We assessed the interactive effects of gross feed use efficiency (FUE, milk yield/kg DMI) background (“high” = HEFF vs. “low” = LEFF) and graded levels of dietary CP (130, 145, 160, and 175 g/kg DM) on milk production, enteric methane (CH4) emission, and apparent nitrogen use efficiency (NUE, g milk protein nitrogen/g nitrogen intake) with Norwegian Red (NRF) dairy cows. Eight early- to mid-lactation cows were used in a 4 × 4 Latin square design experiment (2 efficiency backgrounds, 4 dietary treatments, and 4 periods each lasting 28 d). The diets were designed to be identical in physical nature and energy density, except for the planned changes in CP, which was a contribution of slight changes in other dietary constituents. We hypothesized that HEFF cows would partition more dietary energy and nitrogen into milk components and, as such, partition less energy in the form of methane and excrete less nitrogen in urine and feces compared with their LEFF contemporaries. We observed no interactions between dietary CP level and efficiency background on DMI, other nutrient intake, NUE, CH4 emission, and its intensity (g CH4/kg milk). Gradually decreasing dietary CP from 175 to 130 g/kg DM did not affect DMI, milk and energy-corrected milk yield, and milk component yields and daily CH4 emission. However, decreasing dietary CP increased NUE and reduced urinary nitrogen (UN) excretion both in quantitative terms and as proportion of nitrogen intake. The HEFF cows showed improved NUE and decreased CH4 emission intensity compared with the LEFF cows. In the absence of interaction effects between efficiency background and dietary CP level, our results suggest that CH4 emission intensity and UN excretions can be reduced by selecting dairy cows with higher FUE and reducing dietary CP level, respectively, independent of one another. Furthermore, UN excretion predictions based on milk urea nitrogen (MUN) and cow BW for NRF cows produced very close estimates to recorded values promising an inexpensive and useful tool for estimating UN excretion under the Nordic conditions where ordinary milk analysis comes with MUN estimates.
Forty-eight 4- to 5-yr-old Blackface x Bluefaced Leicester (Mule) ewes and their 24-d-old twin lambs were used to assess the effects of maternal protein nutrition and subsequent grazing on chicory (Cichorium intybus) on performance and parasitism. The experiment consisted of 2 grazing periods: safe pasture period and experimental pasture period. During an adaptation period of 66 d, ewes were infected through oral dosing with Teladorsagia circumcincta infective larvae (3 d per wk) and were supplemented with protein (HP) or not (LP) for the last 45 d of this period. At the end of this period, ewes and their lambs were turned out onto a parasitologically safe pasture; all ewes continued to be dosed with parasite (once a week), and HP ewes received protein supplementation for the first 35 d. Ewes and lambs grazed the safe pasture for an additional 43 d after termination of protein supplementation and of oral dosing with parasites. Ewes and their lambs were then moved onto newly established experimental pastures sown with chicory or grass/clover (Lolium perenne/Trifolium repens). During the safe pasture period, HP ewes had decreased fecal egg counts (FEC) compared with LP ewes, whereas HP lambs had temporarily less (P < 0.05) FEC, decreased (P < 0.001) plasma pepsinogen concentrations, and grew faster (P = 0.028) than LP lambs. Lambs grazing chicory had consistently less (P < 0.001) FEC and grew faster (P = 0.013) than lambs grazing grass/clover but had greater (P < 0.001) concentrations of pepsinogen. Pasture larvae counts were decreased (P = 0.07) for the chicory compared with the grass/clover plots. There were no interactions (P > 0.10) between maternal nutrition and grazed forage type on performance or parasitological measurements. Our results suggest that increased maternal protein nutrition and subsequent grazing of chicory independently improve lamb performance and reduce lamb parasitism.
The periparturient relaxation of immunity (PPRI) to parasites in mammals is sensitive to both metabolisable protein (MP) supply and animal genotype (different reproductive outputs). We tested the hypothesis that the sensitivity of PPRI to MP scarcity would not differ between different levels of reproductive output when nutrient intake is adjusted for associated differences in MP demand; this hypothesis assumes that PPRI has a nutritional basis only. Scottish Blackface (BF) and the more productive Mule (MU) ewes were infected with the abomasal parasite Teladorsagia circumcincta, and from day 221 to day 32 (day 0 is parturition), they were fed restrictedly at either 0·8 (low protein (LP)) or 1·3 (high protein (HP)) times their breed-specific estimated MP requirement (n 18 for each breed-feeding treatment combination). During late pregnancy, LP feeding reduced ewe body weight gain in both breeds, tended to increase faecal egg count (FEC), but it did not affect plasma pepsinogen. During lactation, LP feeding reduced litter growth rate and ewe plasma urea and plasma albumin concentrations compared with HP feeding in both breeds. However, breed and feeding treatment interacted for ewe FEC, worm egg excretion and plasma pepsinogen, which were higher for the LP-MU ewes compared with the HP-MU and BF ewes. The lower degree of PPRI of the BF ewes during lactation compared with the MU ewes at a similar degree of MP scarcity suggests that the effect of reproductive output on nutritional sensitivity of PPRI cannot be explained by associated differences in nutrient demand only. Breed: Metabolisable protein: Faecal egg count: Teladorsagia circumcinctaDuring the periparturient period, resistance to nematode parasites often breaks down, resulting in increased worm burdens and nematode egg excretion in animals that are immune to parasites when non-reproducing (1)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.