Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:41:06.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Magnesium metabolism in the dairy cow V. Experimental observations with a purified diet low in magnesium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. E. Storry  and
J. A. F. Rook
J. E. Storry
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, near Reading
J. A. F. Rook
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, near Reading
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. An artificial diet low in magnesium (0·01–0·02% of the dry matter), and providing about 0·5 g. magnesium daily, was prepared from paper pulp, maize gluten, magnesium-free minerals and vitamins A and D and used in experimental studies with two non-lactating cows.

2. The omission of a dietary supplement of magnesium oxide (5 g./day) caused a rapid fall in the excretion of magnesium in the urine, from values of 1–2 g./day to virtually zero within about 4 days. There was a similar rapid fall in the concentration of magnesium in the serum, from about 2·7 to 2·0 mg./lOO ml., and then a slow fall to between 1·0 and 1·5 mg./lOO ml. after 12 days. Faecal excretion of magnesium was also reduced but the faecal loss continued at about 1·0 g./day after 2–3 days on the low magnesium diet.

3. The availability of the magnesium of various salts was determined by giving them as supplements to the basal diet and measuring the increase in the excretion of magnesium in the urine. The mean value was 26·2% in one cow and 34·5% in the other, a highly significant difference (P < 0·01). The availabilities of the oxide, nitrate, acetate and lactate were similar, but the citrate gave a higher value and the sulphate, silicate and, in one cow, the chloride a lower value.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 61 , Issue 2 , October 1963 , pp. 167 - 171
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

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

Balch, C. C., Bartlett, S. & Johnson, V. W. (1951). J. Agric. Sci. 41, 98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, E. S., Elkinton, J. R. & Clark, J. K. (1959). J. Clin. Invest. 38, 1733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. & Mcgill, R. F. (1956). Vet. Rev. & Annot. 2, 35.Google Scholar
Hawk, P. B., Oser, B. L. & Summerson, W. H. (1947). Practical Physiological Chemistry, 12th edn, p. 839. London: J. & A. Churchill Ltd.Google Scholar
Huffman, C. F., Conley, C. L., Llghtfoot, C. C. & Duncan, C. W. (1941). J. Nutr. 22, 609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rook, J. A. F., Balch, C. C. & Line, C. (1958). J. Agric. Sci. 51, 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simesen, M. G., Lunaas, T., Rogers, T. A. & Luick, J. R. (1962). Acta. vet. scand. 3, 175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, A. A. (1960). Vet. Rev. & Annot. 6, 39.Google Scholar