Determination of Nutritive Value of Seven Species of Alfalfa Weeds Using in vitro Techniques

پژوهشهای علوم دامی ایران

Article 12, Volume 10, Issue 2 - Serial Number 34, June 2018, Pages 195-208   

Document Type: Ruminant Nutrition

DOI: 10.22067/ijasr.v10i2.62498

Authors

Malihe Dadashi¹; Ali Hossein khani^{* 2}; Hamid Mohammadzadeh³

¹Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Ira

²Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran.

³Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Weeds constantly invade crop fields and pastures. It is frequently assumed that weeds have low nutritive value and livestock will not eat weeds, so expensive and time consuming methods are often used for their control. Some weeds are toxic or poisonous for livestock, and certain weeds are unpalatable – causing a reduction in total intake. Weeds also compete with cultivated crops and forages for moisture, light, and nutrients, but many weeds are nutrient-rich and digestible. There are large numbers of weeds which are consumed by animals as forage. A study with geographic information system (GIS) in the east Azerbaijan province of Iran, showed that Bromus tectorum,Crepis sancta, Alopecurus myosuroides, Dactylis glomerata and Acroptilon repens were found in 77.8, 66.7, 67.7, 33.3 and 22.2 percent of alfalfa fields respectively. Based on this report only five species of the mentioned weeds consist of about 15 percent of total forages production area at the first cut of alfalfa fields which are harvested and used in the farms as livestock feed. Nonetheless, preliminary results suggest that weeds can play a significant role in livestock industry if their chemical composition and nutritional quality is well known. The main goal of present study was to evaluate nutritional value of seven common species of alfalfa field weeds using in vitro techniques.
Material and methods: Seven species of alfalfa field weeds including: Crepis sancta, Achillea millefolium and Acroptilon repens from family of Asteraceae, Melilotus officinalis (L.) Pall. from family of Fabaceae and Bromus tectorum, Dactylis glomerata and Alopecurus myosuroides from family of poaceae were harvested from alfalfa field at 10 percent blooming. The samples were dried in 60° oven for 48 hours and grounded to pass through a 2-mm screen. Chemical composition of weeds was determined according to prescribed procedures of AOAC (2003). Neutral detergent finer (NDF) was measured by method of Van-Soest et al. 1991. Rumen fluid was obtained from three fistulated ghezel male lambs before morning feeding. The lambs were fed twice daily at maintenance level. Dry matter fermentation of each weed was determined using in vitro gas production technique. Potential of gas production, organic matter digestibility, small chain fatty acid production and net energy of lactation (NEl) were calculated from the results of gas production. In vitro disappearance of forages was measured.
Result and discussion: Alfalfa and Alopecurus myosuroides had the highest and lowest crude protein (CP) content respectively (14.3 vs 8.4 %) (P

Keywords

Alfalfa field weeds; chemical composition; degradation; in vitro digestibility

References

1. AOAC. 1990. Official methods of analysis. 15th edition. Association of official analytical chemists Washington, D.C.

2. Arzani, H., A. Ahmadi, H. Azarniv, and A. A. Jafari. 2007. Determination and composition of forage quality of five species in different phonological stages. Journal of Agricultural Science, 37(2):303-311. (In Persian).

3. Arzani, H., M. Basiri, F. Khatibi, and G. Ghorbani. 2006. Nutritive value of some zagros mountain rangeland species. Small Ruminant Research, 65: 128-135.

4. Arzani, H., N. Charehsaz, A. A. Jafari, and H. Azarnivan. 2011. Survey of the impact of the form and growth stage on forage quality of nine range species in central Alborz (case study: Taleghan). Watershed Management Research Journal (Pajouhesh & Sazandegi), 87: 81-87. (In Persian).

5. Burns J. C., D. S. Fisher, and H. F. Mayland. 2007. Diurnal shifts in nutritive value of alfalfa harvested as hay and evaluated by animal intake and digestion. Crop science, 47: 2490.

6. Coblentz, W. K., S. E. Nellis, P. C. Hoffman, B, Hallm, P. J. Weimer, N. M. Esser, and G. M. Bertram. 2013. Unique interrelationships between fiber composition, water soluble carbohydrates, and in vitro gas production for fall-grown oat forages. Journal of Dairy Science, 96: 7195-7209.

7. Datt, C. and G. Singh. 1995. Effect of protein supplementation on in vitro digestibility and gas production of wheat straw. Indian Journal of Dairy Science, 48: 357-361.

8. Elizalde, J. C., N. R. Merchen, and O. B. Faulkner. 1999. In situ dry matter and crude protein degradation of fresh forages during the spring growth. Journal of Dairy Science, 82: 1978-1990.

9. Fedorak, P. and D. Hrudey. 1983. A simple apparatus for measuring gas production by methanogenic cultures in serum bottles. Environmental Technology Letters, 4 (10): 425-432.

10. Getachew, G., G. Crovetto, M. Fondevila, U. Krishna moorthy, B. Singh, and M. Spanghero. 2002. Laboratory variation of 24h in vitro gas production and estimated metabolizable energy values of ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 102 (1-4): 169-180 .

11. Holechek J. L., C. H. Herbel, and R. D. Pieper. 2001. Rang Management. West View Press, USA. 520.

12. Hasannejad, S. 2010. Weed identification and mapping of alfalfa East Azerbaijan province using Geographical Information System (GIS). University of Tehran. PhD thesis.

13. Heshmati, G. A., M. Baghani, and O. Bazrafshan. 2007. Comparison of nutritional values of 11 rangeland species in eastern part of Golestan province. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi, 73: 90-95. (In Persian).

14. Hoseininejad, Z., M. Yousefelahi, and H. Fazaeli. 2013. Determination of nutritive value of five dominant species of halophyte plants in Sistan. Journal of Animal Science of Iran, 43(1): 1-10. (In Persian).

15. Jafarzadeh, A. A. 1999. Detailed studies of 26 acres of land and soils. Agricultural Research Station, University of Tabriz. College of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2, 3 and 4: 16-29.

16. Karimi, H. 1995. Iran weeds. Center of Academic Publishing, First edition.

17. Kilic, U. and B. Z. Saricicek. 2008. Potential nutritive value of some forage used in ruminant nutrition in Northern Turkey. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 20(5).

18. McDonald, P., R. A. Edwards, J. F. D. Greenhalgh, C. A. Morgan, L. A. Sinclair, and R. G. Wilkinson. 2012. Animal Nutrition. 6th edition. (Translated by Rashid Soofi Siawash). Amidi Publication, Tabriz. 655-678.

19. McDougall, E. I. 1948. The composition and output of sheep in saliva. Biochemical Journal, 43:99-109.

20. Mafi, H. 2014. Agricultural Engineering- cultivation. Director of Agro-Industry and Animal Husbandry plain Zrngyn. http://www.crop.blogsky.com/category/cat-11. (In Persian).

21. Mansouri, H., A. Nikkhah, M. Rezaeian, M. Moradi, and S. A. Mirhadi. 2003. Determination of forage degradation and gas production technique using nylon bags. Journal of Agricultural Sciences of Iran, 32(2):495-507. (In Persian).

22. Maheri, N., A. R. Safaei, A. Mirzaei Aghsaghli, A. M. Aghazadeh, and M. R. Dastoori. 2007. Use of in vitro gas production technigue to compare nutritive value of quackgrass and for ruminants. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 6 (12): 1351-1356.

23. Mertens, D. R. 1993. Kinetics of cell wall digestion and passage in ruminants. American Society of Agronomy, pp. 535-570

24. Norton, B. W. 2003. The nutritive value of tree legumes. In: Forage tree legumes in tropical agriculture (Ed. R. C. Gutteridge and H. M. Shelton) pp:1-10. Available in website:

http://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpc/doc/publicat/gutt-shel/x5556e0j.htm.

25. Orskov, E. R. andM . Mcdonald. 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurments weighted according to rate of passage. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 92: (2) 499-503.

26. Ozzie abaye, A., S. Guillermo, and T. Chris. 2009. The Nutritive Value of Common Pasture Weeds and Their Relation to Livestock Nutrient Requirements. Virginia Cooperative Extenion, Virginia State University.

27. Paya, H. 2007. Determine the digestion of some foods with methods of in vivo, in situ and in vitro. MSc Thesis,University of Tabriz. (In Persian).

28. Rabii, M. 2012. Identification of range plants. Payam Nour Publications. Pp 124.

29. Radosevich, S. R., J. S. Holt, and C. M. Ghersa. 2007. Ecology of weeds and invasive plants. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Third edition.

30. Riasi, A., A. A. Resani, H. Naimipour, and M. H. Fathi. 2010. Comparison of two methods for analyzing the forages and by-products neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber. Journal of Animal Science Research,19 (1): 91-103. (In Persian).

31. Saadat-Noori, M. and Siah-Mansoor, S. 1992. Sheep Husbandry and Management. Ashrafi Publication, Tehran, PP.135-136.

32. SAS Institute Inc. 2003. SAS Users Guide. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.

33. Shafiee Varzaneh, H. Nutrition of livestock and poultry. http://salimin.blogfa.com/8808.aspx. Accessed Feb 1, 2017.

34. Shawrang, P., and A. Nikkhah. 2008. The estimation of dry matter and cell wall degradability some of range forages using gas production and nylon bags techniques. Journal of Agricultural Sciences of Iran. 38 (1): 57-66. (In Persian).

35. Shikhahmadi, H., A. Azafar, and S. Mohammadzadeh. 2013. Chemical comositions, energy contents and in situ dry matter, crude protein and organic matter degradability of second harvest alfalfa samples from Kurdistan province. Journal of Animal Science Research, 23. 3. 88-99.

36. Steingass H, K. P. Aiple, and W. Drochner. 1979. Estimation of organic matter digestibility and ME content in ruminant feeds from in vitro gas production. Session 17- forage quality. Institue of Animal Nutrition (450) Hohenheim University, D-70593 Stuttgart, Germany. ID NO. 1169. Pp: 17-79.

37. Taghizadeh A, 2004. Determination of fermentation characteristics of forage source with the nylon bag and gas production technique. Proceeding of the Canadian Society of Animal Science, p: 134.

38. Taghizadeh, A., H. Janmohamadi, and M. Besharati. 2012. Estimation of degradation and fermentation Characterization of some feedstuffs using in situ and In vitro techniques. Journal of Animal Science Research, 23.2(4): 1-16. (In Persian).

39. Tabatabaee, S. M. M., B. Najafnejad, P. Zamani, A. Taghizadeh, A. Ahmadi, and H. A. Arab. 2011. Estimate of chemical composition, degradability and gas production of Persian clover in different harvesting stages. Journal of Animal Science Research, 21. 2: 255-264. (In Persian).

40. Wang, Y., P. Frotus, M. Y. Gruber, H. Ray, and T. A. McAllister, 2006. In vitro ruminal digestion of anthocyanidin-containing alfalfa transformed with the miaze lc regulatory gene. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 86: 1119-1130

41. Walter. R. 1984. Rationnement Pratique de la Vache laitiere, de la chevre et des ovins. Translated by Houshang Saedi. University of Tehran Publications. Pp, 156.

42. Voth, K. S. 2009. Demonstrating how trained, weed-eating cattle train herd mates as a tool to enhance weed management. GLCI Final Report. Available at: http://www.livestockforlandscapes.com/GLCI.