the nutritionist 2019 · 9/12/2019 · dr. tom jenkins, clemson university 2 c acetate de novo...
TRANSCRIPT
The Nutritionist 2019
Live and Recorded Ruminant Nutrition WebinarsMore Information at https://agmodelsystems.com/webinars/
Email: [email protected]
12 Sept20199:00 am EDT6:00 pm EDT
Dr Tom JenkinsClemson University
Nutritional Decisions that Cause Microorganisms in the Rumen to
Drive Down Milk fat!
Nutritional Decisions that Cause
Microorganisms in the Rumen to
Drive Down Milk Fat!
Tom Jenkins
Professor Emeritus
Animal & Veterinary Sciences
Clemson University
Clemson, South Carolina, USA
Nutritional Factors Non-nutritional Factors
genetics
?
stage of lactation
?
season
?
parity
?
breed
disease
Milk fat
Many factors can affect milk fat
Milk Fat
Feed Delivery
TMR Mixing
Feeding Freq
Push up
Low Rumen pHHigh Starch
High Fat
Feed Facilities
Bunk space
Overcrowding
Wild Yeast
Ionophores
Making Milk Fat (C4 to C18)Dr. Tom Jenkins, Clemson University
2 C Acetate
De novo fatty acids (C4 - C16)
BLOOD
Preformed (C16-C18)
C16-C18
Diet & Body
Fat
De novo <C16
Mixed C16
Preformed C18
Takes all three to build milk fat
Data from Woolpert et al. (2017)
% of total FA g/100 g
De novo 24.6 0.97
Mixed 41.2 1.63
Preformed 34.4 1.36
total 100 3.96De Novo 1.8 g/100 g
Preformed 2.2 g/100 g
The Central Role of the Rumen!Dr. Tom Jenkins, Clemson University
De novo milk fat ≤16 C
VFA
Inhibitors
Why the rumen is important for
milk fat?
Acetate
Inhibitors
Step on the gas!
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
4
4.1
4.2
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Milk F
at,
%
Acetate, g/d
J. Nutr. (2017)
Stepping on the brakes!
From J. Dairy Sci. (2008) 91:260.
-55-61
17
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
De Novo Mixed Preform
% Change From CON
De Novo Mixed PreformCON 5% SBO
Milk yield, kg/d 30.3 28.8
Fat, % 3.53 2.73*
Fat yield, kg/d 1.12 0.85*
Where do the inhibitors come from?
Unsaturated FAIN FEED
Saturated FAIN INTESTINES
BIOHYDROGENATION (BH)
What is Biohydrogenation?
Linoleic (18:2) Stearic
18:0
An enzymatic pathway carried on by
ruminal microorganisms.
SUBSTRATE ENDPRODUCT
Linoleic Acid (18:2)Unsaturated
Intermediates
Stearic Acid (18:0)Saturated
BH Has Intermediates
Linoleic Acid
CLA TRANS FA
Stearic Acid
Increases BH Intermediates
Conjugated Linoleic Acid
• CLA inhibits de novo milk fat synthesis
16:0 Palmitic
18:0 Stearic
18:1 Oleic
18:2 Linoleic
18:3 Linolenic
Feed Input Rumen Outflow
From Biochimie (2017) 141:107-120.
t10,c12 CLA dose, g/day
From DeVeth et al. 2004. Lipids
What nutritional signals cause the
t10 shift?
t10 t11
t10 PathwayHigh RUFAL
Rumen Unsaturated Fatty Acid Load (RUFAL)
C18:1(oleic) + C18:2(linoleic) + C18:3(linolenic)
Example RUFAL Values1
Total FA,
% DM
RUFAL,
% DM
lbs DM/100 g
RUFAL
Corn silage 2.4 1.8 12.2
Alfalfa 3.2 2.4 9.2
Corn 4.1 3.4 6.5
Ryegrass 6.2 4.6 4.8
DDG 8.6 6.8 3.2
Cottonseed 16.9 12.2 1.8
Soybeans 17.9 15.1 1.5
Flaxseed 28.5 24.7 0.9
1Random selection of feeds analyzed at Clemson University
T10 Pathway
Feed Delivery
TMR Mixing
Feeding Freq
Push up
Low Rumen pHHigh Starch
High Fat
Feed Facilities
Bunk space
Overcrowding
Wild Yeast
Ionophores
How are these risk factors signaling the
microorganisms to shift to the t10 pathway?
Bacterial Outer Membrane
RUFAL-below antimicrobial
RUFAL-above antimicrobial
Yoon et al. (2018). Int J Mol. Sci.
The interaction among nutritional risk factors that
reduces milk fat is often explained by a shift in the
microbial population community!
• RUFAL antimicrobial effects trigger the population shift.
✓ Antimicrobial effects occur quickly.
✓ Antimicrobial effects target t11 microorganisms.
✓ Antimicrobial effects are enhanced by interactions
among nutritional risks.
Metabolic pathway intermediates in
B. fibrisolvens 20 min after linoleic acid addition.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
No Linoleic 0.2 mg/ml linoleic
pm
ol/
mg
pro
tein 95% drop in cell metabolism after just 20 min.
of RUFAL exposure!
J. Appl. Microbiol. (2017)
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
t10
, mg
/10
ml
t11
, mg
/10
ml
Hours after am feeding Day 5
t11 t10 Log. (t11) Poly. (t10)Hour Effect (P< 0.01)
t11/t10 Sources
(t11 Pathway)
Butyrvibrio fibrisolvens J. Biol. Chem. (1967, 1971)
Pseudobutyrivibrio Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (2007)
Bifidio Appl Microbiol. Biotech (2010)
Lactobacillus J. Functional Foods (2017)
Roseburia Microbiology (2009)
Sharpea azabuensis Microbiology (2019)
(t10 Pathway)
Megasphaera elsdenii J. Dairy Sci (2010)
Propionibacterium acnes Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci (2006)
Some Lactobacillus spp. Microbiology (2009)
Do fatty acids exhibit ANTIMICROBIAL
properties differently for t11 vs t10?
Modification of Antimicrobial Effects
◼ Low pH enhanced antimicrobial effects of
linoleic on B. fibrisolvens (t11) but not P. acnes
(t10) in recent abstracts by Maia et al. (2018).
◼ Lactate has direct effect
accentuates the antimicrobial effects of unsat FA on
t11 B. fibrisolvens (BMC Microbiol. 2010).
RUFAL – low antimicrobial
RUFAL-high antimicrobial
• Low pH
• High Starch
• Wild Yeast
• Ionophores
• Overcrowding
• etc.
Shut down
microbes using t11
pathway.
Microbes using t10
pathway have more
linoleic acid.
All results suggest that when t11 pathway
is lacking, the t10 pathway must then do
the biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty
acids.
Frontiers in Microbiol. (2018)
RISK: Overloading the Rumen
with Unsaturated Fatty Acids!
Rumen Unsaturated Fatty Acid Load (RUFAL)
RUFAL = 18:1(oleic) +18:2 (linoleic)+18:3 (linolenic)
Saturated Fatty Acids Don’t Matter
16:0 (palmitic) +18:0 (stearic)
Low Risk RUFAL
hay, unproc corn, unproc cs, whole oilseeds, CaFA
High Risk RUFAL
Proc corn/cs, ground oilseeds, fats/oils, DDG
Distribution of RUFAL
16% of TMR had
RUFAL > 3%.
Lactating Cow TMR
• 15-20% CP
• 28-35% NDF
RISK: Low and variable ruminal pH.
◼ All these can help:
Maintain effective fiber
Don’t let starch kd get too high
Use buffers (Bicarb, K Carb, Na Carb)
Pay attention to feeding management
◼ Mix TMR well
◼ Don’t overcrowd
◼ Push-up
◼ Increase feeding frequency
y = -0.0519x + 0.7994R² = 0.6748
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Ch
an
ge i
n m
ilk f
at
%
Starch, % DM
Change in milk fat % caused by added fat vs starch
Feeding Management - Starch
corn oil, sunflower oil, DDG, soybean oil,
linseed oil, fish oil
OTHER RISKS
◼ High yeasts and molds.
Risk increases with yeast counts approaching
1 million cfu/g.
◼ Ionophores
Alone not a problem but intensifies risk when
other proper feeding guidelines not followed.
Get Help From Supplements that
Boost Milk Fat ◼ High palmitic bypass fats
◼ MHA
CAUTION!!
These are NOT a substitute for managing trans-10
risks when milk fat is low!
Thank You!!!
10 October20199:00 am EDT6:00 pm EDT
Dr Michel WattiauxUniversity of Wisconsin-
Madison
Managing Excretions and emissions through Nutrition
Webinar Co-Hosts
Gold Sponsor
Silver Sponsors
Bronze Sponsors