| Livestock Research for Rural Development 31 (7) 2019 | Guide for preparation of papers | LRRD Newsletter | Citation of this paper |
The study was conducted to estimate the dry matter intake of selected native forage shrub species by West Africa Dwarf (WAD) goats and sheep and to assess the preference of the selected forage shrub species by the animals. Four native forage shrub species, viz, Cajanus cajan, Securinega virosa, Stylosanthes mucronata and Tephrosia purpurea were grown and fed to eight (8) West African Dwarf goats and sheep. Four (4) each of 17 months old female West African Dwarf (WAD) goats and sheep were considered using the Cafeteria system. Data obtained from the experiment were subjected to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Preference data were analysed as a complete randomised design using collection days as replicates and shrub species and animals as treatments. T-test was conducted on the intake data to indicate differences between the animals by using Minitab software (version 16). The differences among mean values were compared by Fisher’s protected Least Significant Difference at 5% probability. It was observed that both WAD sheep (0.86 kg DM intake per day) and goats (0.67 kg DM intake per day) preferred Tephrosia purpurea as compared to the other shrubs. Intake of dry matter of C. cajan and S. virosa was higher in goats than in sheep. In conclusion, different forage shrub species are preferred by different animal species in the same locality.
Keywords: acceptability, intake, palatability
Intake and digestibility are two major determinants of forage quality. Animal performance is the product of nutrient concentration, intake, digestibility and metabolic efficiency of absorbed nutrients (David, 2007). Though nutrient content, particularly dietary fibre or plant cell wall concentration, affects intake potential and digestibility, it is the animal’s response to these forage physiognomies that ultimately determines the nutritional quality of forages. Voluntary intake of feed is a significant indicator of feed quality, which is well acknowledged and transform into potential animal performance (Coleman and Moore, 2003). The consumption of plant species by animals depends on their preference and acceptability.
Feeding behaviour of animals is categorised into behaviour patterns, feeding and habitat preference (Nastis, 2007) and many factors affect the animals’ feeding behaviour (Goetsch et al 2010).
Palatability is affected by many animal factors such as general of the animal health, hunger and differential preference for forage species (Kochare et al 2018) as well as environmental influences (Jimma et al 2016; Adimasu, 2008). Palatability is also affected by different plant factors such as degree of maturity, growth stage, chemical composition, morphological and seasonal availability of plants (Amjad et al 2014). Potential intake rate and relative preference are the primary indices for palatability (Sultan et al 2007). Whereas potential intake rate is influenced by level of tenderness, relative preference is affected by chemical factors (Rahim et al 2013).
Savannas contain varied shrub species with varying degrees of palatability and acceptability (Skarpe and Hester, 2008). Some researchers observed that sheep usually select grasses and forbs more than shrubs and goats prefer shrubs (Khan 1996). Shrub fodder is vital feed supply for supplementing the seasonal shortage in feed availability for livestock and nutritive value (Mlambo et al 2008). Dumont et al (2007) explained that the level of choice of animals for plant species is dependent on sward constituents and their quality. Studies by Khan and Hussain (2012) revealed that animals generally select live fresh forage. This study aimed at ascertaining the potential of indigenous forage shrub species as animals feed, estimating the intake and preference of selected forage shrub species by West Africa Dwarf goats and sheep.
The field experiment was carried out at the experimental farm of the Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, University for Development Studies, Nyankpala Campus, Ghana from October, 2014 to February, 2015. This area is located within the savanna ecosystem on latitude 09˚ 25' N and longitude 00˚ 55' W and with an altitude of 183 m above sea level. Nyankpala Campus is 16 km (10 miles) away from Tamale, the capital of Northern Region. The area experiences annual rainfall of about 1,034 mm from April to early November with mean monthly temperature of 220C. Maximum monthly relative humidity value of 80 % can be recorded during the rainy season while a minimum monthly value of 42 % during the dry season is observed. The vegetation is guinea savanna with grasses as the dominant plant species and interspersed with economic but drought resistant trees such as Vitellaria paradoxa, Adansonia digitata, and Tamarindus indica. The soils are well drained with low nitrogen content due to the low organic matter cover (Ziblim et al 2016).
A total of eight (8) animals were used for the trial. Four (4) each of 17 months old female West African Dwarf (WAD) goats and sheep were considered using the Cafeteria system (Larbi et al 1993). The sheep and goats were obtained from a livestock farmer in Cheyohi, a farming community close to the experimental site. Four selected indigenous forage shrub species namely, Cajanus cajan, Securinega virosa, Stylosanthes mucronata and Tephrosia purpurea were considered for the experiment (Plates 1, 2, 3 and 4). These shrub species were selected based on a survey conducted on livestock farmers and they were noted to be readily available and commonly used by the farmers to feed their animals in the study area. Fresh leaves of these shrubs were harvested in the morning and rinsed in water to avoid any contamination. One (1) kilogram fresh leaves each of the shrubs were weighed, kept in clean well labeled separate open plastic containers and carried to the animals under the same housing structure.
|
|
|
| Plate 1. Cajanus cajan | Plate 2. Securinega virosa |
 |
 |
| Plate 3. Stylosanthes mucronata | Plate 4. Tephrosia purpurea |
One (1) kilogram of freshly harvested leaves from each shrub species was offered separately and randomly to each of the four West African Dwarf (WAD) goats and sheep kept in separate pen under a single roof (Larbi et al 1993). The animals were exposed to the sample feed for four (4) hours for four consecutive times each day from 8.30 am to 12.30 pm (peak hours for grazing) and the weight of feed consumed measured and recorded based on the quantity of feed not consumed (Kalio et al 2006). The order of the placement of the test feed in the pen was randomized to avoid “habit reflex” by the animals (Kaitho et al 1996). The feed intake was estimated during each experimental period by the conventional difference method between amount offered and rejected.
Feed preference was determined from the Coefficient of Preference (CoP) value calculated from the ratio between the intake of each shrub sample divided by the average intake of the four feed samples (Karbo et al 1993, Bamikole et al 2004, Babayemi et al 2006). Coefficient of Preference (CoP) is a direct measure of acceptability and nutritional capability of feedstuff or forage and a shrub species was considered relatively preferred if the CoP value is greater than unity. The results were used to rank the various shrub species by preference.
The dry matter intake data obtained were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the preferred shrub species. T-test by the use of Minitab software (version 16.0) was conducted on the intake data to show the difference in preference between the goats and the sheep on the shrub species. Differences in preference among mean values were compared by Fisher’s protected Least Significant Difference Test at 5% probability.
| Table 1. Mean dry matter intake (kg /DM) of selected shrubs by animals | ||
| Shrub species | Sheep | Goat |
| C. cajan | 0.16c | 0.23c |
| T. purpurea | 0.86a | 0.67a |
| S. mucronata | 0.31b | 0.35cd |
| S. virosa | 0.21c | 0.48bd |
| SEM | 0.02 | 0.04 |
| P – value | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Means bearing different superscripts within columns are different ar p < 0.05 | ||
| Table 2. Between sheep and goats, intake was significant in C. cajan and S. virosa | |||
| Shrub species | Mean (SEM) | P-Value | |
| Sheep | Goat | ||
| C. cajan | 0.16(0.009)b | 0.23(0.013)a | 0.007 |
| T. purpurea | 0.86(0.045)a | 0.67(0.070)a | 0.071 |
| S. mucronata | 0.31(0.025)a | 0.35(0.015)a | 0.323 |
| S. virosa | 0.21(0.010)b | 0.48(0.020)a | 0.000 |
| Means bearing different superscripts within rows are different at p < 0.05 | |||
Tephrosia purpurea was highly preferred by both the WAD sheep and goats while C. cajan was least preferred (Tables 3 and 4).
| Table 3. Mean Coefficient of Preference (CoP) values and Preference Ranking (PR) of some indigenous shrubs used by WAD sheep | |||
| Shrub Species | Plant part | Coefficient of Preference | Preference Ranking |
| Tephrosia purpurea | Leaves | 2.24 | 1 |
| Stylosanthes mucronata | Leaves | 0.80 | 2 |
| Securinega virosa | Leaves | 0.57 | 3 |
| Cajanus cajan | Leaves | 0.43 | 4 |
| Table 4. Mean Coefficient of Preference (CoP) values and Preference Ranking (PR) of indigenous shrubs used by WAD Goats | |||
| Shrub Species | Plant part | Coefficient of Preference | Preference Ranking |
| Tephrosia purpurea | Leaves | 1.55 | 1 |
| Securinega virosa | Leaves | 1.12 | 2 |
| Stylosanthes mucronata | Leaves | 0.80 | 3 |
| Cajanus cajan | Leaves | 0.52 | 4 |
The observed variations in the mean dry matter intake of shrubs by the WAD sheep and goats could be influenced by difference in the plant species, mode of presentation, texture of the leaves and chemical constituents of the leaves (Kouch et al 2003; Keopaseuht et al 2004). Olafadehan (2011) reported that the main constraint to the use of shrubs as feed for livestock is the occurrence of anti-nutritional factors which can be poisonous and induce toxicity consumed exclusively for long time by animal. The low intake or near total rejection of C. cajan by both the sheep and goats could be attributed to the presence and level of secondary plant metabolites in the leaves as well as other plant factors such as presence of hairs (Alonso-Diaz et al 2008; Amjad et al 2014). Animals are likely to show difference in intake if species differ in secondary compounds, macronutrient concentrations, and flavors (Provenza et al 2003). Kaitho et al (1997) indicated that preference of forage by animals is affected by taste, odour and texture, chemical composition. Personius et al (1987) also reported that herbivores are able to detect some toxic chemicals in fodder through their sense of smell either before or soon after the first bite.
Based on the intake, the shrub species were ranked from most to least preferred. By the procedure of Karbo et al (1996) on which the CoP was evaluated, both WAD sheep and goats highly preferred T. purpurea to the rest of the species. The preference for the shrubs was, however, in the order; T. purpurea > S. mucronata > S. virosa > C. cajan for the WAD sheep. For the WAD goat, it was T. purpurea > S. virosa > S. mucronata> C. cajan.
These rankings could, however, change depending on animal species involved, season or availability of the forage. Kaitho et al (1996) commented that some forage species that are least preferred in times of abundance could be favoured or relished when in scarcity. No species was, however, avoided by the animals. Differences in the nutritional, anti-nutritional and other astringent tastes in the forage might have been partly accountable for the differences in the observed Coefficient of preference. Similar to these results, variation in preference for browse species has been documented in Australia by sheep and goats (Lambert et al 1989). Although very productive in terms of dry matter yield, C. cajan was less preferred by both sheep and goats in the present study, which may affect its utilization in agroforestry systems. The relatively greater intake of C. cajan and S. virosa by the goat compared to the sheep could mean that they are more preferred by the goat. This partly is in concordance with Wilson et al (1995) who remarked that sheep preferred grasses and forb than shrubs while goats preferred shrubs. Generally, the animal species differed in their preference for the various shrub species studied and this could be related to the genetic makeup of the animals (Bartoszuk et al (2001).
Adimasu Y 2008 Assessment of livestock feed resource utilization in Alaba Woreda, Southern Ethiopia. Master›s Thesis, Haramaya University, Harar, Ethiopia.
Alonso-Diaz M A, Torres-Acosta J F J, Sandoval-Castro C A, Hoste H, Aguilar-Caballero A J and Capetillo-Leal C M 2008 Is goat’s preference of forage trees affected by their tannin or fiber content when offered in a cafeteria experiment? Animal Feed Science Technology, 141: 36-48.
Amjad M S, Arshad M, Fatima S and Mumtaz N 2014 Palatability and Animal Preferences of Plants in Tehsil Nikyal, District Kotli, Azad Jammu and Kashmir Pakista. Annual Research & Review in Biology, 4(6): 953-996.
Babayemi J and Bamikole M 2006 Supplementary value of Tephrosia bracteolata, Tephrosia candida, Leucaena leucocephala and Gliricidia sepium hay for West African Dwarf goats kept on range. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 7(2), 323-328.
Bamikole M A, Ikhatua U J, Arigbede O M, Babayemi O J and Etela I 2004 An Evaluation of the Acceptability as forage of some Nutritive and Anti-nutritive Components and of Dry Matter Degradation Profiles of Five Species of Ficus. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 36; 157-167.
Bartoszuk H, Dembek W, Jezierski T, Kaminski J, Kupis J, Liro A, Nawrocki P, Sidor T and Wasilewski Z 2001 The grazing on wet meadows in Narew and Biebrza rivers’ valleys as the method of their natural values protection (In Polish). Biblioteczka Wiadomosci IMUZ. No. 98.
Coleman S W, and Moore J E 2003 Feed quality and animal performance. Field Crops Research, 84(1):17-29.
Dumont B, Garel J P, Ginane C, Decuq F, Farruggia A, Pradel P and Petit M 2007 Effect of cattle grazing a species-rich mountain pasture under different stocking rates on the dynamics of diet selection and sward structure. Animal, 1(7):1042–1052.
Goetsch A L, Gipson T A, Askar A R and Puchala R 2010 Invited review: Feeding behavior of goats. Journal Animal Science, 88: 361–373.
Jimma A, Tessema F, Gemiyo D and Bassa Z 2016 Assessment of Available Feed Resources, Feed Management and Utilization Systems in SNNPRS of Ethiopia. Journal of Fisheries and Livestock Production, 4: 183-186.
Kaitho R J, Umunna N N, Nsahlai I V, Tamminga S, Van Bruchem J and Hanson J 1997 Palatability of wilted and dried multipurpose tree species fed to sheep and goats. Animal Feed Science Technology 65: 151–163.
Kaitho R J, Umunna N N, Nsahlai I V, Tamminga S, Vanbruchem I and Vandwouw M 1996 Palatability of multipurpose tree species: effect of species and length of study on intake and relative palatability by sheep. Agroforestry Systems, 33: 249 – 261.
Kalio G A, Oji U I and Larbi A 2006 Preference and acceptability of indigenous and exotic acid soil-tolerant multipurpose trees and shrubs by West African Dwarf sheep. Agroforestry Systems, 67: 123 – 128.
Karbo N, Barnes P and H Rudat 1993 An evaluation of browse forage preference by sheep and goat in northern Savanna zone Ghana. In: J. Ndikumanaan, P. DeLeeuw (Eds). Proceeding of the 2nd African Feed Resource Network (AFRNETA) on sustainable feed production and utilisation smallholder of livestock enterprises in sub-saharan African. Harare, Zimbabwe.
Karbo N P, Barnes P and Rudat H 1996 An evaluation of browse forage preferences by sheep and goats in the Northern Guinea Savannah Zone, Ghana. In: J. Ndikumana and P. N. de Leeuw (Eds); Sustainable feed production and utilization for small holder livestock enterprises in Sub-Saharan Africa. Proc. of the Sub-Saharan Afri. Feed Resources Network, Harare, Zimbabwe, 6th-10th December 1993. AFRNET (African =Feed Resources Network), Nairobi, Kenya, 201.
Keopaseuht T, Bouahom B and Preston T R 2004 Effect of method of offering foliages of Gliricida sepium and Stylosanthes guianensis CIAT 184 (Stylo) to goats on intake and digestibility. Livestock Research for Rural Development 16 (5). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228818106 [accessed Apr 24 2019].
Khan I I 1996 Biodiversity depletion with respect to Human and livestock population in Indian Desert. In: Proc. Rangelands. In a sustainable biosphere. (Ed.): N.E. West. 5th International Congress 1995, Salt Lake City Utah. 286-287 pp.
Khan M and Hussain F 2012 Palatability and animal preferences of plants in Tehsil Takht-e Nasrali, District Karak, Pakistan. African Journal of agricultural Research, 7(44): 5858-5872.
Kochare T, Tamir B and Kechero Y 2018 Palatability and Animal Preferences of Plants in Small and Fragmented Land Holdings: The Case of Wolayta Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Agri Res & Tech., 14(3): 55-59.
Kouch T, Preston T R and Ly J 2003 Studies on utilization of trees and shrubs as the sole feedstuff by growing goats; foliage preferences and nutrient utilization. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 15 (7). http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd15/7/kouc157.htm
Krueger N C, Sollenberger L E, Blount A R, Vendramini J M B, Lemos N L S, Costa A G and Adesogan A T 2014 Mixed stocking by cattle and goats for blackberry control in rhizoma peanut-grass pastures. Crop Science, 54: 2864–2871.
Lambert M G, Jung G A, Fletcher R H, Budding P J and Costall D A 1989 Forage shrubs in North Island hill country 2. Sheep and goat preferences. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 32: 485-490.
Larbi A, Osakwe I I and Lambourne J W 1993 Variation in relative palatability to sheep among Gliricida sepium provenances. Agroforestry Systems, 22:221-224.
Mlambo V, Mould F L, Sikosana J L N, Smith T, Owen E and Mueller-Harvey I 2008 Chemical composition and in vitro fermentation of tannin-rich tree fruits. Animal Feed Science Technology 140: 402-417.
Nastis A 2007 Feeding behaviour of goats and wisation of pasture and rangelands. Options Mediterraneenes, CIHEAM.
Olafadehan O A 2011 Changes in haematological and biochemical indices of Red Sokoto goats fed tannin-rich Pterocarpus erinaceus forage diets. Veterinarski Arhiv, 81: 471- 483.
Personius T L, Wambolt C L, Stephens J R and Kelsey R G 1987 Crude terpenoid influence on mule deer preference for sagebrush. Journal of Range Management, 84-88.
Rahim I, Sultan J I, Sharif M and Bilal M Q 2013 Chemical composition, mineral profile, palatability and in vitro digestibility of shrubs. Journal of Animal and Plant Science, 23, 45-49.
Skarpe C and Hester A 2008 Plant traits, browsing and grazing herbivores, and vegetation dynamics. In: The Ecology of Browsing and Grazing: Ecology studies. Eds. Gordon, I.J. & Prins, H.H.T., Springer, 19 (5), 217-261.
Sultan J I, Rahim I, Nawaz H and Yaqoob M 2007 Nutritive value of marginal land grasses of Northern Grasslands of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 39: 1071-1082.
Wilson A D, Leigh J H, Hindley N L and Mulham W E 1995 Comparison of the diets of goats and sheep on a Easuarina cristata - Heterodendrram oleifolium woodland community in Western New South Wales. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry, 15: 45-53.
Ziblim A I, Agyapong R A, and Aikins T K 2016 Assessing the biomass production and nutritive value of Kenaf (Hibiscus Cannabinus) at various stages of growth. UDS International Journal of Development, 2(2): 26-36.
Received 13 March 2019; Accepted 4 May 2019; Published 2 July 2019