The transit of external markers throughout the ruminant digestive tract: 2. The estimation of fiber digestibility, ruminoreticular fill, and related biases

Presentation (Chopped Versus Ground and Pelleted) of a Low-Quality Alfalfa Hay in Sheep: Effects on Intake, Feeding Behaviour, Rumen Fill and Digestion, and Passage

A voluminous amount of knowledge has been collected about the effects of the rate and amount of intake and of the rate and amount of digesta flow out of the rumen on rumen fill and, hence, intake. However, the mechanisms by which small particles in the rumen are selected for passage have not been clearly identified. Grinding and pelleting have been alleged to either enhance or reduce entrapment; hence, the relationships between particle size and digestion and passage kinetics are not sufficiently clear, as it is not the effect of rumen digesta particle size on marker dilution kinetics. On these grounds, the aim of the present experiment was to examine the behaviour of small particles within the rumen and determine if their retention time by passage or digestion pathways alter under pelleting and control intake. In the present experiment, the effects of a low-quality alfalfa hay presentation (chopped vs. ground and pelleted) on intake, feeding behaviour, rumen fill and digestion, and passage were assessed in adult wethers. Pelleting increased intake without alteration of either the maximum amount of digesta present in the rumen or degradation rates. The faster dilution rate of the liquid phase with the pelleted hay, likely including significant amounts of particles <0.15 mm, should be the main factor for the higher intake with this diet.

Predicting ruminally undegraded and microbial protein flows from the rumen

The objectives of the present work were (1) to identify the cause of the linear bias in predictions of rumen-undegradable protein (RUP) content of feeds, and devise methods to remove the bias from prediction equations, and (2) to further explore the impact of rumen-degradable protein (RDP) on microbial N (MiN) outflow from the rumen. The kinetic model used by NRC (2001), which is based on protein fractionation and rates of degradation (Kd) and passage (Kp), displays considerable slope bias (-0.30 kg/kg), indicating parameter or structural problems. Regressing Kp by feed class and a static adjustment factor for the in situ-derived Kd on observed RUP flows completely resolved the slope bias problem, and the model performed significantly better than models using unadjusted Kd and marker-based Kp. The Kd adjustment was 3.82%/h, which represents approximately a 50% increase in rates of degradation over the in situ values, indicating that in situ analyses severely underestimate true rates of protein degradation. The Kp for concentrate-derived protein was 5.83%/h, which was slightly less than the marker-predicted rate of 6.69%/h. However, the derived forage protein rate was 0.49%/h, which was considerably less than the marker-based rate of 5.07%/h. Compartmental analysis of data from a single study corroborated the regression analysis, indicating that a 25% reduction in the overall passage rate and an 87% increase in the rate of degradation were required to align ruminal N pool sizes and the extent of protein degradation with the observed data. Therefore, one must conclude that both the in situ-derived degradation rates and the marker-based particle passage rates are biased relative to protein passage and cannot be used directly to predict RUP outflow from the rumen. The effects of RDP supply on microbial nitrogen (MiN) flow were apparent when intakes of individual nutrients were offered but not when DM intake and individual nutrient concentrations were offered, due to collinearity problems. Microbial N flow from the rumen was found to be linearly related to ruminally degraded starch, ruminally degraded neutral detergent fiber (NDF), RDP, and forage NDF intakes; and quadratically related to residual OM intake. More complicated models containing 2- and 3-way interactions among nutrients were also supported by the data. Independent MiN responses to RDP, ruminally degraded starch, and ruminally degraded NDF aligned with the expected responses to each of those nutrients. Nonlinear representations of MiN were found to be inferior to the linear models. Despite using unbiased predictions of RUP and MiN as drivers of AA flows, predictions of Arg, His, Ile, and Lys flow exhibited linear slope bias relative to the observed data, indicating that representations of the AA composition of the proteins may be biased or the observed data are biased. This is an improvement over the NRC (2001) predictions, where bias adjustments were required for all of the essential AA. Despite the bias for 4 AA flows, the revised prediction system was a substantial improvement over the prior work.

Characterization and effects of DDG on the intake and digestibility of finishing bulls in feedlots

The aim of this study was to characterize four corn and sorghum co-products (DDG) in terms of their protein and carbohydrate fractions; we also evaluated the effects of substituting the protein source of the conventional supplement by DDG on consumption and nutrient digestibility in confined finishing cattle. Thirty-six male Nellore cattle with a mean age of 24 months were used. The treatments were: FA: concentrate with corn as an energy source and cottonseed meal as a protein source; DDG50: concentrate with a 50% substitution of the FA protein source by DDG; DDG100: concentrate with 100% substitution of the FA protein source by DDG. The experimental design was completely randomized with three treatments and three replicates (pens) containing four animals per pen. We found that the use of DDG in the finishing phase did not interfere with the animals’ food intake or the digestibility of the nutrients (p > 0.05). Nutrients were used by the animals; therefore, DDGs may be viable substitutes of cottonseed meal. We conclude that the bromatological composition of this co-product is influenced a lot during processing; therefore, the nutritional values of this co-product present in the composition tables may not be true.