Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T20:42:56.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of defaunation on fermentation characteristics and biotin balance in an artificial rumen-simulation system (RUSITEC) receiving diets with different amounts and types of cereal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2007

H. Abel ,
B. Schröder ,
P. Lebzien  and
G. Flachowsky
H. Abel*
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, Georg-August University of Goettingen, Germany
B. Schröder
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, Georg-August University of Goettingen, Germany
P. Lebzien
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Agricultural Research Centre (FAL), Braunschweig, Germany
G. Flachowsky
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Agricultural Research Centre (FAL), Braunschweig, Germany
*
*Corresponding author: Dr Hansjoerg Abel, fax +49 551 393343, email habel@gwdg.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Biotin is required by rumen microbes for efficient fermentation. To evaluate the role of protozoa in ruminal biotin metabolism, five diets composed of grass hay or of grass hay/cereal grain mixtures were supplied to faunated or defaunated RUSITEC fermenters. In the mixed diets, hay was replaced to 33:67 or 67:33 w/w on an air-dried basis by either wheat or maize grain in order to simulate different cellulolytic and amylolytic fermentation conditions. Defaunation increased SCFA production, whereas NH4 concentration and the release of CH4 were reduced. Biotin input declined when cereal grain was used to replace the hay. With the exception of the high-wheat treatment, defaunated fermenters yielded higher biotin outputs than faunated fermenters. The biotin balance, calculated as the difference between the total biotin output (biotin in the solid residue contained in the nylon bags after fermentation plus the biotin in the effluent) and the biotin input with the feed, was negative for all the dietary treatments apart from fermenters supplied with the high-maize diet. It was less negative or, in the case of the high-maize diets, more positive for defaunated compared with faunated fermenters. It was concluded that, under normal faunated conditions, protozoa directly utilise or indirectly affect the bacterial synthesis and/or utilisation of biotin. With diets of a high fermentation potential, as realised with the high-wheat diet, protozoa prevent the development of a bacterial population that would utilise high or synthesise low amounts of biotin.

Keywords

BiotinProtozoaRUSITEC
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 95 , Issue 1 , January 2006 , pp. 99 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2006

References

Abel, HJ, Immig, I, Da Costa Gomez, C & Steinberg, WEffect of increasing dietary concentrate levels on microbial biotin metabolism in the artificial rumen simulation system (RUSITEC). Arch Anim Nutr (2001) 55, 371–376.Google ScholarPubMed
Aitken, FC & Hankin, RGVitamins in Feeds for Livestock. Aberdeen: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux/Central Press (1970)Google Scholar
Bergner, H & Hoffmann, LBioenergetik und Stoffproduktion landwirtschaftlicher Nutztiere. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers. (1996)Google Scholar
Czerkawski, JW & Breckenridge, GDesign and development of a long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec).. Br J Nutr (1977) 38, 371–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frigg, MBrubacher, GBiotin deficiency in chicks fed a wheat based diet. Int J Vit Nutr Res (1976) 46, 314–321.Google ScholarPubMed
Frigg, M, Straub, OC & Hartmann, DThe bioavailability of supplemental biotin in cattle. Int J Vitam Nutr Res (1993) 63, 122–128.Google ScholarPubMed
Hayes, BW, Mitchell, GE Jr., Little, CO & Bradley, NWConcentrations of B-vitamins in ruminal fluid of steers fed different levels and physical forms of hay and grain. J Anim Sci (1966) 25, 536–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDougall, EIStudies on ruminant saliva. 1. The composition and output of sheep's saliva. Biochem J (1948) 43, 99–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makkar, HPS, Becker, K, Abel, HJ & Szegletti, CDegradation of condensed tannins by rumen microbes exposed to quebracho tannins (QT) in rumen simulation technique (RUSITEC) and effects of QT on fermentative processes in the RUSITEC. J Sci Food Agric (1995) 69, 495–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, C, Devillard, E & Michalet-Doreau, BInfluence of sampling site on concentrations and carbohydrate-degrading enzyme activities of protozoa and bacteria in the rumen. J Anim Sci (1999) 77, 979–987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, BL, Meiske, JC & Goodrich, RDEffects of grain source and concentrate level on B-vitamin production and absorption in steers. J Anim Sci (1986) 62, 473–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milligan, LP, Asplund, JM & Robblee, ARIn vitro studies on the role of biotin in the metabolism of rumen microorganisms. Can J Animal Sci (1967) 47, 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumann, K & Bassler, RMethodenbuch. Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln. Band III Darmstadt, Germany: VDLUFA-Verlag. (1997)Google Scholar
Poe, SE, Mitchell, GE Jr & Ely, DGRumen development in lambs. III. Microbial B-vitamin synthesis. J Anim Sci (1972) 34, 826–829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosendo, O, Bates, DB, McDowell, LR, Staples, CR, McMahon, R & Wilkinson, NSAvailability and ability of biotin for promoting forage fiber in vitro ruminal digestibility. J Anim Vet Adv (2003a) 2, 350–357.Google Scholar
Rosendo, O, Bates, D, Staples, CR, McDowell, LR, McMahon, RJ, Seymour, WM, & Wilkinson, NIs ruminal biotin availability decreased by low pH? ”. J Anim Sci (2003b) Suppl. 1, 266.Google Scholar
Santschi, DE, Berthiaume, R, Matte, JJ, Mustafa, AF, & Girard, CLFate of supplementary B-vitamins in the gastrointestinal tract of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci (2005) 88, 2043–2054.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scheifinger, CC & Wolin, MJPropionate formation from cellulose and soluble sugars by combined cultures of Bacteroides succinogenes and Selenomonas ruminantium. Appl Microbiol (1973) 26, 789–795.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scheiner, J & De Ritter, EBiotin content of feedstuffs. J Agric Food Chem (1975) 23, 1157–1162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, AG & Coleman, GSThe Rumen Protozoa Brock/Springer Series in Contemporary BioscienceNew York: Springer-Verlag (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolin, MJ & Miller, TLMicrobe—microbe interactions Rumen Microbial Ecosystem pp. 343–359 [PN, Hobson, editor]. London: Elsevier Applied Science. (1988)Google Scholar
Zinn, RA, Owens, FN, Stuart, RL, Dunbar, JR & Norman, BBB-vitamin supplementation of diets for feedlot calves. J Anim Sci (1987) 65, 267–277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed