HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Interpretive Summary Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Desnoyers, M. Articles by Sauvant, D. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Desnoyers, M. Articles by Sauvant, D.

Meta-analysis of the influence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae supplementation on ruminal parameters and milk production of ruminants

M. Desnoyers^*,, S. Giger-Reverdin^*,1, G. Bertin, C. Duvaux-Ponter^* and D. Sauvant^*

^* Unite Mixté de Recherches, Institut National de la Recherche Agnonomique-AgroParisTech Physiologie de la Nutrition et Alimentation, 75231 Paris Cedex 05, France
Alltech France, 92593 Levallois-Perret Cedex, France

¹ Corresponding author: sylvie.giger-reverdin{at}agroparistech.fr

The effects of yeast supplementation on intake, production, and rumen fermentation characteristics have been widely studied, but results are inconsistent between different studies. A quantitative meta-analysis was applied to 110 papers, 157 experiments, and 376 treatments dealing with yeast supplementation in ruminants. The objective was first to highlight the major quantitative effects of live yeast supplementation on intake, rumen fermentation, and milk production, and second, to identify major differences in experimental conditions between studies that can affect the response to treatment. Some of these experimental conditions are referred to as interfering factors. Yeast supplementation increased rumen pH (+0.03 on average) and rumen volatile fatty acid concentration (+2.17 mM on average), tended to decrease rumen lactic acid concentration (–0.9 mM on average), and had no influence on acetate-to-propionate ratio. Total-tract organic matter digestibility was also increased by yeast supplementation (+0.8% on average). Yeast supplementation increased dry matter intake (DMI; +0.44 g/kg of body weight; BW), milk yield (+1.2 g/kg of BW), and tended to increase milk fat content (+0.05%), but had no influence on milk protein content. Dose effects of yeast supplementation, expressed as log₁₀ [1+(cfu per 100 kg of BW)], globally confirmed the qualitative effects observed in the first analysis. The positive effect of yeast supplementation on rumen pH increased with the percentage of concentrate in the diet and with the DMI level. It was negatively correlated with the level of dietary neutral detergent fiber (NDF). The positive effect of yeast supplementation on rumen volatile fatty acid concentration increased with DMI and crude protein levels. The positive effect of yeast supplementation on organic matter digestibility increased with the percentage of concentrate and NDF in the diet. The negative effect of yeast supplementation on lactic acid concentration tended to decrease when the DMI level and the percentage of concentrate in the diet increased. The effects of interfering factors were globally similar when either dose effect or qualitative effect of yeast was taken into account. Although rumen fermentation efficiency per se was not measured, these results suggest an improvement in rumen fermentation by yeast supplementation. This effect could, however, be modulated by several different factors such as DMI, percentage of concentrate or NDF in the diet, or species.

Key Words: meta-analysis • yeast • Saccharomyces cerevisiae • ruminant