Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aimed to evaluate the performance, ingestive behaviour, and enzymatic, protein, and energy profiles of Soinga lambs fed sisal mucilage silage with or without additives. For 60 days, thirty-two Soinga lambs, with an initial body weight of 19 ± 1.38 kg, were allocated in a completely randomised design with four treatments and eight replications was used. The treatments consisted of: control (CON); sisal mucilage silage without additive (SMS); sisal mucilage silage with additive (wheat bran) (SMS-WB); and sisal mucilage silage with additive (ground corn) (SMS-GC). Dry matter and crude protein intake of lambs on the SMS-GC diet (1.129 and 147 g/day, respectively) were lower (p = 0.0461 and p = 0.0108, respectively) than the intake of animals fed the CON diet. Neutral detergent fibre intake of lambs fed the SMS (367 g/day) and SMS-WB (389 g/day) diets was higher (p = 0.0002) that of animals fed the CON diet (315 g/day). The average daily gain of lambs that consumed the SMS diet (200 g/day) was lower (p = 0.0391) than that of lambs that consumed the CON diet (230 g/day). The blood biochemical profile of the lambs was not altered. Sisal mucilage silages supplemented with wheat bran or ground corn are recommended for Soinga lambs in feedlot systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sousa et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: