title: Rumen Degradability and Post-ruminal Digestion of Dry Matter, Nitrogen and Amino Acids of Three Protein Supplements.
abstract: This study evaluated the in situ ruminal degradability, and subsequent small intestinal digestibility (SID) of dry matter, crude protein (CP), and amino acids (AA) of cottonseed meal (CSM), sunflower seed meal (SFSM) and distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) by using the modified three-step in vitro procedure. The ruminal degradability and subsequent SID of AA in rumen-undegradable protein (RUP-AA) varied among three protein supplements. The result show that the effective degradability of DM for SFSM, CSM, and DDGS was 60.8%, 56.4%, and 41.0% and their ruminal fermentable organic matter was 60.0%, 55.9%, and 39.9%, respectively. The ruminal degradable protein (RDP) content in CP for SFSM, CSM, and DDGS was 68.3%, 39.0%, and 32.9%, respectively, at the ruminal solid passage rate of 1.84%/h. The SFSM is a good source of RDP for rumen micro-organisms; however, the SID of RUP of SFSM was lower. The DDGS and CSM are good sources of RUP for lambs to digest in the small intestine to complement ruminal microbial AA of growing lambs. Individual RUP-AA from each protein source was selectively removed by the rumen micro-organisms, especially for Trp, Arg, His, and Lys (p<0.01). The SID of individual RUP-AA was different within specific RUP origin (p<0.01). Limiting amino acid was Leu for RUP of CSM and Lys for both RUP of SFSM and DDGS, respectively. Therefore, different protein supplements with specific limitations should be selected and combined carefully in growing lambs ration to optimize AA balance.
authors: Wei
authors: W
authors: Gao
authors: Aodong
authors: A
authors: Chen
authors: Bowen
authors: B
authors: Zhang
authors: Ping
authors: P
authors: Kong
authors: Chenli
authors: C
authors: Liu
authors: Jie
authors: J
authors: Zhao
keywords: Amino Acids; Intestinal Digestibility; Lamb; Protein Supplement; Ruminal Degradability
references: J Dairy Sci. 1996 Sep;79(9):1647-53
references: 8899532
references: J Dairy Sci. 1992 Aug;75(8):2304-23
references: 1401380
references: J Anim Sci. 2006 Aug;84(8):2163-7
references: 16864878
references: J Dairy Sci. 2007 May;90(5):2377-85
references: 17430941
references: J Anim Sci. 1983 Feb;56(2):493-507
references: 6221008
references: J Dairy Sci. 2010 Jun;93(6):2803-15
references: 20494190
references: J Dairy Sci. 2009 Dec;92(12):6056-67
references: 19923609
references: J Dairy Sci. 1986 Oct;69(10):2648-57
references: 3805447
references: J Dairy Sci. 2007 Jun;90(6):2909-18
references: 17517731
references: J Dairy Sci. 1987 May;70(5):1092-109
references: 3298341
references: Br J Nutr. 1997 Jan;77(1):83-97
references: 9059232
references: J Anim Sci. 1995 May;73(5):1459-65
references: 7665377
references: J Dairy Sci. 1994 Mar;77(3):825-34
references: 8169290
references: J Anim Sci. 1989 Jan;67(1):262-75
references: 2925547
references: Br J Nutr. 1984 Nov;52(3):613-20
references: 6498152
references: J Dairy Sci. 1991 Oct;74(10):3583-97
references: 1660498
references: J Dairy Sci. 2005 May;88(5):1807-14
references: 15829674
references: J Anim Sci. 1997 Jul;75(7):1941-9
references: 9222853
references: J Dairy Sci. 1987 May;70(5):977-82
references: 3597938
references: J Dairy Sci. 1995 Jan;78(1):161-71
references: 7738252
references: J Dairy Sci. 2009 Sep;92(9):4489-98
references: 19700710