Regulating Effects of Yeast Culture on Subacute Ruminal Acidosis Fermentation Model in Vitro in Goats

REN Shengnan; JIN Yaqian; ZHAO Fangfang; WANG Hongrong

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2020.05.035

Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2020 , Vol. 32 >Issue 5: 2263 - 2272

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2020.05.035

RUMINANT AND HERBIVORE NUTRITION AND FEED

Regulating Effects of Yeast Culture on Subacute Ruminal Acidosis Fermentation Model in Vitro in Goats

REN Shengnan ,
JIN Yaqian ,
ZHAO Fangfang ,
WANG Hongrong

Expand

College of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225100, China

Received date: 2019-10-29

Online published: 2020-05-15

Fold

Abstract

The aim of this experiment was to investigate the regulating effects of yeast culture (YC) on subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) fermentation model in vitro in goats. Six different levels of YC[0 (control), 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, 2.0% and 2.5%] were supplemented into substrate with different non-fibrous carbohydrates (NFC)/neutral detergent fiber (NDF) at 1.19 (conventional substrate) and 2.30 (high NFC substrate), respectively. Rumen fermentation parameters were determined, and moreover, the multi-index composite index (MFAEI) was evaluated. The results showed as follows:1) under high NFC substrate condition, the duration of pH lower than 5.8 was longer than 3 h, which indicated that the SARA model was established successfully in vitro. The pH during 9 to 12 h was stabilized with YC supplementation. In addition, the content of lactate at 12 and 24 h significantly decreased (P<0.05), the content of ammoniacal nitrogen (NH₃-N) at 9 and 12 h significantly decreased (P<0.05), the content of microbial protein (MCP) at 12 h significantly increased (P<0.05), the percentage of propionic acid at 3, 6, 12 and 24 h significantly increased (P<0.05), and the content of total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) at 24 h significantly increased (P<0.05). 2) Under conventional substrate condition, the pH at 24 h in rumen fermentation fluid was also stabilized with YC supplementation. At 12 h, the content of lactate significantly decreased (P<0.05); at 9 h, the content of NH₃-N significantly increased (P<0.05); at 6 and 9 h, the content of MCP significantly increased (P<0.05); during 3 to 24 h, the content of TVFA significantly increased (P<0.05). 3) The MFAET results showed that 1.5% YC could stabilize in vitro rumen fermentation under conventional substance condition; 2.0% YC supplementation could relive SARA under high NFC substance condition. In conclusion, YC supplementation has the best effect under high NFC substance condition, and relive SARA by improving the pH and reducing the content of lactic acid in rumen fermentation fluid, which indicate that YC has the potential to alleviate SARA.

Key words： in vitro batch culture; yeast culture; different supplemental levels; subacute rumen acidosis

Cite this article

REN Shengnan , JIN Yaqian , ZHAO Fangfang , WANG Hongrong . Regulating Effects of Yeast Culture on Subacute Ruminal Acidosis Fermentation Model in Vitro in Goats[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2020 , 32(5) : 2263 -2272 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2020.05.035

References

[1] MWENYA B,SANTOSO B,SAR C,et al.Effects of yeast culture and galacto-oligosaccharides on ruminal fermentation in Holstein cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2005,88(4):1404-1412.

[2] 寇慧娟.酵母培养物对羔羊生产性能、营养物质消化率及瘤胃发育的影响[D].硕士学位论文.杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2011.
[3] 卢庆萍.用体内、体外法研究纤维素酶、酵母培养物对瘤胃发酵的影响[J].中国草食动物,1999,1(5):3-5.
[4] MARTIN S A,NISBET D J.Effect of direct-fed microbials on rumen microbial fermentation[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1992,75(6):1736-1744.

[5] ERASMUS L J,BOTHA P M,KISTNER A.Effect of yeast culture supplement on production,rumen fermentation,and duodenal nitrogen flow in dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1992,75(11):3056-3065.

[6] DOREAU M,JOUANY J P.Effect of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae culture on nutrient digestion in lactating dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1998,81(12):3214-3221.

[7] 熊本海,罗清尧,周正奎,等.中国饲料成分及营养价值表(2018年第29版)制订说明[J].中国饲料,2018(21):64-73.
[8] VAN SOEST P J,ROBERTSON J B,LEWIS B A.Methods for dietary fiber,neutral detergent fiber,and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1991,74(10):3583-3597.

[9] 中华人民共合国国家质量监督检验检疫总局,中国国家标准化管理委员会.GB/T 6435-2014饲料中水分的测定[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2015.
[10] 国家市场监督管理总局,国家标准化管理委员会.GB/T 6432-2018饲料中粗蛋白的测定凯氏定氮法[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2018.
[11] 中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局.GB/T 6436-2002饲料中钙的测定[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2002.
[12] 中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局.GB/T 6437-2002饲料中总磷的测定分光光度法[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2002.
[13] 潘晓花.硫胺素对SARA状态下奶牛瘤胃发酵及瘤胃菌群结构的影响[D].硕士学位论文.扬州:扬州大学,2013.
[14] LEEDLE J A,HESPELL R B.Changes of bacterial numbers and carbohydrate fermenting groups during in vitro rumen incubations with feedstuff materials[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1984,67(4):808-816.

[15] BRODERICK G A.Alfalfa silage or hay versus corn silage as the sole forage for lactating dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1985,68(12):3262-3271.

[16] KAWAMOTO H,OGAWA M,HAYASAKA K,et al.Effects of formic acid-propionic acid-ammonium complex on fermentation quality and palatability of wrapped round bale silage[J].Bulletin of National Grassland Research Institute,2000,59:18-23.
[17] KHAN N A,CONE J W,HENDRIKS W H.Stability of fatty acids in grass and maize silages after exposure to air during the feed out period[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2009,154(3/4):183-192.
[18] 苏海涯.反刍动物日粮中桑叶与饼粕类饲料间组合效应的研究[D].硕士学位论文.杭州:浙江大学,2002.
[19] 张吉鹍,邹庆华,李龙瑞.饲料间的组合效应及其在粗饲料科学搭配上的应用[J].饲料广角,2003,(21):26-30.
[20] YANG W Z,BEAUCHEMIN K A.Effects of physically effective fiber on chewing activity and ruminal pH of dairy cows fed diets based on barley silage[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2006,89(1):217-228.

[21] BEAUCHEMIN K A,YANG W Z,MORGAVI D P,et al.Effects of bacterial direct-fed microbials and yeast on site and extent of digestion,blood chemistry,and subclinical ruminal acidosis in feedlot cattle[J].Journal of Animal Science,2003,81(6):1628-1640.

[22] LILA Z A,MOHAMMED N,YASUI T,et al.Effects of a twin strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae live cells on mixed ruminal microorganism fermentation in vitro[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2004,82(6):1847-1854.
[23] 刘相玉,毛胜勇,朱伟云.高精料日粮条件下酵母培养物对瘤胃细菌体外发酵的影响[J].动物营养学报,2009,21(2):199-204.
[24] DAWSON K A,NEWMAN K E,BOLING J AEffects of microbial supplements containing yeast and lactobacilli on roughage-fed ruminal microbial activities[J].Journal of Animal Science,1990,68(10):3392-3398.
[25] 胡红莲.奶山羊亚急性瘤胃酸中毒营养生理机制的研究[D].博士学位论文.呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2008:2-4.
[26] 冯仰廉,卢德勋,陆治年,等.反刍动物营养学[M].北京:科学出版社,2004.
[27] 丁耿芝.酵母菌添加对饲喂不同精粗比饲粮肉牛瘤胃发酵、养分降解和血浆代谢组的影响[D].博士学位论文.北京:中国农业大学,2014.
[28] 张霞.沙葱提取物对绵羊瘤胃发酵和微生物区系的影响[D].硕士学位论文.呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2007.
[29] 张爱忠,卢德勋,王立志,等.酵母培养物对绒山羊体外瘤胃发酵的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2008,44(3):31-34.
[30] 唐海翠.酵母培养物对瘤胃微生物体外发酵及山羊瘤胃代谢的影响[D].硕士学位论文.南京:南京农业大学,2006.
[31] 蒋小军,王康宁.酵母培养物对山羊瘤胃发酵的影响[J].畜禽业,2005(7):26-27.

Options

Outlines

模态框（Modal）标题

Abstract

Cite this article

References