Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T14:14:10.937Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of varying protein degradability on mohair fibre characteristics and liveweight gain in angora goats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2017

S.A. Austin ,
D. Aliakbar ,
R.A. Cooper  and
J.A. Kirk
S.A. Austin
Affiliation:
Seale-Hayne Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Land Use, Polytechnic South West. Newton Abbot, Devon, TQ12 6NQ
D. Aliakbar
Affiliation:
Seale-Hayne Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Land Use, Polytechnic South West. Newton Abbot, Devon, TQ12 6NQ
R.A. Cooper
Affiliation:
Seale-Hayne Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Land Use, Polytechnic South West. Newton Abbot, Devon, TQ12 6NQ
J.A. Kirk
Affiliation:
Seale-Hayne Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Land Use, Polytechnic South West. Newton Abbot, Devon, TQ12 6NQ
Get access

Extract

The primary objective of Angora goat producers is to optimise yields of high quality mohair, characterised by long staples of fine fibres. There is also now an increased interest in the concurrent production of goat meat as an additional source of income. Protein supplementation has been shown to affect mohair yield, quality and liveweight gain in Angora goats both in the USA (Shelton and Huston, 1966) and more recently in the UK (Shahjalal et al., 1991). Throckmorton et al. (1982) detected an improvement in liveweight gain and fibre production when Australian Angoras were fed a supplement high in rumen undegradable protein (UDP) but the effect of protein degradability has not yet been established, particularly under UK conditions. The aim of this trial was to determine the effect of varying protein degradability on yield, staple length and fibre diameter of mohair, and on liveweight gain of British Angora goats.

Type
Goats
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production (1972) , Volume 1992 , March 1992 , pp. 94
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1992

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

Refererences

Aufrere, J. Cartailler, D. (1988). Ann. Zootech. 31, (4), 55–270.Google Scholar
Gifford, D.R. (1989). Anim. Prod. 48, 245–247.Google Scholar
Huston, J.E., Shelton, M. & Ellis, W.C. (1971). Tex. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bulletin 1105.Google Scholar
Hutchings, N.J. & Ryder, M.L. (1985). J. Text. Inst. 76, 295–299.Google Scholar
Shahjalal, Md. Galbraith, H., Topps, J.H. & Cooper, J.M. (1991). Anim. Prod. 52 (3), 608.Google Scholar
Shelton, J.M. & Huston, J.E. (1966). Tex. Agric. Exp. Sta. Prog. Report 2399.Google Scholar
Throckmorton, J.C., Ffoulkes, D., Leng, R.A. & Evans, J.V. (1982). Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 14, 661.Google Scholar