Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T22:37:38.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grain source and marginal changes in forage particle size modulate digestive processes and nutrient intake of dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2012

S. M. Nasrollahi ,
M. Khorvash ,
G. R. Ghorbani ,
A. Teimouri-Yansari ,
A. Zali  and
Q. Zebeli
S. M. Nasrollahi*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
M. Khorvash
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
G. R. Ghorbani
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
A. Teimouri-Yansari
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Animal Science and Aquacultures, University of Agriculture and Natural Resource Science of Sari, Sari, Iran
A. Zali
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Tehran, P.O. Box 3158711167-4111, Karaj, Iran
Q. Zebeli
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition, Vetmeduni, 1210 Vienna, Austria
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of, and interactions between, dietary grain source and marginal changes in alfalfa hay (AH) particle size (PS) on digestive processes of dairy cows. A total of eight Holstein dairy cows (175 days in milk) were allocated in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square design with four 21-day periods. The experiment was a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement with two levels of theoretical PS of AH (fine = 15 mm or long = 30 mm) each combined with two different sources of cereal grains (barley grain alone or barley plus corn grain in a 50 : 50 ratio). Results showed that cows consuming diets supplemented with corn had greater dry matter and nutrient intakes (P < 0.01), independent of forage PS. In addition, the apparent digestibility of fiber fractions was greater for diets supplemented with corn (P = 0.01). The feeding of barley grain-based diets was associated with greater apparent digestibility of non-fiber carbohydrates, and this variable was even greater when long AH was fed (P = 0.04). Moreover, the feeding of long AH resulted in longer time spent eating (P = 0.03) and higher pH (P < 0.01), as well as a tendency for higher acetate-to-propionate ratio in the rumen fluid (P = 0.06) at 3 h post feeding. In conclusion, the results indicated that the marginal increase of PS of AH may prolong eating time and improve rumen fermentation, particularly in diets based on barley grain. Partial substitution of barley grain by corn can improve feed intake and fiber digestibility in mid-lactation dairy cows.

Keywords

physically effective NDFhay particle sizebarleycorn
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Issue 8 , August 2012 , pp. 1237 - 1245
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2012

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

Aikman, PC, Reynolds, CK, Beever, DE 2008. Diet digestibility, rate of passage, and eating and rumination behavior of Jersey and Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 1103–1114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allen, DM 1997. Relationship between fermentation acid production in the rumen and the requirement for physically effective fiber. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1447–1462.Google Scholar
Allen, MS 2000. Effects of diet on short-term regulation of feed intake by lactating dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 1598–1624.Google Scholar
Allen, MS, Bradford, BJ, Oba, M 2009. The hepatic oxidation theory of the control of feed intake and its application to ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 87, 3317–3334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ASAE (American National Standards Institute) 1995. Method of determining and expressing fineness of feed material by sieving. ASAE Standards 1995. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI, p. 461.Google Scholar
AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemists) 2002. Official methods of analysis, vol. 1, 17th edition. AOAC, Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
Beauchemin, KA, Rode, LM 1997. Minimum versus optimum concentrations of fiber in dairy cow diets based on barley silage and concentrates of barley or corn. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1629–1639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beauchemin, KA, Yang, WZ 2005. Effects of physically effective NDF on intake, chewing activity, and ruminal acidosis for dairy cows fed diets based on corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science 88, 2117–2129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dubois, M, Gilles, KA, Hamilton, JK, Rebers, PA, Smith, F 1956. Colorimetric method for determination of sugar and related substances. Analytical Chemistry 28, 350–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, DG, Tylutki, TP, Czymmek, KJ, Rasmussen, CN, Durbal, VM 2000. Development and application of the Cornell university nutrient management planning systemProceedings of the Cornell Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers, Rochester, pp. 167–179. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Giger-Reverdin, S 2000. Characterization of feedstuffs for ruminants using some physical parameters. Animal Feed Science and Technology 86, 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, RJ 1997. Interactions among forages and nonforage fiber sources. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1438–1446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grant, RJ, Colenbrander, VF, Mertens, DR 1990a. Milk fat depression in dairy cows: role of particle size of alfalfa hay. Journal of Dairy Science 73, 1823–1833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grant, RJ, Colenbrander, VF, Albright, JL 1990b. Effect of particle size of forage and rumen cannulation upon chewing activity and laterality in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 73, 3158–3164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grovum, WL, Williams, VJ 1973. Rate of passage of digesta in sheep. 4. Passage of markers through the alimentary tract and the biological relevance of rate-constants derived from changes in concentration of markers in feces. The British Journal of Nutrition 30, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, MB, William, WH, Jennings, JP, Webster, TKM 1999. A method for partitioning neutral detergent-soluble carbohydrates. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 79, 2079–2086.3.0.CO;2-Z>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmon, DL, Yamka, RM, Elam, NA 2004. Factors affecting intestinal starch digestion in ruminants: a review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 84, 309–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iranian Council of Animal Care 1995. Guide to the care and use of experimental animals, vol. 1. Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran.Google Scholar
Kaske, M, Engelhardt, WV 1990. The effect of size and density on mean retention time of particles in the gastrointestinal tract of sheep. The British Journal of Nutrition 63, 457–465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kononoff, PJ 2002. The effect of ration particle size on dairy cows in early lactation. PhD Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Kowsar, R, Ghorbani, GR, Alikhani, M, Khorvash, M, Nikkhah, A 2008. Corn silage partially replacing short alfalfa hay to optimize forage use in total mixed rations for lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 4755–4764.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krause, KM, Combs, DK, Beauchemin, KA 2002a. Effects of forage, particle size, and grain fermentability in midlactaion cows. I. Milk production and diet digestibility. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 1936–1946.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krause, KM, Combs, DK, Beauchemin, KA 2002b. Effects of forage particle size and grain fermentability in midlactation dairy cows. II. Ruminal pH and chewing activity. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 1947–1957.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lammers, BP, Buckmaster, DR, Heinrichs, AJ 1996. A simple method for the analysis of particle sizes of forages and total mixed rations. Journal of Dairy Science 79, 922–928.Google Scholar
Lechartier, C, Peyraud, JL 2010. The effects of forage proportion and rapidly degradable dry matter from concentrate on ruminal digestion in dairy cows fed corn silage-based diets with fixed neutral detergent fiber and starch contents. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 666–681.Google Scholar
Leonardi, C, Armentano, LE 2003. Effect of quantity, quality, and length of alfalfa hay on selective consumption by dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 557–564.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthe, A, Lebzien, P, Hric, I, Flachowsky, G, Sommer, A 2001. Effect of starch application into proximal duodenum of ruminants on starch digestibility in the small and total intestine. Archives of Animal Nutrition 55, 351–369.Google ScholarPubMed
Mertens, DR 1997. Creating a system for meeting the fiber requirements of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 1463–1481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Research Council (NRC) 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th revised edition. National Academy Science, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Nikkhah, A, Alikhani, M, Amanlou, H 2004. Effects of feeding ground or steam-flaked broom sorghum and ground barley on performance of dairy cows in midlactation. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 122–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Offner, A, Bach, A, Sauvant, D 2003. Quantitative review of in situ starch degradation in the rumen. Animal Feed Science and Technology 106, 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS 1998. User's guide: statistics, version 8.2 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Silveira, C, Oba, M, Beauchemin, KA, Helm, J 2007. Effect of grains differing in expected ruminal fermentability on the productivity of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2852–2859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tafaj, M, Zebeli, Q, Baes, CH, Steingass, H, Drochner, W 2007. A meta analysis examining effects of particle size of total mixed rations on intake, rumen digestion and milk production in high-yielding dairy cows in early lactation. Animal Feed Science and Technology 138, 137–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uden, P, Colucci, E, Van Soest, PJ 1980. Investigation of chromium, cerium, and cobalt as markers in digesta rate of passage studies. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 31, 625–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Keulen, V, Young, BH 1977. Evaluation of acid-insoluble ash as natural marker in ruminant digestibility studies. Journal of Animal Science 26, 119–135.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharide in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, WZ, Beauchemin, KA, Farr, BI, Rode, LM 1997. Comparison of barley, hull-less barley, and corn in the concentrate of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 2885–2895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zebeli, Q, Mansmann, D, Steingass, H, Ametaj, BN 2010. Balancing diets for physically effective fiber and ruminally degradable starch: a key to lower the risk of sub-acute rumen acidosis and improve productivity of dairy cattle. Livestock Science 127, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zebeli, Q, Tafaj, M, Weber, I, Dijkstra, J, Steingass, H, Drochner, W 2007. Effects of varying dietary forage particle size in two concentrate levels on chewing activity, ruminal mat characteristics and passage in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 1929–1942.Google Scholar