Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants In Hot Humid Environment of Lafia. *Barde, R. E., Abimiku, H. K., Hassan, D.I and Maiangwa, A.

Transcription

1 PAT June, 2014; 10 (1): ISSN: Online copy available at Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants In Hot Humid Environment of Lafia *Barde, R. E., Abimiku, H. K., Hassan, D.I and Maiangwa, A.O Animal Science Department, College of Agriculture, Lafia. Abstract Five samples of browse plants: Swietenia mahogany, Mangnifera indica, Gmelina arborea, Vitex doniana and Ficus thoningii were collected from hot humid environment of Lafia. The samples were analyzed in triplicates for proximate components, fibre fractions, some minerals and phytohemicals in a completely randomized design. All values analyzed were significant (P<0.05). Proximate and acid detergent lignin values for Mangnifera indica were significantly (P<0.05) higher than values of other browse plants in this study. However, all browse plants met the minimum crude protein content of 8% and minimum 20% of NDF for optimum rumen microbial growth, multiplication and optimal roughage digestion for the ruminant animal. Mineral content (Na, K, Ca, Mg, P, Fe, Cu, Mn and Zn) determined were within the recommended requirements for maintenance and proper functioning of physiological systems of ruminant animals. The significant (P<0.05) phytochemicals (Tannin, saponin, alkaloid and oxalate), CP and NDF components recorded for these browse plants could be beneficial to the ruminant animal. Keywords: Browse, proximate, fibre, phytochemical, ruminant, Lafia Introduction Browse plants provide protein, energy, vitamins and mineral elements which are inadequate in grass land pastures. There year round evergreen presentation and nutritional abundance provides for year round provision of fodder. It also provides standing feed reserve to be built so that herd can survive critical periods of shortfall, or even prolonged period of drought without remarkable losses (Oji and Isilebo, 2000). These browse plants furnish not only essential energy, proteins, vitamins, minerals and fibre in ruminant diets; provide high-quality feed for livestock while at the same time improving soil quality and reducing green house gas emission. Some workers (Akbar and Alam 1991 ; Ajayi et al.,2005 ; Burte et al.,2006) have showed that browse plants (Mangifera indica, Gmelina aborea and Ficus thonnigii ) improves intake and live weight gain in supplemented ruminant diets. Tropical forages contain phytochemical substances; it could have both adverse and beneficial, nature effects depending on their concentration and nature (Makkar et al., 2007). Benefits of tropical forages have improved nutrition of ruminant animals and subsequently greater production as the cheapest sources of feedstuff. Therefore, there is the need for continuous screening of browse plants to identify those with good potentials as livestock fodder and which could serve as alternatives (Fadiyima et al.,

2 PAT 2014; 10 (1): : ISSN: ; Barde et al; Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants ). It is against this backdrop that this study was designed to determine the chemical composition of Vitex doniana, Swietenia mahogany, Mangifera indica, Gmelina aborea and Ficus thonnigii as potential browse plants for ruminants. Materials and Methods Collection of sample Samples of the five browse plants: Swietenia mahogany, Mangnifera indica, Gmelina arborea, Vitex doniana and Ficus thoningii were collected from hot humid environment of Lafia. Sampling was done by hand, using scissors to cut the sample into 2-3 pieces, then subsampled using the quartering method (Zhang and Redfearn, 1990).The forages were dried at room temperature under shade to a constant weight for five days and taken to laboratory for chemical analysis in triplicate. Experimental site The study was conducted at the Farm Unit of the College of Agriculture, Lafia, Nigeria located Latitude N '8.66''; Longitude E ' 49.10''and Altitude 164.5m; in the guinea savannah vegetation, with its sandy loam soil texture (Akwa et al., 2007). Chemical Analysis Crude protein (CP) was determined as Kjeldhal nitrogen x Ether extracts (EE), crude fibre (CF) and ash determined according to (AOAC, 2005) method. Neutral detergent fibre (NDF), acid detergent fibre (ADF) and acid detergent lignin (ADL) was determined using the method described by Van Soest et al. (1991). Concentrations of minerals: Ca, P, Na, Mg, K, Fe, Cu, Mn and Zn of samples were determined by Atomic Absorptions spectrophotometer (GBC 908 AA). Photochemical analysis of, tannins, saponnins, alkaloids, oxalate and glycoside concentrations in the forages were determined according to A.O.A.C.(1984). Statistical analysis Experimental design employed was complete randomized design (Steel and Torrie, 1980). Data obtained were subjected to analysis of variance where significant differences occurred, the means were separated using Duncans multiple range test (SPSS, 2007). Results and Discussions Proximate composition of the browse plants The proximate composition of the browse plant samples are presented in table 1 and shows significant (P<0.05) different values of all proximate components. Content of CP (18.92%), EE (3.55%), CF (19.48%), Ash (11.37%) and DM (90.00%) for Mangnifera

3 PAT 2014; 10 (1): : ISSN: ; Barde et al; Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants.146 indica were all significantly (P<0.05) better than values of other browse plants. Sweitenia mahogany, Gmelina arborea, Vitex doniana, Ficus thoningii indicated 16.43, 17.71, and17.44% of CP contents respectively. Though there is species variation in CP values, all browse plants met the minimum crude protein of 8% required by ruminants for optimum rumen microbial growth and multiplication (Machen, 2012). In order to develop acceptable and alternative feeding systems, it is necessary to relate information on the nutritional characteristics of feed resources to animal requirements. % Table 1: Proximate Composition of experimental browse plants Sweitenia Mangnifera Gmelina Vitex Ficus mahogany indica arborea doniana thoningii CP e a b d c EE 3.23 d 3.55 a 3.40 c 3.47 b 2.97 e CF b a ab ab b NFE a d c b a Ash 9.69 e a b c 9.97 d DM e a c d b M a e c b d A,b,c,d,e Means on the same row with different superscripts are significantly (p 0.05) different - Standard Error of mean CP - Crude Protein EE - Ether Extract CF - Crude Fibre NFE - Nitrogen Free Extract DM - Dry Matter M - Moisture Fibre fraction of browse plants The fibre fractions of the browse plants presented in table 2 showed significant (P<0.05) values. Mangnifera indica s acid detergent lignin was significantly (12.38%) higher than values obtained for other forages in this study. Lignin content is negatively correlated to the digestibility of the feedstuff, so the higher the lignin content in the samples the lower the feed value (Khan et al., 2003). Due to the wide variation in chemical analyses for CF and NFE, the detergent fiber system was developed, which better reflects true carbohydrate digestibility in ruminants. The NDF values (table 2) recorded 42.69, 44.60, 43.27, and 41.91% respectively for Swietenia mahogany, Mangifera indica, Gmelina aborea, Vitex doniana and Ficus thonnigii. In order to maintain optimal roughage digestion, ruminant diet must contain minimum of 20% NDF (David, 2012). The result recorded in this study could indicate some potential of the browse plants as ruminant feed resources.

4 PAT 2014; 10 (1): : ISSN: ; Barde et al; Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants.147 Table 2: Fibre Fractions of browse plant % Sweitenia mahogany Mangnifera indica Gmelina arborea Vitex doniana Ficus thoningii NDF c a b c d ADF d a b c e ADL d a b c e Hemicellulose b a d b c Cellulose b a a b b A,b,c,d,e Means on the same row different superscripts are significantly (p 0.05)different Standard Error of Mean NDF Neutral Detergent Fibre ADF Acid Detergent Fibre ADL Acid Detergent Lignin Mineral content of browse plants Table 3 shows some mineral contents of the five browse plants in this study. Significant (P<0.05) differences were observed among the browse plants but, they all met the recommended minimum requirement (Na, 0.2%; K, %; Ca, %; Mg, % and P, %) for maintenance and proper functioning of physiological systems of the ruminant animal as reported by some workers ( Gimerenze, 2004; Rashid, 2008). Table 3: Minerals concentration of browse plants Sweitenia Mangnifera Gmelina Vitex Ficus mahogany indica arborea doniana thoningii Na (%) 0.30 c 0.34 bc 0.36 abc 0.41 a 0.38 ab K (%) 0.44 c 0.64 abc 0.49 ab 0.45 bc 0.51 a Ca (%) 0.79 c 0.79 bc 0.81 a 0.80 ab 0.81 a Mg (%) 0.30 b 0.33 b 0.30 b 0.34 b 0.42 a P (%) 0.42 b 0.46 ab 0.50 a 0.48 a 0.51 a Fe(mg/kg) c bc a b a Cu(mg/kg) 4.70 c 5.33 bc 4.87 c 5.60 ab 5.90 a Mn(mg/kg) b ab b a a Zn(mg/kg) b ab b a a A,b,c,d,e Means on the same row with different superscripts are significantly (p 0.05) different - Standard Error of Mean

5 PAT 2014; 10 (1): : ISSN: ; Barde et al; Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants.148 Phytochemical content of browse plants. Significant (P<0.05) contents of phytochemicals in the browse plants (table 4) were observed in this study. Phytochemicals have been of great interest among nutritionists and rumen microbiologists to modify rumen fermentation and decrease methane emission favourably. The significant (P<0.05) higher phytochemicals (Tannin, saponin, alkaloid and oxalate) were recorded in samples of Mangnifera indica leaves. Its beneficial effects depending on concentration could be superior with this browse plant (Makkar et al., 2007). Table 4: Phytochemical content of browse plants % Sweitenia Mahogany Mangnifera Indica Gmelina arborea Vitex doniana Ficus thoningii Tannin bc a ab abc c Saponin d a c b e Alkaloid bd a c b e Oxalate c a bc b d A,b,c,d,e Means on the same row with different superscripts are significantly (p 0.05) different - Standard Error of Mean Conclusion Proximate and acid detergent lignin values for Mangnifere indica were all significantly higher than values of other browse plants in this study. But Major and minor mineral contents of the five browse plants were significant but also met the recommended minimum requirements for maintenance and proper functioning of physiological systems of the ruminant animal. References A.O.A.C (1984) 14 th edition. Pg North Nineteenth street, suite 210 Arlington VA A.O.A.C. (2005 ). Association of Official Analytical Chemist. Official method of analysis.18 th ed. AOAC Washington DC USA. Ajayi, D.A, J.A. Adeneye and F.T. Ajayi (2005). Intake and nutritive utilization of west African dwarf goats fed mango (Mangnifera indica) ficus (Ficus

6 PAT 2014; 10 (1): : ISSN: ; Barde et al; Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants.149 thoningi) glicidia (Glicidia spepium) foliages and concentrates as supplement to basal diet of guinea grass (Penicum maximum). World J. Agric. Sci. 1 (2): Akbar, M.A., Alam, M.N. (1991). Effect of feeding mango (Mangifera indica) and Shaora (Streblus asper) tree leaves to Black Bengal goats of Bangladesh small Rumin Res, 6 (1-2): Akwa,V. L.,Binbol,N.L., Samaila K.I and Marcus N.D (2007). Geographic Perspective of Nasarawa State. Department of Geography Nasarawa State University.157pp. Burte, R.G. Raut, My, Jadhav, S.S, Wandaka V.V. and Yadav, D.N. (2006). Nutritive value of shivan (gmelina arborea) tree leaves for goats. Indian journal of small ruminants Vol. 12 No 1 pp David, L. (2012). Nutritive Value of Feeds for Beef Cattle. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Fact Sheets. Fadiyimu, A.A., A.N. Fajemisin and J.A. Alokan (2006). Department of animal production technology, federal college of agriculture Akure Nigerian yemifadiyimu@yahoo.com Gimerenez, D.M. (2004). Nutrients Requirements of Sheep and Goats. Extension System. ANR-812. Alabama Cooperative, Alabama A & M University and Auburn University,USA Khan, M.A. Mahr-un-nisa and Sarwar, M. (2003). Techniques Measuring Digestibility for the Nutritional Evaluation of Feeds. Int. J. Agri. Bio. Vol. 5, No. 1, Machen, R. (2012).Goat Nutrition Energy, Small Ruminant Series. Texas Agricultural Extension Service, The Texas A & M University System. Makkar,H.P.S., G.Francis and K. Beeker (2007). Bioactivity of Phytochemicals in some lesser-known plants and their effect and potential applicationin livestock and aquaculture production systems. The Animal Consortium :9,Pp Oji.U.I. and Isilebo J.O. (2000). Nutrient Characteristics of Selected Browse Plants in Humid Tropics. Proceedings on 20 th annual Conference of Animal Productin rd March, 2000 Umudike, Nigeria pp54-56 Rashid, M. (2008). Goats and their Nutrition. Manitoba Agricultural Food and Rural Initiative Publication. SPSS (2007). Statistical Package for Social Science.16.0version. Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H.(1980). Principles and procedure of statistics. A biometrics approach. 2nd edition McGraw Hill Boo co. Inc. New York. Van Soest, P. J.; J. B. Robertson and B. A. Lewis (1991). Methods for dietary fiber neutral detergent fiber and non starch polysaccharides in relation to to rate of passage. J. Agric. Sci. 92:

7 PAT 2014; 10 (1): : ISSN: ; Barde et al; Potential of Some Browse Plants For Ruminants.150 Zhang, H and Redhfearn,D.(1990). Collecting Forage Samples for Analysis. Cooperative and Extension Services, Okalahoma State University.