| Literature DB >> 26104399 |
N T Thao1, M Wanapat2, S Kang3, A Cherdthong2.
Abstract
Four rumen fistulated swamp buffaloes were randomly assigned according to a 4×4 Latin square design to investigate the effects of Eucalyptus (E. Camaldulensis) leaf meal (ELM) supplementation as a rumen enhancer on feed intake and rumen fermentation characteristics. The dietary treatments were as follows: T1 = 0 g ELM/hd/d; T2 = 40 g ELM/hd/d; T3 = 80 g ELM/hd/d; T4 = 120 g ELM/hd/d, respectively. Experimental animals were kept in individual pens and concentrate was offered at 0.3% BW while rice straw was fed ad libitum. The results revealed that voluntary feed intake and digestion coefficients of nutrients were similar among treatments. Ruminal pH, temperature and blood urea nitrogen concentrations were not affected by ELM supplementation; however, ELM supplementation resulted in lower concentration of ruminal ammonia nitrogen. Total volatile fatty acids, propionate concentration increased with the increasing level of EML (p<0.05) while the proportion of acetate was decreased (p<0.05). Methane production was linearly decreased (p<0.05) with the increasing level of ELM supplementation. Protozoa count and proteolytic bacteria population were reduced (p<0.05) while fungal zoospores and total viable bacteria, amylolytic, cellulolytic bacteria were unchanged. In addition, nitrogen utilization and microbial protein synthesis tended to increase by the dietary treatments. Based on the present findings, it is suggested that ELM could modify the rumen fermentation and is potentially used as a rumen enhancer in methane mitigation and rumen fermentation efficiency.Entities:
Keywords: Eucalyptus Leaf Meal; Rice Straw; Rumen Fermentation; Swamp Buffalo
Year: 2015 PMID: 26104399 PMCID: PMC4478504 DOI: 10.5713/ajas.14.0878
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian-Australas J Anim Sci ISSN: 1011-2367 Impact factor: 2.509
Ingredients and chemical composition of experimental diets
| Items | Concentrate | Rice straw | ELM |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingredients (%) | |||
| Cassava chip | 65.0 | ||
| Rice bran | 10.0 | ||
| Palm meal | 20.2 | ||
| Urea | 1.5 | ||
| Molasses | 1.5 | ||
| Sulfur | 0.3 | ||
| Premix mineral | 1.0 | ||
| Salt | 0.5 | ||
| Chemical composition (%) | |||
| Dry matter | 93.2 | 95.6 | 93.5 |
| ———% DM basis——— | |||
| Organic matter | 94.7 | 87.5 | 94.0 |
| Ash | 5.3 | 12.5 | 6.0 |
| Crude protein | 14.2 | 3.2 | 9.5 |
| Neutral detergent fiber | 16.0 | 76.2 | 34.3 |
| Acid detergent fiber | 8.4 | 47.2 | 22.0 |
| Tannins | - | - | 9.0 |
ELM, Eucalyptus leaf meal.
Minerals and vitamins premix: vitamin A, 10,000,000 IU; vitamin E, 70,000 IU; Vitamin D, 1,600,000 IU; Fe, 50 g; Zn, 40 g; Mn, 40 g; Co, 0.1 g; Se, 0.1 g; I, 0.5.
Effects of Eucalyptus leaf meal supplementation on voluntary feed intake and nutrient digestibility
| Items | ELM (g/hd/d) | SEM | Contrast | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||
| 0 | 40 | 80 | 120 | L | Q | C | ||
| Rice straw intake | ||||||||
| kg/d | 5.5 | 5.4 | 5.2 | 5.3 | 0.26 | ns | ns | ns |
| % BW | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 0.52 | ns | ns | ns |
| Concentrate intake | ||||||||
| kg/d | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.05 | ns | ns | ns |
| % BW | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.05 | ns | ns | ns |
| Total intake | ||||||||
| kg/d | 6.4 | 6.3 | 6.1 | 6.3 | 0.30 | ns | ns | ns |
| % BW | 1.9 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 0.05 | ns | ns | ns |
| Apparent digestibility (%) | ||||||||
| DM | 63.9 | 62.3 | 60.1 | 58.8 | 1.87 | ns | ns | ns |
| OM | 68.3 | 66.6 | 65.6 | 64.5 | 2.13 | ns | ns | ns |
| CP | 61.8 | 60.2 | 59.6 | 59.1 | 1.60 | ns | ns | ns |
| NDF | 54.5 | 53.2 | 52.4 | 51.8 | 1.73 | ns | ns | ns |
| ADF | 61.8 | 58.9 | 58.2 | 57.3 | 2.40 | ns | ns | ns |
ELM, Eucalyptus leaf meal; SEM, standard error of the mean; L, linear; Q, quadratic, C, cubic; ns, non-significant; BW, body weight; DM, dry matter; OM, organic matter; CP, crude protein; NDF, neutral detergent fiber; ADF, acid detergent fiber.
Effect of Eucalyptus leaf meal on rumen fermentation characteristics
| Items | ELM (g/hd/d) | SEM | Contrast | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||
| 0 | 40 | 80 | 120 | L | Q | C | ||
| Ruminal pH | 6.6 | 6.5 | 6.4 | 6.5 | 0.06 | ns | ns | ns |
| Ruminal temperature (°C) | 38.6 | 38.6 | 38.5 | 38.6 | 0.05 | ns | ns | ns |
| Blood urea nitrogen (mg/dL) | 9.3 | 9.3 | 9.9 | 9.4 | 1.94 | ns | ns | ns |
| NH3-N (mg/dL) | 11.8 | 10.3 | 8.5 | 7.8 | 0.99 | ns | ns | |
| Total VFA (mM/L) | 102.8 | 104.6 | 106.6 | 108.5 | 0.83 | ns | ns | |
| ———mmol/100 mol——— | ||||||||
| Acetate | 68.9 | 66.7 | 63.2 | 64.5 | 0.5 | |||
| Propionate | 18.4 | 22.2 | 24.4 | 23.6 | 0.24 | ns | ||
| Butyrate | 12.7 | 11.2 | 12.4 | 11.9 | 0.27 | ns | ns | |
| Methane | 31.0 | 28.4 | 26.7 | 27.3 | 0.18 | ns | ||
ELM, Eucalyptus leaf meal; SEM, standard error of the means; L, linear; Q, quadratic; C, cubic; ns, non-significant; VFA, volatile fatty acids.
Calculated: CH4 = (0.45×acetate)−(0.275×propionate)+(0.40×butyrate) (Moss et al., 2000).
Values on the same row with difference superscript differed;
p<0.05.
Effects of Eucalyptus leaf meal supplementation on rumen microbial population
| Items | ELM (g/hd/d) | SEM | Contrast | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||
| 0 | 40 | 80 | 120 | L | Q | C | ||
| Total direct count (cell/mL) | ||||||||
| Protozoa (×105) | 9.1 | 8.6 | 7.6 | 7.1 | 0.51 | ns | ns | |
| Fungi zoospores (×105) | 3.9 | 3.4 | 3.2 | 4.5 | 0.40 | ns | 0.08 | ns |
| Viable bacteria (CFU/mL) | ||||||||
| Total (×109) | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 1.13 | ns | ns | ns |
| Amylolytic (×107) | 4.7 | 3.4 | 3.1 | 5.1 | 0.91 | ns | ns | ns |
| Proteolytic (×107) | 6.8 | 5.7 | 5.0 | 3.1 | 0.45 | ns | ns | |
| Cellulolytic (×108) | 2.0 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 0.33 | ns | ns | ns |
ELM: Eucalyptus leaf meal; SEM, standard error of the means; L, linear; Q, quadratic; C, cubic; ns: non-significant; CFU, colony-forming unit.
Values on the same row with different superscripts differ;
p<0.05.
Effects of Eucalyptus leaf meal supplementation on nitrogen metabolism and microbial protein synthesis
| Items | ELM (g/hd/d) | SEM | Contrast | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||||
| 0 | 40 | 80 | 120 | L | Q | C | ||
| N utilization (g/d) | ||||||||
| N intake | 40.8 | 41.9 | 41.1 | 42.3 | 1.05 | ns | ns | ns |
| N excretion | ||||||||
| Feces | 26.4 | 27.1 | 26.7 | 27.4 | 0.28 | ns | ns | ns |
| Urine | 5.4 | 5.3 | 5.4 | 5.2 | 0.93 | ns | ns | ns |
| N balance | ||||||||
| Absorption | 14.4 | 14.7 | 14.5 | 14.9 | 0.52 | ns | ns | ns |
| Retention | 8.9 | 9.5 | 9.1 | 9.7 | 0.80 | ns | ns | ns |
| PD (mmol/d) | ||||||||
| Allantoin excretion | 28.1 | 29.7 | 31.6 | 34.0 | 1.95 | ns | ns | ns |
| Allantoin absorption | 108.5 | 120.7 | 140.0 | 145.4 | 15.98 | ns | ns | ns |
| Microbial nitrogen supply (g N/d) | 78.9 | 87.8 | 101.8 | 105.7 | 11.62 | ns | ns | ns |
| EMPS (g N/kg OMDR) | 32.5 | 37.3 | 42.7 | 44.0 | 4.70 | ns | ns | ns |
ELM, Eucalyptus leaf meal; SEM, standard error of the mean; L, linear; Q, quadratic; C, cubic; ns, non-significant; PD, purine derivations; EMPS, efficiency of microbial nitrogen synthesis; OMDR, digestible organic matter apparently fermented in the rumen.