Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T17:24:42.895Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In vitro gas and foam production by rumen fluid from cows of genetically high or low susceptibility to pasture bloat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

F. R. M. Cockrem ,
J. T. McIntosh ,
R. D. McLaren  and
C. A. Morris
F. R. M. Cockrem
Affiliation:
Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre, Private Bag, Hamilton, New Zealand
J. T. McIntosh
Affiliation:
Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre, Private Bag, Hamilton, New Zealand
R. D. McLaren
Affiliation:
Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre, Private Bag, Hamilton, New Zealand
C. A. Morris
Affiliation:
Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre, Private Bag, Hamilton, New Zealand
Get access

Abstract

Rumen fluid was obtained from rumen fistulated cows (two of high (HS) and two of low (LS) susceptibility to bloat) which were bred in experimental herds subjected to long-term divergent genetic selection for pasture bloat susceptibility. In vitro fermentation using strained rumen fluid from each cow with various pasture juice substrates showed no differences between HS and LS in gas production per unit of rumen fluid or in foam production per unit of gas production. Fluid from cows on grazed pasture produced greatest gas volumes. Clover juices produced more foam of similar stability to ryegrass and mixed pasture juices. Foam production per unit of gas was greater for all juices when the rumen fluid was from cows grazing bloat potent pasture.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , August 1987 , pp. 37 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1987

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

Bartley, E. E. 1976. Bovine saliva. Production and function. In Buffers in Ruminant Physiology and Metabolism (ed. Weinberg, M. W. and Sheffner, A. L.), pp. 61–77. Church Dwight, New York.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. T. J. and Reid, C. S. W. 1970. Legume bloat. In Physiology of Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant (ed. Phillipson, A. T.), pp. 599–606. Oriel Press, Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. T. J. and Reid, C. S. W. 1974. Foamy bloat of cattle. A review. Journal of Dairy Science 57: 753–785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cockrem, F. R. M. and McIntosh, J. T. 1976. Genetics of susceptibility to bloat in cattle. I. An analysis of variation in degree of bloat in cows grazing red clover. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 19: 177–183.Google Scholar
Cockrem, F. R. M. and McIntosh, J. T. 1978. An effect of pasture on the secretion of salivary proteins by the cow. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 38: 174 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Cockrem, F. R. M., McIntosh, J. T. and McLaren, R. D. 1983. Selection for and against susceptibility to bloat in dairy cows—a review. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 43: 101–106.Google Scholar
Cockrem, F. R. M., McIntosh, J. T., McLaren, R. D. and Morris, C. A. 1987. The relationship between volume of rumen contents and genetic susceptibility to pasture bloat in cattle. Animal Production 45: 43–47.Google Scholar
Conrad, H. R., Pounden, W. D., Bentley, O. G. and Fetter, A. W. 1958. Production of gas in rumen fermentations and stable mass formation from alfalfa fibre and pectic substances. Journal of Dairy Science 41: 1586–1592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunoate, R. E. 1966. The Rumen and Its Microbes. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Hungate, R. E., Fletcher, D. W., Dougherty, R. W. and Barrentink, B. F. 1955. Microbial activity i n the bovine rumen: its measurement and relation to bloat. Applied Microbiology 3: 161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, W. T. and Lytileion, J. W. 1969. Bloat in cattle. XXIX. The foaming properties of clover proteins. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 12: 31–46.Google Scholar
Jones, W. T. and Lyttleton, J. W. 1972. Bloat in cattle. XXXVI. Further studies on the foaming properties of soluble leaf proteins. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 15: 267–278.Google Scholar
Jones, W. T., Lyttleton, J. W. and Mangan, J. L. 1978. Interactions between fraction 1 leaf protein and other surfactants involved in the bloat syndrome. I. Foam stabilising materials. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 21: 401–407.Google Scholar
Lippke, H., Reaves, J. L. and Jacobson, N. L. 1972. Rumen pressures associated with the scores of a bloat severity scale. Journal of Animal Science 34: 171–175.Google Scholar
McDougall, E. I. 1948. Studies on ruminant saliva. Biochemical Journal 43: 99–109.Google Scholar
McIntosh, J. T. 1975. The components of bovine saliva n i relation to bloat. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 35: 29–34.Google Scholar
McIntosh, J. T. 1978. A study of bovine salivary proteins. D.Phil. Thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Majak, W., Howarth, R. E., Cheng, K.-J. and Hall, J. W. 1983. Rumen conditions that predispose cattle to pasture bloat. Journal of Dairy Science 66: 1683–1688.Google Scholar
Nugent, J. H. A. and Mangan, J. L. 1978. Rumen proteolysis of fraction I leaf protein, casein and bovine serum albumin. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 37: 48A (Abstr.).Google ScholarPubMed
Nugent, J. H. A. and Mangan, J. L. 1981. Characteristics of the rumen proteolysis of fraction I (18S) leaf protein from lucerne (Medicago saliva L.). British Journal of Nutrition 46: 39–58.Google Scholar