Digestion of leaflets of Paspalum notatum subjected to different ruminal incubation times in cattle at different times of the year

Authors

  • A. L. Slanac Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias. Cátedra de Fisiología
  • O. Balbuena Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias. Cátedra de Nutrición
  • M. C. Peichoto Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias
  • C. D. Kucseva Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Colonia Benítez

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30972/vet.3326173

Keywords:

Paspalum notatum, Rumen, Degradability, Grasslands, Foliar anatomy

Abstract

In order to evaluate the ruminal degradation of Paspalum notatum (grass pasture) in rumen of bovines at different times of the year, in a field of northeastern Argentina, samples of this pasture were collected at 15, 30 and 45 days of regrowth, were cut and placed 5 g in dacron bags, to be introduced in the rumen at 120, 72, 48, 24, 12, 6, 3 and 0 hours, and removed at the same time, an aliquot was fixed in acetoalcoholic formalin solution (FAA), dehydrated with acetone and mounted on aluminum foil and metallized for observation in scanning microscope (MEB). The degradation of the tissues was determined according to the state of the cell walls. Four categories were established: D: highly degraded; DA: advanced degradation; PD: partially degraded; ND: not degraded. In autumn, the cut from 15 days to 12 hours, the disappearance of the chlorenchyma (mesophyll) was advanced and the phloem beganto be digested. After 48 hours, some paranchymal
cells of the beam sheath remained undigested. At 30 days and 48 hours of incubation, mesophyll and phloem suffered complete degradation. At 45 days instead, he only showed a complete digestion for the chlorenchyme, the phloem presented advanced digestion. In winter, at 24 hours on lythex ylem tissues and abaxial sclerench y maremained. After 48 hours in rumen the only thing not digested was xylem, sclerenchyma and sheath of the beam. The mesophyll and the phloem, at 15 days and 24 hours, were digested 100%, for 30 and 45 days, advanced digestion was observed. In spring, the three ages showed chlorenchyme, phloem, and partially degraded sheath at 12 hours, the 24-hour the reveal e advanced degradation and complete digestion after 48 hours. The xylem, was degraded in it sentir et y to 48 hours of the cut of 15 days, instead for 30 and 45 days, the degradation was advanced . In summer the behavior was similar to spring. In general terms the anatomical characteristics observed, in the thre eages of cut and different seasons were variable fort his species.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akin DE. 1982. Section to slide technique for study of forage anatomy and digestion. Crop Sci 22: 444-446.

Akin DE, Brown RH, Rigsby LL. 1984. Digestion of stem tissues in Panicum species. Crop Sci 24: 769-773.

Akin DE, Rigsby LL. 1992. Scanning electron microscopy and ultraviolet absorption micro spectrophotometry of plant cell types of different biodegradabilities. Food Structure 11: 3, 259-271.

Arellano CA. 2017. Caracterización anatómica de hoja de recursos genéticos de Hymenachne amplexicaulis (Rudge) nees. Rev Fitotec Mex 40: 1, 65-72.

Brito CI, Rodella RA, Deschamps FC. 1999. Anatomia quantitativa in vitro de tecidosem cultivares de capim-elefante (Pennisetum pupureum Schumach). Rev Bras Zoot 28: 2, 223-229.

Buxton DR, Mertens DR, Fisher DS. 1996. Forage quality utilization. ASA CSSA. Madinson, Wisconsin, USA. p. 471-502.

Buxton DR, Redfearn DD. 1997. Plant limitations to fiber digestion and utilization. En: Proceeding Annual Ruminant Nutrition Conference. New developments in forage science. Am Soc Nutr Sci 814-818.

Carvalho GP, Pires AJ. 2008. Organizacao dos tecidos de plantas forrageiras e sua simplicacoes para os ruminates. Arch Zootec 57: 13-28.

Fernandez JA. 2000. Relación entre la calidad del forraje y las características fenológicas, morfológicas y anatómicas en materiales genéticos de agropiro alargado. Tesis M Sci Facult. Cs. Agr., Balcarce, Argentina, 91 p.

Frecentese MA, Stritzler N. 1985. Ataque diferencial de la flora ruminal bovina sobre tejidos foliares de gramíneas estivales. Rev Arg Prod Anim 5: 531-540.

Gasser M, Ramos J, Vegetti A, Tivano JC. 2005. Digestión de láminas foliares de Bromus auleticus sometidas a diferentes tiempos de incubación ruminal. Agricultura Técnica (Chile) 65: 1, 48-54.

Gasser M, Ramos J, Tivano JC, Vegetti A. 2002. Anatomía foliar de Bromus auleticus y Setaria lachnea sometidas a digestión in situ. Rev. Fac. Agronomia, La Plata, 105: 1, 68-75.

Gates RN, Quarin CL, Pedreira CG. 2004. Bahiagrass, En: Moser LE, Burson BL, Sollenberger L.E. (eds), Madison, WI. p. 651-680.

Heinzen F, Ramos J, Tivano JC. 2002. Anatomía cuantitativa comparada de algunas especies de gramíneas de la Provincia de Santa Fe. Rev. FAVE – Ciencias Agrarias 1: 2, 57-63.

Magai MM, Sleper DA, Beuselinck PR. 1994. Degradation of three warm season grasses in a prepared cellulose solution. Agron J 86: 1049-

Masciangelo P, Tivano JC, Ramos JC. 2002. Influencia de la fecha de siembra en la anatomía cuantitativa foliar de un híbrido de maíz para silo.

VII Jornadas de Jóvenes Investigadores, UNL, Santa Fe, Argentina.

Mitchell R et al. 2001. Predicting forage quality in Switchgrass and Big Bluestem. Agronomy Journal 93: 118-124.

Nuciari MC, Cid MS, Fay P, Stitzler N. 1997. Porcentajes de tejidos lentamente digestibles e indigestibles en Elytrigia scabrifolia y E. cabriglumis. Archivos Latinoamericanos de Producción Animal 5: 1, 118-121.

Nuciari MC. 2008. Degradación de tejidos foliares en Elymus breviari status sub sp. scabrifolius y E. scabriglumis (Gramineae). Agrociencia 12: 2, 68-77.

Pérez VY, Cambi V. 2010. Anatomía vegetativa comparativa entre Chloridoideae (Poaceae) halófilas de importancia forrajera. International Journal of Experimental Botany. Fyton 79: 69-76.

Silva LM, Alquini Y, Freixeiro CJ, Deschamps FC. 2001. Area de tecidos de folhas e caules de Axonopusscoparius (Flugge) y Axonopusfissifolius

(Raddi). Ciencia Rural 31: 3. 509-515.

Tivano JC, Heinzen FA. 1996. Anatomía cuantitativa en 3 cultivares de Dichantium aristatum (Poiret) C.E. Hubbard. (Poaceas) para inferir su

valor forrajero. Rev Fac Agr La Plata 101: 15-23.

Tivano JC, Ramos JC, Gasser M. 2007. Digestibilidad de los pastos. Bases histoquímicas. Ed. UNL, 63 pp.

Tsuzukibashi D, Costa JP, Moro FV, Ruggieri AC, Malhei EB. 2016. Anatomia quantitativa, digestibilidade in vitro e composição química de

cultivares de Brachiaria brizantha. Revista de Ciências Agrárias 39: 1, 46-53.

Wilson JR. 1997. Structural and anatomical traits of forage influencing their nutritive value for ruminants. In: Gomide JA: Anais do Simposio Internacional sobre Producao Animal Empastejo, Dpto. Zoot. Univ. Fed. Viscosa, Brasil, p. 173-208.

Wilson JR. 1993. Organization of forage plant tissues. En: Forage cell wall structure and digestibility (Jung H.G., Buxton D.R., Hatfield R., Ralph J. ASA. CSSA. SSA.), Madison, Wisconsin, USA, p. 1-3.

Wilson JR. 1990. Influence of plant anatomy on digestion and fibre breakdown, pp. 99-117. En: Microbial and plant opportunities to improve lignocellulose utilization by ruminants (E.E. Akin, L.G. Ljungdahl, J.R. Wilson, P.J. Harris (eds.). Elsevier, New York.

Wilson JR, Mertens DR. 1995. Cell wall accessibility and cell structure limitations to microbial digestion of forage. Crop Science 35: 1, 251-259.

Wilson JR, Hatfield RD. 1997. Structural and chemical changes of cell wall types during stem development: consequence for fibre degradation rumen micloflora. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 48: 2, 165-180.

Wilson JR, Kennedy PM. 1996. Plant and animal constraints to voluntary feed intake associated with fiber characteristics and particle breakdown and passage in ruminants. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 47: 2, 199-225.

Published

2022-12-26

How to Cite

Slanac, A. L., Balbuena, O., Peichoto, M. C., & Kucseva, C. D. (2022). Digestion of leaflets of Paspalum notatum subjected to different ruminal incubation times in cattle at different times of the year. Revista Veterinaria, 33(2), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.30972/vet.3326173

Issue

Section

Trabajos de Investigación

Most read articles by the same author(s)