Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-vt8vv Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-08-18T19:00:55.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Energy and protein utilization of lucerne hay and barley grain by yearling camel calves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. N. Bhattacharya ,
S. Al-Mutairi ,
A. Hashimi  and
S. Economides
A. N. Bhattacharya
Affiliation:
Range and Animal Development Research Center, Sakaka, Al-jouf Ministry of Agriculture and Water, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
S. Al-Mutairi
Affiliation:
Range and Animal Development Research Center, Sakaka, Al-jouf Ministry of Agriculture and Water, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
A. Hashimi
Affiliation:
Range and Animal Development Research Center, Sakaka, Al-jouf Ministry of Agriculture and Water, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
S. Economides
Affiliation:
Range and Animal Development Research Center, Sakaka, Al-jouf Ministry of Agriculture and Water, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Get access

Abstract

Two trials were conducted with eight yearling camels with an average intial body weight of 300 kg, to evaluate protein and energy values of lucerne hay and barley grains. In each trial, eight animals were randomly allotted to two different dietary treatments of coarsely ground lucerne hay or lucerne hay + barley grain (50:50) in such a way that two animals in each of the two blocks received the same ration. Each trial consisted of a 10-day preliminary period followed by a 7-day collection period during which total urine and faeces collections were made, and samples were processed and composited for later analysis.

All animals consumed daily an average of about 5 kg food divided in two equal meals. The apparent digestibility coefficients for organic matter, crude protein, neutral-detergent fibre and cellulose of the lucerne hay ration improved respectively from 0·615, 0·662, 0·455 and 0·555 to 0·736, 0·655, 0·547 and 0·589, as a result of incorporating 500 g/kg barley grain in place of hay in the diet. Even though there was no difference in the proportion of nitrogen retained relative to intake, the proportion of nitrogen retained relative to that absorbed was higher (P < 0·05) in the lucerne + barley group (0·769) than in the lucerne-only group (0·747). On a dry-matter basis, the feeding value in camels of digestible protein (g/kg), total digestible nutrients (g/kg), digestible energy (MJ/kg), metabolizable energy (MJ/kg), net energy maintenance (MJ/kg), net energy lactation (MJ/kg) and net energy gain (MJ/kg) were respectively 118, 552, 10·0, 8·4, 5·4, 5·0 and 2·1 for lucerne hay and 80, 800, 14·6, 12·1, 8·4, 8·8 and 5·0 for barley grain (calculated by difference).

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , December 1988 , pp. 481 - 485
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1980. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. AOAC, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bhattacharya, A. N. 1987. Nutrient requirements and feeding schedules for different groups of camels in the Kuneitra Experimental Station. Miscellaneous Mimeo Publication. Range and Animal Development Research Center, Al-jouf, Saudi Arabia.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11: 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farid, M. F. A., Shawket, S. M. and Abdel-Rahman. M. H. A. 1984. The nutrition of camel and sheep under stress. In The Camelid: An All Purpose Animal. Vol. 1. (ed. Cockrill, W. Ross), Proceedings of Khartoum Workshop on Camels, pp. 293–322. Scandinavian Institute of African Studies. Uppsala.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fiber analysis (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). Agriculture Handbook, U.S. Department of Agriculture, No. 379.Google Scholar
Kazem-Khatami, A. 1970. Camel meat. Report, Ministry of Agriculture, Tehran, Iran.Google Scholar
Knoess, K. H. 1977. The camel as a meat and milk animal. World Animal Review 22: 39–44.Google Scholar
Lloyd, L. E., Mcdonald, B. E. and Crampton, E. W. 1978. Fundamentals of Nutrition. Freeman. San Francisco.Google Scholar
Mathur, C. S. 1960. Nutrition in relation to satyriasis in camel. Indian Veterinary Journal 37: 199–201.Google Scholar
Nanda, P. N. 1963. Camels and their management. India Council of Agricultural Research, Review Series No. 16. New Delhi.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1969. United States- Canadian Feed Composition. Sub-committee on Feed Composition. Committee on Animal Nutrition. National Research Council. Publication 1684. National Academy of Science, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
National Research Council, 1975. Nutrient Requirements of Sheep. 5th rev. ed. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1978. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. 5th rev. ed. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
Newman, D. M. R. 1975. The camel — Its potential as a provider of protein in arid Australia. Proceedings 3rd World Conference on Animal Production, Melbourne, Australia, 1973 (ed. Reid, R. L.), pp. 95–101. Sydney University Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
Rao, M. B., Gupta, R. C. and Dastur, N. N. 1970. Camel's milk and milk products. Indian Journal of Dairy Science 23: 71–78.Google Scholar
Toofanian, F. and Ali-Akbari, S. 1977. Studies on digestion of carbohydrates in the camel Camelus dromedarius. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 10: 75–81.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. 1971. Estimation of nutritive value from laboratory analysis. Proceedings of the Cornell Nutrition Conference, pp. 106–117.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. 1973. Revised estimates of net energy values of feeds. Proceedings of the Cornell Nutrition Conference, pp. 11–23.Google Scholar
Williams, W. 1978. Foraging strategy in ruminants. Rangeman's Journal 5: 72–74.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. T. 1984. The Camel. Longman, London.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. T. 1986. The International Livestock Center for Africa and research on camels. Proceedings of MINEADEP Conference on Camels, Kuwait, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar