Literature DB >> 33539434

Energy metabolism of pregnant zebu and crossbred zebu dairy cattle.

Helena Ferreira Lage1, Ana Luiza da Costa Cruz Borges1, Ricardo Reis E Silva1, Alan Maia Borges1, José Reinaldo Mendes Ruas2, Pedro Henrique Araújo de Carvalho1, Marcelina Pereira da Fonseca1, Paolo Antônio Dutra Vivenza1, Lúcio Carlos Gonçalves1, André Santos de Souza1, Antônio Último de Carvalho1, Elias Jorge Facury Filho1, Edilane Aparecida Silva3, Joana Ribeiro da Glória1, Alexandre Lima Ferreira1, Rodrigo Melo Meneses1, Eloísa de Oliveira Simões Saliba1.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the energy partition of pregnant F1 Holstein x Gyr with average initial body weight (BW) of 515.6 kg and Gyr cows with average initial BW of 435.1 kg at 180, 210 and 240 days of gestation, obtained using respirometry. Twelve animals in two groups (six per genetic group) received a restricted diet equivalent to 1.3 times the net energy for maintenance (NEm). The proportion of gross energy intake (GEI) lost as feces did not differ between the evaluated breeds and corresponded to 28.65% on average. The daily methane production (L/d) was greater for (P<0.05) F1 HxG compared to Gyr animals. However, when expressed as L/kg dry matter (DM) or as percentage of GEI there were no differences between the groups (P>0.05). The daily loss of energy as urine (mean of 1.42 Mcal/d) did not differ (P>0.05) between groups and ranged from 3.87 to 5.35% of the GEI. The metabolizable energy intake (MEI) of F1 HxG animals was greater (P < 0.05) at all gestational stages compared to Gyr cows when expressed in Mcal/d. However, when expressed in kcal/kg of metabolic BW (BW0,75), the F1 HxG cows had MEI 11% greater (P<0.05) at 240 days of gestation and averaged 194.39 kcal/kg of BW0,75. Gyr cows showed no change in MEI over time (P>0.05), with a mean of 146.66 kcal/kg BW0. 75. The ME used by the conceptus was calculated by deducting the metabolizable energy for maintenance (MEm) from the MEI, which was obtained in a previous study using the same cows prior to becoming pregnant. The values of NEm obtained in the previous study with similar non-pregnant cows were 92.02 kcal/kg BW0.75 for F1 HxG, and 76.83 kcal/kg BW0.75 for Gyr (P = 0.06). The average ME for pregnancy (MEp) was 5.33 Mcal/d for F1 HxG and 4.46 Mcal/d for Gyr. The metabolizability ratio, averaging 0.60, was similar among the evaluated groups (P>0.05). The ME / Digestible Energy (DE) ratio differed between groups and periods evaluated (P<0.05) with a mean of 0.84. The heat increment (HI) accounted for 22.74% and 24.38% of the GEI for F1 HxG and Gyr cows, respectively. The proportion of GEI used in the basal metabolism by pregnant cows in this study represented 29.69%. However, there were no differences between the breeds and the evaluation periods and corresponded to 29.69%. The mean NE for pregnancy (NEp) was 2.76 Mcal/d and did not differ between groups and gestational stages (P>0.05).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33539434      PMCID: PMC7861432          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246208

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  19 in total

1.  Energy utilization by pregnant and non-pregnant heifers.

Authors:  C L Ferrell; W N Garrett; N Hinman; G Grichting
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1976-04       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 2.  Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition.

Authors:  P J Van Soest; J B Robertson; B A Lewis
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 4.034

3.  Effects of stage of gestation and nutrient restriction during early to mid-gestation on maternal and fetal visceral organ mass and indices of jejunal growth and vascularity in beef cows.

Authors:  A M Meyer; J J Reed; K A Vonnahme; S A Soto-Navarro; L P Reynolds; S P Ford; B W Hess; J S Caton
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Metabolizable energy requirements of pregnant dairy cows.

Authors:  P W Moe; H F Tyrrell
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1972-04       Impact factor: 4.034

5.  Growth and accretion of energy and protein in the gravid uterus during late pregnancy in Holstein cows.

Authors:  A W Bell; R Slepetis; R A Ehrhardt
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.034

Review 6.  Partitioning of nutrients during pregnancy and lactation: a review of mechanisms involving homeostasis and homeorhesis.

Authors:  D E Bauman; W B Currie
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1980-09       Impact factor: 4.034

Review 7.  Endocrinology of milk production.

Authors:  K Svennersten-Sjaunja; K Olsson
Journal:  Domest Anim Endocrinol       Date:  2005-04-07       Impact factor: 2.290

Review 8.  Oxygen consumption and metabolite flux of bovine portal-drained viscera and liver.

Authors:  G B Huntington; C K Reynolds
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 4.798

9.  Methane emissions from cattle.

Authors:  K A Johnson; D E Johnson
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  Effects of maternal nutrient restriction followed by realimentation during early and midgestation on beef cows. I. Maternal performance and organ weights at different stages of gestation.

Authors:  L E Camacho; C O Lemley; M L Van Emon; J S Caton; K C Swanson; K A Vonnahme
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 3.159

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.