Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:20:03.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of the inclusion of tropical tree legumes, Gliricidia sepium and Leucaena leucocephala, on the nutritive value of silages prepared from tropical grasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. Tjandraatmadja ,
I. C. MacRae  and
B. W. Norton
M. Tjandraatmadja
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 40721, Australia
I. C. MacRae
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
B. W. Norton
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 40721, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Silages were prepared from the tropical grasses, pangola grass (Digitaria decumbens) and setaria (Setaria sphacelata), with the addition of molasses (4% w/w) and/or leaves (33%) from the leguminous trees leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala) and gliricidia (Gliricidia sepium). All forages were grown at the University of Queensland farm in south eastern Queensland during 1985. These silages, together with hays made from these grasses and sorghum silage (13 diets) were fed to sheep to assess their nutritive value. All silages were well preserved, as indicated by low pH (3·5–4·4), low ammonia N (26–57 g/kg total N) and high lactic acid (73–95% total acids) contents. The addition of legumes increased both the dry matter (DM) and total N (TN) contents of silages to the same extent as the addition of both legumes and molasses at ensiling. Sheep given silages prepared from pangola grass and legumes (±molasses) consumed similar DM intakes (22·9–25·4 g/kg0·75 per day) as sheep given pangola grass hay (23·9 g/kg0'75 per day). Silage made from pangola grass + molasses was of low palatability (16·1 g/kg0·75 per day). The digestibilities of silage DM (DMD) and its fibrous components were significantly (P<0·05) lower (DMD 53·3–60·6%) than that of pangola hay (DMD 64·7%). Silages and hay made from setaria, and sorghum silage, were of lower nutritive value than those from pangola grass. The addition of leucaena and molasses increased silage DM intakes (21·1 g/kg0·75 per day) above those for setaria hay and setaria + molasses silage (16·7 and 19·0 g/kg0·75 per day respectively). The intakes of silages made from gliricidia (17·1 g/kg0·75 per day) were significantly (P <0·05) improved when molasses was included at ensiling (21·8 g/kg0·75 per day). The digestibilities of silage DM were significantly (P<0·05) higher (DMD 53·6–60·4%) than that of setaria hay (DMD 40·6). Liveweight change in sheep was significantly (P<0·05) correlated with intakes of digestible DM (r2= 0·74) and with N intake (r2= 0·82). The inclusion of legumes in the silages increased N retention and, for setaria silages, also increased rumen ammonia concentration. It was concluded that tropical grasses can be effectively ensiled by the addition of legumes alone and, with the exception of setaria/gliricidia silages, the resultant silages were of sufficiently high quality to merit their use in tropical animal production systems.

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 120 , Issue 3 , June 1993 , pp. 397 - 406
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

Agricultural Research Council (1980). The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Aguilera, G. R. (1975). Dynamics of the fermentation of tropical grass silage. 1. Elephant grass (P. purpureum) without additives. Cuban Journal of Agricultural Science 9, 227–235.Google Scholar
Campling, R. C. (1966). The intake of silage and hay by cows. Journal of the British Grassland Society 21, 41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catchpoole, V. R. (1969). Preliminary studies on curing and storing Nandi setaria hay. Tropical Grasslands 3, 65–74.Google Scholar
Catchpoole, V. R. & Henzell, E. F. (1971). Silage and silage-making from tropical herbage species. Herbage Abstracts 41, 213–221.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, D. G. (1988). Effect of added glucose and xylose on the fermentation of perennial ryegrass silage inoculated with Lactobacillus plantarum. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 46, 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheeke, P. R. & Raharjo, Y. C. (1987). Evaluation of Gliricidia sepium forage and leaf meal as feedstuffs for rabbits and chickens. In Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Walp.: Management and Improvement (Eds Withington, D., Glover, N. & Brewbaker, J. L.), pp. 193–198. Waimanalo, Hawaii: Nitrogen Fixing Tree Association.Google Scholar
Cochran, W. G. & Cox, G. M. (1957). Experimental Designs, 2nd edn.New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Donaldson, E. & Edwards, R. A. (1980). Metabolism, within the rumen, of silages made with formaldehyde. In Forage Conservation in the 80's (Ed. Thomas, C.), pp. 350–355. Hurley, Maidenhead: British Grassland Society.Google Scholar
Dubois, M., Gillies, K. A., Hamilton, J. K., Reibers, P. A. & Smith, F. (1956). Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry 28, 350–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, R., McMeniman, N. P., Norton, B. W. & Calderon-Cortes, F. J. (1984). The food intake response of sheep fed five roughage sources supplemented with formaldehyde treated casein with and without urea. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 15, 337–340.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage fibre analysis. In Agricultural Handbook, United States Department of Agriculture No. 379.Google Scholar
Haigh, P. M. & Hopkins, J. R. (1977). Relationship between oven and toluene dry matter in grass silage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 28, 477–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holdeman, L. V., Cato, E. P. & Moore, W. E. C. (1977). Anaerobe Laboratory Manual, 4th edn.Blacksburg: The Virginia Polytechnic Institute Anaerobe Laboratory.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. R., Balwani, T. L., Johnson, L. J., McClure, K. E. & Dehority, B. A. (1966). Corn plant maturity. II. Effect on in vitro cellulose digestibility and soluble carbohydrate content. Journal of Animal Science 25, 617–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kass, M. L. & Rodriguez, G. (1987). Preliminary studies on silage making from Gliricidia sepium (madero negro). In Gliricidia sepium (Jacq.) Walp.: Management and Improvement (Eds Withington, D., Glover, N. & Brewbaker, J. L.), pp. 201–204. Waimanalo, Hawaii: Nitrogen Fixing Tree Association.Google Scholar
Little, E. L. Jr, & Wadsworth, F. H. (1964). Common Trees of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Agricultural Handbook, USDA Forest Service No. 249.Google Scholar
McCarrick, R. B. (1962). Effect of additives on silages made from different herbages. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 1, 267–282.Google Scholar
McDonald, P. (1981). The Biochemistry of Silage. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
McDonald, P. & Whittenbury, R. (1973). The ensilage process. In Chemistry and Biochemistry of Herbage (Eds Butler, G. W. & Bailey, R. W.), Volume 3, pp. 33–60. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Murdoch, J. C. (1980). The conservation of grass. In Grass, its Production and Utilization (Ed. Holmes, W.), pp. 174–215. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Nilsson, G. & Nilsson, P. E. (1956). The microflora on the surface of some fodder plants at different stages of maturity. Archiv fur Mikrobiologie 24, 412–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norton, B. W. (1982). Differences between species in forage quality. In Nutritional Limits to Animal Production from Pastures (Ed. Hacker, J. B.), pp. 89–110. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Panditharatne, S., Allen, V. G., Fontenot, J. P. & Jayasuriya, M. C. N. (1986). Ensiling characteristics of tropical grasses as influenced by stage of growth, additives and chopping length. Journal of Animal Science 63, 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, J. W. G. & Bastiman, B. (1982). Effect of additives on nutrient losses and feeding value of silage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 33, 877.Google Scholar
Paterson, D. D. (1945). Ensilage investigations with tropical forages. Tropical Agriculture, Trinidad 22, 43–48.Google Scholar
Playne, M. J. (1985). Determination of ethanol, volatile fatty acids, lactic and succinic acids in fermentation liquids by gas chromatography. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 36, 638–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooke, J. A., Brett, P. A., Overend, M. A. & Armstrong, D. G. (1985). The energetic efficiency of rumen microbial protein synthesis in cattle given silage-based diets. Animal Feed Science and Technology 13, 255–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, M. & Lund, C. W. (1980). Improved gas-liquid chromatography for simultaneous determination of volatile fatty acids and lactic acid in silage. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 28, 1040–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjandraatmadja, M., Norton, B. W. & MacRae, I. C. (1991). Fermentation patterns of forage sorghum ensiled under different environmental conditions. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 1, 206–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tjandraatmadja, M., Norton, B. W. & MacRae, I. C. (1993). Ensilage of tropical grasses mixed with legumes and molasses. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology.Google Scholar
Wieringa, G. W. (1966). The influence of nitrate on silage fermentation. Proceedings of the Tenth International Grassland Congress, Helsinki, 1966, pp. 537–540. Helsinki: Finnish Grassland Association.Google Scholar