Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research (Jun 2021)
Scope and cost-effectiveness of fermented corn straw roughage-based buffalo fattening approach
Abstract
Objective: This experiment was undertaken to assess the scope and cost-effectiveness of the fer¬mented corn mixture (FCM)-based buffalo fattening approach compared to urea molasses straw (UMS) and silage-based approach. Materials and Methods: A completely comparative randomized design experiment was con¬ducted for 90 days with three treatments and five buffalo bulls in each. UMS, silage, and FCM roughage-based fattening diets were attributed as T1, T2, and T3, respectively. Two types of protein supplements, i.e., Type 1 (Bangladesh Livestock Research Institute-developed) for T1 and T2 and Type 2 (prescribed by farmers) for T3 treatments, were used. All the parameters were analyzed through Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, 20 software. Results: Dry matter intake (kg, %live weight) was significantly higher in T1 (2.65), followed by T2 (2.34) and T3 (2.00), respectively. The crude protein intake, digestible crude protein intake, and digestible dry matter intake (kg/d) significantly (p < 0.05) differed between T1 and T3, but not T2. The digest¬ibility of acid detergent fiber (65.97) was significantly higher for T3 than T1 and T2 (54.44 and 58.73, respectively). Neutral detergent fiber digestibility of T3 (70.35) also differed (p < 0.05) with T1 (60.97) but not T2 (64.78). No difference was observed in the case of growth, but feed conversion ration was found to be significantly (p < 0.05) better in T2 (7.10) than T1 (8.35), where T3 (7.24) was neutral. The significantly (p < 0.001) highest expense [216.37 Bangladesh taka (BDT)/kg gain] was required for T1, followed by T2 and T3 (174.47 and 126.33 BDT/kg gain, respectively). Net profit from T3 and T2 (15,877 and 15,175 BDT, respectively) gained significantly (p < 0.05) higher than T1 (11,265 BDT). Conclusion: The FCM-based diet was suitable and cost-effective as a buffalo fattening approach. [J Adv Vet Anim Res 2021; 8(2.000): 195-202]
Keywords