Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T14:34:04.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of correcting for microbial contamination and the use of sodium sulphite in neutral detergent fibre analyses on the ruminal fibre degradability of several feeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 June 2014

J. A. GUEVARA-GONZÁLEZ ,
R. MOUHBI ,
J. M. ARROYO ,
M. R. ALVIR  and
J. GONZÁLEZ
J. A. GUEVARA-GONZÁLEZ
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain
R. MOUHBI
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain
J. M. ARROYO
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain
M. R. ALVIR
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain
J. GONZÁLEZ*
Affiliation:
Departamento de Producción Animal, Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: javier.gonzalez@upm.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Sodium sulphite is used in an optional way to remove insoluble proteins from neutral detergent fibre (NDF) residue. To determine whether the recovery of both NDF and insoluble nitrogen (N) in NDF solution (NDIN) are altered by its use, both parameters were measured in a set of 12 feeds, including cereal grains: maize (MG), rye (RG) and wheat (WG); cereal co-products: maize gluten feed (MGF), distilled dried grains from barley (DDGB) and wheat (DDGW) and wheat bran (WB); protein concentrates: rapeseed meal (RSM) and expeller palm kernel (EPK); dehydrated sugar beet pulp (DBP) and oat (OH) and ryegrass (RGH) hays. Associated effects on the in situ effective degradability (ED) of both NDF and NDIN were also studied in DDGW, WB, RSM, EPK, DBP, OH and RGH. Also, ED of acid detergent fibre (ADF) and its N (ADIN) were studied in hays. Errors due to microbial contamination in the rumen on the ED of NDF, ADF, NDIN and ADIN were also established in these last seven samples using 15N infusion methods. Three rumen and duodenum cannulated wethers were used in the study. The sulphite use in NDF solution led to reductions (DDGB, DDGW, RSM and OH) and increases (RG, WG, WB and DBP) of the NDIN proportion, as well as the contribution of crude protein to NDF. These variations were associated with irregular effects on NDF residues and on ED of both NDIN and NDF. As a consequence, sulphite use does not assure the reduction of the insoluble protein contamination and it may even increase it. This methodology may also alter the degradability estimates of NDIN or NDF. Mean ruminal microbial contamination in NDF was 7·0, 10·8, 13·3, 5·4, 12·0, 35·3 and 20·0 g/kg in WB, DDGW, RSM, EPK, DBP, OH and RGH, respectively. The associated contents of microbial N in NDIN were: 59·3, 29·9, 26·2, 19·8, 37·3, 441 and 150 g/kg, respectively. Microbial contamination in ADF and ADIN (g/kg) was 3·6 and 94·5 in OH and 1·7 and 41·2 in RGH. Not correcting this contamination led to consistent undervaluations of ED of NDIN and NDF in all tested feeds, although errors only reached significance for NDIN in hays and DBP. Microbial-corrected ED of NDIN was 0·685, 0·826, 0·481, 0·389, 0·166, 0·718 and 0·425 in WB, DDGW, RSM, EPK, DBP, OH and RGH, respectively, whereas values for ADIN were 0·504 (OH) and 0·469 (RGH).

Type
Animal Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 153 , Issue 2 , March 2015 , pp. 361 - 370
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 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

REFERENCES

AOAC (2000). Official Methods of Analysis, 17th Edition. Gaithersburg, MD, USA: AOAC.Google Scholar
Arroyo, J. M. & González, J. (2013 a). Effects of the ruminal comminution rate and microbial contamination of particles on accuracy of in situ estimates of ruminal degradability and intestinal digestibility of feedstuffs. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 97, 109–118.Google Scholar
Arroyo, J. M. & González, J. (2013 b). Effects of microbial colonization in the rumen on concentration and degradability estimates of fibre fractions. Livestock Science 153, 101–107.Google Scholar
Aufrère, J., Boulberhane, D., Graviou, D. & Demarquilly, C. (1994). Comparison of in situ degradation of cell-wall constituents, nitrogen and nitrogen linked to cell walls for fresh lucerne and 2 lucerne silages. Annales de Zootechnie 43, 125–134.Google Scholar
BOE (2007). Ley 32/2007 de 7 de Noviembre para el cuidado de los animales, en su explotación, transporte, experimentación y sacrificio. Boletín Oficial del Estado (BOE) 268, 45914–45920.Google Scholar
Dhanoa, M. S., Siddons, R. C., France, J. & Gale, D. L. (1985). A multicompartmental model to describe marker excretion patterns in ruminant faeces. British Journal of Nutrition 53, 663–671.Google Scholar
Ellis, W. C., Matis, J. H. & Lascano, C. (1979). Quantitating ruminal turnover. Federation Proceedings 38, 2702–2706.Google Scholar
González, J., Ouarti, M., Rodríguez, C. A. & Alvir, M. R. (2006). Effects of considering the rate of comminution of particles and microbial contamination on the accuracy of in situ studies of feed protein degradability in ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology 125, 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guevara-González, J. A., González, J., Arroyo, J. M., Moya, V. J. & Piquer, O. (2013). Effects of the correction of particle microbial contamination and particle transit model in the rumen on in situ protein evaluation of grass hays. Animal Production Science 53, 134–141.Google Scholar
Haj-Ayed, M., González, J., Caballero, R. & Alvir, M. R. (2000). Nutritive value of on-farm common vetch-oat hays. II Ruminal degradability of dry matter and crude protein. Annales de Zootechnie 49, 391–398.Google Scholar
Mason, V. C. (1969). Some observations on the distribution and origin of nitrogen in sheep faeces. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 73, 99–111.Google Scholar
McDonald, I. (1981). A revised model for the estimation of protein degradability in the rumen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 96, 251–252.Google Scholar
Michalet-Doreau, B. & Ould-Bah, M. Y. (1989). Estimation of the extent of bacterial contamination in bag residues and its influence on in sacco measurements of forage nitrogen degradation in rumen. In Proceedings of the XVIth International Grassland Congress (Ed. Jarrige, R.), pp. 909–910. Nice, France: French Grassland Society.Google Scholar
Ørskov, E. R. & Mcdonald, I. (1979). The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 499–503.Google Scholar
Pereira, J. C. & González, J. (2004). Rumen degradability of dehydrated beet pulp and dehydrated citrus pulp. Animal Research 53, 99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, J. C., Carro, M. D., González, J., Alvir, M. R. & Rodríguez, C. A. (1998). Rumen degradability and intestinal digestibility of brewers’ grains as affected by origin and heat treatment and of barley rootlets. Animal Feed Science and Technology 74, 107–121.Google Scholar
Repetto, J. L., González, J., Cajarville, C., Alvir, M. R. & Rodríguez, C. A. (2003). Relationship between ruminal degradability and chemical composition of dehydrated lucerne. Animal Research 52, 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, J. B. & Van Soest, P. J. (1981). The detergent system of analysis and its application to human foods. In The Analysis of Dietary Fiber in Foods (Eds James, W. P. T. & Theander, O.), pp. 123–142. New York, USA: Marcel Dekker Inc.Google Scholar
Rodríguez, C. A. & González, J. (2006). In situ study of the relevance of bacterial adherence to feed particles for the contamination and accuracy of rumen degradability estimates for feeds of vegetable origin. British Journal of Nutrition 96, 316–325.Google Scholar
Rodríguez, C. A., González, J., Alvir, M. R., Repetto, J. L., Centeno, C. & Lamrani, F. (2000). Composition of bacteria harvested from the liquid and solid fractions of the rumen of sheep as influenced by feed intake. British Journal of Nutrition 84, 369–376.Google Scholar
Sanderson, M. A. & Wedin, W. F. (1990). In situ digestion of detergent fiber nitrogen in alfalfa stems. Animal Feed Science and Technology 30, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute (1990). SAS/STAT® User's Guide, 2 vol. version 6, 4th edn, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Vanhatalo, A., Aronen, Y. & Varvikko, T. (1995). Intestinal nitrogen digestibility of heat-moisture treated rapeseed meals as assessed by the mobile-bag method in cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 55, 139–152.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1994). Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, 2nd edn, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B. & Lewis, B. A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.Google Scholar