Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T20:38:51.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of casein and urea as nitrogen sources on in vitro equine caecal fermentation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 December 2011

A. S. Santos ,
L. M. M. Ferreira ,
W. Martin-Rosset ,
M. Cotovio ,
F. Silva ,
R. N. Bennett ,
J. W. Cone ,
R. J. B. Bessa  and
M. A. M. Rodrigues
A. S. Santos*
Affiliation:
Animal Production Group, Animal and Veterinary Research Centre, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, PO Box 1013, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
L. M. M. Ferreira
Affiliation:
Animal Production Group, Animal and Veterinary Research Centre, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, PO Box 1013, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
W. Martin-Rosset
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Center of Research of Clermont-Ferrand, Theix, 63122 Saint-Gene's-Champanelle, France
M. Cotovio
Affiliation:
Animal Production Group, Animal and Veterinary Research Centre, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, PO Box 1013, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
F. Silva
Affiliation:
Animal Production Group, Animal and Veterinary Research Centre, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, PO Box 1013, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
R. N. Bennett
Affiliation:
Centre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, PO Box 1013, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
J. W. Cone
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Department of Animal Science, Wageningen University, Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
R. J. B. Bessa
Affiliation:
Interdisciplinary Centre of Research in Animal Health (CIISA), Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Technical University of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal
M. A. M. Rodrigues
Affiliation:
Animal Production Group, Animal and Veterinary Research Centre, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro, PO Box 1013, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
*
†E-mail: assantos@utad.pt
Get access

Abstract

To access the fermentative response of equine caecal microbial population to nitrogen availability, an in vitro study was conducted using caecal contents provided with adequate energy sources and nitrogen as limiting nutrient. Two nitrogen (N) sources were provided, protein (casein) and non-protein (urea). Caecal fluid, taken from three cannulated horses receiving a hay–concentrate diet, was mixed with a N-free buffer–mineral solution. The influence of four N levels (3.7, 6.3, 12.5 or 25 mg of N in casein or urea) was studied using the gas production technique. Total volatile fatty acids (VFA), NH3-N and gas production were measured after a 24-h incubation period. Microbial biomass was estimated using adenine and guanine bases as internal markers, and ATP production was estimated stoichiometrically. Microbial growth efficiency (YATP) and gas efficiency (Egas) were estimated. Fermentation with casein as the sole N source was generally characterized by lower total VFA, NH3-N, total gas production and higher acetate : propionate (A : P) ratio and YATP than with urea. Results herein presented indicate that, under these in vitro conditions, caecal microbial population does in fact use urea N, but less efficiently than casein in terms of microbial growth.

Keywords

caecal fermentationcaseinureain vitroequine hindgut
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Issue 7 , 28 May 2012 , pp. 1096 - 1102
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2012

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

Argyle, JL, Baldwin, RL 1989. Effects of amino acids and peptides on rumen microbial growth yields. Journal of Dairy Science 72, 2017–2027.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belasco, IJ 1954. Comparison of urea and protein meals as nitrogen sources for rumen micro-organisms: urea utilization and cellulose digestion. Journal of Animal Science 13, 739–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blümmel, M, Steingass, H, Becker, K 1997. The relationship between in vitro gas production, in vitro microbial biomass yield and N15 incorporation and its implications for the prediction of voluntary feed intake of roughages. British Journal of Nutrition 77, 911–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broderick, GA, Wallace, RJ 1988. Effects of dietary nitrogen source on concentrations of ammonia, free amino acids and fluroescamine-reactive peptides in the sheep rumen. Journal of Animal Science 66, 2233–2238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, KF, Wallace, RJ 1979. The mechanism of passage of endogenous urea through the rumen wall and the role of ureolytic epithelial bacterial in the urea flux. British Journal of Nutrition 42, 553–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cone, JW, Van Gelder, AH, Visscher, GJW, Oudshoom, L 1996. Influence of rumen fluid and substrate concentration on fermentation kinetics measured with a fully automated time related gas production apparatus. Animal Feed Science and Technology 61, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cone, JW, Jongbloed, AW, Van Gelder, AH, De Lange, L 2005. Estimation of protein fermentation in the large intestine of pigs with a gas production technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 123–124, 463–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cone, JW, Rodrigues, MAM, Guedes, CM, Blok, MC 2009. Comparison of protein fermentation characteristics in rumen fluid determined with the gas production technique and the nylon bag technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 153, 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, EJ 1950. Microdiffusion analysis and volumetric error, 2nd edition. Crosby Lockwood and Son, London, UK.Google Scholar
Czerkawski, JW 1976. The use of pivalic acid as a reference substance in measurements of production of VFA by rumen microorganisms in vitro. British Journal of Nutrition 36, 311–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Demeyer, DI 1991. Quantitative aspects of microbial metabolism in the rumen and hindgut. In Rumen microbial metabolism and ruminant digestion (ed. JP Jouany), pp. 217–237. INRA Publications, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Groot, JCJ, Williams, BA, Oostdam, AJ, Boer, H, Tamminga, S 1998. The use of cumulative gas and volatile fatty acid production to predict in vitro fermentation kinetics of Italian ryegrass leaf cell walls and contents at various time intervals. British Journal of Nutrition 79, 519–525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, DG, McAllan, AB 1980. Factors affecting microbial growth yields in the reticulorumen. In Digestive physiology and metabolism in ruminants (ed. Y Ruckebusch and P Thivend), pp. 205–226. AVI Publishing Co., Inc., Westport, CT, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hespell, RB, Bryant, MP 1979. Efficiency of rumen microbial growth: influence of some theoretical and experimental factors on YATP. Journal of Animal Science 46, 1640–1659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintz, HF, Schryver, HF 1972. Nitrogen utilization in ponies. Journal of Animal Science 34, 592–595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Houpt, TR, Houpt, KA 1971. Nitrogen conservation by ponies fed a low-protein ration. American Journal of Veterinary Research 32, 579–588.Google ScholarPubMed
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) 1990. Alimentation des chevaux (ed. W Martin-Rosset), 232pp. INRA Publications, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Jansen, WL, Cone, JW, Geelen, SNJ, Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan, MM, Van Gelder, AH, Oude Elferink, SJWH, Beynen, AC 2007. High fat intake by ponies reduces both apparent digestibility of dietary cellulose and cellulose fermentation by faeces and isolated caecal and colonic contents. Animal Feed Science and Technology 133, 298–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julliand, V, Tisserand, JL 1992. Alimentation du poney: importante de la qualité de l'azote sur la flore microbienne caecale. Compte rendu de la 18ème Journée de la Recherche Equine, Haras Nationaux ed., 4 mars 1992, Paris, pp. 2–11.Google Scholar
Kang-Meznarich, JH, Broderick, GA 1981. Effects of incremental urea supplementation on ruminal ammonia concentration and bacterial protein formation. Journal of Animal Science 51, 422–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowman, RS, Theodorou, MK, Longland, AC, Cuddeford, D 1996. A comparison of equine faeces or caecal digesta as sources of inoculum for in vitro fermentation studies using the pressure transducer technique. Animal Science 62, 683A.Google Scholar
Maczulak, AE, Dawson, KA, Baker, JP 1985. Nitrogen utilization in bacterial isolates from the equine cecum. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 50, 1439–1443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maeng, WJ, Van Nevel, CJ, Baldwin, RL, Morris, JG 1976. Rumen microbial growth rates and yields: effect of amino acids and protein. Journal of Dairy Science 59, 68–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin-Rosset, W, Tisserand, JL 2004. Evaluation and expression of protein allowances and protein value of feeds in the MADC system for the performance horse. In Nutrition of the performance horse: which system in Europe for evaluating the nutritional requirements? (ed. V Julliand and W Martin-Rosset), EAAP no. 111, pp. 103–140. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Menke, KH, Raab, L, Salewski, A, Steingass, H, Fritz, D, Schneider, W 1979. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. Journal of Agriculture Science 93, 217–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, TR, Leng, RA 1987. Digestive physiology of ruminants. In Matching ruminant production systems with available resources in the tropics and subtropics (ed. Penambul Books), pp. 21–48. Penambul Books Ltd, Armidale, NSW, Australia.Google Scholar
Prior, RL, Hintz, HF, Lowe, JE, Visek, WJ 1974. Urea recycling and metabolism of ponies. Journal of Animal Science 38, 565–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reynal, SM, Broderick, GA 2009. Technical note: a new high-performance liquid chromatography purine assay for quantifying microbial flow. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 1177–1181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS Institute 1999. SAS/STAT user's guide, version 8. SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Slade, LM, Robinson, DW, Casey, KE 1970. Nitrogen metabolism in nonruminant herbivores. I. The influence of nonprotein nitrogen and protein quality on the nitrogen retention of adult mares. Journal of Animal Science 30, 753–760.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steingass, H 1983. Bestimmung des energetischen Futterwertes von wirtschaftseigenen Futtermitteln aus der Gasbildung bei der Pansenfermentation in vitro. PhD thesis, University of Hohenheim, Germany.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant, 2nd edition. Comstock, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinn, RA, Owens, FN 1986. A rapid procedure for purine measurement and its use for estimating net ruminal protein synthesis. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 66, 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar