添加剂对不同含水量多花黑麦草青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2016.03.028

草地学报 ›› 2016, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (3): 669-675.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2016.03.028

添加剂对不同含水量多花黑麦草青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响

关皓¹, 郭旭生², 干友民¹, 白慧娟¹, 宋珊¹

1. 四川农业大学动物科技学院, 四川温江 611130;
2. 兰州大学青藏高原生态系统管理国际中心, 甘肃兰州 730000

收稿日期:2015-06-30 修回日期:2016-01-05 出版日期:2016-06-15 发布日期:2016-09-18
通讯作者: 干友民
作者简介:关皓(1991-),女,四川成都人,硕士研究生,主要从事饲料资源开发与利用,E-mail:guan0427@foxmail.com
基金资助:
公益性行业（农业）科研专项（201303061）资助

Effect of Different Additives on Fermentation Quality and Aerobic Stability of Italian Ryegrass Silage Ensiled at Different Moisture

GUAN Hao¹, GUO Xu-sheng², GAN You-min¹, BAI Hui-juan¹, SONG Shan¹

1. Department of Grassland Science, Sichuan Agricultural University, Wen Jiang, Sichuan Province 611130, China;
2. International Centre for Tibetan Plateau Ecosystem Management, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu Province 730000, China

Received:2015-06-30 Revised:2016-01-05 Online:2016-06-15 Published:2016-09-18

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究不同添加剂对不同含水量多花黑麦草（Lolium multiflorum Lam.）样品青贮品质以及有氧稳定性的影响，在含水量分别为75%和65%条件下的多花黑麦草中添加3种不同的添加剂（甲酸、植物乳杆菌、布氏乳杆菌）青贮，在60天时开袋对青贮料进行测定。结果表明，75%和65%水分条件下的植物乳杆菌组pH值显著低于其他处理组（P<0.05），且乳酸含量显著高于其他处理组（P<0.05）；布氏乳杆菌处理组的氨态氮/总氮和乙酸含量显著高于其他处理组（P<0.05）；甲酸组可溶性碳水化合物含量显著高于其他处理组（P<0.05）。就有氧稳定性而言，75%水分条件下布氏乳杆菌处理组的有氧稳定性（186 h）显著高于其他处理组（P<0.05）。在75%和65% 2种水分条件下，3种不同类型的添加剂都能有效改善多花黑麦草青贮品质，改善程度依次为：植物乳杆菌 >甲酸 >布氏乳杆菌；开袋后，75%和65% 2种水分条件下，添加布氏乳杆菌能有效改善多花黑麦草青贮料的有氧稳定性。

关键词: 多花黑麦草, 青贮, 添加剂, 发酵品质, 有氧稳定性

Abstract:

In order to evaluate effects of different additives on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of Italian Ryegrass, three additives (formic acid (LA), Lactobacillus plantment (LP), Lactobacillus buchneri (LB))were used to ensile Italian ryegrass with different moisture contents (75% and 65%). Results showed that after 60 days fermentation, the pH value of LA significantly lower than the other treatment groups (P<0.05) in 75% and 65% moisture conditions, and the content of lactic acid was significantly higher than other groups (P<0.05); NH₃-N/TN and acetic acid content of LB was significantly higher than the other groups (P<0.05); WSC content of formic acid group were significantly higher than other groups (P<0.05). For the aerobic stability, aerobic stability (186h) of LB group with 75% moisture was significantly higher than other groups (P<0.05). Under 75% and 65% moisture conditions, three additives all effectively improved the silage quality of Italian ryegrass, LP >formic acid >LB, and LB effectively improved the aerobic stability of ryegrass silage.

Key words: Italian ryegrass, Silage, Additives, Fermentation quality, Aerobic stability

中图分类号:

S816.53

关皓, 郭旭生, 干友民, 白慧娟, 宋珊. 添加剂对不同含水量多花黑麦草青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2016, 24(3): 669-675.

GUAN Hao, GUO Xu-sheng, GAN You-min, BAI Hui-juan, SONG Shan. Effect of Different Additives on Fermentation Quality and Aerobic Stability of Italian Ryegrass Silage Ensiled at Different Moisture[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2016, 24(3): 669-675.

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.1007-0435.2016.03.028

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2016/V24/I3/669

参考文献

[1] 孙吉雄. 草坪学[M]. 北京:中国农业科技出版社,2008,7:89-90
[2] 张子仪. 中国饲料学[M]. 北京:中国农业出版社,2003:334
[3] 陈三有,杨中艺,辛国荣. 黑麦草、水稻草田轮作系统研究与应用[J]. 草原与草坪,2000,(1):32-34
[4] 杨杰,顾洪如,翟频,等. 凋萎程度与复合添加剂处理对多花黑麦草青贮品质的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报,2008,24(2):187-189
[5] 沈益新,杨志刚,刘信宝. 凋萎和添加有机酸对多花黑麦草青贮品质的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报,2004,20(2):95-99
[6] 杨连双. 牧草青贮的优点及其调制[J]. 哲里木畜牧学院学报,2000,10(2):31-32
[7] 杨志刚. 多花黑麦草春季青贮技术的研究[D]. 南京:南京农业大学,2002
[8] 杨杰. 复合青贮剂处理对多花黑麦草青贮品质的影响[D]. 南京:南京农业大学,2006
[9] 张增欣,邵涛. 丙酸对多花黑麦草青贮发酵动态变化的影响[J]. 草业学报,2009,18(2):102-107
[10] 张静,玉柱,邵涛. 丙酸、乳酸菌添加对多花黑麦草青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 草地学报,2009,17(2):162-165
[11] 杨春华,杨兴霖,左艳春,等. 不同含水量多花黑麦草青贮效果研究[J]. 草业与畜牧,2006,3:5-7
[12] Liu Q H, Zhang G J, Shi S L, et al. The effects of wilting and storage temperatures on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of stylo silage[J]. Animal Science Journal,2011,82:549-553
[13] Zhu Y, Nishion N, Kishida Y, et al. Ensiling characteristics and ruminal degration of Italian ryegrass and Lucerne silages treated with cell wall-degrading enzymes[J]. Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture,1999,79(14):1987-1992
[14] 杨胜. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M]. 北京:农业出版社,1999:58-63
[15] Krishnamoorthu U, Muscato T V, Sniffen C J, et al. Nitrogen fractions in selected feed stuffs[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1982,65:217-225
[16] Vansoest P J, Robertson J B, Lewis B A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation nutrition[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1991,74:3583-3597
[17] 傅彤. 微生物接种剂对玉米青贮饲料发酵进程及其品质的影响[D]. 北京:中国农业科学院硕士学位论文,2005
[18] 刘建新,杨振海,叶均安. 青贮饲料的合理调制与饲料评定标准[J]. 饲料工业,1999,20(4):3-5
[19] Zhang J G, Kumai S. Effluent and aerobic stability of cellulase and LAB-treated silage of napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum)[J]. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences,2000,8:1035-1188
[20] Weatherburn M W. Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia[J]. Ana/ytica/Chemistry,1967,39(8):971-974
[21] Whitlock L A, Wistuba T J, Seifers M K, et al. Effect of level of surface-spoiled silage on the nutritive value of corn silage diets[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2000,83(Suppl 1):110
[22] 张德玉,李忠秋,刘眷龙. 影响青贮饲料品质因素的研究进展[J]. 家畜生态学报,2007,28(1):109-112
[23] McDouald P, Henderson A R, Herou S J E. The Biochemistrv of Silage[M]. Marlow,U K:Chalconhe Publications,1991:184-236
[24] 张宁. 青贮饲料品质的鉴定法[J]. 国外畜牧学饲料,1990(1):34-35
[25] Weinberg Z G, Ashbell G, Hen Y, et al.The effect of applying lactic acid bacteria on the aerobic stability of silages[J]. Apply Bacteriol,1993,75:512-518
[26] 张吉鹍,卢德勋. 试述反刍动物日粮中的纤维问题[J]. 中国乳业,2003(7):21-24
[27] Muck R E. A lactic acid bacteria strain to improve aerobic stability of silages[J]. U.S.Dairy Forage Research Center 1996 Research Summaries,1996,3(14):42-43
[28] Wohlt J E. Use of silage inoculant to improve feeding stability and intake of a corn dilae-gain diet[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1989,72:545-551
[29] Borreani G, Cavallarin L, Antoniazzi, et al. Effeet of the stage of growth,wilting and inoeulation in field Pea(Pisum sativam L.)silages.Herbageeoln Position and silage fermentation[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,2003,86:1377-1382
[30] DavidsonT R, Stevenson K R. Influence of Formic acid and formalin on quality of direct-cut Alfalfa silage[J]. Canadian Journal of Plantence,1973,66:482-486
[31] Davit G, Chamberlain J Q. The effeets of the rate of addition of formic acid,sulphuric acid on the ensilage of Perennial ryegrass in laboratory silos[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agrieulture,1987,38:217-228
[32] Jones B A, Satter L D, Muck R E. Influence of bacterial inoculant and subst rate addition to lucerne ensiled at different dry matter contents[J].Grass and Forage Science,1992,47:19-27
[33] Ohyama Y, Mcmonld P. The effect of some additives on aerobic deterioration of silage[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1975,26:941-948
[34] Hill J, Leaver J D. Changes in chemical composition and nutritive value of urea treated whole crop wheat during exposure to air[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology,2002,102(3):181-195
[35] Filya I, Sucu E. The effect of bacterial inoculants and a chemical preservative on the fermantation and aerobic stability of whole crop cereal silages[J]. Asian-Australisian Journal of Animal Science,2007,20(3):378-384

添加剂对不同含水量多花黑麦草青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响

Effect of Different Additives on Fermentation Quality and Aerobic Stability of Italian Ryegrass Silage Ensiled at Different Moisture

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]	卢家顶, 杨旭, 朱晓艳, 崔亚垒, 王成章, 李德锋, 史莹华. 河南地区21个粮饲兼用型青贮玉米品种综合评价[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 1950-1958.
[2]	马冉冉, 袁洁, 张文洁, 许能祥, 顾洪如. 堆放时间对西兰花尾菜青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(9): 2107-2114.
[3]	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.
[4]	杜昭昌, 王红, 闫艳红, Muhammad Tahir, 韦潇, 曾泰儒, 李洪亮. 稻壳和麦麸对鲜玉米秸秆青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1549-1554.
[5]	吴硕, 邹璇, 王明亚, 张庆. 陈皮柑汁对柱花草和水稻秸秆青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1565-1570.
[6]	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.
[7]	韩学琴, 邓红山, 普天磊, 罗会英, 赵琼玲, 廖承飞, 薛世明, 范建成, 金杰. 金沙江干热河谷区青贮玉米品种农艺性状分析[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(6): 1327-1335.
[8]	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.
[9]	秦伟娜, 焦婷, 师尚礼, 李雄雄, 高雪梅, 赵生国, 祁娟, 王正文. 不同水热资源条件下10个青饲玉米品种的青贮品质评价[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 1070-1079.
[10]	李雯, 马琳峰, 曹熙敏, 俞凤芳, 佘智慧, 徐占云, 刘贵河, 吕爱枝. 播期对冀西北坝上农牧交错区青贮玉米产量和品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 1080-1086.
[11]	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.
[12]	郑明扬, 吴硕, 郭香, 陈晓阳, 张庆. 添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对砂仁叶青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(5): 1113-1117.
[13]	尤思涵, 都帅, 周忠义, 格根图, 宛涛, 贾玉山. 高丹草与黑麦草适宜混贮比例研究[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 821-827.
[14]	王斌, 董秀, 李满有, 杨雨琦, 兰剑. 不同播量拉巴豆与青贮玉米混播对草地生产性能及牧草品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(4): 828-834.
[15]	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.