Analyze Diet
Journal of animal science1974; 38(3); 559-564; doi: 10.2527/jas1974.383559x

Ponies vs. steers: microbial and chemical characteristics of intestinal ingesta.

Abstract: No abstract available
Publication Date: 1974-03-01 PubMed ID: 4856481DOI: 10.2527/jas1974.383559xGoogle Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Journal Article

Cite This Article

APA
Kern DL, Slyter LL, Leffel EC, Weaver JM, Oltjen RR. (1974). Ponies vs. steers: microbial and chemical characteristics of intestinal ingesta. J Anim Sci, 38(3), 559-564. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1974.383559x

Publication

ISSN: 0021-8812
NlmUniqueID: 8003002
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 38
Issue: 3
Pages: 559-564

Researcher Affiliations

Kern, D L
    Slyter, L L
      Leffel, E C
        Weaver, J M
          Oltjen, R R

            MeSH Terms

            • Abomasum / microbiology
            • Animal Feed
            • Animals
            • Bacteria / isolation & purification
            • Cattle / metabolism
            • Cecum / microbiology
            • Colon / microbiology
            • Digestion
            • Eukaryota / isolation & purification
            • Fatty Acids, Volatile / metabolism
            • Horses / metabolism
            • Humans
            • Hydrogen-Ion Concentration
            • Hydrolysis
            • Ileum / microbiology
            • Intestines / microbiology
            • Male
            • Proteins / metabolism
            • Rumen / microbiology
            • Stomach / microbiology

            Citations

            This article has been cited 16 times.
            1. Rodríguez-González S, González-Dávalos L, Robles-Rodríguez C, Lozano-Flores C, Varela-Echavarría A, Shimada A, Mora-Izaguirre O. Isolation of bacterial consortia with probiotic potential from the rumen of tropical calves.. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl) 2023 Jan;107(1):62-76.
              doi: 10.1111/jpn.13699pubmed: 35253270google scholar: lookup
            2. Froidurot A, Julliand V. Cellulolytic bacteria in the large intestine of mammals.. Gut Microbes 2022 Jan-Dec;14(1):2031694.
              doi: 10.1080/19490976.2022.2031694pubmed: 35184689google scholar: lookup
            3. Muhonen S, Sadet-Bourgeteau S, Julliand V. Effects of Differences in Fibre Composition and Maturity of Forage-Based Diets on the Microbial Ecosystem and Its Activity in Equine Caecum and Colon Digesta and Faeces.. Animals (Basel) 2021 Aug 8;11(8).
              doi: 10.3390/ani11082337pubmed: 34438794google scholar: lookup
            4. Wolford AN, Coverdale JA, Leatherwood JL, Pinchak WE, Anderson RC, Wickersham TA. Influence of housing type on the cecal environment of horses.. Transl Anim Sci 2019 Mar;3(2):877-884.
              doi: 10.1093/tas/txz030pubmed: 32704852google scholar: lookup
            5. Johnson ACB, Rossow HA. Effects of two equine digestive aid supplements on hindgut health.. Transl Anim Sci 2019 Jan;3(1):340-349.
              doi: 10.1093/tas/txy103pubmed: 32704804google scholar: lookup
            6. Mok CH, Urschel KL. Amino acid requirements in horses.. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2020 May;33(5):679-695.
              doi: 10.5713/ajas.20.0050pubmed: 32164055google scholar: lookup
            7. Biddle AS, Black SJ, Blanchard JL. An in vitro model of the horse gut microbiome enables identification of lactate-utilizing bacteria that differentially respond to starch induction.. PLoS One 2013;8(10):e77599.
              doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077599pubmed: 24098591google scholar: lookup
            8. Grilli DJ, Cerón ME, Paez S, Egea V, Schnittger L, Cravero S, Escudero MS, Allegretti L, Arenas GN. Isolation of Pseudobutyrivibrio ruminis and Pseudobutyrivibrio xylanivorans from rumen of Creole goats fed native forage diet.. Folia Microbiol (Praha) 2013 Sep;58(5):367-73.
              doi: 10.1007/s12223-012-0219-1pubmed: 23275250google scholar: lookup
            9. Botha M, Botes M, Loos B, Smith C, Dicks LM. Lactobacillus equigenerosi strain Le1 invades equine epithelial cells.. Appl Environ Microbiol 2012 Jun;78(12):4248-55.
              doi: 10.1128/AEM.00552-12pubmed: 22504808google scholar: lookup
            10. Dehority BA, Varga GA. Bacterial and Fungal Numbers in Ruminal and Cecal Contents of the Blue Duiker (Cephalophus monticola).. Appl Environ Microbiol 1991 Feb;57(2):469-72.
              doi: 10.1128/aem.57.2.469-472.1991pubmed: 16348413google scholar: lookup
            11. Bailey SR, Baillon ML, Rycroft AN, Harris PA, Elliott J. Identification of equine cecal bacteria producing amines in an in vitro model of carbohydrate overload.. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003 Apr;69(4):2087-93.
            12. Julliand V, de Vaux A, Millet L, Fonty G. Identification of Ruminococcus flavefaciens as the predominant cellulolytic bacterial species of the equine cecum.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1999 Aug;65(8):3738-41.
            13. Maczulak AE, Dawson KA, Baker JP. Nitrogen utilization in bacterial isolates from the equine cecum.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1985 Dec;50(6):1439-43.
            14. Lewis SM, Dehority BA. Microbiology and ration digestibility in the hindgut of the ovine.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1985 Aug;50(2):356-63.
              doi: 10.1128/aem.50.2.356-363.1985pubmed: 4051484google scholar: lookup
            15. Mackie RI, Wilkins CA. Enumeration of anaerobic bacterial microflora of the equine gastrointestinal tract.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1988 Sep;54(9):2155-60.
            16. Goodson J, Tyznik WJ, Cline JH, Dehority BA. Effects of an abrupt diet change from hay to concentrate on microbial numbers and physical environment in the cecum of the pony.. Appl Environ Microbiol 1988 Aug;54(8):1946-50.