Professional Documents
Culture Documents
BY RUMINANTS
Predicting Energy Values of Feeds 1
W. P. WEISS
Department of Dairy Science
Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
The Ohio State University
Wooster 44691
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
1802
[1]
NEdMcal/kg) =
.0245 x TON(%) - .12.
1803
[3]
1804
WEISS
1805
1806
WEISS
= .98
[5]
where all variables are expressed as a percentage of the DM, and lignin was measured using
the ADF-sulfuric acid method. Then, PDNDF
was multiplied by its digestibility coefficient.
The digestibility coefficients for PDNDF and
EE were the only empirical coefficients in the
model. Estimated NEL values were correlated
TDN
1807
= .98
TABLE 1. Chemical composition and actual and estimated NEL for forages.
Forage
NDF
ADF
Alfalfa
Alfalfa
Alfalfa
Bromegrass
Bromegrass
Grass-legume mix
Grass-legume mix
Com silage
Com silage
38
49
58
56
70
49
65
51
57
29
37
42
34
39
41
41
28
29
Lignin
Actual
NELl
7.4
7.7
8.4
3.3
4.5
9.1
6.3
4.0
3.8
1.47
1.37
1.20
lAO
1.30
1.15
1.30
1.60
1.40
(%)
Est.
NEl 2
(McalJkg)
1.42
1.30
1.18
lAO
1.25
1.28
1.35
1.56
1.33
Est.
NEl 3
Ref. 4
1.54
1.33
1.20
1.46
1.32
1.24
1.24
1.48
1.46
(63)
(6)
(6)
(30)
(35)
(29)
(34)
(38)
(50)
IActual NEl determined by converting TON (measured by digestion trials) to NEl using Equation (3].
2Estimated NEl calculated using Equation [61 and chemical composition data.
3Estimated NEl calculated using ADF and equations from Adams (2): legume, NEl = 2.297 - .0262 x ADF, grass,
NEl =2.387 - .0273 x ADF, and com silage, NEl =2.297 - .0290 x ADF. Grass legume mix estimated by averaging
results obtained from the legume and grass equations.
4Reference source for the composition and TON data.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 76, No.6, 1993
1808
WEISS
[7]
where D = fiber digestibility, and !c<J and kp =
rates of digestion and passage, respectively.
Accurate rates of passage and digestion are
needed to make use of Equation [7]. but they
are difficult to obtain and are variable. Factors
that affect rate of passage include type of
feedstuff (lO), forage to concentrate ratio (l0),
and particle size (31). Rate of digestion is
affected by type of feedstuff (58), particle size
(19), and rumen pH (26). Those effects and
interactions must be quantified before Equation [7] can be incorporated into Equation [6]
to be used to estimate accurately the digestibility coefficient for PDNDF.
Because many of the components of NDS
can be digested readily in the intestines, Equation [7] should not be used for that fraction.
TABLE 2. Chemical composition and actual and estimated NEL for concentrate feeds.
Feedstuff
NDF
ADF
Com grain
Barley grain
Soybean meal
Soyhulls
Com gluten feed
Cottonseed hulls
II
17
10
60
38
65
3
7
5
43
10
49
ADL
Actual
NELl
Est.
NEL2
.3
.8
.6
1.9
.6
17.5
2.06
1.90
2.10
1.64
1.78
1.02
2.10
1.95
1.97
1.60
1.74
1.15
Est.
NEL3
Ref. 4
(McalJkg)
(9&)
1.96
1.94
2.01
1.77
1.91
.98
(5)
(5)
(5)
(29)
(5)
(29)
(Actual NEL determined by converting TON (measured by digestion trials) to NEL using Equation [3].
2Estirnated NEL calculated using Equation [6] and chemical composition data.
3Estimated NEL from NRC Feed Composition Table (38).
4Reference source for lhe composition and TON data.
Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 76, No.6, 1993
1809
Digestibility has been the only variable discussed relative to available energy concentration. Fecal losses of energy account for the
greatest variation in available energy content
among feeds. Conversion of DE to ME and NE
is much less variable, and reasonable accuracy
can be obtained using standard equations.
However, the efficiencies of conversion of DE
to ME or NE vary among feeds. Some variation can be accounted for by chemical composition and mathematical modeling. The ME
content of feeds can be detennined from the
composition of feeds using an equation based
on proximate analysis or on the detergent system, but digestibility of the individual fractions
must be known (41). Summative models that
can be used to predict digestibility of individual components (12, 62) could be modified to predict ME or NE by use of appropriate
coefficients for each fraction. More complex
models using more specific composition data
(ash, CP, EE, starch, cellulose, and fennentation acids in silages) have been derived and
appear to be accurate (15). Models for prediction of ME or NE based on nutrient composition account for additional variation, so two
feeds with the same DE may have different
ME, depending on their nutrient composition.
Fat is used more efficiently for production than
carbohydrate (4). Therefore, ME and NE for
feeds with high concentrations of fat are underestimated when standard conversion equations are used. The amount of carbohydrate
fennented to propionate (inversely proportional to methane production) in the rumen
(14) affects conversion efficiency. This effect
can introduce relatively large error when individual feeds are used (13), but much less
error when total diets are evaluated. The main
limitation to improved accuracy of conversion
of DE or TON to ME or NE is the limited
number of actual ME and NE values.
CONCLUSIONS
1810
WEISS
1060.
27 Harlan, D. W. J. B. Holter. and H. H. Hayes. 1991.
Detergent fiber traits to predict productive energy of
10umal of Dairy Science Vol. 76, No.6, 1993
NY.
35 Messman, M. A., W. P. Weiss, and D. O. Erickson.
1991. Effects of nitrogen fertilization and maturity of
bromegrass on in situ ruminal digestion kinelics of
fiber. J. Anim. Sci. 69:1151.
36 Minson, D. J. 1982. Effect of chemical composition
on feed digestibility and metabolizable energy. Nutr.
Abstr. Rev. Ser. B 52:591.
37 Minson. D. J., and C. D. Kemp. 1961. Studies on the
digestibility of herbage. 9. Herbage and faecal nitrogen as indicators of herbage organic matter digestibility. 1. Br. Grassl. Soc. 16:76.
38 National Research Council. 1982. United StatesCanadian Tables of Feed Composition. Nail. Acad.
Press. Washington. DC.
39 Neter. 1.. and W. Wasserman. 1974. Applied Linear
Slatistical Models. Richard D. Irving. Inc., Homewood, IL.
40 Nichols. E. L . and R. C. Dixon. 1984. Forage energy
prediction equations used by private laboratories. Page
32 in Proc. Am. Feed Manur. Assoc. Nutr. Coun. Am.
Feed Manuf. Assoc., Arlington. VA.
41 Osbourn. D. F. 1978. Principles governing the use of
chemical methods for assessing the nutritive value of
forages: a review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 3:265.
42 Osbourn. D. F. D. E. Beever. and D. 1. Thomson.
1976. The influence of physical processing on the
intake. digestion and utilization of dried herbage.
Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35: 191.
43 Palmquisl. D. L. 1991. Influence of source and
amount of dietary fat on digestibility in lactating
cows. 1. Dairy Sci. 74:1354.
44 Rebole, A., P. Alvira, and G. Gonzalez. 1990. Relationship among compositional data of fibrous byproducts as determined by two different extractions in
the detergent system of analysis. Influence on the
prediction of the digestibility. 1. Sci. Food Agric. 53:
15.
1811