Goat dairy products in Colombia: consumption analysis as a basis for development of the value chain
Keywords:
Goat dairying, Market study, Market segmentation, Sensorial analysis
Abstract
Colombia’s dairy sector remains predominantly centered on bovine milk production, systematically marginalizing goat milk within the national value chain. This structural bias has hindered the development of the goat dairy industry, resulting in limited market visibility and a scarcity of differentiated, functional goat milk products. Consequently, Colombian consumers continue to exhibit traditional consumption patterns, favoring conventional bovine dairy and demonstrating minimal openness to non-bovine alternatives. To analyse consumption trends of goat dairy products in Colombia by identifying sociocultural and market-related factors that influence their acceptance. A panel of 100 untrained consumers from a university community was convened to evaluate the organoleptic attributes of three goat dairy products: fresh cheese, aged cheese, and yogurt. The evaluation was conducted through a blind tasting, in which samples were randomly and evenly distributed without any visual references or prior information that could bias sensory perception. Data were collected using an 11-item structured questionnaire designed to capture key sensory perceptions, as well as aspects related to purchase intention and consumption frequency. The data were analyzed using R software, applying a repeated measures ANOVA and cluster analysis to identify preference patterns and consumer segmentation. Additionally, descriptive statistics were used to characterize the distribution of market trends. Although there was a general tendency toward rejection, three consumer groups were identified: the first group comprised individuals with a potential acceptance of goat yogurt (34.9%); the second group showed low sensory acceptance across all products (13.9%); and the third group consisted of gourmet-oriented consumers with a high potential for consuming aged cheese (10.7%). This study is crucial for developing targeted promotional strategies that aim to increase consumption and explore new market opportunities for goat milk producers in Colombia.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
1. Cuervo W, Gomez-Lopez C, DiLorenzo N. Methane Synthesis as a Source of Energy Loss Impacting Microbial Protein Synthesis in Beef Cattle—A Review. Methane. 2025;4:10.
2. Brockway PE, Sorrell S, Semieniuk G, Heun MK, Court V. Energy efficiency and economy-wide rebound effects: A review of the evidence and its implications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2021;141.
3. Satter LD, Klopfenstein TJ, Erickson GE. The role of nutrition in reducing nutrient output from ruminants. J Anim Sci. 2002;80 E-suppl_2:E143–56.
4. Cheng M, McCarl B, Fei C. Climate Change and Livestock Production: A Literature Review. Atmosphere. 2022;13.
5. Liu J, Zhou M, Zhou L, Dang R, Xiao L, Tan Y, et al. Methane production related to microbiota in dairy cattle feces. Environ Res. 2025;267.
6. Da-Silva-Macêdo AJ, Costa-Campos A, Nascimento-Coutinho D, Soares-Freitas CA, Dos-Anjos AJ, Rocha-Bezerra L. Effect of the diet on ruminal parameters and rumen microbiota: review. Revista Colombiana de Ciencia Animal - RECIA. 2022;14:e886.
7. Ungerfeld EM. Metabolic Hydrogen Flows in Rumen Fermentation: Principles and Possibilities of Interventions. Front Microbiol. 2020;11.
8. Króliczewska B, Pecka-Kiełb E, Bujok J. Strategies Used to Reduce Methane Emissions from Ruminants: Controversies and Issues. Agriculture (Switzerland). 2023;13.
9. Pang Z, Chen J, Wang T, Gao C, Li Z, Guo L, et al. Linking Plant Secondary Metabolites and Plant Microbiomes: A Review. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2021;12.
10. Khan A, Kanwal F, Ullah S, Fahad M, Tariq L, Altaf MT, et al. Plant Secondary Metabolites—Central Regulators Against Abiotic and Biotic Stresses. Metabolites. 2025;15.
11. Divekar PA, Narayana S, Divekar BA, Kumar R, Gadratagi BG, Ray A, et al. Plant Secondary Metabolites as Defense Tools against Herbivores for Sustainable Crop Protection. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23.
12. Iason G. The role of plant secondary metabolites in mammalian herbivory: ecological perspectives. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2005;64:123–31.
13. Niu X, Xing Y, Wang J, Bai L, Xie Y, Zhu S, et al. Effects of Caragana korshinskii tannin on fermentation, methane emission, community of methanogens, and metabolome of rumen in sheep. Front Microbiol. 2024;15.
14. Ballaré CL, Caldwell MM, Flint SD, Robinson SA, Bornman JF. Effects of solar ultraviolet radiation on terrestrial ecosystems. Patterns, mechanisms, and interactions with climate change. Photochemical & Photobiological Sciences. 2011;10:226–41.
15. Qaderi MM, Martel AB, Strugnell CA. Environmental Factors Regulate Plant Secondary Metabolites. Plants. 2023;12.
16. Bonin E, Avila VD, Carvalho VM, Cardoso MAP, Matos AM, Ramos AVG, et al. Study of chemical constituents, antioxidants and antimicrobial activities of Tamarindus indica L. seed. J Food Sci. 2023;88:4639–52.
17. Bonin E, Carvalho VM, Avila VD, Aparecida dos Santos NC, Benassi-Zanqueta É, Contreras Lancheros CA, et al. Baccharis dracunculifolia: Chemical constituents, cytotoxicity and antimicrobial activity. LWT. 2020;120:108920.
18. NRC. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle, 8th Revised Edition. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2016.
19. Carvalho VM, Ávila VADAD, Bonin E, Matos AM, Prado RM do M, Castilho RAA, et al. Effect of extracts from baccharis, tamarind, cashew nut shell liquid and clove on animal performance, feed efficiency, digestibility, rumen fermentation and feeding behavior of bulls finished in feedlot. Livest Sci. 2021;244.
20. Nehra C, Harshini V, Shukla N, Chavda P, Savaliya K, Patil S, et al. Moringa leaf meal exerts growth benefits in small ruminants through modulating the gastrointestinal microbiome. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2024;108.
21. Jo SU, Lee SJ, Kim HS, Eom JS, Choi Y, Lee Y, et al. Dose–Response Effects of Bamboo Leaves on Rumen Methane Production, Fermentation Characteristics, and Microbial Abundance In Vitro. Animals. 2022;12.
22. Benitez-Velásquez M, Cabrera R, Ríos-Tobón S, Isaza JP, Gutiérrez LA. Assessment of four different DNA extraction methodologies for the molecular detection of phage λ and Bacillus sp. in raw bovine milk samples. Int Dairy J. 2024;151.
23. MURPHY MA, SHARIFLOU MR, MORAN C. High quality genomic DNA extraction from large milk samples. Journal of Dairy Research. 2002;69:645–9.
24. National Center for Biotechnology Information. NCBI homepage.
25. Kim S-H, Islam M, Son A-R, Lee S-S, Kang S-H, Cho Y-I, et al. In vitro Assessment of Rumen Inocula between Jersey and Holstein Steers with Forage and Concentrate Substrates. Journal of Agriculture & Life Science. 2021;55:89–96.
26. Ahmed E, Yano R, Fujimori M, Kand D, Hanada M, Nishida T, et al. Impacts of Mootral on Methane Production, Rumen Fermentation, and Microbial Community in an in vitro Study. Front Vet Sci. 2021;7.
27. Brede J, Peukert M, Egert B, Breves G, Brede M. Long-Term Mootral Application Impacts Methane Production and the Microbial Community in the Rumen Simulation Technique System. Front Microbiol. 2021;12.
28. Litti Y V., Kovalev DA, Kovalev AA, Merkel AY, Vishnyakova A V., Russkova YI, et al. Auto-selection of microorganisms of sewage sludge used as an inoculum for fermentative hydrogen production from different substrates. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2021;46:29834–45.
29. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2024.
30. Patra AK. Meta-analyses of effects of phytochemicals on digestibility and rumen fermentation characteristics associated with methanogenesis. J Sci Food Agric. 2010;90:2700–8.
31. Omondi VO, Bosire GO, Onyari JM, Kibet C, Mwasya S, Onyonyi VN, et al. Multi-omics analyses reveal rumen microbes and secondary metabolites that are unique to livestock species. mSystems. 2024;9.
32. Kim D, Kuppusamy P, Jung JS, Kim KH, Choi KC. Microbial Dynamics and In Vitro Degradation of Plant Secondary Metabolites in Hanwoo Steer Rumen Fluids. Animals. 2021;11:2350.
33. Ku-Vera JC, Jiménez-Ocampo R, Valencia-Salazar SS, Montoya-Flores MD, Molina-Botero IC, Arango J, et al. Role of Secondary Plant Metabolites on Enteric Methane Mitigation in Ruminants. Front Vet Sci. 2020;7.
34. Huang M, Ma J, Wu X, Zhao M, Wang L, Che F, et al. Synthesis, Surface Activity, and Antimicrobial Efficacy of Hydrogenated Cardanol‐Derived Positively Charged Asymmetric Gemini Surfactants. J Surfactants Deterg. 2019;22:1289–98.
35. Marchese A, Barbieri R, Coppo E, Orhan IE, Daglia M, Nabavi SF, et al. Antimicrobial activity of eugenol and essential oils containing eugenol: A mechanistic viewpoint. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2017;43:668–89.
36. Doughari JH. Antimicrobial Activity of Tamarindus indica Linn. Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research. 2007;5.
37. Hua D, Hendriks WH, Xiong B, Pellikaan WF. Starch and Cellulose Degradation in the Rumen and Applications of Metagenomics on Ruminal Microorganisms. Animals. 2022;12.
38. Pressman EM, Kebreab E. A review of key microbial and nutritional elements for mechanistic modeling of rumen fermentation in cattle under methane-inhibition. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2024;15.
39. Zhao L, Ma Y, Awasthi MK, Tian D, He J, Huang M, et al. Enhancement of bacterial cellulose production synergistic H2 and volatile fatty acids from fruit and vegetable waste through retting pretreatment. Ind Crops Prod. 2025;225.
40. Vijande C, Bevilacqua R, Balboa S, Carballa M. Altering operational conditions during protein fermentation to volatile fatty acids modifies the associated bacterial community. Microb Biotechnol. 2024;17.
41. Pereira AM, de Lurdes Nunes Enes Dapkevicius M, Borba AES. Alternative pathways for hydrogen sink originated from the ruminal fermentation of carbohydrates: Which microorganisms are involved in lowering methane emission? Animal Microbiome. 2022;4.
42. Beckman JL, Weiss WP. Nutrient Digestibility of Diets with Different Fiber to Starch Ratios when Fed to Lactating Dairy Cows. J Dairy Sci. 2005;88:1015–23.
43. Dombrowski N, Mahendrarajah T, Gross ST, Eme L, Spang A. Archaea. In: Practical Handbook of Microbiology. CRC Press; 2021. p. 229–48.
44. Wang J, Deng L, Chen M, Che Y, Li L, Zhu L, et al. Phytogenic feed additives as natural antibiotic alternatives in animal health and production: A review of the literature of the last decade. Animal Nutrition. 2024;17:244–64.
45. Wakai M, Hayashi S, Chiba Y, Koike S, Nagashima K, Kobayashi Y. Growth and morphologic response of rumen methanogenic archaea and bacteria to cashew nut shell liquid and its alkylphenol components. Animal Science Journal. 2021;92.
46. Abdul Kalam Saleena L, Chang SK, Simarani K, Arunachalam KD, Thammakulkrajang R, How YH, et al. A comprehensive review of Bifidobacterium spp : as a probiotic, application in the food and therapeutic, and forthcoming trends. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2024;50:581–97.
47. Sun H, Du Z, Fan L, Xu Z, Yang W, Zhang G, et al. Structural alterations in butyrylated and recrystallized high-amylose maize starch and their effect on gut microbiota during in vitro fermentation. Int J Biol Macromol. 2025;302:139970.
48. Faniyi TO, Adegbeye MJ, Elghandour MMMY, Pilego AB, Salem AZM, Olaniyi TA, et al. Role of diverse fermentative factors towards microbial community shift in ruminants. J Appl Microbiol. 2019;127:2–11.
49. Smith PE, Kelly AK, Kenny DA, Waters SM. Differences in the Composition of the Rumen Microbiota of Finishing Beef Cattle Divergently Ranked for Residual Methane Emissions. Front Microbiol. 2022;13.
50. Yang Y, Liu C, Zhao W, Mazarji M, Ren L, Liu C, et al. Anaerobic propionic acid production via succinate pathway at extremely low pH. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2024;486.
51. Gharechahi J, Vahidi MF, Sharifi G, Ariaeenejad S, Ding X-Z, Han J-L, et al. Lignocellulose degradation by rumen bacterial communities: New insights from metagenome analyses. Environ Res. 2023;229:115925.
52. Gao Q, He J, Wang J, Yan Y, Liu L, Wang Z, et al. Effects of dietary D-lactate levels on rumen fermentation, microflora and metabolomics of beef cattle. Front Microbiol. 2024;15.
53. Skorokhodova AYu, Gulevich AYu, Debabov VG. Optimization of Aerobic Synthesis of Succinic Acid from Glucose by Recombinant Escherichia coli Strains through the Tricarboxylic Acid Cycle Variant Mediated by the Action of 2-Ketoglutarate Decarboxylase. Appl Biochem Microbiol. 2023;59:786–92.
54. He S, Zhao S, Wang Z, Dai S, Mao H, Wu D. Impact of Seasonal Variation in Pasture on Rumen Microbial Community and Volatile Fatty Acids in Grazing Yaks: Insights from High-Altitude Environments. Microorganisms. 2024;12.
55. Huang YJ, Lewis CA, Wright C, Schneider K, Kemmitt J, Trumper DL, et al. Faecalibacterium prausnitzii A2-165 metabolizes host-and media-derived chemicals and induces transcriptional changes in colonic epithelium in GuMI human gut microphysiological system. Microbiome Research Reports. 2024;3.
56. Dos Santos TL, Favaretto JAR, Brunetto ALR, Zatti E, Marchiori MS, Pereira WAB, et al. Dietary Additive Combination for Dairy Calves After Weaning Has a Modulating Effect on the Profile of Short-Chain Fatty Acids in the Rumen and Fecal Microbiota. Fermentation. 2024;10.
2. Brockway PE, Sorrell S, Semieniuk G, Heun MK, Court V. Energy efficiency and economy-wide rebound effects: A review of the evidence and its implications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2021;141.
3. Satter LD, Klopfenstein TJ, Erickson GE. The role of nutrition in reducing nutrient output from ruminants. J Anim Sci. 2002;80 E-suppl_2:E143–56.
4. Cheng M, McCarl B, Fei C. Climate Change and Livestock Production: A Literature Review. Atmosphere. 2022;13.
5. Liu J, Zhou M, Zhou L, Dang R, Xiao L, Tan Y, et al. Methane production related to microbiota in dairy cattle feces. Environ Res. 2025;267.
6. Da-Silva-Macêdo AJ, Costa-Campos A, Nascimento-Coutinho D, Soares-Freitas CA, Dos-Anjos AJ, Rocha-Bezerra L. Effect of the diet on ruminal parameters and rumen microbiota: review. Revista Colombiana de Ciencia Animal - RECIA. 2022;14:e886.
7. Ungerfeld EM. Metabolic Hydrogen Flows in Rumen Fermentation: Principles and Possibilities of Interventions. Front Microbiol. 2020;11.
8. Króliczewska B, Pecka-Kiełb E, Bujok J. Strategies Used to Reduce Methane Emissions from Ruminants: Controversies and Issues. Agriculture (Switzerland). 2023;13.
9. Pang Z, Chen J, Wang T, Gao C, Li Z, Guo L, et al. Linking Plant Secondary Metabolites and Plant Microbiomes: A Review. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2021;12.
10. Khan A, Kanwal F, Ullah S, Fahad M, Tariq L, Altaf MT, et al. Plant Secondary Metabolites—Central Regulators Against Abiotic and Biotic Stresses. Metabolites. 2025;15.
11. Divekar PA, Narayana S, Divekar BA, Kumar R, Gadratagi BG, Ray A, et al. Plant Secondary Metabolites as Defense Tools against Herbivores for Sustainable Crop Protection. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23.
12. Iason G. The role of plant secondary metabolites in mammalian herbivory: ecological perspectives. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2005;64:123–31.
13. Niu X, Xing Y, Wang J, Bai L, Xie Y, Zhu S, et al. Effects of Caragana korshinskii tannin on fermentation, methane emission, community of methanogens, and metabolome of rumen in sheep. Front Microbiol. 2024;15.
14. Ballaré CL, Caldwell MM, Flint SD, Robinson SA, Bornman JF. Effects of solar ultraviolet radiation on terrestrial ecosystems. Patterns, mechanisms, and interactions with climate change. Photochemical & Photobiological Sciences. 2011;10:226–41.
15. Qaderi MM, Martel AB, Strugnell CA. Environmental Factors Regulate Plant Secondary Metabolites. Plants. 2023;12.
16. Bonin E, Avila VD, Carvalho VM, Cardoso MAP, Matos AM, Ramos AVG, et al. Study of chemical constituents, antioxidants and antimicrobial activities of Tamarindus indica L. seed. J Food Sci. 2023;88:4639–52.
17. Bonin E, Carvalho VM, Avila VD, Aparecida dos Santos NC, Benassi-Zanqueta É, Contreras Lancheros CA, et al. Baccharis dracunculifolia: Chemical constituents, cytotoxicity and antimicrobial activity. LWT. 2020;120:108920.
18. NRC. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle, 8th Revised Edition. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2016.
19. Carvalho VM, Ávila VADAD, Bonin E, Matos AM, Prado RM do M, Castilho RAA, et al. Effect of extracts from baccharis, tamarind, cashew nut shell liquid and clove on animal performance, feed efficiency, digestibility, rumen fermentation and feeding behavior of bulls finished in feedlot. Livest Sci. 2021;244.
20. Nehra C, Harshini V, Shukla N, Chavda P, Savaliya K, Patil S, et al. Moringa leaf meal exerts growth benefits in small ruminants through modulating the gastrointestinal microbiome. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2024;108.
21. Jo SU, Lee SJ, Kim HS, Eom JS, Choi Y, Lee Y, et al. Dose–Response Effects of Bamboo Leaves on Rumen Methane Production, Fermentation Characteristics, and Microbial Abundance In Vitro. Animals. 2022;12.
22. Benitez-Velásquez M, Cabrera R, Ríos-Tobón S, Isaza JP, Gutiérrez LA. Assessment of four different DNA extraction methodologies for the molecular detection of phage λ and Bacillus sp. in raw bovine milk samples. Int Dairy J. 2024;151.
23. MURPHY MA, SHARIFLOU MR, MORAN C. High quality genomic DNA extraction from large milk samples. Journal of Dairy Research. 2002;69:645–9.
24. National Center for Biotechnology Information. NCBI homepage.
25. Kim S-H, Islam M, Son A-R, Lee S-S, Kang S-H, Cho Y-I, et al. In vitro Assessment of Rumen Inocula between Jersey and Holstein Steers with Forage and Concentrate Substrates. Journal of Agriculture & Life Science. 2021;55:89–96.
26. Ahmed E, Yano R, Fujimori M, Kand D, Hanada M, Nishida T, et al. Impacts of Mootral on Methane Production, Rumen Fermentation, and Microbial Community in an in vitro Study. Front Vet Sci. 2021;7.
27. Brede J, Peukert M, Egert B, Breves G, Brede M. Long-Term Mootral Application Impacts Methane Production and the Microbial Community in the Rumen Simulation Technique System. Front Microbiol. 2021;12.
28. Litti Y V., Kovalev DA, Kovalev AA, Merkel AY, Vishnyakova A V., Russkova YI, et al. Auto-selection of microorganisms of sewage sludge used as an inoculum for fermentative hydrogen production from different substrates. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2021;46:29834–45.
29. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2024.
30. Patra AK. Meta-analyses of effects of phytochemicals on digestibility and rumen fermentation characteristics associated with methanogenesis. J Sci Food Agric. 2010;90:2700–8.
31. Omondi VO, Bosire GO, Onyari JM, Kibet C, Mwasya S, Onyonyi VN, et al. Multi-omics analyses reveal rumen microbes and secondary metabolites that are unique to livestock species. mSystems. 2024;9.
32. Kim D, Kuppusamy P, Jung JS, Kim KH, Choi KC. Microbial Dynamics and In Vitro Degradation of Plant Secondary Metabolites in Hanwoo Steer Rumen Fluids. Animals. 2021;11:2350.
33. Ku-Vera JC, Jiménez-Ocampo R, Valencia-Salazar SS, Montoya-Flores MD, Molina-Botero IC, Arango J, et al. Role of Secondary Plant Metabolites on Enteric Methane Mitigation in Ruminants. Front Vet Sci. 2020;7.
34. Huang M, Ma J, Wu X, Zhao M, Wang L, Che F, et al. Synthesis, Surface Activity, and Antimicrobial Efficacy of Hydrogenated Cardanol‐Derived Positively Charged Asymmetric Gemini Surfactants. J Surfactants Deterg. 2019;22:1289–98.
35. Marchese A, Barbieri R, Coppo E, Orhan IE, Daglia M, Nabavi SF, et al. Antimicrobial activity of eugenol and essential oils containing eugenol: A mechanistic viewpoint. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2017;43:668–89.
36. Doughari JH. Antimicrobial Activity of Tamarindus indica Linn. Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research. 2007;5.
37. Hua D, Hendriks WH, Xiong B, Pellikaan WF. Starch and Cellulose Degradation in the Rumen and Applications of Metagenomics on Ruminal Microorganisms. Animals. 2022;12.
38. Pressman EM, Kebreab E. A review of key microbial and nutritional elements for mechanistic modeling of rumen fermentation in cattle under methane-inhibition. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2024;15.
39. Zhao L, Ma Y, Awasthi MK, Tian D, He J, Huang M, et al. Enhancement of bacterial cellulose production synergistic H2 and volatile fatty acids from fruit and vegetable waste through retting pretreatment. Ind Crops Prod. 2025;225.
40. Vijande C, Bevilacqua R, Balboa S, Carballa M. Altering operational conditions during protein fermentation to volatile fatty acids modifies the associated bacterial community. Microb Biotechnol. 2024;17.
41. Pereira AM, de Lurdes Nunes Enes Dapkevicius M, Borba AES. Alternative pathways for hydrogen sink originated from the ruminal fermentation of carbohydrates: Which microorganisms are involved in lowering methane emission? Animal Microbiome. 2022;4.
42. Beckman JL, Weiss WP. Nutrient Digestibility of Diets with Different Fiber to Starch Ratios when Fed to Lactating Dairy Cows. J Dairy Sci. 2005;88:1015–23.
43. Dombrowski N, Mahendrarajah T, Gross ST, Eme L, Spang A. Archaea. In: Practical Handbook of Microbiology. CRC Press; 2021. p. 229–48.
44. Wang J, Deng L, Chen M, Che Y, Li L, Zhu L, et al. Phytogenic feed additives as natural antibiotic alternatives in animal health and production: A review of the literature of the last decade. Animal Nutrition. 2024;17:244–64.
45. Wakai M, Hayashi S, Chiba Y, Koike S, Nagashima K, Kobayashi Y. Growth and morphologic response of rumen methanogenic archaea and bacteria to cashew nut shell liquid and its alkylphenol components. Animal Science Journal. 2021;92.
46. Abdul Kalam Saleena L, Chang SK, Simarani K, Arunachalam KD, Thammakulkrajang R, How YH, et al. A comprehensive review of Bifidobacterium spp : as a probiotic, application in the food and therapeutic, and forthcoming trends. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2024;50:581–97.
47. Sun H, Du Z, Fan L, Xu Z, Yang W, Zhang G, et al. Structural alterations in butyrylated and recrystallized high-amylose maize starch and their effect on gut microbiota during in vitro fermentation. Int J Biol Macromol. 2025;302:139970.
48. Faniyi TO, Adegbeye MJ, Elghandour MMMY, Pilego AB, Salem AZM, Olaniyi TA, et al. Role of diverse fermentative factors towards microbial community shift in ruminants. J Appl Microbiol. 2019;127:2–11.
49. Smith PE, Kelly AK, Kenny DA, Waters SM. Differences in the Composition of the Rumen Microbiota of Finishing Beef Cattle Divergently Ranked for Residual Methane Emissions. Front Microbiol. 2022;13.
50. Yang Y, Liu C, Zhao W, Mazarji M, Ren L, Liu C, et al. Anaerobic propionic acid production via succinate pathway at extremely low pH. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2024;486.
51. Gharechahi J, Vahidi MF, Sharifi G, Ariaeenejad S, Ding X-Z, Han J-L, et al. Lignocellulose degradation by rumen bacterial communities: New insights from metagenome analyses. Environ Res. 2023;229:115925.
52. Gao Q, He J, Wang J, Yan Y, Liu L, Wang Z, et al. Effects of dietary D-lactate levels on rumen fermentation, microflora and metabolomics of beef cattle. Front Microbiol. 2024;15.
53. Skorokhodova AYu, Gulevich AYu, Debabov VG. Optimization of Aerobic Synthesis of Succinic Acid from Glucose by Recombinant Escherichia coli Strains through the Tricarboxylic Acid Cycle Variant Mediated by the Action of 2-Ketoglutarate Decarboxylase. Appl Biochem Microbiol. 2023;59:786–92.
54. He S, Zhao S, Wang Z, Dai S, Mao H, Wu D. Impact of Seasonal Variation in Pasture on Rumen Microbial Community and Volatile Fatty Acids in Grazing Yaks: Insights from High-Altitude Environments. Microorganisms. 2024;12.
55. Huang YJ, Lewis CA, Wright C, Schneider K, Kemmitt J, Trumper DL, et al. Faecalibacterium prausnitzii A2-165 metabolizes host-and media-derived chemicals and induces transcriptional changes in colonic epithelium in GuMI human gut microphysiological system. Microbiome Research Reports. 2024;3.
56. Dos Santos TL, Favaretto JAR, Brunetto ALR, Zatti E, Marchiori MS, Pereira WAB, et al. Dietary Additive Combination for Dairy Calves After Weaning Has a Modulating Effect on the Profile of Short-Chain Fatty Acids in the Rumen and Fecal Microbiota. Fermentation. 2024;10.
Published
2025-07-20
How to Cite
Diaz Avila, Vicente. 2025. “Goat Dairy Products in Colombia: Consumption Analysis As a Basis for Development of the Value Chain”. Archivos Latinoamericanos De Producción Animal 33 (Supl 1), 33-34. https://ojs.alpa.uy/index.php/ojs_files/article/view/3472.
Section
Proceedings
Copyright (c) 2025 Vicente Diaz Avila
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
