Effect of Supplementing Common Reed (Phragmites australis) with Urea on Intake, Apparent Digestibility and Blood Metabolites of Baluchi Sheep
محورهای موضوعی : Camel
1 - پژوهشکده دام های خاص، پژوهشگاه دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران
2 - Department of Clinical Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
کلید واژه: Sheep, Urea, common reed,
چکیده مقاله :
To evaluate the effects of treating or supplementing common reed (Phragmites australis) with 2% urea on intake, nutrient apparent digestibility, and blood metabolites, fifteen Baluchi rams (35.4±2.3 kg body weight) were used in a completely randomized design. Treatments were as follows: 1) common reed, 2) common reed supplemented with 2% urea solution at feeding, and 3) common reed treated with 2% urea solution and stored for 21 d. Results showed that crude protein (CP) content increased with addition or treatment of urea (P<0.05). The contents of dry matter (DM) and nutrients were not affected by urea. The CP intake significantly increased in sheep fed urea whereas intake of DM, organic matter (OM), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and estimated energy intake (MJ/d) were not affected by supplementing with urea. Apparent digestibility of CP increased (P<0.05) in urea fed sheep and also a trend (P<0.10) for more DM and NDF digestibilities was observed in sheep fed urea treated common reed compared to control group. Blood serum urea nitrogen (BUN) concentration was higher in sheep fed urea compared with control (P<0.05), however, the other blood metabolites were not affected by supplementing or treating with urea. It can be concluded that with the exception of slight increase in DM and NDF digestibilities, no significant advantage of treating common reed with urea compared with supplementing with urea was observed. However, compared to untreated and un-supplemented common reed, urea at 2% of DM increased feed efficiency and hence can be used in Baluchi sheep diet.
برای بررسی اثر عمل آوری یا مکمل کردن علوفه نی با 2 درصد اوره بر مصرف، قابلیت هضم ظاهری مواد مغذی و متابولیتهای خون، از 15 رأس قوچ بلوچی (میانگین وزن 2.3±35.4 کیلوگرم) در قالب یک طرح کاملاً تصادفی استفاده شد. تیمارها عبارت بودند از: 1) علوفه نی، 2) علوفه نی مکمل شده با 2 درصد محلول اوره هنگام خوراکدهی و 3) علوفه نی عمل آوری شده با 2 درصد محلول اوره و ذخیره شده به مدت 21 روز. نتایج نشان داد که میزان پروتئین خام با اضافه کردن یا عمل آوری با اوره افزایش یافت (P<0.05). مقدار ماده خشک و مواد مغذی تحت تأثیر اوره قرار نگرفت. مصرف پروتئین خام به طور معنیداری در گوسفندان تغذیه شده با اوره افزایش یافت، درصورتی که مصرف ماده خشک، ماده آلی، الیاف نامحلول در شوینده خنثی و اسیدی و مصرف انرژی تخمین زده شده (مگاژول در روز) تحت تأثیر مکمل کردن یا عمل آوری با اوره قرار نگرفت. قابلیت هضم ظاهری پروتئین خام در گوسفندان تغذیه شده با اوره افزایش یافت (P<0.05) و همچنین قابلیت هضم ماده خشک و الیاف نامحلول در شوینده خنثی در گوسفندان تغذیه شده با علوفه نی عمل آوری شده با اوره نسبت به گروه شاهد تمایل به افزایش معنیدار داشت (P<0.10). غلظت نیتروژن اورهای سرم خون در گوسفندان تغذیه شده با اوره نسبت به شاهد افزایش یافت (P<0.05) ولی سایر متابولیت های خونی تحت تأثیر مکمل کردن یا عمل آوری با اوره قرار نگرفت. میتوان نتیجه گیری کرد که بجز افزایش ناچیز در قابلیت هضم ماده خشک و الیاف نامحلول در شوینده خنثی، هیچ مزیتی در عملآوری علوفه نی با اوره نسبت به مکمل کردن اوره وجود ندارد. ولی، در مقایسه با علوفه نی عمل آوری نشده و مکمل نشده، اوره در سطح 2 درصد ماده خشک راندمان خوراک را افزایش داد و بنابراین میتواند در جیره گوسفندان بلوچی استفاده شود.
Abebe G., Merkel R.C., Animut G., Sahlu T. and Goetsch A.L. (2004). Effects of ammoniation of wheat straw and supplementation with soybean meal or broiler litter on feed intake and digestion in yearling Spanish goat wethers. Small Rumin. Res. 51, 37-46.
Abo-Donia F.M., Abdel-Azim S.N., Elghandour M.M.Y., Salem A.Z.M., Buendía G. and Soliman N.A.M. (2014). Feed intake, nutrient digestibility and ruminal fermentation activities in sheep-fed peanut hulls treated with Trichoderma viride or urea. Trop. Anim Health. Prod. 46, 221-228.
AOAC. (2005). Official Methods of Analysis. 18th Ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, Washington, D.C.
Bach A., Calsamiglia S. and Stern M.D. (2005). Nitrogen metabolism in the rumen. J. Dairy Sci. 88(1), 9-21.
Ben Salem H. and Smith T. (2008). Feeding strategies to increase small ruminant production in dry environments. Small Rumin. Res. 77, 174-194.
Braun J.P., Trumel C. and Bézille P. (2010). Clinical biochemistry in sheep: A selected review. Small Rumin. Res. 92, 10-18.
Frandson R.D., Wilke W.L. and Fails A.D. (2009). Anatomy and Physiology of Farm Animals. A John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.
Hammond A.C., Kunkle W.E., Genho P.C., Moore S.A., Crosby C.E. and Ramsay K.H. (1994). Use of blood urea nitrogen concentration to determine time and level of protein supplementation in wintering cows. Prof. Anim. Sci. 10, 24-31.
Hibbard C.A. and Thrift T.A. (1992). Supplementation of forage based diets: Are results predictable? J. Anim. Sci. 70, 181-187.
Kardooni A. and Alemzadeh B. (2005). Determination of chemical composition and digestibility coefficients of Phragmatis australis with in vivo and in vitro in Khuzestan province. Anim. Sci. J. (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi). 68, 24-30.
Kearl L.C. (1982). Nutrient requirements of ruminants in developing countries. MS Thesis. Utah State Univ., Lake, Utah.
Kirby D.R., Green D.M. and Mings T.S. (1989). Nutrient composition of selected emergent macrophytes in northern prairie wetlands. J. Range. Manage. 42, 323-326.
Köbbing J.F., Thevs N. and Zerbe S. (2013). The utilisation of reed (Phragmites australis): A review. Mires and Peat. 13, 1-14.
Makkar H.P.S. (2002). Development and field evaluation of animal feed supplementation packages. Proceedings of the final review meeting of an IAEA Technical Co-operation Regional AFRA Project organized by the Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture.
Malekkhahi M. and Mesgaran M.D. (2014). Effect of chemical treatment of sesame stover with NaOH and urea on chemical composition and in vivo rumen digestion in sheep. Not. Sci. Biol. 6, 36-40.
Manyuchi B., Mikayiri S. and Smith T. (1994). Effect of treating or supplementing maize stover with urea on its utilization as feed for sheep and cattle. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 49, 11-23.
Mashayekhi M.R. and Ghorbani G.R. (2004). Variation of chemical composition and digestibility of common reed forage during growth stage and characteristices of reed forage ensilage. Anim. Sci. J. (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi). 68, 93-98.
Merck Veterinary Manual. (2009). Serum biochemical reference ranges. WebMD. www.merckvetmanual.com Accessed Mar. 2009.
Myer H.H., Abdulkhaliq A., Davis S.L., Thompson J., Nabioullin R., Wu P. and Forsberg N.E. (1996). Effects of the callipyge phenotype on serum creatinine, total cholesterol, low-density lipoproteins, very-low-density lipoproteins, high-density lipoproteins, and triacylglycerol in growing lambs. J. Anim. Sci. 74, 1548-1552.
Nakhaei Moghadam S.H. and Dehghani M.R. (1392). Nutritional value of Commom reed forage treated with Oyster fungus Pleurotus ostreatus. Pp. in Proc. 1st Nat. Conf. Stable Agric. Nat. Res., Tehran, Iran.
Ndlovu T., Chimonyo M., Okoh A.I., Muchenje V., Dzama K., Dube S. and Raats J.G. (2009). A comparison of nutritionally-related blood metabolites among Nguni, Bonsmara and Angus steers raised on sweetveld. Vet. J. 179, 273-281.
NRC. (1985). Nutrient Requirements of Sheep. 6th Ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Rosler D.K., Ferguson J.D., Sniffen C.J. and Letrrema J. (1993). Dietary protein degradability effects on plasma and milk urea nitrogen and milk non protein nitrogen in Holstein cows. J. Dairy Sci. 16, 525- 534.
SAS Institute. (2003). SAS®/STAT Software, Release 9.1. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. USA.
Silanikove N. and Tiomkin D. (1992). Toxicity induced by poultry litter consumption: effect on parameters reflecting liver function in beef cows. Anim. Prod. 54, 203-209.
Smith J.M., Van Amburgh M.E., Diaz M.C., Lucy M.C. and Bauman D.E. (2002). Effect of nutrient intake on the development of the somatotropic axis and its responsiveness to GH in Holstein bull calves. J. Anim. Sci. 80, 28-37.
Smith T. (2002). On-farm treatment of straws and stovers with urea. MS Thesis. University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.
Tanaka Y., Mori A., Tazaki H., Imai S., Shiina J., Kusaba A., Ozawa T., Yoshida T., Kimura N., Hayashi T., Kenyon P.R., Blair H. and Arai T. (2008). Plasma metabolite concentrations and hepatic enzyme activities in pregnant Romney ewes with restricted feeding. Res. Vet. Sci. 85, 17-21.
Thrall M.A., Baker C., Campbell T.W., DeNicola D., Martin J.F., Lassen E.D., Rebar A. and Weiser G. (2012). Veterinary Haematology and Clinical Chemistry. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Thanh V.T.K. (2012). The effect on intake digestibility and microbial protein production of adding urea to rice straw for cattle and buffalo calves. Livest. Sci. 150, 111-113.
Tuen A.A., Daham M.M., Young B.A. and Vijchulata P. (1991). Intake and digestibility of ureatreated, urea-supplemented and untreated rice straw by goats. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 32, 333-340.
Vadiveloo J. and Fadel J.G. (2009). The response of rice straw varieties to urea treatment. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 151, 291-298.
Van Kuelen J. and Young B.A. (1977). Evaluation of acid-insoluble ash as a natural marker in ruminant digestibility studies. J. Anim. Sci. 44, 282-287.
Van Soest P.J., Robertson J.B. and Lewis B.A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74, 3583-3597.
Whitaker D.A., Goodger W.J., Garcia M., Perera B.M.A.O. and Wittwer F. (1999). Use of metabolic profiles in dairy cattle in tropical and subtropical countries on smallholder dairy farms. Pp. 87-98 in Proc. Final Res. Co-ordination Meet. Co-ordinated Res. Project Organ., Vienna, Austria.
