Cited by 118Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production

Effect of camelina oil or live yeasts (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on ruminal methane production, rumen fermentation, and milk fatty acid composition in lactating cows fed grass silage diets

Open access
Bayat, A.R., Kairenius, P., Stefański, T., Leskinen, H., Comtet-Marre, S., Forano, E., Chaucheyras-Durand, F., Shingfield, K.J.·2015·Journal of Dairy Science

Abstract

The potential of dietary supplements of 2 live yeast strains (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) or camelina oil to lower ruminal methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) production and the associated effects on animal performance, rumen fermentation, rumen microbial populations, nutrient metabolism, and milk fatty acid (FA) composition of cows fed grass silage-based diets were examined. Four Finnish Ayrshire cows (53±7 d in milk) fitted with rumen cannula were used in a 4×4 Latin square with four 42-d periods. Cows received a basal total mixed ration (control treatment) with a 50:50 forage-to-concentrate ratio [on a dry matter (DM) basis] containing grass silage, the same basal total mixed ration supplemented with 1 of 2 live yeasts, A or B, administered directly in the rumen at 10(10) cfu/d (treatments A and B), or supplements of 60g of camelina oil/kg of diet DM that replaced concentrate ingredients in the basal total mixed ration (treatment CO). Relative to the control, treatments A and B had no effects on DM intake, rumen fermentation, ruminal gas production, or apparent total-tract nutrient digestibility. In contrast, treatment CO lowered DM intake and ruminal CH4 and CO2 production, responses associated with numerical nonsignificant decreases in total-tract organic matter digestibility, but no alterations in rumen fermentation characteristics or changes in the total numbers of rumen bacteria, methanogens, protozoa, and fungi. Compared with the control, treatment CO decreased the yields of milk, milk fat, lactose, and protein. Relative to treatment B, treatment CO improved nitrogen utilization due to a lower crude protein intake. Treatment A had no influence on milk FA composition, whereas treatment B increased cis-9 10:1 and decreased 11-cyclohexyl 11:0 and 24:0 concentrations. Treatment CO decreased milk fat 8:0 to 16:0 and total saturated FA, and increased 18:0, 18:1, 18:2, conjugated linoleic acid, 18:3n-3, and trans FA concentrations. Decreases in ruminal CH4 production to treatment CO were related, at least in part to lowered DM intake, whereas treatments had no effect on ruminal CH4 emission intensity (g/kg of digestible organic matter intake or milk yield). Results indicated that live yeasts A and B had no influence on animal performance, ruminal gas production, rumen fermentation, or nutrient utilization in cows fed grass silage-based diets. Dietary supplements of camelina oil decreased ruminal CH4 and CO2 production, but also lowered the yields of milk and milk constituents due to an adverse effect on intake.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3168/jds.2014-7976

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bayat, A. R., Kairenius, P., Stefański, T., Leskinen, H., Comtet-Marre, S., Forano, E., Chaucheyras-Durand, F., & Shingfield, K. J.
Affiliations
  • Natural Resources Institute Finland (FI)
  • Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (FR)
Corresponding author
Bayat, A.R.
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Published
2015-05
Volume
98
Issue
5
Pages
3166-3181
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2164605450
Cited by
118
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 3
FWCI
23.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • Jukuri (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Keywords
methane, camelina oil, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, live yeast supplementation, grass silage, lactating dairy cows, milk fatty acid composition, rumen fermentation, rumen methanogens, dietary supplementation, milk fat, conjugated linoleic acid, trans fatty acids, nitrogen utilization, dry matter intake, rumen protozoa, rumen fungi
MeSH terms
Animals, Carbon Dioxide, Cattle, Diet, Digestion, Fatty Acids, Female, Fermentation, Poaceae, Lactation, Lactose, Methane, Milk, Plant Oils, Rumen, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Silage, Dietary Supplements, Brassicaceae

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review