In vivo digestibility of a range of silages in cattle compared with sheep

Context Ensuring accuracy of feed testing is becoming increasingly important as livestock industries seek to maximise efficiency of producing animal products to meet world requirements. Aim Twenty-four silages were fed to sheep and cattle to test the validity of using sheep-derived digestibility estimates for cattle. Method The silages tested included temperate and subtropical forages, and differed in level of maturity and weed contamination at harvest: several of the forage crops were grown with irrigation. In vivo comparisons were made for digestibility of dry matter (DMD), organic matter (OMD), and organic matter in the dry matter (DOMD) across two experiments. Intake was restricted to 16.5 g/kg liveweight and those silages with low nitrogen (N) contents were supplemented with urea to meet minimum dietary crude protein requirements. Key results DMD, OMD and DOMD ranged from 0.538 to 0.773, 0.550 to 0.810, 0.505 to 0.762 and 0.551 to 0.749, 0.584 to 0.786, 0.539 to 0.702 for cattle and sheep respectively. DMD, OMD and DOMD determined in sheep explained 88.7, 86.3 and 78.4% of the variation of DMD, OMD and DOMD in cattle respectively. In Experiment 1, DOMD was higher in cattle than sheep but for two silages (Silage 1, Subterranean clover: 0.631 vs 0.589; Silage 5, Annual ryegrass/oats, early cut: 0.761 vs 0.702) whereas in Experiment 2 DOMD was lower for cattle than sheep for one silage (silage 21, maize: 0.645 vs 0.691, s.e.d. = 0.019). Conclusions and Implications Since there was no clear trend for sheep to digest higher quality feeds better than cattle or for cattle to digest lower quality feeds better than sheep, we conclude that, at least for silages made from forage, sheep-derived values for digestibility should, in most instances, be applicable to cattle.

[1]  E. Charmley Towards improved silage quality – A review , 2001 .

[2]  D. Wilman,et al.  The use of near infrared spectroscopy to investigate the composition of silages and the rate and extent of cell-wall degradation. , 2000 .

[3]  F. O'Mara,et al.  The effect of animal species (cattle or sheep) and level of intake by cattle on in vivo digestibility of concentrate ingredients , 1999 .

[4]  B. Cottyn,et al.  Prediction of the feeding value of maize silages by chemical parameters, in vitro digestibility and NIRS☆ , 1997 .

[5]  R. Mailer,et al.  A comparison of Karl Fischer titration with alternative methods for the analysis of silage dry matter content , 1995 .

[6]  D. Givens,et al.  A comparison of the neutral detergent-cellulase method with other laboratory methods for predicting the digestibility in vivo of maize silages from three European countries , 1995 .

[7]  K. Südekum,et al.  Comparative digestion in cattle and sheep fed wheat silage diets at low and high intakes. , 1995, Journal of dairy science.

[8]  D. Givens,et al.  Prediction of the organic matter digestibility of grass silage , 1990 .

[9]  J. Aerts,et al.  COMPARATIVE DIGESTIBILITY BY SHEEP AND COWS AND CONSEQUENCES ON ENERGY VALUE , 1984 .

[10]  J. Aerts,et al.  Comparative digestibility of feedstuffs by sheep and cows , 1984 .

[11]  G. Varga,et al.  Comparative digestion, rumen fermentation and kinetics of forage diets by steers and wethers. , 1984, Journal of animal science.

[12]  M. Playne Differences between cattle and sheep in their digestion and relative intake of a mature tropical grass hay , 1978 .

[13]  J. B. Holter,et al.  Digestibility, nutritive value and intake of ensiled corn plant (Zea mays) in cattle and sheep. , 1970 .

[14]  J. Buchanan-Smith,et al.  Effect of Methods of Processing on Digestibility and Utilization of Grain Sorghum by Cattle and Sheep , 1968 .

[15]  R. Cordts,et al.  Comparative Nutrient Digestibility of Silages by Cattle and Sheep , 1965 .

[16]  J. Mccall,et al.  Comparative Digestibility of Nutrients in Roughages by Cattle and Sheep , 1962 .

[17]  H. L. Lucas,et al.  Significance of the differences in digestibility of feeds by cattle and sheep. , 1951, Journal of animal science.

[18]  R. Jordan,et al.  Digestibility comparisons between steers and lambs fed prairie hays of different quality. , 1951, Journal of animal science.

[19]  M. Choct,et al.  Processing cereal grains for animal feeding , 1999 .

[20]  H. Nicol,et al.  Use of a kernel milkline score to determine stage of maturity in maize crops harvested for silage , 1995 .