It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The use of probiotics and phytobiotics has attracted interest because of their protective effect against acidosis. Ferula elaeochytris (FE) is considered a good source of bioactive compounds, mainly monoterpene α-pinene. This study aimed to investigate the effect of a direct-fed microbial blend (Pro) and FE on rumen fermentation parameters in vitro under normal and acidosis conditions. An in vitro experiment using the Hohenheimer Futterwerttest (HFT) gas production system was conducted. An acidosis challenge was made to compare the effectiveness of the probiotics blend and FE extract on ruminal pH regulation. To generate different ruminal fermentation parameters, the design of the trial considered the 2 additives (Pro and FE) × 6 incubation times (2, 4, 8, 12, 24 and 48 h) × 2 conditions (acidosis and normal) × 2 incubation runs for each feedstuff (barley, alfalfa and straw). An acidosis challenge was successfully induced. The Pro and FE additives had no impact on the observed rumen fermentation parameters such as volatile fatty acid concentration or ammonia (P = 0.001). The acidosis condition decreased total in vitro degradability (IVD) by 3.5% and 21.9% for barley and straw, respectively (P < 0.001). The additives had different significant effects on the IVD of nutrients during both normal and acidosis conditions. In alfalfa samples, FE supplementation significantly decreased the IVD of all observed nutrients under the ruminal acidosis condition, although it had no effect during the normal condition. An acidosis challenge was successfully induced and the effect of additives was varied on fermentation parameters and rumen degradability of different feeds either under normal or acidosis conditions.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Animal Nutrition and Nutritional Disease, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ankara University, 06110 Diskapi, Ankara, Turkey; Department of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Virginia Tech University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
2 Nutrition and Clinical Nutrition Department, South Valley University, 83523 Qena, Egypt; Educational and Research Animal Farm, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, South Valley University, 83523 Qena, Egypt
3 Department of Animal Nutrition and Nutritional Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Afyon Kocatepe University, 03200 Afyonkarahisar, Turkey