Waste and Biomass Valorization

, Volume 10, Issue 11, pp 3363–3371 | Cite as

Ensiling Pretreatment of Banana Waste By-products: Influences on Chemical Composition and Environmental Rumen Biogas and Fermentation

  • Mostafa Yousef Elahi
  • Azeez Olanrewaju Yusuf
  • Abdulhamid Torshabi
  • Hassan Fazaeli
  • Mohammad Reza Dehghani
  • Abdelfattah Z. M. SalemEmail author
Original Paper


The negative effect of waste from agricultural activities on man and animals had continued to be worrisome. This research inquired into the benefits of banana by-products silage (BBPs) supplemented with different substrates and urea. Samples of BBPs (banana peels, leaves, pseudostem and stalk) were cut, dried and bulked to formulate eight treatment (silage) groups namely; BBPs without additives (high moisture material 80–90%), BBPs treated with urea (2.5% of fresh weight), BBPs treated with wheat straw (20% of fresh weight), BBPs treated with wheat bran (20% of fresh weight), BBPs treated with alfalfa (20% of fresh weight), BBPs treated with wheat straw and urea, BBPs treated with wheat bran and urea and BBPs treated with alfalfa and urea arranged in a 2 × 4 factorial arrangement using completely randomized design. Results indicated that addition of different absorbents and urea significantly (P < 0.05) influenced the chemical composition. Highest crude protein and NH3–N contents were observed in silage with “urea and alfalfa”. Different absorbents and urea significantly (P < 0.05) influenced gas production from insoluble fraction (b), gas production rate constant for insoluble fraction (c), organic matter digestibility and metabolizable energy. Highest values for b and organic matter digestibility were obtained in BBPs silage with both “urea and alfalfa”. It can be inferred from this study that anaerobic fermentation of ensiling-treated banana wastes have an appreciable level of nutrient and can be adopted in livestock feeding. Moreover, it will reduce or eliminate danger (on both man and animals) posed by these waste on the environment.


Banana wastes Environmental biogas Fermentation Gas production Silage 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest in the course of his research.


  1. 1.
    Ulloa, J.B., Weerd, J.H., Huisman, E.A., Varreth, J.A.J.: Tropical agricultural residues and their potential uses in fish feeds: the Costa Rican situation. Waste Manag. 24(1), 87–97 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Olafadehan, O.A.: Changes in haematological and biochemical diagnostic parameters of Red Sokoto goats fed tannin-rich Pterocarpus erinaceus forage diets. Vet. Arh. 81(4), 471–483 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yusuf, A.O., Mlambo, V., Iposu, S.O.: A nutritional and economic evaluation of Moringa oleifera leaf meal as a dietary supplement in West African Dwarf goats. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 48(1), 81–87 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aganga, A.A., Tshwenyane, S., Molefhe, L.: Influence of feed type on egg production of tswana laying chicken. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2(4), 256–258 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Padam, B.S., Tin, H.S., Chye, F.Y., Abdullah, M.I.: Banana by-products: an under-utilized renewable food biomass with great potential. J. Food Sci. Technol. 51(12), 3527–3545 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marie-Magdeleine, C., Liméa, L., Etienne, T., Lallo, C.H., Archimède, H., Alexandre, G.: The effects of replacing Dichantium hay with banana (Musa paradisiaca) leaves and pseudo-stem on carcass traits of Ovin Martinik sheep. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 41(7), 1531 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yang, J.S., Tan, H.S., Zhai, H.R., Wang, Q., Zhao, N., Cai, Y.M., Li, M., Zhou, H.L.: Research on chemical composition and ensiling characteristics of banana stems and leaves. Adv. Mater. Res. 347, 1647–1651 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mohapatra, D., Mishra, S., Sutar, N.: Banana and its by-product utilisation: an overview. J. Sci. Ind. Res. 69, 323–329 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Okelana, M.A.: Chemical properties and potential utilization of banana pseudostem. ASSET 1(1), 63–70 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    AOAC.: Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International (16th edn., 3rd revision). AOAC International, Gaithersburg (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Van Soest, P.V., Robertson, J.B., Lewis, B.A.: Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74(10), 3583–3597 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guo, X.S., Ding, W.R., Han, J.G., Zhou, H.: Characterization of protein fractions and amino acids in ensiled alfalfa treated with different chemical additives. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 142, 89–98 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Broderick, G.A., Kang, J.H.: Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acid in ruminal fluid and in vitro media. J. Dairy Sci. 63, 64–75 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moran, J.P., Weinberg, Z.G., Ashbell, G., Hen, Y., Owen, T.R.: A comparison of two methods for the evaluation of the aerobic stability of whole crop wheat silage: 11th International Silage Conference. Aberystwyth, Wales, UK, pp. 162–163: (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Menke, K.H., Steingass, H.: Estimation of the energetic feed value from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Ani. Res. Dev. 28, 7–55 (1988)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    SAS.: Statistical Analysis System. User’s Guide: Statistics. Ver 9.0. SAS Institute, Cary (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kebreab, E., Smith, T., Tanner, J., Osuji, P.: Review of undernutrition in smallholder ruminant production systems in the tropics. Coping with Feed Scarcity in Smallholder Livestock Systems in Developing Countries. Animal Sciences Group, pp. 3–95. Wageningen UR, Wageningen (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Siebert, B.D., Hunter, R.A.: Supplementary feeding of grazing animals. In: Proceedings of an International Symposium Nutritional Limits to Animal Production from Pastures, St Lucia, Qld, pp 409–426 (1982)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Denek, N., Can, A.: Effect of wheat straw and different additives on silage quality and in vitro dry matter digestibility of wet orange pulp. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 6(2), 217–219 (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang, Q., Zhou, H.L., Tan, H.S., Yang, J.S.: Effect of different additives on banana stems silage quality. Guangdong Agric. Sci. 22, 104–106 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Silva, J.K.D., Oliveira, J.S.D., Medeiros, A.N.D., Santos, E.M., Magalhães, T.D.S., Ramos, A.O., Bezerra, H.F.C.: Elephant grass ensiled with wheat bran compared with corn silage in diets for lactating goats. Rev. Bras. Zootec. 43(11), 618–626 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bhatti, S.A., Firkins, J.L.: Kinetics of hydration and functional specific gravity of fibrous feed by-products. J. Anim. Sci. 73, 1449–1458 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Noblet, J., Le Goff, G.: Effect of dietary fibre on the energy value of feeds for pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 90(1), 35–52 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Muia, J.M.K.: Use of Napier grass to improve smallholder milk production in Kenya. PhD thesis Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Printed by Grafisch Service Centrum Van Gils B.V., Wageningen, pp. 259 (2000)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rasool, E., Gilani, A.H.: Chemical composition of wheat straw as influenced by urea and alkali treatments at different moisture levels. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 8, 563–566 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    NRC.: Urea on Other Non Protein Nitrogen Compound in Animal Nutrition. National Academy of Science, Washington, DC (1976)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McDonald, P., Henderson, A.R., Heron, S.J.E.: The Biochemistry of Silage. 2nd edn., Chalcombe Publications, Marlow, ISBN-13: 9780948617225$4, pp. 340 (1991)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yunus, M., Ohba, N., Shimojo, M., Furuse, M., Masuda, Y.: Effects of adding urea and molasses on Napier grass silage quality. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 13, 1542–1547 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Aioanei, N.M., Pop, I.M.: Research on chemical composition of alfalfa hay obtained in different production systems (conventional and organic). Lucr. Științifice Vet. 60, 60–64 (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Meneses, M., Megías, M.D., Madrid, J., Martínez-Teruel, A., Hernández, F., Oliva, J.: Evaluation of the phytosanitary, fermentative and nutritive characteristics of the silage made from crude artichoke (Cynara scolymus L.) by-product feeding for ruminants. Small Rumin. Res. 70(2), 292–296 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ojo, V.O.A., Akinade, G.A., Adetokunbo, G.A., Lamidi, A.A., Jolaosho, A.O., Aderinboye, R.Y., Amole, T.A., Akinbode, R.M., Okukenu, O.A., Idowu, O.J.: Silage quality of Pennisetum purpureum Schumach. grass mixed with processed Enterolobium cyclocarpum (Jacq.) Griseb. seeds at varying proportions as affected by ensiling periods. Trop. Agric. 94(4), 62–371 (2017)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wilkinson, J.M., Davies, D.R.: The aerobic stability of silage: key findings and recent developments. Grass Forage Sci. 68(1), 1–19 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Oloche, J., Ayoade, J.A., Oluremi, O.I.A.: In vitro gas production parameters and characteristics of four types of sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) peels. Meal. J. Vet. Agric. Sci. 5(3), 5–8 (2013)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kafilzadeh, F., Heidary, N.: Chemical composition, in vitro digestibility and kinetics of fermentation of whole-crop forage from 18 different varieties of oat (Avena sativa L.). J. Appl. Anim. Res. 41(1), 61–68 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Getachew, G., Blümmel, M., Makkar, H.P.S., Becker, K.: In vitro gas measuring techniques for assessment of nutritional quality of feeds: a review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 72(3), 261–281 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Makkar, H.P.S.: Applications of the in vitro gas method in the evaluation of feed resources, and enhancement of nutritional value of tannin-rich tree/browse leaves and agro-industrial by-products. In: Development and Field Evaluation of Animal Feed Supplementation Packages, IAEA-TECDOC-1294, pp. 23–39. IAEA, Vienna, (2002)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pashaei, S., Razmazar, V., Mirshekar, R.: Gas production: a proposed in vitro method to estimate the extent of digestion of a feedstuff in the rumen. J. Biol. Sci. 10, 573–580 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Saha, U.K., Sonon, L.S., Hancock, D.W., Hill, N.S., Stewart, L., Heusner, G.L., Kissel, D.E.: Common terms used in animal feeding and nutrition. Learning for life. Bulletin 1367 (2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pilajun, R., Wanapat, M.: Chemical composition and in vitro gas production of fermented cassava pulp with different types of supplements. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 46(1), 81–86 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mostafa Yousef Elahi
    • 1
  • Azeez Olanrewaju Yusuf
    • 2
  • Abdulhamid Torshabi
    • 1
  • Hassan Fazaeli
    • 3
  • Mohammad Reza Dehghani
    • 1
  • Abdelfattah Z. M. Salem
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Animal Science, College of AgricultureUniversity of ZabolZabolIran
  2. 2.Department of Animal ScienceNorth West UniversityMafikengSouth Africa
  3. 3.Animal Science Research Institute of IranAgricultural Research Education and Extension Organization (AREEO)KarajIran
  4. 4.Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y ZootecniaUniversidad Autónoma del Estado de MéxicoTolucaMexico

Personalised recommendations