Nutritional Evaluation of Five Tropical Gramineous Forages

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2013.05.030

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2013, Vol. 21 ›› Issue (5): 1028-1032.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2013.05.030

Nutritional Evaluation of Five Tropical Gramineous Forages

LI Mao¹, ZI Xue-juan^1,2, HOU Guan-yu¹, ZHOU Han-lin¹

1. Tropical Crops Genetic Resources Institute, Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences, Danzhou, Hainan Province 571737, China;
2. College of Applied Science and Technology, Hainan University, Danzhou, Hainan Province 571737, China

Received:2013-03-21 Revised:2013-04-24 Online:2013-10-15 Published:2013-10-30

体外产气法评价5种热带禾本科牧草营养价值

李茂¹, 字学娟^1,2, 侯冠彧¹, 周汉林¹

1. 中国热带农业科学院热带作物品种资源研究所, 海南儋州 571737;
2. 海南大学应用科技学院(儋州校区), 海南儋州 571737

通讯作者: 周汉林
作者简介:李茂(1984- ),男,四川绵阳人,研究实习员,硕士,主要从事热带牧草和反刍动物营养研究,E-mail:limaohn@163.com
基金资助:
中国热带农业科学院基本科研业务专项(1630032012049)资助

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this experiment was to evaluate the nutritional value of 5 tropical gramineous forages in Hainan province. The chemical compositions, in vitro dry matter degradability (IVDMD), metabolizable energy (ME) of tested forages including Pennisetum purpureum×P. glaucum, Panicum maximum, Pennisetum purpureum, Paspalum atratum and Melinis minutiflora were determined by approximate analysis and in vitro gas production methods. Results showed that the crude protein (CP), ether extract (EE), relative feed value (RFV), IVDMD and ME of P. purpureum×P. glaucum was 6.85%, 8.07%, 0.87, 59.76%, 8.21 MJ·kg^-1; that of P. maximum was 8.94%, 6.03%, 0.81, 58.81%, 7.69 MJ·kg^-1; that of P. purpureum was 14.41%, 8.05%, 0.88, 66.43%, 9.24 MJ·kg^-1; that of P. atratum was 10.84%, 9.85%, 0.80, 67.34%, 8.54 MJ·kg^-1; that of M. minutiflora was 8.48%, 6.56%, 0.86, 63.99%, 9.13 MJ·kg^-1, respectively. Comprehensive evaluation indicated that P. purpureum had the highest nutritional value, and P. purpureum×P. glaucum and P. maximum forages were of lower nutritional value than P. atratum and M. minutiflora.

Key words: Chemical composition, In vitro gas production, In vitro dry matter degradability, Metabolizable energy

摘要： 为评价5种热带禾本科牧草的营养价值,通过常规化学成分分析和体外产气技术测定其主要营养成分含量、体外干物质消化率(IVDMD)和代谢能(ME),并进行综合评价。结果表明:5种牧草的粗蛋白质(CP)、粗脂肪(EE)、饲料相对值(RFV)、IVDMD和 ME分别如下:王草(Pennisetum purpureum×P. glaucum)为6.85%,8.07%,0.87,59.76%,8.21 MJ·kg^-1;坚尼草(Panicum maximum)为8.94%,6.03%,0.81,58.81%,7.69 MJ·kg^-1;红象草(Pennisetum purpureum)为14.41%,8.05%,0.88,66.43%,9.24 MJ·kg^-1;黑籽雀稗(Paspalum atratum)为10.84%,9.85%,0.80,67.34%,8.54 MJ·kg^-1;糖蜜草(Melinis minutiflora)为8.48%,6.56%,0.86, 63.99%,9.13 MJ·kg^-1。综合考虑,红象草营养价值最高,王草和坚尼草营养价值较低,黑籽雀稗和糖蜜草居中。

关键词: 营养成分, 体外产气法, 体外干物质消化率, 代谢能

CLC Number:

S816.15

LI Mao, ZI Xue-juan, HOU Guan-yu, ZHOU Han-lin. Nutritional Evaluation of Five Tropical Gramineous Forages[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2013, 21(5): 1028-1032.

李茂, 字学娟, 侯冠彧, 周汉林. 体外产气法评价5种热带禾本科牧草营养价值[J]. 草地学报, 2013, 21(5): 1028-1032.

0
/ Save 0 / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2013.05.030

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2013/V21/I5/1028

References

[1] 李茂,字学娟,周汉林,等.海南省部分热带灌木饲用价值评定[J].动物营养学报,2012,24(1):85-94

[2] 张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].2版.北京:中国农业大学出版社,2003

[3] Rohweder D A, Barnes R F, Jorgensen N. Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality[J]. Journal of Animal Science,1978,47(3):747-759

[4] Zhao G Y, Lebzien P. Development of an in vitro incubation technique for the estimation of the utilizable crude protein (uCP) in feeds for cattle[J].Archives of Animal Nutrition,2000,53(3):293-302

[5] ARC (Agricultural Research Council).The nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock[M]. Slough, Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, 1965

[6] Φrskov E R, McDonald I. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science,1979,92(2):499-503

[7] 赖志强,黄敏瑞,周解,等.热带亚热带优质高产牧草矮象草的试验研究[J].中国草地,1998,20(6):26-30

[8] 刘国道,白昌军,王东劲,等.热研4号王草选育[J].草地学报,2002,10(2):92-96

[9] 韦家少,刘国道,蔡碧云. 热研9号坚尼草选育研究[J].草地学报,2002,10(3):157-163

[10] 陈勇,罗富成,毛华明,等.施肥水平和不同株高刈割对王草产量和品质的影响[J].草业科学,2009,26(2):72-75

[11] 易显凤,赖志强. 南方优质象草品种比较试验初报[J].广西大学学报:自然科学版,2008,33(3):313-316

[12] 陆云华,汤洪波,邹怀波,等. 台湾甜象草、红象草和皇竹草营养成分和无机元素的分析[J].浙江农业科学,2011(2):418-419

[13] Menke K H, Raab L, Salewski A, et al. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolisable energy content of ruminant feedstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro[J].The Journal of Agricultural Science,1979,93(1):217-222

Nutritional Evaluation of Five Tropical Gramineous Forages

体外产气法评价5种热带禾本科牧草营养价值

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 2

Recommended Articles 0

Metrics

Comments

[1]	LI Mao, ZI Xue-juan, ZHOU Han-lin, LIU Guo-dao. Dynamics and Correlations among Shearing Force and Nutritional Value of Stylo Stem [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2016, 24(3): 642-646.
[2]	GU Xue-ying, YU Zhu, GUO Yan-ping, SUN Qi-zhong, CHAO Ke-tu. Fermentation Quality and Chemical Composition in the Mixed Silage of Whole Crop Corn and Soybean [J]. , 2011, 19(1): 132-136.