Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:43:34.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of acarbose on ruminal fermentation, blood metabolites and microbial profile involved in ruminal acidosis in lactating cows fed a high-carbohydrate ration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2010

Marta Blanch ,
Sergio Calsamiglia ,
Maria Devant  and
Alex Bach
Marta Blanch
Affiliation:
Grup de Recerca en Nutrició, Maneig i Benestar Animal, Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona), 08193 - Bellaterra, Spain
Sergio Calsamiglia
Affiliation:
Grup de Recerca en Nutrició, Maneig i Benestar Animal, Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona), 08193 - Bellaterra, Spain
Maria Devant
Affiliation:
Grup de Nutrició, Maneig i Benestar Animal, Department of Ruminant Production, IRTA (Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentàries), 08140Caldes de Montbui, Spain
Alex Bach*
Affiliation:
Grup de Nutrició, Maneig i Benestar Animal, Department of Ruminant Production, IRTA (Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentàries), 08140Caldes de Montbui, Spain ICREA (Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats), 08010Barcelona, Spain
*
*For correspondence; e-mail: alex.bach@irta.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective was to evaluate the effects of an inhibitor of α-amylase and glucosidase (acarbose, Pfizer Limited, Corby, UK) on ruminal fermentation, blood metabolism and microbial profile in dairy cows in a 2×2 cross-over experiment. Eight Holstein cows fitted with rumen cannulas (milk yield, 24·3±2·35 kg/d, body weight, 622±54 kg, days in milk, 183±67, 5 multiparous and 3 primiparous) were used. Treatments were: control (no additive, CTR) and α-amylase and glucosidase inhibitor (0·75 g acarbose-premix/cow per d, AMI). Animals were given ad-libitum access to a high non-fibre carbohydrate (NFC) partial mixed ration (PMR) containing 17·6% crude protein, 28·3% neutral detergent fibre, and 46·5% NFC in the dry matter and supplementary concentrate during milking. Blood samples were taken to determine blood glucose, insulin and urea within the first hour after the morning feeding on two separate days in each period. Samples of ruminal contents were collected during 3 d in each period at 0, 4 and 8 h after feeding to determine volatile fatty acid and ammonia-N concentrations and to quantify protozoa, Streptococcus bovis and Megasphaera elsdenii. Rumen pH was recorded electronically at 22-min intervals during 6 d in each period. Results were analysed using a mixed-effects model. Cows on AMI treatment spent less time with ruminal pH <5·6 compared with cows in the CTR group (3·74 and 6·52±0·704 h/d, respectively). Cows in the AMI group had greater daily average pH compared with those in the CTR group (6·05 and 5·92±0·042, respectively). AMI animals tended (P=0·09) to have lower Str. bovis to Meg. elsdenii ratio than CTR (4·09 and 26·8±12·0, respectively). These results indicate that dietary supplementation with acarbose in dairy cattle fed high-production rations may be effective in reducing the time for which rumen pH is suboptimal, with no negative effects on ruminal fermentation and blood metabolites.

Keywords

Acarboseamylase inhibitordairy cowssubacute ruminal acidosis
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 123 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2010

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

AOAC 1990 Official Methods of Analysis (15th Edn). Arlington VA, USA: Association of Official Analytical ChemistsGoogle Scholar
Bach, A, Iglesias, C & Busto, I 2004 Technical note: a computerized system for monitoring feeding behavior and individual feed intake of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 87 4207–4209CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bach, A, Iglesias, C & Devant, M 2007 Daily rumen pH pattern of loose-housed dairy cattle as affected by feeding pattern and live yeast supplementation. Animal Feed Science and Technology 136 146–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanch, M, Calsamiglia, S & Castelló, A 2007 Quantification of Streptococcus bovis and Megasphaera elsdenii in ruminal fluid of dairy cows and beef heifers by real time PCR technique. Journal of Dairy Science 90 (Suppl. 1) 339 (Abstract)Google Scholar
Burrin, JM & Price, CP 1985 Measurement of blood glucose. Annals of Clinical Biochemistry 22 327–342CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaney, AL & Marbach, EP 1962 Modified reagents for determination of urea and ammonia. Clinical Chemistry 8 130–132CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehority, BA 1993 Laboratory Manual for Classification of Rumen Ciliate Protozoa. Boca Raton FL, USA: CRC PressGoogle Scholar
Goodall, SR & Byers, FM 1978 Automated micro method for enzymatic L(+) and D(-) lactic acid determinations in biological fluids containing cellular extracts. Analytical Biochemistry 89 80–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, I & Bergmeyer, HU 1974 Determination of urea with glutamate dehydrogenase as indicator enzyme. In: Methods of Enzymatic Analysis 2nd Edn, pp. 1794–1798. New York, USA: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
Jouany, JP 1982 Volatile fatty acid and alcohol determination in digestive contents, silage juices, bacterial cultures and anaerobic fermentation contents. Sciences des Aliments 2 131–144Google Scholar
Littell, R, Henry, PR & Ammerman, CB 1998 Statistical analysis of repeated measures data using SAS procedures. Journal of Animal Science 75 1216–1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, CL, Thompson, A, Greenwood, K, Sherington, J & Bruce, C 2009 Effect of acarbose on acute acidosis. Journal of Dairy Science 92 2758–2766CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newbold, CJ, Williams, AG & Chamberlain, DG 1987 The in vitro metabolism of D,L L-lactic acid by rumen microorganisms. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 38 9–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouwerkerk, D, Klieve, AV & Forster, RJ 2002 Enumeration of Megasphaera elsdenii in rumen contents by real-time Taq nuclease assay. Journal of Applied Microbiology 92 753–758CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Owens, FN, Secrist, DS, Hill, WJ & Gill, DR 1998 Acidosis in cattle: A review. Journal of Animal Science 76 275–286CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramirez, I 1992 Does reducing the rate or efficiency of digestion reduce food intake? American Journal of Physiology 263 852–856Google ScholarPubMed
Speight, SM & Harmon, DL 2005 Application of carbohydrase inhibitors to moderate rumen fermentation: in-vitro evaluation. Journal of Dairy Science 88 (Suppl. 1) 307 (Abstract)Google Scholar
Speight, SM, Harmon, DL & Tricarico, JM 2007 Application of carbohydrase inhibitors to moderate rumen fermentation: Continuous culture evaluation. Journal of Dairy Science 90 (Suppl. 1) 340 (Abstract)Google Scholar
Stone, WC 1999 The effect of subclinical rumen acidosis on milk components. In Proceedings Cornell Nutrition Conference for Feed Manufacturers, pp. 40–46. Ithaca NY, USA: Cornell UniversityGoogle Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB & Lewis, BA 1991 Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74 3583–3597CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vedula, U, Schnitzer-Polokoff, R & Tulp, OL 1991 The effect of acarbose on the food intake, weight gain, and adiposity of LA/N-cp rats. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. A, Comparative Physiology 100 477–482Google Scholar
Veira, DM, Ivan, M & Jui, PY 1983 Rumen ciliate protozoa: effects on digestion in the stomach of sheep. Journal of Dairy Science 66 1015–1022CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitford, MF, Forster, RJ, Beard, CE, Gong, JH & Teather, RM 1998 Phylogenetic analysis of rumen bacteria by comparative sequence analysis of cloned 16S rRNA genes. Anaerobe 4 153–163CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, AG & Coleman, GS 1988 The rumen protozoa. In The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem, p. 77. London, UK: Elsevier Applied ScienceGoogle Scholar