Journal of Animal Environmental Science (한국축산시설환경학회지)

The Korean Society of Animal Environmental Science & Technology (한국축산환경학회)
권호 표지

Effect of Collection Times of Rumen Fluid on In vitro Dry Matter Digestibility of Forage Crops

반추위액 채취 시간이 사료작물의 In vitro 건물 소화율에 미치는 영향

  • Published : 2009.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Object of this study were to determine the influence of collection times of rumen fluid on in vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) of forage crops. The donor cow was fed concentrate once a day and given free access to grass-legume mixture hay. Main plot was consisted of different collection time of rumen fluid; T1: 1 hour before concentrate feeding, T2: 1 hour after feeding, T3: 4 hour after feeding and T4: 8 hour after feeding. A total of 7 samples of 4 different forage crops (barely, Italian ryegrass, crimson clover, rye) were used for the estimation of IVDMD and tested in three replicates. For the $DAISY^{II}$ incubation, each sample was inserted into each filter bag then heat-sealed and incubated in a digestion vessel for 48 h at $39^{\circ}C$. The times of rumen fluid collection had no significant effect on the IVDMD values over all varieties except for 2 breeds of IRG (Kogreen and Kospeed). IVDMD values with T1 over all varieties were slightly higher than other treatments, however those with both T1 of Kogreen and Kospeed varieties were significantly higher than T2 (p<.05).

본 실험은 국립축산과학원에 초지사료연구센터에서 조사료의 IVDMD 분석을 위해 사용 중인 Holstein을 이용하여, 혼합건초를 자유 채식케 하는 Holstein에서 반추위액의 채취 시간이 사료작물의 IVDMD에 미치는 영향을 알아보기 위하여 실시하였다. 사료작물은 청보리 (Yong-yang, Yu-yeong), 크림손 클로버 (Tibbee), 이탈리안 라이그라스(Kospeed, Kogreen, Hwasan 101), 호밀(Wintergreen) 등 4작물 7품종을 공시재료로 이용하였으며, 반추위액의 채취 시간은 T1: 농후사료 급여 전, T2: 사료급여 직후(급여 1시간 후), T3: 사료급여 후 4시간, T4: 사료급여 후 8시간으로 하였다. 모든 사료작물에서 T1 처리구의 위액을 이용한 IVDMD가 T2, T3, T4 처리구에서 채취한 위액을 이용한 IVDMD 보다 높게 나타났다. 특히 IRG의 Kospeed의 경우 T1 처리구에서 T2 처리구보다, Kogreen의 경우 T1 처리구에서 T2 및 T3 처리구보다 IVDMD이 유의적으로 높게 나타났다(p<0.05). 하지만 나머지 모든 사료작물에서 처리구간에 IVDMD의 차이는 있었지만 유의성은 인정되지 않았다. 이러한 결과는 혼합건초의 자유채식이 사료급여 횟수를 증가시킴과 동시에 조사료를 충분히 급여하는 효과를 가져와 침 분비량이 증가하여, 배합사료 급여 후에도 제 1 위 내 pH가 정상범위를 유지하여 사료작물의 안정적인 소화에 영향을 미친 것으로 생각된다.

Keywords

References

  1. 맹원재, 1998. 반추동물영양학. 향문사. pp 168
  2. Ankom, Technology Corporation 1998. Method for determining Acid Detergent Fiber, Neutral Detergent Fiber and Crude Fibre, using the Ankom Fiber Analyser. Ankom Technology Corporation, 14 Turk Hill Park, Fairport New York 14450, USA
  3. AOAC International. 1995. Official methods of analysis of AOAC International. 16th edition. Arlington, VA, USA, Association of Analytical Communities
  4. Aufrere, J. and Michalet-Doreau, B. 1988. Comparison of methods for predicting digestibility of feeds. Anim Feed Sci. Technol. 20:203-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(88)90044-2
  5. Barnes, R. F. 1965. Use of in vitro fermentation techniques for estimating forage digestibility and intake. Agron. J. 57:2-3.
  6. Cone, J. W., Cline-Theil, W., Malestein, A. and van't Klooster, A. T. 1989. Degradation of starch by incubation with rumen fluid. A comparison of different starch sources. J. Sci. Food Agric. 49:173-183. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740490206
  7. Debbie, J. R. Cherney, Martin, J., Traxler, and James B. Robertson. 1997. Use of Ankom Determination Systems to Determine Digestibility. NIRS Forage and Feed Testing Consortium Annual Conference, February 19-20.
  8. Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, regents, procedures, and some applications). Agric. Handbook 379, ARS, USDA, Washington, DC.
  9. Goldman, A., Genizi, A., Yuzari, A. and Seligman, N. G. 1987. Improving the reliability of the two-stage in vitro assay for ruminant feed digestibility by calibration against in vivo data from a wide range of sources. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 18:233-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(87)90074-5
  10. Grant, R. J., P. J. Van Soest, and R. E. McDowell. 1974. Influence of rumen fluid source and fermentation time on in vitro true dry matter digestibility. J. Dairy Sci. 57:1201. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(74)85037-X
  11. Grant, R. J. and D. R. Mertens. 1992a. Development of buffer systems for pH control and evaluation of pH effects on fiber digestion in vitro. J. Dairy Sci. 75:1581-1587. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)77915-6
  12. Grant, R. J., and D. R. Mertens. 1992b. Impact of in vitro fermentation techniques upon kinetics of fiber digestion. J. Dairy Sci. 75:1263-1272. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)77876-X
  13. Harris L. E. 1970. Nutrition research techniques for domestic and wild animals.
  14. Hutjen, M. F. 1995. Feeding application for high producing cow. p.34. In Proc. Cornell Nutr. Cont. for Feed Manufactures.
  15. Komarek, A. R., J. B. Robertson and P. J. Van Soest. 1994 Comparison of the filter bag technique to conventional filtration in the Van Soest analysis of 21 feeds. Proceedings of the National Conference on Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization. Lincoln, NE.
  16. Marinucci, M. T., B. A. Dehority, and S. C. Loerch. 1992. In vitro and in vivo studies of factors affecting digestion of feeds in synthetic fiber bags. J. Anim. Sci. 70:296. https://doi.org/10.2527/1992.701296x
  17. Marten, G. C., and R. F. Barnes. 1980. Prediction of energy digestibility of forages with in vitro rumen fermentation and fungal enzyme systems. Pages 61-128 in Standardization of Analytical Methodology for Feeds. W. J. Pigden, C. C. Balch, and M. Graham, eds. Int. Dev. Res. Center, Ottawa, Canada
  18. Nelson, B. D., H. D. Ellzey, C. Montgomery, and E. B. Morgan. 1972. Factors affecting the variability of an in vitro rumen fermentation technique for estimating forage quality. J. Dairy Sci. 55:358. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(72)85497-3
  19. Quicke, G. V., O. G. Bentley, H. W. Scott and A. L. Moxon. 1959. Cellulese digestion in vitro as a measure of the digestibility of forage cellulose in ruminants. J. Animal Sci. 18:275. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1959.181275x
  20. Reid, R. L., G. A. Jung, and S. Murray. 1964. The measurement of nutritive quality in a bluegrass pasture using in vitro and in vivo techniques. J. Animal Sci., 23: 700. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1964.233700x
  21. Richards, C. J., J. F. Pedersen, R. A. Britton, R. A. Stock, and C. R. Krehbiel. 1995. In vitro starch disappearance procedure modifications. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 55:35-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(95)00790-T
  22. Smith K. F., Reed K. F. M. and Foot J. Z. (1997) An assessment of the relative importance of specific traits for the genetic improvement of nutritive value in dairy pasture. Grass and Forage Science, 52,. 167-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1997.tb02347.x
  23. Stem, M. D., A. Bach, and S. Calsamiglia. 1997. Alternative techniques for measuring nutrient digestion in ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2256-2276. https://doi.org/10.2527/1997.7582256x
  24. Strobel, H. J. and J. B. Russell. 1986. Effects of pH and energy spilling on bacterial protein synthesis by carbohydratelimited cultivates of mixed rumen bacteria. J. Dairy Sci. 69:2941. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(86)80750-0
  25. Tilly, J. M. and R. A. Terry. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 18:104-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x
  26. Weimer, P. J. 1996. Why don't ruminal bacterial digest cellulose faster. J. Dairy Sci. 79:1496. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(96)76509-8