DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Nutritional and performance viability of cactus Opuntia-based diets with different concentrate levels for Girolando lactating dairy cows

  • Received : 2018.12.06
  • Accepted : 2019.04.22
  • Published : 2020.01.01

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this research was to evaluate the effect of different concentrate levels in diets based on cactus Opuntia Stricta (Haw.) Haw cladodes on the performance of lactating Girolando cows. Methods: The experiment involved 10 Girolando multiparous dairy cows at 512.6 kg of body weight (BW) and producing 13.2 kg milk/d, allocated into two 5×5 Latin squares. The experimental treatments consisted of control diet composed by cactus Nopalea cochenillifera. Salm-Dyck. cladodes (Nopalea), forage sorghum silage and concentrate at 20% on dry matter (DM) basis, and four concentrate levels diets (20%, 24%, 28%, and 32%) plus cactus Opuntia stricta (Haw.) Haw. cladodes (Opuntia) and forage sorghum silage. Results: Regarding cows fed control diet, the nutrients intake were greater than for cows fed with cactus Opuntia and concentrate. Regarding concentrate levels, intakes of DM, organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP), non-fiber carbohydrates (NFC), and total digestible nutrients of cows increased linearly. Organic matter, CP, and NDF digestibilities were similar in between to control diet and cactus Opuntia-based diets. The digestibility of NFC increased linearly when the concentrate was inserted. The N balance was the same for control diet and cactus Opuntia-based diets, irrespective the concentrate levels. Conclusion: For cows producing 14 kg/d with 3.5% of fat, it is recommended 32% of concentrate to be included in cactus Opuntia-based diets, and the increase in concentrate level promotes a linear increase in milk yield.

References

  1. Ferreira MA, Silva RR, Ramos AO, Veras ASC, Melo AAS, Guimaraes AV. Microbial protein synthesis and urea nitrogen concentrations in lactating dairy cows fed spineless cactus and different forages based diets. R Bras Zootec 2009;38:159-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982009000100020 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982009000100020
  2. Oliveira MC, Campos JMS, Oliveira AS, Ferreira MA, Melo AS. Benchmarks for milk production systems in the Pernambuco Agreste Region, Northeastern Brazil. R Caatinga 2016; 29:725-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252016v29n324rc https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252016v29n324rc
  3. Wanderley WL, Ferreira MA, Batista AMV, et al. Intake, digestibility and ruminal measures in sheep feed silage and hay in association with cactus pear. R Bras Saude Prod Anim 2012;13:444-56. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1519-99402012000200 013 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-99402012000200013
  4. Araujo PRB, Ferreira MA, Brasil LHA, et al. Replacement of corn by forage cactus in the total mixed rations for crossbreed lactating cows. R Bras Zootec 2004;33:1850-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982004000700024 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982004000700024
  5. Silva RC, Ferreira MA, Oliveira JCV, et al. Orelha de Elefante Mexicans (Opuntia stricta [Haw.] Haw.) spineless cactus as an option in crossbred dairy cattle diet. S Afr J Anim Sci 2018;48:516-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v48i3.12 https://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v48i3.12
  6. Santos DC, Silva MC, Dubeux junior JCB, Lira MA, Silva RM. Strategies for using semiarid zones in cactaceous: new variety and sustainable use of native species. Rev Cient Prod Anim 2013;15:111-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.15528/2176-4158/rcpa.v15n2p111-121 https://doi.org/10.15528/2176-4158/rcpa.v15n2p111-121
  7. Rocha Filho RR. Cactus giant cladodes and genotypes resistant to carmine cochineal in diets for ruminants [thesis]. Recife, Brazil: Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco; 2012.
  8. National Research Council. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 7th ed revised. Washington, DC, USA: National Academic Science; 2001.
  9. Torres LCL, Ferreira MA, Guim A, Vilela MS, Guimaraes AV, Silva EC. Replacement of giant forage cactus by small forage cactus to growing dairy cattle diets and evaluation of internal markes. R Bras Zootec 2009;38:2264-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982009001100028 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982009001100028
  10. Valente TNP, Detmann E, Sampaio CB. Review: recent advances in evaluation of bags made from different textiles used in situ ruminal degradation. Can J Anim Sci 2015;95:493-8. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas-2015-100 https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas-2015-100
  11. Weiss WP. Energy prediction equations for ruminant feeds. In: Proceedings of the 61th Cornell Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers. Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell University; 1999. p. 176-85.
  12. Detmann E, Souza MA, Valadares Filho SC, et al. Methods for feed analysis INCT - Animal Science. Visconde do Rio Branco, MG, Brazil: Suprema; 2012.
  13. Detmann E, Valadares Filho SC. The estimation of non-fibrous carbohydrates in feeds and diets. Arq Bras Med Vet Zootec 2010;62:980-4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-093520100 00400030 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-09352010000400030
  14. Chizzotti ML, Valadares Filho SC, Valadares RFD, Chizzotti FHM, Tedeschi LO. Determination of creatinine excretion and evaluation of spot urine sampling in Holstein cattle. Livest Sci 2008;113:218-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2007.03. 013 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2007.03.013
  15. Chen XB, Gomes MJ. Estimation of microbial protein supply to sheep and cattle based on urinary excretion of purine derivatives - an overview of technical details. Aberdeen, UK: International Feed Research Unit. Rowett Research Institute; 1992 (occasional publication). 21 p.
  16. Valadares Filho SC, Valadares RFD. Recent advances in protein in dairy cow nutrition. In: Proceedings Simpósio de bovinocultura de leite. Lavras, MG, Brazil: UFLA; 2001.
  17. Gonzalez-Ronquillo M, Balcells J, Guada JA, Vicente F. Purine derivative excretion in dairy cows: endogenous excretion and the effect of exogenous nucleic acid supply. J Dairy Sci 2003;86:1282-91. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73712-6 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73712-6
  18. ISO 9622/IDF 141C. Determination of milk fat, protein, lactose, and urea content: Guidance on the operation of mid-infrared instruments. Bruxelas, Belgium: 2013. 14 p.
  19. Sklan D, Ashkenazi R, Braun A, Devorin A, Tabori K. Fatty acids, calcium soaps of fatty acids, and cottonseeds fed to high yielding cows. J Dairy Sci 1992;75:2463-72. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)78008-4 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)78008-4
  20. Monteiro CCF, Ferreira MA, Veras ASC, et al. A new cactus variety for dairy cows in areas infested with Dactylopius Opuntiae. Anim Prod Sci 2018;59:479-85. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN17256
  21. Foley PA, Kenny DA, Callan JJ, Boland TM, O'Mara FP. Effect of DL-malic acid supplementation on feed intake, methane emission, and rumen fermentation in beef cattle. J Anim Sci 2009;87:1048-57. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1026 https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1026
  22. Silva ETS, Melo AAS, Ferreira MA, et al. Acceptability by Girolando heifers and nutritional value of erect prickly pear stored for different periods. Pesq Agropec Bras 2017;52:761-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s0100-204x2017000900008 https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-204x2017000900008
  23. Owens FN, Goetsh AL. Fermentacion ruminal. In: Church DC. The ruminant: digestive physiology and nutrition. Zaragoza, Spain: Acribia; 1993. p.159-90.
  24. Inacio JG, Ferreira MA, Silva RC, et al. Sugarcane bagasse as exclusive roughage for dairy heifers. R Bras Zootec 2017;46:80-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1806-92902017000100012 https://doi.org/10.1590/s1806-92902017000100012
  25. Chung Y, Pickett MM, Cassidy TW, Varga GA. Effects of prepartum dietary carbohydrate source and monensin on periparturient metabolism and lactation in multiparous cows. J Dairy Sci 2008;91:2744-58. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0781 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0781
  26. Ospina PA, Nydam DV, Stokol T, Overton TR. Evaluation of nonesterified fatty acids and ${\beta}$-hydroxybutyrate in transition dairy cattle in the northeastern United States: Critical thresholds for prediction of clinical diseases. J Dairy Sci 2010;93:546-54. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2277 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2277
  27. Enjalbert F, Nicot MC, Bayourthe C, Moncoulon R. Ketone bodies in milk and blood of dairy cows: relationship between concentrations and utilization for detection of subclinical ketosis. J Dairy Sci 2001;84:583-9. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74511-0 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74511-0
  28. Butler WR, Calaman JJ, Beam SW. Plasma and milk urea nitrogen in relation to pregnancy rate in lactating dairy cattle. J Anim Sci 1996;74:858-65. https://doi.org/10.2527/1996.744858x https://doi.org/10.2527/1996.744858x
  29. Broderick GA. Use of milk urea as an indicator of nitrogen utilization in lactating dairy cow. USDA, Agricultural Research Service. US Dairy Forage Research Center, Research Summaries; 1995.
  30. Abrahamse PA, Vlaeminck B, Tamminga S, Dijkstra J. The effect of silage and concentrate type on intake behavior, rumen function, and milk production in dairy cows in early and late lactation. J Dairy Sci 2008;91:4778-92. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1350 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1350