Assessment of the Effects of Cinnamon Leaf Oil on Rumen Microbial Fermentation Using Two Continuous Culture Systems
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Two continuous culture (CC) systems, the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec) and a dual-flow (DF) fermenter, were used to evaluate effects of the essential oil from cinnamon leaf (CIN) on rumen microbial fermentation. Incubations (d 1 through 8 for adaptation and d 9 through 16 for sampling) were conducted concurrently in the 2 systems, with CIN added at 0 (control) and 500 mg/L of rumen fluid culture. Eight Rusitec (920 mL; dilution rate = 2.9%/h) and 6 DF (1,300 mL; dilution rate = 6.3%/h) fermenters were randomly assigned to treatment. Inoculum was prepared from 4 ruminally cannulated lactating Holstein cows fed a total mixed ration consisting of 51% forage and 49% concentrate (dry matter basis). Ruminal pH, total volatile fatty acid (VFA) concentration, and diet digestibility were reduced by CIN addition in the Rusitec but were not affected by CIN administration in the DF. The addition of CIN in the Rusitec decreased apparent N disappearance, NH3-N concentration, and molar proportions of branched-chain VFA. In contrast, in the DF no effect of CIN was observed on apparent N degradation, NH3-N concentration, and molar proportion of branched-chain VFA. In the Rusitec, the molar proportion of acetate was similar between treatments on d 9 and 13, but was lower from d 10 to 12 and higher on d 14 to 16 with CIN than with control (interaction of treatment x sampling day). The molar proportion of acetate remained unaffected by CIN addition in the DF. In both CC systems, the molar proportion of propionate was decreased whereas that of butyrate was increased by CIN addition. In the DF, CIN decreased microbial N flow and efficiency of microbial protein synthesis. Protozoa numbers were lower with CIN than with control in both CC fermenters. In the Rusitec, CIN increased 15N enrichment in total bacterial fractions, but no effect was observed on the production of microbial N. This study showed that CIN exhibited antimicrobial activity in both CC systems, but the effects were more pronounced in the Rusitec than in the DF system. These differences are likely a reflection of the higher dilution rate in the DF resulting in a lower effective concentration of CIN than in Rusitec. Based on these changes in rumen microbial fermentation, supplementation of CIN at the concentration evaluated in this study may not be nutritionally beneficial to ruminants.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».