Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T06:34:33.195Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The role of the large intestine in post-ruminal digestion of feeds as measured by the mobile-bag method in cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Aila Vanhatalo  and
Elise Ketoja
Aila Vanhatalo
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Production, Agricultural Research Centre of Finland, FIN-31600 Jokioinen, Finland
Elise Ketoja
Affiliation:
Data and Information Services, Agricultural Research Centre of Finland, FIN-31600 Jokioinen, Finland
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.

To study the importance of site of recovery and other factors related to mobile-bag (MB) digestion values, two consecutive experiments in which diets were applied in a 3 × 3 Latin square design, were carried out with cannulated growing heifers. In Expt 1, several types of experimental feed were exposed to intestinal digestion in mobile bags made of two cloth types and filled with intact or rumen-undegradable (RUD) feed material to be recovered either from the ileum (IB) or faeces (FB). In Expt 2, mean retention time (MRT) of Yb-labelled digesta particles within the intestine and in vivo digestibility of diets were measured. With vegetable concentrates, FB resulted generally in slight overestimation of small-intestinal dry matter and N digestion, while with meat-and-bone meal no difference between FB and IB was found. The respective N digestibility of RUD late-cut silage was clearly underestimated as measured from FB. The disappearance of neutral-detergent fibre (NDF) of all feeds under test was higher from FB than from IB. It was not possible to isolate the influence of the large intestine on the MB values by changing bag cloth type. Irrespective of the longer retention time of bags and longer MRT of Yb in the intestine on a low as compared with a high level of feeding, only NDF disappearance of feeds increased due to lower feeding level. Altering the diet type to increase large-intestinal fermentation, as indicated in vivo, usually had no effect on the MB values. It is concluded that the site of collection of bags does not practically affect small-intestinal digestion values of feed N, unless the feed is rich in fibre.

Keywords

Post-ruminal digestionLarge intestineMobile-bag method
Type
Post-ruminal digestion in cattle
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 73 , Issue 4 , April 1995 , pp. 491 - 505
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1995

References

Agricultural Research Council (1980) The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council (1984) The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock Supplement no. 1. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Aronen, I., Toivonen, V., Ketoja, E. & Ofversten, J.(1992) Beef production as influenced by stage of maturity of grass for silage and level and type of supplementary concentrates. Agricultural Science in Finland 1, 441–460.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1956) Some observations on the digestibility of food by sheep and on related problems. British Journal of Nutrition 10, 69–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Boer, G., Murphy, J. J. & Kennelly, J. J. (1987) Mobile nylon bag for estimating intestinal availability of rumen undegradable protein. Journal of Dairy Science 70, 977–982.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frydrych, Z. (1992) Intestinal digestibility of rumen undegraded protein of various feeds as estimated by the mobile bag technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 37, 161–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoover, W. H. (1978) Digestion and absorption in the hindgut of ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 46, 1789–1798.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huhtanen, P. & Khalili, H. (1991) Sucrose supplements in cattle given grass silage-based diet. 3. Rumen pool size and digestion kinetics. Animal Feed Science and Technology 33, 275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huhtanen, P. & Khalili, H. (1992) The effect of sucrose supplements on particle-associated carboxymethylcellulase. (EC 3·2·1·4) and xylanase (EC 3·2·1·8) activities in cattle given grass-silage-based diet. British Journal of Nutrition 67, 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huhtanen, P. & Kukkonen, U. (1995) Comparison of methods, markers, sampling sites and models for estimating digesta passage kinetics in cattle fed at two levels of intake. Animal Feed Science and Technology (In the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hvelplund, T. (1985) Digestibility of rumen microbial protein and undegraded dietary protein estimated in the small intestine of sheep and by in sacco procedure. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 25, Suppl., 132–144.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, T. (1986) Estimation of nitrogen digestibility in undegraded dietary protein by the in sacco procedure. In Nuclear and Related Techniques in Animal Production and Health, pp. 641–643. Vienna: IAEA.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, T. & Madsen, J. (1990) A study of the quantitative nitrogen metabolism in the gastro-intestinal tract, and the resultant new protein evaluation system for ruminants. The AAT-PBV system. Dissertation, Institute of Animal Science, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen. Odense: AiO Tryk as.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, T., Weisbjerg, M. & Andersen, L. (1992) Estimation of the true digestibility of rumen undegraded dietary protein in the small intestine of ruminants by the mobile bag technique. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 42, 34–39.Google Scholar
Jarosz, L., Weisbjerg, M. R., Hvelplund, T. & Borg Jensen, B. (1991) Digestibility of nitrogen and 15N from different roughages in the lower gut of cows estimated with the mobile nylon bag procedure. In Protein Metabolism and Nutrition. Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Protein Metabolism and Nutrition. EAAP Publication no. 59, Vol. 2, pp. 113–115 [Eggum, B.O., Boisen, S., Børsting, C., Danfær, A. and Hvelplund, T., editors]. Tjele: National Institute of Animal Science, Research Centre Foulum.Google Scholar
Kijora, C, Bergner, H., Szakacz, J., Bartelt, J. & Götz, K.-P. (1992) Utilization of 15N-urea infusion in the small intestine. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 67, 238–249.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, B. K. & Kennelly, J. J. (1985) The mobile bag technique as a predictor of the nutritive value of feedstuffs for dairy cattle. Agriculture and Forestry Bulletin, Special Issue. 64th Annual Feeders'' Day Report, pp. 12–13. Alberta: University of Alberta.Google Scholar
Lopez, S., France, J. & Dhanoa, M. S. (1994) A correction for particulate matter loss when applying the polyester-bag method. British Journal of Nutrition 71, 135–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, J. H. F. & Mackie, R. I. (1986) Microbiological evaluation of the intraruminal in sacculus digestion technique. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 51, 622–629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neter, J., Wasserman, W. & Kutner, M. H. (1990) Applied Linear Statistical Models, 3rd ed. Boston: Irwin.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R., Fraser, C. & McDonald, I. (1971) 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. British Journal of Nutrition 25, 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rae, R. C. & Smithard, R. R. (1985) Estimation of true nitrogen digestibility in cattle by modified nylon bag technique. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44, 116A.Google Scholar
Robertson, J. B. & Van Soest, P. J. (1981) The detergent system of analysis and its application to human foods. In The Analysis of Dietary Fibre in Foods, pp. 123–158 [James, W.P. T. and Theander, O., editors]. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Rooke, J. A. (1985) The nutritive values of feed protein residues resistant to degradation by rumen micro-organisms. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 36, 629–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. (1990) SAS® Procedures Guide, Version 6, 3rd ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. (1992) SAS® Technical Report P-229, SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements, Release 6·07. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Sauer, W. C, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todorov, N. A. & Girginov, D. G. (1991) Comparison of the infusion method, mobile bag technique and in vitro method for determination of the protein digestibility in small intestine of cattle. In Protein Metabolism and Nutrition. Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Protein Metabolism and Nutrition. EAAP publication no. 59, Vol. 2, pp. 80–82 [Eggum, B.O., Boisen, S., Børsting, C., Danfær, A. and Hvelplund, T., editors]. Tjele: National Institute of Animal Science, Research Centre Foulum.Google Scholar
Tukey, J. W. (1977) Exploratory Data Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J., Dellow, O. W., Reid, C. S. & Bauchop, T. (1975) Structure and function of the large intestine of ruminants. In Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 119–133 [McDonald, I.W. and Warner, A. C. I., editors]. Armidale: University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Van Straalen, W. M., Dooper, F. M. H., Antoniewicz, A. M., Kosmala, I. & Van Vuuren, A. M. (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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Straalen, W. M. & Tamminga, S. (1990) Protein degradation of ruminant diets. In Feedstuff Evaluation, pp. 55–72 [Wiseman, J. and Cole, D.J. A., editors]. London: Butterworths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanhatalo, A., Dakowski, P. & Huhtanen, P. (1992) Ruminal and intestinal degradation of grass cut at different stages of growth. Proceedings of the 14th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation, pp. 412–415. Lahti: European Grassland Federation.Google Scholar
Vanhatalo, A. & Varvikko, T. (1993) Intestinal nitrogen digestibility of 15N-labelled rapeseed meal measured by mobile-bag method. In Proceedings of the Society of Nutrition Physiology, Vol. 1, p. 60, [Freese, H.-H., editor]. Frankfurt am Main: DLG-Verlag.Google Scholar
Vanhatalo, A., Varvikko, T. & Aronen, I. (1992) The effect of type of additive on rumen fermentation and digestion of grass silage in cattle. Agricultural Science in Finland 1, 163–175.Google Scholar
Varga, G. A. & Prigge, E. C. (1982) Influence of forage species and level of intake on ruminal turnover rates. Journal of Animal Science 55, 1498–1504.CrossRefGoogle 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 a cow. British Journal of Nutrition 63, 221–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voigt, J. & Piatkowski, B. (1983) Methode zur Untersuchung der Qualität des Futterproteins beim Wiederkäuer. (A method to evaluate quality of dietary protein in ruminants). Archiv für Tierernährung 33, 531.Google Scholar
Voigt, J., Piatkowski, B., Engelmann, H. & Rudolph, E. (1985) Measurement of the postruminal digestibility of crude protein by the bag technique in cows. Archiv fur Tierernährung 35, 555–562.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weisbjerg, M. R., Bhargava, P. K., Hvelplund, T. & Madsen, J. (1990) Use of Degradation Curves in Feed Evaluation. Report from the National Institute of Animal Science, no. 679. Frederiksberg: Boktrykeri as.Google Scholar