EFFECT OF FEEDING SLOW AMMONIA RELEASE AND PROTECTED PROTEIN SUPPLEMENT IN LACTATING COWS AND BUFFALOES

Article Id: ARCC438 | Page : 168-171
Citation :- EFFECT OF FEEDING SLOW AMMONIA RELEASE AND PROTECTED PROTEIN SUPPLEMENT IN LACTATING COWS AND BUFFALOES.Indian Journal Of Animal Research.2012.(46):168-171
P.L. Sherasia*, M.R. Garg and B.M. Bhanderi pankajs@nddb.coop
Address : Animal Nutrition Group, National Dairy Development Board Anand – 388 001, India

Abstract

Feeding trials using slow ammonia release and protected protein supplement (SARPP) were conducted on lactating crossbred cows (n=24) and buffaloes (n=24). Animals were divided into three groups of eight each, based on milk yield, fat percentage and stage of lactation. In addition to basal ration, animals in groups I, II and III were fed 1.0 kg untreated rapeseed meal containing 50 g untreated urea, 1.0 kg treated meal containing 50 g untreated urea and 1.0 kg treated meal containing 50 g treated urea, respectively. In cows, the level of blood urea-N (mg/dl) was 12.23, 12.29 and 11.63, whereas, level of allantoins (mmol/litre) in urine was 7.94, 9.31 and 13.85 in groups I, II and III, respectively. The average milk yield (kg) and fat (%) in three groups of cows were 9.67 & 4.30, 10.61 & 4.56 and 11.05 & 4.58, respectively. In buffaloes, the level of blood urea nitrogen (mg/dl) was 10.33, 10.48 and 9.64 and the level of allantoins (mmol/litre) in urine was 2.35, 3.03 and 5.23 in groups I, II and III respectively. The average milk yield (kg) and fat (%) in three groups of buffaloes were 6.46 & 6.64, 7.42 & 6.81 and 7.70 & 6.86, respectively. The present study suggested that SARPP is promising feed supplement for increasing milk yield in cows and buffaloes.

Keywords

Slow ammonia release Protected protein Blood urea nitrogen Allantoin Cow Buffalo.

References

  1. AOAC, (2005). Official Methods of Analysis. 14th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.
  2. Chen, X.B.; Hovell, F.D. DeB and Orskov, E.R. (1990). Brit. J. Nutr. 63:197-205.
  3. FDA, (2004). Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC. 21 CFR Part 573.
  4. Garg, M.R. (2009). 9th National seminar for popularization of oilmeal usage in compound cattle, poultry & aqua feeds. 20th June, 2009, Hotel Taj Residency, Lucknow, UP.
  5. Garg, M.R.; Sherasia, P. L. and Bhanderi, B.M. (2007). Indian Dairyman. 59: 43-49.
  6. Goering, H.K. and Van Soest, P.J. (1970). Agricultural Handbook, No. 379, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
  7. Kearl, (1982). Nutrient Requirements of Ruminants in Developing Countries. Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA.
  8. Liang, J.B.; Pimpa, O.; Jelan, Z.A. and Abdullah, N. (2003). “An overview on the use of urinary derivatives excretion as a method of estimation of rumen microbial protein production in swamp and zebu cattle”.
  9. NRC. (2001), “Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, National Academy of Science – National Research Council, Washington, DC.
  10. Scott, T.W. and Ashes, J.R. (1993). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 44: 495.
  11. Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. (1976). Statistical Methods, 8th ed.
  12. Thanh, V.T.K.; Ba, N.K. and Orskov, E.R. (2003). Estimation of rumen microbial protein production from urinary purine derivatives in buffalo.
  13. Walli, T.K. (2009). Proceedings of 13th Biennial Conference of ANSI.17th-19th December, 2009, National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, Bangalore.

Global Footprints