Effect of increasing doses of chitosan to grazing beef steers on the relative population and transcript abundance of Archaea and cellulolytic and amylolytic bacterias

References

• Kong M, Chen XG, Xing K, Park HJ. Antimicrobial properties of chitosan and mode of action: a state of the art review. Int J Food Microbiol. 2010;144(1):51–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helander IM, Nurmiaho-Lassila EL, Ahvenainen R, Rhoades J, Roller S. Chitosan disrupts the barrier properties of the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria. Int J Food Microbiol. 2001;71(2–3):235–244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belanche A, Pinloche E, Preskett D, Newbold CJ. Effects and mode of action of chitosan and ivy fruit saponins on the microbiome, fermentation and methanogenesis in the rumen simulation technique. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2016;81–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zanferari F, Vendramini THA, Rentas MF, et al. Effects of chitosan and whole raw soybeans on ruminal fermentation and bacterial populations, and milk fatty acid profile in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2018;101(12):10939–10952.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paulino MF, Detmann E, Valente EEL. Nutricão de bovinos em pastejo. In: Simpósio Sobre Manejo Estratégico Da Pastagem, 2008, Viçosa, MG. Proceedings. Viçosa: UFV; 2008:131–169.
   Google Scholar
• Dias AOC, Goes RHTB, Gandra JR, et al. Increasing doses of chitosan to grazing beef steers: Nutrient intake and digestibility, ruminal fermentation, and nitrogen utilization. Animal Feed Science Technology. 2017;225:73–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaps MF, Lamberson WR. Biostatistics for Animal Science. 2nd ed. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Dubbs TM, Vanzant ES, Kitts SE, Bapst RF, Fieser BG, Howlett CM. Characterization of season and sampling method effects on measurement of forage quality in fescue-based pastures. Journal Animal Science. 2003;81(5):1308–1315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official Methods of Analysis. 17th ed. Arlington, VA: AOAC International; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Van Soest J, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci. 1991;74(10):3583–3597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council (NRC). Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy of Science; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Tajima K, Aminov RI, Nagamine T, Matsui H, Nakamura M, Benno Y. Diet-dependent shifts in the bacterial population of the rumen revealed with real-time PCR. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001;67(6):2766–2774.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevenson DM, Weimer PJ. Dominance of Prevotella and low abundance of classical ruminal bacterial species in the bovine rumen revealed by relative quantification real-time PCR. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009;83(5):987–988.
   Google Scholar
• Stevenson DM, Weimer PJ. Dominance of Prevotella and low abundance of classical ruminal bacterial species in the bovine rumen revealed by relative quantification real-time PCR. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2007;75(1):165–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohene-Adjei S, Chaves AV, McAllister TA, Benchaar C, Teather RM, Forster RJ. Evidence of increased diversity of methanogenic archaea with plant extract supplementation. Microb Ecol. 2008;56(2):234–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell JE, Martinson VG, Urban-Mead K, Moran NA. Routes of acquisition of the gut microbiota of the honey bee Apis mellifera. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014;80(23):7378–7387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maeda HC, Fujimoto Y, Haruki T, et al. Quantitative real-time PCR using TaqMan and SYBR green for Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, tetQ gene and total bacteria. FEMS Immunol, Journal of Medical Microbiology. 2003;39(1):81–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmittgen TD, Livak KJ. Analyzing real-time PCR data by the comparative C(T) method. Nat Protoc. 2008;3(6):1101–1108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) Method. Methods. 2001;25(4):402–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kocherginskaya SA, Aminov RI, White BA. Analysis of the Rumen bacterial diversity under two different diet conditions using denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, random sequencing, and statistical ecology approaches. Anaerobe. 2001;7(3):119–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papineau AM, Hoover DG, Knorr D, Farkas DF. Antimicrobial effect of water soluble chitosans with high hydrostatic pressure. Food Biotechnol. 1991;5(1):45–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sudarshan NR, Hoover DG, Knorr D. Antibacterial action of chitosan. Food Biotechnol. 1992;6(3):257–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goiri I, Oregui LM, Garcia-Rodriguez A. Use of chitosans to modulate ruminal fermentation of a 50:50 forage-to-concentrate diet in sheep. J Anim Sci. 2010;88(2):749–755.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patra A, Park T, Kim M, Yu Z. Rumen methanogens and mitigation of methane emission by anti-methanogenic compounds and substances. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2017;8:13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolin MJ, Miller TL, Stewart CS. Microbe-microbe interactions. In: Hobson PN, Stewart CS, eds., The Rumen Microbial Ecosystem. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Blackie Academic and Professional; 1997:467–491.
   Google Scholar
• Latham M, Wolin M. Fermentation of cellulose by Ruminococcus flavefaciens in the presence and absence of Methanobacterium ruminantium. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1977;34(3):297–301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheifinger C, Linehan B, Wolin M. H2 production by Selenomonas ruminantium in the absence and presence of methanogenic bacteria. Appl Microbiol. 1975;29(4):480–483.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar