EVALUATION OF HYDROPONIC FODDER PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT VARIETIES OF SORGHUM

Authors

  • Zelalem Garuma Wollega University College of Agriculture and Natural Resource, Department of Animal Science, Ethopia
  • Kassahun Gurmessa Oromia Regional State office of Agriculture and Natural Resource, Ethopia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6346-4986

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v9.i2.2021.2854

Keywords:

Germination, Sprout, Nutritive Value, Varieties

Abstract

The hydroponic fodder yield performance evaluation of different varities of sorghum was conducted in green house of Wollega University.. Three experiments were conducted. The first was to observe effects of irrigation frequency. The second one was undertaken to evaluate four sorghum varieties (Lalo, Chemeda, Gamadi and Dano) on fodder yield, yield related components and nutritive values. The third experiment was done to determine the appropriate date of harvest for biomass yield and agronomic traits. Complete randomized design (CRD) was employed to conduct the experiment with three replications. The results showed that there was no significant difference (p>0.05) between treatments on   Dry matter yield (t/ha), Leaf Weight (t/ha), Root weight (t/ha) and Plant height (cm) as effect of frequency of watering at 2hr, 3hr and 4hr interval but, significant difference (p<0.05) among varieties of sorghums as an effect of frequency of irrigation on Fresh yield(t/ha), Plant height (cm) and leaf to root ratio (LRR%).The lowest average fresh yields were harvested at 7th days after planting and consistently increased until 17th days of planting. The highest plant heights were observed at 17 days while the lowest was observed at 7th days of harvesting. Except for dry matter (DM), Ash and crude protein (CP), there were significant differences (P<0.05) in neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), acid detergent lignin (ADL) and in vitro dry matter digestibility contents of the sorghum varieties. The Sorghum variety, Gamadi contained the highest CP (13.29%) and lowest Acid detergent lignin contents. The Sorghum variety, Chemeda showed best in vitro DM digestibility (73.24%). Harvesting hydroponic sorghum at 17 days after planting gave the best biomass yield (t/ha), LRR and Plant height (cm); showing the increase in biomass as time of harvesting increases. Among the tested varieties of sorghum a variety, Dano best for biomass yield among the others.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adugna Tolera, (2012). Potential for Development of Alternative Feed Resources in Ethiopia. An Assessment Report prepared for ACDI/VOCA. Addis Ababa Ethiopia.pp20

AOAC.(1999). Official methods of analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Inc. Arlington, Virginia, USA.

AOAC. (2000). Official Methods of Analysis. 17th Ed.Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, MD.

Alemayehu Mengstu, (2002). Forage production in Ethiopia: A case study with implications of livestock production. ESAP (Ethiopian Society of Animal Production), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. pp. 1-3.

Ayele, Solomon, Assegid Workalemahu, Jabbar, M.A., Ahmed, M.M., and Belachew Hurrisa, (2003). Livestock marketing in Ethiopia: Performance and Development Initiatives. Socioeconomic and Policy Research Working Paper 52

Bhise V, Chavan J, S Kadam, (1988)’ Effects of malting on proximate composition and in vitro protein and starch digestibilities of grain sorghum. Journal of Food Science Technology 25(6): 327-329

Bill C.and Pavel R., (2002). Growing cattle feed hydroponically. Meat and Livestock Australia

Boue S, T Wiese, S Nehls, M Burow, S Elliott, C Carterwientjes, B Shih, J McLachlan, and T. Cleveland, (2003). Evaluation of the estrogenic effects of legume extracts containing phytoestrogens. Journal Agriculture Food Chemistry 51(8):2193-2199 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/jf021114s

Chandra P and M J. Gupta, (2003). Cultivation in hi-tech greenhouses for enhanced productivity of natural resources to achieve the objective of precision farming. In: Precision Farming in Horticulture (Singh H P, Singh, Gorakh, Samuel J C and R K Pathak, (Eds). pp 64-74

Chavan J, and S S Kadam, (1989). Nutritional improvement of cereals by sprouting Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 28(5): 401-437 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398909527508

Chrisdiana R,. (2018). Quality and Quantity of Sorghum Hydroponic Fodder from different varieties and harvest time. IOP conf. ser., Earth Environ. Sci., 11:21-24.

Chung T Y, Nwokolo E N and J S Sim, (1989). Compositional and digestibility changes in sprouted barley and canola seeds. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 39: 267-278 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01091937

Cuddeford D, (1989). Hydroponic Grass Journal of the British Veterinary Association 11(5): 211-214 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/inpract.11.5.211

Dung D D, Godwin I R , and J V Nolan, (2010a). Digestive characteristics, ammonia nitrogen and volatile fatty acids levels in sheep fed oaten chaff supplemented with grimmett barley grain freeze-dried or fresh barley sprouts. Journal of animal and veterinary Advances 9 (19): 2493-2501 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3923/javaa.2010.2493.2501

Dung, D.D.,Goodwin, I.R., and Nolan, J.V. (2010). Nutrient content in Sacco Digestibility of barley grain and sprouted barley. Journal of animal and veterinary Advances, 9(19), 2485- 24992. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3923/javaa.2010.2485.2492

Fazaeli, H., Golmoihammadi, H.A., Tabatabayee, S.N. and Asghari-Tabrizi, M. (2012). Productivity and nutritive value of barley green fodder yield in hydroponic system. World Applied Sciences Journal, 16: 531-539.

Firehiwot Girma, Diriba Diba, Kassahun Gurmessa and Diribe Kumsa(2018). Evaluation of Hydroponics Performance and Nutritive Value of Different Oat (A. sativa) Forage Varieties in Wollega University, Western Ethiopia. American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research 13 (3): 39-46

Ghazi N. Al-Karaki and M. Al-Hashimi. (2011). Green Fodder Production and Water Use Efficiency of Some Forage Crops under Hydroponic Conditions. Volume 2012, Article ID 924672, 5 pages. doi:10.5402/2012/924672. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/924672

Hande, I.A., S.T. Onur, B. Harun and Y.Y. Ismail, (2014). Effects of Harvesting Time on Nutritional Value of Hydroponic Barley Production. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences Special Issue, 2: 2014

IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority on Development), (2010). The contribution of livestock to the economies of IGAD member states. IGAD LPI working paper No. 02-11.

Kassahun Gurmessa, Taye Tolemariam, Adugna Tolera, Fekadu Beyene, (2016). Production and Utilization of Crop Residues in Horro and Guduru Districts, Western Ethiopia. Food Science and Quality Management Vol.48, 2016.

Malede B. (2013): Forage Agronomic Evaluation and Biological Compatibility on Grasse: Legume Intercropping in North Gondar Zone, Ethiopia. International Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 5: 245-250. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19026/ijava.5.5605

Mooney J. (2005). Growing cattle feed hydroponically. Meat and livestock Australia.30p.

Morgan J, Hunter R R and R O’Haire, (1992). Limiting factors in hydroponic barley grass production In: Proc. 8th International Congress on Soilless Culture. Hunter’s Rest South Africa pp: 241- 261

Naik P K and N P Singh, (2013). Hydroponics fodder production: an alternative technology for sustainable livestock production against impeding climate change. Pp 70- 75

Naik P K and N P Singh, (2014). Production and feeding of hydroponics green fodder Indian Farming 64 (7)

Naik P K, Dhuri R B and N P Singh, (2011). Technology for production and feeding of hydroponics green fodder Extension Folder No 45/ 2011 ICAR Research Complex for Goa.

Naik P K, Dhuri R B, Karunakaran M, Swain B K and N P Singh, (2014). Effect of feeding hydroponics maize fodder on digestibility of nutrients and milk production in lactating cows. Indian Journal of Animal Science 84(8), 880-883

Naik P K, Dhuri R B, Swain B K and N P Singh, (2012a). Cost of production of hydroponics fodder maize In:Proc of 8th Biennial Animal Nutrition Association Conference on Animal Nutrition Research Strategies for Food Security November 28-30 2012 Bikaner Rajasthan India p12

Naik P K, Dhuri R B, Swain B K and N P Singh, (2012b). Nutrient changes with the growth of hydroponics fodder maize. Indian Journal Animal Nutrition (29): 161-163

Naik P K, Dhuri R B, Swain B K and N P Singh, (2013). Water management for green fodder production as livestock feed in Goa In Abstracts of International Conference on Water Management for Climate Resilient Agriculture held at Jalgaon Maharashtra India May 28-31 2012 Pp 126-127

Naik P K, Swain B K and N P Singh, (2015). Production and Utilization of Hydroponics Fodder Indian Journal Animal Nutrition 32 (1): 1-9

Naik, P.K., (2012a). Hydroponics technology for fodder production. ICAR News. 18: 4.

Naik, P.K. and Singh, N.P., (2013). Hydroponics Fodder Production: An Alternative Technology for Sustainable Livestock Production against Impeding Climate Change. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. ICAR Research Complex for Goa, Old Goa, Goa- 403 402 45

Naik, P.K. and Singh, N.P., (2014). Production and feeding of hydroponics green fodder. Indian Farming. 64 (6): 42- 44.

Naik, P.K., Dhuri, R.B., Karunakaran, M., Swain, B.K. and Singh, N.P., (2014). Effect of feeding hydroponics maize fodder on digestibility of nutrients and milk production in lactating cows.Indian Journal of Animal Science. 84 (8): 880-883.

Naik, P.K., Gaikwad, S.P., Gupta, M.J., Dhuri, R.B., Dhumal, G.M. and Singh, N.P., (2013b). Low cost devices for hydroponics fodder production. Indian Dairyman. 65: 68-72.

Naik, P .K, Swain, B. K, Chakurkar, E., B and Singh N. P,. (2016a). Effect of seed rate on yield and proximate constituents of different parts of hydroponics maize fodder. IndianJournal of Animal Sciences 87(1): 109–12.

Naik, P.K., Swain, B.K. and Singh, N.P., (2015). Production and Utilisation of Hydroponics Fodder. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition. 2015. 32 (1): 1-9.

Peer D J and S Leeson, (1985). Feeding Value of Hydroponically Sprouted Barley for Poultry and Pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology (13): 183-190.

Rachel Jemimah, E., Gnanaraj, P.T., Muthuramalingam, T., Devi, T., Babu, M. and Sundharesan, A., (2015). Hydroponic green fodder production-TANUVAS experience.

SAS (Statistical Analysis System). (2008). The Little SAS® Book: A Primer, Fourth

Edition, version 9.1.3. Statistical analysis system institute Inc., NC. USA.

Shah, V.D., Makwana, M., and Sharma, S., (2011). Economics of production, processing and marketing of fodder crops in Gujarat. India Research Study No.144.

Shapiro, B.I., Gebru, G., Desta, S., Negassa, A., Nigussie, K., Aboset, G. and Mechal, H. (2015). Ethiopia livestock master plan. ILRI Project Report. Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).

Sneath, R. and McIntosh, F., (2003). “Review of hydroponics fodder production for beef cattle.” North Sydney; Australia: Meat and livestock Australia Limited. Crops for the Purification of Aquaculture Wastewater and the Production of Fish Feed. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3(1): 364-378

Tilley,J.M.A and Terry, R. A,. (1963). A two stage technique for invitrodigestion. Journal of British Grassland Society 18: 104.

Van Soest,P.J.,Robertson,J.B.,Lewis, B.A. (1991). Methods fordietary fiber, neutraldetergent fiber and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animalnutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74: 3583-3597.

Downloads

Published

2021-02-11

How to Cite

Garuma, Z., & Gurmessa, K. (2021). EVALUATION OF HYDROPONIC FODDER PERFORMANCE OF DIFFERENT VARIETIES OF SORGHUM. International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH, 9(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v9.i2.2021.2854