See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/51463217

Effects of restricted feed intake on heat energy by different goat breeds

Article in Journal of Animal Science · July 2011

DOI: 10.2527/jas.2011-3907 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

11 52

6 authors, including:

Richard Puchala Terry Gipson

Langston University Langston University
152 PUBLICATIONS 1,999 CITATIONS 98 PUBLICATIONS 909 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Arthur Goetsch
Langston University
301 PUBLICATIONS 4,456 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Enhancing Wellbeing and Productivity of Dairy Goats Using Smart Technology View project

Genome-Wide Association Analysis for the identification of Alpine Goats with High Milk Production View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Terry Gipson on 29 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Published December 4, 2014

Effects of restricted feed intake on heat energy

by different goat breeds1
A. Helal,*† R. Puchala,* G. D. Detweiler, T. A. Gipson,* T. Sahlu,* and A. L. Goetsch*2

*American Institute for Goat Research, Langston University, Langston, OK 73050;

and †Animal and Poultry Nutrition Department, Desert Research Center, Cairo, Egypt

ABSTRACT: Sixteen Boer goat doelings, 16 Spanish
doelings, and 8 Angora doelings and 8 wethers, 283,
316, and 330 d of age initially (SEM = 5.0), respective-
ly, were used to evaluate effects of nutrient restriction
on heat energy (HE). During the first and second 10-wk
phases, 8 animals of each breed were fed a 50% concen-
trate pelletized diet at a level adequate for maintenance
and moderate energy accretion (CONT). Other animals
were fed approximately 50% of these amounts in phase
1 relative to initial BW, followed by the greater level of
feeding in phase 2 based on initial or actual BW when
greater (REST). Average daily gain was 43, −20, 16,
−78, 8, and −48 g in phase 1 (SEM = 5.0) and 26, 44,
50, 65, 27, and 32 g in phase 2 (SEM = 3.5) for An-
gora-CONT, Angora-REST, Boer-CONT, Boer-REST,
Spanish-CONT, and Spanish-REST, respectively. Total
HE was greater for CONT vs. REST in both phases
(P < 0.001), greater in phase 1 for Angora than for
Boer (P < 0.01) and Spanish (P < 0.01), and greatest
(P < 0.01) in phase 2 among breeds for Angora [481,
347, 430, 356, 424, and 338 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day in
phase 1 (SEM = 11.1), and 494, 479, 445, 397, 444, and
406 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day in phase 2 (SEM = 11.3)
for Angora-CONT, Angora-REST, Boer-CONT, Boer-
REST, Spanish-CONT, and Spanish-REST, respective-
Key words: energy, feed intake, goat
ly]. Equations describing the temporal pattern of HE
(kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day), expressed as a percentage of
the wk-0 value and corrected for corresponding breed
× week CONT means, in phase 1 were 95.8 ± 2.43 –
(8.18 ± 1.144 × week) + (0.655 ± 0.1098 × week2) for
Angora (R2 = 0.58), 95.3 ± 2.63 – (4.34 ± 1.237 × wk)
+ (0.271 ± 0.1187 × wk2) for Boer (R2 = 0.41), and
97.4 ± 2.21 − (4.69 ± 1.068 × wk) + (0.282 ± 0.1021
× wk2) for Spanish (R2 = 0.53). Phase 2 equations were
78.9 ± 2.22 + (8.74 ± 1.036 × wk) − (0.608 ± 0.0095
× wk2) for Angora (R2 = 0.60), 77.5 ± 2.10 + (3.30 ±
0.978 × wk) − (0.153 ± 0.0942 × wk2) for Boer (R2 =
0.39), and 80.6 ± 2.50 + (4.50 ± 1.165 × wk) − (0.208
± 0.1122 × wk2) for Spanish (R2 = 0.43). These equa-
tions indicate that changes in HE in response to nutri-
ent restriction and realimentation were more rapid and
of greater magnitude in Angora vs. Boer and Spanish.
The temporal pattern of decline in HE by Boer and
Spanish during restriction was similar, but the subse-
quent rise with realimentation was slower and smaller
for Boer. In conclusion, most appropriate methods of
predicting change in the maintenance energy require-
ment during and after periods of limited feed intake
may differ among breeds of goats.

©2011 American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. J. Anim. Sci. 2011. 89:4175–4187
doi:10.2527/jas.2011-3907

INTRODUCTION liver account for an appreciable portion (Freetly et al.,

One of the most widely acknowledged effectors of the
ME requirement for maintenance (MEm) is level of feed
intake. At levels of intake below MEm, fasting heat pro-
duction or energy (HE) is reduced because of decreased
basal metabolic rate, for which the digestive tract and
1
This experiment was supported by Project No. BIO12-001-016
of the US-Egypt Joint Science and Technology Fund Program and
USDA Project No. 2005-38814-16353.
2
Corresponding author: goetsch@luresext.edu
Received January 24, 2011.
Accepted June 23, 2011.
1995; Wester et al., 1995; Sainz and Bentley, 1997).
Effects of level of intake on MEm of goats were not
addressed by NRC (1981), AFRC (1998), or Drochner
et al. (2003). Based on a literature review, NRC (2000)
suggested up to a 20% decrease in MEm of beef cattle
during and after a low plane of nutrition, with impact
for 2 to 3 mo after the change to a greater plane of nu-
trition. A convenient means of assessing the severity of
a low nutritional plane is BCS, although it is recognized
that the accuracy of using BCS is greatest when the
BCS is static rather than changing. The NRC (2000)
proposed a 5% decrease in MEm of beef cattle for each
BCS unit less than 5 (1 to 9 scale), resulting in a 20%

4175
4176 Helal et al.

smaller value for a BCS of 1. Sahlu et al. (2004) pro-
posed that the MEm of goats be adjusted similarly for
decreased BCS, with smaller adjustments applied with
advancing time (i.e., linear). The NRC (2007) subse-
quently recommended this method for goats.
The NRC (2007) adjustment of MEm for low planes
of nutrition was not based on actual data with goats
and has not been evaluated. There are reports sug-
gesting that reductions of MEm might be greater than
20% depending on severity of restriction in ME intake
(Brosh et al., 1986; Silanikove, 1986, 1987; Choshniak
et al., 1995; Asmare et al., 2006). However, there have
not been meaningful comparisons of goat breeds, and
linearity of change in MEm during realimentation has
not been evaluated. Hence, the objectives of this exper-
iment were to determine effects of restricted feed intake
on HE by Angora, Boer, and Spanish goats during and
after limited feed intake.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The protocol for the experiment was approved by the
Langston University Animal Care Committee.
Animals and Treatments
quirement for ADG was 23.1 and 19.8 kJ/g of ADG for
Boer and Spanish, with ADG targets of 25 and 17.5 g,
respectively. Requirements for tissue and clean mohair
fiber growth were 37.2 and 157 kJ/g, respectively, and
anticipated tissue and clean mohair fiber growth for
Angora were 12.5 and 7.5 g/d, respectively. However,
ADG of CONT animals was less than expected, result-
ing in increased feeding in wk 6 to 10 (i.e., to support
50 and 35 g of ADG for Boer and Spanish and 20 and 5
g/d of tissue and clean mohair fiber growth for Angora,
respectively). When BW did not markedly increase or
declined, the amount of feed offered was not changed.
With increasing BW in wk 6 to 8 for CONT animals,
feed amounts were increased slightly in wk 9 and 10.
The same feeding rates were employed in phase 2 for
the CONT treatment, with amounts offered increasing
as BW rose. These rates were used for the REST treat-
ment in phase 2, except that only a partial increase
was imposed in wk 11 to avoid potential digestive upset
and feeding continued to be based on initial BW when
greater than actual BW. A 50% concentrate pelleted
diet (Table 1) was used, with a ME concentration of
9.4 MJ/kg of DM used, as determined by Ngwa et al.
(2007a). During a 4-wk preliminary period, this same
diet was fed at the CONT level.

Forty-eight yearling goats were used. Sixteen animals Measurements

were Boer doelings, 16 were Spanish doelings, and there
were 8 Angora doelings and 8 wethers. Initial age was Two weeks before the experiment began, fiber was
283, 316, and 330 d for Angora, Boer, and Spanish, clipped from a defined 10 × 10 cm mid-side patch area
respectively (SEM = 5.0). Angora doelings and weth- and the whole body of all animals. The patch area was
ers were used, rather than only doelings, because of a again shorn at the end of wk 12 and at 2 wk after
limited number of animals of different sexes available.
Sahlu et al. (2004) and NRC (2007) recommended simi-
lar nutrient requirements for doelings and wethers. Ani- Table 1. Ingredient and chemical composition of the
mals of each breed were allocated to 2 dietary or levels diet
of feed intake treatments for similar BW and variation
in BW within breed × treatment groupings, with 4 Item Concentration
Angora of each sex assigned to the 2 intake treatments. Ingredient, % as fed
At most times animals were housed in individual 1.05 Dehydrated alfalfa 19.98
× 0.55 m elevated pens with plastic-coated expanded Cottonseed hulls 29.07
metal floors. Cottonseed meal 15.99
The experiment was 20 wk in length, divided into Ground corn 15.99
Wheat middlings 9.99
two 10-wk phases. In the first phase, 1 dietary treat- Pelletizing agent 5.00
ment was a level of feeding to meet MEm and mod- Trace mineralized salt1 0.50
erate rates of BW gain (Boer and Spanish) or tissue Salt 0.50
and clean mohair fiber growth by Angora, designated Yeast 1.00
as the control (CONT) treatment. The other dietary Calcium carbonate 0.95
Ammonium chloride 1.00
treatment was feeding approximately 50% of these Vitamin A premix2 0.02
quantities on a BW basis, termed the restricted treat- Rumensin 80 premix3 0.01
ment (REST). Feed allowances were based on require- Chemical constituent
ment recommendations of Sahlu et al. (2004) and NRC DM, % 91.2
(2007). The MEm requirement for Boer and Spanish Ash, % of DM 8.1
CP, % of DM 18.2
used was 391 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day and that for An- NDF, % of DM 41.2
gora was 473 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day. The requirement GE, MJ/kg of DM 18.4
for Boer and Spanish was based on the estimate of 423 1
Contained 95 to 98% NaCl and at least 0.24% Mn, 0.24% Fe, 0.05%
kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day for mature animals of Sahlu Mg, 0.032% Cu, 0.011% Co, 0.007% I, and 0.005% Zn.
et al. (2004), decreased by 7.5% for use of wethers and 2
Contained 66,200 IU/kg.
doelings rather than intact males. The assumed ME re- 3
17.6% monensin (Elanco, Greenfield, IN).
 Restricted intake for different goat breeds
the experiment ended at wk 20. Shearing was at these
times rather than before the experiment and the end of
wk 10 and 20 in regard to time required from produc-
tion of fiber to that when the skin level is reached for
removal (Downes and Sharry, 1971; Reis and Tunks,
1976; Nagorcka, 1977). The mid-side patch mohair
samples were used to determine clean yield (ASTM,
1988) and fiber diameter with a Peyer FDA 200 system
(Peyer, Wallerau, Switzerland). The ratio of patch to
whole body fiber was used to estimate growth during
phases 1 and 2. Also, during the 4-wk preliminary pe-
riod and in the 4 wk after the experiment, animals were
placed in metabolism crates fitted with head-boxes in a
calorimetry room for 2-d periods, with 1 d for adapta-
tion and 1 d for gas exchange measurement, as subse-
quently described. Both HE and heart rate (HR) were
measured simultaneously. The CONT level of feeding
was imposed during these periods.
The calorimetry system and its usage were described
previously by Tovar-Luna et al. (2007a). Heat energy
was estimated based on the Brouwer (1965) equation
from O2 consumption and CO2 and CH4 production.
Human S610 HR (Polar, Lake Success, NY) monitors
with infrared connections to the transmitters were used
to collect HR data at a 1-min interval. Heart rate data
were analyzed using Polar Precision Performance SW
software provided by Polar.
Body weight and BCS (Ngwa et al., 2007b) were de-
termined in the preliminary period and weekly. Heart
rate was estimated for 24-h periods near the end of wk
0 (final segment of preliminary period), 2, 4, 6, 8, 10,
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20. Heat energy
was determined from the average of the HE:HR ratio
for each animal before and after the experiment. Feed
intake, dietary concentrate, and HR, as influenced by
level of exercise, have had little to no effect on the ratio
of HE:HR in goats (Berhan et al., 2006; Puchala et al.,
2007, 2009). However, studies of Puchala et al. (2007,
2009) did not entail comparison of a maintenance level
of feed intake and fasting after long periods of feeding.
However, Puchala et al. (2009) did note similar HE:HR
for growing crossbred Boer and Spanish wethers (19
kg of BW) with ad libitum consumption for 4 wk of a
65% concentrate diet or coarsely ground alfalfa hay diet
even though there was a 38% difference in MEI (i.e.,
7.6 vs. 5.5 MJ/d; Tovar-Luna et al., 2007b). Further-
more, O2 consumption per heartbeat (corresponding to
HE:HR in the present experiment) by Bedouin goats in
shade or with direct solar radiation and 40, 55, or 100%
of ad libitum intake was similar among treatments ex-
cept for 40% of ad libitum intake with solar radiation
(Shargal et al., 2001, as cited by Brosh, 2007).
The diet was sampled weekly. Except for a small
number of instances, there were no feed refusals. Feed
was analyzed for DM, ash, N, GE (AOAC, 1990), and
NDF (filter bag technique; Ankom Technology Corp.,
Fairport, NY).
4177
Calculations
Expressions relative to BW0.75 were based on the
average of BW determined at the beginning and end
of the week of measurement. Recovered energy (RE)
was calculated from the difference between ME intake
(MEI) and HE. Average daily gain was estimated by
regression (i.e., BW against time) for individual ani-
mals separately in phases 1 and 2. Average daily gain
was used to estimate energy use in tissue accretion in
conjunction with clean mohair fiber growth for Angora
goats. The amount of ME required for ADG (MEt) by
Boer and Spanish goats was calculated from ADG and
that for Angora goats from tissue mass change deter-
mined from ADG and unwashed mohair fiber growth,
with an energy concentration in tissue gained of 6.4
MJ/kg (Ngwa et al., 2009). This value was derived
from data of growing Boer and Spanish wether goats
fed a hay-based diet for 98 d with an ADG of 44 and 50
g for Boer and Spanish, respectively. Recovered energy
of tissue gain (REt) and the associated HE (HEt) were
determined assuming an efficiency of ME utilization for
tissue accretion of 40.4% from the equation of AFRC
(1998) of (0.78 × metabolizability in %, 51.0) + 0.6.
Energy recovered in clean mohair fiber (REf) and HE
associated with clean mohair fiber growth (HEf) were
determined assuming an efficiency of dietary ME use
for fiber gain of 15% (Luo et al., 2004). Energy use in
fiber growth by Boer and Spanish goats was not con-
sidered because NRC (2007) requirements for ADG by
goats other than Angora encompass fiber growth.
If RE or RE plus REf was negative, it was assumed
that tissue energy was mobilized and used for MEm.
Total HE associated with maintenance (HEm or MEm)
was estimated as the difference between total HE and
the sum of HE associated with tissue and clean mohair
fiber gain. Mobilized tissue energy used for mainte-
nance (HEmt) was subtracted from total HEm to derive
dietary ME used for maintenance (HEmd).
To evaluate change in HE for animals on the REST
treatment with advancing time during each phase, val-
ues for each animal on both treatments were expressed
as a percentage of HE in wk 0. This was done on a ba-
sis similar to that used by NRC (2007). That is, NRC
(2007) recommended an adjustment of MEm based on
percentages. For example, the maximal decrease in
MEm proposed for a severe nutrition restriction as re-
flected by very low BCS was 20%. Values for individ-
ual animals on the REST treatment were adjusted for
corresponding CONT treatment breed × week means.
This adjustment was made to account for possible ef-
fects of factors such as variability in environmental or
experimental procedures, assuming similar effects on
HE of CONT and REST animals. Resultant variables
were abbreviated as HE%CH for megajoules per day
and HEMBW%CH for kilojoules per kilogram of
BW0.75 per day.
4178 Helal et al.
Statistical Analyses
Estimates of HE:HR determined before and after the
experiment were analyzed by the MIXED procedure
(SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC; Littell et al., 1996) with a
model consisting of breed, intake treatment, breed ×
intake treatment, time (repeated measure), interactions
involving time, and animal (random). Neither the effect
of time nor interactions with time were significant for
HE:HR (P > 0.10); hence, the average value for each
animal was used to estimate HE during the experiment.
Nonetheless, breed × intake treatment means for the 2
times of measurement are shown in tabular form. Data
in the two 10-wk phases were analyzed separately with
the GLM procedure of SAS, with a model containing
breed, intake treatment, and breed × intake treatment.
The model for variables pertaining to mohair fiber
growth contained only intake treatment. Means were
separated by LSD with a protected F-test (P < 0.05).
A probability between 0.05 and 0.10 was viewed as in-
dicative of a trend or tendency for a difference. Repeat-
ed measures during the experiment were also analyzed
with a MIXED model as noted above, with week of the
entire experiment used as the repeated measure regard-
less of phase. Means are presented in tables for breed
× intake treatment regardless of the significance (P <
0.05) of the interaction effect. Figures describe signifi-
cant (P < 0.05) interactions between time and breed,
intake treatment, and breed × intake treatment. Al-
though for BW and BCS, breed × intake treatment ×
week means are shown despite only a significant (P <
0.05) interaction between breed and intake treatment.
Regression analyses for total HE were conducted with
the GLM procedure of SAS.
RESULTS
BW and ADG
Initial BW ranked Boer > Spanish (P = 0.01) > An-
gora (P < 0.001; Table 2). The ranking was the same at
the end of phases 1 and 2, although at the end of phase
1 the difference between Boer and Spanish only tended
(P < 0.07) to be significant. The only interaction in
BW involving week was with intake treatment (P <
0.01; Figure 1, panel A). As expected, BW of CONT
increased slightly as the experiment advanced. Con-
versely, REST BW declined from wk 0 to 8, changed
little from wk 8 to 12, and then increased steadily with
advancing time until the end of the experiment. The
difference in BW between CONT and REST remained
fairly steady from wk 7 to 20.
Tissue growth in phase 1 for CONT was greater for
Angora than for Boer (P < 0.01) and Spanish (P <
0.01; Table 2). Likewise, for REST in phase 1, tissue
loss ranked Boer > Spanish > Angora (P < 0.01). The
interaction in phase 2 tissue growth between breed and
intake treatment was not significant; however, tissue
gain was greatest among breeds for Boer (P < 0.01)
and greater for REST vs. CONT (P < 0.01).
BCS
Initial BCS was less for Angora than for Boer and
Spanish (P < 0.01; Table 2). There were interactions
between breed and intake treatment in BCS at the end
of phases 1 (P = 0.05) and 2 (P < 0.01). These in-
teractions were caused by a difference between intake
treatments of lesser magnitude for Angora vs. Boer and
Spanish at the end of phase 1 and similar values for
Angora on both intake treatments at the end of phase
2 compared with reduced values for REST vs. CONT
at the end of phase 2 for Boer and Spanish. In phase 1,
BCS decreased less for Angora than for Boer and Span-
ish (P < 0.01) and decreased considerably for REST
relative to little change for CONT (P < 0.01). The only
significant effect in BCS change during phase 2 was
an increase for REST compared with little change for
CONT (P < 0.01).
As for BW, there was an interaction (P < 0.01) be-
tween intake treatment and week in BCS (Figure 1,
panel B). The pattern of change in BCS with advancing
time was slightly different than in BW. With CONT,
BCS decreased slightly from wk 0 to 3 then increased
from wk 7 to 12, with little change from initial phase
values in wk 3 to 7 and 12 to 20. With REST, BCS de-
creased markedly from wk 0 to 6 and increased slightly
from wk 12 to 14 and wk 16 to 20. In slight contrast to
BW, the difference between CONT and REST in BCS
was slightly less in wk 14 to 20 than in wk 7 to 12.
DMI
Intake of DM in grams per day during phase 1 dif-
fered among breeds and between intake treatments as
designed (Table 2). Dry matter intake (g/d) during
phase 2 remained less (P < 0.01) for REST vs. CONT.
Fiber
Unwashed fiber growth during phase 1 was greatest
among breeds (P < 0.01) for Angora and greater for
CONT than for REST (P < 0.01; Table 2). Conversely,
there was an interaction (P = 0.04) between breed and
treatment in unwashed fiber growth during phase 2;
values were similar between intake treatments for Boer
and Spanish but were greater for Angora for CONT
vs. REST (P < 0.01). Clean mohair fiber growth for
Angora was greater for CONT than for REST in phase
1 (P = 0.08) and 2 (P = 0.02). Fiber yield was quite
variable in phase 1 relative to phase 2, resulting in a
difference (P = 0.03) only between intake treatments.
There was an interaction (P = 0.03) between breed
and intake treatment in phase 2 fiber yield, although
the primary difference was in decreased values for Boer
and Spanish compared with Angora. Fiber diameter
was slightly less (P < 0.01) for Angora and Spanish
than for Boer in phase 1, but in phase 2 diameter was
much less for Angora than for the 2 meat goat breeds
(P < 0.01; Table 2). This was because of little effect of
Table 2. Effects of feed intake restriction on DMI, ADG, tissue gain, mohair fiber growth, and change in BCS in Angora, Boer, and Spanish goats
P-value1 Angora Boer Spanish

Item Trt Brd Int Phase CONT REST CONT REST CONT REST SEM Breed2

BW, kg
Initial, wk 0 0.92 <0.01 0.89 13.7 13.9 21.4 21.5 19.5 19.0 0.82 Angora < Spanish < Boer
End of phase 1 <0.01 <0.01 0.34 16.5 12.8 22.7 16.9 20.1 16.4 0.78 Angora < Boer, Spanish
End of phase 2 <0.01 <0.01 0.39 18.6 15.9 26.5 21.3 22.5 18.8 0.86 Angora < Spanish < Boer
BCS3
Initial, wk 0 0.57 <0.01 0.50 2.66 2.71 3.12 3.05 3.07 3.02 0.055 Angora < Boer, Spanish
End of phase 1 <0.01 0.79 0.05 2.78b 2.25a 3.16c 2.04a 3.03bc 2.04a 0.119
End of phase 2 <0.01 0.12 <0.01 2.66a 2.50a 3.22b 2.39a 3.16b 2.39a 0.115
DMI, g/d <0.01 <0.01 0.17 1 476 234 514 259 441 219 8.9 Spanish < Angora < Boer
<0.01 <0.01 0.62 2 505 435 581 497 486 426 12.2 Angora, Spanish < Boer
ADG, g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1 43e −20c 16d −76a 8d −48b 5.0
<0.01 <0.01 0.15 2 26 44 50 65 27 32 3.5 Angora, Spanish < Boer
BCS change <0.01 <0.01 0.07 1 0.12 −0.46 0.03 −1.01 −0.04 −0.97 0.103 Boer, Spanish < Angora
<0.01 0.12 0.67 2 −0.13 0.25 0.06 0.36 0.13 0.34 0.088
<0.01 0.14 <0.01 1–2 −0.01bc −0.21b 0.10c −0.66c 0.09c −0.63a 0.095
Tissue gain, g/d <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1 33.1e −27.7c 12.9d −77.7a 4.1d −50.4b 4.99
<0.01 <0.01 0.11 2 17.7 37.2 48.1 63.8 24.9 29.8 3.50 Angora, Spanish < Boer
Unwashed fiber growth, g/d <0.01 <0.01 0.67 1 9.6 7.7 3.0 2.0 3.6 2.3 0.50 Boer, Spanish < Angora
<0.01 <0.01 0.04 2 8.2c 6.5b 2.2a 1.7a 2.5a 2.3a 0.31
Clean mohair growth, g/d 0.08 1 6.70 5.33 0.513
0.02 2 6.63b 5.37a 0.350
Restricted intake for different goat breeds

Mid-side patch fiber yield, % 0.03 0.61 0.28 1 70.1 69.3 73.1 57.0 72.4 63.9 4.69
0.21 <0.01 0.03 2 80.6a 82.8a 91.6bc 89.7b 93.5c 90.6b 1.00
Fiber diameter, µm <0.01 <0.01 0.30 1 24.3 22.4 27.5 26.3 25.1 21.5 0.78 Angora, Spanish < Boer
0.21 <0.01 0.36 2 26.2 23.6 36.5 37.6 36.7 32.5 1.85 Angora < Boer, Spanish
a–e
Means in a row without a common superscript letter differ (P < 0.05).
1
Trt = treatment (CONT = intake for moderate energy accretion in 10-wk phases 1 and 2; REST = 50% of CONT intake in phase 1 relative to initial BW, followed by the greater level of feeding
in phase 2 based on initial or actual BW when greater); Brd = breed; Int = interaction between treatment and breed.
2
< indicates P < 0.05 for breed main effect means when the interaction was nonsignificant (P > 0.05).
3
Scores: 1 to 5, with 1 and 5 = extremely thin and obese, respectively.
4179
4180
Figure 1. Effects of feed intake restriction on BW (panel A) and
BCS (1 and 5 = extremely thin and obese, respectively; panel B) of
Angora, Boer, and Spanish goats. CONT = intake for moderate en-
ergy accretion in 10-wk phases 1 and 2; REST = 50% of CONT intake
in phase 1 relative to initial BW, followed by the greater level of feed-
ing in phase 2 based on initial or actual BW when greater.
phase on diameter of Angora fiber and much greater
values for Boer and Spanish in phase 2 vs. 1.
Energy Use
HE:HR and MEI. The ratio of HE:HR was not af-
fected by intake treatment but was greater (P < 0.001)
for Boer and Spanish than for Angora (Table 3). Differ-
ences among breeds and between intake treatments in
MEI in megajoules per day were the same as those in
DMI because of the constant assumed dietary ME con-
centration. During phase 2, MEI in kJ/kg of BW0.75 per
day ranked (P < 0.01) Angora > Boer > Spanish and
was slightly greater for REST vs. CONT (P = 0.02).
Total HE. During phase 1, total HE in MJ/d ranked
Boer > Spanish (P = 0.02) > Angora (P = 0.01) and
was greater for CONT vs. REST (P < 0.01; Table 3).
Total HE (MJ/d) was likewise greater for CONT than
for REST (P < 0.01) during phase 2. There was an in-
teraction in total HE (MJ/d) between week and intake
treatment (P < 0.01; Figure 2, panel A). For CONT
animals, total HE (MJ/d) was fairly constant during
phase 1, but increased slightly as week advanced in
phase 2. Total HE (MJ/d) for REST during phase 1
Helal et al.
decreased every 2 wk until reaching a minimum in wk
8 and 10. During phase 2, weekly changes in total HE
(MJ/d) were marked in wk 10 to 13, with no or rela-
tively little change from wk 13 to 17 and slight increas-
es from wk 17 to 20.
Total HE in kilojoules per kilogram of BW0.75 per
day during phase 1 was similar among breeds for the
REST intake treatment, greater for CONT vs. REST
(P < 0.01), and greater for Angora vs. Boer (P < 0.01)
and Spanish (P < 0.01) with CONT (Table 3). During
phase 2, HE (kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day) was greater for
Angora vs. Boer and Spanish (P < 0.01) and for CONT
than for REST (P < 0.01). There was an interaction
(P = 0.01) among breed, intake treatment, and week in
HE (kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day; Figure 2, panel B). This
interaction appeared primarily because of a different
pattern of change for Angora vs. Boer and Spanish in
phase 2. For Angora, REST values markedly increased
from wk 10 to a plateau at wk 13, with values similar to
those for CONT from wk 13 to 20. Conversely, values
for Boer and Spanish on the REST intake treatment
increased more slowly from wk 10 to 13, followed by
little or no change through wk 16 and increasing values
thereafter to wk 19 or 20. Values for Boer and Spanish
were less for REST vs. CONT in wk 10 to 20 except
for wk 19.
HEmt, HEmd, and HEm. Tissue energy mobilized
for use in maintenance was 0 for CONT during phase
1, with a greater value for Boer and Spanish than for
Angora on the REST intake treatment (P < 0.01; Ta-
ble 3). There was an interaction (P = 0.02) between
breed and intake treatment in HEmd in phase 1, with
the least values among breeds for Angora within CONT
and REST intake treatments (P < 0.01). The HEmd
was similar between Boer and Spanish with CONT but
less for Spanish vs. Boer with REST (P = 0.05). The
HEmd during phase 2 was less for Angora than for Boer
and Spanish (P < 0.01) and for REST vs. CONT (P
< 0.01). Total HE used in maintenance in both phases
was least among breeds for Angora (P < 0.01) and
greater for CONT vs. REST (P < 0.01). The HEm in
kilojoules per kilogram of BW0.75 per day during phase
1 was least among breeds for Angora (P < 0.01) and in
phase 2 was less for Angora and Boer than Spanish (P
< 0.01). In both phases HEm in kilojoules per BW0.75
per day was less for REST than for CONT (P < 0.01).
Tissue and Fiber Gain. Heat energy associated
with tissue energy gain during phase 1 was 0 for REST,
and for CONT ranked Angora > Boer (P < 0.01) >
Spanish (P = 0.05; Table 3). During phase 2, HEt for
CONT was greatest among breeds for Boer (P < 0.01)
and greater for REST vs. CONT (P < 0.01). Heat ener-
gy associated with mohair fiber growth for Angora was
almost identical in both phases, with slightly greater
values for CONT vs. REST in phases 1 (P = 0.08) and
2 (P = 0.02).
RE. Because of the assumptions employed, differ-
ences in REt and MEt and in REf and MEf were the
same as those in HEt and HEf, respectively (Table 3).
Table 3. Effects of feed intake restriction on BW, heat energy:heart rate (HE:HR), ME intake, HE, and recovered energy (RE) in Angora, Boer, and Span-
ish goats
P-value1 Angora Boer Spanish

Item Trt Brd Int Phase CONT REST CONT REST CONT REST SEM Breed2

BW, kg 0.01 <0.01 0.86 1 14.8 12.9 21.3 18.5 19.4 16.9 0.78 Angora < Boer, Spanish
<0.01 <0.01 0.38 2 17.3 14.1 24.1 18.7 20.9 17.3 0.80 Angora < Spanish < Boer
HE:HR, kJ/kg of BW0.75 per beat
Mean 0.92 <0.01 0.85 4.92 4.90 5.60 5.66 5.60 5.52 0.119 Angora < Boer, Spanish
Before experiment 0.90 <0.01 0.76 4.95 4.95 5.59 5.68 5.56 5.42 0.129
After experiment 4.88 4.85 5.61 5.65 5.63 5.63
ME intake, MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 0.17 1 4.47 2.20 4.84 2.43 4.14 2.06 0.084 Spanish < Angora < Boer
<0.01 <0.01 0.62 2 4.74 4.09 5.46 4.67 4.57 4.01 0.114 Angora, Spanish < Boer
ME intake, kJ/kg of BW0.75 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1 597f 328c 490e 277b 449b 249a 4.8
0.02 <0.01 0.35 2 561 568 503 523 467 473 5.3 Spanish < Boer < Angora
HE
Total HE, MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 0.71 1 3.64 2.34 4.26 3.12 3.91 2.82 0.130 Angora < Spanish < Boer
<0.01 0.06 0.24 2 4.20 3.47 4.84 3.56 4.34 3.45 0.160
Total HE, kJ/kg of BW0.75 <0.01 0.02 0.03 1 481c 347a 430b 356a 424b 338a 11.1
<0.01 0.01 0.33 2 494 479 445 397 444 406 11.3 Boer, Spanish < Angora
Maintenance from tissue, MJ/d <0.01 0.01 <0.01 1 0.00a 0.27b 0.00a 0.69b 0.00a 0.75b 0.062
0.84 0.17 0.71 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.004
Maintenance from the diet, MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 0.02 1 2.44c 1.36a 4.10d 2.43c 3.82d 2.06b 0.125
<0.01 <0.01 0.10 2 3.18 2.45 4.37 2.94 4.08 3.15 0.163 Angora < Boer, Spanish
Total of maintenance, MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 0.75 1 2.44 1.63 4.10 3.12 3.82 2.82 0.146 Angora < Boer, Spanish
<0.01 <0.01 0.11 2 3.18 2.45 4.37 2.94 4.08 3.15 0.164 Angora < Boer, Spanish
Total of maintenance, kJ/kg of BW0.75 <0.01 <0.01 0.73 1 321 238 414 353 415 338 13.2 Angora < Boer, Spanish
<0.01 <0.01 0.29 2 372 338 402 328 417 370 12.6 Angora, Boer < Spanish
Tissue gain,3 MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1 0.31d 0.00a 0.16c 0.00a 0.09b 0.00a 0.027
<0.01 <0.01 0.17 2 0.14 0.30 0.47 0.62 0.26 0.30 0.032 Angora, Spanish < Boer
Mohair fiber growth, MJ/d 0.08 1 0.89 0.71 0.068 Angora, Spanish < Boer
0.02 2 0.88b 0.72a 0.047
Restricted intake for different goat breeds

RE
Total RE, MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 0.21 1 0.83 −0.15 0.57 −0.69 0.23 −0.75 0.089 Spanish < Boer < Angora
<0.01 <0.01 0.15 2 0.54 0.63 0.62 1.11 0.23 0.56 0.107
Tissue gain,3 MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1 0.21d 0.00a 0.11c 0.00a 0.06b 0.00a 0.018
<0.01 <0.01 0.17 2 0.10 0.20 0.32 0.42 0.18 0.21 0.022 Angora, Spanish < Boer
Mohair fiber growth, MJ/d 0.08 1 0.16 0.13 0.012
0.02 2 0.16b 0.13a 0.008
ME use
Tissue gain,3 MJ/d <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 1 0.52d 0.00a 0.27c 0.00a 0.15b 0.00a 0.045
<0.01 <0.01 0.17 2 0.24 0.50 0.80 1.04 0.43 0.51 0.053 Angora, Spanish < Boer
Mohair fiber growth, MJ/d 0.08 1 1.05 0.84 0.080
0.02 2 1.04b 0.84a 0.055
a–f
Means in a row without a common superscript letter differ (P < 0.05).
1
Trt = treatment (CONT = intake for moderate energy accretion in 10-wk phases 1 and 2; REST = 50% of CONT intake in phase 1 relative to initial BW, followed by the greater level of feeding
in phase 2 based on initial or actual BW when greater); Brd = breed; Int = interaction between treatment and breed.
2
< indicates P < 0.05 for breed main effect means when the interaction was nonsignificant (P > 0.05).
3
Scores: 1 to 5, with 1 and 5 = extremely thin and obese, respectively.
4181
4182 Helal et al.

constant compared with small steady declines for Boer

and Spanish as week advanced.
Prediction of Change in HE. Breed and week
interacted (P < 0.01) in HE%CH and HEMBW%CH
for the REST intake treatment (Figures 4, panels A
and B, respectively). Interactions in HE%CH and
HEMBW%CH between breed and linear and quadratic
effects of week during phase 1 and 2 were not significant
for the CONT intake treatment. However, these inter-
actions were significant for the REST intake treatment
(P from <0.01 to =0.03). Regression equations in Table
4 depict considerable differences between Angora and
Boer and Spanish in patterns of change in HE%CH and
HEMBW%CH with advancing week during both phas-
es 1 and 2, as shown in Figures 5 and 6, respectively.
There were more marked decreases in phase 1 as week
advanced for Angora vs. Boer and Spanish (Figure 5;
panel A = HE%CH and panel B = HEMBW%CH)
and greater magnitudes of increase in phase 2 (Figure
6; panel A = HE%CH and panel B = HEMBW%CH),
concomitant with greater parameter estimates for the
quadratic effect of week, with Angora. In fact, within

Figure 2. Effects of feed intake restriction on heat energy (HE;

panel A = MJ/d and panel B = kJ/kg of BW0.75) in Angora, Boer, and
Spanish goats. CONT = intake for moderate energy accretion in 10-wk
phases 1 and 2; REST = 50% of CONT intake in phase 1 relative to
initial BW, followed by the greater level of feeding in phase 2 based on
initial or actual BW when greater.

During neither phase was there an interaction in total

RE between breed and intake treatment. Main effect
means during phase 1 ranked Angora > Boer (P <
0.01) > Spanish (P = 0.03) and were greater for CONT
vs. REST (P < 0.01). Conversely, during phase 2 RE
was greater for Boer vs. Angora (P = 0.01) and Spanish
(P < 0.01) and greater for REST vs. CONT (P < 0.01).
There were breed × week and intake treatment × week
interactions (P < 0.01) in RE in megajoules per day
and kilojoules per kilogram of BW0.75 per day (Figure
3, panels A and B, respectively). The latter interaction
was expected, with relatively steady RE across weeks
for CONT compared with a slow increase to wk 8 for
REST, marked increase from wk 10 to 12, and then
a gradual decline to wk 20. In wk 2 to 8 or 10, RE
for Boer and Spanish rose, whereas for Angora values
decreased slightly. The increase from wk 10 to 12 for
Boer and Spanish was of a similar magnitude, slightly Figure 3. Effects of feed intake restriction on recovered energy
greater than that for Angora. A somewhat greater mag- (RE; panel A = MJ/d and panel B = kJ/kg of BW0.75) in Angora,
nitude of change for Boer vs. Spanish from wk 2 to 12 Boer, and Spanish goats. CONT = intake for moderate energy accre-
tion in 10-wk phases 1 and 2; REST = 50% of CONT intake in phase 1
resulted in a difference that continued thereafter until relative to initial BW, followed by the greater level of feeding in phase
wk 20. The RE for Angora in wk 12 to 20 was relatively 2 based on initial or actual BW when greater.
 Restricted intake for different goat breeds
Figure 4. Effects of feed intake restriction on heat energy (HE;
panel A = HE%CH, MJ/d and panel B = HEMBW%CH, kJ/kg of
BW0.75) by different goat breeds expressed as a percentage of HE in
wk 0 for animals subjected to restricted feed intake, corrected for HE
of corresponding animals on a constant plane of nutrition adequate for
maintenance and moderate energy accretion (HE%CH).
the time frame of phase 2, quadratic effects for Boer
and Spanish were not significant.
DISCUSSION
HEm and HE
Estimates of HEm (i.e., MEm) for Angora goats on the
CONT intake treatment were considerably less than
473 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day recommended by Sahlu
et al. (2004) and NRC (2007) and 431 kJ/kg of BW0.75
per day recently determined for growing Angoras sub-
jected to 6 levels of feed intake (Puchala et al., 2011).
However, Tovar-Luna et al. (2011) reported a HEm of
362 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day for mature Angora does
consuming a 60% concentrate diet at approximately
100, 125, and 150% of an assumed HEm, with housing
in the same facility and pens used in the present ex-
periment. It was suggested that the less than expected
value could have involved a limited activity energy cost
and restricted rather than ad libitum feed intake. Val-
ues for Boer and Spanish on the CONT intake treat-
ment (average of 412 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day) were
slightly greater than 391 kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day used
4183
to determine amounts of feed offered and less than 452
kJ/kg of BW0.75 per day suggested for growing doelings
(Sahlu et al., 2004; NRC, 2007).
Results of the present experiment indicate that HE
in kilojoules per kilogram of BW0.75 per day of Angora
goats during a period of restricted intake was more de-
pendent on nutritional plane compared with Boer and
Spanish. Even though the breed × intake treatment in-
teraction during phase 2 was not significant, interaction
means reflected a relatively rapid increase of Angora
goats after a nutrient intake limitation compared with
Boer and Spanish. This resulted in an average HE in
kilojoules per kilogram of BW0.75 per day of Angora on
the REST intake treatment in phase 2 that was 97% of
that for CONT animals. Conversely, mean HE of Boer
and Spanish on the REST treatment in phase 2 was less
than for CONT animals, with values 80 to 83% and 89
to 91% of those in phase 1 and 2, respectively. How-
ever, it should be reiterated that different MEI among
breeds on a kilojoule-per-kilogram-of-BW0.75-per-day
basis could have influenced findings.
That realimentation in phase 2 did not entail ad li-
bitum intake, but rather intake to meet assumed MEm
requirements plus continued moderate tissue and fiber
growth, could have resulted in a less than maximal in-
crease in HE associated with support tissue metabo-
lism such as of the gastrointestinal tract and liver and,
thereby, could have prolonged effects of restricted in-
take in phase 1 on HE in phase 2 for Boer and Spanish.
Such an effect was not evident with Angora goats, for
which the greater MEI relative to BW0.75 may have had
an influence. Feed intake less than ad libitum was used
in phase 2 also to simulate common field conditions
in which after a period of severely restricted nutrient
intake, feed availability is increased though not unlim-
ited, with constraints of lesser magnitude still present.
ADG
Greatest ADG and tissue gain among breeds for An-
gora on the CONT intake treatment in phase 1 may
have involved the greatest level of feeding and attain-
ment of maximal mohair fiber growth. Greatest BW
loss during phase 1 for Boer vs. Spanish was not antici-
pated based on previous studies (Joemat et al., 2004;
Negesse et al., 2007; Ngwa et al., 2009). Ngwa et al.
(2009) concluded that with low- to moderate-quality
diets, growth by Boer goats is similar to but not less
than that by Spanish goats, with greater levels of per-
formance by Boer achieved only with greater nutrition-
al planes. Asmare et al. (2006) found an appreciable
capacity of 14-mo-old Boer goats to decrease HE with
severely limited energy intake, although that study did
not entail a breed comparison. As suggested for Angora
goats, different findings in this experiment compared
with previous studies may relate to the fairly severe
nutrient restriction imposed for a relatively long period
of time and young animal age compared with previous
studies. Results of this experiment coupled with those
4184 Helal et al.

Table 4. Equations for regressions of heat energy (HE) by different goat breeds expressed as a percentage of HE
in wk 0 for animals subjected to restricted feed intake, corrected for HE of corresponding animals on a constant
plane of nutrition adequate for maintenance and moderate energy accretion, against length of restriction (wk) in
phase 1 or time after restriction ended in phase 2 (HE%CH, MJ/d; HEMBW%CH, kJ/kg of BW0.75)
HE%CH HEMBW%CH

Phase Intercept or Parameter Parameter

and breed independent variable estimate SE P-value Model R2 estimate SE P-value Model R2

Phase 1
Angora Intercept 97.0 2.05 0.01 0.76 95.8 2.43 0.01 0.58
Week −10.23 0.966 0.01 −8.18 1.144 0.01
Week2 0.801 0.0928 0.01 0.655 0.1098 0.01
Boer Intercept 96.9 2.18 0.01 0.76 95.3 2.63 0.01 0.41
Week −6.39 1.025 0.01 −4.34 1.237 0.01
Week2 0.334 0.0984 0.01 0.271 0.1187 0.03
Spanish Intercept 99.0 1.88 0.01 0.79 97.4 2.21 0.01 0.53
Week −7.03 0.907 0.01 −4.69 1.068 0.01
Week2 0.415 0.0867 0.01 0.282 0.1021 0.01
Phase 2
Angora Intercept 73.4 2.49 0.01 0.71 78.9 2.22 0.01 0.60
Week 9.49 1.160 0.01 8.74 1.036 0.01
Week2 −0.526 0.1115 0.01 −0.608 0.0995 0.01
Boer Intercept 65.1 2.21 0.01 0.63 77.5 2.10 0.01 0.39
Week 3.83 1.03 0.01 3.30 0.978 0.01
Week2 −0.074 0.0992 0.46 −0.153 0.0942 0.11
Spanish Intercept 72.4 2.37 0.01 0.57 80.6 2.50 0.01 0.43
Week 4.74 1.103 0.01 4.50 1.165 0.01
Week2 −0.164 0.1062 0.13 −0.208 0.1122 0.07

of previous studies indicate that the nature of nutrient
intake restriction (e.g., length, magnitude) will influ-
ence comparisons of Boer goats and indigenous or local
genotypes with decreased growth potential.
Greater ADG in phase 2 for Boer vs. Spanish and
Angora suggests that the period of time after nutri-
ent restriction with low HEm relative to MEI for Boer
goats was long compared with Spanish. Greater ADG
for Boer compared with Angora and Spanish on the
CONT intake treatment in phase 2, in fact greater
than in phase 1, also implies an ability of Boer goats
to adapt over time to a moderate nutrient restriction
for subsequent efficient nutrient use in tissue accretion.
Fiber
The negative effect of the REST intake treatment
on clean mohair fiber growth in phase 1 agrees with
a small decrease in mohair fiber growth by Angoras
14 mo of age, in addition to limited tissue gain, ob-
served by Sahlu et al. (1999). Conversely, Puchala et
al. (2011) noted relatively constant clean mohair fiber
growth by 6-mo-old Angoras subjected to 6 levels of
restricted feed intake. Nutrient partitioning to mohair
fiber growth neither can be truly confirmed nor refuted
in the present experiment or that of Sahlu et al. (1999).
That is, nutrient restriction decreased mohair fiber
growth, but it is unknown if the magnitude of change
was minimized at the expense of nonfiber tissue gain.
Studies with multiple levels of feed intake, such as that
of Puchala et al. (2011), can potentially provide more
accurate evaluation of nutrient partitioning to mohair
fiber growth.
The decline in mohair fiber growth for REST vs.
CONT in phase 2, which was of similar magnitude to
that in phase 1, is in accordance with a carryover effect
of restricted feed intake reported by Sahlu et al. (1999)
when later consumption was ad libitum. However, the
change in tissue gain noted by Sahlu et al. (1999) was
fully compensatory for limited ADG earlier. In accor-
dance with no effect of different levels of intake during
the period of restricted feeding, Puchala et al. (2011)
found similar mohair fiber growth by yearling Ango-
ras later with ad libitum consumption. Findings of the
present study along with those of Sahlu et al. (1999)
and Puchala et al. (2011) indicate that if feed intake
restriction retards real-time mohair fiber growth, sub-
sequent fiber growth also will be slowed but to a magni-
tude no greater than during the restriction period. Re-
sults of Sahlu et al. (1999) regarding compensation in
tissue growth during realimentation, but with contin-
ued decreased mohair fiber growth, and tissue gain 19.5
g/d greater for REST vs. CONT during phase 2 of the
present experiment indicate that nutrient restriction
has relatively long-term effects on follicle metabolism.
Further research would be required to fully character-
ize influences of the length and magnitude of nutrient
intake restriction on subsequent mohair fiber growth.
Even though unwashed fiber growth was consider-
ably greater for Angora than for Boer and Spanish,
intake restriction in phase 1 still decreased fiber growth
by Boer and Spanish, which was due at least in part
 Restricted intake for different goat breeds 4185
was deemed inappropriate given substantial differences
in HE and BW among weeks within phases. Weekly HE
was expressed relative to that in wk 0 so that any pre-
diction methods developed could be readily incorporat-
ed into nutrient requirement calculation systems [e.g.,
web-based for goats of Langston University available at
http://www2.luresext.edu, applying recommendations
of Sahlu et al. (2004) and NRC (2007)]. Adjustment of
REST values for mean change of the different breeds at
each measurement time partially corrected for factors
such as procedural variability and increased reflection
of true change in MEm relative to that of animals on a
continual plane of nutrition adequate for maintenance
and moderate tissue and fiber gain. In this regard, for
the CONT intake treatment in phase 1, effects of breed,
week, week2, week × breed, and week2 × breed were
nonsignificant for both HE%CH and HEMBW%CH. In
phase 2 for the CONT treatment, effects were noted for
breed and week in HE%CH and for week and week2 in
HEMBW%CH.
Magnitudes of change in HE%CH for REST were
greater than in HEMBW%CH because of the adjust-
ment for BW0.75 at measurement times with the latter
but not former expression. For most appropriate poten-

Figure 5. Prediction of heat energy (HE) by different goat breeds

expressed as a percentage of HE in wk 0 for animals subjected to
restricted feed intake, corrected for HE of corresponding animals on
a constant plane of nutrition adequate for maintenance and moder-
ate energy accretion, at different lengths of restriction (wk) in phase
1 (panel A = HE%CH, MJ/d; panel B = HEMBW%CH, kJ/kg of
BW0.75). Equations are given in Table 4.

to reduced diameter. This is somewhat contradictory

to previous reports indicating that fiber growth by
cashmere-producing goats is relatively recalcitrant to
nutritional plane (Restall et al., 1994; Russel, 1995;
Galbraith, 2000; Ivey et al., 2000). This disparity may
involve the marked nutrient intake limitation in phase
1 of the present experiment compared with these oth-
er studies. However, in contrast to Angora goats, re-
stricted nutrient intake in phase 1 for Boer and Spanish
did not influence subsequent fiber growth in phase 2.
Differences in follicle metabolism between mohair- and
cashmere-producing goats, which could simply involve
total substrate supply as well as suitability of the pro-
file of nutrients presented to follicles in relation to fiber
growth potential, are implied.

Change in HE
Change in total HE with advancing time during
phases 1 and 2 was addressed rather than MEm be-
cause measurement of MEm involved estimates for en-
tire phases. Total HE in specific weeks could have been
partitioned into HEm based on phase averages, but this
Figure 6. Prediction of heat energy (HE) by different goat breeds
expressed as a percentage of HE in wk 0 for animals subjected to
restricted feed intake, corrected for HE of corresponding animals on
a constant plane of nutrition adequate for maintenance and moder-
ate energy accretion at different times in phase 2 after restriction
ended (panel A = HE%CH, MJ/d; panel B = HEMBW%CH, kJ/kg
of BW0.75). Weeks 10 to 20 are wk 0 to 10 after change in level of feed
intake. Equations are given in Table 4.
4186 Helal et al.
tial application or incorporation of any methods of pre-
diction developed into nutrient requirement calculation
systems, use of HEMBW%CH is preferable and will be
addressed below.
From equations in Table 4, the pattern and mag-
nitude of decline in HEMBW%CH for REST during
phase 1 was almost identical for Boer and Spanish,
with average linear and quadratic regression coeffi-
cients of −4.52 and 0.277%/wk, respectively. For both
breeds, HEMBW%CH reached a minimum in wk 6 to
7 at approximately 78% of the wk-0 value, with little
change thereafter through wk 10. Conversely, for Ango-
ra HEMBW%CH decreased with advancing time dur-
ing phase 1 much more rapidly (i.e., linear regression
coefficient of −8.2%/wk), with the minimum of 70%
at wk 6. Then, HEMBW%CH increased rapidly to wk
10 to reach nearly 80% in wk 10. Therefore, a differ-
ent method of adjusting real-time MEm of Angora vs.
Boer and Spanish goats for a limited nutritional plane
seems warranted. Reasonably accurate prediction for
Boer and Spanish goats could be achieved through use
of a linear decrease until wk 6, with steady HE thereaf-
ter. For Angora goats, inclusion of a quadratic regres-
sion coefficient is advisable. However, it is not known
if similar regression coefficients would be applicable to
various magnitudes and lengths of intake restriction or
animals of different ages. In general agreement with the
prediction system suggested by Sahlu et al. (2004) and
NRC (2007), for each breed final HEMBW%CH was
near 80%.
In contrast to phase 1, in phase 2 patterns of change in
HEMBW%CH differed between Boer and Spanish. The
rate of increase for Spanish was greater than for Boer
(i.e., linear regression coefficients of 3.30 and 4.50%/
wk for Boer and Spanish, respectively). As in phase
1, change in HEMBW%CH for Angora with advanc-
ing week was much greater than for Boer and Spanish
(i.e., linear regression coefficient of week for Angora of
8.74%/wk). Likewise, HEMBW%CH peaked in wk 16
to 18 and declined in wk 19 and 20 (quadratic regres-
sion coefficient of −0.608%/wk). Mean values in wk 20
for Angora and Spanish were similar at approximately
105%, both considerably greater than between 94 and
95% for Boer. Patterns of change in HEMBW%CH for
Angora goats in both phases imply less stringent or
tight regulation of HE and MEm compared with meat
goat breeds of Boer and Spanish.
To potentially adjust MEm of goats during a reali-
mentation period, these results suggest that different
methods should be considered both for Angora than for
meat goat breeds such as Boer and Spanish and also
for different meat goat breeds. Furthermore, results of
this experiment are not in close accordance with recom-
mendations of Sahlu et al. (2004) and NRC (2007) for
adjusting MEm of goats for previous low planes of nutri-
tion. For example, with an initial BCS of 2 after a low
plane of nutrition, the NRC (2007) adjustment of MEm
for all goat breeds is a 10% reduction in wk 1, followed
by sequential weekly increases of 1.67% of MEm for 6
wk while on a constant adequate plane of nutrition.
Even with an initial BCS of 1, only a 20% decrease in
MEm was recommended by NRC (2007), with sequen-
tial weekly increases of 2% of MEm for 10 wk while on
a constant adequate plane of nutrition. For develop-
ment of preferable means, extensive experimentation
with multiple levels and lengths of nutrient restriction
and realimentation would be required.
Conclusions
Although nutrient partitioning cannot be ruled out,
mohair fiber growth by Angora goats decreased during
a 10-wk intake restriction period and the subsequent
10 wk with greater intake. Nutrient intake restriction
resulted in greater BW loss for Boer vs. Spanish goats,
but ADG was greatest for Boer goats in a realimenta-
tion period. Heat energy by Angora goats decreased
more rapidly and to a greater extent than that by Boer
and Spanish, although eventually levels converged rela-
tive to values before restricted intake. Likewise, the
speed and magnitude of rise in HE by Angora goats
when intake was increased after restriction was greater
than for Boer and Spanish. The pattern of change in
HE with increasing length of nutrient restriction was
similar between Boer and Spanish goats, although the
magnitude of increase when feed intake was increased
was less for Boer, which may have accounted for the
difference in ADG. Most appropriate methods of pre-
dicting change in HEm during and after periods of lim-
ited feed intake may differ among breeds of goats.
LITERATURE CITED
AFRC. 1998. The Nutrition of Goats. CAB Int., New York, NY.
AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis. 15th ed. Assoc. Off.
Anal. Chem., Arlington, VA.
Asmare, A., R. Puchala, R. C. Merkel, T. Sahlu, and A. L. Goetsch.
2006. Changes in energy expenditure by meat goats with vary-
ing levels of feed intake near maintenance and below. J. Appl.
Anim. Res. 29:81–89.
ASTM. 1988. Standard Tests Method D584: Wool content of wool-
laboratory scale. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Am.
Soc. Testing Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
Berhan, T., R. Puchala, A. L. Goetsch, and R. C. Merkel. 2006.
Effects of walking speed and forage consumption on energy ex-
penditure and heart rate by Alpine does. Small Rumin. Res.
63:119–124.
Brosh, A. 2007. Heart rate measurements as an index of energy ex-
penditure and energy balance in ruminants: A review. J. Anim.
Sci. 85:1213–1227.
Brosh, A., A. Shkolnik, and I. Choshniak. 1986. Metabolic effects
of infrequent drinking and low-quality feed on Bedouin goats.
Ecology 67:1086–1090.
Brouwer, E. 1965. Report of sub-committee on constants and fac-
tors. Pages 441–443 in Energy Metabolism: Proceedings of the
3rd Symp. K. L. Blaxter, ed. EAAP Publ. No. 11. Academic
Press, London, UK.
Choshniak, I., N. Ben-Kohav, C. R. Taylor, D. Robertshaw, R. J.
Barnes, A. Dobson, V. Belkinb, and A. Shkolnik. 1995. Meta-
bolic adaptations for desert survival in the Bedouin goat. Am.
J. Physiol. 268:R1101–R1110.
 Restricted intake for different goat breeds
Downes, A. M., and L. F. Sharry. 1971. Measurement of wool growth
and its response to nutritional changes. Aust. J. Biol. Sci.
24:117–130.
Drochner, W., G. Flachowsky, J. Pallauf, E. Pfeffer, M. Rodehu-
tscond, and W. Staudacher. 2003. Recommendations for the
Supply of Energy and Nutrients to Goats. DLG-Verlag, Frank-
furt, Germany.
Freetly, H. C., J. A. Nienaber, K. A. Leymaster, and T. G. Jenkins.
1995. Relationships among heat production, body weight, and
age in Suffolk and Texel ewes. J. Anim. Sci. 73:1030–1037.
Galbraith, H. 2000. Protein and sulphur amino acid nutrition of hair
fibre-producing Angora and Cashmere goats. Livest. Prod. Sci.
64:81–93.
Ivey, D. S., F. N. Owens, T. Sahlu, T. H. Teh, P. L. Claypool, and A.
L. Goetsch. 2000. Growth and cashmere production by Spanish
goats consuming ad libitum diets differing in protein and energy
levels. Small Rumin. Res. 35:133–139.
Joemat, R., A. L. Goetsch, G. W. Horn, T. Sahlu, R. Puchala,
B. R. Min, and J. Luo. 2004. Growth of yearling meat goat
doelings with changing plane of nutrition. Small Rumin. Res.
52:127–135.
Littell, R. C., G. A. Milliken, W. W. Stroup, and R. D. Wolfinger.
1996. SAS® Systems for Mixed Models. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary,
NC.
Luo, J., A. L. Goetsch, I. V. Nsahlai, T. Sahlu, C. L. Ferrell, F. N.
Owens, M. L. Galyean, J. E. Moore, and Z. B. Johnson. 2004.
Prediction of metabolizable energy and protein requirements
for maintenance, gain and fiber growth of Angora goats. Small
Rumin. Res. 53:339–356.
Nagorcka, B. N. 1977. The description and analysis of wool growth.
Aust. J. Agric. Res. 28:737–746.
Negesse, T., A. K. Patra, L. J. Dawson, A. Tolera, R. C. Merkel, T.
Sahlu, and A. L. Goetsch. 2007. Performance of Spanish and
Boer × Spanish doelings consuming diets with different levels
of broiler litter. Small Rumin. Res. 69:187–197.
Ngwa, A. T., L. J. Dawson, R. Puchala, G. Detweiler, R. C. Merkel,
I. Tovar-Luna, T. Sahlu, C. L. Ferrell, and A. L. Goetsch.
2007a. Effect of initial body condition of Boer × Spanish year-
ling goat wethers and level of nutrient intake on body composi-
tion. Small Rumin. Res. 73:13–26.
Ngwa, A. T., L. J. Dawson, R. Puchala, G. Detweiler, R. C. Merkel,
I. Tovar-Luna, T. Sahlu, C. L. Ferrell, and A. L. Goetsch.
2007b. Urea space and body condition score to predict body
composition of meat goats. Small Rumin. Res. 73:27–36.
Ngwa, A. T., L. J. Dawson, R. Puchala, G. D. Detweiler, R. C.
Merkel, Z. Wang, K. Tesfai, T. Sahlu, C. L. Ferrell, and A. L.
Goetsch. 2009. Effects of breed and diet on growth and body
composition of crossbred Boer and Spanish wether goats. J.
Anim. Sci. 87:2913–2923.
NRC. 1981. Nutrient Requirements of Goats: Angora, Dairy, and
Meat Goats in Temperate and Tropical Countries. Natl. Acad.
Press, Washington, DC.
NRC. 2000. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle (Update 2000).
Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.
NRC. 2007. Nutrient Requirements of Small Ruminants. Sheep,
Goats, Cervids, and New World Camelids. Natl. Acad. Press,
Washington, DC.
Puchala, R., A. Patra, A. L. Goetsch, G. Animut, and T. Sahlu.
2011. Effects of feed restriction and subsequent realimentation
on tissue and mohair fiber by growing Angora goats. Livest.
Sci. 138:180–186.
Puchala, R., I. Tovar-Luna, A. L. Goetsch, T. Sahlu, G. E. Carstens,
and H. C. Freetly. 2007. The relationship between heart rate
View publication stats
4187
and energy expenditure in Alpine, Angora, Boer and Spanish
goat wethers goats consuming different quality diets at level
of intake near maintenance or fasting. Small Rumin. Res.
70:183–193.
Puchala, R., I. Tovar-Luna, T. Sahlu, H. C. Freetly, and A. L.
Goetsch. 2009. The relationship between heart rate and energy
expenditure in growing crossbred Boer and Spanish wethers. J.
Anim. Sci. 87:1714–1721.
Reis, P. J., and D. A. Tunks. 1976. The influence of abomasal sup-
plements of zein and some amino acids on wool growth and
plasma amino acids. J. Agric. Sci. 86:475–482.
Restall, B. J., H. Restall, M. Restall, and A. Perry. 1994. Seasonal
production of cashmere and environmental modification in Aus-
tralian Cashmere goats. Pages 63–74 in Hormonal Control of
Fibre Growth and Shedding. J. P. Laker and D. Allain, ed.
European Fine Fibre Network, Vol. 2. Macaulay Land Use Re-
search Institute, Aberdeen, Scotland.
Russel, A. J. F. 1995. Current knowledge on the effects of nutrition
on fibre production in nutrition and grazing ecology of special-
ity fibre-producing animals. Pages 3–21 in Hormonal Control of
Fibre Growth and Shedding. J. P. Laker and A. J. F. Russel,
ed. European Fine Fibre Network, Vol. 3. Macaulay Land Use
Research Institute, Aberdeen, Scotland.
Sahlu, T., A. L. Goetsch, J. Luo, I. V. Nsahlai, J. E. Moore, M.
L. Galyean, F. N. Owens, C. L. Ferrell, and Z. B. Johnson.
2004. Energy and protein requirements of goats: Developed
equations, other considerations and future research to improve
them. Small Rumin. Res. 53:191–220.
Sahlu, T., S. P. Hart, and A. L. Goetsch. 1999. Effects of level
of feed intake on body weight, body components, and mohair
growth in Angora goats during realimentation. Small Rumin.
Res. 32:251–259.
Sainz, R. D., and B. E. Bentley. 1997. Visceral organ mass and cel-
lularity in growth-restricted and refed beef steers. J. Anim.
Sci. 75:1229–1236.
Shargal, E., A. Brosh, and I. Choshniak. 2001. Heart rate as measure
of energy expenditure and energy intake in the black Bedouin
goat. Abstract ID number 1975 on CD in Proc. 34th Int. Congr.
Physiol. Sci. Int. Union Physiol. Sci., Christchurch, NZ.
Silanikove, N. 1986. Interrelationships between feed quality, digest-
ibility, feed consumption, and energy requirements in desert
(Bedouin), and energy requirements in desert (Bedouin) and
non-desert (Saanen) goats. J. Dairy Sci. 69:2157–2162.
Silanikove, N. 1987. Effect of imposed reduction in energy intake on
resting and fasting heart production in the black Bedouin goat.
Nutr. Rep. Int. 35:725–731.
Tovar-Luna, I., A. L. Goetsch, R. Puchala, T. Sahlu, G. E. Carstens,
H. C. Freetly, and Z. B. Johnson. 2007a. Effects of moderate
feed restriction on energy expenditure by 2-year-old crossbred
Boer goats. Small Rumin. Res. 72:25–32.
Tovar-Luna, I., A. L. Goetsch, R. Puchala, T. Sahlu, G. E. Carstens,
H. C. Freetly, and Z. B. Johnson. 2007b. Efficiency of energy
use for maintenance and gain by growing crossbred Boer and
Spanish goats consuming diets differing in forage level. Small
Rumin. Res. 67:20–27.
Tovar-Luna, I., R. Puchala, T. Sahlu, H. C. Freetly, and A. L.
Goetsch. 2011. Effects of level of feeding on energy utilization
by Angora goats. J. Anim. Sci. 89:142–149.
Wester, T. J., R. A. Britton, T. J. Klopfenstein, G. A. Ham, D. T.
Hickok, and C. R. Krehbiel. 1995. Differential effects of plane of
protein or energy nutrition on visceral organs and hormones in
lambs. J. Anim. Sci. 73:1674–1688.