Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T14:37:05.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A new approach to estimate the in situ fractional degradation rate of organic matter and nitrogen in wheat yeast concentrates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2014

L. H. de Jonge ,
H. van Laar ,
W. H. Hendriks  and
J. Dijkstra
L. H. de Jonge*
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
H. van Laar
Affiliation:
Nutreco R&D, PO Box 220, 5830 AE Boxmeer, The Netherlands
W. H. Hendriks
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL Utrecht, The Netherlands
J. Dijkstra
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
†E-mail: leon.dejonge@wur.nl
Get access

Abstract

In the classic in situ method, small particles are removed during rinsing and hence their fractional degradation rate cannot be determined. A new approach was developed to estimate the fractional degradation rate of nutrients in small particles. This approach was based on an alternative rinsing method to reduce the particulate matter loss during rinsing and on quantifying the particulate matter loss that occurs during incubation in the rumen itself. To quantify particulate matter loss during incubation, loss of small particles during the in situ incubation was studied using undegradable silica with different particle sizes. Particulate matter loss during incubation was limited to particles smaller than ~40 μm with a mean fractional particulate matter loss rate of 0.035 h−1 (first experiment) and 0.073 h−1 (second experiment) and an undegradable fraction of 0.001 and 0.050, respectively. In the second experiment, the fractional particulate matter loss rate after rinsing in a water bath at 50 strokes per minute (s.p.m.) (0.215 h−1) and the undegradable fraction at 20 s.p.m. (0.461) were significantly larger than that upon incubation in the rumen, whereas the fractional particulate matter loss rate (0.140 and 0.087 h−1, respectively) and the undegradable fraction (0.330 and 0.075, respectively) after rinsing at 30 and 40 s.p.m. did not differ with that upon rumen incubation. This new approach was applied to estimate the in situ fractional degradation rate of insoluble organic matter (OM) and insoluble nitrogen (N) in three different wheat yeast concentrates (WYC). These WYC were characterised by a high fraction of small particles and estimating their fractional degradation rate was not possible using the traditional washing machine rinsing method. The new rinsing method increased the mean non-washout fraction of OM and N in these products from 0.113 and 0.084 (washing machine method) to 0.670 and 0.782, respectively. The mean effective degradation (ED) without correction for particulate matter loss of OM and of N was 0.714 and 0.601, respectively, and significant differences were observed between the WYC products. Applying the correction for particulate matter loss reduced the mean ED of OM to 0.676 (30 s.p.m.) and 0.477 (40 s.p.m.), and reduced the mean ED of N to 0.475 (30 s.p.m.) and 0.328 (40 s.p.m.). These marked reductions in fractional degradation rate upon correction for small particulate matter loss emphasised the pronounced effect of correction for undegraded particulate matter loss on the fractional disappearance rates of OM and N in WYC products.

Keywords

particulate matter lossin situ protocolrumen degradabilitysilicawheat yeast concentrates
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , March 2015 , pp. 437 - 444
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

de Jonge, LH, van Laar, H, Hendriks, WH and Dijkstra, J 2013. A modified rinsing method for the determination of the S, W-S, and D+U fraction of protein and starch in feedstuffs within the in situ technique. Animal 7, 1289–1297.Google Scholar
Dhanoa, MS, France, J, Lòpez, S, Dijkstra, J, Lister, SJ, Davies, DR and Bannink, A 1999. Correcting the calculation of extent of degradation to account for particulate matter loss at zero time when applying the polyester bag method. Journal of Animal Science 77, 3385–3391.Google Scholar
France, J, Dhanoa, MS, Theodorou, MK, Lister, SJ, Davies, DR and Isac, D 1993. A model to interpret gas accumulation profiles associated with in vitro degradation of ruminal feeds. Journal of Theoretical Biology 163, 99–111.Google Scholar
ISO 6496 1999. Animal feeding stuffs – determination of moisture and other volatile matter content. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
ISO 5984 2002. Animal feeding stuffs – determination of crude ash. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
ISO 5985 2002. Animal feeding stuffs – determination of ash insoluble in hydrochloric acid. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
ISO 5983-2 2005. Animal feeding stuffs – determination of nitrogen content and calculation of crude protein content – Part 2: block digestion/steam distillation method. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Lipke, PN and Ovalle, R 1998. Cell wall architecture in yeast: new structure and new challenges. Journal of Bacteriology 180, 3735–3740.Google Scholar
López, S 2005. In vitro and in situ techniques for estimating digestibility. In Quantitative aspects of ruminant digestion and metabolism, 2nd edition (ed. Dijkstra J, Forbes JM and France J), pp. 87–122. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Michalet-Doreau, B and Ould-Bah, MY 1992. In vitro and in sacco methods for the estimation of dietary nitrogen degradability in the rumen: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 40, 57–86.Google Scholar
NRC 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Ørskov, ER and McDonald, I 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. The Journal of Agricultural Science 92, 499–503.Google Scholar
SAS Institute 2002. SAS/STAT User’s Guide 2002. Version 9. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Tas, BM, Taweel, HZ, Smit, HJ, Elgersma, A, Dijkstra, J and Tamminga, S 2006. Rumen degradation characteristics of perennial ryegrass cultivars during the growing season. Animal Feed Science and Technology 131, 102–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, C (ed.) 2004. Feed into milk. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
van Duinkerken, G, Blok, MC, Bannink, A, Cone, JW, Dijkstra, J, van Vuuren, AM, Tamminga, S 2011. Update of the Dutch protein evaluation system for ruminants: the DVE/OEB2010 system. The Journal of Agricultural Science 149, 351–367.Google Scholar
Vanzant, ES, Cochran, RC and Titgemeyer, EC 1998. Standardization of in situ techniques for ruminant feedstuff evaluation. Journal of Animal Science 76, 2717–2729.Google Scholar
Volden, H (ed.) 2011. Norfor, the Nordic feed evaluation system. EAAP Publication No. 130. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar