Technical factors affecting estimation of nitrogen balance of dairy cattle in climate respiration chambers.

IF 3.7 1区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
K Nichols, S J J Alferink, T Zandstra, M J W Heetkamp, J Dijkstra
{"title":"Technical factors affecting estimation of nitrogen balance of dairy cattle in climate respiration chambers.","authors":"K Nichols, S J J Alferink, T Zandstra, M J W Heetkamp, J Dijkstra","doi":"10.3168/jds.2024-25901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nitrogen retention is often overestimated when calculating N balance of dairy cattle. This study determined if different N analysis methods [Kjeldahl (KJEL) or elemental analysis (EA)] and sample collection and storage protocols when using climate respiration chambers (CRC) affected the estimation of N intake, milk N secretion, manure N excretion, volatile N appearance, and N retention. Twenty-eight Holstein-Friesian cows were housed in CRC for a 4-d measurement period. Nitrogen intake was estimated using individual forages (corn silage and grass silage) and mixtures of forages sampled before or after storage at 4°C. Total N content of forages was the sum of NH<sub>3</sub>-N content in wet samples and N content in dry samples analyzed by KJEL and EA. Nitrogen content in dry concentrate samples was analyzed by KJEL and EA. Secretion of N in milk was based on N content in wet samples analyzed by KJEL and EA. Manure N excretion was based on the N content of wet manure samples with and without acid preservative analyzed by KJEL and EA. Volatile N consisted of N in condensed water from the CRC heat exchanger analyzed by KJEL, and aerial N. Aerial N was determined using an NH<sub>3</sub> sensor or acid trap analyzed by KJEL. Volatile N was quantified during the 4-d measurement period (cow phase), CRC cleaning (cleaning phase), and between CRC cleaning and the next 4-d measurement period (post-cleaning phase). Nitrogen content, with and without accounting for NH<sub>3</sub>-N, was higher in dry silage samples when analyzed using EA compared with KJEL. Nitrogen intake was higher when forages were analyzed by EA but was not affected by forage source (individual forages or forage mixtures pre- or post-storage) or interaction between forage source and N analysis method. Nitrogen analysis method did not affect the N content of milk or manure. Acid addition to manure samples did not affect N content on a wet basis but tended to increase the DM content of manure such that N content on a DM basis was lower in acid-preserved samples. There was no effect of aerial N analysis method (acid trap or NH<sub>3</sub> analyzer) and no interaction between volatile N measurement phase and N analysis method on volatile N appearance. Nitrogen retention was lower when samples were analyzed using KJEL compared with EA (19 and 36 g/d, respectively), attributed to the lower N content of forages when analyzed with KJEL. The measurement phase used for estimating volatile N production did not affect N retention. Overall, N analysis method of forages impacts the estimation of N intake but may be less important for milk and manure in terms of the impact on N retention. When using CRC to quantify volatile N, an acid trap or NH<sub>3</sub> analyzer for aerial N can be used with similar outcomes. Although N analysis by KJEL resulted in lower N retention relative to EA, this may be artificial if KJEL underestimates N content of forages. Overestimation of N retention was not mitigated through the sampling or analytical approaches evaluated in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":354,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dairy Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dairy Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-25901","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nitrogen retention is often overestimated when calculating N balance of dairy cattle. This study determined if different N analysis methods [Kjeldahl (KJEL) or elemental analysis (EA)] and sample collection and storage protocols when using climate respiration chambers (CRC) affected the estimation of N intake, milk N secretion, manure N excretion, volatile N appearance, and N retention. Twenty-eight Holstein-Friesian cows were housed in CRC for a 4-d measurement period. Nitrogen intake was estimated using individual forages (corn silage and grass silage) and mixtures of forages sampled before or after storage at 4°C. Total N content of forages was the sum of NH3-N content in wet samples and N content in dry samples analyzed by KJEL and EA. Nitrogen content in dry concentrate samples was analyzed by KJEL and EA. Secretion of N in milk was based on N content in wet samples analyzed by KJEL and EA. Manure N excretion was based on the N content of wet manure samples with and without acid preservative analyzed by KJEL and EA. Volatile N consisted of N in condensed water from the CRC heat exchanger analyzed by KJEL, and aerial N. Aerial N was determined using an NH3 sensor or acid trap analyzed by KJEL. Volatile N was quantified during the 4-d measurement period (cow phase), CRC cleaning (cleaning phase), and between CRC cleaning and the next 4-d measurement period (post-cleaning phase). Nitrogen content, with and without accounting for NH3-N, was higher in dry silage samples when analyzed using EA compared with KJEL. Nitrogen intake was higher when forages were analyzed by EA but was not affected by forage source (individual forages or forage mixtures pre- or post-storage) or interaction between forage source and N analysis method. Nitrogen analysis method did not affect the N content of milk or manure. Acid addition to manure samples did not affect N content on a wet basis but tended to increase the DM content of manure such that N content on a DM basis was lower in acid-preserved samples. There was no effect of aerial N analysis method (acid trap or NH3 analyzer) and no interaction between volatile N measurement phase and N analysis method on volatile N appearance. Nitrogen retention was lower when samples were analyzed using KJEL compared with EA (19 and 36 g/d, respectively), attributed to the lower N content of forages when analyzed with KJEL. The measurement phase used for estimating volatile N production did not affect N retention. Overall, N analysis method of forages impacts the estimation of N intake but may be less important for milk and manure in terms of the impact on N retention. When using CRC to quantify volatile N, an acid trap or NH3 analyzer for aerial N can be used with similar outcomes. Although N analysis by KJEL resulted in lower N retention relative to EA, this may be artificial if KJEL underestimates N content of forages. Overestimation of N retention was not mitigated through the sampling or analytical approaches evaluated in this study.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Dairy Science
Journal of Dairy Science 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
17.10%
发文量
784
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the American Dairy Science Association®, Journal of Dairy Science® (JDS) is the leading peer-reviewed general dairy research journal in the world. JDS readers represent education, industry, and government agencies in more than 70 countries with interests in biochemistry, breeding, economics, engineering, environment, food science, genetics, microbiology, nutrition, pathology, physiology, processing, public health, quality assurance, and sanitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信