Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

  • 제32권3호
  • /
  • Pages.375-386
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1011-2367(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1976-5517(eISSN)
아세아태평양축산학회 (Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Altering undigested neutral detergent fiber through additives applied in corn, whole barley crop, and alfalfa silages, and its effect on performance of lactating Holstein dairy cows

  • Hosseini, Seyed Mohsen (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad) ;
  • Mesgaran, Mohsen Danesh (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad) ;
  • Vakili, Ali Reza (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad) ;
  • Naserian, Abbas Ali (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad) ;
  • Khafipour, Ehsan (Department of Animal Science, University of Manitoba)
  • 투고 : 2018.04.23
  • 심사 : 2018.07.05
  • 발행 : 2019.03.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: We hypothesized that silage additives may alter the undigested neutral detergent fiber (uNDF) content through ensiling. Therefore, urea and formic acid were applied to corn, whole barley crop (WBC) and alfalfa to change uNDF content of the ensiled forages. Methods: Six experimental diets at two groups of high uNDF (untreated corn and alfalfa silages [CSAS] and untreated whole barley and alfalfa silages [BSAS]) and low uNDF (urea-treated corn silage+untreated alfalfa silage [$CS_UAS$], urea-treated whole barley silage+untreated alfalfa silage [$BS_UAS$], untreated corn silage+formic acid-treated alfalfa silage [$CSAS_F$], and untreated whole barley silage+formic acid-treated alfalfa silage [$BSAS_F$]), were allocated to thirty-six multiparous lactating Holstein dairy cows. Results: The untreated silages were higher in uNDF than additive treated silages, but the uNDF concentrations among silages were variable (corn silage0.05). Milk yield tended to increase in the cows fed high uNDF diets than those fed low uNDF (p = 0.10). The cows fed diet based on urea-treated corn silage had higher milk yield than those fed other silages (p = 0.05). The substitution of corn silage with the WBC silage tended to decrease milk production (p = 0.07). Changing the physical source of NDF supply and the uNDF content from the corn silage to the WBC silage caused a significant increase in ruminal $NH_3-N$ concentration, milk urea-N and fat yield (p<0.05). The cows fed diets based on WBC silage experienced greater rumination time than the cows fed corn silage (p<0.05). Conclusion: Administering additives to silages to reduce uNDF may improve the performance of Holstein dairy cows.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Khan N, Yu AP, Ali M, Cone JW, Hendriks WH. Nutritive value of maize silage in relation to dairy cow performance and milk quality. J Sci Food Agric 2015;95:238-52. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6703
  2. Kolver ES, Roche JR, Miller D, Densley R. Maize silage for dairy cows. In: Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association, New Zealand. 2001. p. 195-201.
  3. Huhtanen P, Ahvenjarvi S, Weisbjerg MR, Orgaard PN. Digestion and passage of fibre in ruminants. In: Sejrsen K, Hvelplund T, Nielson MO, editors. Ruminant physiology: digestion, metabolism and impact of nutrition on gene expression, immunology and stress. Wageningen, the Netherlands: Wageningen Acad. Publ.; 2006. p. 87-138.
  4. Oba M, Allen MS. Effects of brown midrib 3 mutation in corn silage on dry matter intake and productivity of high yielding dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1999;82:135-42. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75217-3
  5. Raffrenato E, VanAmburgh ME. Development of a mathematical model to predict sizes and rates of digestion of a fast and slow degrading pool and the indigestible NDF fraction. In: Proceedings of Cornell Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers. New York, USA, 2010. pp. 52-65.
  6. Cotanch KW, Grant RJ, VanAmburgh ME, et al. Applications of uNDF in ration modeling and formulation. In: Proceedings of Cornell Nutrition Conference. Syracuse, NY, USA, 2014. p. 114-31.
  7. Weimer PJ. Why don't ruminal bacteria digest cellulose faster? J Dairy Sci 1996;79:1496-502. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(96)76509-8
  8. McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE. Microorganisms. The biochemistry of silage. 2nd ed. Kingston, Kent, UK: Chalcombe Publications; 1991.
  9. Kung L, Stokes MR, Lin CJ. Silage additives. Agronomy 2003;42:305-60.
  10. Jaakkola S, Kaunisto V, Huhtanen P. Volatile fatty acid proportions and microbial protein synthesis in the rumen of cattle receiving grass silage ensiled with different rates of formic acid. Grass Forage Sci 2006;61:282-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2006.00532.x
  11. Harrison JH, Blauwiekel R, Stokes MR. Fermentation and utilization of grass silage. J Dairy Sci 1994; 10:3209-35. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(94)77264-7
  12. Cushnahan A, Mayne CS. Effects of ensilage of grass on performance and nutrient utilization by dairy cattle 1. Food intake and milk production. Anim Sci 1995;60:337-45. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1357729800013217
  13. Nagel SA, Broderick GA. Effect of formic acid or formaldehyde treatment of alfalfa silage on nutrient utilization by dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1992;75:140-54. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)77748-0
  14. Mertens DR. Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fiber in feeds with refluxing in beakers or crucibles: Collaborative study. J AOAC Int 2002;85:1217-40.
  15. VanSoest PV, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:3583-97. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  16. NRC. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press; 2001.
  17. Lammers BP, Buckmaster DR, Heinrichs AJ. A simple method for the analysis of particle sizes of forage and total mixed rations. J Dairy Sci 1996;79:922-8. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(96)76442-1
  18. Iranian Council of Animal Care. Guide to the care and use of experimental animals. Isfahan, Iran; Isfahan University of Technology; 1995.
  19. VanKeulen V, Young BH. Evaluation of acid-insoluble ash as a natural marker in ruminant digestibility studies. J Anim Sci 1977;44:282-7. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1977.442282x
  20. Sales J, Janssens GPJ. Acid-insoluble ash as a marker in digestibility studies: a review. J Anim Feed Sci 2003;3:383-401. https://doi.org/10.22358/jafs/67718/2003
  21. Colenbrander VF, Noller CH, Grant RJ. Effect of fiber content and particle size of alfalfa silage on performance and chewing behavior. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:2681-90. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78446-4
  22. Edmonson AJ, Lean IJ, Weaver LD, Farver T, Webster G. A body condition scoring chart for Holstein dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1989;72:68-78. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(89)79081-0
  23. Broderick GA, Kang JH. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media. J Dairy Sci 1980;63:64-75. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(80)82888-8
  24. AOAC. Method 990-03. In: Helrich K, editor. Official methods of analysis, first supplement. Arlington, VA, USA: AOAC International; 1990. 746 p.
  25. Playne MJ, McDonald P. The buffering constituents of herbage and of silage. J Sci Food Agric 1966;17:264-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740170609
  26. Deriaz RE. Routine analysis of carbohydrates and lignin in herbage. J Sci Food Agric 1961;12:152-60. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740120210
  27. Kleinschmit DH, Kung L. A meta-analysis of the effects of Lactobacillus buchneri on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn and grass and small-grain silages. J Dairy Sci 2006;89:4005-13. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72444-4
  28. Palmonari A, Gallo A, Fustini M, et al. Estimation of the indigestible fiber in different forage types. J Anim Sci 2016;94:248-54. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2015-9649
  29. SAS. Statistical analysis system. User's guide: statistics, version 9.2. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute; 2003.
  30. Kung L. A review on silage additives and enzymes. Newark, DE, USA: Department of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Delaware; 2014.
  31. Britt DG, Huber JT. Fungal growth during fermentation and refermentation of nonprotein nitrogen treated corn silage. J Dairy Sci 1975;58:1666-71. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(75)84765-5
  32. Buchanan-Smith JG. Preservation and feeding value for yearling steers of whole plant corn ensiled at 28 and 42% dry matter with and without cold flow ammonia treatment. Canadian J Anim Sci 1982;62:173-80. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas82-018
  33. Addah W, Baah J, Groenewegen P, Okine EK, McAllister TA. Comparison of the fermentation characteristics, aerobic stability and nutritive value of barley and corn silages ensiled with or without a mixed bacterial inoculant. Canadian J Anim Sci 2011;91:133-46. https://doi.org/10.4141/CJAS10071
  34. Grant RJ, Cotanch KW. Higher forage diets: dynamics of passage, digestion, and cow productive responses. In: Proceedings Cornell Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers. October 16-18, 2012. Syracuse, NY, USA. pp. 45-57.
  35. Atrian P, Shahryar HA. Heat stress in dairy cows. Res Zool 2012;2:31-7.
  36. Huber JT, Thomas JW. Urea-treated corn silage in low protein rations for lactating cows. J Dairy Sci 1971;54:224-30. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(71)85816-2
  37. Shaver RD, Erdman RA, O'connor AM, Vandersall JH. Effects of silage pH on voluntary intake of corn silage and alfalfa haylage. J Dairy Sci 1985;68:338-46. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(85)80830-4
  38. Yu P, Refat B, David A. Comparing barley silage with corn silage [Internet]. Christensen for Progressive Dairyman; [cited 2016 September 30]. Available from: https://www.progres sivedairy.com
  39. Migliorati L, Boselli L, Pirlo G, Moschini M, Masoero F. Corn silage replacement with barley silage in dairy cows' diet does not change milk quality, cheese quality and yield. J Sci Food Agric 2017;97:3396-401. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8190
  40. Mertens DR. Maximizing forage use by dairy cows. In: WCDS Adv Dairy Technol 2009;21:303-19.
  41. Allen MS, Bradford BJ, Oba M. Board-invited review: The hepatic oxidation theory of the control of feed intake and its application to ruminants. J Anim Sci 2009;87:3317-34. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-1779
  42. Kononoff PJ, Heinrichs AJ, Lehman HA. The effect of corn silage particle size on eating behavior, chewing activities, and rumen fermentation in lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2003;86:3343-53. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73937-X
  43. Beauchemin KA, Buchanan-Smith JG. Effects of dietary neutral detergent fiber concentration and supplementary long hay on chewing activities and milk production of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1989;72:2288-300. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(89)79360-7
  44. Schulze AKS, Weisbjerg MR, Norgaard P. Effects of feeding level and NDF content of grass-clover silages on chewing activity, fecal particle size and NDF digestibility in dairy heifers. Animal 2014;8:1945-54. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731114002055
  45. Stojevic Z, Pirsljin J, Milinkovic-Tur S, Zdelar-Tuk M, Ljubic BB. Activities of AST, ALT and GGT in clinically healthy dairy cows during lactation and in the dry period. Vet Arhiv 2005;75:67-73.