Acta Prataculturae Sinica ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (5): 155-164.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2020203
Previous Articles Next Articles
Xiao-fei YU1(), Xiao-nong GUO1,2,3(), Yan ZHANG1, Zi-wei LIU1, Xi-wen ZHANG1, Ke-xin XU1, Zhi-yong Wu1
Received:
2020-05-11
Revised:
2020-09-03
Online:
2021-05-20
Published:
2021-04-16
Contact:
Xiao-nong GUO
Xiao-fei YU, Xiao-nong GUO, Yan ZHANG, Zi-wei LIU, Xi-wen ZHANG, Ke-xin XU, Zhi-yong Wu. Optimization of fermentation technology for production of quinoa straw feed using response surface methodology[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(5): 155-164.
水平 Level | 发酵时间 Fermentation time (h) | 含水量 Moisture content (%) | 菌剂添加量 Amount of bacteria added (g) |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 72 | 50 | 0.75 |
2 | 120 | 60 | 1.00 |
3 | 168 | 70 | 1.25 |
Table 1 Levels of factors in orthogonal experiment of lactic acid bacteria fermenting quinoa straw feed
水平 Level | 发酵时间 Fermentation time (h) | 含水量 Moisture content (%) | 菌剂添加量 Amount of bacteria added (g) |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 72 | 50 | 0.75 |
2 | 120 | 60 | 1.00 |
3 | 168 | 70 | 1.25 |
水平 Level | 发酵时间 Fermentation time (h) | 含水量 Moisture content (%) | 酵母菌∶乳酸菌 Saccharomycetes∶Lactobacillus |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 72 | 50 | 1∶1 |
2 | 120 | 60 | 1∶2 |
3 | 168 | 70 | 2∶1 |
Table 2 Factors of orthogonal experiment on fermentation of quinoa straw feed by mixed bacteria
水平 Level | 发酵时间 Fermentation time (h) | 含水量 Moisture content (%) | 酵母菌∶乳酸菌 Saccharomycetes∶Lactobacillus |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 72 | 50 | 1∶1 |
2 | 120 | 60 | 1∶2 |
3 | 168 | 70 | 2∶1 |
试验组别Pilot group | 菌剂添加量Amount of bacteria added (g) | 含水量 Moisture content (%) | 发酵时间 Fermentation time (h) | 黑曲霉添加量 Amount of A.niger (g) | 酵母菌∶乳酸菌 Saccharomycetes∶ Lactobacillus | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
乳酸菌 Saccharomycetes | 酵母菌 Lactobacillus | |||||
1 | 0.75 | - | 60 | 120 | - | - |
2 | 0.75 | - | 70 | 168 | - | - |
3 | 1.25 | - | 50 | 168 | - | - |
4 | 1.00 | - | 70 | 72 | - | - |
5 | 1.25 | - | 70 | 120 | - | - |
6 | 1.00 | - | 60 | 168 | - | - |
7 | 1.00 | - | 50 | 120 | - | - |
8 | 1.25 | - | 60 | 72 | - | - |
9 | 0.75 | - | 50 | 72 | - | - |
10 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 60 | 120 | - | 1∶1 |
11 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 70 | 168 | - | 1∶1 |
12 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 50 | 168 | - | 2∶1 |
13 | 1.00 | 0.50 | 70 | 72 | - | 1∶2 |
14 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 70 | 120 | - | 2∶1 |
15 | 1.00 | 0.50 | 60 | 168 | - | 1∶2 |
16 | 1.00 | 0.50 | 50 | 120 | - | 1∶2 |
17 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 60 | 72 | - | 2∶1 |
18 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 50 | 72 | - | 1∶1 |
19 | 1.00 | - | 70 | 72 | 0.075 | - |
Table 3 Pilot group 1-19 test treatment
试验组别Pilot group | 菌剂添加量Amount of bacteria added (g) | 含水量 Moisture content (%) | 发酵时间 Fermentation time (h) | 黑曲霉添加量 Amount of A.niger (g) | 酵母菌∶乳酸菌 Saccharomycetes∶ Lactobacillus | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
乳酸菌 Saccharomycetes | 酵母菌 Lactobacillus | |||||
1 | 0.75 | - | 60 | 120 | - | - |
2 | 0.75 | - | 70 | 168 | - | - |
3 | 1.25 | - | 50 | 168 | - | - |
4 | 1.00 | - | 70 | 72 | - | - |
5 | 1.25 | - | 70 | 120 | - | - |
6 | 1.00 | - | 60 | 168 | - | - |
7 | 1.00 | - | 50 | 120 | - | - |
8 | 1.25 | - | 60 | 72 | - | - |
9 | 0.75 | - | 50 | 72 | - | - |
10 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 60 | 120 | - | 1∶1 |
11 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 70 | 168 | - | 1∶1 |
12 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 50 | 168 | - | 2∶1 |
13 | 1.00 | 0.50 | 70 | 72 | - | 1∶2 |
14 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 70 | 120 | - | 2∶1 |
15 | 1.00 | 0.50 | 60 | 168 | - | 1∶2 |
16 | 1.00 | 0.50 | 50 | 120 | - | 1∶2 |
17 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 60 | 72 | - | 2∶1 |
18 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 50 | 72 | - | 1∶1 |
19 | 1.00 | - | 70 | 72 | 0.075 | - |
感官指标 Sensory indicators | 总配分 Total distribution | 感官指标及评分值Sensory indicators and scoring values | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
优等Top | 良好Good | 一般General | 劣等Inferior | ||
气味Smell | 3.0 | 甘酸香味Sweet sour flavor (2.5~3.0) | 酒酸香味Fragrant wine sour (2.0~2.5) | 刺鼻酸味Pungent sour (1.0~2.0) | 腐败味Decayed (0~1.0) |
色泽Color | 3.0 | 亮黄色Bright yellow (2.5~3.0) | 暗黄色Dark yellow (2.0~2.5) | 黄褐色Tawny (1.0~2.0) | 暗褐色Dun (0~1.0) |
质地Texture | 3.0 | 质地松软Floppy (2.5~3.0) | 略带粘性Slightly sticky (2.0~2.5) | 发粘Sticky (1.0~2.0) | 结块Cake-shaped (0~1.0) |
总评分Total rating | 9.0 | 7.5~9.0 | 6.0~7.5 | 3.0~6.0 | 0~3.0 |
Table 4 Criteria for sensory quality assessment
感官指标 Sensory indicators | 总配分 Total distribution | 感官指标及评分值Sensory indicators and scoring values | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
优等Top | 良好Good | 一般General | 劣等Inferior | ||
气味Smell | 3.0 | 甘酸香味Sweet sour flavor (2.5~3.0) | 酒酸香味Fragrant wine sour (2.0~2.5) | 刺鼻酸味Pungent sour (1.0~2.0) | 腐败味Decayed (0~1.0) |
色泽Color | 3.0 | 亮黄色Bright yellow (2.5~3.0) | 暗黄色Dark yellow (2.0~2.5) | 黄褐色Tawny (1.0~2.0) | 暗褐色Dun (0~1.0) |
质地Texture | 3.0 | 质地松软Floppy (2.5~3.0) | 略带粘性Slightly sticky (2.0~2.5) | 发粘Sticky (1.0~2.0) | 结块Cake-shaped (0~1.0) |
总评分Total rating | 9.0 | 7.5~9.0 | 6.0~7.5 | 3.0~6.0 | 0~3.0 |
1 | Koziol M J. Chemical composition and nutritional evaluation of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 1992, 5(1): 35. |
2 | Schilick G, Bubenheim D L. Quinoa: An emerging new crop with potential for Celss. Washington: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center, 1993. |
3 | Li J K, Wang J L, Shang C, et al. Adaptability of different quinoa materials in Harbin. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(9): 202-208. |
李佶恺, 王建丽, 尚晨, 等. 不同藜麦材料在哈尔滨地区的适应性研究. 草业学报, 2019, 28(9): 202-208. | |
4 | Zhang W J. Study and application of the rational and chemical properties of quinoa whole powder and starch. Zhengzhou : Zhengzhou Institute of Light Industry, 2016. |
张文杰. 藜麦全粉与淀粉的理化性质与结构研究及应用. 郑州: 郑州轻工业学院, 2016. | |
5 | Kang Z Q, Chen Q. 2017 quinoa industry market development status report. China Reporting Network, 2017. |
康智琪, 陈权. 2017年藜麦行业市场发展现状报告. 中国报告网, 2017. | |
6 | Gongbu Z X, Wang M, Zhang C X, et al. Studies on the biological characteristics of quinoa in Tibet. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 1994, 3(4): 81. |
贡布扎西, 旺姆, 张崇玺, 等. 南美藜在西藏的生物学特性研究. 西北农业学报, 1994, 3(4): 81. | |
7 | Ren G X. The status and development prospects of quinoa industry in China. Shanghai: Institute of Crop Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2019. |
任贵兴. 中国藜麦产业现状与发展前景. 上海: 中国农业科学院作物科学研究所, 2019. | |
8 | Ding Y S, Zeng Y W, Min K, et al. Comprehensive study and utilization of functional components of quinoa. Current Biotechnology, 2015, 5(5): 340-346. |
丁云双, 曾亚文, 闵康, 等. 藜麦功能成分综合研究与利用. 生物技术进展, 2015, 5(5): 340-346. | |
9 | Wei A C, Yang X S, Me Y, et al. Advances in the study of the nutritional function of quinoa and biological activity. Food Science, 2015, 36(15): 272-276. |
魏爱春, 杨修仕, 么杨, 等. 藜麦营养功能成分及生物活性研究进展. 食品科学, 2015, 36(15): 272-276. | |
10 | Xu X M. Extraction, separation purification and biological activity of quinoa saponlygin. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2017. |
徐晓敏. 藜麦皂苷的提取、分离纯化及生物活性研究. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2017. | |
11 | Hou Z H, Fu M R, Zhang W Y, et al. Advances in the study of quinoa saponin. Journal of Food Safety & Quality, 2018, 9(19): 5146-5152. |
侯召华, 傅茂润, 张威毅, 等. 藜麦皂苷研究进展. 食品安全质量检测学报, 2018, 9(19): 5146-5152. | |
12 | Hu Y C, Zhao G, Qin P Y, et al. Advances in the study of quinoa active ingredients. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2018, 44(11): 1579-1591. |
胡一晨, 赵钢, 秦培友, 等. 藜麦活性成分研究进展. 作物学报, 2018, 44(11): 1579-1591. | |
13 | Yang F R. The current situation of quinoa research and development and industrial development proposal steamin in Gansu. Lanzhou: Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2019. |
杨发荣. 甘肃藜麦研发现状与产业发展建议. 兰州: 甘肃省农业科学院, 2019. | |
14 | Liu J J. Effect and mechanism of biological additives on switchgrass silage. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2015. |
刘晶晶. 生物添加剂对柳枝稷青贮的作用及机理研究. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2015. | |
15 | Nie Q, Dai J J, Hu J P, et al. The strains and functions of yeast-derived biological feed. China Feed, 2018(11): 89-93. |
聂琴, 戴晋军, 胡骏鹏, 等. 酵母源生物饲料的菌种与功能. 中国饲料, 2018(11): 89-93. | |
16 | Weinberg Z G, Muck R E. New trends and opportunities in the development and use of inoculants for silage. Femsm Icrobiology Reviews, 1996, 19: 53-68. |
17 | Chen G, Sun Y, Wang G, et al. Comprehensive utilization and development prospect of quinoa. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University, 2018, 40(1): 1-6. |
陈光, 孙旸, 王刚, 等. 藜麦全植株的综合利用及开发前景. 吉林农业大学学报, 2018, 40(1): 1-6. | |
18 | Li F L, Fan M X, Bian C Z. Characteristics of Aspergillus niger producing enzyme and its application in animal production. Modern Animal Husbandry, 2018, 2(4): 47-49. |
李凤玲, 范明夏, 边传周. 黑曲霉菌的产酶特性及在动物生产中的应用. 现代牧业, 2018, 2(4): 47-49. | |
19 | Li W G, Zhou S Y, Bi J, et al. GB 12316-1990, Sensory analysis “a” is not “a” test. Beijing: Standards Press of China,1990. |
李伟格, 周苏玉, 毕健, 等. GB 12316-1990, 感官分析“a”非“a”检验. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 1990. | |
20 | Bi Y Y. Research on the evaluation and utilization of straw resources. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2010. |
毕于运. 秸秆资源评价与利用研究. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2010. | |
21 | Wang R H, Yu X H. On the application of coarse fiber in animal production. Jiangxi Feed, 2015(2): 7-8. |
王仁华, 于学红. 浅谈粗纤维在动物生产中的应用. 江西饲料, 2015(2): 7-8. | |
22 | Ge D J. Effect of dietary fiber on the nutritional physiological effect and reproductive performance of producing sows. Fuzhou: Fujian Agricultural and Forestry University, 2009. |
葛德军. 日粮纤维对经产母猪的营养生理作用及繁殖性能的影响. 福州: 福建农林大学, 2009. | |
23 | Yang Y F. Study on the digestive physiology and production performance of pig in different stages of growth. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2001. |
杨玉芬. 日粮纤维对于猪不同生长阶段消化生理和生产性能的研究. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2001. | |
24 | Guo D S. Effect of ruminant diet combination on rumen fermentation and available crude protein. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2004. |
郭冬生. 反刍动物日粮组合效应对瘤胃发酵和可利用粗蛋白的影响研究. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2004. | |
25 | Huang K W. Effect of protein source and composition on growth and immune index of pre weaning calves. Alaer: Tarim University, 2016. |
黄开武. 蛋白质来源和组成对断奶前犊牛生长发育及免疫指标的影响. 阿拉尔: 塔里木大学, 2016. | |
26 | Li L, Gu L Q, He H, et al. Some problems in the determination of crude protein in feed by Kjeldahl method. Guizhou Journal of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2010, 34(5): 43. |
李雷, 顾丽群, 何虎, 等. 凯氏定氮法测定饲料中粗蛋白质应注意的几个问题. 贵州畜牧兽医, 2010, 34(5):43. | |
27 | Han H W, Sun L N, Yao T, et al. Effects of different combinations of growth promoting strains on yield and quality of alfalfa. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(5): 104-112. |
韩华雯, 孙丽娜, 姚拓, 等. 不同促生菌株组合对紫花苜蓿产量和品质的影响. 草业学报, 2013, 22(5): 104-112. | |
28 | Tao X W. Fermentation processes and equipment. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2011: 84-85. |
陶兴无. 发酵工艺与设备. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2011: 84-85. | |
29 | Wang J B, Fan S J, Liu J B, et al. Application of bacterial inoculants and enzyme preparations in straw silage. Feed Review, 1999, 11(4): 17-20. |
王建兵, 范石军, 刘静波, 等. 细菌接种剂和酶制剂在秸秆类饲料青贮中的应用. 饲料博览, 1999, 11(4): 17-20. |
[1] | Zhan XIE, Lin MU, Zhi-fei ZHANG, Gui-hua CHEN, Yang LIU, Shuai GAO, Zhong-shan WEI. Effects on fermentation in alfalfa mixed silage of added lactic acid bacteria or organic acid salt combined with urea [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(5): 165-173. |
[2] | Hong-jian LV, Xiang GUO, De-kui CHEN, Xiao-yang CHEN, Qing ZHANG. Effect of lactic acid bacteria and storage temperature on the quality of Moringa oleifera leaf silage [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(3): 121-128. |
[3] | Xin-zhu CHEN, Jian-guo ZHANG. Effects of cutting time and plant height of ‘Reyan No.4’ king grass on distribution of lactic acid bacteria and silage fermentation quality [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(1): 150-158. |
[4] | FU Jin-tao, WANG Xue-kai, NI Kui-kui, YANG Fu-yu. The effects of adding lactic acid bacteria and molasses on fermentation of Broussonetia papyrifera and rice straw mixed silage [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(4): 121-128. |
[5] | WAN Xue-rui, DOU Si-yuan, LI Yu, HE Yi-qun, WANG Chuan, ZHANG Xiao-li, LEI Zhao-min. Effect of lactic acid bacteria preparations on microbial population counts and silage quality in maize silage during fermentation and on aerobic exposure [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(11): 83-90. |
[6] | MAO Cui, LIU Fang-yuan, SONG En-liang, WANG Ya-fang, WANG Yong-jun, ZHAN Xiang, LI Yuan, CHENG Hai-jian, JIANG Fu-gui. Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculant level and ensiling time on nutritional value and fermentation quality of whole-crop maize silage [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(10): 172-181. |
[7] | JU Ze-liang, ZHAO Gui-qin, CHAI Ji-kuan, JIA Zhi-feng, LIANG Guo-ling. Comprehensive evaluation of nutritional value and silage fermentation quality of different oat varieties in central Gansu Province [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(9): 77-86. |
[8] | WANG Cheng, WANG Yi, ZHOU Wei, PIAN Rui-qi, ZHANG Qing, CHEN Xiao-yang. Effects of Lactobacillus plantarum (LP) and moisture on feed quality and tannin content of Moringa oleifera leaf silage [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(6): 109-118. |
[9] | LI Fei-fei, ZHANG Fan-fan, WANG Xu-zhe, MIAO Fang, MA Chun-hui. Effects of homo-and heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria on the nutritional quality and ruminal degradation rate of the whole plant maize silage [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(6): 128-136. |
[10] | YANG Da-sheng, WANG Shui-ping, HAN Xue-feng, TANG Shao-xun, TAN Zhi-liang, YIN Meng-jie, LUO Dong-mei. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and alkyl polyglycoside on yellow corn stover silage quality and fermentation in vitro [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(5): 109-120. |
[11] | WANG Jian-fu, LEI Zhao-min, WAN Xue-rui, JIANG Hui, LI Jie, WU Jian-ping. Effects on the quality of corn silage, of 5 strains of lactic acid bacteria with different combinations of added CaCO3, enzyme and urea [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(3): 90-97. |
[12] | WANG Hong-Mei, SUN Qi-Zhong, TU Yan, SI Bing-Wen, SA Ru-La, NA Ya, DIAO Qi-Yu. Isolation and identification of high-quality lactic acid bacteria from wild forage silages on the Hulunbuir prairie [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(8): 189-196. |
[13] | WANG Xiao-Cheng, LIU Jun-Hua, ZHU Wei-Yun, MAO Sheng-Yong. Isolation and characterization of rumen yeast and an evaluation of its effect on ruminal fermentation with different types of substrate [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(5): 141-148. |
[14] | REN Hai-Wei, ZHAO Tuo, LI Jin-Ping, LI Xue-Yan, XU Na, WANG Yong-Gang, WANG Xiao-Li, GAO Xiao-Hang. Quality and lactic acid bacteria of mixed corn stalk and cabbage waste silage [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(1): 197-206. |
[15] | YANG Xiao-Dan, YUAN Xian-Jun, GUO Gang, CUI Zhao-Ming, LI Jun-Feng, BAI Xi, BA Sang, SHAO Tao. Isolation and identification of low temperature-tolerant lactic acid bacteria from legume silages in Tibet [J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2015, 24(6): 99-107. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||