Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 57 - Sayı: 4

Propolisin rumen mikrobiyal fermantasyonu üzerine in vitro etkileri

Effects of propolis on in vitro rumen microbial fermentation

Pages
217–221
Publication Date
2022-10-12
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)

High concentration of PEE resulted in a significant decrease (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different concentrations of propolis ethanolic extract (PEE) on rumen microbial fermentation using the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Six fermenters with a nominal volume of 750 ml were set up for the study that lasted 14 days.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:High concentration of PEE resulted in a significant decrease (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different concentrations of propolis ethanolic extract (PEE) on rumen microbial fermentation using the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Six fermenters with a nominal volume of 750 ml were set up for the study that lasted 14 days. Each fermenter received daily 10 g of a basal diet consisting of 6 g pelleted alfalfa hay and 4 g pelleted concentrate. Treatments were control (received 0.5 ml/day of 70% ethanol without having any propolis), 0.5 ml/day of 20% PEE, and 0.5 ml/day of 60% PEE. Supplementation of PEE in both concentrations did not affect ruminal pH, production of total short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) as well as of acetate, acetate to propionate ratio, total protozoa count, and dry matter digestibility. High concentration of PEE resulted in a significant decrease (p

Özet

Bu araştırmada, Rusitec tekniği (Rumen Simulation Technique) kullanılarak, farklı yoğunluklardaki etanolik propolis ekstraktlarının rumen mikrobiyal fermantasyonu üzerine etkilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlandı. Gerçek hacimleri 750 ml olan 6 fermenterin kullanıldığı araştırma 14 gün sürdü. Her bir fermenterde günlük olarak 6 g yonca otu peleti ve 4 g konsantre pelet yemden oluşan bir rasyon inkübe edildi. Araştırmadaki uygulama grupları kontrol (propolis içermeyen % 70’lik etanol çözeltisinden 0,5 ml/gün), propolisin % 20’lik etanolik ekstraktı (0,5 ml/gün) ve propolisin % 60’lık etanolik ekstraktı (0,5 ml/gün) şeklindeydi. Rusitec fermenterlerine ilave edilen propolisin her iki yoğunluktaki ekstraktı da ruminal pH, toplam kısa zincirli yağ asitleri ve asetat üretimleri, asetatın propiyonata oranı, toplam protozoon sayısı ve yem kuru maddesi sindirilebilirliklerinde istatistiksel bir değişime neden olmadı. Ancak % 60’lık propolis ekstraktı propiyonat üretimini belirgin bir şekilde azaltırken (p

🔖

Cite This Article

PEKCAN, M., OZTURK, H., SIRELI, M., FIDANCI, U. R. (2022). Propolisin rumen mikrobiyal fermantasyonu üzerine in vitro etkileri. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 57 - Sayı: 4, 217–221. https://ajindex.com/articles/444965

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Banskota AH, Tezuka Y, Kadota S (2001): Recent progress in pharmacological research of propolis. Phytother Res, 15, 561-571
  2. Broudiscou LP, Papon Y, Broudiscou AF (2000): Effects of dry extracts on fermentation and methanogenesis in continuous culture of rumen microbes. Anim Feed Sci Tech, 87, 263-277
  3. Broudiscou LP, Papon Y, Broudiscou A (2002): Effects of dry plant extracts on feed degradation and the production of rumen microbial biomass in a dual outflow fermenter. Anim Feed Sci Tech, 101, 183–189
  4. Burdock GA (1998): Review of the biological properties and toxicity of propolis. Food Chem Toxicol, 36, 341-363
  5. Crane E (1997): The past and present importance of bee products to man. 1-14. In: A Mizrahi, Y Lensky (Ed), Bee Products: Properties, Applications, and Apitherapy. Plenum Press, New York
  6. Czerkawski JW, Breckenridge G (1977): Design and development of a long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Brit J Nutr, 38, 371-384
  7. Demeyer D, Van Nevel CJ (1975): Methanogenesis, an integrated part of carbohydrate fermentation and its control. 366-382. In: LW McDonald, ACI Warner (Ed), Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant. University of New England Publishing Unit, Armidale, Australia
  8. Gonsales GZ, Orsi RO, Fernandes A, Rodrigues P, Funari SRC (2006): Antibacterial activity of propolis collected in different regions of Brazil. J Venom Anim Toxins, 12, 276-284
  9. Irbis C, Ushida K (2004): Detection of methanogens and proteobacteria from a single cell of rumen ciliate protozoa. J Gen Appl Microbiol, 50, 203-212
  10. Kartal M, Yıldız S, Kaya S, Kurucu S, Topçu G (2003): Antimicrobial activity of propolis samples from different regions of Anatolia. J Ethnopharmacol, 86, 69-73
  11. Kreuzer M, Kirchgessner M, Müller HL (1986): Effect of defaunation on the loss of energy in wethers fed different quantities of cellulose and normal or steamflaked maize starch. Anim Feed Sci Tech, 16, 233-241
  12. Lana RP, Camardelli MML, Queiroz AC, Rodrigues MT, Eifert EC, Miranda EN, Almeida ICC (2005): Soybean oil and propolis in the diets of dairy goats. Rev Bras Zootecn, 34, 650-658
  13. Lana RP, Camardelli MML, Rodrigues MT, Eifert EC, Oliveira MVM, Stradiotti JD, Oliveira JS (2007): Soybean oil and propolis in the diets of dairy goats: intake of nutrients and ruminal metabolism. Rev Bras Zootecn, 36, 191-197
  14. McGuffey RK, Richardson LF, Wilkinson JID (2001): Ionophore for dairy cattle: Current status and future outlook. J Dairy Sci, 84 (E.