In vitro dietary analysis of tropical browses and pasture consumed by goats

Posted on
in-vitro-dietary-analysis-of-tropical-browses-and-pasture-consumed-by-goats
In vitro dietary analysis of tropical browses and pasture consumed by goats

References

  1. CSIRO. The Challenge: A Hungry, Warming World. https://www.csiro.au/en/research/animals/livestock/futurefeed. (2023).

  2. Koluman, N. Goats and their role in climate change. Small Ruminant Res. 228, 107094 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  3. FAO. FAOSTAT. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL. (2023).

  4. IPCC. Climate change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. (2021).

  5. Valone, T. F. Linear global temperature correlation to carbon dioxide level, sea level, and innovative solutions to a projected 6 C warming by 2100. J. Geosci. Environ. Protect. 9, 84 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hughes, L. Climate change and Australia: Trends, projections and impacts. Austral Ecol. 28, 423–443 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Christensen, L., Coughenour, M. B., Ellis, J. E. & Chen, Z. Z. Vulnerability of the Asian typical steppe to grazing and climate change. Clim. Change 63, 351–368 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sejian, V. et al. Climate Change Impact on Livestock: Adaptation and Mitigation 2015th ed. (Springer India, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gurung, N. Nutritional requirements of different classes of meat goats. Prof. Agric. Workers J. 6, 90 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Morgan, J. A., Milchunas, D. G., LeCain, D. R., West, M. & Mosier, A. R. Carbon dioxide enrichment alters plant community structure and accelerates shrub growth in the shortgrass steppe. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, 14724–14729 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vitti, D. M. & Kebreab, E. Phosphorus and calcium utilization and requirements in farm animals. (2010).

  12. Ramirez, R. & Ledezma-Ton-es, R. Ramirez R, Ledezma-Tones R. Forage utilization from native shrubs Acacia rigidula and Acacia farnesiana by goats and sheep. Small Ruminant Research 25, 43–50 (1997).

  13. Mengistu, G., Karonen, M., Salminen, J.-P., Hendriks, W. & Pellikaan, W. F. In vitro fermentation of browse species using goat rumen fluid in relation to browse polyphenol content and composition. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 231, 1–11 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ventura-Cordero, J., Sandoval-Castro, C., Torres-Acosta, J. & Capetillo-Leal, C. Do goats have a salivary constitutive response to tannins?. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 45, 29–34 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Njidda, A. & Nasiru, A. In vitro gas production and dry matter digestibility of tannin-containing forages of semi-arid region of north-eastern Nigeria. Pak. J. Nutr. 9, 60–66 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Getachew, G., Robinson, P., DePeters, E. & Taylor, S. Relationships between chemical composition, dry matter degradation and in vitro gas production of several ruminant feeds. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 111, 57–71 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Blümmel, M., Schröder, A., Südekum, K. & Becker, K. Estimating ruminal microbial efficiencies in silage‐fed cattle: Comparison of an in vitro method with a combination of in situ and in vivo measurements. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 81, 57–67 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hammond, K. et al. The effects of fresh forages and feed intake level on digesta kinetics and enteric methane emissions from sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 193, 32–43 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Anele, U., Yang, W., McGinn, P., Tibbetts, S. & McAllister, T. Ruminal in vitro gas production, dry matter digestibility, methane abatement potential, and fatty acid biohydrogenation of six species of microalgae. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 96, 354–363 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Durmic, Z. et al. In vitro fermentative traits of Australian woody perennial plant species that may be considered as potential sources of feed for grazing ruminants. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 160, 98–109 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gemeda, B. S. & Hassen, A. In vitro fermentation, digestibility and methane production of tropical perennial grass species. Crop Pasture Sci. 65, 479–488 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Jiang, X., Ni, Y., Zhang, S., Zhang, Y. & Shen, X. Identification of differentially expressed proteins in liver in response to subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) induced by high-concentrate diet. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 27, 1181 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Nagaraja, T. & Titgemeyer, E. Ruminal acidosis in beef cattle: The current microbiological and nutritional outlook. J. Dairy Sci. 90, E17–E38 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Meale, S. J., Chaves, A. V., Baah, J. & McAllister, T. A. Methane production of different forages in in vitro ruminal fermentation. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 25, 86 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Min, B.-R., Lee, S., Jung, H., Miller, D. N. & Chen, R. Enteric methane emissions and animal performance in dairy and beef cattle production: Strategies, opportunities, and impact of reducing emissions. Animals 12, 948 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Vongsamphanh, P., Preston, T. & Leng, R. Glycerol supplementation increased growth rates, decreased the acetate: propionate ratio in rumen VFA, and reduced enteric methane emissions, in cattle fattened on cassava pulp-urea, brewers’ grains and rice straw. Livestock Res. Rural Dev. 29 (2017).

  27. Kumar, R. & D’mello, J. Anti-nutritional factors in forage legumes. (1995).

  28. Ku-Vera, J. C. et al. Role of secondary plant metabolites on enteric methane mitigation in ruminants. Front. Vet. Sci. 7, 584 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rira, M., Morgavi, D. P., Popova, M., Maxin, G. & Doreau, M. Microbial colonisation of tannin-rich tropical plants: Interplay between degradability, methane production and tannin disappearance in the rumen. Animal 16, 100589 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Osuga, I. M., Abdulrazak, S. A., Ichinohe, T. & Fujihara, T. Rumen degradation and in vitro gas production parameters in some browse forages, grasses and maize Stover from Kenya. J. Food Agric. Environ. 4, 60 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Singh, S., Kundu, S. & Karnani, L. In vitro gas production, rumen parameters and nutrients degradability of diets based on Cenchrus ciliaris grass-shrubs and tree leaves in sheep and goats. Indian J. Animal Sci. 78 (2008).

  32. Fox, L. R. & Macauley, B. Insect grazing on Eucalyptus in response to variation in leaf tannins and nitrogen. Oecologia 29, 145–162 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  33. MacAuley, B. J. & Fox, L. R. Variation in total phenols and condensed tannins in Eucalyptus: Leaf phenology and insect grazing. Aust. J. Ecol. 5, 31–35 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Campbell, I. C. & Fuchshuber, L. Polyphenols, condensed tannins, and processing rates of tropical and temperate leaves in an Australian stream. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 14, 174–182 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Russell, J. The importance of pH in the regulation of ruminal acetate to propionate ratio and methane production in vitro. J. Dairy Sci. 81, 3222–3230 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ellis, J. et al. Aspects of rumen microbiology central to mechanistic modelling of methane production in cattle. J. Agric. Sci. 146, 213–233 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gäbel, G. & Sehested, J. SCFA transport in the forestomach of ruminants. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A Physiol. 118, 367–374 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Barsila, S. R. The fodder oat (Avena sativa) mixed legume forages farming: Nutritional and ecological benefits. J. Agric. Nat. Resour. 1, 206–222 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Moore , G., Revell , C. K., Schelfhout , C., Ham , C. & Crouch , S. Mosaic agriculture: a guide to irrigated crop and forage production in northern WA. (2021).

  40. Jayasinghe, J., Pembleton, K. G., Barber, D. G., Donaghy, D. J. & Ramilan, T. Modelling of tropical pasture growth using DairyMod: Model parameterisation and validation across multiple environments. Eur. J. Agron. 156, 127146 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Patra, A. K. A meta-analysis of the effect of dietary fat on enteric methane production, digestibility and rumen fermentation in sheep, and a comparison of these responses between cattle and sheep. Livest. Sci. 162, 97–103 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Enjalbert, F., Combes, S., Zened, A. & Meynadier, A. Rumen microbiota and dietary fat: A mutual shaping. J. Appl. Microbiol. 123, 782–797 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Czerkawski, J. & Breckenridge, G. Design and development of a long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Br. J. Nutr. 38, 371–384 (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Fedorah, P. M. & Hrudey, S. E. A simple apparatus for measuring gas production by methanogenic cultures in serum bottles. Environ. Technol. 4, 425–432 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Chaves, A. et al. Effect of pasture type (alfalfa vs. grass) on methane and carbon dioxide production by yearling beef heifers. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 86, 409–418 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Forwood, D. L. et al. Crop sorghum ensiled with unsalable vegetables increases silage microbial diversity. Front. Microbiol. 10, 2599 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  47. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis. Method 990.03 (Association of Official Analytical Chemistry, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Van Soest, P., Robertson, J. B. & Lewis, B. A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74, 3583–3597 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  49. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis: Changes in Official Methods of Analysis Made at the Annual Meeting (Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Thiex, N., Novotny, L. & Crawford, A. Determination of ash in animal feed: AOAC official method 942.05 revisited. J. AOAC Int. 95, 1392–1397 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Pryor, W., McDonald, W. & Seawright, A. Supplejack (Ventilago viminalis) feeding of sheep. Nutrittonal and toxicological investigations. (1972).

Download references

Related Posts