Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T01:33:04.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rumen fill and digesta kinetics in lactating Friesian cows given two levels of concentrates with two types of grass silage ad lib

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. Gasa ,
K. Holtenius ,
J. D. Sutton ,
M. S. Dhanoa  and
D. J. Napper
J. Gasa
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
K. Holtenius
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
J. D. Sutton
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
M. S. Dhanoa
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
D. J. Napper
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Hurley, Maidenhead SL6 5LR
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.

Four lactating Friesian cows with permanent cannulas in the rumen and proximal duodenum were given early (EC)- or late (LC)-cut grass silage ad lib., each with either 3 or 9 kg concentrate dry matter (DM)/d in a 4 x 4 Latin square design starting about 10 weeks after calving. Feed was offered twice daily at 08.30 hours and 15.30 hours. Periods lasted 5 weeks and measurements were made in the last 15 d. The higher amount of concentrates increased total DM intake but reduced silage DM intake and the fractional rate of degradation of silage-fibre DM. Later cutting date of silage had no effect on DM intake or the fractional rate of degradation of silage-fibre DM but reduced potential degradability of silage fibre. Dilution rate of CoEDTA in rumen fluid was greater during the day (eating period) than during the night (resting period). Dilution rates measured at the duodenum were lower than those measured in the rumen, but neither was affected by diet. Silage-particle passage rates were measured by use of ytterbium-labelled silage fibre (Yb-fibre) and chromium-mordanted faecal particles (Cr-faeces) and samples were taken at the duodenum and in the faeces. Values for slower rate constant (k1) and transit time were higher and for faster rate constant (k2) were lower for Yb-fibre than for Cr-faeces, but differences in total mean retention time were inconsistent. Values for k1 for both markers and k2 for Yb-fibre only were similar at both sampling sites, but values for k2 for Cr-faeces were lower in the faeces. No diet effects were established with Yb-fibre but, with Cr-faeces, k1 was reduced by more concentrates and EC-silage. Daily mean weights of wet digesta, liquid, neutral-detergent fibre (NDF) and indigestible NDF in the rumen were greater with LC-silage but were unaffected by the amount of concentrates whereas weight of rumen DM was increased by the amount of concentrates only. Maximum rumen fill occurred at 18.00 hours with all diets. Particle-size distribution of rumen contents did not vary markedly during the day. Mean particle size was generally greater with LC-silage than EC-silage. Very small particles, passing through the 0.3 mm screen, constituted about half the rumen DM. It is concluded that rumen fill could have limited intake of LC-silage but not EC-silage. The reduced silage intake with greater concentrate intake was associated with a reduction in fibre degradation rate and an increase in rumen DM fill but no other consistent effects on weight or kinetics of rumen fractions were established.

Keywords

Digesta kineticsRumen fillVoluntary intake
Type
Kinetics of Digestion and Absorption
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 66 , Issue 3 , November 1991 , pp. 381 - 398
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1991

References

REFERENCES

Baile, C. A. & Forbes, J. M. (1974). Control of feed intake and regulation of energy balance in ruminants. Physiological Reviews 54, 160–214.Google Scholar
Balch, C. C. (1958). Observations on the act of eating in cattle. British Journal of Nutrition 12, 330–345.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1956). Some observations on the digestibility of food by sheep, and on related problems. British Journal of Nutrition 10, 69–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. & Wilson, R. S. (1961). The regulation of food intake by sheep. Animal Production 3, 51–61.Google Scholar
Bueno, L. (1975). Les fonctions matrices et digestives du feuillet. (The mechanical and digestive function of the omasum) PhD Thesis, University of Toulouse.Google Scholar
Campling, R. C. (1966). The intake of hay and silage by cows. Journal of the British Grassland Society 21, 41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C. & Freer, M. (1962). The effect of specific gravity and size on the mean time of retention of inert particles in the alimentary tract of the cow. British Journal of Nutrition 16, 507–518.Google Scholar
Davidson, J., Mathieson, J. & Boyne, A. W. (1970). The use of automation in determining nitrogen by the Kjeldahl method, with final calculation by computer. Analyst 95, 181–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DesBordes, C. K. & Welch, J. G. (1984). Influence of specific gravity on rumination and passage of indigestible particles. Journal of Animal Science 59, 470–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhanoa, M. S. (1988). On the analysis of dacron bag data for low degradability feeds. Grass and Forage Science 43, 441–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhanoa, M. S., Siddons, R. C., France, J. & Gale, D. L. (1985). A multicompartmental model to describe marker excretion patterns in ruminant faeces. British Journal of Nutrition 53, 663–671.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dixon, R. M. & Milligan, L. P. (1985). Removal of digesta components from the rumen of steers determined by sieving techniques and fluid, particulate and microbial markers. British Journal of Nutrition 53, 347–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ehle, F. R. (1984). Influence of feed particle density on particulate passage from rumen of Holstein cow. Journal of Dairy Science 67, 693–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlein, H. J. (1979). Motility of the forestomachs in goats. Annales de Recherches Vétérinaires 10, 173–175.Google ScholarPubMed
Ellis, W. C., Lascano, C., Guerrero, J., Pond, K. & Matis, J. H. (1982). Particle size degradation in and escape from the rumen. Federation Proceedings 41, 342.Google Scholar
Ellis, W. C., Matis, J. H. & Lascano, C. (1979). Quantitating ruminal turnover. Federation Proceedings 38, 2702–2706.Google Scholar
Evans, E. W., Pearce, G. R., Burnett, J. & Pillinger, S. L. (1973). Changes in some physical characteristics of the digesta in the reticulo-rumen of cows fed once daily. British Journal of Nutrition 29, 357–376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Faichney, G. J. (1975). The use of markers to partition digestion within the gastro-intestinal tract of ruminants. In Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant, pp. 277–291 [McDonald, I. W. and Warner, A. C. I., editors]. Armidale: The University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Gasa, J. & Sutton, J. D. (1991). Empleo de marcadores en estudios de cinética de paso a través del tracto digestivo de vacas lecheras (Use of markers in studies of the kinetics of rates of passage through the digestive tract of lactating cows). lnvestigación Agraria: Producción y Sanidad Animal 6, 39–50.Google Scholar
Genstat 5 (1987). Genstat 5 Reference Manual. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Gill, M., Rook, A. J. & Thiago, L. R. S. (1988). Factors affecting the voluntary intake of roughages by the dairy cow. In Nutrition and Lactation in the Dairy Cow, pp. 262–279 [Garnsworthy, P. C., editor]. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Gill, M., Sargeant, A. & Evans, R. T. (1987). The effect of type of silage and level of concentrate on pattern of eating in dairy cows. In Proceedings of the Eighth Silage Conference, pp. 63–64. Hurley, Berks.: AFRC Institute for Grassland and Animal Production.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage fibre analysis. Agricultural Handbook no. 379. Washington, D. C.: US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Goetsch, A. L. & Owens, F. N. (1985). Effects of sampling site on passage rate estimates in heifers fed alfalfa hay or high concentrate diet. Journal of Dairy Science 68, 914–922.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grovum, W. L. & Williams, V. J. (1973). Rate of passage of digesta in sheep. 4. Passage of marker through the alimentary tract and the biological relevance of rate-constants derived from the changes in concentration of marker in faeces. British Journal of Nutrition 30, 313–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartnell, G. F. & Satter, L. D. (1979). Determination of rumen fill, retention time and ruminal turnover rates of ingesta at different stages of lactation in dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 48, 381–392.Google Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1966). The Rumen and its Microbes. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Matis, J. H. (1972). Gamma time-dependency in Blaxter's compartmental model. Biometrics 28, 597–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & McDonald, L. (1979). The estimation of protein degradability from incubation measurements weighted according to the rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 499–503.Google Scholar
Owens, F. N. & Goetsch, A. L. (1986). Digesta passage and microbial protein synthesis. In Control of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 196–233 [W, L. P. Milligan.. Grovum, L. and Dobson, A., editors]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Pond, K. R., Ellis, W. C., Matis, J. H., Ferreiro, H. M. & Sutton, J. D. (1988). Compartment models for estimating attributes of digesta flow in cattle. British Journal of Nutrition 60, 571–595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poppi, D. P., Norton, B. W., Minson, D. J. & Hendricksen, R. W. (1980). The validity of the critical size theory for particles leaving the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 275–280.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. M. & Sniffen, C. J. (1983). Comparison of rumen. duodenal and faecal sampling sites to estimate rumen turnover rate of markers in cows. Journal of Dairy Science 66, Suppl. 1, 187.Google Scholar
Ross, G. J. S. (1987). MLP, Maximum Likelihood Program, Version 3.08, Oxford: Numerical Algorithms Group.Google Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. (1985). Statistical Analysis System User's Guide: Statistics. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Siddons, R. C., Arricastres, C., Gale, D. L. & Beever, D. E. (1984). The effect of formaldehyde or glutaraldehyde application to lucerne before ensiling on silage fermentation and silage N digestion in sheep. British Journal of Nutrition 52, 391–401.Google Scholar
Siddons, R. C., Paradine, J., Beever, D. E. & Cornell, P. R. (1985). Ytterbium acetate as a particulate-phase digesta flow marker. British Journal of Nutrition 54, 509–519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teeter, R. G. & Owen, F. N. (1983). Characteristics of water soluble markers for measuring rumen liquor volume and dilution rate. Journal of Animal Science 56, 717–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uden, P., Colucci, P. E. & Van Soest, P. J. (1980). Investigation of chromium, cerium and cobalt as markers in digesta rate of passage studies. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 31, 625–632.Google Scholar
Waghorn, C. C. (1986). Changes in rumen digesta of cows during a restricted feeding period when offered fresh red clover, lucerne, or lucerne hay. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 29, 233–241.Google Scholar
Waldo, D. R., Miller, R. W., Okamoto, M. & Moore, L. A. (1965). Ruminant utilization of silage in relation to hay, pellets, and hay plus grain. 1. Composition, digestion, nitrogen balance, intake and growth. Journal of Dairy Science 48, 910–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, A. C. I. (1981). Rate of passage of digesta through the gut of mammals and birds. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 51, 789–820.Google Scholar