The effect of lactic acid bacteria included as a probiotic or silage inoculant on in vitro rumen digestibility, total gas and methane production

被引:53
作者
Ellis, J. L. [1 ,2 ]
Bannink, A. [3 ]
Hindrichsen, I. K. [4 ]
Kinley, R. D. [1 ]
Pellikaan, W. F. [1 ]
Milora, N. [4 ]
Dijkstra, J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Wageningen Univ, Anim Nutr Grp, NL-6700 AP Wageningen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Guelph, Dept Anim Biosci, Ctr Nutr Modelling, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
[3] Wageningen UR Livestock Res, Anim Nutr, Wageningen, Netherlands
[4] Chr Hansen AS, Boge Alle 10-12, DK-2970 Horsholm, Denmark
关键词
In vitro; Lactic acid bacteria; Silage; Methane; Cattle; LACTOBACILLUS-PLANTARUM; RUMINAL DIGESTION; FERMENTATION; CORN; KINETICS; ALFALFA; GROWTH; MAIZE;
D O I
10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2015.10.016
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Through alterations in silage and rumen fermentation, lactic acid bacteria (LAB) silage inoculants may affect OM digestibility and methane (CH4) emissions. To identify LAB that may have beneficial effects on CH4 emissions and/or OM digestibility in vivo, a series of in vitro gas production trials were conducted to evaluate potential LAB inoculants at several inoculation levels, combinations, and using different substrates. In Experiment 1, the probiotic effects of 7 LAB on in vitro gas and CH4 production was examined, using dry grass silage as a substrate and a LAB inoculation level of 1 x 10(6) cfu/ml. In Experiment 2, the dose-response probiotic effect of 3 LAB on in vitro total gas and CH4 production were examined using the same dry grass silage as in Experiment 1 as the substrate. In Experiment 3, 3 LAB inoculant mixtures were examined while varying the substrate. Substrates for Experiment 3 were inoculated with LAB prior to ensiling for 3 months and were ryegrass/clover silage (RCS), maize silage (MS) and ryegrass silage (RS, from bales or mini silos). Results from the 3 experiments revealed several patterns in the effects of LAB inoculants on in vitro fermentation. First, not all LAB had a probiotic affect during in vitro fermentation. Of the LAB strains examined in Experiment 1, none had any significant effect on gas production, CH4 production/curve parameters (with the exception of one time point, 72-h, P=0.05), VFA concentration and profile or OM digestibility. In Experiment 2, Lactobacillus plantarum (LP) as a probiotic resulted in significant increases in QM digestibility, and there was a trend for several dose related responses. In Experiment 3 it was demonstrated that LAB show both strain and substrate-specific responses, when added as silage inoculants. In RS and RCS, an inoculation mixture of L. plantarum, Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactococcus lactis (LM1) tended to increase OM digestibility, while an inoculation of L. buchneri and L. lactis mixture (LM2) and of L. plantarum, L lactis and Enterococcus faecium mixture (LM3) tended to decrease OM digestibility in RCS. These effects were generally mirrored by changes in gas and CH4 production. In MS, no effects were observed on OM digestibility, total gas or CH4 production. Results suggest LAB may be most effective in grass silages (compared to maize silages), and that the LP treatment from Experiment 2, or the LM1 treatment from Experiment 3, may be most promising for evaluation in vivo. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:61 / 74
页数:14
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   Effects of Protease-resistant Antimicrobial Substances Produced by Lactic Acid Bacteria on Rumen Methanogenesis [J].
Asa, Reina ;
Tanaka, A. ;
Uehara, A. ;
Shinzato, I ;
Toride, Y. ;
Usui, N. ;
Hirakawa, K. ;
Takahashi, J. .
ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCES, 2010, 23 (06) :700-707
[2]   Effect of lactic acid bacteria inoculant and beet pulp addition on fermentation characteristics and in vitro ruminal digestion of vegetable residue silage [J].
Cao, Y. ;
Cai, Y. ;
Takahashi, T. ;
Yoshida, N. ;
Tohno, M. ;
Uegaki, R. ;
Nonaka, K. ;
Terada, F. .
JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2011, 94 (08) :3902-3912
[3]   Effect of adding lactic acid bacteria and molasses on fermentation quality and in vitro ruminal digestion of total mixed ration silage prepared with whole crop rice [J].
Cao, Yang ;
Takahashi, Toshiyoshi ;
Horiguchi, Ken-ichi ;
Yoshida, Norio .
GRASSLAND SCIENCE, 2010, 56 (01) :19-25
[4]   Influence of rumen fluid and substrate concentration on fermentation kinetics measured with a fully automated time related gas production apparatus [J].
Cone, JW ;
vanGelder, AH ;
Visscher, GJW ;
Oudshoorn, L .
ANIMAL FEED SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 1996, 61 (1-4) :113-128
[5]   Microbial inoculant effects on silage and in vitro ruminal fermentation, and microbial biomass estimation for alfalfa, bmr corn, and corn silages [J].
Contreras-Govea, Francisco E. ;
Muck, Richard E. ;
Mertens, David R. ;
Weimer, Paul J. .
ANIMAL FEED SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2011, 163 (01) :2-10
[6]   Anaerobic lactic acid degradation during ensilage of whole crop maize inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri inhibits yeast growth and improves aerobic stability [J].
Driehuis, F ;
Elferink, SJWHO ;
Spoelstra, SF .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY, 1999, 87 (04) :583-594
[7]   Effects of a bacterial inoculant and propionic acid on preservation of high-moisture ear corn, and on rumen fermentation, digestion and growth performance of beef cattle [J].
Fellner, V ;
Phillip, LE ;
Sebastian, S ;
Idziak, ES .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2001, 81 (02) :273-280
[8]   Antibacterial activity of lactic acid bacteria included in inoculants for silage and in silages treated with these inoculants [J].
Gollop, N ;
Zakin, V ;
Weinberg, ZG .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY, 2005, 98 (03) :662-666
[9]   Multiphasic analysis of gas production kinetics for in vitro fermentation of ruminant feeds [J].
Groot, JCJ ;
Cone, JW ;
Williams, BA ;
Debersaques, FMA ;
Lantinga, EA .
ANIMAL FEED SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 1996, 64 (01) :77-89
[10]   Effects of dietary starch content and rate of fermentation on methane production in lactating dairy cows [J].
Hatew, B. ;
Podesta, S. C. ;
Van Laar, H. ;
Pellikaan, W. F. ;
Ellis, J. L. ;
Dijkstra, J. ;
Bannink, A. .
JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE, 2015, 98 (01) :486-499