Anim Biosci > Volume 32(9); 2019 > Article |
|
Items | Treatment1) | SEM | p-value2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||
CON | RO | FO | RFO | CON vs oil | RO vs FO | RFO vs RO+FO | ||
DMI (kg/d) | 20.2 | 20.5 | 19.8 | 19.9 | 0.26 | 0.45 | 0.67 | 0.37 |
Energy intake (Mcal/d) | 32.5 | 35.5 | 34.3 | 34.4 | 0.81 | 0.39 | 0.68 | 0.36 |
Fatty acid intake (g/d) | ||||||||
C14:0 | 2.3 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.22 | *** | * | 0.45 |
C16:0 | 105.3 | 161.5 | 127.6 | 140.7 | 1.85 | *** | ** | 0.54 |
C16:1 | 3.2 | 4.7 | 3.1 | 3.9 | 0.68 | ** | ** | 0.37 |
C17:0 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 1.3 | 0.28 | ** | 0.88 | 0.87 |
C18:0 | 15.0 | 68.5 | 37.0 | 50.6 | 2.15 | *** | ** | 0.55 |
C18:1 cis-9 | 127.4 | 284.3 | 246.1 | 260.4 | 4.86 | *** | * | 0.44 |
C18:2 cis-9,12 | 259.0 | 526.4 | 344.4 | 423.9 | 5.72 | *** | *** | 0.55 |
C18:3 (ALA) | 52.6 | 240.1 | 490.1 | 370.6 | 4.89 | *** | ** | 0.77 |
C20:0 | 3.0 | 5.1 | 3.4 | 4.1 | 0.19 | ** | ** | 0.43 |
C20:1 | 1.3 | 2.8 | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0.11 | *** | 0.76 | 0.45 |
C22:0 | 2.6 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 0.18 | * | 0.87 | 0.83 |
C22:2 | 2.7 | 2.9 | 2.8 | 2.7 | 0.11 | * | 0.44 | 0.34 |
Summations (g/d) | ||||||||
Total C183) | 454.0 | 1,119.3 | 1,117.6 | 1,105.4 | 9.28 | *** | 0.58 | 0.46 |
SFA | 132.4 | 248.1 | 180.2 | 207.4 | 4.76 | ** | ** | 0.65 |
UFA | 446.2 | 1,061.1 | 1,089.0 | 1,064.0 | 8.57 | *** | 0.76 | 0.29 |
MUFA | 132.0 | 291.7 | 251.7 | 266.8 | 4.75 | *** | * | 0.77 |
PUFA | 314.3 | 769.4 | 837.3 | 797.2 | 6.74 | *** | ** | 0.65 |
SEM, standard error of least squares means; DMI, dry matter intake; ALA, α-linolenic acid; SFA, saturated fatty acid; UFA, unsaturated fatty acid; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acid; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acid.
1) Cows were fed a basal diet (control; CON) or basal diet supplemented with either 4.0% rubber seed oil (RO), 4.0% flaxseed oil (FO), or 2.0% rubber seed oil+2.0% flaxseed oil (RFO). The CON diet was also used for feeding during the pre-trial period.
2) CON vs oil, CON versus oil (RO, FO, RFO); RO vs FO, RO versus FO; RFO vs RO+FO, RFO versus RO plus FO.
FA (g/100 g of total FA reported) | Treatment1) | SEM | p-value2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||
CON | RO | FO | RFO | CON vs oil | RO vs FO | RFO vs RO+FO | ||
C8:0 | 0.23 | 0.28 | 0.24 | 0.33 | 0.02 | ** | 0.09 | ** |
C14:0 | 0.98 | 0.76 | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.05 | ** | * | 0.35 |
C14:1 | 0.49 | 0.38 | 0.46 | 0.46 | 0.02 | * | * | 0.14 |
C15:0 | 0.54 | 0.37 | 0.43 | 0.41 | 0.02 | *** | ** | 0.37 |
C16:0 | 8.75 | 7.81 | 7.60 | 7.59 | 0.16 | *** | 0.31 | 0.52 |
C16:1 | 0.52 | 0.67 | 0.69 | 0.71 | 0.04 | *** | 0.61 | 0.55 |
C17:0 | 0.72 | 0.44 | 0.47 | 0.44 | 0.02 | *** | 0.21 | 0.44 |
C18:0 | 12.99 | 12.79 | 12.18 | 11.75 | 0.28 | * | 0.11 | * |
C18:1 t-93) | 0.16 | 0.31 | 0.28 | 0.41 | 0.05 | ** | 0.70 | 0.06 |
C18:1 t-11 (VA) | 0.41 | 2.16 | 2.70 | 2.89 | 0.19 | *** | * | * |
C18:1 c-9 | 9.35 | 11.28 | 10.45 | 10.37 | 0.56 | * | 0.26 | 0.45 |
C18:2 c-9, 12 | 48.81 | 47.50 | 43.97 | 45.54 | 0.81 | *** | ** | 0.83 |
C20:0 | 1.38 | 0.70 | 0.59 | 0.73 | 0.08 | *** | 0.32 | 0.33 |
C18:3 (ALA) | 4.42 | 6.84 | 10.74 | 8.37 | 0.25 | *** | *** | 0.17 |
C20:1 | ND | 0.03 | 0.03 | ND | 0.00 | *** | * | *** |
C18:2 c-9, t-11 CLA | 0.01 | 0.32 | 0.43 | 0.46 | 0.03 | *** | * | * |
C22:0 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.26 | 0.23 | 0.01 | * | *** | 0.10 |
C20:3 c-8, 11, 14 | 3.58 | 1.37 | 1.61 | 1.58 | 0.16 | *** | 0.27 | 0.64 |
C23:0 | 2.91 | 2.35 | 2.17 | 2.43 | 0.13 | *** | 0.30 | 0.24 |
C22:1 c-13 | 0.47 | 052 | 0.63 | 0.59 | 0.02 | *** | ** | 0.51 |
C20:5 (EPA) | 0.62 | 0.74 | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.05 | *** | * | 0.16 |
C22:2 | 0.27 | 0.23 | 0.28 | 0.25 | 0.01 | * | *** | 0.69 |
C24:1 | 0.21 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.01 | *** | 0.65 | 0.84 |
C22:4 | 0.87 | 0.39 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.06 | *** | 0.89 | 0.99 |
C22:5 | 0.90 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 1.09 | 0.07 | 0.12 | 0.99 | 0.26 |
Summations | ||||||||
SFA4) | 28.80 | 25.50 | 25.20 | 25.21 | 0.48 | *** | 0.93 | 0.45 |
UFA | 71.20 | 74.43 | 74.80 | 74.75 | 0.48 | *** | 0.91 | 0.34 |
MUFA | 11.72 | 15.50 | 15.40 | 15.96 | 0.58 | *** | 0.76 | 0.44 |
PUFA | 59.48 | 59.61 | 59.40 | 58.77 | 0.75 | 0.78 | 0.96 | 0.19 |
(n-3)/(n-6) ratio | 0.21 | 0.22 | 0.33 | 0.27 | 0.01 | *** | *** | 0.55 |
FA, fatty acid; SEM, standard error of least squares means; VA, vaccenic acid; ALA, α-linolenic acid; ND, not detected; CLA, conjugated linoleic acid; EPA, eicosapentaenoic acid; SFA, saturated fatty acid; UFA, unsaturated fatty acid; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acid; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acid.
1) Cows were fed a basal diet (control; CON) or basal diet supplemented with either 4.0% rubber seed oil (RO), 4.0% flaxseed oil (FO), or 2.0% rubber seed oil+2.0% flaxseed oil (RFO). The CON diet was also used for feeding during the pre-trial period.
2) CON vs oil, CON versus oil (RO, FO, RFO); RO vs FO, RO versus FO; RFO vs RO+FO, RFO versus RO plus FO.
4) SFA, sum of C8:0, C14:0, C15:0, C16:0, C17:0, C18:0, C20:0, C22:0, and C23:0; UFA, total unsaturated FA reported; MUFA, sum of C14:1, C16:1, C18:1 trans-9, C18:1 trans-11 (VA), C18:1 cis-9, C20:1, C22:1 cis-13, and C24:1; PUFA, sum of C18:2 cis-9, 12, C18:2 cis-9, trans-11 (CLA), C18:3 (ALA), C20:3 cis-8, 11, 14, C20:5 (EPA), C22:2, C22:4, and C22:5.
Items | Treatment1) | SEM | p-value2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||
CON | RO | FO | RFO | CON vs oil | RO vs FO | RFO vs RO+FO | ||
Serum | ||||||||
SOD (U/mL) | 42.7 | 41.8 | 41.7 | 47.6 | 2.68 | 0.74 | 0.99 | 0.10 |
GSH-Px (U/mL) | 122.0 | 118.7 | 102.3 | 104.4 | 4.23 | ** | * | 0.24 |
MDA (nmol/mL) | 3.8 | 3.3 | 4.8 | 4.6 | 0.27 | 0.10 | ** | 0.19 |
CAT (U/mL) | 2.5 | 2.3 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 0.17 | * | 0.37 | 0.27 |
Milk | ||||||||
SOD (U/mL) | 133.2 | 127.9 | 130.6 | 130.4 | 1.44 | * | 0.23 | 0.56 |
GSH-Px (U/mL) | 72.7 | 58.8 | 69.9 | 56.8 | 5.28 | 0.09 | 0.19 | 0.28 |
MDA (nmol/mL) | 1.9 | 3.5 | 2.1 | 2.6 | 0.40 | * | 0.48 | 0.12 |
CAT (U/mL) | 5.3 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 0.31 | ** | 0.46 | 0.23 |
SEM, standard error of least squares means; SOD, superoxide dismutase; GSH-Px, glutathione peroxidase; MDA, malondialdehyde; CAT, catalase.
1) Cows were fed a basal diet (control; CON) or basal diet supplemented with either 4.0% rubber seed oil (RO), 4.0% flaxseed oil (FO), or 2.0% rubber seed oil+2.0% flaxseed oil (RFO). The CON diet was also used for feeding during the pre-trial period.
Items | Treatment1) | SEM2) | p-value | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||
CON | RO | FO | RFO | CON vs oil | RO vs FO | RFO vs RO+FO | ||
IgA (μg/mL) | 58.1 | 73.5 | 67.4 | 58.6 | 1.86 | 0.44 | 0.58 | 0.19 |
IgG (mg/mL) | 30.5 | 42.5 | 24.6 | 23.9 | 3.15 | * | *** | 0.97 |
IgM (mg/mL) | 4.6 | 3.9 | 3.6 | 4.3 | 0.63 | 0.42 | 0.73 | 0.50 |
PGE2 (pg/mL) | 12.6 | 14.6 | 12.1 | 12.1 | 0.55 | 0.10 | ** | 0.71 |
Cytokine levels (pg/mL) | ||||||||
IFN-γ | 230.1 | 213.3 | 215.2 | 216.9 | 1.91 | *** | 0.38 | 0.42 |
IL-2 | 45.3 | 50.9 | 45.3 | 47.9 | 1.85 | 0.37 | 0.29 | 0.59 |
IL-4 | 21.4 | 22.4 | 21.4 | 21.4 | 0.50 | 0.36 | * | 0.08 |
IL-10 | 204.1 | 209.2 | 201.4 | 199.9 | 1.52 | 0.58 | 0.07 | 0.22 |
TNF-α | 67.6 | 16.3 | 26.0 | 23.9 | 5.79 | ** | 0.89 | 0.58 |
SEM, standard error of least squares means; Ig, immunoglobulin; PGE2, prostaglandin 2; INF-γ, interferon γ; IL, interleukins; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor α.
1) Cows were fed a basal diet (control; CON) or basal diet supplemented with either 4.0% rubber seed oil (RO), 4.0% flaxseed oil (FO), or 2.0% rubber seed oil+2.0% flaxseed oil (RFO). The CON diet was also used for feeding during the pre-trial period.