| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 Department of Agriculture, Meiji University, Higashimita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki 214-8571, Japan
The effect of fumarate used as a feed additive on the reduction of methanogenesis in the rumen was evaluated by in vitro experiments. The addition of fumarate to the culture of mixed ruminal microorganisms that were fermenting hay powder and concentrate reduced methane production. Most fumarate was metabolized to propionate, and a slight increase was noted in other volatile fatty acids. Fumarate was utilized by mixed bacteria but not by mixed protozoa. Fibrobacter succinogenes, Selenomonas ruminantium ssp. ruminantium, Selenomonas ruminantium ssp. lactilytica, Veillonella parvula, and Wollinella succinogenes oxidized H2 by using fumarate as a final electron acceptor, suggesting that these bacteria compete with methanogens for H2, which is the main substrate for methanogenesis in the rumen. However, the affinity of these bacteria to H2 was lower than their affinity to methanogens. These fumarate-utilizing bacteria metabolized malate to products that were similar to those from fumarate, suggesting the possession of fumarate dehydratase. Fibrobacter succinogenes, V. parvula, and W. succinogenes utilized formate, another substrate for methanogenesis, as an electron donor for fumarate reduction. The affinity of these bacteria to formate was higher than the affinity methanogens have for formate. When methanogens were cocultured with an equal cellular amount of each of the fumarate-utilizing bacteria, methane production was markedly decreased, not only from formate, but also from H2. These results suggest that the addition of fumarate to ruminant feed reduces methanogenesis and enhances propionate production in the rumen.
Key Words: ruminal microorganisms • fumarate • methane
Submitted on March 30, 1998
Accepted on November 24, 1998
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  G. Fonty, K. Joblin, M. Chavarot, R. Roux, G. Naylor, and F. Michallon Establishment and Development of Ruminal Hydrogenotrophs in Methanogen-Free Lambs Appl. Envir. Microbiol., October 15, 2007; 73(20): 6391 - 6403. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. M. Ungerfeld, R. A. Kohn, R. J. Wallace, and C. J. Newbold A meta-analysis of fumarate effects on methane production in ruminal batch cultures J Anim Sci, October 1, 2007; 85(10): 2556 - 2563. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. A. Beauchemin and S. M. McGinn Methane emissions from beef cattle: Effects of fumaric acid, essential oil, and canola oil J Anim Sci, June 1, 2006; 84(6): 1489 - 1496. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. M. McGinn, K. A. Beauchemin, T. Coates, and D. Colombatto Methane emissions from beef cattle: Effects of monensin, sunflower oil, enzymes, yeast, and fumaric acid J Anim Sci, November 1, 2004; 82(11): 3346 - 3356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Griffiths and R. S. Gupta The use of signature sequences in different proteins to determine the relative branching order of bacterial divisions: evidence that Fibrobacter diverged at a similar time to Chlamydia and the Cytophaga-Flavobacterium-Bacteroides division Microbiology, September 1, 2001; 147(9): 2611 - 2622. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
