Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T03:11:33.252Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Purine quantification in digesta from ruminants by spectrophotometric and HPLC methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

H. P. S. Makkar  and
K. Becker
H. P. S. Makkar*
Affiliation:
Institute for Animal Production in the Tropics and Subtropics (480), University of Hohenheim, D-70593 Stuttgart, Germany
K. Becker
Affiliation:
Institute for Animal Production in the Tropics and Subtropics (480), University of Hohenheim, D-70593 Stuttgart, Germany
*
*Corresponding author: Dr H. P. S. Makkar, fax + 49 711 459 3702, email [email protected]
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.

The method of Zinn & Owens (1986; Canadian Journal of Animal Science66, 157–166), based on release of purine bases by HClO4 followed by their precipitation with AgNO3, was used to study recovery of purines from lyophilized rumen microbial or Escherichia coli preparations added to matrices such as cellulose, starch and neutral-detergent fibre. The recovery of purines was poor (approximately 50 %). Under the hydrolysis conditions (12 M-HClO4, 90–95° for 1 h) used in the method of Zinn & Owens (1986), the recovery of purines from the rumen microbial preparations added to matrices measured using an HPLC method was 95–102 %, suggesting that the lower recovery of purines in the method of Zinn & Owens (1986) was not due to incomplete hydrolysis of nucleic acids. Using the HPLC method, adenine and allopurinol (an internal standard) were found to be heat-labile as substantial destruction was observed on heating at 121°. On the other hand, another commonly used internal standard, caffeine, was stable at 121°. A complete hydrolysis of nucleic acids from the rumen microbial preparation was observed with 2·5 ml 0·6 M-HClO4 in a total volume of 3 ml (0·5 M-HClO4 during hydrolysis) at 90–95° for 1 h, and under these conditions adenine, guanine, allopurinol and caffeine were stable. Moreover, under these milder hydrolysis conditions, the recovery of purine bases from the rumen microbial or E. coli preparations added to matrices ranged from 92 to 108 % using the method of Zinn & Owens (1986). Based on the results, changes in hydrolysis conditions have been proposed for accurate determination of purine bases using spectrophotometric or HPLC methods.

Keywords

Purine basesMicro-organismsHPLC methodSpectrophotometry
Type
Technical report
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 81 , Issue 2 , February 1999 , pp. 107 - 112
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1999

References

Balcells, J, Guada, JA & Peiró JM (1992) Simultaneous determination of allantoin and oxypurines in biological fluids by high-performance liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography 575, 153–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calsamiglia, S, Stern, MD & Firkins, JL (1996) Comparison of nitrogen-15 and purines as microbial markers in continuous culture. Journal of Animal Science 74, 1375–1381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makkar, HPS, Blümmel, M & Becker, K (1995) In vitro effects of and interactions between tannins and saponins and fate of tannins in the rumen. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 69, 481–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllan, AB & Smith, RH (1973) Degradation of nucleic acids in the rumen. British Journal of Nutrition 29, 331–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ørskov ER (1982) Rumen microorganisms and their nutrition. In Protein Nutrition in Ruminants, pp. 19–40 [ER Ørskov, editor]. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pérez, JF, Balcells, J, Guada, JA & Castrillo, C (1996) Determination of rumen microbial-nitrogen production in sheep: a comparison of urinary purine excretion with methods using 15N and purine bases as markers of microbial-nitrogen entering the duodenum. British Journal of Nutrition 75, 699–709.Google Scholar
Pérez, JF, Balcells, J, Guada, JA & Castrillo, C (1997) Rumen microbial production estimated either from urinary purine derivative excretion or from direct measurements of 15N and purine bases as microbial markers: effect of protein source and rumen bacteria isolates. Animal Science 65, 225–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ushida, K, Lassalas, B & Jouany, J-P (1985) Determination of assay parameters for RNA analysis in bacterial and duodenal samples by spectrophotometry. Influence of sample treatment and preservation. Reproduction Nutrition Dévelopment 25, 1037–1046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB & Lewis, BA (1991) Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, C-MJ & Russell, JB (1992) Resistance of proline-containing peptides to ruminal degradation in vitro. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 58, 3954–3958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zinn, RA & Owens, FN (1982) Rapid procedure for quantifying nucleic acid content of digesta. In Protein Requirement for Cattle, pp. 26–30. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK. Miscellaneous Publication 109.Google Scholar
Zinn, RA & Owens, FN (1986) A rapid procedure for purine measurement and its use for estimating net ruminal protein synthesis. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 66, 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar