You can find the comparison of nutritional value of different types of forages including rice straw in this slide.

1. 1
Evaluation of nutritional value of locally produced
forages
Presenter
Jeevan Kumar Shrestha
Academia Sinica, Taiwan
National Chung Hsing University, Taiwan
Email: jeevan@smail.nchu.edu.tw

2. Outline
Introduction
Objectives
Research gaps
Materials and methods
Results
Discussions
Conclusion
Personal critics
References
2

3. Introduction
Locally produced forages (LPF)
Corn silage, Italian ryegrass, Sudan grass,
rice straw etc.
Economical and environmental friendly.
Increase the sustainability of cattle production.
Countries like Korea, Japan and Taiwan depend on imported forages.
3
Pile of rice straw ready for feeding

4. Introduction
Rice straw
4 tons of rice grain, produce 6 tons of rice straw.
 Annual yield of rice straw is about 188 million tons in China
(Guo et al., 2002).
Low protein, energy, digestibility & degradability.
Burning is the choice.
4

5. 5
(Retrieved from: https://www.hindustantimes.com)
Farmers burning their rice straw and stubble

6. Why is rice straw important? (Anderson and
Hoffman, 2006)
Dilute the energy contents of the diets.
Increase the fiber content and stimulate rumination.

Increases the dry matter contents of the diet.

Rice straw have low potassium and it prevents milk fever.
6

7. What is brittle mutant (BM)?
 Obtained by means of mutation using Sodium azide, 60Co-
radiation etc.
Mutation changes the secondary cell was composition, thickness &
strength.
Normal phenotype except fragility.
Eg: Mutation in OsCesA4 which encode cellulose synthase catalytic
subunit (CesA) (Yan et al., 2007).
7

8. Research gaps
Nutritional information of LPFs were unavailable.
Human food got higher priority than animal feed.
Brittle mutants are limited to very few countries.
Several brittle mutants have varying characteristics.
8

9. Objectives (I)
General objective
To evaluate the nutritional value of locally produced
forages
Specific objectives
To compare the nutritional values of different locally
produced forages (LPFs)
To compare the nutritional values of LPFs with imported
forages
9

10. Materials & Methods (I)
Cows
Two fistulated Holstein dry cows
Forages
10 LPF (5 from Chungcheong
and from Jeolla)
Corn silage, Italian ryegrass, sudangrass, rice straw, Ryegrass, and
Barley silage.
10
Source: https://i.ytimg.com

11. Imported forages
11
alfalfa hay kline hay
ryegrass straw Pine fescue straw tall fescue straw
Timothy hay

12. Sample processing
12
Dried at 60°C for 96 h
ground using a cyclone mill
Sieved through 1 mm screen
Chemical analysis In vitro ruminal fermentation
Forages (local + imported)
General linear model
yijk = μ+Ti+Yj+TiYj+eijk

13. In vitro ruminal fermentation
13
Mixed rumen fluid
Filter through cheesecloth
Mixed with in vitro solution
Transferred 50 ml into 0.5g containing bottle
0, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h
Gas pH ammonia volatile fatty acids NDF
39 °C

14. Results
14
Corn silage
Italian ryegrass
Sudan grass
Rice straw
Volatile fatty
acids
Gas production
Ruminal fermentation
Non fiber
carbohydrate
Crude protein
Lignin

15. Nutrient composition of LPFs
15
Forages
DM
(g/kg as
fed)
CP EE Ash
Cellulos
e
Hemicel
lulose
Lignin NFC TDN
Corn
silage
326 84 22 61 344 288 27 200 625
Italian
ryegrass
446 134 27 85 507 146 43 101 573
Sudan
grass
341 51 16 105 559 163 52 137 531
Rice
straw
619.5 49 16 76 615 168 83 49 440
(g/kg as dw)

16. Nutrient comparison of forages
Forages
DM (g/kg as
fed)
CP Cellulose
Hemicellul
ose
Lignin NFC TDN
Alfalfa hay 906 189 245 212 52 246 561
Timothy
hay
903 101 457 198 40 152 588
Kline hay 914 85 458 87 32 282 616
Ryegrass
straw
809 46 589 133 47 143 551
Pine
fescue
straw
856 55 526 163 63 161 550
Tall fescue
straw
955 64 378 310 55 142 534
Rice straw 619.5 49 615 168 83 49 440
16
(g/kg as dw)

17. Objectives (II)
General objective
To compare the nutrition value of brittle mutant (bm) with
wild type (wt)
Specific objective
To determine the chemical composition of bm and wt
To determine the in situ digestibility of bm and wt
17

18. Materials and methods (II)
Brittle mutants (BM) and wild types (WT) were sown.
Hand harvested at yellow maturity stage (122 days after
sowing).
Leaf, sheath and stem were separated.
Dried at 65 °C for 72 hours.
18

19. In situ digestibility
Three Holstein dairy cows with permanent rumen cannula
3g ground rice straw in nylon bags (45 µm)
Bags were placed in rumen.
Bags were removed from the rumen
after 0, 6, 12, 24, 48 and 72 h incubation.
19
http://www.holsteinusa.com/holstein_breed/holstei
n101.html

20. Electron microscopy
Second internode below the panicle
of BM and WT stem samples
Observed in scanning electron
microscope (SEM) and transmission
electron microscope (TEM)
20
First
internode
Second
internode

21. Resuts (II)
21
Morphological composition of rice straw

22. Chemical composition
22
Hemicellulose Acid insoluble ash Crude protein
Cellulose Acid detergent fiber Organic matter
Wild type
50.3% 30.6% 16.9%
33.1% 29.8% 4.5%

23. Electron microscopy
23
Sclerenchyma cells
Thin Thick
Brittle mutants Wild type

24. In situ digestibility
24
W
T
BM

25. Discussion
Rice silage reduced acidification and eutrophication
potentials by 3.6% and 3.3%, respectively
As a plant matures or the nutrient supply is sufficient, NFC
decreases, while NDF increases
Interaction between region and forage species
Rice straw contained the lowest CP, NFC, and TDN, but the
highest Lignin.
25

26. Discussion
Reduced particle size increase dry matter intake and
improve rumen fermentation (Kononoff et al.,2003).
 Degradability of hemicellulose is higher than cellulose
(Agbagla-Dohnani et al.,2001).
Parenchyma digest completely while sclerenchyma remain
intact even after 72 hours incubation (Wang et al., 2008).
26

27. Synthesis of 2 papers
Forages CP Cellulose
Hemicellul
ose
TDN
Corn
silage
84 344 288 625
Italian
ryegrass
134 507 146 573
Sudan
grass
51 559 163 531
Rice straw 49 615 168 440
Brittle
mutant
57.281 411.435 252 517.45
27
(g/kg of dw)

28. Synthesis of 2 papers
28
Forages CP Cellulose Hemicellulose TDN
Alfalfa hay 189 245 212 561
Timothy hay 101 457 198 588
Kline hay 85 458 87 616
Ryegrass straw 46 589 133 551
Pine fescue
straw
55 526 163 550
Tall fescue
straw
64 378 310 534
Rice straw 49 615 168 440
Brittle mutant 57.281 411.435 252 517.45
(g/kg of dw)

29. Conclusion
LPFs should be promoted for sustainable livestock
farming.
Rice straw (wild type) is not good enough.
But, ice straw produced from brittle mutant has a
potential to be used as a forage.
29

30. Personal critics
Whether the forage contains grain or not
Possibility of cultivating imported forage species locally or not.
Electron microscopy of basal internode would have given even
better result.
Nothing about NFC of brittle mutants.
30

31. References
 https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8a8mwuY4fAU/hqdefault.jpg
 http://www.holsteinusa.com/holstein_breed/holstein101.html
 https://www.hindustantimes.com/rf/image_size_960x540/HT/p2/2017/10/04/Pictures/pollution-national-november-
burning-despite-november-highway_c1b65ea6-a922-11e7-8fa9-3a95f17ae4d1.jpg
 Alfalfa hay. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81L7k6S8A1L._SX466_.jpg.
 Timothy hay. https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1308/9569/products/2ndTimclose.jpg?v=1534857831
 Kline hay. https://www.google.com.tw/search?q=kline+hay&rlz=1C1NDCM_zh-
TWTW779TW779&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRhMffotjdAhWBWLwKHQQHBvgQ_AUIDigB&biw
=1366&bih=657#imgrc=3QsYraF8Kz9O5M
 Ryegrass. https://www.newhay.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Ryegrass.jpg
31

32. References
 Pine fescue. https://encrypted-
tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTifOmfkX9xcGRpkCxDc0KBfcc2Z7tEcWhgbkDU6QRUz7NrVkxv
 Tall fescue. http://www.uwyo.edu/plantsciences/uwplant/forages/images/tallfescue.jpg
 https://merced.cropmobster.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/09/alerts/brittanyoakes/FoodEvolution-rice-
straw-720x400.png
 Wang, J. K., X. L. Chen, J. X. Liu, Y. M. Wu and J. A. Ye. 2008. Histological changes of tissues and cell wall of rice straw
influenced by chemical pretreatments. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 21:824-830.
 Agbagla-Dohnani, A., P. Noziere, G. Clement and M. Doreau. 2001. In sacco degradability, chemical and morphological
composition of 15 varieties of European rice straw. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 94:15-27.
 Kononoff, P. J., A. J. Heinrichs and H. A. Lehman. 2003. The effect of corn silage particle size on eating behavior, chewing
activities, and rumen fermentation in lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 86:3343-3353.
32

33. 33
Thanks for your
attention