Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T17:54:28.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The indirect estimation of the digestibility of pasture herbage. IV. Regressions of digestibility on faecal nitrogen concentration: effects of different fractions of the herbage upon within- and between-period regressions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. F. D. Greenhalgh ,
G. W. Reid  and
I. McDonald
J. F. D. Greenhalgh
Affiliation:
Rotvett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen
G. W. Reid
Affiliation:
Rotvett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen
I. McDonald
Affiliation:
Rotvett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. In each of 6 digestibility trials, comprising a total of 21 measurement periods of 3-4 days, two steers were fed on herbage cut from the top of the sward, two on the remaining bottom growth and two on a mixture of equal parts of these fractions. Within each period the fractions were similar in digestibility although the top growth had a higher content of nitrogen.

2. The trials were divided into three groups, according to time of year, for the purpose of calculating regressions of digestibility on faecal nitrogen concentration. Regressions calculated in the usual manner on a between-period basis (i.e. within animals) had constant terms which differed significantly among animals but not from one fraction of the herbage to another.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 66 , Issue 2 , April 1966 , pp. 277 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

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

Arnold, G. W. (1962). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 13, 701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, T. A., Richabds, C. R., Haenlein, G. F. W. & Weaver, H. G. (1960). J. Dairy Sci. 43, 958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. & Corbett, J. L. (1960). J. Agric. Sci. 55, 371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D., Corbett, J. L. & McDonald, I. (1960). J. Agric. Sci. 55, 377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. & Reid, G. W. (1965). Anim. Prod. (Abstr.), 7, 287.Google Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. & Rtjncie, K. V. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 59, 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gbeenhalgh, J. F. D. & Runcie, K. V. (1964). Anim. Prod. (Abslr.), 6, 260.Google Scholar
Hardison, W. A., Reid, J. T., Martin, C. M. & Woohtolk, P. G. (1954). J. Dairy Sci. 37, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardison, W. A., Linkous, W. N. & Ward, C. Y. (1957). J. Dairy Sci. 40, 768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambourne, L. J. & Reardon, T. F. (1962). Nature, Lond., 196, 961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambourne, L. J. & Reardon, T. F. (1963). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 14, 239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlands, J. P., Corbett, J. L. & McDonald, I. (1963). J. Agric. Sci. 61, 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. H., Lofgreen, G. P. & Hull, J. L. (1957). J. Anim. Sci. 16, 766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearce, G. R., Vercoe, J. E. & Freer, M. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 59, 397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearce, G. R., Vercoe, J. E. & Tribe, D. E. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 59, 349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tayler, J. C. & Rudman, J. E. (1964). Exps Prog. Grassld Res. Inst. 16, 90.Google Scholar
Terry, R. A. & Tilley, J. M. A. (1964). J. Br. Grassld Soc. 19, 363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A., Terry, R. A. & Deriaz, R. E. (1961). Exps Prog. Grassld Res. Inst. 13, 75.Google Scholar
Vercoe, J. E., Pearce, G. R. & Tribe, D. E. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 59, 343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar