medigraphic.com
ISSN 8541-3697 (Print)

2020, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

AbanicoVet 2020; 10 (1)

Leucaena leucocephala and Opuntia ficus-indica reduce the ruminal methane production in vitro

Carranco-Jáuregui M, Fuente-Martínez B, Ramírez-Poblano M, Calvo-Carrillo M, Ávila-González E

Language: Spanish
References: 38
Page: 1-13
PDF size: 791.24 Kb.


ABSTRACT

This study aimed to evaluate the inclusion of Leucaena leucocephala (LL) and Opuntia ficus-indica (OFI) fresh and fermented as alfalfa hay substitute in the forage fraction on the ruminal fermentative parameters, gas production kinetics and methane production in vitro. Four treatments were formulated as beef cattle diets (T1: 50% HA; T2: 30% LL y 20% HA; T3: 30% OFI y 20% HA; T4: 30% OFI fermentado y 20% HA). Total phenolics compounds and condensed tannins (CT) increased over 400% when LL was included (P‹0.05). Additionally, CT increased 45% when fermented OFI was included in the ration in T4 (P‹0.05). Ammonia-nitrogen, volatile fatty acids, gas production and acetate:propionate ratio were different among treatments. The maximum gas production was observed when LL was included in T2 (P‹0.05). However, no changes were observed among T1, T2 and T3 (P›0.05). In addition, lag phase decreased in T2 (P‹0.05). Furthermore, methane production was different among treatments (P‹0.05); reductions of 26 and 14% were observed when including LL and OFI, respectively. Thus, according to the obtained results, LL and OFI are ingredients, which may be included in the bovine diets and thereby contribute to the greenhouse gases mitigation.


REFERENCES

  1. ALMEIDA A, Nafarrete E, Alvarado A, Cervantes A, Luevanos Oropeza R, Balagurusamy N. 2011. Expresión genética en la digestión anaerobia: un paso adelante en la comprensión de las interacciones tróficas de esta biotecnología. Revista Científica de la Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila. 3(6):14-34. http://www.posgradoeinvestigacion.uadec.mx/AQM/No.%206/3.html

  2. ALVES FAL, Andrade AP, Bruno RLA, Silva MGV, Souza MFV, dos Santos DC. 2017. Seasonal variability of phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity in prickly pear cladodes of Opuntia and Nopalea genres. Food Science and Technology. 37(4):536- 543. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-457x.19316

  3. ANKOM. 2018. RF Gas production system operator’s manual. ANKOM Technology, USA. https://www.ankom.com/sites/default/files/document-files/RF_Manual.pdf

  4. ANKOM. 2020. Fiber analyzer operator’s manual. ANKOM Technology, USA. https://www.ankom.com/sites/default/files/document-files/A200_Manual.pdf

  5. AOAC. 2010. Official method of Analysis. 18th Ed 3rd Revision. Washington DC, USA. Association of Officiating Analytical Chemists. 2590 p. ISBN: 9780935584820

  6. AYE PA, Adegun MK. 2013. Chemical composition and some functional properties of Moringa, Leucaena and Gliricidia leaf meals. Agricultural and Biology Journal of North America. 4(1):71-77. https://doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2013.4.1.71.77

  7. BERARD NC, Wang Y, Wittenberg KM, Krause DO, Coulman BE, McAllister TA, Ominski KH. 2011. Condensed tannin concentrations found in vegetative and mature forage legumes grown in western Canada. Canadian Journal of Plant Sciences. 91:669-675. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjps10153

  8. CARDADOR-MARTÍNEZ A, Jiménes-Martínez C, Sandoval G. 2011. Revalorization of cactus pear (Opuntia spp) wastes as a source of antioxidants. Ciência e Tecnologia de Alimentos. 31(3):782-788. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612011000300036

  9. CHANDRASEKHARAIAH M, Thulasi A, Suresh KP, Sampath KT. 2011. Rumen degradable nitrogen requirements for optimum microbial protein synthesis and nutrient utilization in sheep fed on finger millet straw (Eleucine coracana) based diet. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 163:130-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.10.015

  10. FIGUEROA-PÉREZ M, Pérez-Ramírez I, Paredes-López O, Mondragón-Jacobo C, Reynoso-Camacho R. 2016. Phytochemical composition and in vitro analysis of nopal (O. ficus-indica) cladodes at different stages of maturity. International Journal of Food Properties. 21(1):1728-1742. https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2016.1206126

  11. FLORES-ORTIZ M, Reveles-Hernández M. 2010. Producción de nopal forrajero de diferentes variedades y densidades de plantación. In: VIII Simposium‐Taller Nacional y 1er Internacional “Producción y Aprovechamiento del Nopal”. Nuevo León, México: RESPYN; 2010. pp. 198-210. http://respyn2.uanl.mx/especiales/2010/ee-05- 2010/documentos/17.pdf

  12. GALYEAN ML. 2010. Laboratory Procedures in Animal Nutrition Research. 13 ed, Lubbock. USA. https://www.depts.ttu.edu/afs/home/mgalyean/lab_man.pdf

  13. GONZÁLEZ-ARREOLA A, Murillo-Ortiz M, Pámanes-Carrasco G, Reveles-Saucedo F, Herrera-Torres E. 2019. Nutritive quality and gas production of corn silage with the addition of fresh and fermented prickly pear cladodes. Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences. 40(1): 6544-6553. https://m.elewa.org/Journals/wpcontent/ uploads/2019/04/4.Gonzalez.pdf

  14. GRILLI DJ, Páez-Lama SA, Egea AV, Cerón-Cucchi ME, Cobos E, Allegretti L, Arenas N. 2015. Degradación y utilización de la hemicelulosa contenida en especies forrajeras Pseudobutyrivibrio ruminis y Pseudobutyrivibrio xilanivorans. REV FCA/Uncuyo. 47(2):231-243. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3828/Resumenes/Resumen_382842590018_1.pdf

  15. HEIMLER D, Vignolini P, Dini M, Romani A. 2005. Rapid Tests to Assess the Antioxidant Activity of Phaseolus vulgaris L. Dry Beans. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemestry. 53(8):3053-3056. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf049001r

  16. HERRERA-TORRES E, Murillo M, Berumen L, Páez J, Villarreal G. 2014. Efecto de Sacharomyces cerevisiae y Kluyveromices marxianus durante el tiempo de fermentación en la calidad nutritiva del nopal forrajero. Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios. 1(1):33-40. http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/era/v1n1/v1n1a4.pdf

  17. HERRERA TE, Murillo M, Berumen L, Soto-Cruz NO, Páez-Lerma JB. 2017. Protein Enrichment of Opuntia Ficus-indica using Kluyveromyces marxianus in solid-state fermentation. Ciencia e Investigación Agraria. 44:113-120. http://dx.doi.org/10.7764/rcia.v44i2.1767

  18. HRISTOV AN, Oh J, Firkins JL, Dijkastra J, Kebreab E, Waghorn G, Makkar HPS, Adesogan AT, Yang W,, Lee C, Gerber PJ, Henderson B, Tricario JM. 2013. Special Topics – Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options. Journal of Animal Science. 91:5045- 5069. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6583

  19. IPCC. 2015: Meeting Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Expert Meeting on Climate Change, Food, and Agriculture. Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Barros VR, Bilir TE, Dokken DJ, Edenhofer O, Field CB, Hiraishi T, Kadner S, Krug T, Minx JC, PichsMadruga R, Plattner JK, Qin D, Sokona Y, Stocker TF, Tignor M (eds.). World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 68 pp. https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_supporting_materi al.shtmL

  20. INECC. 2018. Sexta comunicación nacional y segundo reporte bienal de actualización ante la convención marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el cambio climático. Secretaria del Medio ambiente y recursos naturales (SEMARNAT). Instituto Nacional de Ecología y Cambio Climático. México. http://cambioclimatico.gob.mx:8080/xmlui/handle/publicaciones/117

  21. JOHNSON KA, Johnson DE. 1995. Methane emissions from cattle. Journal of Animal Science. 73:2483-2492. https://doi.org/10.2527/1995.7382483x

  22. KARIMI E, Oskoueian E, Oskoueian A, Omidvar V, Hendra R, Nazeran H. 2013. Insight into the functional and medicinal properties of Medicago sativa (Alfalfa) leaves extract. Journal of Medical Plants Research. 7(7):290-297. https://doi.org/10.5897/JMPR11.1663

  23. KOENIG KM, Beauchemin KA, McGinn SM. 2018. Feeding condensed tannins to mitigate ammonia emissions from beef feedlot cattle fed high-protein finishing diets containing distillers grains. Journal of Animal Science. 96(10):4414-4430. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky274

  24. LIU Y, Whitman WB. 2008. Metabolic, Phylogenetic, and Ecological Diversity of the Methanogenic Archaea. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1125(1):171– 189. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1419.019

  25. MÁRQUEZ D, Suárez A. 2008. El uso de taninos condensados como alternativa nutricional y sanitaria en rumiantes. Revista de Medicina Veterinaria. 16:87-109. https://doi.org/10.19052/mv.1449

  26. MARTIN C, Morgavi DP, Doreau M. 2010. Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale. Animal. 4(3):351–365. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731109990620

  27. MENKE K, Raab L, Salewski A, Steingass H, Fritz D, Schneider W. 1979. 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. Journal of Agricultural Science. 93(1):217-222. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600086305

  28. MURILLO OM, Herrera TE, Corral LA, Pámanes CG. 2018. Effect of inclusion of graded level of water hyacinth on in vitro gas production kinetics and chemical composition of alfalfa hay based beef cattle diets. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 52(8):1298-1303. https://doi.org/10.18805/ijar.11417

  29. PÁMANES-CARRASCO G, Herrera-Torres E, Murillo-Ortiz M, Reyes-Jáquez D. 2019. “Climate change mitigation in livestock produciton: nonconventional feedstuffs and alternative additives”. En: Abubakar M, Livestock health and farming. London, UK: IntechOpen publishers. http://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89433

  30. PATRA AK, Saxena J. 2010. A new perspective on the use of plant secondary metabolites to inhibit methanogenesis in the rumen. Pshytochemistry. 71(11-12):1198- 1222. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2010.05.010

  31. PIÑEIRO-VÁZQUEZ AT, Jiménez-Ferrer GO, Chay-Canul AJ, Casanova-Lugo F, Días-Echeverría VF, Ayala-Burgos AJ, Solorio-Sánchez FJ, Aguilar-Pérez CF, Ku- Vera JC. 2017. Intake, digestibility, nitrogen balance and energy utilization in heifers fed low-quality forage and Leucaena leucocephala. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 228:194-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2017.04.009

  32. PORTER LJ, Hrstich LN, Chan BG. 1986. The conversion of procyanidins and prodelphinidins to cyanidin and delphinidin. Phytochemistry. 25:223-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9422(00)94533-3

  33. SAS Institute Inc. 2011. SAS 9.3. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc. ISBN 978-1-60764-896- 3

  34. SUTTON JD, Dhanoa MS, Morant SV, France J, Napper DJ, Schuller E. 2003. Rates of Production of Acetate, Propionate, and Butyrate in the Rumen of Lactating Dairy Cows Given Normal and Low-Roughage Diets. Journal of Dairy Science. 86:3620- 3633. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73968-X

  35. SINGH V, Toky OP. 1995. Biomass and net primary productivity in Leucaena, Acacia and Eucalyptus, shor rotation, high density (‘energy’) plantations in arid India. Journal of Arid Environments. 31(3):301-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-1963(05)80034-5

  36. TAN HY, Sieo CC, Abdullah N, Liang JB, Huang XD, Ho YW. 2011. Effects of condensed tannins from Leucaena on methane production, rumen fermentation and populations of methanogens and protozoa in vitro. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 169(3-4):185-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.07.004

  37. TAVENDALE MH, Meagher LP, Pacheco D, Walker N, Attwood GT, Sivakumaran S. 2005. Methane production from in vitro rumen incubations with Lotus pedunculatus and Medicago sativa, and effects of extractable condensed tannin fractions on methanogenesis. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 123:403-419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.04.037

  38. VAN SOEST PJ. 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. 2da Edición. Ithaca, EEUU. Cornell University Press. Pp. 476. ISBN: 9780801427725.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com