体外产气法评价不同分级指数玉米青贮—苜蓿干草组合发酵特性

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.04.033

草地学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (4): 1136-1144.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.04.033

体外产气法评价不同分级指数玉米青贮—苜蓿干草组合发酵特性

夏洪泽^1,2,3, 张琳琳^1,3, 王银梦^1,3, 孙璐^1,3, 王磊^1,3, 刘书杰^1,2,3, 崔占鸿^1,2,3, 刘明莲¹

1. 青海大学畜牧兽医科学院, 青海西宁 810016;
2. 青海省牦牛工程技术研究中心, 青海西宁 810016;
3. 青海省高原放牧家畜动物营养与饲料科学重点实验室, 青海西宁 810016

收稿日期:2020-03-15 修回日期:2020-04-26 出版日期:2020-08-15 发布日期:2020-07-28
通讯作者: 崔占鸿
作者简介:夏洪泽(1996-),男,吉林梨树人,硕士研究生,研究方向为动物营养与饲料科学专业,E-mail:2290947926@qq.com
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划子课题“放牧牦牛冷季营养平衡调控技术研究”（2018YFD0502403）；青海省科技厅项目（2020-ZJ-911）；中国科学院“西部之光”西部青年学者A类（3-4）共同资助

Evaluation of Fermentation Characteristics of Different Grading Indexes Corn Silage and Alfalfa Hay Combination Using in Vitro Gas Production

XIA Hong-ze^1,2,3, ZHANG Lin-lin^1,3, WANG Yin-meng^1,3, SUN Lu^1,3, Wang Lei^1,3, LIU Shu-jie^1,2,3, CUI Zhan-hong^1,2,3, LIU Ming-lian¹

1. Qinghai University Academy of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences, Xining, Qinghai Province 810016, China;
2. Yak Engineering Technology Research Center of Qinghai Province, Xining, Qinghai Province 810016, China;
3. Key Laboratory of Plateau Grazing Animal Nutrition and Feed Science of Qinghai Province, Xining, Qinghai Province 810016, China

Received:2020-03-15 Revised:2020-04-26 Online:2020-08-15 Published:2020-07-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为明确不同分级指数（Grading index，GI）下牦牛日粮粗饲料营养情况，本试验选取了5种不同GI（7.20，6.43，5.66，4.89，4.12）的玉米青贮—苜蓿干草组合，其质量比分别为70：30，60：40，50：50，40：60，30：70，进行牦牛瘤胃体外发酵试验，旨在探究不同组合下牦牛瘤胃体外发酵效果。试验结果表明：发酵48 h时，GI=7.20组合的累积产气量（Gas production，GP）显著高于或极显著高于其他组合（P<0.05或P<0.01）；各GI组合的干物质降解率（Dry matter degradation in vitro，IVDMD）差异不显著（P>0.05）；发酵3 h和12 h时，GI=7.20组合的中性洗涤纤维降解率（Neutral detergent fiber in vitro，IVNDFD）与GI=6.43组合差异不显著但极显著高于其他GI组合（P<0.01）；3 h，6 h，12 h，24 h时的氨态氮（NH₃-N）浓度随着GI降低呈现出减小趋势，48 h时的NH₃-N浓度随着GI降低呈现出先减小后增加趋势，GI=7.20时的NH₃-N浓度最大；发酵48 h时，各GI组合的微生物蛋白（Microbial protein，MCP）浓度差异不显著（P>0.05），但GI=7.20时的MCP浓度最大；发酵48 h时，乙酸、丙酸、总挥发性脂肪酸（Total volatile fatty acid，TVFA）浓度随着GI降低呈现出减小趋势，GI=7.20时的乙酸、丙酸、TVFA浓度最大；各GI组合发酵6 h~48 h均呈现了正组合效应，综合组合效应值（Multiply factors associative effects index，MFAEI）随着GI减小呈现先减小后增大的趋势，且各时间段GI=7.20组合的MFAEI高于其他GI组合。综上所述，GI值为7.20玉米青贮—苜蓿干草组合的牦牛瘤胃体外发酵效果最优。

关键词: 分级指数, 玉米青贮, 苜蓿干草, 牦牛, 瘤胃发酵, 组合效应

Abstract: The purpose of this experiment is to optimize the forage nutritional combination of yak diet with the grading index (GI). Five combinations of corn silage and alfalfa hay with different GIs (7.20,6.43,5.66,4.89,4.12) were selected to do yak rumen fermentation in vitro. After 48 h of fermentation,the cumulative gas production (GP) of the GI=7.20 combination was significantly higher or very significantly higher than the other GI values (P<0.05 or P<0.01). The dry matter degradation in vitro (IVDMD) of each GI combination was not significantly different (P>0.05). After 3 h and 12 h of fermentation,the neutral detergent fiber in vitro (IVNDFD) of GI=7.20 was not significantly different from that of GI=6.43 and was significantly higher than the other GI combinations (P<0.01). For 3 h,6 h,12 h and 24 h of fermentation,the concentration of ammonia nitrogen (NH₃-N) showed a decreasing tendency as GI decreased,at 48 h of fermentation,the concentration of NH₃-N showed a first decreasing and then increasing tendency with the decreasing of GI,and the concentration of NH₃-N at GI=7.20 was the largest. At 48 h of fermentation,the concentration of microbial protein (MCP) in all GI combinations was not significantly different (P>0.05) with the maximum MCP concentration at GI=7.20. After 48 h of fermentation,the concentrations of acetic acid,propionic acid and total volatile fatty acid (TVFA) showed decreasing tendencies as GI decreased. The concentrations of acetic acid,propionic acid and TVFA with GI=7.20 were the largest. Different GI forage combinations showed a positive combination effect from 6 to 48 hours of fermentation,the value of multiply factors associative effects index (MFAEI) had a first decrease and then increase tendency then increased trend as the GI decreases,GI=7.20 forage combination of MFAEI was higher than other GI combinations. Overall,in vitro fermentation of yak rumen with the GI=7.20 alfalfa hay and corn silage combination was optimal combination.

Key words: Grading index, Alfalfa hay, Silage corn, Yak, Rumen fermentation, Associative effects

中图分类号:

S153

夏洪泽, 张琳琳, 王银梦, 孙璐, 王磊, 刘书杰, 崔占鸿, 刘明莲. 体外产气法评价不同分级指数玉米青贮—苜蓿干草组合发酵特性[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(4): 1136-1144.

XIA Hong-ze, ZHANG Lin-lin, WANG Yin-meng, SUN Lu, Wang Lei, LIU Shu-jie, CUI Zhan-hong, LIU Ming-lian. Evaluation of Fermentation Characteristics of Different Grading Indexes Corn Silage and Alfalfa Hay Combination Using in Vitro Gas Production[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2020, 28(4): 1136-1144.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.04.033

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2020/V28/I4/1136

参考文献

[1] Wiener G,Jianlin H,Ruijun L. The Yak[J]. Rap publication,2011,44(4):57-58
[2] 胡令浩. 牦牛营养研究论文集[M]. 西宁:青海人民出版社,1997:3-15
[3] 刁波,崔占鸿,赵月平,等. 燕麦青干草与5种天然牧草的组合效应对产气量及发酵产物的影响[J]. 草地学报,2013,21(04):789-797
[4] 叶明. 不同GI与CBI组合日粮对奶牛产奶性能及血液生化指标的影响[D]. 大庆:黑龙江八一农垦大学,2017:47-50
[5] 朱双,王法明,张爱忠. 反刍动物常用粗饲料营养价值评定与组合优化配方的筛选[C]. 中国畜牧兽医学会动物营养学分会.第七届中国饲料营养学术研讨会论文集.中国畜牧兽医学会动物营养学分会.郑州:中国农业大学出版社,2014:498-499
[6] 王旭. 利用GI技术对粗饲料进行科学搭配及绵羊日粮配方系统优化技术的研究[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2003:55-57
[7] 张吉鹍,卢德勋,李龙瑞,等. 浅析粗饲料品质评定指数及其模型[J]. 畜牧与兽医,2004,36(4):23-25
[8] 红敏,高民,卢德勋,等. 粗饲料品质评定指数新一代分级指数的建立及与分级指数(GI₂₀₀₁)和饲料相对值(RFV)的比较研究[J]. 动物营养学报,2011,23(8):1296-1302
[9] 张吉鹍,邹庆华,李龙瑞. 饲料间的组合效应及其在粗饲料科学搭配上的应用[J]. 饲料广角,2003(21):26-30
[10] 胡红莲,卢媛. 粗饲料分级指数技术-粗饲料品质评定的新进展[J]. 饲料工业,2010,31(21):31-35
[11] Menke K H,Steingass H. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid[J]. Animal Research Development,1988,28:47-55
[12] Ørskove R,Mcdonald Ι. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science,1979,92(2):499-503
[13] 毕思思. 黄芪属植物对牦牛与黄牛体外发酵特征的影响[D]. 兰州:兰州大学,2019:7-15
[14] 冯宗慈,高民. 通过比色测定瘤胃液氨氮含量方法的改进[J]. 内蒙古畜牧科学,1993(4):40-41
[15] Cotta M A,Russell J B. Effect of peptides and amino acids on efficiency of rumen bacterial protein synthesis in continuous culture[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1982,65(2):226-234
[16] 曹庆云,周武艺,朱贵钊,等. 气相色谱测定羊瘤胃液中挥发性脂肪酸方法研究[J]. 中国饲料,2006(24):26-28
[17] Drachey D J,Beaulieu A D,Elliott J P. Responses of milk fat composition to dietary fat or nonstructural in Holstein and Jersey cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2001,84:1231-1237
[18] Zhang J K,Liu J X. Use of in vitro gas production to evaluate associative effects on gas production of rice straw supplemented with Lucerne[J]. Journal of Animal and Feed Science,2007,16(2):156-160
[19] 张文佳. 产朊假丝酵母和白地霉混合固态发酵豆渣生产反刍动物饲料的研究[D]. 哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2015:16-22
[20] 薛红枫,孟庆翔. 奶牛中性洗涤纤维营养研究进展[J]. 动物营养学报,2007(S1):454-458
[21] 崔占鸿,刘书杰,郝力壮,等. 体外产气法评价青海高原反刍家畜常用粗饲料组合效应[J]. 草业科学,2011,28(10):1894-1900
[22] 周传社,汤少勋,姜海林,等. 农作物秸秆体外发酵营养特性及其组合利用研究[J]. 应用生态学报,2005(10):1862-1867
[23] Nagaraja T G,Titgemeyer E C. Ruminal acidosis in beef cattle:the current microbiological and nutritional outlook[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2007,90(S1):17-38
[24] Yang W Z,Beauchemin K A,Rode L M. Effects of grain processing,forage to concentrate ratio,and forage particle size on rumen pH and digestion by dairy cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2001,84(10):2203-2216
[25] 嘎尔迪,齐智利,张润厚,等. 玉米的不同加工处理对绵羊瘤胃内pH、NH₃-N和VFA浓度的影响[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医,2002(9):18-20
[26] 李新,冀连斌,王聪,等. 产酶益生素对西门塔尔牛瘤胃液pH及氨态氮浓度的影响[J]. 中国饲料,2012,5:24-28
[27] 冯仰廉. 反刍动物营养学[M]. 北京:科学出版社,2004:136-138
[28] 刘哲,张昌吉,郝正里,等. 饲喂含不同秸秆的全日粮颗粒料对绵羊瘤胃及血液代谢参数的影响[J]. 中国饲料,2005(11):12-14
[29] 齐智利. 玉米的不同加工处理对泌乳奶牛瘤胃发酵和小肠消化以及能氮同步代谢影响的研究[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2004:12-18
[30] Owens F N,Bergen W G. Nitrogen metabolism of ruminant animals:Historical perspective,current understanding and future implications[J]. Journal of Animal Science,1983,57(S2):498-518
[31] Schaefer D M,Davis C L,Bryant M P. Ammonia saturation constants for predominant species of rumen bacteria[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1980,63:1248-1263
[32] Vanhoutertm M. Challenging the retinal for altering VFA ratios in growing ruminates[J]. Feed Mix,1996,4(1):514-525
[33] Kung L R,Sheperd A C,Smagala A M,et al. The effect of preservatives based on propionic acid on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage and a total mixed ration[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1988,81(5):1322-1330
[34] Spears J W,Schlegel P,Seal M C,et al. Bio-availability of zinc from zinc sulfate and different organic zinc sources and their effects on ruminal volatile fatty acid proportions[J]. Livestock Production Science,2004,90(2/3):211-217
[35] 王玲. 半胱胺和酵母培养物对奶牛瘤胃微生物蛋白产量、产奶性能和氮排泄的影响[D]. 青岛:青岛农业大学,2016:46-50
[36] 李满双,薛树媛,王超,等. 体外产气法研究沙柳混合发酵饲料对绵羊瘤胃内环境参数的影响[J]. 动物营养学报,2015,27(6):1943-1953
[37] Copani G,Ginane C,Lemorvan A,et al. Patterns of in vitro rumen fermentation of silage mixtures including sainfoin and red clover as bioactive legumes[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology,2015,208:220-224
[38] Murphy M,Akerlind M,Holtenius K. Rumen fermentation in lactating cows selected for milk fat content fed two forage to concentrate ratios with hay or silage[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2000,83:756-764
[39] Khejornsart P,Wanapat M. Effect of chemical treatment of rice straw on rumen fermentation characteristic,anaerobic fungal diversity in vitro[J]. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances,2010,9(24):3070-3076
[40] 董瑞阳. 粗饲料组合对泌乳牛与干奶牛甲烷产量、瘤胃发酵模式及微生物菌群的影响[D]. 郑州:河南农业大学,2014:18-19
[41] 张吉鹍. 粗饲料分级指数参数的模型化及粗饲料科学搭配的组合效应研究[D]. 呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2005:68-75

体外产气法评价不同分级指数玉米青贮—苜蓿干草组合发酵特性

Evaluation of Fermentation Characteristics of Different Grading Indexes Corn Silage and Alfalfa Hay Combination Using in Vitro Gas Production

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	姚喜喜, 才华, 刘皓栋, 李长慧. 不同季节高寒草甸牧草瘤胃发酵特性和体外消化率分析[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1729-1737.
[2]	陈雷, 暴雪艳, 郭刚, 霍文婕, 李清宏, 许庆方, 王聪, 刘强. 单宁酸和乳酸菌对紫花苜蓿青贮品质和体外瘤胃发酵的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1853-1858.
[3]	孙彩彩, 冯斌, 董全民, 刘文亭, 时光, 刘玉祯, 张小芳, 俞旸, 张春平, 杨晓霞. 牦牛藏羊混合放牧对高寒草地紫花针茅功能性状的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1477-1483.
[4]	孙雷雷, 赵桂琴, 柴继宽, 刘富渊, 聂秀美, 王军. 贮藏方式和贮藏时间对苜蓿干草霉菌数量和种类的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 884-893.
[5]	王新宇, 申晨, 霍文婕, 刘强, 张拴林, 王聪, 陈雷, 许庆方, 王永新, 郭刚. 雁北地区不同品种玉米全株青贮发酵品质及细菌群落结构分析[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 1087-1093.
[6]	肖红, 张德罡, 徐长林, 潘涛涛, 柴锦隆, 李亚娟, 鱼小军. 模拟践踏和降水对高寒草甸阴山扁蓿豆根系特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(2): 348-355.
[7]	史悦, 丁婉, 许庆方, 玉柱, 王璐娜, 赵愉风, 温盛慧. 灭菌处理对不同含水量玉米青贮影响的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(2): 512-519.
[8]	张建文, 杨海磊, 徐长林, 陈陆军, 肖红, 柴锦隆, 潘涛涛, 鱼小军. 牦牛和藏羊夏季划区轮牧对高寒草甸3种植物凋落物分解的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2017, 25(4): 732-742.
[9]	高燕丽, 孙彦. 利用近红外光谱分析预测紫花苜蓿干草品质[J]. 草地学报, 2015, 23(5): 1080-1085.
[10]	李积兰, 刘书杰, 柴沙驼, 王迅, 崔占鸿, 张晓卫, 牛建章. 体外产气法评价精补料与冷季天然牧草组合发酵营养特性[J]. 草地学报, 2015, 23(4): 850-858.
[11]	董全民, 赵新全, 李世雄, 施建军, 王彦龙, 郑伟, 候宪宽, 宋磊. 基于高寒草地放牧系统次级生产力的优化放牧强度研究[J]. 草地学报, 2014, 22(5): 919-923.
[12]	苗彦军, 付娟娟, 孙永芳, 褚希彤, 益西措姆, 呼天明, 许岳飞. 牦牛放牧模式对西藏高山嵩草草甸群落特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2014, 22(5): 935-941.
[13]	张晓娜. 贮藏方法对苜蓿干草营养品质的影响[J]. , 2013, 21(6): 1169-1175.
[14]	张晓娜. 不同干燥方法对苜蓿干草营养价值的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2013, 21(5): 977-984.
[15]	许红, 李冠真, 高永革, 王成章, 梁新平, 姜山, 王洁, 严学兵. 苜蓿干草对杜寒F1的生产性能及瘤胃pH值和氨态氮的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2013, 21(5): 1012-1017.