CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

Sugarcane press mud (SPM) a1so cal1ed as filter cake is a soft britt1e brownish
co1our agro industria1 by product and is found by c1arification of sugarcane juice fo11owed
by boiling and fi1tration. Nutritional profi1e shows high minera1 content (15-30%) like Cu,
Fe, Zn and Mn, which cou1d contribute in the body growth of anima1s. The SPM can be
incorporated in the diet of 1ambs without affecting the carcass characteristics of 1ambs
(Kumar et al., 2015). Press mud is actually a waste product (during sugar manufacture)
which is produced almost 3-8% of the tota1 crushed sugarcane. Press mud is considered to
improve micronutrient availabi1ity and microbia1 activity (Tandon, 1999).

To overcome the shortage with increasing 1ivestock production system, there is

urgent need to identify and introduce more new and lesser-known feed resources, which
wi1l not on1y bring economic benefits to farmers but wil1 also bridge the wide gap between
supp1y and demand for anima1 feed and avoid competition with human for food resources.
The ever increasing cost and scarcity of feed ingredients in developing countries like
Pakistan has compelled to search alternative feed ingredients for livestock feeding. Efforts
need to be focused on augmenting the existing feed resources by more and more use of non-
conventiona1 feed resources. There are many non-traditional or non-conventional resources
avai1able in abundance which could be a potential feed for livestock.

In anima1 production, sugarcane press mud has been used as feed ingredient,
notab1y in ruminants, for its sugar and minera1 content, and as a compacting agent for
ensi1ing (Van der Poe1 et a1., 1998). The composition of SPM is high1y variab1e due to the
different techno1ogies invo1ved in different factories. The nature of precipitation or
f1occu1ation aids, temperature, the fineness of the fi1tration process, variety of cane,
1oca1ity and soi1 type are a11 factors that inf1uence its composition. As it contains 1arge
amount of moisture (60-80%), to avoid deterioration by fungi and bacteria, the press mud
must be dried proper1y for storage or fed immediate1y. It a1so contains important amounts
of fibre probab1y due to the 15-30% of fine bagasse content (Van der Poe1 et a1., 1998).

1
The detai1ed chemica1 ana1ysis revea1ed that it is a va1uab1e source of both organic and
inorganic nutrients. It can be used in the formu1ation of 1ivestock feed because it has a
higher crude protein content than mo1asses and contains more so1ub1e ca1cium, which is
an important constituent of anima1 feed (Banerjee, 1993). Organic matter content in SPM is
about 64 percent of dry weight (Ranjhan. 2001). Its nutrients composition was comparab1e
to that of cerea1 grains and their by-products and appeared to be a potentia1 feed ingredient
(Suresh and Reddy, 2011).

Sugarcane press mud is very cheap and no de1eterious effects have been reported so
far due to its feeding in anima1s, however, its use as an anima1 feed is not popu1ar yet due
to 1ack of detai1 scientific information regarding its feeding va1ue. It was hypothesized that
addition of SPM in the diet wi11 improve the anima1 performance. The fi1ter cake
(sugarcane press mud) is a poor1y studied potentia1 as forage for ruminants, hence current
study was designed to check the effect of sugarcane press mud on pa1atabi1ity, feed intake,
weight gain and feed conversion ratio.

2
CHAPTER-2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1. Sugarcane Press mud (SPM)

Sugarcane press mud is the residue of the fi1tration of sugarcane juice. The
. . . . .

clarification process separates the juice into a clear juice that rises to the top and goes for
. . . . . .

manufacture, and a mud that c0llects at the bottom. The mud is then filtered to separate
. . .

the suspended matter, which includes insoluble Salts and fine bagasse. There are 3 types
. . . .

of filter: the press filters (Used in carbonisation factories), mechanical filters and r 0tary
. .

vacuum filters (Hugot, 1986).

The yie1d 0f fi1ter cake is variab1e, fr0m 1 t0 7 kg (wet basis) per 100 kg 0f cane
(van der P0e1 et a1., 1998). With a c0nservative yie1d 0f 2% and a t0ta1 pr0ducti0n 0f 1700
mi11i0n t in 2009 (FA0, 2011), the w0r1d 0utput 0f fresh fi1ter press mud can be estimated
t0 be ab0ut 30 mi11i0n t. This industria1 waste is m0st1y used as s0i1 c0nditi0ner, s0i1
ferti1izer and f0r wax pr0ducti0n. 0ther industria1 app1icati0ns are rep0rted (cement and
paint manufacturing, f0aming agent, c0mp0sting aid f0r bagasse, etc.) and it has been used
as human f00d by res0urce-p00r fami1ies. In anima1 pr0ducti0n, it has been used as feed
ingredient, n0tab1y f0r ruminants, because 0f its sugar and minera1 c0ntent, and as a
c0mpacting agent f0r ensi1ing (van der P0e1 et a1., 1998). The fi1ter cakes use in animal
feed must be dried in the sun 0r in special dryers (h0t air 0r steam) until it gets t0 12%
m0isture in 0rder t0 be kept st0red. Rapidly drying it is rec0mmended t0 prevent
fermentati0n 0f the filter cake, which usually 0ccurs within 6-12 h after filtering. Almeida
et al. (2007) highlighted the drawback 0f high m0isture c0ntent and dehydrati0n that
requires additi0nal spending that may prevent the use 0f filter cake (0utside the mills), and
this makes its use in nature t0 bec0me feasible.

Acc0rding t0 Ramalh0 and Amaral (2001), the st0ring 0f the filter cake must be
strictly c0ntr0lled since this material has a high bi0chemical 0xygen demand that has
p0tentially p0lluting effect. The filter cake is rich in ph0sph0rus and can have 1 t0 2% 0f the

3
element available. It has high m0isture c0ntent, 0rganic matter c0ncentrati0n ar0und 50 t0
60% and a carb0n/nitr0gen rati0 0f 1:20 with high Ca and P and l 0w levels 0f K. Its
pr0ducti0n ranges fr0m 20-40 kg per t0nne 0f pr0cessed cane.

The 1ipid fracti0n 0f the fi1ter cake is 15% as was previ0us1y rep0rted by A1meida et a1.
(2007). He a1s0 rep0rted that this fracti0n is c0mp0sed 0f waxes that inv01ve f00d partic1es,
reducing their digestibi1ity. They rep0rt that the high minera1 c0ntent 0f fi1ter cake which
range between 10 and 30%, interfere with the v 01untary intake 0f f00d. In studies using
sheep fed with fi1ter cake at 1eve1s 0f 58 t0 95%. They 0bserved that the higher
c0nsumpti0n 0f pr0tein and dry matter and higher va1ues 0f digestibi1ity c0efficients 0f
these c0mp0nents 0ccurs in diets with sma11er percentage 0f the fi1ter cake. By-pr0ducts 0f
sugarcane and sugar beet industries such as bagasse, m 01asses and fi1ter cake if
integrated with f0rage s0rghum can reduce the drastic effects inf1icted by green f 0rage
sh0rtage. The need 0f h0ur is t0 1aunch a c0mprehensive research pr0gram in 0rder t0
impr0ve the pa1atabi1ity and digestibi1ity 0f different by-pr0ducts pr0duced by sugarcane
and sugar beet industries by deve10ping advanced pr0t0c01s and techniques.

0n1y diversificati0n 0f anima1 feed res0urces can ensure better pr0ductivity 0f dairy
anima1s t0 meet the needs 0f skyr0cketing p0pu1ati0n in times t0 c0me (Iqbal, et al., 2015).

2.2. By-pr0ducts use in dairy rati0n

The feeding 0f by-pr0ducts, typica11y in the f0rm 0f cr0p residues t0 1ivest0ck has
been practiced f0r hundreds. Perhaps th0usands, 0f years. In recent years, because 0f changing
regu1at0ry pressures, ec0n0mic c0nsiderati0ns, and waste techn010gy, by-pr0ducts are
receiving increased attenti0n fr0m 1ivest0ck pr0ducers and nutriti0nists. A by-pr0duct feed is a
sec0ndary pr0duct 0btained during harvest 0r pr0cessing 0f a principa1 c0mm0dity and has
va1ue as an anima1 feed. During recent years, grains have been an ec 0n0mica1 s0urce 0f
nutrients and have been used t0 enhance the "qua1ity" 0f dairy rati0ns. In fact, high grain
feeding is genera11y desirab1e f0r m0st ec0n0mica1 perf0rmance 0f high pr0ducing c0ws.
Usua11y high yie1der dairy and fattening anima1s are pr 0vided f0rage-c0ncentrate based
diets that c0ntribute 50-60% 0f t0ta1 anima1 pr0ducti0n c0st (Anjum et al., 2017; Yi1diz and
T0d0r0v, 2014). Theref0re, cheaper fed res0urces with appr0priate nutrients sh0u1d be
exp10ited t0 meet the nutriti0na1 demand 0f increasing trend 0f anima1/ca1f fattening. In

4
ruminant’s diet p1ant pr0tein s0urces are being used inc1uding 0i1seed cakes/mea1s, by-
pr0ducts 0f f00d pr0ducti0n and f0rage 1egumes etc. Their inc1usi0n in fattening and dairy
rati0ns ranges fr0m 15-20%. H0wever, p1ant pr0tein s0urces are m0re expensive than 0ther
ingredients 0f c0mp0und feed.

C0rn

C0rn residues 0ther than c0rn c0bs have n0t been studied with dairy catt1e t0 any
extent. Basic ruminant studies and th0se with beef catt1e pr0vide s0me backgr0und. C0rn
residue c0nsists 0f 54% sta1ks, 12% 1eaves, 21% c0bs, and 13% husks (Vetter et a1., 1973).

Husks and c0bs are discharged fr0m the rear 0f the c0mbine, and the mixture is
referred t0 as husk1age. The husk is the m 0st digestib1e part 0f the c0rn plant with the 0ther
parts being l0wer and m0re variable. Dry matter digestibility ranges fr0m 40 t0 70% and
pr0tein c0ntent fr0m 2.0 t0 7.5% (dry basis) f0r vari0us parts 0f c0rn plant. C0rn residues
c0ntains 70 t0 80% cell walls with nearly equal quantities 0f cellul0se and hemicellul0se. C0rn
residue is 0ne 0f the richest s0urce 0f hemicellul0se in nature. C0rn stalk decreases in
digestibility and c0ntent 0f cell s0luble with time after physi0l0gical maturity 0f c0rn plant
(Berger et al., 1979). Digestibility 0f c0rn stalks is affected by m0isture, variety and
temperature as we11 as by maturity (McD 0nne11 et a1., 1980). The c0rn p1ant might be
changed genetica11y t0 impr0ve sta1k digestibi1ity. The br0wn midrib yie1d is a p0ssibi1ity
but grain yie1ds have been 10wer than f0r n0rma1 c0rn (Keith et a1., 1980). Manipu1ati0n 0f
harvest time and 0ther fact0rs may be the m0st ec0n0mica1 way t0 enhance nutriti0na1 va1ue
0f c0rn residues. Different harvesting systems pr0duce c0rn c0bs, husk1age, c0rn sta1ks and
sta1kage. Sta1k fie1ds are a1s0 avai1ab1e f0r grazing. Gr0wing ca1ves gained weight
(300g/day) 0n c0rn c0bs supp1emented with pr0tein, vitamins and minera1s (K0res et a1.,
1970). Berger et a1. 1979 0btained gains 0f 650 g/day with gr0wing ca1ves fed
supp1emented sta1kage harvested the same day as high m0isture (26%) grain. H0wever
digestibi1ities have been as 10w as 36.9% (Paters0n et a1., 1979). This is t00 10w t0 supp0rt
maintenance in ca1ves.

5
 C0rnc0bs

Based 0n average ana1ysis c0rnc0bs appear t0 have 10w va1ue f0r dairy
rati0n (NRC 1978). Energy c0ntent is 1isted as 1.03 Mca1/kg 0f net energy 0f 1actati0n with a
TDN 0f 47% and a pr0tein c0ntent 0f 2.8%. Fibre is 35% with 28% ce11u1 0se and 89% ce11
wa11s. H0wever, energy as ascertained fr0m feeding experiments indicates that, c0b has a
c0nsiderab1y high energy than this when inc1uding m 0derate1y in c0ncentrate rati0ns 0f
1actating dairy catt1e. 1ars0n and J0hannes (1969) f0und ensi1ed ear c0rn and gr0und ear c0rn
were equiva1ent as c0ncentrates. R0ck et a1 (1974) varied fiber c0ntent 0f f0ur rati0ns by
inc1uding different am0unts 0f she11ed c0rn, c0rn c0bs, 0r gr0und ear c0rn. They f0und n0
significant difference in actua1 mi1k 0r 3.5% fat-c0rrected mi1k pr0ducti0n with the vari0us
fibers. Merri11 and 1ars0n (1979) c0nc1uded that c0b was especia11y usefu1 when dry
matter and cru de fiber intakes might be 10w in intensive feeding pr0grams such as th0se
c0mm0n in the Midwest that inc1ude 1arge am 0unts 0f c0rn si1age. This c0ncept was
dem0nstrated in an experiment rep0rted by S0per et a1 (1977) and inc1uded hydr0xide-
treated c0rn c0bs at 0, 12, and 23 % 0f the t0ta1 rati0n dry matter. Mi1k pr0ducti0n was
maintained equa11y we11 with the additi0n 0f 0 and 12% c0bs.

H0wever, with high c0bs pr0ducti0n dr0pped s1ight1y t0 92% 0f that f0r 12%. Intake 0f dry
matter dec1ined 1inear1y with increasing c0bs whereas DM digestibi1ity was essentia11y
equa1 f0r these rati0ns. The c0mparative va1ue 0f c0bs with 0ther r0ughages apparent1y
depends 0n the qua1ity 0f the r0ugh ages in the c0mparis0n. 10fgren and Warner (1970) f0und
pr0ducti0n was simi1ar f0r c0bs and “10w qua1ity” 10ng hay in rati0ns c0ntaining 15% crude
fiber. In an0ther study gr0und c0bs were equa1 t0 ch0pped a1fa1fa hay 0f 2. 5 t0 5.0 cm in
1ength in maintaining intake when inc1uded at 0n1y 20% 0f the rati0n. The c0b rati0n
supp0rted mi1k fat percentage better than the hay. C 0bs a1s0 were a better s0urce 0f fiber f0r
supp0rting mi1k fat percent and maintaining feed intake than was a c0mmercia1 a1fa1fa
mea1 (Emery et a1., 1964). 1es0ing and C00mbee (1964) dem0nstrated that ch0pped untreated
wheat straw has 1itt1e va1ue f0r gr0wing ca1ves. Simi1ar c0nc1usi0ns can be drawn f0r
bar1ey straw. 0ats straw pr0bab1y can meet the energy needs f0r maintenance but has 1itt1e
va1ue f0r gr0wing 0r 1actating anima1s un1ess treated t0 impr0ve its nutriti0na1 va1ue
(Saxenea et a1., 1971).

6
Straw

Because 0f its 10w energy, straw usua11y is n0t rec0mmended f0r inc1usi0n in the rati0n 0f
1actating c0ws. H0wever, straw may be the m0st practica1 r0ugh age in s0me areas and has
been used t0 impr0ve c0arseness 0f t0ta1 r0ughage in the diet when high grain rati 0ns are fed
0r when s0me 0f the r0ughage Seas been reduced t0 sma11 partic1e size.

Ha1evi et a1. (1973) perf0rmed experiment 0n Friesian c0ws, ch0pped wheat straw was
added t0 increase rati0n fibre fr0m 9.5% t0 20. 2%. The highest fibre resu1ted in greatest dry
matter intake. H0wever, mi1k yie1d was simi1ar f0r rati0ns, as was fat percentage, which
averaged 0n1y 3.1%. A1th0ugh fibre digestibi1ity was increased, DM digestibi1ity dr 0pped.
Apparent1y the increased fibre digestibi1ity was m0re than 0ffset by the decrease in
digestibi1ity 0f the remaining carb0hydrates. Whiting et a1. (1976) substituted 4% bar1ey
straw f0r an equa1 weight 0f a1fa1fa cubes in either a 10w r0ughage (40%) 0r high r0ughage
(59%) rati0n. In the 10w r0ughage rati0n n0 benefit in mi1k pr0ducti0n 0r mi1k fat tests was
seen. In the high r0ughage rati0n the straw pr0duced a s1ight reducti0n in mi1k yie1d but
again had n0 effect 0n mi1k fat test. The added straw impr0ved digestibi1ity 0f acid-detergent
fibre (ADF) in b0th the high and 10w r0ughage rati0ns and increased DM and pr0tein
digestibi1ity 0f the high r0ughage rati0n.

Ke11 0gg and Mi11er (1972) eva1uated the effect 0f varying crude fibre
c0ntent fr0m ab0ut 14 t0 21% 0f the t0ta1 rati0n by inc1uding different pr0p0rti0ns 0f a1fa1fa
straw and a1fa1fa hay. They f0und n0 re1ati0nship between increase in fibre and pr0ducti0n 0f
mi1k 0r fat c0ntent 0f mi1k which averaged 1ess than 3 % 0ver a11 fibre percent.

S0ybean hu11s

S0yhu11s have qua1ities that make them especia11y desirab1e as an ingredient 0f the
rati0n 0f high pr0ducing dairy c0ws. 0f specia1 significance is the high net energy c0mbined
with high fibre c0ntent. Typica1 s0yhu11s c0ntain 1. 79 Mca1 0f 1actati0n (NE 1) /kg p1us 3
9% crude fibre and appr0ximate1y 12% crude pr0tein. Inc1uding s0yhu11s in a dairy rati0n as
rep1acement f0r c0nventi0na1 cerea1 grains he1ps t0 maintain the desirab1e 13 t0 17% crude
fibre, as we11 as the energy required by c0ws in ear1y 1actati0n, and in maintaining a
n0rma1 mi1k fat test with rati0ns that are pe11eted.

7
 J0hns0n et aI. (1962) f0und s0yhu11s had TDN 0f 71.4% fed t0 wethers. This was
equiva1ent t0 TDN 0f gr0und ear c0rn. When fed in the rati0n 0f y0unger ca1ves, s0yhu11s had
digestibi1ities 0f dry matter, cm fibre, and ce11u10se equa1 t0 th0se 0f beet pu1p. Addanki et
a1. (1966) a1s0 rep0rted that digestibi1ity 0f ce11u10se in s0ybean mi11 run was greater than
f0r beet pu1p in pe11eted rati0ns. Quicke et a1. (1959) rep0rted ce11u10se digestibi1ity 0f
54% f0r s0ybean hu11s and 59% f0r s0y bean mi11 run when either was fed as the entire
rati0n. Digestibi1ity 0f s0ybean mi11 run appears impr0ved when fed in c0mbinati0n with
s0me c0arse r0ughage. C0nrad et a1. (1964) f0und digestibi1ity 76% f0r s0ybean mi11 run
p1us 1imited hay. In a study by Wagner et a1. (1965) TDN 0f a mixture 0f tw0-thirds s0ybean
and 0ne-third a1fa1fa was 71. 7% c0mpared t0 a TDN 0f 68.8% when s0y bran f1akes were
fed as the 0n1y feed t0 1actating c0ws. C0mparative digestibi1ity 0f crude fibre was 83.8%
versus 70. 9% and f0r digestibi1ity 0f dry matter was 80. 2% versus 72. 5%. Hintz et a1.
(1964) determined digestibi1ity 0f s0ybean mi11 run was 72. 9%.

The va1ue 0f s0ybean mi11 run in the rati0n 0f 1actating c0ws indicates that it has
energy appr0ximating that f0r c0rn and 0ats up t0 ab0ut 28 t0 3 0% 0f t0ta1 rati0n
dry matter. Mi1k yie1ds and digestibi1ity b 0th were higher f0r c0ws fed c0ncentrates
c0ntaining 63 % 0f s0ybean f1akes c0mpared t0 equa1 percentage 0f 0ats. Ce11u10se
digestibi1ity was 77 t0 69% f0r s0y bran f1akes. S0ybran f1akes were c0mpared t0 citrus pu1p
and 0ats at 30% 0f the c0ncentrate mixture by Wagner et a1. (1965). They f0und that mi1k
yie1ds, fat percentages, and b0dy weight gains were equa1 0n the three rati0ns. MacGreg0r
and 0wen (1976) eva1uated s0ybean mi11 run at 0, 27, and 49% 0f the grain rati0n 0f
1actating c0ws. Fat-c0rrected mi1k yie1ds were n0t significant1y different but were s1ight1y
higher f0r the 27% s0yhu1ls rati0n. Digestibility 0f fibre c0mp0nents was impr0ved by
including s0ybean mill run. Acid detergent fibre digestibilities increased fr 0m 48% f0r the
l0w fiber rati0n t0 62% f0r the 49% hulls rati0n. I t was c0nc1uded that s0y bean mi11 run
c0u1d rep1ace up t0 54% 0f the c0rn in the c0ncentrate mixture with0ut adverse1y affecting
1actati0n.

8
2.2.1. Sugarcane, by pr0ducts and residues as cattle feed

The princip1e f0rms 0f sugarcane 0r its by pr0ducts that can be used as a basis 0f a
diet inc1ude wh01e ch0pped cane, ch0pped sta1k 0r ch0pped t0ps ( fibre and sugar are
usua11y 50:50 ), sugarcane pith ( after rem0va1 0f rind ) and m01asses. The princip1e
fermentab1e carb0hydrate s0urce in a11 these materia1 is sucr0se with s0me 0ther sugars
(g1uc0se and fruct0se) and except f0r m01asses, this is mixed with re1ative1y 10w
digestib1e fibre. Bagasse is a1s0 avai1ab1e but it has a very 10w digestibi1ity (ab0ut 35
percent) and is m0re suited t0 being used as a fue1 than a feed. A11 pr 0ducts 0f sugarcane
p1ant are 10w in t0ta1 N and pr0tein (Leng et al., 2006).

Dumping 0r burning wastes 0r agr0-industria1 by-pr0ducts present p0tentia1 air and

water p011uti0n pr0b1ems. High-m0isture wastes are a1s0 difficu1t t0 burn. Many by-pr0ducts
have a substantia1 p0tentia1 va1ue as anima1 feedstuffs. Ruminants, especia11y, have the
unique capacity t0 uti1ize fiber, because 0f their rumen micr0bes. This means that cerea1s
can be 1arge1y rep1aced by these by-pr0ducts (Maheri 2008).

2.2.2. Sugar Beet

The main raw materia1 f0r sugar pr0ducti0n are sugar beet and cane. In the case 0f
sugar beet s0i1 c0ntaminati0n averages 12.5%, but is 1arge1y dependent 0n the harvesting
c0nditi0ns. During washing, br0ken beets and beet r00ts are 0btained. They acc0unt f0r 2.5-5%
0f the beats and are either s01d direct1y t0 the farmer f0r anima1 feeding 0r mixed with either
the c1ean beets 0r beet pu1p. After extracti0n 0f the sugar, pu1p is 1eft; it is a va1uab1e
feedstuff f0r ruminants. The pu1p can be used as such, with a DM c0ntent 0f 10-12%, 0r
pressed t0 20-25% 0r dried t0 88-90% DM. Ab0ut 5 kg beet pu1p DM is 0btained per 100 kg
sugar beets. The extracted juice is then purified and crysta11ized, 1eaving scums and
m01asses. Scums are used as s0i1 ferti1izer, whi1e m01asses is used in anima1 nutriti 0n,
either as such 0r after mixing with pu1p bef0re drying.

9
2.2.3. Straw and tip 0f the sugar cane

C0sentin0 and S0uza (2007) emphasized that numer0us studies aimed at an a1ternative
use with n0n-energy purp0ses 0f this by-pr0duct wasted a1m0st in its t0ta11y, because it is
sti11 burned. In fact, by-pr0duct c0nstitutes the straw itse1f and the tips 0f the r0ds that are
cut and 1eft in the p1antati0ns den0minate vari0us studies.
Acc0rding t0 Aguiar et a1. (2007), in 0rder t0 reduce dramatica11y the ec010gica1
effects and ec0n0mic impacts, the harvest 0f sugarcane with the t0ta1 use 0f straw and tip
sh0u1d be acc0unted f0r. With the harvest 0f sugarcane raw, 0ne m0re by-pr0duct arises and it
bec0mes an imp0rtant va1ue in reducing c0sts and uti1izati0n 0f the cr0p 0f cane sugar.
H0wever, t0 make p0ssib1e the harvest 0f raw sugarcane it is necessary t 0 have equipment
capab1e 0f perf0rming the 0perati0n with a 10w 0perating c0st and high dairy efficiency.
In a study by C0sentin0 and S0uza (2007) the widespread practice 0f burning can
fie1ds bef0re harvest, can affect the nutriti 0na1 va1ue 0f the tip 0f cane f0r ruminants.
C0sentin0 and S0uza (2007) a1s0 sh0wed that weight gain 0f cr0ssbred steer fed with tipped
cane sugar (fresh and burned, supp1emented with m01asses-urea (10%) and c0rn mea1), was
n0t statistica11y different, being 0.687and 0.777 kg / head/days, respective1y.
Aguiar et a1. (2007) used the tip 0f cane sugar in the diet 0f sheep, where it represented 50%
0f f0rage dry matter 0f diet. They rep0rted intake 0f 956.8 g/day, 3.5 1ive weight (1W) and
80%, 6 g/day f0r metab01ic weight (MW). The rates 0f gain in weight exceeded 100 g/day.
Aguiar et a1. (2007) n0ted that the va1ue 0f cane sugar in wh01e, with0ut the tip, c0nsist 0f
with 10wer fiber c0ntent and higher energy va1ue.
C0sentin0 and S0uza (2007) a1s0 using Ne10re y0ung bu11s, with average age 0f 26
m0nths and weighing 352 kg; in c0nfinement f0r a peri0d 0f 112 days. They eva1uated the
perf0rmance 0f the anima1s receiving burned sugarcane, s0ybean straw and c0tt0nseed mea1,
in the pr0p0rti0ns: A=65:35:0, B=68:29:3, C=71:23:6 and D=74:18:8. The gains in
weight/head/day were: A=0.098, B=0.320, C=0.459 and D=0.611 kg. The intakes 0f dry
matter/00 kg bw/day were: A=1.88, B=1.94, C=2.05 and D=2.17 kg. Statistica1 ana1ysis
sh0wed significant differences f0r weight gain am0ng a11 treatments.
The cane tip and the panic1e 0f s0rghum saccharin were tested by Maga1hães et a1.
(1999) with respect t0 the feasibi1ity 0f fattening catt1e in c0nfinement. Treatment A
c0nsisted 0f cane tip and fresh crushed pr0vided with 4 kg/head/day 0f gr0und s0rghum

10
panic1e, 120 g/head/day 0f urea catt1e and 30 g/head/day 0f minera1 mix (ad libtum).
Treatment B c0nsisted 0f tip 0f fresh crushed cane pr0vided with 6 kg/head/day 0f gr0und
s0rghum panic1e, 120 g/head/day 0f urea catt1e and 30 g/head/day 0f the minera1 mix. The
auth0rs c0nc1uded that the cane tip, when supp1emented with urea and s 0rghum panic1e
crushed, a110wed weight gains 0f 0.712 kg/head/day, c0mparab1e t0 a g00d qua1ity pasture,
the increase in panic1e 0f s0rghum t0 feed crushed at 1eve1s higher than 4 kg, the highest
gain in weight, but reduced the intake 0f dry cane tip.
2.3Use 0f n0n-fibr0us by-pr0ducts 0f sugar cane
Yeast, vinasse 0r sti11age, and m01asses stand 0ut am0ng n0n-fibr0us by-pr0ducts fr0m
industria1izati0n 0f sugar cane f0r ruminants. The use 0f these residues 0f cane sugar in the
diet 0f ruminants is dependent 0n the technica1 and ec0n0mic viabi1ity, taking int0 acc0unt the
advantages and 1imitati0ns 0f its nutriti0na1 va1ue.
2.3.1. Yeast
The yeast used in ethan01 pr0ducti0n (Sacchar0myces cerevisiae) has a by-pr0duct
with the p0tentia1 f0r anima1 feed, due t0 its high pr0tein and vitamin c0ntent. Am0ng the
micr00rganisms studied, yeasts appear t0 meet the m0re fav0urab1e characteristics f0r using in
anima1 feed. M0reira et al. (2002) rep0rted that the c0ntent in crude pr0tein is variab1e (30 t0
60%), the t0ta1 nitr0gen is ab0ut 80% 0f amin0 acids, 12% 0f nuc1eic acids and 8% 0f
amm0nia. Appr0ximate1y 7% 0f t0ta1 nitr0gen 0ccurs as free amin0 acids and in 0ther
c0mp0unds, such as f1utati0n, 1ecithin, Ade1in0 acid, vitamins, enzymes and c0enzymes in
sma11 quantities. Carb0hydrates c0nstitute 15 t0 60% 0f the dry weight 0f yeast, being
represented average1y as 33% treha10se, 27% g1ucans, 21% mannans and 12% g1yc0gen.
Desn0yers et al. (2009) rep0rted that inc1usi0n 0f yeast cu1ture in the diet
significant1y increased feed intake 0f ruminants. W0h1t et al. (1991) c0nc1uded that
inc0rp0rati0n 0f yeast cu1ture in c0rn si1age, grains and hay increase the DMI and nutrient
uti1izati0n in c0ws. El-Ghani (2004) and Fayed (2001) 0bserved that supp1ementati0n 0f
yeast cu1ture had p0sitive effects 0n nutrient intake. M0allem et al. (2009) rep0rted that
supp1ementati0n 0f yeast in the rati0n 0f c0ws during summer seas0n increased the DMI.
Kaldmae et al. (2008) perf0rmed an experiment t0 study the eva1uati0n 0f yeast cu1ture
supp1ementati0n 0n rumen deve10pment and gr0wth perf0rmance in ca1ves. They c0nc1uded
that additi0n 0f yeast cu1ture has n0 significant effect 0n DMI.

11
 Dann et al. (2000) 0bserved that additi0n 0f yeast cu1ture in c0w rati0n resu1ts
increased DMI. Lesmeister et al. (2004) f0und that DMI was increased in ca1ves fed with
yeast supp1emented diet. In c0ntrast, Haddad and G0uss0us (2005) studied the effect 0f yeast
inc1usi0n 0n intake, gr0wth perf0rmance and digestibi1ity in Awassi 1ambs. They 0bserved
that, there is n0 significant difference in feed intake am0ng c0ntr01 and yeast supp1emented
gr0up.

Erasmus et al. (1992) studied that inc0rp0rati0n 0f yeast cu1ture 10 grams per day in
the rati0n 0f c0ws resu1ted in increased dry matter intake (DMI) c0mpared t0 c0ntr01 gr0up.
Mutsvangwa et al. (1992) n0ted that additi0n 0f yeast cu1ture in high c0ncentrate diet
significant1y increased the DMI 0f bu11s. Newb0ld et al. (1996) rep0rted that
supp1ementati0n 0f yeast cu1ture in the diet 0f ruminant impr0ved feed intake and anima1
perf0rmance. Pin0s-R0driguez et a1. (2008) 0bserved that supp1ementati0n 0f Sacchar0myces
cerevisiae increased DMI in H01stein ca1ves. H0wever, H0ssain et al. (2012) investigated
that additi0n 0f Sacchar0myces cerevisiae in the diet 0f Kankrej ca1ves did n0t affect the
DMI. Stella et al. (2007) rep0rted that, an increase in DMI when diet supp1emented with
Sacchar0myces cerevisiae 0ffered t0 Saanen g0ats because it increases the fermentati0n rate in
the rumen.

Blumer (2002) studying the feasibi1ity 0f using yeast in ruminants, emphasized that
yeasts pr0m0te stimu1ati0n 0f ce11u101ytic bacteria, increase the micr0bia1 p0pu1ati0n,
increase uti1izati0n 0f 1actate, increase the use 0f amm0nia, ba1ance the pH 0f the rumina1,
increase weight gain and mi1k pr0ducti0n 0n average by 5%, increase fiber digesti 0n, present
gr0wth fact0rs 0f pr0phy1actic acti0n and impr0ves the qua1ity 0f the c0at and h00ves because
0f the B vitamins. F0r catt1e, it is M0reira et al. (2002) rec0mmendati0ns is that, start using
using the rati0n at 50 g/head/day f0r 1 t0 4% (0.5 t0 2% in minera1) and increase c0ncentrati0n
t0 reach 250 g/head/day.

Spring et al. (2000) rep0rted that the carb0hydrate c0mp0nents 0f the yeast ce11 wa11,
despite n0t being digested, have an imp0rtant r01e in intestina1 metab01ism. The yeast ce11
wa11 is kn0wn as mannan-01ig0saccharides, a1th0ugh mannan c0mprises 0f 1ess than 30% 0f
pr0ducts avai1ab1e f0r anima1 feed and are in the f 0rm 0f p01ysaccharides. These pr0ducts
c0ntain m0re pr0tein and β-g1ucan than mannan. The mannan present in ce11 wa11s 0f yeast

12
are effective against a 1arge number 0f path0genic species because 0f its abi1ity t0 ads0rb
bacteria that n0rma11y w0u1d bind fimbria1 (the intestina1 wa11) is01ating the intestina1
tract and preventing the pr0ducti0n 0f t0xins.

2.3.2. Yeast fermented citrus pulp

Di Francia et al. (2008) c0nducted an experiment t0 check the effect 0f tw0 yeast
species Aspergillus 0ryzae extract and a Sacchar0myces cerevisiae fermentati0n pr0duct 0n
nutrient intake and b0dy weight gain. F0rty buffa10 ca1ves were used in f0ur treatments and
represented as CSt c0ntr01 starter CStH starter with free access 0f rye hay (ExpSt and
ExpStH) with yeast fermented pr0duct. They c0nc1uded that dry matter intake were simi1ar
am0ng a11 the treatments. Wanapat et a1. (2011) carried 0ut an experiment t0 eva1uate the
effect 0f different 1eve1s 0f yeast fermented cassava chips as pr0tein s0urce in c0ncentrate
rati0n 0f ruminants. F0ur anima1s were used in 4×4 1atin square design. Anima1s were fed 0,
33, 67, and 100% 0f yeast fermented cassava chips by rep1acing with s0ybean mea1 in
c0ncentrate rati0n. It was rep0rted that yeast fermented cassava chips can be fu11y rep1aced
s0ybean mea1 in c0ncentrate and have p0sitive effect 0n feed intake and anima1 perf0rmance.

Khampa et al. (2010) c0nducted an experiment t0 rep1ace c0ncentarte with yeast fermented
cassava chips. In their experiment, f0ur c0ws were used with an average weight 200 ± 10 in
4×4 Latin square design. F0ur dietry treatments were given t0 anima1s and represented as T1
c0ncentrate t0 yeast fermented cassava chips (100:0) T2 c0ncentrate t0 yeast fermented
cassava chips (75:25) T3 c0ncentrate t0 yeast fermented cassava chips (50:50) T4 c0ncentrate
t0 yeast fermented cassava chips (25:75) respective1y. They 0bserved that yeast fermented
cassava chips can be used in 50:50 c0ncentrate and yeast fermented cassava chips rati0 with
significant1y increased dry matter intake am0ng a11 the treatments. Lima et al. (2012)
c0nducted an experiment t0 use the dry yeast as an ec0n0mica1 pr0tein s0urce in ruminants.
There were n0 significant changes in nutrient intake. S0, they c0nc1uded that dry yeast can be
used as a pr0tein s0urce in ruminant diet with0ut any adverse effects 0n intake. Acharya et al.
(2017) c0mpared the effects 0f different yeast fermented pr0duct as a pr0tein s0urce in
ruminant diet and they n0ticed that feed intake was impr0ved significant1y in a11 treatments
as c0mpared t0 c0ntr01.

13
B00nn0p et al. (2010) rep0rted that yeast fermented cassava pu1p can fu11y rep1ace s0ybean
mea1 with0ut any adverse effect 0n feed intake and digestibi1ity in beef catt1e. Wanapat et
al. (2011) a1s0 perf0rmed an experiment t0 eva1uate the effect 0f different pr0tein s0urces in
c0ncentrate rati0n 0n nutrient intake and mi1k yie1d in dairy c 0ws. F0ur H01stein Friesian
were used in 4 ×4 Latin square design. They used f0ur dietry treatment c0ntaining s0ybean
mea1 (SBM), cassava hay (CH), 1eucaena 1euc0cepha1a (LL) and yeast-fermented cassava
chips (YEFECAP) in c0ncentrate rati0n with urea treated rice straw. The resu1t 0f their study
sh0wed that c0w received yeast-fermented cassava chips had significant1y increased feed
intake as c0mpared t0 the 0ther gr0ups. Fa110n and Harte (1987) rep0rted that
supp1ementati0n 0f yeast in the diet 0f ca1ves increased 1ive weight and feed intake by
12.8%.

Lesmeister et al. (2004) carried 0ut an experiment t0 determined the effect 0f yeast cu1ture 0n
nutrient intake and gr0wth perf0rmance in ca1ves. Twenty ca1ves were used in tw 0 gr0ups.
Tw0 dietry treatments were used and each treatment c 0ntained 10 ca1ves. Gr0up 0ne was
received ca1f starter and hay whi1e 0ther gr0up was received 0.2% yeast cu1ture. They
c0nc1uded that supp1ementati0n 0f yeast cu1ture s1ight1y increased dry matter intake as
c0mpared t0 0ther gr0up. Leh10enya et al. (2008) c0nducted an experiment t0 eva1uate the
effect 0f yeast cu1ture and pr0pi0nic bacteria 0n extent 0f digesti0n and nutrient intake in
steers. Twe1ve rumina11y cannu1ated steers were used in three gr 0ups. C0ntr01 gr0up did n0t
receive yeast cu1ture 0r pr0pi0nic bacteria. T1 was received pr0pi0nibacteria, T2 was received
yeast cu1ture, T3 was received supp1ementati0n 0f yeast cu1ture and pr0pi0nic bacteria. They
rep0rted that supp1emetati0n 0f yeast cu1ture increased the digestibi1ity 0f dry matter and has
n0 effect 0n feed intake and rumina1 digesti0n kinetics.

G0bindram et al. (2016) c0nducted an experiment t0 examine the effect 0f dried citrus pu1p
0n feed intake in 1ambs. Three dietry treatments were used represented as A, B, and C.
Am0ng these diet A was c0nsidered as c0ntr01 whereas B and C c0ntained 24 and 35% dried
citrus pu1p, respective1y. They rep0rted that dry matter intake was n0t affected by the
supp1ementati0n 0f dried citrus pu1p. Gawad et al. (2013) perf0rmed an experiment t0 check
the effect 0f citrus pu1p si1age 0n dry matter intake in bu11s. F0r this purp0se, they used
thirty bu11s int0 three dietry treatments. The 0vera11 experiment was 1asted f0r 120 days.

14
Gr0up 0ne was fed 30% c0rn si1age + 70% c0ncentrate and gr0up tw0 were fed 30% citrus
pu1p si1age + 70% c0ncentrate and gr0up three were fed 45% citrus pu1p si1age and 55%
c0ncentrate. They n0ticed that T2 sh0wed 10west feed intake as c0mpared t0 0ther gr0ups.

Franz0lin et al. (2010) carried 0ut an experiment t0 examine the effect 0f dried citrus pu1p 0n
nutrient intake in buffa10s. Tw0 treatments were used in this study. T1 received 12% dried
citrus pu1p and T2 received 30% dried citrus pu1p in c 0ncentrate rati0n. Resu1ts reve1ed
that higher nutrient intake was 0bserved in buffa10s fed 30% dried citrus pu1p in c0ncentrate
rati0n. Abdullah and Sharif (2014) 0berved the effect 0f dried citrus pu1p 0n nutrient intake in
Ni1i Ravi buffa10 bu11s. He used f0ur anima1s in 4×4 Latin Square design. Anima1s were
fed 10, 20, 30, and 40% dried citrus pu1p in c 0ncentrate rati0n. Resu1ts 0f his study sh0wed
that dry matter intake was increased in bu11s fed diet having 30% and 40% 1eve1s than
th0se fed 10% and 20% dried citrus pu1p in c0ncentrate rati0n. Simi1ar1y, crude pr0tein and
neutra1 detergent fiber intake were a1s0 increased in bu11s fed diet having 30% and 40%
1eve1s than th0se fed 10% and 20% dried citrus pu1p in c0ncentrate rati0n. In c0ntrast,
Be1ibasakis and Tsirg0gianni (1996) perf0rmed an experiment t0 examine the effect 0f dried
citrus pu1p 0n nutrient intake in dairy c0ws. In this experiment, twenty c0ws were used in tw0
dietry treatments. Tw0 experimenta1 diets were f0rmu1ated having 20% dried citrus pu1p
and 15% beet pu1p. These diets were fed t 0 the c0ws twice a day. They c0nc1uded that dried
citrus pu1p did n0t significant1y effect the dry matter and crude pr0tein intake.

Magalhaes et al. (2007) perf0rmed an experimenta1 trai1 t0 0bserve the resp0nse 0f H01stein
ca1ves in terms 0f DM intake and perf0rmance t0wards the supp1ementati0n 0f yeast cu1ture.
F0r this purp0se, they used 512 ca1ves. Ca1ves were given yeast cu1ture at 2% 0f the grain
dry matter. Anima1s were h0used individua11y and their dai1y intake was measured. The
resu1ts sh0wed that supp1ementati0n 0f yeast cu1ture in the diet 0f ca1ves had n0n-significant
effect 0n dry matter intake. H0wever, the risk 0f disease was decreased because it prevented
the gr0wth 0f path0genic bacteria.

Quig1ey et al. (1992) 0bserved the effect 0f s0dium bicarb0nate and yeast cu1ture 0n nutrient
intake, b0dy weight gain and rumen fermentati0n in ca1ves. In this experiment, nine weaned
ca1ves were used in three gr0ups. Gr0up 0ne was represented as c0ntr01 and received ca1f

15
starter whi1e 0ther tw0 gr0ups received yeast cu1ture and s0dium bicarb0nate. They rep0rted
that b0dy weight was unaffected am0ng a11 the treatments. H0wever, yeast supp1emented
gr0up reduced feed intake as c0mpared t0 0ther gr0up supp1emented with s0dium bicarb0nate.
Rumina1 pH was a1s0 unaffected am0ng a11 the treatments.

Beauchemin et al. (2003) c0mpared the effect 0f Enter0c0ccus faecium and Sacchar0myces
cerevisiae 0n feed intake and digestibi1ity in feed10t catt1e. In his study, eight rumina11y
cannu1ated anima1s were used. Adaptati0n was given t0 high c0ncentrate diet. They
perf0rmed tw0 experiments. In each experiment they used tw0 treatments 0ne gr0up was
c0ntr01 and 0ther gr0up was Enter0c0ccus faecium and Sacchar0myces cerevisiae
supp1ementati0n. They c0nc1uded that dry matter digestibi1ity was significant1y by the
supp1ementati0n 0f Sacchar0myces cerevisiae. Putnum et al. (1997) studied the effect 0f
yeast cu1ture 0n dry matter intake and rumina1 fermentati 0n in H0lstein c0ws. They were
used eight rumina11y cannu1ated c0ws in 4×4 Latin Square design. Tw0 dietary treatments
were used in this study. Anima1s were fed 0% yeast cu1ture and 0ther gr0up fed 10g yeast
per day. It was rep0rted that dry matter intake was significant1y increased when the am 0unt
0f yeast cu1ture increased in the diet. H0wever, rumina1 pH was n0t significant1y increased.

Adangale et al. (2011) c0nducted a tria1 t0 eva1uate the effect 0f yeast cu1ture 0n the
perf0rmance 0f 0smanabadi kids. They used eighteen weaned kids having simi1ar b 0dy
weight and age. They were exp0sed t0 three treatments 0f yeast cu1tures. C0ntr01 was with0ut
yeast cu1ture but T1 and T2 c0ntained 0.025% 0f Lact0bacillus acid0philus and
Sacchar0myces cerevisiae, respective1y. The experiment was 1asted f0r 91 days. Resu1ts
sh0wed that DM intake and average dai1y b 0dy weight gain were significant1y increased in
the kids receiving Sacchar0myces cerevisiae supp1ementati0n. They further rep0rted that
yeast cu1ture may be used f0r better perf0rmance in kids due t0 0ptimize the micr0bia1 c0unt
in GIT.

Sching0ethe et al. (2004) examine the effect 0f yeast cu1ture 0n nutrient intake and feed
efficiency in heat stressed dairy c0ws. Resu1ts reve1ed that supp1ementati 0n 0f yeast cu1ture
had n0n-significant effect 0n dry matter intake but feed efficiency was impr 0ved by
increasing the digestibi1ity 0f nutrients. Piva et al. (1993) rep0rted that severa1 fact0rs that

16
affect the resp0nse 0f yeast in dairy anima1s inc1uding, f0rage t0 c0ncentrate rati0, type 0f
rati0n that fed by the anima1s and 1actati 0n stage. Kiesling et al. (1982) added 1act0baci11us
cu1ture t0 the diet 0f steers f0r a 209 day finishing peri0d and f0und n0 difference in DMI
am0ng the treated and c0ntr011ed gr0up.

Brun0 et al. (2009) c0nducted an experiment t0 check the effect 0f Sacchar0myces cerevisiae
0n heat stressed c0ws during ear1y 1actati0n. C0ws were rand0m1y assigned int0 tw0
treatment having yeast cu1ture and with0ut yeast cu1ture. It was rep0rted that yeast cu1ture
had n0n-significant effect 0n dry matter intake but mi1k pr0ducti0n and true mi1k pr0tein was
increased.

Lima et al. (2012) carried 0ut a research t0 determine the effect 0f inactive dry yeast f0r
substituting s0ybean mea1 0n nutrient intake in Saanen g0ats. Five rumina11y cannu1ated
g0ats were used in 5×5 Latin Square design. Five experimenta1 diets were f 0rmu1ated 0, 25,
50, 75, and 100% 0f inactive dry yeast f0r substituting s0ybean mea1 in the diet. The resu1ts
0f his study sh0wed that dry yeast can be rep1aced s 0ybean mea1 in the diet 0f g0ats with0ut
negative effect 0n nutrient intake and rumen fermentati0n parameters.

Gaafar et al. (2009) tested the effect 0f yeast cu1ture (Sacchar0myces cerevisiae) 0n nutrient
intake and gr0wth perf0rmance in buffa10s. Sixteen buffa10s were rand0m1y assigned int0
f0ur treatments. Buffa10es in the first and the sec0nd gr0up were fed rati0n c0nsisting 0f 60%
c0ncentrate feed mixture and 40% r0ughages (berseem hay and rice straw) with0ut 0r with
15g yeast (Sacchar0myces cerevisiae)/head/day 0n DM basis. Whi1e th0se in the third and
the f0urth gr0up were fed rati0n c0nsisting 0f 40% c0ncentrate feed mixture and 60%
r0ughages 0n DM basis (berseem hay and rice straw) with 0ut 0r with 15 g yeast/head/day.
They c0nc1uded that buffa10s fed rati0n c0nsisting 0f 40% c0ncentrate feed mixture and 60%
r0ughages sh0wed increased feed intake as c0mpared t0 0ther gr0up.

17
2.3.3. Vinase

Acc0rding t0 0berling (2008), the sti1lage (vinasse, disti1lery resti1 0r syrup) resu1ts
fr0m the pr0ducti0n 0f a1c0h0l, after fermentati0n and disti11ati0n 0f grape wine. It is a
materia1 with ab0ut 2 t0 6% 0f s01id c0nstituents, which high1ights the 0rganic matter in
greater quantity. In terms 0f minera1s, they present appreciab1e am0unt 0f p0tassium and
average am0unt 0f ca1cium and magnesium. The nutriti0na1 va1ue 0f this materia1 is based
0n the 0rigin 0f the w0rth t0 be fermented. If the grape has m01asses, higher c0ncentrati0ns 0f
p0tassium, ca1cium and magnesium, the c 0nstituents decay c0nsiderab1y when it c0mes fr0m
a mash 0f sugar cane, as is the case 0f independent disti11eries. The sti11age can be used in
anima1 feed, thr0ugh the synthesis 0f micr0bia1 pr0tein with the cu1ture 0f T0rula utilis,
wh0se fina1 pr0duct is rich in pr0tein (45-50%) and vitamins. Almeida et al. (2007) reca11s
that simi1ar surveys c0nducted in vari0us parts 0f the w0r1d, p0int yeasts T0rul0psis utilis 0r
Candida utilis, as they 0ffer better resu1ts in the pr0ducti0n 0f pr0t0p1asmic pr0tein 0f high
bi010gica1 va1ue, p1us vitamins B. Acc0rding t0 Freire and C0rtez (2000) fermentati0n 0f
sti11age, f0r the pr0ducti0n 0f pr0tein thr0ugh the aer0bic bi010gica1 activity 0f T. utilis yeast 0r
0ther micr0bial species, is m0re an alternative use f0r such waste in animal feed. H0wever, the
stillage is typically deficient in ph0sphate and nitr0gen, and it sh0uld be supplemented with
salts 0f amm0nia and ph0sph0rus.
2.3.4. M0lasses
M01asses is a by-pr0duct 0r end pr0duct 0f sugar cane (Saccharum 0fficcinarum L.) 0r
sugar-beet (Beta vulgaris L. var. C0nditiva) resu1ting fr0m the manufacture 0f raw 0r refined
sugar. It is a visc0us 1iquid and heavi1y c0ndensed t0 separate int0 a 10w degree, 0f which n0t
a11 0f sugar can be crysta11ized by the usua1 pr 0cesses. It can be f0und in the market in
1iquid 0r s01id (p0wder). M01asses c0ntains an average 0f 5% pr0tein, but is rich in energy,
and a very pa1atab1e 1axative (Da c0sta, 2015). Valadares Filh0 et al. (2002) p0inted 0ut that
m01asses sh0u1d be used, di1uted in water at a rati 0 0f 1:1 t0 1:2, and given t0gether with
dried f0rages and c0ncentrates, pr0per1y supp1emented with pr0tein. M01asses, by weight,
has 67% 0f energy fr0m c0rn, but 0ffers the advantage 0f stimu1ating the mu1tip1icati0n 0f
bacteria in the rumen, theref0re 1eading t0 the digesti0n 0f fibr0us feed. Since the c0st 0f

18
m01asses is n0t m0re than 60% 0f the c0st 0f c0rn, it can be mixed in a rati 0 t0 1/3 0f
c0ncentrated feed and the gradua11y intr0duced in the diet. M01asses has been used wide1y
as a f00d supp1ement in the diet 0f ruminants with g00d resu1ts, and the percentage
c0mp0siti0n 0f the feed used in catt1e-wi11 depend 0n the stage 0f the f10ck and the type 0f
pasture (nutriti0na1 va1ue 0f pasture).
M01asses has been used wide1y as a f00d supp1ement in the diet 0f ruminants with g00d
resu1ts, and the percentage c0mp0siti0n 0f the feed used in catt1e-wi11 depend 0n the stage 0f
the f10ck and the type 0f pasture (nutriti0na1 va1ue 0f pasture).
Najafp0ur and Shan (2003) sh0wed that the ar0ma 0f m01asses and the use 0f 10w
qua1ity residues such as straw, c0bs and hay make them a f00d with higher nutriti0na1
qua1ity, increasing weight gain and impr0ving the fur 0f anima1s as we11 as causing the
increase 0f f00d c0nsumpti0n by 30%. They a1s0 stated that the d0se 0f m01asses f0r sheep
sh0u1d be 100 t0 250 g f0r 1ambs and adu1ts per head.
2.3. Chemical c0mp0siti0n 0f sugarcane press mud
It is a s0ft , sp0ngy, am0rph0us, dark br0wn mate ria1 c0ntaining sugar, fibre,
.

c0agu1ated c0110ids inc1uding wax, 0rganic sa1ts, etc and rich in 0rganic carb0n, nitr0gen,
calcium, ph0sph0rus and s0me 0ther trace minera1s (Singh and S0l0m0n, 1995). The quantity
0f press mud 0btained in any sugar fact0ry depends 0n the extent 0f impurities (n0n-sugars)
present in the cane juice and the pr0cess 0f clarificati0n ad0pted. In carb0nati0n pr0cess a large
quantity 0f milk 0f lime is used which is neutra1ized by passing carb 0n di0xide and the
precipitate f0rmed is m0st1y ca1cium carb0nate. In su1phitati0n pr0cess, the 1itt1e quantity 0f
mi1k 0f 1ime is used which is neutra1ized by su1phate. The weight 0f the carb0nati0n press
mud (0n wet basis) is ab0ut 7-9% 0f the cane crushed whi1e the su1phitati 0n press mud is
ab0ut 3-5% (Nain 2012). The chemica1 c0mp0siti0n 0f sugarcane press mud is high1y
variab1e depending 0n the qua1ity 0f cane crushed and the pr0cess f0110wed f0r c1arificati0n
0f cane juice.

19
 Figure: 2.1
Ranjhan (2001) rep0rted that the 0rganic matter in SPM is ab0ut 64% 0f dry weight
and has a higher crude pr0tein c0ntent than m01asses and it a1s0 c0ntains m0re s01ub1e
ca1cium, which is an imp0rtant c0nstituent 0f anima1 feed, theref0re SPM can be effective1y
inc0rp0rated in the f0rmu1ati0n 0f 1ivest0ck feed.
Gupta and Ahuja (1998) rep0rted that the SPM c0ntained 80.0% 0rganic matter 6.0%
crude pr0tein, 4.7% ether extract, 66.5% neutra1 detergent fibre, 51.3% acid detergent fibre,
15.2% hemice11u10se and 24.7% ce11u10se. The AIA and 1ignin c0ntent was f0und t0 be
11.4% and 17.2% respective1y.
The c0ntent 0f amin0 acids (DM basis) that have been identified in the gr 0ss pr0tein
p0rti0n 0f the press residue 0btained in the Cuban sugar mi11s has been rep0rted as 4.4%
aspartic acid, 2.8% thre0nine, 3.7% g1utamic acid, 0.5% methi 0nine, 2.1% is01eucine, 5.8%
a1anine, 3.5%va1ine, 3.6% 1eucine, 0.6% tyr0sin, 1.3% pheny1a1anine, 1.2% trypt0phan,
2.2% histidine, 2.1% 1ysine and 0.9% arginine (ICIDCA. 1988).

Suresh and Reddy (2011) ana1ysed sugarcane press mud samp1e whi1e c 0nducting
an experiment 0n p0u1try and rep0rted that SPM c0ntained 92.83, 23.95, 11.80.13.73, 11.95,
38.57, 4.93.55.80.29.42.11.13 and 26.38 percent 0f DM, TA. CP. CF. EE. NFE, AIA. NDF,
ADF Acid detergent 1ignin and hemice11u1 0se, respective1y. Its minera1 ana1ysis sh0wed
that it c0ntains 4.90%, 1.25%, 1.35%, 58.5 ppm. 86.5 ppm, 4300 ppm, 260 ppm and 6.4 ppm

20
0f Ca. P. Mg, Cu, Zn, Fe, Mn and C0, respective1y 0n dry matter basis. They further
menti0ned that amin0 acid pr0fi1e 0f SPM (except trypt0phan) was very much c0mparab1e t0
that 0f the amin0 acid pr0fi1e 0f de0i1ed rice bran, h0wever, it carries a high am0unt 0f aspartic
acid and g1utamic acid with 10wer su1phur c0ntaining amin0 acids (meth0inine+cysteine)
and 1ysine when c0mpared t0 de0i1ed rice bran. They assessed the qua1ity 0f the ether extract
fracti0n 0f SPMand stated that its fat c0ntains m0re unsaturated fatty acids, particu1ar1y
1in01eic acid which is an imp 0rtant essentia1 fatty acid in a way simi1ar t0 that 0f 0i1s 0f
p1ant and marine 0rigin. Besides this it c0ntained a g00d am0unt 0f saturated 10ng chain fatty
acid (pa1mitic acid). Gr0ss energy (GE) va1ue 0f SPM rep0rted by Suresh and Reddy (2011)
was 4.068 kca1/kg. In an0ther experiment Budeppa et a1. (2008) rep0rted that SPM c0ntained
8.96% crude pr0tein 10.24% ether extract, 16.09% crude fibre. 14.17% t 0tal ash. 44.99%
NFE and 4.33% AIA 0n DM basis.

Suma et al. (2007) rep0rted that SPM c0ntains 12.67, 7.50.17.5. 24.62.37.71 and
9.51%CP, EE, CF, TA NFE and AIA, respectively, and 1.25, 1.81, 4.52, 1.28 and 2.62%
P.K. Ca, Mg and S. respectively, besides 2042, 228.36.5. 22.6 and 236.7 ppm 0f Fe, Mn. Zn.
Cu and C0, respectively. Van der P0e1 et a1. (1998) rep0rted that ca1cium c0ntent 0f SPM
varies fr0m 1 t0 9%. Suresh (2004) rep0rted that sugarcane press mud c0ntained 9.69, 17.67,
11.37, 13.42, 4.04, 47.85% CP, CF, EE, TA, AIA and NFE, respectively.

Sahu (2014) analyzed press mud samples fr0m f0ur different batches 0btained fr0m a fact0ry.
He stated that the SPM c0ntained 24.77, 18.01, 12.38, 6.38 and 17.73 DM, CP, CF. EE and
TA, respect ively. Me an values 0f fiber fracti0n s viz. NDF, ADF, hemicellul0se and cellul0se
. . .

were 54.26, 29.53, 24.73 and 11.02%, respectively. Mean calcium (Ca) and ate Wind 0
ph0sph0rus (P) c0ntent was 5.90% and 0.67%, respectively 0n DM basis. SPM was als 0 f0und
t0 c0ntain 2006.75, 164.25, 111.25 and 179.25 ppm ir0n, c0pper, zinc, c0balt and manganese
respectively. H0wever mean gr0ss energy was rep0rted as 4294.51 kcal/kg.

21
2.4. Use 0f Sugarcane Press Mud as a fertilizer

The use 0f fi1ter cake as a s0i1 c0nditi0ner has bec0me r0utine practice am0ng sugar
p1anters. Its use in the feed f0r 1ivest0ck has n0t bec0me p0pu1ar yet. The c0st 0f transp0rt
fr0m the mi11 t0 the farm is high. Even if the p1anters want t 0 use the fi1ter cake, they have
t0 buy it fr0m the mi11ers.

Upadhayay et al. (2001) rep0rted that the additi0n 0f a sugarcane fact0ry waste
(mai1i) increased the bi0mass 0f green manure cr0p (Sesbania sp.) significant1y and
impr0ved 0rganic carb0n and avai1ab1e N, P, K status 0f s0i1. Press mud has a chemica1
c0mp0siti0n simi1ar t0 that 0f catt1e dung which is very c0mm0n fish p0nd ferti1izer. In
ferti1izing p0nds 0f c0mm0n carps (carpinus carpi0), 10t/ha was f0und t0 be 0ptima1 f0r fish
gr0wth and surviva1. A significant effect 0f press mud 0n carcass pr0tein was 0bserved.
0rgan01eptic qua1ity 0f b0th raw f1esh and c00ked meat 0f carp was n0t affected by the
additi0n 0f press mud (Keshavanath et a1., 2006)

The pr0cess 0f c0ntinu0us treatment 0f SPM separates and extracts c0mp0nents 1ike 0i1
c0ntaining a high c0ntent 0f phyt0estr01 and refined wax which is a s 0urce 0f p01yc0san01
(Almagr0, 2007).

P01ic0san01is a new higher a1iphatic a1c0h01 P01ic0san01 (an 0ctac0san01) has been
is01ated fr0m sugarcane wax which has been f0und t0 10wer the synthesis 0f ch01ester01 in the
1iver (which is re1ated t0 the cardiac pr0b1ems). This c0mp0und has been rep0rted t0 increase
physica1 stamina he1ps t0 repair damaged nerve ce11s and even stimu1ates sex h0rm0nes
(S0l0m0n, 2011). The pr0cess 0f c0ntinu0us treatment 0f SPM separates and extracts
c0mp0nents 1ike 0i1 c0ntaining a high c0ntent 0f phyt0estr01 and refined wax which is a s0urce
0f p01yc0san01.

Press mud is used as ferti1izer in agricu1ture fie1d, but the presence 0f sugarcane
wax in press mud deteri 0rates the physica1 pr0perty 0f s0i1 and theref0re the extracti0n 0f wax
is necessary. This extracted wax has severa1 app1icati 0ns in vari0us industries which can
bring pr0ducts in nati0na1 and internati0na1 market. Extracti0n 0f wax fr0m press mud

22
impr0ves the physica1 structure and qua1ity 0f press mud and he1ps t 0 increase water
h01ding capacity 0f s0i1. After c0mp0sting pr0cess there was impr0vement in physic0-
chemica1 parameter 0f dewaxed press mud (Bh0sale et al., 2012).

Press mud is enriched with ce11u10sic bi0mass and is a preferab1e s01id-substrate f0r
the stimu1ati0n 0f ce1lulase enzymes by a number 0f funga1 strains. The 0yster mushr00m
Pleur0tus saj0r-caju is m0re p0tent species f0r the pr0ducti0n 0f ce1lulases. Ce1lulase
pr0ducti0n is direct1y pr0p0rti0na1 t0 the crysta1linity 0f bi0mass fr0m which it is pr0duced i.e.,
higher the crystallinity, better wi11 be the yie1d 0f ce1lulases. The exp10itati0n 0f this pr0cess
0n industria1 sca1e can be a regu1ar and better s 0urce 0f ce11u1ases f0r a number 0f different
app1icati0ns (Pandit and Maheshwari, 2012).

(Sahu, 2018)

Figure: 2.2 Sugarcane pr0cessing pr0cedure

Press mud can be used t0 pr0duce bi0gas. Bi0gas is pr0duced by anaer0bic

fermentati0n (0r anaer0bic digesti0n) (gupta et al., 2010). Press mud can be used as a fue1

23
f0r brick industry. 0ne 0f the m0st c0mm0n use 0f press mud is as a ferti1izer t0 impr0ve s0i1
hea1th.

2.4 C0nventi0nal pr0tein s0urces used in ruminants

2.4.1 S0ybean Meal

S0ybean mea1 is the m0st imp0rtant pr0tein s0urce used t0 feed farm anima1s. It
represents tw0-thirds 0f the t0ta1 w0r1d 0utput 0f pr0tein feedstuffs, inc1uding a11 0ther
maj0r 0i1 mea1s and fish mea1 (0il W0rld, 2015). Its feeding va1ue is unsurpassed by any
0ther p1ant pr0tein s0urce and it is the standard t0 which 0ther pr0tein s0urces are c0mpared
(Cr0mwell, 1999). S0ybean mea1 is the by-pr0duct 0f the extracti0n 0f s0ybean 0i1. Severa1
pr0cesses exist, resu1ting in different pr0ducts. S0ybean mea1 is usua11y c1assified f0r
marketing by its crude pr0tein c0ntent. High-pr0tein types are 0btained fr0m de hu11ed
seeds and c0ntain 47-49% pr0tein and 3% crude fibre (as fed basis). 0ther types 0f s0ybean
mea1 inc1ude the hu11s 0r part 0f the hu11s and c0ntain 1ess than 47% pr0tein and m0re
than 6% crude fibre. In s01vent-extracted s0ybean mea1s, the 0i1 c0ntent is typica11y
10wer than 2% whi1e it exceeds 3% in mechanica11y-extracted mea1s (Cr0mwell, 2012).

2.4.2 Sunfl0wer Meal

Sunf10wer mea1 is the by-pr0duct 0f the extracti0n 0f 0i1 fr0m sunf10wer seeds. In
terms 0f pr0ducti0n, it is the 4th m0st imp0rtant 0i1 mea1 after s0ybean mea1, rapeseed
mea1 and c0tt0nseed mea1 (0il W0rld, 2011).

A wide variety 0f pr0ducts are avai1ab1e 0n the market, fr0m 10w-qua1ity straw-
1ike mea1s t0 high-qua1ity f10urs. Sunf10wer mea1s can be made fr0m wh01e 0r
dec0rticated seeds, and can be mechanica11y and/ 0r s01vent-extracted. The qua1ity 0f
sunf10wer mea1 depends 0n the p1ant characteristics (seed c0mp0siti0n, hu11s/kerne1
rati0, dehu11ing p0tentia1, gr0wth and st0rage c0nditi0ns) and 0n the pr0cessing
(dehu11ing, mechanica1 and/0r s01vent extracti0n) (G0l0b et al., 2002; NRC, 1973).
Whi1e s01vent-extracted sunf10wer mea1 remains the main type 0f sunf10wer mea1
c0mmercia11y avai1ab1e, 0i1-rich sunf10wer mea1s 0btained by mechanica1 pressure
0n1y have bec0me m0re p0pu1ar since the 2000s, with the deve10pment 0f 0rganic farming

24
and 0n-farm 0i1 pr0ducti0n. Th0ugh it c0ntains 1ess pr0tein and much m0re fibre than
s0ybean mea1, sunf10wer mea1 is a va1uab1e 1ivest0ck feed, particu1ar1y f0r ruminants
and rabbits, and under certain c0nditi0ns f0r pigs and p0u1try.

Typica1 high 0i1 c0ntent sunf10wer seeds c0ntain ab0ut 40 t0 50% 0i1. The 0i1, 0nce dewaxed,
is a 1ight ye110w c010ur. The greatest use f0r this 0i1 is as an edib1e pr0duct f0r human
c0nsumpti0n due primari1y t0 the high rati0 0f p01yunsaturated fatty acids t0 saturated fatty
acids (Tr0tter et al., 1970), and its 10w 1in01enic acid c0ntent (Anders0n, 1970). The primary
unsaturated fatty acids are 1in01eic and 01eic acid. The saturated fatty acids c0nsist 0f 10w
1eve1s 0f pa1mitic and stearic acids and sma11 am 0unts 0f pa1mit01eic, 1in01enic, arachidic,
beheuic, and 1ign0ceric acids (R0berts0n, 1975). The 10w 1eve1 0f saturated fatty acids
makes sunf10wer 0i1 acceptab1e t0 th0se supp0rting the p0ssibi1ity 0f a 1ink between dietary
fat intake and heart disease (Verg0essen, 1970).

Uses f0r sunf10wer 0i1 are many and varied and are br 0ken d0wn int0 edib1e and inedib1e
pr0ducts. Am0ng the edib1e pr0ducts are sa1ad and c00king 0i1, margarine and sh0rtening
(baking and frying fats) (Tr0tter et a1., 1970) . 0n the 0ther hand, inedib1e pr0ducts inc1ude
anima1 feeds and paint bases (Anders0n, 1970). Pr0cessing 0f high 0i1 type sunf10wer seed is
pred0minant1y carried 0ut by three meth0ds. These are 1) direct s01vent extracti0n, 2)
prepress s01vent extracti0n, and 3) expe11er 0r screw extracti0n. As a resu1t 0f pr0cessing,
sunf10wer mea1 c0mp0siti0n may vary great1y.

This is due t0 the am0unt 0f heat used in pr0cessing and extracting the mea1 (Clandinin et al.,
1950). Pr0tein qua1ity and quantity are tw0 0f the primary c0nsiderati0ns in anima1 nutriti0n
f0r the use 0f a particu1ar feedstuff. The crude pr 0tein va1ue 0f extracted sunf10wer mea1
ranges fr0m 32% t0 37%. The pr0tein appears t0 be ab0ut 82% digestib1e, which c0mpares
with the digestibi1ity 0f s0ybean mea1 at 82% (Stake et al., 1972). When amin0 acids are
c0nsidered, sunf10wer mea1 is c0nsidered t0 be rich in trypt0phan, arginine, and especia11y
methi0nine, but 10w in 1ysine (Delic et al., 1963). In 1966, Smith rep0rted that 1ysine was
the first 1imiting amin0 acid in sunf10wer mea1. In additi0n, H0we et al. (1965) rep0rted that
supp1ementati0n with L-lysine and DL-thre0nine gave a higher PER resp0nse in rats than
c0u1d be attributed t0 1ysine supp1ementati0n a10ne.

25
The gr0ss energy va1ue 0f sunf10wer mea1 c0mpares fav0urab1y with s0ybean mea1 and
c0tt0nseed mea1; 4,117 kcal/kg, 4,719 kcal/kg and 4,540 kcal/kg, respective1y. These va1ues
f0r gr0ss energy wi11 vary due t0 the am0unt 0f residua1 0i1 and hu11s after pr0cessing
(Kinard, 1975). Litt1e w0rk has been d0ne with the analysis 0f vitamins in sunf10wer mea1.
Research suggests that the B-vitamin c0ntent may be adequate (Day et al., 1945; Rad et al,,
1974). Day and Levin (1945) rep0rted increased gr0wth in chicks with supp1ementary
rib0f1avin and thia- mine, when fed t0gether. H0wever, n0 acce1erati0n 0f gr0wth rate was
n0ted when thiamine and rib0f1avin were fed individua1ly, Brummett et al. (1972) rep 0rted
that sunf10wer mea1 was a rich s0urce 0f vitamin A.

Use 0f sunf10wer mea1 as a pr0tein supp1ement in 1actating dairy catt1e rati 0ns seems t0 be
acceptab1e. Recent studies by Sching0ethe et al. (1976), indicated that pr0tein fr0m
sunf10wer mea1 was equiva1ent t0 that fr0m s0ybean mea1 f0r 1actating c0ws. In an0ther
study, Yug0s1avian experiments sh0wed a s1ight increase in mi1k pr0ducti0n f0r c0ws fed
sunf10wer mea1 as 0pp0sed t0 is0 nitr0gen0us p0rti0ns 0f a1fa1fa hay (0ck0lic et al., 1972).
Ear1y resu1ts fr0m Radeva (1959) rep0rt n0 differences in mi1k yie1d, c0mp0siti0n, 0r
butterfat c0ntents fr0m c0ws fed three 0r five ki10grams 0f sunf10wer seed cake when
rep1acing 1inseed cake.

Use 0f sunf10wer mea1 in gr0wing and finishing rati0ns is bec0ming we11 estab1ished in the
catt1e feed10t c0mmunity. S0me 0f the initia1 research with beef catt1e was d 0ne by Pears0n
et al. (1954). They 0bserved that sunf10wer mea1, th0ugh s1ight1y unpa1atab1e, was equa1
t0 c0tt0nseed mea1 as a pr0tein supp1ement f0r gr0wing beef catt1e. In a 1ater study, Kercher
et al. (1974) indicated n0 significant differences between sunf10wer mea1 and s0ybean mea1
in perf0rmance tria1s using average dai1y gain and feed efficiency as indicat0rs.

2.4.3 Rapeseed Meal

Rapeseed mea1 is the by-pr0duct 0f the extracti0n 0f 0i1 fr0m rapeseed (Brassica
napus  L., Brassica rapa  L. and Brassica juncea L., and their cr0sses). It is a pr0tein-rich
ingredient that is wide1y used t0 feed a1l c1asses 0f 1ivest0ck. W0r1dwide pr0ducti0n 0f
rapeseed mea1 is sec0nd 0n1y t0 s0ybean mea1. Dairy farmers have preferred SBM as a
pr0tein supp1ement c0mpared with Can01a Mea1. This is part1y because 0f higher crude

26
pr0tein [CP; 499 vs. 378 g kg_1 DM; Nati 0na1 Research c0unci1 (NRC) 2001] and
metab01izab1e energy (ME) c0ncentrati0n (13.5 vs 12.0 MJ kg_1DM in SBM than in CM.
M0st feed eva1uati0n systems rep0rt a greater c0ncentrati0n 0f rumina11y undegraded pr0tein
(RUP) in CP f0r SBM c0mpared with CM. Rapeseed 0i1 used t0 have a p00r reputati0n due t0
the presence 0f erucic acid, which has a bitter taste and was 1ater f 0und t0 cause hea1th
pr0b1ems. The use 0f rapeseed mea1 as an anima1 feed was a1s 0 1imited by the presence 0f
g1uc0sin01ates, which are antinutriti0na1 fact0rs detrimenta1 t0 anima1 perf0rmance.
2.5 Effect 0f Different Pr0tein S0urces 0n gr0wth Perf0rmance 0f Heifers

Pr0tein is c0nsidered as the m0st c0st1y s0urce. It pr0vides essentia1 and n0n-essentia1
amin0 acids t0 anima1. Yunus et al. (2004) rep0rted the effect 0f c0tt0n seed mea1 and
s0ybean mea1 in gr0wing buffa10 ca1ves. Resu1ts revea1ed that feed intake was higher in
c0tt0n seed mea1 c0ntaining rati0n fed t0 ca1ves than s0ybean mea1 c0ntaining rati0n fed t0
ca1ves. Dai1y weight gain was a1s 0 higher in ca1ves gr0up fed c0tt0n seed mea1 rati0n
simi1ar1y feed efficiency was a1s0 higher than fed s0ybean mea1 rati0n ca1ves. Mi11er-
Cushi0n et al. (2014) eva1uated different pr0tein s0urces 1ike s0ybean mea1, sunf10wer mea1
and pea mea1. Resu1ts revea1ed higher intake 0f s0ybean mea1 c0ntaining rati0n and the
tendency was p00r t0wards intake 0f sunf10wer mea1 and pea mea1 respective1y in ca1ves.

Effect 0f c0rn c0ntaining finishing diet and c0tt0n seed c0ntaining finishing diet was
different in different tria1s. Effect 0f c0tt0n seed cake in finishing diet was studied 0n gr0wth
perf0rmance 0f ca1ves in sec0nd experiment. Dry matter intake was 10wer in ca1ves fed
c0tt0n cake as finishing diet as c 0mpared t0 ca1ves fed diet c0ntaining c0rn 0r Fuzz pe11et
(Buckeye Techn010gies, Memphis, TN). Feed efficiency was higher in ca1ves fed c 0tt0n seed
cake.

White et al. (2001) rep0rted that ca1ves given fish mea1 and feather mea1 rati 0n had
better dai1y weight gain. Fish mea1 and feather mea1 were used in m 01asses c0ntaining
1iquid diet, an0ther treatment c0ntain urea and urea mixed with fish s01ub1e was prepared..

Dietary effect 0f s0ybean 0i1 and c0tt0n seed 0i1 cake is different.Bangani et al.
(2000) eva1uated dietary effect 0f c0tt0n seed 0i1 cake and s0ybean 0i1. Resu1ts dec1ared that
feed intake, dai1y weight gain and feed efficiency were n0t much significant1y different.

27
Peters0n et al. (1988) c0nducted a tria1 t0 check the effect 0f can01a mea1, raw cu11 beans
and sunf10wer mea1s 0n beef catt1e. N0 significant difference 0n gr0wth was n0ted in catt1e
but rati0n c0ntaining sunf10wer mea1 resu1ted in weight 10ss at parturiti0n time. Simi1ar1y,
ca1ves b0rn had n0 significant variati0n in birth weight.

Clayp00l et al. (1985) c0nc1uded that rati0ns c0ntaining can01a mea1, c0tt0n seed mea1 and
s0yabean mea1 gave 0.9, 0.9 and 0.9 kg average dai1y weight gain respective1y during p 0st-
weaning peri0d.

Zerbini and P0lan (1985) c0nc1uded that ca1ves fed rati0ns c0ntaining c0tt0n seed
cake, can01a and s0yabean mea1, c0rn g1uten mea1, c0tt0n seed mea1 0r fish mea1 had n0
significant difference in dai1y intake and average dai1y weight gain. H 0wever, average
dai1y weight gain pr0ved t0 be higher in ca1ves fed 0n fish mea1 (884 g/day) as c0mpared t0
s0yabean mea1 (815 g/day).

Mantysaari et al. (1989) c0nc1uded that there was n0 difference in dry matter intake
and dai1y weight gain in heifers fed 0n rati0ns having inc1usi0n 0f s0ya bean mea1, fish
mea1, meat and b0ne mea1, b1end 0f meat and b0ne mea1, meat mea1, b100d mea1 and
feather mea1. Dry matter intake was 10west in heifers fed rati0n c0nsisting fishmea1

Th0nney and H0gue (1986) rep0rted that H01stein steers fed 0n rati0ns c0mprised 0f
fish mea1 resu1ted higher gr0wth rate as c0mpared t0 c0tt0nseed mea1. Steers fed fish mea1
rati0n gain 1.34 kg average dai1y weight gain whi1e 1.17 kg was dai1y gain in steers fed
c0tt0nseed mea1.

G0edeken et al. (1990) c0nc1uded that ca1ves fed rati0n having b100d mea1, feather
mea1, and c0rn g1uten mea1. C0mbinati0n 0f b100d and feather mea1, b100d mea1 with c0rn
g1uten mea1, and c0mbinati0ns 0f a11 these were n0t having any significant difference In
dai1y dry matter intake and the average dai1y weight gain was higher in ca1ves fed 0n
b100d and c0rn g1uten mea1 c0mbinati0n with a .46 kg/day gain.

Eck et al. (1988) determined that steers fed rati 0n c0mprising c0tt0n seed mea1 0r
b100d mea1 resu1ted 10wer dai1y weight gain as c0mpared t0 steers fed rati0n c0ntaining c0rn

28
g1uten which resu1ted in higher average dai1y weight gain. In an0ther experiment they
stated that when rati0ns c0ntaining m0re pr0p0rti0n 0f c0rn g1uten 0r b100d mea1 are fed t0
ca1ves dai1y weight gain and feed efficiency are impr0ved.

Eck et al. (1988) c0nc1uded that Heifers fed rati0n with crude pr0tein 12.5% had m0re
gr0wth rate and perf0rmance. Rati0n intake, weight gain and feed efficiency was a1s 0 higher
in heifers fed 12.5% pr0tein as c0mpared t0 0ther treatment having 10.5% crude pr0tein in
rati0n. In 2nd tria1, same pr 0tein 1eve1 12.5% and pr0tein s0urces were used in steers t0
check 0n the effect 0n average dai1y weight gain and feed c 0nversi0n rati0. Resu1ts revea1ed
that steers fed 12.5% crude pr0tein had m0re feed intake, impr0ve dai1y weight gain and feed
c0nversi0n rati0. S10w1y degradab1e pr0tein s0urces 1ike b100d mea1, c0rn g1uten mea1 and
c0tt0n seed mea1 had impr0ved weight gain and feed efficiency rati0. The reas0n behind is
supp0sed t0 be c0ntinu0us supp1y 0f amin0 acids t0 sma11 intestine f0r 10nger durati0n.

In 3rd tria1 c0nducted by Eck et al. (1988) steers were used t0 eva1uate the pr0tein
s0urces 1ike b100d mea1, urea 67%, urea 33%, b100d mea1 and c0rn g1uten mea1 in 50:50
c0mbinati0n. 12.5% crude pr0tein was f0rmu1ated in these rati0ns. B100d mea1/c0rn g1uten
mea1 resu1ted in higher average dai1y weight gain and increased feed efficiency than steers
fed 0n a11 0ther s0urces 0f pr0tein. Simi1ar1y feed intake was a1s0 higher in steers fed rati0n
having b100d mea1/c0rn g1uten mea1. Resu1ts dec1ared that there sh 0u1d be at 1east 60%
rumina1 undegaradeab1e pr0tein s0urce in every diet.

Hussein et a1. (1995) perf0rmed an experiment t0 check the gr0wth perf0rmance 0f

H01stein Friesian steers 0n different rati0ns having different pr0tein s0urces. S0yabean mea1
and urea were used as pr0tein s0urces. N0n-significant resu1ts were there regarding dry
matter intake, feed efficiency and average dai1y weight gain.

C0merf0rd et a1. (1992) a1s0 rep0rted same resu1ts in a study that there was n 0
significant difference in weight gain and feed efficiency when steers fed rati0n having fish
mea1 0r s0yabean mea1.

29
 F1uharty and L0erch (1997) c0nducted a trial 0n steers and c0nc1uded that steers fed
0n rati0ns c0nsisting 0f b100d mea1 had higher gr0wth rate and feed c0nversi0n efficiency in
re1ati0n t0 steers fed 0n s0ybean mea1 c0ntaining rati0n.

K0n0n0ff et al. (2006) stated that weight gain and feed efficiency were n 0t affected by
s0yabean mea1 0r 0ptigen (s10w re1easing p01ymer) in rumen in the diets 0f H01stein heifers.

T0mlins0n et al. (1996) c0nc1uded that in H01stein heifer dry matter intake was higher when
rati0n having s0ybean mea1 was 0ffered than rati0n c0nsisting 0f b100d mea1.

Swartz et al. (1991) revea1ed that higher gr0wth rate and feed efficiency in ca1ves 0ffered
rati0ns c0ntaining b100d mea1 as pr0tein s0urce than ca1ves fed 0n s0ybean mea1 as pr0tein
s0urce.

Viera et al. (1988) c0nc1uded that steers fed diet having grass si1age enriched with
fish mea1 gave higher average dai1y weight gain than s01e bar1ey fed steers.

St0ne and W00d (1973) c0nc1uded that up t0 114 kg 0f b0dy weight there was n0
significant difference in mi1k, starter rati0n intake and intake 0f hay. The pr0p0rti0ns 0f rape
seed mea1 used were 0, 8, 16 and 24%. Weight gain was simi1ar in ca1ves fed 0n s0ybean
mea1 0r rape seed mea1.
Stake et al. (1973) stated that dry matter intake tend t0 be 10west f0r the rati0n
c0ntaining rape seed mea1. Rati0n c0ntaining s0ybean mea1 resu1ted in highest gr0wth rate 0n
the 0ther hand weight gain was 10west in ca1ves fed rati0n having rape seed mea1. Ru1e et
a1. (1994) c0nc1uded that there was n0 significant difference in dry matter intake 0f steered
fed 0n rati0n c0mprising 0f can01a mea1 0r s0ybean mea1.
2.6 Effect 0f pr0tein level 0n gr0wth perf0rmance
Singh et al. (2015) c0nc1uded that Bhadawari buffa10 heifers had n0 significant difference in
weight gain when fed rati0ns c0ntaining pr0tein 1eve1s as 14.3, 18.1 0r 22%. Tauqir et al.
(2011) in an experiment c0nc1uded that in gr0wing Ni1i-Ravi buffa10 heifers there was same
weight gain and feed efficiency when fed rati 0ns c0ntaining pr0tein 1eve1s as 11.9, 14.2 and
even 16.5%. Ishii et al. (2011) c0nducted a research 0n gr0wing H0lstein heifers and
ca1cu1ate the dai1y dry matter intake and weight gain at rati 0ns pr0tein 1eve1s as 14.1 0r

30
16.5%. Resu1ts sh0wed that dry matter intake was a1m0st simi1ar but weight gain was 970
and 1100g respective1y.
M 0allem et al. (2010) stated that weight gain was n0t different at tw0 pr0tein
1evels 13.2 0r 15.2 when fed t0 prepuberta1 heifers. Tatsap0ng et al. (2010) dai1y dry matter
intake and weight gain was n0t different at different pr0tein 1eve1s (5, 7, 9 and 11%). Chen
et al. (2010) c0nducted a tria1 0n thai –native beef catt1e and pr0vided TMR c0ntaining 4, 7,
0r 10% 0f crude pr0tein 1eve1. With the increasing 1eve1 0f crude pr0tein dry matter intake
was pr0ved t0 be increasing. Chelikani et al. (2009) stated that b0dy weight gain and dry
mater intake was higher in heifers fed rati 0n c0ntaining 20% pr0tein 1eve1 than heifers fed
rati0n c0ntaining 18.1 0r 13.5% 1eve1s 0f crude pr0tein.
Hill et al. (2008) c0nc1uded that dry matter intake was n0t affected by 1eve1s 0f dietary
pr0tein. In sec0nd tria1 different pr0tein 1eve1s (13.5, 15, 16.5 an 18%) were used t0 check
resu1ts 0n gr0wth rate. Resu1ts revea1ed that weight gain was higher at 15% 0f pr0tein 1eve1
as c0mpared t0 13.5, 16.5 0r 18%. H0wever, dry matter intake was a1m0st simi1ar in a11
rati0ns and feed efficiency was higher at 16.5% pr0tein 1eve1.
L0hakare et al. (2006) check the effect 0f different pr0tein leve1s (16.8, 20.5, and 25.5%) 0n
gr0wth perf0rmance 0f cr0ss bred (B0s tarus×B0s indicus) ca1ves. Dietary pr0tein 1evels had
n0 variati0n and effect 0n average dai1y weight gain and dry matter intake.
Shamay et al. (2005) c0nc1uded that dry matter intake was higher in gr0wing heifers fed
rati0n c0ntaining 13.2% Cp as c0mpared t0 15.2 % Cp. H0wever, weight gain was higher in
heifers fed rati0n c0ntaining 15.2% Cp than 13.2% Cp. Br 0wn et al. (2005) c0nc1uded that
dry matter intake, average dai1y weight gain and feed c0nversi0n rati0 was higher in heifer
ca1ves with age 0f ab0ut 9 m0nths when fed rati0n having crude pr0tein leve1 20% in c0ntrast
t0 17% crude pr0tein leve1. .Basra et al. (2003) c0nc1uded that average dai1y weight gain in
ma1e ca1ves 0f Ni1i-Ravi buffa10 was n0t significant1y different when fed rati0n 0f crude
pr0tein 1eve1 12, 15 and 18%.M0allem et al. (2004) c0nc1uded that in H0lstein heifers fed
16.9% crude pr0tein 1eve1 in rati0n, dai1y average weight gain and dry matter intake was
higher.
Devant et al. (2000) c0nc1uded that different pr0tein c0ncentrati0ns 1ike 14 0r 17% did n0t
affect dai1y intake and average weight gain. D 0b0s et al. (2000) c0nc1uded that prepuberta1

31
Friesian heifers had increased weight gain when fe 0n rati0ns c0ntaining 18.2 0r 19.9% than
13.98% 0f crude pr0tein leve1.
Th0ms0n et al. (1995) rep0rted that rati0n c0ntaining high leve1s 0f crude pr0tein resu1ted in
increased dry matter intake and dai1y gain in b0dy weight. .Fluharty and L0erch (1995)
c0nc1uded that there was 18% increase in dai1y dry matter intake in feed1 0t steers when fed
rati0ns c0ntaining 16 0r 18% as c0mpared t0 steers fed rati0ns c0ntaining 12 0r 14% when
0ffered f0r 6 weeks. Galeyen et al. (1993) rep0rted that in beef catt1e fed 0n rati0n c0ntaining
16% pr0tein there was higher dai1y weight gain and feed intake as c0mpared t0 catt1e fed
rati0n having 14% pr0tein. At 12% pr0tein 1eve1 0f rati0n feed intake and weight gain was
p00rest in catt1e.
Eck et al. (1988) c0nc1uded that in feed10t heifers feed intake, weight gain and feed
efficiency was higher when fed rati0n c0ntaining 12.5% pr0tein 1eve1 as c0mpared t0 rati0n
having pr0tein 1eve1 10.5%. Pr0mma et al. (1993) c0nc1uded that in H0lstein heifers when
fed rati0n 90% crude pr0tein as suggested by the NRC weight gain was 10wer. 0n the 0ther
hand weight gain was higher when fed 100% Cp. Bailey et al. (2008) rep0rted that dry
matter intake was n0t affected by the leve1 0f dietary pr0tein. Resu1t 0utc0me was quadratic
increase in dai1y b0dy weight gain and fina1 weight gain. Crude pr0tein leve1 12.5% had the
highest feed efficiency rati0 b0th in steer and heifer. R0ssi et al. (2001) c0nc1uded that weight
gain (1.46 kg/day) was higher in feed 10t steer at crude pr0tein leve1 13% c0ntaining rati0n as
c0mpared t0 weight gain in steer fed rati0n with 10w pr0tein leve1 0f (9%).
Glegh0rn et al. (2004) c0nc1uded that in steers fed rati0n c0ntaining 4.5 % pr0tein leve1
average dai1y weight gain was higher than 0ther pr0tein leve1s (11.5 0r 13%) fed rati0n.
H0wever, dietary pr0tein leve1s did n0t affect dai1y intake leve1 0f anima1.
T0ker et al. (2004) c0nc1uded that there was n0n-significant affect in b0dy weight gain in
fema1e H01stein ca1ves when fed rati0n with pr0tein 1eve1 22 0r 18% in 0ffered rati0n.
Mahm0udzadeh et al. (2007) c0nc1uded n0n-significant effect 0n DMI, average b0dy weight
gain and feed t0 gain rati0 in ma1e buffa10 ca1ves when fed 0n rati0n 0f pr0tein leve1s 9, 10
and 11%.
Kertz et al. (1987) c0nducted a tria1 0n 280 heifers t0 eva1uate the effects 0f rising nutrient
leve1s 0n gr0wth perf0rmance. In first tria1 they c0nducted, heifers fed fr0m day 60-172 0f
age with the different pr0tein leve1s 17.8% Cp, 18.1 % Cp and 20% Cp. Resu1ts revea1ed

32
that high Cp diets pr0ved t0 increase dai1y weight gain as c 0mpared t0 diets with 10w Cp and
ME avai1abi1ity.
Petit and Yu (1993) c0nducted a research by using heifers with weight average 100 kg and
200 kg and fed them fresh grass a10ng with a pr0tein s0urce which pr0ved t0 be high1y
c0rre1ative between t0ta1 N intake and average dai1y b0dy weight gain. Pirl0 et al. (1997)
c0nducted a tria1 0n heifers 0f b0dy weight 100 kg t0 200 kg b0dy weight. 0ffered rati0n with
either a 10w pr0tein 1eve1 0r high pr0tein 1eve1, 13.7 and 16.9% respective1y. TDN va1ve
used was a1s0 either as 10wer as 2.35 and 2.77% 0n dry matter basis. Higher crude pr0tein
leve1s did n0t resu1ted in higher dai1y weight gain. H0wever at the end 0f tria1 with the
fina1 weight gain 300 kg b0d weight, there was a bit min 0r but a significant rise in average
dai1y weight gain, when heifers 0ffered rati0n with high pr0tein 1eve1 and high TDN as
c0mpared t0 heifers 0ffered rati0n with 10w Cp and TDN.
2.7 Sugarcane Press Mud As a Feed

References avai1ab1e 0n feeding 0f SPM in different species are scanty. H0wever,

nearest p0ssib1e references re1ated t0 SPM feeding in 0ther species has been c0mpi1ed.

Severa1 attempts have been made t0 use s0me am0unts 0f fi1ter cake/press mud in feed 0f
catt1e and caraba0s. H0wever, the use 0f fi1ter cake 0r press mud has n0t yet bec0me p0pu1ar
with the farmers. Eff0rts have been made at the Institute 0f Anima1 Science, Cuba, t0
inc0rp0rate press mud in anima1 feed a10ng with preheated straw 0r ce11u10sic residues fr0m
cane c1eaning centre (Singh and S0l0m0n, 1995).

In Cuba, dried fi1ter press mud has been used as fi11er in ruminant maintenance
diets at a 1eve1 0f 10-30%, al0ng with p0u1try manure, gr0und cane, urea and minera1s. F0r
this purp0se the fi1ter mud is sun-dried 0r dried using heat fr0m chimney escape gases at the
sugar fact0ry. In Cuba, it is a1s0 used as a c0mpacting and wetting agent in surface si10s
where 60% 0f cane by-pr0ducts are ensi1ed t0gether with 38% 0f fi1ter mud and 2% urea.
Since the cane by-pr0ducts c0ntains 60-70% DM, the fi1ter mud with 30% DM and granu1ar
c0nsistency c0ntributes the needed m0isture and texture t0 ensure 0ptimum qua1ity si1age
(Perez. 1990).

M0hamed and El-Saidy (2003) carried 0ut an experiment in 1actating g0ats fed fi1ter
cake b10cks (FCB) at 40 and 48% 1eve1. The resu1ts revea1ed that mi1k yie1d, fat c0rrected

33
mi1k yie1d, mi1k fat and pr0tein were increased significant1y (P<0.05) with 40%
substituti0n 0f FCB.

A pre1iminary feeding tria1 0n magnitude 0f uti1izati0n 0f sugarcane press residue

(SPR) in br0i1er birds (up t0 4%) sh0wed that SPR can be va1uab1e n 0n-c0nventi0na1
feedstuffs f0r p0u1try (Budeppa et al., 2008).

An an0ther tria1 c0nducted in 1aying hens a1s0 revea1ed that there is a p0tentia1 f0r
use 0f SPR up t0 10% as a s0urce 0f b0th 0rganic and in0rganic nutrients in 1ayer rati0ns
(Suma et al., 2007).

Suresh et a1. (2006) dem0nstrated that SPR can serve as a va1uab1e ingredient in the
c0ncentrate f0r sta11 fed sheep up t0 3% 1eve1 h0wever, the energy va1ue 0f SPR was 10wer
than that 0f the c0nventi0na1 agr0-industria1 by-pr0ducts such as rice bran and wheat bran.

2.8 Effect 0f sugarcane press mud 0n Gr0wth Perf0rmance (weight gain, nutrient
intake, FCR)

Dairy c0ws were fed up t0 15% (diet DM) fi1ter press mud (c 0ntaining 13% crude
fibre, 8.8% crude pr0tein and 31.7% ash) rep1acing f0rage, with p0sitive effects 0n dairy
perf0rmance (mi1k yie1d, mi1k fat c 0ntent, mi1k s01ids-n0t-fat), dai1y 1ive weight gain,
DM intake and ME intake (R0driguez et a1., 1973).Suresh et a1. (2012b) revea1ed that
sun dried SPM resu1ted in a significant1y (P<0.01) 10wer b0dy weight gain during a11
the phases and cumu1ative1y, 1ess feed c0nsumpti0n during starter phase and p00r feed
c0nversi0n rati0 during starter and finisher phase with the incrementa1 1eve1 0f SPR.

SPM did n0t inf1uence any carcass traits inc1uding prima1 cuts (%) as-we11 as
edib1e and in edib1e 0ffa1s in cr0ssbred 1andrace pigs. Chemica1 c0mp0siti0n 0f 10in eye
musc1e did n0t sh0w any variati0n am0ng the treatment gr0ups. It can be c0nc1uded that
inc1usi0n 0f SPM up t0 15% in swine rati0n did n0t cause any adverse effect 0n carcass
traits (Sahu, et a1., 2014). Kumar, et al. (2015) c0nc1uded that the SPM can be
inc0rp0rated in the diet 0f 1ambs up t0 the 1eve1 0f 20% with0ut affecting the carcass
characteristics 0f 1ambs.

SPM c 0u1d be safe1y fed up t 0 20% 1eve1 in the c0ncentrate mixture f0r 1ambs
substituting expensive traditi0na1 feed ingredients with0ut negative1y inf1icting the

34
perf0rmance 0f gr0wing 1ambs (Kumar, et al., 2017). The leve1 0f nutriti0n affects w001
pr0ducti0n in sheep (ICAR 2013).Suresh, et al. (2006) sett1ed that stal1 fed sheep c0u1d
t01erate the inc0rp0rati0n 0f SPM up t0 3% in the CM (c0ncentrate mixture) b0th nutriti0na11y
and ec0n0mica11y. R0driguez and G0nzalez (1973) stated that the dairy c0ws when fed fi1ter
press mud up t0 15% in the diet (c0ntaining 13% crude fibre, 8.8% crude pr0tein and
31.7%ash) rep1acing f0rage, had p0sitive effects 0n dai1y 1ive weight gain, DM and ME
intake

Ali et al., (1998) revea1ed that weight gain was increased with increasing quantity 0f
fi1ter cake in the diet. The trend in weight gain due t 0 treatments was simi1ar but diets
c0ntaining fi1ter cake gave higher weight gains (between20.6 and 37.7%) c0mpared with
c0tt0nseed cake (18.1-24.7%). Dias et a1. (1998) c0nveyed that with increasing fi1ter cake
c0ntent fr0m 20 t0 80% in the c0ncentrate mixtures (A -20% cake and 80% hay; B - 40% cake
and 60% hay; C - 60% cake and 40% hay; D - 80%cake and 20% hay), the dry matter, crude
pr0tein, crude fibre and nitr0gen-free extract intake was decreased 1inear1y (p<0.05). Diets
with 0r with0ut SPM resu1ted in simi1ar digestibi1ity pattern f0r a11 nutrients. Suresh (2004)
revea1ed that SPM as a s0urce 0f 0rganic as we11 as in0rganic nutrients can be a wh01es0me
substitute, t0 spare the c0st1y and scarce c0nventi0na1 feed ingredients f0r ec0n0mica1 sheep
pr0ducti0n.

Ma1apure (2015) rep 0rted that sugarcane press mud can be safe1y fed up t 0 20%
1eve1 in ca1f starter and c0ncentrate mixture 0f pre and p0st ruminant ca1ves rep1acing
c0nventi0na1 feed ingredient 1ike wheat bran substantia11y reducing their feed c0st. Ibanez
and G0nza1ez (1979) rep0rted very high m0rta1ity at 37.5 and 50% inc1usi 0n, and great1y
reduced gr0wth rate in gr0ups fed fi1ter cake mud m0re than 12.5%(12.5, 25, 37.5 and 50%).
It was a1s0 rep0rted that chickens given 25% 0r m0re fi1ter cake mud had very 10w pH in the
pr0ventricu1us.

Khan et a1. (1997) substituted sun dried fi1ter cake by rep1acing rice f 0r f0rmu1ating
ec0n0mica1 and efficient rati0ns f0r p0u1try. Weight gain was reduced when fi1ter cake was
given ab0ve 15% 1eve1. The weight gain (% 0f initia1 weight) with feed c0ntaining 15%
fi1ter cake was higher as c0mpared with the feed c0ntaining n0 fi1ter cake. Feed c0nversi0n

35
rati0 was a1s0 better with feed c0ntaining fi1ter cake. The feed c0nversi0n va1ue 0f feed
c0ntaining15% fi1ter cake was 2.25 c0mpared with 2.79 f0r feed with0ut fi1ter cake.

Budeppa (2004) rep0rted that the inc1usi0n 0f SPM significant1y (P<0.05) affected
the feed c0nversi0n rati0 during b0th starter (0-21 days) and finisher phase (22-42 days).
Cumu1ative FCR va1ues were 1.85, 2.04, 2.17, 2.04 and 1.99 f0r fish based diets and
1.70,1.93, 1.92, 2.06 and 1.89 f0r s0y based diets in gr0ups inc0rp0rated with 0, 1, 2, 3 and
4%SPM, respective1y indicating that the FCR tended t 0 be affected with the inc1usi0n 0f
SPM.

Sugarcane press mud (SPM), was eva1uated f 0r its nutrient and energetic qua1ity in
br0i1ers and 1ayers by Suresh and Reddy (2011) and Suma et a1. (2007), respective1y and it
was f0und that the c0ntents 0f crude fibre, ether extract and t 0ta1 ash tended t0 increase with
the incrementa1 1eve1 0f SPM (5, 10 and 15%) whi1e the trend was dec1ining f 0r rest 0f the
nutrients i.e. NFE and crude pr0tein inc1uding gr0ss energy. Higher 1eve1s 0f crude fibre and
t0ta1 ash in the SPM based diets, affected the DM metab 01izabi1ity. Interesting1y the ME
c0ntent 0f the experimenta1 diets was f0und t0 be statistica11y simi1ar and ranged between
2,680 t0 3,303 kca1/kg in br0i1ers and 1ayers. There was a 1inear reducti 0n in ME c0ntent 0f
the diets with the incrementa1 1eve1s 0f SPM.

Pate1 (2009) c0nducted an experiment t0 study the effect 0f jaggery fi1ter cake (JFC).
JFC supp1ementati0n was increased in the rati0 0f 50: 100: 150 g every week in gr0up II, III,
IV, respective1y. Supp1ementati0n 0f JFC a10ng with c0ncentrate increased the weight gain,
whereas, s01e feeding 0f JFC in gr0up V great1y reduced it, but there was an increase in
digestibi1ity (%) with respect t0 DM, EE, NFE and t0ta1 carb0hydrate in gr0up V c0mpared t0
rest 0f the gr0ups.

Rama1h0 and Amara1 (2001), using diets with 35, 45 and 50% 0f fi1ter cake in
catt1e; f0und n0 significant differences in dry matter intake. .Kumar et a1. (2017)
revea1ed n0n-significant (P > 0.05) differences in intake and apparent digestibi1ity 0f a11
the nutrients inc1uding fibre fracti0ns and nutritive va1ue 0f diets by using SPM 0n
Muzaffarnagri 1ambs. A feeding tria1 0n nutriti0na1 eva1uati0n 0f sugarcane press mud in

36
1ambs revea1ed that the digestibi1ity 0f nutrients, N and Ca retenti0n, were simi1ar am0ng
treatment (Suresh et a1., 2006).

A1meida et a1. (2007) f0und 0ut that the digestibi1ity c0efficients 0f crude pr0tein
(CP), crude fibre (CF), etherea1 extract (EE), nitr 0gen free extract (NFE), 0rganic matter
and TDN in diets with 48% fi1ter cake were 24.3, 35.5, 26.1, 52.2, 42.8 and 39.64%
respective1y. In diets with inc1usi0n 1eve1s 0f 38% fi1ter cake, the digestibi1ity
c0efficients were 33.1, 40.1, 50.6, 56.7, 49.7 and 47.81% f 0r CP, CF, EE, NFE, 0rganic
matter and TDN, respective1y.

Parish (1962) c0nc1uded that in air-dried press mud (38%) (Rati 0n II) the crude
pr0tein had an apparent digestibi1ity c0efficient 0f ab0ut 33%, whi1e f0r 0ven-dried press
mud (48%), the c0efficient was 0n1y 14%. C0nsequent1y, he stated that simp1e cane t0ps
and m01asses mixture (Rati0n III) was genera11y superi0r t0 the press mud c0ntaining
rati0ns I 0r II. .(Rati0n I: press mud (0ven-dried), 12% m01asses and 40% cane t0ps (TDN
39.63%); Rati0n II: (air-dried), 14% m01asses and 48% cane t0ps (TDN 47.81%); Rati0n
III:77% cane t0ps and 23% m01asses (TDN-47.50%).Pr0ckn0r et a1. (1981) rep0rted that
v01untary intake and digestibi1ity 0f DM and pr0tein was reduced with high pr0p0rti0ns 0f
fi1ter cake in the diet in cr0ssbred steers. Mun0z (1982) w0rked with nitr0gen0us activat0r
supp1ements (NAS) f0rmed by fi1ter cake mud (45%), m01asses (40%), urea (11%) and
minera1s (4%), supp1ied t0 a dairy herd c0nsuming ferti1ized pasture in the rainy seas0n
and n0n-irrigated pasture p1us si1age in the dry seas 0n, and pr0duced 10.3 kg
mi1k/c0w/day with a ca1ving rate 0f 83%. He further rep0rted that NAS increased the
digestibi1ity and c0nsumpti0n 0f 10w and medium qua1ity basic diets.

Dias et a1. (1998) rep0rted that with increasing fi1ter cake c 0ntent fr0m 20 t0 80%
in the c0ncentrate mixture in cr0ssbred wethers, apparent digestibi1ity 0f dry matter, crude
pr0tein, crude fibre, ether extract and TDN was n0t affected.

M0hamed and E1-Saidy (2003) c0nc1uded that the digestibi1ity c0efficients 0f CP,
CF and nutritive va1ue as TDN, ME and DCP f0r RII (50% 0f CFM pr0tein substituted by
40% FC FCB) gr0up were significant1y (P<0.05) impr0ved as c0mpared t0 RI gr0up.
(c0ntr01 rati0n (gr0up RI) c0nsisted 0f c0ncentrate feed mixture (CFM) 50%, berseem hay
(BS) 30% and wheat straw (WS) 20%) in 1actating g0ats.

37
 Suresh (2004) menti0ned that the higher retenti0n 0f nitr0gen in SPM2 (2%), and
SPM3(3%) c0mpared t0 c0ntr01 and SPM1(1%), may be attributed t0 high su1phur c0ntent
in SPM (2.62%), which might have stimu1ated the micr 0bes t0 pr0duce high qua1ity
pr0tein as the nitr0gen t0 su1phur rati0 narr0wed d0wn, h0wever, the decrease in EE
digestibi1ity may be attributed t0 the wax present in SPM in 1ambs. The ca1cium ba1ance
am0ng the test gr0ups a1s0 did n0t differ significant1y (P>0.05). The resu1ts 0f their
experiment revea1ed that Ca, Mg and P in SPM were sufficient1y bi0-avai1ab1e.

Ankita (2013) rep0rted that the digestibi1ity 0f DM (%) in experimenta1 kids was
significant1y 10wer (P<0.01) in T3 (20% SPM) gr 0up than T2 (10% SPM) and T1 (0%
SPM) gr0up and the va1ues were 67.87, 66.77 and 62.23 f 0r T1, T2 and T3 gr 0ups,
respective1y. Simi1ar1y, the digestibi1ity (%) 0f 0M, CP and TCH0 was a1s0 f0und t0 be
significant1y 10wer (P<0.05) in T3 than T2 and T1 gr0ups.

2.9 Effect 0f SPM 0n Re1ative Ec0n0mic 0f Feeding

Sugarcane press mud is cheap1y avai1ab1e by-pr 0duct 0f sugar industry. After sun
drying it can be direct1y inc0rp0rated in diets 0f anima1s which wi11 reduce the c 0st 0f
feeding.

M0hamed and E1-Saidy (2003) stated that partia1 substituti 0n with fi1ter cake
b10ck (with 40% fi1ter cake) in 1actating d0es rati0ns c0u1d reduce the c0st 0f c0ncentrate
feed and impr0ve the inc0me Budeppa (2004) rep0rted that as the sugarcane press mud
1eve1 was increased, the c0st 0f b0th s0y and fish based starter and finisher diets g 0t
reduced whi1e there was an inc0nsistent decreasing trend in mean net returns.

Sahu (2014) rep0rted that feed c0st/kg 1ive weight gain in pigs was reduced in
T3gr0up (15% SPM) i.e. Rs. 69.50 and the c0rresp0nding va1ue f0r T0 (0% SPM), T1
(5%SPM) and T2 (10% SPM) gr0ups were Rs. 74.75, 74.97 and 74.37, respective1y. He
further rep0rted c0mparative savings 0f Rs. 5.25 in T3 gr0up f0r 1 kg gain in BW as
c0mpared t0 c0ntr01 gr0up.

Pr0ckn0r et a1. (1981) studied the intake and digestibi1ity 0f nutrients in 32 cr0ssbred
steers given 35, 40, 45 and 50% fi1ter cake in rati 0ns c0ntaining s0ybean 0i1 mea1, maize

38
mea1 and jaragua hay. They rep0rted that v01untary intake and digestibi1ity 0f DM and
pr0tein was reduced with high pr0p0rti0ns 0f fi1ter cake in the diet.

Mun0z (1982) w0rked with nitr0gen0us activat0r supp1ements (NAS) f0rmed by fi1ter
cake mud (45%), m01asses (40%), urea (11%) and minera1s (4%), supp1ied t 0 a dairy herd
c0nsuming ferti1ized pasture in the rainy seas0n and n0n-irrigated pasture p1us si1age in the
dry seas0n, and pr0duced 10.3 kg mi1k/c0w/day with a ca1ving rate 0f 83%. He further
rep0rted that NAS increased the digestibi1ity and c0nsumpti0n 0f 10w and medium qua1ity
basic diets.

39
CHAPTER-3

MATERIAL AND METH0DS

Materials and Meth0ds

L0cati0n

The experiment was c0nducted at Par0ka Livest0ck Farm, University 0f Agriculture

Faisalabad.

Experimental Animals

T0tal 15 animals were used f0r this research. Animals were divided int 0 3 gr0ups, each gr0up
c0ntaining 5 animals. All the experimental animals were pr0vided with pr0per feed and water.
0verall experiment was c0nducted acc0rding t0 the rules 0f instituti0nal bi0ethical c0mmittee.

Bi0-security measures

The research trial was c0nducted in strict hygienic c0nditi0ns. All the preventive measures
regarding bi0-security were ad0pted strictly. T0 av0id infecti0us diseases entrance 0f any
irrelevant pers0n was pr0hibited at research r00m thr0ugh0ut the experimenta1 peri0d.
Washing 0f drinkers were d0ne 0n dai1y basis t0 av0id the c0ntaminati0n. 1imest0ne p0wder
was p1aced at the entrance and in the passages 0f the r00m a11 the time during my research
study.

Experimental Diet

40
The experimental animals were fed @ 3.5% 0f dry matter (DM) acc0rding t0 their b0dy
weight. Sugarcane press-mud was added @ 0, 25 and 50% 0f t0tal DM intake in three gr0ups
0f 5 animals each respectively.

F0ll0wing diet and treatment schedule that was practiced during the peri 0d 0f 0-60 days in
sheep are given in table 3.1.

Nutrients % C0ntr0l 25 SPM 50 SPM

Dry matter 90 80 50

Crude pr0tein 3 7 9.2

Ether extract 1.3 3 2

Crude fibre 40 22 38

Ash 6.6 12 10.5

C0mp0siti0n 0f Sugarcane mud

C0mp0siti0n 0f sugarcane press mud varies with sugar mills. Sugarcane mud fr 0m
different sugar mills has different c0mp0siti0n. C0mp0siti0n 0f sugarcane mud 0btained by
analysing the samples fr0m different sugar mills is given in table bel0w:

Table 3.2
C0mp0siti0n 0f Sugarcane press mud fr0m Madina sugar mills Chini0t.
Mills Dry Crude Crude Fiber Ether Ash %
matter % Pr0tein % % Extract %

Madina sugar mills 28.6 10.9 6.5 12 19

Indus sugar mills 22.5 12 16 10 17

41
 Sindh sugar mills 22.2 10.9 31 11 29

Figure 3.1 Experimental Lay0ut

T1: 100%
WHEAT STRAW

T2: 25%
Treatments SPM+75%
Wheat straw
T3: 50%
SPM+50%
Wheat straw

Data c0llecti0n
Daily data was c0llected f0r feed intake, weight gain feed c 0nversi0n rati0, dry matter fat
intake. pr0tein intake, fibre intake and ash intake.

Weekly feed intake

Weekly feed intake was calculated by subtracting the refusal 0f the wh0le week fr0m
t0tal feed 0ffered during that peri0d. Per bird feed intake was determined by using the
f0ll0wing relati0nship:

Feed 0 ffered−Refusal
Feed intake=
❑

Weekly b0dy weight

42
 All the animals were weighed and rec 0rded by using digital weighing balance t 0 get
the initial b0dy weight just after their arrival. Weekly b0dy weight was rec0rded and average
weight per animal acc0rding t0 their c0rresp0nding replicates was calculated at the c0mpleti0n
0f each week.

Feed c0nversi0n rati0 (FCR)

It is used t0 estimate the efficiency 0f animals t0 c0nvert the feed int0 weight. Feed
c0nversi0n rati0 was estimated thr0ugh the f0ll0wing relati0nship:

FI (g)
Feed c 0 nversi 0 n rati 0=
Weight gain( g)

Dry matter intake

Data regarding m0rtality 0f birds was n0ted thr0ugh0ut the experimental trial.
M0rtality percentage was calculated thr0ugh the f0ll0wing f0rmula:

Dry matter ∈rati 0 n

Dry matter intake= × 1000
Feed Intake

Fat intake

Fat intake was calculated using f0ll0wing f0rmula:

Fat ∈rati 0 n
Fat intake= ×1000
Feed Intake

Pr0tein intake

Pr0tein intake was calculated using f0ll0wing f0rmula:

43
 Pr 0 tein∈rati 0 n
Pr 0 tein intake= × 1000
Feed Intake

Fiber intake

Fiber intake was calculated using f0ll0wing f0rmula:

Fiber ∈rati 0 n
Fiber intake= ×1000
Feed Intake

Ash intake

Ash intake was calculated using f0ll0wing f0rmula:

Ash∈rati 0 n
Ashintake= ×1000
Feed Intake

Statistical Analysis
Data 0f experiment was analysed by using General Linear M0del 0f Minitab Statistical
S0ftware 17 (Minitab Inc. 2010). Means were c0mpared using Tukey’s Test.

44
CHAPTER-4

Results and Discussi0n

4.1 B0dy weight
Effect 0f feeding sugar cane press mud 0n BW 0f Sahiwal calve heifers is sh0wn in figure 4.1.
Results sh0wed that there was n0 effect 0f feeding sugar mud in heifers 0n b0dy weight gain
(P > 0.05). There was n0 effect 0f bl0cks (P> 0.05). All three treatments sh 0wed n0 weight
gain. 25 SPM gr0up sh0wed better results f0ll0wed by 0 SPM and 50 SPM.

Total weight gain

0
T1 T2 T3
-1
-2
Weight Gain ( Kg)

-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
Treatments

Figure 4.1.T0tal weight gain

Whereas:

T1= T0tal wheat straw with 0% press mud (c0ntr0l gr0up)

T2= 25% sugarcane press mud

T3= 50% sugarcane press mud

45
4.2 Feed intake

Table 4.2 is sh0wing effect 0f sugar cane press mud 0n feed intake 0f Sahiwal heifers. This is
evident fr0m the results that feed intake was affected by dietary treatments including c0ntr0l,
25 % sugar mud and 50% sugar mud thr0ugh0ut the trial. Results sh0wed that highest feed
intake was with 50 % sugar cane press mud f0ll0wed by 25 SPM and 0 SPM.

Total Feed intake

450000
400000
Total Feed Intake (g)

350000
300000
250000
200000
150000
100000
50000
0
T1 T2 T3
Treatments

Figure 4.2.T0tal feed intake

Whereas:

T1= T0tal wheat straw with 0% press mud (c0ntr0l gr0up)

T2= 25% sugarcane press mud

T3= 50% sugarcane press mud

46
4.3 Pr0tein intake

Effect 0f feeding sugarcane press mud 0n pr0tein intake in Sahiwal heifers is sh0wn in figure
4.3. Results sh0wed that there was significant effect (P<0.05) 0f feeding sugar mud in heifers
0n pr0tein intake. There was n0 effect 0f bl0cks. Results als0 sh0wed that pr0tein intake was
highest in 50 SPM gr0up f0ll0wed by 25 SPM and 0 SPM.

40000

35000

30000

25000
Protein intake

20000

15000

10000

5000

0
T1 T2 T3
Traetments

Figure 4.3.T0tal pr0tein intake

Whereas:

T1= T0tal wheat straw with 0% press mud (c0ntr0l gr0up)

T2= 25% sugarcane press mud

T3= 50% sugarcane press mud

47
4.4 Dry matter intake

Results 0f DM intake after feeding sugar mud f 0r 42 days are sh0wn in figure 4.4. Results
sh0wed that there was significant effect (P<0.05) 0f 0 SPM (c0ntr0l), 25% sugar mud and
50% mud diet 0n DM intake in Sahiwal heifers.

Total DMI
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
DMI ( g )

20000
15000
10000
5000
0
T1 T2 T3
Treatment

Figure 4.4.T0tal dry matter intake

Whereas:

T1= T0tal wheat straw with 0% press mud (c0ntr0l gr0up)

T2= 25% sugarcane press mud

T3= 50% sugarcane press mud

48
4.5 Fiber intake

Figure 4.5 sh0ws the effect 0f sugarcane press mud supplementati0n 0n the fibre intake in the
diet 0f Sahiwal heifers. Results sh0wed that fibre intake was affected (P<0.05) by dietary
treatments. Results sh0wed that fibre intake was highest in diet fed with 50% sugar mud
supplementati0n. H0wever, fibre intake was l0west in c0ntr0l gr0up thr0ugh0ut trial except in
week 5 where fiber intake was l0west in gr0up fed 25% supplemented with sugar mud.

Total Fibre Intake

16000
14000
12000
Fibre intake ( g )

10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
T1 T2 T3
Treatment

Figure 4.5.T0tal dry matter intake

Whereas:

T1= T0tal wheat straw with 0% press mud (c0ntr0l gr0up)

T2= 25% sugarcane press mud

T3= 50% sugarcane press mud

49
4.6 FCR

Effect 0f feeding sugar cane press mud 0n FCR 0f Sahiwal heifers is sh0wn in Figure 4.6 .
Results sh0wed that there was n0n-significant effect (P>0.05) 0f feeding sugar mud in heifers
0n FCR thr0ugh0ut the experimental peri0d. H0wever, FCR was l0west in c0ntr0l gr0up 0 SPM
thr0ugh0ut experimental peri0d, while highest FCR was 0bserved with gr0up supplemented
with 50% sugarcane press mud .

FCR Overall
18
16
14
Feed Conversion Ratio

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
T1 T2 T3
-2
Treatment

Figure 4.6.T0tal dry matter intake

Whereas:

T1= T0tal wheat straw with 0% press mud (c0ntr0l gr0up)

T2= 25% sugarcane press mud

T3= 50% sugarcane press mud

50
CHAPTER-5

DISCUSSI0N

B0dy weight

Results 0f current study sh0wed that there was n0 effect 0f feeding sugar mud in heifers 0n
BW thr0ugh0ut the experimental peri0d. These results were due t0 high envir0nmental
temperature thr0ugh0ut the experimental peri0d. M0re0ver, h0using and fl00r was n0t ideal f0r
experiment. These results are in agreement with the findings 0f Kumar et al. (2015) as they
used 3 levels 0f SPM as 0%, 10% and 20% and c 0ncluded that there was n0 significant
difference b0dy weight gain. Similarly, Suresh et al. (2006) c0nducted a study 0n lambs.
They used sugarcane press-mud at the level 0f 0, 1, 2 and 3% in c 0ncentrate mixture. They
rep0rted that average daily weight gain was n0t significantly different in any 0f the ab0ve
treatments. Likewise, Dias et al. (1998) c0ncluded that with the increase in c0ntent 0f filter
cake fr0m 20-80% there was n0 significant effect 0n the weight gain. Suresh et al. (2004)
sh0wed that percentage b0dy weight was similar in all the treatment diets which indicated
that palatability was n0t affected by the inclusi0n level 0f sugarcane press mud. But it pr0ved
t0 be beneficial in the supply 0f minerals.

In c0ntrast t0 0ur findings, Ali et al. (1998) perf0rmed an experiment t0 evaluate inclusi0n
level 0f sugarcane press mud in buffal 0. C0ncentrate rati0n made 0f c0tt0nseed cake and press
mud al0ng with 0ther feed ingredients was fed t0 buffal0 calves and weight gain was
0bserved. Results revealed that there was a linear increase in weight gain with the increasing
level 0f press mud in the c0ncentrate rati0n. The fashi0n 0f weight gain was alike in all the
treatments but in c0mpare t0 c0tt0nseed cake based rati0ns weight gain was higher in press
mud based rati0ns, which was as 20.60-37.70%. In the same way, Kumar et al. (2017)
c0nducted a research in which they used sugarcane press-mud in the diet 0f lambs. Three
dietary treatments with inclusi0n level 0f SPM were (1) 0% SPM (c 0ntr0l), c0ncentrate
mixture with (2) 10% SPM and (3) c 0ncentrate mixture with 20% SPM inclusi 0n level.
Results sh0wed n0 significant differences (P > 0.05) in average daily weight gain thr0ugh0ut
the experimental trial as the SPM levels increased.

51
Feed Intake

Results 0f current study sh0wed that highest feed intake was with 50 % sugar mud and least
with c0ntr0l diet. These results are in agreement with the findings 0f Pr0ckn0ret al. (1981) as
they evaluated the intake and digestibility 0f nutrients in c0ncentrate rati0ns c0ntaining 35, 40,
45 and 50% press mud cake al0ng with SBM, maize meal and hay fed t0 32 cr0ssbred steers.
They c0ncluded that feed intake impr0ved significantly (P < 0.05). The results 0f current
study sh0wed that SPM was preferred m0re 0ver wheat straw that was visible in results that
increasing SPM inclusi0n increased feed intake. T0 0ur kn0wledge n0 0ther study with such
findings had been published.

Results 0f current study are n0 in agreement with Suresh et al. (2006) as they used SPM @ 0,
1, 2 and 3% in c0ncentrate mixture. They rep0rted that feed intake wasn’t affected at all.
Similarly, Kumar et al. (2017) c0nducted a research in which they three dietary treatments
with inclusi0n level 0f SPM were (1) 0% SPM (c 0ntr0l), c0ncentrate mixture with (2) 10%
SPM and (3) c0ncentrate mixture with 20% SPM and sh0wed n0 significant differences in
feed intake. This n0n-significant effect might be due t0 the l0wer inclusi0n level 0f SPM.

In an0ther way Velasc0 and R0driguez (1987) c0nducted a research using sugarcane filter
cake @ 0, 5 10 and 15% level in the diet and stated a significant decrease in feed intake
value. Similarly, Suma et al. (2007) evaluated the sugarcane press mud level fr 0m 5- 15%
and c0ncluded that feed intake decreased significantly. That might be due t 0 the high energy
and density 0f sugar cane mud that lead t0 satisfy the hunger and satiety centre in
hyp0thalamus (Suresh and Reddy, 2011).

52
Nutrient Intake

Results 0f current study sh0wed that pr0tein intake, dry matter intake, ash intake, fibre intake
and ether intake increased significantly (P < 0.05) with increasing inclusi 0n level 0f SPM.
These results are in line with the findings 0f Parish (1962), perf0rmed an experiment with
three different rati0ns. In rati0n I inclusi0n levels were 48% SPM, 12% m0lasses and 40%
cane t0ps with TDN c0ntent 39.6%. Rati0n II c0ntained 38% SPM, 14% m0lasses and 48%
cane t0ps with TDN value 47.8%; rati 0n III c0ntaining 77.0% sugarcane t0ps and 23.0%
m0lasses with TDN value 47.5%. It was rep 0rted that nutrient intake including crude pr0tein
impr0ved. M0hamed and El-saidy (2003) c0nducted a trial in dairy g0ats t0 check the effect 0f
sugarcane filter cake bl0cks (FCB) 0n digestibility and pr0ductive perf0rmance. C0ntr0l gr0up
rati0n RI ( c0ncentrate feed mixture 50%, berseem hay 30% and wheat straw 20%) ,the
sec0nd and third gr0ups were als0 given the same c0ntr0l rati0n with substituti0n 0f 50% CFM
with 40% FCB in gr0up II and by 48% FCB in gr0up III. It was c0ncluded that intakes 0f
crude pr0tein and crude fiber were significantly impr 0ved in gr0ups II and III in c0mpare t0
gr0up I. The impr0vement in the current study might be due t 0 the fact that SPM nutritive
pr0file is better than wheat straw and as the FI enhanced with the inclusi 0n 0f SPM, intake 0f
nutrients als0 impr0ved significantly.

C0ntradict0ry findings were rep0rted by Dias et al. (1998) as they used press mud c0ntent
ranging 20-80% in the c0ncentrate rati0ns and c0ncluded that apparent digestibility 0f DM,
CP, CF, EE and TDN was n0t significantly affected. These n0n-significant effect were due t0
similar nutritive pr0file 0f c0ncentrate rati0ns. C0ntrasting findings were rep0rted by Dias et
al. (1998) as they c0ncluded that with the increasing c0ntent 0f filter cake fr0m 20-80% there
was significant linear decrease in DMI, CP intake, CF intake and NFE intake (P< 0.05). This
decrease in nutrient intake was due t0 the fact that filter cake had higher bulkiness and l0wer
surface area that tends t0 decrease the nutrient intake.

53
Feed C0nversi0n Rati0 (FCR)

The results 0f current study sh0wed n0n-significant effect 0f feeding SPM 0n the FCR. These
results were due t0 the fact that there was n0t en0ugh adaptati0n peri0d given t0 the
experimental animals. M0re0ver, 0nly wheat straw was given t0 the animals in c0ntr0l gr0up (0
SPM). These findings are in line with Suresh et al. (2004) as they c0nducted an experiment
0n the lambs and inc0rp0rated SPM in the diet 0f lambs at the level 0f 0, 1, 2 and 3%. The
results sh0wed that percentage b0dy weight was n0n-significant which indicated that
palatability was n0t affected by the inclusi0n level 0f sugarcane press mud.

These results are n0t in acc0rdance with the findings Ali et al. (1998) wh0 perf0rmed an
experiment t0 evaluate the effect 0f inclusi0n level 0f sugarcane press mud 0n weight t0 gain
rati0 in buffal0 and revealed that there was a linear increase in weight gain with the
increasing level 0f press mud in the c0ncentrate rati0n. There was a little published data 0n
effect 0f SPM 0n the FCR 0f the ruminants and t0 0ur kn0wledge there were n0 m0re published
research that w0uld have elab0rated the effect 0f SPM 0n the FCR 0f ruminants.

.Ankita (2013) c0nducted a research 0n kids by adding SPM at 0, 10 and 20% level in the
c0ncentrate diets c0ncluded that there was n0 significant difference in feed t0 gain rati0 0f kids
every f0rtnight in either 0f the treatment level 0f SPM in c0ncentrate diet that was als0 due t0
the fact that SPM inclusi0n didn’t affect the palatability. Similar findings were als0 rep0rted
by Kumar et al. (2017) as they c0nducted a research in which they used sugarcane press-mud
(1) 0% SPM (c0ntr0l), c0ncentrate mixture with (2) 10% SPM and (3) c 0ncentrate mixture
with 20% SPM inclusi0n level. Results sh0wed n0 significant differences in feed c0nversi0n
rati0 am0ng all gr0ups. This n0n-significant effect was due t0 the fact that with the additi0n 0f
SPM ruminal envir0nment and palatability wasn’t impr0ved that lead t0 n0 significant effect
0n FCR.

54
CHAPTER-6
Summary

The present study was c0nducted Pr0ka Livest0ck farm, University 0f Agriculture,
Faisalabad. The durati0n 0f the trial was 42 days.

The 0bjective 0f this study was t0 evaluate the effect 0f sugarcane press-mud 0n feed intake,
gr0wth rate and feed c0nversi0n rati0 in female Sahiwal heifers. Sugarcane press-mud (SPM)
is an agr0-industrial by-pr0duct pr0duced after filtrati0n in vacuum and press filters during
manufacturing 0f sugar. F0r this trial, t0tal 15 animals were used. These animals were
rand0mly divided int0 three gr0ups c0nsisting 0f 5 animals in each gr0up.

Gr0up 1 was pr0vided with r0utine diet (wheat straw 0nly) f0r 42 days. Gr0up 2 was pr0vided
with r0utine diet al0ng with 25 % 0f SPM 0f t0tal dry matter f0r 42 days. Gr0up 3 was pr0vided
with r0utine diet added with 50 % 0f SPM 0f t0tal dry matter f0r same peri0d. Ad libitum feed
was 0ffered t0 the animals twice a day. Feed intake, weight gain and feed c 0nversi0n rati0 was
calculated 0n weekly basis in all the gr0ups.

Final data were analysed by using analysis 0f variance (AN0VA). The means were c0mpared
by using Tukey’s test.

Results suggested that feeding sugarcane mud did n0t had a significant effect 0n b0dy weight
gain 0f Sahiwal heifers (P>0.05). 2nd week weight gain was f0und t0 be significantly effected
sugarcane press mud.

Feed intake was affected by dietary treatment including c0ntr0l, 25 % sugarcane press mud
and 50% sugarcane press mud thr0ugh0ut the trial fr0m 1st week t0 6th week(P<0.05). It was
als0 revealed that the treatment with 50% Sugarcane press mud has the highest feed intake as
c0mpared t0 the remaining treatments.

FCR was als0 f0und t0 be significantly influenced by feeding Sugarcane press mud t0 the
Sahiwal heifers (p<0.05).

Nutrient intake (Crude pr0tein, Crude fibre, Ash, Dry matter and Ether) was als 0 affected by
Sugarcane press mud.

55
Based 0n the results, it is c0ncluded that the replacement 0f ruminant diet (wheat straw) with
sugarcane mud up t0 50% has a p0sitive impact 0n Feed intake, nutrient intake and FCR
(p<0.05). H0wever b0dy weight gain was n0t significantly affected by replacement 0f wheat
straw with Sugarcane press mud.

56
57