Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T14:06:38.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimation of the proportion of non-ammonia-nitrogen reaching the lower gut of the ruminant derived from bacterial and protozoal nitrogen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

W. D. Steinhour ,
M. R. Stokes ,
J. H. Clark ,
J. A. Rogers ,
C. L. Davis  and
D. R. Nelson
W. D. Steinhour
Affiliation:
Department of Dairy Science, University of Illinois
M. R. Stokes
Affiliation:
Department of Dairy Science, University of Illinois
J. H. Clark
Affiliation:
Department of Dairy Science, University of Illinois
J. A. Rogers
Affiliation:
Department of Dairy Science, University of Illinois
C. L. Davis
Affiliation:
Department of Dairy Science, University of Illinois
D. R. Nelson
Affiliation:
College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA
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. A method for estimating the proportions of bacterial- and protozoal-N in the total non-ammonia-N reaching the lower gut of the ruminant under steady-state conditions was evaluated. Three trials using two different diets were conducted with a Holstein steer equipped with a rumen cannula and duodenal re-entrant cannulas.

2. An intraruminal primed infusion of (15nh4)2so4 was administered for 68 h during each trial. Bacteria and protozoa samples were isolated from rumen fluid at approximately 6 h intervals during each infusion period. Total non-ammonia-N was isolated from duodenal digesta samples taken at approximately the same times. All of these samples were analysed for 15N enrichment. A computer program was used to fit equations to the 15N-enrichment curves of bacterial- and protozoal-N. Models of both bacterial- and protozoal-N kinetics consisted of a small pool which equilibrated rapidly with rumen NH3 and a large pool with a fractional turnover rate of 0.045–0.070/h for bacterial-N and 0.056–0.069/h for protozoal-N.

3. Abomasal fluid turnover was estimated by a single injection of polyethylene glycol (molecular weight 4000) into the rumen followed by sampling of rumen fluid and duodenal digesta.

4. Estimates of abomasal fluid turnover, bacterial-N turnover, and protozoal-N turnover were entered into an equation which was adjusted by computer iteration to fit the 15n-enrichment curve of duodenal digesta non-NH3-N generated from each (15nh4)2so4 infusion period. The computer fit of this equation to the observed results gave estimates of 0.39–0.45 and 0.22–0.41 for the proportion of duodenal non-NH3-N derived from bacterial-N and protozoal-N respectively.

5. This method is potentially useful in estimating microbial protein passage to the lower gut in ruminants. Sampling digesta from the omasum rather than the duodenum would simplify the method and possibly increase the reliability of the estimates.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , September 1982 , pp. 417 - 431
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1982

References

REFERENCES

Abou Akkada, A. R. & El-Shazly, K. (1964). Appl. Microbiol. 12, 384.Google Scholar
Abou Akkada, A. R., Fine, L. R. & Bartley, E. E. (1968). J. Dairy Sci. 51, 78.Google Scholar
AOAC. (1970). Official Methods of Analysis, 11th ed.Washington, DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
Bauman, D. E., Davis, C. L., Frobish, R. A. & Sachan, D. S. (1971). J. Dairy Sci. 54, 928.Google Scholar
Beever, D. E., Harrison, D. G., Thompson, D. J., Cammell, S. B. & Osbourn, D. F. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, M. & Weiss, M. F. (1974). Users Manual for SAAM. Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
Bremner, J. M. (1965). In Agronomy, Methods of Soil Analysis, vol. 9, part 2, p. 1256 [Black, C. A., editor]. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy Inc.Google Scholar
Cheng, K.-J., Akin, D. E. & Costerton, J. W. (1977). Fedn. Proc. Fedn Am. Socs. exp. Biol. 36, 193.Google Scholar
Coleman, G. S. (1975). In Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant, p. 149. [McDonald, I. W. and Warner, A. C. I., editors]. Armidale, New South Wales: University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Eadie, J. M. & Gill, J. C. (1971). Br. J. Nutr. 26, 155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faichney, G. J. & Griffiths, D. A. (1978). Br. J. Nutr. 40, 71.Google Scholar
Harrison, D. G., Beever, D. E. & Osbourn, D. F. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1966). The Rumen and its Microbes. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hutton, K., Bailey, F. J. & Annison, E. F. (1971). Br. J. Nutr. 25, 165.Google Scholar
Hyden, S. (1955). Kungl. Lantbrukshögskolans Annal. 22, 139.Google Scholar
Kennedy, P. M. & Milligan, L. P. (1978). Br. J. Nutr. 39, 105.Google Scholar
Ling, J. R. & Buttery, P. J. (1978). Br. J. Nutr. 39, 165.Google Scholar
Mathison, G. W. & Milligan, L. P. (1971). Br. J. Nutr. 25, 351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolan, J. V. & Leng, R. A. (1972). Br. J. Nutr. 27, 177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otchere, E. O., McGilliard, A. D. & Young, J. W. (1974). J. Dairy Sci. 57, 1189.Google Scholar
Pilgrim, A. F., Gray, F. V., Weller, R. A. & Belling, C. B. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provencher, S. W. (1976). J. chem. Physics 64, 2772.Google Scholar
Salter, D. N., Daneshvar, K. & Smith, R. H. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, U. B., Varma, A., Verma, D. N. & Ranjhan, S. K. (1974). J. Dairy Res. 41, 299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. (1959). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 52, 72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. & McAllan, A. B. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H., McAllan, A. B., Hewett, D. & Lewis, P. E. (1978). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 90, 557.Google Scholar
Steele, R., Wall, J. S., DeBodo, R. C. & Altszuler, N. (1956). Am. J. Physiol. 187, 15.Google Scholar
Stokes, M. R., Steinhour, W. D., Puckett, H. B. & Clark, J. H. (1979). J. Dairy Sci. 62, 1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umbreit, W. W., Burris, R. H. & Stauffer, J. F. (1964). Manometric Techniques, 4th ed.Minneapolis, MN: Burgess Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Walker, D. J. & Nader, C. J. (1975). Aust. J. agric. Res. 26, 689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, A. C. I. (1962). J. gen. Microbiol. 28, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weller, R. A. & Pilgrim, A. F. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 341.Google Scholar
Williams, P. P. & Dinusson, W. E. (1973). J. Anim. Sci. 36, 588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar