NITROGEN-FREE EXTRACT DIGESTIBILITY OF COMBINATION OF

SILAGE, FORMULATED CONCENTRATE AND UREA MOLASSES

MINERAL BLOCK FED BY RAMBON

Gowri Mariappan1), Romziah Sidik2), Djoko Poetranto3),

1)
Student, 2) Department of Animal Husbandry, 3) Department of Clinic
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universitas Airlangga

ABSTRACT

The aim of this research were to determine the digestibility value of nitrogen-
free extract of silage, formulated concentrate and urea molasses mineral block fed by
beef cattle. Experimental animals used in this study were 9 Rambon beef cattle. This
research was conducted by providing various combination of feed to experimental
animal. The experimental design used was the completely randomized design with
three treatments and seven replications as time of collection feces. P0 was control
treatment while P1 and P2 used as different feed combination. Result of research
showed that nitrogen-free extract value of feed by Rambon cattle there were
significantly differences (p<0.05). The best result of nitrogen-free extract was on P2
as 94.844% significantly different with P1 90.558% and the lowest result was
89.748%. result of digestibility of nitrogen-free extract of combination feed by
Rambon cattle showed that there were any significantly difference (p<0.05). The best
result of digestible nitrogen-free extract was on P2 as 94.844% significantly different
with P1 as 90.558 and P0 as 89.748.

Key words: silage, formulated concentrate, urea molasses mineral block

nitrogen-free extract digestibility, Rambon cattle

Introduction 2006). Approximately about 70 %

Livestock is one of the producers
livestock production, especially
of meat such as cattle that have high
growth and ability of reproduction
economic value and are important in
influenced by environmental factors.
the life of society (Sudarmono, 2008).
Among the environmental factors,diet
Cattle is one of the meat producer in
had the most impact which is about 60
Indonesia. However, meat production
% (Siregar, 2012).The low level
in the country has not been able to
productivity of meat that produces
meet the needs for the population
livestock is caused by maintenance
(Rosida,
management people who rely on low
quality feed (Suharti, 2009). Therefore,
the farmers can obtain higher profit if
he can prepare cheap and quality ration
(Setyono et al., 2013). Alternative feed
ingredients that relatively inexpensive
and does not compete with human
need is one of the effort to reduce the
cost of the feed (Istighfarin, 2010).
The feed material is anything
that can be eaten and digested partially
or completely without harm to the
health of livestock that consume. The
quality of feed ingredients will affect
meat and
dairy products produced by ruminants
(Tillman et al., 2005).
Ruminant feedstuff can be
classified into three groups, forages,
formulated feed and supplement feed
(Sugeng, 2010). Silage is
combination of two forages (David,
2006) that preserved in a fresh state
(Setyono et al., 2013). Formulated
concentrate are feeds with low in fiber
but rich in energy (David, 2006). Urea
molasses mineral block is
supplement feed (Harinder, 2011).
Beef cattle need nutrients to
support body maintenance, lactation,
growth and reproduction. Beef cattle
need carbohydrates, fats, protein,
minerals, and vitamins (Parish et al.,
2009). Energy is needed for
production, reproduction and also
body care. Nitrogen-free extract is part
of the feed material containing
carbohydrates such as sugars and
starches which produces energy
(Romziah, 2015).
Rambon cattle were suspected to
be the result of a cross between three
nations namely PO, Bali and Madura
cattle (Susilawati, 2004). Rambon
cattle have high survivability. They
can reproduce with low quality and
quantity of feed (Disnak, 2005).
a
Digestibility of feed is the
amount of nutrients that contained in
the feed that can be consumed reduced
by the amount of nutrients contained in
feces (McDonald et al., 2010). In vivo
digestibility is a way of determining
a
the digestibility of nutrients using
Rambon cattle with nutrient analysis
of feed and feces (Mulyawati, 2009).
METHODS OF THE RESEARCH
The research was conducted in was given silage 10-15kg/head/day,
PT. Agro Great Indoberkah, Sepuh formulated concentrate 1kg/head/day
Gembol Village, Wonomerto District, same with P2 but with addition of urea
Probolinggo City. The proximate molasses mineral block 0.1 kg/head/.
analysis was conducted at the All feed given and rejected were
Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, calculated to find out the feed
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, consumption of each cattle. Amount of
Airlangga University. feces excreted by each cattle were also
This research used 9 Rambon
weighed every day.
cattle that has been randomized and Data obtained was analyzed
divided into 3 groups. All of the using One Way Analysis of Variance
Rambon were adapted for 7 days, (ANOVA) based on Completely
maintained at the same place and given Randomized Design (RAL) then
different kind of feed for each continued with Duncans Multiple
treatment. Range to know the mean difference
Control group (P0) was given
between the treatments
10-15kg/head/day of silage, P1 group

RESULT AND DISCUSSION (94.844 %), followed by P1 (90.558

Research results for
digestibility value of Nitrogen-free
extract in combination of silage,
formulated concentrate and
molasses mineral block showed that
treatment P2 had the highest (p<0.05)
nitrogen-free extract digestibility value
the
%) and the lowest was P0 (89.748 %).
Research result data was
analyzed by ANOVA and to analyze
urea the mean differences among treatments
Duncans Multiple Range test was
used. Results from statistical analysis
showed that the digestibility value of
nitrogen- free extract in combination
of silage, formulated concentrate and
urea molasses mineral block had mean of Nitrogen-free extract
significant differences (p<0.05). digestibility and standard deviation
According to proximate analysis the could be seen in the table 4.1 below:

Table 4.1. Mean and SD Nitrogen-Free Extract Digestibility of Different Kind of

Feed by Rambon Cattle as follows:
Treatment NFE digestibility value (%) SD
P0 89.748a 3.921
P1 90.558a 1.963
P2 94.844b 1.333
a and b:
Different superscripts in the same column indicate significant differences (p<0.05)

In this research, the results (McDonald et al.,2010). Silage only

showed that feeding combination of
silage, formulated concentrate and
urea molasses mineral block is the best
feed quality compared to silage only
and the combination of silage and
formulated concentrate based on
nitrogen-free extract digestibility.
Nitrogen free extract (non-
structural carbohydrate) considered to
be highly digestible and a major of
source of energy for cattle. An increase
in the quantity of feed consumed by an
animal generally causes an increase in
the rate of passage into digestive
system. When the cattle consume more
feed, it will receive more energy
has 36.46 % nitrogen free-extract
where the formulated concentrate has
46.29 % of nitrogen-free extract and
urea molasses mineral block has 36.74
% nitrogen-free extract. P2 cattle
consumed all three feeds which made
the digestibility of nitrogen-free
extract has the highest value.
Digestibility can be influenced
by the rate of feeding, combined effect
of feed ingredients, the rate of passage
of feed through the digestive tract and
the physical form of feed (Tillman et
al., 2005). This was proven by the
average of feed consumption of P2
with the highest nitrogen-free extract
digestibility (10.9 kg of silage/day,
0.99kg of concentrate/day and 100gr
urea molasses mineral block/day), and
P0 with the lowest nitrogen-free
extract digestibility (9.42 kg of
silage/day).
Digestion of carbohydrates in
ruminants is through fermentation
process by microbes in the rumen
(Murray, 2009) Urea molasses mineral
block is a feed supplement for
ruminants which provides a constant
Conclusion
Feeding silage,
formulated concentrate and
urea molasses
Bakshi, M.P.S. and Wadhwa,
M. 2011. Evaluation
of Urea Molasses
Multinutrient Blocks
Prepared by Hot or
Cold Process in
Buffalo Calves. Page
35-39
David A. T., 2006. Animal
Feeds, Feeding and
Nutrition and Ration
Evaluation. Cengage
source of fermentable nitrogen to
promote growth of rumen microbes
(Bakshi and Wadhwa, 2011) without
urea molasses mineral block as P1 than
with urea molasses mineral block as
P2.
For ruminants the end product
of carbohydrate will produce VFA
which is the main source of energy. P2
cattle which is the combination of
silage, formulate concentrate and urea
molasses mineral block has the highest
mineral block will increase the
digestibility of nitrogen-free
extract.
Learning. United States
of America. Page 139-
155
Disnak 2005. Sumberdaya
Hayati Ternak Lokal
Jawa Tengah. Dinas
Peternakan Propinsi
Jawa Tengah dengan
Balai Pengkajian
Teknologi Pertanian
Jawa Tengah.
Semarang. Page 4
Harinder P.S. Makkar. 2011 Mc Graw Hills
FAO Animal Production Companie. Page 18-27
and Health Proceedings.
No. 11. Rome, Italy. Parish, J.A., J.D Rivera., H.T
Page 10-15 Boland. 2009.
Understanding the
Istighfarin. 2010. Aspergillus Ruminant Animal
terreus Cairan Rumen Digestive System.
Sapi untuk Penurunan Mississippi State
Kandungan Serat Kasar University. USA. Page
dan Peningkatan 3
Protein Kasar pada
Fermentasi Bekatul.
Fakultas Kedokteran Romziah, S. 2015. Complete
Hewan Universitas Proximate Analysis
Airlangga. Page 2 (Feed). Lab Test
Service Unit,
McDonald, P., R.A Edwards, Consultation and
J.F.D. Greenhalgh, C.A. Training. Faculty of
Morgan, L.A. Sinclair, Veterinary Medicine
R.G. Wilkinson 2010. Airlangga Universiti.
Animal Nutrition. 7th
Ed. USA. Pearson Rosida, I. 2006. Analisis
Prentice Hall. Pages Potensi Sumber Daya
156-189 Peternakan Kabupaten
Tasikmalaya sebagai
Mulyawati, Y. 2009. Wilayah Pengembangan
Fermentabilitas dan Sapi Potong. Skripsi.
Kecernaan In Vitro Fakultas Peternakan
Biomineral Institut Pertanian
Dienkapsulasi. Skripsi. Bogor. Page 1-2
Fakultas Peternakan,
Institut Pertanian Sireger, 2012 Analisis
Bogor. Pages 11-13 Kelayakan dan Strategi
Pengembangan Usaha
Murray, R.K., D.A, Bender, Ternak Sapi Potong,
K.M. Botham, P.J. Sumatera Utara. Page
Kennelly, V.W. 293
Rodwell, P.A. Weil. Sudarmono, A.S dan Sugeng,
2009.Harpers Y.B., 2008. Sapi
Illustrated Potong. Penebar
Biochemistry. 28 Ed. Swadaya ; Jakarta. Page
International editions. 17-18
Sugeng, Y. Bambang 2008 Al-Arief, M. Lamid dan
"Sapi potong: W.P. Lokapirnasari.
Pemeliharaan, 2013. Teknologi Pakan
Perbaikan Produksi, Hewan. Fakultas
Prospek Bisnis, Analisis Kedokteran Hewan.
Penggemukan. Page 16- Universitas Airlangga.
19 Surabaya. Page 2-41
Suharti, S., D.A. Astuti and E. Susilawati, T. 2004. Sapi Lokal
Wina. 2009. Nutrient Indonesia. Laporan
Digestibility and Beef Penelitian. Fakultas
Cattle Performance Fed Peternakan Universitas
by Lerak (Sapindus Brawijaya Malang.
Rarak) Meal in Page 1-3
Concentrate Ration.
Departemen Ilmu Tillman, A.D., S.
Nutrisi dan Teknologi Reksohadiprodjo, S.
Pakan, Fakultas Prawirokusumo dan S.
Peternakan IPB. Page Lebdosoekojo. 2005.
200 Ilmu Makanan Ternak
Dasar. Gadjah Mada
Setyono, H., Kusriningrum University Press,
R.S., T. Nurhajati, Yogyakarta. Page 10-89
Romziah, S.B., M.A.