Contribution to the Method of Sugar Analysis in Legume Grains for Ensiling - A Pilot Study

Authors

  • Annette Zeyner  Institute of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences, Group Animal Nutrition, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany
  • Annett Gefrom  State Research Centre of Agriculture and Fishery Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Gulzow-Pruzen, Germany
  • Dirk Hillegeist  Institute for Crop and Soil Science, Julius Kuhn Institute, Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Braunschweig, Germany
  • Manfred Sommer  Chamber of Agriculture Lower Saxony, Hanover, Germany
  • Jorg M. Greef  Institute for Crop and Soil Science, Julius Kuhn Institute, Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants, Braunschweig, Germany

Keywords:

Legume Grain, Ensiling, Sugar, Buffering Capacity, Anthrone Method, HPLC

Abstract

The quotient of sugar content and buffering capacity (S/BC quotient) serves as an important predictor for the ensilability of green feed and cereal or legume grains. For this, reference values were given which base on the anthrone method for sugar analysis. This method has largely been replaced today, but the consistency of results from different methods is questionable. In this study, the sugar content of legume grains was determined by the anthrone method and compared with results from nowadays more common methods. For this, grains from lupine (Lupinus spp.; var. 'Bora', 'Borlu'), pea (Pisum sativum; var. 'Lisa', 'Phönix') and field bean (Vicia faba; var. 'Limbo') were analysed (n = 4 each) for sugar via anthrone method, a gravimetric method (GRAVI) and HPLC. Following HPLC, either glucose, fructose and sucrose (HPLC-1) or these monomers plus galactose (HPLC-2) or HPLC-2 plus oligomeric carbohydrates (raffinose, stachyose, verbascose; HPLC-3) as sum were referred to as sugar. Results were compared by one-way analysis of variance. None of the alternative methods provided results that are at least similar to the sugar content detected by the anthrone method (P > 0.05). HPLC-3 caused a clear overestimation whereas the other methods (VDLUFA, HPLC-1, HPLC-2) resulted in a remarkable underestimation compared to the anthrone method. The results from legume grains suggest that different methods of sugar analysis provide remarkably different results even though all methods are accepted and applied in routine analysis. Thus, i) sugar contents should not be interpreted without knowledge of the applied method, and ii) as long as reference values base on anthrone method, the forecast of ensilability via the S/BC quotient should only be performed when anthrone method was used to determine the sugar content. The comparison of results from different methods of sugar analysis should be extended to grasses and further more conventional material for ensiling.

References

  1. L. Ayed and M. Hamdi. 2002. Biotechn. Letters, vol. 24, pp. 1763-1765, 2002.
  2. L. Camacho, C. Sierra, D. Marcus, E. Guzman, R. Campos, D. von Baer, and L. Trugo. 1991. Int. J. Food Microbiol., vol. 14, pp. 277-286, 1991.
  3. S.W. Cui. 2005. "Food Carbohydrates.” Chemistry, Physical Properties, and Applications. Taylor & Francis Group. USA
  4. Z. Dische and E. Borenfreund. 1951. J. Biol. Hem., vol. 192, pp. 583-587, 1951.
  5. W. Duszkiewicz-Reinhard, E. Gujska, and K. Khan. 1994. J. Food Sci., vol. 59, pp. 115-117, 1994.
  6. A. Gefrom, C. Balko, and A. Zeyner. 2014. Proteinmarkt.de, 7 pp.
  7. A. Gefrom, E.M. Ott, S. Hoedtke, and A. Zeyner. 2013. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr., vol. 97, pp. 1152-1160, 2013.
  8. A. Gefrom, E.M. Ott, S. Hoedtke, and A. Zeyner. 2013. Zuchtungskunde vol. 85(2), pp. 154-168, 2013.
  9. E. Giraud, A. Champailler, and M. Raimbault. 1994. Appl. Envir. Microbiol., vol. 60, pp. 4319-4323, 1994.
  10. M. Granito and G. Alvarez. 2006. J. Sci. Food Agric., vol. 86, pp. 1164-1171, 2006.
  11. M. Granito, A. Torres, J. Frias, M. Guerra, and C. Vidal-Valverde. 2005. Europ. Food Res. Technol., vol. 220, pp. 176-181, 2005.
  12. W. Hackl, B. Pieper, R. Pieper, U. Korn, and A. Zeyner. 2010. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr., vol. 94, pp. 729-735, 2010.
  13. M. Horbowicz and L. Obendorf. 1994. Seed Sci. Res., vol. 4, pp. 385-405, 1994.
  14. H. Kluge, F. Hirche, and K. Eder. 2002. "NSP- und Oligosaccharidgehalte von Lupinen der Spezies L. angustifolius, L. luteus und L. albus." In: M. Rodehutscord (ed.), 7. Tagung Schweine- und Geflugelernahrung, Lutherstadt Wittenberg, 26.11.-28.11.2002, pp. 145-147. Germany
  15. M.J. Lee, J.S. Pate, D.J. Harris, and C.A. Atkins. 2006. J. Exp. Botany, vol. 22, pp. 1-12, 2006.
  16. C. Martinez-Villaluenga, J. Frias, and C. Vidal-Valverde. 2005. Food Chemistry, vol. 91, pp. 645-649, 2005.
  17. H. Munte. 1931. "Einsauerungsversuche mit grunen Lupinen." Kiel: Univ., Doctoral thesis. Germany
  18. C. Naumann and R. Bassler. 2012. "Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln." VDLUFA-Methodenbuch III: 8. Erganzungslieferung. VDLUFA-Verlag Darmstadt, Germany
  19. R. Pieper, W. Hackl, U. Korn, A. Zeyner, W.B. Souffrant, and B. Pieper. 2011. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., vol. 164, pp. 96-105, 2011.
  20. R. Pieper, W. Hackl, B. Pieper, and U. Korn. 2006. "Einfluss der Silierung von Feuchtkorn-Maisschrot mit Milchsaurebakterien (Lactobacillus plantarum) auf ausgewahlte Fermentationsparameter und den Futterwert beim Schwein." In: M. Rodehutscord (ed.), 9. Tagung Schweine und Geflugelernahrung. Halle, 28.11.-30.11.2006, pp. 274-276. Germany
  21. R. Quemener. 1988. J. Agr. Food Chem., vol. 36, pp. 754-759, 1988.
  22. F.C. Santana and J. Empis. 2001. Europ. Food Res. Technol., vol 212, pp. 217-224, 2001.
  23. T. Schmidt, K. Krawielitzki, J. Voigt, and M. Gabel. 2005. ubersichten Tierernahrung, vol. 33, pp. 87-100, 2005.
  24. E.A. Shimelis and S.K.Rakshit. 2008. Int. J. Food Sci. Techn., vol. 43, pp. 658-665, 2008.
  25. S. Smulikowska, B. Pastuszewsk, E. Swiech, A. Ochtabinska, A. Mieczkowska, V.C. Nguyen, and L. Buraczewska. 2001. J. Anim. Feed Sci., vol. 10, pp. 511-523, 2001.
  26. L.C. Trugo, A. Farah, N.M.F. Trugo, C. Sierra, and L. Camacho. "Effect of germination and fermentation on the oligosaccharide composition of lupin seeds.” Proc. 6th Int. Lupin Conf., Temuro Pucon, Chile, pp. 43-49, 1990.
  27. F. WeiBbach, L. Schmidt, and E. Hein, "Method of anticipation of the run of fermentation in silage making, based on the chemical composition of green fodder.” Proc. XIIth Int. Grassland Congr., Moskov, Russia
  28. F. WeiBbach. 1968. "Beziehungen zwischen Ausgangsmaterial und Garungsverlauf bei der Grunfuttersilierung." Rostock: Univ., Habilitation thesis. Germany
  29. M. Wink. 2003. Phytochemistry, vol. 64, pp. 3-19, 2003.
  30. E.W. Yemm and A.J. Willis. 1954. Biochem. J., vol. 57(3), pp. 508-514, 1954.

International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology

Downloads

Published

2015-06-30

Issue

Volume 1, Issue 2, May-June-2015

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) IJSRST

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

[1]
Annette Zeyner, Annett Gefrom, Dirk Hillegeist, Manfred Sommer, Jorg M. Greef, " Contribution to the Method of Sugar Analysis in Legume Grains for Ensiling - A Pilot Study, International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology(IJSRST), Online ISSN : 2395-602X, Print ISSN : 2395-6011, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp.74-80, May-June-2015.