Tackling the future challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry - vTI

RAHMANN G & GODINHO D (Ed.) (2012): Tackling the Future Challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry.
Proceedings of the 2 nd OAHC, Hamburg/Trenthorst, Germany, Sep 12-14, 2012
Table 1. Means (+ standard deviation) of TEAC determined by ABTS method expressed as
nmoles of Trolox® depending on production system
February March April May June
IS 1.290 a
+0.009 1.280ª +0.013 1.297 a
+0.017 1.297 a
+0.020 1.298 a
+0.011
SES 1.298 a
+0.022 1.296 b +0.026 1.195 a
+0.019 1.323 b
+0.014 1.325 b
+0.014
OS 1.302 a
+0.012 1.328 c +0.005 1.292 a
+0.018 1.336 b
+0.011 1.332 b
+0.007
a
Different type in the same column shows statistically significant differences due to the production system.
Table 2. Means (+ standard deviation) of TEAC determined by FRAP method expressed as
nmoles of Trolox ® depending on production system
February March April May June
IS 15.77 a
+3.24 10.39 a +2.48 14.49 b
+2.41 14.42 a
+1.88 15.02 a
+1.74
SES 14.78 a
+3.51 16.01 b +4.59 15.50 b +5.44 20.52 b
+6.03 13.85 a
+5.04
OS 12.23 a
+5.19 9.30 a +0.92 8.16 a
+5.71 15.50 a,b
+2.27 20.11 b
+2.22
a
Different type in the same column shows statistically significant differences due to the production system.
Table 3. Means (+ standard deviation) of TEAC determined by ABTS and FRAP methods
expressed as nmoles of Trolox ® depending on breed.
FRAP ABTS
Assaf 14.88 a +3.50 1.295 a +0.002
Churra 15.59 a +6.52 1.318 b +0.018
a Different type in the same column shows statistically significant differences due to breed.
Taking into account that Assaf breed were reared only on IS and SES and Churra breed only on
SES and OS, the effect of breed on TEAC was considered. The results (Table 3) showed that breed
had a significantly effect on ABTS results, showing the Churra breed milk significantly higher values,
but not on FRAP values. This result is due to the higher casein content of Churra milk
(Rodríguez-Nogales et al., 2007) because TEAC(ABTS) is primarily associated to the milk caseins
(Havemose et al., 2006) while FRAP method cannot detect compounds that act by radical quenching
particularly proteins (Ou et al., 2002).
Table 4. Means (+ standard deviation) of TEAC determined by ABTS expressed as nmoles
of Trolox ® depending on production system for each breed.
Breed PS February March April May June
Assaf
IS 1.290 +0.009 1.280 +0.013 1.297 +0.017 1.297 a
+0.020 1.298 a
SES 1.290 +0.019 1.281 +0.017 1.290 +0.013 1.314
+0.011
b
+0.014 1.317 b
+0.104
Churra
SES
OS
1.314
1.298
+0.019
+0.012
1.310
1.328
+0.026
+0.005
1.301
1.292
+0.024
+0.018
1.332
1.336
+0.009
+0.011
1.332
1.332
+0.010
+0.007
a
Different type in the same column shows statistically significant differences due to production system within each
breed.
Due to the strong influence of breed, the effect of the production system for each breed on the
TEAC was considered (Table 4). The results showed a significant effect of production system (IS vs
SES) for Assaf breed (p