Scientia Agricultura Sinica ›› 2012, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (22): 4668-4677.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.22.013

• ANIMAL SCIENCE·RESOURCE INSECT • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Degradable Protein and Non-Fiber Carbohydrates on in Vitro Ruminal Fermentation, Microbial Synthesis, and Populations of Ruminal Cellulolytic Bacteria

 ZHAO  Xiang-Hui, LIU  Chan-Juan, LIU  Ye, LI  Chao-Yun, YAO  Jun-Hu   

  1. 1.College of Animal Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling712100, Shaanxi;
    2.College of Animal Science and Technology, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang 330045
  • Received:2012-08-14 Online:2012-11-15 Published:2012-09-10

PDF

748

Abstract: 【Objective】 The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of levels of rumen degradable protein (RDP) and sources of non-fibre carbohydrates (NFC) on ruminal fermentation, microbial synthesis, and populations of ruminal cellulolytic bacteria using the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). 【Method】 The experiment was a 2×4 factorial arrangement with four NFC types (corn starch, sucrose, pectin, inulin) each combined with two levels of RDP obtained by supplementing with 0 g•d-1 (low RDP) or 1.56 g•d-1 (high RDP) sodium caseinate. 【Result】 Apparent disappearance of dry matter and organic matter was greater (P＜0.01) for the main effect means of sucrose and pectin than for other treatments. A NFC×RDP interaction (P＜0.01) was observed for apparent neutral detergent fibre disappearance, which tended to be lower for sucrose (P=0.10) and pectin (P=0.09) than for starch treatment under low RDP conditions, but did not differ among treatments under high RDP conditions. The 16S rDNA copies of Ruminococcus albus were greater for the main effect means of pectin than for starch treatment. There were NFC×RDP interactions for 16S rDNA copy numbers of R. flavefaciens in both liquid and solid fractions and Fibrobacter succinogenes in liquid fraction. Compared with starch treatment, R. flavefaciens in solid fraction tended to be lower (P=0.06) for sucrose treatment under low RDP conditions and F. succinogenes in liquid fraction was lower (P＜0.01) for inulin treatment under high RDP conditions. Increasing dietary RDP increased total volatile fatty acids production (P＜0.01) and total microbial nitrogen (MN) flow (P＜0.01) in all treatments. The molar proportion of acetate and the ratio between acetate and propionate were both the greatest (P＜0.05 and P＜0.01, respectively) for the main effect means of pectin among treatments. Butyrate molar proportion was greater (P＜0.01) for sucrose and inulin treatments than for other treatments regardless of RDP level. Total MN flow did not differ among treatments under low RDP conditions, but sucrose (P＜0.01) and pectin (P=0.10) produced greater MN than starch with increased RDP. The efficiency of available N was lower for the main effect means of starch than for sucrose (P=0.04) and pectin (P=0.05) treatments.【Conclusion】 Dietary RDP level, NFC type, and their interaction affected ruminal fermentation, microbial synthesis, and cellulolytic bacteria populations, and under sufficient ruminal available N sucrose and pectin had greater advantage in microbial N synthesis than starch.

Key words: rumen degradable protein , non-fibre carbohydrates , ruminal fermentation , microbial synthesis , cellulolytic bacteria

[1]Hall M, Larson C, Wilcox C. Carbohydrate source and protein degradability alter lactation, ruminal, and blood measures. Journal of Dairy Science, 2010, 93(1): 311-322.

[2]van Soest P J, Robertson J, Lewis B. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 1991, 74(10): 3583-3597.

[3]Weisbjergm M, Hvelplund T, Bibby B M. Hydrolysis and fermentation rate of glucose, sucrose and lactose in the rumen. Animal Science, 1998, 48(1): 12-18.

[4]Alamouti A A, Alikhani M, Ghorbani G, Zebeli Q. Effects of inclusion of neutral detergent soluble fibre sources in diets varying in forage particle size on feed intake, digestive processes, and performance of mid-lactation Holstein cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2009, 154(1/2): 9-23.

[5]Nocek J, Russell J. Protein and energy as an integrated system. Relationship of ruminal protein and carbohydrate availability to microbial synthesis and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science, 1988, 71(8): 2070-2107.

[6]Broderick G, Luchini N, Reynal S, Varga G, Ishler V. Effect on production of replacing dietary starch with sucrose in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 2008, 91(12): 4801-4810.

[7]Azizi-Shotorkhoft A, Rouzbehan Y, Fazaeli H. The influence of the different carbohydrate sources on utilization efficiency of processed broiler litter in sheep. Livestock Science, 2012, 148(3): 249-254.

[8]Owens D, McGee M, Boland T, O’Kiely P. Intake, rumen fermentation and nutrient flow to the omasum in beef cattle fed grass silage fortified with sucrose and/or supplemented with concentrate. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2008, 144(1/2): 23-43.

[9]Sannes R, Messman M, Vagnoni D. Form of rumen-degradable carbohydrate and nitrogen on microbial protein synthesis and protein efficiency of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 2002, 85(4): 900-908.

[10]Broderick G, Radloff W. Effect of molasses supplementation on the production of lactating dairy cows fed diets based on alfalfa and corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science, 2004, 87(9): 2997-3009.

[11]Hall M, Herejk C. Differences in yields of microbial crude protein from in vitro fermentation of carbohydrates. Journal of Dairy Science, 2001, 84(11): 2486-2493.

[12]Strobel H J, Russell J B. Effect of pH and energy spilling on bacterial protein synthesis by carbohydrate-limited cultures of mixed rumen bacteria. Journal of Dairy Science, 1986, 69(11): 2941-2947.

[13]Heldt J, Cochran R, Stokka G, Farmer C, Mathis C, Titgemeyer E, Nagaraja T. Effects of different supplemental sugars and starch fed in combination with degradable intake protein on low-quality forage use by beef steers. Journal of Animal Science, 1999, 77(10): 2793-2802.

[14]Kajikawa H, Jin H, Terada F, Suga T. Operation and characteristics of newly improved and marketable artificial rumen (Rusitec). Memoirs of National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science, 2003, 2: 1-30.

[15]McDougall E. Studies on ruminant saliva. 1. The composition and output of sheep's saliva. Biochemical Journal, 1948, 43(1): 99-109.

[16]Ranilla M, Carro M. 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 Science, 2003, 81(2): 537-544.

[17]Weatherburn M. Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia. Analytical Chemistry, 1967, 39(8): 971-974.

[18]Akalin A, Gönç S, Akba? Y. Variation in organic acids content during ripening of pickled white cheese. Journal of Dairy Science , 2002, 85(7): 1670-1676.

[19]Makkar H P S, Vercoe P E. In Measuring Methane Production from Ruminants. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2007.

[20]Reynal S, Broderick G. Technical note: a new high-performance liquid chromatography purine assay for quantifying microbial flow. Journal of Dairy Science, 2009, 92(3): 1177-1181.

[21]Koike S, Kobayashi Y. Development and use of competitive PCR assays for the rumen cellulolytic bacteria: Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 2001, 204(2): 361-366.

[22]Denman S E, McSweeney C S. Development of a real-time PCR assay for monitoring anaerobic fungal and cellulolytic bacterial populations within the rumen. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 2006, 58(3): 572-582.

[23]Hall M B. Working with sugars (and molasses). In Proc. 113th Annu. Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symp. Gainesville, FL, 2002: 146-158

[24]Hall M, Pell A, Chase L. Characteristics of neutral detergent-soluble fiber fermentation by mixed ruminal microbes. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 1998, 70(1/2): 23-39.

[25]任  莹, 赵胜军, 卢德勋, 李  宏. 瘤胃尼龙袋法测定常用饲料过瘤胃淀粉量及淀粉瘤胃降解率. 动物营养学报, 2004, 16(1): 42-46.

Ren Y,  Zhao S J, Lu D X,  Li H. Measurement of amount of rume bypass starch and ruminal starch degradability in some feedstuffs by a nylon bag technique.  Acta Zoonutrimenta Sinica, 2004, 16(1): 42-46. (in Chinese)

[26]Cherney D, Cherney J, Chase L. Influence of dietary nonfiber carbohydrate concentration and supplementation of sucrose on lactation performance of cows fed fescue silage. Journal of Dairy Science, 2003, 86(12): 3983-3991.

[27]Hindrichsen I, Kreuzer M. High methanogenic potential of sucrose compared with starch at high ruminal pH. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2009, 93(1): 61-65.

[28]Rosendo O, Hall M B, Staples C, Bates D. The effect of different neutral-detergent-soluble polysaccharides in digestive cynetics in vitro of neutral detergent forrage fiber and the synthesis of microbial protein. Revista Científica, 2010, 13(1): 18-27.

[29]Gradel C M, Dehority B. Fermentation of isolated pectin and pectin from intact forages by pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1972, 23(2): 332-340.

[30]Dewhurst R, Davies D, Merry R. Microbial protein supply from the rumen. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2000, 85(1/2): 1-21.

[31]Martel C A, Titgemeyer E, Mamedova L, Bradford B. Dietary molasses increases ruminal pH and enhances ruminal biohydrogenation during milk fat depression. Journal of Dairy Science, 2011, 94(8): 3995-4004.

[32]Penner G, Oba M. Increasing dietary sugar concentration may improve dry matter intake, ruminal fermentation, and productivity of dairy cows in the postpartum phase of the transition period. Journal of Dairy Science, 2009, 92(7): 3341-3353.

[33]Oelker E, Reveneau C, Firkins J. Interaction of molasses and monensin in alfalfa hay-or corn silage-based diets on rumen fermentation, total tract digestibility, and milk production by Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 2009, 92(1): 270-285.

[34]Khalili H, Huhtanen P. Sucrose supplements in cattle given grass silage-based diet. 1. Digestion of organic matter and nitrogen. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 1991, 33(3/4): 247-261.

[35]Pol A, Demeyer D I. Fermentation of methanol in the sheep rumen. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1988, 54(3): 832-834.

[36]Satter L, Slyter L. Effect of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in vitro. British Journal of Nutrition, 1974, 32(2): 199-208.

[37]Griswold K, Apgar G, Bouton J, Firkins J. Effects of urea infusion and ruminal degradable protein concentration on microbial growth, digestibility, and fermentation in continuous culture. Journal of Animal Science, 2003, 81(1): 329-336.

[38]夏  楠, 王加启, 赵国琦. 体外法研究不同水平的可发酵糖与尿素对瘤胃发酵及干物质降解率的影响. 中国饲料, 2008(20): 6-9.

Xia N, Wang J Q, Zhao G Q. Effects of fermentable sugar and urea on ruminal fermentation and dry matter digestibility in vitro. China Feed, 2008(20): 6-9. (in Chinese)

[39]Chester-Jones H, Stern M, Metwally H, Linn J, Ziegler D. Effects of dietary protein-energy interrelationships on Holstein steer performance and ruminal bacterial fermentation in continuous culture. Journal of Animal Science, 1991, 69(12): 4956-4966.

[40]National Research Council. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. 7 th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.

[41]Ribeiro C, Karnati S, Eastridge M. Biohydrogenation of fatty acids and digestibility of fresh alfalfa or alfalfa hay plus sucrose in continuous culture. Journal of Dairy Science, 2005, 88(11): 4007-4017.

[42]Bach A, Calsamiglia S, Stern M. Nitrogen metabolism in the rumen. Journal of Dairy Science, 2005, 88: E9-E21.

[43]Ariza P, Bach A, Stern M, Hall M. Effects of carbohydrates from citrus pulp and hominy feed on microbial fermentation in continuous culture. Journal of Animal Science, 2001, 79(10): 2713-2718.

[44]Bach A, Yoon I, Stern M, Jung H, Chester-Jones H. Effects of type of carbohydrate supplementation to lush pasture on microbial fermentation in continuous culture. Journal of Dairy Science, 1999, 82(1): 153-160.
[1] WEI De-Yong, ZHU Wei-Yun, MAO Sheng-Yong. Effects of Different Dietary NFC/NDF Ratios on the Ruminal Fermentation and the Changes of the Rumen Microbial  Community of Goats [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012, 45(7): 1392-1398.
[2] LIN Miao,GUO Wang-shan,REN Li-ping,ZHOU Zhen-ming,MENG Qing-xiang
. Comparison of Nitrate Reduction, Methane Production and Fermentation Characteristics Among Ruminal Microbial Fractions
 [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2010, 43(19): 4088-4093 .
[3] . Effects of Seeds of Different Oil Plants on Fatty Acid in Ruminal Fluid, Blood Plasma and Milk CLA of Lactating Cows
[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2009, 42(3): 1039-1046 .
[4] . Real-Time PCR Approach for Cellulolytic Bacteria Quantification in Rumen [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008, 41(6): 1795-1803 .
[5] . Effect of Different Quality of Forage on Ruman Fermentation and Predominant Fibrolytic Bacterial Population [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008, 41(4): 1199-1206 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
京ICP备09089781号-30
Copyright 2018 © Editorial office of Scientia Agricultura Sinica
Tel: 86-010-82106279    E-mail: zgnykx@mail.caas.net.cn
Supported by Beijing Magtech Co.Ltd