Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T23:27:52.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of leaf shear breaking load on the feeding value of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) for sheep

I. Effects on leaf anatomy and morphology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

T. Inoué ,
I. M. Brookes ,
A. John ,
W. F. Hunt  and
T. N. Barry
T. Inoué
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
I. M. Brookes
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
A. John
Affiliation:
Ag Research, Grasslands Research Centre, Palmerston North, New Zealand
W. F. Hunt
Affiliation:
Ag Research, Grasslands Research Centre, Palmerston North, New Zealand
T. N. Barry
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Two populations of perennial ryegrass (PRG) (Lolium perenne L.) were selected for low (LS) and high leaf shear breaking load (HS) in 1984 at DSIR, Palmerston North. Leaf shear breaking load for the LS group was c. 41% lower than for the HS group and the LS selection had significantly shorter, narrower leaves and smaller leaf cross-sectional areas than the HS selection. LS leaves were c. 27% less resistant to shear than HS leaves per unit of cross-sectional area. The lower leaf shear strength in the LS selection was associated with a significantly lower concentration of sclerenchyma tissues in the leaf cross-sectional area compared with the HS selection. The total shear load required to break down the same dry weight of leaves to 1 mm particle size (leaf index of masticatory load) was calculated and shown to be influenced by the differences in leaf morphology. LS leaves were estimated to have a 21% lower index of masticatory load than HS leaves when both were grown under optimum climatic conditions.

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 123 , Issue 1 , August 1994 , pp. 129 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

Betteridge, G. P., Tallon, J. L., Staines, M. P., Buckley, R. G., Bryan, H. T. & Stevenson, I. C. (1986). An interim report on the tensile properties of four forage grasses. Internal Report, Physics and Engineering Laboratory, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Black, J. L., Faichney, G. J. & Sinclair, R. E. (1982). Role of computer simulation in overcoming limitations to animal production from pastures. In Nutritional Limits to Animal Production from Pastures (Ed. Hacker, J. B.), pp. 473–493. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Domingue, B. M. F., Dellow, D. W. & Barry, T. N. (1991). Voluntary intake and rumen digestion of a lowquality roughage by goats and sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 117, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easton, H. S. (1989). Variability of leaf shear strength in perennial ryegrass. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 32, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, P. S. (1964). A comparison of some aspects of the anatomy and morphology of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) and perennial ryegrass (L. perenne L.). New Zealand Journal of Botany 2, 120–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, P. S. (1967 a). Leaf strength studies of pasture grasses. 1. Apparatus, techniques and some factors affecting leaf strength. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 69, 171–174.Google Scholar
Evans, P. S. (1967 b). Leaf strength studies of pasture grasses. II. Strength, cellulose content and sclerenchyma tissue proportions of eight grasses grown as single plants. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 69, 175–181.Google Scholar
Hiiemae, K. M. (1978). Mammalian mastication: a review of the activity of the jaw muscles and the movements they produce in chewing. In Development, Function and Evolution of Teeth (Eds Butler, P. M. & Joysey, Y. K. A.), pp. 359–398. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, W. F. & Halligan, G. (1981). Growth and developmental responses of perennial ryegrass grown at constant temperature. I. Influence of light and temperature on growth and net assimilation. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 8, 181–190.Google Scholar
Hunt, W. F. & Thomas, V. J. (1985). Growth and developmental responses of perennial ryegrass grown at constant temperature. II. Influence of light and temperature on leaf, tiller and root appearance. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 12, 69–76.Google Scholar
Larmond, E. & Petrasovits, A. (1972). Relationship between Warner-Bratzler and sensory determinations of beef tenderness by the method of paired comparisons. Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology Journal 5, 138–144.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, B. W., Easton, H. S., Barry, T. N. & Sedcole, J. R. (1988). The effect of reduced leaf shear strength on the nutritive value of perennial ryegrass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 111, 469–474.Google Scholar
Mitchell, K. J. & Soper, K. (1958). Effects of differences in light intensity and temperature on the anatomy and development of leaves of Lolium perenne and Paspalum dilatatum. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 1, 1–16.Google Scholar
Murphy, T. (1959). The axis of the masticatory stroke in the sheep. Australian Dental Journal 4, 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neter, J. & Wasserman, W. (1974). Applied Linear Statistical Models: Regression, Analysis of Variance, and Experimental Designs, pp. 140–178. Homewood, Illinois: R. D. Irwin.Google Scholar
Pool, M. F. & Klose, A. A. (1969). The relation of force to sample dimensions in objective measurement of tenderness of poultry meat. Journal of Food Science 34, 524–526.Google Scholar
Poppi, D. P., Norton, B. W., Minson, D. J. & Hendricksen, R. E. (1980). The validity of the critical size theory for particles leaving the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 275–280.Google Scholar
Rae, A. L., Brougham, R. W. & Barton, R. A. (1964). A note on liveweight gains of sheep grazing different ryegrass pastures. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 491–495.Google Scholar
Rensberger, J. M. (1973). An occlusion model for mastication and dental wear in herbivorous mammals. Journal of Paleontology 47, 515–528.Google Scholar
Robertson, J. B. & van Soest, P. J. (1981). The detergent system of analyses and its application to human foods. In Basic and Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 3 (Eds James, W. P. T. & Theander, O.), pp. 123–158. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Sant, F. I. (1969). A comparison of the morphology and anatomy of seedling leaves of Lolium multiflorum Lam. and L. perenne L. Annals of Botany 33, 303–313.Google Scholar
Sas Institute (1985). SAS User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5 Edition. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Soper, K. & Mitchell, K. J. (1956). The developmental anatomy of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.). New Zealand Journal of Science and Technology 37, 484–504.Google Scholar
Thornton, R. F. & Minson, D. J. (1973). The relationship between apparent retention time in the rumen, voluntary intake, and apparent digestibility of legume and grass diets in sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 24, 889–898.Google Scholar
Turnbull, W. D. (1970). Mammalian masticatory apparatus. In Fieldiana: Geology Vol. 18. Chicago: Field Museum of National History.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J. (1981). The feeding value of herbage: Can't it be improved? New Zealand Agricultural Science 22, 200–205.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J. (1983). Plant fibre and regulation of digestion in the ruminant. In Fibre in Human and Animal Nutrition (Eds Wallace, G. & Bell, L.), pp. 103–107. Wellington: The Royal Society of New Zealand.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J., Dellow, D. W., John, A., Reid, C. S. W. & Waghorn, G. C. (1986). Contribution of chewing during eating and rumination to the clearance of digesta from the ruminoreticulum. In Control of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants (Eds Milligan, L. P., Grovum, W. L. & Dobson, A.), pp. 498–515. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Vincent, J. V. (1982). The mechanical design of grass. Journal of Material Science 17, 856–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voisey, P. W. (1976). Engineering assessment and critique of instruments used for meat tenderness evaluation. Journal of Textile Studies 7, 11–48.Google Scholar
Voisey, P. W. & Larmond, E. (1974). Examination of factors affecting performance of the Warner-Bratzler meat shear test. Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology Journal 7, 243–249.Google Scholar
Waghorn, G. C. & Barry, T. N. (1987). Pasture as a nutrient source. In Livestock Feeding on Pasture (Ed. Nicol, A. M.). Occasional publication no. 10, pp. 21–37. Hamilton: New Zealand Society of Animal Production.Google Scholar
Wilkins, R. J. (1972). The potential digestibility of cellulose in grasses and its relationship with chemical and anatomical parameters. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 78, 457–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. (1965). Nutritive value and the genetic relationships of cellulose content and leaf tensile strength in Lolium. Journal of Agricultural Science 65, 285–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar