Literature review

Buffaloes production China

China has a history of buffalo breeding for more than 7000 years (Wey et al. 1980),
and buffaloes are mainly distributed in 18 provinces in southern China, the quantity of
buffaloes in stock in 2005 was 22,745,300, ranking the third place in the world (FAO, 2005).
China has respectively introduced famous dairy buffalo breeds (Murrah and Nili-Ravi) from
India and Pakistan to crossbreed with local buffaloes in 1957 and 1974. Chinese buffalo is of
swamp type, they are small-size and the milk and meat performance are poor. Average milk
yield of the local female buffaloes in lactation is 500-600kg. The contents of milk fat, lacto
protein and dry matter are 7.5%, 5% and 20%, respectively (Yang et al., 2005). It is reported
that after crossbreeding of local buffaloes with dairy buffaloes (Murrah and NiliRavi), the
milk yield of the first and second generation Murrah and NiliRavi crossbreds respectively
reached 1240.5kg and 1423.3kg, 2041.2kg and 1994.9kg which were 13.5% and 30.2%
higher than that of selected local. The contents of milk fat, lacto protein and dry matter in
crossbred milk are 7.9%, 4.5% and 18.4%, respectively observed by Zhang (2000).
According to incomplete statistics, more than 1 million crossbred buffaloes have been born in
China in recent 30 years.

Comparative nutritional studies between buffaloes and cattle

Devendra (1985) and Wanapat et al. (1994) showed that swamp buffaloes were more
efficient than cattle in many aspects, namely N-recycling and fiber digestion, ruminal NH3-N
level in relation to efficient fermentation and intake. Buffaloes are recognized to be better at
converting poor-quality roughage into milk and meat. Wanapat and Rowlinson (2007)
described that when cattle and buffalo were kept under similar conditions, buffalo used feed
more efficiently, with the digestibility of feeds typically ranging between 2 and 3 percentage
units higher. Nitrogen utilization in swamp buffalo was found to be more efficient than in
Malaysian cattle (Devendra, 1985). This superiority is particularly noticeable in situations
where the feed supply is low quantity and/or quality and how much of superiority may be
explained by differences in the nature of rumen microbial population which would affect the
type of fermentation. Thus, any variations between cattle and buffalo in the proportions and
numbers of ruminal bacteria, protozoa and fungi might attribute to the explanation of
differences in digestive capability due to fermentation end-products available for absorption
and utilization by ruminants. Cattle and swamp buffaloes showing differences in rumen
bacterial, protozoal population and fungal zoospore counts, offer new additional information
as why swamp buffaloes exhibit conditionally body weight better than cattle especially
during long dry season without green grass (Wanapat et al., 2000).

Nutrition and feeding of swamp buffalo

Livestock production in tropical areas plays a crucial role, which extends beyond its
traditional supply of meat and milk. Swamp buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) are used for multiple
purposes as draft power, means of transportation, capital, credit, meat, milk, social value,
hides, and source of organic fertilizer for seasonal croppings (Chantalakhana, 1990; Wanapat,
1990; Devendra and Chantalakhana, 1994; Devendra, 2007). Livestock can utilize
agricultural crop residues and farm by-products that are abundantly available. In general,
farms in tropical production systems include traditional rice cultivation, field crop
production, e.g., sugarcane, cassava, sweet potato and raise buffalo or cattle, or both. Feed
resources are scarce in both quantity and quality especially during the long dry season which
results in low productivity of livestock. Seasonal fluctuation has a great impact on feed
resource quantity and quality (Wanapat, 1990; Devendra, 2007).
Factor Affecting Voluntary Feed Intake
Feed intake is one of the most crucial factors for ruminants (cattle, sheep, goat, and
buffalo) in terms of productivity and performance Ocak N et al. (2006). If voluntary feed
intake (VFI) of animals is low in range-based livestock, production rate of acquired products
decreases swiftly Van DTT. (2006). This situation arises from the usage of great proportion
of consumed metabolisable energy (ME) for maintenance and a deficiency at the conversion
of the consumed nutrients to animal products Van DTT. (2006). All of these are more
important for animals having pretty complicated feed intake decisions Parsons AJ et al.
(1994) according to different plant families and species in the rangeland. For example, cattles
prefer bioactive fodder crops containing compounds like tannins at a lower rate and thus
malnutrition occurs. Therefore, harvesting or afternoon grazing, when non-structural
carbohydrate rate of the plants increases, is suggested for decreasing plant preference at the
rangelands rich with these plants or increasing palatability of these species. Thus, Lombardi
D et al. (2015) such bioactive fodder crops are consumed more willingly by the ruminants
and animals are naturally controlled against pathogens and there is no deterioration in their
productivity and performance Lombardi D et al. (2015) and Uzun F et al. (2016). The most
significant three factors affecting VFI of ruminants are animals, fodder crops and
environmental conditions. It has been determined that preferability of plants and VFI control
short period feeding behaviour with homeostatic and long period control of body depending
on body reserves and nutrient requirements of animals [43, 60].
Voluntary feed intake of an animal in rangeland can be explained as which plant or
plants were preferred primarily, willingly and heartily. When VFI behaviours of grazing
animals are assessed, plant height, fertilizer amount and type applied to range, physiologic
status of animals, body reserves, previous nutrition habits, climate, time zone within a day
and antinutritional factors of plants must be considered McDonald P et al. (1995).
Voluntary feed intake of grazing ruminants is proportional to body weight and this
proportion shows that not only metabolic but also physical factors regulate intake and these
factors mostly support each other. Herbage intake can be seen as a function of factors such as
average biting size, biting rate (number of bites per minute) and grazing time. Another factor
regulating the VFI in rangeland is fullness of digestive tract Aikman PC et al. (2008).
Fullness of digestive tract depends on metabolic rate connected with consumed oxygen Ocak
N, Yıldırım A. (2007). It was stated that different sheep breeds of the same age Yıldırım A et
al. (2014a) or animals in different ages from the same breed [88] have different digestive tract
characteristics, which may affect feed intake and feed conversion ratios. If DM of the herbage
is lower than 20 %, water volume of the rumen increases and this can show a repressive
effect on VFI Meissner HH, Paulsmeier DV. (1995), Pasha TN (1994). Moreover, some
studies have reported that VFI is related with body weight and metabolic body size
Erfanzadeh R et al. (2014). Besides, it is known that there is a relation between grazing speed
and herbage intake however individual speed differences prevent using grazing speed as a
factor in an estimation equation Halachmi Y et al. (2016). Plant preference of grazing animals
is also related with nutrient composition of plants Khojasteh F (2013). While the effect of this
relation on VFI at the plant growth period was 5%, effect of elderly plants on VFI with ADF,
NDF and N content was 51 % Prendiville R et al. (2010), Thomas DT et al. (2010).

A. L. TAP ARIA AND V. V. SHARMA (1980) observed that three experiments, each
with six lactating Mehsana-Surti buffaloes, was conducted to investigate the effect of
supplementary feeding of concentrates on intake of basal rations of berseem hay, maize silage
or wheat straw and on the total intake of feeds in 3 x 3 latin square designs. Experiment 1,
berseem hay ad libitum (H); berseem hay ad libitum + concentrates at 15% of the hay DMI
(HCj); berseem hay ad libitum + concentrates at 30% of the hay DMI (HC2). Experiment 2,
maize silage ad libitum (S); maize silage ad libitum + concentrates at 15% of silage DMI
(SC1); maize silage ad libitum + concentrates at 30% of silage DMI (SC2). Experiment 3,
wheat straw ad libitum + concentrates at 30% of straw DMI (WC]); wheat straw ad libitum +
concentrates at 50% of straw DMI (WC2); wheat straw ad libitum + concentrates at 70% of
straw DMI (WC8).
In the berseem hay experiment, concentrate feeding at 16-8 or 26-1% of hay dry
matter intake (DMI) resulted in a decrease of hay DMI by 0-77 and 0-65 kg/kg concentrate
D.M., respectively. Intake of total digestible nutrients (TDN) and digestible crude protein
(DCP) of buffaloes receiving concentrates in addition to hay were not different from those
receiving hay alone. The possibility of some chemical factor limiting feed intake has been
indicated for these rations in buffaloes. In the maize silage experiment, concentrate feeding at
14-5 and 27-7% of the silage DMI resulted in a similar increase of total DMI, thereby
increasing the TDN intake and DCP intake. Voluntary intake of rations comprising wheat
straw fed free choice with three levels of concentrates at 28-7, 48-0 and 68-8 % of straw DMI
was studied in the third experiment. Concentrate supplementation had little effect on straw
DMI with the result that intakes of total DM, TDN and DCP on the medium and high
proportions of supplements were higher than those on the low proportion. The milk yield, of
buffaloes receiving medium and high proportions of concentrates with wheat straw increased
significantly over those receiving the low proportion of concentrates. The implication of
physical factors limiting intake is discussed in the case of maize silage and wheat straw diets.

S. Ahmad et al. (2014) described by dry Nili Ravi buffaloes (n=25) was selected from
amongst the existing herd and randomly divided into five groups. These animals were fed
five total mixed rations (TMR) which wheat straw, Cotton seed meal, Maize gluten, Maize
grain, Wheat bran, Rice polishing, Molasses, Maize gluten, Sunflower meal and mineral
mixture was formulated with different NDF levels for different groups. Rations C had 33%
NDF level as per NRC (NRC, 2001) requirements. Ration A and B had 23 and 28% NDF
levels while rations D and E were having 38 and 43% levels of NDF, respectively
isonitrogenous and isocaloric diets. Nutrient intake and nutrients digestibility differed
significantly among the dietary groups. In group C dry matter, (14.42±0.09 kg/d), crude
protein (1.58±0.01 kg/d) and in group E neutral detergent fiber intake (5.52±0.010kg/d) were
highest than rest of other treatment groups. Whereas, DM, and NDF digestibility was
observed highest in the group B (62.5±1.04kg/d) and C (64.46±0.99kg/d) respectively as
compared to other groups. The CP digestibility was non-significantly different among
treatment groups. The average weight gain in dry Nili Ravi buffaloes was 0.48±0.045 kg/d.

Rice straw as a feed source

Rice straw is abundantly produced by rice farmers in many agricultural countries

worldwide. In Southeast Asia, about 30–40% of the total rice straw production is commonly
used to feed more than 90% of the ruminant population in the region including other
countries such as China and Mongolia (Devendra and Thomas 2002). Rice straw can also be
offered, up to 60%, in combinations with other feed ingredients, such as concentrates,
molasses, or legumes to improve palatability, protein content, and intake and digestibility by
the animals.

Nutritional characteristics of rice Straw

Basically, rice straw has low protein content ranging from 3% to 6%. It has high cell
walls, the neutral detergent fiber (ADF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) which consisted of
the degradable carbohydrate fractions such as starch, cellulose and hemicellulose. It also
contains an indigestible phenolic substance called lignin. When used as fodder, rice straw
primarily serves as bulk or filler to meet the dry matter requirement of ruminants. This
contains 80% substances which are potentially degradable and a source of energy. Shen et al.
(1998) found that rice straw had high dry matter (DM) contents of 92–96% but with a low CP
content ranging from 3% to 7%. The lignin and silica contents of rice straw are in an
indigestible form when ingested by animals. As fodder, rice straw has low energy and protein
contents. Utilization of rice straw is limited due to minimal contents of digestible nutrients
and various characteristics such as palatability, variable nutritional values, high silica and
oxalates, and sometimes.

Rice straw contains higher quantities of potassium (1.58% of DM), calcium (0.53%),
and magnesium (0.24%). But it is low in phosphorus (0.12%), sodium (0.13%), iron (0.07%),
and manganese (0.07%), (Shen et al. 1998). The phosphorus (0.02–0.16%) content of rice
straw is not sufficient to meet the required 0.3% for growth and normal fertility of animals.
However, its calcium content of 0.4% is considered adequate to meet the daily requirement
for livestock (Jackson 1977).
Rice straw intake by ruminants

Generally, the quantity of rice straw that the animal can eat each day is limited to less
than 2% of its body weight. According to the report of Devendra (1997), the amount of rice
straw that ruminants can consume can be as high as 1.2 kg DM per 100 kg of live weight.
The rice straw intake, however, varies among animals and this is also influenced by the
proportion or parts of the rice straw used in the ration. The intake of rice straw also varies
according to method of processing. Physical processing, such as chopping or the use of
chemical or microbiological treatments, considerably improves an animal’s rice straw intake.
When offered as is, rice straw intake is lower because it is bulky or occupies more space in
the rumen. The digestibility of the straw is also affected due to the slow passage rate of
ingested straw and its fermentation by microorganisms in the rumen. Chopping the straw
provides more space in the rumen and allows more entries of microorganisms to ferment the
straw’s degradable components.

Supplementation of by-product which may increase intake and/or digestion and/or

utilization of the basal diet are the condition directly related to microbial activities which are
required to optimize rumen digestion. The microbes within the rumen grow efficiently when
ammonia-nitrogen in the rumen is adequate. For good growth for young stock which is fed on
the rice straw-based diet, 8-10% of protein is needed (Jackson, 1978). Wanapat, Prasevdsuk,
Chanthi and Sivapraphagon (1983) expressed that 7% of crude protein was sufficient to
supply adequate amount of digestible protein for normal growth of cattle.

Supplementation with dried rumen digesta pellets (DRDP) at 50 to 150 g in buffalo

rice straw DM intake significantly improved than no-supplement group. Neutral detergent
fibre (NDF) intake was 1.43% of no supplement group and 1.86%, 1.88%, 1.96% of 50g,
100g and 150g of DRDP. The acid detergent fibre intake (ADF) was 0.83% of no supplement
group and 1.09%, 1.14%, 1.19% of 50g, 100g and 150g of DRDP that NDF and ADF intakes
were not affected by DRDP levels. Supplementation of DRDP in buffalo increased digestible
organic matter intake (DOMI) and metabolizable energy (ME) when compared to the no
supplement group. Buffalo fed with DRDP at 150 g/day had the highest CP and NDF
digestibility but the digestibility coefficients of DM, OM, and ADF did not change among
treatments (Anuthida Seankamsorn et al., 2017).
 Perdok etal (1982) recommended that urea ammonia treatment improved the feeding
value of rice straw and diets containing urea ammonia treated straw increased live weight
gain and milk production in cattle and buffaloes compared to diets containing untreated
straw. Wanapat et al. (2013) described that using combination of cassava chip and rice bran
(as carbohydrate sources) was improved digestibility, populations of total viable bacteria and
proteolytic bacteria. Lohani et al. (1986) revealed that urea treatment increases crude protein
content and dry matter digestibility of straw. By treating rice straw with urea intake,
degradability and growth can be enhanced, compared to feeding untreated rice straw alone
(Wanapat, 2009). Perdok et al. (1982) recommended that urea ammonia treatment improved
the feeding value of rice straw and diets containing urea ammonia treated straw increased live
weight gain and milk production in cattle and buffaloes compared to diets containing
untreated straw. Wanapat et al., (1999) that treatment of urea-calcium hydroxide could
enhance the nutritive value of rice straw. In addition, dry matter intake (DMI) and nutrient
digestibility (DM, CP, OM, NDF and ADF) were significantly increased by straw treatments.

Vo Thi Kim Thanh (2012) described that there was no significant effect on intake of
rice straw which was 3.1, 3.4, 3.1 and 3.1 kg DM/day for cattle and 4.5, 4.5, 4.5 and 4.6 kg
DM/day for buffalo when the animal was fed on urea sprayed rice straw (0%, 0.5%, 1% and
2% of urea) at libitum. Rumen NH3 concentrations were 39, 60, 70 and 96 mg/l for cattle and
51, 81, 102 and 132 mg/l for buffalo with significant difference. The dry matter digestibility
for both cattle and buffalo were not significantly different between the diets containing
different levels of urea which were 57.1%, 60.3%, 58.3% and 60.7% for cattle and 60.7%,
57.4%, 59.6% and 60.2% for buffaloes.

Sugarcane as feed sources

In many developing countries, livestock suffer from shortages of feed supply despite
the high amounts of crop by-products and agro industrial residues that are not completely
utilized. Much of these are consumable and utilizable by ruminants and can be enriched by
different process, some of which can be carried out by small farmers. Sugarcane is grown in
tropical regions and its tops (the up. most 20-25 centimeter portion of the plant) are the first
by-products after harvesting and extensively used as forage crop and silage in some countries.
Sugarcane tops (Saccharum officinarum) are the important crop residue yielding about 15%
of the total sugarcane yield. Thus, there is abundant availability of sugarcane tops at the time
of harvest, which could be used a fodder to reduce pressure on the cultivable land. However,
due to the low protein (Kutty and Prasad, 1980), low digestibility of nutrients (Patil et al.,
1999) and poor mineral contents (Joshi et al., 1995) the sugarcane tops are being partially
used as roughage. Sugarcane leaves contain 5.68 Mj/kg DE and 3-6% CP and are a good feed
resource for buffalo. Andrade et al. (2001) reported that urea supplementation increased the
digestibility of dry matter and total digestible nutrients intake of sugarcane forage.

The potential of sugarcane, and its intrinsic advantages over other tropical grasses, as
a converter of solar energy into biomass is the rationale for the concept of “energy cane”
(Alexander, 1985). However, sugarcane has other characteristics which make it especially
appropriate as a feed reserve for livestock in the tropics and superior to almost all other
forage crops. The quantity and nutritional quality of sugarcane increase with harvest interval,
with optimum values being reached at a harvest interval of between 12 and 18 months. The
dry matter content of mature sugarcane averages 30 percent which exceeds that of most other
forage grasses (the average for Elephant and King Grasses is closer to 17 percent). Thus
harvest, transport and processing costs per unit dry matter are less for sugarcane than for most
other forages.

Sugarcane intake by ruminant

During harvesting season, sugarcane-tops are plenty left in the field. It is known that
sugarcane tops are one of usable crop-residues as animal feeds because of its components are
suitable for ruminants. But the use of sugarcane tops is negligable due to low nutritive values.
However, some researchers have reported that feeding sugarcane-tops with protein
supplementation for ruminants in dry season did maintain their body weight (Kutty and
Prasad, 1980). In accordance with Snitwong et al. (1983) who found that feed intake and
feed/gain in buffaloes fed sugarcane-tops were shown similar performance as those buffaloes
fed napeir grass (P. purpureum). Moreover, ensiling sugarcane-tops with urea increased feed
intake and digestibility of nutrients in sheep (Reddy and Prasad, 1982). Preston and Leng
(1987) reported that ensiling chopped sugarcane-tops with urea improved digestibility of
nutrients but was not affected voluntary feed intake. Sugarcane-tops silage was contained
similar nutritive value to dried sugarcane-tops (Sritakoonpech, 1990). In feeding trial from
Gendley et al. (2002) demonstrated that supplementation of wheat bran and Lentil chuni in
crossbred cattle fed chopped green sugarcane tops improved nutrient intakes and digestibility.
In accordance with Kawashima et al. (2002b) who concluded that chopped sugarcane tops
can be utilized as roughage source during dry season, but it is necessary to be properly added
with protein and energy sources. Wanapat et al. (1999) reported that feeding sugarcane tops
with urea treated rice straw was improved feed intake and nutrient digestion in dairy cattle.
Kawashima et al. (2002) found that feeding chopped sugarcane tops improved energy supply
when compared with rice straw in dairy cows.

Kawashima et al. (2002) observed that feeding chopped sugar cane together with rice
straw or rice straw alone as roughage for dairy cattle showed no significant difference in milk
yield. Suksombat and Mernkrathoke (2005) reported that no significant differences in
performance between the two groups was observed when lactating dairy cows were fed with
chopped whole sugar cane or corn silage. They also found a reduction in final live weight and
live weight change of cows on corn silage since cows on chopped whole sugar cane
consumed more energy than cows on corn silage.

Suksombat (2005) observed that no differences in dry matter intake and milk yield
were observed but cows on grass silage lost more weight than the other cows when Holstein
Friesian cross in bred lactating dairy cows was fed with grass silage, sugar cane silage or
chopped cane sugar ad libitum and 7.5 kg/d commercial concentrate was fed as supplement.

Afrooz Sharifi (2016) studied the effect of adding sulfuric acid to sugarcane tops
silage on rumen bacteria and whole rumen microorganisms, and nutrient digestibility between
Holstein cow and Khouzestan buffalo in which positive effect on nutrients digestibility, and
growth of microorganisms were observed. Sugarcane tops silage treated by cow rumen
bacteria and whole microorganisms of digestibility was higher than buffalo. Yuangklang
(2005) observed that the digestibility of DM, OM and CP in male crossbred beef steers fed on
dried-chopped sugarcane tops or pelleted sugarcane-tops (3 cm diameter) were not different
but were significantly lower in those fed on pelleted sugarcane-tops (1 cm diameter) or
pelleted sugarcane-tops (2 cm diameter) treatments than in dried-chopped sugarcane tops or
pelleted sugarcane-tops (3 cm diameter).

Nutritional characteristics of corn stover

 Corn stover contains slightly more crude protein (CP) (12.06%), crude fiber (CF)
(25.02%), and a net energy content of 2350 Kcal/kg (Erna et al., 2007). Furthermore, corn
stover also contains 91.94% dry matter (DM), 43.23% organic matter (OM), 94% lignin,
4.95% silica, 68.78% neutral detergent fiber (NDF), and 42.36% acid detergent fiber (ADF).
The digestibility of DM and OM of corn stover, which ranges from 59.48% to 88.71%, is
considerably higher when compared with other fodders (Nasriya et al., 2016).
Supplementation with by-products of local crops such as rice bran and legume leaves
increase feed intake and digestibility. Corn stover without supplementation has been reported
to increases cattle weight by 0.55 kg/cow/day, whereas supplementation with rice branand
legume leave increases it by 0.77 kg/cow/day (Marsetyo et al.,2015 and Quang do et al.,
2015).

The Rumen Yeast (RY; Saccharomyces cerevisiae) supplementation might have

stimulated the growth of cellulolytic bacteria which resulted in higher NDF digestibility and
more production of VFAs for energy (Ayad et al., 2013). Guedes et al. (2008) concluded that
live yeast supplementation has improved fiber digestibility up to 4.3% in cows fed corn silage
base diets that supports our NDF and ADF digestibility results in buffaloes. Pinloche et al.
(2013) discovered that Increase in NDF digestibility without any increase in DMD in RY fed
cows. Corn silage should be primarily fed based on its carbohydrate contribution for meeting energy
needs of cattle. This is because 70 to 80 percent of nutrient makeup in corn silage is carbohydrate
from neutral-detergent fiber (NDF), starch and sugars.

King Grass

King grass is one of the most widely used grasses in tropical ruminant production
systems (Herrera et al. 2006), because it can produce high dry matter (DM) yields relative to
other tropical grass species (Araya-Mora and Boschini 2005; Evitayani et al. 2005). Annual
DM yields of king grass varieties are higher (20–28t/ha) than of Napier grass (Cenchrus
purpureus cv. Napier) and dwarf elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schumach.)
varieties (14–16 t/ha) (Herrera and Ramos 1990). King grass is a hybrid of napier grass
(Pennisetum purpureum Schum.) and bulrush millet (Pennisetum americanum Schum.). It
has high biomass and good palatability (Kiranadi et al., 2002; Michelena et al., 2002), thus it
is widely cultivated in tropical and subtropical regions. King grass (Pennisetum purpupoides)
possesses high protein content and palatability. King grass contains 11.88% CP, 25.48% CF,
and a net energy content of 2070 kcal/kg (Erna et al., 2007), 59.7% of NDF, 0.7% calcium,
and 57% total digestible nutrition (Sutardi, T. 1981). King grass has digestibility values in the
range of 56.27-87.85. The highest digestibility of DM and OM of corn stover and king grass
in the Ongole breed was obtained by a combination of 75% corn stover and 25% king grass
that contributed to weight gain up to 3,600,372 g/cow/day (Nasriya et al., 2016).

Liu et al. (2002) reported that king grass of Reyan No. 4 had an average fresh yield of
274.5 t ha-1 (185.3 to 375 t ha-1) in the productive test at eight places of South China, which
was 19.4% (12.8 to 25.0%) higher than napier grass. In addition, king grass has no head
sprouting in the winter and its available period is longer than that of napier grass. In the
Yunnan province of southwestern China, king grass had somewhat higher dry matter (DM)
yield and crude protein (CP) yield than napier grass, they were 58.2, 4.30, 53.7 and 4.18 t ha-
1 on average of two years, respectively (Zhong et al., 2002). Since king grass is of such
merits, it has been a very important grass in tropic and subtropics as a perennial plant and in
the regions of temperate zone as annual plant due to failing to survive in winter.

King grass is mainly used in cut-and-carry systems (i.e. zero-graze) and fed in stalls,
or preserved as silage and fed to ruminants during the periods of feed deficit (Santos et al.
2001; Lounglawan et al. 2014). However, feeding king grass or king grass silage alone may
not fulfil ruminant nutrient requirements for production, mainly because of its low nitrogen
(N) content (~1.12 g N/kg DM; Santana et al. 2015). Santana el at.; 2015 observed that the
mixed-silage treatments (KLS and KGS) resulted in higher DMI, N intake, nitrogen
digestibility and nitrogen retention of sheep than KS when king grass silage (KS); mixed king
grass and leucaena silage (KLS); and mixed king grass and gliricidia silage (KGS) were fed
to sheep.

Ratio of concentrate to roughage on intake

Roughages are commonly fed to ruminants to maintain ruminal health; however, they
are included at lower levels in finishing diets because of lower energy values and digestibility
characteristics (Allen, 1997; Mertens, 1997). Finishing animals receive higher-energy diets
for growth efficiency; therefore, it is important to understand the minimum roughage
inclusion threshold without negatively affecting rumen function. Increasing dietary roughage
in feedlot diets decreases DM digestibility (Hales et al., 2014; Benton et al., 2015). Mertens
(1997) described physically effective NDF (peNDF) as the roughage’s ability to stimulate
rumination. Increasing the physical effectiveness of the roughage source can aid in
maintaining a higher ruminal pH by stimulating salivary buffer secretions via chewing
activity (Allen, 1997). Fiber can vary in its effectiveness in stimulating rumination, primarily
because of differences in coarseness, digestibility, and particle size (Allen, 1997). When the
ratio of concentrate in the diet was increased methane production decreased by shift of
hydrogen from the methane pathway to be used to produce propionate (Poungchompu et al.,
2009)

Safora Jabari (2014) supported the experiment that rumen fluid obtained from two
buffalo and cow steers fed the same diet, 30:70 concentrate: (Corn grain, barley grain and
wheat bran): forage (Sugarcane silage, corn silage, alfalfa hay and wheat straw). Results
showed steam treated sugarcane pith of NDF digestibility has 7.80 and 1.69% and DM not
significant for protozoal population of buffalo and cow respectively. There were also
significant difference in in vitro NDF and ADF digestibility between rumen protozoa of
buffalo and cow. The ADF digestibility 6.24 vs. 3.24% of steam treated sugarcane pith by
rumen protozoal of Khuzestan buffalo was higher than that of cow.
Tuturoong (2020) reported that when four roughage based diets (R1, R2, R3 and R4 )
containing 50% concentrate were fed to Ongole male calves aged 26 months and weighing
220-245 kg , R4 (37.5% corn stover+12.5% king grass); and R5 (50% corn stover) diets
significantly increased the feed nutritional value and weight gain of male Ongole steer calves
than R1 (50% king grass) and R2 (12.5% corn stover +7.5% king grass 50% concentrate)
diets. The diet R4 had the maximum increase on the digestibility value of each variable: DM,
68.85%; OM, 71.89%; CP, 73.90%; NDF, 59.10%; ADF, 55.35%; and weight gain,
0.61/gr/day.

Quang et al. (2015) conducted that Twenty male cross-bred Brahman bulls of 11–12
months of age and weighing between 190–200 kg was fed with five treatments: a basal diet of
Guinea grass fed at 1 % of LW (light weight) and rice straw fed ad libitum (T0), or this diet
supplemented with concentrate at 0.6 (T1), 1.2 (T2), 1.8 (T3), or 2.4 % of LW (T4). Total
feed intake increased in a curvilinear manner from 4.0 to 6.4 kg DM/d as the quantity of
concentrate consumed increased. With increasing amount of concentrate in the diet, the
digestibility of dry matter, organic matter, crude protein, and crude fat increased, but NDF
digestibility decreased.

When buffalo calves were fed with concentrate at the level of 70, 85 and 100% of the
concentrate feed mixture (groups A. B and C, respectively). Calves fed 100% concentrate
gained more than the other two groups in all experimental periods. The overall average feed
intake for groups A. B and C were 8.65, 9.81 and 11.11 kg/d, respectively. Feed conversion
was better for the 70% group than the control. No differences were found regarding the
digestibility of all nutrients as a result of feeding different concentrate levels during summer
season. However, during winter season some differences were found regarding digestion
coefficients of DM and CP being higher in group C than the other groups observed by Helal
(2011).

Sinha (2017) stated that feed intake (99.77±2.51 g/kg body weight), ruminal ammonia
nitrogen, and total nitrogen were significantly different among (p0<05) among treatments and
significantly higher in buffalo and in treatment group fed with high concentrate diet when
three rumen-fistulated crossbred cattle and buffalo were fed on three TMR diets consisting of
concentrate mixture, wheat straw and green maize fodder in the ratios of (T1) 60:20:20, (T2 )
40:30:30, and (T3 ) 20:40:40, respectively. There was non-significant difference in intake
g/kgW0.75 and digestibility of dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP),
ether extract, neutral detergent fiber (NDF), and acid detergent fiber (ADF) in crossbred
cattle and buffalo.

Sharma (2005) observed the effect of different roughage to concentrate (R:C), ratio
viz. 60:40 (control), 55:45 (T1) and 50:50 (T2) on the productive performance of buffalo
calves. In that experiment, the daily DM intake increased significantly with the reduction in
R:C ratio. The digestibility of nutrients was comparable between C and T1 groups but was
depressed significantly when concentrate in the ration was increased from 45 to 50%. The
differences between the experimental and control groups at 18 months of age were significant
for most of the parameters whereas no such differences were observed at 22 months old
calves. The efficiency of uttlization of nutrients was depressed after 18 months resulting in
low daily live weight gain at 22 months. Maximum daily live weight gain was observed
between 12 to 15 months of age with best feed conversion ratio.
 Rupinderjit Singh et al., (2000) conducted that Effect of different roughage to
concentrate ratios in the pelleted complete diet was assessed on 32 birth weaned buffalo
calves (16 of each sex) up to 4 months of age. The calves were divided into four equal
groups. The calves in the control (C) group were offered ad lib calf starter (16.97Vo DCP
zind 71.75Vo TDN) and green Egyptian clover and chaffed green fodder (Egyptian clover)
whereas in the experimental groups Egyptian clover hay and calf starter in 30:70 (T1), 40:60
(T2) and 50:50 (T3) ratio was offered ad lib as pellets. The daily dry matter intake (DMI)
under the conventional control and complete pelleted diet feeding system (T1 to T3) did not
differ significantly. The digestibility of nutrients especially cell wall constituents was
improved significantly in pelleted than conventional control diet and increased linearly with
the increase in roughage proportion. Similar trend was observed in nitrogen retention and
efficiency of N-utilization. The daily live weight gain in pelleted diets was significantly
higher and feed cost/hg gain was lower than control group.
Sixty-four male Holstein-Friesian × Dutch Friesian veal calves (46 ± 3.0 kg) were
used to evaluate the effect of the inclusion of different levels and sources of dietary roughage
on animal performance and rumen development. Treatments consisted of 1) C100 =
concentrate only; 2) C70-S30 = concentrate (70%) with straw (30%), 3) C70-G30 =
concentrate (70%) with dried grass (30%), 4) C70-G15-S15 = concentrate (70%) with dried
grass (15%) and straw (15%), 5) C70-CS30 = concentrate (70%) with corn silage (30%), 6)
C40-CS60 = concentrate (40%) with corn silage (60%), 7) C70-CS30-AL = concentrate
(70%) with corn silage (30%) ad libitum, 8) C70- G15-S15-AL = concentrate (70%) with
dried grass (15%) and straw (15%) ad libitum. All dietary treatments were provided in
addition to a commercial milk replacer. Concentrate was provided as pellets and roughage
was chopped. The dietary treatments 1 to 6 were supplied restrictedly to a maximum of 750 g
of dry matter (DM) per day, whereas treatments 7 and 8 were offered ad libitum in
combination with a reduced amount of milk replacer. Calves were euthanized after 10 wk.
Straw supplementation (C70-S30 vs. C70-G30 and C70-CS30) reduced DM intake, and ad
libitum supply of concentrate and roughage increased DM intake. Roughage addition did not
affect growth performance. Rumen fermentation was characterized by low pH and high total
volatile fatty acids and reducing sugar concentrations recommended by B. J. Suarez et al.
(2007).
S.M. Abdel Raheem et al. (2017) conducted that this study was accomplished to
designed to assess the appropriate concentrate: roughage (C:R) ratio for better nutrient
digestibility, rumen fermentation patterns, healthy and economic beef production in Egyptian
buffalo calves. Sixteen buffalo calves aged about 18-20 months had 292.5±4.7 kg average
body weight was randomly assigned into four groups of 4 animal each. The treatment diets
were composed of four concentrate: roughage (C: R) ratios (80:20, A; 75:25, B; 60:40, C;
55:45, D). The results revealed that increasing in the proportion of concentrate in the diet
significantly increased the digestibility of dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM), crude
protein (CP), crude fiber (CF), ether extract (EE), nitrogen free extract (NFE) and the total
digestible nutrients. Ruminal concentration of both volatile fatty acids (VFA) and ammonia
nitrogen were increased linearly with increasing the dietary concentrate portion (60, 75, 80),
however the rumen pH was decreased with increasing the concentrate level in the diet. In
addition, increasing the concentrate proportion increased the dry matter intake, average daily
gain, final body weight; feed cost per kg body weight. Feeding diet containing 60%
concentrate showed better performance and economic per kg body weight gain when
comparing diet containing (75 and 80 %) concentrates levels.

Reference

A. L. TAP ARIA AND V. V. SHARMA (1980). Some factors affecting voluntary food
intake in buffaloes 3. Effect of concentrate feeding on intake of roughages fed to
lactating buffaloes J. agric. Sci., Camb. 95, 165-173.

A.A. Santana, L. Cheng, D. M. Verdecia, J. L. Ramírez, S. López, M. V. Cisneros, I. Rugoho,

T. M. R. Maxwell and O. Al-Marashdeh (2018). Effect of a mixed silage of king grass
(Cenchrus purpureus) and forage legumes (Leucaena leucocephala or Gliricidia
sepium) on sheep intake, digestibility and nitrogen balance.
Afrooz Sharifi, M.C, T.M (2016). The comparison of digestibility of treated sugarcane tops
silage by bacteria or whole microorganisms of Holstein cow and buffalo rumen.
Veterinary Research Forum. 7 (3) 203 – 211.
Aikman PC, Reynolds CK, Beever, DE. (2008). Diet digestibility, rate of passage, and eating
and rumination behavior of Jersey and Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science,
91:1103-1114.

Alexander, A.G. 1985 The energy cane alternative Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–509.
Alvarez, F. J. and T. R. Preston. 1976. Leucaena leucocephala as protein supplement for dual
purpose milk and weaned calf production on sugarcane based ration. Trop. Anim.
Prod. 1:112-119.
Alvarez, F. J., A. Wilson and T. R. Preston. 1977. Sugar cane, molasses and restricted
grass/legume grazing or unsupplemented grazing for milk and weaned calf
production in a dual-purpose herd during the wet season. Trop. Anim. Prod. 2:219-
222.
Andrade, J.B-de, J.E. Ferrari, R.A. Possenti, F.F. Leinz, D. Bianchiri, C.F. de. Rodrigues, C.
de. Rodrigues and D.J.B. Andrade, 2001. Chemical treatments in sugarcane forage.
Boletim-de-Industria-Animal, 58: 145-152.
Anuthida Seankamsorn & Anusorn Cherdthong & Metha Wanapat & Chanadol Supapong &
Benjamad Khonkhaeng & Sutipong Uriyapongson & Nirawan Gunun & Pongsatron
Gunun & Pin Chanjula (2017). Effect of dried rumen digesta pellet levels on feed
use, rumen ecology, and blood metabolite in swamp buffalo. 49:79–86.
Araya-Mora M, Boschini FC (2005) Producción de forraje y calidad nutricional de
variedades de Pennisetum purpureum en la meseta central de Costa Rica.
Mesoamerican Agronomy 16, 37–43. [Forage production and nutritional quality of
varieties of Pennisetum purpureum in the Central Plateau of Costa Rica].
doi:10.15517/am. v16i1.5180.
B. J. Sua´rez,C . G. Van Reenen,N. Stockhofe,J. Dijkstra, and W. J. J. Gerrits (2007). Effect
of Roughage Source and Roughage to Concentrate Ratio on Animal Performance
and Rumen Development in Veal Calves. J. Dairy Sci. 90:2390–2403.

Brookes IM, Nicol AM (2007) The protein requirements of grazinglivestock. In ‘Pasture and
supplements for grazing animals. Ch. 11. (Eds PV Rattray, IM Brookes, AM Nicol)
pp. 173–187. (New Zealand Society of Animal Production).
Bui Van Chinh, Le Vietly, Neguyen Huu Tao Nguyen Van Ttai, and Tran Bich Ngoc. (2001).
Effect of drying, ensiling or urea treatment on the use of sugarcane leaves as ruminant
feed. In Proceedings of a Workshop on Improved Utilization of By-products for
Animal Feeding in Vietnam. National Institute Animal Husbandry.
C. Yuangklang, M. Wanapat and C. Wachirapakorn (2005). Effects of Pelleted Sugarcane
Tops on Voluntary Feed Intake, Digestibility and Rumen Fermentation in Beef
Cattle .Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. Vol 18, No.1 : 22-26).
Chantalakhana, C. 1990. Small farm animal production and sustainable agriculture. In
Proceedings of the 5th AAAP Animal Science Congress, Taipei, Taiwan. Volume II. p.
36-64. Organization Committee, Chunan, Maiali, Taiwan.
Devendra C (1997) Crop residues for feeding animals in Asia: technology development and
adoption in crop/livestock systems. In: Renard C (ed) Crop residuals in sustainable
mixed crop/ livestock farming system. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 241–267.
Devendra C, Thomas D (2002) Crop-animal interactions in mixed farming systems in Asia.
Agric Syst 71:27–40.
Devendra, C. 1985. Comparative nitrogen utilization in Malaysia Swamp buffaloes and
Kedah-Kelanton cattle. In: Proc. The 3 rd AAAP Animal science Congress, Seoulk,
Korea, Vol 2:873-875.
Deville, J. and Y. Wong. (1977). Chemical quality of sugarcane tops silage made with and
without molasses, urea and ammonia. International Society of Sugarcane Technologists.
Do Van Quang, Nguyen Xuan Ba, Peter T. Doyle, Dau Van Hai, Peter A. Lane, Aduli EO
Malau-Aduli, Nguyen Huu Van2 and David Parsons (2015). Effect of concentrate
supplementation on nutrient digestibility and growth of Brahman crossbred cattle fed
a basal diet of grass and rice straw. Quang et al. Journal of Animal Science and
Technology 57:35.
El-Ashry, M.A., 1968. Urea and poor quality roughage in fattening rations for buffalo males.
Egypt. J. Anim. Prod., 8: 57-65.
Erfanzadeh R, Hosseini Kahnuja SH, Pétillon J. (2014). Crude Protein Content does not
determine the Preference Value of Plant Species for the Raini Goat (Capra aegagrus
hircus L.) in Dry Rangelands, Desert, 19: 35-43.

Erna, W. and Sarjiman, S. (2007) Budidaya hijauan pakan bersama tanaman pangan sebagai
upaya penyediaan hijauan pakan di lahan sempit. J. Peternakan dan Lingkungan, 7(
2007): 134-141.
Evitayani WL, Fariani A, Ichinohe T, Abdulrazak SA, HayashidaM, Fujihara T (2005)
Nutritive value of selected grasses in North Sumatra, Indonesia. Journal of Animal
Science and Technology 76, 461–468. doi:10.1111/ j.1740-0929.2005.00291.
F.I.S. Helal, K.M. Abdel Rahman, B.M. Ahmed and S.S. Omar (2011). Effect of Feeding
Different Levels of Concentrates on Buffalo Calves Performance, Digestibility and
Carcass Traits. Agric. & Environ. Sci., 10 (2): 186-192.
FAO Statistics Database (2005).
Gendley, M. K., P. Singh and A. K. Garg. 2002. Performance of crossbred cattle fed chopped
green sugarcane tops and supplemented with wheat bran and lenti chuni concentrate.
Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 15(10):1422-1427.
Halachmi Y, Ben M, Miron J, Maltz E. (2016). Feeding behavior improves prediction of
dairy cow voluntary feed intake but cannot serve as the sole indicator, Animal, 10:
1501–1506.

Herrera RS, Febles GJ, Crespo GJ (2006) ‘Pennisetum purpureum para la ganadería tropical
[Pennisetum purpureum for tropical herds].’ (Cedica: La Habana. Cuba).
Herrera RS, Ramos N (1990) Evaluación agronómica. In ‘King grass. Plantación,
establecimiento y manejo en Cuba’. [Agronomic evaluation. In ‘King grass.
Plantation, establishment and management in Cuba’.] (Ed. R Herrera) pp. 111–170.
(Institute of Animal Science: Cuba).
Jackson MG (1977) Review article: the alkali treatment of straw. Anim Feed Sci Technol
2:105–130
Jackson, M.G. (1978): Rice straw as livestock feed. Wld. Anim. Rev.23:34-40. F.A.O.
Animal production and health paper.
Joshi DC, Talapatra SK (1968) Studies on the utilization of minerals under acid- and
alkaliproducing cattle feeds. Indian J Vet Sci Anim Husb 38:645–664.
Joshi, A.L., D.V. Rangnekar, S.S. Mahendra Singh, S.S. Kander, S.R. Ambedkar and A.V.
Bendigeri, 1995. Sugarcane Tops: Feeding of Ruminants on Fibrous Crop Residues.
Hand Book of Straw Feeding System. Indian Council of Agric. Res., New Delhi,
India, pp: 343-405.
Joshi, A.L., D.V. Rangnekar, S.S. Mahendra Singh, S.S. Kander, S.R. Ambedkar and A.V.
Bendigeri, 1995. Sugarcane Tops: Feeding of Ruminants on Fibrous Crop Residues.
Hand Book of Straw Feeding System. Indian Council of Agric. Res., New Delhi,
India, pp: 343-405.
Kawashima, T., W. Sumamal, P. Pholsen, R. Chaithiang and W. Boonpakdee. 2002b.
Feeding value of sugarcane stalk for lactating cows. 15(2):205-208.
Kawashima, T., W. Sumamal, P. Pholsen, R. Chaithiang, W. Boonpakdee, M. Kurihara and
M. Shibata. 2002a. Feeding value of sugarcane stalk for cattle. 15(1) 55-60.
Kawashima, T., W. Sumamal, P. Pholsen, R. Chaitiang and W. Boonpakdee. 2002. The use
of sugar cane stalk for feeding lactating cows. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 15(2):205-
208.
Khojasteh F, Chahouki MAZ, Azarnivand H, Kikvidze Z. (2013). Life form and preference
can drive spatial relationships among plant species in semi-arid rangelands of middle
Iran. The Rangeland Journal 35: 63-69.
Kiranadi B, Sastradipradja D, Astuti DA, Permadi H (2002). The effect of king grass silage
with chicken manure on the metabolism and glucose production rate of lactating
goats. Asian-Aus. J. Anim. Sci. 7:982–985.
Kutty, K. P. A. and D. A. Prasad. 1980. Studies on improving nutritive value of sugarcane
tops with urea or dried poultry waste by ensiling techniques. Indian J. Anim. Sci.
50(2):189- 193.
Kutty, K.P.A. and D.A. Prasad, 1980. Studies on improving nutritive value of sugarcane tops
with urea or dried poultry waste by ensiling techniques. Ind. J. Anim. Sci., 50: 189-
193.
Li CW, Gao F, Liu JY (2008). Studies on yield and nutrition constitution of alfalfa in
different cuts. Beijing Agric. 9:17–30. Liu GD, Bai CJ, Wang DJ, Yi KX, Wei JS, He
HX, Zhou JS (2002). The Selection and utilization of Reyan No. 4 king grass. Acta
Agrestia. Sin. 10(2):92–96.
Lombardi D, Vasseur E, Berthiaume R, DeVries TJ, Bergeron R. (2015). Feeding preferences
and voluntary feed intake of dairy cows: Effect of conservation and harvest time of
birdsfoot trefoil and chicory. Journal of Dairy Science, 98: 7238-7247.

Lounglawan P, Lounglawan W, Suksombat W (2014) Effect of cutting interval and cutting

height on yield and chemical composition of King Napier grass (Pennisetum
purpureum ·Pennisetum americanum). APCBEE Procedia 8, 27–31. doi:
10.1016/j.apcbee.2014.01.075.
M. Wanapat, S. Kang, N. Hankla and K. Phesatcha (2013). Effect of rice straw treatment on
feed intake, rumen fermentation and milk production in lactating dairy cows. pp.
1677-1687.
McDonald P, Edwards RA, Greenhalgh JFD, Morgan CA. (1995). Animal Nutrition, 5th
Edition. Wiley, New York, 418–433.

McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE (1991). The Biochemistry of Silage. Chalcombe
Publ., Marlow.
Meissner HH, Paulsmeier DV. (1995). Plant compositional constituents affecting between-
plant and animal species prediction of forage intake. Journal of Animal Science, 73:
2447-2457.

Michelena JB, Molina A (1990). Effect of the exposure time to sun of the king grass forage
(Pennisetum purpureum × Pennisetum thyphoides) in the silage quality. Rev. Cuban.
Cien. Agric. 24(2):221–226. Michelena JB, Senra A, Fraga C (2002). Effect of formic
 acid, propionic acid and predrying on the nutritive value of king grass (Pennisetum
purpureum) silage. Cuban J. Agric. Sci. 3: 231–236.
Mohamad, K., Olsson, M., van Tol, H.T., Mikk, O.S., Vlamings, B.H., Andersson, G.,
Rodríguez-Martínez, H., Purwantar, A.B., Paling, R.W., Colenbrander, B. and
Lenstra, J.A. (2009) On the origin of Indonesian cattle. PLoS One, 4(5): e5490.
Naseeven, M. R. (1988). Sugarcane tops as animal feed. In Sugarcane as feed. F. A.O.
Publication. 72: pp. 106-121.
Nasriya, N., Victor, T.R.A., Kaunang, C.L., Malalantang, S.S. and Tindangen, M.M. (2016)
Pengaruh pemberian rumput raja (Pennisetum purpoides) dan tebon jagung terhadap
kecernaan bahan kering dan bahan organik pada sapi PO. Zootec, 36(2): 387-394.
Nath K, Sahai K, Kehar ND (1969) Effect of water washing, lime treatment and lime and
calcium carbonate supplementation on the nutritive value of paddy (oryza sativa) straw.
J Anim Sci 28:383.
Ocak N, Cam MA, Kuran M. (2006). The Influence of pre-and post-mating protein
supplementation on reproductive performance in ewes maintained on rangeland.
Small Ruminant Research, 64: 16-21.
Ocak N, Cam MA, Kuran M. (2006). The Influence of pre-and post-mating protein
supplementation on reproductive performance in ewes maintained on rangeland.
Small Ruminant Research, 64: 16-21.

Ocak N, Yıldırım A. (2007). İstekli yem tüketimi, vücut rezervi, metabolizma ve fetal gelişim
arasındaki ilişkiler. IV. Hayvan Besleme Kongresi, 476-480, 24-28 Haziran 2007,
Bursa.

Parsons AJ, Newman JA, Penning PD, Harvey A, Orr RJ. (1994). Diet Preference of Sheep:
Effects of Recent Diet, Physiological State and Species Abundance, Journal of
Animal Ecology, 63, 465-478.

Pasha TN, Prigge EC, Russell RW, Bryan WB. (1994). Influence of moisture content of
forage diets on intake and digestion by sheep. Journal of Animal Science, 72: 2455-
2463.

Patil, N.V., V.B. Kharadi, P.M. Desai and B.M. Desai, 1999. Comparative nutritional value
of fresh and sun dried sugarcane tops in buffalo calves. Ind. J. Anim. Nutr., 16: 259-
261.
Patil, N.V., V.B. Kharadi, P.M. Desai and B.M. Desai, 1999. Comparative nutritional value
of fresh and sun dried sugarcane tops in buffalo calves. Ind. J. Anim. Nutr., 16: 259-
261.
Perdok, H.B., M. Thamotharam, J.J. Bolm, H. Van Den Born and C.Van Veluw (1982):
Effects of different level of urea on nitrogen content and digestibility of urea treated
rice straw. Term paper for B.Sc. in chemistry, Faculty of Science, Chiang Mai
University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Prendiville R, Lewis E, Pierce KM, Buckley F. (2010). Comparative grazing behavior of
lactating Holstein-Friesian, Jersey, and Jersey x Holstein-Friesian dairy cows and its
association with intake capacity and production efficiency. Journal of Dairy Science,
93: 764-774.

Preston, T. R. and R. A. Leng. 1987. Matching Ruminant Production System with Available
Resources in the Tropics and Subtropics. Penambul Books, Armidale, NSW, Australia.
p. 245.
Reddy, R. R. and D. A. Prasad. 1982. Studies on improving nutritive value of sugarcane tops
with urea (1.5%) or dried poultry waste (30 or 40% on DMB) by ensiling techniques
and development of complete rations for growing Nellore lambs. Indian J. Anim Sci.
52(7):524-529.
Rupinderjit Singh, Balwant Singh, IVL Wadhwa and IVLP.S. Bakshi (2000). Original Article
Effect of Roughage To Concentrate Ratio In Pelleted Diet On The Productive
Performance Of Buffalo Calves. 131-137.
S. Ahmad, M. A. Jabbar, A. Khalique, Saima, F. Shahzad, N. Ahmad, M. Fiaz and U. Younas
(2014). Effect of Different Levels of NDF on Voluntary Feed Intake, Dry Matter
Digestibility and Nutrients Utilization in Dry Nili Ravi Buffaloes. The Journal of
Animal & Plant Sciences, 24(6), Page: 1602-1605 ISSN: 1018-7081.

S. K. Sinha, V. B. Chaturvedi, Putan Singh, L. C. Chaudhary, Mayukh Ghosh and Swati

Shivani (2017). Effect of high and low roughage total mixed ration diets on rumen
metabolites and enzymatic profiles in crossbred cattle and buffaloes. Veterinary
World, EISSN: 2231-0916.
S.M. Abdel Raheem, E.H. Hassan, M.M. Farghaly (2017). Effect of Dietary Concentrate to
Roughage Ratio on Nutrient Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, Growth
Performance And Serum Acute Phase Protein In Growing Buffalo Calves. Egyptian
J. Nutrition and Feeds, 20 (3): 429-437.

Santana AA, Cisneros MV, Martínez Y, Pascual Y (2015) Conservation and chemical
composition of Leucaena leucocephala plus fresh or wilted Pennisetum purpureum
mixed silages. Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics of the University of Cordoba 20,
4895–4906.
Santos EA, da Silva DS, de Queiroz J (2001) Chemical composition of elephant grass cv.
Roxo cut at different heigths. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 30, 18–23.
doi:10.1590/S1516-35982001000100004
Shen HS, Ni DB, Sundstøl F (1998) Studies on untreated and urea-treated rice straw from
three cultivation seasons: 1. Physical and chemical measurements in straw and straw
fractions. Anim Feed Sci Technol 73:243–261.
Shen, H. S., D. B. Ni and F. Sundstøl. 1998. Studies on untreated and urea-treated rice straw
from three cultivation seasons: 1. Physical and chemical measurements in straw and
straw fractions. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 73:243-261.
Silvester. R., N. A. Macleod. and T. R. Preston. (1976). Sugarcane ensiled with urea or
ammonia for fattening cattle. Trop. Anim. Prod., 3: 216-222.
SK. Sharma, S.C. Crupta, M. Wadhma and MPP.Bakshi (2005).Effect of roughage to
concentrate ratio on buffalo meat production.ISSN 1594-7718.
Snitwong, C., S. Mangmichai, K. Klingason, T. Intharasomchai and C. Manidul. 1983.
The performance of buffaloes fed on dehydrated sugarcane tops with and without fresh
left as a protein supplementation. In: Rep. Div. Anim. Nutr. Dept. of Livestock,
Bangkok, Thailand. 165-169.
Sritakoonpech, M. 1990. Chemical composition and degradability of sugarcane tops in the
rumen of cattle and buffalo. M.S. Thesis, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen,
Thailand. p. 143.
Suksombat, W. and P. Mernkrathoke. 2005. Feeding of whole sugar cane as roughage for
dairy cattle during the dry season. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. (in press).
Sutardi, T. (1981) Sapi Perah dan Pemberian Makanannya. Fakultas Petemakan Institut
Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.
Thomas DT, Milton JTB, Revell CK, Ewing MA, Dynes RA, Murray K, Lindsay DR. (2010).
Preference of sheep among annual legumes is more closely related to plant nutritive
characteristics as plants mature. Animal Production Science, 50: 114–12.

Tuturoong RAV, Malalantang SS, Moningkey SAE (2020) Assessment of the nutritive value
of corn stover and king grass in complete feed on Ongole steer calves productivity,
Veterinary World, 13(4): 801-806. Astuti, M. (2005) Potensi dan Keragaman Sumber
Daya Genetik Sapi Peranakan Ongole (PO). Wartozoa, 15(1): 98-106.
Uzun F, Ocak N, Şenel MZ, Karadağ Y. (2016). The rates of desirable grazing plant species
in rangelands: Effect of different animal species and grazing pressures. Options
Méditerranéennes. Série A, Séminaires Méditerranéens, A114, 83-86.
Van DTT. (2006). Some animal and feed factors affecting feed intake, behaviour and
performance of small ruminants, (Doctoral thesis. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and
Animal Science, SLU, Uppsala, Sweden).

Vo Thi Kim Thanh (2012). The effect on intake digestibility and microbial protein production
of adding urea to rice straw for cattle and buffalo calves.
W. Suksombat* and P. Junpanichcharoen (2005). Feeding of Sugar Cane Silage to Dairy
Cattle during the Dry Season. No. 8: 1125-1129.
W.Y. Wei, B.Q. Tong and H.P. Huang. (1980). A compilation of survey on Chinese
fine local buffalo [J]. Buffalo Technical Materials, 9: 1-17.
Wanapat M, Rowlinson P. 2007. Nutrition and feeding of swamp buffalo: feed resources and
rumen approach. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 6, (Suppl. 2), 67–73.
Wanapat, M. 2000. Rumen Manipulation to Increase the Efficient use Local Feed Resources
and Productivity of Ruminants in the Tropics. In:Proc. the 9th AAAP Congress. (Eds.
G. M. Stone), July 3-7, 2000. University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Asian-Aus J. Anim. Sci. 13:59-67.
Wanapat, M. 2009. Potential uses of local feed resources for ruminant. Trop. Anim. Health
Prod. 41:1035-1049.
Wanapat, M. 1990. Nutritional aspects of ruminant production in southeast asia with special
reference to Thailand. Bangkok, Funny Press Company Ltd. 217 pp.
Wanapat, M., S. Chumpawadee and P. Paengkoum. 1999. Utilization of urea-treated rice
straw and whole sugarcane crop as roughage sources for dairy cattle during the dry
season. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 13(4):474-477.
Wanapat,M, S. Prasevdsuk, S. Chanthi and A.Sivapraphagon (1983): Improvement of rice
straw utilization by ensiling with urea for catle during the dry season. Thai Journal of
Agricultural Science 16:267.
Wanapat,M., K Sommart., C. Wachirapakorn, S. Uriyapongson, and C.Wattanachant. 1994.
Recent advances in swamp buffalo nutrition and feeding. In: Proc.The 1st Asian
Buffalo Association Congress. (Eds. M. Wanapat and K.Sommart), Khon Kaen
University, Khon Kaen, January 17-21, 1994, Thailand.
Wei JS, Jiang HM (1994). Approach of cutting time on king grass. Pratacul. Sci. 11(2):52–54
Wilkins. R. J., K. J. Hutchinson, R. F. Wilson and C. E. Harris. (1971). The voluntary
intake of silage by sheep. Agric. Sci. Camp., 77: 531-537.
Xiumin Zhang (2019), R. F. Medrano, M.W, Karen A. Beauchemin, Z.M, R.W, J.W, Lukuyu
A. Bernard and Zhiliang Tan: Effects of urea plus nitrate pretreated rice straw and
 corn oil supplementation on fiber digestibility, nitrogen balance, rumen fermentation,
microbiota and methane emissions in goats. https://doi.o rg/10.1186/s40104-019-
0312-2.
Yang, X.W. Liang and X.F. Zhang. (2005). Current status of buffalo and development of
milk performance in China. Progress of research on bovine scientific technology.
Shijiazhuang. October: 22-26.
Yıldırım A, Ulutas Z, Ocak N, Şirin E, Aksoy Y. (2014a). A study on gastrointestinal tract
characteristics of ram lambs with same weights from six common Turkish sheep
breeds,” South African Journal of Animal Science, 44: 90–96.

Zhong S, Zhou ZW, Wen JK, Yang SP (2002). A study on adaptability of elephant grass and
king grass in the subtropical region of Yunnan Province. Chn. Pratacul. Sci. 19(5):23–
25.