Search

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of hydroponic barley forage in the diets of lactating Italian Mediterranean buffaloes on Mozzarella cheese chemical and sensory properties. Thirty‐six buffaloes were evenly assigned to three groups: control (C) with standard maize silage‐based ration, and low hydroponic (LH) and high hydroponic (HH) barley forage substitution for 50% and 100% of maize silage, respectively. HH Mozzarella had lower hardness, reduced saturated fatty acids, increased oleic and α‐linolenic fatty acids. Hydroponic forage could be an innovative system for sustainable livestock production with a positive impact on the Mozzarella cheese improving its nutritional value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the feasibility of integrating hydroponic barley forage (HBF) production into dairy ruminant production, focusing on its effect on milk yield and components, energy and water footprints, and economic implications. Maize silage (MSil) was used as a benchmark for comparison. The research was conducted on a water buffalo dairy farm equipped with a fully automated hydroponic system producing approximately 6,000 kg/d of HBF as fed (up 1,000 kg/d on DM basis). Thirty-three lactating water buffaloes were assigned to 3 dietary treatments based on the level of MSil or HBF in the diet: D0 (100% MSil), D50 (50% MSil and 50% HBF), and D100 (100% HBF). The feeding trial lasted 5 wk, plus a 2-wk adaptation period during which each cow underwent a weighing, BCS scoring, recording of milk yield and components, including SCC and coagulation characteristics. Based on the data obtained from the in vivo study, the water and energy footprints for the production of MSil and HBF and buffalo milk, as well as income over feed cost, were evaluated. Complete replacement of MSil with HBF resulted in a slight increase in milk yield without significant impact on milk components. The resource footprint analysis showed potential benefits associated with HBF in terms of water consumption. However, the energy footprint assessment showed that the energy ratio of HBF was less than 1 (0.88) compared with 11.89 for MSil. This affected the energy efficiency of milk yield in the 3 diets, with the D50 diet showing poorer performance due to similar milk yield compared with D0, but higher energy costs due to the inclusion of HBF. The production cost of HBF was about 4 times higher than that of farm-produced MSil, making feed costs for milk yield more expensive. Nevertheless, HBF can potentially improve income over feed costs if it increases milk yield enough to offset its higher production costs. Overall, the results suggest that the current practice of using HBF to replace high-quality feedstuffs as concentrates is likely to result in energy and economic losses. The list of standard abbreviations for JDS is available at adsa.org/jds-abbreviations-24. Nonstandard abbreviations are available in the Notes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The safety of reclaimed urban wastewater (RUW) for the production of hydroponic barley forage (HBF) was evaluated in terms of effluent and forage characteristics, as well as the health and performance of lactating cows. The study was conducted on a dairy farm equipped with two hydroponic chambers producing approximately 620 kg/d of HBF as fed. For experimental purposes, HBF was produced using RUW collected from an aqueduct plant processing urban wastewater in a membrane bioreactor treatment chain. A feeding trial was carried out with HBF derived from RUW. Sixty lactating cows were randomly assigned to two balanced groups fed a standard total mixed ration (TMR) or a TMR in which 10 kg of HBF replaced 1 kg of oat hay and 0.5 kg of maize. The experimental period lasted 7 weeks, including a 2-week adaptation period, during which each cow underwent a physical examination, BCS scoring, blood sampling for a complete blood count and biochemical panel, recording of body weight and milk yield and quality, including fatty acid composition and heavy metal content. Ruminal pH was continuously monitored by reticulorumen boluses, and nutrient digestibility and N balance were determined at week 7. RUW showed an acceptable microbial load and an overall good quality as irrigation water, even though the supply of N and P did not influence the yield and quality of HBF. The characteristics of HBF reflected the quality of RUW supplied to the hydroponic chambers and no anomalous components (i.e., high ion concentration) were found. Feeding RW-derived HBF to lactating cows had no major positive or negative effects on animal health and production, including milk quality, ruminal pH, in vivo digestibility, and N balance. The use of RUW under the conditions tested appears to be safe for the health status of lactating cows and the quality of the milk obtained. Overall, the results do not reveal any major limitations for the use of tertiary wastewater as irrigation water for the hydroponic production of forage barley, so that a wider use of wastewater in hydroponic systems seems realistic.