Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:28:39.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digestion and rumen metabolism of red clover and perennial ryegrass/white clover forages by red deer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. O. Freudenberger ,
C. J. Burns ,
K. Toyokawa  and
T. N. Barry
D. O. Freudenberger
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
C. J. Burns
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
K. Toyokawa
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
T. N. Barry
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Red clover (RC) and perennial ryegrass (PRG)-based forages were cut fresh during late spring/early summer and fed at similar levels of dry matter (DM) intake to rumen fistulated castrated red deer kept indoors in metabolism pens. RC contained higher concentrations of total N and non-protein cell contents than PRG and lower concentrations of fibre. Rumen pool size and fractional outflow rates of liquid (13·3 ν. 15·1%/h) and of paniculate matter (2·5 ν. 3·9%/h) were lower for deer fed RC than PRG. Apparent digestibility of energy and fibre, rumen fibre fractional degradation rate and rumen fractional disappearance rate of non-protein cell contents were all higher for RC than for PRG deer. Nitrogen retention was similar for deer fed both forages. However, the concentration, pool size and outflow of ammonia from the rumen, together with urinary N excretion, were all much greater for deer fed RC than those fed PRG. The acetate: propionate ratio in rumen volatile fatty acids (VFA) was lower for the RC than the PRG group. It was concluded that the greater fibre digestion in deer fed RC was due to a faster rumen fractional degradation rate and a longer particulate mean retention time in the rumen, and that the very rapid outflow of water from the rumen relative to particulate matter in deer fed RC (5·5:1 ν. 3·8:1) may explain why deer are not susceptible to rumen frothy bloat when grazing RC. One reason for the greater voluntary feed intake (VFI) of deer grazing RC than those grazing PRG may be due to its greater concentration of protein and non-protein cell contents and their more rapid degradation and removal from the rumen.

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 122 , Issue 1 , February 1994 , pp. 115 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

Ataja, A. M., Wilson, P. R., Barry, T. N., Hodgson, J., Hoskinson, R. M., Parker, W. J. & Purchas, R. W. (1992). Early venison production from red deer (Cervus elaphus) as affected by grazing perennial or annual ryegrass pastures, pasture surface height and immunization against melatonin. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 118, 353–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, T. N. (1989). Condensed tannins: their role in ruminant protein and carbohydrate digestion and possible effects upon the rumen ecosystem. In The Roles of Protozoa and Fungi in Ruminant Digestion (Eds Nolan, J. V., Leng, R. A. & Demeyer, D. I.), pp. 153–169. Armidale, Australia: Penambul Books.Google Scholar
Barry, T. N. & Forss, D. A. (1983). The condensed tannin content of vegetative Lotus pedunculatus, its regulation by fertiliser application, and effect upon protein solubility. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 34, 1047–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, T. N., Faichney, G. J. & Redekopp, C. (1985). Gastro-intestinal tract function in sheep infused with somatostatin. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 38, 393–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barry, T. N., Suttie, J. M., Milne, J. A. & Kay, R. N. B. (1991). Control of food intake in domesticated deer. In Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants (Eds Tsuda, T., Sasaki, Y. & Kawashima, R.), pp. 385–402. San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binnerts, W. T., Van Klooster, A. & Frens, A. M. (1968). Soluble chromium indicator measured by atomic absorption in digestion experiments. Veterinary Record 82, 470.Google Scholar
Black, J. L., Gill, M., Beever, D. E., Thornley, J. H. M. & Oldham, J. D. (1987). Simulation of the metabolism of absorbed energy-yielding nutrients in young sheep: efficiency of utilization of acetate. Journal of Nutrition 117, 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domingue, B. M. F., Dellow, D. W. & Barry, T. N. (1991 a). Voluntary intake and rumen digestion of a lowquality roughage by goats and sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 117, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domingue, B. M. F., Dellow, D. W., Wilson, P. R. & Barry, T. N. (1991 b). Comparative digestion in deer, goats, and sheep. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 34, 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, G. J. (1975). The use of markers to partition digestion within the gastro-intestinal tract of ruminants. In Digestion and Metabolism of the Ruminant (Eds McDonald, I. W. & Warner, A. C. I.), pp. 277–291. University of New England Publishing Unit: Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Gill, J. L. (1986). Repeated measurement: sensitive tests for experiments with few animals. Journal of Animal Science 63, 943–954.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Genstat Statistical Software (1988). Genstat 5. Statistics Dept, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Hertfordshire, UK.Google Scholar
Hunt, J. F. & Hay, R. J. M. (1990). Alternative pasture species for deer production in the Waikato. In Ruakura Deer Industry Conference, Proceedings of the Conference held at Ruakura Agricultural Centre (Eds Asher, G. & Squire, J.), pp. 31–33. Hamilton, New Zealand: Ruakura Agricultural Centre.Google Scholar
Korte, C. J., Chu, A. C. P. & Field, T. R. O. (1987). Pasture production. In Livestock Feeding on Pasture (Ed. Nicol, A. M.), pp. 7–20. Hamilton, New Zealand: New Zealand Society of Animal Production.Google Scholar
Mangan, J. L. (1959). Bloat in cattle. XI. The foaming properties of proteins, saponins, and rumen liquor. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 2, 47–61.Google Scholar
Milne, J. A., MacRae, J. C., Spence, A. M. & Wilson, S. (1978). 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). British Journal of Nutrition 40, 347–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niezen, J. H., Barry, T. N., Hodgson, J., Wilson, P. R., Ataja, A. M., Parker, W. J. & Holmes, C. W. (1993). Growth responses in red deer calves and hinds grazing red clover, chicory or perennial ryegrass/white clover swards during lactation. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 121, 255–263.Google Scholar
Robertson, J. B. & Van Soest, P. J. (1980). The detergent system of analysis and its application to human foods. In The Analysis of Dietary Fiber in Food (Eds James, W. P. T. & Theander, O.), pp. 123–158. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Semiadi, G., Barry, T. N., Wilson, P. R., Hodgson, J. & Purchas, R. W. (1993). Growth and venison production from red deer (Cervus elaphus) grazing red clover (Trifolium pratense) or perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne)/while clover (Trifolium repens) pasture. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 121, 265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1980). Statistical Methods. 7th edn.Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Terrill, T. H., Rowan, A. M., Douglas, G. B. & Barry, T. N. (1992). Determination of extractable and bound condensed tannin concentrations in forage plants, protein concentrate meals and cereal grains. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 58, 321–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulyatt, M. J. & MacRae, J. C. (1974). Quantitative digestion of fresh herbage by sheep. I. The sites of digestion of organic matter, energy, readily fermentable carbohydrate, structural carbohydrate, and lipid. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 82, 295–307.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1982). Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Corvallis, Oregon, USA: O&B Books.Google Scholar