大豆秸和稻草对甜玉米秸秆和湿啤酒糟混合青贮的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.03.031

草地学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (3): 945-951.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2024.03.031

大豆秸和稻草对甜玉米秸秆和湿啤酒糟混合青贮的影响

黄莉莹¹, 崔卫东², 田静¹, 张建国¹

1. 华南农业大学南方草业中心, 广东广州 510642;
2. 智牧农业科技(河北)有限公司, 河北定州 073000

收稿日期:2023-08-05 修回日期:2023-09-27 出版日期:2024-03-15 发布日期:2024-04-03
通讯作者: 张建国,E-mail:zhangjg@scau.edu.cn
作者简介:黄莉莹(1999-)，女，汉族，福建龙岩人，硕士研究生，主要从事饲草加工与贮藏研究，E-mail:1095450651@qq.com
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划(2022YFE0111000-2)；广东省现代草牧业(羊)产业技术体系(2019KJ127)资助

Effects of Soybean Straw and Rice Straw on Mixed Silage of Sweet Corn Straw and Wet Brewers Grains

HUANG Li-ying¹, CUI Wei-dong², TIAN Jing¹, ZHANG Jian-guo¹

1. South Pratacultural Research Center, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province 510642, China;
2. Zhimu Agricultural Technology(Hebei) Co., Ltd, Dingzhou, Hebei Province 073000, China

Received:2023-08-05 Revised:2023-09-27 Online:2024-03-15 Published:2024-04-03

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 甜玉米(Zea mays var. rugosa)秸秆和湿啤酒糟含水量较高,青贮可有效解决其不易贮藏的问题。通过设置甜玉米秸秆单贮、湿啤酒糟单贮、两者不同比例(3:1和4:1)混合青贮以及分别添加大豆(Glycine max)秸和稻(Oryza sativa)草将混合青贮的含水量调节为60%和70%,共12个处理,探究混合比例及含水量对其混合青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响。结果表明:甜玉米秸秆单贮发酵品质良好,湿啤酒糟单贮发酵品质较差,二者按3:1混贮后显著提高了乳酸及乙酸含量(P<0.05),4:1混贮后显著提高了乳酸含量(P<0.05),但4:1混贮后好氧细菌及酵母数量较3:1高;与甜玉米秸秆单贮相比,添加大豆秸显著提高了混合青贮料的有氧稳定性(P<0.05),有氧暴露7 d后的pH值仍接近4.2,添加大豆秸将含水量调节为60%显著降低了NH₃-N含量(P<0.05);添加稻草的所有处理均显著降低了NH₃-N含量(P<0.05)。综上,甜玉米秸秆与湿啤酒糟按3︰1的比例混合,并添加大豆秸将含水量调节为60%,其发酵品质好,有氧暴露7 d有氧稳定性也较好。

关键词: 混合青贮, 湿啤酒糟, 甜玉米秸秆, 发酵品质, 有氧稳定性

Abstract: Sweet corn (Zea mays var. rugosa) straw and wet brewers grains have high moisture contents,and ensiling can effectively solve their storage problem. The research set up 12 ensiling treatments of sweet corn straw and wet brewers grains alone,their mixtures in different ratios (3:1 and 4:1),or above mixtures added with soybean (Glycine max) straw and rice (Oryza sativa) straw to moisture contents of 60% and 70%,respectively. The experiment was to investigate the effects of mixed ratio and moisture content on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of sweet corn straw and wet brewers grains silages. Results showed that the fermentation quality of sweet corn straw silage alone was good,while that of the wet brewers grains silage was poor;mixing them at a ratio of 3:1 significantly increased the lactic acid and acetic acid contents of silages,and mixing them at a ratio of 4:1 significantly increased lactic acid content (P<0.05),but the numbers of aerobic bacteria and yeasts were higher than those of 3:1. Adding rice straw significantly reduced the NH₃-N content (P<0.05),while adding soybean straw significantly improved aerobic stability of mixed silage (P<0.05). The silage pH was close to 4.2 after 7 days of aerobic exposure;adding soybean straw to moisture content of 60% significantly reduced the NH₃-N content (P<0.05). In summary,the mixed silage of sweet corn straw and wet brewers grains at a ratio of 3:1 with moisture content of 60% by adding soybean straw had better fermentation quality,and it was stable after 7 days of aerobic exposure.

Key words: Mixed silage, Wet brewers grains, Sweet corn straw, Fermentation quality, Aerobic stability

中图分类号:

S816.5+3

黄莉莹, 崔卫东, 田静, 张建国. 大豆秸和稻草对甜玉米秸秆和湿啤酒糟混合青贮的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2024, 32(3): 945-951.

HUANG Li-ying, CUI Wei-dong, TIAN Jing, ZHANG Jian-guo. Effects of Soybean Straw and Rice Straw on Mixed Silage of Sweet Corn Straw and Wet Brewers Grains[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2024, 32(3): 945-951.

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.1007-0435.2024.03.031

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2024/V32/I3/945

参考文献

[1] 韩建成,江杨,江汉,等. 我国南方地区甜玉米秸秆资源有效利用研究进展[J]. 当代畜牧,2017(21):72-75
[2] ROMERO-HUELVA M,RAMIREZ-FENOSA M A,PLANE-LLES-GONZALEZ R,et al. Can by-products replace conventional ingredients in concentrate of dairy goat diet?[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2017,100(6):4500-4512
[3] ABDOLLAHZADEH F,PIRMOHAMMADI R,FARHOOMAND P,et al. Effect of feeding ensiled mixed tomato and apple pomace on performance of Holstein dairy cows[J]. Italian Journal of Animal Science,2010,9(2):212-216
[4] 高晓梅,杨会宁,林波,等. 不同类型饲料原料混合青贮对象草青贮品质的影响[J]. 中国饲料,2021(15):90-93
[5] 何家俊,赵国强,李莉,等. 纤维素酶对玉米秸秆与酒糟混合青贮营养成分、发酵品质、瘤胃体外降解率及微生物多样性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报,2023,35(5):3190-3200
[6] 曹欣,吴康乐,文乐元,等. 水稻秸秆、麦麸、葡萄糖添加对绿狐尾藻青贮质量影响研究[J]. 草地学报,2022,30(12):3447-3454
[7] MCDONALD P,HENFERSON A R,HERON S J E. The biochemistry of silage[M]. Marlow:Chalcombe Publications,1991:129-135
[8] 琚泽亮,赵桂琴,覃方锉,等. 含水量对燕麦及燕麦+箭筈豌豆裹包青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业科学,2016,33(7):1426-1433
[9] 关皓,郭旭生,干友民,等. 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
[10] 罗燕,陈天峰,李君临,等. 多花黑麦草与大豆秸秆混合青贮品质的研究[J]. 草地学报,2015,23(1):200-204
[11] 陶雅,李峰,高凤芹,等. 籽粒苋与青贮玉米混贮品质及微生物特性研究[J]. 草业学报,2016,25(12):119-129
[12] 郁万瑞,陈亚飞,王芳芳,等. 不同比例残次香梨对芦苇秸秆青贮品质、微生物多样性及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报,2023,35(5):3349-3360
[13] 燕翔,宫峥嵘,王都留,等. 大豆秸秆综合利用研究进展[J]. 大豆科学,2022,41(4):480-489
[14] 邹松岩,李妍,孙晓玉,等. 大豆秸秆对西门塔尔母牛产后失重、养分表观消化率及血清生化指标的影响[J]. 动物营养学报,2021,33(9):5054-5063
[15] PLAYNE M J,MCDONALD P. The buffering constituents of herbage and of silage[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1966,17(6):264-265
[16] 张丽英. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M]. 北京:中国农业科技出版社,2003:46-75
[17] MURPHY R P. A method for the extraction of plant samples and the determination of total soluble carbohydrates[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1958(9):714-717
[18] KUNG L M,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
[19] YANG H Y,WANG X F,LIU H B,et al. Effects of water-soluble carbohydrate content on silage fermentation of wheat straw[J]. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering,2006,101(3):232-237
[20] RANJIT N K,KUNG L J. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri,Lactobacillus plantarum,or a chemical preservative on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2000,83(3):526-535
[21] JOHNSON L M,HARRISON J H,DAVIDSON D,et al. Corn silage management:Effects of hybrid,maturity,inoculation,and mechanical processing on fermentation characteristics[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2003,86(1):287-308
[22] NI K K,ZHAO J Y,ZHU B G,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(256):563-567
[23] 原现军,余成群,李志华,等. 添加青稞酒糟对西藏地区青稞秸秆和高羊茅混合青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2012,21(2):92-98
[24] ZENG T R,LI X L,GUAN H,et al. Dynamic microbial diversity and fermentation quality of the mixed silage of corn and soybean grown in strip inter cropping system[J]. Bioresource Technology,2020,313:123655
[25] SONG M K,KENNELLY J J. Effect of ammoniated barley silage on ruminal fermentation,nitrogen supply to the small intestine,ruminal and whole tract digestion,and milk production of Holstein cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2019,72(11):2981-2990
[26] PILT J W,MEYER R G,BRENNAN M A,et al. Fermentation quality of silages produced from wilted sown tropical perennial grass pastures with or without a bacterial inoculant[J]. Agronomy-Basel,2022,12(7):1721-1738
[27] DRIEHUIS F,ELFERINK O,SPOELSTRA S F. Anaerobic lactic acid degradation during ensilage of whole crop maize inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri inhibits yeast growth and improves aerobic stability[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology,1999,87(4):583-594
[28] GANDRA J R,OLIVEIRA E R,TAKIYA C S,et al. Chitosan improves the chemical composition,microbiological quality,and aerobic stability of sugarcane silage[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology,2016(211):44-52
[29] WANG X L,SONG J M,LIU Z H,et al. Fermentation quality and microbial community of corn stover or rice straw silage mixed with soybean curd residue[J]. Animals,2022,12(7):919-922
[30] DANNER H,HOLZER M,MAYRHUBER E,et al. Acetic acid increases stability of silage under aerobic conditions[J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2003,69(1):562-567
[31] ZHANG T,LI L,WANG X F E,et al. Effects of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on fermentation,aerobic stability,bacteria diversity and ruminal degradability of alfalfa silage[J]. World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology,2009,25(6):965-971(责任编辑闵芝智)第32卷第3期 Vol.32 No. 3草地学报 ACTAAGRESTIASINICA 2024年 3月

大豆秸和稻草对甜玉米秸秆和湿啤酒糟混合青贮的影响

Effects of Soybean Straw and Rice Straw on Mixed Silage of Sweet Corn Straw and Wet Brewers Grains

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]	董霖, 刘晓静, 蔺芳, 汪雪, 王静. 豆/禾牧草间作下混合青贮品质的研究[J]. 草地学报, 2024, 32(2): 620-629.
[2]	金丽娜, 蒋苏苏, 敬淑燕, 何建文, 张慧君. 黄芪药渣与全株玉米混合青贮对饲料感官、发酵品质及营养成分的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2024, 32(2): 630-636.
[3]	武伟成, 肖定福, 陈一峰, 陈东, 温娟, 黄纯勇, 陈艳, 徐志雄, 魏仲珊, 刘一然. 杏鲍菇菌糠和植物乳杆菌对全株玉米青贮有氧稳定性和体外发酵特性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2024, 32(2): 646-653.
[4]	刘逸超, 孙鹏波, 张佳伟, 李冬梅, 马宏伟, 井志伟, 王瑞峰, 贾玉山. 发酵抑制剂对羊草青贮品质和有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(8): 2564-2570.
[5]	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.
[6]	李肖, 陈永成, 黄嵘峥, 齐亚银, 张凡凡, 马春晖. 复合发酵剂对葵花副产物发酵品质及瘤胃降解率的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(5): 1564-1570.
[7]	冯启贤, 张磊, 李妍, 凌文卿, 李珏, 周燚, 阳伏林, 周晶. 甲酸处理对苜蓿青贮品质及瘤胃降解率的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(4): 1264-1272.
[8]	柴继宽, 赵桂琴, 琚泽亮. 添加不同乳酸菌对燕麦低温青贮发酵的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(3): 923-928.
[9]	陈三冬, 巩海强, 尹国丽, 师尚礼. 青贮玉米有氧暴露过程中营养品质及细菌群落多样性[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(2): 388-395.
[10]	詹佳琦, 陈丹丹, 郭田心, 郭香, 吴硕, 陈晓阳, 周玮, 张庆. 不同添加剂对中药渣青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(12): 3851-3857.
[11]	高龙, 张娟, 戈辰妍, 刘宽, 唐嘉祺, 石神炳, 阳伏林, 周晶. 添加植物乳杆菌、布氏乳杆菌对杂交狼尾草青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(12): 3867-3875.
[12]	郑杨晨, 赵峻祥, 刘宇洋, 卞彬彬, 孔令芝, 李井春, 李雁冰. 湿贮玉米中添加春蓼对饲料抑菌能力的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(12): 3887-3896.
[13]	包文龙, 郑成忠, 张腾薇, 云颖, 韩云鹏, 刘志萍, 巴图, 徐广祥, 王凤梧, 孙娟娟. 施氮量对全株大麦生产性能及青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(10): 3167-3173.
[14]	刘逸超, 司强, 刘明健, 卢轩, 闫蒙, 格根图, 王志军, 贾玉山. 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.
[15]	孙蓉, 刘悦, 陈婷, 吕仁龙, 周汉林, 李茂, 字学娟. 乳酸菌和糖蜜对构树叶青贮品质和细菌多样性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(1): 280-286.