한국초지조사료학회지 (Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science)

  • 제22권3호
  • /
  • Pages.177-186
  • /
  • 2002
  • /
  • 2287-5824(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-5832(eISSN)
한국초지조사료학회 (The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

육림부산물 발효사료 급여 꽃사슴에 있어서 채식기호성, 소화율 및 채식행동에 관한 연구

Study on the Palatability, Digestibility and Feeding Behavior in Spotted Deer (Cervus nippon) Fed Forest by-product Silage

  • 전병태 (건국대학교 한국녹용연구센터) ;
  • 문상호 (건국대학교 한국녹용연구센터) ;
  • 이상무 (건국대학교 한국녹용연구센터) ;
  • 권영재 (대전충남양돈협동조합)
  • 발행 : 2002.09.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 실험은 꽃사슴에 있어서 육림부산물 발효 사료 급여에 따른 체내 이용성과 행동양식을 시판 완전혼합사료와의 비교를 통해 육림부산물에 대한 사슴사료로서의 적합성을 검토하기 위해 실시하였고 그 결과는 다음과 같다. 1. 건물채식량은 숫성록의 경우 CMR구와 FPS구가 거의 비슷한 수준을 유지하였고, 육성록의 경우 FPS구가 약간 낮았다. 2. 소화율은 CMR구의 경우 개체별로 평균 76.7%의 높은 건물 소화율을 나타냈으며 FPS구의 경우에도 CMR구에 비해서는 낮은 소화율을 나타냈으나 평균 65.5%의 건물소화율로서 비교적 높은 체내이용성을 보였다. 3. 질소출납 실험에서 섭취질소에 대한 축적질소의 비율은 FPS구가 48.3%, CMR구가 41.3%로 FPS구가 더 높은 효율을 나타냈다. 4. 채식시간은 하루 중 CMR구가 127분이었고 FPS구가 216분, 반추시간은 CMR구가 154분과 FPS구가 197분을 소비하여 FPS를 급여한 사슴들이 채식시간과 반추시간이 더 길었다. 5. 사슴의 24시간동안 채식 및 반추 휴식 등의 행동에서는 CMR구와 FPS구 모두 짧고 잦은 빈도의 전형적인 사슴의 행동양식을 나타냈다. 이상의 결과로 볼 때 육림부산물 발효사료는 사슴에 있어서 높은 체내이용성을 나타내어 사슴용 사료로서 충분한 가치가 있다고 평가된다.

This experiment was conducted to examine possibility and suitability of forest by-product as a roughage source of deer. As a experimental diet, forest by-product silage(FPS) and commercial mixed ration(CMR) were prepared to compare dry matter intake, digestibility, nitrogen balance and feeding behavior in feeding trials with spotted deer. The digestibility of dry matter was higher(P<0.05) in CMR than in FPS. The digestibility of crude protein was higher in CMR than in FPS and there was significant difference(P＜0.05). CMR had more digestibility of crude fiber than FBS but the difference was not significant. Dry matter intake were similar in both diets. Digestible dry matter intake was higher in CMR than FPS, however, there was no significant difference between experimental diets. Nitrogen intake, urinary and digestible nitrogen were significantly higher(P<0.05) in CMR than FPS. The efficiency of nitorgen utilization was higher for FPS than for CMR. Feeding behavior were similar in FPS and CMR. Consequently. It would be expected that FPS that composed with various feed sources can be used as a good roughage source of deer. Because it has high digestibility, dry matter intake and internal availability of nitrogen.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis(15th ed.). Association of official analytical chemists. Washington, D. C., U.S.A.
  2. Balch, C. C. and R. C. Campling. 1962. Regulation of voluntary food intake in ruminants. Nutri. Abst. Rev. 32: 669-686
  3. Blaxter, K. L., F. W. Wainman and R. S. Wilson. 1961. The regulation of food intake by sheep. Anim. Prod. 3: 51-61 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100033766
  4. Crawford, H. S. 1982. Seasonal food selection and digestibility by tame white-tailed deer in central Maine. J. Wildl. Manag. 46: 974-982 https://doi.org/10.2307/3808230
  5. Currie, P. O., D. W. Reichert, J. C. Malechek and O. C. Wallmo, 1977. Forage selection comparisons for mule deer and cattle under managed ponderosa pine. J. Range Manag. 30: 352-356 https://doi.org/10.2307/3897720
  6. Forbes, T. J. and N. Jackson. 1971. A study of the utilization of silages of different dry-matter content by young beef cattle with or without supplementary barley. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 26: 257-264 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1971.tb00673.x
  7. Forbes, J. M. 1986. The voluntary food intake of farm animals. Butterworth & Co. Ltd. London
  8. Freer, M. and R. C. Campling, 1965. Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by cows.7.The behavior and reticular motility 9of cows given diets of hay, dried grass, concentrates and ground, pelleted hay. Brit. J. Nutr. 19: 195 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19650020
  9. Griffiths, T.W.1984. studies on the protein requirements of growing cattle: effects of differing intakes of proteins and energy on growth and nitrogen metabolism in young entire males. Br. J. Nutr. 51: 133 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19840015
  10. Harumoto, T. and Kato, M. 1979. Effect of different amounts of hay intake on the ruminating behavior in sheep. Jap. J. Zootech. Sci. 50:155
  11. Henke, S. E., S. Demarais and J. A. Pfister. 1988. Digestive capacity and diets of white-tailed deer and exotic ruminants. J. Wildl. Manage. 52: 595-598 https://doi.org/10.2307/3800913
  12. Hofmann, R. R. 1988. Aspects of digestive physiology in ruminants. Comstock Publishing Associates. pp. 1-20
  13. Kay, R. N. B. and E. D Goodall, 1976. The intake, digestibility and retention time of roughage diets by red deer(Cervus claphus) and sheep. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 36: 98A
  14. Milne, J. A., J. A. MacRae, A. M. Spence and S. Wilson, 1978. A comparison of the voluntary intake digestion of the forages at different times of the year by the sheep and the red deer(Cervus claphus). British Journal of Nutrition 40: 347 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19780131
  15. McLeod, M. N. 1986. Physical and biological factors controling the reduction of feed particles in the ruminant. ph. D. Dissertation. Univ. of Queensland, St. Lucia, Aust
  16. Pelletier, G., J. C. Stpierre and J. E. Comeau. 1976. Composition chimique, digestibility et ingestion volontaire densilages dherbes et de mais par des agneaux. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 56: 65-72 https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas76-010
  17. Poppi, D. P., D. J. Minson and J. H. Ternouth. 1981. Studies of cattle and sheep eating leaf and stem fractions of grasses. I. The voluntary intake, digesibility and retention time in the reticulo-rumen. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 32: 99-108 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9810099
  18. Priebe, J. C., and R. D. Brown. 1987. Protein requirements of subadult nilgai antelope. Comp. Biochem. Phsiol. 88: 495 https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-9629(87)90070-3
  19. Sasaki, Y., K. Katoh and Oda. 1993. Digestive Physiology and Feeding of Sika deer. The 4th ARRC International Symposium. pp. 105-113
  20. Smith, S. H., J. B. Holter, H. H. Hayes, and H. Silver. 1975. Protein requirement of white-tailed deer fawns. J. Wildl. Manage. 39: 582 https://doi.org/10.2307/3800401
  21. Smith, S. H., J. B. Holter, H. H. Hayes, and H. Silver. 1975. Protein requirement of white-tailed deer fawns. J. Wildl. Manage. 39: 582 https://doi.org/10.2307/3800401
  22. Thomas, P. C., N. C. Kelly and M. K. Wait. 1976. The effect of physical form of a silage on its voluntary consumption and digestibility by sheep. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 31: 19-22 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1976.tb01110.x
  23. Van Soest, P. J. 1982. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. O & B Books, Portland
  24. Wanapat, M., D. O. Ericksom, and W. D. Slanger. 1982. Nitrogen metabolism in sheep fed protein source of various solubilities with low quality roughages. J. Anim. Sci. 54: 625 https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1982.543625x
  25. Welch, J. G. and A. M. Smith. 1969. Influence of forage quality on rumination time in sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 28: 813-818 https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1969.286813x
  26. Yerex, D. and I. Spiers. 1993. Modern deer farm management. Farm Books, 'Ranginui', Chamberlain Road, RD8, Masterton, NZ
  27. 김경훈, 신향재, 이상무, 전병태, 1995. 꽃사슴에 있어서 소화율 및 소화관내 통과속의 계절간의 차이. 한축지. 37: 371-378
  28. 김찬규, 1996 한국양록업의 현황과 사슴사양관리와 연관된 생리적 고찰. 중앙대학교 JFRI 논문집 8권 1호: 17-32
  29. 농림부. 2000. 농업통계요람
  30. 농림부. 2001. 농업통계요람
  31. 산림청, 2000. 임업통계요람
  32. 이중해, 이인덕, 이형석, 1990. 꽃사슴의 수엽류 이용에 관한 연구. Ⅰ. 꽃사슴의 채식습성. 한축지. 32(2): 100-108
  33. 전병태외 7명. 2000. 생산비절감을 위한 육림 및 간벌 생목류의 사슴용 사료화 및 이용기술 개발. 농림부과제 최종보고서
  34. 전병태외 9인. 1997. 한국사슴의 표준사양체계 확립 및 사슴전용 완전사료 개발에 관한 연구. 농림부 현장애로기술개발사업 연구과제 최종결과 보고서
  35. 한국양록협회, 1999. 한국양록회보. 1호