Effect of conserved sorghum hybrid (Sorghum x Sudan grass) fodder on growing Barbari kids during post monsoon season.

Effect of conserved sorghum hybrid (Sorghum x Sudan grass) fodder on growing Barbari kids during post monsoon season. | 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 Effect of conserved sorghum hybrid (Sorghum x Sudan grass) fodder on growing Barbari kids during post monsoon season. Prabhat Tripathi, M. K. Tripathi, T. K. Dutta, Ravindra Kumar, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4545434/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted 5 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Goats play a very important role in rural economy of India; it not only augments small and marginal farmer’s income but also provide livelihood to landless and economically weaker section of the rural society in semi-arid and arid areas. Indian livestock sector is facing a big challenge to minimise gap between demand and supply of animal feed resources and this gap widened day by day due to least priority addressed to fodder production and its conservation. Therefore, surplus fodder available with the farmer during the monsoon season is used as fuel and litter material etc. during post monsoon season again deepen the fodder scarcity problem. Goat is primarily grazing and browsing animal but feed resources are available in inadequate quantity at grazing sites mainly on waste fallow, barren lands during the post monsoon season to fulfil its dietary needs. Fodder conservation strategies could narrow the gap between demand and supply during fodder scarcity months and sustain the livelihood security of rural poor as well as minimising risk to commercial goat farmers. Therefore, summer sown sorghum hybrid (sorghum x sudan grass) green fodder of third cut was conserved as hay and silage because in rainy season there was sufficient green biomass available for goats at grazing sites and cultivated fodder become surplus to the animals. Such surplus fodder needs to be conserved so that it can be utilized during scarcity period. This conserved fodder i.e. hay and silage were evaluated for its suitability as goat feed during post monsoon season. Fourteen Barbari growing kids 6-7 months of age with 13.50 ± 0.63 Kg average live body weight were divided randomly in to two groups and one group was fed with hay and another with silage. A metabolism trial was conducted using individual cages for comparing nutrient intake digestibility and rumen fermentation pattern. Dry matter intake (% of live body weight) was 3.47 and 2.91 % with hay and silage fed animal respectively. Crude protein, organic matter contents were significantly higher in silage fodder over hay. Dry matter digestibility was 23.9 percent higher with silage fodder over hay. However, values for crude protein digestibility did not differ between hay and silage feeding. DCP (%) was 3.89 with hay and 6.32 with silage fed animal. Rumen fermentation parameters except Total-N were also not influenced by hay and silage feeding. Therefore, hay and silage preparation may improve the fodder utilization of poor grade roughage in goats during the fodder scarcity months or post monsoon season. Hybrid sorghum Conservation Silage Hay Kids 1. Introduction Commercially goat is in high demand because of its role in livelihood security to resource poor farmers in rural areas and employment generation for today’s youth in India. Goat prefers grazing and browsing to fulfil its feed requirement but commercial importance of goats is promoting its rearing under organised farm condition. Availability of feed resources is the big challenge before the goat keepers to sustain their livelihood as well as commercial interest without any adverse effect especially during the fodder scarcity period because during this period feed resources available at grazing sites get deteriorate in quality and quantity therefore, goats mainly depend on poor grade roughages, which are also available in insufficient quantity in fallow, barren and waste lands during post monsoon season. Roy et al ( 2019 ) estimated on all India basis, there is an overall deficit of 11.24%in green fodder availability in the country. Total green fodder availability is 734.2 mt against requirement of 827. 19mt.Major source of green fodder in India is from cultivated land followed by pasture land and forests. However, there is an overall deficit of 23.4% in dry fodder availability in the country. Total dry fodder availability is 326.4mt against requirement of 426.1 mt. However, under organised farm condition goat keepers forced to purchase fodder on a high price and such situations force to goat farmers either sell their animals at very low price or face multiple losses on the consequence of increasing production cost with decreasing body weight and poor health of the animals ultimately decrease in production and productivity. Cultivated grass species were nutritious for small ruminants and used successfully and safely as good quality summer fodder in meeting the shortage of feed in summer and autumn seasons (Fahmy et al., 2010 ). Multicut Sorghum x Sudan Grass hybrid fodder crop is generally cultivated in summer season in arid and semi-arid area with irrigations. Multicut Sorghum x Sudan grass hybrid ( Sorghum bicolor x Sorghum bicolor var. sudanense ) is a summer annual, high yielding, rapid growing and drought tolerant forage crop (Fribourg 1995 ) and can reach 3.7 m high (Ball et al., 2007 ). It is taller, coarser and more yielding than Sudan grass. Less leaf area, secondary roots and waxy leaf surface makes sorghum-sudan grass more resistant to drought (Sarrantonio, 1994 ). Sorghum-sudan grass hybrids has potential to produce more forage yield than maize under high temperature and drought (Uzun et al., 2009 ). Its’ yield and quality similar sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L.) (Ngongoni et al., 2007 ). During summer season its green fodder gives a very valuable support to goats for their fodder needs, However, with the progression of monsoon in arid and semi-arid areas there are lot of fodder become available in cultivated fields and seasonal vegetation growing up in the form of monsoon herbages at grazing sites i.e. fallow, barren and waste lands. Goats are not able to utilize all available feed resources during the monsoon season and it becomes surplus during this period, if this surplus quantity of feed resources is not conserved properly then it gets mature which leads deterioration in its quantity and quality, thus animals suffer adversely due to scarcity of quality fodder during post monsoon season when most of the grazing sites dried. Therefore, by adopting conservation strategies for surplus hybrid sorghum fodder in the form of hay and silage could able to provide quality fodder biomass during post monsoon season that may keep animals nutritionally sound. Hence, an experiment was conducted at Central Institute for Research on Goats, Mathura (U.P.) on conservation of surplus hybrid sorghum (sorghum x sudan grass) green biomass in the form of hay & silage to study the effect of its feeding on growing kids during post monsoon season. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1 Hybrid Sorghum fodder conservation and feeding A multicut hybrid sorghum (sorghum x sudan grass) stand was sown at institute farm area in summer season with recommended agronomic package of practices. The soil of cropped area was sandy loam with low salinity. Two cuts of hybrid sorghum fodder were taken up to onset of monsoon and fed to goats as green fodder, after the onset of monsoon there was sufficient green biomass available in the grazing area to fulfil feed requirement of goats. Thus supply of hybrid sorghum green fodder to goats was stopped and it became a surplus biomass during the rainy season. Therefore, fodder crop was allowed to grow and the final cut of hybrid sorghum crop was taken in between flowering and grain filling stage so that rainy period can be escaped at harvesting. The harvested biomass was chaffed with power operated chaff cutter and converted in to small pieces 1.5-2.0 cm in size. The chaffed material was mixed properly so that leaf and stem portions mixed uniformly. To conserve this chaffed fodder material in the form of hay, a part of chaffed biomass was dried on cemented floor and stored in a moisture free place. The other part of chaffed biomass material was conserved in the form of silage. Silage was prepared by using cemented pits with standard practice. Silage pit was opened after 6o days for its utilization. Fourteen Barbari growing kids 6–7 months of age with 13.50 ± 0.63 Kg average live body weight were divided randomly in to two groups and one group was fed ad lib with hay and another with silage. Animals of both the groups were supplemented with pelleted concentrate mixture at the rate of 1.5% of their live body weight. Concentrate mixture contained DM, OM, CP, fat, NDF, ADF, cellulose, hemicelluloses, total carbohydrate and lignin 94.4, 93.46, 17.17, 3.05, 27.69, 5.24, 4.56, 22.45, 73.24 and 0.55 percent respectively. These kids were offered conserved fodder in the form of hay and silage for a period of 75 days during post monsoon season. 2.2 Growth study The experimental animals were weighed with an electric digital electric weighing balance at weekly interval early in the morning two consecutive days early in the morning before the offering of hay and silage fodder to respective group. The mean values animal body weight of consecutive two days was used as animal body, weight and expressed in kg/animal. The animal body weight is divided by the total number of days of feeding for getting average daily gain (g)/animal in respective group. 2.3 Metabolism study A metabolism trial was conducted using individual metabolic cages for all kids from both the groups. The metabolism trial lasted for 10 days (i.e.3 days’ adaptation followed by 7 days of sample collection) during which daily feed intake and output of faeces and urine of 24 h were collected and recorded. During the metabolic trial clean drinking water was offered three times a day. Samples of feed, orts, faeces and urine were collected every morning. The DM of feeds, faeces and orts was determined by drying to a constant weight in a forced air oven at 70 0 C. urine DM was not determined. dried samples for each day of the 7 days’ collection were pooled, ground to pass a 1 mm screen and preserved for chemical analysis. For N estimation, samples of faeces (0.1%) and urine (1%) from individual animals were collected every morning in a 500 ml flask containing 25 ml of concentrated sulphuric acid. 2.4 Chemical analysis feed, refusals and faeces samples were analysed for DM by drying at 100 0 C for 24 h. The OM was determined by ashing at 550 0 C for 4 h (AOAC, 1990 ) and crude protein by a Kjeldahl technique (AOAC, 1990 ). Neutral detergent fibre (NDF) was determined by a procedure of Van Soest et al. ( 1991 ) without sodium sulphite or α-amylase, whereas acid detergent fibre (ADF) and acid detergent lignin (ADL) were determined according to the method described by Robertson and Van Soest ( 1981 ). Total lipids were determined as ether extract using solvent extraction procedure. 2.5 Rumen Fermentation Samples of rumen fluid (50 ml) were withdrawn from all intact kids at 4 h post-feeding using a stomach tube at the end of experiment. Each sample was placed in a 100 ml glass jar and the pH determined using a portable pH meter within 4 to 5 min of sampling. After pH measurement rumen fluid was strained with four layer of muslin cloth and stored − 20ºC. The N was determined using Kjeldahl technique (AOAC, 1990 ), total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) as per Barnett and Reid ( 1957 ) procedure, ammonia nitrogen by Conway ( 1962 ) method, while TCA-N by estimated following the procedure given by Tagari et al. ( 1964 ). 2.6 Haematology study Blood samples were collected once at the end of the feeding period. Samples were drawn by puncture of jugular vein in EDTA impregnated tubes for haematology study. Various haematological observations were determined in whole blood at the earliest using blood analyzer (Nihon Kohden, Japan) standardized for goat haematology. 2.7 Statistical analysis Data on proximate composition intake, nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation pattern and haematological parameters were analysed with the statistical “t” test model as given by Snedecor GW and Cochran WG (1994). 3. Results and Discussion 3.1 Proximate composition The dry matter content in hay was more than two times as compared to silage. The crude protein content was 4.78 ± 0.03 and 5.65 ± 0.019 percent in hay and silage respectively. It was lower than the values reported by Muang and Mu (2020) in sorghum silage. It might be due to delayed harvesting of sorghum. was also responsible for poor protein. However, conserved fodder in the form of silage was enhanced by 18.20% in crude protein content over hay fodder. (Table 1 ). Ahmad et al ( 2007 ) categorised sorghum as poor in quality due to low protein content in it. Hay and silage of sorghum x sudan grass hybrid observed with low crude protein and fat also reported by Jalajakshi et al ( 2016 ). Silage showed a significant improvement by 1.43% in organic matter content over hay fodder. NDF, ADF, cellulose, hemi-cellulose, ether extract (fat) and lignin contents were observed without any significant variation between hay and silage forms of conserved fodder. (Table 1 ). The values of OM, NDF and ADF in silage were observed very close to the findings of Muang and Mu (2020). Table 1 proximate composition of sorghum x sudan grass fodder as influenced by conservation. Components (% content on DM basis) Conserved fodder Hay Silage P- value Dry matter 93.04 44.4 - Crude protein 4.78 ± 0.03 5.65 ± 0.019 0.002 Ether extract 1.73 ± 0.23 1.39 ± 0.07 0.302 Organic matter 92.34 ± 0.12 93.66 ± 0.23 0.034 NDF 1 66.50 ± 1.44 65.77 ± 0.56 0.685 ADF 2 36.71 ± 1.44 40.94 ± 1.06 0.143 Cellulose 30.1 ± 0.59 32.98 ± 1.05 0.141 Hemicellulose 29.79 ± 2.89 24.83 ± 0.50 0.233 Total carbohydrate 85.82 ± 0.07 86.62 ± 0.29 0.129 Lignin 8.55 ± 0.61 7.22 ± 0.09 0.166 NDF 1 - Neutral detergent fibre, *ADF 2 - Acid detergent fibre Notably, silage had higher crude protein and organic matter content compared to hay, suggesting that silage might be a more nutritious option for these components. 3.2 Metabolic studies Fodder conservation in the form of silage improved digestibility of DM, fat, organic matter, NDF, hemi-cellulose and total carbohydrate by 12.91, 15.82, 12.29, 16.33, 22.28 and 13.62 percent respectively over hay (Table 2 ). These improvements in digestibility could be attributed to the fermentation process in silage, which breaks down fiber components and enhances nutrient availability The values of dry matter, organic matter digestibilities were very close to findings of Tjandraatmadja et al (1993). Although variation in digestibility of crude protein, ADF and cellulose did not differ significantly between hay and silage forms of conserved fodder but values with silage were tending towards higher side than hay. Table 2 Digestibility of various constituents in goat kids fed on conserved hybrid sorghum fodder. Parameters Conserved fodder Hay Silage P- Value Dry matter 51.01 ± 2.10 63.20 ± 0.17 0.001 Crude protein 48.73 ± 3.5 55.5 ± 1.83 0.103 Ether extract 60.33 ± 3.94 76.15 ± 2.40 0.005 Organic matter 55.63 ± 1.90 67.92 ± 1.34 0.000 1 NDF 38.91 ± 3.21 55.24 ± 1.68 0.001 2 ADF 34.89 ± 3.15 42.18 ± 1.87 0.070 Cellulose 49.21 ± 3.20 57.85 ± 2.34 0.050 Hemicellulose 43.46 ± 4.44 65.74 ± 2.02 0.001 Total carbohydrate 56.01 ± 1.80 69.63 ± 1.41 0.000 1 NDF -Neutral detergent fibre 2 ADF- Acid detergent fibre The overall nutrient digestibility profile suggests that silage offers a more efficient nutrient utilization compared to hay. Table 3 Dry matter intake TDN, DCP and N balance of kids fed on hay and silage of hybrid sorghum (sorghum x sudan grass). Parameters Conserved fodder Hay Silage P- Value Animal body weight (kg) 14.74 ± 0.94 13.41 ± 0.86 0.319 Metabolic Body weight ( 1 W 0.75 ) 7.50 ± 0.35 6.99 ± 0.33 0.314 Dry matter intake(g/animal/day) 502.53 ± 13.55 381.83 ± 12.04 0.000 Dry matter intake / (W 0.75 ) 67.55 ± 2.76 55.30 ± 3.10 0.012 Dry matter intake (kg/100kg LBW) Crude protein intake (g/animal/day) Crude protein intake (kg/100kg LBW) Crude protein intake (W 0.75 ) 3.47 ± 0.18 47.41 ± 0.64 0.32 ± 0.64 6.38 ± 0.64 2.91 ± 0.20 43.32 ± 0.68 0.33 ± 0.68 6.27 ± 0.68 0.064 0.990 0.470 0.600 TDN intake (g/animal/day) 267.05 ± 8.05 250.90 ± 7.48 0.167 2 TDN intake /(W 0.75 ) 36.15 ± 2.31 36.35 ± 2.08 0.948 TDN intake (kg/100kg LBW) 1.86 ± 0.14 1.91 ± 0.13 0.782 TDN % 53.28 ± 1.74 65.81 ± 1.31 0.000 Digested 3 CP (g/animal/day) 19.43 ± 0.92 24.02 ± 0.77 0.003 Digested CP/ (W 0.75 ) 2.64 ± 0.21 3.47 ± 0.16 0.010 Digested CP (g/ 100kg 4 LBW) 136.17 ± 12.66 182.71 ± 11.02 0.017 Digested CP % 3.89 ± 0.23 6.32 ± 0.26 0.000 N Balance (g/day) Average daily gain (g) 1.75 ± 0.32 20.0 ± 2.25 1.45 ± 0.17 28.38 ± 3.42 0.437 0.968 1 W 0.75 - Metabolic body weight 2 TDN- Total digested nutrient, 3 CP- Crude protein, 4 LBW- Live body weight Goat kids consumed 31.61% more dry matter (animal/day) in the form of hay as compared to silage fed animals, which support the findings of Jalajakshi et al ( 2016 ), he also observed a decrease in dry matter intake in lambs fed on sole silage. In the same pattern dry matter intake per kg metabolic body weight was also recorded high with hay as compared to silage. CPI (g/animal/day), CPI (% body weight) and CPI (per kg metabolic body weight) were observed at par between the groups. However, dry matter intake (% LBW), TDN intake (g/animal/day), TDN intake / W 0.75 and TDN intake (% LBW) with hay fodder did not differ in their respective values in case of silage fed animals when compared with hay. TDN (%) and DCP (%) were 12.35% and 2.43% higher with silage than hay. Silage also improved the quantum of digested crude protein (g/animal/day, per kg metabolic body weight and % LBW) over hay in the growing kids (Table 3 ). Hay-fed kids consumed more dry matter, but silage-fed kids benefitted from higher TDN and DCP percentages, indicating more efficient nutrient utilization. Despite lower dry matter intake, silage provided higher nutritional efficiency as seen in the improved DCP metrics. Nitrogen balance and average daily gain varied non-significantly between the groups, suggesting that both hay and silage were observed effective in maintaining nitrogen balance and supporting growth in kids. 3.3 Haematology Haematological parameters are critical indicators of the health status and physiological condition of livestock. Feeding of conserved hybrid sorghum in the form of hay and silage had no influence on haematological attributes (RBC, WBC, Platelets, Hb and MCHC etc.) and remain unchanged between animals of both the groups. However, there were trends indicating lower haemoglobin, WBC, and haematocrit levels in silage-fed kids compared to hay-fed kids, though these differences were not statistically significant. The lack of significant differences in RBC, MCV, MCH, MCHC, and platelet counts suggests that both hay and silage provide similar haematological profiles, which indicates that either conservation method can maintain adequate haematological health in goat kids. (Table 4 ). Brown et al ( 2016 ) also revealed no change in haematological indices of Pedi goats fed varying levels of leaf meal in Setaria verticillata hay-based diet. The Hb content under both the groups were observed within the range (6 to 12 g dl − 1 ) as reported by Kaneko ( 1997 ). The results of Durge et al ( 2014 ) and Chaudhary et al ( 2013 ) also resemble with the findings, but in contrast to this Radostits et al ( 2000 ) suggested reference value of Hb (8.0–12.0 g/dl) for goats. Table 4 Haematological attributes of goat kids as influenced by hay and silage feeding. Parameters Conserved fodder Hay Silage P- Value Hb 1 (g/dl) 7.38 ± 0.18 6.77 ± 0.22 0.056 WBC 2 (10 3 / µL) 19.41 ± 0.76 16.32 ± 1.09 0.059 RBC (10 6 /µL) 18.26 ± 1.02 17.06 ± 1.37 0.151 HCT 4 (g/dl) 22.84 ± 0.54 20.58 ± 0.78 0.060 MCV 5 (fl) 25.34 ± 0.57 23.78 ± 1.81 0.429 MCH 6 (pq) 8.14 ± 0.16 7.81 ± 0.59 0.588 MCHC 7 (g/dl) 32.32 ± 0.11 32.52 ± 0.27 0.510 PLT 8 (10 2 /µL) 1059.57 ± 83.06 1143.57 ± 73.40 0.463 Hb 1 : haemoglobin; WBC 2 : white blood cell; RBC 3 : red blood cell; HCT 4 haematocrit; MCV 5 mean corpuscular volume; MCH 6 : mean corpuscular haemoglobin; MCHC 7 : mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration. PLT 8 : platelets 3.4 Rumen Fermentation Table 5 Rumen parameters as influenced by hay and silage feeding in kids. Parameters Conserved fodder Hay Silage P- Value pH 6.16 ± 0.07 6.02 ± 0.07 0.186 Total volatile fatty acid(m mol/dl) 9.41 ± 0.31 9.65 ± 0.42 0.658 Ammonia nitrogen (mg/dl) 18.2 ± 0.74 19.0 ± 0.80 0.479 Total nitrogen (mg/dl) 54.0 ± 1.54 58.8 ± 0.034 0.034 Non-precipitable nitrogen (mg/dl) 39.2 ± 1.72 40.0 ± 2.35 0.594 TCA-ppt-N (mg/dl) 14.8 ± 1.32 18.0 ± 2.19 0.240 The values of rumen fermentation parameters such as pH, TVFA, ammonia –N, Non-perceptible nitrogen and TCA-ppt-N were remaining unchanged in both the forms of conserved fodder. However, total nitrogen content was significantly higher in rumen fluid of silage fed animals over hay, this suggests that silage may enhance nitrogen retention and utilization more effectively than hay. (Table 5 ). The rumen NH3-N concentration between 15 to 18 mg/dl was reported adequate for optimum rumen fermentation (Satter and Slyter 1974 ). However, the values of TVFA and ammonia nitrogen in rumen liquor of both the groups were higher than values reported by Yokota, et al ( 1992 ) with Napier grass silage. Rumen fluid pH under both the groups was less than 6.50, which was recommended for optimum fermentation of fibrous feed (Stewart 1977 ), however, low pH is the indicator of low protein digestibility of both the forms of conserved fodder. This indicates that both hay and silage provide similar conditions for rumen fermentation. Overall, while silage may offer an advantage in terms of total nitrogen availability, both conservation methods appear to maintain comparable overall rumen health and function. Conclusion Feeding kids with silage of hybrid sorghum enhanced the digestibility of nutrients, particularly TDN and DCP as compare to hay. Silage also enhanced dry matter digestibility, which denotes increase in utilization of dry matter over hay. The protein requirement for growing kids recommended 0.30 to 0.36 g CP/g of gain (NRC 1985), therefore, both form of conserved fodder may be offered to growing kids with adequate concentrate supplementation with both the forms of conserved sorghum fodder during post monsoon season because conserved hybrid sorghum fodder alone not able to fulfil nutritional requirements of growing kids. Although dry matter intake was higher in hay-fed kids but silage provided more efficient nutrient utilization. Under both the form of conserved sorghum fodder no variation observed in rumen fermentation pattern, percent dry matter intake and haematological parameters. During course of investigation all animals were observed in good health and there was no detrimental effect was observed on growth of the kids. Both conservation methods maintain similar nitrogen balance and average daily body weight gain, therefore, both the forms of conserved fodder offering flexibility in fodder choice based on specific nutritional goals and resource availability. Declarations Acknowledgement Author is thankful to ICAR- Central Institute for Research on Goats, for allowing conducting research on this aspect and provide all support during course of investigation. Funding None Data availability The data generated and analysed during this study are included in this article Author’s contribution Prabhat Tripathi, M.K. Tripathi, T.K. Dutta, Ravindra Kumar and U.B. Chaudhary involved in designing the experiment, execution of the treatments and conducted experiments. Prabhat Tripathi and M.K. Tripathi prepared the manuscript. Conflict of Interest There is no conflict of Interest References AOAC 1990.Official Method of Analysis.15 th Edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, D.C. Ahmad, A., A. Riaz, M. Naeem and A. Tanveer. 2007. Performance of forage sorghum intercropped with forage legumes under different planting patterns. Pakistan J. Bot. 39(2): 431-439 Ball, D.M., C.S. Hoveland and G.D. Lacefield. 2007. Southern Forages. 4th ed. International Plant Nutrition Institute, Norcross, GA. Barnett, A.J.G. and Reid, R.L. 1957 Studies on the production of volatile fatty acids from grass and rumen liquor in an artificial rumen. Journal of Agriculture Science 48: 315-321. Brown D., Ngambi J.W., Norris D. And Mbajiorgu F.E. 2016. Blood profiles of indigenous Pedi goats fed varying levels of Vachellia karroo leaf meal in Setaria verticillata hay-based diet. South African Journal of Animal Science, 46 (4) 432-440. Chandramoni, S.B., Tiwari, C.M. and Khan, M.Y. 2000. Energy metabolism with particular reference to methane production in Muzaffarnagari sheep fed rations varying in roughage to concentrate ratio. Animal Feed Science and Technology 83: 287-300. Chaudhary U B, Tripathi M K, Gupta B, Dutta T K and Sirohi H V. 2013. Effect of inorganic and organic zinc and copper on performance, nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation and blood biochemistry of kids. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 83: 1313-1322. Conway, E.J. 1962. Micro Diffusion analysis and Volumetric error. 5 th Edn.Cross by Lockwood and Sons Ltd. London. Durge S M, Tripathi M K, Tripathi P, Narayan D., Rout P K and Chaudhary U B. 2014. Intake, nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation, microbial hydrolytic enzymes and haemato-biochemical attributes of lactating goats fed concentrates containing Brassica juncea oil meal. Small Ruminant Research 121: 300-307. Fahmy A A, Youssef K M and El Shaer, H M. 2010. Intake and nutritive value of some salt-tolerant fodder grasses for sheep under saline conditions of South Sinai, Egypt. Small Ruminant Research 91: 110-115. Fribourg, H.A. 1995. Summer annual grasses. In An Introduction to Grassland Agriculture edited by Barnes, R.F., Miller, D.A. & Nelson, C.J. Forages, Vol. I, Ames Iowa: Iowa State University Press. pp. 463-472. Jalajakshi K., Reddy Y. Ramana and Reddy Vara Prasad 2016. Effect of feeding Sweet sorghum silage with or without supplementation on nutrient digestibilities and performance in Nellore brown ram lambs. Indian Journal of animal research B-3265. 1-6. Kaneko J J. 1997. Clinical Biochemistry of Domestic Animals . 5th Ed. Academic Press. Mandebvu, P. and Galbraith, H. 1999. Effect of sodium bicarbonate supplementation and variation in the proportion of barley and sugar beet pulp on growth performance and rumen, blood and carcass characteristics in young entire lambs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 82: 37-49. Muang EI EI and Mu Khin San 2020. Effect of different percentage of sorghum silage and Napier grass on nutritive intake and growth performance of Goats. International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development 11-1 ,75-80. Ngongoni, N.T., M. Mwale, C. Mapiye, M.T. Moyo, H. Hamudikuwanda and M. Titterton. 2007. Evaluation of cereal-legume intercropped forages for smallholder dairy production in Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 19:126-134. N R C, 1985 Nutrient requirements of sheep. 6th Edition, National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Washington, D.C. Radostits O M, Gay C C, Blood D C and Hinchcliff K W. 2000. Veterinary Medicine, 9th edn, W. B.Saunders, London, pp. 1819-1822. Robertson, J.B. and Van soest, P.J. 1981. The detergent system of analysis and its application to human foods. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. Roy, A. K., Agrawal, R. K., Bhardwaj, N. R., Mishra, A. K. and Mahanta, S. K. 2019. Revisiting National Forage Demand and Availability Scenario. In: Indian Fodder Scenario: Redefining State Wise Status (eds. A. K. Roy, R. K. Agrawal, N. R. Bhardwaj). ICAR- AICRP on Forage Crops and Utilization, Jhansi, India, pp. 1-21. Sarrantonio, M. 1994. Northeast cover crop handbook. Rodale Institute, Emmaus, PA. Satter L D and Slyter L L. 1974. Effects of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in-vitro. British Journal of Nutrition 32: 199-210. Snedecor GW and Cochran WG 1994. Statistical Methods.9h edt Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa. Stewart C S. 1977. Factors affecting the cellulolytic activity of rumen contents. Applied Environmental Microbiology 33: 497-502. Tagari H., Dror,Y. Ascarelli, I. and Bondi, A. 1964. The influence of levels of protein and starch in the ration of sheep on the utilization of protein. British Journal of Nutrition 18: 333. Tjandraatmadja; Rae Mac I.C. and Norton B.W. 1993. Intake and digestibility of sorghum silage by goats. Animal Feed Science and Technology 41(3): 171-179. Tripathi, M.K., Chaturvedi, O.H., Karim, S.A., Singh, V.K. and Sisodiya, S.L. 2007. Effect of different levels of concentrate allowances on rumen fluid pH, nutrient digestion, nitrogen retention and growth performance of weaner lambs. Small Ruminant Research 72: 178-186. Uzun, F., S. Ugur and M. Sulak. 2009. Yield, nutritional and chemical properties of some sorghum x sudan grass hybrids ( Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench x Sorghum sudanense Stapf.). Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 8: 1602-1608 Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B. and Lewis, B.A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and no starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Symposium: Carbohydrate methodology, metabolism and nutritional implications in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 3583-3597. Yokota H.; Okajima T. and Ohshima M.1992. Nutritive value of napier grass ( Pennisetum purpureum) silage ensiled with molasses by goats. Asian-Australaian Journal of animal Sciences.5(1) 33-37. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Revision Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Major revision with re-assessment 18 Aug, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 19 Jul, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 18 Jul, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 01 Jul, 2024 First submitted to journal 23 Jun, 2024 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-4545434","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":328884333,"identity":"5c1077c1-407d-41ce-920b-84c279aad5de","order_by":0,"name":"Prabhat Tripathi","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2676-4895","institution":"ICAR Indian Institute of Soil Science","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Prabhat","middleName":"","lastName":"Tripathi","suffix":""},{"id":328884334,"identity":"d54b1ffb-40af-4aea-a9d0-c1768b8b3d13","order_by":1,"name":"M. K. Tripathi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Indian Council of Agricultural Research","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"M.","middleName":"K.","lastName":"Tripathi","suffix":""},{"id":328884335,"identity":"057adc17-ef93-4ba6-a48f-dc7f15aea276","order_by":2,"name":"T. K. Dutta","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Dairy Research Institute","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"T.","middleName":"K.","lastName":"Dutta","suffix":""},{"id":328884336,"identity":"c158692f-4e7b-45fa-b451-9098232f53ac","order_by":3,"name":"Ravindra Kumar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"ICAR Central Institute for Research on Goats","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ravindra","middleName":"","lastName":"Kumar","suffix":""},{"id":328884337,"identity":"70759a14-7fc6-4483-a07e-33c07ebf8096","order_by":4,"name":"U.B. Chaudhary","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"ICAR Central Institute for Research on Goats","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"U.B.","middleName":"","lastName":"Chaudhary","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-06-07 10:18:44","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4545434/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4545434/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":81173043,"identity":"a3c11062-071f-4eb0-afc1-dedb695588b9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-23 05:41:00","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":745888,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4545434/v1/bb95f185-b348-40ef-93cd-f6fdc0f82ff2.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Effect of conserved sorghum hybrid (Sorghum x Sudan grass) fodder on growing Barbari kids during post monsoon season.","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eCommercially goat is in high demand because of its role in livelihood security to resource poor farmers in rural areas and employment generation for today\u0026rsquo;s youth in India. Goat prefers grazing and browsing to fulfil its feed requirement but commercial importance of goats is promoting its rearing under organised farm condition. Availability of feed resources is the big challenge before the goat keepers to sustain their livelihood as well as commercial interest without any adverse effect especially during the fodder scarcity period because during this period feed resources available at grazing sites get deteriorate in quality and quantity therefore, goats mainly depend on poor grade roughages, which are also available in insufficient quantity in fallow, barren and waste lands during post monsoon season. Roy et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) estimated on all India basis, there is an overall deficit of 11.24%in green fodder availability in the country. Total green fodder availability is 734.2 mt against requirement of 827. 19mt.Major source of green fodder in India is from cultivated land followed by pasture land and forests. However, there is an overall deficit of 23.4% in dry fodder availability in the country. Total dry fodder availability is 326.4mt against requirement of 426.1 mt. However, under organised farm condition goat keepers forced to purchase fodder on a high price and such situations force to goat farmers either sell their animals at very low price or face multiple losses on the consequence of increasing production cost with decreasing body weight and poor health of the animals ultimately decrease in production and productivity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCultivated grass species were nutritious for small ruminants and used successfully and safely as good quality summer fodder in meeting the shortage of feed in summer and autumn seasons (Fahmy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Multicut Sorghum x Sudan Grass hybrid fodder crop is generally cultivated in summer season in arid and semi-arid area with irrigations. Multicut Sorghum x Sudan grass hybrid (\u003cem\u003eSorghum bicolor\u003c/em\u003e x \u003cem\u003eSorghum bicolor var. sudanense\u003c/em\u003e) is a summer annual, high yielding, rapid growing and drought tolerant forage crop (Fribourg \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e) and can reach 3.7 m high (Ball et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). It is taller, coarser and more yielding than Sudan grass. Less leaf area, secondary roots and waxy leaf surface makes sorghum-sudan grass more resistant to drought (Sarrantonio, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e). Sorghum-sudan grass hybrids has potential to produce more forage yield than maize under high temperature and drought (Uzun et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Its\u0026rsquo; yield and quality similar sorghum (\u003cem\u003eSorghum bicolor\u003c/em\u003e L.) (Ngongoni et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring summer season its green fodder gives a very valuable support to goats for their fodder needs, However, with the progression of monsoon in arid and semi-arid areas there are lot of fodder become available in cultivated fields and seasonal vegetation growing up in the form of monsoon herbages at grazing sites i.e. fallow, barren and waste lands. Goats are not able to utilize all available feed resources during the monsoon season and it becomes surplus during this period, if this surplus quantity of feed resources is not conserved properly then it gets mature which leads deterioration in its quantity and quality, thus animals suffer adversely due to scarcity of quality fodder during post monsoon season when most of the grazing sites dried. Therefore, by adopting conservation strategies for surplus hybrid sorghum fodder in the form of hay and silage could able to provide quality fodder biomass during post monsoon season that may keep animals nutritionally sound. Hence, an experiment was conducted at Central Institute for Research on Goats, Mathura (U.P.) on conservation of surplus hybrid sorghum (sorghum x sudan grass) green biomass in the form of hay \u0026amp; silage to study the effect of its feeding on growing kids during post monsoon season.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1 Hybrid Sorghum fodder conservation and feeding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA multicut hybrid sorghum (sorghum x sudan grass) stand was sown at institute farm area in summer season with recommended agronomic package of practices. The soil of cropped area was sandy loam with low salinity. Two cuts of hybrid sorghum fodder were taken up to onset of monsoon and fed to goats as green fodder, after the onset of monsoon there was sufficient green biomass available in the grazing area to fulfil feed requirement of goats. Thus supply of hybrid sorghum green fodder to goats was stopped and it became a surplus biomass during the rainy season. Therefore, fodder crop was allowed to grow and the final cut of hybrid sorghum crop was taken in between flowering and grain filling stage so that rainy period can be escaped at harvesting. The harvested biomass was chaffed with power operated chaff cutter and converted in to small pieces 1.5-2.0 cm in size. The chaffed material was mixed properly so that leaf and stem portions mixed uniformly.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo conserve this chaffed fodder material in the form of hay, a part of chaffed biomass was dried on cemented floor and stored in a moisture free place. The other part of chaffed biomass material was conserved in the form of silage. Silage was prepared by using cemented pits with standard practice. Silage pit was opened after 6o days for its utilization. Fourteen Barbari growing kids 6\u0026ndash;7 months of age with 13.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.63 Kg average live body weight were divided randomly in to two groups and one group was fed \u003cem\u003ead lib\u003c/em\u003e with hay and another with silage. Animals of both the groups were supplemented with pelleted concentrate mixture at the rate of 1.5% of their live body weight. Concentrate mixture contained DM, OM, CP, fat, NDF, ADF, cellulose, hemicelluloses, total carbohydrate and lignin 94.4, 93.46, 17.17, 3.05, 27.69, 5.24, 4.56, 22.45, 73.24 and 0.55 percent respectively. These kids were offered conserved fodder in the form of hay and silage for a period of 75 days during post monsoon season.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2 Growth study\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe experimental animals were weighed with an electric digital electric weighing balance at weekly interval early in the morning two consecutive days early in the morning before the offering of hay and silage fodder to respective group. The mean values animal body weight of consecutive two days was used as animal body, weight and expressed in kg/animal. The animal body weight is divided by the total number of days of feeding for getting average daily gain (g)/animal in respective group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3 Metabolism study\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA metabolism trial was conducted using individual metabolic cages for all kids from both the groups. The metabolism trial lasted for 10 days (i.e.3 days\u0026rsquo; adaptation followed by 7 days of sample collection) during which daily feed intake and output of faeces and urine of 24 h were collected and recorded. During the metabolic trial clean drinking water was offered three times a day.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSamples of feed, orts, faeces and urine were collected every morning. The DM of feeds, faeces and orts was determined by drying to a constant weight in a forced air oven at 70\u003csup\u003e0\u003c/sup\u003eC. urine DM was not determined. dried samples for each day of the 7 days\u0026rsquo; collection were pooled, ground to pass a 1 mm screen and preserved for chemical analysis. For N estimation, samples of faeces (0.1%) and urine (1%) from individual animals were collected every morning in a 500 ml flask containing 25 ml of concentrated sulphuric acid.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4 Chemical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003efeed, refusals and faeces samples were analysed for DM by drying at 100 \u003csup\u003e0\u003c/sup\u003eC for 24 h. The OM was determined by ashing at 550 \u003csup\u003e0\u003c/sup\u003eC for 4 h (AOAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e) and crude protein by a Kjeldahl technique (AOAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). Neutral detergent fibre (NDF) was determined by a procedure of Van Soest et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e) without sodium sulphite or α-amylase, whereas acid detergent fibre (ADF) and acid detergent lignin (ADL) were determined according to the method described by Robertson and Van Soest (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e). Total lipids were determined as ether extract using solvent extraction procedure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.5 Rumen Fermentation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSamples of rumen fluid (50 ml) were withdrawn from all intact kids at 4 h post-feeding using a stomach tube at the end of experiment. Each sample was placed in a 100 ml glass jar and the pH determined using a portable pH meter within 4 to 5 min of sampling. After pH measurement rumen fluid was strained with four layer of muslin cloth and stored \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;20\u0026ordm;C. The N was determined using Kjeldahl technique (AOAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e), total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) as per Barnett and Reid (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1957\u003c/span\u003e) procedure, ammonia nitrogen by Conway (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1962\u003c/span\u003e) method, while TCA-N by estimated following the procedure given by Tagari et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1964\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.6 Haematology study\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBlood samples were collected once at the end of the feeding period. Samples were drawn by puncture of jugular vein in EDTA impregnated tubes for haematology study. Various haematological observations were determined in whole blood at the earliest using blood analyzer (Nihon Kohden, Japan) standardized for goat haematology.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.7 Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eData on proximate composition intake, nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation pattern and haematological parameters were analysed with the statistical \u0026ldquo;t\u0026rdquo; test model as given by Snedecor GW and Cochran WG (1994).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Proximate composition\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe dry matter content in hay was more than two times as compared to silage. The crude protein content was 4.78 ± 0.03 and 5.65 ± 0.019 percent in hay and silage respectively. It was lower than the values reported by Muang and Mu (2020) in sorghum silage. It might be due to delayed harvesting of sorghum. was also responsible for poor protein. However, conserved fodder in the form of silage was enhanced by 18.20% in crude protein content over hay fodder. (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Ahmad et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e) categorised sorghum as poor in quality due to low protein content in it. Hay and silage of sorghum x sudan grass hybrid observed with low crude protein and fat also reported by Jalajakshi et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Silage showed a significant improvement by 1.43% in organic matter content over hay fodder. NDF, ADF, cellulose, hemi-cellulose, ether extract (fat) and lignin contents were observed without any significant variation between hay and silage forms of conserved fodder. (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The values of OM, NDF and ADF in silage were observed very close to the findings of Muang and Mu (2020).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eproximate composition of sorghum x sudan grass fodder as influenced by conservation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComponents\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(% content on DM basis)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConserved fodder\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHay\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSilage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP- value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry matter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e93.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCrude protein\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.78 ± 0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.65 ± 0.019\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEther extract\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.73 ± 0.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.39 ± 0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.302\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganic matter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e92.34 ± 0.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e93.66 ± 0.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNDF\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66.50 ± 1.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65.77 ± 0.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.685\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eADF\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.71 ± 1.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.94 ± 1.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.143\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCellulose\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.1 ± 0.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.98 ± 1.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.141\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHemicellulose\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29.79 ± 2.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.83 ± 0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.233\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal carbohydrate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e85.82 ± 0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.62 ± 0.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.129\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLignin\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.55 ± 0.61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.22 ± 0.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.166\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNDF\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e- Neutral detergent fibre, *ADF\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e- Acid detergent fibre\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNotably, silage had higher crude protein and organic matter content compared to hay, suggesting that silage might be a more nutritious option for these components.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Metabolic studies\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFodder conservation in the form of silage improved digestibility of DM, fat, organic matter, NDF, hemi-cellulose and total carbohydrate by 12.91, 15.82, 12.29, 16.33, 22.28 and 13.62 percent respectively over hay (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). These improvements in digestibility could be attributed to the fermentation process in silage, which breaks down fiber components and enhances nutrient availability The values of dry matter, organic matter digestibilities were very close to findings of Tjandraatmadja \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e (1993). Although variation in digestibility of crude protein, ADF and cellulose did not differ significantly between hay and silage forms of conserved fodder but values with silage were tending towards higher side than hay.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigestibility of various constituents in goat kids fed on conserved hybrid sorghum fodder.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameters\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConserved fodder\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHay\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSilage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP- Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry matter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.01 ± 2.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e63.20 ± 0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCrude protein\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.73 ± 3.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.5 ± 1.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.103\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEther extract\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60.33 ± 3.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e76.15 ± 2.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOrganic matter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.63 ± 1.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e67.92 ± 1.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eNDF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.91 ± 3.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.24 ± 1.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003eADF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34.89 ± 3.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42.18 ± 1.87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.070\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCellulose\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49.21 ± 3.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e57.85 ± 2.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.050\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHemicellulose\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.46 ± 4.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65.74 ± 2.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal carbohydrate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e56.01 ± 1.80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e69.63 ± 1.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eNDF -Neutral detergent fibre\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003eADF- Acid detergent fibre\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe overall nutrient digestibility profile suggests that silage offers a more efficient nutrient utilization compared to hay.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"±\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"±\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry matter intake TDN, DCP and N balance of kids fed on hay and silage of hybrid sorghum (sorghum x sudan grass).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameters\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConserved fodder\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHay\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSilage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP- Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnimal body weight (kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.74 ± 0.94\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.41 ± 0.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.319\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMetabolic Body weight (\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eW\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.50 ± 0.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.99 ± 0.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.314\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry matter intake(g/animal/day)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e502.53 ± 13.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e381.83 ± 12.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry matter intake / (W\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e67.55 ± 2.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.30 ± 3.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry matter intake (kg/100kg LBW)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCrude protein intake (g/animal/day)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCrude protein intake (kg/100kg LBW)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCrude protein intake (W\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.47 ± 0.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.41 ± 0.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.32 ± 0.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.38 ± 0.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.91 ± 0.20\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.32 ± 0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.33 ± 0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.27 ± 0.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.064\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.990\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.470\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.600\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTDN intake (g/animal/day)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e267.05 ± 8.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e250.90 ± 7.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.167\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003eTDN intake /(W\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.15 ± 2.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.35 ± 2.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.948\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTDN intake (kg/100kg LBW)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.86 ± 0.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.91 ± 0.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.782\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTDN %\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53.28 ± 1.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65.81 ± 1.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigested \u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003eCP (g/animal/day)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.43 ± 0.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.02 ± 0.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigested CP/ (W\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.64 ± 0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.47 ± 0.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigested CP (g/ 100kg \u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003eLBW)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e136.17 ± 12.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e182.71 ± 11.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.017\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDigested CP %\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.89 ± 0.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.32 ± 0.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN Balance (g/day)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAverage daily gain (g)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.75 ± 0.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.0 ± 2.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.45 ± 0.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.38 ± 3.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.437\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.968\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003eW\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e- Metabolic body weight \u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003eTDN- Total digested nutrient, \u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003eCP- Crude protein, \u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003eLBW- Live body weight\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGoat kids consumed 31.61% more dry matter (animal/day) in the form of hay as compared to silage fed animals, which support the findings of Jalajakshi et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), he also observed a decrease in dry matter intake in lambs fed on sole silage. In the same pattern dry matter intake per kg metabolic body weight was also recorded high with hay as compared to silage. CPI (g/animal/day), CPI (% body weight) and CPI (per kg metabolic body weight) were observed at par between the groups. However, dry matter intake (% LBW), TDN intake (g/animal/day), TDN intake / W\u003csup\u003e0.75\u003c/sup\u003e and TDN intake (% LBW) with hay fodder did not differ in their respective values in case of silage fed animals when compared with hay. TDN (%) and DCP (%) were 12.35% and 2.43% higher with silage than hay. Silage also improved the quantum of digested crude protein (g/animal/day, per kg metabolic body weight and % LBW) over hay in the growing kids (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Hay-fed kids consumed more dry matter, but silage-fed kids benefitted from higher TDN and DCP percentages, indicating more efficient nutrient utilization. Despite lower dry matter intake, silage provided higher nutritional efficiency as seen in the improved DCP metrics. Nitrogen balance and average daily gain varied non-significantly between the groups, suggesting that both hay and silage were observed effective in maintaining nitrogen balance and supporting growth in kids.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3 Haematology\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHaematological parameters are critical indicators of the health status and physiological condition of livestock. Feeding of conserved hybrid sorghum in the form of hay and silage had no influence on haematological attributes (RBC, WBC, Platelets, Hb and MCHC etc.) and remain unchanged between animals of both the groups. However, there were trends indicating lower haemoglobin, WBC, and haematocrit levels in silage-fed kids compared to hay-fed kids, though these differences were not statistically significant. The lack of significant differences in RBC, MCV, MCH, MCHC, and platelet counts suggests that both hay and silage provide similar haematological profiles, which indicates that either conservation method can maintain adequate haematological health in goat kids. (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Brown et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) also revealed no change in haematological indices of Pedi goats fed varying levels of leaf meal in \u003cem\u003eSetaria verticillata\u003c/em\u003e hay-based diet. The Hb content under both the groups were observed within the range (6 to 12 g dl\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e) as reported by Kaneko (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). The results of Durge et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) and Chaudhary et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) also resemble with the findings, but in contrast to this Radostits et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) suggested reference value of Hb (8.0–12.0 g/dl) for goats.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"±\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"±\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHaematological attributes of goat kids as influenced by hay and silage feeding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameters\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConserved fodder\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHay\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSilage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP- Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHb\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e (g/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.38 ± 0.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.77 ± 0.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.056\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWBC\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e (10\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e/ µL)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.41 ± 0.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.32 ± 1.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.059\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRBC (10\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e/µL)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.26 ± 1.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.06 ± 1.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.151\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHCT \u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e (g/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.84 ± 0.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.58 ± 0.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.060\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMCV \u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e (fl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.34 ± 0.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.78 ± 1.81\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.429\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMCH \u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e (pq)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.14 ± 0.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.81 ± 0.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.588\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMCHC \u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e (g/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.32 ± 0.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.52 ± 0.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.510\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePLT \u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e (10\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e/µL)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1059.57 ± 83.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"±\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1143.57 ± 73.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.463\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003eHb\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e: \u003cem\u003ehaemoglobin;\u003c/em\u003e WBC\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e: \u003cem\u003ewhite blood cell;\u003c/em\u003e RBC \u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e: \u003cem\u003ered blood cell;\u003c/em\u003e HCT \u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003ehaematocrit;\u003c/em\u003e MCV \u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003emean corpuscular volume;\u003c/em\u003e MCH\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e: \u003cem\u003emean corpuscular haemoglobin;\u003c/em\u003e MCHC\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e: \u003cem\u003emean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration.\u003c/em\u003e PLT \u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e: \u003cem\u003eplatelets\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4 Rumen Fermentation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRumen parameters as influenced by hay and silage feeding in kids.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameters\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConserved fodder\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHay\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSilage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP- Value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003epH\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.16 ± 0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.02 ± 0.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.186\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal volatile fatty acid(m mol/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.41 ± 0.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.65 ± 0.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.658\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmmonia nitrogen (mg/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.2 ± 0.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.0 ± 0.80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.479\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal nitrogen (mg/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54.0 ± 1.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58.8 ± 0.034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNon-precipitable nitrogen (mg/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.2 ± 1.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.0 ± 2.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.594\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTCA-ppt-N (mg/dl)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.8 ± 1.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.0 ± 2.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.240\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe values of rumen fermentation parameters such as pH, TVFA, ammonia –N, Non-perceptible nitrogen and TCA-ppt-N were remaining unchanged in both the forms of conserved fodder. However, total nitrogen content was significantly higher in rumen fluid of silage fed animals over hay, this suggests that silage may enhance nitrogen retention and utilization more effectively than hay. (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). The rumen NH3-N concentration between 15 to 18 mg/dl was reported adequate for optimum rumen fermentation (Satter and Slyter \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1974\u003c/span\u003e). However, the values of TVFA and ammonia nitrogen in rumen liquor of both the groups were higher than values reported by Yokota, et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e) with Napier grass silage. Rumen fluid pH under both the groups was less than 6.50, which was recommended for optimum fermentation of fibrous feed (Stewart \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1977\u003c/span\u003e), however, low pH is the indicator of low protein digestibility of both the forms of conserved fodder. This indicates that both hay and silage provide similar conditions for rumen fermentation. Overall, while silage may offer an advantage in terms of total nitrogen availability, both conservation methods appear to maintain comparable overall rumen health and function.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eFeeding kids with silage of hybrid sorghum enhanced the digestibility of nutrients, particularly TDN and DCP as compare to hay. Silage also enhanced dry matter digestibility, which denotes increase in utilization of dry matter over hay. The protein requirement for growing kids recommended 0.30 to 0.36 g CP/g of gain (NRC 1985), therefore, both form of conserved fodder may be offered to growing kids with adequate concentrate supplementation with both the forms of conserved sorghum fodder during post monsoon season because conserved hybrid sorghum fodder alone not able to fulfil nutritional requirements of growing kids. Although dry matter intake was higher in hay-fed kids but silage provided more efficient nutrient utilization. Under both the form of conserved sorghum fodder no variation observed in rumen fermentation pattern, percent dry matter intake and haematological parameters. During course of investigation all animals were observed in good health and there was no detrimental effect was observed on growth of the kids. Both conservation methods maintain similar nitrogen balance and average daily body weight gain, therefore, both the forms of conserved fodder offering flexibility in fodder choice based on specific nutritional goals and resource availability.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAuthor is thankful to ICAR- Central Institute for Research on Goats, for allowing conducting research on this aspect and provide all support during course of investigation.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data generated and analysed during this study are included in this article\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor\u0026rsquo;s contribution\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePrabhat Tripathi, M.K. Tripathi, T.K. Dutta, Ravindra Kumar and U.B. Chaudhary \u0026nbsp; involved in designing the experiment, execution of the treatments and conducted experiments. Prabhat Tripathi and M.K. Tripathi prepared the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of Interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere is no conflict of Interest\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAOAC 1990.Official Method of Analysis.15\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003eEdn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, D.C.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAhmad, A., A. Riaz, M. Naeem and A. Tanveer. 2007. Performance of forage sorghum intercropped with forage legumes under different planting patterns. Pakistan J. Bot. 39(2): 431-439\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBall, D.M., C.S. Hoveland and G.D. Lacefield. 2007. Southern Forages. 4th ed. International Plant Nutrition Institute, Norcross, GA.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBarnett, A.J.G. and Reid, R.L. 1957 Studies on the production of volatile fatty acids from grass and rumen liquor in an artificial rumen. Journal of Agriculture Science 48: 315-321.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBrown D., Ngambi J.W., Norris D. And Mbajiorgu F.E. 2016. Blood profiles of indigenous Pedi goats fed varying levels of \u003cem\u003eVachellia karroo\u003c/em\u003e leaf meal in \u003cem\u003eSetaria verticillata\u003c/em\u003e hay-based diet. South African Journal of Animal Science, 46 (4) 432-440.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChandramoni, S.B., Tiwari, C.M. and Khan, M.Y. 2000. Energy metabolism with particular reference to methane production in Muzaffarnagari sheep fed rations varying in roughage to concentrate ratio. Animal Feed Science and Technology 83: 287-300.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChaudhary U B, Tripathi M K, Gupta B, Dutta T K and Sirohi H V. 2013. Effect of inorganic and organic zinc and copper on performance, nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation and blood biochemistry of kids. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 83: 1313-1322.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eConway, E.J. 1962. Micro Diffusion analysis and Volumetric error. 5\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003eEdn.Cross by Lockwood and Sons Ltd. London.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDurge S M, Tripathi M K, Tripathi P, Narayan D., Rout P K and Chaudhary U B. 2014. Intake, nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation, microbial hydrolytic enzymes and haemato-biochemical attributes of lactating goats fed concentrates containing \u003cem\u003eBrassica juncea\u003c/em\u003e oil meal. Small Ruminant Research 121: 300-307.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFahmy A A, Youssef K M and El Shaer, H M. 2010. Intake and nutritive value of some salt-tolerant fodder grasses for sheep under saline conditions of South Sinai, Egypt. Small Ruminant Research 91: 110-115.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFribourg, H.A. 1995. Summer annual grasses. In An Introduction to Grassland Agriculture edited by Barnes, R.F., Miller, D.A. \u0026amp; Nelson, C.J. Forages, Vol. I, Ames Iowa: Iowa State University Press. pp. 463-472.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJalajakshi\u0026nbsp;K., Reddy Y. Ramana and Reddy Vara Prasad 2016. Effect of feeding Sweet sorghum silage with or without supplementation on nutrient digestibilities and performance in Nellore brown ram lambs. Indian Journal of animal research B-3265. 1-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp;Kaneko J J. 1997. \u003cem\u003eClinical Biochemistry of Domestic Animals\u003c/em\u003e. 5th Ed. Academic Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMandebvu, P. and Galbraith, H. 1999. Effect of sodium bicarbonate supplementation and variation in the proportion of barley and sugar beet pulp on growth performance and rumen, blood and carcass characteristics in young entire lambs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 82: 37-49. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMuang EI EI and Mu Khin San 2020. Effect of different percentage of sorghum silage and Napier grass on nutritive intake and growth performance of Goats. International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development 11-1 ,75-80.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eNgongoni, N.T., M. Mwale, C. Mapiye, M.T. Moyo, H. Hamudikuwanda and M. Titterton. 2007. Evaluation of cereal-legume intercropped forages for smallholder dairy production in Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 19:126-134.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eN R C, 1985 Nutrient requirements of sheep. 6th Edition, National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRadostits O M, Gay C C, Blood D C and Hinchcliff K W. 2000. Veterinary Medicine, 9th edn, W. B.Saunders, London, pp. 1819-1822.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRobertson, J.B. and Van soest, P.J. 1981. The detergent system of analysis and its application to human foods. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u0026nbsp;Roy, A. K., Agrawal, R. K., Bhardwaj, N. R., Mishra, A. K. and Mahanta, S. K. 2019. Revisiting National Forage Demand and Availability Scenario. In: Indian Fodder Scenario: Redefining State Wise Status (eds. A. K. Roy, R. K. Agrawal, N. R. Bhardwaj). ICAR- AICRP on Forage Crops and Utilization, Jhansi, India, pp. 1-21.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSarrantonio, M. 1994. Northeast cover crop handbook. Rodale Institute, Emmaus, PA.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSatter L D and Slyter L L. 1974. Effects of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in-vitro. British Journal of Nutrition 32: 199-210.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSnedecor GW and Cochran WG 1994. Statistical Methods.9h edt Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStewart C S. 1977. Factors affecting the cellulolytic activity of rumen contents. Applied Environmental Microbiology 33: 497-502.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTagari H., Dror,Y. Ascarelli, I. and Bondi, A. 1964. The influence of levels of protein and starch in the ration of sheep on the utilization of protein. \u0026nbsp;British Journal of Nutrition 18: 333.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTjandraatmadja; Rae Mac I.C. and Norton B.W. 1993. Intake and digestibility of sorghum silage by goats. Animal Feed Science and Technology 41(3): 171-179.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTripathi, M.K., Chaturvedi, O.H., Karim, S.A., Singh, V.K. and Sisodiya, S.L. 2007. Effect of different levels of concentrate allowances on rumen fluid pH, nutrient digestion, nitrogen retention and growth performance of weaner lambs. Small Ruminant Research\u0026nbsp;72: 178-186.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eUzun, F., S. Ugur and M. Sulak. 2009. Yield, nutritional and chemical properties of some sorghum x sudan grass hybrids (\u003cem\u003eSorghum bicolor\u003c/em\u003e (L.) Moench x \u003cem\u003eSorghum sudanense\u003c/em\u003e Stapf.). Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 8: 1602-1608\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVan Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B. and Lewis, B.A. 1991. \u0026nbsp;Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and no starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Symposium: Carbohydrate methodology, metabolism and nutritional implications in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 3583-3597.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eYokota H.; Okajima T. and Ohshima M.1992. Nutritive value of napier grass (\u003cem\u003ePennisetum purpureum)\u003c/em\u003e silage ensiled with molasses by goats. Asian-Australaian Journal of animal Sciences.5(1) 33-37. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":true,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"tropical-animal-health-and-production","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"trop","sideBox":"Learn more about [Tropical Animal Health and Production](https://www.springer.com/journal/11250)","snPcode":"11250","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11250/3","title":"Tropical Animal Health and Production","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Hybrid sorghum, Conservation, Silage, Hay, Kids","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4545434/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4545434/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eGoats play a very important role in rural economy of India; it not only augments small and marginal farmer’s income but also provide livelihood to landless and economically weaker section of the rural society in semi-arid and arid areas. Indian livestock sector is facing a big challenge to minimise gap between demand and supply of animal feed resources and this gap widened day by day due to least priority addressed to fodder production and its conservation. Therefore, surplus fodder available with the farmer during the monsoon season is used as fuel and litter material etc. during post monsoon season again deepen the fodder scarcity problem. Goat is primarily grazing and browsing animal but feed resources are available in inadequate quantity at grazing sites mainly on waste fallow, barren lands during the post monsoon season to fulfil its dietary needs. Fodder conservation strategies could narrow the gap between demand and supply during fodder scarcity months and sustain the livelihood security of rural poor as well as minimising risk to commercial goat farmers. Therefore, summer sown sorghum hybrid (sorghum x sudan grass) green fodder of third cut was conserved as hay and silage because in rainy season there was sufficient green biomass available for goats at grazing sites and cultivated fodder become surplus to the animals. Such surplus fodder needs to be conserved so that it can be utilized during scarcity period. This conserved fodder i.e. hay and silage were evaluated for its suitability as goat feed during post monsoon season. Fourteen Barbari growing kids 6-7 months of age with 13.50 ± 0.63 Kg average live body weight were divided randomly in to two groups and one group was fed with hay and another with silage. A metabolism trial was conducted using individual cages for comparing nutrient intake digestibility and rumen fermentation pattern. \u0026nbsp;Dry matter intake (% of live body weight) was 3.47 and 2.91 % with hay and silage fed animal respectively. Crude protein, organic matter contents were significantly higher in silage fodder over hay. Dry matter digestibility was 23.9 percent higher with silage fodder over hay. However, values for crude protein digestibility did not differ between hay and silage feeding. DCP (%) was 3.89 with hay and 6.32 with silage fed animal. Rumen fermentation parameters except Total-N were also not influenced by hay and silage feeding. Therefore, hay and silage preparation may improve the fodder utilization of poor grade roughage in goats during the fodder scarcity months or post monsoon season.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Effect of conserved sorghum hybrid (Sorghum x Sudan grass) fodder on growing Barbari kids during post monsoon season.","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-08-13 05:12:18","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4545434/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Major revision with re-assessment","date":"2024-08-18T19:55:56+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"","date":"2024-07-19T16:10:40+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-07-18T20:06:00+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-07-01T06:23:10+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Tropical Animal Health and Production","date":"2024-06-24T02:31:51+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"tropical-animal-health-and-production","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"trop","sideBox":"Learn more about [Tropical Animal Health and Production](https://www.springer.com/journal/11250)","snPcode":"11250","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/11250/3","title":"Tropical Animal Health and Production","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"8d716896-7c43-4ae2-a47d-9b107f46c3d3","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 13th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"in-revision","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-28T15:00:39+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-08-13 05:12:18","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4545434","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4545434","identity":"rs-4545434","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}