Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 84, Issue 1, pp 25–34

Effect of pre-feeding forage treatments, harvesting stage, and animal type on preference of tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis)

  • Getnet Assefa
  • C. Kijora
  • Aemiro Kehaliew
  • K. Sonder
  • K. J. Peters


Tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis), a multipurpose fodder tree, is highly productive in the tropical highlands. The forage has high crude protein (CP) concentrations but is reported to have low intake by ruminants. This study investigated the effects of plant harvest stage and feeding management (wilted, dried and fresh) on levels of tannins in tagasaste and on preference and intake by Menz sheep and cattle fed during the dry season. The treatments were (1) fresh tagasaste, (2) wilted tagasaste, (3) dried tagasaste and (4) native hay. There were three preference experiments using sheep (20.2 ± 0.66 kg) to investigate intake under ad libitum or restricted offering of the forages, and to assess effect of harvest age (6- or 10-month regrowth age) on ad libitum intake. In two further experiments ad libitum offerings of the forages were evaluated using young steers (131.2 ± 19.6 kg) and heifers (156.3 ± 5.4 kg). The CP (201 g/kg), hydrolysable tannin (150.2 g/kg) and condensed tannin (8.97abs measured as absorbance at 550 nm wavelength/g NDF) contents of tagasaste forage were not affected by the physical treatments and harvesting stage. When fed ad libitum, sheep preferred (P < 0.01) fresh forage to wilted or dry tagasaste (24.5 vs. 22.9 and 7.9 g dry matter (DM)/kg metabolic body weight (MBW). The restricted offering increased intake of the less preferred dried form. Regrowth age (6 vs. 10 months) did not affect sheep preference. Unlike sheep, steers and heifers preferred (P < 0.01) dried tagasaste rather than the fresh or wilted forage. Animal preference and intake were affected by the preparation method of the forage, but not by regrowth age. Methods to improve intake (for cattle), effects of long-term feeding and evaluation on the subsequent effect of anti-nutritional compounds during digestion and animal performance should be further investigated.


Tagasaste Fresh Wilted Drying Harvesting stage Tannins Intake Ruminants 


  1. Agegnehu G, Gizaw A, Sinebo W (2006) Crop productivity and land use efficiency of a teff/faba bean mixed cropping system in a tropical highland environment. Expl Agric 42:495–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AOAC (1990) Association of official analytical chemists, official methods of analysis, 15th edn. AOAC International, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  3. Assefa G (1998) Biomass yield, botanical fractions and quality of tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis) as affected by harvesting interval in the highlands of Ethiopia. Agrofor Sys 42:13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Assefa G, Kijora C, Peters KJ (2005) Tagasaste: a legume tree to improve ruminant feeding in the tropics. In: Proceedings of the German society of animal production. der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Züchtungskunde e.V. (DGFZ), Züchtungskunde, p B33Google Scholar
  5. Assefa G, Kijora C, Kehaliew A, Bediye S, Peters KJ (2008) Evaluation of tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis) forage as a substitute for concentrate in diets of sheep. Livest Sci 114:296–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becholie D, Tamir B, Terrill TH, Singh BP, Kassa H (2005) Suitability of tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis L.) as a source of protein supplement to a tropical grass hay fed to lambs. Small Rumin Res 56:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borens FMP, Poppi DP (1990) The nutritive value for ruminants of Tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis), a leguminous tree. Anim Feed Sci Technol 28:275–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buxton DR (1996) Quality-related characteristics of forages as influenced by plant environment and agronomic factors. Anim Feed Sci Technol 59:37–49Google Scholar
  9. Cornell University (2001) Poisonous plants informational data base: phenolic toxicants. Cornell University, Ithaca.
  10. Edwards NJ (2000) A review of tannins and other secondary metabolites in the fodder shrub tagasaste (Chamaecytisus proliferous). In: Proceedings of an international workshop. ACIAR proceeding no. 92, Adelaide, pp 160–164Google Scholar
  11. El hassan SM, Lahlou-Kassi A, Newbol CJ, Wallace RJ (2000) Chemical composition and degradation characteristics of foliage of some African multipurpose trees. Anim Feed Sci Technol 86:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forbes JM (2003) The multifunctional nature of food intake control. J Anim Sci 81:E139–E144Google Scholar
  13. Getachew G, Makkar HPS, Becker K (2002) Tropical browses: contents of phenolic compounds, in vitro gas production and stoichiometric relationship between short chain fatty acid and in vitro gas production. J Agric Sci 139:341–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. González-Rodríguez AM, Martín-Olivera A, Morales D, Jiménez MS (2005) Physiological responses of tagasaste to a progressive drought in its native environment on the Canary islands. Environ Exp Bot 53:195–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Horvath PJ (1981) The nutritional and ecological significance of acer-tannins and related polyphenols. M.S. Thesis. Cornell University, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  16. Hyder PW, Fredrickson EL, Estell RE, Tellez M, Gibbens RP (2002) Distribution and concentration of total phenolics, condensed tannins, and nordihydroguaiaretic acid (NDGA) in creosotebush (Larrea tridentate). Biochem Syst Ecol 30:905–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kaitho RJ, Umunna NN, Nsahlai IV, Tamminga S, van-Bruchem J, Hanson J (1997) Palatability of wilted and dried multipurpose tree species fed to sheep and goats. Anim Feed Sci Technol 65:151–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Makkar HPS (2003) Effects and fate of tannins in ruminant animals, adaptation to tannins, and strategies to overcome detrimental effects of feeding tannin-rich feeds. Small Rumin Res 49:241–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mali S, Borges RM (2003) Phenolics, fibre, alkaloids, saponins, and cyanogenic glycosides in a seasonal cloud forest in India. Biochem Syst Ecol 31:1221–1246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Naumann C, Bassler R (1997) Die Chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln. Methodenbuch, Band III (The chemical analysis of feeds. Book of methods vol. 3) 3. Ergänzungen, 1993, VDLUFA, Verlag, DarmstadtGoogle Scholar
  21. Norton BW (2000) The significance of tannins in tropical animal production. In: Proceedings of an international workshop. ACIAR proceeding No. 92, Adelaide, pp 14–23Google Scholar
  22. Omokanye AT, Balogun RO, Onifade OS, Afolayan RA, Olayemi ME (2001) Assessment of preference and intake of browse species by Yankasa sheep at Shika, Nigeria. Small Rumin Res 42:201–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Priston TR (1995) Tropical animal feeding: a manual for research workers, FAO animal production and health paper 126. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  24. Provenza FD, Villalba JJ, Dziba LE, Atwood SB, Banner RE (2003) Linking herbivore experience, varied diets and plant biochemical diversity. Small Rumin Res 49:257–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reed JD (1995) Nutritional toxicology of tannins and related polyphenols in forage legumes. J Anim Sci 73:1516–1528PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Reed JD, Horvath PJ, Allen MS, Van Soest PJ (1985) Gravimetric determination of soluble phenolics including tannins from leaves by precipitation with trivalent ytterbium. J Sci Food Agric 36:255–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Salminen Juha-Pekka, Ossipov V, Haukioja E, Pihlaja K (2001) Seasonal variation in the content of HT in leaves of Betula pubescens. Phytochemistry 57:15–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sanon HO, Kaboré-Zoungrana C, Ledin I (2007) Behaviour of goats, sheep and cattle and their selection of browse species on natural pasture in a Sahelian area. Small Rumin Res 67:64–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. SAS (Statistical Analytical System) (2001) Users guide ver. 8.02. SAS Institute Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
  30. Sereme A, Kouda-Bonafos M, Nacro M (1993) Phenolic compounds in Sorghum caudatum tissues during plant development. Biomass Bioenergy 4:69–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tilley JMA, Terry RA (1963) A two stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J Br Grassl Soc 18:104–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Umunna NN, Nsahlai IV, Osuji PO (1995) Degradability of forage protein supplements and their effects on the kinetics of digestion and passage. Small Rumin Res 17:145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Van Soest PJ (1994) Nutritional ecology of ruminants, 2nd edn. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  34. Varvikko T, Khalili H (1993) Wilted tagasaste (Chamaecytisus palmensis) forage a replacement for a concentrate supplement for lactating crossbred Friesian × Zebu (Boran) dairy cows fed low quality native hay. Anim Feed Sci Technol 40:239–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ventura MR, Castanon JIR, Muzquiz M, Mendez P, Flores MP (2000) Influence of alkaloid content on intake of subspecies of Chamaecytisus proliferus. Anim Feed Sci Technol 85:279–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wiley T (2000) The feed value of the perennial fodder shrub tagasaste, farmnote No. 50. Department of Agriculture, Western AustraliaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Getnet Assefa
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. Kijora
    • 2
  • Aemiro Kehaliew
    • 1
  • K. Sonder
    • 3
  • K. J. Peters
    • 2
  1. 1.Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural ResearchHoletta Research CentreAddis AbabaEthiopia
  2. 2.Institute of Animal SciencesHumboldt University of BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)Addis AbabaEthiopia

Personalised recommendations