1

Feed the Future: Using crop by-products to intensify and sustain

food production

Michael Blümmel

ILRI Livestock live talk seminar,Nairobi, 26 September 2012

2

Topics

Why target by-products as feed resources

Differences in feed/fodder quality matter that matter

for productivity, fodder market studies

How to improve by-product based feed/fodderresources: exploiting variation, enhance variation,

value addition

Effect of improved feed/fodder resources on livestock productivity and environment

3

Why by-products

Already the most important feed resource in targetsystems, targeting strongly suggest their

importance will further increase

They do not compete for land and water andtherefore not for food-production

Entry point for increasing overall productivity of mixed systems

Short delivery pathways, well defined public and private partners with global reach

Good acceptability in an environment increasingly reserved against livestock

CR becoming more importantKahsay Berhe (2004) study in Yarer Mountain area

Cultivated land has doubled at the expense of pasture in 30 years

Switch in source of nutrition for livestock from grazing to CR

5

Sorghum stover trading in Hyderabad

6

Type and cost of sorghum stover traded monthly 2004-2005 in

Hyderabad, India Stover type Price IR / kg DM

Andhra 3.52b

Andhra Hybrid 3.15cd

Ballary Hybrid 3.54b

Raichur 3.89a

Rayalaseema 3.23c

Telangana (Local Y) 3.06d

Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006

7

Relation between digestibility and price of sorghum stover

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 552.8

3.0

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4.0

4.2y = -4.9 + 0.17x; R2 = 0.75; P = 0.03

Stover in vitro digestibility (%)

Sto

ver

pri

ce (

IR/k

g D

M)

Premium Stover“Raichur”

Low Cost Stover“Local Yellow”

Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006

8

Stover digestibility and grain yield in new sorghum cultivars release-tested in

India between 2002 and 2008

34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 640

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Kharif: y = 1473 + 44.2x; r = 0.17; P=0.05Rabi: y = 9208 -132x; r = -0.47; P < 0.0001

Stover in vitro organic digestibility (%)

Gra

in y

ield

(kg

/ha)

Blümmel et al. 2010

9

Targeted genetic enhancement towards higher food-feed-fodder

quality Recurrent selection in pearl millet: about 2-3% digestibility in 2-yeas

cycle (Bidinger et al. 2010)

Hybrid maize production: about 7 to 9% digestibility (Zaidi et al. 2012; Berhanu et al. 2012)

Brown mid rib sorghum: about 2-3% digestibility (Srinivas et al., 2012a/b)

Stay green introgression in sorghum: about 3-4% digestibility (Blümmel et al 2012).

10

Importance of value addition to basal diet,

feed processing,densification, fortification

11

Feed block manufacturing: supplementation, densification

Ingredients %

Sorghum stover 50

Bran/husks/hulls 18

Oilcakes 18

Molasses 8

Grains 4

Minerals, vitamins, urea 2

Courtesy: Miracle Fodder and Feeds PVT LTD

12

Relation between digestibility and price of sorghum stover

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 552.8

3.0

3.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4.0

4.2y = -4.9 + 0.17x; R2 = 0.75; P = 0.03

Stover in vitro digestibility (%)

Sto

ver

pri

ce (

IR/k

g D

M)

Premium Stover“Raichur”

Low Cost Stover“Local Yellow”

Blümmel and Parthasarathy, 2006

13

Comparisons of high and low quality sorghum stover based feed blocks

in commercial dairy buffalo

Block High Block Low

CP 17.2 % 17.1%

ME (MJ/kg) 8.46 MJ/kg 7.37 MJ/kg

DMI 19.7 kg/d 18.0 kg/d

DMI per kg LW 3.6 % 3.3 %

Milk Potential 16.6 kg/d 11.8 kg/d

Anandan et al. (2009a)

14

Supplementation and processing of sweet sorghum bagasse and

response in sheep

Mash Pellets Block

Control

Chaffed SSBRL

Concentrate

DMI (g/kg LW) 52.5 a 55.6 a 42.1 b 41.5 b

ADG (g / d) 132.7 a 130.4 a 89.5 b 81.3 b

Processing ($/t) 5.9 7.0 5.2 1.7

Transport ($/t/100km) 6.6 5.8 5.2 13.5

Anandan et al. (2012)

15

Feed intensification, greenhouse gases and natural resource usage

16

Across herd milk yields (3.61 kg/d) in India and scenario-dependent ME needs for total milk production (81.8 million t/y)

ME required (MJ x 109)

Milk (kg/d) Maintenance Production Total

3.61 (05/06) 1247.6 573.9 1821.5

6 (Scenario 1) 749.9 573.9 1323.8

9 (Scenario 2) 499.9 573.9 1073.8

12 (Scenario 3) 374.9 573.9 948.8

15 (Scenario 4) 299.9 573.9 873.9

17

Effect of increasing average daily milk yields onoverall methane emissions from dairy in India

0 3 6 9 12 150.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Daily milk yield per animal (liter)

Met

han

e p

rod

uce

d (

Tg

)current herd average milk yield of 3.61 l/d

(Blϋmmel et al. 2009)

(2005-06) 2020 2020 (fixed LP

Milk (million tons) 81.8 172 172

yield/day (kg) 3.6 5.24 6.76

Numbers (000) 69759 89920 * 69759

Metabolizable energy requirements (MJ x 109)

Maintenance 1247.64 1608.22 1247.6

Production 573.94 1075.00 1075.00

total 1821.58 2683.22 23266.6

Feed Req.( m tons) 247.50 364.57 315.6

18

* Calculated based on CAGR

Livestock revolution: Impact on energy and feed requirements

19

Summary Intuitively “small differences” in feed/fodder quality

have significant implication for livestock productivity

These differences can be exploited in a wide range of key crops and basal diets and/or generated

Combining improved basal diets with supplementation

and feed processing can result in economically and environmentally significant level of productivity

20

Outlook In some ways, a proof-of-concept element to

presented approaches/findings

CRP’s, particularly 3-7, are will providing good frameworks for larger scale put-into-practice

With regards to CRP 3-7 focused employment of heath + breed + feed technology will enable and enforce presented approaches