Effects of silage additives on the quality of whole crop maize silage produced from plants irrigated with livestock wastewater

doi:10.11686/cyxb2025267

Abstract

Abstract:

Whole crop maize （Zea mays） silage is an important source of roughage for ruminant production. Livestock wastewater contains large amounts of many nutrients required by crops. The aims of this study， therefore， were to determine whether plants irrigated with livestock wastewater produced better silage than those irrigated with groundwater， and to determine the effects of different silage additives. Whole-plant silage maize irrigated with livestock wastewater （W₁） or groundwater （W₂） were used as raw materials for the following treatments： natural silage （CK）， silage with added Qingzhubang （A₁）， silage with added Xianmu 1152 （A₂）， and silage with added Zhuanglemei （A₃）. After ensilage for 3 and 80 days， the bags were opened and sampled to determine the nutritional components and fermentation quality of the silages. It was found that irrigation with livestock wastewater significantly increased soil available nutrient contents， resulting in a significant decrease in the dry matter content of silage maize raw materials and a significant increase in the content of crude protein and acid detergent fiber. Livestock wastewater irrigation and different additives significantly affected the nutritional quality and fermentation quality of whole crop maize silage， and the effect of the interaction between the two factors was significant. Based on nine indicators at the early and stable stages of silage fermentation， a grey correlation analysis showed that W₁A₁ （silage maize grown with livestock wastewater and addition of Qingzhubang） was the optimal treatment. In summary， adding Qingzhubang to whole-plant silage maize grown under livestock wastewater irrigation conditions improved the silage quality of ‘Fengdan 189’ silage maize after 80 days， yielding superior results compared with natural silage produced from plants irrigated with groundwater. These findings provide a practical reference for the rational utilization of livestock wastewater and the screening of suitable silage maize additives.

Key words: livestock wastewater, whole crop maize silage, silage additive, fermentation quality

Zhi-hao LIU, Wen-long LI, Chen ZHANG, Mei-ying LIU, Ya TAO. Effects of silage additives on the quality of whole crop maize silage produced from plants irrigated with livestock wastewater[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(6): 60-72.

Figures/Tables 12

References 49

[1]	Department of Rural Surveys of China National Bureau of Statistics. China rural statistical yearbook 2023. Beijing： China Statistics Press， 2023.
	国家统计局农村社会经济调查司. 2023中国农村统计年鉴. 北京：中国统计出版社， 2023.
[2]	Zou H Y， Zhang P Y， Hou S C， et al. Effect of phosphoric acid-microbial agent on ammonia emission reduction in liquid slurry. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering， 2025， 41（18）： 253-260.
	邹宏宇，张朋月，侯善策，等. 磷酸-微生物菌剂对生猪粪水氨气减排效果的影响. 农业工程学报， 2025， 41（18）： 253-260.
[3]	Williams J. Contribution of livestock farming to environmental pollution in China. Journal of Animal Health， 2024， 4（1）： 43-53.
[4]	Zhai C Y， Luo J M， Liu C J， et al. Effects of long-term manure fertilizer on saline-sodic properties and stoichiometric ratio of saline-sodic soil in Songnen plain. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology， 2024， 26（2）： 153-161.
	翟车宇，骆静梅，刘昌杰，等. 长期施用有机肥对松嫩平原盐碱土壤盐碱性质和化学计量比的影响. 中国农业科技导报， 2024， 26（2）： 153-161.
[5]	Lin J J， Liu D， Li T Z. Exploration of soil remediation technologies and application practices. Yangling： Northwest A & F University Press， 2019.
	林俊杰，刘丹，李廷真. 土壤修复技术与应用实践探究. 杨凌：西北农林科技大学出版社， 2019.
[6]	Wang L Y， Yan H， Li J H， et al. Whole maize silage nutrition composition and its influence factors： A meta-analysis. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition， 2022， 34（2）： 1352-1360.
	王里彦，严慧，李金辉，等. 基于Meta分析的全株玉米青贮营养成分含量及其影响因素. 动物营养学报， 2022， 34（2）： 1352-1360.
[7]	Lu H L， Cui X W， Gao P， et al. Cattle farm sewage： A preliminary investigation on its application in lily’s green production. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin， 2019， 35（28）： 80-84.
	卢红玲，崔新卫，高鹏，等. 养牛场污水在百合绿色生产中的应用效果初报. 中国农学通报， 2019， 35（28）： 80-84.
[8]	Zhang X D， Li J， Xiao H X， et al. Effects of different microbial enzyme treatments on silage quality and in vitro fermentation characteristics of rice straw. Acta Agrestia Sinica， 2025， 33（7）： 2380-2387.
	张现东，李靖，肖海翔，等. 不同菌酶处理对水稻秸秆青贮品质和体外发酵特性的影响. 草地学报， 2025， 33（7）： 2380-2387.
[9]	Bao S D. Soil analysis in agricultural chemistry （3rd Edition）. Beijing： China Agriculture Press， 2000.
	鲍士旦.土壤农化分析（第三版）. 北京：中国农业出版社， 2000.
[10]	General Administration of Quality Supervision， Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China， Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of moisture in feedstuffs， GB/T 6435-2014. Beijing： Standards Press of China， 2014.
	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局，中国国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中水分的测定， GB/T 6435-2014. 北京：中国标准出版社， 2014.
[11]	State Administration for Market Regulation， Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of crude protein in feeds-Kjeldahl method， GB/T 6432-2018. Beijing： Standards Press of China， 2018.
	国家市场监督管理总局，中国国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中粗蛋白的测定凯氏定氮法， GB/T 6432-2018. 北京：中国标准出版社， 2018.
[12]	Murphy R P. A method for the extraction of plant samples and the determination of total soluble carbohydrates. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture， 1958， 9（11）： 714-717.
[13]	State Administration for Market Regulation， Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of neutral detergent fiber （NDF） in feeds， GB/T 20806-2022. Beijing： Standards Press of China， 2022.
	国家市场监督管理总局，中国国家标准化管理委员会. 饲料中中性洗涤纤维（NDF）的测定， GB/T 20806-2022. 北京：中国标准出版社， 2022.
[14]	Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of acid detergent fiber （ADF） in feeds， NY/T 1459-2022. Beijing： China Agriculture Press， 2022.
	中华人民共和国农业农村部. 饲料中酸性洗涤纤维的测定， NY/T 1459-2022. 北京：中国农业出版社， 2022.
[15]	Virtanen A I， Miettinen J K. Estimation of volatile fatty acids and ammonia in silage by means of paper chromatography. Nature， 1951， 168（4268）： 294-295.
[16]	Han L Y， Zhou H. Effects of ensiling processes and antioxidants on fatty acid concentrations and compositions in corn silages. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology， 2013， 4（1）： 48.
[17]	Weatherburn M W. Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia. Analytical Chemistry， 1967， 39（8）： 971-974.
[18]	Zhang N， Wu W F， Li S Y， et al. Comprehensive evaluation of paddy quality by different drying methods， based on gray relational analysis. Agriculture， 2022， 12（11）： 1857.
[19]	Yang H H， Du J， Liu H E， et al. Effects of livestock wastewater irrigation on phosphorus forms content in different soil layers. Soil and Fertilizer Sciences in China， 2021（3）： 318-323.
	杨焕焕，杜君，刘红恩，等. 养殖废水灌溉对不同土层磷素形态含量的影响. 中国土壤与肥料， 2021（3）： 318-323.
[20]	Cheng H Y， Tang Z D， Lei Y M， et al. Effects of organic fertilizer partially substituting chemical fertilizer on yield， quality and soil fertility of silage maize. Acta Agrestia Sinica， 2025， 33（5）： 1702-1712.
	程红玉，汤振东，雷玉明，等. 有机肥替代部分化肥对青贮玉米产量、品质及土壤肥力的影响. 草地学报， 2025， 33（5）： 1702-1712.
[21]	Zhou T F， Li R， Liu Q Q， et al. Analysis of salt tolerance at the germination stage of 118 maize hybrid varieties in the Northeast China. Crops， 2025. https： //link.cnki.net/urlid/11.1808.S.20250902.1141.002.
	周婷芳，李冉，刘倩倩，等. 东北区118份玉米杂交种萌发期耐盐性分析. 作物杂志， 2025. https： //link.cnki.net/urlid/11.1808.S.20250902.1141.002.
[22]	Wang R H， Li Y S， Wang J C， et al. Effects of salt-low temperature combined stress on growth and physiological characteristics of maize seedlings. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis， 2025. https： //link.cnki.net/urlid/36.1028.S.20250808.1349.008.
	王瑞红，李永生，汪军成，等. 盐-低温复合胁迫对玉米幼苗生长及生理特性的影响. 江西农业大学学报， 2025. https： //link.cnki.net/urlid/36.1028.S.20250808.1349.008.
[23]	Santos T O， Amaral J A T， Moulin M M. Maize breeding for low nitrogen inputs in agriculture： Mechanisms underlying the tolerance to the abiotic stress. Stresses， 2023， 3（1）： 136-152.
[24]	Zheng L W， Tian J F， Yang W， et al. Effect of cultivar and growth stage on fermentation quality of maize silage. Pratacultural Science， 2023， 40（4）： 1105-1114.
	郑立文，田健帆，杨蔚，等. 品种和生育期对玉米青贮发酵品质的影响. 草业科学， 2023， 40（4）： 1105-1114.
[25]	Lin S C. Study on feeding value evaluation and difference of silage maize varieties in different harvest periods. Hohhot： Inner Mongolia Agricultural University， 2023.
	林仕超. 不同收获期青贮玉米品种饲用价值评价及差异研究. 呼和浩特：内蒙古农业大学， 2023.
[26]	Firdous R， Gilani A H. Effect of stage of growth and cultivar on chemical composition of whole maize plant and its morphological fractions. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences， 1999， 12（3）： 366-370.
[27]	Zhao J P， Zhao J， Li J F， et al. Effect of different additives on fermentation quality and structural carbohydrates compositions of rice straw silage. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University， 2019， 42（1）： 152-159.
	赵金鹏，赵杰，李君风，等. 不同添加剂对水稻秸秆青贮发酵品质和结构性碳水化合物组分的影响. 南京农业大学学报， 2019， 42（1）： 152-159.
[28]	Wang X J， Qi J， Che M M， et al. Quality and rumen fermentation characteristics of mixed silage intercropping with corn and sorghum hybrid sudan grass. Grassland and Turf， 2023， 43（6）： 101-108.
	王晓娟，祁娟，车美美，等. 玉米与高丹草间作混合青贮品质及瘤胃发酵特性. 草原与草坪， 2023， 43（6）： 101-108.
[29]	Chen P， Shi H J， Hao Y X， et al. Research progress on types of lactic acid bacteria and lactic acid synthesis pathway in silage. China Feed， 2024（19）： 1-7.
	陈萍，师慧娟，郝怡欣，等. 青贮乳酸菌类型和乳酸合成途径的研究进展. 中国饲料， 2024（19）： 1-7.
[30]	Der Bedrosian M C， Nestor Jr K E， Kung Jr L. The effects of hybrid， maturity， and length of storage on the composition and nutritive value of maize silage. Journal of Dairy Science， 2012， 95（9）： 5115-5126.
[31]	Jayanegara A， Wardiman B， Kondo M， et al. Fermentative quality of silage as affected by protein level in the ensiled material： A meta-analysis. IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science， 2020， 462（1）： 012001.
[32]	García Á. Ammonia-N concentration in alfalfa silage and its effects on dairy cow performance： A meta-analysis. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias， 2017， 30（3）： 175-184.
[33]	Zhan J Q， Chen D D， Guo T X， et al. Effects of different additives on silage quality of Chinese medicine residue. Acta Agrestia Sinica， 2023， 31（12）： 3851-3857.
	詹佳琦，陈丹丹，郭田心，等. 不同添加剂对中药渣青贮品质的影响. 草地学报， 2023， 31（12）： 3851-3857.
[34]	Li Y Y， Du S， Sun L， et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and molasses additives on dynamic fermentation quality and microbial community of native grass silage. Frontiers in Microbiology， 2022， 13： 830121.
[35]	Kalúzová M， Kačániová M， Bíro D， et al. The change in microbial diversity and mycotoxins concentration in corn silage after addition of silage additives. Diversity， 2022， 14（8）： 592.
[36]	Liu J L， Liu M J， Sheng P J， et al. Biotechnological effects of Lactobacillus plantarum， cellulase， and xylanase on nutritional quality and microbial community structure of corn stover silage. Fermentation， 2025， 11（1）： 14.
[37]	Su J Q， Xue Y， Zhang K L， et al. The effects of Lactobacillus plantarum， Bacillus subtilis， a lignocellulolytic enzyme system， and their combination on the fermentation profiles， chemical composition， bacterial community， and in situ rumen digestion of fresh waxy corn stalk silage. Animals， 2024， 14（23）： 3442.
[38]	Sarıçiçek B Z， Yıldırım B， Kocabaş Z， et al. Effect of storage time on nutrient composition and quality parameters of maize silage. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology， 2016， 4（11）： 934-939.
[39]	Yu R H， Mo F， Zhao L H， et al. Effect of wilting on chemical and physical characteristics of silage with corn stalk. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin， 2007， 23（6）： 13-17.
	余汝华，莫放，赵丽华，等. 凋萎时间对青玉米秸秆青贮饲料营养成分的影响. 中国农学通报， 2007， 23（6）： 13-17.
[40]	Babaeinasab Y， Rouzbehan Y， Fazaeli H， et al. Chemical composition， silage fermentation characteristics， and in vitro ruminal fermentation parameters of potato-wheat straw silage treated with molasses and lactic acid bacteria and maize silage. Journal of Animal Science， 2015， 93（9）： 4377-4386.
[41]	Wang X L， Song J M， Liu Z H， et al. Fermentation quality and microbial community of corn stover or rice straw silage mixed with soybean curd residue. Animals， 2022， 12（7）： 919.
[42]	Yu M， Wang P， Li F H， et al. Fermentation quality and in vitro digestibility of sweet corn processing byproducts silage mixed with millet hull or wheat bran and inoculated with a lactic acid bacteria. Fermentation， 2024， 10（5）： 254.
[43]	Da Silva L D， Pereira O G， Da Silva T C， et al. Effects of silage crop and dietary crude protein levels on digestibility， ruminal fermentation， nitrogen use efficiency， and performance of finishing beef cattle. Animal Feed Science and Technology， 2016， 220： 22-33.
[44]	Han L Y， Zhou H. Effects of ensiling processes and antioxidants on fatty acid concentrations and compositions in maize silages. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology， 2013， 4： 1-7.
[45]	Muck R， Nadeau E， McAllister T， et al. Silage review： Recent advances and future uses of silage additives. Journal of Dairy Science， 2018， 101（5）： 3980-4000.
[46]	Xu J Z. Effect of complex enzyme fermented total mixed ration on growth performance， nutrient digestion， rumen fermentation and flora in beef cattle. Tongliao： Inner Mongolia Minzu University， 2023.
	徐均钊. 复合酶发酵全混合日粮对肉牛生长性能、养分消化率、瘤胃发酵和菌群的影响. 通辽：内蒙古民族大学， 2023.
[47]	Wang L L， Li Y F， Yu Y S， et al. Effects of a delayed harvest and additives on the fermentation quality of corn stalk silage. Agriculture， 2024， 14（2）： 174.
[48]	Arbabi S， Ghoorchi T， Hasani S. The effect of delayed ensiling and application of propionic acid-based additives on the nutritive value， aerobic stability and degradability of maize silage. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences， 2008， 11（24）： 2646.
[49]	Guo G， Shen C， Liu Q， et al. The effect of lactic acid bacteria inoculums on in vitro rumen fermentation， methane production， ruminal cellulolytic bacteria populations and cellulase activities of corn stover silage. Journal of Integrative Agriculture， 2020， 19（3）： 838-847.

处理 Treatment	处理方式 Treatment method	编号 Number
1	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+自然青贮Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were naturally ensiled	W₁CK
2	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+青贮邦Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were ensiled by adding Qingzhubang	W₁A₁
3	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+先牧1152 Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were ensiled by adding Xianmu1152	W₁A₂
4	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+壮乐美Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were ensiled by adding Zhuanglemei	W₁A₃
5	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+自然青贮Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were naturally ensiled	W₂CK
6	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+青贮邦Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were ensiled by adding Qingzhubang	W₂A₁
7	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+先牧1152 Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were ensiled by adding Xianmu1152	W₂A₂
8	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+壮乐美Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were ensiled by adding Zhuanglemei	W₂A₃

处理 Treatment	处理方式 Treatment method	编号 Number
1	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+自然青贮Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were naturally ensiled	W₁CK
2	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+青贮邦Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were ensiled by adding Qingzhubang	W₁A₁
3	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+先牧1152 Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were ensiled by adding Xianmu1152	W₁A₂
4	养殖废水灌溉青贮玉米+壮乐美Raw materials under livestock wastewater irrigation were ensiled by adding Zhuanglemei	W₁A₃
5	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+自然青贮Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were naturally ensiled	W₂CK
6	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+青贮邦Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were ensiled by adding Qingzhubang	W₂A₁
7	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+先牧1152 Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were ensiled by adding Xianmu1152	W₂A₂
8	地下水灌溉青贮玉米+壮乐美Raw materials under groundwater irrigation were ensiled by adding Zhuanglemei	W₂A₃

灌溉用水 Irrigation water	pH	水溶性盐 Water-soluble salt （g·kg^-1）	全氮 Total nitrogen （g·kg^-1）	有效磷 Available phosphorus （mg·kg^-1）	速效钾 Available potassium （mg·kg^-1）
W₁	8.61a	2.21a	1.49a	19.24a	162.26a
W₂	8.86a	1.62a	1.05a	13.73b	120.94b
SEM	0.072	0.210	0.127	1.269	9.435
P值P-value	0.060	0.194	0.068	0.001	<0.001

灌溉用水 Irrigation water	pH	水溶性盐 Water-soluble salt （g·kg^-1）	全氮 Total nitrogen （g·kg^-1）	有效磷 Available phosphorus （mg·kg^-1）	速效钾 Available potassium （mg·kg^-1）
W₁	8.61a	2.21a	1.49a	19.24a	162.26a
W₂	8.86a	1.62a	1.05a	13.73b	120.94b
SEM	0.072	0.210	0.127	1.269	9.435
P值P-value	0.060	0.194	0.068	0.001	<0.001

灌溉用水 Irrigation water	干物质 Dry matter （DM， %FM）	粗蛋白 Crude protein （CP， %DM）	中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber （NDF， %DM）	酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber （ADF， %DM）	可溶性糖 Water-soluble carbohydrate （WSC， %DM）
W₁	33.58b	10.05a	47.63a	25.57a	10.27a
W₂	36.27a	8.21b	43.99a	21.02b	9.28a
SEM	0.612	0.436	1.266	1.170	0.328
P值P-value	<0.001	0.004	0.169	0.024	0.144