Compartmentation in the rumen

  • K.-J. Cheng
  • T. A. McAllister
Chapter

Abstract

There is little evidence of a truly random or haphazard behaviour within biological systems. The structures of these systems are usually complex and they have evolved to carry out a variety of functions that ensure the existence and propagation of any given species. In general, the function of a given part of a biological system will depend on the requirements of the system as a whole and this, of course, leads to tissue differentiation in complex organisms. If a particular part of a biological system is to accomplish a specific function, it must usually be separated from other parts of the system. In other words, it must have a boundary and thus constitute a compartment. Such a compartment cannot exist in isolation; it interacts with the enviroment and with other parts of a given biological system. A full understanding of the integrated physiological functions of organs and of their associated microbial populations can only be achieved in terms of the interrelations between different compartments.

Keywords

Microbial Population Rice Straw Microbial Matter Rumen Content Anaerobic Fungus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abe, M. and Iriki, T. (1989). Usi no diaiichiinai zenmouchuu noudo no tokuina nisshyhendou to soreni kakawaru youin ni tuite. Proc. Jap. Soc. Anim. Nutr. Metabol., 33, 77–96.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, M. S. and Mertens, D. R. (1988). Evaluating constraints on fiber digestion by rumen microbes. J. Nutr., 118, 261–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bae, H. D., McAllister, T. A., Kokko, E. G. et al. (1997) Effect of silica on the colonization of rice straw by ruminal bacteria, Anim. Fd Sci. Technol. (in press).Google Scholar
  4. Bauchop, T. (1979). The rumen ciliateEpidinium in primary degradation of plant tissues. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 37, 1217–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Beauchemin, K. A., McAllister, T. A., Dong, Y. et al. (1994). Effects of mastication on digestion of whole cereal grains by cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 72, 236–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Blanchart, G., Durand, M., Barry, J. L. et al. (1989). Interets et limites des fermenteurs a flux semi-continu de type Rusitec dans I’etude des fermentations du rumen. Ann. Zootech., 38, 285–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bogaert, C., Gomez, L., Jouany, J. P. and Jeminet, G. (1989). Effects of the ionophore antibiotics lasalocid and cationomycin on ruminal fermentation in vitro (RUSITEC). Anim. Feed. Sci. Technol., 27, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonhomme, A. (1990). Rumen ciliates: their metabolism and relationships with bacteria and their hosts. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 30, 203–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Briesacher, S. L., May, T., Grigsby, K. N. et al. (1991). Use of DNA probes to monitor nutritional effects on ruminal prokaryotes and Fibrobacter succinogenes S85. J. Anim. Sci., 70, 289–95.Google Scholar
  10. Brink, D. R., Lowry, S. R., Stock, R. A. and Parrott, J. C. (1990). Severity of liver abscesses and efficiency of feed utilization of feedlot cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 68, 1201–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brock, F. M., Forsberg, C. W. and Buchanan-Smith, J. G. (1982). Proteolytic activity of rumen microorganisms and effects of proteinase inhibitors. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 44, 561–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cheng, K.-J. and Costerton, J. W. (1980). Adherent rumen bacteria: their role in the digestion of plant material, urea and epithelial cells. In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants, ed. Y. Ruckebush and P. Thivend. MTP Press, Lancaster, pp. 227–50.Google Scholar
  13. Cheng, K.-J. and Wallace, R. J. (1979). The mechanism of passage of endogenous urea through the rumen wall and the role of ureolytic epithelial bacteria in the urea flux. Br. J. Nutr., 42, 553–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cheng, K.-J., Fay, J. P., Howarth, R. E. and Costerton, J. W. (1980). Sequence of events in the digestion of fresh legume leaves by rumen bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 40, 613–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cheng, K.-J., Stewart, C. S., Dinsdale, D. and Costerton, J. W. (1983/84). Electron microscopy of bacteria involved in the digestion of plant cell walls. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 10, 93–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cheng, K.-J., Forsberg, C. W., Minato, H. and Costerton, J. W. (1991). Microbial ecology and physiology of feed degradation within the rumen. In Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, ed. T. Tsuda, Y. Sasaki and R. Kawashima. Academic Press, Toronto, pp. 595–624.Google Scholar
  17. Cheng, K.-J., McAllister, T. A., Mathiesen, S. D. et al. (1993). Seasonal changes in the adherent microflora of the rumen in high-arctic Svalbard reindeer. Can. J. Microbiol., 39, 101–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cheng, K.-J., McAllister, T. A. and Costerton, J. W. (1995). Biofilms of the ruminant digestive tract. In Microbial Biofilms, ed. H. M. Lappin-Scott and J. W. Costerton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 221–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cherney, J. H. (1990). Normal and brown-midrib mutations in relation to improved lignocel-lulose utilization. In Microbial and Plant Opportunities to Improve Lignocellulose Utilization by Ruminants, ed. D. E. Akin, L. G. Ljungdahl, J. R. Wilson and P. J. Harris. Elsevier Science Publishing Company Inc., New York, pp. 205–14.Google Scholar
  20. Craig, A. M. (1995). Detoxification of plant and fungal toxins by ruminant microbiota. In Ruminant Physiology: Digestion, Metabolism, Growth and Reproduction, ed. W. v. Engelhardt, S. Leonhard-Marek, G. Breves and D. Giesecke. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, pp. 271–88.Google Scholar
  21. Craig, W. M., Brown, D. R., Broderick, G. A. and Ricker, D. B. (1984). Polysaccharide levels of fluid and particulate microbes.Can. J Anim. Sci., 64 (Suppl.), 62–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Craig, W. M., Broderick, G. A. and Ricker, D. B. (1987). Quantitation of microorganisms associated with the particulate phase of ruminal ingesta. J. Nutr., 117, 56–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Czerkawski, J. W. (1980). Compartmentation in the rumen. Hannah Res. Inst. Rep., 69–85.Google Scholar
  24. Czerkawski, J. W. (1983). Microbial fermentation in the rumen. Proc. Nutr. Soc., 43, 101–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Czerkawski, J. W. (1986a).Introduction to Rumen Studies. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 51–62.Google Scholar
  26. Czerkawski, J. W. (1986b). A simple model to describe the flow of large and small particles in the rumen. InNuclear and Related Techniques in Animal Production and Health. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, pp. 485–99.Google Scholar
  27. Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. (1970). Small scale apparatus for studying rumen fermentation in vitro. Lab. Practice, 19, 717–19.Google Scholar
  28. Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. (1977). Design and development of a long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Br. J. Nutr., 38, 371–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. (1979a). Experiments with the long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec); response to supplementation of the rations. Br. J. Nutr., 42, 217–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. (1979b). Experiments with the long-term rumen simulation technique (Rusitec); use of soluble food and an inert solid matrix. Br. J. Nutr., 42, 229–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. (1982). Distribution and changes in urease (EC 3.5.1.5) activity in the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec).Br. J. Nutr., 47, 331–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Davies, D. R., Theodorou, M. K., Brooks, A. E. and Trinci, A. P. J. (1993). Influence of drying on the survival of anaerobic fungi in rumen digesta and faeces of cattle. FEMS Microbiol. Lett., 106, 59–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Faichney, G. J. (1993). Digesta flow. In Quantitative Aspects of Ruminant Digestion and Metabolism, ed. J. M. Forbes and J. France. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 53–85.Google Scholar
  34. Finlay, B. J., Esteban, G., Clarke, K. J. et al. (1994). Some rumen ciliates have endosymbiotic methanogens. FEMS Microbiol Lett., 117, 157–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Flint, H. J. and Forsberg, C. W. (1995). Polysaccharide degradation in the rumen: biochemistry and genetics. In Ruminant Physiology: Digestion, Metabolism, Growth and Reproduction, ed. W. v. Engelhardt, S. Leonhard-Marek, G. Breves and D. Giesecke. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, pp. 43–70.Google Scholar
  36. Fonty, G. and Joblin, K. N. (1991). Rumen anaerobic fungi: their role and interactions with other rumen microorganisms in relation to fiber digestion. In Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, ed. T. Tsuda, Y. Sasaki and R. Kawashima. Academic Press, Toronto, pp. 655–80.Google Scholar
  37. Fonty, G., Gouet, P., Jouany, J. P. and Senaud, J. (1987). Establishment of the microflora and anaerobic fungi in the rumen of lambs. J. Gen. Microbiol., 133, 1835–43.Google Scholar
  38. Forsberg, C. W., Beverage, T. J. and Hellstrom, A. (1981). Cellulose and xylanase release from Bacteroides succinogenes and its importance in the rumen environment. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 42, 886–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Gong, J. and Forsberg, C. W. (1989). Factors affecting adhesion of Fibrobacter succinogenes subsp.succinogenes S85 and adherence-defective mutants to cellulose. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 55, 3039–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Goplen, B. P., Howarth, R. E. and Lees, G. L. (1993). Selection of alfalfa for a lower initial rate of digestion and corresponding changes in epidermal and mesophyll cell wall thickness. Can. J. Plant Sci., 73, 111–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hillman, K., Williams, A. G. and Lloyd, D. (1991). Evaluation of matrices in the rumen simulation technique (RUSITEC) for the maintenance of ciliate protozoa. Lett. Appl. Microbiol., 12, 129–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ho, Y. W. and Barr, D. J. S. (1995). Classification of anaerobic gut fungi from herbivores with emphasis on rumen fungi from Malaysia. Mycologia, 87, 655–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Howarth, R. E., Cheng, K.-J., Majak, W. and Costerton, J. W. (1986). Ruminant bloat. In Control of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, ed. L. P. Milligan, W. L. Grovum and A. Dobson. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 516–27.Google Scholar
  44. Huntington, G. B., Zetina, E. J., Whitt, J. M. and Potts, W. (1996). Effects of dietary concentrate level on nutrient absorption, liver metabolism, and urea kinetics of beef steers fed isonitrogenous and isoenergetic diets. J. Anim. Sci., 74, 908–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Hyden, S. (1961). Determination of the amount of fluid in the reticulo-rumen of the sheep and its rate of passage to the omasum. Lantbr Hogsk. Annlr., 27, 51–79.Google Scholar
  46. Kanoe, M., Imagawa, H., Toda, M. et al. (1976). Bacteriology of bovine hepatic abscesses. Jap. J. Vet. Sci., 38, 263–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kennedy, P. M. and Milligan, L. P. (1980). The degradation and utilization of endogenous urea in the gastrointestinal tract of ruminants: a review. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 60, 205–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Krishna, G., Czerkawski, J. W. and Breckenridge, G. (1986). Fermentation of various preparations of spent hops (Humulus lupulus L.) using the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Agric. Wastes, 17, 99–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kudo, H., Cheng, K.-J. and Costerton, J. W. (1986a). Electron microscopic study of the methylcellulose-mediated detachment of cellulolytic rumen bacteria from cellulose fibres. Can. J. Microbiol., 33, 267–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kudo, H., Cheng, K.-J. and Costerton, J. W. (1986b). Interactions between Treponema bryantii and cellulolytic bacteria in the in vitro degradation of straw cellulose. Can. J. Microbiol., 33, 244–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kung, L. Jr and Hession, A. O. (1995). Preventing in vitro lactate accumulation in ruminal fermentations by inoculation withMegasphaera elsdenii. J. Anim. Sci., 73, 250–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Legay-Carmier, F. and Bauchart, D. (1989). Distribution of bacteria in the rumen contents of dairy cows given a diet supplemented with soya-bean oil. Br. J Nutr., 61, 725–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mansfield, H. R., Endres, M. I. and Stern, M. D. (1995). Comparison of microbial fermentation in the rumen of dairy cows and dual flow continuous culture. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 55, 47–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mathison, G. W., Okine, E. K., Vaage, A. S. et al. (1995). Current understanding of the contribution of the propulsive activities in the forestomach to the flow of digesta. In Ruminant Physiology: Digestion, Metabolism, Growth and Reproduction, ed. W. v. Engelhardt, S. Leonhard-Marek, G. Breves and D. Giesecke. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, pp. 23–41.Google Scholar
  55. McAllister, T. A., Moustafa, S. M. S., Cheng, K.-J., et al. (1994a). Effect of salinomycin on fermentation and nitrogen metabolism in the artificial rumen. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 74, 575–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. McAllister, T. A., Bae, H. D., Jones, G. A. and Cheng, K.-J. (1994b). Microbial attachment and feed digestion in the rumen. J. Anim. Sci., 72, 3004–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. McAllister, T. A., Okine, E. K., Mathison, G. W. and Cheng, K.-J. (1996). Dietary, environmental and microbiological aspects of methane production in ruminants. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 76, 231–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Menke, K. H., Raab, L., Salewski, A. et al. (1979). The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. J. Agric. Sci. (Camb.), 93, 217–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Merry, R. J. and McAllan, A. B. (1983). A comparison of the chemical composition of mixed bacteria harvested from the liquid and solid fractions of rumen digesta. Br. J. Nutr., 50, 701–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Minato, H., Endo, A., Ootomo, Y. and Uemura, T. (1966). Ecological treatise on the rumen fermentation. II. The amylolytic and cellulolytic activities of fractionated bacterial portions attached to the rumen solids. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol., 12, 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mitsumori, M. and Minato, H. (1993). Purification of cellulose-binding proteins 1 and 2 from cell lysate of Fibrobacter succinogenes S85. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol., 39, 361–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Morrison, M., Mackie, R. I. and Kistner, A. (1990). 3-Phenylpropanoic acid improves the affinity ofRuminococcus albus for cellulose in continuous culture. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 56, 3220–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Nocek, J. E. (1997). Bovine acidosis: implications in laminitis. J. Dairy Sci. (submitted).Google Scholar
  64. Orpin, C. G. and Bountiff, L. (1978). Zoospore chemotaxis in the rumen phycomycete Neocallimastix frontalis. J. Gen. Microbiol., 104, 113–22.Google Scholar
  65. Pell, A. N. and Schofield, P. (1993). Microbial adhesion and degradation of plant cell walls. In Forage Cell Wall Structure and Digestibility, ed. H. G. Hung, D. R. Buxton, R. D. Hatfield and J. Ralph. American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI, pp. 397–423.Google Scholar
  66. Pond, K. R., Ellis, W. C., Lascano, C. E. and Akin, D. E. (1987). Fragmentation and flow of grazed coastal bermudagrass through the digestive tract of cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 65, 609–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Roger, V., Fonty, G., Komisarczuk-Bony, S. and Gouet, P. (1990). Effects of physicochemical factors on the adhesion to cellulose avicel of ruminal bacteriaRuminococcus flavefaciens and Fibrobacter succinogenes subsp.succinogenes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 56, 3081–7.Google Scholar
  68. Russell, J. B. and Strobel, H. J. (1993). Microbial energetics. In Quantitative Aspects of Ruminant Digestion and Metabolism, ed. J. M. Forbes and J. France. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 165–86.Google Scholar
  69. Russell, J. B., Onodera, R. and Hino, T. (1991). Ruminal protein fermentation: new perspectives on previous contradictions. In Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, ed. T. Tsuda, Y. Sasaki and R. Kawashima. Academic Press, Toronto, pp. 681–97.Google Scholar
  70. Schofield, P. and Pell, A. N. (1995). Measurement and kinetic analysis of the neutral detergentsoluble carbohydrate fraction of legumes and grasses. J. Anim. Sci., 73, 3455–63.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Skene, I. K. and Brooker, J. D. (1995). Characterization of tannin acylhydrolase activity in the ruminal bacterium Selenomonas ruminantium. Anaerobe, 1, 321–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Stewart, C. S., Dinsdale, D., Cheng, K.-J. and Paniagua, C. (1979). The digestion of straw in the rumen. In Straw Decay and its Effect on Disposal and Utilization, ed. E. Grossbard. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 123–30.Google Scholar
  73. Stewart, C. S., Fevre, M. and Prins, R. A. (1995). Factors affecting fermentation and polymer degradation by anaerobic fungi and the potential for manipulation of rumen function. In Ruminant Physiology: Digestion, Metabolism, Growth and Reproduction, ed. W. v. Engelhardt, S. Leonhard-Marek, G. Breves and D. Giesecke. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, pp. 251–70.Google Scholar
  74. Susmel, P. and Stefanon, B. (1993). Aspects of lignin degradation by rumen microorganisms. J. Biotechnol., 30, 141–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Teather, R. M. and Sauer, F. D. (1988). A naturally compartmented rumen simulation system for the continuous culture of rumen bacteria and protozoa. J. Dairy Sci., 71, 666–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Theodorou, M. K. and France, J. (1993). Rumen microorganisms and their interactions. In Quantitative Aspects of Ruminant Digestion and Metabolism, ed. J. M. Forbes and J. France. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 145–63.Google Scholar
  77. Trinci, A. P. J., Davies, D. R., Gull, K. et al. (1994). Anaerobic fungi in herbivorous animals. Mycol. Res., 98, 129–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ushida, K., Jouany, J. P. and Demeyer, D. I. (1991). Effects of presence or absence of rumen protozoa on the efficiency of utilization of concentrate and fibrous feeds. In Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, ed. T. Tsuda, Y. Sasaki and R. Kawashima. Academic Press, Toronto, pp. 625–54.Google Scholar
  79. Van Milgen, J., Berger, L. L. and Murphy, M. R. (1993). An integrated dynamic model of feed hydration and digestion, and subsequent bacterial mass accumulation in the rumen. Br. J. Nutr., 70, 471–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Van Nevel, D. J. and Demeyer, D. I. (1977). Determination of rumen microbial growth in vitro from 32 P-labelled phosphate incorporation. Br. J. Nutr., 38, 101–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wallace, R. J. (1994). Ruminai microbiology, biotechnology and ruminant nutrition: progress and problems. J. Anim. Sci., 72, 2992–3003.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Wallace, R. J., Cheng, K.-J., Dinsdale, D. and Ørskov, E. R. (1979). An independent microbial flora of the epithelium and its role in the ecomicrobiology of the rumen.Nature (Lond.), 279, 424–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Williams, A. G. and Strachan, N. H. (1984). Polysaccharide-degrading enzymes in microbial populations from the liquid and solid fractions of bovine rumen digesta. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 64(Suppl.), 58–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wubah, D. A., Akin, D. E. and Borneman, W. S. (1993). Biology, fiberdigestion, and enzymology of anaerobic zoosporic fungi. Crit. Rev. Microbiol., 19, 99–155.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Yang, W. (1991). Etude cinetique de la colonisation microbienne des aliments dan le rume du mounton consequences sur la compartimentation de la biomasse et sur sa dynamique de sortie du rumen dans le cas de différents types de rations. Doctoral Thesis, University of Clermont-Ferrand, France.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • K.-J. Cheng
    • 1
  • T. A. McAllister
    • 1
  1. 1.Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaResearch CentreLethbridgeCanada

Personalised recommendations