-
Created
July 15, 2024 11:50
by
lxf5262
-
Updated
July 15, 2024 11:50
by
[unknown user]
-
Added Creator Susanna Räisänen
July 15, 2024 12:14
by
lxf5262
-
Added Creator Derek Wasson
July 15, 2024 12:14
by
lxf5262
-
Added Creator Sergio Cueva Welchez
July 15, 2024 12:14
by
lxf5262
-
Added Creator Taina Silvestre
July 15, 2024 12:14
by
lxf5262
-
Added Creator Alexander Hristov
July 15, 2024 12:14
by
lxf5262
-
Added
BA of RPAA JDS supplemental material.pdf
July 15, 2024 12:15
by
lxf5262
-
Added
README.rtf
July 15, 2024 12:15
by
lxf5262
-
Added Creator M. Miura
July 15, 2024 12:23
by
lxf5262
-
July 15, 2024 12:23
by
lxf5262
Alexander Hristov
- Alexander N. Hristov
-
July 15, 2024 12:24
by
lxf5262
Description
- The objective of this experiment was to estimate the bioavailability (BA) of rumen-protected (RP) His, RPLys and 2 RPMet products using 3 in vivo methods: the area-under-the curve (AUC), plasma dose-response (PDR), and the fecal free AA (FFAA) methods. Eight rumen-cannulated cows were used in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin Square experiment, with 16 d periods. Treatments were (1) abomasal dosing of water (Control), (2) abomasal dosing/infusion of free His, Lys and Met (FAA), (3) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet1 (RPAA1), and 4) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet2 (RPAA2). On d 7 of each experimental period a pulse-dose of water (Control) or FAA were administered into the abomasum of the cows or RPAA were placed directly in the rumen and blood samples were taken from the jugular vein through a catheter 11 times over a 24-h period. Following the AA pulse-dose, infusion lines were installed into the abomasum for continuous infusion of FAA from d 12 to d 16, and cows were fitted with urinary catheters for total collection of feces. Fecal collection and blood sampling were conducted from d 14 to 16 of each experimental period. Data for PDR method are reported in Supplemental Material. Relative BA based on the AUC method was lower for RPMet1 compared with RPMet2 (43 vs. 61%) and was 45% (SEM = 3.35) and 82% (SEM = 6.92), for RPHis and RPLys, respectively. Similarly, relative BA based on the FFAA method was lower for RPMet1 (67%) compared with RPMet 2 (91%) and was 75 (SEM = 2.75) and 87% (SEM = 0.71) for RPLys and RPHis, respectively. The relative differences in estimated BA based on both the AUC and FFAA methods between the RPMet products were as expected, based on literature, and data for all 4 RPAA products corresponded well with previously estimated BA using the FFAA method. Variability in BA data and differences in estimated BA between the in vivo methods highlight the current challenges for accurate measurements of relative in vivo BA of RPAA products. Different protection technologies may call for different methodology to be used for BA estimations. Further research and standardization of in vivo BA methods are warranted.
Publication Date
-
July 15, 2024 12:24
by
lxf5262
Description
- The objective of this experiment was to estimate the bioavailability (BA) of rumen-protected (RP) His, RPLys and 2 RPMet products using 3 in vivo methods: the area-under-the curve (AUC), plasma dose-response (PDR), and the fecal free AA (FFAA) methods. Eight rumen-cannulated cows were used in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin Square experiment, with 16 d periods. Treatments were (1) abomasal dosing of water (Control), (2) abomasal dosing/infusion of free His, Lys and Met (FAA), (3) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet1 (RPAA1), and 4) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet2 (RPAA2). On d 7 of each experimental period a pulse-dose of water (Control) or FAA were administered into the abomasum of the cows or RPAA were placed directly in the rumen and blood samples were taken from the jugular vein through a catheter 11 times over a 24-h period. Following the AA pulse-dose, infusion lines were installed into the abomasum for continuous infusion of FAA from d 12 to d 16, and cows were fitted with urinary catheters for total collection of feces. Fecal collection and blood sampling were conducted from d 14 to 16 of each experimental period. Data for PDR method are reported in Supplemental Material. Relative BA based on the AUC method was lower for RPMet1 compared with RPMet2 (43 vs. 61%) and was 45% (SEM = 3.35) and 82% (SEM = 6.92), for RPHis and RPLys, respectively. Similarly, relative BA based on the FFAA method was lower for RPMet1 (67%) compared with RPMet 2 (91%) and was 75 (SEM = 2.75) and 87% (SEM = 0.71) for RPLys and RPHis, respectively. The relative differences in estimated BA based on both the AUC and FFAA methods between the RPMet products were as expected, based on literature, and data for all 4 RPAA products corresponded well with previously estimated BA using the FFAA method. Variability in BA data and differences in estimated BA between the in vivo methods highlight the current challenges for accurate measurements of relative in vivo BA of RPAA products. Different protection technologies may call for different methodology to be used for BA estimations. Further research and standardization of in vivo BA methods are warranted.
Publication Date
-
July 15, 2024 12:28
by
lxf5262
License
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
-
July 15, 2024 13:13
by
lxf5262
Description
The objective of this experiment was to estimate the bioavailability (BA) of rumen-protected (RP) His, RPLys and 2 RPMet products using 3 in vivo methods: the area-under-the curve (AUC), plasma dose-response (PDR), and the fecal free AA (FFAA) methods. Eight rumen-cannulated cows were used in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin Square experiment, with 16 d periods. Treatments were (1) abomasal dosing of water (Control), (2) abomasal dosing/infusion of free His, Lys and Met (FAA), (3) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet1 (RPAA1), and 4) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet2 (RPAA2). On d 7 of each experimental period a pulse-dose of water (Control) or FAA were administered into the abomasum of the cows or RPAA were placed directly in the rumen and blood samples were taken from the jugular vein through a catheter 11 times over a 24-h period. Following the AA pulse-dose, infusion lines were installed into the abomasum for continuous infusion of FAA from d 12 to d 16, and cows were fitted with urinary catheters for total collection of feces. Fecal collection and blood sampling were conducted from d 14 to 16 of each experimental period. Data for PDR method are reported in Supplemental Material. Relative BA based on the AUC method was lower for RPMet1 compared with RPMet2 (43 vs. 61%) and was 45% (SEM = 3.35) and 82% (SEM = 6.92), for RPHis and RPLys, respectively. Similarly, relative BA based on the FFAA method was lower for RPMet1 (67%) compared with RPMet 2 (91%) and was 75 (SEM = 2.75) and 87% (SEM = 0.71) for RPLys and RPHis, respectively. The relative differences in estimated BA based on both the AUC and FFAA methods between the RPMet products were as expected, based on literature, and data for all 4 RPAA products corresponded well with previously estimated BA using the FFAA method. Variability in BA data and differences in estimated BA between the in vivo methods highlight the current challenges for accurate measurements of relative in vivo BA of RPAA products. Different protection technologies may call for different methodology to be used for BA estimations. Further research and standardization of in vivo BA methods are warranted.
- The objective of this experiment was to estimate the bioavailability (BA) of rumen-protected (RP) His, RPLys and 2 RPMet products using 3 in vivo methods: the area-under-the curve (AUC), plasma dose-response (PDR), and the fecal free AA (FFAA) methods. Eight rumen-cannulated cows were used in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin Square experiment, with 16 d periods. Treatments were (1) abomasal dosing/infusion of water (Control), (2) abomasal dosing/infusion of free His, Lys and Met (FAA), (3) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet1 (RPAA1), and 4) dietary inclusion of RPHis + RPLys + RPMet2 (RPAA2). On d 7 of each experimental period a pulse-dose of water (Control) or FAA were administered into the abomasum of the cows or RPAA were placed directly in the rumen and blood samples were taken from the jugular vein through a catheter 11 times over a 24-h period. Following the AA pulse-dose, infusion lines were installed into the abomasum for continuous infusion of FAA from d 12 to d 16, and cows were fitted with urinary catheters for total collection of feces. Fecal collection and blood sampling were conducted from d 14 to 16 of each experimental period. Data for PDR method are reported in Supplemental Material. Relative BA based on the AUC method was lower for RPMet1 compared with RPMet2 (43 vs. 61%) and was 45% (SEM = 3.35) and 82% (SEM = 6.92), for RPHis and RPLys, respectively. Similarly, BA based on the FFAA method was lower for RPMet1 (67%) compared with RPMet 2 (91%) and was 87 (SEM = 0.71) and 75% (SEM = 2.75) for RPHis and RPLys, respectively. The relative differences in estimated BA based on both the AUC and FFAA methods between the RPMet products were as expected, based on literature, and data for all 4 RPAA products corresponded well with previously estimated BA using the FFAA method. Variability in BA data and differences in estimated BA between the in vivo methods highlight the current challenges for accurate measurements of relative in vivo BA of RPAA products. Different protection technologies may call for different methodology to be used for BA estimations. Further research and standardization of in vivo BA methods are warranted.
-
Deleted Creator M. Miura
July 15, 2024 13:14
by
lxf5262
-
July 15, 2024 13:14
by
lxf5262
Susanna Räisänen
- Susanna E. Räisänen
-
July 15, 2024 13:14
by
lxf5262
Derek Wasson
- Derek E. Wasson
-
July 15, 2024 13:14
by
lxf5262
Sergio Cueva Welchez
- Sergio F. Cueva
-
Updated Creator Alexander N. Hristov
July 15, 2024 13:14
by
lxf5262
-
Deleted
BA of RPAA JDS supplemental material.pdf
July 15, 2024 13:14
by
lxf5262
-
Deleted
README.rtf
July 15, 2024 13:14
by
lxf5262
-
Added
BA of RPAA JDS supplemental material.pdf
July 15, 2024 13:15
by
lxf5262
-
Added
README.rtf
July 15, 2024 13:15
by
lxf5262
-
Published
July 15, 2024 13:15
by
lxf5262
-
Updated
July 15, 2024 22:04
by
[unknown user]