Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:16:53.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dietary factors influencing the digestion of starch in the rumen and small and large intestine of early weaned lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

E. R. Ørskov ,
C. Fraser  and
R. N. B. Kay
E. R. Ørskov
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, AB2 9SB
C. Fraser
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, AB2 9SB
R. N. B. Kay
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, AB2 9SB
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. Lambs fitted with cannulas in the abomasum, terminal ileum and caecum were used to study the digestion of starch and dry matter when rations with high starch content were given. Polyethylene glycol was used as an indigestible reference substance.

2. In Expt I reduction in level of feeding from an estimated ad lib. intake to 70% of this level reduced the amount of dietary starch escaping fermentation in the rumen from 6.8 to 4.4% of intake on a barley diet and from 12.8 to 7.7% on a diet consisting of 40% dried grass and 60 yo barley. Inclusion of 40% chopped dried grass in the diet increased the amount of dietary starch escaping fermentation in the rumen. There appeared to be a linear relationship between the concentrations of starch in abornasal and ilcal dry matter, indicating a limited capacity for starch digestion in the small intestine.

3. In Expt 2 a barley diet was compared with diets based on flaked maize, ground maize or cracked maize. With these diets the percentage of dietary starch escaping fermentation in the rumen was respectively 6.2, 5.4, 12.1 and 142, showing that more starch escapes fermentation with uncooked maize diets than with barley diets.

4. The molar proportions of volatile fatty acids produced by fermentation in the caecum were apparently influenced by the amount of starch passing to the intestines. The highest proportion of acetic acid (78%) was associated with 4.5% of starch in abomasal dry matter, and the lowest proportion (57%)was associated with 20.1% of starch in abomasal dry matter.

5. The possible relationships between the extent of fermentation in the rumen and energy and nitrogen metabolism are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , June 1969 , pp. 217 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1969

References

Agricultural Research Council (1965). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2. Ruminants. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. G. & Blaxter, K. L. (1957). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 413.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. G., Blaxter, K. L. & Graham, N. McC. (1960). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 19, xxxi.Google Scholar
Heald, P. J. (1951). Br. J. Nutr. 5, 84.Google Scholar
Hogan, J. P. & Weston, R. H. (1967). Aust. J. ugric. Res. 18, 973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, J. T., Jacobson, N. L., McGilliard, A. D. & Allen, R. S. (1961). J. Dairy Sci. 44, 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1966). The Rumen and its Microbes. New York and London: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
Hydén, S. (1955). K. LantbrHögsk. Annlr 22, 139.Google Scholar
Karr, M. R., Little, C. O. & Mitchell, G. E. (1966). J. Anim. Sci. 25, 652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, R. W. (1950). Chemistry and Industry of Starch. New York and London: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
MacRae, J. C. & Armstrong, D. G. (1968). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 19, 578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R., Flatt, W. P. & Moe, P. W. (1968). J. Dairy Sci. 51, 1429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & Fraser, C. (1968). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 27, 37A.Google Scholar
Smith, R. H. (1958). Nature, Lond. 182, 260.Google Scholar
Topps, J. H., Kay, R. N. B. & Goodall, E. D. (1968). Br. J. Nutr. 22, 261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Topps, J. H., Kay, R. N. B., Goodall, E. D., Whitelaw, F. G. & Reid, R. S. (1968). Br. J. Nutr. 22, 281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, R. E., Mitchell, G. E. & Little, C. O. (1968). J. Anim. Sci. 27, 824.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1963). J. Ass. off. agric. Chem. 46, 829.Google Scholar
Walker, D. M. (1959). J. agric Sci., Camb. 53, 374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weller, R. A. & Gray, F. V. (1954). J. exp. Biol. 31, 40.Google Scholar
Wright, P. L., Grainger, R. B. & Marco, G. R. (1966). J. Nutr. 89, 241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar