Indian J. Anim. Res.

, 44 (3) : 208 - 210, 2010


D.J. Kalita, B.C. Sarma and B.K. Sarmah
Department of Animal Physiology, College of Veterinary Science Assam Agricultural University, Khanapara – 781022, India

Bioavailability trial on mineral balance was conducted in two groups of nondescriptive calves. Restricted amount of concentrate ration with and without mineral mixture at 2% level was fed to group-I and group-II respectively. Para (Panicum Purpuream) grass was provided ad libitum as a source of green. The weight of the animals was recorded at two different periods – on the day of precondition and at the end of the trial .The dry matter (DM) intake, voidance of dung and urine was recorded and samples of concentrate, green, dung and urine were collected daily for analysis. The samples were processed and different elements viz. Ca, P , Mg, Fe, Cu and Zn were analyzed in concentrate, fodder, dung and urine to know the percentage of retention. Blood samples were also collected from each animal on the day of actual trial and at the end of the trial for analysis of mineral concentration. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in respect of DM intake and growth. However, significantly (P<0.05) higher retention percentage was recorded in mineral mixture supplemented group. Blood mineral profile was also observed apparently high in mineral mixture supplemented group.

Key words : Bioavailability trial, Nondescriptive, Mineral mixture, Retention percentage
INTRODUCTION Mineral disorder including deficiency and imbalances have more significant consequences than any infectious diseases ( McDowell , 1995 ) . To overcome the detrimental influences on animal performance, mineral supplementations are essential to the livestock (Underwood, 1981). The present experiment was designed to elucidate the effect of mineral supplementation on growth, retention percentage of different elements and serum mineral profile in nondescriptive calves of Assam. MATERIAL AND METHODS Ten healthy nondescript male calves of 10 to 12 months old were selected from the experimental animal shed, Department of Animal Physiology, College of Veterinary Science, Khanapara for the present investigation. The calves were randomly divided in to two groups (group-I and group-II), five in each by keeping nearly equal body weight .Measured amount of concentrate as per Ranjhan (1993) and ad libitum green and clean drinking water was provided to the animals during the trial. Calves of group-1 were provided concentrate ration with 2% mineral mixture (Concentrate Ration-1 : compose of whole maize 42 , wheat bran 20 , GNC 35 , mineral mixture 2 and common salt 1 part respectively ) and group2 was provided a concentrate ration without mineral mixture (Concentrate Ration-II : compose of whole maize 43 ,wheat bran 21, GNC 35 and common salt 1 part respectively ) . Para grass (Panicum Purpuream) was the common source of green for both the groups. The actual trial for mineral balance was carried out for 7 days, following a preconditioned period of 21 days .Body weight of the animals were recorded at two different periods – on the day of precondition and on the end of the trial . Blood samples were collected from each animal on the day of actual trial and at the end of the trial for analysis of Ca, Mg, Fe, Cu and Zn. The dry matter (DM) intake from concentrate and green, voidance of dung and urine per twenty four hours were recorded and representative samples of concentrate ,green ,dung and urine were collected daily . The samples were processed (Fick et

02 1..01 (%) P 0. The concentrate ration-II showed lower level of mineral as no mineral mixture was added to it. Cu and Zn were analyzed in Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer.95±0. These might be due to the appetite stimulant effect of higher concentration of Zn (Cousin. 2010 209 al.11 1.72±0.84±2. Retention percentage (Table-4) was significantly ( P< 0.34 9.07 Urine (L/24 hrs ) 9.97±0. The data generated from the study were compared by‘t’ test (Snedecor and Cochran. 1968)..40 .01 1. (2003) observed increased body weight in Assam local goat by supplementing mineral mixture and present experimental finding is corroborated with earlier results. All the analyzed element showed a positive balance for both the groups as the concentration of mineral in green and concentrate provided to the animals were above the recommendation of NRC (1981) and Kearl (1982). But Berhanu et al (2003) observed significantly (P<0.26±2.99±2.12±2.71 110. indicate that the addition of mineral mixture have no significant effect on DM intake . No.01 0.08±0.33±0. voidance of dung and urine per twenty four hours ( Table-3 ) .01 0.35±0.93 At the end of the trial 112.81 (ppm) Cu 34.12±0.01 Mg 0.02 Table 3: Total dry matter intake.28 78.01 Fe 470.70±0.97 ±0.02 0. Kalita et al.36 Zn 147.01 0.28±0.84 ±0. Mg. Serum mineral profile (Table-5) was obser ved within the reported range (Phukan et al. (1999) also observed higher serum mineral concentration Table 1 : Mineral profile of concentrate and green used in the trial Feed Conc.93 562. Phosphorus in the samples was analyzed following the methods of Harris and Popat (1954).01 0. Ca.36±0. Apparently increase body weight (Table2) was recorded in group-I at Period-III. 1997).57±0.05) higher DM intake in crossbred heifer by supplementing zinc and iodine together. 1979) and different elements viz.Ration-I Conc. 2000) and concentration did not show any significant difference between the group .05 ) higher in group-1 and it might be due to the greater degree of accumulation and absorption of different elements in the gastrointestinal tract of mineral supplemented group ( Lall et al . DM intake from concentrate and green .10±2.50±0.56 20. who observed that on similar dietary regime. dung and urine voided during the trial Group Group-1 Group-II Dry Matter intake (Kg/24hrs) Concentrate Green 0.78±1.01 0.96 ±0. Lall et al. 1994 ) .49±0.20±3.02 0. 44.50 242.51±1. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Mineral profiles of concentrate ration and para grass (Panicum Purpuream) used in bioavailability trial are presented in Table-1.Vol.02 Dung on DM basis (Kg/24hrs) 1.33±1.86 0. Our results was correlated with the Chabraa et al (1986) .95±0. 2002). The apparently higher serum mineral concentration in group-1 might be due to the higher percentage of retention of all elements by this group.09 52. addition of mineral mixture had no effect on DM intake on crossbred calves. Fe.76 108.Ration-II Para grass Ca 0.06±0.97 (Panicum purpuream) Table 2: Body weight (Kg) of the animal during the trial Group Group-I Group-II On the day of precondition 108. (1994) and Newar et al. The apparently higher body weight in group-I might be due to growth promoting action of minerals (Paul et al.33±0. 3.38±0.92 17.

18 3.01 ±3. Ames . Newar.02 0.02 1.07 26.Table 3: Total dry matter intake. Ottawa. Indian J. Berhanu. et al. The State University Press . S.75 a P 34. Cousin.V.25 (mg%) *P 4.88 ±0.12 Fe #P 3. and Popat . Canada.86b±3. (1986). et al. 6 th edition. P .53 ±0.97 ±0. Amer. Washington. A. New-Delhi for financial assistance to carry out this work. ±0. J.11 2.16 0.09 10.USA. W. Intern. London.15 2.09 0.67 32. NRC . Logan .56b±2. Mcdowell. 3 :90-94.34 9. Chabraa.05 *P 2.51 45. Method of Mineral Analysis for Plant and Animal Tissue (2nd edition ) . S. dung and urine voided during the trial Group Group-1 Dry Matter intake (Kg/24hrs) Concentrate Green 0. REFERENCES . et al.Nutrient Requirement of Cattle. T. Nutrition of Grazing Ruminants in Warm Climates. (1982)..06 0.K. Kalita. Nutrition.11 2.05) Table 5: Serum mineral profile of the animal Group *P Group-I Group-II Ca #P 11.(1993) Animal Nutrition in the Tropics .14 ±0. et al (2003).87 ±0.85 ±0. 2 nd.18 *P Cu #P 0.(1954).10 a Mg 43. Anim.02 Dung on DM basis (Kg/24hrs) 1.14 62.96 ±0.41 ±0. (1968). 4th edition.61 ±0.35±0. Paul . National Academy of Sciences . Snedecor . L.87 a Cu 69. Kearl.(2003).44 ±1.70 ±2. University of Florida . 3rd revised edition.(2000) Indian Vet. C.91 ±0.33±0. et al.G. The Mineral Nutrition of Livestock.20 3. S.852. on Trace Elements in Man and Animals . Gainesville . Vikas Publishing . F .20 P #P *P 2. J.27b±4. 9: 343-345. (1995). Indian J.(1979 ). D.95±0.14 Mg #P a ppm *P 3.86 0. D. Sci. Ranjhan . W. L. Anim.57 ±2.07 INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL RESEARCH Table 4 : Retention percentage of different minerals Group Group-I Group-II Ca 52.13 4. Statistical Methods. D.54b±2. J.29 ±0.W and Cochran .84 ±0.99 ±0. edition . Int.69 a Fe 54. et al.81 ±0. IX International Symp. PP 849-852.61 ±0.41 Mean bearing different superscripts are significant (P < 0.01 ±0.82 ±0. Nutrition. U. et al. New-Delhi. 31 : 124-129.82 ±1.18 4. NRC Research Press. Lall. G.03 ±0.17 2. (2002) Livestock Intern. 20 (4):467-470. 77: 583-585. (1999). Thus it can be concluded that supplementation of mineral mixture significantly (P<0. Anim. Harris. 76:102-104. Anim. J. Iowa .15a±2.11 Urine (L/24 hrs ) 9. (1997).09 Zn #P 95 ±0.40 Group-II 210 1.16 2. R .05) increased the retention percentage of different elements in growing calves.06 *p indicates day of actual trial #p indicates at the End of the trial in mineral mixture supplemented groups of calves and buffaloes respectively. S. J. S. (1994).66 ±0.91 ±0. New York. USA.82 ±0. Academic Press. Soil Chem. Proc. Department of Animal Science .26 10. 6 : 8-10 Phukan Manoshi et al. K.21 10.51 ±0.(1981).40 35.Sc and Director of Research (Vety) for providing necessary facilities and to the ICAR. Underwood.82 ±0. E.24 4. Fick .25b±3. Nutrition Requirements of Ruminant in Developing Countries. Feed Stuff Institute Utah State University. Nutrition.30 a Zn 46.Indian Vet.20b±4.95±0.56 ±0. R.01 1. Soc. Indian J. 20 :11-15.R.97 ±0.40 44. Y. (1981). ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The authors are thankful to Dean.K. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful