Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-24T11:07:21.981Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of the voluntary intake and digestion of a range of forages at different times of the year by the sheep and the red deer (Cervus elaphus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. A. Milne ,
J. C. Macrae ,
ANGELA M. Spence  and
S. Wilson
J. A. Milne
Affiliation:
Hill Farming Research Organisation, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian
J. C. Macrae
Affiliation:
Hill Farming Research Organisation, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian
ANGELA M. Spence
Affiliation:
Hill Farming Research Organisation, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian
S. Wilson
Affiliation:
Hill Farming Research Organisation, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Comparisons were made between castrated male Scottish Blackface sheep and red deer (Cervus elaphus) of voluntary forage intake (VFI), digestibility and the mean retention time (MRT) of a particulate-phase marker (103Ru-phenanthroline) in the alimentary tract, when a range of forages: dried-grass pellets, chopped dried grass, fresh-frozen Agrostis-Festuca spp. and heather (Calluna vulgaris, L. Hull) were given at different times of the year.

2. On both the dried-grass-pellet and chopped dried-grass diets the red deer and sheep ate similar quantities. Both species had a higher VFI of dried-grass pellets in July than in November. The sheep digested the dried-grass-pellet diet better than the red deer and this was associated with a longer MRT of the particulate-phase marker in the alimentary tract.

3. The VFI of Agrostis-Festuca spp. and heather by the red deer was twice that of the sheep. The VFI of heather by the sheep increased by 32 % between January and April, and the VFI of both the Agrostis-–Festuca spp. and heather diets by the red deer increased by 65–70 %. The sheep digested the Agrostis–Festuca spp. better than the red deer but the red deer digested the heather slightly better than the sheep. MRT of the particulate-phase marker was greater for the sheep than for the red deer on both diets. The digestibility and MRT of both diets in the red deer did not decrease with the seasonal increase in VFI, suggesting a possible hypertrophy of the alimentary tract.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , September 1978 , pp. 347 - 357
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1978

References

Alexander, R. H. & McGowan, M. (1966). J. Br. Grassld Soc. 21, 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. & Davidson, J. L. (1966). Anim. Prod. 8, 75.Google Scholar
Buchman, D. T. & Hemken, R. W. (1964). J. Dairy Sci. 47, 861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C. (1970). In Physiology of Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant [Phillipson, A. T., editor]. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Oriel Press.Google Scholar
Demarquilly, C. & Weiss, P. (1971). Ann. Zootech. 20, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, G. F. (1975). In Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant, p. 277. [McDonald, I. W. and Warner, A. C. I., editors.] Armidale: University of New England.Google Scholar
Gordon, J. G. (1964). Nature, Lond. 204, 798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. & Reid, G. W. (1974). Anim. Prod. 19, 77.Google Scholar
Grovum, W. L. & Williams, V. J. (1973). Br. J. Nutr. 30, 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobson, P. N. (1969). In The Husbanding of Red Deer, p. 46 [Bannerman, M. M. and Blaxter, K. L., editors]. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, E. A., Patterson, H. D. & Talbot, M. (1973). University of Edinburgh, Scientific and Social Sciences Program Library, Rep. no. 12.Google Scholar
Kay, R. N. B. & Goodall, E. D. (1976). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 36, 98A.Google Scholar
Knox, K. L., Wesley, D., Crownover, J. C. & Nagy, J. (1974). In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals, p. 229 [Menke, K. H., Lantzch, J. H. and Reichl, J. R., editors]. Hohenheim: University of Hohenheim Press.Google Scholar
Long, T. A., Cowan, R. L., Strawn, G. D., Wetzel, R. S. & Miller, R. C. (1966). PA agric. Exp. Stn. Prog. Rep. no. 262.Google Scholar
McEwan, E. H. & Whitehead, P. E. (1970). Can. J. Zoo. 48. 905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, J. A., MacRae, J. C., Spence, A. M. & Wilson, S. (1976). Nature, Lond. 263, 763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, A. M. (1976). A study of the energy metabolism and seasonal cycles of captive red deer. PhD Thesis, University of Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Tan, T. N., Weston, R. H. & Hogan, J. P. (1971). Int. J. Appl. Radiat. Isotopes. 22, 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. & Young, G. B. (1968). Anim. Prod. 10, 393.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. & Terry, R. A. (1963). J. Br. Grassld Soc. 18, 104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tulloh, N. M. (1966). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 9, 999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tulloh, N. M. & Hughes, J. W. (1965). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 8, 1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1965). J. Ass. Off. agric. Chem. 48, 785.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. & Wine, R. H. (1967). J. Ass. Off. agric. Chem. 50, 50.Google Scholar