Maataloustieteellinen A ikakauskirja
Vol. 63: 455—463, 1991

A comparison of untreated and formaldehyde-treated barley
distiller’s solubles and rapeseed meal as protein supplements
in dairy cows given grass silage ad libitum

PEKKA HUHTANEN, HANNELE KHALILI and MATTI NASI
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Helsinki,
SF-00710 Helsinki, Finland

Abstract. Twenty Friesian cows in four pens were arranged in a 4 x 4 Latin square ex-
periment with 4 wk experimental periods to evaluate the effects on feed intake, milk yield and
milk composition of treating barley dried distiller’s solubles (DDS) with a formaldehyderea-
gent, and to compare DDS with rapeseed meal as a protein supplement in dairy cows given
a grass silage-based diet. The control diet (C) consisted of grass silage ad libitum fed with 8.5
kg/d of concentrate based on barley, oats and barley fibre (250, 250 and 500 g/kg dry matter
(DM)). In three other diets 1.5 kg/d of the basal concentrate was replaced with rapeseed meal
(RSM) treated for reduced ruminal degradability, 1.5 kg of untreated DDS (UDDS) or 1.5
kg of DDS treated with formaldehyde reagent at the level of 15 1/t (TDDS).

On average, protein supplementation increased silage and total DM intake by approxi-
mately 0.5 kg/d (P>0.05). Milk yield (P<o.l), protein content (P<0.05) and protein yield
(P <0.01) were likewise increased. Untreated DDS had no effect onmilk yield or milk compo-
sition as compared with diet C. Treatment of DDS with formaldehyde reagent tended to in-
crease milk and protein yield as compared with UDDS, and resulted in a milk yield similar
to that obtained with the RSM supplement. Compared with RSM, the mean milk protein yield
was lower (P<0.01) when the diet was supplemented with DDS. Live weight gain was higher
(P<0.05) in cows receiving RSM diet than in cows receiving DDS diets. Calculation of energy
balance showed that increased milk energy output in cows fed diets containing protein supple-
ments was mediated mainly through increased energy intake.

Index words: barley distiller’s solubles, formaldehyde treatment, rapeseed meal, silage intake, milk production

Introduction

Dairy cows have shown considerable re-
sponse to feeding of supplementary protein
with grass silage based diets (Gordon et al.
1981; Thomas and Rae 1988; Chamberlain et

al. 1989). It would appear that both digesti-
bility and intake of silage are increased by in-
creasing theprotein concentration in the sup-
plement, and that the energy intake is there-
fore increased as well (Oldham 1984). Ac-
cording to a review by Oldham (1984), most

455

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE IN FINLAND

https://www.c-info.fi/en/info/?token=OBkaACH5MN3UqSv6.XszVb1ctEHToJ18pERuwkA.dNMD2BpAbBODF_D0L5AZ50YA3gjB8sfgn2001md4VuQ0nqQyu8mWDSxm4IlxghqLBtZ6iKnFWTNMO2KNHkj-cBCoPhXDurqw-tB1X5Di2nWaORGzqxuLErZht7N49P5moP-Y76lOPTcNNIPWxF37CUbHlfGSQwy8L-2PlSvtdQQpcqZN09POXK5HVMHGka5sDcI0hzk94Cuy2KEfh39ah3nRXpnl2z5OVbLSHuUTG3ykC1G7vqgV5YRVFHualXhvWSU8QBbt


responses to protein supplementation are
mediated through increased energy supply.
The reason for greater silage intake is thought
to be improved fibre digestibility in the rumen
(Oldham, 1984), but greater silage intake in
response to abomasal infusion of protein
(Chamberlain et al. 1989) suggests that in-
takeresponses can also be mediated via an in-
creased supply of protein to the abomasum.

Rapeseed meal is the usual protein supple-
ment in dairy cow concentrates in Finland. In
several studies supplementation of grass silage
and cereal grain diets with rapeseed meal has
been shown to increase milk yield (SetAlA et
al. 1984; Tuori and SyrjAlA-Qvist 1988;
1989, unpublished). At present some high pro-
tein by-products from integrated starch-etha-
nol production from barley are also available
in reasonable amounts (Nasi 1988). In an
earlier study, feeding barley protein (370 g
crude protein (CP)/kg dry matter (DM)) in
replacement for soybean meal reduced N
retention in young cattle (Huhtanen et al.
1989). In a feeding experiment with growing
bulls, rapeseed meal increased daily gain by
50 g, whereas barley protein had no effect,
when compared with diets based on forage
and barley alone (Aronen 1990). Similarly,
increasing the CP content of the concentrate
with dried distiller’s solubles (DDS) had no ef-
fect on milk yield or milk composition in dairy
cows given grass silage-based diet (Ala-Sep-
pAlA et al. 1988). Inefficient protein utiliza-
tion of these by-products may be related to
their high ruminal degradability as indicated
by the absence of response in duodenal non-
ammonia N flow to increasing dietary CP con-
tent through the inclusion of wet distiller’s
solubles in the diet (Huhtanen 1992). It
seemed reasonable that the supply of un-
degraded protein from distiller’s solubles
might be increased ifthe protein were protect-
ed from ruminal degradation by treatment
with formaldehyde reagent. Treatment in this
way of barley, whose protein is also highly
degradable in the rumen, has increased milk
yield in dairy cows given grass silage-based
diet (Kassem et al. 1987). A feeding experi-

ment was accordingly undertaken to study the
effect of the treatment of DDS with formal-
dehyde reagent, and to compare DDS and
rapeseed meal treated for reduced ruminal
degradability as protein supplements for dairy
cows given grass silage ad libitum.

Material and methods

Animals and management

Twenty Friesian cows were used. The cows
had calved 62 days (SE 5.6) before the start
of the experiment and on average were in their
4th lactation. The average milk yield before
the start of the experiment was 28.4 kg (SE
0.78). The animals were held in a loose-hous-
ing barn divided into four pens of five cows.
The cows were grouped into five blocks on the
basis of the pre-trial milk yield, calving date
and number. Within each block they were al-
located at random to the four pens. Grass si-
lage was given ad libitum for each pen, and
concentrates individually in the milking
parlour twice daily. Drinking water was free-
ly available.

Feeds

The silage was made of first cut timothy,
meadow fescue and red clover sward. The
grass was cut with a disc mower and harvest-
ed with a precision-chop forage harvester after
a wilting period of about 4 h. The grass was
ensiled into a bunker silo of 2501 capacity us-
ing a formic acid based additive applied at a
level of 4—5 1/t. Rapeseed meal (RSM) was
treated for reduced ruminal degradability (Ol-
jynpuristamo Ltd., Helsinki). The basal con-
centrate consisted of barley, oats and barley
fibre (250, 250 and 500 g/kg). Barley fibre,
the cell wall fraction of the barley endosperm,
and DOS were obtained from an integrated
starch-ethanol process. DOS was divided into
two portions, one of which remained untreat-
ed and the other of which was treated with a
formaldehyde-containing reagent ((formalin
410 g/kg, short-chain fatty acids 430 g/kg, lig-

456



4

none sulphonate 75 g/kg and urea -I- utropine
stabilizer 75 g/kg (European Patent Office,
Anon. 1982)). The rate of application of the
reagent was 15 1/t. Barley and oats were
crushed before use. All the diets were sup-
plemented with 0.25 kg/day of a commercial
mineral mixture to meet the animals’ require-
ments.

Design and treatments

The experiment was conducted according to
4x4 Latin square design balanced with re-
spect to residual effects so that each treatment
was preceded by each of the other treatments.
The control diet (diet C) comprised grass si-
lage ad libitum and 8.5 kg/day of the basal
concentrate on an air dry basis. In the three
other diets 1.5 kg of the basal concentrate was
replaced with RSM (diet RSM), untreated
DDS (UDDS) or DDS treated with the form-
aldehyde reagent (TDDS).

Milk yield and concentrate intake were
recorded individually daily. After milking, any
concentrate refusals were removed and weigh-
ed. Weighed amounts of silage were offered
twice daily in sufficient quantities to ensure
that 50—100 g/kg was refused. Silage refusals
were weighed once daily at 14 h.

Each experimental period lasted for 4 weeks,
of which the first 2 weeks served as an adjust-
ment period for the cows to adapt to the new
diet. The results were based on the data from
weeks 3 and 4 in each period. Live weights
(LW) were recorded at biweekly intervals be-
fore the afternoon feeding on two consecutive
days, or on three consecutive days if the
difference between the two days exceeded 6
kg. LW change was calculated as a linear
regression of time and LW.

Sampling and analyses

Samples of silage were taken twice a week
and analyzed for oven DM. The ingredients
of the concentrate supplements were sampled
once a week and analyzed for DM. The silage
samples were bulked over one period and con-

centrate ingredients over two periods to pro-
vide a sample for chemical analysis. The
methods for the chemical analyses and calcu-
lation of the feeding values have been
described by Huhtanen et al. (1988). Sam-
ples of milk were taken at the last four milk-
ings at the end of the 3rd and 4th week of each
experimental period and analyzed for fat, pro-
tein and lactose by an infra-red milk analyzer.

Calculation of results and statistical analyses

Metabolizable energy (ME) requirements
for maintenance and LW change were calcu-
lated according to the Ministry of Agriculture,
Food and Fisheries (Anon. 1984a) and milk
energy according to Tyrrel and Reid (1965).
ME available for milk production was calcu-
lated as the difference between ME intake and
the ME requirement for maintenance (ignor-
ing the effect ofLW change), or as the differ-
ence between ME intake and the ME require-
ment for maintenance and live weight change
(including the effect of LW change). The ef-
ficiency of the utilization of ME for milk pro-
duction was calculated as milk energy/ME
available for milk production.

The data were subjected to the analyses of
variance for Latin square experiments. In all
the analyses the data from one pen in a single
period were treated as an experimental unit (6
d.f. for the residual). The sum of squares of
the treatment effect was further partitioned
into single degrees of freedom using or-
thogonal contrasts (Sokal and Rohlf 1981)
for comparisons of diet C vs. protein supple-
ments (C,), RSM vs. DDS (C 2) and the effect
of treatment of DDS (C 3).

Results

The chemical composition and estimated
feeding values of the dietary ingredients are
presented in Table 1. The silage used was well
preserved with a low pH and satisfactory fer-
mentation characteristics. The NDF content
of the barley fibre was markedly higher than
the corresponding value in our earlier experi-

457



Table 1. Chemical composition (g/kg DM) and estimated feeding values of the experimental feeds.

Silagel Barley Oats Barley RSM Untreated Treated
fibre DDS DDS

Dry matter (g/kg) 210 872 868 896 881 928 925
In dry matter

Ash 88 25 33 27 80 123 158
Crude protein 142 115 117 138 323 303 339
Ether extract 49 33 68 89 117 68 64
Crude fibre 308 55 112 163 133 45 35
NFE 2 413 772 670 583 348 461 404

NDF3 558 226 296 714 281
ADF4 329 56 128 202 178
ADL5 32 9 30 43 77

Feed values
FUVkg DM 0.727 1.051 7 1.071 1.015 0.995
ME MJ/kg DM 10.2 12.37 12.7 12.2 12.0
DCP8 g/kg DM 99 97 7 267 252 281

1 In silage: pH 3.85; in dry matter (g/kg): water soluble carbohydrates 17, lactic acid 94, acetic acid 25, propionic
acid 0.1, butyric acid 0.5; in total nitrogen (g/kg): ammonia N 55, soluble N 524

2 NFE = nitrogen free extracts
3 NDF = neutral detergent fibre
4 ADF = acid detergent fibre
5 ADL = acid detergent lignin
6 FU = feed unit = 0.7 kg starch
7 Feed values for a mixture of barley, oats and barley fibre (25:25:50)
8 DCP = digestible crude protein

ments (Nasi 1988; Huhtanen et al. 1988).
The differences between the protein supple-
ments in CP content and estimated feeding
values were small.

Feed intake data are summarized in Table
2. There was a trend indicating higher intakes
of silage DM when protein supplements were
included in the diet. As a result, the total in-
take of DM and calculated intakes of FU and
ME showed a non-significant tendency to in-
crease with protein supplements. No differ-
ences between the protein supplements were
observed in their effect on feed intake. As ex-
pected, digestible crude protein (DCP) intake
was higher (P< 0.001) when protein supple-
ments were included in the diet. The dietary
CP concentration was 136, 150, 148 and 151
g/kg DM for diets C, RSM, UDDS and
TDDS, respectively.

The yield and composition of milk and the
yields of milk constituents for cows receiving
the experimental diets are shown in Table 3.
On average, protein supplementation tended

(P<o.l) to increase milk yield and reduce
milk fat content as compared with the unsup-
plemented diet (C). Milk protein content and
milk protein yield were significantly (P < 0.05;
PcO.Ol) higher for cows given protein sup-
plements. Among the three protein supple-
ments, the best response in milk protein yield
was obtained with RSM; the difference be-
tween RSM and the mean value of the DOS
diets was significant (P<0.01). As compared
with the control diet, untreated DDS had no
effect on milk yield or milk composition. The
formaldehyde treatment of DDS resulted in
a slightly higher milk yield (0.45 kg/d; P
>0.1), protein yield (19 g/d; P<o.l) and
FCM yield (0.55 kg/d; P<o.l) as compared
with UDDS, and the values were very close
to those in cows receiving the RSM supple-
ment. LW gain was higher (P<0.05) in cows
given RSM supplement than in those given
DDS supplements.

The results for .the calculation of the ME
balance are shown in Table 4. Inclusion of

458



Table 2. Feed intake (kg DM/d) and estimated nutrient consumption for cows given the four diets.

Diet Significance

Control RSM UDDS TDDS SEM C, C 2 C,

Silage 10.15 10.36 10.57 10.67 0.193 NS NS NS
Concentrate 7.00 7.27 7.12 6.98
Total 17.15 17.64 17.70 17.64 0.231 NS NS NS
Dry matter

kg/100 kg LW 2.81 2.89 2.89 2.89 0.019 NS NS NS
g/kg LW0 -75 139.6 143.5 143.6 143.5 1.89 NS NS NS

Net energy (FU/d) 14.74 15.21 15.21 15.01 0.179 NS NS NS
ME (MJ/d) 190.6 196.5 196.1 195.0 1.77 o NS NS
DCP (g/d) 1676 1942 1942 1973 24 *** NS NS

SEM = standard error of means
Significance: o (P<0.10), * (Pc0.05), ** (P<0.01), *** (P<0.001)

Table 3. Milk production, live weight and feed conversion for the cows given the four diets.

Diet Significance

Control RSM UDDS TDDS SEM C, C 2 C 3
Milk yield (kg/d) 23.83 24.64 24.05 24.50 0.20 o NS NS
FCM yield (kg/d) 24.12 24.45 23.84 24.39 0.19 NS NS o
Milk composition (g/kg)

Fat 41.1 39.7 39.7 40.0 0.50 o NS NS
Protein 28.8 29.9 29.1 29.3 0.22 * o NS
Lactose 49.5 49.1 49.4 49.6 0.22 NS NS NS

Yield (g/d)
Fat 973 973 948 972 10.6 NS NS NS
Protein 680 732 695 714 6.1 •» *• o
Lactose 1181 1209 1188 1216 12.5 NS NS NS

Live weight
Mean (kg) 614 615 618 616 2.7 NS NS NS
Change (kg/d) 0.37 0.35 0.13 0.23 0.076 NS * NS

Feed conversionl
FU/kg FCM 0.384 0.387 0.427 0.402 0.012 NS o NS
DCP g/kg FCM 56.1 66.1 67.3 67.4 1.05 NS NS

1 Corrected for maintenance (FU and DCP) and live weight change (FU)
For significance: see Table 2

Table 4. Calculated ME balance (MJ/d) and efficiency of the utilization of ME for milk production.

Diet Significance

Control RSM UDDS TDDS SEM C, C 2 C 3
ME intake 190.6 196.5 196.1 195.0 1.77 oNS NS
ME from LW change —12.6 —15.9 —5.3 —8.5 5.98 NS *NS
Energy output

Maintenance 64.2 64.3 64.6 64.3 0.25 NS NS NS
Milk 75.8 77.5 75.3 77.2 0.51 NS o *

Efficiency
Including LW change 0.672 0.671 0.600 0.640 0.021 NS oNS
Ignoring LW change 0.607 0.592 0.575 0.594 0.013 NS NS NS

For significance: see Table 2

459



460

protein supplements in the diet increased daily
ME intake by approximately 5 MJ/d
(P < 0.1). Milk energy output was 1.9MJ/day
(P<0.05) higher in cows given treated DDS
than in those given untreated DDS. Including
the effect of LW change in calculations, the
efficiency of transferring surplus energy into
milk tended (P<o.l) to be higher with the
RSM than the DDS supplements; when the
effect of LW change was ignored this differ-
ence disappeared.

Discussion

Effect of protein supplementation

The main effect of increasing supplemen-
tary crude protein intake was an increase in
silage DM intake, in agreement with the ob-
servations of Murphy et al. (1985), HeikkilA
et al. (1987, unpublished), Tuori and Syr-

jAlA-Qvist (1988, 1989, unpublished) in
studies with RSM. In this study, the mean re-
sponse to protein supplementation in feed in-
take, of 0.21 kg per 10 g/kg DM increase in
dietary CP concentration, was close to the val-
ue of 0.19 reported by Oldham (1984) in a re-
view. Chamberlain et al. (1989) reported a
corresponding response of 0.29 kg with high
D-value silage plus barley based concentrate
diets. The response to RSM supplementation
in milk yield was smaller than has often been
observed when protein supplements are in-
cluded in grass silage based diets (Thomas
and Rae 1988; Chamberlain et al. 1989).
Similar or slightly higher responses were
found (Murphy et al. 1985; HeikkilA et al.
1987, unpublished; Tuori and SyrjAlA-Qvist
1988; 1989, unpublished) when RSM was used
to supplement the protein level in cereal grain
based concentrates for cows given grass silage
ad libitum. At 0.32 kg/day per 100 g/day in-
crease in supplementary CP intake, the milk
yield response in our study was higher than
the mean response of 0.20 kg reported by
Gordon et al. (1981) in a review of similar

studies with soybean meal supplementation.
This may be explained by the quite low level
of protein supplementation and low CP con-
tent of the basal concentrate that we used.
There is also considerable variation (0—0.051
kg milk per g/kg) in the response to increase
in concentrate CP content (Thomas and Rae
1988). The proportion and amount of RSM
in the concentrate was within the optimal
range found in the studies of Tuori and Syr-

jAlA-Qvist (1988; 1989, unpublished), in-
dicating that with high quality silage given ad
libitum the response to RSM supplementation
is fairly small.

The effect of RSM supplements on milk
protein concentration has been varied; Mur-
phy et al. (1985) reported a similar increase
to us, whereas Tuori and SyrjAlA-Qvist (1988;
1989, unpublished) found variable effects.
With the effects of RSM on milk yield and
protein content combined, the increase of in
milk protein yield in our experiment was
7.6 %. Our findings are in agreement with the
data quoted by Gordon et al. (1981) and
Chamberlain et al. (1989), which indicate
that increases in protein intake generally re-
sult in small, but consistent depressions in
milk fat content and increases in milk protein
content.

The average effect of protein supplementa-
tion on calculated ME intake was 3.1 Ml/
10 g/kg increase in dietary CP content. Cal-

culation of the energy balance shows that pro-
tein response to energy input was great enough
to account for the total increase in milk pro-
duction with all protein supplements. In con-
trast to our results, consistent increase in the
efficiency of the utilizationof ME in response
to protein supplementation was reported by
Chamberlain et al. (1989). Assuming a
degradability coefficient of 0.8 for silage and
barley N, the control diet was calculated to
be adequate to meet therequirements of both
rumen degradable (RDN) and rumen unde-
gradable N (UDN) (Agricultural Research
Council; Anon. 1984b).



Comparison of rapeseed meal and distiller’s
solubles

RSM and DDS supplements had similar ef-
fects on feed intake, so that the higher pro-
tein yield in the cows fed the RSM supplement
must mainly reflect the greater postruminal
supply of amino acids. The rapeseed meal
used in the present study was protected from
ruminal degradation (degdability 0.50—0.55).
However, the differences in the protein
degradability of the RSM and DDS supple-
ments cannot be estimated by nylon bag tech-
nique because of the very small particle size
of DDS. Also, the quality of the RSM pro-
tein is better than that of DDS in terms of
higher concentration of lysine and methio-
nine. The significantly higher milk protein
yield and the slightly higher fat and lactose
yields with the RSM diet than the DDS diet
(mean values) were mainly due to the lower
yields obtained with untreated DDS. Lower
live weight gain with theDDS diets is in agree-
ment with our earlier observation (Ala-Sep-
pAlA et al. 1988).

Effect of treatment of DDS

The absence of response to UDDS supple-
ment in milk yield is in agreement with our
previous study (Ala-SeppAlA et al. (1988), in
which UDDS replaced either barley or barley
fibre in the concentrate. This suggests that
amino acids were not supplied in adequate
amounts to meet the requirements of the cows.
Increasing dietary CP content by feeding wet
UDS in replacement for barley or barley fibre
had no effect on the postruminal supply of
non-ammonia nitrogen (Huhtanen 1992) in
cattle given grass silage-based diet.

The treatment of DDS with formaldehyde
reagent tended to increase the yield of all milk
components as compared with untreated
DDS, which resulted in a significant increase
in milk energy yield. The tendency for milk

yield to increase with the treatment of DDS
is consistent with the findings for cows given
untreated and treated barley or oats (Kassem
et al. 1987; Martin and Thomas 1988). Feed
intake was not affected by the treatment of
DDS, and live weight gain was even slightly
higher in cows fed TDDS, suggesting that the
chemical treatment modified the nutrient sup-
ply, possibly by increasing the supply of ami-
no acids. The slower rate of degradation
(Huhtanen et al. 1985; Kassem et al. 1987)
and the increased duodenal protein flow (Van
Ramhorst and Thomas 1988) with treated
than with untreated barley support this sug-
gestion. The quality of undegraded DDS pro-
tein may not be ideal for high producing dairy
cows because of the low contents of lysine and
sulphur-containing amino acids (NAsi 1989).
Lysine and methionine may be the first limit-
ing amino acids in dairy cows given grass si-
lage based diets (Thomas and Chamberlain
1984). In growing cattle the treatment of bar-
ley with formaldehyde reagent did not, how-
ever, increase live weight gain (Huhtanen et
al. 1985). A trend towards lower efficiency in
the utilization of ME and smaller live weight
gain in cows given untreated DDS may sug-
gest that crude protein was supplied in excess
and more energy was required for synthesiz-
ing and excreting urea. The energy expendi-
ture of excreting the extra crude protein sup-
plied by untreated DDS would be 1.8 MJ/d
(Oldham 1984).

We conclude that the utilization of barley
distiller’s solubles in dairy cows fed grass si-
lage based diet can be improved by treatment
with formaldehyde reagent. The production
response was similar for cows fed RSM and
TDDS supplements; the only benefit of RSM
was higher live weight gain.

Acknowledgements. The financial support of Alko Ltd.
and the technical assistance of Mrs Maija Tuomola and
Mr Jorma Tossavainen and his staff are gratefully ac-
knowledged.

461



References

Ala-SeppAlA, H., Huhtanen, P. & Nasi, M. 1988. Silage
intake and milk production in cows given barley or
barley fibre with or without distiller’s solubles. J.
Agric. Sci. Finl. 60; 723—733.

Anon. 1982. Additive composition of animal feeding-
stuffs. European Patent Application No. 0 043202.
European Patent Office.

Anon, 1984a. Energy Allowances and Feeding Systems
for Ruminants. Reference Book 433. Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Fisheries.

Anon. 1984b. The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant
Livestock. Supplement 1. Agricultural Research
Council. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux. 44 p.
London.

Aronen, I. 1988. Barley protein feed as protein supple-
ment for growing cattle. Acta Agric. Scand. 40:
297—307.

Chamberlain, D.G., Martin, P.A. & Robertson, S.
1989. Optimizing compound feed use in dairy cows
with high intakes of silage. Recent Advances in Ani-
mal Nutrition (Ed. W. Haresign & D.J.A. Cole), pp.
175—193. Butterworths.

Gordon, F.J., Unsworth, E.F. & Peoples, A.C. 1981.
Protein supplementation of silage-based diets for milk
production. 54th Annual Report, Agricultural Re-
search Institute of Northern Ireland, pp. 13—23.

Huhtanen, P. 1992. The effects of barley vs. barley fibre
with or without distiller’s solubles on site and extent
of nutrient digestion in cattle fed grass-silage-based
diet. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. (In press).

Huhtanen, P., Nasi, M. & Khalili, H. 1989. By-pro-
ducts from integrated starch-ethanol production from
barley in the diets of growing cattle. J. Agric. Sci. Finl.
61: 451—462.

—, Ala-SeppAla, H & Nasi, M. 1988. Response of silage
intake and milk production to replacement of barley
by barley fibre derived from integrated starch-ethanol
process. J. Agric. Sci. Finl. 60: 711—721.

—, Poutiainen, E. & Mikkola, T. 1985. The effect of
supplementation of grass silage with rapeseed meal
or Gasol-treated barley on the performance of grow-
ing cattle. J. Agric. Sci. Finl. 57: 75—84.

Kassem, M.M., Thomas, P.C., Chamberlain, D.G. &

Robertson, S. 1987. Silage intake and milk produc-
tion in cows given barley supplements of reduced
degradability. Grass Forage Sci. 42: 175—183.

Martin, P.A, & Thomas, P.C. 1988. Dietary manipula-
tion of the yield and composition of milk: Effects of
dietary inclusions of barley and oats in untreated or
formaldehyde-treated forms on milk fatty acid com-
position. J. Sci. Food Agric. 43: 145—154.

Murphy, J.J., Gleeson, P.A. & Morgan, D.J. 1985.
Evaluation of protein source in the concentrate on the
performance ofcows offered grass silage ad libitum.
Ir. J. agric. Res. 24: 151—159.

NAsi, M. 1988. Evaluation of barley feed fractions from
integrated ethanol-starch production in the diets of
ruminants. J. Agric. Sci. Finl. 60: 701—709.
1989. Barley feed fractions from integrated starch-

ethanol process in the diets of pigs. J. Agric. Sci. Finl.
61: 441—450.

Oldham, J.D. 1984. Protein-energy interrelationships in
dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 67: 1090—1114.

SetAlA, J., SyrjAlA-Qvist, L., Tuori, M., Poutiainen,
E. & Riipinen, U. 1984. Feeding of high producing
dairy cows according toprotein requirements in grass
silage based diets. J. Scient. Agric. Soc. Finl. 56:
73—82.

Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J. 1981. Biometry. Second Edi-
tion. 859 p. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York.

Thomas, C. & Rae, R.C. 1988. Concentrate supplemen-
tation of silage for dairy cows. Nutrition and Lacta-
tion in the Dairy Cow (Ed. P.C. Garnsworthy), pp.
327—354. Butterworths.

Thomas, P.C. & Chamberlain, D.G. 1984. Manipulation
ofmilk composition to meet market need. Recent Ad-
vances in Animal Nutrition 1984 (Ed. W, Haresign
& D.J.A. Cole) pp. 219—243. Butterworths.

Tuori, M. & Syrjala-Qvist L. 1988. The effect of
rapeseed meal on the digestibility and protein utili-
zation of silage and hay based diet. Polish-Finnish
Seminar on ’Nutritive Value of Rapeseed Protein and
other Plant Protein in Animal Nutrition’. Jablonna,
December 1988. 3 p.

Tyrrel, H.F. & Reid, J.T. 1965. Prediction of energy
value of cow’s milk. J. Dairy Sci. 48: 1215—1223.

Van Ramhorst, H. & Thomas, P.C. 1988. Digestion in
sheep of diets containing barley chemically treated to
reduce its ruminal degradability. J. Sci. Food Agric.
42: I—7.

Ms received December 21, 1990

462



SELOSTUS

Tarkkelysrankki, suojauskasitelty tarkkelys-
rankki ja rypsirouhe valkuaisrehuna lypsy-
lehmilla vapaalla sailorehuruokinnalla

Pekka Huhtanen, Hannele Khalili ja
Matti Nasi
Helsingin yliopisto, kotielaintieteen lailos,
00710 Helsinki

Kokeessa selvitettiin integroidusta tarkkelys-etanoli-
prosessista saatavan tarkkelysrankin arvoa lypsylehmien
valkuaisrehuna vapaalla sailOrehuruokinnalla. Koe tehtiin
4x4 latinalaisena neliOna, jossa koejakson pituus oli
28 pv. Koe-elaimina oli 20 Fr-lehmaa, jotka oli jaettu nel-
jaan 5 lehman osastoon. Koejasenina olivat kontrolli (ei
lisavalkuaista), kasittelematOn tarkkelysrankki, formal-
dehydia, orgaanisia happoja ja lignosulfonaatteja sisal-
tavalla liuoksella suojauskasitelty tarkkelysrankki seka
Opex-kasitelty rypsirouhe. Kontrolliruokinnalla lehmat
saivat 8.5 kg/pv vakirehua, jokakoostui ohrasta, kaurasta
ja ohrarehusta (250, 250 ja 500 g/kg). Koeruokinnoilla
tasta vakirehusta korvattiin 1.5 kg/pv ylla mainituilla
valkuaisrehuilla.

Lisavalkuaista saaneet lehmat soivat keskimaarin 0.5
kg/pv (P>0.05) enemman sailorehun kuiva-ainetta.
Valkuaisrehun antaminen lisasi maitotuotosta (P<o.l),

maidon valkuaispitoisuutta(P <0.05) seka valkuaistuotos-
ta (PcO.Ol). Kasittelemattomalla tarkkelysrankilla ei ollut
vaikutusta maitotuotokseen tai maidon koostumukseen
kontrolliin verrattuna. Tarkkelysrankin suojauskasittely
lisasi maitotuotosta 0.45 kg/pv (P>o.l), valkuaistuotosta
19 g/pv (P<o.l) jaRKM-tuotosta 0.55 kg/pv (P<o.l)

kasittelemattomaan rankkiin verrattuna, ja tuotokset
olivat hieman pienempaa valkuaistuotosta (18 g/pv)
lukuunottamatta samatkuin rypsirouhetta saaneilla leh-
milla. Rypsirouheeseen verrattuna keskimaarainen valku-
aistuotos oli rankkiruokinnoilla pienempi (P<0.01).
Elopainon lisays oli rypsirouhetta saaneilla lehmilla
suurempi (P<0.05) kuin tarkkelysrankkia saaneilla. Ener-
giataselaskelmat osoittivat, etta lisaantynyt maidon ener-
giatuotos lisavalkuaista saaneilla lehmilla johtui pelkas-
taan lisaantyneesta saildrehun syonnista.

463