| Livestock Research for Rural Development 35 (6) 2023 | LRRD Search | LRRD Misssion | Guide for preparation of papers | LRRD Newsletter | Citation of this paper |
An experiment was conducted to examine the chemical composition of oat silage (Avena sativa), treated with urea (U) and/or molasses (M) in Kimbibit district situated in North Shewa Zone of the Oromia regional state, Ethiopia. Sample of oats seed were collected from the three study villages, sowed in different beds and grown using irrigation. The oats harvested at 105 days and chopped at 2mm size for silage making. Silage experiment was made in plastic container with the capacity of 2 kilograms. There were a combination of nine treatments (without additive (control), 0.5% U, 1% U, 2% M, 4% M, (0.5% U+2% M), (0.5% U + 4% M), (1% U + 2% M), and (1% U +4% M) on fresh weight basis with three replications. The experimental data were subjected to analysis of variance using the General Liner Model procedure of Statistical Analysis System Version, 2004 program. The laboratory result illustrated that the dry matter of treated local oats silage was different from the control sample in the level of M treated. Dry matter of U at 0.5 and 1 % treated silage were also showed significant (p < 0.05) differences. The crude protein contents of oats silage treated without U (9.77%) was lower than 1% U treated (17.07%). Silage making using additives with a combination of 2% M and 1% U could improve the nutritive values of Oats. It remains to be proved that the improvement in the nutritional profile of the oat forage ensiled with urea and molasses is reflected in improved animal performance.
Keywords: molasses, oats, silage, urea
In Ethiopia, there is huge number of livestock resources, though its productivity is extremely low. The major constraint for such low productivity is inadequate feed resources in terms of both quantity and quality especially during dry season of the year (Ahmed et al 2010; Habte et al 2020). Inadequate and poor quality feed supply was identified as a major limiting factor to the development of the livestock sector in general and dairy production in particular (Belay et al 2012). Alemayehu et al (2016) and Denbela and Sintayehu (2020) also reported that the nutritional factors in both quantity and quality are the most limiting determinants to sustain livestock production in Ethiopia. In smallholder mixed crop-livestock production systems, livestock feed supply mainly depends on crop residues, natural pastures, and other agricultural by-products. However, the predominant feed resources, crop residues, and natural pastures have low nutritional quality (Talore 2015). One potential way for increasing the quality and availability of feed for smallholder ruminant animals in the dry season may be making silage (Dargo and Haftay 2019).
Oat (Avena Sativa) is early maturing, palatable, succulent and energy-rich crop. It is mostly used as silage and is preferred by animals due to its high palatability and softness (Gebremedhin et al 2015). Supplementing oat silage to small-scale dairy systems is useful when grazing conditions are limiting, especially during the dry season (Victor et al 2018). FAO (2018) indicated that 21 % of dry matter (DM), 48 % of crude protein (CP) and 52 % of metabolizable energy (ME) is highly deficient for feeding animals. Oats are the best-adapted and productive forage with minimum input usage (Tewodros and Amare 2016). It has high concentrations of CP and crude fat (Qi et al 2017; Farhad et al 2019). It is also a well-adapted fodder crop used as energy source for livestock (Mengistu 2008). In the study area, oats are one of the major indigenous feed resources but their nutritional value and related farmer’s preferences and evaluation of oats silage with different levels of additives have not been adequately studied and documented (Deribe 2015) in the study area. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the chemical composition of local oat fodder crops and its silage at 50% flowering stage in different level of (U) and (M). The ultimate aim of the study was to identify the appropriate additive type and their appropriate proportion to make quality silage from local oat fodder crops.
The study was conducted in Kimbibitdistrict of North Showa Zone, Oromia National Regional State, Ethiopia at a distance of 78 km from Addis Ababa, a capital city of Ethiopia. Kimbibitdistrict is located at 9 0 20' North, 39 0 18' East. The total human population of the district is about 109,933, of which 54,425 are women (CSA 2005). It has an estimated population density of 127.6 people per square kilometer. The total land area of the district is estimated to be 861.26 square kilometers. The altitude of the district ranging from 2620 to 3020 m.a.s.l. (Seblewengel 2018). The districtfalls under the highland agro-ecological zone. The rainfall distribution is bimodal, with short and long rainy seasons from March to April and June to September, respectively. It received an average annual rainfall of about 1013mm with a temperature ranging from 17 to 23 oC. Most of the land is used for crop production, which is entirely rain-fed, and a few parts used for grazing lands. The majority of the community members of the district are dependent on subsistence agriculture and the farming system is characterized by mixed crop-livestock production system. As a result, there is close interdependence between crop and livestock sub-systems in the study area. It is best known for barley, wild oats, wheat, horse beans, linseed and lentils. Cattle, sheep and equines are the dominant types of livestock (Seblewengel 2018).
The total land coverage of the district is 65,885 hectares, out of which, crop cultivation covers 33,401 hectares, and private grazing land takes up 29,168 hectare. Vertisoil and red brown soil soils are the dominant soil types. Vertisoils are found on flat areas, characterized by poor drainage, difficult to plough when dry, and had too much moisture. It is less productive compared to red brown soil. The red brown soils found mostly on sloppy areas of the district and has good drainage and moderately exposed to erosion. This type of soil is productive and suitable for crops such as wheat, barley, beans and peas.
About 14.45m 2 of land was prepared for the study and plowed two times before sowing. It was sowed on 22 November 2020 (Staff 2019) and grown using irrigation and harvested greater than 52 kilograms of green fodder (Gebremedhin et al 2015). The seed was collected from the three selected villages and was sowed on different three beds. The seeding rates were 100kg ha -1 (Amanuel et al 2019). The beds were uniformly irrigated starting from the sowing date up to maturity. Water was applied once a day in the afternoon up to the emergency period. After emergency, the application of water was decreased and applied every two days at the same time. Moreover, fertilizers (either organic or Inorganic) and other management practice (weed control, pest control) were not applied to the sown local oats.
Molasses is the byproducts of sugar cane and purchased from Wonj Sugar factory. It was diluted with water at the ratio of 1:1.5 to sprinkle uniformly (Kang et al 2018). In addition, U was diluted with the same ratio of water (1:1.5) when used as a sole additive. When U and M were mixed, the amount of water used for dilution equaled to the amount of mentioned ratio of M used by weight (Suárez et al 2011). Two kilogram chopped oats were measured for silage making. On the 2 kilogram chopped oats, which was ready for silage making, its 2% weight was 40 gram and 4% weight was 80 g. In addition, the amount of M according to the set ratio were 60 and 120 milliliters mixed with 2 kilogram chopped oats at 2mm length. The M and water were stirred together in graduated cylinder until mixed each other and then the mixture were added to the chopped oats, mixed well each other and put into the mini silos. Urea was purchased from local farmers cooperative. Urea 0.5% (10 g), 1% (20 g) and 2 kilogram chopped oats were measured. Water at the ratio of 1:1.5 (15 and 30 milliliters) mixed with 10 and 20 g U, respectively. Then the prepared U and water was mixed with the 2 kilogram chopped oats and put it into the mini silos. Water was not applied for the 0% treatment of U and M.
The local oats sowed was harvested after 105 days at 50% flowering stages. The flowering stage of this crop was best stage to harvest (Gebremedhin et al 2015) and it reached flowering stage at 99 to 150 days (Usman et al 2018). Hand sickle was used to harvest the oats. The irrigated oats were harvested at 50% flowering stage where the moisture contents of this fodder were 72.86 %, which was suitable for silage making (James 1987; Ranjhan 2001). During field practical work the materials used were hand sickle for harvesting oats, a local axe for chopping, plastic containers with the capacity of five liters as mini silos, transparent plastic bags for sample collection, icebox for sample transportation to the laboratory, graduated cylinder for measuring liquid additives and water, and sensitive balance for measuring chopped oats and additives. Urea and M with different proportions were used in the prepared silage.
The oats were harvested at 50% flowering stage from the three beds and chopped mechanically at the length of 2cm (Rafiuddin et al 2017). For each treatment oats were ensiled either untreated or with one of the two additives. Before packing into mini silos, the chopped oat samples were mixed with the ratio of U (0%, 0.5%. 1%) and M (0%, 2%, 4%) (Yibarek and Tamir 2014) and (Khan et al 2006). The treatments were, no additive (control), (0.5% U), (1% U), (2% M), (4% M), (0.5% U+2% M), (0.5%U + 4%M), (1% U + 2% M), and (1% U + 4% M) on fresh weight basis of oat crops with three replications.The level of applications was adopted from research reports studied elsewhere on other silage crops (Getahun et al 2018; Habte et al 2020). After treatments, mini silos with five liters of plastic container were prepared for silage making. The containers were prepared with a packing weight of two kilogram and the chopped local oat samples were inserted to the containers. To remove oxygen from the container, packing with hand, periodically tamping with a wooden stick, and tightly closed the containers were practiced. The mini silos were covered with plastic materials to decrease the DM lost. Moreover, the containers (mini silos) were protected from rodents, birds, livestock damage and aerobic spoilage.
Completely Randomized Design (CRD) was used with factorial combinations of nine additive types with three replications (Kwanchai and Arturo 1984). Twenty-Seven mini silos were used in the study.
Local oat fodder samples at 50% flowering (before ensiling) were collected. After collection, the triplicate samples were weighed immediately, transferred into bags, and taken to Debre Berhan agricultural research center laboratory shortly after harvesting, and then the samples were weighed and put into a properly labeled paper bag and oven-dried at 60oc for 72 hours. After drying, the samples were ground in a Wiley mill to pass through 1-mm sieve for chemical analysis.Then after DM evaluation, the three samples were mixed with each other and representative samples were prepared for other chemical composition analyses.
After 21 days of the fermentation period, the mini silos were opened and samples were taken for physical and chemical analysis. Observation for mold formation was done starting from the silo opening time, while color, smell and texture were evaluated after silo content extraction. For physical analysis, the quality of silages was determined by color and smell. The color of the silage was measured using the four parameters: dark/deep brown, medium brown, yellow-brown, and greenish-yellow, and the smell was measured with the parameter of rancid/pungent smell, irritative/alcoholic, lightly acidic and very pleasant and sweet acidic (Getahun et al 2018).
Silage samples collected from each mini silos were kept in an icebox until sending to Debre Berhan agricultural research institute laboratory. Dried samples were ground to pass at a 1mm screen. Silage chemical evaluation was done after 21 days (Imsya et al 2018; Habte, et al 2020). Dry Matter, Nitrogen, and ash were analyzed using standard procedures of AOAC (1990). Nitrogen content was determined using Kjeldhal method and then CP content was calculated as N x 6.25. Fibers such as NDF, ADF and ADL contents were determined following the standard procedures of Van Soest and Robertson (1985).
Experimental data were subjected to analysis of variance using the General Linear Model (GLM) procedure of the SAS program (SAS 2004). Mean separation was done using Duncan’s multiple rang test at 5% probability.
Yijk = µ + Ci + Pj + CPij +Eijk. Where:
Yijk = the dependent variable,
μ = overall mean,
Ci = effects of Additives,
Pj = effect of length of fermentation period,
CPij= interaction effect,
Eijkm, = experimental error.
The DM and CP content of oats fodder at 50% flowering stage was 27.4% and 7.12%, respectively, where the NDF value of oats fodder in the current study was 63.96%. In addition, the ADF content was 48.96% at the 50% flowering stage.
Additives affected the chemical composition of local oats silage (Table 1). In both U and M treated and control silage, the pH ranges from 3.84 to 3.89. A significant DM increment p< 0.01) was observed in local oats silage treated with different levels of M as compared to the control. The CP values were significantly (p<0.05) different among oat silages treated with the respective level of M additives. The NDF, ADF, and ADL concentration in different levels of U treated local oats silage was slightly decreased.
|
Table 1. Nutrient composition of Urea and Molasses treated oats ensiled for 21 days |
||||||||
|
Measured |
Level of Urea (%) |
Level of Molasses (%) |
||||||
|
0 |
0.5 |
1 |
p |
0 |
2 |
4 |
p |
|
|
PH |
3.88 |
3.86 |
3.86 |
p>0.05 |
3.89 |
3.86 |
3.84 |
p>0.05 |
|
DM |
35.53 b |
36.57 a |
36.71 a |
p<0.05 |
34.31 c |
36.38 b |
38.11 a |
p<0.01 |
|
CP |
9.77 c |
15.38 b |
17.07 a |
p<0.01 |
13.58 b |
14.36 a |
14.28 a |
p<0.05 |
|
NDF |
50.49 a |
50.23 a |
48.47 b |
p<0.05 |
62.38 a |
45.94 b |
40.87 c |
p<0.01 |
|
ADF |
34.95 a |
33.73 ab |
33.13 b |
p<0.05 |
36.54 a |
33.60 b |
31.68 c |
p<0.01 |
|
ADL |
5.28 a |
4.93 ab |
4.81 b |
p<0.05 |
5.76 a |
4.92 b |
4.34 c |
p<0.01 |
|
Ash |
10.00 b |
10.84 a |
11.16 a |
p<0.01 |
10.25 b |
10.64 ab |
11.11 a |
p<0.05 |
|
Means with different letters within rows are
significantly different at p≤0.05 |
||||||||
The current study indicated that the pH level change of the silage was insignificant as the proportion of M increased (Table 2). The DM was increased with the increment of treatment levels of U and M on oats silage p< 0.01). The control sample DM was lowest as compared to the other treated oats silage. The CP percentage of the interactions was significant (p< 0.01). The increased level of U treatment radically changed the CP level of silage. The control sample CP was 9.49% whereas the oats silage treated with U 1% and M 4% CP contents was 16.88 %, but less effect for M alone. The contents of NDF, ADF, and ADL were minimized significantly with the increased level of M treatment, but no significant effect on the level of U treatment.
|
Table 2. Effects of Urea and Molasses interaction at 21 days of ensiling |
||||||||
|
Treatment (%) |
Nutrient content |
|||||||
|
U |
M |
pH |
DM |
CP |
NDF |
ADF |
ADL |
Ash |
|
0 |
0 |
3.95 |
32.33 e |
9.49 d |
65.43 a |
39.34 a |
6.52 a |
9.53 d |
|
0 |
2 |
3.89 |
35.76 cd |
9.43 d |
45.38 c |
33.78 bcd |
5.07 bc |
10.15 |
|
0 |
4 |
3.80 |
38.49 a |
10.40 d |
40.66 d |
31.73 cd |
4.26 d |
10.33 bcd |
|
0.5 |
0 |
3.90 |
35.12 d |
14.29 c |
61.23 b |
35.92b |
5.34 bc |
10.46 bcd |
|
0.5 |
2 |
3.84 |
36.77 bc |
16.31 ab |
47.39 c |
33.38 bcd |
4.84 bcd |
11.42 ab |
|
0.5 |
4 |
3.84 |
37.83 ab |
15.56 b |
42.03 d |
31.91 cd |
4.62 cd |
10.63 bcd |
|
1 |
0 |
3.84 |
35.50 cd |
16.97 a |
60.48 b |
34.36 bc |
5.43 b |
10.77 bc |
|
1 |
2 |
3.85 |
36.62 bcd |
17.36 a |
45.06 c |
33.64 bcd |
4.83 bcd |
10.35 bcd |
|
1 |
4 |
3.88 |
38.00 ab |
16.88 a |
39.87 d |
31.41 d |
4.16d |
12.37 a |
|
p |
p>0.05 |
p<0.01 |
p<0.01 |
p <0.01 |
p <0.01 |
p <0.01 |
p <0.01 |
|
|
CV |
1.37 |
2.38 |
4.31 |
3.42 |
4.03 |
7.60 |
5.49 |
|
|
Mean |
3.87 |
36.27 |
14.08 |
49.73 |
33.94 |
5.01 |
10.67 |
|
|
Means with different letters within column
are significantly different at p≤0.05 |
||||||||
The DM content of oats fodder at 50% flowering stage was 27.4%. The value was higher than Ranjhnan (2001) who reported 17% DM at fresh blooming and 19% at the late blooming stage. Similarly, Khan et al(2006) reported that at medium maturity the DM content was 28.2%, which was comparable with the current study values, and at early maturity, the value of DM was 21.4%, which is lower than the current study. The same author also observed higher values of DM (34.5%) from the late maturity stage. The CP content of oats was 7.12%. Comparable results were obtained by James (1987) (7-9%) and higher values were recorded by Ranjhnan (2001) fresh early blooming (10.8%). The same author reported lower values of CP from fresh ripe oats (5.3%). Khan et al (2006) also reported 7% of CP at late maturity of oats, which was almost similar to the current results, and disagrees with the value obtained at early maturity of oats (12.1%). Ghulam et al (2014) reported a range of 8.41-9.13% CP contents of oats at different irrigated dates. In contrast, Usman et al (2018) who obtained 5.12% at the 50% flowering stage reported lower values. The NDF value of oats fodder in the current study was 63.96%. This result agreed with Khan et al(2006) who reported 63% from early maturity oats but disagree with medium maturity (70.1%) and late maturity stage (76.1%). In addition, Usman et al (2018) also recorded higher NDF values (69.95%) at the 50% flowering stage. The current ADF results (48.96%) at the 50% flowering stage were higher than the values obtained by Usman et al (2018) (45.28%). Khan et al (2006) also recorded lower values of ADF at early (30.2%), medium (38.5%), and late maturity stages (42.5%). The ash content of oats in the current study (11.83%) was higher than the values obtained by Ranjhnan (2001), who registered 10.4% and 9.4% at the fresh blooming and late blooming stages, respectively. Khan et al (2006) also observed similar ash contents at early maturity (11.2%) and medium maturity (11.3%), but higher values at late maturity (12.5%). In addition, Ghulam et al(2014) reported 10.96% of ash contents from irrigated oats, which was comparable to the current findings.
Additives affected the pH and chemical composition of local oats silage (Table 1). In both U and M treated and control silage the pH ranges from 3.84 to 3.89, which was comparable to the findings of Sibel et al (2009) (3.5 to 4.2). The pH values were not significantly ( p > 0.05) different among oat silages treated with the respective level of U and M additives, which was agreed with the results of Sibelet al (2009), who indicated that the effects of U, M, and U X M mix on the pH was not significant. The pH results in this study were also similar to the findings of Khan et al (2006) who reported the pH values of 3.96, 3.66 and 3.64 on M (0%), M (2%), and M (4%) respectively, on oats silage ensiled for 30 days. In contrast, higher values of pH was reported by Khan et al (2018) who reported the pH of 4.5 and 3.99 on M (0%) and M (2%) respectively, on the cassava top silage ensiled for 30 days. The pH of the current findings insignificantly decreased with the level of M increased which agreed with the study of Khan et al (2006) on oats grass silage and Kang et at. (2018) on cassava top silage ensiled for 30 days. This indicated that M facilitates better growth of lactic acid-producing bacteria.
A significant DM increment (p < 0.01) was observed in local oats silage treated with different levels of M as compared to the control (Table 1). Molasses has added to the silages to increase DM concentration, stimulate fermentation rate and production of lactic acid (McDonald et al 1991). In the current study, as the level of M level increased the DM contents was also increased, which was agreed with Khan et al (2006) studies on oats grass and Khan et al (2018) on cassava top silage ensiled for 30 days. In addition, M has been used to supply energy sources that can be fermented into lactic acid by lactic acid bacteria and to increase the DM content of forage (Thomas et al 2003). The U-treated oats in the current result were less effect to increase the DM contents. These results agreed with the study of Khan et al (2018) who reported that as the level of U treatment increased less effect to increase the DM contents of silage.
The CP values were significantly (p<0.05) different among oat silages treated with the respective level of M additives. The effects of M to increase CP contents of silage was less effective in the current result, but McDonaldet al (1991) reported that additive-containing carbohydrates result in to decrease ammonia-N by stimulating fermentation via these effects improve the amount and quality of protein. In the current result the CP (p<0.01) content of 50% oats silage treated with U was increased with the increments of the level of U additives. Similar results were reported by Bilal and Brahim (2005) who indicated that the addition of U increased the CP contents of sorghum silage (p<0.01). Khan et al (2018) also observed higher values of CP as U level increased on cassava silage ensiled for 30 days.
The NDF, ADF, and ADL concentration in different levels of U treated local oats silage was slightly decreased which was similar to previously studied on cassava top silage (Kang et al 2018). The NDF concentration of the silage treated by 1% U its mean was differed from 0.5% treated oats silage. The silage treated at 0.5 and 1 % level of U, their mean level of ADL was similar. The NDF level of M treated local oats silage was highly decreased as the proportion of M increased. This might be due to M as a silage additive provides a source of readily fermentable sugar promote the ensiling process and improve the silage quality. McDonaldet al (2002) indicted that M reduced the pH and ammonia levels in treated silages, which Ammonia cause pungent smell in silage. Similarly, McDonaldet al (1991), Kung et al (2003) and Dehghani et al (2012) reported that lactic acid bacteria with more fermentable substrate degraded cell-wall components to simpler molecules in the silage. In addition, Arbabi and Ghoorchi (2008) reported that NDF and ADF values of silage was decreased with an increased percentage of molasses. McDonaldet al (1991) and Baytok (2005) indicted that reducing ADF due to the effect of M, raising fermentation of silage. This additive is also utilized by microorganisms and increase fermentation activity which helps hemi-cellulose degradation in silage (McDonald et al 1991; Arbabi and Ghoorchi, 2008). In the current studies, the silage treated with both U and M its NDF, ADF, and ADL values were significant (p<0.05) which was similar to the study of Bilal and Brahim (2005) on sorghum silage.
In all different levels of U (p< 0.01) and M (p< 0.05) treated silage, the ash contents were slightly increased (Table 1). The ash contents at 0.5 and 1% U treated silage their means were similar, also had similar mean for the control and 2 % level of M and 2 and 4 % level of M treated silage. In general, U and M treatment increased the quality of oats silage, which was agreed with the study of Wanapat et al (2013) who reported that supplementation of U and M improved the quality of whole crop rice silage by increasing CP and reducing NDF and ADF contents.
The current study indicated that the pH level change of the silage was insignificant as the proportion of M increased (Table 2), which is proportionally similar to the report of Mehtapet al (2007) who observed on sorghum silage. The DM was increased with the increment of treatment levels of U and M on oats silage (p < 0.01). The control sample DM was lowest as compared to the other treated oats silage. The DM was increased with the increment level of M treatment, which agreed with the report of Getahunet al(2018) who studied on sugarcane top silage. On the other hand, U treatment has less effect on the DM percentage. The CP percentage of the interactions was significant (p < 0.01). The increased level of U treatment radically changed the CP level of silage. The control sample CP was 9.49% whereas the oats silage treated with U 1% and M 4% CP contents was 16.88 %, but less effects for M alone which agreed with the study of Getahun et al (2018). The contents of NDF, ADF, and ADL were minimized significantly with the increased level of M treatment, but no significant effect on the level of U treatment. The interaction treatment of U and M decreased the NDF percentage but less effect on the ADF and ADL.
The DM of U treated 50% flowering of local oats silage was slightly increased from 0 to 1 % U treatment, which agreed with the study of Khan et al (2018) who reported that U had less effect in increasing the DM values of silage. In the silage treated with M, the DM contents were slightly increased as the level of M increased. Molasses has also been added to the silage to increase DM concentration (McDonald et al 1991; Thomas et al 2003). The fodder of oat DM at 50% flowering stage was less than that of both U, and M treated its silage because the fodder had high moisture contents at the harvested time. The CP contents at 50% flowering stage silage was radically changed in U-treated silage. The CP contents in 0%U was 9.77% but in 1%U level increased to 17.07%. The advantage of using ammonia positively resulted in an enhanced CP source and decreased protein degradation in the silo (Yibarek and Tamir, 2014). Molasses treated silage had less effect to increase the CP contents, but as Khan et al (2018) reported that, the addition of different combinations of U and M may improve both the protein content and fermentation quality of the silage.
Ahmed H, Abule E, Mohammed K and Tredate AC 2010 Livestock feed resources utilization and management as influenced by altitude in central high-lands of Ethiopia. Livestock Research Rural Development. 2 (12):125–132.
Alemayehu M, Gezahagn K, Getnet A and Fekede F 2016 Improved forage crops production strategies in Ethiopia: A review. Academic Research. Journal of Agriculture Science Research. Volume, 4(6): 285-296.
Amanuel W, Kassa S and Deribe G 2019 Biomass Yield and Nutritional Quality of Different Oat Varieties (Avena sativa) Grown under Irrigation Condition in Sodo Zuriya District, Wolaita Zone, Ethiopia. Agriculture Research Technology open Access Journal.
AOAC 1990 Official methods of analysis of the AOAC, 15th ed. Methods 932.06, 925.09, 985.29, 923.03. Association of official analytical chemists. Arlington, VA, USA.
Arbbi S and Ghoorchi T 2008 The effect of different level of Molasses as silage additive on fermentation Quality of Foxtail Millet (Seraria italica) silage. Asian Journal of animal Science. volume 2 (2): 43-50.
Baytok E, Aksu M, Karsli and Muruz 2005 The effects of formic acid, molasses and inoculant as silage additives on corn silage composition and ruminal fermentation characteristics in sheep. Turk Journal of Veterinary Animal Science. Volume: 29: 469-474.
Belay D, Azage T and Hegde B 2012 Smallholder Livestock Production System in Dandi District, Oromia Regional State, Central Ethiopia. Global Veterinaria 8 (5): 472-479.
Bilal k and Brahim H 2005 Effects of Urea or Urea plus Molasses Supplementation to Silages with Different Sorghum Varieties Harvested at the Milk Stage on the Quality and In Vitro Dry Matter Digestibility of Silages. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences. www.researchgate.net/publication/279586564.
CSA 2005 Ethiopian National statistics Agency. Table B 3 and B 4.
Dehghani M, Weisbjerg M, Hvelplund T, Kristensen N 2012 Effect of enzyme addition to forage at ensiling on silage chemical composition and NDF degradation characteristics.
Denbela H and Sintayehu K 2020 Comparative Performance Evaluation of Oat (Avena sativa) Varieties for Dry Matter Production and Chemical Composition in South Ari Woreda, South Western Ethiopia. American Journal of Agricultural Science. Vol. 6: 64-70.
Deribe G 2015 Evaluation of major feed resources in crop-livestock mixed farming systems, southern Ethiopia: Indigenous knowledge versus laboratory analysis results. Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development in the Tropics and Subtropics. ISSN: 2363-6033.
FAO 2018Ethiopia: Report on feed inventory and feed balance. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO Rome, Italy.
Farhad M, Saman L, Anne L, Mogens L and Martin R 2019 Effects of toasting and decortication of oat on nutrient digestibility in the rumen and small intestine and on amino acid supply in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science103:1484–1499.
Gebremedhn B, Alemu A and Hailay G 2015 Evaluation of different oat varieties for fodder yield and yield related traits in Debre Berhan Area, Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Livestock Research for Rural Development.
Getahun K, Ashenafi M, Getnet A and Getachew A 2018 Nutritional and fermentative quality of sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) top ensiled with or without urea and molasses. African Journal of Agricultural Research. doi: 10.5897/AJAR2017.12888.
Ghulam M, Azraf-ul-H, Tasneem K, Muzammal R and Saddam H 2014 Effect of Different Irrigation Levels on Yield and Forage Quality of Oat (Avena Sativa). App. Sci. Report. 3 (1), 2014: 42-46.doi: 10.15192 /PSCP.ASR.2014.3.1.4246.
Habte A, Ashenafi M, Berhan T, Getnet A and Fekede F 2020 Effects of Additive Type and Ensiling Periods on Fermentation Characteristics of Green Maize Stover. Ethiopia Journal Agriculture Science 30(2) 1-12.
Imsya A, Yuanita W and Riswandi 2018 Optimization of Ensilage Total Mixed Fiber (TMF) with Additive and Incubation Periods Differences. E3S Web of Conferences 68, 010. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20186801014.
James R 1987 Animal Nutrition and Feeding. Delmar publishers Inc. Albany, New York.
Kang S, Wanapat M and Nunoi A 2018 Effect of urea and molasses supplementation on quality of cassava top silage. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences , The Kielanowski Institute of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, Polish Academy of Sciences, Jabłonna.
Khan M, Ajmal M, Sarwar M, Nisa Z, Iqbal M, Khan W, Lee H and Kim H 2006 Chemical Composition, In situ Digestion Kinetics and Feeding Value of Oat Grass (Avena sativa) Ensiled with Molasses for Nili-Ravi Buffaloes. Asian-Austiralia Journal Animal Science. Volume 19, No. 8:1127–1133.
Kung J, Stokes L and Lin C 2003 Silage additives. In: Buxton, D.R., Muck, R.E., Harrison, J.H. (Eds.), Silage Science and Technology. Agronomy Monograph, 42. , ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 305–360.
Kwanchai A and Arturo A 1984 Statistical procedures for Agricultural Research. Second edition. An International Rice research Institute Book. Printed in the United States of America.
McDonald P, Edwards R, Green F and Morgon C 2002 Animal nutrition 6 th ed. Longman, UK.
McDonald P, Henderson A and Heron S 1991 The Biochemistry of Silage. 2 nd Edition. Chalcombe Publications, Marlow, Bucks, UK.
Mehtap G, Murat D, Sibel C, Yunus B and Taner L 2007 Effects of Urea, Molasses and Urea Plus Molasses Supplementation to Sorghum Silage on the Silage Quality, in vitroOrganic Matter Digestibility and Metabolic Energy Contents.Journal of Biological Science. 7:401-404.
Mengistu S 2008 Forage development for sheep and goats. Sheep and goat production handbook for Ethiopia. Ethiopia Sheep and Goat Productivity Improvement Program.
Qi X C, Wang H, Zhang L, Wang and Qian H 2017 Development of standard fingerprints of naked oats using chromatography combined with principal component analysis and cluster analysis. Journal Cereal Science.74:224–230.
Rafiuddin M, Abdullah K, Javed M, Jabbar M, Shahid P, Ramzan M and Ahmad M 2017 Comparison of silo types on chemical composition and physical quality of silage made from maize, sorghum and oats fodders. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 27(3).
Rahjhnan S 2001 Animal Nutrition in tropics. 5 th edition. Vikas publishing house PVT LTD, New delhi, India.
SAS 2004Statistical Analysis System Version 9 for Microsoft Windows, Copyright © 2004 SAS (Statistical Analysis System) Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
Seblewengel H 2018 Causes and Coping Strategies of Food Insecurity among Rural Households in Kimbibit Wereda, Oromia National Regional State, Ethiopia. Msc Graduating thesis. Addis A. University College of Business and Economics.
Sibel C, Cemal B, Murat D, Yunus B and Savas C 2009 The effects of adding Urea and Molasses to Corn Harvested at Dough stage on silage Fermentation Quality, in vitroOrganic Matter Digestiblity and Metabolic Energy contents. Jour. Of animal and veterinary advanced 8(10):1921-1924.
Staff K 2019 Oats Cultivation Guide: Suitable Climate, Land Selection, Field Preparation, Sowing and Harvesting.
Suárez R, Mejía J, González M, García DE and Perdomo DA 2011 Evaluation of mixed silages of Saccharum officinarum and Gliricidia sepium using additives. Pastos Forrajes 34(1):69-86.
Talore D 2015 Evaluation of major feed resources in crop-livestock mixed farming systems, southern Ethiopia: Indigenous knowledge versus laboratory Analysis results. Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development in the Tropics and Subtropics.
Tewodros A and Amare B 2016 Adaptation Trial of Oat (Avena sativa) Varieties in Dehana District, Northern Ethiopia. Journal of Animal Research. doi:10.5958/2277-940X.2016.00003.
Thomas J, Moore K and Huber J 2003 ttp://www agcom.purdue.edu/Agcom/ pubs/NCH/NCH-59 html. National com hand book.
Usman S, Bedasa E andTamirat D 2018 Performance Evaluation of Improved Oat Varieties/Accessions at the Highland of Guji Zone, Bore, Ethiopia. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare. Vol.8, No.17.
Van Soest P and Robertson J 1985Analysis of Forages and Fibrous Foods a Laboratory Manual for Animal Science. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Victor A, Felipe L, Julieta G, Pedro A and Carlos M 2018Oat silage for grazing dairy cows in small-scale dairy systems in the highlands of central Mexico. https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2018.1473493.
Wanapat M, Kang S, Khejornsart P and Pilajun R 2013 Improvement of whole crop rice silage nutritive value and rumen degradability by molasses and urea supplementation. Tropical Animal Health Production 45, 1777–1781.
Yitbarek M and Tamir B 2014 Silage Additives: Review. Open Journal of Applied Sciences 4: 258-274.