Influence of dietary slow-release urea on growth performance, organ development and serum biochemical parameters of mutton sheep.

Eighty Dorper × thin-tailed Han cross-bred non-castrated male lambs [mean body weight (BW), 25.87 ± 1.06 kg] were randomly allocated to one of five different concentrations of slow-release urea (urea phosphate, UP). The feed consisted of an equal amount of concentrate diet and roughage; the concentrate feed was formulated to be isoenergetic and isonitrogenic and contained 0%, 1%, 2%, 4% and 8% UP (UP0.0, UP1.0, UP2.0, UP4.0 and UP8.0, respectively) as a replacement for soya bean meal. Feed intake, BW, average daily gain (ADG), feed utilisation efficiency (FUE), absolute and relative organ weights and biochemical and histopathological parameters were measured. Feed intake, BW, ADG and FUE significantly decreased in the group receiving UP8.0 (p < 0.05), but no difference was found among the other groups (p > 0.05). Quadratic equations were developed between the UP dosage in the concentrate feed and ADG or FUE (r2  = 0.973 for ADG and r2  = 0.761 for FUE) to determine the appropriate dosage of UP given the desire to maximise either ADG or FUE, the appropriate dosage (feed concentration) was calculated as 2.01% UP to achieve the greatest ADG or 2.13% UP to achieve the best FUE. The relative weight of the liver (% BW) in the UP2.0 groups was significantly greater than that of UP0.0 (p < 0.05), and the relative weight of the intestine in the UP8.0 was significantly greater than that of UP0.0 (p < 0.05); the relative weight of the carcass, heart, spleen, lung, kidney, rumen, reticulum, omasum and abomasum did not differ among treatments (p > 0.05). The UP8.0 treatment significantly increased serum phosphorus levels (p < 0.05) and decreased the levels of alkaline phosphatase, glucose and calcium (Ca) compared with the lower UP dosage (p < 0.05). No histopathological differences were found in either hepatic tissues or renal tissues among treatments. Dietary UP as a replacement for soya bean in concentrate feeds for mutton sheep should not exceed 4%, as higher dosing may cause malnutrition and mineral disorders.

Effect of urea supplementation on performance and safety in diets of Dorper crossbred sheep.

This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dietary urea in sheep rations having a 50:50 concentrate:roughage ratio. Sixty-four Dorper × thin-tailed Han crossbred ram lambs with an average body weight of 30.8 (±0.02) kg were randomly divided into four groups of 16 sheep each, and each group was fed one of the following diets: a basal diet (CON), or CON supplemented with 0.5% (0.5UTM), 1.5% (1.5UTM) or 2.5% (2.5UTM) urea. Growth performance, carcass characteristics, non-carcass offals, meat quality and peptic tissue lesions were assayed. The average daily weight gains for CON, 0.5UTM, 1.5UTM and 2.5UTM were 216, 218, 200 and 170 g, respectively, with the CON and 0.5UTM groups higher than 2.5UTM group (p < 0.05). Sheep from the 2.5UTM treatment had a significantly lower dry matter intake (1.29 kg/day) than those from the CON and 0.5UTM treatments (1.42 and 1.43 kg/day, p < 0.05), and the feed conversion ratio in the 2.5UTM group was the highest (p < 0.05). Carcass characteristics, including shrunk body weight, empty body weight, hot carcass weight, dress percentage, and the absolute or relative weight (% body weight) of heart, liver, spleen, lung and kidney, were not altered by the treatments (p > 0.05). The muscular pH of 2.5UTM was higher than that of CON (5.68 vs. 5.52, p < 0.05), and shear force in 0.5UTM was lower compared with CON and 2.5UTM (p < 0.05). The anatomical structure lesions in kidneys became more serious with the increasing dietary urea concentrations, with the 2.5UTM animals showing the most severe lesions compared with CON animals. Therefore, supplementary urea as a non-protein nitrogen source for sheep should not exceed 1.5% of ration having a 50:50 concentrate:roughage ratio to ensure efficacy and safety.

Effect of dietary supplementation with resveratrol on nutrient digestibility, methanogenesis and ruminal microbial flora in sheep.

Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect of resveratrol on methanogenesis and microbial flora in Dorper × thin-tailed Han cross-bred ewes. In experiment 1, ten ewes (67.2 ± 2.24 kg BW) were assigned to two dietary treatments, a basal diet and a basal diet supplemented with resveratrol (0.25 g/head·day), to investigate the effect of resveratrol on nutrient digestibility and nitrogen balance. In experiment 2, six ewes (64.0 ± 1.85 kg BW) with ruminal cannulae were assigned to the identical dietary treatments used in experiment 1 to investigate supplementary resveratrol on ruminal fermentation and microbial flora using qPCR. The results showed that supplementary resveratrol improved the digestibility of organic matter (OM; p < 0.001), nitrogen (N; p = 0.007), neutral detergent fibre (NDF; p < 0.001) and acid detergent fibre (ADF; p < 0.001). The excretion of faecal N was reduced (p = 0.007), whereas that of urinary N increased (p = 0.002), which led to an unchanged N retention (p = 0.157). Both CO2 and CH4 output scaled to digestible dry matter (DM) intake decreased from 602.5 to 518.7 (p = 0.039) and 68.2 to 56.6 (p < 0.001) respectively. Ruminal pH (p = 0.341), ammonia (p = 0.512) and total volatile fatty acid (VFA) (p = 0.249) were unaffected by resveratrol. The molar proportion of propionate increased from 13.1 to 17.5% (p < 0.001) while that of butyrate decreased from 11.0 to 9.55% (p < 0.001). The ratio of acetate to propionate (A/P) decreased from 5.44 to 3.96 (p < 0.001). Supplementary resveratrol increased ruminal population of Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus albus and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens (p < 0.001) while decreased protozoa and methanogens. In conclusion, dietary resveratrol inhibited methanogenesis without adversely affecting ruminal fermentation.