Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:33:54.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plane of nutrition and starch equivalents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

K. L. Blaxter  and
N. McC. Graham
K. L. Blaxter
Affiliation:
Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
N. McC. Graham
Affiliation:
Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Experiments with two sheep are described in which energy retention was measured at different levels of food intake and the losses of energy incidental to food consumption measured.

2. Attainment of reasonably stable values for energy losses occurred after 72 hr. of fast. On realimentation stable values were not attained until 10 days had elapsed. Methane production was resumed relatively slowly.

3. The accuracy of the mean estimates of energy retention was high, and duplicate determinations of metabolism after lapses of time gave excellent agreement.

4. It is shown that the assumption of linearity of the relationship between energy retention and food intake expressed as metabolizable energy is incorrect.

5. An exponential relationship between energy retention, and food intake was employed to describe the data. This resulted in a reduction of the residual sum of squares compared with a linear regression.

6. It is shown that net energy values (starch equivalents) measured by Kellner, Armsby and Forbes have entirely different meanings, and that the correction employed by Wood reflects these facts.

7. The exponential relationship has been generalized to take into account body-size variation and has been examined as far as it affects concepts of efficiency of food utilization, and of nutritional plane.

8. Nutritional plane has been rigidly defined in such a way that it is independent of body size and of food quality, and it enables net energy values to be predicted at other planes of nutrition once the net energy value at one nutritional plane is known.

9. A simple and rational scheme for the feeding of livestock to take into account the decline in net energy value (starch equivalent) with nutritional plane has been devised.

10. Analysis of the energy losses in relation to nutritional plane shows that losses of energy in faeces, urine and as heat per unit food ingested tend to rise with increasing nutritional plane. Methane losses fall. These results suggest that the prediction of net energy values from measurement of energy losses in faeces, or from estimates of metabolizable energy, can give rise to extremely unreliable results.

11. The results have been discussed in relation to previous work in this field. It is pointed out that the exponential relationships employed are a convenient method of describing a very complex situation and facilitating its analysis.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , October 1955 , pp. 292 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1955

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

A.O.A.C. (1940). Official and Tentative Methods of Analysis of the Association Official Agricultural Chemists, 5th ed.Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Armsby, H. P. (1917). The Nutrition of Farm Animals. New York: MacMillan Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1947). J. Agric. Sci. 38, 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1949–1950). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 20, 1.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Rook, J. A. F. (1954). J. Agric. Sci. (in the Press).Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. & Rook, J. A. F. (1953). Brit. J. Nutr. 7, 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breirem, K. (1944). Kgl. LandtbrAkad. Handl., Stockh., 83, 345.Google Scholar
Crasemann, E. (1947). F.A.O. European Bull. no. 2, p. 106.Google Scholar
Ellis, G. H., Matrone, G. & Maynard, L. A. (1946). J. Anim. Sci. 5, 285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Braman, W. W. & Kriss, M. (1928). J. Agric. Res. 37, 253.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Braman, W. W. & Kriss, M. (1930). J. Agric. Res. 40, 37.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Fries, J. A., Braman, W. W. & Kriss, M. (1926). J. Agric. Res. 33, 483.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. B. & Kriss, M. (1932). J. Nutr. 5, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Kriss, M. & Miller, R. C. (1934). J. Nutr. 8, 535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, E. B. & Swift, R. W. (1941). Bull. Pa Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 415.Google Scholar
Gigon, A. (1911). Pflüg. Arch. ges. Physiol. 140, 509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hellberg, A. (1949). Metabolism of Rabbits at Different Planes of Nutrition, including the Influence of the Duration of Fast and Degree of Fatness. Thesis Univ. Uppsala. Uppsala: Aknquist and Wiksells.Google Scholar
Hoffpauir, C. L. (1950). J. Ass. Off. Agric. Chem. 33, 810.Google Scholar
Jawetz, M. B. (1953). Agric. J. Minist. Agric. 60, 56.Google Scholar
Jensen, E., Klein, J. W., Rauchenstein, E., Woodward, T. E. & Smith, R. H. (1942). Tech. Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric. no. 815.Google Scholar
Kellner, O. (1912). Die Ernährung der Landwistschafteichen Nutztiere. Berlin: Paul Parey.Google Scholar
Kendall, M. G. (1946). The Advanced Theory of Statistics, 2. London: Chas. Griffen and Co.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M., Regan, W. M. & Mead, S. W. (1945). Hilgardia, 16, 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kriss, M. (1931). J. Nutr. 4, 141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kullgren, C. & Tydén, H. (1929). Ingeniörsvetenskas Akad., Handlingar, no. 94. Stockholm.Google Scholar
Marston, H. R. (1948). Aust. J. Sci. Res. B, 1, 93.Google Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. (1935). Report of the Conference on Energy Metabolism, p. 66. Nation. Res. Council Publ., Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. & Hamilton, T. S. (1932). J. Agric. Res. 45, 163.Google Scholar
Mitchell, H. H., Hamilton, T. S. & Haines, W. T. (1941). J. Nutr. 22, 541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Møllgaard, H. (1929). Fütterungslehre des Milchviehs. Hanover: M. and H. Schaper.Google Scholar
Norman, A. G. & Jenkins, S. H. (1933). Biochem. J. 27, 818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, H. (1939). Varratspf. Lebensmittelforsch, 2, 22.Google Scholar
Samsel, E. P. & McHard, J. A. (1942). Industr. Engng Chem. (Anal. ed.). 14, 750.Google Scholar
Watte, R. & Boyd, J. (1953). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 4, 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiegner, G. & Ghoneim, A. (1930). Biedermanns Zbl. B, Tierernährung, 2, 193.Google Scholar
Yates, F., Boyd, D. A. & Pettit, G. H. N. (1942). J. Agric. Sci. 32, 428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar