Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Early Access

Nutrient-rich or anti-nutritional challenge? Evaluating Senna spectabilis (DC.) H.S. Irwin & Barneby for sustainable animal feed production

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7953
Submitted
27 February 2025
Published
20-04-2025
Versions

Abstract

This study investigated the nutritional composition and anti-nutritional factors of Senna spectabilis as a potential fodder for animal feed. Key parameters such as crude protein, crude fiber, dry matter, digestibility and anti-nutritional factors like phenols, tannins, saponins and nitrates were analyzed from the five formulations named from SS1 to SS5. The results showed significant variations across the species in terms of digestibility and energy content, with formulations SS1 and SS4 demonstrating superior digestibility and higher Total Digestible Nutrients (TDN). On the other hand, formulation SS5 exhibited higher crude fiber content and lower digestibility, making it less efficient as a feed source. Anti-nutritional factors such as saponins and nitrates were found to be highest in formulation SS1, which could affect feed intake and livestock health if present in excessive amounts. The study also noted moderate levels of tannins and phenols in several species, which could impact nutrient absorption for animals. Additionally, concentrate feed mixtures were considered in comparison to fodder-based feeds for their influence on livestock growth and performance. These findings suggest that careful selection of feed ingredients, considering both nutritional and anti-nutritional parameters, is essential for optimizing livestock nutrition. Formulations with lower levels of anti-nutritional compounds like SS2, offer more sustainable feed options, while further research is required to understand the effects of these compounds on livestock health and performance.

References

  1. IUCN. Senna spectabilis: Groom, A: The IUCN red list of threatened species 2012: E.T19892105A20141165. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN; 2010.
  2. Kumar A, Prasad S. Threats of invasive alien plant species. Int Res J Manag Sci Technol. 2014; 4:605-24.
  3. Hobbs HA. Invasive species in a changing world. Island press; 2000.
  4. Raizada P, Raghubanshi AS, Singh JS. Impact of invasive alien plant species on soil processes: A review. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences India Section B–Biological Sciences. 2008;78(PART 4):288-98.
  5. Vitousek PM, D'antonio CM, Loope LL, Rejmanek M, Westbrooks R. Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. New Zealand Journal of Ecology. 1997:1-6.
  6. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM. Trees and shrubs as invasive alien species–2013 update of the global database. Diversity and Distributions. 2013;19(8):1093-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12075
  7. Rejmánek M, Richardson DM, Pyšek P. Plant invasions and invasibility of plant communities. Vegetation Ecology. 2013:387-424. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118452592.ch13
  8. Gaertner M, Den Breeyen A, Hui C, Richardson DM. Impacts of alien plant invasions on species richness in Mediterranean-type ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Progress in Physical Geography. 2009;33(3):319-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/030913330934160
  9. Hejda M, Pyšek P, Jarošík V. Impact of invasive plants on the species richness, diversity and composition of invaded communities. Journal of Ecology. 2009;97(3):393-403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2009.01480.x
  10. Irwin HS, Barneby RC. The American Cassiinae: a synoptical revision of Leguminosae tribe Cassieae subtribe Cassiinae in the new world. 1982.
  11. Satyanarayana P, Gnanasekaran G. An exotic tree Species S. spectabilis (DC.) Irwin & Barneby (Caesalpiniaceae) naturalized in Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Indian Journal of Forestry. 2013;36(2):243-6. https://doi.org/10.54207/bsmps1000-2013-fbbsv3
  12. Garden MB. Tropicos database. St. Louis, Missouri, USA: Missouri Botanical Garden [Internet]. 2016.
  13. Harilal K. Impact of invasive alien Plants on understorey vegetation in Tholpetty range of Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Natural Resource Management, College of Forestry, Vellanikkara). http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/7993
  14. Anoop NR, Sen S, Vinayan PA, Ganesh T. Native mammals disperse the highly invasive Senna spectabilis in the Western Ghats, India. Biotropica. 2022;54(6):1310-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12996
  15. Lukosi N. < News> A Brief Note on Possible Control of S. spectabilis, an Invasive Exotic Tree at Mahale. Pan Africa News. 1997;4(2):18.
  16. Vinayan PA, Anjankumar BN, Vishnu NM, Vaishnav K, Unais P, Ajayan PA, et al. Mapping the distribution and abundance of the exotic invasive species, Senna spectabilis in the Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary, Kerala. Ferns-A society for nature conservation & Kerala Forests and Wildlife Department. 2020.
  17. Garba Y, Muhammad IR, Adnan aa. Common fodder fed by small ruminants of the agro-pastoral production system in semi-arid, Nigeria. Proceedings of the 1st International conference on Drylands. 2014.
  18. Duarte-Vargas JH, Melo O, Mora-Delgado J, Castañeda-Serrano R, Váquiro H. Pod production, and dasometric variables, of the tree S. spectabilis (Fabaceae) in a tropical dry forest. Revista de Biología Tropical. 2021;69(1):218-30. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v69i1.42792
  19. Kumar S, Singh P, Devi U, Yathish KR, Saujanya PL, Kumar R, et al. An overview of the current fodder scenario and the potential for improving fodder productivity through genetic interventions in India. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology. 2023;23(3):631-44. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-181X.2023.00054.9
  20. Helrich K. Official methods of analysis ;1990.
  21. Schroeder JW. Interpreting forage analysis ;1994.
  22. Redfearn DD, Zhang H, Caddel JL. Forage quality interpretations. Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Oklahoma State University; 2004.
  23. CI KC, Indira G. Quantitative estimation of total phenolic, flavonoids, tannin and chlorophyll content of leaves of Strobilanthes kunthiana (Neelakurinji). J Med Plants. 2016;4:282-6.
  24. Cataldo DA, Maroon M, Schrader LE, Youngs VL. Rapid colorimetric determination of nitrate in plant tissue by nitration of salicylic acid. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 1975;6(1):71-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627509366547
  25. Hiai S, Oura H, Nakajima T. Color reaction of some sapogenins and saponins with vanillin and sulfur1c acid. Planta Medica. 1976;29(02):116-22. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0028-1097639
  26. Cheng ZJ, Hardy RW. Effects of extrusion processing of feed ingredients on apparent digestibility coefficients of nutrients for rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Aquaculture Nutrition. 2003;9(2):77-83. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2095.2003.00226.x
  27. Syarief R, Halid H. Food storage technology. Inter-University Food and Nutrition, Bogor Agricultural University, Bogor, Indonesia. 1993.
  28. Afolabi SS, Oyeyode JO, Shafik W, Sunusi ZA, Adeyemi AA. Proximate Analysis of Poultry?Mix Formed Feed Using Maize Bran as a Base. International Journal of Analytical Chemistry. 2021;2021(1):8894567. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8894567
  29. Ukachukwu SN. Studies on the nutritive value of composite cassava pellets for poultry: chemical composition and metabolizable energy. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 2005;17(11).
  30. Julaikha Qistina I. Characterisation of Mulberry Leaf Pellet as Rabbit Feed (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Malaysia Kelantan);2020.
  31. Buliah N, Jamek S, Ajit A, Abu R. Production of dairy cow pellets from pineapple leaf waste. InAIP Conference Proceedings 2019(Vol. 2124, No. 1). AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5117108
  32. Tillman BA, Pan WL, Ullrich SE. Nitrogen Use by Northern?Adapted Barley Genotypes Under No?Till. Agronomy Journal. 1991;83(1):194-201. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1991.00021962008300010046x
  33. Raut RG, Rekhate DH, Dhok AP. Nutrient utilization in goats fed arhar (Cajanus cajan) straw based complete feed pellets. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition. 2002;19(2):135-9.
  34. Formato M, Scharenberg F, Pacifico S, Zidorn C. Seasonal variations in phenolic natural products in Fagus sylvatica (European beech) leaves. Phytochemistry. 2022;203:113385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2022.113385
  35. Rajanish, Varshini. Validation of multi nutrient animal feed pellets using farm grown fodder trees with Prosopis pods. UG Project, Forest College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University. 2022.
  36. Naumann HD, Tedeschi LO, Zeller WE, Huntley NF. The role of condensed tannins in ruminant animal production: advances, limitations and future directions. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 2017;46:929-49. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1806-92902017001200009
  37. Oyaniran DK, Ojo VO, Aderinboye RY, Bakare BA, Olanite JA. Effect of pelleting on nutritive quality of forage legumes. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 2018;30(4).
  38. Lenz M. Risk of nitrate toxicity when grazing annual forages. 2018.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.