Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:56:03.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of the mobile bag method for estimation of in vivo starch digestibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2012

T. Ghoorchi ,
P. Lund ,
M. Larsen ,
T. Hvelplund ,
J. Hansen-Møller  and
M. R. Weisbjerg
T. Ghoorchi
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
P. Lund
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
M. Larsen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
T. Hvelplund
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
J. Hansen-Møller
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
M. R. Weisbjerg*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, AU Foulum, DK-8830 Tjele, Denmark
*
†E-mail: Martin.Weisbjerg@agrsci.dk
Get access

Abstract

The objective was to assess the ability of the in situ mobile nylon bag method for predicting small intestinal and total tract starch digestibility. Starch disappearance was measured for 18 samples of different cereals and legumes subjected to different physical and chemical processing methods and compared with coherent in vivo digestibility. Starch disappearance was measured both with and without initial ruminal pre-incubation during 4 h. Bags were retrieved from either the ileal cannula or faeces. Two dry Danish Holstein cows fitted with rumen cannulas were used for rumen pre-incubations and two lactating Danish Holstein cows fitted with duodenal and ileal cannulas were used for intestinal incubations. Rumen pre-incubation had no significant effect on disappearance from bags recovered in faeces. The disappearance of legume starch was lower, both in the rumen and small intestine, compared with starch from barley, wheat, oats, ear maize and maize. Transit times of the mobile bags from duodenum to ileum were not significantly different between feeds. A weak positive correlation was found between in vivo small intestinal and total tract digestibility of starch and disappearance obtained using the mobile bag technique across a broad range of starch sources. Omitting two less conventional starch sources (NaOH wheat and xylose-treated barley) resulted in a high (0.87) correlation between total tract in vivo digestibility and mobile bag disappearance. The use of the mobile bag method for estimation of in vivo starch digestibility will therefore depend on the starch type.

Keywords

starch digestibilitymobile bagin vivocerealslegumes
Type
Nutrition
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , February 2013 , pp. 265 - 271
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2012

Access options

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

References

Åkerlind, M, Weisbjerg, MR, Eriksson, T, Thøgersen, R, Uden, P, Olafsson, BL, Harstad, OM, Volden, H 2011. Feed analysis and digestion methods. In Norfor – the Nordic feed evaluation system. EAAP publication (ed. Volden H) no. 130, pp. 41–54. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bach Knudsen, KE 1997. Carbohydrate and lignin contents of plant materials used in animal feeding. Animal Feed Science and Technology 67, 319–338.Google Scholar
Crocker, LM, DePeters, EJ, Fadel, JG, Perez-Monti, H, Taylor, SJ, Wyckoff, JA, Zinn, RA 1998. Influence of processed corn grain in diets of dairy cows on digestion of nutrients and milk composition. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 2394–2407.Google Scholar
Focant, M, Van Hoecke, A, Vanbelle, M 1990. The effect of two heat treatment (steam flaking and extrusion) on the digestion of Pisum sativum in the stomach of heifers. Animal Feed Science and Technology 28, 303–313.Google Scholar
Gallant, DJ, Bouchet, B, Buleon, A, Perez, S 1992. Physical characteristics of starch granules and susceptibility to enzymatic degradation. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 46 (suppl. 2), S3–S16.Google Scholar
Goelema, JO, Smits, A, Vaessen, LM, Wemmers, A 1999. Effects of pressure toasting, expander treatment and pelleting on in vitro and in situ parameters of protein and starch in a mixture of broken peas, lupins and faba beans. Animal Feed Science and Technology 78, 109–126.Google Scholar
Harmon, DL, Yamka, RM, Elam, NA 2004. Factors affecting intestinal starch digestion in ruminants: a review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 84, 309–318.Google Scholar
Holm, J, Lundquist, I, Bjöck, I, Eliasson, AC, Asp, NG 1988. Relationship between degree of gelatinisation, digestion rate in vitro, and metabolic response in rats. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 47, 1010–1016.Google Scholar
Huhtanen, P, Sveinbjörnsson, P 2006. Evaluation of methods for estimating starch digestibility and digestion kinetics in ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology 130, 95–113.Google Scholar
Huntington, GB 1997. Starch utilization by ruminants: from basics to the bunk. Journal of Animal Science 75, 852–867.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, T 1985. Digestibility of rumen microbial protein and undegraded dietary protein estimated in the small intestine of sheep or by in sacco procedure. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Supplementum 25, 132–144.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, T, Weisbjerg, MR, Andersen, LS 1992. Estimation of the true digestibility of rumen undegraded protein in the small intestine of ruminants by the mobile bag technique. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science 42, 34–39.Google Scholar
Jarosz, L, Hvelplund, T, Weisbjerg, MR, Borg Jensen, B 1994. True digestibility of protein in the small intestine and the hind gut of cows measured with the mobile bag technique using N-labelled roughage. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science 44, 146–151.Google Scholar
Larsen, M, Lund, P, Weisbjerg, MR, Hvelplund, T 2009. Digestion site of starch from cereals and legumes in lactating dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 153, 236–248.Google Scholar
McNiven, MA, Weisbjerg, MR, Hvelplund, T 1995. Influence of roasting or sodium hydroxide treatment of barley on digestion in lactating cows. Journal of Dairy Science 78, 1106–1115.Google Scholar
Mills, JAN, France, J, Dijkstra, J 1999. A review of starch digestion in the lactating dairy cow and proposals for a mechanistic model. 2. Postruminal starch digestion and small intestinal glucose absorption. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 8, 451–481.Google Scholar
Nocek, JE, Tamminga, S 1991. Site of digestion of starch in the gastrointestinal tract of dairy cows and its effect on milk yield and composition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3598–3629.Google Scholar
Norberg, E, Volden, H, Harstad, OM 2007. Technical note: assessment of recovery site of mobile nylon bags for measuring ileal digestibility of starch in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 418–421.Google Scholar
Offner, A, Sauvant, D 2004. Prediction of in vivo starch digestion in cattle from in situ data. Animal Feed Science and Technology 111, 41–56.Google Scholar
Owens, FN, Zinn, RA, Kim, YK 1986. Limits to starch digestion in the ruminant small intestine. Journal of Animal Science 63, 1634–1648.Google Scholar
Prestløkken, E, Rise, O 2003. Protein and amino acid digestibility in dairy cows measured with mobile nylon bag recovered in ileum or faeces. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science 53, 11–20.Google Scholar
SAS Institute 2005. Statistical Analysis System, version 9.1 (release TS1M3). SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Tothi, R, Lund, P, Weisbjerg, MR, Hvelplund, T 2003. Effect of expander processing on fractional rate of maize and barley starch degradation in the rumen of dairy cows estimated using rumen evacuation and in situ techniques. Animal Feed Science and Technology 104, 71–94.Google Scholar
Vanhatalo, A, Ketoja, E 1995. The role of the large intestine in post-ruminal digestion of feeds measured by the mobile-bag method in cattle. British Journal of Nutrition 73, 491–505.Google Scholar
Varvikko, T, Vanhatalo, A 1990. The effect of differing types of cloth and of contamination by non-feed nitrogen on intestinal digestion estimates using porous synthetic-fibre bags in a cow. British Journal of Nutrition 63, 221–229.Google Scholar
Voight, J, Piatkowski, B, Engelmann, H, Rudolph, E 1985. Measurement of the postruminal digestibility of crude protein by the bag technique in cows. Archiv für Tiernährung 35, 555–562.Google Scholar
Volden, H (ed.) 2011. Norfor – the Nordic feed evaluation system. EAAP publication No. 130. Wageningen Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 180 pp.Google Scholar
Volden, H, Harstad, OM 1995. Effect of rumen incubation on the true indigestibility of feed protein in the digestive tract determined by nylon bag techniques. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science 45, 106–115.Google Scholar
Weisbjerg, MR, Hvelplund, T, Hellberg, S, Olsson, S, Sanne, S 1996. Effective rumen degradability and intestinal digestibility of individual amino acids in different concentrate determined in situ. Animal Feed Science and Technology 62, 179–188.Google Scholar
Yu, P, Goelema, JO, Leury, BJ, Tamminga, S, Egan, AR 2002. An analysis of the nutritive value of heat processed legume seeds for animal production using the DVE/OEB model: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 99, 141–176.Google Scholar