Technological advancements in fodder production: a review


  • Awadhesh Kishore School of Agriculture ITM University, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India
  • Aman Parashar School of Agriculture, ITM University Gwalior. MP, India
  • Jai Dev Sharma School of Agriculture, ITM University Gwalior. MP, India


BN hybrid, Dinanath grass, Guinea grass, hitech farming, system approach


Livestock is a sub-sector of agriculture that plays an important role not only in the Indian economy but also in national nutritional security, particularly for small and marginal farmers. But the production potential of our animals is not comparable with that of the global average due to many reasons, feed and fodder deficiency being the major one. The feed shortage in India is due to the unavailability of land for quality fodder cultivation. Thus, there is a burning need to adopt innovative methods not only in production but also in the preservation of fodder. Unconventional methods in fodder production, including seed technology, system approaches, hi-tech farming and adopting mechanization in fodder production, can be considered for their advancement. Being the leader in cattle and buffalo populations and increasing livestock populations, current fodder production in our country is not able to meet the requirement. Improved technology in fodder preservation, including technical interventions in hay and silage like supplementation with additives for quality hay and silage, preserving as haylage and balage and making dehydrated products like pellets and cubes, can also be considered for increasing quality fodder production and utilization. Land under fodder cultivation is static and has little scope for expansion due to reduced per capita availability and human priorities. So, technological advancements both in the production and preservation of fodder should essentially be adopted to fight against fodder scarcity.


Artemiev A A. 2010. Productivity and quality of annual grass mixtures depending on the ratio of components. Achievements of Science and Technology of the AIC. 3:40-42.

Bakshi M P S, Wadhwan M, and Makkar H P S. 2018. Feeding strategies during natural calamities. Indian J. Anim. Nutr. 35:1- 21. [DOI]

Borowski S, Kaszkowiak J and Dulcet E. 2021. How to Harvest Haylage Bales in Sustainable Agriculture. Appl. Sci. 11(23):11508. [DOI]

Borreani G, Tabacco E, Schmidt R J, Holmes B J and Muck R E. 2018. Silage review: Factors affecting dry matter and quality losses in silages. J. Dairy Sci. 101:3952-3979. [DOI]

Charmley E and Firth S. 2004. Comparison of flail-harvested, precision-chopped and round-bale silages for growing beef cattle. Ir. J. Agric. Food Res. 43:43-57. [DOI]

Coblentz W K and Hoffman P C. 2009. Effects of bale moisture and bale diameter on spontaneous heating, dry matter recovery, in vitro true digestibility, and in situ disappearance kinetics of alfalfa-orchard hays. J. Dairy Sci. 92:2853–2874. [DOI]

da Cunha L L, Bremm C, Savian J V, Zubieta Á S, Rossetto J and de Faccio Carvalho P C. 2023. Relevance of sward structure and forage nutrient contents in explaining methane emissions from grazing beef cattle and sheep. Science of the Total Environment. 869(15):161695. [DOI]

Doroszewski P A. 2009. Effectiveness of Silaging Additives’ Application in Preservation of Green Forages from Legume–Grass Mixture and the Whole Corn Plants. No. 136; Publishing House of the Univ. of Technology and Life Sciences: Bydgoszcz.

Dulcet E and Woropay M. 2000. Analysis of liquid additives loss when applied to green forage in a forage harvester. Appl. Eng. Agric. 16:653–656. [DOI]

Dulcet E, Kaszkowiak J, Borowski S and Mikołajczak J. 2006. Effects of Microbiological Additive on Baled Wet Hay. Biosyst Eng. 95:379–384. [DOI]

Dung D D, Godwin I R and Nolan J V. 2010. Nutrient content and in sacco digestibility of barley grain and sprouted barley. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 9:2485-2492. [DOI]

Giggin T. 2015. Giggins farm villa-Vertical farming integrated with animal husbandry for sustainable livelihood. In: International Magazine on Vertical Farming, Vertical Farming Association, India, pp. 67-69.

GOI, 2021. Annual Report 2020-21. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying. [DOI]

GOI, 2022. Annual Report 2021-22. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying. [DOI]

Goyal M and Tiwana U S. 2016. Ensiling Legume with Cereal Fodder Influences Quality of Silage Mixtures. Indian J. Anim. Nutr. 33:228-232. [DOI]

Han K J, Collins E S, Vanzant E S and Dougherty C T. 2006. Characteristics of baled silage made from first and second harvests of wilted and severely wilted forages. Grass Forage Sci. 61:22–31. [DOI]

Harris P, Ellis A D, Fradinho M J, Jansson A, Julliand V, Luthersson N, Vervuert I. 2017. Review: Feeding conserved forage to horses: Recent advances and recommendations. Animal. 11:958–967. [DOI]

Hassan S W, Oad F C, Tunio S D, Gandahi A W, Siddiqui M H, Oad S M and Jagirani A W. 2010. Impact of nitrogen levels and application methods on agronomic, physiological and nutrient uptake traits of maize fodder. Pakistan J. Bot. 42:4095-4101. [DOI]

ICAR-IGFRI. 2015. Vision 2050. ICAR Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, 40p. [DOI]

ICAR-IGFRI. 2018. Annual Report 2017-18. ICAR- Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, 132p.

Ishrath P K. 2016. Cutting intervals and additives for quality silage production. M.Sc. (Ag) thesis, Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur, 92p. [DOI]

Jamroz D, Podkówka W and Chachułowa J. 2001. Animal Nutrition and Animal Feed Science. Polish Scientific Publishers: Warsaw.

Jolad R. 2018. Economical green fodder production through hydroponics. M.Sc. (Ag) thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 86p.

Jugovic M, Radivojevic D, Lalovic M and Trifkovic J. 2014. Effect of different haylage lines on haylage chemical composition. In: Fifth International Scientific Agricultural Symposium, pp. 104-108. [DOI]

Kaiser A G. 1999. Silage Additives. Department of Primar Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Wagga Wagga, NSW, 4p.

Karamaev S, Karamaeva A, Soboleva N and Bakaeva L. 2019. Milk productivity of cows when haylage with biological preservatives is included in the diet. Earth and Environmental Science. 403(1):012081. [DOI]

Khanna C H. 2015. Effect of feeding rations supplemented with hydroponic fodder on nutrient utilization and milk production in lactating graded Murrah. M.V.Sc. and AH thesis, SriVenkateswara. Veterinary University, Tirupati, 118p.

Khanna R S. 2014. Fodder of the future- A review of the hydroponics technique. Indian Dairyman. 66:5-6. [DOI]

Khramoj V K, Rakhimova О V and Sikharulidze Т D. 2019. Photosynthetic activity of two-and three-component vetch and grasses mixed crops in Central Non-chernozem zone. Agrarian Science. 4:52-54.

Kishore A and Singh L, 2021. Nutritive evaluation of Dinanath grass (Pennisetum pedicellatum) at pre and post flowering stage for crossbred heifers. Journal of Rural Advancement 9(2):24-29. [DOI]

Kishore A and Verma M L. 2000. Comparative feeding value of Dinanath grass and sorghum fodder for crossbred heifers. Indian J Anim Nutr. 17(4):311-314. [DOI]

Kondratenko E P, Soboleva O M, Berezina A S, Miroshina T A, Raushkina D and Raushkin N. 2021. Influence of sowing time on chemical composition and nutritional value of annual herbs in mixed crops. J Biochem Technol. 12(4):6-11. [DOI]

Lötjönen T. 2008. Harvest losses and bale density in reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) spring-harvest. Asp. Appl. Biol. 90:263–268. [DOI]

Maity A, Vijay D, Malaviya D R, Gupta C K, Ahmed A and Singh S K. 2015. Seed Ball Technology: Way forward to revitalizing rangelands in Bundelkhand region. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Bio-Resource and Stress Management, January 07-10, 2015, Hyderabad, pp. 345-352. [DOI]

Marrugat F O 2001. The evolution of fodder dehydration in Spain: Future prospects. In: (I Delgado and J. Lloveras (eds) Quality in lucerne and medics for animal production. Zaragoza: CIHEAM, pp. 13-18. [DOI]

McDonald P, Henderson A R and Heron S J E. 1991.The Biochemistry of Silage. 2nd ed, Chalcombe Publications: Marlow.

McEniry J, O’Kiely P, Clipson N J W, Forristal P D and Dogle E M. 2006. The microbiological and chemical composition of baled and precision-chop silages on a sample of farms in County Meath. Ir. J. Agric. Food Res. 45:73–83.

Meo-Filho P, Hood J, Lee M R F, Fleming H, Meethal M.E and Misselbrook T. 2023. Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles. Animal. 17(4):100726. [DOI]

Merzlikina Yu A. 2010. Formation of highly productive agrocenoses in the conditions of the Altai forest-steppe. Achievements of Science and Technology of the AgroIndustrial Complex. 6:31-32.

Mironova I, Nigmatyanov A, Radchenko E and Gizatova N. 2019. Effect of feeding haylage on milk and beef quality indices. Web of Conferences. 135:01100. [DOI]

Muck R E and Shinners K J. 2001. Conserved forage (silage and hay): Progress and priorities. Int. Grassl. Cong. 19:753-762.

Muck R. 2012. Microbiology of ensiling. In Proceedings of the XVI International Silage Conference, Hämeenling, Finland, July 2–4. MTT Agrifood Research, University of Helsinki, pp. 75–86. [DOI]

Müller C E. 2005. Fermentation patterns of small-bale silage and haylage produced as a feed for horses. Grass Forage Sci. 60:109–118. [DOI]

Naik P K, Dhuri R B, Swain B K and Singh N P. 2012. Nutrient changes with the growth of hydroponics fodder maize. Indian J. Anim. Nutr. 29:161-163. [DOI]

Naik P K, Swain B K and Singh N P. 2015. Production and utilization of hydroponics fodder. Indian J. Anim. Nutr. 32:1-9. [DOI]

Nowak J. 2013. Machines for Forming Cylindrical Bales. Publishing House of the Univ. of Life Sciences: Lublin.

Nysand M and Suokanns A. 2012. Optimising the application technique for silage additive in harvesting machinery. In Proceedings of the XVI International Silage Conference, Hämeenling, July 204. MTT Agrifood Research Finland, University of Helsinki, pp. 73–74. [DOI]

Sahay C S, Pathak P K and Singh S K. 2016. Mechanization in Fodder Production. ICAR Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, India, 42p.

Sharma T and Kishore A. 2022. The feeding value of Dinanath grass and sweet sorghum fodder at the post-flowering stage for crossbred heifers. YMER. 21(5):511-516. [DOI]

Singh S. 2016. Non-conventional fodder resources for feeding livestock. In: P K Pathak, S K Singh, C S Sahay, R K Sharma, M Chaudhary and A Maity (eds.), Recent approaches in crop residue management and value addition for entrepreneurship development. ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP, pp. 7-12.

Sneath R and McIntosh F. 2003. Review of Hydroponic Fodder Production for Beef Cattle. Department of primary industries, Queensland, Australia, 84p. In: C G Thomas (ed.) Forage crop production in the tropics. Kalyani publishers. New Delhi. 226p. [DOI]

Thomas C G. 2003. Forage crop production in the tropics. Kalyani publishers. New Delhi. 226p.

Thomas S L and Thomas U C. 2019. Innovative techniques in fodder production-a review. Forage Res. 44(4):217-223. [DOI]

Türer H and Yildiz T. 2023. Total Costs, Labor Requirements, and Work Efficiencies in Rice Production Mechanization in Turkey: A Case Study From Samsun Province. Research in Agricultural Sciences. 5(1):9-14. [DOI]

Vijay D, Gupta C K and Malaviya D R. 2018. Innovative technologies for quality seed production and vegetative multiplication in forage grasses. Curr. Sci. 114:148-154. [DOI]

Wyss W, Thaysen J, Pauly T and Rubenschuh M. 2012. Testing inoculant and chemical additives in round bales in comparison to laboratory silos. In Proceedings of the XVI International Silage Conference, Hämeenling, July 2-4; MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Univ. of Helsinki, pp. 294–295. [DOI]




How to Cite

Kishore, A., Parashar, A., & Sharma, J. D. (2023). Technological advancements in fodder production: a review. The Journal of Rural Advancement, 11(1), 52–65. Retrieved from

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>