Soft faeces excretion and passage time in the laboratory rabbit

Jilge, Burghart

doi:10.1258/002367774780943698

Cited by 33 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, GIDENNE and PONCET (1985) estimated with a "feed labelling" procedure (without collar) that caecotrophe production reached 15% of the intake. However, caecotrophy itself seemed slightly affected, as the duration of the caecotrophy period and the frequency of the double caecotrophy were similar to that reported by JILGE (1974). Moreover, the caecotrophy impact on DM digestibility was similar to previous studies (FRAGA and DE BLAS, 1977;LUICK et al, 1992).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Impact of caecotrophy on rate of passage, intake and faecal excretion pattern in the growing rabbit.

Gidenne¹,

Lapanouse

2010

World rabbit sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rate of passage was measured on 12 rabbits, either allowed to practice caecotrophy (Control period, from 56 to 60 days of age) or prevented from consuming soft faeces by wearing a plastic collar (without soft faeces intake = WSF periods, 63-66 d old and 70-73 d old). Measurements of digestive transit of the solid phase of the digesta were carried out by analysing the kinetics of faecal excretion of a fibre particles labelled with 141 Ce. The excretion pattern of hard and soft faeces, hourly quantified during three complete 24-h cycle during WSF periods, showed that hard faeces excretion averaged 35.3 ± 3.2 g/day DM, while caecotrophes excretion was meanly 10.7 ± 2.6 g DM/d for a mean feed intake of 113.7 g DM/d. During the control period, daily hard faeces excretion was not significantly different (36.4 ± 3.0 g DM/d, for a feed intake of 110.8 g DM/d). The DM digestibility did not differ during control and WSF periods (67.2 and 67.8%). If caecotrophe production is included in the DM digestibility calculation, coefficient fell by 10.5 units (mean = 57.3%). When soft faeces intake was prevented (period WSF), the mean retention time in the whole tract evolved from 23 h (Control) to 15 h (-34%) and the minimal transit time was 50% shorter. The caecal mean retention time passed from 17 h in Control to 10 h (-40%) in WSF period. Caecal retention of large particles seemed less affected (CRlp:-23%) than fine (CRfp:-48%).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Impact of caecotrophy on rate of passage, intake and faecal excretion pattern in the growing rabbit.

Gidenne¹,

Lapanouse

2010

World rabbit sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The frequency and time devoted to caecotrophy, which was affected by both time and day factors, presented a maximum during midday and afternoon up to 18 hours. The classic observations of JILGE (1974), andFIORAMONTI andRUCKEBUSCH (1976), established that, in an ad libitum feeding situation, the emission of caecotrophes takes place in the morning, with an average duration of 7 h and a maximum of approximately 12 h. Although biphasic patterns tend to appear when the light period is reduced from a schedule of 12 h, Figure 4 shows a monophasic pattern of excretion. Like other activities, the frequency and time dedicated to caecotrophy were 2-3 times greater on day 1.…”

Section: Lactationmentioning

confidence: 92%

The behaviour of farm rabbit does around parturition and during lactation.

Fernández-Carmona¹,

Solar

Pascual³

et al. 2010

World rabbit sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The effects of parturition and lactation were assessed on eleven multiparous rabbit does caged under farm conditions. Frequency and time for different activities (drinking, eating, caecotrophy, nesting, grooming, chewing, attention to neighbour and resting) were studied for the day of parturition, and days 1, 10 and 28 of lactation. Parturition: Does spent most time during the dark period in drinking (85%) and eating (63%). Conversely, 79% of the time spent in caecotrophy and 55% in resting were recorded during the light period. Eating time was 104 minutes per day, being higher during the dark period and after delivery. Females rested 33 minutes per hour and started one of the observed activities 39 times per hour. A general tendency to reduce main activities was observed around parturition with the exception of time spent nesting. Lactation: Does spent most time during the dark period in drinking (59%), eating (59%), grooming (55%) and neighbour (72%) while they spent less time resting (46%). The level of activity in parturition seems to be maintained or increased on the following day and reduced afterwards. Does were resting 31, 35 and 41 minutes per hour, and started one activity 67, 27 and 24 times per hour during 1 st , 10 th and 28 th lactation days, respectively.

show abstract

“…Caecotrophy elongates the retention time of the food in the digestive tract, as was illustrated for rabbits (Jilge, 1974;Fraga et al, 1991;Sakaguchi, Kaizu & Nakamichi, 1992). The time period that food is retained in the caecum has been shown to account for > 60% of the total retention time of the food in rabbits and is responsible for the most variation in total retention time .…”

Section: Do Hares and Rabbits Have A Different Digestive Strategy?mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Real retention times of the different fractions of the food can only be determined by the use of internal markers (see e.g. Jilge, 1974;Fraga et al, 1991). Therefore, this approximation of retention time was used to look only at qualitative differences in mean retention time of the food between species or between diets.…”

Section: Chemical Analyses and Calculationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We are aware of only two published studies which report on the proportion of soft faeces that are produced by rabbits and hares. Jilge (1974) found that soft faeces made up to 40% of daily faeces production in laboratory rabbits, while Pehrson (1983) observed that only 24% of daily faeces production consisted of soft faeces in caged mountain hares Lepus timidus. Although this suggests a large difference between rabbits and hares, differences in diet need to be taken into account when comparing the results of both studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Digestive strategies in two sympatrically occurring lagomorphs

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Separation of low digestible fibres and fermentation of the digestible part of the food in the caecum is an adaptation of some small herbivores to cope with low-quality forage. The caecum content is later re-ingested as soft faeces so that the herbivore can benefit from this protein-rich material. This is known as caecotrophy and is a common phenomenon in species of leporids, although differences exist between hares and rabbits. Hares have amorphous soft faeces and the amount of soft faeces produced is smaller compared to that of rabbits. Both factors suggest that hares have smaller benefits from re-ingestion of the caecal contents compared with rabbits and, as a consequence, have a less efficient digestion (mainly of nitrogen) compared to rabbits. The assertion was tested whether digestive efficiency is different between the two herbivores and how this affects the choice of food plants in a natural situation. A feeding trial was conducted using hares and rabbits fed with diets with a range of fibre contents. Dry matter digestibility was not different, but nitrogen digestibility was lower in hares than in rabbits, indicating a less efficient digestion of protein. Both taxa showed a different response to increased fibre content in the diet. Rabbits maximized digestibility by increasing retention time of the food, hares maximized digestion rate by increasing the passage rate of the food through the digestive tract. The daily digestible nitrogen intake was higher in hares Lepus europaeus than that in rabbits Oryctolagus cuniculus, indicating that hares compensated for their lower nitrogen digestibility. Hares were predicted to select for higher quality plant species in a natural situation, but they had, on average, a lower nitrogen and higher total fibre content in their diet compared to sympatrically occurring rabbits. This indicated that hares did not compensate for their lower digestive efficiency by selecting higher quality food plants. The present experiment shows that hares and rabbits have different digestive strategies to cope with low quality forage. Rabbits had a higher N-digestibility by increasing the retention time, whereas hares appeared to compensate for their lower N-digestibility by increasing the processing rate, when food quality deteriorated.

show abstract

Soft faeces excretion and passage time in the laboratory rabbit

Cited by 33 publications

References 11 publications

Impact of caecotrophy on rate of passage, intake and faecal excretion pattern in the growing rabbit.

Impact of caecotrophy on rate of passage, intake and faecal excretion pattern in the growing rabbit.

The behaviour of farm rabbit does around parturition and during lactation.

Digestive strategies in two sympatrically occurring lagomorphs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About