Evaluation of chemical composition of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) silage enriched with Jaggery, mineral mixture & whey.

Introduction

Forages are the biggest source of nutrient supply for the dairy animals therefore, they occupy central place in feed supply chain of the dairy animals. Fodder crops are cultivated and harvested for feeding the animals in the form of forage (fresh green fodder), silage (preserved under anaerobic conditions) and hay (dehydrated or dried green). Green forage supply must rise at a rate of 1.69 per cent per annum to satisfy the deficit; however the area under cultivated fodder accounts for only 4 per cent of the total cultivated land (8.4 million ha) in the country and remain unchanged over last few decades (Dagar et al., 2017) [10] . Sorghum is the most important staple food and fodder crop of dry land areas. Sorghum as a source of dry fodder has potential to meet the dairy sector needs. Single cut sorghum varieties yield about 100-150 quintal per hectare of dry fodder. It contains 8 -10 per cent crude protein, 60 -65 per cent neutral detergent fiber, 37-42 per cent acid detergent fiber and 32 per cent cellulose when harvested at flowering stage. (Kumar et al.,2012) [18] . Sorghum crop is rich in soluble sugars/ carbohydrates which is most suitable for ensiling. There are many varieties of sorghum but their composition does not differ enough to affect the feeding qualities to great extent. Mostly sorghum is slightly higher in protein but low in oil than maize (Pande, 2019) [28] . Sorghum grains contain about 70-75% carbohydrates, 10-12% protein and 2-3% fat, in addition to minerals such as phosphorus, iron, and zinc.

Silage may be defined as, "Any crop which is harvested green and preserved in succulent condition by the partial fermentation in more or less airtight container such as silos." Silages are known to be an most effective feed resources in the milking animals as it helps in improving the health of the ruminants, yield more milk, solids and the forages. Silage is a high-moisture content forage that is used to feed livestock and using silage as feed is economically feasible and suitable for the cattle management. Silage production techniques play an important role in silage quality, as well as the characteristic of the silage material and for this purpose many crops can be used to make silage, either sole or mixtures (Ozyazici et al., 2022) [27] . Jaggery also contains minerals and vitamins that help to enhance the fermentation process and improves the quality of silage. It also act as a natural preservative which helps to prevent spoilage and mold growth in the silage. Animals cannot synthesize minerals inside its body usually feeds and fodders fed to the dairy animals do not provide all the minerals in the required quantity. Therefore, animals should be provided with adequate and balanced amount of good quality minerals in their ration (Gupta et al., 2020) [14] . Whey is used as an additive to silage, which improves its fermentation quality and increases nutritional value. Scotta is a dairy industry waste obtained by ricotta cheese production because of its high availability and its high lactose content. Ricotta cheese whey, also known as scotta, is a valuable source of the lactose (about 4 per cent) so it could be used as silage additive. Most of scotta is used as a supplement feed for livestock (Mariotti et al., 2020) [22] .

Materials AND Methods Location

The livestock farm is located at latur, which is one of "Marathwada" region in Maharashtra state. The environmental conditions directly affects the performance of animal and indirectly to the quality of fodder. Therefore, it is necessary to describe the topographical and climatological situation of the place. Latur is located on the latitude of 18.050 to 18.70 North and longitude of 73.250 to 77.250 East with a height of 636 meter above sea level.

Forage Production and Ensiling

The materials required for research include three varieties of sorghum CSH22SS, Phule Suchitra and Dagdi jowar procured from International crops Research Institute for the Semiarid (ICRISAT) Hyderabad, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth (MPKV) Rahuri and local market of Latur. These varieties were grown in the field of Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairy science, College of Agriculture, Latur. The crop was grown upto 75 days of sowing and harvested at dough stage which occurs 15 to 25 days after flowering, when approximately 50 per cent of the grain weight accumulated is used for preparation of silage. The fodder crop were chopped by an Mechanical chaff cutter with size of 2 cm for easy compacting and for purpose of removing air when it is packed in heavy micron plastic bags. Total 36 bags of 5 kg were prepared and kept for fermentation process at room temperature.

Silage Preparation

The optimum dry matter for crop harvesting for silage depends on the stage of harvesting. Most of the crops are harvested at 50% flowering to dough stage when the moisture content varies between 18-22 per cent. Silage making involves four major steps viz., harvesting and transportation, chaffing, filling, compaction and covering of silos. The crop had to be chaffed into small pieces preferably 2-4 cm length using a chaff cutter. This improves the packing density which favours the growth of lactic acid bacteria, naturally present in crops. Add the fermentation mixtures in small quantities layer by layer after chaffing. Level the chaffed pieces evenly and press it hard so that all the air comes out. Pressing and removing air is very important. Chaffed material should be spread evenly over entire surface of silo (the structure) and then compacted through trampling (in case of small silo). The bags should be packed in such a way that neither air enters into the bags nor the gas comes out from the bags. The entire surface of polythene bags should be covered with straw or any other dried material upto 6-8 inches. The silage will be ready in 45 to 60 days depending upon the types of material used and the silage of thin stem crop like oats become ready in 45 days while thick stem crops like maize, sorghum and bajra becomes ready in 60 days. After completion of fermentation period the bags will be opened for further chemical analysis.

Silage Additives

To improve the nutritional quality of ensiling materials (2%) Mineral mixture was evenly sprinkled and thoroughly mixed over the chopped fodders in all treatments. Jaggery (2%) was diluted with water in a 2:1 ratio for easy application. While, whey (2%) was added as an inoculant to improve the fermentation quality. The fermentation process was done upto 60 days and silage obtained was subjected to the physical and chemical analysis.

Experimental Details

A Randomized block design with 3 replicates was applied and the treatment details are as follows

Statistical Analysis

The data generated during the experimental period were subjected to statistical analysisof variance (ANOVA) by Randomized block design for testing the differences as per the procedure described by Panse and Sukhatme.

Chemical Analysis of Ensiled Sorghum

The silo bags of each treatment were opened at 15,30 and 45 and 60 days of ensiling, the silage samples of each treatment were collected for the immediate chemical analysis which include Dry matter, Crude protein, Crude fiber, Ether Extract and Total Ash as per the BIS IS :7874 (Part-1)1975.

A. Dry matter (DM)

Weighed accurately 10 gm of the feed and fodder into aluminium dish. Heat the dish containing the material in hot air oven maintained at 100-1200C for about 3 hours and cooled it and weighted with the cover on. Repeat the process of drying, cooling and weighting at 30 minutes intervals for appropriate reading.

Calculation

Dry matter (%) = Weight of sample -Weight of moisture in sample

B. Crude protein (CP)

Crude Protein percentage was calculated by multiplying the percentage of total nitrogen by 6.25.

After determining the moisture content, the oven dried sample was ground and further processed for chemical analysis. Weighed 10 gm of sample was transferred to the Kjeldahl"s flask. About 10 gm of potassium sulphate and 0.5 gm of copper sulphate were added to 25 ml flask and concentrated sulphuric acid was added. The flask was placed on digestion chamber and heated gently to boil until contents were clear and allowed the liquid to cool and diluted with 200 ml of distilled until all ammonia was passed over and was received over standard sulphuric acid which was then back titrated with standard NaOH in order to determine the amount of standard acid used to neutralize the ammonia evolved from digested material. Similarly blank sample was run.

Calculation

Total protein = Total Nitrogen X 6.25 The cold water circulation in the condenser was started. After, extraction is over the thimble with material from Soxhlet was removed and again the apparatus was assemble, heated on water bath to recover all the ether from the receiver flask. Then, the receiver flask was disconnected and wiped outside the flask thoroughly with a clean dry cloth to remove the film of moisture, dust and dried it in a hot air oven at 1000C for one hour, cooled it in a desiccator and weigh.

C. Ether extract

Calculation D. Crude Fiber (CF)

After determining ether, the oven dried sample was ground. A 10 g of sample was transferred into a flask and boiled with 1.25% sulphuric acid and 1.25% sodium hydroxide for half an hour. Then left residue was dried, weighted and ignited. Loss in weight was taken as fiber contents of the sample.

E. Total Ash (TA)

The total ash percentage was determined as per the procedure recommended by AOAC (2007).

The empty and dried silica crucible was weighed. Accurately 10 g of feed sample was taken into a crucible.

Transfer the crucible to a muffle furnace with the help of a pair of long tongs and keep it at 6000C for two hours (At this temperature all the organic matter will be burnt leaving white ash). Remove the crucible from the furnace, cool it in a desiccator and weigh. The previously recorded empty crucible weighted and subtracted. Thus, the weight of ash was determined.

Calculation Results and Discussion 1. Dry Matter

The table 1 shows that Dry matter content of sorghum silage was significantly affected by the effect of additives in which the highest dry matter content was observed in T10 (52.60%), wheareas the lowest content was observed in T 6 (39.32). similarly, treatments T 11 (39.82%), T 7 (52.55%), T8 (43.67%) also shows the at par results. The results obtained in the study are in agreement with the result obtained by Querol et al., who reported the DM varies from 35.6% to37.0% in sorghum bicolor and fresh citrus fruit pulp silage. Additionally, Andrade et al., (2019) [3] reported that the increasing level of leucaena increases the DM 33.47% to 34.75% in sorghum silage.

Crude Protein

On an average, the highest crude protein was observed in T 10 (9.93%) followed by T 2 (9.26%) which were at par with T 9 (7.88), whereas an T 4 (

3.Crude Fiber (CF)

The crude fiber percentage of sorghum silage (on dry matter basis) was significantly affected by both the treatments and storage duration.

Among different treatments, the crude fiber values was found to be highest in T 2 (33.71%) and lowest in T 4 (24.03%) treatment. Similarly, treatment T 10 (30.18%), T 3 (28.00%) and T 9 (28.00%) shows at par result. The results obtained in this study are in agreement with the results obtained by calabro et al., who reported the crude fibre of chopped sorghum (30.5%) and ensiled sorghum (35.1%). Randa et al., (2017) [31] shows the result in 100% NP (34.68%),75%NG + 25% BP (25.23%), 50% NG + 50% BP (23.97%), 100% BP(13.71%) respectively. Similarly, Amuda et al., (2017) [2] reported 31.4% CF in maize stover as compared to unensiled (32.3%) and (31.9%) in control.

4.Ether Extract (EE)

Among all the treatments on mean basis, T7 (3.25%) had recorded the highest ether extract which were at par with T6 (2.78), T 11 (2.78), T 10 (2.68) and T2 (2.68) while T 5 (1.55) was the lowest. Consistent with the present findings, Calabro et al. assessed 3.10% and 3.29% ether extract in chopped and ensiled sorghum. Andrade et al. (2019) [3] observed 1.97% to 2.51% ether extract in sorghum silage with increasing level of leucaena. Mahanta and Pachauri (2004) reported 1.69, 1.78 and 1.53% EE for three different varieties of sorghum silages.

Total Ash

On mean basis, the highest ash content was retained in T 6 (9.38%) which were at par with T 10 (8.50%) and T 9 (8.45%) whereas, the T 4 (6.95%) was noticed as the lowest value. Consistent with the present findings, Ozturk et al. reported 4.71% to 11.64% ash in different silage mixtures. Whereas, it is also similar to Andrade et al. (2019) [3] also discussed the total ash content ranging from 7.45% to 8.20% in sorghum silage with increasing level of leucaena. values declined by 60 days, reaching 38.0% (T₆ and T₇) at the lowest and 52.07% (T₀) at the highest. Among treatments, the highest mean DM content was observed in the control T₀ (52.60%), followed by T₂ (51.85%) and T₃ (51.83%), while the lowest means were recorded in T₆ (39.32%) and T₇ (39.82%). This indicates that some additives caused greater DM loss compared to others. Crude protein The crude protein (CP) content of sorghum silage showed a consistent variation across treatments and fermentation periods. At 15 days, CP values ranged from 4.8% to 8.3% in T4 and T2, while by 60 days, the values ranged from 5.0% to 9.7% in T 4 and T 11 . This indicates that silages supplemented with additives, particularly T₂, T₁₀, and T₁₁, achieved the higher CP levels as compared to control and untreated treatments. The mean CP content across treatments varied from lowest value (5.3%) in T₄ to highest value (10.2%) in T₁₁ treatment.

The additive-based silages preserved crude protein more effectively, while the control T₀, T₄ and T₆ showed significantly lower CP content in the silage. The overall study revealed that the highest CP content was recorded in whey and jaggery based treatments, followed by mineral mixtures while the untreated silages showed the poor result. At 15 days, the values ranged from 22.30% to 32.13% in T4 and T2 treatment. while on 60 days, the values extended from 24.20% (T₄) to 34.73% (T₂). Across treatments, T₂, T₃, T₁₁, and T₁₂ had recorded the highest CF values (32-34%), whereas T₄, T₅, and T₆ maintained the lowest values (22-27%). The mean crude fiber content ranged from 26.45% (T₆) to 30.77% (T₁₁), with significant difference. Overall, the data suggest that additives and treatment type influenced crude fiber concentration, with some treatments enhancing fiber preservation. While, T₄ and T₆ lead to lowest CF, which could be considered as superior in terms of nutritive quality as they preserved more digestible nutrients. The values ranged from lowest (1.37%) to highest (4.30%) across the different treatments. The overall treatment means varied between lowest (1.55%) and highest (3.25%) was recorded in T8 or in T 9 which are the additive based treatments. The Treatments supplemented with jaggery, mineral mixtures and whey was recorded with higher ether extract values (2.5-3.3%), while the untreated and control treatments showed (1.5-2.1%) lower EE values reflecting the greater nutrient losses. At 15 days, ash values ranged between 7.13% (T₅) and 9.40% (T₁₀), while at 60 days, the range was 6.13% (T₅) to 9.15% (T₇) treatments. The mean total ash values across treatments ranged from 6.95% (T₅) to 9.38% (T₇), with significant differences. Treatments T₇, T₉, and T₁₁ concluded the highest ash content due to additive supplementation that improves mineral preservation during ensiling. The lowest ash values recorded in T₅ and T₆ indicated the greater mineral losses, which reduce the nutrients. Overall, the results show that ash content stability was enhanced by the use of additives, particularly whey and jaggery-based treatments, which helped preserve essential minerals. vulgare L.) on silage quality. Legume Research. 2019;42 (5)

References

1. Alhan R, Can A. Determining the effect of straw and inoculant addition on silage quality of sugar beet leaves silage. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science. 2017;23(4):639-643.
2. Amuda AJ, Falola OO, Babayemi OJ. Chemical composition and quality of ensiled maize stover silage. FUW Trends in Science and Technology Journal. 2017;2(1A):195-198.
3. Andrade RW, Moura MA, Rocha VR, Costa RF, Santos LH, Silva MM. Quality of sorghum silage with Leucaena. Acta Scientiarum Animal Science. 2019;41:1-5.
4. Bureau of Indian Standards. Methods for sampling and test for animal feeds. IS:7874 (Part 1). New Delhi: BIS; 1975.
5. Bostami AB, Khan RI, Amin MR, Sarker NR, Pervage S, Hasan K. Effect of addition of molasses and period of preservation on physical and nutritional properties of maize stover silage. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science. 2008;37(2):42-51.
6. Bunyamin A, Hidir A. Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculant on quality, fermentation profile and nutritive value of alfalfa silage at different ensiling periods. Ankara University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Journal. 2020;67:281-287.
7. Bureenok S, Yuangklang C, Schonewille JT, Kawamoto Y. The effects of additives in sorghum silage on chemical composition, feed intake, digestibility and rumen fermentation. AsianAustralasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 2006;19(12):1726-1731.
8. Bureenok S, Schonewille JT. Selective thermotolerant lactic acid bacteria isolated from fermented juice of epiphytic lactic acid bacteria and their effects on fermentation quality of stylo silages. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2021;12:673946.
9. Calabrò S, Tudisco R, Grossi M, Bovera F, Cutrignelli MI, Guglielmelli A, Piccolo V, Infascelli F. In vitro fermentation characteristics of corn and sorghum silages. Italian Journal of Animal Science. 2007;6(2):559-562.
10. Dagar JC. Potentials for fodder production in degraded lands. In: Approaches towards fodder security in India. New Delhi: Studera Press; 2017. p. 333-364.
11. McDonald P, Edwards RA, Greenhalgh JFD, Morgan CA, Sinclair LA, Wilkinson RG. Animal nutrition. 7th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited; 2011. p. 1-692.
12. Esen S, Okuyucu B, Koc F, Ozduven ML. Determination of nutritional quality and aerobic stability of sorghum, maize and sorghum-maize mixture silages. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty. 2022;19(1):1-10.
13. Fahmi M, Utomo R, Umami N. Physical and chemical quality of silage from two Pennisetum spp. varieties supplemented with molasses at different levels. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2019;387:012059.
14. Gupta G, Upadhyay D, Chand K. Mineral mixture in animal feed for balanced nutrition and enhanced animal productivity. Indian Grasslands and Fodder Research Institute; 2020. p. 1-15.
15. Handriati LN, Suhartanto B, Widodo B, Dewi MP, Umami N. Effects of sorghum varieties and molasses addition on prussic acid content of silage quality. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2019;387:012045.
16. Jolasho A, Dele P, Olanite J, Arigbede O, Ojo V, Okukenu O. Chemical composition of silage from guinea grass, cassava peel and brewery waste as affected by ensiling duration. Pacific Journal of Science and Technology. 2013;14(2):463-467.
17. Kumar A, Brar NS, Sashipal, Singh P. Available soil macro-and micro-nutrients under cropping systems in district Tarn Taran of Punjab, India. Ecology, Environment and Conservation. 2017;23:202-207.
18. Kumar AA, Reddy BVS, Ramaiah B, Sahrawat KL, Pfeiffer WH. Genetic variability and character association for grain iron and zinc contents in sorghum germplasm accessions and commercial cultivars. European Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology. 2012;6(1):66-70.
19. Kumar S, Singh S, Thakur SS. Sorghum as a forage crop in India: importance, utilization and scope. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition. 2019;36(3):205-212.
20. Mafakher E, Meskarbashee M, Hassibi P, Mashayekhi MR. Chemical composition and quality characteristics of corn, sunflower and corn-sunflower mixture silages. Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 2010;5(2):175-179.
21. Mahanta SK, Pachauri VC. Nutritional evaluation of two promising varieties of forage sorghum in sheep fed as silage. Animal Bioscience. 2005;18(12):1715-1720.
22. Mariotti M, Filippo F, Ceri D, Andreuccetti V, Roberta G, Francesco G, Angeletti S, Turchi B. Use of fresh scotta whey as an additive for alfalfa silage. Applied Sciences. 2020;10:365.
23. Muhammad N, Astuti A, Utomo R, Budi SP. Physical characteristics evaluation of Hymenachne amplexicaulis silage. Proceedings of the 7th International Seminar on Tropical Animal Production; 2014; Yogyakarta, Indonesia. p. 12-14.
24. Naik PK, Dhuri RB, Karangiya VK, Swain BK. Effects of jaggery addition on quality of sorghum silage. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition. 2014;31(1):26-31.
25. Nascimento RD, Edvan LR, Barros SL, Bezerra RL, Miranda SR, Perazzo FA, Araujo MD. Quality of silage with different mixtures of melon biomass with urea as an additive. Agronomy. 2023;13:293.
26. Ofori AD, Nartey MA. Nutritive value of napier grass ensiled using molasses as an additive. International Journal of Engineering and Science. 2018;7:45-50.
27. Ozyazici S, Semih A. Determination of silage quality of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) with oat (Avena sativa L.) and rye (Secale cereale L.) mixtures. Legume Research. 2022;11(3):102-109.
28. Pande VA. Studies on silo types on qualities of sorghum silage [master's thesis]. Akola: Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2019.
29. Patil AN, Shinde AK, Waghmare S. Effects of additives on the quality of sorghum silage. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2020;9(4):15131516.
30. Rahman MM, Said NNB, Mat KB, Rusli ND. Effects of ensiling duration on nutritional composition and oxalate content in dwarf napier grass silage. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2021;756:012034.
31. Randa SY, Lekitoo MN, Lyai DA, Lanno FP. Nutritive value and quality of ensiled napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum.) and banana (Musa acuminata) peelings. Animal Production. 2017;19(2):101-110.