CSIRO Publishing blank image blank image blank image blank imageBooksblank image blank image blank image blank imageJournalsblank image blank image blank image blank imageAbout Usblank image blank image blank image blank imageShopping Cartblank image blank image blank image You are here: Journals > Crop & Pasture Science   
Crop & Pasture Science
Journal Banner
  Plant Sciences, Sustainable Farming Systems & Food Quality
 
blank image Search
 
blank image blank image
blank image
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
New Editor-in-Chief
Editorial Board
Contacts
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Research Fronts
Farrer Reviews
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Notice to Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
Referee Guidelines
Review Article
Annual Referee Index
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

blue arrow e-Alerts
blank image
Subscribe to our Email Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

red arrow Connect with us
blank image
facebook   youtube

red arrow Farrer Reviews
blank image

Invited Farrer Review Series. More...


red arrow PrometheusWiki
blank image
PrometheusWiki
Protocols in ecological and environmental plant physiology

 

Article << Previous     |         Contents Vol 48(5)

The buffering capacity of caecal digesta exceeds that of rumen digesta from sheep fed pasture or roughage diets

Z. Ding, J. B. Rowe, I. R. Godwin and Y. Xu

Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 48(5) 723 - 728
Published: 1997

Abstract

The buffering capacities of caecal and rumen digesta of sheep on different diets were determined by titration with lactic, acetic, and hydrochloric acids, and certain factors affecting the buffering capacity of rumen digesta were studied. Both rumen and caecal digesta had maximal buffering capacity at pH 6·5–6·0. The buffering capacity of caecal digesta was nearly double (P < 0·001) that of rumen digesta. The rumen digesta from sheep fed oaten chaff had a buffering capacity 21% higher (P < 0·05) than that of sheep grazing green pasture. This was reduced (P < 0·05) by one-third following ruminal infusions of glucose, lactic, or acetic acid to induce acidosis. Diet did not significantly affect the buffering capacities of rumen and caecal digesta. However, the buffering capacities of rumen and caecal digesta from pasture-fed sheep that had been fasted for 24 h were significantly greater (P < 0·001) than those for sheep that had not been fasted (62 and 18%). The buffering capacity determined using HCl was always less than that for lactic or acetic acid. This may be due to the lower pKa for HCl and the fact that there is no evidence that HCl undergoes inter-conversion through fermentation that the organic acids may undergo. The addition of carbonate or phosphate buffer significantly increased (P < 0·05) the buffering capacity of rumen and caecal digesta. The sodium bicarbonate and sodium carbonate (NaHCO3 and Na2CO3) system played a more effective buffering role than the sodium dihydrogen orthophosphate and disodium hydrogen orthophosphate (NaH2PO4 and Na2HPO4) system in the rumen digesta.

Keywords: acidosis, caecum.



Full text doi:10.1071/A96151

© CSIRO 1997

blank image >
 
PDF (329 KB) $25
 Export Citation
 Print
  
  
Subscriber Login
Username:
Password:  

    
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2013