Effects of different proportions of stevia stalk on nutrient utilization and rumen fermentation in ruminal fluid derived from sheep

View article
Zoological Science

Introduction

Stevia (Stevia rebaudiana Bert.) is a green plant used as a calorie-free sweetener due to the presence of stevioside in leaves (Mehravaran et al., 2021), which has become the third natural sugar source widely used in food, beverage, medical, daily chemical and other industries in the world (Zhu, 2021; Sharma Saurabh et al., 2016), in which stevia leaves was only used as raw materials. Thus, a large number of stevia waste residues and discarded stevia stalks were produced as by-products of the sugar industry. Among them, only a small part of residues were used as agricultural fertilizers (Ding et al., 2016), others were used for fuel combustion or even landfill, which resulted in a lot of waste of straw resources and environmental pollution. Stevia was also rich in amino acids, minerals and active ingredients such as steviol and polyphenols (chlorogenic acid, flavonoids) (Xiong et al., 2022; Schiatti et al., 2022). It became a research hotspot in the field of livestock and poultry feed as feed ingredients. Studied found that adding 0.3%∼0.6% stevia (whole plant) into feed for one month could improve dairy cow appetite (Xie & Wang, 2010). 5% stevia residue regulated poultry digestive function (Shang, 2011). Stevia or stevia glycosides could improve appetite in livestock (Guo et al., 2016; Yu et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2014), goats (Han et al., 2019), poultry (Jiang et al., 2020) and racehorses (Ma & Ma, 2009), improve pets anorexia and feed conversion rate and regulate intestinal microflora balance (Ma & Ma, 2009). In addition, in vitro rumen fermentation of stevia residue was a typical acetic acid type fermentation, which could promote rumen carbohydrate fermentation, improve energy utilization and VFAs production, reduce methane production during rumen fermentation, all of which could be conducive to reducing greenhouse gas emission (He et al., 2017). Stevia could also stimulate the biological metabolic activity of rumen microbe, promote ammonia nitrogen transferring to microbial protein, so accelerate microbial protein synthesis (He et al., 2017). Therefore, stevia can be used as a natural green feed material with various bioactive functions. However, current studies on stevia have focused on dairy cows and poultry, and few have been reported in sheep. In this study, the effects of stevia stalk with different proportions on nutrients utilization in sheep rumen fluid and rumen fermentation were studied by in vitro gas production method. The in vitro gas production method is a research method to simulate the dynamic process of feed degradation in rumen in the laboratory and then determine the rate of nutrient degradation in feeds (Yang & Fang, 2015; Peñailillo et al., 2021). Therefore, we hypothesized that there would be differences in in vitro gas production and substrate degradation rates, etc., through adding different stevia stalk proportions to sheep rations, and determined the effect of stevia stalk on sheep nutrient utilization and rumen fermentation by in vitro gas production method, to determine the key indexes such as gas production rate and substrate degradation rate, so as to screen the best adding ratio and provide a theoretical reference for scientific application of stevia stalk in sheep production.

Materials & Methods

Test materials

Stevia stalk was collected from Wulan Town, Jingyuan County, Gansu Province, in November 2020. After drying at 65 °C for 48 h, initial moisture was determined, and plant material was crushed through a 40-mesh sieve for further use. Stevia samples were placed into nylon bags (9 cm × 5 cm, 400-mesh), which was placed into a 100 mL trachea with a chitin plug and plastic screw top. The basal diet was ground with a plant crusher and then prepared into dry matter substrate. The main nutrients in stevia stalk were shown in Table 1.

Rumen fluid collection

All experimental protocols were approved by the Livestock Care Committee of Gansu Agricultural University (GAU-LC-2022-0555). Rumen fluid was obtained from animals at Zhonghua Sheep Farm in Lanzhou, and the experiment was conducted with the consent of the farmer. It was collected from three sheep (Small Tailed Han Sheep, 3 months old, male) at different sites in rumen, then mixed with CO2 gas in an insulated bottle preheated to 39 °C. After the rumen fluid was extracted, the experimental sheep were in good health and had no adverse reaction. The bottle mouth was immediately covered, then transported to the laboratory quickly. All of the mixed contents were filtered through four layers of gauze and stored in containers in a 39 °C water bath. CO2 gas was continuously injected, all of which were completed as soon as possible.

Diet composition and nutrition

The trial sheep diet was made by Lanzhou Zhengda Co., Ltd. and formulated according to nutritional requirements of rams (body weight 45 kg, daily gain 50 g, fine to coarse ratio 4: 6) established by Agricultural Industry Standard of People’s Republic of China (NY/T816-2004). Dietary composition and nutritional information was shown in Table 2.

Test design

A single-factor experiment was conducted in seven treatments, these were, 0%, 0.2%, 0.4%, 0.6%, 0.8%, 1.0%, and 1.5% (dry matter basis) proportions of stevia stalk, added to total mixed basal diet and mixed evenly for fermenting substrate. The specific test design was shown in Table 3.

Table 1:
Stevia stalk powder nutrients (air-dried basis %).
Material DM(%) CP NDF ADF ESC Ca P Ash
Stevia stalk 96.64 3.76 57.62 40.04 10.90 0.73 0.13 5.34
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/table-1

Notes:

DM

dry matter

CP

crude protein

NDF

neutral detergent fiber

ADF

acid detergent fiber

ESC

monosaccharide

Ca

calcium

P

phosphorus

Ash

ash

Table 2:
Test diet composition and nutritional levels (dry basis).
Formula composition Proportion/ % Nutritional level Content
Corn 38 DM / % 86.0
Corn germ meal 20 DE (MJ/kg) 14.23
Corn cob flour 9 ME (MJ/kg) 11.67
Rice Husk Powder 8 Ca (%) 4.3
Sprayed corn husk 6 P (%) 1.9
Corn husk 5 CP (%) 9.4
Cotton meal 3
Rapeseed meal 2
Soybean meal 3.5
Bean curd 3.5
1% Premix additives 1
Salt 1
Total 100
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/table-2

Notes:

Each kilogram of premix contains: vitamin A, 220000 IU, vitamin D, 372000 IU, vitamin E, 2000 IU, D-biotin ,40.0 mg, nicotinamide, 2000 mg, Mn, 710 mg, Zn, 2005 mg, Fe, 830.0 mg, Cu, 680.0 mg, Co, 12 mg.

DM

dry matter

DE

digestible energy

ME

metabolizable energy

Ca

calcium

P

phosphorus

CP

crude protein

Table 3:
Test design.
Item Control treatment Test treatments
Stevia stalk powder 0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% 1.5%
Stevia stalk powder (% of DM in diet) concentration (g/kg) 0 2 4 6 8 10 15
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/table-3

In vitro fermentation method

Stevia stalk with concentrations of 0, 2, 4, 6, 8,10 and 15 g/kg was accurately weighed and placed in a homemade nylon bag (9 cm ×5 cm, 400-mesh) with 0.5000 g basal diet for substrate, numbered, sealed and then placed with forcep in the bottom of 100 mL tracheas, which were preheated to 39 °C for 30 min, in order to prevent gas from escaping, an appropriate amount of petroleum jelly was applied to the plunger of the syringe and then the filtered rumen fluid and artificial culture medium were mixed evenly at a volume ratio of 1: 2. 30 mL microbial culture mixture saturated with CO2 was accurately measured and placed in each trachea, sealed with rubber tube and clips, and the initial volume (mL) of each trachea was recorded. Each treatment contained 17 replicates. In order to ensure the representativeness of the test sample, three blank samples were made when the sample was incubated to eliminate test errors. After reading the initial volume, the tracheas were immediately transferred to water bath for culture preheated to 39  °C (the water surface height of the bath should be higher than liquid surface height of trachea culture solution) for 48 h. All data of the gas production at 2 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 36 h and 48 h were recorded. After 2 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h of fermentation, the fermentation tube was placed into an ice water bath to stop fermentation. Three replicates were removed after 2 h, 6 h, 12 h and 24 h fermenting respectively, keeping the last five replicates for 48 h fermenting were placed into an ice water bath to stop fermentation, collected fermentation broth and nylon bags for index measurements.

Indexes and measurement methods

Gas production

Gas production were recorded and the fermenting fluid were collected at 2 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 36 h, and 48 h; calculated cumulative gas production. The gas production for each time were calculated as fllows:

Gas production (mL/g) = (gas production in each tube recorded at each time - gas production in blank tubes at the same time)/fermentation substrate weight (Yang et al., 2017).

Fermentation indexes

pH value of rumen fluid was determined by pH meter (P611 type). Determination of ammonia nitrogen concentration (NH3-N), 10 mL of rumen fluid was centrifuged at 3,500 r/min for 10 min, 2 mL of supernatant was taken and placed in 15 mL test tube, then 8 mL of 0.2 mol/L hydrochloric acid was added to 10 mL, shaking, and the content of NH3-N was determined by colorimetry (Feng & Gao, 2010).

For volatile fatty acids (VFAs), sample of each treatment at each time was centrifuged at 5,400 r/min for 10 min at 4 °C; 1 mL of supernatant was added to a 1.5 mL centrifuge tube containing 0.2 mL of 25% phosphonic acid solution containing internal standard 2-ethyl butyric acid. The samples were mixed well, placed in an ice water bath for more than 30 min, centrifuged at 10,000 r/min for 10 min, filtered through a 0.22 µL filter membrane, and detected by gas chromatography (Li, 2021).

Rumen degradation rates

After 2 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h of fermentation, nylon bag was washed with distilled water until clear. After natural drying, the nylon bag was transferred to an oven at 65  °C for 48 h and dried to a constant weight. The weight of the residue was weighed and used to determine DMD, CPD, ADFD and NDFD of different treatments at different times. ADF and NDF contents were determined by fiber washing method.

Every index of rumen degradation rate of feed was calculated as: (Mass of certain components in feed-the mass of associated components in residue)/the mass of associated components in feed ×100% (Liu et al., 2021).

Data processing and statistical methods

Microsoft Excel 2010 was used for preliminary data collation. SPSS 23.0 software was used for single factor analysis of variance, duncan method was used for multiple comparisons. The results were expressed as means ± standard deviations, and P < 0.05 was considered significant. The data standardization of 48 h fermentation was transformed by membership function method.

The positive indexes were transformed according to the formula “Uij = (Xij-Ximin)/(Ximax-Ximin)”; the negative indexes were transformed according to the formula “Uij = 1 - (Xij-Ximin)/(Ximax-Ximin)”. In the formula Uij was the index (j) membership function value of different stevia stalk treatments (i); Xij was the measured value, Ximax and Ximin were the maximum and minimum measured values, respectively. The membership value of each index was obtained by the membership function method, and the average membership value of the measured index was calculated and used as the comprehensive evaluation of different stevia stalk treatments (Liao et al., 2022).

Results

Effects of stevia stalk on gas production, DMD, CPD, NDFD and ADFD of sheep diet

Effects of different stevia stalk proportions on gas production

The change trend of fermented gas production remained the same under different stevia stalk treatments. It tended to be slight at 2 h-6 h and increased at 6 h-24 h in each treatment, but they were significantly higher in 0.8%, 1.0% and 1.5% treatment at 2 h-6 h than that in the control (P < 0.05). All of treatment reached to flat at 36 h-48 h among treatments. The maximum value was obtained in 0.8% treatment at 36 h (P < 0.05) while got the highest value in 1.0% treatment at 48 h (P <  0.05) (Fig. 1; Table 4).

Variation curve of in vitro fermentation gas production under different stevia stalk treatments.
Figure 1: Variation curve of in vitro fermentation gas production under different stevia stalk treatments.
Different lines in the graph indicate different treatments, red represents 0% treatment, dark blue represents 0.2% treatment, dark gray represents 0.4% treatment, blue represents 0.6% treatment, light green represents 0.8% treatment, black represents 1.0% treatment, and dark green represents 1.5% treatment.
Table 4:
Significance among treatments.
Item Fermentation time
2 h 6 h 12 h 24 h 36 h 48 h
0% c d a a ab c
0.2% c c b ab b c
0.4% ab c ab b b c
0.6% bc c ab ab b c
0.8% a a ab ab a ab
1.0% a b a ab ab a
1.5% a b a ab ab bc
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.148 0.218 0.072 0.004
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/table-4

Notes:

Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences (P < 0.05) between different stevia stalk concentrations at the same time.

Effects of stevia stalk on DMD, CPD, NDFD and ADFD

The DMD of sheep diet increased with fermentation time extention. It was lower in each treatment fermented at 2 h, 6 h and 12 h than that in the control. After 48 h of fermentation, there were no significant differences among treatments (P > 0.536). But the DMD48h in 0.2% and 1.0% treatments were higher than that in the control (P > 0.05). CPD12 h, CPD24h and CPD48h in 1.0% and 1.5% treatments were higher than that in the control (P < 0.05). And the ADFD48h and NDFD48h of 0.8%, 1.0% and 1.5% treatments were significantly higher than those of other treatments (P < 0.05) (Table 5).

Table 5:
Effects of stevia stalk on DMD, CPD, NDFD and ADFD.
Items Fermentation time (h)
2 h 6 h 12 h 24 h 48 h
DMD 0% 28.18 ± 1.14a 28.08 ± 0.06a 31.26 ± 0.85a 32.92 ± 0.02a 34.77 ± 0.78a
0.2% 24.06 ± 0.36bc 24.45 ± 0.22bc 27.66 ± 0.25c 29.83 ± 0.04b 35.44 ± 0.27a
0.4% 25.09 ± 0.92bc 24.91 ± 0.4c 28.34 ± 0.49bc 31.19 ± 0.19ab 34.96 ± 0.47a
0.6% 25.59 ± 0.66b 27.63 ± 0.26a 29.67 ± 0.37abc 32.26 ± 0.21a 34.56 ± 0.51a
0.8% 24.49 ± 0.42bc 24.88 ± 0.21bc 28.42 ± 0.03bc 31.37 ± 0.33ab 34.31 ± 0.79a
1.0% 23.07 ± 0.17c 25.19 ± 0.76bc 27.64 ± 0.57c 31.39 ± 1.13ab 35.41 ± 0.29a
1.5% 23.33 ± 0.41c 25.91 ± 0.57b 29.97 ± 1.36ab 32.95 ± 0.77a 34.19 ± 0.32a
P- value 0.002 0.000 0.018 0.013 0.536
CPD 0% 0.42 ± 0.001f 0.38 ± 0.01b 0.44 ± 0.017bc 0.51 ± 0.002bc 0.62 ± 0.002b
0.2% 0.48 ± 0.004b 0.46 ± 0.001a 0.47 ± 0.001ab 0.51 ± 0.003bc 0.69 ± 0.007ab
0.4% 0.38 ± 0.001 g 0.4 ± 0.007b 0.41 ± 0.014c 0.52 ± 0.009bc 0.63 ± 0.002b
0.6% 0.43 ± 0.002e 0.46 ± 0a 0.45 ± 0.012abc 0.5 ± 0.008c 0.62 ± 0.004b
0.8% 0.44 ± 0.002d 0.39 ± 0.003b 0.49 ± 0.002ab 0.58 ± 0.006b 0.73 ± 0.015a
1.0% 0.51 ± 0.002a 0.44 ± 0.023a 0.5 ± 0.016a 0.66 ± 0.011a 0.77 ± 0.053a
1.5% 0.46 ± 0.001c 0.44 ± 0.016a 0.5 ± 0.028a 0.67 ± 0.061a 0.77 ± 0.045a
P- value 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.000 0.002
NDFD 0% 38.8 ± 0.96a 41.9 ± 0.81cd 63.23 ± 0.67c 63.18 ± 0.96bc 58.03 ± 0.57b
0.2% 31.93 ± 0.85bc 38.5 ± 0.6cd 58.38 ± 1.44d 57.83 ± 0.82cd 52.44 ± 1.85c
0.4% 39.3 ± 1.21a 36.28 ± 0.4d 69.51 ± 0.56b 60.94 ± 0.55cd 55.93 ± 0.65c
0.6% 30.1 ± 0.07c 42.79 ± 1.09ab 71.07 ± 1.06ab 69.75 ± 0.24a 58.25 ± 0.95b
0.8% 34.23 ± 0.29b 46.19 ± 0.44a 66.18 ± 0.97c 54.8 ± 2.79d 71.13 ± 2.11a
1.0% 24.44 ± 1.36d 36.37 ± 2.11d 63.05 ± 1.82c 60.07 ± 0.94cd 73.18 ± 1.01a
1.5% 31.31 ± 0.5c 46.34 ± 1.41a 73.12 ± 0.43a 68.6 ± 3.9ab 72.4 ± 0.94a
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000
ADFD 0% 26.52 ± 1.05bc 36.95 ± 0.15d 57.7 ± 0.42d 56.61 ± 0.34e 48.37 ± 0.49d
0.2% 28.62 ± 0.49b 36.37 ± 0.34d 58.17 ± 0.07d 70.11 ± 0.22ab 45.73 ± 0.52e
0.4% 22.53 ± 0.83de 36.37 ± 0.2d 60.99 ± 0.19c 59.79 ± 0.93d 45.45 ± 0.36e
0.6% 24.33 ± 0.69cd 36.18 ± 0.61d 66.07 ± 1.01b 57.35 ± 1.6de 59.19 ± 0.44b
0.8% 33.44 ± 0.32a 42.95 ± 0.21b 68.2 ± 0.18a 66.72 ± 1.34c 67.34 ± 0.71a
1.0% 21.22 ± 1.42e 38.9 ± 0.79c 65.35 ± 0.76b 72.28 ± 0.99a 52.76 ± 1.09c
1.5% 28.46 ± 0.42b 48.66 ± 0.31a 67.17 ± 0.86ab 68.58 ± 0.65bc 66.48 ± 1.35a
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/table-5

Notes:

Different lowercase letters in same column indicate significant differences (P < 0.05) between different stevia stalk concentrations at the same time and the same index; this also applies to the table below.

DMD

dry matter degradability

CPD

crude protein degradability

NDFD

neutral detergent fiber degradability

ADFD

acid detergent fiber degradability

Effects of stevia stalk on in vitro fermentation characteristics

As shown in Table 6, the pH value of rumen fluid derived from sheep treated with different stevia concentrations fluctuated between 6.21 and 7.25. It increased first and then decreased in 0%, 0.2%, 0.4% and 0.6% treatments while decreased in 0.8%, 1.0% and 1.5% treatments during fermentation. In short, with the extension of fermentation, the pH of rumen fluid declined. At 48 h, the pH was significantly lower in the 0.8% and 1.0% treatments than in the control (P < 0.05).

Table 6:
Changes of pH, NH3-N and VFAs in rumen fluid in different Stevia stalk treatments (mmol L−1).
Items Fermentation time (h)
2 h 6 h 12 h 24 h 48 h
pH 0% 6.98 ± 0.01b 7.25 ± 0.01a 6.85 ± 0.01a 6.63 ± 0.09b 6.48 ± 0.14bc
0.2% 6.93 ± 0.01b 7.24 ± 0.01a 6.88 ± 0.01a 6.83 ± 0.01a 6.55 ± 0.1ab
0.4% 6.93 ± 0.02b 7.21 ± 0.02ab 6.87 ± 0.01a 6.84 ± 0.01a 6.73 ± 0.01a
0.6% 7.11 ± 0.1a 7.19 ± 0.01b 6.88 ± 0.02a 6.8 ± 0.03a 6.68 ± 0.07ab
0.8% 6.9 ± 0.01b 6.83 ± 0.01c 6.57 ± 0.01c 6.6 ± 0.02b 6.24 ± 0.02d
1.0% 6.89 ± 0.01b 6.81 ± 0.02c 6.62 ± 0b 6.56 ± 0.02b 6.21 ± 0.04d
1.5% 6.92 ± 0.01b 6.83 ± 0.01c 6.6 ± 0b 6.52 ± 0.01b 6.29 ± 0.02cd
P- value 0.014 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
NH3-N 0% 20.08 ± 0.28ab 16.21 ± 1.98c 12.17 ± 0.33e 26.04 ± 0.24c 37.69 ± 0.87ab
0.2% 20.93 ± 1.56ab 19.37 ± 0.51bc 17.53 ± 0.66d 23.93 ± 0.34de 37.27 ± 3.75ab
0.4% 16.7 ± 1.26b 17.3 ± 2.64c 14.2 ± 1.37e 22.1 ± 0.57e 32.92 ± 1.16c
0.6% 17.97 ± 1.99ab 15.44 ± 2.42c 20.7 ± 0.08c 24.88 ± 0.85cd 34.54 ± 1.17ab
0.8% 18.94 ± 0.71ab 27.17 ± 1.96a 31.41 ± 0.56b 44.15 ± 0.72ab 38.67 ± 0.43b
1.0% 22.48 ± 0.55a 24.53 ± 3.48ab 35.97 ± 1.07a 45.92 ± 0.3a 43.39 ± 1.91a
1.5% 20.05 ± 3.15ab 27.85 ± 1.57b 30.48 ± 0.48b 42.39 ± 0.85b 43.67 ± 1.49a
P- value 0.294 0.004 0.000 0.000 0.000
Acetic acid 0% 12.27 ± 0.06c 18.2 ± 0.1d 18.81 ± 0.04d 16.69 ± 1.36d 24.51 ± 1.79ab
0.2% 12.02 ± 0.52c 13.48 ± 0.14e 17.86 ± 0.14d 22.12 ± 1.03bc 13.89 ± 3.52c
0.4% 16.22 ± 0.1b 13.67 ± 0.34e 18.52 ± 0.02d 23.51 ± 1.04bc 24.36 ± 4.07ab
0.6% 11.42 ± 0.51c 12.02 ± 0.3f 20.07 ± 0.04c 28.52 ± 0.9a 16.88 ± 0.99bc
0.8% 15.71 ± 0.03b 23.46 ± 0.56b 29.8 ± 0.64a 20.77 ± 0.43c 27.49 ± 0.74a
1.0% 18.1 ± 0.17a 24.62 ± 0.31a 26.27 ± 0.43b 24.44 ± 0.57b 31.61 ± 1.17a
1.5% 15.41 ± 0.14b 19.74 ± 0.25c 20.3 ± 0.56c 21.83 ± 0.41bc 22.27 ± 2.08abc
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006
Propionic acid 0% 6.15 ± 0.13d 5.22 ± 0.01b 7.28 ± 0.21cd 5.17 ± 0.02d 15.74 ± 4.61bc
0.2% 5.19 ± 0.11d 6.78 ± 0.23b 8.61 ± 0.11c 5.22 ± 0.01d 8.77 ± 1.74d
0.4% 13.77 ± 0.25a 5.18 ± 0.01b 9.38 ± 0.03c 5.24 ± 0.01d 10.44 ± 0.88cd
0.6% 5.56 ± 0.41d 5.19 ± 0.01b 5.13 ± 0.01d 11.62 ± 1.06c 8.69 ± 1.01d
0.8% 8.46 ± 0.48c 19.46 ± 2.36a 18.64 ± 1.8b 17.92 ± 0.16b 20.04 ± 0.07ab
1.0% 11.78 ± 0.76b 5.54 ± 0.21b 24.2 ± 0.45a 20.42 ± 0.67a 22.45 ± 0.63a
1.5% 9.34 ± 0.66c 5.31 ± 0.1b 16.66 ± 1.23b 17.99 ± 0.3b 18.96 ± 1.55ab
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Isobutyric acid 0% 0.48 ± 0.01bc 0.41 ± 0d 0.54 ± 0.01abc 0.69 ± 0.02ab 0.78 ± 0.13abc
0.2% 0.48 ± 0.01bc 0.5 ± 0.01c 0.52 ± 0.01cd 0.47 ± 0.04e 0.56 ± 0.03c
0.4% 0.5 ± 0ab 0.48 ± 0c 0.55 ± 0ab 0.57 ± 0d 0.6 ± 0.06bc
0.6% 0.48 ± 0c 0.49 ± 0c 0.48 ± 0.04d 0.61 ± 0.02cd 0.63 ± 0.01abc
0.8% 0.5 ± 0abc 0.59 ± 0.02a 0.61 ± 0.01b 0.72 ± 0a 0.84 ± 0ab
1.0% 0.52 ± 0.02a 0.56 ± 0.01ab 0.68 ± 0.04a 0.72 ± 0.01a 0.86 ± 0.02a
1.5% 0.5 ± 0.01abc 0.55 ± 0.01b 0.54 ± 0abc 0.65 ± 0bc 0.84 ± 0.03ab
P- value 0.011 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.033
Butyric acid 0% 1.94 ± 0.01b 2.19 ± 0.02c 3.02 ± 0.07de 3.48 ± 0.05e 4.67 ± 0.07ab
0.2% 2.43 ± 0.23b 2.05 ± 0.03c 2.84 ± 0.05e 3.96 ± 0.04d 2.66 ± 0.62c
0.4% 3.24 ± 0.05a 2 ± 0.01c 3.12 ± 0.06d 4.26 ± 0.02cd 4.37 ± 0.23ab
0.6% 2.13 ± 0.32b 2.03 ± 0.02c 3 ± 0.1de 4.7 ± 0.23a 3.98 ± 0.22b
0.8% 3.07 ± 0.04a 4.03 ± 0.32a 4.59 ± 0.04b 4.35 ± 0bc 5.06 ± 0.11ab
1.0% 3.4 ± 0.24a 3.71 ± 0.07ab 5.44 ± 0a 4.59 ± 0.07ab 5.32 ± 0.05a
1.5% 3.11 ± 0.06a 3.47 ± 0.14b 3.44 ± 0.05c 4.19 ± 0.09cd 4.86 ± 0.27ab
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Isovaleric acid 0% 0.53 ± 0.01ab 0.52 ± 0b 0.56 ± 0.01cd 0.88 ± 0.14a 1.05 ± 0.16b
0.2% 0.55 ± 0.02a 0.48 ± 0.02b 0.53 ± 0.01d 0.63 ± 0b 0.62 ± 0.12c
0.4% 0.54 ± 0ab 0.49 ± 0.01b 0.57 ± 0.01cd 0.56 ± 0.04b 0.91 ± 0.05bc
0.6% 0.49 ± 0.01bc 0.5 ± 0b 0.53 ± 0.01d 0.69 ± 0.03b 0.87 ± 0.09bc
0.8% 0.52 ± 0ab 0.62 ± 0.02a 0.76 ± 0.02b 1.03 ± 0.03a 1.83 ± 0.14a
1.0% 0.53 ± 0.01ab 0.59 ± 0.01a 0.83 ± 0.02a 1.03 ± 0a 1.6 ± 0.09a
1.5% 0.45 ± 0.04c 0.58 ± 0.01a 0.58 ± 0.01c 0.9 ± 0.03a 1.46 ± 0.03a
P- value 0.023 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Valeric acid 0% 0.56 ± 0b 0.66 ± 0.01c 1.02 ± 0.02d 1.74 ± 0.29a 2.51 ± 0.33a
0.2% 0.71 ± 0.12b 0.63 ± 0.01c 0.94 ± 0.01d 1.36 ± 0.02b 1.08 ± 0.35c
0.4% 1.01 ± 0.01a 0.63 ± 0c 1.05 ± 0d 1.54 ± 0ab 1.62 ± 0.06bc
0.6% 0.64 ± 0.12b 0.62 ± 0.01c 0.92 ± 0.01d 1.77 ± 0.03a 1.47 ± 0.17bc
0.8% 0.97 ± 0.01a 1.33 ± 0.09a 1.53 ± 0.02b 1.67 ± 0.01ab 2.09 ± 0.05ab
1.0% 1.05 ± 0.06a 1.25 ± 0.01ab 1.72 ± 0.11a 1.77 ± 0.01a 2.14 ± 0.04ab
1.5% 0.99 ± 0.01a 1.18 ± 0.03b 1.22 ± 0.01c 1.54 ± 0ab 1.91 ± 0.07ab
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.145 0.005
Total acid 0% 21.92 ± 0.04c 27.18 ± 0.12cd 31.23 ± 0.26de 28.64 ± 1.87d 49.05 ± 3.28ab
0.2% 21.38 ± 0.8cd 23.92 ± 0.33de 31.3 ± 0.3de 33.75 ± 1.07c 33.36 ± 8.44c
0.4% 35.28 ± 0.4a 22.45 ± 0.34e 33.19 ± 0.11d 35.69 ± 1.03c 42.31 ± 5.22bc
0.6% 19.78 ± 0.58d 20.84 ± 0.29e 30.13 ± 0.1e 47.91 ± 1.87b 32.51 ± 3.2c
0.8% 29.22 ± 0.42b 49.49 ± 3.36a 55.93 ± 1.2b 46.45 ± 0.37b 57.79 ± 0.65ab
1.0% 35.38 ± 0.46a 36.27 ± 0.05b 59.14 ± 1.05a 52.96 ± 1.33a 63.62 ± 1.72a
1.5% 29.79 ± 0.91b 30.83 ± 0.46c 42.73 ± 1.59c 47.1 ± 0.8b 50.3 ± 3.69ab
P- value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/table-6

Notes:

NH3-N

ammoniacal nitrogenin

VFAs

volatile fatty acids

The concentration of NH3-N in sheep rumen fluid decreased with the extension of fermentation time. 0.4% treatment had significantly lower NH3-N48h than other treatments (P < 0.05), while there had no significant different NH3-N48h between other treatments and control (P > 0.05).

During period of 2 h-48 h, the concentrations of acetic acid and propionic acid varied significantly among treatments, while the concentrations of isobutyric acid, butyric acid, isovalerate and valerate changed only slightly and remained relatively stable. At 6 h and 12 h, the total acid content of 0.8% and 1.0% treatments were significantly higher than that of other treatments (P < 0.05), while at 48 h, it had no difference in 0.8%, 1.0% , and 1.5% treatment, compared to the control. But showed the higest value in 1.0% treatment.

Comprehensive analysis

It was insufficient to evaluate the fermentation characteristics with single index. Using the membership function method to analyze the relevant indicators of rumen fermentation characteristics comprehensively could reflect the overall performance of rumen fermentation accurately. In this study, the membership function method was used to comprehensively analyze pH, NH3-N, VFAs, DMD, CPD, NDFD and ADFD (Table 7). The higher the comprehensive analysis value, the better the fermentation of rumen nutrients. The results showed that order of the treatments was 1.0% >0.8% >1.5% >0.4% >0.6% >0.2%.

Table 7:
Comprehensive indexes, weights, membership function values and rankings.
Item 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% 1.0% 1.5%
Weights pH 0.0542 0.0645 0.0615 0.0898 0.0909 0.0854
NH3-N 0.0554 0.0767 0.0692 0.0843 0.0756 0.0715
Acetic acid 0.0967 0.0674 0.0920 0.0771 0.0675 0.0912
Propionic acid 0.0984 0.1010 0.1148 0.0679 0.0610 0.0688
Isobutyric acid 0.0763 0.0871 0.0785 0.0803 0.0790 0.0769
Butyric acid 0.0962 0.0716 0.0744 0.0798 0.0764 0.0796
Isovaleric acid 0.0928 0.0773 0.0765 0.0496 0.0571 0.0596
Valeric acid 0.1274 0.1038 0.1082 0.1039 0.1021 0.1083
Total acid 0.0806 0.0776 0.0956 0.0740 0.0671 0.0808
DMD 0.0538 0.0666 0.0638 0.0869 0.0861 0.0842
CPD 0.0496 0.0659 0.0634 0.0737 0.0705 0.0670
NDFD 0.0606 0.0695 0.0503 0.0706 0.0867 0.0664
ADFD 0.0580 0.0713 0.0518 0.0621 0.0798 0.0603
Membership function value pH 0.6538 1.0000 0.9038 0.0577 0.0000 0.1538
NH3-N 0.4047 0.0000 0.1507 0.5349 0.9740 1.0000
Acetic acid 0.0000 0.5909 0.1687 0.7675 1.0000 0.4729
Propionic acid 0.0058 0.1272 0.0000 0.8249 1.0000 0.7464
Isobutyric acid 0.0000 0.1333 0.2333 0.9333 1.0000 0.9333
Butyric acid 0.0000 0.6429 0.4962 0.9023 1.0000 0.8271
Isovaleric acid 0.0000 0.2397 0.2066 1.0000 0.8099 0.6942
Valeric acid 0.0000 0.3776 0.2727 0.7063 0.7413 0.5874
Total acid 0.0270 0.3148 0.0000 0.7974 1.0000 0.5714
DMD 1.0000 0.6130 0.2965 0.3322 0.7904 0.0000
CPD 0.4444 0.0689 0.0000 0.7334 0.9889 1.0000
NDFD 0.0000 0.1681 1.0000 0.9013 0.2803 0.9622
ADFD 0.0127 0.0000 0.6273 1.0000 0.3338 0.9604
Comprehensive evaluation value 0.1372 0.3139 0.2838 0.7041 0.7355 0.6559
Total ranking 6 4 5 2 1 3
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/table-7

Discussion

Substrate degradation rate

Dry matter degradation rate, gas production and in vivo digestibility are highly correlated (Blümmel, Makkar & Becker, 1997). In this experiment, the trend of gas production with different concentrations was consistent, and they were stable at 2 h-6 h, it was because the rumen microbial activity was weak and a small amount of gas produced in early fermentation stage, while to 6 h-36 h, rumen microbe proliferated, acting on substrate completely to be digested enough, thus producing large amounts of gas rapidly. The gas production decreased slowly with the nutrients being consumed. Menke et al. (1979) showed that the rate of forage organic matter degradation was positively correlated with gas production during in vitro incubation, i.e., higher gas production indicated higher forage degradation in rumen and higher microbial activity. The results of this study showed that the CPD48h, NDFD48h and ADFD48h of 0.6%, 0.8%, 1.0% and 1.5% stevia stalk treatments were higher than those without stevia stalk, and 1.0% treatment has the highest gas production at 48 h, which was consistent with the result of DMD48h, CPD48h and NDFD48h. It showed that appropriate concentration of stevia stalk could improve sheep rumen digestive function and promote crude fiber digestion and absorption in diet, adding 1.0% stevia stalk could promote the microbe fermentation activities in rumen more effectively, thus improved feed digestibility. Studies showed that the active ingredients such as stevia or flavonoids in stevia rebaudiana could reduce rumen protozoa and increase cellulolytic bacteria amount to facilitate fiber decomposition and change rumen micro ecological environment (He et al., 2017). This was consistent with the results of the Sarnataro’s study (2020). Studies reported that sea buckthorn flavonoids (Bai et al., 2020) and sea onion flavonoids (Bao et al., 2015) significantly increased rumen gas production, which was consistent with the results of the present experimental study. Its specific mechanism needs further research in feeding experiments.

Rumen fermentation characteristics

The pH value is a comprehensive index reflecting rumen fermentation level, it not only reflects the strength of rumen microbial activity but also serves as an important indicator to evaluate nutrients decomposition status and assess rumen internal environment stability. The normal rumen pH is 5.5 ∼7.5, and pH values higher or lower than this range will affect normal fermentation in rumen. When pH value is lower than 6.0, the number of fiber-decomposing bacteria and protozoa will decrease, and the cellulose and protein degradation rates in diet will also decrease (Liu et al., 2012; Krause & Oetzel, 2005). In this experiment, the pH range was 6.21 to 7.25, and high stevia stalk concentration (0.8%, 1.0%, 1.5%) could decrease the pH of the rumen culture medium, but the final pH still remained within the normal physiological range. This was consistent with the results of He’s study (2017). It indicated that the artificial rumen was in a normal fermentation state and had not adverse effects on normal metabolism of rumen microbe, ensuring rumen microbe normal growth and reproduction. An explanation was that rumen microbe decomposed starch and structural carbohydrates in feed, producing a large number of VFAs. Moreover, with the extension of fermentation, VFAs was accumulated in fermentation tubes, resulting in a further decline in pH value. Consistent with the result of a negative correlation between VFAs and rumen pH by Stritzler et al. (1998).

The NH3-N concentration in rumen is an important indicator of nitrogen metabolism, microbial protein synthesis and protein degradation. Maintaining an appropriate NH3-N concentration is a prerequisite for microbial protein synthesis in rumen (Feng et al., 2017). A suitable rumen NH3-N concentration is beneficial to growth of microbe, and higher NH3-N concentration is beneficial to fibrolytic bacteria growth and reproduction and DM degradation. The most suitable NH3-N concentration range for microbial activity was 0.35 ∼29 mg/dL (Galdi et al., 2002). In this experiment, the NH3-N concentration was 12.17 ∼45.92 mg/dL, and NH3-N concentrations were relatively high in all treatments for 48 h. He et al. (2017) found that stevia residue reduced ruminal NH3-N concentration, contrary to the results of the present study. This might be related to factors such as feed type, feeding form and in vitro fermentation. In this experiment, after 12 h of rumen fermentation, NH3-N concentration in each treatment increased significantly, which might be due to the longer retention time of chyme in rumen and the longer interaction time between rumen microbe and feed particles (He et al., 2020). This might also be associated with lower microbial utilization. With the extension of fermentation, the pH of rumen fluid decreased, and the decreased pH environment was not conducive to the growth of microbe that decomposed structural carbohydrates. The utilization efficiency of NH3-N by microbe that decompose structural carbohydrates decreased, resulting in increasing of NH3-N concentration in rumen. This was also consistent with the decreasing trends of the pH value.

VFAs in the rumen are important indicators of rumen fermentation in sheep and can reflect the environmental conditions in the rumen, the fermentation degree and the type of feed in rumen (Liu et al., 2012). In this experiment, at 48 h of fermentation, the content of acetic acid and propionic acid increased in all treatments, and acetic acid contents were higher than propionic acid contents, and the total acid content of 1.0% treatment was the highest. It could be seen that adding 1.0% stevia stalk could increase the concentration of VFA in vitro fermentation, better improve rumen fermentation capacity, maintain the normal growth, development and reproduction of rumen microbe and ensure the normal function of rumen, which was consistent with the results of pH value decreased to the lowest and NH3-N concentration increased. However, Jiang (2019) found that the addition of stevia pellets to lactating cows did not affect rumen fermentation. Studies had shown that in vitro rumen fermentation of stevia residue was a typical acetic acid type fermentation, which could promote rumen carbohydrate fermentation, improve energy utilization and VFAs production (He et al., 2017). This indicated that stevia stalk also had good feeding value as a by-product. Stevia extract could reduce the number of rumen protozoa, thereby affecting rumen metabolism (Chiara & Mauro, 2020). It was also reported that stevia could help digest and prevent constipation. Stevia could promote the proliferation of bifidobacteria and lactobacillus in human body, improve human immunity, prevent and treat constipation and diarrhea (Xu, 2013). Stevia rebaudiana residue could significantly inhibit the growth of harmful bacteria and promote the proliferation of beneficial bacteria (Zhong et al., 2022). Therefore, it was speculated that the glycosides in stevia stalk also had an effect on sheep gastrointestinal fermentation. However, whether the increase of VFAs content in this experiment was related to steviosides in stevia rebaudiana, its mechanism needs further study.

Conclusions

Evaluating the nutritional value of ruminant feed by in vitro gas production was feasible, and adding stevia to the diet could be used by ruminants and could improve feed conversion, promote rumen fermentation and, to a certain extent, reduce breeding costs. Under the experimental conditions, the appropriate level of stevia stalk supplementation was 1.0%.

Supplemental Information

Raw data used for all indicators in this article

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/supp-1

The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: author checklist

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14689/supp-2
11 Citations   Views   Downloads