Regional variability in perceptions of feed supplementation on milk production of Kosali Cows in Chhattisgarh

Introduction 1.1 Importance of Kosali Cows in Chhattisgarh Rural Economy

Indigenous cow breeds are critical to supporting the livelihoods of rural families in India, particularly in places such as Chhattisgarh where dairying is highly entrenched in traditional farming systems. Of these, the Kosali cow has special significance for smallholder farmers because of its tolerance for the stressful agro-climatic conditions, resistance to diseases, and role in improving household nutrition through milk availability (Jain et al., 2017) [21] . In contrast to exotic and crossbred cows, which require intensive management, Kosali cows perform well with low-input systems and are thus compatible with resource-poor tribal and rural communities (Sahu et al., 2018) [36] . Kosali cow milk, even though in smaller quantity than exotic breeds, is prized for its quality such as increased fat and protein content, which renders greater nutritional advantages to rural households (Chand et al., 2018) [9] . Furthermore, milk from Kosali cows is also economically and culturally important because it not only constitutes a basic diet but also generates income through local market channels (Bhagat et al., 2021) [5] . Dairy farming thus complements cropbased livelihoods and serves as a hedge against agrarian risks in rainfed Chhattisgarh. Even though Kosali cows play a significant role, they are often kept with low inputs based on crop residues and naturally occurring fodders. Research on Chhattisgarh's feed resource base reveals that macro and micro minerals are lacking in the state's fodder base, which will have direct implications for animal health and productivity (Goswami et al., 2017) [17] . This has led to a farmer perception that Kosali cows are genetically low milk yielders, without addressing the scope for productivity improvement through nutritional interventions. This is important to address in order to enhance the socio-economic status of smallholder households without compromising indigenous cattle germplasm.

Role of Feed Supplementation in Improving Indigenous Cattle Productivity

The scientific fraternity has always prioritized feed supplementation in accelerating milk output, content, and general animal performance. Supplementation fills gaps in basal diets, especially when animals rely on crop residues, poor-quality grasses, or forages lacking minerals (Bhanderi et al., 2016; Pandey et al., 2018) [6,33] . Research has proven that strategic supplementation with concentrates, mineral mixtures, and non-traditional feed sources results in remarkable increases in milk productivity in various breeds (Singh et al., 2016; Shinde, 2021) [39,37] . Worldwide, evidence indicates high correlations between feeding supplementation and performance of milk. Supplementation with concentrates or fiber-rich feed ingredients, for instance, has improved milk yield and quality in pasture-based dairy systems (Auldist et al., 2013; 2016) [3,4] . Similarly, new supplement strategies like polyherbal additives, grape pomace, hydroponic fodders, and oilseeds have been reported to not only enhance milk yield but also mitigate methane emissions and enhance environmental sustainability (Akter et al., 2024; Muñoz et al., 2021; Wu et al., 2024) [2,31,40] . In India, research with Azolla, plant feed additives such as Shatavari, and peptide additives have shown encouraging outcomes for crossbred as well as native cattle (Kumar, 2020; Muwal et al., 2020; Jagadeesh et al., 2025) [24,26,32,20] . For Kosali cows of Chhattisgarh, supplementing can be a major intervention to fill the production gap. Feeding experiments in comparable situations emphasize that regionspecific mineral supplements, cereal-supplemented feedingstuffs, and compound rations appreciably improve milk production and reproduction performance (Rajpoot et al., 2020; Singh et al., 2024) [34,38] . The advantage goes beyond yield improvement to encompass enhanced milk quality characteristics like fat percentage, protein percentage, and processing characteristics (Bulgakov et al., 2021) [8] . Therefore, feed supplementation serves a twin purpose: enhancing farmer earnings through higher output and enhancing consumer nutrition through improved milk quality.

Research Gap 1.3.1 Non-availability of Comparative Perception-Based Studies Across Districts

Whereas the biological and nutritional effects of supplementation through feed have been extensively researched, there is sparse literature on how farmers view such interventions, particularly among indigenous breeds such as the Kosali cow. Perception determines adoption behavior, and without farmer belief in supplementation efficacy, scientifically proven practices can suffer poor implementation (Mooventhan et al., 2016) [30] . The majority of current research on Chhattisgarh cattle feeding is descriptive analyses of management practices or experimental supplementation trials (Bhagat et al., 2021; Jain et al., 2017) [5,21] . For example, studies point out mineral content deficiencies of local fodders (Goswami et al., 2017) [17] and provide information on the profitability of dairying in tribal areas (Chand et al., 2018) [9] , but there is no systematic evidence available on what farmers across districts understand about the role of supplementation in increasing Kosali milk production. Also, studies of supplementation focus mainly on crossbred or high-yielding dairy cows (Akinlade et al., 2021; Dineen et al., 2021; Dida et al., 2024) [1,12] , and indigenous breeds are given less consideration. Even when Kosali cows are considered, productivity impact is of focus over farmer perception. This is concerning since perceptions may be very variable across regions due to variations in socio-economic status, availability of feed resources, and extension support systems. With no comparative perception-based research across districts, policymakers and extension workers are likely to apply blanket interventions that can fail in heterogeneous rural contexts.

Regional Variation in Perceived Advantage of Feed Supplementation

Against this background, the current research intends to examine regional differences in farmer perceptions of feed supplementation on milk production among Chhattisgarh's Kosali cows. Through comparisons of farmer perceptions across various districts, the research intends to identify variations in awareness, adoption, and perceived advantage of supplementation practices. These perspectives are important for designing extension programs and feed interventions at the local level. The objectives are fourfold 1. To record existing feeding behaviors and awareness about supplementation among Kosali cow farmers. 2. To compare farmers' beliefs on the impact of feeding supplementation on milk production and quality. 3. To examine differences in perceptions between districts and show the role of socio-economic and ecological factors. 4. To make region-specific feeding recommendations backed by evidence to enhance Kosali cattle productivity. [5,31,9] . [30,1] .

Sample Size and

Questionnaire Design

A 12-item structured questionnaire was crafted to elicit farmers' beliefs regarding feed supplementation and its effects on Kosali cow milk quantity and quality. The tool used a fivepoint Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) to measure important areas like perceived effect on productivity, milk quality, animal health, and affordability. Questionnaire items were constructed based on themes identified in supplementation research (Auldist et [17,18] .

Statistical Analysis

The coded responses were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics employed included mean, standard deviation (SD), and coefficient of variation (CV) to describe central tendencies and variability.

Independent sample t-tests were done to establish significant differences in perceptions between districts, with p-values less than 0.05 taken to signify statistical significance. This method is similar to analytical frameworks utilized in previous supplementation and perception research ( [4,8] . All the analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel.

Ethical Considerations

Voluntary participation was ensured, with informed consent from all the respondents. Respondents were guaranteed confidentiality, and data were solely utilized for research purposes. Ethical standards followed general guidelines generally adopted in animal husbandry and participatory farmer studies (Kholif et al., 2021; Muwal et al., 2020) [23,32] .

Results and Discussion

Demographic Profile of Respondents in Raipur Division

The demographic profile of respondents in the five districts of Raipur Division, namely Dhamtari, Baloda Bazar, Raipur, Gariyaband, and Mahasamund, yields significant information on the socio-economic profile underlying perceptions of feed supplementation.

Age Distribution and Gender Pattern

The information showed in Table 1 and Figure [21] . Table 2 showed that all the respondents were men (100%), indicating a sampling constraint or more likely, the prevalence of men in structured decision-making around cattle feeding and farm finances. The same gendered patterns of participation have been reported in livestock production systems in South Asia (Bhagat et al., 2021) [5] .

Education Level, Occupation, Location, and Farming Experience

Most (60-75%) of the respondents in the districts had education below high school, and few reached higher secondary or diploma/certificate levels. Less than 5% had education at college level. Low formal education levels may limit adoption of scientific feed management, as literacy was reported to correlate with awareness of nutritional technologies in dairy cattle production (Hassen et al., 2022) [18] . All the interviewees were farmers from rural backgrounds with more than 10 years of experience in farming, emphasizing their extensive knowledge of local cattle rearing.

Although such an experience strengthens indigenous practices, it can also enhance resistance to change without specific training and extension (Mooventhan et al., 2016) [30] . Although respondents accepted the economic as well as production advantages, they were ambivalent regarding supplementation's effect on nutritional quality (Q2), health of the cow (Q4), and sustainability (Q8). This partial acceptance reflects a lack of insight into feed-milk quality relationships, something echoed by Bipate and Misra (2020) [7] as part of their study of indigenous cattle feeding systems.

District-Wise

Baloda Bazar District

Five of 12 items were significant at Baloda Bazar, including milk production (Q1), feed management (Q3), cow health (Q4), visible milk output (Q7), and government support (Q12). [3] .

Raipur District

Raipur district showed the highest recognition with 10 out of 12 variables being statistically significant. Respondents overwhelmingly felt that feed supplementation enhanced milk production (Q1, p< 0.001), quality of nutrition (Q2, p< 0.001), feed management (Q3, p < 0.001), cow health (Q4, p< 0.001), cost-effectiveness (Q5, p = 0.004), and sustainability (Q8, p = 0.003). They were also aware of government incentives (Q12). [9] . The prevalent awareness of feed management skills is in agreement with Dida et al. (2024) [12] , who stressed training as a significant factor for adoption of supplementation.

Gariyaband District

In Gariyaband, five alone were significant, viz., nutritional quality (Q2, p = 0.01), role of feed management (Q3, p < 0.001), cost-effectiveness (Q5, p = 0.01), sustainability (Q8, p = 0.01), and government support (Q12, p = 0.03). Though farmers understood supplementation's contribution toward milk quality and economic sustainability, they were not so sure regarding direct effects on milk production or cow health. This mixed view indicates limited uptake of good quality feed or inconsistency in supplementation practice. Such disparity mirrors findings by Goswami et al. (2017) [17] , where local fodder availability influenced heterogeneous results in supplementation studies.

Mahasamund District

Three major factors came out in Mahasamund: effect on milk production (Q1, p< 0.001), feeding management (Q3, p< 0.001), and government incentives (Q12, p< 0.001). All other variables; such as milk quality, health, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability-were non-significant. [21] also reported poor supplementation in this district, notwithstanding its large number of Kosali cattle. 3 revealed that the research indicated considerable regional variation in perceptions regarding feed supplementation on Kosali cow milk production. Greatest average scores were registered in Gariyaband (2.82 ± 0.45) and Dhamtari (2.76 ± 0.44), whereas Raipur recorded lesser perceptions (2.28 ± 0.36). Constant SE values reflect consistent regional responses. [5,37,36] , emphasizing the importance of targeted intervention.

Comparative Discussion Across Districts

There is evident regional heterogeneity in feed supplementation perceptions across Raipur Division.  Raipur district farmers demonstrated the greatest awareness of supplementation gains in nearly all aspects, implying greater assimilation of scientific information and extension support.  Baloda Bazar and Dhamtari farmers recognized production and economic gains but demonstrated weaker awareness of milk quality and sustainability dimensions.  Gariyaband respondents emphasized nutritional and sustainability benefits but were not convinced regarding output effects.  The farmers of Mahasamund exhibited the most incomplete perceptions, with understanding mostly limited to yield and government incentives.

This disparity is an indication of differences in schooling, training exposure, availability of fodder, and extension service access between districts. According to Hassen et al.

(2022) [18] , farmer attitudes towards supplementation are predominantly influenced by institutional support, awareness programs, and cost-feasibility.

Implications for Sustainable Dairy Development

The results highlight several important implications:

Targeted Awareness Programs:

Extensive extension programs are needed in districts such as Mahasamund and Dhamtari to enhance supplementation's contribution to improving milk quality and animal health.

Policy Interventions:

Government schemes need to be propagated effectively and tailored to local situations. The high level of government incentives' perception across the districts shows their impact, consistent with previous indicators of policy effectiveness in livestock development (Muwal et al., 2020) [32] .

Training and Capacity Building:

Raipur's success testifies to the potency of farmer training. Scaling such efforts would fill knowledge gaps in other districts.

Integration of Indigenous Practices:

Local feeding habits ought to be synchronized with supplementation approaches in order to maximize acceptance, as proposed by Bipate and Misra (2020) [7] . The research indicates that although Kosali cattle farmers in Raipur Division recognize the possibility of feed supplementation, perception differs widely between districts. Raipur excels with high positive perceptions, while Mahasamund is behind with low awareness. These variations highlight the need for context-specific interventions, training for farmers, and policy assistance to achieve the best in supplementation for indigenous cattle systems.

Conclusion 4.1 Feed supplementation perceptions vary widely across districts

Findings indicate extensive regional difference in the perceptions of farmers on supplementation of Kosali cow milk production in Chhattisgarh. Whereas Raipur district respondents exhibited extensive awareness of supplementation benefits on milk yield, quality, animal health, and sustainability, Mahasamund farmers depicted limited awareness based primarily on production and government incentives. Dhamtari and Baloda Bazar showed moderate awareness, with a focus on yield and costeffectiveness, whereas Gariyaband farmers highlighted nutritional quality and sustainability at the expense of direct productivity benefits. Such variation highlights how local socio-economic settings, levels of education, and exposure to extension activities influence perceptions.

Regionalized interventions required for successful adoption

Since uneven patterns of awareness are likely, one-size-fits-all approaches are bound to fail. District-based interventions that link scientific training with traditional feeding practices are required to drive adoption higher. For example, awareness campaigns in Mahasamund must highlight the connection between supplementation and milk quality, while technical programs in Dhamtari could communicate about technical approaches to sustainability and long-run economic gain. The success seen in Raipur underscores the value of capacitybuilding programs, implying that replicated experience with similar training and demonstration programs across other districts may help fill knowledge gaps and enhance adoption rates.

Policy implications for dairy development programs

The results have significant policy implications for livestock development in Chhattisgarh. Firstly, higher visibility and access to government schemes are required, as awareness of incentives heavily impacted perceptions across districts. Secondly, policies need to promote public-private partnerships in feed supply chains to ensure supplementation affordability and access. Lastly, blending indigenous knowledge with contemporary supplementation methods will secure cultural acceptance and sustainability. By making dairy development schemes fit regional requirements, policymakers can increase milk productivity, improve smallholder farmers' livelihoods, and promote the conservation and use of Kosali cattle as an important indigenous genetic resource.

References

1. Akinlade J, Smith J, Taiwo A, Adekunle I, Akangbe F. Milk production from primiparous Bunaji cows fed Pennisetum purpureum with or without supplements. Nigerian Journal of Animal Production. 2021;36(1):125133. https://doi.org/10.51791/NJAP.V36I1.1089
2. Akter A, Li X, Grey E, Wang S, Kebreab E. Grape pomace supplementation reduced methane emissions and improved milk quality in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 2024;107(5):e25419. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-25419
3. Auldist M, Marett L, Greenwood J, Hannah M, Jacobs J, Wales W. Effects of different strategies for feeding supplements on milk production responses in cows grazing a restricted pasture allowance. Journal of Dairy Science. 2013;96(2):1218-1231. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-6079
4. Auldist M, Marett L, Greenwood J, Wright M, Hannah M, Jacobs J, et al. Milk production responses to different strategies for feeding supplements to grazing dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 2016;99(1):657-671. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-9834
5. Bhagat V, Bhonsle D, Nety S, Dinkar P, Yogi S, Nandanwar A, et al. Feeding and breeding management practices of dairy cattle in Surajpur District of Chhattisgarh. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology. 2021;39(12):308-315. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaees/2021/v39i1230815
6. Bhanderi B, Goswami A, Garg M, Samanta S. Study on minerals status of dairy cows and their supplementation through area specific mineral mixture in the state of Jharkhand. Journal of Animal Science and Technology. 2016;58:42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40781-016-0124-2
7. Bipate M, Misra A. Effect of polyherbal supplementation on milk production and postpartum reproduction in crossbred cattle. Indian Journal of Dairy Science. 2020;73(2):122-126. https://doi.org/10.33785/ijds.2020.v73i02.006
8. Bulgakov A, Khaustov V, Zhukov V, Ponamarev N, Motovilov K, Lunitsyn V. Improving milk nutritional value and processing properties through giving feed supplements to highly productive cows. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2021;640:032033. https://doi.org/10.1088/17551315/640/3/032033
9. Chand P, Sirohi S, Saxena R, Mishra A. How profitable is dairying in tribal Chhattisgarh? The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 2018;88(6):808-813. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v88i6.80899
10. Civiero M, Delagarde R, Berndt A, Rosseto J, De Souza M, Schaitz L, et al. Progressive inclusion of pearl millet herbage as a supplement for dairy cows fed mixed rations: Effects on methane emissions, dry matter intake, and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science. 2020;103(11):9560-9571. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-18894
11. Della Rosa M, Bosher T, Khan M, Sandoval E, DobsonHill B, Duranovich F, et al. Effect of supplementing high-fiber or high-starch concentrates or a 50:50 mix of both to late-lactation dairy cows fed cut herbage on methane production, milk yield, and ruminal fermentation. Journal of Dairy Science. 2025;108(2):1102-1116. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-26213
12. Dida M, Garcia S, Gonzalez L. Dietary concentrate supplementation increases milk production and reduces predicted greenhouse gas emissions intensity in pasturebased commercial dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science. 2024;107(1):112-123. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.202324303
13. Dineen M, McCarthy B, Dillon P, Coughlan F, Galvin N, Van Amburgh M. Effect of concentrate supplement type on milk production, nutrient intake, and total-tract nutrient digestion in mid-lactation, spring-calving, dairy cows grazing perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) pasture. Journal of Dairy Science. 2021;104(9):99709985. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-20148
14. Fotsidie H, Ayemele A, Zhao G, Li X, Sheng YL, Bu D. Milk production analysis after supplementing Calotropis gigantea leaves silage to dairy cows. Circular Agricultural Systems. 2023;3(1):2-10. https://doi.org/10.48130/cas-2023-0002
15. Garmashov S, Bagno O, Izhmulkina E, Konstantinova O. Impact of extruded feed supplements on the productivity of lactation cows. Egyptian Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 2020;51(2):203-213. https://doi.org/10.21608/ejvs.2020.23132.1149
16. George S, Aslam M, Dipu M, Lalu K. Effect of supplementation of broken maize on milk production of crossbred cows reared at high altitudes. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 2020;8(2):300-301.
17. Goswami A, Garg M, Bhanderi B. Macro and micro mineral status of feeds and fodders of Chhattisgarh State. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition. 2017;34(2):270-276. https://doi.org/10.5958/2231-6744.2017.00044.5
18. Hassen A, Ahmed R, Alam MS, Chavula P, Mohammed SS, Dawid A. Effect of feed supplementation on cow milk productivity and quality: A brief study. International Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences. 2022;4(1):13-25. https://doi.org/10.34104/ijavs.022.013025
19. Hills J, Wales W, Dunshea F, Garcia S, Roche J. Invited review: An evaluation of the likely effects of individualized feeding of concentrate supplements to pasture-based dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 2015;98(3):1363-1401. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.20148475
20. Jagadeesh U, Ds S, Pasagadi A, D G, B S, Nandi A, et al. Field evaluation of novel peptide and amino acid-based cattle feed supplement for improved milk yield and quality in dairy cattle in Kolhapur region of Maharashtra state. International Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Animal Husbandry. 2025;10(3):459-462. https://doi.org/10.22271/veterinary.2025.v10.i3f.2162
21. Jain A, Barwa DK, Jain T, Singh M, Mukherjee K, Gendley MK. Geographical distribution, management practices and utility of Kosali cattle at native tract. Int J Sci Environ Technol. 2017;6(6):3420-3426.
22. Jain P, Satapathy T, Pandey R. Rhipicephalus microplus: A parasite threatening cattle health and consequences of herbal acaricides for upliftment of livelihood of cattle rearing communities in Chhattisgarh. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol. 2020;26:101611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2020.101611
23. Kholif A, Matloup O, El-Bltagy E, Olafadehan O, Sallam S, El-Zaiat H. Humic substances in the diet of lactating cows enhanced feed utilization, altered ruminal fermentation, and improved milk yield and fatty acid profile. Livest Sci. 2021; (article). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104699
24. Kumar A, Murugesan S, Balamurugan P. Feeding of Azolla as a green fodder supplement on productive performance and milk composition of crossbred dairy cows in Theni district of Tamil Nadu, India. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9: (article). https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.906.171
25. Kumar L, Jat R, Jat M, Choudhary O, Kudi V. Economics of milk production feeding different protein supplements of Gir cows. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2021;10:641-645. https://doi.org/10.20546/IJCMAS.2021.1001.078
26. Kumar R. Effects of feed additives and supplement on production performance on cross breed lactating cows. 2020;8:487-492. https://doi.org/10.18782/2582-2845.8374
27. Kureninova T, Pushkarev I, Martynov V, Kireeva K. Vitamin and mineral supplements feeding effect on milk productivity of cows. Bull KSAU. 2025; (article). https://doi.org/10.36718/1819-4036-2023-10-194-201
28. Martono S, Negara W, Gopar R, Rofiq M. Combination effect of feed supplements on milk yield and milk quality of dairy cattle. J Opr Appl Agric Technol. 2016;3:136139. https://doi.org/10.18178/JOAAT.3.2.136-139
29. Mishra P, Chellai F, Niranjan H, Tiwari S, Devi M, Dubey A. Modelling and forecasting of milk production in Chhattisgarh and India. Indian J Anim Res. 2020; (article). https://doi.org/10.18805/ijar.b-3918
30. Mooventhan P, Kadian K, Senthilkumar R, Manimaran A, Meena B, Karpagam C. Assessment of tribal dairy farmers perceived importance, level of awareness and constraints in the adoption of good feeding practices using exploratory factor analysis. Range Manag Agrofor. 2016;37:98-103.
31. Muñoz C, Villalobos R, Peralta A, Morales R, Urrutia N, Ungerfeld E. Long-term and carryover effects of supplementation with whole oilseeds on methane emission, milk production and milk fatty acid profile of grazing dairy cows. Animals. 2021;11(10):2978. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11102978
32. Muwal H, Rai D, Bhateshwar V, Lal D, Nehra H. Effect of herbal feed supplementation Shatavari (Asparagus racemosus) on milk yield and post-partum estrus in lactating Sahiwal crossbred cows. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9:2921-2928. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.902.332
33. Pandey V, Gendley M, Tiwari S, Prusty S. Effect of area specific mineral mixture on serum biochemical parameters and milk yield in dairy cattle. Int J Sci Environ Technol. 2018;10:4965-4968. https://doi.org/10.9735/0975-3710.10.1.4965-4968
34. Rajpoot J, Kirad K, Chauhan S, Gathiye G. Comparative study of traditional feed and supplement feed with Azolla on milk yield in cows under tribal belt of Dhar district of MP. Asian J Anim Sci. 2020;15:15-18. https://doi.org/10.15740/has/tajas/15.1/15-18
35. Ribeiro-Filho H, Dall-Orsoletta A, Mendes D, Delagarde R. Dry matter intake and milk production of grazing dairy cows supplemented with corn silage or a total mixed ration offered ad libitum in a subtropical area. Anim Sci J. 2021;92(1):e13558. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.13558
36. Sahu J, Bhonsle D, Mishra S, Khune V, Chaturvedani A. Factors affecting the milk composition of Kosali cow. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2018;7(8):387. https://doi.org/10.20546/IJCMAS.2018.708.387
37. Shinde A. Efficacy of area specific mineral mixture and vitamin AD3E supplementation on milk production performance of dairy cattle. J Anim Res. 2021;11(5):767771. https://doi.org/10.30954/2277-940x.05.2021.12
38. Singh N, Gupta R, Awasthi A, Kumar V. Feeding balanced ration for improving dairy cattle productivity: a review. J Biol Nature. 2024;16(1):1-12. https://doi.org/10.56557/joban/2024/v16i18625
39. Singh S, Chhabra S, Singh C, Randhawa S, Gupta D. Effect of area specific mineral mixture feeding on milk yield and composition of dairy animals of central zone of Punjab. Int J Livest Res. 2016;6(3):62-65. https://doi.org/10.5455/IJLR.20160326103223
40. Wu Z, Du C, Hou M, Zhao L, Sinclair L, Bu D. Hydroponic barley supplementation fed with high protein diets improves the production performance of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 2024;107(4):13451354. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2023-24178