Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T22:03:41.402Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The associative effect of level of energy and protein intake in the dairy cow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

F. J. Gordon  and
T. J. Forbes
F. J. Gordon
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough and The Queen's University of Belfast
T. J. Forbes
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough and The Queen's University of Belfast
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Eight lactating cows were used in a Latin square experiment, to study the associative effects of level of energy and protein intake on milk yield and composition. Four diets were used, supplying 80 and 120% of estimated energy requirements and 80 and 120% of estimated protein requirements. The level of energy intake significantly affected milk yield, milk energy output, percentage butterfat, ash and non-protein nitrogen. The level of protein intake only significantly affected milk energy output and the non-protein nitrogen content of the milk. Although only the interaction of the effects of energy and protein intake on the milk content of solidsnot-fat (SNF) and ash was significant, it was evident that the effect of each of these factors on milk yield or composition was related to the level of the other in the diet.

Input-output relationships within each protein level were used to compute the response in milk energy output and bodyweight change to a change in energy intake. These showed a greater partitioning of additional energy toward milk energy output with the high than with the low protein level. Multiple regression analysis within each level of protein intake was used to partition energy intake between that used for maintenance, milk energy output and liveweight change. The results showed efficiencies of utilization of metabolizable energy for milk output of 63 and 50% on the high- and low-protein diets, respectively.

Nitrogen balance data are presented.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , October 1970 , pp. 481 - 491
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1970

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 (1965). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2, Ruminants. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1959). In Scientific Principles of Feeding Farm Livestock, p. 21. London: Farmer & Stockbreeder Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1966). The Feeding of Dairy Cows for Optimal Production. George Scott Robertson Memorial Lecture, Queen's University, Belfast.Google Scholar
Burt, A. W. A. (1957). Dairy Sci. Abstr. 19, 435.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955). Biometrics 11, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flatt, W. P., Moe, P. W., Moore, L. A., Hooven, N. W., Lehmann, R. P., Ørskov, E. R. & Hemken, R. W. (1966). Paper P·3 Annual Meeting, American Dairy Science Association Corvallis, Oregon.Google Scholar
Hashizume, T., Morimoto, H., Masubuchi, T., Abe, M. & Hamada, T. (1965). 3rd Symposium on Energy Metabolism (Ed. Blaxter, K. L.) p. 111. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M. (1961). The Fire of Life—an Introduction to Animal Energetics. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M., Regan, W. M. & Mead, S. W. (1945). Hilgardia 16, 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ling, E. R. (1963). A Text-book of Dairy Chemistry, vol. 2, p. 95. London: Chapman and Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
Logan, V. S., Miles, V. & Haskell, S. R. (1959). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 39, 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, H. L. (1943). J. Dairy Sci. 26, 1011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (1956). Publs. natn. Res. Coun., Wash. no. 464, 3rd ed.Google Scholar
Patterson, H. D. & Lucas, H. L. (1962). Tech. Bull. N. Carol, agric. Exp. Stn no. 147.Google Scholar
Reid, D. & Holmes, W. (1956). J. Dairy Res. 23, 159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rook, J. A. F. (1953). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 12, viii.Google Scholar
Rook, J. A. F. (1961). Dairy Sci. Abstr. 23, 250.Google Scholar
Rook, J. A. F. & Line, C. (1962). 16th Int. Dairy Congr., Copenhagen A, 57.Google Scholar
Van Es, A. J. H. (1966). 9th Int. Congr. Anim. Prod. Edinburgh, p. 225.Google Scholar
Williams, E. J. (1949). Aust. J. scient. Res. A2, 149.Google Scholar
Woodman, H. E. (1948). Bull. Minist. Agric. Fish., Lond. no. 48. 11th edn.Google Scholar
Woodman, H. E. (1957). Bull. Minist. Agric. Fish., Lond. no. 48, 14th edn.Google Scholar