Effect of harvesting interval on biomass yield and chemical composition of taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) for feeding pigs in Laos

Abstract

Cheap feedstuffs with acceptable protein content are needed for the improvement of pig performance in developing countries, and the utilization of traditional crops is one possible solution. Taro (Colocasia esculenta (L) Schott) was grown for two seasons in Vientiane, Lao PDR, and was subjected to three harvesting frequency treatments. The treatments applied were harvesting leaves and petioles at intervals of 4 (H4), 6 (H6) and 24 (H24) weeks, respectively. The tubers were harvested at the ast harvest occasion. Leaf, petiole and tuber dry matter (DM) yield, leaf proportion (DM basis) and chemical composition of the leaves and petioles were determined. Treatments H4 and H6 yielded significantly more leaf and petiole DM than treatment H24 in both years. Total leaf DM yield was 2146, 1654 and 364kg ha(-1) in 2007 and 1483, 1341 and 691 kg ha(-1) in 2008 for treatments H4, H6 and H24, respectively. Tuber DM yield was not affected by the treatments and was on average 3667 and 2732 kg ha(-1) in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Leaf proportion did not generally differ between treatments and was on average 52 and 62% in 2007 and 2008, respectively. The leaves contained between 160 and 260 g kg DM-1 crude protein (C:P) which was much higher than in the petioles. Although significant, the difference between treatments was small, which was clue to the high rate of leaf turn-over (5 weeks). Ash content of the leaves was 112-145 g kg DM-1, and crude fiber (CF) was a 173-206 g kg DM-1. The total essential amino acid content of taro leaf ranged from 40 to 45g. 16 g N-1. It is concluded that taro leaves are a potential protein feed resource for growing pigs, and that leaves can be harvested frequently with no detrimental effect on tuber yield. (C) 2012 Elsevier All rights reserved.

Keywords

Taro; Leaf; Petiole; Tuber; Harvesting interval; Yield; Forage quality

Published in

Field Crops Research
2012, volume: 128, pages: 71-75
Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV

SLU Authors

• Frankow-Lindberg, Bodil

  • Department of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
    

UKÄ Subject classification

Agricultural Science

Publication identifier

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2011.12.019

Permanent link to this page (URI)

https://res.slu.se/id/publ/56611