IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlcjs/v58y2013i6id6822-cjas.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the effects of six essential oils on fermentation and biohydrogenation in in vitro rumen batch cultures

Author

Listed:
  • M. Gunal

    (Department of Animal Science, Süleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey)

  • A. Ishlak

    (Department of Animal Science, Food and Nutrition, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, USA)

  • A.A. Abughazaleh

    (Department of Animal Science, Food and Nutrition, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, USA)

Abstract

The effects of six essential oils (EO) on rumen fermentation and biohydrogenation were evaluated under in vitro conditions. Three doses (125, 250, and 500 mg/l) of EO were evaluated using in vitro 24 h batch culture of rumen fluid with a 55 : 45 forage : concentrate diet. Treatments were control (CON), control with Siberian fir needle oil (FNO), citronella oil (CTO), rosemary oil (RMO), sage oil (SAO), white thyme oil (WTO), and clove oil (CLO). Treatments were incubated in triplicate in 125 ml flasks containing 500 mg of finely ground total mixed ration (TMR), 25 mg of soybean oil, 10 ml of the strained ruminal fluid, 40 ml of media, and 2 ml of reducing solution. After 24 h, the pH was determined and samples were collected to analyze ammonia N, volatile fatty acids (VFA), and fatty acids (FA). Cultures pH was not affected by EO averaging 6.6 ± 0.2. In general, high EO doses reduced the total VFA concentration except for SAO and RMO. Relative to CON, all EO decreased (P < 0.05) ammonia N concentrations except for the highest dose of WTO. Except for SAO, EO did not modify acetate to propionate ratio. Relative to CON, the addition of CTO and FNO increased (P < 0.05) the proportions of isobutyrate and decreased (P < 0.05) the proportions of valerate and isovalerate. The concentrations (mg/culture) of C18:0 and C18:1 trans FA decreased (P < 0.05) with CTO, FNO, RMO, and SAO relative to CON. Most tested EO in this study had little to no effects on conjugated linoleic acids (CLA), and linoleic and linolenic acids concentrations. In conclusion, results from this study showed that except for effects on ammonia N, EO tested in this study had moderate effects on rumen fermentation. The reduction in the formation of trans FA and C18:0 with some EO may indicate shifts in the biohydrogenation pathways toward the formation of other unidentified intermediate FA.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Gunal & A. Ishlak & A.A. Abughazaleh, 2013. "Evaluating the effects of six essential oils on fermentation and biohydrogenation in in vitro rumen batch cultures," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 58(6), pages 243-252.
  • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjs:v:58:y:2013:i:6:id:6822-cjas
    DOI: 10.17221/6822-CJAS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cjas.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/6822-CJAS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: http://cjas.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/6822-CJAS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/6822-CJAS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. K. Mikešová & H. Härtlová & L. Zita & E. Chmelíková & M. Hůlková & R. Rajmon, 2014. "Effect of evening primrose oil on biochemical parameters of thoroughbred horses under maximal training conditions," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(10), pages 488-493.
    2. K. Karásková & P. Suchý & E. Straková, 2015. "Current use of phytogenic feed additives in animal nutrition: a review," Czech Journal of Animal Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 60(12), pages 521-530.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjs:v:58:y:2013:i:6:id:6822-cjas. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.