Factors affecting the intake of blocks
The hardness of the block will affect its rate of intake. If it is soft, it may be rapidly consumed with the risk of toxicity. On the other hand if it is too hard its intake may be highly limited.
High levels of urea may reduce intake of the block as well as of straw, urea being unpalatable (Table 2).
Table 2. Effect of urea content on intake of block and straw by lambs
Urea content of block, % |
10 |
15 |
20 |
Block intake g/lamb/day |
136 |
112 |
18* |
Straw intake g/lamb/day |
441 |
550 |
326 |
*4 out of lambs did not lick any of their block. Source: El Fouly et al., 1986
The level of inanition or imbalance in minerals which lead to pica may result in excessive consumption in a short time also leading to urea poisoning. This has been noticed in at least one case in Senegal. Precautions should be taken to avoid this problem of over-consumption in drought prone countries particularly towards the end of the dry season when feed is scarce. The block should be introduced progressively, and it should be clear that the block, as it is presently formulated, cannot constitute the only feed and a minimum of roughage is necessary.
Where there is a bulk of dry feed the risk of toxicity from overconsumption is not apparent. In India, several thousand buffaloes in village herds have been fed blocks containing 15 percent urea without problems (George Kunju, 1986) and there is some indication that buffaloes learn to regulate their intake.
Finally, the intake of block obviously varies with the type of animals (Table 3).
Table 3. Intake of blocks for different types of animals fed a basal diet of straw
Effects of blocks on intake of basal diet
Feeding blocks usually results in a stimulation of intake of the basal diet. With a basal diet of straw without any supplementary concentrate, the increase of straw consumption due to molasses urea blocks is between 25 and 30 percent. When some high protein concentrate is also given with the basal diet, the increase of straw consumption is less and varies between 5 and 10 percent (Table 4).
Table 4. Effect of block on intake of straw
Type of animals |
Animal weight kg |
Increase in straw intake % |
References |
Without concentrate |
|
|
|
Lambs |
22 |
26 |
Sudana et al., 1986 |
Jersey bulls |
300 |
29.5 |
Kunju, 1986 |
Dairy buffaloes |
- |
24 |
Kunju, 1986 |
Young buffaloes |
100 |
23 |
Leng, 1983 |
With high protein supplement |
|
|
|
Lambs |
22 (1) |
8 |
Sudana et al., 1986 |
Jersey bulls |
350 (2) |
6 |
Kunju, 1986 |
Crossbred cows |
(3) |
10 |
Preston, Leng and Nuwanyapka, unpublished data |
Crossbred cows |
(3) |
(4) |
Preston, Leng and Nuwanyapka, unpublished data |
(1) with 150g cottonseed meal (2) with 1kg concentrates (3) with 1kg noug cake (Guizotia abyssinica) (4) with 2kg noug cake
Effects of intake of blocks on digestibility of straw and some parameters of digestion
The digestibility of straw dry matter in dacron bags measured after 24 hours in the rumen of lambs increased from 42.7 to 44.2 percent when 100 g of molasses urea block was consumed, and to 48.8 percent by an additional supply of 150 g cottonseed meal.
Ammonia concentration in the rumen of lambs receiving molasses urea blocks increases to levels which are much higher than those generally recommended for optimal microbial development (60 to 100 mg NH3/1 of rumen fluid). This concentration increases with the urea content of the block (Table 5) and when a by-pass protein is added (Table 6). The digestibility of straw in sheep increased even up to 250 mg NH3 - N/1.
The total volatile fatty acids in rumen fluid is increased when lambs consume the blocks with or without additional by-pass protein. There is a small but significant shift toward a higher propionate and butyrate production, and a lower acetate production.
Effects of blocks on ruminant growth
Dry mature pasture or straw given alone are unbalanced in nutrients to provide for an active and efficient rumen and to ensure an efficient utilization of the nutrient absorbed. Feed intake and the nutrient absorbed from such diets are insufficient to ensure even maintenance requirements and animals lose weight if they do not receive any nitrogen and mineral supplement. Molasses-urea blocks added to such an unbalanced diet allow for maintenance requirements because they ensure an efficient fermentative digestion. When some by-pass protein is added (e.g. cottonseed meal, noug cake) there is a synergistic effect which further improves considerably the average daily gain of ruminants and they become much more efficient in using the available nutrients. In addition total nutrients are often increased because feed intake is increased.
Compared to urea supplied by spraying on straw, urea from blocks give superior results. It is assumed that part of the response may be due to the small amount of supplementary energy supplied by the molasses but also by a stimulatory effect of other ingredients in the blocks on the rumen ecosystem.
Effects of blocks on milk production
The use of multinutrient blocks has allowed for a substantial reduction in concentrate in the diet of buffalo cows fed on rice straw. The fat corrected milk yield was not diminished by replacing part of the concentrate with block. But the amount of straw in the diet and thus the profit per animal per day were greatly increased.
Considerable commercial experience has now been acquired in the use of blocks for supplementing dairy buffaloes fed rice straw under village conditions in India. Reducing the amount of concentrate give to buffalo cows from 5 to 3.5 or 4 to 2.5 kg/day, and distributing blocks, did not reduce milk production but increased fat percentage by about 10 percent and reduced the cost of feeding. In other observations the addition of blocks to the diet increased milk production by about 10 to 25 percent and fat content of milk by 13 to 40 percent. In one village where the initial production level was lower the increase was even grater.
Subsequent trials were conducted in Ethiopia with crossbred cows given meadow hay of low quality with two levels of noug cake. They showed that milk yield was increased by 28 percent when feeding 2 rather than 1 kg of noug cake in the absence of blocks. However, there was no difference between the two levels of noug cake when the cows had access to blocks (containing 10 percent urea). It was then possible to save 1 kg nough cake by providing blocks without lowering milk production.