000062025 001__ 62025
000062025 005__ 20190709135437.0
000062025 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.5424/sjar/2017152-10753
000062025 0248_ $$2sideral$$a101101
000062025 037__ $$aART-2017-101101
000062025 041__ $$aeng
000062025 100__ $$aAmanzougarene, Z.
000062025 245__ $$aIn vitro fermentation pattern and acidification potential of different sources of carbohydrates for ruminants given high concentrate diets
000062025 260__ $$c2017
000062025 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000062025 5203_ $$aThe in vitro fermentation pattern of five sources of carbohydrates of differing nature (maize grain, MZ; sucrose, SU; wheat bran, WB; sugarbeet pulp, BP; and citrus pulp, CT) under conditions of high concentrate diets for ruminants was studied. A first 8 h incubation trial was performed under optimal pH using inoculum from ewes given a fibrous diet, to compare fermentative characteristics of substrates. As planned, incubation pH ranged within 6.3 to 6.6. The gas produced from CT was higher than MZ, SU and BP from 4 and 6 h onwards, and at 8 h, respectively (p<0.05). There were no differences (p>0.05) on total volatile fatty acid (VFA) concentration, nor on acetate or propionate proportions, but butyrate was lowest (p<0.05) with CT and BP. The second incubation trial was performed in a poorly-buffered medium, with inoculum from ewes given a concentrate diet. All substrates showed a gradual drop of pH, being lowest with SU after 4 h (p<0.05). Throughout the incubation, gas production was highest with CT and lowest with MZ and BP (p<0.05). Total 8 h VFA concentration was higher with CT than BP, SU and MZ (p<0.05). Acetate proportion was higher, and that of propionate lower, with BP than WB (p<0.05), butyrate proportion being higher with MZ and WB than with BP and CT (p<0.05). Lactic acid concentration was higher (p<0.05) with SU than WB and BP. Fermentation characteristics and acidification potential of feeds depend on the nature of their carbohydrate fraction, and must be considered for practical applications.
000062025 536__ $$9info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MEC/FPU15-01960$$9info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MICINN/AGL2013-46820
000062025 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby$$uhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/
000062025 590__ $$a0.811$$b2017
000062025 591__ $$aAGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY$$b29 / 56 = 0.518$$c2017$$dQ3$$eT2
000062025 592__ $$a0.37$$b2017
000062025 593__ $$aAgronomy and Crop Science$$c2017$$dQ2
000062025 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000062025 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0003-3927-9793$$aYuste, S.$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000062025 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-8753-8887$$ade Vega, A.$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000062025 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-0712-1185$$aFondevila, M.$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000062025 7102_ $$12008$$2700$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Produc.Animal Cienc.Ali.$$cÁrea Producción Animal
000062025 773__ $$g15, 2 (2017), e0602 [8 pp]$$pSpan. j. agric. res.$$tSpanish Journal of Agricultural Research$$x1695-971X
000062025 8564_ $$s390361$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/62025/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000062025 8564_ $$s112969$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/62025/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000062025 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:62025$$particulos$$pdriver
000062025 951__ $$a2019-07-09-11:34:42
000062025 980__ $$aARTICLE