Meat productivity of gobies when used in the diets of silage from galega and pierced leaf sylphia

Relevance. The article is devoted to the topical problem of studying unconventional, poorly studied forage plants that are promising for introduction into agricultural production for fattening gobies — galega and pierced leaf sylphia.

Methods and results. The studies were carried out at the test site of the All-Russian Research Institute of Reclaimed Lands (VNIIMZ, Tver Region). In the experiment on fattening gobies with a live weight of 260–262 kg, rations on average per day consisted of: in the control group, 2 kg of herb hay, 14.65 kg of clover silage, 2.5 kg of chopped barley and 35 g of sodium chloride; in the first experimental group — 2.12 kg of herb hay, 14.3 kg of silage from galega, 2.5 kg of chopped barley and 35 g of sodium chloride; in the second experimental group — 2.2 kg of herb hay, 14.5 kg of silage from sylphia, 2.5 kg of chopped barley and 35 g of sodium chloride. In the daily ration, each feed unit contained digestible protein: 106 g in the control group, 126 g in the first experimental group, and 105 g in the second experimental group. Cellulose occupied 20.84% in the first group, fat — 2.59%, in the second and third groups, respectively — 16.46% and 1.91%, 15.06 and 1.95%. Feeding silage from galega and silphia in the diet of fattening gobies with a daily consumption of 7.05 feed units with a content of 105-125 g of digestible protein in 1 feed unit made it possible to obtain an average daily weight gain in the first experimental group of 838 g, in the second — 812 g, which is 6.75% and 3.44% more than in the control group. At the same time, feed costs decreased by 6.13 and 3.01%.

1. Kosolapov V.M., Pilipko S.V., Kostenko S.I. New varieties of forage crops are the key to the successful development of forage production. Achievement of science and technology of the agroindustrial complex. 2015;29(4):35-37. (In Russ.) https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=23374009 (In Russ.)

2. Kutuzova A.A., Provornaya Ye.Ye., Tsybenko N.S. The efficiency of improved technologies for the creation of pasture herbage using new varieties of legumes and agrotechnical methods. Feed production. 2019;(1):7-11. (In Russ.). URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=36826282 (In Russ.)

3. Stepanov A.F., Chupina M.P. On the productivity and nutritional value of sylphia pierced-leaved in the conditions of Western Siberia. Feeding farm animals and forage production. 2015;(9):40-47. (In Russ.)

4. Kapsamun A.D. Perennial leguminous grasses on the drained lands of the Non-Chernozem region. Tver: Tver State University, 2018.177 p. (In Russ.)

5. Grigoriev N.G., Vorobiev E.S., Fitsev A.I. et al. Guidelines for the assessment of feed based on their digestibility. M: VASKHNIL, 1989. 44 p. (In Russ.)

6. Tomme M.F. Methods for determining the digestibility of feed and rations. M., 1969. 39 p. (In Russ.)

7. Plokhinsky N.A. Biometrics. M.: Iz-in Moscow State University, 1970. 342 p. (In Russ.)

8. Lukashik N.A., Tashchilin V.A. Zootechnical analysis of forage M.: Kolos, 1965. 222 p. (In Russ.)

9. Komissarova T.N., Loginova T.P. Zootechnical analysis of feed. Study guide. Nizhny Novgorod, FGBOU VO NGSKhA, 2017. 49 p. (In Russ.)