Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-06-04T13:46:52.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In vitro rumen fungi growth in a medium containing sodium hydroxide treated wheat straw using competitive PCR assay

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2017

M H Sakhavati ,
T Mohammadabadi ,
M Danesh Mesgaran ,
M R Nassiry  and
A Fani Maleki
M H Sakhavati*
Affiliation:
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Islamic Republic of Iran
T Mohammadabadi
Affiliation:
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Islamic Republic of Iran
M Danesh Mesgaran
Affiliation:
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Islamic Republic of Iran
M R Nassiry
Affiliation:
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Islamic Republic of Iran
A Fani Maleki
Affiliation:
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Islamic Republic of Iran
*
Email: hadisekhavati@gmail.com
Get access

Extract

Rumen fungi produce a wide range of polysaccharide degrading enzymes during growth on cell walls and can degrade 0.25 -0.65 of plant tissue dry weight in pure cultures (Orpin, 1983). It has been proposed that sodium hydroxide may break-down hemicellulose and cellulose and expose them to microbial attachment and improve digestibility (Goto et al., 1993). The aim of the present study was to determine in vitro rumen fungal growth using a quantitative competitive PCR assay (QC-PCR) and dry matter (DM) and neutral detergent fibre (NDF) disappearance from a medium containing untreated (US) or sodium hydroxide treated wheat straw (TS).

Type
Theatre Presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2009 , April 2009 , pp. 174
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2009

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

Greenough, PR and Vermunt, JJ 1991. Vet. Record 128, 11–17.Google Scholar
Joblin, KN 1981. Applied Environmental Microbiol. 42, 1119–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livesey, CT, Harrington, T, Johnston, AM, May, SA and Metcalf, JA 1998. Journal of Animal Science 67, 9–16.Google Scholar
Nassiry, MR, Hravi Moussavi, AR, Sekhavati, MH, Hosseini, F and Farajollahi, H 2008. Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Animal Science p 20.Google Scholar
Orpin, CG 1983. Animal Feed Science Technology. 10, 121–143.Google Scholar
Rezaiean, M, Gordon, W, Beakes, W and Chaudhry, AS 2005. Journal of Anaerobe 11, 163–175.Google Scholar