Advertisement

Phenolic and tannin compounds in subtropical shrubs (Bituminaria bituminosa, Chamaecytisus proliferus, and Adenocarpus foliosus) and the effects on in vitro digestibility

  • M. R. VenturaEmail author
  • D. Bastianelli
  • S. Deniz
  • P. Saavedra
  • L. Rey
  • L. Bonnal
  • E. González-García
Short Communications
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

The objective of this study was to contribute to the characterization of nutritional potentials, with special attention to the total phenol and condensed tannins content and the effects on in vitro digestibility of some browsing shrub legumes traditionally used for ruminant feeding. The varieties selected were Bituminaria bituminosa var. bituminosa (BBB), Bituminaria bituminosa var. albormaginata (BBA), Chamaecytisus proliferus var. palmensis (CPP), Chamaecytisus proliferus var. canariae (CPC), and Adenocarpus foliosus (AF). Chemical composition, in vitro digestibility, and net energy for lactation (NE) were analyzed and compared among varieties; the effects of total phenol (TP) and condensed tannins (CT) compounds on digestibility were estimated. Condensed tannins ranged from 1 to 5 g/kg DM of tannins, while total phenols ranged from 9 to 32 g/kg DM of tannins. In vitro organic matter digestibility (OMD) ranged from 0.52 to 0.71, and estimated net energy for lactation (NE) ranged from 4.2 to 5.8 MJ/kg DM, with significant differences among all the varieties. This Chamaecytisus varieties (CPC, CPP) have higher feeding values, following CPC > CPP > AF > BBB > BBA in order. Although there were condensed tannins and total phenols in all the shrubs analyzed, total phenol contents differed significantly between the shrubs. The effect of the content of the total phenols and of the tannins condensed in the OMD of the varieties of shrubs analyzed, shows that the higher amounts of total phenols in some of the varieties of shrubs analyzed, increased the in vitro digestibility (OMD) of the shrubs but high amounts of CT decreased OMD.

Keywords

Chemical composition Nutritive value Polyphenolic compounds Tropical legumes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria and the Centre de Coopération Internationale Recherche Agronomique (CIRAD) for support.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Aufrere, J., 1982. Etude de la prévision de la digestibilité des fourrages par une méthode enzimatique. Annales de Zootechnie, 31, 2, 111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AOAC., 2000. Official Methods of Analysis 17th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.Google Scholar
  3. Barry, T. N. and McNabb, W.C., 1999. The implications of condensed tannins on the nutritive value of temperate forages fed to ruminants. British Journal of Nutrition, 81, 263–272Google Scholar
  4. Burns, R.E., 1963. Methods of tannins analysis for forage crop evaluation. University Georgia. Agric. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. N.S. 32.Google Scholar
  5. D’Mello, J.P., 1992. Chemical constraints to the use of tropical legumes in animal nutrition. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 38, 237–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Getachewm, G., Makkar, H.P.S. and Becker, K., 2002. Tropical browses: contents of phenolic compounds, in vitro gas production and stoichiometric relationship between short chain fatty acid and in vitro gas production. Journal of Agriculture Science, 139, 341–352.Google Scholar
  7. Heuzé, V., Thiollet, H., Tran, G., Hassoun, P., Bastianelli, D. and Lebas, F., 2017. Tagasaste (Cytisus proliferus). Feedipedia, a programme by INRA, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO. Available online from https://www.feedipedia.org/node/310
  8. INRA Institute National de la Recherche Agronomique., 1988. Ruminant Nutrition. Jarrige edn John Libbey Eurotext, London.Google Scholar
  9. Kumara, M., Krebs, G., McCafferty, P. and Gunaratne, L., 2009. Chemical composition, biological effect of tannin and in vitro nutritive value of selected browse species grown in the West Australian Mediterranean environment. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 153, 203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Makkar H.P.S. and Blummel, M, Borowy, N.K., 1993. Gravimetric determination of tannins and their correlations with chemical and protein precipitation methods. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 61, 161–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Minson, D.J., 1990. Forages in Ruminant Nutrition. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Mc Sweeney, C.S., Palmer B., McNeill, D.M. and Krause, D.O., 2001. Microbial interactions with tannins: nutritional consequences for ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 91, 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. NRC., 1988. Nutrient requirements for dairy cattle, 6th ed. National Academy Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  14. Papanastasis, V., Yiakoulaki, M., Decandia, M. and DiniPapanastasi, O., 2008. Integrating woody species into livestock feeding in the Mediterranean areas of Europe. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 140, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Patra, A.K. and Saxena, J., 2011. Exploitation of dietary tannins to improve rumen metabolism and ruminant nutrition. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 91(1), 24–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Piluzza, G., Sulas, L. and Bullitta, S., 2013. Tannins in forage plants and their role in animal husbandry and environmental sustainability: a review. Grass Forage Science 69, 32–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. R Core Team., 2012. Team RDC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  18. Sauvant, D. and Morand-Fehr, P., 1991. Goat Nutrition. Morand-Fehr, P. (Ed). PUDOC, Wageningen 61–72.Google Scholar
  19. Schofield, P., Mbugua, D.M. and Pell, A.N., 2001. Analysis of condensed tannins: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 91, 21–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Silanikove, N., Perevolotsky, A. and Provenza, F.D., 2001. Use of tannin-binding chemicals to assay for tannins and their negative post ingestive effects in ruminant. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 91, 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B. and Lewis, B.A., 1991. Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ventura, M.R., Castanon, J.I.R., Muzquiz, M., Mendez, P. and Flores, M.P., 2000. Influence of alkaloid content on intake of (Chamaecytisus proliferus) sub-species for goats. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 85, 279–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ventura, M.R., Castanon, J.I.R. and Mendez, P., 2009. Effect of season on tedera (Bituminaria bituminosa) intake by goats. Animals Feed Science and Technology, 153, 314–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Animal ScienceUniversity of Las Palmas de Gran CanariaLas PalmasSpain
  2. 2.CIRAD-UMR Systèmes d’élevage Méditerranéens et TropicauxMontpellierFrance
  3. 3.INRA-CIRAD, Systèmes d’élevage Méditerranéens et Tropicaux, Montpellier SupAgroMontpellierFrance

Personalised recommendations