Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:29:26.834Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Passage of indigestible particles of various specific gravities in sheep and goats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

K. Katoh ,
F. Sato ,
A. Yamazaki ,
Y. Sasaki  and
T. Tsuda
K. Katoh
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Faculty of Agriculture Tohoku University, Tsutsumidori Amamiyamachi, Sendai 980, Japan
F. Sato
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Faculty of Agriculture Tohoku University, Tsutsumidori Amamiyamachi, Sendai 980, Japan
A. Yamazaki
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Faculty of Agriculture Tohoku University, Tsutsumidori Amamiyamachi, Sendai 980, Japan
Y. Sasaki
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Faculty of Agriculture Tohoku University, Tsutsumidori Amamiyamachi, Sendai 980, Japan
T. Tsuda
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Faculty of Agriculture Tohoku University, Tsutsumidori Amamiyamachi, Sendai 980, Japan
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. Eight kinds of indigestible particles with specific gravities (SG) ranging from 0.92 to 1.87 (2 mm diameter and 4 mm length) were injected into the reticulo-rumen of sheep and goats in order to investigate the relation between SG and passage through the gastrointestinal tract, and the difference in passage time in the two species of animals.

2. The percentage of excreted particles significantly increased, while the percentage of ruminated particles in the excreted particles significantly decreased, as the SG increased.

3. The daily and cumulative recovery rates of particles of SG 1.38 were slower in sheep than in goats, while those with SG 0.92 were not different between species.

4. It is concluded that particles with SG higher than 1.27 would pass through the gastrointestinal tract of sheep and goats more quickly than those with SG lower than 1.21.

Type
General Nutrition papers
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 60 , Issue 3 , November 1988 , pp. 683 - 687
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1988

References

Campling, R. C. & Freer, M. (1962) British Journal of Nutrition 16, 507–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, E. J. (1956) British Journal of Nutrition 10, 15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derrickson, C. M., Hoefer, J. A., Bradley, N. W., Ullrey, C. M. & Little, C. O. (1965) Journal of Animal Science 24, 879.Google Scholar
desBordes, C. K. & Welch, J. G. (1984) Journal of Animal Science 59, 470–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deswysen, A. G. (1987). In Physiological and Pharmacological Aspects of the Reticulorumen, pp. 133–154 [Ooms, L. A. A., Degryse, A. D. and van Miert, A. S. J. P. A. M., editors]. Dordrecth: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, G. J. (1975) Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 13, 319–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, G. J. (1986). In Control of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 173–195 [Milligan, L.P., Grovum, W. L., Dobson, A., editors]. New Jersey: A. Reston Books.Google Scholar
Grenet, E., Martin-Rosset, W. & Chenost, M. (1984). Canadian Journal of Animal Sciences 64 Suppl., 345–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauffe, R. & von Engelhardt, W. (1975) Zentralblatt für Veterinarmedizin 22, 149–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, R. R. [editor] (1973). The Ruminant Stomach, East African Monographs in Biology, Vol. 2. Nairobi: East African Literature Bureau.Google Scholar
Hooper, A. P. & Welch, J. G. (1985) Journal of Dairy Science 68, 1181–1188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, R. N. B. (1987). In Physiological and Pharmacological Aspects of the Reticulorumen, pp. 155–170 [L., A. A., Ooms, A. D., Degryse, and A. S., J., P. A. M. van Miert, editors]. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, R. N. B., von Engelhardt, W. & White, R. G. (1980). In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 743–761 [Ruckebusch, Y., Thivend, P., editors]. Lancaster: MTP Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, P. M. [editor] (1984). Techniques in Particle Size Anaysis of Feed and Digesta in Ruminants, Canadian Society of Animal Science, Occasional Publication, no. 1. Edmonton: Canadian Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
King, K. W. & Moore, W. E. C. (1957) Journal of Dairy Science 40, 528–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. [editor]; (1982 a). In Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, pp. 211–229. Corvallis: O. & B. Books.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. [editor]; (1982 b). In Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, pp. 325–344. Corvallis: O. & B. Books.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. [editor]; (1984). Biostatistical Analysis, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar