Indian Journal of Animal Research

  • Chief EditorK.M.L. Pathak

  • Print ISSN 0367-6722

  • Online ISSN 0976-0555

  • NAAS Rating 6.50

  • SJR 0.263

  • Impact Factor 0.4 (2024)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Scopus, AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Indian Journal of Animal Research, volume 47 issue 6 (december 2013) : 555-557

IN VITRO EVALUATION OF WHEAT STRAW VARIETIES FOR CHEMICAL COMPOSITION, GAS PRODUCTION AND DIGESTIBILITY

Shalini Vaswani, Ravindra Kumar, Vinod Kumar, Debashis Roy, Muneendra Kumar
1Department of Animal Nutrition College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, DUVASU, Mathura- 281 001, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Vaswani Shalini, Kumar Ravindra, Kumar Vinod, Roy Debashis, Kumar Muneendra (2024). IN VITRO EVALUATION OF WHEAT STRAW VARIETIES FOR CHEMICAL COMPOSITION, GAS PRODUCTION AND DIGESTIBILITY. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 47(6): 555-557. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Straws of five wheat varieties viz, Raj3077, PBW373, PBW154, Raj3765 and LOK1 were evaluated for their chemical composition, in vitro digestibility and gas production. It was found that IVDMD and IVOMD content were higher in varieties  PBW154 and Raj 3077 as compared to other varieties. The gas production/gm DM and gas production/gm digestible DM were significantly (P  exists  a positive relation between the gas production and digestibility.

REFERENCES

  1. Ali. N and Singh.M. (2003). In sacco Nutritional Evaluation of wheat straw varieties. Anim. Nutri. and Feed Tech. 3: 67-74.
  2. AOAC (1995). Official Methods of Analysis, 16th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA.
  3. Erickson, D. O., Meyer, D. W. and Foster, A. E. (1982). The effect of genotypes on the feed value of barley straws. J. Anim. Sci. 55: 1015–1026.
  4. Kafilzadeh. F and Maleki. E. (2011). Chemical composition, in vitro digestibility and gas production of straws from different varieties and accessions of chickpea J. Anim. Physio. and Anim. Nutr. 95(3).
  5. Kernan, J. A., Crowle, W. L., Spurr, D. T. and Coxworth, E. C. (1979). Straw quality of cereal cultivars before and after treatment with anhydrous ammonia. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 59: 511–517.
  6. Menke, K.H. and Steingass, H. (1988). Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained by chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Anim. Res. Dev. 28: 7-55.
  7. Menke, K.H., Raab, L., Salewski, A., Steingass, H., Fritz, D. and Schneider, W. (1979). The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feeding stuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. J. Agri. Sci. (Camb.), 93: 217-222.
  8. Pearce, G.R. (1983). Variability in the composition and in vitro digestibility of cereal straws. In: Feed Information and Animal Production, (Robards G.E. and. Packham R.G. ed) pp. 417-420.
  9. Ramachandra, K.S., Taneja, R.P., Sampath, K.T., Angadi, U.B. and Anandan, S. (2007). Availability and Requirement of feeds and fodders in India. National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, Banglore, India.
  10. Reid, G.W., Orskov, E.R., Kay, M. (1988). A note on the effect of variety, type of straw and ammonia treatment on digestibility and on growth rate in steers. Anim. Prod. 47: 157-160.
  11. SPSS (1996). Statistical Packages for Social Science version 7.5. SPSS Inc., IL, USA.
  12. Tuah, A. K., Lafadeuju, E., Ørskov, E. R. and Blackett, G. A. (1986). Rumen degradation of straw. Untreated and ammonia treated barley, oat and wheat straw varieties and triticale straw. Anim. Prod. 43: 261–269.
  13. Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B. and Lewis, B.A. (1991). Method for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci., 74: 3583-3597.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)