Submitted:
09 November 2023
Posted:
10 November 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract

Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Results
2.1.
- B. subtilis feed additive preparation
- Feed treatment and fiber degradability
2.2. Gas Production and ruminal fermentative profile
3. Discussion
4. Materials and Methods
4.1. Bacillus subtilis strains
4.2. Bacterial medium preparation and its characterization
4.3. Bacillus subtilis cultures
4.4. Cellulase and xylanase activity assays
4.5. In vitro analyses
4.5.1. In vitro NDF degradability
4.5.2. In vitro gas production
4.6. Calculations and statistical analyses
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Capper, J.L.; Bauman, D.E. The Role of Productivity in Improving the Environmental Sustainability of Ruminant Production Systems. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences 2013, 1, 469–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adesogan, A.T.; Arriola, K.G.; Jiang, Y.; Oyebade, A.; Paula, E.M.; Pech-Cervantes, A.A.; Romero, J.J.; Ferraretto, L.F.; Vyas, D. Symposium review: Technologies for improving fiber utilization. Journal of Dairy Science 2019, 102, 5726–5755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oba, M.; Allen, M.S. Evaluation of the Importance of the Digestibility of Neutral Detergent Fiber from Forage: Effects on Dry Matter Intake and Milk Yield of Dairy Cows. Journal of Dairy Science 1999, 82, 589–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kendall, C.; Leonardi, C.; Hoffman, P.C.; Combs, D.K. Intake and milk production of cows fed diets that differed in dietary neutral detergent fiber and neutral detergent fiber digestibility. Journal of Dairy Science 2009, 92, 313–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Donnelly, D.M.; de Resende, L.C.; Cook, D.E.; Atalla, R.H.; Combs, D.K. Technical note: A comparison of alkali treatment methods to improve neutral detergent fiber digestibility of corn stover. Journal of Dairy Science 2018, 101, 9058–9064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mor, P.; Bals, B.; Tyagi, A.K.; Teymouri, F.; Tyagi, N.; Kumar, S.; Bringi, V.; VandeHaar, M. Effect of ammonia fiber expansion on the available energy content of wheat straw fed to lactating cattle and buffalo in India. Journal of Dairy Science 2018, 101, 7990–8003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ferreira, R.G.; Azzoni, A.R.; Freitas, S. On the production cost of lignocellulose-degrading enzymes. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2021, 15, 85–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Himmel, M.E.; Xu, Q.; Luo, Y.; Ding, S.-Y.; Lamed, R.; Bayer, E.A. Microbial enzyme systems for biomass conversion: emerging paradigms. Biofuels 2010, 1, 323–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Dijl, J.M.; Hecker, M. Bacillus subtilis: from soil bacterium to super-secreting cell factory. Microb Cell Fact 2013, 12, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, Y.; Liu, C.; Fang, H.; Zhang, D. Bacillus subtilis: a universal cell factory for industry, agriculture, biomaterials and medicine. Microbial Cell Factories 2020, 19, 173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Earl, A.M.; Losick, R.; Kolter, R. Ecology and genomics of Bacillus subtilis. Trends in Microbiology 2008, 16, 269–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ); Koutsoumanis, K. ; Allende, A.; Álvarez-Ordóñez, A.; Bolton, D.; Bover-Cid, S.; Chemaly, M.; de Cesare, A.; Hilbert, F.; Lindqvist, R.; et al. Update of the list of qualified presumption of safety (QPS) recommended microorganisms intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA. EFSA Journal 2023, 21, e07747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernardeau, M.; Lehtinen, M.J.; Forssten, S.D.; Nurminen, P. Importance of the gastrointestinal life cycle of Bacillus for probiotic functionality. J Food Sci Technol 2017, 54, 2570–2584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, N.-K.; Kim, W.-S.; Paik, H.-D. Bacillus strains as human probiotics: characterization, safety, microbiome, and probiotic carrier. Food Science and Biotechnology 2019, 28, 1297–1305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mun, D.; Kyoung, H.; Kong, M.; Ryu, S.; Jang, K.B.; Baek, J.; Park, K., II; Song, M.; Kim, Y. Effects of Bacillus-based probiotics on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and intestinal health of weaned pigs. Journal of Animal Science and Technology 2021, 63, 1314–1327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sun, P.; Wang, J.-Q.; Zhang, H.-T. Effects of supplementation of Bacillus subtilis natto Na and N1 strains on rumen development in dairy calves. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2011, 164, 154–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, P.; Li, J.; Bu, D.; Nan, X.; Du, H. Effects of Bacillus subtilis natto and Different Components in Culture on Rumen Fermentation and Rumen Functional Bacteria In Vitro. Current Microbiology 2016, 72, 589–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Souza, V.L.; Lopes, N.M.; Zacaroni, O.F.; Silveira, V.A.; Pereira, R.A.N.; Freitas, J.A.; Almeida, R.; Salvati, G.G.S.; Pereira, M.N. Lactation performance and diet digestibility of dairy cows in response to the supplementation of Bacillus subtilis spores. Livestock Science 2017, 200, 35–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choonkham, W.; Schonewille, J.T.; Bernard, J.K.; Suriyasathaporn, W. Effects of on-farm supplemental feeding of probiotic Bacillus subtilis on milk production in lactating dairy cows under tropical conditions. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 2020, 29, 199–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jia, P.; Tu, Y.; Liu, Z.; Li, F.; Yan, T.; Ma, S.; Dong, L.; Diao, Q. Diets supplementation with Bacillus subtilis and Macleaya cordata extract improve production performance and the metabolism of energy and nitrogen, while reduce enteric methane emissions in dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2022, 294, 115481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pan, L.; Harper, K.; Queiroz, O.; Copani, G.; Cappellozza, B.I. Effects of a Bacillus-based direct-fed microbial on in vitro nutrient digestibility of forage and high-starch concentrate substrates. Translational Animal Science 2022, 6, txac067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Ren, Y.; Cui, Y.; Gao, B.; Zhang, H.; Jiang, Q.; Loor, J.J.; Deng, Z.; Xu, C. Bacillus subtilis Produces Amino Acids to Stimulate Protein Synthesis in Ruminal Tissue Explants via the Phosphatidylinositol-4,5-Bisphosphate 3-Kinase Catalytic Subunit Beta–Serine/Threonine Kinase–Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Complex 1 Pathway. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 2022, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, P.; Wang, J.Q.; Deng, L.F. Effects of Bacillus subtilis natto on milk production, rumen fermentation and ruminal microbiome of dairy cows. Animal 2013, 7, 216–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivatsan, A.; Han, Y.; Peng, J.; Tehranchi, A.K.; Gibbs, R.; Wang, J.D.; Chen, R. High-Precision, Whole-Genome Sequencing of Laboratory Strains Facilitates Genetic Studies. PLOS Genetics 2008, 4, e1000139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doria, E.; Buonocore, D.; Marra, A.; Bontà, V.; Gazzola, A.; Dossena, M.; Verri, M.; Calvio, C. Bacterial-Assisted Extraction of Bioactive Compounds from Cauliflower. Plants 2022, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weinberg, Z.G.; Chen, Y.; Solomon, R. The quality of commercial wheat silages in Israel1. Journal of Dairy Science 2009, 92, 638–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Satlewal, A.; Agrawal, R.; Bhagia, S.; Das, P.; Ragauskas, A.J. Rice straw as a feedstock for biofuels: Availability, recalcitrance, and chemical properties. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 2018, 12, 83–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McIntosh, S.; Vancov, T. Optimisation of dilute alkaline pretreatment for enzymatic saccharification of wheat straw. Biomass and Bioenergy 2011, 35, 3094–3103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.-y.; Seyama, T.; Shiroma, R.; Ike, M.; Srichuwong, S.; Nagata, K.; Arai-Sanoh, Y.; Kondo, M.; Tokuyasu, K. Efficient Recovery of Glucose and Fructose via Enzymatic Saccharification of Rice Straw with Soft Carbohydrates. Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Biochemistry 2009, 73, 1072–1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nave, R.L.G.; Sulc, R.M.; Barker, D.J. Relationships of Forage Nutritive Value to Cool-Season Grass Canopy Characteristics. Crop Science 2013, 53, 341–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matthews, C.; Crispie, F.; Lewis, E.; Reid, M.; O’Toole, P.W.; Cotter, P.D. The rumen microbiome: a crucial consideration when optimising milk and meat production and nitrogen utilisation efficiency. Gut Microbes 2019, 10, 115–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero, J.J.; Zarate, M.A.; Arriola, K.G.; Gonzalez, C.F.; Silva-Sanchez, C.; Staples, C.R.; Adesogan, A.T. Screening exogenous fibrolytic enzyme preparations for improved in vitro digestibility of bermudagrass haylage. Journal of Dairy Science 2015, 98, 2555–2567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith Janet, L.; Goldberg Jonathan, M.; Grossman Alan, D. Complete Genome Sequences of Bacillus subtilis subsp. subtilis Laboratory Strains JH642 (AG174) and AG1839. Genome Announcements 2014, 2, e00663–00614. [Google Scholar]
- Belal, E.B. Bioethanol production from rice straw residue. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 2013, 44, 225–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krishania, M.; Kumar, V.; Sangwan, R.S. Integrated approach for extraction of xylose, cellulose, lignin and silica from rice straw. Bioresource Technology Reports 2018, 1, 89–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bergstrand, M.; Karlsson, M.O. Handling data below the limit of quantification in mixed effect models. AAPS J 2009, 11, 371–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ermoli, F.; Bontà, V.; Vitali, G.; Calvio, C. SwrA as global modulator of the two-component system DegSU in Bacillus subtilis. Research in Microbiology 2021, 172, 103877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spanghero, M.; Chiaravalli, M.; Colombini, S.; Fabro, C.; Froldi, F.; Mason, F.; Moschini, M.; Sarnataro, C.; Schiavon, S.; Tagliapietra, F. Rumen Inoculum Collected from Cows at Slaughter or from a Continuous Fermenter and Preserved in Warm, Refrigerated, Chilled or Freeze-Dried Environments for In Vitro Tests. Animals 2019, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mertens, D.R. Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fiber in feeds with refluxing in beakers or crucibles: collaborative study. J AOAC Int 2002, 85, 1217–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pirondini, M.; Colombini, S.; Malagutti, L.; Rapetti, L.; Galassi, G.; Zanchi, R.; Crovetto, G.M. Effects of a selection of additives on in vitro ruminal methanogenesis and in situ and in vivo NDF digestibility. Animal Science Journal 2015, 86, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Theodorou, M.K.; Williams, B.A.; Dhanoa, M.S.; McAllan, A.B.; France, J. A simple gas production method using a pressure transducer to determine the fermentation kinetics of ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 1994, 48, 185–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colombini, S.; Rota Graziosi, A.; Parma, P.; Iriti, M.; Vitalini, S.; Sarnataro, C.; Spanghero, M. Evaluation of dietary addition of 2 essential oils from Achillea moschata, or their components (bornyl acetate, camphor, and eucalyptol) on in vitro ruminal fermentation and microbial community composition. Animal Nutrition 2021, 7, 224–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]


| Before hydrolysis | After hydrolysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carbon source | Glucose1 | Xylose1 | Glucose1 | Xylose1 |
| WL (mg/mL) |
0.542 ± 0.012 | 0.500 ± 0.000 | 2.183 ± 0.519 | 0.700 ± 0.047 |
| Treatment1 | SE2 | p-value3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | PB5700 | PB2OPT | T | Feed | T x Feed | ||
| NDFd4(%) | 43.4a | 45.6b | 47.8c | 1.30 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.028 |
| GP50-24 h (mL g DM) | 83.3a | 89.6b | 91.1b | 5.07 | 0.019 | <0.001 | 0.099 |
| GP 24-48 h (mL/g DM) | 29.3a | 32.2b | 32.8b | 1.56 | 0.016 | <0.001 | 0.757 |
| GP 0-48 h (mL/g DM) | 113a | 122b | 124b | 5.25 | 0.010 | <0.001 | 0.217 |
| pH | 6.26 | 6.29 | 6.28 | 0.161 | 0.239 | <0.001 | 0.392 |
| N-NH36(mg/dL) | 49.1 | 47.9 | 47.6 | 7.59 | 0.556 | 0.005 | 0.938 |
| Total VFA7(mmol/L) | 92.4 | 97.4 | 94.4 | 13.1 | 0.455 | 0.255 | 0.342 |
| VFA (% of total VFA) | |||||||
| Acetic acid (%) | 56.7 | 57.3 | 57.9 | 0.839 | 0.151 | <0.001 | 0.922 |
| Propionic acid (%) | 21.4 | 20.2 | 20.1 | 2.74 | 0.063 | 0.051 | 0.528 |
| Butyric acid (%) | 17.0 | 17.5 | 16.7 | 1.48 | 0.490 | <0.001 | 0.459 |
| Valeric acid (%) | 4.86 | 5.05 | 5.20 | 0.570 | 0.551 | 0.301 | 0.545 |
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. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).