UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

The digestive performance of mammalian herbivores: why big may not be that much better


Clauss, Marcus; Hummel, J (2005). The digestive performance of mammalian herbivores: why big may not be that much better. Mammal Review, 35(2):174-187.

Abstract

1. A traditional approach to the nutritional ecology of herbivores is that larger animals can tolerate a diet of lesser quality due to a higher digestive efficiency bestowed on them by comparatively long ingesta retention times and lower relative energy requirements.

2. There are important physiological disadvantages that larger animals must compensate for, namely a lower gut surface : gut volume ratio, larger ingesta particle size and greater losses of faecal bacterial material due to more fermentation. Compensating adaptations could include an increased surface enlargement in larger animals, increased absorption rates per unit of gut surface, and increased gut motility to enhance mixing of ingesta.

3. A lower surface : volume ratio, particularly in sacciform forestomach structures, could be a reason for the fact that methane production is of significant scope mainly in large herbivores and not in small herbivores with comparably long retention times; in the latter, the substrate for methanogenesis – the volatile fatty acids – could be absorbed faster due to a more favourable gut surface : volume ratio.

4. Existing data suggest that in herbivores, an increase in fibre digestibility is not necessarily accompanied by an increase in overall apparent dry matter digestibility. This indicates a comparative decrease of the apparent digestibility of non-fibre material, either due to a lesser utilization of non-fibre substrate or an increased loss of endogenous/bacterial substance. Quantitative research on these mechanisms is warranted in order to evaluate whether an increase in body size represents a net increase of digestive efficiency or just a shift of digestive focus.

1. A traditional approach to the nutritional ecology of herbivores is that larger animals can tolerate a diet of lesser quality due to a higher digestive efficiency bestowed on them by comparatively long ingesta retention times and lower relative energy requirements.

2. There are important physiological disadvantages that larger animals must compensate for, namely a lower gut surface : gut volume ratio, larger ingesta particle size and greater losses of faecal bacterial material due to more fermentation. Compensating adaptations could include an increased surface enlargement in larger animals, increased absorption rates per unit of gut surface, and increased gut motility to enhance mixing of ingesta.

3. A lower surface : volume ratio, particularly in sacciform forestomach structures, could be a reason for the fact that methane production is of significant scope mainly in large herbivores and not in small herbivores with comparably long retention times; in the latter, the substrate for methanogenesis – the volatile fatty acids – could be absorbed faster due to a more favourable gut surface : volume ratio.

4. Existing data suggest that in herbivores, an increase in fibre digestibility is not necessarily accompanied by an increase in overall apparent dry matter digestibility. This indicates a comparative decrease of the apparent digestibility of non-fibre material, either due to a lesser utilization of non-fibre substrate or an increased loss of endogenous/bacterial substance. Quantitative research on these mechanisms is warranted in order to evaluate whether an increase in body size represents a net increase of digestive efficiency or just a shift of digestive focus.

Citations

43 citations in Web of Science®
46 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

3 downloads since deposited on 02 Dec 2008
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, further contribution
Communities & Collections:05 Vetsuisse Faculty > Veterinary Clinic > Department of Small Animals
Dewey Decimal Classification:570 Life sciences; biology
630 Agriculture
Language:English
Date:2005
Deposited On:02 Dec 2008 10:17
Last Modified:14 Sep 2016 13:36
Publisher:Wiley-Blackwell
ISSN:0305-1838
Publisher DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2907.2005.00062.x
Permanent URL: http://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-3500

Download

[img]
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 1MB
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations