Journals / Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi / 1997 / Cilt: 03 - Sayı: 03

Feed Values of Sunflower Heads and Stovers Treated with Different Methods and Possibilities of Using as Roughage

Farklı Yöntemlerle Muamele Edilmi ş Ayçiçeği Sap ve Tablalar ı n ı n Yem Değerleri ve Kaba Yem Olarak Kullan ı labilme Olanaklar ı

Pages
52–56
Publication Date
1997-08-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Fattening period was 70 days and animal materials were 40 hoggets.Total weight gains, daily weight gains, daily forage intakes, daily concentrate intakes and feed efficiency ratios feed/gain were found as: 7.02, 7.54. 7.70, 9.23 Kg; 100.00±12.95, 107.72±15.78, 109.57±11.56, 127.43±15.70 g; 553.86, 550.00, 574.36, 575.86 g; 599.21, 592.43, 598.21, 598.79 g; 11.53, 10.61, 10.71, 9.22 for UTS, US, UMS, and USS, respectively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was carried out to determine the effects of different urea treatments 4% urea; US. 4% urea+molasses; UMS, and 4% urea+soybean extract treated stovers and heads; USS on the digestibilities of the -sunflower stovers and heads and also to determine the possibilities of utilizing of these stovers and heads as an alternative roughage source.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Digestibility coefficients related to dry matter, organic matters, crude protein of the untreated stovers and heads UTS , US, UMS, and USS were determined as; 35.771, 46.232, 6.037 %; 42.478, 47.742, 37.916%; 62.334, 51.085, 45.311%; 55.232, 59.340, 56.330%, respectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Fattening period was 70 days and animal materials were 40 hoggets.Total weight gains, daily weight gains, daily forage intakes, daily concentrate intakes and feed efficiency ratios feed/gain were found as: 7.02, 7.54. 7.70, 9.23 Kg; 100.00±12.95, 107.72±15.78, 109.57±11.56, 127.43±15.70 g; 553.86, 550.00, 574.36, 575.86 g; 599.21, 592.43, 598.21, 598.79 g; 11.53, 10.61, 10.71, 9.22 for UTS, US, UMS, and USS, respectively.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ayçiçeğ i sap ve tablalar ı · üre muamelesi · sindirilme derecesi.

Abstract

This study was carried out to determine the effects of different urea treatments 4% urea; US. 4% urea+molasses; UMS, and 4% urea+soybean extract treated stovers and heads; USS on the digestibilities of the -sunflower stovers and heads and also to determine the possibilities of utilizing of these stovers and heads as an alternative roughage source. Four native Karayaka hoggets were used in digestion trial. Digestibility coefficients related to dry matter, organic matters, crude protein of the untreated stovers and heads UTS , US, UMS, and USS were determined as; 35.771, 46.232, 6.037 %; 42.478, 47.742, 37.916%; 62.334, 51.085, 45.311%; 55.232, 59.340, 56.330%, respectively. Energy values SV were determined as; 5.468, 14.353, 15.550, 26.757 SV, respectively. Fattening period was 70 days and animal materials were 40 hoggets.Total weight gains, daily weight gains, daily forage intakes, daily concentrate intakes and feed efficiency ratios feed/gain were found as: 7.02, 7.54. 7.70, 9.23 Kg; 100.00±12.95, 107.72±15.78, 109.57±11.56, 127.43±15.70 g; 553.86, 550.00, 574.36, 575.86 g; 599.21, 592.43, 598.21, 598.79 g; 11.53, 10.61, 10.71, 9.22 for UTS, US, UMS, and USS, respectively.

Özet

Bu çal ışma, farkl ı şekillerde uygulanan üre muamelelerinin %4 üre; ÜA, %4 üre+melas: OMA, %4 üre+soya fasülyesi ekstrakt ı ; ÜSA ayçiçeği sap ve tablaları n ı n AST sindirilme düzeyleri üzerindeki etkilerinin ve bu şekilde muamele edilmiş AST'nin kaba yem kayna ğı olarak kullan ı labilme olanaklar ı n ı n belirlenmesi amac ı yla yürütülmü ştür. Sindirim denemesinde 4 Karayaka koçu kullan ı lm ışt ı r. Muamelesiz AST ile 0A, OMA ve OSA'n ı n kuru madde, organik maddeler, ham protein sindirilme dereceleri s ı ras ı yla; %35.771, 46.232, 6.037; % 42.478, 47.742. 37.916; %62.334, 51.085, 45.311; %55.232, 59.340, 56.330, enerji değerleri ise 5.468, 14.353. 15.550, 26.757 Ni şasta .Değeri ND olarak saptanm ışt ı r. Yemleme denemesi 40 tokluyla 70 gün sürdürülmü ştür. Toplam ve günlük a ğı rl ı k kazanc ı sı ras ı yla, 7.02, 7.54, 7.70, 9.23 Kg;100.00±12.95, 107.72±15.78, 109.57±11.56, 127.43±15.70; günlük kaba yem tüketimi ve kesif yem tüketimi 553.86, 550.00, 574.36, 575.86 g; 599.21, 592.43, 598.21. 598.79 g ve yemden yararlanma oranlar ı s ı ras ı yla; 11.53, 10.61, 10.71, 9.22 olarak saptanm ıştı r.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARIÇİÇEK, B., GARİPOĞLU, A. V. (1997). Feed Values of Sunflower Heads and Stovers Treated with Different Methods and Possibilities of Using as Roughage. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 03 - Sayı: 03, 52–56. https://ajindex.com/articles/179266

References (4)

  1. Aky ı ld ı z, A.R., 1984. Yemler Bilgisi Laboratuar Klavuzu. A.O. Zir. Fak.Yay.895., Uyg. Klav. 213. Aky ı ld ı z, A.R.,1986. Yemler Bilgisi veTeknolojisi. A.O. Fakültesi, Yay ı n No: 97. Cafantaris, B., Khan, J., MenkeK.H.,1983. Treatment of Straw with Urea and Plant Extract Containing UreaseNutrition Abst. and (Series B) 54:6. Cheva-Isarakul, B.; KanjanapruthipongJ., 1986. A Comparison of Urea-treated Rice Straw with Urea-molasses Sprayed Rice Straw as Basal Diets for Growing Cattle. Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Workshop of the Australian-Asian fibrous Agricultural Residues Research Network. Çak ı r, A., Haş imoğ lu, S., Aksoy, A., 1981. Çiftlik Hayvanlar ı n ı n Uygulamal ı Besleme ve Yemlenmesi. A.Ü. Zir. Fak. Yay., (Ders Notu) Çerçi, i.H., Sar ı, M.,1990. Ürenin Rasyonlara Farkl ı Yöntemlerle ilave Edilmesinin Keçilerde Sindirilme Dereceleri ve Azot. Dengesi Üzerine Etkileri. A.Ü.Zir. Fak. Derg. 37(1): 160-172.
  2. Dias-da-Silva, A.A., Ferreira, A.M., Guedes, C.V.M., Mascarenhas Ferreira, A., 1988.
  3. Effects of Moisture Level, Treatment Time and Soybean Addition on the NutritiveValue of Urea-treated Maize Stover. Anim. Feed Sci. and Tech. 19 (1-2):67-77.
  4. Drackley, J.K., Clark, A.K., Sahlu, T., Schingathe, D.J., 1985. Evaluation of Sunflower Crop Residue in Rations for Growing Holstein Heifers. Nutr. Abst. and Reviews (Series B), 56:4. Du, Z Y., Ji Y.L., Huang, Y.X., Zhany, S.W., Liu, M.X., 1992. Effects of Ammonia Treatment on Nutritive Value of Wheat Straw and Maize Stover for Beef Cattle. Nutr. Abst. and Reviews (Series B), 62:12. Düzgüneş, O., Kesici, T., Kavuncu, O., Gürbüz, F., 1987. Araştı rma ve Deneme Metodları (istatistik Metodlar ı 2). Ank. Only. Zir. Fak. Yay. 1021., Ders kitab ı, 295. Ergül, M., 1993. Yemler Bilgisi veTeknolojisi. E.Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi, Yay ı n No:487 Hai, N.V., Singh, G.P., 1993. Effect of Feeding Urea Supplemented and Urea-treated Oat Straw on Nutrient Utilization and Cost of Feeding in Crossbred Cattle. Nutr. abst. and.reviews (Series B), 63:10. Haoque, M., Davis, C.H., Saadulah, M., Dolberg, F., 1983. A Note on the Performance of Cattle Fed Treated Paddy Straw with Animal Urine as a Source of Ammonia. Nutr. Abst. And Reviews (Series B), 54:9. Joy, M., Al ı bes, X., Munoz, F., 1992. Chemical Treatment of Lignosellülosic Residues with Urea. Nutr. Abst. and Reviews (Series B), 64:2. Karabulut, A., 1986. Üre ve NaOH ile Muamele Edilmiş Buğday Samanı nı n Yem Değeri Üzerinde Bir Ara ştı rma. U.Ü. Zir. Fak. Derg., 5: 1-9. M