López SMA, Arellano GE, Barreras SA, González VVM, May GD, Plascencia JA, Avery ZR

Language: English/Spanish
References: 52
Page: 275-289
PDF size: 0. Kb.

ABSTRACT

Five cannulated dry Holstein cows (633 ± 81 kg) were used to evaluate the possible interaction of an exogenous fi brolytic enzyme and the maceration process of rice straw on the ruminal digestion and function parameters. Treatments consisted of a cornbased concentrate diet supplemented with 40% forage as: ground Sudan grass hay, ground rice straw with and without enzyme (15 g/d), and macerated rice straw with and without enzyme (15 g/d). No effect (P › 0.10) on dry matter intake was observed among treatments. Combined enzyme and macerate increased (interaction, P ‹ 0.05) neutral detergent fiber (NDF) ruminal digestion rate, and total tract digestion of acid detergent fiber (ADF). Enzyme addition increased (P ‹ 0.50) ruminal digestion of organic matter (OM), ADF and NDF, without effects (P ͒ 0.10) in total tract digestion. Maceration decreased ruminal digestion (P ‹ 0.05) and apparent total tract digestion of nitrogen intake (P ‹ 0.01). Even when, maceration tended to decrease (P = 0.06) NDF ruminal digestion, total tract digestion of NDF was increased (P ‹ 0.05). The maceration increased (P › 0.01) ruminal passage and ruminal digestion rate of NDF’s fraction in rumen, and decreased (P ‹ 0.01) rumen’s total solid and NDF content in that site (P ‹ 0.01). Meanwhile, the enzyme increased only the NDF digestion rate (P ‹ 0.01). A greater total tract digestion (P ‹ 0.05) of OM, NDF and gross energy (3%, 19% and 4%, respectively) was observed in the Sudan grass diet, and these effects refl ected a greater contribution of digestible energy (P ‹ 0.01). There was no effect of the treatments on ruminal pH and volatile fatty acid profi le. It is concluded that exogenous fi brolytic enzyme supplementation works synergistically with maceration to enhance the feeding value of low quality forages.

REFERENCES

1. 1 White TW, Hembry FG, Reynolds WL. Infl uence of level of dehydrated coastal Bermuda grass or rice straw on digestibility. J Anim Sci 1974; 38:844-849.

2. 2 Willis CM, Stallcup OT, Kreider DL. Infl uence of sodium hydroxide and enzyme additions on nutritive values of rice straws. J Anim Sci 1980; 50:303-308.

3. 3 Oh JH, Weir WC, Longhurst WM. Feed value for sheep of cornstalk, rice straw as compared with alfalfa. J Anim Sci 1971;32:343-347.

4. 4 White TW, Hembry FG, Reynolds WL. Infl uence of feeding rice straw and urea supplement with whole and ground corn on feedlot performance, rate of passage and digestibility by steers. J Anim Sci 1975; 41:1180-1188.

5. 5 Wilson JR, Mertens DR. Cell wall accessibility and cell structure limitations to microbial digestion of forage. Crop Sci 1995; 35:251-259.

6. 6 Buxton DR, Redfearn DD. Plant limitation to fi ber digestion and utilization. J of Nutr 1997; 127:814-818.

7. 7 Jung HG, Allen MS. Characteristics of plant cell walls affecting intake and digestibility of forages by rumi-nants. J Anim Sci 1995; 73:2774-2790.

8. 8 Romney DL, Gill R. Intake of forage. In: Givens DI, Owen E, Axford RFE, Omed HM, editors. Forage Evalu-ation in Ruminant Nutrition. UK: CABI publishing , 2000:43- 62.

9. 9 Hong BJ, Broderick GA, Panciera MP, Koegel RG, Shin-ners KJ. Effects of shredding alfalfa stems of fi ber diges-tion determined by in vitro procedures and scanning electron microscopy. J Dairy Sci 1988a; 71:1536-1545.

10. 10 Hong BJ, Broderick GA, Koegel RG, Shinners KJ, Straub RJ. Effects of shredding alfalfa on cellulolytic activity, digestibility, rate passage and milk production. J Dairy Sci 1988b; 71:1546-1555.

11. 11 Hintz WR, Koegel RG, Kraus TJ, Mertens DR. Mechani-cal maceration of alfalfa. J Anim Sci 1999; 77:187-193.

12. 12 Howes DJ, Tricarico GM, Dawson K, Karnezos P. Fibrozyme, the fi rst protected enzyme for ruminants: Improve fi ber digestion and animal performance. In: Lyons TP, Jacques KA, editors. Biotechnology in the Feed Industry. Nottingham UK: Nottingham University Press, 1998: 393-403.

13. 13 Zinn RA, Salinas J. Infl uence of fi brozyme on digestive function and growth performance of feedlot steers fed a 78% concentrate growing diet. In: Lyons TP, Jacques KA, editors. Biotechnology in the Feed Industry. Bio-technology in the Feed Industry. Nottingham UK: Not-tingham University Press. 1999: 313-319.

14. 14 Pinos-Rodriguez JM, Gonzalez SS, Mendoza GD, Bar-cena R, Cobos MA, Hernandez A, et al. Effect of exog-enous fi brolytic enzyme on ruminal fermentation and digestibility of alfalfa and rye-grass hay fed to lambs. J Anim Sci 2002b; 80:3016-3020.

15. 15 Zinn RA, Plascencia A. Interaction of whole cottonseed and fat on rumen function in feedlot steers. J Anim Sci 1993; 71:11-17.

16. 16 Alvarez EG, Zinn RA. Development of a low-cost, easy-to-assemble, and durable ruminal cannula for cattle. Proceedings of Western Section of American Society of Animal Science; 2001 june 20-22; Bozeman (Montana) USA. Bozeman (Montana): American Society of Animal Science, 2001: 539-540.

17. 17 Bergen WG, Purcer DB, Cline JH. Effect of ration on the nutritive quality of rumen microbial protein. J Anim Sci 1968; 27:1497-1501.

18. 18 AOAC. Offi cial methods of analysis. Washington (DC): Association of Offi cial Analytical Chemists, 1984.

19. 19 Zinn RA, Owens FN. A rapid procedure for purine measurement and its use for estimating net ruminal synthesis. Can J Anim Sci 1996; 66:157-164.

20. 20 Hill FN, Anderson DL. Comparison of metabolizable energy and productive energy determination with grow-ing chicks. J Nutr 1958; 64:587-594.

21. 21 Zinn RA. Infl uence of fl ake density on the comparative feeding value of steam-fl aked corn for feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci 1990; 68: 767-775.

22. 22 Zinn RA. Comparative feeding value of supplemental fat in fi nishing diets for feedlot steers supplemented with and without monensin. J Anim Sci 1988; 66:213-227.

23. 23 Goering HK, Van Soest PJ. Forage Fiber Analysis (Appa-ratus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications) Agricultural Handbook No.379. Washington (DC): ARS-USDA, 1970.

24. 24 Plascencia A, Estrada M, Zinn RA. Infl uence of fatty acids content on the feeding value of yellow grease in fi nishing diets for feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci 1999; 77:2603-2609.

25. 25 Wolin MJ. A theoretical rumen fermentation balance. J Dairy Sci 1960; 43:1452-1459.

26. 26 Hicks CR. Fundamental concepts in the design of experiments. 2nd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc, 1973.

27. 27 Agbossamey YR, Savoie P, Petit HV. Effect of intensity of maceration on digestibility and intake of alfalfa hay and silage fed to sheep. Can J Anim Sci 2000; 80:113-121.

28. 28 Lu CD, Jorgensen NA, Barrington BP. Intake, digest-ibility, and rate of passage of silages and hay from wet fractionation of alfalfa. J Anim Sci 1980; 63: 2051.

29. 29 Petit HV, Savoie P, Tremblay PD, Dos Santos GT, But-tler G. Intake, digestibility, and ruminal degradability of shredded hay. J Dairy Sci 1994; 77:3043-3050.

30. 30 Straub RJ, Koegel RG, Shinners KJ. Harvesting system for macerated mat-dried alfalfa. Paper No. 89-115. American Society Agriculture Engineering. St. Joseph (MI):ASAE, 1989

31. 31 National Research Council. Nutrient requirement of dairy cattle. Washington (DC): National Academy Press, 2001.

32. 32 Titgemeyer DC. Design and interpretation of nutrient digestion studies. J Anim Sci 1997; 75:2235-2247.

33. 33 Beauchemin KA, Yang WZ, Rode LM. Effects of grain source and enzyme additive on site and extent of nutri-ent digestion in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1999; 82:378-390.

34. 34 Szasz JI, Mccalmant TM, Hunt CW, Grove AV, Kenning-ton LR. Effect of a fi brolytic enzyme preparation on intake and digestibility of bluegrass seed straw fed to beef cattle. Proceedings of Western Section of Ameri-can Society of Animal Science; 2002 junio 20-22; Fort Collins (Colorado) USA: American Society of Animal Science 2002:313-316.

35. 35 Feng P, Hunt CW, Pritchard GT, Julien WE. Effect of enzyme preparations on in situ and in vitro degradation and in vivo digestive characteristics of mature cool-season grass forage in beef steers. J Anim Sci 1996; 74:1349-1357.

36. 36 Frost JP, Poots R, Knigth A, Gordon FJ, Long FNJ. Effect of forage matting on rate of grass drying, rate of silage fermentation silage intake and digestibility of silage by sheep. Grass Forage Sci 1995; 50:21-30.

37. 37 Pinos-Rodríguez JM, González SS, Mendoza GD, Bár-cena R, Cobos M. Efecto de enzimas fi brolíticas exóge-nas en la digestibilidad in vitro de la pared celular de heno de alfalfa (Medicago sativa) o de ballico (Lolium perenne). Interciencia 2002a; 27:28-32.

38. 38 Ambrosio RM, Alvarez EG, Zinn RA. Interaction of dietary eNDF level and supplemental fi brolytic enzyme on site and extent of fi ber digestion in cattle fed a 35% forage growing diet. Proceedings of Western Section of American Society of Animal Science; 2001 junio 20-22; Bozeman (Montana) USA: American Society of Animal Science 2001: 541-543.

39. 39 Murillo M, Alvarez EG, Cruz J, Castro H, Sanchez JF, Vazquez MS, et al. Interaction of forage level and fi bro-lytic enzyme on digestive function in cattle. Proceed-ings of Western Section of American Society of Animal Science; 2000 julio 21-23; Davis (California) USA. Davis (California): American Society of Animal Science 2000: 324-326.

40. 40 Lewis GE, Hunt CW, Sanchez WK, Treacher R, Pritch-ard GT, Feng P. Effect of direct-fed fi brolytic enzymes on the digestive characteristics of a forage-based diet fed to beef steers. J Anim Sci 1996; 74:3020-3028.

41. 41 Yang WZ, Beauchemin A, Rode LM. Effects of an enzyme feed additive on extent of digestion and milk production of lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1999; 82:391-403.

42. 42 Broderick GA, Koegel RG, Mauris MJC, Schneeberger E, Krause TJ. Effect of feeding macerated alfalfa silage on nutrient digestibility and milk yield in lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1999; 82:2472-2485.

43. 43 Torrentera N, Alvarez EG, Zinn RA. Infl uence of mac-eration on the feeding value of rice straw in growing-fi n-ishing diets for feedlot cattle. Proceedings of Western Section of American Society of Animal Science; 2000 julio 21-23; Davis (California) USA. Davis (California): American Society of Animal Science 2000:496-499.

44. 44 Moore JA, Poore MH, Swingle RS. Infl uence of rough-age source on kinetics of digestion and passage, and on calculated extents of ruminal digestion in beef steers fed 65% concentrate diets. J Anim Sci 1990; 68:3412-3420.

45. 45 Savoie P, Agbossamey YR, Petit HV. Retention time of macerated alfalfa hay and silage in sheep. J Anim Sci 2001; 79:507-514.

46. 46 Offer NW, Dixon J. Factors affecting outfl ow rate from reticulo-rumen. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews: Live-stock Feed and Feeding. 2000; 70:833-844.

47. 47 Van Soest PJ. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. 2nd ed. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press, 1994.

48. 48 Bowman JG, Hunt CW, Kerley MS, Paterson JA. Effects of grass maturity and legume substitution on large par-ticle size reduction and small particle fl ow from the rumen of cattle. J Anim Sci 1991; 69:369-378.

49. 49 Bourquin LD, Fahey GC. Ruminal digestion and glyco-syl linkage patterns of cell wall components from leaf and stem fractions of alfalfa, orchard grass, and wheat straw. J Anim Sci 1994; 72:1362-1374.

50. 50 Krause M, Beauchemin KA, Rode LM, Farr BI, Nør-gaard P. Fibrolytic enzyme treatment of barley grain and source of forage in high-grain diets fed to growing cattle. J Anim Sci 1998; 76: 2912-2920.

51. 51 Kung L Jr, Treacher RJ, Nauman GA, Smagala AM, Endres KM, Cohen MA. The effect of treating forages with fi brolytic enzymes on its nutritive value and lac-tation performance of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2000; 83:115-122.

52. 52 Bowman GR, Beauchemin KA, Shelford JA. Fibrolytic enzymes and parity effects on feeding behavior, saliva-tion, and ruminal pH of lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 565-575.