Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2026 , Vol. 38 >Issue 1: 729 - 737

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2026.056

RESEARCH PAPER

Effects of Artemisia ordosica Crude Polysaccharides and High-Quality Mixed Forage on in Vitro Rumen Fermentation and Nutrient Degradation in Beef Cattle

  • ZHENG Ziwei ,
  • MARK Tala ,
  • ZHENG Yi ,
  • YANG Weijia ,
  • DONG Shuhui ,
  • ZHANG Qingyue ,
  • ZHAO Yanli ,
  • GUO Yongmei ,
  • GUO Xiaoyu ,
  • YAN Sumei , *
Expand
  • Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science at Universities of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, College of Animal Science, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010018, China
* professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2025-06-02

  Online published: 2026-01-13

Fold

Abstract

This experiment aimed to investigate the effects of dietary supplementation of crude polysaccharides from Artemisia ordosica or replacing part of corn stover and rice straw with high-quality mixed forage on in vitro rumen fermentation and nutrient degradation in beef cattle, providing a basis for the rational utilization of Artemisia ordosica resources and roughage resources in beef cattle farming. Simmental cattle were selected as donors of rumen fluid. A single-factor completely randomized experimental design was adopted and divided into 7 groups, with 6 replicates in each group. They were continuously cultured in vitro for 24 h. The ratio of concentrate to roughage of the culture substrate was 60∶40. Among them, in the control group (group CON), the ratio of high-quality mixed forage (alfalfa∶oat grass∶Leymus chinensis=4∶3∶3) to low-quality roughage (corn stover∶rice straw=1∶1) in the substrate was 1∶1. In groups Ⅰ to Ⅵ, no high-quality mixed forage was supplemented as the substrate. Groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ were a single corn stover group and a single rice straw group, respectively, and the low-quality roughage in the substrate was either a single corn stover or rice straw. Group Ⅲ was the corn stover+rice straw group, with the ratio of corn stover to rice straw in the substrate being 1∶1. Groups Ⅳ, Ⅴ and Ⅵ were supplemented with 0.050%, 0.075% and 0.100% crude polysaccharides of Artemisia ordosica on the basis of group Ⅲ, respectively. The results showed as follows: 1) compared with groups CON and Ⅵ, the bacterial protein concentration in groups Ⅱ to Ⅳ was significantly decreased (P<0.05), which was the lowest in group Ⅱ; the gas production in groups Ⅰ to Ⅴ showed a decreasing trend (P=0.068). Compared with group CON, the ammonia nitrogen concentration in groups Ⅱ to Ⅵ was significantly decreased (P<0.05), which was the lowest in group Ⅱ. Compared with group CON, the acetate concentration in group Ⅰ was significantly decreased (P<0.05), the concentrations of propionate, butyrate and total volatile fatty acids in groups Ⅰ to Ⅵ were significantly decreased (P<0.05), and the acetate to propionate ratio was significantly increased (P<0.05). Compared with groups CON, Ⅴ and Ⅵ, the degradation rates of dry matter, crude protein and acid detergent fiber in groups Ⅰ to Ⅳ were significantly decreased (P<0.05). Compared with groups CON and Ⅳ, the ether extract degradation rate in the other five groups was significantly decreased (P<0.05). Compared with groups CON and Ⅴ, the neutral detergent fiber degradation rate in groups Ⅰ to Ⅳ was significantly decreased (P<0.05). 3) The multiple-factors associative effects indices (MFAEI) from high to low were group CON, group Ⅵ, group Ⅴ, group Ⅲ, group Ⅳ, groupⅠ and group Ⅱ. In conclusion, dietary supplementation of 0.075% and 0.100% crude polysaccharides of Artemisia ordosica or replacing 50% of the low-quality roughage composed of corn stover and rice straw with high-quality mixed forage composed of alfalfa, oat grass and Leymus chinensis can both improve the utilization efficiency of roughage and promote the in vitro rumen fermentation and nutrient degradation of the diet in beef cattle.

Key words： crude polysaccharides from Artemisia ordosica; corn stover; rice straw; beef cattle; in vitro rumen fermentation; nutrient degradation; associative effects

Cite this article

ZHENG Ziwei , MARK Tala , ZHENG Yi , YANG Weijia , DONG Shuhui , ZHANG Qingyue , ZHAO Yanli , GUO Yongmei , GUO Xiaoyu , YAN Sumei . Effects of Artemisia ordosica Crude Polysaccharides and High-Quality Mixed Forage on in Vitro Rumen Fermentation and Nutrient Degradation in Beef Cattle[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2026 , 38(1) : 729 -737 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2026.056

随着我国居民膳食结构的优化和消费水平的提升,消费者对牛肉的需求持续增长,人畜争粮矛盾更加突出,能量、蛋白质饲料等饲料粮资源的短缺及其对进口的依存度高,成为制约我国肉牛养殖业健康可持续发展的卡脖子问题,肉牛养殖成本也不断增加。内蒙古作为我国重要的肉牛养殖基地,玉米秸秆、稻草等非粮型粗饲料是主要的粗饲料资源,但这些资源普遍存在营养价值低、适口性差、利用率低等问题[1-2]。因此,提高非粮型粗饲料资源的饲料转化效率,对减少饲料粮消耗、降低肉牛养殖成本具有重要意义。
研究发现,优质牧草等比例替代粗饲料后,能提升绒山羊对纤维物质的降解率,提高粗饲料的营养价值[3];苜蓿草和全株玉米青贮替代玉米秸秆可显著提升驴盲肠发酵功能及其对饲粮营养物质降解率[4]。黑沙蒿(Artemisia ordosica)作为生长于我国北方干旱半干旱地区的典型生态植物,富含多糖、总酚及黄酮类化合物[5]。研究表明,黑沙蒿粗多糖可有效调控绒山羊瘤胃发酵,提高纤维物质降解效率和生长性能[6],体外研究也得出了类似的结果[7]。西门塔尔牛因其生长速度快、饲料转化效率高等优势,已成为内蒙古地区主导的肉牛品种[8],但关于黑沙蒿粗多糖在改善肉牛对非粮型粗饲料资源利用效率方面的研究尚未见系统的资料报道。
体内法作为评价饲料营养价值的主要手段之一,准确率较高,但因其操作复杂、费时费力、测定费用高、动物个体差异大,而且重复性较低,不适用于大量样本的营养价值评价[9]。体外法可较好地模拟反刍动物的生理条件,具有操作简单、易标准化、省时省力等优势,适用于实验室大量样本的常规测定。本研究利用体外试验,通过探讨饲粮中添加黑沙蒿粗多糖或用苜蓿草、燕麦草和羊草等优质牧草替代部分玉米秸秆和稻草等非粮型粗饲料对西门塔尔牛瘤胃发酵特性及营养物质降解的影响,探究优质牧草与非粮型粗饲料的优化组合或营养调控剂对秸秆营养价值的调控作用,为非粮型粗饲料资源在肉牛育肥饲粮中的高效利用提供技术支撑。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验设计及饲粮组成

本试验获得内蒙古农业大学实验动物福利与伦理委员会的许可(批准号:NND2022111)。试验采用单因素完全随机试验设计,选取3头体重为(379.39±8.74) kg的1.5~2.0岁西门塔尔牛公牛采集瘤胃液,通过体外瘤胃模拟试验,比较研究7种不同粗饲料组合的体外瘤胃参数和营养物质降解率。各组基础饲粮均为全混合日粮,精粗比为60∶40,其中粗饲料中均含有相同比例的全株玉米青贮,农作物秸秆(玉米秸秆∶稻草=1∶1)与优质混合牧草(苜蓿草∶燕麦草∶羊草=4∶3∶3)在饲粮中的比例按照试验设计要求设定。对照组(CON组)底物用优质混合牧草替代50%的农作物秸秆;Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组分别为单一的玉米秸秆组和稻草组,基础饲粮中不补充优质混合牧草,农作物秸秆为单一的玉米秸秆或稻草;Ⅲ组为玉米秸秆+稻草组,基础饲粮中不补充优质混合牧草,玉米秸秆与稻草的比例为1∶1;Ⅳ组、Ⅴ组和Ⅵ组在Ⅲ组饲粮的基础上分别添加0.050%、0.075%和0.100%黑沙蒿粗多糖。每组6个重复,体外连续培养24 h。各组饲粮组成及营养水平见表1。饲粮中粗蛋白质(CP)含量参照《饲料中粗蛋白的测定 凯氏定氮法》(GB/T 6432—2018)中方法测定;中性洗涤纤维(NDF)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)含量参照Van Soest等[10]的方法,使用ANKOM纤维分析仪测定;钙(Ca)含量参照《饲料中钙的测定》(GB/T 6436—2018)中的高锰酸钾法测定;磷(P)含量参照《饲料中总磷的测定 分光光度法》(GB/T 6437—2018)中方法测定。
表1 饲粮组成及营养水平(风干基础)

Table 1 Composition and nutrient levels of diets (air-dry basis) %

项目
Items		 组别Groups
CON Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅲ Ⅳ Ⅴ Ⅵ
原料Ingredients
苜蓿干草Alfalfa hay 5.89
燕麦草Oat hay 3.68
羊草Leymus chinensis hay 3.68
玉米青贮Corn silage 12.73 12.73 12.73 12.73 12.73 12.73 12.73
稻草Rice straw 6.63 26.52 13.43 13.43 13.43 13.43
玉米秸秆Corn stover 6.63 26.52 13.43 13.43 13.43 13.43
玉米Corn 25.33 22.15 25.36 25.02 25.02 25.02 25.02
玉米喷浆蛋白Corn spray-dried protein 26.52 25.31 22.10 22.10 22.10 22.10 22.10
菜籽粕Rapeseed meal 3.65 5.82 5.82 5.82 5.82 5.82 5.82
棉籽粕Cottonseed meal 2.06 4.27 4.27 4.27 4.27 4.27 4.27
预混料Premix1) 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50
石粉Limestone 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60
磷酸氢钙CaHPO4 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
碳酸氢钠NaHCO3 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70
食盐NaCl 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
合计Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
营养水平Nutrient levels2)
增重净能NEg/(MJ/kg) 6.37 6.17 6.29 6.22 6.22 6.22 6.22
粗蛋白质CP 12.65 12.48 12.51 12.53 12.53 12.53 12.53
中性洗涤纤维NDF 38.25 40.42 39.87 39.47 39.47 39.47 39.47
酸性洗涤纤维ADF 17.10 20.52 19.75 19.41 19.41 19.41 19.41
钙Ca 0.61 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53
磷P 0.38 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37

1)预混料为每千克饲粮提供 The premix provided the following per kg of diets:VA 5 000 IU,VD 1 250 IU,VE 15 IU,Mn (as manganese sulfate) 40 mg,Zn (as zinc sulfate) 40 mg,Cu (as copper sulfate) 8 mg,Se (as sodium selenite) 0.2 mg,I (as potassium iodide) 0.5 mg。

2)增重净能参考NY/T 815—2004计算,其余为实测值。NEg was calculated according to NY/T 815—2004, while the others were measured values.

1.2 体外瘤胃发酵试验

晨饲前通过口腔采集3头西门塔尔牛瘤胃液,经4层纱布过滤后与参考Menke等[11]方法配置的培养液按1∶2混合。精确称取1 g饲粮底物(精度0.000 1 g)置于培养瓶,加入60 mL混合液,全程通二氧化碳(CO2)维持厌氧环境。采用AGRS-Ⅲ型全自动产气记录系统在39 ℃下培养24 h。培养结束后立即冰浴终止发酵,过滤后分装瘤胃液测定各项指标,-20 ℃保存备用。

1.3 测定指标及方法

1.3.1 瘤胃发酵参数

体外瘤胃发酵培养液的pH采用精密pH计测定(pHS-3S,上海雷磁);氨态氮(NH3-N)浓度采用比色法[12]测定;乙酸、丙酸和丁酸等挥发性脂肪酸(VFA)浓度采用气相色谱仪(Agilent 7890B,美国)测定[13],根据测定结果计算总挥发性脂肪酸(TVFA)浓度及乙酸/丙酸值;菌体蛋白(BCP)浓度采用差速离心法和考马斯亮蓝法测定;24 h累积产气量通过AGRS-Ⅲ型全自动产气记录系统连续监测;采用甲基绿-福尔马林染色镜检法[14]记录测定瘤胃原虫数量。

1.3.2 体外瘤胃营养物质降解率

将266 mL缓冲溶液B和1 330 mL缓冲溶液A加入发酵罐中,将装有缓冲溶液的发酵罐放置于恒温水浴锅中,平衡温度至39 ℃,并通入CO2气体2 h;每个发酵罐中加入400 mL瘤胃液混匀;称取6 g发酵底物于尼龙袋中,平铺于发酵罐中,每个处理6个重复,上述操作全程冲入CO2气体;将发酵罐放置于Daisy Ⅱ体外模拟培养箱中培养。降解前底物和降解后残渣中水分含量参照《饲料中水分的测定》(GB/T 6435—2014),并计算干物质(DM)含量;粗脂肪(EE)含量参照《饲料中粗脂肪的测定》(GB/T 6433—2006)中方法测定;CP、NDF和ADF含量的测定方法与饲粮中的测定方法一致。体外瘤胃营养物质降解率计算公式如下:
X(%)=100×(W1×A-W2×B)/(W1×A)。
式中:X为体外瘤胃某营养物质降解率(%);A为降解前底物中该营养物质含量(%);W1为降解前底物重量(g);W2为经体外瘤胃发酵降解后的残渣重量(g);B为降解残渣中该营养物质含量(%)。

1.3.3 单项组合效应指数(SFAEI)和多项组合效应指数(MFAEI)

SFAEI和MFAEI是反刍动物营养学中量化饲料组合效应的重要理论工具。其中,SFAEI可以反映单一饲料原料与基础饲粮组合后,对特定单项营养指标的影响程度;MFAEI是在SFAEI的基础上,通过多项指标加权整合形成综合指数,以评估多种饲料原料共同组合时产生的协同或拮抗效应,从而量化多种饲料原料的混合效果,优化原料比例,构建高效组合。二者的值越大,组合效应越大。本试验中,单项指标分别为BCP、产气量、TVFA浓度和DM降解率,参考张清月[15]的方法按照公式计算SFAEI和MFAEI,计算公式如下:
SFAEI= ∑ m = 1 n ( A 2 m - A 1 m   ) / n A - 2 m;
MFAEI=∑SFAEI。
式中:m为各发酵时间点;n为发酵时间点的总次数;A1m为组合前(CON组)各单一指标第n个发酵时间点的值;A2m为组合后(试验组)各单一指标第n个发酵时间点的值,各时间点的平均值为 A - 2 m。

1.4 数据统计和分析

试验数据采用SAS 9.4进行单因素方差分析,并采用Duncan氏法进行多重比较。结果以平均值和均值标准误(SEM)表示,P<0.05表示差异显著,0.05≤P<0.10表示存在差异显著趋势。

2 结果

2.1 体外瘤胃发酵产气量、pH、原虫数量以及NH3-N和BCP浓度

由表2可知,与CON组和Ⅵ组相比,Ⅱ组~Ⅳ组体外瘤胃发酵培养液中BCP浓度显著降低(P<0.05),且以Ⅱ组最低,并显著低于Ⅴ组(P<0.05)。与CON组相比,除Ⅰ组外,其他试验组NH3-N浓度均显著降低(P<0.05),且以Ⅱ组最低,并显著低于Ⅰ组(P<0.05)。与CON组和Ⅵ组相比,其他组产气量有降低趋势(P=0.068);各组间pH和原虫数量无显著差异(P>0.05)。
表2 体外瘤胃发酵产气量、pH、原虫数量以及NH3-N和BCP浓度

Table 2 In vitro rumen fermentation gas production, pH, protozoan count, as well as NH3-N and BCP concentrations

项目
Items		 产气量
Gas production/
mL		 pH 原虫数量
Protozoan count/
(×104个/mL)		 氨态氮
NH3-N/
(mg/dL)		 菌体蛋白
BCP/
(mg/dL)
组别Groups
CON 124.63 6.57 6.38 9.83a 19.21a
Ⅰ 114.12 6.58 5.71 8.88ab 17.04abc
Ⅱ 108.73 6.56 7.63 7.04c 15.62c
Ⅲ 113.48 6.47 5.78 8.22bc 16.24bc
Ⅳ 111.64 6.57 7.29 7.49bc 16.30bc
Ⅴ 116.94 6.59 6.38 7.73bc 18.25ab
Ⅵ 124.01 6.57 6.50 7.97bc 18.91a
均值标准误SEM 4.103 0.031 0.579 0.454 1.026
P值P-value 0.068 0.174 0.131 0.003 0.001

同列数据肩标不同字母表示差异显著(P<0.05)。表3和表4同。

Values with different letter superscripts in the same column indicated significant differences (P<0.05). The same as Table 3 and Table 4.

2.2 体外瘤胃发酵VFA浓度

由表3可知,与CON组相比,Ⅰ组体外瘤胃发酵培养液中乙酸浓度显著降低(P<0.05),其他试验组乙酸浓度无显著差异(P>0.05)。与CON组相比,Ⅰ组~Ⅵ组丙酸、丁酸和TVFA浓度均显著降低(P<0.05),乙酸/丙酸值显著提高(P<0.05)。同时,Ⅰ组丙酸浓度最低,显著低于Ⅴ组(P<0.05);Ⅰ组~Ⅵ组间丁酸、TVFA浓度以及乙酸/丙酸值无显著差异(P>0.05),但Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组乙酸/丙酸值较高。
表3 体外瘤胃发酵VFA浓度

Table 3 In vitro rumen fermentation VFA concentration

项目
Items		 乙酸
Acetate/
(mmol/L)		 丙酸
Propionate/
(mmol/L)		 丁酸
Butyrate/
(mmol/L)		 总挥发性脂肪酸
TVFA/
(mmol/L)		 乙酸/丙酸
Acetate/
propionate
组别Groups
CON 40.61a 26.44a 7.32a 74.37a 1.54c
Ⅰ 37.72b 19.80c 6.41b 63.93b 1.86ab
Ⅱ 39.45ab 20.18bc 6.37b 66.00b 1.95a
Ⅲ 39.94ab 20.40bc 6.06b 66.40b 1.96a
Ⅳ 39.23ab 20.43bc 6.41b 66.40b 1.92ab
Ⅴ 39.87ab 21.16b 6.02b 66.97b 1.94ab
Ⅵ 39.52ab 20.46bc 6.40b 66.38b 1.93ab
均值标准误SEM 0.852 0.446 0.180 1.492 0.025
P值P-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

2.3 体外瘤胃营养物质降解率

由表4可知,与CON组、Ⅴ组和Ⅵ组相比,Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组和Ⅳ组DM降解率显著降低(P<0.05),且以Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组较低,并显著低于Ⅲ组和Ⅳ组(P<0.05)。与CON组、Ⅴ组和Ⅵ组相比,Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组和Ⅳ组CP降解率显著降低(P<0.05),且以Ⅱ组最低,并显著低于Ⅳ组(P<0.05)。与CON组和Ⅳ组相比,其余5组EE降解率显著降低(P<0.05),且以Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组较低,并显著低于Ⅲ组(P<0.05);Ⅲ组次低,并显著低于Ⅴ组和Ⅵ组(P<0.05)。与CON组和Ⅴ组相比,Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组和Ⅳ组NDF降解率显著降低(P<0.05),且以Ⅱ组最低,并显著低于Ⅰ组和Ⅵ组(P<0.05)。与CON组、Ⅴ组和Ⅵ组相比,其余4组ADF降解率显著降低(P<0.05),且以Ⅱ组最低,并显著低于Ⅰ组(P<0.05)。
表4 体外瘤胃营养物质降解率

Table 4 In vitro ruminal nutrient degradation rates %

项目
Items		 干物质
DM		 粗蛋白质
CP		 粗脂肪
EE		 中性洗涤纤维
NDF		 酸性洗涤纤维
ADF
组别Groups
CON 71.73a 77.88a 83.59a 57.47a 50.58a
Ⅰ 62.27c 67.60bc 51.82d 45.80bc 39.89b
Ⅱ 59.24c 62.39c 56.64d 37.43d 30.81c
Ⅲ 66.54b 67.23bc 64.60c 42.49cd 37.72bc
Ⅳ 66.50b 68.35b 88.10a 43.65cd 36.24bc
Ⅴ 73.97a 75.97a 80.30b 56.56a 53.31a
Ⅵ 71.40a 75.70a 77.76b 51.65ab 51.38a
均值标准误SEM 1.465 1.435 1.948 2.030 2.030
P值P-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001

2.4 体外瘤胃发酵MFAEI

表5列出了不同处理组合的体外发酵参数的MFAEI,从高到低依次为CON组、Ⅵ组、Ⅴ组、Ⅲ组、Ⅳ组、Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组。
表5 体外瘤胃发酵MFAEI

Table 5 MFAEI of in vitro rumen fermentation

组别
Groups		 单项组合效应指数SFAEI 多项组合
效应指数
MFAEI
产气量
Gas
production		 菌体蛋白
BCP		 干物质降解率
DM degradation
rate		 总挥发性
脂肪酸
TVFA
CON 0 0 0 0 0
Ⅰ -0.092 -0.127 -0.152 -0.140 -0.511
Ⅱ -0.146 -0.230 -0.211 -0.163 -0.750
Ⅲ -0.098 -0.183 -0.078 -0.158 -0.517
Ⅳ -0.116 -0.179 -0.079 -0.157 -0.531
Ⅴ -0.066 -0.053 0.030 -0.157 -0.246
Ⅵ -0.005 -0.016 -0.005 -0.156 -0.182

3 讨论

瘤胃发酵参数是表征反刍动物瘤胃内环境稳态及机体健康状态的重要直接指标。作为关键性发酵评价参数,瘤胃pH受VFA浓度和饲粮组成等多因素协同调控,其动态变化可精准指示瘤胃微生物代谢活性及终产物生成状态。研究表明,维持5.5~7.5的生理性pH波动区间对保障瘤胃微生物发酵功能至关重要,超出该阈值将显著抑制微生物活性及发酵效率[16]。本研究的各组pH均在正常范围内波动。瘤胃微生物发酵产生的NH3-N作为瘤胃BCP生物合成的前体物质,直接调控微生物增殖活性及代谢功能稳态[17]。BCP作为反刍动物瘤胃氮代谢的核心产物,其合成效率直接决定宿主蛋白质营养供给水平[18]。饲粮组分间的互作效应可引发营养因子的生物协同作用,表现为组合饲粮的营养素利用率显著高于单一原料线性加权预测值,即呈现正向组合效应[19]。MFAEI通过量化微生物代谢网络协同效应及底物互补效应,其数值与瘤胃发酵动力学参数及底物降解效率呈正相关,故可作为评估饲料间代谢互作强度的关键指标[15]。
本研究中,与用优质混合牧草替代部分非粮型秸秆的CON组相比,饲喂玉米秸秆+稻草的Ⅲ组BCP、NH3-N和TVFA浓度显著降低,MFAEI下降,产气量也呈降低趋势;同时,DM、CP、EE、NDF和ADF降解率均显著降低,说明用优质混合牧草替代部分玉米秸秆和稻草后,可促进肉牛的体外瘤胃发酵和营养物质的降解,因此可以提高饲粮的饲料转化效率。刘畅等[4]通过体外研究发现,用苜蓿草和全株玉米青贮替代部分玉米秸秆等低质粗饲料可显著提升驴对饲粮营养物质的降解效果和盲肠发酵功能。张吉鹍等[20]通过体外发酵试验证实,玉米秸秆与苜蓿以40%~60%比例组合时,苜蓿中的非结构性碳水化合物通过能量-氮源协同作用激活瘤胃微生物,显著提升秸秆纤维降解效率及MFAEI。其原因可能与瘤胃菌群结构变化有关,马小俊[21]以湖羊为研究对象发现,不同粗饲料种类的营养价值高低与其对湖羊瘤胃菌群结构的影响有关。
本研究也发现,与玉米秸秆+稻草组(Ⅲ组)相比,添加0.100%黑沙蒿粗多糖的Ⅵ组BCP浓度显著提高,产气量也有提高的趋势;添加0.075%黑沙蒿粗多糖的Ⅴ组BCP浓度也有升高的趋势;同时,Ⅴ组和Ⅵ组MFAEI升高,DM、CP、EE、NDF和ADF降解率显著提高。这些结果说明添加黑沙蒿粗多糖对肉牛的体外瘤胃发酵和营养物质降解的促进作用呈剂量依赖性,其添加量在0.075%和0.100%时均呈积极的影响效果。刘锦涛等[22]通过奶牛体外瘤胃发酵试验发现,饲粮添加黑沙蒿水提物能够显著提高TVFA、乙酸和丙酸浓度,并抑制原虫的繁殖,促进瘤胃发酵。有研究指出,饲粮添加0.075%青蒿提取物能够促进奶牛瘤胃发酵,其原因可能与其改变了瘤胃菌群结构、增加了瘤胃菌群中普雷沃氏菌属1和解琥珀酸菌属的相对丰度有关[23]。因此推测,本研究得出的添加黑沙蒿粗多糖能够促进肉牛的体外瘤胃发酵和营养物质降解,可能与其影响了瘤胃菌群结构有关。然而,黑沙蒿粗多糖对瘤胃微生物区系的影响仍需要进一步探讨。本课题组前期研究得出,黑沙蒿粗多糖对绒山羊瘤胃发酵和营养物质表观消化率的促进作用是提高其日增重、降低料重比和发挥促生长作用的主要原因之一[6]。
此外,本研究也得出,Ⅰ组(玉米秸秆组)的营养价值优于Ⅱ组(稻草组),其NDF和ADF降解率以及NH3-N和BCP浓度不同程度高于Ⅱ组,MFAEI也升高。同时,研究也得出,MFAEI由高到低次为Ⅲ组(玉米秸秆+稻草组)、Ⅰ组和Ⅱ组,说明玉米秸秆组的体外瘤胃发酵优于稻草组,且二者混合后呈一定的组合效应。然而,稻草组、玉米秸秆组和玉米秸秆+稻草组在体外瘤胃发酵、营养物质降解方面均低于用优质混合牧草替代50%玉米秸秆和稻草的CON组,以及添加黑沙蒿粗多糖的Ⅴ组和Ⅵ组,这些结果进一步说明玉米秸秆和稻草等低质粗饲料单一饲喂或二者混合饲喂,尽管二者存在一定的组合效应,但均表现出较低的瘤胃发酵和营养物质降解效果。因此,提高肉牛对以玉米秸秆和稻草作为主要粗饲料的饲粮的瘤胃发酵和营养物质降解是非常必要的。本研究用优质混合牧草替代部分玉米秸秆和稻草后,或在玉米秸秆+稻草组中添加黑沙蒿粗多糖后,均可促进肉牛对以玉米秸秆和稻草作为主要粗饲料的饲粮瘤胃发酵和营养物质降解,提高饲料转化效率,这些研究结果为提高肉牛对非粮型粗饲料资源的利用效率提供了可行方案。目前在肉牛养殖业中,为了降低养殖成本,饲粮中的粗饲料多数用单一玉米秸秆或单一稻草或二者的简单混合,但从目前的研究结果看,由这些粗饲料构成的饲粮转化效率是比较低的,而通过添加黑沙蒿粗多糖或者用优质混合牧草替代部分低质粗饲料是提高粗饲料营养价值和饲料转化效率的有效途径。

4 结论

饲粮添加0.075%和0.100%黑沙蒿粗多糖或用苜蓿草+燕麦草+羊草(4∶3∶3)组成的优质混合牧草替代50%的玉米秸秆+稻草(1∶1),能够正向调控肉牛的体外瘤胃发酵和营养物质降解,提高纤维物质的利用效率。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
赵靖丹, 冯志国, 包菡, 等. 内蒙古主要农作物秸秆饲料化节粮能力分析[J]. 粮油与饲料科技, 2024(7):122-125.

ZHAO J D, FENG Z G, BAO H, et al. Analysis of grain-saving potential through forage utilization of major crop straws in Inner Mongolia[J]. Grain Oil And Feed Technology, 2024(7):122-125. (in Chinese)

[2]
曹静, 曹华. 纤维素酶青贮玉米秸秆对肉牛生长性能、养分表观消化率及屠宰性能的影响[J]. 中国饲料, 2025(4):137-140.

CAO J, CAO H. Effects of adding cellulase to corn stover silage on growth performance,apparent nutrient digestibility,and slaughter performance in beef cattle[J]. China Feed, 2025(4):137-140. (in Chinese)

[3]
董姝慧, 杜霞, 闫素梅, 等. 利用体外瘤胃发酵参数评价绒山羊不同粗饲料的组合效应[J]. 饲料研究, 2023, 46(12):1-5.

DONG S H, DU X, YAN S M, et al. Evaluation on roughage combination effect of cashmere goats by parameters of in vitro rumen fermentation[J]. Feed Research, 2023, 46(12):1-5. (in Chinese)

[4]
刘畅, 赵艳丽, 郭晓宇, 等. 利用体外胃蛋白酶-胰酶-盲肠液法评价驴不同粗饲料组合的营养物质降解率与组合效应[J]. 动物营养学报, 2024, 36(5):3183-3191.

DOI

LIU C, ZHAO Y L, GUO X Y, et al. Evaluation on nutrient degradation rate and combination effects of different roughage combinations of donkey by in vitro pepsin-trypsin-cecal fluid method[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024, 36(5):3183-3191. (in Chinese)

[5]
姜联广, 赵艳丽, 闫晶, 等. 不同刈割时期黑沙蒿水提物体外抗氧化活性的研究[J]. 饲料研究, 2025, 48(3):85-89.

JIANG L G, ZHAO Y L, YAN J, et al. Study on in vitro antioxidant activity of water extracts from Artemisia ordosica at different cutting stages[J]. Feed Research, 2025, 48(3):85-89. (in Chinese)

[6]
LI S Y, GUO Y M, GUO X Y, et al. Effects of Artemisia ordosica crude polysaccharide on antioxidant and immunity response,nutrient digestibility,rumen fermentation,and microbiota in cashmere goats[J]. Animals, 2023, 13(22):3575.

DOI

[7]
李书仪, 马国强, 郭晓宇, 等. 黑沙蒿多糖对阿尔巴斯白绒山羊体外瘤胃发酵功能的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023, 35(5):3164-3173.

DOI

LI S Y, MA G Q, GUO X Y, et al. Effects of Artemisia ordosica polysaccharide on in vitro rumen fermentation function of albas white cashmere goats[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2023, 35(5):3164-3173. (in Chinese)

[8]
姚喜喜, 康泽西, 王伟, 等. 不同精粗比饲粮对西门塔尔肉牛生长性能、屠宰性能和肉品质的影响[J]. 饲料工业, 2025, 46(12):83-88.

YAO X X, KANG Z X, WANG W, et al. Effects of different roughage-concentrate ratios in diets on growth performance,carcass traits and meat quality of Simmental beef cattle[J]. Feed Industry, 2025, 46(12):83-88. (in Chinese)

[9]
靳玲品. 反刍动物常用粗饲料营养价值评定方法的比较研究[D]. 硕士学位论文. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2013.

JIN L P. Comparation of nutritionnal value evaluation method in common roughage for ruminants[D]. Master’s Thesis. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2013. (in Chinese)

[10]
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.

DOI

[11]
MENKE K H, RAAB L, SALEWSKI A, et al. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feeding stuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 1979, 93(1):217-222.

DOI

[12]
冯宗慈, 高民. 通过比色测定瘤胃液氨氮含量方法的改进[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2010, 31(6/7):37.

FENG Z C, GAO M. Modification of the method for determining ammonia nitrogen content in rumen fluid by colorimetry[J]. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2010, 31(6/7):37. (in Chinese)

[13]
张梦洁, 袁甜, 史雪敏, 等. 气相色谱法检测粪便中短链脂肪酸的前处理方法[J]. 包头医学院学报, 2017, 33(11):121-123.

ZHANG M J, YUAN T, SHI X M, et al. Study of the pretreatment method of the detection of SCFA in feces by gas chromatography[J]. Journal of Baotou Medical College, 2017, 33(11):121-123. (in Chinese)

[14]
CEDROLA F, ROSSI M, DIAS R J P, et al. Methods for taxonomic studies of rumen ciliates (Alveolata:Ciliophora):a brief review[J]. Zoological Science, 2015, 32(1):8-15.

DOI

[15]
张清月. 诺丽果多糖对绒山羊瘤胃发酵、营养物质消化、免疫及抗氧化功能的影响[D]. 硕士学位论文. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2019.

ZHANG Q Y. Effects of noni fruit polysaccharide on rumen fermentation,nutrient digestion,immunity and antioxidation in cashmere goats[D]. Master’s Thesis. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2019. (in Chinese)

[16]
郑宇慧, 都文, 黄文明, 等. 全株甘蔗的奶牛瘤胃降解特性及其替代奶牛饲粮苜蓿、燕麦草及精料的应用研究[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2020, 51(11):2743-2756.

DOI

ZHENG Y H, DU W, HUANG W M, et al. The rumen degradation characteristics of whole sugarcane for dairy cows and its application in substituting alfalfa,oat hay and concentrate in dairy cows’ diets[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2020, 51(11):2743-2756. (in Chinese)

DOI

[17]
蒋辰宇. 甘草酸单铵盐对绵羊瘤胃甲烷产生的关键菌群、相关代谢产物及血液生化指标的影响[D]. 硕士学位论文. 阿拉尔: 塔里木大学, 2021.

JIANG C Y. The effect of glycyrrhizic acid monoammonium salt on the key bacteria,related metabolites and blood physiological indexes of methane production in sheep[D]. Master’s Thesis. Alar: Tarim University, 2021. (in Chinese)

[18]
聂春桃, 尚相龙, 杨梓曼, 等. 不同水平葛根素对肉牛瘤胃体外发酵指标及养分降解率的影响[J]. 江西农业大学学报, 2021, 43(6):1381-1387.

NIE C T, SHANG X L, YANG Z M, et al. Effects of puerarian at different levels on rumen fermentation indices and nutrient degradability of beef cattle in vitro[J]. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, 2021, 43(6):1381-1387. (in Chinese)

[19]
张子仪. 中国饲料学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.

ZHANG Z Y. Feed science in China[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000. (in Chinese)

[20]
张吉鹍, 刘建新. 玉米秸秆与苜蓿之间组合效应的综合评定研究[J]. 饲料博览, 2007(5):5-10.

ZHANG J K, LIU J X. Comprehensive evaluation of associative effects of supplementing corn straws with alfalfa hay[J]. Feed Review, 2007(5):5-10. (in Chinese)

[21]
马小俊. 不同粗饲料营养价值评定及其对滩羊瘤胃菌群结构的影响[D]. 硕士学位论文. 银川: 宁夏大学, 2024.

MA X J. To evaluate the nutritional value of different roughages and their effects on rumen microflora structure of Tan sheep[D]. Master’s Thesis. Yinchuan: Ningxia University, 2024. (in Chinese)

[22]
刘锦涛, 姜联广, 闫俊峰, 等. 黑沙蒿水提物对奶牛体外瘤胃发酵功能的影响[J]. 饲料研究, 2023, 46(13):7-11.

LIU J T, JIANG L G, YAN J F, et al. Effect of Artemisia annua water extract on rumen fermentation function of dairy cows in vitro[J]. Feed Research, 2023, 46(13):7-11. (in Chinese)

[23]
余诗强, 熊安然, 潘予琮, 等. 青蒿提取物对泌乳奶牛瘤胃发酵参数及微生物区系的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(11):6431-6444.

DOI

YU S Q, XIONG A R, PAN Y C, et al. Effects of Artemisia annua L. extracts on rumen fermentation parameters and microflora of lactating dairy cows[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(11):6431-6444. (in Chinese)

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉

京ICP备17050989号-2
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 010－62817823　E-mail: cjan@vip.163.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co., Ltd.