Citation of this paper |
This investigation was aimed at
evaluating foliage production and nutritive value of Muntingia calabuara, Hibiscus
The fresh biomass production (average of the first 3 harvests at 10 week intervals) was 13.7, 8.1, 8.9 and 19.6 tonnes/ha for Hibiscus rosa sinensis L, two local varieties of Morus alba and Trichanthera gigantea, respectively. Muntingia calabuara did not re-grow after the first harvest. Rumen degradability of dry matter as well as gas production was higher in leaves and foliage of Morus alba and Hibiscus rosa sinensis L. than the others. Dry matter loss (in sacco) at 48h or gas production at 48h were better predictors of nutritive value than the coefficients of the fitted curve [P = a + b (1 - e -ct)].
In general, Morus alba, Hibiscus rosa sinensis L and Trichanthera gigantea trees seem to be promising fodder species especially in the dry season in central Vietnam.
In central Vietnam, the population of ruminants occupy around 45% of the total live stock in the whole country. Because of harsh conditions (high temperature, low rainfall in the dry season), shortage of animal feed is a big problem for livestock development, particularly for grazing cattle. The main feed supplement for animals during the dry season is rice and maize straws and various crop residues. Quantity and quality of feed is usually limited, particularly the protein content. This is reflected in poor animal performance.
In recent years, there have been many studies on the of tree foliages as supplements for live stock (Leng 1997). In central Vietnam, there are some indigenous trees that can be used as forages. Among these are:
"Trung Ca" (Muntingia calabura) belonging to the family Elaeocarpacae. It can grow everywhere (sandy land, humid areas, and high land area) and is well adapted to the dry season in central Vietnam. The farmers use it as shade tree around the homestead, and along the roads. Trung Ca is a tall tree with a large canopy of leaves but it has not been used for animals.
"Dam But" (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L.) belongs to the Malvacae family. It adapts and grows well during the dry season in Central Vietnam. The most common planting method is by stem cuttings. The tree is grown as a live fence. In some areas "Dam But" is fed to rabbits and goats.
Mulberry (Morus spp) belongs to the Moraceae Family (Subtype Angiosperms; Class Dicotyledons; Subclass Urticales) and there are several species. Mulberry leaves have been the traditional feed for silk worms. In Vietnam there are many varieties with high yield. In recent years, the area of Mulberry has decreased due to reduced activities in silk processing and limited market. The traditional way of using mulberry as animal feed in silk-producing areas is to feed ruminants with the residue left by the silk worm.
Trichanthera gigantea is a tree of the Acanthaceae family and is apparently native to the Andean foothills of Colombia (Rosales 1997). The tree was introduced into Vietnam in 1991 and has been readily adopted by farmers throughout the country because of its tolerance to a wide range of ecological conditions and apparent resistance to pest and diseases (Nguyen Ngoc Ha and Phan Thi Phan 1993; Nguyen Thi Hong Nhan et al 1996; Nguyen Thi Hong Nhan and Nguyen van Hon 1999; Nguyen Xuan Ba, personal observations).
The research described in this paper was aimed at the evaluation of the agronomic characteristics and the nutritive value of the above trees as ruminant feeds.
The experiment was started in September, 2001 in the Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry experimental farm in Hue City. The climate is tropical monsoon with a yearly rainfall around 3415cm, most of which occurs from August to January. The temperature range is 21 to 29 ºC. Air humidity varies in the range 79 to 91%. The soil is sandy loam with the pH around 5.5 in the topsoil.
The above species of shrubs and trees were planted at the same time in September, 2001. The trees were planted from stem cuttings at spacing of 0.2*0.5m for Mulberry and Trichanthera, 0.2*1.0m for Hibiscus and 1*1 for Muntingia calabuara, which was planted by seedlings when their height was about 50 cm. The plot size was 25m² for each of the trees. The foliages were harvested when the plants reached 1 m height except for "Trung Ca" which was 2.5 m. The cutting point was 50 cm above ground level.
Samples of
the foliages (leaves, petioles and young stems) were collected at harvest time
and analysed according to the official methods of AOAC (1990). Cell wall
components (NDF, ADF) were determined according to Van Soest et al (1991).
Rumen degradability was determined according to Ørskov et al (1980) using three fistulated
crossbred cattle. In vitro gas production method was measured
following the method of Menke and Steingass (1988). Rumen degradation and gas
production parameters were estimated by fitting the
exponential equation of McDonald (1981):
P = a + b (1 - e -ct)
Table
1: Planting and
harvesting details and foliage production of Hibiscus rosa, Muntingia,
Morus alba and
Trichanthera | |||||
|
Hibis. |
Munt. |
Morus.1 |
Morus.2 |
Trichan. |
Tree spacing
(m) |
0.2 x
1 |
1 x
1 |
0.2 x
0.5 |
0.2 x
0.5 |
0.2 x
0.5 |
Age of first
cutting (months) |
10 |
3 |
8 |
8 |
10 |
Plant height at
1st cutting (cm) |
101 |
250 |
105 |
139 |
109 |
Biomass yield (kg/ha) |
|
|
|
|
|
1st cutting |
17417 |
13500 |
11000 |
13114 |
26476 |
2nd cutting |
13908 |
- |
8200 |
9032 |
15904 |
3rd cutting |
9700 |
- |
5100 |
4700 |
16304 |
Mean of 3 cuttings | 13675 | 8100 | 8949 | 19561 | |
Cutting interval
(weeks) |
9 |
- |
9 |
9 |
10 |
Estimated biomass
(tonnes/ha/year) |
55 to
60 |
40 to
50 |
40 to
45 |
40 to
45 |
80 to
100 |
Ratio leaf:
stem |
3.00 |
1.50 |
1.50 |
1.25 |
1.35 |
|
Trichanthera and Hibiscus had
higher biomass yield than Mulberry and Muntingia (Table 1). It has been observed that all the above
species grow faster in the spring season compared with the winter season in
central
The crude protein of
the dry matter of the leaves and stems varied from 12 to 23 % (Table 2).
The NDF contents were high in all the plants.
Table 2: Chemical composition of Hibiscus rosa, Muntingia, Morus alba and Trichanthera ( dry matter basis except for DM which is on fresh basis) | ||||||||
|
DM |
CP |
CF |
Ash |
NDF |
ADF |
Ca |
P |
Hibis.
leaves |
20.5 |
18.4 |
15.6 |
13.4 |
30.4 |
14.2 |
||
Hibis.
leaves and young stems |
20.0 |
17.2 |
17.9 |
13.4 |
34.0 |
19.0 |
||
Munt.
leaves |
37.0 |
16.0 |
14.1 |
11.6 |
24.5 |
12.6 |
||
Munt.
leaves and young stems |
40.0 |
14.3 |
20.2 |
12.0 |
34.7 |
22.6 |
||
Trichan.
leaves |
14.0 |
12.4 |
17.4 |
23.5 |
44.9 |
25.9 |
||
Trichan.
leaves and young stems |
13.0 |
12.0 |
18.0 |
24.7 |
45.2 |
25.9 |
||
Morus
2. leaves |
31.0 |
24.3 |
9.5 |
13.2 |
32.9 |
15.6 |
1.9 |
0.6 |
Morus
2. leaves and young stems |
28.0 |
22.6 |
9.6 |
11.8 |
34.5 |
14.8 |
1.8 |
0.6 |
Morus
1. leaves |
37.0 |
22.2 |
8.8 |
15.5 |
31.0 |
15.0 |
2.8 |
0.4 |
Morus
1. leaves and young stems |
35.5 |
23.1 |
10.9 |
13.7 |
32.4 |
15.4 |
2.8 |
0.5 |
DM degradability at 24 h was highest for Hibiscus followed by
Mulberry with lower values for Trichanthera and Muntingia (Table
3).
Table 3: In sacco degradability (mean values and SE) of leaves and stems of Morus alba, Hibiscus rosa, Muntingia and Trichanthera gigantea | ||||||
|
Incubation time (hr) | |||||
8 |
16 |
24 |
48 |
72 |
96 | |
Hibis. leaves |
34.8±5.1 |
78.5±6.4 |
92.1±0.9 |
93.3±0.2 |
93.5±0.1 |
93.9±0.3 |
Hibis. leaves and young stems |
44.3±1.6 |
55.1±1.3 |
71.9±1.8 |
89.5±1.2 |
91.2±0.4 |
91.4±0.3 |
Munt. leaves |
30.6±0.5 |
33.9±2.7 |
39.6±6.2 |
67.1±3.3 |
75.2±0.5 |
79.1±1.9 |
Munt. leaves and young stems |
32.5±0.6 |
36.5±1.8 |
46.5±4.2 |
63.8±1.7 |
68.7±1.0 |
70.1±0.7 |
Trichan. leaves |
36.1±0.5 |
41.7±0.3 |
48.2±5.9 |
79.9±0.7 |
84.7±3.9 |
91.6±0.1 |
Trichan. leaves and young stems |
37.7±0.4 |
43.4±0.1 |
46.8±3.3 |
79.0±3.2 |
83.5±0.1 |
88.0±0.5 |
Morus 2. leaves |
47.0±0.4 |
49.6±2.9 |
79.7±8.4 |
88.0±0.1 |
88.5±0.6 |
89.1±0.6 |
Morus 2. leaves and young stems |
53.6±1.4 |
61.8±6.4 |
81.1±8.1 |
89.8±0.4 |
90.5±0.2 |
90.7±0.3 |
Morus 1. leaves |
53.2±3.5 |
74.7±15.1 |
82.0±8.7 |
89.7±0.6 |
90.9±0.2 |
91.1±0.1 |
Morus 1. leaves and young stems |
61.7±10.8 |
73.3±14.0 |
84.5±6.0 |
90.3±0.6 |
90.8±0.2 |
91.0±0.1 |
The washing loss (soluble cell contents) was
higher for Mulberry than the other species. The other
degradability parameters are difficult to interpret as apparently there are few
differences among the species. However, it is known that the nutritive value of
Trichanthera is relatively low when fed to goats (Keir et al 1997), whereas
Mulberry has a high feeding value for goats (Theng Kouch et al 2003).
Table 4: In sacco degradability characteristics of Mulberry, Hibiscus, Muntingia and Trichanthera | |||||||
|
a (%) |
b (%) |
a
+ b (%) |
c (%/hr) |
Washing
loss |
ED
of water insoluble (%) |
Lag
time (hr) |
Hibis.
leaves |
-147 |
241 |
93.9 |
0.176 |
14.1 |
79.8 |
6.3 |
Hibis.
leaves and young stems |
17.4 |
76.2 |
93.6 |
0.050 |
15.5 |
78.1 |
0.0 |
Munt.
leaves |
16.0 |
77.5 |
93.5 |
0.019 |
28.2 |
65.3 |
9.0 |
Munt.
leaves and young stems |
18.3 |
56.5 |
74.8 |
0.030 |
30.1 |
44.7 |
7.9 |
Trichan.
leaves |
19.4 |
84.0 |
100 |
0.022 |
34.0 |
66.0 |
8.8 |
Trichan.
leaves and young stems |
21.7 |
77.7 |
99.4 |
0.022 |
36.0 |
63.4 |
9.3 |
Morus
2. leaves |
15.8 |
75.0 |
90.8 |
0.057 |
40.4 |
50.4 |
7.0 |
Morus
2. leaves and young stems |
26.0 |
65.8 |
91.8 |
0.062 |
44.1 |
47.7 |
5.2 |
Gas production at 48h was highest for Hibiscus followed by the Mulberry with lowest values for Trichanthera and Muntingia (Table 5). There were no consistencies, however, in the fitted curve parameters, which indicated higher rate constants for Mulberry compared with Hibiscus, yet 48h gas production showed the contrary. The unreliability of the fitted curve procedures is shown in Figures 1 and 2. There was a close relationship (R² = 0.70) between the 48h degradation and gas production data (Figure 2) but no relationship (R² = 0.07) between the "a+b" parameters for the two methods (Figure 1).
Table
5: Gas production
from the fermentation of 200 mg of DM of Mulberry, Hibiscus,
Muntingia and Trichanthera | ||||||
|
Gas production, ml |
Parameters | ||||
24 |
48 |
72 |
96 |
a+b |
c | |
Hibis.
leaves |
39.7 |
46.7 |
48.8 |
49.8 |
49.2 |
0.075 |
Hibis.
leaves and young stems |
35.2 |
41.4 |
43.4 |
45.0 |
44.0 |
0.075 |
Munt.
leaves |
15.7 |
23.8 |
27.4 |
29.4 |
31.7 |
0.027 |
Munt.
leaves and young stems |
11.6 |
19.5 |
20.0 |
21.7 |
22.8 |
0.033 |
Trichan.
leaves |
13.2 |
22.4 |
24.4 |
26.1 |
27.7 |
0.032 |
Trichan.
leaves and young stems |
13.5 |
22.6 |
24.3 |
26.0 |
27.6 |
0.032 |
Morus
2. leaves |
35.5 |
39.0 |
41.1 |
41.4 |
40.6 |
0.104 |
Morus
2. leaves and young stems |
25.4 |
30.6 |
31.8 |
31.8 |
31.2 |
0.097 |
Morus
1. leaves |
31.4 |
36.2 |
36.7 |
36.1 |
36.7 |
0.086 |
Morus
1. leaves and young stems |
32.2 |
35.7 |
38.5 |
39.2 |
38.0 |
0.095 |
Figure 1: Relationship between a+b parameters for in sacco and gas production | Figure 2: Relationship between 48h in sacco DM degradation and gas production at 48h |
Conclusions and recommendations
Based on this study, it can be
concluded that some indigenous trees together with the introduced Trichanthera gigantea can be grown as protein sources for ruminants
in central
These trees grow well in poor quality soil, at high ambient temperature, with low levels of management.
Morus alba and Hibiscus
This research was partially financed by the bilateral SAREC project 2000-2002.
AOAC 1990 Official
Methods of Analysis 13th
Edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists,
Keir Brenda, Dinh van Binh, Preston T R and Orskov E R 1997 Nutritive value of leaves from tropical trees and shrubs: 2. Intake, growth and digestibility studies with goats. Livestock Research for Rural Development (9) 4: http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd9/4/bren942.htm
Leng R A 1997 Tree foliage in ruminant nutrition. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper. Number 139. http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/w7448e/w7448e00.htm
McDonald I 1981
A revised model for the estimation of protein
degradability in the rumen. Journal
of Agricultural Science (Cambridge) 96: 251-252
Menke K H and Staingass H 1988 Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Science and Development 28: 7-55
Nguyen Ngoc Ha and Phan Thi Phan 1995 Vegetative propagation capacities and effect of fertilization on biomass production of Trichanthera gigantea. Livestock Research for Rural Development (7) 1: http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd7/1/6.htm
Nguyen Thi Hong Nhan, Nguyen van Hon, Vo Van Son, Preston T R and Dolberg F 1996 Effect of shade on biomass production and composition of the forage tree Trichanthera Gigantea. Livestock Research for Rural Development (8) 2: http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd8/2/nhan82.htm
Nguyen Thi Hong Nhan and Nguyen van Hon 1999 Supplementing rice by-products with foliage of Trichanthera gigantea in diets of growing and lactating pigs and fattening ducks. Livestock Research for Rural Development (11) 3: http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd11/3/nhan113.htm
Ørskov E R, Howell F D DeB and Mould F 1980 The use of
the nylon bag technique for the evaluation of feedstuffs. Tropical Animal Production
5: 195 - 213
Rosales M 1997 Trichanthera gigantea (Humboldt & Bonpland.) Nees: A review; Livestock Research for Rural Development (9) 4: http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd9/4/mauro942.htm
Theng Kouch, 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
Van Soest P J, Robertson J B and Lewis B A 1991 Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74:3583-3593
Received 25 March 2003; Accepted 16 June 2003