Quality of Silage Made with Different Ratios of Feed Rape and Corn Stalk

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.04.029

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2018, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (4): 1011-1019.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.04.029

Previous Articles Next Articles

Quality of Silage Made with Different Ratios of Feed Rape and Corn Stalk

YIN Fa-ting^1,2, ZHANG Yu-long¹, SHI Jing¹, JIANG Tong-xuan¹, LIU Dong-yang¹, ZHANG Feng-hua^1,2

1. College of Agronomy, Shihezi University, Shihezi, Xinjiang 832003, China;
2. Key Laboratory of Oasis Ecology Agriculture of Xinjiang, Shihezi University, Shihezi, Xinjiang 832003, China

Received:2018-01-29 Revised:2018-07-08 Online:2018-08-15 Published:2018-09-20

饲料油菜与玉米秸秆混合青贮品质研究

阴法庭^1,2, 张玉龙¹, 石婧¹, 姜同轩¹, 刘东洋¹, 张凤华^1,2

1. 新疆石河子大学农学院, 新疆石河子 832003;
2. 新疆石河子大学绿洲生态农业重点实验室, 新疆石河子 832003

通讯作者: 张凤华
作者简介:阴法庭(1991-),男,山东泰安人,博士研究生,主要从事绿洲生态与农作制度研究。E-mail:820174369@qq.com
基金资助:
公益性行业（农业）科研专项项目（201503120）；新疆生产建设兵团科技攻关与成果转化项目（2016AD022）；国家重点研发计划课题（2016YFC0501406）资助

Abstract

Abstract: In order to investigate suitable ratio of rape and corn stalk,seven treatments (I,10:0 rape-corn stalk ratio;Ⅱ,0:10 rape-corn stalk ratio;Ⅲ,7:3 rape-corn stalk ratio;IV,6:4 rape-corn stalk ratio;V,5:5 rape-corn stalk ratio;VI,4:6rape-corn stalk ratio;VⅡ,3:7rape-corn stalk ratio;) were set according to different rape-corn stalk ratios. The results showed that feed rape and corn stalk could not be prepared individually for silage because of the lower dry matter content and nutrients quality,respectively. However,after the mixed-storage process,the content of CP (Crude protein),EE (Crude fat),ADF (Acid detergent fiber),NDF (Neutral detergent fiber),and Ash (Coarse ash) ranged between feed rape and corn stalks for single storage. Nutritional quality improved significantly and the purpose of improving the quality of silage achieved. The content of CP and EE in treatment Ⅲ (7:3 rape-corn stalk ratio) was significantly higher than that in treatment VⅡ (3:7 rape-corn stalk ratio),while pH,ADF and NDF content were significantly lower than that in treatment Ⅱ (0:10 rape-corn stalk ratio) and treatment IV (P<0.05). The highest V-Score was observed in treatment I,followed by treatment Ⅲ and treatment V. Through the comprehensive comparison,we concluded that 7:3 rape-corn stalk ratio could be used as a better mixing ratio.

Key words: Feed rape, Corn stalk, Mixed-storage process, Nutritional quality

摘要： 以盛花期刈割收获的饲料油菜（Brassica napus）与玉米秸秆（Zea mays）为原料，按不同比例混贮，通过青贮发酵及营养品质分析，探讨二者混贮的适宜配比。结果表明：饲料油菜单贮的干物质（DM）含量较低，玉米秸秆单贮的营养品质较差，均不宜单独调制青贮饲料；混贮处理后的粗蛋白（CP）、粗脂肪（EE）、酸性洗涤纤维（ADF）、中性洗涤纤维（NDF）、粗灰分（Ash）含量均介于饲料油菜与玉米秸秆单贮之间，营养品质均得到明显改善，达到提高青贮品质的目的；饲料油菜与玉米秸秆7：3混贮处理的CP、EE含量显著高于玉米秸秆单贮与其它混贮处理，pH值、ADF与NDF含量显著低于玉米秸秆单贮与其它混贮处理（P<0.05）；在V-Score青贮发酵品质评价体系中，饲料油菜单贮的得分最高，达到优秀，混合青贮中以7：3、5：5的处理得分较高。通过综合比较分析，以饲料油菜与玉米秸秆7：3的混贮处理品质较好，可作为饲料油菜与玉米秸秆混合青贮配比方案。

关键词: 饲料油菜, 玉米秸秆, 混贮, 青贮品质

CLC Number:

S816.5+3

YIN Fa-ting, ZHANG Yu-long, SHI Jing, JIANG Tong-xuan, LIU Dong-yang, ZHANG Feng-hua. Quality of Silage Made with Different Ratios of Feed Rape and Corn Stalk[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2018, 26(4): 1011-1019.

阴法庭, 张玉龙, 石婧, 姜同轩, 刘东洋, 张凤华. 饲料油菜与玉米秸秆混合青贮品质研究[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(4): 1011-1019.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.04.029

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2018/V26/I4/1011

References

[1] 黎咏蜀. 饲用油菜栽培技术及营养价值研究[D]. 重庆:西南大学,2014:2-7
[2] 杨祁峰,滕怀渊,牛菊兰. 饲用双低油菜华协1号营养成分含量动态及营养价值研究[J]. 草业学报,2003,2(2):87-92
[3] 郭丛阳,王天河,杨文元,等. 河西地区麦后复种饲用(绿肥)油菜栽培技术及效益分析[J]. 草业科学,2008,25(03):90-92
[4] 韩鲁佳,阎巧娟. 中国农作物秸秆资源及其利用现状[J]. 农业工程学报,2002,18(3):87-91
[5] 贾晶霞,梁宝忠,王艳红,等. 不同汽爆预处理对干玉米秸秆青贮效果的影响[J]. 农业工程学报,2013,29(20):192-198
[6] 王洪超,刘春龙,刘大森,等. 利用CNCPS体系评价不同生育期饲料油菜的营养价值研究[J]. 饲料工业,2016,37(21):31-34
[7] 公美玲. 玉米秸秆青贮过程中的营养动态研究[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学. 2013:41-42
[8] 郭丛阳,王天河. 饲用油菜青贮技术规程[J]. 草业科学,2008,25(4):86-87
[9] 任海伟,王聪,窦俊伟,等. 玉米秸秆与废弃白菜的混合青贮品质及产沼气能力分析[J]. 农业工程学报,2016,32(12):187-194
[10] 蔡敦江,周兴民. 苜蓿添加剂青贮、半干青贮和与麦秸混贮的研究[J]. 草地学报,1997,5(2):123-127
[11] 许庆方. 影响苜蓿青贮品质的主要因素及苜蓿青贮在奶牛日粮中应用效果的研究[D]. 北京:中国农业大学,2005:24-26
[12] 杨胜. 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,1999:19-61
[13] 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,2003:46-75
[14] 单贵莲,薛世明,徐柱,等. 不同调制方法紫花苜蓿干燥特性及干草质量的研究[J]. 草业学报,2008,17(04):102-109
[15] 宁开桂. 实用饲料分析手册[M]. 北京:中国农业出版社,1993:21-27
[16] Broderica G A,Kang J H. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1980,33(1):64-75
[17] 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
[18] 自给饲料品质评价研究会. 粗饲料品质评价方法[M]. 东京:日本草地畜产种子协会,2001:91-101
[19] 王旭哲,岳亚飞,马春晖. 全株玉米青贮营养品质的紧实度效应[J]. 草业科学,2016,33(09):1893-1900
[20] 刘建新,杨振海,叶均安,等. 青贮饲料的合理调制与质量评定标准[J]. 饲料工业,1999,20(03):4-7
[21] 李向林,张新跃,唐一国,等. 日粮中精料和牧草比例对舍饲山羊增重的影响[J]. 草业学报,2008,17(02):85-91
[22] 席兴军,韩鲁佳,原慎一郎,等. 添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对玉米秸秆青贮饲料品质的影响[J]. 中国农业大学学报,2003,8(2):21-24
[23] Selmer olsen I. Enzymes as silage additives for grass clover mixtures[J]. Grass Forage Science,1994(49):305-315
[24] 许宇薇. 不同微生物制剂及其组合处理对微贮稻草营养价值的影响评定[D]. 南昌:江西农业大学,2012:15-20
[25] 吴晓杰,韩鲁佳,刘贤. 不同切碎方式对全株玉米青贮饲料品质影响的试验研究[J]. 农业工程学报,2006,22(5):215-217
[26] 王林,孙启忠,张慧杰. 苜蓿与玉米混贮质量研究[J]. 草业学报,2011,20(04):202-209
[27] 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
[28] 刘桂要. 玉米秸杆青贮过程中微生物、营养成分及有机酸变化规律的研究[D]. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2009:36-42
[29] 杨云贵,张越利,杜欣,等. 2种玉米青贮饲料青贮过程中主要微生物的变化规律研究[J]. 畜牧兽医学报,2012,43(3):397-403
[30] Kaiser E,Weib K,Krause R. Beurteilung skriterien fur die quality on grass silage[J]. Proceedings of the Society for Nutritional Physiology,2000,(9):94-101
[31] Ennahar S,Cai Y,Fujita Y. Phylogenetic Diversity of Lactic Acid Bacteria Associated with Paddy Rice Silage as Determined by 16S Ribosomal DNA Analysis[J]. Applied & Environmental Microbiology,2003,69(1):444
[32] 李向林,万里强. 苜蓿青贮技术研究进展[J]. 草业学报,2005,14(02):9-15
[33] 庄益芬,张文昌,陈鑫珠,等. 绿汁发酵液、纤维素酶及其混合物对水葫芦青贮品质的影响[J]. 中国农学通报,2008,24(5):35-38
[34] 原现军,余成群,李志华,等. 西藏青稞秸秆与多年生黑麦草混合青贮发酵品质的研究[J]. 草业学报,2012,21(4):325-330
[35] 万里强,李向林. 乳酸菌复合添加剂糖分浓度对不同含水量苜蓿青贮效果的影响[J]. 中国草地学报,2005,27(1):000045-51
[36] 秦丽萍,柯文灿,石超. 温度对垂穗披碱草青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业科学,2013,30(9):1433-1438
[37] 马春晖,夏艳军,韩军,等. 不同青贮添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报,2010,19(1):128-133
[38] 张涛,崔宗均,李建平,等. 不同发酵类型青贮菌制剂对青贮发酵的影响[J]. 草业学报,2005,14(3):67-71
[39] Zhang T,Li L,Wang X F,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
[40] 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
[41] 黄晓辉. 苦豆子和玉米秸秆的混合青贮及其品质评价[D]. 兰州:兰州大学,2014:31-35
[42] 许庆方,玉柱,李志强,等. 苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料有氧稳定性研究[J]. 草地学报,2007,15(6):519-524
[43] 朱玉环,廉美娜,郭旭生. 藏嵩草绿汁发酵液提高苜蓿青贮发酵品质[J]. 农业工程学报,2013,29(5):199-206
[44] 王旭哲,贾舒安,马春晖,等. 紧实度对青贮玉米有氧稳定期发酵品质、微生物数量的效应研究[J]. 草业学报,2017,26(9):156-166
[45] 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,2008,30(4):100-106
[46] 孙小龙,周禾,李平,玉柱. 苜蓿与玉米秸秆混贮研究[J]. 草业学报,2009,18(05):86-92

Quality of Silage Made with Different Ratios of Feed Rape and Corn Stalk

饲料油菜与玉米秸秆混合青贮品质研究

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	YAO Xi-xi, WANG Li-ya, YAN Zhen-ying, LI Quan-lin, WANG You-bin, MA Bing-yun, LEI Yan-min, ZHOU Rui, XIE Jiu-xiang. Characteristics of Forage Nutritional Quality and Digestibility in Different Types of Grassland in Qinghai Tibet Plateau and their Correlation [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 113-120.
[2]	YAO Xi-xi, WANG Li-ya, YAN Zhen-ying, ZHANG Wen-juan, SUN Hai-qun, ZHOU Rui. Effects of Grazing on Vegetation Characteristics and Forage Nutrientional Quality in a Temperate Desert Steppe [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 165-172.
[3]	YAO Xi-xi, XIAO Feng, QI Shou-zhong, CHEN Guo-ming, WANG Li-ya, YAN Zhen-ying, ZHANG Wen-juan, SUN Hai-qun. Responses of Plant Functional Group Traits and Nutritional Quality to Fencing in an Alpine Meadow [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 208-217.
[4]	YAO Xi-xi, CAI Hua, LIU Hao-dong, LI Chang-hui. Analysis of Rumen Fermentation Characteristics and In Vitro Digestibility of Alpine Meadow Forage in Different Seasons [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(8): 1729-1737.
[5]	DONG Zhi-xiao, HE Run-hao, KUANG Jian-yang, NIE Cong, YANG Jian, ZHANG Jian-bo, GOU Wen-long, MA Xiao. Effects of Sweet Sorghum Intercropping with Lablab Purpureus on Yield and Quality of Mixed Forage in Chengdu Plain,China [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1578-1583.
[6]	LI Wen, MA Lin-feng, CAO Xi-min, YU Feng-fang, SHE Zhi-hui, XU Zhan-yun, LIU Gui-he, LYU Ai-zhi. Effect of Sowing Date on Yield and Quality of Zea mays L. in Bashang Agro-pastoral Ecotone in Northwest Hebei Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 1080-1086.
[7]	NIE Cong, YANG Xiao-peng, LIU Zhe-chuan, ZHAO Yu-han, CHEN Wan-ting, HE Run-hao, LIU Wei, GOU Wen-long, MA Xiao. Effects of Different Preceding Combination and Planting Density on Production Performance and Quality of Forage Corn [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(4): 709-716.
[8]	WANG Wei-qiang, LIU Jing, TIAN Xin-hui, DU Wen-hua. Adaptability Evaluation of Secale cereale ‘Gannong No.2’ in Different Regions of Qinghai Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(3): 504-514.
[9]	SU Li-he, ZHANG Fan-fan, WANG Xu-zhe, WANG Ting, FU Dong-qing, MA Chun-hui. Effects of Snow Cover on the Yield and Nutritional Quality of Alfalfa with Different Fall-dormancy Levels [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(2): 356-363.
[10]	YAO Xi-xi, ZHOU Rui, LI Chang-hui, DUOJIE Suo-nan. Effects of Slope Aspect on Vegetation Distribution Pattern and Forage Quality Characteristics of Alpine Grassland in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(12): 2792-2799.
[11]	LI Wen, WEI Ting-hu, Abaodi, Yongcuobazhan, Cairentaci, ZHOU Yu-hai, LI Wen-hao, GUO Wei-xing, ZHANG Yan-ping. Effects of Reduction of Chemical Fertilizer and Organic Manure Supplement on Oat Nutrient Quality and Soil Nutrient in Alpine Cold Region [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(12): 2878-2886.
[12]	YUE Li-nan, SHI Shang-li, QI Juan, YANG Pei-zhi, LIU Gang, LIU Wen-hui, ZHANG Ying-jun, JING Jing-ying. Effects of No-tillage Reseeding on Productivity and Nutritional Quality of Degraded Grassland in Northern China [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(11): 2583-2590.
[13]	HE Peng-liang, WANG Ya-mei, JIE Hong-dong, DENG Hui-fen, XING Hu-cheng, JIE Yu-cheng. Effects of Different Cutting Time on the Forage Yield and Nutritional Quality of Forage Triticale [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(11): 2609-2614.
[14]	HOU Pai, CHEN Cai-jin, ZHANG Jing-ni, FAN Long, DING Wang. Study on Production Performance and Nutritional Quality of Different Silage Maize in Guyuan Area of Ningxia [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(10): 2346-2354.
[15]	FU Dong-qing, WANG Yan-chao, SONG Lei, WANG Xu-zhe, ZHANG Fan-fan, MA Chun-hui. Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate and Planting Density on Production Performance of Early Maturing Forage Oat in Shihezi,Xinjiang [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(10): 2364-2371.