Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T02:40:53.930Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of drying and ensiling grass on its digestion in sheep

Sites of energy and carbohydrate digestion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 January 2009

D. E. Beever ,
D. J. Thomson ,
E. Pfeffer  and
D. G. Armstrong
D. E. Beever
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biochemistry, University of Newcastle upon Tyne
D. J. Thomson
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biochemistry, University of Newcastle upon Tyne
E. Pfeffer
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biochemistry, University of Newcastle upon Tyne
D. G. Armstrong
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biochemistry, University of Newcastle upon Tyne
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. The effect of drying and ensiling ryegrass on the site of digestion of the energy andcarbohydrate fractions was studied in sheep fitted with rumen cannulas and re-entrant can-nulas in the proximal duodenum and terminal ileum.

2. The sheep were given fresh (frozen) grass, dried grass, wilted and unwilted silage pre-pared from herbage harvested from the same sward. The grass diets were offered twice dailyto each animal and paper impregnated with chromium sesquioxide was administered twicedaily into the rumen. Twenty-four hour collections of duodenal and ileal digesta, adjusted togive 100 yo recovery of Cr2O3, were analysed to determine the extent of digestion in the fore-stomachs, the small intestine and the caecum and colon.

3. Total digestibility of the gross energy was similar for the fresh grass, dried grass andwilted silage diets (67·4,68·1 and67·5 %)but higher for the unwilted silage (72·0 %, P < 0·01).There was an increased flow of energy into the small intestine when the sheep were given driedgrass and unwilted silage. The proportion of the apparently digested energy lost within thesmall intestine was greater when the dried grass was given (302 yo) than when the fresh grasswas given (23·6 yo).

4. Drying or ensiling of wilted material affected digestion neither in the entire alimentarytract nor in the different sections of the tract, of some carbohydrate fractions. About 97 yo ofthe digested water-soluble carbohydrate, over 90 yo of the digested cellulose and over 70 yo ofthe digested hemicellulose were digested before reaching the small intestine. The increasedamount of energy entering the duodenum of the sheep given the dried grass was notaccounted for by changes in the fate of these carbohydrate fractions in the digestive tract. Withunwilted silage, digestibilities of the cellulose and hemicellulose fractions were higher, andlower proportions of the digested carbohydrates were lost before the small intestine.

Type
General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , September 1971 , pp. 123 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1971

References

REFERENCES

Beever, D. E. (1969). Sites of digestion in the adult sheep, of carbohydrates in forage and cereal diets. PhD Thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Beever, D. E., Thomson, D. J., Pfeffer, E. & Armstrong, D. G. (1969). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 28, 26 A.Google Scholar
Brown, G. F., Armstrong, D. G. & MacRae, J. C. (1968). Br. vet. J. 124, 78.Google Scholar
Christian, K. R. & Williams, V. J. (1957). N. Z. Jl Sci. Technol. A 38, 1003.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. L., Greenhalgh, J. F. D., McDonald, I. & Florence, E. (1960). Br. J. Nutr. 14, 289.Google Scholar
Crampton, E. W. & Maynard, R. A. (1938). J. Nutr. 15, 383.Google Scholar
Dewar, W. A. & McDonald, P. (1961). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 12, 790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, N. D. (1956). Landbouwvoorlichting 13, 223.Google Scholar
Ekern, A., Blaxter, K. L. & Sawers, D. (1965 a). Br. J. Nutr. 19, 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekern, A., Blaxter, K. L. & Sawers, D. (1965 b). Energy Metabolism p. 217 [Blaxter, K. L., editor]. London and New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Elsden, S. R. & Gibson, Q. H. (1954). Biochem. J. 58, 154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, N. McC. (1964). Aust. J. agric. Res. 15, 974.Google Scholar
Grassland Research Institute (1961).Bull. Commonw. Bur. Past. Fld Crop no. 45.Google Scholar
Harris, C. E., Raymond, W. F. & Wilson, R. F. (1966). Int. Grassld Congr. x.Helsinki p. 564.Google Scholar
MacRae, J. C. & Armstrong, D. G. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 15.Google Scholar
Prabucki, A. L. & Crasemann, E. (1961). Int. Congr. Anim. Prod. VIII.Hamburg p. 34.Google Scholar
Raymond, W. F. (1969). Adv. Agron. 21, 2.Google Scholar
Raymond, W. F., Harris, C. E. & Harker, V. G. (1953). J. Br. Grassld Soc. 8, 315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoch, H., Schürch, A. & Crasemann, E. (1965). Energy Metabolism p. 225 [Blaxter, K. L., editor]. London and New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Somogyi, M. (1945). J. biol. Chem. 160, 61.Google Scholar
Stevenson, A. E. & de Langen, H. (1960). N. Z. Jl agric. Res. 3, 314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, D. J. (1968). Anim. Prod. 10, 240.Google Scholar
Unsworth, E. F. (1970). Some aspects of nitrogen digestion in the adult sheep. MSc Thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Waldo, D. R., Miller, R. W., Okamoto, M. & Moore, L. A. (1965). J. Dairy Sci. 48, 910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, S. J. (1939). The Science and Practice of Conservation: Grass and Forage Crops. London: The Fertilizer and Feedingstuffs Journal.Google Scholar