scholarly journals Evaluation of a single‐flow continuous culture fermenter system for determination of ruminal fermentation and enteric methane production

2019 ◽  
Vol 103 (5) ◽  
pp. 1313-1324
Author(s):  
S. Leanne Dillard ◽  
Ana I. Roca‐Fernández ◽  
Melissa D. Rubano ◽  
Kathy J. Soder
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Culture ◽  
Methane Production ◽  
Ruminal Fermentation ◽  
Enteric Methane ◽  
Single Flow

scholarly journals 488 Enteric methane production and ruminal fermentation from forage Brassica diets fed in continuous culture

2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (suppl_4) ◽  
pp. 238-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. L. Dillard ◽  
A. I. Roca-Fernandez ◽  
M. D. Rubano ◽  
K. R. Elkin ◽  
K. J. Soder
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Culture ◽  
Methane Production ◽  
Ruminal Fermentation ◽  
Enteric Methane

scholarly journals Effects of concentrate replacement by feed blocks on ruminal fermentation and microbial growth in goats and single-flow continuous-culture fermenters1

2009 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 1321-1333 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Molina-Alcaide ◽  
M. R. Pascual ◽  
G. Cantalapiedra-Hijar ◽  
E. Y. Morales-García ◽  
A. I. Martín-García
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Culture ◽  
Microbial Growth ◽  
Ruminal Fermentation ◽  
Single Flow

In vitro ruminal fermentation and enteric methane production of tropical forage added nitrogen or nitrogen plus starch

2021 ◽  
Vol 275 ◽  
pp. 114878
Author(s):  
M.M.D. Castro ◽  
M.A. Cardoso ◽  
E. Detmann ◽  
M.A. Fonseca ◽  
C.B. Sampaio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Methane Production ◽  
Ruminal Fermentation ◽  
Tropical Forage ◽  
Enteric Methane

scholarly journals The effect of the feed-to-buffer ratio on bacterial diversity and ruminal fermentation in single-flow continuous-culture fermenters

2011 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 1374-1384 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Cantalapiedra-Hijar ◽  
D.R. Yáñez-Ruiz ◽  
C.J. Newbold ◽  
E. Molina-Alcaide
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Culture ◽  
Bacterial Diversity ◽  
Ruminal Fermentation ◽  
Single Flow

scholarly journals PSVII-4 Ruminal fermentation and enteric methane production of legumes containing condensed tannins fed in continuous culture

2019 ◽  
Vol 97 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. 297-298
Author(s):  
Kathy J Soder ◽  
Ana Roca-Fernandez ◽  
S Leanne Dillard
Keyword(s):  
Protein Synthesis ◽  
Continuous Culture ◽  
Condensed Tannins ◽  
Nutrient Digestibility ◽  
Ruminal Fermentation ◽  
Microbial Protein ◽  
Microbial Protein Synthesis ◽  
Ch4 Production ◽  
N Efficiency ◽  
Enteric Methane

Abstract A continuous culture fermentor study was conducted to assess nutrient digestibility, VFA concentration, microbial protein synthesis, bacterial N efficiency and enteric methane (CH4) production of 4 legumes containing different condensed tannins (CT) concentrations. Legumes were fermented in a 50:50 diet with orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.): 1) Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.; ALF no CT); 2) Birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.; BFT, low CT); 3) Crown vetch [Securigera varia (L.); CV, moderate CT]; 4) Sericea lespedeza [Lespedeza cuneata (Dum. Cours.); SL, high CT]. Diets were randomly assigned to 4 fermentors in 4 periods in a 4 × 4 Latin square design, with 7 d for adaptation and 3 d for sample collection. Temperature, pH and CH4 concentrations were recorded. Effluent samples were analyzed for pH, VFA, and DM, OM, CP, NDF and ADF for determination of apparent (DM, OM, NDF and ADF) and true (DM and OM) nutrient digestibilities. Microbial protein synthesis and bacterial efficiency were estimated by analysis of N flows and purines. Forage samples were analyzed for DM, OM, CP, NDF, ADF, minerals and CT concentrations. Data were analyzed using the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS. The CT concentrations (g/kg DM) were 3, 21, 38 and 76 in ALF, BFT, CV and SL, respectively. Apparent and true DM and OM digestibilities were lower (P < 0.01) in SL than in ALF and BFT. Bacterial N efficiency per kg of truly digested DM and OM was lower (P = 0.05) in SL than in BFT and CV. The lowest (P < 0.001) CH4 production per unit of digestible nutrients was found in SL. There was a negative correlation (P < 0.001) between CT concentration and CH4 production. However, tradeoffs in ruminal fermentation (reduced nutrient digestibility, VFA concentration and bacterial N efficiency) must be considered when SL is used.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document