Dual-Purpose Crop Development, Fodder Trading and Processing Options for Improved Feed Value Chains Blümmel M 1 ., S.A.T Tarawali 2 , N. Teufel 1 and I. A. Wright 1 International Livestock Research Institute, India 1 and Ethiopia 2 Fifth All African Conference on Animal Agriculture, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia October 25 – 28, 2010

Key feed sources in India: 2003 and 2020 (summarized from NIANP, 2005 and Ramachandra et al., 2007 ) Feed Resource % Crop Residues Planted fodder crops 2003 2020 44.2 69.0 34.1 ? Greens (F/F/CPR/WL) 17.8 ? Concentrates 3.9 7.3

Sorghum stover trading in Hyderabad

Type and cost of sorghum stover traded monthly 2004-2005 in Hyderabad, India Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006 Stover type Price IR / kg DM Andhra 3.52 b Andhra Hybrid 3.15 cd Ballary Hybrid 3.54 b Raichur 3.89 a Rayalaseema 3.23 c Telangana (Local Y) 3.06 d

Relation between digestibility and price of sorghum stover Premium Stover “ Raichur” Low Cost Stover “ Local Yellow” Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006

Price variations in different sorghum stover traded concomitantly in Mieso, Ethiopia, April 2007 Source: calculated from Gebremedhin et al. 2009 Note: In India SS stover have about 3-4 units higher digestibility than GS stover Stover ETB/kg Trader ETB/kg Farm Sweet Sorghum (SS) 0.65 0.20 “ Grain” Sorghum (GS) 0.50 0.13 Price premium 30% 54%

Price: quality relation estimates in rice straw traded monthly in Kolkata from 2008 to 2009 Teufel et al. 2010 (less successful in establishing price: quality relations in wheat straw trading)

Dual-purpose crop development - exploiting existing variation, targeted further improvement

Stover digestibility and grain yield in new sorghum cultivars release-tested in India between 2002 and 2008 Blümmel et al. 2010

Stover digestibility and stover yield in new sorghum cultivars release-tested in India between 2002 and 2008 Blümmel et al. 2010

Stover yields and grain yields in new sorghum cultivars release-tested in India between 2002 and 2007

Variation in food-feed crop traits within 256 full-sib progenies of pearl millet cultivar ICMV 221 Bidinger et al. (2006) Experimental varieties :” dual purpose” and “ grain” generated Bidinger et al. 2006 Variable Mean Range Grain yield (kg/ha) Stover yield (kg/ha) Stover digestibility (%) 3561 3617 43.6 2719 to 4154 ** 2783 to 5005 ** 40.7 to 46.1 **

Original and experimental pearl millet stover ICMV 221 tested with sheep (2 selection cycles ) Bidinger et al. 2009 Selection criterion Digestible Intake Grain yield Original ICMV 221 29.2 g/kg LW .75 /d 3 110 kg/ha Exp: Dual Purpose 221 31.5 “ 3 250 “ Exp: Grain 221 27.5 “ 3 110 “ Significance (P <) 0.0001 ns

Live weight gains in sheep fed exclusively on groundnut haulms Prasad et al. 2010 Groundnut cultivars Gain (g/d) ICGV 89104 137 ICGV 9114 123 TMV 2 111 ICGS 76 76 ICGS 11 76 DRG 12 66 ICGS 44 65 ICGV 86325 83 ICGV 92020 95 ICGV 92093 109 Prob > F 0.02

Comparisons of on farms advantage of improved dual purpose groundnut and traditional cultivar in 3 villages of Anantapur High adoption incentive through moderate but accumulating advantages Cultivars Pod yield Haulm yield Milk yield TMV2 2.24 t/ha 2.64 t/ha 3.92 kg/d ICGV 91114 2.57 t/ha 3.08 t/ha 4.36 kg/d 15 % 17 % 10 %

Importance of basal diet quality, processing, densification, fortification

Feed block manufacturing: supplementation, densification Courtesy: Miracle Fodder and Feeds PVT LTD Ingredients % Sorghum stover 50 Bran/husks/hulls 18 Oilcakes 18 Molasses 8 Grains 4 Minerals, vitamins, urea 2

Comparisons of high and low quality sorghum stover based feed blocks in commercial dairy buffalo Anandan et al. (2009a) Block High Block Low CP 17.2 % 17.1% ME (MJ/kg) 8.46 MJ/kg 7.37 MJ/kg DMI 19.7 kg/d 18.0 kg/d DMI per kg LW 3.6 % 3.3 % Milk Potential 16.6 kg/d 11.8 kg/d

Supplementation and processing of sweet sorghum bagasse and response in sheep Anandan et al. (2009b) Mash Pellets Block Control Chaffed SSBRL Concentrate DMI (g/kg LW) 52.5 a 55.6 a 42.1 b 41.5 b ADG (g / d) 132.7 a 130.4 a 89.5 b 81.3 b Processing ($/t) 5.9 7.0 5.2 1.7 Transport ($/t/100km) 6.6 5.8 5.2 13.5

Thank you for your attention Acknowledgement : The inputs and suggestions of Alan Duncan, Bruno Gerard and Andre Van Rooyen for this presentation are appreciated