饲粮中添加棕榈油或包封脂肪钙盐对奶牛营养物质消化率、生产性能和乳脂肪酸分布的影响。

IF 1.5 3区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
Archives of Animal Nutrition Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-19 DOI:10.1080/1745039X.2025.2542145
Ana Carolina Freitas, Nathália T Grigoletto Scognamiglio, Rodrigo G Chesini, Osmar Pietro Sbaralho, Julia Nunes Ribeiro, Guilherme G da Silva, Caio S Takiya, Francisco P Rennó
{"title":"饲粮中添加棕榈油或包封脂肪钙盐对奶牛营养物质消化率、生产性能和乳脂肪酸分布的影响。","authors":"Ana Carolina Freitas, Nathália T Grigoletto Scognamiglio, Rodrigo G Chesini, Osmar Pietro Sbaralho, Julia Nunes Ribeiro, Guilherme G da Silva, Caio S Takiya, Francisco P Rennó","doi":"10.1080/1745039X.2025.2542145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study was conducted to evaluate fat supplements differing in fatty acid (FA) composition on nutrient digestibility, milk yield and composition, and milk FA profile in dairy cows. Twenty-four Holstein cows (149 ± 85 d in milk, 35.6 ± 6.29 kg/d milk yield and 671 ± 93.4 kg body weight) were distributed in 8 Latin squares according to parity number, milk yield and days in milk, and enrolled in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square experiment with 21-d periods. Cows within block were randomly assigned to treatment sequences containing: 1) control (CON), no fat supplement and 2.44% ether extract (EE, dry matter basis (DM)); 2) calcium salts of palm oil (CSPO), CSPO at 2.60% diet DM and 4.49% EE diet DM; and 3) encapsulated fatty acids (EFA), EFA at 2.60% diet DM and 4.30% EE diet DM. Fatty acids from EFA are derived from soybean oil, palm oil, and tallow. The primary differences in FA profiles between CSPO and EFA were related to stearic acid (4.26 and 31.7 g/100 g FA, respectively), oleic acid (32.7 and 8.80 g/100 g FA, respectively), and linoleic acid (8.81 and 19.1 g/100 g FA, respectively). Fat supplements were included in the concentrate mix and cows were fed a total mixed ration (48:52 of forage to concentrate ratio). Data were analysed using mixed models and treatment differences were evaluated by orthogonal contrasts (CON vs. fat-supplemented diets and CSPO vs. EFA). Dry matter intake and digestibility were not affected by treatments; however, EE intake and digestibility were higher with the inclusion of fat supplements. Fat supplementation increased milk yield (34.1, 35.8, and 35.9 kg/d for CON, CSPO and EFA, respectively). Fat supplementation also improved the yield of milk components and feed efficiency. Cows fed EFA had higher milk protein concentrations compared to those fed CSPO. Cows fed fat supplements exhibited higher concentrations of unsaturated FA and lower concentrations of de novo FA in milk compared to CON group. The concentration of de novo and odd-chain FA in the milk of cows fed CSPO was lower than in those fed EFA. Cows fed EFA had lower concentrations of <i>trans</i>-11 C18:1 and <i>cis</i>-9 C18:1 FA compared to the CSPO group. Fat supplements increased milk yield, feed efficiency and unsaturated FA concentration in milk without affecting DM digestibility. Supplementing cows with either CSPO or EFA resulted in similar performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":8157,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Animal Nutrition","volume":" ","pages":"139-154"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dietary supplementation of calcium salts of palm oil or an encapsulated fat on nutrient digestibility, performance, and milk fatty acid profile in dairy cows.\",\"authors\":\"Ana Carolina Freitas, Nathália T Grigoletto Scognamiglio, Rodrigo G Chesini, Osmar Pietro Sbaralho, Julia Nunes Ribeiro, Guilherme G da Silva, Caio S Takiya, Francisco P Rennó\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1745039X.2025.2542145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study was conducted to evaluate fat supplements differing in fatty acid (FA) composition on nutrient digestibility, milk yield and composition, and milk FA profile in dairy cows. Twenty-four Holstein cows (149 ± 85 d in milk, 35.6 ± 6.29 kg/d milk yield and 671 ± 93.4 kg body weight) were distributed in 8 Latin squares according to parity number, milk yield and days in milk, and enrolled in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square experiment with 21-d periods. Cows within block were randomly assigned to treatment sequences containing: 1) control (CON), no fat supplement and 2.44% ether extract (EE, dry matter basis (DM)); 2) calcium salts of palm oil (CSPO), CSPO at 2.60% diet DM and 4.49% EE diet DM; and 3) encapsulated fatty acids (EFA), EFA at 2.60% diet DM and 4.30% EE diet DM. Fatty acids from EFA are derived from soybean oil, palm oil, and tallow. The primary differences in FA profiles between CSPO and EFA were related to stearic acid (4.26 and 31.7 g/100 g FA, respectively), oleic acid (32.7 and 8.80 g/100 g FA, respectively), and linoleic acid (8.81 and 19.1 g/100 g FA, respectively). Fat supplements were included in the concentrate mix and cows were fed a total mixed ration (48:52 of forage to concentrate ratio). Data were analysed using mixed models and treatment differences were evaluated by orthogonal contrasts (CON vs. fat-supplemented diets and CSPO vs. EFA). Dry matter intake and digestibility were not affected by treatments; however, EE intake and digestibility were higher with the inclusion of fat supplements. Fat supplementation increased milk yield (34.1, 35.8, and 35.9 kg/d for CON, CSPO and EFA, respectively). Fat supplementation also improved the yield of milk components and feed efficiency. Cows fed EFA had higher milk protein concentrations compared to those fed CSPO. Cows fed fat supplements exhibited higher concentrations of unsaturated FA and lower concentrations of de novo FA in milk compared to CON group. The concentration of de novo and odd-chain FA in the milk of cows fed CSPO was lower than in those fed EFA. Cows fed EFA had lower concentrations of <i>trans</i>-11 C18:1 and <i>cis</i>-9 C18:1 FA compared to the CSPO group. Fat supplements increased milk yield, feed efficiency and unsaturated FA concentration in milk without affecting DM digestibility. Supplementing cows with either CSPO or EFA resulted in similar performance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8157,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Animal Nutrition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"139-154\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Animal Nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1745039X.2025.2542145\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Animal Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1745039X.2025.2542145","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本试验旨在评价不同脂肪酸组成的脂肪添加物对奶牛营养物质消化率、产奶量和乳成分以及乳FA谱的影响。选取产奶量为149±85 d、产奶量为35.6±6.29 kg/d、体重为671±93.4 kg的24头荷斯坦奶牛,按胎次、产奶量和泌乳天数分成8个拉丁方,进行3 × 3重复拉丁方试验,每期21 d。各组奶牛随机分为以下处理组:1)对照组(CON)、不添加脂肪和2.44%粗脂肪(EE,干物质基础(DM));2)棕榈油钙盐(CSPO), CSPO在2.60%日粮DM和4.49% EE日粮DM中;3)胶囊脂肪酸(EFA),即2.60%粗脂肪日粮和4.30%粗脂肪日粮时的EFA。EFA中的脂肪酸来源于大豆油、棕榈油和牛脂。CSPO和EFA之间FA谱的主要差异与硬脂酸(分别为4.26和31.7 g/100 g FA)、油酸(分别为32.7和8.80 g/100 g FA)和亚油酸(分别为8.81和19.1 g/100 g FA)有关。在精料混合物中添加脂肪,饲喂全混合日粮(料精比48:52)。使用混合模型分析数据,并通过正交对比(CON vs.脂肪补充饮食,CSPO vs. EFA)评估治疗差异。干物质采食量和消化率不受处理影响;然而,添加脂肪补充剂后,粗脂肪摄入量和消化率更高。添加脂肪可提高产奶量(CON、CSPO和EFA分别为34.1、35.8和35.9 kg/d)。脂肪的补充也提高了乳成分的产量和饲料效率。饲喂EFA的奶牛乳蛋白浓度高于饲喂CSPO的奶牛。与CON组相比,添加脂肪组奶牛的牛奶中不饱和FA浓度较高,而新生FA浓度较低。饲喂CSPO的奶牛乳中新生脂肪酸和奇链脂肪酸的浓度低于饲喂EFA的奶牛。与CSPO组相比,饲喂EFA的奶牛的反式-11 C18:1和顺式-9 C18:1 FA浓度较低。添加脂肪可提高产奶量、饲料效率和乳中不饱和FA浓度,但不影响DM消化率。添加CSPO或EFA的奶牛的生产性能相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dietary supplementation of calcium salts of palm oil or an encapsulated fat on nutrient digestibility, performance, and milk fatty acid profile in dairy cows.

This study was conducted to evaluate fat supplements differing in fatty acid (FA) composition on nutrient digestibility, milk yield and composition, and milk FA profile in dairy cows. Twenty-four Holstein cows (149 ± 85 d in milk, 35.6 ± 6.29 kg/d milk yield and 671 ± 93.4 kg body weight) were distributed in 8 Latin squares according to parity number, milk yield and days in milk, and enrolled in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square experiment with 21-d periods. Cows within block were randomly assigned to treatment sequences containing: 1) control (CON), no fat supplement and 2.44% ether extract (EE, dry matter basis (DM)); 2) calcium salts of palm oil (CSPO), CSPO at 2.60% diet DM and 4.49% EE diet DM; and 3) encapsulated fatty acids (EFA), EFA at 2.60% diet DM and 4.30% EE diet DM. Fatty acids from EFA are derived from soybean oil, palm oil, and tallow. The primary differences in FA profiles between CSPO and EFA were related to stearic acid (4.26 and 31.7 g/100 g FA, respectively), oleic acid (32.7 and 8.80 g/100 g FA, respectively), and linoleic acid (8.81 and 19.1 g/100 g FA, respectively). Fat supplements were included in the concentrate mix and cows were fed a total mixed ration (48:52 of forage to concentrate ratio). Data were analysed using mixed models and treatment differences were evaluated by orthogonal contrasts (CON vs. fat-supplemented diets and CSPO vs. EFA). Dry matter intake and digestibility were not affected by treatments; however, EE intake and digestibility were higher with the inclusion of fat supplements. Fat supplementation increased milk yield (34.1, 35.8, and 35.9 kg/d for CON, CSPO and EFA, respectively). Fat supplementation also improved the yield of milk components and feed efficiency. Cows fed EFA had higher milk protein concentrations compared to those fed CSPO. Cows fed fat supplements exhibited higher concentrations of unsaturated FA and lower concentrations of de novo FA in milk compared to CON group. The concentration of de novo and odd-chain FA in the milk of cows fed CSPO was lower than in those fed EFA. Cows fed EFA had lower concentrations of trans-11 C18:1 and cis-9 C18:1 FA compared to the CSPO group. Fat supplements increased milk yield, feed efficiency and unsaturated FA concentration in milk without affecting DM digestibility. Supplementing cows with either CSPO or EFA resulted in similar performance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Archives of Animal Nutrition
Archives of Animal Nutrition 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>24 weeks
期刊介绍: Archives of Animal Nutrition is an international journal covering the biochemical and physiological basis of animal nutrition. Emphasis is laid on original papers on protein and amino acid metabolism, energy transformation, mineral metabolism, vitamin metabolism, nutritional effects on intestinal and body functions in combination with performance criteria, respectively. It furthermore deals with recent developments in practical animal feeding, feedstuff theory, mode of action of feed additives, feedstuff preservation and feedstuff processing. The spectrum covers all relevant animal species including food producing and companion animals, but not aquatic species. Seldom can priority be given to papers covering more descriptive studies, even if they may be interesting and technically sound or of impact for animal production, or for topics of relevance for only particular regional conditions.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信