Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T07:16:41.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ruminal degradation characteristics of some African rangeland grasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

P. J. O'Reagain ,
B. C. Goetsch  and
R. N. Owen-Smith
P. J. O'Reagain
Affiliation:
Döhne Agricultural Development Institute, Private Bag X15, Stutterheim 4930, South Africa
B. C. Goetsch
Affiliation:
Döhne Agricultural Development Institute, Private Bag X15, Stutterheim 4930, South Africa
R. N. Owen-Smith
Affiliation:
Centre for African Ecology, University of the Witwatersrand, PO Wits 2050, South Africa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The seasonal rate and extent of dry matter (DM) and neutral detergent fibre (NDF) degradation of the African sourveld grasses Alloteropsis semialata, Andropogon appendiculatus, Cynodon dactylon, Elionurus muticus, Eragrostis plana, Harpochloa falx, Heteropogon contortus, Hyparrhenia hirta, Microchloa caffra, Themeda triandra and Tristachya leucothrix in the rumen were measured using the nylon bag technique at the Döhne Agricultural Development Institute, South Africa, in 1993. The size of the soluble fraction (SF) was markedly different (P < 0·05) between species, being largest in A. semialata (22·6%) and smallest in E. plana (13%). Over all species, the mean SF was highest (P < 0·01) in spring (21·6%) and lowest in winter (11·8%). Species differed (P < 0·05) in the size of the potentially digestible fraction (PDF), with H. contortus and T. leucothrix having the largest (71%) and M. caffra the smallest (53%) PDF. Mean PDF declined (P < 0·01) from spring (77·3%) through to winter (55·8 %). The rate of DM degradation (kd) in the rumen also differed (P < 0·01) between species, with C. dactylon and A. semialata having the fastest (0·054) and E. plana and A. appendiculatus the slowest (0·039) degradation rates. Mean kd values were lower (P < 0·05) in winter (0·039) than in the other seasons (0·048).

Neutral detergent soluble (NDS) content was highest in A. semialata (29%) and lowest in E. plana (21·5%). Species similarly varied in the amount of potentially digestible cell wall (PDCW), with E. plana having the highest (57%) and C. dactylon the lowest (45·1%) PDCW content. Mean PDCW content was highest in spring (59·5 %) and lowest in winter (44·6%). Cell wall degradation (kc) rates were fastest (0·04) in C. dactylon and slowest in M. caffra (0·03). Overall, kc declined from spring (0·039) through to winter (0·029). In general, A. semialata, T. triandra and H. hirta appeared to have the most favourable, and E. plana, A. appendiculatusand M. caffra the least favourable, ruminal degradation characteristics. These differences suggest that species composition is likely to have a major impact on potential animal production on these low quality grasslands.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 125 , Issue 2 , October 1995 , pp. 189 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

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

Acocks, J. P. H. (1988). Veld types of South Africa. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 57. Pretoria: Government Printer.Google Scholar
Akin, D. E. (1989). Histological and physical factors affecting digestibility of forages. Agronomy Journal 81, 17–25.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. P. (1977). Distribution of the Kranz syndrome in the Southern African Eragrostoideae and Panicoideae according to bundle sheath anatomy and cytology. Agroplantae 9, 73–110.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. P. (1990). Tannin-like substances in grass leaves. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 59. National Botanic Gardens, South Africa.Google Scholar
Emlen, J. M. (1966). The role of time and energy in food preference. American Naturalist 100, 611–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, P. S. (1964). A study of leaf strength in four ryegrass varieties. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 508–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs Russell, G. E., Watson, L., Koekemoer, M., Smook, L., Barber, N. P., Anderson, H. M. & Dalling, M. J. (1990). Grasses of Southern Africa. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 58. National Botanic Gardens, South Africa.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage Fiber Analysis. United States Department of Agriculture No. 379.Google Scholar
Grabber, J. H. & Allinson, D. W. (1992). Anatomical structure and digestiblility of reed canarygrass cultivars and hybrid ryegrass. Grass and Forage Science 47, 400–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, N. McC. & Williams, A. J. (1962). The effects of pregnancy on the passage of food through the digestive tract of sheep. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 13, 894–900.Google Scholar
Hoffman, P. C., Sievert, S. J., Shaver, R. D., Welch, D. A. & Combs, D. K. (1993). In situ dry matter, protein, and fiber degradation of perennial forages. Journal of Dairy Science 76, 2632–2643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoover, W. H. (1986). Chemical factors involved in ruminal fiber digestion. Journal of Dairy Science 69, 2755–2766.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inoué, T., Brookes, I. M., Barry, T. N. & John, A. (1989). Effects of selection for shear strength on the voluntary intake and digestion of perennial ryegrass fed to sheep. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 49, 221–224.Google Scholar
Lentz, E. M. & Buxton, D. R. (1992). Digestion kinetics of orchardgrass as influenced by leaf morphology, fineness of grind, and maturity group. Crop Science 32, 482–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masaoka, Y., Wilson, J. R. & Hacker, J. B. (1991). Selecting for nutritive value in Digitaria milanjiana. 3. Relation of chemical composition and morphological and anatomical charcteristics to the difference in digestibility of divergently selected full sibs, and comparison with D. eriantha ssp. pentzii (pangola grass). Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 31, 631–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mertens, D. R. & Ely, L. O. (1982). Relationship of rate and extent of digestion to forage utilization — a dynamic model evaluation. Journal of Animal Science 54, 895–905.Google Scholar
Minson, D. J. (1984). Digestibility and voluntary intake by sheep of five Digitaria species. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 24, 494–500.Google Scholar
Norton, B. W. (1981). Differences between species in forage quality. In Nutritional Limits to Animal Production from Pastures (Ed. Hacker, J. B.), pp. 89–110. Proceedings of an International Symposium held at St Lucia, Queensland, Australia. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Oellermann, R. A. (1965). The nutritive value of Themeda triandra. III. Seasonal variations in forage quality as determined by different criteria. South African Journal of Agricultural Science 8, 607–620.Google Scholar
Opperman, D. P. J., Roberts, B. R. & Nel, L. O. (1974). Elyonurus argenteus Nees — a review. Proceedings of the Grassland Society of Southern Africa 9, 123–131.Google Scholar
O'Reagain, P. J. (1989). The effect of veld condition on diet selection by cattle. MSc thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.Google Scholar
O'Reagain, P. J. (1993). Plant structure and the acceptability of different grasses to sheep. Journal of Range Management 46, 232–236.Google Scholar
O'Reagain, P. J. (1994). The effect of sward structure and species composition on dietary quality and intake in cattle and sheep grazing the Döhne Sourveld. PhD thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & McDonald, I. (1979). The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen-Smith, N. & Novellie, P. (1982). What should a clever ungulate eat? American Naturalist 119, 151–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pienaar, J. P., Roux, C. Z. & Cronjé, P. B. (1989). Comparison of in vivo and in sacco methods to estimate mean retention time of fermentable organic matter in the rumen. South African Journal of Animal Science 19, 71–75.Google Scholar
Pond, K. R., Ellis, W. C. & Akin, D. E. (1984). Ingestive mastication and fragmentation of forages. Journal of Animal Science 58, 1567–1574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppi, D. P., Minson, D. J. & Ternouth, J. H. (1981 a). Studies of cattle and sheep eating leaf and stem fractions of grasses. I. The voluntary intake, digestibility and rentention time in the reticulo-rumen. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 32, 99–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppi, D. P., Minson, D. J. & Ternouth, J. H. (1981 b). Studies of cattle and sheep eating leaf and stem fractions of grasses. II. Factors controlling the retention of feed in the reticulo-rumen. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 32, 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L. W., Goering, H. K., Waldo, D. R. & Gordon, C. H. (1971). In vitro digestion rate of forage cell wall components. Journal of Dairy Science 54, 71–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spalinger, D. E., Robbins, C. T. & Hanley, T. A. (1986). The assessment of handling time in ruminants: the effect of plant chemical and physical structure on the rate of breakdown of plant particles in the rumen of mule, deer and elk. Canadian Journal of Zoology 64, 312–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute (1991). SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computers, Release 6.03 (6th Edition). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Stoltsz, C. W. & Danckwerts, J. E. (1990). Grass species selection patterns on rotationally-grazed Döhne Sourveld during autumn and early winter. Journal of the Grassland Society of Southern Africa 7, 92–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tainton, N. M. (1981). The ecology of the main grazing lands of South Africa. In Veld and Pasture Management in South Africa (Ed. Tainton, N. M.), pp. 25–55. Pietermaritzburg: Shuter & Shooter.Google Scholar
Theron, E. P. (1966). A study of certain chemical and physical properties of ten indigenous grasses and their relationship to animal preference. PhD thesis, University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg.Google Scholar
Van Schalkwyk, A., Lombard, P. E. & Vorster, L. F. (1968). Evaluation of the nutritive value of a Themeda triandra pasture in the central Orange Free State. IV. Digestibility. South African Journal of Agricultural Science 11, 679–686.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. & Jones, L. H. P. (1968). Effect of silica in forages upon digestibility. Journal of Dairy Science 51, 1644–1648.Google Scholar
Verlinden, C. & Wiley, R. H. (1989). The constraints of digestive rate: an alternative model of diet selection. Evolutionary Ecology 3, 264–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viljoen, L. & Roberts, B. R. (1968). Development of lignin in Themeda triandra, Cymbopogon plurinodis and Eragrostis lehmanniana. Proceedings of the Grassland Society of Southern Africa 3, 101–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinmann, H. (1940). Seasonal chemical changes in the roots of some South African highveld grasses. Journal of South African Botany 2, 131–145.Google Scholar
Weinmann, H. (1942). On the autumnal remigration of nitrogen and phosphorus in Trachpogon plumosus. Journal of South African Botany 8, 179–196.Google 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
Wilson, J. R., Anderson, K. L. & Hacker, J. B. (1989). Dry matter digestibility in vitroof leaf and stem of buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris) and related species and its relation to plant morphology and anatomy. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 40, 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar