首页> 外文期刊>Animal Feed Science and Technology >Faecal near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) compared with other techniques for estimating the in vivo digestibility and dry matter intake of lactating grazing dairy cows.
【24h】

Faecal near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) compared with other techniques for estimating the in vivo digestibility and dry matter intake of lactating grazing dairy cows.

机译:粪便近红外反射光谱法(NIRS)与其他技术相比,可以估算泌乳放牧奶牛的体内消化率和干物质摄入量。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The objective of this study was to validate near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) applied to faeces (FNIRS) for estimating the grass in vivo organic matter digestibility (G-OMD) and the grass dry matter intake (G-DMI, kg/d) of concentrate-supplemented grazing dairy cows. The G-OMD estimates from one FNIRS model were compared with two estimates using faecal nitrogen indicator (FNI) methods. Similarly, two FNIRS models were compared with the ratio technique (RT) and with three animal performance methods (APM) for estimating G-DMI. The results were analysed at cow and herd level in two grazed paddocks (P1 and P2) in a rotational grazing scheme. For both G-OMD and G-DMI, the FNIRS estimations were correlated (P<0.05) with other predictive methods (r=0.61 for G-OMD and r=0.63-0.88 for G-DMI). Depending on the estimation method, the G-OMD varied from 0.689 (FNIRS) to 0.773 (FNI). The FNI estimates were generally higher and were similar to the G-OMD estimates obtained from NIRS analyses of grass sampled in the field. The FNIRS and FNI estimates were biased at cow and paddock level by 0.01-0.1 digestibility units (P<0.001). Depending on the estimation method, the G-DMI estimates varied from 11.9 to 16.4 kg/d. FNIRS and APM produced similar estimates of G-DMI at both cow and herd level. The RT estimates of G-DMI were 3 kg/d higher than the FNIRS and APM estimates (P<0.05). The G-DMI estimated by RT methods was particularly high for P2, with a mean value of 18.5 kg/d, which seemed too high in terms of the maximum intake capacity of supplemented grazing dairy cows. For both G-OMD and G-DMI and for all the estimation methods, inter-cow and intra-paddock variations, expressed through the coefficient of variation (SD/mean), ranged from 0.05 to 0.40. As the accuracy of the FNIRS models, expressed through the standard error of cross validation (SECV), was lower than these inter-animal and intra-paddock variations, we suggest that FNIRS could be used to record, quickly and easily, the evolution of grass digestibility and the intake of grazing dairy cows. These estimates could be implemented through decision-support systems aimed at improving the management of grazing dairy herds.Digital Object Identifier http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.02.005
机译:这项研究的目的是验证应用于粪便(FNIRS)的近红外反射光谱(NIRS),以估算草的体内有机物消化率(G-OMD)和草干物质摄入量( G-DMI,千克/天)补充浓缩的放牧奶牛。使用粪便氮指示剂(FNI)方法将一种FNIRS模型的G-OMD估计值与两种估计值进行比较。同样,将两种FNIRS模型与比率技术(RT)和三种动物行为方法(APM)进行了比较,以估算G-DMI。在轮牧方案中,在两个放牧的牧场(P1和P2)中以牛和畜群水平分析了结果。对于G-OMD和G-DMI,FNIRS估计与其他预测方法(G-OMD r = 0.61和 r = 0.63)相关(P <0.05) -0.88(对于G-DMI)。根据估算方法,G-OMD从0.689(FNIRS)到0.773(FNI)不等。 FNI估计值通常更高,与通过实地采样草的NIRS分析获得的G-OMD估计值相似。 FNIRS和FNI估计值在母牛和围场水平上的消化率单位为0.01-0.1(P <0.001)。根据估算方法,G-DMI估算值从11.9公斤/天到16.4公斤/天不等。 FNIRS和APM在牛和畜群水平上得出的G-DMI估计值相似。 G-DMI的RT估算值比FNIRS和APM估算值高3 kg / d(P <0.05)。通过RT方法估算的P2的G-DMI尤其高,平均值为18.5 kg / d,就补充放牧奶牛的最大摄入量而言似乎太高了。对于G-OMD和G-DMI以及所有估计方法,用变异系数(SD /平均值)表示的牛内和围场内变异范围为0.05至0.40。由于通过交叉验证的标准误差(SECV)表示的FNIRS模型的准确性低于这些动物间和围场内的变异,因此我们建议FNIRS可用于快速轻松地记录动物的进化草的消化率和放牧奶牛的摄入量。可以通过旨在改善放牧奶牛场管理的决策支持系统来实现这些估算。数字对象标识符http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.02.005

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号