Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:51:31.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The relationship between in vitro digestible cell wall and the cell-wall content of forage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

K. W. Moir
Affiliation:
Animal Research Institute, Department of Primary Industries, Yeerongpilly, Brisbane, Australia

Summary

In oven-dried whole plants from three regrowths of four varieties of Panicum maximum, leaf and stem of normal and stunted oats at three stages of first growth, leaf and stem of rape and the whole plant of millet, cell wall ranged from 14 to 77% of the organic matter. In vitro digestible cell wall ranged from 13 to 46% of the organic matter and was closely related to the cell wall (residual standard deviation, ± 2·5). In 16 legume hays the average in vitro digestible cell wall was 22·1% of the forage organic matter compared with an average value of 20·5% found previously from in vivo digestibility experiments with legumes. An unsatisfactory feature of the in vitro digestibility determination was that in silages and low quality grass hays, the digestible cell wall was low relative to known in vivo values for these forage types. The separate determinations of cell wall and in vitro digestible cell wall would add to the confidence that can be placed on estimates of in vivo digestibility from laboratory measurements. Often, the determination of cell-wall content is sufficient for this purpose.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

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

Brown, D. D. & Radcliffe, J. C. (1971). Prediction of in vivo dry matter, organic matter, and energy digestibilities of silage by in vitro digestion techniques. Aust. J. agric. Res. 22, 787–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, M. N. & Minson, D. J. (1969). Sources of variation in the in vitro digestibility of tropical grasses. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 24, 244–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minson, D. J. (1963). Methods of assessing herbage feeding value. Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 23, 6378.Google Scholar
Minson, D. J. (1971). The place of chemistry in pasture evaluation. Proc. B. Aust. chem. Inst. 38, 141–5.Google Scholar
Minson, D. J. & McLeod, M. N. (1972). The in vitro technique: Its modification for estimating digestibility of large numbers of tropical pasture samples. Div. of Tropical Pastures, Tech. Paper No. 8, C.S.I.R.O., Aust.Google Scholar
Moir, K. W. (1971). In vivo and in vitro digestible fractions in forage. J. Sci. Fd Agric. 22, 338–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mora, K. W. (1972). An assessment of the quality of forage from its cell-wall content and amount of cell wall digested. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 78, 355–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, J. G. & Levitt, M. S. (1968). The intake and digestibility of silages made from Dolichos lablabL. alone and with Sorghum cv. Sugardrip. Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 7, 7885.Google Scholar
Raymond, W. F. (1969). In Advances in Agronomy (ed. Brady, N.C.). Cornell University, Ithaca, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. & Terry, R. A. (1963). A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 18, 104–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Soest, P. J., Wine, R. H. & Moore, L.A. (1966). Estimation of the true digestibility of forages by the in vitro digestion of cell walls. Proc. X int. Grassld Congr., pp. 438–41.Google Scholar