| Literature DB >> 35681869 |
Haoqi Han1, Liyang Zhang1, Yuan Shang1, Mingyan Wang1, Clive J C Phillips2,3, Yao Wang1, Chuanyou Su1, Hongxia Lian1, Tong Fu1, Tengyun Gao1.
Abstract
Maize silage has a significant environmental impact on livestock due to its high requirement for fertilizer and water. Mulberry has the potential to replace much of the large amount of maize silage grown in China, but its feeding value in the conserved form needs to be evaluated. We fed Hu lambs diets with 20-60% of the maize silage replaced by mulberry silage, adjusting the soybean meal content when increasing the mulberry silage inclusion rate in an attempt to balance the crude protein content of the diets. Mulberry silage had higher crude protein and lower acidic and neutral detergent fiber contents compared to maize silage. Replacing maize silage and soyabean meal with mulberry silage had no effect on the feed intake and growth rate of Hu lambs. However, the rumen pH increased, the acetate to propionate in rumen fluid increased, and the rumen ammonia concentration decreased as mulberry replaced maize silage and soyabean meal. This was associated with an increase in norank_f__F082 bacteria in the rumen. Rumen papillae were shorter when mulberry silage replaced maize silage, which may reflect the reduced neutral detergent fiber (NDF) content of the original silage. In conclusion, mulberry silage can successfully replace maize silage and soyabeans in the diet of Hu lambs without loss of production potential, which could have significant environmental benefits.Entities:
Keywords: Hu lambs; environment; maize; mulberry; novel feeds; resource utilization; roughage
Year: 2022 PMID: 35681869 PMCID: PMC9179289 DOI: 10.3390/ani12111406
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 3.231
Composition and nutrient levels of basal diets.
| Items | Treatment 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | L | M | H | |
| Ingredients (g/kg DM) | ||||
| Maize | 200 | 220 | 240 | 260 |
| Wheat bran | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Soybean meal | 170 | 150 | 130 | 110 |
| Maize silage | 250 | 200 | 150 | 100 |
| Mulberry silage | 0 | 50 | 100 | 150 |
| Peanut vines | 250 | 250 | 250 | 250 |
| Premix 1 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 |
| Bicarbonate of soda | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Total | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 | 1000 |
| Nutrient concentrations 2 (g/kg DM, except where otherwise stated) | ||||
| Dry matter (g/kg fresh weight) | 445.1 | 444.1 | 443.2 | 441.8 |
| Digestible Energy (DE), MJ/kg | 12.3 | 12.0 | 12.0 | 11.8 |
| Crude protein (CP) | 135.6 | 137.1 | 142.8 | 149.3 |
| Ether extract (EE) | 27.7 | 29.5 | 28.9 | 30.8 |
| Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) | 394.7 | 378.2 | 370.3 | 367.8 |
| Acid detergent fiber (ADF) | 250.8 | 241.0 | 238.3 | 225.8 |
| Ash | 122.8 | 116.5 | 117.4 | 109.4 |
| Calcium (Ca) | 13.3 | 13.2 | 15.2 | 16.5 |
| Phosphorus (P) | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.5 |
1 The premix provided the following per kg of the concentrate: Vitamin A 1.0 × 104 IU, Vitamin D3 2000 IU, Vitamin E 125 IU, Niacin 250 mg, pantothenic acid 75 mg, Biotin b 5mg, Cu 20 mg, Fe 68 mg, Mn 56 mg, Zn 50 mg, I 1.05 mg, Se 0.2 mg, Co 0.75 mg. 2 Nutrient levels were measured values. 3 CON, L, M and H represent the substitution of 0, 20, 40 and 60% of maize silage with mulberry silage, respectively.
Nutrient composition of mulberry and maize silages (g/kg DM, except where otherwise stated).
| Items | DM (g/kg Fresh Weight) | EE | CP | Ash | NDF | ADF | Ca | P | GE (MJ/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mulberry silage | 247.6 | 73.8 | 169.0 | 87.2 | 429.9 | 284.2 | 11.7 | 4.0 | 17.05 |
| Maize silage | 308.1 | 45.4 | 78.0 | 80.1 | 500.7 | 298.7 | 6.2 | 1.1 | 16.51 |
DM dry matter; EE ether extract; CP crude protein; NDF neutral detergent fibers; ADF acidic detergent fibers; Ca calcium; P phosphorus; GE gross energy.
Effects of replacing 0 (CON group), 20 (L group), 40 (M group) and 60% (H group) of maize silage with mulberry silage on lambs’ feed intake and growth.
| Items | Treatment | SEM 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | L | M | H | |||
| Initial body weight, kg | 27.38 | 27.94 | 27.05 | 28.01 | 0.36 | 0.752 |
| Final body weight, kg | 41.21 | 42.28 | 41.45 | 41.67 | 0.41 | 0.828 |
| Total weight, kg | 13.83 | 14.34 | 14.40 | 13.66 | 0.21 | 0.528 |
| Dry matter intake, g/d | 1168 | 1170 | 1175 | 1178 | 0.08 | 0.098 |
| Average daily gain, g/d | 231 | 239 | 240 | 228 | 3.52 | 0.528 |
| Feed conversion ratio (DM intake/live weight gain) | 5.13 | 4.98 | 5.01 | 5.20 | 0.07 | 0.447 |
1 SEM (Standard error of mean).
Effects of replacing 0 (CON group), 20 (L group), 40 (M group) and 60% (H group) of maize silage with mulberry silage on lambs’ rumen fermentation characteristics.
| Items | Treatment | SEM 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | L | M | H | |||
| pH | 6.38 b | 6.38 b | 6.47 ab | 6.57 a | 0.22 | 0.004 |
| Acetic acid, mmol/L | 87.74 b | 85.58 b | 85.25 b | 93.29 a | 1.28 | 0.021 |
| Propionic acid, mmol/L | 35.51 a | 31.58 b | 29.56 b | 28.13 b | 0.91 | 0.001 |
| Butyric acid, mmol/L | 13.55 c | 19.11 b | 22.27 a | 24.53 a | 0.88 | <0.001 |
| TVFA 1, mmol/L | 136.80 | 136.54 | 137.08 | 145.95 | 1.78 | 0.366 |
| Acetate: Propionate ratio | 2.47 c | 2.71 bc | 2.89 b | 3.31 a | 0.05 | <0.001 |
| NH3-N, mg/dL | 76.40 a | 56.70 b | 21.91 c | 21.49 c | 4.42 | <0.001 |
1 TVFA (total volatile fatty acids) = acetate + propionate + butyrate. 2 SEM (Standard error of mean). Within rows, mean values with different superscripts differ significantly by Duncan’s Multiple Comparison Test (p < 0.05).
Effects of replacing 0 (CON group), 20 (L group), 40 (M group) and 60% (H group) of maize silage with mulberry silage on lambs’ gastrointestinal tissue morphology.
| Items | Treatment | SEM 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | L | M | H | |||
| Rumen | ||||||
| Papilla height, μm | 1981.43 a | 1542.02 b | 1553.12 b | 1457.79 b | 68.72 | 0.014 |
| Papilla width, μm | 401.44 | 398.26 | 374.29 | 360.14 | 9.15 | 0.346 |
| Duodenum | ||||||
| Villus height, μm | 1039.92 | 946.82 | 949.95 | 959.96 | 30.30 | 0.705 |
| Villus width, μm | 168.73 | 199.59 | 173.96 | 177.08 | 6.70 | 0.410 |
| Crypt depth, μm | 416.42 | 424.97 | 386.58 | 373.03 | 17.57 | 0.735 |
| V/C 2 | 2.55 | 2.28 | 2.28 | 2.65 | 0.12 | 0.790 |
| Jejunum | ||||||
| Villus height, μm | 866.63 a | 790.75 b | 709.59 c | 900.34 a | 21.26 | <0.001 |
| Villus width, μm | 183.91 | 161.55 | 153.14 | 177.08 | 5.60 | 0.192 |
| Crypt depth, μm | 741.89 a | 650.01 a | 459.80 b | 744.98 a | 32.76 | <0.001 |
| V/C | 1.17 b | 1.22 b | 1.55 a | 1.22 b | 0.05 | 0.001 |
1 SEM (Standard error of mean).2 V/C (Villus height/Crypt depth). Within rows, mean values with different superscripts differ significantly by Duncan’s Multiple Comparison Test (p < 0.05).
Figure 1Histological observation the lambs’ rumen, duodenum and jejunum tissues. CON, L, M and H represent the substitution of 0, 20, 40 and 60% of maize silage with mulberry silage, respectively.
Effects of replacing 0 (CON group), 20 (L group), 40 (M group) and 60% (H group) of maize silage with mulberry silage on lambs’ rumen microbial alpha diversity (n = 6).
| Items | Treatment | SEM 1 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | L | M | H | |||
| Sobs index | 784.33 | 806.50 | 776.00 | 721.50 | 23.59 | 0.653 |
| Shannon index | 4.42 | 4.41 | 4.54 | 4.14 | 0.10 | 0.603 |
| Simpson index | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.554 |
| Ace index | 979.02 | 1067.57 | 976.46 | 967.89 | 31.72 | 0.680 |
| Chao index | 985.85 | 1053.54 | 976.08 | 945.81 | 29.26 | 0.642 |
| Coverage index | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.01 | 0.446 |
1 SEM = Standard error of mean.
Figure 2Composition of rumen microbial phyla in lambs. CON, L, M and H represent the substitution of 0, 20, 40 and 60% of maize silage with mulberry silage, respectively.
Figure 3Composition (A) and difference (B) of rumen microbial genera level in lambs. Only the dominant genera (those with relative abundances ≥ 1%) of rumen bacteria are shown. Corrected p < 0.05 is marked with *. CON, L, M and H represent the substitution of 0, 20, 40 and 60% of maize silage with mulberry silage, respectively.
Figure 4Bacteria differentiated between samples, different groups identified by linear discriminant analysis (A). Green, red and blue bars or nodes represent the bacteria with the significantly higher relative abundance in CON, L and M groups, respectively. LDA analysis of rumen microbial abundance (B). The larger the LDA score, the greater the influence of species abundance on the difference effect.
Figure 5Relationship between environmental variables and microbial diversity and abundance. R values are displayed in different colors, *, ** and *** represent p < 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001, respectively, and the legend on the right is the colour interval of different R values.