Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T10:17:25.015Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of animal species on the ruminal degradation of dry matter and nitrogen fractions in urea-treated whole-crop wheat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

A. T. Adesogan ,
A. L. Abdalla ,
M. S. Dhanoa ,
D. I. Givens ,
E. Owen  and
J. D. Sutton
A. T. Adesogan
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT ADAS Feed Evaluation and Nutritional Sciences, Alcester Road, Stratford-upon-Avon CV37 9RQ
A. L. Abdalla
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT
M. S. Dhanoa
Affiliation:
Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Plas Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB
D. I. Givens
Affiliation:
ADAS Feed Evaluation and Nutritional Sciences, Alcester Road, Stratford-upon-Avon CV37 9RQ
E. Owen
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT
J. D. Sutton
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT
Get access

Extract

At maintenance at least, the whole tract digestibility of several foods in sheep and cattle is similar, consequently much of the information on the nutritive value of dairy cow foods in food composition tables is derived from studies conducted in sheep. However, Adesogan (1996) reported that in whole-crop wheat (WCW), starch digestibility is higher in sheep than in dairy cows. This study examined the validity of using sheep to model the ruminal degradation of WCW in cows by comparing the degradability of dry matter (DM) and nitrogen (N) of urea-treated WCW in both species.

Winter wheat (cv. Hussar) was harvested at 540 g DM per kg and conserved following urea application at target rates of 20 or 40g/kg DM (WCW2 and WCW4 respectively). The degradability of the forages was examined in dairy cows given 6 kg dairy concentrate and grass silage ad libitum and in wethers given 2.4 kg/day of grass silage supplemented with 0.36kg/day of rolled, mineralized barley.

Type
Posters
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 22: In vitro techniques for measuring nutrient supply to ruminants , 1998 , pp. 326 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adesogan, A. T. 1996. Prediction of the nutritive value of fermented and urea-treated whole crop wheat forages. Ph.D. thesis, University of Reading, UK.Google Scholar
Bibby, J. and Toutenberg, H. 1977. Prediction and improved estimation in linear models. John Wiley and Sons, London.Google Scholar
Dhanoa, M. S. 1988. On the analysis of dacron bag data for low degradability feeds. Grass and Forage Science 43: 441–444.Google Scholar
Dhanoa, M. S., France, J., Siddons, R. C., Lopez, S. and Buchanan-Smith, J. G. 1995. A non-linear compartmental model to describe forage degradation kinetics during incubation in polyester bags in the rumen. British Journal of Nutrition 73: 3–15.Google Scholar
Givens, D. I., Moss, A. R. and Adamson, A. H. 1993. The digestion and energy value of whole crop wheat treated with urea. Animal Feed Science and Technology 43: 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, J. and Leaver, J. D. 1993. The intake digestibility and rate of passage of whole crop wheat by growing heifers. Animal Production 56: 443 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Lin, L. I. K. 1989. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45: 255–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ørskov, E. R. and McDonald, I. 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92: 499–503.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant, second edition. Cornell University Press, Ithaca.CrossRefGoogle Scholar