Effects of field pea supplementation on digestibility and rumen volatile fatty acid concentrations of beef-cattle diets containing high and low quality forages

H. Greenwell, J. Gramkow, M. Jolly-Breithaupt, J. MacDonald, K. Jenkins
{"title":"Effects of field pea supplementation on digestibility and rumen volatile fatty acid concentrations of beef-cattle diets containing high and low quality forages","authors":"H. Greenwell, J. Gramkow, M. Jolly-Breithaupt, J. MacDonald, K. Jenkins","doi":"10.15232/PAS.2018-01730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Field peas (Pisum sativum) are increasingly available with limited data on the effects on forage digestibility. Two experiments were conducted to determine the effects of field pea supplementation in forage-based diets on total-tract digestibility and RUP digestibility in growing beef cattle. In Exp. 1, 5 ruminally fistulated steers (202 kg) were used in a 2 × 3 factorial. The first factor was high quality forage (50% alfalfa, 50% sorghum silage) or low quality forage (50% bromegrass hay, 50% wheat straw). The second factor was supplement type: a nonsupplemented control (CON), dry-rolled corn (DRC), or ground field peas (FP), supplemented at 0.43% of BW. Each diet was fed for 14 d. There were no interactions between forage quality and supplement type for digestibility estimates (P ≥ 0.25). Intake and digestibility of OM were greater with high quality forage (4.96 kg/d and 64.2%, respectively) than with low quality forage (3.60 kg/d and 50.1%, respectively; P","PeriodicalId":22841,"journal":{"name":"The Professional Animal Scientist","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Professional Animal Scientist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15232/PAS.2018-01730","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Field peas (Pisum sativum) are increasingly available with limited data on the effects on forage digestibility. Two experiments were conducted to determine the effects of field pea supplementation in forage-based diets on total-tract digestibility and RUP digestibility in growing beef cattle. In Exp. 1, 5 ruminally fistulated steers (202 kg) were used in a 2 × 3 factorial. The first factor was high quality forage (50% alfalfa, 50% sorghum silage) or low quality forage (50% bromegrass hay, 50% wheat straw). The second factor was supplement type: a nonsupplemented control (CON), dry-rolled corn (DRC), or ground field peas (FP), supplemented at 0.43% of BW. Each diet was fed for 14 d. There were no interactions between forage quality and supplement type for digestibility estimates (P ≥ 0.25). Intake and digestibility of OM were greater with high quality forage (4.96 kg/d and 64.2%, respectively) than with low quality forage (3.60 kg/d and 50.1%, respectively; P
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
饲粮中添加豌豆对优质和劣质饲料肉牛消化率和瘤胃挥发性脂肪酸浓度的影响
田豌豆(Pisum sativum)对饲料消化率的影响越来越多,但数据有限。本试验旨在研究在饲料基础饲粮中添加豌豆对生长肉牛全道消化率和RUP消化率的影响。在实验1中,5只瘤胃瘘的阉牛(202公斤)被用于2 × 3因子。第一个影响因素是优质饲料(50%苜蓿,50%高粱青贮)或劣质饲料(50%凤梨草干草,50%小麦秸秆)。第二个因素是补充类型:未补充对照(CON)、干卷玉米(DRC)或地豌豆(FP),添加量为体重的0.43%。每种饲粮饲喂14 d。饲粮品质与饲粮类型对消化率的估计不存在交互作用(P≥0.25)。优质饲料组OM采食量(4.96 kg/d)和消化率(64.2%)均高于低品质饲料组(3.60 kg/d)和消化率(50.1%);P
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Case Study: Effect of exercise programs during receiving in a commercial feedlot on behavior and productivity of Brahman crossbred calves: Results from a commercial environment and a comparison to the research environment Effects of field pea supplementation on digestibility and rumen volatile fatty acid concentrations of beef-cattle diets containing high and low quality forages Enteric nitrous oxide emissions from beef cattle Invited Review: Detection and management of pregnancy loss in the cow herd1 Review: Sperm: Comparative morphology and function related to altered reproductive strategies and fertility in mammals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1