NUTRITIONAL POTENTIAL OF ELEPHANT EAR TREE (ENTEROLOBIUM CYCLOCARPUM) LEAVES AS FEED RESOURCE FOR WEST AFRICAN DWARF GOAT IN THE HUMID TROPICS

ABSTRACT

The experiment was designed to evaluate the nutritional potentials of fresh and preserved Enterolobium cyclocarpum (EC) leaves by West African Dwarf (WAD) goats. The fresh and preserved leaves were evaluated for their chemical composition (Experiment 1). The leaves and experimental diets were assessed for their in vitro gas and methane production potentials (Experiment 2). The acceptability of the leaves by WAD goats were monitored in Experiment 3. The best acceptable form of the leaves were incorporated (0, 7.50, 15 and 22.50%) in concentrate diets and fed to WAD goats to evaluate their growth and carcass characteristics (Experiment 4), digestibility of nutrients (Experiment 5) and lactation performance (Experiment 6). Results obtained revealed that both fresh and preserved EC leaves were rich in nutrient, with a crude protein content of 14.53 – 22.50% which was significantly different (p<0.05) across treatment. Ensiling significantly (p<0.05) reduced the concentration of tannin, phytate and HCN compared to sun drying. The phosphorus contents of the fresh and preserved leaves was 0.31 – 0.34%, while calcium concentration was 0.22 - 0.26%. The vitamin concentrations of the leaves were significantly different (p<0.05) across treatment, with higher concentrations of vitamin C (308.79 – 657.60mg/100g). The presence of tannin in EC leaves led to methane reduction of 16.67%. In the acceptability studies, bucks preferred the fresh leaves (FENT) most with a Coefficient of preference of 3.20. The CP of the four EC leaves containing experimental diets ranged from 16.45% to 17.50%. Bucks fed 15% EC leaves diet (Diet 3) recorded the best indices in average final live weight of 8.83kg compared to bucks fed the control diet (7.73kg), 7.50% EC diets (7.33kg; Diet 2) and 22.50% EC diet (5.65kg; Diet 4). Significant increases (p<0.05) in the weight of the kidney, heart and diaphragm were recorded. However, the kidney weight of bucks fed diet 3 (0.64%) compared favourably with the control (0.61%), while the heart and diaphragm weight of bucks fed diet 3 (0.99 and 0.61%) were quite lower than those fed the control diet (1.05 and 0.67). In the sensory evaluation, meat from bucks fed diet 3 was significantly (p<0.05) adjudged the most preferred, possessing the best aroma, juiciness and tenderness. Similarly, bucks fed diet 3 (15.00% EC) recorded highest values for dry matter (42.51%), crude fibre (15.48%), ether extract (86.36%), nitrogen free extracts (42.92%), organic matter (46.93%), neutral detergent fibre (58.38%) and hemicellulose (51.62%) digestibilities coefficient which were significantly different (p<0.05) across treatments. Bucks fed EC diets containing tannins partitioned more nitrogen to the feaces than urine. Bucks retained more nitrogen with increased EC in the diets. Milk yield was 101.79 – 196.10g/d with does fed Diet 2 producing significantly (p<0.05) the highest quantity. Weight of kids increased linearly with increased milk production.  In conclusion, WAD goats should be fed 15% EC leaves for better growth performance, carcass yield and sensory characteristics. Lactating does should be fed diet 7.50% EC leaves for maximal milk production and better kid growth. Thus WAD goats should be fed 7.50 – 15.00% EC leaves with no deleterious effect.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Front Cover Page                                                                                                                   

Title Page                                                                                                                                i

Declaration                                                                                                                             ii

Certification                                                                                                                           iii

Dedication                                                                                                                              iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                                v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                  vii

List of Tables                                                                                                                         xiv

Abstract                                                                                                                                 xviii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION                                                                                        1

1.1 Background Information                                                                                                  1

1.2 Statement of Problem                                                                                                       3

1.3 Justification                                                                                                                      4

1.4 Objectives                                                                                                                         4

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW                                                                           6

2.1 The Goat (Capra aegagrus hircus)                                                                                  6

2.2. Population and Breeds of Goats                                                                             8

2.2.1 Sahel or desert goats                                                                                                                     9

2.2.2. Red Sokoto or maradi goats                                                                                         9

2.2.3 West African dwarf (WAD) goats                                                                                 9

2.3 Socio-Economic Importance of Goats                                                                             11

2.4 Goat Milk                                                                                                                         12

2.4.1 Characteristics of goat milk                                                                                           12

2.4.2 Superiority of goat milk to cow milk                                                                            13

2.4.3 Yield of goat milk and factors influencing goat milk yield                                          14

2.4.3.1 Breed                                                                                                                          16

2.4.3.2 Nutrition                                                                                                                     16

2.4.3.3 Body size and weight                                                                                                 17

2.4.3.4 Age                                                                                                                             17

2.4.3.5 Udder size and shape                                                                                                  17

2.4.3.6 Litter size                                                                                                                    17

2.4.3.7 Season of kidding                                                                                                       17

2.4.3.8 Temperature                                                                                                               17

2.4.3.9 Disease                                                                                                                        17

2.4.3.10 Growth                                                                                                                      18

2.4.3.11 Environment                                                                                                             18

2.4.4 Composition of goat milk                                                                                              18

2.4.4.1 Carbohydrate                                                                                                              19

2.4.4.2 Fat                                                                                                                               19

2.4.4.3 Proteins                                                                                                                       23

2.4.4.4 Vitamins                                                                                                                     24

2.4.4.5 Minerals                                                                                                                      24

2.4.4.6 Enzymes                                                                                                                     25

2.4.4.7 Ash                                                                                                                              26

2.4.4.8 Total solids                                                                                                                 26

2.4.4.9 Other constituents                                                                                                       27

2.4.5 Factors influencing the composition of goat milk                                                         27

2.4.5.1 Breed                                                                                                                          27

2.4.5.2 Feed                                                                                                                            27

2.4.5.3 Stage of lactation                                                                                                        29

2.4.5.4 Environment                                                                                                               29

2.4.5.5 Daily variation                                                                                                            30

2.4.5.6 Parity                                                                                                                          30

2.4.5.7 Other factors                                                                                                               30

2.5. Goats Feed in Nigeria                                                                                                      30

2.5.1 Forages                                                                                                                          30

2.5.1.1 Natural pasture/ rangelands                                                                                        31

2.5.1.2 Artificial/sown pasture                                                                                               31

2.5.1.3 Browses                                                                                                                      32

2.5.2 Concentrate feed supplement                                                                                        33

2.5.3 Agricultural wastes/crop residues and agro-industrial by-products                                    34

2.6 Chemical Composition of Browse Plants                                                                         34

2.7 Elephant-ear Tree (Enterolobium cyclocarpum) (Jacq.) Griseb.                                     42

2.7.1 Common names                                                                                                             42

2.7.2 Scientific classification                                                                                                 43

2.7.3 Description and distribution                                                                                          43

2.8  Chemical Composition and Nutritional Potentials of Enterolobium cyclocarpum         45

2.8.1 Chemical composition                                                                                                   45

2.8.2 Anti-nutritional and toxicological properties                                                                46

2.8.3 In vitro gas production potentials of Enterolobium cyclocarpum                               48

2.8.4 Defaunating/anti-protozoal and methane reduction potentials of

ruminants fed Enterolobium cyclocarpum                                                                    49

2.8.5      Effect of feeding Enterolobium cyclocarpum on digestibility

and rumen bacteria                                                                                                     51

2.8.6 Effect of feeding Enterolobium cyclocarpum on growth

performance and carcass characteristics of ruminant animals                                    52

2.9 Chemical Composition of Panicum maximum                                                                 53

2.10 Voluntary Feed Intake (VFI) by Goats                                                                           54

2.11 Nutritive Value of Feed                                                                                                  54

2.11.1 Chemical analyses                                                                                                       55

2.11.1.1 Proximate analysis (Weende system of feed analysis)                                             55

2.11.1.2 Detergent system of feed analysis                                                                            56

2.11.2 Digestibility                                                                                                                 57

2.12 Factors Affecting Digestibility                                                                                       57

2.12.1 Animal effect                                                                                                               58

2.12.2 Plant effect                                                                                                                   58

2.12.3 Preparation of feed                                                                                                      59

2.13 Methods of Estimating Feed Digestibility                                                               60

2.13.1 Direct/total/complete collection (quantitative feed and feaces) method                        60

2.13.2 Marker-to-marker/index/indicator method                                                                  61

2.13.4   Difference/indirect method                                                                                         62

2.13.4 Regression method (prediction technique)                                                                  62

2.13.5 Nylon bag (in situ) technique                                                                                      62

2.13.6 Rumen fluid –pepsin in vitro digestibility (IVOMD) technique                                    62

2.13.7 In vitro cumulative gas method                                                                                   63

2.14 Plant Secondary Metabolites                                                                                                                         63

2.15 Fate of Ingested Nitrogen and/or Protein                                                                                                                                             65

2.16 Effect of forage Processing on Methanogenesis                                                            66

CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS                                                                                                                       68

3.1 Study Area                                                                                                                        68

3.2. Experiment 1: Proximate Composition, Fibre Fractions, Minerals/Vitamin

Assays and Anti-Nutritional Factors in Raw and Treated (Dried, Ensiled,

Dried X Ensiled) Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves                                                69

3.2.1 Determination of proximate composition                                                                     70

3.2.2 Determination of fibre fractions                                                                                                70

3.2.3 Determination of anti-nutrients                                                                                     70

3.2.3.1 Determination of tannins by Folin-Dennis Spectrophometric

method (Pearson, 1976)                                                                                              71

3.2.3.2 Determination of saponin                                                                                           71

3.2.3.3 Determination of phytate (McCance and Widdowson, 1953)                                    72

3.2.3.4 Determination of ammonia nitrogen (NH₃N) by Nessler’s

Colorimeter Method (AOAC, 1990)                                                                          73

3.2.4 Determination of minerals                                                                                             73

3.3 Experiment 2: In Vitro Gas and Methane Production Potentials of Raw and

Treated (Dried, Ensiled, Dried X Ensiled) Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves             73

3.4  Experiment 3: Acceptability of Raw and Treated (Dried, Ensiled,

Dried X Ensiled) Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves by WAD Bucks                    75

3.5 Experiment 4: Growth Performance and Carcass Characteristics of WAD

Bucks Fed Concentrate Diets Containing Graded Levels of the Best

Acceptable Form of Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves                                           76

3.5  Experiment 5: Digestibility Trial using WAD Bucks Fed Diets Containing

Graded Levels of the Best Acceptable Form of Enterolobium

cyclocarpum Leaves                                                                                                         80

3.7 Experiment 6: Lactation Studies of WAD Does Fed Diets Containing Graded

Levels of the Best Acceptable Form of Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves             81

3.7.1 Animal management                                                                                                     81

3.7.2 Kid management                                                                                                           83

3.7.3 Milk measurements and sampling                                                                                 83

3.7.4 Analytical procedures                                                                                                    84

3.7.4.1 Lactose determination by the Marrier and Boulet (1959) method                                    84

3.7.4.2 Determination of total solids (AOAC, 1980)                                                             85

3.7.4.3 Butterfat determination by the Roese-Gotlieb method (AOAC, 1980)               85

3.7.4.4 Crude protein determination                                                                                      86

3.7.4.5 Total ash determination                                                                                              86

3.7.4.6 Energy determination                                                                                                 87

3.7.4.7 Solids-not-fat determination                                                                                      87

3.7.4.8 Mineral composition of milk samples                                                                                    87

3.7.5 Statistical analysis                                                                                                         88

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                                                                  89

4.1. Proximate Composition, Fibre Fractions, Minerals, Vitamin and

Anti-nutritional Factors Assays in Raw and Treated (Ensiled, Dried

and Ensiled X Dried) Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves                                         89

4.2. Acceptability of Raw and Treated (Ensiled, Dried and Ensiled X

Dried) Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves by WAD Bucks                                    103

4.3. Chemical Composition of Diets, Growth Performance and Carcass

Characteristics of WAD Bucks Fed Diets Containing Graded Levels of

the Best Acceptable Form of Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves                                   105

4.3.1 Chemical composition of experimental diets                                                              106

4.3.2 Growth performance of bucks fed the experimental diets                                          112

4.3.2 Carcass characteristics of bucks fed the EC containing diets                                     114

4.4. Digestibility Trial with WAD Bucks Fed Diets Containing Graded Levels

of the Best Acceptable Form of Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves                                  129

4.5. Lactation Studies of WAD Does Fed Diets Containing Graded Levels

of the Best Acceptable form of Enterolobium cyclocarpum Leaves                                 140

4.5.1. Proximate composition of experimental diets                                                            140

4.5.2. Composition of WAD colostrum                                                                               142

4.5.3. Colostrum mineral composition                                                                                 146

4.5.4. Feed intake, milk yield and composition                                                                   149

4.5.5. Milk mineral composition                                                                                          154

4.5.6. Weight of kids at birth, weekly weight gain and weight at weaning                                  157

4.5.7. Relationship between milk yield and constituents                                                     160

4.6. In vitro Total Gas and Methane Gas Production                                                           162

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION                                                                                           165

5.1 Conclusion                                                                                                                       165

5.2 Recommendation                                                                                                            166

References                                                                                                                           167

LIST OF TABLES

                                                             CHAPTER 1

1.0  INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The need to match livestock production with feed resources at no or low cost in developing countries (Preston, 1987, Leng, 1987) has necessitated research into the use of forage trees (Isah et al., 2011; Idowu et al., 2013; Ukanwoko and Okpechi, 2016), agricultural waste and agro-industrial by-products (Ifut et al, 2014; Ukanwoko and Ibeawuchi, 2014; Ekanem et al., 2017) in ruminant animals production.  The utilization of these natural resources in a rational and sustainable way is a viable option for obtaining profits in agricultural activities (FAO, 2012). The utilization of forage trees as feed ingredients helps to improve the animal diet and reduce the use of concentrates in ruminant diets (De Andrade et al. 2008; Ortega 2012; Delgado et al., 2014).

Browse plants are less expensive but have high nutritive value. They are available all year round. They contain both primary and secondary metabolites (Galindo et al., 2014). The primary metabolites are directly involved with growth and development while the secondary metabolites have beneficial and detrimental effects on the plants and on animals consuming those (Crozier et al., 2006). These less beneficial secondary metabolites are bioactive compounds/anti-nutritional factors (ANFs) which confer a mechanism of chemical defense against microorganisms, insects and grazing ruminants. Plant bioactive compounds include a variety of plant secondary metabolites such as saponins, tannins, mimosine, coumarin, oxalate, phytate and hydrocyanic acid (HCN) ((Galindo et al., 2014). These compounds have the advantage of being “natural” compounds, which may or may not be readily accepted by livestock. Some of these ANFs affect the activities of microbes in the rumen, increasing bacterial proteins and overall nutrients flow and digestibility to the duodenum for subsequent absorption by the ruminant (Koenig et al., 2007; Isah et al., 2011; Idowu et al., 2013). Some of these ANFs have defaunation qualities while some have bactericidal or bacteriostatic properties (Galindo et al., 2014; Isah et al., 2011). These plant bioactive compounds possess antimicrobial activity which can be used as alternative additives to reduce methanogen population in the rumen (Kamra et al., 2012). Herbal extracted products have a prominent effect on rumen microbiota either directly changing the methanogens or indirectly affecting protozoa (Karri et al., 2015).

Enterolobium cyclocarpum, commonly known as guanacaste, caro caro, or elephant-ear tree, is a species of flowering tree in the pea family, Fabaceae, that is native to tropical regions of America, from central Mexico south to northern Brazil (Roraima) and Venezuela (USDA, 1994). Enterolobium cyclocarpum (EC) is a native Neotropical mimosaceous legume tree, found mainly in the deciduous lowlands forests (Janzen, 1981). Enterolobium cyclocarpum is easy to establish and it is a fast and luxuriantly growing tree (Babayemi, 2006). Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaf is rich in nutrients, containing 15.59 – 18.6 % crude protein (CP), 8.16 – 48.2 % crude fibre (CF), 2.21 – 11.00 % ether extract (EE), 4.90 – 11.80 % ash, 51.4 – 63.94 % neutral detergent fibre (NDF); 31.90 – 42.99 % acid detergent fibre (ADF), 8.6 % acid detergent lignin (ADL) (Babayemi, 2006; Isah et al., 2011; Galindo et al.,  2014; Aderinboye et al., 2016). However, its acceptability by ruminant is low due to its contents of ANFs (Koenig et al., 2007; Isah et al., 2011).

The digestibility of forages and industrial waste have been improved by mechanical, chemical or biological treatments (Shrestha et al., 2008; Mahmood and Rahman, 2008; Abedo et. al., 2009; Barde et al., 2015). For various reasons, including environmental considerations, biological rather than chemical conversion is the preferred treatment (Coughlan and Collaço, 1990). The ensiling of feedstuff is a simple and appropriate biological method of conservation. It is the most effective way to improve animal feed resources through the rational use of locally available agricultural and industrial-by products.  The ensiling of herbage and agricultural waste is accepted as the major method of forage conservation, and much research has been undertaken in this field (McDonald et al., 1991; Babayemi et al., 2010; Olorunnisomo, 2013; Ekanem, et al., 2015). For better fermentation characteristics, there should be enough water soluble carbohydrates in the ensiled mass (McDonald et al., 2002; Olorunnisomo and Fayomi, 2012). The nitrogen free extract (NFE) contents of Enterolobium cyclocarpum (64.71 %) (Isah et al., 2011) compares favourably well with that of cassava peels (76.00 %) (Olorunnisomo and Fayomi, 2012), thus making the Enterolobium cyclocarpum substrate an effective medium for fermentation.

Little information is available about the ANFs present in Enterolobium cyclocarpum and their long term effect on the rumen microbial population. The interactions between diets, microbial species and their population and methane emissions are poorly understood. Information on the lactation performance of cows fed Enterolobium cyclocarpum forage is scanty (Olorunnisomo, 2013). No information is available on the overall animal productivity (meat and milk production) of West African Dwarf (WAD) goats fed Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves. The main aim of this investigation was to assess the feed value of Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves when fed treated or untreated to WAD goats.

1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The animal protein (meat and milk) consumption of an average Nigerian is low due to the unavailability and high cost of these products from cattle. Goat production will help to increase animal protein consumption. The productivity of livestock is generally low in the dry season due to reduced forage quantity and quality. Browse plants including Enterolobium cyclocarpum are available all year round, but they contain secondary metabolites or anti-nutritional factors which affects their digestibility by livestock.

1.3 JUSTIFICATION

1. Enterolobium cyclocarpum is a browse plant that is available all year round.

2. There is dearth of information on the ANFs present in Enterolobium cyclocarpum.

3. No information is available on the carcass and lactation performance of WAD goats fed Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves.

4. Treatment of Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves (drying and ensiling) will help in the reduction of anti-nutritional factors, improvement of forage digestibility and increased animal productivity in terms of meat and milk.

1.4 OBJECTIVES    

The broad objective of this research was to evaluate the growth and lactation performance of West African Dwarf (WAD) goats fed treated Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves.

The specific objectives of this research were:

1.     To assay the proximate, fibre fractions, minerals, vitamins, anti-nutritional factors and in vitro total gas and methane production potentials of fresh (untreated) and treated (sun-dried and ensiled) Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves.

2.     To determine the most acceptable form and optimal voluntary intake level of untreated or treated Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves by WAD goats.

3.     To assess the growth performance and carcass characteristics of WAD bucks fed concentrate diet containing varying levels of the best acceptable form of Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves.

4.     To determine the intake and digestibility of experimental concentrate diets in 3 above.

5.     To determine the milk yield and compositions of lactating WAD does fed concentrate diet containing varying levels of the best acceptable form of Enterolobium cyclocarpum leaves.

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.