草业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (8): 164-170.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2021022
• 研究论文 • 上一篇
收稿日期:
2020-06-30
修回日期:
2020-08-31
出版日期:
2021-07-09
发布日期:
2021-07-09
通讯作者:
李俊年
作者简介:
Corresponding author. E-mail: junnianl@163.com基金资助:
Dong-mei YANG(), Jun-nian LI(), Shuang-lun TAO
Received:
2020-06-30
Revised:
2020-08-31
Online:
2021-07-09
Published:
2021-07-09
Contact:
Jun-nian LI
摘要:
为探讨添加单宁酸(TA)在青贮葛藤茎叶中的利用前景,分析了0、1.0%、1.5% 和2.0%单宁酸处理对青贮葛藤茎叶的发酵品质和霉菌毒素含量以及暴露于有氧条件下的青贮葛藤茎叶稳定性的影响。结果表明,青贮70 d后,添加2.0%单宁酸的青贮葛藤可溶性碳水化合物含量较对照组提高16%(P<0.05)。经单宁酸处理的青贮葛藤未检出丙酸和丁酸。而随着单宁酸添加量的增加,青贮葛藤中乳酸含量显著下降(P<0.05)。单宁酸显著降低了青贮葛藤中黄曲霉毒素、呕吐毒素和玉米赤霉烯酮的含量(P<0.05)。青贮70 d后,添加2.0%单宁酸的青贮葛藤中黄曲霉毒素含量较对照组降低47.6%,呕吐毒素含量较对照组下降53.9%,玉米赤霉烯酮含量较对照组降低37.4%。添加2.0%单宁酸的青贮葛藤pH最低,乳酸含量降幅较小,酵母菌增加幅度较低,有氧稳定性最佳。因此,添加单宁酸可提高青贮葛藤的品质。
杨冬梅, 李俊年, 陶双伦. 添加单宁酸对青贮葛藤有氧稳定性和霉菌毒素含量的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(8): 164-170.
Dong-mei YANG, Jun-nian LI, Shuang-lun TAO. Effects of tannic acid addition on the aerobic stability and mycotoxin content of kudzu vine silage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(8): 164-170.
指标 Index | 添加量 Addition | 发酵时间 Fermentation time | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 d | 10 d | 35 d | 50 d | 70 d | ||
粗蛋白 Crude protein (%) | 0 | 19.25±1.55Aa | 19.21±1.45Aa | 19.04±1.44Aa | 18.23±1.25Aa | 18.22±1.24Aa |
1.0% | 19.34±1.46Aa | 19.31±1.32Aa | 19.14±1.28Aa | 18.80±1.36Aa | 18.56±1.34Aa | |
1.5% | 19.35±1.64Aa | 19.32±1.65Aa | 19.01±1.77Aa | 18.90±1.24Aa | 18.16±1.14Aa | |
2.0% | 19.44±1.56Aa | 19.34±1.22Aa | 19.27±1.35Aa | 19.20±1.56Aa | 19.05±1.74Aa | |
可溶性碳水化合物 Water soluble carbohydrate (g·kg-1 FW) | 0 | 116.31±21.26Ca | 110.24±10.25Ba | 116.40±10.46Ba | 105.00±0.23Cb | 104.00±11.04Bb |
1.0% | 118.27±11.34Ca | 115.24±11.29Ba | 112.14±11.05Ba | 109.42±0.12Ca | 104.20±9.55Bb | |
1.5% | 127.56±12.47Ba | 125.32±11.36Ba | 116.54±10.58Bb | 113.54±10.89Bb | 109.87±10.54Bb | |
2.0% | 137.56±11.62Aa | 130.22±12.24Aa | 126.54±10.48Aa | 123.17±8.45Ab | 120.15±12.47Ab | |
中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber (%) | 0 | 55.32±2.32Aa | 54.56±2.45Aa | 53.24±2.64Aa | 52.35±3.21Aa | 52.01±2.30Aa |
1.0% | 55.34±2.14Aa | 54.32±2.34Aa | 53.98±2.46Aa | 53.68±3.45Aa | 53.21±2.14Aa | |
1.5% | 55.64±2.15Aa | 54.89±2.34Aa | 54.34±2.32Aa | 54.12±3.68Aa | 53.41±2.01Aa | |
2.0% | 56.36±2.65Aa | 56.02±2.31Aa | 55.78±2.11Aa | 55.29±3.45Aa | 54.21±2.31Aa | |
酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber (%) | 0 | 30.24±1.32Aa | 29.87±1.26Aa | 28.24±1.01Aa | 28.16±1.24Aa | 28.08±0.47Aa |
1.0% | 30.89±1.24Aa | 29.47±1.15Aa | 29.14±1.21Aa | 28.87±1.21Aa | 28.55±0.65Aa | |
1.5% | 31.02±1.26Aa | 30.65±1.21Aa | 30.21±0.98Aa | 29.30±0.65Aa | 29.04±0.78Aa | |
2.0% | 30.45±1.48Aa | 30.21±1.55Aa | 29.97±1.01Aa | 29.65±0.45Aa | 29.14±0.58Aa |
表1 添加单宁酸对青贮葛藤茎叶营养成分的影响
Table 1 Effect of tannin acid addition on the nutrient content of silage kudzu vine
指标 Index | 添加量 Addition | 发酵时间 Fermentation time | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 d | 10 d | 35 d | 50 d | 70 d | ||
粗蛋白 Crude protein (%) | 0 | 19.25±1.55Aa | 19.21±1.45Aa | 19.04±1.44Aa | 18.23±1.25Aa | 18.22±1.24Aa |
1.0% | 19.34±1.46Aa | 19.31±1.32Aa | 19.14±1.28Aa | 18.80±1.36Aa | 18.56±1.34Aa | |
1.5% | 19.35±1.64Aa | 19.32±1.65Aa | 19.01±1.77Aa | 18.90±1.24Aa | 18.16±1.14Aa | |
2.0% | 19.44±1.56Aa | 19.34±1.22Aa | 19.27±1.35Aa | 19.20±1.56Aa | 19.05±1.74Aa | |
可溶性碳水化合物 Water soluble carbohydrate (g·kg-1 FW) | 0 | 116.31±21.26Ca | 110.24±10.25Ba | 116.40±10.46Ba | 105.00±0.23Cb | 104.00±11.04Bb |
1.0% | 118.27±11.34Ca | 115.24±11.29Ba | 112.14±11.05Ba | 109.42±0.12Ca | 104.20±9.55Bb | |
1.5% | 127.56±12.47Ba | 125.32±11.36Ba | 116.54±10.58Bb | 113.54±10.89Bb | 109.87±10.54Bb | |
2.0% | 137.56±11.62Aa | 130.22±12.24Aa | 126.54±10.48Aa | 123.17±8.45Ab | 120.15±12.47Ab | |
中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber (%) | 0 | 55.32±2.32Aa | 54.56±2.45Aa | 53.24±2.64Aa | 52.35±3.21Aa | 52.01±2.30Aa |
1.0% | 55.34±2.14Aa | 54.32±2.34Aa | 53.98±2.46Aa | 53.68±3.45Aa | 53.21±2.14Aa | |
1.5% | 55.64±2.15Aa | 54.89±2.34Aa | 54.34±2.32Aa | 54.12±3.68Aa | 53.41±2.01Aa | |
2.0% | 56.36±2.65Aa | 56.02±2.31Aa | 55.78±2.11Aa | 55.29±3.45Aa | 54.21±2.31Aa | |
酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber (%) | 0 | 30.24±1.32Aa | 29.87±1.26Aa | 28.24±1.01Aa | 28.16±1.24Aa | 28.08±0.47Aa |
1.0% | 30.89±1.24Aa | 29.47±1.15Aa | 29.14±1.21Aa | 28.87±1.21Aa | 28.55±0.65Aa | |
1.5% | 31.02±1.26Aa | 30.65±1.21Aa | 30.21±0.98Aa | 29.30±0.65Aa | 29.04±0.78Aa | |
2.0% | 30.45±1.48Aa | 30.21±1.55Aa | 29.97±1.01Aa | 29.65±0.45Aa | 29.14±0.58Aa |
处理 Treatment | 有机酸含量Organic acid content (g·kg-1 DM) | 氨态氮NH3-N (g·kg-1 DM) | 微生物Microorganisms (lg CFU·g-1 FM) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LA | AA | PA | BA | 乳酸菌LAB | 酵母菌Yeast | ||
对照 Control | 46.62±2.16A | 0.66±0.09A | 0.22±0.01 | 0.01 | 5.57±1.25A | 8.21±1.69A | <2.00 |
1.0%TA | 41.35±1.34B | 0.63±0.08A | 0 | 0 | 5.47±1.68A | 8.56±1.75A | <2.00 |
1.5%TA | 39.24±1.68B | 0.61±0.06A | 0 | 0 | 5.34±1.54A | 7.98±1.54A | <2.00 |
2.0%TA | 34.26±1.35C | 0.58±0.04A | 0 | 0 | 5.31±1.84A | 8.01±1.66A | <2.00 |
表2 添加单宁酸对青贮葛藤茎叶发酵参数的影响
Table 2 Effects of addition of tannic acid on fermentation parameters of silage kudzu vine
处理 Treatment | 有机酸含量Organic acid content (g·kg-1 DM) | 氨态氮NH3-N (g·kg-1 DM) | 微生物Microorganisms (lg CFU·g-1 FM) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LA | AA | PA | BA | 乳酸菌LAB | 酵母菌Yeast | ||
对照 Control | 46.62±2.16A | 0.66±0.09A | 0.22±0.01 | 0.01 | 5.57±1.25A | 8.21±1.69A | <2.00 |
1.0%TA | 41.35±1.34B | 0.63±0.08A | 0 | 0 | 5.47±1.68A | 8.56±1.75A | <2.00 |
1.5%TA | 39.24±1.68B | 0.61±0.06A | 0 | 0 | 5.34±1.54A | 7.98±1.54A | <2.00 |
2.0%TA | 34.26±1.35C | 0.58±0.04A | 0 | 0 | 5.31±1.84A | 8.01±1.66A | <2.00 |
项目 Items | 添加量 Addition | 发酵时间 Fermentation time | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 d | 10 d | 35 d | 50 d | 70 d | ||
黄曲霉毒素 AF | 0 | 17.28±1.54Aa | 12.35±1.64Ab | 8.14±1.54Ab | 2.03±0.34Ac | 1.66±0.17Ac |
1.0% | 12.35±1.24Ba | 8.64±0.54Bb | 7.62±1.34Bb | 1.11±0.24Bc | 1.32±0.12Ac | |
1.5% | 11.47±1.65Ba | 6.24±0.74Bb | 6.44±0.58Bb | 0.58±0.14Cc | 0.98±0.12Bc | |
2.0% | 7.67±0.28Ca | 6.24±0.28Ba | 6.21±0.80Ba | 0.42±0.10Cb | 0.87±0.08Bb | |
呕吐毒素 DON | 0 | 263.05±23.45Aa | 265.21±22.45Aa | 229.85±20.14Aa | 213.21±18.74Aa | 207.35±16.24Aa |
1.0% | 135.46±12.35Ba | 133.02±13.24Ba | 122.03±11.28Ba | 105.12±10.57Bb | 102.24±10.69Bb | |
1.5% | 133.57±12.98Ba | 124.02±11.32Ba | 105.60±10.77Bb | 102.17±10.24Bb | 98.65±8.54Bb | |
2.0% | 105.18±11.27Ca | 100.21±10.22Ba | 98.20±9.35Ba | 97.16±7.89Ba | 95.56±8.74Ba | |
玉米赤霉烯酮 ZEA | 0 | 164.31±21.32Aa | 156.40±12.58Aa | 132.40±11.65Ab | 124.46±12.54Ab | 120.27±11.24Ab |
1.0% | 143.27±11.59Ba | 135.24±12.54Ba | 115.60±10.25Bb | 102.35±9.87Bb | 87.46±9.54Bc | |
1.5% | 137.56±12.47Ba | 125.32±11.54Bb | 116.54±10.58Bb | 105.26±11.24Bb | 87.38±7.59Bc | |
2.0% | 137.56±11.62Ba | 125.32±11.26Bb | 116.54±10.48Bb | 95.64±7.68Bc | 75.24±5.47Bc |
表3 添加单宁酸对青贮葛藤霉菌毒素含量的影响
Table 3 Effects of tannin acid addition on mycotoxin contents of silage kudzu vine (μg·kg-1)
项目 Items | 添加量 Addition | 发酵时间 Fermentation time | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
5 d | 10 d | 35 d | 50 d | 70 d | ||
黄曲霉毒素 AF | 0 | 17.28±1.54Aa | 12.35±1.64Ab | 8.14±1.54Ab | 2.03±0.34Ac | 1.66±0.17Ac |
1.0% | 12.35±1.24Ba | 8.64±0.54Bb | 7.62±1.34Bb | 1.11±0.24Bc | 1.32±0.12Ac | |
1.5% | 11.47±1.65Ba | 6.24±0.74Bb | 6.44±0.58Bb | 0.58±0.14Cc | 0.98±0.12Bc | |
2.0% | 7.67±0.28Ca | 6.24±0.28Ba | 6.21±0.80Ba | 0.42±0.10Cb | 0.87±0.08Bb | |
呕吐毒素 DON | 0 | 263.05±23.45Aa | 265.21±22.45Aa | 229.85±20.14Aa | 213.21±18.74Aa | 207.35±16.24Aa |
1.0% | 135.46±12.35Ba | 133.02±13.24Ba | 122.03±11.28Ba | 105.12±10.57Bb | 102.24±10.69Bb | |
1.5% | 133.57±12.98Ba | 124.02±11.32Ba | 105.60±10.77Bb | 102.17±10.24Bb | 98.65±8.54Bb | |
2.0% | 105.18±11.27Ca | 100.21±10.22Ba | 98.20±9.35Ba | 97.16±7.89Ba | 95.56±8.74Ba | |
玉米赤霉烯酮 ZEA | 0 | 164.31±21.32Aa | 156.40±12.58Aa | 132.40±11.65Ab | 124.46±12.54Ab | 120.27±11.24Ab |
1.0% | 143.27±11.59Ba | 135.24±12.54Ba | 115.60±10.25Bb | 102.35±9.87Bb | 87.46±9.54Bc | |
1.5% | 137.56±12.47Ba | 125.32±11.54Bb | 116.54±10.58Bb | 105.26±11.24Bb | 87.38±7.59Bc | |
2.0% | 137.56±11.62Ba | 125.32±11.26Bb | 116.54±10.48Bb | 95.64±7.68Bc | 75.24±5.47Bc |
添加量 Addition | pH | 乳酸 Lactic acid (g·kg-1DM) | 酵母菌Yeasts (lg CFU·g-1FM) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 d | 5 d | 10 d | 0 d | 5 d | 10 d | 0 d | 5 d | 10 d | ||
0 | 4.10±0.25Ab | 4.96±1.01Ab | 8.38±1.35Aa | 8.21±1.69Ab | 30.85±2.56Ba | 8.60±1.35Bb | <2.00 | 7.58±1.02Ab | 9.67±1.28Aa | |
1.0% | 4.10±0.31Ab | 4.72±1.06Ab | 6.79±1.36Ba | 8.56±1.75Ac | 33.45±2.74Aa | 11.21±0.65Ab | <2.00 | 4.37±1.01Bb | 7.12±1.02Ba | |
1.5% | 4.11±0.21Ab | 4.53±1.11Ab | 6.27±1.38Ba | 7.98±1.54Ac | 34.25±2.45Aa | 12.40±1.35Ab | <2.00 | 4.54±1.06Bb | 7.02±1.04Ba | |
2.0% | 4.10±0.26Aa | 4.50±1.21Aa | 4.88±1.45Ca | 8.01±1.66Ac | 34.21±2.14Aa | 12.40±1.24Ab | <2.00 | 4.18±1.11Bb | 6.87±1.06Ba |
表4 添加单宁酸对青贮葛藤有氧暴露过程中pH、乳酸含量和酵母菌数量的影响
Table 4 Effects of addition of tannic acid on pH, lactic acid and yeast counts in silage kudzu vine
添加量 Addition | pH | 乳酸 Lactic acid (g·kg-1DM) | 酵母菌Yeasts (lg CFU·g-1FM) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 d | 5 d | 10 d | 0 d | 5 d | 10 d | 0 d | 5 d | 10 d | ||
0 | 4.10±0.25Ab | 4.96±1.01Ab | 8.38±1.35Aa | 8.21±1.69Ab | 30.85±2.56Ba | 8.60±1.35Bb | <2.00 | 7.58±1.02Ab | 9.67±1.28Aa | |
1.0% | 4.10±0.31Ab | 4.72±1.06Ab | 6.79±1.36Ba | 8.56±1.75Ac | 33.45±2.74Aa | 11.21±0.65Ab | <2.00 | 4.37±1.01Bb | 7.12±1.02Ba | |
1.5% | 4.11±0.21Ab | 4.53±1.11Ab | 6.27±1.38Ba | 7.98±1.54Ac | 34.25±2.45Aa | 12.40±1.35Ab | <2.00 | 4.54±1.06Bb | 7.02±1.04Ba | |
2.0% | 4.10±0.26Aa | 4.50±1.21Aa | 4.88±1.45Ca | 8.01±1.66Ac | 34.21±2.14Aa | 12.40±1.24Ab | <2.00 | 4.18±1.11Bb | 6.87±1.06Ba |
1 | Shi C G. Research progress in Chinese medicine kudzu. Chinese Traditional and Herbal Drugs, 1994, 25(9): 496-497. |
石昌顾. 中药葛根的研究进展. 中草药, 1994, 25(9): 496-497. | |
2 | Mao F C, Zhao B S. Present utilization status of wild plant Pueraria and its exploitation evaluation. Journal of Northwest Forest of College, 1995, 10(3): 88-92. |
毛富春, 赵伯善. 野生植物葛藤的研究利用现状及开发前景. 西北林学院学报, 1995, 10(3): 88-92. | |
3 | Zhang D W, Dai S J, Li G H, et al. Chemical constituents in cane of Pueraria lobata. Chinese Traditional and Herbal Drugs, 2011, 42(4): 649-651. |
张德武, 戴胜军, 李贵海, 等. 野葛藤的化学成分研究.中草药, 2011, 42(4): 649-651. | |
4 | Liu J L, Xia M Z, Luo Q, et al. Feeding value of Pueraria lobata (Willd.) ohwi and its application of livestock in Panxi area. Resource Development & Market, 2005, 21(1): 52-53. |
刘建林, 夏明忠, 罗强, 等. 葛藤的饲用价值及其在攀西地区畜牧业中的应用. 资源开发与市场, 2005, 21(1): 52-53. | |
5 | Zhou J, Long W, Kui J X. Utilization value and exploitation for ground of Pueraria lobata. Prataculture and Animal Husbandry, 2007, 135(2): 35-38. |
周珺, 龙伟, 奎嘉祥. 葛藤的利用价值及开发前景. 草业与畜牧, 2007, 135(2): 35-38. | |
6 | Zhang C Q, Gu M. Kudzu bean, a forage crop with higher exploitable potentiality in Guizhou. Journal of Guizhou Agricultural Sciences, 1998, 26(4): 9-12. |
张川黔, 顾明. 贵州极有开发潜力的饲用植物-葛藤. 贵州农业科学, 1998, 26(4): 9-12. | |
7 | Ma Z H, Lu Z B, Shi B. Chemical properties and application of tannic acid. Natural Product Research and Development, 2003, 15(1): 87-91. |
马志红, 陆忠兵, 石碧. 单宁酸的化学性质及应用. 天然产物研究与开发, 2003, 15(1): 87-91. | |
8 | Albrecht K A, Muck R E. Proteolysis in ensilage legumes that vary in tannin concentration. Crop Science, 1991, 31(2): 464-469. |
9 | Salawu M B, Acamovica T, Stewartc C S, et al. The use of tannins as silage additives on silage composition and mobile bag disappearance of dry matter and protein. Journal of Animal Science, 1999, 82(3): 243-259. |
10 | Waghorn G C, Ulyatt M J, John A, et al. The effect of condensed tannins on the site of digestion of amino acids and other nutrients in sheep fed on Lotus corniculatus L. British Journal of Nutrition, 1987, 57(1): 115-126. |
11 | Mcnabb W C, Waghorn G C, Barry T N, et al. The effects of condensed tannins in Lotus pedunculatus on the digestion and metabolism of methionine, cystine and in organic sulphur in sheep. British Journal of Nutrition, 1993, 70(2): 647-661. |
12 | Getachew G, Pittroff W, Depeters E J, et al. Influence of tannic acid application alfalfa hay: In vitro rumen fermentation, serum metabolites and nitrogen balance in sheep. Animal Science, 2008, 2(3): 381-390. |
13 | Hoskin S O, Barry T N, Wilson P R, et al. Growth and carcass production of young farmed deer grazing sullage (Hedysarum coronarium), chicory (Cichorium intybus), or perennial ryegrass(Lolium perenne)/white clover (Trifolium repens) pasture in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 1999, 42(1): 83-92. |
14 | Shimada T, Saitoh T. Re-evaluation of the relationship between rodent population and acorn masting: A review from the aspect of nutrients and defensive chemicals in acorns. Population Ecology, 2006, 48(4): 341-352. |
15 | Tabacco E, Borreani G, Grovetto G M, et al. Effect of chestnut tannin on fermentation quality, proteolysis, and protein rumen degradability of alfalfa silage. Journal of Dairy Science, 2006, 89(12): 4736-4746. |
16 | Zhu Y, Nishino N, Kishida Y, et al. Ensiling characteristics and ruminal degradation of Italian ryegrass and lucerne silages treated with cell wall-degrading enzymes. Science, 1999, 79(14): 987-992. |
17 | Li M, Zi X J, Diao Q Y, et al. Effect of tannic acids on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of cassava foliage. Pratacultural Science, 2019, 36(6): 1662-1667. |
李茂, 字学娟, 刁其玉, 等. 添加单宁酸对木薯叶青贮品质和有氧稳定性的影响. 草业科学, 2019, 36(6): 1662-1667. | |
18 | Zhang L. Study of effects of additives on Napier grass and Italian ryegrass fermentation quality and aerobic stability. Nanjing: Nanjing Agricultural University, 2010. |
张磊. 添加剂对象草和意大利黑麦草青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性影响的研究. 南京: 南京农业大学, 2010. | |
19 | Yang D M, Tao S L, Liang J, et al. Effects of tannic acid additive on the quality of kudzu stem and leaf silage. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2012, 20(4): 784-787. |
杨冬梅, 陶双伦, 梁静, 等.添加单宁酸对青贮葛藤茎叶品质的影响. 草地学报, 2012, 20(4): 784-787. | |
20 | Zhang L Y. Feed analysis and quality in inspection technology(The 3rd Edition). Beijing: China Agricultural University Press, 2007. |
张丽英. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术(第3版). 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2007. | |
21 | Vansoest P V, Robertson J B, Lewis B A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 1991, 74(10): 3583-3597. |
22 | AOAC. Official methods of analysis(15th ed). Arlington, VA, USA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 1990. |
23 | Yu R H, Zhao L H, Mo F, et al. Study on determination of water-soluble carbohydrate in corn straw silage. Feed Industry, 2003, 24(9): 38-39. |
余汝华, 赵丽华, 莫放, 等. 玉米秸秆青贮饲料中水溶性碳水化合物测定方法研究. 饲料工业, 2003, 24(9): 38-39. | |
24 | Weathe R, Burn M W. Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia. Annual of Chemistry, 1967, 39(8): 971-974. |
25 | Jia Y S, Yu H R, Du S, et al. Research progress on natural forage silage additives. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2018, 26(3): 533-538. |
贾玉山, 于浩然, 都帅, 等. 天然牧草青贮添加剂研究进展. 草地学报, 2018, 26(3): 533-538. | |
26 | Turan A, Onenc S S. Effect of cumin essential oil usage on fermentation quality, aerobic stability and in vitro digestibility of alfalfa silage. Asian-Australians Journal of Animal Science, 2018, 31(8): 1252-1258. |
27 | Sun Q, Xu S J, Zeng X G, et al. Animal silage additives: Research progress. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(27): 158-164. |
孙茜, 徐圣君, 曾贤桂, 等. 动物青贮饲料添加剂的研究进展. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(27): 158-164. | |
28 | Huang F, Li H, Wang K, et al. Effects of epiphytic microorganisms on fermentation quality and aerobic stability of silage. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2020, 32(12): 1-9. |
黄峰, 李浩, 王坤,等. 附生微生物对青贮发酵品质和有氧稳定性的影响. 动物营养学报, 2020, 32(12): 1-9. | |
29 | Bolsen K K, Lin C, Brent B E, et al. Effect of silage additives on the microbial succession and fermentation process of alfalfa and corn silages. Journal of Dairy Science, 1992, 75(11): 3066-3083. |
30 | Huang F, Zhang L, Zhou B, et al. Research process in silage microorganism and its effect on silage aerobic stability. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(1): 82-89. |
黄峰, 张露, 周波, 等. 青贮微生物及其对青贮饲料有氧稳定性影响的研究进展. 动物营养学报, 2019, 31(1): 82-89. | |
31 | Tian J P. The accumulation and control technology of aflatoxin in whole crop corn silage. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2017. |
田吉鹏. 全株玉米青贮饲料中黄曲霉毒素积累规律及调控技术研究. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2017. | |
32 | Wu K K, Zhang K, Zhang J Y, et al. Investigation on contamination of feed mycotoxins in large scale dairy farms in some areas of Gansu province. Progress in Veterinary Medicine, 2019, 40(9): 137-140. |
吴开开, 张康, 张景艳, 等. 甘肃部分地区规模化奶牛场饲料霉菌毒素污染状况调查. 动物医学进展, 2019, 40(9): 137-140. | |
33 | Xu S Y, Yu Z. The effects of different additives on the silage qualities. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2021, 57(2): 148-152. |
徐生阳, 玉柱. 不同添加剂对天然牧草青贮品质的影响. 中国畜牧杂志, 2021, 57(2): 148-152. |
[1] | 尹祥, 王咏琪, 李鑫琴, 田静, 王晓亚, 张建国. 不同水分吸附材料对象草青贮发酵品质及好氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(7): 133-138. |
[2] | 董文成, 林语梵, 朱鸿福, 张欢, 张桂杰. 不同品种葡萄渣对苜蓿青贮品质和有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(4): 129-137. |
[3] | 李艳芬, 程金花, 田川尧, 田雨佳, 卢冬亚, 张建斌. 双乙酸钠对苜蓿青贮品质、营养成分及蛋白分子结构的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(2): 163-171. |
[4] | 宗成, 张健, 邵涛, 董志浩, 李君风, 唐露, 冉启凡, 刘秦华. 添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮饲料发酵品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(12): 180-187. |
[5] | 毛翠, 刘方圆, 宋恩亮, 王亚芳, 王永军, 战翔, 李原, 成海建, 姜富贵. 不同乳酸菌添加量和发酵时间对全株玉米青贮营养价值及发酵品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(10): 172-181. |
[6] | 琚泽亮, 赵桂琴, 柴继宽, 贾志峰, 梁国玲. 不同燕麦品种在甘肃中部的营养价值及青贮发酵品质综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(9): 77-86. |
[7] | 李小铃, 关皓, 帅杨, 李小梅, 彭安琪, 李昌华, 蒲棋, 闫艳红, 张新全. 单一和复合乳酸菌添加剂对扁穗牛鞭草青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(6): 119-127. |
[8] | 刘月, 王国艮, 吴浩, 孟庆翔, 宋恩亮, 成海建, 周振明. 全株青贮玉米品种对其发酵品质及营养价值的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(6): 148-156. |
[9] | 罗颖洁, 陈桂华, 穆麟, 胡龙兴, 张志飞, 高帅, 魏仲珊. 不同稻秸添加比例对紫花苜蓿和麦麸混合青贮的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(5): 178-184. |
[10] | 商振达, 谭占坤, 李家奎, 卓嘎, 王宏辉, 巴桑, 谢国平, 刘锁珠. 西藏地区荞麦与玉米混合青贮对发酵品质和微生物多样性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(4): 95-105. |
[11] | 李菲菲, 张凡凡, 王旭哲, 唐开婷, 马春晖. 刈割茬次和生育期对苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(12): 137-148. |
[12] | 梁小玉, 季杨, 易军, 付茂忠, 胡远彬. 混合比例和添加剂对菊苣与青贮玉米混合青贮品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(2): 173-181. |
[13] | 申瑞瑞, 李秋凤, 李运起, 孙晓玉, 曹玉凤, 岳康宁, 王勇胜, 王美美, 高艳霞, 李建国. 不同添加剂对薯渣与玉米秸秆混贮饲料发酵品质及牛瘤胃降解率的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2018, 27(11): 200-208. |
[14] | 王旭哲, 贾舒安, 张凡凡, 鲁为华, 张前兵, 马春晖. 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. |
[15] | 苗芳, 张凡凡, 唐开婷, 贾舒安, 王旭哲, 马春晖. 同/异质型乳酸菌添加对全株玉米青贮发酵特性、营养品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2017, 26(9): 167-175. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||