Diagnostic evaluation of rumen function and physiological parameters in buffaloes with fore-stomach disorders

Introduction

Fore-stomach disorders in buffaloes are commonly encountered in veterinary clinical practice and include conditions such as simple indigestion, ruminal acidosis, alkalosis, tympany, impactions, and traumatic conditions like reticulo-peritonitis and pericarditis. These disorders disturb rumen physiology, microbial activity, and fermentation processes, ultimately affecting animal health and leading to decreased productivity and economic losses. (Constable et al., 2017; Radostits et al., 2020) [11,12] . The rumen plays a crucial role in digestion, and any dysfunction can lead to significant systemic consequences. Clinical and physiological parameters such as rumen consistency, ruminal motility, rectal temperature, respiration rate, and heart rate serve as important diagnostic tools in identifying and differentiating fore-stomach disorders in buffaloes (Smith, 2020) [21] . Under field conditions, where advanced diagnostic tools may not always be readily available, the assessment of rumen function along with basic physiological parameters provides a practical and cost-effective approach for diagnosis (Radostits et al., 2007) [11] . Parameters such as rumen motility and consistency reflect the functional status of the rumen, while rectal temperature, respiration rate, and heart rate indicate the degree of systemic involvement (Constable et al., 2017; Rosenberger, 1990) [11,15] . Alterations in rumen function, along with changes in physiological parameters, provide valuable insight into the severity and progression of these conditions. Therefore, the combined assessment of rumen function and physiological parameters plays a vital role in the early diagnosis and effective management of fore-stomach disorders, ultimately improving clinical outcomes and minimizing economic losses. However, although several studies have evaluated individual fore-stomach disorders, a clinico-physiological assessment across multiple such disorders in buffaloes remains limited. In this context, the present study was designed to evaluate and compare rumen function and selected physiological parameters in buffaloes affected with different fore-stomach disorders.

Materials and Methods

The study was conducted on buffaloes presented to the Veterinary Clinical Complex. During study 10 healthy buffaloes (control group) and 107 buffaloes affected with different fore-stomach disorders were included. The affected buffaloes were categorized into groups such as simple indigestion, ruminal acidosis, alkalosis, tympany, ruminal impaction, traumatic reticulo-peritonitis, traumatic pericarditis, diaphragmatic hernia, and omasal impaction. A detailed clinical examination was carried out for each animal. Rumen consistency was assessed by palpation, rectal temperature was recorded using a clinical thermometer, respiration rate measured per minute, heart rate was determined by auscultation, and ruminal motility was assessed by observing ruminal contractions per minute. The data were expressed as Mean ± Standard Error (SE) and analysed statistically using ANOVA to determine the significance of differences among groups.

Results and Discussion

The present study revealed that rumen consistency was predominantly tense in 88.78 percent of the buffaloes affected with fore-stomach disorders such as simple indigestion, acidosis, alkalosis, tympany, traumatic reticuloperitonitis, traumatic pericarditis, and diaphragmatic hernia. This may be attributed to gas accumulation and increased intraruminal pressure. In contrast, ruminal impaction cases exhibited hard (54.54%) and doughy (36.36%) consistency, indicating accumulation of dry ingesta and reduced ruminal fluidity. Similar findings have been reported by Athar (2011) [1] and Hussain and Uppal (2012) [6] , who observed firm rumen consistency in impaction cases due to chronic stasis. The mean rectal temperature in healthy buffaloes was recorded as 100.02±0.16°F. In most fore-stomach disorders such as simple indigestion, acidosis, alkalosis, tympany, diaphragmatic hernia, and omasal impaction, the rectal temperature remained within normal range, indicating absence of systemic involvement. However, a significant increase in rectal temperature was observed in cases of traumatic reticulo-peritonitis (102.61±0.28°F) and traumatic pericarditis (103.08±0.14°F), suggesting severe inflammatory response. This increase may be due to infection and inflammation caused by penetrating foreign bodies in the reticulum, as also reported by Singh et al.

(1983) [17] , Sojka et al. (1990) [20] , and Sharm. (2022) [16] . The respiration rate in healthy buffaloes was recorded as 22.80±0.85 per minute, whereas a significant increase was observed in most diseased groups, particularly in tympany, traumatic reticulo-peritonitis, and traumatic pericarditis. The highest respiration rate was recorded in traumatic pericarditis (50.40±0.98/min). This increase may be attributed to pain, elevated body temperature, and mechanical pressure on the diaphragm due to ruminal distension. Similar observations were reported by Mohan et al. (2015) [8] and Patel et al. (2023) [9] . The mean heart rate in healthy buffaloes was 72.2±1.55 per minute. A significant increase in heart rate was observed in buffaloes affected with traumatic reticulo-peritonitis, traumatic pericarditis, and diaphragmatic hernia. The highest heart rate was observed in traumatic pericarditis (94.60±1.60/min), which may be due to cardiac involvement, pericardial inflammation, and reduced cardiac efficiency. These findings are in agreement with Radostits et al. (2020) [11] and Smith (2020) [21] . Ruminal motility in healthy buffaloes was recorded as 1.5±0.11 per minute, whereas it was reduced in all forestomach disorders. The most severe reduction was observed in ruminal impaction (0.18±0.16/min). The reduction in ruminal motility may be attributed to inflammation, adhesions, pain, and altered rumen microflora. Similar findings have been reported by Ramprabhu et al. (2003) [14] , Chaudhary et al. (2007) [3] , and Suthar and Patel (2009) [22] . The findings revealed significant alterations in rumen activity, characterized by reduced or absent motility and changes in rumen consistency in affected animals. Physiological parameters also exhibited marked deviations, with variations in temperature, pulse, and respiration rate indicating systemic involvement.

Overall, the study indicates that non-traumatic fore-stomach disorders cause mild physiological alterations, whereas traumatic conditions such as reticulo-peritonitis and pericarditis result in severe systemic changes including fever, tachycardia, and tachypnea.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the combined evaluation of rumen related parameters, particularly rumen motility and consistency, serve as primary diagnostic indicators in the assessment of fore-stomach disorders in buffaloes. Alterations such as reduced or absent ruminal motility and changes in rumen consistency are consistently observed across various forestomach conditions, reflecting disturbances in ruminal function. Alongside these, physiological parameters including rectal temperature, respiration rate, and heart rate (TRH) provide supportive information regarding the systemic involvement of the disease. While most forestomach disorders exhibit mild to moderate systemic changes, more severe or traumatic conditions may be associated with pronounced alterations in these physiological parameters. Thus, the combined evaluation of rumen function and TRH parameters enhances the accuracy of diagnosis, enabling early detection, better clinical assessment, and improved prognosis in buffaloes affected with fore-stomach disorders.

References

1. Athar H. Studies on ruminal impaction in bovines. Indian Vet J. 2011;88(6):45-48.
2. Biswal SS, Das PK, Mishra PR. Clinical studies on digestive disorders in buffaloes. Indian J Vet Med. 2016;36(2):123-128.
3. Chaudhary PS, Varshney JP, Deshmukh VV. Clinical findings in bovine traumatic reticuloperitonitis. Indian J Anim Sci. 2007;77(4):303-305.
4. Constable PD, Hinchcliff KW, Done SH, Grünberg W. Veterinary medicine: a textbook of the diseases of cattle, horses, sheep, pigs and goats. 11th ed. Elsevier; 2017. p.300-450.
5. Dirksen G. Digestive system. In: Clinical examination of cattle. Berlin: Verlag Paul Parey; 1985. p.270-300.
6. Hussain SA, Uppal SK. Clinical studies on ruminal disorders in bovines. Vet Pract. 2012;13(1):40-43.
7. Kumar A, Saini NS, Randhawa SS. Clinical evaluation of ruminal disorders in bovines. Indian J Vet Med. 2021;41(1):50-55.
8. Mohan M, Kumar P, Singh R. Respiratory changes in bovine digestive disorders. Vet World. 2015;8(5):680684.
9. Patel NB, Patel JS, Patel BJ. Clinico-diagnostic studies on ruminal disorders in buffaloes. Indian J Anim Res. 2023;57(3):350-355.
10. Prasad J, Joshi HC. Studies on rumen motility in cattle. Indian J Vet Sci. 1975;45(2):120-124.
11. Radostits OM, Gay CC, Hinchcliff KW, Constable PD. Veterinary medicine. 10th ed. Saunders Elsevier; 2007. p.312-358.
12. Radostits OM, Gay CC, Hinchcliff KW, Constable PD. Veterinary medicine: a textbook of the diseases of cattle, horses, sheep, pigs and goats. 11th ed. Elsevier; 2020. p.310-520.
13. Raidurg R. Clinical evaluation of bovine digestive disorders. Indian Vet J. 2010;87(9):910-912.
14. Ramprabhu R, Dhanapalan P, Prathaban S. Clinical diagnosis of traumatic reticuloperitonitis in cattle. Indian J Vet Med. 2003;23(2):87-89.
15. Rosenberger G. Clinical examination of cattle. 2nd ed. Berlin: Verlag Paul Parey; 1990. p.210-245.
16. Sharma R, Verma AK, Singh M. Physiological alterations in bovine digestive disorders. J Vet Sci. 2022;23(2):1-8.
17. Singh AP, Nigam JM, Singh GR. Clinical studies on traumatic reticuloperitonitis in cattle. Indian Vet J. 1983;60(5):380-384.
18. Singh B, Rathor SS. Respiratory changes in bovine diseases. Indian J Vet Med. 1977;1(2):75-78.
19. Singh J, Kumar V, Yadav R. Diagnostic approaches in traumatic reticuloperitonitis in bovines. Vet World. 2022;15(4):1025-1030.
20. Sojka WJ, Hinton M, Hughes DL. Pathophysiology of traumatic pericarditis in cattle. Vet Rec. 1990;126(5):110-112.
21. Smith BP. Large animal internal medicine. 6th ed. Elsevier; 2020. p.801-850.
22. Suthar DN, Patel JS. Ruminal motility changes in bovines. Indian J Anim Res. 2009;43(1):66-69.
23. Vedpathak HS, Shinde DK, Bhokre AP. Clinical findings in traumatic pericarditis. Vet Pract. 2010;11(2):120-123.
24. Yakubu OE, Boyi RN, Shaibu C, Abah MA, Akighir J. Antioxidant parameter and GC-MS phytochemical analysis of Hymenocardia acida stem bark ethanolic extract. Trends Appl Sci Res. 2019;14:263-270.
25. Gurib-Fakim A. Medicinal plants: traditions of yesterday and drugs of tomorrow. Mol Aspects Med. 2006;27(1):1-93.
26. Efferth T, Greten HJ. Quality control for medicinal plants. Med Aromat Plants. 2012;1:7-9.
27. Mgbeje BIA, Abu C. Chemical fingerprinting of Nauclea latifolia, an antidiabetic plant, using GC-MS. J Complement Altern Med Res. 2020;9(4):25-34.