Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ https://doaj.org/art...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
https://doaj.org/article/e3373...
Article . 2022
Data sources: DOAJ
addClaim

Digestibility and palatability of Virginia fanpetals (Sida hermaphrodita R.) silage in sheep

Authors: C. Purwin; M. Borsuk-Stanulewicz; M. Borsuk-Stanulewicz; Z. Nogalski; M. Baranowska; A. Zygmuntowicz; J. P. Michalski;

Digestibility and palatability of Virginia fanpetals (Sida hermaphrodita R.) silage in sheep

Abstract

The aim of the current study is to evaluate Virginia fanpetals silage based on an apparent digestibility and palatability test performed on six adult rams. Alfalfa silage was used as standard forage for comparison. Virginia fanpetals samples were harvested in the bud-formation stage and alfalfa samples were harvested in the late bud stage. Virginia fanpetals silage had a crude protein (CP) content of 176 g kg−1 dry matter (DM), a neutral detergent fiber (NDF) content of 378 g kg−1 DM, and a lignin content of 42.8 g kg−1 DM. Virginia fanpetals silage had higher acidity (pH of 4.30) and was characterized by intense lactic acid fermentation compared with alfalfa silage (80 % vs. 51 % of the total acids). The digestibility coefficient of Virginia fanpetals silage was as follows: for DM it was 0.707, for organic matter (OM) it was 0.724, for CP it was 0.861, and for NDF it was 0.609. In comparison with alfalfa silage, Virginia fanpetals silage was characterized by higher apparent digestibility of nutrients, but a significant difference was noted only for CP. The voluntary intake of Virginia fanpetals silage was significantly higher than that of alfalfa silage (1427.4 vs. 954 g DM). The greatest differences in voluntary intake were observed 0–2 and 8–12 h after feeding. Virginia fanpetals silage had a chemical composition similar to that of alfalfa, but it was characterized by a more desirable fermentation pattern and higher digestibility, and it was more willingly consumed by rams. The present findings indicate that Virginia fanpetals silage can be fed to sheep.

Keywords

QL1-991, S, Science, Q, Agriculture, SF1-1100, Zoology, Animal culture

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average