Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T12:34:10.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Are enzymes useful in ruminant diets?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2017

R. H. Phipps
Affiliation:
Centre for Dairy Research, Department of Agriculture, The University of Reading, Reading RG6, 6AR
J. D. Sutton
Affiliation:
Centre for Dairy Research, Department of Agriculture, The University of Reading, Reading RG6, 6AR
M. K. Bhat
Affiliation:
Institute for Food Research, Norwich Research Park, Colney, Norwich, NR4 7UA
Get access

Extract

Cellulose and hemicellulose are the major structural carbohydrates present in forages and form between 30 and 60% of the forage component of ruminant diets. The complex network of structural carbohydrates and lignin generally leads to low digestibility and limits the efficient utilisation of forages by ruminants. This situation occurs in both developed and developing countries, and in the latter it is particularly pronounced as much of the forage component is based around the use of crop residues (Owen and Jayasuria, 1989). Because forage costs are significantly lower than those of other dietary ingredients, improving forage quality has been a major objective for many research programmes in both the developed and developing world. Improvements in forage quality have been sort through a number of different strategies. These have included conventional breeding techniques, which have included the integration of mutant genes, leading to the development of Brown Midrib varieties of maize and the use of chemical and biological additives. Enzyme supplements are commonly used to improve the nutritive value of feeds for non ruminants and as silage additives where they have been shown to improve silage fermentation, feed intake and performance. Recent work with ruminants has however focused on the use of enzyme supplements to improve feed efficiency by the use of “direct-fed” fibrolytic enzymes. This strategy involves the application of enzymes to feed at or only hours before feeding. These studies have yielded very variable production responses. For any new technology to be implemented widely, the responses achieved must provide an acceptable level of consistency and predictability. The current paper reviews developments in enzymology, production responses achieved and the effects on nutrient digestion.

Type
Invited Theatre Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2002

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

Bhat, M.K. and Bhat, S. 1997 Cellulose degrading enzymes and their potential industrial applications. Biotechnology Advances, 15: 583620.Google Scholar
Bhat, M.K. and Hazlewood, G.P. 2001 Enzymology and other characteristics of cellulases and xylanases. In “Enzymes in Farm Animal Nutrition” edited by Bedford, M.R. & Partridge, G.G., pp. 1160, CABI International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.Google Scholar
Beauchemin, K. A., Yang, W. Z. and Rode, L. M. 1999. Effects of grain source and enzyme additive on site and extent of nutrient digestion in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 82: 378390.Google Scholar
Kung, K. L., Treacher, R. J., Nauman, G. A., Smagala, A. M., Endres, K. M. and Cohen, M.A. 2000. The effect of treating forages with fibrolytic enzymes on its nutritive value and lactation performance of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 83: 115122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, G. E., Sanchez, W. K., Hunt, C. W. Guy, M. A., Pritchard, G. T., Swanson, B. I. and Treacher, R. J. 1999. Effect of direct-fed fibrolytic enzymes on the lactational performance of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 82: 611617.Google Scholar
Owen, E. and Jayasuriya, M. C. N. 1989. Use of crop residues as animal feeds in developing countries. Research and Development in Agriculture 3: 129138.Google Scholar
Phipps, R.H., Sutton, J.D., Beever, D.E., Bhat, M.K., Hartnell, G.F., Vicini, J. L. and Hard, D.L. 2000. Effect of cell-wall degrading enzymes and method of application on feed intake and milk production of Holstein-Friesian dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 83, Supp. l, p 237.Google Scholar
Schingoethe, D. J., G. A., Stegeman, and R. J., Treacher. 1999. Response of lactating dairy cows to a cellulase and xylanase enzyme mixture applied to forages at the time of feeding. Journal Dairy Science 82: 9961003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sutton, J D, Phipps, R H, Beever, D E, Humphries, D J, Hartnell, G F and Vicini, J L. 2001. Comparison of different methods of administration on the effect of fibrolytic enzymes on digestive processes in lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 84, Supp. 1, p. 37.Google Scholar
Yang, W. Z., Beauchemin, K. A. and Rode, L. M. 1999. Effects of an enzyme feed additive on extent of digestion and milk production of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 82: 391403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, W. Z., Beauchemin, K. A. and Rode, L. M. 2000. A comparison of methods of adding fibrolytic enzymes. Journal of Dairy Science 83: 25122520.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed