4.4 Article

Evaluating the suitability of field beans as a substitute for soybean meal in early-lactating dairy cow: Production and metabolic responses

期刊

ANIMAL SCIENCE JOURNAL
卷 83, 期 2, 页码 136-140

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-0929.2011.00934.x

关键词

dairy cow; field bean; lactation performance; metabolic profile

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Twenty-four multiparous Holstein cows were utilized in a completely randomized design to examine the effect of feeding field beans (FB, Vicia faba L. var. minor) as substitute for soybean meal (SBM) on lactation performance and metabolic response during the early lactation period. Cows were individually divided into two equal groups and fed for 16 weeks on one each of the two experimental diets. The controls were fed pelleted concentrate contained 150 g/kg dry matter (DM) of SBM as the main protein source, whereas the experimental concentrate contained 345 g/kg DM of FB. Oat hay was offered ad libitum to cows and water was freely available. Blood samples were assayed for their content of: urea, glucose, triglycerides, cholesterol, total protein, albumin, calcium and phosphorus, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT), nonesterified fatty acids (NEFA) and beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHBA). Inclusion of FB had no detectable effects on DM intake (DMI), body weight (BW), or body condition score (BCS). Neither milk yield nor quality were influenced by dietary treatment, except for milk urea nitrogen (MU) that was reduced in cows fed the FB diet (P < 0.05). Clotting properties of milk were not affected adversely by added dietary FB. Concentration of blood urea (BU) was lower in cows fed the FB diet than in those fed the control SBM diet (P < 0.05). These findings indicate that feeding FB in a lactation diet supported lactation performance similar to cows fed traditional SBM-based diet, and the results may elicit great interest for countries where soybean utilization is adversely influenced by high supply costs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据