Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T01:57:12.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes in some physical characteristics of the digesta in the reticulo-rumen of cows fed once daily

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

E. W. Evans ,
G. R. Pearce ,
J. Burnett  and
Susan L. Pillinger
E. W. Evans
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AT
G. R. Pearce
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AT
J. Burnett
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AT
Susan L. Pillinger
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AT
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. Three cows were given 3, 5 or 7 kg hay once daily in a Latin-square design, and samples of digesta from four sites in the rumen and one site in the reticulum were taken at six times within the 24 h period after the feed. Dry-matter content and distribution of particle size and of particle density were measured for each sample. The changes in these measurements with time were studied. The incidence of rumination was also recorded.

2. Dry-matter contents of samples ranged from 15 to 3%. Values for samples from the dorsal sacs of the rumen were considerably higher than those for samples from the ventral sites; they also changed more with time after feeding and with level of feeding.

3. Particles were fractionated by sieving into six size groups with mean dimensions (mm) of 9·3 × 0·8, 4·4 × 0·6, 2·6 × 0·3, 1·6 × 0·25, 0·5 × 0·1 and smaller than 0·5 × 0·1. Coarse particles occurred at highest concentrations in the dorsal sacs of the rumen and responded to effects of time and level of feeding; smaller particles showed less response.

4. Particle densities ranged from 800 g/l to 1500 g/l. The proportions of low-density particles were higher in samples from the dorsal sacs of the rumen than in samples from ventral sites; the latter samples had higher proportions of high-density particles than of low-density particles. The changes which occurred are discussed.

5. The density of coarse particles tended to be low and that of fine particles tended to be high.

6. Rumination started at the time of maximum concentration of particles of low density and minimum concentration of particles of high density. Conversely, rumination ended when the concentration of the low-density particles was a minimum and that of the dense particles a maximum.

7. The results are discussed in relation to the possible movement of particles within the reticulo-rumen and the kinetics of particle breakdown.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , May 1973 , pp. 357 - 376
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1973

References

REFERENCES

Balch, C. C. (1949). Some factors influencing the intake and digestion of foods by dairy cows. PhD Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Balch, C. C. (1950). Br. J. Nutr. 4, 361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, C. C. (1958). Outl. Agric. 2, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, C. C. (1961). In Digestive Physiology and Nutrition of the Ruminant, ch. 3, p. 23 [Lewis, D., editor]. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Balch, C. C., Balch, D. A., Bartlett, S., Bartrum, M. P., Johnson, V. W., Rowland, S. J. & Turner, J. (1955). J. Dairy Res. 22, 270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, C. C. & Kelly, A. (1950). Br. J. Nutr. 4, 395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, D. A. & Rowland, S. J. (1957). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1956). Br. J. Nutr. 10, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C. & Freer, M. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1966). The Rumen and Its Microbes, ch. 5. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Magee, H. E. (1932). J. exp. Biol. 9, 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, R. E. (1959). Res. Rep. Wisc. agric. Exp. Stn no. 3.Google Scholar
Pearce, G. R. (1967). Aust. J. agric. Res. 18, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schalk, A. F. & Amadon, R. S. (1928). Bull. N. Dak. agric. Exp. Stn no. 216.Google Scholar
Troelsen, J. E. & Campbell, J. B. (1968). Anim. Prod. 10, 289.Google Scholar
Welch, J. G. (1965). J. Anim. Sci. 24, 911.Google Scholar