Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:47:53.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predicting the amount of urea nitrogen recycled and used for anabolism in growing cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2016

J. H. EISEMANN  and
L. O. TEDESCHI
J. H. EISEMANN*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, USA
L. O. TEDESCHI
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2471, USA
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: Joan_Eisemann@ncsu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

In ruminants, urea nitrogen (N) produced by the liver and recycled to the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) provides a source of N for microbial growth and also conserves N. In this respect, it buffers the dietary supply of N available for microbial growth and microbial protein supply. The equation for recycled N in the National Research Council's (NRC 1996, 2000) beef model is based on relationships between ruminal ammonia and plasma urea N concentrations. The objective of the current paper was to estimate recycled N available for anabolism (i.e., urea N used for anabolism, UUA) using available kinetic data. A meta-analysis was conducted using results reported in nine publications that measured urea N kinetics using the dual-labelled urea technique in growing cattle. Diets used in these experiments were predominantly forage-based. Urea production was linearly related to N intake (NI, g/day). Growing cattle converted 74·5% of the incremental NI to urea N. As NI increased, a smaller proportion of the urea produced was recycled to the GIT. On average, 54·4% of the urea N recycled to the GIT was used for anabolism; however, this percentage was not constant. As NI or dietary crude protein (CP) increased (g/kg dry matter, DM), proportionately less of the urea produced was used for anabolism. Nonlinear equations were developed to predict UUA based on NI or dietary CP in the current database and simulated at 5 or 10 kg of daily DM intake (DMI) over the same range of NI (g/day) and therefore, for diets differing in CP content (g/kg DM). The equation based on NI had a quadratic behaviour and the same estimated UUA for both levels of DMI. The equation based on CP showed a relatively small increase in UUA at low DMI and increased UUA at the higher DMI as NI increased. For both equations and both DMI, the pattern suggested a limit to use of recycled N for anabolism.

Type
Animal Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 154 , Issue 6 , August 2016 , pp. 1118 - 1129
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

REFERENCES

Abdoun, K., Stumpff, F. & Martens, H. (2006). Ammonia and urea transport across the rumen epithelium: a review. Animal Health Research Reviews 7, 43–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Archibeque, S. L., Burns, J. C. & Huntington, G. B. (2001). Urea flux in beef steers: effects of forage species and nitrogen fertilization. Journal of Animal Science 79, 1937–1943.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Archibeque, S. L., Burns, J. C. & Huntington, G. B. (2002). Nitrogen metabolism of beef steers fed endophyte-free tall fescue hay: effects of ruminally protected methionine supplementation. Journal of Animal Science 80, 1344–1351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atasoglu, C., Newbold, C. J. & Wallace, R. J. (2001). Incorporation of [15N]ammonia by the cellulolytic ruminal bacteria Fibrobacter succinogenes BL2, Ruminococcus albus SY3, and Ruminococcus flavefaciens 17. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 67, 2819–2822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bailey, E. A., Titgemeyer, E. C., Olson, K. C., Brake, D. W., Jones, M. L. & Anderson, D. E. (2012). Effects of supplemental energy and protein on forage digestion and urea kinetics in growing beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 90, 3492–3504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, D. M. & Chambers, J. M. (1993). Nonlinear models. In Statistical Models in S (Eds Chambers, J. M. & Hastie, T. J.), pp. 421–454. New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Brake, D. W., Titgemeyer, E. C., Jones, M. L. & Anderson, D. E. (2010). Effect of nitrogen supplementation on urea kinetics and microbial use of recycled urea in steers consuming corn-based diets. Journal of Animal Science 88, 2729–2740.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldstein, H., Browne, W. & Rasbash, J. (2002). Partitioning variation in multilevel models. Understanding Statistics 1, 223–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmeyer, J. & Martens, H. (1980). Aspects of urea metabolism in ruminants with reference to the goat. Journal of Dairy Science 63, 1707–1728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, G. B. (1989). Hepatic urea synthesis and site and rate of urea removal from blood of beef steers fed alfalfa hay or a high concentrate diet. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 69, 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, G. B., Magee, K., Matthews, A., Poore, M. & Burns, J. (2009). Urea metabolism in beef steers fed tall fescue, orchardgrass, or gamagrass hays. Journal of Animal Science 87, 1346–1353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kennedy, P. M. & Milligan, L. P. (1980). The degradation and utilization of endogenous urea in the gastrointestinal tract of ruminants: a review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 60, 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapierre, H. & Lobley, G. E. (2001). Nitrogen recycling in the ruminant: a review. Journal of Dairy Science 84, (Suppl.), E223–E236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobley, G. E., Bremner, D. M. & Zuur, G. (2000). Effects of diet quality on urea fates in sheep as assessed by refined, non-invasive [15N15N]urea kinetics. British Journal of Nutrition 84, 459–468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marini, J. C. & Van Amburgh, M. E. (2003). Nitrogen metabolism and recycling in Holstein heifers. Journal of Animal Science 81, 545–552.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martineau, R., Sauvant, D., Ouellet, D. R., Côrtes, C., Vernet, J., Ortigues-Marty, I. & Lapierre, H. (2011). Relation of net portal flux of nitrogen compounds with dietary characteristics in ruminants: a meta-analysis approach. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 2986–3001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Research Council (1985). Ruminant Nitrogen Usage. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1996). Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th revised edn. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (2000). Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th revised edn: update 2000. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Ouellet, D. R., Berthiaume, R., Holtrop, G., Lobley, G. E., Martineau, R. & Lapierre, H. (2010). Effect of method of conservation of timothy on endogenous nitrogen flows in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4252–4261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D. & R Core Team (2014). nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
R Core Team (2014). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Reynolds, C. K. & Kristensen, N. B. (2008). Nitrogen recycling through the gut and the nitrogen economy of ruminants: an asynchronous symbiosis. Journal of Animal Science 86 (E. Suppl), E293–E305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, J. B., O'Connor, J. D., Fox, D. G., Van Soest, P. J. & Sniffen, C. J. (1992). A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets: I. Ruminal fermentation. Journal of Animal Science 70, 3551–3561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titgemeyer, E. C., Spivey, K. S., Parr, S. L., Brake, D. W. & Jones, M. L. (2012). Relationship of whole body nitrogen utilization to urea kinetics in growing steers. Journal of Animal Science 90, 3515–3526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickersham, T. A., Titgemeyer, E. C., Cochran, R. C., Wickersham, E. E. & Gnad, D. P. (2008 a). Effect of rumen-degradable intake protein supplementation on urea kinetics and microbial use of recycled urea in steers consuming low-quality forage. Journal of Animal Science 86, 3079–3088.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickersham, T. A., Titgemeyer, E. C., Cochran, R. C., Wickersham, E. E. & Moore, E. S. (2008 b). Effect of frequency and amount of rumen-degradable intake protein supplementation on urea kinetics and microbial use of recycled urea in steers consuming low-quality forage. Journal of Animal Science 86, 3089–3099.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickersham, T. A., Titgemeyer, E. C., Cochran, R. C. & Wickersham, E. E. (2009). Effect of undegradable intake protein supplementation on urea kinetics and microbial use of recycled urea in steers consuming low-quality forage. British Journal of Nutrition 101, 225–232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickham, H. (2009). ggplot2 Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuur, G., Russell, K. & Lobley, G. E. (2000). Multiple-entry urea kinetic model: effects of incomplete data collection. In Modelling Nutrient Utilization in Farm Animals (Eds McNamara, J. P., France, J. & Beever, D. E.), pp. 145–161. Wallingford, UK: CABI International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar