J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Legleiter, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Kerley, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Legleiter, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Kerley, M. S.
J. Anim. Sci. 2005. 83:863-870
© 2005 American Society of Animal Science

ANIMAL NUTRITION

Level of supplemental protein does not influence the ruminally undegradable protein value1

L. R. Legleiter, A. M. Mueller and M. S. Kerley2

Department of Animal Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211

2 Correspondence: 111 ASRC (phone: 573-882-0834; fax: 573-884-7712; e-mail: kerleym{at}missouri.edu).

Two experiments were conducted to determine whether elevating the percentage of ruminally undegradable protein (RUP) in the diet would influence the RUP value of the protein feedstuff. A single-effluent, continuous-culture study was designed to test the effect of RUP inclusion rate in the diet on ruminal degradability of the protein. Treatments consisted (DM basis) of a control diet with no supplemental protein, control + 2.5% bloodmeal (BM-L), control + 5% bloodmeal (BM-H), control + 4.45% soybean meal (SBM-L), and control + 8.89% soybean meal (SBM-H). Proteolytic activity and total VFA concentration were not affected (P = 0.73 and P = 0.13) by treatment. Within protein source, dietary RUP value was not affected (P = 0.94) by level of inclusion. When corrected for control diet RUP flow, the RUP value of the blood meal (BM) protein was higher (P = 0.01) than soybean meal (SBM); however, level of supplementation did not affect (P = 0.07) the RUP value of BM or SBM. In Exp. 2, 32 British x Continental crossbred steers (276 ± 26.3 kg) were fed for 72 d to examine the effects of balancing the AA:energy ratio, using BM as a RUP source, on ADG, G:F, and lean tissue deposition. Diets were formulated to provide increasing levels of arginine, while ruminally degradable protein and energy were held constant. Four dietary treatments provided 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2x the required amount of arginine, whereas the control diet had no BM included. Daily DMI averaged 7.6 kg/steer and did not differ (P = 0.71) among treatments. Steers gained an average of 1.9 kg/d and average G:F was 0.260, with no differences (P = 0.60 and P = 0.97, respectively) among treatments. There was no difference (P = 0.48) in the change in 12th-rib fat depth during the study; however, change in LM area was affected quadratically as the level of BM increased in the diet, with the greatest increase in LM area occurring in steers fed the 1x and 1.5x required arginine treatments. Balancing the AA:energy ratio did not affect G:F, DMI, or ADG; however, it increased deposition of lean in the LM quadratically. Level of dietary inclusion of BM as an RUP source does not affect its RUP value or efficacy of providing postruminal AA in growing steers.

Key Words: Amino Acid:Energy • Bloodmeal • Feed Efficiency • Ruminally Undegradable Protein






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Society of Animal Science.