Importance of cut length on silage quality and animal performance – evaluating particle size –...
60
Basim Refat
-
Upload
basim-refat -
Category
Food
-
view
82 -
download
2
Transcript of Importance of cut length on silage quality and animal performance – evaluating particle size –...
Basim Refat
Topic of presentation
Effect of forage particle size on silage quality
Effect of forage particle size on dairy cow
performance
Topic of presentation
Effect of forage particle size on silage quality
Effect of forage particle size on dairy cow
performance
Chop length for silage
Roughage value and rumen function Compaction and fermentation
Density
DM concentration
permeability
Aerobic Deterioration
Factor Correlation Coefficient Correlation Coefficient
Initial layer thickness -0.279*
Average packing tractor weight 0.262*
Average wheel load 0.224*
Dry matter content 0.29*
Total weight of packing tractor(s) 0.20*
Average particle size 0.194*
Packing time (min/t as-fed) 0.162*
Speed of packing (1 ≥ 8 km/h; 4 ≤ 1.6 km/h) 0.147
Number of packing tractors 0.146
Wheels per packing tractor 0.126
Tire pressure 0.098
Crop (1 = corn; 2 = alfalfa) 0.086
Packing time (min/t DM) 0.078
* Significant correlations (P < 0.05). Muck 2000
ab
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
DM content % pH value lactic/acetic
acid
NH3-N /total N Dm-lossess
%DM
aerobic stability
days
stability lossess
%DM
yeast (log
cfu/g FM)
moulds (log
cfu/g FM)
CL7 CL 22
Mahlkow and Thaysen 2005
24.8
67.8
45
4.9
27.7 28.5
49.8
33.7
4.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
DM CP (%DM) NDF(%DM) ADF (%DM) WSC (%DM) nh3(Total N) Ph
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
Moisture PS additives
T1 F L no
T2 F S no
T3 W L no
T4 F L (ground pearl Millet grain)
T5 F S microbial additives
Paziani et al 2005
2.4
ab
b
ab
2.2
b
a
b
3.4
ab
ab
a
2.2
a
ab
ab
2
b
a
ab
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Mean Particle size cm DM density porosity spoilage lossess
Physical parameters
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
Moisture PS additives
T1 F L no
T2 F S no
T3 W L no
T4 F L (ground pearl Millet grain)
T5 F S microbial additives
OA, Open-air storage condition;
SC, semi-closed storage condition;
CS, Closed storage condition
Toruk and Gonulol, 2011
163
204
0
50
100
150
200
250
UC UC UC UC C C C C
trail 1(1stcut DM35)
trail 1 cutDM50)
trail 2 (firstcut)
trail3(second
cut)
trail 1(1stcut DM35)
trail 1 cutDM50)
trail 2 (firstcut)
trail3(second
cut)
Density
Borreani and Tabacco (2006)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
pH Lactic acid, % of DM Acetic acid, % of DM Ammonia, % of DM
Fermentation
Long Medium Short
Yang and Beauchemin 2006
Effects of reducing dietary particle size on silage fermentation
Theoretical cut length (TCL)Long: 28.6mmMedium:15.9mm Short: 4.8mm
The recommended theoretical length of cut (TLC)
3 ⁄ 8 to 3 ⁄ 4 inch for corn silage
▪ 3 ⁄ 8 for processed corn
▪ 3 ⁄ 8 for not processed corn
3 ⁄ 8 to 1 ⁄ 2 inch for alfalfa silage.
Chopping too long makes compaction difficult
trapping air in the forage mass and resulting in silage that
heats and spoils.
Conclusion first part
Topic of presentation
Effect of forage particle size on silage quality
Effect of forage particle size on dairy cow
performance
feed high energy diets In large amounts
While maintaining the cow in a normal
physiological state?
Forage amount in the ration
The amount and type of grains
Physical form
The addition of additives
Measuring the Effectiveness of NDF
Is the fraction of fiber that stimulates chewingand contributes to the floating mat of largeparticles in the rumen = % remaining on 1.18 mmscreen after dry sieving
The concept of peNDF incorporates the chemical NDF
content of the diet in a manner that predicts the
physical effectiveness of the diet
(Mertins 1997)
dietary particle length
chemical NDF
content
peNDF
(Mertens 1997)
Pore diameter of sieve (mm)
Poppi et al. 1980
Why 1.18?This size below whichparticles have potential toescape from rumen-
DM retained
1.18-mm sieve
NDF content peNDF
Proposed by Mertens 1997
Penn State Particle Separator (PSPS)
Lammers et al. (1996)
DM retained by the 19- and 8-mm sieves of
the PSPS
NDF content peNDFps-2s
Type
Corn Silage Haylage TMR
Sieve Size % of DM retained
>19.0 mm 5 ± 3 15 ± 5 5 ± 3
19.0 – 8.0 mm 55 ± 10 60 ± 15 40 ± 10
8.0 – 1.18 mm 40 ± 10 30 ± 10 40 ± 10
<1.18 mm <5 < 5 < 20
Forage and TMR particle size
recommendations based on two
experiments that fed either alfalfa haylage
or corn silage, with or without cottonseed
hulls, to cows in early lactation.
(Heirichs and Kononoff, 2002)
+ 1.18-mm sieve to the PSPS
DM retained by 19-, 8-, and
1.18-mm sieves
NDF content peNDFps-3s
Kononoff et al. 2003
1- The Penn State Particle Separator
pefps-2s = physical effectiveness factor
determined as the proportion of particles
retained on 2 sieves (Lammers et al., 1996)
pefps-3s = physical effectiveness factor
determined as the proportion of particles
retained on 3 sieves (Kononoff et al., 2003)
(Yang and Beauchemin 2006)
Particle length Effects
Long Medium Short Linear Quadratic
PSPS
% DM retained on sieves
19 mm 10.2 8.3 2.7 0.01 0.02
8 mm 61.3 59.8 38.7 0.01 0.01
1.18 mm 24.0 27.6 51.5 0.01 0.01
Pan 4.5 4.3 7.2 0.01 0.01
peNDFps-2s, % of DM 35.2 31.5 17.4 0.01 0.01
peNDFps-3s, % of DM 47.0 44.3 44.4 0.07 NS
(Yang and Beauchemin 2006)
2- dry sieving
vertical oscillating sieve shaker equipped
with a stack of sieves arranged in
descending mesh size;
Dietary peNDF effect
Long Medium Short Linear Quadratic
Dry sieving
% DM retained on sieves
9.5 mm 9.9 5.8 4.1 0.02 NS
6.7 mm 11.1 14.4 9.1 NS NS
3.35 mm 24.6 26.3 22.5 NS NS
1.18 mm 33.0 34.4 40.3 0.03 NS
0.6 mm 11.6 10.3 14.5 0.12 0.10
0.15 mm 6.2 5.6 7.3 NS NS
<0.15 mm 3.6 3.2 2.1 0.03 NS
peNDF1.18 % 24.9 24.7 23.7 NS NS
(Yang and Beauchemin 2006)
Finely chopped alfalfa Silage (FS)
Cracked shelled corn (DC; low RFC)
Ground high-moisture corn
(HMC; high RFC)
Coarse alfalfa Silage (CS)
Cracked shelled corn (DC; low RFC)
Ground high-moisture corn
(HMC; high RFC)
Krause et al. (2002a,b)
HMCFS DCCS HMCCSDCFS
Effects of, and interactions between, level
of dietary ruminally fermentable
carbohydrate (RFC) and forage particle
size on milk production,
Mean (mm) SD (mm)
Dry cracked shelled corn 1.55
High-moisture shelled corn 1.60
Coarse alfalfa silage 13.6
Fine alfalfa silage 3.7
HMC FS 3.0
HMC CS 6.0
DC FS 2.8
DC CS 6.3
Mean geometric particle size of corn grain, forage, and TMR
14% NDF, % of DM
reduce rumination time and cause milk fat
depression when dairy cows are fed
chopped alfalfa hay as forage
(Woodford et al. 1986)
6.4 mm
Treatments
Foragesignificance HMCFS HMCCS DCFS DCCS
Time/DMI per d,
min/kg24.9 30.6 21.7 30.9 ***
Total chewing time increased 7.5 min/kg of DM consumed.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Time/DMI per d, min/kg
HMCFS HMCCS DCFS DCCS
Krause et al. (2002a,b)
Effects of level of ruminally fermentable
carbohydrates and forage particle size
on intake
Dig, %
Treatments significance
HMCFS HMCCS DCFS DCCS RFC ForageRFC ×Forage
DM 75.5 74.5 72.8 69.9 * NS NS
OM 76.6 75.5 73.9 70.8 ** NS NS
NDF 54.3 47.6 46.2 47.7 NS NS NS
ADF 58.9 52.9 51.8 54.2 NS NS T
Starch 97.7 97.1 94.5 91.6 ** * NS
Krause et al. (2002a,b)
TreatmentsP- value
HMC FS HMC CS DC FS DC CS RFC × Forage
Milk, kg/d 45.6 43.6 42.9 43.7 0.06
SCM, kg/d 41.0 41.1 39.6 40.0 NS
SCM/DMI 1.76 1.68 1.59 1.59 NS
Fat, % 3.42 3.60 3.48 3.62 NS
Fat yield, kg/d 1.55 1.59 1.49 1.57 NS
Protein, % 3.05 3.12 3.15 3.10 NS
Protein yield, kg/d 1.38 1.37 1.35 1.33 NS
Effects of level of ruminally fermentable
carbohydrates and forage particle size on
milk yield and milk composition
Krause et al. (2002a,b)
TreatmentsP-VALUE
Forage PSHMCFS HMCCS DCFS DCCS
VFA, mM
Total 161.5 148.4 151.1 144.9 NS
Acetate (A) 78.9 77.4 82.8 82.5 NS
Propionate (P) 52.4 43.7 39.8 35.2 NS
Butyrate 19.6 19.6 20.8 22.5 NS
A:P ratio 1.60 1.90 2.23 2.45 NS
Effects of level of ruminally fermentable
carbohydrates and forage particle size on
ruminal fermentation and pH
Krause et al. (2002a,b)
Treatments (P-value)
HMCFS HMCCS DCFS DCCS RFC Forage RFC × Forage
Mean ruminal pH 5.72 5.98 5.9 6.07 * *** NS
Time belowpH 5.8, h/d
14.3 7.2 9.3 5.5 ** *** NS
Effects of level of ruminally fermentable carbohydrates and forage particle size on ruminal pH.
Decreasing forage particle size decreased
pH from 6.02 to 5.81, whereas replacing
DC with HMC decreased pH from 5.99 to
5.85.
Krause et al. (2002)
Effect of forage particle size on rumen pH pattern post-feeding
CS ♦ = Coarse silage FS ■ = Fine silage
Krause et al. (2002)
Hours post-feeding
Ru
min
al p
H
49.3 46.3 47.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
DM, % OM, % of DM NDF, % of DM ADF, % of DM Starch, % of DM CP, % of DM
Corn Silage
Theoretical cut length (TCL)Long: 28.6mmMedium:15.9mm Short: 4.8mm
(Yang and Beauchemin 2006)
Dietary peNDF
High Medium Low P-Value
Min/kg of DM 38.2 36.4 32.5 NS
Effects of reducing dietary physically
effective fiber (peNDF) on chewing
activity of dairy cows
(Yang and Beauchemin 2006)
Dietary peNDFSig
Long Medium Short
Mean pH 6.08 6.06 5.99 NS
pH <5.8, h/d 3 4.1 4.8 NS
pH <5.5, h/d 0.8 1 2 0.13
Effects of reducing dietary physically effective fiber (peNDF) on ruminal pH and fermentation of lactating dairy cows
(Yang and Beauchemin 2006)
Dietary peNDF
High Medium Low P- VALUE
Total, mM 128.3 138.7 128.7 NS
Acetate (A), % 53.3 52.4 53.3 NS
Propionate (P), % 26.9 23.1 25.8 NS
Butyrate, % 14.6 18.3 15.7 NS
A:P 2.1 2.5 2.2 NS
NH3 N, mM 8.5 11.0 8.8 *
Mean pH 6.08 6.06 5.99 NS
(Yang and Beauchemin 2006)
Effects of reducing dietary physically
effective fiber (peNDF) on ruminal pH
and fermentation characteristics of
dairy cows
CL7 CL22
FI (kg DM/day) 21.6 20.5
Milk Yield (Kg/d) 36.1 35.5
Milk Fat (Kg/d) 1.5 1.51
Milk Protein (Kg/d) 1.16 1.16
Effect of two different chopping lengthsof maize silage on dairy cowperformance ; cut length 7-mm or 22mm
Mahlkow and Thaysen 2005
UnchoppedChopped SED P-value
Intake of WCBS
Dry matter, kg day− 1
3.42 4.20 0.147 0.001
Dry matter, g kg−1
live weight
16.3 19.7 0.51 < 0.001
Neutral detergent fibre, kg day
− 1 1.55 1.93 0.066 < 0.001
Neutral detergent fibre, g kg
− 1live weight
7.38 9.06 0.229 < 0.001
LWG
Initial weight 182 184 4.6 0.728
Final weight 236 249 4.5 0.027
LWG, kg 53.9 64.8 1.45 < 0.001
LWG, kg day− 1
0.855 1.028 0.0230 < 0.001
Chopping of whole-crop barley silage
improves intake and live-weight gain of
young dairy steers
Rustas and Nadeau 2011
PSPS with 2 sieves provided a better description of the variationin dietary physical effectiveness and the potential of the diet topromote chewing and prevent ruminal acidosis.
Differences in particle size do not always result in differences in mean rumen pH.
When evaluating a diet to determine a possible risk of subclinicalacidosis, we should review levels of fiber and nonstructuralcarbohydrates, along with their associated fermentability
THANK YOU
http://images.vancepublishing.com/pdfs/dairyherd/NDF_DairyRations.pdf
unclear which measure of peNDF and what peNDF
contents provide the most accurate estimation of
chewing activity and ruminal pH in dairy cows
These different methods of peNDF estimation result in
very different values
Feed particles retained on a 1.18-mm sieve had a high resistance
to passage from the rumen of sheep.
Important to fractionate the larger feed particles requiring chewing
to pass from the rumen,
Standard laboratory assessment for measuring pef for feeds using
dry sieving techniques.
Poppi et al. (1980)
what is the critical particle size for passage from the rumen?
which fraction of particles remains in the rumen to stimulate
chewing?
Although the peNDF system has become
firmly established using the 1.18-mm sieve
to measure pef,
Critical size for cattle is actually closer to a
fraction of particles that would be retained on
a 3.35-mm sieve.
Oshita et al. (2004)Yang et al. 2001
Larger critical size may be more appropriate for cattle
Ruminal outflow rate of particles: 1.18 mm averaged 5.57%/h a
3.35-mm sieve = 1.75%/h.
Feed particles retained on sieves with apertures >4.0 mm would be
retained in the rumen of dairy cows and contribute to chewing
activity.
Yang et al. (2001)
Cardoza and Mertens (1986)
UnchoppedWCBS
Chopped WCBS
Dry matter, g kg− 1 fresh weight 334 319
Crude protein 83.0 83.4
Sugar 27.7 24.3
Starch 173 157
Neutral detergent fibre 449 460
IVDOM, g kg− 1 OM(96h) 756 752
Indigestible NDF(288h-in situ) 150 146
pH 4.1 4.1
NH3-N, g kg−1 total N 100 103
Lactic acid 51.3 45.6
Acetic acid 7.7 7.2
Butyric acid 1.2 1.1
Ethanol 9.2 8.4
Rustas and Nadeau (2011)
chemical composition of whole-crop barley
silage (WCBS) (g kg− 1 dry matter)
