Nutritive Value and In-Vitro Digestibility of Blended Ratios of Wheat Offal and Wet Sorghum Brewer Residue as Feed for Livestock
คำสำคัญ:
Nutritive value, In-vitro digestibility, Fatty acids, Wheat offal, Wet brewer residueบทคัดย่อ
The use of agro-industrial by-products as animal feeds has been a matter of interest for the last few decades. Hence, this study evaluated the chemical composition, volatile fatty acid profile, and in-vitro digestibility of blended ratios of wheat offal and wet sorghum brewer residue. Fresh wet sorghum brewer residue (WSBR) was collected from local gin (Burukutu) producers and blended with wheat offal (WO) on a weight-for-weight basis in the following rations: 1WO:1WSBR, 1WO:1.5WSBR, 1WO:1.2WSBR, 1WO:2.5WSB, 1WO:1.3WSBR, and 1WO:3.5WSBR, arranged in a Completely Randomized Design. The blends were air-dried for 3 days at 39 °C. Samples of blended ratios were analyzed for chemical composition, volatile fatty acids profile, and in-vitro digestibility using standard procedures. The dry matter contents of ratios 1:1, 1:2, 1:2.5, 1:3, and 1:3.5 were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the 1:1.5 ratio. The crude fibre content significantly increased (p < 0.05) as the proportion of WSBR increased in the blends. The carbohydrate fractions of ratios 1:2, 1:2.5, and 1:3 were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than those of ratios 1:1 and 1:1.5. The neutral detergent fibre was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in ratio 1:3.5 than in other blended ratios. Furthermore, the hemicellulose content was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in ratios 1:1.5, 1:2.5, and 1:3 than in ratio 1:1, and was lowest in 1:3.5. However, ratios 1:1 and 1:1.5 had significantly higher (p < 0.05) acetic, propionic, butyric, valeric, and lactic acid contents than the other ratios. Notably gas production was significantly highest (p < 0.05) in ratio 1:1 from 3 to 24 hours of in-vitro digestibility compared to other ratios. It could be concluded that blended ratios of wheat offal and wet sorghum brewer residue improved nutrient availability for livestock animals; however, ratios 1:1 and 1:1.5 produced more in-vitro gases, while ratios 1:1, 1:1.5, and 1:2 showed superior dry matter digestibility.
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Abo-Zeid HM, El-Zaiat HM, Morsy AS, Attia MFA, Abaza MA, Sallam SMA. Effects of replacing dietary maize grains with increasing levels of sugar beet pulp on rumen fermentation constituents and performance of growing buffalo calves. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2017;234:128-38.
Aliyu S, Bala M. Brewers spent grains: A review of its potentials and applications. Afr J Biotechnol. 2011;10(3):321-31.
Amaza IB. Determination of proximate composition, amino acids, mineral and phytochemical profile of Cassava peel (Manihot esculenta) peel from Cassava varieties grown in Yobe State of North Eastern Nigeria. Niger J Anim Prod. 2012;48(1):124-34.
AOAC International. Official methods of analysis of the AOAC international. 19th ed. Gaithersburg: MD; 2012.
Ayandiran SK, Odeyinka SM, Oloidi FF, Amoo AF, Ojo IF, Ogunmola YE, et al. Effect of ensiling elephant grass with molasses on the nutritive value and in-vitro digestibility. Proceedings of 49th Conference of the Nigerian Society for Animal Production., Oyo State, Nigeria: University of Ibadan; 2024. p. 1585-8.
Bargo F, Mullar LD, Kolver ES, Delahoy JE. Invited review: Production and digestion of supplemented dairy cows on pasture. J Dai Sci. 2003;86:1-42.
Blezinger SB. Feed supplements come in several different forms: part 4. Cattle Today Online. 2003 [cited 2025 Sep 10]. Available from: http://www.cattletoday.com/archive/2003/February/CT251.shtml.
Blümmel M, Ørskov ER. Comparison of gas production and nylon bag degradability of roughages in predicting feed intake in cattle. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 1993;40:109-19.
Chamberlain AT, Wilkinson JM. Feeding the dairy cow. Lincoln: Chalcombe Publications; 1996.
Christodoulou C, Kliem KE, Auffret MD, Humphries DJ. In-vitro rumen degradation, fermentation, and methane production of four agro-industrial protein-rich co-products, compared with soyabean meal. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2025;319:116151.
Contreras-Govea FE, Muck RE, Mertens DR, Weimer PJ. Microbial inoculant effects on silage and in vitro ruminal fermentation, and microbial biomass estimation for Alfalfa, bmr corn, and corn silages. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2011;163:2-10.
Danner H, Holzer M, Mayrhuber E, Braun R. Acetic acid increases stability of silage under aerobic conditions. Appl Environ Microb. 2003;69(1):562-7.
Erwin ES, Marcos GJ, Emery EM. Volatile fatty acid analyses of blood and rumen fluid by gas chromatography. J Dairy Sci. 1961;44(9):1768-71.
France JD, Theodorou MS, Lister MK, Davies SJ, Isac DDR. A model to interpret gas accumulation profiles associated with in vitro degradation of ruminant feeds. J Theor Biol. 1993;163:99-111.
Geron LJ, Zeoulax’x LM, Branco AF, Erke JA, Prado OP, Jacobi G. Caracterização, fracionamento protéico, degradabilidade ruminal digestibilidade in vitro da matéria seca e proteína bruta do resíduo de cervejaria úmido e fermentado. Acta Sci Anim Sci. 2007;29(3):291-9.
Getachew G, Makkar HPS, Becker k. Tropical browses: content of phenolics compounds and in vitro gas production and stoichiometric relationship between short chain fatty acids and in vitro gas production. Anim Feed Sci and Technol. 2002;98(1-2):15-30.
Gidenne T. Dietary fibres in the nutrition of the growing rabbit and recommendation to preserve digestive health: A review. Animal. 2015;9(2):227-42.
Hassan J, Ekin S, Damiano C, Melania G, Muhammad ZA, Büşra K, et al. Rumen fermentation profile and methane mitigation potential of mango and avocado byproducts as feed ingredients and supplements. Sci Rep. 2025;15:16164.
Jung HG, AllenMS. Characteristics of plant cell walls affecting intake and digestibility of forages by ruminant animal. J Anim Sci. 1995;73(9):2774-90.
Jung HG, Mertens DR, Payne AJ. Correlation of acid detergent lignin and Klason lignin with digestibility of dry matter and neutral detergent fibre. J Dairy Sci. 1997;80(8):1622.
Kumar D, Datt C, Das LK, Kundu SS. Evaluation of various feedstuffs of ruminants in terms of chemical composition and metabolisable energy content. Vet World. 2015;8(5):605-9.
Makinde OA, Odeyinka SM, Ayandiran SK. Simple and quick method for recycling pineapple waste into animal feed. Livest Res Rural Dev. 2011;23:9.
Makinde OA, Sonaiya EB. Determination of water, blood and rumen fluid absorbencies of some fibrous feedstuffs. Livest Res Rural Dev. 2007;19:10.
Makkar HPS, Blummel M. Formation of complexes between polyvincyl pyrrolidones or polyethylene glycol and tannins and their implications in gas production and true digestibility in in vitro techniques. Br J Nutr. 1995;73(6):897-1079.
Marcos CN, Carro MD, Fernández-Yepes JE, Arbesu L, Molina-Alcaide E. Utilization of avocado and Mango fruit wastes in multi-nutrient blocks for goats feeding: in vitro evaluation. Animals. 2020;10:2279.
Mateos GG, Camara L, Fondevila GG, Lazaro RP. Critical review of the procedure used for estimation of the energy content of diets and ingredients in poultry. J Appl Poult Res. 2019;28(3):506-25.
McDonald P, Edwards RA, Greenalgh JFD, Morgan CA. Animal Nutrition. 6th ed. Essex: Pearson Education Limited; 2002.
Menke KH, Stengass H. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Anim Res Dev. 1988;28:7-55.
Mertens DR, Weimer PJ, Waghorn GM. Inocula differences affect in vitro gas production kinetics. In: Deaville ER, Owen E, Adesogan AT, Rymer C, Huntington JA, Lawrence TLJ, editors. In Vitro Techniques for Measuring Nutrient Supply to Ruminants. Edinburgh: British Society of Animal Science; 1998. p. 95-7.
Munoz C, Yan T, Wills DA, Murray S, Gordon AW. Comparison of the sulfur hexafluoride tracer and respiration chamber techniques for estimating methane emissions and correction for rectum methane output from dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2012;95:3139-48.
Mussatto SI, Dragone G, Roberto IC. Brerwers spent grains: generation, characteristics and potential applications. J Cereal Sci. 2006;43(1):1-14.
National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM). Nutrient requirements of beef cattle: Eight revised edition. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2016.
National Research Council (NRC). Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle: Seventh revised edition. Subcommittee on dairy cattle nutrition, board on agriculture and natural resources. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2001.
National Research Council (NRC). Nutrient requirements of poultry: Ninth revised edition. Subcommittee on Poultry nutrition, board on agriculture. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 1994.
National Research Council (NRC). Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: Sheep, goats, cervids and new world camelids. Washington DC: The National Academies Press; 2007.
National Research Council (NRC). Nutrient requirements of swine: Eleventh revised edition. Washington, DC: National Academies press; 2012.
Ogunbosoye DO, Salau KB. In vitro fermentation evaluation of selected agro-industrial by-products as alternative feed for ruminants. Nig J Anim Prod. 2020;47(4):219-26.
Olosunde AO, Ajibola NA, Otunla TA, Yusuf IW, Akingbade AO, Ajibogun FAH, et al. Simple and quick method for recycling cashew pulp into animal feed. J Biotech Res. 2023;2(2):176-8.
Pereira ES, Mizubuti IY, Edson Lde AR, José NMN, Pimente PG, Duarte LS, et al. Estimative of the nutritional value of agro-industrial by-products by using in vitro gas production technique. Semin Cienc Agrár. 2013;34(1):391-8.
Playne MJ. Determination of ethanol, volatile fatty acid and succinic acid fermentation liquids by gas chromatography. J Sci Food and Agri. 1985;36(8):638-44.
Rahman MM, Abdullah RB, Wan Khadijah WE, Nakagawa T, Akashi R. Feed intake, digestibility and growth performance of goats offered Napier grass supplemented with molasses protected palm kernel cake and soya waste. Asian J Anim Vet Adv. 2013;8:527-34.
Rozis J. Drying foodstuffs: Techniques, processes, equipment. Leiden: Bachuys Publishers; 1997.
Salami SA, Luciano G, O’Grady MN, Biondi L, Newbold CJ, Kerry JP, et al. Sustainability of feeding plant by-products: A review of the implications for ruminant meat production. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2019;251:37-55.
Salman FM, El-Nomeary YAA, Abedo AA, Abd El-rahman HH, Mohamed MI, Ahmed SM. Utilization of artichoke (Cynara scolymus) by-products in sheep feeding. Am J Agric Environ Sci. 2014;14:624-30.
Santoso B, Widayati TW, Hariadi BT. Improvement of fermentation and the in vitro digestibility characteristics of agricultural waste-based complete feed silage with cellulase enzyme treatment. Adv Anim Vet Sci. 2020;(8):873-81.
SAS. SAS/STAT® 9.0 user’s guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 2002.
Saunders RM. The properties of rice bran as a foodstuff. Cereal Foods World. 1990;35(7):632-6.
Shafiqa-Atikah MK, Mahyudin NA, Abas F, Nur-Syifa J, Nor-Khaizura MA. The proximate composition and metabolite profiling of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) molasses. Malays Appl Biol. 2022;51(2):63-8.
Silivong P, Onphachanh X, Ounalom, Preston TR. Methane production in in vitro rumen incubation is reduced when leaves from Mimosa pigra are the protein source compared with Gliricidia sepium. Livest Res Rural Dev. 2013;25(7):131.
Souza LC, Zambom MA, Pozza MSS, Neres MA, Radis AC, Borsatti L, et al. Development of microorganisms during storage of wet brewery waste under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Rev Bras Zootec. 2012;41(1):188-93.
Soxhlet F. Die gewichtsanalytische Bestimmung des Milchfettes. Dinglers Polytech J. 1879;232:461-5.
Tilley JM, Terry RA. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J Br Grassl Soc. 1963;18(2):104-11.
Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci. 1991;74:3583-97.
Van Soest PJ. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. 2nd ed. New York: Cornell University Press; 1994.
Vasta V, Nudda A, Cannas A, Lanza M, Priolo A. Alternative feed resources and their effects on the quality of meat and milk from small ruminants. Anim. Feed Sci Technol. 2008;147:223-46.
ดาวน์โหลด
เผยแพร่แล้ว
รูปแบบการอ้างอิง
ฉบับ
ประเภทบทความ
สัญญาอนุญาต
ลิขสิทธิ์ (c) 2025 คณะสัตวแพทยศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยมหิดล
อนุญาตภายใต้เงื่อนไข Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
เนื้อหาและข้อมูลในบทความที่ลงตีพิมพ์ในวารสาร Journal of Applied Animal Science ถือเป็นข้อคิดเห็นและความรับผิดชอบของผู้เขียนบทความโดยตรงซึ่งกองบรรณาธิการวารสาร ไม่จำเป็นต้องเห็นด้วย หรือร่วมรับผิดชอบใด ๆ
บทความ ข้อมูล เนื้อหา รูปภาพ ฯลฯ ที่ได้รับการตีพิมพ์ในวารสาร Journal of Applied Animal Science ถือเป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของวารสาร Journal of Applied Animal Science หากบุคคลหรือหน่วยงานใดต้องการนำทั้งหมดหรือส่วนหนึ่งส่วนใดไปเผยแพร่ต่อหรือเพื่อกระทำการใด ๆ จะต้องได้รับอนุญาตเป็นลายลักอักษรจากวารสาร Journal of Applied Animal Science ก่อนเท่านั้น
