Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T15:20:51.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feeding value of high moisture ammonia-treated wheat straw for lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. L. Streeter ,
G. W. Horn  and
D. G. Batchelder
C. L. Streeter
Affiliation:
Animal Science and Agricultural Engineering Departments, Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Stillwater, USA 74078
G. W. Horn
Affiliation:
Animal Science and Agricultural Engineering Departments, Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Stillwater, USA 74078
D. G. Batchelder
Affiliation:
Animal Science and Agricultural Engineering Departments, Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Stillwater, USA 74078
Get access

Abstract

1. Two experiments were conducted to determine the feeding value of high moisture wheat straw treated with ammonia. The straw was chopped, water added to attain 350 g dry matter per kg treated straw, then treated with 84 or 90 g anhydrous ammonia per kg wheat straw dry matter and stored in a large plastic bag.

2. In Experiment 1, the treated straw was provided ad libitum to lambs in individual pens with either a control supplement (molasses and minerals), or 200 or 400 g of a soya bean meal- or maize gluten meal-based supplement.

3. Lambs fed the control supplement consumed 24·8 g of treated straw dry matter per kg live weight and lost 32 g live weight per day during the 28-day study. Source of supplemental protein did not affect live-weight gain or treated straw consumption. Level of supplement increased live-weight gains (P < 0·01) but did not affect treated straw consumption.

4. In Experiment 2, the lambs were fed one of three levels of supplement that each supplied 58 or 116 g of crude protein per day. Supplemental protein level increased cellulose digestibility (P < 0·01) with no effect on hemicellulose digestibility. Protein level did not affect treated straw consumption or live-weight gain.

5. Supplement level decreased cellulose digestibility (P < 0·01), hemicellulose digestibility (P < 0·01), and treated straw intake (P < 0·01) but increased live-weight gain.

6. The results are discussed in relation to the effects of amount and type of supplemental protein and level of supplementation on utilization of the treated straw.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , June 1983 , pp. 481 - 487
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1975. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 12th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Burroughs, W., Gall, L. S., Gerlaugh, P. and Bethke, R. M. 1950. The influence of casein upon roughage digestion in cattle with rumen microbiological studies. J. Anim. Sci. 9: 214–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C. and Murdoch, J. C. 1966. The effect of concentrates on the voluntary intake of roughages by cows. J. Dairy Res. 33: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaney, A. L. and Marbach, E. P. 1962. Modified reagents for determination of urea and ammonia. Clin. Chem. 8: 130–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crabtree, J. R. and Williams, G. L. 1971. The voluntary intake and utilization of roughage-concentrate diets by sheep. 1. Concentrate supplements for hay and straw. Anim. Prod. 13: 71–82.Google Scholar
Elliott, R. C. 1967. Voluntary intake of low-protein diets by ruminants. I. Intake of food by cattle. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 69: 375–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallup, W. D. and Briggs, H. M. 1948. The apparent digestibility of prairie hay of variable protein content, with some observations of fecal nitrogen excretion by steers in relation to their dry matter intake. J. Anim. Sci. 7: 110–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). U.S. Dep. Agric. Agric. Handb. No. 379.Google Scholar
Head, M. J. 1953. The effect of quality and quantity of carbohydrate and protein in the ration of the sheep on the digestibility of cellulose and other constituents of the ration, with a note on the effect of adding vitamins of the B-complex on the digestibility and retention of the nutrients of a hay ration. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 43: 281–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henning, Penelope A., Van Der Linden, Yvonne, Mattheyse, Mary E., Nauhaus, Wilfried K., Schwartz, H. M. and Gilchrist, F. M. C. 1980. Factors affecting the intake and digestion of roughage by sheep fed maize straw supplemented with maize grain. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 94: 565–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamb, C. S. and Eadie, J. 1979. The effect of barley supplements on the voluntary intake and digestion of low quality roughages by sheep. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 92: 235–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, T., Caffrey, P. J. and O'connell, W. J. 1970. The effect of energy, protein and vitamin supplementation on the performance and voluntary intake of barley straw by cattle. Anim. Prod. 12: 323–334.Google Scholar
McManus, W. R., Grout, L. L., Robinson, V. N. E., Southwell-Keely, P. and Woodhart, P. N. 1979. Ensilage from alkali-treated roughages. Aust. J. exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 19: 354–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council. 1975. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. No. 5, Nutrient Requirements of Sheep. 5th ed. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D C.Google Scholar
Paterson, J. A., Klopfenstein, T. J. and Britton, R. A. 1979. Ammonia treatment on corn plant residue. J. Anim. Sci. 49: Suppl. 1, p. 270 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Raleigh, R. J. and Wallace, J. D. 1963. Effect of urea at different nitrogen levels on digestibility and on performance of growing steers fed low quality flood meadow roughage. J. Anim. Sci. 22: 330–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Satter, L. D. and Slyter, L. L. 1974. Effect of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in vitro. Br. J. Nutr. 32: 199–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1960. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Stock, R., Merchen, N., Klopfenstein, T. and Poos, M. 1981. Feeding value of slowly degraded proteins. J. Anim. Sci. 53: 1109–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streeter, C. L. and Horn, G. W. 1980. The use of crop residues as feedstuffs for ruminant animals. Oklahoma State Univ. Res. Rep. P–795.Google Scholar