樓主: 中國西翁
打印 上一主題 下一主題

[其他信息] 天天翻譯:譯摘要,得論壇幣,長英語

[復制鏈接]
21
 樓主| 發(fā)表于 2007-6-3 13:59:24 | 只看該作者
原帖由 白石綠兔 于 2007-6-3 02:52 發(fā)表
這里有漢譯英的高手嗎?


呵呵,漢譯英俺就傻了:4d:
望高手出現(xiàn)?。?!
版權聲明:本文內容來源互聯(lián)網(wǎng),僅供畜牧人網(wǎng)友學習,文章及圖片版權歸原作者所有,如果有侵犯到您的權利,請及時聯(lián)系我們刪除(010-82893169-805)。
22
發(fā)表于 2007-6-3 14:40:56 | 只看該作者
西翁只灌水了,也不指點了呢
23
 樓主| 發(fā)表于 2007-6-3 20:09:17 | 只看該作者
原帖由 huiseren 于 2007-6-3 14:40 發(fā)表
西翁只灌水了,也不指點了呢


呵呵,沒有了,共同學習嘛,今忙別的了呵呵
題目的重心你放錯了,不能只簡單的按著英語句子的順序翻譯成漢語就行了,關
鍵要看句子的結構,也就是主謂賓了呵呵。題目這樣翻譯可能更準確些:自由采
食和限制采食下群養(yǎng)母豬的社會等級和采食行為
第一句話只是在陳述限制采食是一種商業(yè)化措施,以及這樣作的目的,并沒有直
接說限制采食的不足,呵呵你把這句話再推敲一下吧。
This kind of competition...這句話也不太準確,感覺還是主謂賓沒有搞清楚:)
A conventional diet is...這句話主要突出的是飼料雖然能滿足動物的營養(yǎng)和健
康的需要,但并不能滿足其它的需要(并不是說不能滿足所有的豬),如滿足不
了豬的飽感。
最后一句話作者的語氣應該是在肯定自由采食,最起碼在理論上自由采食可以
消除這兩個消極的方面。
呵呵,繼續(xù)努力,可能這篇比第一篇的句子長,翻譯起來句子成分不好劃分,只
要你再堅持一段時間,應該就能看見自己的進步的,當你回頭再看你以前翻譯的
文章時,可能就會發(fā)現(xiàn)很多不足之處。
24
發(fā)表于 2007-6-4 16:20:05 | 只看該作者
為什么 老不知道論壇幣就沒了呢
25
發(fā)表于 2007-6-6 14:14:30 | 只看該作者

我也想試試~

看到這么多高手,覺得自己好落后啊,我先打印一篇慢慢翻譯,畢竟幾年都沒有看英語了。!3: !3: :xuehu: :xuehu: :xuehu:
26
發(fā)表于 2007-6-6 16:04:51 | 只看該作者

第四篇第一句~

The behavioural response to infection is well organized and may enhance disease
resistance and facilitate recovery, but the behaviour of pigs with an acute respiratory
infection has not been assessed. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate
behaviour of pigs inoculated with Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (Mh) and porcine
reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV).
對感染后表現(xiàn)出的生理反應可能有利于對侵害的抵御,并有利于機體的康復,但是就豬對急性呼吸道感染的生物反應來說,卻無法進行評定,因此,本項研究的目的在于評估對豬感染支原體、繁殖和呼吸道綜合癥的生物學反應的意義!
27
發(fā)表于 2007-6-6 16:17:04 | 只看該作者
很好的倡議,支持,畢業(yè)10多年把英語都仍的差不多了.
28
發(fā)表于 2007-6-6 19:46:07 | 只看該作者
樓主:翻譯不來啊,能力有限,汗……

[ 本帖最后由 Gerrard 于 2007-6-6 19:47 編輯 ]
29
發(fā)表于 2007-6-10 12:17:06 | 只看該作者

Feeding whole grains to poultry improves gut health

Feeding whole grains to poultry improves gut health
By PETER FERKET
Dr. Peter R. Ferket is an extension poultry nutritionist at North Carolina State University, Raleigh.
Feeding whole grains along with pellet-processed feed could result in considerable feed cost savings, depending upon the production system and market conditions. Moreover, some health benefits could be realized if a proper portion of the bird's diet contained whole grains.
During the past 50 years, considerable change has occurred in the manufacturing of commercial poultry feeds. In the very early days of commercial poultry production, poultry were fed diets that included whole grains and protein concentrates, often offered as a free-choice, cafeteria-style feeding program. Beginning in the 1950s, many poultry producers began feeding complete diets in mash form. Young birds were fed a finely ground mash feed, and a coarser grind was fed to older birds. This practice continues today, especially for laying hens. During the 1970s, many commercial feed mills began pellet processing poultry feeds, and today, essentially all commercial broiler and turkey feeds are pellet processed in some form.
Pelleted feeds became an obvious advantage because of improved feed conversion, better feed handling and transport characteristics and reduced ingredient separation. Feed manufacturing continues to evolve from an art into a science as operations are modified to increase pelleting rate and improve pellet quality.
Recent advances in pelleting include "high-temperature, short-time" and "expansion" conditioning. The pressure and heat from the steam and friction in the expander increases starch gelatinization, denatures proteins, deactivates some antinutritional factors and destroys pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms. These advances have improved pellet production efficiency and pellet quality, which is usually measured by the pellet durability index.
Major concerns of high-temperature conditioning by expansion prior to pelleting are the destruction of nutrients, particularly enzymes, vitamins, amino acids and direct-fed microbials. Increased dietary fortification or post-pellet applications of critical nutrients can address these concerns. However, highly processed feeds that are finely ground, heat-processed and highly digestible may predispose poultry to enteric motility problems.
It is true that the more physical work feed manufactures put into processing feed, the less work poultry must devote to prepare a diet for digestion and, thereby, improve feed conversion efficiency. When feed manufacturers do too much physical work in physical feed processing, which leaves little for the bird to do, enteric dysfunction in the birds will likely occur. To maintain normal gut motility and digestion in poultry, a portion of the diet may need to be in an unprocessed or "pristine" state. After all, these birds are designed to be seed-eaters with a powerful grinding organ, the gizzard. Highly processed feeds may negate the need for normal gizzard function, which may predispose poultry to such common problems as feed passage, flushing, enteritis, proventriculitis, litter and feather picking or a perturbation of gut microflora.
The objective of this article is to discuss: (1) dietary factors that influence gut motility; (2) normal gut motility function in poultry, and (3) a practical approach to facilitate normal gut motility in poultry by dietary inclusion of whole or coarsely ground grain.
Dietary modifiers of gut motility
Dietary fiber, fat and feed texture can modify gut motility. Feed passage rate generally increases as dietary fiber content increases. Conversely, passage rate decreases as dietary fat content increases. Proper dietary balance of these dietary components may help normalize gut motility in poultry exhibiting enteric problems. Good gut motility is necessary for proper food digestion, nutrient absorption and maintaining a healthy gut environment.
Textural properties of feed (fiber content, particle size and particle integrity) are important for proper gizzard musculature and motility. To illustrate this point, turkey poults were fed a highly processed feed (fine grind, expanded, pelletized and crumbled), but one group was reared in Farmer Automatic cages equipped with a trampoline perforated floor, and the other group was reared on soft pine shavings litter floor. Dissection of sample poults at four weeks of age revealed that those reared on the litter floor had a much larger and muscular gizzard and a smaller, well-defined proventriculus compared to poults reared in the cages (Table 1). This response was apparently associated with the consumption of pine shavings by the poults reared on the litter floors because those in cages did not have access to shavings. Why did the poults consume pine shavings even though it has no apparent nutritional value? A desire to satiate the gizzard and normalize gut motility may be the answer to this question.
Gut motility, implications
The gizzard is the "pace-maker" of normal gut motility (Duke, 1994). Unlike mammals, vigorous gut refluxes (reverse peristalsis) are normal in birds as an adaptation to compensate for a short intestine. The refluxes serve to re-expose intestinal digesta to gastric secretions, vigorously mix digesta with enzymes to enhance digestion, enhance nutrient absorption over a short segment of the gut and discourage microbial proliferation that may cause disease or compete for nutrients. Dietary fat stimulates the reflux of digesta from the jejunum through duodenum into the gizzard, thus slowing food passage rate and improving the utilization of dietary protein and energy.
Reverse peristalsis in poultry occurs in three distinct regions in the gut: (1) the gastric reflux, (2) the small intestine reflux and (3) the cloaca-ceca reflux. The phenomenon of gut refluxes is a creative adaptation in birds to minimize gut mass without compromising digestive efficiency.
The first gut reflux moves digesta from the gizzard back into the proventriculus once for each gastro-duodenal contraction cycle.
The gizzard, the food-grinding organ, consists of two thin and thick pairs of muscles, which contract alternately to mix (thin pair) and grind (thick pair) the gastric contents. In addition, the motility of the proventriculus and duodenum is coordinated with that of the gizzard. A normal gastroduodenal contraction sequence follows: "thin pair -- duodenal contraction -- thick pair -- proventricular contraction." The gastro-duodenal contraction sequence appears to be coordinated by nerves within the gastric region and to be initiated by a neural pace-setter near the pyloric valve of the gizzard. Chyme is moved sequentially from the gizzard back into the proventriculus, then forward into the gizzard and duodenum. This contraction cycle is repeated several times until the feed particles are reduced to a diameter of less than 1 mm and finally leaves the gizzard via the crevaces that convey material toward the duodenal sphincter.
Ingested feed is repeatedly ground and mixed in the gizzard, sent back to the proventriculus for more peptic juice application and returned to the gizzard. Thus, the gastric reflux is an essential part of both physical and chemical preparation before subsequent digestion in the small intestine. By reducing food particle size, surface area is increased to maximize exposure to digestive enzymes in the small intestine. Furthermore, repeated exposure to pepsin (an endopepidase) in the proventriculus and gizzard increases the efficiency of protein fragment digestion by trypsin and chymotrypsin (both exopeptidases) in the small intestine.
The second gut reflux moves chyme from the duodenum and jejunum back into the gastric area. This reflux occurs about three times per hour in poultry; however, it increases in rate as dietary fat increases and decreases in rate as dietary fiber increases. The characteristic yellow staining of the gizzard lining is evidence of bile exposure due to the reflux of intestinal chyme back into the gizzard. Bile may, in fact, be necessary to enhance the integrity of the kaolin matrix making up the gizzard lining. Inadequate bile exposure may result in excellerated gizzard erosion. Reverse peristalsis sufficiently increases food digestibility and nutrient absorption by slowing down overall passage rate through the gut and re-exposing intestinal digesta to digestive enzyme secretions.
The importance of feed integrity and vigorous gut motility on digestion is clearly illustrated by data reported by Rogel et al. (1987). These researchers demonstrated the inclusion of 10% (ground) oat hulls in a semipurified broiler diet containing either corn or raw potato starch. The presence of the oat hulls increased gizzard mass and also improved the digestibility of the potato starch, which is not readily digested by the amylase secreted in the bird's pancreas (Table 2). It is noteworthy that only whole oat hulls would elicit this response and not pulverized oat hulls or grit, thus emphasizing the importance of food particle integrity rather than a matter of dietary fiber content. Grit in the gizzard assists in food grinding but does not stimulate gizzard motility to grind food. In addition to improving digestive efficiency, periodic reverse peristalsis in the small intestine also helps maintain a healthy gut by discouraging colonization of pathogens and other organisms that compete with the bird for available nutrients.
The third and most unique reflux conveys chyme from the cloaca to the cecal touncils. This reflux is a continuous, low-amplitude, colonic antiperistalsis. Urine is conveyed from the urethral ports in the cloaca backward along the epithelial surface of the rectum and into the ceca, where microbial activity can convert uric acid into microbial biomass (Bjornhag, 1989; Karasawa, 1989). Additionally, the ceca are involved in water re-absorption facilitated by the absorption of volatile fatty acids producted by bacterial fermentation. Under normal circumstances, birds are very efficient at conserving body water. Of the total amount of water that is reabsorbed, 10-12% is absorbed in the ceca, 3-5% is reabsorbed in the rectum and the rest of the body water (about 85%) is reabsorbed by the kidneys.
Enteric disorders, such as diarrhea, swollen proventriculus, gizzard erosion and flushing, may partially be a consequence of dysfunctional gut motility associated with processed feed characteristics. The primary objective of modern feed manufacturing (grinding, post-mix grinding, steam conditioning, expansion and pelletizing) is to reduce the bird's "work" of feed prehension and enhance digestion for the sake of maximizing feed conversion efficiency. However, all this mechanical work invested into processing feed reduces the work load of the gizzard to grind the ingested food. In particular, highly processed feed leads to atrophy and malfunction of the gizzard, which then acts more as a transit organ rather than a grinding organ (Cumming, 1994).
Normal gastric reflux does not occur when birds consume highly processed feed, and, thus, proventricular hypertrophy occurs as an attempt to deliver sufficient peptic secretions within a single pass. Poor peptic digestion by pepsin in the gizzard will result in less efficient peptic digestion by trypsin and chymotrypsin in the duodenum. Consequently, more undigested protein ends up in the hindgut, where it is subject to microbial fermentation by putrefying bacteria, such as clostridia, campylobactor, listeria, pseudomonas, E. coli and other potentially pathogenic agents.
The literature has several examples that support the hypothesis that highly processed feed is associated with changes in gut morphology and increased health problems in poultry, despite improvements in feed conversion efficiency. Nir et al. (1995) and Munt et al. (1995) reported male broilers exhibited a threefold increase in mortality if they were fed pellets instead of a coarse mash. Moreover, the incidence of ascites may be affected negatively by dietary factors that improve feed conversion ratio, such as high-energy density and pelleted diets, all stimulating feed intake, protein accretion and oxygen consumption (Scheele, 1993). Riddell (1976) reported dietary fiber (in this study: oat hulls) added to pelletized feed reduced the incidence of dilated proventriculi of broilerchicks (Table 3). Concomitantly, the presence of structural fibres in feed stimulated normal development of the gizzard and proventriculus.
Whole wheat feeding
During a casual discussion with my father about six years ago, I mentioned my interest in solving enteric problems in poultry by dietary manipulation. "Based on my research" I said, "there is not a lot that can be added or done to a diet formulation to treat or reduce the susceptibility of poultry to gut problems such as flushing, diarrhea and feed passage." My father, who's career was livestock and poultry farming, looking at me with bewilderment, replied, "Don't you remember that when our hens became loose I told you to give them a little whole oats or whole wheat to tighten them up? I thought that was common knowledge because I learned that from my father." I had discredited this "old-timers" remedy after my years of academic study in poultry nutrition taught this practice as primitive and inefficient and seemed to favor more feed processing and use of feed additive antibiotics. However, my opinion about whole-grain feeding to poultry changed during my sabbatical study leave in the Netherlands in 1996.
Blending some whole wheat along with pellet-processed feed has become a common practice in Europe. There was a revival of this practice because of economic reasons shortly after the ratification of the General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade. Poultry farmers traded with wheat producers the right to land apply litter for wheat. Poultry farmers could then economically dispose of their litter, and wheat farmers gained from an economically favorable alternative to selling their wheat products at lower world market prices. At first, feed manufacturers opposed this practice because it adversely affected their feed sales. In response, they sponsored research to prove that the practice of diluting their carefully formulated feed with 10-25% whole wheat would adversely affect growth performance of poultry. Through their research, they discovered that adding some whole wheat on top of their formulas at the farm did not reduce performance to the degree as expected by nutrient dilution. When whole wheat was included within a balance ration, growth performance and bird health often improved and economic return improved.
Van Middlekoop and Van Harn (1994) conducted two experiments in which whole wheat was added to pellet-processed feed either increased incrementally to levels of 10, 15 or 25% (Figure 1) or at a constant level (Figure 2). Regardless of how the whole wheat was delivered, whole wheat feeding did not adversely affect technical performance in broilers (Table 4). In contrast, a marginal improvement in feed conversion along with significant improvements in economic return were proportional to the amount of whole wheat included in the diet.
The results of feeding whole grains to turkeys are more variable than observed with broilers. Several field studies conducted in Germany concluded that growth performance of turkey toms was adversely affected by whole wheat feeding, although economic return favored the practice (Tuller and Velten, 1988 and 1992; Reiter et al., 1994). A field trial conducted in the Netherlands also demonstrated a clear economic benefit of feeding whole wheat (Rooijakkers, 1997). In this Dutch trial, turkeys were fed a standard starter diet until three weeks of age. Then, from four weeks to market age, 10% whole wheat was included in the diet, adding 5% additional wheat every week until the diet contained 50% wheat.
Based on a series of field trials in Italy, Melandri (1998) reported turkey hens and toms fed standard whole wheat or sorghum up to levels of 17% of the diet improved a production efficiency index (measured as [market weight x livability]/[days of age x feed:gain]) without adverse effects on total yield and breast meat yield. Melandri (1998) noted that economic return improved significantly as the level of whole grain increased in the diet. The incidence of coccidiosis did not change despite the dilution of coccidiostat in the diet by whole grain addition. Moreover, litter quality and bird activity were generally improved by inclusion of whole wheat or sorghum. Some of the benefits observed by gradually increasing whole wheat within a feed phase was alleviation of the adverse effects typically observed during feed changes.
Including whole grains as a component of a complete diet may not only improve gut motility, but it may also be an economical benefit simply because less feed must be processed. Turkey companies in Italy and in the midwestern U.S. have reduced the amount of feed that must be processed by about 25% simply by blending whole wheat or whole corn with a pelletized feed concentrate. Moreover, this practice improved the feed mill efficiency because this feeding program required fewer formulas and longer processing runs. Additional feed formulas could be delivered to the birds simply by adding more whole grain to a common concentrate.
More scientifically designed experiments must be conducted before the feeding of whole grains to broilers and turkeys can be advocated as a standard practice. However, I believe there is sufficient physiological merit and practical evidence that warrant serious consideration for American feed manufacturers and poultry production companies. Feeding whole grains along with pellet-processed feed could result in considerable feed cost savings, depending upon the production system and market conditions. Moreover, some health benefits could be realized if a proper portion of the bird's diet contained whole grains. These benefits may arise from reduced litter consumption, better gut motility and reduced aggression.
30
發(fā)表于 2007-6-10 12:18:00 | 只看該作者

飼喂整谷粒改善腸道健康

飼喂整谷粒改善腸道健康
Peter R.ferket
(美國北卡羅來納州家禽營養(yǎng)推廣專家 )

按生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)和市場條件,飼喂整谷粒與顆粒料相比的結果是:可以顯著節(jié)約飼料成本,而且人們還認識到禽飼料含一定比例的整谷粒有益健康。

過去的50年內,商品禽飼料的生產(chǎn)發(fā)生了相當大的變化,早期的商品家禽生產(chǎn)上,家禽日糧包括蛋白濃縮料和整谷粒,有點類似于自助餐館自由取食的情形。從50年代開始,許多家禽生產(chǎn)者使用粉狀全價飼料,雛禽喂以粉碎細一點的飼料,大一點就喂以粗粉碎的飼料。這種方式一直延續(xù)到現(xiàn)在,尤其是在蛋雞飼養(yǎng)上。到了70年代,許多商品飼料廠開始生產(chǎn)顆粒禽料,今天幾乎所有的商品肉雞和火雞都使用各種形式的顆粒飼料。
顆粒飼料由于改善飼料轉化率、方便飼喂和運輸、減少成份分級,而具有明顯的優(yōu)勢,隨著操作上向增加制料效率的提高顆粒質量的努力,飼料生產(chǎn)開始了以一種從技術向科學的演化。
制粒上新近的進步包括調質上的“高溫-短時”、“膨化”,來自蒸汽的壓力和熱量以及膨化機的磨擦能增加淀粉糊化使蛋白質變性、使一些抗營養(yǎng)因子失活、殺死病原菌及微生物,這些進展已經(jīng)改進了顆粒飼料生產(chǎn)率和顆粒質量,顆粒質量是以顆粒的耐久性系數(shù)來衡量的。
與制顆粒相比較,膨化的高溫調質引起關注的主要問題是對營養(yǎng)的破壞,特別是酶、維生素、氨基酸和直接飼喂的微生物,通過日糧強化或敏感營養(yǎng)制粒后添加可以解決這些問題。
可是,過度加工的飼料,即過細粉碎、加熱及高度可消化性,會使家禽腸蠕動出現(xiàn)問題。事實上,飼料加工過程使用越多的物理手段,家禽花在準備消化提高飼料轉化率上的工作就越少。當飼料生產(chǎn)者在飼料加工過程中使用過多的物理加工,留給禽類去做的工作就會減少,腸功能紊亂就很容易發(fā)生。為保證禽類正常的腸蠕動和消化,日糧中必須要有部分未經(jīng)加工的或叫“原糧”狀態(tài)的原料。畢竟,這些禽類強有力的磨碎器官——肌胃,就是為吃食種子而設計的。過度加工的飼料就不需要肌胃的正常功能。這些引起禽類太多的問題,如:飼料通過消化道過快、好斗、腸炎、腺胃炎、啄羽以及腸道微生物群落的紊亂。
這篇文章主要是討論以下幾個方面:1、影響腸蠕動的日糧因子;2、禽類正常的腸蠕動功能;3、通過日糧中加入整?;虼制扑楣攘W鳛橐环N促進禽類腸蠕動的有效性。
腸蠕動的日糧調節(jié):
日糧粗纖維、脂肪和飼料結構都可以調節(jié)腸蠕動,日糧中粗纖維含量增加會加快飼料的通過速度,相反,日糧脂肪含量增加,會降低飼料通過速度。在日糧中適當?shù)钠胶猓梢詭椭心c疾病的禽類恢復正常。良好的腸蠕動對食物消化、營養(yǎng)吸收和保持腸道環(huán)境的健康是必須的。
飼料的結構特性(纖維含量、粒徑大小和粒的完整性)對肌胃的肌肉組織和運動是很重要的。為說明這一點,雛火雞喂以過度加工的飼料(細粉碎、膨化、制粒并破碎)。一組飼養(yǎng)在網(wǎng)上自動化雞籠內,另一組則養(yǎng)在松木鋸木屑地面,在四周齡時解剖樣本禽,顯示那些養(yǎng)在地面的火雞與網(wǎng)上自動化飼養(yǎng)的相比,有一顆相當大的肌胃,而前胃小而正常(見表1)。這種表現(xiàn)顯然與木屑地面飼養(yǎng)的火雞對松木屑的消耗有關,而那些在籠子里的火雞無法得到木屑。為什么這些雛禽要去吃那些顯然沒有營養(yǎng)價值的木屑?合理的解釋是滿足肌胃和腸部正常蠕動。
腸蠕動的意義:
肌胃是正常腸蠕動的“速度控制器”(Duke,1994)。不象哺乳動物,禽類充滿活力的腸回流(反蠕動)是很正常的,這是對短腸道的適應性補償,回流是為了腸內的消化物重新與胃液接觸,與酶充分混合,以利在這么短的腸道內消化和營養(yǎng)吸收,并阻止微生物的繁殖,這些微生物能致病或爭奪營養(yǎng)。日糧脂肪刺激消化物從空腸穿過十二指腸到達肌胃,這就降低了食物的通過速度,提高了日糧蛋白質和能量的利用率。
禽類的這種逆向蠕動存在于消化道的三個不同區(qū)域:1、胃回流;2、小腸回流;3、泄殖腔—盲腸回流。消化道回流的現(xiàn)象是禽類在腸道縮至最小而又不影響消化率的一種創(chuàng)造性適應。
第一個消化道回流是消化物從肌胃回流到前胃,胃—十二指腸每收縮循環(huán)一次,回流一次。
肌胃是禽類的食物碾磨器官,由兩對厚薄不同的肌肉組成。它們有規(guī)律的交替對胃內容物進行混合(薄的一對)和碾磨(厚的一對)。另外,前胃和十二指腸的運動是與肌胃協(xié)同作用的,胃與十二指腸的收縮順序是:“肌胃薄的一對肌肉--十二指腸收縮--肌胃厚的一對肌肉--前胃收縮”。胃--十二指腸收縮順序似乎是由胃區(qū)神經(jīng)來協(xié)調的并且由靠近肌胃幽門瓣的速度控制神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)的來啟動的。食糜順序地從肌胃反流到前胃,然后再前進到肌胃和十二指腸。這種收縮循環(huán)會重復很多次,直至飼料粒徑降到1毫米以下,最后通過向十二指腸括約肌轉運物質的小縫離開肌胃。
攝食的飼料在肌胃內被不斷的重復碾磨混合再送回前胃去接觸更多的消化液。然后再返回到肌胃。這樣看來,胃回流就是進入小腸消化之前的物理和化學準備的一個重要部分。通過降低粒徑,表面積增加至最大,以利小腸內充分暴露于消化酶,而且在前胃和肌胃,重復暴露于胃蛋白酶(一種肽鏈內切酶),會提高小腸內胰島素和胰凝乳蛋白酶(兩種肽鏈外切酶)對蛋白質片段的消化率。
第二種腸回流使食糜從十二指腸和空腸向胃區(qū)回流,這種回流在家禽體內大約每小時發(fā)生三次,但其發(fā)生頻率隨日糧脂肪增加而增加,隨日糧纖維增加而減慢,肌胃內表面的典型銀黃著色就是由于腸內食糜回流到肌胃而暴露于膽汁的證據(jù)。事實上,膽汁對提高形成肌胃內表面的高嶺土狀組織的完整性是必需的。膽汁分泌不足會加速肌胃的侵蝕。相反,充分蠕動,因為全面降低通過腸道的速度而腸內消化物與酶分泌物的再次接觸,會增加食物消化性和營養(yǎng)吸收。
飼料完整性和腸道運動對消化的重要性在Rogel等人(1987)的報告資料中已經(jīng)闡明。這些研究者用含10%的(粉碎過)的燕麥皮的玉米或馬鈴薯原淀粉的肉雞半純化日糧來做試驗。燕麥皮的存在增加了肌胃的大小,也改善了馬鈴薯淀粉的消化率,這是不容易被禽類胰腺分泌的淀粉酶所消化的淀粉(見表2)。值得注意的是,只有整燕麥皮才有這種反應,而研磨過的或磨成粉的燕麥皮則沒有這種效果。這就強調了食物粒徑的重要性而不是日糧纖維的含量問題。肌胃中的砂礫只是幫助食物的研磨,而不是刺激肌胃運動來研磨食物,除了提高消化效率,周期性的小腸內的反向蠕動還能通過抑制病原菌的定殖及抑制其它與禽類競爭有效營養(yǎng)的微生物,從而保持腸道健康。
第三種也是最獨特的回流是將從泄殖腔到盲腸(touncils)這種回流是連續(xù)的,低振幅的結腸逆蠕動。尿液從泄殖腔的尿道口沿著直腸上皮面進入盲腸。這里微生物活動可以利用尿酸進行微生物繁殖(Bjornhag,1989;Karasama,1989)。加上盲腸參與水的再吸收,細菌發(fā)酵中產(chǎn)生的揮發(fā)性脂肪酸的吸收推動盲腸的水份再吸收過程。正常情況下,禽類在保持體水份方面非常有效,再吸收的水份中,10-12%是盲腸吸收的,3-5%是在直腸吸收的,其余的體水分(大約85%)是由腎臟吸收的。
腸紊亂,像腹瀉、腺胃腫脹、肌胃紅腫糜爛等,原因之一就是由于與飼料加工有關的腸運動功能失調?,F(xiàn)代飼料制造(粉碎、混合后粉碎、蒸汽調質、膨化及制粒)的主要目的就是為了最大限度地提高飼料轉化率而降低禽類的采食“工作”和增加消化。然而,所有這些投入到飼料加工中的機械能,降低了肌胃對所攝食物的碾磨負荷,詳細說來,就是過度加工的飼料,導致了肌胃萎縮和功能障礙,然后肌胃成了一個運輸器官而不再是一個碾磨器官(Cumming,1994)。
禽類食用過度加工的飼料時正常的胃反流不再發(fā)生,這樣,由于需要努力在單向通過的過程中分泌足夠的消化酶,前胃肥大發(fā)生了。肌胃中胃蛋白酶的酶反應不足將導致十二指腸內胰島素和胰蛋白酶的酶反應不足,因而后腸就會積聚更多的未消化的蛋白質,在這里常碰到腐敗細菌發(fā)酵,像梭狀芽孢桿菌、弧狀菌(campylobactor)、李氏特桿菌、假單胞菌、大腸桿菌及其它潛在致病菌。
文獻中有好幾個例證支持這一假說,即過度加工的飼料與禽的腸道形態(tài)學改孌及增加健康問題有關系,盡管對飼料轉化率有改善。Nir等人(1995)和Munt 等人(1995)報道雄性肉雞飼喂顆粒料死亡率是飼喂粗粉料的三倍。而且腹水的發(fā)病率與提高飼料轉化率的日糧因子成負相關,如高能量濃度和顆粒飼料,這些都會刺激采食量、提高蛋白質累積和增加氧氣消耗(Scheel,1993)。Riddell(1976)報道,顆粒日糧中加進纖維(試驗中用的是燕麥皮),能減少肉雞前胃肥大的發(fā)病率。隨之而來的是飼料中結構性纖維刺激肌胃和前胃的正常發(fā)育。
整小麥飼喂:
六年前偶然的機會與父親進行了一次討論,我提及我對通過日糧處理來解決家禽腸道病感興趣,我說:“據(jù)我研究,日糧配方對治療或減輕像腸道充血、腹瀉及消化不良等腸道疾病沒有多少調整的余地。”我父親是一位牧場經(jīng)營者,疑惑地看著我:“你還記得我們的母雞群四處散漫的時候,我教你給點整燕麥或整小麥把它們召集來?我想這是常識,因為我是從你爺爺那兒學來的?!倍嗄甑募仪轄I養(yǎng)的基礎研究告訴我們這種方法是原始的、低效率的,并且營養(yǎng)理論支持精加工和使用抗生素添加劑,所以我曾經(jīng)懷疑這種“古老”的療法;可是,我對整粒飼喂的看法1996年在荷蘭休假期間發(fā)生了改變。在歐洲,顆粒飼料中摻一點整粒小麥是一種很普遍的方法,這種方法的復蘇是由于經(jīng)濟原因,并很快得到關稅和貿易總協(xié)定的批準。養(yǎng)禽業(yè)者和小麥種植者互換小麥和土地使用糞肥的權利,養(yǎng)禽者可以經(jīng)濟地處理雞糞;作為回報,麥農(nóng)可以以較低的國際市場價格出售他們的小麥。首先,飼料生產(chǎn)者會反對這種方法,因為這會影響他們的飼料銷售,作為應對,他們發(fā)起研究以證明這種在他們精心加工的配方飼料中加入10-25%的整粒小麥會影響禽類的生長表現(xiàn)。通過他們研究,他們發(fā)現(xiàn)雞場在配方外添加一些整粒小麥并沒有如他們期望的那樣因營養(yǎng)稀釋而降低生產(chǎn)性能。整粒小麥加入到平衡日糧中,生產(chǎn)表現(xiàn)和禽體健康狀況得到改善,經(jīng)濟效益提高了。
Van Middlekoop 和Van Harn (1994)報道了兩個試驗,其中一個是在顆粒飼料中分別加10,15或20%的整粒小麥,另一個是添加一個固定水平。無論用什么方式提供小麥,肉雞的表現(xiàn)都未產(chǎn)生負面影響。與之相反,飼料轉化率的改善以及由此而帶來經(jīng)濟回報的顯著改善與日糧中整粒小麥的添加量成正比。
火雞中添加整粒谷物的效果與肉雞相比變化較大。幾個在德國進行的生產(chǎn)試驗報道,整粒小麥對雄火雞的生長表現(xiàn)有負面影響,盡管經(jīng)濟回報有優(yōu)勢(Tuller和Velten,1988和1992;Reiter等,1994)。荷蘭進行的生產(chǎn)試驗也證明飼喂整粒小麥經(jīng)濟效益明顯(Rooijakkers,1997),在這個荷蘭試驗中,火雞喂以標準雛火雞日糧到三周齡,以后每周增加5%額外的整粒小麥,直至日糧中含50%的整粒小麥為止。
根據(jù)意大利的一系列生產(chǎn)試驗,Melandri(1998)報道雌火雞和雄火雞喂以最高占日糧的17%的標準整粒小麥或高粱可以提高生產(chǎn)率指標而對總產(chǎn)量及胸肉產(chǎn)量沒有影響(生產(chǎn)率指標用下式計算:[上市體重*成活率]/[日齡*飼料/增重])。Melandri(1998)注意到隨著日糧中整粒谷物的增加,經(jīng)濟回報顯著提高。日糧中由于谷物的增加而抗球蟲劑被稀釋,但球蟲病的發(fā)生率沒有變化。而且糞便質量和禽的活躍性通常由于日糧中含整粒小麥或高粱而改善。添加整粒谷物還觀察到其它的好處,在同一個飼養(yǎng)階段,逐漸增加整粒谷物可以緩解負面效應,這在飼料更換階段尤為典型。
全價日糧中含有整粒谷物不僅可以改善腸蠕動,而且很簡單,由于需要加工的飼料減少而帶來經(jīng)濟利益。意大利和美國中西部的火雞公司已經(jīng)把需要加工的飼料減少了25%,而只是簡單地把整粒小麥或玉米加到顆粒濃縮飼料中。而且這種做法提高了飼料廠的效率,因為這種飼喂程序不需要較多的配方和較長的加工流程。給禽的另外的飼料配方只要調整整粒谷物到通用的濃縮料就行。
在給肉雞和火雞飼喂整粒谷物作為一種標準方法來提倡還需要做更多科學的試驗。可是,我相信有足夠的生理優(yōu)勢和實踐證據(jù)值得美國飼料制造商和家禽生產(chǎn)者認真考慮。
按現(xiàn)有生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)和市場情況,將整粒谷物與顆粒飼料一同飼喂可以節(jié)約相當?shù)某杀?,而且,如果禽類日糧中含有一定比例的整粒谷物還有一些健康效應。這些效應可以從減少墊料消耗、改善腸蠕動和減少疾病侵害反映出來。

評分

參與人數(shù) 1 +5 收起 理由
中國西翁 + 5 優(yōu)秀?。?!

查看全部評分

您需要登錄后才可以回帖 登錄 | 注冊

本版積分規(guī)則

發(fā)布主題 快速回復 返回列表 聯(lián)系我們

關于社區(qū)|廣告合作|聯(lián)系我們|幫助中心|小黑屋|手機版| 京公網(wǎng)安備 11010802025824號

北京宏牧偉業(yè)網(wǎng)絡科技有限公司 版權所有(京ICP備11016518號-1

Powered by Discuz! X3.5  © 2001-2021 Comsenz Inc. GMT+8, 2024-12-28 18:06, 技術支持:溫州諸葛云網(wǎng)絡科技有限公司