Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T20:24:41.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The mobile bag technique as a method for determining the degradation of four botanically diverse fibrous feedstuffs in the small intestine and total digestive tract of ponies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

M. J. S. Moore-Colyer ,
J. J. Hyslop ,
A. C. Longland  and
D. Cuddeford
M. J. S. Moore-Colyer*
Affiliation:
Institute of Rural Studies, University of Wales Aberystwyth, Llanbadarn Fawr, Aberystwyth SY23 3AL, Ceredigion, Wales, UK
J. J. Hyslop
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, Roslin EH25 9RG, Midlothian, Scotland, UK
A. C. Longland
Affiliation:
Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Plas Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB, Ceredigion, Wales, UK
D. Cuddeford
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush Veterinary Centre, Roslin EH25 9RG, Midlothian, Scotland, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Dr M. J. S Moore-Colyer, fax +44 1970 611264, 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 in sacco mobile bag technique was used to determine the rate and extent of disappearance of unmolassed sugar-beet pulp, soyabean hulls, hay cubes and an oat hull–naked oats mixture (67:33, w/w) in the foregut and total digestive tract of ponies. Ponies were administered naso-gastrically polyester mesh bags (60×10×10 mm) containing 350 mg feed, in a 3×4 Latin square design. Bags were collected at the ileo-caecal junction (small intestine bag, SIB) and in the faeces (faecal bag, FB) and their residues analysed for proximate constituents and NSP composition and content. DM disappearances from individual bags were fitted to degradation profiles () and effective degradability values determined. Significant differences (P<0·05) in DM, organic matter and crude protein (N×6·25) losses from SIB were noted between feeds with hay cubes and oat hulls–naked oats > sugar-beet pulp and soyabean hulls. Acid-detergent fibre, neutral-detergent fibre and NSP disappearances were small and varied little between feeds. In contrast, FB losses showed significant (P<0·05) differences for all constituents measured with sugar-beet pulp > soyabean hulls > hay cubes > oat hulls–naked oats. Crude protein losses from sugar-beet pulp and soyabean hulls in FB were significantly higher (P<0·05) than from SIB. FB degradation curves showed degradation to be affected by bag residence time with sugar-beet pulp > soyabean hulls and the effective degradability showed that significantly more (P<0·05) sugar-beet pulp was lost at 40.0 and 60.0 h than for the other three feeds. These results show that sugar-beet pulp and soyabean hulls are rapidly degraded by ponies and could be used as alternatives to hay in equid rations. However, the foregut availability of crude protein from sugar-beet pulp is poor, so a readily digestible source of crude protein should be offered to animals with high protein demands when diets are based on sugar-beet pulp.

Keywords

HorseFibreDegradation profilesEffective degradabilityMobile bags
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 88 , Issue 6 , December 2002 , pp. 729 - 740
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2002

References

American Dairy Science Association (1970) A report: committee on classification of particle size in feedstuffs. Journal of Dairy Science 53, 689–690.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1990) Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 15th ed. Arlington, VA: AOAC.Google Scholar
Bach-Knudsen, E (1991) Gastrointestinal implications in pigs of wheat and oat dietary fibre, (2) Microbial activity in the gastrointestinal tract. British Journal of Nutrition 65, 233–248.Google Scholar
Caroll, CL, Hazard, G, Coloe, PJ & Hooper, PT (1987) Laminitis and possible enterotoxaemia associated with carbohydrate overload in mares. Equine Veterinary Journal 19, 344–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherian, G, Sauer, WC & Thacker, PA (1989) Factors affecting the apparent digestibility of protein for swine when determined by the mobile nylon bag technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 27, 137–146.Google Scholar
Cockburn, J, Dhanoa, MS, France, J & Lopez, S (1993) Overestimation of solubility when using dacron bag methodology. Animal Production 56, 466–467.Google Scholar
Coleman, RJ, Mathison, GW, Ingram, J & Bell, D (1998) Cannulation of the distal ileum in ponies. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 78, 445–447.Google Scholar
Cottrell, DF, Jones, AJ & Potter, KE (1998) Gas handling in the caecum of the horse. Experimental Physiology 83, 397–408.Google Scholar
Cuddeford, DC, Pearson, RA, Archibalb, RF & Muirhead, RH (1995) Digestibility and gastrointestinal transit time of diets containing different proportions of alfalfa and oat straw given to Thoroughbreds, Shetland ponies, Highland ponies and donkeys. Animal Science 61, 407–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duren, SE (1998) Feeding the endurance horse. In Advances in Equine Nutrition, [Pagan, JD, editor]. Trowbridge, Wilts.: Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
Gibbs, PG, Potter, GD, Schelling, GT, Kreider, JL & Boyd, CL (1988) Digestion of hay protein in different segments of the equine digestive tract. Journal of Animal Science 66, 400–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibbs, PG, Potter, GD, Schelling, GT, Kreider, JL & Boyd, CL (1996) The significance of small vs. large intestine digestion of cereal grain and oil seed protein in the equine. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 16, 60–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, H, Hesselman, K & Aman, P (1986) The influence of wheat bran and sugar beet pulp on the digestibility of dietary components in a cereal based pig diet. Journal of Nutrition 116, 242–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groff, L, Pagan, J, Hoekstra, K, Gardner, S, Rice, O, Roos, K & Geor, R (2001) Effect of preparation method on the glycaemic response to ingestion of beet pulp in Thoroughbred horses. Proceedings of the Equine Nutrition and Physiology Society, Kentucky. Savoy, WA: ENPS.Google Scholar
Hintz, HF, Argenzio, RA & Schyrver, HF (1971) Digestibility coefficients, blood glucose levels and molar percentages of volatile fatty acids in intestinal fluid of ponies fed varying forage–grain ratios. Journal Animal Science 33, 992–995.Google Scholar
Hintz, HF & Cymbaluk, NF (1994) Nutrition of the horse. Annual Review of Nutrition 14, 243–267.Google Scholar
Huntington, JA & Givens, DJ (1995) The in situ technology for studying the rumen degradation of feeds: A review of the Procedure. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 65, 63–93.Google Scholar
Hyslop, JJ & Cuddeford, DC (1996) Investigations on the use of the mobile bag technique in ponies. Animal Science 62, 647 Abstr.Google Scholar
Hyslop, JJ, Stefánsdóttir, GJ, McLean, BML, Longland, AC & Cuddeford, DC (1999) In situ incubation sequence and its effect on degradation of feed components when measured in the caecum of ponies. Animal Science 69, 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkpatrick, BK & Kennelly, JJ (1984) Prediction of digestibility in cattle using a modified nylon bag technique. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 64, 1104.Google Scholar
Leibholz, J (1991) A rapid assay for the measurement of protein digestion to the ileum of pigs by the use of a mobile nylon bag technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 33, 209–219.Google Scholar
Longland, AC & Low, AG (1995) Prediction of the energy value of alternative feeds for pigs. In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition, pp. 187–208 [Garnsworthy, PC and Cole, DJA, editors]. Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
Longland, AC & Low, AG (1988) The digestion of three sources of dietary fibre by growing pigs. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 47, 104 Abstr.Google Scholar
Longland, AC & Low, AG (1989) Digestibility of diets containing molassed sugar beet pulp or plain sugar beet pulp by growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 23, 67–78.Google Scholar
McDonald, M, Edwards, RA, Greenhalgh, JFD & Morgan, C (1996) Animal Nutrition, 5th ed. Harlow, Essex: Longman Scientific and Technical.Google Scholar
McLean, BML, Hyslop, JJ, Longland, AC, Cuddeford, D & Hollands, T (1999) Development of the mobile bag technique to determine the degradation kinetics of purified starch sources in the precaecal segment of the equine digestive tract. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science p. 133.Google Scholar
Macheboeuf, D, Poncet, C, Jestin, M & Martin-Rossett, W (1996) Use of a mobile bag technique with caecum fistulated horses as an alternative method for estimating pre-caecal and total tract nitrogen digestibility. In Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of the European Association of Animal Production, Lillehammer, Norway, pp. 296. Rome: EAAP.Google Scholar
Moore-Colyer, MJS (2000) Studies on the degradation kinetics of botanically diverse fibrous feeds and their apparent digestibility and rate of passage when fed to ponies. PhD Thesis, Edinburgh University.Google Scholar
Moore-Colyer, MJS, Hyslop, JJ, Longland, AC & Cuddeford, D (1997) The degradation of organic matter and crude protein of four botanically diverse feedstuffs in the foregut of ponies as measured by the mobile bag technique. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, p. 120.Google Scholar
Moore-Colyer, MJS & Longland, ACL (2000) In vivo apparent digestibility of four types of conserved forage by ponies. Animal Science 71, 527–534.Google Scholar
Moore-Colyer, MJS, Longland, AC, Hyslop, J & Cuddeford, D (2000) Intra-caecal fermentation parameters in ponies fed botanically diverse fibre feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 84, 183–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, IM (1980) Hemicellulose contamination of acid detergent residues and their replacement by cellulose residues in cell wall analysis. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 31, 639–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (1989) Nutrient Requirements for Horses, 5th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Ørskov, ER & McDonald, I (1979) The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubated measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 92, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pagan, J (1998) Forages for horses: More than just a filler. In Advances in Equine Nutrition, pp. 13–27 [Pagan, J, editor]. Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
Peloso, JG, Schumaker, J, McClure, SR, Crabill, MR, Honselka, DJ, Householder, DD & Potter, GD (1994) Technique for long term ileal cannulation in ponies. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 58, 181–184.Google Scholar
Potter, GD, Arnold, FF, Householder, DD, Hansen, DH & Brown, KM (1992) Digestion of starch in the small or large intestine of the equine. Europaische Knoferenz uber die Ernahrung des Pferdes 140–143.Google Scholar
Radicke, S, Kienzle, E & Meyer, H (1991) Preileal apparent digestibility of oats and corn starch and consequences for caecal metabolism. In Proceedings of the 12th Equine Nutrition and Physiology Symposium, Calgary, Canada, pp. 43–48. Savoy, USA.Google Scholar
Robertson, JA & Eastwood, MA (1981) An examination of factors which may affect the water holding capacity of dietary fibre. British Journal of Nutrition 45, 83–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sauer, WC, Jorgensen, H & Berzins, R (1983) A modified nylon bag technique for determining apparent digestibilities of protein in feedstuffs for pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 63, 233–237.Google Scholar
Smoulders, EAA, Steg, A & Hindle, VA (1990) Organic matter in horses and its prediction. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 38, 435–447.Google Scholar
Southgate, DAT, Hudson, GJ & Englyst, H (1978) The analysis of dietary fibre – the choices for the analyst. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 29, 979–988.Google Scholar
Stefánsdóttir, GJ (1996) Degradation of fibre-based feedstuffs in the caecum of ponies using the in situ technique. MSc Thesis, University of Wales, Aberystwyth.Google Scholar
Theander, O & Aman, P (1979) Studies on dietary fibres. 1. Analysis and chemical characterisation of water soluble and water insoluble dietary fibres. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 9, 97–106.Google Scholar
Todd, LK, Sauer, WC, Christopherson, RJ, Coleman, RJ & Caine, WR (1995) The effect of feeding different forms of alfalfa on nutrient digestibility and voluntary intake in horses. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 73, 1–8.Google Scholar
Tomlinson, A (1997) Voluntary feed intake and apparent digestibility of grass chaff, and an assessment of the mobile bag technique to study the dynamics of fibre digestion in equids. MSc Thesis, University of Wales, Aberystwyth.Google Scholar
Uden, P & Van Soest, PJ (1984) Investigations of the in situ bag technique and a comparison of the fermentation in heifers, sheep, ponies and rabbits. Journal of Animal Science 58, 213–221.Google Scholar
Van Straalen, WM, Dooper, FMH, Antoniewicz, AM, Kosmala, I & Van Vuuren, AM (1993) Intestinal digestibility in dairy cows of protein from grass and clover measured with mobile nylon bag and other methods. Journal of Dairy Science 76, 2970–2981.Google Scholar
Varvikko, T & Vanhatalo, A (1990) The effect of differing types of cloth and of contamination by non-feed nitrogen on intestinal digestion estimates using porous synthetic-fibre bags in cows. British Journal of Nutrition 63, 221–229.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ (1994) Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, 2nd ed. Ithaca, NY: Comstock Publishing Associates, Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Yan, T, Longland, AC, Close, WH, Sharpe, CE & Keal, HD (1995) The digestion of dry matter and non-starch polysaccharides from diets containing plain sugar beetpulp or wheat straw by pregnant sows. Animal Science 61, 305–309.Google Scholar
Yelle, M (1986) Clinicians guide to equine laminitis. Equine Veterinary Journal 18, 156–158.Google Scholar