ResearchersLinks
Advances in Animal and Veterinary SciencesA ResearchersLinks journal
Submit manuscriptReview for this journal

Review · Volume 10, Issue 12, 9 December 2022 · Open Access

Ionophores: Their Effects on Ruminal Fermentation, Animal Performance and Carcass Characteristics and Meat Quality

· · · · ·

Affiliations & Notes ⌄
  1. 1Department of Animal Production, College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  2. 2Department of Animal and Fish Production, Faculty of Agriculture, Alexandria University, El-Shatby, P.O. Box 21545, Alexandria, Egypt
  3. 3Department of Meat Production, Faculty of Animal Production, University of Khartoum, Khartoum North, Sudan. *Correspondence | Ahmed M El-Waziry, Department of Animal and Fish Production, Faculty of Agriculture, Alexandria University, El-Shatby, P.O. Box 21545, Alexandria, Egypt
  4. 4Email: aelwaziry@yahoo.com
Article Info ⌄
Journal:
Advances in Animal and Veterinary Sciences
Published:
9 December 2022
Download PDF ePub eFLIP Set Alert Get Rights Reprints

From the article

  • The feed intake of lambs fed a diet containing monensin was significantly lower than that of lambs fed control or lasalocid diets.
  • The effectiveness of ionophores can be principally attributed to alterations in ruminal fermentation, enhanced feed efficiency, and an improved weight gain rate.
  • The increase in propionic acid is lower in animals that consume a high grain-containing diet (higher energy) compared to animals that consume a high roughage diet (lower energy).
  • Rumen volatile fatty acid production and nutrient utilization in steers fed a diet supplemented with sodium bicarbonate and monensin.

Selected from the article's own text.

Abstract

As a result of the increased human population and increased demand for food consumption, there is a need to improve the nutritional value of animal feed. Among the available methods of increasing production is using feed additives. One class of these additives is ionophores, a type of antibiotic that increases the nutritional value of the feed, thereby increasing production by reducing of feed intake, and decreasing the degradability of protein in the rumen, which increases its by-pass to the small intestine and decreasing the ammonia concentration in the rumen. Moreover, ionophores increase propionic acid in the rumen, which is used as an energy source; hence, ionophores increase muscle growth by enhancing the daily weight gain due to the improved feed conversion rate. Studies indicate the effect of ionophores on the characteristics and quality of the carcass have been limited. Ionophoers may be enhanced the concentration of unsaturated fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). The benefits of these acids with respect to human health include lower cholesterol and blood pressure and a reduced incidence of diabetes. There have been few studies on the use of ionophores in the diet of goats. Therefore, more research are needed concerning the influence of ionophores on ruminal fermentation, performance and characteristics of carcass of goats.

Keywords | Ionophores, Ruminal Fermentation, Animal Performance, Carcass Characteristics, Meat Quality  

Introduction

Ionophores are polyether antibiotics that modulate the composition of rumen microorganisms and rumen fermentation. The result of this manipulation is increased average daily gain and reduced feed intake, resulting improved feed conversion rate. If there is no negative impact on carcass characteristics, the addition of ionophores is an excellent way to increase livestock production.

A long- valued dream of ruminant nutritionists has been to manipulate and improve the efficiency of ruminal fermentation. Specifically, this objective has been pursued by increasing propionic acid in the rumen, depressing methane production, and reducing the fast ruminal proteolysis and protein deamination in the diet. Ionophores, along with monensin, salinomycin, lasalocid, and tetronasin, have been indicated to modify the function of rumen microorganisms ; ; ; ; . The effects of ionophores on coccidiosis , bloat, total counts of Gram-positive cocci ; , mixed protozoa ; Suda et al., 1995), mixed rumen fungi , the acidosis ; and improving body weight gain and feed efficiency had been formerly established. Salinomycin and monensin ; alter the proportions of ruminal VFAs, with a resulting enhance in propionic acid and reduction in acetic acid. The reduction of amino acid deamination in the rumen is important as a means of increasing the ruminal passage of dietary protein. The rate of ruminal amino acid degradation is the way to determine deamination in the rumen. Ionophores effectively decrease amino acid breakdown, resulting in an inhibitory effect on deamination ; ; ; . Yang et al. (2003) showed that the improvement of weight gain of goats when fed lasalocid without any effect on feed intake or nutrient digestion coefficients and increase N retention. Heydari et al. (2008) reported that the average daily gain and final weight of lambs fed ration containing monensin or lasalocid were significantly higher than those of groups fed a control ration. The feed intake of lambs fed a diet containing monensin was significantly lower than that of lambs fed control or lasalocid diets. Carcass qualities were not affected by monensin, but the dressing percentage and boneless meat were higher in lambs fed a diet containing lasalocid . Price et al. (2009) reported that dietary treatment with ionophores had no effect on lamb performance. However, the shortage of literature concerning the impact of nutritional ionophore addition on animal performance and meat quality characteristics of intensively fed lambs or goats must be addressed.

Review Pattern

Ionophore antibiotics, so named because of their ion-carrying property, are members of a big and developing group of compounds that have the ability to make lipid-soluble complexes with cations and mediate their transport across lipid barriers . Due to the variety of cyclic ethers in systems of a few ionophores, they may be additionally called “polyether” antibiotics. These ionophores are created by different strains of Streptomyces (Table 1). All of the ionophores currently in use or being tested as increase promotants for ruminants are categorized as carboxylic ionophores (they own a carboxyl group).

The effectiveness of ionophores can be principally attributed to alterations in ruminal fermentation, enhanced feed efficiency, and an improved weight gain rate. The ruminal fermentation is altered when livestock are fed monensin or lasalocid ; or other ionophores, although the effect can vary depending on the type of ionophore (Ngaraja et al., 1987). Bergen and Bates (1984) reported alterations in ruminal fermentation due to ionophore additives in three major areas:

1-      the enhancement of energy utilization in the rumen and/or host animal due to an increase in propionate and a reduction in methane emission,

2-      the enhancement of the nitrogen utilization in the rumen and/or host animal due to a decrease in protein degradability, resulting in a reduction in amino acid deamination,

3-      a reduction of ruminal disorders due to a decrease in lactic acid production.

Table 1: Ionophore under study for use in ruminant diets

Ionophore Producing organism
Monensin Streptomyces cinnamonesis
Lasalocid Streptomyces lasaliensis
Salinomycin Streptomyces albus
Tetronasin Streptomyces longisporofavus
Narasin Streptomyces aureofaciens
Laidlomycin Streptoverticillum eurocidicum
Lysocellin Streptomyces longwoodensis

(Adapted from Nagaraja, 1995)

Most studies have shown that when ruminants are fed ionophores, alterations in rumen fermentation are observed, including an increased of propionate and decreased proportions of acetic and butyric acids ; . The proportional increase in the utilization of energy diet due to the increase in the proportion of propionic acid. The increase in propionic acid is lower in animals that consume a high grain-containing diet (higher energy) compared to animals that consume a high roughage diet (lower energy). In the rumen, the relation improvement is lower in cows eating high energy feeds (high grain) that already have extents of propionic acid than in cows eating low energy feeds (high roughage) (Table 2).

When animals are fed ionophores, the increase in propionate may result in hydrogen utilization due to decreased methane production. Slyter (1979) suggested that some of the enhance in the propionic acid proportion when ruminants are fed monensin is neutral of its influence on methane emission because acetic acid is changed to propionic acid even when methane is not produced in culture. Monensin and salinomycin inhibit biodehydrogenation, resulting in the release of unsaturated fatty acids from the rumen, which are then deposited in body tissues ; ; . When lasalocid was added to the diet improves propionate rate and decreases methane emission .

Table 2: Concentration (mM) and Proportion (%) of ruminal volatile fatty acids in cattle fed diets with or without monensin

 70% Roughage + 30% Concentrate50% Roughage + 50% Concentrate
VFAControlMonensin% change from controlControlMonensin% change from control
Concentration, mM      
Acetate70

61a

-1365.8

55.9 a

-15
Propionate19

23 a

+2141.1

41.9 a

+2
Butyrate10

8 a

-2013.5

9.1 a

-33
Proportion, %      
Acetate71.0

66.8 a

-653.5

51.3 a

-4
Propionate19.1

24.7 a

+2933.4

38.4 a

+15
Butyrate9.9

8.5 a

-1411.0

8.3 a

-25

a Different from control.

(Adapted from Rogers and Davis, 1982; Nagaraja, 1995).

 

Singh and Mohini (1999)reported that the VFA concentration did not vary among the studied groups, while there was a significant increase in the proportion of propionic acid and a decrease in the proportion of acetic and butyric acids in the rumen of animals fed rumensin. Related findings were informed byGado (1997) and in agreement with the results ofEl-Waziry and Kamel (2001)andEl-Waziry (2002). These authors found that the proportion of acetate was significantly decreased when monensin was supplemented to the control diet; while supplementation with monensin significantly increased the proportion of propionate, the molar concentration of butyrate was slightly decreased. Kobayashi et al. (1986) reported that when salinomycin was added to animal feed, the ruminal VFA proportions changed to reflect improved propionic acid and reduced acetic acid, although the ruminal pH was not altered.  Propionate is utilized more than that of acetate by host tissues . Furthermore, when more propionic acid is produced in the rumen, the efficiency of fermentation is enhanced because of improvements in hydrogen metabolism and may due to the propionate gives a lower heat increment than acetate and thus provides more energy . Improving the carbon retention and energy in the rumen results in enhanced animal performance ;. Supplementation with monensin allows the host animal to retain approximately 20% more metabolizable energy and results in a 5.6% energy savings for the animal . Further researchers have indicated that the lower heat increment may be due to the increase in propionic acid ;, resulting in excess amino acids that are utilized for gluconeogenesis and increase protein synthesis ;.

Recently, Martinez et al. (2022) reported that although an interaction between ionophore of monensin and protein supplement was observed on the acetate: propionate ratio, these results remind that the addition of monensin to protein for cattle consuming low quality forage will not give any addition of improving of intake or digestion compared without any additive. In addition, monensin is identified to modify the ratio of acetate:propionate ; ; the propionate molarity increases at the rate of acetate. Propionic acid is a more gluconeogenic VFA; hence, monensin enhances propionate obtainability for glucose creation. Linneen et al. (2015) stated related data with acetate to propionate ratio reducing for steers consuming monensin compared to steers fed diet without monensin.

The ruminal pH did not change when animals were fed ionophores ; ; ; ; as shown in Table (3).

Table 3: Effect of ionophores on ruminal pH

  Control Control + Ionophore Reference
Monensin

6.73

6.8

6.45

6.75

6.9

6.54

Newbold et al., 1993

Gado, 1997

Garcia et al., 2000
Salinomycin 7.20 7.20 McAllister et al., 1994
Lasalocid 5.92 6.20 Saleh, 2002
Tetronasin 6.73 6.75 Newbold et al., 1993

The feed additives of ionophores such as monensin, salinomycin, and lasalocid may inhibit methane production by stimulating hydrogen production ;; ; ; . Schelling (1984) and Rumpler et al. (1986) observed that methane production in the rumen was decreased by 4 to 31% due to the increasing in propionate and reducing in H2 and formic acid ; . Moreover, the reduction of methane possibly due to a reduction of the nickel concentration by monensin, which reduces the presence of methanogens ; . Contrary, methane production in the rumen of cows was unaffected when diets with or without monensin were supplemented with nickel . Van Nevel and Demeyer (1977) and Russell and Martin (1984) demonstrated that the production of methane was unchanged by the addition of monensin when CO2 and H2 were provided .

Dinius et al. (1976) performed that ruminal ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) was decreased in cows fed monensin containing a forage diet. Newbold et al. (1993) and El-Waziry (2002) found that ruminal NH3-N concentrations were decreased when tetronasin or monensin was added to the control diet; however, when salinomycin was added to an artificial rumen, the NH3-N concentration increased . Gado (1997) confirmed that the NH3-N concentration unchanged with the addition of monensin in the diet. Saleh (2002) found that the same manner of the amount of NH3-N in rumen liquor when lasalocid was added. Goodrich et al. (1984) reported that protein degradability decreased when Rumensin was added to the diet, resulting in reduce in NH3 in the rumen. Monensin is used to prevent bloat in Australia ; hence the results of soluble protein in the rumen was decreased. Zhao et al. (1995) reported that the degradability of protein was declined when salinomycin was added to the diet of goats. The ruminal degradation of DM and CP reduced when monensin was added to a control diet . El-Waziry and Kamel (2001) and El-Waziry (2002) observed an increase in microbial nitrogen leaving the rumen with the addition of monensin in the diet. The escape protein from ruminal degradation was increased in the presence of monensin in an in vivo trial ; ; . The undegraded dietary protein increased from 22 to 55% in five different experiments using monensin as feed additive . The investigations of Dinius et al. (1976), ; ; , Russell and Martin, (1984), Newbold et al. (1990), Wallace et al. (1990), and Chen and Russell (1991) concluded that the decrease in ruminal ammonia nitrogen was primarily caused by a reduction in protein degradability in the rumen. Monensin affected peptide degradation and deamination of amino acid in the rumen more than the breakdown of protein ; ; ; (Table 4).

The capability of ionophores to inhibit proteolysis is decreased when ionophores unaffected ruminal bacteria . Yang and Russell (1993) observed that the bypass of amino acids in the rumen was increased when the diet contained monensin, and the quantity of amino acid was dependent on the protein sources. The utilization rate of protein by the animal depends on the deamination process in the rumen, which produces ammonia .

Ionophores inhibit ammonia-producing bacteria, resulting in a reduction in the breakdown of peptides and deamination of amino acid ; Newebold and Wallace, 1989). In the rumen, Starnes et al. (1984) concluded that the addition of ionophores caused a decreasing in urease activity. Hanson and Klopfenstein (1979) reported that changes in nitrogen utilization due to ionophores depend on protein sources in the diet; the highest utilization occurred when the protein in the diet was more fermentable in the rumen.

Supplementation with ionophores is effective at reducing ruminant diseases such as acidosis due to their ability to alter ruminal fermentation . Ionophore antibiotics reduce acidosis because they selectively inhibit Gram-positive bacteria but do not have an effect on Gram-negative bacteria, such as those that produce lactic acid . Nagaraja et al. (1981) stated that monensin and lasalocid have been helpful at inhibiting lactic acidosis in cows congested with glucose solution or grain. However, lasalocid appeared to be more effective at stating ruminal pH and avoiding lactic acid accretion than monensin. Cattle exposed to experimental acidosis and treated with a diet containing ionophores exhibited more ruminal pH and lesser lactic acid concentrations than those fed a control diet ; . Newbold et al. (1993) mentioned that the concentration of lactic acid observed to be lower in ionophore (monensin or tetronasin)-supplemented animals.

Frothy bloat is a disorder in ruminants caused by eating a diet containing legumes such as alfalfa and a large amount of grain or a mixture of feeds that contain microorganisms that influence digestion in the rumen . Monensin supplementation is highly effective at reducing the prevalence of feedlot bloat, and this measurable impact is related to a lower in ruminal fluid viscosity . Bartley et al. (1983) suggested that all ionophores are similarly effective at reducing bloat. The rate of rumen turnover is reduced when monensin is added to the diet ; . The effect of monensin on feed intake is due to a decrease in rumen turnover . The decrease in feed intake might be caused

 

Table 4: Effect of menensin on the extent of escape from ruminal degradation of different protein sources

  Extent of escape
Diet and protein source Control Monensin Reference
  %
Feedlot plus brewers dried grain 100 137 Poos et al.(1979)
Feedlot plus urea supplement 100 155 Poos et al.(1979)
Rolled corn plus protein supplement to 16% 100 122 Owens (1980)
Corn silage plus soybean 100 152 Isichei, (1980)
Ground corn, corn silage plus soybean 100 136

Isichei, (1980)

Table 5: General response of beef cattle to ionophore

    Grain-fed   Pasture-fed
Ionophore Intake Gain Efficiency Gain
Monensin ↓ 0 ↑ ↑
Lasalocid

0, ↑

 ↑ ↑

↑
Salinomysin

0, ↓

0, ↑

 ↑ ↑
Tetronasin ↓

0, ↑

 ↑ ↑
Narasin ↓ 0 ↑ NA
Laidlomycin

0, ↑

 ↑ ↑ NA
Lysocellin ↓

0, ↑

 ↑

↑

↑, Increase; ↓, Decrease; 0, No change; NA, Data not available

Adapted from Nagaraja, (1995).

by the testes of ionophores or due to a decrease in rumen motility ; . Nagaraja (1995) reported that ionophore, particularly monensin, has gained varied assent in the cattle feeding industry. Generally, the feed additives ionophores has improved feed conversion but effects on body weight gain and feed intake have been varying. When animals fed grain, ionophores generally lower feed intake, but body weight gain is improved or unaffected and feed conversion is improved. In pasture fed cattle, ionophores do not effect on feed intake but body weight gain is improved, thus resulting in improved feed conversion (Table 5).

A diet containing ionophores increases feed efficiency. When animals are fed grain and ionophore-containing diets, the feed intake decreases, the average daily weight gain increases or is unchanged, and the feed efficiency is enhanced. Van der Merwe et al. (2001) found that the average daily weight gain of cows fed a diet -contained monensin was higher than those fed the control diet; this enhancement was attributed to VFA production. Stock et al. (1995) informed that the growth rate of animals was improved by 2.8% by a monensin-containing diet in four feedlot trails. Nakashima et al. (1982) reported that the addition of salinomycin increased feed conversion by 12%. Gado (1997) found that goats fed monensin-supplemented rations had lower dry matter intake. Xu (2014) reported that the supplementation of monensin with a higher level of 44 mg/kg monenesin than the currently practical level of 28 mg/kg monensin had no effect on growth performance rate, feed efficiency and carcass characteristics, although dry matter intake was decreased. Neumann et al. (2018) suggested that when monensin was added to the diet of young bulls, it improved the production and economic performance without residues in edible tissues. Salinomycin ionophore when fed to Barki sheep diet increased the lean quantity, decreased the fat quantity and decreased meat brightness score . However, there is varying evidence assistant these concerns, whereas ionophores are still an important dietary implement to improve productivity and profitability in beef cattle production systems. However, Studies that indicate the effect of ionophores on the characteristics and quality of the carcass have been limited, and there have been few studies on the use of ionophores in the diet of goats. Therefore, more studies are needed as for the effect of ionophores as feed additives on carcass characteristics and meat quality of goats.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project was funded by the National Plan for Science, Technology and Innovation (MAARIFFAH), King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Award Number (13-AGR956).

CONFLiCT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

AUTHORS CONTRIBUTION

The manuscript was written by Ahmed M. El-Waziry, Saeid M. Basmaeil and Gamaleldin M. Suliman, and edited by Ibrahim A. Alhidary, Mutassim M. Abdelrahman and Maged A.. Al-Gara­­di. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Figures

Figure 1.

References

  1. Allen JD, Harrison DG (1979). The effect of dietary addition of monensin upon digestion in the stomachs of sheep. Proc. Nutr. Soc., 38: 32A. https://doi.org/10.1079/PNS19790048[CrossRef]
  2. Barclay RA, Faulkner DB, Fahey GC Jr, Cmarik GF (1986). Effects of salinomycin on performance characteristics and apparent dry matter digestion by grazing beef steers. Nutr. Rep. Int., 33: 43-54.
  3. Bartley EE, Nagaraja TG, Pressman ES, Dayton AD, Katz P, Fina LR (1983). Effects of lasalocid or monensin on legume or grain (feedlot) bloat. J. Anim. Sci., 56: 1400-1406. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1983.5661400x[CrossRef]
  4. Bell NL, Anderson RC, Callaway TR, Franco MO, Sawyer JE, Wickersham TA (2017). Effect of monensin inclusion on intake, digestion, and ruminal fermentation parameters by Bos taurus indicus and Bos taurus taurus steers consuming Bermuda grass hay. J. Anim. Sci., 95: 2736-2746. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2016.1011[CrossRef]
  5. Bergen WG, Bates DB (1984). Ionophores: Their Effect on Production Efficiency and Mode of Acion. J. Anim. Sci., 58: 1465-1483. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1984.5861465x[CrossRef]
  6. Blaxter KL, Wainman FW (1964). The utilization of the energy of different rations by sheep and cattle for maintenance and for fattening. J. Agr. Sci., (Camb.) 63: 113-128. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002185960001515X[CrossRef]
  7. Burrin DG, Britton RA (1986). Response to monensin in cattle during subacute acidosis. J. Anim. Sci., 63: 888-893. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1986.633888x[CrossRef]
  8. Cameron AR, Malmo J (1993). valuation of an ultrasonic Doppler probe for pregnancy diagnosis in cattle. Australian Vet. J., 70: 109-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-0813.1993.tb03289.x[CrossRef]
  9. Cann IKO, Kobayashi Y, Onoda A, Wakita M, Hoshino S (1993). Effects of some ionophore antibiotics and poloxins on the growth of anaerobic rumen fungi. J. Appl. Bacteriol., 74: 127-133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1993.tb03005.x[CrossRef]
  10. Chalupa W (1980). Chemical control of rumen microbial metabolism. In: Y. Ruckebusch and P. Thivend (ed.), Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in Ruminants. pp. 325. MTP Press Limited, Lancaster. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-8067-2_16[CrossRef]
  11. Chalupa W (1984). Manipulation of rumen fermentation. In Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition (Haresign W, Cole DJA eds) pp.143-150. Butterworths, Boston, MA, US. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-407-01160-1.50013-0[CrossRef]
  12. Chen G, Russell, JB (1991). Effect of monensin and a protonophore on protein degradation, peptide accumulation, and deamination by mixed ruminal microorganisms in vitro. J. Anim. Sci., 69: 2196-203. https://doi.org/10.2527/1991.6952196x[CrossRef]
  13. Chen M, Wolin MJ (1979). Effect of monensin and lasalocid sodium on the growth of methanogenic and rumen saccharolytic bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 38: 72-77. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.38.1.72-77.1979.[CrossRef]
  14. Clarke RTJ, Reid CSW (1973). Foamy float of cattle. A review. J. dairy Sci., 57: 753-785. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(74)84964-7[CrossRef]
  15. Daniels L, Sporling R, Sprott GD (1984). The bioengergetics of methanogenesis. Biochem. Biophys. Acta, 708: 113-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4173(84)90002-8[CrossRef]
  16. Dellinger CA Ferry JG (1984). Effect of monensin on growth and methanogenesis of Methanobacterium formicium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 48: 680-682. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.48.3.680-682.1984[CrossRef]
  17. Dennis SM, Nagaraja TG, Bartley EE (1981). Effects of lasalocid or monensin on lactate producing or using rumen bacteria. J. Anim. Sci., 52: 418-426. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1981.522418x[CrossRef]
  18. Deswysen AG, Ellis WC, Pond KP, Jenkins WL Connelly J (1987). Effects of monensin on voluntary intake, eating and ruminating behavior and rumen motility of heifers fed corn silage, J. Anim. Sci., 64: 827-834. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1987.643827x[CrossRef]
  19. Dinius DA, Simpson ME, Marsh PB (1976). Effect of monensin fed with forage on digestion and the ruminal ecosystem of steers. J. Anim. Sci., 42: 229-234. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1976.421229x[CrossRef]
  20. El-Waziry AM (2002). Effect of monensin supplementation on the digestion of mixed diet containing soybean meal as a protein source by sheep J. Agric. Sci., Mansoura Univ., 27: 2861-2871. https://doi.org/10.21608/jappmu.2002.254733[CrossRef]
  21. El-Waziry AM, Kamel HEM (2001). Effect of monensin supplementation on berseem hay-protein degradability, ruminal fermentation and microbial nitrogen synthesis in sheep. Egyptian J. Nutrition and Feed, 4 (Special Issue) 3.
  22. Eskeland B, Pfander WH, Preston RL (1974). Intravenous energy infusion in lambs: Effects on nitrogen retention, plasma free amino acids and plasma urea nitrogen. Brit. L. Nutr., 31: 201-211. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19740025[CrossRef]
  23. Fuller JR, Johnson DE (1981). Monensin and lasdalocid effects on fermentation invitro. J. Anim. Sci., 53: 1574-1580. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1982.5361574x[CrossRef]
  24. Gado H (1997). Nutrient utilization and growth performance of baladi goats kids fed monensin sodium supplemented ration. Egyptian J. Nutrition and Feeds, 1 (Special Issue): 91.
  25. Garcia CCG, Mendoza MGD, Gonzalez MS, Cobos PM, Ortega CME, Ramirez LR (2000). Effect of a yeast culture (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and monensin on ruminal fermentation and digestion in sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 83: 165-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(99)00126-1[CrossRef]
  26. Goodrich RD, Garrett JE, Gast DR, Kirick MA, Larson DA, Meiske JC (1984). Influence of monensin on the performance of cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 58: 1484-1498. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1984.5861484x[CrossRef]
  27. Hanson TL, KlopfensteinTJ (1979). Monensin, protein source and protein levels for growing steers. J. Anim. Sci., 48: 474-479. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1979.483474x[CrossRef]
  28. Heydari KH, Dabiri N, Fayazi J, Roshanfekr H (2008). Effect of Ionophores Monensin and Lasalocid on Performance and Carcass Characteristics in Fattening Arabi Lambs. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 7: 81-84. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2008.81.84[CrossRef]
  29. Hino T, Russell JB (1985). Effect of reducing-equivalent disposal and NADH/NAD on deamination of amino acids by intact rumen microorganisms and their cell extract. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 50: 1368-1374. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.50.6.1368-1374.1985[CrossRef]
  30. Hoshino S, Kobayashi Y, Wakita M (1992). Effect of salinomycin on amino acid utilization by mixed sheep rumen microbes in vitro. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. (Jpn), 63: 308-309. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.63.308[CrossRef]
  31. Hoshino S, Wakita M, Kobayashi Y, Okubo M, Nakashima T, Shimizu Y, Takano S, Kudo H. (1986). Ruminal traits of bloated cattle and the curative effect of a polyether ionophore salinomycin on feedlot bloat. Jpn. J. Zootech. Sci., 57: 833-841. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.57.833[CrossRef]
  32. Hungate RE (1966). The rumen and its microbes. Academic Press, New York, NY.
  33. Isichei CO (1980). The role of monensin in protein metabolism in steers. Ph.D. Dissertation. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing.
  34. Jalc D, Baran M, Vendrak T, Siroka P (1992). Effect of monensin on fermentation of hay and wheat bran investigated by the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec) 1. Basal parameters of fermentation. Arch. Anim. Nutr., 42: 147-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450399209432984[CrossRef]
  35. Jarrell KF, Sprott GW (1983). The effects of ionophores and metabolic inhibitors on methanogenesis and energy-related properties of Methanobacterium bryantii. Arch. Biochem. Biophys., 225: 33-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(83)90004-8[CrossRef]
  36. Kobayashi R, Wakita M, Hoshino S (1992). Effects of ionophore salinomycin on nitrogen and long chain fatty acid profiles of digesta in the rumen and the duodenum of sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 36: 67-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(92)90087-M[CrossRef]
  37. Kobayashi Y, Wakita M, Hoshino S (1986). Effect of salinomycin on digesta passage, digestibility, nitrogen balance and ruminal traits in wethers. J. Anim. Physiol. a. Anim. Nutr. 56: 90-96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0396.1986.tb00554.x[CrossRef]
  38. Kobayashi, Y., Wakita M., and Hoshino, S. (1988). Effect of salinomycin on growing calves reared from 3 to 25 weeks of age. Jpn. J. Zootech. Sci., 59: 643-652. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.59.643[CrossRef]
  39. Kobayashi Y, Wakita M, Okamoto A, Hoshino S (1989). Effect of salinomycin on site and extent of digestion, rumen microbial protein synthesis and long-chain fatty acids composition in digesta in sheep. AJAS, 2: 317-318. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1989.317[CrossRef]
  40. Lemenager RP, Owens FN, Shockey BJ, Lusby KS Tokusck R (1978). Monensin effects on rumen turnover rate, twenty four hour VFA pattern, nitrogen components and cellulose disappearance. J. Anim. Sci., 47: 255-261. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1978.471255x[CrossRef]
  41. Leng RA, Steele JW, Luick JR (1967). Contribution of propionate to glucose synthesis in sheep. Biochem. J., 103: 785-790. https://doi.org/10.1042/bj1030785[CrossRef]
  42. Linneen SK, Harding AR, Smallwood MT, Horn GW, Jennings JS, Goad CL, Lalman DL (2015). In vivo ruminal degradation characteristics and apparent digestibility of low-quality prairie hay for steers consuming monensin and Optimase. J. Anim. Sci., 93: 3941-3949. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8772[CrossRef]
  43. Lowe LB, Ball GJ, Carruthers VR, Dobos L, Lynch RC, Moate PJ, Poole PR Valentine SC (1991). Monensin controlled-release intraruminal capsule for control of bloat in pastured dairy cows. Australian Vet. J. 68: 17-20 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-0813.1991.tb09834.x[CrossRef]
  44. Martineau R, Benchaar C, Petit HV, Lapierre H, Ouellet DR, Pellerin D, Berthiaume R (2007). Effects of lasalocid or monensin supplementation on digestion, ruminal fermentation, blood metabolites, and milk production of lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 90:5714–5725. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0368[CrossRef]
  45. Martinez JJ, Löest CA, McCuistion KC, Wester DB, Bell NL (2022). Effects of monensin and protein supplementation on intake, digestion, and ruminal fermentation in beef cattle consuming low-quality forage. Appl. Anim. Sci., 38: 13-21 https://doi.org/10.15232/aas.2021-02219.[CrossRef]
  46. McAllister TA, Moustafa SM., Cheng KJ, Newbold CJ, McKain N, Wallace RJ (1994). Effect of salinomycin on fermentation and nitrogen metabolism in the artificial rumen. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 74: 575-578. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas94-083[CrossRef]
  47. Merchen NR, Berger LL (1985). Effect of salinomycin level on nutrient digestibility and ruminal characteristics of sheep and feedlot performance of cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 60, 1338-1346. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1985.6051338x[CrossRef]
  48. Nagaraja TG, Avery TB, Galitzer SJ, Harmon DL (1985). Effect of ionophore antibiotics on experimentally induced lactic acidosis in cattle. Am. J. Vet. Res., 46: 2444-2452. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1981.531206x[CrossRef]
  49. Nagaraja TG (1995). Ionophores and antibiotics in ruminants. In: Biotechnology in Animal Feeds and Animal Feeding, (Edited by R.J. Wallace and A. Chesson), Weinheim, New York, Basel Cambridge, Tokyo, pp. 174.
  50. Nagaraja TG, Avery TB, Bartley EE, Galitzer SJ, Dayton AD (1981). Prevention of lactic acid acidosis in cattl by lasalocid or monensin. J. Anim. Sci., 53: 206-216. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1981.531206x[CrossRef]
  51. Nagaraja TG, Taylor MB, Harmon DL, Boyer JE (1987). In vitro lactic acid inhibition and alterations in volatile fatty acid production by antimicrobial feed additives. J. Anim. Sci., 65: 1064-1076. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1987.6541064x[CrossRef]
  52. Nakashima T, Masuno T, Sakauchi R, Hoshino S (1982). Effect of salinomycin on feed efficiency, ruminal and blood characteristics of steers. Jpn. J. Zootech. Sci., 53: 541-546. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.53.541[CrossRef]
  53. Neumann M, Ueno RK, Heker JC, Askel EJ, de Souza AM, Vigne GLD, Poczynek M, Coelho M G, Eto AK (2018). Growth performance and safety of meat from cattle feedlot finished with monensin in the ration. Ciências Agrárias, 39: 697-709. https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2018v39n2p697[CrossRef]
  54. Newbold CJ, Wallace RJ (1989). Changes in the rumen bacterium, Bacteroides ruminicola, grown in the presence of ionophore, tetronasin. Australian-Asian J. Anim. Sci., 2: 452-453. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1989.452[CrossRef]
  55. Newbold CJ, Wallace RJ, Walker ND (1993). The effect of tetronasin and monensin on fermentation, microbial numbers and the development of ionophore-resistant bacteria in the rumen. J. Appl. Bacteriol., 75: 129-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1993.tb02757.x[CrossRef]
  56. Newbold CJ, Wallace RJ, McKain N, (1990). Effects of the ionophore tetronasin on nitrogen metabolism by ruminal microorganisms in vitro. J. Anim. Sci., 68: 1103-1109. https://doi.org/10.2527/1990.6841103x[CrossRef]
  57. Okuuchi K, Komatsu K, Nagasawa T, Onodera R, (1993). Effects of Salinomycin on the Production of Tryptophan, Skatole and their Related Compounds by Rumen Bacteria, Protozoa and their Mixture. Anim. Sci. Technol., 64: 1087-1093. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.64.1087[CrossRef]
  58. Ørskov ER, Macleod NA, Nakashima Y (1991). Effect of different volatile fatty acids mixures on energy metabolism in cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 69: 3389-3397. https://doi.org/10.2527/1991.6983389x[CrossRef]
  59. Ørskov ER, Grubb DA, Smith JS, Webster AJF, Corrigall W (1979). Efficiency of utilization of volatile fatty acids for maintenance and energy retention by sheep. Brit. J. Nutr. 41: 541-551. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19790069[CrossRef]
  60. Oscar TP, Spears JW, Shih JCH (1987). Performance, methanogenesis and nitrogen metabolism of finishing steers fed monensin and nickel. J. Anim. Sci., 64: 887-896. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1987.643887x[CrossRef]
  61. Owens FN (1980). Ionophore effect on utilization and metabolism of nutrients-Ruminants. Proc. 1980 Georgia Nutr. Conf., Univ. of Georgia, Athens, p 17.
  62. Poos MI, Hanson TL, Klopfenstein TJ (1979). Monensin effects on diet Digestibility, ruminal protein bypass and microbial protein synthesis. J. Anim. Sci., 48: 1516-1524. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1979.4861516x[CrossRef]
  63. Price MM, Einkamerer OB, de Witt FH, Greyling JPC, Fair MD (2009). The effect of dietary ionophores on feedlot performance of lambs. South African J. Anim. Sci., (Supplement 1). https://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v39i1.61255[CrossRef]
  64. Raun AP, Cooley CO, Potter EL, Rathmacher RP, Richardson LF (1976). Effect of monensin on feed efficiency of feedlot cattle. J. Anim. Sci., 43: 670-677. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1976.433670x[CrossRef]
  65. Richardson LF, Raun AP, Potter EL, Cooley CO, Rathmacher RP (1976). Effect of monensin on rumen fermentation in vitro and in vivo. J. Anim. Sc., 43: 657-664. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1976.433657x[CrossRef]
  66. Rogers JA, Davis CL (1982). Rumen volatile fatty acid production and nutrient utilization in steers fed a diet supplemented with sodium bicarbonate and monensin. J. Dairy Sci., 65: 944-952. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(82)82295-9[CrossRef]
  67. Rowe JB, Davis A, Broome AWJ (1981). Quantitative changes in the rumen fermentation of sheep associated with feeding monensin. Proc. Nutr. Soc., 41: 3A.
  68. Rumpler WV, Johonson DE, Bates DB (1986). The effect of high dietary cation concentration on methanogenesis by strees fed diets with and without ionophores. J. Anim. Sci., 62: 1737-1741. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1986.6261737x[CrossRef]
  69. Russell JB, Strobel HJ (1989). Effect of ionophores on ruminal fermentation. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 55: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.55.1.1-6.1989[CrossRef]
  70. Russell JB, Martin SA (1984). Effects of various methane inhibitors on the fermentation of amino acids by mixed rumen microorganisms in vitro. J. Anim. Sci., 59: 1329-1338. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1984.5951329x[CrossRef]
  71. Russell JB, Onodera R, Hino T (1991). Ruminal protein fermentation: New perspectives on previous contradictions. In Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in Ruminants, ed. By Tsuda S, Sasaki Y, Kawashima R, Academic Press Inc. Publ., San Diego, CA, pp. 681. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-702290-1.50034-5[CrossRef]
  72. Sakauchi R, Hoshino S (1981). Effect of monensin on ruminal fluid viscosity. pH, volatile fatty acids and ammonia levels, and microbes activity and population in healthy and bloated feedlot steers. Z. Tierphysiol., Tierernahrg. u. Futtermittelkde, 46: 21-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0396.1981.tb01333.x[CrossRef]
  73. Saleh MS (2002). Effect of rotating lasalocid and monensin plus tylosin on performance of nursling buffalo calves. 53rd Annual Meeting of the European Assocition for Animal Production Cairo, Egypt, September 1-4, 2002.
  74. Schelling GT (1984). Monensin mode of action in the rumen. J. Anim. Sci., 58, 1518-1527. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1984.5861518x[CrossRef]
  75. Shaaban MM, Kholif AE, Abd El Tawab AM, Radwan MA, Hadhoud FI, Khattab MSA, Saleh HM, Anele UY (2021). Thyme and celery as potential alternatives to ionophores use in livestock production: their effects on feed utilization, growth performance and meat quality of Barki lambs. Small Rumin. Res., 200: 106400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106400[CrossRef]
  76. Singh GP, Mohini M (1999). Effect of different levels of rumensin in diet on rumem fermentation, nutrient digestibility and methane production in cattle. Asian-Aus. J. Anim. Sci., 12: 1215-1221. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1999.1215[CrossRef]
  77. Slyter LL (1979). Monensin and dichloracetamide influences on methane and volatile fatty acid production by rumen bacteria in vivo. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 37: 283-288. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.37.2.283-288.1979[CrossRef]
  78. Smith GE (1979). Energy metabolism and metabolism of the volatile fatty acids. In: S.C. Church (Ed.) Digestive Physiology and Nutrition of the ruminant. p 629. Oregon State Univ. Bookstore, Inc., Corvallis.
  79. Starnes SR, Spears JW, Froetschel MA, Croom WJ Jr (1984). Influence of Monensin and Lasalocid on Mineral Metabolism and Ruminal Urease Activity in Steers. J. Nutr. 114: 518-525 https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/114.3.518[CrossRef]
  80. Stock RA, Laudert SB, Stroup WW, Larson EM, Parrott JC, Britton RA (1995). Effect of monensin and monensin and tylosin combination on feed intake variation of feedlot steers. J. Anim. Sci., 73: 39-44. https://doi.org/10.2527/1995.73139x[CrossRef]
  81. Suda K, Hidaka S, Kudo H, Hidari H, Okada M (1993). Effect of salinomycin on performance, and blood characteristics in growing steers. Anim. Sci. Technol. (Jpn), 64: 395-402. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.64.395[CrossRef]
  82. Suda K, Hiramatsu M, Kobayashi Y, Motoi Y, Wakita M, Hoshino S (1995). Effects of ionophores on lactate and endotoxin production in the in vitro incubation of ruminal fluid. Anim. Sci. Technol. (Jpn), 66: 869-874. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.66.869[CrossRef]
  83. Tamminga S (1979) Protein degradation in the forestomachs of ruminants. J. Anim. Sci., 49: 1615-1630. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1979.4961615x[CrossRef]
  84. Van der Merwe BJ, Dugmore TJ, Walsh KP (2001). The effect of monensin on milk production, milk urea nitrogen and body condition score of grazing dairy cows. South Africa J. Anim. Sci., 31: 49-55. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v31i1.3847[CrossRef]
  85. Van Nevel CJ, Demeyer DI (1977). Effect of monensin on rumen metabolism in vitro. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 34: 251-257 https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.34.3.251-257.1977.[CrossRef]
  86. Wakita M, Sakauchi R, Hoshino S (1989). Salinomycin alters cellular fatty acid composition of mixed rumen bacteria and genus Entodinium ciliates. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol., 35: 327-331. https://doi.org/10.2323/jgam.35.327[CrossRef]
  87. Wallace RJ, Czerkawski JW, Breckenridge G (1981). Effect of monensin on the fermentation of basal rations in the rumen simulation technique (Rusitec). Br. J. Nutr., 46: 131-148. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19810016[CrossRef]
  88. Whetstone HD, Davis CL, Bryant MP (1981). Effect of monensin on breakdown of protein by ruminal microorganisms in vitro. J.Anim. Sci., 53: 803-809. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1981.533803x[CrossRef]
  89. Xu L, He ML, Liang RF, McAllister TA, Yang WZ (2014). Effects of grain source and monensin level on growth performance, carcass traits and fatty acid profile in feedlot beef steers. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 198: 141-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.10.015[CrossRef]
  90. Yang C-MJ, Russell JB (1993). The Effect of monensin on the flow of amino nitrogen from the rumen. J. Dairy Sci., 76 (Suppl.1): 179 Abstr.
  91. Zhao JY, Shimojo M, Masuda Y, Goto I (1995). Effects of salinomycin on forage digestion and forage protein degradation in the rumen of goats. Anim. Sci. Technol., (Jap) 66: 732-738. https://doi.org/10.2508/chikusan.66.732[CrossRef]

Related articles

Services

Article usage statistics

Loading…

Ionophores: Their Effects on Ruminal Fermentation, Animal Performance and Carcass Characteristics and Meat Quality · ResearchersLinks