Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:44:40.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The nutritive value of silages

Energy metabolism in sheep receiving diets of grass silage or grass silage and barley

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

N. C. Kelly
Affiliation:
The Hannah Research Institute, Ayr KA6 5HL
P. C. Thomas
Affiliation:
The Hannah Research Institute, Ayr KA6 5HL
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.

1. Two calorimetric experiments were conducted to study the utilization of energy in sheep given diets of grass silage or grass silage and barley. Three silages were investigated. One was made from first-harvest grass in the spring (S) and the others from regrowth cut either early or late in the autumn (E and L respectively). All were of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) and preserved with formic acid. Each silage was given at two levels of feeding, the lower providing approximately a maintenance energy intake. The S and L silages were also given supplemented with barley.

2. The digestibilities of organic matter, cellulose and energy in the silages were high. Measured at maintenance, digestible energy (de) contents (MJ/kg dry matter (dm)) were 11.83, 14.67 and 12.90 for S, E and L respectively. The de contents of the S and E silages were depressed at the higher level of feeding but the effect was offset by changes in the energy losses as methane and urine. Metabolizable energy (me) contents (MJ/kg dm) for the three silages, S, E and L were respectively 9.88, 12.54 and 10.73 at the low level of feeding and 9.91, 11.99 and 11.08 at the high level of feeding. The mean me content of barley calculated by difference was 13.76 MJ/kg dm.

3. The mean efficiencies of utilization of me for maintenance (km) for the S, E and L silages were 0.69, 0.71 and 0.68 respectively. Corresponding values for fattening (kf) were 0.21, 0.57 and 0.59. Excepting the kf for the S silage which was low, observed efficiencies were in broad agreement with those predicted by the equations of the Agricultural Research Council (1965). Similar agreement was obtained with all diets consisting of silage and barley.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1978

References

Agricultural Research Council (1965). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock, no. 2, Ruminants. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Alwash, A. H. & Thomas, P. C. (1971). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 22, 611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. G. (1964). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 62, 399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beever, D. E., Cammell, S. B. & Wallace, A. (1974). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 33, 73A.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1973). In Proceedings of the Seventh University of Nottingham Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers, p. 3. [Swan, H. and Lewis, D., editors]. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. & Wainman, F. W. (1964). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 63, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, E. (1965). In Energy Metabolism, p. 441 [Blaxter, K. L., editor]. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cottyn, B. G. & Boucque, C. V. (1968). J. Agric. Fd Chem. 16, 105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crampton, E. W. & Maynard, L. A. (1938). J. Nutr. 15, 383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland (1975). 1st Report of the Feedingstuffs Evaluation Unit. Edinburgh: Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland.Google Scholar
Dewar, W. A. & MacDonald, P. M. (1961). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 12, 790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlop, R. H. & Hammond, P. B. (1965). Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 119, 1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekern, A., Blaxter, K. L. & Sawers, D. (1965). In Energy Metabolism, p. 217 [Blaxter, K. L., editor]. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ekern, A. & Sundstøl, G. (1973). In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals, p. 221 [Menke, K. H., Lantzsch, H. J. and Reichl, J. R., editors]. Stuttgart: Universitat Hohenheim.Google Scholar
Farhan, S. M. A. & Thomas, P. C. (1977). J. Br. Grassl. Soc. (In the Press.)Google Scholar
Fertilizer and Feedingstuffs Regulations (1960). Stat. Instr. no. 1165.Google Scholar
Fishwick, G. (1973). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 24, 105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, L., Schiemann, R. & Nehring, K. (1963). Arch. Tierernahr. 13, 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, P., Henderson, A. R. & Ralton, I. (1973). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 24, 827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKenzie, D. D. S. (1967). J. Dairy Sci. 50, 1772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacRae, J. C., Campbell, D. R. & Eadie, J. (1975). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 84, 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1975). Tech. Bull. Minist. Agric. Fish. Fd no. 33. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Nijkamp, H. J. (1965). In Energy Metabolism, p. 147 (K. L. Blaxter, editor). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & Fraser, C. (1975). Br. J. Nutr. 34, 493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigma Chemicals (1974). Tech. Bull. 726 uv/826 uv, p. 9. St Louis, Missouri: Sigma Chemical Company Limited.Google Scholar
Smith, J. S., Wainman, F. W. & Dewey, P. J. S. (1977). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 36, 68A.Google Scholar
Somogyi, M. (1945). J. biol. Chem. 160, 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweetsur, A. M. (1971). Studies on the heat coagulation of milk protein. PhD thesis, University of Strath-Clyde.Google Scholar
Thomas, P. C., Kelly, N. C., Chamberlain, D. G. & Macdonald, L. (1976). In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals, p. 245, [Vermorel, M., editor]. Clermont-Ferrand: de Bussac.Google Scholar
Thomas, P. C., Kelly, N. C. & Wait, M. K. (1976). J. Br. Grass]. Soc. 31, 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wainman, F. W. & Blaxter, K. L. (1958). Publs Eur. Ass. Prod., no. 8, p. 85.Google Scholar
Wainman, F. W. & Paterson, D. (1963). J. Agric. Sci., Camb. 61, 253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, R. J. (1974). In Proceedings of the Eighth University of Nottingham Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers, p. 167 [Swan, H., editor]. London: Butterworths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar