Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T09:15:36.722Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inocula differences affect in vitro gas production kinetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

D. R. Mertens ,
P. J. Weimer  and
G. M. Waghorn
D. R. Mertens
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, US Dairy Forage Research Center, Madison, WI 53706, USA
P. J. Weimer
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, US Dairy Forage Research Center, Madison, WI 53706, USA
G. M. Waghorn
Affiliation:
AgResearch Grasslands, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Get access

Extract

The kinetics of gas production during ruminal fermentation may provide valuable information about foods that can be used to formulate diets and model animal responses. However, measurement of digestion kinetics is affected by methodology and techniques must be established that provide accurate and precise estimates of kinetic parameters. Because gas production measurements provide the opportunity to estimate the digestion kinetics of both soluble and insoluble matter in foods, it would be desirable to use this technique on a wide variety of forages, grains, supplements, and by-product foods. Applying an in vitro technique to such a wide variety of substrates raises questions about the type of inoculum that should be used. The objective of our study was to evaluate the effects of donor animal and its diet on the measurement of gas production kinetics using both forage and concentrate substrates.

Type
In vitro techniques for measuring rumen microbial activity
Information
BSAP Occasional Publication , Volume 22: In vitro techniques for measuring nutrient supply to ruminants , 1998 , pp. 95 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fiber analysis. USDA agricultural handbook no. 379, pp. 1–20. ARS-USDA, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Grant, R. J. and Mertens, D. R. 1992. Development of buffer systems for pH control and evaluation of pH effects on fibre digestion in vitro . Journal of Dairy Science 75: 1581–1587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mertens, D. R. and Weimer, P. J. 1998. Method for measuring gas production. In In vitro techniques for measuring nutrient supply to ruminants (ed. Deaville, E. R., Owen, E., Adesogan, A. T., Rymer, C., Huntington, J. A. and Lawrence, T. L. J.), pp. 209–211. British Society of Animal Science occasional publication no. 22.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1989. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, sixth revised edition. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Pell, A. N. and P., Schofield 1993. Computerised monitoring of gas production to measure forage digestion in vitro . Journal of Dairy Science 76:1063–1073.Google Scholar
Undersander, D., Mertens, D. R. and Thiex, N. 1993. Forage analyses procedures, pp. 95–103. National Forage Testing Assoc, Omaha, NE.Google Scholar