A ring test of a wireless in vitro gas production system

Animal Production Science

Volumn 53, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 585-592

  Cornou, Cécile ^a   Storm, Ida M L Drejer ^a   Hindrichsen, Ida K ^b   Worgan, Hilary ^c   Bakewell, Eleanor ^c   Ruiz, David R Yáñez ^d   Abecia, Leticia ^d   Tagliapietra, Franco ^e   Cattani, Mirko ^e   Ritz, Christian ^f   Hansen, Hanne H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b CHR HANSEN A S   (Denmark)

^c ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d CSIC   (Spain)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^f UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

curve fitting; fermentation kinetics; repeatability; reproducibility.

Indexed keywords

CATTLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FERMENTATION; GAS PRODUCTION; LABORATORY METHOD; REACTION KINETICS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SAMPLING; SHEEP; STARCH; STRAW; SUBSTRATE;

EID: 84877723830     PISSN: 18360939     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1071/AN12091     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. ANKOM (2011) RF-Gas-Info.pdf. Available at http://www.ankom.com [Verified 27 February 2012]
2. Bates D, Maechler M (2009) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-32. Available at http://cran.rproject. org/web/packages/lme4/index.html [Verified 27 February 2012]
3. Bueno ICS, Abdalla AL, Cabral Filho SLS, Vitta DMSS, Owen E, Mauricio RM, Givens I, Sutton JD, Mould FL (1999) Comparison of inocula from sheep and cattle for the in vitro gas production technique under tropical conditions. In 'Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science'. p. 151. (British Society of Animal Science: Scarborough, UK
4. Cone JW, vanGelder AH, Visscher GJW, Oudshoorn L (1996) Influence of rumen fluid and substrate concentration on fermentation kinetics measured with a fully automated time related gas production apparatus. Animal Feed Science and Technology 61, 113-128. doi:10.1016/0377- 8401(96)00950-9
5. Cone JW, vanGelder AH, Bachmann H (2002) Influence of inoculum source on gas production profiles. Animal Feed Science and Technology 99, 221-231. doi:10.1016/S0377-8401(02)00073-1
6. Craig WM, Brown DR, Broderick GA, Ricker DB (1987) Postprandial compositional changes of fluid-associated and particle-associated ruminal microorganisms. Journal of Animal Science 65, 1042-1048.
7. Getachew G, Blümmel M, Makkar HPS, Becker K (1998) In vitro gas measuring techniques for assessment of nutritional quality of feeds: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 72, 261-281. doi:10.1016/ S0377-8401(97)00189-2
8. Getachew G, Crovetto GM, Fondevila M, Krishnamoorthy U, Singh B, Spanghero M, Steingass H, Robinson PH, Kailas MM (2002) Laboratory variation of 24 h in vitro gas production and estimated metabolizable energy values of ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 102, 169-180. doi:10.1016/S0377-8401(02)00212-2
9. Gierus M, Schiborra A, Südekumb KH, Rave G, Taube F (2008) Comparison of gas accumulation profiles of several feeds using manual or automated gas production methods. Animal Feed Science and Technology 147, 310-325. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2008.02.001
10. Goering HK, Van Soest PJ (1970) 'Forage fiber analysis (apparatus, reagents, procedures, and some applications).' Handbook No. 379. (USDA Agricultural Research Service: Washington, DC
11. Goncalves LMBO, Borba AES (1996) Study of gas production capacity by three sources of inocula. The Journal of Agricultural Science 127, 511-515. doi:10.1017/S0021859600078734
12. Hall MB, Mertens DR (2008) In vitro fermentation vessel type and method alter fiber digestibility estimates. Journal of Dairy Science 91, 301-307. doi:10.3168/jds.2006-689
13. Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical Journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift 50, 346-363. doi:10.1002/bimj.200810425
14. ISO 5725-2 (1994) 'Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 2: Basic method for the determination of repeatability and reproducibility of a standard measurement method. ISO 5725-2.' (International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland
15. Mauricio RM, Mould FL, Dhanoa MS, Owen E, Channa KS, TheodorouMK (1999) A semi-automated in vitro gas production technique for ruminant feedstuff evaluation. Animal Feed Science and Technology 79, 321-330. doi:10.1016/S0377- 8401(99)00033-4
16. Menke KH, Steingass H (1988) Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research and Development 28, 7-55.
17. Menke K, Raab L, Salewski A, Steingass H, Fritz D, Schneider W (1979) The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. The Journal of Agricultural Science 93, 217-222. doi:10.1017/ S0021859600086305
18. Mertens DR (2002) Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fiber in feeds with refluxing in beakers or crucibles: collaborative study. Journal of the Association of Analytical Communities International 85, 1217-1240.
19. Mould FL, Kliem KE, Morgan R, Mauricio RM (2005) In vitro microbial inoculum: a review of its function and properties. Animal Feed Science and Technology 123-124, 31-50. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.04.028
20. Nagadi S, Herrero M, Jessop NS (2000) The influence of diet of the donor animal on the initial bacterial concentration of ruminal fluid and in vitro gas production degradability parameters. Animal Feed Science and Technology 87, 231-239. doi:10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00197-8
21. Pell AN, Schofield P (1993) Computerized monitoring of gas production to measure forage digestion in vitro. Journal of Dairy Science 76, 1063-1073. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(93)77435-4
22. R Development Core Team (2012) 'R: a language and environment for statistical computing.' (R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria) ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Available at http://www.Rproject. org [Verified 27 February 2012]
23. Raun NS, BurroughsW(1962) Suction strainer technique in obtaining rumen fluid samples from intact lambs. Journal of Animal Science 21, 454-457.
24. Ritz C, Streibig JC (2005) Bioassay analysis using R. Journal of Statistical Software 12(5), 1-22.
25. Robertson and Van Soest (1981) The detergent system of analysis and its application to human foods. In 'The analysis of dietary fiber in food'. (Eds WPT James, O Theander) pp. 123-158. (Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York
26. Robinson PH, Mathews MC, Fadel JG (1999) Influence of storage time and temperature on in vitro digestion of neutral detergent fibre at 48 h, and comparison to 48 h in sacco neutral detergent fibre digestion. Animal Feed Science and Technology 80, 257-266. doi:10.1016/S0377-8401(99) 00062-0
27. Rymer C, Huntington JA, Williams BA, Givens DI (2005) In vitro cumulative gas production techniques: history, methodological considerations and challenges. Animal Feed Science and Technology 123-124, 9-30. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.04.055
28. SpangheroM, Berzaghi P, Fortina R, Masoero F, Rapetti L, Zanfi C, Tassone S, Gallo A, Colombini S, Ferlito JC (2010) Technical note: Precision and accuracy of in vitro digestion of neutral detergent fiber and predicted net energy of lactation content of fibrous feeds. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 4855-4859. doi:10.3168/jds.2010-3098
29. Storm IMLD, Hellwing ALF, Nielsen NI, Madsen J (2012) Methods for measuring and estimating methane emissions from ruminants. Animals 2, 160-183. doi:10.3390/ani2020160
30. Tagliapietra F, Cattani M, Bailoni L, Schiavon S (2010) In vitro rumen fermentation: effect of head space pressure on the gas production kinetics of corn meal and meadow hay. Animal Feed Science and Technology 158, 197-201. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.04.003
31. Tagliapietra F, Cattani M, Hansen HH, Hindrichsen IK, Bailoni L, Schiavon S (2011) Metabolizable energy content of feeds based on 24 or 48 h in situ NDF digestibility and on in vitro 24 h gas production methods. Animal Feed Science and Technology 170, 182-191. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci. 2011.09.008
32. Tagliapietra F, Cattani M, Hindrichsen IK, Hansen HH, Colombini S, Bailoni L, Schiavon S (2012) True dry matter digestibility of feeds evaluated in situ with different bags and in vitro using rumen fluid collected from intact donor cows. Animal Production Science 52, 338-346. doi:10.1071/ AN11206
33. Theodorou MK, Williams BA, Dhanoa MS, McAllan AB, France J (1994) A simple gas production method using a pressure transducer to determine the fermentation kinetics of ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 48, 185-197. doi:10.1016/0377-8401(94)90171-6
34. Valentin SF, Williams PEV, Forbes JM, SauvantD(1999) Comparison of the in vitro gas production technique and the nylon bag degradability technique to measure short- and long-term processes of degradation of maize silage in dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 78, 81-99. doi:10.1016/S0377-8401(98) 00262-4
35. van Gelder AH, Hetta M, Rodrigues MAM, De Boever JL, Den Hartigh H, Rymer C, van Oostrum M, van Kaathoven R, ConeJW(2005) Ranking of in vitro fermentability of 20 feedstuffs with an automated gas production technique: results of a ring test. Animal Feed Science and Technology 123-124, 243-253. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.04.044
36. van Laar H, Van Straalen WM, Van Gelder AH, De Boever JL, D'heer B, Vedder H, Kroes R, de Bot P, Van Hees J, Cone JW (2006) Repeatability and reproducibility of an automated gas production technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 127, 133-150. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci. 2005.08.009