凋萎和不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响

doi:10.11686/cyxb20150515

草业学报 ›› 2015, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (5): 126-133.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb20150515

凋萎和不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响

刘辉^{1, 2}, 卜登攀², 吕中旺², 李发弟¹, 刘士杰³, 张开展⁴, 王加启^{1, 2*, *}

1.甘肃农业大学动物科学技术学院,甘肃兰州730070;
2.中国农业科学院北京畜牧兽医研究所动物营养学国家重点实验室,北京100193;
3.中国饲料工业协会,北京100125;
4.北京中地种畜有限公司,北京100028

收稿日期:2014-11-18 出版日期:2015-05-20 发布日期:2015-05-20
作者简介:刘辉(1978-),女,湖北天门人,在读博士。E-mail: liuhui2001@163.com
基金资助:
“十二五”科技支撑计划(2012BAD12B02-5),“十二五”科技支撑计划课题(2012BAD43B01-2)和中国农业科学院科技创新工程(ASTIP-IAS07)资助

Effects of wilting and additives on fermentation quality of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) silage

LIU Hui^{1, 2}, BU Deng-Pan², LV Zhong-Wang², LI Fa-Di¹, LIU Shi-Jie³, ZHANG Kai-Zhan⁴, WANG Jia-Qi^{1, 2, *}

1.College of Animal Science and Technology, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou 730070, China;
2. State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China;
3. China Feed Industry Association, Beijing 100125, China;
4.Beijing Sino Farm, Beijing 100028, China

Received:2014-11-18 Online:2015-05-20 Published:2015-05-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以孕蕾后期至初花期紫花苜蓿为材料,在实验室条件下研究了两种凋萎程度(晾晒3 h和晾晒12 h),对应含水率分别为72.6%和61.8%的苜蓿草分别添加乳酸菌接种剂(LAB)、甜菜粕(SB)、乳酸菌+甜菜粕(LAB+SB)、甲酸钠(SF)、甲酸钠+甜菜粕(SF+SB)五组不同添加剂处理及对照组(CK)对苜蓿青贮发酵品质和主要营养成分含量的影响。青贮65 d开封,对青贮进行了感官评定和实验室评定。结果表明,1)添加剂对苜蓿青贮发酵品质有极显著的影响(P<0.01),各种添加剂均不同程度地提高了苜蓿青贮饲料的发酵品质,显著降低了青贮饲料的pH和氨态氮含量;2)两种凋萎程度下苜蓿青贮的NDF、ADF和干物质回收率均与对照组差异不显著,LAB+SB和SF处理显著提高了青贮饲料WSC的含量(P<0.05),添加SB显著降低了青贮饲料的CP值(P<0.05);3)提高原料的凋萎程度能够改善苜蓿青贮饲料的发酵品质,显著提高青贮饲料的CP和WSC含量(P<0.05)。总体来说,不同添加剂的青贮效果不同,添加LAB+SB的青贮品质最佳。

Abstract: The effect of wilting and different additives on alfalfa silage fermentation and nutritive value were studied under laboratory conditions. Alfalfa (at the early bloom stage of maturity), wilting 3 and 12 h respectively, was ensiled at 72.6% and 61.8% moisture content either untreated (CK) or treated with inoculant (LAB), sugar beet pulp (SB), inoculant and sugar beet pulp (LAB+SB), sodium formate (SF) and the combination of sodium formate and sugar beet pulp (SF+SB). Silo was opened and analysed after 65 d of ensiling. The results showed that additives addition generally had an significantly effect on alfalfa silage characteristics in terms of lower pH and ammonia-N concentration (P<0.01). Treated silage had a similar concentration of neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and dry matter recovery compared with untreated silage. The addition of sugar beet pulp (SB) greatly reduced crude protein concentrations (P<0.05). Water-soluble carbohydrate concentrations were found increased in silage from alfalfa herbage treated with inoculant and sugar beet pulp combined and sodium formate prior to ensiling (P<0.05). As silage wilting enhanced, silage quality was improved. In general, different additives had different effect on ensiling. Inoculant and sugar beet pulp combined (LAB+SB) was found to be the most effective additive.

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.

LIU Hui, BU Deng-Pan, LV Zhong-Wang, LI Fa-Di, LIU Shi-Jie, ZHANG Kai-Zhan, WANG Jia-Qi. Effects of wilting and additives on fermentation quality of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) silage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2015, 24(5): 126-133.

参考文献

[1] Mcdonald P, Henderson A R, Heron S J E. The Biochemistry of Silage[M]. UK: Abersytw yth, 1991: 81-151.
[2] Weinberg Z G, Muck R E. New trends in development and use of inoculants for silage. Fems Microbiology Reviews, 1996, 19: 53-68.
[3] Filya I, Muck R E , Contreras-Govea F E. Inoculant effects on alfalfa silage: fermentation products and nutritive value. Journal of Dairy Science, 2007, 90: 5108-5114.
[4] Nagel S A, Broderick G A. Effect of formic acid or formaldehyde treatment of alfalfa silage on nutrient utilization by dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 1992, 75: 140-154.
[5] Mohammed R, Stevenson D M, Beauchemin K A, et al . Changes in ruminal bacterial community composition following feeding of alfalfa ensiled with a lactic acid bacterial inoculant. Journal of Dairy Science, 2012, 95: 328-339.
[6] Kung L. Potential Factors that May Limit the Effectiveness of Silage Additives[C]. Madison: Proc. XV International Silage Conference, US Dairy Forage Research Centre, 2009: 37-45.
[7] Nadeau E M G, Buxton D R, Russell J R, et al . Enzyme, bacterial inoculant, and formic acid effects on silage composition of orchardgrass and alfalfa. Journal of Dairy Science, 2000, 83: 1487-1502.
[8] Lorenz M M, Udén P. Influence of formic acid and dry matter on protein degradation in the tanniniferous legume sainfoin. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2011, 164: 217-224.
[9] Zhang X Q, Li P, Zheng C, et al . Effect of formic acid on silage quality of hempleaf nettle ( Urtica cannabina ). Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2013, 21(3): 618-621.
[10] Ferris C P, Mayne C S. Effects on milk production of feeding silage and sugar-beet pulp as separate components, in a mixed ration or as an ensiled blend. Grass and Forage Science, 1994, 49: 229-240.
[11] Wang M, Wang J Q, Zhang J Y, et al . Effects of sugar beet pulp substituted for ground corn on the performance and blood metabolite of dairy cows. China Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2011, 38(1): 18-22.
[12] Charlotte A M, Kennedy S J. The effect of sugar beet pulp-based silage additives on effluent production, fermentation, in-silo losses, silage intake and animal performance. Grass and Forage Science, 1994, 49: 54-64.
[13] Cummins B, Kiely P O, Keane1 M G, et al . Conservation characteristics of grass and dry sugar beet pulp co-ensiled after different degrees of mixing. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research, 2007, 46: 181-193.
[14] Ji M M, Wu Y M. Effects of addition of urea and beet pulp on silage quality of water hyacinth stem and leaf. Journal of Zhejiang University(Agriculture and Life Sciences), 2001, 37(1): 91-96.
[15] Chen P F, Rong Y P, Yu Z, et al . Determination of moisture in alfalfa by microwave oven. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2006, 28(3): 53-55.
[16] Zhang Z Y. Chinese Feed[M]. Beijing: Chinese Agricultural Press, 2000.
[17] Zhang L Y. Feed Analysis and Quality Test Technology (Second Edition)[M]. Beijing: Chinese Agricultural University Press, 2003.
[18] 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. Crop Science, 1999, 39(6): 1873-1880.
[19] Planye M J, McDonald P. The buffering constituents of herbage and silage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 1966, 17(6): 264-268.
[20] Han K J, Collins M, Collins E S, et al . Bale density and moisture effects on alfalfa round bale silage. Crop Science, 2004, 44(3): 914-919.
[21] Broderica G A, kang J H. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro midia. Journal of Dairy Science, 1980, 63(1): 64-75.
[22] Liu X, Han L J, Shinichiro H, et al . Effects of different additives on the quality of alfalfa silage. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2004, 9(3): 25-30.
[23] Zhuang Y F, Kazuo A, Zhang W C. Effects of biological additive and moisture content on fermentation quality of alfalfa and timothy silages. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2007, 38(12): 1394-1400.
[24] Liu L, Chen X, Li Z, et al . Effects of moisture content and additives on the quality of Agropyron elongatum silage. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(6): 203-207.
[25] Zhang T, Cui Z J, Gao L J, et al . The effect of fermented green juice and silage inoculant bacteria MMD3 on the fermentation of Alfalfa silage. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2004, 9(5): 32-37.
[26] Zhao Q J, Yuan X J, Guo G, et al . Effect of adding an inoculant and molasses on fermentation quality of mixed silage of hull-lessbarley straw and perennial ryegrass in Tibet. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(4): 100-106.
[27] Qing F C, Zhao G Q, Jiao T, et al . Effect of different moisture centents and additives on the quality of baled oat silage. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(6): 119-125.
[28] Randby T. The effect of some acid-based additives applied to wet grass crops under various ensiling conditions. Grass and Forage Science, 2000,(55): 289-299.
[29] Conaghan P, O’Kiely P, O’Mara F P. Conservation characteristics of wilted perennial ryegrass silage made using biological or chemical additives. Journal of Dairy Science, 2010, 93: 628-643.
[30] Li P, Bai S Q, Yan J J, et al . Effect of additives and moisture content on the quality of Elymus sibiricus L. silages. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2013, 21(6): 1176-1180.
[9] 张晓庆, 李鹏, 郑琛, 等. 添加甲酸对麻叶荨麻青贮品质的影响. 草地学报, 2013, 21(3): 618-621.
[11] 王萌, 王加启, 张俊瑜, 等. 甜菜粕替代玉米对奶牛生产性能及血液代谢的影响. 中国畜牧兽医, 2011, 38(1): 18-22.
[14] 纪苗苗, 吴跃明. 添加尿素和甜菜粕对水葫芦茎叶青贮品质的影响.浙江大学学报( 农业与生命科学版), 2001, 37(1): 91-96.
[15] 陈鹏飞, 戎郁萍, 玉柱, 等. 微波炉测定紫花苜蓿含水量的初步研究. 中国草地学报, 2006, 28(3): 53-55.
[16] 张子仪. 中国饲料学[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000.
[17] 张丽英. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术(第2版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业大学出版社, 2003.
[22] 刘贤, 韩鲁佳, 原慎一郎, 等. 不同添加剂对苜蓿青贮饲料品质的影响. 中国农业大学学报, 2004, 9(3): 25-30.
[23] 庄益芬, 安宅一夫, 张文昌. 生物添加剂和含水率对紫花苜蓿和猫尾草青贮发酵品质的影响. 畜牧兽医学报, 2007, 38(12): 1394-1400.
[24] 刘玲, 陈新, 李振, 等. 含水量及添加剂对高冰草青贮饲料品质的影响. 草业学报, 2011, 20(6): 203-207.
[25] 张涛, 崔宗均, 高丽娟, 等. 绿汁发酵液和乳酸菌剂MMD3在不同含水率苜蓿青贮中的添加试验. 中国农业大学学报, 2004, 9(5): 32-37.
[26] 赵庆杰, 原现军, 郭刚, 等. 添加糖蜜和乳酸菌制剂对西藏青稞秸秆和多年生黑麦草混合青贮发酵品质的影响. 草业学报, 2014, 23(4): 100-106.
[27] 覃方锉, 赵桂琴, 焦婷, 等. 含水量及添加剂对燕麦捆裹青贮品质的影响. 草业学报, 2014, 23(6): 119-125.
[30] 李平, 白史且, 鄢家俊, 等. 添加剂及含水量对老芒麦青贮品质的影响. 草地学报, 2013, 21(6):1176-1180.

凋萎和不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响

Effects of wilting and additives on fermentation quality of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) silage

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics