Loading...

INFLUENCE OF RECEIVING DIFFERENT LEVELS OF DIETARY FAT ON THE PERFORMANCE OF FINISHING STEERS

Article Id: ARCC2341 | Page : 85-89
Citation :- INFLUENCE OF RECEIVING DIFFERENT LEVELS OF DIETARY FAT ON THE PERFORMANCE OF FINISHING STEERS.Indian Journal of Animal Research.2008.(42):85-89
A.R. Yazdani
Address : Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Golestan Province, Iran

Abstract

Eighteen crossbred Holstein finishing steers of 200±25kg weight and 9.5 to 10 months of age
were assigned randomly to one of the three groups having 6 animals in each those were supplied
with different rations at different levels of calcium long chain of fatty acids (Ca-LCFA) for 120 days
and the growth, feed conversion efficiency, dry matter intake and blood profile was studied. The
control group received 0 % of Ca-LCFA, 1st group 3 % and the 2nd group 6 % of CLCFA .The average
daily gains of control,1st and, 2nd groups were 1.083, 1.011 and 1.115kg, respectively and the fed
conversion efficiency were 5.340, 5.688 and 5.898 which showed no significant difference treatment
(P005).Average daily dry matter intake of entire period in different groups were 7.433, 7.467 and
7.565 which was also not significant (p0.05). The blood Hemoglobin, Glucose, CV and total
protein were also measured. The pcv of the 2nd group was significantly (P<0.05) lower than the
other group, and also total protein of control groups was slightly lower than the other two groups.

References

  1. Abdel Hafez G A, et al (1983). Indian J Anim Sci. 53:477-480.
  2. Agenas S K, et al(2002). Acta Agric.Scand, Sect.A, Anim Sci. 52:25-33.
  3. Aro A, et al (2000). Nutrition. Cancer. 38(2):151-7.
  4. Bidarkar, D. K. (1985). Ph.D.Thesis, Haryana Agric. Univ., Hisar, India.
  5. Brandt Jr.R.T, et al (1988).In: Kansas Agric. Experimental Station. Report Programme.555, pp16-19.
  6. Brandt, Jr.R.T, et al (1987). In :Proc.of Great plains Cattle Feeder’s Conf.and SW Kansas Experimental Station.
  7. Feeder’s Day, pp 98-112.
  8. Brethour, J.R., et al (1986). Kansas Agric. Experimental Station.Report.Programme.494, pp4-11
  9. Vol. 42, No. 2, 2008 89
  10. Brink, D.R. and Steele, R.T. (1985). J Anim Sci. 60:1330.
  11. Brink, D.R. et al (1984). J Anim Sci. 59:791.
  12. Canale, C.J. et al (1990). J Dairy Sci. 73:1031-1038.
  13. Chillard, Y. (1993). J Dairy Sci. 76:3897-3931.
  14. Cochran, W.G. and Cox, G.M. (1957). Experimental Designs. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
  15. Cole, N.A. and Hutcheson, D.P. (1987). Nutrition Report Intern. 36:965.
  16. Drackley, J K. et al. (2003). J Dairy Sci. 86:1306-1314.
  17. Fluharty, F L. and Loerch, S.C. (1997). J Anim Sci. 75:2308-2316.
  18. Grummer, R.R. (2003). In: Advance in Dairy Technology. Western Canada Dairy Seminar. 8:117.
  19. Holman, H H (1956). British Vet. J. 112: 91-104.
  20. Katharia, L G. and Avasathi, B.L. (1985). Indian Vet. J. 62: 289-293.
  21. Knekt, P.et al. (1996). British J Cancer. 73:687-691.
  22. Kreikemeier, K.K. et al. (1990). J Anim Sci. 68:2130.
  23. MacDonald, H.B. (2000). J Amer Coll. Nutrit . 19 (Suppl.2), 111-118.
  24. NRC (1984). Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle (6th Ed). National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
  25. Payne, T M.et al (1974). British Vet J. 130: 31.
  26. Rule, D.C.and Beitz D.C. (1986). J Amer Oil Chem Soc. 63:1429.
  27. SAS Institute (1998). SAS/Stat Software. Changes and Enhancement through Release 6.12.SAS Institute, Cary, NC. Shaffer, L.et al (1981). J Dairy Sci. 64:62-70.
  28. Soly, M Juan Singh, S V (2003). Indian J Anim Sci. 74: 185-190.
  29. Soni, PL. et al. (1982). Indian J Anim Sci. 52: 222-227.
  30. Yazdani, A.R. and Gupta, L R (1996a). In: National Symposium on Livestock Industry for Self / Gainful Employment, held at department of livestock production and management, Madras Veterinary College, Chennai-600007, from sept. 18 to 20. India.
  31. Zinn, R.A (1989). J Anim Sci. 67:1029.

Global Footprints