Clark J K, Shanks B C, Jogan K S, Philipp D, Coffey K P, Jack N E, Caldwell J D, Rhein R T
J Anim Sci. 2016 Dec;94(12):4985-4992. doi: 10.2527/jas.2016-0564.
Bermudagrass ( L.) is a familiar forage in the equine industry and teff () is gaining popularity as well. However, it is unclear if the application of poultry litter as a fertilizer affects palatability of these forages in horses. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine if forage species and timing of litter application as a fertilizer has an effect on preference by horses. Hay treatments were arranged in a 2 × 3 factorial treatment arrangement consisting of teff and bermudagrass harvested after no poultry litter application (NL), poultry litter applied to stubble immediately after removal of the previous cutting (L0), or poultry litter applied 14 d after the previous cutting (L14). Mature, stock-type geldings ( = 5; 480 ± 52.9 kg) were used in this study arranged as a balanced incomplete block design. Horses were offered different combinations of 4 of the 6 total forages daily for 3 d in each of 3 evaluation periods that immediately followed a 10-d adaptation period. Each forage was offered at half of the total daily DMI as measured during the last 5 d of the 10-d adaptation period to encourage selection among the 4 forages. Each hay offered was randomly allocated to a corner and suspended in hay nets over muck buckets in the corners of each stall. Horses were individually housed in 3.6- by 3.6-m indoor stalls with sand bedding and access to 3.6- by 7.6-m outdoor runs. Along with hay, horses were offered oats twice daily at 0.125% of BW at each feeding. Dry matter intake was greater ( < 0.01) for bermudagrass than for teff and for NL and L0 treatments compared with L14 treatments. Horses spent more ( < 0.01) time consuming bermudagrass compared with teff. However, there were no differences ( ≥ 0.25) in time spent consuming hay across litter treatments. Therefore, horses may prefer bermudagrass to teff and later application of poultry litter may affect voluntary intake by horses. However, all forages were mature, which may have impacted total intake and preference.
狗牙根（Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.）是马业中常见的饲料，而埃塞俄比亚画眉草（Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter）也越来越受欢迎。然而，尚不清楚施用家禽粪便作为肥料是否会影响这些饲料对马的适口性。因此，本研究的目的是确定饲料种类和作为肥料的家禽粪便施用时间是否会对马的偏好产生影响。干草处理采用2×3析因处理设计，包括未施家禽粪便（NL）、在前茬刈割后立即将家禽粪便施用于茬口（L0）或在前茬刈割后14天施用家禽粪便（L14）后收获的埃塞俄比亚画眉草和狗牙根。本研究使用了成熟的、役用型去势公马（n = 5；480 ± 52.9 kg），采用平衡不完全区组设计。在紧接着10天适应期后的3个评估期内，每天为马提供6种总饲料中4种的不同组合，持续3天。每种饲料的供应量为10天适应期最后5天测量的每日总干物质摄入量（DMI）的一半，以鼓励在4种饲料中进行选择。提供的每种干草都随机分配到一个角落，并悬挂在每个马厩角落的粪桶上方的干草网中。马单独饲养在3.6×3.6米的室内马厩中，铺垫沙子，可进入3.6×7.6米的室外运动场。除了干草外，每天还以体重的0.125%分两次为马提供燕麦。狗牙根的干物质摄入量高于埃塞俄比亚画眉草（P < 0.01），与L14处理相比，NL和L0处理的干物质摄入量更高（P < 0.01）。与埃塞俄比亚画眉草相比，马消耗狗牙根的时间更多（P < 0.01）。然而，不同粪便处理的干草消耗时间没有差异（P ≥ 0.25）。因此，马可能更喜欢狗牙根而不是埃塞俄比亚画眉草，后期施用家禽粪便可能会影响马的自愿采食量。然而，所有饲料都已成熟，这可能影响了总采食量和偏好。
