Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T03:15:58.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of fibre digestion and digesta retention time between rabbits, guinea-pigs, rats and hamsters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

EI Sakaguchi ,
Hiroshi Itoh ,
Senji Uchida  and
Takao Horigome
EI Sakaguchi
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, Okayama University, Okayama 700, Japan
Hiroshi Itoh
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, Okayama University, Okayama 700, Japan
Senji Uchida
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, Okayama University, Okayama 700, Japan
Takao Horigome
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, Okayama University, Okayama 700, Japan
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. Digestive efficiencies of fibre components and retention time of digesta in the whole gut and in the large intestine were measured in rabbits, guinea-pigs, hamsters and rats when given a lucerne (Medicago saliva)-containing diet.

2. Co-EDTA and chromium-mordanted cell-wall constituents of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum L.) were used as liquid- and solid-phase markers respectively. Both markers were mixed with the experimental diet and given after digestion trials.

3. Mean retention times of each marker were calculated from time-course changes in concentrations of the markers in faeces. The mean retention times of the markers in the large intestine were calculated from exponential slopes fitted to the time-course changes of faecal concentrations of the markers.

4. The digestibilities of crude fibre, neutral-detergent fibre and acid-detergent fibre were highest in the guineapigs, followed by the hamsters, and lowest in the rabbits and rats.

5. The mean retention times of Cr in the whole tract were longer in the larger animals and shortest in the hamsters. The mean retention times of Cr in the large intestine were longest in the guinea-pig followed by the hamsters and the rats. The rabbits had an extremely short retention time of Cr in the large intestine.

6. These results suggest that the retention time of solid digesta in the large intestine can explain the difference in the digestive efficiencies of fibre components amongst non-ruminant small herbivores whereas retention of digesta in the whole gut is not related to the digestibility of fibre components.

Type
General Nutrition papers
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , July 1987 , pp. 149 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1987

References

REFERENCES

Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1975). Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Analytical Chemists. 12th ed. Washington, DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
Björnhag, G. (1972). Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 2, 125–136.Google Scholar
Brandt, C. S. & Thacker, E. J. (1958). Journal of Animal Science 17, 218–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, E. T. & Stevens, C. E. (1980). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 735–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyer, J. J. & Mahon, E. H. (1982). South African Journal of Science 78, 73–75.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955). Biometrics 11, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehle, F. R. & Warner, R. G. (1978). Journal of Nutrition 108, 1047–1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fonnesbeck, P. V., Harris, L. E. & Kearl, L. C. (1974). Journal of Animal Science 39, 182.Google Scholar
Gioffre, F., Gisberti, C., Angelini, A. & Proto, V. (1980). Annali della Facolta di Scienze Agrarie dell Universita di Napoli in Portici Serie IV, 14, pp. 84–92.Google Scholar
Hörnicke, H. & Björnhag, G. (1980). In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 665–684 [ Ruckebusch, Y. and Thivend, P., editors]. Lancaster: MTP Press.Google Scholar
Hörnicke, H., Ruoff, G., Vogt, B., Clauss, W. & Ehrlein, H. J. (1984). Laboratory Animals 18, 169–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hukuhara, T. & Neya, T. (1968). Japanese Journal of Physiology 18, 551–562.Google Scholar
Hume, I. D. & Warner, A. C. I. (1980). In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants, pp. 665–684 [Ruckebusch, Y. and Thivend, P., editors]. Lancaster: MTP Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunstýr, I., Peters, K. & Gartner, R. (1976). Laboratory Animal Science 26, 166–170.Google Scholar
Lloyd, L. E., Dale, D. G. & Crampton, E. W. (1958). Journal of Animal Science 17, 684–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murai, M., Manda, T. & Horiguchi, M. (1982). Experimental Herbivora 7, Suppl., 35–40.Google Scholar
Pickard, D. W. & Stevens, C. E. (1972). American Journal of Physiology 222, 1161–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakaguchi, E., Becker, G., Rechkemmer, G. & Engelhardt, W. v. (1985). Zeitschrift für Tierphysiologie, Tierernährung und Futtermittelkunde 54, 276–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakaguchi, E., Heller, R., Becker, G. & Engelhardt, W. v. (1986). Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 55, 44–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakaguchi, E., Itoh, J., Shinohara, H. & Matsumoto, T. (1981). British Journal of Nutrition 46, 503–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slade, L. M. & Hintz, H. F. (1969). Journal of Animal Science 28, 842–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1967). Statistical Methods, 6th ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Thacker, E. J. & Brandt, C. S. (1955). Journal of Nutrition 55, 375–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udén, P., Rounsaville, T. R., Wiggans, G. R. & Van Soest, P. J. (1982). British Journal of Nutrition 48, 329–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udèn, P. & Van Soest, P. J. (1982). British Journal of Nutrition 47, 267–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1963). Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists 46, 829–835.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. (1982). Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Corvallis: O&B Books Inc.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. & Wine, R. H. (1967). Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists 50, 50–55.Google Scholar
Varga, F. (1976). Digestion 14, 319–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, C. H., David, D. J. & Iismaa, O.(1962). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 59, 381–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, V. J. & Senior, W. (1982). Australian Journal of Biological Science 35, 373–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar