농업생명과학연구 (Journal of agriculture & life science)

  • 제53권2호
  • /
  • Pages.15-26
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1598-5504(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2383-8272(eISSN)
경상대학교 농업생명과학연구원 (Institute of Agriculture & Life Science, Gyeongsang National University)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

단위동물 모델에서 In vitro 소화율 측정과 평가

Evaluation and Method of In Vitro Digestibility in Monogastric Animal Model

  • 강령인 (경상대학교 응용생명과학부(BK21 Plus) 축산생명학과(농업생명과학연구원)) ;
  • 김진선 (경상대학교 응용생명과학부(BK21 Plus) 축산생명학과(농업생명과학연구원)) ;
  • 이성실 (경상대학교 응용생명과학부(BK21 Plus) 축산생명학과(농업생명과학연구원)) ;
  • 추교문 (농협사료 사료기술연구소) ;
  • 김진욱 (경상대학교 응용생명과학부(BK21 Plus) 축산생명학과(농업생명과학연구원))
  • Kang, Lyeongin (Dept. of Animal Science & Biotechnology, Division of Applied Life Science(BK21 Plus), Institute of Agriculture and Life Science, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Kim, Jin Seon (Dept. of Animal Science & Biotechnology, Division of Applied Life Science(BK21 Plus), Institute of Agriculture and Life Science, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Lee, Sung Sill (Dept. of Animal Science & Biotechnology, Division of Applied Life Science(BK21 Plus), Institute of Agriculture and Life Science, Gyeongsang National University) ;
  • Chu, Gyo-Moon (Feed Technology Research Center, Nonghyup Feed Co., Ltd) ;
  • Kim, Jin Wook (Dept. of Animal Science & Biotechnology, Division of Applied Life Science(BK21 Plus), Institute of Agriculture and Life Science, Gyeongsang National University)
  • 투고 : 2018.10.15
  • 심사 : 2019.01.16
  • 발행 : 2019.04.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

In vivo 측정법은 비용이 많이 들고 연구기간이 길며 동물복지 측면에서 여러 문제점이 있다. 이에 대한 대안으로 지난 수십년간 in vitro 소화율 측정법이 개발되어 왔다. 본 총설에서는 대표적인 단위 동물로써 사양되고 있는 돼지의 소화기관 특징 및 소화작용에 대한 논하였다. 또한, 최근에 개발된 daisy II incubator 를 이용한 in vitro 방법을 통해 돼지에서 주요 곡류사료로 이용되고 있는 옥수수, 쌀, 소맥 및 대맥의 회장 및 전분 건물소화율을 측정하였다.

An in vitro digestibility methods have been developed to mimic an in vivo system in the past decades. Because the in vivo techniques cause high cost, intensive labor, longer research periods and ethnical problems. In this review, the digestive systems from stomach to large intestine of pig as a monogastric animal were addressed to understand an in vivo digestion. The innovative in vitro technique using the Daisy II incubator was performed and the in vitro ileal and fecal dry matter (DM) digestibility of corn, rice, wheat and barley was determined.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Adesogan AT. 2005. Effect of bag type on the apparent digestibility of feeds in Ankom Daisy II incubators. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 119: 333-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2004.09.012
  2. Agudelo JH. 2009. Alternative feedstuffs for swine: what are our options? Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias. 22: 287-286.
  3. Awati A, Willams BA, Bosch MW, Li YC and Verstergen WA. 2006. Use of in vitro cumulative gas production technique for pigs: An examination of alternations in fermentation products and substrate losses at various time points. Journal of Animal Science. 84: 1110-1118. https://doi.org/10.2527/2006.8451110x
  4. Bauer E, Willams BA, Voigt C, Mosenthin R and Verstegen MWA. 2003. Impact of mammalian enzyme pretreatment on the fermentability of carbohydrate-rich feedstuffs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 83: 207-214. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.1293
  5. Bednar GE, Patil AR, Murray SM, Grieshop CM, Merchen NR and Fahey Jr GC. 2001. Starch and fiber fractions in selected food and feed ingredients affect their small intestinal digestibility and fermentability and their large bowel fermentability in vitro in a canine model. Journal of Nutrition. 131: 276-286. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/131.2.276
  6. Bindelle J, Buldgen A, Lambotte D, Wavreille J and Leterme P. 2007. Effect of faecal donor and of pig diet composition in in vitro fermentation of sugar pulp. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 132: 212-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.03.010
  7. Bindelle J, Buldgen A and Leterme P. 2008. Nutritive and environmental consequences of dietary fibre in pig nutrition: a review. Biotechnology Agronomy Society and Environment. 12: 313-324.
  8. Boisen S and Fernandez JA. 1997. Prediction of the total tract digestibility of energy in feedstuffs and pig diet by in vitro analysis. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 68: 277-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(97)00058-8
  9. Chiang CC, Croom J, Chuang ST, Chiou PWS and Yu B. 2008. Development of a dynamic system stimulating pig gastric digestion. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science. 21: 1522-1528. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2008.70640
  10. Coles LT, Moughan PJ and Darragh AJ. 2005. In vitro digestion and fermentation methods, including gas production techniques, as applied to nutritive evaluation of foods in the hindgut of human and other simple-stomached animals. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 123-124: 421-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.04.021
  11. Corson DC, Waghorn GC, Ulyatt MJ and Lee J. 1999. NIRS: Forage analysis and livestock feeding. Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association. 61: 127-132.
  12. De Rouchey J, Goodband B, Tokach M, Dritz S and Nelson J. 2009. Digestive system of a pig: Anatomy and function. Swine Profitability Conference, Manhattan. pp.47-50.
  13. Dung NNX, Manh LH and Udeh P. 2002. Tropical fibre sources for pigs digestibility, digesta retention and estimation of fibre digestibility in vitro. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 102: 109-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(02)00253-5
  14. Freire JPB, Guerreiro AJG, Cunha LF and Aumaitare A. 2000. Effect of dietary source on the total digestibility, caecum volatile fatty acids and digestive transit time in the weaned piglets. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 87: 71-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00183-8
  15. Jha R, Bindelle J, Van Kessel A and Leterme P. 2011. In vitro fibre fermentation of fermentable carbohydrate and protein level and protein synthesis by colonic bacteria isolated from pig. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 165: 190-200.
  16. Kennedy PM, Lowry JB and Conlan LL. 2000. Phosphate rather than surfactant accounts for the main contribution to enhanced fibre digestibility resulting from treatment with boiling neutral detergent. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 86: 177-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00164-4
  17. Kim YY. 2012. Animal Nutrition. 2nd edition. Life Science. Korea.
  18. Kong C, Park CS and Kim BG. 2015. Effects of an enzyme complex on in vitro dry matter digestibility of feed ingredients for pigs. Springer Plus. 4: 261-264. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1060-1
  19. Lee SA. 2017. Prediction of energy values in feed ingredients fed to pigs. MS Thesis. Konkuk Univrsity. Korea.
  20. Lowgren W, Graham H and Aman P. 1989. An in vitro method for digestion in the pig: Stimulating digestion in the different compartments of the intestine. British Journal of Nutrition. 61:673-687. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19890154
  21. Makkar HPS. 2002. Applications of the in vitro gas method in the evaluation of feed resources, and enhancement of nutritive value of the tannin-rich/browse leaves and agro-industrial by products. IAEA TECDOC-1294: Development and field evaluation of animal feed supplementation packages. pp.23-42.
  22. Metzler BU and Mosenthin R. 2008. A review of interaction between dietary fibre and the gastrointestinal microbiota and their consequences in intestinal phosphorus metabolism in growing pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science. 21: 603-615. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2008.r.03
  23. Noblet J and Jaguelin-Peyraud Y. 2007. Prediction of digestibility of organic matter and energy in the growing pig from an in vitro method. Animal Food Science and Technology. 134: 211-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.07.008
  24. Noblet J and Le Goff G. 2001. Effect of dietary fibre on the energy value of feeds for pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 90: 35-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(01)00195-X
  25. Park KR, Park CS and Kim BG. 2016. An enzyme complex increases in vitro dry matter digestibility of corn and wheat in pigs. Springer Plus. 5: 598-604. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2194-5
  26. Perez-Vendrell AM and Torrallardona D. 2010. In vitro digestibility kinetics of diets containing different cereal sources. Livestock science. 134: 47-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2010.06.093
  27. Poeikhampha T and Bunchasak C. 2010. Effect of sodium gluconate on pH value, ammonia and short chain fatty acids concentration in batch culture of porcine cecal digesta. Journal of Applied Sciences. 10: 1471-1475. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2010.1471.1475
  28. Regmi PR, Ferguson NS and Zijlstra RT. 2009. In vitro digestibility techniques to predict apparent total tract energy digestibility of wheat in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 87: 3620-3627. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1739
  29. Regmi PR, Sauer WC and Zijlstra RT. 2008. Prediction of in vivo apparent digestibility of barley in growing pigs using an in vitro digestibility technique. Journal of Animal Science. 86: 2619-2626. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1058
  30. Rymer C, Huntington JA, Willams BA and Given DJ. 2005. In vitro cumulative gas production techniques: History, methodological considerations and challenges. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 123-124: 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.04.055
  31. Stevens CE and Hume ID. 1998. Contributions of Microbes in Vertebrate Gastrointestinal Tract to Production and Conservation of Nutrients. Physiological Reviews. 78: 393-427. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.1998.78.2.393
  32. Sun T, Laerke HN, Jorgensen H and Knudsen KEB. 2006. The effect of extrusion cooking of different starch sources on the in vitro digestibility in growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 131: 66-85.
  33. Tilley JMA and Terry RA. 1963. A two stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crop. Journal of British Grassland Society. 18: 104-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x
  34. Van Soest PJ. 1966. Non-nutritive residue: A system of analysis for the replacement of crude fibre. Journal Association of Official Analytical Chemist. 49: 546.
  35. Viljoen J, Fick JC, Coetzee SE, Hayes JP and Siebrits FK. 1998. Apparent and true amino acid digestibilities of feedstuffs in pig employing the total ileal content (TIC) techniques and the mobile nylon bag technique (MNBT). Livestock Production Science. 53: 205-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(97)00151-6
  36. Wang JF, Li DF, Jesen BB, Jakobson K, Xing JJ, Gong LM and Zhuy H. 2003. Effect of type and level of fibre on gastric microbial activity and short chain fatty acids concentration in gestating sows. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 104: 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(02)00333-4
  37. Wilfart A, Jagualin-Peyrand Y, Simmins H, Noblet J, Van Milgen J and Montagne L. 2008. Kinetics of enzymatic digestion of feeds as estimated by a stepwise in vitro methods. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 141: 171-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2007.05.021
  38. Williams BA, Bosch MW, Boer H, Verstegen MWA and Tamamminga S. 2005. An in vitro batch culture method to assess potential fermentability of feed ingredient for monogastric diet. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 123-124: 445-462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.04.031