Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T21:55:03.449Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of defaunation on digestion of fresh Digitaria decumbens grass and growth of lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

M. Eugène ,
D. Sauvant ,
J. L. Weisbecker  and
H. Archimède
M. Eugène
Affiliation:
INRA-UR 143, Unité de Recherches Zootechniques, Prise d’eau, Petit-bourg, 97170 Guadeloupe, French West Indies
D. Sauvant
Affiliation:
INRA-UMR 791 AgroParisTech, Unité de Physiologie de la Nutrition et Alimentation, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75231 Paris CEDEX 05, France
J. L. Weisbecker
Affiliation:
INRA-1264, Plate forme Tropicale d’Expérimentation sur l’Animal, Prise d’Eau, Petit-bourg, 97170 Guadeloupe, FrenchWest Indies
H. Archimède*
Affiliation:
INRA-UR 143, Unité de Recherches Zootechniques, Prise d’eau, Petit-bourg, 97170 Guadeloupe, French West Indies
*
†E-mail: Harry.Archimede@antilles.inra.fr
Get access

Abstract

The effects of defaunation on growth and digestion were measured in sheep fed fresh Digitaria decumbens grass cut at four stages of regrowth 14, 28, 42, and 56 days, and with different protein to energy (P/E) ratios. Two completely randomized designs trials (growth and digestion) were conducted using faunated animals, defaunated rams and protozoa free lambs. The digestion trial: eight faunated and eight defaunated rams fitted with ruminal and duodenal cannulas were fed 4 diets (diets D1 to D4) to measure digestion parameters. The dietary P/E ratios were 120 (D1), 130 (D2), 130 (D3), and 140 (D4) g PDIN/UFL (Protein Digested in the small Intestine supplied by microbial protein from rumen-degraded protein/Feed Unit for Lactation) and the grass stages of regrowth were 56, 42, 28, and 14 days, respectively. Increasing the dietary P/E ratios increased dry matter intake (DMI) and the total tract digestibility of organic matter (OM), NDF and CP. Defaunation decreased DMI, except for rams fed D4 diet. Defaunation also decreased total tract digestibility of OM except for rams fed D1 diet and that of NDF except for rams fed D1 and D4 diets. Increasing the dietary P/E ratios also increased nitrogen intake and ammonia (NH3) concentration in the rumen, whereas defaunation decreased them. The dietary P/E ratio increased non-NH3 nitrogen and microbial nitrogen duodenal flows and microbial efficiency. Defaunation did not affect duodenal flows of neither non-NH3 nitrogen and microbial nitrogen or microbial efficiency. The growth trial: 20 faunated and 20 protozoa free lambs were fed four diets (diets D5 to D8) to measure their average daily gain (ADG). The dietary P/E ratios were 60 (D5), 70 (D6), 80 (D7) and 100 (D8) g PDIN/UFL and the stages of regrowth were 56, 42, 28, and 14 days, respectively. DMI of lambs increased with P/E ratio. Protozoa free lambs had greater DMI than faunated ones when fed D7 diet (80.8 v. 74.9 g/kg LW0.75, respectively). The ADG of the lambs increased with P/E ratio. Fed on the same D5 diet, protozoa free lambs had greater ADG than faunated lambs (29.8 v. 11.6 g/day, respectively). In conclusion, animal response to defaunation was modulated by the P/E ratio of the D. decumbens grass diets. Defaunation increased ADG of lambs fed forage with the lowest P/E ratio, while digestion and nitrogen duodenal flows of rams fed the lowest P/E ratio were not affected.

Keywords

defaunationdigestiongrowthDigitaria decumbenssheep
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , March 2010 , pp. 439 - 445
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

AFNOR 1997. Dosage de l’azote. Méthode par combustion (DUMAS). Procédure ID: NF V 18-120. In Aliments des animaux (ed. AFNOR), Paris.Google Scholar
Alexandre, G, Archimède, H, Chevaux, E, Aumont, G, Xandé, A 2001. Feeding supply of suckling Martinik ewes reared in intensive conditions: effects of supplement levels and litter size. Animal Research 50, 213–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archimède, H, Aumont, G, Saminadin, G, Dépres, E, Despois, P, Xandé, A 1999. Effect of urea and saccharose on intake and digestion of a Digitaria decumbens hay by black belly sheep. Animal Science 69, 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Archimède, H, Boval, M, Alexandre, G, Xandé, A, Aumont, G, Poncet, C 2000. Effect of regrowth age on intake and digestion of Digitaria decumbens consumed by black belly sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology 87, 153–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, SH 1989. Production from ciliate-free ruminants. In The role of protozoa and fungi in ruminant digestion (ed. JV Nolan, RA Leng and DI Demeyer), pp. 233–246. Pennambul books, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Bird, SH, Hill, MK, Leng, RA 1979. The effects of defaunation of the rumen on the growth of lambs on low-protein-high-energy diets. British Journal of Nutrition 42, 81–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eadie, JM, Hobson, PN 1962. Effect of presence or absence of ciliates on the total rumen bacterial counts in lambs. Nature 193, 503–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eugène, M, Archimède, H, Sauvant, D 2004a. Quantitative meta-analysis on the effects of defaunation of the rumen on growth, intake and digestion in ruminants. Livestock Production Science 85, 81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eugène, M, Archimède, H, Weisbecker, JL, Periacarpin, F, Saminadin, G, Sauvant, D 2004b. Effects of defaunation on digestion and growth, in sheep receiving mixed diet (fresh Digitaria decumbens grass and concentrate) at four protein value to energy value ratios. Animal Research 53, 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, GJ 1980. The use of markers to measure digesta flow from the stomach of sheep fed once daily. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 313–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fujihara, T, Todoroki, M, Nakamura, N 2003. The effect of rumen protozoa on the urinary excretion of purine derivatives in goats. Journal of Agricultural Science 140, 101–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hristov, A, Jouany, J 2005. Factors affecting the efficiency of nitrogen utilization in the rumen. In Nitrogen and Phosphorus nutrition of cattle: Reducing the Environmental Impact of Cattle Operations (ed. E Pfeffer and A Hristov), pp. 117–166. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
INRA 1981. Prévision de la valeur nutritive des aliments des ruminants. In Table de prévision de la valeur alimentaire des fourrages (ed. C Demarquilly), p. 580. INRA, Paris.Google Scholar
Jouany, JP, Sénaud, J 1978. Utilisation du monensine dans la ration des ruminants. II. effets sur les fermentations et la population microbienne du rumen. Annales de Zootechnie 27, 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jouany, JP, Ushida, K 1998. The role of protozoa in feed digestion. Review. Asian–Australian Journal of Animal Science 12, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasuya, N, Wada, I, Shimada, M, Kawai, H, Itabashi, H 2007. Effect of presence of rumen protozoa on degradation of cell wall constituents in gastrointestinal tract of cattle. Animal Science Journal 78, 275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenig, KM, Ivan, M, Teferedegne, BT, Morgavi, D, Rode, LM, Ibrahim, IM, Newbold, CJ 2007. Effect of dietary Enterolobium cyclocarpum on microbial protein flow and nutrient digestibility in sheep maintained fauna-free, with total mixed fauna or with Entodinium caudatum monofauna. British Journal of Nutrition 98, 504–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Malawar, R, Powel, DD 1967. Improved turbidimetric analyses of polyethylene-glycol usingan emulsifier. Gastroenterology 53, 250–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS 2000. SAS/STAT® User’s Guide: Realease 8.02. SAS institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA.Google Scholar
Santra, A, Karim, SA, Chaturvedi, OH 2007. Rumen enzyme profile and fermentation characteristics in sheep as affected by treatment with sodium lauryl sulfate as defaunating agent and presence of ciliate protozoa. Small Ruminant Research 67, 126–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermorel, M 1978. Feed evaluation for ruminants. II. The new energy systems proposed in France. Livestock Production Science 5, 34–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vérité, R, Journet, M, Jarrige, R 1979. A new system for the protein feeding of ruminants: the PDI system. Livestock Production Science 6, 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J 1994. Cell wall characteristics in relation to forage digestion by ruminants. Journal of Agricultural Science 122, 173–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, WZ 1992. Etude de la cinétique de la colonisation des aliments dans le rumen des moutons. Conséquence sur la compartimentation de la biomasse et de la dynamique à la sortie du rumen dans le cas de différents types de rations. Université Blaise Pascal, Clermont Ferrand II, n°307, France.Google Scholar
Zinn, RA, Owens, FN 1986. A rapid procedure for purine measurement and its use for estimating net ruminal protein synthesis. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 66, 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar