Comparative dry matter intake and nutrient utilisation efficiency in lactating cattle and buffaloes

Abstract

An attempt was made to assess the comparative dry matter intake and nutrient utilisation efficiency of lactating buffaloes and cows based on results obtained from experimental feeding trials conducted in India. Data on dry matter (DM) intake, total digestible nutrient (TDN) intake, digestible crude protein (DCP) intake, body weight or metabolic body size (MBS), body weight change, milk yield or 4% fat-corrected milk (FCM) yield, milk fat percentage and roughage/concentrate ratio in the diet of lactating buffaloes and cows were collected from published reports. The data were processed and analysed to assess the comparative dry matter intake and nutrient utilisation efficiency using suitable statistical analysis models. DM intake was significantly (P < 0.01) lower in buffaloes (2.57 kg DM per 100 kg body weight or 119.2 g kg À1 MBS) than in cattle (3.09 kg DM per 100 kg body weight or 132.0 g kg À1 MBS). Mean gross energetic efficiency (30.53 versus 27.83%; P < 0.01), gross protein efficiency (45.48 versus 37.06%; P < 0.01), net energetic efficiency (69.16 versus 64.10%; P < 0.05) and net protein efficiency (80.15 versus 59.59%; P < 0.001) were significantly higher in buffaloes than in cattle. Lactating buffaloes consumed significantly less (P < 0.001) protein (75.69 g DCP) and less (P < 0.01) energy (695.9 g TDN) than cows (93.89 g DCP, 774.8 g TDN) for production of 1 kg of 4% fat-corrected milk. Buffaloes had higher energy and protein utilisation efficiencies as compared with cattle at similar fat-corrected milk production level, plane of energy and protein nutrition, body size and body weight change. Buffaloes (1.189 kg DM kg À1 4% FCM) consumed a similar (P > 0.05) amount of feed dry matter to that of cows (1.267 kg DM kg À1 4% FCM). However, when DM intake kg À1 FCM (4%) was compared at constant levels of metabolic body size, fat-corrected milk, body weight change, dietary energy concentration and green forage percentage in the diet, lactating buffaloes consumed significantly less DM kg À1 FCM yield as compared with cattle. It was concluded that DM intake was lower in lactating buffaloes. Moreover, lactating buffaloes utilised dietary dry matter, energy and protein for milk production more efficiently than cattle.

Comparative nutrient utilization, growth, and rumen enzyme profile of mithun (Bos frontalis) and Tho-tho cattle (Bos indicus) fed on tree-leaves-based ration

“…When buffaloes were compared with cattle in many experiments, similar results of higher DM intake in buffaloes than cattle were recorded (Kennedy 1990;Ichinohe et al 2004;Lapitan et al 2008), and higher DM intake is responsible for higher growth rate of animals (Trach and Thom 2004;Lapitan et al 2008). Paul et al (2003) reported that DM intake was significantly lower in buffaloes than cattle. In one of the experiments of comparison between cattle and sheep/goat, higher DMI/ W 0.75 in cattle than sheep or goat was observed (Reid et al 1990).…”

Nitrogen and Phosphorus Utilisation and Excretion in Dairy Buffalo Intensive Breeding

“…The lower protein-to-energy ratio in buffalo milk compared with bovine milk indicates that buffaloes are able to efficiently utilise forage that has relatively low protein content (Zicarelli, 1994;Paul et al, 2003). This feature of buffaloes has allowed them to adapt to environments where forage is characterised by a low protein-to-energy ratio (Zicarelli, 1994).…”

Determination of nutrient requirements for growth and maintenance of growing pigs under tropical condition

“…The BW range classes were as per the existing feeding standards being followed in India for pigs recommended by ICAR (Indian Council of Agricultural Research). The experimental data were subjected to regression analysis using the following model: A similar model was also used by other workers (Ratray et al, 1974;Abate, 1989;Walter and Mao, 1989;Solis et al, 1991;Paul et al, 2002Paul et al, , 2003aPaul et al, , b and 2004 for estimation of nutrient requirements from feeding trial data.…”

“…Regression analysis of feeding trial data provides estimates of nutrient requirements of productive animals kept under normal farm feeding condition. This approach is less costly, more convenient and, most importantly, can generate nutrient requirement data for animals kept under a normal production setting, without requiring energy chambers or slaughtering of animals and hence such an approach has been widely used (Ash and Norton, 1987;Abate, 1989;Onwuka and Akinsoyinu, 1989;Yang et al, 1997a and b;Zhang and Coon, 2000;Paul et al, 2002Paul et al, , 2003aPaul et al, , b and 2004Mandal et al, 2005;Okagbare et al, 2004). The present study was undertaken to determine energy, protein and amino acid requirements of growing pigs employing regression analysis models on combined nutrient intake and performance data of almost all of the experimental feeding trials conducted so far in India under diverse tropical feeding conditions.…”