Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T01:48:30.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Protein metabolism in growing lambs fed on fresh ryegrass (Lolium perenne)–clover (Trifolium repens) pasture ad lib. 1. Protein and energy deposition in response to abomasal infusion of casein and methionine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

T. N. Barry
T. N. Barry
Affiliation:
Invermay Agricultural Research Centre, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Mosgiel, New Zealand
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. Male lambs that had been born in autumn and wintered on forage diets were cannulated in the abomasum, confined indoors in individual pens, and fed on fresh primary growth ryegrass (Lolium perenne) – clover (Trifolium repens) pasture ad lib, for a 12-week period during spring. Mean diet organic matter digestibility (OMD) was 0/76, nitrogen content 29 g/kg dry matter (DM) and metabolizable energy (ME) content 11.1 MJ/kg DM. Thirteen lambs were infused into the abomasum with 44 g sodium caseinate +0/5 g L-methionine/d and 12 lambs were similarly infused with equivalent amounts of inorganic sodium and phosphorus. Initial live weight was 16/5 kg.

2. The twenty-five treatment lambs were slaughtered at the end of the experiment, and thirteen similar lambs were slaughtered when the experiment commenced. Body composition was determined and rates of protein, fat and energy deposition were calculated using comparative slaughter procedures.

3. Voluntary herbage DOM intakes tended to be slightly greater for control than protein-infused lambs, but calculated ME intakes including that infused as amino acids were similar for the two groups. Live-weight gains were 79 and 99 g/d for control and protein-infused lambs respectively (P < 0/05) and corresponding values for carcass gain: live-weight gain were 0/44 and 0/50 (P < 0/01), Wool growth was markedly increased by the amino acid infusion.

4. Carcass and whole body protein content was increased 10 g/kg by the protein infusion (P < 0/01) and fat content depressed approximately 25 g/kg (P < 0/05). Rates of protein deposition in both carcass and wool-free whole body were markedly increased by protein infusion, and total deposition including wool was 12.6 and 21.0 g/d for control and protein-infused lambs (P < 0/001). Energy deposited in protein as a proportion of total energy deposition was 0/27 and 0/41 for control and protein-infused lambs (P < 0/001), but total energy retention and the efficiency of utilization of ME for growth did not differ between the two groups of lambs.

5. It was estimated that 60 and 100 g total amino acids/d were absorbed from the small intestine in the control and protein-infused lambs respectively, corresponding to 0.16 and 0/25 of total ME intake. It was concluded that absorption of protein from the small intestine was limiting protein deposition in the growing lambs fed on fresh ryegrass-based spring pasture in this study. Absorption of cystine+methionine was specifically shown to be limiting. However, the protein deficiency was not a major factor in the low value for the efficiency of utilization of ME for growth for this diet (0/30).

Type
General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , November 1981 , pp. 521 - 532
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1981

References

Agricultural Research Council (1965). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2, Ruminants. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Barry, T. N. (1976). J. agric. Sci, Camb. 86, 141.Google Scholar
Barry, T. N. (1981). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 23, 427.Google Scholar
Barry, T. N., Manley, T. R., Redekopp, C., Davis, S. R., Fairclough, R. & Lapwood, K. R. (1982). Br. J. Nutr. (In the Press).Google Scholar
Black, J. L. (1974). Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 10, 211.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Clark, J. H. (1975). J. Dairy Sci. 58, 1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, S. R., Barry, T. N. & Hughson, G. A. (1981). Br. J. Nutr. 46, 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drew, K. R. & Reid, J. T. (1975). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 85, 193.Google Scholar
Fennessy, P. F., Woodlock, M. E. & Jagusch, K. T. (1972). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 15, 795.Google Scholar
John, A., Ulyatt, M. J., Jones, W. T. & Shelton, I. D. (1980). Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 42, 152.Google Scholar
MacRae, J. C., Campbell, D. R. & Eadie, J. (1975). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 84, 125.Google Scholar
MacRae, J. C. & Ulyatt, M. J. (1974). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 82, 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R., Grubb, D. A., Smith, J. S., Webster, A. J. F. & Corrigall, W. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 541.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R., McDonald, I., Fraser, C. & Corse, E. L. (1971). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 77, 351.Google Scholar
Rattray, P. V. & Joyce, J. P. (1974). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 17, 401.Google Scholar
Rattray, P. V. & Joyce, J. P. (1976). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 19, 299.Google Scholar
Reis, P. J. (1970). Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 23, 441.Google Scholar
Reis, P. J. & Schinckel, P. G. (1964). Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 17, 532.Google Scholar
Rogers, G. L., Bryant, A. M. & McLeay, L. M. (1979). N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 22, 533.Google Scholar
Scott, J. D. J., Rattray, P. V. & Smeaton, D. C. (1976). Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 36, 103.Google Scholar
Thomson, D. J. & Cammell, S. B. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 297.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J., Fennessy, P. F., Rattray, P. V. & Jagusch, K. T. (1980). In Supplementary Feeding (Drew, K. R. and Fennessy, P. F. editors). Mosgiel: New Zealand Society of Animal Production.Google Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J., MacRae, J. C., Clarke, R. T. J. & Pearce, P. D. (1975). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 84, 453.Google Scholar