Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:33:54.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Passage kinetics of concentrates in dairy cows measured with carbon stable isotopes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2013

D. Warner ,
J. Dijkstra ,
S. Tamminga  and
W. F. Pellikaan
D. Warner*
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700AH Wageningen, the Netherlands
J. Dijkstra
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700AH Wageningen, the Netherlands
S. Tamminga
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700AH Wageningen, the Netherlands
W. F. Pellikaan
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700AH Wageningen, the Netherlands
*
†E-mail: Daniel.Warner@wur.nl
Get access

Abstract

Fractional passage rates form a fundamental element within modern feed evaluation systems for ruminants, but knowledge on feed-specific fractional passage is largely lacking. Commonly applied tracer techniques based on externally applied markers, such as chromium-mordanted neutral detergent fibre (Cr-NDF), have been criticised for behaving differently to feed particles. This study describes the use of the carbon stable isotope ratio (13C : 12C) as an internal digesta marker to quantify the fractional passage rate of concentrates through the digestive tract of dairy cows. In a crossover study, five dairy cows were fed low (24.6%) and high (52.6%) levels of concentrates (dry matter (DM) basis) and received a pulse-dosed Cr-NDF and 13C isotopes. The latter was administered orally by exchanging part of the dietary concentrates of low 13C natural abundance with a pulse dose of maize bran-based concentrates of high 13C natural abundance. Fractional passage rates from the rumen (K1) and from the large intestine (K2) were determined from faecal marker concentrations of Cr-NDF and of 13C in the DM (13C-DM), NDF (13C-NDF) and neutral detergent soluble (13C-NDS). No differences in K1 estimates were found for the two concentrate levels fed but significant differences between markers (P<0.001) were observed. Faecal Cr-NDF excretions gave lower K1 estimates (0.037–0.039/h) than 13C-DM (0.054–0.056/h) and 13C-NDF (0.061–0.063/h). The 13C-NDS was calculated by the difference of 13C in the DM and NDF, and K1 values (0.039–0.043/h) were comparable to Cr-NDF. Total mean retention time was considerably higher for Cr-NDF (40.9–42.0 h) as compared to 13C-DM and 13C-NDF (32.0–33.5 h; P<0.001). The accuracy of the curve fits for Cr-NDF and 13C-DM and 13C-NDF was overall good (mean prediction error of 9.9–13.9%). Fractional passage rate of Cr-NDF was comparable to studies where this marker was assumed to represent the fractional passage of roughages. However, K1 estimates based on the 13C : 12C ratio varied considerably from studies based on external markers. Our results suggest that the use of 13C isotopes as digesta passage markers can provide feed component-specific K1 estimates for concentrates and provides new insight into passage kinetics of NDF from technologically treated compound feed.

Keywords

markersstable isotopes13Cfractional passagecompound feed
Type
Nutrition
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue 12 , December 2013 , pp. 1935 - 1943
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2013 

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

Ahvenjärvi, S, Rinne, M, Heikkilä, T and Huhtanen, P 2010. The effect of a diet and intrinsic characteristics of feed particles on passage kinetics in dairy cows. In Proceedings of 1st Nordic Feed Science Conference, 22–23 June, Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 162–165.Google Scholar
Bannink, A, de Visser, H, Dijkstra, J and France, J 1997. Impact of diet-specific input parameters on simulated rumen function. Journal of Theoretical Biology 184, 371–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bibby, J and Toutenburg, H 1977. Prediction and improved estimation in linear models. Wiley and Sons, London, UK.Google Scholar
Bosch, MW and Bruining, M 1995. Passage rate and total clearance rate from the rumen of cows fed on grass silages differing in cell-wall content. British Journal of Nutrition 73, 41–49.Google Scholar
Boutton, TW, Tyrrell, HW, Patterson, BW, Varga, GA and Klein, PD 1988. Carbon kinetics of milk formation in Holstein cows in late lactation. Journal of Animal Science 66, 2636–2645.Google Scholar
Brito, AF, Broderick, GA and Reynal, SM 2006. Effect of varying dietary ratios of alfalfa silage to corn silage on omasal flow and microbial protein synthesis in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 3939–3953.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brunt, K, Sanders, P and Rozema, T 1998. The enzymatic determination of starch in food, feed and raw materials of the starch industry. Starch-Stärke 50, 413–419.3.0.CO;2-F>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colucci, PE, MacLeod, GK, Grovum, WL, McMillan, I and Barney, DJ 1990. Digesta kinetics in sheep and cattle fed diets with different forage to concentrate ratios at high and low intakes. Journal of Dairy Science 73, 2143–2156.Google Scholar
CVB 2000. Chemical composition and nutritional values of feedstuffs and feeding standards. CVB table ruminants 2000, Centraal Veevoeder Bureau, Lelystad, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Dhanoa, MS, Siddons, RC, France, J and Gale, DL 1985. A multicompartmental model to describe marker excretion patterns in ruminant faeces. British Journal of Nutrition 53, 663–671.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, J, Kebreab, E, Mills, JAN, Pellikaan, WF, López, S, Bannink, A and France, J 2007. Predicting the profile of nutrients available for absorption: from nutrient requirement to animal response and environmental impact. Animal 1, 99–111.Google Scholar
Faichney, GJ 1975. The use of markers to partition digestion within the gastro-intestinal tract of ruminants. In Digestion and metabolism in the ruminant (ed. IW McDonald and ACI Warner), pp. 227–291. University of New England Publishing Unit, Armidale, NSW, Australia.Google Scholar
Huhtanen, P and Hristov, AN 2001. Estimating passage kinetics using fibre-bound 15N as an internal marker. Animal Feed Science and Technology 94, 29–41.Google Scholar
Lund, P, Weisbjerg, MR and Hvelplund, T 2006. Passage kinetics of fibre in dairy cows obtained from duodenal and faecal ytterbium excretion. Effect of forage type. Animal Feed Science and Technology 128, 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matis, JH 1972. Gamma time-dependency in Blaxter’s compartmental model. Biometrics 28, 597–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayes, RW, Giráldez, J and Lamb, CS 1997. Estimation of gastrointestinal passage rates of different plant components in ruminants using isotopically-labelled plant wax hydrocarbons or sprayed even-chain n-alkanes. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 56, 187A.Google Scholar
Mould, FL, Ørskov, ER and Mann, SO 1983. Associative effects of mixed feeds. I. Effects of type and level of supplementation and the influence of the rumen fluid pH on cellulolysis in vivo and dry matter digestion of various roughages. Animal Feed Science and Technology 10, 15–30.Google Scholar
Offer, NW and Dixon, J 2000. Factors affecting outflow rate from the reticulo-rumen. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews Series B: Livestock Feeds and Feeding 70, 833–844.Google Scholar
Owens, FN and Goetsch, AL 1986. Digesta passage and microbial protein synthesis. In Control of digestion and metabolism in ruminants (ed. LP Milligan, WL Grovum and A Dobson), pp. 196–223. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
Owens, FN and Hanson, CF 1992. External and internal markers for appraising site and extent of digestion in ruminants. Journal of Dairy Science 75, 2605–2617.Google Scholar
Robinson, PH, Tamminga, S and Van Vuuren, AM 1987. Influence of declining level of feed intake and varying the proportion of starch in the concentrate on rumen ingesta quantity, composition and kinetics of ingesta turnover in dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 17, 37–62.Google Scholar
Pellikaan, WF 2004. Passage of 13C-labelled feed components through the digestive tract of dairy cows. PhD thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Pellikaan, WF, Verstegen, MWA, Tamminga, S, Dijkstra, J and Hendriks, WH 2013. δ13C as a marker to study digesta passage kinetics in ruminants; a combined in vivo and in vitro study. Animal 7, 754–767.Google Scholar
Poore, MH, Moore, JA and Swingle, RS 1990. Differential passage rates and digestion of neutral detergent fiber from grain and forages in 30, 60 and 90% concentrate diets fed to steers. Journal of Animal Science 68, 2965–2973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seo, S, Tedeschi, LO, Schwab, CG, Garthwalte, BD and Fox, DG 2006. Evaluation of the passage rate equations in the 2001 dairy NRC model. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 2327–2342.Google Scholar
Sponheimer, M, Robinson, T, Roeder, B, Hammer, J, Ayliffe, L, Passey, B, Cerling, T, Dearing, D and Ehleringer, J 2003. Digestion and passage rates of grass hays by llamas, alpacas, goats, rabbits, and horses. Small Ruminant Research 48, 149–154.Google Scholar
Südekum, KH, Ziggers, W, Roos, N, Sick, H, Tamminga, S and Stangassinger, M 1995. Estimating the passage of digesta in steers and wethers using the ration of 13C to 12C and titanium(IV)-oxide. Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies 31, 219–227.Google Scholar
Tamminga, S, Robinson, PH, Vogt, M and Boer, H 1989. Rumen ingesta kinetics of cell wall components in dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 25, 89–98.Google Scholar
Udén, P, Colucci, PE and Van Soest, PJ 1980. Investigation of chromium, cerium and cobalt as markers in digesta. Rate of passage studies. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 31, 625–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Duinkerken, G, Blok, MC, Bannink, A, Cone, JW, Dijkstra, J, Van Vuuren, AM and Tamminga, S 2011. Update of the Dutch protein evaluation system for ruminants: the DVE/OEB2010 system. Journal of Agricultural Science 149, 351–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Es, AJH 1975. Feed evaluation of dairy cows. Livestock Production Science 2, 95–107.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.Google Scholar
Van Vliet, PCJ, Reijs, JW, Bloem, J, Dijkstra, J and de Goede, RGM 2007. Effects of cow diet on the microbial community and organic matter and nitrogen content of feces. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 5146–5158.Google Scholar