Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:20:02.503Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In vitro gas production kinetics and short-chain fatty acid production from rumen incubation of diets supplemented with hop cones (Humulus lupulus L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2014

A. Lavrenčič ,
A. Levart ,
I. J. Košir  and
A. Čerenak
A. Lavrenčič*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Groblje 3, SI-1230 Domžale, Slovenia
A. Levart
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Groblje 3, SI-1230 Domžale, Slovenia
I. J. Košir
Affiliation:
Slovenian Institute of Hop Research and Brewing, Cesta Žalskega tabora 2, SI-3310 Žalec, Slovenia
A. Čerenak
Affiliation:
Slovenian Institute of Hop Research and Brewing, Cesta Žalskega tabora 2, SI-3310 Žalec, Slovenia
*
†E-mail: andrej.lavrencic@bf.uni-lj.si
Get access

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of hop cones (Humulus lupulus L.) from two varieties Aurora and Dana, differing in their α- and β-acid contents, on rumen microbial activity measured with in vitro gas production kinetics and short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) production. Hop cones were added to the total mixed dairy cow ration (CONT) in concentrations simulating a cow’s daily intake of 50, 100 and 200 g of hop cones – the concentrations of hop cones expressed on a substrate basis were 43, 82 and 153 mg/g of substrate. Substrates were anaerobically incubated in glass syringes, and gas production kinetic parameters were determined by fitting data with the Gompertz model. Gas produced after 24 h (Gas24), maximum fermentation rate (MFR) and time of maximum fermentation rate (TMFR) were calculated from the estimated gas production kinetic parameters. After 24 h of incubation, the fermentation liquids of each substrate were taken for the determination of SCFA. Increasing the hop cone concentration decreased the total potential gas production, Gas24, MFR and shortened TMFR. The highest hop cone concentration significantly decreased acetic and butyric acid productions and total SCFA production after 24 h of incubation, but not propionic acid production, resulting in a decreased ratio between acetic acid and propionic acid.

Keywords

hop conesin vitro gas productionshort-chain fatty acidsmicrobial activity
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , April 2015 , pp. 576 - 581
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Benchaar, C, Petit, HV, Berthiaume, R, Whyte, T and Chouinard, P 2006. Effects of addition of essential oils and monesin premix on digestion, ruminal fermentation, milk production, and milk composition in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 89, 4352–4364.Google Scholar
Calsamiglia, S, Busquet, M, Cardozo, PW, Castillejos, L and Ferret, A 2007. Invited review: essential oils as modifiers of rumen microbial fermentation. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2580–2595.Google Scholar
DLG 1997. DLG Futterwerttabellen: Wiederkäuer, 7., erweite und uberarbeitete Auflage, DLG-Verlag, Frankfurt, 212 p.Google Scholar
Drouillard, JS, Uwituze, S, Shelor, MK, Higgins, JJ and Garden, S 2009. Effects of beta acid extracts of hops on ruminal metabolism and apparent total tract digestibility by steers fed high concentrate diets. In Ruminant physiology: digestion, metabolism, and effects of nutrition on reproduction and welfare (ed. Y Chilliard, F Glasser, Y Faulconnier, I Bocquier and M Doreau), pp. 164–165. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Flythe, MD 2009. The antimicrobial effects od hops (Humulus lupulus L.) on ruminal hyper ammonia-producing bacteria. Letters in Applied Microbiology 48, 712–717.Google Scholar
Flythe, MD and Aiken, GE 2010. Effects of hops (Humulus lupulus L.) extracts on volatile fatty acids production by rumen bacteria. Journal of Applied Microbiology 109, 1169–1176.Google Scholar
Garcia-Gonzalez, R, Lopez, S, Fernandez, M, Bodas, R and Gonzalez, JS 2008. Screening the activity of plants and spices for decreasing ruminal methane production in vitro. Animal Feed Science and Technology 147, 36–52.Google Scholar
Holdeman, LV, Cato, EP and Moore, WEC 1977. Ether extraction of volatile fatty acids. In Anaerobe laboratory manual, 4th edition. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.Google Scholar
Jirovetz, L, Bail, S, Buchbauer, G, Denkova, Z, Slavchev, A, Stoyanova, A, Schmidt, E and Geisser, M 2006. Antimicrobial testing, gas chromatographic analisis and olfactory evaluation of an essential oil of hop cones (Humulus lupulus L.) from Bavaria and some of its main compounds. Scientia Pharmaceutica 74, 189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchgessner, M 1997. Tierernährung: Leitfaden für Studium, Beratung and Praxis. 10., neuarbeitede Auflage. Verlags Union Agrar, DLG Verlag Frankfurt (Main), Germany, 582p.Google Scholar
Larson, AE, Yu, RRY, Lee, OA, Price, S, Haas, GJ and Johnson, EA 1996. Antimicrobial activity of hop extracts against Listeria monocytogenes in media and in food. International Journal of Food Microbiology 33, 195–207.Google Scholar
Lavrenčič, A, Stefanon, B and Susmel, P 1997. An evaluation of the Gompertz model in degradability studies of forage chemical components. Animal Science 64, 423–431.Google Scholar
Lavrenčič, A, Levart, A, Košir, IJ and Čerenak, A 2014. Influence of two hop (Humulus lupulus L.) varieties on in vitro dry matter and crude protein degradability and digestibility in ruminants. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 94, 1248–1252.Google Scholar
Menke, KH and Steingass, H 1988. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Animal Research and Development 28, 7–55.Google Scholar
Moss, AR, Jouany, J-P and Newbold, J 2000. Methane production by ruminants: its contribution to global warming. Annales de Zootechnie 49, 231–253.Google Scholar
Mueller-Harvey, I 2006. Unravelling the conundrum of tannins in animal nutrition and health. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 86, 2010–2037.Google Scholar
Narvaez, N, Wang, Y, Zhonjou, X, Alexander, T, Garden, S and McAllister, T 2013. Effects of hop varieties on ruminal fermentation and bacterial community in an artificial rumen (rusitec). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 93, 45–52.Google Scholar
Pavlovič, M 2012. International Hop Grower’s Convention. Retrieved October 22, 2012, from https://www.hmelj-giz/ihgc/ Google Scholar
Sağdiç, O, Karahan, AG, Özcan, M and Özkan, G 2003. Note: effect of some spice extracts on bacterial inhibition. Food Science and Technology International 9, 353–358.Google Scholar
Sakamoto, K and Konings, W 2003. Beer spoilage bacteria and hop resistance. International Journal of Food Microbiology 89, 105–124.Google Scholar
Schmidt, MA and Nelson, ML 2006. Effects of hop acids. I. In vitro ruminal fermentation. Journal of Animal Science 84 (suppl. 1), 239–240.Google Scholar
Schmidt, MA, Nelson, ML, Michal, JJ and Westberg, HH 2006. Effects of hop acids. II. Beta acids on ruminal methane emissions, protozoal populations, fermentation and CoM concentration in cannulated finishing steers. Journal of Animal Science 84 (suppl. 1), 240.Google Scholar
Serra, A, Macia, A, Romero, M-P, Reguant, J, Ortega, N and Motilva, M-J 2012. Metabolic pathways of the colonic metabolism of flavonoids (flavonols, flavones and flavanones) and phenolic acids. Food Chemistry 130, 383–393.Google Scholar
Siragusa, GR, Haas, GJ, Matthews, DD, Smith, RJ, Buhr, RJ, Dale, NM and Wise, MG 2008. Antimicrobial activity of lupulone against Clostridium perfringens in the chicken intestinal tract jejunum and caecum. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 61, 853–858.Google Scholar
Srivasan, V, Goldberg, D and Haas, GJ 2004. Contribution to the antimicrobial spectrum of hop constituents. Economic Botany 58, S230–S238.Google Scholar
Staerfl, SM, Kreuzer, M and Soliva, CR 2010. In vitro screening of unconventional feeds and various natural supplements for their ruminal methane mitigation potential when included in a maize-silage based diet. Journal of Animal Feed Science 19, 651–664.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute (SAS) 1994. SAS/STAT user’s guide (release 6.03 edition. SAS Institute, Cary, USA, 1686p.Google Scholar
Van Cleemput, M, Cattor, K, De Bosscher, K, Haegeman, G, De Keukeleire, D and Heyerick, A 2009. Hop (Humulus lupulus)-derived bitter acids as multipotent bioactive compounds. Journal of Natural Products 72, 1220–1230.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant, 2nd edition. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, USA, 476p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y, Chaves, AV, Rigby, FL, He, ML and McAllister, TA 2010. Effects of hops on ruminal fermentation, growth, carcass traits and shedding of Escherichia coli of feedlot cattle. Livestock Science 129, 135–140.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lavrenčič Supplementary Material

Figure S1

Download Lavrenčič Supplementary Material(File)
File 114.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Lavrenčič Supplementary Material

Figure S2

Download Lavrenčič Supplementary Material(File)
File 119.6 KB