Collaborative study to evaluate the indigestible neutral detergent fiber and indigestible acid detergent fiber contents in feeds by in situ procedure

The objective of this collaborative study was to evaluate the indigestible neutral detergent fiber (iNDF) and indigestible acid detergent fiber (iADF) content in feeds in six laboratories from institutions linked to the National Institute of Science and Technology in Animal Science (INCT-CA). Six fe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marjorrie Augusto de Souza, Edenio Detmann, Gabriel Cipriano Rocha, Marcia de Oliveira Franco, Erick Darlisson Batista, Sebastião de Campos Valadares Filho, Telma Teresinha Berchielli
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universidade Estadual de Londrina 2016-09-01
Series:Semina: Ciências Agrárias
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/23546
Description
Summary:The objective of this collaborative study was to evaluate the indigestible neutral detergent fiber (iNDF) and indigestible acid detergent fiber (iADF) content in feeds in six laboratories from institutions linked to the National Institute of Science and Technology in Animal Science (INCT-CA). Six feeds were evaluated: signal grass hay, sugarcane, corn silage, soybean meal, corn and citrus pulp. Estimated levels of iNDF and iADF proved to be dependent on the laboratory in which the analysis was performed. It was found that differences between laboratories ranged from 2.40 percentage points for soybean meal to 8.05 percentage points for sugarcane for iNDF analysis and from 1.79 percentage points for corn to 10.06 percentage points for hay for iADF analysis. It was observed that the individual evaluation of each material, the total random variation of the results between laboratories ranged from 88.75 to 96.77% and 88.75 to 98.40% for iNDF and iADF analysis, respectively. The iNDF and iADF levels are dependent on the interaction effect between the evaluated material and laboratory and have low reproducibility; this may be a consequence of the differences between the methods practiced by each laboratory, demonstrating lack of standardization of procedures used by the laboratories.
ISSN:1676-546X
1679-0359