Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-h6jzd Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-02-26T01:17:59.885Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating the metabolizable energy requirement for pregnancy in sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

N. J. Hutchings
N. J. Hutchings
Affiliation:
Department of Land Use, Danish Institute of Plant and Soil Science, Research Centre Foulum, PO Box 23, 8830 Tjele, Denmark
Get access

Abstract

A model is developed in which the metabolizable energy (ME) requirement for growth and maintenance of the foetus, uterus and udder are described explicitly for sheep. The efficiency of the use of ME for the growth of the products of conception (kp) is assumed to be the same as that for growth in non-pregnant animals. Using the results from the model to calculate the efficiency of the use of ME for conceptus growth (kc) in the conventional manner yields values with a similar magnitude and similar variation with food quality as those estimated experimentally. It is concluded that separately accounting for the growth and maintenance of the foetus, uterus and udder is preferable in models but unnecessary in feeding standards.

Keywords

efficiencyenergymathematical modelspregnancysheep
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 64 , Issue 3 , June 1997 , pp. 463 - 467
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1997

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

Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. An advisory manual prepared by the AFRC Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
CSIRO. 1990. Feeding standards for Australian livestock Ruminants. CSIRO Publications, East Melbourne, Victoria.Google Scholar
Finlayson, J. D., Cacho, O. J. and Bywater, A. C. 1995. A simulation-model of grazing sheep. 1. Animal growth and intake. Agricultural Systems 48: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geisler, P. A. and Jones, C. M. 1979. A model for calculation of the energy requirements of the pregnant ewe. Animal Production 29: 339–355.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. and Sutherland, H. A. M. 1968. An estimate of the nutrients utilized for pregnancy by Merino sheep. British journal of Nutrition 22: 217–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mellor, D. J. and Murray, L. 1985. Effects of maternal nutrition on udder development during late pregnancy and on colostrum production in Scottish Blackface ewes with twin lambs. Research in Veterinary Science 39: 230–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rattray, P. V., Garret, W. N., East, N. E. and Hinman, N. 1974a. Efficiency of utilization of metabolizable energy during pregnancy and energy requirements for pregnancy in sheep. Journal of Animal Science 38: 383–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rattray, P. V., Garret, W. N., East, N. E. and Hinman, N. 1974b. Growth, development and composition of the ovine conceptus and mammary gland during pregnancy. Journal of Animal Science 38: 613–626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, J. J., McDonald, I., Fraser, C. and Crofts, R. M. J. 1977. Studies on reproduction in prolific ewes. I. Growth of the products of conception. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88: 539–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, J. J., McDonald, I., Fraser, C. and Gordon, J. G. 1980. Studies on reproduction in prolific ewes. 6. The efficiency of energy utilization for conceptus growth. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94: 331–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vera, R. R., Morris, J. G. and Koong, L.-J. 1977. A quantitative model of energy intake and partition in grazing sheep in various physiological states. Animal Production 25: 133–153.Google Scholar