| Literature DB >> 27617083 |
M D Mostafizar Rahman1, Katerina Theodoridou2, Peiqiang Yu3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To our knowledge, there is little study on the interaction between nutrient availability and molecular structure changes induced by different processing methods in dairy cattle. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of heat processing methods on interaction between nutrient availability and molecular structure in terms of functional groups that are related to protein and starch inherent structure of oat grains with two continued years and three replication of each year.Entities:
Keywords: Dry roasting; Feed processing; Microwave irradiation; Modeled cereal grains; Molecular structure; Nutrient availability
Year: 2016 PMID: 27617083 PMCID: PMC5016947 DOI: 10.1186/s40104-016-0111-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anim Sci Biotechnol ISSN: 1674-9782
Chemical profiles and nutrient availability: comparison among raw (RO), dry roasted (DO) and microwave irradiation (MIO) oat seed
| Item | Raw (RO) | Oat Heat Treatment | SEM |
| Contrast | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry roasting (DO) | Microwave irradiation (MIO) | Do | MIO | DO | ||||
| Chemical Profile, % DM | ||||||||
| DM | 90.51 b | 92.37 b | 96.01 a | 0.54 | 0.012 | 0.018 | 0.006 | 0.094 |
| ASH | 3.55 a | 2.95 b | 3.68 a | 0.07 | 0.012 | 0.006 | 0.285 | 0.011 |
| CP | 12.94 | 12.60 | 12.25 | 0.18 | 0.160 | 0.266 | 0.076 | 0.283 |
| Starch | 50.88 b | 56.09 a | 54.56 ab | 0.76 | 0.036 | 0.251 | 0.042 | 0.017 |
| OM | 96.79 b | 97.28 a | 96.47 b | 0.07 | 0.011 | 0.005 | 0.055 | 0.019 |
| Residue of feed nutrients after 16 h rumen incubation, % | ||||||||
| DM | 35.05b | 28.58b | 57.20a | 2.17 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.006 | 0.125 |
| CP | 24.49b | 20.19b | 69.19a | 3.08 | 0.003 | 0.015 | 0.002 | 0.040 |
| Starch | 17.21b | 10.46b | 43.03a | 3.98 | 0.019 | 0.010 | 0.018 | 0.308 |
| OM | 33.05b | 27.89c | 53.25a | 0.30 | <.0001 | <.0001 | <.000 | 0.001 |
|
| ||||||||
| IVCPD | 50.06 | 57.57 | 72.14 | 3.94 | 0.06 | 0.079 | 0.029 | 0.271 |
SEM standard error of mean, DM dry matter, CP crude protein, OM organic matter
a, b, cMeans with different letters within the same row differ (P < 0.05)
Molecular structure spectral characteristics using ATR-FT/IR molecular spectroscopy: comparison among raw (RO), dry roasted (DO) and microwave irradiation (MIO) oat seed
| Item | Oat Heat Treatment | Contrast | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw (RO) | Dry roasting (DO) | Microwave irradiation (MIO) | SEM |
| Do | MIO | DO | |
| Protein amide molecular structure spectral profiles (Unit: Absorbance) | ||||||||
| Amide I area | 2.82 | 2.68 | 1.94 | 0.30 | 0.13 | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
| Amide II area | 0.74 | 0.71 | 0.56 | 0.07 | 0.15 | 0.07 | 0.14 | 0.13 |
| Ratio amide I to amide II area | 3.94a | 3.61ab | 3.44b | 0.11 | 0.03 | 0.29 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Amide I height | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| Amide II height | 0.02a | 0.02ab | 0.01b | <0.01 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Ratio amide I to amide II height | 2.47 | 2.45 | 2.55 | 0.05 | 0.36 | 0.18 | 0.28 | 0.28 |
| Protein secondary structure spectral profile | ||||||||
| a-helix (height) | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.11 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| β-sheet (height) | 0.04a | 0.03ab | 0.02b | 0.004 | 0.03 | 0.12 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Ratio a-helix to β-sheet | 1.26b | 1.39ab | 1.40a | 0.01 | <.0001 | 0.57 | <.0001 | <.0001 |
| Starch related molecular structure spectral profiles | ||||||||
| Starch area | 7.50 | 7.92 | 6.86 | 0.78 | 0.643 | 0.35 | 0.71 | 0.57 |
| Starch height | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.02 | 0.50 | 0.28 | 0.88 | 0.35 |
| Ratio amide I to starch area | 0.37a | 0.34b | 0.28c | 0.02 | <0.01 | 0.02 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
SEM standard error of mean
a, b, cMeans with different letters within the same row differ (P < 0.05)
Correlation between molecular structures (amide I, amide II, their ratio and amide I and starch ratio) and nutrient profiles of processed oat seed
| Items | Chemical and nutrient digestion a | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DM | ASH | CP | OM | Starch | IVCPD | |||||||
| R |
| R |
| R |
| R |
| R |
| R |
| |
| Protein molecular profiles | ||||||||||||
| Amide I height | −0.97 | 0.150 | −0.56 | 0.624 | 0.92 | 0.254 | 0.74 | 0.473 | −0.32 | 0.786 | −0.97 | 0.152 |
| Amide I area | −0.98 | 0.118 | −0.51 | 0.657 | 0.94 | 0.221 | 0.70 | 0.506 | −0.38 | 0.754 | −0.98 | 0.120 |
| Amide II height | −0.98 | 0.142 | −0.55 | 0.632 | 0.93 | 0.245 | 0.73 | 0.482 | −0.34 | 0.770 | −0.97 | 0.144 |
| Amide II area | −0.87 | 0.334 | −0.77 | 0.441 | 0.77 | 0.437 | 0.90 | 0.289 | −0.05 | 0.970 | −0.86 | 0.336 |
| α-helix | −0.99 | 0.003 | −0.35 | 0.772 | 0.99 | 0.106 | 0.56 | 0.621 | −0.54 | 0.639 | −0.99 | 0.005 |
| β-sheet | −0.99 | 0.097 | −0.20 | 0.872 | 0.99 | 0.007 | 0.43 | 0.720 | −0.66 | 0.534 | −0.99 | 0.095 |
| Ratio α-helix to β-sheet | 0.80 | 0.404 | −0.28 | 0.821 | −0.89 | 0.300 | 0.043 | 0.973 | 0.93 | 0.232 | 0.81 | 0.402 |
| Ratio amide I to amide II height | 0.86 | 0.340 | 0.78 | 0.435 | −0.77 | 0.444 | −0.90 | 0.284 | 0.038 | 0.980 | 0.86 | 0.342 |
| Ratio amide I to amide II area | −0.94 | 0.229 | 0.006 | 0.996 | 0.98 | 0.126 | 0.23 | 0.853 | −0.80 | 0.417 | −0.94 | 0.227 |
| Starch Molecular profiles | ||||||||||||
| Starch height | −0.88 | 0.302 | −0.74 | 0.470 | 0.79 | 0.413 | 0.88 | 0.322 | −0.09 | 0.941 | −0.89 | 0.311 |
| Starch area | −0.73 | 0.483 | −0.89 | 0.292 | 0.61 | 0.580 | 0.97 | 0.152 | 0.18 | 0.894 | −0.73 | 0.472 |
| Ratio amide I to starch (area) | −0.99 | 0.034 | −0.30 | 0.812 | 0.99 | 0.071 | 0.52 | 0.650 | −0.58 | 0.610 | −0.99 | 0.030 |
a DM dry matter, CP crude protein, OM organic matter, IVCPD In vitro crude protein digestibility in small intestine, R correlation coefficient