ABSTRACT

Four West African Dwarf sheep were used to investigate the effect of brewers’ spent grains supplementation on the utilization of mixed forage diets. The sheep were randomly assigned three dietary treatments: treatment 1- Gliricidia sepium (G. sepium) + 200 g brewers’ spent grain (BSG), treatment 2- Panicum maximum (P. maximum) grass + 200 g BSG, and treatment 3- G. sepium (50%) + P. maximum (50%) + 200 g BSG, with four rams per treatment diet for 42 days. Data were collected on feed intake and faeces voided during a digestibility trial. The results revealed that animals fed on Treatment1 recorded the highest (p<0.05) total dry matter intake (1626.83 g), total crude fibre intake (464.56 g), total nitrogen free extract (846.35 g) and total organic matter intake (1563.69 g). Animals on treatment 2 recorded the highest (p<0.05) total crude protein intake (274.06 g) and total ether extract intake (73.19 g). Highest ash intake was recorded in treatment 3 (76.65 g). Animals fed treatment 2 recorded the highest digestibility % (P<0.05) in all nutrient parameters, while the least was observed for those fed diet treatment 3. Animals fed  treatment 2 utilized their diet efficiently and which resulted in best digestibility while the least efficiency of utilization was observed in animals on diet treatment 3. Results from this study revealed that supplementation of forages with agro-industrial by-products such as BSG enhances utilization of forages.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1       Background of the Study

Inadequate feeding is a major limiting factor to small ruminant production in tropical Africa (Ademosun, 2010). Fodder is of poor nutritional value for most of the year due to the rainfall pattern. In the arid and semi-arid zones, rainfall is less than 600 mm and between 600-1000 mm per year, respectively. Many conventional diets for ruminants in the tropics are poor quality roughages typified by high Neutral Detergent Fibre (NDF), low nitrogen contents and slow fermentation rates. This poor dietary combination leads to decreased intake, weight loss, increased susceptibility to health risks and reduced reproductive performance. Including herbaceous legumes in these feeding regimes helps to rectify some of the problems associated with low protein and high fibre diets. Poppi and Mclennan, (1995) suggested that to optimise the benefits of lablab as a feed source, it should be grazed in conjunction with poor quality feedstuffs.

The quality of available forage is low and browse species which can provide higher levels of proteins and carbohydrates are sparsely dispersed. In the humid and sub-humid zones, up to six months of the year can be rainless, resulting in poor quality forages. The rapid buildup of cell-wall materials and decline in crude protein (CP) content with maturity reduces the nutritional value of the forages. Little is known about the nutritional value, distribution, palatability, seedling vigour and seasonal production of the forage species that characterise the natural grassland. This is particularly true of the arid, semi-arid and sub-humid areas which contain 75% of the sheep and 80% of the goats of tropical Africa and where the rangeland is the most important source of food (FAOSTAT, 2013). Besides the use of browse, other strategies can be employed to improve the feeding of animals. During the dry season, the quality of available herbage is so low that, unless the animals have access to supplementary feeds, they lose weight. These supplementary feeds can be obtained from agro-industrial by-products such as residues of oil extracted from oil bearing seeds (groundnuts, coconut, palm kernels, cotton seed, soyabean etc), by-products of grain processing (maize, rice, wheat, sorghum, millet etc), peelings of crops (yams, cassava, potatoes, plantains

1. 1. This material content is developed to serve as a GUIDE for students to conduct academic research work
2. 2. As a source for additional understanding of the subject.
3. 3. As a source for ideas for your own research work (if properly referenced).
4. 4. For PROPER paraphrasing (see your university definition of plagiarism and acceptable paraphrase)
5. 5. Direct citing (if referenced properly)
Thank you so much for your respect to the authors copyright.