不同精粗比和苜蓿水平对饲粮组合效应的影响

doi:10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2018.02.025

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

旨在探讨不同精粗比小麦秸/氨化小麦秸基础日粮中苜蓿的补饲水平对饲粮组合效应的影响。本试验共设6个精粗比（Concentrate∶Roughage，C∶R）（70∶30、60∶40、50∶50、40∶60、30∶70、20∶80）和4个苜蓿水平（Alfalfa）（0%、10%、20%、30%）。小麦秸/氨化小麦秸与苜蓿干草为粗饲料部分。采用体外产气法测定不同精粗比下48个饲粮组合（24个小麦秸组和24个氨化小麦秸组）和4种饲料分别培养2、4、6、9、12、24、36、48、72、96 h的产气量，并通过24 h产气量和各组合的加权估算值计算出饲粮组合效应值。结果表明：1）在小麦秸基础日粮中各组合的组合效应值，C∶R为70∶30时，20%苜蓿组极显著高于30%、10%、0组（P<0.01），30%苜蓿组极显著高于10%、0组（P<0.01），10%苜蓿组极显著高于0组（P<0.01）；C∶R为50∶50时，30%苜蓿组极显著高于10%组（P<0.01），显著高于0组（P<0.05）；C∶R为40∶60时，30%苜蓿组极显著高于0组（P<0.01），10%、20%苜蓿组显著高于0组（P<0.05）。2）在氨化小麦秸基础日粮中各组合的组合效应值，C∶R为70∶30时，30%、10%苜蓿组显著高于0组（P<0.05）；C∶R为60∶40时，10%苜蓿组显著高于30%组（P<0.05）；C∶R为50∶50时，10%、20%、0苜蓿组极显著高于30%组（P<0.01）；C∶R为40∶60时，0苜蓿组显著高于20%组（P<0.05）。结果显示，氨化小麦秸基础日粮比小麦秸基础日粮补饲更少比例的苜蓿（前者为10%，后者为30%与20%）就可以达到正组合效应，有利于节约优质苜蓿干草资源。

Abstract:

This experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of wheat straw (WS) or ammonium bicarbonate treated wheat straw (ABWS) basal diets supplemented with different levels of alfalfa on associative effects(AE) in vitro. There were 6 concentrate-roughage ratio(70:30, 60:40, 50:50, 40:60, 30:70, 20:80) and 4 alfalfa supplementation levels (0%, 10%, 20%, 30%) in this study. Roughage contained WS/ABWS and alfalfa. Gas production (GP) of 48 feed combination groups (24 groups of WS and 24 groups of ABWS)and 4 diets was recorded at 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72, 96 h for culture. The AE values were calculated by in vitro GP during 24 h and weighted values of different combinations. The results showed as follows:1) In WS basal diet, the AE of 20% group was significantly higher than that of 30%, 10% and 0 groups (P<0.01), the AE of 30% group was significantly higher than that of 10% and 0 groups (P<0.01), the AE of 10% group was significantly higher than that of 0 group (P<0.01) when C:R was 70:30. The AE of 30% group was significantly higher than that of 10% group (P<0.01) and 0 group (P<0.05) when C:R was 50:50. The AE of 30% group was significantly higher than that of 0 group (P<0.01), and the AE of 10% and 20% groups were significantly higher than that of 0 group (P<0.05) when C:R was 40:60. 2) In ABWS basal diet, the AE of 30% and 10% groups were significantly higher than that of 0 group (P<0.05) when C:R was 70:30, the AE of 10% group was significantly higher than that of 30% group (P<0.05) when C:R was 60:40, the AE of 10%, 20% and 0 groups were significantly higher than that of 30% group (P<0.01) when C:R was 50:50, the AE of 0 group was significantly higher than that of 20% group (P<0.05) when C:R was 40:60. It is concluded that ABWS diet need less alfalfa (10%) than WS (30%, 20%) diet to develop positive AE. ABWS is better than WS in reduing the supplement of alfalfa.

中图分类号:

S816.8

袁玖, 万欣杰, 平丽莹, 王军军, 何天乐, 俞海山. 不同精粗比和苜蓿水平对饲粮组合效应的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2018, 49(2): 449-458.

YUAN Jiu, WAN Xin-jie, PING Li-ying, WANG Jun-jun, HE Tian-le, YU Hai-shan. Effect of Concentrate-roughage Ratio and Alfalfa Supplementation on Associative Effects of Diets in vitro[J]. ACTA VETERINARIA ET ZOOTECHNICA SINICA, 2018, 49(2): 449-458.

参考文献

[1] 卢德勋. 饲料的组合效应[M]. 北京:中国农业出版社, 2000:289-294.
LU D X. The associative effects of feeds[M]. Beijing:Chinese Agricultural Press, 2000:289-294. (in Chinese)
[2] 张帆,崔凯,王杰,等. 妊娠后期饲粮营养水平对母羊和胚胎发育的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2017, 48(3):474-482.
ZHANG F,CUI K, WANG J,et al. Effects of dietary nutrient levels on the development of late pregnant ewes and fetal[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2017, 48(3):474-482.(in Chinese)
[3] 陈伟健, 王翀, 段智勇, 等. 反刍动物饲料组合效应的衡量指标及评估方法综述[J]. 中国牛业科学, 2011, 37(2):61-65.
CHEN W J, WANG C, DUAN Z Y, et al. The measurements and methods for evaluation of associative effects in Ruminants[J]. China Cattle Science, 2011, 37(2):61-65. (in Chinese)
[4] MENKE K H, RAAB L, SALEWSKI A, et al. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro[J]. J Agric Sci, 1979, 93(1):217-222.
[5] 王加启, 冯仰廉. 不同来源可发酵碳水化合物和可降解氮合成瘤胃微生物蛋白质效率的研究[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 1996, 27(2):97-104.
WANG J Q, FENG Y L. Studies on the synthetic efficiencies of rumen microbial protein from various sources of fermentable carbohydrates and degradable nitrogens[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 1996, 27(2):97-104. (in Chinese)
[6] DOLEBO A T, PUCHALA R, GIPSON T A, et al. Evaluation of a method to predict negative feedstuff associative effects in meat goats consuming diets with different forage sources and levels of concentrate[J]. J Appl Anim Res, 2017, 45(1):470-479.
[7] 孟庆翔, 熊易强. 辐射处理提高秸秆营养价值[J]. 饲料工业, 1991, 12(1):13-14.
MENG Q X, XIONG Y Q. Radiation treatment improves the nutritional value of straw[J]. Feed Industry, 1991, 12(1):13-14. (in Chinese)
[8] 王亚静, 毕于运, 高春雨. 中国秸秆资源可收集利用量及其适宜性评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(9):1852-1859.
WANG Y J, BI Y Y, GAO C Y. Collectable amounts and suitability evaluation of straw resource in China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2010, 43(9):1852-1859.(in Chinese)
[9] MENKE K H, STEINGASS H. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid[J]. Anim Res Dev, 1988, 28:7-55.
[10] AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis[M]. 15th ed. Virginia, USA:Association of Official Analytical Chemists Inc., 1990.
[11] VAN SOEST P J, ROBERTSON J B, LEWIS B A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition[J]. J Dairy Sci, 1991, 74(10):3583-3597.
[12] ØRSKOV E R, MCDONALD I. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage[J]. J Agric Sci, 1979, 92(2):499-503.
[13] 卢广林, 李东风, 杨连玉. 不同日粮组合对牛瘤胃发酵参数的影响[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2011, 8(15):101-103.
LU G L, LI D F, YANG L Y. Effects of different dietary combinations on fermentation parameters of bovine rumen[J]. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2011, 8(15):101-103. (in Chinese)
[14] 孟梅娟, 涂远璐, 白云峰, 等. 小麦秸秆与米糠粕瘤胃体外发酵组合效应研究[J]. 草业学报, 2016, 25(9):161-172.
MENG M J, TU Y L, BAI Y F, et al. Study of associative effects of wheat straw mixed with rice bran meal on in vitro fermentation parameters[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(9):161-172. (in Chinese)
[15] 张勇, 夏天婵, 常誉, 等. 体外产气法评价油菜秆与玉米、豆粕的组合效应[J]. 草业学报, 2016, 25(11):185-191.
ZHANG Y, XIA T C, CHANG Y, et al. Evaluation of the associative effects of rape straw, corn and soybean meal using an in vitro gas production technique[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(11):185-191. (in Chinese)
[16] 王典, 李发弟, 张养东, 等. 马铃薯淀粉渣-玉米秸秆混合青贮料对肉羊生产性能、瘤胃内环境和血液生化指标的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(5):47-54.
WANG D, LI F D, ZHANG Y D, et al. Mixed silage of potato pulp and corn straw affects growth performance, ruminant environments and blood biochemical parameters of mutton sheep[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(5):47-54. (in Chinese)
[17] 崔占鸿, 刘书杰, 郝力壮, 等. 体外产气法评价青海高原反刍家畜常用粗饲料组合效应[J]. 草业学报, 2011, 28(10):1894-1900.
CUI Z H, LIU S J, HAO L Z, et al. Evaluation of associate effects of ruminants forages in the Qinghai Plateau using in vitro gas production technique[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 28(10):1894-1900. (in Chinese)
[18] 王志军, 格根图, 高静, 等. 苜蓿、沙打旺、高丹草、狼尾草和黑麦草间的组合效应研究[J]. 动物营养学报, 2015, 27(11):3628-3635.
WANG Z J, GE G T, GAO J, et al. Research of associative effects of alfalfa, Astragalus adsurgens, Gaodan grass, Chinese pennisetum and ryegrass[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2015, 27(11):3628-3635. (in Chinese)
[19] 吕永艳, 崔海净, 蔡李逢, 等. 奶牛常用3种粗饲料间组合效应的研究[J]. 饲料研究, 2011(9):3-5.
LV Y Y, CUI H J, CAI L F, et al. Study on the associative effects of three kinds of roughage in dairy cattle[J]. Feed Research, 2011(9):3-5. (in Chinese)
[20] 孙国强, 吕永艳, 张杰杰. 利用体外瘤胃发酵法研究全株玉米青贮与花生蔓和羊草间的组合效应[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(3):224-231.
SUN G Q, LV Y Y, ZHANG J J. A study on the associative effect of whole corn silage-peanut vine and Leymus chinensis by rumen fermentation in vitro[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(3):224-231. (in Chinese)
[21] 孟梅娟, 涂远璐, 白云峰, 等. 小麦秸与非常规饲料组合效应的研究[J]. 动物营养学报, 2016, 28(9):3005-3014.
MENG M J, TU Y L, BAI Y F, et al. Combination effects on wheat straw and non-conventional feeds[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2016, 28(9):3005-3014. (in Chinese)
[22] 于腾飞, 张杰杰, 孙国强. 花生蔓与4种粗饲料间组合效应的研究[J]. 动物营养学报, 2012, 24(7):1246-1254.
YU T F, ZHANG J J, SUN G Q. Associative effects of peanut vine and four kinds of roughages[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2012, 24(7):1246-1254. (in Chinese)
[23] 袁翠林, 于子洋, 王文丹, 等. 豆秸、花生秧和青贮玉米秸间的组合效应研究[J]. 动物营养学报, 2015, 27(2):647-654.
YUAN C L, YU Z Y, WANG W D, et al. Research of associative effects of soybean stalk, peanut vine and corn stalk silage[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2015, 27(2):647-654. (in Chinese)
[24] 刘丽英, 王志军, 尹强, 等. 3种饲草不同配比的体外消化特性及组合效应分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2017, 48(6):1066-1075.
LIU L Y, WANG Z J, YIN Q, et al. Research on the in vitro digestibility and associative effects of three forage with different proportion[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2017, 48(6):1066-1075. (in Chinese)
[25] 王法明. 基于GI与CBI理论的反刍动物饲料组合效应的研究[D]. 大庆:黑龙江八一农垦大学, 2014.
WANG F M. The study of feed associative effects based on GI and CBI theories in ruminants[D]. Daqing:Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, 2014. (in Chinese)
[26] 高静, 贾玉山, 王晓光, 等. 饲草组合效应综合指数研究[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(4):236-243.
GAO J, JIA Y S, WANG X G, et al. Study on the multiple-factors associative effects of forage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(4):236-243. (in Chinese)
[27] 张吉鹍, 邹庆华, 王金芬, 等. 稻草与多水平苜蓿混合瘤胃体外发酵组合效应的整体研究[J]. 饲料工业, 2011, 32(17):40-48.
ZHANG J K, ZOU Q H, WANG J F, et al. Comprehensive study of associative effects of rice straw mixed with vary levels of Medicago sativa L. on in vitro fermentation parameters[J]. Feed Industry, 2011, 32(17):40-48. (in Chinese)
[28] 张锐, 朱晓萍, 李建云, 等. 辽宁绒山羊常用粗饲料苜蓿和羊草间饲料组合效应[J]. 动物营养学报, 2013, 25(10):2481-2488.
ZHANG R, ZHU X P, LI J Y, et al. Combination effects between regular roughages of alfalfa hay and Chinese wildrye in Liaoning cashmere goats[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2013, 25(10):2481-2488. (in Chinese)