Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T05:38:38.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A review of current nutritional models: what we need to measure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

B. R. Cottrill*
Affiliation:
ADAS, Woodthorne, Wergs Road, Wolverhampton WV6 8TQ
Get access

Abstract

A common feature of nutritional models developed in the last three decades is that estimates of energy and protein are generally made independent of each other, even though interactions between them are recognized.

Most of the energy systems have adopted metabolizable energy (ME) or net energy (NE) as the unit for energy evaluation. Accurate measurement of the ME content of a food requires in vivo digestibility measurements using cattle or sheep, with methane losses either measured or predicted. This approach is clearly unsuitable for routine food evaluation and most systems predict the ME content from chemical analyses, using regression equations derived from calorimetric measurements.

The new generation of protein systems recognize the need to consider, separately, the energy and nitrogen requirements of the rumen micro-organisms and the protein requirements of the host animal. Despite this common base, systems differ markedly in estimates of energy supply to rumen bacteria, the degree to which dietary protein is degraded in the rumen, microbial protein yield and the digestibility of the microbial and undegraded dietary protein.

Although empirically based, current protein systems contain dynamic elements relating to rates of fermentation and protein degradation. In most cases, data have been derived using the in situ nylon bag technique, although this has major limitations. Recent developments in the gas production technique suggest that this approach has the potential for describing fermentation and degradation rates of individual foods.

To be effective, energy and protein systems need to describe foods in units that are both easily understood by non-specialists and can be measured using procedures that are rapid, reliable and cost effective. Near infra-red reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) can be both rapid and cost effective and there is evidence that it may be able to predict not only proximate analyses but also dynamic characteristics of foods.

Type
Overview of the in vitro technique
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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.)

References

Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1990. Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients, report no. 5. Nutritive requirements of ruminant animals: energy. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Series B: Livestock Feeds and Feeding 60: 729804.Google Scholar
Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1992. Nutritive requirements of farm animals: protein. AFRC Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients, report no. 9. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Series B: Livestock Feeds and Feeding 62: 787835.Google Scholar
Agricultural and Food Research Council. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. An advisory manual prepared by the AFRC Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Agricultural Development and Advisory Service. 1989. The nitrogen value of grass silage. Nutrition Chemistry Feed Evaluation Unit technical bulletin 89/10.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1980. The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Technical review by an Agricultural Research Council working party, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham Royal.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1984. Nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock, supplement no. 1. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham Royal.Google Scholar
Alderman, G., Griffiths, J. R., Morgans, D. E., Edwards, R. A., Raven, A. M., Holmes, W. and Lessells, W. J. 1974. Application of a metabolisable energy system. In Proceedings of the seventh nutrition conference for feed manufacturers (ed. Swan, H. and Lewis, D.), pp. 3778. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antoniewicz, A. M., Vuuren, A. M. van, and Koelen, C. J. van der, . 1991. Comparison between the mobile bag technique and an enzymatic in vitro method to measure post-ruminal digestibility of undegraded protein. In Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, vol. 2. (ed. Eggum, B. O., Biosen, S., Borsting, C., Danfaer, A. and Hvelplund, T.), pp. 110112. EAAP publication no. 59.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. G. 1964. Evaluation of artificially dried grass as a source of energy for sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 62: 399417.Google Scholar
Aufrère, J., Graviou, D., Demarquilly, C, Vérité, R., Michalet-Doreau, B. and Chapoutot, P. 1991. Predicting in situ degradability of feed proteins in the rumen by two laboratory methods (solubility and enzymatic degradation). Animal Feed Science and Technology 33: 97116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, R. L., Lucas, H. L. and Cabrera, R. 1970. Energetic relationships in the formation and utilisation of fermentation end products. In Physiology of digestion and metabolism in the ruminant (ed. Phillipson, A. T., Annison, E. F., Armstrong, D. G., Balch, C. C., Hardy, R. S., Hobson, P. N. and Keynes, R. D.), pp. 319334. Oriel Press, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.Google Scholar
Barber, G. D., Givens, D. I., Kridis, M. S., Offer, N. W. and Murray, I. 1990. Predicting the organic matter digestibility of grass silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology 28: 115128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, G. D., Offer, N. W. and Givens, D. I. 1989. Predicting the nutritive value of silage. In: Recent developments in animal nutrition (ed. Garnsworthy, P. C. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 141158. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckers, Y. and Théwis, A. 1991. Influence of increasing amounts of hydrolysed casein protein infused into the duodenum on its ileal digestibility in sheep. Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, vol. 2. (ed. Eggum, B. O., Biosen, S., Borsting, C., Danfaer, A. and Hvelplund, T.), pp. 107109. EAAP publication no. 59.Google Scholar
Ben Salem, H., Krzeminski, R., Ferlay, A. and Doreau, M. 1993. The effect of lipid supply on in vivo digestion in cows: comparison of hay and corn silages diets. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 73: 547557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bittante, G., Ramanzin, M., Bailoni, L. and Cozzi, G. 1991. A comparison of different laboratory techniques for predicting rumen degradation of feed proteins. Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, vol. 2. (ed. Eggum, B. O., Biosen, S., Borsting, C., Danfaer, A. and Hvelplund, T.), pp. 9294. EAAP publication no. 59.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. 1962. The energy metabolism of ruminants. Hutchinson and Co., London.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. and Clapperton, J. L. 1965. Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants. British Journal of Nutrition 19: 511522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boer, G. de, , Murphy, J. J. and Kennelly, J. J. 1987. Mobile nylon bag for estimating intestinal availability of rumen undegradable protein. Journal of Dairy Science 70: 977982.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boila, R. J. and Ingalls, J. R. 1994. The post-ruminal digestion of dry matter, nitrogen and amino acids in wheat-based distillers’ dried grains and canola meal. Animal Feed Science and Technology 49: 173188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borchers, R. 1967. Proteolytic activity of rumen fluid in vitro . Journal of Animal Science 24: 10331038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britton, R. A., Klopfenstein, T. J., Cleale, R., Goedeken, F. and Wilkerson, V. 1986. Methods of estimating heat damage in protein sources. Proceedings of the distillery feed conference, Cincinnati, OH, pp. 6772.Google Scholar
Broderick, G. A. 1987. Determination of protein degradation rates using a rumen in vitro system containing inhibitors of microbial nitrogen metabolism. Journal of Dairy Science 58: 463475.Google ScholarPubMed
Broderick, G. A. 1994. Quantifying forage protein quality. In Forage quality, evaluation and utilization, (ed. Fahey, G. C., Collins, M., Mertens, D. R. and Moser, L. E.), pp. 200228. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Broderick, G. A. and Craig, W. M. 1980. Effect of heat treatment on ruminal degradation and escape, and intestinal digestibility of cottonseed meal protein. Journal of Nutrition 110: 23812389.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broderick, G. A., Wallace, R. J., Ørskov, E. R. and Hansen, L. 1988. Comparison of estimates of ruminal protein degradation by in vitro and in situ methods. Journal of Animal Science 66: 17391745.Google Scholar
Broderick, G. A., Yang, J. H. and Koegel, R. G. 1993. Effect of steam heating alfalfa hay on utilization by lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 76: 165174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burroughs, W., Nelson, D. K. and Mertens, D. R. 1975. Protein physiology and its application in the lactating dairy cow. Journal of Dairy Science 62: 433440.Google Scholar
Calsamiglia, S. and Stern, M. D. 1995. A three-step in vitro procedure for estimating intestinal digestion of protein in ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 73: 14591465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calsamiglia, S., Stern, M. D. and Crooker, B. A. 1992. Effects of diets formulated to contain different amounts of rumen non-degradable protein on microbial fermentation and nutrient flow from a continuous culture system. Animal Feed Science and Technology 39: 239252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. 1977. Design and development of a long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). British Journal of Nutrition 38: 371384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. 1985 Metabolism of protein supplements studied by the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Archiv für Tierernährung, Berlin 20: 261278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, J. and France, J. 1996. A comparative evaluation of models of whole rumen function. Annales Zootechnie 45:(supplement) 175192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Es, A. J. H. van, . 1978. Feed evaluation of ruminants. I. The system in use from May 1977 onwards in the Netherlands. Livestock Production Science 5: 331345.Google Scholar
Fahmy, W. G., Aufrère, J., Graviou, D., Demarquilly, C. and El-Shazly, K. 1991. Comparison between the mechanism of protein degradation of two cereals by enzymatic and in situ methods, using gel electrophoresis. Animal Feed Science and Technology 35: 115130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faldet, M. A., Voss, V. L., Broderick, G. A. and Satter, L. D. 1991. Chemical, in vitro and in situ evaluation of heat treated soybean proteins. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 25482554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferasin, L., Terramoccia, S., Bailoni, L., Rizzi, L. and Martillotti, F. 1995. Comparison between in sacco and in vitro estimates of rumen protein degradability. Zootecnica Nutrizione Animale 21: (supplement) 121126.Google Scholar
Fox, D. G., Sniffen, C. J., O'Conner, J. D., Russell, J. B. and Van Soest, P. J. 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets. III. Cattle requirements and diet adequacy. Journal of Animal Science 70: 35783596.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frydrych, Z. 1992. Intestinal digestibility of rumen undegraded protein of various feeds as estimated by the mobile bag technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 37: 161172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Givens, D. I., Cottyn, B. G., Dewey, P. J. S. and Steg, A. 1995. 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. Animal Feed Science and Technology 54: 5564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, H. K. and Adams, R. S. 1973. Frequency of heat damaged protein in hay, hay-crop silage and corn silage. Journal of Animal Science 37: 295302.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K., Gordon, C. H., Hemken, R. W., Waldo, D. R., Van Soest, P. J. and Smith, L. W. 1972. Analytical estimates of nitrogen digestibility in heat damaged forages. Journal of Dairy Science 55: 12751283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, H. K. and Lindahl, I. L. 1975. Growth and metabolism of sheep fed rations containing alfalfa hay or dehydrated alfalfa. Journal of Dairy Science 58: 759 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Goering, H. K., Van Soest, P. J. and Hemken, R. W. 1973. Relative susceptibility of forages to heat damage as affected by moisture, temperature and pH. Journal of Dairy Science 56: 137143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hindle, V. A., Steg, A., Vuuren, A. M. van, and Vroons-de-Bruin, J. 1995. Rumen degradation and post-ruminal digestion of palm kernel by-products in dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 51: 103121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honing, Y. van der, and Alderman, G. 1988. Livestock feed resources and feed evaluation in Europe. Present situation and future prospects. EAAP publication no. 37. III. Feed evaluation and nutritional requirements. 2. Ruminants. Livestock Production Science 19: 217278.Google Scholar
Honing, Y. van der, and Steg, A. 1990. Relationship between energy value of feedingstuffs predicted with thirteen evaluation systems for dairy cows. IVVO report no. 160.Google Scholar
Hoover, W. H., Crooker, B. A. and Sniffen, C. J. 1976. The effects of differential solid and liquid removal rates on protozoa numbers in continuous culture of rumen contents. Journal of Animal Science 39: 528534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulme, D. J., Kellaway, R. C., Booth, P. J. and Bennett, L. 1986. The CamDairy model for formulating and analysing dairy cow rations. Agricultural Systems 22: 81108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, J. A. and Givens, D. I. 1995. The in situ technique for studying the rumen degradation of feeds: a review of the procedure. ‘Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, Series B 65: 6393.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, T. 1985. Digestibility of rumen microbial protein and undegraded dietary protein estimated in the small intestine of sheep and by in sacco procedure. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica, Supplement 25: 132144.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, T. and Weisbjerg, M. R. 1991. Small intestinal digestibility of undegraded dietary protein in different feeds for ruminants. In Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, vol. 2 (ed. Eggum, B. O., Biosen, S., Borsting, C., Danfaer, A. and Hvelplund, T.), pp. 8688. EAAP publication no. 59.Google Scholar
Institut National des Recherches Agronomiques. 1988. Alimentation des bovins, ovins et caprins (ed Jarrige, R.). INRA.Google Scholar
Jarosz, L., Weisbjerg, M. R., Hvelplund, T. and Borg Jensen, B. 1991. Digestibility of nitrogen and 15N from different roughages in the lower gut of cows estimated with the mobile bag technique. In Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, vol. 2. (ed. Eggum, B. O., Biosen, S., Borsting, C., Danfaer, A. and Hvelplund, T.), pp. 113115. EAAP publication no. 59.Google Scholar
Jarrige, R. 1989. Ruminant nutrition: recommended allowance and feed tables. INRA, Paris.Google Scholar
Keyserlingk, M. A. G. von, , Swift, M. L., Puchala, R. and Shelford, J. A. 1996. Degradability characteristics of dry matter and crude protein of forages in ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology 57: 291311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krishnamoorthy, U., Sniffen, C. J., Stern, M. D. and Van Soest, P. J. 1983. Evaluation of a mathematical model of digestion and an in vitro simulation of rumen proteolysis to estimate the rumen undegraded nitrogen content of feedstuffs. British Journal of Nutrition 50: 555568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laycock, K. A., Hazlewood, G. P. and Miller, E. L. 1985. Potential use of proteolytic rumen bacteria for assessing feed protein degradability in vivo . Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44: 54 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Luchini, N. D., Broderick, G. A. and Combs, D. K. 1996. Characterization of the proteolytic activity of commercial proteases and strained ruminal fluid. Journal of Animal Science 74: 685692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Madsen, J. 1985. The basis for the proposed Nordic protein evaluation system. The AAT-PBV system. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica, Supplement 25:920.Google Scholar
Madsen, J. and Hvelplund, T. 1985. Protein degradation in the rumen. A comparison between in vivo and buffer measurements. Acta Agricultural Scandinavica, Supplement 25: 103124.Google Scholar
Madsen, J. and Hvelplund, T. 1994. Prediction of in situ protein degradability in the rumen. Results of a European ring test. Livestock Production Science 39: 201212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahadevan, S., Erfle, J. D. and Sauer, F. D. 1980. Degradation of soluble and insoluble proteins by Bacteroides amylophilus protease and by rumen microorganisms. Journal of Animal Science 50: 723728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mansfield, H. R., Endres, M. I. and Stern, M. D. 1995. Comparison of microbial fermentation in the rumen of dairy cows and dual flow continuous culture. Animal Feed Science and Technology 55: 4766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masoero, F., Fiorentini, L., Rossi, F. and Piva, A. 1994. Determination of nitrogen intestinal digestibility in ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology 48: 253263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merry, R. J., Smith, R. H. and McAllen, A. B. 1983. Studying rumen function in a model in vitro system. Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Clermont-Ferrand, France (ed. Arnal, M., Pion, R. and Bonnin, D.), pp. 227230. Les Colloques de l'Inra, no. 16.Google Scholar
Messman, M. A. and Weiss, W. P. 1993. Electrophoretic measurements of feed proteins in fluid and particulate phases of digesta. Journal of Dairy Science 76: (suppl. 1) 176 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Michalet-Doreau, B. and Ould-Bah, M. Y. 1992. In vitro and in sacco methods for the estimation of dietary nitrogen digestibility in the rumen: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 40: 5786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1975. Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Technical bulletin no. 33. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, pp. 79.Google Scholar
Mirza, M. A. and Miller, E. L. 1991. In vitro degradability of feed proteins in the rumen. In Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, vol. 2 (ed. Eggum, B. O., Biosen, S., Borsting, C., Danfaer, A. and Hvelplund, T.), pp. 98100. EAAP publication no. 59.Google Scholar
Moe, P. W., Flatt, W. P. and Tyrell, H. F. 1972. Net energy value of feeds for dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 55: 945958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, A. R. and Givens, D. I. 1990. The effect of feed type on methane production by sheep. Animal Production 50: 552 (abstr).Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1978. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, fifth revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1989. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, sixth revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Nocek, J. E. 1988. In situ and other methods to estimate ruminal protein and energy digestibihtity: a review. Journal of Dairy Science 71: 20512069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nugent, J. H. A. and Mangan, J. L. 1981. Characteristics of the rumen proteolysis of fraction I (18S) leaf protein from lucerne (Medicago sativa L). British Journal of Nutrition 46: 3958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, J. D., Sniffen, C. J., Fox, D. G. and Cahlupa, W. 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets. IV. Predicting amino acid adequacy. Journal of Animal Science 70: 35513561.Google Scholar
Oldham, J. D. 1984. Protein-energy interrelationships in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 67: 10901114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oldham, J. D. 1996. Protein requirement systems for ruminants. In Progress in dairy science (ed. Phillips, C. J. C.), pp. 327. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. and McDonald, I. 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of the Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92: 499503.Google Scholar
Poos-Floyd, M., Klopfenstein, T. and Britton, R. A. 1985. Evaluation of laboratory techniques for predicting ruminal protein degradation. Journal of Dairy Science 68: 829839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rae, R. C. and Smithard, R. R. 1985. Estimation of true nitrogen digestibility in cattle by a modified nylon bag technique. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44: 116A (abstr).Google Scholar
Romagnolo, D., Polan, C. E. and Barbeau, W. E. 1990. Degradability of soybean meal protein fractions as determined by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Journal of Dairy Science 73: 23792385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooke, J. A. 1985. The nutritive value of feed proteins and feed protein residues resistant to degradation by rumen microorganisms. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 36: 629635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, J. H. B., Balch, C. C, Miller, E. L., Ørskov, E. R. and Smith, R. H. 1977. In Protein metabolism and nutrition (ed. Tamminga, S.), pp. 126129. EAAP Publication No. 22, PUDOC, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Russell, J. B., O'Connor, J. D., Fox, D. G., Van Soest, P. J. and Sniffen, C. J. 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets: I. Ruminal fermentation. Journal of Animal Science 70: 35513561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, W. A., Harris, B. Jr Van Horn, H. H. and Wilcox, C. J. 1993. Effects of forage type on production of dairy cows supplemented with whole cottonseed, tallow, and yeast. Journal of Dairy Science 76: 205215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniffen, C. J., Hoover, W. H., Junkins, L. L., Crooker, B. A. and Macgregor, C. A. 1979. Variation in protein and soluble carbohydrate composition of various feedstuffs. Proceedings of the Cornell nutrition conference for feed manufacturers ,pp. 119123.Google Scholar
Sniffen, C. J., O'Conner, J. D., Van Soest, P. J., Fox, D. G. and Russeli, J. B. 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets. II. Carbohydrate and protein availability. Journal of Animal Science 70:35623577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stern, M. D., Santos, K. A., and Satter, L. D. 1985. Protein degradation in rumen and amino acid absorption in small intestine of lactating dairy cattle fed heat-treated whole soybeans. Journal of Dairy Science 68: 4556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Straalen, W. M. van, and Huisman, G. 1991. The digestibility of bypass crude protein from grass silage in the intestine of dairy cows measured by the mobile nylon bag technique. In Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, vol 2 (ed. Eggum, B. O., Biosen, S., Borsting, C., Danfaer, A. and Hvelplund, T.), pp. 8385. EAAP publication no. 59. Google Scholar
Susmel, P., Mills, C. R., Colitti, M. and Stefanon, B. 1993. In vitro solubility and degradability of concentrate ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 42: 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamminga, S. 1983. Recent advances in our knowledge on protein digestion and absorption in ruminants. Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Clermont-Ferrand, France (ed. Arnal, M., Pion, R. and Bonnin, D.), pp. 263287. Les Colloques de lílnra, no. 16.Google Scholar
Tamminga, S., Van Straalen, W. M., Subnel, A. P. J., Meijer, R. G. M., Steg, A., Wever, C. J. G. and Blok, M. C. 1994. The Dutch protein evaluation system: the DVE/OEB-system. Livestock Production Science 40: 139155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. W., Yu, Y., Middleton, T. and Stallings, C. 1982. Estimations of protein damage. In Protein requirements for cattle: symposium (ed. Owens, F. N.), pp. 8198. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.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: 104111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Sniffen, C. J., Mertens, D. R., Fox, D.G., Robinson, P. H. and Krishnamoorthy, U. C. 1982. A net protein system for cattle: the rumen submodel for nitrogen. In Protein requirements for cattle: symposium (ed. Owens, F. N.), pp. 265279. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.Google Scholar
Voigt, J., Piatkowski, B., Englemann, H. and Rudolph, E. 1985. Measurement of the postruminal digestibility of the crude protein by the bag technique in cows. Archiv für Tierernährung 8: 555562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, J. E., Broderick, G. A. and Brammal, M. L. 1987. Protein degradation by ruminal microorganisms from sheep fed dietary supplements of urea, casein or albumin. Applied Environmental Microbiology 53: 751753.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waltz, D. M., Stern, M. D. and Illg, D. J. 1989. Effect of ruminal protein degradation of blood meal and feather meal on the intestinal amino acid supply to lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 72: 15091516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webster, A. J. F. 1992. The metabolizable protein system for ruminants. In Recent advances in animal nutrition (ed. Garnsworthy, P.C., Haresign, W. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 93110. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkerson, V. A., Klopfenstein, T. J. and Stroup, W. W. 1995. A collaborative study of in situ forage protein degradation. Journal of Animal Science 73: 583588.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed