HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wise, G. H. Articles by Linnerud, A. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Wise, G. H. Articles by Linnerud, A. C.

Changes in Milk Products Sham Fed to Calves. IV. Suckling from a Nurse Cow versus Consuming from Either a Nipple Feeder or an Open Pail¹

Department of Dairy Science, South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, Clemson 29631

A. C. Linnerud

Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh 27607

ABSTRACT

Lipolysis and associated changes in whole milk sham fed by different systems to two pairs of calves (Guernseys and Holsteins, 2 to 5 mo of age) were compared. Each calf was sham fed milk from the respective halves of the udder of a Holstein cow by: (a) nursing directly from the udder, (b) sucking from a nipple pail, and (c) drinking from an open pail. Increasing rates of consumption by these methods were in the order listed. Exposures during ingestion increased lipolysis and numbers of bacteria. Lipolysis, evidenced by increased soluble volatile fatty acids and decreased concentrations of fat, was accompanied by lowered pH and by accelerated rates of rennet coagulation. Lipolytic changes were accentuated throughout an 8-h incubation at 38 C. Magnitudes of lipolysis in milks removed by hand from the respective udder halves and subsequently sham fed by pail systems were related closely to the duration of ingestion. Hence, changes in milk sucked from nipple pails were more marked than in that drunk from open pails. Nursing from the udder was slower than by sucking from a pail, but lipolytic modifications were less, which difference is attributed to the lower fat content of nursed milk.

¹ Technical contribution No. 1258, South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, Clemson University, Clemson. Published by permission of the Director. Paper No. 4676 of the Journal Series of the North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station, Raleigh. Use of trade names in this publication does not imply endorsement of the products mentioned.

² Department of Animal Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh 27607.

³ Peace Corps, Avenida Glavarino Gallardo 2125, Santiago, Chile.