Research Article

 

Effect of Supplementation of Essential Cation, Anion or Combination of Both on the Digestibility of Cation Minerals in Diet of Cows

 

Kiran Babu S., Bandla Srinivas

Dairy Production, National Dairy Research Institute, Bangalore 560030, India.

Editor | Kuldeep Dhama, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Received | August 22, 2014; Revised | September 08, 2014; Accepted | September 09, 2014; Published | September 20, 2014

*Correspondence |Bandla Srinivas, Dairy Production, National Dairy Research Institute, Bangalore 560030, India; Email: bandla_srinivas@rediffmail.com

Citation | Babu KS, Srinivas B (2014). Effect of supplementation of essential cation, anion or combination of both on the digestibility of cation minerals in diet of cows. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci. 2 (8): 433-437.

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.14737/journal.aavs/2014/2.8.433.437

ISSN (Online) | 2307-8316; ISSN (Print) | 2309-3331

Copyright © 2014 Babu and Srinivas. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Underwood (1981) suggested 22 essential mineral elements to farm animals based on their concentration in the blood i.e., either >100 or < 100 mg/dl blood plasma and categorised to 7 macro and 15 micro minerals, respectively. Another classification was drawn on the basis of net electrical charge of ions such as cation or anion (Srinivas, 2012), which is relevant in the nutrition of higher forms of animals (Miller, 1981). Delaquis and Block (1995) discussed the dietary anion and cation concept with reference to the systemic acid–base balance of the animal that is basic for all nutrient transportation. Although dietary cation–anion balance (DCAB) is relevant in dairy animals, the concept is restricted to balance between few cations (Na+ and K+) and, few anions (Cl–, S– and P–). This needs to be extended to understand the functional importance of all essential mineral ions supplemented in mineral mixtures (Srinivas, 2012). Present study was conducted with an objective to evaluate the digestibility of essential cation mineral elements when net electrical charge (electrovalency) of mineral ion in the mineral mixtures was positive (cationic) or negative (anionic).

 

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 

Animals and Diet

Lactating Deoni cows were randomly distributed into 4 groups of 4 animals each. Cows were fed with 8 KG of fresh para grass (Brachiaria mutica) and ad lib ragi straw (Elusine coracana) at 8 AM and 5 PM, respectively and, supplemented concentrate mixture (consisted of 35 parts of maize, 15 parts of groundnut meal and 50 parts of wheat bran without mineral mixture and common salt) in 2 equal parts twice in a day as per the requirements (ICAR, 1998). Control group (CG) was fed basal diet without additional mineral supplements apart from those naturally present in the diet. Treatment groups (TG) supplemented mineral mixture consisted of only essential cation (T1) or, anion (T2) minerals or, both cation and anion mineral elements together (T3) added to concentrate supplement fed in CG. Composition of mineral mixtures containing cation or, anion mineral compounds is presented in Table 1.

 

Digestibility Trial

Digestibility trial was conducted after a preliminary period of feeding for 1 month. Trial consisted of 5 d of collection period. Body weight of animals, at zero hour of feeding and watering, recorded for 2 consecutive days before and after the trial. Faecal samples collected during trial period at 8:30 AM and sub-sampled to 1/400 parts. A part of sample was preserved with known quantities of 10 % H2SO4 (V/V) in pre–weighed glass bottles to estimate nitrogen (N). Dried samples of feed offered, left over feed (orts), and faeces were pooled for 5 d for chemical analysis.

 

Chemical Analysis

Dried samples of feed offered, orts, and faeces analysed for dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP) and total ash (AOAC, 2005). Minerals in feed and faecal samples were estimated using inductively coupled plasma (ICP) optical emission spectrometry (Optima 8000, M/s Pelkin elmer, Waltham, U.S.A) after predigesting the samples by modified method of closed system of acid digestion (US–EPA, 2001). The digested samples were cooled and filtered through Whatmann filter paper No1. Repeated washings were given to digestion tube and filter paper using Millipore water and final volume made to 10 ml. Subsequent dilutions were made as for the concentration of the element and estimated important cations viz., calcium (Ca2+), magnesium (Mg2+) copper (Cu2+), zinc (Zn2+), iron (Fe2+) and manganese (Mn2+).

 

Statistical Analysis

Data were subjected to descriptive statistics and variances between groups mean were compared using CRD based on the following model:

 

Yij = µ+ Ti + Bj +eij

 

Where, Yij was any observation for which, µ was population mean, Ti was treatment effect, Bj was block effect, and eij was random error component (Das and Giri, 1991). Pairwise comparison between group means was tested by DMRT and significance was denoted by alpha superscripts with probability (p) ranged from 0.01 to 0.05.

 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

 

Dicalcium phosphate (Ca2PO4) was used as P– source in the mineral mixtures although it contained cation Ca2+. Similarly, iodide (I–), molybdate (Mo–) and selenite (Se–) sources contained sodium (Na2+) cation. Net electrical charge of the mineral mixtures supplemented in T1, T2 and T3 are presented in Table 2. Total quantity of mineral mixture supplemented in T1, T2 and T3 was 20.18, 18.10 and 31.36 g/d, respectively. Net ion electrical charge of mineral mixtures supplemented in T1, T2 and T3 were +0.87, –1.55 and –0.64, respectively. Chemical composition of the feedstuffs is presented in Table 3. DM (p = 0.96), OM (p = 0.96), CP (p = 0.99), Fe2+ (p = 0.98) and Mn2+ (p = 0.83) intakes were not significantly different between CG and TGs (Table 4). DM intake was numerically higher by 6 % in T2 and T3 where net charge of ions was negative. This is contrary to the observations of Hu et al., (2007). Mg2+ (p < 0.01), Cu2+ (p < 0.01) and Zn2+ (p < 0.05) ions intake were significantly different in CG, T1, T2 and T3.

 

 

Table 1: Composition of ion specific mineral supplements.

Mineral ion	Mineral Source	Mineral supplement of (G/KG DM)
		Cations	Anions	Cations + anions
Ca2+	Calcium carbonate	7.58	––	––
Mg2+	Magnesium carbonate	1.53	––	1.53
Na+	Sodium sulphate	10.28	––	10.28
K+	Potassium chloride	1.26	––	1.26
Cu2+	Cupric carbonate	0.05	––	0.05
Co2+	Cobalt carbonate	0.0005	––	0.0005
Zn2+	Zinc carbonate	0.14	––	0.14
Ca2+ & P–	Dicalcium Phosphate	––	18.06	18.06
I–	Sodium iodide	––	0.003	0.003
Mo–	Sodium Molybdate	––	0.03	0.03
Se–	Sodium Selenite	––	0.0025	0.0025

 

 

Table 2: Net charge of the ions in mineral supplements.

Mineral ion	Atomic mass	Cations	Anions	Net charge
CaCO3	100.09	3.9449	3.6351	0.3098
MgCO3	84.31	0.6590	0.8710	–0.2120
Na2SO4	142.04	5.6483	4.6317	1.0166
KCl	74.55	0.6608	0.5992	0.0616
CuCO3	123.56	0.0306	0.0194	0.0112
CoCO3	118.94	0.0003	0.0002	0.0001
ZnCO3	125.42	0.0864	0.0536	0.0328
Ca2PO4	175.13	8.2659	9.7941	–1.5281
NaI	149.89	0.0005	0.0025	–0.0021
Na2MoO4	205.92	0.0067	0.0233	–0.0166
Na2SeO3	188.94	0.0007	0.0021	–0.0014
Total	T1	10.9687	9.2110	1.2201
	T2	8.2738	9.8220	–1.5480
	T3	15.3592	15.9968	–0.6376

 

 

Table 3: Chemical composition of diet.

Parameter	Ragi straw	Green fodder	Concentrate
DM (g/Kg)	881 ± 18	178 ± 9	905 ± 2
OM (g/Kg)	896 ± 0.5	864 ± 3	908 ± 0.4
CP (g/kg)	25.60 ± 0.5	103.0 ± 0.1	20.22 ± 0.2
Calcium (g/kg)	10.3 ± 0.25	7.13 ± 0.26	9.40 ± 0.74
Magnesium (g/kg)	10.85 ± 0.24	10.15 ± 0.35	14.04 ± 1.01
Copper (mg/kg)	3.63 ± 0.28	55.13 ± 1.92	13.10 ± 1.51
Zinc (mg/kg)	213.40 ± 19.27	226.35 ± 5.07	470.40 ± 33.34
Iron (mg/kg)	95.88 ± 3.63	1341.00 ± 77.94	477.60 ± 22.60
Manganese (mg/kg)	384.90 ± 6.25	80.17 ± 5.05	126.30 ± 12.60

 

 

CP digestibility was significantly reduced (p < 0.05) in T2 which could be probably because of more net negative charge of ions in the mineral mixture. Hu et al., (2007) reported adverse impact of net negative charge on CP digestibility in dairy cows. Although net electrical charge in T3 was negative, CP digestibility was not reduced. Considering the result of Hu et al., (2007) as well as CP digestibility observed in this study, we presume that CP digestibility might be affected only beyond a threshold level of net negative electrical charge probably less than –1. Contrary to the observation of Popplewell et al., (1993) on cation and anion balance in the diet of dairy cows, no significant impact of net charge of mineral supplements on DM and OM digestibility were observed between CG and TGs. Ca2+ digestibility was negative in few replicates and indicated individual cow variation. Ca2+ digestibility was apparently (p = 0.29) higher in T2 and T3. Probably lack of P– source in the cationic mineral mixture affected the Ca2+ utilization in T1. In general, the ideal ratio of Ca2+ and P– intake is 1:2 to 2:1 (Horst et al., 1994). Ca2+ to P– ratio in Ca2PO4 is about 2:1. Mg2+ intake (p < 0.01), and digestibility (p < 0.05) were significantly different in CG and TGs. Mg2+ digestibility was higher in T2 or T3 than CG and T1. Mg2+ digestibility improved in T2 where mineral mixture consisted of anion mineral elements i.e., net electrical charge was negative. Weiss (2004) reported that mean apparent digestibility of Mg2+ was ranging from –0.04 to 0.33. According to NRC (2001), optimum Mg2+ digestibility is 43 %. Mg2+ digestibility in diet can be affected by increased K+ intake above the stipulated requirement in the diet (Weiss, 2004).

 

Intake of Cu2+ was significantly (p < 0.01) different between CG and TGs but, digestibility was not significantly (p = 0.77) affected Cu2+ in CG utilized more efficiently because it was in lower concentration than in TGs. According to Ivan and Grieve (1975) Cu2+ concentration in liver was inversely proportional to the dietary Zn2+ and, directly proportional to dietary Mn2+ supplementation. Mn2+ was not added in the cation mineral mixture but, Zn2+ was included. Zn2+ intake in CG or TGs was 15 folds higher than Cu2+. According to Weiss (2004), Zn2+ intake should not exceed the dietary Cu2+ intake by more than 5 folds. Probably, higher ratio of Zn2+ in the mineral mixture decreased the Cu2+ utilization even though both the elements incorporated as per the requirements (NRC, 2001). Zn2+ intake (p < 0.05) and digestibility (p < 0.01) were significantly different in CG and TGs. Significantly higher digestibility in T3 (59 %) than T1 (39 %) indicated that Zn2+ digestion improved in the presence of anion minerals such as P–, I–, Mo– and Se–. Fe2+ intake was not significantly (p = 0.98) different between CG and TGs because, it was not fortified in the cation or cation + anion mineral mixture since Fe2+ availability from the diet was sufficient to meet the requirements. Fe2+ digestibility was negative in CG (–4 %) and significantly lesser than TGs (p < 0.01). Fe2+ digestibility was comparable between T2 (23 %) and T3 (36 %) but not with T1 (2 %). Fe2+ utilization also improved in the presence of anions; P–, I–, Mo– and Se–, present in T2 and T3. Mn2+ intake was not significantly (p= 0.83) different as its availability in the basal diet was sufficient to substantiate requirement.

 

 

Table 4: Feed and mineral intake and digestibility in different groups

Parameter	Control	Mineral supplement (g/Kg DM)			SEM
		Cations	Anions	Combined
Nutrient intake
DM intake (kG/d)	6.46	6.40	6.60	6.61	0.35
OM intake (kG/d)	5.76	5.71	5.89	5.89	0.31
CP intake (g/d)	648.75	638.90	645.4	653.13	36.52
Calcium (g/d)	57.83a	71.65bc	65.42ab	76.65c	2.51*
Magnesium (g/d)	67.29a	76.28b	65.41a	77.59b	2.04**
Copper (g/d)	0.12a	0.17b	0.12a	0.18b	0.01**
Zinc (g/d)	1.78ab	1.94b	1.78a	1.99b	0.07*
Iron (g/d)	3.05	3.03	3.00	3.09	0.13
Manganese (g/d)	1.45	1.48	1.55	1.52	0.08
Digestibility coefficient
DM	56.68	56.16	57.09	55.97	1.44
OM	58.96	58.65	59.69	58.68	1.42
CP	54.45b	54.56 b	48.49a	56.10 b	1.65*
Calcium	4.87	14.46	23.56	31.23	9.40
Magnesium	33.26a	31.95a	45.15b	47.96b	4.06*
Copper	62.59	58.11	55.53	58.54	4.74
Zinc	27.43a	39.16b	36.17ab	58.56c	3.14**
Iron	–4.96a	2.40ab	23.43bc	35.78c	7.05**
Manganese	41.46a	44.54ab	55.12bc	64.15c	3.50**

 

Mean values in a row with different superscripts a, b, c vary significantly; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01

 

 

Digestibility of Mn2+ was significantly (p < 0.01) different between CG and TGs. Mn2+ utilization also improved when net ion charge was negative. Cations homeostasis is partially dependent on endogenous faecal excretion controlled by the intestinal tract, liver and pancreas while, anions homeostasis is partially dependent on renal excretion (Buckley, 2000) thus, enumerating both the ions are mutually exclusive but collectively exhaustive. According to Block (2011), subjects such as ratios of Ca2+ to P and N to sulphur, interactions between Mg2+ and K+, Mn2+ and Cu2+, and vitamin E and Se have been investigated and addressed however, no unifying concepts on mineral balances have been proposed yet. Our result indicated that utilization of some of the cation mineral elements e.g., Ca2+, Mg2+, Zn2+, Fe2+ and Mn2+ were improved in the presence of anion mineral elements P–, I–, Mo– and Se–.

 

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

Study revealed that interaction between electrical charge carried by the cation and anion group of minerals in the mineral mixtures and their net electrovalency influenced the digestibility. Digestibility of cation mineral elements improved when net ion charge was negative.

 

 

REFERENCES

 

AOAC (2005). Official methods of analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 18th Edn. Washington, DC.

Block E (2011). Revisiting negative dietary cation–anion difference balancing for prepartum cows and its impact on hypocalcaemia and performance. E–mail: Elliot.Block@churchdwight.com. http://dairy.ifas.ufl.edurns/2011/5block.pdf.

Buckley WT (2000). Trace element dynamics. In: D’ Mello, JPF ed. Farm Animal Metabolism and Nutrition. CABI publishing, CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon OX10 8DE UK. Pp161 – 182.

Das MN, Giri NC (1991). Design and analysis of experiments. Wiley Eastern Ltd., New Delhi.

Delaquis AM, Block E (1995). Acid base balance, renal function, water and macro mineral metabolism of dry cow differing in cation–anion difference. J. Dairy Sci. 78: 604 – 19. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(95)76853-9

Horst RL, Goff JP, Reinhardt TA (1994). Calcium and vitamin D metabolism in the dairy cow. J. Dairy Sci. 77: 1936 – 1951. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(94)77140-X

Hu W, Murphy MR, Constable PD, Block E (2007). Dietary cation–anion difference and dietary protein effects on performance and acid–base status of dairy cows in early lactation. J. Dairy Sci. 90: 3355 – 3366. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-515

ICAR (1998). Nutrient Requirement of Livestock and Poultry, 2nd revised ed. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan, PUSA, New Delhi.

Ivan M, Grieve CM (1975). Effects of zinc, copper, and manganese supplementation of high–concentrate ration on digestibility, growth, and tissue content of Holstein calves. J. Dairy Sci. 58: 410 – 415. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(75)84579-6

Miller WJ (1981). Mineral and vitamin nutrition of dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 64: 1196 – 1206. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(81)82696-3

NRC (2001). Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 7th edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

Popplewell JC, Topliff DR, Freeman DW, Breazile JE (1993). Effects of dietary cation–anion balance on acid base balance and blood parameters in anaerobically exercised horses. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 13: 552 – 555. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0737-0806(06)81524-8

Srinivas B (2012). Homeostasis regulation and bioavailability of cation and anion minerals in ruminants in perspective of functional physiological chemistry: A review. Indian J. Dairy sci. 65: 1 – 18

Underwood EJ (1981). The Mineral Nutrition of Livestock, 2nd Edition. New York: CABI Publishing.

US–EPA (2001). Developing of digestion procedure for determination of mercury in solid and semi solid samples, United States–Environment Protection Agency. Method 163. DYN Crop 1 and E.T, Alexandria.VA22304 (703–461–2100, SCC@dyncrop.com).

Weiss WP (2004). Macromineral digestion by lactating dairy cows: factors affecting digestibility of magnesium. J. Dairy Sci. 87: 2167 – 71. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)70036-3