For Libraries For Publication Open Access Downloads About Us Contact Us
Paper Titles
Chemical Constituents from Marine Streptomycete sp. S11
p.202
Determination of N-Butyl Pyridine Nitrate in Ethanol by UV-Spectrum
p.206
Effect of Biochar on Microorganisms Quantity and Soil Physicochemical Property in Rhizosphere of Spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.)
p.210
Preparation and Characterization of N-Butyl Pyridine Nitrate
p.220
The Effects of Elimination of Fungi on Microbial Population and Fiber Degradation in Sheep Rumen
p.224
The Experimental Study of Ammonia Removal in Compound Clinoptilolite Biological Aerated Filter (BAF)
p.232
The Synthesis and Characterization of N-Butyl Pyridine Tetrafluoroborate
p.236
The Study of Biodegradation Kinetics of Starch Based on Coating in Controlled Released Fertilizer (CRF)
p.240
Effects of Simulated Acid Rain on Soil Respiration of Pinus massoniana
p.249

The Effects of Elimination of Fungi on Microbial Population and Fiber Degradation in Sheep Rumen

Article Preview

Abstract:

The role of microbes in fiber degradation and the relations among the microbes in sheep rumen were explored by in vivo elimination of fungi. The experiment was conducted on 6 Mongolian sheep with fistulae approximately 1.5 years old (35kg). The sheep were randomly divided into two groups, treatment group (n=3) and control group (n=3). The rumen fluids were collected from the rumen though fistulae. The results showed that the total numbers of bacteria, cellulolytic bacteria and protozoa in the rumen were significantly increased (P<0.05) after fungus elimination. Among the three main cellulolytic bacteria, the number of R.flavefaciens and F.succinogenes increased significant (P<0.05). Elimination of fungi significantly reduced the degradation of DM, NDF and ADF, and the activity of CMCase in sheep rumen (P<0.05). The number of total rumen bacteria and fungi detected by real-time PCR were about 10 times and 1,000 times higher than that of the traditional anaerobic culture method, suggesting that real-time PCR is superior to the traditional roller tube culture method.

You might also be interested in these eBooks
Progress in Environmental Protection and Processing of Resource View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 295-298)

Pages:

224-231

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.295-298.224

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

February 2013

Authors:

Ai Wu Gao, Hai Rong Wang*, Jin Li Yang, Cai Xia Shi

Keywords:

Cellulase, Cellulolytic Bacteria, Fiber Degradation, Rumen Bacteria, Rumen Fungi

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

© 2013 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] Itabashi H, Matsul H: Recent advances in microbial ecology of protozoa and fungi in the rumen of herbivores, (2008), 110-124.

Google Scholar

[2] Maillet CB, Ribot Y, Forano E: Applied and Environmental Microbiology Vol. 70 (2004), pp.2172-2179.

Google Scholar

[3] Weimer PJ, Waghorn GC, Odt CL, et al.: J. Dairy. Sci. Vol. 82 (1999), pp.122-134.

Google Scholar

[4] Coleman GS: J. Agric. Sci. Vol. 104(1985), pp.349-360.

Google Scholar

[5] Jouany JP, Martin C: Rumen microbes and digestive physiology in ruminants, (1997), pp.11-24.

Google Scholar

[6] Takenaka A, Silva CGD, Kudo H, et al.: J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol Vol. 45 (1999), pp.57-61.

Google Scholar

[7] Krause DO, Denman SE, Mackie RI, et al.: FEMS Microbiology Reviews Vol. 27 (2003), pp.663-693.

Google Scholar

[8] Joblin KN, Matsui H, Naylor GE, et al.: Current microbiology Vol. 45 (2002), pp.46-53.

Google Scholar

[9] Joblin KN, Naylor G. E：Proc. Nutr. Soc Vol. 3 (1994), p.171.

Google Scholar

[10] Orpin CG, Jobin KN: The rumen microbial ecosystem. Chapman and Hall, London, United Kingdom, (1997), 140-195.

Google Scholar

[11] XX Huo, XZ Hou, DB Li et al.: Chinese Journal of Animal and Veterinary Vol. 37 (2006), pp.447-451.

Google Scholar

[12] Hungate RE: Methods Microbiol, Vol. 3B (1969), pp.117-132.

Google Scholar

[13] Joblin KN: Applied and Environmental Microbiology Vol. 42 (1981), pp.1119-1122.

Google Scholar

[14] Dehority BA: Applied and Environmental Microbiology Vol. 48 (1984), pp.182-185.

Google Scholar

[15] Shinkai T, Kobayshi Y: Applied and Environmental Microbiology Vol. 73 (2007), pp.1646-1652.

Google Scholar

[16] Denman SE, Mcsweeney CS: FEMS Microbiol Ecol. Vol. 58 (2006), pp.572-582.

Google Scholar

[17] Koike S, Kobayashi Y: FEMS Microbiology Letters Vol. 204 (2001), pp.361-366.

Google Scholar

[18] Joe Sambrook, Russell DW. Guideline for molecular cloning experiments. Translated by Huang et al. Third Edition. Beijing: Science Press, (2002).

Google Scholar

[19] Lee ChangSoo, Kim Jaai, Shin Seung Gu, et al.: Journal of Biotechnology Vol. 123 (2006), pp.273-280.

Google Scholar

[20] Qrskov ER, Mcdonald I: J. Agric. Sci. (Camb) Vol. 92 (1979), pp.499-503.

Google Scholar

[21] Paul SS, Kamra DN, Sastry VRB, et al.: Animal feed science and technology Vol. 115 (2004), pp.143-157.

Google Scholar

[22] Gordon GLR, Phillips MW: Letters in Applied Microbiology Vol. 17 (1993), pp.220-223.

Google Scholar

[23] SY Mao, QJ Wang, W Yao et al.: Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University Vol. 25 (2002), pp.61-65.

Google Scholar

[24] L DB i, XZ Hou: Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition Vol. 17 (2005), pp.43-48.

Google Scholar

[25] SY Mao, J Chen, W Yao et al.: Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University Vol. 24 (2005), pp.610-613.

Google Scholar

[26] XX Huo. The role of anaerobic fungi in fiber degradation and their relations with bacteria and protozoa. Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, (2003).

Google Scholar

[27] Joblin KN, Naylor GE: Ann Zootech(pairs) Vol. 45 (1996), p.289.

Google Scholar

[28] Dehority BA, Tirabasso PA: Applied and Environmental Microbiology Vol. 66 (2000), pp.2921-2927.

Google Scholar

[29] Roger V, Bernalier AE, Grenet, et al.: Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. Vol. 19 (1993), pp.25-31.

Google Scholar

[30] Irivine HL, Stewart CS: Lett. Appl. Microbiol. Vol. 12 (1991), pp.62-64.

Google Scholar

[31] Bernalier AG, Fonty F, Bonnemoy: Curr. Microbiol. Vol. 25 (1992), pp.143-148.

Google Scholar

[32] Michalet-doreau B, Fernandez I, Fonty G: American society of animal science Vol. 80 (2002), pp.790-796.

Google Scholar

[33] Ozutsumi Y, Tajima K, Takenaka A, et al.: Current microbiology Vol. 52 (2006), pp.158-162.

Google Scholar

[34] Paul SS, Kamra DN, Sastry VRB, et al.: Reprod. Nutr. Dev. Vol: 44 (2004), pp.313-319.

Google Scholar

[35] Lee SS, Ha JK, Cheng KJ: Feed Sci. Technol. Vol. 88 (2000), pp.201-217.

Google Scholar

[36] Lee SS, Choi CK, Ahn BH, et al.: Animal feed science and technology, Vol. 115 (2004), pp.215-226.

Google Scholar

[37] Akin DE, Lyon CE, et al.: Applied and Environmental Microbiology Vol. 55 (1989), pp.611-616.

Google Scholar

[38] Williams AG, Orpn CG: Canadian Journal of Microbiology Vol. 33 (1987), pp.418-426.

Google Scholar

[39] Gordon GLR, Phillips MW, Rintoul AJ, et al.: J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 13 (2000), p.13.

Google Scholar

© 2025 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies. For open access content, terms of the Creative Commons licensing CC-BY are applied.
Scientific.Net is a registered trademark of Trans Tech Publications Ltd.