DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Feed intake, digestibility and energy partitioning in beef cattle fed diets with cassava pulp instead of rice straw

  • Kongphitee, Kanokwan (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University) ;
  • Sommart, Kritapon (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University) ;
  • Phonbumrung, Thamrongsak (Bureau of Animal Nutrition Development, Department of Livestock Development) ;
  • Gunha, Thidarat (Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University) ;
  • Suzuki, Tomoyuki (Animal Production and Grassland Division, Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences)
  • Received : 2017.10.16
  • Accepted : 2018.03.05
  • Published : 2018.09.01

Abstract

Objective: This study was conducted to assess the effects of replacing rice straw with different proportions of cassava pulp on growth performance, feed intake, digestibility, rumen microbial population, energy partitioning and efficiency of metabolizable energy utilization in beef cattle. Methods: Eighteen yearling Thai native beef cattle (Bos indicus) with an average initial body weight (BW) of $98.3{\pm}12.8kg$ were allocated to one of three dietary treatments and fed ad libitum for 149 days in a randomized complete block design. Three dietary treatments using different proportions of cassava pulp (100, 300, and 500 g/kg dry matter basis) instead of rice straw as a base in a fermented total mixed ration were applied. Animals were placed in a metabolic pen equipped with a ventilated head box respiration system to determine total digestibility and energy balance. Results: The average daily weight gain, digestible intake and apparent digestibility of dry matter, organic matter and non-fiber carbohydrate, total protozoa, energy intake, energy retention and energy efficiency increased linearly (p<0.05) with an increasing proportion of cassava pulp in the diet, whereas the three main types of fibrolytic bacteria and energy excretion in the urine (p<0.05) decreased. The metabolizable energy requirement for the maintenance of yearling Thai native cattle, determined by a linear regression analysis, was $399kJ/kg\;BW^{0.75}$, with an efficiency of metabolizable energy utilization for growth of 0.86. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated that increasing the proportion of cassava pulp up to 500 g/kg of dry matter as a base in a fermented total mixed ration is an effective strategy for improving productivity in zebu cattle.

Keywords

Bos indicus;Intake;Digestibility;Rumen Microbes;Energy Requirement

Acknowledgement

Supported by : National Research Council of Thailand

References

  1. Fiems LO, De Boever JL, Vanacker JM, De Campeneere S. Maintenance energy requirements of double-muscled Belgian blue beef cows. Animals 2015;5:89-100. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani5010089
  2. Ma T, Xu GS, Deng KD, et al. Energy requirements of earlyweaned Dorper cross-bred female lambs. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr 2016;100:1081-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12481
  3. Ogino A, Sommart K, Subepang S, et al. Environmental impacts of extensive and intensive beef production systems in Thailand evaluated by life cycle assessment. J Clean Prod 2016;112:22-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.110
  4. The Working Committee of Thai Feeding Standard for Ruminant. Nutrient requirement of beef cattle in Indochinese Peninsula. 1st rev. ed. Khon Kaen, Thailand: Klungnanavithaya Press; 2010.
  5. Chaokaur A, Nishida T, Phaowphaisal I, Sommart K. Effects of feeding level on methane emissions and energy utilization of Brahman cattle in the tropics. Agric Ecosyst Environ 2015;199:225-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.09.014
  6. Tangjitwattanachai N, Phaowphaisal I, Otsuka M, Sommart K. Enteric methane emission, energetic efficiency and energy requirements for maintenance of beef cattle in the tropics. Jpn Agric Res Q 2015;49:399-407. https://doi.org/10.6090/jarq.49.399
  7. Kamphayae S, Kumagai H, Angthong W, Narmseelee R, Bureenok S. Effects of different ratios and storage periods of liquid brewer's yeast mixed with cassava pulp on chemical composition, fermentation quality and in vitro ruminal fermentation. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2017;30:470-8.
  8. Sommart K, Parker DS, Rowlinson P, Wanapat M. Fermentation characteristics and microbial protein synthesis in an in vitro system using cassava, rice straw and dried Ruzi grass as substrates. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2000;13:1084-93. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2000.1084
  9. Sommart K, Wanapat M, Rowlinson P, et al. The use of cassava chips as an energy source for lactating dairy cows fed with rice straw. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2000;13:1094-101. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2000.1094
  10. Lofgreen GP, Garrett WN. A system for expressing net energy requirements and feed values for growing and finishing beef cattle. J Anim Sci 1968;27:793-806. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1968.273793x
  11. Agricultural Research Council. The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Farnham Royal, Slough, UK: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux; 1980.
  12. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000.
  13. Chuntrakort P, Otsuka M, Hayashi K, et al. The effect of dietary coconut kernels, whole cotton seeds and sunflower seeds on the intake, digestibility and enteric methane emissions of Zebu beef cattle fed rice straw based diets. Livest Sci 2014;161:80-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2014.01.003
  14. Kongphitee K, Udchachon S, Otsuka M, Sommart K. Energetic efficiency of Thai native beef cattle fed rice straw or Ruzi straw base diet. Khon Kaen Agric J 2010;38:176-9.
  15. Marcondes MI, Tedeschi LO, Valadares Filho SC, Gionbelli MP. Predicting efficiency of use of metabolizable energy to net energy for gain and maintenance of Nellore cattle. J Anim Sci 2013;91:4887-98. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-4051
  16. Chizzotti ML, Tedeschi LO, Valadares Filho SC. A meta-analysis of energy and protein requirements for maintenance and growth of Nellore cattle. J Anim Sci 2008;86:1588-97. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0309
  17. Kongphitee K, Sommart K. Ensilage quality, digestibility and enteric methane emission of the fermented total mixed ration in Thai native beef cattle. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Tropical Animal Science and Production; 2016 Jul 26-29, Bangkok, Thailand. Lerdsilp Printing; 2016. pp. 116-20.
  18. Suzuki T, Phaowphaisal I, Pholsen P, et al. In vivo nutritive value of Pangola grass (Digitaria eriantha) hay by a novel indirect calorimeter with a ventilated hood in Thailand. Jpn Agric Res Q 2008;42:123-9. https://doi.org/10.6090/jarq.42.123
  19. Brouwer E. Report of sub-committee on constants and factors. In: Blaxter KL, editors. Energy metabolism of farm animals. London, UK: Academic Press; 1965. p. 441-3.
  20. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis, 16th ed. Arlington, VA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists; 1995.
  21. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:3583-97. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  22. Galyean ML. Laboratory Procedures in Animal Nutrition Research, 12th ed. Lubbock, TX: Department of Animal and Food Science; 1997.
  23. Fawcett JK, Scott JE. A rapid and precise method for the determination of urea. J Clin Pathol 1960;13:156-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.13.2.156
  24. Porter MG, Murray RS. The volatility of components of grass silage on oven drying and the inter-relationship between drymatter content estimated by different analytical methods. Grass Forage Sci 2001;56:405-11. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2494.2001.00292.x
  25. Sylvester JT, Karnati SKR, Yu Z, Morrison M, Firkins JL. Development of an assay to quantify rumen ciliate protozoal biomass in cows using real-time PCR. J Nutr 2004;134:3378-84. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/134.12.3378
  26. Denman SE, Mcsweeney CS. Development of a real-time PCR assay for monitoring anaerobic fungal and cellulolytic bacterial populations within the rumen. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2006;58:572-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2006.00190.x
  27. Koike S, Kobayashi Y. Development and use of competitive PCR assays for the rumen cellulolytic bacteria: Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2001;204:361-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2001.tb10911.x
  28. Denman SE, Tomkins NW, Mcsweeney CS. Quantitation and diversity analysis of ruminal methanogenic populations in response to the antimethanogenic compound bromochloromethane. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2007;62:313-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2007.00394.x
  29. Jin W, Cheng YF, Mao SY, Zhu WY. Discovery of a novel rumen methanogen in the anaerobic fungal culture and its distribution in the rumen as revealed by real-time PCR. BMC Microbiol 2014;14:104. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2180-14-104
  30. Kaewpila C. Energy utilization and enteric methane emission assessment in beef cattle fed on selected tropical feeds [dissertation]. Khon Kaen, Thailand: Khon Kaen University; 2016.
  31. Wang C, Nishino N. Effects of storage temperature and ensiling period on fermentation products, aerobic stability and microbial communities of total mixed ration silage. J Appl Microbiol 2013;114:1687-95. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.12200
  32. Rabelo E, Rezende RL, Bertics SJ, Grummer RR. Effects of transition diets varying in dietary energy density on lactation performance and ruminal parameters of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2003;86:916-25. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73674-1
  33. Koike S, Yabuki H, Kobayashi Y. Interaction of rumen bacteria as assumed by colonization patterns on untreated and alkalitreated rice straw. Anim Sci J 2014;85:524-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12176
  34. Newbold CJ, de la Fuente G, Belanche A, Ramos-Morales E, McEwan NR. The role of ciliate protozoa in the rumen. Front Microbiol 2015;6:1313.
  35. Miron J, Adin G, Solomon R, et al. Effects of feeding cows in early lactation with soy hulls as partial forage replacement on heat production, retained energy and performance. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2010;155:9-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2009.09.012
  36. Pathak AK, Dutta N, Pattanaik AK, Chaturvedi VB, Sharma K. Effect of condensed tannins from Ficus infectoria and Psidium guajava leaf meal mixture on nutrient metabolism, methane emission and performance of lambs. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2017;30:1702-10. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.17.0060
  37. Hales KE, Brown-Brandl TM, Freetly HC. Effects of decreased dietary roughage concentration on energy metabolism and nutrient balance in finishing beef cattle. J Anim Sci 2014;92:264-71. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6994
  38. Ferrell CL, Jenkins TG. Energy utilization by Hereford and Simmental males and females. Anim Prod 1985;41:53-61. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100017542
  39. Calegare L, Alencar MM, Packer IU, Lanna DPD. Energy requirements and cow/calf efficiency of Nellore and Continental and British Bos taurus$\times$Nellore crosses. J Anim Sci 2007; 85:2413-22. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-448
  40. Ferrell CL, Oltjen JW. ASAS CENTENNIAL PAPER: Net energy systems for beef cattle - concepts, application, and future models. J Anim Sci 2008;86:2779-94.
  41. Kirkland RM, Gordon FJ. The metabolisable energy requirement for maintenance and the efficiency of use of metabolisable energy for lactation and tissue gain in dairy cows offered a straw/concentrate ration. Livest Prod Sci 1999;61:23-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(99)00046-9