Determination of Chemical Compositions and Gas Production Values of Some Root and Tuber Crops from Market Wastes

Year 2019, Volume: 2 Issue: 4, 186 - 190, 01.10.2019

Emrah Kaya , Adem Kamalak

Abstract

 In this study, it was aimed to determine the chemical composition, gas production, methane production,
organic matter digestibility and metabolisable energy values of some root and tuber crops obtained from markets.
Potatoe, carrot, sugar beet, sweet potatoe, turnip, black carrot, radish and jerusalem artichoke obtained from the
markets found in Kahramanmaraş province were used as study materials. Dry matter (DM), crude ash (CA), crude protein (CP), acid detergent fiber (ADF), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), ether extract (EE) analysis were performed on
the collected materials and afterwards gas production values metabolic energy contents and organic matter
digestibilities of study materials were calculated. The CA, DM, ADF, NDF, EE and HP of root and tuber crop wastes varied
between 0.66 and 2.41 %, 7.36 and 21.60 %, 4.52 and 16.27 %, 12.58 and 34.30 %, 0.87 and 2.41 % and 5.11 and 19.01
% respectively. The net gas production of wastes varied between 65.74 and 84.66 ml. The metabolisable energy values
of study materials ranged from 11.86 to 14.07 MJ kg-1 DM. The net methane production varied between 8.29 ml to
11.49 ml. The percentage of methane production ranged from 11.56 to 14.89 %. The OMD of root and tuber crop wastes
ranged from 79.69 to 93.66 %. In this study, it is considered that the materials classified as waste may be evaluated in
animal nutrition. However, it is thought that due to the chemical compounds contained in the waste material, the
amount of use should be considered. It is also stated that there will be positive effects on the prevention of
environmental pollution and waste. 

Keywords

Market wastes, Chemical composition, In vitro gas production, Methane, Organic matter digestibility

References

• Albayrak M. 2009. Yaş meyve ve sebze pazarlama merkezleri: toptancı haller-pazarlar; Dünya, Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye’den örneklerle yapısı ve işleyişi. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Kalkınma Bakanlığı Yayın No:177, s:70, Ankara.
• AOAC. 1990. Official method of analysis. 15th ed., pp.66-88. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC, USA.
• Emeksiz F, Albayrak M, Güneş E, Özçelik A, Özer OO, Taşdan K. 2005. Türkiye’de tarımsal ürünlerin pazarlama kanalları ve araçlarının değerlendirilmesi, Tarım Haftası 2005 VI.Teknik Kongre, s.1155-1171, Ankara.
• Goel G, Makkar HPS, Becker K. 2008. Effect of sesbania sesban and carduus pycnocephalus leaves and fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L) seeds and their extract on partitioning of nutrients from roughage-and concentrate-based feeds to methane. Anim Feed Sci Technol, 147(1-3): 72-89.
• Gümüş S. 1997. Yaş meyve ve sebze pazarlama kanallarındaki sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Tarım ve Köy Dergisi, Sayı:114.
• Hatırlı SA, Yurdakul O. 1992. Mersin’de örtüaltı sebzeciliğinin pazarlama yapısı ve sorunları. Çukurova Üniv Zir Fak Derg 7(2):159-172.
• Kaptangil MK. 1980. Toptancı meyve sebze halleri ve kooperatifçilik. Ziraat Ekon Derg, 30-31: 3.
• Karaçalı İ. 2004. Bahçe ürünlerinin muhafaza ve pazarlanması, Ege Üniv Zir Fak Yayınları No:494, Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi, Bornova/İzmir.
• Marino TC, Hector B, Rodrigues PHM, Borgatti LMO, Meyer PM, Silva EJA, Orskov ER. 2010. Characterization of vegetables and fruits potential as ruminant feed by in vitro gas production technique. Livest Res Rural Develop, 22: 1–9.
• Menke KH, Steingass H. 1988. Estimation of energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production. Anim Res Develop, 28: 7-55.
• Özdüven ML, Coşkuntuna L, Koç F. 2005. Üzüm posası silajının fermantasyon ve yem değeri özelliklerinin saptanması. Trakya Univ J Nat Sci, 6(1): 45-50.
• SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows), 1999. Spps Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA.
• TUİK. 2015. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, Bitkisel ürün denge tabloları internet sitesi. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=104&locale=tr (erişim tarihi: 20.07.2017).
• Tunçel H. 2003. Anadolu şehirlerinde semt pazarları: Elazığ Örneği. Fırat Üniv Sos Bil Derg, 13(1): 50.
• Tunçel H. 2009. Geleneksel ticaret mekanı olarak Türkiye’de haftalık pazarlar. New World Sci Acad Nat Sci, 4(2): 35-52.
• Van Soest PJ, Robertson JD, Lewis BA. 1991. Methods for dietary fibre, and neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animals nutrition. J Dairy Sci, 74: 3583-3597.
• Vural H. 1983. Ankara şehri yaş meyve ve sebze toptancı halinin ekonomik analizi ve düzenleme tedbirleri. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ziraat Fakültesi, Tarım Ekonomisi Bölümü, No:5, Ankara.
• Vural H, Eşiyok D, Duman İ. 2000. Kültür sebzeleri (Sebze yetiştirme), Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi Bornova, s: 253-260.
• Wadhwa M, Bakshi MPS. 2013. Utilization of fruit and vegetable wastes as livestock feed and as substrates for generation of other value-added products. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
• Waller JC. 2005. Feedstuffs Reference Issue & buyers guide. Volume: 76 (38).