2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2010.11.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of grain processing and supplementation with exogenous amylase on nutrient digestibility in feedlot diets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
27
0
13

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
2
27
0
13
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite the improved ruminal starch digestion with amylase supplementation, total-tract starch digestion was not modified, reflecting the ability of the intes- tine to digest starch escaping ruminal digestion, which can be up to 3 g/d per kg of BW (Huntington, 1997;Offner and Sauvant, 2004;Nozière et al, 2010). Previous studies reported a numerical increase in total-tract digestibility of starch with amylase-supplemented diets in dairy cows (Hristov et al, 2008;Klingerman et al, 2009;Weiss et al, 2011) or in beef steers (DiLorenzo et al, 2011), but it never exceeded 1.7% and was not always observed (McCarthy et al, 2013). It is worth noting that starch was highly degradable in the present work, with an average digestibility of 78 and 98% at the ruminal and total-tract levels, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Despite the improved ruminal starch digestion with amylase supplementation, total-tract starch digestion was not modified, reflecting the ability of the intes- tine to digest starch escaping ruminal digestion, which can be up to 3 g/d per kg of BW (Huntington, 1997;Offner and Sauvant, 2004;Nozière et al, 2010). Previous studies reported a numerical increase in total-tract digestibility of starch with amylase-supplemented diets in dairy cows (Hristov et al, 2008;Klingerman et al, 2009;Weiss et al, 2011) or in beef steers (DiLorenzo et al, 2011), but it never exceeded 1.7% and was not always observed (McCarthy et al, 2013). It is worth noting that starch was highly degradable in the present work, with an average digestibility of 78 and 98% at the ruminal and total-tract levels, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In this context, the use of exogenous amylase as a feed additive for high-producing ruminants is of interest (McCarthy et al, 2013). Several studies have demonstrated that exogenous amylase preparations resistant to ruminal degradation are able to improve OM digestibility in dairy cows (Hristov et al, 2008;Klingerman et al, 2009;Gencoglu et al, 2010) or beef steers (DiLorenzo et al, 2011). This increased OM digestibility was associated, in some cases, with improved NDF digestibility, whereas no effect on starch digestibility (Gado et al, 2009;Klingerman et al, 2009;Gencoglu et al, 2010) or on true digestibility of OM in the rumen (Hristov et al, 2008) was found.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exogenous amylases increase ruminal butyrate concentration that serves as a source of energy for tissues without increasing starch digestibility in the rumen (Tricarico, Johnston, & Dawson, ). Several studies demonstrated that supplemental amylase improved dry matter intake (DMI), neutral detergent fiber (NDF) digestibility and weight gain (DiLorenzo et al., ; Gado, Salem, Robinson, & Hassan, ; Tricarico et al., ). In terms of α‐amylase from Aspergillus oryzae , supplementation of 240–662 dextrinizing units (DU) fungal α‐amylase per kg DM to dairy cows (DeFrain, Hippen, Kalscheur, & Tricarico, ; Tricarico et al., ) improved milk yield (+0.6 to +1.5 kg/day), and 580–950 DU α‐amylase per kg DM to finishing beef cattle enhanced DMI, average daily gain (ADG) but did not affect carcass yield grade or characteristics (Tricarico et al., ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, results obtained in the literature are inconsistent regarding the enzymes use on performance of the animals in these dietary conditions (Beauchemin, Rode, & Sewalt, 1995;DiLorenzo et al, 2011;Hristov, McAllister, & Cheng, 2000;Oliveira et al, 2015). This inconsistency of results can be attributed in part to differences in activity and characteristics of the enzymes used in each study, as well as physical and chemical properties of the diet, since enzymes performance are related with substrate specificity (Meale, Beauchemin, Hristov, Chaves, & McAllister, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%