HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Crawford, D. F. Articles by Harris, R. R. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Crawford, D. F. Articles by Harris, R. R.

Evaluation of Concentrated Hemicellulose Extract as Cattle Feed

Auburn University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, AL 36830

Abstract

A feed grade wood molasses made from the hydrolyzate resulting from the steaming of hardwood chips with water (IPEHE), was evaluated as a feed for cattle. Cane molasses (CM) and a commercial hemicellulose extract₁ (CHE) were the products to which the experimental molasses was compared.

The experiment consisted of three phases: I. A cattle finishing trials II. A digestion trial; and III. A palatability trial. The high energy finishing diet contained 10% of either IPEHE, CM or CHE. Each mixture was fed to two groups of 10 steers each. The average daily gains (kg) and feed efficiencies were: IPEHE, 1.35, 6.80; CHE, 1.30, 7.00; and CM, 1.36, 6.83. Differences were not significant (P>.05). Carcass merit was not affected by kind of molasses.

The digestion trial was a 4 x 4 latin square arrangement of treatments with two steers per cell with the diets the same as in the feeding trial but with the addition of a negative control (NC), basal diet without any molasses product. The differences among IPEHE, CM and CHE were significant. Both hemicellulose extract products enhanced cellulose digestibility.

The palatability trial was a 3 x 3 latin square arrangement of treatments with two steers per cell, The animals were fed a high fiber diet to meet maintenance requirements and had access to one of the experimental molasses products ad libitum. Differences in intake occurred but they were not significant.

IPEHE was of equal values to CM and CHE in a feeding program for ruminants.