how to cite this poster |
Multi-nutritional
blocks (molasses /urea) were manufactured and fed to
Total milk production
of the stable increased from 358 litres/day to 418 litres/day, with a slight indication of
improved corporal conformation.
The use of molasses/urea blocks for supplementing livestock has been documented in beef cattle (Sansoucy 1989; Waliszewski 1994; Araquey and Cortes 1998) in sheep and goats (Mejía et al 1991; Dinh Van Binh and Preston 1995). However, their use in milk production has been little investigated (Chen Yuzhi et al 1993). In the small-holder milk production systems of Iztapalapa, wastes of food industry and markets are the basis of the diet (Losada et al 1996) with the result that a frequently restrictive factor is the supply of protein. A possibility to improve this deficiency and to diminish production costs would be by supplementation with molasses/urea blocks.
The objective of the present study
was therefore to study the response to supplementation with blocks of molasses/urea in a
herd of cows maintained under commercial conditions and fed with vegetable wastes.
The production unit was a stable
located in the Iztapalapa delegation, situated in the eastern portion of the
The stable included a herd of 28
cows in production, 3 heifers and 1 bull of the commercial
The animals received a diet made up
of cauliflower leaves coming from the Metropolitan Central Food Depot, maize silage,
sun-dried lucerne and brewery waste (Brewer’s grains) as forage sources and tortilla,
bread scraps, coconut meal and wheat bran as the source of concentrate.
The approach to define the
ingredients for block manufacture was the access to the inputs by the producer. The blocks
contained (% air dry): sugar cane molasses 46, maize stover 23, urea 9, common salt 4,
cement 4, lime 4 and water 10. For 100 kg of block, the urea (9 kg) was first dissolved in
5 litres of water and this solution then added to, and mixed with, the molasses (46 kg).
The maize stover (23 kg) was chopped and mixed with the molasses/urea solution. The salt,
cement and lime were dissolved in the remaining 5 litres of water and the resulting
suspension added to the mixture of stover and molasses/urea. The final mixture was
poured in wooden block moulds of 30*30*30 cm lined with acrylate sheets and pressed during
a period of 5 minutes. The resulting blocks were allowed to dry at ambient temperature
during 24 h and were then removed from the moulds and stored at ambient temperature for a
6 day period before being given to the animals. Each block had an average weight of 20 kg.
The blocks were offered to all the animals in the pen after morning milking during a
period of 2 h. One block was consumed on average every two days.
The study was carried out over a
period of 6 weeks. Milk production from the stable was measured during three periods: the
first two weeks were considered as pre-experimental yield, the three following weeks were
evaluated as the experimental test and the remaining week was considered as the
post-experiment yield. The weight of the animals was calculated using a metric tape
according to the procedure described by Bath et al (1985). Changes in corporal
conformation were assessed in terms of a classification scale of 1 to 5 (1 poor to 5
excellent) following the procedure designed by Wildman et al (1982) and Brawn et al
(1985). The proximal composition (DM, crude protein and fibre) of the diet components was
determined following conventional procedures (AOAC 1990).
Data regarding milk production and
corporal conformation were analysed according to the procedures described by Daniel
(1991).
The blocks were observed to be of
good quality (ie: did not absorb moisture, did not become mouldy and did not lose shape
when exposed to sunshine).
| Table 1. Dry matter (% of
air-dry), crude protein (% N*6.25 in DM) and crude fibre (% in DM) of the feeds offered |
|||
|
DM |
Crude protein |
Crude fibre |
| Cauliflower leaf |
13 |
18 |
13 |
| Maize silage |
25 |
6 |
29 |
| Sun-dried lucerne |
68 |
20 |
20 |
| Brewery waste |
14 |
26 |
18 |
| Tortilla* scraps |
93 |
6 |
4 |
| Bread scraps |
91 |
12 |
0.8 |
| Coconut meal |
95 |
20 |
29 |
| Wheat bran |
90 |
15 |
11 |
| *
Mexican bread |
|||
The cauliflower leaf and brewery
waste had lower content of DM and higher crude protein than the maize silage (Table 1).
Tortilla scraps were low in protein with very low fibre. The bread scraps had a medium
level of protein and almost no fibre. The other ingredients (Lucerne hay, coconut
meal, wheat bran) had values similar to those in the literature (Gohl 1981).
| Table 2. Feeds offered to the
cows in the commercial stable of Iztapalapa |
|||
| |
Total, kg |
Per animal, kg |
Cost, Pesos/animal |
| Cauliflower leaf * |
1278 |
43 |
1.70 |
| Maize silage |
348 |
12 |
3.50 |
| Sun-dried lucerne |
42 |
1.4 |
1.30 |
| Brewery waste |
521 |
17.4 |
5.20 |
| Tortilla scraps |
26 |
0.87 |
0.80 |
| Bread scraps |
58 |
1.95 |
2.34 |
| Coconut meal |
13.5 |
0.45 |
1.10 |
| Wheat bran |
80 |
2.70 |
3.32 |
| Total |
2366 |
80.0 |
19.3 |
| * Only includes price of
transport |
|||
The major part of the diet was
formed by the cauliflower leaves followed by brewery waste and maize silage
(Table 2). Wheat bran was the major source of concentrate feed. The highest costs
corresponded to the brewery waste, maize silage and wheat bran.
Estimates of total milk of the
stable, production per animal and the corporal conformation (Table
3) indicated a positive effect due to the blocks. Total milk produced in the stable increased from a
mean value of 358 litres to 418 litres with the use of the blocks. There
was a slight improvement in the conformation of the animals when
they were supplemented with
molasses/urea blocks.
| Table 3. Total milk production
for cows supplemented with molasses/urea blocks in Iztapalapa |
||||||
| Week No |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
| Supply of block |
No block |
No block |
Block1 |
Block2 |
Block3 |
No block |
| Total milk of the stable,
l/day |
367 |
348 |
409 |
428 |
418 |
391 |
| Milk/cow, litres/day |
17 |
16 |
18 |
19 |
18 |
17 |
| Body
conformation |
2.8 |
2.9 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
The results obtained in the present
study showed a positive effect of the supply of the molasses /urea block on the production
of milk that rebounded in a bigger quantity of milk for the sale and bigger economic
earnings for the producer. In spite of this situation, the technology was not assimilated
by the proprietor, as the cheese maker that purchased the milk complained that a bigger
quantity of milk was needed for the production of cheese, during the period when the
blocks were fed. A detailed evaluation of this hypothesis constitutes the object of future
research.
The authors wish to thank Mr Don
Crisóstomo Tapia Aguilar for the access to his stable that made feasible the present
study; and the authorities of the
Anon 1992
Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática Cuaderno de información
básica delegacional Iztapalapa, Mexico.
AOAC 1990
Association of official analytical chemists. Official methods of analysis.15th
edition
Araquey C A y Cortes R
1998
Evaluación del efecto de diferentes niveles de urea en bloques multi-nutricionales sobre el consumo de los
bloques y ganancia de peso en rumiantes. Revista de la Facultad de Agronomía.
Universidad de Zulia, pp 180-187 Venezuela
Bravn R K, Donovan G A, Trant Q, Shearer J K, Blisse L, Webb D, Beede D K and Harris B 1985 Body condition scoring dairy cows as herd management tool. Compendium food animal. University of Florida pp 62- 67. USA
CEDA 1993 Central de Abasto. Ciudad de México. Departamento del Distrito Federal. Gobierno del Distrito Federal. México.Pp 1-6
Chen Yuzhi, Wen
Hong, Ma Xiuewu, Li Yu Gao Zhanqi and Peterson Mary 1993 Multi-nutrient lick blocks for dairy cattle in
Gansu province, China. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Vol 5, No 3: 1-3 http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd5/3/china.htm
Daniel W W 1991 Biostadística Ed.
Limusa-Noriega. Sexta re-impresión.
Dinh Van Binh
and
Gohl B 1981 Tropical feeds. Feed information summaries and nutritive values. FAO Animal Production and Health Series 12. FAO, Rome.
Losada H, Cortes
J, Grande D, Rivera J, Soriano R, Vieyra J, Fierro A and Arias L 1996 The production
of milk from dairy herds in the suburban conditions of Mexico City I. The cases of
Iztapalapa. Livestock Research for Rural Development.. Vol 8, No.4 http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd8/4/tito841.htm
Mejía C E,
Rosales M, Vargas J E and Murgueito E 1991 Intensive production from African hair sheep fed sugar cane tops,
multi-nutritional blocks and tree foliage. Livestock Research for Rural
Development. Vol 3
No.1. http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd3/1/mejia.htm
Sansoucy R 1989
Los bloques de melaza-urea como suplemento multi-nutriente para animales. La melaza como
recurso alimentario para la producción animal GEPLACEA. Pp 227-239.
Waliszewski K y Pardio V 1994 Utilización de 5 bloques solidificados de
melaza como suplemento alimenticio para ganado bovino durante la sequía en los trópicos.
Ciencia 45(1):57-65.
Wildman E E, Jones C M and Wagner P E 1982 A dairy cow body condition scoring system and its relationship to selected production characteristics. Journal of Dairy Science Vol 65: 485-501
Received 28 July 2002