Advertisement
Article| Volume 81, ISSUE 6, P1619-1623, June 1998

Download started.

Ok

Prediction of Milk Protein Concentration from Elements of the Metabolizable Protein System

  • Author Footnotes
    1 Present address: Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, PO Box 12, Rehovoth 76100, Israel.
    E. Smoler
    Footnotes
    1 Present address: Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, PO Box 12, Rehovoth 76100, Israel.
    Affiliations
    Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
  • A.J. Rook
    Affiliations
    Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, North Wyke, Okehampton, Devon EX20 2SB, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
  • J.D. Sutton
    Affiliations
    Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
  • D.E. Beever
    Affiliations
    Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6AT, United Kingdom
    Search for articles by this author
  • Author Footnotes
    1 Present address: Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, PO Box 12, Rehovoth 76100, Israel.
Open ArchiveDOI:https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(98)75728-5
Prediction of Milk Protein Concentration from Elements of the Metabolizable Protein System
Previous ArticleProtein Density and Its Influence on Metabolite Concentration and Nitrogen Retention by Holstein Cows in Late Gestation
Next ArticleEffects of Postruminal Protein on Fatty Acid Digestibility in Dairy Cows
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      Abstract

      Elements of the metabolizable protein system in the United Kingdom were examined for their suitability as potential predictors of milk protein concentration. Models were based on data from 163 cows offered five forage mixtures for ad libitum intake plus concentrates at 3, 6, or 9 kg/d of dry matter. The models were then tested on a separate data set of 100 cows offered seven forage mixtures for ad libitum intake plus concentrates at 6 kg/d of dry matter. To minimize problems with collinearity, variables were arranged hierarchically; successive elements were components of variables at higher element levels. Variables from different element levels were not used in the same models. Models were constructed using ridge regression to minimize problems with collinearity.
      The fit and precision of prediction were generally poor because these models did not take into account animal variables. Models using undegradable dietary protein performed slightly better than did those using digestible undegraded protein. The use of slowly degradable protein and quickly degradable protein rather than rumen-degradable protein generally resulted in improvements in prediction. Models using neutral detergent fiber and quickly fermented carbohydrate were better than those using total carbohydrate. We concluded that there was little to be gained from using the elements of the metabolizable protein system considered here for the prediction of milk protein concentration.

      Key words

      Abbreviation key:

      DUP (digestible undegraded protein), MP (metabolizable protein), MSPE (mean square prediction error), QFC (quickly fermentable carbohydrate), UDP (undegradable dietary protein), WSC (water-soluble carbohydrate)

      References

        • Agricultural and Food Research Council
        Energy and Protein Requirements of Ruminants.
        CAB Int., Wallingford, Oxon, United Kingdom1993
        • Association of Official Analytical Chemists
        Official Methods of Analysis.
        12th ed. AOAC, Washington, DC1979
        • Beever D.E.
        • Cottrill B.R.
        Protein systems for feeding ruminant livestock: a European assessment.
        J. Dairy Sci. 1994; 77: 2031-2043
        • Emery R.S.
        Feeding for increased milk protein.
        J. Dairy Sci. 1978; 61: 825-828
        • Hoerl A.E.
        • Kennard R.W.
        Ridge regression: biased estimation for non-orthogonal problems.
        Technometrics. 1970; 12: 55-67
        • Hulme D.J.
        • Kellaway R.C.
        • Booth P.J.
        • Bennett L.
        The CAMDAIRY model for formulating and analysing dairy cow rations.
        Agric. Syst. 1986; 22: 81-108
        • MacRae J.C.
        • Armstrong D.G.
        Enzyme method for determination of linked glucose polymers in biological materials.
        J. Sci. Food Agric. 1968; 19: 578-581
        • Phipps R.H.
        • Jones A.K.
        • Sutton J.D.
        • Allen D.
        The effect of concentrate level on feed intake and milk production of dairy cows offered mixed forage diets.
        Anim. Sci. (Sofia). 1996; 62 (Abstr.): 641
        • Phipps R.H.
        • Sutton J.D.
        • Jones B.A.
        Forage mixtures for dairy cows: the effect on dry matter intake and milk production of incorporating either fermented or urea-treated wholecrop wheat, brewers’ grains, fodder beet or maize silage into diets based on grass silage.
        Anim. Sci. (Sofia). 1995; 61: 491-496
        • Rook A.J.
        Autoregressive models for the prediction of milk constituents in dairy cows.
        Anim. Prod. 1991; 52 (Abstr.): 566
        • Rook A.J.
        • Dhanoa M.S.
        • Gill M.
        Prediction of the voluntary intake of grass silages by beef cattle. 2. Principal component and ridge regression analyses.
        Anim. Prod. 1990; 50: 439-454
        • Rook A.J.
        • Sutton J.D.
        • France J.
        Prediction of the yields of milk constituents in dairy cows offered silage ad libitum and concentrates at a flat rate.
        Anim. Prod. 1992; 54: 313-322
        • Smith D.
        • Paulgen G.M.
        • Raguse C.A.
        Extraction of total available carbohydrates from grass and legume tissue.
        Plant Physiol. (Sofia). 1964; 69: 960-962

      14. Smoler, E. 1996. Mathematical models to predict milk protein concentration from dietary components fed to dairy cows. Ph.D. Diss., Univ. Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.

        • Spoörndly E.
        Effect of diet on milk composition and yield of dairy cows with special emphasis on milk protein content.
        Swed. J. Agric. Res. 1989; 19: 99-106
        • Sutton J.D.
        • Oldham J.D.
        • Hart I.C.
        Mount L.E. Energy Metabolism. Butterworth, London, United Kingdom1980: 303-306
        • Van Soest P.J.
        • Wine R.H.
        Use of detergent in the analysis of fibrous feeds. IV. Determination of plant cell-wall constituents.
        J. AOAC. 1965; 50: 50-55

      Article info

      Publication history

      Accepted: February 23, 1998
      Received: July 24, 1997

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(98)75728-5

      Copyright

      © 1998 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc.

      User license

      Elsevier user license |
      How you can reuse Information Icon
      Elsevier user license

      Permitted

      For non-commercial purposes:

      • Read, print & download
      • Text & data mine
      • Translate the article

      Not Permitted

      • Reuse portions or extracts from the article in other works
      • Redistribute or republish the final article
      • Sell or re-use for commercial purposes

      Elsevier's open access license policy

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect

      The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the Cookie Preference Center for this site.
      Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties.


      RELX