0.906
IF5
0.875
IF
Q3
JCR
1.0
CiteScore
0.374
SJR
Q2
SJR
20
MNiSW
165.24
ICV
ORIGINAL PAPER
 
CC-BY 4.0
 
 

Effect of post-fermentative yeast biomass as a substitute for soybean meal on feed utilization and rumen ecology in Thai native beef cattle

A. Cherdthong 1  ,  
P. Sumadong 1,  
S. Foiklang 2,  
M. Wanapat 1,  
P. Chanjula 4,  
N. Gunun 5,  
 
1
Khon Kaen University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Animal Science, Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
2
Maejo University, Faculty of Animal Science and Technology, Chiangmai 50290, Thailand
3
KSL Green Innovation Public Company Limited, Rajathevi 10400, Bangkok, Thailand
4
Prince of Songkla University, Faculty of Natural Resources, Department of Animal Science, Songkhla 90112, Thailand
5
Udon Thani Rajabhat University, Faculty of Technology, Program in Animal Production Technology, Udon Thani 41000, Thailand
6
Rajamangala University of Technology-Isan, Faculty of Natural Resources, Department of Animal Science, Sakon Nakhon Campus, Phangkhon 47160, Sakon Nakhon, Thailand
J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2019;28(3):238–243
Publish date: 2019-09-23
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The aim of this experiment was to study the influence of substituting soybean meal (SBM) with post-fermentative yeast biomass (post-FYeB) powder on feed intake, ruminal fermentation, and bacteria and protozoa content in rumen fluid in beef cattle. The study was conducted on four male Thai native beef cattle at around 1 to 2 years of age with an initial body weight (BW) of 120 ± 20 kg. The experimental design was a 4 × 4 Latin square design and the dietary treatments included four levels of SBM substitution with post-FYeB in concentrate feed: 0, 33, 67 and 100%. The used post-FYeB contained 26.4% crude protein. Increasing levels of post-FYeB in concentrate diets did not alter roughage intake and total intake (P > 0.05). Rice straw intake ranged from 2.0 to 2.1 kg DM/day while total intake ranged from 2.7 to 2.8 kg DM/day. Ruminal pH and temperature in cattle fed various levels of post-FYeB were not significantly different among treatments. Total volatile fatty acids (VFA) and VFA profiles were not altered by different levels of post-FYeB. Post-FYeB addition into diet did not change bacteria and protozoal populations (P > 0.05). Thus, the inclusion of post- FYeB as a replacement of SBM in ruminant diets up to 100% is suggested.
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
A. Cherdthong   
Khon Kaen University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Animal Science, Tropical Feed Resources Research and Development Center (TROFREC), Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
 
REFERENCES (24):
1. AOAC International, 1995. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 16th Edition. Arlington, VA (USA).
2. Broderick G.A., Muck R.E., 2009. Effect of alfalfa silage storage structure and rumen-protected methionine on production in lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 92, 1281–1289, https://doi.org/10.3168/JDS.20....
3. Cherdthong A., Wanapat M., 2010. Development of urea products as rumen slow-release feed on ruminant production: A review. Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 4, 2232–2241.
4. Cherdthong A., Wanapat M., Saenkamsorn A., Waraphila N., Khota W., Rakwongrit D., Anantasook N., Gunun P., 2014. Effects of replacing soybean meal with dried rumen digesta on feed intake, digestibility of nutrients, rumen fermentation and nitrogen use efficiency in Thai cattle fed on rice straw. Livest. Sci. 169, 71–77, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livs....
5. Crocker C.L., 1967. Rapid determination of urea nitrogen in serum or plasma without deproteinization. Am. J. Med. Technol. 33, 361–365.
6. Díaz A., Ranilla M.J., Saro C., Tejido M.L., Pérez-Quintana M., Carro M.D., 2017. Influence of increasing doses of a yeast hydrolyzate obtained from sugarcane processing on in vitro rumen fermentation of two different diets and bacterial diversity in batch cultures and Rusitec fermenters. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 232, 129–138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anif....
7. Firkins J.L., Yu Z., Morrison M., 2007. Ruminal nitrogen metabolism: perspectives for integration of microbiology and nutrient for dairy. J. Dairy Sci. 90, Suppl., E1–E16, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.20....
8. Galyean M.L., 2010. Laboratory Procedures in Animal Nutrition Research. Revised Edition. Department of Animal and Food Science. Texas Tech University. Lubbock, TX (USA).
9. Kettunen H., Vuorenmaa J., Gaffney D., Apajalahti J., 2016. Yeast hydrolysate product enhances ruminal fermentation in vitro. J. Appl. Anim. Nutr. 4, e1, https://doi.org/10.1017/jan.20....
10. Laluce C., Leite G.R., Zavitoski B.Z., Zamai T.T., Ventura R., 2016. Fermentation of sugarcane juice and molasses for ethanol production. In: I.M. O’Hara, S.G. Mundree (Editors). Sugarcane-Based Biofuels and Bioproducts. John Willey & Sons. Hoboken, NY (USA), https://doi.org/10.1002/978111....
11. Miller-Webster T., Hoover W.H., Holt M., Nocek J.E., 2002. Influence of yeast culture on ruminal microbial metabolism in continuous culture. J. Dairy Sci. 85, 2009–2014, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0....
12. Mukherjee R., Chakraborty R., Dutta A., 2016. Role of fermentation in improving nutritional quality of soybean meal – a review. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 29, 1523–1529, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1....
13. Oeztuerk H., Emre B., Breves G., 2016. Effects of hydrolysed yeasts on ruminal fermentation in the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Vet. Med. 61, 195–203, https://doi.org/10.17221/8820-....
14. Pérez Quintana M., Milian Florido G., Bocourt Salabarría R., Alemán Pérez R., 2016. In vitro evaluation of prebiotics in hydrolysates of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) prepared by different methods. Cien. Vida 16, 64–75, https://doi.org/10.33936/la_te....
15. Polyorach S., Wanapat M., 2015. Potential of yeast as probiotics in ruminants. Khon Kaen Agric. J. 43, 191–206.
16. Robinson P.H., Erasmus L.J., 2009. Effects of analyzable diet components on responses of lactating dairy cows to Saccharomyces cerevisiae based yeast products: A systematic review of the literature. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 149, 185–198, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anif....
17. SAS, 1998. User’s Guide: Statistics. Version 6. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC (USA).
18. Sauvant D., Perez J.-M., Tran G. (Editors), 2004. Tables of Composition and Nutritional Value of Feed Materials. 2nd Revised Edition. Wageningen Academic Publishers. Wageningen (The Netherlands), https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90....
19. Shurson G.C., 2018. Yeast and yeast derivatives in feed additives and ingredients: Sources, characteristics, animal responses, and quantification methods. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 235, 60–76, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anif....
20. Shurson G.C., 2017. The role of biofuels coproducts in feeding the world sustainably. Ann. Rev. Anim. Biosci. 5, 229–254, https://doi.org/10.1146/annure....
21. Steel R.G.D., Torrie J.H., 1980. Analysis of covariance. In: Principles and Procedures of Statistics: a Biometrical Approach. 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill. New York, NY (USA).
22. Van Soest P.J., Robertson J.B., Lewis B.A., 1991. Methods for dietary fiber neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74, 3583–3597, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0....
23. Wanapat M., 1990. Nutritional Aspects of Ruminant Production in Southeast Asia with Special Reference to Thailand. Khon Kaen University. Khon Kaen (Thailand).
24. Wanapat M., Pimpa O., 1999. Effect of ruminal NH3-N levels ruminal fermentation, purine derivatives, digestibility and rice straw intake in swamp buffaloes. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 12, 904–907, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1....
ISSN:1230-1388