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 Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cole, N. A. Articles by Hutcheson, D. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cole, N. A. Articles by Hutcheson, D. P.

Influence of Realimentation Diet on Recovery of Rumen Activity and Feed Intake in Beef Steers^1,2,

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bushland, TX 79012 and Texas A&M University Research Center, Amarillo 79106

Abstract

Two trials were conducted to determine the influence of realimentation diet energy, protein, B-vitamin (BV) and Lactobacillus acidophilus (LAC) content on recovery of rumen activity and feed consumption in beef steers. In trial 1, ruminal-fistulated steers were fasted and refed 1) prairie hay, 2) 10% protein (LCP), 3) 12.5% protein (MCP), 4) LCP + BV or 5) LCP + LAC. In trial 2, calves were fasted and refed 1) 60% cottonseed hulls-40% alfalfa dehy (high roughage), 2) LCP, 3) 15% protein (HCP), 4) LCP + BV or 5) LCP + LAC. Rumen fermentative capacity declined 74% (P<.05) during feed and water deprivation, but returned to control levels by d 7 of realimentation. On d 3 of realimentation, steers fed the LCP and MCP diets had molar proportions of ruminal butyrate in excess of 35%. Steers fed the hay, LAC and BV diets did not have a high butyrate fermentation. In trial 2, calves lost about 15% of their body weight during feed and water deprivation. Calves fed the high roughage diet appeared to return to prefast feed and energy intakes more slowly than steers fed the medium roughage diets. Results of this study indicate that rumen fermentative capacity is a factor limiting feed intake in fasted calves for 7 to 14 d after the reintroduction of feed and water.

¹ Contribution from USDA, Agricultural Research Service, in cooperation with The Texas Agr. Exp. Sta., Texas A&M Univ., College Station 77843.

² Mention of specific products or equipment does not constitute an endorsement by the USDA or Texas Agr. Exp. Sta., and does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that may be suitable.

³ USDA-ARS, Conservation and Production Research Laboratory, Bushland, TX 79012.

⁴ Texas A&M Univ. Research and Extension Center. Amarillo 79106.