A survey of nutritive value, fermentability and digestibility of different genotypes of quinoa straw

Document Type : (original research)

Authors

1 Department of Fodder Plants, Vice Chancellor of Crop Production Improvement, Ministry of Jihad Agricultural, Tehran, Iran

2 Animal Nutrition and Physiology Research Department, Animal Science Research Institute of Iran, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

3 Vegetable and Irrigated Pulse Crop Research Department, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran

10.22034/aej.2022.319276.2702

Abstract

 Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) is an annual plant considered as pseudocereals and belongs to the chenopodiaceae family. Quinoa has excellent properties as low water demand, resistant to drought, salinity and nutritional quality, which are the reason for the great interest in IRAN. The objective of this study was to determine nutritive value, fermentabiliy and digestibility of 10 genotypes of quinoa crop residues (Titicaca, Red Carina, Gizal, Q12, Q18, Q21, Q22, Q26, Q29 and Q31) in a completely randomized design. In the hardening stage of quinoa seeds, complete quinoa plants were harvested, were dried and then the seeds were separated. The quinoa straw samples were used for determine of chemical composition and fermentabiliy parameters via gas test production method. The concentration of chemical composition were different between different genotypes of quinoa straw. The range of variations were for dry matter between 92.44 to 94.29%, crude protein 3.53 to 11.0%, organic matter 84.25 to 89.65%, ether extract 1.20 to 2.30%, crude ash 9.90 to 15.59%, neutral detergent fiber 57.60 to 72.40%, acid detergent fiber 35.60 to 43.20% and nitrogen-free extract 9.41 to 18.09% and these difference between genotypes were significant (P<0.01), except of DM. The 24h gas production, potential of gas production (b), rate of gas production (c) were different between straw quinoa genotypes (P<0.01). The gas production in Red Carina, Q18, Q26 and Q29 genotypes were higher than other genotypes and (b) parameter in Gizal, Q18, Q26 and Q31 genotypes were higher than other genotypes (P<0.01). Furthermore, the digestibility of organic matter and metabolisable energy in different genotypes had range between 33.30 to 39.39% and 4.88 to 5.97 J/g, respectively (P<0.01). In general, the results have shown that the concentration of CP in Red Carina, Q12, Q18, Q21, Q22, Q26 and Q29 quinoa straw is higher than cereal straw and other agricultural residues and can be used as a new protein feedstuff for provide nutritive requirement of ruminants, especially ewes.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Asher, A., Galili, S., Whitney, T. and Rubinovich, L., 2020. The potential of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) cultivation in Israel as a dualpurpose crop for grain production and livestock feed. Scientia Horticulturae. 272: 109534.
  2. Van Schooten, H.A. and Pinxterhuis, J.B., 2003. Quinoa as an alternative forage crop in organic dairy farming. Optimal Forage Systems for Animal Production and the Environment Grassland Science in Europe. 8: 445-448.
  3. Zom, R.L.G., Avan Schooten, H.A. and Pinxterhuis, I., 2002. Quinoa-geheleplantensilage in het rantsoen van melkkoeien. (The effects of replacing grass silage by quinoa whole crop silage in the ration of dairy cows). Prakt. Veehouderij, Lelystad. Netherlands. Prakt. Rapp. Rundvee.
  4. Filik, G., 2020. Biodegradability of quinoa stalks: The potential of quinoa stalks as a forage source or as biomass for energy production. Fuel. 266: 117064.
  1. Robinson, T.F., Roeder, B.L. and Johnston, N.P., 2013. Nitrogen Balance and Blood Metabolites of Llama (Lama glama) Fed Barley Hay Supplemented with Alfalfa and Quinoa Straw in Bolivia. Journal of Animal Science Advances. 3(8): 386-391.
  2. Shakeri, P., Dayani, O., Asadi Korom, M., Najafi Neghad, H. and Aghashahi, A.R., 2019. Determination of nutritive value, fermentability and degradability in two genotypes of Quinoa crop residues. Journal of Ruminant Research. 7(2): 83-96. (In Persian)
  1. Ghavipanjeh, N., Fathi Nasri, M.H., Bashtani, M. and Farhangfar, S.H., 2021. Determination of chemical composition and estimating nutritional value of quinoa crop residues using nylon bag and gas production techniques. Animal Production. 23(1): 35-45. (In Persian)
  2.  AOAC. 2000. Official Methods of Analysis, 17th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA, USA.
  3. Menke, K.H. and Steingass, H., Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research and Development. 28: 7-55.
  4. Mc Dougall, E.I., 1948. Studies on ruminant saliva: part 1. The composition and output of sheeps saliva. The Biochemical Journal. 42: 99-109.
  1. Ørskov, E.R. and McDonald, I., 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. The Journal of Agricultural Science. 92: 499-503.
  2. SAS. 2003. SAS User’s Guide Statistics. Version 9.1 Edition. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary NC.
  3. Shakeri, P. and Fazaeli, H., 2004. A survey of nutritive value of gramineae range species in Kerman province, Iran. Proceeding of the 4th International Iran & Russia Conference. University of Shahrekord, Iran. 1044-1047.
  1. Riasi, A., Danesh Mesgaran, M., Stern, M.D. and Ruiz Moreno, M.J., 2008. Chemical composition, in situ ruminal degradability and post-ruminal disappearance of dry matter and crude protein from the halophytic plants Kochia scoparia, Atriplex dimorphostegia, Suaeda arcuata and Gamanthus gamacarpus. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 141: 209-219.
  2. Papastylianou, P., Kakabouki, I., Tsiplakou, E., Travlos, I., Bilalis, D., Hela, D., Chachalis, D., Anogiatis, G. and Zervas, G., 2014. Effect of Fertilization on Yield and Quality of Biomass of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) and Green Amaranth (Amaranthus retroflexus L.). Bulletin UASVM Horticulture. 71(2): 288-292.
  3. Shalka, F., Bilquees, G., Wei-qiang, L., Xiao-jing, L. and Khan, M., 2006. Effect of calcium and lighte on the dermination of urochondra setulosa under different salt. Journal of Zheijang University Science B. 8 (1): 6-20.
  1. Paterson, J., Funston, R. and Cash, D., 2001. Forage Quality Influences Beef Cow Performance and Reproduction. Presented at the 2001 Intermountain Nutrition Conference. 11 p. Available at: http://www.animalrangeextension.montana.edu/Articles/Beef/Forage/Intermountain%20Article.pdf.
  2. Arzani, H., Motamedi, J. and Zare Chahoki, M.A., 2010. Report of the National Fodder Quality Plan of the country's pasture plants. Organization of forests, pastures and watershed of the country. (In Persian)
  3. Hassan Khan, S., Ghafar, A., Khan, A., Sarwar, M. and Azim, A., 2007. Effect of maturity on production Efficiency, nutritive value and in situ nutrients digestibility of three cereal fodders. International Journal of Agriculture. 2: 900-909.
  4. Peiretti, P.G., Gai, F. and Tassone, S., 2013. Fatty acid profile and nutritive value of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) seeds and plants at different growth stages. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 183: 56-61.
  5. Heydari, H., 2014. Determination of nutritional value of Chenopodium album treated with lime at different times using nylon bag method. Master's thesis. Birjand University. (In Persian)
  6. Kakabouki, I., Bilalis, D., Karkanis, A., Zervas, G., Tsiplakou, E. and Hela, D., 2014. Effects of fertilization and tillage system on growth and crude protein content of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.): An alternative forage crop. The Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture. 26(1): 18-24.
  1. Masters, D.G., Bennes, S.E. and Norman, H.C., 2007. Biosaline agriculture for forage and livestock production. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 119: 234-248.
  2. Getachew, G., Blummel, M., Makkar, H.P.S. and Becker, K., 1998. In vitro gas measuring techniques for assessment of nutritional quality of feeds: A review. Animal Feed Science and Technolgy. 72: 261-281.
  1. Kamalak, A., Canbolat, O. and Gurbuz, Y., 2004. Comparison between in situ dry matter degradation and in vitro gas production of tannin containing leaves from four tree species. The South African Journal of Animal Science. 34(4): 524-532.
  2. Mahmoudi-Abyaneh, M., 2018. Comparison of the nutritional value of some halophyte plants with wheat straw and dry alfalfa. Master's thesis. Mashhad Ferdowsi University. (In Persian)
  3. Van Soest, P.J., 1994. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. 2th Ed. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, NY. 476 p.
Journal of Animal Environment
Volume 15, Issue 1
June 2023
Pages 25-32

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics