Altering undigested neutral detergent fiber through additives applied in corn, whole barley crop, and alfalfa silages, and its effect on performance of lactating Holstein dairy cows

Effect of forage types differing in undigested neutral detergent fiber concentration and forage inclusion rate on reticulo-ruminal motility and fermentation, total tract barrier function, and blood metabolites of finishing beef heifers

This study evaluated the effects of forages (BarS vs. STR) that differ in the uNDF concentration and FI rate on ruminal fermentation, total tract barrier function, reticulo-ruminal motility, and blood metabolites of beef heifers. Six ruminally cannulated Hereford × Simmental heifers (699 ± 69.1 kg BW) were used in a 6 × 6 Latin square (26 d periods) with a 2 × 3 factorial treatment arrangement. However, 1 heifer was removed from the study after period 2 due to health problems unrelated to treatment, resulting in an incomplete 6 × 6 Latin square design. Barley grain-based diets were formulated using BarS or wheat STR to alter uNDF (7.1% vs. 8.5% DM) with FI rates of 5%, 10%, or 15% of DM. There were limited interactions between the forage type and FI. DM intake was not affected (P ≥ 0.10) by forage type or FI. Use of STR vs. BarS increased uNDF intake (P < 0.001). Increasing FI increased (P < 0.001) uNDF intake for those fed 15% forage. Ruminal pH was not affected (P ≥ 0.10) by forage type; however, cattle fed 5% FI had lesser (P = 0.017) mean ruminal pH and maximum pH (P = 0.018) than those fed 10% and 15% of forage. The total SCFA concentration was not affected by forage type (P = 0.84) but cattle fed the 5% FI rate had lesser (P < 0.001) molar proportion of acetate when compared with cattle fed 10% and 15% forage. Increasing the FI rate decreased the molar proportion of propionate (P < 0.001). Feeding STR relative to BarS decreased (P = 0.041) the reticulo-ruminal contraction duration. In contrast, cattle fed the 10% and 15% FI rates had a greater (P = 0.028) contraction frequency with lower (P = 0.048) contraction area than those fed 5% forage. Plasma glucose, serum insulin, and serum amyloid A were not affected by forage type or FI rate (P ≥ 0.10). Cattle fed 15% forage had lesser (P = 0.040) concentration of serum haptoglobin when compared with cattle fed 5% or 10% forage. In conclusion, forage type used to affect the dietary uNDF concentration, and FI rate act independently suggesting that the provision of STR to increase uNDF reduces reticulo-ruminal contraction duration and total tract permeability but may not affect ruminal pH. Increasing the FI increased dietary uNDF, stabilized ruminal pH, stimulated more frequent reticulo-ruminal contractions, and may decrease the permeability of the gastrointestinal tract and systemic inflammation.

Effect of silage source, physically effective neutral detergent fiber, and undigested neutral detergent fiber concentrations on performance and carcass characteristics of finishing steers

This study was designed to evaluate the effect of silage source (barley vs. wheat silage) when harvested at two chop lengths (low vs. high physically effective neutral detergent fiber [peNDF]) and when barley silage was partially replaced with straw to increase the undigested neutral detergent fiber (uNDF) concentration on performance and carcass characteristics of finishing steers. Four hundred and fifty yearling commercial crossbred steers with an initial body weight (BW) of 432 ± 30.5 kg were allocated to 30 pens and fed diets containing 90% concentrate:10% forage for 123 d in a completely randomized block design with a 2 × 2 + 1 factorial arrangement. Treatments included 1) barley silage (BarS) with low peNDF (LpeNDF); 2) BarS with high peNDF (HpeNDF); 3) BarS with straw to yield a diet with LpeNDF + uNDF; 4) wheat silage (WhS) LpeNDF; and 5) WhS HpeNDF. There were no silage × peNDF interactions for dry matter intake (DMI), average daily gain (ADG), or gain to feed ratio (G:F), but cattle fed WhS LpeNDF had a lower (P < 0.01) proportion of yield grade 3 and a greater proportion in yield grade 2 carcasses than cattle fed BarS LpeNDF or HpeNDF and WhS HpeNDF. Cattle fed WhS LpeNDF had greater (P = 0.02) incidence of severe liver abscesses when compared with cattle fed BarS LpeNDF or HpeNDF and WhS HpeNDF. Cattle fed BarS consumed less (P < 0.01) uNDF as a percentage of BW, had increased (P = 0.02) ADG, heavier (P = 0.02) hot carcass weight, with greater (P = 0.01) back fat thickness, and (P < 0.01) incidence of minor liver abscesses when compared with cattle fed WhS. Feeding HpeNDF did not affect DMI, ADG, or G:F, but increased (P = 0.02) marbling score and reduced (P < 0.01) the proportion AA quality grade and increased (P < 0.01) those classified as AAA when compared with cattle fed LpeNDF. Cattle fed low uNDF had lesser (P < 0.01) uNDF intake as a percentage of BW, greater dressing percentage (P = 0.01), had a lower (P < 0.01) proportion of carcasses in yield grade 2, and a greater (P < 0.01) proportion of carcasses in yield grade 3 when compared with cattle fed high uNDF. Thus, silage source, peNDF, and uNDF content do not impact DMI or G:F when diets contain 10% forage, but BarS relative to WhS as well strategies increasing the peNDF concentration may increase ADG, HCW, back fat thickness, dressing percentage, marbling score, and carcasses classified as quality grade AAA. Future research is needed to evaluate the usefulness of peNDF and uNDF in rations for finishing cattle.