Page 87 - Agroforestry system - book inner (final corrected) - 9.-3-21_Neat
P. 87

National level e-symposium on “Agroforestry system for augmenting livestock
                                productivity and empowering resource poor rural farmers”



             to get the uniform sample for the respective foliage in all the six blocks. The collected samples were dried at
             60°C for 72 h, ground, analysed for proximate components and other cell wall constituents. Minerals i.e. Ca,
             P, Mg, Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, and Co were estimated following standard methods.

             Results and discussion
                 The DM content of tree foliages ranged from 25.85 (seabuck thorn) to 35.05% (poplus). The
             OM, CP, EE, NDF, ADF and ADL contents varied widely from 87.18-90.43, 11.58-18.23, 2.34-3.82,
             36.95-48.53, 20.35-26.12 and 3.54-4.98 %DM, respectively. The present findings are supported by
             the results of proximate composition and fibre fractions as analysed by Sahoo et al. (2016) in different
             tree leaves of temperate sub-Himalayas. The tree leaves were rich source of Ca containing 2.13%
             (poplus) to 3.13% (mulberry) and Mg content ranging from 0.26% (poplus) to 0.44% (sarsing). The
             foliages were poor in P content ranging from 0.15% (seabuck thorn) to 0.26% (sarsing). A wide ratio
             of Ca: P (above 2.5:1) recorded in various samples of tree leaves indicate the poor bioavailability of
             these macro- minerals to animals (McDowell et al., 1993). The foliages were found to be rich source
             of Fe, Co and Mn with a wide variation from 174.33 ppm (poplus) to 223.67 ppm (mulberry), 0.13
             (mulberry) to 0.24 (seabuck thorn), and 49.22 ppm (sarsing) to 76.96 ppm (mulberry), respectively.
             Zn concentration were lower than critical range in all samples varying from 19.08 ppm (bathwa) to
             27.36 ppm (mulberry).

             References
             Marcelo, A., Carolina, P.,  Torres, R.S. and Mariana, A. 2014.  Tree canopy-herbaceous layer relation in
                 temperate woodland: seasonal variations in forage quantity and quality.  Range  Management  and
                 Agroforestry 35: 101-106.
             McDowell, L.R., Conrad J.H. and Glenhembry, F. 1993. Mineral for grazing ruminants in tropical regions,
                 2nd edn. University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
             Sahoo, B., Garg, A.K., Mohanta, R.K., Bhar, R., Thirumurgan, P., Sharma, A.K. and Pandey, A.B. 2016.
                 Nutritional value and tannin profile of forest foliages in temperate sub-Himalayas. Range Management
                 and Agroforestry 37(2): 228-232.
             S2-4
                           Assessment of nutritive value of Azadirachta indica (Neem) leaves

                             R.Kavitha*, C.Valli, R,Karunakaran, K.Vijayarani, and R.Amutha
                          Department of Animal Nutrition, Madras Veterinary College, Vepery, Chennai-600 007
                                      Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
                                     *Corresponding author’s email: vetkavi2004@gmail.com

             Introduction

                 Neem is a ever green tropical tree, native to India. Azadirachta indica commonly known as neem or Indian
             lilac. The leaves are the edible part to animals and their nutritive value vary depend upon the geographical are,
             soil nutrient content, etc., The study was undertaken to evaluate the nutritive value of leaves.





             68    Institute of Animal Nutrition, Centre for Animal Production Studies, TANUVAS
                   National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development
   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92