Adaptation of ruminants to browse and grass diets: are anatomical-based browser-grazer interpretations valid?

Robbins, Charles T.; Spalinger, Donald E.; Hoven, W. Van

doi:10.1007/bf00329082

Cited by 170 publications

(138 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

121

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There have been two previous measurements of their mass by Robbins et al (1995) and Hofmann et al, (2008). Robbins et al provided no details of their mass.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The size of the glands in giraffes (and okapi), which is relatively far smaller than in any other ruminant, clearly has a genetic component and perhaps an epigenetic one as it may be affected by the consistency of the diet with diets providing mechanical stimulation leading to hypertrophy (Kay, 1987), by the volume of saliva produced (Hofmann, 1989), by the amount of tannin neutralizing proteins secreted (Robbins et al, 1995), and /or variation in habitat, variation with seasons, increasing in summer and regressing in winter, and dissection technique . Hofmann et al also suggested that the small parotid gland in okapi and giraffes could be complemented by comparatively large mandibular, buccal and sublingual glands.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Saliva secretion rate is stimulated by eating (Kay, 1987) and varies with dry matter intake and bite size (Robbins et al, 1995). In giraffe it varies with browse height (Young & Isbell, 1991), bite size varies between 2.5 (Pellew, 1984B) to 0.5 grams per bite (Young & Isbell, 1991) and they take 15-30 bites a minute (Pellew, 1984A;Young & Isbell, 1991).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There have been sporadic measurements of salivary gland mass (Robbins et al, 1995;Hofmann et al, 2008) but no systematic analysis of their ontogeny.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The digestive morphophysiology of wild, free-living, giraffes

Mitchell

Roberts

Sittert

2015

Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular &

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have measured rumen-complex (rumen, reticulum, omasum, abomasum) and intestine (small and large combined) mass in 32 wild giraffes of both sexes with body masses ranging from 289 -1441kg, and parotid gland mass, tongue length and mass, masseter and mandible mass in 9 other giraffes ranging in body mass from 181 to 1396kg. We have estimated metabolic and energy production rates, feed intake and home range size. Interspecific analysis of mature ruminants show that components of the digestive system increase linearly (Mb 1 ) or positively allometric (Mb >1 ) with body mass while variables associated with feed intake scale with metabolic rate (Mb .75 ). Conversely, in giraffes ontogenetic increases in rumen-complex mass were negatively allometric (Mb <1 ), and increases in intestine mass, parotid gland mass, masseter mass, and mandible mass were isometric (Mb 1 ). The relative masseter muscle mass (0.14% of Mb) and the relative parotid mass (0.03% of Mb) are smaller than in other ruminants. Increases in tongue length scale with head length 0.72 and Mb .32 and tongue mass with Mb .69 . Absolute mass of the gastrointestinal tract increased throughout growth but its relative mass declined from 20% to 15% of Mb. Rumen-complex fermentation provides ca43% of daily energy needs, large intestine fermentation 24% and 33% by digestion of soluble carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. Dry matter intake (kg) was 2.4 % of body mass in juveniles and 1.6% in adults.Energy requirements increased from 35Mj/day to 190 Mj/day. Browse production rate sustains a core home range of 2.2-11.8 km 2 .

show abstract

“…There have been two previous measurements of their mass by Robbins et al (1995) and Hofmann et al, (2008). Robbins et al provided no details of their mass.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There have been sporadic measurements of salivary gland mass (Robbins et al, 1995;Hofmann et al, 2008) but no systematic analysis of their ontogeny.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The digestive morphophysiology of wild, free-living, giraffes

Mitchell

Roberts

Sittert

2015

Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular &

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Robbins et al (1995) postulated that RR liquid flow rate in ruminants was independent of feeding type, and was RR liquid flow rate (ml h -1 ) = 11.5 BM 0.98 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal faecal excretion, gut fill, liquid and particle marker retention in mouflonOvis ammon musimon, and a comparison with roe deerCapreolus capreolus

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seasonal faecal excretion, gut fill, liquid and particle marker retention in mouflon ovis ammon musimon, and a comparison with roe deer capreolus capreolus Seasonal faecal excretion, gut fill, liquid and particle marker retention in mouflon ovis ammon musimon, and a comparison with roe deer capreolus capreolus AbstractFive mouflon (average body mass [BM] 33 kg) and two roe deer (average BM 20 kg) with rumen cannulas were kept in large enclosures under semi-natural conditions and were used for seasonal studies on gastrointestinal tract (GIT) indigestible fill and digesta passage kinetics. As the mouflon were not fully mature, both species had similar digesta volumes in the reticulorumen (RR; mouflon 5.5 ± 1.8% of BM; roe deer 5.4 ± 1.5% of BM); however, the mouflon had lower RR liquid flow rates (15.1 ± 4.3 ml h-1 kg-0.75) than the roe deer (19.2 ± 0.2 ml h-1 kg-0.75), and particle retention in the RR accounted for 68 ± 3% of total GIT retention in the mouflon versus 55 ± 6% in the roe deer. Annual average total GIT retention times for liquids and particles were longer in the mouflon (23.4 ± 0.9 h and 37.9 ± 4.0 h) than in the roe deer (18.4 ± 1.7 h and 22.4 ± 1.9 h). Similarly, annual average RR retention times for liquids and particles were longer in the mouflon (11.9 ± 0.9 h and 25.8 ± 3.3 h) than in the roe deer (8.1 ± 1.7 h and 12.5 ± 2.3 h). The factor of selective particle retention in the RR (retention of particles/retention of liquid) was 2.10 ± 0.09 in the mouflon versus 1.54 ± 0.01 in the roe deer. These observations are in accord with differences in digesta passage characteristics postulated between browsing and grazing ruminants. Total GIT indigestible fill was lower in the mouflon than in the roe deer (10.7 ± 2.1 g kg-1 and 13.3 ± 1.0 g kg-1). As the mouflon were not fully mature, both species had similar digesta volumes in the reticulorumen (RR; mouflon 5.5 ± 1.8% of BM; roe deer 5.4 ± 1.5% of BM); however, the mouflon had lower RR liquid flow rates (15.1 ± 4.3 ml h -1 kg -0.75 ) than the roe deer (19.2 ± 0.2 ml h -1 kg -0.75 ), and particle retention in the RR accounted for 68 ± 3% of total GIT retention in the mouflon versus 55 ± 6% in the roe deer. Annual average total GIT retention times for liquids and particles were longer in the mouflon (23.4 ± 0.9 h and 37.9 ± 4.0 h) than in the roe deer (18.4 ± 1.7 h and 22.4 ± 1.9 h). Similarly, annual average RR retention times for liquids and particles were longer in the mouflon (11.9 ± 0.9 h and 25.8 ± 3.3 h) than in the roe deer (8.1 ± 1.7 h and 12.5 ± 2.3 h). The factor of selective particle retention in the RR (retention of particles/retention of liquid) was 2.10 ± 0.09 in the mouflon versus 1.54 ± 0.01 in the roe deer. These observations are in accord with differences in digesta passage characteristics postulated between browsing and grazing ruminants. Total GIT indigestible fill was lower in the mouflon than in the roe deer (10.7 ± 2.1 g kg -1 and 13.3 ± 1.0 g kg -1 ).

show abstract

Small ruminants: Digestive capacity differences among four species weighing less than 20 kg

Conklin‐Brittain

Dierenfeld

1996

Zoo Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small ruminants are generally classified as either browsers or frugivores. We compared intake and digestion in one browsing species, the pudu (Pudu pudu), body weight 9 kg, and three frugivorous species, the red brocket (Mazama americana), 20 kg, the bay duiker (Cephalophus dorsalis), 12 kg, and Maxwell's duiker (C. maxwellii), 9 kg. Rations comprised: a commercial grain and alfalfa pellet, a small amount of vegetables, and mixed hay. Across species, neutral‐detergent fiber (insoluble fiber) consumed averaged 34.2 ± 2.6% of dry matter (DM) while the crude protein consumed averaged 16.1 ± 0.5% DM. Apparent DM digestion was similar in pudu (75.2 ± 4.7%), brocket (73.2 ± 1.1%), and Maxwell's duikers (73.0 ± 2.8%), and significantly lower (P = 0.0167) in bay duikers (67.1 ± 4.3%). There were significant differences among species in digestibilities of neutral‐detergent fiber, hemicellulose, and cellulose, but they did not follow body size differences, since larger species were expected to show higher digestion coefficients for fiber compared to smaller species. The type of fiber fed may have influenced these results. Frugivores may be adapted to a diet of soluble fibers, as might be found in wild fruits, instead of the insoluble fibers in the diet fed. Passage trials were conducted on the two smallest species. The mean transit time for pudu was 29.9 ± 0.8 hr, and for the Maxwell's duiker was 42.2 ± 6.4 hr. © 1996 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

show abstract

Adaptation of ruminants to browse and grass diets: are anatomical-based browser-grazer interpretations valid?

Cited by 170 publications

References 32 publications

The digestive morphophysiology of wild, free-living, giraffes

The digestive morphophysiology of wild, free-living, giraffes

Seasonal faecal excretion, gut fill, liquid and particle marker retention in mouflonOvis ammon musimon, and a comparison with roe deerCapreolus capreolus

Small ruminants: Digestive capacity differences among four species weighing less than 20 kg

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About