Cargando…

Comparison among methods of effective energy evaluation of corn silage for beef cattle

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to compare different methods on effective energy evaluation of corn silage for beef cattle. METHODS: Twenty Wandong bulls (Chinese indigenous yellow cattle) with initial body weight of 281±15.6 kg, were assigned to 1 of 5 dietary treatments with 4 animals per trea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wei, Ming, Chen, Zhiqiang, Wei, Shengjuan, Geng, Guangduo, Yan, Peishi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (AAAP) and Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology (KSAST) 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5933983/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29268584
http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.17.0538
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to compare different methods on effective energy evaluation of corn silage for beef cattle. METHODS: Twenty Wandong bulls (Chinese indigenous yellow cattle) with initial body weight of 281±15.6 kg, were assigned to 1 of 5 dietary treatments with 4 animals per treatment in a randomized complete block design. Five dietary treatments included group 1 with corn silage only diet, group 2 with corn silage-concentrate basal diet (BD) and 3 groups with 3 test diets, which were the BD partly substituted by corn silage at 10%, 30%, and 60%. The total collection digestion trial was conducted for 5 d for each block after a 10-d adaptation period, and then an open-circuit respiratory cage was used to measure the gas exchange of each animal in a consecutive 4-d period. RESULTS: The direct method-derived metabolizable energy and net energy of corn silage were 8.86 and 5.15 MJ/kg dry matter (DM), expressed as net energy requirement for maintenance and gain were 5.28 and 2.90 MJ/kg DM, respectively; the corresponding regression method-derived estimates were 8.96, 5.34, 5.37, and 2.98 MJ/kg DM, respectively. The direct method-derived estimates were not different (p>0.05) from those obtained using the regression method. Using substitution method, the nutrient apparent digestibility and effective energy values of corn silage varied with the increased corn silage substitution ratio (p<0.05). In addition, the corn silage estimates at the substitution ratio of 30% were similar to those estimated by direct and regression methods. CONCLUSION: In determining the energy value of corn silage using substitution method, there was a discrepancy between different substitution ratios, and the substitution ratio of 30% was more appropriate than 10% or 60% in the current study. The regression method based on multiple point substitution was more appropriate than single point substitution on energy evaluation of feedstuffs for beef cattle.