Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T10:24:34.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of leaf shear breaking load on the feeding value of perennial ryegrass (Lolium pevenne) for sheep. II. Effects on feed intake, particle breakdown, rumen digesta outflow and animal performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

T. Inoué ,
I. M. Brookes ,
A. John ,
E. S. Kolver  and
T. N. Barry
T. Inoué
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
I. M. Brookes
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
A. John
Affiliation:
Ag Research, Grasslands Research Centre, Palmerston North, New Zealand
E. S. Kolver
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
T. N. Barry
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A series of experiments was conducted at Palmerston North, New Zealand, during 1988–91 to compare the efficiency of chewing during eating and rumination, rumen fractional outflow rate (FOR), voluntary organic matter intake, liveweight gain and wool production in sheep fed either low (LS) or high (HS) leaf shear breaking load perennial ryegrass (PRG). The LS ryegrass had a 13% lower mean leaf shear breaking load and ingestion rates tended to be higher than for HS PRG, but no consistent significant treatment differences were observed in rate of particle breakdown, rumen FOR, voluntary intake or animal performance. It was concluded that selection for reduced leaf shear breaking load per se did not improve feeding value. The total shear load required to reduce a unit dry weight of PRG leaf to < 1 mm particles (index of masticatory load; IML) differed by only 3% between LS and HS PRG in this study, due to higher leaf length:dry weight ratios for LS PRG. It is therefore suggested that IML, which takes into account both leaf shear breaking load and associated changes in leaf morphology may be a better criterion for selection than leaf shear breaking load alone in breeding programmes to improve the feeding value of perennial ryegrass.

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 123 , Issue 1 , August 1994 , pp. 137 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

Akin, D. E. (1976). Ultrastructure of rumen bacterial attachment to forage cell walls. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 31, 562–568.Google Scholar
Akin, D. E. (1979). Microscopic evaluation of forage digestion by rumen microorganisms – a review. Journal of Animal Science 48, 701–710.Google Scholar
Bailey, R. W. (1964). Pasture quality and ruminant nutrition. 1. Carbohydrate composition of ryegrass varieties grown as sheep pastures. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 496–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betteridge, G. P., Tallon, J. L., Staines, M. P., Buckley, R. G., Bryan, H. T. & Stevenson, I. G. (1986). An interim report on the tensile properties of four forage grasses. Internal Report, Physics and Engineering Laboratory. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Bigland, G. & Lippold, O. C. J. (1954). The relation between force, velocity and integrated electrical activity in human muscle. Journal of Physiology 123, 214–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binnerts, W. T., van't Klooster, A. Th. & Frens, A. M. (1968). Soluble chromium indicator measured by atomic absorption in digestion experiments. Veterinary Record 82, 470.Google Scholar
Black, J. L., Faichney, G. J. & Sinclair, R. E. (1982). Role of computer simulation in overcoming limitations to animal production from pastures. In Nutritional Limits to Animal Production from Pastures (Ed. Hacker, J. B.), pp. 473–493. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Costigan, P. & Ellis, K. J. (1987). Analysis of faecal chromium from controlled release devices. New Zealand Journal of Technology 3, 89–92.Google Scholar
Dellow, P. G. & Lund, J. P. (1971). Evidence for central timing of rhythmical mastication. Journal of Physiology 215, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Domingue, B. M. F., Dellow, D. W. & Barry, T. N. (1991 a). Voluntary intake and rumen digestion of a lowquality roughage by goats and sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 117, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domingue, B. M. F., Dellow, D. W. & Barry, T. N. (1991 b). The efficiency of chewing during eating and ruminating in goats and sheep. British Journal of Nutrition 65, 355–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Domingue, B. M. F., Dellow, D. W., Wilson, P. R. & Barry, T. N. (1991 C). Comparative digestion in deer, goats and sheep. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 34, 45–53.Google Scholar
Earle, D. F. & McGowan, A. A. (1979). Evaluation and calibration of an automated rising plate meter for estimating dry matter yield of pasture. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 19, 337–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easton, H. S. (1989). Variability of leaf shear strength in perennial ryegrass. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 32, 1–6.Google Scholar
Elliott, R., Norton, B. W. & Ford, C. W. (1985).In vivo colonization of grass cell walls by rumen micro-organisms. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 105, 279–283.Google Scholar
Evans, C. C., MacRae, J. C. & Wilson, S. (1977). Determination of ruthenium and chromium by x-ray fluorescence spectrometry and the use of inert ruthenium (II) phenanthroline as a solid phase marker in sheep digestion studies. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 89, 17–22.Google Scholar
Evans, E. W., Pearce, G. W., 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.Google Scholar
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 (Eds McDonald, I. W. & Warner, A. C. I.), pp. 277–291. Armidale: University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Hiiemae, K. M. (1978). Mammalian mastication: a review of the activity of the jaw muscles and the movements they produce in chewing. In Development, Function and Evolution of Teeth (Eds Butler, P. M. & Joysey, Y. K. A.), pp. 359–398. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Inoué, T., Brookes, I. M. & Barry, T. N. (1989). Effects of selection for shear strength on the voluntary intake and digestion of perennial ryegrass fed to sheep. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 49, 221–224.Google Scholar
Inoué, T., Brookes, I. M., John, A., Hunt, W. F. & Barry, T. N. (1994). Effects of leaf shear breaking load on the feeding value of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) for sheep. I. Effects on leaf anatomy and morphology. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 123, 129–136.Google Scholar
Kennedy, P. M. (1985). Effect of rumination on reduction of particle size of rumen digesta by cattle. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 36, 819–828.Google Scholar
Li, C. C. (1964). Introduction to Experimental Statistics, pp. 207–226. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, B. W., Easton, H. S., Barry, T. N. & Sedcole, J. R. (1988). The effect of reduced leaf shear strength on the nutritive value of perennial ryegrass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 111, 469–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacRae, J. C. & Evans, C. C. (1974). The use of inert ruthenium–phenanthroline as a digesta particulate marker in sheep. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 33, 10A–11A.Google ScholarPubMed
Parker, W. J. (1990). Application of intraruminal chromium controlled release capsules to the measurement of herbage intake of sheep at pasture. PhD thesis, Massey University, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Phyllips, A. G. & Fibiger, H. C. (1973). Substantia nigra: self-stimulation and post stimulation feeding. Physiological Psychology 1, 233–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Podolsky, R. J. & Tawada, K. (1980). A rate-limiting step in muscle contraction. In Muscle Contraction: Its Regulatory Mechanisms (Eds Ebashi, S. et al. ), pp. 65–78. Tokyo: Japan Science Society Press/Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Poppi, D. P., Norton, B. W., Minson, D. J. & Hendricksen, R. E. (1980). The validity of the critical size theory for particles leaving the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 275–280.Google Scholar
Poppi, D. P., Hughes, T. P. & L'Huillier, P. J. (1987). Intake of pasture by grazing ruminents. In Livestock Feeding on Pasture (Ed. Nicol, A. M.), Occasional publication no. 10, pp. 55–64. Hamilton: New Zealand Society of Animal Production.Google Scholar
Robertson, J. B. & Van Soest, P. J. (1981). The detergent system of analyses and its application to human foods. In Basic and Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 3 (Eds James, W. P. T. & Theander, O.), pp. 123–158. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Roughan, P. G. & Holland, R. (1977). Predicting in-vivo digestibilities of herbages by exhaustive enzymic hydrolysis of cell walls. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 28, 1057–1064.Google Scholar
Sas Institute (1985). SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5 Edition. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Tan, T. N., Weston, R. H. & Hogan, J. P. (1971). Use of 103Ru-labelled tris (1, 10-phenanthroline)-Ruthenium (II) chloride as a marker in digestion studies with sheep. International Journal of Applied Radiation and Isotopes 22, 301–308.Google Scholar
Thornton, R. F. & Minson, D. J. (1973). The relationship between apparent retention time in the rumen, voluntary intake, and apparent digestibility of legume and grass diets in sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 24, 889–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troelsen, J. E. & Bigsby, F. W. (1964). Artificial mastication – a new approach for predicting voluntary forage consumption by ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 23, 1139–1142.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J. (1983). Plant fibre and regulation of digestion in the ruminant. In Fibre in Human and Animal Nutrition (Eds Wallace, G. & Bell, L.), pp. 103–107. Wellington: The Royal Society of New Zealand.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J., Dellow, D. W., John, A., Reid, C. S. W. & Waghorn, G. C. (1986). Contribution of chewing during eating and rumination to the clearance of digesta from the ruminoreticulum. In Control of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants (Eds Milligan, L. P., Grovum, W. L. & Dobson, A.), pp. 498–515. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Vincent, J. V. (1982). The mechanical design of grass. Journal of Material Science 17, 856–860.Google Scholar
Waghorn, G. C., Shelton, I. D. & Thomas, V. J. (1989). Particle breakdown and rumen digestion of fresh ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) and lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) fed to cows during a restricted feeding period. British Journal of Nutrition 61, 409–423.Google Scholar
Williams, C. H., David, D. J. & Iismaa, O. (1962). The determination of chromic oxide in faeces samples by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Journal of Agricultural Science 59, 381–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar