Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:33:59.293Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Protein degradability estimated by tiolic enzymes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

F. Sarubbi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Zootecniche, Via F. Delpino, 1 - 80137 Napoli, Italy
F. Infascelli
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Zootecniche, Via F. Delpino, 1 - 80137 Napoli, Italy
T. di Lella
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze Zootecniche, Via F. Delpino, 1 - 80137 Napoli, Italy
Get access

Extract

New feeding systems for ruminants are based on the estimation of the quantity of protein that can be absorbed by the small intestine. This protein has two origins: dietary or microbial. The measurement of food protein which escapes rumen degradation is probably the major element in the evaluation of food protein value. The in situ incubation in nylon bags (Ørskov and McDonald, 1979) is the technique widely utilized to determine rate and extent of protein degradation. However, the technique is difficult to manage as it requires cannulated animals and can furnish reproducible data only utilizing standardized procedures. Although it is possible to standardize the amount and particle size of food sample, bag characteristics, incubation times and calculation model, it is, on the other hand, very difficult to standardize the basal diet (in our opinion to evaluate the diet only in function of forage/concentrate ratio and crude protein content is inadvisable). Thus for many years various alternative methods which are easier to manage and to standardize (chemical, enzymatic and microbiological procedures) have been developed (Nocek, 1988), to replace the in situ method. The most commonly used enzyme is an endoprotease from Streptomyces griseus (Krishnamoorthy et al, 1983; Poos-Floyd et al., 1985; Aufrère et al, 1991, Infascelli et al, 1993). However, some of the authors (Infascelli et al., 1993 plus Poos-Floyd et al., 1985) agree that this bacterial protease is of little consequence when predicting protein food degradation due to its unspecificity. In addition Poos-Floyd et al., 1985) suggest discarding the endoprotease from Streptomyces griseus due to the variability of results. On the contrary, the latter authors, evaluating rumen protein escape and proportion of degraded nitrogen (N) with enzymatic methods contemporarily, found ficin, a tiolic enzyme, preferable. Recently, Tomànkovà and Kopêcný (1995) have developed a method using another tiolic enzyme, bromelain, to predict rumen protein degradability. Kosmala et al. (1996) in agreement with Poos-Floyd et al. (1985) indicate ficin as the protease to estimate rumen degradability. Because these enzymes allow measurement of crude protein solubility at fixed incubation times, we think that the latter should not be necessarily correlated with the effective degradability that originates from combining degradability kinetics with rumen outflow rate. Thus, the aim of the present work was to compare the bromelain and ficin methods for estimating N solubility, particularly with regard to the variability of results.

Type
Posters
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Aufrère, J., Graviou, D., Demarquilly, C., Vérité, R., Michalet-Doreau, B. and Chapoutot, P. 1991. Predicting in situ degradability of feed proteins in the rumen by two laboratory methods (solubility and enzymatic degradation). Animal Feed Science and Technology 33:97116.Google Scholar
Infascelli, F., Moniello, G., Di Leila, T., Piccolo, V. and Nizza, A. 1993. [In situ and in vitro protein degradability of concentrates.] Atti X Congresso Nazionale ASPA:pp.6974.Google Scholar
Kosmala, I., Antoniewicz, A., De Boever, J., Hvelplund, T. and Kowalczyk, J. 1996. Use of enzymatic solubility with ficin (EC 3.4.22.3) to predict in situ feed protein degradability. Animal Feed Science and Technology 59:245254.Google Scholar
Krishnamoorthy, U., Sniffen, C. J., Stern, M. D. and Van Soest, P. J. 1983. Evaluation of a mathematical model of rumen digestion and in vitro simulation of rumen proteolysis to estimate rumen undegraded nitrogen content of feedstuffs. British Journal of Nutrition 50:555568.Google Scholar
Nocek, J. E. 1988. In situ and other methods to estimate ruminal protein and energy digestibility. A review. Journal of Dairy Science 71:20512069.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. and McDonald, I. 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to the rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92:499503.Google Scholar
Poos-Floyd, M., Klopfenstein, T. and Britton, R. A. 1985. Evaluation of laboratory tecniques for predicting ruminal protein degradation. Journal of Dairy Science 68:829839.Google Scholar
Tomànkovà, O. and Kopêcný, J. 1995. Prediction of feed protein degradation in the rumen with bromelain. Animal Feed Science and Technology 53:7180.Google Scholar