توان بیوچار در تقویت اثرگذاری پروبیوتیک‌های باسیلی و لاکتوباسیلی بر جمعیت‌های میکروبی، آنزیم‌های هیدرولیتیک و تخمیر برون‌تنی شکمبه گوسفند

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد تغذیه دام، گروه علوم دامی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

2 دانشیار، گروه علوم دامی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

3 استاد، گروه علوم دامی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

چکیده

هدف این پژوهش، بررسی پتانسیل بیوچار در تقویت اثربخشی پروبیوتیک‌ها (باسیل/لاکتوباسیل) بر فعالیت‌های میکروبی-آنزیمی و تخمیر برون‌تنی شکمبه گوسفند بود. آزمایش با هفت تیمار شامل جیره فاقد پروبیوتیک و بیوچار (شاهد) و جیره‌های حاوی باسیل، لاکتوباسیل، بیوچار، باسیل-بیوچار، لاکتوباسیل-بیوچار و باسیل-لاکتوباسیل-بیوچار انجام شد. جمعیت‌های باکتریایی و پروتوزوآیی، آنزیم‌های هیدرولیتیک، هضم‌پذیری، فراسنجه‌های تولید گاز، ظرفیت آنتی‌اکسیدانی و فرآورده‌های تخمیر طی انکوباسیون‌های 24 و 72 ساعته تعیین شدند. مصرف جداگانه پروبیوتیک‌ها و بیوچار موجب افزایش هضم‌پذیری، سوبسترای تجزیه‌شده، اسیدهای چرب فرار و توده میکروبی شد (05/0>P)، اما باکتری‌های پروتئولیتیک، پروتئاز و فعالیت آنتی‌اکسیدانی تغییر نکرد. باکتری‌های سلولولیتیک و آنزیم‌های فیبرولیتیک در تیمارهای باسیل و بیوچار بیشتر از شاهد بود (05/0>P). همچنین، تعداد پروتوزوآها در گروه‌های باسیل و لاکتوباسیل کمتر از شاهد بود (05/0>P). آلفاآمیلاز در انکوباسیون 24 ساعته در تیمارهای باسیل و لاکتوباسیل افزایش یافت (05/0>P)، اما تحت تأثیر بیوچار قرار نگرفت. در زمان 72، آلفاآمیلاز در شاهد کمتر از تیمارهای پروبیوتیکی و بیوچار بود (05/0>P). متان، آمونیاک و نسبت استات:پروپیونات در تیمارهای پروبیوتیک و بیوچار در مقایسه با شاهد کاهش یافت (05/0>P). گنجاندن بیوچار در جیره‌های پروبیوتیکی (باسیل-بیوچار، لاکتوباسیل-بیوچار و باسیل-لاکتوباسیل-بیوچار)، هضم‌پذیری، سوبسترای تجزیه‌ شده، توده میکروبی، اسیدهای چرب فرار و آنزیم‌های فیبرولیتیک را به بیشترین مقدار رساند، و کمترین آمونیاک و متان حاصل شد (05/0>P). بیشترین جمعیت سلولولیتیک‌ها در گروه‌های باسیل-بیوچار و باسیل-لاکتوباسیل-بیوچار، و بیشترین آلفاآمیلاز در تیمارهای لاکتوباسیل-بیوچار و باسیل-لاکتوباسیل-بیوچار مشاهده شد. درمجموع، افزودن بیوچار در جیره‌های پروبیوتیکی به ‌منظور تقویت تأثیر پروبیوتیک‌ها بر هضم‌ و تولید توده میکروبی، و کاهش متان و آمونیاک قابل توصیه است، هرچند مطالعات بیشتری لازم است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Potential of biochar in enhancing the effectiveness of probiotics Bacilli and Lactobacilli on in vitro microbial populations, hydrolytic enzymes, and ruminal fermentation in sheep

نویسندگان [English]

  • Z. Bagherpoor 1
  • J. Rezaei 2
  • Y. Rouzbehan 3
1 Former MSc Student of Animal Nutrition, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
3 Professor, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Probiotics accelerate and improve rumen development, stability, and balance of beneficial microbes in the digestive system and decrease microflora disruption, which will increase the activity of desirable enzymes. This action of probiotics increases digestibility, feed efficiency, livestock performance, and general defense including antioxidant power. However, the response of different animals to the specific probiotics is not uniform and similar. Therefore, it is necessary to provide factors that improve the conditions for the establishment and functioning of microbial additives in the rumen or to use compounds that have a synergistic effect with probiotics to receive a uniform and reassuring response from the herd. One of the potentially useful materials to achieve this goal is biochar. In the present study, it was hypothesized that if biochar (as a favorable habitat for microorganisms) is added to probiotic-containing diets, the conditions for establishing these microbial products in the fermentation environment may be improved and probiotics can act more efficiently. Moreover, a probable synergy between probiotics and biochar may increase the efficiency of these additives compared to their separate usage. However, there is no special information available in this regard, especially about the effect of including biochar in probiotic-containing diets on different microbial populations and rumen hydrolytic enzymes. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the potential of biochar in enhancing the effectiveness of the probiotic sources (Bacilli and/or Lactobacilli) on microbial populations, hydrolytic enzyme activity, digestibility, antioxidant capacity, and fermentation products in the sheep rumen, in vitro.
Materials and methods: The experimental treatments were: 1. A basal diet without probiotics and biochar (control), 2. Basal diet containing probiotic Bacilli (B. coagulans, B. subtilis, and B. licheniformis, at the ratio of 2×1011, 5×109, and 5×109 CFU/g, respectively), 3. A basal diet containing probiotic Lactobacilli (L. plantarum, L. rhamnosus, and Enterococcus faecium, at the ratio of 2×109, 2×1010, and 2×1010 CFU/g, respectively), 4. A basal diet containing biochar, 5. A basal diet containing Bacilli-biochar, 6. A basal diet containing Lactobacilli-biochar, and 7. A basal diet containing Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar. Diet digestibility was determined by the two-stage Tilley and Terry method. In addition, the 24 and 72-h in vitro gas production techniques were conducted. At the end of each incubation, cellulolytic and proteolytic bacteria, as well as protozoa population, enzymatic activity (carboxymethyl cellulose, microcrystalline cellulose, filter paper degrading, and α-amylase), truly digestible substrate (TDS), partitioning factor (PF), microbial biomass production (MBP), methane release, antioxidant capacity, pH, ammonia-N (NH3-N), and volatile fatty acids (VFA) were determined by the standard methods. All in vitro tests were done in three replicates and two batches (runs) in different weeks. Data were analyzed in a completely randomized design using the GLM procedure of SAS.
Results and discussion: Separate inclusion of probiotic Bacilli and biochar in the diet increased the cellulolytic bacteria population and activity of fibrolytic enzymes compared to the control (P<0.05), but these variables were not affected by Lactobacilli. The highest values of these variables were observed with the inclusion of biochar in probiotic Bacilli-containing diets (i.e., Bacilli-biochar and Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar treatments). These results were due to probiotics' ability to provide superior growth conditions for useful ruminal microbes, as well as the positive influence of the biochar structure, as a desirable habitat, on establishing, attaching, and developing rumen microorganisms. The protozoa population was not affected by biochar, but it was decreased (P<0.05) in the probiotic-containing diets (Bacilli and Lactobacilli treatments without or with biochar) in comparison to the control. The number of proteolytic bacteria and protease activity were not affected by the experimental treatments. Alpha-amylase activity in 24-h incubation in Basilli and Lactobacilli treatments was higher than the control (P<0.05) but was not affected by biochar. The activity of this enzyme in 72-incubation was lower in the control than in probiotic or biochar treatments (P<0.05). The alpha-amylase activity was the highest in the Lactobacilli-biochar and Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar groups. Separate inclusion of probiotics and biochar in the diet increased the diet digestibility, degraded substrate, and microbial biomass production (P<0.05). The maximum values of these parameters were detected in the probiotics-biochar diets. The reason for these increases can be related to the improvement of the cellulolytic bacteria population, alpha-amylase, and fibrolytic enzyme activity in the probiotic or biochar groups. The 24-h total antioxidant activity was not affected by the treatments. In 72-h incubation, the probiotics did not affect this variable, but a tendency to increase in antioxidant capacity was observed in diets containing biochar (without or with probiotics). The improving effect of biochar on the antioxidant power could be owing to its activity in trapping pollutants, poisons, and adverse factors in the incubation medium. Methane release, NH3-N, and acetate to propionate ratio were decreased, but total VFA was increased by separate use of the probiotics or biochar in the diet, compared to the control (P<0.05). More importantly, the inclusion of biochar in the diets containing the probiotic (i.e., Bacilli-biochar, Lactobacilli-biochar, and Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar) resulted in the greatest total VFA and the lowest NH3-N and methane release (P<0.05). One reason for the increased methane and ammonia was the lower protozoa population in the additives groups. The methane decline may also be related to the decreasing effect of the additives on methanogens, and their increasing effect on methanotrophs. Moreover, the improved bacterial biomass production could be considered as another reason for the decreased ammonia; i.e., more ammonia was assimilated into the bacterial protein. The increased VFA production was due to the higher digestibility and degraded substrate in the probiotic and/or biochar groups. Regarding the valuable characteristics of probiotics and biochar and their probable synergistic effects, their simultaneous application resulted in the highest improvement of fermentation variables.
Conclusions: Separate use of probiotics Bacilli and Lactobacilli or biochar in the diet improved in vitro ruminal microbial and enzymatic activity and reduced energy (as methane) and nitrogen (as ammonia) losses. More importantly, the addition of biochar to the probiotics-containing diets was a suitable strategy for enhancing the effectiveness of the probiotic sources on digestibility and microbial biomass and reduction of methane and ammonia. However, these results need to be confirmed by further experiments.Materials and methods: The experimental treatments were: 1- basal diet without probiotic and biochar (control), 2 - basal diet containing probiotic Bacilli (B. coagulans, B. subtilis, and B. licheniformis, at the ratio of 2×1011, 5×109, and 5×109 CFU/g, respectively), 3- basal diet containing probiotic Lactobacilli (L. plantarum, L. rhamnosus, and Enterococcus faecium, at the ratio of 2×109, 2×1010 and 2×1010 CFU/g, respectively), 4- basal diet containing biochar, 5- basal diet containing Bacilli-biochar, 6- basal diet containing Lactobacilli-biochar, and 7- basal diet containing Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar. Diet digestibility was determined by the two-stage Tilley and Terry method. In addition, the 24 and 72-h in vitro gas production techniques were conducted. At the end of each incubation, cellulolytic and proteolytic bacteria, as well as protozoa population, enzymatic activity (carboxymethyl cellulose, microcrystalline cellulose, filter paper degrading, and α-amylase), truly digestible substrate (TDS), partitioning factor (PF), microbial biomass production (MBP), methane release, antioxidant capacity, pH, ammonia-N (NH3-N) and volatile fatty acids (VFA) were determined by the standard methods. All in vitro tests were done in three replicates and two batches (runs) in different weeks. Data were analyzed in a completely randomized design using the PROC GLM of SAS.
Results and discussion: Separate including probiotic Bacilli and biochar in the diet increased the cellulolytic bacteria population and activity of fibrolytic enzymes compared to the control (P<0.05), but these variables were not affected by Lactobacilli. The highest values of these variables were observed with the inclusion of biochar in probiotic Bacilli-containing diets (i.e., Bacilli-biochar and Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar treatments). These results were due to probiotics' ability to provide superior growth conditions for useful ruminal microbes, as well as the positive influence of the biochar structure, as a desirable habitat, on establishing, attaching, and developing rumen microorganisms. The protozoa population was not affected by biochar, but it was decreased (P<0.05) in the probiotics-containing diets (Bacilli and Lactobacilli treatments without or with biochar) in comparison to the control. The number of proteolytic bacteria and protease activity were not affected by the experimental treatments. Alpha-amylase activity in 24-h incubation in Basilli and Lactobacilli treatments was higher than the control (P<0.05) but was not affected by biochar. The activity of this enzyme in 72-incubation was lower in the control than in probiotic or biochar treatments (P<0.05). The alpha-amylase activity was the highest in Lactobacilli-biochar and Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar groups. Separate inclusion of probiotics and biochar in the diet increased the diet digestibility, degraded substrate, and microbial biomass production (P<0.05). The maximum values of these parameters were detected in the probiotics-biochar diets. The reason for these increases can be related to the improvement of the cellulolytic bacteria population, alpha-amylase, and fibrolytic enzyme activity in the probiotic or biochar groups. The 24-h total antioxidant activity was not affected by the treatments. In 72-hour incubation, the probiotics had no effect on this variable, but a tendency to increase in antioxidant capacity was observed in diets containing biochar (without or with probiotics). The improving effect of biochar on the antioxidant power could be owing to its activity in trapping pollutants, poisons, and adverse factors in the incubation medium. Methane release, NH3-N, and acetate to propionate ratio were decreased, but total VFA was increased by separate use of the probiotics or biochar in the diet, compared to the control (P<0.05). More importantly, the inclusion of biochar in the diets containing the probiotic (i.e., Bacilli-biochar, Lactobacilli-biochar, and Bacilli-Lactobacilli-biochar) resulted in the greatest total VFA and the lowest NH3-N and methane release (P<0.05). One reason for the increased methane and ammonia was the lower protozoa population in the additives groups. The methane decline may also be related to the decreasing effect of the additives on methanogens, and their increasing effect on methanotrophs. Moreover, the improved bacterial biomass production could be considered as another reason for the decreased ammonia; i.e., more ammonia was assimilated into the bacterial protein. The increased VFA production was due to the higher digestibility and degraded substrate in the probiotic and/or biochar groups. Regarding the valuable characteristics of probiotics and biochar and their probable synergistic effects, their simultaneous application resulted in the highest improvement of fermentation variables.
Conclusions: Separate use of probiotics Bacilli and Lactobacilli or biochar in the diet improved in vitro ruminal microbial and enzymatic activity and reduced energy (as methane) and nitrogen (as ammonia) losses. More importantly, the addition of biochar to the probiotics-containing diets was a suitable strategy for enhancing the effectiveness of the probiotic sources on digestibility and microbial biomass and reduction of methane and ammonia. However, these results need to be confirmed by further experiments.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Bacilli
  • Biochar
  • Rumen
  • Enzymatic-microbial activity
  • Lactobacilli
AFRC. (1993). Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. Agricultural and Food Research Council, Technical Committee on Responses to Nutrients. CABI Publisher. Wallingford, UK. 176 p.
Agarwal, N., Kamra D. N., Chaudhary, L. C., Sahoo, A., & Pathak N. N. (2002). Microbial status and rumen enzyme profile of crossbred calves fed on different microbial feed additives. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 34, 329-336. doi: 10.1046/j.1472-765X.2002.01092.x
Anele, U. Y., Südekum, K. H., Hummel, J., Arigbede, O. M., Oni, A. O., Olanite, J. A., Böttger, C., Ojo, V. O., & Jolaosho, A. O. (2011). Chemical characterization, in vitro dry matter and ruminal crude protein degradability and microbial protein synthesis of some cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp) haulm varieties. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 163(2-4), 161-169. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.11.005
Ashkvari, A. (2019). Effect of Lactobacillales, Bacillales and/or yeast on in vitro ruminal fermentation, microbial populations and hydrolytic enzymes activities. MSc Thesis, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]
Astuti, W. D., Ridwan, R., Fidriyanto, R., Rohmatussolihat, R., Sari, N. F., Sarwono, K. A., Fitri, A., & Widyastuti, Y. (2022). Changes in rumen fermentation and bacterial profiles after administering Lactiplantibacillus plantarum as a probiotic. Veterinary World, 15(8), 1969-1974. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2022.1969-1974
Benzie, I. F., & Strain, J. J. (1996). The ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) as a measure of “antioxidant power”: the FRAP assay. Analytical Biochemistry, 239(1), 70-76. doi: 10.1006/abio.1996.0292
Cabeza, I., Waterhouse, T., Sohi, S., & Rooke, J. A. (2018). Effect of biochar produced from different biomass sources and at different process temperatures on methane production and ammonia concentrations in vitro. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 237, 1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2018.01.003
Chen, L., Ren, A., Zhou, C., & Tan, Z. (2017). Effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus supplementation for improving in vitro rumen fermentation characteristics of cereal straws. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 16(1), 52-60. doi: 10.1080/1828051X.2016.1262753
Dehority, B. A. (2003). Rumen microbiology, 1st ed. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK. 372 p.
Di Gioia, D., & Biavati, B. (2018). Probiotics and prebiotics in animal health and food safety. Springer International Publishing, Gewerbestrasse, Switzerland. 273 p.
Galyean, M. L. (2010). Laboratory procedures in animal nutrition research. Department of Animal and Food Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA. 189 p.
Le, O. T., Schofield, B., Dart, P. J., Callaghan, M. J., Lisle, A. T., Ouwerkerk, D., Klieve, A. V., & McNeill, D. M. (2016). Production responses of reproducing ewes to a by-product-based diet inoculated with the probiotic Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain H57. Animal Production Science, 57(6), 1097-1105. doi: 10.1071/AN16068
Leng, R. A., Inthapanya, S., & Preston, T. R. (2013). All biochars are not equal in lowering methane production in in vitro rumen incubations. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 25(6), #106.
Leng, R. A., Preston, T. R., & Inthapanya, S. (2012). Biochar reduces enteric methane and improves growth and feed conversion in local “Yellow” cattle fed cassava root chips and fresh cassava foliage. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 24(11), #199‏.
Makkar, H. P. S. (2010). In vitro screening of plant resources for extra-nutritional attributes in ruminants: nuclear and related methodologies. Vercoe P. E., Makkar H. P. S. and Schlink A. C. ed. In vitro screening of feed resources for efficiency of microbial protein synthesis. IAEA, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
Manhar, A. K., Bashir, Y., Saikia, D., Nath, D., Gupta, K., Konwar, B. K., Kumar, R., Namsa, N. D., & Mandal, M. (2016). Cellulolytic potential of probiotic Bacillus Subtilis AMS6 isolated from traditional fermented soybean (Churpi): An in vitro study with regards to application as an animal feed additive. Microbiological Research, 186, 62-70. doi: 10.1016/j.micres.2016.03.004
McDonald, P., Edwards, R. A., Greenhalgh, J. F., Morgan, C. A., Sinclair, L. A., & Wilkingson R. G. (2022). Animal nutrition, 7th ed. Prentice Hall, Essex, UK. 736 p.
McFarlane, Z. D., Myer, P. R., Cope, E. R., Evans, N. D., Bone, T. C., Bliss, B. E., & Mulliniks, J. T. (2017). Effect of biochar type and size on in vitro rumen fermentation of orchard grass hay. Agricultural Sciences, 8, 316-325. doi: 10.4236/as.2017.84023
Menke, K. H., Raab, L., Salewski, A., Steingass, H., Fritz, D., & Schneider, W. (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. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 93(1), 217-222. doi: 10.1017/S0021859600086305
Millen, D. D., Arrigoni, M. D. B., & Pacheco, R. D. L. (2016). Rumenology. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany. 330 p.
Mirheidari, A., Torbatinejad, N., Hasani, S., & Shakeri, P. (2018a). Effects of pistachio by-product biochar on performance, microbial protein, some of ruminal fermentation parameters and blood metabolites in fattening lambs. Animal Sciences Journal, 30(117), 151-162. doi: 10.22092/asj.2017.109299.1382 [In Persian]
Mirheidari, A., Torbatinejad, N. M., Hassani, S., & Shakeri, P. (2018b). Effect of different levels of walnut shell and chicken manure biochar on ruminal fermentation parameters and methane production. Journal of Ruminant Research, 1, 1-16. doi: 10.22069/ejrr.2017.13198.1546 [In Persian]
Mirheidari, A., Torbatinejad, N. M., Shakeri, P., & Mokhtarpour, A. (2019). Effects of walnut shell and chicken manure biochar on in vitro fermentation and in vivo nutrient digestibility and performance of dairy ewes. Tropical animal Health and Production, 51, 2153-2160. doi: 10.1007/s11250-019-01909-y
Morgavi, D. P., Forano, E., Martin, C., & Newbold, C. J. (2010). Microbial ecosystem and methanogenesis in ruminants. Animal, 4(7), 1024-1036. Doi: 10.1017/S1751731110000546
Mosoni, P., Martin, C., Forano, E., & Morgavi, D. P. (2011). Long-term defaunation increases the abundance of cellulolytic ruminococci and methanogens but does not affect the bacterial and methanogen diversity in the rumen of sheep. Journal of Animal Science, 89(3), 783-791. doi: 10.2527/jas.2010-2947
NRC. (2007). Nutrient requirements of small ruminants. National Research Council, Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC, USA. 341 p.
Porsavathdy, P., Phongphanith, S., Preston, T. R., & Leng, R. A. (2017). Methane production in an in vitro rumen fermentation of molasses-urea was reduced by supplementation with fresh rather than dried cassava (Manihot esculenta, Crantz) leaves and by biochar. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 29(3), #41.
Prasai, T. P., Walsh, K. B., Bhattarai, S. P., Midmore, D. J., Van, T. T., Moore, R. J., & Stanley, D. (2016). Biochar, bentonite and zeolite supplemented feeding of layer chickens alters intestinal microbiota and reduces campylobacter load. PLoS One, 11(4), e0154061. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154061
Qiao, G. H., Shan, A. S., Ma, N., Ma, Q. Q., & Sun, Z. W. (2010). Effect of supplemental Bacillus cultures on rumen fermentation and milk yield in Chinese Holstein cows. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 94(4), 429-436. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0396.2009.00926.x
Radzikowski, D. (2017). Effect of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics on the productivity and health of dairy cows and calves. World Scientific News, 78, 193-198.
Rashidi, N., Khatibjoo, A., Taherpour, K., Akbari Gharaei, M., & Shirzadi, H. (2018). Effect of licorice extract, probiotic, antifungal and biochar on performance of broiler chickens fed aflatoxin B1 contaminated diet. Animal Production, 20(1), 145-157. doi 10.22059/jap.2018.246192.623242 [In Persian]
Rigobelo, E. C. (2012). Probiotic in animals. InTech, Rijeka, Croatia. 272 p.
Saleem, A. M., Ribeiro Jr, G. O., Yang, W. Z., Ran, T., Beauchemin, K. A., McGeough, E. J., Ominski, K. H., Okine, E. K., & McAllister, T. A. (2018). Effect of engineered biocarbon on rumen fermentation, microbial protein synthesis, and methane production in an artificial rumen (RUSITEC) fed a high forage diet. Journal of Animal Science, 96(8), 3121-3130. doi: doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky204
Saroeun, K., Preston, T. R., & Leng, R. A. (2018). Rice distillers’ byproduct and molasses-urea blocks containing biochar improved the growth performance of local Yellow cattle fed ensiled cassava roots, cassava foliage and rice straw. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 30(9), #162.
Seo, J. K., Kim, S. W., Kim, M. H., Upadhaya, S. D., Kam, D. K., & Ha, J. K. (2010). Direct-fed microbials for ruminant animals. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 23(12), 1657-1667. doi: 10.5713/ajas.2010.r.08
Sheikh, G. G., Ganai, A. M., Ahmad Sheikh, A., & Mir, D. M. (2022). Rumen microflora, fermentation pattern and microbial enzyme activity in sheep fed paddy straw based complete feed fortified with probiotics. Biological Rhythm Research, 53(4), 547-558. doi: 10.1080/09291016.2019.1644019
Silivong, P., & Preston, T. R. (2015). Growth performance of goats was improved when a basal diet of foliage of Bauhinia acuminata was supplemented with water spinach and biochar. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 27(3), #58.
Sirjani, M. H., Rezaei, J., Zahedifar, M., & Rouzbehan, Y. (2022). Effect of adding biochar in diets containing probiotics on in vitro fermentation variables, health indicators, rectum bacteria, and blood enzymes of Holstein calves. Animal Production Research, 11(4), 1-19. doi: 10.22124/ar.2023.23067.1727 [In Persian]
Soren, N. M., Tripathi, M. K., Bhatt, R. S., & Karim, S. A. (2013). Effect of yeast supplementation on the growth performance of Malpura lambs. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 45, 547-554. doi: 10.1007/s11250-012-0257-3
Sun, P., Wang, J. Q., & Deng, L. F. (2013). Effects of Bacillus subtilis natto on milk production, rumen fermentation and ruminal microbiome of dairy cows. Animal, 7(2), 216-222. doi: 10.1017/S1751731112001188
Teoh, R., Caro, E., Holman, D. B., Joseph, S., Meale, S. J., & Chaves, A. V. (2019). Effects of hardwood biochar on methane production, fermentation characteristics, and the rumen microbiota using rumen simulation. Frontiers in Microbiology, 10, 1534. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01534
Tilley, J. M. A., & Terry, D. R. (1963). A two‐stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Grass and Forage Science, 18(2), 104-111. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x
Uyeno, Y., Shigemori, S., & Shimosato, T. (2015). Effect of probiotics/prebiotics on cattle health and productivity. Microbes and Environments, 30(2), 126-132. doi: 10.1264/jsme2.ME14176
Wu, G. (2018). Principles of animal nutrition, 1th ed. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group LLC, Boca Raton FL, USA. 772 p.
Zhang, R., Dong, X., Zhou, M., Tu, Y., Zhang, N., Deng, K., & Diao, Q. (2017). Oral administration of Lactobacillus plantarum and Bacillus subtilis on rumen fermentation and the bacterial community in calves. Animal Science Journal, 88(5), 755-762. doi: 10.1111/asj.12691