Assessment of nutrient content in grain, hydroponic and conventional fodder with focus on maize, wheat and Sudan grass

Paper Details

Research Paper 16/03/2024
Views (40) Download (7)

Assessment of nutrient content in grain, hydroponic and conventional fodder with focus on maize, wheat and Sudan grass

Md. Baharul Islam, Md. Giush Uddin Ahmed, Md. Akhtarul Islam, Md. Shakil Khan, Ferdous Akter
Int. J. Biosci.24( 3), 187-194, March 2024.
Certificate: IJB 2024 [Generate Certificate]


Livestock nutrition plays a crucial role in ensuring animal health and productivity. However, the nutritional quality of fodder can vary significantly depending on cultivation methods, posing challenges for livestock farmers in providing balanced diets for their animals. This study aimed to compare the chemical composition of fodder produced using three different cultivation methods: grain, hydroponic, and conventional. Specific objectives included assessing the levels of crude protein, fiber, ether extract, and ashes in maize, wheat, and Sudan grass fodder types. Fodder samples were collected from representative farms and subjected to laboratory analysis to determine their chemical composition. Standard methods were employed to assess crude protein, crude fiber, acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber, ether extract, and ash content. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare the results among different fodder types. Hydroponically cultivated fodder consistently exhibited higher levels of crude protein and ether extract compared to conventionally grown fodder. Additionally, conventional fodder types tended to have higher fiber and ash content. However, all fodder types showed variations in nutritional composition depending on the crop species. Hydroponic cultivation methods resulted in higher protein and lipid content in maize, wheat, and Sudan grass fodder. Conventional fodder types had higher levels of fiber and ash, potentially impacting digestibility and nutrient availability. The findings suggest that hydroponic cultivation methods hold promise for enhancing the nutritional quality of fodder, thereby improving livestock health and productivity. Farmers should consider integrating hydroponic systems into their fodder production practices to optimize animal nutrition and achieve better economic outcomes.


Abou-El-Ezz MA, Kholif AE, El-Shafie MH, Gado HM. 2020. Productive performance, carcass characteristics and economic efficiency of rabbits fed hydroponic barley sprouts diet. Alexandria Journal of Veterinary Sciences 63(1), 83-92.

Al-Dobaib SN, Al-Mufarrej SI, Al-Saiady MY, Al-Qhtani SA, Samara EM. 2015. Hydroponic maize fodder for dairy cows: Growth and physiological responses. Livestock Science 175, 87-94.

Allen MS. 2014. Dairy cattle nutrition: Effects of fat and fatty acid supplementation on production and metabolic parameters. Animal Feed Science and Technology 189, 60–75.

American Oil Chemists’ Society (AOCS). 2009. Official Methods and Recommended Practices of the AOCS, 6th ed.

Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) International. 2016. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International (20th Ed.).

Bartok JW, Bucklin RA. 1995. Controlled Environment Agriculture: A Global Review of Greenhouse Food Production. CRC Press.

Batista AMV, Dias LS, Vieira RA, Veiga JB, de Oliveira LR, da Silva LFP, do Nascimento WG. 2021. Nutritional evaluation and digestibility of hydroponic corn, wheat, barley, and sorghum fodder for goats. Animal Feed Science and Technology 278, 115024.

Chamberlain DG, Wilkinson JM, Oldham JD. 1993. Forage Intake and Satiety. Journal of Dairy Science 76(2), 533–547.

El Khishin DA, Ahmed WM, El-Sherif AH, El-Tabbakh AM. 2017. Hydroponic barley fodder and its effect on growth performance, nutrient digestibility and blood metabolites of growing goats. Animal Feed Science and Technology 228, 47-54.

Ferraretto LF, Crump PM,  Shaver RD. 2013. Effect of cereal grain type and corn grain harvesting and processing methods on intake, digestion, and milk production by dairy cows through a meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 96(1), 533–550.

Ferraretto LF, Crump PM, Shaver RD. 2013. Effect of cereal grain type and corn grain harvesting and processing methods on intake, digestion, and milk production by dairy cows through a meta-analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 96(1), 533–550.

Gòdia F,  Montesinos JL. 2005. Plant production for life support systems: Hydroponic crop production. In R. M. Wheeler & S. S. Kumar (Eds.), Crop Science: Progress and Prospects (pp. 137–160). CABI Publishing.

Goering HK, Van Soest PJ. 1970. Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, reagents, procedures, and some applications). Agricultural Handbook No. 379. ARS, USDA, Washington, DC.

Huntington GB. 1997. Starch utilization by ruminants: From basics to the bunk. Journal of Animal Science 75(3), 852–867.

Khan MJ, Arshad M. 2019. Nutritional and health perspectives of hydroponic fodder. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 103(3), 685-692.

Li YC, Yang SS. 2017. Comparison of two hydroponic systems for the production of green forage. Journal of Applied Animal Research 45(1), 584–587.

Liorente BE, Causape AC. 2018. Use of hydroponic systems in animal nutrition. Emir. J. Food Agric. 30(5), 374–380.

Moore JE, Brink GE, Koegh BE. 2017. Nutritional Evaluation of Forages. In Forages: The Science of Grassland Agriculture (7th ed., pp. 53–78). John Wiley & Sons.

Rajapaksha RMCP, Gunawardena AJSL, Jansz ER. 2016. Comparative study on hydroponic and conventional forage production for dairy cows in Sri Lanka. Tropical Agricultural Research 27(1), 110–117.

Rodehutscord M, Pfeffer E. 2021. Evaluation of the nutritive value of hydroponically produced barley, wheat, maize and alfalfa for growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 276, 114899.

Selim A, Ibrahim AA, El-Hamid AET. 2019. Nutritional evaluation of hydroponic barley and wheat green fodder for growing rabbits. World Rabbit Science 27(4), 235-241.

Thabet HM, Khalafalla MM, Eltahir ME, Elmansy HA. 2019. Hydroponic Sudan grass as a new promising forage resource for ruminant feeding. International Journal of Veterinary Science and Medicine 7(1), 20-25.

Tyagi N, Tyagi SK, Pandey S, Tyagi P, Sharma N. 2017. Hydroponic fodder: A new paradigm for food security. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 6(6), 2557–2559.

Undersander D, Mertens D, Thiex N. 2005. Forage Analysis Procedures (2nd ed.). National Forage Testing Association.

Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74(10), 3583–3597.

Van Soest PJ. 1994. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, 476.

Wilkinson JM. 2011. Re-defining efficiency of feed use by livestock. Animal 5(7), 1014–1022.