Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-c8zdz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T07:42:10.563Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rumen-undegradable dry matter and neutral detergent fibre as ratio indicators of digestibility in sheep given cereal straw-based diets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. Fondevila ,
C. Castrillo ,
J. Gasa  and
J. A. Guada
M. Fondevila
Affiliation:
Departamento de Produción Animal y Ciencia de los Alimentos, Universidad de Zaragoza, M. Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain
C. Castrillo
Affiliation:
Departamento de Produción Animal y Ciencia de los Alimentos, Universidad de Zaragoza, M. Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain
J. Gasa
Affiliation:
Departamento de Produción Animal y Ciencia de los Alimentos, Universidad de Zaragoza, M. Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain
J. A. Guada
Affiliation:
Departamento de Produción Animal y Ciencia de los Alimentos, Universidad de Zaragoza, M. Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Studies were conducted in 1989 at the University of Zaragoza, Spain, to determine the value of undegradable dry matter and neutral detergent fibre (uDM and uNDF) forestimating apparent dry matter digestibility (DMD), with sheep diets based on untreated or ammonia-treated barley straw (US or TS) offered alone or supplemented with 300 or 600 g/day of grass hay (H), barley (B) or sugarbeet pulp (P). Marker recovery in faeces was 107·9±1·90 and 96·4±1.43% for uDM and uNDF, respectively. Faecal uDM excretion was overestimated, especially with TS as sole feed and in B-supplemented diets (116%), whereas underestimation of uNDF excretion was observed mainly in unsupplemented US (92%), supplemented TS (92%) and in diets including H (91 %). Digestibility estimations from uDM or uNDF concentration in feeds and faeces (DuDM or DuNDF) were affected in the same way as DMD by the dietary sources of variation. Correlation coefficients between in vivo digestibility and its estimates with both internal markers were 0·80, and differences between DMD and DuDM and DuNDF were –2·5±0·14 and 2·2±0·13 percentage units, respectively. The suitability of both markers for predicting apparent digestibility, and the choice between them, would depend on diet characteristics.

Information

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 125 , Issue 1 , August 1995 , pp. 145 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1980). Official Methods of Analysis, 13th edn. Washington DC:AOAC.Google Scholar
Balcells, J., Fondevila, M., Guada, J. A., Castrillo, C. & Surra, J. C. E. (1993). Urinary excretions of purine derivatives and nitrogen in sheep given straw supplemented withdifferent sources of carbohydrates. Animal Production 57, 287–292.Google Scholar
Cochran, R. C., Adams, D. C., Wallace, J. D. & Galyean, M. L. (1986). Predicting digestibility of different diets with internal markers: evaluation of four potential markers. Journal of Animal Science 63, 1476–1483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochran, R. C., Vanzant, E. S. & Del Curto, T. (1988). Evaluation of internal markers isolated by alkaline hydrogen peroxide incubationand acid detergent lignin extraction. Journal of Animal Science 66, 3245–3251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1975). Forage Fibre Analysis. Agricultural Research Service. Agricultural Handbook no. 379. US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Graham, H. & Åman, P. (1984). A comparison between degradation in vitro and in sacco of constituents of untreated and ammonia-treated barley straw. Animal Feed Science and Technology 101, 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judkins, M. B., Krysl, L. J. & Barton, R. K. (1990). Estimating diet digestibility: acomparison of 11 techniques across six differentdiets fed to rams. Journal of Animal Science 68, 1405–1415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krysl, L. J., Galyean, M. L., Estell, R. E. & Sowell, B. F. (1988). Estimating digestibility and faecal output in lambs usinginternal and external markers. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 111, 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippke, H., Ellis, W. C. & Jacobs, B. F. (1986). Recovery of indigestible fiber from feces of sheep and cattle on forage diets. Journal of Dairy Science 69, 403–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayes, R. W., Lamb, C. S. & Colgrove, P. M. (1986). The use of dosed and herbage n-alkanes as markers for the determination of herbage intake. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 107, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehrez, A. Z. & Ørskov, E. R. (1977). A study of the artificial fibre bag technique for determining the digestibility of feeds in the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88, 645–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muntifering, R. B. (1982). Evaluation of various lignin assays for determining ruminal digestion of roughages by lambs. Journal of Animal Science 55, 432–438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penning, P. D. & Johnson, R. H. (1983). The use of internal markers to estimate herbage digestibility and intake. 1. Potentially indigestiblecellulose and acid insoluble ash. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 100, 127–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez, J. F., Gasa, J., Castrillo, C. & Guada, J. A. (1993). Comportamiento de la materia seca indegradable como marcador interno de raciones a base de paja en ovejas en distintas etapas reproductivas. ITEA, volumen extra n° 13, 150–152.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. & Torrie, J. H. (1980). Principles and Procedures of Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Sunvold, G. D. & Cochran, R. C. (1991). Technical note: evaluation of acid detergent lignin, alkaline peroxide lignin, acid insoluble ash andindigestible acid detergent fiber as internal markers for prediction of alfalfa, bromegrass and prairie hay digestibilityby beef steers. Journal of Animal Science 69, 4951–4955.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Undersander, D. J., Cole, N. A. & Naylor, C. H. (1987). Digestibility by lambs of water-stressed alfalfa as determined by totalcollection or internal markers. Journal of Dairy Science 70, 1719–1723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, P. J. (1982). Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Corvallis, OR: O & B Books.Google Scholar
Wilkins, R. J. (1969). The potential digestibility of cellulose in forage and faeces. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 73, 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar