Characterising an artiodactyl family inhabiting arid habitats by its metabolism: Low metabolism and maintenance requirements in camelids

Dittmann, M.; Hummel, Jürgen; Runge, Ullrich; Galeffi, Cordula; Kreuzer, Michael; Clauss, Marcus

doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2014.04.005

Cited by 28 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although merycism (i.e., regurgitation and re-mastication) and the presence of comparatively fine digesta particles have been reported in non-ruminant foregut fermenters such as kangaroos Vendl et al, 2017) and proboscic monkeys (Nasalis larvatus) (Matsuda et al, 2011;Matsuda et al, 2014), true rumination linked to a sorting mechanism and with a physiologically fixed motor sequence (Gordon, 1968) only evolved twice, in the camelids and the taxonomic ruminants. While there appears to be no functional difference in the forestomach particle sorting mechanism between these two functional ruminant groups (Dittmann et al, 2015b), a major difference between them is the generally lower metabolism and lower feed intake in camelids (Dittmann et al, 2014). This may be linked to a less efficient morphophysiological design of their sorting mechanism (Dittmann et al, 2014;Dittmann et al, 2015b;Pérez et al, 2016); however, conclusive physiological studies are lacking.…”

Section: Basic Ruminant Digestive Physiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there appears to be no functional difference in the forestomach particle sorting mechanism between these two functional ruminant groups (Dittmann et al, 2015b), a major difference between them is the generally lower metabolism and lower feed intake in camelids (Dittmann et al, 2014). This may be linked to a less efficient morphophysiological design of their sorting mechanism (Dittmann et al, 2014;Dittmann et al, 2015b;Pérez et al, 2016); however, conclusive physiological studies are lacking.…”

Section: Basic Ruminant Digestive Physiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Physiological adaptations of ruminants and their potential relevance for production systems

Clauss

Hummel

2017

R. Bras. Zootec.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Herbivores face the dilemma that the level of feed intake is negatively related to factors that determine digestive efficiency, such as thoroughness of ingesta comminution by chewing, and retention of digesta in the digestive tract. Ruminants have evolved particular adaptations to solve this dilemma. Most ruminants share the characteristic of "digesta washing": fluid moves through their digestive tract faster than particles, thus effectively washing very fine particles, such as bacteria, out of the digesta plug. As the forestomach is followed by auto-enzymatic digestion, this allows a continuous, increased harvest of microbes from the forestomach. True rumination only evolved twice, in the camelids and the true ruminants. These both evolved a density-dependent sorting mechanism based on physical separation of the digesta by the process of flotation and sedimentation, ensuring that the process of rumination is applied to large particles. Differences in this sorting mechanism might facilitate a faster digesta processing in true ruminants as compared with camelids. The hallmark of ruminant digestive anatomy is the omasum, in which the fluid required for both digesta washing and the reticular separation mechanism is re-absorbed. In ruminants of the tribe Bovini, the omasum has reached the largest size and this group has a particularly great forestomach fluid throughput. Increasing the degree of digesta washing even more should increase microbial harvest from the forestomach and reduce the susceptibility to acidosis. At the same time, it should result in a metabolic state of the microbiome more tuned towards biomass production and less towards methanogenesis. Enhancing the forestomach fluid throughput by selective breeding could represent a promising way to further advance the productivity of the ruminant digestive tract.

show abstract

Section: Basic Ruminant Digestive Physiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Basic Ruminant Digestive Physiologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Physiological adaptations of ruminants and their potential relevance for production systems

Clauss

Hummel

2017

R. Bras. Zootec.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In relation to body mass, the ostium between C1 and C2 is smaller than the Ostium rumino‐reticulare, and in contrast to the Ostium rumino‐reticulare , the ostium between C1 and C2 is not located along the longitudinal axis of C1 (Pérez et al, ). The size and location of this ostium have been hypothesized to be one cause for the lower food processing capacity in camelids as compared to ruminants (Dittmann et al, ). The C3 is a tubular structure, which is functionally divided as based on its mucosal lining: it has a mucigenous glandular mucosa in its proximal part that represents about three quarters of its length, and gastric and pyloric glandular glands in its distal part, which therefore corresponds functionally to the abomasum (Luciano, Voss‐Wermbter, Behnke, Engelhardt, & Reale, ; Vallenas et al, ; von Engelhardt, Ali, & Wipper, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical characteristics of gastrointestinal content of llama (Lama glama)

Idalan

Martin

Clauss

2019

Animal Physiology Nutrition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in digesta dry matter (DM) and mean digesta particle size (MPS) along the gastrointestinal tract are well known in ruminants, but not in camelids. We collected digesta from the dorsal (d) and ventral (v) first forestomach compartment (C1), the second forestomach compartment (C2), three proximal segments and the subsequent glandular part of the third compartment (C3A‐D), the caecum and the faeces twelve llamas (Lama glama). DM analysis indicates the presence of digesta stratification in the C1, the presence of fluid in the C2 to facilitate the sorting function of this compartment, the fluid‐absorbing function of the proximal parts of the C3, the secretion of enzymes and digestive acids in the C3D, and the water‐resorbing function of the lower intestinal tract. These findings illustrate the functional resemblance between the gastrointestinal tract of camelids and cattle‐like ruminants (C1 equivalent to the rumen with stratified contents, C2 to the reticulum, C3A/B/C to the omasum and C3D to the abomasum). MPS analysis revealed a progressive reduction in MPS from the C1 to the distal C3. This gradual transition is different from the clear‐cut threshold in ruminants between the reticulum and the omasum and had so far only been described in dromedaries (Camelus dromedarius). These findings indicate that regardless of the convergent property of rumination and resemblance of general mechanisms involved in contents stratification and particle sorting, differences between ruminants and camelids exist that could be interpreted as a more efficient functionality of the ruminant forestomach.

show abstract

“…This average MR of adult animals was somewhat lower than that measured with a mask in adults, or with chamber respirometry in juveniles, in other studies (Table 3). It appears possible that even when trained, animals wearing respiration masks feel a higher degree of distress than animals in respiration chambers; higher oxygen consumption in animals investigated by mask respirometry is, for example, also found in data for camelids (Dittmann et al, 2014). It was remarkable that the RMR measured in the present study was identical to the reported average mammal's mammalian basal metabolic rate (Kleiber, 1961); yet, although our animals were also observed to rest at night with closed eyes, their RMR was higher than that reported by Withers (1983).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%