Suppr超能文献

反刍动物对灌木和草类食物的适应:基于解剖学的食叶动物-食草动物解释是否有效?

Adaptation of ruminants to browse and grass diets: are anatomical-based browser-grazer interpretations valid?

作者信息

Robbins Charles T, Spalinger Donald E, van Hoven Wouter

机构信息

Department of Natural Resource Sciences and Zoology, Washington State University, 99164-6410, Pullman, WA, USA.

Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&M University, 1619 Garner Field Road, 78801, Uvalde, TX, USA.

出版信息

Oecologia. 1995 Aug;103(2):208-213. doi: 10.1007/BF00329082.

Abstract

As a result of pioneering work of Hofmann (1973, 1989), nutritional ecologists classify ruminants into three feeding-type categories: browsers ("concentrate" feeders), grazers, and intermediate or mixed feeders. Hofmann proposed that these feeding types result from evolutionary adaptations in the anatomy of the digestive system and that one consequence is shorter retention of the digesta in the rumen of browsers, and thus a decreased efficiency of fiber digestion relative to that of grazers. We examined the hypotheses that (1) fiber digestion of browsers is lower than that of grazers, (2) salivary gland size is larger in all browsers than in grazers, (3) the browser's larger salivary glands produce larger volumes of thin serous saliva than those of grazers, and (4) thus, browsers have higher liquid passage rates than do grazers. We found that the extent of fiber digestion is not significantly different between browsers and grazers, although fiber digestion is positively related to herbivore size. In general, salivary gland size is approximately 4 times larger in browsers than grazers, but some browsers (e.g., greater kudu) have small, grazer-sized salivary glands. Resting (non-feeding or ruminating) saliva flow rates of mule deer (browser) and domestic sheep and cattle (grazers) were not significantly different from each other. Finally, ruminal liquid flow rates were not different between feeding types. We conclude that many of Hofmann's nutritional and physiological interpretations of anatomical differences amongst ruminants are not supportable.

摘要

由于霍夫曼(1973年、1989年)的开创性工作,营养生态学家将反刍动物分为三种采食类型:食叶动物(“精料”采食者)、食草动物以及中间型或混合型采食者。霍夫曼提出,这些采食类型是消化系统解剖结构进化适应的结果,其一个后果是食叶动物瘤胃中食糜的停留时间较短,因此相对于食草动物,纤维消化效率降低。我们检验了以下假设:(1)食叶动物的纤维消化率低于食草动物;(2)所有食叶动物的唾液腺都比食草动物的大;(3)食叶动物较大的唾液腺产生的稀薄浆液性唾液量比食草动物的多;(4)因此,食叶动物的液体通过率比食草动物高。我们发现,尽管纤维消化率与食草动物体型呈正相关,但食叶动物和食草动物之间的纤维消化程度没有显著差异。一般来说,食叶动物的唾液腺大小约是食草动物的4倍,但一些食叶动物(如大林羚)的唾液腺较小,与食草动物的大小相当。骡鹿(食叶动物)与家养绵羊和牛(食草动物)的静息(非采食或反刍)唾液流速彼此之间没有显著差异。最后,不同采食类型之间的瘤胃液流速也没有差异。我们得出结论,霍夫曼对反刍动物解剖差异的许多营养和生理学解释是不成立的。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验