Evaluation of fungal degradation of wheat straw cell wall using different analytical methods from ruminant nutrition perspective.
carbohydrates
in vitro gas production
lignin
lignin quantification
pyrolysis-GC/MS
white-rot fungi
Journal
Journal of the science of food and agriculture
ISSN: 1097-0010
Titre abrégé: J Sci Food Agric
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0376334
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Jun 2019
Historique:
received:
10
07
2018
revised:
06
02
2019
accepted:
07
02
2019
pubmed:
10
2
2019
medline:
16
7
2019
entrez:
10
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
White rot fungi have been used to improve the nutritive value of lignocellulose for ruminants. In feed analysis, the Van Soest method is widely used to determine the cell wall contents. To assess the reliability of this method (Method A) for determination of cell wall contents in fungal-treated wheat straw, we compared a combined monosaccharide analysis and pyrolysis coupled to gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) (Method B). Ruminal digestibility, measured as in vitro gas production (IVGP), was subsequently used to examine which method explains best the effect of fungal pretreatment on the digestibility of wheat straw. Both methods differed considerably in the mass recoveries of the individual cell wall components, which changed on how we assess their degradation characteristics. For example, Method B gave a higher degradation of lignin (61.9%), as compared to Method A (33.2%). Method A, however, showed a better correlation of IVGP with the ratio of lignin to total structural carbohydrates, as compared to Method B (Pearson's r of -0.84 versus -0.69). Nevertheless, Method B provides a more accurate quantification of lignin, reflecting its actual modification and degradation. With the information on the lignin structural features, Method B presents a substantial advantage in understanding the underlying mechanisms of lignin breakdown. Both methods, however, could not accurately quantify the cellulose contents - among others, due to interference of fungal biomass. Method A only accounts for the recalcitrant residue and therefore is more suitable for evaluating ruminal digestibility. Method B allows a more accurate quantification of cell wall, required to understand and better explains the actual modification of the cell wall. The suitability of both methods, therefore, depends on their intended purposes. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
White rot fungi have been used to improve the nutritive value of lignocellulose for ruminants. In feed analysis, the Van Soest method is widely used to determine the cell wall contents. To assess the reliability of this method (Method A) for determination of cell wall contents in fungal-treated wheat straw, we compared a combined monosaccharide analysis and pyrolysis coupled to gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) (Method B). Ruminal digestibility, measured as in vitro gas production (IVGP), was subsequently used to examine which method explains best the effect of fungal pretreatment on the digestibility of wheat straw.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Both methods differed considerably in the mass recoveries of the individual cell wall components, which changed on how we assess their degradation characteristics. For example, Method B gave a higher degradation of lignin (61.9%), as compared to Method A (33.2%). Method A, however, showed a better correlation of IVGP with the ratio of lignin to total structural carbohydrates, as compared to Method B (Pearson's r of -0.84 versus -0.69). Nevertheless, Method B provides a more accurate quantification of lignin, reflecting its actual modification and degradation. With the information on the lignin structural features, Method B presents a substantial advantage in understanding the underlying mechanisms of lignin breakdown. Both methods, however, could not accurately quantify the cellulose contents - among others, due to interference of fungal biomass.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Method A only accounts for the recalcitrant residue and therefore is more suitable for evaluating ruminal digestibility. Method B allows a more accurate quantification of cell wall, required to understand and better explains the actual modification of the cell wall. The suitability of both methods, therefore, depends on their intended purposes. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30737799
doi: 10.1002/jsfa.9634
pmc: PMC6593870
doi:
Substances chimiques
lignocellulose
11132-73-3
Cellulose
9004-34-6
Lignin
9005-53-2
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4054-4062Subventions
Organisme : Wageningen UR Fund (WUF)
Organisme : DEKA
Organisme : ForFarmers
Organisme : The Victam Foundation
Organisme : Ministry of Higher Education
Organisme : Universiti Putra Malaysia
Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Références
J Agric Food Chem. 1999 May;47(5):2005-8
pubmed: 10552486
J Dairy Sci. 1991 Oct;74(10):3583-97
pubmed: 1660498
Bioresour Technol. 2007 Jul;98(10):2034-42
pubmed: 17029957
Biomacromolecules. 2008 Jul;9(7):1870-5
pubmed: 18540645
Biotechnol Bioeng. 1988 Sep 5;32(6):771-6
pubmed: 18587784
Bioresour Technol. 2009 Jan;100(1):10-8
pubmed: 18599291
Eukaryot Cell. 2008 Nov;7(11):1980-93
pubmed: 18806214
Environ Microbiol. 2011 Jan;13(1):96-107
pubmed: 21199251
Bioresour Technol. 2012 May;111:336-42
pubmed: 22377477
J Agric Food Chem. 2012 Jun 13;60(23):5922-35
pubmed: 22607527
Biotechnol Adv. 2015 Jan-Feb;33(1):191-202
pubmed: 25447421
Bioresour Technol. 2016 Jan;199:83-91
pubmed: 26316403
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 05;10(10):e0138909
pubmed: 26436656
Fungal Genet Biol. 2016 May;90:53-60
pubmed: 26688467
J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2016 Sep 22;7:55
pubmed: 27688879
J Appl Microbiol. 2017 Aug;123(2):352-361
pubmed: 28517113
Anal Chem. 2017 Oct 17;89(20):10907-10916
pubmed: 28926698
J Appl Microbiol. 2018 Aug;125(2):468-479
pubmed: 29704882
Biotechnol Biofuels. 2018 Sep 26;11:262
pubmed: 30263063
Analyst. 1982 Mar;107(1272):307-18
pubmed: 6283946
Microbiology. 1994 Mar;140 ( Pt 3):631-6
pubmed: 8012585
Lett Appl Microbiol. 1996 Sep;23(3):195-8
pubmed: 8862026
J Nutr. 1997 May;127(5 Suppl):819S-823S
pubmed: 9164244