Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
1.Five sheep were given 400, 625, 850, 1075 and 1300 g lucerne chaff/d according to a 5 × 5 Latin square design to perturbate a mathematical model describing the rate of passage of digesta in terms of rate constants for the reticulo-rumen (k1) and caecum and proximal 2.colon (k2), and a transit time (TT) for the intestines. These values were obtained from the concentration curves of51Cr EDTA and144Ce-144Pr (144Pr) excretion in faeces for comparison with similar measurements obtained directly. 3.The retention times of markers in the reticulo-rumen, caecum and proximal colon and intestines all decreased by approximately 50% as intakes were increased from 400 to 1300 g/d. For both markers, the direct and indirect measures of half-time in the reticulo-rumen were essentially identical. The predicted (indirect) values for half times in the caecum and proximal colon were smaller than the direct values (P< 0.005) but the correlations between them were significant (P< 0.01) for51Cr EDTA (r0.66) and144Pr (r0.78). The direct measures of transit time were smaller (P< 0.025) by 5–10% than the predicted values but correlations between them were significant (P< 0.01) for51Cr EDTA (r0.91) and for144Pr (r0.93). Thus the model predicted the changes produced in the rate of passage of digesta and its usefulness and limitations are discussed. 3.With144Pr1/2k1for the reticulo-rumen andT1/2k2for the caecum and proximal colon were both positively correlated (P< 0.025) with the organic matter digestibilities.T1/2k2decreased at half the rate ofT1/2k1with increasing intakes. This would have favoured compensatory digestion in the large intestine.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Grovum et al. (1977) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: