ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to assess the effect of garlic oil supplementation on intake, digestibility, performance and rumen function of goats. Thirty goats with initial average body weight of 6 ± 0.99 kg were randomly divided into five treatments with six goats each in a completely randomized design. The diets contained a control group without garlic oil (CA1) and diets supplemented with garlic oil at 20 g (GB2), 25 g (GC3), 30 g (GD4) and 35 g (GE5). Results showed that acid detergent fibre and lignin (66.02 and 52.37%) digestibility, total volatile fatty acid with acetate (88.62 mM and 69.68mol/100mol), feed conversion ratio (9.47), ammonia nitrogen (12.39mg/dl), methane (21.96mol/mol) and protozoa (8.93 x 108 cfµ/mol) of goats reared on CA1 were (P < 0.05) higher than those on test diets (GB2, GC3, GD4 and GE5). Goats fed on GC3 and GD4 diets had higher (P < 0.05) nutrients digestibility with rumen parameters, daily weight gain and intake compared with those on CA1, CB2 and GE5 diets. The ether extract intake (58.09%) and digestibility (64.03%) in goats reared on GE5 were (P < 0.05) higher than those on other diets. Ash intake and digestibility, rumen pH, iso-butyrate, valerate, iso-valerate and total fungi count were not significantly (P > 0.05) affected by treatment diets. In conclusion, the supplementation of garlic oil to treatment diets improved intake, digestibility, performance and rumen function of goats, indicating garlic oil as alternative additive to improve poor quality feeds.
ABSTRACT
A study on comparative assessment of the microbial load of beef and chicken meat collected at different hours of the day in Ekpoma town market was carried out. Samples were purchased at 8am, 1pm and 5pm and taken to the laboratory for microbial load counts. The design of the experiment was a completely randomized design (CRD). Result from the study revealed that microbial load of beef for Diluent 1 (Dil.-1) was less at 8am, having 30.0 log10 CFU/g as compared with 43.5 and 47.0 observed at 1pm and 5pm respectively. Diluent 2 (Dil.-2) showed similar results of less counts at 8am (22.0 log10 CFU/g) compared with 31.5 and 45.0 recorded at 1pm and 5pm respectively, as well as Diluent 3 (Dil.-3), which recorded similar results of less microbial load at the early hours of the day. The result from the microbial load count of chicken was not affected by the time (hours) of collection, as values were not significantly (P>0.05) different. Diluent 1 (Dil.-1) had the least count of 22.0 log10 CFU/g at 8am compared with a high count of 32.5 at 1pm and a less count of 24.5 at 5pm. Similarly, Diluent 2 (Dil.-2) recorded a microbial count of 20.5 log10 CFU/g at 8am compared with 24.5 and 22.5 recorded at 1pm and 5pm respectively. While Diluent 3 (Dil.-3) had 14.5 log 10 CFU/g at 8am compared with 18.5 and 17.5 recorded at 1pm and 5pm respectively. Microbial load of chicken meat was lowest in the morning (8am), high in the afternoon (1pm) and lower in the evening (5pm). Here, the rate of exposure of chickens in the refrigerator to the atmosphere affected its microbial load. The result did not follow the trend of higher microbial load as time of the day progressed, observed in beef. Results on a comparative assessment of the microbial load of beef and chicken meat further revealed that microbial load in beef was higher than chicken, as beef was completely exposed on a table platform in the market, while chicken was stored in the refrigerator when sold in the market. It also revealed that microbial load concentration of beef and chicken decreased as dilution rate of concentration increased, as observed in Dil.1 – 3. Hence, home consumers should buy beef meat in the early hours of the day, and chicken meat in the morning and evening from the market, in order to check the risk of microbial contamination.