Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:27:34.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes of rumen pH, fermentation and microbial population as influenced by different ratios of roughage (rice straw) to concentrate in dairy steers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2013

M. WANAPAT ,
P. GUNUN ,
N. ANANTASOOK  and
S. KANG
M. WANAPAT*
Affiliation:
Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
P. GUNUN
Affiliation:
Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Natural Resources, Rajamangala University of Technology-Isan, Sakon Nakhon Campus, Phangkhon, Sakon Nakhon 47160, Thailand
N. ANANTASOOK
Affiliation:
Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand Program in Animal Production Technology, Faculty of Technology, UdonThani Rajabhat University, UdonThani, 41000, Thailand
S. KANG
Affiliation:
Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The current study was designed to determine the effect of roughage to concentrate ratio (R : C) on rumen pH, fermentation and bacterial population in dairy steers. Four rumen fistulated dairy steers (170±20 kg) were randomly assigned according to a 4×4 Latin square design, in which the steers were fed with four dietary treatments with different R : C ratios of 0·8 : 0·2, 0·6 : 0·4, 0·4 : 0·6 and 0·2 : 0·8, respectively. All animals were kept in individual pens and received feed according to the respective R : C ratios at 0·025 body weight (BW)/d; urea-treated rice straw (prepared using 3·5 kg urea+100 kg water sprayed onto 100 kg of rice straw) was used as a roughage source. The experiment was conducted for four periods of 21 days each. During the first 14 days, feed intake was measured and the animals were then moved to metabolism crates for total urine and faecal collection for 7 days. Total dry matter intake (DMI) was similar among treatments. Energy intake increased as the proportion of concentrate in the diet increased. Apparent digestibilities of dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM) and crude protein (CP) were improved, while neutral detergent fibre (NDF) and acid detergent fibre (ADF) were reduced when the levels of concentrate increased. A decreasing ratio of R : C reduced rumen pH linearly, from 6·4 to 5·9 at 0·2 : 0·8. High levels of concentrate impacted on volatile fatty acids (VFA) molar proportions and decreased acetate (C2) linearly, while propionate (C3) was increased, leading to decreased C2 : C3 ratio. Numbers of protozoa, fungi and proteolytic bacteria were not affected by R : C ratio. Cellulolytic bacteria decreased linearly while amylolytic bacteria increased linearly with 0·60 and 0·80 concentrates. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) based on 16S RNA revealed that Fibrobacter succinogenes numbers were increased when steers were fed with R : C ratio of 0·8 : 0·2. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA)-producing bacteria, especially those of Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens, increased linearly with R : C ratios of 0·8 : 0·2 and 0·6 : 0·4, while Megasphaera elsdenii, a lactate-utilizing bacterium and reported producer of trans-10, cis-12 CLA increased linearly with R : C ratio of 0·8 : 0·2. In addition, microbial CP synthesis increased quadratically when steers were fed high levels of concentrate. However, the efficiency microbial N synthesis (EMNS) based on OM, truly digested in the rumen, was not affected by different R : C ratios. From the current study, it can be concluded that roughage to concentrate ratio of 0·4 : 0·6 had positive effects for the creation of healthy rumen (rumen pH and ecology), and improved energy intake and rumen fermentation, particularly propionic acid and microbial protein synthesis, in dairy steers fed urea-treated rice straw as a roughage source.

Type
Animal Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 152 , Issue 4 , August 2014 , pp. 675 - 685
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 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

REFERENCES

Anantasook, N. & Wanapat, M. (2012). Influence of rain tree pod meal supplementation on rice straw based diets using in vitro gas fermentation technique. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 25, 325–334.Google Scholar
Anantasook, N., Wanapat, M. & Cherdthong, A. (2013). Manipulation of ruminal fermentation and methane production by supplementation of rain tree pod meal containing tannins and saponins in growing dairy steers. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition. doi: 10.1111/jpn.12029.Google Scholar
AOAC (1995). Official Methods of Analysis, 16th edn. Virginia, USA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
ARC (1990). The Nutrient Requirements of Ruminant Livestock. Suppl. 1. Slough, Farnham Royal, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
Bach, A., Calsamiglia, S. & Stern, M. D. (2005). Nitrogen metabolism in the rumen. Journal of Dairy Science 88 (Suppl.), E9–E21.Google Scholar
Balch, C. C. (1971). Proposal to use time spent chewing as an index of the extent to which diet for ruminant possess the physical property of fibrousness characteristics of roughages. British Journal of Nutrition 4, 389–394.Google Scholar
Bremmer, J. M. & Keeney, D. R. (1965). Steam distillation methods for determination of ammonium, nitrate and nitrite. Analytica Chimica Acta 32, 485–495.Google Scholar
Brown, M. S., Ponce, C. H. & Pulikanti, R. (2006). Adaptation of beef cattle to high-concentrate diets: performance and ruminal metabolism. Journal of Animal Science 84 (E-Suppl.), E25–E33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calsamiglia, S., Cardozo, P. W., Ferret, A. & Bach, A. (2008). Changes in rumen microbial fermentation are due to a combined effect of type of diet and pH. Journal of Animal Science 86, 702–711.Google Scholar
Cantalapiedra-Hijar, G., Yáñez-Ruiz, D. R., Martín-García, A. I. & Molina-Alcaide, E. (2009). Effects of forage:concentrate ratio and forage type on apparent digestibility, ruminal fermentation, and microbial growth in goats. Journal of Animal Science 87, 622–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cerrillo, M. A., Russell, J. R. & Crump, M. H. (1999). The effects of hay maturity and forage to concentrate ratio on digestion kinetics in goats. Small Ruminant Research 32, 51–60.Google Scholar
Chen, X. B. & Gomes, M. J. (1995). Estimation of Microbial Protein Supply to Sheep and Cattle based on Urinary Excretion of Purine Derivatives: An Overview of the Technical Details. Occasional Publication 1992. Aberdeen, UK: Rowett Research Institute.Google Scholar
Cheng, K. J., Fay, J. P., Howarth, R. E. & Costerton, J. W. (1980). Sequence of events in the digestion of fresh legume leaves by rumen bacteria. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 40, 613–625.Google Scholar
Cherdthong, A., Wanapat, M., Kongmun, P., Pilajun, R. & Khejornsart, P. (2010). Rumen fermentation, microbial protein synthesis and cellulolytic bacterial population of swamp buffaloes as affected by roughage to concentrate ratio. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 9, 1667–1675.Google Scholar
Cherdthong, A., Wanapat, M. & Wachirapakorn, C. (2011). Influence of urea calcium mixture supplementation on ruminal fermentation characteristics of beef cattle fed on concentrates containing high levels of cassava chips and rice straw. Animal Feed Science and Technology 163, 43–51.Google Scholar
Crocker, C. L. (1967). Rapid determination of urea nitrogen in serum or plasma without deproteinization. The American Journal of Medical Technology 33, 361–365.Google ScholarPubMed
Dehority, B. A. (1993). Microbial ecology of cell wall fermentation. In Forage Cell Wall Structure and Digestibility (Eds Jung, H. G., Buxton, D. R., Hatfield, R. D. & Ralph, J.), pp. 425–453. Madison, WI: ASA, CSSA, SSSA.Google Scholar
Fernando, S. C., Purvis, H. T. II, Najar, F. Z., Sukharnikov, L. O., Krehbiel, C. R., Nagaraja, T. G., Roe, B. A. & Desilva, U. (2010). Rumen microbial population dynamics during adaptation to a high-grain diet. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 76, 7482–7490.Google Scholar
Firkins, J. L., Yu, Z. & Morrison, M. (2007). Ruminal nitrogen metabolism: perspectives for integration of microbiology and nutrition for dairy. Journal of Dairy Science 90, Supp, E1–E16.Google Scholar
Galo, E., Emanuele, S. M., Sniffen, C. J., White, J. H. & Knapp, J. R. (2003). Effects of a polymer-coated urea product on nitrogen metabolism in lactating Holstein dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2154–2162.Google Scholar
Galyean, M. (1989). Laboratory Procedures in Animal Nutrition Research. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, A. H. & Palmquist, D. L. (1993). Diurnal variation of rumen ammonia, serum urea, and milk urea in dairy cows at high and low yields. Journal of Dairy Science 76, 475–484.Google Scholar
Huber, J. T. & Kung, L. (1981). Protein and nonprotein nitrogen utilization in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 64, 1170–1195.Google Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1969). A roll tube method for cultivation of strict anaerobes. In Methods in Microbiology, Vol. 3B (Eds Norris, J. R. & Ribbons, D. W.), pp. 117–131. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kearl, L. C. (1982). Nutrient Requirements of Ruminants in Developing Countries. Logan, Utah: International Feedstuffs Institute, Utah State University.Google Scholar
Kim, Y. J., Liu, R. H., Rychlik, J. L. & Russell, J. B. (2002). The enrichment of a ruminal bacterium (Megasphaera elsdenii YJ-4) that produces the trans-10, cis-12 isomer of conjugated linoleic acid. Journal of Applied Microbiology 92, 976–982.Google Scholar
Klieve, A. V., Hennessy, D., Ouwerkerk, D., Forster, R. J., Mackie, R. I. & Attwood, G. T. (2003). Establishing populations of Megasphaera elsdenii YE 34 and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens YE 44 in the rumen of cattle fed high grain diets. Journal of Applied Microbiology 95, 621–630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koike, S. & Kobayashi, Y. (2001). Development and use of competitive PCR assays for the rumen cellulolytic bacteria: Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens. FEMS Microbiology Letters 204, 361–366.Google Scholar
Latham, M. J., Sharpe, M. E. & Sutton, J. D. (1971). The microbial flora of the rumen of cows fed hay and high cereal rations and its relationship to the rumen fermentation. Journal of Applied Microbiology 34, 425–434.Google Scholar
Lee, M. R. F., Tweed, J. K. S., Dewhurst, R. J. & Scollan, N. D. (2006). Effect of forage:concentrate ratio on ruminal metabolism and duodenal flow of fatty acids in beef steers. Animal Science 82, 31–40.Google Scholar
Mackie, R. I., Gilchrist, F. M. C., Robberts, A. M., Hannah, P. E. & Schwartz, H. M. (1978). Microbiological and chemical changes in the rumen during the stepwise adaptation of sheep to high concentrate diets. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 90, 241–254.Google Scholar
Makkar, H. P. S. & McSweeney, C. S. (2005). Methods in Gut Microbial Ecology for Ruminants. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Mayne, C. S. & Gordon, F. J. (1984). The effect of type of concentrate and level of concentrate feeding on milk production. Animal Production 39, 65–76.Google Scholar
Michalet-Doreau, B., Fernandez, I., Peyron, C., Millet, L. & Fonty, G. (2001). Fibrolytic activities and cellulolytic bacterial community structure in the solid and liquid phases of rumen contents. Reproduction, Nutrition, Development 41, 187–194.Google Scholar
Moorby, J. M., Dewhurst, R. J., Evans, R. T. & Danelón, J. L. (2006). Effects of dairy cow diet forage proportion on duodenal nutrient supply and urinary purine derivative excretion. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 3552–3562.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moss, A. R., Jouany, J. -P. & Newbold, J. (2000). Methane production by ruminants: its contribution to global warming. Annals of Zootechnology 49, 231–253.Google Scholar
Mould, F. L. & Ørskov, E. R. (1983). Manipulation of rumen fluid pH and its influence on cellulolysis in sacco, dry matter degradation and the rumen microflora of sheep offered either hay or concentrate. Animal Feed Science and Technology 10, 1–14.Google Scholar
Mould, F. L., Ørskov, E. R. & Mann, S. O. (1983). Associative effects of mixed feeds. I. Effects of type and level of supplementation and the influence of the rumen fluid pH on cellulolysis in vivo and dry matter digestion on various roughages. Animal Feed Science and Technology 10, 15–30.Google Scholar
Mourino, F., Akkarawongsa, R. & Weimer, P. J. (2001). Initial pH as a determinant of cellulose digestion rate by mixed ruminal microorganisms in vitro. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 848–859.Google Scholar
Nagaraja, T. G., Towne, G. & Beharka, A. A. (1992). Moderation of ruminal fermentation by ciliated protozoa in cattle fed a highgrain diet. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58, 2410–2414.Google Scholar
Nguyen, V. T., Wanapat, M., Khejornsart, P. & Kongmun, P. (2012). Nutrient digestibility and ruminal fermentation characteristic in swamp buffaloes fed on chemically treated rice straw and urea. Tropical Animal Health and Production 44, 629–636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olumeyan, D. B., Nagaraja, T. G., Miller, G. W., Frey, R. A. & Boyer, J. E. (1986). Rumen microbial changes in cattle fed diets with or without salinomycin. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 51, 340–345.Google Scholar
Opsi, F., Fortina, R., Tassone, S., Bodas, R. & López, S. (2012). Effects of inactivated and live cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on in vitro ruminal fermentation of diets with different forage:concentrate ratio. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 150, 271–283.Google Scholar
Palmonari, A., Stevenson, D. M., Mertens, D. R., Cruywagen, C. W. & Weimer, P. J. (2010). pH dynamics and bacterial community composition in the rumen of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 279–287.Google Scholar
Poungchompu, O., Wanapat, M., Wachirapakorn, C., Wanapat, S. & Cherdthong, A. (2009). Manipulation of ruminal fermentation and methane production by dietary saponins and tannins from mangosteen peel and soapberry fruit. Archives of Animal Nutrition 63, 389–400.Google Scholar
Prins, R. A., Lankhorst, A., Van Der Meer, P. & Van Nevel, C. J. (1975). Some characteristics of Anaerovibrio lipolytica, a rumen lipolytic organism. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 41, 1–11.Google Scholar
Rotger, A., Ferret, A., Calsamiglia, S. & Manteca, X. (2005). Changes in ruminal fermentation and protein degradation in growing Holstein heifers from 80 to 250 kg fed high-concentrate diets with different forage-to-concentrate ratios. Journal of Animal Science 83, 1616–1624.Google Scholar
Rotger, A., Ferret, A., Calsamiglia, S. & Manteca, X. (2006). In situ degradability of seven plant protein supplements in heifers fed high concentrate diets with different forage to concentrate ratio. Animal Feed Science and Technology 125, 73–87.Google Scholar
Russell, J. B. (1998). The importance of pH in the regulation of ruminal acetate to propionate ratio and methane production in vitro. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 3222–3230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, J. B. & Wilson, D. B. (1996). Why are ruminal cellulolytic bacterial unable to digest at low pH? Journal of Dairy Science 79, 1503–1509.Google Scholar
Samuel, M., Sagathewan, S., Thomus, J. & Mathen, G. (1997). An HPLC method for estimation of volatile fatty acids of rumen fluid. Indian Journal of Animal Science 67, 805–807.Google Scholar
SAS (1996). User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5. edn. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Satter, L. D. & Slyter, L. L. (1974). Effect of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in vitro. British Journal of Nutrition 32, 199–208.Google Scholar
Slyter, L. L. (1976). Influence of acidosis on rumen function. Journal of Animal Science 43, 910–929.Google Scholar
Slyter, L. L. (1986). Ability of pH-selected mixed ruminal microbial population to digest fiber at various pHs. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 52, 390–391.Google Scholar
Slyter, L. L., Oltjen, R. R., Kern, D. L. & Blank, F. C. (1970). Influence of type and level of grain and diethylstilbestrol on the rumen microbial population of steers fed all-concentrate diets. Journal of Animal Science 36, 996–1002.Google Scholar
Stewart, C. S. (1977). Factors affecting the cellulolytic activity of rumen contents. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 33, 497–502.Google Scholar
Tripathi, M. K., Santra, A., Chaturvedi, O. H. & Karim, S. A. (2004). Effect of sodium bicarbonate supplementation on ruminal fluid pH, feed intake, nutrient utilization and growth of lambs fed high concentrate diets. Animal Feed Science and Technology 111, 27–39.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B. & Lewis, B. A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.Google Scholar
Wanapat, M. (1999). Feeding of Ruminants in the Tropics Based on Local Feed Resources. Khon Kaen, Thailand: Khon Kaen Publishing Company Ltd.Google Scholar
Wanapat, M. (2000). Rumen manipulation to increase the efficient use of local feed resources and productivity of ruminants in the tropics. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 13, Suppl, 59–67.Google Scholar
Wanapat, M., Polyorach, S., Boonnop, K., Mapato, C. & Cherdthong, A. (2009). Effect of treating rice straw with urea or urea and calcium hydroxide upon intake, digestibility, rumen fermentation and milk yield of dairy cows. Livestock Science 125, 238–243.Google Scholar
Wanapat, M., Pilajun, R., Kang, S., Setyaningsih, K. & Setyawan, A. R. (2012). Effect of ground corn cob replacement for cassava chip on feed intake, rumen fermentation and urinary derivatives in swamp buffaloes. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 25, 1124–1131.Google Scholar
Wora-anu, S., Wanapat, M., Wachirapakorn, C. & Nontaso, N. (2007). Effect of roughage sources on cellulolytic bacteria and rumen ecology of beef cattle. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 20, 1705–1712.Google Scholar
Yang, S. L., Bu, D. P., Wang, J. Q., Hu, Z. Y., Li, D., Wei, H. Y., Zhou, L. Y. & Loor, J. J. (2009). Soybean oil and linseed oil supplementation affect profiles of ruminal microorganisms in dairy cows. Animal 3, 1562–1569.Google Scholar
Yu, Z. & Morrison, M. (2004). Improved extraction of PCR-quality community DNA from digesta and fecal samples. BioTechniques 36, 808–812.Google Scholar