燕麦与苜蓿不同比例组合对驴盲肠体外发酵的影响

doi:10.11686/cyxb2018698

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究燕麦干草与苜蓿不同比例组合对驴盲肠液体外发酵的影响,旨在为肉驴养殖中粗饲料的科学利用提供理论依据。将燕麦干草和苜蓿按干物质比为80:20、60:40、40:60和20:80分为Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ组,通过体外产气法与人工瘤胃持续发酵法培养2、4、8、12和24 h,各时间点3个重复,发酵终止后测定发酵参数和饲草养分降解率,通过24 h时发酵参数的加权估算值计算饲草组合效应值。结果表明:1)燕麦与苜蓿不同比例组合影响了其养分降解率,随着苜蓿比例的增加,干物质(DM)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)降解率增大,Ⅳ组显著高于Ⅰ组(P<0.05),各组中性洗涤纤维(NDF)降解率差异不显著(P>0.05)。2)随着苜蓿含量的增加,pH逐渐升高,Ⅳ组显著高于Ⅰ组(P<0.05);各时间点产气量(GP)均为Ⅱ组显著高于其余3组(P<0.05),且24 h时Ⅳ组显著高于Ⅰ和Ⅲ组(P<0.05);从发酵12 h开始Ⅲ、Ⅳ组氨态氮(NH₃-N)浓度显著高于Ⅰ、Ⅱ组(P<0.05);24 h时Ⅱ组微生物蛋白(MCP)浓度显著高于Ⅲ组(P<0.05),与Ⅰ、Ⅳ组无显著差异(P>0.05);燕麦与苜蓿不同比例组合对挥发性脂肪酸(VFA)有显著影响,24 h时Ⅰ和Ⅳ组丙酸浓度显著高于Ⅱ和Ⅲ组(P<0.05),而Ⅰ、Ⅱ组总VFA(TVFA)含量显著高于Ⅲ、Ⅳ组(P<0.05)。3)发酵24 h后Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅳ组均产生正组合效应,且Ⅳ组效应值最大,而Ⅲ组产生负组合效应。综上所述:燕麦与苜蓿按20:80组合时能提高DM、NDF和ADF降解率,且多项组合效应值更高;燕麦与苜蓿饲喂驴以20:80组合效果较好。

关键词: 驴, 盲肠, 燕麦, 苜蓿, 体外发酵, 组合效应

Abstract: This study investigated the effects of mixing oat hay and alfalfa in different proportions, on in vitro fermentation rate when incubated with donkey cecum fluid, so as to provide a theoretical basis to determine the optimal use of roughage in donkey breeding. Oat hay and alfalfa were mixed in ratios of 80:20, 60:40, 40:60, 20:80, denoted as treatment groups Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, and Ⅳ respectively. Each mixture was cultured for 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours using continuous fermentation in an artificial rumen, and in vitro gas production measured. There were 3 replicates at each time point. After termination of fermentation, fermentation parameters and nutrient degradation rate of forage were determined. The results showed: 1) With increased alfalfa proportion in the ration, the dry matter (DM) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) degradation rates increased gradually, and were significantly higher for group Ⅳ than for group Ⅰ (P<0.05); there was no significant difference in the degradation of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) (P>0.05). 2) With increase in alfalfa content, the pH increased gradually, and group Ⅳ was significantly higher than group Ⅰ (P<0.05); The gas production (GP) of group Ⅱ was significantly higher than that of the other three groups at each time point (P<0.05). 3) The concentration of NH₃-N in groups Ⅲ and Ⅳ was significantly higher than for groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ from 12 hours (P<0.05). At 24 h, the concentration of microbial protein in group Ⅱ was significantly higher than in group Ⅲ (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between groups Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ (P>0.05). 4) The combination of oat hay and alfalfa had significant effects on volatile fatty acids (VFA), the concentration of propionic acid in groups Ⅰ and Ⅳ was significantly higher than that in groups Ⅱ and Ⅲ at 24 h (P<0.05), while the total VFA content in groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ was significantly higher than that in group Ⅲ and Ⅳ (P<0.05). 5) After 24 h of fermentation, a positive interaction effect was observed in groups Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅳ, with the interaction being largest in group Ⅳ. Conversely, a negative interaction effect was observed in group Ⅲ. We concluded that the optimal proportion of oat hay and alfalfa was 20:80 (group Ⅳ), as the degradation rate of DM, NDF and ADF was improved, and a higher interaction effect occurred.

Key words: donkey, cecum, oat hay, alfalfa, in vitro fermentation, combination effect

梁婷玉, 郞侠, 吴建平, 王彩莲, 刘立山, 张瑞, 韦胜. 燕麦与苜蓿不同比例组合对驴盲肠体外发酵的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(6): 185-195.

LIANG Ting-yu, LANG Xia, WU Jian-ping, WANG Cai-lian, LIU Li-shan, ZHANG Rui, WEI Sheng. Effect of different proportions of oat hay and alfalfa on in vitro fermentation in simulated donkey ceca[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(6): 185-195.

参考文献

[1] Li W Q.Effect of different energy and protein levels in diet on growth performance and expression of the skin related genes of Dezhou donkeys. Jinzhou: Jinzhou Medical University, 2017.
李文强. 日粮能量蛋白水平对德州驴生长性能及驴皮相关基因表达的影响. 锦州: 锦州医科大学, 2017.
[2] Burden F.Practical feeding and condition scoring for donkeys and mules. Equine Veterinary Education, 2012, 24(11): 589-596.
[3] Broderick G A.In vitro procedures for estimating rates of ruminal protein degradation and proportions of protein escaping the rumen undegraded. Journal of Nutrition, 1978, 108(2): 181-190.
[4] Berg M V D, Hoskin S O, Rogers C W, et al. Fecal pH and microbial populations in thoroughbred horses during transition from pasture to concentrate feeding. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 2013, 33(4): 215-222.
[5] Ade F, Julliand V, Drogoul C, et al. Feeding and microbial disorders in horses: 1-effects of an abrupt incorporation of two levels of barley in a hay diet on microbial profile and activities. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 2001, 21(9): 439-445.
[6] Merchen N R, Berger L L, Jr F G.Comparison of the effects of three methods of harvesting and storing alfalfa on nutrient digestibility by lambs and feedlot performance of steers. Journal of Animal Science, 1986, 63(4): 1026-1035.
[7] Bryant M P, Robinson I M.Some nutritional characteristics of predominant culturable ruminal bacteria. Journal of Bacteriology, 1962, 84(4): 605-614.
[8] Bryant M P.Nutritional requirements of the predominant rumen cellulolytic bacteria. Federation Proceedings, 1973, 32(7): 1809-1813.
[9] Zou Y, Zou X, Li X, et al. Substituting oat hay or maize silage for portion of alfalfa hay affects growth performance, ruminal fermentation, and nutrient digestibility of weaned calves. Asian Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2017, 31(3): 369-378.
[10] Frape D. Equine nutrition and feeding (4th ed). Singapore: Blackwell Publishing LTD, 2010: 10-15.
[11] Pearson R A, Archibald R F, Muirhead R H.The effect of forage quality and level of feeding on digestibility and gastrointestinal transit time of oat straw and alfalfa given to ponies and donkeys. British Journal of Nutrition, 2001, 85(5): 599-606.
[12] Menke K.Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research and Development, 1988, 28(1): 47-55.
[13] Yuan Y.Animal nutrition experiment course. Beijing: China Agricultural University Press, 2006: 12-44.
袁缨. 动物营养学实验教程. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2006: 12-44.
[14] Feng Z C, Gao M.Improvement of ammonia nitrogen content in rumen by colorimetric method. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2010, (6): 40-41.
冯宗慈, 高民. 通过比色测定瘤胃液氨氮含量方法的改进. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2010, (6): 40-41.
[15] Yang L.Study on the combined effect of alfalfa, corn stover and concentrate supplement in beef cattle diet. Changchun: Jilin Agricultural University, 2007.
杨丽. 肉牛日粮中苜蓿、玉米秸秆、精料补充料组合效应研究. 长春: 吉林农业大学, 2007.
[16] Wang Q L, Tian L Y, Zhao R Y, et al. Factors affecting the rumen pH of dairy cows. Henan Animal Husbandry and Veterinary (Comprehensive Version), 2008, (10): 36-37.
王庆丽, 田兰英, 赵仁义, 等. 影响奶牛瘤胃pH值的因素. 河南畜牧兽医(综合版), 2008, (10): 36-37.
[17] Ge T, Sun W W, Zhu W Y.Effects of different levels of protein substrates on fermentation characteristics and microbial protein synthesis ability of porcine colonic microbiota. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2016, 28(7): 1998-2004.
葛婷, 孙巍巍, 朱伟云. 不同水平蛋白质底物对猪结肠微生物体外发酵特性和菌体合成能力的影响. 动物营养学报, 2016, 28(7): 1998-2004.
[18] Jiang H.The comprehensive evaluation of feed value of Alhagi sparsifolia shap and alfalfa mix-silage. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2017.
蒋慧. 骆驼刺与苜蓿混合青贮饲用价值综合评价. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2017.
[19] Feng Y.Effects of dietary sulfur-nitrogen ratio on ruminal environment parameters, gas production and nutrient degradation of sheep in artificial simulation. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2016.
冯媛. 用体外模拟法研究日粮氮硫比对绵羊瘤胃内环境参数、产气性能和养分降解率的影响. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2016.
[20] Liu Y F, Ma J, Du W, et al. Degradation characteristics of common roughage and roughage in the rumen of dairy cows. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2018, 30(4): 1592-1602.
刘艳芳, 马健, 都文, 等. 常规与非常规粗饲料在奶牛瘤胃中的降解特性. 动物营养学报, 2018, 30(4): 1592-1602.
[21] Zhao H Y.The associative effects of dietary roughage of donkey and its impact on the major of cecum cellulolytic bacteria. Jilin: Jilin Agricultural University, 2014.
赵红艳. 驴日粮粗饲料的组合效应及其对盲肠主要纤维分解菌的影响. 吉林: 吉林农业大学, 2014.
[22] Li Y, Han X M, Li J G, et al. Associative effects of cornstalk, millet straw, and corn stalk on silage digestibility in vitro. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(5): 213-223.
李妍, 韩肖敏, 李建国, 等. 体外法评价玉米秸秆、谷草和玉米秸秆青贮饲料组合效应研究. 草业学报, 2017, 26(5): 213-223.
[23] Menke K H, Raab L, Salewski A, et al. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. The Journal of Agriculture Science, 1979, 93(1): 217-222.
[24] Silva A T, Greenhalgh J F D, Rakov E R. Influence of ammonia treatment and supplementation on the intake, digestibility and weight gain of sheep and cattle on barley straw diets. Animal Production, 1989, 48(1): 99-108.
[25] Tang S X, Jiang H L, Zhou C S, et al. Effects different forage species on in vitro gas production characteristics. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2005, 14(3): 72-77.
汤少勋, 姜海林, 周传社, 等. 不同牧草品种对体外发酵产气特性的影响. 草业学报, 2005, 14(3): 72-77.
[26] Sun L, Jia Y S, Ge G T, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of combinational effects of five forages. Chinese Grassland Science Journal, 2013, 35(3): 61-66.
孙林, 贾玉山, 格根图, 等. 五种饲草间组合效应的综合评定研究. 中国草地学报, 2013, 35(3): 61-66.
[27] Zhang B Y, Zhao G Q, Jiao T, et al. Effects of adding oat hay to the diet on in vitro ruminal fermentation. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(2): 182-191.
张毕阳, 赵桂琴, 焦婷, 等. 饲粮中添加燕麦干草对绵羊体外发酵的影响. 草业学报, 2018, 27(2): 182-191.
[28] Yan S H, Zhao S P, Jiang Q H, et al. Effects of tea saponin on rumen fermentation and rumen microflora of dairy cows. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2016, 28(8): 2485-2496.
严淑红, 赵士萍, 蒋琦晖, 等. 茶皂素对奶牛瘤胃发酵及瘤胃微生物区系的影响. 动物营养学报, 2016, 28(8): 2485-2496.
[29] Sun L S, Li H W, Cui H H, et al. Associative effects of different combination ratios of silkworm excrement and rice straw on the rumen microbial fermentation in vitro. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2015, 27(1): 313-319.
孙丽莎, 李华伟, 崔慧慧, 等. 蚕沙和稻秸不同比例组合对瘤胃微生物体外发酵的组合效应. 动物营养学报, 2015, 27(1): 313-319.
[30] Schaefer D M, Davis C L, Bryant M P.Ammonia saturation constants for predominant species of rumen bacteria. Journal of Dairy Science, 1980, 63(8): 1248-1263.
[31] Mao H L, Wang J K, Zhou Y Y, et al. Effects of addition of tea saponins and soybean oil on methane production, fermentation and microbial population in the rumen of growing lambs. Livestock Science, 2010, 129(1): 56-62.
[32] Wang Z J, Ge G T, Gao J, et al. Research of associative effects of alfalfa, astragalus adsurgens, gaodan grass, chinese pennisetum and ryegrass. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2015, 27(11): 3628-3635.
王志军, 格根图, 高静, 等. 苜蓿、沙打旺、高丹草、狼尾草和黑麦草间的组合效应研究. 动物营养学报, 2015, 27(11): 3628-3635.
[33] Zhang R, Zhu X P, Li J Y, et al. Combination effects between regular roughages of alfalfa hay and chinese wildrye in Liaoning cashmere goats. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2013, 25(10): 2481-2488.
张锐, 朱晓萍, 李建云, 等. 辽宁绒山羊常用粗饲料苜蓿和羊草间饲料组合效应. 动物营养学报, 2013, 25(10): 2481-2488.
[34] Yi Y Q, Tang D, Yuan Y L, et al. In vitro test of combination of alfalfa and oat grass for meat sheep. The Chinese Livestock and Poultry Breeding, 2017, 13(11): 84-87.
衣艳秋, 唐丹, 袁英良, 等. 肉羊日粮苜蓿和燕麦草组合体外法试验. 中国畜禽种业, 2017, 13(11): 84-87.
[35] Pan M J.The impact of TMR composed with oat hay or Leymus chinensis on rumen digestion and metabolism. Nanjing: Nanjing Agricultural University, 2007.
潘美娟. 燕麦草、羊草及其组合TMR日粮对奶牛瘤胃消化代谢的影响. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2012.
[36] Hao X Y, Zhang G N, Me E Y, et al. Effects of replacing alfalfa hay with dry corn fiber feed and chinese leymus on in vitro rumen fermentation. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2018, 30(3): 953-962.
郝小燕, 张广宁, 么恩悦, 等. 干玉米纤维饲料与羊草组合替代苜蓿干草对体外瘤胃发酵的影向. 动物营养学报, 2018, 30(3): 953-962.
[37] Liu S Z, Li L, Fu G H, et al. Fermentation of different fiber by microbial of Tibetan pig fecal in vitro. Chinese Veterinary Journal, 2017, 37(7): 1359-1364.
刘锁珠, 李龙, 付冠华, 等. 藏猪粪样微生物对不同纤维底物的体外发酵. 中国兽医学报, 2017, 37(7): 1359-1364.
[38] Ewing P V, Wells C A.Associative digestibility of corn silage, cottonseed meal and starch in steer rations. Agricultural Science and Technology, 1915, 12(8): 13-15.