Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:03:51.584Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The relative importance of the total cell wall and quantity of digested cell wall in the regulation of the voluntary intake of grass hays by sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

K. W. Moir
Affiliation:
Animal Research Institute, Yeerongpilly, Brisbane, Australia
L. Laws
Affiliation:
Animal Research Institute, Yeerongpilly, Brisbane, Australia
G. Blight
Affiliation:
Animal Research Institute, Yeerongpilly, Brisbane, Australia

Summary

In 18 digestibility experiments with sheep, 9 diets consisting of single-grass hays and 9 diets each consisting of equal quantities of a good and poor quality hay were fed. Correlations between the voluntary intake of organic matter, digested organic matter, total cell wall and digested cell wall in all possible combinations were investigated. There were no significant differences among the simple correlation coefficients for hays fed singly or as mixtures, even though they were eaten in very different amounts. The simple pooled correlationswere significant (P < 0·01) among voluntary intake, digested organic matter and cell wall. The cell wall was significantly correlated with digested cell wall, but there was no simple correlation between voluntary intake and digested cell wall. However, when considered together in a multiple linear model they explained 58% of the variation in voluntary intake compared with 43% explained by the total cell wall alone. The additional variation accounted for by the digested cell wall was significant (P < 0·05).

The relative importance of the total cell wall and digested cell wall is discussed in relation to selection in grass breeding.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

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

Balch, C. C. & Campling, R. C. (1962). Regulation of food intake in ruminants. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 32, 669–86.Google ScholarPubMed
Baumgardt, B. R. (1970). In Physiology of Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant (ed. Phillipson, A. T..) Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Oriel Press.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. & Wilson, R. S. (1961). The regulation of food intake by sheep. Animal Production 3, 5161.Google Scholar
Lovelace, D. A., Holt, E. C, Ellis, W. C. & Bashaw, E. C. (1972). Nutritive value estimates in apomictio lines of buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris L.). Agronomy Journal 64, 453–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moir, K. W. (1971). In vivo and in vitro digestible fractions in forage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 22, 338–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moir, K. W. (1972). An assessment of the quality of forage from its cell-wall content and amount of cell wall digested. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 78, 355–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moir, K. W. (1973). The relationship between in vitro digestible cell wall and the cell-wall content of forage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 81, 533–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moir, K. W. (1974). The constancy of the digested cell wall in grass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 83, 295–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1965). Symposium of factors influencing the voluntary intake of herbage by ruminants: voluntary intake in relation to chemical composition and digestibility. Journal of Animal Science 24, 834–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1967). Development of a comprehensive system of feed analysis and its application to forages. Journal of Animal Science 26, 119–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1969). In Nutrition of Animals of Agricultural Importance. 1. The Science of Nutrition of Farm Livestock (ed. Cuthbertson, D..) London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar