Journals / Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences / 2015 / Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 5

Effects of hydrolyzed and live yeasts on rumen microbial fermentation in a semicontinuous culture system (Rusitec)

Pages
556–559
Publication Date
2015-12-04
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall, these results showed that different types of yeast products in terms of their viability status had significant actions in ruminal microbial metabolism in different ways.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of hydrolyzed and live forms of yeast products from Saccharomyces cerevisiae on in vitro fermentation of a 50:50 forage:concentrate substrate using the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The Rusitec system consisted of nine fermentation vessels: three of them received daily 0.5 g/L hydrolyzed yeast, three vessels received daily 0.5 g/L live yeast, and three vessels received no additives (control).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, these results showed that different types of yeast products in terms of their viability status had significant actions in ruminal microbial metabolism in different ways.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Hydrolyzed yeast · live yeast · rumen

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of hydrolyzed and live forms of yeast products from Saccharomyces cerevisiae on in vitro fermentation of a 50:50 forage:concentrate substrate using the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). The Rusitec system consisted of nine fermentation vessels: three of them received daily 0.5 g/L hydrolyzed yeast, three vessels received daily 0.5 g/L live yeast, and three vessels received no additives (control). After an adaptation period of 7 days, the main fermentation characteristics were evaluated for 7 consecutive days. Ruminal pH was decreased (P < 0.05) by hydrolyzed yeast, whereas no effects were observed after live yeast treatment. Both hydrolyzed and live yeasts tended to increase butyrate production (P = 0.052). Acetate to propionate ratio was significantly higher (P < 0.05) for live yeast. Both products increased NH3-N concentration, and it was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in live yeast in comparison with that in hydrolyzed yeast. Digestibility of dry matter was not significantly affected by both yeast treatments. Overall, these results showed that different types of yeast products in terms of their viability status had significant actions in ruminal microbial metabolism in different ways.

Özet

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of hydrolyzed and live forms of yeast products from Saccharomyces cerevisiae on in vitro fermentation of a 50:50 forage:concentrate substrate using the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). The Rusitec system consisted of nine fermentation vessels: three of them received daily 0.5 g/L hydrolyzed yeast, three vessels received daily 0.5 g/L live yeast, and three vessels received no additives (control). After an adaptation period of 7 days, the main fermentation characteristics were evaluated for 7 consecutive days. Ruminal pH was decreased (P < 0.05) by hydrolyzed yeast, whereas no effects were observed after live yeast treatment. Both hydrolyzed and live yeasts tended to increase butyrate production (P = 0.052). Acetate to propionate ratio was significantly higher (P < 0.05) for live yeast. Both products increased NH3-N concentration, and it was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in live yeast in comparison with that in hydrolyzed yeast. Digestibility of dry matter was not significantly affected by both yeast treatments. Overall, these results showed that different types of yeast products in terms of their viability status had significant actions in ruminal microbial metabolism in different ways.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZTÜRK, H., DEMİRBAŞ, Y. S., AYDIN, F. G., PİŞKİN, İ., ÜNLER, F. M., EMRE, M. B. (2015). Effects of hydrolyzed and live yeasts on rumen microbial fermentation in a semicontinuous culture system (Rusitec). Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 5, 556–559. https://ajindex.com/articles/121413

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. European Commission. Regulation (EC) No. 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on Additives for Use in Animal Nutrition. Off J Eur Union 2003; 50: L268/29–L268/43. Opsi F, Fortina R, Tassone S, Bodas R, López S. Effects of inactivated and live cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on in vitro ruminal fermentation of diets with different forage:concentrate ratio. J Agri Sci 2011; 150: 271–283.
  2. Sullivan ML, Bradford BJ. Viable cell yield from active dry yeast products and effects of storage temperature and diluent on yeast cell viability. J Dairy Sci 2011; 94: 526–531. Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO). Official Publication. West Lafayette, IN, USA: AAFCO; 2012.
  3. Czerkawski JW, Breckenridge G. Design and development of a long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Br J Nutr 1977; 38: 371–384.
  4. Oeztuerk H, Schroeder B, Beyerbach M, Breves G. Influence of living and autoclaved yeasts of Saccharomyces boulardii on in vitro ruminal microbial metabolism. J Dairy Sci 2005; 88: 2594–2600.
  5. Oeztuerk H, Emre B, Sagmanligil V, Piskin I, Reha Fidanci U, Pekcan M. Effects of nisin and propolis on ruminal fermentation in vitro. J Anim Vet Adv 2010; 9: 2752–2758.
  6. Bhandari SK, Ominski KH, Wittenberg KM, Plaizier JC. Effects of chop length of alfalfa and corn silage on milk production and rumen fermentation of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 2007; 90: 2355–2366.
  7. Nisbet DJ, Martin SA. Effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae culture on lactate utilization by the ruminal bacterium Selenomonas ruminantium. J Anim Sci 1991; 69: 4628–4633.
  8. Callaway ES, Martin SA. Effects of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae culture on ruminal bacteria that utilize lactate and digest cellulose. J Dairy Sci 1997; 80: 2035–2044.
  9. Chaucheyras-Durand F, Fonty G, Bertin G, Salmon JM, Gouet P. Effects of a strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Levucell SC), a microbial additive for ruminants, on lactate metabolism in vitro. Can J Microbiol 1996; 42: 927–933.
  10. Brossard L, Chaucheyras-Durand F, Michalet-Doreau 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: 1–8. Bergman EN. Energy contributions of volatile fatty acids from the gastrointestinal tract in various species. Physiol Rev 1990; 70: 567–590.
  11. Stoiber C, Dohnal I, Ganner A, Reichel C, Rose S, Schatzmayr G. Influence of autolysed yeast derivatives on rumen fermentation in vitro. In: 51. Jahrest