Veterinary Research Forum
Vet Res Forum

Effect of different corn processing methods on enzyme producing bacteria, ‎protozoa, fermentation and histomorphometry of rumen in fattening lambs ‎

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Mohammad Amin Gholami 1
Masihollah Forouzmand 2
Mokhtar Khajavi 2
Shima Hossienifar 3
Reza Naghiha 4

1 Graduate student, Department of Animal Sciences, , Faculty of Agriculture, Yasouj University, Yasouj, Iran

2 Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Yasouj University, Yasouj, Iran

3 Department of Basic Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine,Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran‎

4 Department Microbiology, Faculty of Agriculture, Yasouj University, Yasouj, Iran

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of different corn processing methods on rumen microbial flora, histomorphometry and fermentation in fattening male lambs. Twenty male lambs (average age and weight of 90 days and 25.00 ± 1.10 kg, respectively) were used in a completely randomized design including four treatments and five replicates each over 80 days long period: 1) Lambs fed ground corn seeds; 2) Lambs fed steam-rolled corn; 3) Lambs fed soaked corn seeds (24 hr) and 4) Lambs fed soaked corn seeds (48 hr). At the end of the experiment, three lambs of each treatment were slaughtered and samples were collected for pH, volatile fatty acids, amylolytic, proteolytic, cellulytic and heterophilic bacteria and protozoa assessment. The number of proteolytic bacteria in soaked corn seeds was significantly increased in comparison with other treatments. The thickness of wall, papillae and muscular layers of rumen in the soaked corn seeds treatment was significantly increased. Overall, from a practical point of view, soaked corn processing could be generally used in lambs fattening system.

Keywords

Bacteria
‎ Corn processing
‎ Fattening lambs
‎ Histology
‎ Rumen‎

Subjects

  1.  

    1. Hungate RE, Phillips GD, McGregor AA. Comparison of the rumen fermentation in European and Zebu cattle. J Animal Sci 1960; 54: 196-201.
    2. Ashenbach JR, Borau T, Gabel G. Glucose uptake via SGLT-1 is stimulated by B2 adrenoceptors in the ruminal epithelium of sheep. J Nut 2002; 132: 1254-1257.
    3. Krause KM, Oetzel GR. Understanding and preventing subacute ruminal acidosis in dairy herds: A review. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2006; 126: 215-236.
    4. Zitnan R, Kuhla S, Nurnberg K, et al. Influence of the diet on morphology of ruminal and intestinal mucosa and on intestinal carbohydrate levels in cattle. Vet Med Czech 2003; 48: 177-182.
    5. Lesmeister KE, Heinrichs AJ. Effects of corn processing on growth characteristics, rumen development and rumen parameters in neonatal dairy calves. J Dairy Sci 2004; 87: 3439-3450.
    6. Nocek JE, Heald CW, Polan CE. Influence of ration physical form and nitrogen availability on ruminal morphology of growing bull calves. J Dairy Sci 1984; 67: 334-343.
    7. Dehghan-banadaky M, Corbett R, Oba M. Effects of barley grain processing on productivity of cattle. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2007; 137: 1-24.
    8. Blanch M, Calsamiglia S, Dilorenzo N, et al. Physiological changes in rumen fermentation during acidosis induction and its control. J Animal Sci 2009; 87: 1722-1730.
    9. Heinrichs J. Rumen development in the dairy Calf. J Animal Sci 2005; 17: 179-187.
    10. Kotarski SF, Waniska RD, Thurn KK. Starch hydrolysis by the rumen microflora. J Nut Sci 1992; 122: 178-190.
    11. Knowlton KF, Glenn BP, Eroman RA. Performance, ruminal fermentation and site of starch digestion in early lactation cows fed corn grain harvested and processed differently. J Dairy Sci 1998; 81: 1972-1984.
    12. Nibedita K, Koushik G. Enzyme producing bacteria in the gastrointestinal tracts of Labeo rohita (Hamilton) and Channa punctatus (Bloch). Turkish J Fish Aqu Sci 2008; 8: 115-120.
    13. Lane MA, Jesse BW. Effect of volatile fatty acid infusion in development of the rumen epithelium in neonatal sheep. J Dairy Sci 1997; 80: 740-746.
    14. Bancroft RL, McLeod KR, Klotz JL, et al. Rumen development, intestinal growth and hepatic metabolism in the pre- and post-weaning ruminant. J Dairy Sci 2004; 87: 55-65.
    15. Engstrom DF, Mathison GW, Goonewardene LA. Effect of B-glucan, starch, and fiber content and steam vs. dry rolling of barley grain on its degradability and utilization by steers. J Animal Feed Sci 1992; 37: 33-46.
    16. Murphy TA, Fluharty FL, Loerch SC. The influence of intake level and corn processing on digestibility and ruminal metabolism in steers fed all-concentrate diets. J Animal Sci 1994; 72: 1608-1615.
    17. Nagaraja TG, Titgemeyer EC. Ruminal acidosis in beef cattle: The current microbiological and nutritional outlook. J Dairy Sci 2007; 78: 17-38.
    18. Schlau N, Mcallister TA, Duineveld LW, et al. Precision processing barley grain did not affect productivity of lactating dairy cows. J Animal Sci 2013; 93: 261-268.
    19. Saro C, Ranilla MJ, Carro MD. Influence of forage type in the diet of sheep on rumen microbiota and fermentation characteristics. Livestock Sci 2014; 160: 52-59.
    20. Crocker LM, Peters EJD, Fadel JG, et al. Influence of processed corn grain in diets of dairy cows on digestion of nutrients and milk composition. J Dairy Sci 1998; 81: 2394-2407.
    21. Lechartier C, Peyraud JL. The effects of starch and rapidly degradable dry matter from concentrate on ruminal digestion in dairy cows fed corn silage-based diets with fixed forage proportion. J Dairy Sci 2011; 94: 2440-2454.
    22. Baldwin RL, McLeod VI. Effects of diet forage: Concentrate ratio and metabolizable energy intake on isolated rumen epithelial cell metabolism in vitro. J Animal Sci 2000; 78: 771-783.
    23. Lykos T, Varga GA. Effects of processing method on degradation characteristics of protein and carbohydrate sources in situ. J Dairy Sci 1995; 78: 1789-1801.
    24. Nocek JE, Heald CW, Polan CE. Influence of ration physical form and nitrogen availability on ruminal morphology of growing bull calves. J Dairy Sci 1984; 67: 334-343.

     

Veterinary Research Forum
Volume 9, Issue 1
Winter 2018
Pages 43-48

  • Receive Date 02 June 2017
  • Revise Date 05 November 2017
  • Accept Date 07 November 2017

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us