Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T14:46:10.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partition of portal-drained visceral net flux in beef steers

1. Blood flow and net flux of oxygen, glucose and nitrogenous compounds across stomach and post-stomach tissues*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Christoper K. Reynolds  and
Gerald B. Huntington
Christoper K. Reynolds
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Ruminant Nutrition Laboratory, Building 162, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705, USA and University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742, USA
Gerald B. Huntington
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Ruminant Nutrition Laboratory, Building 162, BARC-East, Beltsville, MD 20705, USA and University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Blood from chronic indwelling catheters in the caudal aorta and anterior mesenteric, gastrosplenic and hepatic portal veins was used to measure blood flow and net flux of oxygen, glucose and nitrogenous compounds across hepatic portal-drained viscera (PDV), post-stomach (anterior mesenteric-drained viscera (MDV)) and stomach tissues of two beef steers (390 kg mean live weight).

2. Steers were fed in sequence on (1) chopped lucerne (Medicago sativa) hay (twelve meals/d), (2) chopped lucerne hay (two meals/d) and (3) a pelleted concentrate diet containing 780 g ground maize/kg (two meals/d). The lucerne hay and concentrate contained 26.5 and 16.8 g nitrogen/kg respectively.

3. Five measurements of net flux (blood flow multiplied by venous-arterial concentration differences (VA)) were obtained hourly on 2 d for each dietary regimen, beginning 0.5 h before feeding at 08.00 hours. Blood flow was measured by downstream dilution of p-aminohippurate (PAH).

4. Blood flow across MDV averaged 42% of PDV blood flow (665 litres/h).

5. Net use of O2 across MDV accounted for 51 % of net PDV use of O2 (920 mmol/h). This disproportionate use of O2 in relation to blood flow was due to greater VA for O2 across MDV than across stomach tissues. Dietary regimen had no effect on the proportions of PDV blood flow and net O2 consumption attributable to MDV or stomach tissues.

6. When lucerne was given, net glucose use across MDV represented 69% of PDV use (35 mmol/h). When concentrate was given, MDV glucose use switched to net absorption (29 mmol/h), reducing net PDV glucose use to I mmol/h.

7. When concentrate was given, net MDV absorption of α-amino-N (AAN) increased from 98 to 190 mmol/h, yet net PDV absorption (101 mmol/h) was not affected. Net stomach AAN flux increased from -7 to -69 mmol/h when concentrate was given, negating the increase in net MDV absorption.

8. Net absorption of ammonia-N across MDV represented 28 and 52% of net PDV absorption when lucerne and concentrate were given respectively. Net NH3-N absorption across PDV was lower when lucerne was given than when concentrate was given (295 v. 154 mmol/h), reflecting lower dietary N intake (153 v. 83 g/d). Net MDV absorption of NH3-N was not affected by diet. Net removal of blood urea-N (BUN) across PDV (101 mmol/h) was not affected by diet. Across MDV, BUN removal was lower when concentrate was given than when lucerne was given (32 v. 77 mmol/h). In beef steers, MDV tissues account for substantial portions of net flux of non-protein-N across PDV and are responsible for essentially all PDV absorption of AAN.

Type
General Nutrition papers
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , November 1988 , pp. 539 - 551
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1988

References

Bensadoun, A. & Reid, J. T. (1962) Journal of Dairy Science 45, 540–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergman, E. N. & Wolff, J. E. (1971) American Journal of Physiology 221, 586–592.Google Scholar
Bernt, E. & Bergmeyer, U. (1974). In Methods of Enzymyatic Analysis, 2nd ed, pp. 1704–1708 [Bergmeyer, H. U. editor]. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Carr, S. B. & Jacobson, D. R. (1968) Journal of Dairy Science 51, 721–729.Google Scholar
Conrad, H. R., Smith, H. R., Vandersall, J. H., Pouden, W. D. & Hibbs, J. W. (1958) Journal of Dairy Science 58, 1094–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danfaer, A. (1979). Protein Utilization in Farm Animals, Vol. 1. Copenhagen: Institute of Animal Science, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University.Google Scholar
Hales, J. R. S. (1973) Pflügers Archiv 344, 119–132.Google Scholar
Harmon, D. L. (1986) Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 85B, 643–647.Google Scholar
Huntington, G. B. (1984) Journal of Dairy Science 67, 1919–1927.Google Scholar
Huntington, G. B. & Tyrrell, H. F. (1985) Journal of Dairy Science 68, 2727–2731.Google Scholar
Janes, A. N., Parker, D. S., Weekes, T. E. C. & Armstrong, D. G. (1984) Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 103, 549–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janes, A. N., Weekes, T. E. C. & Armstrong, D. G. (1985) British Journal of Nutrition 54, 449–458.Google Scholar
Jones, S. D. M., Rompala, R. E. & Jeremiah, L. E. (1985) Journal of Animal Science 60, 427–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D., Hill, K. J. & Annison, E. F. (1957) Biochemical Journal 66, 587–592.Google Scholar
Lund, P. (1974). In Methods of Enzymatic Analysis, 2nd ed, pp. 1719–1722 [Bergmeyer, H. U. editor]. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, R. E., Underwood, P. C., Lehman, R. H. & Barrada, M. S. (1966) Journal of Dairy Science 49, 78–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGilliard, A. D. & Thorp, W. W. (1971) Journal of Dairy Science 54, 129–132.Google Scholar
MacRae, J. C. (1974) Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 33, 147–154.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1985). In Ruminant Nitrogen Usage, pp. 28–36 [Bull, L.S., Chalupa, W., Owens, F. N., Satter, L. D., Sniffen, C. F., Trenkle, A. H. and Waldo, D. R., editors]. Washington DC: National Academy of Science.Google Scholar
Nolan, J. V. (1975). In Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant, pp. 416–431 [McDonald, I.W. and Warner, A. C. I. editors]. New South Wales, Australia: University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Norton, B. W., Janes, A. N. & Armstrong, D. G. (1982 b) British Journal of Nutrition 48, 265–274.Google Scholar
Norton, B. W., Mackintosh, J. B. & Armstrong, D. G. (1982 a) British Journal of Nutrition 48, 249–264.Google Scholar
Norton, B. W., Murray, R. M., Entwistle, K. W., Nolan, J. W, Ball, F. M. & Leng, R. A. (1978) Australian Journal of Agriculture Research 29, 595–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prior, R. L., Huntington, G. B. & Britton, R. A. (1981) Journal of Nutrition 111, 2212–2222.Google Scholar
Schambye, P. (1955) Nordica Veterinary Medicine 7, 1001–1016.Google Scholar
Shaefer, A. L. & Young, B. A. (1980) Canadian Journal of Animal Science 60, 677–681.Google Scholar
Wolff, J. E., Bergman, E. N. & Williams, H. H. (1972) American Journal of Physiology 223, 438–446.Google Scholar