Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:32:12.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by sheep 6. The effect of monosodium glutamate on the palatability of straw diets by sham-fed and normal animals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Pablo E. Colucci  and
W. Larry Grovum
Pablo E. Colucci
Affiliation:
Departments of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Ontario NIG 2W1, Canada
W. Larry Grovum
Affiliation:
Departments of Biomedical Sciences, University of Guelph, Ontario NIG 2W1, Canada
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. Sheep with oesophageal fistulas were used in sham-feeding experiments to assess how sham intakes were affected by (a) physical form of straw (finely and coarsely ground; ground and pelleted), (b) type of food (straw pellets v. lucerne (Medicago sativa) hay pellets) and (c) additions of monosodium glutamate (MSG) with or without NaCl to the various straw diets. Normal animals were also fed on diets with and without MSG. Sham intakes of fine-ground loose straw (25 g/30 min) were markedly less (P = 0.002) than those of ground and pelleted straw (711 g/30 min). However, MSG at 5–40 g/kg fine and coarse ground straw increased sham intakes by 146 (P = 0.04) and 164% (P = 0.01) respectively. These findings indicated that the intakes of poor-quality diets can be increased by compacting them or by improving their palatability with MSG, or both. Sham intakes of straw pellets in two experiments were 32 (P = 0.02) and 45% (P = 0.008) of those of lucerne pellets (436 v. 1366 and 737 v. 1640 g/30 min). However, MSG at 20 g/kg straw pellets increased sham intakes from 674 to 1100 g/30 min (P = 0.05). When the MSG was mixed with NaCl (20 g/kg), the intakes of straw pellets were increased from 1089 to 1512 g/30 min (P = 0.02). Thus, the addition of MSG with or without NaCl increased the intakes of straw pellets. The highest intakes of the straw pellets treated with MSG were similar to those for lucerne pellets. When MSG-treated ammoniated barley straw (10 g/kg) was fed to normal sheep, the MSG increased DM intakes by 10 % (719–789 g/d; P = 0.04). MSG sprayed onto grass hay (10 g/kg) did not, however, affect daily DM intakes by these sheep. In general, the findings indicate that the intake of straw by ruminants may be increased by compressing it to form pellets or cubes and by adding MSG.

Keywords

PalatabilityMonosodium glutamateVoluntary food intakeSheep
Type
Effects on Voluntary Food Intake
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 69 , Issue 1 , January 1993 , pp. 37 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1993

References

REFERENCES

Arave, C. W., Purcell, D. & Engstrom, M. (1989). Effect of feed flavors on improving choice for a ten percent meat and bone meal dairy concentrate. Journal of Dairy Science 72, Suppl. 1, 563.Google Scholar
Baumont, N., Seguier, N. & Dulphy, J. P. (1990). Rumen fill, forage palatability and alimentary behaviour in sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 115, 277–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cagan, R. H., Torii, K. & Kare, M. R. (1979). Biochemical studies of glutamate taste receptors: The synergistic taste effect of L-glutamate and 5′-ribonucleotides. In Glutamic Acid: Advances in Biochemistry and Physiology, pp. 1–9 [Filer, L. J. Jr, Garattini, S., Kare, M. R. and Wurtman, R. J., editors]. New York: Raven Press.Google Scholar
Campling, R. C. (1970). Physical regulation of voluntary intake. In Physiology of Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant, pp. 226–234 [Phillipson, A. T., editor]. Newcastle: Oriel Press.Google Scholar
Campling, R. C., Freer, M. & Balch, C. C. (1961). Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by cows. 2. The relationship between the voluntary intake of roughages, the amount of digesta in the reticulo-rumen, and the rate of disappearance of digesta from the alimentary tract. British Journal of Nutrition 15, 531–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapple, R. S. & Lynch, W. L. (1986). Behavioural factors modifying acceptance of supplementary foods by sheep. Research and Development in Agriculture 3, 113–120.Google Scholar
Church, D. C. (1971). Taste, appetite, and regulation of food intake. In Digestive Physiology and Nutrition of Ruminants, vol. 2, pp. 737–762 [Church, D. C., editor]. Corvallis, Oregon: O & B Books Inc.Google Scholar
Cochran, W. G. & Cox, G. M. (1957). Experimental Designs, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Dittrich, A., Hoffmann, M., Schindler, K. & Viertel, H. (1981). Untersuchungen zur freiwillingen aufnahme von stroh durch mutterschafe bei verschiedenen darbietungsformen (Investigations into the voluntary intake of straw by non-pregnant ewes as influenced by various feeding methods and forms of forage). Archiv fur Tierzucht 24, 127–134.Google Scholar
Galgan, M. W. & Russell, T. S. (1968). Use of Dyna-Ferm and monosodium glutamate in rations for lambs. Washington Agricultural Experiment Station, College of Agriculture, Bulletin no. 695. Washington State University, Washington.Google Scholar
Gatel, F. & Guion, P. (1990). Effects of monosodium 1 glutamate on diet palatability and piglet performance during the sucking and weaning periods. Animal Production 50, 365–372.Google Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D. & Reid, G. W. (1971). Relative palatability to sheep of straw, hay and dried grass. British Journal of Nutrition 26, 107–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grovum, W. L. (1984). Controls over the intake of straw by sheep: effects of form of diet and intake stimulants on sham feeding. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 64, Suppl., 150–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grovum, W. L. (1988). Appetite, palatability and control of feed intake. In The Ruminant Animal, pp. 202–216 [Church, D. C., editor]. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Grovum, W. L. & Chapman, H. W. (1988). Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by sheep. 4. The effect of additives representing the primary tastes on sham intakes by oesophageal-fistulated sheep. British Journal of Nutrition 59, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutson, G. D. & van Mourik, S. C. (1981). Food preference of sheep. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 21, 575–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Magnen, J. (1985). Hunger. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McClymont, G. L. (1967). Selectivity and intake in the grazing ruminant. In Handbook Of Physiology, Section 6 , Alimentary Canal, vol. 1. Control of Food and Water Intake, pp. 129–137 [Code, C. F., editor]. Washington, DC: American Physiological Society.Google Scholar
McDonald, C. L., Rowe, J. B., Gittins, S. P. & Smith, J. A. W. (1988). Feed additives for attracting sheep to eat a pelleted diet during assembly for live export. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 28, 719–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, L. R. & Kilgour, R. (1980). Learning and associated factors in ruminant feeding behaviour. In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 123–144 [Ruckebusch, Y. and Thivend, P., editors]. Lancaster: MTP Press Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. H., Weir, W. C., Dobie, J. B. & Hull, J. L. (1959). Influence of the method of preparation on the feeding value of alfalfa hay. Journal of Animal Science 18, 976–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minson, D. J. (1963). The effect of pelleting and wafering on the feeding value of roughages – a review. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18, 39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mook, D. G. (1963). Oral and postingestional determinants of the intake of various solutions in rats with oesophageal fistulas. Journal of Comparative Physiology and Psychology 56, 645–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Mahony, M. & Ishii, R. (1987). Recent developments in umami research. In Umami: A Basic Taste, pp. 75–93 [Kawamura, Y. and Kare, M. R., editors]. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.Google Scholar
Powell, R. (1968). Monosodium Glutamate and Glutamic Acid. Chemical Process Review no. 25. Park Ridge, New Jersey: Noyes Development Corporation.Google Scholar
Provenza, F. D. & Balph, D. F. (1988). Development of dietary choice in livestock on rangelands and its implications for management. Journal of Animal Science 66, 2356–2368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, W. L. & Gaynor, P. J. (1987). Analysis of switchback data using Statistical Analysis System, Inc. Software. Journal of Dairy Science 70, 2186–2191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS (1981). SAS for Linear Models. A Guide to the Anova and GLM Procedures. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Siegel, H. S. (1983). Effects of intensive production methods on livestock health. Agro-Ecosystems 8, 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1980). Statistical Methods, 7th ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Van Niekerk, A. I., Greenhalgh, J. F. D. & Reid, G. W. (1973). Importance of palatability in determining the feed intake of sheep offered chopped and pelleted hay. British Journal of Nutrition 30, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waldern, D. E. & Van Dyk, R. D. (1971). Effect of monosodium glutamate in starter rations on feed consumption and performance of early weaned calves. Journal of Dairy Science 54, 262–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, W. C., Meyer, J. H., Garret, W. N., Lofgreen, G. P. & Ittner, N. R. (1959). Chopped rations compared to similar rations fed chopped or ground for steers and lambs. Journal of Animal Science 18, 805–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weller, R. F. & Phipps, R. H. (1989). Preliminary studies on the effect of flavouring agents on the dry-matter intake of silage by lactating dairy cows. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 112, 67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar