Skip to main content
. 2020 May 24;98(6):skaa160. doi: 10.1093/jas/skaa160

Table 1.

Ingredients and chemical and particle size analysis of the experimental diets

Barley silage, % of dietary DM
Item 0 4 8 12
Ingredient, % of DM
 Barley silage — 4 8 12
 Barley grain, dry rolled 80 76 72 68
 Corn distillers grains 15 15 15 15
 Supplement (pelleted) 5 5 5 5
  Barley grain 3.36 3.36 3.36 3.36
  Calcium carbonate 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
  Salt 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
  Feedlot premix1 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31
  Vitamin E (500,000 IU/kg) 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006
  Rumensin premix2 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015
  Flavoring agent 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
Chemical analysis, % of DM
 DM, % as-is 90.7 ± 0.80 86.1 ± 0.63 81.2 ± 0.69 76.3 ± 0.68
 OM 95.6 ± 0.80 96.1 ± 0.33 95.1 ± 0.68 95.4 ± 0.49
 Starch 49.0 ± 2.24 48.2 ± 1.54 46.8 ± 1.99 43.1 ± 3.19
 NDF 22.7 ± 1.27 22.4 ± 1.21 23.9 ± 1.31 25.1 ± 1.25
 ADF 6.3 ± 0.72 6.4 ± 0.48 7.3 ± 0.40 8.1 ± 0.65
 CP 14.8 ± 0.76 14.6 ± 0.67 14.8 ± 0.60 14.8 ± 0.62
 Ether extract 3.5 ± 0.23 3.0 ± 0.09 3.0 ± 0.16 2.3 ± 0.08
Particle size analysis3
 pef8.0 0.037 ± 0.0053 0.045 ± 0.0053 0.055 ± 0.0105 0.057 ± 0.0093
 peNDF8.0, % of DM 0.84 ± 0.145 1.01 ± 0.114 1.32 ± 0.285 1.43 ± 0.250
 pef1.18 0.927 ± 0.0120 0.921 ± 0.0165 0.925 ± 0.0091 0.925 ± 0.0027
 peNDF1.18, % of DM 21.0 ± 1.11 20.6 ± 1.10 22.1 ± 1.27 23.2 ± 1.13
DM retained on sieve4, %
 3.35 mm 24.5 ± 4.27 27.6 ± 3.82 29.6 ± 3.63 32.2 ± 3.80
 2.36 mm 44.9 ± 2.47 42.6 ± 1.95 39.9 ± 2.10 38.9 ± 2.59
 1.70 mm 16.4 ± 2.08 15.0 ± 1.54 14.4 ± 1.46 13.9 ± 1.07
 1.18 mm 5.9 ± 0.74 6.0 ± 0.64 6.4 ± 0.66 6.2 ± 0.50
 850 µm 3.3 ± 0.70 3.4 ± 1.00 3.7 ± 0.76 3.6 ± 0.46
 Pan 5.2 ± 1.77 5.3 ± 2.38 6.0 ± 1.76 5.2 ± 0.76

1Feedlot premix provided an additional 14 g/kg Ca, 103 mg/kg Zn, 26 mg/kg Cu, 47 mg/kg Mn, 1 mg/kg I, 0.50 mg/kg Se, 0.33 mg/kg Co, 17,187 IU/kg vitamin A, 859 IU/kg vitamin D3, and 24 IU/kg vitamin E to the diet DM.

2Rumensin premix (Elanco Animal Health, Ontario, Canada) supplied 28 mg monensin/kg dietary DM.

3Particle size distribution of TMR measured using the Penn State Particle Separator; pef8.0 and pef1.18 = physical effectiveness factor (ranging from 0 to 1) determined as the total proportion of particles retained on 2 sieves (19 and 8 mm) and 3 sieves (19, 8, and 1.18 mm, respectively; peNDF8.0 and peNDF1.18 = physically effective NDF determined as NDF content of TMR multiplied by pef8.0 and pef1.18, respectively.

4Determined by dry sieving through a series of sieves arranged in descending mesh size.