Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science (한국초지조사료학회지)

The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science (한국초지조사료학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Studies on Feed Values of Oak(Quercus serrata Thunb.) and Pine (Pinus densiflora) Browses

졸참나무지엽과 소나무지엽의 사료가치에 관한 연구

  • 최순호 (축산기술연구소 남원지소) ;
  • 김원호 (축산기술연구소 남원지소) ;
  • 김맹중 (축산기술연구소 남원지소) ;
  • 허삼남 (전북대학교 농과대학) ;
  • 이성운 (전북대학교 농과대학)
  • Published : 2002.03.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Chemical composition, mineral compounds, cellular constituents, digestibility for dry matter, total digestible nutrients, and tannin constituents were investigated to evaluate feed value for oak and pine browses to use effectively browses as forest by products. The results of this study were as follows : Crude protein was 6.00∼7.89% for oak browse and 5.15∼6.06% for pine browse sampled through July to October, It gradually decreased in oak browse but not in pine browse as the growth of tree was progressed stages. Crude fat content of oak and pine browse were 1.90∼2.68% and 6.30∼6.33%. Crude fiber content was 33.3∼35.2% for oak browse and 33.7∼34.8% for pine browse and they tended to increase according to the growth stage of trees. Crude ash was 3.13∼2.78% for oak browse and 2.11 ∼1.93% for pine browse, respectively. Ca, Mg, Mn and Cu content were higher in oak browse than those in pine browse, but P, K, Na, Fe, and Zn content were similar each other. Mineral contents were decreased as the growth of tree was progressed(P<.05). Acid detergent fiber content of pine and oak browse were 47.7∼52.0% and 46.1∼48.1%, and they increased as the tree grew. Neutral detergent fiber content of pine and oak browse were 64.1∼67.9% and 65.0∼66.5%. NDF content was increased according to the tree growth in pine browse but it was the same in oak browse(P<.05). in vitro digestibility of dry matter was 51.7∼48.4% for pine browse that decreased according to the tree growth(p<.05) and 53.0∼5l.4% for oak browse. Total digestible nutrients of oak browse was 50.9∼52.4% and that of pine browse was 47.7∼51.1% which decreased as the tree grew. Oak browse showed the same relative feeding value(RFV) as pine browse, and it decreased as the growth of tree was progressed(P<.05). Tannin contents was 2.96% for oak browse, 6.27% for pine browse. Tannin contents decreased when browses were dried.

본 연구는 산림부산물인 지엽류를 보다 효율적으로 활용할 수 있는 방안을 모색하고자 졸참나무지엽과 소나무지엽에 대한 사료가치를 구명하였으며 그 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 일반조성분인 조단백질 함량은 참나무지엽과 소나무지엽이 각각 6.00∼7.89%, 5.15∼6.06%로 참나무지엽이 다소 높았으며 생육이 진행됨에 따라 참나무지엽은 감소하였으나 소나무지엽은 생육시기에 크게 영향을 받지 않았다. 조지방 함량은 각각 1.90∼2.68%, 6.30∼6.33%로 소나무지엽이 현저하게 높은 수준이었고, 조섬유 7 함량은 각각 33.3∼35.2%, 33.7∼34.8%로 비슷하였으며 생육이 진행됨에 따라 증가하는 경향이었다. 그리고 조회분 함량은 각각 3.13∼2.78%, 2.11∼l.93%로 참나무지엽이 약간 높았다. 무기물 함량은 Ca, Mg, Mn, Cu가 소나무 지엽보다 참나무지엽이 높은 수준이었고 P, K, Na, Fe, Zn은 비슷한 수준이었으며 생육이 진행됨에 따라 대부분 감소하는 경향이었다. 소나무지엽과 참나무지엽의 ABF 함량은 각각 47.7∼52.0%, 46.1∼48.1%로 비슷하였으며 생육이 진행됨에 따라 증가하였고(P<.05), NDF 함량은 각각 64.1∼67.9%, 65.0∼66.5%로 비슷하였으며 생육이 진행됨에 따라 소나무지엽은 증가하였으나(P<.05) 참나무지엽은 비슷하였다. 건물소화율은 소나무지엽이 51.7∼48.4%로 생육이 진행됨에 따란 감소하였고, 참나무지엽은 53.0%∼51.4%로 비슷하였다. 가소화양분층량은 참나무지엽이 50.9∼52.4% 이었고, 소나무지엽은 47.7∼51.1%로 생육이 진행됨에 따라 감소하였으며(P<.05), 상대적 사료가치는 참나무지엽과 소나무지엽이 비슷하였고 생육이 진행됨에 따라 낮아지는 경향이었다. 탄닌 함량은 참나무지엽과 소나무지엽이 각각 2.96%, 6.27%로 소나무지엽이 높았으며 지엽을 건조하였을 때 각각 2.46%, 4.79%로 탄닌 함량이 낮아지는 경향이었다.

Keywords

References

  1. A.O.A.C. 1991. Official method of analysis. Washington D.C
  2. Forwood, J.R. and C.E. Owensby. 1985. Nutritive value of tree leaves in the Kansas Filint Hills. J. Range Manage. 38(1):61-64 https://doi.org/10.2307/3899335
  3. Goering, H.K. and P.J. Van Soest. 1970. Forage Fiber Analysis. US Dept. Agric. Handbook. No.379. ARS. USDA, Washington, DC
  4. Hilgard, E.W. 1903. The value of oak leaves of for forage. California. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 150
  5. Liacos, L.G., V.P. Papanastasis and C.N. Tsiouvaras. 1980. Contribution to the conversion of kermes oak brushlands to grasslands and comparison of their production with improved brushlands in Greece. Dasiki Erevna, 1:97-141
  6. Meuret, M. 1988. Feasibility of in vivo digestibility trials with lactating goats browsing fresh leafy branches. Small Rumin. Res. 1: 273-290 https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-4488(88)90055-7
  7. Moore, J.E. 1970. Procedure for the two-stage in vitro digestion of forage. University of Florida, Dept. Anim. Sci
  8. Nastis, A.S. and L.G. Liacos. 1982. Consumption, digestion and utilization by yearling goats of oak(Quercus coccifera) foliage at three pheno- logical stages. In: Proc. Symp. Dynamics and management of mediterranean type ecosystems. 22-26
  9. Papachristou, T.G. and A.S. Nastis. 1993a. Diets of goats grazing oak shrublands of varying cover in Northern Greece. J. Range. Manage. 46: 220-226 https://doi.org/10.2307/4002610
  10. Papachristou, T.G. and A.S. Nastis. 1993b. Nutritive value of diet selected by goats grazing on kermes oak shrublands with different shrub and herbage cover in Northern Greece. Small Rumi. Res. 12:35-44 https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-4488(93)90036-H
  11. Papachristou, T.G. and V.P. Papanastasis. 1994. Forage value of Mediterranean deciduous woody fodder species and its implication to management of silvo-pastoral systems for goats. Agrofor. Systems. 27:269-282 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00705061
  12. Papanastasis, V.P. 1993. Review of papers on woody forage plants. Herba, 6:28-33
  13. Perevolotsky, A., A. Brosh, O. Ehrlich, M. Gutman, Z. Henkin and Z. Holzer. 1993. Nutritional value of common oak(Quercus calliprinos) browse as fodder for goats: Experimental results in ecological perspective. Small Rumi. Res. 11:95-106 https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-4488(93)90143-6
  14. SAS. 1991. User's Guide Statistics. Cary. N. C. Statistical Analysis System Institute Inc
  15. Sidahmed, A.E., J.G. Morris, L.J. Koong and S.R. Radosevich. 1981. Contribution of mixtures of three chaparrel shrubs to the protein and energy requirement of Spanish goats. J. Anim. Sci. 53:1391-1396 https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1981.5351391x
  16. Singh, P., J.C. Biswas, R. Somvanshi, A.K. Verma, S.M. Deb and R.A. Dey. 1996. Performance of pashmina(Cheghu) goats fed on oak(Quercus semecarpifolia) leaves. Small Rumi, Res. 22(2):123-130 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-4488(96)00870-X
  17. Singh, P., A.K. Verma, N.N. Pathak and J.C. Biswas. 1998. Nutritive value of oak(Quercus semecarpifolia) leaves in pashmina kids. Anim. Feed Sci. and Techno. 72:183-187 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(97)00174-0
  18. Tilley, J.M.A. and R.A. Terry. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 18:104-111 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x
  19. Villena, F. Pfister, J. A. 1990. Sand shinnery oak as forage for Angora and Spanish goats. J. Range-Manage. 43(2):116-122 https://doi.org/10.2307/3899027
  20. 김득수. 이인덕. 1994. 갈참나무 수엽의 사료가치 및 생엽량 추정에 관한 연구. 한초지. 14(2): 120-124
  21. 김용국. 1980. 관목지에서의 사초생산에 관한 연구. 한국낙농학회지. 2(1):1-7
  22. 김용국. 전창기. 1981. 관목지 목본초류의 사료가치에 관한 평가. 충남대. 8(2):167-170
  23. 이성운. 2000. 탄닌 함유 목초의 사료가치에 관한 연구. 전북대학원. 석사학위논문
  24. 이인덕, 이중해, 이형석. 1993. 참나무수엽의 사료가치 비교연구. 한초지. 13(3):221-227
  25. 윤익석, 맹원재. 1984. 임지의 축산적이용에 관한 연구. 제3보. 채취시기가 잡관목수엽의 화학적 성분, 소화율 및 섭취량에 관한 연구. 건국대. 28:253-263
  26. 조익환, 황보순, 전기현, 송해범, 안종호, 이주삼. 1997. 조사료원이 한국 재래산양의 섭취량과 소화율에 미치는 영향. 한초지. 17(1):82-88
  27. 한인규, 박신호, 김영상, 안병홍. 1971. 한국산 야초류의 사료적 가치에 관한 연구. Ⅰ. 야초류의 일반성분과 생육시기에 따른 성분변화에 관한 연구. 한축지. 13:3-16
  28. 최인규. 1999. 숲가꾸기 산물을 이용한 조사료 개발. 임업연구원
  29. 축산시험장. 1988. 한국표준사료성분표. 농진청. pp 146-152