Influence of Using Pomegranate Peel Silage in Rations of Dairy Cows on Their Productive Performance

Influence of Using Pomegranate Peel Silage in Rations of Dairy Cows on Their Productive Performance | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Influence of Using Pomegranate Peel Silage in Rations of Dairy Cows on Their Productive Performance Ahmed Mahmoud Elmorsy, Mohsen Mahmoud Shoukry, Soliman Mohamed Soliman, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1325562/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 21 Jun, 2022 Read the published version in International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences → Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study was implemented to evaluate the effect of partial replacement of whole corn plant silage (WCS) by pomegranate peel silage (PPS) treated with enzymes mixed (ZYMOGEN) or lactic acid bacterial inoculants (Inoculant 1188) on nutrient digestibility and productive performance of dairy cows. The first experiment two stacks of PPS and WCS were prepared. WCS was replaced by PPS, at 25:75, 50:50 and 75:25, respectively used in forming three rations. The second experiment has been carried with twenty lactating crossbred Friesian cows in four similar groups (5 cows / group): the control group was fed a ration consisting of WCS. G1 (WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level 50:50), G2 (WCS replaced with PPS treated with bacterial inoculants at level 50:50) and G3 (WCS replaced with PPS treated with ZYMOGEN at level 50:50). The results showed the values of CP, NFE and lactic acid were highest, while values of NDF, ADF, pH, the concentration of NH3 -N and acetic acid were lowest in all groups treated PPS. The values of digestibility coefficients, nutritive values, ruminal fluid fermentation of TVFAs and acetic acid, milk yield, 4% FCM, milk composition, blood proteins were highest, while the values of ruminal fluid fermentation of pH and NH3 N were lowest in group 2 and 3 compared with other groups. It concluded that using of treated or untreated pomegranate peel is safe in dairy cows feeding at a level of 20%. The addition of ZYMOGEN or inoculant 1188 to PPS improved fermentation and nutritive quality of silage along with its nutritive values. digestibility milk inoculant enzymes methane rumen fermentation and silage. Introduction Pomegranate is a scientific name Punicagranatum L. from the Punicaceae family; it has been used anciently for medicinal purposes . It is extensively cultivated in Iran, Spain, Egypt, Russia, France, Argentina, China, Japan, the USA, and India (Patil and Karade, 1996). The world's pomegranate production amounts to approximately 8.1 million tons (Pienaar, 2021). Pomegranate production annually in Egypt could reach approximately 382587 tons (Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). The peels (pericarp, rind, or hull) amount to approximately 60 % of the weight of the pomegranate fruit (Lansky and Newman, 2007). The evolution of agro-industry has caused increased quantities of by-products such as peels and seeds of the pomegranate . Reducing the loss of non-ammonia nitrogen and essential amino acids in the small intestine may be attributed to the lowering of protein degradation in the animal rumen (Atkinson et al., 2007). Recently, pomegranate by-products have attracted attention. Pomegranate peel is abundant in bioactive compounds, including phenolic compounds, flavonoids, proanthocyanidins, various tannins and ascorbic acid, which are known as secondary plant metabolites . These compounds have several beneficial properties, like antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibacterialand antiviral activities. High levels of tannins reduce palatability and protein and carbohydrate digestion, whereas low to moderate levels protect dietary protein from degradation (Min et al., 2003). Tannins are two groups: hydrolysable and condensed tannins (Li et al., 2006). So, we can use the pomegranate peel as a source of tannin in the diet to improve the process of rumen fermentation . Also, Shabtay et al. (2008) and Sadq et al. (2016) showed that the growth parameters were increased in animals that fed on rations containing pomegranate peels, which may be attributed to improving immune functions that can potentially affect an animal's health . The pomegranate biomass is rich in moisture, but if it is not consumed in a short period, it gets mouldy and becomes useless (Shabtay et al., 2008). Therefore, using the ensiling is an efficient way to preserve pomegranate peel for use in ruminant rations. High-quality silages are characterized by high concentrations of water-soluble carbohydrates (WSC) and dry matter content of 250–400g/kg ( Wilkinson, 2005 ) . The feed intake, nutrient utilization and milk production of ruminants are affected by the fermentation quality of silages ( Huhtanen et al., 2003 ) . Employing several additives (bacterial inoculants, enzymes, etc.) during the ensiling process causes improved aerobic stability and enhances the nutritive value of silage ( Muck, 2010). Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) inoculants are divided into two major groups: homofermentative LAB and heterofermentative LAB . They are used as biological additives in silage. Numerous studies have explained that the employment of homofermentative LAB inoculants in plant ensilage caused an excess of lactic acid and low values of acetic acid, butyric acid, ammonia nitrogrn(NH 3 -N) and pH of the silage ( Aksu et al., 2004 andNkosi et al., 2011 ) . Moreover, the addition of enzymes to characterised ensiling caused the decay of cell walls and increased the availability of WSC that acts as a substrate to LAB (Sheperd and Kung, 1996). Recycling of the large quantities of by-products of industrial and agricultural in rations of livestock is met with great attention . This process contributes to transforming by-products that are misfit for human consumption into useful food for human consumption which contributes to meet the requirements of population growth . Also, it's lowering environmental pollution, health damage and costs of waste disposal (Elkholy et al., 2009). Moreover, it's reduced the acute shortage of feedstuffs in developing countries, and reduces the feeding cost, thus increasing the economic efficiency of animal production (Soliman et al., 2020a). This study's objective is to investigate the influence of thepartaily replacement of the whole corn silage by pomegranate peel silage, and the effect of adding the LAB inoculants or enzymes to pomegranate peel silage on nutrient digestibility, rumen parameters, methane production and productivity of dairy cows . Materials And Methods This study was designed forutilizing the pomegranate peel as silage (PPS) by replacement of the whole corn plant silage (WCS). Firstly, the laboratory study was done. It was prepared two stacks of PPS silage and WCS. PPS was tested at three levels of replacement of WCS, at 25:75, 50:50 and 75:25, respectively.The three different levels of silage were used in forming three rations in the laboratory to determine the optimum level of replacement WCS suitable for ruminant nutrition . The tannin concentrations in the three different rations were 3.49gm,6.92gm and 10.43gm/ kg diet that equivalent 0.69, 1.40 and 2.14% on DM basis,according to Colombini et al. ( 2009) andHerremans et al. (2020) ,the level 50:50 (WCS: PPS) was chosen as the optimum level for dairy cows feeding experiment.This experiment was carried out at NoubariaExperimentalStation, Animal Production Research Institute. Evaluate the effect of adding the lactic acid bacterial inoculants (Inoculant 1188) or enzymes mixed (ZYMOGEN) toPPS on nutrient digestibility, in vivo rumen parameters, in vitro methane production and milk production in dairy cows. The fresh pomegranate peel was obtained from the private El-Marwa Company, 6 October Cityat the end of summer 2019 . The whole corn plant was collected from the Noubaria region at the end of July 2019 . According to the manufacturer's recommendation, the Inoculant, 1188 (Pioneer®, USA), which contains four strains of Lactobacillus plantarum and two strains of Enterococcus faecium , was applied at a rate of 10 ml/ton.In lactic acid bacteria (LAB), a total of 125 billion colony forming units (CFU) per gram are guaranteed.ZYMOGEN is a liquid mixture of digestive enzymes, such as amylase (1500000 Units), lipase (500000 Units), cellulase (1000000 Units), xylanase (1000000 Units), protease (2500000 Units) and pectinase (20000000 Units) from WISEMED INC – USA.The approximate chemical analysis of fresh pomegranate peel and whole corn plant before ensiling, the concentrate feed mixture (CFM) and rice straw (RS) used in this experiment are presented in Table (1) . The second experiment has been carried out to prepare four silage stacks; the first silage stack was a WCS as a control group. The second silage stack was made of untreatedPPS.The third silage stacksPPS treated with bacterial inoculants (Pioneer brand 1188). The fourth silage stacksPPS treated with ZYMOGEN. Four stacks were covered separately by double-layered linoleum plastic and pressed with 30 cm of the soil layer. The ensiled materials were compressed by a heavy drum filled with sand to guarantee anaerobic conditions for ensiled for more than two months . Table 1. Chemical composition of fresh pomegranate peel,whole corn plant, rice straw and concentrate feed mixture on DM basis. Item CFM* RS whole corn plant PP DM 91.87 93.88 32 .76 30.32 CP 23.34 04.69 8.64 10.42 CF 9.17 32.25 27.39 18.11 EE 3.25 1.76 2.23 4.69 NFE 57.05 47.41 56.17 61.09 Ash 7.19 13.89 5.57 5.69 NDF 15.95 76.06 46.17 19.68 ADF 10.61 45.23 25.39 16.48 ADL 4.01 4.96 4.52 4.59 Tannin g/kg DM -- -- -- 92.8 * CFM of Composition: 30%yellow corn, 27%wheat bran, 25% soybean meal (47%), 10% undecorticated cottonseed meal (26%), 5% molasses, 2.5% salt Limestone and 0.5%premix.The vitamin and mineral premix per kg contained the followingVitamin A 12 000 000 IU, Vitamin D3 3 000 000 IU, Vitamin E 30 g, Mn 50 g, Fe 52 g, Zn 50 g, Cu 10 g, I 0.8 g, Co 0.1 g, Se 0.15 g and antioxidant 10 g. 2-1- Silage quality Samples from the four stacks were taken after 60 d to determine silage quality and chemical composition. The same volume of water that was used to dissolve the silage additives was added to the first and second treatments to maintain equal moisture. For evaluating the silage quality, silage extract was prepared by homogenizing 30-gram fresh material with 270 ml distilled water, then blending for 10 minutes in a laboratory blender. The homogenized sample was filtered through a Whatman No. 54 filter paper until it becomes clear. The pH value was directly determined using Orion 680 digital pH meter. The lactic acid concentration was measured according to AOAC (1990). Total volatile fatty acids (TVFA’S) concentration was determined according to Warner (1964). The molar proportion of TVFA'S (acetic, propionicand butyric) was measured according to Bush et al . (1979) using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). NH3-N concentration (ID 941.04) was determined by direct distillation according to the AOAC (1990). Neutral detergent fibre (NDF), acid detergent fibre (ADF) and acid detergent lignin (ADL) were determined by the procedure of Van Soest et al. (1991). The chemical composition and silage quality of WCS and untreated or treated PPSare shown in Table (2) . 2-2- Experimental dietsand lactationtrials Twenty lactating crossbred Friesian cows were assigned randomly to four treatments (5 cows / each treatment) stratified by milk yield and live body weight (548 ± 5.7 kg); each cow has the individual pen.Each group was fed CFM, silage and RS at 50:40:10 (%DM basis), respectively, for each group, to cover their maintenance requirements according to NRC (2001) recommendationsand requirements for the production that were calculated from the preliminary period and also the milk yield previous according to Barney Harris (1992). The first group (control) was fed a ration that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% WCS and 10%. The second group(G1) was fed a ration that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% silage (WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level 50:50) and 10% RS. The third group (G2) was fed a ration that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% silage WCS replaced with PPS treated with bacterial inoculants ˝Pioneer brand 1188ʺ at level 50:50 and 10% RS. The fourth group (G3) was fed a ratio that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% silage (WCS replaced with PPS treated with ZYMOGEN at level 50:50) and 10% RS. The animals were fed twice daily at 8.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M.andwater was available all time. The residual diets were collected and calculated for the estimated feed intakefor each individual cow.Cows were machine milked twice daily at 06:00 and 18:00 pm, from 30 days to 90 day and samples were collected at each milking (1% from total milk of each period). A mixed sample of milk was taken daily. Milk composition (fat, total protein, lactose, and total solids) and somatic cell count (SCC) of milk samples were determined using MilkoScan FT 6000. Average yields of each milk component were calculated for individual cows by multiplying milk yield by the component content (g/kg) of milk. Fat corrected milk (4 %) was calculated according to Gaines (1923) using the following equation: FCM4% = M (0.4+0.15 F %) Where M= milk yield, F = fat percentage. 2-3- Digestibility trials The digestibility trial lasted three weeks as a preliminary period followed by one week as a collection period. Feed intake was recorded daily by weighing the offered rations and refusals from the previous dayfor each cow separately. A nutrient digestibility trial was carried out in which acid insoluble ash was used as an internal indigestibility marker and coefficients of digestion were calculated according to Ferret et al. (1999 ) . Faecal grab samples were collected from each cow twice daily and then dried at 60 °C in a forced-air oven for 48 h. Faecal samples were ground to pass a 1-mm screen using a Wiley mill (Arthur H. Thomas, Philadelphia, PA, USA), and analyzed for DM, OM, ash, CP and EE according to AOAC (1990) official methods. NDFand ADF were determined by the procedure of Van Soest et al. (1991 ). 2-4- Rumen fermentation parameters, microbial nitrogen synthesized and measurement of methane production Ruminal fluid contents were sampled at 0 times before feeding and at 3 and 6 h after the morning feeding using stomach tubing from cows from day 27 to day 30 . Approximately 100 ml of rumen fluid were collected from each cow and strained through a polyester screen (pore size of 355 μm). The supernatant was used for determining pH immediately using a glass electrode. Five millilitres of the filtered ruminal fluid were added to 1 ml of 1% sulfuric acid and samples were retained for NH 3 -N determination. The concentration of NH 3 -N in the ruminal contents was determined as described by Al-Rabbat et al . (1971). The filtered rumen fluid was mixed with 0.2 ml of a solution containing 250 g of metaphosphoric acid/L for TVFA’s analysis by titration according to the method of Warner (1964). Samples were stored at −20 °C until analyses. Concentration and molar proportions of individual VFA were measured by gas-liquid chromatography (model 5890, HP, Little Falls, DE, USA). The separation process was carried out with a capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm internal diameter, 1-m film thickness, SupelcoNukol; Sigma–Aldrich, ON, Canada) and with flame ionization detection. The column temperature was adjusted to 100 °C for 1 min, then increased by 20 °C/min to 140 °C, then by 8 °C/min to 200 °C and held at this temperature for 5 min. Helium was used as the carrier gas . The microbial nitrogen ( MN) synthesized was determined according to Chen and Gomes (1992). Equations used to calculate as follows:MN = (70 × AP) / (0.83 × 0.116 × 1000), where 70 represents the amount of N in the purines (mg N/mmol), 0.83 is the digestibility of the microbial purines, and 0.116 is the purine N: total N ratio in ruminal microorganisms. The absorbed microbial purines (AP, mmol/day) are calculated from the total excretion of purine derivatives (PD, mmol/day), using the equation: AP = {PD – (0.385 × BW 0.75 )} / 0.85, where 0.85 is the recovery of absorbed purines as urinary purine derivatives, and 0.385 * BW 0.75 is the endogenous contribution in the urinary excretion of PD (Verbic et al., 1990). In vitro methane production was determined as described by Menke and Steingass, (1988). 2-5- Plasma metabolites At the end of the feeding trial, blood samples (10 ml) were taken by venipuncture from the jugular vein using heparinized vacuum tubes and were stored on ice. Then samples are centrifuged and the serum remains at the top of the tube immediately after the completion of the centrifuge we transfer the serum directly and prepared it for storage at − 20°C until analysis. Blood serum was analyzed for total protein was determined according to Armstrong and Carr (1964). Plasma albumin was assayed according to Doumas et al. (1971). Globulin was calculated by subtracting the albumin value from totalprotein.Liver function was assessed by measuring the activities of aspartate transaminase (AST) and alanine transaminase (ALT) were measured with a colorimeter using commercial kits, according to Reitman and Frankel (1957). Kidney functionswere evaluated by measuring blood ureaaccording to the method of Siest et al . (1981 ) andcreatinine was measured with a colorimeter using commercial kits, according to the method of Folin (1994). 2-6- Statistical analysis Data were analyzed as a completely randomizeddesign with repeated measures using the PROC MIXEDprocedure of SAS (SAS, 2000). Statistical processes were carried out using the General Linear. The model describing each trait was assumed to be: Yijkl = µ + Ti + a (T) IJ+ WK+ Eijkl. Where:Yijkl= Parameter under analysis; µ = Overall mean; Ti = The fixed effect of treatment; a (T) IJ = The random effect of animal (j) nested within treatment (i); WK = The fixed effect of week when K = 1, 2,….,8; Eijkl = random error. Significant differences among means were separated using Duncan multiple range tests (Duncan, 1955). Results 3-1- Silage quality The results obtained from laboratory studies illustrate that the optimum level of replacement of PPStoWCSwas 50:50. This level contains an adequate amount of tannins suitable for ruminant nutrition. Data of the chemical composition and silage quality of untreated or treated PPS and WCS are shown in Table (2) . PPS treated with inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN led to significant increases (P<0.05) in the contents of CP, EE and NFE. While, the contents of CF, ash, NDF and ADF were significantly decreased (P<0.05) compared to WCS. Adding inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN to PPS improved CP by increasing it while NDF and ADF decreased. On the other hand, there were no significant changes in values of OM between all groups . PPS treated with inoculant had the lowest values(P<0.05) of pH and concentrations of NH 3 -N, acetic acid, propionic acid, and butyric acid (11.74, 15.67, 14.6, 18.06, and 20.4%, respectively) compared to WCS, whereas concentrations of lactic acid were higher (P< 0.05) in PPS treated with inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN (22.22% and 11.77%, respectively) compared to WCS, On the other hand, the values of acetic, propionic and butyric acid were decreased (P<0.05) in PPS treated with inoculant (9.74, 14.06and 17.77%, respectively) whilethe values of lactic acid were increased (15.51%) compared to untreated PPS. Data on the chemical composition of the experimental rations fed to cows is shown in Table (3) . The chemical composition of rations fed to cows in G3 and G4 showed improvement and low tannin concentration compared to G1 . Table 2. Means for chemical composition and fermentation characteristics of treated or untreated silages (n = 5). Item Untreated WCS Untreated PPS PPS treated with inoculant 1188 PPS treated with ZYMOGEN SEM P-value DM 30.41 a 28.04 b 29.62 a 29.86 a 0.248 0.021 OM 93.64 93.35 94.03 94.18 0.275 0.714 CP 7.86 c 9.38 b 10.07 a 9.92 a 0.222 0.001 CF 26.53 a 17.61 b 17.25 b 16.91 b 0.933 0.001 EE 2.58 b 4.45 a 4.41 a 4.38 a 0.189 0.001 NFE 56.67 b 61.91 a 62.30 a 62.97 a 0.678 0.018 Ash 6.36 a 6.65 a 5.97 b 5.82 b 0.110 0.019 NDF 43.65 a 18.57 b 17.25 c 15.72 d 2.650 0.001 ADF 26.02 a 15.54 b 14.48 c 13.36 d 1.187 0.001 Silage quality pH 3.93 a 3.77 b 3.47 c 3.53 c 0.076 0.001 Lactic acid % DM 8.99 d 9.51 c 10.99 a 10.05 b 0.300 0.001 Acetic acid % DM 1.56 a 1.48 b 1.33 c 1.39 c 0.085 0.001 Propionic acid %DM 0.107 a 0.102 a 0.088 c 0.094 b 0.005 0.001 Butyric acid% DM 0.050 a 0.048 a 0.040 c 0.044 b 0.005 0.001 NH 3 -N % of TN 8.87 a 7.94 b 7.48 c 7.86 b 0.160 0.001 a,b,c and, d Means within the same rows with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). WCS: whole corn silage. PPS: pomegranate peel silage. Table 3.Chemical composition of the experimental rations . Item Control G1 G2 G3 DM 67.41 66.99 68.06 68.39 CP 15.44 15.74 16.06 15.90 EE 2.85 3.25 3.21 3.19 Ash 6.4 6.73 6.43 6.49 NDF 33.01 28.01 26.69 26.08 ADF 19.40 17.71 16.75 16.39 ADL 4.22 4.22 4.10 4.04 Tanning/kg diet DM 0.23 13.48 12.98 12.31 Control: ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS and 10% RS. G1: second group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. G2 third group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with bacteria inoculants PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. G3 fourth group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with ZYMOGEN PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. 3-2- Dry matter intake and digestibility coefficients Dry matter (DM) intake, digestibility coefficients and nutritive values are presented in Table (4). The results showed that treated PPS replacement by WCS led to an improvement in DM intake. The results were close to those fed a diet containing WCS and enhanced palatability compared to untreated PPS . Also, cows fed PPS treated with enzyme or inoculant had higher digestibility of DM, OM, CP, EE, NDF, TDN,ADF and DCP% compared to cows fed untreated PPS and WCS . Table 4. Daily feed intake, digestibility coefficients (%) and nutritive values (%) of diets to cows. Item Control G1 G2 G3 SEM P-value DMI kg/head/day 17.01 a 16.87 b 17.02 a 17.09 a 0.057 0.047 Digestibility coefficients DM 67.42 b 66.12 b 70.40 a 71.10 a 0.473 0.012 OM 68.86 b 68.04 b 72.13 a 72.56 a 0.445 0.023 CP 63.72 b 64.03 b 66.96 a 67.82 a 0.429 0.008 EE 71.93 b 72.82 b 74.34 ab 75.77 a 0.342 0.016 NDF 59.09 b 58.87 b 62.11 a 62.85 a 0.433 0.001 ADF 60.24 b 59.59 b 63.33 a 63.56 a 0.432 0.001 Nutritive value TDN 64.58 b 65.75 b 67.34 a 68.96 a 0.387 0.009 DCP 9.84 b 10.08 b 10.75 a 10.78 a 0.093 0.001 a and b Means within the same rows with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). Control: ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS and 10% RS. G1: second group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. G2 third group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with bacteria inoculants PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. G3 fourth group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with ZYMOGEN PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. 3-3- Rumen fermentation Rumen liquor parameters of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental rations are presented in Table (5) . Results revealed that addingZYMOGEN or lactic acid bacterial inoculant to PPS led to decreaseruminal pH values and NH 3 -N concentrations, which were in the normal range for microorganism growth, while the values of TVFA’s, acetic acid and acetic: propionic were significantly (P< 0.05) increased with diets G2 and G3, but the highest value was recorded with G3, including treated with ZYMOGEN. Despite the ZYMOGEN or lactic acid bacteriainoculants enhanced OM digestibility, the increase in microbial protein synthesis was not significant. Microbial protein synthesis was shown to have a numerical increase with diet G2 than with other diets . Replacement of WCS with PP resulted in a significant (P <0.05) decrease in methane emissions in G1, G2 and G3 (20.33, 17.72 and 16.24%, respectively), whereas ZYMOGEN or lactic acid bacteriaadditives had no effect on methane production when compared to G1 . Table 5. The overall mean of rumen liquor parameters of lactating cows fed the experimental rations. Item Control G1 G2 G3 SEM P-value pH 6.75 a 6.63 a 6.21 b 6.26 b 0.102 0.012 NH3-N concentration (mg/100 mlR.L) 8.83 a 8.11 b 7.80 c 8.06 b 0.161 0.006 TVFA concentration (meq/100 mlR.L) 12.57 c 12.98 c 13.79 b 14.21 a 0.351 0.001 Acetic acid, % 58.99 b 59.81 b 63.71 a 64.57 a 1.217 0.002 Propionic acid, % 22.41 22.54 23.03 22.96 0.398 0.842 Acetic /propionic ratio 2.65 b 2.66 b 2.79 a 2.83 a 0.064 0.035 Methane production at 24h 9.45 a 7.53 b 7.78 b 7.92 b 0.166 0.001 Microbial protein synthesis (g/d) 55.84 55.15 56.18 55.73 0.222 0.876 a,b and c Means within the same rows with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). Overall mean values of 0, 3, 6 h after feeding. Control: ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS and 10% RS. G1: second group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. G2 third group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with bacteria inoculants PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. G3 fourth group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with ZYMOGEN PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS. 3-4- Milk production and milk composition The average daily milk yield and milk composition of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental diets are presented in Table (6). Cows fed on diets containing 50%WCS and50% PPS treated with ZYMOGEN have the highest daily milk yield, 4% FCM yield and milk composition of fat followed by those fed diets containing WCS and PPS treated with inoculant . While, cows fed the diets containing untreated PPSwere recorded the lowest milk yield, 4% FCM yield and fat . Moreover, there were no significant differences in values of lactose, TS and SNF between all groups . The value of SCC recorded normal values, but the cows fed diets containing untreated or treated PPS recorded the lowest (P<0.05) values compared with control . Table 6. Milk production and milk composition of crossbredcowsfed the experimental rations. Item Control G1 G2 G3 SEM P-value Milk yield (kg/h/d) 18.02 ab 17.76 b 18.12 ab 18.34 a 0.139 0.031 4% FCM (kg/d/h) 17.05 ab 16.54 b 17.46 a 17.78 a 0.265 0.024 Fat ( kg/d/h ) 0.66 ab 0.63 b 0.68 a 0.69 a 0.015 0.001 Milk composition (%): Fat % 3.65 a 3.54 b 3.72 a 3.76 a 0.071 0.025 Protein % 3.43 b 3.49 b 3.68 a 3.71 a 0.097 0.012 Lactose 4.56 b 4.49 b 4.67 a 4.68 a 0.105 0.021 Total solids 12.80 12.77 12.91 12.95 0.194 0.649 Solid not fat 9.15 9.23 9.19 9.19 0.159 0.712 SCC×10 3 /ml 88.54 a 81.26 b 80.80 b 81.07 b 0.825 0.001 a and bmeans inthe same row with different superscriptsarediffersignificantly (P<0.05). 3-5- Plasma metabolites Blood plasma constituents of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental rations are shown in Table (7). Serum total protein, albumin and globulin concentrations were higher (P<0.05) in G3 (9.1, 7.0 and 12.1%, respectively) than in controls. On the other hand, values of liver functions (AST and ALT) and kidney functions (urea and creatinine) were within normal values for all groups and had no significant effects between all groups. Table 7 . Blood parameters of crossbred cows fed the experimental rations. Item Control G1 G2 G3 SEM P-value Total protein, g/dl 7.13 b 7.27 b 7.67 a 7.78 a 0.100 0.013 Albumin, g/dl 4.24 b 4.32 b 4.49 a 4.54 a 0.083 0.019 Globulin, g/dl 2.89 b 2.96 a 3.18 a 3.24 a 0.044 0.001 AST, U/l 38.28 40.08 39.30 39.06 0.521 0.776 ALT, U/l 21.62 22.57 22.05 22.21 0.246 0.794 Urea, mg/dl 41.57 42.04 42.94 43.19 0.655 0.842 Creatinine, mg/dl 1.04 1.09 1.06 1.03 0.028 0.715 a and b means in the same row with different superscripts are differ significantly (P< 0.05). 3-6- Economic efficiency The economic efficiency of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental diets is shown in Table 8. The results showed that cows fed diets G2 and G3 were more efficient in producing higher milk yields with lower daily feed costs and, as a result, lower net revenue when compared to the control. In addition, when compared to the control, economic efficiency increased to 10.3, 10.5 and 12.2% in G1, G2and G3, respectively. Table 8. Economic efficiency for lactating cows fed the experimental rations. Item Control G1 G2 G3 Daily feed intake (kg/head /day ) Concentrate feed mixture 9.23 9.22 9.25 9.24 Silage 21.98 21.41 21.85 21.92 Rice straw 1.80 1.79 1.81 1.80 Total feed intake 33.01 32.42 32.91 32.96 Economic efficiency Milk yield (kg/head/day) 18.02 17.76 18.20 18.44 Daily feed cost (LE /head/day) 61.12 56.50 57.70 57.90 Price of daily milk yield (LE) 180.2 177.6 182.0 184.4 Net revenue 119.1 121.2 124.3 126.5 Economic efficiency% 194.8 214.8 215.3 218.6 Free market prices (LE/ton) for the corn silage = 600 LE. Free market prices (LE/ton) for the pomegranate peel silage untreated = 200 LE. Free market prices (LE/ton) for the inoculants treated silage mixture = 440 LE. Free market prices (LE/ton) for the enzymes treated silage mixture = 450 LE. Free market prices (LE/ton) for Rice straw =1000E. Free market prices (LE/ton) for CFM = 5000 LE. Free market prices (LE/kg) for milk yield 4% fat = 10 LE. According to the year 2020 market price. Discussion 4-1- Silage quality Since the pomegranate peel is containing tannin that considered as antinutrition factors that effect of animal performance. Makkar(2003 ) illustrated that tannin at higher levels than 50 g kg−1 DM had a negative effect on palatability of feed intake or animal performance . The purpose of silage is to preserve feed with many of the nutrients present in the original fresh forage as possible (Wilkinson and Davies, 2012). Therefore, biological additives were used during ensiling to speed the fermentation process and raise of lactic acid concentration led to speed reduction in silage pH and thus improving silage preservation (McDonald et al. 2002). A pH range of 3.7-4.2 is generally considered beneficial for whole-crop cereal preservation (Kung and Shaver, 2001) and in the presentstudy; pH was less than 3.93, indicative of well-preserved silage . The results obtained from PPS treated with inoculant 1188 or treated with ZYMOGEN are supported by the findings of various scientists (Nkosi et al. 2012) whoobserved that treating silage with inoculant led to a decrease in pH value . Also, Kung and Muck (1997) reported that pH was reduced when silages were treated with enzymes. In contrast Ozduven et al. (2017) reported an increase in pH when adding bacterial inoculants to sunflower silage . The addition of bacterial inoculants to corn silage had no effect on the pH value (Reich and Kung, 2010). The addition of additive inoculates 1188 to PPS silage led to an increase in the concentration of lactic acid while decreasing acetic acid. The same trend was observed with silage treated with ZYMOGEN. This may be because the silage additive improved the lactic: acetic ratio. These results supported the extent of pH decline and are consistent with Nkosi et al. (2011). In contrast, Filya (2003) found that lactic acid concentration decreased in inoculated maize silage compared to untreated silage.The reduction of pH values and increase of lactic acid values in PPS treated with inoculant or ZYMOGEN may be attributed to an increase in carbohydrate fermentation and hydrolysis of hemicellulose by lactic acid bacteria while ZYMOGEN could partially digest the plant cell walls (cellulose and hemicellulose). These results were in agreement with others Nkosi et al. (2015)andKung(2014) who explained that addition of enzymes or inoculant to silage led to the enhancement degrade cell wall and increase the availability of WCS that serve as substrate for LAB and decreased the concentration of acetic, propionic and butyric acids . Ammonia-N concentration in silage is an indicator of the degree of protein degradation which impairs the nutritive value of forages and causes adverse effects on the utilization of nitrogen by ruminants (Wilkinson, 2005). NH 3 –N as a percentage of DM should be less than 10% of total nitrogen (TN) . In the present study, we had anNH 3 –N concentration of less than 10% NH3-N/kg TN . This confirms that silage additives have a positive effect on rapid reduction of pH values, which leads to the desirable reduction of protein degradation in the silo (McDonald et al. 2010 andNkosi et al. 2010). The inclusion of PPS in replace about 50% of the WCS had a considerable effect on the reduction of NH 3 –N concentration and increase in silage CPthat may be attributed to the presence of tannin in pomegranate peel. Tannin during the silage fermentation process protects forage proteins from degradation by forming complexes with proteins (Kondo et al., 2004). Moreover, treating PPS with inoculant or ZYMOGEN led to improvement in the reduction of ammonia concentration and increased CP (McDonald et al . 2002). In addition, the use of inoculant or ZYMOGEN in PPS silage was enhanced to degrade the cell wall and reduce the fiber fraction (NDF and ADF) . In particular, the addition of ZYMOGEN had more effect on the degradation of cell wall and the hydrolysis of cellulose and hemicellulose ( Addah et al. 2016 a nd Lynch et al .2015) . While, inoculant had little ability to degrade plant cell wall (Nkosi et al. 2012) , but decreases in fiber fraction may be due to efficiency in the hydrolysis of hemicellulose (Islam et al . 2001). These results are supported by previous studies done by Nkosi et al. (2011),Nkosi et al. (2015)and Dean et al. (2005). It was suggested that the inoculants or enzyme additions caused degraded structural carbohydrates and improved fiber degradation during silage fermentation (Dean et al. 2005). 4-2- Dry matter intake and digestibility The improvement in DMI of G2 and G3 may be related to silage treated with inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN, respectively, which caused improved silage characteristics, thus improving palatability . The improvement in DMI of G2 and G3 is in agreement with the results of other researchers Nkosi et al, (2011) and Abedo et al, (2013) who found that treated silage with inoculant led to a significant increase in feed consumption compared to untreated silage, while, Romero et al. (2016) recorded a significant increase when adding exogenous fibrolytic enzymesto corn silage . The study showed a considerable improvement in digestibility coefficients as a result of adding both inoculant 1188 and ZYMOGEN to the PPS,that may be attributed to adding the bacterial inoculants, or enzyme which contributed to improved digestibility of DM, OM and CP Romero et al. (2016) observed improvement in digestibility of DM, CP, NDF, ADF and ADL in silage treated with enzymes may be attributed to the effect of enzymes on the degraded cell wall during ensilage . The improvement in CP digestibility in treated or un-treated silage containing PPS could be due to an improvement in the fermentation quality of duringensilages by reducing proteolysis and nitrogen losses, which led to anincrease level of CP in the diets, thus improving the efficiency of protein utilization (Wilkinson, 2005 and McDonald et al., 2002). Since the presence of tannin in pomegranate peel. Tannins have been shown to benefit from binding with diet proteins, reducing rumen degradability, increasing enzymes intestinal digestibility and improving nitrogen utilization efficiency (Getachew et al., 2000 andMin et al., 2003). Doce et al. (2007) reported that the presence of tannins in the rumen of animals at levels up to 1.5% of DM did not cause negative effects on digestibility . Moreover, McSweeney et al. (1999) and Ott et al. (2005) showed that the fermentation process decreases the levels of tannins in silages, thus animals have not been negatively affected by the tannins in silage. TDN and DCP values were higher in G2 and G3 than in other groups . The increase in TDN can be attributed to higher digestibility coefficients in rations containing treated PPS, while the increase in DCP can be attributed to better protein utilization efficiency by passing dietary protein from the rumen to the abomasum ( Patra and Saxena, 2011). The current study's improvement in nutritional values and digestibility coefficients is consistent with other studies that have found adding that biological additives to agricultural or agro-industrial by-products during ensilage may beimproved nutritive values and digestibility coefficients for most nutrients (Nkosi et al., 2015 ؛Soliman et al., 2016 and El-Morsy et al., 2018). 4-3- Rumen fermentation The results of ruminal pH ranged from 6.21 to 6.75. These levels are suitable for the normal function of cellulites bacteria and pH should be 6.4 to 7.0 according to Wanapat and Cherdthong (2009). The diets that contained untreated or treated pomegranate silage led to a reduction in NH 3 -N that may be due to protection of dietary protein from ruminal degradation (Jalč et al ., 2013 and Atkinson et al., 2007). A high level of tannins in pomegranate peel may play an important role in the reduction in rumen ammonia production because tannins have the ability to formed tannin-protein binding that is more stable in the rumen and resistant to degradation by rumen microorganisms at pH 5.0 to 7.0 . However, it dissociates in gastric juice (abomasum pH 2-3) ( Oh and Hoff, 1987). Also, Soliman et al. (2020b) reported that feeding ruminants with diets containing flavonoids led to a reduction in rumen ammonia production as a consequence of a decrease in protein degradation. Moreover, treated silage with inoculants or ZYMOGEN led to a greater reduction of NH3–N concentration compared to diets that contained untreated PPS or corn silage . According to Makkar (2003), this may be attributed to the improvement of fermentation quality of the silages by reducing proteolysis and nitrogen losses.Increased values of rumen TVFA's,acetic acid and acetic: propionic acid in diets G2 and G3 than in G1 and control diets may be due to improvement in DM or OM digestibility and increased degradation of cellulose and hemicellulose during ensilage. These results are in agreement with Jatkauskas and Vrotniakiene(2006). The microbial protein synthesis in the current study showed insignificant improvement in G2 compared to other groups . This is in agreement with Basso et al. (2014) who showed that improvement of silage protein by LAB inoculant increased ruminal microbial protein synthesis. The microbial protein synthesis was not affected by pomegranate peel, which probably has an impact on reducing NH 3 -N concentration as a result of containing tannin, but the NH 3 -N concentration was still sufficient for microbial protein synthesis . These results are in agreement with those of Wischer et al. (2013) who found that adding tannin to silage did not affect microbial protein synthesis. Several studies have been done to reduce methane emissions by feed additives. Tannin is one of the additives that have been used as an important substrate for reducing methane (Jayanegara et al., 2015 andWei et al., 2019). In the present study, it was observed that CH 4 emissions decreased in cows fed diets containing treated or untreated PPS. This may be attributed to PPS having an amount of tannin. These results are consistent with previous results ( Aboagye et al., 2018 and Stewart et al., 2019) who emphasis that tannins reduce CH 4 production and may therefore inhibit methanogenesis. 4-4- Milk production and milk composition Regardless effect of pomegranate peel on decreased palatability and DMI as a consequence of the presence of tannins, which bind with saliva proteins while, the addition of ZYMOGEN ( Romero et al., 2016) or inoculants ( Soliman, 2014) to the PPS had a positive effect on increased voluntary DMI . These results are in agreement with Kung et al. (2018) who observed that DMI increased with silage containing a lower percentage of acetic acid . Dairy cows fed diets that contained PPS treated with ZYMOGENor inoculantas well as those fed diet containing WCS had a positive effect on milk yield, 4% FCM and fatcomposition compared to fed diet containing un-treated PPS which may be attributed to the improvement in palatability and DMI (Oliveira et al., 2017) , nutrients digestibility ( Morand-Fehr et al., 2000 ) and rumen fermentation especially VFAs (Huhtanen et al., 2003) consequence to improve silage characteristics . Also, Morand-Fehr et al. (2000 ) showed that a higher level of energy intake leads to greater production of milk by the animal .Abido et al. (2007) reported that fed lactating buffaloes on maize silage treated with inoculated led toincreased daily milk yield, FCM (4%) and milk contents of fat and lactose . Moreover, Peymanfar and Kermanshahi(2012) reported that treating forages with the fibrolytic enzyme improvement the milk yield and fat composition compared to untreatedas result to increasing feed intake, fibre degradation and digestibility of nutrients.Furthermore, Schmidely et al. (2005) found that the increasing degradation of fiber fractions led to an increase in acetic acid that reflects an increase in fat milk composition .Abedo et al. (2013) showed that feeding the goats with biological inoculated corn silage led to increase milk protein and lactose synthesis may be attributed to an increase in the amino acid levels and ruminal microbial protein synthesis, those contributing to increases in overall production.The improvement of milk protein in cows fed diets containing PPS may be attributed to tannins of pomegranate peel is agree with several studies explained that inclusion of tannin in the diet of lactating ruminant led to increased milk protein and lactose percentages (Liu, et al., 2013 and Aguerre et al., 2016) , this is attributed to tannin has a role in enhancing protein utilization during digestion and induce improvements in milk production (Min et al., 2005). Somatic Cell Count (SCC) is secreted in milk during cows milking and is a general indicator of udder health and milk quality . Generally, when ranged an amount of SCC less than 200,000 cells /ml it indicates that animals are healthy and not infected with mastitis, reported by Ruben (2003). In the present study, each cow had a cell count less than 200,000 cells/ml. The cows fed PPS had the lowest significance, which could be due to the fact that pomegranate peel contains a lot of bioactive chemicals (Mariana et al ., 2019). 4-5- Plasma metabolites Increased concentrations of serum total protein, albumin, and globulin in cows fed diets containing PPS may be attributed to improving the utilization of CP and increasing the number of amino acids available for absorption in the intestine (Min et al., 2003) . Also, Abido et al . (2007) found that the addition of lactic acid bacteria inoculants to silage resulted in enhanced silage quality with no deleterious effects on liver or kidney function . Thus, serum AST and ALT values were within normal limits in all the groups that corresponded with Pithayanukul et al. (2009) whofound that supplementing with 2000 mg/kg body weight tannin extracts from Areca catechu or nutgalls seeds had no effect on blood indices or liver and kidney function . The higher serum urea in diets G2 and G3 comp may be attributed to an increase in protein percentage in the diet as well as an increase in digestible CP intake (Balikci et al., 2007). Increased urea values in cows fed PPS may be attributed to the low ruminal ammonia concentration, and greater intestinal absorption of amino acids, leading to increase serum urea content . This is consistent with Min et al. (2003) who reported that the presence of tannins in the rumen decreased protein degradation by ruminal microorganisms, which increases the dietary protein absorbed in the intestines. When compared to control cows, the liver and kidney functions of the PPS-fed cows did not reveal any negative impacts . It could be due to the high quantity of phenolic and flavonoids, in pomegranate peel (Li et al., 2006). 4-6- Economic efficiency Our results indicated an improvement in values of net revenue and economic efficiency % in G2 and G3 compared with G1 and control . This improvement may be attributed to increased milk production and lower daily feed costs .Abido et al. (2007) demonstrated that lactating buffaloes fed inoculated maize silage improved economic efficiency compared to the untreated silage . Numerous studies have found that adding biological additives to agricultural by-products and agro-industrial by-products in ruminant diets can reduce feed costs and, as a result, increase the economic efficiency of livestock production (Soliman et al., 2020a and Soliman et al., 2016). Conclusions In conclusion, results obtained in this study showed that pomegranate peel silage can be used safely as good roughage during the feeding of dairy cows at a level 20% of dietary DM . The addition of enzymes mixed (ZYMOGEN) or lactic acid bacterial inoculants (Inoculant 1188) during ensilage of pomegranate peel caused improvements in fermentation and nutritive quality silage , and, it's nutritive values . It's contributed to increasing productive performance of cows and decreased feed cost, and subsequently leads to higher net revenue and economic efficiency . Abbreviations PP pomegranate peel PPS pomegranate peel silage CFM concentrate feed mixture RS rice straw WCS whole corn plant silage DM dry matter OM organic matter CP crude protein EE ether extract NDF neutral detergent fiber ADF acid detergent fiber ADL acid Detergent Lignin WSC water-soluble carbohydrates LAB lactic acid bacteria NH3-N ammonia- nitrogen AST aspartate transaminase ALT alanine transaminase ZYMOGEN enzymes mixed Inoculant 1188 lactic acid bacterial inoculants TVFA’s total volatile fatty acid 4% FCM fat corrected milk (4 %) CFU colony-forming units TS total solids percent SNF solid not fat TDN total digestible nutrients DCP digestible crude protein Declarations Acknowledgements We thank our colleagues who do not meet all criteria for authorship for helping me during the experimental work and accomplish this research. Also, I go my special gratitude goes to the staff in the Noubaria Experimental Station of the Animal Production Research Institute - Agricultural Research Center - Dokki - Egypt for help to facilitate this experimental work Funding: The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work. Conflicts of interest: All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. Ethics approval: This experimental study was approved all procedures involving animals by the researchers committee of Regional Centre for Food and Feed, Agriculture Research Centre, Ministry of Agriculture, Egypt. Approval number: 00017/2019. Consent to participate: The sections are not relevant to our manuscript. Consent for publication: The sections are not relevant to our manuscript. Availability of data and material: All authors are support all journal requests. Code availability: All authors are support all journal requests. Author Contribution: Dr. Ahmed Mahmoud El-Morsy((first draft of the manuscripts designed the experimentation, writing the manuscripts, analysis computational and correspondence)). Dr. Mohsen Mahmoud Shoukry((interpretation of data, reviewing and editing)). Dr. Soliman Mohamed Soliman((designed the experimentation, interpretation of data, test in vivo, writing the manuscripts, analysis mathematical)). Dr. Mahmoud Mohamed Soliman((writing the manuscripts, tests in vitro and statistical analysis)).All authors read and approved the final manuscript. References Abedo, A.A., Hafez, Y.H., Khalifa, E. I., Mohamed, Bahera, K., El-Zolak, O.A. 2013. Milk yield and composition of dairy Zaraibi goats fed microbial inoculated corn silage. Egyptian J. of Sheep and Goat Scie. 8 (1):141-151. DOI: 10.21608/EJSGS.2013.26780. Abido, A.M., Soliman, H.S., Hamza, A. S., Kholif, S.M., Elsayed, H.M.,Abd-Elaziz, A.S. 2007. Effect of maize silage inoculated by bacteria on performance of lactating buffaloes. Int. J. of Dairy Scie, 2(4): 330-338. DOI: 10.3923/ijds.2007.330.338. Aboagye, I.A., Oba, M., Castillo, A.R., Koenig, K.M., Iwaasa, A.D.,Beauchemin K.A. 2018. Effects of hydrolyzable tannin with or without condensed tannin on methane emissions, nitrogen use and performance of beef cattle fed a high-forage diet. J. Anim. Sci. 96:5276–5286.DOI: 10.1093/jas/sky352. Addah, W., Baah, J., McAllister, T.A. 2016.Effects of an exogenous enzyme-containing inoculant on fermentation characteristics of barley silage and on growth performance of feedlot steers, Can. J. Anim. Sci., 96: 1-10. Aguerre, M.J., Capozzolo, M.C., Lencioni, P., Cabral, C.,Wattiaux, M.A. 2016. Effect of 2-tier crude feed protein quebracho-chestnut tannin extracts on performance, ruminal fermentation and nitrogen distribution in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 99:4476–4486. DOI.org/10.3168/jds.2015-10745. Aksu, T., Baytok, E.,Bolat, D. 2004.Effects of a bacterial silage inoculant on corn silage fermentation and nutrient digestibility. Small Ruminant Research, 55: 249-252.DOI.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2003.12.012. Al-Rabbat, M.F., Baldwin, R.L., Weir, W.C. 1971. In vitro nitrogen-treacer technique for some kinetic measures of rumen ammonia. J. Dairy Sci., 54(8): 1150-1161. DOI.org/10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(71)85993-3. AOAC 1990.Official Methods of Analysis.15th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington D.C., USA. Armstrong, W.D., Carr, C.W. 1964. PhysiologicalChemistry, 3rd ed. pp., 75 Burges Publishing CO., Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. Atkinson, R.L., Toone, C.D.,Ludden, P.A. 2007. Effects of supplemental ruminally degradable protein versus increasing amounts of supplemental ruminallyundegradable protein on site and extent of digestion and ruminal characteristics in lambs fed low- quality forage. J. Anim. Sci., 85: 3322-3330. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2006-417. Balikci, E., Yildiz, A.,Gurdogan, F. 2007. Blood metabolite concentrations during pregnancy and post-partum in Akkaraman ewes.Small Rum. Res., 67: 247-251. DOI: 10.1016/J.SMALLRUMRES.2005.10.011. Barney Harris jr., 1992.Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. This document is Fact Sheet DS 38, of the Dairy Production Guide, originally published as part of Circular 594, Florida Cooperative Extension Service. Basso, F.C., Adesogan, A.T., Lara, E.C., Rabelo, C.H.S., Berchielli, T.T., Teixeira, I.A.M.A., Siqueira, G.R., Reis, R.A.2014. Effects of feeding corn silage inoculated with microbial additives on the ruminal fermentation, microbial protein yield and growth performance of lambs. J. Anim. Sci., 92:5640–5650. DOI.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8258. Bush, K.J., Russel, R.W., Young, J.W. 1979. Quantitative separation of volatile fatty acids by high performance liquid chromatography. J. Liquid Chromatography. DOI: 10.1080/01483917908060143. Chen, X.B., Gomes, M.J. 1992. Estimation of microbial protein supply to sheep and cattle based on urinary excretion of purine derivatives – an overview of technical details. (Occasional publication) International Feed Research Unit.Bucksburnd, Aberdeen:Rowett Research Institute. 21p. Colombini, S., Colombari, G., Crovetto, G.M., Galassi, G.,Rapetti, L. 2009. Tannin treated lucerne silage in dairy cow feeding. Ital. J. Anim. Sci., 8 (2): 289-291. Doi.org/10.4081/ijas. 2009. S2.289. Dean, D.B., Adesogan, A.T., Krueger, N., Littell , R.C. 2005.Effect of Fibrolytic Enzymes on the fermentation characteristics, aerobic stability, and digestibility of bermudagrasssilage. J.of Dairy Scie. 88(3): 994-1003. DOI: 10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(05)72767-3. Doce, R.R., Hervas, G., Giraldez, F.J., López-Campos, O., Mantecón, A.R.,Frutos, P. 2007. Effect of immature oak ( Quercuspyrenaica ) leaves intake on ruminal fermentation and adaptation of rumen microorganisms in cattle.Journal of Animal and Feed Science, 16(2), 13- 18. DOI: 10.22358/jafs/74411/2007. Doumas, B., Walson, W.,Blgga, H. 1971. Albumin standards and measurement of serum with bromocresol green. Clin. Chem. Acta, 31: 87. Duncan, D.B. 1955. Multiple R and M F- T. Biometric, 11: 1-42.DOI: 10.2307/3001478. Elkholy, M.El.H., Hassanein1, El.I., Edrees, N., Eleraky, W., Elgamel, M.F.A.,Ibraheim, D. 2009. Nutritional aspects of recycling plants by-products and crop residues (corn stalk) in sheep. Pakistan J. of Nutr., 8 (12): 1834-1841. DOI.org/10.3923/pjn.2009.1834.1841 . El-Morsy, A.M., Soliman, S.M.,Bakr, A.A. 2018. Influence of inclusion of fungal treated watermelon straw in the ration on nutrient utilisation and rumen fermentation in sheep. Indian J. Anim. Nutr., 35 (3): 251-259. DOI: 10.5958/2231-6744.2018.00039.7. Ferret, A., Plaixats, J., Caja, G., Gasa, J.,Prio, P. 1999. Using markers to estimate apparent dry matter digestibility, faecal output and dry matter intake in dairy ewes fed Italian ryegrass hay or alfalfa hay. Small Rumin Res., 33: 145–152. DOI.org/10.1016/S0921-4488 (99)00015-2. Filya, I. 2003. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri with or without homofermentatitive lactic acid bacteria on the fermentation, aerobic stability and ruminal degradability of wheat, sorghum and maize silages. J. Appl. Microbiol. 95: 1080-1086. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.02081. X. Folin, O.Z. 1994. Colorimetric of determination of plasma cereatinine. Phys. Chem. 268: 228. Gaines, W.L., Davidson, F.A. 1923. Relation between percentage fat content and yield of milk.Ill.Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 245. Getachew, G., Makkar, H.P.S., Becker, K. 2000. Effect of polyethylene glycol on in vitro degradability of nitrogen and microbial protein synthesis from tannin-rich browse and herbaceous legumes. British J. of Nutr., 84: 73-83. DOI: DOI.org/10.1017/S0007114500001252. Herremans, S., Decruyenaere, V., Cantalapiedra-Hijar, G., Beckers, Y.,Froidmont, E. 2020. Effects of hydrolysable tannin-treated grass silage on milk yield and composition, nitrogen partitioning and nitrogen isotopic discrimination in lactating dairy cows.Animal.14(4): 771–779. DOI:10.1017/S175173111900226X. Huhtanen, P., Nousiainen, J.I., Khalili, H., Jaakkola, S.,Heikkila, T. 2003. Relationship between silage fermentation characteristics and milk production parameters: analyses of literature data. Livest. Prod. Sci., 81: 57–73. DOI.org/10.1016/S0301-6226 (02)00195-1. Islam , M., Enishi , O., Purnomoadi , A., Higuchi , K., Takusari , N., Terada , F. 2001. Energy and protein utilization by goats fed Italian ryegrass silage treated with molasses, urea, cellulase or cellulase lactic acid bacteria. Small Ruminant Research , 42(1): 49-60. DOI.org/10.1016/S0921-4488 (01)00235-8. Jalč, D., Váradyová, Z., Mihaliková, K., Ledecký, V.,Kišidayová, S. 2013. Enterococci inoculated silages: Effect on rumen fermentation and lipid metabolism in vitro . African J. of Microbiology Research, 7(32): 4191-4199. DOI: 10.5897/AJMR2012.2456. Jatkauskas, J.,Vrotniakiene, V. 2006. Effects of silage fermentation quality on ruminal fluid parameters.Biologija 4: 65–71. Jayanegara, A., Goel, G., Makkar, H.P.S., Becker, K. 2015. Divergence between purified hydrolysable and condensed tannin effects on methane emission, rumen fermentation and microbial population in vitro . Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 209:60–68. Doi:10.1111/jpn.12531. Kondo, M., Kita, K., Yokota, H. 2004. Feeding value to goats of whole-crop oat ensiled with green tea waste. Anim. Feed Scie, and Tech. 113:71-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2003.10.018. Kung, Jr. L. 2014. a review on silage additives and enzymes. http://ag.udel.edu/anfs/faculty/kung/articles/a_review_on_silage_additiv . Kung, Jr. L., Shaver, R. 2001. Interpretation and use of silage fermentation analysis reports.University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA. Focus on Forage 3 (13): 1-5. Kung, Jr. L., Shaver, R.D., Grant, R.J., Schmidt, R.J. 2018. Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial and organoleptic components of silages. J. of Dairy Scie., 101(5): 4020-4033. Doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13909. Kung, Jr.L., Muck, R.E. 1997. Animal response to silage additives. Proc. from the Silage: Field to Feedbunk North American Conference. NRAES -99: 200-210. Lansky, E.P., Newman, R.A. 2007. Punicagranatum (pomegranate) and its potential for prevention and treatment of inflammation and cancer. J. Ethnopharmacol., 109:177–206. DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2006.09.006. Li, Y., Guo, C., Yang, J., Wei, J., Xu, J., Cheng, S. 2006. Evaluation of antioxidant properties of pomegranate peel extract in comparison with pomegranate pulp extract. Food Chem., 96:254-260. DOI.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.02.033. Liu, H.W., Zhou, D.W., Li, K. 2013. Effects of chestnut tannins on performance and antioxidative status of transition dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 96:5901–5907. DOI.org/ 10.3168/jds.2013-6904 Lynch,J.P., Baah, J.,Beauchemin K.A. 2015.Conservation, fiber digestibility and nutritive value of corn harvested at 2 cutting heights and ensiled with fibrolytic enzymes, either alone or with a ferulic acid esterase-producing inoculant. J. Dairy Sci., 98:1214-1224. Makkar, H.P.S. 2003.Effects and fate of tannins in ruminant animals, adaptation to tannins, and strategies to overcome detrimental effects of feeding tannin-rich feeds. Small Ruminant Research, 49: 241-256. DOI.org/10.1016/S0921-4488 (03)00142-1. Mariana, P.S., Mariana, C.S., Beatriz, R.S.,Laise, C.da S., Diogo, T.C., Rosangela Maria, N.B.,Mauricio, A.R. 2019.Extraction of bioactive compounds from pomegranate peel ( Punicagranatum L .) with pressurized liquids assisted by ultrasound combined with an expansion gas. J. UltrasonicsSonochemistry, 54: 11-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2019.02.021. McDonald, P., Edwards, R.A., Greenhalgh, J.F.D., Morgan, C.A. 2002.Animal Nutrition.6th ed. Longman Scientific and Technical, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA. McDonald, P., Edwards, R.A., Greenhalgh, J.F.D., Morgan, C.A., Sinclair, L.A., Wilkinson, R.G. 2010. Chapter 19: silage. In: Animal Nutrition, seventh ed., pp. 499-520. McSweeney, C.S., Palmer, B., Bunch, R., Krause, D.O. 1999. Isolation and characterization of proteolyticruminal bacteria from sheep and goats fed tannin-containing shrub legume Calliandracalothyrsus . Applied and Environmental Microbiology 65:3075-3083. DOI. 10.1128/AEM.65.7.3075-3083.1999. Menke, K.H.,Steingass, H. 1988. Estimation of the energeticfeed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gasproduction using rumen fluid. Anim. Res. Dev., 28:7-55. Min, B.R., Attwood, G.T., McNabb, W.C., Molan, A.L, Barry, T.N.2005.The effect of condensed tannins from Lotus corniculatus on the proteolytic activities and growth of rumen bacteria.Anim. Feed Scie.andTechn. 121(1-2):45-58.DOI.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.02.007. Min, B.R., Barry, T.N., Attwood, G.T., McNabb, W.C. 2003. The effect of condensed tannins on the nutrition and health of ruminants fed fresh temperate forages: a review. Anim. Feed Scie.andTechn. 106:3-19.DOI.org/10.1016/S0377-8401 (03)00041-5. Ministry of Agriculture2019.Agriculture direction of governorate, Economic affairs sector, Ministry of Agriculture (Summer &Nili crops), P325. Morand-Fehr, P., SanzSampelayo, M.R., Fedele, Y.V., Le Frileux, Y., Eknaes, M., Schmidely, P.H., GigerReverding, S., Bas, P., Rubino, R., Havrevoll, O.,Sauvant, D. 2000. Effect of feeding on the quality of goat milk and cheeses. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Goats, Tour, France, Tome I, pp. 53–58. Muck, R.E.2010.Silage additives and management issues.Proceedings of Idaho Alfalfa Forage Conference, Best Western Burley Inn, Burley, Idaho, USA. 16-17 February, pp. 49-55. Nkosi, B.D., Meeske, R., Langa, T., Thomas, R.S. 2011.Effects of bacterial silage inoculants on whole-crop maize silage fermentation and silage digestibility in rams. South African J of Anim.Scie., 41(4): 351-359. DOI.org/10.4314/sajas. v41i4.5. Nkosi, B.D., Meeske, R., Langa, T. Motiang, M.D.,Mutavhatsindi, T.F. 2015. The influence of ensiling potato hash waste with enzyme/bacterial inoculants mixtures on the fermentation characteristics, aerobic stability and nutrient digestion of the resultant silages by rams. Small Ruminant Research, 127: 28-35. DOI.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.04.013. Nkosi, B.D., Meeske, R., Van der Merwe, H.J.,Groenewald, I.B. 2010. Effects of homofermentative and heterofermentative bacterial silage inoculants on potato hash silage fermentation and digestibility in rams. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 157(3): 195–200. DOI: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.03.008. Nkosi, B.D., Vadlani, P.V. Brijwani, K. Nanjunda, A.,Meeske, R. 2012. Effects of bacterial inoculants and an enzyme on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of ensiled whole-crop sweet sorghum. South African J. of Anim.Scie., 42 (3): 332-240. DOI.org/10.4314/sajas. v42i3.4. NRC 2001.Nutrient Requiremets of Dairy Animals.National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council. Washington, D C., USA.381p. DOI: 10.17226/9825. Oh, H.I., Hoff, J.E. 1987. pH dependence of complex formation between condensed tannins and proteins. Journal of Food Science 52(5), 1267- 1269. Oliveira, A.S., Weinberg, Z.G., Ogunade, I.M., Cervantes, A.A.P., Arriola, K.G., Jiang, Y., Kim, D., Li, X., Gonçalves, M.C.M., Vyas, D.,Adesogan, A.T. 2017.Meta-analysis of effects of inoculation with homofermentative and facultative heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria on silage fermentation, aerobic stability and the performance of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 100 (6):1–17.DOI.org/10.3168/jds.2016-11815. Ott, E.M., Aragon, M., Gabel, M. 2005.Ensiling of tannin_containing sorghum grain.Silage production and utilisation.Prceedings of the XIVth International Silage Conference.pp. 178. Ozduven, M.L., Okuyucu, B., BuyukkilicBeyzi, S.,Konca, Y.2017.The effects of lactic acid bacterial inoculants on the fermentation, aerobic stability and nutritive value of sunflower silages. Inter. J.of Current Research, 9 (7):54289-54295. Patil, A.V.,Karade, A.R.1996. In T.K. Bose and S.K. Mitra (Eds.), Fruits: Tropical and subtropical. Calcutta, India: NayaPrakash. Patra, A.K.,Saxena, J. 2011. Exploitation of dietary tannins to improve rumen metabolism and ruminant nutrition. Sci. Food and Agri.,91:24-37. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.4152. Peymanfar, S ., Kermanshahi, R.2012. The effect of bacteria, enzymes and inulin on fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage. Iran Microbiol. , 4(4):180-6.PMCID: PMC3507307. Pienaar, L. 2021. The Economic Contribution of South Africa’s Pomegranate Industry. Western Cape Department of Agriculture Division for Macro & Resource Economics.South African.| www.sapomegranate.co.za . Pithayanukul, P., Nithitanakool, S.,Bavovada, R. 2009.Hepatoprotective Potential of Extracts from Seeds of Areca catechu and Nutgalls of Quercusinfectoria . Molecules, 14: 4987-5000. DOI:10.3390/molecules14124987. Reich, L.J., Kung Jr. L.2010. Effects of combining Lactobacillus buchneri 40788 with various lactic acid bacteria on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage.Anim. Feed Scie.andTechn., 159:105– 109. DOI: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.06.002. Reitman, S., Frankel, S. 1957. A calorimetric method for the determination of serum glutamic oxaloacetic and glutamic pyruvic transaminases. Amer. J. Clinc. Path., 28: 56. Romero, J.J., Macias, E.G., Ma, Z.X., Martins, R.M., Coy, B.Y., Martinez, F., Garbuio, D.H., Staples, C.R.,Adesogan, A.T. 2016. Improving the performance of dairy cattle with a xylanase-rich exogenous enzyme preparation. Journal of Dairy Science, 99(5):486–3496. DOI: 10.3168/jds.2015-10082. Ruben, N. 2003.Monitoring udder health and milk quality using somatic cell counts.Veterinary Research. EDP Sciences, 34 (5): 579–596. DOI: 10.1051/vetres:2003028. Sadq, S.M., Ramzi, D.O.M., Hamasalim, H.J., Ahmed, K.A. 2016.Growth performance and digestibility in karadilambs receiving different levels of pomegranate peels. Open J. of Anim.Scie., 6: 16-23. DOI: 10.4236/ojas.2016.61003. SAS 2000. SAS users guide: Statistics, SAS Inst., Inc., Cary N.C., USA. Schmidely, P.H., Morand-Fehr, P.,Sauvant, D. 2005. Influence of extruded soybeans with or without bicarbonate on milk performance and fatty acid composition of goat milk. J. Dairy Sci., 88: 757–765. DOI.org/10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(05)72739-9. Shabtay, A., Eitam, H., Tadmor, Y., Orlov, A., Meir, A., Weinberg, P., Weinberg, Z.G., Chen, Y., Brosh, A., Izhaki, I.,Kerem, Z. 2008. Nutritive and antioxidative potential of fresh and stored pomegranate industrial byproduct as novel beef cattle feed. J. Agric. Food Chem., 56:10063–10070. DOI: 10.1021/jf8016095. Sheperd, A.C., Kung Jr., L. 1996. Effects of an Enzyme Additive on Composition of Corn Silage Ensiled at Various Stages of Maturity. Journal of Dairy Science, 79, 1767-1773. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302 (96)76544-X. Siest, G., Henny, J.,Schiele, F. 1981.Interpretation des examens de laboratoire, K., P. 206-223. Soliman, S.M., El-Morsy, A.M., El-Shinnawy, A.M., El-Ashry, G., Osman, M.A. 2020a.Utilization of biologically treated watermelon vine in rations for dairy cows. J. of Animal and Poultry Production, Mansoura Univ., 11 (3):117 – 123. DOI: 10.21608/jappmu.2020.87135. Soliman, S.M., El-Shinnawy, A.M., El-Morsy, A.M. 2016.Effect of probiotic or prebiotic supplementation on the productive performance of Barkilambs. J. Animal and Poultry Prod., Mansoura Univ., 7(10): 369- 376.DOI: 10.21608/JAPPMU.2016.48743. Soliman, S.M., Hassan, A.A., Bassuony, Neamat I., El-Morsy, A.M. 2020b.Effect of biological extract supplementation on milk yield and rumen fermentation in dairy cows.Intern.J. of Dairy Scie. 15 (2): 88-98. DOI: 10.3923/ijds.2020.88.98. Soliman.M.S. 2014.The Effects of addition microbial inoculants or formic aid to whole corn plant at ensiling on silage quality, nutritive value and rumen fermentation in sheep and milk yield and composition of lactation cows. J.of Animal and Poultry Production, 5(5): 249-266. Stewart, E.K., Beauchemin, K.A., Dai, X., MacAdam, J.W., Christensen, R.G.,Villalba, J.J. 2019. Effect of tannin-containing hays on enteric methane emissions and nitrogen partitioning in beef cattle. J. of Ani.l Sci., 97(8): 3286–3299.DOI: 10.1093/jas/skz206. Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B., Lewis, B.A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci., 74:3583–3597. DOI.org/10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(91)78551-2. Verbic, J., Chen, X.B., Macleod, N.A. 1990.Excretion of purine derivatives by ruminants.Effect of microbial nucleic acid infusion on purine derivative excretion by steers. J. of Agri. Sci. 114: 243-248. Wanapat, M.,Cherdthong, A. 2009.Use of real-time PCR technique in studying rumen cellulolytic bacteria population as affected by level of roughage in swamp buffalo. Curr.Microbial., 58:294–299. DOI.org/10.1007/s00284-008-9322-6. Warner, A.C.I. 1964. Production of volatile fatty acids in the rumen methods of measurements.Nutr.Abstr., and Rev., 34:339-352. Wei, C., Guyader, J., Collazos, L., Beauchemin, K.A., Zhao, G.Y. 2019.Effects of gallic acid on in vitro rumen fermentation and methane production using rumen simulation (Rusitec) and batch-culture techniques. Anim. Prod. Sci., 59:277–287. Doi: 10.1071/AN17365. Wilkinson, J. M., Davies, D.R. 2012. The aerobic stability of silage: key findings and recent developments. Grass Forage Sci., 68: 1-19. DOI.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2012.00891. Wilkinson, J.M. 2005. In: Wilkinson, J.M. (Ed.), Silage. Part 6: Assessing Silage Quality. Chapter 19: Analysis and clinical assessment of silage. Chalcombe Publications, UK, pp. 198–208. Wischer, G., Boguhn, J., Steingaß, H., Schollenberger, M.,Rodehutscord, M. 2013.Effects of different tannin-rich extracts and rapeseed tannin monomers on methane formation and microbial protein synthesis in vitro. Animal, 7(11):1796–1805.DOI: 10.1017/S1751731113001481. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 21 Jun, 2022 Read the published version in International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences → Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-1325562","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":86671618,"identity":"413ac787-6d01-4d6b-91a3-5bce426f3062","order_by":0,"name":"Ahmed Mahmoud Elmorsy","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0292-7710","institution":"Agricultural Research Center","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ahmed","middleName":"Mahmoud","lastName":"Elmorsy","suffix":""},{"id":86671619,"identity":"7045a467-514d-47a6-b03a-233c2162b633","order_by":1,"name":"Mohsen Mahmoud Shoukry","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Research Center","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mohsen","middleName":"Mahmoud","lastName":"Shoukry","suffix":""},{"id":86671620,"identity":"26790f7e-1624-4f87-acf9-2fa1075fbd45","order_by":2,"name":"Soliman Mohamed Soliman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Agricultural Research Center","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Soliman","middleName":"Mohamed","lastName":"Soliman","suffix":""},{"id":86671621,"identity":"8319284b-c552-47d7-94f1-94729bd40213","order_by":3,"name":"Mahmoud Mohamed Soliman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Agricultural Research Centre","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mahmoud","middleName":"Mohamed","lastName":"Soliman","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2022-02-03 23:30:02","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-1325562/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1325562/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.26502/ijpaes.202133","type":"published","date":"2022-06-22T00:00:00+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":23830356,"identity":"8f306556-7626-4e77-8852-049d8a99edfd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2022-07-13 19:08:54","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1366403,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-1325562/v1/880326bf-d319-4128-982f-56931e3af520.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eInfluence of Using Pomegranate Peel Silage in Rations of Dairy Cows on Their Productive Performance\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003ePomegranate is a scientific name \u003cem\u003ePunicagranatum\u003c/em\u003e L. from the Punicaceae family; it has been used anciently for medicinal purposes\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e It is extensively cultivated in Iran, Spain, Egypt, Russia, France, Argentina, China, Japan, the USA, and India \u003cstrong\u003e(Patil and Karade, 1996).\u003c/strong\u003e The world's pomegranate production amounts to approximately 8.1 million tons \u003cstrong\u003e(Pienaar, 2021).\u003c/strong\u003e Pomegranate production annually in Egypt could reach approximately 382587 tons \u003cstrong\u003e(Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). \u003c/strong\u003eThe peels (pericarp, rind, or hull) amount to approximately 60 % of the weight of the pomegranate fruit \u003cstrong\u003e(Lansky and Newman, 2007). \u003c/strong\u003eThe evolution of agro-industry has caused increased quantities of by-products such as peels and seeds of the pomegranate\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Reducing the loss of non-ammonia nitrogen and essential amino acids in the small intestine may be attributed to the lowering of protein degradation in the animal rumen \u003cstrong\u003e(Atkinson \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2007).\u003c/strong\u003e Recently, pomegranate by-products have attracted attention. Pomegranate peel is abundant in bioactive compounds, including phenolic compounds, flavonoids, proanthocyanidins, various tannins and ascorbic acid, which are known as secondary plant metabolites\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e These compounds have several beneficial properties, like antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibacterialand antiviral activities. High levels of tannins reduce palatability and protein and carbohydrate\u0026nbsp;digestion, whereas low to moderate levels protect dietary protein from degradation \u003cstrong\u003e(Min \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2003).\u003c/strong\u003e Tannins are two groups: hydrolysable and condensed tannins \u003cstrong\u003e(Li \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2006). \u003c/strong\u003eSo, we can use the pomegranate peel as a source of tannin in the diet to improve the process of rumen fermentation\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Also, \u003cstrong\u003eShabtay\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2008)\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003eSadq\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2016) \u003c/strong\u003eshowed that the growth parameters were increased in animals that fed on rations containing pomegranate peels, which may be attributed to improving immune functions that can potentially affect an animal's health\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The pomegranate biomass is rich in moisture, but if it is not consumed in a short period, it gets mouldy and becomes useless \u003cstrong\u003e(Shabtay\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2008).\u003c/strong\u003e Therefore, using the ensiling is an efficient way to preserve pomegranate peel for use in ruminant rations. High-quality silages are characterized by high concentrations of water-soluble carbohydrates (WSC) and dry matter content of 250\u0026ndash;400g/kg (\u003cstrong\u003eWilkinson, 2005\u003c/strong\u003e)\u003cstrong\u003e. \u003c/strong\u003eThe feed intake, nutrient utilization and milk production of ruminants are affected by the fermentation quality of silages (\u003cstrong\u003eHuhtanen\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2003\u003c/strong\u003e)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Employing several additives (bacterial inoculants, enzymes, etc.) during the ensiling process causes improved aerobic stability and enhances the nutritive value of silage (\u003cstrong\u003eMuck, 2010).\u003c/strong\u003e Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) inoculants are divided into two major groups: homofermentative LAB and heterofermentative LAB\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e They are used as biological additives in silage. Numerous studies have explained that the employment of homofermentative LAB inoculants in plant ensilage caused an excess of lactic acid and low values of acetic acid, butyric acid, ammonia nitrogrn(NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N) and pH of the silage (\u003cstrong\u003eAksu\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2004 andNkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2011\u003c/strong\u003e)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Moreover, the addition of enzymes to characterised ensiling caused the decay of cell walls and increased the availability of WSC that acts as a substrate to LAB\u003cstrong\u003e (Sheperd and Kung, 1996).\u003c/strong\u003e Recycling of the large quantities of by-products of industrial and agricultural in rations of livestock is met with great attention\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e This process contributes to transforming by-products that are misfit for human consumption into useful food for human consumption which contributes to meet the requirements of population growth\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Also, it's lowering environmental pollution, health damage and costs of waste disposal \u003cstrong\u003e(Elkholy\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2009).\u003c/strong\u003e Moreover, it's reduced the acute shortage of feedstuffs in developing countries, and reduces the feeding cost, thus increasing the economic efficiency of animal production \u003cstrong\u003e(Soliman\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2020a).\u003c/strong\u003e This study's objective is to investigate the influence of thepartaily replacement of the whole corn silage by pomegranate peel silage, and the effect of adding the LAB inoculants or enzymes to pomegranate peel silage on nutrient digestibility, rumen parameters, methane production and productivity of dairy cows\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials And Methods ","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study was designed forutilizing the pomegranate peel as silage (PPS) by replacement of the whole corn plant silage (WCS). Firstly, the laboratory study was done. It was prepared two stacks of PPS silage and WCS. PPS was tested at three levels of replacement of WCS, at 25:75, 50:50 and 75:25, respectively.The three different levels of silage were used in forming three rations in the laboratory to determine the optimum level of replacement WCS suitable for ruminant nutrition\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eThe tannin concentrations in the three different rations were 3.49gm,6.92gm and 10.43gm/ kg diet that equivalent 0.69, 1.40 and 2.14% on DM basis,according to \u003cstrong\u003eColombini\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e(\u003cstrong\u003e2009) andHerremans\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2020)\u003c/strong\u003e,the level 50:50 (WCS: PPS) was chosen as the optimum level for dairy cows feeding experiment.This experiment was carried out at NoubariaExperimentalStation, Animal Production Research Institute. Evaluate the effect of adding the lactic acid bacterial inoculants (Inoculant 1188) or enzymes mixed (ZYMOGEN) toPPS on nutrient digestibility, \u003cem\u003ein vivo\u003c/em\u003e rumen parameters, \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e methane production and milk production in dairy cows.\u0026nbsp;The fresh pomegranate peel was obtained from the private El-Marwa Company, 6 October Cityat the end of summer 2019\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The whole corn plant was collected from the Noubaria region at the end of July 2019\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e According to the manufacturer's recommendation, the Inoculant, 1188 (Pioneer\u0026reg;, USA), which contains four strains of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus plantarum\u003c/em\u003e and two strains of \u003cem\u003eEnterococcus faecium\u003c/em\u003e, was applied at a rate of 10 ml/ton.In lactic acid bacteria (LAB), a total of 125 billion colony forming units (CFU) per gram are guaranteed.ZYMOGEN is a liquid mixture of digestive enzymes, such as amylase (1500000 Units), lipase (500000 Units), cellulase (1000000 Units), xylanase (1000000 Units), protease (2500000 Units) and pectinase (20000000 Units) from WISEMED INC \u0026ndash; USA.The approximate chemical analysis of fresh pomegranate peel and whole corn plant before ensiling, the concentrate feed mixture (CFM) and rice straw (RS) used in this experiment are presented in Table (1)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe second experiment has been carried out to prepare four silage stacks; the first silage stack was a WCS as a control group. The second silage stack was made of untreatedPPS.The third silage stacksPPS treated with bacterial inoculants (Pioneer brand 1188). The fourth silage stacksPPS treated with ZYMOGEN. Four stacks were covered separately by double-layered linoleum plastic and pressed with 30 cm of the soil layer. The ensiled materials were compressed by a heavy drum filled with sand to guarantee anaerobic conditions for ensiled for more than two months\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1. Chemical composition of fresh pomegranate peel,whole corn plant, rice straw and concentrate feed mixture on DM basis.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable width=\"577\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCFM*\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ewhole corn plant\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e91.87\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e93.88\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e32 .76\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e30.32\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e23.34\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e04.69\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8.64\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.42\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.17\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e32.25\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e27.39\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.11\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.76\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.23\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.69\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNFE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e57.05\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e47.41\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e56.17\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e61.09\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAsh\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.19\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e13.89\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.57\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.69\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNDF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.95\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e76.06\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e46.17\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e19.68\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.61\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e45.23\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e25.39\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.48\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.01\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.96\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.52\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.59\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTannin g/kg DM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e--\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e--\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e--\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"106\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e92.8\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e* CFM of Composition: 30%yellow corn, 27%wheat bran, 25% soybean meal (47%), 10% undecorticated cottonseed meal (26%), 5% molasses, 2.5% salt Limestone and 0.5%premix.The vitamin and mineral premix per kg contained the followingVitamin A 12 000 000 IU, Vitamin D3 3 000 000 IU, Vitamin E 30 g, Mn 50 g, Fe 52 g, Zn 50 g, Cu 10 g, I 0.8 g, Co 0.1 g, Se 0.15 g and antioxidant 10 g.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e2-1- Silage quality\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSamples from the four stacks were taken after 60 d to determine silage quality and chemical composition. The same volume of water that was used to dissolve the silage additives was added to the first and second treatments to maintain equal moisture. For evaluating the silage quality, silage extract was prepared by homogenizing 30-gram fresh material with 270 ml distilled water, then blending for 10 minutes in a laboratory blender.\u0026nbsp;The homogenized sample was filtered through a Whatman No. 54 filter paper until it becomes clear. The pH value was directly determined using Orion 680 digital pH meter. The lactic acid concentration was measured according to\u003cstrong\u003eAOAC (1990).\u003c/strong\u003eTotal volatile fatty acids (TVFA\u0026rsquo;S) concentration was determined according to \u003cstrong\u003eWarner (1964).\u003c/strong\u003eThe molar proportion of TVFA'S (acetic, propionicand butyric) was measured according to \u003cstrong\u003eBush \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (1979)\u003c/strong\u003eusing High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). NH3-N concentration (ID 941.04) was determined by direct distillation according to the\u003cstrong\u003eAOAC (1990).\u003c/strong\u003eNeutral detergent fibre (NDF), acid detergent fibre (ADF) and acid detergent lignin (ADL) were determined by the procedure of \u003cstrong\u003eVan Soest\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(1991).\u003c/strong\u003e The chemical composition and silage quality of WCS and untreated or treated PPSare shown in Table (2)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e2-2- Experimental dietsand\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003elactationtrials\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwenty lactating crossbred Friesian cows were assigned randomly to four treatments (5 cows / each treatment) stratified by milk yield and live body weight (548 \u0026plusmn; 5.7 kg); each cow has the individual pen.Each group was fed CFM, silage and RS at 50:40:10 (%DM basis), respectively, for each group, to cover their maintenance requirements according to \u003cstrong\u003eNRC (2001)\u003c/strong\u003e recommendationsand requirements for the production that were calculated from the preliminary period and also the milk yield previous according to \u003cstrong\u003eBarney Harris (1992).\u003c/strong\u003eThe first group (control) was fed a ration that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% WCS and 10%. The second group(G1) was fed a ration that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% silage (WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level 50:50) and 10% RS. The third group (G2) was fed a ration that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% silage WCS replaced with PPS treated with bacterial inoculants ˝Pioneer brand 1188ʺ at level 50:50 and 10% RS. The fourth group (G3) was fed a ratio that consisted of 50% CFM, 40% silage (WCS replaced with PPS treated with ZYMOGEN at level 50:50) and 10% RS. The animals were fed twice daily at 8.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M.andwater was available all time. The residual diets were collected and calculated for the estimated feed intakefor each individual cow.Cows were machine milked twice daily at 06:00 and 18:00 pm, from 30 days to 90 day and samples were collected at each milking (1% from total milk of each period). A mixed sample of milk was taken daily. Milk composition (fat, total protein, lactose, and total solids) and somatic cell count (SCC) of milk samples were determined using MilkoScan FT 6000. Average yields of each milk component were calculated for individual cows by multiplying milk yield by the component content (g/kg) of milk. Fat corrected milk (4 %) was calculated according to \u003cstrong\u003eGaines (1923)\u003c/strong\u003e using the following equation:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFCM4% = M (0.4+0.15 F %)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhere M= milk yield, F = fat percentage.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e2-3- Digestibility trials \u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe digestibility trial lasted three weeks as a preliminary period followed by one week as a collection period. Feed intake was recorded daily by weighing the offered rations and refusals from the previous dayfor each cow separately. A nutrient digestibility trial was carried out in which acid insoluble ash was used as an internal indigestibility marker and coefficients of digestion were calculated according to \u003cstrong\u003eFerret \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(1999\u003c/strong\u003e)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eFaecal grab samples were collected from each cow twice daily and then dried at 60 \u0026deg;C in a forced-air oven for 48 h. Faecal samples were ground to pass a 1-mm screen using a Wiley mill (Arthur H. Thomas, Philadelphia, PA, USA), and analyzed for DM, OM, ash, CP and EE according to \u003cstrong\u003eAOAC (1990)\u003c/strong\u003e official methods. NDFand ADF were determined by the procedure of \u003cstrong\u003eVan Soest\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(1991\u003c/strong\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e2-4- Rumen fermentation parameters, microbial nitrogen synthesized and measurement of methane production\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRuminal fluid contents were sampled at 0 times before feeding and at 3 and 6 h after the morning feeding using stomach tubing from cows from day 27 to day 30\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eApproximately 100 ml of rumen fluid were collected from each cow and strained through a polyester screen (pore size of 355 \u0026mu;m). The supernatant was used for determining pH immediately using a glass electrode. Five millilitres of the filtered ruminal fluid were added to 1 ml of 1% sulfuric acid and samples were retained for NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N determination. The concentration of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N in the ruminal contents was determined as described by \u003cstrong\u003eAl-Rabbat\u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (1971).\u003c/strong\u003e The filtered rumen fluid was mixed with 0.2 ml of a solution containing 250 g of metaphosphoric acid/L for TVFA\u0026rsquo;s analysis by titration according to the method of \u003cstrong\u003eWarner (1964).\u003c/strong\u003e Samples were stored at \u0026minus;20 \u0026deg;C until analyses. Concentration and molar proportions of individual VFA were measured by gas-liquid chromatography (model 5890, HP, Little Falls, DE, USA). The separation process was carried out with a capillary column (30 m \u0026times; 0.25 mm internal diameter, 1-m film thickness, SupelcoNukol; Sigma\u0026ndash;Aldrich, ON, Canada) and with flame ionization detection. The column temperature was adjusted to 100 \u0026deg;C for 1 min, then increased by 20 \u0026deg;C/min to 140 \u0026deg;C, then by 8 \u0026deg;C/min to 200 \u0026deg;C and held at this temperature for 5 min. Helium was used as the carrier gas\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe microbial nitrogen\u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003eMN) synthesized was determined according to \u003cstrong\u003eChen and Gomes (1992).\u003c/strong\u003eEquations used to calculate as follows:MN = (70 \u0026times; AP) / (0.83 \u0026times; 0.116 \u0026times; 1000), where 70 represents the amount of N in the purines (mg N/mmol), 0.83 is the digestibility of the microbial purines, and 0.116 is the purine N: total N ratio in ruminal microorganisms. The absorbed microbial purines (AP, mmol/day) are calculated from the total excretion of purine derivatives (PD, mmol/day), using the equation:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;AP = {PD \u0026ndash; (0.385 \u0026times; BW\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e)} / 0.85, where 0.85 is the recovery of absorbed purines as urinary purine derivatives, and 0.385 * BW\u003csup\u003e0.75 \u003c/sup\u003eis the endogenous contribution in the urinary excretion of PD \u003cstrong\u003e(Verbic\u003cem\u003eet al., \u003c/em\u003e1990).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e methane production was determined as described by \u003cstrong\u003eMenke and Steingass, (1988).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e2-5- Plasma metabolites\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt the end of the feeding trial, blood samples (10 ml) were taken by venipuncture from the jugular vein using heparinized vacuum tubes and were stored on ice. Then samples are centrifuged and the serum remains at the top of the tube immediately after the completion of the centrifuge we transfer the serum directly and prepared it for storage at \u0026minus; 20\u0026deg;C until analysis. Blood serum was analyzed for total protein was determined according to \u003cstrong\u003eArmstrong and Carr (1964).\u003c/strong\u003ePlasma albumin was assayed according to \u003cstrong\u003eDoumas\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (1971).\u003c/strong\u003eGlobulin was calculated by subtracting the albumin value from totalprotein.Liver function was assessed by measuring the activities of aspartate transaminase (AST) and alanine transaminase (ALT) were measured with a colorimeter using commercial kits, according to \u003cstrong\u003eReitman and Frankel (1957).\u003c/strong\u003eKidney functionswere evaluated by measuring blood ureaaccording to the method of \u003cstrong\u003eSiest\u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (1981\u003c/strong\u003e) andcreatinine was measured with a colorimeter using commercial kits, according to the method of \u003cstrong\u003eFolin (1994).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e2-6- Statistical analysis\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData were analyzed as a completely randomizeddesign with repeated measures using the PROC MIXEDprocedure of SAS\u003cstrong\u003e(SAS, 2000).\u003c/strong\u003eStatistical processes were carried out using the General Linear. The model describing each trait was assumed to be:\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYijkl = \u0026micro; + Ti + a (T) IJ+ WK+ Eijkl.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhere:Yijkl= Parameter under analysis; \u0026micro; = Overall mean; Ti = The fixed effect of treatment; a (T) IJ = The random effect of animal (j) nested within treatment (i); WK = The fixed effect of week when K = 1, 2,\u0026hellip;.,8; Eijkl = random error. Significant differences among means were separated using Duncan multiple range tests\u003cstrong\u003e(Duncan, 1955).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e3-1- Silage quality\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results obtained from laboratory studies illustrate that the optimum level of replacement of PPStoWCSwas 50:50. This level contains an adequate amount of tannins suitable for ruminant nutrition. Data of the chemical composition and silage quality of untreated or treated PPS and WCS are shown in Table (2)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003ePPS treated with inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN led to significant increases (P\u0026lt;0.05) in the contents of CP, EE and NFE. While, the contents of CF, ash, NDF and ADF were significantly decreased (P\u0026lt;0.05) compared to WCS. Adding inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN to PPS improved CP by increasing it while NDF and ADF decreased. On the other hand, there were no significant changes in values of OM between all groups\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e \u0026nbsp;PPS treated with inoculant had the lowest values(P\u0026lt;0.05) \u0026nbsp;of pH and concentrations of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N, acetic acid, propionic acid, and butyric acid (11.74, 15.67, 14.6, 18.06, and 20.4%, respectively) compared to WCS, whereas concentrations of lactic acid were higher (P\u0026lt; 0.05) in PPS treated with inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN (22.22% and 11.77%, respectively) compared to WCS,\u0026nbsp; On the other hand, the values of acetic, propionic and butyric acid were decreased (P\u0026lt;0.05) in PPS treated with inoculant (9.74, 14.06and 17.77%, respectively) whilethe values of lactic acid were increased (15.51%) compared to untreated PPS. Data on the chemical composition of the experimental rations fed to cows is shown in Table (3)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The chemical composition of rations fed to cows in G3 and G4 showed improvement and low tannin concentration compared to G1\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2. Means for chemical composition and fermentation characteristics of treated or untreated silages (n = 5).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable width=\"621\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUntreated WCS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUntreated\u0026nbsp; PPS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePPS treated with inoculant 1188\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePPS\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003etreated with\u0026nbsp; ZYMOGEN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSEM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e30.41\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e28.04\u003csup\u003e b\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e29.62\u003csup\u003e a\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e29.86\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.248\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.021\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e93.64\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e93.35\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e94.03\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e94.18\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.275\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.714\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.86\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.38\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.07\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.92\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.222\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26.53\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.61\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.25\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.91\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.933\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.58\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.45\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.41\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.38\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.189\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNFE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e56.67\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e61.91\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e62.30\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e62.97\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.678\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.018\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAsh\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.36\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.65\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.97\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.82\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.110\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.019\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNDF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e43.65\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.57\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.25\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.72\u003csup\u003ed\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.650\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26.02\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.54\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e14.48\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e13.36\u003csup\u003ed\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.187\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"7\" width=\"621\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSilage quality\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.93\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.77\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.47\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.53\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.076\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLactic acid % DM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8.99\u003csup\u003ed\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.51\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.99\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.05\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.300\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcetic acid % DM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.56\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.48\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.33\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.39\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.085\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePropionic acid %DM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.107\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.102\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.088\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.094\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eButyric acid% DM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.050\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.048\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.040\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.044\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"132\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N % of TN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"90\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8.87\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"97\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.94\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.48\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.86\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.160\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003ea,b,c and, d\u003c/sup\u003eMeans within the same rows with different superscripts are significantly different (P\u0026lt;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWCS: whole corn silage.\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; PPS: pomegranate peel silage.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3.Chemical composition of the experimental rations\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable width=\"603\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e67.41\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e66.99\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e68.06\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e68.39\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.44\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.74\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.06\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.90\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.85\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.25\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.21\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.19\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAsh\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.4\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.73\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.43\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.49\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNDF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e33.01\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e28.01\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26.69\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26.08\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e19.40\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.71\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.75\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.39\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.22\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.22\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.10\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.04\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"158\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTanning/kg diet DM \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.23\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e13.48\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"113\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.98\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"104\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.31\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eControl: ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS and 10% RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG1: second group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG2 third group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with bacteria inoculants PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG3 fourth group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with ZYMOGEN PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e3-2- Dry matter intake and digestibility coefficients\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDry matter (DM) intake, digestibility coefficients and nutritive values are presented in Table (4). The results showed that treated PPS replacement by WCS led to an improvement in DM intake. The results were close to those fed a diet containing WCS and enhanced palatability compared to untreated PPS\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Also, cows fed PPS treated with enzyme or inoculant had higher digestibility of DM, OM, CP, EE, NDF, TDN,ADF and DCP% compared to cows fed untreated PPS and WCS\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4. Daily feed intake, digestibility coefficients (%) and nutritive values (%) of diets to cows.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable width=\"631\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSEM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDMI kg/head/day\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.01\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.87\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.02\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.09\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.057\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.047\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"7\" width=\"631\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDigestibility coefficients\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e67.42\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e66.12\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e70.40\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e71.10\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.473\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e68.86\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e68.04\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e72.13\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e72.56\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.445\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.023\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e63.72\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e64.03\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e66.96\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e67.82\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.429\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.008\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e71.93\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e72.82\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e74.34\u003csup\u003eab\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e75.77\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.342\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNDF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e59.09\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e58.87\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e62.11\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e62.85\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.433\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eADF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e60.24\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e59.59\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e63.33\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e63.56\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.432\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"7\" width=\"631\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNutritive value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTDN\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e64.58\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e65.75\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e67.34\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e68.96\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.387\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.009\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDCP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.84\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.08\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.75\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e10.78\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.093\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003ea and b\u003c/sup\u003eMeans within the same rows with different superscripts are significantly different (P\u0026lt;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eControl: ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS and 10% RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG1: second group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG2 third group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with bacteria inoculants PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG3 fourth group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with ZYMOGEN PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e3-3- Rumen fermentation\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRumen liquor parameters of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental rations are presented in Table (5)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Results revealed that addingZYMOGEN or lactic acid bacterial inoculant to PPS led to decreaseruminal pH values and NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N concentrations, which were in the normal range for microorganism growth, while the values of TVFA\u0026rsquo;s, acetic acid and acetic: propionic were significantly (P\u0026lt; 0.05) increased with diets G2 and G3, but the highest value was recorded with G3, including\u0026nbsp;treated with ZYMOGEN. Despite the ZYMOGEN or lactic acid bacteriainoculants enhanced OM digestibility, the increase in microbial protein synthesis was not significant. Microbial protein synthesis was shown to have a numerical increase with diet G2 than with other diets\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Replacement of WCS with PP resulted in a significant (P \u0026lt;0.05) decrease in methane emissions in G1, G2 and G3 (20.33, 17.72 and 16.24%, respectively), whereas ZYMOGEN or lactic acid bacteriaadditives had no effect on methane production when compared to G1\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5. The overall mean of rumen liquor parameters of lactating cows fed the experimental rations.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable width=\"640\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSEM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.75\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.63\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.21\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e6.26\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.102\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNH3-N concentration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(mg/100 mlR.L)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8.83\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8.11\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.80\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e8.06\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.161\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTVFA concentration\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(meq/100 mlR.L)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.57\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.98\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e13.79\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e14.21\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.351\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcetic acid, %\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e58.99\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e59.81\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e63.71\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e64.57\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.217\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePropionic acid, %\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.41\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.54\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e23.03\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.96\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.398\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.842\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcetic /propionic ratio\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.65\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.66\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.79\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.83\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.064\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.035\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethane production at 24h\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.45\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.53\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.78\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.92\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.166\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"187\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMicrobial protein synthesis (g/d)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e55.84\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e55.15\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e56.18\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e55.73\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.222\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.876\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003ea,b and c\u003c/sup\u003e Means within the same rows with different superscripts are significantly different (P\u0026lt;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOverall mean values of 0, 3, 6 h after feeding.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eControl: ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS and 10% RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG1: second group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG2 third group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with bacteria inoculants PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eG3 fourth group fed ration consisted of 50% CMF, 40% silage WCS replaced with treated with ZYMOGEN PPS at level (50 :50) and 10%RS.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e3-4- Milk production and milk composition\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe average daily milk yield and milk composition of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental diets are presented in Table (6). Cows fed on diets containing 50%WCS and50% PPS treated with ZYMOGEN have the highest daily milk yield, 4% FCM yield and milk composition of fat followed by those fed diets containing WCS and PPS treated with inoculant\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e While, cows fed the diets containing untreated PPSwere recorded the lowest milk yield, 4% FCM yield and fat\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Moreover, there were no significant differences in values of lactose, TS and SNF between all groups\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The value of SCC recorded normal values, but the cows fed diets containing untreated or treated PPS recorded the lowest (P\u0026lt;0.05) values compared with control\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6. Milk production and milk composition of crossbredcowsfed\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e the experimental rations.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable width=\"593\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSEM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMilk yield \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(kg/h/d)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.02\u003csup\u003eab\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.76\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.12\u003csup\u003eab\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.34\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.139\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.031\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4% FCM \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(kg/d/h)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.05\u003csup\u003eab\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16.54\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.46\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.78\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.265\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.024\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFat (\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ekg/d/h\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.66\u003csup\u003eab\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.63\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.68\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.69\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.015\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"7\" width=\"593\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMilk composition (%):\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFat %\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.65\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.54\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.72\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.76\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.071\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.025\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProtein %\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.43\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.49\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.68\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.71\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.097\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLactose\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.56\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.49\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.67\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.68\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.105\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.021\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal solids\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.80\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.77\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.91\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e12.95\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.194\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.649\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSolid not fat\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.15\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.23\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.19\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.19\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.159\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.712\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"138\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSCC\u0026times;10\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e/ml\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"87\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e88.54\u003csup\u003e a\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e81.26\u003csup\u003e b\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e80.80\u003csup\u003e b\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"85\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e81.07\u003csup\u003e b\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.825\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ea and bmeans inthe same row with different superscriptsarediffersignificantly (P\u0026lt;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e3-5- Plasma metabolites\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBlood plasma constituents of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental rations are shown in Table (7). Serum total protein, albumin and globulin concentrations were higher (P\u0026lt;0.05) in G3 (9.1, 7.0 and 12.1%, respectively) than in controls. On the other hand, values of liver functions (AST and ALT) and kidney functions (urea and creatinine) were within normal values for all groups and had no significant effects between all groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 7\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBlood parameters of crossbred cows fed the experimental rations.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable width=\"574\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSEM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eP-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal protein,\u0026nbsp; g/dl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.13\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.27\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.67\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7.78\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.100\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAlbumin, g/dl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.24\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.32\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.49\u003csup\u003e a\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.54\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.083\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.019\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGlobulin, g/dl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.89\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.96\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.18\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.24\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.044\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAST, U/l\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e38.28\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e40.08\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e39.30\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e39.06\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.521\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.776\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eALT, U/l\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e21.62\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.57\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.05\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e22.21\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.246\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.794\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUrea, mg/dl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e41.57\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e42.04\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e42.94\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e43.19\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.655\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.842\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"149\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCreatinine, mg/dl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"81\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.04\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.09\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.06\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"76\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.03\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"59\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.028\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"57\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.715\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003ea and b\u003c/sup\u003e means in the same row with different superscripts are differ significantly (P\u0026lt; 0.05).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e3-6- Economic efficiency\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe economic efficiency of lactating Friesian cows fed the experimental diets is shown in Table 8. The results showed that cows fed diets G2 and G3 were more efficient in producing higher milk yields with lower daily feed costs and, as a result, lower net revenue when compared to the control. In addition, when compared to the control, economic efficiency increased to 10.3, 10.5 and 12.2% in G1, G2and G3, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 8. Economic efficiency for lactating cows fed the experimental rations.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eItem\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eG3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"5\" width=\"599\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDaily feed intake (kg/head /day\u0026nbsp; )\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConcentrate feed mixture\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.23\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.22\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.25\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e9.24\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSilage\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e21.98\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e21.41\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e21.85\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e21.92\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRice straw\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.80\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.79\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.81\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.80\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTotal feed intake\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e33.01\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e32.42\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e32.91\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e32.96\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"5\" width=\"599\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEconomic efficiency\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMilk yield (kg/head/day)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.02\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e17.76\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.20\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e18.44\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDaily feed cost (LE /head/day)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e61.12\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e56.50\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e57.70\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e57.90\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrice of daily milk yield (LE)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e180.2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e177.6\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e182.0\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e184.4\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNet revenue\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e119.1\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e121.2\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e124.3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e126.5\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"221\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEconomic efficiency%\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e194.8\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e214.8\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"95\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e215.3\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"94\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e218.6\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFree market prices (LE/ton) for the corn silage = 600 LE.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFree market prices (LE/ton) for the pomegranate peel silage untreated = 200 LE.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFree market prices (LE/ton) for the inoculants treated silage mixture = 440 LE.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFree market prices (LE/ton) for the enzymes treated silage mixture = 450 LE.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFree market prices (LE/ton) for Rice straw =1000E.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFree market prices (LE/ton) for CFM = 5000 LE.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFree market prices (LE/kg) for milk yield 4% fat = 10 LE.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccording to the year 2020 market price.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e4-1- Silage quality\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSince the pomegranate peel is containing tannin that considered as antinutrition factors that effect of animal performance.\u003cstrong\u003eMakkar(2003\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e illustrated that tannin at higher levels than 50 g kg\u0026minus;1 DM had a negative effect on palatability of feed intake or animal performance\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eThe purpose of silage is to preserve feed with many of the nutrients present in the original fresh forage as possible \u003cstrong\u003e(Wilkinson and Davies, 2012).\u003c/strong\u003e Therefore, biological additives were used during ensiling to speed the fermentation process and raise of lactic acid concentration led to speed reduction in silage pH and thus improving silage preservation \u003cstrong\u003e(McDonald \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2002).\u003c/strong\u003e A pH range of 3.7-4.2 is generally considered beneficial for whole-crop cereal preservation \u003cstrong\u003e(Kung and Shaver, 2001)\u003c/strong\u003e and in the presentstudy; pH was less than 3.93, indicative of well-preserved silage\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eThe results obtained from PPS treated with inoculant 1188 or treated with ZYMOGEN are supported by the findings of various scientists \u003cstrong\u003e(Nkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2012)\u003c/strong\u003e whoobserved that treating silage with inoculant led to a decrease in pH value\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Also, \u003cstrong\u003eKung and Muck (1997)\u003c/strong\u003e reported that pH was reduced when silages were treated with enzymes. In contrast \u003cstrong\u003eOzduven\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2017)\u003c/strong\u003e reported an increase in pH when adding bacterial inoculants to sunflower silage\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The addition of bacterial inoculants to corn silage had no effect on the pH value \u003cstrong\u003e(Reich and Kung, 2010).\u003c/strong\u003eThe addition of additive inoculates 1188 to PPS silage led to an increase in the concentration of lactic acid while decreasing acetic acid. The same trend was observed with silage treated with ZYMOGEN. This may be because the silage additive improved the lactic: acetic ratio. These results supported the extent of pH decline and are consistent with \u003cstrong\u003eNkosi\u003cem\u003eet al. \u003c/em\u003e(2011).\u003c/strong\u003e In contrast, \u003cstrong\u003eFilya (2003)\u003c/strong\u003e found that lactic acid concentration decreased in inoculated maize silage compared to untreated silage.The reduction of pH values and increase of lactic acid values in PPS treated with inoculant or ZYMOGEN may be attributed to an increase in carbohydrate fermentation and hydrolysis of hemicellulose by lactic acid bacteria while ZYMOGEN could partially digest the plant cell walls (cellulose and hemicellulose). These results were in agreement with others \u003cstrong\u003eNkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2015)andKung(2014)\u003c/strong\u003ewho explained that addition of enzymes or inoculant to silage led to the enhancement degrade cell wall and increase the availability of WCS that serve as substrate for LAB and decreased the concentration of acetic, propionic and butyric acids\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eAmmonia-N concentration in silage is an indicator of the degree of protein degradation which impairs the nutritive value of forages and causes adverse effects on the utilization of nitrogen by ruminants \u003cstrong\u003e(Wilkinson, \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2005).\u003c/strong\u003e NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026ndash;N as a percentage of DM should be less than 10% of total nitrogen (TN)\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eIn the present study, we had anNH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026ndash;N concentration of less than 10% NH3-N/kg TN\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e This confirms that silage additives have a positive effect on rapid reduction of pH values, which leads to the desirable reduction of protein degradation in the silo\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e(McDonald \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2010 andNkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2010).\u003c/strong\u003eThe inclusion of PPS in replace about 50% of the WCS had a considerable effect on the reduction of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026ndash;N concentration and increase in silage CPthat may be attributed to the presence of tannin in pomegranate peel. Tannin during the silage fermentation process protects forage proteins from degradation by forming complexes with proteins \u003cstrong\u003e(Kondo \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2004).\u003c/strong\u003eMoreover, treating PPS with inoculant or ZYMOGEN led to improvement in the reduction of ammonia concentration and increased CP\u003cstrong\u003e (McDonald \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. 2002).\u003c/strong\u003eIn addition, the use of inoculant or ZYMOGEN in PPS silage was enhanced to degrade the cell wall and reduce the fiber fraction (NDF and ADF)\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e In particular, the addition of ZYMOGEN had more effect on the degradation of cell wall and the hydrolysis of cellulose and hemicellulose\u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAddah\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2016\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ea\u003c/strong\u003end\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eLynch \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e.2015)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eWhile, inoculant had little ability to degrade plant cell wall\u003cstrong\u003e(Nkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2012)\u003c/strong\u003e, but decreases in fiber fraction may be due to efficiency in the hydrolysis of hemicellulose\u003cstrong\u003e(Islam \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. 2001).\u003c/strong\u003e These results are supported by previous studies done by \u003cstrong\u003eNkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2011),Nkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2015)and Dean\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2005).\u003c/strong\u003e It was suggested that the inoculants or enzyme additions caused degraded structural carbohydrates and improved fiber degradation during silage fermentation\u003cstrong\u003e(Dean \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2005).\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e4-2- Dry matter intake and digestibility\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe improvement in DMI of G2 and G3 may be related to silage treated with inoculant 1188 or ZYMOGEN, respectively, which caused improved silage characteristics, thus improving palatability\u003cstrong\u003e. \u003c/strong\u003eThe improvement in DMI of G2 and G3 is in agreement with the results of other researchers \u003cstrong\u003eNkosi\u003cem\u003eet al,\u003c/em\u003e(2011) \u003c/strong\u003eand\u003cstrong\u003eAbedo\u003cem\u003eet al,\u003c/em\u003e(2013)\u003c/strong\u003e who found that treated silage with inoculant led to a significant increase in feed consumption compared to untreated silage, while, \u003cstrong\u003eRomero\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2016)\u003c/strong\u003e recorded a significant increase when adding exogenous fibrolytic enzymesto corn silage\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eThe study showed a considerable improvement in digestibility coefficients as a result of adding both inoculant 1188 and ZYMOGEN to the PPS,that may be attributed to adding the bacterial inoculants, or enzyme which contributed to improved digestibility of DM, OM and CP\u003cstrong\u003eRomero \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2016) \u003c/strong\u003eobserved improvement in digestibility of DM, CP, NDF, ADF and ADL in silage treated with enzymes may be attributed to the effect of enzymes on the degraded cell wall during ensilage\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The improvement in CP digestibility in treated or un-treated silage containing PPS could be due to an improvement in the fermentation quality of duringensilages by reducing proteolysis and nitrogen losses, which led to anincrease level of CP in the diets, thus improving the efficiency of protein utilization \u003cstrong\u003e(Wilkinson, 2005 and McDonald \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2002).\u003c/strong\u003e Since the presence of tannin in pomegranate peel. Tannins have been shown to benefit from binding with diet proteins, reducing rumen degradability, increasing enzymes intestinal digestibility and improving nitrogen utilization efficiency \u003cstrong\u003e(Getachew\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2000 andMin\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2003). Doce\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2007)\u003c/strong\u003e reported that the presence of tannins in the rumen of animals at levels up to 1.5% of DM did not cause negative effects on digestibility\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Moreover, \u003cstrong\u003eMcSweeney\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (1999)\u003c/strong\u003e and \u003cstrong\u003eOtt\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2005)\u003c/strong\u003e showed that the fermentation process decreases the levels of tannins in silages, thus animals have not been negatively affected by the tannins in silage. TDN and DCP values were higher in G2 and G3 than in other groups\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The increase in TDN can be attributed to higher digestibility coefficients in rations containing treated PPS, while the increase in DCP can be attributed to better protein utilization efficiency by passing dietary protein from the rumen to the abomasum (\u003cstrong\u003ePatra and Saxena, 2011).\u003c/strong\u003e The current study's improvement in nutritional values and digestibility coefficients is consistent with other studies that have found adding that biological additives to agricultural or agro-industrial by-products during ensilage may beimproved nutritive values and digestibility coefficients for most nutrients \u003cstrong\u003e(Nkosi\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2015 ؛Soliman\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2016 and El-Morsy\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2018).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e4-3- Rumen fermentation\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results of ruminal pH ranged from 6.21 to 6.75. These levels are suitable for the normal function of cellulites bacteria and pH should be 6.4 to 7.0 according to \u003cstrong\u003eWanapat and Cherdthong (2009).\u003c/strong\u003e The diets that contained untreated or treated pomegranate silage led to a reduction in NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N that may be due to protection of dietary protein from ruminal degradation \u003cstrong\u003e(Jalč\u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2013 and Atkinson \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2007).\u003c/strong\u003e A high level of tannins in pomegranate peel may play an important role in the reduction in rumen ammonia production because tannins have the ability to formed tannin-protein binding that is more stable in the rumen and resistant to degradation by rumen microorganisms at pH 5.0 to 7.0\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e However, it dissociates in gastric juice (abomasum pH 2-3) (\u003cstrong\u003eOh and Hoff, 1987).\u003c/strong\u003eAlso, \u003cstrong\u003eSoliman\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2020b)\u003c/strong\u003ereported that feeding ruminants with diets containing flavonoids led to a reduction in rumen ammonia production as a consequence of a decrease in protein degradation. Moreover, treated silage with inoculants or ZYMOGEN led to a greater reduction of NH3\u0026ndash;N concentration compared to diets that contained untreated PPS or corn silage\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e According to \u003cstrong\u003eMakkar (2003),\u003c/strong\u003e this may be attributed to the improvement of fermentation quality of the silages by reducing proteolysis and nitrogen losses.Increased values of rumen TVFA's,acetic acid and acetic: propionic acid in diets G2 and G3 than in G1 and control diets may be due to improvement in DM or OM digestibility and increased degradation of cellulose and hemicellulose during ensilage. These results are in agreement with\u003cstrong\u003eJatkauskas and Vrotniakiene(2006).\u003c/strong\u003e The microbial protein synthesis in the current study showed insignificant improvement in G2 compared to other groups\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e This is in agreement with \u003cstrong\u003eBasso \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2014)\u003c/strong\u003e who showed that improvement of silage protein by LAB inoculant increased ruminal microbial protein synthesis. The microbial protein synthesis was not affected by pomegranate peel, which probably has an impact on reducing NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N concentration as a result of containing tannin, but the NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N concentration was still sufficient for microbial protein synthesis\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e These results are in agreement with those of \u003cstrong\u003eWischer\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2013)\u003c/strong\u003e who found that adding tannin to silage did not affect microbial protein synthesis. Several studies have been done to reduce methane emissions by feed additives. Tannin is one of the additives that have been used as an important substrate for reducing methane \u003cstrong\u003e(Jayanegara\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2015 andWei\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2019).\u003c/strong\u003e In the present study, it was observed that CH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e emissions decreased in cows fed diets containing treated or untreated PPS. This may be attributed to PPS having an amount of tannin. These results are consistent with previous results (\u003cstrong\u003eAboagye\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2018\u003c/strong\u003eand\u003cstrong\u003eStewart\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2019)\u003c/strong\u003ewho emphasis that tannins reduce CH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e production and may therefore inhibit methanogenesis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e4-4- Milk production and milk composition\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegardless effect of pomegranate peel on decreased palatability and DMI as a consequence of the presence of tannins, which\u0026nbsp;bind\u0026nbsp;with saliva proteins\u0026nbsp;while,\u0026nbsp;the addition of\u0026nbsp;ZYMOGEN\u0026nbsp;(\u003cstrong\u003eRomero \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2016) \u003c/strong\u003eor inoculants (\u003cstrong\u003eSoliman, 2014)\u003c/strong\u003e to the PPS had a positive effect on increased voluntary DMI\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;These\u0026nbsp;results\u0026nbsp;are in\u0026nbsp;agreement with \u003cstrong\u003eKung\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2018)\u003c/strong\u003e who observed that DMI increased with silage\u0026nbsp;containing\u0026nbsp;a lower percentage of acetic acid\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eDairy cows fed diets that contained PPS treated with ZYMOGENor inoculantas well as those fed diet containing WCS had a positive effect on milk yield, 4% FCM and fatcomposition compared to fed diet containing un-treated PPS which may be attributed to the improvement in palatability and DMI\u003cstrong\u003e(Oliveira \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2017)\u003c/strong\u003e, nutrients digestibility (\u003cstrong\u003eMorand-Fehr \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2000\u003c/strong\u003e) and rumen fermentation especially VFAs \u003cstrong\u003e(Huhtanen\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2003) \u003c/strong\u003econsequence to improve silage characteristics\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Also, \u003cstrong\u003eMorand-Fehr \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2000\u003c/strong\u003e) showed that a higher level of energy intake leads to greater production of milk by the animal\u003cstrong\u003e.Abido\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2007)\u003c/strong\u003e reported that fed lactating buffaloes on maize silage treated with inoculated led toincreased daily milk yield, FCM (4%) and milk contents of fat and lactose\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eMoreover,\u003cstrong\u003ePeymanfar and Kermanshahi(2012)\u003c/strong\u003e reported that treating forages with the fibrolytic enzyme improvement the milk yield and fat composition compared to untreatedas result to increasing feed intake, fibre degradation and digestibility of nutrients.Furthermore, \u003cstrong\u003eSchmidely\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2005)\u003c/strong\u003efound\u0026nbsp;that the increasing degradation of fiber fractions led to an increase in acetic acid that reflects an increase in fat milk composition\u003cstrong\u003e.Abedo\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2013)\u003c/strong\u003e showed that feeding the goats with biological inoculated corn silage led to increase milk protein and lactose synthesis may be attributed to an increase in the amino acid levels and ruminal microbial protein synthesis, those contributing to increases in overall production.The improvement of milk protein in cows fed diets containing PPS may be attributed to tannins of pomegranate peel is agree with several studies explained that inclusion of tannin in the diet of lactating ruminant led to increased milk protein and lactose percentages \u003cstrong\u003e(Liu, \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2013 \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eand\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAguerre\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2016)\u003c/strong\u003e, this is attributed to tannin has a role in enhancing protein utilization during digestion and induce improvements in milk production \u003cstrong\u003e(Min \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2005).\u003c/strong\u003eSomatic Cell Count (SCC) is secreted in milk during cows milking and is a general indicator of udder health and milk quality\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Generally, when ranged an amount of SCC less than 200,000 cells /ml it indicates that animals are healthy and not infected with mastitis, reported by \u003cstrong\u003eRuben (2003).\u003c/strong\u003eIn the present study, each cow had a cell count less than 200,000 cells/ml. The cows fed PPS had the lowest significance, which could be due to the fact that pomegranate peel contains a lot of bioactive chemicals\u003cstrong\u003e(Mariana \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2019).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e4-5- Plasma metabolites\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIncreased concentrations of serum total protein, albumin, and globulin in cows fed diets containing PPS\u0026nbsp;may be attributed to improving the utilization of CP and increasing the number of amino acids available for absorption in the intestine \u003cstrong\u003e(Min \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eet al.,\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e 2003)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eAlso, \u003cstrong\u003eAbido\u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e. (2007)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e found that the addition of lactic acid bacteria inoculants to silage resulted in enhanced silage quality with no deleterious effects on liver or kidney function\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Thus, serum AST and ALT values were within normal limits in all the groups that corresponded with \u003cstrong\u003ePithayanukul\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2009)\u003c/strong\u003ewhofound that supplementing with 2000 mg/kg body weight tannin extracts from Areca catechu or nutgalls seeds had no effect on blood indices or liver and kidney function\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e The higher serum urea in diets G2 and G3 comp may be attributed to an increase in protein percentage in the diet as well as an increase in digestible CP intake \u003cstrong\u003e(Balikci\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2007).\u003c/strong\u003e Increased urea values in cows fed PPS\u0026nbsp;may be attributed to the low ruminal ammonia concentration, and greater intestinal absorption of amino acids, leading to increase serum urea content\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e This is consistent with \u003cstrong\u003eMin \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e(2003)\u003c/strong\u003e who reported that the presence of tannins in the rumen decreased protein degradation by ruminal microorganisms, which increases the dietary protein absorbed in the intestines. When compared to control cows, the liver and kidney functions of the PPS-fed cows did not reveal any negative impacts\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eIt could be due to the high quantity of phenolic and flavonoids,\u0026nbsp;in pomegranate peel \u003cstrong\u003e(Li \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2006).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e4-6- Economic efficiency\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOur results indicated an improvement in values of net revenue and economic efficiency % in G2 and G3 compared with G1 and control\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e This improvement may be attributed to increased milk production and lower daily feed costs\u003cstrong\u003e.Abido\u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2007)\u003c/strong\u003e demonstrated that lactating buffaloes fed inoculated maize silage improved economic efficiency compared to the untreated silage\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Numerous studies have found that adding biological additives\u0026nbsp;to agricultural by-products and agro-industrial by-products in ruminant diets can reduce feed costs and, as a result, increase the economic efficiency of livestock production \u003cstrong\u003e(Soliman\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2020a and Soliman\u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2016).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, results obtained in this study showed that pomegranate peel silage can be used safely as good roughage during the feeding of dairy cows at a level 20% of dietary DM\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eThe addition of enzymes mixed (ZYMOGEN) or lactic acid bacterial inoculants (Inoculant 1188) during ensilage of pomegranate peel caused improvements in fermentation and nutritive quality silage\u003cstrong\u003e,\u003c/strong\u003eand, it's nutritive values\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003eIt's contributed to increasing productive performance of cows and decreased feed cost, and subsequently leads to higher net revenue and economic efficiency\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003ctable\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePP\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003epomegranate peel\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePPS\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003epomegranate peel silage\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCFM\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003econcentrate feed mixture\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRS\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003erice straw\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWCS\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ewhole corn plant silage\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDM\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003edry matter\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOM\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eorganic matter\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCP\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ecrude protein\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEE\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eether extract\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNDF\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eneutral detergent fiber\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eADF\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eacid detergent fiber\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eADL\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eacid Detergent Lignin\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWSC\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ewater-soluble carbohydrates\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLAB\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003elactic acid bacteria\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNH3-N\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eammonia- nitrogen\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAST\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003easpartate transaminase\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eALT\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ealanine transaminase\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eZYMOGEN\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eenzymes mixed\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInoculant 1188\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003elactic acid bacterial inoculants\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTVFA\u0026rsquo;s\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003etotal volatile fatty acid\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4% FCM\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003efat corrected milk (4 %)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCFU\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ecolony-forming units\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTS\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003etotal solids percent\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSNF\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003esolid not fat\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTDN\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003etotal digestible nutrients\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"140\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDCP\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"425\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003edigestible crude protein\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe thank our colleagues who do not meet all criteria for authorship for helping me during the experimental work and accomplish this research. Also, I go my special gratitude goes to the staff in the Noubaria Experimental Station of the Animal Production Research Institute - Agricultural Research Center - Dokki - Egypt for help to facilitate this experimental work\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eFunding:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eConflicts of interest:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eEthics approval:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis experimental study was approved all procedures involving animals by the researchers committee of Regional Centre for Food and Feed, Agriculture Research Centre, Ministry of Agriculture, Egypt. Approval number: 00017/2019.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eConsent to participate:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe sections are not relevant to our manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eConsent for publication:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe sections are not relevant to our manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eAvailability of data and material:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors are support all journal requests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eCode availability:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors are support all journal requests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eAuthor Contribution:\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Ahmed Mahmoud El-Morsy((first draft of the manuscripts designed the experimentation, writing the manuscripts, analysis computational and correspondence)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Mohsen Mahmoud Shoukry((interpretation of data, reviewing and editing)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Soliman Mohamed Soliman((designed the experimentation, interpretation of data, test in vivo, writing the manuscripts, analysis mathematical)).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Mahmoud Mohamed Soliman((writing the manuscripts, tests in vitro and statistical analysis)).All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbedo, A.A., Hafez, Y.H., Khalifa, E. I., Mohamed, Bahera, K., El-Zolak, O.A. 2013. Milk yield and composition of dairy Zaraibi goats fed microbial inoculated corn silage. Egyptian J. of Sheep and Goat Scie. 8 (1):141-151. DOI: 10.21608/EJSGS.2013.26780.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbido, A.M., Soliman, H.S., Hamza, A. S., Kholif, S.M., Elsayed, H.M.,Abd-Elaziz, A.S. 2007. Effect of maize silage inoculated by bacteria on performance of lactating buffaloes. Int. J. of Dairy Scie, 2(4): 330-338. DOI: 10.3923/ijds.2007.330.338.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAboagye, I.A., Oba, M., Castillo, A.R., Koenig, K.M., Iwaasa, A.D.,Beauchemin K.A. 2018. Effects of hydrolyzable tannin with or without condensed tannin on methane emissions, nitrogen use and performance of beef cattle fed a high-forage diet. J. Anim. Sci. 96:5276\u0026ndash;5286.DOI: 10.1093/jas/sky352.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAddah, W., Baah, J., McAllister, T.A. 2016.Effects of an exogenous enzyme-containing inoculant on fermentation characteristics of barley silage and on growth performance of feedlot steers, Can. J. Anim. Sci., 96: 1-10.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAguerre, M.J., Capozzolo, M.C., Lencioni, P., Cabral, C.,Wattiaux, M.A. 2016. Effect of 2-tier crude feed protein quebracho-chestnut tannin extracts on performance, ruminal fermentation and nitrogen distribution in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 99:4476\u0026ndash;4486. DOI.org/10.3168/jds.2015-10745.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAksu, T., Baytok, E.,Bolat, D. 2004.Effects of a bacterial silage inoculant on corn silage fermentation and nutrient digestibility. Small Ruminant Research, 55: 249-252.DOI.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2003.12.012.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAl-Rabbat, M.F., Baldwin, R.L., Weir, W.C. 1971.\u003cem\u003eIn vitro\u003c/em\u003e nitrogen-treacer technique for some kinetic measures of rumen ammonia. J. Dairy Sci., 54(8): 1150-1161. DOI.org/10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(71)85993-3.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAOAC 1990.Official Methods of Analysis.15th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington D.C., USA.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArmstrong, W.D., Carr, C.W. 1964. PhysiologicalChemistry, 3rd ed. pp., 75 Burges Publishing CO., Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAtkinson, R.L., Toone, C.D.,Ludden, P.A. 2007. Effects of supplemental ruminally degradable protein versus increasing amounts of supplemental ruminallyundegradable protein on site and extent of digestion and ruminal characteristics in lambs fed low- quality forage. J. Anim. Sci., 85: 3322-3330. DOI: 10.2527/jas.2006-417.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBalikci, E., Yildiz, A.,Gurdogan, F. 2007. Blood metabolite concentrations during pregnancy and post-partum in Akkaraman ewes.Small Rum. Res., 67: 247-251. DOI: 10.1016/J.SMALLRUMRES.2005.10.011.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarney Harris jr., 1992.Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. This document is Fact Sheet DS 38, of the Dairy Production Guide, originally published as part of Circular 594, Florida Cooperative Extension Service.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBasso, F.C., Adesogan, A.T., Lara, E.C., Rabelo, C.H.S., Berchielli, T.T., Teixeira, I.A.M.A., Siqueira, G.R., Reis, R.A.2014. Effects of feeding corn silage inoculated with microbial additives on the ruminal fermentation, microbial protein yield and growth performance of lambs. J. Anim. Sci., 92:5640\u0026ndash;5650. DOI.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8258.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBush, K.J., Russel, R.W., Young, J.W. 1979. Quantitative separation of volatile fatty acids by high performance liquid chromatography. J. Liquid Chromatography. DOI: 10.1080/01483917908060143.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen, X.B., Gomes, M.J. 1992. Estimation of microbial protein supply to sheep and cattle based on urinary excretion of purine derivatives \u0026ndash; an overview of technical details. (Occasional publication) International Feed Research Unit.Bucksburnd, Aberdeen:Rowett Research Institute. 21p.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eColombini, S., Colombari, G., Crovetto, G.M., Galassi, G.,Rapetti, L. 2009. Tannin treated lucerne silage in dairy cow feeding. Ital. J. Anim. Sci., 8 (2): 289-291. Doi.org/10.4081/ijas. 2009. S2.289.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030205727673#!\"\u003eDean, D.B., \u003c/a\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030205727673#!\"\u003eAdesogan, A.T., \u003c/a\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030205727673#!\"\u003eKrueger, N.,\u003c/a\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030205727673#!\"\u003eLittell\u003c/a\u003e, R.C. 2005.Effect of Fibrolytic Enzymes on the fermentation characteristics, aerobic stability, and digestibility of bermudagrasssilage.\u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00220302\"\u003eJ.of Dairy Scie.\u003c/a\u003e 88(3): 994-1003. DOI: 10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(05)72767-3.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDoce, R.R., Hervas, G., Giraldez, F.J., L\u0026oacute;pez-Campos, O., Mantec\u0026oacute;n, A.R.,Frutos, P. 2007. Effect of immature oak (\u003cem\u003eQuercuspyrenaica\u003c/em\u003e) leaves intake on ruminal fermentation and adaptation of rumen microorganisms in cattle.Journal of Animal and Feed Science, 16(2), 13- 18. DOI: 10.22358/jafs/74411/2007.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDoumas, B., Walson, W.,Blgga, H. 1971. Albumin standards and measurement of serum with bromocresol green. Clin. Chem. Acta, 31: 87.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuncan, D.B. 1955. Multiple R and M F- T. Biometric, 11: 1-42.DOI: 10.2307/3001478.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eElkholy, M.El.H., Hassanein1, El.I., Edrees, N., Eleraky, W., Elgamel, M.F.A.,Ibraheim, D. 2009. Nutritional aspects of recycling plants by-products and crop residues (corn stalk) in sheep. Pakistan J. of Nutr., 8 (12): 1834-1841. \u003ca href=\"http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2009.1834.1841\"\u003eDOI.org/10.3923/pjn.2009.1834.1841\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEl-Morsy, A.M., Soliman, S.M.,Bakr, A.A. 2018. Influence of inclusion of fungal treated watermelon straw in the ration on nutrient utilisation and rumen fermentation in sheep. Indian J. Anim. Nutr., 35 (3): 251-259. DOI: 10.5958/2231-6744.2018.00039.7.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFerret, A., Plaixats, J., Caja, G., Gasa, J.,Prio, P. 1999. Using markers to estimate apparent dry matter digestibility, faecal output and dry matter intake in dairy ewes fed Italian ryegrass hay or alfalfa hay. Small Rumin Res., 33: 145\u0026ndash;152. DOI.org/10.1016/S0921-4488 (99)00015-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFilya, I. 2003. The effect of \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus buchneri\u003c/em\u003e with or without homofermentatitive lactic acid bacteria on the fermentation, aerobic stability and ruminal degradability of wheat, sorghum and maize silages. J. Appl. Microbiol. 95: 1080-1086. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.02081. X.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFolin, O.Z. 1994. Colorimetric of determination of plasma cereatinine. Phys. Chem. 268: 228.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGaines, W.L., Davidson, F.A. 1923. Relation between percentage fat content and yield of milk.Ill.Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 245.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGetachew, G., Makkar, H.P.S., Becker, K. 2000. Effect of polyethylene glycol on in vitro degradability of nitrogen and microbial protein synthesis from tannin-rich browse and herbaceous legumes. British J. of Nutr., 84: 73-83. DOI: DOI.org/10.1017/S0007114500001252.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHerremans, S., Decruyenaere, V., Cantalapiedra-Hijar, G., Beckers, Y.,Froidmont, E. 2020. Effects of hydrolysable tannin-treated grass silage on milk yield and composition, nitrogen partitioning and nitrogen isotopic discrimination in lactating dairy cows.Animal.14(4): 771\u0026ndash;779. DOI:10.1017/S175173111900226X.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHuhtanen, P., Nousiainen, J.I., Khalili, H., Jaakkola, S.,Heikkila, T. 2003. Relationship between silage fermentation characteristics and milk production parameters: analyses of literature data. Livest. Prod. Sci., 81: 57\u0026ndash;73. DOI.org/10.1016/S0301-6226 (02)00195-1.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921448801002358#!\"\u003eIslam\u003c/a\u003e, M., \u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921448801002358#!\"\u003eEnishi\u003c/a\u003e, O., \u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921448801002358#!\"\u003ePurnomoadi\u003c/a\u003e, A., \u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921448801002358#!\"\u003eHiguchi\u003c/a\u003e, K., \u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921448801002358#!\"\u003eTakusari\u003c/a\u003e, N.,\u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921448801002358#!\"\u003eTerada\u003c/a\u003e, F. 2001. Energy and protein utilization by goats fed Italian ryegrass silage treated with molasses, urea, cellulase or cellulase lactic acid bacteria. \u003ca href=\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09214488\"\u003eSmall Ruminant Research\u003c/a\u003e, 42(1): 49-60. DOI.org/10.1016/S0921-4488 (01)00235-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJalč, D., V\u0026aacute;radyov\u0026aacute;, Z., Mihalikov\u0026aacute;, K., Ledeck\u0026yacute;, V.,Ki\u0026scaron;idayov\u0026aacute;, S. 2013. Enterococci inoculated silages: Effect on rumen fermentation and lipid metabolism \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e. African J. of Microbiology Research, 7(32): 4191-4199. DOI: 10.5897/AJMR2012.2456.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJatkauskas, J.,Vrotniakiene, V. 2006. Effects of silage fermentation quality on ruminal fluid parameters.Biologija 4: 65\u0026ndash;71.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJayanegara, A., Goel, G., Makkar, H.P.S., Becker, K. 2015. Divergence between purified hydrolysable and condensed tannin effects on methane emission, rumen fermentation and microbial population \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 209:60\u0026ndash;68. Doi:10.1111/jpn.12531.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKondo, M., Kita, K., Yokota, H. 2004. Feeding value to goats of whole-crop oat ensiled with green tea waste. Anim. Feed Scie, and Tech. 113:71-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2003.10.018.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKung, Jr. L. 2014. a review on silage additives and enzymes. \u003ca href=\"http://ag.udel.edu/anfs/faculty/kung/articles/a_review_on_silage_additiv\"\u003ehttp://ag.udel.edu/anfs/faculty/kung/articles/a_review_on_silage_additiv\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKung, Jr. L., Shaver, R. 2001. Interpretation and use of silage fermentation analysis reports.University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA. Focus on Forage 3 (13): 1-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKung, Jr. L., Shaver, R.D., Grant, R.J., Schmidt, R.J. 2018. Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial and organoleptic components of silages. J. of Dairy Scie., 101(5): 4020-4033. Doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13909.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKung, Jr.L., Muck, R.E. 1997. Animal response to silage additives. Proc. from the Silage: Field to Feedbunk North American Conference. NRAES -99: 200-210.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLansky, E.P., Newman, R.A. 2007. \u003cem\u003ePunicagranatum\u003c/em\u003e (pomegranate) and its potential for prevention and treatment of inflammation and cancer. J. Ethnopharmacol., 109:177\u0026ndash;206. DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2006.09.006.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, Y., Guo, C., Yang, J., Wei, J., Xu, J., Cheng, S. 2006. Evaluation of antioxidant properties of pomegranate peel extract in comparison with pomegranate pulp extract. Food Chem., 96:254-260. DOI.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.02.033.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu, H.W., Zhou, D.W., Li, K. 2013. Effects of chestnut tannins on performance and antioxidative status of transition dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 96:5901\u0026ndash;5907. DOI.org/ 10.3168/jds.2013-6904\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLynch,J.P., Baah, J.,Beauchemin K.A. 2015.Conservation, fiber digestibility and nutritive value of corn harvested at 2 cutting heights and ensiled with fibrolytic enzymes, either alone or with a ferulic acid esterase-producing inoculant. J. Dairy Sci., 98:1214-1224.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMakkar, H.P.S. 2003.Effects and fate of tannins in ruminant animals, adaptation to tannins, and strategies to overcome detrimental effects of feeding tannin-rich feeds. Small Ruminant Research, 49: 241-256. DOI.org/10.1016/S0921-4488 (03)00142-1.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMariana, P.S., Mariana, C.S., Beatriz, R.S.,Laise, C.da S., Diogo, T.C., Rosangela Maria, N.B.,Mauricio, A.R. 2019.Extraction of bioactive compounds from pomegranate peel (\u003cem\u003ePunicagranatum L\u003c/em\u003e.) with pressurized liquids assisted by ultrasound combined with an expansion gas. J. UltrasonicsSonochemistry, 54: 11-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2019.02.021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcDonald, P., Edwards, R.A., Greenhalgh, J.F.D., Morgan, C.A. 2002.Animal Nutrition.6th ed. Longman Scientific and Technical, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcDonald, P., Edwards, R.A., Greenhalgh, J.F.D., Morgan, C.A., Sinclair, L.A., Wilkinson, R.G. 2010. Chapter 19: silage. In: Animal Nutrition, seventh ed., pp. 499-520.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcSweeney, C.S., Palmer, B., Bunch, R., Krause, D.O. 1999. Isolation and characterization of proteolyticruminal bacteria from sheep and goats fed tannin-containing shrub legume \u003cem\u003eCalliandracalothyrsus\u003c/em\u003e. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 65:3075-3083. DOI. 10.1128/AEM.65.7.3075-3083.1999.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMenke, K.H.,Steingass, H. 1988. Estimation of the energeticfeed value obtained from chemical analysis and \u003cem\u003ein vitro\u003c/em\u003e gasproduction using rumen fluid. Anim. Res. Dev., 28:7-55.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMin, B.R., Attwood, G.T., McNabb, W.C., Molan, A.L, Barry, T.N.2005.The effect of condensed tannins from \u003cem\u003eLotus corniculatus\u003c/em\u003e on the proteolytic activities and growth of rumen bacteria.Anim. Feed Scie.andTechn. 121(1-2):45-58.DOI.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.02.007.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMin, B.R., Barry, T.N., Attwood, G.T., McNabb, W.C. 2003. The effect of condensed tannins on the nutrition and health of ruminants fed fresh temperate forages: a review. Anim. Feed Scie.andTechn. 106:3-19.DOI.org/10.1016/S0377-8401 (03)00041-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMinistry of Agriculture2019.Agriculture direction of governorate, Economic affairs sector, Ministry of Agriculture (Summer \u0026amp;Nili crops), P325.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMorand-Fehr, P., SanzSampelayo, M.R., Fedele, Y.V., Le Frileux, Y., Eknaes, M., Schmidely, P.H., GigerReverding, S., Bas, P., Rubino, R., Havrevoll, O.,Sauvant, D. 2000. Effect of feeding on the quality of goat milk and cheeses. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Goats, Tour, France, Tome I, pp. 53\u0026ndash;58.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMuck, R.E.2010.Silage additives and management issues.Proceedings of Idaho Alfalfa Forage Conference, Best Western Burley Inn, Burley, Idaho, USA. 16-17 February, pp. 49-55.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNkosi, B.D., Meeske, R., Langa, T., Thomas, R.S. 2011.Effects of bacterial silage inoculants on whole-crop maize silage fermentation and silage digestibility in rams. South African J of Anim.Scie., 41(4): 351-359. DOI.org/10.4314/sajas. v41i4.5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNkosi, B.D., Meeske, R., Langa, T. Motiang, M.D.,Mutavhatsindi, T.F. 2015. The influence of ensiling potato hash waste with enzyme/bacterial inoculants mixtures on the fermentation characteristics, aerobic stability and nutrient digestion of the resultant silages by rams. Small Ruminant Research, 127: 28-35. DOI.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.04.013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNkosi, B.D., Meeske, R., Van der Merwe, H.J.,Groenewald, I.B. 2010. Effects of homofermentative and heterofermentative bacterial silage inoculants on potato hash silage fermentation and digestibility in rams. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 157(3): 195\u0026ndash;200. DOI: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.03.008.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNkosi, B.D., Vadlani, P.V. Brijwani, K. Nanjunda, A.,Meeske, R. 2012. Effects of bacterial inoculants and an enzyme on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of ensiled whole-crop sweet sorghum. South African J. of Anim.Scie., 42 (3): 332-240. DOI.org/10.4314/sajas. v42i3.4.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNRC 2001.Nutrient Requiremets of Dairy Animals.National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council. Washington, D C., USA.381p. DOI: 10.17226/9825.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOh, H.I., Hoff, J.E. 1987. pH dependence of complex formation between condensed tannins and proteins. Journal of Food Science 52(5), 1267- 1269.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOliveira, A.S., Weinberg, Z.G., Ogunade, I.M., Cervantes, A.A.P., Arriola, K.G., Jiang, Y., Kim, D., Li, X., Gon\u0026ccedil;alves, M.C.M., Vyas, D.,Adesogan, A.T. 2017.Meta-analysis of effects of inoculation with homofermentative and facultative heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria on silage fermentation, aerobic stability and the performance of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 100 (6):1\u0026ndash;17.DOI.org/10.3168/jds.2016-11815.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOtt, E.M., Aragon, M., Gabel, M. 2005.Ensiling of tannin_containing sorghum grain.Silage production and utilisation.Prceedings of the XIVth International Silage Conference.pp. 178.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOzduven, M.L., Okuyucu, B., BuyukkilicBeyzi, S.,Konca, Y.2017.The effects of lactic acid bacterial inoculants on the fermentation, aerobic stability and nutritive value of sunflower silages. Inter. J.of Current Research, 9 (7):54289-54295.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePatil, A.V.,Karade, A.R.1996. In T.K. Bose and S.K. Mitra (Eds.), Fruits: Tropical and subtropical. Calcutta, India: NayaPrakash.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePatra, A.K.,Saxena, J. 2011. Exploitation of dietary tannins to improve rumen metabolism and ruminant nutrition. Sci. Food and Agri.,91:24-37. DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.4152.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003ca href=\"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Peymanfar%20S%5BAuthor%5D\u0026amp;cauthor=true\u0026amp;cauthor_uid=23205249\"\u003ePeymanfar, S\u003c/a\u003e.,\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u003ca href=\"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Kermanshahi%20R%5BAuthor%5D\u0026amp;cauthor=true\u0026amp;cauthor_uid=23205249\"\u003eKermanshahi, \u003c/a\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eR.2012. The effect of bacteria, enzymes and inulin on fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage.\u003ca href=\"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23205249\"\u003eIran Microbiol.\u003c/a\u003e,\u0026nbsp;4(4):180-6.PMCID: PMC3507307.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePienaar, L. 2021. The Economic Contribution of South Africa\u0026rsquo;s Pomegranate Industry. Western Cape Department of Agriculture Division for Macro \u0026amp; Resource Economics.South African.| \u003ca href=\"http://www.sapomegranate.co.za\"\u003ewww.sapomegranate.co.za\u003c/a\u003e .\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePithayanukul, P., Nithitanakool, S.,Bavovada, R. 2009.Hepatoprotective Potential of Extracts from Seeds of \u003cem\u003eAreca catechu\u003c/em\u003e and Nutgalls of \u003cem\u003eQuercusinfectoria\u003c/em\u003e. Molecules, 14: 4987-5000. DOI:10.3390/molecules14124987.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReich, L.J., Kung Jr. L.2010. Effects of combining \u003cem\u003eLactobacillus buchneri\u003c/em\u003e 40788 with various lactic acid bacteria on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage.Anim. Feed Scie.andTechn., 159:105\u0026ndash; 109. DOI: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.06.002.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReitman, S., Frankel, S. 1957. A calorimetric method for the determination of serum glutamic oxaloacetic and glutamic pyruvic transaminases. Amer. J. Clinc. Path., 28: 56.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRomero, J.J., Macias, E.G., Ma, Z.X., Martins, R.M., Coy, B.Y., Martinez, F., Garbuio, D.H., Staples, C.R.,Adesogan, A.T. 2016. Improving the performance of dairy cattle with a xylanase-rich exogenous enzyme preparation. Journal of Dairy Science, 99(5):486\u0026ndash;3496. DOI: 10.3168/jds.2015-10082.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRuben, N. 2003.Monitoring udder health and milk quality using somatic cell counts.Veterinary Research. EDP Sciences, 34 (5): 579\u0026ndash;596. DOI: 10.1051/vetres:2003028.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSadq, S.M., Ramzi, D.O.M., Hamasalim, H.J., Ahmed, K.A. 2016.Growth performance and digestibility in karadilambs receiving different levels of pomegranate peels. Open J. of Anim.Scie., 6: 16-23. DOI: 10.4236/ojas.2016.61003.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSAS 2000. SAS users guide: Statistics, SAS Inst., Inc., Cary N.C., USA.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchmidely, P.H., Morand-Fehr, P.,Sauvant, D. 2005. Influence of extruded soybeans with or without bicarbonate on milk performance and fatty acid composition of goat milk. J. Dairy Sci., 88: 757\u0026ndash;765. DOI.org/10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(05)72739-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShabtay, A., Eitam, H., Tadmor, Y., Orlov, A., Meir, A., Weinberg, P., Weinberg, Z.G., Chen, Y., Brosh, A., Izhaki, I.,Kerem, Z. 2008. Nutritive and antioxidative potential of fresh and stored pomegranate industrial byproduct as novel beef cattle feed. J. Agric. Food Chem., 56:10063\u0026ndash;10070. DOI: 10.1021/jf8016095.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSheperd, A.C., Kung Jr., L. 1996. Effects of an Enzyme Additive on Composition of Corn Silage Ensiled at Various Stages of Maturity. Journal of Dairy Science, 79, 1767-1773. \u003ca href=\"http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302\"\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302\u003c/a\u003e(96)76544-X.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSiest, G., Henny, J.,Schiele, F. 1981.Interpretation des examens de laboratoire, K., P. 206-223.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSoliman, S.M., El-Morsy, A.M., El-Shinnawy, A.M., El-Ashry, G., Osman, M.A. 2020a.Utilization of biologically treated watermelon vine in rations for dairy cows. J. of Animal and Poultry Production, Mansoura Univ., 11 (3):117 \u0026ndash; 123. DOI: 10.21608/jappmu.2020.87135.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSoliman, S.M., El-Shinnawy, A.M., El-Morsy, A.M. 2016.Effect of probiotic or prebiotic supplementation on the productive performance of Barkilambs. J. Animal and Poultry Prod., Mansoura Univ., 7(10): 369- 376.DOI: 10.21608/JAPPMU.2016.48743.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSoliman, S.M., Hassan, A.A., Bassuony, Neamat I., El-Morsy, A.M. 2020b.Effect of biological extract supplementation on milk yield and rumen fermentation in dairy cows.Intern.J. of Dairy Scie. 15 (2): 88-98. DOI: 10.3923/ijds.2020.88.98.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSoliman.M.S. 2014.The Effects of addition microbial inoculants or formic aid to whole corn plant at ensiling on silage quality, nutritive value and rumen fermentation in sheep and milk yield and composition of lactation cows. J.of Animal and Poultry Production, 5(5): 249-266.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStewart, E.K., Beauchemin, K.A., Dai, X., MacAdam, J.W., Christensen, R.G.,Villalba, J.J. 2019. Effect of tannin-containing hays on enteric methane emissions and nitrogen partitioning in beef cattle. J. of Ani.l Sci., 97(8): 3286\u0026ndash;3299.DOI: 10.1093/jas/skz206.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVan Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B., Lewis, B.A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci., 74:3583\u0026ndash;3597. DOI.org/10.3168/jds. S0022-0302(91)78551-2.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVerbic, J., Chen, X.B., Macleod, N.A. 1990.Excretion of purine derivatives by ruminants.Effect of microbial nucleic acid infusion on purine derivative excretion by steers. J. of Agri. Sci. 114: 243-248.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWanapat, M.,Cherdthong, A. 2009.Use of real-time PCR technique in studying rumen cellulolytic bacteria population as affected by level of roughage in swamp buffalo.\u0026nbsp;Curr.Microbial., 58:294\u0026ndash;299.\u0026nbsp;DOI.org/10.1007/s00284-008-9322-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWarner, A.C.I. 1964. Production of volatile fatty acids in the rumen methods of measurements.Nutr.Abstr., and Rev., 34:339-352.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWei, C., Guyader, J., Collazos, L., Beauchemin, K.A., Zhao, G.Y. 2019.Effects of gallic acid on in vitro rumen fermentation and methane production using rumen simulation (Rusitec) and batch-culture techniques. Anim. Prod. Sci., 59:277\u0026ndash;287. Doi: 10.1071/AN17365.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilkinson, J. M., Davies, D.R. 2012. The aerobic stability of silage: key findings and recent developments. Grass Forage Sci., 68: 1-19. DOI.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2012.00891.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilkinson, J.M. 2005. In: Wilkinson, J.M. (Ed.), Silage. Part 6: Assessing Silage Quality. Chapter 19: Analysis and clinical assessment of silage. Chalcombe Publications, UK, pp. 198\u0026ndash;208.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWischer, G., Boguhn, J., Steinga\u0026szlig;, H., Schollenberger, M.,Rodehutscord, M. 2013.Effects of different tannin-rich extracts and rapeseed tannin monomers on methane formation and microbial protein synthesis in vitro. Animal, 7(11):1796\u0026ndash;1805.DOI: 10.1017/S1751731113001481.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"digestibility, milk, inoculant, enzymes, methane, rumen fermentation and silage.","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-1325562/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1325562/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"This study was implemented to evaluate the effect of partial replacement of whole corn plant silage (WCS) by pomegranate peel silage (PPS) treated with enzymes mixed (ZYMOGEN) or lactic acid bacterial inoculants (Inoculant 1188) on nutrient digestibility and productive performance of dairy cows. The first experiment two stacks of PPS and WCS were prepared. WCS was replaced by PPS, at 25:75, 50:50 and 75:25, respectively used in forming three rations. The second experiment has been carried with twenty lactating crossbred Friesian cows in four similar groups (5 cows / group): the control group was fed a ration consisting of WCS. G1 (WCS replaced with untreated PPS at level 50:50), G2 (WCS replaced with PPS treated with bacterial inoculants at level 50:50) and G3 (WCS replaced with PPS treated with ZYMOGEN at level 50:50). The results showed the values of CP, NFE and lactic acid were highest, while values of NDF, ADF, pH, the concentration of NH3 -N and acetic acid were lowest in all groups treated PPS. The values of digestibility coefficients, nutritive values, ruminal fluid fermentation of TVFAs and acetic acid, milk yield, 4% FCM, milk composition, blood proteins were highest, while the values of ruminal fluid fermentation of pH and NH3 N were lowest in group 2 and 3 compared with other groups. It concluded that using of treated or untreated pomegranate peel is safe in dairy cows feeding at a level of 20%. The addition of ZYMOGEN or inoculant 1188 to PPS improved fermentation and nutritive quality of silage along with its nutritive values.","manuscriptTitle":"Influence of Using Pomegranate Peel Silage in Rations of Dairy Cows on Their Productive Performance","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2022-02-28 17:01:37","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-1325562/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"7ac4f247-33d7-4375-8fa6-ecbe9e88e5ee","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 28th, 2022","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2022-07-13T19:08:50+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-1325562","link":"https://doi.org/10.26502/ijpaes.202133","journal":{"identity":"international-journal-of-plant-animal-and-environmental-sciences","isVorOnly":true,"title":"International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences"},"publishedOn":"2022-06-22 00:00:00","publishedOnDateReadable":"June 22nd, 2022"},"versionCreatedAt":"2022-02-28 17:01:37","video":"","vorDoi":"10.26502/ijpaes.202133","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26502/ijpaes.202133","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-1325562","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-1325562","identity":"rs-1325562","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"J0_U0BvcaRcwD8yVFaRlm","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}