Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:36:34.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soaking of complete fattening rations high in poor roughage 1. The effect of moisture content and spontaneous fermentation on nutritional value†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

Z. Holzer ,
D. Levy ,
H. Tagari  and
R. Volcani
Z. Holzer
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Regional Experiment Station, Haifa, Israel
D. Levy
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Regional Experiment Station, Haifa, Israel
H. Tagari
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Regional Experiment Station, Haifa, Israel
R. Volcani
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Organization, Newe Ya'ar Regional Experiment Station, Haifa, Israel
Get access

Summary

The effect of three moisture concentrations (10, 50 and 75%) and of four fermentation conditions (none, 24 hr aerobic, and 24 and 48 hr anaerobic) on the nutritive value of two complete fattening diets containing 25 and 45% poor roughage, was examined in three digestion and nitrogen balance trials, each of Latin square design, in cattle.

Fermentation increased the lactic acid and volatile fatty acid concentrations of the feed, decreased its pH and the crude fibre content, and caused losses of dry matter.

There were non-significant differences in voluntary intake between the dry and soaked diets. The apparent digestibility of dry and organic matter, crude protein, nitrogen-free extract and crude fibre was non-significantly improved by added moisture. There were no consistent differences in nitrogen retention.

The average metabolizable energy values (ME) observed for both diets were 6% higher than those calculated. There were no significant differences in the apparent digestibility of gross energy or in ME value between treatments of different moisture content.

The fluctuations in pH of rumen liquor during the day differed markedly when the animals received different levels of roughage. These differences were greater when the feed was allowed to ferment. Soaking of feed resulted in a significant increase in the concentration of propionic acid in the rumen liquor, and a non-significant decrease in that of acetic acid. Consequently the C2/C3 ratio was significantly lower on the moist feed treatments.

There were no consistent differences in concentration of ammonia in the rumen liquor, or of urea in the blood.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , December 1975 , pp. 323 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1975

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1965. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2, Ruminants. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
American Society of Agricultural Engineers. 1967. Method of determining modulus of uniformity and modulus of fineness of ground feed. Yb. Am. Soc. agric. Engrs, 1967, p. 301.Google Scholar
Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. 1965. Official Methods of Analysis. 10th ed. Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Beardsley, D. W. 1964. Symposium on forage utilization: Nutritive value of forage as affected by physical form–Part II. Beef cattle and sheep studies. J. Anim. Sci. 23: 239–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. 1967. The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants. 2nd ed. Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. and Clapperton, J. L. 1965. Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants. Br. J. Nutr. 19: 511–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burkhardt, J. D., Embry, L. B. and Luther, R. M. 1969. Corn processing methods for high concentrate diets. J. Anim. Sci. 29: 153 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Burt, A. W. A. 1965. The nutritive value of ground and pelleted barley straw. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 66: 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C. 1969. Physical regulation of voluntary intake. In Physiology of Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant (ed. Phillipson, A. T.). Oriel Press, Newcastle.Google Scholar
Chaturvedi, M. L., Singh, N. B. and Ranjhan, S. K. 1973. Effect of feeding water-soaked and dry wheat straw on feed intake, digestibility of nutrients and VFA production in growing zebu and buffalo calves. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 80: 393–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clare, N. T. and Stevenson, A.E. 1964. Measurement of feed intake by grazing cattle and sheep. 10. Determination of nitrogen in faeces and feeds using an Auto-Analyzer. N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 7: 198–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulombe, J. J. and Favreau, L. 1963. A new simple semimicro method for colorimetric determination of urea. Clin. Chem. 9: 102–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dalton, H. L., Huffman, C. F. and Ralston, N. P. 1953. The effect of feeding concentrates with different degrees of fineness and water contents on the eating and milking times in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 36: 1279–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11: 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erwin, E. S., Marco, G. J. and Emery, E. N. 1961. Volatile fatty acid analysis of blood and rumen fluid by gas chromatography. J. Dairy Sci. 44: 1768–1771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, W. S. 1943. The digestibility of straw pulp. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 33: 174–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glover, J., Duthie, D. W. and French, M. H. 1957. The apparent digestibility of crude protein by ruminants. 1. A synthesis of the results of digestibility trials with herbage and mixed feeds. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 48: 373–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. and Wainman, F. W. 1972. The nutritive value of processed roughages for fattening cattle and sheep. Proc. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod. (New Series) 1972, pp. 57–68.Google Scholar
Heuberger, G. L., Mitchell, G. E. Jr, Albert, W. W. and Neumann, A. L. 1959. The effect of moisture content of field-shelled corn on harvesting and storage losses and on its feeding value for beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 18: 1527 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Husted, W. T., Hale, W. H. and Theurer, B. 1966. Effect of various processing methods on milo digestion by steers. J. Anim. Sci. 25: 903 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Ishaque, M., Thomas, P. C. and Rook, J. A. F. 1971. Relationship between the pattern of ruminal fermentation and the flow of materials to the duodenum in sheep receiving a diet of barley, flaked maize and ground hay. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 30: 1A–2A.Google Scholar
Kay, M., MacDearmid, A. and Massie, R. 1970. Intensive beef production. 11. Replacement of cereals with ground straw. Anim. Prod. 12: 419–424.Google Scholar
Koes, R. M. and Pfander, W. H. 1974. Increased utilization of bluestem hay with the addition of water or certain protein sources. J. Anim. Sci. 38: 662–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamming, G. E., Swan, H. and Clarke, R. T. 1966. Studies on the nutrition of ruminants. I. Substitution of maize by milled barley straw in a beef fattening diet, and its effect on performance and carcass quality. Anim. Prod. 8: 303–311.Google Scholar
McCann, C. P. and Matsushima, J. K. 1973. Dietary moisture in steer finishing rations. J. Anim. Sci. 37: 349–350.Google Scholar
Matsushima, J. K. and Stenquist, N. J. 1967. Reconstituted, ensiled and flaked corn for cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 26: 925 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Meyer, J. H., Weir, W. C., Dobie, J. B. and Hull, J. L. 1959. Influence of the method of preparation on the feeding value of alfalfa hay. J. Anim. Sci. 18: 976–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minson, D. J. 1963. The effect of pelleting and watering on the feeding value of roughage–a review. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 18: 39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, L. A. 1964. Symposium on forage utilization. Nutritive value of forage as affected by physical form. I. General principles involved with ruminants and effect of feeding pelleted or wafered forage to dairy cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 23: 230–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Packett, L. V. and McCune, R. W. 1965. Determination of steam volatile organic acids in fermentation media by gas-liquid chromatography. Appl. Microbiol. 13: 22–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pickard, D. W., Swan, H. and Lamming, G. E. 1969. Studies on the nutrition of ruminants. 4. The use of ground straw of different particle sizes for cattle from twelve weeks of age. Anim. Prod. 11: 543–550.Google Scholar
Raghavan, G. V., Hassan, Q. Z. and Prasad, V. L. 1971. Effect of physical preparation of ration on nutrient, utilization, concentration of TVFA, various nitrogen fractions and electrolyte composition of rumen liquor in cattle and buffaloes. Scient. Rep., Div. Anim. Nutr., Indian Vet. Res. Inst., Izatnagar, p. 64.Google Scholar
Raven, A. M. and Robinson, K. L. 1961. Comparative effects of wet and dry feeding on the utilization of protein by calves. Nature, Lond. 192: 1256–1258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raven, A. M. and Robinson, K. L. 1964. Factors affecting the nutritive value of fat for calves. The system of feeding and the mode of incorporation into meal mixtures. J. Sci. Fd Agric. 15: 219–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renton, A. R. and Forbes, T. J. 1973. The utilization by beef cattle of a cereal supplement given in liquid suspension or in the dry form. Anim. Prod. 16: 173–177.Google Scholar
Shafizadeh, F. 1968. Pyrolysis and combustion of cellulosic materials. Adv. Carbohyd. Chem. 23: 419–474.Google Scholar
Tagari, H. 1969. Comparison of the efficiency of proteins contained in lucerne hay and soya-bean meal for sheep. Br. J. Nutr. 23: 455–470.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tonroy, B. Q., Perry, T. W. and Beeson, W. M. 1974. Dry, ensiled high-moisture, ensiled reconstituted high-moisture and volatile fatty acid treated high moisture corn for growing-finishing beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 39: 931–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. K. and Pigden, W. J. 1964. Effect of sodium hydroxide treatment on the utilization of wheat straw and poplar wood by rumen microorganisms. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 44: 122–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar