Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Influence of Urea Treatment and Soybean Meal (Urease) Addition on the Utilization of Wheat Straw by Sheep

  • Kraidees, M.S. (Department of Animal Production, College of Agriculture, King Saud University)
  • Received : 2004.05.19
  • Accepted : 2005.02.18
  • Published : 2005.07.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The effect of ammoniation with urea and with soybean meal (SBM) as a source of urease on the nutritive value of wheat straw was evaluated in sheep. Twenty-four male Najdi lambs were used in a 3${\times}$2 factorial design, in which the animals were allocated to three straw treatments: 0% urea-treated (NT), 6% urea-treated (UT) and 2.2% urea-supplemented (US) straws. Each straw treatment was either supplemented or non-supplemented with 70 g SBM $kg^{-1}$ straw during the treatment time with urea, giving a total of six straw treatments. Each of these treatments was individually fed ad libitum to 4 lambs, together with 300 g of barley grain/head/day. Total N content of UT and US straws increased significantly (p<0.001) as compared to NT straw. The degree of urea hydrolysis, either with or without SBM addition, was nearly similar. Lambs fed either UT or US straw based diets had significantly (p<0.01) and numerically (p>0.05) higher straw DM intake (g $d^{-1}$ $kg^{-1}$ $BW^{0.75}$), compared to those fed NT straw based diet. Apparent DM or OM digestibilities increased significantly (p = 0.014) in lambs fed UT diet, and numerically (p>0.05) in lambs fed US diet as compared to those fed NT diet. Fiber (CF, NDF, ADF, cellulose and hemicellulose) digestibility increased to a similar magnitude, averaging 20.2 (p<0.001) and 7.8% (p<0.07); this corresponds to 35 (p<0.001) and 51% (p<0.001) in N digestibility and approximately 78 (p<0.017) and 105% (p<0.002) in N retention, for UT and US diets, respectively, as compared to NT diet. However, the UT diet had higher (p<0.01) fiber digestibility over the US diet. Addition of SBM tended to improve (p = 0.09) straw DM and digestible OM intakes, while significantly increasing (p<0.001) total and digestible CP intakes across all diets. Lambs fed on US diet had higher ruminal ammonia N than those fed on UT (p<0.05) or NT (p<0.001) diets. However, ruminal pH and molar proportion of the volatile fatty acids did not differ (p>0.05) among the treatment diets. This study suggests that US and UT treatments, particularly the latter, improved straw intake, digestibility and N utilization by lambs compared to NT treatment. On the other hand, addition of SBM as a source of urease had a negligible effect on urea hydrolysis.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahmed, A., M. J. Khan, M. Shahjalal and K. M. S. Islam. 2002. Effects of feeding urea and soybean meal -treated rice straw on digestibility of feed nutrients and growth performance of Bull calves. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 15(4):522-527.
  2. Anon. 2002. Agriculture Statistical Year Book 14th Issue. Agriculture research and development affairs, department of economic studies and statistics, ministry of agriculture and water resources.
  3. AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis 15th edn. Association of official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, Virginia.
  4. Ben Salem, H., A. Nefzaoui and N. Rokbani. 1994. Upgrading of sorghum stover with anhydrous ammonia or urea treatments. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 48:15-26.
  5. Dias-da-Silva, A. A. and F. Sundstol. 1986. Urea as a source of ammonia for improving the nutritive value of wheat straw. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 14:67-79.
  6. Dias-da-Silva, A. A., A. Mascarenhas-Ferreira and V. M. Gudes-Cristina. 1988. Effects of moisture level, treatment time and soya bean meal addition on the nutritive value of urea treated maize stover. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 19:67-77.
  7. Djajanegara, A. and P. T. Doyle. 1989. Urea supplementation compared with pretreatment. 1. Effect on intake, digestion and live weight change by sheep fed a rice straw. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 27:17-30.
  8. Goering, H. K. and P. J. Van Soest. 1970. Forage fiber analyses (apparatus, reagents, procedures, and some applications). Agric. Handbook 379. ARS, USDA, Washington, DC, p. 20.
  9. Hadjipanayiotou, M. 1982. The effect of ammoniation using urea on the intake and nutritive value of chopped barley straw. Grass and Forage Sci. 37:89-93.
  10. Hartley, R. D. and E. C. Jones. 1978. Effect of aqueous ammonia and other alkalis on the in vitro digestibility of barley straw. J. Sci. Food Agric. 29:92-98.
  11. Herrera-Saldana, R., D. C. Church and R. O. Kellems. 1982. The effect of ammoniation treatment on intake and nutritive value of wheat straw. J. Anim. Sci. 54(3):603-608.
  12. Jayasuriya, M. C. N. and G. R. Pearce. 1983. The effect of urease enzyme on treatment time and the nutritive value of straw treated with ammonia as urea. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 8:271-281.
  13. Khan, M. J., J. R. Scaife and F. D. Hovell. 1999. The effect of different sources of urease enzyme on the nutritive value of wheat straw treated with urea as a source of ammonia. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 12:1063-1069.
  14. Kraidees, M. S. 1997. Effects of temperature, addition of soybean meal and treatment period on the nutritive value of urea treated wheat straw. J. King Saud Univ., Agric. Sci. 9(1):73-86.
  15. Kraiem, K., H. Abdouli and R. D. Goodrich. 1991. Comparison of the effects of urea and ammonia treatments of wheat straw on intake, digestibility and performance of sheep. Livest. Produc. Sci. 29:311-321.
  16. Maeng, W. J., C. J. van Nevel, R. L. Baldwin and J. C. Morris. 1976. Rumen microbial growth rates and yields: effects of amino acids and protein. J. Dairy Sci. 59:68-79.
  17. Males, J. R. and G. T. Gaskins. 1982. Growth, nitrogen retention, dry matter digestibility and ruminal characteristics associated with ammoniated wheat straw diets. J. Anim. Sci. 55(3):505-515.
  18. Manyuchi, B., S. Mikayiri and T. Smith. 1994. Effect of treating or supplementing maize stover with urea on its utilization as feed for sheep and cattle. Anim. Feed Sci. and Technol. 49:11-23.
  19. Mgheni Dyness, M., A. E. Kimambo, F. Sundstol and J. Maden. 1993. Influence of urea treatment or supplementation on degradation, intake and growth performance of goat fed rice straw diets. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 44:209-220.
  20. Mgheni Dyness, M., A. E. Kimambo, F. Sundstol and J. Maden. 1994. The influence of urea supplementation or treatment of rice straw and fish meal supplementation on rumen environment and activity in sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 49:223-235.
  21. Moore, J. E. 1970. In vitro dry matter and organic matter digestion. In: (Ed. L. E. Haris) Nutrition Research Techniques for domestic and wild animals. pp. 5001-5001:5. Loran E. Haris. Logan, UT.
  22. Mould, F. L., E. R. Orskov and S. O. Mann. 1983. Associative effects of mixed feeds. I. Effect of type and level of supplementation on the influence of the rumen fluid pH on cellulolysis in vivo and dry matter digestion of various roughages. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 10:15-30.
  23. Nair, P. V., A. K. Verma, R. S. Dass and U. R. Mehra. 2002. Growth and nutrient utilization in buffalo calves fed ureaammoniated wheat straw and hydrochloric acid plus urea treated wheat straw. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 15(5):682-686. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2002.682
  24. Naik, P. K., S. K. Mendiratta, V. Laxmanan, Usha R. Mehra and R. S. Dass. 2004. Effect of feeding ammoniated wheat straw treated with and without hydrochloric acid on meat quality and various sensory attributes of growing male buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) calves. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 17(4):485-490.
  25. Oji, U. I., D. N. Mowat and J. G. Buchanan-Smith. 1979. Nutritive value of thermo-ammoniated and steam-treated maize stover II. Rumen metabolites and rate of passage. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 4:187-197.
  26. SAS Institute Inc. 1998. SAS/STAT User's Guide: SAS institute. Inc., Cary, North Carolina.
  27. Satter, L. D. and L. L. Slyter. 1974. Effect of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in vitro. Br. J. Nutr. 32:199-208.
  28. Solaiman, S. G., G. W. Horn and F. N. Owens. 1979. Ammonium hydroxide treatment on wheat straw. J. Anim. Sci. 49(3):802-808.
  29. Streeter, C. L. and G. W. Horn. 1984. Effect of high moisture and dry ammoniation of wheat straw on its feeding value for lambs. J. Anim. Sci. 59(3):559-565.
  30. Tilly, J. M. A. and R. A. Terry. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 18:104-111.
  31. Tuen, A. A., M. M. Dahan, B. A. Young and P. Vijchulata. 1991. Intake and digestion of urea -treated, urea supplemented and untreated rice straw by goats. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 32:333-340.
  32. Williams, P. E. V., G. M. Innes and A. Brewer. 1984. Ammonia treatment of straw via the hydrolysis of urea. II. Addition of soya bean (urease), sodium hydroxide and molasses, effects on the digestibility of urea-treated straw. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 11:115-124.
  33. Zorrilla-Rios, J., G. W. Horn and R. W. McNew, 1989. Effect of ammoniation and energy supplementation on the utilization of wheat straw by sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 22:305-320.

Cited by

  1. The impact of hydrolyzing and oxidizing agents on chemical composition and digestibility of various high-fibre forages vol.73, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12369
  2. Utilization of Steam-treated Oil Palm Fronds in Growing Saanen Goats: II. Supplementation with Energy and Urea vol.19, pp.11, 2005, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2006.1623
  3. Effects of forage species and feeding systems on rumen fermentation, microbiota and conjugated linoleic acid content in dairy goats vol.59, pp.12, 2005, https://doi.org/10.1071/an18232