Steiner S, Neidl A, Linhart N, Tichy A, Gasteiner J, Gallob K, Baumgartner W, Wittek T
Department of Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University Clinic for Ruminants, University of Veterinary Medicine (Vetmeduni) Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, Vienna 1210, Austria.
Department for Biomedical Science, Platform Biostatistics, University of Veterinary Medicine (Vetmeduni) Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, Vienna 1210, Austria.
Vet Rec. 2015 Jan 10;176(2):50. doi: 10.1136/vr.102399. Epub 2014 Oct 20.
The objective of the study was to compare the performance of five types of stomach tubes for rumen fluid sampling. Rumen fluid was sampled in rumen fistulated cows assigned to a 5×5 Latin square study design. The pH values of samples taken by stomach tubes and via fistulas were measured; the results were compared with indwelling sensor measurements. The practicability of the stomach tubes for regular use was tested in the field. Rumen fluid samples were obtained rapidly. Volumes for transfaunation could be obtained. The pH-values of samples taken with the four out of the five tubes (Dirksen, Geishauser, tube 4 and a simple water hose used with a gag) did not show significant differences to samples taken via rumen fistulas. Mean differences ranged between -0.02 and +0.09. Samples taken with tube 4 and the water hose showed also no significant differences to pH-sensor measurements. This study demonstrates that stomach tubes are suitable for rumen fluid sampling. Tube 4 seems to be the best probe for work in the field. It was well tolerated by the animals, saliva contamination is negligible. We, therefore, conclude that the evaluation of rumen acid base status in the field is possible.
本研究的目的是比较五种类型的胃管用于瘤胃液采样的性能。在采用5×5拉丁方研究设计的瘤胃造瘘奶牛中采集瘤胃液。测量通过胃管和经瘘管采集的样本的pH值；将结果与留置传感器测量值进行比较。在实地测试了胃管常规使用的实用性。瘤胃液样本采集迅速。可以获得用于接种动物的液体量。五种胃管中的四种（Dirksen、Geishauser、4号管以及带开口器使用的简单水管）采集的样本的pH值与经瘤胃瘘管采集的样本相比无显著差异。平均差异在-0.02至+0.09之间。4号管和水管采集的样本与pH传感器测量值相比也无显著差异。本研究表明胃管适用于瘤胃液采样。4号管似乎是实地工作的最佳探头。动物对其耐受性良好，唾液污染可忽略不计。因此，我们得出结论，在实地评估瘤胃酸碱状态是可行的。
