Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T23:50:31.258Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

67. The Nutritive Value of Proteins for Milk Production. II. A Comparison of the Proteins of Blood Meal, Pea Meal, Decorticated Earth-Nut Cake, and a Mixture of Decorticated Earth-Nut Cake and Flaked Maize

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

Samuel Morris
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr.
Norman C. Wright
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr.

Extract

The results of the present experiments and of those reported in the previous paper(1) may be summarised as follows:

1. When minimal quantities of protein are fed in the production rations of milking cows, a deficiency of either lysine or tryptophane will lead to a marked reduction in milk yield. There is, however, some evidence of the storage of reserve N, which can be utilised when the food protein is inadequate.

2. The feeding of a lysine- or tryptophane-deficient ration causes a marked increase in urinary N, indicating a poor utilisation of food protein. On the other hand, the feeding of a ration containing adequate quantities of these essential amino acids reduces the urinary N, indicating efficient protein utilisation.

3. The utilisation of body tissue in an attempt to maintain normal milk production on a deficient protein ration is shown by the high creatine excretion. The fact that the S: N ratio of the excess sulphur and nitrogen excreted during the deficient protein periods approximates that of body tissue (circa 1: 15·7) confirms this conclusion.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1933

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

(1) Morris, and Wright, (1933). J. Dairy Research, 4, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2) Wilson, (1925). Bioch. J. 19, 322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3) Wilson, (1926). Bioch. J. 20, 76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4) Wilson, (1931). J. Physiol. 72, 327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5) Wilson, (1933). J. Physiol. 77, 240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar