Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:36:59.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors influencing the estimation of the nutritive value of the diet selected by cattle fistulated at the oesophagus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. D. H. Cohen
R. D. H. Cohen
Affiliation:
N.S.W. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Station, Grafton, N.S.W. 2460, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Four experiments were conducted to examine the extent to which some sampling procedures may bias the estimation of the nutritive value of herbage consumed by cattle which have been fistulated at the oesophagus.

In one experiment the nitrogen, sulphur and calcium contents (g/100 g organic matter (OM)) and organic matter digestibilities (OMD %) of 15 herbage samples were determined and compared with those of extrusa collectedfrom Hereford cattle fistulated at the oesophagus. The extrusa samples were analysed both as total extrusa, which included saliva, and as extrusa which had been squeezed through muslin and the solid and liquid fractions separated. The herbage samples covered a wide range of nutritive values (0·78–4·92 g N/lOOg OM; 0·08–0·27 g S/100 g OM; 0·17–1·43 g Ca/100 g OM and 34·4–85·7% OMD).

It was concluded that satisfactory estimates of nitrogen, sulphur and calcium contents and digestibility of herbage prehended by cattle can be made from oesophageal fistula extrusa and that the precisions of the estimates will not be increased if extrusa are separated into solid and liquid fractions immediately following collection. Corrections are not necessary for estimates of herbage sulphur, calcium and digestibility made from total extrusa but may be necessary for nitrogen values in excess of 2·74 g N/100 g OM. If extrusa are squeezed it is necessary to apply correction factors for nitrogen and sulphur but not calcium or digestibility.

In the other experiments three factors were examined in relation to the nitrogen content and digestibility of extrusa. They were the effects of (i) previous grazing experience of the pasture (ii) fasting for 0, 3, 6 and 23 h prior to sample collection and (iii) collection of extrusa during the morning or afternoon.

It was concluded that the lack of previous grazing experience of apasture or the length of a pre-collection fast up to 23 h will not significantly bias the estimation of the nutritive value of extrusa, but that it is preferable to collect extrusa samples from cattle in the morning and that sampling on rainy days should be avoided.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 93 , Issue 3 , December 1979 , pp. 607 - 618
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

Alder, F. E. (1969). The use of cattle with oesophageal fistulae in grassland experiments. Journal of the British Grassland Society 24, 6–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, G. W., Mcmanus, W. R., Bush, I. G. & Ball, J. (1964). The use of sheep fitted with oesophageal fistulae to measure diet quality. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 4, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barth, K. M. & Kazzal, N. T. (1971). Separation of the selective grazing by cattle from effects of the esophageal fistula. Journal of Animal Science 33, 1124–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barth, K. M., Chandler, J. E., Fryer, M. E. & Wang, H. C. (1970). Effects of saliva and drying temperature on composition and digestibility of forage samples collected through esophageal fistulas. Journal of Animal Science 31, 794–798.Google Scholar
Bietz, J. A. (1974). Micro-Kjeldahl analysis by an improved automated ammonia determination following manual digestion. Analytical Chemistry 46, 1617–1618.Google Scholar
Campbell, C. M., Eng, K. S., Nelson, A. B. & Pope, L. S. (1968). Use of the esophageal fistula in diet sampling with beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 27 231–233Google Scholar
Cook, C. W., Blake, J. T. & Call, J. W. (1963). The use of esophageal-fistula cannulae for collecting forage samples from both sheep and cattle grazing in common. Journal of Animal Science 22, 579–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edlefson, J. L., Cook, C. W. & Blake, J. T. (1960). Nutrient content of the diet as determined by hand plucked and esophageal fistula samples. Journal of Animal Science 19, 560–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, J. (1969). The use of sheep fitted with oesophageal fistula in grazing studies. Journal of the British Grassland Society 24, 325–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoehne, O. E., Clanton, D. C. & Streeter, C. L. (1967). Chemical changes in esophageal fistula samples caused by salivary contamination and sample preparation. Journal of Animal Science 26, 628–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langlands, J. P. (1966). Studies on the nutritive value of the diet selected by grazing sheep. I. Differences in composition between herbage consumed and material collected from oesophageal fistulae. Animal Production 8, 253–259.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. (1967). Studies on the nutritive value of the diet selected by grazing sheep. II. Some sources of error when sampling oesophageally fistulated sheep at pasture. Animal Production 9, 167–175.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. (1975). Techniques for estimating nutrient intake and its utilization by the grazing ruminant. In Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant (ed. McDonald, I. W. and Warner, A. C. I.), pp. 320–332. Armidale: University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Langlands, J. P. & Sanson, J. (1976). Factors affecting the nutritive value of the diet and the composition of rumen fluid of grazing sheep and cattle. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 27, 691–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lesperance, A. L., Bohman, V. R. & Marble, D. W. (1960). Development of techniques for evaluating grazed forage. Journal of Dairy Science 45, 682–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lesperance, A. L., Clanton, D. C, Nelson, A. B. & Theurer, C. B. (1974). Factors affecting the apparent chemical composition of fistula samples. Publication of the Western Begional Co-ordinating Committee 8. Reno: University of Nevada.Google Scholar
Little, D. A. (1972). Studies on cattle with oesophageal fistulae: The relation of the chemical composition of feed to that of the extruded bolus. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 12, 126–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, D. A. (1975). Studies on cattle with oesophageal fistulae: Comparison of concentrations of mineral nutrients in feeds and associated boluses. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 15, 437–439.Google Scholar
Little, D. A. & Takken, A. (1970). Preparation of oesophageal fistulae in cattle under local anaesthesia. Australian Veterinary Journal 46, 335–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lombard, P. E. & Van Schalkwyk, A. (1963). Changes in the composition of feedstuffs during sampling by means of an oesophageal fistula. South African Journal of Agricultural Science 6, 205–212.Google Scholar
Marshall, B., Torell, D. T. & Bredon, R. M. (1967). Comparison of tropical forages of known composition with samples of these forages collected by esophageal fistulated animals. Journal of Range Management 20, 310–313.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. H., Lofgreen, G. P. & Hull, L. J. (1957). Selective grazing by sheep and cattle. Journal of Animal Science 16, 766–772.Google Scholar
Minson, D. J. & Mcleod, M. N. (1970). The digestibility of temperate and tropical grasses. Proceedings of the XI International Grassland Congress Surfers Paradise, pp. 719–722.Google Scholar
Mottershead, B. E. (1971). Estimation of sulphur in biological materials using the Technicon Auto Analyser. Laboratory Practice 20, 483–484.Google Scholar
Obioha, F. C, Clanton, D. C, Rittenhouse, L. R. & Streeter, C. L. (1970). Sources of variation in chemical composition of forage ingested by esophageal fistulated cattle. Journal of Range Management 23, 133–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1967). Statistical Methods, pp. 296–298. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M. A. & Terry, R. A. (1963). A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18, 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Dyne, G. M. & Torell, D. T. (1964). Development and use of the esophageal fistula: a review. Journal of Range Management 17, 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, J. D., Hyder, D. N. & Van Dyke, G. M. (1972). Salivary contamination of forage selected by esophageal fistulated steers grazing sandhill grassland. Journal of Range Management 25, 184–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, W. C. & Torrell, D. T. (1959). Selective grazing by sheep as shown by a comparison of the chemical composition of the range and pasture forage obtained by hand-clipping and that collected by esophageal fistulated sheep. Journal of Animal Science 18, 641–649.Google Scholar