Şeker Pancarı Yan Ürünlerinin Kaba Yem Kaynağı Olarak Kullanımı

Öz

Hayvansal üretimde en önemli girdilerden birini yem maliyeti oluşturmaktadır. Hayvancılık işletmelerinde üretilen hayvansal ürünlerin miktarlarındaki düşüşün temel nedenlerinden biri, hayvanların yeterli kaliteli kaba yemle beslenememesidir. Türkiye'de artan kaba yem açığı ve yüksek yem maliyetleri, hayvancılık sektörünün sürdürülebilirliği açısından ciddi sorunlar yaratmaktadır. Bu nedenle, yerli ve düşük maliyetli alternatif yem kaynaklarının değerlendirilmesi zorunluluk haline gelmektedir. Türkiye'de yaygın olarak yetiştirilen bir endüstri bitkisi olan şeker pancarının hasat sonrası tarlada kalan yaprak ve baş kısımları, genellikle atık olarak bırakılmaktadır. Oysa bu materyallerin protein, vitamin ve mineral içeriği bakımından zengin olduğu ve özellikle ruminant hayvanlar için değerli bir yem kaynağı olduğu bilinmektedir. Şeker pancarı yapraklarının silaj haline getirilmesi, besin değerlerinin korunmasına ve yıl boyunca kullanılabilir bir yem formuna dönüşmesine olanak tanımaktadır. Bununla birlikte yüksek nem içeriği, düşük kuru madde oranı ve oksalik asit ile saponin gibi anti-besinsel faktörler, yaprakların doğrudan kullanımını sınırlandırmakta ve silaj yapımında uygun katkı maddelerinin kullanımını zorunlu kılmaktadır. Laktik asit bakterisi inokulantları ve kuru madde dengeleyicilerin (arpa kırması, buğday kepeği, kuru pancar posası vb.) kullanımı fermantasyon kalitesini belirgin biçimde iyileştirmektedir. Melas ve pancar küspesi de önemli yan ürünler olup, hayvancılıkta enerji ve lif kaynağı olarak geniş kullanım alanı bulmaktadır. Bu derleme çalışması; şeker pancarı yan ürünlerinin kimyasal kompozisyonunu, besleme değerini, silaj fermantasyon biyokimyasını, anti-besinsel faktörleri ve ruminant hayvan performansına etkilerini güncel literatür ışığında kapsamlı biçimde değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Küspe
• laktik asit bakterisi
• melas
• silaj
• yem değeri

The Use of Sugar Beet By-Products as a Source of Roughage

Öz

Feed cost is one of the most important inputs in animal production. One of the main reasons for the decrease in the output of animal products in livestock enterprises is that animals are not fed sufficient quality roughage. The increasing roughage deficit and high feed costs in Türkiye are creating serious problems for livestock sector sustainability. Therefore, the evaluation of domestic and low-cost alternative feed sources is necessary. The leaves and crown parts of sugar beet, an industrial crop widely grown in Türkiye, are generally left as waste in the fields after harvest. However, these materials are rich in protein, vitamins, and minerals and are a valuable feed source, especially for ruminants. Ensiling sugar beet leaves preserves their nutritional value and transforms them into a feed form that can be used year-round. However, high moisture content, low dry matter ratio, and anti-nutritional factors such as oxalic acid and saponins limit the direct use of the leaves and necessitate the use of appropriate additives during silage production. The use of lactic acid bacteria inoculants and dry matter balancers (such as cracked barley, wheat bran, and dried beet pulp) significantly improves fermentation quality. Molasses and beet pulp are also important by-products that are widely used in animal husbandry as sources of energy and fiber. This review aims to comprehensively evaluate the chemical composition, nutritional value, silage fermentation biochemistry, anti-nutritional factors, and effects on the performance of ruminant animals fed sugar beet by-products, based on the current literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Pulp
• lactic acid bacteria
• molasses
• silage
• feed value

Kaynakça

1. Acikbas, S., Ozyazici, M.A., 2019. Buğday samanının yem değerinin belirlenmesi: Türkiye, Siirt ili örneği. International Journal of Scientific and Technological Research, 5(12): 238-243.
2. Açıkbaş, S., Özyazıcı, M.A., 2022. Mercimek (Lens culinaris Medic.) hasat artıklarının kaba yem kalite özellikleri açısından değerlendirilmesi. II-International Conference on Global Practice of Multidisciplinary Scientific Studies, Conference Proceedings Book, July 26-28, Batumi, Georgia, s. 1594-1604.
3. Adbhai, A.R., Dewanjee, S., Patel, K.G., Karmakar, N., 2022. Sugar beet molasses production and utilization. In: V. Misra, S. Srivastava and A.K. Mall (Eds.), Sugar Beet Cultivation, Management and Processing, Springer, Singapore, pp. 885-904.
4. Ak, İ., Uzatıcı, A., 2001. Şeker pancarı yapraklarının hayvan beslemede kullanımı. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(1): 95-99.
5. Aleixo, J.A., Daza, J., Keim, J.P., Castillo, I., Pulido, R.G., 2022. Effects of sugar beet silage, high-moisture corn, and corn silage feed supplementation on the performance of dairy cows with restricted daily access to pasture. Animals, 12(19): 2672.
6. Altaçlı, S., Deniz, S., 2013. Değişik şekillerde hazırlanan yaş şeker pancarı posası silajlarının in vivo ve in vitro sindirilebilirlikleri ile enerji içeriklerinin belirlenmesi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(1): 9-13.
7. Altunbay, S.G., Kangal, A., Gürel, S., 2016. Şeker pancarından biyoetanol üretimi. Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi, 25(Özel Sayı-2): 334-339.
8. Anonim, 2025. Şeker Üretimi Teknolojisi. Türkiye Şeker Fabrikaları Anonim Şirketi, (https://www.turkseker. gov.tr/?ModulID=3&MenuID=55), (Erişim Tarihi: 02.06.2025).

9. Anonim, 2026. Tahıllar ve Diğer Bitkisel Ürünler, Bitkisel Üretim İstatistikleri. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, (https://www.tuik.gov.tr), (Erişim Tarihi: 18.04.2026).
10. Anonymous, 2024. Sweeteners. International Sugar Organization, (https://www.isosugar.org/sugarsector /Sweeteners), (Erişim Tarihi: 18.04.2026).
11. Anonymous, 2025. Sugar Beet Production. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), (https://archive.ourworldindata.org/202 60417-112857/grapher/sugar-beet-production.html), (Erişim Tarihi: 17.04.2026).
12. Anonymous, 2026. Beet Pulp, Dried. French Feed Database (Feedtables), (https://www.feedtables.com/ content/beet-pulp-dried), (Erişim Tarihi: 18.04.2026).
13. Antczak-Chrobot, A., Macierzyński, J., Wojtczak, M., 2026. Polyphenols in sugar beet leaves: Composition, variability, and valorization opportunities. Molecules, 31(3): 489.
14. Aslani, M.R., Movassaghi, A.R., Najarnezhad, V., Pirouz, H.J., Bami, M.H., 2011. Acute oxalate intoxication associated to ingestion of eshnan (Seidlitzia rosmarinus) in sheep. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 43(6): 1065-1068.
15. Ayas, S., 2024. Effects of different irrigation and fertilization levels on the yield and quality of wet sugar beet pulp used as animal feed. Sugar Tech, 26(5): 1448-1462.
16. Ayaşan, T., Gök, K., Asarkaya, A., Hızlı, H., Görgülü, M., Karakozak, E., Coşkun, M.A., Seğmenoğlu, M.S., 2012. Mısır silajı ve şeker pancarı posasının erkek danaların besi performansı, kan parametresi ile kesim ölçütleri üzerine etkisi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1): 64-73.
17. Bağuç, Y., Aksu, T., 2021. Elma (Malus pumila) katkısının yaş şeker pancarı posası silajı kalitesine etkisi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Veteriner Bilimleri Dergisi, 16(1): 49-56.
18. Beauchemin, K.A., 2006. Use of sugar beet silage in feedlot cattle diets. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 86(1): 129-133.
19. Can, A., Denek, N., Yazgan, K., 2003. Şeker pancarı yaprağına değişik katkı maddeleri ilavesinin silaj kalitesi ile in vitro kuru madde sindirilebilirlik düzeylerine etkisi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(2): 26-29.
20. Cao, Y., Cai, Y., Takahashi, T., Yoshida, N., Tohno, M., Uegaki, R., Nonaka, K., Terada, F., 2011. Effect of lactic acid bacteria inoculant and beet pulp addition on fermentation characteristics and in vitro ruminal digestion of vegetable residue silage. Journal of Dairy Science, 94(8): 3902-3912.
21. Carvalho, B.F., Sales, G.F.C., Schwan, R.F., Ávila, C.L.S., 2021. Criteria for lactic acid bacteria screening to enhance silage quality. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 130(2): 341-355.
22. Ćirić, M., Popović, V., Prodanović, S., Živanović, T., Ikanović, J., Bajić, I., 2024. Sugar beet: Perspectives for the future. Sugar Tech, 26(5): 1208-1219.
23. Duraisam, R., Salelgn, K., Berekete, A.K., 2017. Production of beet sugar and bio-ethanol from sugar beet and it bagasse: A review. International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, 43(4): 222-233.
24. Edirisinghe, N., Flavel, M., Pouniotis, D., Zakaria, R., Lim, K.F., Dias, D.A., 2024. From feed to fork: Immunity, performance and quality of products from farm animals fed sugarcane products. Frontiers in Animal Science, 5: 1352961.
25. El-Khodery, S., El-Boshy, M., Gaafar, K., Elmashad, A., 2008. Hypocalcaemia in Ossimi sheep associated with feeding on beet tops (Beta vulgaris). Turkish Journal of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, 32(3): 199-205.
26. Eştürk, Ö., 2018. Türkiye’de şeker sektörünün önemi ve geleceği üzerine bir değerlendirme. Anadolu İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 2(1): 67-81.
27. Evans, E., Bernhardson, D., Lamont, J., 2016. Case study: Effects of feeding fresh sugar beets to lactating dairy cows on milk production and milk composition. The Professional Animal Scientist, 32(2): 253-258.
28. Evans, E., Messerschmidt, U., 2017. Review: Sugar beets as a substitute for grain for lactating dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 8: 25.
29. Fišerová, M., Gigac, J. Butaš, R., 2007. Influence of sugar beet pulp on bond strength and structure of paper. Wood Research, 52(3): 59-74.
30. Gheller, L.S., Ghizzi, L.G., Takiya, C.S., Grigoletto, N.T.S., Silva, T.B.P., Marques, J.A., Dias, M.S.S., Freu, G., Renno, F.P., 2021. Different organic acid preparations on fermentation and microbiological profile, chemical composition, and aerobic stability of whole-plant corn silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 281: 115083.
31. Ghirişan, A., Drăgan, S., Coţa, C., Nagy, E. M., Zoltan, G., Miclăuş, V., 2020. Modelling of the sugar beet pulp drying process. Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai, Chemia, 65(2): 21-28.
32. Gonda, H., Nikodinoska, I., Le Cocq, K., Moran, C.A., 2023. Efficacy of six lactic acid bacteria strains as silage inoculants in forages with different dry matter and water‐soluble carbohydrate content. Grass and Forage Science, 78(4): 636-647.
33. Gül, S., 2022. The effect of barley paste, barley straw and wheat bran addition to sugar beet leaves silages on feed value, silage quality and in vitro organic matter digestibility. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, 9(4): 951-956.
34. Gün, M., 2019. Şeker pancarı küspesi ve buğday kepeğinden ferulik asit eldesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Karamanoğlu Mehmet Bey Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Karaman.
35. Güneş, Z., Kırtıl, H.E., Küçükata, Y.Ş., Toprak, B., 2020. Şeker pancarı ve yan ürünlerinden biyoyakıt (etanol) üretimi ve biyoetanolün endüstriyel kullanımının değerlendirilmesi. İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2(2): 16-24.
36. Habeeb, A.A.M., Gad, A.E., El-Tarabany, A.A., Mustafa, M.M., Atta, M.A.A., 2017. Using of sugar beet pulp by-product in farm animals feeding. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology, 3(4): 107-120.
37. Hellwing, A.L.F., Messerschmidt, U., Larsen, M., Weisbjerg, M.R., 2017. Effects of feeding sugar beets, ensiled with or without an additive, on the performance of dairy cows. Livestock Science, 206: 37-44.
38. Hvas, E.M.V., Larsen, M., Andersen, L., Bedenk, U., Weisbjerg, M.R., 2024. Ensiling sugar beets: Effect of mixer feed used for co-ensiling on fermentation products and losses when ensiled in vacuum bags. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 318: 116101.
39. İpçak, H.H., Özüretmen, S., Alçiçek, A., Özelçam, H., 2018. Alternatif protein kaynaklarının hayvan beslemede kullanım olanakları. Hayvansal Üretim, 59(1): 51-58.
40. Jiménez-Ferrer, G., Mendoza-Martínez, G., Soto-Pinto, L., Alayón-Gamboa, A., 2015. Evaluation of local energy sources in milk production in a tropical silvopastoral system with Erythrina poeppigiana. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 47(5): 903-908.
41. Joanna, B., Michal, B., Piotr, D., Agnieszka, W., Dorota, K., Izabela, W., 2018. Sugar beet pulp as a source of valuable biotechnological products. In: A.M. Holban and A.M. Grumezescu (Eds.), Advances in Biotechnology for Food Industry, Academic Press, Poland, pp. 359-392.
42. Kabeyi, M.J.B., 2020. Investigating the challenges of bagasse cogeneration in the Kenyan Sugar Industry. International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology, 9(5): 7-64.
43. Karabıyık, A., 2016. Şeker pancarı baş ve yapraklarının farklı katkı maddeleri ilavesiyle peletlenmesinin kaba yem kalitesi üzerine etkileri. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ordu Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ordu.
44. Karabıyık, A., Özcan, M.A., Kılıç, Ü., 2018. The effects on forage quality of pelleting by using different additives of sugar beet head and leaves. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 1(4): 117-121.
45. Karabulut, A., Filya, İ., 2012. Yemler Bilgisi ve Yem Teknolojisi (5. Baskı). Uludağ Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Ders Notları, Yayın No: 67, Bursa.
46. Kung Jr, L., Shaver, R.D., Grant, R.J., Schmidt, R.J., 2018. Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. Journal of Dairy Science, 101(5): 4020-4033.
47. Lammens, T.M., Franssen, M.C.R., Scott, E.L., Sanders, J.P.M., 2012. Availability of protein-derived amino acids as feedstock for the production of bio-based chemicals. Biomass and Bioenergy, 44: 168-181.
48. Liu, J., Zhao, M., Hao, J., Yan, X., Fu, Z., Zhu, N., Jia, Y., Wang, Z., Ge, G., 2024. Effects of temperature and lactic acid Bacteria additives on the quality and microbial community of wilted alfalfa silage. BMC Plant Biology, 24: 844.
49. Mohamed, E.S.G., El-Syiad, S.I., Farghly, O.A., El-Geddawy, M.A., 2023. Evaluation of sugar losses in beet molasses as affected by the quality of sugar beet roots. Egyptian Sugar Journal, 20: 24-33.
50. Mohsen, M.K., Ali, M.F., Gaafar, H.M., Al-Sakka, T.S., Aboelenin, S.M., Soliman, M.M., Dawood, M.A., 2021. Impact of dry sugar beet pulp on milk production, digestibility traits, and blood constituents of dairy Holstein cows. Animals, 11(12): 3496.
51. Muck, R.E., Nadeau, E.M.G., McAllister, T.A., Contreras-Govea, F.E., Santos, M.C., Kung Jr, L., 2018. Silage review: Recent advances and future uses of silage additives. Journal of Dairy Science, 101(5): 3980-4000.
52. Mustafa, M.M.M., 2011. Effect of dried olive oil by-product supplementation to ration on the performance of local ewes and their lambs. Isotope and Radiation Research, 43(1): 77-93.
53. Mustafa, M.M.M., Saleh, H.M., El-Fouly, H.A., 2009. Effect of olive by-product inclusion in lambs diet on productive performance and some blood parameters. Egyptian Journal of Nutrition and Feeds, 12(3): 253-262.
54. Nkosi, B.D., Langa, T., Motiang, M.D., Modiba, S., Mutavhatsindi, T.F., Malebana, I.M.M., Meeske, R., Groenewald, I.B., 2016. Effects of bacterial inoculation on the fermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of ensiled whole plant soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). South African Journal of Animal Science, 46(2): 129-138.
55. Pavlečić, M., Vrana, I., Vibovec, K., Ivančić Šantek, M., Horvat, P., Šantek, B., 2010. Ethanol production from different intermediates of sugar beet processing. Food Technology and Biotechnology, 48(3): 362-367.
56. Pimlott, A., 1991. Some practical aspects of sugar beet tops silage. British Sugar Beet Review, 59(3): 36-38.
57. Pulido, R., García, E., Beltrán, I., Daza, J., Keim, J., Castillo, I., 2020. Effect of a homofermentative lactic acid bacteria additive on the quality of sugar-beet pulp silage and animal response of dairy cows with restricted access to pasture. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 80(2): 234-240.
58. Rahman, M.M., Abdullah, R.B., Wan Khadijah, W.E., 2013. A review of oxalate poisoning in domestic animals: tolerance and performance aspects. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 97(4): 605-614.
59. Rahman, M.M., Nakagawa, T., Niimi, M., Fukuyama, K., Kawamura, O., 2011. Effects of feeding oxalate containing grass on intake and the concentrations of some minerals and parathyroid hormone in blood of sheep. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 24(7): 940-945.
60. Rajaeifar, M.A., Hemayati, S.S., Tabatabaei, M., Aghbashlo, M., Mahmoudi, S.B., 2019. A review on beet sugar industry with a focus on implementation of waste-to-energy strategy for power supply. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 103: 423-442.
61. Rusdy, M., 2016. Effects of agro-industrial byproduct on fermentation quality and nutritional composition of elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum) silage. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 28(12): 224.
62. Saadaoui, I., Rasheed, R., Aguilar, A., Cherif, M., Al Jabri, H., Sayadi, S., Manning, S.R., 2021. Microalgal-based feed: promising alternative feedstocks for livestock and poultry production. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 12(1): 76.
63. Saleh, M., Eweedah, N., Ali, M., Mohsen, M., 2001. Comparison between dried sugar beet pulp and yellow corn as a sourve of energy with berseem in ration of growing lamps. Egyptian Journal of Nutrition and Feeds, 4(Special Issue): 231-240.
64. Saltyk, I., Bolokhontseva, Y., 2021. Resource-saving environmentally friendly technologies and waste processing as a key to improve the sugar beet production efficiency. BIO Web of Conferences, 37: 00115.
65. Šantek, B., Gwehenberger, G., Šantek, M.I., Narodoslawsky, M., Horvat, P., 2010. Evaluation of energy demand and the sustainability of different bioethanol production processes from sugar beet. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(11): 872-877.
66. Shah, A.M., Zhang, H., Shahid, M., Ghazal, H., Shah, A.R., Niaz, M., Naz, T., Ghimire, K., Goswami, N., Shi, W., Xia, D., Zhao, H., 2025. The vital roles of agricultural crop residues and agro-industrial by-products to support sustainable livestock productivity in subtropical regions. Animals, 15(8): 1184.
67. Singh, D., Garg, A.K., 2013. Evaluation of beet varieties for forage yield and quality parameters. Range Management and Agroforestry, 34(2): 182-185.
68. Soare, E., Dobre, I., David, L., 2021. Research on sugar beet production and trade-worldwide overview. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 21(4): 533-540.
69. Sorathiya, L.M., Patel, M.D., Tyagi, K.K., Fulsoundar, A.B., Raval, A.P., 2015. Effect of sugar beet tubers as a partial replacer to green fodder on production performance and economics of lactating Surti buffaloes in lean period. Veterinary World, 8(1): 15-18.
70. Svedružić, D., Jónsson, S., Toyota, C.G., Reinhardt, L.A., Ricagno, S., Lindqvist, Y., Richards, N.G., 2005. The enzymes of oxalate metabolism: Unexpected structures and mechanisms. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 433(1): 176-192.
71. Şakalar, B., Kamalak, A., 2016. Melaslı kuru şeker pancarı posasının yonca bitkisinin silolanmasında kullanılması. Anadolu Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 31(1): 157-164.
72. Şanlı, A., Karadoğan, T., Tosun, B., 2015. The effects of sugar beet molasses applications on root yield and sugar content of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24(2): 103-108.
73. Tabynbayeva, L., Bastaubayeva, S., Konusbekov, K., Kantarbayeva, E., Yerzhebayeva, R., 2025. Ecological and agronomic evaluation of sugar beet hybrids (Beta vulgaris L.) in a Northern Kazakhstan Agroclimatic Zone. International Journal of Agriculture and Biosciences, 14(6): 1307-1315.
74. Temür, C., Güney, M., Erdoğan, S., Demirel, M., 2021. Inhibition of toxic effects of oxalate in sugar beet pulp with adding ca during ensiling. Journal of Animal Science and Products, 4(2): 164-173.
75. Tenorio, A.T., 2017. Sugar beet leaves for functional ingredients. Doctoral Dissertation, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.
76. Valderrama, X.L., Anrique, R.G., 2011. In situ rumen degradation kinetics of high-protein forage crops in temperate climates. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 71(4): 572-577.
77. Wang, Y., Xia, K., Wang, X.N., Lin, X., Liu, J., Li, Y.J., Liu, X.L., Zhao, W.J., Zhang, Y.G., Guo, J.H., 2022. Improvement of feed intake, digestibility, plasma metabolites, and lactation performance of dairy cows fed mixed silage of sugar beet pulp and rice straw inoculated with lactic acid bacteria. Journal of Dairy Science, 105(1): 269-280.
78. Wilke, K.H., Loza, P.L., Watson, A.K., 2021. Sugar beets as an energy source in diets of gestating, growing, and finishing beef cattle. Applied Animal Science, 37(2): 115-121.
79. Yetik, A.K., Candoğan, B.N., 2022. Optimisation of irrigation strategy in sugar beet farming based on yield, quality and water productivity. Plant, Soil & Environment, 68(8): 358-365.
80. Yin, X., Wu, J., Tian, J., Wang, X., Zhang, J., 2021. Dried soybean curd residue: A promising absorbent for cleaner production of high-quality silage. Journal of Cleaner Production, 324: 129300.
81. Zhang, Z.Y., Zhang, S., Lai, C.H., Zhao, J.B., Zang, J.J., Huang, C.F., 2018. Effects of adaptation time and inclusion level of sugar beet pulp on nutrient digestibility and evaluation of ileal amino acid digestibility in pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 32(9): 1414-1422.