| Literature DB >> 32537108 |
Abbas Ali Ahmadi Naghadeh1, Younes Ali Alijoo2, Abbas Ali Naserian3.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of warm and cold physical as well as chemical processing methods on the nutritive value of barley grains by gas production technique. The processing methods included milling, steam flaking, extruding and soaking up the grain in water containing 1.00% citric acid, 1.00% propionic acid and 0.01 M sulfuric acid. Two-hundred mg of milling samples were incubated in special 100 mL glasses and the amount of gas produced at different hr was measured. The data were analyzed in a completely randomized design. The results showed that different treatments did not have a significant effect on chemical composition of barley seeds. Other methods of processing compared to the grinding method, significantly reduced the total amount of produced gas. In the 72 hr incubation period, the lowest amount of gas production was in the extruded (245.6 mL per g dry matter) treatment. However, there was no significant difference between the two methods of extruding and flaking. The highest percentage of digestible organic matter was associated with propionic acid (64.90%), while the steam cracking method (58.74%) was the least. Among the processing methods, the highest amounts of methane production, total protozoa population and volatile fatty acid concentration were related to the grinding method and the least amount of extrusion treatment was observed during 24 hr of incubation. Different experimental treatments had a significant effect on ammonia nitrogen condensation and the highest level was observed in milling. According to our results, processing methods such as extrusion and flaking may improve the grain nutritive value.Entities:
Keywords: Extruding; Gas production technique; Incubation; Processing
Year: 2020 PMID: 32537108 PMCID: PMC7282213 DOI: 10.30466/vrf.2017.84395.2022
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vet Res Forum ISSN: 2008-8140 Impact factor: 1.054
The analysis of barley processed nutrients composition (% of dry matter).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 92.61 | 1.90 | 2.66 | 12.50 | 24.21 | 6.70 |
|
| 87.80 | 2.13 | 2.56 | 12.90 | 22.20 | 6.60 |
|
| 93.48 | 1.85 | 2.76 | 12.44 | 23.70 | 7.60 |
|
| 46.85 | 2.20 | 2.40 | 12.77 | 25.25 | 7.45 |
|
| 47.51 | 1.85 | 2.48 | 12.64 | 25.34 | 7.14 |
|
| 47.77 | 2.15 | 2.22 | 12.71 | 24.89 | 8.08 |
|
| 0.87 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.31 | 0.45 | 0.54 |
DM: Dry matter; CF: Crude fat; CA: Crude ash; CP: Crude protein; NDF: Neutral detergent fiber; ADF: Acid detergent fiber; and SEM: Standard error of means.
* Processing included: Milled barley; Steam flaking barley; Extruded barley; Barley grain wetting in water containing 1.00% citric acid, 1.00% propionic acid and 0.01 M sulfuric acid.
The production of gas at incubation times (mL per g DM) using rumen fluid
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 15. 33 | 12.12 | 11. 13 | 13.00 | 12.75 | 12.88 | 2.65 |
|
| 30.16 a | 22.20 b | 21 .60 b | 24.24 b | 24.40b | 23.10 b | 2.15 |
|
| 39.08 a | 25.11b | 24.40b | 26.30 b | 28.20 b | 27.40 b | 5.44 |
|
| 48.10 a | 31.10 b | 29.33 b | 36.40 b | 38.00 b | 37.60 b | 8.41 |
|
| 69.60 a | 44.50 b | 37.80 b | 58.78 a | 56.80 a | 57.10 a | 10.48 |
|
| 84.90 a | 56.58 a b | 44.10 b | 75.30 a | 78.70 a | 76.30 a | 12.71 |
|
| 191.40 a | 160.40 b | 138.70 c | 183.40 a | 179.17 a | 180.18 a | 13.55 |
|
| 270.50 a | 234.80 b | 208.70 c | 267.80 a | 270.00 a | 272.40 a | 12.56 |
|
| 281.28 a | 248.24 b | 245.60 b | 274.01 a | 278.24 a | 275.62a | 14.01 |
|
| 282.10 a | 250.90 b | 247.20 b | 275.13 a | 279.81 a | 276.14 a | 14.63 |
|
| 282.28 a | 251.21 b | 247.60 b | 278.00 a | 279.92 a | 276.36 a | 14.48 |
|
| 290.88 a | 270.58 c | 267.27 d | 286.58 b | 287.41 b | 287.64 b | 4.45 |
|
| 0.064 d | 0.082 b | 0.087 a | 0.074 c | 0.075 c | 0.072 c | 0.0015 |
* Processing included: Milled barley; Steam flaking barley; Extruded barley; Barley grain wetting in water containing 1.00% citric acid, 1.00% propionic acid and 0.01 M sulfuric acid.
† Potential gas production (mL per 200 mg of DM); ‡ Rate fermentation section b (per hr); and SEM: Standard error of means.
abcd Different letters in each row indicate significant differences at the 0.05 level.
Estimated parameters for processing seeds
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 11.00 | 10.28 | 10.52 | 10.26 | 9.87 | 10.78 | 0.11 |
|
| 64.60 | 59.12 | 58.74 | 64.40 | 64.50 | 64.90 | 0.74 |
* Processing included: Milled barley; Steam flaking barley; Extruded barley; Barley grain wetting in water containing 1.00% citric acid, 1.00% propionic acid and 0.01 M sulfuric acid.
ME: Metabolized energy; DOM: Digestible organic matter; and SEM: Standard error of means.
Effects of various methods of barley treatment on pH, methane and protozoa (per mL rumen fluid at 24 hr of incubation).
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 6.15 | 6.80 | 6.90 | 6.40 | 6.38 | 6.45 | 0.049 |
|
| 45.60 a | 39.20 c | 38.60 c | 42.24 b | 41.40 bc | 42.00 b | 0.87 |
|
| 2.94 a | 1.85 b | 1.80 b | 2.01 b | 1.98 b | 2.00 b | 0.15 |
|
| 54.00 a | 44.00 b | 43.60 b | 53.60 a | 46.60 b | 50.64 ab | 4.00 |
|
| 57.60 a | 44.30 b c | 42.30 c | 46.90 b | 48.10 b | 44.45 bc | 2.07 |
|
| 23.30 c | 36.90 a | 37.50 a | 32.00 b | 31.10 b | 33.31 b | 1.40 |
|
| 20.30 | 18.70 | 19.50 | 21.10 | 20.80 | 22.30 | 2.28 |
|
| 2.45a | 1.22cd | 1.12d | 1.47b | 1.55b | 1.33bc | 0.17 |
|
| 20.10 a | 13.40 c | 12.40 c | 15.60 b | 14.30 b | 15.30 b | 0.75 |
* Processing included: Milled barley; Steam flaking barley; Extruded barley; Barley grain wetting in water containing 1.00% citric acid, 1.00% propionic acid and 0.01 M sulfuric acid.
TVFAs: Total volatile fatty acids; SEM: Standard error of means.
abcd Different letters in each row indicate significant differences at the 0.05 level.