Effect of Different Concentrate to Forage Ratios of Caragana korshinskii Silage on Lamb Performance, Digestion, and Metabolism

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2015.03.022

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2015, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (3): 586-593.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2015.03.022

Previous Articles Next Articles

Effect of Different Concentrate to Forage Ratios of Caragana korshinskii Silage on Lamb Performance, Digestion, and Metabolism

XU Zhi-Jun, HU Yan, DONG Kuan-Hu

Department of Pratacuhural Science, College of Agronomy, Shanxi University, Taigu, Shanxi Province 030801, China

Received:2014-06-05 Revised:2014-08-26 Online:2015-06-15 Published:2015-07-02

不同精粗比柠条青贮日粮对羔羊生产性能和消化代谢的影响

徐志军, 胡燕, 董宽虎

山西农业大学动物科技学院, 山西太谷 030801

通讯作者: 董宽虎
作者简介:徐志军(1988-),男,江西赣州人,硕士研究生,主要从事饲料作物营养与安全评价方向的研究工作,E-mail: wutong157@126.com
基金资助:
山西省林业厅科技项目(201122)资助

Abstract

Abstract:

To investigate the effects of Caragana silage diets on lamb performance,digestion and metabolism, the C. korshinskii of 8～10 years was stumped and processed into silage, and 30 male lambs were assigned to five dietary treatments based on randomized block design. Mixed concentrate and corn silage as based diet for control, different concentrate to forage ratios of C. korshinskii silage and mixed concentrate for test groups. Results showed that different forage to concentrate ratios of C. korshinskii silage had no significant effect on palatability and physical health status, and the dry matter intake was elevated as the ratio increasing. Dry matter intake and digestibility significantly increased to the maximum 1131.11 g·d^-1, 73.45%,respectively at the ratio of 60:40 (P<0.05). At this forage ratio, nitrogen deposition and digestible nitrogen utilization reached the maximum 18.33 g·d^-1, 62.97% respectively. Comprehensive consideration was given to nutrient digestibility and cost-benefit, the maximum gains could be obtained by 1.52 yuan daily for per lamb and economic efficiency increased 19.33% at the ratio of 60:40.

Key words: Caragana korshinskii, Silage, Lamb, Nutrient digestibility, Production performance

摘要：

为探讨柠条(Caragana Korshinskii)青贮日粮对羔羊生产性能和消化代谢的影响,以平茬8～10年柠条锦鸡儿(Caragana Korshinskii Kom.)为原料进行青贮。选用小尾寒羊公羔羊30只,采用随机区组设计,试验组饲喂不同精粗比的柠条青贮和精料补充料,对照组饲喂玉米(Zea mays)青贮和精料补充料。结果表明:柠条青贮饲料对羔羊适口性及健康状况无不良影响,干物质采食量随粗料比例增加呈增加趋势,精粗比60:40时羔羊干物质采食量与消化吸率达最大值分别为1131.11 g·d^-1,73.45%,在此精粗比条件下氮沉积量与可消化氮利用率分别为18.33 g·d^-1,62.97%。综合考虑营养物质消化率与养殖效益,以精粗比为60:40为宜,在该精粗比条件下每只羊日收益为1.52元,经济效益较对照提高19.33%。

关键词: 柠条, 青贮, 羔羊, 生产性能, 消化代谢

CLC Number:

S826.92

XU Zhi-Jun, HU Yan, DONG Kuan-Hu. Effect of Different Concentrate to Forage Ratios of Caragana korshinskii Silage on Lamb Performance, Digestion, and Metabolism[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2015, 23(3): 586-593.

徐志军, 胡燕, 董宽虎. 不同精粗比柠条青贮日粮对羔羊生产性能和消化代谢的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2015, 23(3): 586-593.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2015.03.022

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2015/V23/I3/586

References

[1] 李蓉,梁月,杨松,等. 主要水土保持植物及其开发利用[J]. 国际沙棘研究与开发,2013(3):45-48
[2] 王丽莉. 柠条平茬复壮更新技术研究[J]. 现代农业科技,2013(8):156-157
[3] 程积民,万惠娥,王静,等. 半干旱区柠条生长与土壤水分消耗过程研究[J]. 林业科学,2005,41(2):37-41
[4] 李丽英. 对老化柠条采取平茬复壮综合利用枝条的几点建议[J]. 内蒙古农业科技,2009(1):101
[5] 贺丰. 柠条的饲用价值与畜牧基地建设[J]. 山西水土保持科技,2006(4):34-36
[6] 吕建明. 柠条不同平茬时期的营养成分测定[J]. 现代农业科技,2013(12):141-145
[7] 高优娜,常金宝,周闯. 柠条的营养成分动态变化分析[J]. 北方环境,2011,32(1):41-43
[8] Zhou H M, D Allain,Li J Q,et al. Effects of non-genetic factors on production traits of inner mongolia cashmere goats in china [J]. Small Ruminant Research,2003,47(1):85-89
[9] 李爱华,李月华. 枯草期柠条草粉补饲滩羊的试验研究[J]. 中国草食动物,2001,3(4):27-29
[10] 罗惠娣,牛西午,毛杨毅,等. 柠条饲喂山羊效果试验[J]. 草业科学,2006,23(4):63-66
[11] 弓剑,曹社会. 柠条叶粉与苜蓿草粉对羊的饲喂效果比较[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医,2009(12):39-40
[12] 李连友,杨效民,李军,等. 柠条的饲用价值及喂奶牛试验研究[J]. 中国乳业,2002(8):31-34
[13] 张芬琴. 柠条饲喂奶牛效果试验[J]. 安徽农学通报,2010,16(3):152-155
[14] 杨效民,牛西午,张喜中,等. 柠条饲喂泌乳牛试验[J]. 中国牛业科学,2006,32(5):12-15
[15] 杨效民,牛西午,李军,等. 柠条对牛的饲用价值研究[J]. 黄牛杂志,2005,31(4):31-35
[16] 任克良,牛西午,毛杨毅,等. 家兔对柠条营养物质的消化试验研究[J]. 实验与研究,2005(1):25-27
[17] 任克良,牛西午,贺东昌,等. 饲喂柠条对肉兔生产性能及胴体性状影响的研究[J]. 实验与研究,2004(6):14-16
[18] 张平,黄应祥,王珍喜. 采用不同方法加工的柠条饲喂育肥羊效果的研究[J]. 中国畜牧兽医,2004,31(11):7-9
[19] 王永树,张忠富,江浩,等. 碱化结合高温处理对麦秸特性的影响[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医,2010(7):96-97
[20] 王峰,吕海军,温学飞,等. 提高柠条饲料利用率的研究[J]. 草业科学,2005,22(3):35-39
[21] 李明华,孟秀梅,徐生林,等. 微生物在饲料生产中的应用机理[J]. 饲料与畜牧:新饲料,2013(3):33-35
[22] 田晋梅,谢海军. 几种豆科植物单独青贮及喂畜效果试验[J]. 中国草食动物,2000,2(5):29-30
[23] 杨胜. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M]. 北京:北京农业大学出版社,1993
[24] 朱维军. 肉品加工技术[M]. 北京:高等教育出版社,2007:8-17
[25] 李洋静. 海门山羊肉品质指标特性的研究[D]. 扬州:扬州大学,2010:12-15
[26] Scaglia G, Boland H T. The effect of bermudagrass hybrid on forage characteristics, animal performance, and grazing behavior of beef steers [J]. Journal of Animal Science,2014,92(3):1228-1238
[27] 王丁. 舍饲白绒山羊饲喂柠条试验[J]. 陕西农业科学,2008,54(1):50-52
[28] 王云. 绵羊日粮中添加青绿饲料对饲料营养成份瘤胃降解的影响[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学,2003:33-34
[29] 江喜春,陈胜,程广龙,等. 不同精料补饲量对波萨安杂交羊育肥效果的研究[J]. 草食家畜,2010(4):40-42
[30] 王凯英. 不同精粗比全混合日粮(TMR)对梅花鹿消化代谢及生产性能的影响[D]. 北京:中国农业科学院,2008:20-22
[31] Mack J K, Remler H P, Senckenberg E, et al. No effect of moderate or high concentrate allowance on growth parameters in weanling warm blood foals fed late-cut haylage as forage[DOI:10.1111/jpn.12153]. Journal of Animal Physiology And Animal Nutrition, 2014-1-15/2014-4-12
[32] 魏时来,李发弟,郝正里,等. 肥育羔羊对不同精粗比全价颗粒饲粮养分的消化代谢效果[C]//中国农学会,西北农林科技大学.中国农学会秸秆资源综合利用分会论文集.2006:162-166
[33] Abdalatif Y M, Elemam M B, Abdelhadi O M A, et al. Effect of varying levels of concentrate to roughage ratio on growth of sudanese desert kids [J]. Research Opinions in Animal Veterinary Sciences,2011(1):94-97
[34] 王加启,冯仰廉. 日粮精粗比对瘤胃微生物合成效率的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报,1995,26(4):301-307
[35] Ghasemi E, Ghorbani G R, Khorvash M, et al. Adjustment of pH and enzymatic treatment of barley straw by dry processing method [J]. Journal of Applied Animal Research,2014,42(2):1-6
[36] 冯伟业,刘大程,卢德勋,等. 不同品质粗饲料日粮及添加酵母培养物对绵羊瘤胃内主要纤维素酶及纤维物质降解的影响[J]. 动物营养学报,2008,20(1):108-114
[37] Malisetty V, Yerradoddi R R, Devanaboina N, et al. Effect of feeding sorghum straw based complete rations with different roughage to concentrate ratio on dry matter intake, nutrient utilization, and nitrogen balance in nellore ram lambs [J]. Tropical Animal Health and Production,2014,46(5):759-764
[38] Hoover W H. Chemical factors involved in ruminal fiber digestion [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1986,69(10):2755-2766
[39] Jarrett J P, Wilson J W, Ray P P, et al. The effects of forage particle length and exogenous phytase inclusion on phosphorus digestion and absorption in lactating cows [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2014,97(1):411-418
[40] Kumar S, Dagar S.S, Sirohi S K, et al. Microbial profiles, in vitro gas production and dry matter digestibility based on various ratios of roughage to concentrate [J]. Annals of Microbiology,2013,63(2):541-545

Effect of Different Concentrate to Forage Ratios of Caragana korshinskii Silage on Lamb Performance, Digestion, and Metabolism

不同精粗比柠条青贮日粮对羔羊生产性能和消化代谢的影响

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	WANG Jing, LIU Xiao-jing, Cheng Tian-tian, Tong Chang-chun, WANG Xue. Study on Leaf Characteristics and Yield Effect of Alfalfa with Different Nitrogen Efficiency [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 1941-1949.
[2]	LU Jia-ding, YANG Xu, ZHU Xiao-yan, CUI Ya-lei, WANG Cheng-zhang, LI De-feng, SHI Ying-hua. Comprehensive Evaluation of 21 Corn Silage Varieties with both Grain and Forage in Henan Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 1950-1958.
[3]	WU Hai-yan, QU Zhen, LIU Zhao-ming, LABA Dun-zhu, TONGSANG Cuo-mu, QU Ni, NIMA zhuo-ga, MA Yu-shou. Comparative study on Production Performance of Oat Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 1967-1973.
[4]	MA Ran-ran, YUAN Jie, ZHANG Wen-jie, XU Neng-xiang, GU Hong-ru. Effects of Stacking Time on Feeding and Fermentation Quality of Broccoli Waste [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 2107-2114.
[5]	DU Zhao-chang, WANG Hong, YAN Yan-hong, MUHAMMAD Tahir, WEI Xiao, ZENG Tai-ru, LI Hong-liang. Effects of Rice Husk and Wheat Bran Addition on Silage Quality of Fresh Corn Straw [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1549-1554.
[6]	SONG Jian-chao, YU Xiao-jun, WEI Kong-tao, WANG Peng-bin, TONG Yong-shang, LI Zhen, HE You-long, WANG Hai-bo. Effects of Nitrogen Application on Production Performance and Nutritional Quality of Elymus nutans in Alpine Region [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1555-1564.
[7]	WU Shuo, ZOU Xuan, WANG Ming-ya, ZHANG Qing. Effects of Chenpi Citrus Juice on Fermentation Quality of Stylo and Rice Straw Silage [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1565-1570.
[8]	HAN Xue-qin, DENG Hong-shan, PU Tian-lei, LUO Hui-ying, ZHAO Qiong-ling, LIAO Cheng-fei, XUE Shi-ming, FAN Jian-cheng, JIN Jie. The Study on Agronomic Characters of Silage Maize Varieties in Dry-hot Valley Region of Jinsha River [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(6): 1327-1335.
[9]	LYU Hong-jian, ZOU Xuan, WU Shuo, LI Yun, CHEN Xiao-yang, ZHANG Qing. Effect of Adding Moringa Oleifera Leaves and Lactobacillus farciminis on Quality of Corn Stover Silage [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(6): 1343-1349.
[10]	QIN Wei-na, JIAO Ting, SHI Shang-li, LI Xiong-xiong, GAO Xue-mei, ZHAO Sheng-guo, QI Juan, WANG Zheng-wen. Evaluation of Silage Quality of 10 Green-fed Corn Varieties under Different Hydrothermal Rescource Conditions [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 1070-1079.
[11]	LI Wen, MA Lin-feng, CAO Xi-min, YU Feng-fang, SHE Zhi-hui, XU Zhan-yun, LIU Gui-he, LYU Ai-zhi. Effect of Sowing Date on Yield and Quality of Zea mays L. in Bashang Agro-pastoral Ecotone in Northwest Hebei Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 1080-1086.
[12]	WANG Xin-yu, SHEN Chen, HUO Wen-jie, LIU Qiang, ZHANG Shuan-lin, WANG Cong, CHEN Lei, XU Qing-fang, WANG Yong-xin, GUO Gang. Analysis of Fermentation Quality and Bacterial Community Structure of Whole Corn Silage of Different Varieties in Yanbei Region [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 1087-1093.
[13]	TONG Yong-shang, YU Xiao-jun, XU Chang-lin, WANG Peng-bin, SONG Jian-chao, LI Zhen, LI Ying. Effects of Sowing Date on Forage Yield and Quality of Seven Oat Varieties in Tianzhu Alpine Region [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 1094-1106.
[14]	ZHENG Ming-yang, WU Shuo, GUO Xiang, CHEN Xiao-yang, ZHANG Qing. Effects of Lactobacillus and Cellulase on the Silage Quality of Amomum Villosum leaves [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 1113-1117.
[15]	LI Man-you, MA Zhong-ren, WANG Bing, YANG Yu-qi, SHEN Xiao-tian, CAO Li-juan, LI Xiao-yun, LAN Jian. Study on the Mixed Planting Mode of Two Alfalfa Varieties in Different Row Ratios in the Yellow River Irrigation Area in Ningxia [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(4): 798-804.