Use of two sources of urea in the diet of crossbred lambs finished under a semi-intensive system

Authors

  • Sarita Bongurio Gallo Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Faculdade de Zootecnia e Engenharia de Alimentos (FZEA), Departamento de Zootecnia, Pirassununga, SP
  • Eduardo Crespi Alves Pereira Faculdades Associadas de Uberaba (FAZU), Uberaba, MG
  • Vivane Aparecida Amin Reis Universidade Federal de Lavras (UFLA), Lavras, MG

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17523/bia.v72n1p8

Keywords:

Dorper, encapsulated urea, meat quality, Texel, weight gain.

Abstract

This study compared the effect of genetic group and diet containing two sources of urea on the performance, carcass and meat traits of lambs. The experiment was conducted at FAZU, Uberaba, MG. Twelve crossbred Dorper and 12 crossbred Texel lambs, obtained by the crossing of Santa Inês ewes with pure rams of each breed, were divided into two groups and maintained on Ãries paddocks (Panicum maximum cv. Ãries). The animals received concentrate containing ureia or encapsulated urea ad libitum. A completely randomized factorial design was used, in which the two sources of non-protein nitrogen and the two genetic groups (Dorper or Texel crossbreds) were evaluated. Means were compared by the Tukey test at a probability level of 5%. The treatments did not influence daily weight gain (0.256 kg/day). The use of encapsulated urea increased hot and cold carcass yield when compared to the diet containing urea. Cooling losses were lower for Texel crossbreds (3.87%) compared to Dorper crossbreds (6.88%). Fat thickness (1.81 mm), conformation (2.98), L value (36.77), a* value (6.04), b* value (6.73), or shear strength (5.68 kgf) was not altered by the treatments applied. Encapsulated urea provided a higher carcass yield and lower cooling losses. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2015-01-31

Issue

Section

ANIMAL NUTRITION

How to Cite

Use of two sources of urea in the diet of crossbred lambs finished under a semi-intensive system. (2015). Bulletin of Animal Husbandry, 72(1), 8-13. https://doi.org/10.17523/bia.v72n1p8

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 > >>