Animal feed resources information system

Did you find the information you were looking for? Is it valuable to you? Feedipedia is encountering funding shortage. We need your help to keep providing reference-based feeding recommendations for your animals.
Would you consider donating? If yes, please click on the button Donate.

Any amount is the welcome. Even one cent is helpful to us!

Islam et al., 2003. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 16 (6): 837-842

Document reference 
Islam, M. R. ; Saha, C. K. ; Sarker, N. R. ; Jalil, M. A. ; Hasanuzzaman, M., 2003. Effect of variety on proportion of botanical fractions and nutritive value of different Napiergrass (Pennisetum purpureum) and relationship between botanical fractions and nutritive value. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 16 (6): 837-842

Five varieties of napiergrasses (Pennisetum purpureum) were fractionated botanically into leaf blade, leaf sheath, stem and head. Chemical composition of each of whole napiergrass and their botanical fractions were determined. Correlation, linear and multiple regressions between botanical fractions and nutritive value of varieties of napiergrass were also estimated. All botanical fractions differed due to the effect of variety. Napier Pusha contained the highest proportion of leaf blade and internode, but the lowest proportion of leaf sheath. Napier Hybrid contained the lowest proportion of leaf blade, but highest proportion of node. Consequently, napier Pusha contained the highest (p<0.01) crude protein (CP, 9.0%), but Napier Hybrid had the lowest CP (7.0%). Chemical composition of whole plant differed significantly (p<0.01; except NFE, p>0.05) due to the variety. Not only the whole plant, chemical composition of most botanical fractions of whole plant differed (p<0.05 to 0.01) due to the variety. The intrarelationships between leaf blade and leaf sheath was negative (r=-0.43). Leaf sheath was also negatively correlated to CP, but positively correlated to ash of whole Napier or their botanical fractions. Leaf blade, on the other hand, increases CP but decreases ash content of whole plant or their fractions. These results, therefore, suggest that napiergrass varieties differ widely in terms of botanical fractions and nutritive value, which may have important implications on intake and productivity of animals. Furthermore, napiergrass varieties should be selected for leaf blade only for a better response.

Citation key 
Islam et al., 2003