Comparison of Ruminal Degradability, Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fiber, and Total-Tract Digestibility of Three Main Crop Straws with Alfalfa Hay and Corn Silage
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sample Preparations
2.2. Cow Management
2.3. In Situ Ruminal Incubation and iNDF288 Determination
2.4. Pretreatment, Intestinal Incubation, and Total-Tract Digestibility Determination
2.5. Chemical Analysis
2.6. Calculations
2.7. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. In Situ Ruminal Degradability and iNDF288
3.2. Intestinal and Total-Tract Digestibility
3.3. Prediction of iNDF288 and Total-Tract Digestibility
4. Discussions
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Statista, Worldwide Production of Grain in 2020/21, by Type. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/263977/world-grain-production-by-type/ (accessed on 10 August 2021).
- Li, H.; Cao, Y.; Wang, X.; Ge, X.; Li, B.; Jin, C. Evaluation on the Production of Food Crop Straw in China from 2006 to 2014. Bioenerg. Res. 2017, 10, 949–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, J.; Yu, P.; Xu, X. Straw Utilization in China-Status and Recommendations. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, J.; Wei, L.; Duan, Q.; Hu, G.; Zhang, G. Semi-Continuous Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Dairy Manure with Three Crop Residues for Biogas Production. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 156, 307–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, Y.; Bi, Y.; Gao, C. The Assessment and Utilization of Straw Resources in China. Agric. Sci. China 2010, 9, 1807–1815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weimer, P.J.; Russell, J.B.; Muck, R.E. Lessons from the Cow: What the Ruminant Animal Can Teach Us About Consolidated Bioprocessing of Cellulosic Biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 2009, 100, 5323–5331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Seshadri, R.; Leahy, S.C.; Attwood, G.T.; Teh, K.H.; Lambie, S.C.; Cookson, A.L.; Eloe-Fadrosh, E.A.; Pavlopoulos, G.A.; Hadjithomas, M.; Varghese, N.J.; et al. Cultivation and Sequencing of Rumen Microbiome Members from the Hungate1000 Collection. Nat. Biotechnol. 2018, 36, 359–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Firkins, J.L.; Yu, Z. Ruminant Nutrition Symposium: How to Use Data on the Rumen Microbiome to Improve Our Understanding of Ruminant Nutrition. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 93, 1450–1470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Herrero, M.; Havlík, P.; Valin, H.; Notenbaert, A.; Rufino, M.C.; Thornton, P.K.; Blümmel, M.; Weiss, F.; Grace, D.; Obersteiner, M. Biomass Use, Production, Feed Efficiencies, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Global Livestock Systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 20888–20893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Reisinger, A.; Clark, H. How Much Do Direct Livestock Emissions Actually Contribute to Global Warming? Glob. Chang. Biol. 2018, 24, 1749–1761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sarnklong, C.; Cone, J.W.; Pellikaan, W.; Hendriks, W.H. Utilization of Rice Straw and Different Treatments to Improve Its Feed Value for Ruminants: A Review. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2010, 23, 680–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eastridge, M.L.; Starkey, R.A.; Gott, P.N.; Oelker, E.R.; Sewell, A.R.; Mathew, B.; Firkins, J.L. Dairy Cows Fed Equivalent Concentrations of Forage Neutral Detergent Fiber from Corn Silage, Alfalfa Hay, Wheat Straw, and Corn Stover Had Similar Milk Yield and Total Tract Digestibility. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2017, 225, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Getahun, K.Y. Effect of Wheat Straw Urea Treatment and Leucaena Leucocephala Foliage Hay Supplementation on Intake, Digestibility, Nitrogen Balance and Growth of Lambs. Int. J. Livest. Prod. 2014, 5, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wang, B.; Mao, S.Y.; Yang, H.J.; Wu, Y.M.; Wang, J.K.; Li, S.L.; Shen, Z.M.; Liu, J.X. Effects of Alfalfa and Cereal Straw as a Forage Source on Nutrient Digestibility and Lactation Performance in Lactating Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2014, 97, 7706–7715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Zhu, W.; Fu, Y.; Wang, B.; Wang, C.; Ye, J.A.; Wu, Y.M.; Liu, J.X. Effects of Dietary Forage Sources on Rumen Microbial Protein Synthesis and Milk Performance in Early Lactating Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96, 1727–1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oba, M.; Allen, M.S. Evaluation of the Importance of the Digestibility of Neutral Detergent Fiber from Forage: Effects on Dry Matter Intake and Milk Yield of Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1999, 82, 589–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huhtanen, P.; Nousiainen, J.; Rinne, M. Recent Developments in Forage Evaluation with Special Reference to Practical Applications. Agr. Food Sci. 2006, 15, 293–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nousiainen, J.; Rinne, M.; Huhtanen, P. A Meta-Analysis of Feed Digestion in Dairy Cows. 1. The Effects of Forage and Concentrate Factors on Total Diet Digestibility. J. Dairy Sci. 2009, 92, 5019–5030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Harper, K.; McNeill, D. The Role Indf in the Regulation of Feed Intake and the Importance of Its Assessment in Subtropical Ruminant Systems (the Role of Indf in the Regulation of Forage Intake). Agriculture 2015, 5, 778–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Karisson, L.; Ruiz-Moreno, M.; Stern, M.D.; Martinsson, K. Effects of Temperature During Moist Heat Treatment on Ruminal Degradability and Intestinal Digestibility of Protein and Amino Acids in Hempseed Cake. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2012, 25, 1559–1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nousiainen, J.; Rinne, M.; Hellämäki, M.; Huhtanen, P. Prediction of the Digestibility of Primary Growth and Regrowth Grass Silages from Chemical Composition, Pepsin-Cellulase Solubility and Indigestible Cell Wall Content. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2003, 110, 61–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krizsan, S.J.; Rinne, M.; Nyholm, L.; Huhtanen, P. New Recommendations for the Ruminal in Situ Determination of Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fibre. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2015, 205, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lippke, H. Regulation of Voluntary Intake of Ryegrass and Sorghum Forages in Cattle by Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fiber. J. Anim. Sci. 1986, 63, 1459–1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tylutki, T.P.; Fox, D.G.; Durbal, V.M.; Tedeschi, L.O.; Russell, J.B.; Van Amburgh, M.E.; Overton, T.R.; Chase, L.E.; Pell, A.N. Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System: A Model for Precision Feeding of Dairy Cattle. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2008, 143, 174–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tedeschi, L.O.; Chalupa, W.; Janczewski, E.; Fox, D.G.; Sniffen, C.; Munson, R.; Kononoff, P.J.; Boston, R. Evaluation and Application of the Cpm Dairy Nutrition Model. J. Agric. Sci. 2007, 146, 171–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lopes, F.; Cook, D.E.; Combs, D.K. Validation of an in Vitro Model for Predicting Rumen and Total-Tract Fiber Digestibility in Dairy Cows Fed Corn Silages with Different in Vitro Neutral Detergent Fiber Digestibilities at 2 Levels of Dry Matter Intake. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 574–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Weld, K.A.; Armentano, L.E. The Effects of Adding Fat to Diets of Lactating Dairy Cows on Total-Tract Neutral Detergent Fiber Digestibility: A Meta-Analysis. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 1766–1779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shirmohammadi, S.; Taghizadeh, A.; Hosseinkhani, A.; Moghaddam, G.A.; Salem, A.Z.M.; Barbabosa Pliego, A. Ruminal and Post-Ruminal Barley Grain Digestion and Starch Granule Morphology under Three Heat Methods. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2021, 178, 508–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krogstad, K.C.; Anderson, J.L.; Herrick, K.J. In Situ Rumen Dry Matter, Neutral Detergent Fiber, and Crude Protein Degradability in Dairy Cows and in Vitro Intestinal Digestibility of Dried Distillers Grains with Solubles with Varying Fat Concentrations. Appl. Anim. Sci. 2020, 36, 503–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, H.; Li, X.; Me, E.; Zheng, J.; Zhao, H.; Zhang, Y. Study on the Relationship between Nutritional Value, Ruminal Degradation Characteristics and Molecular Structure of Protein in Different Heat-Treated Ddgs. Chin. J. Anim. Sci. 2019, 55, 73–80. [Google Scholar]
- Nedelkov, K.V. In Situ Evaluation of Ruminal Degradability and Intestinal Digestibility of Sunflower Meal Compared to Soybean Meal. Iran. J. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 395–400. [Google Scholar]
- Nasehi, M.; Torbatinejad, N.M.; Rezaie, M.; Ghoorchi, T. The Effect of Green Tea Waste Extract on Ruminal Degradability and Intestinal Digestibility of Barley Grain. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci. 2018, 42, 624–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, L.; Ma, T.; Diao, Q.; Cheng, S.; Sun, Z.; Li, C. Correlation Analysis of Ruminal Degradation Characteristics and in Vitro Small Intestinal Digestibility of Rumen Undegraded Protein of Common Concentrates for Mutton Sheep. Chin. J. Anim. Nrti. 2018, 30, 2641–2651. [Google Scholar]
- Barchiesi, C.; Williams, P.; Velasquez, A. Lupin and Pea Extrusion Decreases the Ruminal Degradability and Improves the True Ileal Digestibility of Crude Protein. Cienc. Investig. Agrar. 2018, 45, 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Y.; Yan, S.; He, Z.; Anele, U.Y.; Swift, M.L.; McAllister, T.A.; Yang, W. Effect of Starch Content and Processing Method on in Situ Ruminal and in Vitro Intestinal Digestion of Barley Grain in Beef Heifers. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2016, 216, 121–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasconcelos, A.M.d.; Dias, M.; Nascimento, V.A.; Rogerio, M.C.P.; Facanha, D.A.E. Ruminal Degradability and Intestinal Digestibility of Raw and Roasted Soy Beans in Dairy Cows. Rev. Bras. De Saúde E Produção Anim. 2016, 17, 744–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wulandari, W.; Widyobroto, B.P.; Noviandi, C.T.; Agus, A. he Effect of Soybean Meal Heating Time on the in Vitro Digestibility and Ruminal Fermentation Profile. Iran. J. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 595–601. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, W.; Chen, A.; Zhang, B.; Kong, P.; Liu, C.; Zhao, J. Rumen Degradability and Post-Ruminal Digestion of Dry Matter, Nitrogen and Amino Acids of Three Protein Supplements. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 28, 485–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Philippeau, C.; Varloud, M.; Julliand, V. Mobile Bag Starch Prececal Disappearance and Postprandial Glycemic Response of Four Forms of Barley in Horses. J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 92, 2087–2093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Paz, H.A.; Klopfenstein, T.J.; Hostetler, D.; Fernando, S.C.; Castillo-Lopez, E.; Kononoff, P.J. Ruminal Degradation and Intestinal Digestibility of Protein and Amino Acids in High-Protein Feedstuffs Commonly Used in Dairy Diets. J. Dairy Sci. 2014, 97, 6485–6498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krizsan, S.J.; Huhtanen, P. Effect of Diet Composition and Incubation Time on Feed Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fiber Concentration in Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96, 1715–1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Raffrenato, E.; Nicholson, C.F.; Van Amburgh, M.E. Development of a Mathematical Model to Predict Pool Sizes and Rates of Digestion of 2 Pools of Digestible Neutral Detergent Fiber and an Undigested Neutral Detergent Fiber Fraction within Various Forages. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 351–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hristov, A.N.; Harper, M.T.; Roth, G.; Canale, C.; Huhtanen, P.; Richard, T.L.; DiMarco, K. Effects of Ensiling Time on Corn Silage Neutral Detergent Fiber Degradability and Relationship between Laboratory Fiber Analyses and in Vivo Digestibility. J. Dairy Sci. 2020, 103, 2333–2346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bender, R.W.; Cook, D.E.; Combs, D.K. Comparison of in Situ Versus in Vitro Methods of Fiber Digestion at 120 and 288 Hours to Quantify the Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fiber Fraction of Corn Silage Samples. J. Dairy Sci. 2016, 99, 5394–5400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lopes, F.; Cook, D.E.; Combs, D.K. Effects of Varying Dietary Ratios of Corn Silage to Alfalfa Silage on Digestion of Neutral Detergent Fiber in Lactating Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 6291–6303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edmunds, B.; Südekum, K.H.; Spiekers, H.; Schwarz, F.J. Estimating Ruminal Crude Protein Degradation of Forages Using in Situ and in Vitro Techniques. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2012, 175, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, M.; Weisbjerg, M.R.; Cone, J.W.; van Duinkerken, G.; Blok, M.C.; Bruinenberg, M.; Hendriks, W.H. Postruminal Degradation of Crude Protein, Neutral Detergent Fibre and Starch of Maize and Grass Silages in Dairy Cows. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2012, 177, 172–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raffrenato, E.; Lombard, R.; Erasmus, L.J.; McNeill, D.M.; Barber, D.; Callow, M.; Poppi, D.P. Prediction of Indigestible Ndf in South African and Australian Forages from Cell Wall Characteristics. Anim. Feed. Sci. Technol. 2018, 246, 104–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raffrenato, E.; Erasmus, L.J. Variability of Indigestible Ndf in C3 and C4 Forages and Implications on the Resulting Feed Energy Values and Potential Microbial Protein Synthesis in Dairy Cattle. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 43, 98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, G.J.; Wang, Y.; Yan, Y.H.; Hall, M.H.; Undersander, D.J.; Combs, D.K. Comparison of Two in Situ Reference Methods to Estimate Indigestible Ndf by near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy in Alfalfa. Heliyon 2021, 7, e07313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- NRC. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 7th ed.; National Academic Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001.
- Nocek, J.E. In Situ and Other Methods to Estimate Ruminal Protein and Energy Digestibility: A Review. J. Dairy Sci. 1988, 71, 2051–2069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diao, X.; Dang, S.; Liu, S.; Jing, L.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, W. Determination of the Appropriate Ratio of Sample Size to Nylon Bag Area for in Situ Nylon Bag Technique Evaluation of Rumen Digestibility of Feedstuffs in Sheep. Livest. Sci. 2020, 241, 104254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volden, H. Norfor-the Nordic Feed Evaluation System; Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Kaitho, R.J.; Umunna, N.N.; Nsahlai, I.V.; Tamminga, S.; van Bruchem, J. Nitrogen in Browse Species: Ruminal Degradability and Post-Ruminal Digestibility Measured by Mobile Nylon Bag and in Vitro Techniques. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1998, 76, 488–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC). Official Methods of Analysis, 16th ed.; AOAC International: Washington, DC, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Vansoest, P.J.; Robertson, J.B.; Lewis, B.A. Methods for Dietary Fiber, Neutral Detergent Fiber, and Nonstarch Polysaccharides in Relation to Animal Nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 1991, 74, 3583–3597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ørskov, E.R.; McDonald, I. The Estimation of Protein Degradability in the Rumen from Incubation Measurements Weighted According to Rate of Passage. J. Agric. Sci. 2009, 92, 499–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Duinkerken, G.; Blok, M.C.; Bannink, A.; Cone, J.W.; Dijkstra, J.; Van Vuuren, A.M.; Tamminga, S. Update of the Dutch Protein Evaluation System for Ruminants: The Dve/Oeb2010 System. J. Agric. Sci. 2010, 149, 351–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tamminga, S.; Brandsma, G.G.; Van Duinkerken, G.; Van Vuuren, A.M.; Blok, M.C. Protein Evaluation for Ruminants: The DVE/OEB 2007-System; CVB Documentation Report; Wageningen University: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2007; Volume 53. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Q.; Xue, B.; Zhao, Y.; Wu, T.; Liu, H.; Yi, X.; Sun, C.; Wang, Z.; Zou, H.; Yan, T. In Situ Degradation Kinetics of 6 Roughages and the Intestinal Digestibility of the Rumen Undegradable Protein. J. Anim. Sci. 2018, 96, 4835–4844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krizsan, S.J.; Nyholm, L.; Nousiainen, J.; Südekum, K.-H.; Huhtanen, P. Comparison of in Vitro and in Situ Methods in Evaluation of Forage Digestibility in Ruminants1. J. Anim. Sci. 2012, 90, 3162–3173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reynolds, C.K.; Crompton, L.A.; Mills, J.A.N. Improving the Efficiency of Energy Utilization in Cattle. In Proceedings of the 30th Western Nutrition Conference, Optimizing Efficiency of Animal Production, Winnipeg, Canada, 23–24 September 2009; pp. 55–65. [Google Scholar]
- Mekuriaw, Y.; Asmare, B. Nutrient Intake, Digestibility and Growth Performance of Washera Lambs Fed Natural Pasture Hay Supplemented with Graded Levels of Ficus Thonningii(Chibha) Leaves as Replacement for Concentrate Mixture. Agr. Food Secur. 2018, 7, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Soest, P.J. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, 2nd ed.; Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY, USA, 1994; Volume 44, pp. 2552–2561. [Google Scholar]
- Palmonari, A.; Gallo, A.; Fustini, M.; Canestrari, G.; Masoero, F.; Sniffen, C.J.; Formigoni, A. Estimation of the Indigestible Fiber in Different Forage Types. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 94, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buckner, C.D.; Klopfenstein, T.J.; Rolfe, K.M.; Griffin, W.A.; Lamothe, M.J.; Watson, A.K.; MacDonald, J.C.; Schacht, W.H.; Schroeder, P. Ruminally Undegradable Protein Content and Digestibility for Forages Using the Mobile Bag in Situ Technique. J. Anim. Sci. 2013, 91, 2812–2822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lopes, F.; Ruh, K.; Combs, D.K. Validation of an Approach to Predict Total-Tract Fiber Digestibility Using a Standardized in Vitro Technique for Different Diets Fed to High-Producing Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 2596–2602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Item 1 | CS | RS | WS | AH | CSil |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
DM (g/kg of fresh matter) | 911.13 | 929.65 | 919.97 | 911.23 | 316.23 |
OM | 915.73 | 875.03 | 902.17 | 896.47 | 944.83 |
CP | 55.23 | 43.73 | 44.37 | 203.90 | 89.87 |
NDICP (g/kg of CP) | 258.78 | 227.36 | 253.34 | 272.43 | 174.24 |
ADICP (g/kg of CP) | 141.02 | 117.57 | 138.4 | 58.75 | 67.82 |
Starch | 27.84 | 23.80 | 22.93 | 11.50 | 309.37 |
Ether extract | 14.33 | 16.77 | 13.45 | 21.94 | 34.93 |
NFC 2 | 109.70 | 99.76 | 29.67 | 230.50 | 339.36 |
NDF | 736.47 | 714.77 | 814.68 | 440.13 | 420.67 |
ADF | 431.31 | 454.90 | 514.19 | 316.10 | 246.23 |
Hemicellulose | 305.16 | 259.87 | 300.49 | 124.03 | 174.44 |
Cellulose | 376.86 | 390.52 | 442.72 | 246.52 | 214.78 |
ADL 3 | 54.45 | 64.38 | 71.47 | 69.58 | 31.45 |
ADL (g/kg of NDF) | 73.93 | 90.07 | 87.73 | 158.09 | 74.76 |
iNDF2.4 4 (g/kg of NDF) | 177.44 | 216.17 | 210.55 | 379.42 | 179.43 |
iNDF288 5 (g/kg of NDF) | 315.64 | 385.07 | 353.61 | 473.40 | 265.92 |
iNDF288/ADL 6 | 4.27 | 4.28 | 4.03 | 2.99 | 3.56 |
Item 1 | CS | RS | WS | AH | CSil | SEM 2 | p Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CP (g/kg of CP, unless otherwise indicated) | |||||||
a 3 | 332.91 bc | 294.98 cd | 270.04 d | 364.25 b | 501.86 a | 22.37 | <0.05 |
b 3 | 284.16 cd | 344.21 b | 321.75 bc | 529.95 a | 231.92 d | 27.91 | <0.05 |
c 3 (%/h) | 3.94 c | 3.94 c | 4.19 c | 10.81 a | 6.89 b | 0.80 | <0.05 |
cpdCP 3 | 617.08 cd | 639.19 c | 591.80 d | 894.20 a | 733.78 b | 29.83 | <0.05 |
dpdCP288 4 | 631.53 cd | 656.76 c | 604.98 d | 909.72 a | 757.06 b | 30.02 | <0.05 |
EDCP4.18 5 | 466.24 c | 461.69 c | 429.92 d | 746.60 a | 642.34 b | 33.14 | <0.05 |
NDF (g/kg of NDF, unless otherwise indicated) | |||||||
a 3 | 53.09 b | 22.53 c | 23.51 c | 38.06 c | 123.06 a | 10.11 | <0.05 |
b 3 | 623.53 a | 587.52 b | 623.89 a | 493.23 c | 605.80 ab | 13.46 | <0.05 |
c 3 (%/h) | 1.99 b | 2.27 b | 1.57 c | 4.31 a | 2.15 b | 0.26 | <0.05 |
cpdNDF 3 | 676.63 b | 610.05 c | 647.40 b | 531.28 d | 728.85 a | 18.20 | <0.05 |
dpdNDF288 4 | 684.36 b | 614.93 c | 646.39 c | 526.60 d | 734.08 a | 19.09 | <0.05 |
EDNDF4.18 5 | 253.83 c | 229.08 d | 193.54 e | 288.31 b | 327.78 a | 12.54 | <0.05 |
ADF (g/kg of ADF, unless otherwise indicated) | |||||||
a 3 | 37.40 b | 24.67 b | 19.30 b | 32.58 b | 59.02 a | 4.19 | <0.05 |
b 3 | 621.37 a | 530.65 b | 567.40 b | 478.73 c | 639.54 a | 16.64 | <0.05 |
c 3 (%/h) | 1.82 c | 2.01 bc | 1.57 c | 4.51 a | 2.31 b | 0.29 | <0.05 |
cpdADF 3 | 658.78 b | 555.31 c | 586.70 c | 511.32 e | 698.55 a | 18.81 | <0.05 |
dpdADF288 4 | 660.06 b | 558.26 c | 583.39 c | 504.50 d | 702.92 a | 19.43 | <0.05 |
EDADF4.18 5 | 225.31 b | 196.57 c | 173.97 d | 280.82 a | 286.22 a | 12.07 | <0.05 |
Item 1 | CS | RS | WS | AH | Csil | SEM 2 | p Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CP (g/kg of CP, unless otherwise indicated) | |||||||
RUDCP 4 (12 h) | 556.48 b | 562.72 b | 615.33 a | 221.82 d | 362.56 c | 39.94 | <0.05 |
Idg of RUDCP 5 (%) | 29.75 b | 25.49 b | 25.19 b | 49.03 a | 48.33 a | 3.11 | <0.05 |
IDCP 6 | 165.55 a | 141.57 b | 156.85 ab | 108.76 c | 175.22 a | 6.56 | <0.05 |
TTDCP 7 | 609.08 c | 579.57 d | 541.52 e | 886.94 a | 812.67 b | 36.86 | <0.05 |
TTUDCP 8 | 390.92 c | 420.43 b | 458.48 a | 113.06 e | 187.33 d | 36.86 | <0.05 |
NDF (g/kg of NDF, unless otherwise indicated) | |||||||
RUDNDF 4 (24 h) | 727.77 b | 785.27 a | 774.83 a | 662.83 c | 643.55 c | 15.79 | <0.05 |
Idg of RUDNDF 5 (%) | 1.54 b | 1.48 b | 1.63 b | 4.73 a | 4.79 a | 0.69 | <0.05 |
IDNDF 6 | 11.21 b | 11.62 b | 12.63 b | 31.35 a | 30.83 a | 2.53 | <0.05 |
TTDNDF 7 | 283.44 b | 226.35 c | 237.8 c | 368.52 a | 387.28 a | 18.06 | <0.05 |
TTUDNDF 8 | 716.56 b | 773.65 a | 762.20 a | 631.48 c | 612.72 c | 18.06 | <0.05 |
ADF (g/kg of ADF, unless otherwise indicated) | |||||||
RUDADF 4 (24 h) | 746.49 b | 776.72 a | 790.88 a | 708.85 c | 688.65 c | 11.00 | <0.05 |
Idg of RUDADF 5 (%) | 1.10 | 0.83 | −0.07 | 0.98 | 0.92 | 0.77 | 0.947 |
IDADF 6 | 8.21 | 6.45 | −0.55 | 6.95 | 6.34 | 0.71 | 0.938 |
TTDADF 7 | 261.72 b | 229.73 c | 209.12 c | 298.10 a | 317.69 a | 11.38 | <0.05 |
TTUDADF 8 | 738.28 b | 770.27 a | 790.88 a | 701.90 c | 682.31 c | 11.38 | <0.05 |
Regression Equation 1 | RMSE 2 | R2 Value 3 |
---|---|---|
iNDF288 | ||
iNDF288 = 74.52 + 1.64 ADL ** + 1.35 Ash ** | 7.51 | 0.995 |
iNDF288 = 0.85 iNDF2.4 ** + 162.07 | 37.39 | 0.828 |
dpdNDF288 = 1.05 cpdNDF ** − 30.01 | 3.98 | 0.998 |
Total-tract digestibility (TTD) | ||
TTDCP = 922.67 + 1.13 CP ** − 0.10 NDF * − 0.68 ADF ** | 9.49 | 0.999 |
TTDNDF = 554.41 − 0.10 NDF * − 0.49 ADF ** | 29.97 | 0.918 |
TTDADF = 424.19 + 0.06 NDF * − 0.50 ADF ** | 12.38 | 0.963 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, E.; Wang, J.; Lv, J.; Sun, X.; Kong, F.; Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Yang, H.; Cao, Z.; Li, S.; et al. Comparison of Ruminal Degradability, Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fiber, and Total-Tract Digestibility of Three Main Crop Straws with Alfalfa Hay and Corn Silage. Animals 2021, 11, 3218. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11113218
Wang E, Wang J, Lv J, Sun X, Kong F, Wang S, Wang Y, Yang H, Cao Z, Li S, et al. Comparison of Ruminal Degradability, Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fiber, and Total-Tract Digestibility of Three Main Crop Straws with Alfalfa Hay and Corn Silage. Animals. 2021; 11(11):3218. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11113218
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Erdan, Jidong Wang, Jiaying Lv, Xiaoge Sun, Fanlin Kong, Shuo Wang, Yajing Wang, Hongjian Yang, Zhijun Cao, Shengli Li, and et al. 2021. "Comparison of Ruminal Degradability, Indigestible Neutral Detergent Fiber, and Total-Tract Digestibility of Three Main Crop Straws with Alfalfa Hay and Corn Silage" Animals 11, no. 11: 3218. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11113218