Effects of Different Water Amount in Total Mixed Ration on Performance, Rumen Hydrolytic Enzymes Activity and Rumen and Blood Metabolites of Fattening Lambs

Document Type : Research Articles

Authors

• Zahra Yousefi ¹
• Ayoub Azizi ¹
• Amir Fadayifar ¹
• Ali Kiani ¹
• Afrooz Sharifi ²

¹ Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Lorestan University, Lorestan, Iran.

² Animal Science Research Department, Khuzestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Ahvaz, Iran.

10.22067/ijasr.2022.73809.1053

Abstract

Introduction: Over the last half century, the shortage of animal feed in many parts of the world, including Iran, has increased the feed costs of animal husbandry and it also has affected revenues from the production of livestock products. Therefore, any improvement in nutritional management and increasing the feed use efficiency in this sector will increase productivity and production. Adding water to ruminant diets is inexpensive physical processing method that has had a positive effect on efficiency of ruminant production. Traditionally, adding water to total mixed diets has been a useful management practice to reduce feed selection behavior by livestock. It has been shown that adding water to the feed of adult cows (decreasing dietary dry matter (DM) from 81% to 64%) reduced the choice of fine components over long particles and also to reduce the preferential consumption of concentrate components (Leonardi et al., 2005). Recent studies have shown that adding water to the starter diet of suckling calves up to 25% during the winter has improved their growth performance (Beiranvand et al., 2018). These positive responses are probably due to the increased adhesion of feed particles, which has led to a reduction of diet dust, condensation of fine particles and increased palatability and consumption.
Materials and Methods: This experiment was conducted in animal house and laboratories of Lorestan University. Twenty-eight Lori male-fattening lambs with120 ± 6 days old and 33.4 ± 3.4 kg of live weight were used in completely randomized design experiment with 4 treatments and 7 lambs per treatment. Dietary treatments in which water was used at levels 10 (control), 20, 30 and 40 % were fed to the lambs for 56 days. Blood and ruminal samples were taken from all of lambs at day 45 and 50 respectively 3 h after morning feeding. A completely randomised design was used to determine the effect of different levels of water on the measured traits. All data were analyzed using the GLM procedure in SAS. Linear (L) and quadratic (Q) contrast statements were included in the model to test the effect of increasing amounts of water. Differences among means were tested using Duncan method.
Results and Discussion: Results showed that increasing the level of dietary moisture up to 30% linearly increased (P<0.05) ruminal ammonia-N, propionate and total VFA concentration, while pH and concentration of other individual VFAs were unchanged among dietary treatments (P>0.05). Increasing the level of dietary moisture up to 30% linearly increased (P<0.05) activity of carboxymethyl cellulase and ɑ-amylase, while activity of microcrystalline cellulase and filter paper degrading activity and blood metabolites (including glucose, total protein and blood urea nitrogen) were similar among treatments (P>0.05). Intake of dry matter (DM) and average daily gain increased linealrly (P<0.05) with elevating dietary water level up to 30%, while NDF and ADF intake and final body weight and feed conversion ratio was unchanged by the level of dietary moisture (P>0.05).
Conclusion: Results of present study showed that adding water to the total mixed ration of fattening lambs up to 30% improved ruminal parameters, feed intake and growth performance.
 

 
 
 

Keywords

• Dietary moisture
• Enzyme activity
• Fermentative parameters
• Lamb

Main Subjects

• Animal Nutrition

---

References

1. Agarwal, N. (2000). Estimation of fiber degrading enzyme. In: L. C. Chaudhary N. Agarwal, D. N. Kamra D. K. Agarwal, editor. Feed microbiology. Izatnagar (India): CAS Animal Nutrition, pp. 278–291.
2. Allen, M. S. (1996). Physical constraints on voluntary intake of forage by ruminants. Journal of Animal Science, 74, 3063–3075. https://doi: 10.2527/1996.74123063x.
3. AOAC. (2002). Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International (17^th, 1^th rev.). Gaithersburg (MD): Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
4. Arzola-Álvarez, C., Bocanegra-Viezca, J. A., Murphy, M. R., Salinas- Chavira, J., Corral-Luna, A., Romanos, A., Ruíz-Barrera, O., & Rodríguez-Muela, C. (2010). Particle size distribution and chemical composition of total mixed rations for dairy cattle: Water addition and feed sampling effects. Journal of Dairy Science, 93, 4180– https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2952.
5. Azizi, A., Papi, N., Sharifi, A., Azarfar, A., & Kiani, A. (2016). Effect of different levels of corn steep liquor on the activity of hydrolytic enzymes in different fractions of rumen liquor and nitrogen metabolism in Moghani-male lambs. Animal Science Journal (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi), 115:, 255-270 (In Persian).
6. Azizi-Shotorkhoft, A., Rezaei, J., Papi, N., Mirmohammadi, D., & Fazaeli, H. (2015). Effect of feeding heat-processed broiler litter in pellet-form diet on the performance of fattening lambs. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 43, 184– https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2014.928636.
7. Beiranvand, H., Khani, M., Ahmadi, F., Omidi-Mirzaei, H., Ariana, M., & Bayat, A. R. (2018). Does adding water to a dry starter diet improve calf performance during winter? Animal, 13, 959-967. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118002367.
8. Beiranvand, H., Khani, M., Omidian, S., Ariana, M., Rezvani, R., & Ghaffari, M. H. (2016). Does adding water to dry calf starter improve performance during summer? Journal of Dairy Science, 99, 1-9. https://doi: 10.3168/jds.2015-10004.
9. Broderick, G., & Kang, J. H. (1980). Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro Journal of Dairy Science, 63, 64-75. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(80)82888-8.
10. Dijkstra, J., Mills, J. A. N., & France, J. (2002). The role of dynamic modelling in understanding the microbial contribution to rumen function. Nutrition Research Reviews, 15, 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1079/NRR200237.
11. Ghasemi Nejad, J., Kim, B. W., Lee, B. H., Kim, J. Y., & Sung, K. L. (2017). Effects of water addition to total mixed ration on water intake, nutrient digestibility, wool cortisol and blood indices in Corridale ewes. Asian-Australas Journal of Animal Science, 30(10), 1435-1441. https://doi: 10.5713/ajas.16.0705.
12. Khan, M. A., Bach, A., Castells, L., Weary, D., & Von Keyserlingk. M. A. (2014). Effects of particle size and moisture levels in mixed rations on the feeding behavior of dairy heifers. Animal, 8(10), 1722–1727. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731114001487.
13. Lahr, D. A., Otterby, D. E., Johnson, D. G., Linn, J. G., & Lundquist, R. G. (1983). Effects of moisture content of complete diets on feed intake and milk production by cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 66, 1891– https://doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(83)82027-X.
14. Leonardi, C., & Armentano, L. E. (2003). Effect of quantity, quality, and length of alfalfa hay on selective consumption by dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 86, 557– https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73634-0.
15. Leonardi, C., Giannico, F., & Armentano, L. E. (2005). Effect of water addition on selective consumption (sorting) of dry diets by dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 1043–1049. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)72772-7.
16. Lowry, O. H., Rosebrough, N. J., Farr, A. L., & Randall, R. J. (1951). Protein measurement with the folin-phenol reagent. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 193, 262–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(19)52451-6.
17. Miller, J. L. (1959). Modified DNS method for reducing sugars. Analytical Chemistry, 31, 426– 429. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60147a030.
18. Miller-Cushon, E. K., & DeVries, T. J. (2009). Effect of dietary dry matter concentration on the sorting behavior of lactating dairy cows fed a total mixed ration. Journal of Dairy Science, 92, 3292–3298. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1772.
19. NRC. (2007). National Research Council, Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: Sheep, Goats, Cervids, and New World Camelids. Washington (DC, USA): National Academy of Sciences.
20. Robinson, P. H., Burgess, P. L., & McQueen, R. E. (1990). Influence of moisture content of mixed rations on feed intake and milk production of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 73, 2916–2921. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(90)78979-5.
21. SAS Institute Inc. (2005). User’s Guide: Statistics, Version 9.0 Edition. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC.
22. Shaver, R. D. (2002). Rumen acidosis in dairy cattle: Bunk management considerations. Advances in Dairy Technology, 14, 241–
23. Thomas, J. W., Moore, L. A., Okamoto, M., & Sykes, J. F. (1961). A study of factors affecting rate of intake of heifers fed silage. Journal of Dairy Science, 44, 1471. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(61)89909-8.
24. Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B., & Lewis, B. A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583–3597. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2.