Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T22:56:09.294Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Milk production from silage 1. The influence of an additive containing formaldehyde and formic acid on the response of lactating heifers and cows to supplementary protein

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. Thomas ,
K. Aston ,
J. C. Tayler ,
S. R. Daley  and
D. F. Osbourn
C. Thomas
Affiliation:
Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 5LR
K. Aston
Affiliation:
Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 5LR
J. C. Tayler
Affiliation:
Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 5LR
S. R. Daley
Affiliation:
Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 5LR
D. F. Osbourn
Affiliation:
Grassland Research Institute, Hurley, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 5LR
Get access

Abstract

1. The primary growth and first regrowth of perennial ryegrass were preserved either without additive (NA), or with a mixture consisting of equal volumes of formic acid and formalin at 10·0 and 13·01/t fresh crop for primary growth and regrowth herbage respectively (35 g formaldehyde per kg crude protein) (FF). The silages were given ad libitum to 40 lactating British Friesian heifers and cows, with a supplement of either pelleted ground maize (104 g crude protein per kg dry matter) (LP) or pelleted ground maize and soya bean meal (254 g crude protein per kg dry matter) (HP), at 6·1 and 7·1 kg per head per day for heifers and cows respectively. The primary growth silage was given from weeks 4 to 14 and the regrowth from weeks 15 to 22 of lactation. The silages were supplemented with urea so that the dietary supply of rumen degradable protein exceeded 7·8g/MJ metabolizable energy.

2. Silage FF had lower concentrations of both fermentation acids and ammonia-nitrogen than silage NA. The digestibility of the dry matter, energy and crude protein of the diet containing silage FF was significantly less than that of diets containing silage NA when cows were given primary growth material (P < 0·001). But silage treatment had no significant effect on the digestibility of cellulose. When cows were given regrowth silage, silage treatment had no significant effect on the digestibility of dry matter, energy and cellulose, but formic acid/formaldehyde reduced the digestibility of crude protein (P < 0·01). The inclusion of soya bean meal in the supplement significantly increased the digestibility of crude protein, dry matter and energy, but when cows were given the primary growth silage the effect on the digestibility of dry matter and energy was only apparent with silage NA.

3. Cows and heifers given silage FF from primary growth consumed 160g/kg more dry matter than those given silage NA (P < 0·01). This effect was not apparent when the animals were given regrowth silage. The effect of formic acid/formaldehyde on the intake of digestible energy was not significant in either period on the trial, but the inclusion of soya bean meal in the pellet significantly increased the intake of digestible energy (P < 0·01).

4. Cows and heifers given silage FF from primary growth produced 90g/kg more milk and 50g/kg more solids-corrected milk than those given silage NA, but the differences were not significant and these trends were not apparent when regrowth silage was given. An increase in the crude protein content of supplement increased the milk (P < 0·01) and protein yield (P < 0·05) of cows, but not heifers, when they were given primary growth silage. The effect was less when milk output was expressed in terms of solids-corrected milk since milk fat content tended to fall when cows were given the HP supplement. Treatments had no significant effect on live-weight change.

5. It is suggested that the increases in milk output were mediated via changes in the supply of energy rather than of protein.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , June 1981 , pp. 285 - 295
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1981

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1965. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2, Ruminants. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Barry, T. N. 1976. The effectiveness of formaldehyde treatment in protecting dietary protein from rumen microbial degradation. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35: 221–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barry, T. N., Cook, J. E. and Wilkins, R. J. 1978. The influence of formic acid and formaldehyde additives and type of harvesting machine on the utilization of nitrogen in lucerne silages. 1. The voluntary intake and nitrogen retention of young sheep consuming the silages with and without intraperitoneal supplements of DL-methionine. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 91: 701–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beever, D. E., Thomson, D. J., Cammell, S. B. and Harrison, D. G. 1977. The digestion by sheep of silages made with and without the addition of formaldehyde. J. agric. Sci, Camb. 88: 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D. C. and Valentine, S. C. 1972. Formaldehyde as a silage additive. 1. The chemical composition and nutritive value of frozen lucerne, lucerne silage, and formaldehyde- treated lucerne silage. Aust. J. agric. Res. 23: 1093–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E., Retter, W. C. and Watson, J. N. 1979. Silage and milk production: comparisons between grass silage of three different chop lengths. Grass Forage Sci. 34: 293–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E. and Watson, J. N. 1976. Silage and milk production. A comparison between barley and groundnut cake as supplements to silage of high digestibility. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 31: 191–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobby, J. M. and Le du, Y. L. P. 1978. On fitting curves to lactation data. Anim. Prod. 26: 127–133.Google Scholar
Crampton, E. W. and Maynard, L. A. 1938. The relation of cellulose and lignin content to the nutritive value of animal feeds. J. Nutr. 15: 383–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewar, W. A. and McDonald, P. 1961. Determination of dry matter in silage by distillation with toluene. J. Sci. Fd Agric. 12: 790–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsden, S. R. and Gibson, Q. H. 1954. The estimation of lactic acid using eerie sulphate. Biochem. J. 58: 154–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1979. The effect of protein content of the supplement for dairy cows with access ad libitum to high digestibility, wilted grass silage. Anim. Prod. 28: 183–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1980. The response of spring-calving cows to a high level of protein in the supplement given with grass silage during early lactation. Anim. Prod. 30: 23–28.Google Scholar
Grenet, E. and Demarquilly, C. 1976. Mesure du bilanazote sur des moutons en croissance eliments avec des fourrages verts ou ensiles. Bull. tech. C.R.Z.V. Theix, I.N.R.A. 26: 21–28.Google Scholar
Lonsdale, C. R., Thomas, C. and Haines, M. J. 1977. The effect of urea on the voluntary intake by calves of silages preserved with formaldehyde and formic acid. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 32: 171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, E. L. 1973. Evaluation of foods as sources of nitrogen and amino acids. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 32: 79–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland and Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland. 1975. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Tech. Bull. 33. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Oldham, J. D. 1980. Protein and the high yielding cow. In Feeding Strategies for Dairy Cows (ed. Broster, W. H., Johnson, C. L. and Tayler, J. C.), pp. 7.7–7.19. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Roffler, R. E., Satter, L. D., Hardie, A. R. and Tyler, W. J. 1978. Influence of dietary protein concentration on milk production by dairy cattle during early lactation. J. Dairy Sci. 61: 1422–1428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, G. L., Bryant, A. M. and McLeay, L. M. 1979. Silage and dairy cow production. III. Abomasal infusion of casein, methionine, and glucose, and milk yield and composition. N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 22: 533–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowell, J. G. and Walters, D. E. 1976. Analysing data with repeated observations on each experimental unit. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 87: 423–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, J. H. B., Balch, C. C., Miller, E. L., Orskov, E. R. and Smith, R. H. 1977. Calculation of the N-requirement for ruminants from nitrogen metabolism studies. Proc. 2nd int. Symp. on Protein Metab. Nutr., Flevehov, Netherlands. pp. 126–129.Google Scholar
Siddons, R. C., Evans, R. T. and Beever, D. E. 1979. The effect of formaldehyde treatment before ensiling on the digestion of wilted grass silage by sheep. Br. J. Nutr. 42: 535–545.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tamminga, S., Van der koelen, C. J. and Van vuuren, A. M. 1979. Effect of the level of feed intake on nitrogen entering the small intestine of dairy cows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 6: 255–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tayler, J. C., Aston, K. and Daley, S. R. 1979. Milk production from diets of silage and dried forage. 3. Effect of formalin-treated ryegrass silage of high digestibility given ad libitum with and without urea. Anim. Prod. 28: 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terry, R. A. and Osbourn, D. F. 1980. Determination and prediction of the digestible energy in silages. In Forage Conservation in the 80's (ed. Thomas, C.), Occ. Symp. Br. Grasslil Soc, No. 11,, pp. 315–318.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. 1980. Conserved forages. In Feeding Strategies for Dairy Cows (ed. Broster, W. H., Johnson, C. L. and (Tayler), J. C.. pp. 8.1–8.14. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. and Terry, R. A. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassld Soc. 18: 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyrrell, H. F. and Reid, J. T. 1965. Prediction of the energy value of cow's milk. J. Dairy Sci. 48: 1215–1223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkins, R. J., Wilson, R. F. and Cook, J. E. 1975. Restriction of fermentation during ensilage: the nutritive value of silages made with the addition of formaldehyde. Proc. 12th int. Grassld Congr., Moscow, 1974, Vol. 3, pp. 674–690.Google Scholar
Wilkins, R. J., Wilson, R. F. and Woolford, M. K. 1974. The effects of formaldehyde on silage fermentation. Vaxtodling 29: 197–201.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, J. M., Wilson, R. F. and Barry, T. N. 1976. Factors affecting the nutritive value of silage. Outl. Agric. 9: 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. F. and Wilkins, R. J. 1977. The effects of mixtures of formalin and acid on silage fermentation. Proc. 13th int. Grassld Congr., Leipzig, Vols 8-10, pp. 187–193.Google Scholar