Animal Bioscience

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

DOI QR Code

Effects of using different roughages in the total mixed ration inoculated with or without coculture of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bacillus subtilis on in vitro rumen fermentation and microbial population

  • Miguel, Michelle (Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bio-industry Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Mamuad, Lovelia (Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bio-industry Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Ramos, Sonny (Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bio-industry Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Ku, Min Jung (Livestock Research Institute, Jeonnam Agricultural Research and Extension Services) ;
  • Jeong, Chang Dae (Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bio-industry Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Kim, Seon Ho (Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bio-industry Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Cho, Yong Il (Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bio-industry Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Lee, Sang Suk (Department of Animal Science and Technology, College of Bio-industry Science, Sunchon National University)
  • Received : 2020.06.03
  • Accepted : 2020.08.05
  • Published : 2021.04.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to determine the effects of different roughages in total mixed ration (TMR) inoculated with or without coculture of Lactobacillus acidophilus (L. acidophilus) and Bacillus subtilis (B. subtilis) on in vitro rumen fermentation and microbial population. Methods: Three TMRs formulations composed of different forages were used and each TMR was grouped into two treatments: non-fermented TMR and fermented TMR (F-TMR) (inoculated with coculture of L. acidophilus and B. subtilis). After fermentation, the fermentation, chemical and microbial profile of the TMRs were determined. The treatments were used for in vitro rumen fermentation to determine total gas production, pH, ammonianitrogen (NH3-N), and volatile fatty acids (VFA). Microbial populations were determined by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). All data were analyzed as a 3×2 factorial arrangement design using the MIXED procedure of Statistical Analysis Systems. Results: Changes in the fermentation (pH, lactate, acetate, propionate, and NH3-N) and chemical composition (moisture, crude protein, crude fiber, and ash) were observed. For in vitro rumen fermentation, lower rumen pH, higher acetate, propionate, and total VFA content were observed in the F-TMR group after 24 h incubation (p<0.05). F-TMR group had higher acetate concentration compared with the non-fermented group. Total VFA was highest (p<0.05) in F-TMR containing combined forage of domestic and imported source (F-CF) and F-TMR containing Italian ryegrass silage and corn silage (F-IRS-CS) than that of TMR diet containing oat, timothy, and alfalfa hay. The microbial population was not affected by the different TMR diets. Conclusion: The use of Italian ryegrass silage and corn silage, as well as the inoculation of coculture of L. acidophilus and B. subtilis, in the TMR caused changes in the pH, lactate and acetate concentrations, and chemical composition of experimental diets. In addition, F-TMR composed with Italian ryegrass silage and corn silage altered ruminal pH and VFA concentrations during in vitro rumen fermentation experiment.

Keywords

References

  1. Chang JB. The effects of forage policy on feed costs in Korea. Agriculture 2018;8:72. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture8060072
  2. Sung MH, Yoon J. Status of feedstuffs imports and calculation of import price index. Seoul, Korea: Korea Rural Economic Institute; 2013.
  3. Chumpawadee S, Pimpa O. Effects of non forage fiber sources in total mixed ration on feed intake, nutrient digestibility, chewing behavior and ruminal fermentation in beef cattle. J Anim Vet Adv 2009;8:2038-44.
  4. Salamone AM, AbuGhazaleh AA, Stuemke C. Effects of replacing corn silage and alfalfa hay with master graze silage on dairy cows performance. Int J Dairy Sci 2013;8:21-9. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijds.2013.21.29
  5. Kim WH, Kang SN, Arasu MV, et al. Profile of Hanwoo steer carcass characteristics, meat quality and fatty acid composition after feeding Italian ryegrass silage. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour 2015;35:299-306. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2015.35.3.299
  6. Mbiriri DT, Oh SJ, Choi NJ. Effect of different silages for TMR on in vitro rumen simulative fermentation. J Korean Soc Grassl Forage Sci 2012;32:379-86. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2012.32.4.379
  7. Kang J, Song J, Marbun TD, Kwon CH, Kim EJ. Effect of intercropped corn and soybean silage on nutritive values, in vitro ruminal fermentation, and milk production of Holstein dairy cows. J Korean Soc Grassl Forage Sci 2017;37:216-22. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2017.37.3.216
  8. Baldinger L, Zollitsch W, Knaus WF. Maize silage and Italian ryegrass silage as high-energy forages in organic dairy cow diets: differences in feed intake, milk yield and quality, and nitrogen efficiency. Renew Agric Food Syst 2014;29:378-87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742170513000252
  9. MARFA. Seeds supply and cultivation area results of forage crops in 2013. Sejong, Korea: MAFRA; 2014.
  10. Ryu CH, Park MS, Park C, Choi NJ, Cho SB. Fermentation of environmental friend total mixed ration and alteration of rumen fermentation characteristics. Korean J Org Agric 2017;25:461-73. https://doi.org/10.11625/KJOA.2017.25.2.461
  11. Coppock CE, Bath DL, Harris B. From feeding to feeding systems. J Dairy Sci 1981;64:1230-49. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(81)82698-7
  12. Cao Y, Takahashi T, Horiguchi K. Effects of addition of food by‐products on the fermentation quality of a total mixed ration with whole crop rice and its digestibility, preference, and rumen fermentation in sheep. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2009;151:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2008.10.010
  13. Rabelo CHS. Effect of Lactobacillus and Bacillus subtilis on the fermentative process of corn silage and performance of beef cattle and sheep [doctoral thesis]. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Universidade Estadual Paulista; 2016.
  14. Basso FC, Lara EC, de Assis FB, Rabelo CHS, Morelli M, Reis RA. Fermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of corn silages inoculated with Bacillus subtilis. Rev Bras Saude Prod Anim 2012;13:1009-19. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-99402012000400003
  15. Donaghy J, Kelly PF, McKay AM. Detection of ferulic acid esterase production by Bacillus spp. and lactobacilli. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 1998;50:257-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002530051286
  16. Lara EC, Basso FC, de Assis FB, Souza FA, Berchielli TT, Reis RA. Changes in the nutritive value and aerobic stability of corn silages inoculated with Bacillus subtilis alone or combined with Lactobacillus plantarum. Anim Prod Sci 2016;56:1867-74. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN14686
  17. Phuoc TL, Jamikorn U. Effects of probiotic supplement (Bacillus subtilis and Lactobacillus acidophilus) on feed efficiency, growth performance, and microbial population of weaning rabbits. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2017;30:198-205. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0823
  18. Hanwoo Board. Hanwoo consulting guide book. Seoul, Korea: Hanwoo Board; 2009.
  19. Rural Development Administration. Korean feeding standard for Hanwoo. Jeonju, Korea: National Institute of Animal Science; 2012.
  20. AOAC. Official methods of analysis. 15th ed. Arlington, VA, USA: AOAC International; 1990.
  21. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:3583-97. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  22. Nishino N, Yoshida M, Shiota H, Sakaguchi E. Accumulation of 1,2-propanediol and enhancement of aerobic stability in whole crop maize silage inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri. J Appl Microbiol 2003;94:800-7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.01810.x
  23. Chaney AL, Marbach EP. Modified reagents for determination of urea and ammonia. Clin Chem 1962;8:130-2. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/8.2.130
  24. Tabaru H, Kadota E, Yamada H, Sasaki N, Takeuchi A. Determination of volatile fatty acids and lactic acid in bovine plasma and ruminal fluid by high performance liquid chromatography. Jpn J Vet Sci 1988;50:1124-6. https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms1939.50.1124
  25. Han SK, Kim SH, Shin HS. UASB treatment of wastewater with VFA and alcohol generated during hydrogen fermentation of food waste. Process Biochem 2005;40:2897-905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2005.01.005
  26. Asanuma N, Iwamoto M, Hino T. Effect of the addition of fumarate on methane production by ruminal microorganisms in vitro. J Dairy Sci 1999;82:780-7. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75296-3
  27. Wongnen C, Wachirapakorn C, Patipan C, et al. Effects of fermented total mixed ration and cracked cottonseed on milk yield and milk composition in dairy cows. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2009;22:1625-32. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2009.80668
  28. Todorova S, Kozhuharova L. Characteristics and antimicrobial activity of Bacillus subtilis strains isolated from soil. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 2010;26:1207-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-009-0290-1
  29. Basso FC, Adesogan AT, Lara EC, et al. Effects of feeding corn silage inoculated with microbial additives on the ruminal fermentation, microbial protein yield, and growth performance of lambs. J Anim Sci 2014;92:5640-50. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8258
  30. Baek YC, Kim MS, Reddy KE, et al. Rumen fermentation and digestibility of spent mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus) substrate inoculated with Lactobacillus brevis for Hanwoo steers. Rev Colomb Cienc Pecu 2017;30:267-77. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rccp.v30n4a02
  31. Chen L, Yuan XJ, Li JF, et al. Effects of applying lactic acid bacteria and propionic acid on fermentation quality, aerobic stability and in vitro gas production of forage-based total mixed ration silage in Tibet. Anim Prod Sci 2019;59:376-83. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN16062
  32. Shao T, Zhang ZX, Shimojo M, Wang T, Masuda Y. Comparison of fermentation characteristics of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) and guineagrass (Panicum maximum Jacq.) during the early stage of ensiling. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2005;18:1727-34. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2005.1727
  33. Muck RE. Silage microbiology and its control through additives. Rev Bras Zootec 2010;39:183-91. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982010001300021
  34. Oskoueian E, Jafari S, Noura R, Jahromi MF, Meng GY, Ebrahimi M. Application of different types of lactic acid bacteria inoculant on ensiled rice straw; effects on silage quality, rumen fermentation, methane production and microbial population. bioRxiv 2019;612556. https://doi.org/10.1101/612556
  35. Kondo M, Shimizu K, Jayanegara A, et al. Changes in nutrient composition and in vitro ruminal fermentation of total mixed ration silage stored at different temperatures and periods. J Sci Food Agric 2016;96:1175-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.7200
  36. Driehuis F, Oude Elferink SJWH, Spoelstra SF. Anaerobic lactic acid degradation during ensilage of whole crop maize inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri inhibits yeast growth and improves aerobic stability. J Appl Microbiol 1999;87:585-94. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.1999.00856.x
  37. Ozelcam H, Kirkpinar F, Tan K. Chemical composition, in vivo digestibility and metabolizable energy values of caramba (Lolium multiflorum cv. caramba) fresh, silage and hay. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2015;28:1427-32. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0074
  38. Krause KM, Oetzel GR. Understanding and preventing subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy herds: a review. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2006;126:215-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.08.004
  39. Stewart CS, Flint HJ, Bryant MP. The rumen bacteria. In: Hobson PN, Stewart CS, editors. The rumen microbial ecosystem. London, UK: Chapman & Hall; 1997. pp. 10-72.
  40. Perdok H, Leng RA. Rumen ammonia requirements for efficient digestion and intake of straw by cattle. In: Nolan JV, Leng RA, editors. The role of protozoa and fungi in ruminant digestion. Armidale, Australia: Penambul Books; 1989. pp. 291-3.
  41. Abdelrahman MM, Alhidary I, Alyemni AH, et al. Effect of alfalfa hay on rumen fermentation patterns and serum biochemical profile of growing Naemi lambs with ad libitum access to total mixed rations. Pak J Zool 2017;49:1519-22. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/2017.49.4.sc6
  42. Latham MJ, Sutton JD, Sharpe ME. Fermentation and microorganisms in the rumen and the content of fat in the milk of cows given low roughage rations. J Dairy Sci 1974;57:803-10. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(74)84968-4
  43. Wolin MJ. A theoretical rumen fermentation balance. J Dairy Sci 1960;43:1452-9. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(60)90348-9
  44. Denman SE, McSweeney CS. Development of a real-time PCR assay for monitoring anaerobic fungal and cellulolytic bacterial populations within the rumen. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2006;58:572-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2006.00190.x
  45. Sylvester JT, Karnati SKR, Yu Z, Morrison M, Firkins JL. Development of an assay to quantify rumen ciliate protozoal biomass in cows using real-time PCR. J Nutr 2004;134:3378-84. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/134.12.3378
  46. Dubernet S, Desmasures N, Gueguen M. A PCR-based method for identification of lactobacilli at the genus level. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2002;214:271-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2002.tb11358.x
  47. Xiao Y, Zeng GM, Yang ZH, et al. Effects of continuous thermophilic composting (CTC) on bacterial community in the active composting process. Microb Ecol 2011;62:599-608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-011-9882-z

Cited by

  1. Seasonal Influence on Rumen Microbiota, Rumen Fermentation, and Enteric Methane Emissions of Holstein and Jersey Steers under the Same Total Mixed Ration vol.11, pp.4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11041184
  2. Prevalence of Mycotoxins and Endotoxins in Total Mixed Rations and Different Types of Ensiled Forages for Dairy Cows in Lithuania vol.13, pp.12, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins13120890