Evaluating the Adequacy of the CNCPS Model

Luis Orlindo Tedeschi

Bertha Rueda-Maldonado

Francisco “Paco” Juárez-Lagunes

Mexican dual-purpose lactating cow evaluation

Descripción Entrada Unidades

Tipo de animal 2 Vacas lechera lactantes

Edad 66 Meses

Sexo 4 Vaca

Peso corporal 511 Kg

Raza 2 Cruzado (doble propósito)

Peso maduro 550 Kg

Condición Corporal 3 1 = flaca a 5 = gorda

Sistema de cruza 2 Dos vías

Raza de la Madre 17 Brahman

Raza del Padre 15 Holstein

Dias gestante 55 D

Días en lactancia 174 D

Lactación 5 #

Intervalo entre partos 13 Meses

Promedio del Hato 2866 Kg

Producción de leche 10 Kg/d

Grasa en leche 3.6 %

Proteína en leche 3.2 Kg%

Prod. De leche relativa 5 Escala de 1 a 9

Peso becerro al nacer 38 Kg

Edad al 1er parto 33 Meses

Descripción ambiental

Aditivo No

Velocidad del viento 16 Km/h

Temperatura previa 27 ºC

Humedad relativa previa 80 %

Temperatura actual 28 ºC

Humedad relativa actual 80 %

Horas luz solar 12 Horas

Exposicion a tormentas 1 Si

Temp. Min. Nocturna 18 ºC

Profundidad del pelo 0.6 Cm

Grosor de la capa 1 Delgada

Cubierta en el pelo 1 No lodo

Animales sofocados 1 No

Actividad Pastoreo intensivo

Pangola

SeñalInsurgentes

Mulato

Llanero

Privilegio MombazaTanzania

Estrella

BASE DE DATOS

BASE DE DATOSEdad

% M.sec

a

FDN, %

MS

Lig.,% FDN1

PC, % MS

Solubilidad % de

PC2

NNP, %

P.Sol3

PIDN, % PC4

PIDA, % PC5

E.E. % MS

MIN, % MS

FDN disp., %MS6

FDN no

disp., %MS7

CNE %

MS8

713.11

64.45 7.53 12.07 90.75 14.93 9.25 3.16 3.79 9.92 46.36 17.95 9.91

1419.53

63.11 5.37 14.16 92.48 16.70 7.52 4.35 3.35 9.87 50.23 12.73 9.67

2116.70

67.12 6.01 13.46 91.45 27.13 8.55 4.06 3.86 9.45 52.70 14.27 6.26

2813.57

66.14 4.89 12.19 91.39 5.56 8.61 4.05 3.92 9.46 54.40 11.61 8.41

3515.91

69.30 6.06 9.40 91.33 8.61 8.67 5.73 2.32 9.96 54.74 14.48 9.10

4219.28

65.70 7.00 4.97 84.12 2.69 15.88 5.89 2.69 8.82 48.90 16.76

17.85

4920.70

63.58 7.63 6.84 88.46 32.46 11.54 3.96 2.25 9.64 45.26 18.26

17.74

5618.45

68.70 7.06 9.43 90.83 11.01 9.17 5.80 3.85 10.17 51.75 16.87 7.93

6322.23

69.02 7.39 7.21 91.51 29.66 8.49 7.49 2.68 9.60 51.29 17.69

11.53

7023.19

71.75 7.51 4.84 90.36 18.83 9.64 10.31 0.80 9.90 53.73 17.99

12.73

7720.44

71.34 7.67 6.62 90.09 32.96 9.91 6.49 0.18 9.64 52.94 18.36

12.26

9621.15

72.75 8.11 4.50 88.33 36.48 11.67 12.95 0.14 9.65 53.29 19.44

12.99

Carbohydrate fractions of four tropical grasses.

Item TOTAL A B1 NDS B2 C

Andropogon 80.4x 10.6x 6.8x 17.4x 47.8y 15.2y

Brachiaria 79.7x 10.8x 4.7xy 15.5xy 50.6xy 13.5y

Cynodon 79.9x 7.9y 2.7y 10.7z 51.2x 18.0x

Panicum 77.8y 9.6xy 4.0y 13.6y 49.4xy 14.8y

SEM .12 .19 .26 .24 .32 .20P < .05

Fertilization effect on the carbohydrate fractions.

Item TOTAL A B1 NDS B2 C

Non-fertilized 83.7x 10.5x 4.5x 15.0x 53.9x 14.8y

Fertilized 75.2y 9.0y 4.6x 13.6x 45.6x 16.0x

SEM .06 .10 .13 .12 .16 .10

P < .10

Digestion rates based on gas production measurements.Item Andropogon Brachiaria Cynodon Panicum SEM Whole grassVol, mL 23.7x 23.0x 21.6y 23.6x .11Rate, %/h 5.1xy 5.2xy 4.8y 6.0x .10Lag, h 2.2y 2.4y 1.0z 3.0x .06 NDF fractionVol, mL 19.4x 18.6xy 17.5x 18.4xy .14Rate, %/h 7.3xy 8.4x 3.8z 6.8y .16Lag, h 4.5y 5.2y 4.6y 6.7x .14 NDS fractionVol, mL 4.3y 4.4y 4.1y 5.2x .08Rate, %/h 13.8y 27.4x 13.2y 8.6y .77Lag, h 1.2x .5x .1y .6x .11x,y,z Different superscript in each row differ (P < .05)

Protein fractionation of four tropical grasses ________________% CP________

Class CP,% DM

A BI B2 B3 C

Andropogon 9.1x 16.6y 2.4z 31.7yz 42.5x 6.7y

Brachiaria 9.0x 29.2x 12.9y 44.6x 9.9z 3.5z

Cynodon 8.3xy 12.3y 19.7x 29.2z 28.1y 10.6x

Panicum 7.2y 16.9y 10.7y 38.1xy 24.9y 9.4x

SEM .12 .77 .68 .86 1.06 .28

P < .05

Effect of N fertilization on protein fractionation __________% CP___________

Class CP,% DM

A B1 B2 B3 C

Non-fert. 5.9y 20.8x 9.3x 33.4y 27.6x 8.8x

Fertilized 10.9x 16.7x 13.5x 38.4x 25.1x 6.3x

SEM .06 .38 .34 .43 .53 .14

P < .10

Digestion Rate of NDF-N in Tropical Forages

F.I. Juarez, A.N. Pell, and J.B. Robertson.

Cornell University

INIFAP

Objectives

To measure the NDF-N digestion kinetics of tropical grasses.

To determine the effects of plant maturity and N fertilization on rate and extent of digestion.

Table 1. NDF-N x 6.25 content (%CP).

Grass n CP/DM NDF-N B3 C

Overall 35 8.2 35.0 27.8 7.2MSE 0.41 1.85 1.64 0.43

Andropogon 5 9.3 48.1 41.9 6.2Brachiaria 5 9.7 13.1 10.2 2.9Cynodon 5 8.8 38.8 29.6 9.2Panicum 5 8.2 34.2 26.1 8.1

MSE = Mean Standard Error.

Table 2. Effect of fertilization on NDF-N x 6.25 (%CP).

Variable NonFertilized

Fertilized MSE

CP/DM* 5.9 10.9 0.060NDF-N* 36.4 31.4 0.347B3 27.6 25.1 0.532C* 8.8 6.3 0.143

Every number is the mean of 8 observations.* Statistically different at P < 0.05.

Table 3. Effect of Age (days) on NDF-N x 6.25 (%CP).

Variable 28 35 42 MSE

CP/DM 7.7 a 6.3 b 5.5 c 0.119

NDF-N 34.9 ab 36.7 a 33.7 b 0.465

B3 28.8 a 28.1 a 25.4 b 0.484

C 6.1 a 8.6 b 8.3 b 0.249

Every number is the mean of 7 observations.Different letters within row differs ( P < 0.05).

Table 4. NDF-N x 6.25 of 4 tropical grasses (%CP).

Variable Andropogon Brachiaria Cynodon Panicum MSE

CP/DM 9.1 a 9.0 a 8.3 b 7.2 c 0.12

NDF-N 49.2 a 13.4 c 38.7 b 34.3 b 1.33

B3 42.5 a 9.9 c 28.1 b 24.9 b 1.06

C 6.7 b 3.5 c 10.6 a 9.4 a 0.28

Every number is the mean of 4 observations.Different letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).

Table 5. NDF and NDF-N x 6.25 extent of digestion (%).

Variable n EXTENTNDF NDF-N MSE

Overall 35 67 b 73 a 0.113

Andropogon 5 71 b 83 a 0.691Brachiaria 5 72 a 56 b 0.691Cynodon 5 61 b 74 a 0.691Panicum 5 69 b 77 a 0.691

Diferent letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).

Table 6. NDF and NDF-N x 6.25 rates of digestion (%/h).

Variable n RATENDF NDF-N MSE

Overall 35 5.5 b 6.5 a 0.040

Andropogon 5 5.5 b 9.1 a 0.241Brachiaria 5 5.2 b 6.7 a 0.241Cynodon 5 5.1 a 5.4 a 0.241Panicum 5 5.3 b 9.4 a 0.241

Different letters within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).

N Fertilization and CP, NDF and NDF-N x 6.25.

Variable Non Fertilized Fertilized MSE

CP/DM 5.7 b 10.7 a 0.051B3/CP 29.9 a 27.4 a 0.478

NDF/DM 72.1 a 69.7 b 0.478NDF extent, % 67.1 a 66.7 a 0.140NDF rate, %/h 4.9 a 5.1 a 0.045NDF lag, h 3.8 a 2.8 b 0.097

NDF-N extent, % 65.7 b 75.5 a 0.345NDF-N rate, %/h 7.1 b 8.3 a 0.176

Every number is the mean of 8 observations.Different letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).

Table 8. Effect of Age (d) on CP, NDF and NDF-N x 6.25.

Variable 28 35 42 MSE

CP/DM 7.3 a 6.2 b 5.2 c 0.134B3/CP 27.5 a 28.5 a 28.2 a 0.483

NDF/DM 69.7 a 72.0 b 72.4 b 0.233NDF extent, % 69.7 a 66.5 b 65.4 b 0.253NDF rate, %/h 5.7 a 5.1 b 4.6 c 0.070NDF lag, h 3.5 a 3.6 a 3.0 a 0.098

NDF-N extent, % 72.0 a 68.1 b 65.1 b 0.663NDF-N rate, %/h 6.2 a 6.3 a 5.2 a 0.238

Every number is the mean of 7 observations.Different letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).

CP, NDF and NDF-N x 6.25 of 4 grasses.

Variable Andropogon Brachiaria Panicum Cynodon MSE

CP/DM 8.7 ab 8.8 a 7.2 c 8.3 b 0.10B3/CP 43.7 c 11.4 a 31.1 b 28.7 b 0.96

NDF/DM 71.5 b 65.3 a 71.9 b 74.9 c 0.57NDF extent,% 69.5 b 71.1 a 68.0 c 59.0 d 0.28NDF rate,%/h 5.3 a 5.1 a 4.8 b 4.7 b 0.09NDF lag, h 3.7 b 5.8 a 1.3 d 2.4 c 0.19

NDF-N extent,% 81.7 a 52.2 c 74.5 b 74.1 b 0.69NDF-N rate,%/h 9.5 a 6.1 b 9.3 a 5.7 b 0.35

Every number is the mean of 4 observations.Different letters within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).

Conclusions - 1

NDF-N as % of CP averaged 35 with a range of 10 - 60.

The NDF-N variation was primarily due to species but N fertilization and maturity also were factors.

Conclusions - 2

NDF-N is potentially ruminally available. Extent and rate of NDF-N digestion is

affected by fertilization. NDF-N was digested faster than NDF.

Requirements for accurate prediction in the tropics

Must accurately predict requirements for maintenance, growth, pregnancy, lactation, and energy reserves

Must accurately predict absorbed energy and protein feeds being fed for each specific farm condition

Tabular nutrient requirements and feed values developed in North America are not adequate for the tropics

CNCPS for feed management

Develop a model to predict requirements and feed biological values on each farm

Use the model to identify the factors that are first limiting performance– Energy– Protein– Amino acids– Minerals

CNCPS components for the tropics

Breed adjustments for maintenance, growth, and lactation

Tropical forages CHO and Protein fractions and digestion rates

Dry matter intake equations Ruminal adjustment for N and branched-

chain amino acids deficiencies

Dual-purpose Lactating Cows

Fifty 3/4 Holstein x 1/4 Brahman lactating cows with:– Body weight = 511 kg (550 mature), Condition

score = 3, and milk production = 10 kg/d Rotational grazing Pangola grass and

supplemented with 3.5 kg/d of concentrate From Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999) in J. Dairy Sci.

82:2136

Animal descriptions for the baseline using the CNCPS.Animal Type 2 Lactating Dairy CowAge 74 MonthsSex 4 CowBody Weight 508 KgBreed Type 2 Beef * DairyMature Weight 550 KgCondition Score 5 1=v. thin - 5=v.fleshyBreeding System 2 way cross Dam's Breed 17 Brahman Bull's Breed 15 HolsteinDays Pregnant 30 daysDays since Calving 210 daysLactation # 3Rolling Herd Average 3660 KgMilk Production 12 KgMilk Fat 3.6 KgMilk Protein 3.2 KgRelative Milk Production 5 1-9Expected Calf BirthWeight 38 Kg

Management and environmental descriptions for the baseline using the CNCPS.

Management DescriptionAdditive 1 NoneGrazing Unit Size 20 HectaresDaily Pasture Allowance 1 DM Kg/PDMIInitial Pasture Mass 3000 Kg/HectareFeeding Frequency 24 # Times DailyFeeding Method 1 Forage and Grain Separate

Environment DescriptionWind Speed 16 kphPrevious Temperature 27 0CCurrent Temperature 28 0CStorm Exposure 1 YesNight Cooling 1 No CoolingHair Depth 0.6 cmHide 1 ThinHair Coat 1 No MudCattle Panting 1 None

Pangola grass descriptions used for the baseline.

Pangola grassa Pangola grass PangolaGrass

Item UnitConcentrate % DM 0.0 0.0 0.0Forage % DM 100.0 100.0 100.0Dry Matter % AF 21.0 26.8 26.8NDF % DM 70.0 69.5 69.5 Lignin % NDF 11.4 7.5 7.5CP % DM 9.1 8.9 8.9 Solubility % CP 42.0 41.9 41.9 NPN % SolP 4.8 36.3 36.3 NDIP % CP 24.0 32.5 32.5 ADIP % CP 2.2 5.4 5.4Starch % NSC 5.0 28.2 28.2Fat % DM 2.3 2.4 2.4Ash % DM 7.6 8.6 8.6CHO-A KD % hr 250.0 250.0 19.7CHO-B1 KD % hr 30.0 30.0 19.7CHO-B2 KD % hr 3.0 3.0 5.3Prot-B1 KD % hr 135.0 135.0 ---Prot-B2 KD % hr 11.0 11.0 ---Prot-B3 KD % hr 0.1 0.1 5.3a Tabular values from Beef NRC, 1996.

Ingredients for the concentrate used in the baselinea

Sorghum Grain

SoybeanMeal

MolassesCane

Urea Minerals

Item UnitConcentrate % DM 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Forage % DM 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Dry Matter % AF 89.0 89.8 73.0 99.0 100.0NDF % DM 13.3 14.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lignin % NDF 6.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0CP % DM 11.6 49.9 8.0 291.0 0.0 Solubility % CP 12.0 20.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 NPN % SolP 33.0 55.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 NDIP % CP 10.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ADIP % CP 5.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Starch % NSC 90.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Fat % DM 3.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0Ash % DM 2.0 7.2 8.0 0.0 100.0CHO-A KD % hr 150.0 300.0 500.0 0.0 0.0CHO-B1 KD % hr 12.0 25.0 30.0 0.0 0.0CHO-B2 KD % hr 5.0 6.0 20.0 0.0 0.0Prot-B1 KD % hr 135.0 230.0 350.0 400.0 0.0Prot-B2 KD % hr 6.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 0.0Prot-B3 KD % hr 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0a Tabular values from Beef NRC, 1996.

Results of the diet evaluation using tabular values or laboratory measurements forpangola grass.Item Tabular values Laboratory values New ratesDMI predicted, Kg 11.8 12.5 12.9DMI actual, Kg 21.4 17.5 14.5Diff., % 182 140 113ME allowable milk,Kg/d

15.9 16.0 16.0

MP allowable milk,Kg/d

7.1 8.7 12.1

PUN, mg % 17 12 9Pangola grass 17.90 14.0 11.0Concentrate 3.5 3.5 3.5

Feed Composition

Item Unit Pangola grass

Sorghum grain

SBM

NDF %DM 69.5 10.3 11.4

Lignin %NDF 7.5 12.8 0.9

Protein %DM 8.9 10.4 52.6

SolCP %CP 41.9 14.9 16.0

NPN %SolCP 36.3 33.0 55.0Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 10

Digestion Rates

Item Unit Pangola grass

Sorghum grain

SBM

CHO A %/h 19.7 14.3 7.9

CHO B1 %/h 19.7 14.3 7.9

CHO B2 %/h 5.3 6.0 5.7

Prot. B1 %/h 135 135 230

Prot. B2 %/h 11.0 6.0 11.0

Prot. B3 %/h 5.3 0.12 0.20Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 10

Sensitivity to NDF and LigninME milk

Kg/d

MP milk

Kg/d

MP Bacteria

g/d

NDF1, %DM

60 11.3 7.7 685

70 9.4 5.7 640

80 7.4 3.8 593

Lignin2,%NDF

4 10.5 6.8 668

8 8.2 4.6 6121 Lignin = 6% DM. 2 NDF = 70% DM. From Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 4Note: ME decreases 1.25 and 0.69 of % units/% of NDF and Lignin increase, respectively

Sensitivity to NDF Digestion Rate

NDF1

Dig. Rate

ME milk

Kg/d

MP milk

Kg/d

MP Bacteria

g/d

3%/h 5.0 0 415

6%/h 9.4 5.7 640

9%/h 11.7 9.9 789

1 CHO A and B1 @ 16%/h. Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 5

Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in NDF and lignin contents.NDF, %DM 60 70 80Lig, %NDFItem

4 6 8 4 6 8 4 6 8

ME, milkKg/d

12.2 11.3 10.4 10.5 9.4 8.2 8.8 7.4 6.0

MP, milkKg/d

8.6 7.7 6.8 6.8 5.7 4.6 5.0 3.8 2.5

Rum N Bal,gm/d

-13 -6 0 -2 6 13 3 12 20

Pept Bal,gm/d

14 14 14 36 36 36 52 52 52

MP Bact.gm/d

708 685 661 668 640 612 626 593 560

MP UIPgm/d

287 287 287 280 280 280 273 273 273

Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in carbohydrates rates ofdigestion.A=B1, %/h 6 16 26B2, %/hItem

3 6 9 3 6 9 3 6 9

ME, milkKg/d

4.9 9.5 11.8 5.0 9.4 11.7 4.9 9.3 11.6

MP, milkKg/d

-2.4 4.1 8.3 -0.8 5.7 9.9 -0.1 6.5 10.7

Rum NBal, gm/d

85 25 -15 66 6 -34 56 -4 -44

Pept Bal,gm/d

48 48 48 36 36 36 30 30 30

MP Bact.gm/d

334 559 708 415 640 789 452 677 826

MP UIPgm/d

280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280 280

Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in crude and soluble protein.CP,% DM

4 8 12

SolP, %CPItem

20 35 50 20 35 50 20 35 50

MP, milkKg/d

4.1 3.7 3.2 6.6 5.7 4.9 9.0 7.7 6.5

Rum NBal, gm/d

-70 -66 -63 -2 6 13 37 49 61

Pept Bal,gm/d

3 -1 -5 45 36 27 84 71 59

MP Bact.gm/d

683 681 680 640 640 640 594 594 594

MP UIPgm/d

161 140 119 321 280 238 482 420 357

Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in the B3 protein fractionrate of digestion in tropical grasses.B1=B2, %/h 10B3, %/hItem

4 7 10

ME, milk Kg/d 9.4 9.4 9.4MP, milk Kg/d 5.4 4.9 4.6Rum N Bal, gm/d 7 12 14Pept Bal, gm/d 37 42 45MP Bact. gm/d 640 640 640MP UIP gm/d 266 240 224

Evaluation of the nutritive value of tropical grasses for dual purpose cattle usingthe CNCPSItem Brizantha Andropo. Cynodon Panicum SEMDMI, kg 14.5X 12.6Y 10.3Z 12.3Y 0.11ME Milk, kg/d 13.6x 8.2y 1.1z 9.3y 0.34MP Milk, kg/d 12.6x 5.9y 0.5z 4.2y 0.33Rum N Bal. gm/d -18.5y 11.7x 34.0x -3.5y 3.14Pept. Bal. gm/d 35.7z 65.5x 40.5yz 50.5y 1.63MP Bact. gm/d 824x 625y 360z 603y 11.4MP UIP, gm/d 465x 294y 288y 214y 11.7P < .05

Nitrogen fertilization effect on the nutritive value of four tropical grasses for dualpurpose cattle using the CNCPS.Item Non-fertilized Fertilized SEMDMI, kg 12.1Y 12.8X 0.05ME Milk, kg/d 7.3x 8.8x 0.17MP Milk, kg/d 4.2y 7.4x 0.16Rum N Bal. gm/d -29.6y 41.5x 1.57Pept. Bal. gm/d 21.2y 74.9x 0.81MP Bact. gm/d 630x 576x 5.7MP UIP, gm/d 202x 428x 5.8P < .10

Effect of N fertilizer on volume of gas, amount of carbohydrate and mL of gas per100 mg of carbohydrate digested.Item Non-fertilized Fertilized SEM

Total carbohydratesVolume, mL 24.0x 21.9y .05Amount, mg 83.7x 75.2y .06Vol/Amt, mL/100 mg 28.7x 29.2x .07 B2 fractionVolume, mL 19.2x 17.8y .07Amount, mg 53.9x 45.6x .16Vol/Amt, mL/100 mg 35.3x 39.2x .21 NDS fractionVolume, mL 4.8x 4.1y .04Amount, mg 15.0x 13.6x .12Vol/Amt, mL/100 mg 34.1x 30.8x .45P < .10

Volume of gas, amount of carbohydrate and mL of gas per 100 mg ofcarbohydrate digested for each grass.Item Andro. Brachi. Cynodon Panicum SEM

NDS fractionVolume, mL 4.3y 4.4y 4.1y 5.2x .08Amount, mg 17.4x 15.5xy 10.7z 13.6y .24Vol/Amta 24.5y 28.1y 38.6x 38.6x .90

A fractionVolume, mL 3.3x 2.0y 3.4x 3.2x .08Amount, mg 10.6x 10.8x 7.9y 9.6xy .19Vol/Amta 31.7y 18.2z 42.6x 33.4y .72

B1 fractionVolume, mL .9y 2.4x .7y 2.0x .09Amount, mg 6.8x 4.7xy 2.7y 4.0y .26Vol/Amta 13.8y 54.7x 24.4xy 51.4x 3.44a Vol/Amt = mL of gas/100 mg of the corresponding carbohydrate fraction.P < .05