African Journal of
Agricultural Research

  • Abbreviation: Afr. J. Agric. Res.
  • Language: English
  • ISSN: 1991-637X
  • DOI: 10.5897/AJAR
  • Start Year: 2006
  • Published Articles: 6932

Review

Anatomical differences among forage with respect to nutrient availability for ruminants in the tropics: A review

Tiago Neves Pereira Valente*
  • Tiago Neves Pereira Valente*
  • Instituto Federal Goiano, IFGoiano, GO-Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Erico da Silva Lima
  • Erico da Silva Lima
  • Environmental Health at FMU, SP-Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Daiany Iris Gomes
  • Daiany Iris Gomes
  • Universidade Federal Rural da Amazônia, PA-Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Wallacy Barbacena Rosa dos Santos
  • Wallacy Barbacena Rosa dos Santos
  • Instituto Federal Goiano, IFGoiano, GO-Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Andréia Santos Cesário
  • Andréia Santos Cesário
  • Instituto Federal Goiano, IFGoiano, GO-Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar
Sandro de Castro Santos
  • Sandro de Castro Santos
  • Instituto Federal Goiano, IFGoiano, GO-Brazil.
  • Search for this author on:
  • Google Scholar


  •  Received: 21 January 2016
  •  Accepted: 01 April 2016
  •  Published: 05 May 2016

 ABSTRACT

Different types of forage have been used worldwide in farm animal feeding. However, different microscopic cellular arrangements are clear in the anatomical structure, are due to climatic influences and are reflected in the productivity responses of cattle, especially in comparisons among tropical and temperate grasses. The physical impediment of the plant anatomical structure affects nutrient accessibility to rumen microorganisms. Thus, the objective of the present review was to discuss aspects related to C3 and C4 forage plant anatomy and nutrient availability for ruminants, due to the specific structure of each plant tissue, the speed at which the microorganisms can access the cells becomes different animal responses.

Key words: Plant anatomy, digestibility, nutritional value, neutral detergent fiber.


 INTRODUCTION

Understanding the anatomical structure of forage can effectively influence nutritional aspects in ruminants. Both grass and legumes are angiosperms. However, their carbon fixation physiology and metabolism can differ among species. In most plants, the CO2 fixation process includes a 3-carbon molecule as the first stable compound; this process is the C3 Calvin-Benson cycle (Sharkey and Weise, 2015; Yamaoka et al., 2015). However, in certain plants, the first stable compound is a 4-carbon molecule in a process referred to as the C4 dicarboxylic acid cycle (Gowik and Westhoff, 2011). The above-described changes imply different morphological traits. Furthermore, C4 plants are more adapted to light and high temperatures (Valente et al., 2011a). In comparison, C4 plants require less than 400 g water to produce 1 g dry matter (DM), whereas C3 plants use 400 g to 1000 g water to produce the same quantity of DM  (Odum, 1983). In nature, including forests, C3 plants produce the most photo-assimilates in the world, likely because these plants are more competitive in mixed communities under the effects of shadow casting and little variation in temperature and luminosity (Jardine et al., 2014). When grass is intercropped with legumes in cattle-feeding pastures, high results of degradability are founded (Barcellos et al., 2008; Silva et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2015). An advantage of intercropping is that legumes exhibit less variation in their nutritional value throughout the year, whereas the grass forage nutrient content decreased in dry seasons (Monteiro et al., 1998; Sage et al., 2015). Intercropping grass and legume forages produces imbalance problems in the pasture because all tropical legumes are C3 plants, whereas most tropical grasses feature a C4-type metabolism. In these mixed pastures, C4 grass exhibits higher growth, and depending on animal management, legumes may disappear due to low persistence and grazing intensity (Carvalho and Pires, 2008a). Tropical C4 plants exhibit little photorespiration because the high CO2 levels in the bundle sheath cells accelerate the carboxylase reaction relative to the oxygenase reaction. This effect is relevant at higher temperatures. Thus, C4 plants have an advantage in hot and bright environments (Van Soest, 1994; Sage and Stata, 2015).
 
Shaded plants invest relatively higher proportion of photoassimilates in increased leaf area, to maximize capture of the available light. Usually have thin leaves, higher specific leaf area and sheets with lower bulk density. The anatomical changes that occur on leaves develop under low light play an important role in plant adaptation to the conditions imposed by the environment. Generally these changes are related to the increased uptake and utilization of the incident light, feature that limits growth in the shade, increasing photosynthetic efficiency of the plant (Lambers et al., 1998). The increase of leaf area in low light conditions It is directly related to anatomical changes that may occur in the shaded plants as cuticles and thinner epidermis, mesophyll and thinner smaller proportion of palisade parenchyma tissue conductive support and a higher proportion of spaces intercellular and lower stomatal density (Berlyn and Cho, 2000).
 
In studied with response to levels of artificial shades (0, 50 and 70%) with the objective of determining the acclimation of C3 and C4 species of forage species to changes in the luminous environment, Gobbi et al. (2011) worked with C4 plant signal grass (Brachiaria decumbens cv. Basilisk) and C3 forage peanut (Arachis pintoi cv. Amarillo) and concluded that the specific leaf blade of the two species increased linearly as a function of the increasing levels of shading. In signal grass, the increase on specific leaf area was followed by a linear reduction in leaf thickness, with the increasing levels of shade. However, forage peanut leaf thickness was not significantly altered by shade. Stomatal density on adaxial and  abaxial  leaf  surfaces  decreased  with   the increase on levels of shade. The forage species evaluated showed a good acclimation to variations on light intensities, and they are good alternatives to use in environments with low solar radiation levels.
 
A great diversity of species of microorganisms present in the rumen environmental, with specific functions, in the degradation of carbohydrates, protein and lipids. However, the knowledge of the interactions between the different species of microorganisms in the rumen ecosystem. Our understanding of characteristics of the ruminal microbial population has opened new avenues of microbial ecology and the use of these nutrients in the plants (Krause et al., 2014; Valente et al., 2016). Thus, the study proposal was to discuss aspects related to C3 and C4 forage plant anatomy and nutrient availability for ruminants, due to the specific structure of each plant tissue, the speed at which the microorganisms can access the cells becomes different animal responses.


 FORAGE PLANT STRUCTURE

Forage plants are composed of different structures, and the physical and chemical composition of each tissue is directly related to its structure in the plant. Supporting tissues must be densely grouped with thickened and lignified cell walls (Lempp et al., 2000). In photosynthesis-specialized tissues, the cell walls must be thin and non-lignified. Thus, the digestibility potential for given forage is related to the different tissues it comprises (Akin and Robinson, 1982; Batistoti et al., 2012; Cardoso, 2013). Accordingly, higher lignified vascular and sclerenchyma tissue content in a plant lowers the digestibility ratio (Brito et al., 2004; Queiroz et al., 2000b; Valente et al., 2011b,c). As the plant ages, the sclerenchyma cell walls in the leaf blades tend to thicken. In a study on three cultivars of elephant grass, which is tropical forage, Brito and Deschamps (2001) found that the lignified tissue area increased with plant growth in both the leaves and stem. The maturity stage is an important factor that influences the nutritional value of the forage plant (Wilson, 1997, Dabo et al. 1997; Aoki et al., 2013). In grass plants, leaf blades harbor different tissues, including tissues specialized in liquid conduction, tissues specialized in supporting the plant and tissues composed of mesophyll, where photoassimilate synthesis occurs. Conducting tissues are known as vascular bundles and are composed of xylem and phloem. Sclerenchyma is a supporting tissue. However, in grass, supporting and conducting tissues are associated. The epidermis covers the lower and upper outer surface of the plant and can feature a cuticle on its external surface. In grass, the stem is composed of an outermost epidermis and parenchyma tissue with vascular bundles that are scattered as a sub-epidermal sclerenchyma ring surrounding the entire stem (Wilson, 1997). The vascular bundles  are  similar  to  the  bundles  in  leaves  and can include a fiber ring (sclerenchyma) around each bundle. In the initial development stages, only xylem is lignified. However, as age increases, the maturation progress proceeds to lignify the sclerenchyma ring and, at a more advanced stage, even the parenchyma where the vascular bundles are inserted (Paciullo, 2000; Smith et al., 2013).
 
C4-type forage plant species are anatomically different compared with C3 plants. Specifically, the mesophyll cells are more densely arranged and form a radial structure around the vascular bundles, which is referred to as Kranz anatomy (Valente et al., 2011a) and is absent in C3 plants. In a study comparing tropical C4 and temperate C3 grass tissue contents, Wilson (1997) showed that the higher mesophyll (rapidly degradable tissue) content in temperate grass produces a better cattle weight gain response than tropical grasses.


 PLANT TISSUE CONTENT AND DIGESTIBILITY

Forage plant digestibility depends on its bromatological and histological composition. Although lignin is the major digestibility-limiting factor (Jung and Deetz, 1993), other components can also limit a plant’s nutritional value (Bonelli et al., 2013). According to Van Soest (1994), these components include substances with different effects, such as those designed for plant defense through diminishing the forage palatability. Other substances inhibit animal metabolism by hindering bacterial development in the rumen; these include phenylpropa-noids, such as lignin, flavonoids, isoflavonoids, other compounds with alkaloid and terpene content and tannins. However, tannins are classified into hydrolysable tannins (HT), with molecular weight between 500 and 3.000 g mol-1, and condensed tannins (CT) with molecular weight up to 20.000 g mol-1, second Cieslak et al. (2013). Tannins can bind proteins, and to a lesser extent metal ions, amino acids, and carbohydrates in aqueous solution (Makkar, 2003). Tannins can antimicro-bial effects due to their capacity to bind microbial enzymes or cell wall or membrane proteins, or proteins in the substrate, decreasing microbial attachment and digestion (Morales and Ungerfeld, 2015).
 
Tropical Legumes also have tannins higher (e.g. Desmodium, Cajanus) or less degree (Arachis, Neonotonia, Centrosema), which interfere in palatability (decreased) in risk of bloat (reduces), digestion and utilization of protein and forage carbohydrates. However, depending on the nature and concentration of these tannins in forage, some advantages can be obtained, especially at high protein diets (e.g. Leucaena grazed in water). If this protein is not was complexed in part, it is precariously utilized by the animal, since the high rate of degradation in the rumen was not synchronized with the power supply. Then, N losses occur, excreted as urea for example second Barcellos et al. (2008).
 
In tropical climates, forage  typically  features less soluble carbohydrate and high cell wall content. Thus, forage tends to exhibit less nutritional value and more structures that are protective against predation. Due to influence by environmental factors, such as long periods of hot nights, plants respire and, when forage grows at higher temperatures, lignification increases. Thus, forage with a C4 metabolism is typically lower quality (Figueiras et al., 2015). Also, according to Van Soest (1994), the generalization that C4 plants have a lower nutritive value than C3 is not universally true, and a few exceptions deserve mention. Corn and sorghum are C4 plants derived from tropical ancestors. Studies show that corn grown under tropical conditions has a much lower nutritive value than corn grown in a temperate environment. Legumes usually have higher levels of crude protein as compared to tropical grasses, which can improve the protein balance in the rumen ecosystem.
 
Studies on leaf anatomy and its relationship with forage plant nutritional value have been reported (Wilkins, 1972; Wilson, 1976; Rossatto et al., 2015). For tissues that are digested after reaching the rumen, different types of microorganisms must colonize the food particles. The main invasion route seems to be via lacerated epidermal areas. Brito and Deschamps (2001) found that stomata in the epidermis of sheaths and blades were used by microorganisms to access inner tissues. The degradation process begins in the substomatal cavity and progresses through the mesophyll. Rumen bacteria initially digest mesophyll and phloem cells (Hanna et al., 1973; Akin et al., 1973; Akin, 1989). To obtain access to parenchyma bundle sheath cells, microorganisms must first digest the mesophyll or epidermal cells, or the bundle sheath cells must be exposed through physical damage. Thus, the parenchyma bundle sheath cell digestion rate is influenced by the mesophyll cell digestion rate, and the colonization time can decrease as the number of lacerated areas in the epidermis increases. Chewing by the animal can contribute to higher physical degradation of the grass, during both intake and rumination (Krause et al., 2014; Valente et al., 2016).
 
For the parenchyma bundle sheath and the epidermis, partial digestion is evident after 24 to 48 h of incubation (Bohn et al., 1988; Wilson et al., 1991; Wilson, 1993; Zhang et al., 2015). However, epidermal cells disappear completely after 24 h of incubation (Akin and Burdick, 1975; Sun et al., 2008). Second Moore and Jung (2001) lignification tends to be most intense in structural tissues such as xylem and sclerenchyma are virtually indigestible and remain intact in the ruminal fluid after long incubation times (Figure 1). The reason dry matter digestibility is negatively correlated with lignin concentration is because the concentration of lignin always increases as cell-wall concentration rises, and forage cell walls are always less digestible than cell soluble. There are large differences in lignification between grasses and legumes and also differences in the impact of lignin per se on their forage quality.  Lignin concentration of legumes often appears comparable to that of grasses when expressed as a proportion of dry matter. However, when expressed as a proportion of fiber, legumes demonstrate a wider range of lignin concentrations that are generally higher than those of grasses.
 
 
Inaccessibility of the secondary cell wall hinders microorganism entry and thus impedes rapid digestion of the plant cell wall, which is due not to its composition but to the time required to access the wall, which can then be excreted in the feces undigested (Wilson, 1997). Cell wall thickness can impede rapid access by the bacteria to initiate the digestive process. Digestion of the sclerenchyma cell wall, for example, requires 48 h. Thus, even if the cell wall is accessible to microorganisms, it will not be fully digested during its residence in the rumen (Krause et al., 2014). Thicker secondary walls require a longer time for full digestion (Akin and Robison, 1982; Monties, 1991). After compiling results from different works on tissue digestion, Akin (1989) suggested dividing C4 grass leaf tissue into rapidly digestible, e.g., mesophyll and phloem; slowly and partially digestible, e.g., epidermis and vascular bundle sheath cells, respectively; and indigestible tissues, e.g., xylem and sclerenchyma. In C3 plants, only vascular tissue (except phloem) and the inner bundle sheath, which is observed in certain species, are resistant to digestion, and the sclerenchyma and parenchyma bundle sheath are considered slowly digestible. Tissues such as mesophyll and other types of parenchyma are not lignified, contain a large proportion of metabolites, and are highly degradable. Between these extremes are tissues with intermediate and variable degradability such as phloem and collenchyma (Wilson, 1993). Tissues such as the mesophyll, epidermis and outer bundle sheath are rapidly digested.
 
In general, C4 species exhibit more vascular tissue, parenchyma bundle sheath and sclerenchyma content in the leaf blade, whereas C3 plants feature exceptionally greater mesophyll content, which occupies approximately 60% of the cross-section of such grass (Minson and Wilson, 1980). The C4 grass mesophyll is more slowly digested, even under rapid ruminal degradation, than  C3 species due to high cell density in C4 forages. In C3 species, cells are more loosely arranged and exhibit few cell-to-cell adhesion points. Anatomically, parenchyma sheath degradation seems the greatest cause of digestibility variations among C4 photosynthetic Panicum spp. (Akin, 1982). Non-lignified tissues (collenchyma, chlorenchyma, cambium, phloem, and parenchyma) are more rapidly and almost completely degraded in animal digestive system, whilst lignified tissues, such as xylem vessels and phloem and xylem fibers, typically resist degradation. Epidermal and collenchyma cells develop very thick, but not lignified primary cell walls, which are slowly degradable, whilst waxy cuticle tends to resist degradation (Zorić et al., 2014).
 
Tissue degradation decreases with plant age. However, according to Carvalho and Pires (2008b), the environment also exerts an influence. Increases in lignified vascular tissue in elephant grass correlate with increasing tissue age, which is more evident in the stem (Brito and Deschamps, 2001). Second, Oliveira et al. (2014) with the aim to determine ruminal degradation of neutral detergent fiber of grasses of the genus Cynodon spp., harvested at four cutting ages. Concluded that daily increased in the cutting age, there was a linear reduction in the effective degradability of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) of blade and stem of 0.16 and 0.18%, respectively. The increase in the cutting age had a linear and positive influence on the un-degradable NDF with daily increments for leaf and stem of 0.12 and 0.18%, respectively.
 
Generally, mesophyll content is positively correlated with digestibility and negatively correlated with cell wall content. On the other hand, parenchyma bundle sheath, vascular tissue and sclerenchyma content are negatively correlated with digestibility and positively correlated with cell wall content (Queiroz et al., 2000a, b). Tropical grasses can exhibit different results for digestion of each leaf tissue. Mesophyll and phloem cells can be rapidly degraded after an incubation period of 12 to 24 h (Márquez et al., 2009), but these tissues have also been found undigested even after 48 h of incubation (Akin et al., 1983). In a study with Tifton 85 and Brachiaria grasses, Paciullo (2000) found that the mesophyll, parenchyma and phloem cells were the only fully digested cells in vitro upon up to 48 h of incubation. During his work with two Cynodon spp., Akin (1982) found that the mesophyll and phloem were the first tissues digested. In situ, after 24 h of digestion, only xylem and sclerenchyma were detected from temperate climate forage (Gasser et al., 2005). Compared with lignified tissues from palisade grass (Urochloa brizantha (Hochst. Ex A.Rich.) R.Webster) and creeping signal grass (U. humidicola (Rendle) Morrone & Zuloaga), Brito et al. (2004) found the highest content in palisade grass in the central basal and aerial apical regions.
 
Barcellos et al. (2008) in a compilation of data to assess the digestibility coefficient for legumes, found 64.4 for Arachis pintoi, 49.2 for Stylosanthes Guianensis, 44.3 for Glycine wightii, 55.6 for Leucaena leucocephala and 59.9 for Medicago sativa.
 
When Paciullo (2000) compared digestion among three tropical grasses, Tifton 85, Bermuda grass ((Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.) exhibited better results than molasses and signal grass species. As for molasses grass (Melinis minutiflora P. Beauv.), the high xylem and sclerenchyma content indicates that this species exhibits anatomical traits more typical of forage with lower nutritional value. signal grass species were intermediate compared with the two other species; it exhibited the highest cell wall thickness irrespective of developmental stage, which negatively affected digestion in the cross-sections. The sclerenchyma cell wall digestion rates ranged from 0.007 to 0.018 µm/h depending on the grass species and age and were higher with a 46 h incubation time. Thus, even without lignification, as in young stems, cell wall digestion in ruminal fluid was not complete during the incubation time, which suggests that limited digestion in thick-walled cells (greater than 1 µm) is mainly due to structural problems (Paciullo, 2000). According to Baurhoo et al. (2008), purified lignin can be digested by monogastric and ruminant animals under specific conditions. However, this phenolic polymer does not naturally occur in original plant structures (plant cell walls) and thus is not relevant to the present study.
 
Lignified vascular tissues exhibit highly significant positive correlations with NDF, acid detergent fibers (ADF) and lignin content and highly significant negative correlations with crude protein (CP) content (Gomes et al., 2011; Mokhele et al., 2012). These tissues exhibit thickened lignified cell walls, which are frequently associated with the slowly digesting fraction and forage fiber content (Queiroz et al., 2000b).


 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VEGETAL ANATOMY AND CONCEPT THE FIBER IN RUMINANT NUTRITION

For determining forage quality is based on separating several fractions of the forage using detergents. A neutral detergent solution is used to dissolve easily digestible substances, which leaves a fibrous residue referred to as NDF that contains the main plant cell wall components (cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin) and generally corresponds to 600 to 800 g/kg forage DM. Thus, carbohydrates are the main energy source for ruminants both directly through absorbing their monomers in the digestive system and indirectly by conversion into volatile fatty acids through microbial fermentation (Aschenbach et al., 2014). The term fiber is used to define a nutritional rather than an anatomical concept. Fibrous carbohy-drates and lignin, which compose the plant cell wall, are slowly digested, exhibit variable nutritional availability and occupy space in the gastrointestinal tract (Van Soest, 1967; Allen, 1996). Fiber methods isolate different chemical constituents in feeds. The fiber with the smallest magnitude is crude fiber, because the strong acid and alkali in this method leaves a residue that is mostly cellulose with variable amounts of lignin and hemicellu-lose. ADF is next largest in magnitude because it recovers most, if not all, of the polymeric lignin and cellulose in feeds, with some contamination from pectin, hemicellulose, tannin-protein complexes, and ash. Of the three routine fiber methods only NDF isolates all of the insoluble fiber components in plants (hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin) with some protein contamination. In animal byproduct feeds, NDF isolates the nitrogenous material that is indigestible or slowly digesting and thus meets the requirements of the nutritional definition of fiber. Because ADF does not contain hemicellulose it is not an accurate estimate of fiber in feeds. It was developed as a preparatory step for the determination of lignin and was never intended to be a measure of fiber in feeds (Van Soest, 1994). The concept of physically effective fiber (peNDF) was introduced to account for the physical characteristics of NDF (primarily particle size) that affect chewing activity (saliva secretion) (Yang and Beauchemin (2007). This concept is based on the hypothesis that the fiber in long feed particles (>1 cm) promotes chewing and saliva secretion, which helps neutralize the acids produced during ruminal digestion of feeds. The fiber that promotes chewing is considered physically effective. The peNDF content of the diet can be determined by multiplying the NDF content of the diet by its physical effectiveness factor (pef) second Beauchemin and Yang (2005).


 NDF AND INDF BEHAVIOR IN THE RUMEN

Of all routinely measured feed constituents, NDF is most consistently correlated with DM ingestion (Van Soest, 1994). Higher NDF intake occupies more space in the ruminant gastrointestinal tract, which produces a filling effect (Mertens, 2003). Furthermore, due to the lower rate of NDF disappearance in the digestive system, more time is required to reduce the particle size, which is necessary for escape from the rumen.
 
Forage fiber or plant cell wall content can be divided into a potentially digestible and indigestible fraction (pdNDF and iNDF, respectively). The digestible fraction of the fiber disappears from the rumen through digestion, fermentation and passage, whereas the indigestible fraction disappears solely through passage (Krause et al., 2014). Notably, particle density is affected by fermentation because the generated and retained gas tends to reduce the specific gravity. As fermentation proceeds and the concentration of potentially fermentable nutrients decreases, the gas production rate decreases, and the density increases, which allows for passage through the reticulo-omasal orifice (Allen, 1996). With the progression of forage maturity, iNDF content increases and decreases the microbial digestion rate of this fraction, which thus affects the fiber particle residence time in the rumen (Jung and Allen, 1995). Microbial growth in animals fed low-quality tropical forage is not yet fully understood. However, additional supplementation with nitrogenous compounds to improve animal performance yielded a balance between digestion and degradation; increased feed intake correlated with increased passage rate (Detmann et al., 2009). Studies on NDF digestibility, which is a heterogeneous fraction composed of two types of carbohydrates, hemicellulose and cellulose, and one phenylpropanoid, lignin, report varying content and physical structure in this fraction among plant species and during the plant life cycle (Gomes et al., 2011). Understanding the iNDF fraction is relevant because it plays an important role in ruminant nutrition. According to Valente et al. (2015), differences in feed particle size are reflected in the iNDF fraction, where a simple change in the particle size from 1 to 3 mm can dramatically increase the expected time for detecting the iNDF in the laboratory after ruminal incubation.
 
The disappearance of NDF from the ruminal environment is a time-dependent process that integrates the speeds of pdNDF degradation and iNDF escape from the ruminal environment (Ellis et al., 1994). Thus, the entry of new fibrous substrates from forage will only occur when part of the resident mass is removed from the environment through degradation or passage. Accordingly, the pdNDF yield can be maximized by minimizing the ruminal fill effect (Figueiras et al., 2010, 2015). This behavior indicates that removing iNDF from the ruminal system improves NDF intake from low-quality forage.
 
At an advanced maturity stage, forage exhibits lower degradation and fiber digestion rates, tends to increase ruminal fill and reduces the passage rate (Kp) (Van Soest, 1994). Passage rates can be mathematically calculated based on independent variables related to the animal or diet. In predicting the Kp potential, special attention must be paid to the ingestion of indigestible particles and to the animal’s live weight (Cannas and Van Soest, 2000). Changes in the fibrous particle passage rate seem directly associated with a higher NDF degradation rate (Russell, 2002; Detmann et al., 2014). The pdNDF degradation reduces gas production and increases the relative concentration of the iNDF fraction of the particle, which is typically denser due to higher phenolic compound content.


 CONCLUSION

C4 grass mesophyll is more slowly digested, even under rapid ruminal degradation, than C3 species due to high cell density in C4 forages. In C3 species, cells are more loosely arranged and exhibit few cell-to-cell adhesion points. Tropical forage typically features less soluble carbohydrate and high cell wall content. Lignification tends to be most intense in structural tissues such as xylem and sclerenchyma are virtually indigestible and remain intact in the ruminal fluid after long incubation times.
 
Plant cell wall lignification is a process that cannot be avoided because it would harm plant structure; however, it hinders nutrient availability for ruminants. Plants with higher growth rate have higher accumulation of lignin hindering access to components of the cell wall by microorganisms because increase the iNDF.


 CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors have not declared any conflict of interests.



 REFERENCES

Akin DE (1982). Section to slide technique for study of forage anatomy and digestion. Crop Sci. 22:444-446.
Crossref
 

Akin DE (1989). Histological and physical factors affecting digestibility of forages. Agron. J. 81:17-25.
Crossref
 

Akin DE, Amos HE, Barton FE, Burdick D (1973). Rumen microbial degradation of grass tissue by scanning electron microscopy. Agron. J. 65:825-888.
Crossref
 

Akin DE, Burdick D (1975). Percentage of tissue types in tropical and temperate grass leaf blades and degradation of tissues by rumen microorganisms. Crop Sci. 15:661-668.
Crossref
 

Akin DE, Robinson EL (1982). Structure of leaves and stems of arrow leaf and crimson clovers as related to in vitro digestibility. Crop Sci. 22:24-29.
Crossref
 

Akin DE, Wilson JR, Windham WR (1983). Site and rate of tissue digestion in leaves of C3, C4 and C3 / C4 intermediate types of Panicum species. Crop Sci. 23:147-55.
Crossref
 

Allen MS (1996). Physical constraints on voluntary intake of forages by ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. 74:3063-3075.
 

Aoki Y, Oshita T, Namekawa H, Nemoto E, Aoki M (2013). Effect of cutting height on the chemical composition, nutritional value and yield, fermentative quality and aerobic stability of corn silage and relationship with plant maturity at harvest. Grassland Sci. 59(4):211-222.
Crossref
 

Aschenbach JR, Penner GB, Stumpff F, Gabel G (2014). Ruminant nutrition symposium: Role of fermentation acid absorption in the regulation of ruminal pH. J. Anim. Sci. 89:1092-1107.
Crossref
 

Barcellos ADO, Ramos AKB, Vilela L, Junior M, Bueno G (2008). Sustentabilidade da produção animal baseada em pastagens consorciadas e no emprego de leguminosas exclusivas, na forma de banco de proteína, nos trópicos brasileiros. Rev. Bras. Zootec. 37(SPE):51-67.
 

Batistoti C, Lempp B, Jank L, Morais MG, Cubas AC, Gomes RA, Ferreira MVB (2012). Correlations among anatomical, morphological, chemical and agronomic characteristics of leaf blades in Panicum maximum genotypes. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 171:173-180.
Crossref
 

Baurhoo B, Ruiz-Feria CA, Zhao X (2008). Purified lignin: Nutritional and health impacts on farm animals-A review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 144:175-184.
Crossref
 

Beauchemin KA, Yang WZ (2005). Effects of physically effective fiber on intake, chewing activity, and ruminal acidosis for dairy cows fed diets based on corn silage. J. Dairy Sci. 88:2117-2129.
Crossref
 

Berlyn GP, Cho J (2000) Light, moisture, and nutrient use by plants. In: Ashton MS, Montagnini F (Eds.). The silvicultural basis for agroforestry systems. Boca Raton: CRC Press. pp. 9-39.
 

Bohn PJ, Brown RH, Akin DE (1988). In vitro dry matter digestibility, leaf anatomy, and fiber concentration of a hybrid between C3 and C3-C4 Panicum species. Crop Sci. 28:332-336.
Crossref
 

Bonelli EA, Zanine AM, Souza AL, Ferreira DJ, Alves GR (2013). Ruminal degradability of Guinea grass silage inoculated with Streptoccocus bovis isolated from bovine rumen combined or not with com wheat bran. Agric. Sci. 4(12):628-634.
Crossref
 

Brito CJFA, Deschamps FC (2001). Caracterização Anatômica em Diferentes Frações de Cultivares de Capim-elefante (Pennisetum purpureum Schumach.) Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 30:1409-1417.
Crossref
 

Brito CJFA, Rodella RA, Deschamps FC (2004). Anatomia Quantitativa da Folha e do Colmo de Brachiaria brizantha (Hochst. Ex A. Rich.) Stapf e B. humidícula (Rendle) Schweick. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 33:519-528.
 

Cannas A, Van Soest PJ (2000). Simple allometric model to predict rumen feed passage rate in domestic ruminants. In: JP McNamara, France J, Beever DE (Eds.). Modelling Nutrient Utilization in Farm Animals London: CAB International, pp. 49-62.
Crossref
 

Cardoso S (2013). Acúmulo de massa seca verde e características anatômicas, químicas e biológicas das lâminas foliares de capim-massai sob doses de calcário e nitrogênio. Ph.D. Teses. UFGD, Dourados MS, Brazil. 91 p.
 

Carvalho GGP, Pires AJ (2008a). Leguminosas Tropicais Herbáceas Em Associação Com Pastagens. Arch. Zootec. 57:103-113.
 

Carvalho GGP, Pires AJ (2008b). Organização dos tecidos de plantas forrageiras e suas implicações para os ruminantes. Arch. Zootec. 57:13-28.
 

Cieslak A, Szumacher-Strabel M, Stochmal A, Oleszek W (2013). Plant components with specific activities against rumen methanogens. Animal 7:253-265.
Crossref
 

Dabo SM, Taliaferro CM, Coleman SW (1997). Anatomical and histological factors affecting the ruminal degradation of stem tissues in Bothriochloa species. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 67:299-309.
Crossref
 

Detmann E, Paulino MF, Mantovani HC, Valadares Filho SC, Sampaio CB, Souza MA, Lazzarinni I, Detmann KSC (2009). Parameterization of ruminal fibre degradation in low quality tropical forage using Michaelis-Menten kinetics. Livest. Sci. 126(1):136-146.
Crossref
 

Detmann E, Paulino MF, Valadares Filho SC, Huhtanen P (2014). Nutritional aspects applied to grazing cattle in the tropics: A review based on Brazilian results. Semina: Ciênc. Agrárias 35(4):2829-2854.
Crossref
 

Ellis WC, Matis JH, Hill TM (1994). Methodology for estimating digestion and passage kinetics of forages. In: Fahey Jr GC (Ed.) Forage quality, evaluation, and utilization. Wisconsin: Am. Soc. Agron. pp. 682-756.
 

Figueiras JF, Detmann E, Valadares Filho SC, Paulino MF, Batista ED, Rufino LMA, Valente TNP, Reis WLS, Franco MO (2015). Desempenho nutricional de bovinos em pastejo durante o período de transição seca-águas recebendo suplementação proteica. Arch. Zootec. 64(247):269-276.
 

Figueiras JF, Detmann E, Paulino MF, Valente TNP, Valadares Filho SC, Lazzarini I (2010). Intake and digestibility in cattle under grazing supplemented with nitrogenous compounds during dry season. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 39:1303-1312.
Crossref
 

Gasser M, Ramos J, Vegetti A, Tivano JC (2005). Digestión de láminas foliares de Bromus auleticus Trin. ex Nees sometidas a diferentes tiempos de incubación ruminal. Agric. Téc. 65:48-54.
 

Gobbi KF, Garcia R, Ventrella MC (2011). Specific leaf area and quantitative leaf anatomy of signal grass and forage peanut submitted to shading. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 40(7):1436-1444.
 

Gomes DI, Detmann E, Valadares Filho SC, Fukushima RS, Souza MA, Valente TNP, Paulino MF, Queiroz AC (2011). Evaluation of lignin contents in tropical forages using different analytical methods and their correlations with degradation of insoluble fiber. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 168:206-222.
Crossref
 

Gowik U, Westhoff P (2011). The Path from C3 to C4 Photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. 155(1):56-63.
Crossref
 

Hanna WW, Monson WG, Burton GW (1973). Histological examination of fresh forages leaves after "in vitro" digestion. Crop Sci.13:98-102.
Crossref
 

Jardine K, Chambers J, Alves EG, Teixeira A, Garcia S, Holm J, Higuchi N, Manzi A, Abrell L, Fuentes JD, Nielsen LK, Torn MS, Vickers CE (2014). Dynamic Balancing of Isoprene Carbon Sources Reflects Photosynthetic and Photorespiratory Responses to Temperature Stress. Plant Physiol. 166:2015-2064.
Crossref
 

Jung HG, Allen MS (1995). Characteristics of plant cell walls affecting intake and digestibility forages by ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. 73:2774-2790.
 

Jung HG, Deetz DA (1993). Cell wall lignification and degradability. Forage cell wall structure and digestibility, (forage cellwalls), pp. 315-346.
Crossref
 

Krause DO, Nagaraja TG, Wright ADG, Callaway TR (2014). Board-invited review: Rumen microbiology: Leading the way in microbial ecology. J. Anim. Sci. 91:331-341.
Crossref
 

Lambers H, Chapim FS, Pons TL (1998). Plant physiological ecology. New York: Springer. 540 p.
Crossref
 

Lempp B, Euclides VPB, Morais MG, Victor DM (2000). Avaliação do resíduo da digestão de três cultivares de Panicum maximum. In: Reunião Anual da Sociedade Bras. Zootec. 37. Viçosa, MG.Brazil.
 

Makkar HPS (2003). Effects and fate of tannins in ruminant animals, adaptation to tannins, and strategies to overcome detrimental effects of feeding tannin-rich feeds. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 49:241-256.
Crossref
 

Márquez A, Mendoza G, Pinos-Rodríguez JM, Zavaleta H, Gonzalez S, Buntinx S, Loera O, Meneses M (2009). Effect of fibrolytic enzymes and incubation pH on in vitro degradation of NDF extracts of alfalfa and orchardgrass. Italian J. Anim. Sci. 8:221-230.
Crossref
 

Mertens DR (2003). Challenges in measuring insoluble dietary fiber. J. Anim Sci. 81: 3233-3249.
 

Minson DJ, Wilson JR (1980). Comparative digestibility of tropical and temperate forage a contrast between grasses and legumes. J. Aust. Inst. Agric. Sci. 46:247-249.
 

Mokhele B, Zhan X, Yang G, Zhang X (2012). Can. J. Plant Sci. 92:399-405.
Crossref
 

Monteiro HCF, Cantarutti RB, Nascimento JRD (1998). Dinâmica de decomposição e mineralização de nitrogênio em função da qualidade de resíduos de gramíneas e leguminosas forrageiras. Braz. J. Anim Sci. 31:1092-1102.
 

Monties B (1991). Plant cell walls as fibrous lignocellulosic composites: Relations with lignin structure and function. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 32:159-175.
Crossref
 

Moore KJ, Jung HJ (2001). Lignin and fiber digestion. J. Range Manage. 54:420-430.
Crossref
 

Morales M, Ungerfeld EM (2015). Use of tannins to improve fatty acids profile of meat and milk quality in ruminants: A review. Chilean J. Agric. Res. 75(2):239-248.
Crossref
 

Odum EP (1983). Basic ecologic. Philadelphia: CBS College Publishing.
 

Oliveira E, Monção F Gabriel P, Araújo AM, Góes RHTB, Lempp B, Moura LV (2014). Ruminal degradability of neutral detergent fiber of Cynodon spp. grasses at four regrowth ages. Acta Sci. Anim. Sci. 36(2):201-208.
Crossref
 

Paciullo DSC (2000). Características anatômicas e nutricionais delâminas foliares e colmos de gramíneas forrageiras, em função do nível de inserção no perfilho, da idade e da estação de crescimento. Ph.D. Tese. In Animal Science. Viçosa-Brazil. Universidade Federal de Viçosa. 104 p.
 

Queiroz DS, Gomide JA, Maria J (2000a). Avaliação da folha e do colmo de topo e base de perfilhos de três gramíneas forrageiras. 1. Digestibilidade in vitro e composição química. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 29:53-60.
Crossref
 

Queiroz DS, Gomide JA, Maria J (2000b). Avaliação da Folha e do Colmo de Topo e Base de Perfilhos de Três Gramíneas Forrageiras. 2. Anatomia. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 29:61-68.
Crossref
 

Rossatto DR, Kolb RM, Franco AC (2015). Leaf anatomy is associated with the type of growth form in Neotropical savanna plants. Botany 93(8):507-518.
Crossref
 

Russell JB (2002). Rumen Microbiology and its role in ruminant nutrition. Ithaca, N.Y. James B. Russell.119 p.
 

Sage R, Stata M (2015). Review. Photosynthetic diversity meets biodiversity: The C4 plant example. J. Plant Physiol. 172:104-119.
Crossref
 

Sage RF, de Melo PM, Friesen P, Deen B (2015). C4 bioenergy crops for cool climates, with special emphasis on perennial C4 grasses. J. Exp. Bot. 66(14):4195-4212.
Crossref
 

Sharkey TD, Weise SE (2015). The glucose 6-phosphate shunt around the Calvin–Benson cycle. J. Exp. Bot. pp. 1768-1779.
Crossref
 

Silva VJ, Dubeux Jr JCB, Teixeira VI, Santos MVF, Lira MA, Mello ACL (2010). Morphologic and productive characteristics of tropical forage legumes under two harvest frequencies. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 39:97-102.
 

Smith RA, Schuetz M, Roach M, Mansfiel SD, Ellis B, Samuels L (2013). Neighboring Parenchyma Cells Contribute to Arabidopsis Xylem Lignification, while Lignification of Interfascicular Fibers Is Cell Autonomous. Plant Cell 25:3988-3999.
Crossref
 

Sun XZ, Joblin KN, Andrew IG, Hoskin SO, Harris PJ (2008). Degradation of forage chicory by ruminal fibrolytic bacteria. J. Appl. Microbiol. 105:1286-1297.
Crossref
 

Valente TNP, Detmann E, Queiroz AC, Valadares Filho SC, Gomes DI, Figueiras JF (2011c). Evaluation of ruminal degradation profiles of forages using bags made from different textiles. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 40:2565-2573.
Crossref
 

Valente TNP, Detmann E, Sampaio CB (2015). Review: Recent advances in evaluation of bags made from different textiles used in situ ruminal degradation. Can. J. Anim Sci. 95:493-498.
Crossref
 

Valente TNP, Detmann E, Valadares Filho SC, Cunha M, Queiroz AC, Sampaio CB (2011b). In situ estimation of indigestible compounds contents in cattle feed and feces using bags made from different textiles. Braz. J. Anim. Sci. 40:666-675.
Crossref
 

Valente TNP, Lima ES, Henriques LT, Machado Neto OR, Gomes DI, Sampaio CB, Costa VAC (2011a). Anatomia de plantas forrageiras e a disponibilidade de nutrientes para ruminantes. Vet. Zootec. 18:347-358.
 

Valente TNP, Lima SE, Santos WBR, Cesario AS (2016). Ruminal microorganism consideration and protein used in the metabolism of the ruminants: A Review. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 10(14):456-464.
Crossref
 

Van Soest PJ (1967). Development of a comprehensive system of feeds analysis and its applications to forages. J. Anim. Sci. 26:119-128.
 

Van Soest PJ (1994). Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Comstock Publication. Association. Ithaca, 476 p.
 

Wilkins RJ (1972).The potential digestibility of cellulose in grasses and its relationship with chemical and anatomical parameters. J Agric. Sci. 78:457-464.
Crossref
 

Wilson JR (1976). Variation of leaf characteristics with level of insertion on a grass tiller. ii. anatomy. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 27:355-364.
Crossref
 

Wilson JR (1993). Organization of forage plant tissues. Forage cell wall structure and digestibility, (foragecellwalls) pp. 1-32.
 

Wilson JR (1997). Structural and anatomical traits of forages influencing their nutritive value for ruminants. Simpósio Internacional sobre Produção Animal em Pastejo. pp. 173-208.
 

Wilson JR, Deinum B, Engels FM (1991). Temperature effects on anatomy and digestibility of leaf and stem of tropical and temperate forage species. Netherlands J. Agric. Sci. 39:31-48.
 

Yamaoka C, Suzuki Y, Makino A (2015). Differential expression of genes of the calvin–benson cycle and its related genes during leaf development in rice. Plant Cell Physiol. 10 p.
 

Yang WZ, Beauchemin KA (2007). Altering physically effective fiber intake through forage proportion and particle length: digestion and milk production. J. Dairy Sci. 90:3410-3421.
Crossref
 

Zhang J, Yin B, Xie Y, Li J, Yang Z, Zhang G (2015). Legume-Cereal Intercropping Improves Forage Yield, Quality and Degradability. PLoS ONE 10(12):e0144813.
Crossref
 

Zorić L, Mikić A, Ćupina B, Luković J, Krstić D, Antanasović S (2014).Digestibility-related histological attributes of vegetative organs of barrel medic (Medicago truncatula Gaertn.) cultivars. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture 101(3):257-264.
Crossref

 




Copyright © 2025 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.

This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

Back to Vol. 11 No. 18
Back to articles
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
SUBMIT MANUSCRIPT
CONFERENCES
          */?>