Diferentes fontes de fibra associadas à palma forrageira para cabras em lactação

• Autor(a) principal: LIMA, Isislayne Estevão de
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UFRPE
• Texto Completo: http://www.tede2.ufrpe.br:8080/tede2/handle/tede2/8951
• topic: Palma forrageira; Fibra (vegetal); Caprino de leite; Caprino; Nutrição animal; CIENCIAS AGRARIAS::ZOOTECNIA

In different production systems, forage is the main food resource for livestock worldwide, particularly when it comes to ruminants. However, good quality forage is often not available throughout the year due to varying environmental conditions such as temperature, humidity, and low rainfall or location causing substantial fluctuation in forage availability and quality. In semi-arid regions, this fact is even more worrying. The option for forage plants adapted to the semi-arid climate, such as forage palm, becomes indispensable for the sustainability of the systems. Due to its bromatological characteristic, it is necessary to associate it with bulky foods (silage, hay, and agro-industry residues, among others) to maximize animal performance. The treatments were represented by corn silage, sorghum silage, pangolão hay, and sugarcane bagasse. Twelve Saanen goats with an average weight of 48.9±7.3kg, average production of 2.8±0,7kg of milk/day were distributed in three simultaneous 4 x 4 Latin squares (four animals, four treatments and four experimental periods). There was no difference between treatments (P>0.05) for dry matter intake (2.58 kg/day), organic matter (2.30 kg/day), crude protein (0.385 kg/day), ether extract (0.170 kg/day), neutral detergent fiber (0.895 kg/day), non-fibrous carbohydrates (0.858 kg/day) and metabolizable energy (5.66 Mcal/day). Also, the fiber sources didn’t influence dry matter and nutrient digestibility (P>0.05). The association of forage palm with silages, hay and sugarcane bagasse did not change milk production, milk production corrected for 3.5% of fat and corrected for energy (2.78; 2.53 and 2,55 kg/day, respectively), in addition to milk composition (P>0.05). No differences were observation on ingestive behavior (P>0.05). Any of the fiber sources evaluated is recommended.