Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T14:54:32.822Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Degradation of maize protein in rumen contents Influence of ammonia concentration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. Anna Níkolić  and
R. Filipović
J. Anna Níkolić
Affiliation:
Institute for the Application of Nuclear Energy in Agriculture, Veterinary Medicine and Forestry, Zemun-Belgrade, Yugoslavia
R. Filipović
Affiliation:
Institute for the Application of Nuclear Energy in Agriculture, Veterinary Medicine and Forestry, Zemun-Belgrade, Yugoslavia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The influence of ammonia concentration on the distribution of nitrogen derived from opaque-2 maize uniformly-labelled with 15N has been investigated during short-term in vitro incubation of bovine rumen contents.

2. Less 15N derived from maize was found in the non-protein-N (NPN) fraction during incubation without added NH3 than with added NH3, due entirely to differences in the amount of N derived from maize in the NH3 fraction.

3. From calculations based on the transfer of N derived from maize to the NPN pool and to a bacterial fraction, it was concluded that degradation of maize protein was not influenced by NH3 concentration within the examined limits.

4. The decrease in relative amount of N derived from maize in the NH3 fraction at low concentrations of NH3, together with evidence for an increased fractional turnover rate of NH3-N suggests that a deficient supply of NH3 is compensated for by increased catabolism of nitrogenous compounds derived from the rumen micro-organisms.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , January 1981 , pp. 111 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1981

References

Abe, M. & Kandatsu, M. (1969). Jap. J. Zootech. Sci. 40, 290.Google Scholar
Chalupa, W. (1978). Proc. 3rd Wld Cong. Anim. Feeding, Madrid, 8, 211.Google Scholar
Conway, E. J. (1962). Microdiffusion Analysis and Volumetric Error, 5th ed. London: Crosby Lockwood.Google Scholar
Demeyer, D. I. & Van Nevel, C. J. (1980). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 39, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ely, D. G., Little, C. O., Woolfolk, P. G. & Mitchell, G. E. (1967). J. Nutr. 91, 314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erfle, J. D., Sauer, F. D. & Mahadevan, S. (1977). J. Dairy Sci. 60, 1064.Google Scholar
Filipović, R. (1980). Soil Nitrogen as Fertilizer or Pollutant, Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.Google Scholar
Hume, I. D. (1970). Aust. J. agric. Res. 21, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiménez, J. R. (1966). Proc. High Lysine Corn Conference, Lafayette. p. 74 [Hertz, E. T. and Nelson, O. E., editors]. Washington DC: Corn Refiners Assoc. Inc.Google Scholar
Mehrez, A. Z. & Ørskov, E. P. (1978). Br. J. Nutr. 40, 337.Google Scholar
Nikolić, J. A., Jovanović, M. & Filipović, R. (1975). Tracer Studies on Non-protein Nitrogen for Ruminants vol. 2, p. 43. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.Google Scholar
Nikolić, J. A., Jovanović, M., Stosic, D. & Pavličević, A. (1971). Br. J. Nutr. 26, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nikolić, J. A., Pavličević, A. & Zebrowska, T. (1975). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 84, 469.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R., Fraser, C., McDonald, I. & Smart, R. I. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 31, 89.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & Mehrez, A. Z. (1977). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 36, 79A.Google Scholar
Pilgrim, A. F., Gray, F. V., Weller, R. A. & Belling, C. B. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pine, H. J. (1973). J. Bacteriol. 115, 107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Satter, L. D. & Slyter, L. L. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar