Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 30, 2025

The Use of an Automated System GreenFeed to Monitor Enteric Methane and Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Ruminant Animals
Published on: September 7, 2015
Effects of rumen-native microbial feed supplementation on milk yield, composition, and feed efficiency in lactating
Ainhoa Valldecabres1, Sean P Gilmore2, Jordan J Embree2
1DairyExperts Inc., Tulare, CA 93274, USA.
Abstract:
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of two rumen-native microbial feed supplements (MFS) on milk production, milk composition, and feed efficiency. A total of 90 multiparous cows between 40 and 60 d in milk were enrolled in a randomized block design study. Within each block (baseline milk yield), cows were randomly assigned to: control (no microbial feed supplementation), MFS1 (0.33 g/kg total mixed ration [TMR] of an MFS containing a minimum of Clostridium beijerinckii at 2 × 106 CFU/g and Pichia kudriavzevii at 2 × 107 CFU/g), or MFS2 (0.33 g/kg TMR of a MFS containing a minimum of C. beijerinckii at 2 × 106 CFU/g, P. kudriavzevii at 2 × 107 CFU/g, Ruminococcus bovis at 2 × 107 CFU/g, and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens at 2 × 107 CFU/g). Cows were housed in a single group and fed the study diets ad libitum for 270 d. Individual milk yield was recorded using electronic milk meters, and milk fat and protein were measured using optical in-line analyzers at each of two daily milkings. Treatment and treatment by time effects were assessed through multiple linear regression analyses. Treatment effects were observed for milk and energy-corrected milk (ECM) yields, milk fat and protein yields and concentrations, dry matter intake (DMI), and feed efficiency; those effects were conditional to time for milk yield, DMI, and feed efficiency. Overall, milk, ECM, fat, and protein yields were higher for MFS2 compared with control cows (+3.0, 3.7, 0.12, and 0.12 kg/d, respectively). Compared with MFS1, milk yield was higher and protein yield tended to be higher for MFS2 cows (+2.9 and 0.09 kg/d, respectively). In contrast, MFS1 cows produced 0.17 and 0.08 units of percentage per day more fat and protein than MFS2 cows, and 0.07 units of percentage per day more protein than control cows. Dry matter intake and feed efficiency were higher for MFS2 cows compared with MFS1 cows (+1.3 kg/d and 0.06, respectively), and feed efficiency was higher for MFS2 cows compared with control cows (+0.04). Where observed, treatment by time effects suggest that the effects of MFS2 were more evident as time progressed after supplementation was initiated. No effects of microbial supplementation were observed on body weight, body condition score, somatic cell count, or clinical mastitis case incidence. In conclusion, the supplementation of MFS2 effectively improved economically important outcomes such as milk yield, solids, and feed efficiency.
More Related Videos
04:16Individualized Reconstitution of Human Milk Microbiota: A Feasible Approach in Real-World Settings
Published on: February 7, 2025
08:29Measuring Liver Mitochondrial Oxygen Consumption and Proton Leak Kinetics to Estimate Mitochondrial Respiration in Holstein Dairy Cattle
Published on: November 30, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Microbial Nutrition
Microorganisms in Agriculture and Food industry
The Roles of Bacteria and Fungi in Plant Nutrition