Evaluation of fungal degradation of wheat straw cell wall using different analytical methods from ruminant nutrition perspective

Nazri Nayan, Gijs van Erven, Mirjam A. Kabel, Anton S.M. Sonnenberg, Wouter H. Hendriks, John W. Cone

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: White rot fungi have been used to improve the nutritive value of lignocellulose for ruminants. In feed analysis, the Van Soest method is widely used to determine the cell wall contents. To assess the reliability of this method (Method A) for determination of cell wall contents in fungal-treated wheat straw, we compared a combined monosaccharide analysis and pyrolysis coupled to gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) (Method B). Ruminal digestibility, measured as in vitro gas production (IVGP), was subsequently used to examine which method explains best the effect of fungal pretreatment on the digestibility of wheat straw. RESULTS: Both methods differed considerably in the mass recoveries of the individual cell wall components, which changed on how we assess their degradation characteristics. For example, Method B gave a higher degradation of lignin (61.9%), as compared to Method A (33.2%). Method A, however, showed a better correlation of IVGP with the ratio of lignin to total structural carbohydrates, as compared to Method B (Pearson's r of −0.84 versus −0.69). Nevertheless, Method B provides a more accurate quantification of lignin, reflecting its actual modification and degradation. With the information on the lignin structural features, Method B presents a substantial advantage in understanding the underlying mechanisms of lignin breakdown. Both methods, however, could not accurately quantify the cellulose contents – among others, due to interference of fungal biomass. CONCLUSION: Method A only accounts for the recalcitrant residue and therefore is more suitable for evaluating ruminal digestibility. Method B allows a more accurate quantification of cell wall, required to understand and better explains the actual modification of the cell wall. The suitability of both methods, therefore, depends on their intended purposes.

LanguageEnglish
Pages4054-4062
JournalJournal of the Science of Food and Agriculture
Volume99
Issue number8
Early online date8 Feb 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2019

Fingerprint

ruminant nutrition
Ruminants
wheat straw
Cell Wall
Triticum
analytical methods
cell walls
degradation
Lignin
lignin
methodology
gas production (biological)
digestibility
Gases
lignocellulose
white-rot fungi
Monosaccharides
Nutritive Value

Keywords

  • carbohydrates
  • in vitro gas production
  • lignin
  • lignin quantification
  • pyrolysis-GC/MS
  • white-rot fungi

Cite this

@article{eaf5eba1d8fa4b9598bc2d7e8bfb3a56,
title = "Evaluation of fungal degradation of wheat straw cell wall using different analytical methods from ruminant nutrition perspective",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: White rot fungi have been used to improve the nutritive value of lignocellulose for ruminants. In feed analysis, the Van Soest method is widely used to determine the cell wall contents. To assess the reliability of this method (Method A) for determination of cell wall contents in fungal-treated wheat straw, we compared a combined monosaccharide analysis and pyrolysis coupled to gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) (Method B). Ruminal digestibility, measured as in vitro gas production (IVGP), was subsequently used to examine which method explains best the effect of fungal pretreatment on the digestibility of wheat straw. RESULTS: Both methods differed considerably in the mass recoveries of the individual cell wall components, which changed on how we assess their degradation characteristics. For example, Method B gave a higher degradation of lignin (61.9{\%}), as compared to Method A (33.2{\%}). Method A, however, showed a better correlation of IVGP with the ratio of lignin to total structural carbohydrates, as compared to Method B (Pearson's r of −0.84 versus −0.69). Nevertheless, Method B provides a more accurate quantification of lignin, reflecting its actual modification and degradation. With the information on the lignin structural features, Method B presents a substantial advantage in understanding the underlying mechanisms of lignin breakdown. Both methods, however, could not accurately quantify the cellulose contents – among others, due to interference of fungal biomass. CONCLUSION: Method A only accounts for the recalcitrant residue and therefore is more suitable for evaluating ruminal digestibility. Method B allows a more accurate quantification of cell wall, required to understand and better explains the actual modification of the cell wall. The suitability of both methods, therefore, depends on their intended purposes.",
keywords = "carbohydrates, in vitro gas production, lignin, lignin quantification, pyrolysis-GC/MS, white-rot fungi",
author = "Nazri Nayan and {van Erven}, Gijs and Kabel, {Mirjam A.} and Sonnenberg, {Anton S.M.} and Hendriks, {Wouter H.} and Cone, {John W.}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1002/jsfa.9634",
language = "English",
volume = "99",
pages = "4054--4062",
journal = "Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture",
issn = "0022-5142",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "8",

}

Evaluation of fungal degradation of wheat straw cell wall using different analytical methods from ruminant nutrition perspective. / Nayan, Nazri; van Erven, Gijs; Kabel, Mirjam A.; Sonnenberg, Anton S.M.; Hendriks, Wouter H.; Cone, John W.

In: Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, Vol. 99, No. 8, 06.2019, p. 4054-4062.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of fungal degradation of wheat straw cell wall using different analytical methods from ruminant nutrition perspective

AU - Nayan, Nazri

AU - van Erven, Gijs

AU - Kabel, Mirjam A.

AU - Sonnenberg, Anton S.M.

AU - Hendriks, Wouter H.

AU - Cone, John W.

PY - 2019/6

Y1 - 2019/6

N2 - BACKGROUND: White rot fungi have been used to improve the nutritive value of lignocellulose for ruminants. In feed analysis, the Van Soest method is widely used to determine the cell wall contents. To assess the reliability of this method (Method A) for determination of cell wall contents in fungal-treated wheat straw, we compared a combined monosaccharide analysis and pyrolysis coupled to gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) (Method B). Ruminal digestibility, measured as in vitro gas production (IVGP), was subsequently used to examine which method explains best the effect of fungal pretreatment on the digestibility of wheat straw. RESULTS: Both methods differed considerably in the mass recoveries of the individual cell wall components, which changed on how we assess their degradation characteristics. For example, Method B gave a higher degradation of lignin (61.9%), as compared to Method A (33.2%). Method A, however, showed a better correlation of IVGP with the ratio of lignin to total structural carbohydrates, as compared to Method B (Pearson's r of −0.84 versus −0.69). Nevertheless, Method B provides a more accurate quantification of lignin, reflecting its actual modification and degradation. With the information on the lignin structural features, Method B presents a substantial advantage in understanding the underlying mechanisms of lignin breakdown. Both methods, however, could not accurately quantify the cellulose contents – among others, due to interference of fungal biomass. CONCLUSION: Method A only accounts for the recalcitrant residue and therefore is more suitable for evaluating ruminal digestibility. Method B allows a more accurate quantification of cell wall, required to understand and better explains the actual modification of the cell wall. The suitability of both methods, therefore, depends on their intended purposes.

AB - BACKGROUND: White rot fungi have been used to improve the nutritive value of lignocellulose for ruminants. In feed analysis, the Van Soest method is widely used to determine the cell wall contents. To assess the reliability of this method (Method A) for determination of cell wall contents in fungal-treated wheat straw, we compared a combined monosaccharide analysis and pyrolysis coupled to gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) (Method B). Ruminal digestibility, measured as in vitro gas production (IVGP), was subsequently used to examine which method explains best the effect of fungal pretreatment on the digestibility of wheat straw. RESULTS: Both methods differed considerably in the mass recoveries of the individual cell wall components, which changed on how we assess their degradation characteristics. For example, Method B gave a higher degradation of lignin (61.9%), as compared to Method A (33.2%). Method A, however, showed a better correlation of IVGP with the ratio of lignin to total structural carbohydrates, as compared to Method B (Pearson's r of −0.84 versus −0.69). Nevertheless, Method B provides a more accurate quantification of lignin, reflecting its actual modification and degradation. With the information on the lignin structural features, Method B presents a substantial advantage in understanding the underlying mechanisms of lignin breakdown. Both methods, however, could not accurately quantify the cellulose contents – among others, due to interference of fungal biomass. CONCLUSION: Method A only accounts for the recalcitrant residue and therefore is more suitable for evaluating ruminal digestibility. Method B allows a more accurate quantification of cell wall, required to understand and better explains the actual modification of the cell wall. The suitability of both methods, therefore, depends on their intended purposes.

KW - carbohydrates

KW - in vitro gas production

KW - lignin

KW - lignin quantification

KW - pyrolysis-GC/MS

KW - white-rot fungi

U2 - 10.1002/jsfa.9634

DO - 10.1002/jsfa.9634

M3 - Article

VL - 99

SP - 4054

EP - 4062

JO - Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

T2 - Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

JF - Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

SN - 0022-5142

IS - 8

ER -