1. BY AMPONSAH KWAME BRIGHT
RICE BRAN AS A FEED RESOURCE IN CROP-LIVESTOCK SYSTEMS: IMPACT ON GROWTH PERFORMANCE, BODY CONDITION SCORES, CARCASS TRAITS AND BLOOD PROFILE OF RURAL PIGS IN THE UPPER EAST REGION OF GHANA. BY
AMPONSAH KWAME BRIGHT

2. INTRODUCTION
Agriculture is noted to be the backbone to social and economic growth in developing countries where the overall well-being and farming fortunes are so closely related.
A major challenge facing the livestock sector in many parts of Sub Sahara Africa is how to arrive at a sustainable increase in livestock productivity with limited use of feed supplements (Powell et al., 2004).

3. INTRODUCTION (CONT’D)
Rice bran (RB) is readily available in Ghana (example: Northern sector)
Serves as a source of energy and as a substitute for wheat or maize bran and also a partial replacement for maize or the cereal component of the diet.
Unfortunately locally produced RB differs in composition with its nutritive value being highly dependent on the extent of its adulteration with rice husk/hulls (Pond and Maner, 1974; Pond et al., 1991).

4. OBJECTIVES
This pig study sought to ascertain the effects of rice bran on:
growth performance
economies of production
body condition scores
carcass traits
blood profile

5. MATERIALS AND METHODS Location of the Experiment
Africa RISING Project Communities in Navrongo in the Upper East Region
Phases - 3 phases
Field survey
Chemical analysis
On-farm feeding trial

6. MATERIALS AND METHODS (CONT’D)
Phase 1: Field Survey
Questionnaire Construction
Sampling Area
Questionnaire Administration

7. MATERIALS AND METHODS (CONT’D)
Phase 2: Chemical Analysis
Proximate
ADF and NDF (Van Soest et al., 1991)
Minerals (Fick et al., 1979)
Pests, Microbes and Fungi Status (Atlas, 1995)

8. MATERIALS AND METHODS (CONT’D)
Phase 3: Feeding Trial with Pigs
Experimental Animals
Duration
Experimental Design
Sources of Feed Ingredients

9. MATERIALS AND METHODS (CONT’D)
Experimental Diets
Four (4) diets were used in the experiment
Diet A: (control diet with no RB)
Diet B:(300g/kg RB)
Diet C: (400g/kg RB)
Diet D: (500g/kg RB)
Feed and water were provided ad-libitum

10. Table 1: Composition of the various diets (g/kg)
Diets
Ingredients
Diet A
Diet B
Diet C
Diet D
Dawadawa pulp flour (DPF)
230
220
210
200
Pito mash (PM)
150
Groundnut skin meal (GSM)
250
130
110
Mill waste (MW)
300
160 90 20
Rice bran (RB) -
400
500
Common salt 10
Vitamin-trace mineral premix
Total
1000
Chemical composition (Calc.)
Crude protein (g/kg)
183.90
180.20
179.30
178.30
DE (Mcal/kg)
3.44
3.45
3.43
3.41
Crude fibre (g/kg)
107.50
106.70
108.80
110.80
Calcium (g/kg)
5.60
4.20
3.80
3.50
Phosphorus (g/kg)
8.20
10.90
11.80
12.80
Provided the following/kg diet:Vitamin A–8,000 IU, Vitamins D3 –3,000 IU, Vitamins E–8 IU, Vitamin K –2mg, Vitamin B1– 1 mg, Vitamin B2–0.2 mg, Vitamin B12–5 mg, N
icotinamide –10 mg, Selenium– 0.1 mg, Ca Pantothenate – 5 mg, Folic acid –0.5 mg, Choline Chloride –150mg, Iron –20 mg, Manganese –80 mg, Copper –8 mg, Zinc –50 mg,
Cobalt –0.225mg, Iodine –2 mg Antioxidant – 0.1ppm.

11. MATERIALS AND METHODS (CONT’D)
Parameters Measured
Feed intake
Weight gain
Feed conversion efficiency
Feed cost and economy of gain
Body condition scores (Holness, 1991)
Carcass traits (absolute and relative)
Blood assays (Peter et al., 1982)
Statistical Analysis

12. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
FIELD SURVEY RESULTS
Table 2: Sources of pig feed by season
Source*
Wet season
Dry season
Frequency
Percentage
Household waste 33
82.5 20
50.0
Rice bran 38
95.0 40
100.0
Mill waste 29
72.5 11
27.5
Dawadawa pulp flour 2
50.5 13
32.5
Pito mash 25
62.5
Groundnut skin meal 12
30.0
Cut grasses -
Commercial feed 1
2.5
Animal fend for itself
*Multiple responses.

13. FIELD SURVEY RESULTS (CONT’D)
Table 3: Prevalent diseases and pests in the study area by season
Diseases*
Wet season
Dry season
Frequency
Percentage
Africa Swine Fever, ASF 8
20.0 14
35.0
Anaemia 26
65.0 28
70.0
Mange/Lice infestation 29
72.5 27
67.0
Diarrhoea (Gastroenteritis) 23
57.5 19
47.5
Cough/Pneumonia 11
27.5 2
5.0
Mastitis -
Worm Infestation (Helminthiasis) 20
50.0 22
55.0
*Multiple responses.

14. FIELD SURVEY RESULTS (CONT’D)
Table 4: Disease and pests control measures from the study area
Control measures*
Frequency
Percentage
Proper husbandry practices (healthcare, feeding, housing) 22 55
Use of resistant/improved breeds 10 25
Government intervention/assistance 18 45
Proper farm sanitation 8 20
Trainings from Agricultural Extension Agents (AEAs) 24 60
*Multiple responses

15. PHASE 2: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Table 5: Chemical composition (g/kg) of the major feed ingredients used
Parameter
DPF PM
GSM MW RB
AS FED BASIS
Moisture
152.6
174.1
121.9
45.3
70.0 CP
39.4
219.8
342.4
109.5
74.4 CF
36.0
60.5
254.6
78.3
71.9 EE
86.9
82.2
72.5
63.3
290.8
Ash
27.1
74.6
75.2
56.1
90.0
NFE
658.0
388.8
133.4
647.5
402.9
ADF
133.3
270.3
158.7
147.4
472.0
NDF
185.6
662.1
435.2
490.6
652.4 Ca
1.2
1.3
1.6
0.5 P
6.2
9.8
8.2
9.0
7.8 K
21.8
12.9
11.0
16.5
12.8
D.E (Mcal/kg)
3.88
3.45
2.78
3.89
5.05

16. CHEMICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS (CONT’D)
Table 6: Microbes present in RB and the RB-based Diets
Samples
Microbes present RB
E. coli, yeast, mould and Salmonella typhi
Diet A
Yeast, mould and Salmonella typhi
Diet B
Diet C
E. coli, yeast, mould and Salmonella typhi
Diet D

17. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (CONT’D)
Health
Health of the pigs was good generally
No mortalities were recorded.

18. PHASE 3: FEEDING TRIAL
Table 7: Growth performance of indigenous pigs and the economics of production
PARAMETERS
DIETARY TREATMENTS
LSD
SIGN. LEVEL A B C D
Number of pigs 8 -
Mean initial weight, kg
8.31
8.50
4.44
1.202 NS
Mean final weight, kg
14.43
14.89
14.44
13.51
2.056
Mean daily feed intake, kg
0.68b
0.79a
0.80a
0.84a
0.103 *
Mean daily weight gain, kg
0.07
0.08
0.06
0.023
Mean FCR (feed/gain)
10.21
11.42
12.63
15.08
4.926
Feed cost/kg, GH¢
0.65
0.58
0.55
0.52
Feed cost/kg liveweight gain, GH¢
6.63
6.62
6.95
7.84
2.389
ab: means with the same superscripts are similar (P>0.05) whilst means with different superscripts are significant (P<0.05); LSD – Least significant difference, Sign. Level – Significance level, NS – Non significant (P>0.05); *means significant at 5%.

19. FEEDING TRIAL RESULTS (CONT’D)
Figure 2: Correlation between girth width and body weight of the indigenous pigs

20. FEEDING TRIAL RESULTS (CONT’D)
Table 8: Relative weight (%) of some carcass components
PARAMETERS
DIETARY TREATMENTS
LSD
SIGN. LEVEL A B C D
Mean head weight
11.07
10.80
10.72
10.94
0.934 NS
Mean shoulder weight
7.94
7.71
7.89
7.51
0.678
Mean loin weight
6.41
6.94
7.38
7.11
0.931
Mean belly weight
3.43
3.50
3.42
3.34
0.630
Mean thigh weight
6.01
6.24
6.65
5.93
0.637
Mean fillet weight
1.29
1.36
1.27
0.337
Mean P2
2.95
2.87
3.06
3.66
0.775
Mean viscera weight
21.48
22.36
19.15
22.64
3.215
Mean GIT weight (empty)
7.27
7.52
6.52
6.96
0.856
Mean heart weight
0.39
0.37
0.33
0.42
0.067
Mean kidney weight
0.49
0.40
0.107
Mean liver weight
2.42
2.13
2.07
2.37
0.379
Mean respiratory tract weight
1.10
1.12
1.00
0.93
0.248
Mean spleen weight
0.24
0.20
0.21
0.18
0.102
LSD – Least significant difference, Sign. Level – Significance level, NS – Non –significant (P>0.05).

21. FEEDING TRIAL RESULTS (CONT’D)
Table 9: Haematological and serum biochemical parameters of the indigenous pigs used in the experiment
Parameters
DIETARY TREATMENTS
LSD
SIGN. LEVEL A B C D
HAEMATOLOGICAL PROFILE
WBC (x 103/µL)
26.40
24.90
26.70
24.20
6.380 NS
RBC (x 106/µL)
6.63
6.79
6.84
6.544
0.409
Hb (g/dl)
11.44
11.91
12.40
12.28
0.797
HCT (%)
33.77
34.88
36.21
35.96
2.631
Platelets (x 103/µL)
592.00a
463.00b
385.00b
425.00b *
MCH (pg)
17.31
17.60
17.64
17.75
0.888
MCHC (g/dl)
33.94
34.10
34.28
0.497
LYM (x 103/µL)
9.50
8.41
10.07
8.16
4.285
GRA (x 103/µL)
13.00
13.27
13.51
12.94
3.825
SERUM BIOCHEMICAL ASSAY
HDL Cholesterol (mg/dl)
47.10
42.20
40.80
44.00
8.510
LDL Cholesterol (mg/dl)
40.70
35.20
32.50
45.10
18.340
Total Cholesterol (mg/dl)
94.90
84.60
80.50
96.50
20.680
Triglycerides (mg/dl)
36.10
36.20
37.20
50.50
22.810
ab: means with the same superscripts are similar (P>0.05) whilst means with differing superscripts are significant (P<0.05); LSD – Least significant difference, Sign. Level – Significance level, NS – Non –significant (P>0.05); *means significant at 5%.

22. CONCLUSIONS
The survey results indicated that, in order to help the indigenous pig productivity, there is need to enhance management.
The chemical analysis has also revealed that the ingredients that were studied and which are readily available have good nutritional values.
The results on the growth performance also showed similar growth rate, and feed conversion ratio for all dietary treatments.
Economically, the results showed that RB-based diets were cheaper than the control diet.

23. CONCLUSIONS (CONT’D)
The use of BCS and girth measurements as weight-estimation tool will empower rural pig farmers to have better bargaining powers.
Carcass, haematological and biochemical parameters were similar for all the dietary treatments
The local pig farmers can incorporate RB into their diets for their pigs up to 50% without any adverse effect on growth performance, carcass characteristics, haematological and serum biochemical characteristics.

24. RECOMMENDATIONS
Need for interventions (by the Government of Ghana and the various NGOs in the country).
Efficient drying of feed ingredients and keeping a clean environment in and around storage facilities.

25. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION