Prediction of the metabolisable energy content of forages and mixed diets for horses: validation and comparison of two evaluation systems.
Abstract: The metabolisable energy (ME) content of feeds is a better estimate of their 'true' energy value than their digestible energy (DE) content, because ME takes account of the gross energy of methane (GEgas) and the gross energy of urine (GEurine) losses. The accuracy and precision of the Gesellschaft für Ernährungsphysiologie (GfE) and Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) systems for predicting the DE and ME contents of diets for horses were compared using the results of a study comprising 15 mixed diets. The INRA system was more accurate than the GfE system for predicting DE, GEurine and ME: the biases between the predicted and the measured values were -0.26 vs -0.46 MJ/kg DM for DE (P < 0.05), -0.03 vs 0.13 MJ/kg DM for GEurine (P < 0.05) and -0.09 vs -0.62 MJ/kg DM for ME (P < 0.05). The biases for GEgas were not significantly different (P > 0.05) between systems. In addition, a study was carried out with 24 forages to compare the ME value of permanent meadow and lucerne hays predicted with the GfE and the INRA systems. The INRA system gave higher prediction values of DE than the GfE system (P < 0.001) and lower estimates of GEgas (0.34 vs 0.63 MJ/kg DM for permanent meadow hays and 0.38 vs 0.63 MJ/kg DM for lucerne hays) (P < 0.001) and GEurine (0.85 vs 0.93 MJ/kg DM for grassland hays and 1.08 vs 1.37 MJ/kg DM for lucerne hays) (P < 0.001). The INRA system thus gave higher estimates of ME (7.57 vs 6.77 MJ/kg DM for permanent meadow hays and 8.80 vs 6.46 MJ/kg DM for lucerne hays, P < 0.001) in agreement with the results obtained with mixed diets. The ME values of permanent meadow hays and legume hays should therefore be predicted separately using specific equations as previously established for the DE value.
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Publication Date: 2020-12-14 PubMed ID: 33573983DOI: 10.1016/j.animal.2020.100086Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Journal Article
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research article compares two systems used to predict the true energy value (Metabolisable Energy or ME) in different horse feeds. The study found that the system developed by Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) produced more accurate results than the one by Gesellschaft für Ernährungsphysiologie (GfE).
Background and Objective
- The study was designed to evaluate and compare the precision and accuracy of two methods for estimating the Digestible Energy (DE) and Metabolisable Energy (ME) contents in horse diets. These methods were developed by the Gesellschaft für Ernährungsphysiologie (GfE) and the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA).
- ME, which includes the energy lost through methane and urine, is considered a better measure of the true energy value of feeds compared to DE.
Methodology
- The GfE and INRA prediction systems were tested on a total of 15 mixed diets.
- A separate study was also carried out with 24 forages to compare ME values and predicted using both GfE and the INRA systems. This included permanent meadow and lucerne hays.
Results
- The INRA system proved to be more accurate in predicting DE, GEurine (Gross Energy of urine) and ME than the GfE system. The biases for these predictions were statistically smaller in the INRA system as compared to the GfE system.
- There was no significant difference in the prediction of GEgas (Gross Energy of methane) between the two systems.
- The additional comparison study on forages showed that the INRA system predicted higher DE values than the GfE system. It also estimated lower values for GEgas and GEurine.
- In accordance with mixed diets results, the INRA system gave higher ME estimates for both permanent meadow hay and lucerne hay.
Conclusion
- The study concluded that INRA system is more accurate for predicting the ME content of forages and mixed diets for horses.
- It advised using specific equations to predict ME values of permanent meadow hays and legume hays separately, as previously stated for the DE value.
Cite This Article
APA
Martin-Rosset W, Andueza D, Vermorel M.
(2020).
Prediction of the metabolisable energy content of forages and mixed diets for horses: validation and comparison of two evaluation systems.
Animal, 15(2), 100086.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2020.100086 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Université Clermont Auvergne, INRAE, VetAgro Sup, UMR Herbivores, 63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France. Electronic address: martinrosset.william@orange.fr.
- Université Clermont Auvergne, INRAE, VetAgro Sup, UMR Herbivores, 63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France.
- Université Clermont Auvergne, INRAE, VetAgro Sup, UMR Herbivores, 63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France.
MeSH Terms
- Animal Feed / analysis
- Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena
- Animals
- Diet / veterinary
- Digestion
- Energy Metabolism
- Horses
- Medicago sativa
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
