Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:03:29.581Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of mixtures of red clover and maize silages on the partitioning of dietary nitrogen between milk and urine by dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2010

R. J. Dewhurst ,
L. J. Davies  and
E. J. Kim
R. J. Dewhurst*
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB, UK
L. J. Davies
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB, UK
E. J. Kim
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Gogerddan, Aberystwyth SY23 3EB, UK
*
†E-mail: richard.dewhurst@teagasc.ie
Get access

Abstract

Eight multiparous lactating Holstein–Friesian cows were used to evaluate the partitioning of dietary nitrogen (N) from diets based on mixtures of red clover and maize silages in comparison with diets based on ryegrass silage. All cows received 4 kg/day of a standard dairy concentrate with one of four forage treatments in an incomplete changeover design with three 4-week periods. Three treatments were based on mixtures of red clover and maize silage. N intake was altered both by varying the ratio of these silages (40/60 and 25/75 on a dry matter (DM) basis) and by an additional treatment for which the DM intake of the 40/60 mixture was restricted to the level achieved with grass silage. Rumen passage rates were estimated from faecal excretion curves following a pulse oral dose of Dysprosium-labeled silage and urinary excretion of purine derivatives (PD) was used as an index of rumen microbial protein synthesis. Red clover silage mixtures led to significantly increased feed intake (21.5, 20.7 and 15.2 kg DM/day for 40/60 and 25/75 red clover/maize silage mixtures and grass silage, respectively), milk production (25.8, 27.8 and 20.0 kg/day for the same treatments, respectively) and milk component yields, but were without effect on milk fat and protein concentrations. The large increase in the yield of milk (24.5 kg/day) and milk components for the restricted red clover/maize silage treatment, in comparison with the grass silage treatment, was proportionately greater than the increase in DM intake (16.6 kg DM/day). There were no significant treatment effects on diet digestibility, while the higher intakes of red clover silage mixtures were associated with higher rumen passage rates (5.82%, 6.24% and 4.55%/h, respectively). There were significant effects of both N intake and forage source on the partitioning of dietary N between milk and urine. When dietary protein was diluted by the inclusion of maize silage, red clover silage led to increased milk N and reduced urinary N in comparison with grass silage. Improvements in N utilisation may be related to increased dietary starch and/or rumen passage rates leading to increased microbial protein synthesis for these treatments. Urinary excretion of PD was significantly higher for all diets based on mixtures of red clover and maize silages, in comparison with grass silage. Urinary N output was close to literature predictions based on N intake for the diet based on ryegrass silage, but 40 to 80 g/day (25% to 30%) less than predicted for the diets based on the mixtures of red clover and maize silages.

Keywords

red clover silage, dairy cow, nitrogen partitioning, milk production, urine output
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 5 , May 2010 , pp. 732 - 738
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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 (AFRC) 1992. AFRC technical committee on responses to nutrients. 9. Nutritive requirements of ruminant animals: protein. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews (Series B) 62, 787–835.Google Scholar
Al-Mabruk, RM, Beck, NFG, Dewhurst, RJ 2004. Effects of silage species and supplemental vitamin E on the oxidative stability of milk. Journal of Dairy Science 87, 406–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aston, K, Fisher, WJ, McAllan, AB, Dhanoa, MS, Dewhurst, RJ 1998. Supplementation of grass silage-based diets with small quantities of concentrates: strategies for allocating concentrate crude protein. Animal Science 67, 17–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browne, EM, Juniper, DT, Bryant, MJ, Beever, DE 2005. Apparent digestibility and nitrogen utilisation of diets based on maize and grass silage fed to beef steers. Animal Feed Science and Technology 119, 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, ME, Reid, D, Watson, JN 1983. Silage and milk production: studies with diets containing white clover silage. Grass and Forage Science 38, 193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, XB, Hovell, FDD, Ørskov, ER, and Brown, DS 1990. Excretion of purine derivatives by ruminants: effects of exogenous nucleic acid supply on purine derivative excretion by sheep. The British Journal of Nutrition 63, 131–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewhurst, RJ, Davies, DR, Merry, RJ 2000b. Microbial protein supply from the rumen. Animal Feed Science and Technology 85, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Fisher, WJ, Tweed, JKS, Wilkins, RJ 2003. Comparison of grass and legume silages for milk production. 1. Production responses with different levels of concentrate. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2598–2611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewhurst, RJ, Mitton, AM, Offer, NW, Thomas, C 1996. Effects of the composition of grass silages on milk production and nitrogen utilisation by dairy cows. Animal Science 62, 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewhurst, RJ, Moorby, JM, Dhanoa, MS, Evans, RT, Fisher, WJ 2000a. Effects of altering energy and protein supply to dairy cows during the dry period. 1. Intake, body condition, and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 1782–1794.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grovum, WL, Williams, VJ 1973. Rate of passage of digesta in sheep. 4. Passage of marker through the alimentary canal and the biological relevance of rate-constants derived from the changes in concentration of marker in faeces. The British Journal of Nutrition 30, 313–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halling, M, Hopkins, A, Nissinen, O, Paul, C, Tuori, M, Soelter, U 2001. Forage legumes – productivity and composition. Landbauforschung Völkenrode 234, 5–15.Google Scholar
Hoffman, PC, Combs, DK, and Casler, MD 1998. Performance of lactating dairy cows fed alfalfa silage or perennial ryegrass silage. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 162–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huhtanen, P, Nousiainen, JI, Rinne, M, Kytölä, K, Khalili, H 2008. Utilisation and partition of dietary nitrogen in dairy cows fed grass silage-based diets. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 3589–3599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Juko, CD, Bredon, RM, Marshall, B 1961. The nutrition of Zebu cattle. II. The techniques of digestibility trials with special reference to sampling, preservation and drying of faeces. Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge) 56, 93–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kebreab, E, France, J, Beever, DE, Castillo, AR 2001. Nitrogen pollution by dairy cows and its mitigation by dietary manipulation. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 60, 275–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margan, DE, Moran, JB, Spence, FB 1994. Energy and protein value of combinations of maize silage and red clover hay for ruminants, using adult sheep as a model. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 34, 319–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, RW, Murray, DA, Harding, SA, Baird, DB, Soutar, DM 2006. GenStat® for Windows™, 10th edition, Introduction. VSN International, Hemel Hempstead, UK.Google Scholar
Pirt, SJ 1965. The maintenance energy of bacteria in growing cultures. Proceedings of the Royal Society (London), Series B 163, 224–231.Google ScholarPubMed
Spanghero, M, Kowalski, ZM 1997. Critical analysis of N balance experiments with lactating cows. Livestock Production Science 52, 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tas, BM, Susenbeth, A 2007. Urinary purine derivative excretion as an indicator of in vivo microbial N flow in cattle: a review. Livestock Science 111, 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, C, Aston, K, Daley, SR 1985. Milk production from silage. 3. A comparison of red clover with grass silage. Animal Production 41, 23–31.Google Scholar