Replacement of Cereal with Low Starch Fibrous By-Products on Nutrients Utilization and Methane Emissions in Dairy Goats

Carla Ibáñez¹, Vicente Javier Moya², Haritz Arriaga³, Diana María López³, Pilar Merino³, Carlos Fernández^1*

¹Research Group ACUMA, Animal Science Department, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
²Institute for Animal Science and Technology, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.
³Neiker-Tecnalia, Basque Institute for Agricultural Research and Development, Bizkaia, Spain.

DOI: 10.4236/ojas.2015.52022                

Abstract

Feeding systems for dairy ruminants need to ensure high intake of energy to achieve maximum milk production potential. This might be accomplished by raising the dietary concentration of cereal grain. Increasing the concentration of starch in diets can lead to undesirable ruminal fermentation, and to prevent it, the partial replacement of cereal grain with low starch by-product feeds is recommended. The purpose of the present study was to compare the effect of fed two mixed diets to dairy goats differing in the type of carbohydrate (starch vs. easily degradable fiber). Energy and nitrogen balance, short chain fatty acids in rumen liquor and milk performance in dairy goats during mid lactation were determined. Enteric methane (CH₄) emissions and CH₄ production from manure were determined as well. Ten multiparous Muciano-Granadina goats were assigned to two isoenergetic and isoproteic diets (19.1 MJ/kg dry matter (DM) and 18.1% of CP, DM basis) in a crossover design. One group was fed a mixed ration with 21.9% of starch (HS diet) and the other (LS diet) with 7.0% of starch. HS diet had 36% of barley (as source of starch) and it was replaced with soy hulls and corn gluten feed in LS diet (as potentially digestible fiber). No differences were observed for dry matter intake in both diets (2.05 kg/d, on average). A significant increase of ruminal acetic acid was found for low starch diet (66.4 and 56.6 mol/100 mol for LS and HS diet, respectively). No significant effect was found among diets for enteric CH₄ emissions (28.5 g/d, on average). Manure derived maximum potential yield was (Bo) higher in HS diet, with 5.9 L CH₄/kg OM vs. 0.28 L CH₄/kg OM for LS diet, probably associated with the low ADF digestibility. Differences among diets were found for milk production (2.4 vs. 2.2 kg/d for HS and LS, respectively), and greater milk fat was observed with LS diet compared with HS (6.4% vs. 5.5%, respectively).

Keywords

Goats, Starch, Enteric Methane, Manure CH₄ Potential Production

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	NRC (2001) Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
[2]	Beauchemin, K., McAllister, T. and McGinn, S. (2009) Dietary Mitigation of Enteric Methane from Cattle. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science. Nutrition and Natural Resources, 4, 1-18.
[3]	Gerber, P.J., Hristov, A.N., Henderson, B., Makkar, H., Oh, J., Lee, C., Meinen, R., Montes, F., Ott, T., Firkins, J., Rotz, A., Dell, C., Adesogan, A.T., Yang, W.Z., Tricarico, J.M., Kebreab, E., Waghorn, G., Dijkstra, J. and Oosting, S. (2013) Technical Options for the Mitigation of Direct Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Livestock: A Review. Animal, 7, 220-234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1751731113000876
[4]	Hindrichsen, I.K., Wettstein, H.R., Machmuller, A. and Kreuzer, M. (2006) Methane Emissions, Nutrient Degradation and Nitrogen Turnover in Dairy Cows and Their Slurry at Different Milk Production Scenarios with and without Concentrate Supplementation. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 113, 150-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.09.004
[5]	Kreuzer, M. and Hindrichsen, I.K. (2006) Methane Mitigation in Ruminants by Dietary Means: The Role of Their Methane Emissions from Manure. International Congress Series, 1293, 199-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ics.2006.01.015
[6]	Aguerre, M.J., Mattiaux, M.A., Powell, J.M., Aguerre, A.F., Wattiaux, M.A. and Powell, J.M. (2012) Emissions of Ammonia, Nitrous Oxide, Methane, and Carbon Dioxide during Storage of Dairy Cow Manure as Affected by Dietary Forage-to-Concentrate Ratio and Crust Formation. Journal of Dairy Science, 95, 7409-7416. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-5340
[7]	Mathot, M., Decruyenaere, V., Stilmant, D. and Lambert, R. (2012) Effect of Cattle Diet and Manure Storage Conditions on Carbon Dioxide, Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Tie-Stall Barns and Stored Solid Manure. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 148, 134-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.11.012
[8]	Orrico, M.A.P., Orrico, A.C.A., de Lucas, J., Sampaio, A.A.M., Fernandes, A.R.M. and de Oliveira, D.A. (2012) Anaerobic Biodigestion of Beef Cattle Manure: Influence of Period, Genotype and Diet. Brazilian Journal of Animal Science, 41, 1533- 1538.
[9]	European Union (2003) Protection of Animals Used for Experimental Purposes. Council Directive 86/609/EEC of 24 November 1986, Amended 16.9.2003, Brussels.
[10]	Lachica, M. and Aguilera, J.F. (2003) Estimation of Energy Needs in the Free-Ranging Goat with Particular Reference to the Assessment of Its Energy Expenditure by the 13C-Bicarbonate Method. Small Ruminant Research, 49, 303-318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-4488(03)00146-9
[11]	Calsamiglia, S., Bach, A., de Blas, C., Fernández, C. and García-Rebollar, P. (2009) Nutritional Requirements for Dairy Ruminants. Fundación Española para el Desarrollo de la Nutrición Animal (FEDNA), Madrid.
[12]	Fernández, C., López, M.C. and Lachica, M. (2012) Description and Function of a Mobile Open-Circuit Respirometry System to Measure Gas Exchange in Small Ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 172, 242-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.01.006
[13]	Fernández, C., López, M.C. and Lachica, M. (2014) Low-Cost Mobile Open-Circuit Hood System for Measuring Gas Exchange in Small Ruminants: From Manual to Automatic Recording. Journal of Agricultural Science, in Press.
[14]	McLean, J.A. and Tobin, G. (1987) Animal and Human Calorimetry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[15]	Brockway, J.M., Boyne, A.W. and Gordon, J.G. (1971) Simultaneous Calibration of Gas Analyzers and Meters. Journal of Applied Physiology, 31, 296-297.
[16]	Aguilera, J.F. and Prieto, C. (1986) Description and Function of an Open-Circuit Respiration Plant for Pigs and Small Ruminants and the Techniques Used to Measure Energy Metabolism. Archiv für Tierernaehrung, 36, 1009-1018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17450398609429522
[17]	Vedrenne, F., Véline, F., Dabert, P. and Bernet, N. (2008) The Effect of Incubation Conditions on the Laboratory Measurement of the Methane Producing Capacity of Livestock Wastes. Bioresource Technology, 99, 146-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2006.11.043
[18]	AOAC (2000) Official Methods of Analysis. 17th Edition, Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington.
[19]	Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B. and Lewis, B.A. (1991) Methods for Dietary Fiber, Neutral Detergent Fiber, and Nonstarch Polysaccharides in Relation to Animal Nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583-3597. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
[20]	Batey, I.L. (1982) Starch Analysis Using Thermostable Alpha-Amylases. Starch/Stärke, 34, 125-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/star.19820340407
[21]	Jouany, J.P. (1982) Volatile Fatty Acid and Alcohol Determination in Digestive Contents, Silage Juices, Bacterial Cultures and Anaerobic Fermentor Contents. Sciences des Aliments, 2, 131-144.
[22]	Brouwer, E. (1965) Report of Sub-Committee on Constants and Factors. In: Blaxter, K.L., Ed., Proceedings of the 3rd EAAP Symposium on Energy Metabolism, Publication No. 11, Academic Press, London, 441-443.
[23]	SAS (2001) User’s Guide, Version 8.02. Statistical Analysis System Institute Inc., Cary.
[24]	Van Knegsel, A.T.M., Brand, H., Dijkstra, J., Straalen, W.M., Heetkamp, M.J.W., Tamminga, S. and Kemp, B. (2007) Dietary Energy Source in Dairy Cows in Early Lactation: Energy Partitioning and Milk Composition. Journal of Dairy Science, 90, 1467-1476. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(07)71632-6
[25]	Casper, D.P., Maiga, H.A., Brouk, M.J. and Schingoethe, D.J. (1999) Synchronization of Carbohydrate and Protein Sources on Fermentation and Passage Rates in Dairy Cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 82, 1779-1790. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75408-1
[26]	Hoover, W.H. and Stokes, S.R. (1991) Balancing Carbohydrates and Proteins for Optimum Rumen Microbial Yield. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3630-3644. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78553-6
[27]	Corbertt, J.L. and Freer, M. (2003) Past and Present Definitions of the Energy and Protein Requirements of Ruminants. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 16, 609-624. http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2003.609
[28]	Aguilera, J.F., Prieto, C. and Fonollá, J. (1990) Protein and Energy Metabolism of Lactating Granadina Goats. British Journal of Nutrition, 63, 165-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/BJN19900104
[29]	Bava, L., Rapetti, L., Crovetto, G.M., Tamburini, A., Sandrucci, A., Galassi, G. and Succi, G. (2001) Effect of a Non- Forage Diet on Milk Production, Energy and Nitrogen Metabolism in Dairy Goats throughout Lactation. Journal of Dairy Science, 84, 2450-2459. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74695-4
[30]	Johnson, K.A. and Johnson, D.E. (1995) Methane Emissions in Cattle. Journal of Animal Science, 73, 2483-2492.
[31]	Waldo, D.R. (1973) Extent and Partition of Cereal Grains Starch Digestion in Ruminants. Journal of Animal Science, 37, 1062-1074.
[32]	Triolo, J.M., Sommer, S.G., Moller, H.B., Weisbjerg, M.R. and Jiang, X.Y. (2011) A New Algorithm to Characterize Biodegradability of Biomass during Anaerobic Digestion: Influence of Lignin Concentration on Methane Production Potential. Bioresource Technology, 102, 9395-9402. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.07.026
[33]	Knapp, J.R., Laur, G.L., Vadas, P.A., Weiss, W.P. and Tricarico, J.M. (2014) Invited Review: Enteric Methane in Dairy Cattle Production: Quantifying the Opportunities and Impact of Reducing Emissions. Journal of Dairy Science, 97, 3231-3261. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2013-7234