J. agric. Sci., Catnb.

(1975), 85, 359-368 359

With 5 text-figures
Printed in Qreat Britain

Biuret and urea in maintenance and production diets of cattle

BY A. C. KONDOS
Department of Animal Industries, Queensland Agricultural College, Lawes, Queensland, Australia
AND B. MUTCH*
Dow Chemical (Austr.) Ltd

{Revised MS. received 17 February 1975)

SUMMARY
A series of five field trials with cattle was carried out to study the comparative
efficiency of utilization of urea and biuret in various maintenance and production
nutritional situations. It was shown that in maintenance diets with energy intake
above 8 Mcal/head/day and where half of the nitrogen requirements of the animals
was contributed by one of the two non-protein nitrogen (NPN) sources, biuret was
utilized 30 % more efficiently than urea. No difference in the degree of utilization of
urea or biuret was apparent when the energy was reduced to 6-7 Mcal/head/day. On
the other hand, a high intake of nitrogen in production rations had a masking effect on
the nitrogen contribution of the NPN sources and no significant differences in body-
weight gain were recorded.

Cheng & Wise Burroughs, 1955; Berry, Riggs &

INTRODUCTION
Intensification of ruminant production, and
especially of beef produced primarily under grazing
conditions has, in many cases, imposed problems
associated with needs for supplementary nitrogen.
To fill the gap between the crude protein available
in pasture and the optimum requirements for
maintenance and production, various sources of
non-protein nitrogen (NPN) and especially urea
and biuret have been tested and used successfully
(Meiske et al. 1955; Repp, Hale & Wise Burroughs,
1955; Repp, Hale, Cheng & Wise Burroughs, 1955;
Anderson et al. 1959; Hatfield et al. 1959; Raleigh
& Wallace, 1963; Johnson & McClure, 1964; Clark,
Baratt & Kellerman, 1965; Henderick, 1967; Mies,
Thomas & Newman, 1967; Tollett et al. 1969).
Nevertheless, due to the limited supply of biuret,
the higher cost per unit crude protein and inexperi-
ence in its application for ruminant nutrition in
Australia, urea has been more widely used in this
country and in the U.S.A. (Klett, 1972; Chalupa,
1972).
The main advantages in favour of biuret are:
(1) It is slowly hydrolysed in the rumen and
consequently risks of ammonia poisoning are
remote compared with urea (Dinning et al. 1948;
Gallup, Pope & Whitehair, 1953; Repp, Hale,
* Present address: Rumevite Pty. Ltd., Boundary
Eoad, Wacol, Brisbane, Queensland.
Kunkel, 1956; Hatfield etal. 1959;Iwatae«oZ. 1959).
(2) The slow rate of hydrolysis of biuret would
be expected to allow a more efficient rate of ammonia
utilization in the rumen when high or low energy
rations are fed (Karr et al. 1965; Tollett et al. 1966;
Raleigh & Turner (1968).
(3) Biuret is more palatable and easily accepted
by cattle in contrast to urea which has to bo given
in special preparations or mixed in the feed (Hat-
field et al. 1959; Hutchinson, 1966a, b, c; Palm &
Ioset, 1966; Schaadt, Johnson & McClure, 1966;
Raleigh & Turner, 1968).
Although biuret-hydrolysing enzymes in the
rumen develop only after the introduction of this
compound into the diet (Clemens & Johnson, 1973a,
6; Johnson & Clemens, 1973), urea, a naturally
occurring substrate, can be rapidly hydrolysed
(Ewan, Hatfield & Garrigus, 1958; McLaren et al.
1959; Johnson & McClure, 1963; Gilchrist, Pot-
gieter & Voss, 1968; Schroder & Gilchrist, 1969).
Recent experiments (Kondos, 1975; E. M. Gil-
christ, personal communication) have shown that
adaptation of the rumen to biuret can easily be
achieved, is relatively fast and, apparently, of a
long-lasting nature.
In view of the importance of biuret as a feeding-
stuff and the better understanding of its properties
from recently accumulated literature, the present
investigations were conducted in an attempt to
360 A. C. KONDOS AND B. MUTCH
study the comparative nutritional value of biuret
and urea in maintenance and production diets of
cattle. Observations were made under closely con-
trolled pen conditions in an endeavour to accurately
establish some basic principles relating to the
utilization of these two compounds.
PROCEDURE
General. Five experiments using cattle were
carried out over a period of 2 years in order to study
the nutritional value of biuret and urea fed with
varying levels of energy and nitrogen intake. The
general plan on which the experiment was based is
shown in Fig. 1. Body weight represents the
approximate average weight at which cattle
entered each experimental period.
In the first three experimental periods or stages,
maintenance conditions were applied and in each
case intake of the basal diet was adjusted at a level
slightly above maintenance requirements of the
animals in the control group. The first period was
repeated twice (trials a and 6) in an effort to test
the effect of a second energy level. After each of
the first two experimental periods, the body weight
of all animals was intentionally decreased by 35-
40 kg and, following a short period of body-weight
adjustment, the efficiency of biuret and urea
utilization was tested. Good-quality feed-grade
biuret (81%) and urea contributed up to about
50 % of the total nitrogen content of the diets.
During the production periods 4 and 5 (Fig. 1),
the same basic treatments as used in the first three
stages were applied, but feed intake in all groups
was increased to allow animals to gain weight at
two different rates up to a body weight of about
400 kg. These two production stages lasted more
than 20 weeks.
Animals. Twenty-four 2-year-old and relatively
small-framed Hereford steers weighing 309-313 kg
were selected from a group of 32 for even size and
growth rate after a pilot 2-month grazing trial
period. The animals were then evenly allotted to
four treatment groups of six animals each. At the
beginning of stage 1 their condition was assessed
as score ' 7 ' . This assessment was made from a
score list of 1—10 in which 10 represents animals in
fat condition. All groups were kept in open yards
(30 x 30 m) and were drenched against parasites
before commencement of the experiments and at
regular intervals thereafter.
Wet conditions at the end of the second stage
compelled continuation with the third experi-
mental stage in concrete yards. The last two stages
of feeding for production (4 and 5) took place in
the original yards. Animals on biuret were adapted
to the utilization of this compound for 4 weeks
before the actual experiment commenced.
During the entire experimental period, all cattle
remained healthy except one steer in the urea
group which died of poisoning after accidentally
consuming the daily urea allowance for the whole

325 -1

200

Weeks
Fig. 1. Plan of the biuret-urea maintenance and production experiments. Numbers 1-5 show experi-
mental periods or stages and their duration in weeks. Period 1 consisted of trials a and b. Maintenance
experiments included periods 1, 2 and 3 to a total of 53 weeks. Production experiments included periods
4 and 5 which covered 20 weeks. See Procedure for details.
 Biuret and urea in cattle nutrition
group. This animal was immediately replaced and
the experiment continued uninterrupted. Body
weights were recorded before feeding in the morning
at 2- to 3-week intervals. During the entire experi-
mental period, no feed intake problems were
encountered in any of the treatment groups.
Feeds and feeding. Composition of the basal diet
is given in Table 1. Lower-quality grass hay was
used for its low protein content, small variation in
composition and availability during the whole
experimental period.
The grain was feed-grade wheat containing 12-3
and 15-1 % crude protein (CP). Biuret, supplied by
Dow Chemicals Company in Queensland, was high-
quality commercial grade containing hot less than
81 % of the compound. Urea was ordinary feed
grade containing about 91 % urea. All feeds were
analysed for nitrogen content by the method of
Mackenzie & Wallace (1954). Calcium and phos-
phorus were supplied in the form of bone meal
(Calphos) at the rate of 0-4 % of the diet, common
salt at 0-5% and a specially prepared mineral
mixture which supplied each animal daily with
40-50 mg Cu, 0-5 mg Ca, 200 mg Zn, 200 mg Mn,
0-1 mg Se, 0-5 mg I, 40r50 mg Fe, was added at
0-4% of the diet.
In addition to the mineral mixture, sulphur was
supplied in the form of Na2SO4.10H2O at the rate
of 0-2%. Water was available ad libitum.
All diets within each experimental stage were
kept isocaloric and the diets in treatment 2 (biuret)
and 4 (urea) were isocaloric and isonitrogenous,
whereas the NPN nitrogen level in treatment 3 was
only half of that in 2 and 4. Treatments 2 and 3
361
were used for a direct comparison of the nutritional
efficiency of biuret against that of urea in treat-
ment 4.
Maintenance experiments. Four treatments were
applied in which the performance of cattle fed
maintenance diets with two levels of biuret and
one of urea were compared.
The four treatments in the first experimental
stage were:
Treatments Diets
1. Control Basal
2. Biuret Basal + 75 g biuret/head/day
3. Biuret Basal + 37-5 gbiurefc/head/day
4. Urea Basal + 66 g urea/head/day
The control treatment consisted only of the basal
diet (Table 1), the level of which was adjusted to
approximately meet maintenance requirements in
energy and nitrogen for the control group in each
of the first three experimental stages (Fig. 1).
The daily allowance of dry matter (D.M.) in the
basal diet and the energy and protein intakes
during the first three stages are shown in Table 2.
According to ARC recommendations and pre-
liminary observations, the daily maintenance
requirements for a steer of 300 kg body weight are
9-10 Meal ME and 375 g CP. Consequently, the
above figures of daily energy intake were adjusted
to be somewhat higher than the calculated ARC
maintenance recommendations iii order to allow a
sufficient energy margin for promoting any possible
growth responses to NPN supplementation.
Production experiments. During production stages
4 and 5 (Fig. 1), intake of the basic diet increased

Table 1. Composition* of basal diet used in maintenance stages 1, 2 and 3

MEf (Meal/kg CP
Ingredients % in diet of diet) (% of diet)
Mixed grass hay 87-0 1-635 4-17
Wheat grain 11-5 0-328 1-41
Salt 0-5 — —
Mineral mixture 0-4 —
Calphos 0-4 — —
Sodium sulphate 0-2 — —
1000 1-963 5-58
* Mixed grass hay = 1-880 Moal ME/kg,. 4-8 % CP; wheat grain = 2-850 Meal ME/kg, 12-3 % CP; mixed basal
diet = 1-963 Meal ME/kg, 6-58 CP %.
f Metabolizable energy.

Table 2. Daily intake of D.M.., ME and CP per head during each of the first three maintenance stagea
Experimental Mean body D.M. ME CP
stage wt (kg) (kg) (Moal) (g)
1 310 5-9 11 6 329
2 270 4-5 8-9 251
3 235 3-4 6-7 189
362 A. C. KONDOS AND B. MUTCH

Table 3. Composition of production diet fed during stages 4 and 5

Ingredients % in diet Meal ME/kg CP % in diet
Grass hay 820 1-541 3-93
Wheat grain* 16-5 0-470 2-49
Salt 0-5 — —
Mineral mixture 0-4 — —
Calphos 0-4 — —
Sodium sulphate 0-2 — —
1000 2011 6-42
* Crude protein content 15-1 %.

330

320

i? 310

Stage 1
300

290

280
10 12 14 16
Weeks
Fig. 2. Body-weight changes in each group in stage 1 (trial a). # 0 , Control;
0 0 , biuret 75g; x x, biuret 37-5g; O O. u r ea i

to meet metabolizable energy requirements for a
gain of 0-7 and 0-9 kg/head/day respectively. The
basal production diet (Table 3), contained more
energy and slightly more crude protein than that
used in the maintenance experiments, and was fed
at the rate of 8-5 and 10 kg/head/day during stages
4 and 5 respectively. All treatments of NPN
supplementation were the same as in stages 1, 2
and 3.
Analysis of variance was used for determining
statistical differences.
RESULTS
Stage la. See Fig. 2 and Table 4.
During the 12-week observation period the con-
trol group maintained an average body weight of
about 313 kg/head, whereas all NPN-supple-
mented animals gained significantly more weight
than the control.
Animals in the high-biuret group (75 g/day)
gained body weight at a significantly (P < 0-01)
greater rate than the control. Body weights in the
urea and low-biuret groups were not significantly
different between themselves, but were greater
(P < 0-05) than the control and below (P < 0-05)
the high-biuret group.
Stage 16
The first stage was repeated approximately 2
months after completion of the first, with the only
difference an increase in energy intake. Each
animal was supplied daily with an additional
0-23 kg of dehydrated molasses. In this second test
the overall growth rate was slightly increased
but the general growth patterns and statistical
 Biuret and urea in cattle nutrition 363

Table 4. Body-weight changes (kg) in stage 1, trial a (12 weeks, condition score 7)
Mean initial Mean final Total actual Actual gain
Treatments body wt body wt Mean gain gain/head per head/week
1. Control 310 312 2» 0 0
2. Biuret, 75 g 305-5 330 24-5b 22-5 1-87
3. Biuret, 37-5 g 307 320-5 13-5° 11-5 0-96
4. Urea, 66 e 310 327-5 17-5" 15-5 1-29
b greater than a (P < 001).
c and d greater than a (P < 005).
b greater than c and d (P < 005).
c and d, not significantly different.

Table 5. Body-weight gain (kg) in stage 1, trials a and b*

Trial a Trial 6
Total actualf Actual gain Total actual Actual gain
Treatments gain/head per head/week gain/head per head/week
1. Control 0 0" 0
2. Biuret, 75 g 22-5" 1-87 240" 20
3. Biuret, 37-5 g 11-5C 0-96 120 c 10
4. Urea, 66 g 15-5" 1-29 15-5a 1-37
* Intake was increased by 0-23 kg of dry molasses per head/day above intake in trial a.
t The ' actual weight gain' represents total gain minus gain of controls.
b greater than a (P < 001).
b greater than c and d (P < 005).
c and d not significantly different.

differences remained similar to those in the first
experiment.
Table 5 shows the actual weight gain per treat-
ment in the two experiments of stage 1. Results
have been expressed as differences from the control
which was adjusted to zero gain. On actual body-
weight gain, the first stage showed that biuret was
about 30 % more effective than urea.
Stage 2. See Fig. 3.
The basal diet was fed as shown in Table 2. After
the end of stage 1, all animals were fed less of the
basal diet until the mean body weight was reduced
to about 275 kg. Their condition at the beginning
of stage 2 was medium to poor (score 5). The main
observation period continued for 11 weeks during
which the controls maintained a fairly constant
body weight of about 279 kg.
All NPN supplemented groups gained weight and
by the end of the trial period were significantly
above (P < 0-05) the control. There was no sig-
nificant difference between any of the NPN supple-
mented groups. The actual total average gain per
animal in each group, when the weight change of
the control was taken as zero, is shown in Table 6.
Considering the results on a supplementary nitrogen
unit basis, the weight gain on the high-biuret treat-
ment was by about 28 % higher than gains on the
isonitrogenous urea treatment. At that energy level
there was a tendency for the low-biuret level to
support the same or even higher weight gain than
the urea supplement.
The apparent response of animals to supple-
mentary NPN was reduced with the effected
reduction in total energy intake. Biuret at all levels
supported better growth than urea. The low-biuret
level was associated with weight gains equivalent
to those corresponding to twice the nitrogen
supplemented in the form of urea.
Stage 3. See Fig. 4.
Feeding levels are given in Table 2. Stage 3 com-
menced at an average live weight of about 245 kg,
and continued for 12 weeks. The animals were in
poor condition (score 3) and remained in the same
groups as in the two previous experiments.
Although trends were evident and the NPN
supplemented groups consistently maintained body
weights above the control, the recorded differences
between any of the four groups were not significant.
364 A. C. KONDOS AND B. MUTCH

300 -

290

280

270

260 -

I l l I i i i i .
1 0 1 7 9 11 13 15
Weeks
Fig. 3. Body-weight changes in each group in stage 2. %, Control; \ • , biuret 75 g;
x x , biuret 37-5 g; O - -Oi urea 66 g.

Table 6. Mean body weight and weight gain (kg) of animals in stage 2(11 weeks, condition score 5)
Mean body wt (kg)
Actual total Weekly
Initial Final rain gain/head gain/head
1. Control 2750 2760 la 0 0
2. Biuret, 75 g 276-5 295-5 19 b 18 1-63
3. Biuret, 37-5 g 2760 2910 15° 14 1-27
4. Urea 277-5 291-5 14" 13 1-18
a less than b, c and d (P < 0-05).
b, c and d not significantly different.

260

250

« 240

I
230
6 10 12
Weeks

Fig. 4. Body-weight change in each group in stage 3. • • , Control; t 9 , biuret 75 g;

x x , biuret 37-5 g; O O, urea 66 g.
 Biuret and urea in cattle nutrition 365

330 -

320

310.

300

Stage 5
290

>>
Stage 4
280

270

Diet change
260

250

240
10 12 14 16 18
Weeks
Fig. 5. Growth rate in production stages 4 and 5. # # , Control; # 9 , biuret 75 g;
X X , biuret 37'6; O O. urea 66 g. For details see production experiments under Procedure.

No definite growth response of animals to NPN
supplementation was recorded at the lowest level
of energy intake.
Stages 4 and 4. Production. See Fig. 5.
During these experiments, which continued for
20 weeks, all diets were gradually changed from low
maintenance to production as shown in Table 2
and the actual D.M. intake/head was 8-5 and 10 kg
for experimental stages 4 and 5 respectively.
During the 10 weeks of stage 4 of the production
phase, a weight gain rate of about 3-3 kg/head/
week was maintained. The control group remained
significantly (P < 0-05) below the NPN treat-
ments. In stage 5, body-weight changes in all NPN
supplemented groups behaved in a way similar to
stage 4, but no significant differences between
treatments were recorded. During this production
stage, growth was about 6-8 kg/head/week. The
experiment was terminated when animals reached
about 400 kg body weight.
DISCUSSION
When a basal diet low in nitrogen (5-58% CP)
and supplemented with constant amounts of biuret
or urea was fed to cattle at three levels of intake
(11-6, 8-9 and 6-7 Meal ME/head/day), the lowest
of which was sufficient to maintain a body weight
of 230 kg, it was found that biuret was utilized
significantly more efficiently than urea at the two
higher levels of energy intake. The differences in
weight changes were not significant when the total
energy intake was reduced to the lowest of the
three levels. This indicates that there is a critical
level of energy intake below which the efficiency of
dietary nitrogen utilization in the rumen is lowered
to the extent that the special properties of biuret
366 A. C. KONDOS AND B. MUTCH
offer no benefit to the animal. Under the conditions
of the present experiments this critical level
appeared to be between 6-7 and 8-9 Meal ME.
Meiske et al. (1955) have also reported a signifi-
cant increase in daily gains and feed conversion
efficiency in sheep fed a low-nitrogen ration supple-
mented with biuret, and Hatfield et al. (1959)
reported higher weight gains in lambs fed biuret
than urea. They also found a significantly higher
nitrogen balance in the biuret treatment.
The higher efficiency of biuret nitrogen utilization
in the above mentioned and present experiments
could be attributed to the use of biuret-adapted
animals and to the slower rate of ammonia release
from biuret (Dining et al. 1948; Repp, Hale & Wise
Burroughs, 1955), which under suitable nitrogen
and energy-intake conditions can be used more
efficiently by ruminal bacteria. The nutritional
value of biuret as NPN supplement in sheep and
cattle diets has also been demonstrated by other
workers (Berry et al. 1956; Campbell, Warner &
Looslie, 1960, and others), but the aspect of energy-
intake level below which non-protein nitrogen may
not be efficiently utilized by rumen bacteria, regard-
less of the form in which it enters the rumen, should
be carefully considered. Clemens & Johnson (1973)
found that the presence of a readily fermentable
carbohydrate in the diet of sheep facilitated the
utilization of biuret.
On the other hand, when similar diets were fed
at two production levels sufficient to promote 0-7
and 0-9 kg weight gain/head/day, no significant
differences in the efficiency of urea or biuret nitrogen
utilization were apparent except for a definite trend
in favour of biuret and particularly at the lowest
of the two feed intakes.
At these two rates of body-weight gain, the
quantity of nitrogen contributed by the basal diet
in relation to the total requirements of the animals
and the contribution and efficiency of utilization
of supplementary NPN sources are difficult to dis-
tinguish and accurately assess. None the less, at
the lower of the two production levels (stage 4), the
significantly lower weight gain of animals in the
control group, below the NPN supplemented
groups, indicated that the nitrogen intake of the
controls was limiting. In spite of this, no quantita-
tive differences in the growth promoting ability
between the two NPN compounds was recorded,
which leads to the conclusion that the form in
which the supplementary non-protein nitrogen was
given in these situations of high nitrogen intake
was of no importance. This became more obvious
when the difference in growth rate between treat-
ments was reduced to non-significant as intake
increased from one production level in stage 4 to
the higher level in stage 5.
Berry et al. (1956) have also reported that no
effect resulted from biuret fed to lambs maintained
on diets containing nitrogen in excess to their
requirements, a result similar to that obtained in
stages 4 and 5 of the present experiments. Hatfield
et al. (1959) used high feed-intake regimens in
lambs and found the highest average nitrogen
retention to be associated with animals supple-
mented with a biuret-urea mixture and not biuret
only.
With reference to situations where the perform-
ance of animals supplemented with urea was better
than others on biuret, insufficient rumen adaptation
to the utilization of biuret could have been respon-
sible for the lower performance of steers on biuret.
Reports of results from early investigations on the
nutritional value of biuret, especially before the
need for ruminal adaptation had been fully under-
stood, are rather disappointing due to insufficient
information given on the adaptation aspect (Berry
et al. 1956; Meiske et al. 1955; Belasco, 1954).
McLaren et al. (1959) and Clemens & Johnson
(19736) have also commented on the importance of
rumen adaptation in experiments where the nutri-
tional value of biuret was assessed. Campbell (1958)
indicated that nitrogen utilization in lambs was
improved when the preliminary feeding period was
prolonged beyond 10 days, which coincides with
the minimum period necessary for adaptation to
biuret (Kondos, 1975). This aspect has also been
confirmed by Clemens & Johnson (19736). In the
present experiments, a sufficient adaptation period
of 4 weeks was allowed.
The better growth response to the combination
of urea and biuret is a difficult phenomenon to
explain but it could be due to a two-stage effect:
(1) a more efficient utilization of urea-ammonia
during the rapid ammonia release soon after intake
when the readily available energy fraction of the
feed could also be released in the rumen encouraging
an increased bacterial activity, and (2) the slow
ammonia release of biuret during the rest of the
digestive period (Kondos, 1975) when it could bo
more efficiently utilized even under conditions of
relatively lower energy intake (Hatfield et al. 1959).
The results have shown that steers on mainten-
ance diets and well adapted to the hydrolysis of
biuret utilized this nitrogen source more efficiently
than urea when a sufficient level of energy intake
was allowed and the NPN source contributed
approximately half of the nitrogen requirements of
the animals. At no stage was urea better utilized
than biuret when low nitrogen-containing diets, fed
at maintenance or growth level, were supplemented
with these compounds. On the other hand, animals
on very low energy intake or high energy and
nitrogen intake did not show any significantly
different response to urea or biuret supplementation.
From an applied aspect, it has become clear that
 Biuret and urea in cattle nutrition
under conditions of low-nitrogen intake, biuret
nitrogen can generally be more efficiently utilized
than urea.
The authors wish to express their appreciation
to Dow Chemical Company of Australia for the
REFERENCES
ANDERSON, G. C , MCLAKEN, G. A., CAMPBELL, 0. D.
& SMITH, G. S. (1959). Comparative effects of urea,
uramite, biuret, soybean and creatine on digestion
and iV-metabolism in lambs. Journal of Animal
Science 18, 134-40.
BELASCO, I. J. (1954). New nitrogen compounds for
ruminants: a laboratory evaluation. Journal of
Animal Science 13, 601-10.
BEBBY, T. J B . , RIQGS, J. K. <fc KUNKEL, H. O. (1956).
The lack of toxicity of biuret to animals. Journal of
Animal Science 15, 225-33.
CAMPBELL, C. D. (1958). Ph.D. Thesis, West Virginia
University, Morgantown, West Virginia, U.S.A.
CAMPBELL, T. C , WARNER, R. G. & LOOSLI, J. K.
(1960). Urea and biuret for ruminants. Proceedings,
Cornell Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers,
pp. 96-103. JOHNSON, R. R. & CLEMENS, E. T. (1973). Adaptation
CHALPUA, W. (1972). The use of biuret as feed additive.
Federation Proceedings, American Society Experi-
mental Biology 31,1152-9.
CLARK, R. E., BABATT, E. L. & KELLERMAN, J. E.
(1965). A comparison between N-retention from urea,
biuret, triuret and cyanuric acid by sheep on a low
protein roughage diet. Journal of the South African
Veterinary Medical Association 36, 79-80.
CLEMENS, E. T. & JOHNSON, R. R. (1973a). Biureto-
lytic activity of rumen microorganisms as influenced
by the frequency of feeding biuret supplement.
Journal of Animal Science 37, 1027-33.
CLEMENS, E. T. & JOHNSON, R. R. (19736). Influence
of dietary nitrogen source, concentrate level and
biuret level in sheep on the adaptation of rumen
microorganisms to biuret as a non-protein nitrogen
source. Journal of Nutrition 103, 1406-13.
DINNING, J. S., BBIGGS, H. M., GALLUP, W. D., OBB,
H. W. & BUTLER, R. (1948). Effect of orally admini-
stered urea on the ammonia and urea concentration
in the blood of cattle and sheep. American Journal of
Physiology 153, 41-8.
EWAN, R. C , HATFIELD, E. E. & GAREIGUS, U . S .
(1958). The effect of certain inoculations on the
utilization of urea or biuret by growing lambs.
Journal of Animal Science 17, 298-303.
GALLUP, W. D., POPE, L. S. & WHITEHAIR, C. K. (1953).
Hydrolysis of biuret in the rumen and toxicity risks.
Oklahoma Experimental Station Bulletin B-409, 35-41.
GlLCHRIST, F . M., POTGIETER, C. E . & VOSS, J . B . N .
(1968). The biuretolytic activity of the ruminal flora HOEFEB, J. A. (1955). The utilization of urea and
of sheep fed practical rations containing biuret.
Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 70, 157- lambs. Journal of Animal Science 14, 941-6.
63.
HATFIELD, E. E., GARBIGUS, U. S., FORBES, R. M.,
NEUMANN, A. L. & GAITHEB, W. (1959). Biuret as a
source of NPN for ruminants. Journal of Animal
Science IS, 1208-19.
367
financial support of these investigations, to the
Council of the Queensland Agricultural College for
making available the necessary research facilities,
and to Mr T. Chen for his valuable technical
assistance.
HENDEBICK, H. K. (1967). Urea As a Protein Supple-
ment (ed. M. H. Briggs). Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd.
HUTCHINSON, H. H. (1966a). Unpublished report.
Moorman Manufacturing Co., Quincy, Illinois.
Exhibit no. 104, Dow Chemicals Ltd-Kedlor 230,
vol. in.
HUTCHINSON, H. H. (19666). Urea V biuret as palat-
ability factor in grain mixtures. Exhibit no. 104, Dow
Chemicals Ltd., Kedlor 230, vol. in.
HUTCHINSON, H. H. (1966 C). Artificial rumen investiga-
tion. Exhibit no. 105, Dow Chemicals Ltd., Kedlor
230, vol. in.
IWATA, H . , KOBAYASHI, K., SATO, Y. & WATOMABA, Y .
(1959). Effects of biuret and heated urea on farm
animals. Kyushu University Faculty Agricultural
Science, Bulletin 17, 69-76.
of rumen microorganisms to biuret as an NPN supple-
ment to low quality roughage rations for cattle and
sheep. Journal of Nutrition 103, 494-502.
JOHNSON, R. R. & MCCLTJRE, K. E. (1963). In vitro and
in vivo studies on the adaptation of sheep to biuret.
Journal of Animal Science 22, 1123.
JOHNSON, R. R. & MCCLUBE, K. E. (1964). In vitro and
in vivo comparisons on the utilization of urea, biuret
and diammonium phosphate by sheep. Journal of
Animal Science 23, 208-13.
KABR, M. R., GARRIGUS, V. S., HATFIELD, E. E. &
NORTON, H. W. (1965). Factors affecting the utiliza-
tion of nitrogen from different sources by lambs.
Journal of Animal Science 24, 459-68.
KLETT, R. H. (1972). Report on the value of non protein
nitrogen for ruminants consuming poor quality
herbage. FAO Publication, Kampala. 1971.
KONDOS, A. C. (1975). Studies on the adaptation of the
rumen to the hydrolysis of biuret in cattle. Journal
of Agricultural Science, Cambridge (in the Press).
MACKENZIE, H. A. & WALLACE, H. S. (1954). The
Kjeldahl determination of nitrogen: a critical study
of digestion conditions. Australian Journal of
Chemistry 7, 55-70.
MCLAREN, G. A., ANDERSON, G. C , WELSH, J. A.,
CAMPBELL, C. S. & SMITH, G. S. (1959). Diethyl sil-
bestral and length of preliminary period in the
utilization of crude biuret and urea by lambs: I.
Journal of Animal Science 18, 1319-26.
MEISKE, J. C , VAN AESDELL, W. J., LUECKE, R. W. &
biuret as sources of nitrogen for growing fattening
MIES, W. L., THOMAS, O. O. & NEWMAN, C. W. (1967).
An evaluation of biuret as a source of protein in
mustering and fattening rations for beef cattle. Pro-
ceedings, West Sector American Society of Animal
Science 18, 159-68.
368 A. C. KONDOS AND B. MUTCH
PALM, B. W. & IOSET, R. M. (1966). Feeding various
. levels of urea and biuret in range pellets. Exhibit no.
212, Dow Chemicals Ltd., Kedlor 230, vol. iv.
RALEIGH, R. J. & TURNER, H. A. (1968). Biuret and
urea in range cattle supplements. Proceedings, West
Sector American Society of Animal Science 19, 301-6.
RALEIGH, R. J. & WALLACE, J. C. (19&3). Effect of
supplementation on intake of grazing animals. Pro-
ceedings, West Sector American Society of Animal
Science 14, 37-44.
R E P P , W. W., HALE, W. H., CHENG, E. W. & WISE
BtTRBOtTGHS (1955). The influence of oral administra-
tion on non protein nitrogen feeding compounds upon
blood ammonia and urea in lambs. Journal of Animal
Science 14, 118-31.
R E P P , W. W., HALE, W. H. & WISE BURROUGHS (1955).
The value of several non-protein nitrogen-compounds
on protein substitutes in lamb fattening rations.'
Journal of Animal Science 14, 901.
SCHAADT, H. J R . , JOHNSON, R. R. & MCCLTOE, K. E.
(1966). Adaptation to and adaptability of urea,
biuret and di-ammonium phosphate as NPN sources
for ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 25, 73-7.
SCHRODER, H. H. E. & GILCHRIST, F. M. (1969).
Adaptation of the ovine ruminal flora to biuret.
Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 72, 1-11.
TOLLETT, J. T., POWERS, D. R., FLETCHER, D. R. &
RACHTOTEK, B. L. (1966). Biuret, non protein nitrogen
supplement for wintering beef cattle. Exhibit no. 205,
Dow Chemicals Ltd., Kedlor 230, vol. iv.
TOLLETT, J. T., SWART, R. W., IOSET, R. M. & TEM-
PLETON, J. A. (1969). Biuret as a source of nitrogen
for wintering steers. Proceedings, West Sector American
Society of Animal Science 20, 325-30.