4.4 Article

Influence of the pattern of peptide supply on microbial activity in the rumen simulating fermenter (RUSITEC)

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
Volume 88, Issue 1, Pages 73-80

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1079/BJN2002585

Keywords

synchrony; microbial protein synthesis; RUSITEC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The source and pattern of N supply was varied in the rumen simulation technique (RUSITEC) in order to determine if continuous, rather than transient, availability of peptides was required for optimum ruminal fermentation. The energy source was fibre prepared from sugar-beet pulp. N was added as NH(3) continuously infused (AC) or peptides (Bacto(R) Casitone, a pancreatic hydrolysate of casein; Difco Laboratories, Detroit, MI, USA) continuously infused (PC) or added as a single dose at the time of feeding (PS). Free peptides were detected in the fermenter liquid for 4 h after feeding in the AC treatment, for 10 h in the PS treatment, and at all times with the PC treatment. Treatments had no effect on DM degradation. Approximately 40 % of the degradation occurred during the time no peptides were detected in the PS treatment. Microbial N flow tended to be higher with the peptide additions (P<0.061), with no significant difference between the two peptides treatments. The production of liquid-associated micro-organisms (LAM) was higher in the PC treatment (P<0.05) and the proportion of LAM derived from NH(3) lower (P<0.05). However, LAM only accounted for 20-30 % total microbial population. Our main conclusion was that peptides had a small stimulatory effect on the fermentation, but there was no indication that synchrony of supply of energy and amino acid-N in the fermenter promoted a more efficient fermentation than non-synchronous supply. This conclusion must be qualified, however, because some N remained in the fibre and may have become available progressively as the fibre was digested by the micro-organisms.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available