Effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on alfalfa nutrient degradation characteristics and rumen microbial populations of steers fed diets with different concentrate-to-forage ratios

Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology

Qingxiang Meng¹  Liping Ren¹  Zhenming Zhou¹  Liping Zhao¹  Ying Chang²  Gengzhi Ding¹ 

[1] State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China;Lallemand biology Technology (Beijing) Co. Ltd., Beijing, China

关键词: Steers;    Rumen microorganism;    Real-time PCR;    In situ;    Concentrate-to-forage ratios;   

Others  :  803449
DOI  :  10.1186/2049-1891-5-24

 received in 2014-03-03, accepted in 2014-04-25,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Live yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) constitutes an effective additive for animal production; its probiotic effect may be related to the concentrate-to-forage ratio (CTFR). The objective of this study was to assess the effects of S. cerevisiae (SC) on fiber degradation and rumen microbial populations in steers fed diets with different levels of dietary concentrate. Ten Simmental × Local crossbred steers (450 ± 50 kg BW) were assigned to a control group or an SC group. Both groups were fed the same basal diet but the SC group received SC supplementation (8 × 10⁹ cfu/h/d through the ruminal fistula) following a two-period crossover design. Each period consisted of four phases, each of which lasted 17 d: 10 d for dietary adaptation, 6 d for degradation study, and 1 d for rumen sample collection. From the 1^st to the 4^th phase, steers were fed in a stepwise fashion with increasing CTFRs, i.e., 30:70, 50:50, 70:30, and 90:10. The kinetics of dry matter and fiber degradation of alfalfa pellets were evaluated; the rumen microbial populations were detected using real-time PCR. The results revealed no significant (P > 0.05) interactions between dietary CTFR and SC for most parameters. Dietary CTFR had a significant effect (P < 0.01) on degradation characteristics of alfalfa pellets and the copies of rumen microorganism; the increasing concentrate level resulted in linear, quadratic or cubic variation trend for these parameters. SC supplementation significantly (P < 0.05) affected dry matter (DM) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) degradation rates (c_DM, c_NDF) and NDF effective degradability (ED_NDF). Compared with the control group, there was an increasing trend of rumen fungi and protozoa in SC group (P < 0.1); copies of total bacteria in SC group were significantly higher (P < 0.05). Additionally, percentage of Ruminobacter amylophilus was significantly lower (P < 0.05) but percentage of Selenomonas ruminantium was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in the SC group. In a word, dietary CTFR had a significant effect on degradation characteristics of forage and rumen microbial population. S. cerevisiae had positive effects on DM and NDF degradation rate or effective degradability of forage; S. cerevisiae increased rumen total bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and lactate-utilizing bacteria but reduced starch-degrading and lactate-producing bacteria.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Ding et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Anadón A: The EU ban of antibiotics as feed additives: alternatives and consumer safety. J Vet Pharmacol Therap 2006, 29(Suppl 1):41-46.
• [2]de Ondarza MB, Sniffen CJ, Graham H, Wilcock P: Case study: Effect of Supplemental Live Yeast on Yield of Milk and Milk Components in High-Producing Multiparous Holstein Cows. The Professional Animal Scientist 2010, 26:443-449.
• [3]Brossard L, Chaucheyras-Durand F, Michalet-Doreauand B, Martin C: Dose effect of live yeasts on rumen microbial communities and fermentations during butyric latent acidosis in sheep: new type of interaction. Anim Sci 2006, 82(6):829-836.
• [4]Moallem U, Lehrer H, Livshitz L, Zachut M, Yakoby S: The effects of live yeast supplementation to dairy cows during the hot season on production, feed efficiency, and digestibility. J Dairy Sci 2009, 92(1):343-351.
• [5]Chaucheyras-Durand F, Walker ND, Bach A: Effects of active dry yeasts on the rumen microbial ecosystem: Past, present and future. Anim Feed Sci Tech 2008, 145(1–4):5-26.
• [6]Guedes CM, Gongalves D, Rodrigues MAM, Dias-da-Silva A: Effects of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast on ruminal fermentation and fibre degradation of maize silages in cows. Anim Feed Sci Tech 2008, 145(1–4):27-40.
• [7]Mir Z, Mir PS: Effect of the Addition of Live Yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on Growth and Carcass Quality of Steers Fed High-Forage or High Grain Diets and on Feed Digestibility and In Situ Degradability. J Anim Sci 1994, 72(3):537-545.
• [8]Stella AV, Paratte R, Valnegri L, Cigalino G, Soncini G, Chevaux E, Dell’Orto Savoini G: Effect of administration of live Saccharomyces cerevisiae on milk production, milk composition, blood metabolites, and faecal flora in early lactating dairy goats. Small Rumin Res 2007, 67(1):7-13.
• [9]Desnoyers M, Giger-Reverdin S, Bertin G, Duvaux-Ponter C, Sauvant D: Meta-analysis of the influence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae supplementation on ruminal parameters and milk production of ruminants. J Dairy Sci 2009, 92(4):1620-1632.
• [10]Ørskov ER, DeB Hovell FD, Mould F: The use of the nylon bag technique for the evaluation of feedstuffs. Trop Anim Prod 1980, 5(3):195-213.
• [11]Yu P, Niu Z: Using a complex non-TDN based model (the DVE/OEB system) to predict microbial protein synthesis, endogenous protein, degradation balance, and total truly absorbed protein supply of different varieties of cereal oats for ruminants. Anim Sci J 2009, 80(3):273-279.
• [12]Alexandrov AN: Effect of ruminal exposure and subsequent microbial contamination of dry matter and protein degradability of various feedstuffs. Anim Feed Sci Tech 1998, 71(1–2):99-107.
• [13]Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA: Methods for dietary fiber neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991, 74(10):3583-3597.
• [14]Hristov AN, Varga G, Cassidy T, Long M, Heyler K, Karnati SKR, Corl B, Hovde CJ, Yoon I: Effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product on ruminal fermentation and nutrient utilization in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2010, 93(2):682-692.
• [15]Denman SE, McSweeney CS: Development of a real-time PCR assay for monitoring anaerobic fungal and cellulolytic bacterial populations within the rumen. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2006, 58(3):572-582.
• [16]Carberry CA, Kenny DA, Han S, McCabe MS, Waters SM: Effect of phenotypic residual feed intake and dietary forage content on the rumen microbial community of beef cattle. Appl Environ Microbiol 2012, 78(14):4949-4958.
• [17]Stevenson DM, Weimer PJ: Dominance of Prevotella and low abundance of classical ruminal bacterial species in the bovine rumen revealed by relative quantification real-time PCR. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2007, 75(1):165-174.
• [18]Li M, Penner GB, Hernandez-Sanabria E, Oba M, Guan LL: Effects of sampling location and time, and host animal on assessment of bacterial diversity and fermentation parameters in the bovine rumen. J Appl Microbiol 2009, 107(6):1924-1934.
• [19]Tajima K, Aminov RI, Nagamine T, Matsui H, Nakamura M, Benno Y: Diet-dependent shifts in the bacterial population of the rumen revealed with real-time PCR. Appl Environ Microbiol 2001, 67(6):2766-2774.
• [20]Lettat A, Nozière P, Silberberg M, Morgavi DP, Berger C, Martin C: Rumen microbial and fermentation characteristics are affected differently by bacterial probiotic supplementation during induced lactic and subacute acidosis in sheep. BMC Microbiol 2012, 12:142-154. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Hernandez-Sanabria E, Goonewardene LA, Wang Z, Durunna ON, Moore SS, Guan LL: Impact of feed efficiency and diet on adaptive variations in the bacterial community in the rumen fluid of cattle. Appl Environ Microbial 2012, 78(4):1203-1214.
• [22]Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD: Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time 401 quantitative PCR and the 2-ΔΔCT Method. Methods 2001, 25:402-408.
• [23]Chaucheyras-Durand F, Fonty G: Influence of a probiotic yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-1077) on microbial colonization and fermentation in the rumen of newborn lambs. Microb Ecol Health Dis 2002, 14(1):30-36.
• [24]Křížová L, Richter M, Třináctý J, Říha J, Kumprechtová D: The effect of feeding live yeast cultures on ruminal pH and redox potential in dry cows as continuously measured by a new wireless device. Czech J Anim Sci 2011, 56(1):37-45.
• [25]Chaucheyras F, Fonty G, Bertin G, Gouet P: Effects of live Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells on zoospore germination, growth, and cellulolytic activity of the rumen anaerobic fungus, Neocallimastix frontalisMCH3. Curr Microbiol 1995, 31:201-205.
• [26]Bach A, Iglesias C, Devant M: Daily rumen pH pattern of loose-housed dairy cattle as affected by feeding pattern and live yeast supplementation. Anim Feed Sci Tech 2007, 136(1–2):146-153.
• [27]Newbold CJ, McIntosh FM, Wallace RJ: Changes in the microbial population of a rumen-simulating fermenter in response to yeast culture. Can J Anim Sci 1998, 78:241-244.
• [28]Rossi F, Luccia AD, Vincenti D, Cocconcelli PS: Effects of peptidic fractions from Saccharomyces cerevisiae culture on growth and metabolism of the ruminal bacteria Megasphaera elsdenii. Anim Res 2004, 53:177-186.
• [29]Monnerat JP, Paulino PV, Detmann E, Valadares Filho SC, Valadares RD, Duarte MS: Effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and monensin on digestion, ruminal parameters, and balance of nitrogenous compounds of beef cattle fed diets with different starch concentrations. Trop Anim Health Prod 2013, 45(5):1251-1257.
• [30]Chaucheyras-Durand F, Fonty G: Establishment of cellulolytic bacteria and development of fermentative activities in the rumen of gnotobiotically-reared lambs receiving the microbial additive Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-1077. Reprod Nutr Dev 2001, 41:57-68.
• [31]Carro MD, Lebzien P, Rohr K: Influence of yeast culture on the in vitro fermentation (Rusitec) of diets containing variable portions of concentrates. Anim Feed Sci Tech 1992, 37(3–4):209-220.