Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-pnlb5 Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-10-29T15:37:07.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feeding straw to small ruminants: effect of amount offered on intake and selection of barley straw by goats and sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. A. Wahed ,
E. Owen ,
M. Naate  and
B. J. Hosking
R. A. Wahed
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, PO Box 236, Reading RG6 2AT
E. Owen
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, PO Box 236, Reading RG6 2AT
M. Naate
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, PO Box 236, Reading RG6 2AT
B. J. Hosking
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, PO Box 236, Reading RG6 2AT
Get access

Abstract

The hypothesis that increasing the amount of straw offered and allowing animals to refuse proportionately more than 0·1 to 0·2 would increase intake and quality of the straw consumed was tested in two experiments with castrated goats (aged 6 to 31 months) and one with wether sheep (aged 6 to 18 months). Each trial (over 21 to 42 days following 14 to 35 days preliminary feeding) involved individually feeding long barley straw and concentrate supplement (15 g dry matter (DM) per kg live weight (M075) daily) and monitoring the quantity and quality of straw offered and straw refused. The results supported the hypothesis. In experiment 1, with 18 goats per treatment, those allowed to refuse 500 rather than 200 g straw per kg DM offered consumed more (18·9 and 14·4 g DM per kg M75 per day, s.e.d. 0·70) and their straw refusals contained more digestible organic matter (DOM) in vitro (347 and 320 g/kg DM, s.e.d. 7·7). For both treatments, refusals were less digestible in vitro than the straw offered (412 g DOM per kg DM). Thirty-six goats in experiment 2 (over 42 days) offered increasing amounts of straw (18, 54 and 90 g DM per kg M075 per day) consumed more (15·5, 22·8 and 26·2 g DM per kg M per day, s.e.d. 0·74), refused more (125, 566 and 703 g/kg DM offered) and the refusals were of increasing digestibility in vitro (354, 370 and 403 g DOM per kg DM, s.e.d. 14·5). All refused straw was inferior to that offered (443 g DOM per kg DM). The estimated intake of straw DOM was markedly improved by offering more straw (7·2, 12·8 and 14·5 g per kg M75 per day). Experiment 3, using 30 wethers over 21 days fed as in experiment 2, showed similar treatment responses, although absolute intakes of straw were lower. The responses observed are comparable to improvements in intake following treatment of straw with alkali. Further research is required to determine optimum feeding rates as affected by straw quality and animal productivity level. Practical feeding strategies will also need to consider utilizing refused straw.

Keywords

food intakegoatsselectionsheepstraw

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 51 , Issue 2 , October 1990 , pp. 283 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1990

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

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1975. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Analytical Chemists. 12th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bhargava, P. K., Ørskov, E. R. and Walli, T. K. 1988. Rumen degradation of straw. 4. Selection and degradation of morphological components of barley straw by sheep. Animal Production 47: 105–110.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Wainman, F. W. and Wilson, R. S. 1961. The regulation of food intake by sheep. Animal Production 3: 51–62.Google Scholar
Doyle, P. T., Devendra, C. and Pearce, G. R. 1986. Rice Straw as a Feed for Ruminants. International Development Program of Australian Universities and Colleges Limited (IDP), Canberra.Google Scholar
Gibb, M. J. and Treacher, T. T. 1976. The effect of herbage allowance on herbage intake and performance of lambs grazing perennial ryegrass and red clover swards. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 86: 355–365.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. and Van soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). Agricultural Handbook, U.S. Department of Agriculture, No. 379.Google Scholar
Hodgson, J. 1976. The influence of grazing pressure and stocking rate on herbage intake and animal performance. In Pasture Utilization by the Grazing Animal (ed. Hodgson, J. and Jackson, D. K.), Occasional Symposium, British Grassland Society, No. 8, pp. 93–103.Google Scholar
Mohammed, H. H. 1982. Energy requirements for maintenance and growth: comparison of goats and sheep. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Ndosa, J. E. M. 1980. A comparative study of roughage utilization by sheep and goats. M.Phil. Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Sundstol, F. and Owen, E. 1984. Straw and Other Fibrous By-products as Feed. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Tilley, J. M A. and Terry, R. A. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18: 104–111.Google Scholar
Wahed, R. A. 1987. Stall-feeding barley straw to goats: the effect of refusal-rate allowance on voluntary intake and selection. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar
Wahed, R. A. and Owen, E. 1986a. Comparison of sheep and goats under stall-feeding conditions: roughage intake and selection. Animal Production 42: 89–95.Google Scholar
Wahed, R. A. and Owen, E. 1986b. The effect of amount offered on selection and intake of barley straw by goats. Animal Production 42: 473 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Wahed, R. A. and Owen, E. 1987. Intake and digestibility of barley straw by goats: effect of ammonia treatment and straw previously refused by goats. Animal Production 44: 479 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Wrathall, J. H. M., Owen, E. and Pike, D. J. 1989. Upgrading barley straw for goats: the effectiveness of a sodium hydroxide and urea dip method. Animal Feed Science and Technology 24: 57–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar