| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana 61801
2 Nittany Dairy Nutrition, Mifflinburg, PA 17844
3 Degussa Corporation, Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660
4 Department of Animal and Nutritional Sciences, University of New Hampshire, Durham 03824
To determine whether statistical inferences obtained from predictions by models were similar to those of measured data from individual cows, data from six research trials published between 1989 and 1997 were simulated using the 1989 National Research Council Model, the Mepron Dairy Ration Evaluator (version 1.1), The University of Pennsylvania release of the Net Carbohydrate and Protein System (version 2.12p), The Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System (version 3), and the CPM Dairy (version 1.0). Both predicted and measured protein fractions were analyzed by ANOVA and compared to determine whether statistical inferences among treatments from predictions by the models were similar to those from the measured data. The interpretations and statistical inferences of measured data did not always agree with those for predicted data. All models responded to changes in diet composition and often predicted that dietary changes would result in statistically different amounts of protein and amino acids passing to the duodenum than were observed in the measured data. The direction of predicted change among treatments for passage of nitrogen fractions to the duodenum also did not agree with the measured data a large percentage of the time. Discrepancies in ANOVA and interpretations between predicted and measured data may be due to the reduction in variation associated with modeling biological systems, associative effects of feeds not accounted for by models, inadequate equations in the models, inadequate description of feeds, or experimental error in measured data. Before model simulations of duodenal flow of crude protein and amino acids can be substituted for experimental measurements, better descriptors of main dietary effects, microbial protein production, ruminal protein degradation, and interactions among dietary factors must be developed.
Key Words: modeling • protein • amino acids • dairy cows
Submitted on December 15, 1999
Accepted on September 20, 2000
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. Lanzas, L. O. Tedeschi, S. Seo, and D. G. Fox Evaluation of Protein Fractionation Systems Used in Formulating Rations for Dairy Cattle J Dairy Sci, January 1, 2007; 90(1): 507 - 521. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. D. Hanigan, H. G. Bateman, J. G. Fadel, and J. P. McNamara Metabolic Models of Ruminant Metabolism: Recent Improvements and Current Status J Dairy Sci, March 1, 2006; 89(e_suppl_1): E52 - E64. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. G. Bateman II, J. H. Clark, and M. R. Murphy Development of a System to Predict Feed Protein Flow to the Small Intestine of Cattle J Dairy Sci, January 1, 2005; 88(1): 282 - 295. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. J. Phillips, T. L. Citron, J. S. Sage, K. A. Cummins, M. J. Cecava, and J. P. McNamara Adaptations in Body Muscle and Fat in Transition Dairy Cattle Fed Differing Amounts of Protein and Methionine Hydroxy Analog J Dairy Sci, November 1, 2003; 86(11): 3634 - 3647. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
