Effects of lactic acid bacteria and calcium propionate on fermentation quality and mycotoxin contents of whole plant maize and oat silages

doi:10.11686/cyxb2021326

Abstract

Abstract:

This study evaluated the effects of compound lactic acid bacteria inoculants and calcium propionate on the fermentation quality， chemical composition， microbial counts， mycotoxin contents and aerobic stability of whole plant maize and oat silages. The two forages， whole plant maize and oats， were ensiled for 120 days in an experiment with four treatments： a control treatment （CK）， addition of compound lactic acid bacteria （LAB treatment）， addition of calcium propionate （PACA treatment） and addition of a combination of LAB and PACA. The application rates of LAB and PACA group were separately 5×10⁵ CFU·g^-1 and 0.4% of the fresh material. It was found that the fermentation quality of maize silages was very good while for oat silages the butyric acid and ammonia nitrogen contents were very high after storage. The effects of the additives on the silage quality of whole plant corn and oat silages were varied. All additives significantly increased the lactic acid and acetic acid contents and decreased the pH value， butyric acid， ammoniac nitrogen contents and yeast counts of oat silages （P<0.05）. While the PACA and LAB+PACA treatments showed better aerobic stability， significantly increased starch and soluble carbohydrate contents and decreased the mould and yeast counts of the whole plant maize silage （P<0.05）. The aflatoxin B1 content was reduced by the LAB and LAB+PACA treatments only in the maize silage （P<0.05）. The propionic acid content was only increased by the PACA and LAB+PACA treatments， but this effect was seen in both the whole plant maize and oat silages. Therefore， the combination of LAB and PACA treatments provides an important improvement in silage quality for whole plant maize and oat silages.

Key words: lactic acid bacteria, calcium propionate, whole plant maize silage, oat silage, mycotoxin

Ji-peng TIAN, Bei-yi LIU, Hong-ru GU, Cheng-long DING, Yun-hui CHENG, Zhu YU. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and calcium propionate on fermentation quality and mycotoxin contents of whole plant maize and oat silages[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2022, 31(8): 157-166.

Figures/Tables 5

References 38

1	Zhang J F. Experimental study on different proportion of oat hay and silage corn fed to beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine， 2021， 40（3）： 64-66.
	张俊锋. 不同比例燕麦干草与青贮玉米饲喂肉牛试验研究. 畜牧兽医杂志， 2021， 40（3）： 64-66.
2	Wan X R， Wu J P， Lei Z M， et al. Effect 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.
3	Li P， Shen Y X， Bai S Q， et al. The effects of wilting on the fermentation quality of oat silage in pastoral area of Sichuan Northwest. Journal of Grassland and Forage Science， 2020（1）： 8-13.
	李平，沈益新，白史且，等. 萎蔫对川西北高寒牧区燕麦青贮饲料发酵品质的影响. 草学， 2020（1）： 8-13.
4	Muck R E， Nadeau E M G， McAllister T A， et al. Silage review： Recent advances and future uses of silage additives. Journal of Dairy Science， 2018， 101（5）： 3980-4000.
5	Zhuang R F， Hua B J， Lin C C， et al. Application and efficacy of compound lactic acid bacteria preparation in whole corn silage. Animal Indusry and Environment， 2020（2）： 85-86.
	庄茹菲，华冰洁，林呈呈，等. 复合型乳酸菌制剂在全株玉米青贮的应用和功效. 畜牧业环境， 2020（2）： 85-86.
6	Lu D Y， Tian Y J， Ma Z X， et al. Effect of combination additive for fermentation characteristics and nutritional quality of whole corn silage. Feed Research， 2019， 42（9）： 45-51.
	卢冬亚，田雨佳，马占霞，等. 组合添加剂对全株玉米青贮发酵特性及营养品质的影响. 饲料研究， 2019， 42（9）： 45-51.
7	Lu X S. Analysis of forage commodity production situation in China in 2020 and outlook in 2021. Animal Agriculture， 2021（3）： 31-36.
	卢欣石. 2020我国饲草商品生产形势分析与2021年展望. 畜牧产业， 2021（3）： 31-36.
8	Tian J P， Xu N X， Liu B Y， et al. Interaction effect of silo density and additives on the fermentation quality， microbial counts， chemical composition and in vitro degradability of rice straw silage. Bioresource Technology， 2020， DOI： 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122412.
9	Liu B Y， Huan H L， Gu H R， et al. Dynamics of a microbial community during ensiling and upon aerobic exposure in lactic acid bacteria inoculation-treated and untreated barley silages. Bioresource Technology， 2019， 273： 212-219.
10	Xu Q F， Yu Z， Han J G， et al. Determining organic acid in alfalfa silage by HPLC. Grassland and Turf， 2007（2）： 63-65， 67.
	许庆方，玉柱，韩建国，等. 高效液相色谱法测定紫花苜蓿青贮中的有机酸. 草原与草坪， 2007（2）： 63-65， 67.
11	Broderick G A， Kang J H. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media. Journal of Dairy Science， 1980， 63（1）： 64-75.
12	Kenneth H. Official methods of analysis （15th Edtion）. Artington， Virginia， USA： Association of Official Analytical Chemists， 1990.
13	Van Soest P J， 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.
14	Mcdonald P， Henderson A R. Determination of water-soluble carbohydrates in grass. Journal of the Science of Food & Agriculture， 1964， 15（6）： 395-398.
15	Rose R， Rose C L， Omi S K， et al. Starch determination by perchloric acid vs enzymes： Evaluating the accuracy and precision of six colorimetric methods. Journal of Agricultural & Food Chemistry， 1991， 39（1）： 2-11.
16	Silveira R C H， De Rezende A V， Silveira R F H， et al. Chemical composition， digestibility and aerobic stability of corn silages harvested at different maturity stages. Revista Caatinga， 2015， 28（2）： 107-116.
17	Miao F， Zhang F， Wang X， et al. Effect of Lactobacillus plantarum， L. buchneri and Pediococcus acidilactici at low doses on the fermentation， aerobic stability and ruminal digestibility of corn silage. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology， 2019， 22（4）： 655-664.
18	Iank B A V， Jobim C C， Rossi R M， et al. Wilting whole crop black oat with glyphosate for ensiling： Effects on nutritive， fermentative， and aerobic stability characteristics. Revista Brasileira De Zootecnia-Brazilian Journal of Animal Science， 2018， DOI： 10.1590/rbz4720170142.
19	Bergen W， Byrem T， Grant A. Ensiling characteristics of whole-crop small grains harvested at milk and dough stages. Journal of Animal Science， 1991， 69（4）： 1766-1774.
20	Ge J， Yang C J， Yang Z M， et al. The effects of wilting and additives on silage quality of naked oats （Avena nuda）. Journal of the Chinese Cereals and Oils Association， 2015， 30（9）： 18-23.
	葛剑，杨翠军，杨志敏，等. 萎蔫处理和添加剂对裸燕麦青贮饲料品质的影响. 中国粮油学报， 2015， 30（9）： 18-23.
21	Wang S， Li J， Dong Z， et al. Effect of microbial inoculants on the fermentation characteristics， nutritive value， and in vitro digestibility of various forages. Animal Science Journal， 2019， 90（2）： 178-188.
22	Gomes A L M， Jacovaci F A， Bolson D C， et al. Effects of light wilting and heterolactic inoculant on the formation of volatile organic compounds， fermentative losses and aerobic stability of oat silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology， 2019， 247： 194-198.
23	Liu Q H， Wu J X， Dong Z H， et al. Effects of overnight wilting and additives on the fatty acid profile， alpha-tocopherol and beta-carotene of whole plant oat silages. Animal Feed Science and Technology， 2020， DOI： 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114370.
24	Yu Z， Sun Q Z. Silage technology of grass and forage. Beijing： China Agricultural University Press， 2011.
	玉柱，孙启忠. 饲草青贮技术. 北京：中国农业大学出版社， 2011.
25	Wilkinson J， Davies D. The aerobic stability of silage： Key findings and recent developments. Grass and Forage Science， 2013， 68（1）： 1-19.
26	Wan X R， Dou S Y， Li Y， et al. Effect of lactic acid bacteria preparations on microbial population counts and silage quality in maize silage during fermentation and on aerobic exposure. Acta Prataculturae Sinica， 2020， 29（11）： 83-90.
	万学瑞，豆思远，李玉，等. 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. 草业学报， 2020， 29（11）： 83-90.
27	Zong C， Zhang J， Shao T， et al. Effects of additives on fermentation quality of alfalfa silage. Acta Prataculturae Sinica， 2020， 29（12）： 180-187.
	宗成，张健，邵涛，等. 添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮饲料发酵品质的影响. 草业学报， 2020， 29（12）： 180-187.
28	Ju Z L， Zhao G Q， Chai J K. Effects of temperature and lactic acid bacteria additives on fermentation quality and aerobic stability of oat silage. Grassland and Turf， 2021， 41（2）： 53-59， 69.
	琚泽亮，赵桂琴，柴继宽. 温度和乳酸菌添加剂对燕麦青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响. 草原与草坪， 2021， 41（2）： 53-59， 69.
29	Zhang Q Q， Liang Q W， Yang X F， et al. Effect of adding organic acids on fermentation and nutritional quality of oat silage. Feed Research， 2019， 42（4）： 84-86.
	张晴晴，梁庆伟，杨秀芳，等. 添加有机酸对燕麦青贮发酵和营养品质的影响. 饲料研究， 2019， 42（4）： 84-86.
30	Sun Z Q， Wu Z， Wang B， et al. The effect of different hybrids and lactic acid bacteria additives on the quality and aerobic stability of the whole plant corn silage. Chinese Journal of Grassland， 2019， 41（1）： 83-88.
	孙志强，吴哲，王炳，等. 不同品种和乳酸菌添加剂对全株玉米青贮品质和有氧稳定性的影响研究. 中国草地学报， 2019， 41（1）： 83-88.
31	Jiang F， Cheng H， Liu D， et al. Treatment of whole-plant corn silage with lactic acid bacteria and organic acid enhances quality by elevating acid content， reducing pH， and inhibiting undesirable microorganisms. Frontiers in Microbiology， 2020， DOI： 10.3389/fmicb.2020.593088.
32	Oliveira A， Weinberg Z， Ogunade I， et al. Meta-analysis of effects of inoculation with homofermentative and facultative heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria on silage fermentation， aerobic stability， and the performance of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science， 2017， 100（6）： 4587-4603.
33	Jia T T， Wu Z， Yu Z. Effect of different lactic acid bacteria additives on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of oat silage. Pratacultural Science， 2018， 35（5）： 1266-1272.
	贾婷婷，吴哲，玉柱. 不同类型乳酸菌添加剂对燕麦青贮品质和有氧稳定性的影响. 草业科学， 2018， 35（5）： 1266-1272.
34	Zhu J G， Zhang J， Shao T， et al. The effects of additives on fermentation quality and aerobic stability of whole plant oat silage. Acta Agrestia Sinica， 2020， 28（6）： 1756-1761.
	朱九刚，张健，邵涛，等. 添加剂对全株燕麦青贮饲料发酵品质和有氧稳定性的影响. 草地学报， 2020， 28（6）： 1756-1761.
35	GB13078-2017. Hygienical standard for feeds. Beijing： General Administration of Quality Supervision， Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China， 2017.
	GB 13078-2017. 饲料卫生标准. 北京：国家质量监督检验检疫总局， 2017.
36	Payne G， Widstrom N. Aflatoxin in maize. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences， 1992， 10（5）： 423-440.
37	Fu H， Jin J， Zhu X， et al. Effect of compound Lactobacillus preparation on quality of whole corn silage. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology， 2021（9）： 221-224.
	付浩，金晶，朱欣，等. 复合乳酸菌制剂对全株玉米青贮饲料品质的影响. 现代农业科技， 2021（9）： 221-224.
38	Guan H， Ke W， Yan Y， et al. Screening of natural lactic acid bacteria with potential effect on silage fermentation， aerobic stability and aflatoxin B1 in hot and humid area. Journal of Applied Microbiology， 2020， 128（5）： 1301-1311.

原料 Material	添加剂 Additive	pH值 pH value	乳酸 Lactic acid （%DM）	乙酸 Acetic acid （%DM）	丙酸 Propionic acid （%DM）	丁酸 Butyric acid （%DM）	氨态氮 Ammoniacal nitrogen （%TN）
玉米青贮 Corn silage	CK	3.71±0.01de	4.53±0.15b	0.70±0.06de	ND	ND	6.50±0.16c
	LAB	3.69±0.01e	4.54±0.18b	0.37±0.09e	ND	ND	4.62±0.21c
	PACA	3.92±0.02c	5.50±0.48a	0.99±0.17cd	0.57±0.04a	ND	6.19±0.32c
	LAB+PACA	3.84±0.02cd	5.71±0.27a	0.46±0.05e	0.55±0.05a	ND	4.66±0.21c
燕麦青贮 Oat silage	CK	4.73±0.12a	1.44±0.36e	1.11±0.11c	0.02±0.01d	2.17±0.95a	21.38±3.16a
	LAB	4.38±0.13b	2.52±0.43d	1.23±0.13c	0.05±0.02d	0.86±0.74b	15.51±3.15b
	PACA	4.22±0.02b	4.19±0.30b	1.63±0.19b	0.27±0.03c	ND	11.94±0.23b
	LAB+PACA	4.36±0.03b	3.30±0.16c	2.40±0.16a	0.42±0.06b	ND	13.54±0.77b
标准误SEM		0.07	0.29	0.14	0.05	0.17	1.22
总体显著性 Total significance	M	**	**	**	**	**	**
	A	**	**	**	**	**	**
	M×A	**	**	**	**	**	**

原料 Material	添加剂 Additive	pH值 pH value	乳酸 Lactic acid （%DM）	乙酸 Acetic acid （%DM）	丙酸 Propionic acid （%DM）	丁酸 Butyric acid （%DM）	氨态氮 Ammoniacal nitrogen （%TN）
玉米青贮 Corn silage	CK	3.71±0.01de	4.53±0.15b	0.70±0.06de	ND	ND	6.50±0.16c
	LAB	3.69±0.01e	4.54±0.18b	0.37±0.09e	ND	ND	4.62±0.21c
	PACA	3.92±0.02c	5.50±0.48a	0.99±0.17cd	0.57±0.04a	ND	6.19±0.32c
	LAB+PACA	3.84±0.02cd	5.71±0.27a	0.46±0.05e	0.55±0.05a	ND	4.66±0.21c
燕麦青贮 Oat silage	CK	4.73±0.12a	1.44±0.36e	1.11±0.11c	0.02±0.01d	2.17±0.95a	21.38±3.16a
	LAB	4.38±0.13b	2.52±0.43d	1.23±0.13c	0.05±0.02d	0.86±0.74b	15.51±3.15b
	PACA	4.22±0.02b	4.19±0.30b	1.63±0.19b	0.27±0.03c	ND	11.94±0.23b
	LAB+PACA	4.36±0.03b	3.30±0.16c	2.40±0.16a	0.42±0.06b	ND	13.54±0.77b
标准误SEM		0.07	0.29	0.14	0.05	0.17	1.22
总体显著性 Total significance	M	**	**	**	**	**	**
	A	**	**	**	**	**	**
	M×A	**	**	**	**	**	**

原料Material	添加剂Additive	乳酸菌Lactic acid bacteria	酵母菌Yeast	霉菌Mould
玉米青贮 Corn silage	CK	4.92±0.80b	4.63±0.42a	4.26±1.51a
	LAB	4.26±0.24b	4.57±0.06a	3.45±0.15a
	PACA	4.50±0.20b	3.48±1.07ab	0.93±1.60b
	LAB+PACA	2.00±0.01c	2.60±0.11bc	ND
燕麦青贮 Oat silage	CK	7.48±0.04a	3.95±0.46a	0.44±0.76b
	LAB	7.17±0.27a	2.63±0.20bc	ND
	PACA	7.40±0.18a	2.79±0.09bc	ND
	LAB+PACA	7.49±0.08a	2.24±0.22c	ND
标准误SEM		0.40	0.20	0.36
总体显著性 Total significance	M	**	**	**
	A	**	**	**
	M×A	**	*	**

原料Material	添加剂Additive	乳酸菌Lactic acid bacteria	酵母菌Yeast	霉菌Mould
玉米青贮 Corn silage	CK	4.92±0.80b	4.63±0.42a	4.26±1.51a
	LAB	4.26±0.24b	4.57±0.06a	3.45±0.15a
	PACA	4.50±0.20b	3.48±1.07ab	0.93±1.60b
	LAB+PACA	2.00±0.01c	2.60±0.11bc	ND
燕麦青贮 Oat silage	CK	7.48±0.04a	3.95±0.46a	0.44±0.76b
	LAB	7.17±0.27a	2.63±0.20bc	ND
	PACA	7.40±0.18a	2.79±0.09bc	ND
	LAB+PACA	7.49±0.08a	2.24±0.22c	ND
标准误SEM		0.40	0.20	0.36
总体显著性 Total significance	M	**	**	**
	A	**	**	**
	M×A	**	*	**

原料Material	添加剂Additive	DM （%）	CP （%DM）	NDF （%DM）	ADF （%DM）	WSC （%DM）	淀粉Starch （%DM）
玉米青贮 Corn silage	CK	32.25±0.91c	7.34±0.28cd	33.08±2.30b	17.54±1.89b	1.06±0.15c	29.55±2.16b
	LAB	32.21±0.43c	7.63±0.20bc	32.04±2.23b	16.97±1.63b	1.01±0.05c	37.94±3.46a
	PACA	32.91±0.85c	7.00±0.11d	29.74±0.30b	15.72±0.37b	1.88±0.19b	33.77±3.61ab
	LAB+PACA	34.21±0.72bc	6.85±0.19d	29.56±2.04b	16.87±0.15b	5.99±0.65a	35.69±3.37a
燕麦青贮 Oat silage	CK	37.00±0.92a	7.97±0.23ab	58.93±2.76a	34.60±1.86a	0.39±0.08c	11.79±1.15c
	LAB	38.13±0.76a	8.30±0.13a	55.62±0.87a	31.83±0.87a	0.51±0.04c	15.46±1.78c
	PACA	38.20±0.47a	8.27±0.17a	54.96±1.41a	32.06±1.26a	0.58±0.11c	14.82±1.47c
	LAB+PACA	35.04±1.14b	8.07±0.30ab	56.84±1.74a	32.92±2.27a	0.50±0.05c	12.68±1.13c
标准误SEM		0.51	0.12	2.69	1.71	0.37	2.24
总体显著性 Total significance	M	**	**	**	**	**	**
	A	NS	**	*	NS	**	**
	M×A	**	*	NS	NS	**	NS