Feeding Mucuna Beans to Small Ruminants of Mayan farmers in the Yucatán, Península, México. Castillo-Caamal, J., B., Jiménez-Osornio, J., J., López-Pérez, A., Aguilar-Cordero, A., & Castillo-Caamal, A., M. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems, 1:113-117, 2003.
Feeding Mucuna Beans to Small Ruminants of Mayan farmers in the Yucatán, Península, México [link]Website  abstract   bibtex   
Mucuna bean (Mucuna pruriens) (MB) has been proposed as a green manure and cover crop in smallholder agricultural systems in the southeastern Mexican state of Yucatan. Its increased adoption could also benefit smallholder farmers through provision of food or feed for their animals. In this in-farm, farmermanaged study, MB was offered as a supplement to small ruminants (sheep and goats) grazing secondary vegetation as their basal diet. The study took place in the homegardens of seven Mayan farmers in Hocaba and Sahcaba, Yucatan. Control diet included grazing secondary vegetation. To improve the adoption of MB by farmers, additional objectives included the solicitation of mallholder perspectives on the MB technology. MB generally improved animal performance in comparison to the control. Weight changes during the study period for growing lambs, kidding goats, double kids pre-suckling, and single kids pre-suckling were 63 (control) vs. 95 (with MB), -1.40 vs. -0.85, 86 vs. 130, and 110 vs.214 g a-1 d-1, respectively. For post-suckling kids and non-pregnant goats, no differences in live weight (LW) were observed between control and MB treatments. Farmers generally commented favorably on the MB supplementation, saying that it was useful, helped during dry season, increased animal weight and milk production, and animals consumed MB well. Most farmers found no disadvantages, but two farmers mentioned the same disadvantage: soaked MB tend to become infested with grubs, and animals do not consume them. All farmers said supplementation was easy and positive changes in animals were evident (such as decreased consumption of pasture, weight increase, and the possibility of feeding them in the corral). There were no major problems in integrating MB in these systems and farmers were able to solve small problems involved in its utilization.
@article{
 title = {Feeding Mucuna Beans to Small Ruminants of Mayan farmers in the Yucatán, Península, México},
 type = {article},
 year = {2003},
 keywords = {crn1},
 pages = {113-117},
 volume = {1},
 websites = {http://www.uady.mx/~veterina/publicaciones/journal/2002-2-3/Castillo-Caamaletal-2-c.pdf,citeulike-article-id:7293361},
 id = {0ee9cbf7-8f67-3b72-b87c-d055edb9b530},
 created = {2019-04-01T18:02:37.101Z},
 file_attached = {false},
 profile_id = {1f5347e3-dec5-3349-a941-3b484c2dfce9},
 group_id = {184ee5d4-bd93-3566-938b-14cc43849390},
 last_modified = {2019-04-01T18:02:37.101Z},
 read = {false},
 starred = {false},
 authored = {false},
 confirmed = {false},
 hidden = {false},
 source_type = {JOUR},
 private_publication = {false},
 abstract = {Mucuna bean (Mucuna pruriens) (MB) has been proposed as a green manure and cover crop in smallholder agricultural systems in the southeastern Mexican state of Yucatan. Its increased adoption could also benefit smallholder farmers through provision of food or feed for their animals. In this in-farm, farmermanaged study, MB was offered as a supplement to small ruminants (sheep and goats) grazing secondary vegetation as their basal diet. The study took place in the homegardens of seven Mayan farmers in Hocaba and Sahcaba, Yucatan. Control diet included grazing secondary vegetation. To improve the adoption of MB by farmers, additional objectives included the solicitation of mallholder perspectives on the MB technology. MB generally improved animal performance in comparison to the control. Weight
      changes during the study period for growing lambs, kidding goats, double kids pre-suckling, and single kids pre-suckling were 63 (control) vs. 95 (with MB), -1.40 vs. -0.85, 86 vs. 130, and 110 vs.214 g a-1 d-1, respectively. For post-suckling kids and non-pregnant
      goats, no differences in live weight (LW) were observed between control and MB treatments. Farmers generally commented favorably on the MB supplementation, saying that it was useful, helped during dry season, increased animal weight and milk
      production, and animals consumed MB well. Most farmers found no disadvantages, but two farmers
      mentioned the same disadvantage: soaked MB tend to become infested with grubs, and animals do not consume them. All farmers said supplementation was
      easy and positive changes in animals were evident (such as decreased consumption of pasture, weight increase, and the possibility of feeding them in the corral). There were no major problems in integrating
      MB in these systems and farmers were able to solve small problems involved in its utilization.},
 bibtype = {article},
 author = {Castillo-Caamal, J B and Jiménez-Osornio, J J and López-Pérez, A and Aguilar-Cordero, A and Castillo-Caamal, A M},
 journal = {Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems}
}

Downloads: 0