Advertisement

Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 50, Issue 6, pp 1365–1371 | Cite as

Effects of feeding fresh cassava root with high-sulfur feed block on feed utilization, rumen fermentation, and blood metabolites in Thai native cattle

  • Anusorn Cherdthong
  • Benjamad Khonkhaeng
  • Anuthida Seankamsorn
  • Chanadol Supapong
  • Metha Wanapat
  • Nirawan Gunun
  • Pongsatron Gunun
  • Pin Chanjula
  • Sineenart Polyorach
Regular Articles
  • 152 Downloads

Abstract

The objective of this research was to evaluate the effect of feeding fresh cassava root (CR) along with a feed block containing high was to sulfur (FBS) on feed intake, digestibility, rumen fermentation, and blood thiocyanate concentration in Thai native beef cattle. Four Thai male native beef cattle, initial body weight (BW) of 130 + 20.0 kg, were used in this study. The experiments were randomly assigned according to a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement in a 4 × 4 Latin square design. The main factors were supplemented fresh CR levels (1.0 and 1.5% BW) and across to a feed block supplemented with sulfur added 2% (FBS-2) and 4% (FBS-4). Intakes of rice straw, concentrate diets, and FBS were not affected by treatments. Intakes of CR, sulfur, and total intake were significantly altered by the FBS treatment. The apparent dry matter and organic matter digestibility coefficient were significantly higher in animals fed FBS-4 than in those fed FBS-2. The ruminal ammonia nitrogen concentration was not affected by treatment and ranged from 15.6 to 17.6 mg/dl. Populations of protozoa and fungal zoospores were similar across treatments, whereas the bacterial population was significantly different between sulfur levels in the feed block. Feeding CR with FBS did not change total volatile fatty acid (VFA) concentrations and VFA profiles except for the propionic acid concentration, which was higher in the group with CR supplementation at 1.5% BW. Cattle fed CR with FBS showed similar blood urea nitrogen concentration at various feeding times and overall. In contrast, CR supplementation at 1.5% BW with FBS-2 increased blood thiocyanate concentrations. Therefore, supplementation of FBS-2 was beneficial to Thai native beef cattle fed with 1.5% BW fresh CR as it improved digestibility and rumen fermentation presumed, because HCN from fresh cassava root was converted into thiocyanate, which is nontoxic to farm animals.

Keywords

Fresh cassava root Feed block Cattle Sulfur Thiocyanate 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to the Increase Production Efficiency and Meat Quality of Native Beef and Buffalo Research Group, Khon Kaen University (KKU), Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, KKU, and Thailand Research Fund (TRF) through the 18th Royal Golden Jubilee PhD Program (contact grant PhD/0023/2558) for providing financial support for the research and the use of the research facilities. This work was also supported by the Thailand Research Fund (TRF) contract grant IRG5980010.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Animals involved in this study were approved by the Animal Ethics Committee of Khon Kaen University (record no. ACUC-KKU-16/2559), based on the Ethic of Animal Experimentation of National Research Council of Thailand.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC). 2012. Official Methods of Analysis, 19th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  2. Bradbury JH, Egan SM, Lynch MJ. 1991. Analysis of cyanide in cassava using acid hydrolysis of cyanogenicglucosides. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 55, 277–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cherdthong A, Wanapat M. 2013. Rumen microbes and microbial protein synthesis in Thai native beef cattle fed with various feed block. Archives of Animal Nutrition, 67, 448–460.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cherdthong A, Wanapat M, Rakwongrit D, Khota W, Khantharin S, Tangmutthapattharakun G, Kang S, Foiklang S, Phesatcha K. 2014. Supplementation effect with slow-release urea in feed blocks for Thai beef cattle-nitrogen utilization, blood biochemistry and hematology. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 46, 293–298.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cherdthong A, Wanapat M, Wachirapakorn C. 2011. Influence of urea calcium mixture supplementation on ruminal fermentation characteristics of beef cattle fed on concentrates containing high levels of cassava chips and rice straw. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 163, 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crocker CL. 1967. Rapid determination of urea nitrogen in serum or plasma without deproteinization. American Journal of Medicine Technology, 33, 361–365.Google Scholar
  7. Galyean M. 1989. Laboratory procedure in animal nutrition research. Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico State University, Las CrucesGoogle Scholar
  8. Lambert JL, Ramasamy J, Paukstelis JF. 1975. Stable reagents for the colorimetric determination of cyanide by modified Konig reactions. Analytical Chemistry, 47, 916–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Morgan NK, Choct M. 2016. Cassava: Nutrient composition and nutritive value in poultry diets. Animal Nutrition, 2, 253–261CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. National Research Council. 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 7th Ed. National Academic Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  11. Onwuka CFI, Akinsoyinu AO, Tewe OO. 1992. Role of sulfur in cyanide detoxification in ruminants. Small Ruminant Research, 8, 277–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Promkot C, Wanapat M. 2009. Effect of elemental sulfur supplementation on rumen environment parameters and utilization efficiency of fresh cassava foliage and cassava hay in dairy cattle. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 22, 1366–1376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Promkot C, Wanapat M, Wachirapakorn C, Navanukraw C. 2007. Influence of sulphur on fresh cassava folige and cassava hay incubate in rumen fluid of beef cattle. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 20, 1424–1432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Qi K, Lu CD, Owens FN. 1993. Sulfate supplementation of growing goats: effects on performance, acid-base balance, and nutrient digestibilities. Journal of Animal Science, 71, 1579–1587.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Samuel M, Sagathewan S, Thomas J, Mathen G. 1997. An HPLC method for estimation of volatile fatty acids of ruminal fluid. Indian Journal of Animal Science, 67, 805–811.Google Scholar
  16. SAS Institute. SAS/STAT User’s Guide: Version 6. 12. 1996, 4, Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  17. Supapong C, Cherdthong A, Seankamsorn A, Khonkhaeng B, Wanapat M, Gunun N, Gunun P, Chanjula P, Polyorach S. 2017. Effect of Delonix regia seed meal supplementation in Thai native beef cattle on feed intake, rumen fermentation characteristics and methane production. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 232, 40–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Van Soest PV, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Wanapat M, Kang S. 2015. Cassava chip (Manihot esculenta Crantz) as an energy source for ruminant feeding. Animal Nutrition, 1, 266–270.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anusorn Cherdthong
    • 1
  • Benjamad Khonkhaeng
    • 1
  • Anuthida Seankamsorn
    • 1
  • Chanadol Supapong
    • 1
  • Metha Wanapat
    • 1
  • Nirawan Gunun
    • 2
  • Pongsatron Gunun
    • 3
  • Pin Chanjula
    • 4
  • Sineenart Polyorach
    • 5
  1. 1.Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Department of Animal Science, Faculty of AgricultureKhon Kaen UniversityKhon KaenThailand
  2. 2.Program in Animal Production Technology, Faculty of TechnologyUdon Thani Rajabhat UniversityUdon ThaniThailand
  3. 3.Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Natural ResourcesRajamangala University of Technology-IsanSakon NakhonThailand
  4. 4.Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Natural ResourcesPrince of Songkla UniversitySongkhlaThailand
  5. 5.Department of Animal Production Technology and Fisheries, Faculty of Agricultural TechnologyKing Mongkut’s Institute of Technology LadkrabangBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations