اثر وزن متفاوت شروع محدودیت فیزیکی خوراک و تغذیه مجدد بر عملکرد رشد و صفات لاشه بره‌های لری

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 بخش تحقیقات علوم دامی مرکز آموزش و تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی لرستان ، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، ایران

2 بخش تحقیقات علوم دامی مرکز آموزش و تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی لرستان ، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی،

3 استادیار ، عضو هیات علمی بخش تحقیقات علوم دامی مرکز آموزش و تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی لرستان ، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی

4 ، عضو هیات علمی مؤسسه تحقیقات علوم دامی کشور، مدیر ایستگاههای تحقیقاتی مؤسسه، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج ایران

10.22034/as.2022.38888.1561

چکیده

زمینه مطالعاتی: رشد جبرانی در واقع یک فرایند فیزیولوژیک است که در آن از پتانسیل حیوان، پس از یک دوره اعمال محدودیت غذایی، برای افزایش رشد و بازده رشد در طی دوره تغذیه آزاد می‌توان بهره گرفت. هدف: این تحقیق به‌منظور بررسی اثر وزن متفاوت شروع محدودیت فیزیکی خوراک و دوره تغذیه مجدد بر عملکرد رشد بره‌های لری انجام شد. روش کار: برای انجام آزمایش، تعداد 54 رأس بره‌ی نر 26 کیلوگرمی انتخاب و بر اساس روش اندازه‌های تکرار شده در قالب طرح کاملاً تصادفی توسط رویه مختلط انجام شد. تیمارها شامل 6 تیمار، گروه شاهد بره 30 کیلوگرمی (جیره پروار بدون محدودیت؛ 2) گروه 80 درصد محدودیت خوراک بره 30 کیلوگرمی ؛ 3) گروه 60 درصد محدودیت خوراک بره 30 کیلوگرمی ؛ 4) گروه شاهد بره 35 کیلوگرمی (جیره پروار بدون محدودیت)؛ 5) گروه 80 درصد محدودیت خوراک بره 35 کیلوگرمی ؛6) گروه 60 درصد محدودیت خوراک بره 35 کیلوگرمی بود ند. پس از 14 روز دوره پیش از محدودیت خوراک یک گروه شامل 27 رأس که به میانگین وزن 30 کیلوگرمی رسیده بودند از بقیه جداشده و تحت تیمارهای محدودیت خوراک قرار گرفتند. گروه 27 رأسی باقیمانده تحت جیره قبلی به مدت 35 روز تا رسیدن به وزن 35 کیلوگرمی قرار داشتند. پس از رسیدن این گروه به میانگین 35 کیلوگرمی جیره‌های محدودیت خوراک اعمال شد. دوره محدودیت خوراک برای هر دو گروه 30 و 35 کیلوگرمی 35 روز بود. سپس گروه 30 کیلوگرمی به مدت 49 روز و گروه 35 کیلوگرمی به مدت 28 روز تا پایان دوره پروار تغذیه مجدد با جیره شاهد (جیره پروار بدون محدودیت و به صورت دسترسی آزاد) شدند. نتایج: نتایج نشان داد بین وزن نهایی بره‌ها در پایان دوره محدودیت خوراک اختلاف معنی‌دار وجود داشت (05/0>P). در پایان تغذیه مجدد بین گروه‌های شاهد (30 و 35 کیلوگرم) و گروه‌های محدودیتی 80 و 60 درصد محدودیت خوراک اختلاف معنی‌دار مشاهده نشد. بین ماده خشک مصرفی روزانه بره‌ها در پایان دوره محدودیت خوراک اختلاف معنی‌دار وجود داشت (05/0>P). در پایان رشد جبرانی بین گروه‌های شاهد و گروه‌های محدودیتی اختلاف معنی‌دار مشاهده نشد. در دوره تغذیه مجدد ضریب تبدیل خوراک در تیمارهای محدودیت خوراک نسبت به تیمارهای شاهد (30 و 35 کیلوگرم) کاهش داشت. نتایج ترکیب لاشه در دوره تغذیه مجدد نشان داد میانگین اکثر صفات لاشه در تیمارهای شاهد (30 و 35 کیلوگرم) و 80 درصد خوراک برای بره‌های 30 کیلوگرمی با یکدیگر تفاوت معنی‌دار نداشته و بالاتر از سایر گروه‌ها بودند. در این بین وزن دنبه، درصد دنبه و چربی کل لاشه در تیمارهای شاهد (30 و 35 کیلوگرم) بالاتر از کلیه گروه‌های محدودیت بود. نتایج نشان داد درصد گوشت لخم لاشه در گروه‌های جبرانی بالاتر از تیمارهای شاهد بود. نتیجه‌گیری نهایی: این مطالعه مشخص نمود بره‌های تحت محدودیت 80 درصد خوراک برای بره‌های 30 کیلوگرمی به دلیل افزایش وزن بالاتر، ضریب تبدیل خوراک مناسب‌تر نسبت به بره‌های شاهد که در کل دوره در حد اشتها خوراک مصرف نمودند، ارجحیت داشتند. همچنین تیمار فوق درصد چربی لاشه کمتر ، گوشت لخم بیشتر و درنهایت هزینه‌ تولید هر کیلوگرم لاشه و گوشت لخم پائین تری نسبت به سایر تیمارها داشت.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of different weight start of feed restriction and re-feeding on growth performance and carcass traits of Lori lambs

نویسندگان [English]

  • Behrouz Yarahmadi 1
  • Mohsen Mohamadi Saei 2
  • Karim Ghorbani 3
  • Nader Papi 4
1 Department of Animal Sciences, Lorestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Iran
2 Department of Animal Sciences, Lorestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO
3 Department of Animal Sciences, Lorestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Khorram Abad, Iran
4 Assistant Professor, Director of the Institute research stations, Animal Science Research Institute (ASRI), Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Compensatory growth is actually a physiological process in which the animal's potential, after a period of dietary restriction, can be exploited to increase growth and growth efficiency during the free feeding period (Hornick et al 2000). Compensatory growth is widely used today in various countries. Another specific management approach (short-term strategies) in lamb fattening is appropriate weight at the beginning of fattening (Santos Silva et al 2002). The benefits of applying a compensatory growth mechanism during the breeding period can be improved feed efficiency during the compensatory growth period (Abouhif et al 2013 and Sami et al 2016), reduced feed cost throughout the breeding period, also improved weight gain during the breeding period (Clark et al 2007; Abuhif et a l 2015) and reduced energy maintenance needs (Kamalzadeh et al 2009; Shadnosh et al 2011). Considering the feedlot of 320,000 fattening lambs in Lorestan province per year and the possibility of using feed restriction to promote the use of compensatory growth in lamb fattening, the project was carried out aims to investigate the possibility of process changing the growth rate, fattening and physical and chemical composition of carcass lambs Lori breed by short-term strategies of feed restriction.This study was conducted to investigate the effect of different weight start of feed restriction on growth performance and carcass lambs traits Lori breed lambs.
Material and methods: Fifty four male Lori lambs with a mean live weight of 26 kg were selected for the experiment. Treatments were consisted of 6 feed restriction treatments (60,80%) and ad libitum(fattening diet without restriction) for two weights (30 and 35 kg). At the beginning of expriment, 54 experimental lambs were fed the same diet.After a 14 day pre-feed restriction period, a group of 27 individuals that had reached an average weight of 30 kg were separated from the rest and subjected to feed restraint treatments. The remaining 27 lambs were fed the former diet for 35 days until reaching a weight of 35 kg. Upon reaching this group, an average of 35 kg dietary restriction was applied.The feed restriction period for both groups was 30 and 35 kg for 35 days. Then the 30 kg group for 49 days and the 35 kg group for 28 days until the end of the fattening period were re-fed the control diet (fattening ration without restriction and ad libitum). At the end of experiment, daily weight gain, final weight, feed conversion ratio, feed efficiency and feed intake were calculated and then three lambs were slathered from each treatment. Carcass characteristics were calculated with the cost of production per kg of weight gain, carcass and lean meat. Analysis were done by repeated measurements basis on a completely randomized design with a mixed model procedure. Comparison of mean treatments was performed by Tukey test. The statistical model was as follows:Yijk= μ + Ti+ Dk + Aij+ (T*D)ik + εijk.
Results and discussion: The results of Table 2 showed that the effect of the experimental diets had no significant effect on all the traits of lambs weighing 30 and 35 kg over the pre-feed restriction period. Results showed that there were significant difference between the final weight of lambs at the end of feed restriction period (P<0.05). At the end of the re-feeding, no significant differences were observed among the control treatment (30 and 35kg) with 60 and 80% feed restriction groups. In the present study, at the beginning of the re-feeding period in the respective treatments, the daily weight gain in the feed restriction treatments was significantly higher than the control groups at 30 and 35 kg. There were significant difference among intake dry matter of lambs at the end of feed restriction period (P<0.05). At the end of compensatory growth, there was observed no significant difference between control and restriction groups. During the re-feeding period, feed conversion ratio was lower in feed restriction treatments compared to control treatment (30 and 35 kg). Compensated feeding reduced FCR in lambs with prior feed restriction compared to control. The results showed that feed efficiency and feed intake needed to maintain live weight are affected by the animal feeding program. Results of physical composition of carcass during re-feeding showed that the average of most carcass traits in the control treatment (30 and 35kg) and 80% of feed restriction treatment for 30kg lambs had no significant difference and were higher than other groups. Also in the compensatory growth experiment, there was no significant difference between the number of empty body weight, hot carcass and cold carcass weight sa well as dressing percentage due to no difference in the final live weight between the 30 and 35 kg control groups with 80% feed intake. Another study in other ruminants was consistent with feed restriction and compensatory growth.Meanwhile, the fat tail weight and percentage and total carcass fat were higher in the control treatment (30 and 35kg) than in all control groups. The results showed that the percentage of carcass lean meat in the compensatory groups was higher than the control treatments. This study showed that lambs with 80% feed restriction for 30kg lambs due to higher weight gain and FCR were more favorable in terms of fattening condition than control lambs who consumed feed during whole period. Also, this treatment was the total carcass fat percentage lower and lean meat higher and ultimately, the production costs per kg carcass and lean meat were lower than other treatments.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Carcass characteristics
  • Feed conversion ratio
  • Feed restriction
  • Re-feeding
Abouheif MA, Al-Sornokh H, Swelum A, Yaqoob H and Al-Owaimer A, 2015. Effect of different feed restriction regimens on lamb performance and carcass traits. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 44(3):76-82.
Abouheif MA, Al-Owaimer A, Kraidees M, Metwally H and Shafey T, 2013. Effect of restricted feeding and realimentation on feed performance and carcass characteristics of growing lambs. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 42(2):95-101.
Aziz NN, Murray DM and Ball RD, 1992. The effect of live weight gain and live weight loss on body composition of Merino wethers: chemical composition of the dissected components. Journal of Animal Science 70:3412-3420.
Bigdeli M, 1996. Compensatory growth in the ruminant animal. Ph.D thesis,University of Queensland.
Carstens GE, Johnson, DE Ellenberger MA and Tatum JD, 1991. Physical and chemical components of the empty body during compensatory growth in beef steers. Journal of Animal Science 69:3251–3264.
Clark JH, Olson KC, Schmidt TB, Linville ML, AlkireDO, Meyer DL, Rentfrow GK, Carr  CC and Berg EP, 2007. Effects of dry matter intake restriction on diet digestion, energy partitioning, phosphorus retention, and ruminal fermentation by beef steers. Journal of Animal Science 85:3383-3390.
Dashtizadeh M, Zamiri M J, Kamalzadeh A and Kamali A, 2008.Effect of feed restriction on compensatory growth response ofyoung male goats. Iranian Journal Veterinary Research 9:109-120. (In Persian)
Deputy of Improvement of Livestock Production in Lorestan Province, 2018. Performance report of the Deputy of Improvement of Livestock Production in Lorestan Province in 2018. Agricultral Jihad organition of Lorestan. (In Persian)
Ding LM, Chen JQ, Degen AA, Qiu Q, Liu PP, Dong QM, Shang ZH, Zhang JJ and Liu SJ, 2016. Growth performance and hormonal status during feed restriction and compensatory growth of Small- Sheep in China Han tail. Small Ruminant Research144: 191-196.
Donovan PB, 1984. Compensatory gain in cattle and sheep. InNutrition Abstract and Review, 54: 389-410.
Drouillard JS, Klopfenstein TJ, Britton RA, Bauer ML, Gramlich SM, Wester TJ and Ferrell CL, 1991. Growth,body composition, and visceral organ mass and metabolismin lambs during and after metabolizable protein or net energyrestrictions. Journal of Animal Science, 69:3357–3375.
Graham NM and Searle TW, 1975. Studies of weaner sheep during and after a period of weight stasis. I. Energy and nitrogen utilization. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 26(2), 343-353.
Greeff JC, Meissner HH and Roux CZ and Van Rensburg RJJ, 1986. The effect of compensatory growth on body composition in sheep. South African Journal of Animal Science 16:162-168.
Homem AC, Sobrinho AG,Yamamoto S, 2007. Compensatory gain in lambs in the rearing phase: performance and biometric measure. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 36(1):111-119.
Hornick Hornick JL, Van Eenaeme C, Gérard O, Dufrasne I and Istasse L, 2000. Mechanisms of reduced and compensatory growth. Domestic animal endocrinology 19(2):121-32.
Kabbali A, Johnson WL, Johnson DW, Goodrich RD and Allen CE, 1992a. Effects of compensatory growth on somebody component weights and on carcass and non carcass composition of growing lambs. Journal of Animal Science 70:2852-2858.
Kabbali A, Johnson WL, Johnson DW, Goodrich RD and Allen CE, 1992b. Effects of under nutrition and refeeding on weights of body parts and chemical components of growing Moroccan lambs. Journal of Animal Science 70:2859-2865.
Kamalzadeh A and Aouladrabiei MR, 2009. Effects of restricted feeding on intake, digestion, nitrogen balance and metabolizable energy in small and large body sized sheep breeds. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 22:667-673.
Kamalzadeh A, Bruchem J, Van Koops WJ Tamminga S and Zwart D,1997. Feed quality restriction and compensatory growth in growing sheep: feed intake, digestion, nitrogen balance and modeling change in feed efficiency. Livestock Production Science 52: 209-217.
Kamalzadeh A, Koops WJ and Kiasat A, 2009. Effect of qualitative feed restriction on energy metabolism and nitrogen retention in sheep. South African Journal of Animal Science 39:30-39.
Kamalzadeh A, Koops WJ, van Bruchem J, Tamminga S and Zwart D, 1998. Feed quality restriction and compensatory growth in growing sheep: Development of body organs. Small Ruminant Research 29:71-82.
Keogh K, Waters SM, Kelly AK and Kenny DA, 2015. Feed restriction and subsequent realimentation in Holstein Friesian bulls: I. Effect on animal performance; muscle, fat, and linear body measurements; and slaughter characteristics. Journal of Animal Science 93:3578–3589.
Libardi KDC, Costa PB, Oliveira AA, Cavilhão C, Hermes PR and Ramella JRP, 2018. Metabolic profile of santaines lambs finished in feedlot with feeding restriction and ad libitum. Ciência Animal Brasil, 19, 1-15.
Mahouachi M and Atti N, 2005. Effects of restricted feeding and re-feeding of Barbarine lambs intake,growth and non-carcass components. Animal Science 81:305-312.
Marais PG, HJ Vander Merwe and JEJ Toit, 1991. The effect of compensatory growth on feed intake, growth rate, body composition and efficiency of feed utilization in Dorper sheep. South African Journal of Animal Sciences 21:80-87.
Moezzifar M, Karimi N and Zand K, 2016. The effect of feed restriction and compensatory growth on microbial crude protein production in fattening Afshari male lambs post weaning. Animal Environment 8(2):25-32. (In Persian)
National Research Council (NRC), 2007. Nutrient requirements of sheep. Sixth rev. ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Rezaivand H, 2000. Investigation of compensatory growth in lamb (Arabian sheep), MSc thesis, Shahid Chamran University of Ahwaz, Ramin Agricultural Education and Research Complex. (In Persian)
Ryan WJ, 1990. Compensatory growth in cattle and sheep. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews. Series B, Livestock Feeds and Feeding 60:653–664.
Sadeghi, S., S.A. Raft and S.Shojah. 2012. Effect of diet composition and fattening starting weight on body growth and carcass composition of Mogani male lambs. Journal of Animal Production Research, 4:43-35. (In Persian)
Sami A, Al-Selbood BA and Abouheif M, 2016. Impact of short compensatory growth periods on performance, carcass traits, fat deposition, and meat properties of Najdi lambs. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 40(6): 744-749.‏
Santos-Silva J, Mendes IA and Bessa RIB, 2002. The effect of genotype, feeding system and slaughter weight on the quality of light lambs: Growth, carcass composition and meat quality. Livestock Production Science 76: 17-25.
SAS Institute, 2003. SAS User's Guide. Version 9.1. SAS Institute Inc. Cary,NC,USA.
Searle T W, Graham N M and Smith E, 1979. Studies of weaned lambs before, during and after a period of weight loss. II. Body composition. Austalian Journal of Agricultural Research 30:525-531.
Shadnoush GR, Alikhani M, Rahmani HR, Edriss MA, Kamalzadeh A and Zahedifar M, 2011. Effects of restricted feeding and re-feeding in growing lambs: intake, growth and body organs development, Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 10(3), 280-285.‏
Turgeon OA, Brink DR and Bartle SJ, 1986. Effects of growth rate and compensatory growth on body composition in lambs. Journal of Animal Science 63:770-780.
Yagoub YM, Hiba, A Satti, RA Ismail and SA Babiker, 2016. Effect of Compensatory Growth on Feedlot Performance of Sudanese Desert Lambs. Journal of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production8:6(1).