Advertisement

In vitro and in situ evaluation of Undaria pinnatifida as a feed ingredient for ruminants

  • You Young Choi
  • Shin Ja Lee
  • Ye Jun Lee
  • Hyun Sang Kim
  • Jun Sik Eom
  • Seong Uk Jo
  • Sung Sill LeeEmail author
Article

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential effects of feeding the brown alga Undaria pinnatifida (sea mustard, miyeok, wakame) on in vitro rumen fermentation parameters and in situ dry matter disappearance (DMD) and to identify functional metabolites using proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1H-NMR). Rumen fluid donors were two rumen-cannulated Hanwoo cows with free access to water and a mineral-vitamin block. The in vitro trial was performed after 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h with U. pinnatifida added at concentrations of 1, 3, 5, and 10% of total ration. The U. pinnatifida DM digestibility was higher than that with the 0% added samples at several incubation times. Microbial growth rate was significantly higher (quadratic effect, P = 0.0003) after 6 h of incubation with 3, 5, and 10% added fermentation than 0% added samples. Supplementation with 10% of U. pinnatifida significantly increased total VFA concentrations compared to those with the 0% added samples. The in situ trial was performed for up to 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h with 5 g U. pinnatifida to estimate DMD from the bag in the rumen. The DMD of U. pinnatifida was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) than that of timothy hay at all fermentation periods. 1H-NMR was used to identify the functional metabolites in U. pinnatifida, including amino acids, carbohydrates, lipids, vitamins, and organic acids. These results indicated that U. pinnatifida has considerable potential to enhance feed conversion efficiency and contains component with nutritional benefits. Long-term feeding trials are required to determine the effect of U. pinnatifida as a feed ingredient for ruminants.

Keywords

Chemical composition 1H-NMR analysis Nutritive value Ruminal degradability Ruminal fermentation Undaria pinnatifida 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the National Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2015R1A6A1A03031413).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ali M, Cone JW, Van Duinkerken G, Klop A, Kruisdijk J, Blok MC, Bruinenberg M, Hendriks WH (2014) Relationship between chemical composition and in situ rumen degradation characteristics of grass silages in dairy cows. NJAS-Wageningen J Life Sci 70:9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AOAC (1990) Official methods of analysis, 15th ed., Assoc of Official Anal Chem, Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
  3. Arasaki S, Arasaki T (1983) Low calorie, high nutrition: vegetables from the sea; to help you look and feel better. Japan Publications, Tokyo, p 196Google Scholar
  4. Baek IK, Maeng WJ, Lee SH, Lee HG, Lee SR, Ha JK, Lee SS, Hwang JH (2004) Effects of the brown seaweed residues supplementation on in vitro fermentation and milk production and composition of lactating dairy cows. Korean J Anim Sci Technol 46:373–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beresford NA, Mayes RW, MacEachern PJ, Dodd BA, Lamb CS (1999) The effectiveness of alginates to reduce the transfer of radiostrontium to the milk of dairy goats. J Environ Radioact 44:43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boisen S, Hvelplund T, Weisbjerg MR (2000) Ideal amino acid profiles as a basis for feed protein evaluation. Livest Prod Sci 64:239–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cardoso S, Carvalho L, Silva P, Rodrigues M, Pereira O, Pereira L (2014) Bioproducts from seaweeds: a review with special focus on the Iberian Peninsula. Curr Org Chem 18:896–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chenost M, Aufrère J, Macheboeuf D (2001) The gas-test technique as a tool for predicting the energetic value of forage plants. Anim Res 50:349–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cone JW (1993) The influence of pH on in vitro protein solubility and enzymatic hydrolysis of protein in feedstuffs. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2:67–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cone JW, Van Gelder AH (1999) Influence of protein fermentation on gas production profiles. Anim Feed Sci Technol 76:251–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Getachew G, Robinson PH, DePeters EJ, Taylor SJ (2004) Relationships between chemical composition, dry matter degradation and in vitro gas production of several ruminant feeds. Anim Feed Sci Technol 111:57–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jung JY, Jung Y, Kim JS, Ryu DH, Hwang GS (2013) Assessment of peeling of Astragalus roots using 1H NMR- and UPLC-MS-based metabolite profiling. J Agric Food Chem 61:10398–10407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Korea Maritime Institute (2018) Undaria pinnatifida statistics reports for the Korea. https://www.foc.re.kr/rbs/data/files/obsbook/1/201804031917261.pdf Accessed 3 April 2018
  14. Kung L, Rode LM (1996) Amino acid metabolism in ruminants. Anim Feed Sci Technol 59:167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lee SJ, Shin NH, Jeong JS, Kim ET, Lee SK, Lee SS (2018a) Effect of Rhodophyta extracts on in vitro ruminal fermentation characteristics, methanogenesis and microbial populations. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 31:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee SJ, Shin NH, Jeong JS, Kim ET, Lee SK, Lee ID, Lee SS (2018b) Effects of Gelidium amansii extracts on in vitro ruminal fermentation characteristics, methanogenesis, and microbial populations. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 31:71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. MacArtain P, Gill CIR, Brooks M, Campbell R, Rowland IR (2007) Nutritional value of edible seaweeds. Nutr Rev 65:535–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Machado L, Kinley RD, Magnusson M, de Nys R, Tomkins NW (2015) The potential of macroalgae for beef production systems in northern Australia. J Appl Phycol 27:2001–2005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maia MRG, Fonseca AJM, Oliveira HM, Mendonça C, Cabrita ARJ (2016) The potential role of seaweeds in the natural manipulation of rumen fermentation and methane production. Sci Report 6:32321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Makkar HPS, Tran G, Heuzé V, Giger-Reverdin S, Lessire M, Lebas F, Ankers P (2016) Seaweeds for livestock diets: a review. Anim Feed Sci Technol 212:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. NRC (1984) Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 7th rev. ed. Natl. Acad. Sci., Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Ørskov ER, McDonald I (1979) The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. J Agric Sci 92:499–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ortega-Calvo JJ, Mazuelos C, Hermosin B, Saiz-Jimenez C (1993) Chemical composition of Spirulina and eucaryotic algae food products marketed in Spain. J Appl Phycol 5:425–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ross AB, Jones JM, Kubacki ML, Bridgeman T (2008) Classification of macroalgae as fuel and its thermochemical behaviour. Bioresour Techonol 99:6494–6504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rupérez P (2002) Mineral content of edible marine seaweeds. J Food Chem 79:23–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Taboada MC, Millán R, Miguez MI (2013) Nutritional value of the marine algae wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) and nori (Porphyra purpurea) as food supplements. J Appl Phycol 25:1271–1276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tayyab U, Novoa-Garrido M, Roleda MY, Lind V, Weisbjerg MR (2016) Ruminal and intestinal protein degradability of various seaweed species measured in situ in dairy cows. Anim Feed Sci Technol 213:44–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Theodorou MK, Williams BA, Dhanoa MS, McAllan AB, France J (1994) A simple gas production method using a pressure transducer to determine the fermentation kinetics of ruminant feeds. Anim Feed Sci Technol 48:185–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Uyeno Y, Shigemori S, Shimosato T (2015) Effect of probiotics/prebiotics on cattle health and productivity. Microbes Environ 30:126–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Van Keuren RW, Heinemann WW (1962) Study of a nylon bag technique for in vivo estimation of forage digestibility. J Anim Sci 21:340–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA (1991) Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 74:3588–3597Google Scholar
  32. Williams AG, Withers S, Sutherland AD (2013) The potential of bacteria isolated from ruminal contents of seaweed-eating North Ronaldsay sheep to hydrolyse seaweed components and produce methane by anaerobic digestion in vitro. Microb Biotechnol 6:45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xia A, Jacob A, Herrmann C, Tabassum MR, Murphy JD (2015) Production of hydrogen, ethanol and volatile fatty acids from the seaweed carbohydrate mannitol. Bioresour Technol 193:488–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yan X, Nagata T, Fan X (1998) Antioxidative activities in some common seaweeds. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 52:253–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yeo SK, Liong MT (2010) Effect of prebiotics on viability and growth characteristics of probiotics in soymilk. J Sci Food Agric 90:267–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Applied Life Science (BK21Plus) and Institute of Agriculture & Life Science (IALS)Gyeongsang National UniversityJinjuSouth Korea
  2. 2.Institute of Agriculture and Life Science & University-Centered LabsGyeongsang National UniversityJinjuSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations