Effect of Type of Hay and Concentrate Level in Intake and Digestibility in Diets for Goats

Author(s): R. Arias, M.G. Muro, M.S. Trigo, S. Deschamps, J. Origlia, D. Gornatti Churria, CATTANEO A.C, C.A. Cordiviola

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the level of hay and concentrate on total hay intake and supplied already, the additive/substitutive effect and total apparent digestibility of the diet intake in diets for goats. Experiment I: diets: Alfalfa hay (A1), Alfalfa hay + corn (0.5% LW/day) (A2), + 1% LW/day (A3), + 1.5% LW/day (A4). Experiment II: diets: Natural grassland hay (CN) (R1), hay CN + corn (0.5% LW/day) (R2), hay CN + corn (1% of LW/day) (R3), + 1.5% of LW/day) (R4). Intake, ratio forage/concentrate and total apparent digestibility were calculated. Experiment I: There were no effects (p> 0.05) on the CMST for the corn tested levels and recorded a linear decrease (p <0.05) in the CTFDN, CTFDA and CTPB. The CMSF decreased linearly (p <0.05) with increasing amounts of corn by verifying a hay effect on the concentrate. The F/C was different (p <0.05) in all treatments. The DTAIVMS increases linearly (p <0.05) with the content of corn in the diet. Experiment II: a linear increase (p <0.05) on the CMST and CTPB with increasing corn in diet and no differences (p> 0.05) on the CMSF, CTFDN and CTFDA is observed. The F/C and CTPB differ (p <0.05) among all the diets tested. The DTAIVMS increases linearly (p <0.05) with the content of corn in the diet. Therefore, it can be concluded that the increase of maize levels improved the total digestibility of the ration consumed and the substitute or additive effect depended on the quality of the hay used.

goats, concentrated, fiber

1. Aello M., O. Di Marco. 2000. Consumo. In Nutrición animal. (ed) Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Balcarce, Argentina. pp: 163-185.
2. AOAC. 1995. Dry mater in Animal Feed. Method number 934.01. In: Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 16 th ed. vol. I. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA, USA, pp, I (Chapter 4).
3. Archimède, H., D. Sauvant, J. Hervieu, C. Poncet & M. Dorleans. 1995. Digestive interactions in the ruminant relationships between whole tract and stomach evaluation. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 54:327–340.
4. Arias, R., M. G. Muro, C.A. Cordiviola, M.S Trigo, M. Brusa, R. A. Lacchini. 2013. Incidencia de la proporción de maíz sobre la degradabilidad in situ de heno de alfalfa en dietas para caprinos. Revista de la Facultad de Agronomía, La Plata. Vol 112 (2): 62-67.
5. Arias, R., M. G. Muro, C.A. Cordiviola, A. C. Cattáneo, M.S Trigo & R.A. Lacchini. 2015. Efecto de la suplementación con grano de maíz sobre la digestibilidad in vivo de heno de alfalfa en caprinos. Revista de la Facultad de Agronomía, La Plata. Vol 114 (1): 44-48.
6. Bach A, S Calsamiglia, MD Andstern. 2005. Nitrogen metabolism in the rumen. Journal of Dairy Science. 88, E9–E21.
7. Castel, J.M; Y. Delgado-Pertíñez, J. Camúñez, J. Basulto, F. Caravaca, J.L. Guzmán, M.J. Alcalde. 2003. Characterisation of semi extensive goat production systems in Southern Spain. Small Ruminall Res 47, 1–11.
8. Cerrillo, M. A., J. R. Russell & M. H. Crump. 1999. The effects of hay maturity and forage to concentrate ratio on digestion kinetics in goats. Small Rumin. Res. 32, 51–60.
9. Coleman, S.W., Lippke, H. & Gill, M. 1999. Estimating the nutritive potential of forages. In: Nutritional Ecology of Herbivores (Ed.H.J. Jung y G.C. Fahey), pp. 647.
10. Fimbres, H., J. R. Kawas, G. Hernandez-Vidal, J. F. Picon-Rubio, C. D. Lu. 2002. Nutrient intake, digestibility, mastication and ruminal fermentation of lambs fed finishing ration with various forage levels. Small Rumin. Res. 43, 275–281.
11. Goering, H.K. and Van Soest, P.J. 1970. Forage fiber analysis (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). Agricultural Handbook N° 379 ARS-USDA, Washington, DC.
12. INRA. 1987. Laboratoire de recherche sur la viande. Centre de recherche de Jouy-en-Josas, Jouy-en-Josas, Versailles, France. Vol 5, 251 pp.
13. Kellaway, R. & S. Porta. 1993. Feeding concentrates supplements for dairy cows. Dairy Research and Development Corporation. Australia. 176 pp.
14. Komarek, A. R., J. B. Robertson & P. J. Van Soest. 1994. Comparison of the filter bag technique to conventional filtration in the Van Soest Analysis of 21 feeds. In: Proc. Natl. Conf. on Forage Quality, Evaluation and Utilization, Lincoln, NE. pp.78.
15. Lu, C. D.; J. R. Kawas; O. G. Mahgoub. 2005. Fibre digestión and utilization in goats. Small Rumin. Res. 60, 45–52.
16. Mayne, J. 2007. Challenges and Lessons in Implementing Results-Based Management. Evaluation, 13, 89-107.
17. Matejovsky, K.M.D & W. Sanson. 1995. Intake and digestion of low-, medium-, and high- quality grass hays by lambs receiving increasing levels of corn supplementation. J. Anim. Science.73, 2156–2163.
18. Mertens, D.R. 1987. Predicting intake and digestibility using mathematical models of ruminal function. J. of Animal Sci. 64, 1548-1558.
19. Mertens, D.R. 2010. NDF and DMI – has anything changed? [Consulta: 24 enero de 2017].
20. Minson, D. J. 1982. Effects of chemical and physical composition of herbage eaten upon intake. In Nutritional Limits to Animal Production from Pastures, pp. 167-182 [J. B. Hacker, editor]. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.
21. Minson, D.J. 1990. Forage in ruminant nutrition. Academic Press, San Diego, 483 pp.
22. Molina-Alcaide, E., A.I. Martín-García, J.F. Aguilera. 2000. A comparative study of nutrient digestibility, kinetics of degradation and passage and rumen fermentation pattern in goats and sheep offered good quality diets. Livest. Prod. Science.64, 215–223.
23. Mould, F. L & E.R. Orskov. 1984. Manipulation of rumen fenid pH and influence on cellulose in sacco, dry matter degradation and the run microflora of sheep offered either hay or concentrate. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 10, 1-14.
24. NRC. 1987. “Predicting feed intake of food-producing animals”. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C.
25. NRC. 2001. National Research Council. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle.7th rev. ed. Natl. Acad. Press Washington, DC. USA.
26. Provenza, F.D., J.J. Villalba, L.E. Dziba, S.B. Atwood, R.E. Banner. 2003. Linking herbivore experience, varied diets, and plant biochemical diversity. Small Ruminant Research. 49, 257–274.
27. Rapetti, L., L. Bava, A. Tamburini, G.M. Crovetto. 2005. Feeding behaviour, digestibility, energy balance and productive performance of lactating goats fed forage-based and forage-free diets. Italian Journal of Animal Science. 4, 71–83.
28. Rapetti, L & L. Bava. 2008. Feeding Management of Dairy Goats in Intensive Systems. In: Dary goats Feedeing and Nutrition. (ed). Cannas A, G Pulina (ed). Milan, Italy, p. 221-337.
29. Relling A & Mattioli G. 2013. Fisiología digestiva y metabólica de los rumiantes. Ed: Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias. UNLP. 104 pp.
30. Russell, J. B & J. L. Rychlik. 2001. Factors that alter rumen microbial ecology. Science 292, 1119-1122.
31. SAS Institute Inc. 2004 SAS On lineDoc* 9.1.3. Cary, NC: SAS Institute. Inc.
32. Van Soest, P.J, Robertson, J.B., Lewis, B.A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber neutral detergent fiber and non-starch polysaccharids in relation to animal nutrition. J.Dairy Sc.74, 3583-3597.
33. Viglizzo, E. 1981. Dinámica de los sistemas pastoriles de producción de leche. Cap. 8: La suplementación de pasturas. Ed. Hemisferio Sur. p. 67-82.
34. Yanez-Ruiz, D. R., A. Moumen, A. I. Martin-Garcia, and E. Molina-Alcaide. 2004. Ruminal fermentation and degradation patterns, protozoa population, and urinary purine derivatives excretion in goats and wethers fed diets based on two-stage olive cake: Effect of PEG supply. J. Anim. Sci. 82, 2023–2032.