Transcript Digestion Rate of NDF-N in Tropical Forages.

Evaluating the Adequacy of
the CNCPS Model
Luis Orlindo Tedeschi
Bertha Rueda-Maldonado
Francisco “Paco” Juárez-Lagunes
Mexican dual-purpose
lactating cow evaluation
Descripción
Entrada
Unidades
Tipo de animal
2
Vacas lechera lactantes
Edad
66
Meses
Sexo
4
Vaca
Peso corporal
511
Kg
Raza
2
Cruzado (doble propósito)
Peso maduro
550
Kg
Condición Corporal
3
1 = flaca a 5 = gorda
Sistema de cruza
2
Dos vías
Raza de la Madre
17
Brahman
Raza del Padre
15
Holstein
Dias gestante
55
D
Días en lactancia
174
D
Lactación
5
#
Intervalo entre partos
13
Meses
Promedio del Hato
2866
Kg
Producción de leche
10
Kg/d
Grasa en leche
3.6
%
Proteína en leche
3.2
Kg%
Prod. De leche relativa
5
Escala de 1 a 9
Peso becerro al nacer
38
Kg
Edad al 1er parto
33
Meses
Descripción ambiental
Aditivo
No
Velocidad del viento
16
Km/h
Temperatura previa
27
ºC
Humedad relativa previa
80
%
Temperatura actual
28
ºC
Humedad relativa actual
80
%
Horas luz solar
12
Horas
Exposicion a tormentas
1
Si
Temp. Min. Nocturna
18
ºC
Profundidad del pelo
0.6
Cm
Grosor de la capa
1
Delgada
Cubierta en el pelo
1
No lodo
Animales sofocados
1
No
Actividad
Pastoreo intensivo
Privilegio
Tanzania
Mombaza
BASE DE DATOS
Llanero
Pangola
Estrella
Señal
Insurgentes
Mulato
BASE DE DATOS
Edad
FDN
no
disp.,
%MS7
CNE
%
MS8
46.36
17.95
9.91
9.87
50.23
12.73
9.67
3.86
9.45
52.70
14.27
6.26
4.05
3.92
9.46
54.40
11.61
8.41
8.67
5.73
2.32
9.96
54.74
14.48
9.10
2.69
15.88
5.89
2.69
8.82
48.90
16.76
17.8
5
88.46
32.46
11.54
3.96
2.25
9.64
45.26
18.26
17.7
4
9.43
90.83
11.01
9.17
5.80
3.85
10.17
51.75
16.87
7.93
7.39
7.21
91.51
29.66
8.49
7.49
2.68
9.60
51.29
17.69
11.5
3
71.7
5
7.51
4.84
90.36
18.83
9.64
10.31
0.80
9.90
53.73
17.99
12.7
3
71.3
4
7.67
6.62
90.09
32.96
9.91
6.49
0.18
9.64
52.94
18.36
12.2
6
%
M.sec
a
FDN,
%
MS
PC, %
MS
Solubilida
d % de
PC2
NNP,
%
P.Sol3
PIDN, %
PC4
PIDA, %
PC5
E.E. %
MS
MIN, %
MS
13.11
64.4
5
7.53
12.07
90.75
14.93
9.25
3.16
3.79
9.92
19.53
63.1
1
5.37
14.16
92.48
16.70
7.52
4.35
3.35
16.70
67.1
2
6.01
13.46
91.45
27.13
8.55
4.06
13.57
66.1
4
4.89
12.19
91.39
5.56
8.61
15.91
69.3
0
6.06
9.40
91.33
8.61
19.28
65.7
0
7.00
4.97
84.12
20.70
63.5
8
7.63
6.84
18.45
68.7
0
7.06
22.23
69.0
2
23.19
20.44
7
14
21
28
35
42
49
56
63
70
77
Lig.,%
FDN1
FDN
disp.,
%MS6
Carbohydrate fractions of four tropical grasses.
Item
TOTAL
A
B1
NDS
B2
C
Andropogon
Brachiaria
Cynodon
Panicum
SEM
P < .05
80.4x
79.7x
79.9x
77.8y
.12
10.6x
10.8x
7.9y
9.6xy
.19
6.8x
4.7xy
2.7y
4.0y
.26
17.4x
15.5xy
10.7z
13.6y
.24
47.8y
50.6xy
51.2x
49.4xy
.32
15.2y
13.5y
18.0x
14.8y
.20
Fertilization effect on the carbohydrate fractions.
Item
TOTAL
A
B1
NDS
B2
C
Non-fertilized
Fertilized
83.7x
75.2y
10.5x
9.0y
4.5x
4.6x
15.0x
13.6x
53.9x
45.6x
14.8y
16.0x
.06
.10
.13
.12
.16
.10
SEM
P < .10
Digestion rates based on gas production measurements.
Item
Andropogon Brachiaria
Cynodon
Whole grass
x
Vol, mL
23.7
23.0x
21.6y
Rate, %/h
5.1xy
5.2xy
4.8y
Lag, h
2.2y
2.4y
1.0z
NDF fraction
x
Vol, mL
19.4
18.6xy
17.5x
Rate, %/h
7.3xy
8.4x
3.8z
Lag, h
4.5y
5.2y
4.6y
NDS fraction
y
Vol, mL
4.3
4.4y
4.1y
Rate, %/h
13.8y
27.4x
13.2y
Lag, h
1.2x
.5x
.1y
x,y,z
Different superscript in each row differ (P < .05)
Panicum
SEM
23.6x
6.0x
3.0x
.11
.10
.06
18.4xy
6.8y
6.7x
.14
.16
.14
5.2x
8.6y
.6x
.08
.77
.11
Protein fractionation of four tropical grasses
________________% CP________
Class
CP,
% DM
Andropogon 9.1x
A
16.6y
BI
B2
B3
C
2.4z
31.7yz
42.5x
6.7y
Brachiaria
9.0x
29.2x 12.9y
44.6x
9.9z
3.5z
Cynodon
8.3xy
12.3y 19.7x
29.2z
28.1y
10.6x
Panicum
7.2y
16.9y 10.7y
38.1xy
24.9y
9.4x
SEM
.12
.86
1.06
.28
P < .05
.77
.68
Effect of N fertilization on protein fractionation
__________% CP___________
Class
Non-fert.
CP,
% DM
5.9y
Fertilized 10.9x
SEM
P < .10
.06
A
B1
B2
B3
C
20.8x
9.3x
33.4y
27.6x
8.8x
16.7x
13.5x
38.4x
25.1x
6.3x
.38
.34
.43
.53
.14
Digestion Rate of NDF-N in Tropical
Forages
F.I. Juarez, A.N. Pell, and J.B. Robertson.
Cornell University
INIFAP
Objectives
l
l
To measure the NDF-N digestion kinetics of
tropical grasses.
To determine the effects of plant maturity and
N fertilization on rate and extent of digestion.
Table 1. NDF-N x 6.25 content (%CP).
Grass
n
CP/DM
NDF-N
B3
C
Overall
MSE
35
8.2
0.41
35.0
1.85
27.8
1.64
7.2
0.43
5
5
5
5
9.3
9.7
8.8
8.2
48.1
13.1
38.8
34.2
41.9
10.2
29.6
26.1
6.2
2.9
9.2
8.1
Andropogon
Brachiaria
Cynodon
Panicum
MSE = Mean Standard Error.
Table 2. Effect of fertilization on NDF-N x 6.25
(%CP).
Variable
Non
Fertilized
Fertilized
MSE
CP/DM*
NDF-N*
B3
C*
5.9
36.4
27.6
8.8
10.9
31.4
25.1
6.3
0.060
0.347
0.532
0.143
Every number is the mean of 8 observations.
* Statistically different at P < 0.05.
Table 3. Effect of Age (days) on NDF-N x 6.25
(%CP).
Variable 28
35
42
MSE
CP/DM
7.7 a
6.3 b
5.5 c
0.119
NDF-N
34.9 ab
36.7 a
33.7 b
0.465
B3
28.8 a
28.1 a
25.4 b
0.484
C
6.1 a
8.6 b
8.3 b
0.249
Every number is the mean of 7 observations.
Different letters within row differs ( P < 0.05).
Table 4. NDF-N x 6.25 of 4 tropical grasses
(%CP).
Variable Andropogon Brachiaria Cynodon Panicum MSE
CP/DM
9.1 a
9.0 a
8.3 b
7.2 c
0.12
NDF-N
49.2 a
13.4 c
38.7 b
34.3 b
1.33
B3
42.5 a
9.9 c
28.1 b
24.9 b
1.06
C
6.7 b
3.5 c
10.6 a
9.4 a
0.28
Every number is the mean of 4 observations.
Different letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).
Table 5. NDF and NDF-N x 6.25 extent of
digestion (%).
Variable
Overall
Andropogon
Brachiaria
Cynodon
Panicum
n
NDF
EXTENT
NDF-N
MSE
35
67 b
73 a
0.113
5
5
5
5
71 b
72 a
61 b
69 b
83 a
56 b
74 a
77 a
0.691
0.691
0.691
0.691
Diferent letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).
Table 6. NDF and NDF-N x 6.25 rates of
digestion (%/h).
Variable
Overall
Andropogon
Brachiaria
Cynodon
Panicum
n
35
5
5
5
5
NDF
RATE
NDF-N
MSE
5.5 b
6.5 a
0.040
5.5
5.2
5.1
5.3
9.1
6.7
5.4
9.4
0.241
0.241
0.241
0.241
b
b
a
b
a
a
a
a
Different letters within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).
N Fertilization and CP, NDF and NDF-N x 6.25.
Variable
Non Fertilized
Fertilized
MSE
CP/DM
B3/CP
5.7 b
29.9 a
10.7 a
27.4 a
0.051
0.478
NDF/DM
NDF extent, %
NDF rate, %/h
NDF lag, h
72.1 a
67.1 a
4.9 a
3.8 a
69.7 b
66.7 a
5.1 a
2.8 b
0.478
0.140
0.045
0.097
NDF-N extent, %
NDF-N rate, %/h
65.7 b
7.1 b
75.5 a
8.3 a
0.345
0.176
Every number is the mean of 8 observations.
Different letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).
Table 8. Effect of Age (d) on CP, NDF and NDFN x 6.25.
Variable
28
35
42
MSE
CP/DM
B3/CP
7.3 a
27.5 a
6.2 b
28.5 a
5.2 c
28.2 a
0.134
0.483
NDF/DM
NDF extent, %
NDF rate, %/h
NDF lag, h
69.7 a
69.7 a
5.7 a
3.5 a
72.0 b
66.5 b
5.1 b
3.6 a
72.4 b
65.4 b
4.6 c
3.0 a
0.233
0.253
0.070
0.098
NDF-N extent, % 72.0 a
NDF-N rate, %/h 6.2 a
68.1 b
6.3 a
65.1 b
5.2 a
0.663
0.238
Every number is the mean of 7 observations.
Different letter within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).
CP, NDF and NDF-N x 6.25 of 4 grasses.
Cynodon
MSE
7.2 c
31.1 b
8.3 b
28.7 b
0.10
0.96
65.3 a
71.1 a
5.1 a
5.8 a
71.9 b
68.0 c
4.8 b
1.3 d
74.9 c
59.0 d
4.7 b
2.4 c
0.57
0.28
0.09
0.19
52.2 c
6.1 b
74.5 b
9.3 a
74.1 b
5.7 b
0.69
0.35
Variable
Andropogon Brachiaria Panicum
CP/DM
B3/CP
8.7 ab
43.7 c
8.8 a
11.4 a
NDF/DM
NDF extent,%
NDF rate,%/h
NDF lag, h
71.5 b
69.5 b
5.3 a
3.7 b
NDF-N extent,%
NDF-N rate,%/h
81.7 a
9.5 a
Every number is the mean of 4 observations.
Different letters within row differ ( P < 0.05 ).
Conclusions - 1
l
l
NDF-N as % of CP averaged 35 with a
range of 10 - 60.
The NDF-N variation was primarily due
to species but N fertilization and
maturity also were factors.
Conclusions - 2
l
l
l
NDF-N is potentially ruminally available.
Extent and rate of NDF-N digestion is
affected by fertilization.
NDF-N was digested faster than NDF.
Requirements for accurate
prediction in the tropics
l
l
l
Must accurately predict requirements for
maintenance, growth, pregnancy,
lactation, and energy reserves
Must accurately predict absorbed
energy and protein feeds being fed for
each specific farm condition
Tabular nutrient requirements and feed
values developed in North America are
not adequate for the tropics
CNCPS for feed management
l
Develop a model to predict
requirements and feed biological values
on each farm
l
Use the model to identify the factors
that are first limiting performance
– Energy
– Protein
– Amino acids
CNCPS components for the
tropics
l
l
l
l
Breed adjustments for maintenance,
growth, and lactation
Tropical forages CHO and Protein
fractions and digestion rates
Dry matter intake equations
Ruminal adjustment for N and
branched-chain amino acids
deficiencies
Dual-purpose Lactating Cows
l
Fifty 3/4 Holstein x 1/4 Brahman
lactating cows with:
– Body weight = 511 kg (550 mature),
Condition score = 3, and milk production =
10 kg/d
l
Rotational grazing Pangola grass and
supplemented with 3.5 kg/d of
concentrate
l
From Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999) in J. Dairy Sci.
82:2136
Animal descriptions for the baseline using the CNCPS.
Animal Type
2 Lactating Dairy Cow
Age
74 Months
Sex
4 Cow
Body Weight
508 Kg
Breed Type
2 Beef * Dairy
Mature Weight
550 Kg
Condition Score
5 1=v. thin - 5=v.fleshy
Breeding System
2 way cross
Dam's Breed
17 Brahman
Bull's Breed
15 Holstein
Days Pregnant
30 days
Days since Calving
210 days
Lactation #
3
Rolling Herd Average
3660 Kg
Milk Production
12 Kg
Milk Fat
3.6 Kg
Milk Protein
3.2 Kg
Relative Milk Production 5 1-9
Expected Calf Birth
Weight
38 Kg
Management and environmental descriptions for the baseline using the CNCPS.
Management Description
Additive
Grazing Unit Size
Daily Pasture Allowance
Initial Pasture Mass
Feeding Frequency
Feeding Method
Environment Description
Wind Speed
Previous Temperature
Current Temperature
Storm Exposure
Night Cooling
Hair Depth
Hide
Hair Coat
Cattle Panting
1 None
20 Hectares
1 DM Kg/PDMI
3000 Kg/Hectare
24 # Times Daily
1 Forage and Grain Separate
16
27
28
1
kph
0
C
0
C
Yes
1 No Cooling
0.6 cm
1 Thin
1 No Mud
1 None
Pangola grass descriptions used for the baseline.
Item
Concentrate
Forage
Dry Matter
NDF
Lignin
CP
Solubility
NPN
NDIP
ADIP
Starch
Fat
Ash
CHO-A KD
CHO-B1 KD
CHO-B2 KD
Prot-B1 KD
Prot-B2 KD
Prot-B3 KD
a
Unit
% DM
% DM
% AF
% DM
% NDF
% DM
% CP
% SolP
% CP
% CP
% NSC
% DM
% DM
% hr
% hr
% hr
% hr
% hr
% hr
Pangola grassa
Pangola grass
Pangola
Grass
0.0
100.0
21.0
70.0
11.4
9.1
42.0
4.8
24.0
2.2
5.0
2.3
7.6
250.0
30.0
3.0
135.0
11.0
0.1
0.0
100.0
26.8
69.5
7.5
8.9
41.9
36.3
32.5
5.4
28.2
2.4
8.6
250.0
30.0
3.0
135.0
11.0
0.1
0.0
100.0
26.8
69.5
7.5
8.9
41.9
36.3
32.5
5.4
28.2
2.4
8.6
19.7
19.7
5.3
----5.3
Tabular values from Beef NRC, 1996.
Ingredients for the concentrate used in the baselinea
Item
Concentrate
Forage
Dry Matter
NDF
Lignin
CP
Solubility
NPN
NDIP
ADIP
Starch
Fat
Ash
CHO-A KD
CHO-B1 KD
CHO-B2 KD
Prot-B1 KD
Prot-B2 KD
Prot-B3 KD
a
Unit
% DM
% DM
% AF
% DM
% NDF
% DM
% CP
% SolP
% CP
% CP
% NSC
% DM
% DM
% hr
% hr
% hr
% hr
% hr
% hr
Sorghu
m Grain
Soybean
Meal
Molasses
Cane
Urea
Mineral
s
100.0
0.0
89.0
13.3
6.1
11.6
12.0
33.0
10.0
5.0
90.0
3.1
2.0
150.0
12.0
5.0
135.0
6.0
0.1
100.0
0.0
89.8
14.9
2.1
49.9
20.0
55.0
5.0
2.0
90.0
1.5
7.2
300.0
25.0
6.0
230.0
11.0
0.2
100.0
0.0
73.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
500.0
30.0
20.0
350.0
11.0
0.3
100.0
0.0
99.0
0.0
0.0
291.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
400.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Tabular values from Beef NRC, 1996.
Results of the diet evaluation using tabular values or laboratory measurements for
pangola grass.
Item
Tabular values
Laboratory values
New rates
DMI predicted, Kg
11.8
12.5
12.9
DMI actual, Kg
21.4
17.5
14.5
Diff., %
182
140
113
ME allowable milk,
15.9
16.0
16.0
Kg/d
MP allowable milk,
7.1
8.7
12.1
Kg/d
PUN, mg %
17
12
9
Pangola grass
17.90
14.0
11.0
Concentrate
3.5
3.5
3.5
Feed Composition
Item
Unit
Sorghum
grain
10.3
SBM
%DM
Pangola
grass
69.5
NDF
Lignin
%NDF
7.5
12.8
0.9
Protein
%DM
8.9
10.4
52.6
SolCP
%CP
41.9
14.9
16.0
%SolCP
36.3
33.0
55.0
NPN
Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 10
11.4
Digestion Rates
Item
Unit
CHO A
CHO B1
CHO B2
Prot. B1
Prot. B2
Prot. B3
%/h
%/h
%/h
%/h
%/h
%/h
Pangola
grass
19.7
19.7
5.3
135
11.0
5.3
Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 10
Sorghum
grain
14.3
14.3
6.0
135
6.0
0.12
SBM
7.9
7.9
5.7
230
11.0
0.20
Sensitivity to NDF and Lignin
NDF1, %DM
60
70
80
Lignin2,%NDF
4
8
1
ME milk
Kg/d
MP milk
Kg/d
MP Bacteria
g/d
11.3
9.4
7.7
5.7
685
640
7.4
3.8
593
10.5
8.2
6.8
4.6
668
612
Lignin = 6% DM. 2 NDF = 70% DM. From Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 4
Note: ME decreases 1.25 and 0.69 of % units/% of NDF and Lignin increase, respectively
Sensitivity to NDF Digestion Rate
NDF1
Dig. Rate
3%/h
ME milk
Kg/d
5.0
MP milk
Kg/d
0
MP Bacteria
g/d
415
6%/h
9.4
5.7
640
9%/h
11.7
9.9
789
1
CHO A and B1 @ 16%/h. Juarez Lagunes et al. (1999), Table 5
Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in NDF and lignin contents.
NDF, %DM
60
70
80
Lig, %NDF
4
6
8
4
6
8
4
6
Item
ME, milk
12.2
11.3
10.4
10.5
9.4
8.2
8.8
7.4
Kg/d
MP, milk
8.6
7.7
6.8
6.8
5.7
4.6
5.0
3.8
Kg/d
Rum N Bal,
-13
-6
0
-2
6
13
3
12
gm/d
Pept Bal,
14
14
14
36
36
36
52
52
gm/d
MP Bact.
708
685
661
668
640
612
626
593
gm/d
MP UIP
287
287
287
280
280
280
273
273
gm/d
8
6.0
2.5
20
52
560
273
Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in carbohydrates rates of
digestion.
A=B1, %/h
6
16
26
B2, %/h
3
6
9
3
6
9
3
6
Item
ME, milk
4.9
9.5
11.8
5.0
9.4
11.7
4.9
9.3
Kg/d
MP, milk
-2.4
4.1
8.3
-0.8
5.7
9.9
-0.1
6.5
Kg/d
Rum N
85
25
-15
66
6
-34
56
-4
Bal, gm/d
Pept Bal,
48
48
48
36
36
36
30
30
gm/d
MP Bact.
334
559
708
415
640
789
452
677
gm/d
MP UIP
280
280
280
280
280
280
280
280
gm/d
9
11.6
10.7
-44
30
826
280
Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in crude and soluble protein.
CP,
4
8
12
% DM
SolP, %CP 20
35
50
20
35
50
20
35
Item
MP, milk
4.1
3.7
3.2
6.6
5.7
4.9
9.0
7.7
Kg/d
Rum N
-70
-66
-63
-2
6
13
37
49
Bal, gm/d
Pept Bal,
3
-1
-5
45
36
27
84
71
gm/d
MP Bact.
683
681
680
640
640
640
594
594
gm/d
MP UIP
161
140
119
321
280
238
482
420
gm/d
50
6.5
61
59
594
357
Sensitivity analysis of the CNCPS to a changes in the B3 protein fraction
rate of digestion in tropical grasses.
B1=B2, %/h
10
B3, %/h
4
7
10
Item
ME, milk Kg/d
9.4
9.4
9.4
MP, milk Kg/d
5.4
4.9
4.6
Rum N Bal, gm/d
7
12
14
Pept Bal, gm/d
37
42
45
MP Bact. gm/d
640
640
640
MP UIP gm/d
266
240
224
Evaluation of the nutritive value of tropical grasses for dual purpose cattle using
the CNCPS
Item
Brizantha
Andropo. Cynodon Panicum
SEM
X
Y
Z
Y
DMI, kg
14.5
12.6
10.3
12.3
0.11
x
y
z
y
ME Milk, kg/d
13.6
8.2
1.1
9.3
0.34
x
y
z
y
MP Milk, kg/d
12.6
5.9
0.5
4.2
0.33
y
x
x
y
Rum N Bal. gm/d
-18.5
11.7
34.0
-3.5
3.14
z
x
yz
y
Pept. Bal. gm/d
35.7
65.5
40.5
50.5
1.63
x
y
z
y
MP Bact. gm/d
824
625
360
603
11.4
x
y
y
y
MP UIP, gm/d
465
294
288
214
11.7
P < .05
Nitrogen fertilization effect on the nutritive value of four tropical grasses for dual
purpose cattle using the CNCPS.
Item
Non-fertilized
Fertilized
SEM
Y
X
DMI, kg
12.1
12.8
0.05
x
x
ME Milk, kg/d
7.3
8.8
0.17
y
x
MP Milk, kg/d
4.2
7.4
0.16
y
x
Rum N Bal. gm/d
-29.6
41.5
1.57
y
x
Pept. Bal. gm/d
21.2
74.9
0.81
x
x
MP Bact. gm/d
630
576
5.7
x
x
MP UIP, gm/d
202
428
5.8
P < .10
Effect of N fertilizer on volume of gas, amount of carbohydrate and mL of gas per
100 mg of carbohydrate digested.
Item
Non-fertilized
Fertilized
SEM
Total carbohydrates
Volume, mL
24.0x
21.9y
.05
x
y
Amount, mg
83.7
75.2
.06
x
x
Vol/Amt, mL/100 mg
28.7
29.2
.07
B2 fraction
x
Volume, mL
19.2
17.8y
.07
x
x
Amount, mg
53.9
45.6
.16
x
x
Vol/Amt, mL/100 mg
35.3
39.2
.21
NDS fraction
x
Volume, mL
4.8
4.1y
.04
x
x
Amount, mg
15.0
13.6
.12
x
x
Vol/Amt, mL/100 mg
34.1
30.8
.45
P < .10
Volume of gas, amount of carbohydrate and mL of gas per 100 mg of
carbohydrate digested for each grass.
Item
Andro.
Brachi.
Cynodon
Panicum
SEM
NDS fraction
y
Volume, mL
4.3
4.4y
4.1y
5.2x
.08
x
xy
z
y
Amount, mg
17.4
15.5
10.7
13.6
.24
a
y
y
x
x
Vol/Amt
24.5
28.1
38.6
38.6
.90
A fraction
x
Volume, mL
3.3
2.0y
3.4x
3.2x
.08
x
x
y
xy
Amount, mg
10.6
10.8
7.9
9.6
.19
a
y
z
x
y
Vol/Amt
31.7
18.2
42.6
33.4
.72
B1 fraction
y
Volume, mL
.9
2.4x
.7y
2.0x
.09
x
xy
y
y
Amount, mg
6.8
4.7
2.7
4.0
.26
a
y
x
xy
x
Vol/Amt
13.8
54.7
24.4
51.4
3.44
a
Vol/Amt = mL of gas/100 mg of the corresponding carbohydrate fraction.
P < .05