Main Article Content
condensed tannin, digestibility, methane, potential nutritive value, tree leaves
The nutritional potential of the leaves of 10 different maquis tree species were evaluated in terms of chemical composition, in vitro gas and methane production, metabolizable energy (ME) and organic matter digestibility (OMD) in a maquis and mountainous region of western Turkey. Leaves from 10 tree species, Quercus aucheri, Olea europaea, Quercus robur, Morus alba L, Paliurus spina-christi, Pistacia terebinthus, Punica granatum, Pyrus elaeagnifolia, Vitis vinifera, and Tilia cordata, were sampled from maquis areas. Tree species had a significant effect on the chemical composition, in vitro gas, methane production, ME, and OMD (P<0.05). The results showed large variation in the contents of all examined nutritional components, in vitro gas and methane production, ME and OMD among the leaves of these tree species.
Species had a significant effect on the chemical components, gas and methane production, ME, and OMD of tree leaves. The current study not only provides information about the chemical composition but also ME and OMD of tree leaves, making possible accurate formulation for ruminant animals grown in areas where tree leaves could be used as supplementary feeds for low-quality forages or substrate deficits. In particular, the nutritional value of the leaves of Morus alba L., Vitis vinifera, Pistacia terebinthus, and Paliurus spina-christi may offer considerable potential as high-quality forages and increase the economic proﬁtability of ruminants during critical periods in some semi-arid, arid, and maquis regions of Turkey. All tree leaves except for Olea europaea and Morus alba L. have a low or moderate potential and seems to be used as alternative feedstuffs to mitigate the enteric methane production. However, in vivo experiment is required to test the anti-methanogenic potential of tree leaves.
2. Atalay I, Efe R. Structural and distributional evaluation of forest ecosystems in Turkey. Journal of Environmental Biology 2010; (31): 61-70
3. Gaikwad US, Pawar AB, Kadlag AD. Nutritional Status of Fodder Tree Leaves and Shrubs of Scarcity Zone of Maharashtrai. Advances in Life Sciences 2017; 7(1): 11-14.
4. Habib G, Khan NA, Sultan A, Ali M. Nutritive value of common tree leaves for livestock in the semi-arid and arid rangelands of Northern Pakistan. Livestock Science 2016; 184: 64-70.
5. Parissi ZM, Abraham EM, Roukos C, Kyriazopoulos AP, Petridis A, Karameri E. Seasonal quality assessment of leaves and stems of fodder ligneous species. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca 2018; 46(2): 426-34.
6. Bae HD, McAllister TA, Yanke J, Cheng KJ, Muir AD. Effect of condensed tannins on endoglucanase activity and filter paper digestion by Fibrobacyer succinogens S85. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 1993; 59: 2132-2138
7. Kumar S, Puniya AK, Puniya M, Dagar SS, Sirohi SK, Singh K, Griffith GW. Factors affecting rumen methanogens and methane mitigation strategies. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 2009; 54(1): 85-87.
8. Paterson RT, Karanja GM, Nyaata OZ, Kariuki IW, Roothaert RL. A review of tree fodder production and utilization within small holder agroforestry systems in Kenya. Agroforestry System 1998; 41: 181-199.
9. Bhatta R, Saravanan M, Baruah L, Prasad CS. Effects of graded levels of tannin-containing tropical tree leaves on in vitro rumen fermentation, total protozoa and methane production. Journal of Applied Microbiology 2014; 118: 557-564.
10. Azim A, Ghazanfar S, Vinifera V, Nadeem L, Nadeem MA. Nutritional Evaluation of Some Top Fodder Tree Leaves and Shrubs of District Chakwal, Pakistan in Relation to Ruminants Requirements. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 2011; 10(1): 54-59.
11. Tirfessa G, Tolera A. Comparative evaluation of chemical composition, in vitro fermentation and methane production of selected tree forages. Agroforest System 2020; 94:1445-1454.
12. Canul-Solis J, Campos-Navarrete M, Piñeiro-Vázquez A, Casanova-Lugo F, Barros-Rodríguez M, Chay-Canul A, Cárdenas-Medina J, Castillo-Sánchez L. Mitigation of Rumen Methane Emissions with Foliage and Pods of Tropical Trees. Animals 2020; 10(5), 843:1-14.
13. AOAC. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official method of analysis.16th ed., Washington, DC, USA: 1997.
14. Van Soest PJ: Nutritional Ecology of Ruminants. 2nd ed., Cornell University Press. Ithaca, New York. USA. 1994.
15. Makkar HPS, Francis G, Becker K. Bioactivity of phytochemicals in some lesser-known plants and their effects and potential applications in livestock and aquaculture production systems. Animal 2007; 1371-1391
16. Menke KH, Raab L, Salewski A, Steingass H, Fritz D, Schneider W. The estimation of digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedstuffs from the gas production when they incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge) 1979; 92: 217-222.
17. Goel G, Makkar HPS, Becker K. Effect of Sesbania sesban and Carduus pycnocephalus leaves and Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L) seeds and their extract on partitioning of nutrients from roughage-and concentrate-based feeds to methane. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2008; 147(1-3): 72-89
18. Menke HH, Steingass H. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research and Development 1988; 28: 7-55.
19. SPSS, SPSS for Windows advanced statistics release. IBM, Chicago, IL, USA 2016.
20. Canbolat Ö. Determination of potential nutritive value of exotic tree leaves in Turkey. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Dergisi 2012; 18(3): 419-423.
21. Kamalak A. Determination of nutritive value of leaves of a native grown shrub, Glycyrrhiza glabra L. using in vitro and in situ measurements. Small Ruminant Research 2006; (64): 268-278.
22. Khanal RC, Subba DB. Nutritional evaluation of leaves from some major fodder trees cultivated in the hills of Nepal. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2001; 92(1-2): 17-32.
23. Habib G, Saleem M, ABDUL Hameed A, 2013. Mineral composition of local tree leaves for feeding sheep and goats in kohat district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Sarhad J. Agric. 29 (1):97-103.
24. Khan AH, Ashraf M, McDowell LR, 2006. Mineral status of soils and forages in southwestern Punjab-Pakistan: Micro-minerals. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Science 2006; 19(8): 1139-1147.
25. Pal K, Patra AK, Sahoo A, Kumawat PK. Evaluation of several tropical tree leaves for methane production potential, degradability and rumen fermentation in vitro. Livestock Science 2015;180: 98-105.
26. Girma M, Animut G, Assefa G (2015) Chemical composition and in vitro organic matter digestibility of major indigenous fodder trees and shrubs in Northeastern drylands of Ethiopia. Livestock Res Rural Dev 27, Article #26. Retrieved 19 Dec 2018, from https://www.lrrd.org/lrrd27/2/girm27026.htm
27. Simbaya J, Chibinga O, Salem AZM. Nutritional evaluation of selected fodder trees: Mulberry (Molus alba Lam.), Leucaena (Leucaena luecocephala Lam de Wit.) and Moringa (Moringa oleifera Lam.) as dry season protein supplements for grazing animals. Agroforestry Systems 2020; 94:1189-1197.
28. NRC. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. National Academic Press, Washington, D.C. 2001; 381.
29. Rubanza CDK, Shem MN, Otsyina ER, Ichinohe I, Fujihara T. Content of phenolics and tannins in leaves and pods of some Acacia and Dichrostachys species and effects on in vitro digestibility. Journal of Animal Feed Science 2003; 12:645-663.
30. Bouazza L, Bodas R, Boufen P, Granatuma S, Bousseboua H, López S. Nutritive evaluation of foliage from fodder trees and shrubs characteristic of Algerian arid and semi-arid areas. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 2012; 21:521-536
31. Subba DB, Neopane SP, Khanal RC. Tree fodders and browse plants as potential nutrient suppliers for ruminants. In: Proceedings of the 3rd National Workshop on Livestock and Fisheries Research, Nepal Agricultural Research Council, Kathmandu, Nepal 1999.
32. Jamala GY, Tarimbuka IL, Moris D, Mahai S. The scope and potentials of fodder trees and shrubs in agroforestry. Journal of Agriculture and Veteri Punica Granatumy Science 2013; 5(4):11-17.
33. Osuga IM, Maindi CN, Abdulrazak SA, Nishino N, Ichinohe T, Fujihara T. Potential nutritive value and tannin bioassay of selected Acacia species from Kenya. J. Sci. Food Agriculture 2007; 87: 1533-1538
34. Sultan S, Bhadoria BK, Koli P, Singh A. Nutritional evaluation of top foliages for livestock feeding in semi-arid region of India. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 2019; 89(12): 1389-1398
35. Sultan JI. Rahim IU, Nawaz H, Yaqoob M, Javed I, 2008. Nutritional evaluation of fodder tree leaves of northern grasslands of Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany 2008; 40(6):2503-2512.
36. Singh GP, Oosting SJ. A model for describing the energy value of straws. Indian Dairyman XLIV 1992; 44:322-327.
37. Ibrahim M, t’Mannetje L, Ospina S. Prospects and problems in the utilization of tropical herbaceous and woody leguminous forages. In VI International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores; Ramírez L, Sandoval C, Ku J, Eds., Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán: Merida, Mexico, 2003; 35–55.
38. Kumar R, Singh M,1984. Tannins: Their adverse role in ruminant nutrition. J. Agric. Food Chem 1984; 32:447-453.
39. Barry TN. Secondary compounds of forages. In, Hacker JB, Ternouth JH (Eds): The Nutrition of Herbivores. Academic Press, Sydney 1987; 91-120.
40. Tefera S, Mlamboa V, Dlamini BJ, Dlamini AM, Koralagama KDN, Mouldb FL. Chemical composition and in vitro ruminal fermentation of common tree forages in the semi-arid rangelands of Swaziland. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2008;142: 99-110
41. Elhassan SM, Lahlou Kassi A, Newbold CJ, Wallace RJ, 2000. Chemical com position and degradation characteristics of foliage of some African multi-purpose trees. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 86, 27–73.
42. Ndlovu, LR, Nherera FV. Chemical composition and relationship to in vitro gas production of Zimbabwean browsable indigenous tree species. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol 1997; 69: 121-129.
43. Piñeiro-Vázquez AT, Canul-Solis JR, Alayón-Gamboa JA, Chay-Canul AJ, Ayala-Burgos AJ, Aguilar-Pérez CF, Solorio-Sánchez FJ, Ku-Vera JC. Potential of condensed tannins for the reduction of emissions of enteric methane and their effect on ruminant productivity. Archivos de Medicina VeteriPunica Granatumia 2015; 47: 263–272.
44. Flachowsky G. Carbon-footprints for food of animal origin, reduction potentials and research need. J. Appl. Anim Res 2011; 39: 2–14.
45. Hassanat F, Benchaar C. Assessment of the effect of condensed (acacia and quebracho) and hydrolysable (chestnut and valonea) tannins on rumen fermentation and methane production in vitro. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013; 93:332–339.
46. Beauchemin, KA, McGinn SM, Martinez TF, McAllister TA. Use of condensed tannin extract from quebracho trees to reduce methane emissions from cattle. J. Anim. Sci 2007; 85: 1990–1996.
47. Bhatta R, Saravanan M, Baruah L, Sampath KT. Nutrient content, in vitro ruminal fermentation characteristics and methane reduction potential of tro-pical tannin-containing leaves. J. Sci. Food Agric 2012; 92: 2929–2935.
48. Lopez S, Makkar HPS, Soliva CR. Screening plants and plant products for methane inhibitors. In: Vercoe PE, Makkar HPS, Schlink A, (Eds): In vitro screening of plant resources for extra nutritional attributes in ruminants: Nuclear and related methodologies 2010. London, New York; 191-231.