6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of Chitosan and Naringin on Enteric Methane Emissions in Crossbred Heifers Fed Tropical Grass

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Simple Summary

          The increase in human population and the concomitant rise in demand for animal protein have contributed to augment enteric methane emissions. It is imperative to reduce methane, increase sustainable production, avoid the use of chemical compounds, and guarantee quality products for the consumer. Chitosan and naringin possess antimicrobial properties, and they have shown their capacity to reduce methane in in vitro trials. This study investigated their effects as feed additives given to improve ruminal fermentation and nutrient utilization and decrease methane in crossbred heifers fed tropical grass. In in vitro experiments, chitosan and naringin at three levels (0, 1.5, 3.0 g/kg) showed significant methane reductions when 1.5 g/kg of chitosan was included. The in situ study did not reveal changes in rumen degradability with the inclusion of the additives. However, in in vivo assays, chitosan and naringin at 1.5 or 3.0 g/kg dry matter intake or the combination of both compounds (1.5 and 1.5 g/kg) given directly into the rumen did not induce changes in rumen fermentation, methane production, or nutrient utilization. However, given the promising evidence from other studies, more research needs to be conducted to clarify the potential effects of chitosan and naringin in animal production.

          Abstract

          In order to meet consumer needs, the livestock industry is increasingly seeking natural feed additives with the ability to improve the efficiency of nutrient utilization, alternatives to antibiotics, and mitigate methane emissions in ruminants. Chitosan (CHI) is a polysaccharide with antimicrobial capability against protozoa and Gram-positive and -negative bacteria, fungi, and yeasts while naringin (NA) is a flavonoid with antimicrobial and antioxidant properties. First, an in vitro gas production experiment was performed adding 0, 1.5, 3.0 g/kg of CHI and NA under a completely randomized design. The substrate containing forage and concentrate in a 70:30 ratio on a dry matter (DM) basis. Compounds increased the concentration of propionic acid, and a significant reduction in methane production was observed with the inclusion of CHI at 1.5 g/kg in in vitro experiments ( p < 0.001). In a dry matter rumen degradability study for 96 h, there were no differences in potential and effective degradability. In the in vivo study, six crossbred heifers fitted with rumen cannulas were assigned to a 6 × 6 Latin square design according to the following treatments: control (CTL), no additive; chitosan (CHI1, 1.5 g/kg DMI); (CHI2, 3.0 g/kg DMI); naringin (NA1, 1.5 g/kg DMI); (NA2, 3.0 g/kg DMI) and a mixture of CHI and NA (1.5 + 1.5 g/kg DMI) given directly through the rumen cannula. Additives did not affect rumen fermentation ( p > 0.05), DM intake and digestibility of ( p > 0.05), and enteric methane emissions ( p > 0.05). CHI at a concentration of 1.5 g/kg DM in in vitro experiments had a positive effect on fermentation pattern increasing propionate and reduced methane production. In contrast, in the in vivo studies, there was not a positive effect on rumen fermentation, nor in enteric methane production in crossbred heifers fed a basal ration of tropical grass.

          Related collections

          Most cited references71

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition.

          There is a need to standardize the NDF procedure. Procedures have varied because of the use of different amylases in attempts to remove starch interference. The original Bacillus subtilis enzyme Type IIIA (XIA) no longer is available and has been replaced by a less effective enzyme. For fiber work, a new enzyme has received AOAC approval and is rapidly displacing other amylases in analytical work. This enzyme is available from Sigma (Number A3306; Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, MO). The original publications for NDF and ADF (43, 53) and the Agricultural Handbook 379 (14) are obsolete and of historical interest only. Up to date procedures should be followed. Triethylene glycol has replaced 2-ethoxyethanol because of reported toxicity. Considerable development in regard to fiber methods has occurred over the past 5 yr because of a redefinition of dietary fiber for man and monogastric animals that includes lignin and all polysaccharides resistant to mammalian digestive enzymes. In addition to NDF, new improved methods for total dietary fiber and nonstarch polysaccharides including pectin and beta-glucans now are available. The latter are also of interest in rumen fermentation. Unlike starch, their fermentations are like that of cellulose but faster and yield no lactic acid. Physical and biological properties of carbohydrate fractions are more important than their intrinsic composition.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Antimicrobial properties of chitosan and mode of action: a state of the art review.

            Owing to its high biodegradability, and nontoxicity and antimicrobial properties, chitosan is widely-used as an antimicrobial agent either alone or blended with other natural polymers. To broaden chitosan's antimicrobial applicability, comprehensive knowledge of its activity is necessary. The paper reviews the current trend of investigation on antimicrobial activities of chitosan and its mode of action. Chitosan-mediated inhibition is affected by several factors can be classified into four types as intrinsic, environmental, microorganism and physical state, according to their respective roles. In this review, different physical states are comparatively discussed. Mode of antimicrobial action is discussed in parts of the active compound (chitosan) and the target (microorganisms) collectively and independently in same complex. Finally, the general antimicrobial applications of chitosan and perspectives about future studies in this field are considered. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Methane emissions from cattle.

              Increasing atmospheric concentrations of methane have led scientists to examine its sources of origin. Ruminant livestock can produce 250 to 500 L of methane per day. This level of production results in estimates of the contribution by cattle to global warming that may occur in the next 50 to 100 yr to be a little less than 2%. Many factors influence methane emissions from cattle and include the following: level of feed intake, type of carbohydrate in the diet, feed processing, addition of lipids or ionophores to the diet, and alterations in the ruminal microflora. Manipulation of these factors can reduce methane emissions from cattle. Many techniques exist to quantify methane emissions from individual or groups of animals. Enclosure techniques are precise but require trained animals and may limit animal movement. Isotopic and nonisotopic tracer techniques may also be used effectively. Prediction equations based on fermentation balance or feed characteristics have been used to estimate methane production. These equations are useful, but the assumptions and conditions that must be met for each equation limit their ability to accurately predict methane production. Methane production from groups of animals can be measured by mass balance, micrometeorological, or tracer methods. These techniques can measure methane emissions from animals in either indoor or outdoor enclosures. Use of these techniques and knowledge of the factors that impact methane production can result in the development of mitigation strategies to reduce methane losses by cattle. Implementation of these strategies should result in enhanced animal productivity and decreased contributions by cattle to the atmospheric methane budget.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Animals (Basel)
                Animals (Basel)
                animals
                Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI
                MDPI
                2076-2615
                28 May 2021
                June 2021
                : 11
                : 6
                : 1599
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Yucatan, Merida C.P. 97100, Mexico; jeyder96@ 123456gmail.com (J.I.A.-C.); caperez@ 123456correo.uady.mx (C.F.A.-P.); luis.ramirez@ 123456correo.uady.mx (L.R.-A.); ssolorio@ 123456correo.uady.mx (F.J.S.-S.)
                [2 ]National Institute for Forestry, Agriculture and Livestock Research—INIFAP, Experimental Field Valle del Guadiana, Durango C.P. 34170, Mexico
                [3 ]National Center for Disciplinary Research in Physiology and Animal Breeding, National Institute for Forestry, Crops, and Livestock Research—Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Ajuchitlan C.P. 76280, Mexico; denis_montoya@ 123456yahoo.com.mx
                [4 ]National Technologic of Mexico, Technological Institute of Valle del Guadiana, Durango C.P. 34371, Mexico; hetoes99@ 123456yahoo.com.mx
                [5 ]Institute of Silviculture and Wood Industry, National Council of Science and Technology–Durango State Juarez University, Durango CP 34126, Mexico; gerardo.pamanes@ 123456gmail.com
                [6 ]College of the Southern Border (ECOSUR), Livestock and Environment, San Cristobal de las Casas C.P. 29290, Mexico; saraudea@ 123456gmail.com
                [7 ]International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Palmira C.P. 763537, Colombia; j.arango@ 123456cgiar.org
                [8 ]National Technologic of Mexico, Technological Institute of Conkal, Conkal C.P. 97345, Mexico; pineiroiamc@ 123456gmail.com
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: rafax77@ 123456hotmail.com (R.J.-O.); kvera@ 123456correo.uady.mx (J.C.K.-V.)
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2171-1357
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0640-608X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3340-8558
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1384-8639
                Article
                animals-11-01599
                10.3390/ani11061599
                8226738
                34071608
                d6980c61-82cb-4932-9586-e6ecf2cb1d8c
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 30 March 2021
                : 21 May 2021
                Categories
                Article

                additive,flavonoid,chitin,antimicrobial action,greenhouse gases

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content1,020

                Cited by4

                Most referenced authors1,249