Korean Journal of Agricultural Science (농업과학연구)

Institute of Agricultural Science, CNU (충남대학교 농업과학연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison between predicted total digestible nutrients and actual total digestible nutrients using nutrient digestibility of rice straw and timothy in ruminants

  • Ryu, Chae Hwa (Animal Nutrition and Physiology Team, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Lee, Seul (Animal Nutrition and Physiology Team, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Kim, Byeonghyeon (Animal Nutrition and Physiology Team, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Ji, Sang Yun (Animal Nutrition and Physiology Team, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Jung, Hyunjung (Animal Nutrition and Physiology Team, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Lee, Hyun-Jeong (Hanwoo Research Institute, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Song, Jae-Yong (Institute of Livestock, Nonghyup Co., Ltd.) ;
  • Baek, Youl Chang (Animal Nutrition and Physiology Team, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
  • Received : 2021.03.16
  • Accepted : 2021.05.24
  • Published : 2021.06.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study attempted to compare total digestible nutrients (TDN) calculated as Rohweder, NRC, and Waldo and Peiqiang methods and TDN measured as digestibility of in vivo appearance. Rohweder method showed that the TDN of rice straw and timothy were 54.32% and 57.79%, respectively. In NRC method, the digestibility of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and TDN of rice straw were 50.76% and 53.15%, respectively. When NRC method was applied in Timothy, the digestibility of NDF and TDN were 51.53% and 55.22%, respectively. Waldo and Peiqiang method calculated the results through the rumen in situ test. NDF digestibility of rice straw and timothy was 44.61% and 51.82%, which was different from the results of NRC method. In addition, TDN was predicted to be 48.85% for rice straw and 55.41% for timothy. In the in vivo apparent digestibility experiment, the digestibility of NDF and TDN in rice straw was 41.10% and 44.79%, respectively. In timothy, the digestibility of NDF and TDN were measured as 51.29% and 58.18%, respectively. As a result of a series of studies, rice straw was found in Rohweder and NRC methods showed higher TDN than other methods. In this study, there was a difference in rice straw by measurement method, but there was no difference in timothy. Therefore, when evaluating the value of feed in order to provide roughage to ruminant, calculation methods must be modified and supplemented. In addition, TDN should be considered to apply several evaluation methods instead of one method.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 성과물은(논문) 농촌진흥청 연구사업(세부과제명: 국내산 동계 조사료의in vivo 소화율 측정 및 추정 모델 검증, 세부과제번호: PJ013107012018)의 지원 및 2021년도 농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 전문연구원 과정 지원사업에 의해 이루어진 것입니다.

References

  1. Abrams S. 1988. Sources of error in predicting digestible dry matter from the acid-detergent fiber content of forages. Animal Feed Science and Technology 21:205-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(88)90102-2
  2. AOAC (Association of Official Agriculture Chemists). 2019. Official methods of analysis. 21st ed. AOAC International, Maryland, USA.
  3. AOCS (American Oil Chemists' Society). 2009. Official methods and recommended practices of the American oil chemists' society, 6th edition. AOCS, Champaign, Illinois, USA.
  4. Cho SB, Lee SM, Kim EJ. 2012. Effect of different forages on growth performance, meat production and meat quality of Hanwoo steers: Meta-analysis. Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science 32:175-184. [in Korean] https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2012.32.2.175
  5. Church DC. 1988. The ruminant animal: Digestive physiology and nutrition. pp. 202-448. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.
  6. Erdman R, Hemken R, Bull L. 1982. Dietary sodium bicarbonate and magnesium oxide for early postpartum lactating dairy cows: Effects of production, acid-based metabolism, and digestion. Journal of Dairy Science 65:712-731. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(82)82259-5
  7. Goering HK, Van Soest PJ. 1970. Forage fiber analyses: Apparatus, reagents, procedures, and some applications. Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., USA.
  8. Ha JJ, Kim BK, Jung DJ, Yi JK, Kim DH, Lee JY, Oh DY. 2018. Effects of different roughage type on disappearance rates of nutrients in the rumen and CH4 emission in Hanwoo cows. The Korean Data and Information Science Society 29:621-632. [in Korean] https://doi.org/10.7465/jkdi.2018.29.3.621
  9. Hayashi Y, Devkota NR, Kumagai H. 2007. Effects of field pea (Pisum sativum L.) hay feeding on dry matter intake and milk production of Murrah buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) fed rice straw ad libitum. Animal Science Journal 78:151-158. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2007.00419.x
  10. Huffman C, Dexter S, Duncan C. 1952. Unidentified dietary factors in dairy cattle nutrition. III. The nutritive value of immature alfalfa and timothy hays for milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 35:1001-1009. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(52)93787-9
  11. Kim C, Lee S. 2003. Isolation and characterization of cellulolytic anaerobic fungi from the guts of the Hanwoo cattle and the Korean native goat. Journal of Animal Science and Technology 45:1019-1030. [in Korean] https://doi.org/10.5187/JAST.2003.45.6.1019
  12. Korean feeding standard for Hanwoo. 2017. Nutrient requirement of Hanwoo. National Institute of Animal Science, RDA, Jeonju, Korea. [in Korean]
  13. Lee HS, Lee SD, Lee S, Sun S, Kim M, Choi H, Lee Y, Baek YC. 2020. Comparative evaluation of nutritional values in different forage sources using in vitro and in vivo rumen fermentation in Hanwoo cattle. Korean Journal of Agricultural Science 47:941-949. https://doi.org/10.7744/KJOAS.20200078
  14. Lee JH, Jeong O, Paek J, Hong H, Yang S, Lee Y, Kim J, Sung K, Kim B. 2005. Analysis of dry matter yield and feed value for selecting of whole crop rice. Journal of Animal Science and Technology 47:355-362. [in Korean] https://doi.org/10.5187/JAST.2005.47.3.355
  15. Licitra G, Hernandez TM, Van Soest PJ. 1996. Standardization of procedures for nitrogen fractionation of ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 57:347-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(95)00837-3
  16. Lundberg K, Hoffman P, Bauman L, Berzaghi P. 2004. Prediction of forage energy content by near infrared reflectance spectroscopy and summative equations. The Professional Animal Scientist 20:262-269. https://doi.org/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31309-7
  17. NRC (National Research Council). 2001. Nutrient requirement of dairy cattle. 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  18. Oh YK, Joeng CS, Kim DH, Seol YJ, Lee SC, Lee HJ, Lee SS, Kim KH. 2008. Effects of sodium bicarbonate and vitamin supplementation on milk production and composition in lactating Holstein cows under heat stress condition. Journal of Animal Science and Technology 50:705-712. [in Korean] https://doi.org/10.5187/JAST.2008.50.5.705
  19. Orskov ER, McDonald I. 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. The Journal of Agricultural Science 92:499-503. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600063048
  20. Promma S, Tasaki I, Cheva-Isarakul B, Indratula T. 1994. Effect of feeding neutralized urea-treated rice straw on milk production of crossbred Holstein cows. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 7:493-498. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1994.493
  21. Raffrenato E, Fievisohn R, Cotanch KW, Grant RJ, Chase LE, Van Amburgh ME. 2017. Effect of lignin linkages with other plant cell wall components on in vitro and in vivo neutral detergent fiber digestibility and rate of digestion of grass forages. Journal of Dairy Science 100:8119-8131. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-12364
  22. Robinson PH, Givens DI, Getachew G. 2004. Evaluation of NRC, UC Davis and ADAS approaches to estimate the metabolizable energy values of feeds at maintenance energy intake from equations utilizing chemical assays and in vitro determinations. Animal Feed Science and Technology 114:75-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2003.12.002
  23. Rohweder D, Barnes R, Jorgensen N. 1978. Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality. Journal of Animal Science 47:747-759. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1978.473747x
  24. Takahashi T, Kobayashi Y, Hasegawa S, Touno E, Otani Y, Haga S, Itoh F, Katoh K, Obara Y. 2008. Different responses in postprandial plasma ghrelin and GH levels induced by concentrate or timothy hay feeding in weathers. Domestic Animal Endocrinology 34:432-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.domaniend.2007.12.003
  25. Vega R, Hidari H, Kuwayama H, Suzuki M, Manalo D. 2004. The relationships of plasma leptin, backfat thickness and TDN intake across finishing stage of Holstein steers. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 17:330-336. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2004.330
  26. Waldo GN, Peiqiang Y. 2011. Using the NRC chemical summary and biological approaches to predict energy values of new co-product from bio-ethanol production for dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 170:165-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.09.007
  27. Weiss W. 1993. Predicting energy values of feeds. Journal of Dairy Science 76:1802-1811. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(93)77512-8