Effects of Different Levels of Dietary Urea on Efficacy and Security for Sheep

WANG Bo; JIANG Chenggang; JI Shoukun; WANG Liwen; DING Jian; SI Bingwen; TU Yan; ZHANG Naifeng; DIAO Qiyu

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2014.05.022

Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2014 , Vol. 26 >Issue 5: 1302 - 1309

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2014.05.022

Feed Security

Effects of Different Levels of Dietary Urea on Efficacy and Security for Sheep

WANG Bo ,
JIANG Chenggang ,
JI Shoukun ,
WANG Liwen ,
DING Jian ,
SI Bingwen ,
TU Yan ,
ZHANG Naifeng ,
DIAO Qiyu

Expand

1. Key Laboratory of Feed Biotechnology of the Ministry of Agriculture, Feed Research Institution, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Science, Beijing 100081, China;
2. Station of Animal and Veterinary of China, Beijing 100026, China

Received date: 2013-12-18

Online published: 2014-05-05

Fold

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effects of different levels of dietary urea on the growth performance, slaughter performance and meat quality of fattening sheep, and to assess the efficacy and safe supplementation level of urea. Sixty-four Dorper×thin-tailed Han crossbred male lambs with an average body weight of (30.77±0.02) kg were randomly divided into four groups, and each group was offered one of the following diets: a basal diet (control group) or the basal diet supplemented with 0.5% (0.5% group), 1.5% (1.5% group) and 2.5% (2.5% group) urea, respectively. Each group contained eight replicates and each replicate included two lambs. The adaptation period was 21 d, and experimental period was 42 d. All lambs were slaughtered at the end of the experiment and slaughter performance, organ index and meat quality were determined. The results showed that the daily total feed intake, daily concentrate feed intake and daily roughage feed intake in 2.5% group were significantly lower than those in 0.5% group (P<0.05), and the differences among other groups were not significant (P>0.05); the average daily gain in 2.5% group was significantly lower than that in control group (P<0.05); no significant difference in feed/gain was found between control group and experimental groups; the live weight, empty body weight, carcass weight and dressing percentage were not remarkably different among groups (P>0.05); the indexes of heart, live, spleen, lungs and kidneys were also not remarkably different among groups (P>0.05); the pH in 2.5% group was significantly higher than that in control group (P<0.05), and the share force in 0.5% group was significantly lower than that in control group (P<0.05); no significant differences were found in the drop loss, meat color and cooking rate among all groups (P>0.05). In conclusion, a supplemental level of 1.5% urea does not affect growth performance and meat quality, and this level is effective and safe for sheep; while 2.5% urea hampers the feed intake, daily gain of sheep and the redness value of meat, and also exacerbates the pH of meat, therefor, this level is harmful to sheep production.

Key words： sheep; urea; growth performance; meat quality; security

Cite this article

WANG Bo , JIANG Chenggang , JI Shoukun , WANG Liwen , DING Jian , SI Bingwen , TU Yan , ZHANG Naifeng , DIAO Qiyu . Effects of Different Levels of Dietary Urea on Efficacy and Security for Sheep[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2014 , 26(5) : 1302 -1309 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2014.05.022

References

[1] 赵有璋.杜泊羊及其在我国初步利用效果[J].现代畜牧兽医,2011(1):2l-23.

[2] 王成章,王恬.饲料学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2003:10-11.

[3] 张民,刁其玉.反刍动物非蛋白氮尿素的应用研究[J].中国饲料,2002(5):6-8.

[4] 张国琛,李秀辰.膨化尿素精料的加工及其质量评价[J].大连水产学报,2000,15(3):201-205.

[5] MATRONE G,BUNN C R,MCNEILL J J.Investigation of dietary factors in purified diets for ruminants[J].The Journal of Nutrition,1961,84:215-219.

[6] GOODRICH R D,TILLMAN A D.Effects of sulfur and nitrogen sources and copper levels on the metabolism of certain minerals by sheep[J].Journal of Animal Science,1968,25:484-491.

[7] NRC.Nutrient requirements of small ruminants:sheep,goats,cervids,and new word camelids[S].10th ed.Washington,D.C.:National Academy Press,2007.

[8] 刘洁,刁其玉,赵一广,等.肉用绵羊饲料养分消化率和有效能预测模型的研究[J].畜牧兽医学报,2012,43(8):1230-1238.

[9] 许贵善,刁其玉,纪守坤,等.不同饲喂水平对肉用绵羊生长性能、屠宰性能及器官指数的影响[J].动物营养学报,2012,24(5):953-960.

[10] 杨加豹.动物饲料适口性与影响因素[J].饲料研究,2001,1(1):23-26.

[11] WILSON G,MARTZ F A,CAMPBELL J R,et al.Evaluation of factors responsible for reduced voluntary intake of urea diets for ruminants[J].Journal of Animal Science,1975,41(5): 1431-1437.

[12] 蒋加进,黄克和.日粮添加不同水平尿素对山羊生产性能及血液生化指标的影响[J].畜牧与兽医,2007,39(11):51-53.

[13] CURRIER T A,BOHNERT D W,FALCK S J,et al.Daily and alternate day supplementation of urea or biuret to ruminants consuming low-quality forage:Ⅲ.Effects on ruminal fermentation characteristics in steers[J].Journal of Animal Science,2004,82(5):1528-1535.

[14] LOOSLI J K,WARNER R G.Distillers grains,brewers grains,and urea as protein supplements for dairy rations[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1958,41(10):1446-1450.

[15] POLAN C E,MILLER C N,MCGILLIARD M L.Variable dietary protein and urea for intake and production in Holstein cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1976,59(11):1910-1914.

[16] CLIFFORD A J,BOURDETTE J R,TILLMAN A D.Urea and isolated soy protein in sheep purified diets[J].Journal of Animal Science,1968,27:485.

[17] MCDONALD F A.Factors influencing the utilization of urea in purified diets for growth and reproduction of the ruminant[J].The Journal of Nutrition,1966,86:154.

[18] OLTJEN R R.Effects of feeding ruminants no-protein nitrogen as the only nitrogen source[J].Journal of Animal Science,1969,28(5):673-681.

[19] GLEGHOM J F,ELAM N A,GALYEAN M L,et al.Effects of crude protein concentration and degradability on performance,carcass characteristics,and serum urea nitrogen concentrations in finishing beef steers[J].Journal of Animal Science,2004,82(9):2705-2717.

[20] KERTZ A F.Urea feeding to dairy cattle:a historical perspective and review[J].The Professional Animal Scientist,2010,26(3):257-272.

[21] 陈裕祥,普布次仁,尼玛,等.不同含量尿素对绵羊增重影响及毒性试验观察研究报告[J].西藏科技,2005(1):38-45.

[22] MAGALHES K A,VALADARES FILHO S C,PAULINO P V R,et al.Performance,digestibility and carcass characteristics of feedlot dairy steers fed diets with different urea levels[J].Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia,2006,58(5):860-867.

[23] YAHYA M,MAHYUDDIN M,ALIMON A R,et al.Sago pith meal based diets in sheep containing different sources of nitrogen:feed preparation,growth performance,digestibility and carcass quality[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2011,170:45-52.

[24] 张晋青,岳度兵,罗海玲,等.日粮中维生素E水平对敖汉细毛羊内脏器官生长发育的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,20l0,46(17):43-46.

[25] 李志斌,于允府.尿素预处理的三种方法[J].饲料工业,1990(6):21.

[26] European Food Safety Authority.Scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of urea for ruminants.1.EFSA panel on additives and products or substances used in animal feed (FEEDAp)2,3[J].European Food Safety Authority Journal,2012,10(3):2624.

[27] SMULDERS F J M,TOLDRA F,FLORES J,et al.New technologies for meat products:fermentation and starter cultures,muscle enzymology and meat ageing,quality control systems[J].Audet Tijdschr,1992,182:186-188.

[28] PRIOLO A,MIKOL D,AGABAIEL J.Effects of grass feeding systems on ruminant meat color and flavor.A review[J].Animal Research,2001,50:185-200.

[29] MANCINI R A,HUNT M C.Current research in meat color[J].Meat Science,2005,71(1):100-121.

[30] SHACKELFORD S D,WHEELER T L,MEADE M K,et al.Consumers impression of tender select beef[J].Journal of Animal Science,2001,79(10):2605-2614.

[31] MALTIN C A,LOBLEY G E,GRANT C M,et al.Factors influencing beef eating quality 2.Effects of nutritional regimen and genotype on muscle fiber characteristics[J].Journal of Animal Science,2001,72:279-287.

Options

Outlines

模态框（Modal）标题

Abstract

Cite this article

References