| Literature DB >> 33364459 |
Yue Wang1, Yiguang Zhao1, Fuguang Xue1,2, Xuemei Nan1, Hui Wang1, Dengke Hua1, Jun Liu3, Liang Yang1, Linshu Jiang4, Benhai Xiong1.
Abstract
The large-scale development of herbivorous animal husbandry in China has increased the demand for forage products. However, due to scarce land resources and poor soil quality, forage is in short supply. In particular, high-quality forage in China heavily relies on imports. The contradiction between supply and demand for forage grass products is increasingly notable. Therefore, the development of indigenous new forage resources with a strong ecological adaptability and a high nutritional value is a key to solving this problem. Jerusalem artichoke (JA, Helianthus tuberosus L.), a perennial herb of the genus Helianthus, has advantageous growth traits such as resistance to salinity, barrenness, drought, cold, and disease. The contents of crude protein, crude fiber, and calcium in the optimal harvest period of forage-type JA straw are comparable to those of alfalfa hay at the full bloom stage and the straw of ryegrass and corn at the mature stage. Inulin in JA tubers is a functional ingredient that has prebiotic effects in the gastrointestinal tract of monogastric animals and young ruminants. In addition, some bioactive substances (e.g. flavonoids, phenolic acids, sesquiterpenes, polysaccharides, and amino acids) in JA leaves and flowers have antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidant functions as well as toxicities to cancer cells. These functional ingredients may provide effective alternatives to antibiotics used in livestock production. In this review, we summarized the potentials of JA as a feed ingredient from the aspects of nutritional value and fermenting characteristics of the straw, the functions of physiological regulation and disease prevention of inulin in the tubers, and bioactive substances in the leaves and flowers.Entities:
Keywords: Bioactive substances; Feedstuff; Inulin; Jerusalem artichoke; Nutrient value
Year: 2020 PMID: 33364459 PMCID: PMC7750793 DOI: 10.1016/j.aninu.2020.09.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anim Nutr ISSN: 2405-6383
Fig. 1Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.): (A) whole plant, (B) tubers, (C) leaves, and (D) flowers.
Fig. 2Dynamics of dry matter accumulation in leaves, stems, and tubers of Jerusalem artichoke during the growing period.
Composition of tubers of different varieties of Jerusalem artichoke (JA) (DM basis unless otherwise stated).1
| Item | Varieties | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | R | S | T | L | Q | N | |
| Nutrients, % | |||||||
| DM, % (fresh weight) | 23.2 | 19.3 | 22.8 | 19.8 | 27.2 | 22.4 | 18.8 |
| CP | 7.79 | 6.74 | 5.12 | 12.1 | 9.81 | 10.16 | 3.47 |
| Total sugars | 81.0 | 76.8 | 82.5 | 68.6 | 81.2 | 71.6 | 74.9 |
| Glucose | 0.21 | 0.21 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Sucrose | 8.13 | 9.56 | 9.19 | 8.54 | 6.05 | 3.61 | 6.82 |
| Fructose | 0.50 | 0.80 | 1.58 | 0.34 | 0.48 | 0.27 | 1.02 |
| Inulin | 75.2 | 66.2 | 71.7 | 71.5 | 74.7 | 67.7 | 67.1 |
| Total starch | 0.55 | 1.60 | – | – | – | 1.95 | – |
| Total fat | 0.83 | 0.90 | 0.60 | 1.57 | – | 2.71 | – |
| Ash | 5.50 | 6.75 | 4.85 | 5.34 | 5.63 | – | 8.40 |
| Minerals and trace elements, mg/100 g | |||||||
| Ca | 114 | 105 | 136 | 70.7 | 57.4 | – | 157 |
| K | 21.0 | 21.8 | 25.4 | – | 4.09 | – | 11.3 |
| Mg | 72.7 | 90.9 | 85.4 | 72.7 | 56.5 | 81.0 | 64.5 |
| P | 2,545 | 2,614 | 2,155 | – | 2,210 | 1,928 | 2,854 |
| Na | 13.6 | 16.0 | – | 6.06 | 4.02 | 8.57 | – |
| Fe | 15.5 | 3.21 | – | 17.2 | 1.84 | 10.0 | 2.69 |
| Cu | 0.55 | 0.43 | – | 0.61 | – | – | – |
| Zn | 0.00 | 0.53 | – | 60.6 | 0.69 | 1.90 | – |
| Amino acids, mg/100 g | |||||||
| Asp | 258 | 169.5 | 210 | 229 | 620 | 115 | 312 |
| Thr | 148 | 155 | 136 | 161 | 220 | 174 | 196 |
| Ser | 251 | 252 | 163 | 232 | 190 | 188 | 169 |
| Glu | – | 242 | – | 415 | 990 | – | 152 |
| Pro | – | – | 217 | – | 340 | 169 | – |
| Gly | 367 | 369 | – | 174 | 200 | 511 | 315 |
| Ala | 39.0 | 24.0 | 17.0 | 23.0 | 210 | 161 | 24.0 |
| Val | 24.0 | 25.0 | – | 32.0 | 180 | 40 | 719 |
| Met | – | 215 | – | – | 60.0 | 159 | – |
| Ile | 30.0 | 34.0 | 25.0 | – | 170 | 66.0 | 51.0 |
| Leu | 52.0 | 56.0 | 52.0 | – | 280 | 44.0 | 42.0 |
| Tyr | 6.30 | 6.10 | 73.0 | 8.00 | 90.0 | 623 | 5.00 |
| Phe | 64.0 | 89.0 | 64.1 | 111 | 160 | 19.0 | – |
| Lys | 38.0 | 39.0 | 37.0 | 41.0 | 300 | 47.0 | 52.0 |
| His | 53.0 | 56.0 | 39.0 | 38.0 | 220 | – | – |
| Arg | 2,364 | 2,267 | 1,738 | 2,151 | 1,450 | 2,553 | 805 |
—, not detected.
Sources: (A) Albik’; (R) ‘Rubik’; (S) ‘Sauliai’ from Lithuania harvested at 16, 18, and 20 wk after planting (Žaldarienė et al., 2013), (T) JA from Thailand harvested at 18 wk after planting (Saengthongpinit and Sajjaanantakul, 2005); (L) JA from Langfang, Hebei, China, harvested at 17 to 19 wk after emergence (China Feed Database, 2019); (Q) JA from Qinghai, China, harvested at 11 to 14 wk after emergence (Huang et al., 2004); (N) JA from Nanjing, China, harvested at 16 to 18 wk after emergence (Kou et al., 2014).
Hydrolyzed amino acid.
Composition of leaves and stems of different Jerusalem artichokes (JA).1
| Ingredients | Varieties | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | R | S | T | L | Q | |
| Nutrients, %, DM basis | ||||||
| CP | 10.2 | 9.79 | 21.4 | 5.65 | 15.2 | 9.59 |
| Total sugars | 18.3 | 21.8 | 17.3 | 14.8 | 19.5 | 14.1 |
| Fructose | 0.26 | 0.27 | 0.26 | 0.18 | – | 0.13 |
| Glucose | 0.74 | – | 0.73 | 0.46 | – | 0.51 |
| Sucrose | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.04 | 0.04 | – | 1.28 |
| CF | 21.0 | 23.9 | 26.1 | 25.6 | 27.4 | 24.3 |
| Lignin | 13.6 | 17.9 | 18.0 | – | – | 21.1 |
| Ash | 9.68 | 11.57 | 13.4 | 10.88 | 11.7 | 13.6 |
| Fat | 4.18 | 1.69 | – | 1.52 | 6.14 | 5.85 |
| Minerals and trace elements, mg/100 g | ||||||
| Ca | – | 291 | 102 | 320 | 760 | – |
| K | 3,600 | 4,500 | – | – | – | – |
| Mg | – | – | 690 | 60.0 | – | 447 |
| P | 105 | – | 34.0 | 7.00 | 26.0 | – |
| Na | 5.10 | 7.00 | 4.00 | – | – | |
| Zn | 4.40 | 6.90 | – | – | – | 7.20 |
| Fe | – | – | 8.00 | <0.10 | – | – |
| Mn | – | 5.30 | – | – | – | – |
CF = crude fiber.
Sources: (A) Albik‘; (R) ‘Rubik’; (S) ‘Sauliai’ from Lithuania harvested at 16, 18, and 20 wk after planting (ŽAldarienė et al., 2013), (T) JA from Thailand harvested at 18 wk after planting (Saengthongpinit and Sajjaanantakul, 2005); (L) JA from Langfang, Hebei, China, harvested at 17 to 19 wk after emergence (China Feed Database, 2019); (Q) JA from Qinghai, China, harvested at 11 to 14 wk after emergence (Huang et al., 2004); (N) JA from Nanjing, China, harvested at 16 to 18 wk after emergence (Kou et al., 2014).
Comparison of silage nutrients between Jerusalem artichoke and several main feeds (%, DM).
| Silage | DM | CP | EE | Ash | NDF | ADF | Lignin | Ca | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jerusalem artichoke silage (squaring stage)1 | 25.8 | 11.6 | 1.60 | 5.90 | 43.9 | 31.7 | 7.50 | 1.36 | 0.20 |
| Yellow corn silage, normal (32% to 38% DM)2 | 35.1 | 8.80 | 3.2 | 4.30 | 45.0 | 28.1 | 2.60 | 0.28 | 0.26 |
| Barley silage2 | 35.5 | 12.0 | 3.5 | 7.50 | 56.3 | 34.5 | 5.60 | 0.48 | 0.30 |
| Oats silage (head)2 | 34.6 | 12.9 | 3.4 | 9.80 | 60.6 | 38.9 | 5.50 | 0.52 | 0.31 |
| Ryegrass silage (annual, vegetative stage)2 | 29.7 | 16.1 | 3.80 | 9.60 | 57.8 | 34.9 | 4.50 | 0.43 | 0.42 |
| Sorghum silage (feed)2 | 28.8 | 10.8 | 3.60 | 10.9 | 63.3 | 40.7 | 5.90 | 0.64 | 0.24 |
| Wheat silage (head)2 | 33.3 | 12.0 | 3.20 | 8.60 | 59.9 | 37.6 | 5.80 | 0.38 | 0.29 |
1Adapted from Liu et al. (2017).
2Adapted from NRC (2001).
Comparison of digestible energy (DE), metabolizable energy (ME) and net energy for lactation (NEL) of dairy cows in Jerusalem artichoke and other main feeds (MJ/kg DM).
| Feed name | DE | ME | NEL |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jerusalem artichoke silage (squaring stage)1 | 11.9 | 9.20 | – |
| Jerusalem artichoke tuber2 | 10.1 | – | 7.78 |
| Corn yellow silage (normal, 32% to 38% DM)3 | 12.5 | 9.75 | 6.07 |
| Barley silage3 | 11.2 | 8.49 | 5.19 |
| Oats silage (head)3 | 10.6 | 7.99 | 4.81 |
| Ryegrass silage (annual, vegetative stage)3 | 11.4 | 8.70 | 5.36 |
| Sorghum silage (feed)3 | 10.1 | 7.49 | 4.48 |
| Wheat silage (head)3 | 10.7 | 7.99 | 4.85 |
| Potato3 | 14.7 | 11.9 | 7.74 |
| Beet sugar (dried)3 | 12.7 | 9.87 | 6.15 |
1 Adapted from Liu et al. (2017); Zhao et al. (2006).
2 Adapted from Hay and Offer (1992).
3 Adapted from NRC (2001).
Bioactive components in the aerial parts of Jerusalem artichoke1.
| Category | Compound |
|---|---|
| Flavonoid | desacetyleupaserrin, hymenoxin, nevadensin, kaempferol gluconate, |
| Phenolic acid | 3,4-dicaffeoylquinic acid, 3-feruloyl-quinic acid, chlorogenic acid, 1,5-dicaffeoylquinic acid, catechin, salicylic acid, epigallocatechin gallate, p-coumaroyl-quinic acid |
| Sesquiterpenoids | 17,18-dihydrobudlein A, heliannuols A, D, niveusin B, argophyllin A, B, heliangine, 3-ethoxyniveusin B, 15-hydroxy-3-dehydrodesoxytifruticin, ciliaric acid, angelylgrandifloric acid |
| Sesquiterpene lactone | desacetyleupaserrin, annuithrin, argophyllin a, heliangine, 3-hydroxy-8b-tigloyl-oxy-1,10-dehydroarigloxin, eupatoliade |
| Amino acids | tyrosine, isoleucine, valine |
| Polysaccharide | |
| Sterols | Δ7-stigmastenol, Δ7-campestenol |
| Essential oil | (E)-2-hexen-1-ol, tricyclene, α-thujene, (e)-ocimene, γ-terpinene |
Analyzed by our laboratory.