Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:08:41.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digestion by sheep of ground and unground dried molassed sugarbeet pulp diets and the effect of partially replacing the beet pulp with barley

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

C. Rymer  and
D. G. Armstrong
C. Rymer
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biochemistry and Nutrition, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
D. G. Armstrong
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biochemistry and Nutrition, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A 4 x 4 Latin square design experiment was performed at the Ruminant Research Centre, Cockle Park Farm, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, in 1986 to determine the effect of grinding molassed sugarbeet pulp (MSBP) to varying degrees of fineness on overall apparent digestibility in wether sheep when the product constituted 90% of dry matter intake. A product (designated S) consisting of the pelleted screenings of unground MSBP was significantly less digestible than the other three products. No significant difference in overall apparent digestibility was observed between unground, coarsely ground and finely ground MSBP prepared from the same batch.

In a 4 x 6 randomized block design experiment, mature wethers equipped with rumen, duodenal and ileal cannulae were fed, in two meals, 1000 g concentrates and 100 g chopped hay per day. The concentrates consisted of 820 g mixture of barley and MSBP, 167·5 g soyabean meal, 10 g vitamins and minerals and 2·5 g chromic oxide per kg (fresh weight). The ratio of MSBP: barley was 1:3, 1:1 or 3:1 and the MSBP was either unground or finely ground. The aim was to determine the effect of replacing MSBP with barley on the nature of the rumen fermentation, overall apparent digestibility of the diet and the efficiency of rumen microbial protein synthesis (using 35S as a microbial marker).

There were no significant differences between the six diets in overall apparent digestibility of dry matter and organic matter, but N digestibility increased significantly (P > 0·05) as barley replaced MSBP in the diet. As before, the particle size of MSBP had no effect on overall apparent digestibility of the diet. The quantity of microbial N was reduced (nonsignificantly) and the efficiency of rumen microbial protein synthesis decreased (P > 0·05) compared with the other treatments when sheep were fed diets in which the ratio of MSBP: barley was 1:1. The particle size of MSBP had no effect on these factors.

As barley replaced MSBP in the diet, the mean pH of rumen fluid, calculated over 24 h, tended to decrease and there was a significant increase (P > 0·05) in the length of time that the rumen fluid was below pH 6. There were no significant differences between treatments in the concentration of ammonia-N in the rumen fluid. The dilution rate of rumen fluid (measured using 14C-Cr EDTA and Co EDTA as markers) decreased (P > 0·05) when MSBP replaced barley in the diet, and ground MSBP gave rise to lower (P > 0·05) dilution rates than unground MSBP. There were no significant differences between treatments in the ruminal concentration of total volatile fatty acids (VFAs) or the proportions of individual VFAs.

Type
Review
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 113 , Issue 2 , October 1989 , pp. 223 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council (1980). The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council (1984). The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Supplement No. 1. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Alawa, J. P., Fishwick, G., Parkins, J. J., Hemingway, R. G. & Aitchison, T. C. (1986). Influence of energy source and dietary protein degradability on the voluntary intake and digestibility of barley straw by pregnant beef cows. Animal Production 43, 201–209.Google Scholar
American Society of Agricultural Engineers (1967). Method of determining modulus of uniformity and modulus of fineness of ground feed. Recommendation R.2461, ASAE Yearbook 301.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. G. (1964). Evaluation of artificially dried grass as a source of energy for sheep. II. The energy value of cocksfoot, timothy and two strains of ryegrass at varying stages of maturity. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 62, 399–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. G. (1968). The amount and physical form of feed and milk secretion in the cow. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 27, 57–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhattacharya, A. N., Khan, T. M. & Uwayjan, M. (1975). Dried beet pulp as a sole source of energy in beef and sheep rations. Journal of Animal Science 41, 616–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C. F., Armstrong, D. G. & MacRae, J. E. (1968). The establishment in one operation of a cannula into the rumen and re-entrant cannulae into the duodenum and ileum of the sheep. British Veterinary Journal 124, 78–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castle, M. E. (1972). A comparative study of the feeding value of dried sugarbeet pulp for milk production. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 78, 371–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, M. E., Gill, M. S. & Watson, J. N. (1981). Silage and milk production: a comparison between barley and dried sugarbeet pulp as silage supplements. Grass ana Forage Science 36, 319–324.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, D. G., Thomas, P. C. & Wilson, A. G. (1976). Efficiency of bacterial protein synthesis in the rumen of sheep receiving a diet of sugarbeet pulp and barley. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 27, 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy, M. J. & Wilson, R. K. (1966). Development and application of a new method for predicting the digestibility and intake of herbage samples. Proceedings, 10th International Grassland Conference, Helsinki, pp. 445–453.Google Scholar
Cottyn, B. G. & Boucque, C. V. (1968). Rapid method for gas-chromatographic determination of volatile fatty acids in rumen fluid. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 16, 105–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland (1978). Feedingstuffs Evaluation Unit Second Report. Aberdeen, UK: Rowett Research Institute.Google Scholar
Elliott, R. & Armstrong, D. G. (1982). The effect of urea and urea plus sodium sulphate on microbial protein production in the rumens of sheep given diets high in alkali-treated barley straw. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 99, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, S. T. M., Lee, N. H. & Ørskov, E. R. (1984). Digestion and utilisation of straw. 2. Effect of different supplements on the digestion of ammonia-treated straw. Animal Production 38, 75–81.Google Scholar
Faichney, G. J. (1980). Measurement in sheep of the quantity and composition of rumen digesta and the fractional outflow rates of digesta constituents. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 31, 1129–1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, G. J. (1986). The kinetics of paniculate matter in the rumen. In Control of digestion and metabolism in ruminants. (Eds Milligan, L. P., Grovum, W. L. & Dobson, A.) pp. 173–195. New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Harrison, D. G. & McAllan, A. B. (1980). Factors affecting microbial growth yields in the reticulo-rumen. In Digestive physiology and metabolism in ruminants (Eds Ruckebusch, Y. & Thivend, P.) pp. 205–226. Westport, CT: AUI Publishing Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiltner, P. & Dehority, B. A. (1983). Effect of soluble carbohydrates on the digestion of cellulose by pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 46, 642–648.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerley, M. S., Kinser, A. R., Firkins, J. L., Fahey, G. C. Jr. & Berger, L. L. (1985). Effects of roughage particle size on site of nutrient digestion and digesta flow through the gastrointestinal tract of sheep fed corncob-concentrate diets. Journal of Animal Science 61, 504–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kinser, A. R., Kerley, M. S., Fahey, G. C. Jr & Berger, L. (1985). Effect of roughage particle size on ruminal, digestive and metabolic characteristics of early weaned lambs fed pelleted corncob-concentrate diets. Journal of Animal Science 61, 514–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mathers, J. C. & Miller, E. L. (1981). Quantitative studies of food protein degradation and the energetic efficiency of microbial protein synthesis in the rumen of sheep given chopped lucerne and rolled barley. British Journal of Nutrition 45, 587–604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, D. S. & Payne, D. S. (1959). A ballistic bomb calorimeter. British Journal of Nutrition 13, 501–508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1980). Nutrient allowances and composition of feedingstuffs for ruminants. Booklet 2087. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1982). The analysis of agricultural materials. 2nd edn. Technical Bulletin 27. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Morant, S. V., Ridley, J. L. & Sutton, J. D. (1978). A model for the estimation of volatile fatty acid production in the rumen in non-steady state conditions. British Journal of Nutrition 39, 451–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offer, N. W., Axford, R. E. & Evans, R. A. (1979). The effect of dietary energy on nitrogen metabolism in sheep. British Journal of Nutrition 40, 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, F. N. & Goetsch, A. L. (1986). Digesta passage and microbial protein synthesis. In Control of digestion and metabolism in ruminants (Eds Milligan, L. P., Grovum, W. L. & Dobson, A.), pp. 196–223. New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Rode, L. M., Weakly, D. C. & Satter, L. D. (1985). Effect of forage amount and particle size in diets of lactating dairy cows on site of digestion and microbial protein synthesis. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 65, 101–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooke, J. A., Lee, N. H. & Armstrong, D. G. (1987). The effects of intraruminal infusions of urea, casein, glucose syrup and a mixture of casein and glucose syrup on nitrogen digestion in the rumen of cattle receiving grasssilage diets. British Journal of Nutrition 57, 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rymer, C. (1988). Digestion of molassed sugarbeet pulp by ruminants. PhD thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Shotton, S. A., Parker, D. S. & Armstrong, D. G. (1987). Estimation of the endogenous N entering the small intestine of sheep. Proceedings, 5th International Symposium on Protein Metabolism and Nutrition. Rostock, German Democratic Republic: EAAP Publication No. 35, p. 70.Google Scholar
Shriver, B. J., Hoover, W. H., Sargent, J. P., Crawford, R. J. & Thayne, W. V. (1986). Fermentation of a high concentrate diet as affected by ruminal pH and digesta flow. Journal of Dairy Science 69, 413–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tetlow, R. M. (1974). A method for determining particle size distribution in packages of dried forage. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 19, 347–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, P. C. & Rook, J. A. F. (1977). Manipulation of rumen fermentation In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition (Eds Haresign, W. & Lewis, D.), pp. 83–109. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Thomson, D. J. & Beever, D. E. (1980). The effect of conservation and processing on the digestion of forages by ruminants. In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants. (Ruckebusch, Eds Y. & Thivend, P.). pp. 291–308. Lancaster, UK: MIP Press Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uden, P., Colucci, P. & Van Soest, P. J. (1980). Investigation of chromium, cerium and cobalt as markers in digesta. Rate of passage studies. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 31, 625–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, P. J. & McQueen, R. W. (1973). The chemistry and estimation of fibre. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 32, 123–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welch, J. G. & Smith, A. M. (1971). Effect of beet pulp and citrus pulp on rumination activity. Journal of Animal Science 33, 472–475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, C. H., David, D. J. & Ismaa, O. (1962). The determination of chromic oxide in faeces samples by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 59, 381–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar