Thumbnail Image

Anand Agricultural University, Anand

Anand Agricultural University (AAU) was established in 2004 at Anand with the support of the Government of Gujarat, Act No.(Guj 5 of 2004) dated April 29, 2004. Caved out of the erstwhile Gujarat Agricultural University (GAU), the dream institution of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Dr. K. M. Munshi, the AAU was set up to provide support to the farming community in three facets namely education, research and extension activities in Agriculture, Horticulture Engineering, product Processing and Home Science. At present there seven Colleges, seventeen Research Centers and six Extension Education Institute working in nine districts of Gujarat namely Ahmedabad, Anand, Dahod, Kheda, Panchmahal, Vadodara, Mahisagar, Botad and Chhotaudepur AAU's activities have expanded to span newer commodity sectors such as soil health card, bio-diesel, medicinal plants apart from the mandatory ones like rice, maize, tobacco, vegetable crops, fruit crops, forage crops, animal breeding, nutrition and dairy products etc. the core of AAU's operating philosophy however, continues to create the partnership between the rural people and committed academic as the basic for sustainable rural development. In pursuing its various programmes AAU's overall mission is to promote sustainable growth and economic independence in rural society. AAU aims to do this through education, research and extension education. Thus, AAU works towards the empowerment of the farmers.

Browse

19991
Reset filters
Subject: Livestock Production and Management × Author: Wadhwani, Kishankumar N. × End date: 1999 × Start date: 1998 × Thesis Type: Ph.D ×
Reset filters

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ThesisItemOpen Access
    FEEDLOT PERFORMANCE OF WEANER LAMBS ON AZOLLA BASED NON-CONVENTIONAL TOTAL MIXED RATION UNDER INTENSIVE PRODUCTION SYSTEM
    (AAU, Anand, 1999) Wadhwani, Kishankumar N.; Patel, Ashok M.
    The growth trial was conducted under feedlot system on twenty one farm born weaner lambs in two phases. The animals were assigned to 3 dietary treatments (T1,T2 and T3) on body weight basis which comprised of conventional (TMR I), non-conventional I (TMR II) and non-conventional II total mixed rations (TMR III) in phase I, the animals were individually fed. In phase II, the lambs were assigned to conventional (TMR I), non-conventional I (TMR IV) and non conventional II total mixed ration (TMR V) and group feeding was followed. Total mixed ration was fed ad lib in order to meet energy and protein requirement of lambs as per ICAR (1985). Each treatment group had Marwari, Patanwadi and Merino x Patanwadi lambs. In phase-I, the TMR I comprised of maize (22 % ) , groundnut cake (15 % ) , rice polish (15 % ) , molasses (10 % ) , mineral mixture (3 %) and urea treated wheat straw (35 %) the non-conventional I (TMR II) and non conventional II (TMR-III) total mixed ration comprised of AzollSy 10 % and 20 %, PJ pods 15 % and 17 % and corn steep liquor 12 % and 15 %, respectively. In addition to these TMR-II contained Rice polish 10 % and GN cake, 5 % to make it isonitrogenous. Both TMR II and TMR III contained same level of molasses, mineral mixture and urea treated wheat straw in TMR I. In phase II, the non conventional T (TMR TV) and non conventional II (TMR V) total mixed rations comprised of Azolla 15 and 25 %, PJ pods 20 and 17 % and corn steep liquor 12 and 15 %, respectively. In addition to these, GN cake to the extent of 5 % was added in TMR IV. The urea treated wheat straw was added at the rate of 35 % in TMR I and TMR IV and 30 % in TMR V. The growth trial lasted for 112 days during which the animals attained live weight acceptable in the local market. In phase I, the average daily dry matter intake during the entire experimental period in terms of g/day, per cent of body weight and g/kg W0.75 in conventional (TMR I), non conventional I (TMR II) and non conventional II (TMR III) groups was recorded as 721.60 ± 75.64, 3.46 ±0.18 and 73.81 ± 4.82, 757.28 ± 35.86, 4.04 ± 0.13 and 84.92 ± 3.26 and 671.63 ± 50.78, 3.80 ± 0.21 and 78.19 ± 4.38, respectively. The treatment means did not differ with each other. In phase II, the respective values for TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V were 642.29 ± 39.82, 3.32 ± 0.08 and 69.48 ± 1.90, 606.14 ± 30.68, 3.46 ± 0.05 and 70.60 ± 1.64 and 598.98 ± 31.14, 3.41 ± 0.07 and 69.78 ± 2.12, respectively. The treatment means were statistically similar. The average daily water intake (ml/day) during the entire experimental period during phase I was 3154.46 ± 327.2, 2735.92 ± 139.54 and 2454.62 ± 161.66 in treatment groups T1, T2 and Ta respectively. In phase II, the corresponding values were 2794.92 ± 254.12, 2662.08 ± 211.10 and 2654.91 ± 233.33 in TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V, respectively. The treatment groups in both the phases showed statistically similar values. In phase I, at the end of experimental feeding, the lambs in T1, T2 and T3 groups attained 25.24 ± 1.96, 23.51 ± 1.36 and 21.07 ± 1.12 kg live body weight, respectively. The body weight in all the treatment group did not differ each other but period effect was significant (P < 0.05). In phase II, the live weight was recorded 24.36 i 1.16, 20.34 ± 1.24 and 20.24 ± 1.49 kg in TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V groups, respectively. The difference between treatment groups was statistically non significant but period as well as period x treatment interaction was significant (P < 0.05). In phase I, the digestibility coefficient in TMR I, TMR II and TMR III respectively for dry matter (59.58 ± 1.72, 51.60 ± 0.52 and 51.98 ± 0.44), organic matter (67.22 ± 1.49, 63.53 ± 2.40 and 63.69 ± 1.42), crude protein (80.50 ± 1.94, 73.82 ± 1.47 and 73.40 ± 1.76), crude fibre (62.27 ± 0.87, 63.18 ± 1.32 and 59.10 ± 1.37), nitrogen free extract (60.37 ± 0.70, 57.48 ± 1.42 and 57.22 ± 1.64) and ether extract (58.82 ± 0.80, 59.69 ± 1.79 and 55.73 ± 1.57) were ascertained. The dry matter and crude protein digestibility of the TMR I differed significantly (P < 0.05) with TMR II and TMR III groups. In phase II, the corresponding values for dry matter (61.76 ± 2.10 , 53.27 ± 0.72 and 52.35 ± 0.99), organic matter (68.37 ± 1.17, 59.66 ± 2.09 and 59.61 ± 2.22), crude protein (79.94 ± 2.12, 78.54 ± 2.04 and 74.56 ± 1.58) crude fibre (61.85 ± 1.01, 63.44 ± 1.98 and 57.66 ± 2.01), nitrogen free extract (62.71 ± 0.77, 57.87 ± 2.26 and 53.08 ± 1.68) and ether extract (60.01 ± 0.71, 58.70 ± 1.37 and 56.20 ± 0.96) was recorded. The digestibility coefficients of dry matter organic matter and nitrogen free extract was significantly (P < 0.06) higher for TMR I than either of TMR IV or TMR V group. In phase I, the nitrogen balance (g/head/day) was 9.98 ± 0.40, 9.66 ± 0.28 and 8.70 ± 0.46 in lambs reared on T1, T2 and Ta rations, respectively. The treatment means did not differ significantly. In phase II, the respective values were 9.81 ± 0.50, 10.06 ± 0.28 and 12.21 ± 0.21 in lambs reared on TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V groups, respectively TMR I and TMR IV did not differ significantly but differ from TMR V. In phase I, the TMR I, TMR II and TMR III provided 13.52 ± 0.42, 11.34 ± 0.36 and 10.62 ± 0.13 per cent DCP and 61.81 ± 0.32, 57.72 ± 1.92 and 55.90 ± 0.55 per cent TDN, respectively. The conventional TMR provided significantly (P < 0.05) higher DCP and TDN than both the non conventional groups which did not differ among themselves. In phase II, the TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V provided 13.32 ± 0.34, 11.48 ± 0.30 and 11.10 ± 0.18 per cent DCP and 61.88 ± 0.23, 58.13 ± 2.11 and 55.48 ± 1.04 per cent TDN. The treatment means showed similar trend as that in phase I. In phase I, the dressing percentage on live weight basis and as the percentage of empty live weight under Ti (50.40 ± 0.83 and 59.63 ± 1.11) T2 (48.51 ± 1.05 and 61.89 ± 1.32) and T3 (48.08 ± 1.20 and 62.33 ± 1.06) group of lambs were calculated. In phase II, the corresponding figures were 47.5 ± 1.07 and 59.38 ± 1.11, 49.34 ± 1.12 and 62.93 ± 1.27 and 47.89 ± 1.03 and 59.96 ± 1.22 in TMR I TMR IV and TMR V groups, respectively. Similar was the trend with respect to primal cuts and edible and non edible organ weight. The feed efficiency in terms of DM, DCP and TDN intake (kg/kg live weight gain) in experimental lambs reared under TMR I, TMR II and TMR III groups was worked out as 8.10 ± 0.98, 1.11 ± 0.09 and 5.09 ± 0.45, 10.90 ± 0.87, 1.14 ± 0.07 and 5.82 ± 0.36 and 13.16 ± 1.1, 1.35 ± 0.13 and 7.13 ± 0.70, respectively. The feed efficiency in terms of DM intake was significantly (P < 0.05) high in conventional group as compared to non conventional groups which did not differ among themselves, but the treatment groups did not differ with respect to DCP and TDN intake per kg live weight gain. In phase IT, the respective values were 7.07 ± 0.97, 0.99 and 4,60, 12.56 ± 1,72 1.25 and 6.34 and 14.96 ± 3.44, 1.28 and 6.44 in TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V, respectively. The feed cost (Rs/animal) during the experiment was worked out as 623.55 ± 64.09, 352.50 ± 22.06 and 256.96 ± 16.42 for TMR I, TMR II and TMR III group, respectively. Both, TMR II and TMR III groups recorded significantly (P < 0.05) lower cost as compared to TMR I group. The total feed cost (pre experimental ± experimental) was worked out as Rs. 863.55 ± 64.09, 592.50 ± 22.06 and 496.96 ± 16.42 for T1 , T2 and T3 treatment groups, respectively. In phase IT, the experimental feed cost (Rs/animal) for TMR T, TMR IV and TMR V group was worked out as 472,82, 261.52 and 246.21 and the total feed cost (pre-experimental ± experimental) was Rs. 712.82, 501,52 and 486.21 per lamb. The trend of feed cost was same as in the phase I. Based on the enquiries from the retailers in the local market, the total realisable receipts (Rs/animal) in phase I were computed as 1292.15 ± 90.04, 1177.00 ± 60.48 and 1059.38 ± 49.32 respectively for TMR I, TMR II and TMR III group. The TMR I recorded significantly (P < 0.05) higher receipt than the other groups. The feed cost per kg dressed weight worked out as Rs. 67.01 ± 0.86, 52.46 ± 1.84 and 51.04 ± 2.03 for TMR I, TMR II and TMR III group, respectively. The TMR II and TMR III groups recorded significantly (P < 0.05) lower feed cost per kg dressed weight when compared to conventional, though they did not differ from each other. In phase II, respective figures for TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V were 1133.89 ± 47.45, 1039.09 ± 57.48 and 1009.42 ± 68.32. The feed cost per kg dressed weight was calculated as 61.60, 49.95 and 48.72 for TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V, respectively. The contribution of experimental feed cost/kg dressed weight in phase I was Rs. 47.64, 31.02 and 28.35 in TMR I, TMR II and TMR III groups respectively. The TMR I group recorded significnalty (P < 0.05) higher contribution as compared to other groups. In phase II, the cost worked out as Rs. 40.86, 26.04 and 24.67 in TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V groups, respectively. The returns as per cent of feed cost in phase I was calculated as 150.12 ± 2.46, 198.59 ± 6.64 and 213.57 ± 9.31 for TMR I, TMR II and TMR III group respectively and the values were significantly (P < 0.05) higher in non conventional groups as compared to TMR I group In phase II, the respective average values were 155.09, 207.18 and 207.60 for TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V group. During 06-18 hours of the day 75.05, 76.42 and 73.93 % of the total was feed consumed by the lambs in TMR I, TMR IV and TMR V groups, respectively.