Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:07:39.661Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relation between diet and protozoal population in the rumen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2007

M. Abe ,
H. Shibui ,
T. Itiki  and
F. Kumeno
M. Abe
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Nippon Formula Feed Manufacturing co., 640 Higashiterao machi, Tsurumi-ku, Yaokohama, Japan
H. Shibui
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Nippon Formula Feed Manufacturing co., 640 Higashiterao machi, Tsurumi-ku, Yaokohama, Japan
T. Itiki
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Nippon Formula Feed Manufacturing co., 640 Higashiterao machi, Tsurumi-ku, Yaokohama, Japan
F. Kumeno
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Nippon Formula Feed Manufacturing co., 640 Higashiterao machi, Tsurumi-ku, Yaokohama, 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. Four feeding trials were made to investigate relations between diet and protozoal population in the rumen.

2. When a ration containing no concentrate was used, the number of entodiniomorphs decreased rapidly. The number of entodiniomorphs increased with the amount of concentrate. Rice straw, which was used as a sole source of roughage, was not always necessary for protozoa to survive in the rumen.

3. The type of diet affected the holotrich population to a much smaller extent than the entodiniomorph population.

Type
General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , March 1973 , pp. 197 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1973

References

REFERENCES

Christiansen, W. C., Woods, W. & Burroughs, W. (1964). J. Anim. Sci. 23, 984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955). Biometrics 11, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eadie, J. M. & Mann, S. O. (1970). In Physiology of Digestion and Metabolism in The Ruminant p. 335 [Phillipson, A. T., editor]. Newcastle upon Tyne: Oriel Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Hawk, P. B., Oser, B. L. & Summerson, W. H. (1954). Practical Physiological Chemistry 13th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar
Hungate, R. E. (1966). The Rumen and Its Microbes. New York and London: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
Kumeno, F. (1962). J. agric. Chem. Soc. Jap. 36, 181.Google Scholar
Purser, D. B. & Moir, R. J. (1959). Aust. J. agric. Res. 10, 555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Slyke, D. D. & Cullen, G. E. (1914). J. biol. Chem. 19, 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, A. C. I. (1965). In Physiology of Digestion in The Ruminant p. 346 [Dougherty, R. W., editor]. Washington, DC: Butterworths.Google Scholar