Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ksp62 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T10:32:33.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of volatile compounds in grass silage on voluntary intake by growing cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2007

S. J. Krizsan*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 5003, N-1432Ås, Norway
F. Westad
Affiliation:
Norwegian Food Research Institute, Osloveien, 1, N-1430Ås, Norway
T. Ådnøy
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 5003, N-1432Ås, Norway
E. Odden
Affiliation:
Pronova Biocare, PO Box 2109, N-3202 Sandefjord, Norway
S. E. Aakre
Affiliation:
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Telemark Hospital, N-3910 Skien, Norway
Å. T. Randby
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 5003, N-1432Ås, Norway
*

Abstract

Twenty-four low dry matter (DM) silages differing in fermentation quality were harvested at the same time from a crop that consisted mainly of timothy (Phleum pratense), and meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis). The silage samples were analysed by gas chromatography (GC) – mass spectrometry and gas chromatography – flame ionisation detection in order to determine and quantify volatiles present in silage. The voluntary intake of the 24 silages had been measured in a previous feeding trial with growing steers of Norwegian Red. Thirteen esters, five aldehydes, three alcohols, and one sulphide were identified and quantified. A total of 51 variables describing the chemical composition of the silages were included in a partial least-squares regression, and the relationship of silage fermentation quality to voluntary intake was elucidated. The importance of variables describing silage fermentation quality in relation to intake was judged from a best combination procedure, jack-knifing, and empirical correlations of the variables to intake. The GC-analysed compounds were mainly present in poorly fermented silages. However, compared with other explanatory chemical variables none of these compounds was of importance for the voluntary intake as evaluated by partial least-squares regression. A validated variance of 71% in silage DM intake was explained with the selected variables: total acids (TA), total volatile fatty acids (TVFA), lactic acid/total acid ratio and propionic acid. In this study extent (by the variable TA) and type of silage fermentation (by TVFA) influenced intake. Further, it is suggested that by restricting the fermentation in low DM grass silages the potential intake of silage DM is maximised.

Information

Type
Full Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2007
Figure 0

Table 1 Chemical composition of the 24 silages (content in silages given as mean and range) and the initial herbage (n=2) in g/kg dry matter unless otherwise stated

Figure 1

Table 2 Content of GC analysed compounds, listed in order of retention time (RT) (min) for GC-MS and GC-FID, in the 24 silages (given as mean and range) and average (n=2) detected concentrations in the initial herbage (mg/kg dry matter)†

Figure 2

Figure 1 Root mean-square error (RMSE) of silage intake (kg dry matter per 100 kg live weight) at five principal components (PCs) for the calibration model including all 51 variables (diamonds), the cross validated model with all 51 variables (squares), the cross validated model with five selected variables (large circles), and the cross model validated 5-variable model (small circles).

Figure 3

Table 3 Correlation between the different silage components and intake (r), significance of r, and significance from the uncertainty test estimated with jack-knifing (JK)

Figure 4

Figure 2 Hotelling T2 statistics for each sample after three PLSR components with critical test value at α = 0.05 indicated as a horizontal line.

Figure 5

Figure 3 Correlation loading plot of the first two PCs for the five-component model with the five selected variables typed in bold. All other variables treated as passive variables, that is visualised, but without contributing to the explained variance of the response variable (INTAKE).

Figure 6

Figure 4 Pattern of relationship between the silage samples in a score plot of PC1 v. PC2 for the five-component model with the five selected variables.

Figure 7

Figure 5 Correlation loading plot of PC1 v. PC3 for the five-component model with the five selected variables (bold), the response variable (INTAKE) and the passive variables.