动物营养学报 >

2018 , Vol. 30 >Issue 3: 1146 - 1154

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2018.03.040

饲料资源开发 Feed Resources Development

甘蔗梢对肉羊的饲用价值评定

展开
  • 1. 中国农业科学院饲料研究所, 农业部生物饲料重点实验室, 北京 100081;
    2. 金陵科技学院动物科学与技术学院, 南京 210038
王世琴(1988-),女,安徽阜南人,博士研究生,动物营养与饲料科学专业。E-mail:wshq1988@163.com

收稿日期: 2017-09-01

  网络出版日期: 2018-03-05

基金资助

公益性行业（农业）科研专项（201403049）；公益性行业（农业）科研专项（201303143）

收起

Feeding Value Assessment of Sugarcane Tops and Leaves in Mutton Sheep

Expand
  • 1. Key Laboratory of Feed Biotechnology of the Ministry of Agriculture, Feed Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China;
    2. College of Animal Science and Technology, Jinling Institute of Technology, Nanjing 210038, China

Received date: 2017-09-01

  Online published: 2018-03-05

Fold

摘要

本试验从常规营养成分分析、半体内试验以及体内消化试验3方面，开展了甘蔗梢在肉羊中的饲用价值评定研究。半体内试验选用3只装有永久瘤胃瘘管的杜泊×小尾寒羊F1成年羯羊，采用尼龙袋法测定了甘蔗梢主要营养物质的瘤胃降解特性。体内消化试验选用杜泊×小尾寒羊F1成年公羊6只，体重为（67.0±5.1）kg。预试期10 d，正试期6 d，自由采食甘蔗梢，采用全收粪法测定干物质采食量（DMI）和营养物质表观消化率。结果表明：1）甘蔗梢的总能（GE）及粗蛋白质（CP）、粗脂肪（EE）、中性洗涤纤维（NDF）、酸性洗涤纤维（ADF）、粗灰分（Ash）、钙（Ca）和磷（P）含量[干物质（DM）基础]分别为16.58 MJ/kg、7.26%、1.23%、68.15%、34.54%、7.02%、0.52%和0.14%；2）甘蔗梢的DM、OM、CP、NDF和ADF在肉羊瘤胃内的有效降解率分别为45.53%、44.14%、49.33%、33.02%和35.26%；3）肉羊对甘蔗梢的DMI为942.95 g/d，占体重的1.39%，甘蔗梢的可供采食潜力为39.98 g/（kg W0.75·d）；4）甘蔗梢对肉羊的消化能为8.32 MJ/kg；5）甘蔗梢DM、OM、CP、EE、NDF、ADF、Ca和P在肉羊中的表观消化率分别为52.48%、54.17%、50.96%、55.84%、54.83%、47.57%、8.79%和0.84%，氮沉积率为20.09%，氮生物学价值为38.68%；6）甘蔗梢的粗饲料分级指数为1.16，属于第4级。上述结果提示，甘蔗梢能够被肉羊采食和利用，属于中等品质粗饲料。建议在配制肉羊饲粮时，考虑甘蔗梢CP含量低和纤维含量高的特点以及Ca、P的补充。

关键词： 肉羊; 甘蔗梢; 饲用价值; 瘤胃降解率; 表观消化率; 消化能

本文引用格式

王世琴, 张乃锋, 邓凯东, 姜成钢, 刁其玉 . 甘蔗梢对肉羊的饲用价值评定[J]. 动物营养学报, 2018 , 30(3) : 1146 -1154 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2018.03.040

Abstract

Common nutrient composition analysis, in situ and in vivo digestion tests were used to assess feeding values of sugarcane tops and leaves in mutton sheep. Three Dorper×thin-tailed Han crossbred F1 wethers fitted with permanent rumen fistulas were used as experimental animals. Nylon-bag technique was used to estimate ruminal degradation characteristics of sugarcane tops and leaves. Six Dorper×thin-tailed Han crossbred F1 adult male sheep with body weight of (67.0±5.1) kg were used in in vivo digestion test. The pre-test period lasted for 10 d, and the test lasted for 6 d. Sugarcane tops and leaves were ad libitum fed. Dry matter intake (DMI) and nutrient apparent digestibility were measured by total collection of feces and urine. The results showed as follows:1) gross energy (GE), and contents of crude protein (CP), ether extract (EE), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), crude ash (Ash), calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P)[dry matter (DM) basis] were 16.58 MJ/kg, 7.26%, 1.23%, 68.15%, 34.54%, 7.02%, 0.52% and 0.14%, respectively; 2) ruminal effective degradability of DM, OM, CP, NDF and ADF of sugarcane tops and leaves were 45.53%, 44.14%, 49.33%, 33.02% and 35.26%, respectively; 3) sugarcane tops and leaves DMI of mutton sheep was 942.95 g/d accounted for 1.39% of body weight, and the intake potential was 39.98 g/(kg W0.75·d); 4) digestive energy of sugarcane tops and leaves was 8.32 MJ/kg for mutton sheep; 5) apparent digestibility of DM, OM, CP, NDF, ADF, Ash, Ca and P were 52.48%, 54.17%, 50.96%, 55.84%, 54.83%, 47.57%, 8.79% and 0.84%, respectively, nitrogen retention rate was 20.09%, and nitrogen biological value (NVB) was 38.68%; 6) roughage grading index (GI) of sugarcane tops and leaves was 1.16, and sugarcane tops and leaves were categorized to the fourth grade. It is concluded that sugarcane tops and leaves can be intake and utilize by mutton sheep, considering as a medium quality roughage. Consideration should be given to the characteristics of low protein content and high fiber content, as well as Ca and P supplementations when sugarcane tops and leaves are used for preparation of diet for mutton sheep.

Key words： sheep; sugarcane tops and leaves; feeding values; ruminal degradability; apparent digestibility; digestive energy

参考文献

[1] 国家统计局.国家数据[EB/OL].http://data.stats.gov.cn/easyquery.htm?cn=C01.

[2] 高雨飞,黎力之,欧阳克蕙,等.甘蔗梢作为饲料资源的开发与利用[J].饲料广角,2014(21):44-45.

[3] RIBEIRO R C O,VILLELA S D J,VALADARES FILHO S C,et al.Effects of roughage sources produced in a tropical environment on forage intake,and ruminal and microbial parameters[J].Journal of Animal Science,2015,93(5):2363-2374.  

[4] GRADIZ L,SUGIMOTO A,UJIHARA K,et al.Beef cow-calf production system integrated with sugarcane production:simulation model development and application in Japan[J].Agricultural Systems,200794(3):750-762.

[5] ORTIZ-RUBIO M A,ØRSKOV E R,MILNE J,et al.Effect of different sources of nitrogen on in situ degradability and feed intake of Zebu cattle fed sugarcane tops (Saccharum officinarum)[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2007,139(3/4):143-158.

[6] 朱欣,郝俊,刘洪来,等.6种不同添加物对甘蔗叶梢青贮发酵品质的影响[J].草地学报,2015,23(2):407-413.

[7] 周雄,周璐丽,王定发,等.日粮中青贮甘蔗尾叶替代不同比例王草对海南黑山羊生长性能、养分表观消化率及血清生化指标的影响[J].中国畜牧兽医,2015,42(6):1443-1448.

[8] 唐振华,周玲,邹彩霞,等.青贮甘蔗尾、青贮玉米秸秆对生长水牛生长性能、消化代谢及血液生化指标的影响[J].中国畜牧兽医,2016,43(1):92-100.

[9] 陈晓琳,刘志科,孙娟,等.不同牧草在肉羊瘤胃中的降解特性研究[J].草业学报,2014,23(2):268-277.

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

[11] 颜品勋,冯仰廉,杨雅芳,等.青粗饲料蛋白质及有机物瘤胃降解规律的研究[J].中国畜牧杂志,1996,32(4):42-43.

[12] 张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].3版.北京:中国农业大学出版社,2010.

[13] VAN SOEST P J.Development of a comprehensive system of feed analyses and its application to forages[J].Journal of Animal Science,,1967,26(1):119-128.  

[14] 中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局,中国国家标准化管理委员会.GB/T 23387-2009饲草营养品质评定GI法[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2009.

[15] 肖祎,吕达,陈政,等.甘蔗梢研究进展[J].中国糖料,2013(1):65-67.

[16] 熊本海,罗清尧,赵峰.中国饲料成分及营养价值表(2016年第27版)制定说明[J].中国饲料,2016(24):26-36.

[17] 曹志军,史海涛,李德发,等.中国反刍动物饲料营养价值评定研究进展[J].草业学报,2015,24(3):1-19.

[18] 杨世平,文际坤,毛华明,等.对拔节期后的糖用甘蔗的营养价值分析[J].云南畜牧兽医,2002(2):1-3.

[19] 刘洁.肉用绵羊饲料代谢能与代谢蛋白质预测模型的研究[D].博士学位论文.北京:中国农业科学院,2012:35-49.

[20] 赵天章,李慧英,闫素梅.反刍动物饲料纤维物质瘤胃降解规律研究进展[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2011,32(7):28-31.

[21] 龙瑞军,董世魁,王元,等.反刍动物采食量的概念与研究方法[J].草业学报,2003,12(5):8-17.

[22] 袁翠林,于子洋,王文丹.等.山东省羊常用粗饲料营养价值评定[J].草业学报,2015,24(6):220-226.

[23] SANTOS S A,DE CAMPOS VALADARES FILHO S,DETMANN E,et al.Different forage sources for F1 Holstein×Gir dairy cows[J].Livestock Science,2011,142(1/2/3):48-58.

[24] SOUSA D O,MESQUITA B S,DINIZ-MAGALHÃES J,et al.Effect of fiber digestibility and conservation method on feed intake and the ruminal ecosystem of growing steers[J].Journal of Animal Science,2014,92(12):5622-5634.  

[25] 余梅,刘建勇,赵刚,等.补饲精料对采食甘蔗梢青贮水牛消化代谢的影响[J].云南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2013,28(4):470-475.

[26] 颜琼娴,谭支良.反刍动物内源磷排泄量及磷真消化率的研究进展[J].华北农学报,2009,24(增刊1):231-235.

[27] 赵明明.肉用绵羊常用粗饲料原料代谢能的预测模型研究[D].硕士学位论文.乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学,2016.

[28] 张吉鹍.粗饲料分级指数参数的模型化及粗饲料科学搭配的组合效应研究[D].博士学位论文.呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2004.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉

    联系我们

  • 地址：北京市海淀区圆明园西路2号
    　　　中国农业大学动科动医大楼153室
  • 邮编：100193
  • 电话：010－62817823
  • 网址：http://www.chinajan.com
  • E-mail：cjan@chinajan.com
京公网安备 11010802041926号    京ICP备17050989号-2