Use of monosodium glutamate by‐product in cow diet on performance of lactating dairy cows

Abstract

Eight multiparous lactating Holstein cows were randomly assigned in a 4 × 4 replicated Latin square design to receive four dietary treatments. The dietary treatments were monosodium glutamate by-product (MSGB) replacement for soybean meal in concentrate at four levels: MSGB replacement at 0, 20, 40 and 60%, respectively. Pangola hay was given on an ad libitum basis. It was found that total dry matter intake, concentrate intake, pangola hay intake and all apparent digestibilities were not different among treatments. Ammonia nitrogen concentration in the rumen at 4 h post-feeding was significantly different, in which the 0% treatment had the highest (P < 0.05) while the 20% treatment had the lowest. Milk fat percentage was the highest (P < 0.05) in the 0% treatment. MSGB replacement at 40% and 60% were shown to be the lowest (P < 0.05) feed cost for milk production, and profitability of milk production was the highest (P < 0.05) for the 60% treatment. Based on this experiment, it could be concluded that MSGB replacement for soybean meal at 20-60% in the feed for dairy cows presented no negative effects on their performances. In addition, it could decrease feed cost 2.9-17.3% and increase milk production profit up to 33.3% in the 60% treatment.

Effects of cassava pulp mixed with monosodium glutamate by-product (CPMSG) as a protein source in goat concentrate diet

“…Baumont (1996) reported that small ruminants will develop for the taste of monosodium glutamate in the diet. These results agreed with earlier results indicated that added monosodium L-glutamate (1.5 g/kg DM) to the diet of early lactation cows was found no effect on DM intake (Nombekela et al 1994) and Padunglerk et al (2017) demonstrated that feed composed of monosodium glutamate by-product 10-15% did not affect feed intake and nutrient digestibilities in dairy cows. Due to the glutamic acid contained in animal feed might stimulate animal feed intake, gastric emptying, stimulation of saliva, gastric and pancreatic juices secretion, growth of visceral organs and trophic action in faster growing tissues as reported by Halpern (2000); Lackeyram et al (2001); Mateo (2005) and Toyomasu et al (2010).…”

“…Utilization of industrial by-products for livestock feed is urgently required to raise the international competitiveness of livestock production. Use of MSG by-product (MSGB) in animal feeding has been studied in various animals, addition of MSG in swine diets on carcass quality (Kananurak et al 1987), in cattle on feed intake, growth rate and carcass quality Keaokliang et al (2012) and by Padunglerk et al (2017) in dairy cows, all these studies reported use of MSGB replacement of protein source in non-ruminant and nonprotein nitrogen source in ruminant animals feeding.…”

Effects of supplementary mother liquor, by‐product of monosodium glutamate, on in vitro ruminal fermentation characteristics

“…In the present study, the chemical compositions of two types of MLs varied considerably due to the different ingredients. Moreover, the MLs have different chemical compositions from monosodium glutamate by‐product used in a previous study (Padunglerk et al., ). For example, monosodium glutamate by‐product used in the previous study (Padunglerk et al., ) contained more DM (63.3%) and less CP concentrations (46.0% on a DM basis) than these of the present study.…”

“…Although ML mainly has been used as silage additives (Yimiti et al., ) and fertilizer (Yoshimura, ), the liquor has a potential to be utilized for a nitrogen source in animal diets. Only a few experiments, however, have been conducted to investigate the possibility of monosodium glutamate by‐product as a feed for ruminant (Keaokliang, Siwichai, Kongmun, & Prasanpanich, ; Padunglerk, Prasanpanich, & Kongmun, ). Keaokliang et al.…”

“…Padunglerk et al. () reported that monosodium glutamate by‐product could be replaced for soybean meal up to 60% in lactating dairy cow feed without any adverse effects on feed intake, digestibility, rumen fermentation, milk yield, and compositions. However, there is no study to evaluate the effect of supplementary ML concisely in the different feeding condition, concentrate and roughage feeding, on ruminal fermentation and digestibility.…”