Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-vt8vv Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-08-24T05:16:06.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Utilization of salts of volatile fatty acids by growing sheep

1. Acetate, propionate and butyrate as sources of energy for young growing lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

E. R. Ørskov  and
D. M. Allen
E. R. Ørskov
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading
D. M. Allen
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading
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. An experiment was conducted in which sodium and calcium salts of acetic, propionic and butyric acids were given to groups of eight lambs as additions to basal diets of hay and concentrate. Two control groups were included, one group which received only the basal ration and one high-level control group which received sufficient additional concentrate to achieve growth rates greater than those of the groups receiving volatile fatty acid (VFA) salts. 2. With rumen-fistulated sheep, the effect on the rumen VFA composition and the pH of the rumen liquor, of diets supplemented with VFA salts given twice daily, was also investigated and compared with the effect of the basal diet alone. 3. The lambs receiving the VFA salts grew faster and achieved significantly greater empty body and carcass weights than those receiving only the basal rations; the high-level control group had significantly greater empty body and carcass weights than groups receiving salts of VFA. 4. There were no differences approaching significance in the efficiency of the three VFA in promoting gains in live weight, empty body weight and carcass weight. There appeared to be equal efficiency of utilization of the gross energy of the VFA and of the calculatedmetabolizable energy of the concentrates. 5. The effect of twice-daily feeding on the rumen VFA composition was that the concentration of the supple- mentary acid was greatest shortly after feeding, and about 5–6 h after feeding the effect was difficult to detect. There were no differences in the pH of the rumen liquor between animals given diets containing VFA salts and those given the basal ration.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , May 1966 , pp. 295 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1966

References

REFERENCES

Annison, E. F., Leng, R. A., Lindsay, D. B. & White, R. R. (1963). Biochem. J. 88, 248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Annison, E. F. & Lewis, D. (1959). Metabolism in the Rumen. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. G. & Blaxter, K. L. (1957 a). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. G. & Blaxter, K. L. (1957 b). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. G., Blaxter, K. L. & Graham, N. McC. (1957). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. G., Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1958). Br. J. Nutr. 12, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, D. A. & Rowland, S. J. (1957). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentley, O. G., Johnson, R. R., Royal, G. W., Deatherage, F., Kunkle, L. E., Tyznik, W. J. & Bell, D. S. (1956). Bull. Ohio agric. Exp. Stn no. 774.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Essig, H. W., Garrigus, U. S. & Johnson, B. C. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Essig, H. W., Hatfield, E. E. & Johnson, B. C. (1959). J. Nutr. 69, 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, R. E. (1960). Bull. Minist. Agric. Fish. Fd, Lond., no. 48, 15th ed.Google Scholar
Hodgman, C. D. (1962). Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 44th ed. Ohio: The Chemical Rubber Publishing Co.Google Scholar
James, A. T. & Martin, A. J. P. (1952). Biochem. J. 50, 679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirton, A. H. & Barton, R. A. (1958). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 1, 633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirton, A. H., Barton, R. A. & Rae, S. L. (1962). J. agric. Sci., Camb., 58, 381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlands, J. P., Corbett, J. L., McDonald, I. & Pullar, J. D. (1963). Anim. Prod. 5, 1.Google Scholar
Leng, R. A. & Annison, E. F. (1963). Biochem. J. 86, 319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAnally, R. A. (1943–1944). J. exp. Biol. 20, 130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matrone, G., Ramsey, H. A. & Wise, G. H. (1957). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 95, 731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matrone, G., Ramsey, H. A. & Wise, G. H. (1959). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 100, 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. H. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. H. & Weir, W. C. (1954). J. Anim. Sci. 13, 443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, J. W. G., Cunningham, H. M. & Friend, D. W. (1962). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 42, 82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. (1963). Anim. Prod. 5, 221.Google Scholar
Phillipson, A. T. (1955). Vet. Rec. 67, 1048.Google Scholar
Phillipson, A. T. & McAnally, R. A. (1942). J. exp. Biol. 19, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rook, J. A. F., Balch, C. C., Campling, R. C. & Fisher, L. J. (1963), Br. J. Nutr. 17, 399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, T. B. (1924). Animal Nutrition. London: University Tutorial Press Ltd.Google Scholar