EFFECT OF HIGH ENERGY AND PROTEIN ON INTAKE, GROWTH, DIGESTIBILITY, FEED EFFICIENCY AND COST OF FEEDING IN CROSSBRED HEIFERS

P.P. VAIDH¹, P.M. LUNAGARIYA²*, J.H. PATEL³, M.M. SHARMA⁴, M.M. CHAUDHARY⁵, K.N. WADHWANI⁶, P.H. PANDYA^7
1Animal Nutrition Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Gandhinagar, 382010, India
²Livestock Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, 388001, Gujarat, India
³Livestock Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, 388001, Gujarat, India
⁴Animal Nutrition Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Gandhinagar, 382010, India
⁵Livestock Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, 388001, Gujarat, India
⁶Livestock Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, 388001, Gujarat, India
⁷Animal Nutrition Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Gandhinagar, 382010, India
* Corresponding Author : drpravinml@gmail.com

Received : 11-10-2022     Accepted : 28-10-2022     Published : 30-10-2022
Volume : 14     Issue : 10       Pages : 11794 - 11798
Int J Agr Sci 14.10 (2022):11794-11798

Keywords : Crossbred heifer, Digestibility, Energy, Feed cost, Feed efficiency, Growth, Intake
Academic Editor : Dr Vijaya Lakshmi V, Dr R. S. Umakanth
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Kamdhenu University, Gandhinagar, 382010, India and Animal Nutrition Research Station; Livestock Research Station, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, 388001, Gujarat, India
Author Contribution : PML, KNW, JHP: designed experiment, monitored experiment, and finalized manuscript; PPV: executed experiment, laboratory analysis, written manuscript; MMS, PHP: laboratory & data analysis; MMC: Monitored health of calves

The experiment was planned to assess the effect of feeding higher energy-protein and higher protein total mixed ration on growth, intake, and digestibility of nutrients as well as feed utilization efficiency in crossbred heifers. Twenty-one healthy crossbred heifers (75% Holstein Friesian x 25%Kankrej) of similar age and body weight were selected and grouped into three (T1, T2, T3) having seven in each group. The crossbred heifers were fed total mixed ration-TMR to meet the requirements of 100 % each of ME and CP of ICAR (2013) (T1; control), T2- 125% each of ME and CP of control and T3 100% ME and 125% CP of control for 140 days. Intake of dry matter, crude protein and metabolic energy were found significantly higher (p<0.01) in heifers fed a high T2 TMR compared to the T1 and T3 TMR when expressed daily, per cent basis and on a metabolic BW basis. The daily gain in body weight of crossbred heifers was higher (P<0.05) in the T2 group than T3 and T1 group. The digestibility of CP and CF of TMR was significantly increased (p<0.05) in the T3 group compared to T1 and T2 group. The reduced digestibility of OM, NFE, NDF and ADF of T2 TMR (six per cent fat; p<0.05) was observed compared to T1 TMR. The nutritive value of high energy-crude protein TMR was slightly lower than the control TMR owing to lower digestibility of OM, NFE, NDF and ADF. The feed cost per kg gain was lower in the T2 (-31.31 ?) and T3 (-39.25 ?) group compared to the control group (T1). The feeding of high-energy crude protein TMR economically feasible option to improve the growth rate of crossbred heifers

1. FAO (2011) World Livestock 2011-Livestock in food security. FAO, Rome, Italy. Available at http, //www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2373e/i2373 e00.htm [Verified 4 December 2015]
2. Akins M.S. (2016) Veterinary Clinics, Food Animal Practice, 32(2), 303-317.
3. Dong L.F., Zhang W.B., Zhang N.F., Tu Y. and Diao Q.Y. (2016). Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 101(1), 30-37.
4. Williams K.T., Weigel K.A., Coblentz W.K., Esser N.M., Schlesser H., Hoffman P.C., Ogden R., Su H., and Akins M.S. (2022) Journal of Dairy Science, 105(3), 2201-2214.
5. Lunagariya P.M., Shah S.V., Hadiya K.K., Sorathiya K.K. and Patel Y.G. (2019) International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 8(7), 1769-1775.
6. ICAR (2013) Nutrient Requirements of Animals-Cattle and Buffalo (ICAR-NIANP), New Delhi, India
7. NRC (2001) Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 2001. National Academies Press. Washington, DC, USA.
8. Anonymous (2012) Nutritive value of commonly available feeds and fodders in India, Animal Nutrition Group, National Dairy Development Board, Anand, 388001.
9. AOAC (1995) Official Methods of Analysis, 16th end. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Washington, D.C.
10. Van Soest P.J., Robertson J.B. and Lewis B.A. (1991) Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583-3597.
11. Snedecor G.W., and Cochran W.G. (2014) Statistical methods (8th ed.). Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Calcutta, India.
12. NRC (2021) Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 2021. Eighth Revised Edition, National Academies Press. Washington, DC, USA.
13. Cantalapiedra-Hijar G, Yanez-Ruiz D.R., Martin-Garcia A.I. and Molina-Alcaide E. (2009) Journal of Animal Science, 87, 622-631.
14. Gabler M.T. and Heinrichs A.J. (2003a) Journal of Dairy Science, 86(1), 268-274.
15. Gabler M.T. and Heinrichs A.J. (2003b) Journal of Dairy Science, 86(6), 2170-2177.
16. Hoffman P.C., Esser N.M., Bauman L.M., Denzine S. L., Engstrom M. and Chester-Jones H. (2001) Journal of Dairy Science, 84(4), 843-847.
17. Li L., Zhu Y., Wang X., He Y. and Cao B. (2014) Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 5, 21.
18. Lohakare J.D., Südekum K.H. and Pattanaik A.K. (2012) Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 25(9), 1338-1350.
19. Frank E., Livshitz L., Portnick Y., Kamer H., Alon T. and Moallem U. (2022) Animals, 12, 1-13.
20. Zanton G.I. and Heinrichs A.J. (2016) Journal of Dairy Science, 99(4), 2825-2836.
21. Belanche A., Doreau M., Edwards J.E., Moorby J.M., Pinloche E., and Newbold C.J. (2012) The Journal of Nutrition, 142, 1684-1692.
22. Katongole C.B. and Yan T. (2020) Animals, 10, 2439, 1-14.
23. Guimarães C.R., de Azevedo R.A., Campos M.M., Machado F.S., Pedroso A.M., Carvalheira L.R., Tomich T.R., Pereira L.G.R. and Coelho S.G. (2018) Pesq. agropec. bras., Brasília, 53 (7), 858-865.
24. Colmenero J.J.O. and Broderick G.A. (2006) Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 1704-1712.
25. Lu Z., Xu Z., Shen Z., Tian Y. and Shen, H. (2019) Frontier in Microbiology, 10, 847, 1-14.
26. Prusty S., Kundu S., Mondal G., Sontakke U. and Sharma V. (2016) Tropical Animal Health Production, 48, 807-815.
27. Akhter M., Islam M., Habib M., Rashid M. and Khandaker Z. (2017) Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science, 46(3), 179-187.
28. Tauqir N.A., Shahzad M.A., Nisa M., Sarwar M., Fayyaz M. and Tipu M.A. (2011) Livestock Science, 137(1-3), 66-72.
29. Elihasridas, Zain M., Marlida Y., and Andri (2019) Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 18(1), 60-66.
30. Rincker L.E., Vandehaar M.J., Wolf C.A., Liesman J.S., Chapin L.T. and Nielsen M.S.W. (2011) Journal of Dairy Science, 94(7), 3554-3567.
31. Brown E.G., VandeHaar M.J., Daniels K.M., Liesman J.S., Chapin L.T., Keisler D.H. and Weber Nielsen M.S. (2005) Journal of Dairy Science, 88(2), 585-594.