Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Influence of Fiber Content and Concentrate Level on Chewing Activity, Ruminal Digestion, Digesta Passage Rate and Nutrient Digestibility in Dairy Cows in Late Lactation

  • Tafaj, M. (University of Hohenheim, Institute of Animal Nutrition) ;
  • Kolaneci, V. (University of Hohenheim, Institute of Animal Nutrition) ;
  • Junck, B. (University of Hohenheim, Institute of Animal Nutrition) ;
  • Maulbetsch, A. (University of Hohenheim, Institute of Animal Nutrition) ;
  • Steingass, H. (University of Hohenheim, Institute of Animal Nutrition) ;
  • Drochner, W. (University of Hohenheim, Institute of Animal Nutrition)
  • Received : 2004.09.22
  • Accepted : 2005.03.14
  • Published : 2005.08.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The influence of fiber content of hay (low-fiber 47% NDF and high-fiber 62% NDF of DM) and concentrate level (high 50% and low 20% of ration DM) on chewing activity, passage rate and nutrient digestibility were tested on four restrict-fed (11.1 to 13.7 kg DM/d) Holstein cows in late lactation. Aspects of ruminal fermentation and digesta particle size distribution were also investigated on two ruminally cannulated (100 mm i.d.) cows of the same group of animals. All digestion parameters studied were more affected by the fiber content of the hay and its ratio to non structural carbohydrates than by the concentrate level. Giving a diet of high-fiber (62% NDF) hay and low concentrate level (20%) increased chewing activity but decreased solid passage rate and total digestibility of nutrients due to a limited availability of fermentable OM in the late cut fiber rich hay. A supplementation of high-fiber hay with 50% concentrate in the diet seems to improve the ruminal digestion of cell contents, whilst a depression of the ruminal fiber digestibility was not completely avoided. Giving a diet of low-fiber (47% NDF) hay and high concentrate level (50%) reduced markedly the chewing and rumination activity, affected negatively the rumen conditions and, consequently, the ruminal digestion of fiber. A reduction of the concentrate level from 50 to 20% in the diet of low-fiber hay improved the rumen conditions as reflected by an increase of the ruminal solid passage rate and of fiber digestibility and in a decrease of the concentration of large particles and of the mean particle size of the rumen digesta and of the faeces. Generally, it can be summarised that, (i) concentrate supplementation is not a strategy to overcome limitations of low quality (fiber-rich) hay, and (ii) increase of the roughage quality is an effective strategy in ruminant nutrition, especially when concentrate availability for ruminants is limited.

Keywords

References

  1. Allen, M. S. 1997. Relationship between fermentation acid production in the rumen and the requirement for physically effective fiber. J. Dairy Sci. 80:1447-1462. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76074-0
  2. Bwire, J. M. N. and H. Wiktorsson. 2003. Effect of supplementary feeding strategies on the performance of stall fed dual-purpose dairy cows fed grass hay-based diets. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 16(3):359-367.
  3. Beauchemin, K. A. 1991. Ingestion and mastication of feed by dairy cattle. Vet. Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice, 7(2):439-463.
  4. Choi, Y. J., S. S. Lee, J. Y. Song, N. J. Choi, H. G. Sung, S. G. Yun and J. K. Ha. 2003. Effects of dietary acidogenicity values on rumen fermentation characteristics and nutrients digestibility. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 16(11):1625-1633.
  5. Fisher, D. S., J. C. Burns and K. R. Pond. 1988. Estimation of mean and median particle size of ruminant digesta. J. Dairy Sci. 71:518-524.
  6. Gabel, G. 2000. S$\"{a}$ure-Basen-Haushalt. In Physiologie der Haustiere. (Ed. W. V. Engelhardt and G. Breves), Enke im Hippokrates Verlag GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany, pp. 295-302.
  7. Hoover, W. H. 1986. Chemical factors involved in ruminal fiber digestion. J. Dairy Sci. 69:2755-2767. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(86)80724-X
  8. Kaufmann, W. and H. Hagemeister. 1969. Das Puffersystem in den Vorm$\"{a}$gen von Rindern. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 25:157-168.
  9. Kennedy, P. M. and P. T. Doyle. 1993. Particle-size reduction by ruminants – Effects of cell wall composition and structure. In Forage cell wall structure and digestibility. (Ed. H. G. Jung, D. R. Buxton, R. D. Hatfield and J. Ralph), Madison, Wisconsin, USA, pp. 499-534.
  10. Khazaal, K., M. T. Dentinho, J. M. Ribeiro and E. R. Orskov. 1993. A comparison of gas production during incubation with rumen contents in vitro and nylon bag degradability as predictors of the apparent digestibility in vivo and the voluntary intake of hays. Anim. Prod. 57:105-112.
  11. Krause, D. O. and A. N. Pell. 2003. Plant cell wall degradation in the rumen: ecology, constraints to digestion and modelling. In Matching herbivore nutrition to ecosystems biodiversity. Mannetje, L.’t, L. Ramirez-Aviles, (Ed. C. A. Sandoval-Castro and J. C. Ku-Vera). Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores. Universidad Autonoma de Yucatan, Mexico, pp. 129-150.
  12. Krause, K. M., D. K. Combs and K. A. Beauchemin. 2002. Effects of forage particle size and grain fermentability in midlactation cows. II. Ruminal pH and chewing activity. J. Dairy Sci. 85:1947-1957.
  13. Lechner-Doll, M. and W. von Engelhardt. 1989. Particle size and passage from the forestomach in camels compared to cattle and sheep fed similar diet. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 61:120-128.
  14. Littell, R. C., P. R. Henry and C. B. Ammerman. 1998. Statistical analysis of repeated measures data using SAS procedures. J. Anim. Sci. 76:1216-1231.
  15. Mambrini, M. and J. L. Peyraud. 1997. Retention time of feed particles and liquids in the stomachs and intestines of dairy cows; direct measurement and calculations based on faecal collection. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 37:427-442.
  16. McLeod, M. N. and D. J. Minson. 1988. Large particle breakdown by cattle eating ryegrass and alfalfa. J. Anim. Sci. 66:992-999.
  17. Mertens, D. R. 1997. Creating a system for meeting the fiber requirements of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 80:1463-1481. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(97)76075-2
  18. Moon, Y. H., S. C. Lee and S. S. Lee. 2004. Effects of neutral detergent fiber concentration and particle size of the diet on chewing activities of dairy cows. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 17(11):1535-1540.
  19. Moore, J. A., K. R. Pond, M. N. Poore and T. G. Goodwin. 1992. Influence of model and marker on digesta kinetic estimates for sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 70:3528-3540.
  20. Mould, F. L., E. R. Orskov and S. O. Mann. 1983. Associative effects of mixed feeds. I. Effects of type and level of supplementation and the influence of the rumen fluid pH on cellolysis in vivo and dry matter digestion on various roughages. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 10:15-30.
  21. Offer, N. W. and J. Dixon. 2000. Factors affecting outflow rate from the reticulo-rumen. Nutr. Abstr. Rev., Series B: Livestock Feeds and Feeding, 70:833-844.
  22. Okine, E. K., G. W. Mathison, M. Kaske, J. J. Kenelly and R. J. Christopherson. 1998. Current understanding of the role of the reticulum and reticulo-omasal orifice in the control of digesta passage from the ruminoreticulum of sheep and cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 78:15-21.
  23. Poppi, D. P., W. C. Ellis, J. H. Matis and C. E. Lascano. 2001. Marker concentration patterns of labelled leaf and stem particles in the rumne of cattle grazing bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon) analysed by reference to a raft model. Br. J. Nutr. 85:353-563.
  24. Robinson, P. H. and R. E. McQueen. 1997. Influence of level of concentrate allocation and fermentability of forage fiber on chewing behaviour and production of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 80:681-691.
  25. SAS. 2001. SAS/STAT, Release 8.2. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC.
  26. Susenbeth, A., T. Dickel, K. -H. Sudekum, W. Drochner and H. Steingass. 2004. Energy requirements of cattle for standing and for ingestion, estimated by a ruminal emptying technique. J. Anim. Sci. 82:129-136.
  27. Tafaj, M., B. Junck, A. Maulbetsch, H. SteingaB and W. Drochner. 2001. Research Note: A method for studying of local differences in ruminal fermentation in dairy cattle. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 54:341-347.
  28. Tamminga, S. 1993. Influence of feeding management on ruminant fibre digestibility. In Forage cell wall structure and digestibility. (Ed. H. G. Jung, D. R. Buxton, R. D. Hatfield and J. Ralph), Madison, Wisconsin, USA, pp. 571-602.
  29. Uden, P., P. E. Colucci and P. J. Van Soest. 1980. Investigation of chromium, cerium and cobalt as markers in digesta rate of passage studies. J. Sci. Food Agric. 31:625-632.
  30. Van Soest, P. J. 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. Second edition. Cornell University Press.
  31. Welch, J. G. 1982. Rumination, particle size and passage from the rumen. J. Anim. Sci. 54:885-894. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1982.544885x

Cited by

  1. Effects of Physically Effective Fiber on Digestive Processes and Milk Fat Content in Early Lactating Dairy Cows Fed Total Mixed Rations vol.89, pp.2, 2006, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72129-4
  2. Effects of Varying Dietary Forage Particle Size in Two Concentrate Levels on Chewing Activity, Ruminal Mat Characteristics, and Passage in Dairy Cows vol.90, pp.4, 2007, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-354
  3. Seasonal variation in rumination parameters of free-ranging impalas Aepyceros melampus vol.14, pp.3, 2008, https://doi.org/10.2981/0909-6396(2008)14[372:SVIRPO]2.0.CO;2
  4. Effects of different sources of forage in high-concentrate diets on fermentation parameters, ruminal biohydrogenation and microbiota in Nellore feedlot steers vol.154, pp.05, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859616000204
  5. Implications of feed concentrate reduction in organic grassland-based dairy systems: a long-term on-farm study vol.11, pp.11, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731117000830
  6. Effect of sugarcane fiber digestibility, conservation method and concentrate level on the ruminal ecosystem of beef cattle vol.7, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-017-0356-7
  7. Effects of the replacement of concentrate and fibre-rich hay by high-quality hay on chewing, rumination and nutrient digestibility in non-lactating Holstein cows vol.71, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/1745039X.2016.1253227
  8. Invited review: Practical feeding management recommendations to mitigate the risk of subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy cattle pp.00220302, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13191
  9. Effects of the dietary nonfiber carbohydrate content on lactation performance, rumen fermentation, and nitrogen utilization in mid-lactation dairy cows receiving corn stover vol.9, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-018-0239-z
  10. Effects of fibre concentration of diets consisting of hay and slowly degradable concentrate on ruminal fermentation and digesta particle size in mid-lactation dairy cows vol.60, pp.3, 2005, https://doi.org/10.1080/17450390600679322
  11. Influence of Level of Feed Intake on Concentration of Purine Derivatives in Urinary Spot Samples and Microbial Nitrogen Supply in Crossbred Bulls vol.19, pp.9, 2005, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2006.1291
  12. Gelatinized Carbohydrates in the Diet of Catla catla Fingerlings: Effect of Levels and Sources on Nutrient Utilization, Body Composition and Tissue Enzyme Activities vol.20, pp.1, 2007, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2007.89
  13. Effects of Rice Straw Particle Size on Chewing Activity, Feed Intake, Rumen Fermentation and Digestion in Goats vol.22, pp.9, 2005, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2009.80672
  14. Productive Performance of Lactating Buffaloes Fed Ration Containing Date Seed and Fibrolytic Enzymes vol.19, pp.3, 2005, https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2019.241.246
  15. Meta-analysis of rumination behavior and its relationship with milk and milk fat production, rumen pH, and total-tract digestibility in lactating dairy cows vol.105, pp.1, 2005, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-20535