of incubation were estimated 83 and 58.6 percent, respectively. The use of PPS in fattening lambs rations improved the final body weight and increased the daily weight gain (P<0.05). The amount of DM digestibility was affected by the treatment (P<0.05), but digestibility of other nutrients was not affected by the experimental treatment. Blood parameters (cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL and LDL) were not affected by the experimental treatments, except for the glucose, which significantly decreased by feeding PPS (P<0.05). The experimental treatments had no significant effect on carcass traits. Based on the results of this study, the use of pea pod silage as a cost-effective alternative forage in replacement with common forages such as wheat straw and alfalfa can improve the performance of fattening lambs.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Blood parameters
  • Digestibility
  • Fattening lambs
  • Pea pod silage
  • Performance
مراجع
Adesogan, A. T., Salawu, M. B., & Deaville, E. R. (2002). The effect on voluntary feed intake, in vivo digestibility and nitrogen balance in sheep of feeding grass silage or pea-wheat intercrops differing in pea wheat ratio and maturity. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 96, 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(01)00336-4.
Alaei, A., Ghanbari, F., Bayat Kouhsar, J., & Farivar, F. (2022). Effects of chemical processing on the nutritional value of green pea (Pisum sativum) residues. Journal of Livestock Science and Technologies, 10(1), 41-50. DOI: 10.22103/JLST.2022.19100.1400.
AOAC. (2005). Association of official analytical chemist official methods of analysis, AOAC, Washington, DC. 14th Ed.
Bastida Garcia, J. L., Gonzalez‐Ronquillo, M., Dominguez Vara, I. A., Romero‐Bernal, J., & Castelan Ortega, O. (2011). Effect of field pea (Pisum sativum L.) level on intake, digestion, ruminal fermentation and in vitro gas production in sheep fed maintenance diets. Animal science journal, 82(5), 654-662.
Blümmel, M., Makkar, H.P.S., & Becker, K. (1997). In vitro gas production: a technique revisited. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 77, 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0396.1997.tb00734.x.
Corbett, R.R., Okine, E.K., & Goonewardene, L.A. (1995). Effects of feeding peas to high-producing dairy cows. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 75, 625-629.
Dabral, D., Mondal, B.C., Lata, M., & Kumar, A. (2021). Effect of dietary incorporation of green pea (Pisum sativum L.) Pods on body weight gain, nutrient utilization and haemato-biochemical constituents in crossbred female calves. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 9(1), 788-793.
Depeters, E.J., Fadel, J.G., & Arosemena, A. (1997). Digestion kinetics of neutral detergent fiber and chemical composition within some selected by-product feedstuffs. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 67, 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(96)01145-5.
Dewhurst, R. J., Evans, R. T., Scollan, N. D., Moorby, J. M., Merry, R. J., & Wilkins. R. J. (2003). Comparison of grass and legume silages for milk production. 2. In vivo and in sacco evaluations of rumen function. Journal of Dairy Science, 86, 2612-2621. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73856-9.
Elzebroek, T., & Wind, K. (2008). Guide to cultivated plants. CAB International, Oxford shire, UK. FAO Statistical. 1995. Available at http://www.fao.org/corp/statistics/en. Faostat. (2015). 496 pages. retrieved from: http://faostat3.fao.org/download/Q/QC/E.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (September 2014). Retrieved on September 25, 2014 from FAO Website: http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/Q/QC/E.
Gasca, P.E.E. (1987). Voluntary ingestion and digestion characterization in the rumen of the pea by-product conserved through ensilage or hay. Master thesis. CIHEAM, Zaragoza, Spain. (In Spanish).
Goddard, J.S., & McLean, E. (2001). Acid insoluble ash as an inert reference material for digestibility studies in tilapia, Oreochromis aureus. Aquaculture, 194(1), 93-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(00)00499-3.
Goelema, J.O., Spreeuwenberg, M.A., Hof, G., Van der Poel, A.F.B., & Tamminga, S. (1998). Effect of pressure toasting on the rumen degradability and intestinal digestibility of whole and broken peas, lupins and faba beans and a mixture of these feedstuffs. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 76, 35-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(98)00212-0.
González García, U.A., Ronquillo, M.G., Flores, J.G.E., Bastida García, J.L., Salas, N.P., &  Salem, A.Z.M. (2011). Inclusion of field pea hay (Pisum sativum L.) and in vitro gas production in diets for growing lambs. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems, 14 (2011), 989-997.
Grasser, L. A., Garneit, J., & Depeters, E. J. (1995). Quantity and economic importance of nine selected by-products used in California dairy rations. Journal of Dairy Science, 78, 962-971. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(95)76711-X.
Gurbuz, Y. (2007). Determination of nutritive value of leaves of several Vitis vinifera varieties as a source of alternative feedstuff for sheep using in vitro and in situ measurements. Small Ruminant Research, 71(1-3), 59-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2006.04.009.
Hart, K. J., Sinclair, L. A., Wilkinson, R. G., & Huntington, J. A. (2011). Effect of whole-crop pea (Pisum sativum L.) silages differing in condensed tannin content as a substitute for grass silage and soybean meal on the performance, metabolism, and carcass characteristics of lambs. Journal of animal science, 89(11), 3663-3676. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2009-2617.
Kahn, C. M. (2005). The Merck Veterinary Manual. 10th ed. Merck and Co. Inc., Rahway, NJ. Khalil, J, Sawaya, W.N., & Hyder, S.Z. (1986). Nutrient composition of Atriplex leaves grown in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Range Management Archives, 39(2), 104-107.
Lanza, M., Bella, M., Priolo, A., & Fasone, A. (2003). Peas (Pisum sativum L.) as an alternative protein source in lamb diets: growth performances, and carcass and meat quality. Small Ruminant Research, 47, 63-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-4488(02)00244-4.
Loe, E.R.., Bauer, M.L., Lardy, G.P., Caton, J.S., Berg, P.T. (2004). Field pea (Pisum sativum) inclusion in corn-based lamb finishing diets. Small Ruminant Research, 53, 39-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2003.08.020.
Kavian, A., Abbasi, A., Gharehbash, A. M., Pasandi, M., & Kamali, R. (2005). Introduction of pea farming waste for livestock feeding (chemical composition and digestibility coefficients by In vivo method. 2nd National Conference on the study of agricultural product waste. Tehran. Iran. (In persian).
Menke, K., & Steinggass, H. (1988). Estimation of the energetic feed value from chemical analyses and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research and Development, 28, 7-55.
Mustafa, A. F., Seguin, P., Ouellet, D. R., & Adelye, I. (2002). Effects of cultivars on ensiling characteristics, chemical composition, and ruminal degradability of pea silage. Journal of dairy science, 85(12), 3411-3419. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74429-9.
Ørskov, E., & McDonald, I. (1979). The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from Incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 92 (2), 499-503. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600063048.
Petit, H.V., Rioux, R., & Ouellet, D.R. (1997). Milk production and intake of lactating cows fed raw or extruded peas. Journal of Dairy Science, 80, 3377-3385. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76313-6.
Pursley, A.A., Biligetu, B., Warkentin, T., Lardner H.A., & Penner G.B. (2019). Effect of stage of maturity at harvest for forage pea (Pisum sativum L.) on eating behavior, ruminal fermentation, and digestibility when fed as hay to yearling beef heifers. Translational Animal Science, 4(1), 149-158. https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txz167.
Reed, J.J., Lardy, G.P., Bauer, M.L., Gilbery, T.C., & Caton, J.S. (2004). Effect of field pea level on intake, digestion, microbial efficiency, ruminal fermentation, and in situ disappearance in beef steers fed growing diets. Journal of Animal Science, 82, 2123-2130. DOI: 10.2527/2004.8272185x.
Rondahl, T., Bertilsson, J., Lindgren, E., & Martinsson, K. (2006) Effects of stage of maturity and conservation strategy on fermentation, feed intake and digestibility of whole-crop pea-oat silage used in dairy production. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section a-Animal Science, 56, 137-147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09064700701284936.
SAS Institute. (2004). SAS®/STAT Software, Release 9.4. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. USA.
Seif Devati, J., Eslami, Z., Abdi Benmar, H., Mirzaei Agje Qashlaq, F., & Seyed Sharifi, R. (2018). Components of phenolic compounds of green pea pods (Pisum sativum L.) and their effects on ruminal digestibility and gas production under laboratory conditions. Iran Animal Science Research, 9(3), 284-299. (In persian).
Sinclair, L. A., Hart, K. J., Wilkinson, R. G., & Huntington, J. A. (2009). Effects of inclusion of whole-crop pea silages differing in their tannin content on the performance of dairy cows fed high or low protein concentrates. Livestock Science, 124, 306 313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2009.02.011.
Stern, M.D., Bach, A., & Calsamiglia, S. (1997). Alternative techniques for measuring nutrient digestion in ruminants. Journal of Animal Science, 75, 2256-2276. DOI: 10.2527/1997. 582256x.
Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B., & Lewis, B.A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and no starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583-3597. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2.
Wallace, R. J., Wallace, S. J. A., McKain, N., Nsereko, V. L., & Hartnell, G. F. (2001). Influence of supplementary fibrolytic enzymes on the fermentation of corn and grass silages mixed ruminal microorganisms in vitro. Journal of Animal Science, 79(7), 1905-1916. DOI: 10.2527/2001.7971905x.
Wilkins, R. J., & Jones, R. (2000). Review article-Alternative home-grown protein sources for ruminants in the United Kingdom. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 85, 23-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00140-1.
Woodman, H. E., & Evans, R. E. (1944). The chemical composition and nutritive value of the pea-canning by-products (Green pea pods, pea-pod meal, pea-pod silage and molasses silage from pea haulms with pods). The Journal of Agricultural Science, 34(3), 155-164. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600019870.
تولیدات دامی
دوره 25، شماره 4
دی 1402
صفحه 375-388
فایل ها
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار