EVALUATION OF FINGER MILLET (Eleusine coracana L.) FODDER PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION BY DAIRY GOATS IN A SEMI-ARID ENVIRONMENT OF NIGERIA

Versions

PDF

Keywords

finger millet
fodder
dairy goat

How to Cite

Girgiri, A. Y, Muhammad, M., Kolo, U. M., Mustapha, M. G., Abubakar, M. A., Kachalla, A., … Bukar, M. (2024). EVALUATION OF FINGER MILLET (Eleusine coracana L.) FODDER PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION BY DAIRY GOATS IN A SEMI-ARID ENVIRONMENT OF NIGERIA. Journal of Arid Agriculture, 25(2), 110–116. Retrieved from https://jaaunimaid.ng/index.php/home/article/view/32

Abstract

The study was conducted to determine the nutritional quality of finger millet silage and its impact on performance of Sahel dairy goat. The experiment was divided into three phases and carried out at University of Maiduguri pasture farm. Experiment I consisted of eight treatments (four different spacings and four cutting ages), experiment II had five different finger millet silages and experiment III constituted five different finger millet based total mixed ration (TMR) as treatments which was laid out in a completely randomized design (CRD). Plant height, leaf number, leaf length, leaf width and tiller count were recorded as influenced by spacing and cutting age in phase I, physical characteristics of the silage and its proximate composition was observed in phase II while feed intake, milk yield and proximate composition of the milk was recorded in phase III. The results revealed that at 21 days after ensiling, the appearance, odour, texture, pH and temperature of the silage had acceptable physical characteristics across the treatments. The results further revealed that plant height (36.54 cm), leaf number (29.95 cm), and leaf length (33.61 cm) were significantly (P<0.05) higher in T4 (30 x 10 cm) while leaf width and tiller number was similar (P>0.05) among the treatments. The findings also indicated that plant cut at 10 WAS had the highest (36.92 cm), plant height (30.30 cm), and leaf number (28.47 cm). The results revealed that the highest average milk yield (0.91 litre) was observed in T4 and the milk quality was equally better in T4. In conclusion, finger millet performed best at 30 x 30 cm spacing and cutting age was best at 10 weeks after sowing, the nutritional quality and the silage physical quality was best at 12 – 20% inclusion level and improved milk production by Sahelian dairy goats.

PDF

References

Achara, L., Jamlong, M., Supapun, B., Ronachai, S., Chunya, K, and Nahathai, V. (2022). Effects of Feeding Silage of Napier Pakchong Fermented with Mung Bean Concentrate on Production Performance, Nutrient Digestibility, Carcass Yield and Meat Quality of Male Dairy Goat production

Adugna, A., Tesso, T., Degu, E., Tadesse, T., Merga, F., Legesse, W., Tirfessa, A., Kidane, H., Wole, A. and Daba, C. (2011). Genotype-by-Environment Interaction and Yield Stability Analysis in Finger Millet (Eleusine coracana L. Gaertn) in Ethiopia. American Journal of Plant Sciences 2:408–415.

Afolayan, F.O. (2022). Replacement Value of Wheat Bran with Treated Rice Husk on the Performance of West African Dwarf Goats. Diss. Kwara State University (Nigeria).

Agossou, D.J., Dougba, T.D. and Koluman, N. (2017). Recent developments in goat farming and perspectives for a sustainable production in Western Africa. Int J Environ, Agric Biotech. 2:2047–51. [Google Scholar]

Aziz, M.A. (2010). Present status of the world goat populations and their productivity. Lohmann Information. 45:42–52. [Google Scholar]

Bot, M. H., Bawa, G. S., Omage, J. J., Onimisi, P. A., Bot, D. Y. and Udom, I. E. (2023). Proximate composition of red and black finger millet (Eleusine coracana) varieties. Nig. J. Anim. Prod. 47(6): 46 – 53.

Damar, W. K., Russom, Z., Garba, A.A., Ibrahim, S. A. and Haggai, P. T. (2016). Yield Response of Finger Millet (EleusineCoracana (L) Gaertn) To Transplanting Date, Intra-Row Spacing and Poultry Manure In Bauchi, Nigeria. International Research Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences, 3(5): 63-86

Gupta, S.M.; Arora, S.; Mirza, N.; Pande, A.; Lata, C.; Puranik, S.; Kumar, J. and Kumar, A. (2017). Finger Millet: A “Certain” Crop for an “Uncertain” Future and a Solution to Food Insecurity and Hidden Hunger under Stressful Environments. Front. Plant Sci. 8, 1–11. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Kosgey, I.S. and Okeyo, A.M. (2016). Genetic improvement of small ruminants in low-input, smallholder production systems: technical and infrastructural issues. Small Rumin Res. 70:76–88. doi: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.

Kosgey, I.S., Rowlands, G.J., van Arendonk, J.A.M. and Baker, R.L. (2016). Small ruminant production in smallholder and pastoral/extensive farming systems in Kenya. Small Rumin Res. 77:11–24. doi: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2008.02.005.

Lamidi, A.A. and Akhigba, A.F. (2022). Influence of seed varieties and harvesting regimes on growth indices, yields and nutritional values of hydroponics maize fodder. Nigerian J. Anim. Sci. 24(2): 221-230.

Miller, B. A. (2019). Lu CD. Current status of global dairy goat production: an overview. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 32(8):1219–32. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.19.0253

Mulualem, T., Adgo, E., Meshesha, D. T., Tsunekawa, A., Haregeweyn, N., Tsubo, M. and Berihun, M. L. (2021). Examining the impact of polyacrylamide and other soil amendments on soil fertility and crop yield in contrasting agroecological environments. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 21(3), 1817-1830.

Soomro, I.H., G.A. Mughal, N. Rajput, R.R. Kaleri, D.K. Bhuptani, R.A. Mangi, G.M. Solangi, S. Dhari, A.W. Solangi and Z.P. Soomro. (2023). Effect of silage feeding on the growth performance and body confirmation of Tapri goats under intensive management system. Journal of Innovative Sciences, 9(1): 51-55.

Vetriventhan, M., Azevedo, V.C.R., Upadhyaya, H.D., Nirmalakumari, A. Kane-Potaka, J., Anitha, S., Ceasar, S.A., Muthamila- rasan, M., Bhat, B.V. and Hariprasanna, K. (2020). Genetic and Genomic Resources, and Breeding for Accelerating Improvement of Small Millets: Current Status and Future Interventions. Nucleus (India); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, p. 13. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13237-020-00322-3 (accessed on 31 July 2020).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.