同型发酵乳杆菌对低水分紫花苜蓿青贮发酵品质及体外消化率的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2021.04.026

草地学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (4): 835-841.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2021.04.026

同型发酵乳杆菌对低水分紫花苜蓿青贮发酵品质及体外消化率的影响

侯红雁, 申晨, 霍文婕, 刘强, 张拴林, 王聪, 陈雷, 许庆方, 王永新, 王忠豪, 郭刚^*

山西农业大学动物科学学院, 山西太谷 030801

收稿日期:2020-11-06 修回日期:2020-12-11 发布日期:2021-06-02
通讯作者: * E-mail:guosteel1984@126.com
作者简介:侯红雁(1995-),女,山西太原人,硕士研究生,主要从事反刍动物营养与饲料科学研究,E-mail:804662423@qq.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(32001405);山西省高等学校科技创新项目(2019L0356);山西农业大学引进人才科研启动项目(2014YJ11)资助

The Effects of Homofermentative Lactobacillus on Ensiling Characteristics and in Vitro Digestibility of Low-moisture Alfalfa Silage

HOU Hong-yan, SHEN Chen, HUO Wen-jie, LIU Qiang, ZHANG Shuan-lin, WANG Cong, CHEN Lei, XU Qing-fang, WANG Yong-xin, WANG Zhong-hao, GUO Gang^*

College of Animal Sciences, Shanxi Agricultural University, Taigu, Shanxi Province 030801, China

Received:2020-11-06 Revised:2020-12-11 Published:2021-06-02
Contact: * E-mail:guosteel1984@126.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为研究同型发酵乳杆菌对低水分紫花苜蓿(Medicago sativa)青贮发酵品质及体外消化的影响,本试验以田间晾晒5 h后的紫花苜蓿(干物质含量为50%)为原料,添加不同种类同型发酵乳杆菌[棒状乳杆菌(LCO)、干酪乳杆菌(LCA)、植物乳杆菌(LP)和戊糖乳杆菌(LPE)],调制青贮饲料,青贮60 d后,测定其发酵品质,基于康奈尔净碳水化合物-蛋白质体系评价其营养价值,并采用体外产气法评价其消化效率。结果表明:LPE处理组青贮饲料pH值显著低于其他各组(P<0.05)。与对照组相比,LCO,LCA和LPE处理组氨态氮含量均显著降低(P<0.05),各处理组的非蛋白氮含量均显著降低(P<0.05),LP和LPE处理组快速降解蛋白和中速降解蛋白含量均显著升高(P<0.05),而LP和LCA组快速降解碳水化合物显著降低(P<0.05)。体外发酵试验中,LPE组青贮饲料产气量、干物质消化率和中性洗涤纤维消化率均显著高于对照组(P<0.05)。因此,干物质含量为50%的低水分紫花苜蓿青贮饲料中,添加戊糖乳杆菌能够提高其发酵品质、营养价值及体外消化效率。

关键词: 紫花苜蓿, 乳杆菌, 发酵品质, 营养价值

Abstract: The objective of this study was to determine the effect of homofermentative lactobacillus on the fermentation quality and in vitro digestibility of low-moisture alfalfa (Medicago sativa) silage. Single factor treatments were designed with Control (C),and Lactobacillus coryniformis (LCO),Lactobacillus casei (LCA),Lactobacillus plantarum (LP) and Lactobacillus pentose (LPE) addition. Alfalfa was harvested at the early flowering stage and dried in the field (5 h) until the dry matter content was about 50%,then the silages were prepared. After 60 days ensiling,the silage fermentation quality was determined,their nutritional value was evaluated based on cornell net carbohydrate and protein system (CNCPS) and digestibility was evaluated by in vitro gas production method. The results showed that the pH value of LPE group was significantly lower than that of other groups (P<0.05). Compared with the Control,the content of NH₃-N in LCO,LCA and LPE groups decreased (P<0.05);and the content of non-protein nitrogen in all lactobacillus groups decreased (P<0.05);the content of rapid degradation protein and intermediately degradable protein in LP and LPE groups increased (P<0.05) while the contents of rapidly degradable carbohydrates in LP and LCA groups decreased (P<0.05). In in vitro fermentation test,the gas production,dry matter digestibility and neutral detergent fiber digestibility of silage in LPE group were higher than those of control (P < 0.05). Therefore,adding L. pentose to low moisture alfalfa silage (with 50% dry matter content) could improve silage fermentation quality,nutritional value and in vitro digestibility.

Key words: Alfalfa, Lactobacillus, Fermentation characteristics, Nutritional value

中图分类号:

S541.9

侯红雁, 申晨, 霍文婕, 刘强, 张拴林, 王聪, 陈雷, 许庆方, 王永新, 王忠豪, 郭刚. 同型发酵乳杆菌对低水分紫花苜蓿青贮发酵品质及体外消化率的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 835-841.

HOU Hong-yan, SHEN Chen, HUO Wen-jie, LIU Qiang, ZHANG Shuan-lin, WANG Cong, CHEN Lei, XU Qing-fang, WANG Yong-xin, WANG Zhong-hao, GUO Gang. The Effects of Homofermentative Lactobacillus on Ensiling Characteristics and in Vitro Digestibility of Low-moisture Alfalfa Silage[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(4): 835-841.

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.1007-0435.2021.04.026

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2021/V29/I4/835

参考文献

[1] 尉志霞,刘强,霍文婕,等. 茬次和一天内不同收获时间对紫花苜蓿青贮发酵质量和体外发酵参数的影响[J]. 草地学报,2019,27(1):235-242
[2] Cai Y,Kumai S,Zhang J,et al. Comparative studies of Lactobacilli and Enterococci associated with forage crops as silage inoculants[J]. Nihon Chikusan Gakkaiho,1999,70(4):188-194
[3] Limin Kung,Shaver R D,Grant R J,et al. Silage review:Interpretation of chemical,microbial,and organoleptic components of silages[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2018,101(5):4020-4033
[4] 张适,吴琼,尤欢,等. 添加不同乳酸菌对全株玉米青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 饲料研究,2019,42(9):55-58
[5] 云颖,李真真,贾婷婷,等. 添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质及CNCPS蛋白组分的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2017,39(6):90-94
[6] 张鹏,卜登攀,张养东,等. 康奈尔净碳水化合物-净蛋白质体系(CNCPS)在反刍动物上的应用研究[J]. 中国奶牛,2014(5):7-10
[7] Menke K H,Raab L,Salewski A,et al. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science,1979,93(1):217-222
[8] 马艳艳,成艳芬,朱伟云. 体外发酵法评价不同产地、不同茬次苜蓿的营养价值[J]. 动物营养学报,2014,26(8):2421-2432
[9] Longland A,Theodorou M K,Sanderson R,et al. Non-starch polysaccharide composition and in vitro fermentability of tropical forage legumes varying in phenolic content[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology,1995,55(3):161-177
[10] 尉志霞,刘强,霍文婕,等. 体外法评价日间不同刈割时间和茬次对初花期紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 粮食与饲料工业,2019,(1):53-57
[11] 张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M]. 第3版.北京:中国农业大学出版社,2007:49-74
[12] Van-Soest P J,Robertson J B,Lewis B A. Methods for dietary fiber,neutral detergent fiber and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1991,74(10):3583-3597
[13] Fox D G,Barry M C,Pitt R E,et al. Application of the cornell net carbohydrate and protein model for cattle consuming forages[J]. Journal of Animal Science,1995,73:267-277
[14] Barker S B,Summerson W H. The colorimetric determination of lactic acid in biological material[J]. Journal of Biological Chemistry,1941,138(2):535-554
[15] Weatherburn M W. Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia[J]. Analytical Chemistry,1967,39(8):971-974
[16] Guo G,Shen C,Liu Q,et al. Fermentation quality and in vitro digestibility of first and second cut alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) silages harvested at three stages of maturity[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology,2019,257:114274
[17] 李积兰,刘书杰,柴沙驼,等. 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(04):850-858
[18] 云颖,赵苗苗,双胡尔,等. 刈割期和添加剂对苜蓿青贮发酵品质和CNCPS蛋白组分的影响[J]. 草业科学,2017,34(10):2149-2156
[19] Hellings P,Bertin G,Vanbelle M. Effect of lactic acid bacteria on silage fermentation[J]. Grassland science,1985,15:932-933
[20] Lanigan G W.Silage Bacteriology I. Water Activity and Temperature Relationships of Silage Strains of Lactobacillus Plantarum,Lactobacillus Brevis,and Pediococcus Cerevisiae[J]. Australian journal of biological ences,1963,16(3):606-615
[21] Greenhill W L. Plant juices in relation to silage fermentation. Ill. Effects of water activity of juice. [J]. Grass&Forage Science.1964,19(2):336-339
[22] Leibensperger R.Y,Pitt R.E. A model of clostridial dominance in ensilage[J]. Grass Forage Science,1987,42:297-317
[23] 刘辉,卜登攀,吕中旺,等. 凋萎和不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2015,24(5):126-133
[24] 解祥学,孟庆翔,代俊芳,等. 康奈尔净碳水化合物—蛋白质体系在中国的研究进展及发展趋势[J]. 中国畜牧兽医,2010,37(5):17-20
[25] Sje H,Edwards R A. Effect of pH on the activity of ryegrass Lolium multiflorum proteases[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,2010,46(3):267-277
[26] 郭旭生,周禾,刘桂霞. 苜蓿青贮过程中蛋白的分解及抑制方法[J]. 草业科学,2005,22(11):46-50
[27] Nutrition C O A. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle:2001[M]. Washington:National Academies press,2001:70-75
[28] 侯建建,白春生,张庆,等. 单一和复合乳酸菌添加水平对苜蓿青贮营养品质及蛋白组分的影响[J]. 草业科学,2016,33(10):2119-2125
[29] 郭旭生. 青贮中苜蓿蛋白的降解特性及化学添加剂的影响[J]. 草地学报,2007,15(9):506-508
[30] 赖玉娇,罗海玲,王朕朕,等. 添加不同乳酸菌剂对苜蓿青贮营养价值的影响[J]. 中国畜牧兽医,2014,41(8):111-116
[31] Gao W,Chen A,Zhang B,et al. Rumen degradability and post-ruminal digestion of dry matter,nitrogen and amino acids of three protein supplements[J]. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences,2015,28(4):485-493
[32] 张一为,李亚东,骆维,等. 四种乳酸菌制剂对半干苜蓿裹包青贮发酵品质和碳水化合物组分的影响[J]. 饲料研究,2019,42(4):90-93
[33] 杜雪燕,王迅,柴沙驼,等. 应用康奈尔净碳水化合物-蛋白质体系(CNCPS)评定不同物候期天然牧草营养价值[J]. 江苏农业科学,2016,44(1):260-263
[34] Beuvink J,Spoelstra S F. In vitro gas production kinetics of grass silages treated with different cell wall-degrading enzymes[J]. Grass and Forage Science,1994,49(3):277-283
[35] 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 and Development,1988,28(1):7-55
[36] Buxton D R,Muck R E,Harrison J H. Silage Science and Technology[M]. Madison,WI:ASA,CSSA and SSSA Publishers,2003:633-664
[37] 张立涛,刁其玉,李艳玲,等. 中性洗涤纤维生理营养与需要量的研究进展[J]. 中国草食动物科学,2013,33(1):57-61

同型发酵乳杆菌对低水分紫花苜蓿青贮发酵品质及体外消化率的影响

The Effects of Homofermentative Lactobacillus on Ensiling Characteristics and in Vitro Digestibility of Low-moisture Alfalfa Silage

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]	王静, 刘晓静, 程甜甜, 童长春, 汪雪. 不同氮效率紫花苜蓿叶特征及其产量效应研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 1941-1949.
[2]	孟宣辰, 马鹏程, 马杰, 段珍, 韩阳阳, 张吉宇. 黄土高原半干旱区紫花苜蓿覆膜垄沟和施肥效应研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 2098-2106.
[3]	谢开云, 孟翔, 徐珍珍, 张力文, 万江春, 颜安, 李陈建. 新疆半干旱地区不同种类混播草地的牧草产量和营养价值研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1835-1842.
[4]	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.
[5]	李春萍, 邱轶辉, 夏厚胤, 谭璐娜, 许环宇, 张瀚文, 高景慧. 紫花苜蓿多父本F₁代低蒸腾及产量性状的隶属函数分析[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1416-1422.
[6]	李天琦, 林志玲, 卢轩, 黄佳媛, 杨宁, 沃野, 高凯, 柳小妮, 王显国. 灌溉量对科尔沁沙地紫花苜蓿土壤速效养分分布及淋失的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1454-1461.
[7]	付志慧, 格根图, 贾玉山, 王志军, 吕世杰, 侯美玲, 南丁罕, 意如乐, 阿希达, 金国. 茬次与品种对多花黑麦草在北方地区种植的产量及营养价值的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1571-1577.
[8]	李鹏珍, 赵得琴, 邓波, 杨军, 赵国华, 赵亮. 生物炭与干旱胁迫对接种紫花苜蓿光合效率及生长的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1257-1264.
[9]	吕竑建, 邹璇, 吴硕, 李云, 陈晓阳, 张庆. 添加辣木叶和香肠乳杆菌对玉米秸秆青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1343-1349.
[10]	王文静, 麻冬梅, 赵丽娟, 马巧利. 2,4-表油菜素内酯对盐胁迫下紫花苜蓿生理指标及根系离子积累的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1363-1368.
[11]	潘新怡, 史昆, 龚攀, 韦宝, 吴欣明, 王赞. 紫花苜蓿花青苷合成的转录组分析[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 866-875.
[12]	黄荣, 姚博, 张玉娟, 贾倩英, 李向阳, 张宏, 张振粉. 成团泛菌CQ10脂多糖对紫花苜蓿种子萌发及苗期生长的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 965-971.
[13]	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.
[14]	徐洪雨, 甄莉丽, 李钰莹, 董宽虎, 李向林. 低温干旱环境对紫花苜蓿根颈耐寒性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 724-733.
[15]	李满有, 马忠仁, 王斌, 杨雨琦, 沈笑天, 曹立娟, 李小云, 兰剑. 宁夏引黄灌区2个苜蓿品种不同行比混播模式研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 798-804.