Mechanistic modelling of in vitro fermentation and methane production by rumen microbiota

Abstract Existing mechanistic models of the rumen ecosystem have proven to be useful to better understand and represent rumen fermentation. Opportunities for improving rumen fermentation models include a better representation of the microbiota, hydrogen dynamics and a mechanistic description of pH. The objective of this work was to include such aspects in the development of a mathematical model of rumen fermentation under in vitro conditions. The developed model integrates microbial metabolism, acid–base reactions and liquid–gas transfer. Model construction was based on an aggregated representation of the hydrolysis of carbohydrates and proteins, and the further fermentation of soluble monomers. The model is a differential algebraic equation model with 18 compartments. One of the main contributions of the model developed here resides in the mechanistic description of pH, the use of biochemical reactions and partition rules to define the stoichiometry of fermentation, the representation of hydrogen metabolism, and the representation of the rumen microbiota into functional groups associated with the utilization of hexoses, amino acids and hydrogen. The model was calibrated with published data from a 2 × 2 factorial experiment devoted to assessing the relative importance of the type of inoculum and substrate on the fermentation pattern. The treatments were the level of concentrate in the substrate (low concentrate vs. high concentrate), and the inocula type (obtained from goats fed at low or high concentrate). The model was implemented in Matlab. The code is available on request for academic purposes. Model evaluation was performed by regression analysis and the calculation of statistical indicators using the model predicted values and observed values. The model was capable to represent in a satisfactory fashion the dynamics of the fermentation, that is the pH, the individual volatile fatty acids and the gas compounds, namely methane, hydrogen and carbon dioxide. The model predictions exhibited high concordance correlation coefficients (CCC). For the pH and the CH 4 , the CCC was of 0.91 and 0.93 respectively. For the other variables CCC >0.96. The model developed was instrumental to quantify the differences of the fermentation pattern between the treatment combinations. These differences were mainly captured by parameters related to the flux distribution and were found to be dependent mainly on the type of inoculum. For instance, the flux towards butyrate production from sugars utilization for the microbiota of the inoculum adapted to high concentrate was about 30% higher than that for the inoculum adapted to low concentrate. This result, however, requires further validation with new data. Further developments are needed to incorporate physiological in vivo factors into our model. Nevertheless, the structure developed here appears to be a promising approach for enhancing the mechanistic description of the rumen microbial ecosystem.

[1]  J. France,et al.  Estimation of the stoichiometry of volatile fatty acid production in the rumen of lactating cows. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[2]  J. Cant,et al.  Non-steady-state modeling of effects of timing and level of concentrate supplementation on ruminal pH and forage intake in high-producing, grazing ewes. , 2005, Journal of animal science.

[3]  R. L. Baldwin,et al.  Quantitative and dynamic aspects of nitrogen metabolism in the rumen: a modeling analysis. , 1979, Journal of animal science.

[4]  D. Sauvant,et al.  Effects of the percentage of concentrate on rumen fermentation, nutrient digestibility, plasma metabolites, and milk composition in mid-lactation goats. , 2011, Journal of dairy science.

[5]  M. Hanigan,et al.  A modified version of the Molly rumen model to quantify methane emissions from sheep. , 2015, Journal of animal science.

[6]  L. Raab,et al.  The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro , 1979, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[7]  J. France,et al.  A dynamic mechanistic model of lactic acid metabolism in the rumen. , 2014, Journal of dairy science.

[8]  R. Wallace,et al.  Incorporation of [15N]Ammonia by the Cellulolytic Ruminal Bacteria Fibrobacter succinogenesBL2, Ruminococcus albus SY3, and Ruminococcus flavefaciens 17 , 2001, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[9]  L. Lin,et al.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. , 1989, Biometrics.

[10]  D. Sauvant,et al.  Fractionation of pea flour with pilot scale sieving. II. In vitro fermentation of pea seed fractions of different particle sizes , 2009 .

[11]  Jérôme Harmand,et al.  A model of a syntrophic relationship between two microbial species in a chemostat including maintenance. , 2016, Mathematical biosciences.

[12]  J. Paruelo,et al.  How to evaluate models : Observed vs. predicted or predicted vs. observed? , 2008 .

[13]  A. Offner,et al.  Comparative evaluation of the Molly, CNCPS, and LES rumen models , 2004 .

[14]  Eugene E. Petersen,et al.  Chemical Reaction Analysis , 1965 .

[15]  Eric Walter,et al.  Kinetic modelling of lactate utilization and butyrate production by key human colonic bacterial species. , 2011, FEMS microbiology ecology.

[16]  R. Boston,et al.  The role of thermodynamics in controlling rumen metabolism. , 2000 .

[17]  A. Offner,et al.  Effects of inoculum source, pH, redox potential and headspace di-hydrogen on rumen in vitro fermentation yields. , 2014, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[18]  Eric Walter,et al.  Identification of Parametric Models: from Experimental Data , 1997 .

[19]  J. A. Robinson,et al.  Kinetics of Hydrogen Consumption by Rumen Fluid, Anaerobic Digestor Sludge, and Sediment , 1982, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[20]  P. Pullammanappallil,et al.  Protein degradation during anaerobic wastewater treatment: derivation of stoichiometry , 2004, Biodegradation.

[21]  J. France,et al.  A mechanistic model of whole-tract digestion and methanogenesis in the lactating dairy cow: model development, evaluation, and application. , 2001, Journal of animal science.

[22]  J Dijkstra,et al.  Simulation of the dynamics of protozoz in the rumen , 1994, British Journal of Nutrition.

[23]  T. Miller,et al.  Microbe-microbe interactions , 1997 .

[24]  R. L. Baldwin,et al.  Rumen modeling: rumen input-output balance models. , 1975, Journal of dairy science.

[25]  J. Doré,et al.  Mathematical modelling of carbohydrate degradation by human colonic microbiota. , 2010, Journal of theoretical biology.

[26]  R. Dewhurst,et al.  Proportions of volatile fatty acids in relation to the chemical composition of feeds based on grass silage. , 1998, Journal of dairy science.

[27]  J. Dijkstra,et al.  A model of enteric fermentation in dairy cows to estimate methane emission for the Dutch National Inventory Report using the IPCC Tier 3 approach , 2011 .

[28]  A. Strathe,et al.  Ruminal pH regulation and nutritional consequences of low pH , 2012 .

[29]  R. L. Baldwin,et al.  Modeling of rumen water kinetics and effects of rumen pH changes. , 1988, Journal of dairy science.

[30]  J. Dolfing,et al.  Maintenance affects the stability of a two-tiered microbial 'food chain'? , 2011, Journal of theoretical biology.

[31]  R. Kleerebezem,et al.  Flux analysis of the human proximal colon using anaerobic digestion model 1. , 2014, Anaerobe.

[32]  M. Herrero,et al.  The influence of diet of the donor animal on the initial bacterial concentration of ruminal fluid and in vitro gas production degradability parameters. , 2000 .

[33]  B. Brunt,et al.  A mechanistic model of hydrogen-methanogen dynamics in the rumen. , 2016, Journal of theoretical biology.

[34]  Irini Angelidaki,et al.  Anaerobic digestion model No. 1 (ADM1) , 2002 .

[35]  M. Cotta,et al.  Metabolism of nitrogen-containing compounds , 1997 .

[36]  D. Sauvant,et al.  In vivo production and molar percentages of volatile fatty acids in the rumen: a quantitative review by an empirical approach. , 2011, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[37]  R L Baldwin,et al.  Metabolism of the lactating cow: II. Digestive elements of a mechanistic model , 1987, Journal of Dairy Research.

[38]  M. Murphy,et al.  Estimation of stoichiometric parameters for rumen fermentation of roughage and concentrate diets. , 1982, Journal of animal science.

[39]  Eric Walter,et al.  IDEAS: A Parameter Identification Toolbox with Symbolic Analysis of Uncertainty and Its Application to Biological Modelling , 2009 .

[40]  D. Sauvant,et al.  In vitro fermentation of total mixed diets differing in concentrate proportion: relative effects of inocula and substrates. , 2016, Journal of the science of food and agriculture.

[41]  R. Kohn,et al.  Calculation of the buffering capacity of bicarbonate in the rumen and in vitro. , 1998, Journal of animal science.

[42]  J. Dijkstra,et al.  Aspects of rumen microbiology central to mechanistic modelling of methane production in cattle , 2008, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[43]  P. Janssen Influence of hydrogen on rumen methane formation and fermentation balances through microbial growth kinetics and fermentation thermodynamics , 2010 .

[44]  Ermias Kebreab,et al.  Rumen stoichiometric models and their contribution and challenges in predicting enteric methane production , 2011 .

[45]  E. L. Cox,et al.  Model of cellulose disappearance from the rumen. , 1972, Journal of dairy science.

[46]  D. Sauvant,et al.  Development of a mechanistic model for rumen digestion validated using the duodenal flux of amino acids. , 1995, Reproduction, nutrition, development.

[47]  Jeffrey C. Lagarias,et al.  Convergence Properties of the Nelder-Mead Simplex Method in Low Dimensions , 1998, SIAM J. Optim..

[48]  A Bach,et al.  Nitrogen metabolism in the rumen. , 2005, Journal of dairy science.

[49]  R. Pieper,et al.  Determination of Henry's constant, the dissociation constant, and the buffer capacity of the bicarbonate system in ruminal fluid. , 2016, Journal of dairy science.

[50]  A. Offner,et al.  Thermodynamic modeling of ruminal fermentations , 2006 .

[51]  C. Martin,et al.  Microbial ecosystem and methanogenesis in ruminants. , 2010, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[52]  J M Lema,et al.  Variable stoichiometry with thermodynamic control in ADM1. , 2006, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[53]  J. Russell,et al.  Energy-yielding and energy-consuming reactions , 1997 .

[54]  D. Sauvant,et al.  A mechanistic model of pH and gas exchanges in the rumen and its in vitro application , 2011 .

[55]  C. Martin,et al.  Influence of rumen protozoa on methane emission in ruminants: a meta-analysis approach. , 2014, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[56]  J. France,et al.  Simulation of nutrient digestion, absorption and outflow in the rumen: model description. , 1992, The Journal of nutrition.

[57]  Z. Tan,et al.  Sampling procedure for the measurement of dissolved hydrogen and volatile fatty acids in the rumen of dairy cows. , 2016, Journal of animal science.

[58]  J. Russell,et al.  An rRNA approach for assessing the role of obligate amino acid-fermenting bacteria in ruminal amino acid deamination , 1996, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[59]  Santiago García-Gen,et al.  Generalised modelling approach for anaerobic co-digestion of fermentable substrates. , 2013, Bioresource technology.

[60]  D Vrecko,et al.  Implementing ADM1 for plant-wide benchmark simulations in Matlab/Simulink. , 2006, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[61]  A. Holmberg On the practical identifiability of microbial growth models incorporating Michaelis-Menten type nonlinearities , 1982 .

[62]  P. Bodegom Microbial Maintenance: A Critical Review on Its Quantification , 2007, Microbial Ecology.

[63]  Lawrence F. Shampine,et al.  The MATLAB ODE Suite , 1997, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..