Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T18:01:29.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of different sources of nitrogen on performance, relative population of rumen microorganisms, ruminal fermentation and blood parameters in male feedlotting lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 December 2019

M. Mahmoudi-Abyane ,
D. Alipour Open the ORCID record for D. Alipour [Opens in a new window]  and
H. R. Moghimi
M. Mahmoudi-Abyane
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
D. Alipour*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
H. R. Moghimi
Affiliation:
School of Pharmacy, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
*
†E-mail: alipourd@basu.ac.ir
Get access

Abstract

Slow-release urea (SRU) can substitute dietary protein sources in the diet of feedlotting ruminant species . However, different SRU structures show varying results of productive performance. This study was conducted to investigate the effect of different sources of nitrogen on performance, blood parameter, ruminal fermentation and relative population of rumen microorganisms in male Mehraban lambs. Thirty-five male lambs with an average initial BW of 34.7 ± 1.8 kg were assigned randomly to five treatments. Diets consisted of concentrate mixture and mineral and vitamin supplements plus (1) alfalfa and soybean meal, (2) wheat straw and soybean meal, (3) wheat straw and urea, (4) wheat straw and Optigen® (a commercial SRU supplement) and (5) wheat straw and SRU produced in the laboratory. No statistical difference was observed in animal performance and DM intake among treatments. The mean value of ruminal pH and ammonia was higher (P < 0.05) for the SRU diet compared with WU diet. The difference in pH is likely to be due to the higher ammonia level as VFAs concentrations were unchanged. The level of blood urea nitrogen (BUN) was different among treatments (P = 0.065). The highest concentration of BUN was recorded in Optigen diet (183.1 mg/l), whereas the lowest value was recorded in wheat straw-soybean meal diet (147 mg/l). The amount of albumin and total protein was not affected by the treatments. The relative population of total protozoa, Fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus flavefaciens and Ruminococcus albus in the SRU treatment was higher (P < 0.01) than that in urea treatment at 3 h post-feeding. During the period of lack of high-quality forage and in order to reduce dietary costs, low-quality forage with urea sources can be used in the diet. Results of microbial populations revealed that SRU can be used as a nitrogen source which can sustainably provide nitrogen for rumen microorganism without negative effects on the performance of feedlotting lambs.

Keywords

slow-release ureasheepreal-time PCRbacteriawheat straw
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 14 , Issue 7 , July 2020 , pp. 1438 - 1446
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdoun, K, Stumpff, F and Martens, H 2006. Ammonia and urea transport across the rumen epithelium: a review. Animal Health Research Reviews 7, 43–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Association of Official Analytical Chemists 1990. Official methods of analysis, 15th edition. AOAC, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Bourg, BM, Tedeschi, LO, Wickersham, TA and Tricarico, JM 2012. Effects of a slow-release urea product on performance, carcass characteristics, and nitrogen balance of steers fed steam-flaked corn. Journal of Animal Science 90, 3914–3923.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broderick, GA and Kang, JH 1980. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media. Journal of Dairy Science 63, 64–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calomeni, GD, Gardinal, R, Venturelli, BC, de Freitas Júnior, JE, Vendramini, THA, Takiya, CS, de Souza, HN and Rennó, FP 2015. Effects of polymer-coated slow-release urea on performance, ruminal fermentation, and blood metabolites in dairy cows. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 44, 327–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cass, J 1994. Urea: calcium compounds as a supplement source of N and Ca for ruminants. MSc thesis, Texas Tech University, TX, USA.Google Scholar
Cherdthong, A and Wanapat, M 2010. Development of urea products as rumen slow-release feed for ruminant production: a review. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences 4, 2232–2241.Google Scholar
Cherdthong, A and Wanapat, M 2013. Rumen microbes and microbial protein synthesis in Thai native beef cattle fed with feed blocks supplemented with a urea–calcium sulphate mixture. Archives of Animal Nutrition 67, 448–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cherdthong, A, Wanapat, M and Wachirapakorn, C 2011. Effects of urea–calcium mixture in concentrate containing high cassava chip on feed intake, rumen fermentation and performance of lactating dairy cows fed on rice straw. Livestock Science 136, 76–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dehority, BA 2003. Rumen microbiology. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
Denman, SE and McSweeney, CS 2005. Quantitative (real-time) PCR. In Methods in gut microbial ecology for ruminants (ed. Makkar, HPS and McSweeney, CS), pp. 105–115. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firkins, JL, Yu, Z and Morrison, M 2007. Ruminal nitrogen metabolism: perspectives for integration of microbiology and nutrition for dairy. Journal of Dairy Science 90 (suppl. 1), E1–E16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galina, M, Guerrero, M, Puga, C and Haenlein, GF 2004. Effect of a slow-intake urea supplementation on growing kids fed corn stubble or alfalfa with a balanced concentrate. Small Ruminant Research 53, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galo, E, Emanuele, SM, Sniffen, CJ, White, JH and Knapp, JR 2003. Effects of a polymer-coated urea product on nitrogen metabolism in lactating Holstein dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 2154–2162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardinal, R, Calomeni, GD, Cônsolo, NRB, Takiya, CS, Freitas, JE, Gandra, JR, Vendramini, THA, Souza, HN and Rennó, FP 2017. Influence of polymer-coated slow-release urea on total tract apparent digestibility, ruminal fermentation and performance of Nellore steers. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 30, 34–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Golombeski, GL, Kalscheur, KF, Hippen, AR and Schingoethe, DJ 2006. Slow-release urea and highly fermentable sugars in diets fed to lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 4395–4403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Highstreet, A, Robinson, PH, Robison, J and Garrett, JG 2010. Response of Holstein cows to replacing urea with a slowly rumen released urea in a diet high in soluble crude protein. Livestock Science 129, 179–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kertz, AF 2010. Review: urea feeding to dairy cattle: a historical perspective and review. The Professional Animal Scientist 26, 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koike, S and Kobayashi, Y 2001. Development and use of competitive PCR assays for the rumen cellulolytic bacteria: fibrobacter succinogenes, Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens. FEMS Microbiology Letters 204, 361–366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Livak, KJ and Schmittgen, TD 2001. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2−ΔΔCT method. Methods 25, 402–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahmoudi-Abyane, M, Alipour, D and Moghimi, HR 2017. Effect of using different sources of nitrogen on digestibility and nitrogen balance in Mehraban male lambs. Animal Production Research 6, 27–38.Google Scholar
Mirzaei-Alamouti, H, Moradi, S, Shahalizadeh, Z, Razavian, M, Amanlou, H, Harkinezhad, T, Jafari-Anarkooli, I, Deiner, C and Aschenbach, JR 2016. Both monensin and plant extract alter ruminal fermentation in sheep but only monensin affects the expression of genes involved in acid-base transport of the ruminal epithelium. Animal Feed Science and Technology 219, 132–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nocek, JE and Russell, JB 1988. Protein and energy as an integrated system. Relationship of ruminal protein and carbohydrate availability to microbial synthesis and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 71, 2070–2107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council 2007. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: sheep, goats, cervids, and new world camelids. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Pfaffl, MW 2001. A new mathematical model for relative quantification in real-time RT-PCR. Nucleic Acids Research 29, e45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinos-Rodríguez, JM, Peña, LY, González-Muñoz, SS, Bárcena, R and Salem, A 2010. Effects of a slow-release coated urea product on growth performance and ruminal fermentation in beef steers. Italian Journal of Animal Science 9, e4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puga, DC, Galina, HM, Peréz-Gil, RF, Sangines, GL, Aguilera, BA, Haenlein, GFW, Barajas, CR and Herrera, HJG 2001. Effect of a controlled-release urea supplementation on feed intake, digestibility, nitrogen balance and ruminal kinetics of sheep fed low quality tropical forage. Small Ruminant Research: The Journal of the International Goat Association 41, 9–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ribeiro, SS, Vasconcelos, JT, Morais, MG, Ítavo, CBCF and Franco, GL 2011. Effects of ruminal infusion of a slow-release polymer-coated urea or conventional urea on apparent nutrient digestibility, in situ degradability, and rumen parameters in cattle fed low-quality hay. Animal Feed Science and Technology 164, 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, JB 2002. Rumen microbiology and its role in ruminant nutrition. Department of Microbiology, Cornell University, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Russell, JB, Muck, RE and Weimer, PJ 2009. Quantitative analysis of cellulose degradation and growth of cellulolytic bacteria in the rumen. FEMS Microbiology Ecology 67, 183–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sinclair, LA, Blake, CW, Griffin, P and Jones, GH 2012. The partial replacement of soyabean meal and rapeseed meal with feed grade urea or a slow-release urea and its effect on the performance, metabolism and digestibility in dairy cows. Animal 6, 920–927.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, PJ 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB and Lewis, BA 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sylvester, JT, Karnati, SKR, Yu, Z, Morrison, M and Firkins, JL 2004. Development of an assay to quantify rumen ciliate protozoal biomass in cows using real-time PCR. The Journal of Nutrition 134, 3378–3384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor-Edwards, CC, Hibbard, G, Kitts, SE, McLeod, KR, Axe, DE, Vanzant, ES, Kristensen, NB and Harmon, DL 2009. Effects of slow-release urea on ruminal digesta characteristics and growth performance in beef steers. Journal of Animal Science 87, 200–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xin, HS, Schaefer, DM, Liu, QP, Axe, DE and Meng, QX 2010. Effects of polyurethane coated urea supplement on in vitro ruminal fermentation, ammonia release dynamics and lactating performance of Holstein dairy cows fed a steam-flaked corn-based diet. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 23, 491–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Mahmoudi-Abyane et al. supplementary material

Mahmoudi-Abyane et al. supplementary material

Download Mahmoudi-Abyane et al. supplementary material(File)
File 15.1 KB