Chemical composition, fractionation of carbohydrates and nitrogen compounds, ruminal degradation kinetics, and in vitro gas production of cactus pear genotypes

André Luiz Rodrigues Magalhães; Ana Lúcia Teodoro; Leandro Pereira de Oliveira; Glayciane Costa Gois; Fleming Sena Campos; Albericio Pereira de Andrade; Airon Aparecido Silva de Melo; Daniel Bezerra do Nascimento; Wanderson Alves da Silva

doi:10.1590/1809-6891v22e-69338

Authors

André Luiz Rodrigues Magalhães Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE), Garanhuns, Pernambuco, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2211-6795
Ana Lúcia Teodoro Institutuo Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Piauí (IFPI), Corrente, Piauí, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2752-6737
Leandro Pereira de Oliveira Universidade Federal da Paraíba (UFPB), Areia, Paraíba, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3014-0915
Glayciane Costa Gois Universidade Federal do Vale do São Francisco (UNIVASF), Petrolina, Pernambuco, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4624-1825
Fleming Sena Campos 1Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE), Garanhuns, Pernambuco, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9027-3210
Albericio Pereira de Andrade 1Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE), Garanhuns, Pernambuco, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1223-394X
Airon Aparecido Silva de Melo 1Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE), Garanhuns, Pernambuco, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7527-1081
Daniel Bezerra do Nascimento 1Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE), Garanhuns, Pernambuco, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6704-2289
Wanderson Alves da Silva Universidade Federal de Alagoas (UFAL), Arapiraca, Alagoas, Brasil https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1474-3561

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-6891v22e-69338

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the chemical composition, fractionation of carbohydrates and nitrogen compounds, degradation parameters, and in vitro ruminal fermentation of cactus pear genotypes. The experiment was conducted in a completely randomized design with 4 cactus pear genotypes and 4 replicates. The evaluated cactus pear genotypes were: Miúda (Nopalea cochenillifera Salm Dyck), IPA Sertânia (Nopalea cochenillifera), Gigante (Opuntia ficus indica Mill), and Orelha de Elefante Mexicana (Opuntia stricta Haw), all in natura. Samples were randomly collected at different points in the experimental area. Whole plants were collected 24 months after field crop establishment. N. cochenillifera Salm Dyck presented the highest dry matter, acid detergent insoluble protein, non-fibrous carbohydrate, total digestible nutrients, digestible energy, total carbohydrates, and fractions A + B1 (P<0.05), while presenting lower neutral detergent fiber corrected for ash and protein, acid detergent fiber, and cellulose in relation to the other genotypes studied (P<0.05). The in vitro true digestibility of neutral detergent fiber was high for the genotypes N. cochenillifera Salm Dyck and N. cochenillifera Dyck, which also presented high in vitro total gas production (P<0.05). The cactus pear genotypes show adequate chemical characteristics to be composed part of diets offered to ruminants. However, supplementation is necessary to increase the dry matter and fiber contents. The Nopalea cochenillifera Salm Dyck genotype presented the highest proportions of total digestible nutrients, non-fibrous carbohydrates, non-protein nitrogen, unavailable nitrogen fraction total, and high gas production in relation to the other analyzed genotypes 24 months after field crop establishment.
Keywords: Degradability; Digestibility; in vitro fermentation; Nopalea; Opuntia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alves FAL, Andrade AP, Bruno RLA, Santos DC, Magalhães ALR, Silva DS. Chemical and nutritional variability of cactus pear cladodes, general Opuntia and Nopalea. Am. J. Food Techn. 2017; 12(1):25-34. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3923/ajft.2017.25.34.

Alvalá RCS, Cunha APMA, Brito SSB, Seluchi ME, Marengo JA, Moraes OLL, Carvalho MA. Drought monitoring in the Brazilian Semiarid region. An. Acad. Bras. Ci. 2019; 9(1):e20170209. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201720170209.

Magalhães ALR, Sousa DR, Nascimento Júnior JRS, Gois GC, Campos FS, Santos KC, Nascimento DB, Oliveira LP. Intake, digestibility and rumen parameters in sheep fed with common bean residue and cactus pear. Biol. Rhyt. Res. 2019a; 50(1): 1-11. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/09291016.2019.1592351.

Louhaichi M, Kumar S, Tiwari S, Islam M, Hassan S, Yadav OP, Dayal D, Moyo H, Dev R, Sarker A. Adoption and utilization of cactus pear in South Asia—Smallholder farmers’ perceptions. Sustain. 2018; 10(10):1-15. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103625.

Mendoza PV, Sousa TC, Santos MVF, Mendoza OVV, Dubeux Junior JCB, Lira MA. Organic matter fertilization improves morphological variables in Nopalea cochenillifera Salm Dyck cv. Miúda grown as forage in Pernambuco, Brazil. Rev. Mex. Ci. Pec. 2019; 10(3):756-766. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v10i3.4386.

Alves FAL, Santos DC, Silva SMS, Silva MC, Mello DR. Metabolismo fotossintético de variedades de palma forrageira cultivadas no Semiárido brasileiro. Pesq. Agropec. Pernamb. 2020; 25(2):e2262252020. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.12661/pap.2020.009.

Matias AGS, Araújo GGL, Campos FS, Moraes SA, Gois GG, Silva TS, Emerenciano Neto JV, Voltolini TV. Fermentation profile and nutritional quality of silages composed of cactus pear and maniçoba for goat feeding. J. Agr. Sci. 2020; 158(4):1–9. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859620000581

Pinho RMA, Santos EM, Oliveira JS, Carvalho GGP, Silva TC, Macêdo AJS, Corrêa YR, Zanine AM. Does the level of forage neutral detergent fiber affect the ruminal fermentation, digestibility and feeding behavior of goats fed cactus pear? An. Sci. J. 2018; 89(10):1–8. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.13043.

Cordova-Torres AV, Mendoza-Mendoza JC, Bernal-Santos G, García-Gasca T, Kawas JR, Costa RG, Jacobo CM, Andrade-Montemayor HM. Nutritional composition, in vitro degradability and gas production of Opuntia ficus indica and four other wild cacti species. Life Sci. J. 2015; 12(2s):42-54. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.7537/marslsj1202s15.07.

Magalhães ALR, Teodoro AL, Gois G.C., Campos, F.S., Souza, J.S.R., Andrade, A.P., Lima, I.E., Oliveira Lp, Nascimento DB. Chemical and mineral composition, kinetics of degradation and in vitro gas production of native cactus. J. Agric. Stud. 2019b; 7(4):129–137. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.5296/jas.v7i4.15315.

Santos CB, Costa KAP, Souza WF, Silva VC, Epifanio OS, Santos HS. Protein and carbohydrates fractionation in Paiaguas palisade grass intercropped with grain sorghum in pasture recovery. Acta Scient. An. Sci. 2019; 41(1):1-8. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.4025/actascianimsci.v41i1.42693.

Harun AY, Sali K. Factors affecting rumen microbial protein synthesis: A review. Veterinary Medicine Open J. 2019; 4(1):27-35. Disponível em: https://dx.doi.org/10.17140/VMOJ-4-133.

Köppen W, Geiger RG. Klimate der Erde. Gotha: Verlag Justus Perthes, Wall-map 150 cm × 200 cm. 1928.

Embrapa. Empresa brasileira de pesquisa agropecuária. Sistema brasileiro de classificação de solos, 5th ed. Brasília: Centro Nacional de Pesquisa de Solos; 2018. 356p. Portuguese.

Aoac. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official methods of analysis, 20th ed. Washington, D.C.: Latimer Jr., G.W.; 2016. 3172p.

Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polyssacharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 1991; 74(10):3583–3597. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2.

Licitra G, Hernandez TM, Van Soest PJ. Standardization of procedures for nitrogen fracionation of ruminant feed. An. Feed Sci. Techn. 1996; 57(4):347-358. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(95)00837-3.

Mertens DR. Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fiber in feeds with refluxing in beaker or crucibles: collaborative study. J. AOAC Int. 2002; 85(6):1217-1240. Disponível em: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12477183/.

Silva DJ, Queiroz AC. Análise de alimentos: métodos químicos e biológicos, 3th ed. Viçosa: Editora UFV; 2006. 235p.

Canteri-Schemin MH, Fertonani HCR, Waszczynskyj N, Wosiacki G. Extraction of pectin from apple pomace. Braz. Arch. Biol. Techn. 2005; 48(2):259–66. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-89132005000200013.

Zanella K, Taranto OP. Influence of the drying operating conditions on the chemical characteristics of the citric acid extracted pectins from “pera” sweet orange (Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck) albedo and flavedo. J. Food Eng. 2015; 166(1):111–118. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2015.05.033.

Sniffen CJ, O'Connor JD, Van Soest PJ. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets: II. Carbohydrate and protein availability. J. Anim. Sci. 1992; 70(11):3562-3577. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2527/1992.70113562x.

Huhtanen P, Seppälä A, Ots M, Ahvenjärvi S, Rinne M. In vitro gas production profiles to estimate extent and effective first-order rate of neutral detergent fiber digestion in rumen. J. Anim. Sci. 2008; 86(3):651–659. Disponível em: https://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0246.

Nrc. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th ed. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2001. 381p.

Tilley JMA, Terry RA. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Brit. Grass. Soc. 1963; 18(2):104–111. Disponível em: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x.

Holden LA. Comparison of methods of in vitro dry matter digestibility for ten feeds. J. Dairy Sci. 1999; 82(8):1791–1795. Disponível em: https://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75409-3.

Ørskov ER, McDonald I. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. J. Agr. Sci. 1979; 92(2):499–503. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600063048.

Afrc. Agricultural and Food Reaserch Council. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. Wallingford: CAB International; 1993.159p.

Theodorou MK, Williams BA, Dhanoa MS, Mcallan AB, France J. A simple gas production method using a pressure transducer to determine the fermentation kinetics of ruminant feeds. An. Feed Sci. Techn. 1994; 48(3-4):185–197. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(94)90171-6.

Schofield P, Pitt RE, Pell AN. Kinetics of fiber digestion from in vitro gas production. Journal of Animal Science. 1994; 72(11):2980–2991. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.2527/1994.72112980x.

Sas. Statistical analysis system institute. SAS/STAT User’s guide, version 9.3. Cary: SAS Institute; 2011.

Al-Arif MA, Suwanti LT, Estoepangestie ATS, Lamid M. The nutrients contents, dry matter digestibility, organic matter digestibility, total digestible nutrient, and NH3 rumen production of three kinds of cattle feeding models. KnE Life Sci. 2017; 36(6):338–343. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.18502/kls.v3i6.1142.

Pessoa DV, Andrade AP, Magalhães ALR, Teodoro AL, Santos DC, Araújo GGL, Medeiros AN, Nascimento DB, Valença RL, Cardoso DB. Forage cactus of the genus Opuntia in different with the phenological phase: Nutritional value. J. Arid Env. 2020; 181(104243):1-8. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2020.104243.

Toit A, Wit M, Hugo A. Cultivar and harvest month influence the nutrient content of Opuntia spp. cactus pear cladode mucilage extracts. Mol. 2018; 23(4):1–12. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules23040916

Silva APG, Souza CCE, Ribeiro JES, Santos MCG, Pontes ALS, Madruga MS. Physical, chemical and bromatological characteristics of the giant forage cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica) and small forage cactus (Nopalea cochenillifera) from Paraíba state (Brazil). Rev. Bras. Tec. Agroind. 2015; 9(2):1810-1820. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3895/rbta.v9n2.1616

Morales-Martínez Y, López-Cuellar MR, Chavarría-Hernández N, Rodríguez-Hernández AI. Rheological behaviour of acetylated pectins from cactus pear fruits (Opuntia albicarpa and O. matudae). Food Hydrocol. 2018; 85(1):110–119. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2018.07.009.

Van Soest PJ Mertens DR. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant, 2nd ed. Cornell University Press: Ithaca. 1994; 476 p.

Singh BS, Bhat V, Shukla GP, Singh KK, Gehrana D. Variation in carbohydrate and protein fractions, energy, digestibility and mineral concentrations in stover of sorghum cultivars. Trop. Grass. 2018; 6(1):42–52. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.17138/TGFT(6)42-52.

Deusch S, Camarinha-Silva A, Conrad J, Beifuss U, Rodehutscord M, Seifert J. A structural and functional elucidation of the rumen microbiome influenced by various diets and microenvironments. Front. Microb. 2017; 8(1):1-21. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.01605.

Williams BA, Grant LJ, Gidley MJ, Mikkelsen D. Gut fermentation of dietary fibers: Physico-chemistry of plant cell walls and implications for health. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017; 18(10):1-25. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms18102203.

Doorenbos J, Martín-Tereso J, Dijkstra J, Van Laar H. Effect of different levels of rapidly degradable carbohydrates calculated by a simple rumen model on performance of lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2017; 100(7):5422-5433. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-12278.

Gómez LM, Posada SL, Oliveira M. Starch in ruminant diets: a review. Rev. Colomb. Ci. Pec. 2016; 29(2):77-90. Disponível em: https://dx.doi.org/10.17533/udea.rccp.v29n2a01.