Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T10:39:31.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The fasting metabolism of cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

K. L. Blaxter  and
F. W. Wainman
K. L. Blaxter
Affiliation:
Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Ayr
F. W. Wainman
Affiliation:
Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Ayr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The metabolism of seventeen steers was determined on forty-nine occasions during fasts of either 112 or 136 h duration.

2. Faeces continued to be produced during fasts of up to 136 h duration at rates which were 15–20% of those noted before the fasts began.

3. Carbon dioxide production and oxygen consumption fell continuously throughout with animals weighing less than 200 kg but changed little after 88 h in animals weighing more than 200 kg. Methane production was considerably reduced during fasting but did not disappear. Urinary nitrogen excretion changed very little. Of the total loss of energy from the body, the loss of protein accounted for 25%. This was unaffected by age or size of animal.

4. With individual Ayrshire steers, metabolism increased during growth with body-weight raised to the power 0.68±0.05. No greater precision of estimate was obtained from logarithmic regressions of metabolism on body-weight than from linear ones.

5. Seven Ayrshire steers had a mean fasting metabolism of 100±1.6 kcal/kg W0.73 24 h, eight Black cattle of the Aberdeen Angus type a fasting metabolism of 81±1.5 kcal/kg W0.73 24 h and two Ayrshire x Beef Shorthorn steers a fasting metabolism of 96±2.9 kcal/kg W0.73 24 h. Variation in the fasting metabolism of an individual steer from time to time, expressed as a coefficient of variation, was ±7.4%.

6. The results are discussed in relation to interspecies generalizations about the relation between fasting metabolism and body-weight.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , February 1966 , pp. 103 - 111
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1966

References

Benedict, F. G. &Ritzman, E. G. (1927). Publs Carnegie Instn, no. 377.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. &Wainman, F. W. (1961 a). J. agric Sci., Camb., 56, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. &Wainman, F. W. (1961 b). J. agric. Sci., Camb., 57, 419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. &Wainman, F. W. (1964). J. agric. Sci., Camd., 63, 113.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. &Davidson, J. (1966). Anim. Prod. 8. (In the Press.)Google Scholar
Brody, S. (1945). Bioenergetics and Growth. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corp.Google Scholar
Cochrane, D. C., Fries, J. A. &Braman, W. W. (1925). J. agric. Res. 31, 1055.Google Scholar
Flatt, W. P. &Coppock, C. E. (1963). J. Dairy Sci. 46, 638.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Fries, J. A., Braman, W. W. &Kriss, M. (1926). J. agric. Res. 33, 591.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Kriss, M. &Braman, W. W. (1927). J. agric. Res. 34, 167.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. B., Swift, R. W., Bratzler, J. W., Black, A, Wainio, W. W., Marcy, L. F., Thacker, E. J. &French, C. E. (1941). Bull. Pa agric. Exp. Stn, no. 415.Google Scholar
Grouven, H. (1864). Physiologisch-chemische Fütterungsversuche. Zweiter Bericht über die Arbeiten der agrikulturchemischen Versuchsstation zu Salzmünde, Berlin.Google Scholar
Hashizume, T., Kaishio, Y., Ambo, S., Morimoto, H., Masubuchi, T., Abe, M., Horii, S., Tanaka, K., Hamada, T. &Takahashi, S. (1962). Bull. natn. Inst. agric. Sci., Tokyo, Ser. G no. 21. (In Japanese.)Google Scholar
Hashizume, T., Morimoto, H., Masubuchi, T., Abe, M., Horii, S., Hamada, T., Tanaka, K., Takahashi, s., Kaishio, Y. &Ambo, S. (1964). Spec. Rep. natn. Inst. Anim. Ind., Chiba, no. 2.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M. (1961). The Fire of Life, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M. (1965). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 11, p. 427.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M., Regan, W. M. &Mead, S. W. (1945). Hilgardia, 16, 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H., Hamilton, T. S. &Haines, W. T. (1940). J. agric. Res. 61, 847.Google Scholar
Mitchell, H. H., Hamilton, T. S. &Haines, W. T. (1941). J. Nutr. 22, 541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H., Hamilton, T. S., McClure, F. J., Haines, W. T., Beadles, J. R. &Morris, H. P. (1932). J. agric. Res. 45, 163.Google Scholar
Ritzman, E. G. &Benedict, F. G. (1938). Publs Carnegie Instn, no. 494.Google Scholar
Robertson, A., Paver, H., Barden, P. &Marr, T. G. (1960). Res. vet. Sci. 1, 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wainman, F. W. &Blaxter, K. L. (1958). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 8, p. 80.Google Scholar