Comparative determination of digestibility and energy contents of Heliz and Parzuk with traditional forages by in vivo and in vitro methods

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 47 - 52, 31.08.2018

Selçuk Altaçlı , Mahmut Ekinci Suphi Deniz

https://doi.org/10.30704/http-www-jivs-net.427603

Cited By: 2

Öz

The aim of this study was to determine digestibility and energy contents of plants heliz (Prangos pabularia) and parzuk (Hippomarathrum microcarpum) with in vivo and in vitro methods and also to compare them to traditional. Seven male Red Karaman hoggets were used in the trial. Digestibilities of four different forages were determined with classical and two-stage digestibility methods. Moreover, energy contents of forages were also estimated using both digestibility values. In situ degradation characteristics of these forages were also evaluated. In the in vivo trial for digestibility, the degrees of digestibility of four different forage plants were determined by ‘’missing block trial pattern’’. In vivo organic matter digestibility (OMD) of parzuk and heliz (75.52% and 73.46%) were higher than those of dried meadow grass (68.94%) and dried alfalfa hays (65.81%), (P<0.05). These difference were reflected in energy contents and DE (digestible energy) (3.33 and 3.24Mcal/kg dry matter (DM)), ME (2.73 and 2.65 Mcal/kg) and NEL (net energy lactation) (1.73 and 1.68 Mcal/kg DM) values of parzuk and heliz were higher than those of meadow grass (3.04, 2.49 and 1.57 Mcal/kg DM) and dried alfalfa (2.90, 2.38 and 1.49 Mcal/kg DM) hays, (P<0.05). In the two-stage digestibility method, OMD values were 71.88, 68.85, 66.99 and 58.52% for parzuk, heliz, meadow grass hay and dried alfalfa hay, respectively (P<0.05) The highest OMD was observed in parzuk with two-stage digestibility method, while OMD of heliz and dried meadow grass were similar to that of parzuk, OMD of dried alfalfa was similar to that of dried meadow grass  but less than those of parzuk and heliz (P<0.05).  In in situ experiment, degradability of dried alfalfa, parzuk and heliz were rapid after 4 hours incubation but degradability of meadow grass hay were slow. Dry matter digestibility of meadow grass hay, dried alfalfa hay, parzuk and heliz was 72.45, 76.36, 88.36 and 84.21%, respectively at end of 48 hours incubation period (P<0.05). In conclusion, parzuk and heliz grown at highlands, in case of cultivation, these plants can be alternative forages to other high quality forages such as alfalfa hay.

Anahtar Kelimeler

dried meadow hay, dried alfalfa, Parzuk, Heliz, in vivo/in vitro

Kaynakça

• Bratzler, J. W. & Swift, R. F. (1959). A comparision a nitrogen and energy determinations on fresh and over- air dried cattle feces . Journal of Dairy Science, 42, 686-691.
• Coşkun, B., Gülşen, N., & Umucalılar, H. D. (2005, September 7-10) Prangos ferulacea (Helis)’nın yem değeri üzerine bir çalışma. III. Hayvan Besleme Kongresi. Adana,Turkey.
• Çerçi, İ. H., Erişir, Z., Gürdoğan, F., Seven, İ., Patır, B., Dikici, A., Kılınç, Ü., & Çiftçi, M. (2011). Taze ot, silaj ve kuru ot şeklinde yedirilen yoncanın kuzularda performans, karkas ve etin duyusal özellikleri üzerine etkisi. Kafkas Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 107-112.
• Davis, P. H. (1972). Flora of Turkey and The East Aegean Islands. Edinburgh, UK; University of Edinburgh Press.
• Deniz, S.,& Tuncer, Ş. D. (1995). Bitkisel protein kaynaklarının formaldehit ile muamele edilmesinin rumende kuru madde ve ham protein ile efektif protein yıkılımı üzerine etkisi. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 19(1), 1-8.
• Düzgüneş, O., Kesici, T., & Gürbüz, F. (1983). İstatistik Metodları I. No: 861, Ankara, Turkey; Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları. Eilami, B., & Noroozian, H. (1995). Comparison of inclusion in diet of Prangos ferulacea and Medicago sativa on fattening performance and carcas characteristics of Fars native sheep (Karakul). Final Research Report. Fars Research Centre for Natural Resources and Animal Husbandry, Shiraz, Iran.
• Hakan, B., Ülker, H., & Demirel, M. (2009, June 24-26) Van ve çevresinde parzük, kerkol, helizin hayvan yemlemede kullanımı. 6. Zootekni Kongresi, Erzurum, Turkey.
• Ishler, V., Heinrichs, J., & Varga, G. (2000). From feed to milk: Understanding rumen function. Retrieved from. http://www.dairyweb.ca/Resources/USWebDocs/RumenFunction.pdf
• MAFF. (1975). Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Ministery of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office. London.
• Marten, G. C., Barnes, & R. F. (1980). Prediction of energy digestibility of forages with in vitro rumen fermentation and fungal enzyme systems. In W. J., Pigden., C. C., Balch & M, Graham. (Ed), Standardization of Analytical Methodology for Feed. Ottowa, Canada; International Development Research Centre.
• NRC. (1985). Nutrient requirements of sheep. National Washington DC, USA; Academy Press. NRC. (1989). Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. 6th rev. ed. Washington DC, USA; National Academy Press.
• Öğretmen, T., & Kılıç, A. (1991). Geviş getirenlerin beslenmesinde kullanılan önemli bazı yemlerin NEL içeriklerinin in vivo ve in vitro yöntemler ile saptanması. PhD thesis, Ege Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir, Turkey.
• Önal, A. G., Şahin, A., & Kuran, M. (2004, September 1-3). Çakşir (Ferula communis) otunun toklularda üreme fonksiyonları üzerine etkileri, 4. Ulusal Zootekni Kongresi, İsparta, Turkey.
• Steel, R. C. D., & Torrie, J. (1980). Principles and procedures of statistics. A biometrical approach. 2nd ed. , New York, USA; Mc Graw- Hill Book Company.
• Tilley, J. M. A., & Terry, R. A. (1963). A two-stage technique for in vitro digestion of forage. Journal of the British Grassland Society,18,104-111.
• Van ES, A. J. H. (1978). Feed evaluation for ruminants. I. The systems in use from May 1977 onwards in The Netherlands. Livestock Production Science, 5, 331-345.