Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:11:58.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chemical composition, cell wall features and degradability of stem, leaf blade and sheath in untreated and alkali-treated rice straw

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2013

E. Ghasemi ,
G. R. Ghorbani ,
M. Khorvash ,
M. R. Emami  and
K. Karimi
E. Ghasemi*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
G. R. Ghorbani
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
M. Khorvash
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
M. R. Emami
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Sciences, Veterinary Surgery Division, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad 91779-48974, Iran
K. Karimi
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Three dominant morphological fractions (i.e. leaf blade (LB), leaf sheath (LS) and stem) were analysed for chemical composition and ruminal degradability in three rice straw varieties. In one variety treated with alkali, cell wall features were also characterized using Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Scanning Electron Microscopy. The highest concentrations of cell wall carbohydrates (hemicellulose and cellulose) were observed in LS, whereas the highest concentrations of non-fibre (silica, phenolic compounds and CP) and lignin were recorded for LB. The stem had the lowest silica and hemicellulose contents but intermediate levels of other components. In terms of ruminal degradability, stem ranked higher than LB, which was followed by LS. Hemicellulose was found to be less degradable than either dry matter or cellulose in all the three fractions investigated. FTIR results indicated that the highest levels of hydrogen bonding, esterification and crystallinity within the cell wall components belonged to LS. In the alkaline treatment, these indices decreased to a larger extent for leaf fractions and a greater improvement was achieved in the degradability of LB and LS compared with that of stem. In the 24-h ruminal incubation, the silicified layer of epidermis and the underlying cell walls showed a rigid structure in the control fractions, whereas the treatment with NaOH resulted in crimping of the silicified cuticle layer and the loss of integrity in cell structure. Despite the highest silica and lignin contents observed in LB, LS showed the lowest degradability, which might be due to its high level of hydrogen bonding, crystallinity and esterification within its cell wall components as well as its high hemicellulose content.

Keywords

morphological fractionssilicaFTIR spectraSEMalkali treatment
Type
Nutrition
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue 7 , July 2013 , pp. 1106 - 1112
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2013 

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

Agbagla-Dohnani, A, Cornu, A, Broudiscou, LP 2012. Rumen digestion of rice straw structural polysaccharides: effect of ammonia treatment and lucerne extract supplementation in vitro. Animal 1, 1–6.Google Scholar
Agbagla-Dohnani, A, Noziere, P, Clement, G, Doreau, M 2001. In sacco degradability, chemical and morphological composition of 15 varieties of European rice straw. Animal Feed Science and Technology 94, 15–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agbagla-Dohnani, A, Noziere, P, Gaillard-Martinie, B, Puard, M, Doreau, M 2003. Effect of silica content on rice straw ruminal degradation. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 140, 183–192.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 2000. Official methods of analysis, 7th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Beauchemin, KA, Colombatto, D, Morgavi, DP 2003. A rationale for the development of feed enzyme products for ruminants. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 84, 23–36.Google Scholar
Chesson, A 1981. Effect of sodium hydroxide on cereal straws in relation to enhanced degradation of structural polysaccharides by rumen microorganisms. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 32, 745–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, CL, Snyder, GH 1991. Autoclave-induced digestion for the colorimetric determination of silicon in rice straw. Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry 39, 1118–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fontes, CM, Gilbert, HJ 2010. Cellulosomes: highly efficient nanomachines designed to deconstruct plant cell wall complex carbohydrates. Annual Review of Biochemistry 79, 655–681.Google Scholar
Herbers, LH, Raiten, DJ, Paulsen, GM 1981. The role of plant epidermal silica as a structural inhibitor of rumen microbial digestion in steers. Nutrition Reports International 24, 1057–1065.Google Scholar
Inglesby, MK, Gray, GM, Wood, DF, Gregorski, KS, Robertson, RG, Sabellano, GP 2005. Surface characterization of untreated and solvent-extracted rice straw. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 43, 83–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kobayashi, GP, Okada, NN, Hirakawa, A, Sato, T, Kobayashi, J, Hatano, S, Itaya, Y, Mori, S 2009. Characteristics of solid residues obtained from hot-compressed-water treatment of woody biomass. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 48, 373–379.Google Scholar
Kumar, R, Mago, G, Balan, V, Wyman, CHE 2009. Physical and chemical characterizations of corn stover and poplar solids resulting from leading pretreatment technologies. Bioresource Technology 100, 3948–3962.Google Scholar
Lau, NM, Van Soest, PJ 1981. Titratable groups and soluble phenolics compounds as indicators of digestibility of chemically treated roughages. Animal Feed Science and Technology 6, 123–131.Google Scholar
Nieves, DC, Karimi, K, Horváth, IS 2011. Improvement of biogas production from oil palm empty fruit bunches (OPEFB). Industrial Crops and Products 34, 1097–1101.Google Scholar
Pedersen, JF, Vogel, KP, Funnell, DL 2005. Impact of reduced lignin on plant fitness. Crop Science 45, 812–819.Google Scholar
Ralph, J, Grabber, JH, Hatfield, RD 1995. Lignin-ferulate cross-links in grasses: active incorporation of ferulate polysaccharide esters into ryegrass lignins. Carbohydrate Research 275, 167–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute 2001. SAS® user's guides: statistics, version 8.1 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Sun, R, Sun, XF, Wang, SQ, Zhu, W, Wang, XY 2002. Ester and ether linkages between hydroxycinnamic acids and lignins from wheat, rice, rye, barley straws, maize stems and fast-growing poplar wood. Industrial Crops and Products 15, 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taherzadeh, MJ, Karimi, K 2008. Pretreatment of lignocellulosic wastes to improve in ethanol and biogas production: a review. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 8, 1–30.Google Scholar
Vadiveloo, J 2000. Nutritional properties of the leaf and stem of rice straw. Animal Feed Science and Technology 83, 57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vadiveloo, J, Fadel, JG 2009. The response of rice straw varieties to urea treatment. Animal Feed Science and Technology 151, 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ 1981. Limiting factors in plant residues of low biodegradability. Agriculture and Environment 6, 135–143.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ 1994. Nutritional ecology of ruminant. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ 2006. Rice straw, the role of silica and treatments to improve quality. Animal Feed Science and Technology 130, 137–171.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Lovelace, FE 1969. Solubility of silica in forages. Journal of Animal Science 29, 182 (abstract).Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3592.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Ghasemi Supplementary Material

Appendix

Download Ghasemi Supplementary Material(File)
File 1.5 MB