Upload
dinhdung
View
221
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna – Department of Veterinary Medicine
The University of Bologna was probably the first University in the western world. Its history is one of great thinkers in science and the humanities, making it an indispensable point of reference in the panorama of European culture. The institution that we today call the University began to take its structure in Bologna at the end of the eleventh century, when masters of Grammar, Rhetoric and Logic began to devote themselves to the law. In the nineteenth century a committee of historians, led by Giosuè Carducci, attributed the birth of the University to the year 1088.
The Faculty of Veterinary Medicine was born in 1784. But it was only in 1991 that the Faculty took place where it is today. The old buildings are now in downtown Bologna, where it is difficult to maintain farms and research facilities. Close to the core building, there are other scientific and educational structures: a centralised library, a teaching hospital, a teaching slaughterhouse, an experimental farm and a centre for artificial insemination of various animal species. A detached structure is the Cesenatico
Centre for Aquaculture and Ittiopathology. Many major groups are involved in scientific research and educational activities: Clinical, Surgery, Public Health, Animal Pathology, Biochemistry, Morphophysiology and Nutrition and Feeding.The Nutrition and Feeding section works mainly in several major species: dogs and cats, pigs and dairy cattle. Within the last 5 years, the Dairy Cattle group expanded its research: the experimental farm houses now 75 cows in lactation, allowing us to design trials on diets composition, milk production and animal behaviour; in a strict relationship, our lab can now afford several determination: wet chemistry and NIRS for forage analysis, chromatography for VFAs and long chain fatty acids in milk, forages and rumen content, two Tilley and Terry systems for fibre and starch in vitro digestibility, and the new space for rumen microbiology.
University of Bologna, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine
y g , y y
International Symposium
12th May 2011 – Castel san Pietro Terme, Italy
With the support of
4
Benvenuto!
Welcome! By Professor Giovanni Savoini, Department of Veterinary Sciences and Technologies for Food Safety,
Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Today, agricultural products are not only used as a source of nutrients for human beings and animals, but they are also used to produce energy and eco-friendly goods. The more appropriate example is the use of corn for the production of ethanol and biodegradable plastic. Moreover, agricultural crops can be fermented to produce biogas. These processes usually have a positive impact on the public opinion, as they are considered means to reduce pollution, using renewal raw materials to produce fuels and goods. Unfortunately, this approach creates a competition between the utilization of agricultural crops as nutrient sources and as non-food materials, and the result is often an increase in price. The prices of cereals indeed varied significantly in the last years and reached high values that made difficult the purchase of these essential energetic feed to many people in the world.
Within this scenario it is quite clear that it is important, and probably it will be even more important in the future, to reduce in the diet of animals the amount of valuable nutrients for human consumption (starch and protein) in favour of fibrous sources. Among food producing animals, ruminants are the only ones able to transform great amounts of fibre into energy that can be utilized for maintenance and for milk and meat production. But fibre plays also a dietetic role in human nutrition and can be used to produce energy too, implying that the production of fibre sources has to be oriented according to its different uses.
The general tendency in ruminant nutrition is to increase the use of home-grown feeds, mainly forages, as this allows a greater use of grains for human consumption and it can prevent rumen fermentation disorders such as (sub)acute acidosis, resulting in lower performance and other metabolic disorders. But, on the other hand, high yielding dairy cattle must be fed diets with a high energy content to sustain their nutrient requirements linked to high milk production. This implies that cows must be fed highly digestible forages. Moreover, the increase of fibre digestibility positively influences the rumen rate of passage allowing cows to eat more.
The goal of increasing fibre utilization implies the knowledge of the factors that affect its degradation and kinetic in the rumen, and the knowledge of the rumen microbiota and how to increase the fibrolytic populations and activities. Moreover it is also important to investigate the dietetic role of fibre, the non dietary factors that could affect rumen function, and finally how to include all these information in mathematical models to simulate the animal response to dietary changes.
Prof. Giovanni Savoini
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
5
Bienvenue!
Welcome
By Olivier Clech, Vice President, Lallemand Animal Nutrition, Human Health and Pharmaceuticals, Lallemand SAS, France. Dear Participants, I would like to extend my grateful appreciation to the University of Bologna for allowing Lallemand Animal Nutrition to take part in this event. At Lallemand, we believe that micro-organisms will take an increasingly important role in animal nutrition, in ruminants in particular. Yeasts and bacteria have clearly demonstrated their value in industries such as baking, brewing, winemaking, and, more recently, bioethanol and plant care …due to their exceptional capacity to add value to carbohydrates and other organic and mineral compounds. Over the past decades, micro-organisms have demonstrated their benefits in ruminant diets too, in preventing some well known metabolic disorders worth millions to the dairy industry, such as sub-acute acidosis, and in participating to a better utilization of highly concentrated diets. Today, we are learning that those beneficial micro-organisms can do more by enhancing the digestion of fibre, allowing to extract additional energy and nutrients from the largest and least used source of dietary carbohydrate on earth: the fibre. With high fluctuations in feed and milk prices, improving feed efficiency and maximizing Income Over Feed Cost becomes crucial. It is necessary to evaluate different feeding strategies and the use of efficient microbial solutions exerting a positive impact on the rumen ecosystem, in order to optimize digestion and utilization of the fibre fraction of the diets while safeguarding the animal health and welfare. It is an honour for Lallemand Animal Nutrition to be associated with some of the world’s best ruminants scientists and leading nutrition experts for this convention, and I am sure you will bring back with you a lot of very valuable information that you will be able to translate into day-to-day feeding and herd management recommendations. Moreover, it is a rare opportunity that we should all take for exchanging experiences and points of view, so enjoy these sessions, and take the best out of it.
Very sincerely,
Olivier Clech
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
6
Benvenuto!
Welcome
By Philippe Bruneau, Managing Director Filozoo Srl, Italy
Dear Participants, The year 2010 and the first months of 2011 have shown strong changes that will leave a mark on the beginning of this new Millennium: -the INSTABILITY of our economical model based on financial speculation -the FRAGILITY of Western society no longer able to find its balance -the impressive GROWTH of China and India allowing these countries to compete for the leadership on the international scene -the regular DEFICIT between the offer and demand of raw materials from Agriculture and other sources -the INCREASE of a world medium social class consuming more animal proteins produced from grains and feedstuffs dependant on climatic factors Here lay the main reasons explaining the observed unpredictable price variations of feed stuffs and grains. Unlike others who are disoriented in front of such drastic changes, partners Lallemand & Filozoo-InVivo NSA in collaboration with the prestigious Veterinary Faculty of Bologna see a fantastic opportunity to contribute together to the improvement of animal production performances. This Symposium is the occasion to offer a fruitful meeting around a current issue: how to further improve fibre digestibility in ruminants. We hope you will return home with new solutions to a recurrent customer problem. Philippe Bruneau
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
7
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability? Chairman: Pr . Giovanni Savoini (University of Milan, Italy) 9:30 Registration & coffee
10: 00 Welcome address by Pr A. Formigoni, University of Bologna, Italy.
10: 15 Introduction: The dietetic role of fibre
(Pr A. Formigoni, Uni of Bologna, Italy)
11: 00 Fibre degradation (and kinetics) and the factors that affect it
(Dr D. Mertens, Mertens Innovation & Research LLC, Wisconsin , USA)
11: 45 Fibre degrading microbiota in the ruminant gut and effect of active dry yeast on fibrolytic populations and activities
(Dr F. Chaucheyras-Durand INRA/Lallemand Animal Nutrition, France )
12: 30 Lunch
14:30 Non-dietary factors influencing rumen function and dairy cow performance
(Dr A. Bach, IRTA Spain).
15:15 Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
(Dr C. Sniffen, Fencrest LLC New Hampshire, USA)
16:00 Conclusions
16:30 End
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
9
Contents
Introductory Notes /Preface 2
Contents 9
The Speakers 11
Pr . Giovanni Savoin 1
Pr . Andrea Formigoni
Dr David Mertens 11
Dr Frédérique Chaucheyras-Durand 11
Dr Alex Bach 11
Dr Charles Sniffen 1
The dietetic role of fibre, by A. Formigoni 13
Fibre degradation (and kinetics) and the factors that affect it, by D. Mertens 23
Fibre degrading microbiota in the ruminant gut and effect of active dry yeast on fibrolytic
populations and activities, by F. Chaucheyras-Durand 33
Non-dietary factors influencing rumen function and dairy cow performance, by A. Bach 39
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation, by C. Sniffen 49
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
11
The Speakers
Pr . Giovanni Savoini, University of Milan ([email protected]) Professor Giovanni Savoini is an expert in dairy nutrition and feed technology. He is full Professor in Animal Nutrition at the Università degli Studi di Milano, Department of Veterinary Sciences and Technologies for Food Safety, in Italy. He is also a member of the Scientific Commission for Research and Technological Transfer and is the Scientific Director of the Animal Production Research and Teaching Centre of the Polo Univesitario of Lodi (Università degli Studi di Milano). He is involved in various animal nutrition research projects and acts as a consultant on feed additives European dossiers. He has recently developed methods for
feed analysis based on modern analytical techniques.
Pr . Andrea Formigoni, University of Bologna ([email protected]). Andrea Formigoni is full Professor of Animal Nutrition and Feeding at the University of Bologna, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and responsible of the Dairy unit centre. His main research interest are in dairy cow nutrition, focusing in particular on the relationship between feeding and milk yield, feeding techniques, animal welfare and health, quality of feedstuffs (mainly forage). As nutritional and managerial specialist, he is also member of the Certification Committee of the Department for the control of the quality of Parmigiano- Reggiano. Dr David Mertens, Mertens Innovation & Research LLC, Wisconsin ([email protected]) Dr. David R. Mertens is known nationally and internationally as an expert on the analysis of fibre in feeds, the maximum and minimum fibre requirements of dairy cows, and the mathematical modeling of the intake and digestion of fibre. While on the faculties of Iowa State University and the University of Georgia, Dr. Mertens developed a reputation as an outstanding teacher for animal nutrition and dairy science. From 1984 to 2009, he focused on dairy nutrition research at the U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center in Wisconsin. In 2010, he formed Mertens Innovation & Research LLC to provide expertise in feed evaluation analyses,
research management, data interpretation, and mathematical modeling of digestion. He wants to see the results of his efforts used by the people feeding and managing livestock on the farm.
Dr Frédérique Chaucheyras-Durand, INRA/Lallemand Animal Nutrition ([email protected]) Frédérique Chaucheyras-Durand obtained a PhD in Microbiology in 1995 at Blaise Pascal University, Clermont-Ferrand, France. She has been involved in the last steps of selection of Saccharomyces cerevisiae I-1077 as a rumen specific yeast strain, under the financial support of Lallemand and the scientific collaboration of INRA, unit of Microbiology. Her main activities are focused on interactions between S.cerevisiae I-1077 and the rumen microbiota under a collaborative research program with INRA. Moreover, she is also involved into evaluation of
effects and mechanisms of action of other probiotic microorganisms or silage bacterial inoculants used in ruminant nutrition and health.
Dr Alex Bach, IRTA,Spain ([email protected]) Dr Àlex Bach heads the Department of Ruminant Production of IRTA (Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentàries), devoted to study ruminant production systems (nutrition, management, development...) and he is a research professor of ICREA (Institut Català de Recerca i Estudis Avançats), an institution formed by high-quality researchers throughout the world that fosters research in Catalonia, Spain. He currently conducts research on management, nutrition, and metabolism of dairy cows and replacements.
Charles Sniffen, Fencrest LLC New Hampshire, USA ([email protected]) Sniffen has taught nutrition and management of dairy cows at the Universities of Maine,
Cornell and Michigan since 1970. Most of his career has been dedicated to research in the amino acid area. He is the one who introduced solubility and rumen degradability of protein and other feed components into feed evaluation systems. In the last 20 years a significant part of his time has been devoted to the development of dairy nutrition models. Today, Sniffen is still actively involved in feeding of dairy cattle as President of Fencrest LLC, located in Holderness, NH.
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
14
Introduction: The dietetic role of fibres
Andrea Formigoni
Dipartimento Scienze Mediche Veterinarie
Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna
The rumen is incredibly able to utilize fibre, in particular from young and barely lignified forages
Fibre (aNDF) is a mixture of several organic compounds, differing in rumen digestibility; it is possible to identify in particular: - Potentially digestible, rapidly digested - Potentially digestible, slowly digested - Indigestible
The fibre indigestible fraction is related to the lignin content of the cell wall, but this relation is not constant, as so far thought.
To be utilized, fibre is selectively retained into the rumen for a long time, while teeth reduce particles size during eating and rumination.
Major part of fibre dietetic role is due to the ability of forages (the main fibrous compound of any diet) to stimulate chewing activity; native structure (straw is more efficient than grass, and grasses are more efficient than legumes) and particles size and shape are probably the main factors involved. Besides,more chewing activity can slow down the feed intake rate, which is important to: prevent a dangerous amount of digestible organic matter in the rumen, increase saliva production (buffering effect), improve rumen motility and passage rate. Adequate dietary fibre levels can.also improve digestion efficiency, affecting positively pH dynamics in the rumen.
While easily digestible fibre disappears rapidly from the rumen, the dietetic role is played mainly by the indigestible and slowly digestible fibre fractions: these components had to be chewed for a longer time and remain into the rumen longer, thus regulating the intake rate.
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
15
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
Dietetic Role of fibre
16
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Chewing and rumination time
Cow chew during feed intake and during rumination, which usually happens after feeding and while resting
Chewing (55-60 times/min) stimulate saliva production and rumen motility
Saliva production = 274ml/min. chewing
Sodium Bicarbonate = 7 g/liter saliva
It is possible to record 6-8 daily rumination periods of 40-50 min each
Average S.D. Min. Max.
Wheat bran 2.63 0.27 2.36 2.90
Soy hulls 0.80 0.20 0.56 0.93
Beet pulp 0.20 0.14 0.10 0.37
Wheat midd 1.77 0.85 0.83 2.49
Alfalfa hay 2.26 0.34 1.59 2.62
Early cutting 2.07 0.37 1.59 2.52
Late cutting 2.39 0.26 1.90 2.62
Corn silage 3.32 0.83 1.55 5.18
Grass hay 2.70 0.55 1.77 3.93
Triticale hay 3.20 0.49 2.31 3.73
iNDF / lignin relationship in
different feeds (IVNDFd-240h)
(Palmonari & Canestrari, 2011)
Dynamic model for ruminal retained
NDF estimation
8 meals
4 meals
Feeds iNDF
Traditional equation to define iNDF is:
% lignin * 2.4 (CNCPS, CPM)
But iNDF is variable
Very long and expensive analysis
Faster, accurate and cheaper analytic systems to
determine iNDF are needed
NIR
Kd and iNDF effects on ruminal filling
Considering the high ability of the rumen to retain and
degrade the potentially digestible NDF, is very important to
well define the digestion rate (kD) and the indigestible fraction (iNDF)
Better definition of intake
Avoid rumen emptiness and prevent changes in eating behaviour
and metabolic disorders
Particles size (mm)
Pas
sag
e R
ate
(%/h
.) Indigestible fibre
Digestible fibre
Ruminal passage rate depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
17
Guidelines for peNDF requirement and
relation with ruminal pH
Minimum requirement of peNDF around 21 e 24% DM basis based on DM intake
Chewing time around 750 min/day
ruminal pH = 6.67 - 0.143 (1/%peNDF)
22.3% peNDF per rumen pH at 6.0
Zebeli (2008) proposed a peNDF requirement of more than 30% DM
Rumen pH = 5.59+0.0218*peNDF
Class cm Grass
hay
Grass
Silage
Corn
silage
Alfalfa
hay
Alfalfa
silage
Long 1.00
Coarse chop >5 0.95 0.95 0.90
Med-coarse 2.5-5 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.85
Medium chop 1.2-2.5 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.80
Med-fine chop 0.6-1.2 0.80 0.80
Fine chop <0.6 0.70 0.70
Ground >0.6 0.40 0.40
Fine ground <0.6 0.30 0.30
Mertens guidelines for feeds peNDF
(Mertens, 1997)
Chewing time estimation
Allen (1997) proposed a system based on fibre source (in forages) and particles size, clustered in three groups (Particle Lenght Index)
long (PLI1); > 0.3 cm (PLI2); < 0.3 cm (PLI3)
Two different equations to estimate chewing time and rumination
To these equations, cows eating more spend less time chewing, but in proportion longer rumination phase
Chewing time estimation
Mertens (1997) proposed a system based on feed particles size and NDF content in the diet
peNDF = physically effective fibre diet fraction > 1.18 mm x % NDF
Ro-Tap: gold standard
chewing: 150 min/kg peNDF Cows can chew for at least 1000 min/day
fibre intake limit
Chewing time
It is well known that insufficient time spent chewing can led to
metabolic concerns
Rumen acidosis (Nocek, 1997)
Decrease in Milk fat
Decrease in fibre digestion
Allen (1997) reported that chewing time cannot completely
explain rumen pH; it depends also on the relationship between
VFA production and absorption
Rumination goals
Feed transfer
To the mouth, to reduce particles size
From reticulum to the rumen, to retain fibre
From the rumen to omasum and abomasum
Allow the best fermentation process possible
Better distribution of feedstuff and bacteria in the rumen
pH maintenance in the whole rumen
Dietetic Role of fibre
18
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Straw and hay usually not enough chopped Cows choose small particles against coarse (lack in peNDF intake)
Water addition is useful when it reaches 40% of the DM
fermentation problems in the feed bunk mainly in summer
Without water addition, forage length must be < 20-30 mm to avoid the ability of cows to choose
Finely chopped rations – lack in peNDF and behaviour changes
Farm crew attention and mixer “feature” are also key
points
TMR and forage structure TMR related concerns
Nordic Feed Evaluation System for
the structure of the ration (2007)
Each feed in the ration can influence intake and rumination time, depending on NDF – iNDF content, particles size
Eating Time Index (EI)
EI=4 min/kg/DM (fixed) x particles size <6mm
Rumination Time Index (RI)
RI=0 min/kg/DM x particles size < 2 mm
EI + RI = Chewing Time Index (CI)
Nordic Feed Evaluation System for
the structure of the ration
Alfalfa : 50-75 min/kg/DM
Grass : 65-100 min/kg/DM
Corn Silage: 50-75 min/kg/DM
Straw : 95-115 min/kg/DM
Guidelines: 32 min/kg/DMI
Es. DMI = 24kg/d = 768 min.
System PSPS
as fed
PSPS
d.m. RO-TAP Z-BOX
Observations 38 38 38 38
pef % NDF 68.9 62.4 55.1 48.72
peNDF % ration 22,98 20,83 18,37 16,27
(Dip.S.Med.Vet. 2009)
Relationship between different systems
on the same dry TMR At – the – farm peNDF evaluation
issue
Useful methods to focus daily on the ration structure and
homogeneity
It is important to relate these data with the Ro-Tap to
validate them and train farm crew
A right NDF evaluation of the diet, as for each sieve –
residue, should be required
19
Studies on chewing activity
Farms Time after unloading
Chop length H2O n° 0 8 24
Short No 4 3,12 3,77 12,28
Short Yes 3 2,23 5,26 9,03
Average No 5 7,23 6,43 12,52
Average Yes 10 6,46 7,69 23,00
Long No 1 13,82 14,39 25,40
Long Yes 15 14,83 B 17,56 B 39,38 A
A, B 0,01;
(Mordenti e Fustini, 2009)
Forage length (> 20 mm) changes in
feed bunk during the day
Total Chewing Time with different
forages
Forages Intake
min/d.
Rumination
min/d.
Total
min/d.
Grass “short” 282 410 692
Grass “long” 352 384 737
Alfalfa “high digestibilty” 236 308 544
Alfalfa “low digestibilty” 262 359 620
Straw “short” 404 352 756
(Dip.S.Med.Vet, 2009)
DIET COMPOSITION
Grass
Hay Straw
Grass hay Kg./cow/d 15.0 9.3
Straw Kg./cow/d - 3.0
Corn Flour Kg./cow/d 6.5 9.5
Soybean meal ( 44% P.G.) Kg./cow/d 2.8 2.0
Aminoplus Kg./cow/d 1.6 2.1
Molasses Kg./cow/d 1.0 1.0
Mineral Kg./cow/d 0.4 0.4
Forages (% DM) 55 45
Effects of different CHO sources in
rations
Grass hay Straw
Avg S.D. Avg S.D. P
Milk kg/cow/d 28,00 ± 5,65 28,90 ± 5,95 NS
Fat % 3,40 ± 0,75 3,22 ± 0,73
NS
Protein % 3,37 ± 0,34 3,48 ± 0,35
< 0,05
Lactose % 4,76 ± 0,36 4,87 ± 0,24
< 0,05
Effects of different CHO sources on
milk production and composition
Effects of different CHO sources on
Feed intake
Grass Hay Straw
Avg. S.D. Avg. S.D. P
Water liters/cow/d 147,07 ± 9,77 147,53 ± 15,00 NS
DM Kg/cow/d 24,64 ± 1,25 24,36 ± 2,04 NS
NDF Kg/cow/d 10,80 ± 0,55 10,10 ± 0,85 NS
starch Kg/cow/d 3,80 ± 0,19 5,46 ± 0,46 <0,01
peNDF Kg/cow/d 5,29 ± 0,27 3,78 ± 0,32 NS
Dietetic Role of fibre
20
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Physiological condition, production and
rumination time
Physiological
condition
cows, n. rumination, min/day
Lactation 79 424±73
Dry 17 518±72
Avg. production cows, n. rumination, min/day
40 kg 4 511±60
35 kg 8 470±80
30 kg 14 436±57
25 kg 10 447±77
20 kg 15 428±69
20 kg 8 406±37
R=0,93
Rumination time : RAct vs IGER
Suggestions
Dietetic = Straw is more effective than predicted just with
structural composition (peNDF)
Dissimilar NDF distribution
Rumen Milieu not influenced by starch content of diet
RuminAct vs IGER Behaviour Recorder
peNDF
Eating
Min /Kg peNDF 59,60
±10,04 98,92
±14,96 <0,01
Ruminating
Min /Kg peNDF 82,45
±11,69 115,25
±23,00 <0,05
Total
Min /Kg peNDF 142,05 ± 14,31 214,17 ± 28,18 <0,01
Grass
Hay Straw
Avg S.D, Avg S.D.
Time
Eating min/d 316,00
±57,27 373,40
±63,93 NS
Ruminating
min/d 435,80
±61,96 430,20
±51,49
NS
Total
min/d 751,80
±81,01 803,60
±62,07
NS
N° meal 12,00
±0,82 12,00
±1,73
NS
Chewing and Ruminating
Grass Hay Straw
Avg S.D. Avg S.D. P
pH 6,38 0,15 6,50 0,19 NS
acetic % mmol 64,72 2,26 64,49 2,12 NS
propionic % mmol 19,08 2,44 20,04 4,04 NS
butyric % mmol 13,6 1,73 12,87 2,08 NS
Effects of different CHO sources on
rumen pH and VFA
21
Thanks !!
…to
Alberto Palmonari
Mattia Fustini
Giorgia Canestrari
Beatrice Zoratti
Attilio Mordenti
Nicola Panciroli
Nico Brogna
Andrea Panciroli
Conclusions
Evaluation of rumination and chewing time can help farmer and nutritionist improving formulation accuracy
Physical structure evaluation with sieves in field is important, but not sufficient
New methods available, once validated, could be more efficient and useful
peNDF intake and rumination time
Ru
min
ati
on
(m
in/d
)
peNDF intake (kg)
Among forages, straw is the best chewing promoter, and could represent a good solution to meet peNDF requirements
We do need a new model which describes chewing activity, rumination and ruminal retention time in order to define NDF filling and passage dynamics, and how these rates can affect intake, meal number and intake patterns
Conclusions
Dietetic Role of fibre
Fiber Degradation Kinetics and the Factors that Affect It
David R. MertensMertens Innovation & Research LLC
Madison, WI
24
Fibre degradation (and kinetics) and the factors that affect it
David Mertens
Mertens Innovation & Research LLC, Belleville WI 53508 USA
Fibre is an important measurement for feed evaluation because it distinguishes between the easily digested non-fibre fraction and the slowly and incompletely digested fibre fraction. Neutral detergent fibre is the best routine method for measuring the total dietary fibre in feeds, which can be used in summative equations to estimate digestibility. Because fibre digestion is slow, ruminants, such as cows and sheep have evolved a digestive system that is designed to slow the passage of fibre through the animal. Ruminants swallow larger particles, and retain them in the rumen until they are reduced in size by rumination to allow passage. While fibre is retained in the rumen, a diverse population of bacteria is responsible for fibre degradation. Digestion of fibre is the result of the competition between rates of passage and degradation. Thus, understanding the dynamic processes of digestion and passage, and the factors affecting them, are the keys to improving forage intake and utilization.
Digestion curves appear to have three distinct phases. During the initial lag phase, fibre becomes hydrated and bacteria penetrate plant cells and attach to the fibrous cell walls. During the rate phase, fibre is degraded at a constant fractional rate that varies from 0.02 to 0.16/h. The rate of digestion is determined by unknown factors that appear to be related to plant maturity. However, in the anaerobic environment of the rumen, fibre digestion is incomplete. This creates the last phase of digestion, which is characterized by an asymptote or plateau of digestion that is less than 100%. The indigestible fibre in forages is related to lignin concentration in the fibre. Not only is lignin itself indigestible, but it also inhibits the digestion of some of the cellulose and hemicellulose in fibre. Indigestible fibre is 2.5 to 3.5 times lignin content of fibre. Reducing lignin and decreasing the maturity of forages will result in the most rapid and complete degradation of fibre. Dietary factors such as starch can also affect fibre digestion by direct effects on the microbial population or indirect effects associated with low ruminal pH. It also appears that individual cows have unique populations of ruminal microbes that may affect fibre digestion. Rate of passage affects fibre digestion by affecting the time fibre is retained in the rumen for fermentation. Passage is primarily a function of fibre particle size and animal feed intake. Smaller particles pass out of the rumen more quickly and we observed that finely chopped or ground forages typically have lower fibre digestibility. Perhaps the greatest impact on passage rate is the level of feed intake. Dairy cows have high nutrient demands, which results in high levels of feed intake. As intake increases rate of passage also has to increase. Lower retention times associated with faster rates of passage result in reduced fibre digestion. To optimize fibre digestion, we need to minimize the indigestible fibre fraction, maximize rate of fibre digestion, and maintain a ruminal environment that maximizes the population of fibre digesting bacteria. We also need to manage diet composition and particle size so that we optimize the intake and digestion of fibre.
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
25
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility •
•
© micro.magnet.fsu.edu/cells/plantcell.html
Fiber particles are
hollow – rigid plant
cell wall occupies
more space than its
mass indicates
Van Soest (1994)
hotel theory for the
filling effect of fiber
Component Corn
Grain
Grass
Silage
Cereal
Silage
Corn
Silage
Alfalfa
Silage
aNDF, % of DM 9.0 50.0 55.0 45.0 40.0
Fractional NDFD 0.50 0.64 0.58 0.58 0.46
Digestible NDF, % of DM 4.5 32.1 31.6 26.2 18.6
NDS, % of DM 91.0 50.0 45.0 55.0 60.0
Digestible NDS, % of DM 89.2 49.0 44.1 53.9 58.8
True DMD 93.7 81.1 75.7 80.1 77.4
Endogenous DM loss -12.9 -12.9 -12.9 -12.9 -12.9
Apparent DMD1X 80.8 68.2 62.8 67.2 64.5
•
–
–
•
•
•
•
•–
–
•
•
•
–
–
–
•
•
•
–
Fiber Degradation Kinetics and the Factors that Affect It
26
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
•
•
•
•
Mathematical models are needed
to use digestion kinetics
Models allow the effects of
changes in rates of digestion and
passage to be determined
•
–
–
–
•
–
–
–
•
–
–
–
–
•
–
Akin (1979) J. Animal Sci 48:701
–
–
–
•
–
–
– Rumination reduces
particle size and digestion
increases density
– After rumination, dense
small particles sink into
the liquid and pass out
27
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility •
•
•
•
–
–
•
•
–
•
•
–•
•
•
•–
–
•
–
–
NDF Intake pdNDF
iNDF iNDF
udNDF
dNDF rd
ri
kd
kp
kp uNDF
•
–
–
–
Indigestible NDF
Potentially Digestible NDF
and Rate of Digestion
Lag phase
•
•
•
Fiber Degradation Kinetics and the Factors that Affect It
28
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Smith et al., 1972 J Dairy Sci 55:1140
Forage
iNDF
(% DM)
iNDF
(% NDF)
Lignin
(% DM)
iNDF/
Lignin
Average legume 20.0 48.8 9.6 2.08
Average grass 19.0 31.3 6.2 3.06
Immature average 10.6 27.6 4.6 2.30
Mature average 28.4 52.6 11.2 2.54
iNDF was measured as uNDF after 72 hours of fermentation
Legumes have more lignin and more iNDF per unit of NDF
Mature forages have more iNDF than immature forages
Rate of digestion phase
•
–
–
–
NDF Intake pdNDF
iNDF iNDF
udNDF
dNDF rd
ri
kd
kp
kp uNDF
Forage
Rate
(h-1)
NDF
(%)
Average legume 0.116 39.5
Average grass 0.096 54.1
Immature average 0.152 38.8
Mature average 0.060 54.8
Legumes typically have faster rates of digestion than grasses
Immature forages have faster rates than mature forages
•
–
•–
–
–
29
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fiber Degradation Kinetics and the Factors that Affect It
ec = encapsulated cocci ib = irregular bacilli
Attachment of Bacteria to Fiber Akin (1980)
Fibrolytic bacteria must be attached or closely associated with fiber
•
•–
–
–
–
Grass
Forage
Lag
(h)
Rate
(h-1)
iNDF
(% DM)
NDF
(% DM)
13/10 C regimen 2.7 0.041 8.8 38.0
20/18 C regimen 3.6 0.037 11.6 42.7
30/27 C regimen 2.8 0.033 16.2 50.1
Warmer growth temperatures increase maturity and iNDF
and reduce rate of digestion
Lag phase
•
–
–
–
•
–
Grass stage
Lag
(h)
Rate
(h-1)
iNDF
(% DM)
NDF
(% DM)
Flag leaf emergence 6.5 0.056 20.4 67.0
14 d after flag leaf 6.0 0.050 29.0 70.6
21 d after flag leaf 6.5 0.044 33.4 72.5
Maturity decreases rate and increases iNDF
(Long lag times suggest an effect of the in vitro technique)
30
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
pH No Starch 45% Starch
Lag
(h)
Rate
(/h)
iNDF
%NDF
Lag
(h)
Rate
(/h)
iNDF
%NDF
5.8 7.36a 0.056a 49.6 7.04a 0.049a 60.7
6.2 4.94b 0.085b 48.8 3.12b 0.068b 59.8
6.8 4.35b 0.086b 48.2 2.70b 0.076b 62.2
Low pH increased lag and decreased rate of NDF digestion
Adding starch decreased lag and rate and increased iNDF
•
–
•
–
•
–
•
–
•
–
•
–
•
•
–
–
•
kp
Digestible
Fiber Fiber Intake
Fiber Digested
Fiber Passed
•
–
–
•
–
–
•
•
•
–
rate of Digestibility Digestibility
digestion passage depression
0.05 0.04 0.56
0.05 0.05 0.50 0.90
0.20 0.04 0.83
0.20 0.05 0.80 0.96
0.20 0.08 0.71
0.20 0.10 0.67 0.93
31
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Rate of pdNDF (h-1)
Response .04 .05 .06 .07
OMD .663 .692 .712 .727
NDFD .615 .663 .697 .720
pdNDFD .739 .795 .836 .865
NDF pool (kg) 7.91 7.20 6.65 6.25
Rate of pdNDF digestion is the 2nd most important characteristic
affecting digestibility and ruminal fill (Huhtanen, 2006)
iNDF (% of ration DM)
Response 6.0 10.0 14.0
OMD .733 .700 .667
NDFD .727 .673 .620
pdNDFD .808 .808 .808
NDF pool (kg) 6.76 7.47 8.18
iNDF is the most important forage characteristic affecting
digestibility and ruminal fill (Huhtanen, 2006)
Intake Passed
Non-escapable
potentially
digestible
Escapable
potentially
digestible
Non-escapable
indigestible
Escapable
indigestible
Absorbed
Rumen
fd
fi
kd kd
kr
kr
ke
ke
Two-Pool Rumen Passage Model
of Allen and Mertens (1988)
Related to Typical Single-Pool Models
kp
•
•
•
•
•
–
–
•
–
–
–
–
•–
–
•
•
•
•
•
•
–
Fiber Degradation Kinetics and the Factors that Affect It
32
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
•
•
•
•
•
Ruminal retention time (h)
Response 30 35 40 45 50
OMD .657 .676 .691 .703 .713
NDFD .608 .637 .659 .678 .693
pdNDFD .730 .764 .791 .814 .832
NDF pool (kg) 6.01 6.59 7.11 7.59 8.03
Rate of passage or ruminal retention time also has a
large impact on digestibility and ruminal fill
Questions?
Fibre degrading microbiota in the ruminant gut and effect of
active dry yeast on fibrolytic populations and activities
Frédérique Chaucheyras-Durand INRA unit of Microbiology,
Lallemand Animal Nutrition, France
34
Fibre degrading microbiota in the ruminant gut and effect of active dry
yeast on fibrolytic populations and activities
Frédérique Chaucheyras-Durand
Lallemand Animal Nutrition and INRA Unit of Microbiology, Research Centre of Clermont-Ferrand/Theix, 63122
Saint Genès Champanelle, France
Ruminant animals represent a key component of agricultural systems thanks to their ability to convert fibrous plant materials into milk, meat, wool and hides. Most of the digestion of plant material is performed in the rumen by a complex symbiotic microbiota, composed of anaerobic bacteria, fungi and ciliate protozoa. The ruminal microbial populations colonise, hydrolyze and ferment forage cell wall polysaccharides and thereby provide volatile fatty acids and proteins which represent essential energy and nitrogen sources for the host animal. Efficacy of fibre digestion in the rumen relies on the nature of the plant material. In addition, the rate and extent to which fibre is degraded depends on physiological characteristics of fibre degrading microbes, microbial interactions or physico-chemical conditions of the ruminal environment.
In vitro and in vivo studies have demonstrated that a specific strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae increases fibre degradation of fibrous materials, by promoting substrate colonisation by rumen bacteria and fungi. In addition, abundance of cellulolytic bacterial species, and polysaccharide and glycoside hydrolase activities of fibrolytic communities have been maintained at high levels in the rumen of sheep fed with high concentrate diets, which represent a risk for ruminal acidosis. The mechanisms underlying these effects are linked to the yeast metabolic activities, such as the capacity of sugar fermentation and oxygen scavenging, and also to nutrient and vitamin supply to the fibrolytic populations within their microhabitat. Active dry yeast can positively affect fibre digestion in the rumen, which should lead to increased feed efficiency and optimised animal health.
Key words : fibrolytic microbiota, rumen, active dry yeast, feed efficiency.
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
35
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre degrading microbiota in the ruminant gut and effect of active dry yeast on fibrolytic populations and activities
Lactate Succinate
Formiate
H2 CO
2
CO2
36
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
37
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
0 7 14 2c 60
Strictly Anaerobic bacteria
Cellulolytic bacteria Archaea methanogens
Fibrolytic fungi
Ciliate protozoa
to Oba and Allen (1999)
Fibre degrading microbiota in the ruminant gut and effect of active dry yeast on fibrolytic populations and activities
38
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Non-dietary FactorsInfluencing Rumen Function and Dairy Cow Performance
Alex Bach IRTA
INVESTIGATION Y TECHNOLOGIA AGROALIMENTARIAS
40
Non-dietary factors influencing rumen function and dairy cow
performance
Alex Bach
Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentàries (IRTA)
Unitat de Remugants, Barcelona, Spain.
Nutritional models calculate nutrient requirements under the assumption that animals have ad libitum access to feed and water and are kept under dry and clean conditions. Some nutritional models incorporate correcting factors to the energy requirements for maintenance based on the environment surrounding the animals. However, herd performance is affected by several factors including nutrition, reproduction, genetics, environment, and management. Among these factors, the impact of management and environment where cows are housed is the least known. Some of these management and environmental factors modify herd performance by causing a reduction on animal well-being and a subsequent increase in stress. In addition, these factors may directly influence eating and lying behaviour of cows potentially affecting rumen function, digestion, and feed efficiency.
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
41
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Non-dietary Factors Influencing Rumen Function and Dairy Cow Performance
The Dataset
CP 16.1% NDF 35.8% NFC 40.4% EE 3.3% NEl 1.62 Mcal/
Cooperative La Pirenaica
Common TMR
Delivered daily
Similar genetic background
Common veterinary services (breeding, etc...)
The Dataset
Some models incorporate correcting factors to energy requirements for maintenance based on the environment surrounding the animals.
NRC (2001) increases by a factor of 10% the energy requirements for maintenance when animals are housed in free stalls or bedded packs as opposed to tie-stalls.
The Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System (CNCPS; Fox et al., 1992) was revised to incorporate equations that would modify nutrient requirements based on ambient temperature, humidity, and housing conditions (Fox and Tylutki, 1998).
Introduction
Herd performance is affected by:
Nutrition
Reproduction
Genetics
Environment
Management
Introduction
Nutritional models calculate nutrient requirements under the assumption that animals have ad libitum access to feed and water and are kept under dry and clean conditions.
Furthermore, they are based on individual animal specifications, although they are commonly applied to groups of several animals.
Introduction Non-dietary Factors
Influencing Rumen Function and
Dairy Cow Performance
Alex Bach
42
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Heifers
Bach, 2011
Age
at fi
rst c
alvi
ng, d
P < 0.05
Average breeding age: 16.9 months
Average AFC 27.7 months
Heifers
Bach et al., 2008
Calves
Moallem et al., 2010
Milk
yie
ld, k
g/d
Calves
Bach and Ahedo, 2008
The amount of TMR that was delivered daily to each farm during the 8-mo period was recorded and averaged within herd and multiplied by the average DM content (51%) of the TMR
The number of lactating cows present daily in each herd was crossed with TMR delivered to estimate DMI.
The Dataset The Dataset
47 herds within a radius of 59 km
3,129 lactating cows
Herd size: 68 cows (23 to 232)
Starting 8 mo before the time the survey was performed:
Daily milk production
Milk quality records every 2 wk
Survey performed in 60 d.
43
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Lactating Cows Some producers pushed the feed up to 4 times per day, whereas others just pushed feed once daily.
There was no relationship (P = 0.67) between the number of daily feed push-ups and milk yield.
DeVries et al., 2003
Lactating Cows
Feed bunk management affects milk production.
Bach et al., 2008
DIM
Lactating Cows Lactating Cows
The average feed bunk space was 69 cm/animal (with less than 20% of herds with < 50 cm of feed bunk per animal).
No relationship was found between feed bunk space and milk yield.
Grant and Albright (2001) concluded that the minimum critical bunk space for dairy cattle was 20 cm/head.
Despite all herds fed the same ration, there were important differences in milk yield among herds.
Lactating Cows
Milk yield, kg/cow/d
Dry Cows C
ows
culle
d fo
r la
men
ess,
% o
f tot
al c
ullin
gs P = 0.12
Non-dietary Factors Influencing Rumen Function and Dairy Cow Performance
44
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Lactating Cows Lactating Cows
Bach et al., 2007
Knonoff et al., 2003
Lactating Cows Lactating Cows
Lactating Cows
Huzzey et al., 2006 Nordlund et al., 2006
Lactating Cows
45
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Guasch and Bach, 2010
•Diagonal Distance and Lying Times
Lactating Cows •When primiparous and multiparous animals are
commingled, resting time is more reduced for heifers than for older cows (Matzke, 2003).
Lactating Cows
Item Coefficient SE P-value
a 28.4 4.4 <0.001
Age at first calving, months -0.26 0.1 0.05
Orts (Yes=1, no=0) 0.64 0.3 0.09
Cubicles/Cow 5.91 1.4 <0.001
Pushing TMR (Yes=1, No=0) 1.29 0.6 0.05
Bach et al., 2008
Lactating Cows
DeVries et al., 2005
Lactating Cows
When the regression model considered the maintenance status of the stall, it accounted for about 38% of the variation observed in milk production (r = 0.62; P < 0.01)
In addition, a negative relationship (r = 0.39; P < 0.05) between the number of stalls per cow and the proportion of cows culled was found.
Lactating Cows Lactating Cows
Bach et al., 2008
Non-dietary Factors Influencing Rumen Function and Dairy Cow Performance
46
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Guasch and Bach, 2010
•Diagonal Distance and Lying Times
Lactating Cows Lactating Cows
Lyin
g, m
in/d
Guasch and Bach, 2010
•Curb Height
Min
/d
Week relative to a pen change Week relative to a pen change
Lactating Cows
Guasch and Bach, 2009
%
Guasch and Bach, 2010
Lactating Cows
%
Guasch and Bach, 2010
Herds that moved cows between pens in groups of several animals had a lower
incidence of lameness than those that moved cows individually.
Lactating Cows
Lactating Cows
Ste
ps/
h
Week relative to a pen change
Guasch and Bach, 2009
47
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
Thank you
Take Home Messages
Variability is part of biology
Individual animal responses to nutrition are variable
At a herd level, variation is much greater
Main factors contributing to deviations in milk yield are (besides nutrition) include:
Growth rate during the first months of life
Age at first calving
Stall availability, maintenance, and design
Feed bunk management
Non-dietary Factors Influencing Rumen Function and Dairy Cow Performance
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
Charles J. Sniff en, Ph.D. [email protected]
Fencrest, LLCHolderness, NH, USA
50
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
Charles J. Sniffen, Ph.D.
Fencrest, LLC
Holderness, NH, USA
Rumen modifiers can be identified as any compounds that when fed can have a positive impact on rumen fermentation. There has been, in recent years, a significant increase in the number of modifiers available that can alter rumen function. For some of these modifiers there has been excellent research that have demonstrated the mechanisms involved in the changes in rumen function. Unfortunately, there has not been rumen submodels developed for our nutrition models and platforms that adequately take advantage of this knowledge. The only attempt was an ionophore submodel developed within the CNCPS system. This was initially active for both the lactating and non lactating growing ruminant. Now it is restricted to the growing ruminant. The development of a submodel that can reflect the mechanistic effects of different rumen modifiers it will be possible to formulate rations that will reflect the responses from the different modifiers available. Examples of possible approaches that can be used to achieve this will be discussed with specific examples using research conducted with yeast and other modifiers. Examples will also be given to show how this will modify ration outcomes and the positive economic consequences.
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
51
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
CNCPS Based Models
The models are defining by chemical, invitro and enzymatic means
Specific protein, CHO and lipid components in feeds that are unique in their characteristics in the rumen and intestine.
These are defined as pools
The extent of ruminal digestion of these pools is defined by rates of digestion and rates of passage – Bn*Kd/(Kd + Kp)
6
Aggregated NRC 2001 Microbial Flow Model
5
Introduction
The objective of this discussion today is to discuss how to enhance our current models to improve prediction of rumen modifiers
Need to first understand a current rumen model
We will then explore how we might develop a submodel to better reflect the mode of action of a modifier
3
NRC 2001 microbial model
Constant efficiency
Based on whole tract OM digestibility
Insensitive to changes in rumen
conditions
4
Introduction
It is now recognized by many scientists and field nutritionists that our ability to predict microbial growth and efficiency can be improved.
Historically we have used empirical models to predict microbial flow to the SI
There are now attempts to develop more mechanistic models
2
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
Charles J. Sniffen, Ph.D.
Fencrest, LLC
Holderness, NH, USA
1
52
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Microbial growth
The bacteria have a theoretical maximum yield of 0.5g cells/g CHO fermented.
The figure shows 0.4g cell due to the inclusion of protozoal predation
Bacteria have a maintenance requirement
The NSC bacteria are stimulated by peptides mainly from the B1 & B2 protein pools
8
Russell mechanistic microbial model
7
Prediction of microbial flow from Beef & Dairy Data
9
Increasing the sensitivity of the microbial model
With CPM, the CHO model was expanded increasing the sensitivity of
the microbial submodel
10
12
Increasing the sensitivity of the microbial submodel
With CNCPS 6.1
Expanded the CHO submodel more
Introduced liquid turnover
Changed the soluble protein pools
Going forward
Will improve the recycled N prediction
Will develop a protozoal submodel
Will develop a Rumen VFA model
11
53
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility NFC Bacteria
The bacteria grow at a very fast rate and without control can dominate the ecology & drop rumen pH
With control they produce the high quality protein that the cow needs
a significant part of the energy she needs
This is good
18
NFC Bacteria
This is a broad category
The substrate is a mixture of starch, sugars and soluble fiber
The bacteria, on the whole, are more tolerant of lower rumen pH
They grow well with peptides and NH3
The starch bacteria are stimulated by peptide
They are more readily predated by protozoa
17
Fiber Bacteria
Optimizing fiber digestion in dairy cattle is often difficult
It starts with the substrate
We need a fiber pool that has a high potential digestibility
This fiber pool has to be both digestible and have enough structure to provide chewing, saliva flow and rumen pH control
15
Fiber Bacteria
These bacteria need access to the inner part of the fiber matrix
The fungi play a role here
They need NH3 and isoacids
Isoacids come from the breakdown of
peptides by proteolytic bacteria
They need a stable rumen mat
16
Rumen Ecology Imbalances
The balances can be disturbed by many factors:
Inadequate effective fiber to produce adequate
buffering
High fermentable starch levels in the ration
Low rumen available peptides and NH3
Excessive rumen degraded protein containing peptides with Histidine
Uneven feed consumption throughout the day
14
Microbial submodel
13
Protozoa
New Prot
Fiber Bacteria
New bacteria
NFC Bacteria
New bacteria
Fungi
New Fungi Predation
Fiber, NH3
NH3, peptides, starch, soluble fiber, Lactic. sugars
Predation
Net Microbial
Flow to intestine
VFA
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
54
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Microbial Growth
CHO Digested, g/d
Microbial N, g/kg CHO digested
Low peptide Low pH
Good env., feed additives
24
The Pirt Equation – the basis for modification
22
Fungi
Fungi are not well understood
It is strongly suggested that they open the fiber matrix allowing fiber bacteria
access and colonization
The do not deal with low pH well
They are stimulated by sugars
We need to know more
20
Protozoa
They are 45% of the microbial mass
The contribute little to the protein delivered to the SI.
They can help maintain rumen pH
They are vociferous predators
Reducing bacterial N flow to the SI
They contribute to the recycled N pool
19
Dynamics in microbial sub model
Russell (Cornell) demonstrated that microbial growth was a combination of meeting a requirement for maintenance and then for growth
He also developed the concept of uncoupled
fermentation when there was low rumen pH or inadequate N and other precursors the fermentation becomes uncoupled, leading to energy spilling
21
Microbial Yield in CNCPS
23
55
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility Rumen Modifiers
Rumen Modifier = feed additives which alter ruminal fermentation, microbial growth with positive impact on feed efficiency
Ionophores
Live Yeasts
Yeast fermentation products
Fermentation products
Essential oils
Enzymes
30
Uncoupled Fermentation
29
Microbes New Microbes
VFA
Fermentation heat increment or energy spilling
NFC Bacteria
Optimized when the peptide supply is 14% of fermentable NFC.
Greatest microbial yield is from the NFC bacteria.
27
Ruminal microbial growth
Maintenance
20 to 40% of ATP
Energy spilling
Up to 18% of ATP
Net yield to SI is a combination of above and
Predation by protozoa and death
25
Coupled Fermentation
28
Microbes New Microbes
VFA
Fermentation heat increment
Or energy spilling – up to 18%
Fiber Bacteria losses in CNCPS
Rumen pH When rumen pH goes below 6.4 there is a reduction in max yield and increase in maintenance
Below 6.2 the changes are rapid peNDF is the key driving factor
Ammonia requirement Bacterial growth limited to the ammonia available
Need isoacid submodel
26
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
56
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Rumen Additives
We have been using different rumen products for a long time.
We have measured response in terms of more milk, better components, improved feed efficiency
Only recently we have been looking closer at these additives in terms of the impact in the rumen
32
We can Modify Rumen Parameters
If we determine that a management practice or a feed additive enhances microbial flow we can potentially modify
Rumen pH
Maintenance – reduction of energy spilling Increase the coupled fermentation
Protozoal predation
We would like this done automatically in the model and a submodel could be developed to do this
31
Yeast as a Modifier
Dried yeast and fermentation products and live yeast
We have known for a long time that yeast has a positive effect on rumen function
There have been many studies now that are showing the positive effects on microbial yield and ruminal digestion
33
Live Yeast
How do we modify the CNCPS model to reflect the impact of Lallemand SC? Need to know the mechanisms then we can potentially develop a submodel for the product Potential Control points in rumen submodel
Lactate reduction – improve rumen pH Reduce proteolysis Increase microbial yield – reduce maintenance
34
Carbohydrates Ammonia + Peptides +
VFA
Microbial Growth
Uncoupled Fermentation
VFA/Microbe Ratio VFA/Microbe Ratio
Acidosis
Lactic acid and Acidosis
Live Yeast :
…a higher degree of coupling and higher fermentation efficiency ... with the right balance of
degradable protein fraction and fermentable carbohydrate fraction
(Sniffen, 2003)
: move to slide 35 Modes of action of Levucell SC, F. Chaucheyras-Durand
Interactions with ruminal microbial species (establishment, growth, activities)
lactate
concentration risk of acidosis
fibre
degradation microbial
proteins
Competition
for sugar
utilization
Growth factors
supply
Oxygen
scavenging
pH stabilization
+ - +
+ +
35
57
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Knowledge of passage rate is a key point to a good estimation of digested fibre
Many studies show that passage rate and retention time are different for digestible and indigestible fraction
New mechanistic models are required to better define
digested fibre (nutritional concept) and ruminal retention time (dietetic concept)
Ruminal NDF passage rate
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
fibre digestion
More than 90% of the potentially digestible fibre from forages is degraded in the rumen (Huhtanen, 2007),
mainly because of:
Teeth effect on particles reduction
More cell surface exposed to bacterial degradation
High ruminal retention time
• ++ Larger and soft particles
• -- Heavier and smaller particles
Size (mm)
>1.0 0.5-1.0 0.2-0.5 0.04- 0.2
pdNDF 0.07 1.10 1.64 1.65
iNDF 0.23 3.70 4.30 4.30
NDF-kd = 6.67%/h
da: P. Huhtanen et al. / Animal Feed Science and Technology 133 (2007) 206–227
Ruminal passage rate (%/h) depends
on fibre particles size and digestibility Biochlor & Fermenten
Relatively new products on the market
Research has shown that there is
Increased microbial yield
Increased microbial efficiency
A improved coupled fermentation
41
Additive submodels
We need more research to show the ruminal changes for the additives coming on the market so that we can alter rumen function
When I say ruminal changes I mean changes in specific bacterial niches, protozoa, and fungi.
This information will allow us to develop improved rumen modifiers
42
Essential Oils
There have been several studies that point to the fact that the oils can
increase protein bypass
Modify fermentation pattern
Increase N efficiency
Decrease starch digestion
Need VFA submodel
40
Monensin : Can optimize feed
efficiency
C. J. VAN NEVEL AND D. I. DEMEYER
Effect of Monensin on Rumen Metabolism In Vitro Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Sept. 1977, p. 251-257
Demonstrated the following: Decreased methane
Inhibition of H2 production
Increased propionate
Decreased Microbial growth – specifically Gm+ organisms – Russell
No change in CHO degradation – decreased miccrobial efficiency
Decreased degradation of protein and reduced NH3
Need VFA and protozoal submodels
CNCPS Rumen submodel for yeast
38
SC bacteria NFC bacteria
SC bacteria NFC bacteria
Energy spilling -
Reduce maintenance
Yeast SC
Lactic
acid
Microbial Yield
-
- -
+ +
+ +
NDFd+
Increase Rumen pH +
Prot Deg +
Live Yeast :… Can optimize feed efficiency
37
• 14 trials with 1 600 dairy cows, • One dose and One strain of Live Yeast :
•1010 CFU/dairy cow/d •CNCM I 1077
• increased milk production by 1 kg of milk/d
• without altering feed intake,
Significant Improvement in feed efficiency (1.70 vs. 1.75 ; P< 0.01 )
Greater effect for cows producing (:38 kg) milk/d (1.78 vs. 1.85 ; P<0.05).
Multiple study analysis of the effect of Levucell SC on milk and milk component production and feed efficiency
M.B. de Ondarza, C.J. Sniffen – ADSA 2009
*
P<0. 001
*
P<0. 05 0
* P<0.05
* * P<0.001
Impact of rumen modifiers on ration formulation
58
Dietetic Role of fibre
Andrea Formigoni [email protected]
Castel S. Pietro Terme, 12 maggio 2011
NDF nutritional and dietetic functions
Fraction
Role
Nutritional Dietetic
Rapidly digested (fast pool) +++ +
Slowly digested (slow pool) +/- ++
Non Digestible none +++
Dietetic Roles of fibre
Feed intake Meal number and length
Feed consumption NDF: 0.8-1.4 % body weight (Mertens, 1997)
retained fibre “fill” effect (Mertens, 2010)
Chewing activity induction Two phases: eating and rumination
Saliva production – buffering effect
274 ml saliva/min. chewing (Beauchemin, 2008)
Rumen passage rate modulation
Limit dangerous pH drops (Allen, 2007)
Fibre: a key element for dairy production profitability?
Additive submodels
Need to also be able to develop submodels for metabolism
Changes in energetic efficiency
Partial ƒ ruminal and metabolic efficiencies
Changes in substrate from ruminal fermentation and intestinal digestion
Changes in AA efficiency
43
Summary
We are now, belatedly, beginning to explore the opportunities of enhancing
rumen function again
We do need more well trained rumen microbiologists
The opportunities are exciting for the future
44
Summary
Need a better understanding of the nutrients needed to optimize rumen function
Need a better understanding of the interactions of the different microbial niches in the rumen
Then development of new rumen modifiers can be achieved that are based on good science
45