4.7 Article

The Potential Role of Seaweeds in the Natural Manipulation of Rumen Fermentation and Methane Production

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep32321

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Union (FEDER funds through COMPETE)
  2. National Funds (Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia, FCT) [EXPL/CVT-NUT/0286/2013, FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-041111, UID/QUI/50006/2013, POCI/01/0145/FEDER/007265]
  3. FCT [SFRH/BPD/70176/2010, SFRH/BPD/75065/2010]
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [EXPL/CVT-NUT/0286/2013] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study is the first to evaluate the effects of five seaweeds (Ulva sp., Laminaria ochroleuca, Saccharina latissima, Gigartina sp., and Gracilaria vermiculophylla) on gas and methane production and ruminal fermentation parameters when incubated in vitro with two substrates (meadow hay and corn silage) for 24 h. Seaweeds led to lower gas production, with Gigartina sp. presenting the lowest value. When incubated with meadow hay, Ulva sp., Gigartina sp. and G. vermiculophylla decreased methane production, but with corn silage, methane production was only decreased by G. vermiculophylla. With meadow hay, L. ochroleuca and S. latissima promoted similar methane production as the control, but with corn silage, L. ochroleuca increased it. With the exception of S. latissima, all seaweeds promoted similar levels of total volatile fatty acid production. The highest proportion of acetic acid was produced with Ulva sp., G. vermiculophylla, and S. latissima; the highest proportion of butyric acid with the control and L. ochroleuca; and the highest proportion of iso-valeric acid with Gigartina sp. These results reveal the potential of seaweeds to mitigate ruminal methane production and the importance of the basal diet. To efficiently use seaweeds as feed ingredients with nutritional and environmental benefits, more research is required to determine the mechanisms underlying seaweed and substrate interactions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据