Next Article in Journal
Association of the IGF1 5′UTR Polymorphism in Meat-Type Sheep Breeds Considering Growth, Body Size, Slaughter, and Meat Quality Traits in Turkey
Previous Article in Journal
Development of a Nomogram to Estimate the 60-Day Probability of Death or Culling Due to Severe Clinical Mastitis in Dairy Cows at First Veterinary Clinical Evaluation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Veterinary Sciences
Volume 10
Issue 4
10.3390/vetsci10040269
vetsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Chestnut Hydrolysable Tannin on Intake, Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, Milk Production and Somatic Cell Count in Crossbred Dairy Cows

by
Tipwadee Prapaiwong
1,
Wuttikorn Srakaew
2,
Sukanya Poolthajit
1,
Chalong Wachirapakorn
1 and
Chaiwat Jarassaeng
3,*
1
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
2
Department of Animal Science and Fisheries, Faculty of Science and Technology, Rajamangala University of Technology Lanna Nan, Nan 55000, Thailand
3
Division of Theriogenology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vet. Sci. 2023, 10(4), 269; https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040269
Submission received: 23 January 2023 / Revised: 28 March 2023 / Accepted: 31 March 2023 / Published: 1 April 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Veterinary Microbiology, Parasitology and Immunology)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Mastitis is a disease that has a significant impact on the global dairy industry, including productivity, quality and farmer income. There are several methods for preventing mastitis. The use of secondary substances (hydrolysable tannins) to prevent the development of mastitis in dairy cows is one example. Hydrolysable tannins have been shown to reduce the bacteria that cause mastitis in the udder. A previous study report discovered that hydrolysable tannins could eliminate both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria that cause mastitis. The aim of this study was to determine how chestnut hydrolysable tannins (CHT) supplemented at levels of 0, 3.15, 6.30 and 9.45 g/day in milking cows affected intake, digestibility, rumen fermentation, and milk yield and quality. As result, CHT supplementation was found to have a promising effect on nutrient apparent digestibility and rumen fermentation. Furthermore, the somatic cell count (SCC) in milk was reduced, indicating lower bacterial contamination in milk.

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine the effects of chestnut hydrolysable tannin (CHT) on intake, digestibility, rumen fermentation, milk yield and somatic cell count in crossbred dairy cows (>75% Holstein Friesian). Four crossbred dairy cows (467.6 ± 35.2 kg BW) were assigned to be supplemented with one of four levels of CHT according to a 4 × 4 Latin square design. Dietary treatments included the control (without CHT supplementation) and CHT treatments that consisted of supplementation with 3.15, 6.30 and 9.45 g CHT/day. Rice straw was given ad libitum. The results showed that increasing levels of CHT tended to quadratically decrease rice straw intake (p = 0.06). However, total dry matter intake (DMI) and other nutrients were not different (p > 0.05) among the dietary treatments. The apparent digestibility of DM, organic matter (OM) and crude protein (CP) in cows with CHT treatments were higher (p < 0.05) than those of control cows. Milk yield and milk composition were not different (p > 0.05) among treatments. Lactose yield tended to increase linearly (p = 0.09) as CHT supplementation increased. Ruminal pH and ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) were not different (p > 0.05), but total volatile fatty acids (VFAs) increased linearly (p < 0.05) as CHT levels increased. The somatic cell count (SCC) and somatic cell score (SCS) in the CHT treatments were different (p < 0.01) than those in the control treatment. In conclusion, it appears that CHT supplementation improved feed utilization and influenced SCC in crossbred dairy cows. Long-term research is needed to confirm the benefit of CHT supplementation.

1. Introduction

There is currently interest in using plant extracts in ruminant diets to improve production in ruminants and animal health. Several plant extracts have been studied in ruminants for their use as rumen fermentation modifiers, antimicrobials and antioxidants, [1,2,3] as well as for therapeutic applications [4]. Tannins are plant extracts that have been widely shown to improve nitrogen utilization and enhance the productivity of ruminants. Tannins are classified into two structures: hydrolysable and condensed tannins. Condensed tannins (CTs) can bind to dietary proteins and reduce their degradability in the rumen [5,6], whereas hydrolysable tannins (HTs) have a lower molecular weight than CTs and are more easily absorbed from the intestine, potentially increasing their toxicity to animals.
Some studies have found no difference between tannin structures on ruminal protein degradation, the digestibility of proteins, or animal performance [7]. One study [8] reported that adding a 0.45% tannin mixture (HTs and CTs at 1:2 ratio) decreased feed efficiency but increased milk protein content. Feeding a tannin extract mixture may reduce environmentally labile urinary N excretion without affecting milk yield but at the expense of decreased feed intake. In addition, chestnut hydrolysable tannin (CHT) has been reported to have positive effects on ruminants, showing better protein utilization, increased weight, wool and milk, increased fertility, and the prevention of parasitic infections as well as improved animal health [9]. Supplementation of CHT at 0.49% in the diet had no effect on dry matter intake and milk yield in dairy cows [10]. Liu et al. [11] reported that CHT extract supplemented at 1% of the diet had no effect on intake, body weight, body condition score, milk yield and milk composition, while decreasing the somatic cell score (SCS). Another study [12] also reported that the addition of CHT at 40 g/day induced a better milk yield from crossbred dairy cows, whereas there was no effect on milk protein, lactose, fat or total solids and a reduced somatic cell count (SCC) in milk. The antibacterial activity of the HT may be responsible for the decrease in SCC in dairy cow’s milk.
Hydrolysable tannins have been reported to exert antibacterial activity by damaging the lipid bilayer membranes and cell membranes of bacteria [13], inhibiting extracellular microbial enzymes and the complexation of metal ions, and depleting substrates [14,15]. Maisak et al. [16] revealed that tannin from chestnut wood has antimicrobial activity against Streptococcus agalactiae, which is the most important contagious bacterium causing a high SCC in milk [17]. Furthermore, our preliminary in vitro study of CHT as an antibacterial agent against bacteria causing mastitis revealed a similar positive response as antibiotics (penicillin and gentamycin) [18]. However, little information has been reported on CHT supplementation that focuses on performance in dairy cows and bacteria causing mastitis leading to high SCC in milk in crossbred dairy cows. Thus, we hypothesized that CHT can increase milk production and simultaneously reduce somatic cell counts. Therefore, our objective in this study was to determine the effects of HT extracts from sweet chestnut wood (Castanea Sativa Mill.) on intake, digestibility, rumen fermentation, milk performance and somatic cell counts in lactating crossbred dairy cows.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Animal Welfare Statement

The Animal Ethics Committee of Khon Kaen University approved the experimental protocol based on the National Research Council of Thailand’s Ethics of Animal Experimentation (Record no IACUC-KKU-86/2560).

2.2. Animals, Diets and Experimental Design

Four crossbred dairy cows (>75% Holstein Friesian), with an average of 5.50 ± 1.65 years, parity 2.00 ± 1.22, body weight of 467.60 ± 35.20 kg and 46.75 ± 25.72 days in milk (DIM), were randomly assigned to receive one of four levels of CHT supplementation using a 4 × 4 Latin square design. The experiment was performed in four periods of 21 days each. There was a 5-day washout period. The first 14 days were assigned for treatment adaptation, while the following 7 days were used for sample collection. All dairy cows were housed in individual crates (2 × 5 m2) on concrete floors with rubber stall mats and open-air ventilation at a dairy farm in the Department of Animal Science, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. Dietary treatments included a control treatment (no CHT supplementation) and CHT treatments with CHT supplementation at 3.15, 6.30 and 9.45 g CHT/day. Cows were individually offered concentrate and roughage based on their requirements for maintenance, milk production and gain [19], twice daily after milking times, at 7 am and at 3 pm. The concentrate was formulated using locally available feed ingredients (Table 1) and offered in the amount based on the ratio of concentrate to milk of 1:1.6. Two equal portions of concentrate were given at the milking in the morning and in the afternoon. Rice straw was offered ad libitum. At the time of the morning feeding, the CHT was on-top and then mixed thoroughly with concentrate. Clean water and mineral blocks were always available.
The CHT extract from sweet chestnut wood (Castanea sativa Mill.) was provided from the Animal Supplement & Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Pathum Thani, Thailand. The tannin content of chestnut extract was at least 73.5% tannin. The tannin is composed of 85% HT and other tannin in brown powdered forms (Globaphonol, Global Nutrition International, Fougères, France). HT is a complex mixture, including both gallotannins and ellagitannins.

2.3. Sampling Procedures and Analysis Methods

All cows were weighed on Day 1 and Day 21 of each period in the morning before feeding. The feed intake of concentrate and roughage were measured separately and recorded daily by weighing the amount offered and the refused feed during the morning feeding. The offered amount of rice straw was adjusted daily to ensure approximately 10% refusal after feeding. Samples of feed were collected during the last five days of each period and pooled for analysis. Faecal samples were collected from each dairy cow by rectal sampling at the same time during the last five days of each period and pooled for analysis. The feed and faeces samples were dried at 60 °C for 48 h before being ground through a 1 mm screen and analysed by the AOAC method [20] for ether extract (EE; method 920.39), ash (method 942.05) and crude protein (CP; method 984.13). Neutral detergent fibre (NDF) and acid detergent fibre (ADF) were measured using the detergent method [21]. Acid insoluble ash (AIA) was analysed as an internal marker to determine the apparent digestibility of nutrients [22].
On the last day of each period, 200 mL of rumen fluid samples were collected at 0, 1, 2 and 4 h post-feeding using a stomach tube connected to a vacuum pump. The rumen fluid samples were taken from the middle part of the rumen. The pH was immediately measured using a portable pH meter (CyberScan pH 11, Eutech Instruments Pte Ltd, Singapore). The rumen fluid samples were then filtered through four layers of cheesecloth. Samples were acidified by adding 5 mL of H2SO4 solution (1 M) mixed with 50 mL of rumen fluid to inhibit microbial activity. The mixture was then centrifuged at 16,000× g for 15 min, and the supernatant was stored at −20 °C. Ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) was measured using Kjeldahl analysis (Kjeltec Auto 1030 Analyzer, Tecator, Hoganiis, Sweden), and volatile fatty acids (VFAs) were analysed using high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC model RF-10AXmugiL, Shimadzu, Tokyo, Japan) following Mathew et al. [23]. At the end of each period, blood samples were taken from the jugular vein immediately after the sampling of rumen fluid. Blood was drawn into 6 mL vacutainer tubes without anticoagulant, refrigerated at 5 °C for 1 h, and then centrifuged at 3000× g for 15 min. The supernatant was stored at –20 °C until analysis of the serum urea nitrogen (SUN) concentration using colorimetric method test kits and an automated analyser (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA) (COBAS INTE-GRA 400 plus analyzer, Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA).
Cows were milked twice daily at 5 a.m. and 2 p.m. and recorded throughout the experiment. Milk samples were collected twice during each period. The first collection was on Day 13 (afternoon milking) and Day 14 (morning milking), and the second collection was on Day 20 (afternoon milking) and Day 21 (morning milking). The samples were pooled and stored at 4 °C until milk composition analyses. Fat, protein, lactose, total solids (TS), solids-not-fat (SNF) contents and SCC were analysed using MilkcoScan FT 600 and Fossomatic 500 Basic (Foss Electric, Integrated Milk TestingTM), respectively. Somatic cell score (SCS) was calculated as [log2(SCC × 10−5) + 3] [24]. Milk samples from each period were also collected to identify the bacteria that cause bovine mastitis, according to conventional biochemical tests [25,26].

2.4. Statistical Analysis

All data obtained from the experiment were subjected to ANOVA for a 4 × 4 Latin square design using general linear models (GLMs) procedures [27]. The model was:
Yijkl = µ + Pi + Cj + Tk + eijkl
where Yijkl is the observation, µ is the overall mean, Pi is the period effect (i = 4), Cj is the cow effect (j = 4), Tk is the treatment effect (k = 4) and eijkl is the residual error. The differences between means were compared using Tukey’s test. Orthogonal polynomial contrasts were performed to determine linear, quadratic and cubic responses to supplementing CHT levels. Somatic cell count values were transformed to log10 bases before the statistical analysis. The results were presented as least square means. Significance was declared at p ≤ 0.05, whereas tendencies were indicated at 0.05 ≤ p ≤ 0.10.

3. Results

3.1. Nutrient Composition of the Experimental Diets

The chemical composition of the feeds used in this study is presented in Table 1. The concentrate contained 90.73%, 21.68%, 3.20%, 19.14% and 14.40% of DM, CP, EE, NDF and ADF, respectively. The rice straw consisted of 92.83% DM, 3.21% CP, 1.80% EE, 90.63% NDF and 57.48% ADF. The metabolizable energy of the concentrate and rice straw was 3.18 and 1.36 Mcal/kg DM, respectively. The brown powder of chestnut hydrolysable tannin consisted of 91.72%, 9.63% and 0.75% of DM, CP and EE, respectively.

3.2. Feed Intake, Nutrient Intake and Nutrient Digestibility

Table 2 shows the effects of CHT supplementation on feed intake in lactating dairy cows. Rice straw intake decreased quadratically (p < 0.05) as the levels of CHT supplementation increased. However, the intake of concentrate and the total DM intake as kg/day, %BW and g/kg BW0.75 were not significantly different (p > 0.05) among the CHT treatments when compared with the control treatment.
The nutrient intake, apparent digestibility and energy intake are shown in Table 2. The nutrient intake of OM, EE, NDF and ADF did not differ (p > 0.05) between dietary treatments. The apparent digestibility of EE, NDF and ADF did not differ (p > 0.05) among the treatments. Dry matter (DM), OM, EE and ADF digestibilities in the CHT treatments were statistically higher (p < 0.05) than those in the control treatment. Crude protein digestibility in cows fed the CHT supplement at 9.45 g/day was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than that in cows fed the control. Moreover, the OM digestibility of diet was increased linearly (p < 0.05) as CHT supplementation increased, while OM digestibilities in the CHT treatments were higher (p < 0.05) than those in the control treatment.
The energy intake of cows ranged from 34.94 to 39.70 Mcal ME/day, which met their energy requirement for producing milk (15.03–17.16 kg/day). Cows supplemented with CHT consumed considerably more energy (p < 0.05) than cows without supplemented with CHT.

3.3. Rumen Fermentation Patterns and Blood Metabolites

Table 3 illustrates the effects of CHT supplementation on ruminal pH, ruminal NH3-N, total VFAs, acetic acid (C2), propionic acid (C3), butyric acid (C4), A:P ratio and serum urea nitrogen (SUN). Ruminal pH, ruminal NH3-N, acetic acid (C2), propionic acid (C3), butyric acid (C4) and the A:P ratio were not significantly different (p > 0.05) between the CHT treatments and the control treatment. The total VFA concentration increased linearly (p < 0.05) as the levels of CHT supplementation increased. In addition, SUN in cows linearly decreased (p < 0.01) as levels of CHT increased. Cows receiving 9.45 g of CHT/day had a lower SUN (p < 0.05) than in cows receiving 0 and 3.15 g of CHT/day, but it did not differ from cows receiving 6.30 g CHT/day.

3.4. Milk Yield and Milk Composition

Chestnut hydrolysable tannin supplementation had no effect on milk yield, 4% FCM, milk composition, fat and protein ratio, milk composition or nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUE) when compared with the control treatment (Table 4). The protein and lactose concentration in milk showed a linear increase (p < 0.05) with increasing CHT levels. Moreover, a linear tendency of lactose yield was observed (p = 0.09). Feed efficiency increased linearly (p < 0.05) as CHT supplementation increased. The feed efficiency of cows with the CHT treatments tended to linearly increase (p < 0.05) as CHT levels increased.
Somatic cell count and somatic cell score (SCS) were lower (p < 0.01) in CHT-supplemented cows than in the control. Cows receiving CHT supplementation had a linear decrease (p < 0.01) in SCC and SCS.

3.5. Identification of Mastitis-Causing Bacteria

Twenty isolates from 16 milk samples were identified as mastitis-causing bacteria, which were isolated and subjected to preliminary screening utilizing morphological and biochemical features. Six species of mastitis-causing bacteria were isolated from the milk collected in the experiment. In addition, one to three bacterial species were identified in a milk sample. The bacteria that were isolated were mostly from the environment. Enterococcus spp. were the most commonly found bacteria (35.0%) (Figure 1).

4. Discussion

4.1. Dry Matter Intake, Nutrient Intake and Nutrient Digestibility

The present study found that a higher level of CHT supplementation in the concentrate resulted in lower rice straw intake but not in a concentrated intake or overall DMI. This was most likely due to the astringent taste of tannins [31]. High tannin concentrations are linked to decreased feed intake, decreased feed palatability, decreased digestion and the development of conditioned aversion [32]. Kapp-Bitter et al. [33] found that supplementing with pellets containing 100 g/kg of chestnut extract resulted in significantly lower intake than supplementing with pellets containing 0 and 50 g/kg of chestnut. In addition, Aruerre et al. [34] reported that supplementation with mixed quebracho and chestnut tannin extract (2:1 ratio) at levels of 0, 0.45, 0.90 and 1.80% of dietary DM linearly reduced DM intake (25.5 to 23.4 kg/day). However, Liu et al. [11] found that feeding CHT at 1% of diet had no effect on the DMI of lactating cows. Another study [35] reported no effect on feed intake when CHT was included at 0.49% of dietary DM. Furthermore, mixing CHT into total mixed ration (TMR) had no effect on intake [6]. Although the effects of tannins on feed intake in ruminants remain controversial, it can be concluded that the level at which CHT has a negative effect may vary depending on the structures, sources and concentrations of tannins in the extract mixture.
Jayanegara et al. [36] reported that CHT is toxic to R. flavefaciens and anaerobic fungal populations, which could lead to decreased fibre digestion. However, the reduction in NDF and ADF digestion in this study was not observed. The digestibility of ADF was increased in the CHT groups compared to the control. In comparison to the control diet, Mannelli et al. [37] confirmed that the inclusion of CHT in the diet had no influence on NDF degradation. Due to the addition of CHT to the diet, the microbial community in the rumen was enriched, particularly the Firmicutes community, which included Anaerovibrio, Bibersteinia, Escherichia/Shigella, Pseudobutyrivibrio and Streptococcus. Deaville et al. [38] found that CHT is not bound to dietary fibre, which may explain why adding CHT from chestnut to the diet of lactating dairy cows in the study did not reduce NDF or ADF digestibility. In addition, Carrasco et al. [39] reported that supplementation with a mixture of chestnut and quebracho tannin at 0.2% in the diet enhanced fibrolytic, amylolytic and ureolytic bacterial communities in the rumen and reduced methanogenic archaea. Another study [36] also reported similar findings in that hydrolysable tannins had a lower effect on the degradation of nutrients by rumen microbes than condensed tannins. In this trial, cows given CHT showed an increase in the digestibility of DM, OM and CP. In contrast, Aguerre et al. [35] found a linear decrease in DM, OM and CP digestibility when tannins from quebracho-chestnut tannin extracts increased from 0.45 to 1.80% of DM. In addition, one study [40] also showed a dramatic decrease in DM, CP, NDF and ADF digestibility in cows fed a 3% valonia hydrolysable tannin diet. According to the literature, the extent and sources of tannin have an impact on intake and feed utilization in ruminants.

4.2. Rumen Fermentation Patterns and Blood Metabolites

Ruminal pH was not altered by CHT treatments, which varied from 6.81–6.98. The optimum ruminal pH level for the microbial digestion of fibre and protein, according to Calabrò et al. [41], and Wanapat and Cherdthong [42], is 6.5 to 7.0. Furthermore, our results are similar to those of a previously published study [43], which found that ruminal pH was 6.79 with CHT of chestnut tannin with oil supplemented at 100 g/kg of DM in the diets of rumen-fistulated sheep. This was also reported in the study of Herremans et al. [44], which found that supplementation with hydrolysable tannins from oak (26 g/kg DM) resulted in a ruminal pH of 7.0, with no difference between diets.
The results of this study revealed that CHT supplementation had no effect on ruminal NH3-N levels that were within a normal range [45]. The ruminal NH3-N concentration, on the other hand, varied depending on several factors, including rumen protein degradation, feed protein amount and retention time [46]. Moreover, Aguerre et al. [34] reported that the tannin extract mixture from quebracho and chestnut trees (2:1 ratio) supplemented at levels of 0.45, 0.90 and 1.80% of diets reduced the concentration of NH3-N in ruminal fluid. The outcome was a decrease in rumen protein degradation due to the formation of tannin–protein complexes. Ali et al. [12] confirmed that CHT supplementation in a diet prevents the degradation of protein in the rumen and consequently increases the supply of amino acids in the intestines. These results are in line with earlier findings [47,48] indicating that reduced protein degradation and production of NH3-N in the rumen resulted in decreased absorption of ammonia across the rumen wall into the blood. The results of this study indicate that SUN concentrations have similarities to the normal range from 8 to 20 mg/dL [49]. However, the SUN concentration in this experiment showed a quadratic decrease with increasing levels of CHT. This finding was in line with results from a previously published report [34]. Serum urea nitrogen decreased linearly when the tannin mixture content in the diet increased from 0 to 1.80% of DM. Other reports have shown a similar response to condensed tannin supplementation that reflects lower rumen protein degradation [50].
Total VFA concentrations increased linearly with increasing CHT levels. It is postulated that CHT supplementation reduces roughage intake and leads to an increased ratio of concentrate to roughage in the diet. A high proportion of concentrate in the ration led to an increase in VFA production [51,52]. This result agrees with previously published work [53], in which ewes fed CHT from chestnut had a higher total VFA level than ewes fed condensed tannin and the control ewes (73.07, 39.82 and 50.89 mM, respectively). Costa et al. [44] reported that sheep fed CHT had a higher total VFA concentration (152.2 mM) than sheep fed condensed tannin (79.3 mM) (p < 0.001). In contrast, Bhatta et al. [54] reported that increasing tannin levels led to a reduction in total VFA concentrations. Several studies [55,56,57] have shown that tannin did not influence the total VFA concentration or their molar proportions in rumen fluid from ewes. Other authors have shown that a response to high levels of tannin (>1.0% of DM) added to the diet decreases the total VFA concentration [35,50,58]. In addition, Benchaar et al. [59] reported that total VFA concentrations were not affected by feeding quebracho tannin extracts at 0.64% of DM.

4.3. Milk Yield and Milk Composition

Supplementation with CHT had no effect on milk yield, 4% FCM, energy-corrected milk (ECM), fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM), milk composition or nitrogen utilization efficiency. Consistent with our results, a previous study found that tannin supplementation did not affect milk yield; 4% FCM; energy-corrected milk (ECM); or fat, protein and lactose contents [50]. Sliwinski et al. [34] found no effect of CHT on feed intake and milk production when CHT from chestnut tannin was included at 0.49% of dietary DM. Likewise, another study [10] observed no significant difference in milk production or milk fat when cows received diets with CHT at 0.30% chestnut tannin extract. Liu et al. [11] observed that HTs from chestnut tannin in diets did not affect milk yield, 3.5% FCM, milk protein, milk fat, or lactose in milk. In another study [60], milk yield was not affected by offering silage treated with tannin. According to Zhang et al. [40], the supplementation of lactating cows with 3% valonia hydrolysed tannin had no effect on milk yield, FCM, ECM, or the composition of fat, protein and lactose in the milk. This was in line with the results of another study [45] that reported that no significant differences between treatments were detected in milk yield and major milk components compared with the control group when CHT from oak was included at 26 g/kg of DM in the forage of dairy cows. According to Dubey [61], a significant increase in milk yield from 9.44 to 10.35 kg/day/cow was achieved by adding 3% tannin from Acacia nilotica pods in crossbred cows. Additionally, Colombini et al. [60] reported slight increases in fat-corrected milk (p < 0.10), and the supplementation of chestnut tannin (120 g/day) in cows’ diets was found to increase milk yield [62].
The results of this study revealed that SCC and SCS in dairy cows fed with CHT were significantly different compared to the control. Ali et al. [12] reported that CHT supplementation ranging from 20 to 40 g/day reduced SCC in lactating crossbred cows. The authors suggested that the lower SCC in milk may be due to the inclusion of zinc. Zinc plays a role in optimizing the cellular immune response [63] and the formation of keratin, which entraps these bacteria [64]. Furthermore, Liu et al. [11] reported that milk SCS in postpartum cows fed a diet containing chestnut tannin (a species with high CHT) at 1% of dietary DM decreased (p < 0.05) when compared to the control group (2.37 and 3.78, respectively). Liu et al. [65] found that HTs from M. bracteata have a strong anti-inflammatory effect, which could reduce SCC in milk. Based on these results, it may be concluded that CHT is able to act against bovine mastitis pathogens because it has antimicrobial properties [18,66]. Due to its absorption and transfer rate to the udder, the extent and source of CHT supplementation are important. Recently, it was reported that the transfer of a phenolic compound at high levels in CTs or CHT from various tanniferous forages in the diet to milk was low, ranging between 1 and 2% [67]. To reduce SCC or SCS in milk, further research should focus on the effective transport of phenolic compounds, particularly hydrolysable tannins, from the diet to the udder.

4.4. Identification of Mastitis-Causing Bacteria

In this experiment, CHT supplementation had positive effects against mastitis-causing bacteria. The prevalent bacteria isolated that were related to causing mastitis were environmental bacteria, and contagious bacteria were not identified. Türkyilmaz et al. [68] reported that environmental microorganisms (77.1%) were found in 188 isolated milk samples, which was much higher than the level of contagious microorganisms found (22.9%). Another study [69] indicated that low production rates and high SCC are usually observed in S. agalactiae infections. Upon infection by S. agalactiae, the SCC in milk was extremely high (>1,572,000 cells/mL) [17]. Furthermore, Panneum et al. [70] found that environmental pathogens such as coliforms, environmental Staphylococci spp., and environmental Streptococci spp. were the bacteria most often isolated in milk with a high SCC concentration. According to Juangphanich et al. [71], the incidence of subclinical mastitis in crossbred Holstein Friesian dairy cows in the central parts of Thailand is high, and environmental infections are the main reason.
Higher SCC levels indicate high intramammary inflection by mastitis-causing pathogens, which is associated with decreased lactose production and lower milk yield. In this study, cows with a high milk yield were observed to have a lower SCC in their milk. Subclinical mastitis affects the alveoli in the mammary, and mastitis bacteria-induced inflammation causes milk production to decrease. Hagnestam-Nielsen et al. [72] reported that daily milk loss at an SCC of 500,000 cells/mL ranged from 0.7 to 2.0 kg (3 to 9%) in primiparous cows, while in multiparous cows, the corresponding loss was 1.1 to 3.7 kg (4 to 18%), depending on the stage of lactation.

5. Conclusions

Although supplementation with CHT had no effect on feed intake or milk production and composition in this study, it did have a positive effect on nutrient digestibility as well as higher total VFAs and lower SUN in cows supplemented with CHT at 9.45 g/day. SCC in milk from cows infected with environmental bacteria was reduced by CHT supplementation. Long-term CHT supplementation in lactating dairy cows is also recommended to improve milk production and control mastitis.

Author Contributions

C.W., C.J. and T.P.: Conceptualization. C.W., C.J. and T.P.: Methodology. T.P., S.P. and W.S.: Data analysis. T.P.: Writing and preparing the first draft. T.P., C.W. and C.J.: Writing—review and editing. C.W.: Supervision. C.W.: Project administration. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The Thailand Research Fund (TRF) supported this study, which was funded by The Animal Supplement and Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Research and Researchers for Industries—RRI (PHD58l0052).

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of the Animal Ethics Committee of Khon Kaen University (record no. IACUC-KKU-86/2560) based on the Ethics of Animal Experimentation of the National Research Council of Thailand.

Informed Consent Statement

The animal owners provided written informed consent for the publication of this paper.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, C.J., upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to Animal Supplement and Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Research and Researchers for Industries—RRI (PHD58l0052) under the Thailand Research Fund (TRF) for providing CHT and financial support for this study. The authors are grateful to the technicians at the Animal Hospital, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Khon Kaen University for their assistance and guidance during lab activities.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. None of the funding sources influenced the design or performance of the experimental study, the interpretation of the results or the writing of the manuscript.

References

  1. Lauzon, K.; Zhao, X.; Bouetard, A.; Delbecchi, L.; Paquette, B.; Lacasse, P. Antioxidants to prevent bovine neutrophil induced mammary epithelial cell damage. J. Dairy Sci. 2005, 88, 4295–4303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Lejonklev, J.; Kidmose, U.; Jensen, S.; Petersen, M.A.; Helwing, A.L.F.; Mortensen, G.; Weisbjerg, M.R.; Larsen, M.K. Short communication: Effect of oregano and caraway essential oils on the production and flavor of cow milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2016, 99, 7898–7903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Oh, J.; Hristov, A.N. Effects of plant-derived bio-active compounds on rumen fermentation, nutrient utilization, immune response, and productivity of ruminant animals. In Medicinal and Aromatic Crops: Production, Phytochemistry, and Utilization; Jeliazkov, V.D., Cantrell, C.L., Eds.; American Chemical Society Publications: Washington, DC, USA, 2016; pp. 167–186. [Google Scholar]
  4. Oh, J.; Wall, E.H.; Bravo, D.M.; Hristov, A.N. Host-mediated effects of phytonutrients in ruminants: A review. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 5974–5983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Patra, A.K.; Saxena, J. Exploitation of dietary tannin to improve rumen metabolism and ruminant nutrition. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2011, 91, 24–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Aboagye, I.A.; Oba, M.; Castillo, A.R.; Koenig, K.M.; Iwaasa, A.D.; Beauchemin, K.A. Effects of hydrolysable tannin with or without condensed tannin on methane emissions, nitrogen use, and performance of beef cattle fed a high-forage diet. J. Anim. Sci. 2018, 96, 5276–5286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Rivera-Méndez, C.; Plascencia, A.; Torrentera, N.; Zinn, R.A. Effect of level and source of supplemental tannin on growth performance of steers during the late finishing phase. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 2016, 45, 199–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Aguerre, M.J.; Duval, B.; Powell, J.M.; Vadas, P.A.; Wattiaux, M.A. Effects of feeding a quebracho–chestnut tannin extract on lactating cow performance and nitrogen utilization efficiency. J. Dairy Sci. 2020, 103, 2264–2271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Mlambo, V.; Smith, T.; Owen, E.; Mould, F.L.; Sikosana, J.L.N.; Mueller-Harvey, I. Tanniniferous dichrostachys cinerea fruits do not require detoxification for goat nutrition: In sacco and in vivo evaluations. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2004, 90, 135–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lavrenčič, A. Effect of hydrolyzable tannin extract on bovine milk production and composition. Sustainable grassland productivity. In Proceedings of the 21st Ed. General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation, Badajoz, Spain, 3–6 April 2006; pp. 586–588. [Google Scholar]
  11. Liu, H.W.; Zhou, D.W.; Li, K. Effects of chestnut tannin on performance and antioxidative status of transition dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2013, 96, 5901–5907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Ali, M.; Mehboob, H.A.; Mirza, M.A.; Raza, H.; Osredkar, M. Effect of hydrolysable tannin supplementation on production performance of dairy crossbred cows. J. Anim. Plant Sci. 2017, 27, 1088–1093. [Google Scholar]
  13. Funatogawa, K.; Hayashi, S.; Shimomura, H.; Yoshida, T.; Hatano, T.; Ito, H.; Iría, Y. Antibacterial activity of hydrolysable tannin derived from medicinal plants against helicobacter pylori. Microbiol. Immunol. 2004, 48, 251–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Scalbert, A. Antimicrobial properties of tannin. Phytochemistry 1991, 30, 3875–3883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Buzzini, P.; Arapitsas, P.; Goretti, M.; Branda, E.; Turchetti, B.; Pinelli, P.; Ieri, F.; Romani, A. Antimicrobial and antiviral activity of hydrolysable tannin. Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 2008, 8, 1179–1187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Maisak, H.; Sasibha, J.; Mintra, L.; Janenuj, W. Antibacterial Activity of Tannin from Sweet Chestnut Wood Against Aeromonas and Streptococcal Pathogens of Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Thai J. Vet. Med. 2013, 43, 105–111. [Google Scholar]
  17. Lopes Júnior, J.E.F.; Lange, C.C.; Brito, M.A.V.P.; Santos, F.R.; Silva, M.A.S.; de Moraes, L.C.D.; de Souza, G.N. Relationship between total bacteria counts and somatic cell counts from mammary quarters infected by mastitis pathogens. Ciência Rural. 2012, 42, 691–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Prapaiwong, T.; Srakaew, W.; Wachirapakorn, C.; Jarassaeng, C. Effects of hydrolyzable tannin extract obtained from sweet chestnut wood (Castanea sativa Mill.) against bacteria causing subclinical mastitis in Thai Friesian dairy cows. Veterinary World 2021, 14, 2427–2433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. NRC. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, 7th ed.; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  20. AOAC. The Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 18th ed.; AOAC: Arlington, TX, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  21. Goering, H.K.; Van Soest, P.J. Forage Fiber Analysis (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications). In Agricultural Handbook No. 379; ARSUSDA: Washington, DC, USA, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  22. Van Keulen, J.; Young, B.A. Evaluation of acid insoluble ash as a neutral marker in ruminant digestibility studies. J. Anim. Sci. 1977, 44, 282–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Mathew, S.; Sagathevan, S.; Thomas, J.; Mathen, G. An HPLC method for estimation of volatile fatty acids in ruminal fluid. Indian J. Anim. 1997, 67, 805–807. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ali, A.K.A.; Shook, G.E. An optimum transformation for somatic cell concentration in milk. J. Dairy Sci. 1980, 63, 487–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. National Mastitis Council (NMC). Current Concepts of Bovine Mastitis; National Mastitis Council, Inc.: Washington, DC, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  26. Quinn, P.J.; Carter, M.E.; Markey, B.K.; Carter, G.R. Clinical Veterinary Microbiology; Mosby Ltd.: Wolfe, TX, USA, 1994; p. 648. [Google Scholar]
  27. SAS. User’s Guide: Statistic; SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kearl, L.C. Nutrient Requirements of Ruminants in Developing Countries. International Feed Stuffs Institute; Utah Agriculture Experimental Station, Utah State University: Logon, UT, USA, 1982. [Google Scholar]
  29. IDF (International Dairy Federation). A Common Carbon Footprint Approach for Dairy. In The IDF Guide to Standard Lifecycle Assessment Methodology for the Dairy Sector; Bulletin IDF No. 479/2010; IDF: Brussels, Belgium, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  30. Broderick, G.A.; Stevenson, M.J.; Patton, R.A. Effect of dietary protein concentration and degradability on response to rumen-protected methionine in lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2009, 92, 2719–2728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kumar, R.; Singh, M. Tannins: Their adverse role in ruminant nutrition. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1984, 32, 447–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gemeda, B.S.; Hassen, A. The potential of tropical tannin rich browses in reduction of enteric methane. Approaches Poult. Dairy Vet. Sci. 2018, 2, 154–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kapp-Bitter, A.N.; Dickhoefer, U.; Suglo, E.; Baumgartner, L.; Kreuzer, M.; Leiber, F. Graded supplementation of chestnut tannins to dairy cows fed protein-rich spring pasture: Effects on indicators of protein utilization. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2020, 29, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Aguerre, M.J.; Capozzolo, M.C.; Lencioni, P.; Cabral, C.; Wattiaux, M.A. Effect of quebracho-chestnut tannin extracts at 2 dietary crude protein levels on performance, rumen fermentation, and nitrogen partitioning in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2016, 99, 4476–4486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Sliwinski, B.J.; Kreuzer, M.; Sutter, F.; Machmuller, A.; Weststein, H.R. Performance, body nitrogen conversion and nitrogen emission from manure of dairy cows fed diets supplemented with different plant extracts. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2004, 13, 73–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Jayanegara, A.; Goel, G.; Makkar, H.P.S.; Becker, K. Divergence between purified hydrolysable and condensed tannin effects on methane emission, rumen fermentation and microbial population in vitro. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2015, 209, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mannelli, F.; Daghio, M.; Alves, S.P.; Bessa, R.J.B.; Minieri, S.; Giovannetti, L.; Conte, G.; Mele, M.; Messini, A.; Rapaccini, S.; et al. Effects of chestnut tannin extract, vescalagin and gallic acid on the dimethyl acetals profile and microbial community composition in rumen liquor: An in vitro study. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Deaville, E.R.; Givens, D.I.; Mueller-Harvey, I. Chestnut and mimosa tannin silages: Effects in sheep differ for apparent digestibility, nitrogen utilization and losses. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2010, 157, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Carrasco, J.M.D.; Cabral, C.; Redondo, L.M.; Viso, N.D.; Colombatto, D.; Farber, M.D.; Miyakawa, M.E.F. Impact of chestnut and quebracho tannin on rumen microbiota of bovines. BioMed Res Int. 2017, 2017, 9610810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Zhang, J.; Xu, X.; Cao, Z.; Wang, Y.; Yang, H.; Azarfar, A.; Li, S. Effect of different tannin sources on nutrient intake, digestibility, performance, nitrogen utilization, and blood parameters in dairy cows. Animals 2019, 9, 507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Calabrò, S.; Moniello, G.; Piccolo, C.; Bovera, F.; Infascelli, F.; Tudisco, R.; Cutrignelli, M.I. Rumen fermentation and degradability in buffalo and cattle using the in vitro gas production technique. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2008, 92, 356–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Wanapat, M.; Cherdthong, A. Use of real-time PCR technique in studying rumen cellulolytic bacteria population as affected by level of roughage in swamp buffalo. Current Microbiol. 2009, 58, 294–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Costa, M.; Alves, S.P.; Cappucci, A.; Cook, S.R.; Duarte, A.; Caldeira, R.M.; McAllister, T.A.; Bessa, R.J.B. Effects of condensed and hydrolyzable tannin on rumen metabolism with emphasis on the biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2018, 66, 3367–3377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Herremans, S.; Decruyenaere, V.; Cantalapiedra-Hijar, G.; Beckers, Y.; Froidmont, E. Effects of hydrolysable tannin-treated grass silage on milk yield and composition, nitrogen partitioning and nitrogen isotopic discrimination in lactating dairy cows. Animals 2020, 14, 771–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Anantasook, N.; Wanapat, M. Influence of rain tree pod meal supplementation on rice straw-based diets using in vitro gas fermentation technique. Asian J. Appl. Sci. 2012, 25, 325–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Schmidt, J.; Zsédely, E. Nutrition of Ruminants. 2011. Available online: https://www.tankonyvtar.hu/en/tartalom/tamop425/0059_ruminants_nutrition/0059_ruminants_nutrition.pdf (accessed on 13 August 2022).
  47. Dey, A.; De, P.S. Influence of condensed tannin from Ficus bengalensis leaves on feed utilization, milk production and antioxidant status of crossbred cows. Asian Australas J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 27, 342–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Allam, A.M.; Nagadi, S.A.; Bakhashwain, A.A.; Sallam, S.M.A. Impact of sub-tropical grass grown in arid region on methane emission, milk yield and composition in dairy cows. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2013, 1, 620–625. [Google Scholar]
  49. Ougi, T. Description of urea nitrogen in blood and milk. Dairy Japan. 1994, 39, 26–29. [Google Scholar]
  50. Dschaak, C.M.; Williams, C.M.; Holt, M.S.; Eun, J.S.; Young, A.J.; Min, B.R. Effects of supplementing condensed tannin extract on intake, digestion, ruminal fermentation, and milk production of lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 2508–2519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Penner, G.B.; Taniguchi, M.; Guan, L.L.; Beauchemin, K.A.; Oba, M. Effect of dietary forage to concentrate ratio on volatile fatty acid absorption and the expression of genes related to volatile fatty acid absorption and metabolism in ruminal tissue. J. Dairy Sci. 2009, 92, 2767–2781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Wang, L.; Guangning, Z.; Yang, L.; Yonggen, Z. Effects of High Forage/Concentrate Diet on Volatile Fatty Acid Production and the Microorganisms Involved in VFA Production in Cow Rumen. Animals 2020, 10, 223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Buccioni, A.; Pauselli, M.; Viti, C.; Minieri, S.; Pallara, G.; Roscini, V.; Rapaccini, S.; Marinucci, M.T.; Lupi, P.; Conte, G.; et al. Milk fatty acid composition, rumen microbial population, and animal performances in response to diets rich in linoleic acid supplemented with chestnut or quebracho tannin in dairy ewes. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 1145–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Bhatta, R.; Uyeno, Y.; Tajima, K.; Takenaka, A.; Yabumoto, Y.; Nonaka, I.; Enishi, O.; Kurihara, M. Difference in the nature of tannin on in vitro ruminal methane and volatile fatty acid production and on methanogenic archaea and protozoal populations. J. Dairy Sci. 2009, 92, 5512–5522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Hervás, G.; Frutos, P.; Giráldez, F.J.; Mantecón, A.R.; Álvarez Del Pino, M.C. Effect of different doses of quebracho tannin extract on rumen fermentation in ewes. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2003, 109, 65–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liu, H.; Vaddella, V.; Zhou, D. Effects of chestnut tannin and coconut oil on growth performance, methane emission, ruminal fermentation, and microbial populations in sheep. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 6069–6077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  57. Toral, P.; Hervàs, G.; Bichi, E.; Belenguer, A.; Fruitos, P. Tannin as feed additives to modulate ruminal biohydrogenation: Effects on animal performance, milk fatty acid composition and ruminal fermentation in dairy ewes fed a diet containing sunflower oil. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2011, 164, 199–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Beauchemin, K.; McGinn, S.M.; Martinez, T.F.; McAllis-ter, T.A. Use of condensed tannin extract from quebracho trees to reduce methane emissions from cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 2007, 85, 1990–1996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Benchaar, C.; McAllister, T.A.; Chouinard, P.Y. Digestion, ruminal fermentation, ciliate protozoal populations, and milk production from dairy cows fed cinnamaldehyde, quebracho con-densed tannin, or Yucca schidigera saponin extract. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 4765–4777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Colombini, S.; Colombari, G.; Crovetto, G.M.; Galassi, G.; Rapetti, L. Tannin treated Lucerne silage in dairy cow feeding. Italian. J. Anim. Sci. 2010, 8, 289–291. [Google Scholar]
  61. Dubey, D. Studies on Degradation of Tannin from Acacia Nilotica Pods and Their Influence on Nutrient Utilization, Milk Production and Reproduction in Dairy Animals. Ph.D. Thesis, NDRI (Deemed University), Karnal, Haryana, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  62. Errante, J.; Barbera, S.; Baldi, C. Use of hydrolysable tannin in high productive dairy cattle diets. Krmiva 1998, 40, 257–261. [Google Scholar]
  63. Cook-Mills, J.M.; Fraker, P.J. The role of metals in the production of toxic oxygen metabolites by mononuclear phagocytes. In Nutrient Modulation of the Immune Response; Cunningham-Rundles, S., Ed.; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1993; pp. 127–140. [Google Scholar]
  64. Craven, N.; Williams, M.R. Defences of the bovine mammary gland against infection and prospects for their enhancement. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 1985, 10, 71–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Liu, J.B.; Ding, Y.S.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, J.B.; Cui, B.S.; Bai, J.Y.; Lin, M.B.; Hou, Q.; Zhang, P.C.; Li, S. Anti-inflammatory hydrolyzable tannin from Myricaria bracteata. J. Nat. Prod. 2015, 78, 1015–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Ekambaram, S.P.; Perumal, S.S.; Balakrishnan, A. Scope of hydrolysable tannin as possible antimicrobial agent. Phytother. Res. 2016, 30, 1035–1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Birkinshaw, A.; Schwarm, A.; Marquardt, S.; Kreuzer, M.; Terranova, M. Rapid responses in bovine milk fatty acid composition and phenol content to various tanniferous forages. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2020, 29, 297–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Türkyilmaz, S.; Yildiz, Ö.; Oryaşin, E.; Kaynarca, S.; Bozdoğan, B. Molecular identification of bacteria isolated from dairy herds with mastitis. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg. 2010, 16, 1025–1032. [Google Scholar]
  69. Hillerton, J.E.; Berry, E.A. The management and treatment of environmental streptococcal mastitis. Veterinary Clinics of North America. Vet. Clin. Food Anim. Pract. 2003, 19, 157–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Panneum, S.; Iniam, K.; Choorut, P.; Bumrungkit, K.; Sroynum, A.; Pinyopummin, A. Identification of clinical mastitis pathogens and antibiotic sensitivity in dairy cattle during years 2004–2006 in Kanchanaburi, Nakhonpathom and Ratchburi. In Proceedings of the 45th Kasetsart University Annual Conference: Animals and Veterinary Medicine, Bangkok, Thailand, 30 January–2 February 2007. [Google Scholar]
  71. Juangphanich, S.; Kiatyingangsulee, T.; Worarach, A.; Ketphan, W.; Kumpusiri, N.; Arunvipas, P. Incidence of subclinical mastitis and antimicrobial susceptibility test: The case study of crossbred Holstein Friesian dairy cow, Chong Sarika Subdistrict, Phatthana Nikhom District, Lopburi Province. Thai-NIAH Ejournal 2018, 13, 9–15. [Google Scholar]
  72. Hagnestam-Nielsen, C.; Emanuelson, U.; Berglund, B.; Strandberg, E. Relationship between somatic cell count and milk yield in different stages of lactation. J. Dairy Sci. 2009, 92, 3124–3133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Vetsci 10 00269 g001 550
Figure 1. Distribution of isolated bacterial species (%) found in milk.
Figure 1. Distribution of isolated bacterial species (%) found in milk.
Vetsci 10 00269 g001
Table
Table 1. Ingredients of the concentrate and chemical composition of concentrate, rice straw and chestnut hydrolysable tannin extract powder.
Table 1. Ingredients of the concentrate and chemical composition of concentrate, rice straw and chestnut hydrolysable tannin extract powder.
ItemConcentrateRice StrawChestnut Hydrolysable Tannin Extract Powder
Ingredients, %DM
Cassava chip47.00
Corn meal7.00
Rice bran5.00
Soybean meal20.00
Peanut hulls4.00
Palm kernel meal9.50
Residue sugar3.00
Urea2.50
Dicalcium phosphate1.00
Salt0.50
Premix0.50
Total100.00
Chemical composition (%DM)
Dry matter, %90.7392.8391.72
OM93.3288.1397.75
CP21.683.219.63
EE3.201.800.75
Ash6.6811.872.25
NDF19.1490.63-
ADF14.4057.48-
ME, Mcal/kgDM2.621.53-
OM = organic matter; CP = crude protein; EE = ether extract; NDF = neutral detergent fibre; ADF = acid detergent fibre; metabolizable energy (ME) calculated from the energy of each ingredient.
Table
Table 2. Nutrient intake and digestibility in lactating dairy cows supplemented with various levels of chestnut hydrolysable tannin.
Table 2. Nutrient intake and digestibility in lactating dairy cows supplemented with various levels of chestnut hydrolysable tannin.
ItemsChestnut Hydrolysable Tannin, g/daySEM cp Value d
03.156.309.45Control vs. CHTLQC
Avg. BW, kg458.4464.6480.9481.410.540.210.120.790.60
DM intake,
   Concentrate11.010.811.712.00.510.390.120.630.47
   Rice straw5.1 ab6.0 a5.4 ab4.7 b0.270.390.18*0.31
Total, kg/day16.016.817.116.70.720.350.490.440.90
%BW3.493.603.563.470.090.620.800.290.83
g/kg W0.75161.5167.2166.8162.44.810.500.920.330.93
Nutrient intake, kg/day
  OM14.615.215.715.30.640.330.440.440.79
  CP3.13.03.33.30.140.360.130.780.50
  EE0.50.50.50.50.030.700.420.620.89
  NDF7.01.61.26.80.380.630.580.220.52
  ADF4.45.24.64.60.250.170.930.130.12
Apparent digestibility, %
  DM68.1 a70.6 ab72.7 ab75.8 b1.35***0.810.87
  OM71.6 a73.4 a75.4 ab78.5 b1.44**0.680.91
  CP77.7 a81.0 ab81.2 ab84.6 b1.760.07*0.970.44
  EE81.0 a83.3 ab91.1 a85.3 ab1.81**0.070.06
  NDF47.350.648.155.82.160.290.150.510.30
  ADF37.5 a44.9 ab40.9 a53.2 b3.18**0.470.10
Energy intake 1
Mcal ME/day42.241.945.244.21.880.490.310.840.39
1 1 kg of digestible organic matter (DOM) = 3.8 Mcal ME [28]. a,b Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (p < 0.05), * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01. c Standard errors of the mean. d Probability of linear (L), quadratic (Q) and cubic (C) effects of chestnut hydrolysable tannin levels.
Table
Table 3. Ruminal pH, NH3-N, volatile fatty acids (VFAs) and SUN in lactating dairy cows supplemented with various levels of chestnut hydrolysable tannin.
Table 3. Ruminal pH, NH3-N, volatile fatty acids (VFAs) and SUN in lactating dairy cows supplemented with various levels of chestnut hydrolysable tannin.
ItemsChestnut Hydrolysable Tannin, g/daySEM cp Value d
03.156.309.45Control vs. CHTLQC
Rumen end-products
Ruminal pH6.92 ab6.98 ab6.81 b6.87 ab0.030.37*0.930.01
Ruminal NH3-N, mg/dL13.616.417.813.11.670.300.990.060.54
Total VFAs, mM89.399.6102.8105.14.62**0.420.77
VFA profiles, mol/100 mol
Acetic acid (C2)64.766.767.265.41.140.220.610.140.89
Propionic acid (C3)22.521.621.323.00.770.550.770.130.65
Butyric acid (C4)12.811.711.611.60.580.120.200.340.75
A:P ratio2.903.133.182.990.900.220.570.150.90
Blood metabolites
SUN, mg/dL21.8 a21.1 a20.5 ab15.4 b1.160.09**0.100.41
a,b Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (p < 0.05), * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01. c Standard errors of the mean. d Probability of linear (L), quadratic (Q) and cubic (C) effects of chestnut hydrolysable tannin levels. SUN = serum urea nitrogen.
Table
Table 4. Milk yield and milk composition in lactating dairy cows supplemented with various levels of chestnut hydrolysable tannin.
Table 4. Milk yield and milk composition in lactating dairy cows supplemented with various levels of chestnut hydrolysable tannin.
ItemsChestnut Hydrolysable Tannin, g/daySEM cp Value d
03.156.309.45Control vs. CHTLQC
Milk yield, kg/day18.217.919.920.51.170.340.130.730.50
4% FCM 1, kg/day19.019.520.821.61.470.380.210.910.84
Milk composition
Fat, %4.354.614.274.480.220.690.960.900.28
Protein, %3.503.453.253.360.050.030.020.120.07
Lactose, %4.894.945.275.160.090.060.020.380.11
SNF, %9.089.089.239.220.060.220.080.920.29
TS, %13.4313.6913.5013.690.250.520.620.900.49
Composition yield
Fat, kg/d0.790.820.850.910.070.430.280.900.95
Protein, kg/day0.630.620.650.690.040.600.230.530.77
Lactose, kg/day0.900.891.051.060.070.260.090.910.36
SNF, kg/d1.651.631.841.890.110.360.120.750.46
TS, kg/d2.442.452.692.800.180.360.150.810.67
ECM, kg18.919.220.821.61.440.380.190.870.77
FPCM 2, kg19.119.320.621.51.380.410.220.830.85
Fat:Protein ratio1.251.341.311.330.060.290.440.540.58
Feed efficiency1.121.061.151.220.030.420.020.070.22
NUE 30.200.200.190.200.0040.400.690.170.26
SCC, log105.66 a5.17 b5.09 b5.13 b0.06******0.33
SCS 45.18 a3.56 b3.30 b3.42 b0.21******0.35
4% FCM = 4% fat-corrected milk, SNF = solid not fat, TS = total solid, SCC = somatic cell count. 1 4% FCM = 0.4 × milk yield (kg/d) + 15 × fat yield (kg/d). 2 Fat- and protein-corrected milk (FPCM) = milk (kg/d) × [0.1226 × fat (%) + 0.0776 × protein (%) + 0.2534] [29]. 3 Nitrogen utilization efficiency = (milk protein yield (kg/d) ÷ 6.38)/(crude protein intake. (kg/d) ÷ 6.25) [30]. 4 Somatic cell score (SCS) = log2 (SCC/100,000) + 3 [24]. a,b Means with different superscripts in the same row differ (p < 0.05), ** p < 0.01. c Standard errors of the mean. d Probability of linear (L), quadratic (Q) and cubic (C) effects of chestnut hydrolysable tannin levels.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Prapaiwong, T.; Srakaew, W.; Poolthajit, S.; Wachirapakorn, C.; Jarassaeng, C. Effects of Chestnut Hydrolysable Tannin on Intake, Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, Milk Production and Somatic Cell Count in Crossbred Dairy Cows. Vet. Sci. 2023, 10, 269. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040269

AMA Style

Prapaiwong T, Srakaew W, Poolthajit S, Wachirapakorn C, Jarassaeng C. Effects of Chestnut Hydrolysable Tannin on Intake, Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, Milk Production and Somatic Cell Count in Crossbred Dairy Cows. Veterinary Sciences. 2023; 10(4):269. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040269

Chicago/Turabian Style

Prapaiwong, Tipwadee, Wuttikorn Srakaew, Sukanya Poolthajit, Chalong Wachirapakorn, and Chaiwat Jarassaeng. 2023. "Effects of Chestnut Hydrolysable Tannin on Intake, Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, Milk Production and Somatic Cell Count in Crossbred Dairy Cows" Veterinary Sciences 10, no. 4: 269. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040269

APA Style

Prapaiwong, T., Srakaew, W., Poolthajit, S., Wachirapakorn, C., & Jarassaeng, C. (2023). Effects of Chestnut Hydrolysable Tannin on Intake, Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, Milk Production and Somatic Cell Count in Crossbred Dairy Cows. Veterinary Sciences, 10(4), 269. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10040269

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop