Stochastic Programming Model in Least Cost Feed Formulation for Lactating Cattle
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32734/injar.v5i03.9195Keywords:
feed formulation, Generalized Reduced Gradient, Linear Programming Model, LINGO's Nonlinear Solver, stochastic modelAbstract
A conventional linear programming model (LPM) for feed formulation of lactating cattle will overlook the variation in feed components. LPM only considers the mean composition of feed values, regardless of variations, the confidence in satisfying the nutrient need falls to 50%. Whereas the stochastic model (SM), which takes into account both the mean and variation of feed composition and provides 90-99% confidence in meeting the nutrient need. In present work, we have proposed SM for least-cost feed formulation of lactating cattle where the variation in the composition of nutrients like crude protein (CP), Calcium (Ca) and Phosphorus (P) in the feedstuff are considered. Data provided by the National Research Council (2001) are the basis for the current analysis. These SMs are resolved using M.S. Excel's Generalized Reduced Gradient (GRG) nonlinear and LINGO's Nonlinear solver, and the results are compared to LPM; the feed formulated by SM (90 % and 99 %) has the lowest cost when compared to LPM. Nutrients estimated by LPM, SM by GRG nonlinear, and SM by Nonlinear solver utilized for feed formulation had no significant differences as (p>0.05). When compared to LPM, the stochastic model is a better technique, particularly when dealing with nutrient variation.
Downloads
References
J. T. Chen, “Quadratic Programming for Least-Cost Feed Formulations under Probabilistic Protein Constraints,” Am J Agric Econ, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 175–183, May 1973, doi: 10.2307/1238434.
S. A. Rahman and F. E. Bender, “Linear Programming Approximation of Least-Cost Feed Mixes with Probability Restrictions,” Am J Agric Econ, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 612–618, Nov. 1971, doi: 10.2307/1237825.
S. Kataoka, “A Stochastic Programming Model,” Econometrica, vol. 31, no. 1/2, p. 181, Jan. 1963, doi: 10.2307/1910956.
A. Charnes and W. W. Cooper, “Chance-Constrained Programming,” https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.6.1.73, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 73–79, Oct. 1959, doi: 10.1287/MNSC.6.1.73.
C. van de Panne and W. Popp, “Minimum-Cost Cattle Feed Under Probabilistic Protein Constraints,” https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.9.3.405, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 405–430, Apr. 1963, doi: 10.1287/MNSC.9.3.405.
A. F. Kertz, L. F. Reutzel, and G. M. Thomson, “Dry Matter Intake from Parturition to Midlactation,” J Dairy Sci, vol. 74, no. 7, pp. 2290–2295, Jul. 1991, doi: 10.3168/JDS.S0022-0302(91)78401-4.
Livestock Management, Annual report, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, 2013.
I. U. Udo, C. B. Ndome, and P. E. Asuquo, “Use of stochastic programming in least-cost feed formulation for african catfish (Clarias gariepinus) in semi-intensive culture system in Nigeria,” J Fish Aquat Sci, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 447–455, 2011, doi: 10.3923/JFAS.2011.447.455.
M. L. Eastridge, H. F. Bucholtz, A. L. Slater, and C. S. Hall, “Nutrient Requirements for Dairy Cattle of the National Research Council Versus Some Commonly Used Ration Software,” J Dairy Sci, vol. 81, no. 11, pp. 3049–3062, Nov. 1998, doi: 10.3168/JDS.S0022-0302(98)75870-9.
K. Wojtunik-Kulesza, A. Oniszczuk, T. Oniszczuk, M. Combrzyński, D. Nowakowska, and A. Matwijczuk, “Influence of In Vitro Digestion on Composition, Bioaccessibility and Antioxidant Activity of Food Polyphenols—A Non-Systematic Review,” Nutrients 2020, Vol. 12, Page 1401, vol. 12, no. 5, p. 1401, May 2020, doi: 10.3390/NU12051401.
J. Li et al., “The application of nonlinear programming on ration formulation for dairy cattle,” J Dairy Sci, vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 2180–2189, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.3168/JDS.2021-20817.
V. Patil, R. Gupta, R. Duraisamy, and R. S. Kuntal, “Nutrient requirement equations for Indian goat by multiple regression analysis and least cost ration formulation using a linear and non-linear stochastic model,” J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl), vol. 106, no. 5, pp. 968–977, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1111/JPN.13653.
A. V. I. Bueno, G. Lazzari, C. C. Jobim, and J. L. P. Daniel, “Ensiling Total Mixed Ration for Ruminants: A Review,” Agronomy 2020, Vol. 10, Page 879, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 879, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.3390/AGRONOMY10060879.
T. Ran et al., “Diets varying in ratio of sweet sorghum silage to corn silage for lactating dairy cows: Feed intake, milk production, blood biochemistry, ruminal fermentation, and ruminal microbial community,” J Dairy Sci, vol. 104, no. 12, pp. 12600–12615, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.3168/JDS.2021-20408.
A. Hassen, P. Chavula, S. Shek Mohammed, and A. Dawid, “The Effect of Feed Supplementation on Cow Milk Productivity and Quality: A Brief Study”, doi: 10.34104/ijavs.022.013025.
M. Yousefi, A. Hajizadeh, and M. N. Soltani, “A Comparison Study on Stochastic Modeling Methods for Home Energy Management Systems,” IEEE Trans Industr Inform, vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 4799–4808, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1109/TII.2019.2908431.
C. van de Panne and W. Popp, “Minimum-Cost Cattle Feed Under Probabilistic Protein Constraints,” Manage Sci, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 405–430, 1963, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.9.3.405.
T. H. D’ALFONSO, W. B. ROUSH, and J. A. VENTURA, “Least Cost Poultry Rations with Nutrient Variability: A Comparison of Linear Programming with a Margin of Safety and Stochastic Programming Models,” Poult Sci, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 255–262, Feb. 1992, doi: 10.3382/PS.0710255.
R. Luthada-Raswiswi, S. Mukaratirwa, and G. O’brien, “Animal Protein Sources as a Substitute for Fishmeal in Aquaculture Diets: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Applied Sciences 2021, Vol. 11, Page 3854, vol. 11, no. 9, p. 3854, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.3390/APP11093854.
G. M. Pesti, “Impact of dietary amino acid and crude protein levels in broiler feeds on biological performance,” Journal of Applied Poultry Research, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 477–486, Oct. 2009, doi: 10.3382/japr.2008-00105.
A. Haselmann, M. Wenter, B. Fuerst-Waltl, W. Zollitsch, Q. Zebeli, and W. Knaus, “Comparing the effects of silage and hay from similar parent grass forages on organic dairy cows’ feeding behavior, feed intake and performance,” Anim Feed Sci Technol, vol. 267, p. 114560, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1016/J.ANIFEEDSCI.2020.114560.
R. Antanaitis, D. Malašauskienė, M. Televičius, V. Juozaitienė, H. Žilinskas, and W. Baumgartner, “Dynamic Changes in Progesterone Concentration in Cows’ Milk Determined by the At-Line Milk Analysis System Herd NavigatorTM,” Sensors 2020, Vol. 20, Page 5020, vol. 20, no. 18, p. 5020, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.3390/S20185020.
D. C. Wathes et al., “Influence of negative energy balance on cyclicity and fertility in the high producing dairy cow,” Theriogenology, vol. 68, no. SUPPL. 1, pp. S232–S241, Sep. 2007, doi: 10.1016/J.THERIOGENOLOGY.2007.04.006.
Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle Seventh Revised Edition, Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2001.
J. Moran, “Tropical Dairy Farming,” Tropical Dairy Farming, 2019, doi: 10.1071/9780643093133.
P. Morand-Fehr, “Recent developments in goat nutrition and application: A review,” in Small Ruminant Research, 2005. doi: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2005.06.004.
ICAR, “Livestock Management,” 2013.
V. Patil, R. Gupta, R. Duraisamy, and V. Patil, “Dairy cattle nutrition and feed calculator—an android application,” Tropical Animal Health and Production 2021 53:2, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 1–13, May 2021, doi: 10.1007/S11250-021-02750-Y.
T. Gorniak, U. Meyer, K. H. Südekum, and S. Dänicke, “Impact of mild heat stress on dry matter intake, milk yield and milk composition in mid-lactation Holstein dairy cows in a temperate climate,” http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1745039X.2014.950451, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 358–369, Jan. 2014, doi: 10.1080/1745039X.2014.950451.
NRC, “Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle: Seventh Revised Edition, 2001,” Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, Nov. 2001, doi: 10.17226/9825.
S. R. Jeffrey, R. R. Gibson, and M. D. Faminow, “Nearly optimal linear programming as a guide to agricultural planning,” Agricultural Economics, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–19, Dec. 1992, doi: 10.1016/0169-5150(92)90031-S.
A. N. Giovanis and C. H. Skiadas, “A Stochastic Logistic Innovation Diffusion Model Studying the Electricity Consumption in Greece and the United States,” Technol Forecast Soc Change, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 235–246, Jul. 1999, doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(99)00005-0.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 1970 Indonesian Journal of Agricultural Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
