Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:14:47.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The flow of forage particles and solutes through segments of the digestive tracts of cattle*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

M. J. Wylie ,
W. C. Ellis ,
J. H. Matis ,
E. M. Bailey ,
W. D. James  and
D. E. Beever
M. J. Wylie
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science
W. C. Ellis*
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics
J. H. Matis
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics
E. M. Bailey
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Physiology and Pharmacology
W. D. James
Affiliation:
Center for Chemical Characterization and Analysis, Chemistry Department, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas 77843USA
D. E. Beever
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, UK
*
†Corresponding author: Dr W. C. Ellis, fax +1 409 845 5292, email [email protected]
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.

An experiment was conducted to investigate the compartmental mean residence time, (CMRT) of feed residues in segments of gastrointestinal digesta of mature Holstein steers. The objective was to evaluate assumptions that feed residues flow through ruminal digesta as sequential mixing pools having age-dependent (GN) and age-independent (G1) distributed residence times respectively (GN → G1 flow). The basal diet was a semi-tropical hay containing 98 g crude protein and 503 g apparently digestible DM per kg DM. The hay was consumed and feed residues of different size and/or previous digestion from the hay were inserted into the reticulo-rumen (rumen) and abomasum. Marker profiles appearing at the duodenum and faeces were fitted to various compartment models to estimate CMRT. Post-abomasal CMRT did not differ among solutes or feed residues of different size and previous digestion and constituted only 5·8 % of the CMRT for the entire gastrointestinal tract. Markers initially applied to orally or ruminally dosed feed residues exhibited profiles in duodenal digesta and faeces conforming to GN → G1 flow. Previously undigested, masticated feed residues inserted into the dorsal rumen digesta had longer ruminal CMRT in the GN pool but not the G1 pool than did similarly inserted faecal small particles or normally ingested hay. These results support model assumptions of GN → G1 flow within rumen digesta. The results support mechanisms proposed for the GN pool as the ‘lag-rumination pool’ and the G1 pool as the ‘mass action turnover pool’. If further validated, rumen CMRT in cattle could be estimated from marker profiles in more easily obtained faeces to estimate ruminal CMRT required for feed evaluation systems.

Keywords

Compartmental modelsDigesta flowForage particle size
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 83 , Issue 3 , March 2000 , pp. 295 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2000

Footnotes

*

Approved for publication as TA 23227 by the Director of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station.

References

Blaxter, KL, Graham, NM and Wainman, NM (1956) Some observations on the digestibility of food by sheep, and on related problems. British Journal of Nutrition 10, 69–91.Google Scholar
Brandt, CS and Thacker, EJ (1958) A concept of rate of food passage through the gastro-intestinal tract. Journal of Animal Science 17, 218–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhanoa, MS, Siddons, RC, France, J and Gale, DL (1985) A multi-compartment model to describe marker excretion patterns in ruminant faeces. British Journal of Nutrition 53, 663–671.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC, Baily, EM and Taylor, CA (1984) A silicone esophageal cannula: it's surgical installation and use in research with grazing cattle, sheep or goats. Journal of Animal Science 59, 204–209.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC & Beever, DE (1984) Methods for binding rare earths to specific feed particles. In Techniques in Particle Size Analysis of Feed and Digesta in Ruminants, pp. 154–165 [Kennedy, PM, editor]. Edmonton: Canadian Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC, Kennedy, P & Matis, JH (1991) Passage and digestion of plant tissue fragments in herbivores. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores, pp. 227–236 [Ho, YW, Wong, HK, Abdullah, N and Tajuddin, ZA, editors]. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Society of Animal Production and Vinlin Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC, Matis, JHHill, TM & Murphy, MR (1994) Chapter 17. Methodology for estimating digestion and passage kinetics of forages. In Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization, pp. 682–756 [Fahey, GC Jr, editor]. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Inc.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC, Matis, JH and Lascano, C (1979) Quantitating ruminal turnover. Federation Proceedings 38, 2702–2706.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC, Matis, JH, Pond, KR, Lascano, CE & Telford, JP (1984 b) Dietary influences on flow rate and digestive capacity. In Herbivore Nutrition in the Subtropics and Tropics, pp. 269–293 [Gilchrist, FMC, and Mackie, RI, editors]. Craighall: The Science Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC, Poppi, DP, Matis, JH, Lippke, H, Hill, TH & Rouquette, FH (1999) Dietary–digestive–metabolic interactions determining the nutritive potential of ruminant diets. In Nutritional Ecology of Herbivores. Proceedings of the Vth International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores, pp. 423–480 [Jung, HG and Fahey, GC Jr, editors]. Savoy, IL: American Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Faichney, GJ (1984) The kinetics of particulate matter in the rumen. In Control of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 173–195 [Milligan, LP, Grovum, WL and Dobson, A, editors]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Faichney, GJ and Boston, RC (1983) Interpretation of faecal excretion patterns of solute and particle markers introduced into the rumen of sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge) 101, 575–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, GJ, Poncet, C and Boston, RC (1989) Passage of internal and external markers of particulate matter through the rumen of sheep. Reproduction, Nutrition, Development 29, 325–339.Google Scholar
Faichney, GJ and White, GA (1988) Rates of passage of solutes, microbes and particulate matter through the gastro-intestinal tract of ewes fed at a constant rate throughout gestation. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 39, 481–492.Google Scholar
France, J, Thornley, JHM, Dhanoa, MS and Siddons, RC (1985) On the mathematics of digesta flow kinetics. Journal of Theoretical Biology 113, 743–758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grovum, WL and Williams, VJ (1973) Rate of passage of digesta in sheep. 4. Passage of marker through the alimentary tract and the biological relevance of rate-constraints derived from the changes in concentration of marker in the faeces. British Journal of Nutrition 30, 313–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huhtanen, P and Vanhatalo, A (1997) Ruminal and total plant cell-wall digestibility estimated by a combined in situ method utilizing mathematical models. British Journal of Nutrition 78, 583–598.Google Scholar
Jacquez, JA (1996) Compartmental Analysis in Biology and Medicine, 3rd ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Bio Medware.Google Scholar
Jessop, NS & Illius, AW (1999) Modeling the influence of buoyancy on particle dynamics in the foregut of ruminants. In Nutritional Ecology of Herbivores: Posters, Plenary Discussions and Papers presented at Satellite Symposia and Seminar held in conjunction with the Vth Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores, San Antonio, TX, April 10–16, 1999. CD-ROM available from WC Ellis, Department of Animal Science, Texas A & M University, TX 77843. Can be viewed online at: http://cnrit. tamu.edu/conf/isnh/post-online/post0056/Google Scholar
Luginbuhl, JM, Pond, KR and Burns, JC (1994) Whole-tract digesta kinetics and comparison of techniques for the estimation of fecal output in steers fed coastal bermudagrass hay at four levels of intake. Journal of Animal Science 72, 201–211.Google Scholar
Matis, JH (1972) Gamma time-dependency in Blaxter's compartmental model. Biometrics 28, 597–602.Google Scholar
Matis, JH, Wehrly, TE and Ellis, WC (1989) Some generalized stochastic compartmental models for digesta flow. Biometrics 45, 703–720.Google Scholar
Milne, JA, MacRae, JC, Spence, AM and Wilson, S (1978) A comparison of the voluntary intake and digestion of a range of forages at different times of the year by the sheep and the red deer (Cervus elaphus). British Journal of Nutrition 40, 347–357.Google Scholar
Pond, KR, Ellis, WC, James, WD and Deswysen, AG (1985) Analysis of multiple markers in nutrition research. Journal of Dairy Science 68, 745–750.Google Scholar
Pond, KR, Ellis, WC, Matis, JH, Sutton, JD, Bishop, C and Ferreiro, HH (1988) Compartmental models for estimating attributes of digesta flow in cattle. British Journal of Nutrition 60, 571–595.Google Scholar
Pond, KR, Ellis, WC, Matis, JH and Deswysen, AG (1989) Passage of chromium mordanted and rare earth labeled fiber: time of dosing kinetics. Journal of Animal Science 67, 1020–1028.Google Scholar
Seber, GAF & Wild, CJ (1989) Nonlinear Regression, p. 110. New York, NY: John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, TM (1986) Particle separation in the forestomach of sheep. In Aspects of Digestive Physiology in Ruminants, pp. 43–73 [Dobson, A, and Dobson, MH, editors]. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Vega, A and Poppi, DP (1997) Extent of digestion and rumen condition as factors affecting passage of liquid and digesta particles in sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge) 128, 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, ACI (1981) Rate of passage of digesta through the gut of mammals and birds. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 51, 789–820.Google Scholar
Winer, BJ (1971) Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, 2nd ed., pp. 261–308. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
Wylie, MJ (1987) The flow of feed residues through the gastrointestinal tract of ruminants. PhD Thesis, Texas A & M University, Texas, USA.Google Scholar
Wylie, MJ, Ellis, WC and Matis, JH (1986) Validity of rare earths as flow markers for undigested feed residues. Journal of Animal Science 63 (Suppl. 1), 5.Google Scholar