Actualisation des besoins protéiques des ruminants et détermination des réponses des femelles laitières aux apports de protéines digestibles dans l’intestin

Sauvant, Daniel; Cantalapiedra-Hijar, Gonzalo; Delaby, Luc; Daniel, Jean-Baptiste; Faverdin, Philippe; Nozière, Pierre

doi:10.20870/productions-animales.2015.28.5.3038

Cited by 18 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The objective of INRA (2018) was to entirely renew the calculation of the energy and protein feed and diets values, taking into account the main digestive phenomena (digestive interactions, passage rates, microbial synthesis, protein × energy interactions and rumen protein balance; Sauvant and Nozière, 2016). Moreover, as part of the revision, the protein requirements as well as responses to changes in protein supply were almost entirely updated using meta-analyses of large databases obtained from literature (Sauvant et al, 2015). The calculation of the response applied in the current work was published by Daniel et al (2016 and2017) and will be referred to as INRA (2018).…”

Section: Institut National De La Recherche Agronomiquementioning

confidence: 99%

Review: Converting nutritional knowledge into feeding practices: a case study comparing different protein feeding systems for dairy cows

Lapierre

Larsen

Sauvant

et al. 2018

Animal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving milk nitrogen efficiency through a reduction of CP supply without detrimental effect on productivity requires usage of feeding systems estimating both the flows of digestible protein, the exported true proteins and from these predict milk protein yield (MPY). Five feeding systems were compared in their ability to predict MPY v. observed MPY in two studies where either protein supply or protein and energy supply were changed. The five feedings systems were: Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System (v6.5.5), Dutch protein evaluation system (1991 and 2007), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique in France (INRA), National Research Council and NorFor. The key characteristic of the systems with the best predicted MPY was the inclusion of a variable efficiency of utilisation of protein supply taking into account the supply of both protein and energy. The systems still using a fixed efficiency had the highest slope bias in their prediction of MPY. Therefore, the development of new feeding systems or improvement of existing systems should include a variable efficiency of utilisation of the protein related to both the protein and energy supply. The limitation of the current comparison did not allow determining if additional factors, as used in INRA, were beneficial. This concept should also probably be transferred to essential amino acids.

show abstract

Section: Institut National De La Recherche Agronomiquementioning

confidence: 99%

Review: Converting nutritional knowledge into feeding practices: a case study comparing different protein feeding systems for dairy cows

Lapierre

Larsen

Sauvant

et al. 2018

Animal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is proposed to use a single Eff MP and Eff AA (one for each EAA) for all the protein functions, except endogenous urinary loss. The latter represents end-products of metabolic pathways, and an efficiency of 1.0 should be used (Sauvant et al, 2015). Sauvant et al (2015) reported that Eff MP was better predicted when the same efficiency was assigned to all protein functions rather than a fixed efficiency for the nonproductive functions and a variable efficiency for lactation.…”

Section: Combined Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although equation (13) yielded a slightly lower AICc than equation 14, in the validation database, the slope bias was larger with the former equation and CCC was lower. Currently, two European systems, the DVE/OEB (Van Duinkerken et al, 2011) and NorFor (2011), are using the ratio of MP/NE L available for milk to predict the efficiency of lactation and MPY; Sauvant et al (2015) estimated that Eff MP was better related to MP/DMI than MP/NE L . Another main advantage of using the ratio is the practicality of transferring results to 'cows of the future' eating more and producing more than cows from the studies included in the current review.…”

Section: Combined Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Review: Impact of protein and energy supply on the fate of amino acids from absorption to milk protein in dairy cows

Lapierre

Martineau

Hanigan

et al. 2020

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Making dairy farming more cost-effective and reducing nitrogen environmental pollution could be reached through a reduced input of dietary protein, provided productivity is not compromised. This could be achieved through balancing dairy rations for essential amino acids (EAA) rather than their aggregate, the metabolizable protein (MP). This review revisits the estimations of the major true protein secretions in dairy cows, milk protein yield (MPY), metabolic fecal protein (MFP), endogenous urinary loss and scurf and associated AA composition. The combined efficiency with which MP (EffMP) or EAA (EffAA) is used to support protein secretions is calculated as the sum of true protein secretions (MPY + MFP + scurf) divided by the net supply (adjusted to remove the endogenous urinary excretion: MPadj and AAadj). Using the proposed protein and AA secretions, EffMP and EffAA were predicted through meta-analyses (807 treatment means) and validated using an independent database (129 treatment means). The effects of MPadj or AAadj, plus digestible energy intake (DEI), days in milk (DIM) and parity (primiparous v. multiparous), were significant in all models. Models using (MPadj, MPadj × MPadj, DEI and DEI × DEI) or (MPadj/DEI and MPadj/DEI × MPadj/DEI) had similar corrected Akaike’s information criterion, but the model using MPadj/DEI performed better in the validation database. A model that also included this ratio was, therefore, used to fitting equations to predict EffAA. These equations predicted well EffAA in the validation database except for Arg which had a strong slope bias. Predictions of MPY from predicted EffMP based on MPadj/DEI, MPadj/DEI × MPadj/DEI, DIM and parity yielded a better fit than direct predictions of MPY based on MPadj, MPadj × MPadj, DEI, DIM and parity. Predictions of MPY based on each EffAA yielded fairly similar results among AA. It is proposed to ponder the mean of MPY predictions obtained from each EffAA by the lowest prediction to retain the potential limitation from AA with the shortest supply. Overall, the revisited estimations of endogenous urinary excretion and MFP, revised AA composition of protein secretions and inclusion of a variable combined EffAA (based on AAadj/DEI, AAadj/DEI × Aadj/DEI, DIM and parity) offer the potential to improve predictions of MPY, identify which AA are potentially in short supply and, therefore, improve the AA balance of dairy rations.

show abstract

“…Chez les ruminants, limiter l'apport en protéines métabolisables augmente leur rendement d'utilisation (Brun-Lafleur et al, 2010 ;Sauvant et al, 2015). De même l'amélioration de l'équilibre en acides aminés digestibles permet d'accroître le rendement de l'utilisation des protéines métabolisables (Haque et al, 2012).…”

Section: Cycle De L'azoteunclassified

Intégrer les changements d’échelle pour améliorer l’efficience des productions animales et réduire les rejets

Faverdin

Milgen

2019

INRA Prod. Anim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

L’élevage est soumis à des défis considérables pour s’adapter au problème de compétition sur les ressources, notamment alimentaires, et aux problèmes environnementaux. L’amélioration de l’efficience de conversion des ressources alimentaires en produits animaux est une voie importante susceptible de répondre simultanément aux deux enjeux. Cette revue définit cette notion d’efficience en la plaçant dans le cadre plus global du triangle de la performance : pertinence, efficience et efficacité. Elle montre l’importance de mettre en perspective ces questions d’efficience alimentaire des animaux en abordant la question du changement d’échelle. Dans les secteurs de production de viande et de lait, elle fait le point sur les travaux conduits pour améliorer l’efficience à la fois par la sélection d’animaux capables de mieux transformer les aliments en produits animaux et par une conduite alimentaire plus précise et mieux équilibrée. Elle évoque les principales avancées pour réduire les émissions à risques pour l’environnement. Raisonner l’efficience alimentaire et les émissions de rejets à l’échelle de l’animal pour la production de lait ou de viande offre des perspectives de progrès importants, mais ne garantit pas toujours une amélioration de l’efficience à une échelle plus globale ni une réduction des impacts sur l’environnement. Il faut donc bien prendre soin de vérifier que les stratégies proposées sont efficaces et permettent d’atteindre les objectifs recherchés avec des indicateurs appropriés. La prise en compte des effets du changement d’échelle pour améliorer la performance globale est un vrai nouveau défi pour la recherche.

show abstract

Actualisation des besoins protéiques des ruminants et détermination des réponses des femelles laitières aux apports de protéines digestibles dans l’intestin

Cited by 18 publications

References 30 publications

Review: Converting nutritional knowledge into feeding practices: a case study comparing different protein feeding systems for dairy cows

Review: Converting nutritional knowledge into feeding practices: a case study comparing different protein feeding systems for dairy cows

Review: Impact of protein and energy supply on the fate of amino acids from absorption to milk protein in dairy cows

Intégrer les changements d’échelle pour améliorer l’efficience des productions animales et réduire les rejets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About