Effect of whole-crop pea (Pisum sativum L.) silages differing in condensed tannin content as a substitute for grass silage and soybean meal on the performance, metabolism, and carcass characteristics of lambs

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of inclusion of whole-crop pea (WCP) silages, differing in condensed tannin content, as a substitute for grass silage (GS) and soybean meal on lamb metabolism, performance, plasma metabolites, digestibility, and carcass characteristics. In both experiments lambs were offered either solely GS or a 50:50 mix on a DM basis of GS with either low-tannin (LTPS) or high-tannin (HTPS) pea silage ad libitum. Each forage mix was fed with either 400 g/d of low-protein (LP) concentrate or 400 g/d of LP with an additional 200 g/d of pelletized soybean meal (HP), resulting in 6 dietary treatments. Experiment 1 examined the effects of the diets on metabolism, digestibility, and N balance using 6 lambs in 4 periods of 21 d in an incomplete crossover design. Experiment 2 used 48 lambs and examined the effects of the diets on ADG, plasma metabolites, and carcass characteristics over 56 d. Both experiments were analyzed using a 3 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. In Exp. 1, lambs offered the LTPS diets had a greater (P < 0.05) digestibility of DM and OM than those offered the GS diets. Lambs offered the WCP silages had an increased (P < 0.05) N intake, N output, and digestibility of GE compared with those offered GS. Mean N digestibility was greatest (P < 0.05) in lambs offered LTPS. Lambs offered HP diets had increased (P < 0.001) digestibility of DM, OM, GE and N, and N- intake, output, retention, and digestibility compared with those offered the LP diets. In Exp. 2, there was no effect (P > 0.05) of forage type on intake, slaughter BW, or feed conversion efficiency (FCE). However, lambs offered the LTPS had a greater (P < 0.05) ADG than those offered the GS diets. Feeding diets containing HP increased (P < 0.001) total DMI, slaughter BW, ADG, and FCE. Lambs offered the WCP had a greater (P < 0.05) plasma β-hydroxybutyrate and urea concentration compared with those offered the GS diets. Feeding lambs HP diets increased (P < 0.05) plasma urea and total protein. Forage mix had no effect (P > 0.05) on carcass composition except for fat depth, which was greater (P < 0.05) in lambs offered WCP silage. Diets containing the HP increased (P < 0.05) carcass weight, hind leg circumference, chop dimensions, and kidney weight. It was concluded that lambs offered LTPS performed better than those offered GS and that LTPS has a concentrate sparing effect. Additionally, the increased tannin concentration in HTPS did not increase performance over lambs offered either GS or LTPS.

The effect of supplemented chestnut tannin to grass silage either at ensiling or at feeding on lamb performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality

“…In the current study, the diet DM digestibility was measured using AIA with an average of 0.81 kg kg -1 with no effect (p> 0.05) of additional tannin (Table 2). These results agree with the results reported by Hart et al (2012) who found that different tannin levels did not have a significant impact on DM digestibility when they fed lambs whole crop pea silage containing different levels of CT. Deaville et al (2010) also observed that there was no significant effect of supplementing 55.1 g of chestnut HT kg -1 DM to grass silage on DM and OM digestibility while an additional 55.6 g of mimosa CT kg -1 DM was found to reduce (p< 0.01) DM and OM digestibility. Makkar (2003) suggested that not all tannin protein complexes could dissociate in the abomasum, or complexes could be reversible in the small intestine depending on the tannin source, type, and concentration.…”

Insights into the role of major bioactive dietary nutrients in lamb meat quality: a review

“…The results related to the lambs’ growth are not conclusive. Studies showed an increase [ 84 , 85 ], a decrease [ 86 , 87 ], or no effect [ 88 ] on the ADG of lambs.…”

Growth Performance, Meat Quality and Antioxidant Status of Sheep Supplemented with Tannins: A Meta-Analysis

“…The authors declare no conflict of interest. [20] Brazil CL CT E Dey et al [106] India Ficus infectoria (n = 3) B, B, B N, N, N Abdalla et al [107] Brazil OP, Clep B, B N, N Fernandes et al [14] Brazil Mimosa tenuiflora (n = 3) B, B, B N, N, N Francisco et al [108] Portugal CL (n = 2) CT, CT N, N Girard et al [109] Switzerland LC and OV B, B N, N Guerreiro et al [110] Portugal CL (n = 4) CT, CT, CT, CT, CT N, N, N, N, N Gruffat et al [111] France OV (n = 2) CT, CT N, N Hart et al [112] United Kingdom Pisum sativum (n = 4) CT, CT, CT, CT, CT N, N, N, N, N Hassan et al [113] Egypt Punica granatum, MI, B B, B, B N, N, N Hatami et al [114] Iran Punica granatum (n = 3) B, B N, N Jerónimo et al [115] Portugal VV (n = 2), CL (n = 2) CT, CT, CT, CT, CT E, N, E, N Jerónimo et al [116] Portugal VV (n = 2), CL (n = 2) CT, CT, CT, CT, CT E, N, E, N Kamel et al [117] Saudi Arabia QU (n = 2) CT, CT E, E Kazemi and Mokhtarpour [118] Iran Prunus amygdalus (n = 3) B, B, B N, N, N Leparmarai et al [119] Switzerland VV B E Lima et al [120] Brazil Macrotyloma axillare B N Liu et al [21] China CH (n = 2) HT, HT E, E López-Andrés et al [91] Italy QU CT E Majewska and Kowalik [121] Poland VAC, Quercus sp. B, B N, N Flores et al [122] Brazil VV (n = 3) B, B, B N, N, N Flores et al [123] Brazil VV (n = 3) B, B, B N, N, N Moghaddam et al [124] Iran Berberis vulgaris (n = 2) B, B N, N Natalello et al [18] Italy Punica granatum B N Nobre et al [125] Brazil Psidium guajava (n = 4) B, B, B, B, B N, N, N, N, N Norouzian and Ghiasi [126] Iran Pistacia vera (n = 3) B, B, B N, N, N Obeidat et al [127] Jordan Ceratonia siliqua (n = 2) CT, CT N, N Odhaib et al [128] Malaysia RO (n = 3), NS (n = 3), B (n = 3) B (n = 9) N (n = 9) Pathak et al [13] India B, B CT, CT N, N Peng et al [95] Canada Dalea purpurea CT N Po et al…”