Oilseed Supplementation Improves Fatty Acid Profile of Milk: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 1 by RODOLFO VIEYRA-ALBERTO and Version 3 by Dean Liu.

This entry is adapted from: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12131642  

Milk is the most consumed dairy product in the world and for humans is one of the major sources of beneficial biocomponents. Lipids from oilseeds can be transferred to milk from cows or converted to other biomolecules with nutraceutical effects, resulting in healthier milk.

  • CLA
  • atherogenic index
  • milk fatty acid
  • experimental design

1. Introduction

The increased consumer concern for the diet–health relationship has increased the attention of nutritionists and animal scientists on the health-beneficial effects of individual foods [1]. Bovine milk is considered as one of the most complete foods with a rich variety of essential nutrients and biocomponents [2]. In this sense, the assessment of milk’s fatty acid (FA) profile has been of great importance in recent decades. Milk fat is the richest natural source of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), with contents that range from 2 to 53.7 mg g−1 [3]. The wide variability of CLA content can be explained by several factors such as breed, geographical region, and management; however, the most effective strategy to modulate milk’s FA profile is through dietary manipulation [4][5].
Conjugated linoleic acid is made up of a set of positional and geometric isomers of LA (C18:2 c9c12). CLA is an intermediate product in lipid metabolism and ruminal biohydrogenation, and is naturally found in milk and meat from ruminants [6]. CLA is particularly important because various studies using animal models or cell cultures, and some using humans, have found nutraceutical properties in its consumption, such as antiatherogenic [7], antidiabetogenic [8], anticarcinogenic [9][10][11] effects, and that it allows the modification of body composition [12].
The manipulation of diets fed to dairy cows determines variations in the fat profile of milk; for instance, the inclusion of ingredients with higher contents of monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA) and polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) increases the CLA [13]. Fat supplementation in dairy cow rations is mostly based on fats, oils and oilseeds from vegetable sources. When agro-climatic and economic conditions allow, oilseed supplementation has been widely used and evaluated due to their lower cost, higher UFA content and protein contribution to the ration compared to other strategies such as the use of oils. However, results from studies that have assessed the effect of oilseed inclusion in dairy cow rations have been inconsistent, which can be associated with differences in the methodological and experimental conditions, such as the inclusion level, content of precursors of basal diets and processing of oilseeds and animal variables which could potentially increase milk yield, fat content and FA transfer from oilseeds to milk [14].
Meta-analysis is a cross-disciplinary statistical framework for estimating the average effect associated with a determined intervention factor from several study outcomes under different experimental conditions; additionally, a random-effect model of meta-analysis can be expanded to a mixed-effect model to assess the sources of heterogeneity through meta-regression [15].

2. Milk Yield and Composition

The inclusion of oilseeds in the diet did not affect milk yield due to the isoenergetic balance between diets shown in the great majority of trials, thus not compromising the productive behavior of ruminants [16]. Similarly, Rabiee et al. [17] did not show a statistical difference with the use of oilseeds; however, it can increase milk production with the use of a different source of lipids, where the variation is attributed to the dry matter intake and energy content of the diet. The decrease in milk fat content is affected by the reduction in the action of bacterial fibrolytic enzymes, precursors of acetic fermentation [18], and the production of beta-hydroxybutyrate and some lipogenic enzymes necessary for de novo synthesis in the mammary gland of the main components in milk fat (short- and medium-chain FA) [17][19][20]. Additionally, at the rumen level, UFA has shown toxic effects on some microorganisms [21] by reducing microbial populations and their fermentative activity [22]. Sunflower, cottonseed and soybeans largely led to a reduction in milk fat, which seems to be related to the amount of LA (greater than 50 g 100 g−1 FA), although this is not clear. However, LA is thought to be a substrate in the production of trans isomers, which have been related to milk fat depression syndrome [23]. The supplementation of flaxseed and rapeseed had a lower effect on LA content, which can be associated with the saturation by alternative pathways of their major FA [22], resulting in a lower number of intermediate isomers that inhibit the de novo synthesis of FA in milk fat [23]. In cows, it has been estimated that for every 100 g of fat intake, 0.03% of milk protein is reduced [24].R In this researchersview, we assumed that the substitution of energy ingredients in starch-deficient ruminant diets, such as lipids, affects microbial protein synthesis [19], resulting in a decreased supply and absorption of amino acids in the duodenum, which are required for the formation of milk protein [25]. However, it is possible that milk protein is reduced by the relative decrease in ruminal microorganisms [20][22], caused by the presence of UFA in the rumen [21], which are the main components of the FA structure of the evaluated oilseeds. The obtained heterogeneity for response variables was reduced with the mixed model (meta-regression) in comparison with the random model. Therefore, theour results reveal that the used moderating variables covered a considerable proportion of the between-study variation and must be considered in the design of future studies.

3. Milk Fatty Acid Profile

The increase in OA in milk could be due to the contribution of OA, LA and LNA in the diet through oilseeds, where the final step in the rumen is the saturation to stearic FA, but in the mammary gland it is desaturated by the enzyme delta-9 desaturase to OA [17]; it should be remembered that the ruminal biohydrogenation pathway of LNA does not include the direct synthesis of OA [26]. In the same sense, LNA that managed to escape biohydrogenation in the rumen was reflected by the increase in its content in milk [23]. Similarly, an increase in these FA in milk was observed via the supplementation of soybean, rapeseed, sunflower and flaxseed in the diet of cows [27]. In contrast, Akraim et al. [28] achieved a high intake of LNA in dairy cows through linseed, but this FA was not expressed in milk. Vaccenic FA is a biohydrogenation intermediate that is related to the incomplete saturation of LA and LNA [23], the major FA of the oilseeds shown in this review. Theoretically, the presence of LA and LNA in the rumen favors the acceleration of the first step in biohydrogenation and reduces the final saturation step towards stearic FA [29], resulting in an increased flow of the VA into the posterior digestive tract and then into the mammary gland to be secreted into milk [23]. VA is a substrate in de novo synthesis in the mammary gland by delta-9 desaturase enzyme activity to produce CLA [30]. Therefore, the increase in VA is more closely related to greater contents of CLA in milk; this fact could explain the higher levels of CLA in animals supplemented with oilseeds found in the current study. However, the level of response depends on the type of oilseed provided, since the greatest effect size was observed for sunflower seed, soybean and flaxseed, which can be associated with the higher contents of LA and LNA (>57%) in these oilseeds. Additionally, intake of VA increases serum CLA levels in humans [31]; both FA (VA and CLA) have been linked to human health with decreased chronic diseases [32], and the intake of CLA and VA has been shown to lead to a reduction in coronary heart disease, low incidence of atherosclerosis [33], decreased risk of hypertension [34], low risk of type II diabetes mellitus [35] and decreased obesity [36]; in addition, CLA has been attributed to reducing cancer induced in laboratory animals [10], and has great potential to improve menopausal symptoms, bone health, sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity [37]. Including oilseeds in the diet of cows reduces the content of SFA in milk and increases the concentration of UFA, possibly by decreasing the production of volatile fatty acid (VFA) in the rumen, specifically acetic acid, the main substrate for the de novo synthesis of short- and medium-chain SFA [38]. Propionic acid production can be affected by the substitution of starchy energy ingredients and/or non-structural carbohydrates in the diet [39]. The use of oilseeds in ruminant diets can increase propionic acid production and decrease acetic acid production proportionally. This is because of the release of glycerol from triglycerides in lipolysis [40]. This alteration in the rumen ratio of acetic to propionic acids does not affect milk yield but creates the conditions (mainly rumen pH and/or microbial population) for increased UFA content [41]. Long-chain PUFA that escape from biohydrogenation are absorbed by the intestine and increase the ratio of UFA in milk at the expense of a decrease in SFA [16], which may be conditioned by an inhibitory effect of acetyl-CoA carboxylase and fatty acid synthetase enzymes at the mammary gland level [42]. The importance of increasing the proportion of PUFA in milk resides in the fact that human consumption of PUFA can reduce obesity and mortality from cardiovascular problems by up to 30% and decreases the incidence of diabetes by up to 50% [43]; the omega-3 PUFA showed a 20% reduction in mortality in patients with cardiac problems [44]. TheOur resultsview showed a 62% increase in omega-3 PUFA in cow’s milk with the inclusion of oilseeds as a dietary supplement. In this regard, extruded and ground whole oilseeds showed the greatest effect, possibly due to the greater availability of these PUFA that have escaped ruminal biohydrogenation by being absorbed by the small intestine and secreted in milk; although, the pericarp of these oilseeds plays an important role in the protection of UFA by limiting biohydrogenation [22]. The AI proposed by Ulbricht and Southgate [45] is the sum of hypercholesterolemic SFA content divided by the sum of protective UFA. A low AI reflects milk with a low SFA content [46]; therefore, the consumer reduces the risk of fat contributing to the development of atheroma [47]. In this sense, thit iss review demonstrateds that there is an adequate relation between the biocomponents of milk produced by cows supplemented with oilseeds, i.e., FA profile, and so can be considered as a functional food with benefits on the human health. However, the milk composition and the FA profile showed a high variability between studies in response to oilseed supplementation. Therefore, considering the role of covariates through meta-regression analysis is a fundamental step to provide a full understanding of the oilseed supplementation strategy in dairy cows.

4. Meta-Regression

TheOur results showed a higher milk fat content in Jersey cows; however, these findings must be cautiously considered due to the reduced number of studies available in this breed. The higher milk fat content found in Jersey cows compared to that of Holstein could be associated with the higher concentration of SFA (lauric, myristic, palmitic, and stearic) and UFA (LA) in Jersey compared to Holstein cows [48]. Carroll et al. [49] suggest that the differences in fat content between cow breeds is associated with the expression and activity of acetyl-CoA carboxylase and mammary stearoyl CoA desaturase, which are responsible of FA and UFA synthesis, respectively. Additionally, several authors reported a positive relationship between the diameter of the milk fat globule and fat content [50][51]. In this sense, the size of the milk fat globule can be explained partly by the greater fat content in Jersey cow´s milk, supported by the fact that fat globules more than 50 mm in diameter are more numerous in Jersey than Holstein cows by a factor of 50 [49]. The composition of cow’s milk changes with the lactation stage [52]. The meta-regression showed an effect of the lactation stage on the response level to oilseed supplementation of some milk components. The response in terms of milk protein to the intervention factor was higher at the beginning and the end of lactation, possibly due to the amount of milk produced [53]. On the other hand, the effect size of oilseed supplementation with regard to fat content was larger when the experimental period was performed in the second stage of lactation, which can be explained by the stronger relationship between energy balance and milk fat synthesis. During the second stage of lactation, after the peak of lactation, there is an increase in dry matter intake, leading to an increased energy supply used for de novo milk fat synthesis [54]. With regard to the negative relationship observed in UFA (LNA and oleic acid) from experiments carried out in the third stage of lactation, theour results are in agreement with Stoop et al. [52], who reported a lower content of C18 FA and high proportion of short- and medium-chain FA (C6:0 to C14:0) in milk towards the third stage of lactation. This fact could explain the negative effect of AI in this lactation stage. The high LA content of sunflower seed (60.4% of FA) affected milk fat content. Supplementing with PUFA-rich sources reduces acetic and butyric fermentation in the rumen and consequently decreases de novo synthesis in the mammary gland and inhibits lipogenic enzymes [55]. Contrary to this, the addition of sunflower to cow diets has a positive effect on the OA content, possibly due to the FA that escape ruminal biohydrogenation and are absorbed by the small intestine to be secreted in milk and/or by the action of the enzyme delta-9 desaturase that has its action in the mammary gland [17]. Additionally, the inclusion of rapeseed and soybean in dairy cow rations results in a positive relationship with the OA content, which can be associated with the fact that these oilseeds have a high concentration of this FA (54.6 g and 22.9 g 100 g−1 FA). Additionally, Sterk et al. [56] found a positive relationship with regard to LA content between diet and milk. Thus, the type of oilseed used in cow diets provide the substrates for the different contents of FA in the milk produced and therefore also influences the level of response to supplementation. The inclusion of rich sources of PUFA in the diet of ruminants has shown increases in the concentration of omega-3 PUFA in meat and milk [14][57]. The type and source of PUFA consumed by the animal can have different impacts on microbial populations and rumen fermentation [58]. These adverse effects of PUFA may be amplified through the use of vegetable oils in the diet compared to oilseeds [59]. Studies using sunflower oil [60] and soybean oil [61] in the diet of dairy cattle reflected an increased concentration of OA in milk, as well as a reduction in short- and medium-chain SFA (C10:0-C16:0). The decrease in VA in milk fat with dietary supplementation of sources of OA, LA and LNA (majority FA in rapeseed, soybean and linseed) could be explained by the decreased synthesis of VA in the ruminal biohydrogenation of PUFA; the level of supplementation was not sufficient to show an effect on this FA and there was a complete biohydrogenation of OA, LA and LNA to stearic FA. The interactions between the type of oilseed and level of inclusion show that the highest levels of response to oilseed supplementation were reached with inclusions of 15% of DM of linseed and 6–7% of DM of rapeseed. The grinding process exposes the oilseeds’ FA to biohydrogenation in the rumen, being the most affected the UFA and omega-3 PUFA [22], which is in accordance with the results of the current study; however, some FA such as LA can escape the biohydrogenation process, and hence reach the mammary gland [23]. Additionally, as explained above, the OA may escape this hydrogen saturation in the rumen and/or be desaturated from stearic FA in the mammary gland. The unprocessed oilseeds have a negative effect on dry matter intake, thus promoting a decrease in milk yield [62] with increases (β = 0.21; p < 0.05) in milk fat content. Unprocessed oilseeds have a negative effect on UFA and positive one on SFA, which may be due to a slower passage rate which allows the rumen microorganisms to saturate PUFA and MUFA of oilseeds [18]. The pericarp of whole oilseeds reaching the small intestine does not allow the absorption of the contained FA [22]. In this sense, the positive effect of SFA and negative effect of UFA with this supplementation strategy (whole oilseed) impacts on a higher AI, which is related to the higher content of SFA and therefore a less positive human-health effect [63][64]. Roasted oilseeds (whole and ground) are better utilized by ruminants [65], but in theour researchview only had a positive effect on omega-6 PUFA, LA and OA, like the results reported by Rafiee-Yarandi et al. [66], which may be related to changes in structural components that increase the level of protection of FA to ruminal biohydrogenation to some degree [19]. On the other hand, total UFA are affected, especially omega-3 PUFA, which may be due to the increased instability of these FA with the heat of cooking. This effect on UFA (omega-3) resulted in a higher AI, which is undesirable in cow’s milk; however, the type of oilseed to be roasted should be considered; for example, including roasted ground soybeans in the diet of cows resulted in a higher UFA content and lower SFA content, having a lower AI, therefore producing healthier milk [64]. Milk’s fat content and FA composition are strongly affected by the fiber content and F:C ratio. The increasing of the F:C ratio is a strategy to increase the levels of PUFA in milk [67], as is revealed in the meta-analysis carried out by Angeles-Hernandez et al. [68], who reported higher levels of milk fat (>0.32 g 100 g−1) and CLA content (>2.28 g 100 g−1 FA) in diets with an inclusion of at least 40% DM of forage. Additionally, the consumption of appropriate of levels of high-quality forage to allow the rumen functions to be maintained under optimal conditions [23][69]. From another perspective, diets with a low F:C ratio, and associated with a ruminal pH below 6.0, reduce PUFA biohydrogenation, resulting in alternative routes and changes in the production of biohydrogenation intermediates [67]. In relation to the intervention factor assessed in the curresearch nt work (oilseed supplementation), an interaction between the F:C ratio and the response to the supplementation of oil sources was reported by Palmquist and Jenkins [18]. Additionally, Ueda et al. [55] observed a significant interaction between a high forage or high concentrate ratio in the diet and flaxseed oil supplementation on ruminal digestion. The above-mentioned studies support the role of the forage-inclusion level covariate as the source of between-study variability. The significate interaction of this covariate was attributed to the CLA, Σ omega-6, and SFA outcomes. This significant relationship can be explained by the fact that the PUFA-rich oil supplementation decreased de novo synthesis in the mammary gland, which can be associated with the reduction in the synthesis of acetate and butyrate, or with the changing in the hydrogenation pathway generating FA with the subsequent inhibition of lipogenic enzymes [55]. Certainly, Castro et al. [70] assumed a reduced lipogenic activity in the mammary gland due to the effect of the addition of PUFA-rich sources in the diet with mixtures of conserved forages, which is reflected in the lower total fat content in milk compared to the control; in addition, the CLA content in milk was lower with the supplementation of LA compared to LNA, due to the inclusion of soybean and flaxseed oil in the diet, respectively. With respect to CLA synthesis in the mammary gland, the activity of the enzyme delta-9 desaturase is highly correlated with VA content [71]. However, changes in rations, by manipulating the F:C ratio or oil intake, cause modifications in the microbial population, which could alter the ruminal biohydrogenation of MUFA and PUFA, promoting the synthesis of specific isomers, which alters the availability of VA by the mammary gland [23]. In accordance with theour findings, the level of NDF of diets affects the response to oil supplementation to fat content, OA and UFA outcomes. In this sense, Sterk [72] stated that the NDF content of the diet affects the UFA in milk content, but the degree of affectation is dependent on the form of supplementation of rich sources of FA in the diet. The effect of dietary NDF content on the UFA content in milk is more negative when the source of UFA in the diet is in free oil form, in contrast to the protected form [72]. A low dietary fiber content is related to less complete biohydrogenation [59], which would explain the higher proportion of UFA in milk fat. Additionally, the same authors [72] indicated that the effect of NDF content depends on the type of main forage in the diet and the UFA content of the diet. The milk FA profile is a product of the manipulation and interaction of a set of factors such as: diet composition, feed intake, ruminal fermentation pattern, lipid metabolism in the liver, body fat mobilization, ruminal biohydrogenation and bacterial degradation of FA and synthesis and absorption of FA in rumen and mammary glands [52][53]. RWesearchers therefore suggest that these factors (almost the same as those reported in the current study) must be considered at the farm and industry levels in the design of feed strategies and in the research process to reduce the noise effect, taking into account the role of these factors as covariates when it is possible. The cross-over design determined the allocation of two or more treatments to the same experimental unit but in different periods. In this sense, there should be no carry-over or lasting effect for the previous treatment. Hence, the purpose of wash-out periods is to eliminate the effect of the previous treatment [73]. TheOur result revealed significant effects of the experimental design and length of wash-out periods on some of the milk components, mainly those associated with the FA profile. TheOur meta-regression results revealed that the response to oilseed supplementation decreases as the number of wash-out days increases to LN, OA VA, CLA and UFA outcomes, which could elucidate a possible cumulative effect of previous treatment in the cross-over design when the wash-out period is short. Therefore, to define the duration of wash-out periods, the variable response and nature of the treatment must be taken into account [74]. According to theour results, cross-over experiments designed to evaluate the effect of oilseed inclusion on milk composition must consider a minimum wash-out period of 20 days to avoid a type I error.

References

  1. Steijns, J.M.; Milk ingredients as nutraceuticals.. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2001, 54, 81-88, 10.1046/j.1364-727x.2001.00019.x.
  2. O’Mahony, J.A.; Fox, P.F. Milk: An overview. Milk Proteins 2014, 19–73.,10.1016/B978-0-12-405171-3.00002-7
  3. Marius Collomb; Alexandra Schmid; Robert Sieber; Daniel Wechsler; Eeva-Liisa Ryhänen; Conjugated linoleic acids in milk fat: Variation and physiological effects. International Dairy Journal 2006, 16, 1347-1361, 10.1016/j.idairyj.2006.06.021.
  4. Einar Vargas-Bello-Pérez; Phil Garnsworthy; Trans fatty acids and their role in the milk of dairy cows. Ciencia e investigación agraria 2013, 40, 449-473, 10.4067/s0718-16202013000300001.
  5. Massimo Bionaz; Einar Vargas-Bello-Pérez; Sebastiano Busato; Advances in fatty acids nutrition in dairy cows: from gut to cells and effects on performance. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology 2020, 11, 1-36, 10.1186/s40104-020-00512-8.
  6. Laura Den Hartigh; Conjugated Linoleic Acid Effects on Cancer, Obesity, and Atherosclerosis: A Review of Pre-Clinical and Human Trials with Current Perspectives. Nutrients 2019, 11, 370, 10.3390/nu11020370.
  7. Fritsche, J.; Rickert, R.; Steinhart, H.; Yurawecz, M.P.. Formation, contents, and estimation of daily intake of conjugated linoleic acid isomers and trans-fatty acids in foods; Yurawecz, M.P., Eds.; AOCS Press: USA, 1999; pp. 378-396.
  8. Julie A. Lovegrove; D. Ian Givens; Dairy food products: good or bad for cardiometabolic disease?. Nutrition Research Reviews 2016, 29, 249-267, 10.1017/s0954422416000160.
  9. Kazunori Koba; Teruyoshi Yanagita; Health benefits of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 2014, 8, e525-e532, 10.1016/j.orcp.2013.10.001.
  10. Clement Ip; Sebastiano Banni; Elisabetta Angioni; Gianfranca Carta; John McGinley; Henry J. Thompson; David Barbano; Dale Bauman; Conjugated linoleic acid-enriched butter fat alters mammary gland morphogenesis and reduces cancer risk in rats.. The Journal of Nutrition 1999, 129, 2135-2142, 10.1093/jn/129.12.2135.
  11. Parodi, P.W. Milk fat in human nutrition. Aust. J. Dairy Technol. 2004, 59, 3.
  12. M. A. McGuire; Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA): A ruminant fatty acid with beneficial effects on human health. Journal of Animal Science 1999, 77, 1-8, 10.2527/jas2000.00218812007700es0033x.
  13. Dale E. Bauman; Kevin J. Harvatine; Adam L. Lock; Nutrigenomics, Rumen-Derived Bioactive Fatty Acids, and the Regulation of Milk Fat Synthesis. Annual Review of Nutrition 2011, 31, 299-319, 10.1146/annurev.nutr.012809.104648.
  14. D.L. Palmquist; Omega-3 Fatty Acids in Metabolism, Health, and Nutrition and for Modified Animal Product Foods. The Professional Animal Scientist 2009, 25, 207-249, 10.15232/s1080-7446(15)30713-0.
  15. J. C. Angeles-Hernandez; M. Miranda; A. L. Muñoz-Benitez; R. Vieyra-Alberto; N. Morales-Aguilar; E. A. Paz; M. Gonzalez-Ronquillo; Zinc supplementation improves growth performance in small ruminants: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Animal Production Science 2020, 61, 621, 10.1071/an20628.
  16. Einar Vargas-Bello-Pérez; Lizbeth Esmeralda Robles-Jimenez; Rafael Ayala-Hernández; Jose Romero-Bernal; Nazario Pescador-Salas; Octavio Alonso Castelán-Ortega; Manuel González-Ronquillo; Effects of Calcium Soaps from Palm, Canola and Safflower Oils on Dry Matter Intake, Nutrient Digestibility, Milk Production, and Milk Composition in Dairy Goats. Animals 2020, 10, 1728, 10.3390/ani10101728.
  17. A.R. Rabiee; K. Breinhild; W. Scott; Helen Golder; E. Block; I.J. Lean; Effect of fat additions to diets of dairy cattle on milk production and components: A meta-analysis and meta-regression. Journal of Dairy Science 2012, 95, 3225-3247, 10.3168/jds.2011-4895.
  18. D.L. Palmquist; T.C. Jenkins; A 100-Year Review: Fat feeding of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 2017, 100, 10061-10077, 10.3168/jds.2017-12924.
  19. F. Glasser; A. Ferlay; Y. Chilliard; Oilseed Lipid Supplements and Fatty Acid Composition of Cow Milk: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 2008, 91, 4687-4703, 10.3168/jds.2008-0987.
  20. Ali Mahdavi; Ata Mahdavi; Babak Darabighane; Andrew Mead; Michael Lee; Effects of soybean oil supplement to diets of lactating dairy cows, on productive performance, and milk fat acids profile: a meta-analysis. Italian Journal of Animal Science 2019, 18, 809-819, 10.1080/1828051x.2019.1585211.
  21. J. A. Ye; C. Wang; H. F. Wang; H. W. Ye; B. X. Wang; H. Y. Liu; Y. M. Wang; Z. Q. Yang; J. X. Liu; Milk production and fatty acid profile of dairy cows supplemented with flaxseed oil, soybean oil, or extruded soybeans. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A — Animal Science 2009, 59, 121-129, 10.1080/09064700903082252.
  22. M. LeDuc; M.-P. Létourneau-Montminy; R. Gervais; P.Y. Chouinard; Effect of dietary flax seed and oil on milk yield, gross composition, and fatty acid profile in dairy cows: A meta-analysis and meta-regression. Journal of Dairy Science 2017, 100, 8906-8927, 10.3168/jds.2017-12637.
  23. Dale E. Bauman; J. Mikko Griinari; NUTRITIONAL REGULATION OF MILK FAT SYNTHESIS. Annual Review of Nutrition 2003, 23, 203-227, 10.1146/annurev.nutr.23.011702.073408.
  24. T.C. Jenkins; M.A. McGuire; Major Advances in Nutrition: Impact on Milk Composition. Journal of Dairy Science 2006, 89, 1302-1310, 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(06)72198-1.
  25. H.V. Petit; Digestion, Milk Production, Milk Composition, and Blood Composition of Dairy Cows Fed Formaldehyde Treated Flaxseed or Sunflower Seed. Journal of Dairy Science 2003, 86, 2637-2646, 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(03)73859-4.
  26. P. F. Wilde; R. M. C. Dawson; F. B. Shorland; R. O. Weenink; A. T. Johns; I. R. C. McDonald; R W White; P Kemp; Pfv Ward; Tw Scott; et al. The biohydrogenation of α-linolenic acid and oleic acid by rumen micro-organisms. Biochemical Journal 1966, 98, 469-475, 10.1042/bj0980469.
  27. A. Sterk; A. M. Van Vuuren; W. H. Hendriks; Jan Dijkstra; Effects of different fat sources, technological forms and characteristics of the basal diet on milk fatty acid profile in lactating dairy cows – a meta-analysis. The Journal of Agricultural Science 2012, 150, 495-517, 10.1017/s0021859611000979.
  28. F. Akraim; M. C. Nicot; P. Juaneda; F. Enjalbert; Conjugated linolenic acid (CLnA), conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and other biohydrogenation intermediates in plasma and milk fat of cows fed raw or extruded linseed. animal 2007, 1, 835-843, 10.1017/s175173110700002x.
  29. R. Khiaosa-Ard; M. Kreuzer; F. Leiber; Apparent recovery of C18 polyunsaturated fatty acids from feed in cow milk: A meta-analysis of the importance of dietary fatty acids and feeding regimens in diets without fat supplementation. Journal of Dairy Science 2015, 98, 6399-6414, 10.3168/jds.2015-9459.
  30. X.Q. Sun; S.J. Gibbs; Diurnal variation in fatty acid profiles in rumen digesta from dairy cows grazing high-quality pasture. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2012, 177, 152-160, 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.08.013.
  31. Anu M Turpeinen; Marja Mutanen; Antti Aro; Irma Salminen; Samar Basu; Donald L Palmquist; J Mikko Griinari; Bioconversion of vaccenic acid to conjugated linoleic acid in humans. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2002, 76, 504-510, 10.1093/ajcn/76.3.504.
  32. Quang V. Nguyen; Bunmi S. Malau-Aduli; John Cavalieri; Aduli E. O. Malau-Aduli; Peter D. Nichols; Enhancing Omega-3 Long-Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Content of Dairy-Derived Foods for Human Consumption. Nutrients 2019, 11, 743, 10.3390/nu11040743.
  33. Huifen Wang; Caroline S. Fox; Lisa M. Troy; Nicola M. Mckeown; Paul F. Jacques; Longitudinal association of dairy consumption with the changes in blood pressure and the risk of incident hypertension: the Framingham Heart Study. British Journal of Nutrition 2015, 114, 1887-1899, 10.1017/s0007114515003578.
  34. Fatemeh Gholami; Malihe Khoramdad; Nader Esmailnasab; Ghobad Moradi; Bijan Nouri; Saeid Safiri; Yousef Alimohamadi; The effect of dairy consumption on the prevention of cardiovascular diseases: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Journal of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Research 2017, 9, 1-11, 10.15171/jcvtr.2017.01.
  35. Simone J. P. M. Eussen; Martien C. J. M. van Dongen; Nicole Wijckmans; Louise Den Biggelaar; Stefanie J. W. H. Oude Elferink; Cécile M. Singh-Povel; Miranda T. Schram; Simone J. S. Sep; Carla J. van der Kallen; Annemarie Koster; et al.Nicolaas SchaperRonald M. A. HenryCoen D. A. StehouwerPieter C. Dagnelie Consumption of dairy foods in relation to impaired glucose metabolism and type 2 diabetes mellitus: the Maastricht Study. British Journal of Nutrition 2016, 115, 1453-1461, 10.1017/s0007114516000313.
  36. Fatemeh Esmaeili Shahmirzadi; Saeid Ghavamzadeh; Tayebeh Zamani; The Effect of Conjugated Linoleic Acid Supplementation on Body Composition, Serum Insulin and Leptin in Obese Adults.. null 2019, 22, 255-261.
  37. Jun Ho Kim; Yoo Kim; Young Jun Kim; Yeonhwa Park; Conjugated Linoleic Acid: Potential Health Benefits as a Functional Food Ingredient. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology 2016, 7, 221-244, 10.1146/annurev-food-041715-033028.
  38. Yves Chilliard; Anne Ferlay; Dietary lipids and forages interactions on cow and goat milk fatty acid composition and sensory properties. Reproduction Nutrition Development 2004, 44, 467-492, 10.1051/rnd:2004052.
  39. Christelle Philippeau; Abderzak Lettat; Cécile Martin; Mathieu Silberberg; Diego Morgavi; Anne Ferlay; C. Berger; Pierre Noziere; Effects of bacterial direct-fed microbials on ruminal characteristics, methane emission, and milk fatty acid composition in cows fed high- or low-starch diets. Journal of Dairy Science 2017, 100, 2637-2650, 10.3168/jds.2016-11663.
  40. A.E. Kholif; T.A. Morsy; M.M. Abdo; Crushed flaxseed versus flaxseed oil in the diets of Nubian goats: Effect on feed intake, digestion, ruminal fermentation, blood chemistry, milk production, milk composition and milk fatty acid profile. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2018, 244, 66-75, 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2018.08.003.
  41. Y. Pi; L. Ma; K. M. Pierce; H. R. Wang; J. C. Xu; D. P. Bu; Rubber seed oil and flaxseed oil supplementation alter digestion, ruminal fermentation and rumen fatty acid profile of dairy cows. animal 2018, 13, 2811-2820, 10.1017/s175173111900137x.
  42. Martínez, M.A.L.; Pérez, H.M.; Pérez, A.L.M.; Carrión, P.D.; Gómez, C.G.; Garzón, S.A.I. Efecto de los aceites y semillas en dietas para rumiantes sobre el perfil de ácidos grasos de la leche. Revisión. Rev. Mex. Cienc. Pecu. 2013, 4, 319–338
  43. Kevin C Maki; Fulya Eren; Martha E Cassens; Mary R Dicklin; Michael H Davidson; ω-6 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids and Cardiometabolic Health: Current Evidence, Controversies, and Research Gaps. Advances in Nutrition 2018, 9, 688-700, 10.1093/advances/nmy038.
  44. K. M. Livingstone; J. A. Lovegrove; J. R. Cockcroft; P. C. Elwood; J. E. Pickering; D. I Givens; Does Dairy Food Intake Predict Arterial Stiffness and Blood Pressure in Men? Evidence from the Caerphilly Prospective Study. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2012, 71, 42-47, 10.1017/s0029665112003254.
  45. T.L.V. Ulbricht; D.A.T. Southgate; Coronary heart disease: seven dietary factors. The Lancet 1991, 338, 985-992, 10.1016/0140-6736(91)91846-m.
  46. Dalia Andrea Plata-Reyes; Omar Hernández-Mendo; Rodolfo Vieyra-Alberto; Benito Albarrán-Portillo; Carlos Galdino Martínez-García; Carlos Manuel Arriaga-Jordán; Kikuyu grass in winter–spring time in small-scale dairy systems in the highlands of central Mexico in terms of cow performance and fatty acid profile of milk. Tropical Animal Health and Production 2021, 53, 1-18, 10.1007/s11250-021-02672-9.
  47. Sánchez, J.C.; Ramírez, C.H.; Lutz, G. Caracterización y determinación del potencial Aterogénico de quesos producidos en Costa Rica. Rev. Cien. Tec. 2006, 24.
  48. H. Soyeurt; P. Dardenne; A. Gillon; C. Croquet; Sylvie Vanderick; P. Mayeres; C. Bertozzi; Nicolas Gengler; Variation in Fatty Acid Contents of Milk and Milk Fat Within and Across Breeds. Journal of Dairy Science 2006, 89, 4858-4865, 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(06)72534-6.
  49. S.M. Carroll; E.J. DePeters; S.J. Taylor; M. Rosenberg; H. Perez-Monti; V.A. Capps; Milk composition of Holstein, Jersey, and Brown Swiss cows in response to increasing levels of dietary fat. Animal Feed Science and Technology 2006, 131, 451-473, 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.06.019.
  50. L. Wiking; L. Björck; J.H. Nielsen; Influence of feed composition on stability of fat globules during pumping of raw milk. International Dairy Journal 2003, 13, 797-803, 10.1016/s0958-6946(03)00110-9.
  51. Lars Wiking; Jan Stagsted; Lennart Björck; Jacob H Nielsen; Milk fat globule size is affected by fat production in dairy cows. International Dairy Journal 2004, 14, 909-913, 10.1016/j.idairyj.2004.03.005.
  52. W.M. Stoop; H. Bovenhuis; J.M.L. Heck; Johan van Arendonk; Effect of lactation stage and energy status on milk fat composition of Holstein-Friesian cows. Journal of Dairy Science 2009, 92, 1469-1478, 10.3168/jds.2008-1468.
  53. P. C. Garnsworthy; L. L. Masson; A. L. Lock; T. T. Mottram; Variation of Milk Citrate with Stage of Lactation and De Novo Fatty Acid Synthesis in Dairy Cows. Journal of Dairy Science 2006, 89, 1604-1612, 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(06)72227-5.
  54. J. J. Gross; R. M. Bruckmaier; Review: Metabolic challenges in lactating dairy cows and their assessment via established and novel indicators in milk. animal 2018, 13, s75-s81, 10.1017/s175173111800349x.
  55. K. Ueda; A. Ferlay; J. Chabrot; J.J. Loor; Y. Chilliard; M. Doreau; Effect of Linseed Oil Supplementation on Ruminal Digestion in Dairy Cows Fed Diets with Different Forage:Concentrate Ratios. Journal of Dairy Science 2003, 86, 3999-4007, 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(03)74011-9.
  56. A. Sterk; A. M. Van Vuuren; W. H. Hendriks; Jan Dijkstra; Effects of different fat sources, technological forms and characteristics of the basal diet on milk fatty acid profile in lactating dairy cows – a meta-analysis. The Journal of Agricultural Science 2012, 150, 495-517, 10.1017/s0021859611000979.
  57. Kamaleldin Abuelfatah; Zuki Abu Bakar Zakaria; Goh Yong Meng; Awis Qurni Sazili; Changes in Fatty Acid Composition and Distribution of N-3 Fatty Acids in Goat Tissues Fed Different Levels of Whole Linseed. The Scientific World Journal 2014, 2014, 1-10, 10.1155/2014/934154.
  58. S. J. Liu; D. P. Bu; J. Q. Wang; L. Liu; S. Liang; H. Y. Wei; L. Y. Zhou; D. Li; J. J. Loor; Effect of incremental levels of fish oil supplementation on specific bacterial populations in bovine ruminal fluid. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 2011, 96, 9-16, 10.1111/j.1439-0396.2010.01113.x.
  59. Donald L. Palmquist; Adam L. Lock; Kevin J. Shingfield; Dale E. Bauman; Biosynthesis of Conjugated Linoleic Acid in Ruminants and Humans. null 2004, 50, 179-217, 10.1016/s1043-4526(05)50006-8.
  60. Marius Collomb; Heinz Sollberger; Ueli Bütikofer; Robert Sieber; Walter Stoll; Walter Schaeren; Impact of a basal diet of hay and fodder beet supplemented with rapeseed, linseed and sunflowerseed on the fatty acid composition of milk fat. International Dairy Journal 2004, 14, 549-559, 10.1016/j.idairyj.2003.11.004.
  61. Vieyra-Alberto, R.; Arriaga-Jordán, C.M.; Domínguez-Vara, I.A.; Bórquez-Gastelum, J.L.; Morales-Almaráz, E. Efecto del aceite de soya sobre la concentración de los ácidos grasos vaccenico y ruménico en leche de vacas en pastoreo. Agrociencia 2017, 51, 299–313.
  62. NRC. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle; NRC, Eds.; National Academic Press: Washington DC, USA, 2001; pp. 292.
  63. Dalia Andrea Plata-Reyes; Omar Hernández-Mendo; Rodolfo Vieyra-Alberto; Benito Albarrán-Portillo; Carlos Galdino Martínez-García; Carlos Manuel Arriaga-Jordán; Kikuyu grass in winter–spring time in small-scale dairy systems in the highlands of central Mexico in terms of cow performance and fatty acid profile of milk. Tropical Animal Health and Production 2021, 53, 1-18, 10.1007/s11250-021-02672-9.
  64. Rodolfo Vieyra-Alberto; Reyna Elizabeth Zetina-Martínez; Jaime Olivares-Pérez; Héctor Hugo Galicia-Aguilar; Saúl Rojas-Hernández; Juan Carlos Ángeles-Hernández; Effect of soybean grain (Glycine max L.) supplementation on the production and fatty acid profile in milk of grazing cows in the dry tropics of Mexico. Tropical Animal Health and Production 2022, 54, 1-9, 10.1007/s11250-022-03056-3.
  65. Tilak R Dhiman; Klaas V Zanten; Larry D Satter; Effect of dietary fat source on fatty acid composition of cow's milk. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 1995, 69, 101-107, 10.1002/jsfa.2740690116.
  66. H. Rafiee-Yarandi; G.R. Ghorbani; M. Alikhani; A. Sadeghi-Sefidmazgi; J.K. Drackley; A comparison of the effect of soybeans roasted at different temperatures versus calcium salts of fatty acids on performance and milk fatty acid composition of mid-lactation Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 2016, 99, 5422-5435, 10.3168/jds.2015-10546.
  67. T. Manso; B. Gallardo; C. Guerra-Rivas; Modifying milk and meat fat quality through feed changes. Small Ruminant Research 2016, 142, 31-37, 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2016.03.003.
  68. Juan C Angeles-Hernandez; Rodolfo Vieyra Alberto; Ermias Kebreab; Jayasooriya A D Ranga Nirosha Appuhamy; Holland C. Dougherty; Octavio Castelan-Ortega; Manuel Gonzalez-Ronquillo; Effect of forage to concentrate ratio and fat supplementation on milk composition in dairy sheep: A meta-analysis. Livestock Science 2020, 238, 104069, 10.1016/j.livsci.2020.104069.
  69. J.J. Loor; A. Ferlay; A. Ollier; M. Doreau; Y. Chilliard; Relationship Among Trans and Conjugated Fatty Acids and Bovine Milk Fat Yield Due to Dietary Concentrate and Linseed Oil. Journal of Dairy Science 2005, 88, 726-740, 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(05)72736-3.
  70. Teresa Castro; Diego Martinez; Beatriz Isabel; Almudena Cabezas; Vicente Jimeno; Vegetable Oils Rich in Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Supplementation of Dairy Cows’ Diets: Effects on Productive and Reproductive Performance. Animals 2019, 9, 205, 10.3390/ani9050205.
  71. M. Caroprese; A. Marzano; R. Marino; G. Gliatta; A. Muscio; A. Sevi; Flaxseed supplementation improves fatty acid profile of cow milk. Journal of Dairy Science 2010, 93, 2580-2588, 10.3168/jds.2008-2003.
  72. A. Sterk; A. M. Van Vuuren; W. H. Hendriks; Jan Dijkstra; Effects of different fat sources, technological forms and characteristics of the basal diet on milk fatty acid profile in lactating dairy cows – a meta-analysis. The Journal of Agricultural Science 2012, 150, 495-517, 10.1017/s0021859611000979.
  73. Teresa Castro; Diego Martinez; Beatriz Isabel; Almudena Cabezas; Vicente Jimeno; Vegetable Oils Rich in Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Supplementation of Dairy Cows’ Diets: Effects on Productive and Reproductive Performance. Animals 2019, 9, 205, 10.3390/ani9050205.
  74. Federer, W.T.. On Planning Repeated Measure Experiments; Federer, W.T., Eds.; Cornell University: New York, USA, 1986; pp. 1-7.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback