Adaptation strategies of camels on a thornbush savannah pasture: Comparison with other domestic animals

Transcription

1 Adaptati strategies camels a thornbush savannah pasture: Comparis with or domestic animals Rutagwenda T., Lechner Doll M., Kaske M., Engelhardt W.V., Schultka W., Schwartz H.J. in Tisser J.-L. (ed.). Séminaire sur la digesti, la nutriti et l' alimentati du dromadaire Zaragoza : CIHEAM Optis Méditerranéennes : Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n pages Article available line / Article dispible en ligne à l adresse : To cite this article / Pour citer cet article Rutagwenda T., Lechner Doll M., Kaske M., Engelhardt W.V., Schultka W., Schwartz H.J. Adaptati strategies camels a thornbush savannah pasture: Comparis with or domestic animals. In : Tisser J.-L. (ed.). Séminaire sur la digesti, la nutriti et l'alimentati du dromadaire. Zaragoza : CIHEAM, p (Optis Méditerranéennes : Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n. 2)

2 Adaptati camels T. RUTAGWENDA M. LECHNER-DOLL M. KASKE W. V. ENGELHARDT SCHOOL VETERINARY MEDICINE HANNOVER, FRG W. SCHULTKA UNIVERSITY GIESSEN GIESSEN,FRG -, H. J. SCHWARTZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BERLIN BERLIN, FRG Introducti leads available animals. amount same time, plant cell wall cstituents, especially Some able se animals tenindispensable because, in additi human food, y also used as pack animals, wool. an cellulose. A cellulose digesti is adapt time in in hence a A feed can be achieved by a volume by possess a feed selecti4 cellulose digesti'? 3 use adapt cditis. Camelids have in hisl0gy7~ between camelids a camel fed is basically solutes do On h, motility 11,1*. functi as between camels aim adaptati goats will be given. examine camel Dietary preference multispecies grazing systems An is ability select a plant. feeding habits in wild Optis - - n.o : 69-73

3 classified m in: a) b) adaptable c) ability like cattle select plants in a is little developed. On h, goats, a less extent able seek out succulent leaves 1). et al.15, that feed than On h, able choose easily digestible plants 1. Sketch 'camels, goat, sheep cattle. We out studies indigenous camels, cattle, sheep goats savannah in found at 70% tal mostly csisted in quantity quality than deep not used by cattle sheep. On h, goats can up 60% tal feeding time being spent at a height between m. above. level. Camels capable up a height That means that seas when leaves may be available, camels some cattle sheep which mainly feed at level quantity quality When plant species selected by animals taken in assheepcsume plant cattle feed ly 30 species17. 90% seas, camels, goats sheep each csumed plant ly 8 taken by cattle. That indicates that if some plants may not be sheep can not be case with cattle because cattle csume a limited plants. plants in 3 low, medium nyl bag studies quality plants in diet animals 2. diet camels was lowest did not seas seas. quality plants tal feeding time). seas cattle spent 80% feeding time quality plants. Sheep spent about 20% 45% tal feeding time spent 5% quality plants but this 20% highest timespentfeeding quality plants seas was obtained cattle followed by sheep. This can be expected because cattle sheep csumed a high mocotyleds mocotyleds was found. be 50-60% On h dicotyleds was ly 8% Since mocotyleds low seas, obviously camels able avoid changes in less than 1% tal feeding timely. Y Q E??JGreen seos D seos Camels Goats Sheep Cattle 2. Time spent feeding tal feeding time. al. 19. may be ccluded that camels some extent goats able select plants whose quality does not change On h, cattle a extent alsosheepfed plants mocotyleds. -An adaptati camels is ability select dicotyleds high -70-

4 digestibility. additi digestibility plants selected by camels does not seas seas. fact that camels can feed selectively at a height which domestic animals do not m have an studied. time spent feeding plants between animal species in plant species, type plants height above Thus, indigenous animals in study than in a savannah study instead having ly e animal system may help its csequency, biotipe. Table 1 SEASON (AS A SEASON Camels 35.2% 17,9% Cattle 56.8% 27.3% Sheep 74.8% 46.1% Goats 40.7% 22.0% Adaptati animals utilize poor quality forage Efficiency digesti.quality be enhanced if digesta in is time feed in ability animal adapt time volume, in feed intake. Mean retenti time (MRT) particles camelids fed in than fluid12 2~22~23. lgest cattle ( h. in 36 -t. 9 h. in seas). Camels had in (25 2 h.) than goats ( h.) sheep ( h.) in No camels was found in seas (29 8 h. 29 -t. Changes in foresmach volume feed intake seas' volumes t 1% body weight (BW) but 11 f 2% seas. animal species had volumes than camels 11 -I 3% 16 f 5% BW in seas given in table 1. is known cattle sheep time digesta is negatively with feed intake intake led an intake is intake tal cannot be compensated. effect can not be be an adaptati low all animal species size (table 1). lg time mav be explained' by viume nit a Thus indigenous animals adapted volume this enabled m a Selective retenti small particles time indigenous animals p~blished2~. was no cattle had than sheep goats. cattle may be explained by effective mass a bed effectn23, 28, 29. selectivity in se species. selective (1 10 mm. lg) densities (0.91, 1.03, g. ml-1) was studied in than 1 mm. same density. mean by lessby size30. can thus be ccluded that digesta is mainly limited l

5 by with a a thus a passage small dense in A TO Table 2 digestibility due a was estimated by nyl bag technique digestibility in by about 12% in sheep 7% in cattle, 6% in goats 5% in camels due digestibility a is cattle sheep because y csume a than goats cattle sheep adapted time digesti out in (2 mm.) in 1 2 about 41 when fed a feed Such a lg Selecti high quality feed +$+ camel is a an effectivedigesti a diet. Thisshowsthat camels also capable if live savaqnah, camels obviously could select a diet high quality in sufficient quantities it was not digestibility References +S - feed SS+ t ttt ttt GOAT ttt t+ in digestibility quality due a mean time tft ttt tt Slight less developed. - t I l l On h, it is known that camels capable if y feedexclusively able select a diet good quality Summary cclusis & 1. VAN SOEST, J. O digestive physiology exist between camels adaptati camels Table 2 adaptati camels, cattle, sheep goats seas in savannah, camels seem adapt feeding cditis by selecting a diet high quality be fact a high seas. additi camels feed at a domestic animal species. able avoid An savannah in That means, in 3. VAN SOEST, J.; J.; FOOSE, animals. Human an Atzinzal Nutriti (eds.: G. Wallace L. New Zeal, 20, , El - E6. ruminant smach. W. V. 6. J. F., J. F. J. 134, J. J. F., VALLENAS, A. two J. 134, G.; V., E. Gegenbaurs Jahrb. 125, : G. O. digesti è humped camel zebu Vet. Sci.,. 13, J

6 l motility flow (Lama guanacoe f. glama). J. V. llama V. smachmotilityinllama (Lamaguanacoe f. glama). Quart J. 70, V. Comp. 84A, J. - O. (1975): adaptatis Aspects Digestive in (eh.: J. V., G. (1980): digestive 8physiology Digestive in (eh.: Y. V.; J. W. (1988): Animal Developm. 28, T.; J., V. v in Tropische Weiden und Futterresourcen (1988): Beispiele deutscher Agrarforschung in den Tropen und Subtropen (ed,: T.; J., W. V. v J. Anim. A. Anim 20. T. (1989): Adaptati sheep goats Diss., TierärztL Hochsck W. V. Volume time Camel, J. A., 33, J.; size 54, Studies A. Anim 61, V.. Aust. J. Agnc. 32, v - im Sudan. DisS., Tierärztl. Hochsch. fed V. (1989): J. Anirn. T.; V. (1989): Seasal intake levels sheep. J. Anim Sci. J., (1981): time E. C. species level intake J. Anim Sci. 55, C. J.; J. G.; A., V. (1986): Effect hay size chewing J. Daiy Sci. 69 (Supplement l), 135. W. L. J. (1986): kinetics in Digesti metabolisnl in ruminants V. (1989): effect size density mean retenti time particles in gastrointestinal tract sheep -73-