Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Applied and Environmental Microbiology logoLink to Applied and Environmental Microbiology
. 1986 Mar;51(3):622–629. doi: 10.1128/aem.51.3.622-629.1986

Microbiological evaluation of the intraruminal in sacculus digestion technique.

J H Meyer, R I Mackie
PMCID: PMC238929  PMID: 3963812

Abstract

The influence of nature of the feed sample, feeding frequency and pore size on the influx of bacteria and protozoa into synthetic fiber bags suspended in the rumens of sheep fed different diets was studied. Counts of total culturable bacteria in bags with a pore size of 10 microns were less than 30% of the ruminal counts for animals that were fed the lucerne hay and high-roughage diets. The maximum count (62 and 82% of the ruminal count) for these specific diets was obtained by using bags with a pore size of 53 microns. Protozoal counts in bags with pore sizes of 30 and 53 microns were equal to or higher than the ruminal counts for the lucerne hay and high-roughage diets but less than half of the ruminal count for the low-roughage diet. An interaction between incubation time, feeding frequency of the host animals, and the microbial populations developing inside the bags was also demonstrated. The results clearly show that the microbial population inside the bag differed from that of the surrounding ruminal ingesta and that caution must be taken in interpreting results on feed evaluation and especially on rates of degradation when using the in sacculus technique. Factors influencing the influx of bacteria and protozoa into bags with different pore sizes and containing a variety of substrates are discussed together with suggestions for the use of this technique.

Full text

PDF
622

Images in this article

623Image
on p.623
628Image
on p.628

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Coleman G. S. Rumen ciliate protozoa. Adv Parasitol. 1980;18:121–173. doi: 10.1016/s0065-308x(08)60399-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. EADIE J. M., HOBSON P. N. Effect of the presence or absence of rumen ciliate protozoa on the total rumen bacterial count in lambs. Nature. 1962 Feb 3;193:503–505. doi: 10.1038/193503a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Figroid W., Hale W. H., Theurer B. An evaluation of the nylon bag technique for estimating rumen of grains. J Anim Sci. 1972 Jul;35(1):113–120. doi: 10.2527/jas1972.351113x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Forsberg C. W., Lam K. Use of adenosine 5'-triphosphate as an indicator of the microbiota biomass in rumen contents. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1977 Mar;33(3):528–537. doi: 10.1128/aem.33.3.528-537.1977. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Mathers J. C., Miller E. L. Quantitative studies of food protein degradation and the energetic efficiency of microbial protein synthesis in the rumen of sheep given chopped lucerne and rolled barley. Br J Nutr. 1981 May;45(3):587–604. doi: 10.1079/bjn19810137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Playne M. J., McLeod M. N., Dekker R. F. Digestion of the dry matter, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur, calcium and detergent-fibre fractions of the seed and pod of Stylosanthes humilis contained in terylene bags in the bovine rumen. J Sci Food Agric. 1972 Aug;23(8):925–932. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.2740230803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Russell J. B., Baldwin R. L. Substrate preferences in rumen bacteria: evidence of catabolite regulatory mechanisms. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1978 Aug;36(2):319–329. doi: 10.1128/aem.36.2.319-329.1978. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Russell J. B., Sniffen C. J., Van Soest P. J. Effect of carbohydrate limitation on degradation and utilization of casein by mixed rumen bacteria. J Dairy Sci. 1983 Apr;66(4):763–775. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(83)81856-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Teather R. M., Mahadevan S., Erfle J. D., Sauer F. D. Negative correlation between protozoal and bacterial levels in rumen samples and its relation to the determination of dietary effects on the rumen microbial population. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1984 Mar;47(3):566–570. doi: 10.1128/aem.47.3.566-570.1984. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. WARNER A. C. Some factors influencing the rumen microbial population. J Gen Microbiol. 1962 Apr;28:129–146. doi: 10.1099/00221287-28-1-129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Weakley D. C., Stern M. D., Satter L. D. Factors affecting disappearance of feedstuffs from bags suspended in the rumen. J Anim Sci. 1983 Feb;56(2):493–507. doi: 10.2527/jas1983.562493x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Applied and Environmental Microbiology are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES