Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-12T10:01:29.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of cytosine as a marker to estimate microbial protein synthesis in the rumen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2017

L.A. Sinclair ,
P.C. Garnsworthy  and
P.J. Buttery
L.A. Sinclair
Affiliation:
University of NottinghamSchool of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, LeicsLE12 5RD
P.C. Garnsworthy
Affiliation:
University of NottinghamSchool of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, LeicsLE12 5RD
P.J. Buttery
Affiliation:
University of NottinghamSchool of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, LeicsLE12 5RD
Get access

Extract

Recently methods based upon the HPLC separation and detection of cytosine (Koenig 1980) and the spectrophotometric analysis of the total purine content of microbes (Zinn and Owens 1986) have been proposed to estimate microbial nitrogen flow at the duodenum. Little work has been undertaken in-vivo to evaluate cytosine as a marker and to compare it with current techniques. The present trial was designed to evaluate this marker and to compare it with diaminopimelic acid (DAPA), [3H]leucine and the total purine technique. In addition, recent reports (Hvelpund and Madsen 1985) have indicated that expressing miaobial efficiency in terms of carbohdrate, as opposed to organic matter degraded in the rumen, reduced the variation in microbial yield. This was also investigated.

Type
Ruminant Nutrition
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production (1972) , Volume 1991 , March 1991 , pp. 107
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1991

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

Hvelpund, T. and Madsen, J. (1985) Acta.Agric.Scand.Suppl 25 pp21–36.Google Scholar
Koenig, S.E, Schelling, G.T, Mitchell, G.E (jr) and Tucker, R.E. (1980) J.Anim. Sci. 51 Suppl 1, p25.Google Scholar
Zinn, R.A. and Owens, F.N. (1986) Can.J.Anim.Sci. 66 pp157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar