| |
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cnpc.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos. |
|
Data corrente: |
01/08/1992 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
06/06/2023 |
|
Autoria: |
McLEOD, M. N.; MINSON, D. J. |
|
Título: |
The analytical and biological accuracy of estimating the dry matter digestibility of different legume species. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
1976 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Animal Feed Science and Technology, v. 1, n. 1, p. 61-72, Apr. 1976. |
|
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(76)90008-0 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Abstract: A comparison was made of the accuracy of 7 laboratory techniques for estimating dry matter digestibility in vivo of 5 legume species represented by 32 samples of known digestibility in vivo. The legumes studied were Desmodium spp., Lablab purpureus, Macroptilium atropurpureum, Vigna sinensis and Medicago sativa. Regressions were calculated relating digestibility in vivo to the laboratory analysis, and the residual standard deviation (RSD) of these regressions was used to calculate the error in predicting digestibility in vivo. For regressions based on all 32 samples the RSD's were: modified acid detergent fibre ± 2.1, acid detergent fibre ± 2.2, dry matter digestibility in vitro ± 2.7, crude fibre ± 3.7, feed nitrogen ± 4.0, Christian's lignin ± 2.8, and Van Soest's Lignin ± 3.7 digestibility units. The cause of the high RSD of these regressions was discussed and it was concluded that it was mainly associated with differences between legume samples grown in different ways, analytical error being only ± 0.5 percentage units or less and the estimation of digestibility in vivo ± 0.7 percentage units. It was concluded that the error in predicting digestibility in vivo from a laboratory analysis is best expressed as the RSD of regressions relating digestibility in vivo to the laboratory analysis, and that this error will not be materially altered by increased replication. |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Feed legumes. |
|
Thesagro: |
Digestibilidade; Macroptilium Atropurpureum; Medicago Sativa; Nutrição; Ruminante; Vigna Sinensis. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Desmodium; Lablab purpureus; Ruminant nutrition. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
L Ciência Animal e Produtos de Origem Animal |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02243naa a2200265 a 4500
001 1522578
005 2023-06-06
008 1976 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(76)90008-0$2DOI
100 1 $aMcLEOD, M. N.
245 $aThe analytical and biological accuracy of estimating the dry matter digestibility of different legume species.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c1976
520 $aAbstract: A comparison was made of the accuracy of 7 laboratory techniques for estimating dry matter digestibility in vivo of 5 legume species represented by 32 samples of known digestibility in vivo. The legumes studied were Desmodium spp., Lablab purpureus, Macroptilium atropurpureum, Vigna sinensis and Medicago sativa. Regressions were calculated relating digestibility in vivo to the laboratory analysis, and the residual standard deviation (RSD) of these regressions was used to calculate the error in predicting digestibility in vivo. For regressions based on all 32 samples the RSD's were: modified acid detergent fibre ± 2.1, acid detergent fibre ± 2.2, dry matter digestibility in vitro ± 2.7, crude fibre ± 3.7, feed nitrogen ± 4.0, Christian's lignin ± 2.8, and Van Soest's Lignin ± 3.7 digestibility units. The cause of the high RSD of these regressions was discussed and it was concluded that it was mainly associated with differences between legume samples grown in different ways, analytical error being only ± 0.5 percentage units or less and the estimation of digestibility in vivo ± 0.7 percentage units. It was concluded that the error in predicting digestibility in vivo from a laboratory analysis is best expressed as the RSD of regressions relating digestibility in vivo to the laboratory analysis, and that this error will not be materially altered by increased replication.
650 $aDesmodium
650 $aLablab purpureus
650 $aRuminant nutrition
650 $aDigestibilidade
650 $aMacroptilium Atropurpureum
650 $aMedicago Sativa
650 $aNutrição
650 $aRuminante
650 $aVigna Sinensis
653 $aFeed legumes
700 1 $aMINSON, D. J.
773 $tAnimal Feed Science and Technology$gv. 1, n. 1, p. 61-72, Apr. 1976.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos (CNPC) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
|
| Registros recuperados : 1 | |
| 1. |  | RODRIGO-COMINO, J.; LÓPEZ-VICENTE, M.; KUMAR, V.; RODRÍGUEZ-SEIJO, A.; VALKÓ, O.; ROJAS, C.; POURGHASEMI, H. R.; SALVATI, L.; BAKR, N.; VAUDOUR, E.; BREVIK, E. C.; RADZIEMSKA, M.; PULIDO, M.; DI PRIMA, S.; DONDINI, M.; DE VRIES, W.; SANTOS, E. S.; MENDONÇA-SANTOS, M. de L.; YU, Y.; PANAGOS, P. Soil science challenges in a new era: a transdisciplinary overview of relevant topics. Air, Soil and Water Research, v.13, p. 1-17, 2020. 17 p.| Tipo: Artigo em Periódico Indexado | Circulação/Nível: B - 1 |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Maranhão. |
|    |
| Registros recuperados : 1 | |
|
| Nenhum registro encontrado para a expressão de busca informada. |
|
|
