Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:13:22.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of food intake and production in grazing ewes Part I. The measurement of food intake

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. B. Owen  and
Jean W. Ingleton
J. B. Owen
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, U.C.W., Aberystwyth
Jean W. Ingleton
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, U.C.W., Aberystwyth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The problems involved in estimating the food intake of the grazing animal are considered and an account is given of studies made on eighteen Clun ewes and six Hampshire × Clun wethers. Results are given from sixty-eight observations on the relationship between food intake and a fraction dissolved in the faeces when a milled sample is left to stand in 0·2N-HCl for 18 hr. Using, in addition, data from grazing ewes subjected to total faeces collection during winter and spring 1959–60 it is concluded that 4 consecutive days of collection give a reasonable estimate of faecal output, and that where similar groups of sheep are grazing on the same pasture at the same time it is unnecessary to convert faeces output data to intake figures in order to compare intake-production relationships between individuals within a group. Where, however, comparisons are to be made between individuals or groups of sheep grazing different pastures at different times then it becomes necessary to allow for differences in food-faeces ratios; for this purpose the dissolved fraction discussed here is likely to prove a useful faecal indicator eliminating many disadvantages of earlier methods and some of the seasonal bias inherent in other indicators at present in use.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 61 , Issue 2 , October 1963 , pp. 267 - 274
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

Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. & Wainman, F. W. (1956). Brit. J. Nutr. 10, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. & Wilson, R. S. (1961). Anim. Prod. 3, part 1.Google Scholar
Corbett, J. (1960). Proc. 8th Int. Grassl. Congr.Google Scholar
Gaerigus, W. P. (1934). Proc. Amer. Soc. Anim. Prod.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, K. J. (1958). Aust. J. Agrio. Res. 9, no. 4.Google Scholar
Lancaster, R. J. (1949). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 31, no. 1.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. (1962). Personal communication.Google Scholar
Minson, D. J. & Kemp, C. D. (1961). J. Brit. Grass. Soc. 16, no. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. (1926). Bull. Nat. Res. Counc. No. 55.Google Scholar
Owen, J. B. & Ingleton, J. W. (1961). Anim. Prod. 3, part 1.Google Scholar
Raymond, W. F. (1948). Nature, Lond., 161, 938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, W. F., Harris, C. E. & Harker, V. G. (1953). J. Brit. Grass. Soc. 8, no. 4.Google Scholar
Raymond, W. F., Minson, D. J. & Harris, C. E. (1959). J. Brit. Grass. Soc. 14, no. 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shellenbubger, P. R. & Kesler, E. M. (1961). J. Anim. Sci. 120, no. 3.Google Scholar