IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlcjs/v53y2008i2id332-cjas.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relationships between the results of various methods of urea analysis in native and enriched milk

Author

Listed:
  • P. Hering

    (Czech Moravia Breeders Corporation, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • O. Hanuš

    (Agroresearch Rapotín, Rapotín, Czech Republic)

  • J. Frelich

    (Department of Special Livestock Breeding, Agricultural Faculty, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Czech Republic)

  • J. Pytloun

    (Czech Moravia Breeders Corporation, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • A. Macek

    (Agroresearch Rapotín, Rapotín, Czech Republic)

  • L. Janů

    (Agroresearch Rapotín, Rapotín, Czech Republic)

  • J. Kopecký

    (Agroresearch Rapotín, Rapotín, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Milk urea concentration (MUC) is a suitable indicator of the health and nutrition state of dairy cows. MUC is in relation to their reproduction performance, longevity and technological milk indicators. The interpretation correctness of results depends on their reliability. There are a lot of principles of MUC analyses. Their results can be affected by a number of interferential factors. Disproportions were noticed in practice. Therefore the sources of variation in results are studied. The goal of this study was to investigate relationships between different methods of MUC determination with the use of standard samples of native milk with an artificial urea addition. After evaluation I (n = 7) the results of methods BI-1 and BI-2 (photometrical ones with diacetylmonoxime) were disqualified because of poor recovery (R), poor correlation (C) with other methods, higher random error (RER) and highest systematic error (SE). Evaluation II is more effective with stricter discrimination limits. Cs of all methods mutually (0.977 up to 0.998; P < 0.001) confirmed the methods as effective with the exception of BI-2 with poor Cs (0.713 up to 0.774), poor R (16.0 up to 69.0%) and high RER ±5.292 mg/100 ml. R of better methods was 44.0 up to 96.7%. The BI-1 method had good Cs (0.986 up to 0.994; P < 0.001), higher SE -7.546 mg/100 ml and poorer R (48.5 up to 75.3%). BI-1 method was a case of mistaken performance. BI method could be improved by the use of more samples in calibration. FT-MIR method (infra-analysis) has good addition R 69.5 up to 95.0% and Cs 0.981 up to 0.994 (P < 0.001). EH method (photometrical one with Ehrlich's agent) has good R 59.0 up to 96.7%, higher SE 4.755 (I) and 2.556 (II) mg/100 ml and close Cs 0.977 up to 0.994 (P < 0.001). UR method (ureolytical difference-conductometric) showed the best combination of results about R, C, SE and RER. MUC measurement was almost independent of fat in milk (r = 0.16 for UR and 0.01 for FT-MIR; P > 0.05) and MUC of both the methods did not increase significantly with lactose increase ((r= 0.16 and 0.27; P > 0.05), which increased logically ((r = -0.88; P < 0.001) during the fat concentration increase. The relationship of MUC results between UR and FT-MIR was significant (validation (r = 0.96; P < 0.001) at average difference -0.93 ± 1.663 mg/100 ml. It is possible to see the result reliability as good after calibration performance of FT-MIR according to results of UR. It is not necessary to see the effects of fat, protein and lactose on MUC methods as substantial. FT-MIR method for MUC has good result reliability at the use of native milk samples, incidentally with urea additions. It is suitable to calibrate the FT-MIR method according to specific determination of MUC (UR). However, the most important for elimination of disproportions is the calibration method with concrete audited R, though nonspecific.

Suggested Citation

  • P. Hering & O. Hanuš & J. Frelich & J. Pytloun & A. Macek & L. Janů & J. Kopecký, 2008. "Relationships between the results of various methods of urea analysis in native and enriched milk," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 64-76.
  • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjs:v:53:y:2008:i:2:id:332-cjas
    DOI: 10.17221/332-CJAS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cjas.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/332-CJAS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: http://cjas.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/332-CJAS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/332-CJAS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. D. Strusińska & D. Minakowski & B. Pysera & J. Kaliniewicz, 2006. "Effects of fat-protein supplementation of diets for cows in early lactation on milk yield and composition," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 51(5), pages 196-204.
    2. S.W. Zhai & J.X. Liu & Y.M. WU & J.A. YE & Y.N. XU, 2006. "Responses of milk urea nitrogen content to dietary crude protein level and degradability in lactatingHolsteindairy cows," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 51(12), pages 518-522.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. M. Czauderna & J. Kowalczyk, 2012. "Simple, selective, and sensitive measurement of urea in body fluids of mammals by reversed-phase ultra-fast liquid chromatography," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 19-27.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. O. Hanuš & J. Vegricht & J. Frelich & A. Macek & M. Bjelka & F. Louda & L. Janů, 2008. "Analysis of raw cow milk quality according to free fatty acid contents in the Czech Republic," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 53(1), pages 17-30.
    2. O. Hanuš & P. Hering & J. Frelich & M. Jílek & V. Genčurová & R. Jedelská, 2008. "Reliability of results of milk urea analysis by various methods using artificial milk control samples," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 152-161.
    3. K. Poláková & V. Kudrna & A. Kodeš & B. Hučko & Z. Mudřík, 2010. "Non-structural carbohydrates in the nutrition of high-yielding dairy cows during a transition period," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(11), pages 468-478.
    4. K. Yazgan & J. Makulska & A. Węglarz & E. Ptak & M. Gierdziewicz, 2010. "Genetic relationship between milk dry matter and other milk traits in extended lactations of Polish Holstein cows," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(3), pages 91-104.
    5. J. Frelich & M. Šlachta & O. Hanuš & J. Špička & E. Samková, 2009. "Fatty acid composition of cow milk fat produced on low-input mountain farms," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 54(12), pages 532-539.
    6. P. Homolka & J. Harazim & J. Třináctý, 2007. "Nitrogen degradability and intestinal digestibility of rumen undegraded protein in rapeseed, rapeseed meal and extracted rapeseed meal," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 52(11), pages 378-386.
    7. M. Czauderna & J. Kowalczyk, 2012. "Simple, selective, and sensitive measurement of urea in body fluids of mammals by reversed-phase ultra-fast liquid chromatography," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 19-27.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjs:v:53:y:2008:i:2:id:332-cjas. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.