Advertisement

Tropical Animal Health and Production

, Volume 51, Issue 2, pp 363–368 | Cite as

Ruminal and morphometric parameters of the rumen and intestines of sheep fed with increasing levels of spineless cactus (Nopalea cochenillifera Salm-Dyck)

  • Talma Jordana Lima
  • Roberto Germano CostaEmail author
  • Geovergue Rodrigues de Medeiros
  • Ariosvaldo Nunes de Medeiros
  • Neila Lidiany Ribeiro
  • Juliana Silva de Oliveira
  • Ricardo Romão Guerra
  • Francisco Fernando Ramos de Carvalho
Regular Articles

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the ruminal parameters (pH, N-NH3, and microbial protein) and morphometry of the rumen and intestine of sheep fed with a diet containing four different levels of the spineless cactus variety, Baiana. The experiment was conducted at the National Semi-Arid Institute in Campina Grande, PB, Brazil. A total of 40 male sheep submitted to the confinement regime were used in a completely randomized design with four treatments (0, 15, 30, and 45% dry matter basis) and ten replicates, with an initial body weight of 23.7 ± 3.08 kg. Experimental diets were composed of ground corn, soybean meal, urea, mineral supplement, limestone, Tifton 85 hay, and spineless cactus of the Baiana variety. The pH, ammonia nitrogen, and microbial protein were evaluated in the ruminal fluid, alongside the morphometric characteristics of the rumen and intestine. While the addition of the spineless cactus did not affect N-NH3, it caused a linear reduction in the ruminal pH following 4 h of feeding, and also increased the microbial protein. In addition, it stimulated a reduction in the height of the papillae and the muscle layer of the rumen, and induced the mucosal height in the intestine to increase. The addition of up to 30% of spineless cactus in the diet of sheep without a defined breed did not alter the N-NH3, pH, and ruminal histology, but it did increase the production of microbial protein and intestinal mucosa.

Keywords

Lambs Papilla height Ruminal histology Spineless cacti 

Notes

Funding information

The authors would like to thank CAPES (Coordination for Improvement of Higher Level Personnel) for financing the project and the Federal University of Paraíba—Brazil (UFPB).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Álvarez-Rodríguez, J., Monleón, E., Sanz, A., Badiola, J.J. and Joy, M., 2012. Rumen fermentation and histology in light lambs as affected by forage supply and lactation length, Research Veterinary Science, 92, 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AOAC, 2005, Official methods of analysis of the AOAC International, 18th ed, Latimer, G.W., Horwitz, W. (Eds.) Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  3. Batista, A. M. V., Ribeiro neto, A. C., Lucena, R. B., Santos, D. C., Dubeux J. B. and Mustafa, A. F., 2009. Chemical Composition and Ruminal Degradability of Spineless Cactus Grown in Northeastern Brazil, Rangeland Ecology & Management, 62,3, 297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bispo, S. V., Ferreira, M. A., Véras, A. S. C., Batista, A. M. V., Pessoa, R.A. S. and Bleuel, M. P., 2007. The ingestive behavior of lactating cows and sheep fed diets with Spineless cactus, Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 36, 1902–1909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradford, M.M., 1976. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding, Analytical Biochemistry, 72, 248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cavalcanti, M.C.A., Batista, A.M.V., Guim, A., Lira, M.A., Ribeiro, V.L. and Ribeiro Neto, A.C., 2008. Intake and ingestive behavior of sheep and goats fed with cactus pear (Opuntia ficus-indica Mill) and prickly pear (Opuntia sp.), Acta Scientiarum Animal Sciences. 30, 173–179.Google Scholar
  7. Cavalcanti, L.F.L., Borges, I., Silva, V.L., Silva, F.V., Sá, H.C.M., Maciel, I.C.F., Paula, F.A.P., Costa, E. H. O., 2014. Morphology of pre-stomach and ruminal papillae of growing Santa Inês female lambs under two nutritional schemes. Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira, 34, 374–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chaney, A. L., and Marbach, E. P, 1962. Modified reagents for determination of urea and ammonia, Clinical Chemistry, 8, 130–132.Google Scholar
  9. Costa, S.F., Pereira, M.N., Melo, L.Q., Resende Júnior, J.C. and Chaves, M.L., 2008. Lactate, propionate and, butyrate induced morphological alterations on calf ruminal mucosa and epidermis - I Histologycals aspects, Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia, 60, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duarte, K. F., Junqueira, O. M., Borges, L. L., Santos, E. T., Marques, R. H., Quadros, T. C. O., Domingues, C. H. F., 2012. Performance and duodenum morphometry of broiler chickens submitted to different metabolizable energy levels and feed programs at 42 to 57 days of age, Ciência Animal Brasileira, 13,  https://doi.org/10.5216/cab.v13i2.9781.
  11. Dusková, D. and Marounek, M., 2001. Fermentation of pectin and glucose, and activity of pectin-degrading enzymes in the rumen bacterium Lachnospira multiparus, Letters in Applied Microbiology, 33, 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Furlan, R. L., Macari, M. and Faria Filho, D. E., 2011. Anatomy and Physiology of the Gastrointestinal Tract, In: Berchielli, T,T., Pires, A. V., Oliveira, S. G., Nutrition of ruminants, (Funep, Jaboticabal)Google Scholar
  13. Heleno, A. R., Santos, L. M., Miglino, M. A., Peres, J. A., & Guerra, R. R. 2011. Biometry, histology, and morphometry of the digestive system of wild crab-eating fox (Cerdocyon thous). Biotemas 24, 111–119.Google Scholar
  14. Holst, D. O. 1973. Holst filtration apparatus for Van Soest detergent fiber analysis. J. AOAC 56:1352–1356.Google Scholar
  15. Meneghetti, C. C. and Domingues, J. L., 2008. Nutritional characteristics and use of by-products of agroindustry in cattle feed, Revista Eletrônica Nutritime, 5, 512–536.Google Scholar
  16. Mertens, D. R. 1997. Creating a system for meeting the fiber requirements of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 80, 1463–1481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Misra, A. K., Mishra, A. S., Tripathi, M. K., Chaturvedi, O. H., Vaithiyanathan, S., Prasad, R. and Jakhmola, R. C., 2006. Intake, digestion and microbial protein synthesis in sheep on hay supplemented with prickly pear cactus [Opuntia ficus-indica (L,) Mill,] with or without groundnut meal, Small Ruminant Research, 63, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Morais, D., and Vasconcelos, A. 2007. Alternatives to increase nutrient availability in semiarid region of Brasil. Revista Verde, 2, 1–24.Google Scholar
  19. National research council (NRC), 2007. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants, National Academy Press: Washington DC, 292.Google Scholar
  20. Neiva, G. S. M., Mota, D. L., Batista, A. M. V., Sousa-Rodrigues, C. F., 2006. Mucous membrane of the rumen of ovines, fed with Spineless, forrage cactus or palm (Barbary fig) (Opuntia ficus indica Mil): histochemical study by means of light microscopy, International Journal of Morphology, 24, 723–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pessoa, R. A. S., Leão, M. I., Ferreira, M. A., Valadares Filho, S. C., Valadares, R. F. D., and Queiroz, A. C. de, 2009. Nitrogenous compounds balance and microbial protein production in crossbred heifers fed forage cactus, sugar cane bagasse and urea associated to different supplements, Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 38, 941–047.Google Scholar
  22. Santos, F. A. P., 2011. Protein metabolism. In: Berchielli, T. T., Pires, A. V. and Oliveira, S. G. (Ed) Nutrition of ruminants, (Funep, Jaboticabal)Google Scholar
  23. SAS (Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc.), 2009, User’s Guide, Version 9.2, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
  24. Silva, J.F.C., Leão, M.I., 1979. Fundamentos de nutrição de ruminantes. Piracicaba: Livroceres. 380pGoogle Scholar
  25. Sniffen, C. J., O’Connor, J. D., Van Soest, P., 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein availability. Journal of Animal Science, 70, 3562–3577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Suárez, B. J., Van Reenen, C. G., Gerrits, W. J. J., Stockhofe, N., Van Vuuren A. M. and Dijkstra, J., 2006. Effects of Supplementing Concentrates Differing in Carbohydrate Composition in Veal Calf Diets: II. Rumen Development, Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 4376–4386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tegegne, F., Kijora, C. and Peters, K. J., 2007. Study on the optimal level of cactus pear (Opuntia ficus-indica) supplementation to sheep and its contribution as source of water, Small Ruminant Research, 72, 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vieira, E. L., Batista, Â. M. V., Guim, A., Carvalho, F. F., Nascimento, A. C., Araújo, R. F. S. and Mustafa, A. F., 2008. Effects of hay inclusion on intake, in vivo nutriente utilization and ruminal fermentation of goats fed Spineless cactus (Opuntia f’ıcus-indica Mill) based diets, Animal Feed Science and Technology, 141, 199–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wang, Y. H., Xu, M., Wang, F. N., Yu, Z.P., Yao, J. H., Zan, L.S, and Yang, F.X., 2009. Effect of dietary starch on rumen and small intestine morphology and digesta pH in goats, Livestock Science, 122, 48–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang, B., Wang, D., Wu, X., Xai, J., Liu, M., Huang, X., Wu, J., Liu, J., Guan, L., 2017. Effects of dietary physical or nutritional factors on morphology of rumen papillae and transcriptome changes in lactating dairy cows based on three different forage-based diets. BMC Genomics, 18, 353.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-017-3726-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Weiss, W.P. 1999. Energy prediction equations for ruminant feeds. In: Cornell Nutrition conference for feed manufactures, Proceedings … Ithaca: Cornell University, 61, 176–185.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Talma Jordana Lima
    • 1
  • Roberto Germano Costa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Geovergue Rodrigues de Medeiros
    • 2
  • Ariosvaldo Nunes de Medeiros
    • 1
  • Neila Lidiany Ribeiro
    • 1
  • Juliana Silva de Oliveira
    • 1
  • Ricardo Romão Guerra
    • 1
  • Francisco Fernando Ramos de Carvalho
    • 3
  1. 1.Federal University of ParaibaAreiaBrazil
  2. 2.National Institute of Semi-AridCampina GrandeBrazil
  3. 3.Rural Federal University of PernambucoRecifeBrazil

Personalised recommendations