Camila da Silva Zornitta , Luís Carlos Vinhas Ítavo , Camila Celeste Brandão Ferreira Ítavo , Alexandre Menezes Dias , Gumercindo Loriano Franco , Amarildo Pedro da Silva , Antonio Leandro Chaves Gurgel
{"title":"莫能菌素和/或益生菌对母牛采食量、表观消化率、瘤胃、血清和尿液变量以及氮平衡的影响","authors":"Camila da Silva Zornitta , Luís Carlos Vinhas Ítavo , Camila Celeste Brandão Ferreira Ítavo , Alexandre Menezes Dias , Gumercindo Loriano Franco , Amarildo Pedro da Silva , Antonio Leandro Chaves Gurgel","doi":"10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2024.116035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The objective of the present study was to evaluate the association of <em>Bacillus toyonensis</em>, <em>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</em> var. <em>boulardii,</em> and sodium monensin on feed intake, apparent digestibility, ruminal, urinary, and serum variables in the diet of steers. Four Angus × Nellore crossbred steers, with 403.0 ± 75.5 kg of BW, rumen cannulated and housed individually were used. The animals were submitted to a 4 ×4 Latin square design, receiving the following treatments: monensin only (MO); monensin + <em>B. toyonensis</em> (MBT); monensin + <em>S. cerevisiae boulardii</em> (MSB); and <em>B. toyonensis</em> + <em>S. cerevisiae boulardii</em> (BTSB). Treatments with monensin (MO, MBT and MSB) presented lower DM intake than BTSB, but similar apparent digestibility between treatments. No difference was observed between treatments for ruminal pH, but BTSB presented higher NH<sub>3</sub>-N concentration than MBT and MSB and did not differ from MO. All concentrations in the blood serum and urinary variables were found within the physiological range or close to normal, and no difference was observed in the retained nitrogen. The BTSB treatment showed potential as a feed additive for cattle, by controlling rumen pH and similar concentrations of NH<sub>3</sub>-N, total SCFA, and retained nitrogen to MO treatment, but when probiotics were combined with monensin no beneficial effect was observed under the studied conditions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7861,"journal":{"name":"Animal Feed Science and Technology","volume":"315 ","pages":"Article 116035"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of monensin and/or probiotics on feed intake, apparent digestibility, ruminal, serum and urinary variables, and nitrogen balance of steers\",\"authors\":\"Camila da Silva Zornitta , Luís Carlos Vinhas Ítavo , Camila Celeste Brandão Ferreira Ítavo , Alexandre Menezes Dias , Gumercindo Loriano Franco , Amarildo Pedro da Silva , Antonio Leandro Chaves Gurgel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2024.116035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The objective of the present study was to evaluate the association of <em>Bacillus toyonensis</em>, <em>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</em> var. <em>boulardii,</em> and sodium monensin on feed intake, apparent digestibility, ruminal, urinary, and serum variables in the diet of steers. Four Angus × Nellore crossbred steers, with 403.0 ± 75.5 kg of BW, rumen cannulated and housed individually were used. The animals were submitted to a 4 ×4 Latin square design, receiving the following treatments: monensin only (MO); monensin + <em>B. toyonensis</em> (MBT); monensin + <em>S. cerevisiae boulardii</em> (MSB); and <em>B. toyonensis</em> + <em>S. cerevisiae boulardii</em> (BTSB). Treatments with monensin (MO, MBT and MSB) presented lower DM intake than BTSB, but similar apparent digestibility between treatments. No difference was observed between treatments for ruminal pH, but BTSB presented higher NH<sub>3</sub>-N concentration than MBT and MSB and did not differ from MO. All concentrations in the blood serum and urinary variables were found within the physiological range or close to normal, and no difference was observed in the retained nitrogen. The BTSB treatment showed potential as a feed additive for cattle, by controlling rumen pH and similar concentrations of NH<sub>3</sub>-N, total SCFA, and retained nitrogen to MO treatment, but when probiotics were combined with monensin no beneficial effect was observed under the studied conditions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Animal Feed Science and Technology\",\"volume\":\"315 \",\"pages\":\"Article 116035\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Animal Feed Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377840124001639\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Feed Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377840124001639","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究的目的是评估土农芽孢杆菌、布拉氏酵母菌和莫能菌素钠对阉牛饲料摄入量、表观消化率、瘤胃、尿液和血清变量的影响。使用四头安格斯×内洛尔杂交母牛,体重为 403.0 ± 75.5 千克,瘤胃插管,单独饲养。动物采用 4 × 4 拉丁正方形设计,接受以下处理:仅使用莫能菌素 (MO);莫能菌素 + B. toyonensis (MBT);莫能菌素 + S. cerevisiae boulardii (MSB);以及 B. toyonensis + S. cerevisiae boulardii (BTSB)。使用莫能菌素的处理(MO、MBT 和 MSB)的 DM 摄入量低于 BTSB,但不同处理之间的表观消化率相似。不同处理的瘤胃 pH 值没有差异,但 BTSB 的 NH3-N 浓度高于 MBT 和 MSB,与 MO 没有差异。血清和尿液变量中的所有浓度都在生理范围内或接近正常值,在氮滞留方面也未观察到差异。BTSB 处理通过控制瘤胃 pH 值以及与 MO 处理相似的 NH3-N、SCFA 总量和残留氮浓度,显示出作为牛饲料添加剂的潜力,但当益生菌与莫能菌素结合使用时,在研究条件下未观察到有益效果。
Effect of monensin and/or probiotics on feed intake, apparent digestibility, ruminal, serum and urinary variables, and nitrogen balance of steers
The objective of the present study was to evaluate the association of Bacillus toyonensis, Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. boulardii, and sodium monensin on feed intake, apparent digestibility, ruminal, urinary, and serum variables in the diet of steers. Four Angus × Nellore crossbred steers, with 403.0 ± 75.5 kg of BW, rumen cannulated and housed individually were used. The animals were submitted to a 4 ×4 Latin square design, receiving the following treatments: monensin only (MO); monensin + B. toyonensis (MBT); monensin + S. cerevisiae boulardii (MSB); and B. toyonensis + S. cerevisiae boulardii (BTSB). Treatments with monensin (MO, MBT and MSB) presented lower DM intake than BTSB, but similar apparent digestibility between treatments. No difference was observed between treatments for ruminal pH, but BTSB presented higher NH3-N concentration than MBT and MSB and did not differ from MO. All concentrations in the blood serum and urinary variables were found within the physiological range or close to normal, and no difference was observed in the retained nitrogen. The BTSB treatment showed potential as a feed additive for cattle, by controlling rumen pH and similar concentrations of NH3-N, total SCFA, and retained nitrogen to MO treatment, but when probiotics were combined with monensin no beneficial effect was observed under the studied conditions.
期刊介绍:
Animal Feed Science and Technology is a unique journal publishing scientific papers of international interest focusing on animal feeds and their feeding.
Papers describing research on feed for ruminants and non-ruminants, including poultry, horses, companion animals and aquatic animals, are welcome.
The journal covers the following areas:
Nutritive value of feeds (e.g., assessment, improvement)
Methods of conserving and processing feeds that affect their nutritional value
Agronomic and climatic factors influencing the nutritive value of feeds
Utilization of feeds and the improvement of such
Metabolic, production, reproduction and health responses, as well as potential environmental impacts, of diet inputs and feed technologies (e.g., feeds, feed additives, feed components, mycotoxins)
Mathematical models relating directly to animal-feed interactions
Analytical and experimental methods for feed evaluation
Environmental impacts of feed technologies in animal production.