Comparation of moist heating and formaldehyde protein protection methods and their impact on dairy ration fermentability and digestibility

Rosmalia, A; Kusdiana, C M P; Permana, I G; Evvyernie, D; Despal, D; Toharmat, T

doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1183/1/012012

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The high RDP local feeds consisting of TD, BW, NSM, SS, and CGF (Rosmalia et al, 2021;Belanche et al, 2013) were carried out using the heating and formaldehyde method as described by Rosmalia et al (2023). The heating process consisted of 30 min preconditioning autoclave (GEA LS-50 LJ, China) followed by heating at 120°C for 60 min.…”

Section: Samples Heating and Formaldehyde Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Sacco and in vitro Evaluation of Heating and Formaldehyde Treated Protein Feed

Rosmalia,

Permana,

Despal

et al. 2024

American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Massive protein conversion into ammonia in the Rumen (RDP) should be avoided to prevent protein quality deterioration. Heating and formaldehyde treatments are commonly used to decrease Rumen-Degradable Protein (RDP), but it rarely used to protect local feed. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of heating and formaldehyde treatments in decreasing the RDP of local feed. The use of fistulated cattle, treatments, and procedures used in this study have been ethically cleared by the animal ethics committee, at IPB University. This study used a 5×3 factorial randomized block design with three replications with a sample size was 45. We used two factors; the 1 st was high RDP feeds (TD = Tempe Dregs, BW = Brewery Waste, NSM = Nigella sativa Meal, SS = Soybean Seeds, CGF = Corn Gluten Feed) and the 2 nd was treatment methods (unprotected, heating and formaldehyde). Ruminal degradation was determined using in sacco method. Three cannulated Frisian Holstein Bulls were fed twice daily with Elephant grass and concentrate at a ratio of 60:40 (DM basis). In vitro digestibility was evaluated using two two-stage Tilley and Terry in vitro methods. Parameters observed include nutrient content, in sacco degradation and ruminal degradation kinetics of dry matter, organic matter, crude protein (DM, OM, and CP), and in vitro digestibility. The results showed that protecting protein changed the nutrient content of feeds (1-6%). The DM and OM disappearance had the same pattern. The effective degradation of DM, OM, and CP significantly (p<0.05) decreased up to 17 and 27% in heating and formaldehyde treatments, respectively, compared to unprotected. Heating did not significantly affect the in vitro digestibility. Formaldehyde treatment had the lowest DM, OM, and CP in vitro digestibility (51.39, 74.25, and 45.90%). Heating treatment was effective in reducing the RDP of feed without interfering with feed digestibility.

show abstract

Section: Samples Heating and Formaldehyde Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Sacco and in vitro Evaluation of Heating and Formaldehyde Treated Protein Feed

Rosmalia,

Permana,

Despal

et al. 2024

American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Elephant grass was the primary forage used in both regions for close-up and fresh cows [18][19][20]. Beside elephant grass, natural grass and corn stover were other primary forage used in KPBS, while in KPSBU, farmers used lower-quality fiber sources such as rice straw [21]. The cooperative's concentrate (Mako) was predominantly used in KPBS, while farmers in KPSBU used more varied concentrate [13].…”

Section: Feed Used In Transition Cowsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dietary Anion Cation Difference in Ration of Transition Cows Kept under KPSBU and KPBS Cooperative Administration

Despal,

Genuisty,

Jelita

et al. 2024

IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transition dairy cows often suffer from hypocalcemia metabolic disorders, commonly known as milk fever. The disorder can be mitigated through DCAD (dietary cation-anion difference) management. DCAD -50 mEq/kg in close-up cow’s ration facilitates Ca bone mobilization, while +50 mEq/kg in fresh cows supports the cow’s health. An explorative study has been conducted to monitor DCAD management of transition cows kept under KPSBU and KPBS cooperatives administration. Thirty dairy farmers in each area were observed for their cows’ DCAD status and performances. Descriptive and correlative statistics were used to characterize averages, ranges, and links between DCAD status and the cow’s performance. The results indicated that Napier grass and concentrate were used as the primary ration with an average proportion of 48% and 52%, respectively. Meanwhile, tofu waste and agriculture by-products were used as complementary feeds. The average ration contains 35% DM, 6.07% ash, 11% CP, 26.17% CF, 52.41% TDN. Only 43.75% in KPSBU and 86.67% in KPBS of pre-partum cows have negative DCAD, while 46.67% and 18.75% of post-partum cows in the consecutive area have positive DCAD. The average milk production was 17 and 14.67 l/day in KPSBU and KPBS, respectively. The occurrence of prepartum metabolic disorder cases was considerably high in both areas, but the post-partum incidence was found more often at KPSBU than at KPBS (46.67% vs 26.67%). The study concludes that the mismanagement of DCAD and feeding prepartum leads to a higher prevalence of metabolic disorders in transition cows and needs to be addressed seriously.

show abstract

Comparation of moist heating and formaldehyde protein protection methods and their impact on dairy ration fermentability and digestibility

Cited by 2 publications

References 21 publications

In Sacco and in vitro Evaluation of Heating and Formaldehyde Treated Protein Feed

In Sacco and in vitro Evaluation of Heating and Formaldehyde Treated Protein Feed

Dietary Anion Cation Difference in Ration of Transition Cows Kept under KPSBU and KPBS Cooperative Administration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About