Glycerol combined with oils did not limit biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acid but reduced methane production in vitro

Castagnino, Pablo S.; Messana, Juliana Duarte; Fiorentini, Giovani; Jesus, Raphael Barbetta de; Vito, Elias San; Carvalho, Isabela Pena Carvalho de; Berchielli, Telma Teresinha

doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.12.004

Cited by 30 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, SO, which is a rich source of C18:2 cis n-6, is expected to have strong negative effects on ruminal bacterial populations; this agrees in part with the reduction of total bacteria (copies of 16S rDNA/ml) caused by SO treatment observed in this study. During rumen byohydrogenation, C18:2 cis n-6 yields several intermediate compounds until reduction to C18:0 (Castagnino et al, 2015). In the present study, C18:1 trans-11 and C18:2 cis-9, trans-11 (biohydrogenation intermediate isomers) were increased in rumen contents with SO compared with control and HPO.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 48%

Quantitative analysis of ruminal bacterial populations involved in lipid metabolism in dairy cows fed different vegetable oils

Vargas‐Bello‐Pérez

Cancino‐Padilla

Romero

et al. 2016

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vegetable oils are used to increase energy density of dairy cow diets, although they can provoke changes in rumen bacteria populations and have repercussions on the biohydrogenation process. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of two sources of dietary lipids: soybean oil (SO, an unsaturated source) and hydrogenated palm oil (HPO, a saturated source) on bacterial populations and the fatty acid profile of ruminal digesta. Three non-lactating Holstein cows fitted with ruminal cannulae were used in a 3 × 3 Latin square design with three periods consisting of 21 days. Dietary treatments consisted of a basal diet (Control, no fat supplement) and the basal diet supplemented with SO (2.7% of dry matter (DM)) or HPO (2.7% of DM). Ruminal digesta pH, NH 3 -N and volatile fatty acids were not affected by dietary treatments. Compared with control and HPO, total bacteria measured as copies of 16S ribosomal DNA/ml by quantitative PCR was decreased ( P < 0.05) by SO. Fibrobacter succinogenes, Butyrivibrio proteoclasticus and Anaerovibrio lipolytica loads were not affected by dietary treatments. In contrast, compared with control, load of Prevotella bryantii was increased ( P < 0.05) with HPO diet. Compared with control and SO, HPO decreased ( P < 0.05) C18:2 cis n-6 in ruminal digesta. Contents of C15:0 iso, C18:11 trans-11 and C18:2 cis-9, trans-11 were increased ( P < 0.05) in ruminal digesta by SO compared with control and HPO. In conclusion, supplementation of SO or HPO do not affect ruminal fermentation parameters, whereas HPO can increase load of ruminal P. bryantii. Also, results observed in our targeted bacteria may have depended on the saturation degree of dietary oils.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 48%

Quantitative analysis of ruminal bacterial populations involved in lipid metabolism in dairy cows fed different vegetable oils

Vargas‐Bello‐Pérez

Cancino‐Padilla

Romero

et al. 2016

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Crude glycerine is preferentially converted to propionate in the rumen (Wang et al, 2009), absorbed directly by ruminal epithelium or go directly to the small intestine and then converted to glucose in the liver (Krehbiel, 2008). In addition, in vitro studies where glycerol was added to the substrate have found a linear increase in propionate to the detriment of acetic acid production (Avila-Stagno et al, 2013;Castagnino et al, 2015) and reduction in the acetate to propionate ratio (Avila et al, 2011;Bergner et al, 1995). Since propionate fermentation has been suggested as a means of reducing methane emissions, inclusion of CG in the diets of ruminants may reduce emissions, particularly when added to high-fibre diets (Rémond et al, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of crude glycerine in supplement on the intake, rumen fermentation, and microbial profile of Nellore steers grazing tropical grass

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of crude glycerine (CG) inclusion in feed supplement (0, 70, 140, 210 and 280 g/kg DM basis of supplement) on the forage intake and digestibility, ruminal fermentation parameters, kinetics of fibre degradation, and rumen microbial profile of Nellore steers grazing on tropical grass. Ten ruminally cannulated Nellore steers [490 kg 7 47 body weight (BW)] were used in a replicated 5 Â 5 Latin square design with 14-d periods. Steers were individually supplemented at the rate of 300 g/100 kg of BW. Inclusion of CG in the supplement did not affect (P40.05) dry matter intake, apparent total tract digestibility, ruminal pH (P ¼0.784) or total ruminal VFA (P ¼0.291), but linearly decreased the NH 3 -N concentration (P ¼0.021). The inclusion of CG in the supplement linearly increased (P o 0.001) the molar proportions of butyrate and valerate; linearly decreased the acetate (P ¼0.007) concentration, thus reducing the acetate to propionate ratio (Po 0.001); and did not affect the molar proportions of propionate and isobutyrate. Inclusion of GC had a quadratic effect (P ¼0.010) on the in situ potential degradable fraction of NDF and rate of fibre degradation (P¼ 0.006). Addition of CG linearly decreased the number of protozoa of the genera Entodinium (P ¼ 0.015) and Isotricha (P ¼0.058) and the relative proportions of Ruminococcus albus (P ¼0.047) and Ruminococcus flavefaciens in the rumen (P ¼0.036), but did not affect Fibrobacter succinogenes (P¼ 0.420) or the methanogens (P ¼0.150). The inclusion of CG in the supplement up to 280 g/kg DM altered ruminal fermentation and negatively affected in situ fibre degradation and the gram-positive cellulolytic bacterial population, but did not affect intake and apparent total tract digestibility for Nellore steers grazing tropical grass.

show abstract

“…Between these two processes, endogenous synthesis is more significant than the ruminal secretion of CLA (Castagnino et al, 2015). The increased vaccenic acid content is important for both cattle (Griinari et al, 2000) and humans (Adlof et al, 2000) as both have the capacity to synthesize CLA.…”

Section: Biohydrogenationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Whole Cottonseed or Protected Fat Dietary Additives on Carcass Characteristics and Meat Quality of Beef Cattle: A review

Lima¹,

Valente²,

Roça³

et al. 2017

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of oil supplies in feed increases the energy density of the diet and has the potential to enhance both animal performance and meat quality. Whole cottonseed is an oilseed that has a high concentration of oil and is especially rich in unsaturated fatty acids such as linoleic acid. Whole cottonseed is considered as an excellent alternative addition to ruminant feed. Protected lipids are composed of industry-based fatty acids. In the feedlot, protected lipids are used in conjunction with calcium and, in certain cases, their addition has been seen to augment meat quality in terms of essential fatty acid concentrations. This review discusses and debates the use of the whole cottonseed as well as protected lipids (calcium salts of fatty acids) as dietary additives to ruminant feed and diet, and also its impact on meat quality. The whole cottonseed and or protected lipids are viable feedlot alternatives for use in feedlot when it is desired to reduce the amount of starch in animal diet without compromising the performance. The addition of the whole cottonseed or protected lipid in diet is not affect pH values in meat. The whole cottonseed does not contribute to the improvement of tenderness of the meat. The proportion mean of Desirable fatty acids in meat in the comparative study were: as pentadecanoic acid (C15:1 = 0.29%), palmitoleic acid (C16:1 = 4.26%), heptadecanoic acid (C17:1 = 0.07%), oleic acid (C18:1n9c = 37.32%), γ-linolenic acid (0.94%) and α-linolenic acid (1.04%), elaidic acid (C18:1n9t = 0.50%), eicosatrienoic acid (C20:3n3 = 0.03%), eicosapentaenoic acid (C20:5n3 = 0.04%), erucic acid (C22:1n9 = 0.89%), docosadienoic acid (C22:2 = 0.04%) and stearic acid (C18:0 = 21.53%). The addition the cottonseed or protected lipid in diet does not affect fatty acids profiles the desirable fatty acids in meat.

show abstract

Glycerol combined with oils did not limit biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acid but reduced methane production in vitro

Cited by 30 publications

References 40 publications

Quantitative analysis of ruminal bacterial populations involved in lipid metabolism in dairy cows fed different vegetable oils

Quantitative analysis of ruminal bacterial populations involved in lipid metabolism in dairy cows fed different vegetable oils

Effect of crude glycerine in supplement on the intake, rumen fermentation, and microbial profile of Nellore steers grazing tropical grass

Effect of Whole Cottonseed or Protected Fat Dietary Additives on Carcass Characteristics and Meat Quality of Beef Cattle: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About