In vitro fermentation characteristics of diets with different forage/concentrate ratios: Comparison of rumen and faecal inocula

Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

Volumn 91, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 1213-1221

  Zicarelli, Fabio ^a   Calabrò, Serena ^a   Cutrignelli, Monica I ^a   Infascelli, Federico ^a   Tudisco, Raffaella ^a   Bovera, Fulvia ^a   Piccolo, Vincenzo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II   (Italy)

Author keywords

Diets; Faeces; Forage concentrate ratio; in vitro gas production; Rumen fluid; Stoichiometric calculations

Indexed keywords

VOLATILE FATTY ACID;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISEASE; ANIMAL FOOD; ARTICLE; BACTERIUM; BIOMASS; BOVIDS; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIET; DIETARY FIBER; EVALUATION; FECES; FERMENTATION; GAS; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; METABOLISM; MICROBIOLOGY; RUMINANT STOMACH; SHEEP;

ANIMAL FEED; ANIMALS; BACTERIA; BIOMASS; DIET; DIETARY FIBER; FATTY ACIDS, VOLATILE; FECES; FERMENTATION; GASES; RUMEN; RUMINANTS; SHEEP;

BOVIDAE; OVIS ARIES;

EID: 79953674774     PISSN: 00225142     EISSN: 10970010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.4302     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Tilley JM and Terry RA, A two stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J Br Grassl Soc 18: 104-111 (1963).
2. Menke KH, Raab L, Salewski A, Steingass H, Fritz D and Schneider W, Estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. J Agric Sci (Camb) 93: 217-222 (1979).
3. Theodorou MK, Williams BA, Dhanoa MS, McAllan AB and France J, A simple gas production method using a pressure transducer to determine the fermentation kinetics of ruminant feeds. Anim Feed Sci Technol 48: 185-197 (1994).
4. Goering HK and Van Soest PJ, Forage Fiber Analysis (USDA Agriculture Handbook No. 379). US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC (1970).
5. De Boever JL, Cottyn BG, Buysse FX, Wainman FW and Vanacker JM, The use of an enzymic technique to predict digestibility, metabolisable and net energy of compound feedstuffs for ruminants. Anim Feed Sci Technol 14: 203-214 (1986).
6. Schofield P and Pell AN, Measurement and kinetics analysis of the neutral detergent-soluble carbohydrate fraction of legumes and grasses. J Anim Sci 73: 3455-3463 (1995).
7. Stefanon B, Pell AN and Schofield P, Effect of maturity on digestion kinetics of water-soluble and water-insoluble fractions of alfalfa and brome hay. J Anim Sci 74: 1104-1115 (1996).
8. Calabrò S, Infascelli F, Bovera F, Moniello G and Piccolo V, In vitro degradability of three forages: fermentation kinetics and gas production of NDF and neutral detergent soluble fraction of forages. J Sci Food Agric 82: 222-229 (2001).
9. 15N incorporation and its implications for the prediction of voluntary feed intake of roughages. Br J Nutr 77: 911-921 (1997).
10. Pell AN and Schofield P, Computerized monitoring of gas production to measure forage digestion in vitro. J Dairy Sci 76: 1063-1073 (1993).
11. Blümmel M and Ørskov ER, Comparison of in vitro gas production and nylon bag degradability of roughages in predicting feed intake in cattle. Anim Feed Sci Technol 40: 109-119 (1993).
12. Cone JW, van Gelder AH, Veerman ET and van Vuuren AM, In vitro estimation of rumen fermentable organic matter using rumen fluid and a cell free preparation of rumen fluid. Neth J Agric Sci 42: 343-356 (1994).
13. Nikolic JA, Jovanovic M and Zeremski D, Application of a modified in vitro procedure in the prediction of organic matter digestibility of feedstuffs for ruminants. Acta Vet (Beograd) 37: 3-12 (1987).
14. Borba AES, Correia PJA, Fernandes JMM and Borba AFRS, Comparison of three sources of inocula for predicting apparent digestibility of ruminant feedstuffs. Anim Res 50: 265-273 (2001).
15. Omed HM, Faza A, Axford RFE and Givens DI, A low tech in-vitro procedure using faecal fluid for the estimation of digestibility of forages. Proc Br Soc Anim Sci p. 59 (1998).
16. El Shaer HM, Omed HM, Chamberlain AG and Axford RFE, Use of faecal organisms from sheep for the in vitro determination of digestibility. J Agric Sci (Camb) 109: 257-259 (1987).
17. Mould FL, Kliem KE, Morgan R and Mauricio RM, In vitro microbial inoculum: a review of its function and properties. Anim Feed Sci Technol 123/124: 31-50 (2005).
18. Borba AES and Ramalho Ribeiro JMC, A comparison of alternative sources of inocula in an in vitro digestibility technique. Ann Zootech 45: 89-95 (1996).
19. Váradyová Z, Baran M and Zelenak I, Comparison of two in vitro fermentation gas production methods using both rumen fluid and faecal inoculum from sheep. Anim Feed Sci Technol 123/124: 81-94 (2005).
20. El-Meadaway A, Mir Z, Mir PS, Zaman MS and Yanke LJ, Relative efficacy of inocula from rumen fluid or faecal solution for determining in vitro digestibility and gas production. Can J Anim Sci 78: 673-679 (1998).
21. Jones RJ and Barnes P, In vitro digestibility assessment of tropical shrub legumes using rumen fluid or faecal fluid as the inoculum source. Trop Grassl 30: 374-377 (1996).
22. Mauricio RM, Owen ER, Mould FL, Givens I, Theodorou MK, France J, et al, Comparison of bovine rumen fluid and bovine faeces as inoculum for an in vitro gas production technique for evaluating forages. Anim Feed Sci Technol 89: 33-48 (2001).
23. Theodorou MK, A new laboratory procedure for determining the fermentation kinetics of ruminant feeds. Cienc Invest Agric 20: 332-334 (1993).
24. AOAC, Official Methods of Analysis (17th edn). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, MD (2000).
25. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB and Lewis BA, Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 74: 3583-3597 (1991).
26. Calabrò S, Tudisco R, Balestrieri A, Piccolo G, Infascelli F and Cutrignelli MI, Fermentation characteristics of different grain legumes cultivars with the in vitro gas production technique. Ital J Anim Sci 8: 280-282 (2009).
27. Groot JCJ, Williams BA, Oostdam AJ, Boer H and Tamminga S, The use of cumulative gas and volatile fatty acid production to predict in vitro fermentation kinetics of Italian ryegrass leaf cell walls and contents at various time intervals. Br J Nutr 79: 519-525 (1998).
28. Van Soest PJ, Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. O&B Books, Corvallis, OR (1994).
29. Groot JCJ, Cone JW, Williams BA, Debersaques FMA and Lantinga EA, Multiphasic analysis of gas production kinetics for in vitro fermentation of ruminant feeds. Anim Feed Sci Technol 64: 77-89 (1996).
30. Bauer E, Williams BA, Voigt C, Mosenthin R and Verstegen MWA, Microbial activities of faeces from unweaned and adult pigs, in relation to selected fermentable carbohydrates. Anim Sci 73: 313-322 (2001).
31. SAS, SAS User's Guide: Statistics (6th edn). SAS Institute, Cary, NC (2000).
32. McDonald P, Edwards RA, Greenalgh JFD and Morgan CA, Animal Nutrition (6th edn). Pearson Education Limited, Harlow, Essex, UK (2002).
33. Kern DL, Slyter LL, Leffel EC, Weaver JM and Oultjen RR, Ponies vs. steers: microbial and chemical characteristics of intestinal ingesta. J Anim Sci 38: 559-564 (1974).
34. Gonçalves LMBO and Borba AES, Study of gas production capacity by three sources of inocula. J Agric Sci (Camb) 127: 511-515 (1996).
35. Cone JW, van Gelder AH and Bachmann H, Influence of inoculum source on gas production profiles. Anim Feed Sci Technol 99: 221-231 (2002).
36. Butler N, Younglove GA, Waggoner JW and Hart RH, In vitro digestibility of grazed mixed native range forage using inoculum from alternative sources. J Anim Sci 78: (Suppl. 2), p. 17 (2004).
37. Akhter S, Owen E, Theodorou MK, Butler EA and Minson DJ, Bovine faeces as a source of micro-organisms for the in vitro digestibility assay of forages. Grass Forage Sci 54: 219-226 (1999).
38. Van der Baan A, van Niekerk A, Rethman NFG and Coertze RJ, The determination of digestibility of Atriplex nummularia cv. De Kock (Oldman's saltbush) using different in vitro techniques. S Afr J Anim Sci 34: 95-97 (2004).
39. Rymer C, Huntington JA, Williams BA and Givens DI, In vitro cumulative gas production techniques: history, methodological considerations and challenges. Anim Feed Sci Technol 123/124: 9-30 (2005).
40. Wood CD, Murray AH, Moss AR and Givens DI, Use of the gas production technique to investigate responses of supplementing low quality forages: 1. In vitro interactions, in In Vitro Techniques for Measuring Nutrient Supply to Ruminants (BSAS Occasional Publication No. 22), ed. by Deaville ER, Owen E, Adesogen AT, Rymer C, Huntington JA and Lawrence TLJ. British Society of Animal Science, Edinburgh, pp. 92-94 (1998).
41. Rymer C, Huntington JA and Givens DI, Effects of inoculum preparation method and concentration, method of inoculation and pre-soaking the substrate on the gas production profile of high temperature dried grass. Anim Feed Sci Technol 78: 199-213 (1999).
42. Doane PH, Schofield P and Pell AN, Neutral detergent fiber disappearance and gas and volatile fatty acid production during the in vitro fermentation of six forages. J Anim Sci 75: 3342-3352 (1997).
43. Calabrò S, Williams BA, Piccolo V, Infascelli F and Tamminga S, A comparison between buffalo (Bubalus bubalus) and cow (Bos taurus) rumen fluids in terms of the in vitro fermentation characteristics of three fibrous feedstuffs. J Sci Food Agric 84: 645-652 (2004).
44. Akhter S, Owen E, Fal A, O'Donovan F and Theodorou MK, Use of fresh or frozen faeces instead of sheep rumen fluid for in vitro digestibility assays for forage. Proc Br Soc Anim Sci p. 100 (1994).
45. Akhter S, Owen E, Tembo SL, Theodorou MK and Deaville ER, Repeatability of in vitro digestibility assays of forages when using fresh, frozen or freeze-dried cow faeces instead of sheep rumen fluid as sources of micro-organisms. Anim Prod 60: 540A (1995).
46. Harris DM, Barlet A and Chamberlain AT, The use of dairy cow faeces rather than rumen fluid in the gas pressure transducer technique for assessing digestion kinetics in vitro. Proc Br Soc Anim Sci p. 113 (1995).
47. Altaf UR, Mauricio R, Mould F, Smith T, Owen E, Phipps RH, et al, Comparison of bovine rumen fluid and bovine faeces as sources of micro-organisms for the in vitro gas production technique for assessing silages of maize and maize plant fractions. Proc. BSAS Annual Winter Meeting, Scarborough, p. 60 (1998).
48. Chen XJ and Zhao GY, The suitability of a faecal suspension of sheep as inocula for the estimation of utilizable crude protein of feeds by in vitro incubation Arch Anim Nutr 58: 137-148 (2004).
49. Mauricio RM, Owen E, Abdalla L, Bueno ICS, Mould FL, Gilmour S, et al, Comparison of rumen liquor and faeces, in UK and Brazil, as sources of microorganisms for in vitro gas production for assessing twelve forages. Proc Br Soc Anim Sci p. 147 (1999).
50. Van Vliet PCJ, Van der Stelt B, Rietberg PI and De Goede RGM, Effects of organic matter content on earthworms and nitrogen mineralization in grassland soils. Eur J Soil Biol 43: S222-S229 (2007).
51. Hidayat C, Hillman K, Newbold CJ and Stewart CS, The contributions of bacteria and protozoa to ruminal forage fermentation in vitro, as determined by microbial gas production. Anim Feed Sci Technol 42: 193-208 (1993).