Feed constitutes about 80% of the total livestock production cost in Nigeria. The problem is more critical during the dry season more especially for ruminants. This study was conducted to determine the effect of location on chemical composition of sugarcane peels as animal feed in Kano State, Nigeria. The three sugarcane peel samples used for the study were from three different locations namely; Kano, Kaduna and mixed sugarcane peel (Kano and Kaduna). Known weights of the peels were sun dried and determined in the laboratory for proximate, energy, pH and phytonutrients. Results showed that ether extract, nitrogen-free extract, and dry matter were influenced by the location. Energy values (3891. 34 – 4037.53kcal/kg) were also affected (P< 0.05) by location of the sugarcane peels meal. Crude protein (6.02 – 8.20%), crude fiber (29.99 – 30.22%) and ash were not significantly affected (P > 0.05) by location. The cellulose, hemicelluloses, NDF, ADF, and ADL of sugarcane peels meal were all significantly (P <0.05) affected by the location. The pH values (6.38 – 6.67) were significantly affected (P < 0.05) by location. The phytonutrients of all the components were not significantly affected (P > 0.05) by the location. Based on these findings, sugarcane peels meal from all the locations can serve as an alternative feed ingredient for ruminants, since the peels contained substantial amount of energy and protein. However, the peels meal can also be safe for ruminants’ feedings because it contained small amounts of anti-nutritional factors.

1. Site Effects on Energy, Phytonutrients and Anti-Nutrient Contents of Ruminant Feed-Grade Sugarcane Peels
IJVSAH
Site Effects on Energy, Phytonutrients and Anti-Nutrient
Contents of Ruminant Feed-Grade Sugarcane Peels
*G. Saleh1, F.G. Kaankuka2
1
Department of Agricultural Education, Federal College of Education (Technical) Bichi, P.M.B., 3473, Kano State
Nigeria
2
Department of Animal Nutrition, University of Agriculture, Makurdi, Nigeria
Feed constitutes about 80% of the total livestock production cost in Nigeria. The problem is more
critical during the dry season more especially for ruminants. This study was conducted to
determine the effect of location on chemical composition of sugarcane peels as animal feed in
Kano State, Nigeria. The three sugarcane peel samples used for the study were from three
different locations namely; Kano, Kaduna and mixed sugarcane peel (Kano and Kaduna). Known
weights of the peels were sun dried and determined in the laboratory for proximate, energy, pH
and phytonutrients. Results showed that ether extract, nitrogen-free extract, and dry matter were
influenced by the location. Energy values (3891. 34 – 4037.53kcal/kg) were also affected (P< 0.05)
by location of the sugarcane peels meal. Crude protein (6.02 – 8.20%), crude fiber (29.99 – 30.22%)
and ash were not significantly affected (P > 0.05) by location. The cellulose, hemicelluloses, NDF,
ADF, and ADL of sugarcane peels meal were all significantly (P <0.05) affected by the location.
The pH values (6.38 – 6.67) were significantly affected (P < 0.05) by location. The phytonutrients
of all the components were not significantly affected (P > 0.05) by the location. Based on these
findings, sugarcane peels meal from all the locations can serve as an alternative feed ingredient
for ruminants, since the peels contained substantial amount of energy and protein. However, the
peels meal can also be safe for ruminants’ feedings because it contained small amounts of anti-
nutritional factors.
Keywords: anti-nutritional factors, crude fiber fractions, proximate compositions, ruminants, sugarcane peels
INTRODUCTION
Feed constitutes about 80% of the total livestock
production cost in Nigeria (Saleh, 2017). The problem of
inadequate feed nutrients is more critical during the dry
season especially in the northern part of Nigeria especially
for ruminants. However, there are inadequate availability
of conventional grazing forages and very expensive
industrial byproducts (Saleh, 2015).Some of the currrent
feed resources being used in Nigeria for ruminant feeding
include wheat and maize offal, groundnut haulm, cowpea
hay, wheat, and rice straws, maize and millet straws,
groundnut cake and cotton seed cake. Moreover, pasture
grasses and legumes that are available in Nigeria that are
used for ruminants feeding include Northern and Southern
gamba grasses, Buffel grass, pigeon pea, Siratro, Axillaris,
centro and so on.
Thus the search for alternative feeds ingredients that are
cheaper and easier to obtain as well as easier to process
become of paramount importance. The use of sugarcane
peels meal (SCM) as feedstuff during the dry season will
help in reducing the problem of feed shortage, especially,
in the northern part of the country where the sugarcane
peels are available at the period and also has the highest
number of ruminants. According to Ayoade, Carew, and
Ameh, (2007) exploitation of cheap feed resources for
animal production would lower cost of production and
*Corresponding author: G. Saleh, Department of
Agricultural Education, Federal College of Education
(Technical) Bichi, P.M.B., 3473, Kano State Nigeria. E-
mail: garbasaleh2@gmail.com; Tel: +2348025095322
International Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry
Vol. 4(1), pp. 028-032, October, 2018. © www.premierpublishers.org ISSN: 2141-5080
Research Article

2. Site Effects on Energy, Phytonutrients and Anti-Nutrient Contents of Ruminant Feed-Grade Sugarcane Peels
Saleh and Kaankuka 029
improve protein intake. Saleh and Maigandi (2014)
reported the availability of sugarcane peels in Kano State
but, have not yet been put to better use such as for feeding
livestock. NSDC, (2003) reported that Nigeria is one of the
most important producers of sugarcane with a land
potential of over 500,000 hectares of suitable cane field
capable of producing over 5.0 million metric tons of
sugarcane. If processed, it will yield about 3.0 million
metric tons of sugar.
There is little information on utilization of sugarcane peels
by ruminants in Nigeria, but Kano has an abundant
sugarcane peels which are largely unutilized except for the
small quantity being scavenged by donkeys, cattle, sheep
and goats; the remaining large quantity are either burnt or
dumped as refuse and this cause environmental havoc by
blocking water ways (Saleh, 2015). Sugarcane peels can
provide cheap feedstuff resource with appreciable amount
of nutrients dry matter 87.6%, crude protein 6.5%, crude
fiber 12.7%, ether extract 2.8%, ash 12.8% and NFE
77.1% that can support modest performance in ruminants
Ayoade et al. (2007). Ochepo, Ochepo, and Ayoade,
(2012) observed in their studies with West African Dwarf
(WAD) goats that up to 40% inclusion level of sugarcane
peels in a complete diet had no adverse effect on
performance. Saleh, (2010) recommended that
sugarcane peels meal could be incorporated into the diet
of growing Yankasa sheep up to 45% level. There is
availability of sugarcane peels in different locations in the
country but their chemical compositions were not known,
therefore, this study was to determine the effect of location
on chemical composition of sugarcane peels as ruminant
feeds ingredient found in Kano State, Nigeria.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
There are three sugarcane peels samples that are found
in Kano State viz; sample of sugarcane peels obtained
from Kano (KN) State; Kaduna (KD), and mixed sample
(KN and KD) which were all obtained from the noble cane
(S. officinarum). Known weights of the peels were sun
dried on a concrete slab for3 – 4 days and thereafter the
dry matter(DM) of the samples was determined in the
laboratory. The dried sugarcane peels were milled to
produce sugarcane peels meal.
The dried samples were then analyzed for crude protein
(CP), crude fiber (CF), ether extract (EE) and ash
according to AOAC, (2006). Energy was determined using
Bomb Calorimeter (Cal2k Isothermal), neutral detergent
fiber (NDF) and acid detergent lignin (ADL) was
determined according to procedures described by Van
Soest and Robertson (1991) .The effects of chemical and
energy compositions of sugarcane peel meal value were
reported as indicated in table (1). All proximate values
were reported in percentages (AOCS, 2000).
The pH values of the three prepared samples of sugarcane
peels were determined in the laboratory using a pH meter.
Also, tannin, oxalate, and hydrogen cyanide contents were
analyzedaccording to standard procedures (AOAC, 2006),
while saponin and phytate were done according to the
procedure of El-Olemy, Al-Muhtad and Afifi (1994). Three
treatment samples using three replicate per each samples
were used. The data generated were subjected to analysis
of variance (ANOVA) according to (SAS, 2000). Where
differences in means manifest, the Fisher’s least
significance difference test (FLSD) was used to separate
them at (P< 0.05) level of probability.
RESULTS
The effect of location on chemical and energy composition
of sugarcane peels meal is presented in table (1). The
chemical composition of, ether extract and nitrogen free
extract were significant (P<0.05), also, dry matter of the
sugarcane peels was highly significant (P<0.01) by the
location. Meanwhile, energy was significantly affected (P<
0.05) by the location of the sugarcane peels. Crude
protein, crude fiber and ash were not significantly affected
(P>0.05) by the sugarcane location. Values for dry matter
ranged from 96.06 – 96. 82%; ether extract ranged from
1.26 – 1.61%; nitrogen free extract from 53.04 – 55.82%.
Also, crude protein ranged from 6.02 – 8.20%; crude fiber
ranged from 29.99 – 30.22%; ash ranged from 6.95 – 6.
97% and energy ranged from 3891. 34 – 4037.5 kcal/kg.
The effect of location on cellulose, hemicellulose, NDF,
ADF, and ADL of sugarcane peels meal is presented also
in table (2). All the parameters were significant (P<0.05).
The values for cellulose ranged from 34.05 – 37.00%;
hemicelluloses ranged from 14.05 - 15.56%; neutral
detergent fibre ranged from 46.92 - 49.54%; acid detergent
fibre ranged from 61.02 - 65.28% and acid detergent lignin
ranged from 11.37 – 13.61%.
The anti-Nutritional factors or phytonutrients (quantitative
and qualitative) in sugarcane peels meal as affected by the
location is presented in table (2). The phytonutrients of all
the components were not significantly affected (P>0.05) by
the location. Values of tannin ranged from 0.10 - 0.11%;
phytate ranged from 2.44 - 2.57%; Oxalate 4.11 - 4.18%;
saponin 3.87 - 5.87% and hydrogen cyanide 0.29 -- 0.33%.
DISCUSSION
The effect of proximate compositions of sugarcane peels
meal value were reported in percentage as indicated in
table( 1).The dry matter is higher than the values reported
by Alu, Kaankuka, Bello and Salau (2013) for SCM. Crude
protein contents recorded are within the values reported
by (Ochepo et al., 2012). The crude fiber observed in the
study is higher than the 12% reported by Ayoade et al.
(2007) for SCM. The ether extract contents recorded are
lower than 2.8% reported by Ayoade et al. (2007) .

3. Site Effects on Energy, Phytonutrients and Anti-Nutrient Contents of Ruminant Feed-Grade Sugarcane Peels
Int. J. Vet. Sci. Anim. Husb. 030
Table 1: Effect of location on chemical, pH and energy composition of sugarcane peels meal
Locations of Sugarcane Peels
Parameters Kano (KN) Kaduna (KD) KN + KD LSD*
Dry Matter (DM%) 96.71ab 96.82a 96.06b 0.754
Crude protein (CP%) 8.2 6.06 6.02 2.53
Crude Fiber (CF%) 30.19 29.99 30.22 0.356
ether extract (EE%) 1.61a 1.18b 1.26b 0.303
nitrogen free extract (NFE%) 53.04b 55.82a 55.55a 2.11
Cellulose% 34.64b 34.05c 37.00a 0.123
Hemicellulose% 15.31b 14.05c 15.56a 0.123
Neutral detergent fiber% 49.54a 46..92c 48.38b 0.099
Acid detergent fiber% 65.28a 61.02c 63.95b 0.049
Acid detergent lignin% 13.61a 12.82b 11.37c 0.278
pH 6.67a 6.42b 6.38c 0.0184
Energy (Kcal/g) 3891.34c 4037.53a 3964.43b 14.12
a,b Means in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different (P < 0.05)
*LSD = Least Significant Difference.
Table 2: Anti nutritional factors or phytonutrients of sugarcane peels meal as affected by location
*LSD = Least Significant Difference.
Table 1 also shows the values for hemicelluloses which
were very close to the values of 12.22 - 14.61% obtained
by Adesoji, (2012) for SCM. The acid detergent fiber
values were lower than the 78.75- 84.04% obtained by
Adesoji (2012) but, within the values (24.95 – 54.37%)
reported by Dos Anjos, Silva and Campana (2008). for
matured sugarcane. The values of NDF reported in the
study are within the values of 61.9% reported by Neckle
(1988) for sugarcane tops. Feed products obtained from
sugarcane are high in fiber and/or energy and, therefore,
are primarily used in ruminant feeding, especially cattle, to
meet nutritive requirements. Feed rations containing
sugarcane or its by-products are usually combined with
other feed products (OECD, 2011).
The pH values in Table1 shows the mixed sugarcane peels
appear to be less alkali compared to the KN and KD
sugarcane peels. Energy content values (3891. 34 –
4037.53kcal/kg) were higher than 1945 kcal/kg reported by
(OECD, 2011) but, within the range of 3344 – 4311 kcal/kg
reported by Alu et al. (2013) for SCM. Location, method
of processing, storage and other factors might have
resulted in observed differences in chemical compositions
since all the authors cited worked on SCM.
Tannin values in this research are very low as indicated
in table (2) and also Waghorn, Avendale and Woodfield
(1990). suggested that the concentration of condensed
tannins above 4 per cent should be considered toxic for
ruminants. The range of phytate in this study is minimal
and will not result to negative performance in ruminants.
Ruminants can readily use phytate because of the
activities of the rumen micro-organisms, while non-
ruminants cannot. The Oxalate values in this study are
safe for ruminants (Abu-Zanat, et al. 2003). Ruminants can
break down saponins in the rumen, while monogastrics
cannot. The saponins are water soluble and feeds
treatments removes saponins (Ranjhan, 2001). In non-
Parameters(%) Locations of Sugarcane Peels
Kano (KN) Kaduna
(KD)
KN + KD LSD*
Tannin 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.06
Phytate 2.57 2.44 2.51 1.09
Oxalate 4.18 4.11 4.11 1.15
Saponin 4.03 5.87 3.87 1.40
Hydrogen Cyanide 0.33 0.29 0.30 0.08

4. Site Effects on Energy, Phytonutrients and Anti-Nutrient Contents of Ruminant Feed-Grade Sugarcane Peels
Saleh and Kaankuka 031
ruminants (chicks and pigs), retardation of growth rate,
due primarily to reduction in feed intake, is probably the
major concern. Such effects have also been noted
(saponin 0.71%) when saponin was incorporated in a chick
diet. Furthermore, because saponins may also undergo
bacterial degradation in the rumen, they may not retard the
growth of ruminants (Soetan and Oyewole, 2009) .The
values of hydrogen cyanide (HCN) reported in this study
are low. An earlier study observed that extensive
processing such as sun drying and milling of sugarcane
will naturally, reduce levels of any(HCN) by animals
consuming sugarcane and its by-products Knight and
Walter (2001).
CONCLUSION
Effect of location on proximate revealed that all the
sugarcane peels from different locations contained
substantial amount of crude protein (6.02% – 8.20%),
crude fibre (29.99% – 30.22%) and other nutrients that will
be used as ruminant feeds. However, energy values
(3891. 34 – 4037.53kcal/kg) and moderate anti-nutritional
Factors/phytonutrients (quantitative and qualitative)
compositions of sugarcane peels from different locations
qualified it to be used as ruminant feeds.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings from this study, sugarcane peels
meal contained substantial amounts of energy and
moderate amounts of proteins for ruminants’ feedings.
However, the peels meal can be safe for ruminants’
feedings since it contained small amounts of anti-
nutritional factors/phytonutrients compositions.
However, further studies should be carried out in order to
evaluate performance, digestibility and economic
incorporation of sugarcane peels to various categories of
ruminants. Also the result of this experiment could be used
to improve sugarcane production and job creation in
Nigeria.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We acknowledge Federal College of Education
(Technical) Bichi, Kano State, Nigeria for providing some
facilities support for this research.
REFERENCES
Abu-Zanat, M. M., Al-Hassanat, W. F. M., Alawi, M. and
Ruyle, G. B. (2003). Oxalate and tannins assessment
in Atriplexhalimus L. and A. nummularia L. J. Range
Manage. 56: 370-374.
Adesoji, A. T. (2012). Utilisation of Sugarcne Peels in diet
of Growing Rabbits (Oryctologus cuniculus).
Unpublished M.Sc. Dissertation, Department of Animal
Science, Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria. 75pp.
Alu, S. E., Kaankuka, F. G., Bello, M. and Salau, E.S.
(2013). Growth parameters and economic analysis of
broiler finisher birds’ production fed sugarcane
scrapping meal (SCSM)-based diets. Available online
at www.actasatech.com (Retrieved November, 2014).
AOAC (2006).Official Method of Analysis (18th edition).
Association of official Analytical Chemists. Volume 1
Arlington, Virginia, USA.
AOCS (American Oil Chemist Society) (2000). Official
Method of Analysis (5th edition) Association of Official
Analytical Chemists. Washington, DC,
Ayoade, J. A., Carew, S. N., and Ameh, A. E. (2007). The
feed value of sugarcane scrapping meal for weaner
rabbits: Growth, meat yield and cost of production:
Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference of the
Nigerian Society for Animal Production, University of
Calabar, March 18-21, 2007. pp. 227 – 299.
Dos Anjos, I. A., Silva, D. N. and Campana, M. P. (2008).
“Cana-de-açúcar como Forrageira”, In:Cana-de-
açúcar (editions. Dinardo-Miranda, L. L Vasconcelos,
A.C.M. and Landell, M.G.A) Campinas: Instituto
Agronômico.
El-Olemy, M. M., Al-Muhtad, F. F. and Afifi, A. A. (1994).
Experimental Phytochemistry. A Laboratory Manual,
King Sa’ud university Press, Saudi Arabia. pp. 21 – 61.
Knight, A. P. and Walter, R.G. (2001). A Guide to Plant
Poisoning of Animals in North America, Teton New
Media, United States of America. pp. 367.
Neckle, F. A. (1986). Experiences with whole sugarcane
feeding in Trinidad and Tobago. FAO Animal
Production and Health Paper, Proceedings of FAO
Expert Consultation held in Santo Domingo, Dominican
Republic from 7-11 July, 1986.
NSDC (National Sugarcane Development Council) (2003).
In: This Day Live (2013). Investing in Sugarcane
Production and Processing Plant:
http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/investing-in-sugar-
production-and-processing-plant/141889 12/3/2013
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development). (2011). key food and feed nutrients,
anti-nutrients and toxicants Series on the Safety of
Novel Foods and Feeds. Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development consensus document
on compositional considerations for new varieties of
sugarcane (saccharum ssp. hybrids): No. 23. 25-Oct-
2011. Pp 1-43.
Ochepo, C. O., Ochepo, G. O. and Ayoade, J. A. (2012).
The utilization of complete diet containing sugarcane
peels by goats. Proceedings of the 37th annual
conference of the Nigerian Society for animal
production, University of Agriculture, Makurdi, March
18-21, 2012. pp. 507 – 511.

5. Site Effects on Energy, Phytonutrients and Anti-Nutrient Contents of Ruminant Feed-Grade Sugarcane Peels
Int. J. Vet. Sci. Anim. Husb. 032
Ranjhan, S. K. (2001).Animal Nutrition in the Tropics: (5th
Revised Edition), New Delhi, Vikas Publishing House,
PVT. Limited. 576pp.
Saleh, G. (2017). Nutritional Evaluation of Sugarcane
Peels for Feeding Goats.Duetschland/Germany,
LAMBERT Academic Publishing. p. 1.
Saleh, G. (2015). Nutritional evaluation of sugarcane peel
meal used in feeding Kano brown goats. Unpublished
PhD. Thesis, Department of Animal Nutrition, University
of Agriculture, Makurdi Nigeria.
Saleh, G. and Maigandi, S. A. (2014). Quantification and
Uses of Sugarcane Peels among the Sheep and Goats’
Owners in Nassarawa Local Government Area of Kano
State. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of
the Nigerian Society for Animal Production, BABCOCK
University, Ilishan-Remo, Ogun State. March 16th -
19th, 2014. pp. 151-153.
Saleh, G. (2010). Utilisation of Sugarcne Peels by
Yankasa Lambs in Savannah Zone. Unpublished M.Sc.
Dissertation,Department of Animal Science, Bayero
University, Kano. 49 pp.
SAS Institute Inc. (2000). Statistical Analysis System
SAS/STAT. Guide for Personal Computers, Version 6th
edition, Cary N.C, USA. pp 967-978.
Soetan, K. O. and Oyewole, O. E. (2009). The need for
adequate processing to reduce the antinutritional
factors in plants used as human foods and animal
feeds: A review African Journal of Food Science Vol. 3
(9): pp. 223-232.
Van Soest, P.J. and Robertson, J. B. (1991). System
analysis for evaluating fibrous feeds. Ed. Pigon. M.J.
and Megraham T. workshop Proceedings on
Standardisation of Analytical Methodology for Feeds.
Ottawa, Canada. Pp 135-143.
Waghorn, G.C., Avendale, M. H. and Woodfield, D. R.
(1990). Methanogenesis from forages fed to sheep.
Proceeding New Zealand Grassland Assoc., 51:171-
175.
Accepted 18 August 2018
Citation: G. Saleh, F.G. Kaankuka (2018). Site Effects on
Energy, Phytonutrients and Anti-Nutrient Contents of
Ruminant Feed-Grade Sugarcane Peels. International
Journal of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry 4(1):
028-032.
Copyright: © 2018 Saleh and Kaankuka. This is an open-
access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and source are cited.