Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

The Effect of Momordica foetida Inclusion on Feed Intake, Digestibility, Growth Performance and Economic Efficiency of Bonga Sheep Fed on Desho (Pedicellatium glocifolium) Grass Hay as a Basal Diet

Altmetrics

Downloads

129

Views

85

Comments

0

Submitted:

02 June 2023

Posted:

20 June 2023

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
This experiment examined the effect of feeding graded levels of Momordica foetida leaf (MFL) as a substitute for Noug Seed Cake (NSC) on feed intake, digestibility, growth performance, and economic efficiency. Forty-two yearling lambs (16.1±0.6 kg) were randomly allotted to six dietary treatment groups for 90 days feeding trial followed by ten days digestibility trial. Treatments were T1(Control) = adlibitum PG (Pennisetum glaucifolium) + 449.3gm WB (Wheat Bran), T2 = 449.3gm WB + 100% MFL; T3 = 449.3gm WB + 75% MFL + 25% NSC; T4 = 449.3gm WB + 50% MFL + 50% NSC; T5 = 449.3gm WB + 25% MFL + 75% NSC; T6 = PG + 449.3gm WB + 0% MFL + 100% NSC. Data were analyzed using SAS's General Linear Model (GLM) procedures (version 9.4, 2019). The result indicates that the increasing level of MFL had no significant effect on basal dry matter intake. The apparent digestibility of DM was higher (P<0.001) in T1 (60.5%) and T6 (62.5%); a higher (P<0.001) average daily gain was recorded for animals in T6 (171.0g/d). The cost-benefit analysis revealed that T5 has a good and optimum final body weight gain (30.5kg), 765.5 ET/head total return, and 381.1 ETB/head net return. It was concluded that 25% inclusion of MFL in the diet increases nutrient intake, weight gain and economic efficiency in Bonga sheep.
Keywords: 
Subject: Biology and Life Sciences  -   Animal Science, Veterinary Science and Zoology

1. Introduction

Feeding the agro-industrial by-products such as oil seed cakes and brans as supplements to low-quality basal diets by smallholder farmers is being challenged by high prices and scarcity due to the high demand for such feeds to the urban and peri-urban development of commercial farms [1]. On the other hand, multipurpose trees that are available year-round in the tropics and require low agronomic inputs could improve the nutritive value of low-quality basal diets.
In some African countries, Momordica spp is widely cultivated [2] and commercially grown for its nutritional value [3]. The fruits, leafy shoots, and ripe seeds are utilized as vegetables [4]. Momordica foetida leaf (MFT) is rich in energy, protein, fiber, calcium, iron, magnesium, zinc, β-carotene, foliate, and ascorbic acid [5, 6, 7]. The leaves are used as fodder and protein supplements [8], the dominant local forage at forest edges and farmlands with large biomass in the study area.
Hence, MFL under smallholder farming can become a cheaper feed alternative than agro-industrial by-products. Therefore, the current experiment assessed the effect of substituting MFL for NSC on feed intake, digestibility, BLW change, and economic efficiency of Bonga sheep fed a basal grass hay diet. We hypothesized that the positive attributes of MFL, when replaced with a NSC, would improve the performance of sheep. To test this hypothesis, we examined the effect of replacing MFL with NSC offered on dry matter intake (DMI), average daily gain (ADG), feed digestibility, and economic efficiency of Bonga sheep.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of the study area

The experiment was conducted at the Modiyo sheep research sub-station located at 7° 26′ N latitude and 36° 47′ E longitude with an elevation of 1867 masl. Based on the eight [8] years of data, the average daily temperatures are 14 and 17◦C, respectively. The average annual rainfall ranges were from 1600 to 2200 mm. The primary rainy season of the area extends from April to November, covering more than eight months of the year. The study area is characterized by clay loam soil and dominated by a mixed crop-livestock production system [9]
Management of animals and experimental design conducted. Forty-two yearlings’ male intact lambs with initial body weight (IBW) of 16.8 ± 1.9 kg were purchased from Boka-Shuta community-based breeding cooperatives. They were housed individually in 2.0m × 1m pens and randomly assigned into six dietary treatment groups with seven replications in a completely randomized block experimental design. The sheep were allowed 14 days of adaptation. Before the experiment, sheep were treated against internal and external parasites with albendazole and diazinon.
The sheep were blocked by initial body weight and assigned to six treatment groups in a completely randomized block design. Treatments; T1(Control)=adlibitum PG + 449.3gm WB, T2 = 449.3gm WB + 100% MFL; T3 = 449.3gm WB + 75% MFL + 25% NSC; T4 = 449.3gm WB + 50% MFL + 50% NSC; T5 = 449.3gm WB + 25% MFL + 75% NSC; T6 = PG + 449.3gm WB + 0% MFL + 100% NSC as indicated in Table 1.

2.2. Chemical analysis

The DM, organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP), and ash were determined according to AOAC (2005). CP content was measured by the Kjeldahl method as N*6.25. The content of neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and acid detergent lignin (ADL) was determined according to Van Soest and Robertson.

2.3. Measurements

2.3.1. Feed intake and conversion efficiency

The supplements were offered in two equal portions at 8:00 h and 16:00 h daily, and the experimental sheep had free access to mineral block and water. Daily feed intake measurements were made for the 90 days of the feeding trial. The daily feed intake of individual animals was calculated as follows:
Feed intake (g) = Amount of feed offered (g) – Amount of feed refused (g).
The metabolizable energy (ME) intake of experimental animals was estimated from its digestible organic matter intake (DOMI) by using the formula,
ME (MJ/kg DM) = DOMI × 0.0157.
Where DOMI = g digestible OM/ kg DM.
Feed conversion efficiency was measured using the formula.
F e e d   c o n v e r s i o n   e f f i c i e n c y = A v e r a g e   d a i l y   l i v e   w e i g h t   g a i n   ( g ) A v e r a g e   d a i l y   f e e d   i n t a k e   ( g )

2.3.2. Feed digestibility

The digestibility trial was conducted for seven days after ninety days of experimental feed. Faeces were collected and weighed every morning for each animal before giving feed or water. The daily collected faces from each animal were weighed and mixed thoroughly, and 20% were sampled and kept in airtight plastic containers and stored at −20 °C up to the completion of the digestibility trial. The apparent digestibility percentage of DM, CP, Ash, NDF, ADF, and ADL [11].
Digestibility (%) = N u t r i e n t   i n t a k e − N u t r i e n t   e x c r e t e d   i n   f a e c e s N u t r i e n t   i n t a k e *100

2.3.3. Live weight change and daily gain

The live weight of each animal was taken every 15 days at intervals in the morning before the provision of feed and water. The live weight gain has been calculated as ted the difference between the final body weight and the initial live weights of the bucks. Average daily gain (ADG) was calculated as follows:
A D G ( k g / d ) = F i n a l   b o d y   w e i g h t   ( K g ) – I n i t i a l   l i v e   w e i g h t   ( K g ) N o .   o f   f e e d i n g   d a y s *100

2.3.4. Partial budget analysis

The partial budget analysis was taken to determine the cost-benefit (profitability) analysis supplementation of different proportions of MFL instead of concentrate mix. At the end of the experiment, the selling price of each experimental sheep was estimated by three experienced local sheep dealers. The average of those three estimation prices was taken. The total returns (TR) were determined by calculating the difference between the estimated selling prices and purchasing price of the experimental goat. Net return (NR) was calculated as follows.
NR = TR − TVC
The change in net return (ΔNR) was calculated as the difference between the change in total return (ΔTR) and the change in total variable costs (ΔTVC).
ΔNR = ΔTR – ΔTVC

2.4. Statistical analysis

The data collected on feed intake, digestibility, and body weight gain were subjected to the analysis of variance (ANOVA) model for RCBD using Statistical Analysis System Software (SAS version 9.1). When the differences in treatment means were significant at the probability level of P<0.05, the means were compared using the Least significant difference (LSD) test.
The statistical model used was:
Yij =μ+ Ti+Bj + eij
where;
Yij = the dependent variable, µ =overall mean,
Ti =effect of treatment, and Bj=block effect eij =random error.

3. Results

3.1. Chemical composition of treatment feeds

The chemical composition of the feeds used in the present study is specified in Table 1. The CP content of the hay refusals was decreased while the content of NDF, ADF, and ADL increased compared to the hay offered.

3.2. Feed and nutrient intake

As indicated in Table 2, sheep supplemented with 201.9 g NSC and 83g MFL+151.4 g NSC had the highest ADL intake values than sheep supplemented with 166.1gMFL+100.9gNSC, 249gMFL+50.5gNSC, and 332.1gMFL. Contrary to the result of NDF and ADL intake, ADF intake was non-significant (P > 0.05) among the groups.

3.3. Dry matter and nutrients digestibility

The apparent DM and nutrient digestibility percentages of experimental feeds are shown in Table 3. Apparent DM digestibility recorded was highest in groups supplemented 201.9 g NSC (P < 0.05) but statically similar with groups supplemented 83g MFL+151.4 g NSC. The apparent CP digestibility in groups supplemented 201.9 g NSC and 83g MFL+151.4 g NSC was higher (P < 0.001) than 166.1gMFL+100.9gNSC and 249gMFL+50.5gNSC.

3.4. Body weight gain

The mean values of initial and final body weight (BW), daily BW gain, and feed conversion efficiency (FCE) of the experimental animals are indicated in Table 4. The result indicated that the effect of the replacement was significant on average daily and final BW gain, final BW, FCE, and protein conversion efficiency (PCE) of experimental animals (P > 0.05).

3.5. Partial budget analysis

The partial budget analysis of Bonga sheep fed on PG hay and replaced different proportions of MFL with concentrates mix is presented in Table 5. The cost-benefit analysis of the replacement value of MFL with CM in this study is presented in Table 5. Accordingly, the lowest total variable cost recorded in T1, T2, T3, T4, T5 and T6 was 73.4, 134.35, 195.98, 258.03, 317.0, and 379.6 ETB/head, respectively. T6 has the highest net return recorded compared to other treatments, which was 310.4ETB/head and the second higher net return obtained from animals in T5, 222.99 ETB/head, followed by T4, T3, which was 131.9, 64.0 ETB/head respectively. A higher total return (310.4ETB/head) was obtained from the sheep-supplemented 201.9 g NSC following the sheep-supplemented 83g MFL+151.4 g NSC with a total return (of 222.99 ETB/head). As the partial budget analysis indicated, groups supplemented 201.9 g NSC and 83g MFL+151.4 g NSC returned a higher net income than the other groups.

4. Discussion

The CP content of MFL in the current study is higher than the study [8] which supplemented dwarf West African goats with Tephrosia canadida and Girilicida sepeium browses species which contain (19.78 %) and (19.25 %) Girilicida sepeium and Tephrosia. Crude Protein content in this study was higher than [9], who reported CP for Vernnonia amygdalin (22.5%) and Mulbery (18.5). Furthermore, the CP content observed in the current study was consistent with the nutritive value of tropical forage plant Moringa oleifera (32.4 %) and Acacia mangium (17.7 %) fed to pigs reported by Kambashi [10].
In this study, the substitution positively affected the total DM intake of the experimental sheep. Higher intake was observed when more CP was present in the substituted diets. An animal with a daily body weight gain (of 150g/d) may be given daily intakes of (560g/d), (76g/d), and (6.4 MJ/kgDM) for DM, CP, and ME, respectively [11]. The increase in total DMI and nutrient intake because of the substitution is a common finding in various studies. The feed intake of sheep fed Vetch (Lathyrus sativus) haulm was increased by substituting wheat bran, Acacia albida leaf meal, or mixtures of these ingredients [12]. The current study's total dry matter intake was higher than previous studies (839-886 g/d) [13]. Instead, the current dry matter intake was lower than [14] total dry matter intake of (1330.7g-1400.9 g) but comparable to Desta’s [15] total dry matter intake of (416.25g-919.96 g/kg DM /d). Variations in different results, including this finding, could be attributed to animal breed, forage type, microclimate, and feed preparation. In this study, CP intake was lower in the control group (39.42 g/kg DM) than in the supplemented groups (105.01-134.64 g/kg DM/d). This is consistent with the findings of Desta [15] and Tesfaye [16], who replaced mulberry leaf with varying levels of concentrate mix. In this study, however, fiber (NDFI) intake was variable and significantly (P<0.05) different between treatments. Thus, according to Van Soest and Robertson [17], it is a cell wall component of feed recovered in faeces.
The DM digestibility in this study was lower than the results of previous studies [18 & 19]. According to Zewdu’s [20] DMD model, less than 65% was due to the model proposed for developing countries, where dry matter digestibility is typically low due to relatively low climatic conditions. According to the report of Rathod [21], biologically active chemicals in M.foetida are glycosides, saponins, alkaloids, fixed oils, triterpenes, proteins, and steroids that may have a reduced apparent digestibility.
In the current experiment, the digestibility of CP was significantly (P< 0.05) different among the treatment group. But the current result of CP digestibility was lower (63-87%) than Awoke [22], who supplemented Washera sheep with Ficus sycomorus Leaf, fruit, and their mixtures; Gezahegn [23] (73.0-81.0 %); and (76.0 %) [24]. While the current study's crude protein digestibility was comparable (62.0-79.0 %) [25], and the result was higher (56.8-60.9 %) [26]. The difference in digestibility between treatment groups could be due to the different feed compositions. Furthermore, according to McDonald [27], the digestibility of the feed is influenced by the composition of other feed consumed with it, and the associated effect can result in a higher or lower digestibility rate.
The difference in body weight change and average daily gain observed in this study could be attributed to differences in daily DM and CP intake and the digestibility of the respective treatment diets [28]. Feed conversion efficiency (FCE) significantly(P>0.001) between the dietary treatments.
Urge [29] reported 24.5 g/day body weight loss in Adilo sheep fed only grass hay and 13.2-36.1 g/d body weight gain in sheep supplemented with haricot bean screenings and sweet potato tubers. Similarly, the higher total DM and CP intake and better digestibility of the treatment diets may explain the increased weight gain and average daily gain in supplemented groups compared to the control group. The current study confirms with Mengistu [30] that MF leaves did not affect the final body weight of lambs. A significant difference (P>0.05) in weight gain between treatments. Furthermore, sheep supplemented with a higher level of NSC had greater (P>0.05) average daily gain 171.0 g/d, 152.0 g/d, and 124.1 g/d) for T6, T5, and T4, respectively. The difference in body weight change and average daily gain observed in this study could be attributed to differences in daily DM and CP intake and the digestibility of the respective treatment diets [31]. Feed conversion efficiency (FCE) significantly(P>0.001) between the dietary treatments.
The economic analysis indicated that total return (selling price of sheep) was higher for sheep fed on T6 and T5 diets due to higher final body weight resulting in 32.5 kg and 30.5 kg for T6 and T5. But T1 had a low rate of total return due to its low body weight(20.6kg). Among treatments, T5 has the optimum total return of 540ETB/head, which had a proportion of 25:75% NSC to MFL diet and had an optimum body weight of 33.8kg, followed by T4, which has 390ETB/head total return.T4 has an excellent daily weight gain 141.4g/day, changes in net return (67.95ETB/head) and 1.09 marginal rate of return .T5 has an excellent daily body weight gain 188g/day), 91.0 changes in net return and optimum marginal rate of return (1.5)compared to other treatments. T3 had 64.0 ETB net returns, 28.3 changes in net return, and 0.46 marginal rate of return, followed by T2 with 35.65 net return, 29.0 changes in net return, and 0.4 marginal rates of return were the lowest in economic feasibility. The changes in net return and marginal rate return indicated that per 1ETB increment investment to purchase concentrate (NSC) to attain required body weight by replacement with MFL meal could return 0.47, 0.46, 1.09, 1.5 and 1.3, respectively. Moreover, the MRR indicated that an additional unit of 1ETB per sheep cost increment resulted in 1ETB an additional 0.47, 0.46, 1.09, 1.5 and 1.3 benefits from T2, T3, T4, T5 and T6, respectively.

5. Conclusions

The feed mixture of T3 25 % MFL +75% NSC (83g MFL+151.4 g NSC) levels replace the NSC as a protein source in the diet, improving feed intake and body weight gain. Based on partial budget analysis, replacing MFL instead of NSC displayed a reduction in feed cost and an increase in net return. Therefore, replacing NSC with MFL at 25% is a viable option as an alternative protein source for Bonga sheep's production and productivity. However, further investigation is needed on the agronomic trait evaluation and anti-nutritional factors.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.Z, K.Y., T.T., and J.W.; methodology, M.Z., K.Y., T.T., and J.W.; formal analysis, M.Z., and K.Y.; investigation, M.Z, K.Y., T.T., and J.W.; resources, J.W.; data curation, M.Z., K.Y.; writing-original draft preparation, M.Z., K.Y writing-review and editing M.Z, K.Y., T.T., and J.W.; supervision, M.Z, K.Y., T.T., and J.W.; funding acquisition, J.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was funded by the CGIAR Collaborative Research Program, Livestock, Feeds & Forage Flagship, and the One CGIAR SAPING Initiative.

Institutional Review Board Statement

All the animal procedures were according to the Animals welfare guideline of Jimma University.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank ICARDA for financing the study. Further, we would like to thank the Bonga Agricultural Research Centre (BARC) for assistance during the experiment.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mekasha, Y.; Tegegne, A.; Yami, A.; Umunna N., N. Evaluation of non-conventional agro-industrial by-products as supplementary ruminant feeds: in vitro and metabolism study with sheep. Small Rumin. Res 2002, 44, 25–35. [Google Scholar]
  2. Muronga, M., Quispe C., Tshikhudo P. P., Msagati T. A. M., Mudau F. N., Martorell M., & Sharifi-Rad J. Three selected edible crops of the genus Momordica as potential sources of phytochemicals: biochemical, nutritional, and medicinal values. Frontiers in Pharmacology 2021, 12, 4–6.
  3. Waako, P. J. , Gumede B., Smith P., and Folb P. I. The In Vitro and In Vivo Antimalarial Activity of Cardiospermum halicacabum l. And Momordica foetida schumch. Et Thonn. J. Ethnopharmacology 2005, 99, 137–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Cantwell, M., Nie X., Zong R. J., and Yamaguchi M. (1996). Progress in New Crops. Arlington: ASHS Press 1996, 488–495.
  5. Oloyede, O. I. , and Aluko O. M. Determination of Antioxidant Potential of Momordica foetida Leaf Extract on Tissue Homogenate. Sci. J. Clin. Med. Trial 2012, 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  6. Puškárová, A., Bučková M., Kraková L., Pangallo D., and Kozics K. (). The Antibacterial and Antifungal Activity of Six Essential Oils and Their Cyto/genotoxicity to Human HEL 12469 Cells. Sci. Rep 2017, 7, 21–22.
  7. Abegunde, M. T., Akinpelu D. A., Omololu-Aso J., Otusanya O. O., and Akinlolu J. T. Determination of Antimicrobial, Antioxidant and Phytochemical Properties of Cocos Nucifera Linn Endocarp Extract on Bacteria Associated with Human Infection. J. Pharm. Microbiol 2018, 4.
  8. Jacob, B. O. & BAMIKOLE M. A. Nutritive value of Tephrosia candida seed in West African dwarf goats. Journal of Central European Agriculture 2006, 7, 4–8. [Google Scholar]
  9. Gezahegn M, Getnet A., and Samuel T. Noug Seed (Guizotia abyssinica) Cake Substituted with Dried Mulberry (Morus indica) and Vernonia amygdalina Mixed Leaves’ Meal on Growth Performances of Bonga Sheep at Teppi, Ethiopia. Hindawi, Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism 2020.
  10. Kambashi, B. , Picron P., Boudry C., Thewis A., Kiatoko H., & Bindelle, J. Nutritive value of tropical forage plants fed to pigs in the Western provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2014, 191, 47–56. [Google Scholar]
  11. McDonald, P.; Edwards, R.A.; Greenhalgh, J.F.D.; Morgan, C.A.; Sinclair, L.A; Wilkinson, R.G. Animal Nutrition, 7th ed.; Ashford Color Press Ltd.: England, 2010; pp. 499–520. [Google Scholar]
  12. Takele, F. Growth performance and carcass characteristics of Horro lambs fed vetch (Lathyrus sativus) haulm supplemented with Acacia albida leaf meal, wheat bran and mixtures: Master’s thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia, 2010.
  13. Araujo, L. C. D. , Santos P. M., Rodriguez D. & Pezzopane, J. R. M. Key factors that influence for seasonal production of Guinea grass. Scientia Agricola 2018, 7, 191–196. [Google Scholar]
  14. Kahsu, A. , Tikabo G., & Teferi, A. Feed intake, digestibility, and growth performance of Begait sheep were kept under different feeding options. African Journal of Agricultural Research 2021, 17, 378–386. [Google Scholar]
  15. Desta, T. G. , Yadav R. K., & Teferi A. T. (2017). Substitute dried mulberry (Morus indica L.) leaf meal for concentrate mix on feed intake, digestibility, body weight gain and carcass characteristics of Abergelle sheep. International Journal of Livestock Production 2017, 8, 48–56. [Google Scholar]
  16. Tesfay, G. , Tamir B., & Berhane, G. Carcass and non-carcass characteristics of Tigray highland lambs fed mulberry (Morus alba) leaf meal at different supplementation levels. Journal of Scientific and Innovative Research, 2017, 6, 104–109. [Google Scholar]
  17. Van Soest, P.J. and Robertson J. B. (1985). Analyses of Forage and Fibrous Foods. A Laboratory Manual for Animal Science 613. vol. 31. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA 1985; pp. 399–405.
  18. Mengistu, A. , Kebede G., Feyissa F. and Assefa G. (2017). Review on major feed resources in Ethiopia: Conditions, challenges, and opportunities. Academic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Research 2017, 5, 176–185. [Google Scholar]
  19. Birilie, E. Effect of Harvesting Day and Plant Spacing on Agronomic Performance, Yield and Chemical Composition of Brachiaria hybrid cv. Mulato II under Irrigation Condition at Kudmi Site, North Mecha District, Ethiopia. Doctoral dissertation. Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia, 2021.
  20. Zewdu, T., & Sufi A. H. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer application on agronomic traits, biomass yield and nutritive value of Cenchrus ciliaris and Panicum maximum grew under irrigation at gode, Somali region. Doctoral dissertation. Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia, 2014.
  21. Rathod, V., Narasegowda N. C., Papanna N., & Simon L. Evaluation of genetic diversity and genome fingerprinting of bitter gourd genotypes (Momordica charantia L.) by morphological and RAPD markers. Int. J. Plant Breed 2008, 2, 79–84.
  22. Awoke, K., & Mekasha Y. Effects of supplementation with sycamore fig (Ficus sycomorus) on performances of Washera sheep fed natural pasture hay and its economic benefit. Global Journal of Animal Scientific Research, 2014, 2, 130–142.
  23. Gezahegn, M. Noug Seed (Guizotia abyssinica) Cake Substituted with Dried Mulberry (Morus indica) on Growth Performances of Bonga Sheep at Teppi, Ethiopia. Hindawi, Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism 2020.
  24. Desta, S. T. , Yuan X., Li, J., & Shao T. Ensiling characteristics, structural and nonstructural carbohydrate composition and enzymatic digestibility of Napier grass ensiled with additives. Bioresource Technology, 2016, 10, 447–454. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mekuriaw, Y., & Asmare B. Nutrient intake, digestibility, and growth performance of Washera lambs fed natural pasture hay supplemented with graded levels of Ficus thonningii (Chibha) leaves as a replacement for concentrate mixture. Agriculture & food security 2018, 7, 1–8.
  26. Sonawane, A. S., Deshpande K. Y., Rathod S. B., Shelke P. R., Nikam M. G., & Gholve, A. U. Effect of feeding Hedge lucerne (Desmanthus virgatus) on intake, growth performance and body condition score in growing Osmanabadi goats. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 2019, 89, 881–884.
  27. McDonald, P., Edwards R.A.J.F.D. and Morgan, Nutrition Animal Greenhalgh, 2002.
  28. Ali, A. I., Wassie S. E., Joergensen R. G., Korir D., Goopy J. P., Butterbach-Bahl K.,. & Schlecht E. Feed quality and feeding level affect fecal composition in East African cattle farming systems. Animals 2021, 11, 54–56.
  29. Urge, M., Kristina D., and Kerstin O. "Effect of intermittent watering on growth, thermoregulation and behaviour of Ethiopian Somali goat kids. Small Ruminant Research 2007, 214–220.
  30. Mengistu, U., Kefelegn K., & Gebretnsae W. M. Effects of supplementing cactus cladode and acacia senegal branches on intake, digestibility and body weight gain of Tigray highland sheep fed barley straw. J Fisheries Livest Prod 2016.
  31. Wassie, S. E., Ali A. I. M., Korir D., Butterbach-Bahl K., Goopy J., Merbold L. & Dickhoefer U. Effects of feed intake level on the efficiency of microbial protein synthesis and nitrogen balance in Boran steers consuming tropical poor-quality forage. Archives of animal nutrition 2019, 7, 140–157.
Table 1. Chemical composition of feed used in the experiments.
Table 1. Chemical composition of feed used in the experiments.
Chemical composition of experimental feeds(%DM)
Feeds DM OM CP NDF ADF ADL Ash ME IVOMD
PGH 92.0 85.0 7.0 69.2 44.9 5.4 13.8 5.9 50.7
MFL 95.5 81.2 28.9 20.1 15.7 6.7 14.3 9.5 71.5
WB 90.4 95.3 16.1 40.6 15.5 3.3 4.5 9.4 82.5
NSC 91.6 90.4 33.2 9.5 34.7 10.7 4.5 10.3 90.3
CM 92.0 89.0 22.6 36.2 21.8 3.0 5.5 10.9 78.0
Treatment Diets
T1 93.0 89.9 7.2 68.4 46.9 6.5 15.0 7.1 49.8
T2 92.4 82.9 24.8 25.3 20.9 6.0 14.0 9.5 70.4
T3 92.4 84.8 23.6 27.3 21.5 6.6 13.3 9.3 69.3
T4 92.5 84.4 21.3 31.0 22.9 6.4 14.4 8.9 66.3
T5 92.8 86.6 18.8 37.2 24.1 6.1 11.0 8.5 61.7
T6 92.6 87.1 16.1 38.9 22.7 6.6 10.6 7.8 56.5
P- value 0.871 0.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 0.0459 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001
SEM 0.40 0.89 0.48 0.61 0.48 0.48 0.46 0.19 0.55
PGH-Pennisetum glaucifolium hay, MFL- Momordica foetida Leaf, CM-concentrate mix, WB- Wheat bran, NSC-Noug seed cake, DM-dry matter, OM-Organic matter, CP-crude protein, NDF-neutral detergent fibre, ADF-acid detergent fibre, ADL= acid detergent lignin, ME-metabolizable energy, IVOMD – in-vitro organic matter digestibility.
Table 2. Daily dry matter and nutrient intake of Bonga sheep fed PG hay and supplemented with different levels of MFL to replace NSC.
Table 2. Daily dry matter and nutrient intake of Bonga sheep fed PG hay and supplemented with different levels of MFL to replace NSC.
Parameters(g/kg/d) T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 SEM P
Dry matter intake
Basal DMI 547.22a 525.75a 531.36a 541.17a 524.36a 540.57a 21.83 ns
Supplement DMI - 300.35b 325.38ab 319.78ab 348.38a 358.70a 14.83 ***
Total DMI 524.9d 825.5c 857.0bc 862.2abc 872.6ab 900.7a 13.27 ***
DMI (%BW) 1.7e 4.7a 4.3b 3.8c 3.2d 3.0d 0.06 ***
Nutrient intake
OMI 491.82e 685.28d 726.98c 726.60c 755.77b 783.20a 21.6 ***
CPI 39.42e 105.01d 110.74c 111.85c 125.28b 134.64a 0.78 ***
NDFI 404.9a 209.38e 234.12d 235.00d 324.74c 349.77b 0.68 ***
ADFI 256.57a 172.67e 184.32d 197.48c 204.41b 204.17b 0.82 ***
ADLI 35.6d 49.6c 56.6c 55.1b 49.8a 59.2a 0.87 ***
MEI 8.9bc 8.5c 9.7a 9.6a 9.2ab 9.14abc 0.20 ***
a,b,c,d,e Mean values within a row with different superscripts are highly significantly different at *** = (p<0.001), significant at ** = (p<0.01); DMI-dry matter intake, SEM-standard error of mean, SL-significance level, %BW-percent of body weight, OMI-Organic matter intake, CPI-crude protein intake, NDFI-neutral detergent fiber intake, ADFI-acid detergent fibre intake, ADLI= acid detergent lignin intake, MEI-metabolizable energy intake, ns non-significant.
Table 3. Body weight gain parameters of Bonga sheep fed on PG hay and replacement of noug seed cake content with different levels of MFL.
Table 3. Body weight gain parameters of Bonga sheep fed on PG hay and replacement of noug seed cake content with different levels of MFL.
Parameter T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 SEM SL
DMD 60.5b 61.3ab 61.6ab 61.6ab 61.0ab 62.5a 0.56 ***
CPD 60.8d 68.4c 69.8bc 69.7bc 71.0ab 72.6a 0.58 ***
NDFD 53.2b 53.2b 53.7b 54.1b 54.3b 58.3ab 0.5 ns
ADFD 46.2a 45.6a 41.4b 41.9b 42.35b 41.7b 0.7 ns
a, b, c, d, e Mean values within a row with different superscripts are highly significant different at *** = (p<0.001); IBW=Initial body weight, FBW=Final body weight, BWC=Body weight change, ADG=average daily gain, FCE=Feed conversion efficiency, PCE=Protein conversion efficiency, SEM=Standard error of the mean, SL=significance level, ns=non-significant.
Table 4. Partial budget analysis of Bonga sheep fed PG hay and supplemented with MFLL to replace NSC—cost-benefit.
Table 4. Partial budget analysis of Bonga sheep fed PG hay and supplemented with MFLL to replace NSC—cost-benefit.
Parameters Treatment
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6
Number of animals 7 7 7 7 7 7
Purchase price of lambs/head 610 610 610 610 610 610
Hay consumed per (kg /lamb) 35.6 35.4 35.9 36.6 35.3 36.4
Concentrate consumed per (kg/lamb) 40.1 40.1 44.9 49.4 54.03 58.5
MFL meal consumed per (kg/lamb) 0 29.8 22.41 14.9 7.47 0
Cost of hay (ETB/kg) 53.4 53.1 53.8 54.9 52.95 54.6
Cost of concentrate mix (ETB/kg) 401 401 449.5 494.9 540.3 585.8
Labor cost (ETB) 20 25 25 25 25 25
Cost of Momordica foetida leaf meal (ETB) 0 37.2 28.012 18.6 9.3 0
Total variable cost (TVC) 474.4 516.3 556.36 593.4 627.5 665.4
The selling price of lamb’s ETB/head 690 780 870 1000 1150 1300
Total Return (TR) 215.6 263.6 313.6 406.5 522.4 634.6
Change in total return (TR) 0 48.0 98.03 190.9 306.8 419
Change in total variable cost (TVC) 0 41.9 81.9 119.0 153.1 191
Change in net return (NR) 0 6.1 16.075 71.95 153.625 228
Marginal rate of return (MRR) 0 0.14 0.19 0.60 1.00 1.192
ETB – Ethiopian birr, kg – kilogram, Δ – change in, TVC – total variable cost, NI-net income, MRR-marginal rate of return.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated