Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T20:34:41.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Solubility of mineral elements present in ruminant feeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. N. M. Ibrahim ,
A. Van Der Kamp ,
G. Zemmelink  and
S. Tamminga
M. N. M. Ibrahim
Affiliation:
Department of Tropical Animal Production, Agricultural University, PO Box 338, Wageningen, Netherlands
A. Van Der Kamp
Affiliation:
Department of Tropical Animal Production, Agricultural University, PO Box 338, Wageningen, Netherlands
G. Zemmelink
Affiliation:
Department of Tropical Animal Production, Agricultural University, PO Box 338, Wageningen, Netherlands
S. Tamminga
Affiliation:
Department of Tropical Animal Production, Agricultural University, PO Box 338, Wageningen, Netherlands
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Eight feeds were treated with seven solvents and the proportion of seven mineral elements (Ca, Mg, P, Na, K, Cu, Zn) released was assessed. Six of the feeds were from Sri Lanka (Panicum maximum ecotype Guinea A, Glyricidia maculata, Artocarpus heterophyllus, untreated and urea-treated rice straw, and rice bran) and two from the Netherlands (maize silage and wheat straw). The solvents were water, tris buffer, rumen fluid from a cow deprived of (RF -) or fed (RF +) mineral supplements, neutral detergent solution with (NDS +) or without (NDS -) EDTA, and acid detergent solution (ADS).

Both the type of feed and the solvent significantly influenced (P < 0·01) the amount of dry matter loss and the proportion of minerals released. Maize silage released over 80% of its minerals, except Cu, in water and tris buffer, probably because of the low pH (3·7) during ensiling. The other feeds differed widely in their ability to release minerals. In general, P, Na and K. were more soluble in water than Ca, Mg and Zn.

Mineral concentration in RF influenced not only the amount of minerals released, but also the extent of sorption by the feed. The latter effect was more pronounced in feeds with low mineral concentration, maize silage being no exception.

Treatment with NDS+ and ADS removed all minerals except Cu. With all feeds, 12–34% and 5–34% of the Cu remained in the ND and AD residues, respectively, indicating its association with the cell wall. Results of the NDS- treatment showed that some of the Ca and Mg may be associated with the cell wall.

Comparison of the feeds across the different solvents tested indicated that, in terms of absolute quantity of mineral released, G. maculata could be a good source of Ca, Mg, K and Cu, and that rice bran is a good source of P and Zn. The variety of rice straw tested released high amounts of Na. A. heterophyllus is rich in available Ca.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 114 , Issue 3 , June 1990 , pp. 265 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

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

Bromfield, S. M. & Jones, O. L. (1972). The initial leaching of hayed-off pasture plants in relation to the recycling of phosphorus. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 23, 811–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durand, M. & Kawashima, R. (1980). Influence of minerals in rumen microbial digestion. In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants (Eds Ruckebush, Y. & Thivend, P.), pp. 375–408. London: MTP Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J. H., Jackson, W. A., Beaty, E. R. & McCreery, R. A. (1977). Element concentration of forage and non-soluble cell wall fraction of coastal Bermuda grass. Journal of Agronomy 69, 617–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, A. C. (1981). Some thoughts on dietary requirements of macroelements for ruminants. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 40, 267–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage Fiber Analysis. Agricultural Handbook No. 379. US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
International Organization For Standardization (1983). Animal Feeding Stuffs, Determination of Moisture Content. Publication 6496. Geneva: IOS.Google Scholar
International Organization For Standardization (1978 a). Animal Feeding Stuffs, Determination of Crude Ash. Publication 5984. Geneva: IOS.Google Scholar
International Organization For Standardization (1978 b). Animal Feeding Stuffs, Determination of Ash Insoluble in Hydrochloric Acid. Publication 5985. Geneva: IOS.Google Scholar
International Organization For Standardization (1979). Animal Feeding Stuffs, Determination of Nitrogen Content and Calculation of Crude Protein Content. Publication 5983. Geneva: IOS.Google Scholar
International Organization For Standardization (1987). Animal Feeding Stuffs, Determination of Calcium, Copper, Iron, Magnesium, Manganese, Potassium, Sodium and Zinc Contents – AAS Method. Publication TC/34/ION 333. Geneva: IOS.Google Scholar
Ivan, M., Jui, P. & Hidiroglou, M. (1979). The effects of nitrilotriacetic acid on solubilities of zinc, copper, manganese and iron in the stomach of sheep. Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology 57, 369–374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ivan, M. & Veira, D. M. (1981). Effect of dietary protein on the solubilities of manganese, copper, zinc, iron in the rumen and abomasum of sheep. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 61, 955–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kincaid, R. L. & Cronrath, J. D. (1983). Amount and digestion of minerals in Washington forages. Journal of Dairy Science 66, 821–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Playne, M. J., Echevarria, M. G. & Megarrity, R. G. (1978). Release of nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium from four tropical hays during their digestion in nylon bags in the rumen. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 29, 520–526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rooke, J. A., Akinsoyinu, A. O. & Armstrong, D. G. (1983). The release of mineral elements from grass silages incubated in sacco in the rumens of Jersey cattle. Grass and Forage Science 38, 311–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Application Systems (1982). SAS User's Guide. Carey, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. & Terry, R. A. (1963). A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18, 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todd, J. R. (1961). Magnesium in forage plants. II. Magnesium distribution in grasses and clovers. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 57, 35–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1982). Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Corvallis, Oregon: O & B Books, Inc.Google Scholar
Whitehead, D. C., Goulden, K. M. & Hartley, R. D. (1985). The distribution of nutrient elements in cell wall and other fractions of the herbage of some grasses and legumes. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 36, 311–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, D. C., Goulden, K. M. & Hartley, R. D. (1986). Fractions of nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus, calcium and magnesium in the herbage of perennial ryegrass as influenced by fertilizer nitrogen. Animal Feed Science and Technology 14, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar