Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T13:28:46.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of feeding on CO2 production and energy expenditure in ponies measured by indirect calorimetry and the 13C-bicarbonate technique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 July 2015

R. B. Jensen ,
T. D. Kyrstein ,
P. Junghans  and
A. H. Tauson
R. B. Jensen
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, DK-1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
T. D. Kyrstein
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, DK-1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
P. Junghans
Affiliation:
Leibniz Institute for Farm Animal Biology, Institute of Nutritional Physiology ‘Oskar Kellner’, D-18196 Dummerstorf, Germany
A. H. Tauson*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Clinical and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, DK-1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Energy expenditure (EE) can be estimated based on respiratory gas exchange measurements, traditionally done in respiration chambers by indirect calorimetry (IC). However, the 13C-bicarbonate technique (13C-BT) might be an alternative minimal invasive method for estimation of CO2 production and EE in the field. In this study, four Shetland ponies were used to explore the effect of feeding on CO2 production and EE measured simultaneously by IC and 13C-BT. The ponies were individually housed in respiration chambers and received either a single oral or intravenous (IV) bolus dose of 13C-labelled sodium bicarbonate (NaH13CO3). The ponies were fed haylage 3 h before (T−3), simultaneously with (T0) or 3 h after (T+3) administration of 13C-bicarbonate. The CO2 produced and O2 consumed by the ponies were measured for 6 h with both administration routes of 13C-bicarbonate at the three different feeding times. Feeding time affected the CO2 production (P<0.001) and O2 consumption (P<0.001), but not the respiratory quotient (RQ) measured by IC. The recovery factor (RF) of 13C in breath CO2 was affected by feeding time (P<0.01) and three different RF were used in the calculation of CO2 production measured by 13C-BT. An average RQ was used for the calculations of EE. There was no difference between IC and 13C-BT for estimation of CO2 production. An effect of feeding time (P<0.001) on the estimated EE was found, with higher EE when feed was offered (T0 and T+3) compared with when no feed was available (T−3) during measurements. In conclusion, this study showed that feeding time affects the RF and measurements of CO2 production and EE. This should be considered when the 13C-BT is used in the field. IV administration of 13C-bicarbonate is recommended in future studies with horses to avoid complex 13C enrichment-time curves with maxima and shoulders as observed in several experiments with oral administration of 13C-bicarbonate.

Keywords

13C-bicarbonateindirect calorimetryenergy expenditurepony
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 11 , November 2015 , pp. 1778 - 1785
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anonymous 1986. European convention for the protection of vertebrate animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. European treaty series no. 123. Council of Europe, Strasbourg.Google Scholar
Bland, JM and Altman, DG 1983. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 8, 135–160.Google Scholar
Barret, PH, Bell, BM, Cobelli, C, Golde, H, Schumitzky, A, Vicini, P and Foster, DM 1998. SAAM II: simulation, analysis, and modeling software for tracer and pharmacokinetic studies. Metabolism 47, 484–492.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K 1989. Energy metabolism in animals and man. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Brouwer, E 1965. Report of sub-committee on constants and factors. In Proceedings of the 3rd symposium on Energy Metabolism, EAAP publication no. 11 (ed. KL Blaxter), pp. 441–443. Academic Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
Butler, PH, Green, JA, Boyd, IL and Speakman, JR 2004. Measuring metabolic rate in the field: the pros and cons of the doubly labelled water and heart rate methods. Functional Ecology 18, 169–183.Google Scholar
Chwalibog, A, Tauson, AH and Thorbek, G 2004. Energy metabolism and substrate oxidation in pigs during feeding, starvation and re-feeding. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 88, 101–112.Google Scholar
Dansen, O, Pellikaan, WF, Hendriks, WH, Dijkstra, J, Jacobs, MPT, Everts, H and van Doorn, DA 2015. Daily methane production pattern of Welsh ponies fed a roughage diet with or without a cereal mixture. Journal of Animal Science 93, 1916–1922.Google Scholar
Elia, M 1991. Estimation of short-term energy expenditure by the labeled bicarbonate method. In New techniques in nutritional research (ed. RG Whitehead and A Prentice), pp. 207–227. Academic Press, New York, USA.Google Scholar
Jansson, A, Nyman, S, Lindholm, A and Lindberg, JE 2002. Effects of exercise metabolism of varying dietary starch and sugar proportions. Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement 34, 17–21.Google Scholar
Jensen, RB, Larsson, C, Junghans, P and Tauson, AH 2015. Validation of the 13C-bicarbonate tracer technique for determination of CO2 production and energy expenditure in ponies by indirect calorimetry. Livestock Science 173, 55–63.Google Scholar
Junghans, P and Chwalibog, A 2001. Complementary application of stable isotope techniques and indirect calorimetry for determining energy expenditure. In Energy metabolism in animals – proceedings of the 15th symposium on energy metabolism in animals (ed. A Chwalibog and K Jakobsen), pp. 425–428. Wageningen Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Junghans, P, Jentsch, W and Derno, M 2008. Non-invasive 13C bicarbonate tracer technique for measuring energy expenditure in men – a pilot study. The European e-Journal of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism 3, 46–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Junghans, P, Voigt, J, Jentsch, W, Metges, CC and Derno, M 2007. The 13C bicarbonate dilution technique to determine energy expenditure in young bulls validated by indirect calorimetry. Livestock Science 110, 280–287.Google Scholar
Junghans, P, Derno, M, Gehre, M, Höfling, R, Kowski, P, Strauch, G, Jentsch, W, Voigt, J and Henning, U 1997. Calorimetric validation of 13C bicarbonate and doubly labeled water method for determining the energy expenditure in goats. Zeitschrift Für Ernährungswissenschaft 36, 268–272.Google Scholar
Larsson, C, Jensen, RB, Junghans, P and Tauson, AH 2014. The oral 13C-bicarbonate technique for estimation of energy expenditure in dogs: validation against indirect calorimetry. Archives of Animal Nutrition 68, 42–54.Google Scholar
NRC 2007. Nutrient requirements of horses, 6th edition. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Prieto, C, Lachica, M, Nieto, R and Aguilera, JF 2001. The 13C-bicarbonate method: its suitability for estimating the energy expenditure in grazing goats. Livestock Production Science 69, 207–215.Google Scholar
Urschel, KL, Smith, TL, Drake, RB, Harris, PA and Geor, RJ 2009. Using [13C]sodium bicarbonate to measure carbon dioxide production in horses at rest. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 29, 375–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermorel, M, Vernet, J and Martin-Rosset, W 1989. Energy utilization and diurnal variations of energy expenditure in saddle horses fed near maintenance. In Energy metabolism of farm animals: proceedings of the 11th EAAP symposium (ed. Y Van der Honing and WH Close), pp. 267–270. Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Vermorel, M, Vernet, J and Martin-Rosset, W 1997. Digestive and energy utilisation of two diets by ponies and horses. Livestock Production Science 51, 13–19.Google Scholar