Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T04:43:55.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Digestion of concentrates in sheep

2.* The effect of urea or fish-meal supplementation of barley diets on the apparent digestion of protein, fat, starch and ash in the rumen, the small intestine and the large intestine, and calculation of volatile fatty acid production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

E. R. Ørskov
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9 SB
C. Fraser
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9 SB
I. McDonald
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9 SB
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. Diets of rolled barley supplemented with urea or fish meal at four different levels were given in a change-over experiment to four sheep with cannulas in the abomasum and in the terminal ileum.

2. Estimates were made of the disappearance of protein, ether extractives, starch, and ash in the various segments of the alimentary canal, and of the production of volatile fatty acids when the urea supplements were given.

3. The disappearance (Y, g/d) of non-ammonia crude protein from the small intestine increased with increasing protein intake (X, g/d) on the fish-meal diets according to the equation Y = 0.37X+44. There was no increase in the disappearance with the urea supplements.

4. In agreement with earlier work, it was shown that faecal nitrogen excretion was influenced to a much greater extent by fermentation in the large intestine than by that in the rumen. There was an apparent synthesis of ether-extractable lipid in the rumen at rates of 21and 18 g/d with the urea and the fish-meal diets respectively.

5. The energy of the volatile fatty acids produced when the urea diets were given was estimated to be 59% of the digestible energy consumed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1971

References

Bergman, E. N., Reid, R. S., Murray, M. G., Brockway, J. M. & Whitelaw, F. G. (1965). Biochem. J. 97, 53.Google Scholar
Chalmers, M. I. & Synge, R. L. M. (1954). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 44, 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, E. M. W., Ellinger, G. M. & Phillipson, A. T. (1966). Proc. R. Soc. B 166, 63.Google Scholar
Conway, E. J. (1957). Microdiffusion Analysis and Volumetric Error 4th ed. London: Crosby Lockwood and Son Ltd.Google Scholar
Harvey, D. (1970). Tech. Commun. Commonw. Bur. Anim. Nutr. no. 19.Google Scholar
Hogan, J. P. & Weston, R. H. (1967). Aust. J. agric. Res. 18, 973.Google Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1966). The Rumen and its Microbes. London and New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kay, M., MacLeod, N. A. & Macdearmid, A. (1969). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 28, 55A.Google Scholar
Leng, R. A., Corbett, J. L. & Brett, D. J. (1968). Br. J. Nutr. 22, 57.Google Scholar
McDonald, I. W. (1948). Biochem. J. 42, 584.Google Scholar
Mason, V. C. (1969). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 73, 91.Google Scholar
MacRae, J. C. & Armstrong, D. G. (1968). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 19, 578.Google Scholar
Mathieson, J. (1970). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 29, 30A.Google Scholar
ørskov, E. R., Flatt, W. P. & Moe, P. W. (1968). J. Dairy Sci. 51, 1429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ørskov, E. R., Fraser, C. & Corse, E. L. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ørskov, E. R., Fraser, C. & Kay, R. N. B. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ørskov, E. R., Fraser, C. & McDonald, I. (1971). Br. J. Nutr. 25, 225.Google Scholar
ørskov, E. R., Fraser, C., Mason, V. C. & Mann, S. O. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, F. M., Moir, R. J. & Underwood, E. J. (1949). Aust. J. scient. Res. B 2, 304.Google Scholar
Sharma, H. R., Van't Klooster, A. Th. & Frens, A. M. (1969). Z. Tierphysiol. Tierernähr. Futtermittelk. 24, 373.Google Scholar
Stevenson, A. E. & Clare, N. T. (1963). N. Z. Jl agric. Res. 6, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar