Preferences of lambs offered Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum L.) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) herbage as choices

Abstract

Partial preference for feeds in ruminants is a welldocumented phenomenon although their explanation can be elusive. The hypothesis was tested that sheep offered herbage of two annual grass species differing in chemical composition free-choice would select a diet that would maximize the nutritive value of the diet compared with sheep offered each herbage separately through a greater nutrient balance and synchronization of nutrient release for efficient ruminal microbial function. Fifteen male lambs were placed into metabolic cages, and randomly assigned to three treatments (n = 5): Italian ryegrass fresh herbage (treatment R), barley fresh herbage (treatment B) or free-choice Italian ryegrass and barley fresh herbage (treatment RB). Both herbages had similar crude protein concentrations but Italian ryegrass herbage had higher concentration of water-soluble carbohydrates and lower concentration of fibre than barley herbage. Lambs were exposed to the treatments for 15 d. Lambs on treatment RB showed a partial preference of 0AE82 (s.e. 0AE031) for Italian ryegrass. Lambs on treatment RB had higher intakes of digestible dry matter and higher values for nitrogen retention than lambs on treatment B although similar to that of lambs on treatment R. The results for the dietary choices were not always consistent with maximizing the nutritive value of the diet. Other explanations, such as lambs needed to sample and track the nutritive value of dietary options or there was the development of transient food aversions, were also possible.

A Comparison Between Fresh Ryegrass and Ryegrass Silage With Respect to Their Nutritive Value for Sheep

“…(2015) (73.07 for fresh ryegrass vs. 73.01 for ryegrass silage). Values of DM digestibility for fresh ryegrass and ryegrass silage were higher than those reported by Catanese et al (2009), Zhang et al (1995 and Ohshima et al (1988), while it was lower than those obtained by Amaral et al (2011) and Nishino et al (1995). The results may be due to the difference in harvest season and silage process.…”

Effects of Mixture Ratio and Row Spacing in Hungarian Vetch (Vicia pannonica Crantz.) and Annual Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) Intercropping Sys

“…While HV has 15%-17% of CP (Balabanli 2009), AR also has CP contents of around the same values (Ozkul et al 2012). These CPRs and yields of sole AR sowings were reported as between 7.3%-25.4% and 101-5197 kg ha -1 , respectively (Parlak et al 2007;Gultekin 2008;Catanese et al 2009;Simic et al 2009;Kusvuran 2011;Durst et al 2013;Rivera et al 2013). …”

“…It is generally a highly nutritious grass that may be presented as forage for beef cattle through grazing, dried out and fed as hay, or ensiled and fed as silage (Acikgoz 2001;Kusvuran and Tansi 2011;Durst et al 2013), and desirably eaten by livestock, especially in milk production (Kusvuran 2011). In recent years, one of the cultivars of AR, 'Caramba', has quite well adapted to Turkey's climate and soil conditions (Ozkul 2012), which has been recognized as potential roughage for ruminant animals (Van Niekerk et al 2008;Catanese et al 2009). Furthermore, (Ozkul et al 2012) reported that it will rise crucially in the use and importance of AR in future and it will be preferred by livestock as a sole crop when compared to cereals such as barley and triticosecale (Van Niekerk et al 2008;Catanese et al 2009).…”

“…In recent years, one of the cultivars of AR, 'Caramba', has quite well adapted to Turkey's climate and soil conditions (Ozkul 2012), which has been recognized as potential roughage for ruminant animals (Van Niekerk et al 2008;Catanese et al 2009). Furthermore, (Ozkul et al 2012) reported that it will rise crucially in the use and importance of AR in future and it will be preferred by livestock as a sole crop when compared to cereals such as barley and triticosecale (Van Niekerk et al 2008;Catanese et al 2009). Accordingly, HV+AR herbage can be used for feeding directly to livestock as fresh material or used as hay or silage.…”

Chemical Composition, <i>In vivo</i> Digestibility and Metabolizable Energy Values of Caramba (<i>Lolium multiflorum cv. caramba</i>) Fresh, Silage and Hay

“…Although generally it is used in ruminant feeding by pasturing or harvesting in the form of fresh grass, caramba may be used after it is dried or ensilaged ( Hannaway et al, 1999 ; Bernard et al, 2002 ; Shao et al, 2005 ; Cooke et al, 2008 ). The conducted studies showed that Italian ryegrasses have high (71% to 78%) dry matter (DM) digestibility ( Ohshima et al, 1988 ; Catanese et al, 2009 ; Amaral et al, 2011 ) and have a favorable effect on milk yield and composition ( Mccormick et al, 1990 ;1998; Miller et al, 2001 ; Bernard, 2003 ) and increase the live weight of livestock ( De Villiers et al, 2002 ; Zaman et al, 2002 ; Van Niekerk et al, 2008 ).…”