Supplementing maize or soybean hulls to cattle fed rice straw: intake, apparent digestion, in situ disappearance and ruminal dynamics *.
Rice straw (Oryza sativa, IRN: 1-03-925) is considered poor quality forage for ruminants but is produced in abundance throughout the rice growing areas of the tropics and subtropics. Better quality forages are usually available in temperate countries so rice straw as feed has not been given much attention by cattle (Bos taurus) producers or animal scientists. However, refuse burning is becoming more restrictive, and as a result, rice producers in the USA are facing economic and environmental problems of rice straw disposal. Rice straw has been successfully treated with urea to improve fiber digestibility (Wanapat, 1990; Elseed et al., 2003), improving its use as a cattle feed and in turn serve as an additional source of revenue for rice producers. Supplementation strategies have also improved the utilization of rice straw (Pradhan et al., 1996; Chowdhury, 2001).
Cattle fed medium or low quality forages respond differently to types and amounts of energy supplements. Reduced intake and fiber digestion of low quality forages with maize (Zea mays, IRN: 4-20-698) supplementation is well documented (Sanson et al., 1990; Higgins et al., 1991; Garces-Yepez et al., 1997). It has been shown, however, that supplementation with soybean hulls (Glycine max, IRN: 5-04-612) does not affect intake or digestibility of forages (Martin and Hibberd, 1990; Wheeler et al., 1999; St. Louis et al., 2002). Associative effects between low quality forages and supplements with different nutrients are not well established. First, National Research Council (1996) equations based on [NE.sub.m] fail to accurately predict dry matter intake (DMI) of beef cattle fed all-forage diets. Second, supplements are often predicted by these equations to substitute for forages in the total diet, not allowing for additive effects on intake (St. Louis et al., 2002).
In companion studies, Orr et al. (2007) and Nguyen et al. (2007), found that supplementing soybean hulls or maize enhanced total tract digestibility of low quality bermudagrass hay (Cynodon dactylon, IRN: 1-00-700). In the same studies they found that soybean hulls, in spite of their high fiber content, resulted in more rapid in situ disappearance of hay constituents, while producing a greater volume of total VFA in the rumen. Their data also suggest that, when fed at least 0.5% of BW, soybean hulls are more efficient than maize as a supplement in feeding systems using low quality forages because of their additive and associative effects. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the effects of maize or soybean hull supplementation on intake, in vivo digestibility, ruminal pH, volatile fatty acids (VFA), ammonia-nitrogen ([NH.sub.3]-N), and in situ ruminal disappearance of feed nutrients by cattle consuming rice straw.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Animals and experimental design
Four steers were assigned to one of four diets during four consecutive 24-d periods using a 4 x 4 Latin square to evaluate apparent nutrient digestibility, ruminal environment, and in situ ruminal digestibility of individual feeds. Angus, Hereford, and(or) Charolais steers with ruminal cannulae (initial BW 225 [+ or -] 18.9 kg) were fed rice straw ad libitum and were assigned to one of four treatments, receiving a new supplement each period. Treatments were: no supplement (RS); soybean meal at 0.127% BW (SBM); cracked maize at 0.415% BW plus soybean meal at 0.044% BW (MAIZE); or pelleted soybean hulls at 0.415% BW plus soybean meal at 0.044% BW (HULLS) (Tables 1 and 2). Soybean meal was included in both MAIZE and HULLS diets so the supplemented diets would be isonitrogenous thus preventing the confounding of protein and energy effects of the supplements.
Rice straw from small square bales was fed without chopping by offering a weighed amount to each animal at 0800 daily, after feeding the treatment supplements. Whole-shelled maize was cracked with a hammer mill with the screen removed in order to grind as course as possible within the restrictions of equipment used. The resulting cracked maize contained various particle sizes, from halfkernel to flour size, somewhat finer than from a roller mill. Soybean hulls, a flaky byproduct (170 kg/[m.sup.3]) of soybean oil extrusion, are usually pelleted to increase bulk density (513 kg/[m.sup.3]) for transportation and storage and to reduce waste and segregation in feeding (comparison, rice bran = 320 kg/[m.sup.3]). The soybean hull pellets of this study were typical for commercial trade, measuring approximately 5 mm diameter by 15 mm long.
Body weights were obtained with no dietary restrictions to determine quantity of supplement to be fed during each period. To facilitate diet adaptation (14 d), steers were housed together in a pen with ad libitum access to rice straw. During this time, steers were separated daily and individually fed their supplement. Mineral blocks were offered free choice only during diet adaptation (92.0-98.5% NaCl with added Zn, Fe, Mn, Cu, I, and Co; Akzo Nobel Salt, Inc., Clarks Summit, PA, USA). After diet adaptation, steers were placed into individual digestion stalls (2.44 x 0.876 m), with separate troughs and automatic waterers, and allowed three days for acclimation immediately followed by five days of data collection for in vivo digestion. While in the stalls, steers remained haltered and tied, but able to stand or lie down at will.
Total fecal collections began 17 d after being introduced to treatments (d 18). Apparent nutrient digestibility was determined by weighing and analyzing daily DMI and total fecal excretion from d 18 through 24. Rice straw and supplements offered, and rice straw refused (i.e., orts), were sampled daily from d 18 to d 23 and composited for each steer and sampling period. There were no supplement orts. Total fecal excretion was weighed daily and sampled, taking a 5% aliquot.
Variation in ruminal digestion due to supplementation was evaluated from d 22 through d 24 by measuring [NH.sub.3]-N, VFAs, pH, and in situ disappearance. On d 22 ruminal fluid was sampled at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 h post-feeding of supplements beginning at 0800. Rumen fluid was collected by sampling ruminal contents from four to five locations within the rumen, which was pressed through four layers of cheesecloth. Collected ruminal fluid was immediately placed on ice. After chilling, the pH was determined using Thermo-Orion combination electrode meter (model 290A meter, Beverly, MA, USA). Ruminal fluid was sub-sampled (two replicates of each original sample) and centrifuged (900 x g, 20 min). Supernatant was transferred to plastic vials (sorted by date, steer, and h of collection) containing m-phosphoric acid (25% wt/vol) at a 5 sample/1 acid ratio. After mixing, vials were placed on ice until subsequent ruminal fluid collections were completed; samples were then frozen (-20[degrees]C) until VFA and [NH.sub.3]-N analysis.
Upon VFA analysis, frozen ruminal fluid was thawed and shaken, and 5 ml sub-samples were centrifuged (30,000 x g, 4[degrees]C, 20 min). To the resulting supernatant, 2-ethyl butyric acid was added (2 g/L) followed by VFA analysis using gas chromatography equipped with mass spectrophotometer. Gas chromatography analysis was based on procedures described by Grigsby et al. (1992) and temperature gradient program described by Bateman et al. (2002), who also modified the procedure by using helium as the carrier gas with an injection flow rate of 60 ml/min.
Ammonia-N was analyzed using original ruminal fluid samples (i.e., without 2-ethyl butyric acid). Samples were thawed, vortexed, and centrifuged (3,500 x g, 4[degrees]C, 15 min) followed by analysis using a direct colorimetric method described by McCullough (1967). Samples were incubated at 91% humidity, 5% CO2, and 37[degrees]C for at least 35 minutes prior to colorimetric analysis. Preliminary data necessitated revising McCullough's (1967) method such that the samples were not deproteinated prior to [NH.sub.3]-N determination.
In situ study
On d 22, 23, and 24 in situ ruminal digestion was evaluated. For each period, pooled samples of daily feed offered during the in vivo collection were ground to pass a 2-mm screen. In situ samples consisting of 3 g of ground rice straw, 5 g of soybean meal, 5 g of ground maize, or 5 g of soybean hulls were directly weighed into separate nylon in situ bags (No. 510; 5 cm x 10 cm; 50 [+ or -] 20 [micro]m, Ankom, Fairport, NY, USA). Each steer received 12 in situ samples of rice straw and 12 in situ samples of the supplement (soybean meal, maize or soybean hulls) assigned to that steer's diet (SBM, MAIZE, or HULLS, respectively). In situ samples for rice straw and supplements were held in separate mesh bags allowed to move freely within the rumen. At 0800, mesh bags containing in situ samples were immersed in a bucket of warm water prior to placement in the rumen to dampen samples and facilitate immediate microbial inoculation. At 2, 4, 6, 8, 16, and 24 h after initiation, two in situ samples of rice straw and two in situ samples of supplement were randomly withdrawn from each steer and immediately placed in ice water to cease microbial digestion. All harvested in situ samples were washed by hand according to a procedure described by Vanzant et al. (1996). Dried bags were weighed, and the remaining sample was analyzed as described below.
Rice straw, supplements, and fecal samples were ground in a Thomas Wiley Mill (model 4, Thomas Scientific, Swedesboro, NJ, USA) to pass through a 2-mm screen. Samples were analyzed for DM, ash, CP, NDF, and ADF (Van Soest et al., 1991; AOAC 2003) using the Fiber Analyzer (ANKOM Technology, Fairport, NY, USA). Analysis for NDF included sodium sulfite to aid in the removal of complex proteins; in addition [alpha]-amylase was used. Neither NDF nor ADF were corrected for ash content. After ruminal incubation, dried in situ bags with their remaining samples were analyzed for DM, NDF, and ADF. Not enough feedstuffs remained in the in situ bags to analyze for CP. In situ nutrient disappearance was expressed as a ratio of incubated to initial feed nutrient content. All laboratory analyses were conducted in duplicate.
Calculations and statistical analysis
Weights for rice straw, supplements and feces were recorded to field sheets daily for each steer. Weights and sample analyses were entered and categorized by steer, treatment and period on electronic spreadsheets for further calculations (also by period, day and hour for ruminal and in situ data).
From DMI and fecal excretion, apparent digestibilities were calculated as percent disappearance of DM, OM, NDF, ADF, hemicellulose (HC) and CP. Hemicellulose was calculated as difference between NDF and ADF residues. Response variables were analyzed as a 4 x 4 Latin square, using the GLM procedure in SAS (V9.1, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Planned comparisons of RS vs. other treatments and SBM vs. MAIZE and HULLS were conducted using GLM CONTRAST statements so probabilities could be reported. When significant, means were separated using Ryan-Einot-Gabriel-Welsh multiple-range test (REGWQ) to minimize risk of Type 1 errors.
Ruminal environment data ([NH.sub.3]-N, pH and VFAs) were analyzed as a 4 x 4 Latin square, where two samples were collected from each steer, using the GLM procedure for each sampling time (0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 h). The previous REGWQ procedure for mean separations and CONTRAST statements were not used. Instead, least-squares means were separated using multiple pairwise t-tests when treatment effects were significant (p<0.05).
In situ degradation ratios for DM, NDF and ADF were analyzed for each sampling time (0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 16 and 24 h) as a 4 x 4 Latin square, using the MIXED procedure of SAS, where two samples were collected from each steer. All laboratory analyses were preformed in duplicate. Steer and time period were anaylzed as fixed factors; subsamples and sub-subsamples were analyzed as random factors.
Least-squares means were reported for each treatment by time for ruminal environment and in situ degradation results and were separated using multiple pairwise t-tests when treatment effects were significant (p<0.05).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Rice straw in this study typified the low quality reported by others. Most of the rice in the Mississippi delta area is grown in a dry seeded culture, where the permanent flood is not established until the five-leaf stage. Cocodrie, Cheniere, and CL 161 are the most popular varieties with average yields about 5800 t/ha (MSUcares, 2007). Whether this straw is significantly different from that of other countries is doubtful when comparing the nutrient composition of rice straw in Table 1 with other published data. High ash concentrations (15.8%, Table 1), agrees with the 16.5 to 21.4%, reported by Gohl (1984) who indicated silica was the predominant mineral present. With its high fiber and low CP (3.8%), rice straw alone obviously will not meet maintenance requirement of ruminants. Consumption of rice straw and other low quality forages is often suppressed as shown in the present study (1.2 to 1.6% BW, Table 3), which is in agreement with previous work (Saadulah et al., 1983; Preston and Leng, 1984; Wanapat, 1990; Nguyen, 1996). The DMI of rice straw was not affected by treatment (p = 0.34, Table 3). As a result, steers offered SBM, MAIZE or HULLS diets had greater (p = 0.008) total DMI compared to steers not supplemented. However, data indicates that supplements were not substitutive of basal forage diet (Table 3). Also, steers on the RS diet had reduced apparent digestion of DM, OM, and CP compared to those receiving supplements (p<0.0001, Table 4). Probably because the SBM diet had a smaller quantity of actual supplement, apparent digestibility of NDF was less compared with HULLS and MAIZE diets (p = 0.004). Apparent DM digestibilities of MAIZE and HULLS were similar (p = 0.12) indicating that soybean hulls and cracked maize have similar feeding value for supplementing low quality forages at the level of this study. Why soybean hulls, with more fiber, can still have similar digestibility to cracked maize, with more starch, can be partially explained because apparent NDF and ADF digestibility was greater (p<0.0008) for HULLS than MAIZE, and there was no difference in apparent HC digestibility (p = 0.43).
Weidner and Grant (1994) reported that non-forage fiber sources, such as soybean hulls, may increase ruminal rate of passage and reduce NDF digestibility due to small particle size and greater specific gravity. Garleb et al. (1988) reported non-forage fiber sources have potential to replace dietary forage, due to their low concentration of lignin and because they contain a large portion of digestible fiber.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
Apparent CP digestibility was least for RS (10.9%), because rice straw contains very little protein (Table 1) and likely because most of the CP in rice straw is bound in the cell wall matrix (Cherney, 2000), making it less available to microbial fermentation. Apparent CP digestibility was greatest for SBM followed by HULLS and MAIZE (p< 0.0001, Table 4).
Compared to RS, supplementation increased (p<0.0001) ruminal [NH.sub.3]-N concentration pre- and post-feeding with the exception of MAIZE prior to feeding (Figure 1). Diets HULLS and SBM had similar and greatest [NH.sub.3]-N concentration at 2 and 4 h post-feeding (p = 0.63 and 0.57, respectively) but were different pre-feeding and 8 h post-feeding (p<0.04). Concentration of [NH.sub.3]-N for the MAIZE diet measured highest 2 h later (4 h) and was intermediate between RS and the other two supplemented diets (HULLS and SBM, Figure 1). Because not all ruminal bacteria share the same N requirement, ruminal ammonia may be affected by microbial metabolism of available N (Hungate, 1966; Chalupa et al., 1970; McAllen and Smith, 1983). Ruminal ammonia also depends on recycled ammonia and, more importantly, on the extent of carbohydrate fermentation. In this study, ammonia values for supplemented animals exceeded the optimal range (2 to 5 mg/dl) proposed by Satter and Slyter (1974).
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
As seen in Figure 2, ruminal pH of RS and SBM remained elevated and relatively stable with means ranging between 6.9 and 7.1 for RS and between 6.7 and 6.8 for SBM, and were not different from each other (p>0.08). Prior to feeding, ruminal pH of MAIZE remained numerically more acidic than RS (6.7 vs. 7.1 pH, p = 0.07). Ruminal pH of both MAIZE and HULLS remained similar (p = 0.13) at all points measured, declining to 6.42 and 6.41 by 8 h, respectively. A similar study by Nguyen et al. (2007) reported greater change in ruminal pH, 8 h after supplementing forage with cracked maize (6.1) or pelleted soybean hulls (5.9) where soybean hulls were p<0.001 than maize. Lack of differences in the current trial might have occurred because rice straw diets with no supplement had lower apparent DM digestibility (44.4%) than the bermudagrass hay of Nguyen et al. (2007) (52.9%). On the other hand, Paengkoum (1998) supplemented rice straw with urea treated cassava chips at 0.5% BW, and ruminal pH reached its lowest level of 6.1 (2 h) whereas our lowest level was 6.4 for MAIZE (6 h). Apparent DM digestibilty of Paengkoum's (1998) diet was 58.8%, similar to 56.6% and 60.0% for our MAIZE and HULLS diets, respectively.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
Fermentation byproducts such as VFAs and lactic acid readily reduce ruminal pH (Burrin and Britton, 1986; Olson et al., 1999), and research has shown that feeding soybean hulls prevented drastic reductions in pH providing a ruminal environment more conducive to fiber digestion (Klopfenstein and Owen, 1987, Sung et al., 2007). In the present study neither maize nor soybean hulls reduced pH below normal physiological range. However, feeding soybean hulls resulted in a reduction of ruminal pH equal to that of maize. Shriver et al. (1986) reported that a ruminal pH of 5.8 was characterized by a 43% reduction in the proportion of microbes associated with fiber particles, indicating fiber digestion was favored in the present study.
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
As seen in Figure 3, total VFA concentration for steers consuming RS remained relatively stable averaging between 149 and 182 mM/L, which was numerically less by contrast comparing RS vs. other treatments across all times (p = 0.0025). Total VFA concentrations were not different among treatments pre- and post feeding (p>0.10), but at 4 h post-feeding, HULLS produced a numerical increase, followed by a decrease in total VFA concentration while both SBM and MAIZE exhibited a numerical increase from 6 to at least 8 h post-feeding. Increased total VFA concentrations immediately followed peaks of ruminal [NH.sub.3]-N (Figures 2 and 3). Ammonia should increase pH, but didn't in this study (Figures 1 and 2), indicating available N is being utilized by ruminal microflora, confirming the required synchrony between N and energy availability. In contrast, Nguyen et al. (2007), supplementing bermudagrass hay with maize and soybean hulls showed that the reduction in pH coincided with the increase in total VFA concentrations for the various feedstuffs. The present study showed a similar relationship between total VFA concentrations and pH, although not as pronounced. One exception occurred when steers were supplemented with SBM. For reasons not yet understood, total VFA concentrations increased while ruminal pH remained stable. In the current study, the peak total VFA concentration was 230 mM for HULLS 4 h post-feeding compared to Nguyen et al. (2007) who reported 185 mM peak 6 h post-feeding for soybean hulls fed at 0.607% BW. It is possible that HULLS peaked at 4 h in the present study, as opposed to 6 h reported previously, because there were fewer total digestible nutrients available from RS as shown by its reduced digestibility of rice straw compared with bermudagrass. Diurnal fluctuations in total VFA concentrations for steers consuming highly fibrous HULLS indicate that it was readily digestible in the rumen even though (66.2% NDF and 46.2% ADF; Table 1). Previous research reported soybean hulls to be digested as much as 75% in vivo (Streeter and Horn, 1983; Hsu et al., 1987).
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
Acetate and propionate are the two primary fatty acids produced in the rumen. Consumption of grains usually results in a relative increase in molar proportions of propionate whereas fiber increase relative proportions of acetate. Supplementation with soybean hulls has shown mixed results with regard to ruminal acetate and propionate concentrations. Although soybean hulls contain mostly fiber and very little starch, trials reported by Nguyen et al. (2007) and Martin and Hibberd (1990) showed supplementation with soybean hulls decreases molar proportions of acetate and increases that of propionate. In contrast, this study showed no change (p = 0.2; Figure 5) in relative proportions of propionate and agrees with Grigsby et al. (1992) who fed approximately 90% soybean hulls and reported an increased ruminal acetate concentrations and reduced ruminal propionate concentrations.
Figure 4 shows molar proportions of acetate tended to be greatest for the RS diet 2 through 6 h post-feeding. By 8 h, acetate was greatest (p<0.05) for RS (Figure 4). Similarly, Galloway et al. (1993) who found maize or soybean hulls to decrease (p<0.06) the molar proportion of propionate. However, the acetate:propionate ratio tended to decrease during the present study whereas, Grigsby et al. (1992) reported acetate:propionate ratios to increase linearly when low quality bromegrass was substituted with 15, 30, 45, or 60% soybean hulls. However, agreement with these finding was reported by Chase and Hibberd (1987) who found that native grass hay supplemented with 0, 1, 2, or 3 kg ground maize to linearly decrease the acetate:propionate ratio. In addition, these results are also in agreement with Martin and Hibberd (1990) reporting acetate:propionate ratios to decrease with increasing soybean hulls supplementation.
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
In the present study, the molar proportions of acetate for MAIZE was not different (p<0.11) from SBM or HULLS from 0 h to 8 h. However, molar proportion of acetate for RS remained numerically elevated (p<0.16) above the other treatments from 0 to 8 h (Figure 4). Molar proportions of propionate remained relatively stable post-feeding (p<0.20), ranging from the least of 16.7 mol/100 mol for HULLS at 0 h to the greatest of 18.7 mol/100 mol for SBM at 8 h (Figure 5).
The molar proportions of butyrate differed at 0, 2, and 4 h with MAIZE remaining more concentrated than RS and SBM but not different from HULLS except at 2 h (p<0.001). Butyrate was similar among treatments from 6 to 8 h post-feeding (Figure 7). Molar proportions of isobutyrate remained stable from 0 to 8 h for all treatments, ranging between 0.69 and 1.00 mol/100 mol (data not shown), and showed no treatment differences (p<0.11). Valerate concentrations were markedly affected by supplementation from 0 to 8 h (p<0.05) but SBM, MAIZE, and HULLS did not differ (Figure 8). Isovalerate concentrations followed a similar trend to valerate except that MAIZE was associated with less proportions of isovalerate than SBM at 2 h and was not different from RS or other supplements at 4 h (Figure 9).
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
In situ disappearance of nutrients
In situ disappearance of rice straw DM from the rumen (Table 5) was greatest for the SBM treatment 6 to 24 h post-feeding (p<0.04). Rice straw NDF and ADF disappearance tended to be greatest for supplemented steers (16 to 24 h, p<0.02). Reduction in rice straw disappearance in RS diet is likely due to an insufficient supply of metabolizable protein within the rice straw (Tables 1 and 2) because RS did not include soybean meal.
The ruminal DM disappearance of cracked maize in the MAIZE diet was greater (p<0.05) than soybean hulls in the HULLS diet from 2 to 8 h after feeding supplements. At 24 h, ruminal soybean hull disappearance exceeded (p<0.05) that of maize, likely because much of the maize starch would have been digested or washed out of the sample bags. Although soybean hulls were digested slower than maize, they still proved to be highly digestible, which is supported by previous studies evaluating the digestion of soybean hulls by cattle (Quicke et al., 1959; Hintz et al., 1964; Ludden et al., 1995).
Comparing MAIZE and HULLS, the differences in apparent fiber (NDF and ADF) digestibilities shown in Table 4 can be explained by in situ disappearances of rice straw and supplements in Table 5 and 6. By implication, the fiber digestion of HULLS in Table 4 involved fiber from both rice straw and soybean hulls. Because there were no differences in in situ fiber (NDF and ADF) disappearance from the rice straw (Table 5), then the differences between MAIZE and HULLS in apparent total tract digestibilities came from the supplements (maize and soybean hulls, respectively). This seems in conflict with Table 6 which shows a more rapid disappearance of NDF and ADF for maize than for soybean hulls. However, the initial concentration of these fiber components was much less to begin with (Table 1). Disappearance ratios greater than 1 in Table 5 and 6 are most likely explained by partial escape of sample material from in situ bags. Current in situ findings differ from a similar study of Nguyen et al. (2007) who reported a difference in ADF in situ disappearance of bermudagrass hay. They suggested that supplying a fibrous feedstuff to the rumen would promote fiber-digesting bacteria while suppressing starch bacteria. They also suggested that feeding at least 0.5% of BW of soybean hulls can enhance forage digestion through additive and associative effects resulting in a more efficient supplement than maize. Current data does not concur with these findings likely do to the differences in forage quality and digestibility between bermudagrass and rice straw.
In summary, steers were fed diets of rice straw ad libitum supplemented with maize or soybean hulls at 0.4% BW to provide approximately 4 MJ [NE.sub.m] per kg of diet. Rice straw DMI was not affected by supplementation, indicating no substitutive effects. In addition, maize or soybean hulls enhanced digestibility of the fiber in rice straw when protein requirements were met with soybean meal.
In spite of high fiber content of soybean hulls, this study suggests that they are as efficient as maize for supplementing rice straw primarily because fiber in soybean hulls are highly digestible as shown by in vivo digestibility and in situ disappearance. Our understanding of the associative effects of soybean hulls, when supplementing low quality forages such as bermudagrass, has become clearer in recent years. Rice bran should perform similarly to soybean hulls (Orden et al., 2000; Chaudhary et al., 2001). This study shows that rice straw, even with its lower protein and higher silica content, has similar associative effects, when additional protein is also provided, because fiber digestion is similar. When feeding cattle rice straw diets, energy and protein-based supplements are essential, but highly digestible fiber-based supplements may tend to increase rice straw utilization.
Received September 14, 2007; Accepted December 23, 2007
AOAC. 2003. Official Methods of Analysis. 17th Ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Arlington, Virginia.
Bateman, H. G., II, C. C. Williams and Y. H. Chung. 2002. Effects of supplemental zinc in high quality diets on ruminal fermentation and degradation of urea in vitro and in vivo. Prof. Anim. Sci. 18:363-367.
Burrin, D. G. and R. A. Britton. 1986. Response to monensin in cattle during subacute acidosis. J. Anim. Sci. 63:888-893.
Chalupa, W., J. Clark, P. Opliger and R. Lavker. 1970. Ammonia metabolism in ruminal bacteria and mucosa from sheep fed soy protein or urea. J. Nutr. 100(2):161-169.
Chase, C. C., Jr. and C. A. Hibberd. 1987. Utilization of low quality native grass hay by beef cows fed increasing quantities of corn grain. J. Anim. Sci. 65:557-566.
Chaudhary, L. C., A. Sahoo, Neeta Agarwal, D. N. Kamra and N. N. Pathak. 2001. Effect of replacing grain with deoiled rice bran and molasses from the diet of lactating cows. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 14:646-650.
Cherney, D. J. R. 2000. Characteristics of forage by chemical analysis. In: Forage evaluation in ruminant nutrition. (Ed. D. I. Givens, E. Owen, R. F. E. Axford and H. M. Omed). CABI Publishing, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom. p. 281.
Chowdhury, S. A. 2001. Effect of graded levels of cottonseed cake supplementation on intake, nutrient digestibility, microbial N yield of growing native (Bos indicus) bulls fed rice straw. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 14:326-332.
Elseed, A. M., A. Fadel, J. Sekine, M. Hishinuma and K. Hamana. 2003. Effects of ammonia, urea plus calcium hydroxide and animal urine treatments on chemical composition and in sacco degradability of rice straw. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 16:368-373.
Gohl, Bo. 1981. Tropical Feeds. FAO Animal Production and Health Series 12. Rome, Italy.
Galloway, D. L., Sr., A. L. Goetsch, L. A. Forster, Jr., A. R. Patil, W. Sun and Z. B. Johnson. 1993. Feed intake and digestibility by cattle consuming bermudagrass or orchardgrass hay supplemented with soybean hulls and(or) corn. J. Anim. Sci. 71:3087-3095.
Garces-Yepez, P., W. E. Kunkle, D. B. Bates, J. E. Moore, W. W. Thatcher and L. E. Sollenberger. 1997. Effects of supplemental energy source and amount of forage intake and performance by steers and intake and diet digestibility by sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 75:1918-1925.
Garleb, K. A., G. C. Fahey, Jr., S. M. Lewis, M. S. Kerley and L. Montgomery. 1988. Chemical composition and digestibility of fiber fractions of certain byproduct feedstuffs fed to ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. 66:2650-2662.
Grigsby, K. N., M. S. Kerley, J. A. Paterson and J. C. Weigel. 1992. Site and extent of nutrient digestion by steers fed a low-quality bromegrass hay diet with incremental levels of soybean hull substitution. J. Anim. Sci. 70:1941-1949.
Higgins, R. K., J. E. Moore and W. E. Kunkle. 1991. Effect of limited grain supplement on bermudagrass hay intake and gain by steers. In: Proc. 2nd Grazing Livestock Nutrition Conf., Steamboat Springs, Colorado, p. 189.
Hintz, H. F., M. M. Mathias, H. F. Ley, Jr. and J. K. Loosli. 1964. Effects of processing and feeding hay on the digestibility of soybean hulls. J. Anim. Sci. 23:43-46.
Hsu, J. T., D. B. Faulkner, K. A. Garleb, R. A. Barclay, G. C. Fahey, Jr. and L. L. Berger. 1987. Evaluation of corn fiber, cottonseed hulls, oat hulls, and soybean hulls as roughage sources for ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. 65:244-255.
Hungate, R. E. 1966. The Rumen and its Microbes. Academic Press. New York, New York.
Klopfenstein, T. and F. Owen. 1987. Soybean hulls, an energy supplement for ruminants. Anim. Health Nutr. 43(4):28.
Ludden, P. A., M. J. Cecava and K. S. Hendrix. 1995. The value of soybean hulls as a replacement for corn in beef cattle diets formulated with or without added feed. J. Anim. Sci. 73:2706-2711.
Martin, S. K. and C. A. Hibberd. 1990. Intake and digestibility of low quality native grass hay by beef cows supplemented with graded levels of soybean hulls. J. Anim. Sci. 68:4319-4325.
McAllen, A. B. and R. H. Smith. 1983. Factors influencing the digestion of dietary carbohydrates between the mouth and abomasum of steers. Br. J. Nutr. 50:445.
McCullough, H. 1967. The determination of ammonia in whole blood by a direct colorimetric method. Clinica Chemica Acta 17:237-304.
MSUcares. 2007. Crops: Rice Accessed 11/20/07. (http://msucares. com/ crops/rice/index.html)
National Research Council. 1996. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th Ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Nguyen, Tien Von. 1996. Effect of protein supplements on performance of sheep and cattle on oaten chaff or rice straw. M.S. Thesis. University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.
Nguyen, V. T., A. I. Orr, D. G. St. Louis and B. J. Rude. 2007. Supplementing corn or soybean hulls to cattle fed bermudagrass hay II: In situ disappearance and ruminal dynamics. J. Anim. Vet. Advances 6(9):1125-1134.
Olson, K. C., R. C. Cochran, T. J. Jones, E. S. Vanzant, E. C. Titgemeyer and D. E. Johnson. 1999. Effects of ruminal administration of supplemental degradable intake protein and starch on utilization of low-quality warm-season grass hay by beef steers. J. Anim. Sci. 77:1016-1025.
Orden, E. A., K. Yamaki, T. Ichinohe and T. Fujihara. 2000. Feeding value of ammoniated rice straw supplemented with rice bran in sheep: II. In situ rumen degradation of untreated and ammonia treated rice straw. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 13:906-912.
Orr, A. I., V. T. Nguyen, A. S. Webb, D. G. St. Louis and B. J. Rude. 2007. Supplementing corn or soybean hulls to cattle fed bermudagrass hay I: Intake, apparent digestion, and utilization. J. Anim. Vet. Advances (in press).
Paengkoum, P. 1998. Effects of dietary Carbohydrate and/or bypass protein on voluntary feed intake, digestibility and ruminal fermentation in dairy cattle fed rice straw and urea-treated rice straw as roughages. M.S. Thesis. Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Pradhan, R. H. Tobioka and I. Tasaki. 1996. Effect of urea and ammonia treatment on voluntary intake, digestibility, energy partition and nitrogen retention of rice straw supplemented with soybean meal and fish meal in goats. Anim. Sci. Technol. (Jpn.) 67:702-712.
Preston, T. R. and R. A. Leng. 1984. Supplementation of diets based on fibrous residues and by-products. In: Straw and other fibrous by-products as feeds (Ed. F. Sunstol and E. Owen). Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. pp. 373-413.
Quicke, B. V., O. G. Bentley, H. W. Scott, R. R. Johnson and A. L. Moxon. 1959. Digestibility of soybean hulls and flakes and the in vitro digestibility of cellulose in various milling by-products. J. Dairy Sci. 42:185-186.
Saadullah, M., M. Haque and F. Dolberg. 1983. Effects of chemical treatment of rice straw supplemented with concentrates on feed intake and weight gain in growing calves. In: The utilization of fibrous agricultural residues (Ed. G. R. Pearce). Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. pp. 129-139.
St. Louis, D. G., B. J. Rude and M. E. McCormick. 2002. Associative effects of corn and soybean hulls on intake of bermudagrass hay. J. Anim. Sci. 80(Supp. 2):1(Abstr.).
Sanson, D. W., D. C. Clanton and I. G. Rush. 1990. Intake and digestion of low-quality meadow hay by steers and performance of cows on native range when fed protein supplements containing various levels of corn. J. Anim. Sci. 68:595-603.
Satter, L. D. and L. I. Slyter. 1974. Effect of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in vitro. Br. J. Nutr. 32:199-208.
Shriver, B. J., W. H. Hoover, J. P. Sargent, R. J. Crawford, Jr. and W. V. Thayne. 1986. Fermentation of a high concentrate diet as affected by ruminal pH and digesta flow. J. Dairy Sci. 69:413-419.
Streeter, R. N. and G. W. Horn. 1983. Comparison of cottonseed hulls, rice mill feed, soybean hulls and beet pulp as roughages. Oklahoma Agric. Experiment Station, Miscellaneous Publication MP-114:216.
Sung, Ha Guyn, Yasuo Kobayashi, Jongsoo Chang, Ahnul Ha, Il Hwan Hwang and J. K. Ha. 2007. Low ruminal pH reduces dietary fiber digestion via reduced microbial attachment. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 20:200-207.
Van Soest, P. J., J. B. Robertson and B. A. Lewis. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74:3583-3597.
Vanzant, E. S., R. C. Cochran, E. C. Titgemeyer, S. D. Stafford, K. C Olson, D. E. Johnson and G. St. Jean. 1996. In vivo and in situ measurement of forage protein degradation in beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 74:2773-2784.
Wanapat, M. 1990. Improving rice straw quality as ruminant feed by urea-treatment in Thailand. Chapter 3 in: Nutritional Aspects of Ruminant Production in Southeast Asia with Special Reference to Thailand. Funny Press, Bangkok, Thailand.
Weidner, S. J. and R. J. Grant. 1994. Altered ruminal mat consistency by high percentages of soybean hulls fed to lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 77:522-532.
Wheeler, J. S., D. L. Lalman, S. Janloo and G. W. Horn. 1999. Supplemental degradable protein requirement for cattle fed stockpiled bermudagrass forage. In: Oklahoma Agric. Experiment Station, 1999 Animal Science Research Report. pp. 96-99.
Nguyen Tien Von (1), David G. St. Louis **, Adam I. Orr and Brian J. Rude
Department of Animal and Dairy Sciences, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, 39762, USA
(1) Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry, 24 Phung Hung Street, Hue City, Vietnam.
* Journal article J11182 of the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, Starkville, Mississippi.
** Corresponding Author: David G. St. Louis. Tel: +1-601-795-4525, Fax: +1-601-795-0653, E-mail: email@example.com
Table 1. Nutrient composition (%, DM) of cracked maize, soybean hulls, soybean meal, and rice straw fed to steers for different treatments (1) Feedstuffs offered (%) Nutrient Cracked Soybean Soybean Rice maize hulls meal straw DM 87 88 88 89 OM 98 95 92 84 Ash 2 5.1 8 15.8 NDF 43 66.2 19 68.9 ADF 4 46.2 4 41.3 CP 10.3 12.8 50.4 3.8 (1) Treatment diets on DM basis: RS = Rice straw diet with no supplement; SBM = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean meal (0.127% BW); MAIZE = Rice straw diet supplemented with maize (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.044% BW); HULLS = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean hulls (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.043% BW). Table 2. Steer body weight (BW), diet composition (% BW) and estimated dietary energy (MJ/kg) and protein (% DM) for different treatments Treatment diets (1) Item RS SBM Diet formulation Rice straw (% BW) Ad libitum Ad libitum Soybean meal (% BW) -- 0.127 Cracked maize (% BW) -- -- Soybean hulls (% BW) -- -- Nutrient density of diet (2) Dietary [NE.sub.m] (MJ/kg) 2.21 2.95 Dietary [NE.sub.g] (MJ/kg) 0.38 0.95 Dietary CP (%) 3.83 15.53 Treatment diets (1) Item MAIZE HULLS Diet formulation Rice straw (% BW) Ad libitum Ad libitum Soybean meal (% BW) 0.044 0.043 Cracked maize (% BW) 0.415 -- Soybean hulls (% BW) -- 0.415 Nutrient density of diet (2) Dietary [NE.sub.m] (MJ/kg) 4.54 3.58 Dietary [NE.sub.g] (MJ/kg) 3.26 2.44 Dietary CP (%) 14.45 15.44 (1) Treatment diets on DM basis: RS = Rice straw diet with no supplement; SBM = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean meal (0.127% BW); MAIZE = Rice straw diet supplemented with maize (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.044% BW); HULLS = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean hulls (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.043% BW). (2) Estimated using 1.3% BW intake of rice straw for all treatments, DM basis. Table 3. The effect of supplementing maize or soybean hulls on DM intake of steers consuming rice straw during a digestion trial Diets (1) RS SBM MAIZE HULLS Dry matter intake Rice straw (kg/d) 3.07 3.64 3.00 3.15 Total (kg/d) (2) 3.07 (b) 4.19 (a) 4.10 (a) 4.28 (a) Rice straw (% BW) 1.27 1.56 1.36 1.40 Total (% BW) (2) 1.27 (b) 1.80 (a) 1.86 (a) 1.91 (a) SEM p-values Rice straw (kg/d) 0.129 0.34 Total (kg/d) (2) 0.173 0.04 Rice straw (% BW) 0.045 0.38 Total (% BW) (2) 0.068 0.02 (1) Treatment diets on dry matter basis: RS = Rice straw diet with no supplement; SBM = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean meal (0.127% BW); MAIZE = Rice straw diet supplemented with maize (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.044% BW); HULLS = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean hulls (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.043% BW). (2) Total = Dry mater intake of rice straw plus supplement. (a, b) Within rows, means without a common superscript differ (p<0.05). Table 4. The effect of supplementing maize or soybean hulls on apparent nutrient digestibility during digestibility trial Diets (1) SEM p-values RS SBM MAIZE HULLS Apparent nutrient digestibility (%) DM 44.4 (c) 51.8 (b) 56.6 (ab) 60.0 (a) 1.63 0.0009 OM 50.2 (c) 57.7 (b) 60.8 (ab) 64.9 (a) 1.52 0.0007 NDF 42.8 (c) 47.6 (c) 58.0 (b) 61.7 (a) 2.13 0.0004 ADF 42.2 (b) 44.1 (b) 49.2 (b) 61.1 (a) 2.02 0.0008 HC (2) 43.7 (b) 52.6 (ab) 66.6 (a) 62.7 (a) 2.80 0.01 CP 10.9 (c) 60.3 (a) 30.3 (b) 41.2 (b) 4.90 0.0001 (1) Treatment diets on dry matter basis: RS = Rice straw diet with no supplement; SBM = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean meal (0.127% BW); MAIZE = Rice straw diet supplemented with maize (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.044% BW); HULLS = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean hulls (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.043% BW). (2) HC = Hemicellulose as difference between ADF and NDF. (a, b, c) Within a row, means without a common superscript differ (p<0.05). Table 5. Least squares means of ruminal remained ratios of incubated to initial rice straw nutrient content between supplemented and non-supplemented steers Treatment (1) Incubation (h) RS SBM MAIZE HULLS DM 0 0.787 0.786 0.788 0.793 2 0.787 0.784 0.787 0.788 4 0.783 (a) 0.773 (b) 0.782 (a) 0.777 (ab) 6 0.769 (b) 0.756 (c) 0.774 (a) 0.765 (ab) 8 0.759 (a) 0.734 (b) 0.750 (a) 0.749 (a) 16 0.720 (a) 0.664 (c) 0.706 (ab) 0.684 (bc) 24 0.675 (a) 0.594 (c) 0.643 (b) 0.623 (b) NDF 0 0.973 0.975 0.984 0.978 2 0.984 0.982 0.973 0.975 4 0.974 0.959 0.978 0.957 6 0.904 0.946 0.970 0.941 8 0.911 0.903 0.941 0.917 16 0.893 (a) 0.802 (b) 0.882 (a) 0.857 (a) 24 0.843 (a) 0.748 (c) 0.796 (b) 0.777 (b) ADF 0 0.986 0.990 0.999 0.994 2 1.005 1.006 0.987 1.005 4 0.990 0.976 1.001 0.994 6 0.960 0.969 0.992 0.978 8 0.958 0.942 0.962 0.957 16 0.905 (a) 0.841 (b) 0.896 (a) 0.872 (ab) 24 0.863 (a) 0.761 (c) 0.809 (b) 0.792 (bc) Incubation (h) SEM p-value (2) 0 0.003 0.334 2 0.002 0.340 4 0.002 0.038 6 0.003 0.001 8 0.003 0.001 16 0.006 <0.0001 24 0.008 <0.0001 0 0.003 0.344 2 0.004 0.619 4 0.005 0.089 6 0.009 0.056 8 0.010 0.603 16 0.010 0.002 24 0.007 <0.0001 0 0.004 0.769 2 0.004 0.415 4 0.005 0.435 6 0.005 0.294 8 0.006 0.461 16 0.007 0.023 24 0.009 0.001 (1) Treatment diets on dry matter basis: RS = Rice straw diet with no supplement; SBM = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean meal (0.127% (BW); MAIZE = Rice straw diet supplemented with maize (0.415% (BW) and soybean meal (0.044% (BW); HULLS = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean hulls (0.415% (BW) and soybean meal (0.043% BW). (2) Probability of effects due to treatment within each time. (a, b, c) Within a row, means without a common superscript differ (p<0.05). Table 6. Least squares means of ruminal remained ratios of incubated to initial nutrients from soybean meal, maize, and soybean hulls in respective supplemented steers Supplement by treatment (1) Incubation (h) SEM p-value (2) Soybean Soybean meal Maize hulls DM 0 0.645 (c) 0.786 (b) 0.832 (a) 0.018 <0.0001 2 0.638 (c) 0.764 (b) 0.813 (a) 0.016 <0.0001 4 0.604 (c) 0.735 (b) 0.790 (a) 0.017 <0.0001 6 0.566 (c) 0.711 (b) 0.751 (a) 0.017 <0.0001 8 0.515 (c) 0.677 (b) 0.719 (a) 0.019 <0.0001 16 0.311 (b) 0.603 (a) 0.601 (a) 0.030 <0.0001 24 0.145 (c) 0.528 (a) 0.468 (b) 0.037 <0.0001 NDF 0 1.392 (a) 0.510 (c) 1.037 (b) 0.084 0.0001 2 1.646 (a) 0.421 (c) 0.977 (b) 0.107 0.0003 4 1.600 (a) 0.689 (b) 0.989 (b) 0.094 0.0040 6 1.653 (a) 0.634 (b) 0.904 (b) 0.100 0.0053 8 1.723 (a) 0.605 (b) 0.884 (b) 0.092 0.0001 16 1.320 (a) 0.420 (b) 0.769 (b) 0.085 0.0009 24 0.444 (b) 0.461 (b) 0.593 (a) 0.025 0.0773 ADF 0 2.016 (a) 0.559 (b) 1.205 (ab) 0.214 0.0250 2 1.977 (a) 0.826 (b) 1.394 (b) 0.230 0.0048 4 1.796 (a) 1.040 (b) 1.110 (ab) 0.185 0.0332 6 1.860 (a) 0.782 (b) 0.432 (b) 0.150 0.0056 8 2.991 (a) 1.452 (b) 0.948 (b) 0.233 0.0029 16 4.066 (a) 0.810 (b) 0.493 (b) 0.398 0.0036 24 2.181 (a) 0.618 (b) 0.672 (b) 0.142 0.0265 (1) Treatment diets on dry matter basis: SBM = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean meal (0.127% BW); MAIZE = Rice straw diet supplemented with maize (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.044% BW); HULLS = Rice straw diet supplemented with soybean hulls (0.415% BW) and soybean meal (0.043% BW). (2) Probability of effects due to treatment within each time. (a, b, c) Within a row, means without a common superscript differ (p<0.05).
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Von, Nguyen Tien; St. Louis, David G.; Orr, Adam I.; Rude, Brian J.|
|Publication:||Asian - Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences|
|Date:||Jun 1, 2008|
|Previous Article:||Avian somitic cell chimeras using surrogate eggshell technology.|
|Next Article:||In vitro methanogenesis, microbial profile and fermentation of green forages with buffalo rumen liquor as influenced by 2-bromoethanesulphonic acid.|