| Literature DB >> 31480168 |
Thiwakorn Ampapon1, Metha Wanapat1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The experiment was conducted to study the effect of rambutan (Nephelium lappaceum) fruit peel powder (RP) on feed consumption, digestibility of nutrients, ruminal fermentation dynamics and microbial population in Thai breed cattle.Entities:
Keywords: Methane; Plant Secondary Compounds; Rambutan Peel Powder; Rumen Enhancer
Year: 2019 PMID: 31480168 PMCID: PMC7206400 DOI: 10.5713/ajas.19.0342
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian-Australas J Anim Sci ISSN: 1011-2367 Impact factor: 2.509
Feed ingredients and chemical composition of the experimental diets
| Items | Concentrate | RP | Napier grass |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ingredients (g/kg DM) | |||
| Cassava chip | 600.0 | - | - |
| Rice bran | 100.0 | - | - |
| Coconut meal | 80.0 | - | - |
| Palm kernel meal | 80.0 | - | - |
| Soybean meal | 80.0 | - | - |
| Molasses | 15.0 | - | - |
| Urea | 30.0 | - | - |
| Mineral mixture | 5.0 | - | - |
| Salt | 5.0 | - | - |
| Sulfur | 5.0 | - | - |
| Chemical composition (g/kg DM) | |||
| Dry matter | 877.0 | 887.0 | 302.0 |
| Organic matter | 926.0 | 966.0 | 914.0 |
| Ash | 74.0 | 34.0 | 86.0 |
| Crude protein | 141.0 | 44.0 | 102.0 |
| Neutral detergent fiber | 184.0 | 313.0 | 697.0 |
| Acid detergent fiber | 107.0 | 268.0 | 435.0 |
| Condensed tannins | - | 120.0 | - |
| Saponins | - | 105.0 | - |
RP, rambutan peel powder; DM, dry matter.
Effect of rambutan peel powder on feed intake and apparent digestibility in beef cattle
| Items | Supplementation level of RP (g/kg of DMI) | SEM | Contrasts | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||
| 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | L | Q | ||
| Napier grass (DM) | |||||||
| kg/d | 5.7 | 5.8 | 5.8 | 5.8 | 0.03 | 0.484 | 0.293 |
| % BW/d | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 0.11 | 0.675 | 0.256 |
| g/kg BW0.75 | 86.7 | 87.0 | 88.2 | 87.3 | 0.43 | 0.612 | 0.567 |
| Concentrate intake | |||||||
| kg/d | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.7 | 2.6 | 0.11 | 0.328 | 0.193 |
| % BW/d | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.05 | 0.142 | 0.153 |
| g/kg BW0.75 | 40.1 | 40.0 | 40.4 | 40.2 | 0.27 | 0.167 | 0.351 |
| RP intake | |||||||
| kg/d | 0 | 0.17 | 0.34 | 0.51 | 0.02 | 0.012 | 0.973 |
| % BW/d | 0 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.19 | 0.01 | 0.025 | 0.703 |
| g/kg BW0.75 | 0 | 2.6 | 5.2 | 7.6 | 0.05 | 0.011 | 0.545 |
| Total DM intake | |||||||
| kg/d | 8.3 | 8.5 | 8.8 | 8.9 | 0.03 | 0.001 | 0.447 |
| % BW/d | 3.1 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 3.4 | 0.04 | 0.002 | 0.732 |
| g/kg BW0.75 | 126.8 | 129.6 | 133.8 | 135.1 | 0.41 | 0.001 | 0.487 |
| CT intake | |||||||
| g/d | 0.0 | 20.2 | 40.1 | 61.2 | 2.42 | 0.012 | 0.043 |
| % total intake | 0.0 | 0.24 | 0.47 | 0.69 | 0.06 | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| SP intake | |||||||
| g/d | 0.0 | 17.7 | 35.7 | 53.6 | 2.11 | 0.001 | 0.021 |
| % total intake | 0.0 | 0.21 | 0.41 | 0.61 | 0.05 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Apparent digestibility (%) | |||||||
| Dry matter | 65.1 | 65.7 | 66.3 | 64.9 | 0.52 | 0.162 | 0.457 |
| Organic matter | 67.1 | 67.5 | 67.7 | 66.9 | 0.91 | 0.218 | 0.312 |
| Crude protein | 65.9 | 66.1 | 66.7 | 66.1 | 0.32 | 0.112 | 0.178 |
| Neutral detergent fiber | 73.2 | 73.5 | 73.1 | 72.8 | 0.64 | 0.231 | 0.732 |
| Acid detergent fiber | 62.7 | 62.6 | 63.1 | 63.0 | 0.55 | 0.125 | 0.435 |
RP, rambutan peel powder; DMI, dry matter intake; SEM, standard error of the mean; L, linear; Q, quadratic; DM, dry matter; BW, body weight; CT, condensed tannins; SP, saponins.
Means in the same row with different superscripts differ (p<0.05).
Effect of rambutan peel powder on rumen fermentation and microbial population in beef cattle
| Items | Supplementation level of RP (g/kg of DMI) | SEM | Contrasts | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||
| 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | L | Q | ||
| Ruminal pH | 6.7 | 6.7 | 6.6 | 6.6 | 0.09 | 0.144 | 0.221 |
| Ruminal temperature (°C) | 39.7 | 39.8 | 39.4 | 39.0 | 0.14 | 0.175 | 0.337 |
| Ruminal NH3-N (mg/dL) | 17.5 | 17.7 | 18.1 | 17.9 | 0.06 | 0.235 | 0.283 |
| BUN (mg/dL) | 9.7 | 10.3 | 10.4 | 10.1 | 0.11 | 0.120 | 0.311 |
| Total VFA (mmol/L) | 97.3 | 99.8 | 99.3 | 97.5 | 1.25 | 0.243 | 0.675 |
| VFA (mol/100 mol) | |||||||
| Acetic acid (C2) | 69.5 | 69.0 | 68.5 | 69.1 | 0.20 | 0.123 | 0.139 |
| Propionic acid (C3) | 18.7 | 18.9 | 20.9 | 20.5 | 0.15 | 0.013 | 0.421 |
| Butyric acid (C4) | 11.8 | 12.1 | 10.6 | 10.4 | 0.57 | 0.144 | 0.111 |
| C2:C3 | 3.7 | 3.7 | 3.3 | 3.4 | 0.06 | 0.034 | 0.476 |
| Methane estimation (mM/L) | 30.9 | 30.7 | 29.3 | 29.6 | 0.16 | 0.021 | 0.121 |
| Total direct counts | |||||||
| Bacteria (×1010 cell/mL) | 9.8 | 10.0 | 10.5 | 10.2 | 0.52 | 0.198 | 0.257 |
| Protozoa (×105 cell/mL) | 10.5 | 7.6 | 5.0 | 4.2 | 0.72 | 0.017 | 0.143 |
| Fungal zoospore (×106 cell/mL) | 2.7 | 3.1 | 3.3 | 3.1 | 0.44 | 0.156 | 0.423 |
RP, rambutan peel powder; DMI, dry matter intake; SEM, standard error of the mean; L, linear; Q, quadratic; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; VFA, volatile fatty acids.
Calculated according to Moss et al [17]. CH4 estimation = 0.45(acetate)–0.275(propionate)+0.4(butyrate).
Means in the same row with different superscripts differ (p<0.05).