A review of forage production and utilisation in Nigerian savanna

O.S. Onifade and E.C. Agishi
Forage and Crop Residue Research Programme National Animal Production Research Institute
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria

Abstract
Introduction
Forage species evaluation
Forage production
Utilisation by livestock
Utilisation of research results by farmers
Suggestions to improve utilisation of research results to farmers
References

Abstract

The low level of animal production from the savanna zones of Nigeria is generally associated with the inability of the stock especially in the dry season. Various forage species have been evaluated and recommended for inclusion in these zones to increase animal output. This paper examines the productivity of these legumes and grasses with respect to establishment and management under different production systems.

The extension of this research information to farmers is discussed. The role of the government is assessed and suggestions offered to improve the utilisation of these research results by farmers.

Introduction

Nigeria lies approximately between latitudes 4° and 13° and longitudes 3° and 14°E. It has an area of about 94 million hectares 75% of which is savanna. The savanna extends from latitudes 6° to 13°N. The savanna can be divided into Sahel/Sudan Savanna and Guinea Savanna zones, corresponding to annual rainfall of,<300 - 800 and 800 - 1500 mm respectively. Most of the estimated 12.5 m cattle, 12.8 m sheep and 26 m goats in Nigeria are principally under extensive system. Forage availability is an important nutritional factor. During the wet season which lasts between 3 to 8 months, there is adequate forage of good quality for ruminants; but during the dry season, the range does not meet the feed requirements of these ruminants both in terms of quantity and quality. During this period, the range grazing has to be supplemented by the utilisation of legume pastures, browse plants, conserved fodder, crop residues and food processing by-products.

The use of highly productive good quality pasture grasses and legumes has given increased productivity in these animals in Nigeria (Agishi, 1971; de Leeuw and Agishi, 1978). Research into both indigenous and exotic forage species has been going on in Nigeria, particularly in the savanna zones, since 1950s. The productivity, utilisation by livestock and extension of these forage species to farmers is the subject of this paper.

Forage species evaluation

Introduction of pasture species into Nigeria started in the 1950s. Table 1 is the summary of the species found to be adapted, and recommended for production on large scale in the Nigerian Savanna (Agishi, 1979). The criteria used for their evaluation were based on ease of establishment, high dry matter yield, nutritive value, persistence, good seed yield and their suitability for conservation as hay or silage. (Foster and Mundy, 1961; Miller and Blair-Rains, 1963; Miller et al, 1964; Haggar et al, 1971 and de Leeuw, 1974). Presently, the most frequently cultivated forage species are gamba, Rhodes grass, Digitaria, Signal grass, giant star grass, stylo, verano, centrosema, lablab and Leucaena.

Table 1. Recommended forage species for the different vegetation zones in Nigeria.

Species	Common Names	Vegetable Zones
		SDS	DS/SGS	NGS	SS	M
A. Grasses
Andropogon gayanus	Northern gamba	X	X	X	X
Andropogon tectorum	Southern gamba	X	X
Brachiaria decumbens	Signal grass	X	X	X
Cenchrus ciliaris	Buffel grass	X	X	X	X
Chloris gayanus	Rhodes grass		X	X
Cynodon dactylon	Bermuda grass	X	X	X
Cynodon plectostachyus	Giant star grass	X	X	X
Digitaria decumbens	Pangola grass
Digitaria smutsii	Wooly finger grass		X	X
Hyparrhenia rufa	Jaragwa grass	X	X	X
Milinis minutiflora	Molasses grass	X	X	X
Panicum maximum	Guinea grass	X	X	X
P. maximum cv. gatton	Gatton panic		X	X	X
P. maximum var. trichoglume	Green panic		X	X	X
Pennisetum clandestinum	Kikuyu grass					X
P. pedicellatum	Kyasuwa				X
P. purpureum	Elephant grass	X	X	X
P. typhoides cv. Maiwa	Maiwa millet			X	X
Setaria anceps	Setaria		X	X
Sorghum almum	Columbus grass			X	X
Tripsacum laxum	Guatemala grass	X	X	X		X
B. Legumes
Cajanus cajan	Pigeon pea	X	X	X	X	X
Centrosema pubescens	Common centro	X	X	X
Desmodium intortum	Greenleaf desmodium		X	X		X
D. scorpiurus	Samoan clover		X	X
Gliricidia sepium	Almond blossom	X	X	X
Lablab purpureus	Lablab, Hyacinth bean	X	X	X	X
Leucaena leucocephala	Leucaena	X	X	X
Macroptilium atropurpureum	Siratro		X	X	X
Macrotyloma axillare	Axillaris			X	X
M. uniflorum	Horsegram bean		X	X	X
Neonotonia wightii	Glycine		X	X		X
Pueraria phaseoloides	Puero (kudzu)	X	X	X
Stylosanthes guianensis cv. Schofield	Schofield stylo	X	X	X	X
S. guinensis cv. Cook	Cook stylo		X	X	X
S. hamata cv. Verano	Verano stylo		X	X	X
S. humilis	Townsville stylo		X	X	X

SDS = South of Derived Savanna
DS = Derived Savana
SGS = Southern Guinea Savanna
NGS = Northern Guinea Savanna
SS = Sudan Savanna
M = Montane

Forage production

Seedbed preparation for sown pastures normally requires land clearing, disc ploughing and harrowing. Forage species can also be oversown in cultivated strips in burnt rangeland (Haggar et al, 1971; Perrier, 1982) or undersown in cereal crops (Blair Rains, 1963; Saleem et al, 1986). Broadcasting method of sowing has been found to be superior to drilling for such legumes as centro, desmodium, siratro, stylo sown in mixture with signal grass (Akinola, 1981) and Rhodes grass (Onifade and Akinola 1986).

The mean dry-matter yields of grasses, legumes and their mixtures grown under rainfed conditions are summarized in Table 2. It can be seen that on average, grasses produced higher dry matter yields than legumes. Yields of grass/legumes mixtures are higher than those of legumes alone but were within the same range as sole grasses. From the various results obtained, it was quite clear that nitrogen and phosphorus were the main factors for grass and legume dry-matter yields respectively. Phosphorus tended to depress grass dry-matter yield while nitrogen had the same effect on legumes (Fayemi et al, 1970; Haggar, 1971 and Agishi, 1982).

Dry-matter yields obtained in grass pasture under rain-fed conditions were generally lower than those from both the fertilized and unfertilized irrigated grass pastures (Agishi, 1984 and Ariba, 1987). These yields were in the range 5-20 t DM/ha.

Utilisation by livestock

Trials at Fashola (Adegbola and Onayinka, 1968) during the wet season showed that higher liveweight gains (LWG) (184-187 kg/ha/yr) are possible from guinea grass/Centro than sole grass pasture (82 kg/ha/yr). These and other results from (Table 4a) are used in estimating the productivity of forages available in the Nigerian Savanna. Dry season LWG are low except when animals are supplemented or grazed on pure stylo pastures (Haggar et al, 1971) for more than 37% of their grazing time. However, Tuley (1968) observed that grazing stylo on 24 hourly basis will eliminate the legume compared with only at daytime.

Table 2: Dry matter yields of pastures in Northern Guinea Savanna of Nigeria (t/has)

Types of pasture	Species	Common Name D.M. (t/ha)
Grass (sole)	Andropogon gayanus	Gamba 7-10
	Brachiaria decumben	Signal grass 10-16
	Cenchrus ciliaris	Buffel grass 8-15
	Chloris gayana	Rhodes grass 7-12
	Cynodon plectostachyus	Giant star grass 5-8
	Digitaria smutsii	Woolly finger grass 5-8
	Panicum maximum	Guinea grass 8-14
	P. maximum var. trichoglume	Green panic 6-11
Legumes (Sole)	Centrosema pubescens	Common centro 2-3
	Lablab purpureus	Lablab (a) 5-9
	Stylosanthes guianensis cv cook	Cook stylo 7-11
	S. guianensis cv Schofield	Schofield stylo 7-11
	S. hamata cv Verano	Verano stylo (Caribbean stylo) 4-7
	S. humilis	Townsville stylo (a)3-6
Grass/legume mixtures	Gamba + stylo	9
	Signal grass + Centro	10
	Signal grass + Schofield stylo	14
	Signal grass + Townsville stylo*	14
	Rhodes grass + Schofield stylo	10
	Rhodes grass + Centro	7

(a) = annual plant
* = Legume content low (10%)

Agishi (1979) reported a delay in the commencement of weight loss from Verano stylo/buffel grass pastures compared with grazing unimproved savanna. In addition, cotton-seed cake supplementation was only necessary from late February at the stocking rate of 1.1 heifers/ha. Okeagu et al (1985) reported that cattle can be stocked on signal grass for 182 days and on Digitaria smutsii for 154 days in the wet season at 2.4 Tropical Livestock Units (TLU)/ha before they start to lose weight.

Data on sheep grazing trials are lacking. In a preliminary study of N-fertilizer on Rhodes grass, Onifade et al (1986) reported a mean daily LWG of 12.6 g/ha at stocking rate of 12 sheep/ha over a period of 168 days in the dry season. Mean loss in weight (-5.9 g/ha) was recorded for sheep at the highest stocking rate (36 sheep/ha) over the same period.

A partial cost analysis showed that livestock production on sown grass/legume mixtures is profitable (Tables 3a&b). Similar findings were reported by de Leeuw and Agishi (1978) from different grazing systems in the Nigerian savanna.

Utilisation of research results by farmers

The National Animal Production Research Institute (NAPRI), International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA) and some Universities located in the savanna zones are primarily responsible for research on forages. Information available from research are made available in various forms viz. journals, newsletters, guides, bulletins and posters (Yazidu, 1985). Other channels of reaching the extension workers and farmers are through leaflets, slides, training courses, video and films, radio, television, newspaper articles, open days, conferences and seminars. All these channels are being used by the National Agricultural Extension and Research Liaison Service (NAERLS), the overall institute responsible for the linkage between research and extension in Nigeria. It also liases with farmers and researchers.

Recently, NAPRI was also mandated to aid extension activities in all aspects of livestock production. With the existence of a Livestock Systems Research Programme (LSRP) and the Livestock Research Extension Unit (LREU) at NAPRI, the linkage between livestock farmers and researchers has been further strengthened. On-farm adaptive research on forage production is carried out by LSRP in the savanna zones. This will also be expanded to other zones in the country. ILCA carries out similar activities with pastoralists in the subhumid zone and also within the savanna area of Nigeria. LREU carries out similar functions with NAERLS but specifically for the livestock industry. On the whole, personnel for extension work are inadequate considering the huge number of farmers who keep livestock. Yazidu (1985) reported that with the existing institutions for training, the country's need for one extension worker to 500 farmers may be met by the year 1990.

Farmers are usually assisted in procurement of inputs for forage production. These inputs include, forage seed, fertilizer, fencing materials, credit facilities/loans etc.

They are either made available directly by government agencies such as the Nigerian Livestock Projects Unit or from other sources. With respect to improved seed for sown pastures, farmers are always encouraged to multiply the seed available in the first growing season so that a greater area could be sown the following season and the remaining seed can be sold to other farmers. Presently, the demand for forage seed is too high for NAPRI to cope with. This is because many of the retired civil servants and members of armed forces who have gone into livestock farming have been aware of the benefits of improved forages for livestock production.

Table 3a. Performance of cattle grazing different pastures at NAPRI, Shika, 1969-1984.

	Pasture type	S.R. (head/ha)	A.D.G. (kg/head)	Duration (days)	Gain/ha (kg)	Returns/ha (N=)
Rainy season	Rangeland	1.0	0.15	120	18	81.00
	Digitaria	4.5	0.31	106	148	666.00
	Digitaria	3.7	0.45	98	164	738.00
	Digitaria	3.3	0.76	70	176	792.00
	Brachiaria	6.8	0.33	126	283	1273.00
	Brachiaria	6.8	0.59	126	506	2277.00
	Stylo	4.1	0.44	143	251	1129.00
Rainy/dry season	Cenchrus/verano	3.33	0.40	222	296	1332.00
	Cenchrus/verano	1.67	0.41	222	152	584.00
	Rangeland	0.50	0.30	222	33	148.00
Dry season	Chloris + kg C.S. daily	3.0	0.64	72	138	621.00
	Stylo + grass	1.0	0.42	140	59	265.00
	Rangeland + C.S.2	1.3	0.07	112	10	45.00

¹ 1 Naira = US$ 0.20 depending upon fluctuation
² C.S. = Cottonseed
Assume N=4.50/kg liveweight

Sources: de Leeuw and Brickman, 1974; de Leeuw and Schillorn, 1978, Agishi, 1979, Okeagu, 1981.

Table 3b: Cost of pasture establishment

		Annual costs
Cost items	Total costs (N/ha)	(N/ha)	(N/ha)
Bush clearing	200.00	20.00	20.00
Seedbed tillage	150.00	30.00	30.00
Seeds	180.00	36.00	36.00
Fertilizers	170.00	170.00	-
Fertilizers	60.00	-	60.00
Fencing (25 has)	196.00	150.00	15.00
Total		271.00	131.00

Note: Assuming N4.50/kg liveweight is the farm-gate selling price for cattle, then a sustained production of 60.2 and 29.1 kg/ha are required to cover the annual costs of grass and legume pasture respectively.

On smallholder level, the adoption of the fodder banks technology has proved profitable to many farmers. Requests by farmers for the establishment of improved forage legumes such as lablab and forage cowpeas is on the increase.

Suggestions to improve utilisation of research results to farmers

(a) Construction of more access roads to the rural communities
(b) Allocation of more land specifically for forage production
(c) Training of more extension staff into subject matter specialists
(d) Involvement of extension staff in the provision of inputs and other forms of assistance to farmers.
(e) Provision of inputs promptly e.g. fertilizers and adequate maintenance of equipment
(f) Contact between researchers, producers and extension staff should be more regular
(g) Provision of more funds to aid in the extension of forage production.

References

Adegbola, A.A. and Onayinka, B.O. 1968. The management and improvement of natural grasslands in Nigeria. Niger. Agric. J. 5: 4-6

Agishi, E.C. 1971. Use of legumes for livestock production in Nigeria. Samaru Agric. News1. 13: 115-119

Agishi, E.C. 1979. The performance of young heifers grazing buffer grass - verano stylo pastures. Ann. Rep. NAPRI Shika pp 90-91

Agishi, E.C. 1982. verano stylo - a promising new pasture legume for the Nigerian Savannas. Paper presented at the National Conference on Beef Production in Nigeria held in Kaduna, July 1982 Nigeria, Mimeo 19 pp

Agishi, E.C. 1984 - Field studies on seed production of tropical grasses at Shika, Nigeria. Ph D thesis, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.

Akinola, J.O. 1981. Growth of signal grass (Brachiaria decumbens) alone and with legumes in Northern Nigeria. Trop. Grasslds 15: 130-134.

Ariba, O.O. 1987. Effect of fertilizer nitrogen on the herbage production of three pasture grasses supplementally irrigated at Kaduna. Northern Nigeria. MSc. thesis, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.

Blair-Rains, A. 1963. Grassland Research in Northern Nigeria. 1952 - 62. Samaru Misc. paper No. 1 69 pp.

Fayemi, A.A., Odu, C.T.I. and Fagbemi, A. 1970. Nutrient requirement of tropical pasture legumes. I. influence of soil type and N levels of the growth, nodulation and N fixation of Centrosema pubescens and Stylosanthes gracilis Nig. J. Sic. 4: 311-318.

Foster, W.H. and Mundy, E.J. 1961. Forage species in Northern Nigeria. Trop. Agric. (Trin). 38: 311-18.

Haggar, R.J. 1971. The production and management of Stylosanthes gracilis at Shika. 1. In sown pastures. J. Agric. Sci. 77: 427-36.

Haggar, R.J., de Leeuw, P.N. and Agishi, E. 1971. The production of and management of Stylosanthes gracilis at Shika, Nigeria. 2. In savanna grassland J. Agric. Sci. 77, 437-447.

de Leeuw, P.N. 1974. The establishment of Stylosanthes humilis in Nigerian savanna. Paper presented at the 12 Int. Grassl. Congr. held in Moscow, pp 839-850.

de Leeuw, P.N. and Brinckman, W.L. 1974. Pasture and rangeland improvement in the Northern Guinea and Sudan zones of Nigeria. In: J.K. Loosli, V.A. Oyenuga and B.M. Babatunde. Animal Production in the Tropics, pp 124-136. Heinemann, Ibadan.

de Leeuw, P.N. and Agishi, E.C. 1978. A partial economic analysis of grazing systems in the savanna zone. 8th Livestock Conference, Samaru, Sept. 1978

de Leeuw, P.N. and Schilhorn, T.W. 1978. Performance of young heifers of different dry season pastures. Ann. Rep. NAPRI-Shikah-Mimeo.

Miller, T.B. and Blair Rains, A. 1963. The nutritive value and economic aspects of some fodders in Northern Nigeria. I. Fresh herbage. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 18: 158-167

Miller, T., Blair-Rains, A.B. and Thorpe, R.J. 1964. The nutritive value and agronomic aspects of some fodders in Northern Nigeria. III. Hays and dried crop residues. J. Br. Grassl. Soc., 19, 77-80.

Okeagu, M.U. 1981. Evaluation of nitrogen fertilized signal grass (Brachiaria decumbens) pastures under cattle grazing. M.Sc. Thesis, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.

Okeagu, M.U., Kallah, M.S., Ummuna, N.N. and Buvanendra, V. 1985. Productivity of grazed Brachiaria decumbens and Digiteria smutsii pastures under different stocking rates. Ann. Rep. NAPRI-Shika. pp 79-81.

Onifade, O.S., Adu, I.F. and Akinola, J.O. 1986. Performance of sheep grazing Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana cv Callide)/stylo (S. guianensis cv Cook) pasture. NAPRI Ann. Report. 1986. (NAPRI), Zaria, Nigeria.

Onifade, O.S. and Akinola, J.O. 1986. Effect of seeding ratio and sowing method on the production of Rhodes grass/stylo swards in the Northern Guinea Savanna zone of Nigeria. J. Anim. Prod. Res. 6: 29-37.

Perrier, G. 1982. Effect of ridging and harrowing with or without seeding and fertilisation on forage production and infiltration rates on rangeland in Nigeria. A report to LPU, Kaduna. 12 pp.

Mohamed Saleem, M.A., Otsyina, R. and van Kaufmann, R. 1986. Some methods for improving fodder by incorporating forage legumes in cereal cropping systems in the Nigerian subhumid zone. In: I. Haque, S. Jutzi, S. Jutzi and P.J.H. Neate (eds) proceedings of workshop on potentials of forage legume in Farming Systems of Sub-Saharan Africa. 16-19 Sept 1985. ILCA, Addis Ababa. pp 363-378.

Tuley, P. 1982. Stylosanthes gracillis. Herbage Abstract 38: 87-94.

Yazidu, I. 1985. Communicating with Nigerian farmers. Paper presented at the Nigerian-Australia Seminar on Collaborative Agricultural Research held in Shika, Nigeria. Nov. 1983. pp 97-104.