Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-89wxm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T15:49:30.938Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparative protein and fibre degradation measured in situ in the caecum of ponies and in the rumen of steers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2021

Hyslop J.J
Affiliation:
Dept. Vet Clinical Studies, Edinburgh University, Vet Field Station, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK
Jessop N.S
Affiliation:
Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, Edinburgh University, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
Stefansdottir G.J
Affiliation:
Dept. Vet Clinical Studies, Edinburgh University, Vet Field Station, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK
Cuddeford D
Affiliation:
Dept. Vet Clinical Studies, Edinburgh University, Vet Field Station, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG, UK
Get access

Extract

Previous work has shown that equids generally have lower apparent digestibilities in vivo compared to ruminants. This observation may be due to either; (1) higher rates of passage through the digestive tract of equids compared to ruminants; (2) less opportunity for absorption of microbial digestion end products following hindgut fermentation in equids compared to foregut fermentation in ruminants; or (3) to caecal and colonic micro-organisms in equids being less efficient at feed constituent degradation compared to ruminal micro-organisms. To test this latter possibility, this experiment examines the hypothesis that feed constituents will be degraded to a similar extent when exposed to either an equid hindgut or a ruminal foregut microflora for the same time periods.

Type
Programme
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1997

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

Dhanoa, M.S. 1988. On the analysis of dacron bag data for low degradability feeds. Grass and Forage Science 43: 441444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar