Literature DB >> 2624460

Most-probable-number procedures for enumerating ruminal bacteria, including the simultaneous estimation of total and cellulolytic numbers in one medium.

B A Dehority1, P A Tirabasso, A P Grifo.   

Abstract

Based on results from eight experiments, no overall difference was found between roll tube and three- and five-tube most-probable-number (MPN) methods for estimating total numbers of ruminal bacteria. However, standard errors for the replicate means within an experiment were higher with the MPN procedures. Visual growth and pH were the criteria used for scoring the MPN tubes. Total numbers were significantly higher in MPN medium containing 40% ruminal fluid, as compared with a complete medium without ruminal fluid. By using a broth medium containing ball-milled cellulose and soluble carbohydrates as energy sources, it was possible to estimate both total and cellulolytic ruminal bacterial numbers in the same MPN series. Disappearance of cellulose and decrease in pH were used to determine growth. Values did not differ from those obtained in separate MPN assays. By using this method, diurnal changes in total and cellulolytic bacterial numbers were estimated in sheep fed forage or a concentrate-type diet.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2624460      PMCID: PMC203169          DOI: 10.1128/aem.55.11.2789-2792.1989

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol        ISSN: 0099-2240            Impact factor:   4.792


  14 in total

1.  Comparison of two methods for enumeration of anaerobe numbers on forages and evaluation of ethylene oxide treatment for forage sterilization.

Authors:  W L Shockey; B A Dehority
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Estimation of bacterial densities by means of the "most probable number".

Authors:  W G COCHRAN
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1950-06       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Variation in colony counts of total viable anaerobic rumen bacteria as influenced by media and cultural methods.

Authors:  J A Grubb; B A Dehority
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1976-02       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Diurnal variations in bacterial numbers and fluid parameters in ruminal contents of animals fed low- or high-forage diets.

Authors:  J A Leedle; M P Bryant; R B Hespell
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Medium without rumen fluid for nonselective enumeration and isolation of rumen bacteria.

Authors:  D R Caldwell; M P Bryant
Journal:  Appl Microbiol       Date:  1966-09

6.  Enumeration and activity of cellulolytic bacteria from gestating swine fed various levels of dietary fiber.

Authors:  V H Varel; W G Pond
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 4.792

7.  Diurnal changes in the concentrations of micro-organisms in the rumens of sheep fed limited diets once daily.

Authors:  A C Warner
Journal:  J Gen Microbiol       Date:  1966-11

8.  Cellulolytic and non-cellulolytic bacteria in rat gastrointestinal tracts.

Authors:  J M Macy; J R Farrand; L Montgomery
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 4.792

9.  Seasonal changes in the ruminal microflora of the high-arctic Svalbard reindeer (Rangifer tarandus platyrhynchus).

Authors:  C G Orpin; S D Mathiesen; Y Greenwood; A S Blix
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 4.792

10.  Ecological factors determining establishment of cellulolytic bacteria and protozoa in the rumens of meroxenic lambs.

Authors:  G Fonty; P Gouet; J P Jouany; J Senaud
Journal:  J Gen Microbiol       Date:  1983-01
View more
  14 in total

1.  Antibiosis between ruminal bacteria and ruminal fungi.

Authors:  B A Dehority; P A Tirabasso
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Bioluminescent Most-Probable-Number Method To Enumerate lux-Marked Pseudomonas aeruginosa UG2Lr in Soil.

Authors:  C A Flemming; H Lee; J T Trevors
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 3.  The use of molecular techniques based on ribosomal RNA and DNA for rumen microbial ecosystem studies: a review.

Authors:  Weidong Deng; Dongmei Xi; Huaming Mao; Metha Wanapat
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2007-05-05       Impact factor: 2.316

4.  Bacterial and Fungal Numbers in Ruminal and Cecal Contents of the Blue Duiker (Cephalophus monticola).

Authors:  B A Dehority; G A Varga
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 5.  Enumeration of methanogens with a focus on fluorescence in situ hybridization.

Authors:  Sanjay Kumar; Sumit Singh Dagar; Ashok Kumar Mohanty; Sunil Kumar Sirohi; Monica Puniya; Ramesh C Kuhad; K P S Sangu; Gareth Wyn Griffith; Anil Kumar Puniya
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2011-04-08

6.  Lyophilization of rumen fluid for use in culture media.

Authors:  B A Dehority; P A Tirabasso
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 4.792

7.  Isolation of Pseudobutyrivibrio ruminis and Pseudobutyrivibrio xylanivorans from rumen of Creole goats fed native forage diet.

Authors:  D J Grilli; M E Cerón; S Paez; V Egea; L Schnittger; S Cravero; M Sosa Escudero; L Allegretti; G N Arenas
Journal:  Folia Microbiol (Praha)       Date:  2012-12-30       Impact factor: 2.099

8.  Molecular diversity of bacteria in Yunnan yellow cattle (Bos taurs) from Nujiang region, China.

Authors:  J Leng; Y M Cheng; C Y Zhang; R J Zhu; S L Yang; X Gou; W D Deng; H M Mao
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2011-05-20       Impact factor: 2.316

9.  Influence of different periods of exposure to hot environment on rumen function and diet digestibility in sheep.

Authors:  U Bernabucci; N Lacetera; P P Danieli; P Bani; A Nardone; B Ronchi
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2009-04-16       Impact factor: 3.787

10.  Bacterial diversity in the rumen of Indian Surti buffalo (Bubalus bubalis), assessed by 16S rDNA analysis.

Authors:  P R Pandya; K M Singh; S Parnerkar; A K Tripathi; H H Mehta; D N Rank; R K Kothari; C G Joshi
Journal:  J Appl Genet       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.653

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.