Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Opportunities for maximizing feed value of sorghum

45 views

Published on

Presented by Michael Blümmel, ILRI, at the Sorghum Scientist Field Day, Patancheru, 14-15 February 2019

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Opportunities for maximizing feed value of sorghum

  1. 1. Opportunities for maximizing feed value of sorghum Michael Blümmel, ILRI Sorghum Scientist Field Day, Patancheru, 14-15 February 2019
  2. 2. Structure of Presentation • Feed – supply demand scenario, valuation of sorghum stover and implication for sorghum improvement • Variations in stover fodder (and grain) quality, responses in livestock productivity • Available and proposed phenotyping infrastructure for mainstreaming multidimensional crop improvement
  3. 3. Feed resource supply - demand scenarios in India Feed resource Contribution to overall feed resources (%) Greens from CRP, forests, grazing 8.0 Planted forages 15.1 Crop residues 70.6 Concentrates 6.3 Deficit: feed availability versus feed requirement (%) Dry matter (i.e. crop residue quantity) -6 Digestible crude protein -61 Total digestible nutrients -50 (NIANP 2012; Blümmel at al. 2014)
  4. 4. Crop residues are becoming more important as feed resources Kahsay Berhe (2004) study in Yarer Mountain area  Cultivated land has doubled at the expense of pasture in 30 years  Switch in source of nutrition for livestock from grazing to CR
  5. 5. Sorghum stover trading in Hyderabad
  6. 6. Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Ju Jul Aug Sep Oc Nov 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Sorghum grain Sorghum stover 3.4 6.5 Month of trading IndianRupeeperkg Yearly mean 2004 to 2005 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Ju Jul Aug Sep Oc Nov 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Sorghum stover Sorghum grain 6.2 10.2 Yearly mean 2008 to 2009 Month of trading Comparisions of average cost of dry sorghum stover traded in Hyderabad and average of cost of sorghum grain in Andhra Pradesh 2005 to 2005 and 2008 to 2009 Changes in grain: stover value in sorghum traded in Hyderabad from 2004-5 to 2008-9 Sharma et al. 2010
  7. 7. Relation between digestibility and price of sorghum stover 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 y = -4.9 + 0.17x; R2 = 0.75; P = 0.03 Stover in vitro digestibility (%) Stoverprice(IR/kgDM) (Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006)
  8. 8. Long term survey of two contrasting sorghum stovers traded in Hyderabad: costs per kg (Rs)
  9. 9. Long term survey of two contrasting sorghum stovers traded in Hyderabad: in vitro digestibility (%)
  10. 10. Fodder N (%) IVOMD (%) Price (CFA/kg) Cowpea Haulm 2.22 61.3 164 Groundnut Haulm 1.66 58.4 119 Sorghum Stover 1.03 52.2 31 Pearl Millet Stover 0.98 47.2 24 Comparisons of pricing and quality of some leguminous and cereal crop residues in fodder markets in Niger Modified from Jarial et al. (2016) Price variations accounted for by laboratory fodder quality traits (R2 > 0.92)
  11. 11. Trading of sorghum stovers from modern cultivars (MC) and land races (LOC) in 4 districts in Maharashtra in 1985 to 1989 (calculated from Kelley et al., 1991)
  12. 12. Feed–supply demand scenario, valuation of sorghum stover and implication for sorghum improvement • High strategic importance of crop residues as livestock feed, likely to increase (feed demand, scarcity of land and water) • Ratio of sorghum stover to sorghum grain prices narrows, now 0.5 to 0.6 • Significant price premiums for sorghum stover quality • Stover significantly contributes to income from sorghum cropping
  13. 13.  Phenotyping new cultivars submitted for release testing for fodder traits  Phenotyping during crop improvement for fodder traits Exploit existing cultivar variations and targeted genetic enhancement  Conventional breeding, recurrent selection, hybridization  Molecular breeding, QTLs, genetic selection Exploit variation Targeted enhancement
  14. 14. Relationship between stover IVOMD and grain yield in 244 Kharif sorghum cultivars submitted to IIMR for cultivar release testing during 2002 to 2017 3 5 3 6 3 7 3 8 3 9 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 4 8 4 9 5 0 5 1 5 2 5 3 5 4 5 5 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 6 0 0 0 In v itro o rg a n ic m a tte r d ig e s tib ility (IV O M D ; % ) Grainyield(kg/ha) r= 0 .1 3 ; P = 0 .0 4 ; N = 2 4 4
  15. 15. Relationship between stover protein content and grain yield in 244 Kharif sorghum cultivars submitted to IIMR for cultivar release testing during 2002 to 2017 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 6 0 0 0 P ro te in c o n te n t (% ) Grainyield(kg/ha)
  16. 16. Relationship between stover IVOMD and grain yield in 156 Rabi sorghum cultivars submitted to IIMR for cultivar release testing during 2002 to 2011 4 2 4 4 4 6 4 8 5 0 5 2 5 4 5 6 5 8 6 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 In v itro o rg a n ic m a tte r d ig e s tib ility (IV O M D ; % ) Grainyield(kg/ha) r= -0 .2 2 ; P = 0 .0 0 0 6 ; N = 1 5 6
  17. 17. Relationship between stover IVOMD and grain yield in 156 Rabi sorghum cultivars submitted to IIMR for cultivar release testing during 2002 to 2011 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 P ro te in c o n te n t (% ) Grainyield(kg/ha) r= -0 .2 8 ; P = 0 .0 0 0 5 ;N = 1 5 6
  18. 18. Staygreen QTL’ associated stover digestibility across 2 years and 2 treatments and grain yields Bl Blummel et al. (2015)
  19. 19. Variations in some grain traits in 18 Rabi sorghum cultivars grown under diverse management conditions Trait-1 Mean Minimum Maximum Broad-sense h2 Crude protein (%) 8.6 7.9 10.2 0.58 Total amino acids (%) 7.1 6.6 8.0 0.57 Lysine 0.20 0.18 0.24 0.64 Polyphenols (mg/g) 12.4 10.8 14.4 0.67 -1 NIRS based analysis
  20. 20. Relation between digestibility and price of sorghum stover 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 y = -4.9 + 0.17x; R2 = 0.75; P = 0.03 Stover in vitro digestibility (%) Stoverprice(IR/kgDM) (Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006) High quality cultivar Low quality cultivar
  21. 21. Feed block manufacturing: supplementation, densification Ingredients % Sorghum stover 50 Bran/husks/hulls 18 Oilcakes 18 Molasses 8 Grains 4 Minerals, vitamins, urea 2 Courtesy: Miracle Fodder and Feeds PVT LTD
  22. 22. Comparisons of feed blocks based on lower (47%) and higher (52%) digestible sorghum stover and tested with commercial dairy buffalo farmer in India Block Premium 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 3.8 % 3.6 % Milk Potential* 15.5 kg/d 9.9 kg/d Modified from Anandan et al. (2009a) * 21 and 14 kg/d in crossbred cattle
  23. 23. Variations in stover fodder quality, responses in livestock productivity, variations in stover and grain quality Structure of Presentation • Livestock nutritionally significant variations exist in sorghum stover quality among cultivars • No, or manageable trade-off exist between stover fodder quality traits and grain yield • “Intuitively” small difference in stover fodder quality traits translate into substantial difference in livestock performance
  24. 24. Phenotyping for feed and fodder quality by Near Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS) Non-evasive c. 200 samples/d >30 traits Physico-chemical c. 60 000 US $ Calibration Validation NIRS equations sharable across compatible instruments At current: ILRI
  25. 25. Available FOSS-based NIRS Hub Infrastructure India: ILRI, ICRISAT, private sector Ethiopia: ILRI, EIAR, private sector Uganda: NARES Tanzania: NARES Nigeria: ILRI, ICRISAT, IITA, NARES private sector Mali: ICRISAT, NARES Burkina Faso: Coming, ILRI- INERA
  26. 26. From stationary to mobile handheld NIRS?
  27. 27. Available and proposed phenotyping infrastructure Broad-brush summary of multi-dimensional crop improvement • FOSS type NIRS ready for networking in South Asia, East Africa and West Africa • NIRS equations for all key cereal and legume crops available for sharing • ILRI platform for NIRS equations being migrated from WiKi to pCloud • Suitability of diverse mobile NIRS being explored
  28. 28. Profiling: groundnut varieties Malawi Variety Country NDF ADF ADL IVOMD Me NDM ICGV-SM 02724 Tanzania 28.561 46.033 8.82 47.69 5.41 1.414 ICGV-SM 99541 Mozambique 40.561 38.97 3.39 50.34 6.37 2.03 Manipinter Malawi 37.685 38.214 9.179 50.85 6.3 2.035 Chalimbana Malawi 28.97 40.853 8.22 49.88 5.9 2.08 ICGV-SM 99551 Tanzania 43.885 37.88 8.72 50.18 6.56 2.12 ICGV-SM 01514 Malawi 37.627 42.513 9.85 45.89 5.59 2.13 ICGV-SM 99568 Malawi 42.459 38.375 9.38 49.92 6.46 2.19 CG7 Malawi 35.542 36.769 8.1 51.78 6.54 2.194 ICGV-SM 99557 Tanzania 42.543 37.41 9.17 50.43 6.53 2.26 RG1 Malawi 37.414 36.33 8.15 50.53 6.38 2.27 Chitembana Malawi 34.597 37.499 8.37 50.02 6.1 2.31 ICGV-SM 01731 Malawi 40.451 37.414 9.067 49.98 6.34 2.31 ICGV-SM 99555 Malawi 43.885 36.755 8.76 51.46 6.55 2.32 ICGV-SM 90704 Malawi 30.887 37.55 8.2 50.29 6.01 2.35 ICGV-08503 Malawi 37.617 35.9 8.15 50.64 6.38 2.4 JL24 Malawi 37.141 34.854 7.9 53.68 6.87 2.46 ICGV-SM 01513 Mozambique 36.883 36.065 8.32 53.23 6.75 2.47 ICG 12991 Malawi 43.165 35.042 9.199 51.16 6.61 2.54 Malimba Malawi 30.143 30.913 7.023 54.17 6.86 2.79 ICGV-SM 01711 Tanzania 33.515 25.664 5.24 62.19 8.44 3.25 P Value <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 LSD 3.8 2.13 0.35 2.2 0.37 0.19 CV 6.27 3.49 2.52 2.6 3.44 5.1
  29. 29. Profiling: Sorghum varieties Malawi Variety NDM NDF ADF ADL ME IVOM IESV 92036 SH 1.055 57.23 37.57 5.17 7.31 50.14 E 36-1 0.97 57.58 39.31 5.45 7.07 48.67 Kari Mtama 1 0.95 57.71 39.31 5.68 7 48.22 IESV 92037/2 SH 0.94 59.56 39.81 5.8 6.89 47.24 IESV 214009 DL 0.95 60.43 41.55 5.83 6.7 46.29 IS 8193 X GADAM 1.05 60.46 41.73 6.26 6.44 44.73 GADAM X IS 8193 0.97 60.47 42.33 5.83 6.4 44.17 IESV 92028 DL 0.99 60.81 40.26 5.52 6.83 47.07 Khalid 0.93 61.18 41.06 5.71 6.63 45.74 GADAM 0.97 62.86 45.62 6.54 6.17 43.13 LSD 0.25 3.82 3.67 0.83 0.53 3.26 P Value NS NS 0.016 NS 0.007 0.005 CV 15.27 3.78 5.28 8.38 4.61 4.11
  30. 30. Relations between straw in vitro digestibility and grain yields in 130 NRRI rice cultivars National Rice Research between food- fodder traits in NRRI rice cultivars 3 8 3 9 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 S tra w in v itro organic m atter digestibility (% ) Grainyield(kg/ha) r= -0 .2 ; P = 0 .0 2 (Prasad et al. 2019)
  31. 31. Key findings • Rice cultivar with high grain yield and high straw quality identified • Straw quality in cultivars targeting upland, lowland, irrigated and saline/coastal areas described • Identification of genomic regions linked with straw quality through mapping panels initiated
  32. 32. This presentation is licensed for use under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. better lives through livestock ilri.org ILRI thanks all donors and organizations who globally supported its work through their contributions to the CGIAR system
  33. 33. CRP and CG logos

×