Africn Journl of Biotechnology Vol. 10(15), pp. 3022-3026, 11 April, 2011 Avilble online t http://www.cdemicjournls.org/ajb DOI: 10.5897/AJB10.1631 ISSN 1684 5315 2011 Acdemic Journls Full Length Reserch Pper Determintion of digestibility of lmond hull in sheep Ther Ylchi Moghn Junior College of Agriculture, University of Mohghegh Ardbili, Ardbil, Irn. E-mil: therylchi@um.c.ir. Tel: +98-4527463959. Fx: +98-4527463417. Accepted 14 Jnury, 2011 A study ws conducted to determine the chemicl composition nd digestibility of lmond hull using invitro, scco nd vivo methods. Chemicl compositions of lmond hull nd lflf hy were determined. The crude protein (CP), neutrl detergent fiber (NDF) nd cid detergent fiber (ADF) of lmond hull were lower thn those of lflf hy but the non fibrous crbohydrte (NFC) ws more thn tht of lflf hy (3.5 times) (P < 0.01). The dry mtter disppernce of lmond hull for ll incubtion times using in scco method ws greter thn tht of lflf hy (P < 0.01). To mesure in vivo digestibility, four mture Moghni sheep of live weight (39 ± 3 kg men±sd) were used in 2 2 chnge over design. Diets consisted of bsl diet (lflf hy) nd mixed diet (lflf hy 70% + lmond hull 30%). Invitro nd vivo dry mtter digestibilities of lmond hull were 585.8 nd 645.0 gkg -1, respectively. There ws no difference between in vivo dry nd orgnic mtter digestibility of lflf hy nd mixed diet but were significntly ffected in the cse of CP nd NDF (P < 0.01). In generl, lmond hull hd low CP but greter NFC content s well s greter digestibility in sheep. Key words: Almond hull, by-product, chemicl composition, digestibility, in vivo. INTRODUCTION Almond, scientificlly known s Prunus dulcis, belongs to the Roscee fmily nd is lso relted to stone fruits such s peches, plums nd cherries (Jhnbn et l., 2009). The United Sttes, specificlly Cliforni, is the mjor producer of lmond (Sthe et l., 2002; Wijernte et l., 2006). Almond, with or without the brown skin, is consumed with the whole nut or used in vrious confectioneries nd chocoltes; its discrded components re used s livestock feed (Tkeok et l., 2000). Almond hull by-product, re obtined by drying the portion of the lmond fruit tht surrounds the hrd shell. The proportion of the hull, shell nd nut is 50% hull, Abbrevitions: DM, Dry mtter; CP, crude protein; EE, ether extrct; ADF, cid detergent fiber; ADL, cid detergent lignin; NDF, neutrl detergent fiber; NFC, non fibrous crbohydrtes; OM, orgnic mtter; DMD, dry mtter digestibility; OMD, orgnic mtter digestibility; DOMD, digestible orgnic mtter in dry mtter; ME, metbolizble energy; DCEL, digestibility of cellulose; DHEM, digestibility of hemicellulose; DCP, digestibility of crude protein; DNDF, digestibility of neutrl detergent fiber; DADF, digestibility of cid detergent fiber; TMR, totl mixed rtion. 25% shell nd 25% nut on n ir-dry bsis (Aguilr et l., 1984; Fdel, 1999). A by-product feedstuff is product tht hs vlue s n niml feed nd is obtined during the hrvesting or processing of commodity in which humn food or fiber is derived. By-product feedstuffs cn be of either plnt or niml origin. Growing interest in identifying nd quntifying by-product feedstuffs is due to the desire to understnd nd monitor environmentl wstes in most countries (Fdel, 1999). The world-wide use of by-product feedstuffs is common prctice, yet few published reports document the mounts of plnt by-product feedstuffs generted (Grsser et l., 1995). Production of lmonds nd the by-product hull hs been incresing rpidly in recent yers. Vrious workers exmined the chemicl composition nd nutritive vlue of lmond hull nd reported tht hull s feedstuff contined 2.1 to 8% crude protein (CP) (Fdel, 1999; Getchew et l., 2002), 1.69 to 2.9% ether extrct (EE) (Reed nd Brown, 1988; Getchew et l., 2004), 28 to 38.49% neutrl detergent fiber (NDF) (Reed nd Brown, 1988; Getchew et l., 2004), 48.7 to 57.8% non fibrous crbohydrte (NFC) (Reed nd Brown, 1988), 59.6 to 66.7% in vivo dry mtter digestibility (DMD) (Alibes et l., 1983; Aguilr et l., 1984) nd 1.85 to 2.87 Mcl/kg met-
Ylchi 3023 bolizble energy (Alibes et l., 1983; Fdel, 1999). The objective of this study ws to evlute the chemicl composition nd digestibility of lmond hull s feed for sheep. MATERIALS AND METHODS The lmond hull ws collected from severl lmond grdens in the north-western prt of Irn. Broken brnches, leves, dust nd other residuls were seprted from hulls, then chopped (bout 2 cm) nd mixed completely. Alflf hy in full bloom ws cut nd suncured, then chopped (bout 2 cm) nd stored on concrete in n enclosed building for use s comprison feed nd bsl diet in this experiment. Dry mtter (DM) ws determined from fresh smples in n oven t 105 C for 24 h or until it reches constnt weight (AOAC, 1995). The residul smples were oven-dried t 55 C for 48 h. Smples of 200 g oven-dried forge from ech tretment were ground in Wiley mill (1-mm screen) nd used for subsequent chemicl nlysis. CP, EE, Ash, cid detergent fiber (ADF) nd cid detergent lignin (ADL) contents of smples were determined by stndrd methods (AOAC, 1995). Neutrl detergent fiber (NDF) ws nlyzed ccording to Vn-Soest et l. (1991). Non fibrous crbohydrte (NFC), cellulose nd hemicellulose were clculted (NRC, 2001) s follows: NFC = 100 (CP% + NDF% + EE% + Ash%) Cellulose = (ADF% - ADL%) Hemicellulose = (NDF% - ADF%) The in scco method ws used to determine the DM nd NDF digestibility of feeds when suspended in the rumens of three rumenfistulted Blochi wether sheep of pproximtely 50 ± 3 kg (men±sd) live weight. The nimls were fed 1.3 kg dy -1 of rtion consisting of lflf hy, whet strw, brley nd whet brn with rtio of forge to concentrte of 60:40 (DM bsis), which ws clculted to provide mintennce requirements. Diet s totl mixed rtion (TMR) ws given to sheep in two equl portions t 08:00 nd 18:00 h. The polyester bg size for determintion of DM disppernce ws 12 19 cm, with pore size of 50 µm. All smples were dried nd milled through 4.0-mm sieve (Spnghero et l., 2003; Ylchi nd Krgr 2010). Then, 5 g of ech smple ws put in the nylon bgs nd incubted in the rumen for 2, 4, 12, 24, 48, 72 nd 96 h. All bgs were inserted t the sme time, just before the morning feeding (08:00 h). For ech sheep, one bg ws used for ech time intervl. Upon withdrwing the bgs from the rumen, they were wshed in wshing mchine for 1 h using cold wter, nd then kept in freezer. When ll bgs hd been tken from the rumen, they were dried for 2 dys t 55 C. For ech bg, the residue ws nlyzed for DM. To determine NDF disppernce, bg size nd smple weight were 3 6 cm with pore size of 46 µm nd 0.5 g, respectively. For ech bg, the residue ws nlyzed for NDF. Disppernce of DM nd NDF t ech incubtion time ws clculted from the proportion remining fter incubtion in the rumen nd ws reported for digestibility t time. The in vitro DM digestibility, orgnic mtter (OM) digestibility nd digestible OM in DM were determined ccording to the two-stge technique of Tilley nd Terry (1963) with rumen liquor collected by stomch tube suction, ided by vcuum pump from mture Irnin Moghni sheep. These sheep with verge weight of 45 ± 4 kg (men±sd) were fed 1.25 kg lflf hy nd 0.25 kg common concentrte (brley 60%, whet brn 35% nd minerls nd vitmins supplement 5%) for ech, two weeks before the beginning of the experiment nd during collection period. Animls were not fed before rumen liquor ws collected. The liquor ws collected in flsk immersed in wrm wter nd mintined t 39 C, strined through three lyers of cheesecloth, nd O 2-free CO 2 ws bubbled slightly through it before dispensing into 100 ml tubes. An in vivo digestibility experiment ws mesured using the totl fecl collection method (Givens et l., 2000). Four mture Moghni sheep of live weight (39 ± 3 kg men±sd) were used. Sheep were fsted for 12 h prior to weighing t the beginning nd t the end of ech experimentl period. Two weeks before the strt of the experiment, sheep were treted ginst internl prsites nd supplied with n intrmusculr injection of A, D 3 nd E vitmins. The nimls were penned in individul metbolic cges tht llowed seprted collection of feces. They hd free-ccess to wter nd slt stone. Two diets were used: Contining bsl diet (lflf hy) nd mixed diet (lflf hy 70% + lmond hull 30%). The diets were supplemented with the sme mounts of minerls nd vitmins supplement. Diets were offered simultneously to the four nimls, using 2 2 chnge over design (two sheep for ech diet in ech period). Ech period lsted for two weeks, of which first nd subsequent week were dpttion nd smpling period, respectively. The nimls were offered feed t mintennce level, 0.87 ± 0.05 kg dy -1 (Ensminger, 2002). The sheep were fed twice dily, round 08:00 nd 17:00 h. Smples of feeds were tken dily for nlysis of chemicl composition. The feces from ech sheep on ech tretment were weighed nd 10% smple ws frozen t - 20 C for lter nlysis. Apprent digestibility coefficient of in vivo experiment for nutrients (such s DM, OM, CP, NDF, ADF, cellulose nd hemicellulose) ws clculted for ech diet on the bsis of quntittive dt for intke nd output (Givens et l., 2000) s follows: Digestibility = (nutrient intke nutrient excreted in feces) nutrient intke (1) The digestible OM in DM (DOMD) nd metbolizble energy (ME) of the feeds were clculted ccording to McDonld et l. (2002) s follows: DOMD = (OM intke OM excreted in feces) DM intke (2) ME (MJ/kg DM) = 0.016 DOMD (g/kg DM) (3) Digestibility coefficients of lmond hull (test feed) were clculted using difference method (ssumes no ssocitive effects) s follows (Givens et l., 2000): TD = (BF DB) + (TF DT) (4) Where, TD is digestibility of mixed diet (contined bsl diet nd test feed), BF is the percentge of bsl diet in mixed diet, DB is digestibility of bsl diet, TF is the percentge of test feed in mixed diet nd DT is digestibility of test feed. The mens from chemicl nlysis nd in scco results of lflf hy nd lmond hull were compred by the t-test. Dt obtined from in vivo digestibility were nlyzed s 2 2 chnge over design using MIXED procedure of SAS (1985). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Chemicl composition of lflf hy nd lmond hull re shown in Tble 1. There were significnt differences in chemicl composition between lflf hy nd lmond hull except for DM nd EE content. The DM content of lmond hull ws 895.0 gkg -1, however Arosemen et l. (1995) reported tht DM of lmond hull vried from 846.8 to 894.5 with men of 880.2 g kg -1. The EE nd sh content of lmond hull (16.5 nd 64.7 gkg -1 DM) were
3024 Afr. J. Biotechnol. Tble 1. Men chemicl composition of lflf hy nd lmond hull (gkg -1 DM) (n = 4). Item Alflf hy Almond hull P vlue DM 911.0±9.3 b 895.0±10.8 0.06 Ash 102.8±4.2 64.7±1.7 0.01 CP 148.0±6.1 28.6±1.4 0.01 EE 18.8±5.4 16.5±5.4 0.58 NDF 585.9±5.5 371.4±21.8 0.01 ADF 367.4±5.6 242.8±24.8 0.01 ADL 98.9±2.8 117.8±9.4 0.01 Cellulose 268.5±8.0 125.0±20.3 0.01 Hemicellulose 218.5±7.8 128.6±3.1 0.01 NFC 144.6±11.8 518.8±28.6 0.01 (g kg -1 s fed); b men±sd; DM: dry mtter; CP: crude protein; EE: ether extrct; NDF: neutrl detergent fiber; ADF: cid detergent fiber; ADL: cid detergent lignin; NFC: non fibrous crbohydrtes. Tble 2. Dry mtter nd neutrl fiber digestibility (%) of lflf hy nd lmond hull with in scco method in different incubtion times. Incubtion Dry mtter Neutrl detergent fiber time Alflf hy Almond hull SE P vlue Alflf hy Almond hull SE P vlue 2 23.97 47.57 1.14 0.01 8.32 1.39 0.20 0.01 4 25.35 47.76 1.22 0.01 8.22 4.68 0.84 0.01 12 36.70 55.66 0.24 0.01 16.61 10.97 0.38 0.02 24 63.33 71.47 0.38 0.01 44.54 39.32 0.77 0.02 48 64.68 71.37 0.72 0.01 50.69 42.57 1.59 0.01 72 64.77 76.27 1.56 0.01 53.72 51.29 1.02 0.10 96 66.63 77.40 0.55 0.01 52.17 55.08 1.09 0.06 SE: Stndrd error. similr to previous reports (Reed nd Brown, 1988; Getchew et l., 2002, 2004). A very low CP of lmond hull (28.6 gkg -1 DM), in the current study greed with previous report (Fdel, 1999) but not with others (NRC, 2001; Getchew et l., 2004). Differences mong studies my be relted to species or genetic vrition. The CP content of lmond hull usully vries in the rnge of 38.7 nd high 80.0 g kg -1 DM (Arosemen et l., 1995). However, the lflf hy which ws used in this experiment, hs been cut in fullbloom, nd hs medium qulity nd its CP content ws lmost 5 times more thn tht of lmond hull. There ws min difference between lmond hull nd lflf hy for cell wll content such s NDF, ADF or cellulose nd hemicellulose (except ADL content) nd NFC content. Except for NFC, the cell wll content of lmond hull ws lower thn tht of lflf hy. Some reserchers (Depeters et l., 1997; Getchew et l., 2004) hve reported tht the NFC content of lmond hull is 487 to 578 nd 504.5 to 553.9 gkg -1 DM, respectively. The NFC content of lmond hull ws lmost 3.5 times more thn tht of lflf hy. However, the cid detergent lignin (ADL) content of lmond hull ws greter thn tht of lflf hy. The NDF nd NFC content of lmond hull in this experiment were 371.4 nd 518.8 gkg -1, respectively, which grees with previous reports (Reed nd Brown, 1988; Getchew et l., 2004). The DM nd NDF digestibility of lflf hy nd lmond hull t different times of incubtion re shown in Tble 2. The DM digestibility of lmond hull for ll incubtion times ws greter thn those for lflf hy (P < 0.01). This effect cn be ttributed to greter NFC s well s lower NDF nd ADF content of lmond hull when compred to lflf hy (Tble 1). Greter disppernce rte of lmond hull when compred to lflf hy t 2 nd 4 h post incubtion times (47.57 nd 47.76 vs. 23.97 nd 25.35, respectively) might increse voluntry DM intke (McDonld et l., 2002). In contrst to Shultz et l. (1993), disppernce rte fter 24-h incubtion ws greter thn tht reported by them (71.47 vs. 56%). Except for 72-h incubtion, the NDF digestibility of lmond hull ws lower t ech incubtion time (P < 0.05).
Ylchi 3025 Tble 3. Men digestibility nd metbolizble energy of lmond hull (DM bsis) (n = 4). Item In vitro In vivo DMD (g kg -1 ) 585.8±26.8 b 645.0±65.8 OMD (g kg -1 ) 530.8±23.9 640.3±59.0 DOMD (g kg -1 ) 506.3±22.8 598.8±52.8 DCP (g kg -1 ) ND 282.8±86.1 ME (MJ kg -1 ) ND 9.59±0.86 c Clculted from eqution 4; b men±sd; C clculted from eqution 3; DMD, dry mtter digestibility; OMD, orgnic mtter digestibility; DOMD, digestible orgnic mtter in dry mtter; DCP, digestible crude protein; ME, metbolizble energy; ND, not dt. Tble 4. Men in vivo digestibility nd ME of diets (gkg -1 DM). Item Bsl diet Mixed diet b P vlue SE DMD 643.4 643.9 0.97 9.53 OMD 658.7 653.2 0.60 8.47 DOMD 588.8 591.8 0.81 7.58 DCP 662.7 542.7 0.01 9.59 DNDF 601.1 504.5 0.01 8.63 DADF 571.1 444.1 0.07 9.06 DCEL 681.8 611.5 0.16 24.62 DHEM 651.5 608.1 0.06 8.39 ME (MJ kg -1 ) 9.42 9.44 0.93 1.25 Contining lflf hy; b contining lflf hy 70% + lmond hull 30%; SE, stndrd error; DMD, dry mtter digestibility; OMD, orgnic mtter digestibility; DOMD, digestible orgnic mtter in dry mtter; DCP, digestibility of crude protein; DNDF, digestibility of neutrl detergent fiber; DADF, digestibility of cid detergent fiber; DCEL, digestibility of cellulose; DHEM, digestibility of hemicellulose; ME, metbolizble energy. Vrg (2006) reported tht redily vilble non-forge fiber sources such s lmond hull, cn ffect fiber digestibility of diet. The NDF digestibility is function of the potentilly digestible frction nd its digestion nd pssge rtes. In vivo NDF digestibility is confounded by different retention times in the rumen, which cn be ttributed to differences in DM intke (Ob nd Allen, 1999). In ddition, exposure to cidic conditions in the smll intestine nd fermenttion in the lrge intestine (in vivo experiment) might reduce differences observed for fermenttion by rumen microorgnisms (in situ experiment). For this reson, NDF digestibility determined in situ is n importnt mesure of forge qulity nd should be distinguished from NDF digestibility in vivo (Vrg, 2006). Men in- vitro nd vivo digestibility coefficients (without sttisticlly nlysis between them) of lmond hull re shown in Tble 3. Results showed tht in vivo DMD, OMD nd DOMD of lmond hull were pproximtely 10.1, 17.1 nd 15.5% units greter thn in vitro study, respectively. Dry mtter digestibility of lmond hull ws clculted s 645.0 g kg -1 DM, which grees with previous report (Alibes et l., 1983). However, DMD of lmond hull in current study ws greter thn tht observed by Aguilr et l. (1984) (645 vs. 596 g kg -1 DM). Clculted ME content of lmond hull (9.59 MJ kg -1 or 2.29 Mcl kg -1 ) ws in greement with others (Alibes et l., 1983; Aguilr et l., 1984; NRC, 2001). Men in vivo digestibility coefficients nd ME of diets contining lflf hy nd mixed diet (lflf hy 70% nd lmond hull 30%) re shown in Tble 4. There ws no difference between bsl nd mixed diet on DM, OM, OMD, ME, cellulose nd hemicellulose digestibilities, except for CP (DCP), NDF (DNDF) nd ADF (DADF). The chemicl composition of diets ffects digestibility of nutrients. Results of the current study showed tht there is substntil difference between lmond hull nd lflf hy for CP nd cell wll content s it ws obvious for digestibility coefficients of nutrients. There ws no significnt difference between bsl nd mixed diet for DOMD, thus no difference ws observed for ME. Almond hull in comprison with lflf hy hd greter NFC nd lower NDF content, thus this feedstuff might cuse lower chewing nd rumintion ctivity nd greter pssge rte in digestion trct of sheep (McDonld et l., 2002). Also, ADL content of lmond hull is greter when compred to
3026 Afr. J. Biotechnol. lflf hy (Tble 1). Therefore, lower NDF nd ADF digestibility of mixed diet my be ttributed to this. Furthermore, lmond hull CP content is very low (28.6 gkg -1 ) nd usully low CP content diets reduce microorgnisms growth in rumen, nd cuse limittion of fiber digestion (McDonld et l., 2002). Crude protein requirements of sheep is estimted to be 94 to 150 gkg -1 of dietry DM (Ensminger, 2002) nd therefore CP concentrtion of the lmond hull used in this experiment would be indequte for providing mintennce nd growing requirements of sheep (Ensminger, 2002). So, treting lmond hull with ure s chep resource on nitrogen is recommended (Ylchi, 2010). Conclusion Almond hull hd lower CP but greter NFC content when compred with lflf hy. Also, DMD, OMD, DOMD nd ME of lmond hull ws similr to tht full-bloom lflf hy. Bsed on in scco mesurement, lmond hull showed greter nd lower DM nd NDF disppernce rte, respectively. Almond hull cn be used s diets for feeding sheep during off seson periods. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The uthor would like to express specil thnks to the University of Mohghegh Ardbili, for finncil support for the reserch through the scientific reserch grnt offered (Grnt Number: 2546). REFERENCES Aguilr AA, Smith NE, Bldwin RL (1984). Nutritionl vlue of lmond hulls for diry cows. J. Diry Sci. 67: 97-103. Alibes X, Mestre MR, Munoz F, Combells J, Rodriguez J (1983). Nutritive vlue of lmond hulls for sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 8: 63-67. AOAC (1995). Officil Methods of Anlysis. Assocition of Officil Anlyticl Chemists Interntionl, Arlington, VA. Arosemen A, Depeters EJ, Fdel JG (1995). Extent of vribility in nutrient composition within selected by-product feedstuffs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 54: 103-120. Depeters EJ, Fdel JG, Arosemen A (1997). Digestion kinetics of neutrl detergent fiber nd chemicl composition within some selected by-products feedstuffs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 67: 127-140. Ensminger ME (2002). Sheep nd Got Science. 6 th edn. Interstte Publishers, Inc., USA, pp. 342-358. Fdel JG (1999). Quntittive nlyses of selected plnt by-product feedstuffs, globl perspective. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 79: 225-268. Getchew G, Grovetto GM, Fondevil M, Krishnmoorthy U, Singh B, Spnghero M, Steingss H, Robinson PH, Kils MM (2002). Lbortory vrition of 24 h in vitro gs production nd estimted metbolizble energy vlues of ruminnt feeds. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 102: 169-180. Getchew G, Robinson PH, DePeters EJ, Tylor SJ (2004). Reltionship between chemicl composition, dry mtter degrdtion nd in vitro gs production of severl ruminnt feeds. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 111: 57-71. Givens DI, Owen E, Axford RFE, Omed HM, (2000). Forge Evlution in Ruminnt Nutrition, chpter 2: 114. Grsser LA, Fdel JG, Grnett I, DePeters EJ (1995). Quntity nd economic importnce of nine selected by-products used in Cliforni diry rtions. J. Diry Sci. 78: 962-971. Jhnbn Sfhln A, Mhmoodzdeh A, Hsnzdeh A, Heidri R, Jmei R (2009). Antioxidnt nd ntirdicls in lmond hull nd shell (Amygdlus communis L.) s function of genotype. Food Chem. 115: 529-533. McDonld P, Edwrds RA, Greenhlgh JFD, Morgn CA, (2002). Animl Nutrition, sixth ed. Prentice Hll, Essex, UK. NRC (2001). Nutrient Requirements of Diry Cttle. 7 th rev. edn. Ntl. Acd. Sci. Wshington, DC. Ob M, Allen MS (1999). Evlution of the importnce of the digestibility of neutrl detergent fiber from forge: Effects on dry mtter intke nd milk yield of diry cows. J. Diry Sci. 82: 589-596. Reed BA, Brown DL (1988). Almond hulls in diets for lctting gots: Effects on yield nd composition of milk, feed intke nd digestibility. J. Diry Sci. 71: 530-533. Sthe SK, Wolf WJ, Roux KH, Teuber SS, Venktchlm M, Sze-To KWC (2002). Biochemicl chrcteriztion of mndin, the mjor storge protein in lmond (Prunus dulcis L.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 50: 4333-4341. Shultz TA, Collr CA, Bth DL, Ahmdi A (1993). Rumen digestion of vrious diry feedstuffs compred in tests. Clif. Agric. 47(3): 29-31. Spnghero M, Bocclon S, Grcco L, Gruber L (2003). NDF degrdbility of hys mesured in situ nd in vitro. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 104: 201-208. Sttisticl Anlysis Softwre (SAS) (1985). Users Guide: Sttistics version 5 Edition. SAS Institute Inc. Cry. NC. p. 956. Tkeok G, Do L, Ternishi R, Wong R, Fless S, Hrden L, Edwrds R (2000). Identifiction of three triterpenoids in lmond hulls. J. Agric. Food Chem. 48: 3437-3439. Tilley JM, Terry RA (1963). A two-stge technique for the in vitro digestion of forge crops. Grss Forge Sci. 18: 104-111. Vn Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA (1991). Methods of dietry fiber, neutrl detergent fiber nd non-strch polyscchrides in reltion of niml nutrition. J. Diry Sci. 74: 3583-3597. Vrg GA (2006). In vivo digestibility of forges. Proc. Tri-Stte diry nutrition conference. Fort Wyne, IN. The Ohio stte university, Columbus. pp. 95-106. Wijernte SSK, Abou-Zid MM, Shhidi F (2006). Antioxidnt polyphenols in lmond nd its co products. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54: 312-318. Ylchi T (2010). Effects of ure nd queous mmoni tretment on the nutritive vlue of triticle strw. J. Food Agri. Environ., 8 (1): 69-72. Ylchi T, Krgr S (2010). Chemicl composition nd in situ ruminl degrdbility of dry mtter nd neutrl detergent fiber from lmond hulls. J. Food Agric. Environ. 8(2): 781-784.