Skip to content
Home▶ Journals▶ Indian Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Biotechnology▶Archive▶Vol. 21 No. 4 (2025)▶Efficacy of Different Feed Additives on In Vitro…
Indian Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Biotechnology
Indian Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Biotechnology ›
Print ISSN 2394-0247 · Online ISSN 2395-1176
Submit your paper About the journal
Research Article

Efficacy of Different Feed Additives on In Vitro Degradability of Maize Hay and Bajra Straw Based Total Mixed Ration

, , , , ,
Patel — Department of Animal Nutrition, College of Veterinary Science & Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Junagadh-362001, Gujarat, India.
Deen Dayal Garg — Department of Animal Nutrition, College of Veterinary Science & Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Junagadh-362001, Gujarat, India.
Arun K Sharma — Department of Veterinary Physiology and Biochemistry, College of Veterinary Science & Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Junagadh-362001, Gujarat, India.
Harish H Savsani — Department of Animal Nutrition, College of Veterinary Science & Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Junagadh-362001, Gujarat, India.
Jignesh A Chavda — Department of Animal Nutrition, College of Veterinary Science & Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Junagadh-362001, Gujarat, India.
Sanket M Kalam — Department of Animal Nutrition, College of Veterinary Science & Animal Husbandry, Kamdhenu University, Junagadh-362001, Gujarat, India.
Published 5 Jul 2025 Vol. 21 No. 4 (2025), pp. 77-82 ● Open access
❝ How to cite 🔗 https://doi.org/10.48165/ijvsbt.21.4.15
Download PDF

Abstract

The present study was conducted to investigate the efficacy of different feed additives (Monensin T1, cellulase 10,00,000 IU/g T2, xylanase  1,50,000 IU/g T3, chitosan T4, sodium bicarbonate T5, magnesium oxide T6, combination of sodium bicarbonate + magnesium oxide  T7 and combination of cellulase + xylanase T8 added at the level of 30 mg/kg, 0.5%, 0.5%, 1%, 1%, 1%, 0.5% (Each) and 0.5% (Each)  on DM basis, respectively) on in vitro degradability of total mixed ration prepared by taking maize hay, bajra straw and concentrate in  the ratio of 30:30:40 and used as substrates for experiment. Rumen liquor was collected from two adult Surti goats 2 h post-feeding.  Statistical analysis revealed that IVDMD (%), IVOMD (%), IVNDFD (%), IVADFD (%), TDOMR (%), IVTGP (mL/200 mg), SCFAs (mMol/200  mg), ME (MJ/kg) and NE (MJ/kg) were significantly (p<0.01) increased in TMR supplemented with combination of cellulase and xylanase  (67.32±1.01, 69.97±1.29, 56.23±0.36, 53.01±1.64, 64.13±0.42, 32.92 ±0.62, 0.75±0.007, 6.16±0.09 and 3.74±0.05 respectively). This  was followed by TMR supplemented with cellulase, xylanase and chitosan alone, which also had significantly (p<0.01) higher values  of all these components as compared to control (52.34±0.31, 54.92±0.50, 41.48±1.63, 38.64±0.53, 49.41±1.20, 22.08±0.56, 0.49±0.01,  4.58±0.08 and 2.70±0.05, respectively). Hence a combination of cellulase and xylanase is recommended as feed additive in maize hay,  bajra straw and concentrate based TMR. 

 

KeywordsDegradabilityFeed additivesIn vitroStrained rumen liquor (SRL)Total mixed ration

The full text of this article is available as a PDF.

Download PDF
  1. Anassori, E., Dalir-Naghadeh, B., Pirmohammadi, R., Taghizadeh, A., Asri-Rezaei, S., Farahmand-Azar, S., & Tahmoozi, M. (2012). In vitro assessment of the digestibility of forage-based sheep diet, supplemented with raw garlic, garlic oil and monensin. Veterinary Research Forum, 3(1), 5.
  2. AOAC. (2005). Official methods of analysis (18th ed.). Horwitz William Publication.
  3. Bach, A., Guasch, I., Elcoso, G., Duclos, J., & Khelil-Arfa, H. (2018). Modulation of rumen pH by sodium bicarbonate and a blend of different sources of magnesium oxide in lactating dairy cows submitted to a concentrate challenge. Journal of Dairy Science, 101(11), 9777–9788.
  4. Besharati, M., Palangi, V., Moaddab, M., Nemati, Z., & Ayaşan, T. (2021). Comparative effects of addition of monensin, tannic acid and cinnamon essential oil on in vitro gas production parameters of sesame meal. Journal of the Hellenic Veterinary Medical Society, 72(2), 2977–2988.
  5. Butaye, P., Devriese, L. A., & Haesebrouck, F. (2003). Antimicrobial growth promoters used in animal feed: Effects of less well-known antibiotics on Gram-positive bacteria. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 16(2), 175–188.
  6. De Paiva, P. G., de Jesus, E. F., Del Valle, T. A., de Almeida, G. F., Costa, A. G. B. V. B., Consentini, C. E. C., & Rennó, F. P. (2016). Effects of chitosan on ruminal fermentation, nutrient digestibility, and milk yield and composition of dairy cows. Animal Production Science, 57(2), 301–307.
  7. Dias, A. O. C., Goes, R. H. T. B., Gandra, J. R., Takiya, C. S., Branco, A. F., Jacaúna, A. G., & Vaz, M. S. M. (2017). Increasing doses of chitosan to grazing beef steers: Nutrient intake and digestibility, ruminal fermentation, and nitrogen utilization. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 225, 73–80.
  8. Geoering, H. K., & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage fibre analysis. Apparatus, reagents, procedure and some applications. Agricultural Handbook, 379.
  9. Goiri, I., Oregui, L. M., & Garcia-Rodriguez, A. (2010). Use of chitosans to modulate ruminal fermentation of a 50:50 forage-to-concentrate diet in sheep. Journal of Animal Science, 88(2), 749–755.
  10. ICAR. (2013). Nutrient requirements of sheep, goat and rabbit (3rd ed.). Indian Council of Agricultural Research.
  11. Kadam, S. J., Garg, D. D., Savsani, H. H., Patel, S. D., Patbandha, T. K., Karangiya, V. K., & Sanchaniya, J. M. (2024). Effect of varying levels of fibrolytic enzymes supplementation on digestibility of nutrients and plane of nutrition in Gir calves. The Indian Journal of Veterinary Science and Biotechnology, 20(6), 7–10.
  12. Karmakar, N. D. (2021). Effect of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes and soapnut (Sapindus mukorossi) shell powder on growth performance of Gir calves (M.V.Sc. Thesis). Junagadh Agricultural University.
  13. Li, C., Zhao, X., Cao, Y., Lei, Y., Liu, C., Wang, H., & Yao, J. (2013). Effects of chitosan on in vitro ruminal fermentation in diets with different forage to concentrate ratios. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 12(7), 839–845.
  14. Lopez, D., Vázquez-Armijo, J. F., López-Villalobos, N., Lee-Rangel, H. A., Salem, A. Z. M., Borquez-Gastelum, J. L., & Rojo-Rubio, R. (2016). In vitro gas production of foliage from three browse tree species treated with different dose levels of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 100(5), 920–928.
  15. Lunagariya, P. M., Shah, S. V., Devalia, B. R., Patel, A. C., & Pandya, P. R. (2018). An in vitro dose optimization of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes in total mixed ration for crossbred cows. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Science, 7(10), 330–338.
  16. Menke, K. H., & Steingass, H. (1988). Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research and Development, 28, 7–55.
  17. Morsy, T. A., Kholif, A. E., Kholif, S. M., Kholif, A. M., Sun, X., & Salem, A. Z. (2016). Effects of two enzyme feed additives on digestion and milk production in lactating Egyptian buffaloes. Annals of Animal Science, 16(1), 209.
  18. Patel, S. D., Garg, D. D., Savsani, H. H., Chavda, J. A., Sharma, A. K., & Kalam, S. M. (2025). In vitro rumen fermentation of maize hay and bajra straw based total mixed ration containing different feed additives. The Indian Journal of Veterinary Science and Biotechnology, 21(1), 21–24.
  19. Rajamma, K., Kumar, D. S., Rao, E. R., & Nath, D. N. (2015). In vitro evaluation of total mixed rations containing different roughage-concentrate ratios supplemented with or without fibrolytic enzymes. Animal Science, 9, 63–69.
  20. Shekhar, C., Thakur, S. S., & Shelke, S. K. (2010). Effect of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes supplementation on milk production and nutrient utilization in Murrah buffaloes. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 42, 1465–1470.
  21. Singh, D. N., Bohra, J. S., Tyagi, V., Singh, T., Banjara, T. R., & Gupta, G. (2022). A review of India’s fodder production status and opportunities. Grass and Forage Science, 77(1), 1–10.
  22. Snedecor, G. W., & Cochran, W. G. (1994). Statistical methods (8th ed.). Oxford and IBH.
  23. Tilley, J. M. A., & Terry, D. R. (1963). A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Grass and Forage Science, 18(2), 104–111.
  24. Vallejo, L. H., Salem, A. Z. M., Kholif, A. E., Elghangour, M. M. Y., Fajardo, R. C., Rivero, N., & Mariezcurrena, M. D. (2016). Influence of cellulase or xylanase on the in vitro rumen gas production and fermentation of corn stover. Indian Journal of Animal Science, 86(1), 70–74.
  25. Wencelova, M., Varadyova, Z., Mihalikova, K., Kisidayova, S., & Jalc, D. (2014). Evaluating the effects of chitosan, plant oils, and different diets on rumen metabolism and protozoan population in sheep. Turkish Journal of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, 38(1), 26–33

Looking up citing articles…

    Creative Commons License

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

    Copyright © 2025 Indian Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Biotechnology