NDF Digestibility and uNDF: What
does this mean and how can we
apply it to make better decisions
Mike Van Amburgh, Rick Grant, Kurt Cotanch,
Alessandro Zontini, Debbie Ross and Andreas Foskolos
Dept. of Animal Science
Chazy, NY
NDF analyses
• Nutrition models/software have an input for NDF that
is used primarily to calculate energy from available
carbohydrates and effective fiber
• Mertens (2002) published the NDF method and gained
AOAC approval – there are many approaches to
measure NDF
• We want everyone to use of aNDFom – NDF with
sulfite and ash correction – we are working to move
labs in that direction
• Sniffen et al. 1992…
Outline
• aNDFom – why and what it means
• aNDFom digestibility
• uNDF – definition
• uNDF and NDF pools
• Implications of using this approach
• Summary
Why aNDFom?
• Hay in a hurry – wide swathing picks up dirt
• 600‐800 hp choppers and big equipment that
move fast make dust and dirt fly
• Flood irrigation moves soil
• Dirt/soil does not solubilize in NDF solution, thus
if not corrected will inflate the NDF content
• Inflation of the NDF content means the diet as
formulated is lower in actual NDF – intake and
rumen health can be compromised
~ 5 units 10 units
 Distribution of Ash in Legume Silage Distribution of NDF Ash in Haycrop Silage
(CVAS 2010‐2011, Chemistry) (CVAS, 2013)

16%
20% N =2,524 N = 3,765
Ave. = 2.72
18% Ave. = 12.3 14%
St. Dev.= 3.69
16% 12%
Percent of Samples

14%

% of samples
10%
12%
8%
10%
6%
8%
6% 4%

4% 2%
2% 0%

<0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
11.00
>12.00
0%
<8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >20
Ash, % NDF Ash

Distribution of NDF Ash in Corn Silage Distribution of NDF Ash in Selected

(CVAS, 2012 crop) Soghum and Soghum/Sudan Samples
(CVAS, 2012 crop, chemistry)

30% N=10,512 30% N=208

Ave. = 0.78 Ave. = 4.05
25% StDev. = 0.83 25% StDev. = 4.94
Percent of Samples

Percent of Samples
20% 20%

15%
15%

10%
10%

5%
5%
0%
<0.25

>5.00
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75

0%
<1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >12
NDF Ash NDF Ash
 Example of the Impact of Ash Contamination Example of the Impact of Ash Contamination
on NDF and NDF Digestibility Recovery on NDF and NDF Digestibility Recovery

Sample NDF NDFom NDFD30 NDFD30om

Sample NDF NDFom NDFD30 NDFD30om

15081‐068 54.6% 56.3% 15081‐ 54.6% 48.3% 56.3% 65.9%

068

Ralph Ward Ralph Ward

Example of the Impact of Ash Contamination Example of the Impact of Ash Contamination
on NDF and NDF Digestibility Recovery on NDF and NDF Digestibility Recovery

Sample NDF NDFom NDFD30 NDFD30om Sample NDF NDFom NDFD30 NDFD30om

15081‐68 54.6% 48.3% 56.3% 65.9% 15081‐68 54.6% 48.3% 56.3% 65.9%

15085‐56 60.1% 49.7% 15085‐56 60.1% 50.9% 49.7% 61.9%

Ralph Ward Ralph Ward

 Fiber degradation and iNDF
Adapted from Waldo et al., 1972
Nomenclature slide ‐ iNDF vs uNDF
Literature uses the term iNDF for indigestible NDF
We have an “Informal Fiber Working Group” that
meets at least once per year around the Cornell Nutrition
Conf. (Cornell, Miner Institute, Univ. of Bologna, Nutreco,
ADM, Univ. of Parma, most commercial labs, Charlie Sniffen,
Dave Mertens)
Mertens proposed a change in name from iNDF to uNDF –
the NDF we call iNDF can digest, just not under
anaerobic conditions, so to say indigestible is a
misrepresentation – so we now use uNDF – undigested
NDF
How do we currently characterize NDF
indigestibility? (iNDF)
Models like the CNCPS use (2.4 x lignin)/NDF
Dairy NRC (2001) and forage labs based on
Weiss et al., 1992 use (lignin/NDF)0.67
Van Soest and Lane Moore, 1963
USDA, Beltsville, MD right after
Pete characterized NDF
NDF Digestibility/Indigestibility
• Nousiainen et al. (2003; 2004)
demonstrated in grasses that the relationship between
lignin and digestibility was highly variable
• This was confirmed by Rinne et al. 2006 on legumes
– methods used to determine this included 288 hr
in situ (in a bag in the rumen) fermentations
• We were/are doing similar work at Cornell
‐ Working to develop a procedure that
could be used in a commercial lab
Ph.D. work of Raffrenato (2011)
Corn Silage NDF Digestibility by NDF and Corn Silage NDF Digestibility by NDF and
Lignin Content Lignin Content
NDF, Lignin, NDF, Lignin, NDFD% Est. NDF
%DM %DM %DM %DM (30hr) kd, %h
42.3 3.01 42.3 3.01 42.2 2.63
42.6 3.32 42.6 3.32 44.1 2.90
42.6 3.24 42.6 3.24 44.6 2.92
42.6 3.24 42.6 3.24 50.8 3.60
42.3 3.18
42.3 3.18 56.7 4.36
42.3 3.00
42.3 3.00 57.0 4.30

Factors Affecting Plant Development and Digestibility

“Lignification” = cross linking between
lignin and hemicellulose
• Light, heat and water interact at various
stages of development
• For example, water stress causes greater
cross‐linking between lignin and
hemicellulose
• Similar to the effect of building a very tall
building

From Van Soest, 1996

 Lignin – Phenolic Acid – Hemicellulose
Linkage Ratio of lignin to uNDF
Group n NDF ADL uNDF Ratio (range)
%DM g/kg NDF uNDF/ADL (%NDF)
• Ester & ether
Conventional C.S. 30 42.7 72.4 316.8 4.72 (1.73‐7.59)
linkages to
hemicellulose BMR C.S. 15 39.1 43.6 171.7 4.01 (3.14‐5.45)
• Steric hindrance Grasses 15 47.2 62.1 222.8 3.63 (2.51‐4.73)
• Phenolic‐CHO Mature grasses 11 64.5 84.4 313.8 3.89 (2.60‐5.64)
complexes may be
toxic Immature grasses 13 44.1 59.3 232.2 4.16 (2.59‐7.40)
Alfalfas 18 36.6 172.6 461.4 2.70 (2.43‐2.95)
(Grabber, 2005)
Raffrenato 2011

NDF Digestibility/Indigestibility Corn silage example for uNDF 240 vs

Weisbjerg et al. (2010) measured iNDF in legumes lignin*2.4 – 2013 corn silages
and grasses
‐ 288 h in situ,
‐ 12 µm porosity bags CS 1 CS 2 CS 3 CS 4
NDF, %DM 45.4 44.5 40.3 50.2
Grasses range between 1.27‐4.57 for ADL and iNDF aNDFom, %DM 44.4 43.8 38.8 49.3
Lignin, %DM 3.40 3.43 2.87 4.26
Legumes ranged between of 1.22‐3.59 for ADL and Lignin*2.4/NDF 18.4 18.7 17.9 20.7
iNDF respectively, uNDF, %NDF 11.8 10.7 10.9 14.2
Corn silage chemistry and uNDF by three methods,
240 hr uNDF, Chandler et al. (1980) and Conrad et al., Opportunity with uNDF
1984 equations
• Improve predictions of energy from forages –
Corn aNDF, aNDFom, uNDF, Chandler Conrad more biologically appropriate measurement
silage %DM %DM %NDF et al. et al.,
• Eliminate the need for ADF and lignin
1980 1984
measurements
1 38.1 37.5 23.6 42.3 16.4
– Only do ADF to get to lignin
2 39.5 38.9 25.6 39.2 16.9
– Only use lignin to calculate relationships to
3 41.5 40.9 27.3 43.4 17.7 NDF (either CNCPS approach or Weiss et al
4 43.7 41.9 22.8 42.8 31.8 1992)
• Helps improve predictions of intake and
rumen function – microbial production, etc

What about Non‐forage Fiber Feeds? Digestion curve of Soy Hulls

1

0.8
• Do they have the same digestion behavior as

aNDFom (% )
forages? 0.6

• What are the time‐points? 0.4

0.2

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (hr)

Alessandro Maria Zontini, 2014

 Digestion curve of Soy Hulls Digestion curve of Wheat Middlings
1 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0.8

aNDFom (%)
LnaNDFom (%)

0.6

0.1 uNDF
0.4
dNDF
0.2

0
0.01 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (hr) Time (hr)

Alessandro Maria Zontini, 2014 Alessandro Maria Zontini, 2014

Digestion curve of Defatted Corn

Digestion curve of Wheat Middlings
Gluten Feed
1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1

0.8

aNDFom (%remaining)
LnaNDFom(% )

0.6

uNDF
0.4

dNDF2
0.2
dNDF1
0
0.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (hr)
Time (hr)

Alessandro Maria Zontini, 2014

 Beet Pulp Degradation behavior
Feed 1 dNDF 2 dNDF
1 Beet Pulp x
0.8
Canola Meal x
Citrus Pulp x
aNDFom (%)

0.6 Corn Gluten Feed x

0.4 Corn Distiller x
Corn Germ x
0.2 Flaked Corn x
Rice Hulls x
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Soy Plus x
Time (hr) Soy Hulls x
Wheat Distiller x
Wheat Midds x

Observations Selecting time‐points

TP/|1‐Slope| 24‐48‐96 15‐48‐96 15‐48‐72 12‐48‐72 9‐48‐96 12‐72‐96 12‐72‐120 12‐48‐120
Beet Pulp 0.0477 0.0418 0.0676 0.0731 0.0962 0.0459 0.0510 0.0443
1) uNDF is best estimated at 120 of in vitro Canola Meal 0.0002 0.0099 0.0699 0.0709 0.0023 0.0479 0.0492 0.0706
fermentation Citrus 0.0036 0.0247 0.0130 0.0068 0.0420 0.0074 0.0076 0.0593
Corn Gluten 0.0672 0.0315 0.0810 0.0810 0.0315 0.0315 0.0122 0.0595
Corn Distiller 0.0748 0.0649 0.0729 0.0827 0.0868 0.0578 0.0538 0.0695
2) Non‐forages feeds are best characterized using a Corn Germ 0.0335 0.0334 0.0505 0.0722 0.0943 0.0786 0.0786 0.1096
two pools model (dNDF + uNDF) Rice Hulls 0.2391 0.1962 0.1545 0.1384 0.1850 0.1621 0.1227 0.1469
Soy Bean Meal 0.0428 0.0454 0.0442 0.0398 0.0548 0.0705 0.0661 0.0351
Soy Hulls 0.0643 0.0825 0.0843 0.0655 0.0789 0.0566 0.0605 0.0544
Which time points are most appropriate Soy Plus 0.0818 0.0555 0.1089 0.1113 0.0555 0.0805 0.0579 0.0391

to estimate the decay? Wheat Distiller 0.0137 0.0343 0.0626 0.0554 0.0030 0.0342 0.0356 0.0259
Wheat Midds 0.0677 0.0398 0.0333 0.1162 0.0690 0.0115 0.0132 0.0885
Average 0.0614 0.0550 0.0702 0.0761 0.0666 0.0570 0.0507 0.0669
STD 0.0625 0.0483 0.0365 0.0350 0.0491 0.0406 0.0321 0.0343
 Selecting time‐points uNDF of Non‐forage Fiber Sources
TP/Intercept 24‐48‐96 15‐48‐96 15‐48‐72 12‐48‐72 9‐48‐96 12‐72‐96 12‐72‐120 12‐48‐120
Beet Pulp 0.033 0.004 0.012 0.042 0.092 0.023 0.027 0.022
1) uNDF is best estimated at 120 of in vitro
Canola Meal 0.040 0.049 0.047 0.038 0.086 0.023 0.026 0.038
Citrus 0.021 0.001 0.017 0.000 0.054 0.018 0.016 0.009 fermentation
Corn Gluten 0.037 0.028 0.039 0.028 0.035 0.033 0.026 0.022
Corn Distiller 0.039 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.064 0.018 0.015 0.027
2) Concentrates feeds are best characterized using a
Corn Germ 0.020 0.101 0.004 0.133 0.201 0.080 0.072 0.094
Rice Hulls 0.242 0.192 0.153 0.128 0.177 0.151 0.111 0.138 two pools model (dNDF + uNDF)
Soy Bean Meal 0.024 0.002 0.006 0.030 0.011 0.014 0.017 0.036
Soy Hulls 0.022 0.026 0.035 0.049 0.023 0.035 0.033 0.031
3) 0, 12, 72, and 120h are the time points to use for
Soy Plus 0.050 0.010 0.042 0.033 0.024 0.013 0.004 0.012
Wheat Distiller 0.023 0.062 0.075 0.043 0.025 0.045 0.047 0.006 non‐forage feeds
Wheat Midds 0.044 0.040 0.009 0.012 0.038 0.034 0.036 0.022
Average 0.050 0.045 0.039 0.047 0.069 0.041 0.036 0.038
STD 0.061 0.054 0.041 0.041 0.061 0.039 0.029 0.039

Comparison of three methods of estimation of uNDF - 120 hr

fermentation, Chandler equation and the Conrad equation
aNDFom uNDF 2.4 x ADL ADL2/3/NDF2/3
Feed (%DM) (%aNDFom) (%aNDFom) (%aNDFom) uNDF Study @ Miner Institute
Beet pulp 47 19 28 24
Canola meal 29 41 73 45
Citrus pulp 25 20 19 53
Corn gluten feed 37 14 15 4 • What does it mean and how do we take
Corn distiller 41 16 26 23 advantage of the information?
Corn germ 63 29 23 21
Flaked corn 13 14 26 23
Soybean meal 9 1 23 21
Soy hulls 72 9 10 7
Wheat distillers 38 26 29 22
Wheat middlings 45 31 17 23
 Composition of diets used in uNDF study at Miner
Institute.
uNDF study – Miner Inst.
Diet
Ingredient % of ration DM LF‐LD (Low HF‐LD (High LF‐HD (Low HF‐HD (High
CS) CS) BMR) BMR) High CCS Low CCS High BMR Low BMR
Conventional corn silage 39.2 54.9 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
Brown midrib corn silage ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 36.1 50.2
DMI lb/d 58.43 63.95 64.39 64.61
Hay crop silage 13.4 13.4 13.3 13.3
Corn meal 17.3 1.6 20.4 6.3
SCM lb/d 92.17 99.67 100.77 102.31
Grain mix 30.1 30.1 30.2 30.2
Chemical composition
Efficiency 1.58 1.56 1.57 1.58
Crude protein, % of DM 17.0 17.0 16.7 16.7
NDF,% of DM 32.1 35.6 31.5 35.1
Starch, % of DM 28.0 21.2 27.8 23.8
24‐h NDF digestibility, % 56.3 54.0 62.0 60.3
peNDF, % of DM 17.3 23.1 18.5 21.5

uNDF Intake, Rumen content and Can we use this to better predict DMI?
Fecal excretion
High CCS Low CCS High BMR Low BMR

High CCS Low CCS High BMR Low BMR uNDF, %DM 9.92% 8.24% 7.57% 6.93%
uNDF uNDFi :
Intake lb/d 5.80 5.27 4.87 4.48 uNDFf 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
uNDF uNDFi :
Rumen lb 9.17 8.42 7.63 7.06 uNDFr 0.63 0.63 0.64 0.63
uNDF Fecal uNDFi, uNDF Intake
lb /d 5.80 5.27 4.87 4.48 uNDFf, uNDF Fecal
uNDFr, uNDF Rumen content
 Interpretation Perspective
High CCS Low CCS High BMR Low BMR Median
• Need to understand what changes uNDF Rumen content uNDF, %DM 9.92% 8.24% 7.57% 6.93% 7.90%
– 4.48 – 5.80 lbs. or 7% ‐ 10% DMI is significant uNDF Intake lb 5.80 5.27 4.87 4.48 5.07
– Rumen content appears to determine intake and fecal uNDF Rumen,
output of uNDF lb 9.17 8.42 7.63 7.06 8.03
– What causes variation of uNDF Rumen content? uNDF Fecal/d 5.80 5.27 4.87 4.48 5.07
• “Working hypothesis”: the disappearance of the fast and uNDFi:uNDFf 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
slow pools of pdNDF determines volume of uNDF Rumen uNDFi:uNDFr 0.63 0.63 0.64 0.63 0.63
content and capacity along with the “ballast and rumen fill
of the slow and uNDF fractions. Take into account current uNDF% and intake while
rebalancing diet. If you know current capacity based on
current feeds you should be able to optimize better diet.

Calculation of rates and pool sizes using in‐ Corn silage example: NDFdigestibility
vitro 30, 120 and 240 hr NDFD data 1.000

<Time> k1
<iNDF 2r> 0.800
Initial Fast Pool Fast Pool Decay

NDF residue
Stock 2r Fast Pool
Rate 2r
Stock 2r 0.600

Initial slow pool

Total pdNDF Residual NDF
Lag 2r
stock 2r 2r 2r P1+P2+iNDF
0.400
Initial total Slow Pool
NDF 2r Stock 2r Slow Pool Decay
Rate 2r
k2
0.200
<Time>

0.000
iNDF 2r
0 50 100 150 200 250
time, hrs
Parameters in orange are
Raffrenato et al. 2011
the those to be optimized
 Corn silage example: P1+P2+iNDF Corn silage example: fast pool
Larger fast pool appears to result in:
1.000 1.000
Faster eating
P1 Faster ruminal disappearance
0.800 0.800
Higher intakes

NDF residue
NDF residue

P2
0.600 0.600 More ruminal bouyancy
P1
iNDF
0.400 kd=5% 0.400 k1=11%
P1 = 72% NDF
P1+P2+iNDF
0.200 0.200

0.000 0.000
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
time, hrs time, hrs

Undigested NDF residues of CS, Corn silage uNDF residue after 47h in
Grass silage and Hay Busted Straw situ, laundered and NDF assay
47h in situ followed by washing
machine and NDF processing in
Ankom 10x20 dacron bags using
Ankom fiber analyzer
Miner 2014
Grass silage uNDF residue after 47h in Corn silage example: slow pool
situ, laundered and NDF assay 1.000
Larger Slow and uNDF pools:
0.800 More “ballast”
Greater chewing and rumination

NDF residue
0.600 P2 Lower intake
Slower eating speed
k2=2%,
0.400
P2 = 18.1% NDF
0.200

0.000
0 50 100 150 200 250
time, hrs

Straw (HB) uNDF residue after 47h in Corn silage example: iNDF
situ, laundered and NDF assay 1.000
uNDF
iNDF
0.800
kuNDF=0%,

NDF residue
uNDF = 9.9% NDF
0.600

0.400 For comparison

2.4*3% lignin/42% NDF = 17% unavailable NDF
0.200

0.000
0 50 100 150 200 250
time, hrs
NEW VERSION OF THE Rumen sub-model

CNCPS CONSTRUCTED <K p solids by

feed>
C N SI

<Kp fiber by
feed>
Nitrogen
B2 N SI

<K p solids b y
feed>
B1 N SI A2 N SI

Kp liquid
Application of a technology to
improve NDF digestibility
C N Escape B2 N Escap e B1 N Escape A2 N Escape

CNR B2 N R B1 N R A2 N R A1 N R

Rumen volume

IN VENSIM
C N Deg B2 N Deg B1 N Deg A2 N Deg A1 N Sol

Kd A1 N
Kd B2 N Kd B1 N Kd A2 N
Kd C N Average rumen
volume liquid <A1a CHO R>
<Feed N Deg Recycled <B2 CHO R>
Urea N R Rumen DM <A1 b CHO R>
IRC> Rumen volume
percent <B1 CHO R>
p ercent BW
Average Rumen <A1p CHO R>
Volume Total
Composition of peptide and free AA escape O A end sec
Pulse End N Rumen end sec
Feed PAA N
Escape Feed PAA N
SI
Recycled Urea N prop iNDF
Rumen Liquid

Rumen NFC
<A2 CHO R>
<A3 CHO R>
R Deg Rumen volume from
<Kp liq uid>
End N O A Kd Rumen End N flux model <A4 CHO R>
<Kp liquid> End N R Secretion <Kp liquid> iN DF
Secretion <PAA N IRC Total NDF
escape> <C CHO R> <EPZ B1 <EPZ B2
Kd Urea Engulfed>
<B1 N Deg> <B3 fast CHO R> Engulfed >
<B2 N Deg> PAA N R Escap e NH3 N R Escape
<A2 N Deg> End N O A Flow End N Escape N H3 N SI <HPZ A4
End N R Deg
End N SI pdNDF Rumen DM Engulfed>
End N O A End N R Rumen FC
PAA N R NH3 N R proppdNDF <B3 slow CHO PZ engulfed DM <EPZ B3 fast
<C N Deg> Feed N Deg IRC R NH3 N Engulfed>
R>
<Kp solids mean> PAA N Deg Kd PAA N R Absorbed <EPZ B3 slow
<HPZ M Cell NH3 N R Ab <C N R>
<B2 N R> <EPZ C Engulfed>
<EPZ B1 Cell Lysis> NFB K PAA Engulfed>
<End N R Deg> Lysis> <EPZ M Cell uptake
PZ p redation NFC Feed PAA IRC <End N R Deg> <R NFB Cell <B1 N R>
Lysis> Rumen protein Rumen Micro bial
bacteria IRC Growth>
<PAA N End PAA N <EPZ B2 Cell N FB PAA Uptake DM <R NFB CHO
Rumen end N Escape Total p rotozoal NFB N <FB N> <A2 N R> Cells>
<NFB Cell N Engulfed> Lysis> PZ Cell N Lysis NH3 N Uptake R NH3 N Uptake
Engulfed > Protozoal IRC <PZ Cell N Lysis> deg IRC cell lysis PAA N Uptak e R FB <PZ Cell N>
IRC inputs NFC bact N NFB <A1 N R>
inputs <HPZ A4 Cell NFB <End N R> <R FB CHO
<FB Cell N Lysis> <PZ N> required FC N required <R FB Cell <PAA N R> Cells> <PZ N>
PZ rumen PAA PZ lysis PAA IRC Gro wth>
Engulfed> <EPZ Fiber Cell
PZ predation FC consumption IRC Lysis>
bacteria IRC
PZ N SI PZ Cell N N FB Cell N FB Cell N R FB N SI
PZ Cell N Escape FB Cell N Escape
PAA N R IRC Ash EE
PZ Cell N IRC PZ N Engulfed IRC <PAA
PAA N IRC Microbial Ash Microbial EE
PZ Cell N PZ N Engulfed PZ IRC cycling consumption HPZ> Uptake
Incorporated IRC escape Uptake
Escape IRC NFB Cell N <PZ Ash R
PZ PAA N Escape Escape> <R FB EE
<Kp solid s mean> Escape>
PZ PAA Escape PZ N Engulfed FB PAA N
excretion IRC <PZ Kp> PAA N Engulfed Escape
IRC PAA N IRC PAA N Excreted as PAA <R NFB Ash <R FB Ash Ash Escape EE Escape <PZ EE R
<Kp liquid> Incorpo rated N PZ N H3 IRC Deg <Kp liquid> <HPZ predation of <R NFB EE
Uptake R N FB Escape> Escap e> Escape> Escape>
IRC output R NFB N NFB> <PAA N IRC
<Kp solids mean>
PZ NH3 IRC SI escape> <Kp solids by
PAA IRC N Deg PAA IRC uptake <PAA feed>
<PZ N Engulfed R NFB NFB Cell N
PZ N Engulfed consumption EPZ>
Incorporated> Engulfed Feed Ash SI
<End N Escape> Incorpo rated NFB PAA N Feed EE SI
<PZ N Engulfed
Excreted as PAA> Escape <EPZ predation of
<PZ N Engulfed <PAA N Uptake <PAA N Deg> <Feed PAA N
Excreted as NH3> R NFB> Escape> <PAA N IRC NFB>
<End PAA N

Ingredients lb DM % Diet
escape>
<A2 N Escape> Escap e>
so l feed n esc
PZ N Engulfed

PZ N Engulfed
Excreted as NH3 <EPZ R FB N
sol end esc

Non fiber carbohydrates

Engulfment>

sol paa % tto Soluble N escape FB Cell N

Engulfed
<FB Cell N <PZ PAA N
<End N Escap e> Escape> Escape>
<PZ Cell N
Escape>
<FB PAA N
Escape> Protozoal N consumption and
Solub le N escape <PAA N R
Escape>
Total N flo wing
from rumen
<NFB Cell N
Escape> m n esc <NFB PAA N
Escap e>
bacterial predation EPZ B1 Maint
EPZ B1
Energy
Yg EPZ
omasal nan

sol n esc g/d

<A2 N Escape>
<B2 N Escape>
<C N Escape>
Protozoal growth from bacterial EPZ B1 CHO for EPZ B1 Growth
<B1 N Escape> Maint
consumption <B3 slow CHO
Engulfment>
EPZ predation of
NFB
Energy

Corn Silage Processed 35 DM 49 NDF

<EPZ Fiber Cell
true % sol <FB N> Growth> EPZ B1 CHO for
<Total Fib er
Soluble N escape <EPZ capacity Growth EPZ B1 <NFB Cell N>
total feed nan EPZ R FB N CHO R> <EPZ B2 Cell EPZ B1
(% total) EPZ M Growth Engulfment Growth> <EPZ B1 Cell restriction> <Kd B1 CHO> Growth
Degraded LK PZ N engulfment

Fiber carbohydrates
EPZ M Energy Ratio FB N to Total Growth> restriction
EPZ M SI EPZ M Cells Growth EPZ M Energy <C CHO
EPZ M Cell EPZ M Cell Fib er CHO R K B1 CHO mu B1 EPZ PZ NFB N
Engulfment> a EPZ
Escape Growth N required EPZ engulfment allowable growth
PAA N consumption <NFC engulfment EPZ B1 Cell
consumption EPZ <B3 fast CHO adjustment> EPZ B1 CHO
<PZ Kp> <R FB CHO EPZ <EPZ M Cell Defaunate Gro wth
<Yg EPZ> Engulfment> Growth> Deg
EPZ M Cell Lysis EPZ M for Cells> <PZ N > EPZ K d B1 CHO <PZ Kp>
<a EPZ> Growth N consump tion
HPZ B1 CHO
<K EPZ lysis> PAA consumption Engulfment EPZ B1
PAA engulfment <Kd B1 CHO> EPZ B1 Cells EPZ B1 SI
restriction HPZ B1 CHO R Engulfed
N required HPZ EPZ B1 Cell
EPZ M Cell EPZ M mu M CHO EPZ EPZ EPZ M Maint <Ratio EPZ B1 Escape
Non CHO SI EPZ M Cell Non Lysed Degrad ed M engulfed to EPZ B1 EPZ metabo lic rate
EPZ M for Maint <PAA N R> HPZ predation o f relative to bacteria
EPZ B3 slow CHO Lysed Cells>
Maint <EPZ fiber NFB <HPZ A4 Cell
<HPZ M Cell
excretion> <EPZ Fiber Cell <HPZ A4 Cell Growth> B1 CHO R Deg B1 CHO Escape EPZ B1 Escap e EPZ B1 Cell
<B3 slow CHO EPZ M Cell CHO <EPZ Fiber Cell Growth> EPZ B2
<Ratio of EPZ B3 slow Lysis> Kd EPZ M CHO CHO Lysed> <LK PZ N engulfment CHO Lysed Cell Non
R> Lysed CHO Lysed> Ratio EPZ B1 engulfed EPZ B1 Lysed CHO SI
engulfed to EPZ fiber Cells> EPZ M Deg <HPZ M Cell restriction> to EPZ B1 Cells
Proportio n B3 slow <PZ CHO> EPZ B1 Cell Lysis
CHO Lysed> <EPZ B1 Cell <K p solids by
CHO R EPZ B3 slow <EPZ B1 Cell
<C CHO R> EPZ B3 slow CHO CHO Lysed> K d B1 CHO feed> Escape>

Medium 22.9 38.8%

Engulfed Recycled EPZ B2 Cell Non
for Maint PZ CHO Lysed
<B3 fast CHO R> R FB B3 <EPZ B2 Cell <PZ CHO> CHO Lysed
EPZ Engulfed Lysed mu B1 CHO EPZ B1 Engulfed K EPZ lysis EPZ B1 Cell N on
slow Maint CHO Lysed> a B NFB B1 CHO SI Recycled
Fiber CHO R EPZ B3 slow PZ CHO CHO Lysed <PZ CHO>
Propo rtion C EPZ
CHO R CHO Deg <EPZ M Cell <Kp solids mean>
EPZ B3 slow EPZ B3 slow <K engulfment FC Engulfed M CHO Lysed> <Rumen Liquid> <Average rumen
Proportion B3 fast Degrad ed Engulfed volume liquid > R B1 CHO fo r EPZ lysis factor
EPZ> <Prop EPZ Cell <K EPZ lysis>
CHO R <N H3 N R> Growth R NFB B1 EPZ B2 Lysed
<R NFB CHO Cell <Prop EPZ Cell Growth> R NFB B1 EPZ B1
EPZ Kd B3 slo w Maint Cell Non EPZ B2 Cell
<Kd B3 slow R B3 slow CHO Engulfment> Growth> Degraded R B1 CHO for CHO SI
<Kp solid s mean> CHO CHO Lysed
CHO> for Maint <R FB CHO Cell Maint
EPZ B3 slow <Bacterial CHO> Rumen NH3
Escape B3 slow CHO <Bacterial CHO> Engulfment> (mg/d l) EPZ B2 Cell Lysis
EPZ Fib er Engulfment R FB Non R NFB Non R NFB Cells R B2 CHO for
EPZ Fiber R FB Cells SI CHO DM SI <PZ Kp>
Cell Non CHO DM SI SI <Kp solids mean> LK N adjustment Maint
CHO SI SI <PZ NFB N <Kp solids mean> EPZ Bacterial CHO R NFB B2 Ratio EPZ B2 Cells to
PZ Kp EPZ B3 slow CHO B3 slow B3 slow CHO R R B3 slo w CHO Maint
allowab le growth> CHO R Engulfed EPZ B2 Engulfed
for Growth B3 slo w CHO Deg for Growth
<EPZ Fiber Cell R FB B3 slow EPZ B2 Cells
SI R NFB Non CHO R N FB Cell <EPZ metabolic rate EPZ B2 SI
EPZ Fiber Cell Non EPZ Fiber Cell Escape> B3 slo w CHO Degraded R FB Cell Escape R FB Non CHO Rumen N H3 EPZ B2 Cell
DM Engulfed Escape <K p solids by <EPZ B2 Cell relative to bacteria>
<PZ CHO> CHO Lysed Escape Escape DM Engulfed allowable growth Escape
feed> Escape>
PZ passage factor mu B3 slow EPZ <Ratio of EPZ B3 slow Kd B3 slow EPZ B2 Engulfed <a EPZ>
engulfed to EPZ fiber Cells> CHO mu B3 slow R FB Cell Recycled <Kd B2 CHO>
EPZ Fiber Cell Engulfed R NFB B2 EPZ B2 Escape
Growth Growth EPZ B2 Cell
EPZ Fiber R FB CHO bacterial Degrad ed B2 CHO R B2 CHO SI
EPZ Fiber Rumen pH R NFB CHO R B2 CHO for B2 CHO R Deg mu B2 EPZ Growth <PZ NFB N
Cells Cells Cells B2 CHO Escape EPZ Kd B2 CHO
EPZ Fiber Cell Lysed EPZ Fib er Cell <Kp fiber b y R FB CHO R FB CHO Cell R NFB CHO Cell Cells R NFB Cell Growth allowable growth>
EPZ Fiber <EPZ metabolic rate pH Inhib <Rumen NH3 a FB <Ratio EPZ B2 Cells to
CHO Lysed Lysis feed> ph Inhibition Growth Engulfment Engulfment Growth <a B NFB> Kd B2 CHO
<a EPZ> relative to b acteria> Y or N allowable growth>

Alfalfa Silage 17 CP 46 NDF 20 LNDF 11.5 19.4%

Growth R FB CHO <FB Cell N EPZ B2 Engulfed>
LK pH inhibition EPZ B2 EPZ B2 EPZ B2
EPZ Fib er Energy Engulfed> mu B2 CHO EPZ B2
R FB Growth <N FB N > Engulfed Degraded Growth
Energy <N FB Cell N <Kd B2 CHO > <Defaunate> B2 CHO EPZ B2 CHO EPZ B2 CHO for EPZ B2 Growth Energy
EPZ Fiber Growth <Ratio of EPZ B3 fast Kd B3 fast mu B3 fast Energy <FB N> HPZ Bacterial
Energy engulfed to EPZ fiber Cells> CHO Engulfed Engulfed> Peptide effect Engulfment Deg Growth Energy
<K EPZ lysis> CHO Prop HPZ Cell Rumen PAA NH3
B3 fast CHO R NFB A2 K B2 CHO
mu B3 fast EPZ Growth Ratio R NFB CHO A2 CHO SI engulfment
Escape NH3 N N FB Degraded A2 CHO R <Kd B2 CHO> EPZ B2 CHO for
B3 fast CHO R FB B3 fast Yg FB Growth R A2 CHO for A2 CHO R Deg A2 CHO Escape
<EPZ Fiber Cell Prop EPZ Cell Incorporated Maint
SI Degraded LK Peptid e Growth <Yg EPZ>
Escape> B3 fast B3 fast CHO R R B3 fast CHO Growth PZ Cell growth <a A NFB> <K p liquid>
<Yg EPZ> EPZ B3 fast CHO Deg <NH3 N Uptake PAA N NFB Adjustment Kd A2 CHO
CHO R for Growth <HPZ A4 Cell Bacterial CHO <NFC engulfment
for Growth R NFB> Incorp orated ad justment>
Growth> R NFB Growth mu A2 CHO R NFB A2 <EPZ capacity
B3 fast CHO restriction> EPZ B2 Maint
<EPZ B2 Cell EPZ Cell Growth Energy R A2 CHO for Maint
EPZ B3 fast Engulfment R B3 fast CHO <PAA N Uptake R NFB CHO
Growth> R NFB> <Kd A2 CHO> Maint
EPZ K d B3 fast for Maint
CHO <Kd B3 fast
Escape Energy
Feed VFAs
Protozoal intake restriction C CHO SI
CHO>
<K engulfment FC
<EPZ Fiber Cell
Growth> <EPZ B1 Cell
Growth>
HPZ
R A3 CHO fo r
R NFB A3
Degraded A3 CHO R Deg
A3 CHO R
A3 CHO Escap e
A3 CHO SI
EPZ B3 fast EPZ B3 fast Engulfed M Yg NFB
<EPZ Fiber Cell EPZ> HPZ Engulfed Growth
Degraded Engulfed R FB B3 fast <K p liquid>
<Ratio of EPZ C engulfed Escape> EPZ B3 fast Lysed PZ CHO
Maint K d A3 CHO
to EPZ fiber Cells> CHO Deg <a A N FB>
<PZ CHO Lysed> A1b CHO A1b CHO R A1b CHO
Pro p B3 slow EPZ mu A3 CHO R NFB A3 R Absorbed
HPZ M Cell CHO SI
Prop B3 fast EPZ Engulfed C CHO Escape EPZ C Escape PZ CHO <Kd A3 CHO> R A3 CHO for Maint A1b CHO R Ab A1b CHO Escape
Engulfed EPZ B3 fast CHO EPZ B3 fast Lysed HPZ M Deg <Prop HPZ Cell
Maint
Gro wth>

Corn Grain Ground Fine 15.4 26.1%

fo r Maint Engulfed Recycled
<EPZ B3 slow Prop B1 EPZ Kd HPZ M CHO R A4 CHO for <Kp liquid>
Prop C EPZ EPZ C Engulfed R NFB A4 HPZ A4
Engulfed> Engulfed Kp fiber by feed Maint Cell Non
Engulfed <EPZ B3 fast Recycled Degraded R NFB A4 Maint CHO SI
C CHO R EPZ C <EPZ Fiber Cell A1p CHO R A1p CHO
Engulfed> Lysis> HPZ M Cell HPZ M HPZ R A4 CHO for HPZ lysis factor A1p CHO R
Engulfed <Ratio of EPZ B3 fast No n CHO SI HPZ M Maint Ab sorb ed SI
<EPZ B1 <EPZ fiber HPZ M Cell Non Lysed Degraded M Growth A1p CHO Escape
EPZ B3 fast Maint engulfed to EPZ fiber Cells> <Kp solids mean> A1p CHO R Ab
<EPZ C Engulfed> excretion> CHO Lysed mu M CHO HPZ HPZ M for Maint
EPZ CHO
Engulfed> LK EPZ capacity <EPZ Fiber Cell HPZ A4 Cell No n
Engulfed EPZ fiber A4 CHO SI HPZ A4 Engulfed
Prop B2 EPZ restriction Lysis> mu A4 CHO K HPZ lysis CHO Lysed <PZ CHO >
excretion HPZ M for Recycled
Engulfed HPZ M Cell Lysis <Kp liquid>
<a HPZ> Growth <d ata capture>
<EPZ B2 a A NFB <Ratio HPZ A4 Cells to A1a CHO
C CHO <Yg HPZ> A1a CHO R
Engulfed> EPZ capacity Engulfment <Kp liq uid> HPZ A4 Engulfed> A1a CHO R SI

<EPZ Fiber Cells>

Ratio EPZ CHO
Engulfed to EPZ Cells restriction Fiber pool sizes <K HPZ lysis>

HPZ M
Kd A4 CHO A4 CHO R Deg
Ratio HPZ A4 Cells to
HPZ A4 Engulfed
HPZ A4 Cell Lysis
HPZ A4
Lysed
Absorbed
A1a CHO R Ab
A1a CHO Escape

K engulfment FC <Defaunate> HPZ M Cells HPZ A4 Escape HPZ A4 Cell

HPZ M SI Gro wth HPZ M Energy A4 CHO Escape
LK NFC EPZ HPZ M Cell HPZ M Cell HPZ M Growth CHO Lysed
Prop EPZ Fiber
EPZ Cells engulfment Escape Growth Energy
Cells N FC engulfment
<Kd B3 fast <EPZ B3 fast <B3 slow CHO <HPZ A4 Cell
adjustment <C CHO R> <B3 fast CHO R>
CHO> Engulfed> R> Escape>
<EPZ B1 Cells> <Kd B3 slow
CHO> <EPZ B3 slow <PZ Kp> HPZ A4 HPZ metabolic rate HPZ A4 Cells HPZ A4 SI
<EPZ B2 Cells> Weighted mean rate <EPZ C A4 CHO R HPZ A4 Cell
Diet NFC Engulfed> A4 CHO Engulfed relative to bacteria
o f FC digestion Engulfed > To tal B3 fast Total B3 slow <LK EPZ capacity Escape
Prop EPZ B1 To tal C CHO R CHO R Engulfment
CHO R restrictio n>
Cells <Kd A4 CHO >

Soybean Meal 47.5 Solvent 0.0 0.0%

Pro p EPZ B2 Kd C CHO <C CHO R>
Cells <PZ Kp>
<B3 slow CHO HPZ Capacity a HPZ
K A4 CHO HPZ A4 CHO HPZ A4 Cell
R> <B3 fast CHO R> Restrictio n engulfment <Defaunate>
total pdndf Deg Gro wth
Total Fiber

<EPZ B3 slow
Engulfed> Ratio o f EPZ B3 fast
engulfed to EPZ fiber Cells
<EPZ B3 fast
Engulfed> <B3 nfd intake>
CHO R

Endogenous nitrogen flows <Ratio HPZ A4 Cells to

HPZ A4 Engulfed> <Defaunate>
<NFC engulfment
adjustment>
<K d A4 CHO>

HPZ A4
Degraded
HPZ Kd A4 CHO mu A4 HPZ

HPZ A4
Gro wth
<PZ NFB N
allowable growth>

<EPZ B3 fast Ratio of engulfed fiber HPZ A4 CHO for

Engulfed> <EPZ Fiber Cells> Ratio o f EPZ B3 slow
to EPZ B3 cells engulfed to EPZ fib er Cells <EPZ B3 slow Growth
Engulfed>
<EPZ C
Engulfed>
Ratio of EPZ C engulfed
Enrichment of ruminal N pools by labeled endogenous N HPZ A4 CHO for HPZ A4 Growth
<EPZ C Maint Energy
to EPZ fiber Cells
Engulfed> (Ouellet/Lapierre experiments)
Yg HPZ
HPZ A4 Maint HPZ A4 Energy

Soy Pass 4.4 7.5%

<K p liquid> <Kp liquid>

<End N R Deg>
NH3 LEN Escape
End N to EN L LEN PAA Escape

Non pool Key: Pools Key: LEN PAA Deg

Rumen VFA + CO2

LEN PAA R NH3 LEN R
NH3 LEN Ab

Black = Flows Blue = Bacteria

<PZ Cell N Lysis>

<PZ Cell N> <PAA N R> <NH3 N R>

K End N FB NH3
<NH3 N R>

Red = Constants and v6.5 inputs Red = Protozoa <ID PZ N> PZ LEN ID
PZ Cell LEN Lysis
LEN PAA
Uptak e N FB

<PAA N Uptake <NH3 N Uptake

NH3 LEN
Uptake NFB
NH3 LEN
Uptake FB

<NH3 N Uptake
uptake

R FB LEN ID
ID R FB N
+ CH4 production
R NFB> R NFB> FB>

Blood Meal Average 1.5 2.5%

PZ LEN LI

Green = Vensim calculations

PZ LEN SI PZ Cell LEN R FB LEN R FB LEN

Green = Feed intake PZ LEN Pass PZ Cell LEN

Escape
N FB Cell LEN FB Cell LEN
FB Cell LEN
Escape
SI
R FB LEN Pass
LI <EPZ B1 CHO
fo r Maint>
<EPZ B2 CHO
PZ LEN Out PZ PAA LEN <EPZ B3 fa st CHO
<LEN PAA R> NFB Cell LEN for M aint>
Escape R FB PAA LEN for Maint>

Pink = Pool shadow variables

Escape R FB LEN Out <HPZ A4 CHO
<Kp solid s mean> FB Cell LEN <Kp solid s mean> Escap e

Yellow = Small intestine <LI transit time>

PZ LEN Fec <LEN PAA
Escape>
PZ LEN Engulfed
Excreted as PAA
LEN PAA
Engulfment
<PAA N R>
N FB Cell LEN
<Kp so lids mean>
Engulfment

<FB Cell N>

R FB LEN
<LI transit time>
<EPZ B3 slow CHO
for Ma int> Protozoa ATP
Maintenance
fo r Maint>
<A1 a CHO R
Ab>
<A1p CHO R
Ab> <A1 b CHO R
Ab>
<EPZ B1 CHO
for Ma int> <EPZ B2 CHO
Engulfment <LEN PAA for Ma int>
<FB Cell N Fec

Blue = Lookups Light blue = Absorbed material

<data capture> PZ LEN Engulfed
Incorporated <PAA N
Engulfed>
<NFB Cell N
<NFB Cell N> Engulfed>
Escape>

<data capture>
<HPZ A4 Growth
Energy>
Feed VFA
N FC CHO ATP
protozoal maintenance
<HPZ A4 CHO
for M aint>

PZ LEN Engulfed Engulfed >

<R B1 CHO for
PZ LEN Engulfed <EPZ Fiber Ma int>
Protozo a VFA +

Pink = Rumen nitrogen transactions Excreted as NH3 Growth Energy> Protozo a ATP <R B2 CHO for
CO2 + CH4
growth Ma int>
<EPZ B2 Gro wth Total rumen VFA + N FC CHO ATP
Energy> Rumen N FC VFA + <R A2 CHO for
CO2 + CH4 bacterial maintenance

Energy Booster 100 1.0 1.7%

CO2 + CH4 Ma int>
R NFB LEN ID <LI transit time>
<ID R N FB N > <EPZ B1 Growth
Ene rgy> <R A3 CHO for
Maint>
R NFB R NFB R N FB Rumen FC VFA + <R A4 CHO for
<data capture>
LEN SI LEN LI LEN Fec CO2 + CH4 NFC CHO ATP Maint>
R NFB LI Pass R N FB LI Out
<End N Out> protozoal growth
<N FB Cell LEN Free LEN Out <EPZ B1 Gro wth
NFB PAA LEN <data capture> NFC CHO ATP Energy>
Escape> Total fecal FC CHO ATP bacterial growth
Escape bacterial maintenance
LEN /kg DMI FC CHO ATP <EPZ B2 Growth
bacterial growth Energy>
<DMI> <R B3 fast CHO <HPZ A4 Growth
<LEN PAA for M aint> <R NFB Growth Energ y>
Free LEN
<LEN PAA Escape> <PZ LEN Fec> Energy>
Fec
Escape> Total fecal LEN <R B3 slow CHO <R FB Growth
<End N Escape> for Maint> Energ y>
Total microbial
Fecal LEN relative to <Fecal N>
<R NFB LEN total fecal N
freee end free end esc Fec> <R FB LEN Fec>
<End N OA
Flow>

<data capture>

b ug end esc
EO

<NFB Cell LEN

Escape>

<FB Cell LEN

total end EO

total end

bug end esc

total/o mi
free end duo

prop free end

prop bug end

bug end sec p er

omi
omi
<DMI>

per dmi

free end sec per

OMI
Endogenous PAA incorporation into microbes

<End N R Deg> End N to EPAA EPAA Escape

<Kp liquid>
MinVit 2.2 3.7%
Escape> <PZ Cell LEN EPAA NH3
PZ EPAA <PZ Cell N>
Escape> EPAA R R NFB EPAA
Absorbed
Absorbed <End N LI Deg>

Urea 0.1 0.2%

<PAA N R>
<PZ Cell N K End PAA
Lysis> Uptake
PZ Cell EPAA <K p solids mean> EPAA LI Deg
PZ EPAA SI ID R NFB EPAA
Lysis EPAA R Uptake
ID PZ N SI ID ID R N FB N

<PAA N Uptake
R NFB>
PZ EPAA LI PZ EPAA SI PZ Cell EPAA NFB Cell R NFB R NFB
PZ Cell EPAA EPAA LI EPAA LI
PZ EPAA SI Pass EPAA N FB Cell EPAA EPAA SI R NFB EPAA SI
Escape Escape EPAA LI NH3
Pass

<PAA N R>
PZ Engulfed EPAA R NFB EPAA
PZ EPAA LI O ut PZ EPAA Escape Excreted EPAA R Engulfed LI Out EPAA LI Uptak e
<Kp solid s mean> R NFB EPAA
N FB Cell EPAA
<EPAA R> Engulfed Escape <PAA N LI
Uptak e N FB>
<LI transit time>
PZ Engulfed EPAA <PAA N R NFB LI NFB Cell
<EPAA Escape> Incorporated Engulfed > <LI transit time> EPAA
PZ EPAA Fec <EPAA Escape> EPAA Fec
PZ Engulfed EPAA

Ryan Higgs, Ph.D. 2014 Total 58.9 100%

Prop ortion of K PZ up take
NFB PAA NFB PAA LI NFB Cell
<PAA N Uptake EPAA Out
R NFB> <NFB Cell N>
Protozoal End <NFB Cell N
N H3 <NH3 N Uptake
R NFB> Engulfed>
LI NFB
EPAA Fec

Chemical composition of the diets Chemical analyses of the control and

treatment forages using the three pool
Crude protein, %DM 15.6
approach for NDF
SolP (% CP) 39.5
Ammonia (% SP) 8.5 Fast Pool Slow Pool uNDF kd 1 kd 2
ADIP (% CP) 6.7 NDF (% NDF) NDF (% NDF) (%NDF) (%/hr) (%/hr)
Feed name
NDIP (% CP) 15.7
Control corn
%NFC 36.4 54.2 27.2 18.6 9.7 1.4
silage
Sugars 2.4
Treatment
Starch 27.2 62.5 25.3 12.2 6.1 1.9
corn silage
NDF 35.4
Control alfalfa
peNDF 55.8 32.3 29.4 38.3 5.2 1.5
silage
Lignin (% NDF) 10.0
Treatment
Ether extract 4.7 50.5 12.4 37.1 9.0 1.8
alfalfa silage
Ash 8.2
Forage % DM 58.3
Predicted rumen pools sizes and expected Conclusions and implications
DM intake – g/d
Control lower Technology
• The use of 240 hr NDFD better describes the undigestibility
Control intake treatment
of the forage for use in cattle
B3 Fast CHO 1849 1624 2578
B3 Slow CHO 3082 2732 2174
• A better description of NDF undigestibility can be
C CHO 5082 4587 4203
implemented by commercial laboratories – especially for
Total rumen NDF 10013 8943 8955 undigested NDF – will have to build new NIR calibrations
DMI (lbs) 59.1 51.4 59.1
Dry matter intake on the control example was reduced to a level • Working to develop a larger data set to explain the
where the total rumen NDF pool was equivalent to the treatment variation in NDF pool sizes and rates for all NDF containing
example (indicated in red). Based on this example intake might be feeds
expected to be different by 7.7 lbs. The diet modeled is high forage – Within forage group information is linked to agronomic
and high NDF and probably represents the situation with the greatest and environmental conditions but not well described
opportunity to achieve an intake response.

Thank you for your attention.

Opportunity with uNDF
• Improve predictions of energy from forages –
more biologically appropriate measurement
• Eliminate the need for ADF and lignin
measurements
– Only do ADF to get to lignin
– Only use lignin to calculate relationships to
NDF (either CNCPS approach or Weiss et al
1992)
• Helps improve predictions of intake and
rumen function – microbial production, etc
mev1@cornell.edu