Abstract:
Disclosed is a method useful for improving lactation in an animal through use of a composition comprising a fiber-depleted fraction derived from fenugreek in combination with additives that synergistically enhance the effective of the fenugreek fraction. Additives that enhance the effect of the fenugreek fraction can include apple cider vinegar, fennel seed powder, saw palmetto berry extract, kelp powder, and methylsulfonylmethane. The method includes schedules for feeding animals in order to optimize effectiveness of the composition.

Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
       [0001]    The invention is in the field of methods of improving milk output in lactating mammals, in particular the use of feed compositions that comprise a fiber-depleted fenugreek fraction. 
       BACKGROUND 
       [0002]    Fenugreek has attracted considerable interest as a natural source of soluble dietary fiber and diosgenin (sapogenin). The fenugreek seed comprises a central hard, yellow embryo surrounded by a corneous and comparatively large layer of white, semitransparent endosperm. This and the sperm contains galactotmannan gum, analysed as soluble dietary fiber. The endosperm is surrounded by a tenacious, dark brown husk. 
         [0003]    There are commercial uses for the various fractions of the fenugreek seed. The commercial fenugreek oleoresins are used as an ingredient for imitation maple flavors and is effective in butter, butterscotch, black walnut, nut and spice flavors. Another fraction of the fenugreek seed has been found to comprise a quantity of saponins. Fenugreek seed saponins are steroidal in nature with the diosgenin as the main sapogenin. Fenugreek has also been cited as useful in stimulating milk production in mammals. Improving output from dairy herds in particular has been a long standing interest in farming, and a variety of prior art methods have been used in an attempt to improve milk production efficiency. For example, feeding dairy cows a mixture of gelatinized corn starch, urea, and yeast culture, has been shown to improve milk production efficiency (Cooke et al., J. Dairy Sci. 90: 360-364). Other examples of teed additive methods include those disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,496,571 (Blagdon et al.), U.S. Pat. No. 5,219,596 (Smith et al) and U.S. Pat. No. 4,388,327 (Cummins). Extracts of natural products have also been used as feed additives, for example yucca extracts. However, in some cases, these extracts have not been effective in increasing milk production when fed as a portion of the daily ration (Wilson et al., 1998, J. Dairy Sci., 81: 1022-1027). 
         [0004]    Other methods include the use of hormonal promoters such as synthetic bovine somatotropin (sBST) to improve yields. One significant problem with the use of sBST is that the use of hormonal promoters is currently banned in the European Union and Canada, a major market for milk production and milk products, limiting their utility. In addition, there are health concerns related to the use of hormonal promoters in cows with respect to their potential effects on human health, as well as on animal health as well. For example, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires labeling on the synthetic hormonal feed supplement Posilac to include reference to the disorders associated with the use of hormonal supplements. 
       SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
       [0005]    As a result of the problems and limitations of prior art methods and compositions intended to improve dairy production, what is needed in the dairy industry is a natural product that is effective in promoting increased lactation and improved animal health, and which avoids problems associated with the use of synthetic hormonal promoters. The present invention provides a natural source composition that is effective in improving dairy production, and which improves upon prior art compositions. 
         [0006]    In some embodiments, the composition comprises a fiber-depleted fraction of fenugreek seed and other additives (FDF). In some embodiments, the composition comprises a fiber-depleted fraction of fenugreek as well as additional additives. In some embodiments the additives comprise fennel seed powder, kelp powder, methysulfonylmethane (MSM), saw palmetto berry powder, and apple cider vinegar powder. The use of FDF provides a synergistic effect over whole fenugreek seed by removing various non-nutritive fiber fractions that appear to limit the efficacy of fenugreek as a lactation inducer. 
         [0007]    The invention provides a method of use of the composition as a feed supplement, effective to increase milk production in mammals. In some embodiments the composition is fed to lactating mammals as part of their daily feed ration on a long term, or chronic basis. In some embodiments, the mammals are fed the composition for a period of time (a supplementation period) followed by a period where no supplement is provided. The supplementation period may range in duration from days to months, or may be adjusted based on seasonal considerations. 
         [0008]    In some embodiments the invention comprises a method of improving growth and lactation in a vertebrate, the method comprising: feeding to an animal capable of lactation, a pharmacologically active composition derived from fenugreek, and effective to improve lactation in said animal, wherein the composition comprises: a fiber-depleted fenugreek fraction; and at least one additive, wherein the at least one additive acts synergistically with the fiber-depleted fenugreek fraction to improve lactation. In some embodiments the fiber-depleted fenugreek fraction comprises at about 70-75% (w/w) of the composition. In some embodiments the at least one additive comprises at least one of fennel seed powder, apple cider vinegar, Saw Palmetto berry extract, kelp powder, and methylsulfonylmethane. In some embodiments the at least one additive comprises: about 1-4% (w/w) apple eider vinegar; about 10-14% (w/w) fennel seed powder; about 1-4% Saw Palmetto berry extract; about 1-4% (w/w) kelp powder; and about 3-7% methylsulfonylmethane (w/w). 
         [0009]    In some embodiments the method further comprises pre-packaging the composition in a single ration form prior to feeding to the animal. In some embodiments the single ration form comprises from about 0.1 lb to about 0.2 lb of the composition. 
         [0010]    In some embodiments the method comprises feeding the animal the composition at least once per day. In some embodiments the method comprises feeding the animal the composition twice per day. In some embodiments the method comprises feeding the animal the composition for a period of at least 20 days. In some embodiments the method comprises feeding the animal the composition on a seasonal schedule. 
         [0011]    The compositions of the present invention are effective to improve dairy production, even in chronically under-producing animals. The compositions provide the additional advantage in that they are natural products and thus are safe to use both respect to the animals being fed, and the downstream consumer of the dairy products produced. A further advantage is provided in that the products are economical to use and improve the income: feed ratio relative to animals not receiving the supplement. 
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
       [0012]    Fenugreek ( Trigonella foenum - graecum ) has been a component of human and animal diets for centuries. The benefits of this herb are numerous and a number of health related claims have been made with respect to this herb including use as a treatment for bronchitis, fevers, digestive ailments, rheumatic pain, and boils. 
         [0013]    Fenugreek also has a long history of use as a galactagogue in many human cultures (Gabay, 2002; Tiran, 2003). This herb has also been fed to animals, and Vermont folk medicine literature describes using fenugreek as fodder to increase milk production. Despite this, little is known about the underlying mechanisms of action, or whether there are sub-fractions of fenugreek that would be more effective in stimulating lactation if separated from other components of the plant. As a result, its historical use, together with its high feeding value (Mir et al., 1997; 1998) provided the rationale for investigating its potential to improve milk production in lactating livestock. 
         [0014]    In the present invention, a FDF is used as a supplement to the normal daily food ration provided to a lactating mammal. It has been found that an extract of fenugreek from which fiber has been removed is more effective as a galactagogue than is unprocessed fenugreek. Thus, what has been observed is an unexpected superior result which appears to occur when dietary fiber and associated components are removed from whole fenugreek. 
         [0015]    FDF is a novel dairy cow supplement based upon fenugreek. FDF is produced from the cotyledon fraction of the fenugreek seed. In one embodiment, the FDF comprises a fiber-depleted fraction produced according to methods described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,997,877 (Chang). A comparative analysis of FDF and whole seed is provided in Table 1. 
         [0016]    FDF has a lower fiber content than whole fenugreek seed, owing primarily to a decrease in soluble dietary fiber, and higher protein content than whole fenugreek seed. In some embodiments, FDF comprises galactomannan-depleted fenugreek seed powder meal (about 70-75% w/w), with the remainder of the composition comprising apple cider vinegar (about 1-4% w/w),  Serenoa repens  (Saw Palmetto) berry extract (about 1-4% w/w) and  Foeniculum vulgare  (Fennel) seed extract (about 10-14% w/w), kelp powder (about 1-4% w/w) and methyl sulfonyl methane (MSM) (about 3-7% w/w). 
         [0017]    In one embodiment, the composition of FDF comprised 73.2% fiber-depleted fenugreek seed powder, 12.2% fennel seed powder, 4.9% kelp powder. 4.9% MSM, 2.4% Saw palmetto berry powder, and 2.4% apple cider vinegar powder. All amounts are on a w/w basis. 
         [0018]    In some embodiments, the amount of fiber-depleted fenugreek seed powder comprises from about 70-80% (w/w) of the FDF, with the remaining 20-30% (w/w) comprising other additives, for example, and without being limiting fennel seed powder, kelp powder, MSM, Saw palmetto berry powder, and apple cider vinegar powder. Other common feed additives can be included in the FDF without reducing the efficacy of the fiber-depleted fenugreek fraction. 
         [0019]    In some embodiments, FDF can be provided to dairy animals at a rate of about 0.1 to about 0.2 lb. per feeding per animal. In some embodiments, FDF is provided at about 0.12 to about 0.15 lb. per feeding per animal. Typically, animals are fed twice per day, so that the total amount of FDF provided may range from about 0.2 to about 0.4 lb. per day per animal. 
         [0020]    The FDF can be fed as a part of each food ration or on an intermittent basis. For example, a method of feeding could comprise including FDF with the normal feed ration for a period of 4 weeks, followed by a period where no supplement was provided. Alternatively, it may be desirable to maintain animals on a diet that includes the FDF for extended periods of time, up to the time during which the animal is in use for milk production. 
         [0021]    FDF can be fed to animals that have been identified as under-producing, as well as to those that have been observed to have milk outputs within normal ranges. Providing the supplement is expected to increase milk production compared to that which would be achieved in the absence of supplement. 
         [0022]    The following example is an embodiment of a method of feeding dairy cows with FDF, and the results that can be expected. The example is but one possible method of feeding, and is not intended to be limiting to the scope of the invention. Those skilled in the art will recognize that variations may be made in the composition of the FDF without departing from the scope of the invention. 
       Example 1 
       [0023]    A field study was carried out on two dairy farms to determine the effect of a novel dietary supplement based upon a fiber-depleted fenugreek (FDF) on milk production by lactating dairy cows. Fifty lactating holstein cows in Dairy #1 with milk production below the herd average for at least 4 consecutive months were fed FDF (0.136 lb. b.i.d.) for 27 days. Milk yield, somatic cell count, milk protein, milk fat and income:feed ratios were compared with 111 high-producing control cows. In a second experiment, 150 lactating Holstein cows in Dairy #2 were all provided with FDF (0.136 lb. b.i.d.) for 39 days. Milk yield was compared with that of 5 months prior to supplementation, as well as with production records for the same cows 12 months earlier. 
         [0024]    Results from Dairy #1 indicate that the chronically low-producing cows fed FDF increased their productivity such that they were not significantly different from high-producing control cows. There was no significant effect of FDF on milk composition or somatic cell count, but there was an improvement in Income:Feed compared with high-producing controls. Cows in Dairy #2 increased their milk production 24% over predicted yields after treatment with FDF. Results support a use for FDF in improving milk production in both low- and high-producing dairy cattle. Future studies should investigate dose optimization and a longer supplementation period to determine how best to incorporate the supplement into commercial dairy production. 
       Methods 
       [0025]    The experiments were performed on two farms, Dairy #1 and Dairy #2 respectively, located in the same area. A total of 161 mature, lactating Holstein cows were recruited from Dairy #1 and a total of 150 mature, lactating Holstein cows were recruited from Dairy #2. 
       Dairy #1 
       [0026]    Milk Yield (MKY; lb./cow/month) and Somatic Cell Count (SCC; ×10 3  cells/mL milk/cow/month) were recorded monthly from Aug. 27, 2008 through Mar. 25, 2009. Days in Lactation, Milk Fat (MF; %), Milk Protein (MP; %) in January (pre-supplementation), February (supplementation) and March (post-supplementation) were also recorded. 
         [0027]    Cows were non-randomly assigned to either control (did not receive FDF) (n=111) or FDF groups (n=50). In this particular example, the FDF group included only cows with MKY chronically below the herd average. However, the invention is non-limiting in this respect and FDF can be provided to animals previously identified as having below average, average, or above average milk production when fed a non-supplemented diet. Criteria for allocation to FDF group included an MKY&lt;60 lb. per month and SCC values&gt;245×10 3  cells/mL of milk during the 5 consecutive months preceding the supplementation period (the “collection period”). Cows allocated to the FDF group received the test supplement as part of their normal ration from Jan. 27, 2009 through Feb. 23, 2009 inclusive (the “supplementation period”). Control cows received their normal basal diet during this time. All cows received 75 lb. daily of a Total Mixed lactating dairy ration (TMR) which met their nutritional requirements (Table 2a and 2b) twice daily. In addition to the TMR, cows in the FDF group received 0.136 lb. of the FDF at each feeding. 
       Dairy #2 
       [0028]    Total Milk (TM; lb.) produced by 150 dairy cows was collected from the milk tank was recorded every 2 days, for a period of 204 days. Twice daily, all cows received the Total Mixed lactating dairy ration (TMR) which met their nutritional requirements (Table 3a and 3b). All cows (n=150) received the FDF (0.371 lb. per day) for a period of 42 days. Cows in the treatment group received FDF in addition to their basal diet between days 0 and 56. Control cows received their basal diet throughout the supplementation period. In order to compare performance from the same sampling interval from the previous year, TM data from the current year and the previous year were also compared. 
       Data Analysis 
       [0029]    All data are expressed as mean±SEM. 
         [0030]    Dairy #1: Two-way Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance (RM-ANOVA) was conducted in order to detect interactions between time and treatment. Individual 1-way RM-ANOVA was conducted on data from control and FDF groups to detect significant effect of time within each group. Differences between groups at individual time points were analyzed using a 1-way ANOVA without RM. When a significant F-ratio was obtained, the Holm-Sidak post-hoc method was used to identify significantly different means. Significance was accepted when P&lt;0.05 at a minimum statistical power of 0.8. 
         [0031]    Dairy #2: Individual One-way ANOVA were used to detect significant effect of time on MKY during the collection period and supplementation period. A 2 nd  order polynomial regression equation was derived from average MKY per month for all cows during the collection period. This equation was used to calculate predicted Milk Yield (PMY) for the supplementation period assuming no intervention with FDF. MKY was divided by PMY and then multiplied by 100 in order to determine % of PMY. MKY from the current year and the previous year was compared with MY January through March 2009 using a 2-way ANOVA; the Holm-Sidak post-hoc method was used to identify significantly different means. Significance was accepted when P&lt;0.05 at a minimum statistical power of 0.8. 
       Results 
     Dairy #1:  
     Milk Yield 
       [0032]    There was considerable variability in MKY in the FDF group during the collection period, and no significant changes over time were observed. In the control group there was a consistent increase in milk yield for the first three months of the collection period, which declined over the month preceding the supplementation period. Increases in MKY in control cows over baseline (August 2008) were significant in November and December 2008, and January and March 2009 ( FIG. 1 ). 
         [0033]    During the collection period MKY was significantly higher in the control group than the FDF group in October (P=0.01), November (P=0.002), December (P=0.012), January (P=0.034) and March (P=0.004). There was no significant difference in MKY between groups in February (p=0.694) ( FIG. 1 ). 
         [0034]    The change in MKY between January and February 2009 was significantly different between control and FDF groups (P=0.012) ( FIG. 2 ). 
       Somatic Cell Count Score (SCCS) 
       [0035]    In control cows, SCCS was significantly higher in August 2008 than in all subsequent months ( FIG. 3 ). SCCS was significantly lower in control cows than in treatment cows at all time points. There were no significant changes in SCCS in treatment cows over the study duration. 
       Days in Lactation 
       [0036]    Mean Days in Lactation in January 2009 (before beginning supplementation) for control (186.8±10.7 days) and treatment groups (162.9±20.7 days) were not significantly different. 
       Milk Composition 
       [0037]    There were no significant changes in % fat in milk in treatment or control cows (Table 3). Percent protein was also unchanged in control cows, but in cows provided FDF % protein was significantly lower in March than in January. 
       Income:Feed Ratio 
       [0038]    There was a significant decline in the Income:Feed ratio in control cows at each interval between January and March 2009 (Table 4). There was also a significant decline in Income:Feed ratio in March in FDF cows, but not during February (during supplementation with FDF). The Income:Feed ratio was significantly lower in FDF cows than in controls (as expected given their selection based upon sub-standard productivity). However, unlike control cows, there was no significant decline in the Income:Feed ratio between January and February (after supplementation with FDF). In the month following termination of FDF supplementation, the Income:Feed ratio decreased significantly in treatment cows. 
       Dairy #2: 
       [0039]    Across the period of September 2008 through March 2009, MKY during February and March 2009 was significantly higher than every preceding month, coinciding with supplementation with FDF ( FIG. 4 ). Predicted MKY (per cow/month) for February and March 2009 was 677.2 and 573.1 lb. (respectively) compared with actual MKY for February and March of 840.9±17.43 lb. and 909.2±16.6 lb. (respectively) ( FIG. 4 ). This represents increases of 24.16% and 58.7% respectively over the predicted MKY values. 
       Comparison of Performance January-March 2008 vs January-March 2009 
       [0040]    MKY increased significantly between January and February in both 2008 and 2009 ( FIG. 5 ). MKY was still significantly increased in March 2009 (909.2±16.6 lb.) compared with January 2009 (743.1±8.7 lb.), whereas there was no further increase in March 2008 (782.8±9.4 lb.) compared with January 2008 (765.0±21.8 lb.). MKY in February 2009 was non-significantly (P&lt;0.1) higher than in February 2008, and significantly higher in March 2009 compared with March 2008 (P&lt;0.001). Elevated milk production in March was primarily due to substantially elevated milk production at the beginning of month while FDF was still being fed. Milk production fell rapidly after removal of the supplement and returned to pre-supplementation levels with one week ( FIG. 6 ). 
       Discussion 
       [0041]    This is the first study to report the effect of a fenugreek meal-based supplement in a commercial dairy cow operation typical of North American dairy production. The data provide evidence that the product effectively increases milk yield in both high- and low-producing dairy cattle and may improve Income:Feed in those cattle with chronically low milk production. In particular, FDF appears to be more effective than would be an equivalent amount of unprocessed fenugreek, suggesting that superior results are obtained by using the fiber-depleted product. 
         [0042]    Cows at Dairy #1 were selected for the treatment group based on chronically low milk production. Analysis of their production records revealed that these cows also had substantially elevated SCCs compared with the control group, and contributed significantly less to dairy profit than the control group as evidenced by lower Income:Feed ratios. The difference in milk yield between treatment and control groups was significant every month between October 2008 and March 2009 except during the month of supplementation with FDF. At this point, milk yield in the chronic low producers was not significantly different from the herd average. Milk yield declined in the treatment group immediately after removal of supplementation despite the fact that milk yield actually increased in controls. Thus, there does not appear to be any residual benefit of feeding FDF after termination of supplementation. Importantly, profitability of these low-producing cows appeared to be improved subsequent to supplementation with FDF despite the additional cost of producing the TMR. 
         [0043]    Similar results were obtained when cows at Dairy #2 were provided with dietary FDF. While no control group was maintained at this Dairy, regression analysis of the previous 5 months of production records provides evidence that milk production was significantly increased after the cows were fed FDF, and the improvement in milk production rapidly declined after removal of the supplement. 
         [0044]    These data are consistent with previous reports of improved milk yield in livestock fed whole fenugreek. Alamar and Basiouni (2005) reported a 13% increase in milk yield in 6 lactating dairy goats fed fenugreek seeds (60 g/day) for 60 days compared with 6 control goats. A 13% increase in milk production was also reported for 6 lactating buffalo provided with a dietary supplement containing fenugreek (200 g) once every 4 days for a total of 60 days, as compared with 6 controls (Tamar et al. 1996). The supplement in this study also contained linseed oil and cane sugar; 6 buffalo treated with just the cane sugar and linseed oil had significantly reduced milk production compared to controls, supporting an essential role of fenugreek in the observed increase in milk production. Other authors report no significant effect of dietary fenugreek (20% DMI) for 3 weeks on milk production in lactating dairy cows, though blood and milk cholesterol levels were significantly reduced (Shah and Mir, 2004). This study was shorter term than the current study and also recruited on three animals per group and thus was likely underpowered for detection of differences in milk yield. 
         [0045]    Increases in milk yield were markedly higher in the current study than in the aforementioned studies. This suggests that the fiber-depleted fenugreek is more effective at improving milk production than is fenugreek alone. In addition, is is anticipated that the other constituents of FDF act synergistically with components from fenugreek to contribute to the observed effect. Saw palmetto ( Serenoa repens ) has widely reported anti-androgenic effects (Ulbricht et al., 2006) including possible anti-estrogenic activity (Di Silverio et al., 1992), though its effect on milk production has not been investigated. Similarly, fennel ( Foeniculum vulgare ) is a putative estrogenic agent (Albert-Puleo, 1980). Trans-anethole, a phytochemical found in fennel (Gosge et al., 2008), has demonstrated estrogenic activity in vitro (Howes et al., 2002; Nakagawa and Suzuki, 2003) though, like Saw palmetto, there arc no reports of its effect on milk production. MSM is provided in FDF as a source of sulphur, an important macromineral in human breast milk (Parcell, 2002). 
         [0046]    The mechanism of galactagogue action of FDF is not fully known, and so the applicants, while speculating on how fenugreek acts to improve milk production, are not bound to any one particular theory of operation. Since there was no change in SCCs in Dairy #1 it is unlikely that the supplement produced an immune-mediated or anti-inflammatory effect. Examination of other reported biological effects of dietary fenugreek point to a hormone related mechanism—specifically, a stimulatory effect of fenugreek on plasma ghrelin. Exogenous ghrelin provided to lactating dairy cows has resulted in increased milk yield (Roche et al., 2008b), and endogenous ghrelin is increased during lactation, probably as physiological means for increasing feed intake and maintaining energy balance (Abizaid et al., 2008; Roche et al., 2008a). Ghrelin plays a key role in regulating feed intake, with elevated plasma ghrelin associated with increased feed intake (Roche et al., 2008). 
         [0047]    Fenugreek has also been associated with increased feed intake (Petit et al., 1993; Rguibi and Belahsen, 2006). Increases in plasma ghrelin is also causative of elevated plasma growth hormone (Nass et al., 2008), an effect reported subsequent to fenugreek feeding (Shim et al., 2008; Alamar and Basiouni, 2005). Interestingly, polymorphisms in the ghrelin gene are associated with feed efficiency in beef cattle (Sherman et al., 2008); beef cattle provided with a diet rich in fenugreek have shown significantly improved feed efficiency (Okine et al., 2001). 
         [0048]    Connections with ghrelin also exist within the effects of fenugreek on glucose metabolism. The seed is well established as a tool to control diabetes, primarily due to its ability to increase insulin sensitivity of adipose tissue, skeletal muscle and liver (Hannan et al., 2007; Gad et al., 2006), and lower serum levels of low density lipoproteins (LDL) (Hannan et al., 2003; Sowmya and Rajyalakshmi 1999). Insulin sensitivity and glucose metabolism are involved in the complex endocrine regulation of feeding behaviour. Among the most important predictors for elevated serum ghrelin is insulin sensitivity (Kempa et al., 2007). Dietary compounds which increase insulin sensitivity, such as fenugreek (Gupta et al., 2001), would thus be predicted to increase serum concentrations of ghrelin. 
         [0049]    The biological activity of ghrelin in serum is dependent on its octanoylation status, such that octanoylated form of ghrelin participates primarily in increasing appetite (De Vriese et al., 2007), while the degradation form of ghrelin (desacyl ghrelin) has other effects, including inhibition of feed intake (Asakawa et al., 2005). Enzymes responsible for degradation of ghrelin to desacyl ghrelin are those associated with lipoproteins, and mainly with LDL (De Vriese et al., 2007). Thus, dietary products which are able to influence the profile of serum lipoproteins in favour of high density lipoprotein (HDL) and reducing LDL, such as fenugreek, will limit interactions of enzymes associated with LDL with ghrelin, thus reducing ghrelin degradation and sustaining appetite. 
         [0050]    In summary the current study provides evidence that a fenugreek-based dietary supplement (FDF) significantly improves milk yield in low- and high-producing dairy cows without changing milk composition or somatic cell count score. Further, the effect appears superior to those that would be obtained using unprocessed fenugreek, indicating that the use of a fiber-depleted fenugreek extract is an effective way in which to improve milk production in mammals, and in particular in dairy cows. 
         [0051]    Note: In the Figures and Tables the term “Nutrifen”=“FDF” 
         [0052]      FIG. 1 . Milk yield from lactating dairy cows fed a control (n=111) diet or a diet containing FDF (n=50). Cows allocated to the FDF group received the test supplement from Jan. 27, 2009 through Feb. 23, 2009 inclusive. Control cows received their normal basal diet during this time. ‘A’ denotes pre-supplementation; ‘B’ denotes supplementation; ‘C’ denotes post-supplementation. * denotes significant changes from August 2008 within treatment groups; letters denote significant differences between treatment groups within a given month. 
         [0053]      FIG. 2 . Change in Milk Yield from January to February 2009 (after supplementation with FDF). Cows allocated to the FDF group received the test supplement from Jan. 27, 2009 through Feb. 23, 2009 inclusive. Control cows received their normal basal diet during this time. Letters denote significant differences between treatment groups. 
         [0054]      FIG. 3 . Somatic Cell Count from lactating dairy cows fed a control (n=111) diet or a diet containing FDF (n=50). Cows allocated to the FDF group received the test supplement from Jan. 27, 2009 through Feb. 23, 2009 inclusive. Control cows received their normal basal diet during this time. ‘A’ denotes pre-supplementation; ‘B’ denotes supplementation; ‘C’ denotes post-supplementation. * denotes significant changes from August 2008 within treatment groups; letters denote significant differences between treatment groups within a given month. 
         [0055]      FIG. 4 . Actual vs Predicted Milk Yield in Dairy Cows Supplemented with FDF (0.371 lbs/day). All cows (n=150) received the FDF supplement (0.371 lbs/day) from January 23, 2009 through Mar. 3, 2009. Predicted Milk Yield was calculated from regression analysis of actual milk yield from September 1 through January 21, 2009. ‘A’ denotes pre-supplementation; ‘B’ denotes supplementation; ‘C’ denotes post-supplementation. * denotes significant increase from January 2009 (ie. presupplementation). 
         [0056]      FIG. 5 . Comparison of monthly MKY in January, February, March in 2008 and 2009. All cows (n=150) received the FDF supplement (0.371 lbs/day) from Jan. 23, 2009 through Mar. 3, 2009. No supplement was fed in 2008. * denotes significant (p&lt;0.05) increase from January value of the same year. Letters denote significant difference (P&lt;0.001) between years during that month. 
         [0057]      FIG. 6 . Milk yield (lb/cow) on each day of March. All cows (n=150) received the FDF supplement (0.371 lbs/day) from Jan. 23, 2009 through Mar. 3, 2009. Data presented are data collection days after removal of FDF. 
       Tables 
       [0058]      
         [0000]    
       
         
               
             
               
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 1 
               
             
             
               
                   
               
               
                 Comparative composition of FDF and fenugreek whole seed. 
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                 Proximate analysis 
                 Fenugreek whole seed 
                 FDF 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                 Moisture 
                 13.1 
                 14.1 
               
               
                   
                 Total Dietary Fiber 
                 44.5 
                 26.9 
               
               
                   
                 Soluble Dietary Fiber 
                 17.6 
                 5.29 
               
               
                   
                 Insoluble Dietary Fiber 
                 26.9 
                 21.7 
               
               
                   
                 Protein 
                 28.1 
                 38.0 
               
               
                   
                 Ash 
                 3.41 
                 4.05 
               
               
                   
                 Fat 
                 7.22 
                 12.2 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0000]    
       
         
               
             
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 2a 
               
             
             
               
                   
               
               
                 Feed composition of TMR (Dairy #1) 
               
             
          
           
               
                 Feed # 
                 Feed Ingredient 
                 % DM intake 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                 4 
                 High moisture corn (78.07DM) 
                 18.46 
               
               
                 30 
                 Grass hay 
                 13.14 
               
               
                 44 
                 Milo silage 
                 9.25 
               
               
                 46 
                 Corn silage 
                 32.46 
               
               
                 66 
                 Corn - distillers grains 
                 10.64 
               
               
                 81 
                 Soybean meat 
                 12.91 
               
               
                 142 
                 Plain salt 
                 0.30 
               
               
                 530 
                 Basemix 
                 2.85 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0000]    
       
         
               
             
               
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 2b 
               
               
                   
               
               
                 Nutrient analysis of dairy ration (Dairy #1) (DM Basis) 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                 Lbs 
                 % 
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 As fed 
                 74.38 
               
               
                   
                 DM 
                 42.29 
                 100 
               
               
                   
                 Crude protein 
                 6.821 
                 16.129 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                 Mcal/Lb 
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 Net Energy (NE) Maint 
                 82.933 
               
               
                   
                 NE Gain 
                 51.084 
               
               
                   
                 Ne Lactation 
                 76.863 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                 % 
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 Total Digestible Nutrients (TDN) 
                 74.141 
               
               
                   
                 NPN 
                 0.000 
               
               
                   
                 Crude Fat 
                 4.090 
               
               
                   
                 Crude Fibre 
                 15.337 
               
               
                   
                 Acid Detergent Fibre (ADF) 
                 18.303 
               
               
                   
                 Neutral Detergent Fibre (NDF) 
                 32.554 
               
               
                   
                 Ash 
                 7.890 
               
               
                   
                 Calcium 
                 0.923 
               
               
                   
                 Phosphorus 
                 0.376 
               
               
                   
                 Potassium 
                 1.026 
               
               
                   
                 Magnesium 
                 0.232 
               
               
                   
                 Sodium 
                 0.246 
               
               
                   
                 Chloride 
                 0.339 
               
               
                   
                 Salt 
                 0.296 
               
               
                   
                 Sulfur 
                 0.214 
               
               
                   
                 Lysine 
                 0.831 
               
               
                   
                 Methionine 
                 0.398 
               
               
                   
                 Starch 
                 28.752 
               
               
                   
                 DIP 
                 61.532 
               
               
                   
                 UIP 
                 38.468 
               
               
                   
                 NFC 
                 39.778 
               
               
                   
                 Forage NDF 
                 25.211 
               
               
                   
                 Soluble protein 
                 23.352 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                 ppm 
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 Zinc 
                 106.773 
               
               
                   
                 Iron 
                 150.112 
               
               
                   
                 Copper 
                 23.710 
               
               
                   
                 Manganese 
                 61.586 
               
               
                   
                 Cobalt 
                 1.202 
               
               
                   
                 Iodine 
                 0.821 
               
               
                   
                 Selenium 
                 0.310 
               
               
                   
                 Niacin 
                 14.591 
               
               
                   
                 Thiamine 
                 1.477 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                 IU/lb 
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 Vitamin A 
                 3659.866 
               
               
                   
                 Vitamin D3 
                 526.056 
               
               
                   
                 Vitamin E 
                 16.117 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                   
                 meQ/lb 
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 Cation-Anion 
                 14.022 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0000]    
       
         
               
             
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 3 
               
             
             
               
                   
               
               
                 Milk composition from January to March 2009 
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                 % Fat 
                 % Protein 
               
             
          
           
               
                 Month 
                 Control 
                 FDF 
                 Control 
                 FDF 
               
               
                   
               
               
                 January 2009 
                 4.02 ± 0.32 
                 3.47 ± 0.10 
                 2.93 ± 0.28 
                 3.42 ± 0.04 a   
               
               
                 February 
                 3.49 ± 0.07 
                 3.85 ± 0.10 
                 3.29 ± 0.03 
                 3.28 ± 0.04 ab   
               
               
                 2009 
               
               
                 March 2009 
                 3.50 ± 0.08 
                 3.70 ± 0.14 
                 3.24 ± 0.04 
                 3.23 ± 0.05 b   
               
               
                   
               
               
                 Letters denote values are significantly different within treatment 
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0000]    
       
         
               
             
               
               
               
             
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 4 
               
             
             
               
                   
               
               
                 Income: Feed from January to March 2009 
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                 Control 
                 FDF 
               
               
                   
                   
               
             
          
           
               
                   
                 January 2009 
                 8.18 ± 0.24 a   
                 8.01 ± 0.50 a   
               
               
                   
                 February 2009 
                 6.74 ± 0.23 b   
                 6.95 ± 0.47 a   
               
               
                   
                 March 2009 
                 5.01 ± 0.19 c   
                 4.42 ± 0.32 b   
               
               
                   
                   
               
               
                   
                 Letters denote significantly different values within treatment 
               
             
          
         
       
     
       REFERENCES 
       [0059]    Abizaid A, Schiavo L, Diane S. Hypothalamic and pituitary expression of ghrelin receptor message is increased during lactation. Neurosci Lett. 2008 Aug. 8;440(3):206-10. 
         [0060]    Albert-Pulco M. Fennel and anise as estrogenic agents. J Ethnopharmacol. 1980 December;2(4):337-44. 
         [0061]    Asakawa, A. Inui, A. Fujimiya, M. Sakamaki R, Shinfuku N, Ueta Y, Meguid M M, Kasuga M. 2007. Stomach regulates energy balance via acylated ghrelin and desacyl ghrelin. Gut 54(1):18-24. 
         [0062]    Co         ge B, Kiralan M, Gürbüz B. Characteristics of fatty acids and essential oil from sweet fennel ( Foeniculum vulgare  Mill. var.  dulce ) and bitter fennel fruits ( F. vulgare  Mill. var.  vulgare ) growing in Turkey. Nat Prod Res. 2008;22(12):1011-6. 
         [0063]    De Vriese C, Hacquebard M, Gregoire F, Carpentier Y, Delporte C. 2007. Ghrelin interacts with human plasma lipoproteins. Endocrinology 148(5):2355-62. 
         [0064]    Di Silverio F, D&#39;Eramo G, Lubrano C, Flammia G P, Sciarra A, Palma E, Caponera M, Sciarra F. Evidence that  Serenoa repens  extract displays an antiestrogenic activity in prostatic tissue of benign prostatic hypertrophy patients. Eur Urol. 1992;21(4):309-14. 
         [0065]    Gabay M P. Galactogogues: medications that induce lactation. J Hum Lact. 2002 August;18(3):274-9. 
         [0066]    Gad M Z, El-Sawalhi M M, Ismail M F, El-Tanbouly N D. Biochemical study of the anti-diabetic action of the Egyptian plants fenugreek and balanites. Mel Cell Biochem. 2006 January;281(1-2):173-83. 
         [0067]    Gupta A, Gupta R, Lal B. Effect of  Trigonella foenum - graccum  (fenugreek) seeds on glycaemic control and insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a double blind placebo controlled study. J Assoc Physicians India. 2001 November;49:1057-61. 
         [0068]    Hannan J M, Ali L, Rokeya B, Khaleque J, Akhter M, Flatt P R, Abdel-Wahab Y H. Soluble dietary fibre fraction of  Trigonella foenum - graecum  (fenugreek) seed improves glucose homeostasis in animal models of type 1 and type 2 diabetes by delaying carbohydrate digestion and absorption, and enhancing insulin action. Br J Nutr. 2007 March;97(3):514-21. 
         [0069]    Hannan J M, Rokeya B, Faruque O, Nahar N, Mosihuzzaman M, Azad Khan A K, Mi L. Effect of soluble dietary fibre fraction of  Trigonella foenum graecum  on glycemic, insulinemic, lipidemic and platelet aggregation status of Type 2 diabetic model rats. J Ethnopharmacol. 2003 September;88(1):73-7. 
         [0070]    Kempa A, Krzyzanowska-Swiniarska B, Miazgowski T, Pilarska K. (2007) Not insulin but insulin sensitivity, leptin, and cortisol are major factors regulating serum acylated ghrelin level in healthy women. J Endocrinol Invest; 30(8):659-65. 
         [0071]    Mir, Z.; Acharya, S. N.; Mir, P. S.; Taylor, W. G.; Zaman, M. S.; Mears, G. J.; Goonewardene, L. A. 1997. Nutrient composition, in vitro gas production and digestibility of fenugreek ( Trigonella foenum - graecum ) and alfalfa forages. Can J Anim Sci 77(1):119-124. 
         [0072]    Mir, Z.; Mir, P. S.; Acharya, S. N.; Zaman, M. S. Taylor, W. G.; Mears, G. J.; McAllister, T. A.; Goonewardene, L. A. 1998. Comparison of alfalfa and fenugreek ( Trigonella foenum - graecum ) silages supplemented with gain on performance of growing steers. Can J Anim Sci 78(3):343-349. 
         [0073]    Nakagawa Y, Suzuki T. Cytotoxic and xenoestrogenic effects via biotransformation of trans-anethole on isolated rat hepatocytes and cultured MCF-7 human breast cancer cells. Biochem Pharmacol. 2003 Jul. 1;66(1):63-73. 
         [0074]    Okine E K, Wang Z, Goonewardene Z, Mir Z, Liu M F. Residual metabolizable feed consumption as a method of comparing feed efficiency in steers fed silage and silage-grain diets. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2001;92:87-93. 
         [0075]    Parcell S. Sulfur in human nutrition and applications in medicine. Altern Med Rev. 2002 February;7(1):22-44. 
         [0076]    Petit P, Sauvaire Y, Ponsin G, Manteghetti M, Fave A, Ribes G. Effects of a fenugreek seed extract on feeding behaviour in the rat: metabolic-endocrine correlates. Pharmacol Biochem Behan. 1993 June;45(2):369-74. 
         [0077]    Rguibi M, Belahsen R. Fattening practices among Moroccan Saharawi women. East Mediterr Health J. 2006 September;12(5):619-24. 
         [0078]    Roche J R, Blache D, Kay J K, Miller D R, Sheahan A J, Miller D W. Neuroendocrine and physiological regulation of intake with particular reference to domesticated ruminant animals. Nutr Res Rev. 2008a December;21(2):207-34. 
         [0079]    Roche J R, Sheahan A J, Chagas L M, Blache D, Berry D P, Kay J K. Long-term infusions of ghrelin and obestatin in early lactation dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2008b December;91(12):4728-40. 
         [0080]    Sherman E L, Nkrumah J D, Murdoch B M, Li C, Wang Z, Fu A, Moore S S. Polymorphisms and haplotypes in the bovine neuropeptide Y, growth hormone receptor, ghrelin, insulin-like growth factor 2, and uncoupling proteins 2 and 3 genes and their associations with measures of growth, performance, feed efficiency, and carcass merit in beef cattle. J Anim Sci. 2008 January;86(1):1-16. 
         [0081]    Shim S H, Lee E J, Kim J S, Kang S S, Ha H, Lee H Y, Kim C, Lee J H, Son K H. Rat growth-hormone release stimulators from fenugreek seeds. Chem Biodivers. 2008 September;5(9):1753-61. 
         [0082]    Sowmya P, Rajyalakshmi P. Hypocholesterolemic effect of germinated fenugreek seeds in human subjects. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 1999;53(4):359-65. 
         [0083]    Tiran D. The use of fenugreek for breast feeding women. Complement Ther Nurs Midwifery. 2003 August;9(3):155-6. 
         [0084]    Tomar K S, Singh V P, Yadav R S. 1996. Effect of feeding maithy ( Trigonella foenum - graecum ) and chandrasoor ( Lepidium sativum L. ) seeds on milk and blood constituents of Murrah buffaloes. Ind J An Sci, 66 (11): 1192-1193. 
         [0085]    Ulbricht C, Basch E, Bent S, Boon H, Corrado M, Foppa I, Hashmi S, Hammerness P, Kingsbury E, Smith M, Szapary P, Vora M, Weissner W. Evidence-based systematic review of saw palmetto by the Natural Standard Research Collaboration. J Soc Integr Oncol. 2006 Fall;4(4):170-86. 
         [0086]    Xue W L, Li X S, Zhang J, Liu Y H, Wang Z L, Zhang R J. Effect of  Trigonella foenum - graecum  (fenugreek) extract on blood glucose, blood lipid and hemorheological properties in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2007;16 Suppl 1:422-6.