Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:05:31.628Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cereals level and source effects on rumen fermentation, colostrum and milk properties, and blood metabolites in periparturient ewes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 October 2018

M. Karam Babaei ,
H. Mirzaei-Alamouti  and
A. Nikkhah
M. Karam Babaei
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, University of Zanjan, Zanjan 313-45195, Iran
H. Mirzaei-Alamouti
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, University of Zanjan, Zanjan 313-45195, Iran
A. Nikkhah*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, University of Zanjan, Zanjan 313-45195, Iran
*
†Present address: Ferdow Pars Agriculture and Livestock Holding Co., Mostazafan Foundation, Tehran, Iran. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Optimal type and dietary inclusion rates of cereal grains for periparturient sheep are unknown. The objective was to determine effects of feeding diets with high (H) v. low (L) levels of ground corn grain (CN) v. combined ground wheat and barley grains (WB) on intake, rumen fermentation, colostrum and milk properties, and blood metabolites of periparturient sheep. Twenty Afshari×Merino ewes were used in a completely randomized design study from 24 days prepartum through 21 days postpartum. Ewes were kept indoors in individual boxes and received once daily at 0900 h total mixed rations. Treatments were mixed rations containing either (1) H or (2) L concentrate based on either (1) 100% CN or (2) 50 : 50 ratio of ground wheat : ground barley grains in a 2×2 factorial arrangement. Each treatment group had five ewes including two twin-lamb ewes and three single-lamb ewes. Postpartal dry matter intake (DMI) increased by feeding high CN v. high and low WB, while high v. low CN improved postpartum DMI. The DMI during lambing tended to increase with the high v. low WB. Feeding CN v. WB, and feeding both CN and WB at L v. H level increased fecal pH. Postpartal rumen pH was lower with the high v. low WB (5.7 v. 6.2). Rumen concentrations of propionate were lower and of acetate were higher with L v. H grain levels. Increased dietary grain reduced urine pH for WB (7.24 v. 7.83) but not for CN (7.63 v. 7.52) prepartum. Colostrum properties, postpartal urine pH, lamb weight at birth and 21 days of age, and placental weight and expulsion time were unaffected. Milk yield increased and milk fat yield tended to increase by H v. L grain diets. Plasma glucose was increased by feeding high v. low WB, whereas CN v. WB tended to reduce peripartal plasma non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) and increased insulin to NEFA ratio. In conclusion, more cereal grains can be included in periparturient sheep diets and CN instead of WB may be fed to periparturient sheep to improve energy status. Findings suggest opportunities to optimize periparturient ewe physiology and performance through feeding certain cereals and avoiding high levels of WB.

Keywords

sheepcereal grainmetabolismperiparturientphysiology
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 6 , June 2019 , pp. 1165 - 1172
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2018 

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

Allen, MS 1997. Relationship between fermentation acid production in the rumen and the requirement for physically effective fiber. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1447–1462.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76074-0Google Scholar
Amanlou, H, Zahmatkesh, D and Nikkhah, A 2008. Wheat grain as a prepartum cereal choice for periparturient cows. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 92, 605–613.10.1111/j.1439-0396.2007.00756.xGoogle Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 2004. Official methods of analysis, volume 2, 18th edition. AOAC, Arlington, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Banchero, GE, Quintans, G, Vazquez, F, Gigena, A, Manna, La, Lindsay, DR and Milton, JTB 2007. Effect of supplementation of ewes with barley or maize during the last week of pregnancy on colostrum production. Animal 1, 625–630.10.1017/S1751731107691885Google Scholar
Bauman, DE and Griinari, JM 2003. Nutritional regulation of milk fat synthesis. Annual Reviws in Nutrition 23, 203–227.10.1146/annurev.nutr.23.011702.073408Google Scholar
Beauchemin, KA and Rode, LM 1997. Minimum versus optimum concentrations of fiber in dairy cow diets based on barley silage and concentrates of barley or corn. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1629–1639.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76094-6Google Scholar
Bizelis, JA, Charismiadou, MA and Rogdakis, E 2000. Metabolic changes during the perinatal period in dairy sheep in relation to level of nutrition and breed. II. Early lactation. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 84, 73–84.10.1046/j.1439-0396.2000.00283.xGoogle Scholar
Cannas, A, Fox, DG, Tedeschi, LO, Pell, AN and Van Soest, PJ 2004. A mechanistic model to predict nutrient requirements and feed biological values for sheep in each unique production situation. Journal of Animal Science 82, 149–169.10.2527/2004.821149xGoogle Scholar
Charismiadou, MA, Bizelis, JA and Rogdakis, E 2000. Metabolic changes during the perinatal period in dairy sheep in relation to level of nutrition and breed. I. Late pregnancy. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 84, 61–72.10.1046/j.1439-0396.2000.00282.xGoogle Scholar
Dann, HM, Varga, GA and Putnam, DE 1999. Improving energy supply to late gestation and early postpartum dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 1765–1778.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75407-XGoogle Scholar
Economides, S, Georghiades, E, Koumas, A and Hadjipanayiotou, M 1989. The effect of cereal processing on the lactation performance of Chios sheep and Damascus goats and the pre-weaning growth of their offspring. Animal Feed Science and Technology 26, 93–104.10.1016/0377-8401(89)90009-6Google Scholar
France, J and Dijkstra, J 2005. Volatile fatty acid production. In Quantitative aspects of ruminant digestion and metabolism, 2nd edition (ed. J Dijkstra, JM Forbes and J France), pp. 157–176. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.10.1079/9780851998145.0157Google Scholar
Gonzalez, J, Faria-Marmal, J, Matesanz, B, Rorriguez, CA and Alvir, MR 2003. In situ intestinal digestibility of dry matter and crude protein of cereal grains and rapeseed in sheep. Reproduction and Nutrition Developments 43, 29–40.10.1051/rnd:2003004Google Scholar
Guessous, F, Rihani, N, Kabbali, A and Johnson, WL 1989. Improving feeding systems for sheep in a Mediterranean rain-fed cereals/livestock area of Morocco. Journal of Animal Science 67, 3080–3086.10.2527/jas1989.67113080xGoogle Scholar
Hall, DG, Holst, PJ and Shutt, DA 1992. The effect of nutritional supplements in late pregnancy on ewe colostrum production plasma progesterone and IGF-1 concentrations. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 43, 325–337.10.1071/AR9920325Google Scholar
Hatfield, PG, Thomas, VM and Kott, RW 1997. Influence of energy or protein supplementation during midpregnancy on lamb production of ewes grazing winter range. Sheep and Goat Research Journal 13, 150–156.Google Scholar
Hunter, RA 1978. The performance of pregnant and lactating Merino ewes and their lambs fed survival rations of wheat grain and sawdust. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 18, 34–40.10.1071/EA9780034Google Scholar
Huntington, GB 1997. Starch utilization by ruminants: from basics to the bunk. Journal of Animal Science 75, 852–867.10.2527/1997.753852xGoogle Scholar
Iranian Council of Animal Care 1995. Guide to the care and use of experimental animals (volume 1. Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran.Google Scholar
Janovick-Guretzky, NA, Dann, HM, Carlson, DB, Murphy, MR, Loor, JJ and Drackley, JK 2007. Housekeeping gene expression in bovine liver is affected by physiological state, feed intake, and dietary treatment. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2246–2252.10.3168/jds.2006-640Google Scholar
Krause, KM and Oetzel, GR 2006. Understanding and preventing subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy herds: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 126, 215–236.Google Scholar
Littell, RC, Milliken, GA, Stroup, WW, Wolfinger, RD and Schabenberger, O 2006. SAS for mixed models. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC) 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC) 2007. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants, 5th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A 2010. Optimizing barley grain use by dairy cows: a betterment of current perceptions. In Progress in food science and technology (volume 1 (ed. A. J. Greco), pp. 165–178. Nova Science Publishers Inc., Hauppauge, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A 2012. Periparturient ewe insulin efficiency and energetics: manipulation via cereal management. In ADSA/ASAS Midwest Meetings, 19–21 March 2012, Des Moines, IA, USA.Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A 2015. Cereals and periparturient ruminants. Journal of Veterinary Science and Technology 6, e120.10.4172/2157-7579.1000e120Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A, Alikhani, M and Amanlou, H 2004. Effects of feeding ground or steam-flaked broom sorghum and ground barley on performance of dairy cows in midlactation. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 122–130.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73149-5Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A, Ehsanbakhsh, F, Zahmatkesh, D and Amanlou, H 2010. Prepartal provision of wheat grain for easier metabolic transition in periparturient Holstein heifers. Animal 5, 522–527.10.1017/S1751731110002065Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A, Karam Babaei, M and Mirzaei, H 2011. Cereal nutrition of periparturient ewes: corn versus barley-wheat. Journal of Dairy Science 94 (E-suppl), 457.Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A, Loor, J, Wallace, R, Graugnard, D, Vasquez, J, Richards, B and Drackley, J 2009. Free-choice access to a moderate-energy diet increases internal body fat in dry cows. Illinois Dairy Report, IL, USA.Google Scholar
Novozamsky, I, Van Eck, R, Schouwenburg, JCH and Walinga, F 1974. Total nitrogen determination in plant material by means of the indole-phenol blue method. Netherland Journal of Agricultural Science 22, 3–5.Google Scholar
Sadri, H, Ghorbani, GR, Rahmani, HR, Samie, AH, Khorvash, M and Bruckmaier, R 2009. Chromium supplementation and substitution of barley grain with corn: effects on performance and lactation in periparturient dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 5411–5418.10.3168/jds.2008-1877Google Scholar
SAS 2003. SAS user’s guide, Version 9.1 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Stone, WC 2004. Nutritional approaches to minimize subacute ruminal acidosis and laminitis in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 87, E13–E26.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)70057-0Google Scholar
Thomas, VM, Soder, KJ, Kott, RW and Schuldt, CM 1992. Influence of energy or protein supplementation on the production of pregnant ewes grazing winter range. Proceedings of the Western Section of the American Society of Animal Science 43, 374–376.Google Scholar
Treacher, TT 1970. Effects of nutrition in late pregnancy on subsequent milk production in ewes. Animal Production 12, 23–36.10.1017/S0003356100028695Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant, 2nd edition. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA and Akin, DE 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 70, 3583–3597.10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2Google Scholar
Vernon, RG, Faulkner, A, Hay, WW, Calvert, DT and Flint, DJ 1990. Insulin resistance of hind-limb tissues in vivo in lactating sheep. Biochemistry Journal 270, 783–786.10.1042/bj2700783Google Scholar
Vipond, JE, Hunter, EA and King, ME 1982. Effects of cereal and protein supplements to Swedes (Brassica napus) on intake and performance of pregnant and lactating ewes kept indoors. Animal Production 34, 131–137.10.1017/S000335610000060XGoogle Scholar
Vipond, JE, Huntera, EA and Kinga, ME 1985. The utilization of whole and rolled cereals by ewes. Animal Production 40, 297–301.10.1017/S000335610002540XGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z and Goonewardene, LA 2004. The use of MIXED models in the analysis of animal experiments with repeated measured data. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 84, 1–11.Google Scholar
Yang, WZ, Beauchemin, KA and Rode, LM 2000. Effects of barley grain processing on extent of digestion and milk production of lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 554–568.Google Scholar