Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-564cf476b6-44467 Total loading time: 0.338 Render date: 2021-06-21T14:57:18.740Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by cows

8.* Experiments with ground, pelleted roughages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

R. C. Campling
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
M. Freer
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

1. Two experiments were conducted to examine the effect of grinding and pelleting roughages on the voluntary intake of food, digestibility, time of retention of food in the digestive tract, amounts of digesta in the recitulo-rumen and eating and ruminating behaviour of adult, non-lactating, non-pregnant cows. The first experiment was with artificially dried grass and the second with oat straw; also, with a diet of ground, pelleted oat straw the effect was studied of giving a daily intraruminal infusion of 150 g urea. The size of the particles of the ground roughages are given. 2. The mean voluntary intakes of long and ground dried grass were similar, the voluntary intake of ground, pelleted oat straw was 26% greater than that of long straw and the daily infusion of urea increased the voluntary intake of ground, pelleted oat straw by 53%. 3. The digestibility of the ground roughages was lower than that of the long roughages, the lower digestibility of the ground roughages was due mainly to the poor digestibility of crude fibre in the reticulo-rumen. The rate of disappearance of cotton thread placed in the ventral sac of the rumen was slower with ground than with long roughages. 4. The mean times of retention of ground roughages were shorter than those of long roughages when equal and restricted amounts of each food were given; with food offered ad lib. there was little difference between the mean times of retention of long and ground roughages in the alimentary tract. 5. On average, the mean amounts of digesta dry matter in the reticulo-rumen immediately after a meal were about the same with long and ground dried grass, with long and ground oat straw the amounts of dry matter were similar, but when the intraruminal infusion of urea was given the amount of dry matter increased by 49%. 6. The rate of eating (min/kg food) ground, pelleted roughages was much faster than that with long roughages; when the cows received ground roughage rumination did not occur but during short periods triple reticular contractions were seen. 7. The relationship between the voluntary intake of food, the amount of digesta in the reticulo-rumen and the rate of disappearance of digesta from the alimentary tract is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1966

References

Balch, C. C. (1950). Br. J. Nutr. 4, 361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, C. C. (1957). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, C. C., Bartlet, S. & Johnson, V. W. (1951). J. agric. Sci., Camb., 41, 98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, C. C., Kelly, A. & Heim, G. (1951). Br. J. Nutr. 5, 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, C. C. & Campling, R. C. (1962). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 32, 669.Google Scholar
Beardsley, D. W. (1964). J. Anim. Sci. 23, 239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. & Graham, N. McC. (1956). J. agric. Sci., Camb., 47, 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1956). Br. J. Nutr. 10, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C., Freer, M. & Balch, C. C. (1961). Br. J. Nutr. 15, 531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C., Freer, M. & Balch, C. C. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campling, R. C., Freer, M. & Balch, C. C. (1963). Br. J. Nutr. 17, 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, E. J. (1956). Br. J. Nutr. 10, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egan, A. R. (1965). Aust. J. agric. Res. 16, 451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freer, M. & Campling, R. C. (1963). Br. J. Nutr. 17, 79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freer, M. & Campling, R. C. (1965). Br. J. Nutr. 19, 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freer, M., Campling, R. C. & Balch, C. C. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greeff, W. L., van der Merwe, F. J. & Swart, J. C. (1963). Proc. S. Afr. Soc. Anim. Prod. 2, 47Google Scholar
Meyer, J. H., Gaskill, R. L., Stoewsand, G. S. & Weir, W. C. (1959). J. Anim. Sci. 18, 336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minson, D. J. (1962). Contribution no. 84, Animal Research Institute, Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa. (Mimeo.)Google Scholar
Moore, L. A. (1964). J. Anim. Sci. 23, 230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Dell, G. D., King, W. A., Cook, W. C. & Moore, S. L. (1963). J. Dairy Sci. 46, 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillipson, A. T. & Ash, R. W. (1965). In Physiology of Digestion in the Ruminant, p. 97. [Dougherty, R. W., Allen, R. S., Burroughs, N. L., Jacobson, N. L. and McGilliard, A. D., editors.] Washington DC: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Rodrigue, C. B. & Allen, N. N. (1960). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 40, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruckebusch, Y. & Marquet, J. P. (1963). Revue Méd. vét. 114, 833.Google Scholar
You have Access
76
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by cows
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by cows
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Factors affecting the voluntary intake of food by cows
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *