Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T12:24:07.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The mechanism of cellulose digestion in the ruminant organism: IV. Further observations from in vitro studies of the behaviour of rumen bacteria and their bearing on the problem of the nutritive value of cellulose

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. E. Woodman  and
R. E. Evans
H. E. Woodman
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Cambridge University
R. E. Evans
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Cambridge University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Further studies of the behaviour of cellulose-splitting bacteria in artificial media have been made in an attempt to account for the manner in which cellulose is utilized for fat production in the ruminant. The behaviour of thermophilic bacteria, with an optimum temperature of fermentation in the neighbourhood of 65°C, has been compared with that of the micro-organisms capable of fermenting at 37°C. In both cases the cultures were obtained from the rumen contents of sheep.

By the addition of toluene at the “head” stage of fermentation, it was possible to demonstrate, both at 37 and 65°C., the production of small amounts of glucose during subsequent incubation. Glucose is clearly a primary breakdown product in the bacterial fermentation of cellulose.

An investigation has been made of the nature of the volatile fatty acids produced by bacterial decomposition of shredded filter paper. No consistent differences from this standpoint were noted between the reactions as carried out at 37 and 65°C., but the nature and proportions of the acids varied considerably from culture to culture. In some cases acetic acid was produced almost exclusively, whilst in others the fatty acids consisted of butyric and formic acids, with but traces of acetic acid. The findings in this regard apparently afford no clue to the manner in which cellulose is used for fat production, since propionic acid, the only recognized fat-former among the lower normal fatty acids, was not detected.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , January 1938 , pp. 43 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Case, & Cook, (1931). Biochem. J. 25, 1319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clift, & Cook, (1932). Biochem. J. 26, 1788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deuel, , Butts, , Hallman, & Cutler, (1935–1936). J. biol. Chem. 112, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyer, (1916–1917). J. biol. Chem. 28, 445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckstein, (1933). J. biol. Chem. 102, 591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernbach, (1913). C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris, 156, 77.Google Scholar
Friedemann, , Cotonio, & Shaffer, (1927). J. biol. Chem. 73, 335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedemann, & Kendall, (1929). J. biol. Chem. 82, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellner, (1905). Ernähr. landw. Nutztiere.Google Scholar
Nelson, & Werkman, (1935). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol., N.Y., 32, 1622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quastel, & Wooldridge, (1929). Biochem. J. 23, 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringer, & Jonas, . See Oxidations and Reductions in the Animal Body (2nd ed.) by Dakin, (1922), p. 33. London.Google Scholar
Simon, & Plaux, (1924). Bull. Soc. Chim. biol. 6, 477.Google Scholar
Stephenson, (1930). Bacterial Metabolism, p. 155. London.Google Scholar
Stewart, , Dickson, & Gaddie, (1934). Biochem. J. 28, 1945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarvin, & Buswell, (1934). J. Amer. chem. Soc. 56, 1751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viljoen, , Fred, & Peterson, (1926). J. agric. Sci. 16, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendel, (1931–1932). J. biol. Chem. 94, 717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, , Stone, & Werkman, (1937). Biochem. J. 31, 349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodman, (1927). J. agric. Sci. 17, 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodman, (1930). Biol. Rev. 5, 273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodman, & Stewart, (1928). J. agric. Sci. 18, 713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodman, & Stewart, (1932). J. agric. Sci. 22, 527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodman, & Evans, (1936). Report on Work of Agric. Res. Institutes for 1933–34, p. 149. Minist. Agric.Google Scholar