Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-gwv8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-01T17:34:27.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficacy of exogenous xylanases for improving in vitro fermentation of forages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2014

Z. X. HE ,
L. Y. YANG ,
W. Z. YANG ,
K. A. BEAUCHEMIN ,
S. X. TANG ,
J. Y. HUANG ,
C. S. ZHOU ,
X. F. HAN ,
M. WANG  and
J. H. KANG
...Show all authors
Z. X. HE
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1, Canada
L. Y. YANG
Affiliation:
College of Animal Science and Technology, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, China
W. Z. YANG
Affiliation:
Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1, Canada
K. A. BEAUCHEMIN
Affiliation:
Lethbridge Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Lethbridge, Alberta T1J 4B1, Canada
S. X. TANG
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China
J. Y. HUANG
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China Graduate University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
C. S. ZHOU
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China
X. F. HAN
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China
M. WANG
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China
J. H. KANG
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China
N. E. ODONGO
Affiliation:
Animal Production and Health Section, Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria
Z. L. TAN*
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for Agro-Ecological Processes in Subtropical Region, Hunan Research Center of Livestock and Poultry Sciences, South-Central Experimental Station of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science in Ministry of Agriculture, Institute of Subtropical Agriculture, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha, Hunan 410125, China
*
* To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: zltan@isa.ac.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Batch cultures of mixed rumen micro-organisms were used to evaluate varying enzyme products with high xylanase activity (EPX), four of which were recombinant single xylanase activity developmental enzyme products (EPX1–EPX4, products of xylanase genes derived from Trichoderma harzianum, Trichoderma reesei, Orpinomyces and Aspergillus oryzae, respectively), for their potential to improve in vitro ruminal fermentation of three forages [maize (Zea mays) stover (MS), rice (Oryza sativa) straw (RS) and Guimu No. 1 grass (Pennisetum americanum×Pennisetum purpureum, GM)]. The enzyme product EPX5, derived from Trichoderma longibrachiatum, was used as a positive control that could improve in vitro fermentation of forages. Enzymes were supplied at dose rates of 0 (control), 20 (low), 50 (medium) and 80 (high) enzymic units of xylanase/g of dry matter (DM). There were no interactions between EPX and dose for the fermentation characteristics evaluated. Increasing EPX dose linearly increased gas production (GP) kinetic characters [i.e. asymptotic GP (VF), half time when GP is half of the theoretical maximum GP (t0·5), and initial fractional rate of degradation (FRD0)] and methane (CH4) production from RS and GM at 24 h, and increased degradability of DM at 24 h for MS and RS. A linear increase in degradability of neutral detergent fibre (NDF) of the three forages at 24 h was observed with increasing dose of EPX, but at 48 h only NDF degradability of RS was increased. There were differences in the effects of EPX on degradability of DM and NDF from RS at 24 h, with EPX4 having the highest and EPX1 having the lowest. In addition, increasing EPX dose linearly increased acetate proportion at 24 h and total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) at 48 h in MS. Increasing EPX dose linearly increased TVFA at 24 h, and ammonia-nitrogen (NH3-N) concentration at 48 h in RS. For GM, linear or quadratic effects of dose on acetate and butyrate concentration were observed at 24 and 48 h. The present study indicates that applying EPX to low-quality forages has the potential to improve rumen degradability and utilization. Furthermore, EPX from different sources differed in their effects when applied at the same dose rate, with the responses being forage-specific. For RS, the EPX derived from A. oryzae showed the greatest positive effects on forage degradation; whereas for MS and GM, the source of micro-organism where EPX gene was derived did not affect the degradation, with little difference among the EPX evaluated.

Information

Type
Animal Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 153 , Issue 3 , April 2015 , pp. 538 - 553
Check for updates
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

AOAC (1999). Official Methods of Analysis, 16th edn. Washington, DC: Association of Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
Arriola, K. G., Kim, S. C., Staples, C. R. & Adesogan, A. T. (2011). Effect of fibrolytic enzyme application to low-and high-concentrate diets on the performance of lactating dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 832–841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beauchemin, K. A., Rode, L. M., Maekawa, M., Morgavi, D. P. & Kampen, R. (2000). Evaluation of a nonstarch polysaccharidase feed enzyme in dairy cow diets. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 543–553.Google Scholar
Beauchemin, K. A., Colombatto, D., Morgavi, D. P. & Yang, W. Z. (2003). Use of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes to improve feed utilization by ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 81(Suppl. 2), E37–E47.Google Scholar
Colombatto, D. & Beauchemin, K. A. (2003). A proposed methodology to standardize the determination of enzymic activities present in enzyme additives used in ruminant diets. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 83, 559–568.Google Scholar
Colombatto, D., Morgavi, D. P., Furtado, A. F. & Beauchemin, K. A. (2003 a). Screening of exogenous enzymes for ruminant diets: relationship between biochemical characteristics and in vitro ruminal degradation. Journal of Animal Science 81, 2628–2638.Google Scholar
Colombatto, D., Mould, F. L., Bhat, M. K., Morgavi, D. P., Beauchemin, K. A. & Owen, E. (2003 b). Influence of fibrolytic enzymes on the hydrolysis and fermentation of pure cellulose and xylan by mixed ruminal microorganisms in vitro . Journal of Animal Science 81, 1040–1050.Google Scholar
Considine, P. J. & Coughlan, M. P. (1989). Production of carbohydrate-hydrolyzing enzyme blends by solid-state fermentation. In Enzyme Systems for Lignocellulose Degradation (Ed. Coughlan, M. P.), pp. 273–281. New York, NY: Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar
Dado, R. G. & Allen, M. S. (1995). Intake limitations, feeding behavior, and rumen function of cows challenged with rumen fill from dietary fiber or inert bulk. Journal of Dairy Science 78, 118–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dong, Y., Bae, H. D., McAllister, T. A., Mathison, G. W. & Cheng, K. J. (1999). Effects of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes, α-bromoethanesulfonate and monensin on fermentation in a rumen simulation (RUSITEC) system. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 79, 491–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elghandour, M. M. Y., Salem, A. Z. M., Gonzalez-Ronquillo, M., Bórquez, J. L., Gado, H. M., Odongo, N. E. & Peñuelas, C. G. (2013). Effects of exogenous enzymes on in vitro gas production kinetics and ruminal fermentation of four fibrous feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 179, 46–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eun, J. S. & Beauchemin, K. A. (2007 a). Enhancing in vitro degradation of alfalfa hay and corn silage using feed enzymes. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2839–2851.Google Scholar
Eun, J. S. & Beauchemin, K. A. (2007 b). Assessment of the efficacy of varying experimental exogenous fibrolytic enzymes using in vitro fermentation characteristics. Animal Feed Science and Technology 132, 298–315.Google Scholar
Eun, J. S. & Beauchemin, K. A. (2008). Assessment of the potential of feed enzyme additives to enhance utilization of corn silage fibre by ruminants. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 88, 97–106.Google Scholar
Eun, J. S., Beauchemin, K. A., Hong, S. H. & Bauer, M. W. (2006). Exogenous enzymes added to untreated or ammoniated rice straw: effects on in vitro fermentation characteristics and degradability. Animal Feed Science and Technology 131, 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eun, J. S., Beauchemin, K. A. & Schulze, H. (2007). Use of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes to enhance in vitro fermentation of alfalfa hay and corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 1440–1451.Google Scholar
Gashe, B. A. (1992). Cellulase production and activity by Trichoderma sp. A-001 . Journal of Applied Bacteriology 73, 79–82.Google Scholar
Giraldo, L. A., Tejido, M. L., Ranilla, M. J. & Carro, M. D. (2007). Effects of exogenous cellulase supplementation on microbial growth and ruminal fermentation of a high-forage diet in Rusitec fermenters. Journal of Animal Science 85, 1962–1970.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giraldo, L. A., Tejido, M. L., Ranilla, M. J. & Carro, M. D. (2008). Effects of exogenous fibrolytic enzymes on in vitro ruminal fermentation of substrates with different forage: concentrate ratios. Animal Feed Science and Technology 141, 306–325.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage Fiber Analysis (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications). Agriculture Handbook 379. Washington, DC: ARS-USDA.Google Scholar
Hristov, A. N., Ahvenjarvi, S., McAllister, T. A. & Huhtanen, P. (2003). Composition and digestive tract retention time of ruminal particles with functional specific gravity greater or less than 1·02. Journal of Animal Science 81, 2639–2648.Google Scholar
Kung, L. Jr, Cohen, M. A., Rode, L. M. & Treacher, R. J. (2002). The effect of fibrolytic enzymes sprayed onto forages and fed in a total mixed ratio to lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 85, 2396–2402.Google Scholar
McAllister, T. A., Hristov, A. N., Beauchemin, K. A., Rode, L. M. & Cheng, K. J. (2001). Enzymes in ruminant diets. In Enzymes in Farm Animal Nutrition (Eds Bedford, M. R. & Partridge, G. G.), pp. 273–298. Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgavi, D. P., Beauchemin, K. A., Nsereko, V. L., Rode, L. M., McAllister, T. A., Iwaasa, A. D., Wang, Y. & Yang, W. Z. (2001). Resistance of feed enzymes to proteolytic inactivation by rumen microorganisms and gastrointestinal proteases. Journal of Animal Science 79, 1621–1630.Google Scholar
Morgavi, D. P., Beauchemin, K. A., Nsereko, V. L., Rode, L. M., McAllister, T. A. & Wang, Y. (2004). Trichoderma enzymes promote Fibrobacter succinogenes S85 adhesion to, and degradation of, complex substrates but not pure cellulose. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 84, 1083–1090.Google Scholar
Mota, M., Rodríguez, R., Solanas, E. & Fondevila, M. (2005). Evaluation of four tropical browse legumes as nitrogen sources: comparison of in vitro gas production with other methods to determine N degradability. Animal Feed Science and Technology 123, 341–350.Google Scholar
Newbold, C. J., Brock, R. & Wallace, R. J. (1992 a). The effect of Aspergillus oryzae fermentation extract on the growth of fungi and ciliate protozoa in the rumen. Letters in Applied Microbiology 15, 109–112.Google Scholar
Newbold, C. J., Frumholtz, P. P. & Wallace, R. J. (1992 b). Influence of Aspergillus oryzae fermentation extract on rumen fermentation and blood constituents in sheep given diets of grass hay and barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 119, 423–427.Google Scholar
Nsereko, V. L., Morgavi, D. P., Rode, L. M., Beauchemin, K. A. & McAllister, T. A. (2000). Effects of fungal enzyme preparations on hydrolysis and subsequent degradation of alfalfa hay fiber by mixed rumen microorganisms in vitro . Animal Feed Science and Technology 88, 153–170.Google Scholar
Nsereko, V. L., Beauchemin, K. A., Morgavi, D. P., Rode, L. M., Furtado, A. F., McAllister, T. A., Iwaasa, A. D., Yang, W. Z. & Wang, Y. (2002). Effect of a fibrolytic enzyme preparation from Trichoderma longibrachiatum on the rumen microbial population of dairy cows. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 48, 14–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oba, M. & Allen, M. S. (1999). Evaluation of the importance of the digestibility of neutral detergent fiber from forage: effects on dry matter intake and milk yield of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Dcience 82, 589–596.Google Scholar
Oba, M. & Allen, M. S. (2000). Effects of brown midrib 3 mutation in corn silage on productivity of dairy cows fed two concentrations of dietary neutral detergent fiber: 3. Digestibility and microbial efficiency. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 1350–1358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS (2002). System for Microsoft Windows, Release 9.1. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Institute.Google Scholar
Sherrod, P. H. (2005). Nonlinear Regression Analysis Program. Nashville, TN.Google Scholar
Stewart, C. S., Flint, H. J. & Bryant, M. P. (1997). The rumen bacteria. In The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem (Eds Hobson, P. N. & Stewart, C. S.), pp. 10–72. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Sutton, J. D., Phipps, R. H., Beever, D. E., Humphries, D. J., Hartnell, G. F., Vicini, J. L. & Hard, D. L. (2003). Effect of method of application of a fibrolytic enzyme product on digestive processes and milk production in Holstein-Friesian cows. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 546–556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tang, S. X., Tayo, G. O., Tan, Z. L., Sun, Z. H., Shen, L. X., Zhou, C. S., Xiao, W. J., Ren, G. P., Han, X. F. & Shen, S. B. (2008). Effects of yeast culture and fibrolytic enzyme supplementation on in vitro fermentation characteristics of low-quality cereal straws. Journal of Animal Science 86, 1164–1172.Google Scholar
Tenkanen, M., Schuseil, J., Puls, J. & Poutanen, K. (1991). Production, purification and characterization of an esterase liberating phenolic acids from lignocellulosics. Journal of Biotechnology 18, 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udén, P., Rounsaville, T. R., Wiggans, G. R. & Van Soest, P. J. (1982). The measurement of liquid and solid digesta retention in ruminants, equines and rabbits given timothy (Phleum pratense) hay. British Journal of Nutrition 48, 329–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, J. M. (2009). The bicinchoninic acid (BCA) assay for protein quantitation. In The Protein Protocols Handbook, 3th edn (Ed. Walker, J. M.), pp. 11–15. New York: Humana Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, M., Tang, S. X. & Tan, Z. L. (2011). Modeling in vitro gas production kinetics: derivation of logistic-exponential (LE) equations and comparison of models. Animal Feed Science and Technology 165, 137–150.Google Scholar
Wang, M., Sun, X. Z., Tang, S. X., Tan, Z. L. & Pacheco, D. (2013). Deriving fractional rate of degradation of logistic-exponential (LE) model to evaluate early in vitro fermentation. Animal 7, 920–929.Google Scholar
Weatherburn, M. W. (1967). Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia. Analytical Chemistry 39, 971–974.Google Scholar
Webb, E. C. (1992). Enzyme Nomenclature 1992: Recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology on the Nomenclature and Classification of Enzymes. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Yang, W. Z., Beauchemin, K. A. & Rode, L. M. (2000). A comparison of methods of adding fibrolytic enzymes to lactating cow diets. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 2512–2520.Google Scholar