Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T05:59:44.914Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of feeding protected and unprotected casein on the milk production of cows grazing ryegrass

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. J. Minson
D. J. Minson
Affiliation:
CSIRO Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures, St Lucia, Queensland 4067, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Milk production of cows grazing Rhodes grass without the addition of grain supplements can be increased by feeding casein protected from deamination in the rumen with formaldehyde (Stobbs, Minson & McLeod 1977; Flores, Stobbs & Minson, 1979). No increase in milk production was achieved when unprotected casein was fed, indicating that production on a tropical grass was limited by the quantity of amino acids absorbed from the small intestines (Stobbs et al. 1977). Formaldehydetreated casein (formal-casein) increased by 5% the milk production of cows grazing ryegrass in New Zealand when an energy supplement was also fed but had no effect oh milk yield when only ryegrass was fed (Wilson, 1970). In a review of this subject Clark (1975) reported that pen studies showed post-ruminal supplementation with casein increased milk production from 1 to 4 kg/day. The result with ryegrass in the absence of an energy supplement is therefore unexpected and warrants further study.

Type
Short Note
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 96 , Issue 1 , February 1981 , pp. 239 - 241
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

REFERENCES

Agricultural Development and Advisory Service (1976). Nutrient allowances and composition of foedingstuffs for ruminants. Advisory Paper No. 11. Agricultural Development and Advisory Service, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London, 2nd edn.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council (1965). The nutrient requirements of farm livestock No. 2. Ruminants. Technical Reviews and Summaries. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Clark, J. H. (1975). Lactational responses to postruminal administration of proteins and amino acids. Journal of Dairy Science 58, 1178–1197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferguson, K. A., Hemsley, J. A. & Reis, P. J. (1967). Nutrition and wool growth. The effect of protecting dietary protein from miorobial degradation in the rumen. Australian Journal of Science and Technology 30, 215–217.Google Scholar
Flores, J. F., Stobbs, T. H. & Minson, D. J. (1979). The influence of the legume Leucaena leucocephala and formal-casein on the production and composition of milk from grazing cows. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, M. J., Schultz, L. H. & Baumgardt, B. R. (1963). The effect of intraruminal infusion of volatile fatty acids and lactic acid on voluntary hay intake. Journal of Dairy Science 46, 1380–1384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (1978). Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. Fifth revised edition.Google Scholar
Stobbs, T. H., Minson, D. J. & McLeod, M. N. (1977). The response of dairy cows grazing a nitrogen fertilized grass pasture to a supplement of protected casein. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 89, 137–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, G. F. (1970). The influence of protein supplements on milk yield and composition. Proceedings New Zealand Society Animal Production 30, 123–127.Google Scholar