Effect of donor animals and their diet on in vitro nutrient degradation and microbial protein synthesis using grass and corn silages

Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition

Volumn 97, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 547-557

  Boguhn, J ^a   Zuber, T ^a   Rodehutscord, M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HOHENHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Donor animal; Fermentation; Rumen simulation; Silage

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISEASE; ANIMAL FOOD; ARTICLE; BACTERIUM; CATTLE; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIET; FEMALE; FERMENTATION; MAIZE; MALE; METABOLISM; MICROBIOLOGY; POACEAE; SHEEP; SILAGE;

ANIMAL NUTRITIONAL PHYSIOLOGICAL PHENOMENA; ANIMALS; BACTERIA; CATTLE; DIET; FEMALE; FERMENTATION; MALE; POACEAE; SHEEP; SILAGE; ZEA MAYS;

ANIMALIA; BOS; OVIS ARIES; ZEA MAYS;

EID: 84878119001     PISSN: 09312439     EISSN: 14390396     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0396.2012.01295.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Abel, H.; Schröder, A.; Lebzien, P.; Flachowsky, G., 2006: Effects of defaunation on fermentation characteristics and biotin balance in an artificial rumen-simulation system (RUSITEC) receiving diets with different amounts and types of cereal. British Journal of Nutrition95, 99-104.
2. Aerts, J. V.; De Boever, J. L.; Cottyn, B. G.; De Brabander, D. L.; Buysse, F. X., 1984: Comparative digestibility of feedstuffs by sheep and cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology12, 47-56.
3. Amaning-Kwarteng, K.; Kellaway, R. C.; Spragg, J. C.; Kirby, A. C., 1986: Relative intakes, digestibility and bacterial protein synthesis by sheep and cattle fed high-roughage diets. Animal Feed Science and Technology16, 75-87.
4. Ayres, J. F., 1991: Sources of error with in vitro digestibility assay of pasture feeds. Grass and Forage Science46, 89-97.
5. Bach, A.; Calsamiglia, S.; Stern, M. D., 2005: Nitrogen metabolism in the rumen. Journal of Dairy Science88(Suppl. 1), E9-E21.
6. Beuvink, J. M. W.; Spoelstra, S. F., 1992: Interactions between substrate, fermentation end-products, buffering systems and gas production upon fermentation of different carbohydrates by mixed rumen microorganisms in vitro. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology37, 505-509.
7. Blümmel, M.; Ørskov, E. R., 1993: Comparison of in vitro gas production and nylon bag degradability of roughages in predicting feed intake in cattle. Animal Feed Science and Technology40, 109-119.
8. Boguhn, J.; Kluth, H.; Rodehutscord, M., 2006: Effect of total mixed ration composition on fermentation and efficiency of ruminal microbial crude protein synthesis in vitro. Journal of Dairy Science89, 1580-1591.
9. Boguhn, J.; Kluth, H.; Bulang, M.; Engelhard, T.; Rodehutscord, M., 2010: Effects of pressed beet pulp silage inclusion in maize-based rations on performance of high-yielding dairy cows and parameters of rumen fermentation. Animal4, 30-39.
10. Bueno, I. C. S.; Cabral Filho, S. L. S.; Gobbo, S. P.; Louvandini, H.; Vitti, D. M. S. S.; Abdalla, A. L., 2005: Influence of inoculum source in a gas production method. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 124-125, 95-105.
11. Carro, M. D.; Lebzien, P.; Rohr, K., 1995: Effects of pore size of nylon bags and dilution rate on fermentation parameters in a semi-continuous artificial rumen. Small Ruminant Research15, 113-119.
12. Chamberlain, D. G.; Thomas, P. C.; Anderson, F. J., 1983: Volatile fatty acid proportions and lactic acid metabolism in the rumen in sheep and cattle receiving silage diets. The Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge)101, 47-58.
13. Cone, J. W.; van Gelder, A. H.; Visscher, G. J. W.; 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 Technology61, 113-128.
14. Cone, J. W.; van Gelder, A. H.; Bachmann, H., 2002: Influence of inoculum source on gas production profiles. Animal Feed Science and Technology99, 221-231.
15. Czerkawski, J. W.; Breckenridge, G., 1977: Design and development of a long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). British Journal of Nutrition38, 371-384.
16. Gerson, T.; John, A.; King, A. S. D., 1985: The effects of dietary starch and fibre on the in vitro rates of lipolysis and hydrogenation by sheep rumen digesta. The Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge)105, 27-30.
17. Gesellschaft für Ernährungsphysiologie [GfE], 1996: Energie-Bedarf von Schafen. Proceedings of the Society of Nutrition Physiology5, 149-152.
18. Gesellschaft für Ernährungsphysiologie [GfE], 2001: Empfehlungen zur Energie- und Nährstoffversorgung der Milchkühe und Aufzuchtrinder, 1st edn. DLG Verlags GmbH, Frankfurt/Main.
19. Givens, D. I.; Rulquin, H., 2004: Utilisation by ruminants of nitrogen compounds in silage-based diets. Animal Feed Science and Technology114, 1-18.
20. Gizzi, G.; Zanchi, R.; Sciaraffia, F., 1998: Comparison of microbiological and fermentation parameters obtained with an improved rumen in vitro technique with those obtained in vivo. Animal Feed Science and Technology73, 291-305.
21. Gonçalves, L. M. B. O.; Borba, A. E. S., 1996: Study of gas production capacity by three sources of inocula. The Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge)127, 511-515.
22. van Gylswyk, N. O.; Wejdemar, K.; Kulander, K., 1992: Comparative growth rates of various rumen bacteria in clarified rumen fluid from cows and sheep fed different diets. Applied and Environmental Microbiology58, 99-105.
23. Harrison, D. G.; Beever, D. E.; Thomson, D. J.; Osbourn, D. F., 1975: Manipulation of rumen fermentation in sheep by increasing the rate of flow of water from the rumen. The Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge)85, 93-101.
24. Hildebrand, B.; Boguhn, J.; Rodehutscord, M., 2011a: Effect of maize silage to grass silage ratio and feed particle size on protein synthesis and amino acid profile in different microbial fractions in a semi-continuous rumen simulation. Animal5, 537-546.
25. Hildebrand, B.; Boguhn, J.; Rodehutscord, M., 2011b: Investigations on the effect of forage source, grinding, and urea supplementation on ruminal fermentation and microbial protein flow in a semi-continuous rumen simulation system. Archives of Animal Nutrition65, 402-414.
26. Hobson, P. N.; Stewart, C. S., 1997: The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem, 2nd edn. Blackie Academic & Professional, London.
27. Holden, L. A., 1999: Comparison of methods of in vitro dry matter digestibility for ten feeds. Journal of Dairy Science82, 1791-1794.
28. Horton, G. M. J.; Christensen, D. A.; Steacy, G. M., 1980: In vitro fermentation of forages with inoculum from cattle and sheep fed different diets. Agronomy Journal72, 601-605.
29. Janssen, P. H.; Kirs, M., 2008: Structure of the archaeal community of the rumen. Applied and Environmental Microbiology74, 3619-3625.
30. Jentsch, W.; Wittenburg, H., 1993: Comparative studies of the parameters of rumen fermentation and the digestibility of feed rations in cattle and sheep. 1. Parameters of rumen fermentation. Archiv für Tierernährung43, 345-361.
31. Jentsch, W.; Hoffmann, L.; Beyer, M., 1993: Comparative studies of the parameters of rumen fermentation and the digestibility of feed rations in cattle and sheep. 2. The digestibility of feed rations. Archiv für Tierernährung44, 63-84.
32. Kamra, D. N., 2005: Rumen microbial ecosystem. Current Science89, 124-135.
33. Latham, M. J.; Storry, J. E.; Sharpe, M. E., 1972: Effect of low-roughage diets on the microflora and lipid metabolism in the rumen. Applied Microbiology24, 871-877.
34. Li, M.; Penner, G. B.; Hernandez-Sanabria, E.; Oba, M.; Guan, L. L., 2009: Effects of sampling location and time, and host animal on assessment of bacterial diversity and fermentation parameters in the bovine rumen. Journal of Applied Microbiology107, 1924-1934.
35. Martínez, M. E.; Ranilla, M. J.; Tejido, M. L.; Saro, C.; Carro, M. D., 2010: The effect of the diet fed to donor sheep on in vitro methane production and ruminal fermentation of diets of variable composition. Animal Feed Science and Technology158, 126-135.
36. McDougall, E. I., 1948: Studies on ruminant saliva, 1. The composition and output of sheep's saliva. The Biochemical Journal43, 99-109.
37. Menke, K.; Raab, L.; Salewski, A.; Steingass, H.; Fritz, D.; Schneider, W., 1979: The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquuor in vitro. The Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge)93, 217-222.
38. Mould, F. L.; Kliem, K. E.; Morgan, R.; Mauricio, R. M., 2005: In vitro microbial inoculum: a review of its function and properties. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 124-125, 31-50.
39. Muetzel, S.; Lawrence, P.; Hoffmann, E. M.; Becker, K., 2009: Evaluation of a stratified continuous rumen incubation system. Animal Feed Science and Technology151, 32-43.
40. Nagadi, S.; Herrero, M.; Jessop, N. S., 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 Technology87, 231-239.
41. van Nevel, C. J.; Demeyer, D. I., 1996: Influence of pH on lipolysis and biohydrogenation of soybean oil by rumen contents in vitro. Reproduction Nutrition Development36, 53-63.
42. Playne, M. J., 1978: Differences between cattle and sheep in their digestion and relative intake of a mature tropical grass hay. Animal Feed Science and Technology3, 41-49.
43. Prigge, E. C.; Baker, M. J.; Varga, G. A., 1984: Comparative digestion, rumen fermentation and kinetics of forage diets by steers and wethers. Journal of Animal Science59, 237-245.
44. Ranilla, M. J.; Carro, M. D., 2003: Diet and procedures used to detach particle-associated microbes from ruminal digesta influence chemical composition of microbes and estimation of microbial growth in Rusitec fermenters. Journal of Animal Science81, 537-544.
45. Rymer, C.; Huntington, J. A.; Williams, B. A.; Givens, D. I., 2005: In vitro cumulative gas production techniques: history, methodological considerations and challenges. Animal Feed Science and Technology124-125, 9-30.
46. Seng, M.; Bonorden, S.; Nissen, J.; Isselstein, J.; Abel, H., 2007: Fermentation patterns and nutrient contents of forb-containing silages and their effects on microbial fermentation in the artificial rumen system RUSITEC. The Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge)146, 333-341.
47. Siddons, R. C.; Paradine, J., 1983: Protein degradation in the rumen of sheep and cattle. Journal of the Science of Food and Agricultural34, 701-708.
48. Südekum, K.-H.; Röh, H.; Brandt, M.; Rave, G.; Stangassinger, M., 1995: Comparative digestion in cattle and sheep fed wheat silage diets at low and high intakes. Journal of Dairy Science78, 1498-1511.
49. Swainson, N. M.; Hoskin, S. O.; Clark, H.; Pinares-Patino, C. S.; Brookes, I. M., 2008: Comparative methane emissions from cattle, red deer and sheep. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production68, 59-62.
50. Verband Deutscher Landwirtschaftlicher Untersuchungs- und Forschungsanstalten [VDLUFA], 2006: Handbuch der Landwirtschaftlichen Versuchs- und Untersuchungsmetho-dik (VDLUFA-Methodenbuch), Vol. III. Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln. VDLUFA-Verlag, Darmstadt.
51. Wolin, M. J., 1960: A theoretical rumen fermentation balance. Journal of Dairy Science43, 1452-1459.
52. Woods, V. B.; Moloney, A. P.; Mulligan, F. J.; Kenny, M. J.; O'Mara, F. P., 1999: The effect of animal species (cattle or sheep) and level of intake by cattle on in vivo digestibility of concentrate ingredients. Animal Feed Science and Technology80, 135-150.
53. Zijlstra, J. B.; Beukema, J.; Wolthers, B. G.; Byrne, B. M.; Groen, A.; Dankert, J., 1977: Pretreatment methods prior to gaschromatographic analysis of volatile fatty acids from faecal samples. Clinica Chimica Acta78, 243-250.