Evaluation of Some Kenyan and Nigerian Livestock Feedstuffs

Ojewola, G.S; Baraza, D.L; Olwenyo, G; Mugun, G; Unah, U.L; Adedokun, O.O

Evaluation of Some Kenyan and Nigerian Livestock Feedstuffs

Ojewola, G.S * §

Contact

Baraza, D.L

Contact

Olwenyo, G

Contact

Mugun, G

Contact

Unah, U.L

Contact

Adedokun, O.O

Contact

§ Michael Okpara University of Agriculture

Evaluation of Some Kenyan and Nigerian Livestock Feedstuffs

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

96RF3

Evaluation of Some Kenyan and Nigerian Livestock Feedstuffs Banner

Key Research Insights

Synthesized scholarly intelligence & interactive research assistant

This converted HTML version may contain rendering inconsistencies. Please refer to the PDF for the authoritative version, or click here to provide feedback.

Abstract

This experiment was carried out to respectively evaluate the nutritive and anti-nutritive constituents of some feedstuffs and forages that are abundantly found in Kenya and Industrial rice milling wastes and Umucass 36 cassava plant meal abundantly found in Nigeria with the aim of producing them in commercial quantity for the enhancement of livestock development and feeding in Kenya and Nigeria and the entire African continent. The forages obtained in Kenya are Napier grass, Guatemala giant panicum, Boma Rhodes, Giant setaria, Mulatto and Green leaf desmodium. Rose coco, Green grams pea and Sorghum are livestock grains obtained from Kakamega County market. Rice milling waste and Umucass 36 cassava root meal (gari) were obtained from Abia State, Nigeria. They were all evaluated for their nutritive content using internationally acceptable stands. The results showed that these feedstuffs are rich in dietary nutrients and the digestibility coefficients of the forages and the feedstuffs are encouraging. Processing or non-processing of Rose coco, Green gram peas and Sorghum showed no definite pattern of response that can be traced to the processing methods used in this trial. In conclusion, the richness of these feedstuff has the potential of enhancing livestock feeding and production in these two countries if properly applied.

References

11 Cites in Article

Reference Format

1. O Adams (2016). Effect of Subsidy on Fish Production in Ondo State, South West, Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science, 4(3), 36-41.
2. Pablo Alarcon,Eric Fèvre,Maurice Murungi,Patrick Muinde,James Akoko,Paula Dominguez-Salas,Stella Kiambi,Sohel Ahmed,Barbara Häsler,Jonathan Rushton (2017). Mapping of beef, sheep and goat food systems in Nairobi — A framework for policy making and the identification of structural vulnerabilities and deficiencies. Agricultural Systems, 152, 1-17.
3. A (1980). Official methods of analysis of the association of official analytical chemists, 12th edition. edited by William Horwitz. Association of official analytical chemists, p.o. box 540, Benjamin Franklin station, Washington, DC 20044, 1975 18.5 × 27cm. 1094pp. Price $40.00 (domestic); $41.00 (foreign). Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 65(1), 162.
4. A (1984). Association of Official Analytical Chemistry. Association of Official Analytical Chemistry, 974.
5. Michèle Friend,Gretel Carney,Ella Derke,Morgan Dulude,Nan Jiang,Amelia Shaw,Jacquelyn Steen (2024). Report on the Jalisco Section of the Santiago River Basin. Using the Institutional Compass. Expresión Económica, 101-123.
6. A (2006). Official Method of Analysis. Official Method of Analysis
7. Knbs (2019). Kentan National Bureau of Statistics. Kentan National Bureau of Statistics
8. I Kosgey,S Mbuku,A Okeyo,J Amimo,J Philipsson,J Ojango (2011). Institutional and organizational frameworks for dairy and beef cattle recording in Kenya: a review and opportunities for improvement. Animal Genetic Resources/Ressources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales, 48, 1-11.
9. S Kuria (2004). Evaluation of forages as mineral sources for camels in western marsabit, Kenya. South African Journal of Animal Science, 34(3), 180-188.
10. W Schroeder (2018). Quality forage series: Forages nutrition for ruminants. NDSU Extension Service, 700, 311.
11. Morill Hall (2018). requirements. A case study in some valley. Punjab, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 40(1), 295-299.

Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Ojewola, G.S, Baraza, D.L, Olwenyo, G, Mugun, G, Unah, U.L, Adedokun, O.O. 2020. "Evaluation of Some Kenyan and Nigerian Livestock Feedstuffs". Global Journal of Science Frontier Research - D: Agriculture & Veterinary GJSFR-D Volume 20 (GJSFR Volume 20 Issue D2).

More Citation Formats

Select Citation Style:

Download Citation

GJSFR Volume 20 Issue D2

Explore Journals Explore Volume Read This Issue

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJSFR

Print ISSN 0975-5896

e-ISSN 2249-4626

Keywords

Not Found

Classification

GJSFR-D Classification FOR Code: 070103

Submission ReceivedJanuary 28, 2020
Peer Review Double Blind
Handling Editor
Accepted February 18, 2020
Published March 2, 2020

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

April 13, 2020

Language

English

Order Article Reprint

Experience in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D

Article Matrices

Total Score: 111

Country: Nigeria

Subject: Global Journal of Science Frontier Research - D: Agriculture & Veterinary

Authors: Ojewola, Baraza, Olwenyo, Mugun, Unah, Adedokun, O.O, Onabanjo, R.S, Adeniji, C.A. (PhD/Dr. count: 0)

View Count (all-time): 346

Total Views (Real + Logic): 920

Total Downloads (simulated): 39

Publish Date: 2020 03, Mon

Monthly Totals (Real + Logic):

Month 1: 46 views
Month 2: 52 views
Month 3: 56 views
Month 4: 50 views
Month 5: 31 views
Month 6: 34 views
Month 7: 28 views
Month 8: 22 views
Month 9: 43 views
Month 10: 30 views
Month 11: 50 views
Month 12: 37 views
Month 13: 16 views
Month 14: 23 views
Month 15: 32 views
Month 16: 39 views
Month 17: 34 views
Month 18: 28 views
Month 19: 21 views
Month 20: 35 views
Month 21: 38 views
Month 22: 47 views
Month 23: 29 views
Month 24: 37 views
Month 25: 30 views
Month 26: 27 views
Month 27: 13 views
Month 28: 36 views
Month 29: 42 views
Month 30: 45 views
Month 31: 34 views
Month 32: 21 views
Month 33: 44 views
Month 34: 24 views
Month 35: 23 views
Month 36: 34 views
Month 37: 34 views
Month 38: 27 views
Month 39: 12 views
Month 40: 14 views
Month 41: 45 views
Month 42: 40 views
Month 43: 20 views
Month 44: 39 views
Month 45: 48 views
Month 46: 20 views
Month 47: 33 views
Month 48: 45 views
Month 49: 29 views
Month 50: 27 views
Month 51: 36 views
Month 52: 19 views
Month 53: 43 views
Month 54: 25 views
Month 55: 23 views
Month 56: 14 views
Month 57: 37 views
Month 58: 23 views
Month 59: 18 views
Month 60: 36 views
Month 61: 29 views
Month 62: 35 views
Month 63: 16 views
Month 64: 30 views
Month 65: 43 views
Month 66: 42 views
Month 67: 15 views
Month 68: 38 views
Month 69: 23 views
Month 70: 67 views
Month 71: 65 views
Month 72: 39 views
Month 73: 26 views
Month 74: 48 views
Month 75: 15 views
Month 76: 25 views
Month 77: 36 views
Month 78: 47 views
Month 79: 57 views
Month 80: 26 views

Total Views: 920

Total Downloads: 39

All Trends