Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:26:03.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of forage quality and level of feeding on digestibility and gastrointestinal transit time of oat straw and alfalfa given to ponies and donkeys

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

R. A. Pearson ,
R. F. Archibald  and
R. H. Muirhead
R. A. Pearson*
Affiliation:
Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG, Scotland, UK
R. F. Archibald
Affiliation:
Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG, Scotland, UK
R. H. Muirhead
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical Studies, University of Edinburgh, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG, Scotland, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Dr R. Anne Pearson, fax + 44 131 445 5099, email anne.pearson@ed.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Four donkeys and four ponies were fed molassed dehydrated alfalfa or oat straw, either ad libitum or restricted to about 70 % ad libitum intake in a Latin-square design for four periods of 21 d. Measurements of apparent digestibility and gastrointestinal transit time were made on the last 7 d of each period. When the forages were provided ad libitum, all animals ate significantly (P<0.01) more of the alfalfa than of the oat straw. Ponies consumed significantly (P = 0.007) more of both diets per unit live weight than donkeys. Higher apparent digestibilities of dietary DM, energy and fibre fractions were seen in donkeys, at both levels of feeding, compared with the ponies. This partly compensated for the lower intakes by the donkeys when fed ad libitum. When intake of alfalfa was restricted, the apparent digestibility of DM was higher compared with the corresponding values when fed ad libitum, but the reverse was true for straw. This may be because restriction of a low-quality diet reduced selection of the more digestible parts of the forage. Donkeys and ponies consumed more energy and protein than required when fed alfalfa ad libitum. Both oat straw treatments provided insufficient protein to meet the predicted requirements of ponies and donkeys. Straw intakes ad libitum exceeded the estimated energy requirement for ponies by 34–51 %, but donkey energy requirements were only just met. When the amount of straw offered was restricted, 78–90 % of the estimated energy requirement for donkeys was met compared with 90–105 % for the ponies.

Keywords

Apparent digestibilityForage intakeEquids
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 85 , Issue 5 , May 2001 , pp. 599 - 606
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2001

References

Araújo, LOD, Gonçalves, LC, Rezende, ASC, Rodriguez, NM & Maurício, RM (1997) Digestibilidade aparente em eqüídeos submetidos a dieta composta de concentrado e volumosos, fornecido com diferentes intervalos de tempo (Apparent digestibility in equids of diets differing in concentration and volume when fed over different time periods). Arquivo Brasilerio de Medicina Veterinaria e Zootecnia 49, 225–237.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1990) Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Analytical Chemists,15th ed. Arlington, VA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
Crozier, JA, Allen, VG, Jack, NE, Fontenot, JP & Cochran, MA (1997) Digestibility, apparent mineral absorption and voluntary intake by horses fed alfalfa, tall fescue and caucasian bluestem. Journal of Animal Science 75, 1651–1658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuddeford, D & Hyslop, JJ (1996) Intake and digestibility of a high fibre concentrate offered ad libitum to ponies and donkeys. In Proceedings of the European Association for Animal Production 47th Annual Meeting, Lillihammer,Norway, 296,Abstr. Norway: EAAP.Google Scholar
Cuddeford, D, Pearson, RA, Archibald, RF & Muirhead, RH (1995) Digestibility and gastro-intestinal transit time of diets containing different proportions of alfalfa and oat straw given to Thoroughbreds, Shetland ponies, Highland ponies and donkeys. Animal Science 61, 407–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cymbaluk, NF (1990) Comparison of forage digestion by cattle and horses. Journal of Animal Science 70, 601–610.Google Scholar
Dulphy, JP, Martin-Rosset, W, Dubroeucq, H, Ballet, JM, Detour, A & Jailler, M (1997 a) Compared feeding patterns in. ad libitum intake of dry forages by horses and sheep. Livestock Production Science 52, 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulphy, JP, Martin-Rosset, W, Dubroeucq, H & Jailler, M (1997 b) Evaluation of voluntary intake of forage trough-fed to light horses. Comparison with sheep. Factors of variation and prediction. Livestock Production Science 52, 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, RNW & Lawrence, TLJ (1980) The energy and protein requirements of the light horse. British Veterinary Journal 136, 116–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernadez-Rivera, S, Midou, A & Marichatou, H (1994) Effect of food allowance on diet selectivity and intake of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucam) stover leaves by sheep. Animal Production 58, 249–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, Z, Cox, JE & Argo, CMcG (1998) Photoperiodic entrainment of seasonal changes in appetite and growth in pony colts Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science 36, 131.Google Scholar
Haenlein, GFW, Holdren, RD & Yoon, YM (1966) Comparative response of horses and sheep to different physical forms of alfalfa hay. Journal of Animal Science 25, 740–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyslop, JJ, Jessop, NS, Stefansdottir, GJ & Cuddeford, D (1997) Comparative degradation in situ of four concentrate feeds in the caecum of ponies and the rumen of steers. In Proceedings of the 15th Equine Nutrition and Physiology Symposium, Ramada Plaza, Fort Worth, Texas, USA, pp. 116–117. [Equine, Nutrition and Physiological, Society, editors]. Savoy, IL: The Equine Nutrition and Physiology Society.Google Scholar
Hyslop, JJ, Tomlinson, AL, Bayley, A & Cuddeford, D (1998) Voluntary feed intake and apparent digestibility in vivo in ponies offered a mature threshed grass hay ad libitum. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, 36, 130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izraely, H, Chosniak, I, Stevens, CE, Demment, MW & Shkolnik, A (1989) Factors determining the digestive efficiency of the domesticated donkey (Equus asinus asinus). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Physiology 74, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Izraely, H, Chosniak, I, Stevens, CE & Shkolnik, A (1989) Energy digestion and nitrogen economy of the domestic donkeys (Equus asinus asinus) in relation to food quality. Journal of Arid Environments 17, 97–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, C (1976) The evolutionary strategy of the Equidae and the origins of rumen and caecal digestion. Evolution 30, 757–774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mueller, PJ, Hintz, HF, Pearson, RA, Lawrence, PR, Van Soest, PJ (1994) Voluntary intake of roughage diets by donkeys Working Equines 137–148. [M, Bakkoury and A, Prentis,editor]. Rabat: Actes Editions.Google Scholar
National Research Council(1989) Nutrient Requirements of Horses.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Pearson, RA (1998) The future of working equids - prospects and problems. In Proceedings of the Third International Colloquium on Working Equines, October 5–9 1998, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico, pp. 1–20 [Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y, Zootecnia, editors]. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.Google Scholar
Pearson, RA & Merritt, JB (1991) Intake, digestion and gastro-intestinal transit time in resting donkeys and ponies and exercised donkeys given. ad libitum hay and straw diets Equine Veterinary Journal 23, 339–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, RA, Archibald, RF & Muirhead, RH (1998) The effect of level of feeding on digestibility of oat straw and alfalfa given to ponies and donkeys In Proceedings of the Third International Colloquium on Working Equines, October 5–9 1998, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico, pp. 286–292 [Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y, Zootecnia, editors]. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.Google Scholar
Pearson, RA, Cuddeford, D, Archibald, RF & Muirhead, RH (1992) Digestibility of diets containing different proportions of alfalfa and oat straw in thoroughbreds, Shetland ponies, Highland ponies and donkeys. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Equine Nutrition. Pferdeheilkunde Sondersgabe, September 1992, pp. 153–157.Google Scholar
Ruckebusch, Y (1984) Motricité digestive chez les équidés (Digestive motility in the equid).In Le Cheval: Reproduction, Selection Alimentation, Exploitation 173–188. [R, Jarrigeand and W, Martin-Rosset, editors]. Paris: INRA.Google Scholar
Savadogo, M, Zemmelink, G & Nianogo, AJ (2000) Effect of selective consumption on voluntary intake and digestibility of sorghum. (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) stover, cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp.) and groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) haulms by sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology 84, 265–277.Google Scholar
Smith, DG (1999) The impact of grazing time allowance on the dry matter intake and foraging behaviour of cattle and donkeys managed under traditional African grazing systems.PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Suhartanto, B, Julliand, V, Faurie, F & Tisserand, JL (1992) Comparison of digestion in donkeys and ponies. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Equine Nutrition. Pferdeheilkunde Sondersgabe, September 1992, pp. 158–161.Google Scholar
Tisserand, JL, Faurie, F, Toure, M (1991) A comparative study of donkey and pony digestive physiology Donkeys, Mules and Horses in Tropical Agricultural Development 67–72 .[D, Fielding and R.A, Pearson, editors]. Edinburgh: Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Todd, LK, Sauer, WC, Christopherson, RJ, Coleman, RJ & Caine, WR (1995) The effect of feeding different forms of alfalfa on nutrient digestibility and voluntary intake in horses. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 73, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uden, P, Rounsaville, TR, Wiggans, GR & Van Soest, PJ (1982) The measurement of liquid and solid digesta retention in ruminants, equines and rabbits given timothy (Phleum pratense) hay 48, 329–339.Google ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, PJ (1994) Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant,2nd ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar