Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:59:11.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Carbohydrate metabolism in the ruminant

Bacterial carbohydrates formed in the rumen and their contribution to digesta entering the duodenum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2011

A. B. McAllan  and
R. H. Smith
A. B. McAllan
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AT
R. H. Smith
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RG2 9AT
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Samples of mixed bacteria were separated from rumen digesta taken from calves, kept out of contact with adult animals, and from sheep and cows.

2. For calves receiving a diet made up of equal amounts of roughage and cereals with 13–16 g nitrogen/kg dry matter, samples of mixed bacteria taken 4–6 h after feeding contained, on average, 140 g glucose in α-linked polymers (α-dextran), 25 g galactose and a total of 25 g other non-glucose, non-galactose sugars (mainly rhamnose, ribose and mannose) in combined forms per kg dry matter.

3. The α-dextran content of similar bacteria samples from sheep or cows receiving diets of similar composition was 70 g/kg dry matter. Samples from animals receiving all-roughage diets contained only 25 g α-dextran/kg dry matter, but those from cows given more than 70% of their ration as concentrates (mainly cereal) contained 150 g α-dextran/kg dry matter.

4. Addition of supplementary protein or urea to cereal–roughage diets given to calves greatly depressed the amount of α-dextran in the rumen bacterial samples to an average value of 60 g/kg dry matter.

5. Samples taken before a morning feed (i.e. after 16 h fasting) contained less α-dextran than samples taken 4–6 h after feeding for both calves and cows.

6. Under different conditions, variations in the amounts of galactose in rumen bacteria sometimes paralleled variations in α-dextran. Amounts of other non-glucose sugars did not vary greatly.

7. It was estimated, from a comparison of the compositions of rumen bacteria and duodenal contents, that, in the latter, the rhamnose, ribose and mannose came mainly from the bacteria, the arabinose, xylose and cellulose-glucose mainly from the diet and the galactose and α-dextran-glucose from both sources.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , January 1974 , pp. 77 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1974

References

REFERENCES

Balch, C. C. & Cowie, A. T. (1962). Cornell Vet. 52, 206.Google Scholar
Doetscli, R. N., Howard, B. H., Mann, S. O. & Oxford, A. E. (1957). J. gen. Microbial. 16, 156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doetsch, R. N., Robinson, R. G., Brown, R. E. & Shaw, J. C. (1953). J. Dairy Sci. 36, 825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, R. J., Doetsch, R. N. & Shaw, J. C. (1955). J. Dairy Sci. 38, 1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heald, P. J. (1951). Br. J. Nutr. 5, 84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobson, P. N. & Mann, S. O. (1955). J. gen. Microbiol. 13, 420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, B. H. (1955). Biochem. J. 60, i.Google Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1963). J. Bact. 86, 848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jouany, J-P. & Thivend, P. (1972 a). Annls Biol. anim. Biochim. Biophys. 12, 673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jouany, J-P. & Thivend, P. (1972 b). Annls Biol. anim. Biochim. Biophys. 12, 679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latham, M. J., Sharpe, M. E. & Sutton, J. D. (1971). J. appl. Bact. 34, 425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllan, A. B. & Smith, R. H. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllan, A. B. & Smith, R. H. (1971). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 31, 24A.Google Scholar
McAllan, A. B. & Smith, R. H. (1973). Br. J. Nutr. 29, 331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacRae, J. C. & Armstrong, D. G. (1968). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 19, 578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masson, F. M. & Oxford, A. E. (1951). J. gen. Microbiol. 5, 664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oxford, A. E. (1951). J. gen. Microbtol. 5, 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, P. & Singleton, A. G. (1971). Br. J. Nutr. 26, 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, Y. K. & Trei, J. E. (1970). J. Anim. Sci. 31, 253.Google Scholar
Smith, R. H. (1969). J. Dairy Res. 36, 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. & McAllan, A. B. (1966). Br. J. Nutr. 20, 703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. & McAllan, A. B. (1969). Automation in Analytical Chemistry (Technicon international Symposium, 1969) p. 207. Basingstoke, Hants: Technicon Instruments Company Ltd.Google Scholar
Smith, R. H. & McAllan, A. B. (1970). J. Nutr. 24, 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. & McAllan, A. B. (1971). Br. J. Nutr. 25, 181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, K. H. & McAllan, A. B. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 31, 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, G. J. (1960). J. agric. Sci.Camb. 54, 360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. K. & Hobson, P. N. (1971). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 76, 423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, D. J. (1968). Appl. Microbial. 16, 1672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, D. J. & Nader, C. J. (1970). Aust. J. agric. Res. 21, 747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, A. P., McAllan, A. B. & Smith, R. H. (1973). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 32, 85p.Google Scholar