Abstract #605
Section: Ruminant Nutrition
Session: Ruminant Nutrition: Manipulating rumen function
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 2:30 PM–2:45 PM
Location: Panzacola H-2
Session: Ruminant Nutrition: Manipulating rumen function
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 2:30 PM–2:45 PM
Location: Panzacola H-2
# 605
Total tract pdNDF digestibility in heifers fed with TMR or pelleted ration.
Elena Bonfante*1, Mattia Fustini1, Nicola Negri1, Alberto Palmonari1, Giorgia Canestrari1, Andrea Formigoni1, 1DIMEVET, University of Bologna, Ozzano Emilia, Italy.
Key Words: TTdpdNDF, physical effective fiber, heifer nutrition
Total tract pdNDF digestibility in heifers fed with TMR or pelleted ration.
Elena Bonfante*1, Mattia Fustini1, Nicola Negri1, Alberto Palmonari1, Giorgia Canestrari1, Andrea Formigoni1, 1DIMEVET, University of Bologna, Ozzano Emilia, Italy.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the total-tract pdNDF digestibility (TTdpdNDF) in heifers fed with the same ration as TMR or pellet. Eight tie-stall heifers (age 336 ± 30d, BW 346 ± 35kg) were used in a 12 weeks study (4 periods of 3 weeks: 2 adaptive and 1 for data collection). Diets had the same ingredients (hay 41.8%, barley straw 27.4%, sunflower 13.7%, grain 16.4%, NaCl 0.7%) but fed in 2 physical forms: TMR and PELLET (Ø = 8mm), thus differing in structure, evaluated through the physical effective factor (pef = 38.73% in pellet, 66.12% in TMR). Heifers, divided in 2 groups, were fed ad libitum, individually, with the 2 diets in alternate periods, and dry matter intake (DMI), DMI/BW, water intake, rumination time, rumen temperature and pH were evaluated daily. Fecal samples for TTdpdNDF determination were collected and average daily gain (ADG) was calculated at the end of each period. Data of the third week of each period were statistically analyzed with ANOVA for repeated measures, while ADG and TTdpdNDF by t-test (Statistica v10). The DMI and DMI/BW was higher (P < 0.001) in pelleted diet (11.49 ± 1.72 vs. 9.03 ± 1.33 kg) (3.05 ± 0.33 vs. 2.40 ± 0.24%) and water intake increased (P < 0.01) during pellet administration (52.0 ± 13.0 vs. 41.0 ± 9.0 L/d). ADG at the end of the study was 1.0 ± 0.45 kg/d. The rate for the pellet diet was greater but not significantly different (1.07 ± 0.32 vs. 0.90 ± 0.54 kg/d). Rumination time was considerably lower (P < 0.001) with pellet than TMR (256 ± 58 vs. 521 ± 66 min/d). Diet had no effect on rumen temperature or pH. TTdpdNDF, evaluated using uNDF240 h as a marker, was statistically different between pellet and TMR (87.88 ± 3.72 vs. 91.45 ± 1.92%). The results of this study suggest that a complete pelleted diet was well accepted by animals, as showed by higher DMI. Moreover, even if rumination time dropped with the pelleted diet, ruminal pH was maintained similar to those with TMR. TTdpdNDF, despite the difference between 2 diets was significant, maintained high values in both diets. In conclusion, a complete pelleted diet, designed to provide sufficient amount of physically effective fiber, could be fed to growing ruminants without generating digestive disorders.
Key Words: TTdpdNDF, physical effective fiber, heifer nutrition