苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料有氧稳定性研究

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2007.06.003

›› 2007, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (6): 519-524.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2007.06.003

苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料有氧稳定性研究

许庆方^1,2, 玉柱¹, 李志强¹, 韩建国¹, 聂志东¹, 孙娟娟¹, 单战¹

1. 中国农业大学动物科技学院, 北京, 100094;
2. 山西农业大学动物科技学院, 山西, 太谷, 030801

收稿日期:2007-07-09 修回日期:2007-08-01 出版日期:2007-12-15 发布日期:2007-12-15
作者简介:许庆方(1972- ),男,山西壶关人,博士,副教授,从事牧草栽培与加工利用研究,E-mail,xqfsx@sohu.com
基金资助:
国家“948”项目(202099);北京市教委共建项目(XK100190552JD100190531);“十一五”国家科技支撑计划课题(2006BAD16B03-09);山西农业大学博士后基金(614114);山西农业大学博士基金(412546)

A Study on Aerobic Stability of Alfalfa and Corn Silage

XU Qing-fang^1,2, YU Zhu¹, LI Zhi-qiang¹, HAN Jian-guo¹, NIE Zhi-dong¹, SUN Juan-juan¹, SHAN Zhan¹

1. College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100094, China;
2. College of Animal Science and Technology, Shanxi Agricultural University, Taigu, Shanxi Province 030801, China

Received:2007-07-09 Revised:2007-08-01 Online:2007-12-15 Published:2007-12-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为评价苜蓿(Medicago sativa)和玉米(Zea mays)青贮饲料的有氧稳定性,采用CO₂滴定法和微生物培养法,分别对有氧暴露0、2、4、6、8、10 d的苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料,以及有氧暴露0、2、4 d的苜蓿青贮饲料和玉米青贮饲料的全混合日粮有氧稳定性进行分析与测定。结果表明:苜蓿青贮饲料在有氧暴露10 d时pH升高0.38,玉米青贮饲料则升高0.60;有氧暴露4d时,苜蓿青贮饲料CO₂产量低于1 g/kg·DM,而玉米青贮饲料则高达5.4 g/kg·DM;苜蓿青贮饲料的酵母菌和霉菌数量从1.58×10₂CFU/g·DM和2.51×10₂CFU/g·DM显著增加到2.51×10₃CFU/g·DM和7.94×10₂CFU/g·DM(P<0.05),而玉米青贮饲料在有氧暴露2 d时即从2.51×10₂CFU/g·DM和1.26×10₂CFU/g·DM显著提高到3.98×10₃CFU/g·DM和3.16×10₃CFU/g·DM(P<0.05);这说明苜蓿青贮饲料的有氧稳定性要优于玉米青贮饲料;在有氧暴露的4d内,虽然苜蓿青贮饲料全混合日粮的pH变化为0.93,低于玉米青贮饲料2.18,但酵母菌和霉菌的数量无明显差异,在有氧暴露2 d后均显著地增加(P<0.05)。

关键词: 苜蓿, 玉米, 青贮饲料, 有氧稳定性

Abstract: When exposed to air in feedlot,the silage quality and nutrient value will be decreased due to aerobic microbe proliferation in silage.This experiment was carried out to evaluate the aerobic stability of the alfalfa and corn silages which were exposed to air and sampled on 0,2,4,6,8,and 10 day and their total mixed ration sampled on 0,2,and 4 day using the methods of CO₂ titration and microbial culture.After 10-day exposure to air,the pH of alfalfa silage increased 0.38,while 0.60 for corn silage.After 4-day exposure to air,the CO₂ production of alfalfa silage was less than 1 g/kg·DM,while more than 5.4 g/kg·DM for corn silage;the numbers of yeast and mold increased significantly(P<0.05) from 1.58×10₂ CFU/g·DM and 2.51×10₂ CFU/g·DM to 2.51×10₃ CFU/g·DM and 7.94×10₂ CFU/g·DM,respectively,while those of corn silage,when exposed to air 2 days,increased significantly(P<0.05) from 2.51×10₂ CFU/g·DM and 1.26×10₂ CFU/g·DM to 3.98×10₃CFU/g·DM and 3.16×10₃CFU/g·DM(P<0.05) respectively.These results indicate that the alfalfa silage were more stable than corn silage when exposed to air.Although the pH of total mixed ration(TMR) with alfalfa silage increased 0.93,which were less than the 2.18 of corn silage TMR,there was no significant differences in the numbers of yeast and mold between those two TMR types after 4-day exposure and both of them increased significantly (P<0.05) when exposed to air 2 days.

Key words: Alfalfa, Corn, Silage, Aerobic stability

中图分类号:

S816.3

许庆方, 玉柱, 李志强, 韩建国, 聂志东, 孙娟娟, 单战. 苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料有氧稳定性研究[J]. , 2007, 15(6): 519-524.

XU Qing-fang, YU Zhu, LI Zhi-qiang, HAN Jian-guo, NIE Zhi-dong, SUN Juan-juan, SHAN Zhan. A Study on Aerobic Stability of Alfalfa and Corn Silage[J]. , 2007, 15(6): 519-524.

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.1007-0435.2007.06.003

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2007/V15/I6/519

参考文献

[1] Driehuis F,Oude Elferink S J W H,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
[2] McGechan M R A review of losses arising during conservation of grass forage:part 2.Storage losses[J].Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research,1990,45(1):1-30
[3] Ashbell G,Lisker N.Aerobic deterioration of maize silage stored in a bunker silo under farm conditions in a subtropical climate[J].Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1988,45(4):307-315
[4] Woolford M K,Wilkie A C.Investigations into the role of specific micro-organisms in the aerobic deterioration of maize silage[J].Journal of Agricultural Science,1984.102(1):97-104
[5] Kleinschmit D H,Schmidt R J,Kung Jr L.The effect of various antifungal additives on fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2005,88(6):2130-2139
[6] Weinberg Z G,Ashbell G,Hen Y,et al.The effect of applying lactic acid bacteria on the aerobic stability of silages[J].Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1993,75:512-518
[7] Courtin M G,Spoelstra S F.A simulation model of the microbiological and chemical changes accompanying the initial stage of aerobic deterioration of silage[J].Grass and Forage Science,1990,45:153-165
[8] Moon N J.Inhibition of the growth of acid tolerant yeasts by acetate,lactate and propionate and their synergistic mixtures[J].Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1983,55:454-460
[9] Kung Jr L,Taylor C C,Lynch M P,et al.The effect of trearing alfalfa with Lactobacillus bunchneri 40788 on silage fermentation,aerobic stability,and nutritive value for lactating dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2003,86(1):336-343
[10] Ranjit N K,Taylor C C,Kung Jr L.Effect of Lactobacillus bunchneri 40788 on the fermentation,aerobic stability and nutritive value of maize silage[J].Grass and Forage Science,2002,57:73-81
[11] 许庆方,韩建国,周禾,等.不同添加剂对拉伸膜裹包苜蓿青贮的影响[J].中国农业科学,2006,39(7):1464-1471
[12] 许庆方,周禾,玉柱,等.贮藏期和添加绿汁发酵液对袋装苜蓿青贮的影响[J].草地学报,2006,14(2):129-133,146
[13] 许庆方,韩建国,周禾,等.苜蓿绿汁发酵液特性的研究[J].草地学报,2005,13(4):295-298
[14] Ashbell G.Weinberg Z G,Azrieli A,et al.A simple system to study the aerobic determination of silages[J].Canadian Agricultural Engineering,1991,33:391-393
[15] Ashbell G,Pahlow G,Dinter B,et al.Dynamics of orange peel fermentation during ensilage[J].Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1987,63(4):275-279
[16] 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
[17] Owens V N,Albrecht K A,Muck R E,et al.Protein degradation and fermentation characteristics of red clover and alfalfa silage harvested with varying levels of total nonstructural carbohydrates[J].Crop Science,1999,39(6):1873-1880
[18] Matt A S.Aerobic stability and in vitro fiber digestibility of microbially inoculated corn and sorghum silages[J].Journal of Animal Science,1993,71(2):505-514
[19] Colombari G,Borreani G,Crovetto G M.Comparison of lucerne silage and ventilated hay in maize silage-based rations for dairy cows for the production of milk destined for Grana cheese[J].Grass and Forage Science,1999,54:184-194
[20] Rhein R T,Coblentz W K.Turner J E,et al.Aerobic stability of wheat and orchardgrass round-bale silage during winter[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2005,88(5):1815-1826
[21] Nishino N,Wada H,Yoshida M,et al.Microbial counts,fermentation products,and aerobic stability of whole crop corn and a total mixed ration ensiled with and without inoculation of Lactobacillus casei or Lactobacillus buchneri[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2004,87(8):2563-2570
[22] Filya I.The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the fermentation,aerobic stability,and ruminal degradability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2003,86(11):3575-3581

苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料有氧稳定性研究

A Study on Aerobic Stability of Alfalfa and Corn 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]	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.
[3]	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.
[4]	孙伟, 刘玉玲, 王德平, 赵敏, 杨合龙, 宋倩, 肖红, 王开丽, 曹婧, 戎郁萍. 补播羊草和黄花苜蓿对退化草甸植物群落特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(8): 1809-1817.
[5]	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.
[6]	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.
[7]	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.
[8]	李红, 李波, 方志坚, 杨曌, 张超, 冯成龙, 金姗姗, 王思琦, 石婉莹. 冻融和冻融+苏打盐碱复合胁迫下苜蓿幼苗的生理响应[J]. 草地学报, 2021, 29(7): 1469-1476.
[9]	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.
[10]	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.
[11]	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.
[12]	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.
[13]	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.
[14]	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.
[15]	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.