共查询到19条相似文献，搜索用时 171 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
猪禽饲用酶制剂的实际应用（上） 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
在畜禽饲料中添加酶制剂的想法很早就有了,这方面的实验也在数十年前就开始做了。但是直到最近几年前这方面的研究才比较有系统性,而且以前用的还都只是不太明确其活性谱的粗酶制剂。所以,过去所得的试验结果很不一致,甚至令人沮丧。关于酶制剂的活性、稳定性和测试方法的资料也很缺乏。所有这些都使得酶制剂在学者和营养师中印象不佳。 相似文献
5.
饲用酶制剂在反刍动物营养中的应用进展 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
一般情况下,在瘤胃中粗饲料细胞壁组分的消化利用率较低,由于其复杂紧密的结构限制了动物对粗饲料的利用。因此,在反刍动物生产中提高粗饲料利用率的应用研究是非常必要的,不仅改善饲料利用率、提高动物生产性能,还为饲料资源的开发与利用乃至为畜牧业发展提供有效途径。而饲用酶制剂以其绿色、环保、安全等特点成为了该研究领域的热点。通常采用体外和半体内法评定酶制剂处理对粗饲料体外发酵和瘤胃降解特性的影响,并采用体内法评价酶制剂在反刍动物营养中的应用效果。研究表明,外源酶制剂的应用能够有效提高饲料消化率、奶牛产量、肉牛增重和肉羊增重,但其效果不一致,其效果受很多因素的影响,包括酶种类、酶活性、饲粮组成、添加水平、添加方式、动物种类及生长性能等。另外,由于人们对所用酶产品的生化特性掌握不足,导致了对其作用机理、优化条件及影响其作用效果因子的了解不够充分。如酶活性作为酶制剂最主要的生化特性,在使用前往往被忽略检测,并且目前国内外对酶活性的检测及质量评定还没有统一的标准。然而研究结果间直接进行比较也是不科学不合理的。本研究主要从饲用酶制剂的发展历程,反刍动物营养中纤维降解酶的作用机理、应用效果和影响其作用效果的因素以及存在问题等方面进行了综述,旨在为饲用酶制剂在反刍动物营养中的应用提供系统的科学知识。 相似文献
6.
7.
8.
饲用酶制剂在家禽生产中的应用 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
酶制剂是一种最安全的饲料添加剂．对动物无任何毒副作用，不影响动物产品品质．被称为“天然”或“绿色”饲料添加剂。本文介绍了酶制剂的来源、种类及作用机理，分析了酶制剂在家禽生产中的应用及影响其作用的因素．并对酶制剂的发展前景做了展望。 相似文献
9.
两种酶制剂对泌乳奶牛生产性能的影响 总被引：6，自引：0，他引：6
通过生物工程方法产生的具有活性的酶产品,称为酶制剂.这种产品中含有纤维素酶、果胶酶、酸性蛋白酶、淀粉酶、木聚糖酶、葡聚糖酶等,能有效地将饲料中一些大分子多聚体分解和消化成为动物容易吸收的物质,从而有效地提高饲料利用率,提高动物生产水平.应用酶制剂还具有不污染环境、无毒副作用、使用安全的优点,国内外都非常重视酶制剂的研究和应用.相对单胃动物,酶制剂在反刍动物上的应用研究还较少.试验研究了两种酶制剂对青海省荷斯坦泌乳奶牛的影响. 相似文献
10.
1975年美国饲料工业首次将酶制剂作为饲料添加剂应用于饲料并取得显著效果(蒋正芳等,2006)[1].此后的几十年间,随饲用酶制剂相关研究的深入,其在畜禽饲料中的应用速度呈几何倍数增长,酶制剂工业也由不成熟的行业逐渐成为了一个单独的研究领域.但由于酶本身的特殊性,饲用酶制剂的质量倍受关注. 相似文献
11.
12.
Resistance of feed enzymes to proteolytic inactivation by rumen microorganisms and gastrointestinal proteases. 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
D P Morgavi K A Beauchemin V L Nsereko L M Rode T A McAllister A D Iwaasa Y Wang W Z Yang 《Journal of animal science》2001,79(6):1621-1630
Potential feed enzyme additives for ruminants were tested in vitro for their stability to ruminal microbial and gastrointestinal proteolysis. Four commercial preparations from Trichoderma longibrachiatum (A, B, C, and D) and one from an undisclosed source (E) were incubated up to 6 h with ruminal fluid taken from four lactating dairy cows before or 2 h after feeding. The stability of preparation B was also tested in the presence of pepsin at pH 3 and pancreatin at pH 7. Cellulase (EC 3.2.1.4), cellulose 1,4-beta-cellobiosidase (EC 3.2.1.91), beta-glucanase (EC 3.2.1.6), xylanase (EC 3.2.1.8), beta-glucosidase (EC 3.2.1.21), and beta-xylosidase (EC 3.2.1.37) activities were monitored throughout the incubations. Polysaccharidase activities of all enzyme preparations were remarkably stable in ruminal fluid taken after feeding. Ruminal fluid obtained before feeding inactivated the polysaccharidases in preparations B and D to a greater extent than ruminal fluid obtained after feeding. Cellulase and cellulose 1,4-beta-cellobiosidase activities were the least stable, declining (P < 0.05) by 35 and 60% for preparations B and D, respectively. Xylanase activity of preparation D decreased (P < 0.05) by up to 30% after 6 h of incubation, whereas beta-glucanase activity was not affected. The ability to degrade exogenous enzymes also differed among cows (P < 0.05). Pepsin and acid (pH 3.0) did not affect polysaccharidases in preparation B but decreased glycosidase activities by 10 to 15% (P < 0.05) after 1 h of incubation. Pancreatin, at the maximum concentration used, inactivated cellulase, cellulose 1,4-beta-cellobiosidase, and xylanase activities at a rate of 0.55, 1, and 0.45%/min, respectively. beta-Glucosidase and beta-xylosidase activities decreased by 1 and 0.75%/min, respectively. Partial proteolysis of cellulase, cellulose 1,4-beta-cellobiosidase, and xylanase by pancreatin produced a transient increase in activity. This twofold increase for cellulase and fourfold increase for cellulose 1,4-beta-cellobiosidase was directly proportional to pancreatin concentration. These results suggest that the enzyme feed additives tested were stable in the rumen of animals after feeding. Exogenous enzymes are likely to be more susceptible to the host gastrointestinal proteases in the abomasum and intestines than to ruminal proteases. However, exogenous polysaccharidases may survive for a considerable period of time in the small intestine and they probably maintain activity against target substrates in this environment. 相似文献
13.
14.
研究中药饲料添加剂对荷斯坦公牛生长发育及血液生化指标的影响。结果表明,中药饲料添加剂能显著增加荷斯坦公牛的体重,添加中药量1%和2%的组平均日增重比空白对照组分别提高了39.91%和52.13%,饲料转化率比空白对照组分别提高了28.61%和34.28%,头均日增重收入比空白对照组分别提高51.58%和60.35%;血清中的葡萄糖(GLU)、尿素氮(BUN)随着药量的增加而增加;中药饲料添加剂可降低牛血清中胆固醇(CT)的含量及血清酶如谷丙转氨酶(ALT)、谷草转氨酶(AST)、碱性磷酸酶(ALP)、乳酸脱氢酶(LDH)等的活性。 相似文献
15.
饲草青贮添加剂研究进展 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
为了提高饲草青贮发酵效率,改善发酵品质,调制青贮时常使用添加剂,文章综述了近年来青贮添加剂的研究进展。根据其作用机制青贮添加剂可以分为4类,分别是发酵促进型添加剂、发酵抑制型添加剂、好氧性变质抑制剂、营养型添加剂等。乳酸菌因具有促进有氧稳定性、抑制二次发酵、产生抗菌物质、抑制有害微生物等特点已广为应用。纤维素酶制剂添加效果主要受酶本身的特性、青贮原料的特性及青贮时的管理等因素影响,其添加效果尚有待于进一步研究。绿汁发酵液是一种新型的青贮添加剂,具有取材方便、制作简单的特点,可明显改善青贮原料的发酵品质。未来饲草青贮添加剂应用应全面考虑环境要素,加强酶的活性研究,注重多学科综合分析,用纤维素酶与乳酸菌、绿汁发酵液、蔗糖、甲酸等常规青贮添加剂进行复合青贮可能取得进步。 相似文献
16.
为了评价不同添加剂对籽粒苋与豆粕混合青贮品质的影响,在72%籽粒苋与28%豆粕混合青贮中分别添加糖蜜、乳酸菌、纤维素复合酶、糖蜜+乳酸菌、糖蜜+纤维素复合酶、乳酸菌+纤维素复合酶、糖蜜+乳酸菌+纤维素复合酶;以等量水为空白对照组,青贮30 d后进行开包取样并分析各项指标。结果表明,添加糖蜜、糖蜜+乳酸菌、糖蜜+纤维素复合酶或糖蜜+乳酸菌+纤维素复合酶处理组均较对照改善了籽粒苋与豆粕混合青贮的发酵品质和营养品质,显著降低了pH值、干物质损失率、洗涤纤维和酸性洗涤木质素含量,显著提高了可溶性碳水化合物含量和相对饲用价值(P<0.05)。乳酸菌、纤维素复合酶及乳酸菌+纤维素复合酶处理组pH值、洗涤纤维和酸性洗涤木质素含量均显著高于对照(P<0.05)。综合评价,建议籽粒苋与豆粕混合青贮时添加糖蜜或复合添加糖蜜与乳酸菌或纤维素复合酶。 相似文献
17.
18.
Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect of four enzyme additives on ruminal fermentation of corn silage using a 48 h batch culture in vitro assay with buffer and ruminal fluid. Experiment 1 (Exp. 1) and Experiment 2 (Exp. 2) were conducted as completely randomized designs each with two runs and four replicates. The enzyme additives (E1, E2, E3, and E4) were commercial products that provided a range in endoglucanase, exoglucanase, and xylanase activities. For both xylanase (birch wood and oat spelt substrate) and endoglucanase (carboxymethylcellulose substrate), the enzyme products (per ml) were ranked E4>E1>E2>E3. In Exp. 1, the four enzymes were added at 0, 2, 4, and 8 μl/g of corn silage dry matter (DM), whereas in Exp. 2 enzymes were added at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 μl/g DM. Gas production (GP) was measured at 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 48 h after incubation. Disappearance of DM (DMD), neutral detergent fiber (NDFD), and acid detergent fiber (ADFD), and volatile fatty acid concentrations (VFA; total and individual molar proportions) were determined after 24 and 48 h. In Exp. 1, E1 and E2 had higher NDFD and ADFD at 24 and 48 h of incubation (P<0.001) compared with E3 and E4. Increasing dose rate increased NDFD and ADFD for all enzymes (except ADFD for E4 at 48 h), with the optimum dose rate dependant on the enzyme additive (dose×enzyme; P<0.01). There were some treatment effects on DMD and total GP at 24 and 48 h, but these responses were not consistent with responses in NDFD and ADFD. Experiment 2 was conducted to confirm the effects and optimum dose rate of each enzyme additive. In Exp. 2, DMD was not affected by enzyme after 24 and 48 h incubation. There were no enzyme×dose interactions for DMD, NDFD, or ADFD after 24 or 48 h of incubation (except for ADFD at 48 h). After 24 h, DMD, NDFD, and ADFD increased linearly with increasing dose (P<0.05); after 48 h DMD increased linearly, whereas NDFD increased quadratically with increasing enzyme dose (P<0.05). The ADFD increased linearly after 48 h for E3 and E4, but after 48 h ADFD increased quadratically for E1 and E2. Total GP was consistently lowest for E4 at both incubation times (P<0.05). There were no enzyme×dose interactions (P>0.05) for any of the fermentation variables at either 24 or 48 h of incubation in Exp. 2. There were differences amongst the additives for total VFA at 24 and 48 h (P≤0.05); increasing enzyme dose decreased total VFA after 24 h but increased total VFA at 48 h, such that all doses were higher than the control (P<0.001). Overall, the enzyme additives increased NDFD and ADFD of corn silage in vitro; however, E1 and E2 were more effective than E3 or E4. Responses to increasing dose of enzyme were generally linear or curvilinear, and the optimum dose rate differed amongst the products evaluated. Evaluation of the enzymes at 24 and 48 h generally led to the same ranking of the additives, and the degradation of NDF and ADF was more useful in differentiating the enzymes compared with DM and total GP. 相似文献
19.
P. Konieczka K. Nowicka M. Madar M. Taciak S. Smulikowska 《British poultry science》2018,59(6):654-662
ABSTRACT1. The effects of supplementation of broiler chicken diets with pea meal, carbohydrase enzymes and a probiotic were investigated for potential performance improvement.2. Raw or extruded pea meal (cv Model, grown in Poland) was included in a wheat-soybean meal-based diet at 250 g/kg. The diets were unsupplemented (control) or supplemented with either carbohydrase enzymes (200 U/kg xylanase and 10 U/kg β-glucanase in feed) or a probiotic (Bacillus subtilis), or both. The diets were fed to Ross 308 broilers aged 9–28 days.3. After two additional days, chick gastrointestinal tracts were excised and analysed for the presence of Bacillus subtilis biofilm; and the ileal and caecal digesta were analysed for bacterial enzyme activities and to determine the concentration of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs).4. Feeding the pea-based diet supplemented with the probiotic compromised feed utilisation, due to higher feed intake. The addition of enzymes to the raw, but not the extruded, pea containing diet partially ameliorated this effect (pea form × additives; P < 0.002).5. In the ileal digesta, interactions between the dietary treatments were observed for the activities of all bacterial glycolytic enzymes and for SCFA concentrations. β-glucosidase, α-galactosidase and β-glucuronidase were highest in birds fed the diet containing extruded pea supplemented with the probiotic and enzymes (pea form x additives; P = 0.018 to P < 0.006). In the caecal digesta, interactions were observed for bacterial enzyme activities, but not for total SCFA concentration. Biofilm formation in the caecum indicated that the probiotic strain was metabolically active in the broiler gut.6. In conclusion, supplementation of diets containing raw or extruded pea meal with enzymes and a Bacillus subtilis spore-based probiotic modulated microbiota activity but had no clear effects on broiler performance. Probiotic administration did not cause excessive fermentation in the ileum and caecum but enhanced Bacillus subtilis spp. biofilm formation in the caecum, which may be indicative of a beneficial effect on gut health. 相似文献