Feeding Dairy Ewes with Fresh or Dehydrated Sulla (

condensed tannins dairy ewes dehydrated sulla forage digestibility feed intake plasma oxidative balance

Journal

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
Titre abrégé: Animals (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101635614

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 Sep 2022
Historique:
received: 26 07 2022
revised: 01 09 2022
accepted: 05 09 2022
entrez: 23 9 2022
pubmed: 24 9 2022
medline: 24 9 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Feeding dairy ewes with fresh sulla forage (FSF), a legume species containing condensed tannins (CT), has been shown to increase feed intake, milk yield, and casein and enhances the oxidative status of animals. Dehydration of FSF could be an alternative to hay-making to preserve the nutritional properties. This research aimed to compare the responses of dairy ewes fed with diets based on sulla hay (SH), pelleted dehydrated sulla forage (DSF), or FSF in terms of efficiency of feed utilization, milk production, and the balance between oxidant (reactive oxygen metabolites (ROMs)) and antioxidant (biological antioxidant potential (BAP)) substances at the plasma level. Ten first-lambing (FL) and ten third-lambing (TL) ewes of the Valle del Belice breed at 60 days in milk were allocated into five homogeneous groups fed with different diets in a partial 5 × 2 Latin square design with two phases. The diets differed for the forage basis: SHL = SH ad libitum; DSF2 = 2 kg/day DSF per head plus SH ad libitum; FSF2 = 2 kg/day FSF per head plus SH ad libitum; FSF4 = 4 kg/day FSF per head plus SH ad libitum; FSFL = FSF ad libitum. A commercial concentrate was provided to FL (0.8 kg/day per head) and TL (1.2 kg/day per head) ewes. Dehydration induced slight variations in the content of protein and fiber, showed no loss of vitamin E and polyunsaturated fatty acids, and decreased the level of CT and polyphenols. The DSF2 diet resulted in a higher intake of dry matter, protein, and vitamin E compared to the other diets, whereas, compared to the FSFL diet, its intake was analogous for net energy and was lower in CT and polyphenols. The DSF2 diet was comparable to FSF4 and FSFL diets for milk yield, and to all diets for casein content and the clotting ability of milk. Ewes fed a DSF2 diet exhibited lowest values of ROMs and oxidative stress index (OSI = ROMs/BAP), indicating a better oxidative status, presumably due to the antioxidant protection exerted by the higher vitamin E intake and CT metabolites. These results confirmed the positive effects of FSF on milk production, especially due to CT intake, in improving the efficiency of dietary protein utilization, and showed how favorable effects also occur when FSF is replaced by DSF instead of SH.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36139177
pii: ani12182317
doi: 10.3390/ani12182317
pmc: PMC9495196
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Subventions

Organisme : Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policies
ID : 2020-1533

Références

Animals (Basel). 2021 Nov 13;11(11):
pubmed: 34827975
J Dairy Sci. 2015 Jan;98(1):37-46
pubmed: 25465629
J Dairy Sci. 1991 Oct;74(10):3583-97
pubmed: 1660498
J Dairy Sci. 2019 May;102(5):3781-3804
pubmed: 30904293
J Dairy Sci. 2013 Apr;96(4):2107-2117
pubmed: 23403186
J Dairy Sci. 2019 Aug;102(8):6790-6801
pubmed: 31178182
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2015;55(5):660-9
pubmed: 24915359
Antioxidants (Basel). 2020 Mar 09;9(3):
pubmed: 32182905
Animal. 2016 Dec;10(12):2074-2082
pubmed: 27328633
J Sci Food Agric. 2022 Aug 30;102(11):4736-4743
pubmed: 35195298
Free Radic Biol Med. 1999 May;26(9-10):1231-7
pubmed: 10381194
Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2019 Jul;18(4):971-985
pubmed: 33336996
J Sci Food Agric. 2010 Jul;90(9):1452-9
pubmed: 20549796
Br J Nutr. 1989 Jul;62(1):51-61
pubmed: 2789989
J Nutr. 1998 Jun;128(6):1003-7
pubmed: 9614160
Molecules. 2021 Jul 29;26(15):
pubmed: 34361758
Mol Biol Rep. 2012 Oct;39(10):9355-60
pubmed: 22772457
Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2000 Oct 1;69(3):199-213
pubmed: 10906404
Vet J. 2014 Dec;202(3):583-7
pubmed: 25466574
J Anim Sci. 1991 Dec;69(12):4951-5
pubmed: 1667011
Br J Nutr. 1999 Apr;81(4):263-72
pubmed: 10999013
Analyst. 1994 Jun;119(6):1161-5
pubmed: 8074317
Br J Nutr. 2007 Oct;98(4):691-701
pubmed: 17475083
Trends Parasitol. 2006 Jun;22(6):253-61
pubmed: 16632404

Auteurs

Riccardo Gannuscio (R)

Dipartimento Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Forestali (SAAF), Università Degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA), 90128 Palermo, Italy.

Marialetizia Ponte (M)

Dipartimento Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Forestali (SAAF), Università Degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA), 90128 Palermo, Italy.

Antonino Di Grigoli (A)

Dipartimento Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Forestali (SAAF), Università Degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA), 90128 Palermo, Italy.

Giuseppe Maniaci (G)

Dipartimento Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Forestali (SAAF), Università Degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA), 90128 Palermo, Italy.

Adriana Di Trana (A)

Scuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali (SAFE), Università Degli Studi Della Basilicata, 85100 Potenza, Italy.

Monica Bacchi (M)

Dipartimento Agraria, Università Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria (UNIRC), 89122 Reggio Calabria, Italy.

Marco Alabiso (M)

Dipartimento Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Forestali (SAAF), Università Degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA), 90128 Palermo, Italy.

Adriana Bonanno (A)

Dipartimento Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Forestali (SAAF), Università Degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA), 90128 Palermo, Italy.

Massimo Todaro (M)

Dipartimento Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Forestali (SAAF), Università Degli Studi di Palermo (UNIPA), 90128 Palermo, Italy.

Classifications MeSH