Читать книгу Sustainable Agriculture Systems and Technologies - Группа авторов - Страница 47

The bio‐mass yield and protein content of different fodder crops used in the experiment are presented in Table 3.2. The productivity of cereal crop was observed higher than the leguminous forages in rainy season whereas opposite trend was observed in winter season. Number of cuts of fodder actually made the difference of biomass yield. The values on fodder biomass yield corroborate with the findings of Pandey and Roy (2011), Gupta and Dey (2015), and Gupta et al. (2016). The DM content of forages varied from 11.65 to 17.19% while CP content varied from 8.72 to 11.14% for cereal forages and 15.30 to 15.83% in leguminous forages. The DM and protein content of cereal (sorghum and oat) and leguminous (berseem and rice bean) fodder are in close agreement with the finding of Banerjee (2000), Gupta and Dey (2015), and Gupta et al. (2016). The minute variations in compositions may be attributed to variety of forage, soil quality, number of cuts, and management practices adopted. Feeding of TMR resulted in higher DMI (kg/100 kg body weight) by 15.92 and 2.41%, respectively in T1 group in both the experiments in comparison to group T2 where feeds were offered separately (Table 3.3). Significantly higher (p < 0.01) DMI was observed in T1 (TMR fed) during experiment 1 (rainy season) when multicut sorghum was used as green fodder. However, total DMI did not differ significantly between groups in experiment II (winter season). This may be attributed to the succulent form of forage oat and berseem which included both in TMR and separate feeding system. Higher intake of DM, CP, and DE was also observed by Khan et al. (2010) in crossbred cows fed densified complete feed. Gupta et al. (2016) observed that feeding of concentrate feed at 1.5% of body weight in TMR increased DMI in crossbred heifers. However, Kajla et al. (2019) reported that DM intake was nonsignificant in TMR and non‐TMR groups in crossbred cows. Similar results were also reported by Raja Kishore et al. (2013), who observed nonsignificant DM intake (kg/day) in TMR and non‐TMR fed buffalo bulls. This may be attributed to the sorting of feed ingredients by animals fed roughage and concentrate separately.

Table 3.2 Season‐wise production potential of different fodder.

Particulars	Total forage yield (t/ha)	Average DM (%)	Average CP (%)
Rainy season
Multicut Sudan (threecuts at 60, 105, and 145 d)	74.78 ± 2.92	14.48	8.72
Rice bean (single cut at 90 d)	35.67 ± 1.52	17.19	15.30
Winter season
Berseem (four cuts at 50, 85, 115, and 145 d)	67.84 ± 1.22	11.65	15.83
Oat (two cuts at 50 and 105 d)	28.23 ± 0.64	14.18	11.14

Table 3.3 Performance of crossbred cows fed on TMR.

Particulars	Experiment I	Experiment II
T1	T2	T1	T2
Days in lactation (d)	98 ± 28.50	84 ± 31.50	246 ± 19.50	222 ± 2.50
Av. body wt. (kg)	362 ± 20.50	385 ± 19.00	354 ± 42	360 ± 32
Av. DMI (kg/100 kg body wt.)	3.14 ± 0.06a	2.64 ± 0.03a	4.14 ± 0.28	4.04 ± 0.23
DMD (%)	68.44 ± 1.83	68.17 ± 0.62	67.54 ± 0.23a	60.07 ± 0.01a
CPD (%)	47.84 ± 1.48	43.51 ± 1.16	44.70 ± 0.53a	31.42 ± 1.57a
DE (Kcal/kg)	2754 ± 34	2687 ± 13	2542 ± 16a	2288 ± 08a
Average initial milk yield (kg/d/head)	6.13 ± 0.16	6.24 ± 0.39	5.13 ± 0.06	6.55 ± 0.44
Average final milk yield (kg/d/head)	7.17 ± 0.12	6.91 ± 0.28	6.13 ± 0.24	6.97 ± 0.09

^a TMR, Total mixed ration; Av, Average; DMD, Dry matter digestibility; CPD, Crude protein digestibility; DE, Digestible energy.

The DM and CP digestibility and DE values of ration are presented in Table 3.2. The DM and CP digestibility and DE value of ration were nonsignificant between the groups in experiment 1, when multicut sorghum and rice bean forage were included in TMR, However, the values increased significantly (p < 0.01) in cows when berseem and oat were used as green fodder in experiment II. The values of DM, CP, and DE were also observed higher in crossbred cows fed densified complete feed by Khan et al. (2010). Gupta et al. (2016) observed that feeding of concentrate feed at 1.5% of body weight in TMR was beneficial and economical for higher DMI, nutrient digestibility, and growth rate in crossbred heifers. Hundal et al. (2004) reported the beneficial effect of feeding TMR than separate feeding as organic matter and neutral detergent fiber digestibility were observed significantly (P < 0.05) higher in TMR fed group. This may be attributed to the higher concentration of total volatile fatty acids and different nitrogen fractions in rumen of calves fed TMR as compared to the conventional feeding system. Similar trends in the rumen fermentation pattern have been reported by Reddy and Reddy (1983) in calves. Raja Kishore et al. (2013) observed that the digestibility of CP, fat, fiber, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, hemi‐cellulose, and cellulose were higher (P < 0.01) in buffalo bulls fed complete rations than those fed conventional ration. Kajla et al. (2019) reported significantly (P < 0.05) higher digestibility of DM, CP, ADF, NDF, and TDN in crossbred cows fed TMR as compared to non‐TMR fed cows. However, OM, EE, and CHO digestibility were not affected by mode of feeding.

In the present study, overall increase in milk production by 16.96 and 19.49% was recorded in cows fed TMR during experiment I and II, respectively in comparison to separate feeding system (Table 3.3). Similarly, an increase in milk production by 10.74 and 6.41% was observed in cows fed different feeds separately during experiment I and II, respectively. Feeding of balanced ration either in mixed form or individually had increased milk production but impact was greater when fed with TMR (Figure 3.1). This might be due to higher DMI and nutrients digestibility. The results corroborate with the observations of Khan et al. (2010) in crossbred cows fed densified complete feed. It is reported that the use of complete feeds over three lactations had no effect on herd health or milk production as compared to the conventional system in which cows were fed forage and grain separately (Larkin and Fosgate 1970). However, Bae et al. (1994) and Su and Hsieh (1999) indicated significant (P < 0.05) impact of feeding system on milk yield and its composition. Efficient utilization of nutrients, favorable rumen environment and blood profile were responsible for higher milk production. Kajla et al. (2019) reported significantly positive (P < 0.05) effect on milk production and milk energy yield on TMR feeding except the milk protein percent, which was observed higher in non‐TMR group. Gupta et al. (2016) observed that feeding of TMR was beneficial in respect of milk production, which was attributed by proportionate intake of all feed ingredients, overall feed intake, and better digestibility of nutrients. Schraufnagel (2007) also observed positive impact on milk yield and thereby profits on TMR feeding. Similar results are reported by Bargo et al. (2002), Sarker et al. (2019), and Awlad Mohammad et al. (2017). Kerketta et al. (2020) observed that the milk yield (kg/day) was found significantly higher (P < 0.05) in TMR (7.90 ± 0.14) than non‐TMR (6.82 ± 0.11) with average increase by 1.13 l/d. TMR fed buffaloes also showed increased milk protein content (3.15% vs 3.3%). The milk fat, SNF percentage also found higher in TMR with no significant difference. Percent increase in milk yield was found to be 14.3% by TMR feeding in buffalo. However, Hundal et al. (2004) reported nonsignificant impact by feeding system on milk production and its composition except lactose content, which was significantly (P < 0.05) higher in animals fed TMR in comparison to conventional feeding system. They concluded that 15–16 kg of milk production per day could be sustained by feeding TMR based on berseem and oat hay. Several workers reported increased milk production in animals fed TMR compared to conventional method. This is because of the steady state of rumen environment conducive to the continuous rumen function and digestive flow achieved by TMR feeding. Animals fed with TMR reported a trend for more milk and higher efficiency of metabolizable energy utilization for milk production. Blending reduces the individual animal variation in feed consumption and results in better balance of nutrients than feeding the same ingredients individually (Holter et al. 1977). In on‐farm trial, increased milk production was reported in lactating Murrah buffaloes fed maize stover‐based TMR compared to conventional feeding system (Raja Kishore et al. 2013).

Figure 3.1 Milk yield of crossbred cows fed on TMR.