Tomato pomace silage as a potential new supplementary food for game species

Judit Galló,László Szemethy,Csaba Fernye,Krisztián Katona,Szilvia Orosz

doi:10.23986/afsci.59665

Judit Galló, László Szemethy + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.23986/afsci.59665

Copy DOI

Abstract

There is a debate whether supplementary feeding of game species is necessary, and what type of supplementary food is appropriate for them. In our study a new type of supplemental food for wild game species was evaluated. Fresh tomato pomace mixed with ground maize grains (20% w/w on a fresh basis) was baled. Different additive treatments were made and crude protein and crude fibre content and fermentation profile were evaluated. Consumption of tomato pomace silage by wild ungulates was also measured. Ground maize grains increased the dry matter content and crude protein : crude fibre ratio of tomato pomace. Tomato pomace mixed silage had a limited fermentation capacity with appropriate pH and fermentation acid content. The special baling technology was suitable to form well-shaped bales. In the investigated hunting preserve tomato pomace was the dominant food component in the diet of ungulate species. According to our results, tomato pomace could provide suitable quality supplementary food for large game species.

Highlights

There is a debate whether supplementary feeding of game species is necessary (Putman and Staines 2004, Dubois and Fraser 2013, Katona et al 2014, Steyaert et al 2014), and if it is what type of supplementary food is appropriate for them
Mixing tomato pomace with 20% ground maize grains increased the dry matter content by 35%, and decreased its crude protein and crude fibre content by 20% and 40%, respectively
Since the decrease of crude fibre content was higher than the decrease in protein content, crude protein : crude fibre ratio (CP/Crude fibre (CF)) increased by 35% compared to fresh tomato pomace

Summary

Introduction

There is a debate whether supplementary feeding of game species is necessary (Putman and Staines 2004, Dubois and Fraser 2013, Katona et al 2014, Steyaert et al 2014), and if it is what type of supplementary food is appropriate for them. According to Putman and Staines (2004) supplementary feeding on open range has little effect on fecundity and body weight of red deer; and its effect on antler size and quality and on survival is equivocal. Katona et al (2014) revealed that the proportion of supplementary food (apple pomace and maize silage) was low in the diet of red deer in different unfenced areas. In most cases some form of artificial feeding is required in the enclosures

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion