AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dehority, B A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dehority, B A
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Dehority, B A

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1984 July; 48(1): 182-185

Evaluation of subsampling and fixation procedures used for counting rumen protozoa.

B A Dehority

ABSTRACT

Total numbers of protozoa can be significantly lower in rumen fluid than in whole rumen contents, depending on the time of sampling and the procedure used to separate the fluid and solid fractions. Moreover, generic distribution in rumen fluid was significantly affected in all cases tested. The percentage of Entodinium spp. increased, whereas percentages of Diplodinium spp. and Ophryoscolex spp. decreased. Microscopic observation of fresh and fixed rumen contents did not indicate any marked attachment of protozoa to particulate matter. In addition, dilution of whole rumen contents with water, 5 mM sucrose, or 0.1% Tween 80 before fixation did not affect total numbers or generic composition of protozoa. It was thus concluded that attachment to feed particles is probably not a problem in counting procedures. Blending of whole rumen contents to facilitate subsampling caused a decrease in numbers of protozoa. The concentration of formaldehyde used for preservation of rumen contents, 4, 10, or 18.5%, did not affect the total count.


Appl Environ Microbiol. 1984 July; 48(1): 182-185




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 1984 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.