See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/240397525

Amino acid metabolism in ruminants

Article in Animal Feed Science and Technology · June 1996

DOI: 10.1016/0377-8401(95)00897-7

CITATIONS READS

81 5,055

2 authors:

Limin Kung Lyle Rode

University of Delaware Novus International, Inc.
158 PUBLICATIONS 10,048 CITATIONS 122 PUBLICATIONS 8,194 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Limin Kung on 01 February 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ANIMAL FEED
SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY

Animal Feed Science Technology 59 ( 1996) 167- 172

Amino acid metabolism in ruminants

Limin Kung Jr. a’*, Lyle M. Rode b
aDepartment of Animal Science and Agricultural Biochemistry, University of’Delaware,Newark, DE
19717-1303, USA
b Agriculture Canada, Research Station, PO Box 3000, Lethbridge, Alta. AB TlJ 481, Canada

Abstract

All animals require amino acids (AA) which are the building blocks of proteins required for
optimal growth, reproduction, lactation, and maintenance. In ruminants, proteins and AA are first
subject to microbial degradation in the rumen making it difficult to predict the quality and quantity
of AA that are absorbed by the animal. In ruminants, absorbed AA comes from microbial protein
synthesis in the rumen and from dietary amino acid sources that are undegraded in the rumen.
Production of microbial protein alone is insufficient to supply adequate amounts of amino acids
for optimal production. In cattle, methionine and lysine are generally the first limiting AA for
production. Improving the quality of absorbable AA can be accomplished through several means.
For example, feeds can be chosen whose proteins are relatively resistant to rumen degradation.
However, this does not ensure overcoming the limiting AA. A better method would be to predict
which AA were limiting and then to supply these AA in a rumen protected form. The future of
understanding requirements of AA for ruminants will rely on the ability of models to accurately
predict the need for supplemental AA.

Keywords: Rumen protected amino acids; Rumen bypass; Nitrogen

1. Introduction

Although protein and amino acid (AA) requirements are well defined for most
non-ruminant species, this is not the case for ruminants. Current requirements for
ruminants establish only protein and not AA needs. This paper reviews briefly some
common past and current methods to increase the supply of amino acid to ruminants.
The reader is referred to several excellent reviews for more in depth details (Broderick
et al., 1991; Merchen and Titgemeyer, 1992; Schwab et al., 1993).

= Corresponding author.

0377.8401/96/$15.00 0 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved

SSDI 0377-8401(95)00897-7
168 L. Kung Jr., L.M. Rode/Animal Feed Science Technology 59 (1996) 167-172

All animals require AA which are the building blocks of proteins required for optimal
growth, reproduction, lactation, and maintenance. However, when fed to ruminants,
proteins and AA are first subject to microbial degradation in the rumen, making it
difficult to predict the quality and quantity of AA that are absorbed by the animal. In
ruminants, absorbed AA originate from microbial protein synthesis in the rumen and
from dietary amino acid sources that are undegraded in the rumen. Although ruminants
have no theoretical requirement for pre-formed protein or amino acids in their diets,
production of microbial protein alone is insufficient to supply adequate amounts of
amino acids for optimal production. In ruminants, metbionine and lysine are generally
the first limiting AA for production.

2. Improving protein availability

Various methods have been used to increase the supply of protein and AA to the
small intestine, including feeding proteins with high values for rumen undegradable
intake protein (UIP), and chemical or physical treatments which increase the UIP value
of a feed.
In recent years, productive diets for ruminants have been supplemented with various
sources of UIP. Of the more common sources, fishmeal, meat and bone meal, feather
meal, and corn gluten meal have been used. Based on amino acid profiles and rumen
degradability, corn and its by-products (e.g. corn gluten meal) are relatively good
sources of leucine but are low in lysine. Fishmeal is a good source of methionine but
soybean meal is not. Blood meal is a good source of lysine but is low in methionine.
Metbionine is likely to be limiting when legume or animal proteins are the main source
of UIP. Feather meal is high in branched-chain amino acids. Thus, it is obvious that
there is no one perfect source of AA.
Heat treatment has been used to decrease ruminal degradation of proteins and amino
acids. Heating causes carbonyl groups of sugars to combine with free amino groups of
proteins in the Maillard reaction. Amino acids also form peptide links with asparagine
and glutamine (Belitz and Grosch, 1987). The resulting peptide linkages from heating
are more resistant to enzymatic hydrolysis. Oil seed protein sources are the most
economical to treat with heat. For example, Benchaar et al. (1993) reported that feeding
extruded lupins increased the flow of AA to the duodenum of cows by 34% and
increased apparent absorption of AA in the small intestine by 58%. Roasting and
extrusion have also been extremely popular methods to increase the UIP content of
soybeans. Some precautions must be taken when heat-treating proteins, as excessive heat
can cause essential amino acids such as lysine, metbionine, and cystine to be extensively
damaged.
Recently, a novel method of improving the supply of AA to the lower gut was
reported by Ohsumi et al. (1994). These researchers isolated a lysine-accumulating
Succharomyces cerevisiae (a yeast) that, depending on substrates, could accumulate
from 4 to 15% of its dry weight as lysine. The majority of lysine was in vacuoles that
were stable when incubated with rumen fluid but immediately released when exposed to
 L. Kung Jr., L.M. Rode/Animal Feed Science Technology 59 (1996) 167-172 169

pepsin. Thus, feeding this organism could increase the amount of lysine for intestinal
absorption.
Increasing the amount of rumen UIP has not always increased the amount or changed
the quality of AA reaching the small intestine. In some instances microbial protein
production has decreased when UIP increased, probably because of a reduction in diet
fermentability. This caused an increase in UIP but a decrease in microbial protein,
resulting in no net change in total AA flow to the small intestine. No single feed source
of UIP provides a balance of essential AA that matches the essential AA profile of milk.
In addition, many feeds with high UIP values are low in one or more essential AA. As a
result, a deficiency of one AA could be exacerbated by feeding a UIP source low in that
AA. Combinations of several UIP proteins that are complementary to each other could
overcome this problem. Ferguson et al. (1994) reported on a research study involving 35
herds and 7000 cows. Cows were supplemented with a marine-animal protein blend to
attain a similar protein level as unsupplemented cows. Nineteen of the 35 herds had a
positive response (79% of cows> where cows averaged 1.22 kg more milk per cow per
day. In early lactation cows only, 26 of 35 herds responded (95% of cows) with an
average increase of 2.64 kg more milk per day.

3. Amino acid supplementation

Free AA are not recommended as supplements in ruminant diets because they are
degraded rapidly in the rumen. Thus, chemical alteration or physical protection are
required to protect an AA from rumen degradation and to increase the supply of that
specific AA to the duodenum. Ideally, rumen protected amino acids (RPAA) should be
generally recognized as safe (GRAS) to avoid lengthy governmental clearances. Further-
more, a balance must be achieved so that AA protected from ruminal degradation are
still available for intestinal absorption. In addition, these compounds should be stable
both when pelleted and when incorporated into silage-based total mixed rations (TMR)
in which the pH of corn silage can be as low as 3.6.
Various analogs of AA have been tested for resistance to ruminal degradation
(Ayoade et al., 1982). One of the more tested AA derivatives is methionine hydroxy
analog (MHA, Novus Intl., Chesterfield, MO). Test results have been variable, with
occasional improvements in milk production and milk fat. Patterson and Kung (1988)
reported that more than 70% of an initial dose of MHA and only 5% of DL-methionine
remained after 12 h of in vitro incubation with ruminal microorganisms. Alimet@, a
liquid form of MHA, was as stable in the rumen as was the solid prill form of MHA.
Amino acid-mineral chelates have also been used to prevent amino acids from being
degraded in the rumen. These chelates contain about 20-25% amino acid. Heinrichs and
Conrad (1983) suggested that Zn-methionine complexes were not degraded to any
substantial extent in the rumen. Kincaid and Cronrath (1993) reported that addition of
Zn-methionine and Zn-lysine significantly increased milk production in cows fed a diet
based on corn, barley, peas, soybean meal, alfalfa hay and grass silage.
Fat has been used to make RPAA but the total proportion of amino acid has usually
been only about 30% by weight. South Dakota researchers conducted several studies
170 L. Kung Jr., L.M. Rode/Animal Feed Science Technology 59 (19961167-I 72

with a fatty acid (58%) and methionine (30%) prill. They had variable results in
improving milk production. Munneke et al. (1991) concluded that, in their series of
studies, encapsulation improved methionine status in the animal but that lysine often
became the next limiting amino acid negating large production responses. Currently,
Megalac-Plus@ (Church and Dwight, Inc., Princeton, NJ) is a commercial formulation
which contains 13 g of methionine hydroxy analog and 0.45 kg of Megalac@ (calcium
salt of long chain fatty acid formulation). Other sources of fat and amino acids are also
commercially available.
Polymers that are pH sensitive have been used to encapsulate methionine and lysine.
Such RPAA formulations should be inert in the rumen where the pH is relatively high
but would release the AA when the pH was 2 or less (as in the abomasum). Examples of
such products are Smartamine’“M (70% methionine) and ML (15% methionine, 50%
lysine) which are combinations of AA and poly (2-vinylpyridine-co-styrene) produced
by Rhone-Poulenc Animal Nutrition N.A., Atlanta, GA. Additionally, Meprone M85
(Degussa Corporation, Ridgefield Park, NJ) is another protected methionine product
which is coated with compounds that are generally recognized as safe (GRAS).
Schwab et al. (1993) published an excellent review on the effects of feeding RPAA to
dairy cattle. They emphasized that optimizing intestinal AA balance is more important to
improving milk protein concentration than is the ration crude protein or quantity of
absorbable protein. In lactating dairy cattle, feeding RPAA has consistently increased
milk protein concentration (%Jo)which is important in cheese making but protein yield
(kg day-’ ) has not always been significantly increased. In general, feeding RPAA has
not improved DMI and increases in milk production have been limited. For example,
Rode et al. (1993) reported that feeding lysine and methionine in a ruminally inert
coating increased milk production, milk fat, and milk protein production. These workers
reported that the positive effect continued after the RPAA supplement was withdrawn
from the diet. This finding may be related to improvement in total milk production due
to increasing peak lactation or to some other unidentified metabolic effect. However, a
more common finding is typical of the data from Armentano et al. (1993) who fed cows
in early lactation a combination of protected methionine and lysine and reported an
increase in milk protein percent but no increase in milk production.
Some studies with growing beef cattle have reported positive responses to feeding
RPAA. For example, Veira et al. (1991) reported that feeding ruminally protected
methionine and lysine to steers improved plasma levels of these AA and increased
average daily gain by more than 16% without an increase in dry matter intake. However,
in general the growth responses of beef cattle fed polymer coated AA have been
inconsistent. Inconsistent production responses to RPAA may be due to the fact that
several essential AA are often co-limiting (Merchen and Titgemeyer, 1992). In addition,
some AA, like methionine, have several metabolic roles other than a precursor for
protein synthesis (e.g. methyl donor for transmethylation reactions in the biosynthesis of
lipids and lipid transport in the blood).
There may be several advantages to using RPAA in ruminant diets. First small
amounts of RPAA can substitute for a substantially greater amount of HIP. Rode et al.
(1993) replaced 0.5 kg of a soy/blood meal combination with 50 g of RPAA. Both
groups had similar dry matter intakes and milk production. Cows supplemented with
 L. Kung Jr., L.M. Rode/Animal Feed Science Technology 59 (19961 167-172 171

RPAA consumed less protein and more forage than protein-supplemented cows. Second,
by-product feeds low in methionine and lysine could be more fully utilized knowing that
RPAA could overcome AA limitations in these feeds. Third, use of RPAA could be used
to supplement cows in the dry period without creating the potential for downer cow
syndrome that may occur with the feeding of high levels of protein (L.M. Rode et al.,
unpublished data). Fourth, feeding supplemental fat to lactating dairy cows increases the
energy density of the diet but often results in decreased milk protein. Feeding RPAA has
been shown to overcome this problem (Canale et al., 1990). Finally, nitrogen pollution
of surface and ground water and environmental acidification from livestock are increas-
ing problems in many areas of the world. Utilizing RPAA technology is ‘environmen-
tally friendly’ in that it improves the efficiency of protein utilization in ruminants. Rode
(L.M. Rode, personal communication) suggested that in a 100 cow herd, feeding RPAA
would decrease N excretion by 2 tonnes per year of cows because of a lower N intake
and greater N output in milk.
In conclusion, several groups have developed models to predict AA requirements of
ruminants (Fox et al., 1990; Schwab et al., 1993). The future of understanding
requirements of AA for ruminants will rely on the ability of such models to accurately
predict the need for supplemental AA.

References

Armentano, L.E., Bert& S.J. and Ducharme, G.A., 1993. Lactation response to rumen-protected methionine,
or methionine with lysine, in diets based on alfalfa haylage. J. Dairy Sci., 76 (Suppl. 1): 202.
Ayoade, J.A., Buttery, P.J. and Lewis, D., 1982. Studies on methionine derivatives as possible sources of
protected methionine in ruminant rations. J. Sci. Food Agric., 33: 949-956.
Belitz, H.D. and Grosch, W., 1987. Reaction involved in food chemistry. In: Food Chemistry. Springer-Berlag,
Berlin, Germany, pp. 53-75.
Benchaar, C., Moncoulon, R., Bayourthe, C. and Vemay, C., 1993. Effects of a supply of raw or extruded
white lupin seeds on protein digestion and amino acid absorption in dairy cows. J. Anim. Sci., 72:
492-501.
Broderick, G.A., Wallace, R.J. and Orskov, E.R., 1991. Control of rate and extent of protein degradation. In:
T. Tsuda, Y. Sasaki and R. Kawashima (Editors), Physiological Aspects of Digestion and Metabolism in
Ruminants. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 541-592.
Canale, C.J., Muller, L.D., McCaho, H.A., Whitsel, T.J., Varga, G.A. and Lomore, M.J., 1990. Dietary fat and
ruminally protected amino acids for high producing dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci., 73: 135- 141.
Ferguson, J.D., Beede, D.K., Shaver, R., Polan, C.E., Huber, J.T. and Chandler, P.T., 1994. Effects of
inclusion of a blended protein product (Prolak) in 35 dairy herds in five regions of the country. J. Anim.
Sci., 72 (Suppl. 1): 238.
Fox, D.G., Sniffen, C.J., O’Conner, J.D., Russell, J.B. and Van Soest, P.J., 1990. The Cornell net carbohydrate
and protein system for evaluating cattle diets. Cornell Univ., Agric. Exp. Sta. No. 34., Ithaca.
Heimichs, A.J. and Conrad, H.R., 1983. Rumen solubility and breakdown of metal proteinate compounds. J.
Dairy Sci., 66 (Suppl. 1): 147.
Kincaid, R.L. and Cronrath, J.D., 1993. Effects of added dietary fat and amino acids on performance of
lactating cows. J. Dairy Sci., 76: 1601-1606.
Merchen, N.R. and Titgemeyer, E.C., 1992. Manipulation of amino acid supply to the growing ruminant. J.
Anim. Sci., 70: 3238-3247.
Munneke, R.L., Schingoethe, D.J. and Casper, D.P., 1991. Lactational evaluation of ruminally protected
methionine in diets containing extruded soybeans and urea. J. Dairy Sci., 74: 227-233.
 172 L. Kung Jr., L.M. Rode/Animal Feed Science Technology 59 (1996) 167-172

Ohsumi, T., Sato, H., Yoshihara, Y. and Ikeda, S., 1994. Selection and breeding of lysine-accumulating
Saccharomyces cereuisiae as a stable source of lysine in the rumen. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem., 58:
1302- 1305.
Patterson, J.A. and Kung, L., Jr., 1988. Metabolism of DL-methionine and methionine analogs by rum&l
microorganisms. J. Dairy Sci., 71: 3292-3301.
Rode, L.M., Fujeda, T., Sato, H., Suzuki, H., Chalupa, W. and Julien, W.E., 1993. Milk production response
in cows supplemented with rumen-protected amino acids. J. Dairy Sci., 76 (Suppl. 1): 277.
Schwab, C.G., Socha, M.T. and Whitehouse, N.L., 1993. Opportunities for rumen protected lysine and
methionine in lactating dairy cow nutrition. Rhone-Poulenc Animal Nutrition Symposium, Guelph,
Ontario, pp. 3-28.
Veira, D.M., Seone, J.R. and Prolux, J.G., 1991. Utilization of grass silage by growing cattle: effect of a
supplement containing ruminally protected amino acids. J. Anim. Sci., 69: 4703-4709.

View publication stats