Livestock Production Science 59 (1999) 61–66

Feeding ensiled crude olive cake to lactating Chios ewes,Damascus goats and Friesian cows

*M. HadjipanayiotouAgricultural Research Institute, P.O. Box 2016, 1516 Nicosia, Cyprus

Received 3 March 1998; accepted 16 November 1998

Abstract

Three trials (48 Chios ewes, 48 Damascus goats, and 22 Friesian cows) were carried out to study the effect of partialreplacement of conventional (barley hay, barley straw) roughage (control, C group) with ensiled crude olive cake (OC)silage (S group) on the lactation performance of ewes, goats and cows. Within each trial, animals were stratified (pairs) basedon their milk yield, and randomly allocated to the C or S group. OC silage was very well preserved judging from its aroma,colour, pH (4.7) and the lack of any mould. There was no difference between diets for milk yield (ewes: C 2.09, S 2.12;goats: C 2.10, S 2.05; cows: C 18.08, S 17.71 kg/d) and fat-corrected (ewes 6%, goats and cows 4%) milk yield (ewes: C1.84, S 1.98; goats: C 2.07, S 2.13; cows: C 16.77, S 17.34 kg/d). Ewes on the S group produced milk of higher fat content(P , 0.01), but in the trials with goats and cows the difference was not significant (P $ 0.1). On the other hand, goats(P , 0.01) and cows (P , 0.05), but not ewes (P . 0.1), on the S group suffered greater body weight loss than those on C.Based on the results of the present study it may be concluded that the ensiling technique can be safely used for extendedstorage of OC, and that such silage can partially replace conventional roughages. 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rightsreserved.

Keywords: Olive cake silage; Dairy ewes; Dairy goats; Dairy cows; Milk yield; Milk composition

1. Introduction the region, its use is limited because of low nutritivevalue (Aguilera et al., 1992) and seasonal availabili-

Crude olive cake (OC), a mixture of skins, pulp, ty. Stacking of OC in non-covered heaps results inwoody endocarp and seeds, is obtained after the considerable deterioration of the material and was-extraction of oil from olives. It is available in tage of nutrients. Chemical (application of 4–6%appreciable quantities in most Mediterranean coun- NaOH) (Nefzaoui et al., 1983) and physical (remov-tries (Sansoucy, 1987), comprising around 35% by al of stones after solvent extraction of oil from theweight of the olives processed for oil extraction. OC) methods have been used for attaining a greaterDespite of a severe shortage of animal feedstuffs in and improved use of the by-product.

When OC is not processed with solvents for the* extraction of the remaining oil, which is mostly seedTel.: 1 357-2-305101; fax: 1 357-2-316770.E-mail address: miltos@arinet.ari.gov.cy (H. Hadjipanayiotou) oil, the by-product though richer in energy (it

0301-6226/99/$ – see front matter 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.PI I : S0301-6226( 99 )00005-6

62 M. Hadjipanayiotou / Livestock Production Science 59 (1999) 61 –66

contains 10.4% ether extract, DM basis), deteriorates black polyethylene film used was of 150 mm thick-2quickly (becomes rancid and mouldy) because of ness, 4.5 m width, and of about 138 g/m . The silos

high oil and moisture (around 50%) content (Had- were opened/used after a fermentation period of 3 tojipanayiotou, 1994a). It has been demonstrated (Had- 4 months. Representative samples of OC werejipanayiotou, 1994b) that the ensiling technique can analyzed (DM, OM, CP, ADF, NDF, lignin, etherbe safely used for extended storage of olive cake extract) prior to ensiling (AOAC, 1975). The samealone or in combination with other by-products analyses were made on a sample obtained at the(molasses, screened poultry litter) or conventional opening of the silo, and routinely during the coursefeedstuffs (ground barley or corn grain). Ensiled OC of the animal studies. Water extracts of the originalwas either used at different rates (10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and fermented OC were prepared by homogenizing78%) in urea blocks (Hadjipanayiotou, 1996), and/ 50 g of wet material with 200 ml water in a blenderor as partial replacement (30%) for conventional at full speed for 4 min. The contents were filteredfeedstuffs (barley hay, straw, concentrate) in diets of through two layers of cheese-cloth and the filtratedry mature or growing ruminants (Hadjipanayiotou was used to measure the pH. Acetic, propionic,and Koumas, 1996). butyric and lactic acids were determined on original

The objective of the present work was to evaluate (non-fermented) and fermented OC silage mixtures.ensiled OC as partial replacement for conventional Sample preparation and the methodology used forroughage fed to lactating ewes, goats and cows. fatty acid measurements were as outlined by Had-

jipanayiotou (1994b).OC silage made in December 1995, and in

2. Materials and methods November 1996 was used in the trial with lactatingChios ewes, and the two trials with lactating Damas-

2.1. Silage making cus goats and Friesian cows, respectively.

OC, collected 2–4 days following olive oil ex- 2.2. Animal studiestraction, was ensiled in a temporary above groundsilo. The by-product was transported by track (15–20 Three separate trials were carried out. Animals int as it is basis) to the farm. It was then unloaded onto all three trials were stratified (pairs) based on theira clean, hard floor, preferably with a slight slope individual milk yield and allocated to the twofrom the middle to the outer ends. The heap of treatments (Control C vs Silage S) at random.by-product was formed to a shape suitable for Representative samples of feed offered were col-covering by black polyethylene film by means of a lected routinely, and chemical analyses (CP, ash, EE,tractor with a front-end loader. While forming to ADF, NDF, lignin) were made in duplicate on twoshape the upper surface of the by-product was bulk samples (AOAC, 1975). In vitro digestibility ofcompacted in such a way as to make the surface as roughage and silage was made following the Tilleysmooth as possible. The heap was then covered with and Terry (1963) procedure as modified by O’Sheaa plastic film. Used car tires were then placed on the and Wilson (1965).high ridge of the heap. Finally, sand or soil waspoured over the ridge of the heap starting from the 2.3. Ewescentre and working outwards from both sites or fromone end working towards the other end. At this stage Forty eight first lactation Chios ewes, lambingspecial care was taken to stretch the film and work between February 4 to March 12, 1996 and of 67slowly expelling the air in order to avoid the days in milk (range 49–86 d) were used. Animals offormation of air pockets. The soil or sand covered the two treatments were housed in adjacent pens andcompletely the edges of the film to avoid flapping of were group fed concentrate and roughage fromany loose ends. Upon completion of the sealing only separate feed troughs. Feed residues were collected30–50 cm from the outer edge of the plastic was daily. Animals on the control diet were offered 0.8covered (10–20 cm thickness) with sand or soil. The kg of barley hay plus concentrate to meet their

M. Hadjipanayiotou / Livestock Production Science 59 (1999) 61 –66 63

0.73 0.731.1 3 maintenance energy (0.401 MJ/kg weight ) weight ) and production requirementsand production requirements (Economides, 1986) at (Economides, 1986) at the commencement of thethe commencement of the trial [Dietary ME MJ/kg trial [Dietary ME MJ/kg milk, Y 5 (1.64 1 0.42X) /milk, Y 5 (1.94 1 0.43X) /0.62, where X 5 fat per- 0.62, where X 5 fat percentage and 0.62 the ef-centage and 0.62 the efficiency of utilization of ficiency of utilization of dietary ME for milk pro-dietary ME for milk production]. In the S diet, barley duction]. In the S diet, barley hay was reduced tohay was reduced to 0.44 kg, and it was compensated 0.35 kg, and OC silage was offered instead (1:1 DMby the provision of OC silage (1:1 DM basis). Feed basis). Feed allowance was kept constant throughoutallowance was kept constant throughout the 61 day the 70 day experimental period. The concentrateexperimental period. The ingredient composition of mixture was of similar form and composition to thatthe concentrate mixture is in Table 1. Barley grain used for ewes. Animals were weighed prior towas whole and mixed with a pelleted (5 mm cubes) morning feeding for two consecutive days at themixture made of the other ingredients of the concen- commencement and at the end of the trial. Milk yieldtrate mixture. Individual milk yield was recorded was recorded weekly, and representative samplesfortnightly, and milk samples were analyzed for fat from morning and afternoon milking were analyzedtwice (days 28 and 50 of the trial). Animals were for fat and CP fortnightly (MAFF, 1973). Data wereweighed prior to morning feeding for two consecu- analyzed using a model that accounted for treatmenttive days at the beginning and at the end of the trial. (Control, C; Silage, S), lactation number (2, 3, 4, 5,Ewes had free access to water. The collected data 6), treatment by lactation number interaction andwere analyzed by two-way (diet, pair) analysis of days in milk as covariate.variance.

2.5. Cows2.4. Goats

Twenty two lactating Friesian cows of 215 days inForty eight lactating Damascus goats of 158 days milk were used. Animals were stratified (pairs) based

in milk (153–164 d) were used. Allocation of on individual milk yield one week prior to theanimals to treatments, housing and feeding were as commencement of the trial, and randomly allocatedin the trial with ewes. Animals on the control diet to the C or the S group. Animals of the two dietswere offered 0.8 kg of barley hay plus concentrate to were housed in adjacent open yard pens withmeet their maintenance energy (0.401 MJ/kg adequate shaded area. Animals on the C group were

group offered 4 kg barley hay, 2 kg barley straw and1 kg lucerne hay, whereas in the S group theTable 1

Ingredient composition (kg/ t) of the concentrate mixtures used for allowance of hay and straw was gradually reducedfeeding lactating ewes, goats and cows by 50 and 100%, respectively; the decrease in the

allowance of conventional roughage was compen-Concentratesated by the provision of OC silage. The concentrateEwes and goats Cowsmixture (Table 1) was given on top of a fixed

Barley grain 821 758 allowance of roughage to cover maintenance, growthSoybean meal 107 170

(first and second lactation cows) and milk productionWheat bran 50 50requirements (NRC, 1989). The concentrate allow-Dicalcium phosphate 3 2.5

Limestone 13 14 ance was adjusted once every fortnight based onSalt 4 3.5 body weight at the beginning of the trial, and on

a bVitamin–trace element mixture 2 2.0 fat-corrected milk yield of the previous week. Con-Total 1000 1000

centrate was offered individually in six equal mealsa, The vitamin trace element mixture supplied 8000 I.U. vitamin via a computerized feeding system, at regular inter-A, 1000 I.U. vitamin D , 8.5 I.U. vitamin E, 25 mg Mn, 1.75 mg3 vals throughout the day. Live weight of the animalsI, 45 mg Zn, 30 mg Fe, 2 mg Co and 60 mg Mg per kg

was recorded on two consecutive days at the begin-concentrate mixture (as fed basis).b, Supplied also and 8 mg Cu/kg concentrate. ning and at the end of the 8 week trial. Individual

64 M. Hadjipanayiotou / Livestock Production Science 59 (1999) 61 –66

milk yields were recorded daily. Milk samples were silage resulted in higher intake of EE, ADF, NDFanalyzed (MAFF, 1973) for fat every fortnight (week and lignin. There was no difference between diets in2, 4, 6 and 8) and twice for protein (week 4 and 8) milk yield, fat corrected (6%) milk yield and weightduring the course of the trial. The collected data gain of ewes fed the two diets. On the other hand,were analyzed as in the trial with goats. ewes on the S diet produced milk of higher (P ,

0.01) milk fat content. With regard to goats andcows, there was no significant difference between

3. Results diets for absolute and fat corrected (4%) milk yieldand concentrate intake; on the other hand, there was

Chemical analyses and in vitro digestibility mea- a trend for higher milk fat content by goats and cowssurements on feedstuffs used in the present study are on the S than the C diet. Contrary, goats (P , 0.01)in Table 2. The pH of OC prior to ensiling was 5.4 and cows (P , 0.05) on the S diet suffered a greaterbut declined below 5 (4.6–4.8) after fermentation body weight loss than those on C. Finally, there was(ensiling). There was no butyric acid in either the no difference between diets in milk CP content.original (non-fermented) or the fermented (ensiled)OC. Acetic, propionic and lactic acids were lower inthe original OC mixture than the fermented (ensiled) 4. DiscussionOC mixture (Table 2). Other chemical constituents(OM, D) were slightly higher in the non-fermented In line with previous studies (Hadjipanayiotou,than the fermented silage mixtures. Data of one pair 1994a,b), the pH value of silage was below 5 (4.6–of ewes were excluded from the analysis because of 4.8), though the pH of non-fermented OC wasmastitis (one ewe on the S group), which was not greater (5.4). The CP, fat and other chemical com-associated with diet effects. ponents of the two silages were almost identical, and

Intake of feedstuffs and of specific nutrients (CP, close to those used in an earlier study (Had-EE, ADF, NDF, lignin) and data on the performance jipanayiotou, 1994b). Though OC silage was offeredof lactating animals on the two diets are in Table 3. in fixed amounts along with conventional feedstuffs,Replacement of conventional roughages with OC it can be stated that judging from its aroma, pH and

Table 2Chemical composition (g /kg DM) of feedstuffs used (trial one ewes, trial two goats, trial three cows)

Concentrate Barley hay Barley straw OC silage Lucerne hay

Trial: 1 2 3 1 2 & 3 3 1 2 & 3 3

DM 900 899 890 910 908 921 490 490 911CP 158 166 178 105 99 28 50 49 188Ash 45 49 43 90 83 69 24 20 114EE 21 20 19 21 19 ... 106 102 20ADF 9 9. 9 311 285 491 524 517 311NDF 21 21 21 503 518 785 722 740 391Lignin ... ... ... 23 23 48 250 248 65‘D’ ... ... ... 655 686 411 126 90 652pH ... ... ... ... ... ... 4.79 4.62 ...

a aAcetic acid .. .. .. .. .. .. (3) (3) ..25 28

a aPropionic acid .. .. .. .. .. .. (2) (2) ..13 15

a aLactic acid .. .. .. .. .. .. (1) (1)4 6

Note: ‘D’ denotes in vitro digestibility of organic matter in the dry matter.a, Values in parentheses are for original, non fermented OC.

M. Hadjipanayiotou / Livestock Production Science 59 (1999) 61 –66 65

Table 3The effect of partial replacement of conventional roughage with an olive cake (OC) silage on the performance of lactating Chios ewes,Damascus goats and Friesian cows

Trial Ewes Goats Cows

treatment C S SD C S SD C S SD

No. of animals 23 23 ... 24 24 ... 11 11 ...NS NS NSMilk yield (kg/d) 2.05 2.12 0.38 2.10 2.05 0.42 18.08 17.71 2.43P50.1 NS NSFCM (6%, 4%) (kg/d) 1.84 2.00 0.37 2.07 2.13 0.40 16.77 17.34 2.07

P50.1 NSFat (g /kg milk) 48.2 54.0 5.62** 39.8 42.9 4.9 35.6 39.7 3.36NS NSCP (g/kg milk) ... ... ... 39.1 38.6 3.3 29.6 30.1 2.34

Initial weight (kg) 62.3 62.2 5.36 77.4 77.7 9.78 542.5 572.7 27.34Final weight (kg) 67.6 67.1 6.67 77.9 75.5 8.86 544.5 552.7 33.42

NSWeight gain (g /d) 88.0 79.0 103 7.0 2 31 50** 34 2 312 317*Feed intake (kg/animal /d)

NSConcentrate 1.9 1.9 ... 1.71 1.71 ... 10.60 11.06 1.15Barley hay 0.80 0.44 ... 0.77 0.35 ... 3.89 2.80 ...Barley straw ... ... ... ... ... ... 2.00 0.04 ...Lucerne hay ... ... ... ... ... ... 1.00 1.00 ...OC silage (49% DM) ... 0.75 ... ... 0.79 ... ... 5.42 ...OC silage (DM basis) ... 0.37 ... ... 0.39 ... ... 2.66 ...Nutrient intake (g /head/day)CP 346 330 ... 324 306 ... 2252 2396 ...EE 51 84 ... 48 80 ... 283 524 ...ADF 384 476 ... 341 434 ... 3070 3315 ...NDF 732 834 ... 692 783 ... 5617 5742 ...

aLignin 17 102 ... 16 104 ... 229 779 ...NS P50.1, Not significant treatment effect; Probability level P 5 0.1; *, significant treatment effect P , 0.05; **, Significant treatment effectP , 0.01;a, Derived only from roughages.

the lack of any mould, OC silage is a well preserved present study, concluded that the most consistentmaterial and may comprise 15–20% (DM basis) of effect of WCS feeding (15% in the total diet) is anthe total diet. increase in milk fat percentage in the order of 0.2 to

OC silage used in the present studies was rela- 0.3 absolute percent units or more. In the presenttively rich in seed oil. Although it constituted only study, OC silage (15% of the total diet) feeding15% (ewes 14%, goats 16%, cows 15%) of the total increased milk fat percentage in the order of 0.3 todiet, it raised the fat content of the finished diet by 0.6 absolute percent units.65% (C 2%, S 3.3% DM basis). Furthermore, Taking into consideration the actual animal per-replacement of conventional roughages by OC silage formance data (Table 3), the tabulated energy (MEresulted in an increase of ADF [(ewes: 22.0% MJ/kg, as fed basis) value of feedstuffs used (con-increase, C 15.74%, S 19.2%), (goats: 26.7% in- centrate 11.30, barley hay 7.30, barley straw 5.90crease, C 15.22%, S 19.29%), (cows: 6.3% increase, and lucerne hay 7.95), and correcting (MAFF, 1975)C 19.5%, S 20.72% DM basis), NDF and lignin for weight changes ((1 kg liveweight loss equals 28content of the total diet. Overall, feeding OC silage MJ of dietary ME), and differences in milk yield ((1as partial replacement for conventional roughages kg ewe (6% fat), goat (4% fat) and cow (4% fat)resulted in higher milk fat content, which might be milk equals to 7.29, 5.35 and 5.31 MJ of dietary ME,ascribed to the higher fat content, as well as, to its respectively)), the energy value of OC silage (49%contribution to the higher fibre content of the total DM) is estimated to be 5.36, 2.92 and 2.37 MJ/kgdiet. Smith (1991) reviewing the literature on whole (as fed basis), for the ewe, goat and cow trial,cottonseed (WCS) feeding to dairy cows, which respectively. In the present study, roughages were 30supplied additional oil and fibre like OC silage in the to 39% of the total diet, and the share of OC silage

66 M. Hadjipanayiotou / Livestock Production Science 59 (1999) 61 –66

AOAC, 1975. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association ofwas only 15%. Although with such low dietary levelOfficial Analytical Chemists, 12th ed. AOAC, Washington, DC.of roughage, it is difficult to determine the relative

Economides, S., 1986. Comparative studies of sheep and goats:merit of roughage replacement on milk production, milk yield and composition and growth rate of lambs and kids.the estimated energy value of OC silage was close to J. Agric. Sci. Camb. 106, 477–484.previously reported (Hadjipanayiotou and Koumas, Hadjipanayiotou, M., 1994a. Voluntary intake and performance of

ruminant animals offered poultry litter-olive cake silage. Liv.1996) values with growing lambs and kids on higherRes. for Rural Dev., 6(2) paper 5. 9p.levels of total roughage (lambs 65%, kids 60%) and

Hadjipanayiotou, M., 1994b. Laboratory evaluation of ensiledof OC silage (lambs 45%, kids 38%) in the total diet. olive cake, tomato pulp and poultry litter. Liv. Res. for RuralIndeed, the results of the present study are in line Dev., 6(2), paper 4. 9p.with former studies (Hadjipanayiotou and Koumas, Hadjipanayiotou, M., 1996. Urea blocks without molasses made of

a variety of by-products and binders. Liv. Res. for Rural Dev. 81996; M. Hadjipanayiotou, unpublished data) where(4), 30–36.ewe lambs were more effective than goat kids in

Hadjipanayiotou, M., Koumas, A., 1996. Performance of sheeputilising OC, and the latter more effective than and goats on olive cake silages. Technical Bulletin 176.heifers. Agricultural Research Institute, Nicosia. 10p.

Based on the findings of the present study it can MAFF, 1973. The Analysis of Agricultural Materials. TechnicalBulletin 27, HMSO, London.be concluded that the ensiling technique can be used

MAFF, 1975. Energy Allowances and Feeding Systems forfor long storage of OC, and that OC silage has anRuminants. Technical Bulletin 33. Ministry of Agriculture,

energy value ranging from 2.37 (cows) to 5.36 Fisheries and Food. HMSO, London.(ewes) MJ/kg as fed. Finally, based on the energy, Nefzaoui, A.P., Hellings, P., Vanbelle, M., 1983. Ensiling of oliveprotein and NDF content of OC silage, and using the pulp with ammonia: Effects on voluntary intake and digestibili-

ty measured by sheep. 34th Annual Meeting of the EAAPcorresponding values for barley grain, soybean mealStudy Commission, Mandrid, 3–6 October, 1983, p. 199.and barley hay (conventional feeds), as well as their

NRC, 1989. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. Sixth Revisedselling prices prevailing during the course of the Revised Edition, Update 1989. National Research Council,studies (barley grain 118, soybean meal 223 and National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.barley hay 95 US $/ t), ensiled OC may obtain a O’Shea, J., Wilson, P.K., 1965. Relationship between in vitro and

in vivo dry matter digestibility. Ir. J. of Agric. Res. 4, 235–monetary value (35–58) that is much higher than its237.current price (US $ 6–10/ t as it is basis).

Sansoucy, R., 1987. Olive by-products for animal feed. Review.FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 43, FAO, Rome.

Smith, W.A., 1991. Fats for lactating dairy cows. S. Afr. J. ofAcknowledgements Anim. Sci. 21 (1), 1–10.

Tilley, J.M.A., Terry, R.A., 1963. A two-stage technique for the invitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassland Soc. 18,The author is grateful to G. Kyprianou, L. Had-104–111.

jiparaskevas, A. Photiou, M. Karavia, M.Theodoridou and the staff of the Central ChemistryLaboratory for skilled technical assistance.

References

Aguilera, J.F., Garcia, M.A., Molina, E., 1992. The performanceof ewes offered concentrates containing olive by-products inlate pregnancy and lactation. Anim. Prod. 55, 219–226.