Abstract
Abstract The objective of this study was to evaluate acid detergent lignin (ADL), and amylase-treated ash-corrected undigestible neutral detergent fiber after 240 h of ruminal in vitro incubation (uNDF), and near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) scanning of feces as methods to estimate the digestibility of diets varying in forage quantity and quality when fed to beef cattle. Five total collection (TC) digestibility studies examined 17 different diets and provided individual fecal samples and the corresponding apparent total tract digestibility of nutrients (n = 229). Feed, orts, and fecal samples were analyzed for dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM), nitrogen (N), amylase-treated ash-corrected neutral detergent fiber (aNDFom), acid detergent fiber (ADF), ADL, and uNDF. Previously developed fecal NIRS digestibility calibrations were expanded with dried and ground samples using a FOSS D3F scanning monochromator (FOSS, Eden Prairie, MN). Marker estimated and NIRS predicted nutrient digestibility coefficients were regressed against those determined by TC and goodness-of-fit statistics were applied. Mean concentrations of ADL and uNDF in diets ranged from 23.4 to 96.4 g/kg DM and 67.7 to 200 g/kg DM, respectively, with mean fecal recoveries of 94.2% (SD ± 15.7%) for ADL and 87.5% (SD ± 11.1%) for uNDF. Regression fit statistics between NIRS and TC were not different from one (P > 0.05), with R2 > 0.83 except for ADF digestibility (R2 = 0.63). In comparison, regression statistics between internal markers and TC were poorer with R2 ranging from 0.21 to 0.78. Concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) between NIRS and TC were greater than 0.90 for DM, OM, N, and aNDFom digestibility, and 0.77 for ADF digestibility. The CCC between ADL and TC ranged between 0.63 and 0.82, and between uNDF and TC from 0.26 to 0.78. Correction bias (Cb) was high for all parameters (Cb > 0.76) except for ADF digestibility (Cb = 0.58) as estimated by uNDF. The mean square error of prediction (MSEP) for NIRS predicted digestibility were lower (< 10.7%) than those estimated by internal markers, and most of the error was attributed to random bias (> 97.9%). Random bias for ADL was also greater (>76.1%); however, for uNDF the error was more evenly partitioned into mean bias (46.4% to 49.4%) and random bias (30.4 to 41.9%). Digestibility predictions from NIRS scanning of feces were more accurate and precise than when estimated using the internal markers ADL and uNDF. In the absence of NIRS, ADL estimations appear to be more precise and accurate than uNDF for forage-based diets, with uNDF possibly of greater value for estimating the digestibility of high concentrate diets.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.