生育期和混播比例对四川冬闲田燕麦/箭筈豌豆混合青贮品质的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.06.031

草地学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (6): 1867-1877.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.06.031

生育期和混播比例对四川冬闲田燕麦/箭筈豌豆混合青贮品质的影响

甘丽¹, 李海萍², 汪辉¹, 陈有军¹, 陈仕勇¹, 蒋永梅³, 张珈敏¹, 梁骥¹, 关皓¹, 周青平¹

1. 西南民族大学四川若尔盖高寒湿地生态系统国家野外科学观测研究站, 四川成都 610041;
2. 青海师范大学数学与统计学院, 青海西宁 810016;
3. 青海省青藏高原优良牧草种质资源利用重点实验室青海大学畜牧兽医科学院, 青海西宁 810016

收稿日期:2023-02-14 修回日期:2023-03-22 出版日期:2023-06-15 发布日期:2023-06-30
通讯作者: 关皓,E-mail:guanh0427@outlook.com
作者简介:甘丽(1998-)，女，汉族，四川自贡人，硕士研究生，主要从事饲草加工与利用研究，E-mail:ganliyo@163.com
基金资助:
青海省重点研发与转化计划“高品质燕麦生产及牦牛高效转化利用关键技术研究”(2022-NK-130)；中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(2022NYXXS041)资助

Effects of Growth Phase and Mixed Sowing Ratio on Silage Quality of Forage Oat/ Common Vetch Mixed Fermentation in Winter Fallow Field of Sichuan

GAN Li¹, LI Hai-ping², WANG Hui¹, CHEN You-jun¹, CHEN Shi-yong¹, JIANG Yong-mei³, ZHANG Jia-min¹, LIANG Ji¹, GUAN Hao¹, ZHOU Qing-ping¹

1. Sichuan Zoige Alpine Wetland Ecosystem National Observation and Research Station, Southwest Minzu University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province 610041, China;
2. School of Mathematics and Statistics, Qinghai Normal University, Xining, Qinghai Province 810016, China;
3. Key Laboratory of Superior Forage Germplasm in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, Qinghai Academy of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Qinghai University, Xining, Qinghai Province 810016, China

Received:2023-02-14 Revised:2023-03-22 Online:2023-06-15 Published:2023-06-30

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探究四川冬闲田燕麦/箭筈豌豆混合青贮适宜的生育期及混播混贮比例，本试验以'贝勒’燕麦(Avena sativa)和'川北’箭筈豌豆(Vicia sativa)为原料，设置1∶0(T1)，3∶1(T2)，1∶1(T3)，1∶3(T4)，0∶1(T5)5个混播比例，在燕麦抽穗期/箭筈豌豆开花期、燕麦开花期/箭筈豌豆结荚前期、燕麦乳熟期/箭筈豌豆结荚后期刈割并混合青贮，青贮60 d取样分析。结果表明，在3个生育期中，燕麦抽穗期/箭筈豌豆开花期混合青贮的pH、氨态氮/总氮比值最低(P＜0.05)，燕麦开花期/箭筈豌豆结荚前期混合青贮的乳酸、乙酸含量最高；在5个混播比例中，T4较T1，T2，T3的中性洗涤纤维、酸性洗涤纤维和淀粉含量更低、粗蛋白含量更高；T4组pH、氨态氮/总氮比值低于各比例，乳酸含量高于T1,T2,T5组。因此，在四川冬闲田于燕麦开花期/箭筈豌豆结荚前期刈割，以燕麦/箭筈豌豆1∶3比例混播混贮其青贮品质最优。

关键词: 燕麦, 箭筈豌豆, 混播比例, 生育期, 混合青贮, 品质

Abstract: To explore the suitable growth phase,the ratio of mixed sowing and mixed storage of forage oat (Avena sativa)/common vetch (Vicia sativa) for the mixed silage for the winter fallow field in Sichuan,this experiment used 'Baler’ oat and 'Chuanbei’ common vetch as raw materials,and set 1:0 (T1)，3:1 (T2),1:1 (T3),1:3 (T4),0:1 (T5) five mixed sowing ratios,in oat heading stage/common vetch flowering stage,oat flowering stage/common vetch pre-podding stage,oat milk-ripe stage/common vetch post-podding stage were cut then mixed as silage,and the silage was sampled and analyzed after fermented for 60 days. The results showed that among the three growth stages,the pH and proportion of ammonia nitrogen/total nitrogen of mixed silage at the oat heading /common vetch flowering phase were the lowest (P<0.05),and the highest contents of lactic and acetic acid in mixed silage at oat flowering /common vetch pre-podding phase (P<0.05). Among the five mixed sowing ratios,T4 had a lower content of neutral detergent fiber,acid detergent fiber and starch,and a higher crude protein content than T1,T2,and in T3;the pH,proportion of ammonia nitrogen/total nitrogen was lower than those of other groups,and the content of lactic acid was higher than that of T1,T2,T5 groups. In summary,for winter fallow fields in Sichuan,the best silage quality would be obtained when the oats and common vetch were mowed with a ratio of 1:3 and harvested at the oat flowering and the common vetch at the early stage of podding.

Key words: Oat, Common vetch, Mixing sowing ratio, Growth phase, Mixed silage, Quality

中图分类号:

S157.4+31

甘丽, 李海萍, 汪辉, 陈有军, 陈仕勇, 蒋永梅, 张珈敏, 梁骥, 关皓, 周青平. 生育期和混播比例对四川冬闲田燕麦/箭筈豌豆混合青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1867-1877.

GAN Li, LI Hai-ping, WANG Hui, CHEN You-jun, CHEN Shi-yong, JIANG Yong-mei, ZHANG Jia-min, LIANG Ji, GUAN Hao, ZHOU Qing-ping. Effects of Growth Phase and Mixed Sowing Ratio on Silage Quality of Forage Oat/ Common Vetch Mixed Fermentation in Winter Fallow Field of Sichuan[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2023, 31(6): 1867-1877.

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.1007-0435.2023.06.031

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2023/V31/I6/1867

参考文献

[1] LIU L,XU X,HU Y,et al. Efficiency analysis of bioenergy potential on winter fallow fields:A case study of rape [J]. Science of The Total Environment,2018,628:103-109
[2] YAN J,YANG Z,LI Z,et al. Drivers of cropland abandonment in mountainous areas:A household decision model on farming scale in Southwest China [J]. Land Use Policy,2016,57:459-469
[3] LIU L,XU X,LIU J,et al. Impact of farmland changes on production potential in China during 1990-2010 [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences,2015,25:19-34
[4] 田静,谢昭良,刘家杏,等. 冬闲田种植大麦不同生育期的营养价值和青贮品质[J]. 草业科学,2017,34(4):753-760
[5] 任继周,胥刚,李向林,等. 中国草业科学的发展轨迹与展望[J]. 科学通报,2016,61(2):178-192
[6] 张建国,刘向东,曹致中,等. 饲料稻研究现状及发展前景[J]. 草业学报,2008,76(5):151-155
[7] 方精云. 我国草原牧区呼唤新的草业发展模式[J]. 科学通报,2016,61(2):137-138
[8] 侯向阳. 关于我国现代草牧业发展的若干思考[J]. 草业科学,2022,39(10):1987-1991
[9] 李凤杰,于晨,马力,等. 施肥对冬闲稻田紫花苜蓿生长及苜蓿绿肥对轮作水稻产量的影响[J]. 草业科学,2021,38(10):2008-2018
[10] 郭金桂,宋灵峰,玉柱,等. 混合比例对紫花苜蓿与燕麦混贮品质的动态影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2018,40(1):73-79
[11] 张洁,原现军,郭刚,等. 添加剂对西藏燕麦和箭筈豌豆混合青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2014,23(5):359-364
[12] 许留兴,李万荣,王晓亚,等. 冬闲田混播小麦与豆科牧草对饲草产量、品质和土壤特性的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2022,44(9):66-74
[13] 冯廷旭,德科加,向雪梅,等. 高寒地区燕麦与豌豆不同混播组合和比例对饲草产量及品质的影响[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(2):487-494
[14] 文兴金,杨继芝,肖启银,等. 川西北高原全株玉米和大豆混贮比例对青贮品质的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2022,44(8):115-120
[15] 张丁华,王艳丰,刘健,等.多花黑麦草与紫花苜蓿混合青贮发酵品质和体外消化率的研究[J]. 动物营养学报,2019,31(4):1725-1732
[16] 葛剑,杨翠军,刘贵河等.添加剂对紫花苜蓿和裸燕麦混合青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报,2016,24(4):919-922
[17] 秦梦臻,沈益新. 生育期对小麦全株青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学,2012,45(8):1661-1666
[18] 李蕾蕾,花登峰,郑兴卫,等. 含水量和混播比例对青南牧区燕麦-箭筈豌豆/毛苕子混播青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2018,27(7):166-174
[19] 邝肖,季婧,梁文学,等. 北方寒区紫花苜蓿/无芒雀麦混播比例和刈割时期对青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2018,27(12):187-198
[20] 倪旺,王斌,王腾飞,等. 不同播量拉巴豆与甜高粱混播对混合饲草青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业科学,2022,39(8):1628-1635
[21] BOLSEN K K,LIN C,BRENT B E,et al. Effect of silage additives on the microbial succession and fermentation process of alfalfa and corn silages [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1992,75(11):3066-3083
[22] GUAN H,YAN Y,LI X,et al. Microbial communities and natural fermentation of corn silages prepared with farm bunker-silo in southwest China [J]. Bioresource Technology,2018,265:282-290
[23] CAI Y,BENNO Y,NAKASE T,et al. Specific probiotic characterization of Weissella hellenica DS-12 isolated from flounder intestine [J]. The Journal of General and Applied Microbiology,1998,44(5):311-316
[24] FILYA I,ASHBELL G,HEN Y,et al. The effect of bacterial inoculants on the fermentation and aerobic stability of whole crop wheat silage [J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology,2000,88(1-2):39-46
[25] 张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].北京：中国农业大学出版社，2016：48-80
[26] THOMAS E D,MANDEBVU P,BALLARD C S,et al. Comparison of corn silage hybrids for yield,nutrient composition,in vitro digestibility,and milk yield by dairy cows [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2001,84(10):2217-2226
[27] RUSSELL J B,O'CONNOR J D,FOX D G,et al. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets:I. Ruminal fermentation [J]. Journal of Animal Science,1992,70(11):3551-3561
[28] SHAO T,ZHANG L,SHIMOJO M,et al. Fermentation quality of Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum lam.) silages treated with encapsulated-glucose,glucose,sorbic acid and pre-fermented juices [J]. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences,2007,20(11):1699-1704
[29] 王亚芳,姜富贵,成海建,等. 不同青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响[J]. 动物营养学报,2020,32(6):2765-2774
[30] 宁祖林,陈慧娟,王珠娜,等. 几种高大禾草热值和灰分动态变化研究[J]. 草业学报,2010,19(2):241-247
[31] NI K,ZHAO J,ZHU B,et al. Assessing the fermentation quality and microbial community of the mixed silage of forage soybean with crop corn or sorghum [J]. Bioresource Technology,2018,265:563-567
[32] NORDKVIST E,AMAN P. Changes during growth in anatomical and chemical composition and in-vitro degradability of lucerne [J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1986,37(1):1-7
[33] THROOP H L. Nitrogen deposition and herbivory affect biomass production and allocation in an annual plant [J]. Oikos,2005,111(1):91-100
[34] 马军,郑伟,朱婧蓉,等. 燕麦与箭筈豌豆混播草地不同刈割时期生产性能的对比分析[J]. 新疆农业科学,2015,52(8):1547-1554
[35] 关皓,张明均,宋珊,等. 添加剂对不同干物质含量的多花黑麦草青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业科学,2017,34(10):2157-2163
[36] 刘逸超,司强,刘明健,等. 装填密度对羊草和苜蓿青贮品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报,2023,31(1):263-271
[37] 陈梦言,白洁,柯文灿等.青贮饲料微生物群落组成与功能研究进展[J]. 生物技术通报,2021,37(9):11-23
[38] 李海萍,关皓,贾志锋,等..添加麦麸和乳酸菌对川西北高寒地区燕麦裹包青贮品质和有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报,2023,31(1):302-310
[39] FAIRBAIRN R,ALLI I,BAKER B E. Proteolysis associated with the ensiling of chopped alfalfa [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1988,71(1):152-158
[40] GUO X S,XU D M,LI F H,et al. Current approaches on the roles of lactic acid bacteria in crop silage [J]. Microb Biotechnology,2023,16(1):67-87
[41] 崔彪,王继彤,张晓峰,等. 影响全株玉米青贮饲料质量的因素及质量评价方法[J]. 中国饲料,2022,699(7):116-121
[42] 张庆,张万军,田吉鹏,等. 乳酸菌青贮技术研究进展[J]. 草业科学,2014,31(2):328-333
[43] 李菲菲,张凡凡,王旭哲,等. 刈割茬次和生育期对苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2019,28(12):137-148
[44] HU W,SCHMIDT R J,MCDONELL E E,et al. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri 40788 or Lactobacillus plantarum MTD-1 on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silages ensiled at two dry matter contents [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2009,92(8):3907-3914
[45] 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):50-54
[46] 金莎,黄世章,钟毅,等. 香蕉茎叶与柱花草混贮饲料的品质[J]. 草业科学,2016,33(3):512-518
[47] 刘逸超,司强,刘明健,等. 装填密度对羊草和苜蓿青贮品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报,2023,31(1):263-271
[48] 郭旭生,丁武蓉,玉柱. 青贮饲料发酵品质评定体系及其新进展[J]. 中国草地学报,2008,163(4):100-106
[49] MEESKE R,VAN DER MERWE G D,GREYLING J F,et al. The effect of adding an enzyme containing lactic acid bacterial inoculant to big round bale oat silage on intake,milk production and milk composition of Jersey cows [J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology,2002,97(3-4):159-167
[50] RANJIT N K,TAYLOR C C,KUNG JR L. Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri 40788 on the fermentation,aerobic stability and nutritive value of maize silage [J]. Grass and Forage Science,2002,57(2):73-81
[51] 季婧,多田琦,梅错,等. 混播比例对紫花苜蓿/无芒雀麦青贮品质的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2017,39(2):19-25
[52] KAISER E,WEIB K,KRAUSE R. Beurteilung skriterien fur die quality on grass silage [C]// Proceedings of the Society for Nutritional Physiology,2000,9:94-101

生育期和混播比例对四川冬闲田燕麦/箭筈豌豆混合青贮品质的影响

Effects of Growth Phase and Mixed Sowing Ratio on Silage Quality of Forage Oat/ Common Vetch Mixed Fermentation in Winter Fallow Field of Sichuan

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]	彭靖涵, 程明军, 董志晓, 雷雄, 苟文龙, 刘岳华, 陈书明, 田科, 刘伟, 马啸. 12个饲用燕麦品种在四川的适应性评价分析[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(7): 2128-2136.
[2]	黄佩珊, 张超, 陈丹丹, 张庆. 辣木叶提取物对柱花草和象草青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(7): 2194-2202.
[3]	鲍根生, 张鹏, 马祥, 贾志锋, 刘文辉, 马兴赟. 高寒区氮添加对禾豆间作系统牧草和种子产量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(7): 2210-2219.
[4]	叶文兴, 孔令琪. 基于氧传感技术测定燕麦种子活力的初步研究[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1714-1719.
[5]	毛丽萍, 盛兵扬, 张鸿博, 阿依谢木, 沈禹颖. 钾添加对燕麦生长及其钾积累和分配的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1744-1753.
[6]	周丽, 付薇, 覃涛英, 孟军江, 桂永清, 任建华, 韩永芬, 丁磊磊. 施氮对高丹草-扁豆套作系统产量、品质和氮素利用效率的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1754-1761.
[7]	胡伟, 梁国玲, 刘凯强, 刘文辉, 李文. 青藏高原9个燕麦品种抗倒伏能力及其影响因素研究[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1788-1797.
[8]	王一博, 陈奕彤, 刘馨迪, 郭勇震, 孙娟, 张慧, 李圆圆, 郭善利. 饲用藜麦在黄河三角洲盐碱地的适应性研究与评价[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1810-1817.
[9]	闫星全, 贾玉山, 格根图, 王志军, 赵牧其尔, 刘静怡, 珠娜, 孙鹏波. 原料含水量及添加剂种类对青贮苜蓿品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1861-1866.
[10]	南铭, 李晶, 王昶, 李永生, 向达兵, 景芳, 刘彦明. 甘肃中部春播燕麦不同刈割期产量和品质比较研究[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1878-1885.
[11]	郭常英, 王伟, 蒲小剑, 傅云洁, 王龙然, 魏晓丽, 彭丹, 徐成体. 种植行距对高寒地区饲用燕麦饲用价值及土壤特性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1886-1893.
[12]	王运涛, 孙震, 王旗旗, 解继红, 于林清, 薛春风, 刘生豪, 钟罡, 弓艳春, 申捷. 不同磷酸二铵施量对紫花苜蓿越冬、生产性能和营养品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(6): 1902-1910.
[13]	王振龙, 杜江, 牛勇, 姚拓. 若尔盖高寒补播草地燕麦根际促生菌的筛选及促生特性研究[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(5): 1406-1413.
[14]	谢乐乐, 王晓丽, 马源, 马玉寿, 王彦龙, 周选博. 返青期休牧对高寒草甸植物品质与碳氮磷化学计量比的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(5): 1454-1460.
[15]	王勃, 夏方山, 董秋丽, 岑慧芳, 李尹琳, 张杰敏. 外源油菜素内酯引发对劣变燕麦种子抗氧化特性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(5): 1461-1468.