+Bioline International Official Site (site up-dated regularly)

African Journal of Biomedical Research
Ibadan Biomedical Communications Group
ISSN: 1119-5096
Vol. 4, Num. 3, 2001, pp. 147-149

African Journal of Biomedical Research, Vol. 4, No. 3, Sept, 2001, pp. 147-149

Original article

THE UTILIZATION OF WATER HYACINTH (EICHHORNIA CRASSIPES) BY WEST AFRICAN DWARF (WAD) GROWING GOATS

SUNDAY, A. DADA

Lagos State Polytechnic, P. O. Box 249, Ikorodu. Lagos State, Nigeria.

Received: February 2000
Accepted in final form: January 2001

Code Number: md01070

Confined growing goats were offered ad libitum sundried water hyacinth, cowpea pod and groundnut stubbles hand mixed in the respective proportions: 30:40:30 (diet 1); 30:30:40 (diet 2) and 40:30:30 (diet 3) to measure intake, feed conversion and rate of gain. Dry Matter Intake, DMI (56.14 ± 6.50g/kg dry matter intake (% of EW) 3.49 ± 0.30, feed conversion (g gain/kg feed) 47.24 ± 5.80 and rate of gain (gd 11.00 ± 2.80 of goats fed diet 3 were higher (P < 0.05) than the corresponding (P > 0.05) mean DM1 (49.88 ± 6.5Ogkg/BW). DM1 (% of BW) 3.11±0.30, feed conversion (g gain/kg feed) 40.55±5.80 and rate of gain (gd 8.37±2.80 of goats fed diets 1 and 2. Evaluation of sundried E. crassipes incorporated with legume residues for ruminant feeds at the maximum beneficial level of inclusion will be necessary.

Key Words: Water hyacinth, growing goats, intake, feed efficiency and weight gain.

INTRODUCTION

The livestock industry in West Africa has not been able to produce enough meat and milk for the existing population. Goat is one of the animals that produce these products (meat and milk). Primarily, the constraints to large scale goat production in the developing countries are unavailability of an adequate quantity and quality feed (Devendra et al 1983; Timon et al 1986). It is therefore necessary to explore all possible avenues to adequately increase small ruminants meat production for human consumption utilizing crop residues and water hyacinth which are of no direct biological value to man.

There have been few studies on ways of utilizing the low nutritive value crop residues including cowpea pod and groundnut stubble (Kossila, 1954; Owen 1981; Sundstil et al., 1984; Kossila, 1985; Doyle 1986) and on assessment of water hyacinth as a feed resource for ruminants (Van Soest et al, 1968; Baldwin et al., 1974; Osman et al., 1975; Van Soest, 1982; Knab, 1982). The present study was therefore aimed at assessing feed intake, rate of gain and feed efficiency of growing goats fed a basal diet composition of water hyacinth, cowpea pod and groundnut stubbles.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Feed description and Preparation

Water hyacinth (E. crassipes) was collected from River Majidun in Ikorodu Local Government, LagosState of Nigeria. The roots were cut-off and discarded, the stalks and leaves were chopped to 3cm in length and sundried for about 5 days at an environmental temperature (22.8 - 33.8°C) and relative humidity (54.0 - 96.0%). Cowpea pod and groundnut stubbles were purchased at Sabo Goat Market in Ikorodu, Lagos, Nigeria. Sundried water hyacinth, cowpea pod and groundnut st each component bagged in separate jute bags were stored on wooden racks under ambient condition until required for feeding.

Weighed water hyacinth; Cowpea pod and groundnut stubbles were hand mixed as experimental diets by the following respective proportions: 30:40:30 (diet 1); 30:30:40 (diet 2) and 40:30:30 (diet 3) as shown in Table 1. These diets were balanced to contain about 10.54% crude protein.

Twelve growing West African dwarf (WAD) goats (6 does and 6 bucks) of about 5 months of age weighing 6.00 to 6.50kg were procured from Lagos State Polytechnic small ruminant unit in Ikorodu. The animals were drenched and dipped against endo-and ecto-parasites and housed in individual pens measuring 1.5m x 1.5m concrete floor covered with wood shavings. They were allocated to the three experimental rations in a completely randomized design (Steel and Torrie, 1980). Goats were fed (DM basis) 3% of BW at 08.OOh and 14.OOh and each animal had free access to fresh water and salt lick daily. Each respective diet was weighed out daily and directly placed in feeder per goat, feed refusals were collected and weighed immediately before 08.00h meal. The study lasted 42 days including 7 days of adjustment to confinement. Each goat was weighed (non-shrunk) every 7 days of the growth trial.

Analytical Procedures

Dried and ground bulked feed samples were analysed for dry matter (residue after drying to constant weight at 100°C), ash (residue after ignition at 500°C), crude protein (Kjeldahl N x 6.25), ether extract or fat extract dry sample with ether for about 4 hours) and crude fibre (Goering and Van Soest, 1970). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) Statistical Analysis System Institute (SAS) 1989 for a completely randomized design was performed on the data and treatment means were differentiated using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (Duncan, 1955).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Chemical Composition

Composition of water hyacinth-based goat diets and proximate analysis of the diets are shown in Table 1 and chemical composition of the feed ingredients is depicted in Table 2. The DM contents b.f diets 1, 2 and 3 were similar with a mean value of 8 1.22%. Also the DM values of the feed ingredients were alike with a mean value of 81.07%.

The crude protein (UP), ether extract (EE) and the ash contents of the three diets were similar with the exception of the crude fibre (CF) of diet 3 which was about 25% below the similar mean CF value of diets 1 and 2 (30.75g/ 100g DM). This observation may be ascribed to the relatively low CF value of E. crassipes which constituted 40% of diet 3.

Table 1: Composition of water hyacinth-based goat diets.

Ingredients^a	DIETS (g/ 100G DM)
	I	II	III
Water hyacinth	30.00	30.00	40.00
Cowpea pods	40.00	30.00	30.00
Groundnut stubbles	30.00	40.00	30.00
Total	100.00	100.00	100.00
Proximate Analysis:
Dry matter %	81.06	81.60	81.00
Crude protein	10.50	10.55	10.68
Ether extract	1.78	1.71	1.80
Ash	10.34	10.58	10.97
Crude fibre	31.00	30.50	22.94

^aAs fed basis

Table 2: Chemical composition of feed ingredients (g/ l00g DM).

	Ingredients^a
	Water hyacinth (stalk + leaves)	Cowpea pods	Groundnut stubbies
Dry matter, %	80.60	81.00	81.60
Crude protein	10.80	8.20	8.30
Ether extract	2.30	1.90	1.31
Ash	14.06	7.70	10.13
Crude fibre	18.05	38.80	33.60

^aDry matter basis.

Table 3: Performance of experimental goats on water hyacinth-based diets.

	DIETS
Parameters	I	II	III	SE
Duration of experiment (days)	35	35	35
	Live weight Changes (kg)
Initial	6.50^a	6.47^a	6.49^a	0.03
Final	6.5O^b	6.76^b	6.87^a	0.08
Growth rate (gd-i)	8.55^b	8.20^b	11.00^a	2.80
	Feed Intake
Dry matter intake (g/kg BW)	49.76	50.00^b	56. 14	6.50
Dry matter intake (% of BW)	3. 10	3. 12	3.49^a	0.30
Feed conversion (g gain/kg feed)	41. 39	39.64^b	47.24^a	5.80

a,b = Means along the same row with identical letters are not significantly (P>0 .05) different.

Crude protein (CP) content of water hyacinth in this study 10.80g/ 100g DM was below the reported range of CP (12-19.8%) by Boyd (1968, 1974), Reza (1981). This observation might be due to the suggestion of Gosset (1971) and Boyd al (1975) that the nutrient content in the environment in which the E. crassipes is cultured influence the nitrogen and phosphorus levels of the water weed (E. crassipes). The observed high (g/ lOOg DM) a (14.06) and CF (18.05) in this study are similar to the contents of ash (17.53) and CF (18.00) reported by Reza (1981). The nutritive values of cowpea pod (Phaseolus vulgaris) and groundnut stubbles (Arachis hypogea) are similar to values reported by Oyenuga (1968) and Karig et al, (1983).

Feed intake and Performance

Dry matter intake (DM1) of goat fed diet 3 (56.14±6.50 gkg ‘BW° was 3.49% BW and was 12.55% higher (P < 0.05) than the similar (P>0.05) mean intake (49.88gkg of goats fed diets 1 and 2. This observation on intake was similar to intake of goats fed wheat straw (54±24gkg (Houston ., 1988) and intake of sheep fed soybean stover (54.58gkg (Dada et al., 1998). The similarly low (P<0.05) mean DM1 of goats fed diets 1 and 2 (49.88gkg- ‘BWO may be attributed to their relatively high CF content (Table 1). A considerable body of authors are in support of kw DM1 due to high CF content of forage (Jones et al, 1972; El Hag, 1976; Sharma et al, 1977; Huston, 1978; Devendra, 1g78; Brown et al, 1984, 1988; Hennessy et al, 1983; Huston et al., 1988; Lascano et al., 1993). Feed efficiency of goats led diet 3 with 40% water hyacinth inclusion (g gain/kg feed) (47.24±5.80) was superior (P<0.05) to the corresponding (P>0.05) mean (40.55±5.80) of goats fed diets 1 and 2 with 30% water hyacinth inclusion. In support of this observation, CF content of diet 3 (22.94g/lOOg DM) was 24% lower than the mean (30.2g/lOOg DM) similar CF content of diets 1 and 2.

There were no differences shown in the initial weight (P>0.05) of the goats in the three diet groups. However, at the termination of the study (35 days) the mean final weight of goats fed diet 3 (6.87kg) was significantly (P<0.05) higher than the similar (P>0.05) weights of goats fed diets 1 and 2 which were 6.80 and 6.76kg respectively. Growth rate (gd 1) of animals fed diet 3 (11.00±2.80) was also significantly (Pet al, 1988. Fuith beneficial level of inclusion of E. crassipes by growing goats will be necessary.

REFERENCES

Baldwin, J.A., Gentges, Jr.; Bagnal, L.O. (1974). Preservation and cattle acceptability of water hyacinth silage as diets. J. Anirn. Science 40: 968.
Boyd, C.E. (1968). Fresh-water plants: a potential source of protein. Economic Botany (USA), 22(4): 359-368.
Boyd, C.E. (1974): Utilization of aquatic plant - In: Mitchel, D.S. (ed.), Aquatic vegetation and its use and control. UNESCO, 107-115. Paris.
Boyd, C.E. and Scarbrook, J. (1975). Chemical composition of aquatic weed. A symposium on water quality management through biological control. Univ. of Florida (USA) 14-15.
Brown, C., Salim, M., Chavalimu, E. and Fitzhugh, H. (1988): Intake, selection, apparent digestibility and chemical composition of Pennisetum purpureum and Cajanus cajan foliage as utilized by lactating goats. Small Ruminant Research, 1: 59-65.
Brown, L.E. and Johnson, W.L. (1984). Comparative intake and digestibility of forage and by-products by sheep and goats. a review mt. Goat and Sheep Res. 2 212.
Chatterjee, T. and Hye, M.A. (1988): Can water hyacinth be used as a cattle feed? Agr. and Livestock Journal, India 8(5): 547-553.
Dada, S.A.O., Adeneye, J.A.; Akinsoyinu, A.O.; Smith, J.W. and Dashiell, K.E. (1998): Performance of sheep fed soybeai and cassava crumb based diets. Small Ruminant Research 1711: 1- 10
Devendra, C. (1978): The digestive efficiency of goats. World Review of Animal Production 14: 9-22.
Devendra, C. and Burns, M. (1983). Effort to enhanc maize stover utilization for small holder livestock “Animal feed producers in Malawi; Resources for small-scale livestock producers’, No. 11- 15.
Doyi P.T (1986): W International Livcstock Re arcI T Centre Journal, Morriton, Arkansas, U.S.A. p.16.
Duncan, D.G. (1955). Multiple Range and Multiple F Tests. Biometrics, II, 1-42.
El Hag, G.A. (1976): A comparative study between desert goat and sheep of feed utilization. World Review of Animal production 12: 43- 48.
Goerin, H.K. and Van Soest, P. (1970): Forage fiber analyses. Agricultural Handbook No. 379, USDA, Washington, D.C.
Gosset, D.R. and Norris, W.E. (1971): Relationship between nutrient availability and content of nitrogen and phosphorus in tissues of the aquatic macrophyte (Eichhomia crassipes) Soims. Hydrobiologig (Netherlands). V. (38): 15-28.
Hennessy, D.W.; Williamson, P.J.; Nolan, J.V.; Kempton, T.J. and Leng, R.A. (1983): The roles of energy or protein-rich supplements in the subtropics for young cattle consuming basal diets that are low in energy and protein. J. Agric. Sci., 100: 657.
Hossein, W. (1959): Investigation to water hyacinth as fodder. Pakistan V. 10: 4:513-518.
Huston, J.E. (1978): Forage utilization and nutrient requirements of the goat. J. Dairy Sci. 61: 988. .
Houston, J.E.; Engdahl, B.S. and gales, K.W. (1988): Intake and digestibility in sheep and goats fed three forages with different levels of supplemental protein. Small Ruminant Research; 1: 81-92.
Jones, G.M.; Larsen, R.E.; Javed, A.H.; Donefer, E. and Gaudreau, J.M. (1972): Voluntary intake and nutrient digestibility of forages by goats and J. Anim. Sc. 34; 830-838.
Kang, B.T. and Juo, M. (1983): Utilization of legumes crops residues as animal feeds and their preparation. Report on the workshop on feed for ruminants in the tropics. p.5.
Knab, W. (1982): Urtor suchungen berdan fulter west der waser by zin the (Eichhomia crassipes mart solmes) bei neder kanm Diplomarbeit Umu Hohanhein.
Kossila, V.L. (1954): The availability of crop residue in developing countries in relation to livestock population. Institute of Animal Production, Finnish Agricultura1 Research Centre, SF-29 100 Jokonen, Finland.
Kossila, V.L. (1985): Global production of different crops residue from different in trillion tonnes, Machich Cobpers Limited, Kenya.
Lascano, C.E. and Palacios, E. (1993): Intake and digestibility by sheep of mature grass alone and in combination with two tropical legumes. Trop. Agric. (Trinidad) Vol. 70, No. 4: 356-358.
Osman, H.E.; El Hag, G.A. and Osman, M.M. (1975): Studies on the nutritive value of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes). In Obeid. M. (ed.) Aquatic Weeds in the Sudan with special references to water hyacinth. National council for Research, Khartoun (Sudan): 104-127.
Osman, H.E.; El Hag, G.A. and Osman, M.M. (1976): on water hyacinth as fodder. Agr. Pakistan 10(4): pp.513-518.
Owen, C. (1981): Utilization of water hyacinth (Eichhbrriia cra.ssipes) as a source of nutrient for animal. md. J. Nutr. Diatetics 18(12): 435-44 1.
Oyenuga, V.A. (1968):Nigeria feed and feed stuff. 3rd Ed, Unipress Ltd. Ibadan. pp.16-18.
Parra, .JW. (1975): The use of water h cinth (Eickiwmk cr as 9 soil amendment and source of plant nutrients, Dissertation Abstracts International, B, 36(2): 1016-1017.
Reza, A. and Khan, J.M (1981): Water hyacinth as cattle feed. India Journal of Animal Science, India 51(11) pg.702-706.
SAS Institute Inc./STAT. 1989. User’s Guide Version 7. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA, pp.283-773.
Sharma, V.V. and Rajora, N.K. (1977): Voluntary intake and nutrient digestibility of low-grade rouphage by ruminants. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88, 75-78.
Steel, R.G.D. and Torrie, J.H. (1980): Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw Hill, New York.
Sundstii, P. and Owen, C: (1984): The importance of crop residue as fodder, a resource analysis in Katsina Province, Nigeria, Samaru Research Bulletin 139.
Timon, R.E. and Hamraham, K. (1986): Feed and fibre from waste use in the production of feed and fiber proceedings: (116-141 EPA; - 660, 2-74-C4). Environmental P. Section Agency.
Van Soest, P.J. and Jones, G.M. (1968): Maize stover and cobs as feed resources for ruminants in Tanzania. J. Ar Sc. 15: 350- 380.
Van Soest, P.J. (1982): Nutritional ecology of the ruminants. 0 and B Books, Inc. Corvalis, Oregon.