Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

In vivo Methane Production from Formic and Acetic Acids in the Gastrointestinal Tract of White Roman Geese

  • Chen, Yieng-How (Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Tunghai University) ;
  • Wang, Shu-Yin (Department of Animal Science, Chinese Culture University) ;
  • Hsu, Jenn-Chung (Department of Animal Science, National Chung Hsing University)
  • Received : 2008.06.04
  • Accepted : 2008.11.27
  • Published : 2009.07.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Three experiments were conducted to determine the conversion rate of formic and acetic acids into methane in the gastrointestinal tracts of geese. In experiment I, two sets of two 4-month-old male White Roman geese were allocated to one of two treatment groups. Each set of geese was inoculated either with formic acid or with phosphate buffer solution (PBS). After the acid or the PBS was inoculated into the esophagi of the geese, two birds from each treatment were placed in a respiratory chamber as a measurement unit for 4 h in order to determine methane production rate. In experiment II and III, 6- and 7-wk-old male White Roman goslings were used, respectively. Birds were allocated to receive either formic acid or PBS solution injected into the ceca in experiment II. Acetic acid or PBS solution injected into the cecum were used for experiment III. After either the acids or the PBS solution were injected into the cecum, two birds from each treatment were placed in a respiratory chamber as a measurement unit for 3 h; each treatment was repeated 3 times. The results indicated that formic acid inoculated into the oesophagi of geese was quickly converted into methane. Compared with the PBS-injected group, methane production increased by 5.02 times in the formic acid injected group (4.32 vs. 0.86 mg/kg BW/d; p<0.05). Acetic acid injected into the ceca did not increase methane production; conversely, it tended to decrease methane production. The present study suggests that formic acid may be converted to methane in the ceca, and that acetic acid may not be a precursor of methane in the ceca of geese.

Keywords

References

  1. Annison, E. F., K. J. Kill and R. Kenworthy. 1968. Volatile fatty acids in the digestive tract of the fowl. Br. J. Nutr. 22:207-216 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19680026
  2. Armstrong, D. G. and K. L. Blaxter. 1957. The increasement of steam-volatile fatty acids in fasting sheep. Br. J. Nutr. 11:247-274 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19570044
  3. Beijer, W. H. 1952. Methane fermentation in the rumen of cattle. Nature 170:576-577 https://doi.org/10.1038/170576a0
  4. Bhatta, R., O. Enishi and M. Kurihara. 2007. Measurement of methane production from ruminants. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 20:1305-1318
  5. Blaxter, K. L. and J. Czerkawski. 1966. Modifications of the methane production of the sheep by supplementation of its diet. J. Sci. Food. Agric. 17:417-421 https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740170907
  6. Chen, Y. H., J. C. Hsu and L. L. Lu. 1991. The effect of high and low dietary fiber level on digesta passage through alimentary canal of goslings. Tunghai J. 32:765-774 (in Chinese)
  7. Chen, Y. H., J. C. Hsu and B. Yu. 1992. Effects of dietary fiber levels on growth performance, intestinal fermentation and cellulase activity of goslings. J. Chin. Soc. Anim. Sci. 21(2): 15-28 (in Chinese)
  8. Chen, Y. H., F. M. Pan and J. C. Hsu. 2002. The caecectomy of geese. Taiwan Vet. J. 28:74-79 (in Chinese)
  9. Chen, Y. H., S. Y. Wang and J. C. Hsu. 2003. Effects of caecectomy on body weight gain, intestinal characteristics and enteric gas production in goslings. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 16:1030-1034
  10. Clemens, E. T., C. E. Stevenes and M. Southworth. 1975. Site of organic acid production and pattern of digesta movement in gastrointestinal tract of geese. J. Nutr. 105:1341-1350
  11. Czerkawski, J. W. 1986. An introduction to rumen studies. Pergamon Press, New York, USA. pp. 185-219
  12. Duke, G. E., E. Eccleston, S. Kirywood, C. F. Louis and H. P. Bedbury. 1984. Cellulose digestion by domestic turkeys fed low and high fiber diets. J. Nutr. 114:95-102 https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-9629(91)90400-7
  13. Gasaway, W. C. 1976. Cellulose digestion and metabolism by captive rock ptarmigan. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 54A:179-182
  14. Gasaway, W. C., R. C. White and D. F. Holleman. 1976. Digestion of dry matter and absorption of water in the intestine and cecum of the ptarmigan. Conder 78:77-84 https://doi.org/10.2307/1366918
  15. Hungate, R. E. 1966. The Rumen and Its Microbes. Academic Press, New York, USA. pp. 133-273
  16. Hungate, R. E., W. Smith, T. Bauchop, I. Yu and J. C. Rabinowitz. 1970. Formate as an intermediate in the bovine rumen fermentation. J. Bacteriol. 102:389-397
  17. Kumar, R., D. N. Kamra, N. Agarwal and L. C. Chaudhary. 2007. In vitro methanogenesis and fermentation of feeds containing oil seed cakes with rumen liquor of buffalo. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 20:1196-1200 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2007.09.016
  18. Lee, H. J., S. C. Lee, J. D. Kim, Y. G. Oh, B. K. Kim, C. W. Kim and K. J. Kim. 2003. Methane production potential of feed ingredients as measured by in vitro gas test. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 16:1143-1150
  19. Marounek, M., O. Suchorska and O. Savka. 1999. Effect of substrate and feed antibiotics on in vitro production of valatile fatty acids and methane in caecal contents of chickens. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 80:223-230 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(99)00065-6
  20. Mattocks, J. G. 1971. Goose feeding and cellulose digestion. Wildfowl 22:107-113 https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-8413(84)90120-8
  21. McBee, R. H. 1969. Cecal fermentation in the willow ptarmigan. Conder 71:54-58 https://doi.org/10.2307/1366048
  22. Nieman, C. 1954. Influence of tract amounts of fatty acids on the growth of the microorganisms. Microbiological Reviews 18: 147-163
  23. Russell, J. B. 1992. Another explanation for the toxicity of fermentation acids at low pH: Anion accumulation versus uncoupling. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 73:363-370 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1992.tb04990.x
  24. SAS. 1996. SAS user's guide: statistics. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC. USA
  25. Tsukahara, T. and K. Ushida. 2000. Effects of animal or plant protein diets on cecal fermentation in guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus), rats (rattus norvegicus) and chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus). Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 127A:139-146
  26. Van Kessell, J. A. S. and J. B. Russell. 1996. The effect of pH on ruminal methanogenesis. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 20:205-210 https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-6496(96)00030-X
  27. Vercoe, J. E. and K. L. Baxter. 1965. The metabolism of formic acid in sheep. Br. J. Nutr. 19:523-530 https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19650047
  28. Wang, S. Y. and D. J. Huang. 2005. Assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from poultry enteric fermentation. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 18(6):873-878
  29. Wang, S. Y., S. W. Shieh, S. H. Wang and Y. H. Chen. 2003. Assessment of enteric fermentation emission factors of greenhouse gases in goose utilizing a respiratory chamber. J. Chin. Soc. Anim. Sci. 32:43-50 (in Chinese)
  30. Williams, R. T. and R. L. Crawford. 1984. Methane production in Minnesota peatlands. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 47:1266-1271
  31. Yang, C. P. and C. H. Lin. 1975. The utilizing of dietary fiber feed in geese. II. The function of cellulose digestion in ceca. J. Chin. Soc. Anim. Sci. 4:41-46 (in Chinese)