The utilization of animal donors of rumen fluid for laboratory experiments can raise ethical concerns, and alternatives to the collection of rumen fluids from live animals are urgently requested. The aim of this study was to compare the fresh rumen fluid (collected at slaughter, W) with that obtained from a continuous fermenter (RCF) and three methods of rumen fluid preservation (refrigeration, R, chilling, C, and freeze-drying, FD). The fermentability of different inoculum was evaluated by three in vitro tests (neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and crude protein (CP) degradability and gas production, NDFd, RDP and GP, respectively) using six feeds as substrates. Despite the two types of inoculum differed in terms of metabolites and microbiota concentration, the differences in vitro fermentability between the two liquids were less pronounced than expected (-15 and 20% for NDFd and GP when the liquid of fermenter was used and no differences for RDP).Within each in vitro test, the data obtained from rumen and from fermenter liquids were highly correlated for the six feeds, as well as betweenWand R (r: 0.837-0.985; p < 0.01). The low fermentative capacity was found for C and, particularly, FD for liquids. RCF could be used to generate inoculum for in vitro purposes and short-term refrigeration is a valuable practice to manage inoculum.

Spanghero, M., Chiaravalli, M., Colombini, S., Fabro, C., Froldi, F., Mason, F., Moschini, M., Sarnataro, C., Schiavon, S., Tagliapietra, F., Rumen inoculum collected from cows at slaughter or from a continuous fermenter and preserved in warm, refrigerated, chilled or freeze-dried environments for in vitro tests, <<ANIMALS>>, 2019; 9 (10): 815-828. [doi:10.3390/ani9100815] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/146655]

Rumen inoculum collected from cows at slaughter or from a continuous fermenter and preserved in warm, refrigerated, chilled or freeze-dried environments for in vitro tests

Froldi, Federico;Moschini, Maurizio;
2019

Abstract

The utilization of animal donors of rumen fluid for laboratory experiments can raise ethical concerns, and alternatives to the collection of rumen fluids from live animals are urgently requested. The aim of this study was to compare the fresh rumen fluid (collected at slaughter, W) with that obtained from a continuous fermenter (RCF) and three methods of rumen fluid preservation (refrigeration, R, chilling, C, and freeze-drying, FD). The fermentability of different inoculum was evaluated by three in vitro tests (neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and crude protein (CP) degradability and gas production, NDFd, RDP and GP, respectively) using six feeds as substrates. Despite the two types of inoculum differed in terms of metabolites and microbiota concentration, the differences in vitro fermentability between the two liquids were less pronounced than expected (-15 and 20% for NDFd and GP when the liquid of fermenter was used and no differences for RDP).Within each in vitro test, the data obtained from rumen and from fermenter liquids were highly correlated for the six feeds, as well as betweenWand R (r: 0.837-0.985; p < 0.01). The low fermentative capacity was found for C and, particularly, FD for liquids. RCF could be used to generate inoculum for in vitro purposes and short-term refrigeration is a valuable practice to manage inoculum.
2019
Inglese
Spanghero, M., Chiaravalli, M., Colombini, S., Fabro, C., Froldi, F., Mason, F., Moschini, M., Sarnataro, C., Schiavon, S., Tagliapietra, F., Rumen inoculum collected from cows at slaughter or from a continuous fermenter and preserved in warm, refrigerated, chilled or freeze-dried environments for in vitro tests, <<ANIMALS>>, 2019; 9 (10): 815-828. [doi:10.3390/ani9100815] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/146655]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10807/146655
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 8
  • Scopus 18
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 17
social impact