Evaluation of Safflower Silage Nutrients and its Effect on Growth Performance of Holstein Bull Calves

Subject Areas : Journal of Animal Biology

Hamidreza Taghian ¹ , بهنام قربانی ² , Mohammad Hosseinabadi ³ , Mahdi Salehi ⁴

1 - - Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
2 - Department of Animal Science, Gorgan University of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources, Golestan, Iran
3 - Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
4 - Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary, University of Garmsar, Semnan, Iran

Received: 2024-05-28 Accepted : 2024-10-09 Published : 2025-01-12

Keywords: Beef performance, Forage, Gas production, Safflower, Safflower silage, Silage,

Abstract :

Safflower forage can be considered as a cost-effective alternative to corn silage because as a seasonal plant, it can be cultivated in winter or summer and it can grow in different environmental and soil conditions. Evaluation of the chemical composition and aspect characteristics of silage is necessary to adjust the formulation of rations and also to diagnose problems related to the quality of silage. Research has shown that safflower forage has a range of appropriate nutritional values and can be used as an alternative to other forage sources in ruminant diets. Studies conducted in horses, sheep, lambs, heifers, beef, and dairy cows showed that replacing safflower silage with corn silage maintained production performance. 600 Holstein calves were used for 90 days in a completely randomized design with two treatments and 300 replications for each treatment. The experimental groups included 1-basal diet containing corn silage, and 2- basal diet containing safflower silage. In this research, the amount of nutrients in safflower silage and then the performance of the animals were evaluated. No significant difference was observed in average daily gain, average final weight, average daily feed intake, and feed conversion ratio between calves fed with safflower silage diet compared to corn silage diet. In general, the results of this research showed that safflower is a forage containing valuable nutrients and if it is replaced with corn silage in the diet of bull calves, maximum growth potential can be achieved.

 

References:

1. Ahrari A., Fathi M., Yousefelahi M., Riasi A. 2013. The effect of adding nitrogen fertilizer and polyethylene glycol on the chemical composition and digestibility of fodder and safflower silage. Animal Science Research, 23(2):73-90.
2. Altin T.B., Barak B., Altin B.N. 2012. Change in precipitation and temperature amounts over three decades in central Anatolia, Turkey. Climate Science, 2:107-125.
3. Alves E.C., Bonfim-Silva E.M., Araujo T.J., Koetz M. 2015. Dry mass, nutrient concentration and accumulation in safflower influenced by nitrogen and potassium fertilizations. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 9(6):552-560.
4. AOAC. 2006. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC Internatioanal.Maryland. USA.
5. Asgharzadeh F., Nasri M. F., Behdani M. 2013. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers on nutritive value of safflower forage and silage. Journal of Animal and Poultry Sciences, 3(2):66-75.
6. Baker B.B., Bourdon R.M., Hanson J.D. 1992. A model of forage intake in beef cattle. Ecological Modelling, 60(3): 257-279.
7. Çağri A. Kanber K. 2018. The effect of safflower on the in vitro digestion parameters and methane production in horse and ruminant. Acta Veterinarian Eurasia, 44(2):73-84.
8. Danieli P.P., Primi R., Ronchi B., Ruggeri R., Rossini F., Del Puglia S., Cereti C.F. 2011. The potential role of spineless safflower as fodder crop in central Italy. Italian Journal of Agronomy, 6(1):4-12.
9. Dordas C. A., Sioulas C. 2009. Dry matter and nitrogen accumulation, partitioning, and retranslocation in safflower as affected by nitrogen fertilization. Field Crops Research, 110(1):35-43.
10. Filya I. 2004. Nutritive value and aerobic stability of whole crop maize silage harvested at four stages of maturity. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 116(1):141-150.
11. Getachew G., Makkar H.P.S., Becker K. 2003. Tropical browses: contents of phenolic compounds, in vitro gas production and stoichiometric relationship between short chain fatty acid and in vitro gas production. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 139(3):341-352.
12. Grant R., Ferraretto L. 2018. Silage review: Silage feeding management: silage characteristics and dairy cow feeding behavior. Journal of Dairy Science, 101(5): 4111-4121.
13. Kamalak A., Canbolat O., Erol A., Kilinc C., Kizilsimsek M., Ozkan C., Ozkose E. 2005. Effect of variety on chemical composition, in vitro gas production, metabolizable energy and organic matter digestibility of alfalfa hays. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 17(7): 1707-1712.
14. Kung L., Shaver R. 2001. Interpretation and use of silage fermentation analysis reports. Focus on forage, 3(13):1-5.
15. Landau S., Friedman S., Brenner S., Bruckental I., Weinberg Z., Ashbell G., Leshem Y. 2004. The value of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius) hay and silage grown under Mediterranean conditions as forage for dairy cattle. Livestock Production Science, 88(3):263-271.
16. Landau S., Molle G., Fois N., Friedman S., Barkai D., Decandia M., Sitzia M. 2005. Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) as a novel pasture species for dairy sheep in the Mediterranean conditions of Sardinia and Israel. Small Ruminant Research, 59(2-3): 239-249.
17. Lardy G., Anderson V.L. 2009. Alternative feeds for ruminants. Feed Science, 3(2):32-76.
18. Leshem Y., Bruckental I., Landau S., Ashbell G., & Weinberg Z. 2001. Safflower (Carthamus tintorius): A Promising Forage Crop for Semi-Arid Regions. Plant and Soil Science, 1(6):7-15.
19. Mahanna B., Chase L.E. 2003. Practical applications and solutions to silage problems. Silage Science and Technology, 42:855-895.
20. Makkar H.P.S., Blümmel M., Becker K. 2007. Formation of complexes between polyvinyl pyrrolidones or polyethylene glycols and tannins, and their implication in gas production and true digestibility in in vitro techniques. British Journal of Nutrition, 73(6):897-913.
21. McDonald P., Henderson A., Heron S.J.E. 1991. The biochemistry of silage, 2nd edition, Chalcombe publications, Marlow, 340.
22. Menke K.H., Stingass Y.H. 1988. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research Devition, 28:7-55.
23. Murthy I. 2006. Effect of phosphorus levels on phosphorus, potassium, calcium and magnesium content and seed yield of safflower genotypes. Agropedology Science, 16(1): 54-59.
24. NRC. 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th edition, National Academies Press, USA, 360.
25. Peiretti P.G. 2017. Nutritional aspects and potential uses of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) in livestock. Agricultural Research updates, 19:3-22.
26. Protes V., Costa C., Pariz C., Castilhos A., Meirelles P., Longhini V., Melo V. 2018. Effects of soybean silage on feeding behavior, performance, and meat quality of lambs. Small Ruminant Research, 164, 64-69.
27. Salama A.A., Caja G., Albanell E., Such X., Casals R., Plaixats J. 2003. Effects of dietary supplements of zinc-methionine on milk production, udder health and zinc metabolism in dairy goats. Journal of Dairy Research, 70(1):9-17.
28. Stanford K., Wallins G., Lees B., Mündel H.H. 2001. Feeding value of immature safflower forage for dry ewes. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 81(2): 289-292.
29. Van Soest P. J., Robertson J. B., Lewis B. A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74(10): 3583-3597.
30. Yitbarek M.B. 2019. Livestock and livestock product trends by 2050. International Journal of Animal Research, 1:40-30.