草业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (7): 122-132.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2020256
邹诗雨1(), 陈思葵1, 唐启源2, 陈东1(), 陈元伟2, 邓攀1, 黄胥莱1, 李付强3
收稿日期:
2020-06-02
修回日期:
2020-11-23
出版日期:
2021-07-20
发布日期:
2021-06-03
通讯作者:
陈东
作者简介:
Corresponding author. E-mail: chendong_326@126.com基金资助:
Shi-yu ZOU1(), Si-kui CHEN1, Qi-yuan TANG2, Dong CHEN1(), Yuan-wei CHEN2, Pan DENG1, Xu-lai HUANG1, Fu-qiang LI3
Received:
2020-06-02
Revised:
2020-11-23
Online:
2021-07-20
Published:
2021-06-03
Contact:
Dong CHEN
摘要:
旨在探究青贮剂对再生稻头季全株青贮品质和体外瘤胃发酵特性的影响。以再生稻头季全株为青贮原料,在青贮中分别添加植物乳杆菌(60%)+纤维素酶(30%)+木聚糖酶(10%)、植物乳杆菌(70%)+粪肠球菌(20%)+纤维素酶(5%)+半纤维素酶(5%)、植物乳杆菌(30%)+粪肠球菌(60%)+纤维素酶(5%)+半纤维素酶(5%)、等量水为对照(依次记为N1、N2、N3和CK组,各组添加量为500 g·t-1 鲜重)。青贮45 d后开包取样,分析其青贮品质和体外瘤胃发酵特性。结果表明:1)青贮结束后,N1、N2和N3组的总能显著高于CK组(P<0.05),中性洗涤纤维和酸性洗涤纤维含量显著低于CK组(P<0.05),且N2组的中性洗涤纤维含量显著低于N1和N3组(P<0.05),N1、N2和N3组的总可消化养分含量和乙酸含量均显著高于CK组(P<0.05),氨态氮/总氮显著低于CK组(P<0.05)。2)体外发酵24 h后,N2组的24 h累积产气量和快速降解部分的产气量显著高于N1、N3和CK组(P<0.05),N2组的潜在产气量显著高于N1、N3和CK组(P<0.05),且N1组显著高于CK组(P<0.05),N1和N2组的pH显著低于N3和CK组(P<0.05),N2组的乙酸和氨态氮含量显著高于N1、N3和CK组(P<0.05),N1和N2组的丙酸含量显著高于N3和CK组(P<0.05),N2组乙酸/丙酸显著低于N3和CK组(P<0.05),N2和N3组的干物质降解率和粗蛋白质降解率显著高于N1和CK组(P<0.05),N2组的有机物降解率、中性洗涤纤维降解率和酸性洗涤纤维降解率显著高于N1、N3和CK组(P<0.05)。综上所述,在实际生产中,建议青贮剂在以植物乳杆菌为主要添加剂的前提下,辅助添加粪肠球菌、纤维素酶和半纤维素酶,有利于获得营养价值较佳的再生稻头季全株青贮。
邹诗雨, 陈思葵, 唐启源, 陈东, 陈元伟, 邓攀, 黄胥莱, 李付强. 青贮剂对再生稻头季全株青贮品质和体外瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(7): 122-132.
Shi-yu ZOU, Si-kui CHEN, Qi-yuan TANG, Dong CHEN, Yuan-wei CHEN, Pan DENG, Xu-lai HUANG, Fu-qiang LI. Effects of silage additives on quality and in vitro rumen fermentation characteristics of first season ratoon rice whole silage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(7): 122-132.
项目 Item | 干物质 Dry matter | 粗蛋白质 Crude protein | 中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber | 酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber | 可溶性碳水化合物 Water soluble carbohydrate |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
含量 Content | 36.49 | 10.07 | 56.32 | 37.62 | 3.33 |
表1 青贮原料营养水平(风干基础)
Table 1 Nutrient levels of silage raw materials (air-dry basis, %)
项目 Item | 干物质 Dry matter | 粗蛋白质 Crude protein | 中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber | 酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber | 可溶性碳水化合物 Water soluble carbohydrate |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
含量 Content | 36.49 | 10.07 | 56.32 | 37.62 | 3.33 |
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
干物质 Dry matter (%) | 93.74±0.01 | 93.68±0.01 | 94.19±0.01 | 92.82±0.01 |
粗蛋白质 Crude protein (%) | 10.56±0.27 | 10.61±0.20 | 10.50±0.47 | 10.07±0.12 |
粗脂肪 Ether extract (%) | 3.69±0.27 | 3.93±0.04 | 3.83±0.07 | 3.44±0.33 |
总能 Gross energy (MJ·kg-1) | 16.84±0.05a | 16.85±0.04a | 16.81±0.08a | 16.58±0.04b |
中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber (%) | 53.84±0.03B | 51.38±0.59C | 54.61±0.06B | 57.82±0.20A |
酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber (%) | 31.29±0.24B | 32.05±0.51B | 30.86±0.53B | 35.12±0.08A |
可溶性碳水化合物 Water soluble carbohydrate (%) | 0.89±0.10 | 0.83±0.01 | 0.86±0.03 | 0.82±0.01 |
总可消化养分 Total digestible nutrient (%) | 64.53±0.18A | 63.94±0.40A | 64.86±0.42A | 61.54±0.06B |
表2 青贮剂对再生稻头季全株青贮营养物质含量的影响(风干基础)
Table 2 Effects of silage additives on nutrients of first season ratoon rice whole silage (air-dry basis)
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
干物质 Dry matter (%) | 93.74±0.01 | 93.68±0.01 | 94.19±0.01 | 92.82±0.01 |
粗蛋白质 Crude protein (%) | 10.56±0.27 | 10.61±0.20 | 10.50±0.47 | 10.07±0.12 |
粗脂肪 Ether extract (%) | 3.69±0.27 | 3.93±0.04 | 3.83±0.07 | 3.44±0.33 |
总能 Gross energy (MJ·kg-1) | 16.84±0.05a | 16.85±0.04a | 16.81±0.08a | 16.58±0.04b |
中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber (%) | 53.84±0.03B | 51.38±0.59C | 54.61±0.06B | 57.82±0.20A |
酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber (%) | 31.29±0.24B | 32.05±0.51B | 30.86±0.53B | 35.12±0.08A |
可溶性碳水化合物 Water soluble carbohydrate (%) | 0.89±0.10 | 0.83±0.01 | 0.86±0.03 | 0.82±0.01 |
总可消化养分 Total digestible nutrient (%) | 64.53±0.18A | 63.94±0.40A | 64.86±0.42A | 61.54±0.06B |
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
pH | 4.53±0.01 | 4.53±0.01 | 4.56±0.01 | 4.53±0.01 |
乙酸 Acetate (mmol·L-1) | 11.07±0.48a | 12.00±0.02a | 12.75±0.51a | 8.32±1.18b |
丙酸 Propionate (mmol·L-1) | 0.66±0.06 | 0.58±0.07 | 0.56±0.01 | 0.73±0.07 |
丁酸 Butyrate (mmol·L-1) | 2.47±0.39 | 2.34±0.14 | 2.46±0.53 | 2.85±0.26 |
异戊酸 Isovalerate (mmol·L-1) | 0.06±0.01 | 0.05±0.01 | 0.06±0.01 | 0.06±0.01 |
正戊酸 Valerate (mmol·L-1) | 0.03±0.01 | 0.02±0.01 | 0.03±0.02 | 0.02±0.01 |
氨态氮/总氮NH3-N/TN (%) | 25.30±0.44b | 24.01±2.09b | 24.61±1.65b | 35.35±0.71a |
表3 青贮剂对再生稻头季全株青贮品质的影响
Table 3 Effects of silage additives on quality of first season ratoon rice whole silage
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
pH | 4.53±0.01 | 4.53±0.01 | 4.56±0.01 | 4.53±0.01 |
乙酸 Acetate (mmol·L-1) | 11.07±0.48a | 12.00±0.02a | 12.75±0.51a | 8.32±1.18b |
丙酸 Propionate (mmol·L-1) | 0.66±0.06 | 0.58±0.07 | 0.56±0.01 | 0.73±0.07 |
丁酸 Butyrate (mmol·L-1) | 2.47±0.39 | 2.34±0.14 | 2.46±0.53 | 2.85±0.26 |
异戊酸 Isovalerate (mmol·L-1) | 0.06±0.01 | 0.05±0.01 | 0.06±0.01 | 0.06±0.01 |
正戊酸 Valerate (mmol·L-1) | 0.03±0.01 | 0.02±0.01 | 0.03±0.02 | 0.02±0.01 |
氨态氮/总氮NH3-N/TN (%) | 25.30±0.44b | 24.01±2.09b | 24.61±1.65b | 35.35±0.71a |
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
24 h累积产气量 24 h cumulative GP (mL) | 24.52±0.38B | 27.86±0.48A | 23.30±0.10B | 24.01±0.92B |
产气参数 GP parameters | ||||
a (mL) | -0.24±0.40B | 1.77±0.69A | -1.64±0.11B | -1.81±0.35B |
b (mL) | 27.48±0.43 | 28.69±0.68 | 27.39±0.45 | 26.58±0.54 |
a+b (mL) | 26.69±0.36B | 30.01±0.47A | 24.51±0.18BC | 23.41±2.30C |
c (%·h-1) | 0.12±0.01 | 0.12±0.01 | 0.12±0.01 | 0.12±0.01 |
表4 青贮剂对再生稻头季全株青贮24 h累积产气量和体外产气参数的影响
Table 4 Effects of silage additives on 24 h cumulative GP and gas production parameters in vitro of first season ratoon rice whole silage
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
24 h累积产气量 24 h cumulative GP (mL) | 24.52±0.38B | 27.86±0.48A | 23.30±0.10B | 24.01±0.92B |
产气参数 GP parameters | ||||
a (mL) | -0.24±0.40B | 1.77±0.69A | -1.64±0.11B | -1.81±0.35B |
b (mL) | 27.48±0.43 | 28.69±0.68 | 27.39±0.45 | 26.58±0.54 |
a+b (mL) | 26.69±0.36B | 30.01±0.47A | 24.51±0.18BC | 23.41±2.30C |
c (%·h-1) | 0.12±0.01 | 0.12±0.01 | 0.12±0.01 | 0.12±0.01 |
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
pH | 7.05±0.01B | 7.03±0.01B | 7.11±0.01A | 7.09±0.01A |
乙酸 Acetate (mmol·L-1) | 16.96±1.20b | 20.18±0.42a | 15.97±0.10b | 17.39±0.54b |
丙酸 Propionate (mmol·L-1) | 6.21±0.30a | 6.53±0.27a | 4.84±0.02b | 5.28±0.19b |
乙酸/丙酸 Acetate/propionate | 3.20±0.04ab | 3.12±0.03b | 3.28±0.02a | 3.29±0.02a |
丁酸 Butyrate (mmol·L-1) | 0.22±0.02 | 0.25±0.01 | 0.21±0.01 | 0.22±0.01 |
异戊酸 Isovalerate (mmol·L-1) | 1.61±0.13 | 1.70±0.06 | 1.71±0.07 | 1.61±0.01 |
正戊酸 Valerate (mmol·L-1) | 0.08±0.01 | 0.09±0.01 | 0.08±0.01 | 0.08±0.01 |
总挥发性脂肪酸 Total volatile fatty acid (mmol·L-1) | 27.21±1.83 | 28.12±0.82 | 23.03±0.14 | 23.81±0.13 |
氨态氮 NH3-N (mg·dL-1) | 2.35±0.02b | 4.10±0.42a | 2.68±0.27b | 2.64±0.10b |
表5 青贮剂对再生稻头季全株青贮体外瘤胃发酵特性的影响
Table 5 Effects of silage additives on in vitro rumen fermentation characteristics of first season ratoon rice whole silage
项目 Items | 组别 Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
pH | 7.05±0.01B | 7.03±0.01B | 7.11±0.01A | 7.09±0.01A |
乙酸 Acetate (mmol·L-1) | 16.96±1.20b | 20.18±0.42a | 15.97±0.10b | 17.39±0.54b |
丙酸 Propionate (mmol·L-1) | 6.21±0.30a | 6.53±0.27a | 4.84±0.02b | 5.28±0.19b |
乙酸/丙酸 Acetate/propionate | 3.20±0.04ab | 3.12±0.03b | 3.28±0.02a | 3.29±0.02a |
丁酸 Butyrate (mmol·L-1) | 0.22±0.02 | 0.25±0.01 | 0.21±0.01 | 0.22±0.01 |
异戊酸 Isovalerate (mmol·L-1) | 1.61±0.13 | 1.70±0.06 | 1.71±0.07 | 1.61±0.01 |
正戊酸 Valerate (mmol·L-1) | 0.08±0.01 | 0.09±0.01 | 0.08±0.01 | 0.08±0.01 |
总挥发性脂肪酸 Total volatile fatty acid (mmol·L-1) | 27.21±1.83 | 28.12±0.82 | 23.03±0.14 | 23.81±0.13 |
氨态氮 NH3-N (mg·dL-1) | 2.35±0.02b | 4.10±0.42a | 2.68±0.27b | 2.64±0.10b |
项目 Items | 组别Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
干物质降解率 Degradation rate of DM | 44.66±1.00b | 49.32±0.49a | 48.85±0.06a | 42.94±1.39b |
有机质降解率 Degradation rate of OM | 41.01±0.26B | 43.75±0.37A | 40.33±0.06B | 42.51±1.26B |
粗蛋白质降解率 Degradation rate of CP | 43.51±1.11B | 48.52±0.01A | 51.48±0.04A | 42.74±1.39B |
中性洗涤纤维降解率 Degradation rate of NDF | 37.64±0.03B | 41.42±0.63A | 38.95±0.57B | 37.50±0.09B |
酸性洗涤纤维降解率 Degradation rate of ADF | 41.16±0.03B | 47.11±0.47A | 42.65±0.71B | 40.73±0.09B |
表6 青贮剂对再生稻头季全株青贮体外发酵24 h的营养物质降解率的影响
Table 6 Effects of silage additives on degradation rates of nutrients after 24 h in vitro fermentation of first season ratoon rice whole silage (%)
项目 Items | 组别Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
N1 | N2 | N3 | CK | |
干物质降解率 Degradation rate of DM | 44.66±1.00b | 49.32±0.49a | 48.85±0.06a | 42.94±1.39b |
有机质降解率 Degradation rate of OM | 41.01±0.26B | 43.75±0.37A | 40.33±0.06B | 42.51±1.26B |
粗蛋白质降解率 Degradation rate of CP | 43.51±1.11B | 48.52±0.01A | 51.48±0.04A | 42.74±1.39B |
中性洗涤纤维降解率 Degradation rate of NDF | 37.64±0.03B | 41.42±0.63A | 38.95±0.57B | 37.50±0.09B |
酸性洗涤纤维降解率 Degradation rate of ADF | 41.16±0.03B | 47.11±0.47A | 42.65±0.71B | 40.73±0.09B |
1 | Xu F X, Xiong H, Zhang L, et al. Progress in research of yield formation of ratooning rice and its high-yielding key regulation technologies. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2015, 48(9): 1702-1717. |
徐富贤, 熊洪, 张林, 等. 再生稻产量形成特点与关键调控技术研究进展. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(9): 1702-1717. | |
2 | Hou M L, Du Z M, Fan W Q, et al. The effects of treating with lactic acid bacteria and cellulase on silage fermentation of natural grasses in meadow steppe. Chinese Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 2017, 48(5): 871-880. |
侯美玲, 杜珠梅, 范文强, 等. 乳酸菌与纤维素酶对草甸草原天然牧草青贮品质的影响. 畜牧兽医学报, 2017, 48(5): 871-880. | |
3 | Wei Y Y, Yu Z. Effects of different additives on the silage quality of Sorghum-sudangrass hybrid. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2016, 24(3): 658-662. |
卫莹莹, 玉柱. 不同添加剂对高丹草青贮的影响. 草地学报, 2016, 24(3): 658-662. | |
4 | Weinberg Z G, Muck R E, Weimer P J, et al. Lactic acid bacteria used in inoculants for silage as probiotics for ruminants. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2004, 118(1/2/3): 1-9. |
5 | Tao L, Feng W X, Wang Y R, et al. Effects of microecological agents on the fermentation quality, nutrition composition and in situ ruminal degradability of corn stalk silage. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(9): 152-160. |
陶莲, 冯文晓, 王玉荣, 等. 微生态制剂对玉米秸秆青贮发酵品质、营养成分及瘤胃降解率的影响. 草业学报, 2016, 25(9): 152-160. | |
6 | Liu H, Bu D P, Lv Z W, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria or a chemical preservative on the quality and aerobic stability of alfalfa silage produced in farm-scale silos. Chinese Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 2015, 46(5): 784-791. |
刘辉, 卜登攀, 吕中旺, 等. 乳酸菌和化学保存剂对窖贮紫花苜蓿青贮品质和有氧稳定性的影响. 畜牧兽医学报, 2015, 46(5): 784-791. | |
7 | Si H Z, Li Z P, Nan W X, et al. Effects of bacterial community composition on fermentation characteristics of Lactobacillus plantarum in low moisture content rice stalk silage. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(3): 184-192. |
司华哲, 李志鹏, 南韦肖, 等. 添加植物乳杆菌对低水分稻秸青贮微生物组成影响研究. 草业学报, 2019, 28(3): 184-192. | |
8 | Zhang J H, Xu L X, Zhang Y, et al. Suitability of straw silage in six rice varieties. Journal of Sichuan Agricultural University, 2014, 32(2): 121-125, 147. |
张锦华, 许留兴, 张俞, 等. 6种水稻秸秆青贮的适宜性. 四川农业大学学报, 2014, 32(2): 121-125, 147. | |
9 | Xu N X, Ding C L, Gu H R, et al. A study on mixed silage of rice straw with corn stalk, hybrid pennisetum and elephant grass. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2012, 34(2): 93-98. |
许能祥, 丁成龙, 顾洪如, 等. 稻秸与玉米秸、杂交狼尾草及象草混合青贮的研究. 中国草地学报, 2012, 34(2): 93-98. | |
10 | Shan A S. Feed and feeding science. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2016. |
单安山. 饲料与饲养学. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2016. | |
11 | National Research Council. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: Sheep, goats, cervids, and new world camelids. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press, 2007. |
12 | Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China. Feeding standard of meat-producing sheep and goats, NY/T 816-2004. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2004. |
中华人民共和国农业部. 肉羊饲养标准, NY/T 816-2004. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2004. | |
13 | Menke K H, Raab L, Salewsli A, et al. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feeding stuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. Journal of Agriculture Science, 1979, 93(1): 217-222. |
14 | Φrskov E R, Mcdonald I. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 1979, 92(2): 499-503. |
15 | Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of moisture and other volatile matter content in feedstuffs, GB/T 6435-2006. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2007. |
中国国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中水分和其他挥发性物质含量的测定, GB/T 6435-2006. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2007. | |
16 | Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of total nitrogen content in animal feeding stuffs by combustion according to the Dumas principle and calculation of the crude protein content, GB/T 24318-2009. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2009. |
中国国家标准化管理委员会. 杜马斯燃烧法测定饲料原料中总氮含量及粗蛋白质的计算, GB/T 24318-2009. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2009. | |
17 | Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of neutral detergent fiber in feedstuffs, GB/T 20806-2006. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2006. |
中国国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中中性洗涤纤维的测定, GB/T 20806-2006. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2006. | |
18 | Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of acid detergent fiber in feedstuff, NY/T 1459-2007. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2007. |
中华人民共和国农业部. 饲料中酸性洗涤纤维的测定, NY/T 1459-2007. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2007. | |
19 | Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of crude fat in feeds, GB/T 6433-2006. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2006. |
中国国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中粗脂肪的测定, GB/T 6433-2006. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2006. | |
20 | Zahiroddini H, Baah J, Mcallister T A. Effects of microbial inoculants on the fermentation, nutrient retention, and aerobic stability of barley silage. Asian Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2006, 19(10): 1429-1436. |
21 | Han K J, Collins M, Vanzant E S, et al. Bale density and moisture effects on alfalfa round bale silage (Forage & Grazing Lands). Crop Science, 2004, 44(3): 914-919. |
22 | Muetzel S, Hunt C L, Tavendale M H. Brief communication: Evaluating rumen fluid from sheep and cattle as inoculum in newly developed automated in vitro rumen batch culture system. Proceeding of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production, 2011, 71: 240-242. |
23 | China Animal Agriculture Association. Silage and haylage alfafa, T/CAAA 003-2018. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2018. |
中国畜牧业协会. 青贮和半干青贮饲料紫花苜蓿, T/CAAA 003-2018. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018. | |
24 | Addah W, Baah J, Groenewegen P, et al. Comparison of the fermentation characteristics, aerobic stability and nutritive value of barley and corn silages ensiled with or without a mixed bacterial inoculant. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 2011, 91(1): 133-146. |
25 | Xu R, Chen P F, Bai S Q, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and cellulase on the fermentation quality of smooth vetch silage. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2014, 22(2): 420-425. |
徐然, 陈鹏飞, 白史且, 等. 乳酸菌和纤维素酶对光叶紫花苕青贮发酵品质的影响. 草地学报, 2014, 22(2): 420-425. | |
26 | Zhong S, Zhang X N, Yang Y G, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and cellulase on alfalfa silage quality with different moisture. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2017, 29(5): 1821-1830. |
钟书, 张晓娜, 杨云贵, 等. 乳酸菌和纤维素酶对不同含水量紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响. 动物营养学报, 2017, 29(5): 1821-1830. | |
27 | Xing L. Study on the effects of Lactobacillus and cellulase additives on the quality of different silage. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2005: 37-48. |
兴丽. 乳酸菌与纤维素酶制剂对不同青贮饲料质量影响的试验研究. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2005: 37-48. | |
28 | Tian J P, Yu Y D, Yu Z, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculants and cellulase on fermentation quality and digestibility of silage. Grassland Science, 2014, 60(4): 199-205. |
29 | Jin H, Jia Y S, Xing Q, et al. Study on correlation between herbage TDN and soil character of nitrogen supplying in Xilinguole grassland. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2008(4): 59-63. |
金花, 贾玉山, 邢旗, 等. 锡林郭勒天然草地牧草TDN与土壤供氮特性的相关性研究. 中国草地学报, 2008(4): 59-63. | |
30 | Zhao X J, Zhang L Y, Liu S, et al. Effects of cutting height on quality of different varieties of whole plant corn silage. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2018, 30(8): 3239-3246. |
赵雪娇, 张立阳, 刘帅, 等.留茬高度对不同品种全株玉米青贮品质的影响. 动物营养学报, 2018, 30(8): 3239-3246. | |
31 | Wan X R, Wu J P, Lei Z M, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria on corn silage quality and stability after aerobic exposure. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(4): 204-211. |
万学瑞, 吴建平, 雷赵民, 等. 优良抑菌活性乳酸菌对玉米青贮及有氧暴露期微生物数量和pH的影响. 草业学报, 2016, 25(4): 204-211. | |
32 | Guo J S, Zhao G Y, Feng Y L, et al. Effects of cellulase on barley silage quality and rumen degradation rates of neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber. Feed Industry, 2005, 26(3): 17-18. |
郭金双, 赵广永, 冯仰廉, 等. 纤维素酶对大麦青贮品质及中酸性洗涤纤维瘤胃降解率的影响. 饲料工业, 2005, 26(3): 17-18. | |
33 | Wang F J, Nishino N. Association of Lactobacillus buchneri with aerobic stability of total mixed ration containing wet brewers grains preserved as a silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2009, 149(3): 265-274. |
34 | Kung L, Taylor C C, Lynch M P, et al. The Effect of treating alfalfa with Lactobacillus buchneri 40788 on silage fermentation, aerobic stability, and nutritive value for lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 2003, 86(1): 336-343. |
35 | Zhang Z X, Shao T. The effects of propionic acid addition on the dynamic fermentation changes of Italian ryegrass. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(2): 102-107. |
张增欣, 邵涛. 丙酸对多花黑麦草青贮发酵动态变化的影响. 草业学报, 2009, 18(2): 102-107. | |
36 | Zhang J G, Kawamoto H, Cai Y M. Relationships between the addition rates of cellulase or glucose and silage fermentation at different temperatures. Animal Science Journal, 2010, 81(3): 325-330. |
37 | Feng Y L, Li S L, Zhang X M. Effects of starch and glucose in diets on milk and beef production and the evaluation of its nutritive value. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2008, 20(1): 115-122. |
冯仰廉, 李胜利, 张晓明. 奶牛和肉牛日粮淀粉和葡萄糖的营养调控及其评定的建议. 动物营养学报, 2008, 20(1): 115-122. | |
38 | Luo R R, Guo Y L, Han H Z, et al. A study on in vitro rumen fermentation characteristics of potato vines and leaves mixed silage based on rumen simulation technique. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2018, 30(3): 1185-1191. |
雒瑞瑞, 郭艳丽, 韩海珠, 等. 基于瘤胃模拟技术的马铃薯茎叶混合青贮料体外瘤胃发酵特性研究. 动物营养学报, 2018, 30(3): 1185-1191. | |
39 | Lemosquet S, Rigout S, Bach A, et al. Glucose metabolism in lactating cows in response to isoenergetic infusions of propionic acid or duodenal glucose. Journal of Dairy Science, 2004, 87(6): 1767-1777. |
40 | Hristov A N, Ropp J K, Hunt C W. Effect of barley and its amylopectin content on ruminal fermentation and bacterial utilization of ammonia-N in vitro. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2002, 99(1/2/3/4): 25-36. |
41 | Owens F N, Bergen W G. Nitrogen metabolism of ruminant animals: Historical perspective, current understanding and future implications. Journal of Animal Science, 1983, 57(Supple2): 498-518. |
42 | Meng Q X, Zhang H J, Rong Y, et al. A new in vitro procedure for estimation of ruminal protein degradation. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Pekinensis, 1991(4): 95-101. |
孟庆翔, 张洪军, 戎易, 等. 估测饲料蛋白质瘤胃降解率活体外新方法的研究. 北京农业大学学报, 1991(4): 95-101. |
[1] | 于浩然, 格根图, 王志军, 贾玉山, 连植, 贾鹏飞. 甲酸添加剂及青贮时间对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(3): 89-95. |
[2] | 万学瑞, 豆思远, 李玉, 何轶群, 王川, 张小丽, 雷赵民. 复合乳酸菌对全株玉米青贮及有氧暴露后微生物及饲料品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(11): 83-90. |
[3] | 李影正, 严旭, 吴子周, 杨春燕, 李晓锋, 何如钰, 张萍, EBENEZERKofiSam, 周阳, 张磊, 荣廷昭, 何建美, 唐祈林. 饲草玉米不同生育期的产量、品质和青贮利用研究[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(7): 82-91. |
[4] | 王建福,雷赵民,成述儒,焦婷,李洁,吴建平. 添加乳酸菌制剂和麸皮对去穗玉米秸秆青贮质量的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(4): 162-169. |
[5] | 王建福, 雷赵民, 万学瑞, 姜辉, 李洁, 吴建平. 5株乳酸菌复合物与CaCO3,酶及尿素不同组合对全株玉米青贮品质影响[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(3): 90-97. |
[6] | 王木川, 杨玉玺, 于奕东, 玉柱. 不同添加剂和青贮密度对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(2): 156-162. |
[7] | 邝肖,季婧,梁文学,崔国文,冀国旭,崔新,刘建,胡国富. 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. |
[8] | 陶莲, 冯文晓, 王玉荣, 刁其玉. 微生态制剂对玉米秸秆青贮发酵品质、营养成分及瘤胃降解率的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2016, 25(9): 152-160. |
[9] | 陶雅, 李峰, 高凤芹, 徐春城, 孙启忠. 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. |
[10] | 李真真,白春生,余奕东,玉柱. 刈割期及添加剂对苜蓿青贮品质及CNCPS蛋白组分的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2016, 25(11): 167-172. |
[11] | 刘辉, 卜登攀, 吕中旺, 李发弟, 刘士杰, 张开展, 王加启. 凋萎和不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2015, 24(5): 126-133. |
[12] | 张晓庆, 金艳梅, 李发弟, 王育青, 李鹏. 麻叶荨麻与玉米粉混贮对青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2015, 24(1): 190-195. |
[13] | 王鸿泽,王之盛,康坤,邹华围,申俊华,胡瑞. 玉米粉和乳酸菌对甘薯蔓、酒糟及稻草混合青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(6): 103-110. |
[14] | 李君临,张新全,玉柱,郭旭生,孟祥坤,罗燕,闫艳红. 含水量和乳酸菌添加剂对多花黑麦草青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(6): 342-348. |
[15] | 张苏江,艾买尔江·吾斯曼,薛兴中,张晓,郭雪峰,陈立强. 南疆玉米和不同糖分甜高粱的青贮品质分析[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(3): 232-240. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||