This post is also available in:
Country: Turkey
Dairy or/and meat sheep: Meat
Source of information: TOGEN and Rural Affairs Branch of Min. of Agr.
Level of solution:
X |
Knowledge |
X |
Practical |
|
Just Being Tested |
Aim: To increase the productivity of the flock related to balanced feed issues and fodder-concentrate ratio
Description:
- a software tool (free) will be installed to intensive farms and a pdf document for the extensive farmers who has no computer. A demonstrative test will be made together according to the raw material they have for a balanced nutrition composition for mating period. Also, a PDF key note explaining basic nutritive requirements for ewe will be introduced with a particular emphasis on pre mating and mating period.
- Portable fencing will be introduced how to move the flock according to the pasture availability in order to avoid overgrazing-thus a better result for grass and nutrition quality at mating period.
Expected benefits: Increased feed- fodder ratio efficiency, improved productivity of flock and pasture utilization
Prerequisites and/or limits (knowledge, training, capabilities, cost, management, facilities, equipment, etc.)
- Technology is always a “second thought” for extensive farms
- Old farmers are difficult to convince for IT tools
- Training will take time but worth for it
References
Blache, D., Adam, C. L., & Martin, G. B. (2002). The mature male sheep: a model to study the effects of nutrition on the reproductive axis. Reproduction, 59(Supplement), 219–233. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=12698984
Porcu, C., Manca, C., Cabiddu, A., Dattena, M., Gallus, M., Pasciu, V., … Molle, G. (2017). Glucogenic treatment creates an optimal metabolic milieu for the conception period in ewes. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 59, 105–115.
Porcu, C., Manca, C., Cabiddu, A., Dattena, M., Gallus, M., Pasciu, V., … Molle, G. (2018). Effects of short-term administration of a glucogenic mixture at mating on feed intake, metabolism, milk yield and reproductive performance of lactating dairy ewes. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 243, 10–21.
Expected impacts
Benefit | |||||||
Benefit expected | Increase productivity better feed management |
||||||
System | |||||||
Is the solution suitable for various production systems | Y | dairy &meat | |||||
If no – for which system | |||||||
Cost | |||||||
What are the asset costs | 100-500 | ||||||
What are the maintenance costs | <50 | ||||||
Any limits to its applicability | |||||||
Work Load | |||||||
Farmers | Service provider/tech.-vet-others | ||||||
How much time is required to prepare and implement the solution | >=1week | ||||||
How many people is needed to implement the solution? | 1 person | ||||||
Timing | |||||||
How long it takes to get results? | >=1week | ||||||
How long it takes to see an effect on sheep productivity? | current production period | ||||||
Equipment/Facility | |||||||
Farmers | Service provider/technicians-vet-others | ||||||
What kind of equipment/tool are necessary? | computer+software | ||||||
Skill/Knowledge-Training (farmer) | |||||||
Does the solution need any specific skill/knowledge or training? | yes | ||||||
How much time will be required for training | 2-3 days | ||||||
Wider Environment | |||||||
Is there any particular regulation link to the solution? | no | ||||||
Does the solution need any particular structure or organisation? | no |