Comparison of methods for forage digestibility determination

Jančík, F.; Rinne, Marketta; Homolka, P.; Čermák, Bohuslav; Huhtanen, Pekka

doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.05.003

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These effects are in agreement with a tendency of reduced k dIS than k dIV of NDF for grass hay in this study. Partly in agreement with the results of this study, Jančík et al (2011) reported on average less k dIS than k dIV of NDF (3.6 vs. 6.4%/h; P < 0.001) for grasses and grass silages of different species and maturities. However, there were no differences between the methods in estimation of k d of NDF for the grass silages in this study.…”

Section: In Situ Compared With Gas In Vitro Derived Digestion Ratesupporting

confidence: 92%

“…However, there were no differences between the methods in estimation of k d of NDF for the grass silages in this study. In the present study the k dIS values for silages were clearly greater than those in the study of Jančík et al (2011), suggesting between laboratory differences in the in situ data (Madsen and Hvelplund, 1994), which was further supported in our meta-analysis. Bossen et al (2008) demonstrated that k dIS of NDF were generally less than in vitro estimates across different feeds due to suboptimal conditions inside the bags, but they also suggested that diurnal variation in rumen conditions may moderate this effect.…”

Section: In Situ Compared With Gas In Vitro Derived Digestion Ratesupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Faster k d determined by rumen evacuation technique compared with the in situ values (Aitchison et al, 1986;Tamminga et al, 1989;Rinne et al, 2002) supports that the in situ technique may underestimate the k d of NDF. Accurate and precise predictions of in vivo NDFD (Huhtanen et al, 2008) and realistic predictions of pdNDF digestibility (Jančík et al, 2011) from parameters derived from the gas in vitro data indicate that the gas in vitro system is a useful tool for estimating k d for NDF.…”

Section: In Situ Compared With Gas In Vitro Derived Digestion Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of some aspects of the in situ and in vitro methods in evaluation of neutral detergent fiber digestion

Krizsan

Jančík

Ramin

et al. 2013

Journal of Animal Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the present study was to compare digestion rates (kd) of NDF for different feeds estimated with the in situ method or derived from an automated gas in vitro system. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate how in situ derived kd of NDF related to in vivo digestibility of NDF. Furthermore, in vitro true digestibility of the feed samples incubated within filter bags or dispersed in the medium was compared, and kd for insoluble and soluble components of those feeds were estimated. Four different concentrates and 4 forages were used in this study. Two lactating Swedish Red cows fed a diet of 60% grass silage and 40% concentrate on DM basis were used for in situ incubations and for collection of rumen fluid. The feed samples were ground through a 2.0-mm screen before the in situ incubations and a 1.0-mm screen before the in vitro gas incubations. In situ nylon bags were introduced into the rumen for determination of kd of NDF. Additional kinetic data were produced from isolated NDF and intact samples subjected to in vitro incubations in which gas production was recorded for 72 h. Samples were weighed in the bottles or within filter bags (for fiber and in vitro studies) that were placed in the bottles. The interaction between feed and method was significant (P < 0.01); kd of NDF for grass hay tended (P = 0.06) to be less whereas kd of NDF for alfalfa, barley grain, canola meal, and dried sugar beet pulp were greater (P < 0.01) when estimated with the in situ method than from gas production recordings. The meta-analysis suggested that in situ derived kd of NDF were biased and underestimated in vivo digestibility of NDF. Digestion rates of the intact samples were lower for all feeds, except for the hay, when incubated within the bags compared with dispersed in the medium (P < 0.01). Less OM and NDF were digested for all feeds when incubated within bags than dispersed in the medium (P < 0.01). It is concluded from the in vitro study that microbial activity within the bags is less than in the medium. Significant interactions between method (in situ vs. in vitro) and feed suggest that one or both methods result in biased estimates of digestion kinetics.

show abstract

Section: In Situ Compared With Gas In Vitro Derived Digestion Ratesupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: In Situ Compared With Gas In Vitro Derived Digestion Ratesupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: In Situ Compared With Gas In Vitro Derived Digestion Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of some aspects of the in situ and in vitro methods in evaluation of neutral detergent fiber digestion

Krizsan

Jančík

Ramin

et al. 2013

Journal of Animal Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In conclusion, the OMS method provides a reliable basis for OMD prediction, but caution should be directed to forage specificity. A recent comparison (Jančík et al 2011) of different laboratory methods in predicting OMD revealed that OMS gave substantially higher OMD estimates than empirical iNDF equation or mechanistic model using gas in vitro production kinetics, especially for Lolium perenne. This suggests that specific OMS correction equations may be needed even for different grass species.…”

Section: Prediction Of Silage Digestibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

An overview of silage research in Finland: from ensiling innovation to advances in dairy cow feeding

Huhtanen¹,

Jaakkola²,

Nousiainen³

2013

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because of the climatic conditions, the Finnish milk production research has focused to improve the utilisation of grassland, mainly as conserved forages. The main research areas have been ensiling, evaluation of the forage feeding value, predicting nutrient supply from grass silage-based diet and the effects of forage quality and concentrate supplementation on milk production responses. Due to changes in ensiling technologies and variety of forage crops new silage additives have been adopted. A centralized system for the analysis of forage energy value is based on NIRS calibration. It was calibrated against in vitro pepsin-cellulase solubility method that was validated against in vivo digestibility. The concentration of indigestible neutral detergent fibre was found to be a useful parameter both in empirical models predicting forage digestibility and mechanistic rumen models predicting the amounts of absorbed nutrients. Models predicting relative intake potential of forages and total diet were developed, and an intake model combining animal and diet effects independently of each other was developed. Using meta-analysis approaches a nutrient response model was developed for dairy cows for milk, energy corrected milk and protein yield. Feed evaluation, intake and nutrient response models form now the basis of practical Finnish ration formulation system that can optimize diets according to maximum income over feed cost in addition to minimum feed cost.

show abstract

“…In vitro methods can be divided into rumen liquor digestion (Tilley and Terry, 1963), rumen liquor gas production (Menke et al, 1979), and enzymatic digestion methods (Weisbjerg and Hvelplund, 1993). Due to the high nutritive variability and importance of ruminant diets, most OMD evaluations and comparisons of methods have focused on forage (Barber et al, 1990;Gosselink et al, 2004;Jančík et al, 2011), and limited attention has been placed on concentrate feed ingredients and compound feeds. However, due to the high level of concentrates used in modern dairy production and new feed ingredients, a precise estimation of OMD in concentrate feeds is needed to match the diet supply to energy requirements and thus avoid excess feeding or under-supply.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision and additivity of organic matter digestibility obtained via in vitro multi-enzymatic method

Álvarez

Prestløkken

Nielsen

et al. 2020

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The enzymatic digestibility of organic matter (EDOM) method is an in vitro multi-enzymatic method for estimating the organic matter (OM) digestibility of feeds. The EDOM method previously showed high accuracy with in vivo values for compound feeds. The aim of this study was to evaluate the precision of the EDOM method and determine its additivity, compared with the long-assumed additive property of the chemical components of compound feeds. 149 feed samples, 70 commercial compound feeds and 79 associated ingredients, were analyzed in a laboratory (lab1) for OM digestibility measured by EDOM (OMD EDOM ) with 2 repetitions separated in time to estimate repeatability. Of the total samples, 49 compound feeds were further analyzed in a commercial laboratory (lab2) for OM-D EDOM to determine reproducibility. The 49 compounds and their 69 associated ingredients were also analyzed by lab2 for dry matter (DM), ash, crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), and starch. The EDOM method resulted in an intralaboratory correlation of 98.9% and an interlaboratory correlation of 92.6%, with no significant mean bias between the 2 laboratories tested. The formulation of compound feeds, total mixed rations, and mixtures in general assumes that their nutrient content can be calculated by adding together the nutrient supply of individual ingredients. This is of great importance in the feed industry for the creation of compound feeds. Additivity of OMD EDOM for the compound feed samples was evaluated by comparing the sum of the digestible OM (DOM EDOM ) of the ingredients (predicted) with DOM EDOM estimated directly in the compound feed (observed). The regression of predicted versus observed showed a coefficient of determination (R 2 ) of 0.93 and root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.07% of total DM, with no linear bias but with a mean bias (0.83% of DM). Additivity of CP, starch, crude fat, and NDF showed an R 2 of 0.95, 0.98, 0.95, and 0.93, and RMSE of 1.56, 1.90, 0.39, and 1.46% of DM, respectively, all presenting linear bias. Crude fat also presented mean bias. Although significant, all linear and mean bias for DOM EDOM and chemical components were within the acceptable error limits for declaration of feeds. The results demonstrate the high precision of the EDOM method and its additive property, which is an advantage for the estimation of OM digestibility in compound feeds. Moreover, results of the tests of chemical components confirm their additive property.

show abstract

Comparison of methods for forage digestibility determination

Cited by 7 publications

References 42 publications

Comparison of some aspects of the in situ and in vitro methods in evaluation of neutral detergent fiber digestion

Comparison of some aspects of the in situ and in vitro methods in evaluation of neutral detergent fiber digestion

An overview of silage research in Finland: from ensiling innovation to advances in dairy cow feeding

Precision and additivity of organic matter digestibility obtained via in vitro multi-enzymatic method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About