Cargando…

Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep

Eleven St. Croix ewes (46.9 ± 1.59 kg BW and 3.6 ± 0.67 yr age) were used in a crossover design to evaluate effects of restricted drinking water availability on intake of a 50% concentrate diet, digestion, and energy utilization. After 2 wk to determine ad libitum water consumption, there were two 4...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hussein, A.H., Puchala, R., Gipson, T.A., Tadesse, D., Wilson, B.K., Goetsch, A.L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7386745/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32734032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vas.2020.100132
_version_ 1783564005969756160
author Hussein, A.H.
Puchala, R.
Gipson, T.A.
Tadesse, D.
Wilson, B.K.
Goetsch, A.L.
author_facet Hussein, A.H.
Puchala, R.
Gipson, T.A.
Tadesse, D.
Wilson, B.K.
Goetsch, A.L.
author_sort Hussein, A.H.
collection PubMed
description Eleven St. Croix ewes (46.9 ± 1.59 kg BW and 3.6 ± 0.67 yr age) were used in a crossover design to evaluate effects of restricted drinking water availability on intake of a 50% concentrate diet, digestion, and energy utilization. After 2 wk to determine ad libitum water consumption, there were two 4-wk periods, with measures in metabolism cages during wk 4. One treatment was water offered at the ad libitum level (CONT) and the other entailed a 25% reduction in wk 1 and 50% thereafter (REST). Although, some water was refused in wk 4, with intake of 2556 and 1707 g/day for CONT and REST, respectively (SEM=170.9). Digestibility of gross energy was greater (P = 0.034) for REST than for CONT (66.5 vs. 62.4%; SEM=1.16); however, because of a numerical difference (P = 0.448) in energy intake (15.79 and 14.66 MJ/day for CONT and REST, respectively; SEM=1.426 MJ/day), digested energy intake was similar between treatments (P = 0.870). Urinary energy was greater (P = 0.023) for CONT vs. REST (0.62 and 0.52 MJ/day; SEM=0.038) and methane energy did not differ (P = 0.213) between treatments (0.76 and 0.89 MJ/day; SEM=0.084), resulting in similar (P = 0.665) ME intake (8.50 and 8.01 MJ/day for CONT and REST, respectively; SEM=0.855). Both heat (8.60 and 8.33 MJ/day; SEM=0.437) and recovered energy (-0.10 and -0.30 MJ/day for CONT and REST, respectively; SEM=0.623) were similar between treatments (P ≥ 0.880). In conclusion, increased digestibility appears an important adaptive response to limited availability of drinking water.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7386745
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73867452020-07-29 Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep Hussein, A.H. Puchala, R. Gipson, T.A. Tadesse, D. Wilson, B.K. Goetsch, A.L. Vet Anim Sci Article Eleven St. Croix ewes (46.9 ± 1.59 kg BW and 3.6 ± 0.67 yr age) were used in a crossover design to evaluate effects of restricted drinking water availability on intake of a 50% concentrate diet, digestion, and energy utilization. After 2 wk to determine ad libitum water consumption, there were two 4-wk periods, with measures in metabolism cages during wk 4. One treatment was water offered at the ad libitum level (CONT) and the other entailed a 25% reduction in wk 1 and 50% thereafter (REST). Although, some water was refused in wk 4, with intake of 2556 and 1707 g/day for CONT and REST, respectively (SEM=170.9). Digestibility of gross energy was greater (P = 0.034) for REST than for CONT (66.5 vs. 62.4%; SEM=1.16); however, because of a numerical difference (P = 0.448) in energy intake (15.79 and 14.66 MJ/day for CONT and REST, respectively; SEM=1.426 MJ/day), digested energy intake was similar between treatments (P = 0.870). Urinary energy was greater (P = 0.023) for CONT vs. REST (0.62 and 0.52 MJ/day; SEM=0.038) and methane energy did not differ (P = 0.213) between treatments (0.76 and 0.89 MJ/day; SEM=0.084), resulting in similar (P = 0.665) ME intake (8.50 and 8.01 MJ/day for CONT and REST, respectively; SEM=0.855). Both heat (8.60 and 8.33 MJ/day; SEM=0.437) and recovered energy (-0.10 and -0.30 MJ/day for CONT and REST, respectively; SEM=0.623) were similar between treatments (P ≥ 0.880). In conclusion, increased digestibility appears an important adaptive response to limited availability of drinking water. Elsevier 2020-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7386745/ /pubmed/32734032 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vas.2020.100132 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Hussein, A.H.
Puchala, R.
Gipson, T.A.
Tadesse, D.
Wilson, B.K.
Goetsch, A.L.
Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep
title Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep
title_full Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep
title_fullStr Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep
title_full_unstemmed Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep
title_short Effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female St. Croix sheep
title_sort effects of water restriction on feed intake, digestion, and energy utilization by mature female st. croix sheep
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7386745/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32734032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vas.2020.100132
work_keys_str_mv AT husseinah effectsofwaterrestrictiononfeedintakedigestionandenergyutilizationbymaturefemalestcroixsheep
AT puchalar effectsofwaterrestrictiononfeedintakedigestionandenergyutilizationbymaturefemalestcroixsheep
AT gipsonta effectsofwaterrestrictiononfeedintakedigestionandenergyutilizationbymaturefemalestcroixsheep
AT tadessed effectsofwaterrestrictiononfeedintakedigestionandenergyutilizationbymaturefemalestcroixsheep
AT wilsonbk effectsofwaterrestrictiononfeedintakedigestionandenergyutilizationbymaturefemalestcroixsheep
AT goetschal effectsofwaterrestrictiononfeedintakedigestionandenergyutilizationbymaturefemalestcroixsheep