| Literature DB >> 35011162 |
Kampanat Phesatcha1, Burarat Phesatcha2, Metha Wanapat3, Anusorn Cherdthong3.
Abstract
The objective of this research is to investigate the effect of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) adding and roughage-to-concentrate ratio (R:C ratio) on nutrients utilization, rumen fermentation efficiency, microbial protein synthesis, and protozoal population in Thai native beef cattle. Four Thai native beef cattle, weighing an average of 120 ± 10 kg live weight, were randomly assigned to four dietary treatments using a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement in a 4 × 4 Latin square design. Factor A was the level of roughage-to-concentrate ratio (R:C ratio) at 60:40 and 40:60; factor B was the levels of live yeast (LY) supplementation at 0 and 4 g/hd/d; urea-calcium-hydroxide-treated rice straw were used as a roughage source. Findings revealed that total intake and digestibility of dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM), and crude protein (CP) were increased (p < 0.05) by both factors, being greater for steers fed a R:C ratio of 40:60 supplemented with 4 g LY/hd/d. Ruminal ammonia nitrogen, total volatile fatty acid (VFA), and propionate (C3) were increased (p < 0.05) at the R:C ratio of 40:60 with LY supplementation at 4 g/hd/d, whereas rumen acetate (C2) and the C2 to C3 ratio were decreased (p < 0.05). With a high level of concentrate, LY addition increased total bacterial direct counts and fungal zoospores (p < 0.05), but decreased protozoal populations (p < 0.05). High-concentrate diet and LY supplementation increased nitrogen absorption and the efficiency of microbial nitrogen protein production. In conclusion, feeding beef cattle with 4 g/hd/d LY at a R:C ratio of 40:60 increased C3 and nutritional digestibility while lowering protozoal population.Entities:
Keywords: beef cattle; feed digestibility; rumen fermentation; yeast addition
Year: 2021 PMID: 35011162 PMCID: PMC8749668 DOI: 10.3390/ani12010053
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Ingredient composition of concentrate and chemical composition of concentrate and treated rice straw offered to steers.
| Items | Concentrate | Urea and Calcium Hydroxide Treated Rice Straw |
|---|---|---|
| Ingredients, % as fresh basis | ||
| Cassava chip | 75.0 | |
| Coconut meal | 15.0 | |
| Rice bran | 4.0 | |
| Urea | 2.5 | |
| Molasses | 2.0 | |
| Mineral mixture | 0.5 | |
| Salt | 0.5 | |
| Sulfur | 0.5 | |
| Total | 100.0 | |
| Chemical composition | ||
| Dry matter, % | 92.7 | 55.1 |
| % of dry matter | ||
| Organic matter | 92.6 | 88.7 |
| Ash | 7.4 | 11.3 |
| Crude protein | 14.1 | 5.6 |
| Neutral detergent fiber | 27.2 | 72.8 |
| Acid detergent fiber | 13.4 | 45.9 |
Effect of roughage-to-concentrate ratio and live yeast supplementation on voluntary feed intake and nutrient digestibility in Thai native beef cattle.
| Items | R:C at 60:40 | R:C at 40:60 | SEM | Interaction | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LY 0 | LY 4 | LY 0 | LY 4 | R:C | LY | R:C × LY | ||
| Dry matter intake | ||||||||
| kg/d | 2.5 | 3.1 | 2.6 | 3.3 | 0.09 | 0.048 | 0.036 | 0.042 |
| g/kg BW0.75 | 83.7 | 85.8 | 84.3 | 88.6 | 1.24 | 0.050 | 0.041 | 0.051 |
| Estimate energy intake | ||||||||
| ME, MJ/d | 25.6 | 33.1 | 27.3 | 36.5 | 0.82 | 0.042 | 0.039 | 0.971 |
| ME, MJ/kgDM | 10.2 | 10.7 | 10.5 | 11.1 | 0.98 | 0.024 | 0.031 | 0.852 |
| Nutrient digestibility, % | ||||||||
| Dry matter | 61.5 | 66.4 | 64.8 | 68.5 | 0.01 | 0.048 | 0.040 | 0.635 |
| Organic matter | 64.4 | 67.1 | 66.1 | 69.6 | 0.04 | 0.021 | 0.035 | 0.664 |
| Crude protein | 64.5 | 66.8 | 67.5 | 69.4 | 0.03 | 0.029 | 0.042 | 0.814 |
| Neutral detergent fiber | 60.1 | 66.2 | 58.3 | 63.7 | 0.04 | 0.047 | 0.015 | 0.385 |
| Acid detergent fiber | 51.6 | 55.2 | 44.1 | 47.6 | 0.05 | 0.030 | 0.022 | 0.638 |
R:C ratio = roughage-to-concentrate ratio; LY 0 = unsupplementation of live yeast; LY 4 = supplementation live yeast at 4 g/hd/d; SEM = standard error of the mean. Metabolizable energy (ME) was calculated according to the equation described by Robinson et al. [19]. Digestible organic matter fermented in the rumen (DOMR) was calculated according to the equation described by ARC [20] as follows: DOMR (kg/d) = digestible organic matter intake (DOMI, kg/d) × 0.65, where DOMI = [digestibility of organic matter (kg/kg DM) × organic matter intake (kg/d)]/100, 1 kg DOMI = 15.9 MJ ME/kg [21].
Effect of concentrate level and live yeast supplementation on fermentation characteristics and blood urea nitrogen in Thai native beef cattle.
| Items | R:C at 60:40 | R:C at 40:60 | SEM | Interaction | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LY 0 | LY 4 | LY 0 | LY 4 | R:C | LY | R:C × LY | ||
| Ruminal pH | 6.5 | 6.6 | 6.3 | 6.3 | 0.19 | 0.050 | 0.058 | 0.463 |
| Temperature, °C | 38.8 | 39.1 | 39.1 | 39.3 | 0.15 | 0.341 | 0.305 | 0.221 |
| NH3-N, mg/dL | 12.3 | 14.6 | 15.8 | 16.9 | 0.43 | 0.028 | 0.015 | 0.659 |
| BUN, mg/dL | 10.4 | 10.7 | 11.6 | 11.8 | 0.26 | 0.543 | 0.612 | 0.802 |
| Total VFAs, mmol/L | 92.4 | 102.1 | 95.5 | 105.0 | 1.35 | 0.031 | 0.039 | 0.726 |
| VFAs, mol/100 mol | ||||||||
| Acetic acid (C2) | 67.6 | 65.6 | 64.2 | 62.1 | 0.43 | 0.024 | 0.015 | 0.908 |
| Propionic acid (C3) | 23.0 | 24.1 | 25.6 | 28.7 | 0.82 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.423 |
| Butyric acid (C4) | 9.4 | 10.3 | 10.2 | 9.2 | 0.35 | 0.678 | 0.779 | 0.706 |
| C2:C3 | 2.9 | 2.7 | 2.5 | 2.2 | 1.15 | 0.611 | 0.048 | 0.658 |
R:C ratio = roughage-to-concentrate ratio; LY 0 = unsupplementation of live yeast; LY 4 = supplementation live yeast at 4 g/hd/d; SEM = standard error of the mean; NH3-N = ammonia nitrogen; BUN = blood urea nitrogen; VFAs = volatile fatty acids.
Effect of concentrate level and live yeast supplementation on microbial population in Thai native beef cattle.
| Items | R:C at 60:40 | R:C at 40:60 | SEM | Interaction | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LY 0 | LY 4 | LY 0 | LY 4 | R:C | LY | R:C × LY | ||
| Ruminal microbes | ||||||||
| Bacteria, ×1011 cell/ml | 4.8 | 5.4 | 5.0 | 5.7 | 0.24 | 0.044 | 0.041 | 0.949 |
| Protozoa, ×106 cell/ml | 5.0 | 3.9 | 5.6 | 4.2 | 0.41 | 0.843 | 0.039 | 0.536 |
| Fungi, ×105 cell/ml | 2.8 | 3.9 | 3.4 | 4.5 | 0.35 | 0.845 | 0.032 | 0.961 |
R:C ratio = roughage-to-concentrate ratio; LY 0 = unsupplementation of live yeast; LY 4 = supplementation live yeast at 4 g/hd/d; SEM = standard error of the mean.
Effect of concentrate level and live yeast supplementation on urinary purine derivatives (PD) and microbial protein synthesis in Thai native beef cattle.
| Items | R:C at 60:40 | R:C at 40:60 | SEM | Interaction | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LY 0 | LY 4 | LY 0 | LY 4 | R:C | LY | R:C × LY | ||
| Urinary purine derivatives, mmol/d | ||||||||
| Allantoin excretion | 17.9 | 21.5 | 20.3 | 24.6 | 4.39 | 0.023 | 0.036 | 0.509 |
| Allantoin absorption | 49.6 | 56.4 | 53.8 | 62.9 | 2.14 | 0.041 | 0.043 | 0.084 |
| MNS, gN/d | 31.6 | 35.4 | 33.9 | 38.6 | 2.03 | 0.044 | 0.042 | 0.751 |
| EMNS, g/kg OMDR | 12.5 | 16.1 | 15.6 | 18.2 | 1.06 | 0.045 | 0.043 | 0.216 |
R:C ratio = roughage-to-concentrate ratio; LY 0 = unsupplementation of live yeast; LY 4 = supplementation live yeast at 4 g/hd/d; SEM = standard error of the mean; MNS = microbial nitrogen supply; EMNS = efficiency of microbial nitrogen synthesis; OMDR = digestible organic matter apparently fermented in the rumen.