PMID- 31079907
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20190826
LR  - 20190826
IS  - 1525-3198 (Electronic)
IS  - 0022-0302 (Linking)
VI  - 102
IP  - 7
DP  - 2019 Jul
TI  - Technical note: Evaluation of a novel enzymatic method to predict in situ 
      undigested neutral detergent fiber of forages and nonforage fibrous feeds.
PG  - 6235-6241
LID - S0022-0302(19)30426-6 [pii]
LID - 10.3168/jds.2019-16279 [doi]
AB  - The purpose of this study was to optimize the conditions of a previously proposed 
      enzymatic method used to estimate in situ undigested neutral detergent fiber 
      (uNDF). We used a multi-step enzymatic approach, in which samples were first 
      solubilized in NaOH solutions as a preincubation (PreInc) phase. After rinsing, 
      samples were incubated (24 h at 39 degrees C) in a buffered solution (pH 6) containing 
      hemicellulase, cellulase, and Viscozyme L enzymes (Sigma-Aldrich s.r.l., Milan, 
      Italy), followed by incubation (24 h at 39 degrees C) in a buffered solution (pH 5) 
      containing xylanase. Two sets of experiments were performed: a calibration trial 
      (that tested different PreInc conditions on 9 selected forages) and a validation 
      trial (that verified the results by testing multiple samples of 6 different 
      forage types and a group of fibrous by-products). In the calibration trial, 
      samples (300 mg in Ankom F57 filter bags; Ankom Technology Corp., Fairport, NY) 
      were preincubated at 39 degrees C in a 0.1 M NaOH solution for 90, 180, or 240 min, or in 
      0.2, 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 M NaOH solution for 90 min. The results indicated that the 
      best PreInc method, in terms of intra-laboratory repeatability and estimation of 
      reference in situ values, was 90 min in a 0.2 M NaOH solution. Thus, we used this 
      PreInc condition to determine enzymatic uNDF of 257 samples in the validation 
      trial. Although the selected method generally had good accuracy in predicting in 
      situ uNDF, inconsistencies were noted for certain forage types. Overall, when 
      enzymatic uNDF was used to predict the in situ uNDF of all samples, the 
      regression was satisfactory (intercept = 7.098, slope = 0.920, R(2) = 0.73). The 
      regression models developed for alfalfa hays, corn silages, and small grain 
      silages had also acceptable regression performances and mean square error of 
      prediction (MSEP) values, and the main sources of MSEP variation were error due 
      to incomplete (co)variation and random error. Even when R(2) values were >0.70, 
      the MSEP value of the regression model for grass hays was 149.55, and that for 
      nonforage fibrous feeds was 155.16. Although enzymatic uNDF partially 
      overestimated the in situ uNDF, particularly in grass silages, the proposed 
      procedure seems to be promising for accurately predicting in situ uNDF, because 
      it generally had good repeatability and provided satisfactory estimates of in 
      situ uNDF.
CI  - Copyright (c) 2019 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. 
      All rights reserved.
FAU - Gallo, A
AU  - Gallo A
AD  - Department of Animal Science, Food and Nutrition (DIANA), Faculty of 
      Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Universita Cattolica del Sacro 
      Cuore, 29122 Piacenza, Italy. Electronic address: antonio.gallo@unicatt.it.
FAU - Bruschi, S
AU  - Bruschi S
AD  - Department of Animal Science, Food and Nutrition (DIANA), Faculty of 
      Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Universita Cattolica del Sacro 
      Cuore, 29122 Piacenza, Italy.
FAU - Masoero, F
AU  - Masoero F
AD  - Department of Animal Science, Food and Nutrition (DIANA), Faculty of 
      Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Universita Cattolica del Sacro 
      Cuore, 29122 Piacenza, Italy.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20190510
PL  - United States
TA  - J Dairy Sci
JT  - Journal of dairy science
JID - 2985126R
RN  - 0 (Dietary Fiber)
RN  - 0 (Multienzyme Complexes)
RN  - EC 3.2.1.- (Glycoside Hydrolases)
RN  - EC 3.2.1.- (hemicellulase)
RN  - EC 3.2.1.4 (Cellulase)
MH  - Animal Feed/*analysis
MH  - Animals
MH  - Cattle/*metabolism
MH  - Cellulase/metabolism
MH  - Dietary Fiber/*analysis/*metabolism
MH  - *Digestion
MH  - Female
MH  - Glycoside Hydrolases/metabolism
MH  - Italy
MH  - Medicago sativa/metabolism
MH  - Multienzyme Complexes/metabolism
MH  - Reproducibility of Results
MH  - Rumen
MH  - Silage/analysis
MH  - Zea mays/metabolism
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - in vitro method
OT  - indigestible neutral detergent fiber
OT  - nutritional model
OT  - silage
EDAT- 2019/05/14 06:00
MHDA- 2019/08/27 06:00
CRDT- 2019/05/14 06:00
PHST- 2019/01/10 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2019/03/06 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2019/05/14 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2019/08/27 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2019/05/14 06:00 [entrez]
AID - S0022-0302(19)30426-6 [pii]
AID - 10.3168/jds.2019-16279 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - J Dairy Sci. 2019 Jul;102(7):6235-6241. doi: 10.3168/jds.2019-16279. Epub 2019 
      May 10.