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 Burroughs, W. Articles by Gerlaugh, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Burroughs, W. Articles by Gerlaugh, P.

Cellulose Digestion in Good and Poor Quality Roughages Using an Artificial Rumen¹

Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station

Abstract

Four poor quality roughages—corn stover, wheat straw, corncobs, and mature timothy-blue grass hay—were compared in in vitro cellulose digestion studies with four good quality dehydrated forages—clover hay, rye hay, and two shipments of alfalfa hay, respectively. Supplements—including available nitrogen, a complex mineral mixture, and an autoclaved water extract of cow manure—each of which proved beneficial to the digestion of filter paper cellulose in control studies, were added singly and in combination to each of the good and poor quality roughages. The cellulose in the good quality roughages was digested efficiently without supplementation, digestion being as good as that occurring when the additions of complex minerals and autoclaved manure extract were included. Conversely, the cellulose in the poor quality roughages failed to be digested efficiently without supplementation. The additions of complex minerals and manure extract along with available nitrogen greatly increased cellulose digestion in these poor quality roughages. The results were interpreted with respect to the advantages and limitations of the artificial rumen technique in determining the nutritive requirements of rumen microorganisms and the adequacies and inadequacies of natural feeds in supplying these nutrients.

¹ Published with the approval of the Director of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. Supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid from Swift and Company, Chicago, Illinois.