Comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs

Background: Peter Van Soest proposed the conventional method of fiber analysis using neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF). The main advantage of this method is the precision of results; however, reagents are costly and laboratory work requires long runtime and labor. Objectiv...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Maria do Socorro N. Lourenço, Juliana D. Messana, Ana Paula de O. Sader, Roberta C. Canesin, Euclides B. Malheiros, Pablo S. Castagnino, Telma T. Berchielli
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Universidad de Antioquia 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/95c10ee7afe94f20b3296e5079463dd3
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:95c10ee7afe94f20b3296e5079463dd3
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:95c10ee7afe94f20b3296e5079463dd32021-11-26T19:13:36ZComparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs2256-295810.17533/udea.rccp.v30n1a03https://doaj.org/article/95c10ee7afe94f20b3296e5079463dd32017-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/rccp/article/view/325752https://doaj.org/toc/2256-2958Background: Peter Van Soest proposed the conventional method of fiber analysis using neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF). The main advantage of this method is the precision of results; however, reagents are costly and laboratory work requires long runtime and labor. Objective: to compare analytical data from different methodologies used to assess NDF and ADF contents. Methods: means obtained with the conventional method were compared through Dunnett’s test (α = 5%) with values from alternative methods using autoclave as the digester system. A completely randomized design in a 4 x 2 factorial arrangement was used. Results: NDF content through alternative methods was assessed for Tifton 85 hay, babassu meal and sugarcane, whereas ADF was only determined for babassu meal. NDF and ADF did not differ (p ≥ 0.05) between non-sequential or sequential analysis for all the feedstuffs and methods studied, except for ADF in corn silage. Conclusion: alternative methodologies allow reducing operating costs and time but lack uniformity and accuracy for analyzing ADF in corn silage.       Palavras chave:Maria do Socorro N. LourençoJuliana D. MessanaAna Paula de O. SaderRoberta C. CanesinEuclides B. MalheirosPablo S. CastagninoTelma T. BerchielliUniversidad de Antioquiaarticleacid detergent fiberbabassu mealneutral detergent fibersugarcanetifton 85 hayAnimal cultureSF1-1100ENRevista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias, Vol 30, Iss 1, Pp 21-29 (2017)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic acid detergent fiber
babassu meal
neutral detergent fiber
sugarcane
tifton 85 hay
Animal culture
SF1-1100
spellingShingle acid detergent fiber
babassu meal
neutral detergent fiber
sugarcane
tifton 85 hay
Animal culture
SF1-1100
Maria do Socorro N. Lourenço
Juliana D. Messana
Ana Paula de O. Sader
Roberta C. Canesin
Euclides B. Malheiros
Pablo S. Castagnino
Telma T. Berchielli
Comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs
description Background: Peter Van Soest proposed the conventional method of fiber analysis using neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF). The main advantage of this method is the precision of results; however, reagents are costly and laboratory work requires long runtime and labor. Objective: to compare analytical data from different methodologies used to assess NDF and ADF contents. Methods: means obtained with the conventional method were compared through Dunnett’s test (α = 5%) with values from alternative methods using autoclave as the digester system. A completely randomized design in a 4 x 2 factorial arrangement was used. Results: NDF content through alternative methods was assessed for Tifton 85 hay, babassu meal and sugarcane, whereas ADF was only determined for babassu meal. NDF and ADF did not differ (p ≥ 0.05) between non-sequential or sequential analysis for all the feedstuffs and methods studied, except for ADF in corn silage. Conclusion: alternative methodologies allow reducing operating costs and time but lack uniformity and accuracy for analyzing ADF in corn silage.       Palavras chave:
format article
author Maria do Socorro N. Lourenço
Juliana D. Messana
Ana Paula de O. Sader
Roberta C. Canesin
Euclides B. Malheiros
Pablo S. Castagnino
Telma T. Berchielli
author_facet Maria do Socorro N. Lourenço
Juliana D. Messana
Ana Paula de O. Sader
Roberta C. Canesin
Euclides B. Malheiros
Pablo S. Castagnino
Telma T. Berchielli
author_sort Maria do Socorro N. Lourenço
title Comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs
title_short Comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs
title_full Comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs
title_fullStr Comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs
title_sort comparison of laboratory methods for quantification of fiber in feedstuffs
publisher Universidad de Antioquia
publishDate 2017
url https://doaj.org/article/95c10ee7afe94f20b3296e5079463dd3
work_keys_str_mv AT mariadosocorronlourenco comparisonoflaboratorymethodsforquantificationoffiberinfeedstuffs
AT julianadmessana comparisonoflaboratorymethodsforquantificationoffiberinfeedstuffs
AT anapauladeosader comparisonoflaboratorymethodsforquantificationoffiberinfeedstuffs
AT robertaccanesin comparisonoflaboratorymethodsforquantificationoffiberinfeedstuffs
AT euclidesbmalheiros comparisonoflaboratorymethodsforquantificationoffiberinfeedstuffs
AT pabloscastagnino comparisonoflaboratorymethodsforquantificationoffiberinfeedstuffs
AT telmatberchielli comparisonoflaboratorymethodsforquantificationoffiberinfeedstuffs
_version_ 1718409305998229504