Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T16:01:17.628Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of nitrogen source in the diet on milk production and amino-acid uptake by the udder

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

R. C. Kellaway ,
S. S. E. Ranawana ,
J. H. Buchanan  and
L. D. Smart
R. C. Kellaway
Affiliation:
Dairy Research Unit, Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney Farms, Camden, N.S.W. 2570, Australia
S. S. E. Ranawana
Affiliation:
Dairy Research Unit, Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney Farms, Camden, N.S.W. 2570, Australia
J. H. Buchanan
Affiliation:
Dairy Research Unit, Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney Farms, Camden, N.S.W. 2570, Australia
L. D. Smart
Affiliation:
Dairy Research Unit, Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney Farms, Camden, N.S.W. 2570, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Two experiments were carried out with Friesian cows grazing improved winter pastures. In expt 1, 12 cows were fed 6·6kg/d of a barley-based concentrate containing either no N supplement, or supplements of casein, formaldehydeprotected casein or urea which provided 48 g N/d. In expt 2, 12 cows were fed 2·6kg/d of a barley-based concentrate containing either casein, formaldehyde-protected casein or equal mixtures of both, all of which provided 96g N/d.

In expt 1, although the production of fat-corrected milk was 7·1% higher and that of total solids 6·1% higher on the protected casein than on the casein diet, production of milk and milk constituents on the control and urea diets were similar to values obtained for cows fed protected casein. In expt 2, milk production and composition were unaffected by treatments.

The concentrations of amino acids in jugular plasma and mammary uptake per litre of plasma were not affected by the experimental diets in expt 1, and were unrelated to milk yield in either experiment. In expt 2 the concentrations of glycine, serine and threonine in jugular plasma were significantly higher in the diet in which none of the casein was protected. Mobilization of muscle protein may have been responsible for the elevated levels of glycine in cows fed this diet. Mammary uptakes of essential amino acids in expts 1 and 2 were respectively 47 and 42% of those available, whereas the uptakes of non-essential amino acids were respectively 24 and 17% of those available.

An attempt was made to determine the amino acids most likely to limit milk production. Milk:uptake concentration ratios were obtained using our values for amino-acid uptakes and values published previously for the concentration of amino acids in milk. The results of these calculations suggest that the amino acids most likely to limit milk production are threonine, phenylalanine and methionine.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , October 1974 , pp. 305 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1974

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

Annison, E. F. & Linzell, J. L. (1964). Journal of Physiology 175, 372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (1965).Official Methods of Analysis, 10th edn, p.223. Washington: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.Google Scholar
Barry, J. M. (1956). Biochemical Journal 63, 669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowie, A. T., Hartmann, P. E. & Turvey, A. (1969). Journal of Endocrinology 43, 651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. G. (1959).Milk Testing, 2nd edn, p.99. London: Dairy Industries.Google Scholar
Davis, J. G. & Macdonald, F. J. (Rev.) (1953).Richmond's Dairy Chemistry, 5th edn, p.358. London: Charles Griffin and Co.Google Scholar
Duncan, C. W., Watson, G. I., Dunn, K. M. & Ely, R. E. (1952). Journal of Dairy Science 35, 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, A. R. (1965).Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 16, 451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, A. R. (1972). Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 32, 87.Google Scholar
Egan, A. R. & Moir, R. J. (1965). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 16, 437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, K. A., Hemsley, J. A. & Reis, P. J. (1967). Australian Journal of Science 30, 215.Google Scholar
Hall, G. A. B., Papas, A., Hatfield, E. E. & Owens, F. N. (1972). Feedstuffs 44 (35), 29.Google Scholar
Jacobson, D. R., Van Horn, H. H. & Sniffen, C. J. (1970). Federation Proceedings 29, 35.Google Scholar
Kronfeld, D. S., Raggi, F. & Ramberg, C. F. Jr (1968). American Journal of Physiology 215, 218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, H. L. (1956). Journal of Dairy Science 39, 146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macrae, J. C., Ulyatt, M. J., Pearce, P. D. & Hendtlass, J. (1972). British Journal of Nutrition 27, 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mepham, T. B. & Linzell, J. L. (1966). Biochemical Journal 101, 76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moe, P. W., Tyrrell, H. F. & Flatt, W. P. (1971). Journal of Dairy Science 54, 548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nimrick, K., Hatfield, E. E., Kaminski, J. & Owens, F. N. (1970). Journal of Nutrition 100, 1293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & Benzie, D. (1969). British Journal of Nutrition 23, 415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, E. R., Fraser, C. & Corse, E. L. (1971). Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 30, 25A.Google Scholar
Papas, A., Nimrick, K., Owens, F. N. & Hatfield, E. E. (1971). Journal of Animal Science 33, 1169.Google Scholar
Paquay, R., De Baere, R. & Lousse, A. (1972). British Journal of Nutrition 27, 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, R. A., McCarthy, R. D. & Griel, L. C. Jr (1968). Journal of Dairy Science 51, 1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, R. A., McCarthy, R. D. & Griel, L. C. Jr (1970). Journal of Dairy Science 53, 460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, T. L. & Hansen, S. (1969). Clinica Chimica Acta 25, 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polan, C. E., Chandler, P. T. & Miller, C. N. (1970). Journal of Dairy Science 53, 607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowland, S. J. (1938). Journal of Dairy Research 9, 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schingoethe, D. J., Hageman, E. C. & Larson, B. L. (1967). Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 148, 469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spector, W. S. (Ed.) (1956).Handbook of Biological Data, p.199. Philadelphia, Pa: W. B. Saunders Co.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. & Torrie, J. H. (1960).Principles and Procedures of Statistics, p.107. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Verbeke, R. & Peeters, G. (1965). Biochemical Journal 94, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verbeke, R., Peeters, G., Massart-leën, A. M. & Cocquyt, G. (1968). Biochemical Journal 106, 719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vik-mo, L. & Huber, J. T. (1971). Journal of Dairy Science 54, 790.Google Scholar
Virtanen, A. I. (1970). 18th International Dairy Congress, Sydney 2, 480.Google Scholar
Weston, R. H. (1973). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 24, 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, G. F. (1970). Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 30, 123.Google Scholar