Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:31:57.473Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Estimation of the in situ degradation of the washout fraction of starch by using a modified in situ protocol and in vitro measurements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2015

L. H. de Jonge*
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
H. van Laar
Affiliation:
Nutreco R&D, PO Box 220, 5830 AE Boxmeer, The Netherlands
J. Dijkstra
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
Get access

Abstract

The in situ degradation of the washout fraction of starch in six feed ingredients (i.e. barley, faba beans, maize, oats, peas and wheat) was studied by using a modified in situ protocol and in vitro measurements. In comparison with the washing machine method, the modified protocol comprises a milder rinsing method to reduce particulate loss during rinsing. The modified method markedly reduced the average washout fraction of starch in these products from 0.333 to 0.042 g/g. Applying the modified rinsing method, the fractional degradation rate (kd) of starch in barley, oats and wheat decreased from on average 0.327 to 0.144 h−1 whereas for faba beans, peas and maize no differences in kd were observed compared with the traditional washing machine rinsing. For barley, maize and wheat, the difference in non-fermented starch in the residue between both rinsing methods during the first 4 h of incubation increased, which indicates secondary particle loss. The average effective degradation of starch decreased from 0.761 to 0.572 g/g when using the new rinsing method and to 0.494 g/g when applying a correction for particulate matter loss during incubation. The in vitro kd of starch in the non-washout fraction did not differ from that in the total product. The calculated ratio between the kd of starch in the washout and non-washout fraction was on average 1.59 and varied between 0.96 for oats and 2.39 for maize. The fractional rate of gas production was significantly different between the total product and the non-washout fraction. For all products, except oats, this rate of gas production was larger for the total product compared with the non-washout fraction whereas for oats the opposite was observed. The rate of increase in gas production was, especially for grains, strongly correlated with the in vitro kd of starch. The results of the present study do not support the assumption used in several feed evaluation systems that the degradation of the washout fraction of starch in the rumen is much faster than that of the non-washout fraction.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2015 

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

Allen, MS and Mertens, DR 1988. Evaluating constraints on fiber digestion by rumen microbes. Journal of Nutrition 118, 261270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cerneau, P and Michalet-Doreau, B 1991. In situ starch degradation of different feeds in the rumen. Reproduction Nutrition Development 31, 6572.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chai, WZ, van Gelder, AH and Cone, JW 2004. Relationship between gas production and starch degradation in feed samples. Animal Feed Science and Technology 114, 195204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cone, JW, van Gelder, AH and Chai, WZ 2006. Fermentation behaviour of the nylon bag washout and degradable fraction determined with the gas production technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 127, 319326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cone, JW, van Gelder, AH, Visscher, GJW and Oudshoorn, L 1996. Influence of rumen fluid and substrate concentration on fermentation kinetics measured with a fully automated time related gas production apparatus. Animal Feed Science and Technology 61, 113128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duinkerken, G van, Blok, MC, Bannink, A, Cone, JW, Dijkstra, J, van Vuuren, AM and Tamminga, S 2011. Update of the Dutch protein evaluation system for ruminants: the DVE/OEB2010 system. Journal of Agricultural Science 149, 351367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
France, J, Dhanoa, MS, Theodorou, MK, Lister, SJ, Davies, DR and Isac, D 1993. A model to interpret gas accumulation profiles associated with in vitro degradation of ruminal feeds. Journal of Theoretical Biology 163, 99111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goelema, JO, Spreeuwenberg, MAM, Hof, G, van der Poel, AFB, Tamminga, S 1998. Effect of pressure toasting on the rumen degradability and intestinal digestibility of whole and broken peas, lupins and faba beans and a mixture of these feedstuffs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 76, 3550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hindle, VA, van Vuuren, AM, Klop, A, Mathijssen-Kamman, AA, van Gelder, AJ, Cone, JW 2005. Site and extent of starch degradation in the dairy cow – a comparison between in vivo, in situ and in vitro measurements. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 89, 158165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huhtanen, P and Sveinbjörnsson, J 2006. Evaluation of methods for estimating starch digestibility and digestion kinetics in ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology 130, 95113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO 6496 1999. Animal feeding stuffs – determination of moisture and other volatile matter content. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
ISO 15914 2004. Animal feeding stuffs – enzymatic determination of total starch content. International Organization for Standardization, Genève, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Jonge, LH de, van Laar, H, Hendriks, WH and Dijkstra, J 2013. A modified rinsing method for the determination of the S, W-S, and D+U fraction of protein and starch in feedstuffs within the in situ technique. Animal 7, 12891297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonge, LH de, van Laar, H, Hendriks, WH, Dijkstra, J 2015. A new approach to estimate the in situ fractional degradation rate of organic matter and nitrogen in wheat yeast concentrates. Animal 9, 437444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, M, Lund, P, Weisbjerg, MR and Hvelplund, T 2009. Digestion site of starch from cereals and legumes in lactating dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 153, 236248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López, S 2005. In vitro and in situ techniques for estimating digestibility. In Quantitative aspects of ruminant digestion and metabolism, (2nd edition ed. J Dijkstra, JM Forbes and J France), pp. 87122. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michalet-Doreau, B and Ould-Bah, MY 1992. In vitro and in sacco methods for the estimation of dietary nitrogen degradability in the rumen: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 40, 5786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, JAN, France, J and Dijkstra, J 1999. A review of starch digestion in the lactating dairy cow and proposal for a mechanistic model: (2) postruminal starch digestion and small intestinal glucose absorption. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 8, 451481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nocek, JE and Tamminga, S 1991. Site of digestion of starch in the gastrointestinal tract of dairy cows and its effect on milk yield and composition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 35983629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Offner, A and Sauvant, D 2004. Prediction of in vivo starch digestion in cattle from in situ data. Animal Feed Science and Technology 111, 4156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offner, A, Bach, A and Sauvant, D 2003. Quantitative review of in situ starch degradation in the rumen. Animal Feed Science and Technology 106, 8193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ørskov, ER and McDonald, I 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. Journal of Agricultural Science 92, 499503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute 2002. SAS/STAT user’s guide 2002. Version 9. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D, Perez, J-M and Tran, G (ed.), 2004. Tables of composition and nutritional value of feed material. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevnebø, A, Seppälä, A, Harstad, OM and Huhtanen, P 2009. Ruminal starch digestion characteristics in vitro of barley cultivars with varying amylose content. Animal Feed Science and Technology 148, 167182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tahir, MN, Hetta, M, Larsen, M, Lund, P and Huhtanen, P 2013. In vitro estimations of the rate and extent of ruminal digestion of starch-rich feed fractions compared to in vivo data. Animal Feed Science and Technology 179, 3645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tas, BM, Taweel, HZ, Smit, HJ, Elgersma, A, Dijkstra, J and Tamminga, S 2006. Rumen degradation characteristics of perennial ryegrass cultivars during the growing season. Animal Feed Science and Technology 131, 102119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tothi, R, Lund, P, Weisbjerg, MR and Hvelplund, T 2003. Effect of expander processing on fractional rate of maize and barley starch degradation in the rumen of dairy cows estimated using rumen evacuation and in situ techniques. Animal Feed Science and Technology 104, 7194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanzant, ES, Cochran, RC and Titgemeyer, EC 1998. Standardization of in situ techniques for ruminant feedstuff evaluation. Journal of Animal Science 76, 27172729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Volden, H (ed.), 2011. Norfor, the Nordic feed evaluation system. EAAP publication No. 130. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisbjerg, MR, Boas, MV, Huhtala, K, Larsen, M and Hvelplund, T 2011. Comparison of in situ and in vitro methods for assessment of in vivo rumen starch degradation. Advances in Animal Biosciences 2, 325.Google Scholar
Yang, H-J, Tamminga, S, Williams, BA, Dijkstra, J and Boer, H 2005. In vitro gas and volatile fatty acids production profiles of barley and maize and their soluble and washout fractions after feed processing. Animal Feed Science and Technology 120, 125140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar