Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:32:44.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phytochemical complementarities among endophyte-infected tall fescue, reed canarygrass, birdsfoot trefoil and alfalfa affect cattle foraging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2011

T. D. Lyman ,
F. D. Provenza ,
J. J. Villalba  and
R. D. Wiedmeier
T. D. Lyman*
Affiliation:
Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan 84322-5230, USA Department of Animal, Dairy and Veterinary Sciences, Utah State University, Logan 84322-5230, USA
F. D. Provenza
Affiliation:
Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan 84322-5230, USA
J. J. Villalba
Affiliation:
Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan 84322-5230, USA
R. D. Wiedmeier
Affiliation:
Department of Animal, Dairy and Veterinary Sciences, Utah State University, Logan 84322-5230, USA
*
†E-mail: tiffannyl@cc.usu.edu
Get access

Abstract

We determined whether plant diversity and sequence of plant ingestion affected foraging when cattle chose from plants that varied in concentrations of alkaloids, tannins and saponins. We hypothesized cattle that ate high-alkaloid grasses (endophyte-infected tall fescue (TF) or reed canarygrass (RCG)) would prefer forages high in tannins (birdsfoot trefoil, BFT+) or saponins (alfalfa, ALF+), because tannins and saponins can bind to alkaloids, presumably reducing their absorption. We further hypothesized that forages with tannins or saponins consumed before, rather than after, foraging on high-alkaloid grasses would promote greater use of those grasses presumably by binding to alkaloids, thereby reducing their absorption. In Phase 1, cattle (n = 32) grazed on either high (+) or low (−) alkaloid grass (TF or RCG) pastures for 30 min each morning at 0600 h and were then offered a choice of BFT+, BFT−, ALF+ and ALF− for 60 min each day for 12 days. In Phase 2, cattle (n = 32) were first offered a choice of BFT+ or ALF+ for 30 min at 0600 h and then placed on grass (TF+ or −, or RCG+ or −) pastures for 60 min for 12 days. In both phases, we had four spatial replications of four treatments with 2 per calves assigned to each of the 16 replications per treatment combinations. Scan samples of individuals at 2-min intervals were used to determine incidence of foraging on each plant species (%). Cattle grazed more on RCG than on TF in Phases 1 (62% v. 27%; P = 0.0015) and 2 (71% v. 32%; P = 0.0005). In Phase 1, cattle that first foraged on RCG+ or TF− subsequently preferred ALF over BFT, whereas cattle offered RCG− or TF+ foraged on ALF and BFT equally. Foraging by cattle on RCG was cyclic during Phase 1, whereas cattle foraging on TF markedly decreased incidence of use of TF from 41% to only 16% by the end of the 12-day trial (P = 0.0029). Contrary to the cyclic (RCG) or steadily declining (TF) use of grasses in Phase 1, cattle steadily and dramatically increased foraging on both RCG and TF throughout Phase 2, when they first grazed BFT+ or ALF+ followed by high-alkaloid grasses (P = 0.0159). Our findings suggest that in plant species the sequence of ingestion influenced foraging behavior of cattle and that secondary compounds influenced those responses.

Keywords

alkaloidscattleforaging behaviorsaponinstannins
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , April 2012 , pp. 676 - 682
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

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

Aldrich, CG, Paterson, JA, Tate, JL, Kerley, MS 1993. The effects of endophyte-infected tall fescue consumption on diet utilization and thermal regulation in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 71, 164–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderton, N, Cockrum, PA, Colegate, SM, Edgard, JA, Flower, K 1999. Assessment of potential for toxicity of Phalaris spp. via alkaloid content determination: P. coerulescens, a case example. Phytochemical Analysis 10, 113–118.3.0.CO;2-#>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman, J 1974. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour 49, 227–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 2002. Official methods of analysis, 17th edition. AOAC, Maryland, USA.Google Scholar
Asay, KH, Jensen, KB, Waldron, BL 2001. Responses of tall fescue cultivars to an irrigation gradient. Crop Science 41, 350–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burritt, EA, Provenza, FD 2000. Role of toxins in intake of varied diets by sheep. Journal of Chemical Ecology 26, 1991–2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeland, WJ, Janzen, DH 1974. Strategies in herbivory by mammals: the role of plant secondary compounds. American Naturalist 108, 269–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeland, WJ, Calcott, PH, Anderson, LR 1985. Tannins and saponin: interaction in herbivore diets. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 13, 189–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, HK, Van Soest, PJ 1970. Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, reagents, procedures, and some applications). Agriculture Handbook No. 379. ARS-USDA, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Hedqvist, H, Muller-Harvey, I, Reed, JD, Krueger, CG, Murphy, M 2000. Characterisation of tannins and in vitro protein digestibility of several Lotus corniculatus varieties. Animal Feed Science and Technology 87, 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, WT, Mangan, JL 1977. Complexes of condensed tannins of sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.) with fraction-1 leaf protein and with submaxillary mucoprotein, and their reversal by polyethylene-glycol and pH. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 28, 126–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, ST, Stegelmeier, BL, Gardner, DR 2001. The isolation and identification of steroidal sapogenins in switchgrass. Journal of Natural Toxins 10, 273–281.Google ScholarPubMed
Lisonbee, LD, Villalba, JJ, Provenza, FD 2009. Effects of tannins on selection by sheep of forages containing alkaloids, tannins and saponins. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 89, 2668–2677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyman, TD, Provenza, FD, Villalba, JJ 2008. Sheep foraging behavior in response to interactions among alkaloids, tannins, and saponins. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 88, 824–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyman, TD, Provenza, FD, Villalba, JJ, Wiedmeier, RD 2010. Cattle preferences differ when endophyte-infected tall fescue, birdsfoot trefoil, and alfalfa are grazed in different sequences. Journal of Animal Science, published online November 5, 2010, jas.2009-2741v1-20092741.Google ScholarPubMed
Malinow, MR, McLaughlin, P, Stafford, C, Livingston, AL, Kohler, GO, Cheeke, PR 1979. Comparative effects of alfalfa saponins and alfalfa fiber on cholesterol absorption in rats. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 32, 1810–1812.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marten, GC 1972. Alkaloids in reed canarygrass. In Anti-quality components of forages (ed. AG Matches), pp. 15–31. CSSA Spec. Publishing, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Meuret, M, Viaux, C, Chadoeuf, J 1994. Land heterogeneity stimulates intake during grazing trips. Annales de Zootechnie 43, 296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mote, T, Villalba, JJ, Provenza, FD 2008. Foraging sequence influences the ability of lambs to consume foods containing tannins and terpenes. Applied Animal Behavior Science 113, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owens, J, Provenza, FD, Wiedmeier, RD, Villalba, JJ 2011. Supplementing endophyte-infected tall fescue or reed canarygrass with alfalfa or birdsfoot trefoil increases forage intake and digestibility by sheep. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, doi:10.1002/jsfa.4681.Google ScholarPubMed
Pedersen, MW 1975. Relative quantity and biological activity of saponins in germinated seeds, roots, and foliage of alfalfa. Crop Science 15, 541–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, MW, Barnes, DK, Sorensen, EL, Griffin, GD, Nielson, MW, JrHill, RR, Grosheiser, FI, Sonoda, RM, Hanson, CH, Hunt, OJ, Peaden, RN, JrElgin, JH, Devine, TE, Anderson, MJ, Goplen, BP, Elling, LJ, Howarth, RE 1976. Effects of low and high saponin selection in alfalfa on agronomic and pest resistance trails and the interrelationship of these traits. Crop Science 16, 193–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfister, JA, Provenza, FD, Manners, GD, Gardner, DR, Ralphs, MH 1997. Tall larkspur ingestion: can cattle regulate intake below toxic levels? Journal of Chemical Ecology 23, 759–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provenza, FD 1995. Postingestive feedback as an elementary determinant of food preference and intake in ruminants. Journal of Range Management 48, 2–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provenza, FD 1996. Acquired aversions as the basis for varied diets of ruminants foraging on rangelands. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2010–2020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Provenza, FD 2003. Twenty-five years of paradox in plant–herbivore interactions and “sustainable” grazing management. Rangelands 25, 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provenza, FD 2008. What does it mean to be locally adapted to a landscape and who cares anyway? Journal of Animal Science 86, E271–E284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Provenza, FD, Villalba, JJ 2010. The role of natural plant products in modulating the immune system: an adaptable approach for combating disease in grazing animals. Small Ruminant Research 89, 131–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provenza, FD, Villalba, JJ, Dziba, LE, Atwood, SB, Banner, RE 2003. Linking herbivore experience, varied diets, and plant biochemical diversity. Small Ruminant Research 49, 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provenza, FD, Villalba, JJ, Landau, SY, Huffman, MH, Cheney, CD 2011. The wisdom body: nutrition, health, and nature's pharmacopeia. Evolutionary Biology (in press).Google Scholar
Rottinghaus, GE, Garner, GB, Creighton, NC, Ellis, JL 1991. HPLC method for quantitating ergovaline in endophyte-infested tall fescue: seasonal variation of ergovaline levels in stems with leaf sheaths, leaf blades, and seed heads. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 39, 112–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seefeldt, SS 2005. Consequences of selecting Rambouillet ewes for Mountain Big Sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) dietary preference. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58, 380–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheaffer, CC, Peterson, PR, Ehlke, NJ 1990. Reed canarygrass. Retrieved September 2, 2007, from http://www.cyfernet.extension.umn.edu/forages/pdfs/Reed_Canarygrass.pdfGoogle Scholar
Terrill, TH, Rowan, AM, Douglas, GB, Barry, TN 1992. Determination of extractable and bound condensed tannin concentrations in forage plants, protein concentrate meals and cereal grains. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 58, 321–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilman, D 1982. Resource Competition and Community Structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.Google ScholarPubMed
Villalba, JJ, Provenza, FD, GouDong, H 2004. Experience influences diet mixing by herbivores: implications for plant biochemical diversity. Oikos 107, 100–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villalba, JJ, Provenza, FD, Clemensen, AK, Larsen, R, Junke, J 2011. Preference for diverse pastures by sheep in response to intraruminal administrations of tannins, saponins, and alkaloids. Grass and Forage Science 66, 224–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar