动物营养学报 >

2017 , Vol. 29 >Issue 5: 1821 - 1830

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2017.05.043

研究简报 Short communications

乳酸菌和纤维素酶对不同含水量紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响

展开
  • 西北农林科技大学动物科技学院, 杨凌 712100
钟书(1993-),女,四川成都人,硕士研究生,研究方向为动物营养与饲料科学。E-mail:suvi@nwafu.edu.cn

收稿日期: 2016-11-15

  网络出版日期: 2017-05-13

基金资助

国家牧草产业技术体系（CARS-35-01A）；国家绒毛用羊产业技术体系（CARS-40-13）；国家燕麦产业技术体系（CARS-08-D1）

收起

Effects of Lactic Acid Bacteria and Cellulase on Alfalfa Silage Quality with Different Moisture

Expand
  • College of Animals Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China

Received date: 2016-11-15

  Online published: 2017-05-13

Fold

摘要

本试验旨在探讨含水量和添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响，以期解决苜蓿青贮困难的问题，提高其青贮品质。采用双因素（含水量×添加剂）完全随机设计，含水量分别为70%和60%；添加剂分4个组，对照组不含添加剂，其余各组均含3个水平，分别为乳酸菌组（LA组，3、6、9 mg/kg）、纤维素酶组（CE组，25、50、100 mg/kg）以及乳酸菌和纤维素酶混合组（LA×CE组，3×25、6×50、9×100 mg/kg），每个组3个重复，共20个组。青贮90 d后，测定其粗蛋白质（CP）、粗纤维（CF）、中性洗涤纤维（NDF）、酸性洗涤纤维（ADF）、可溶性糖（WSC）含量及pH、氨态氮/总氮（AN/TN）。结果表明：与对照组相比，各LA组均显著提高了青贮料的WSC含量（P<0.05），显著降低了青贮料pH（P<0.05）；且6 mg/kg LA组青贮料的CP和WSC含量高于3和9 mg/kg LA组，pH低于3和9 mg/kg LA组。与对照组相比，各CE组均显著降低了青贮料的ADF含量和pH（P<0.05），且50 mg/kg CE组青贮料的ADF含量和pH低于25和100 mg/kg CE组。各LA×CE组青贮料的CF、ADF含量和pH大部分低于各LA和CE组，WSC含量均高于各LA组和CE组，且6×50 mg/kg LA×CE组青贮料的CF、ADF、WSC含量和pH与各LA和CE组差异显著（P<0.05）。除9 mg/kg LA组和100 mg/kg CE组外，相同添加剂下70%含水量青贮料的CP含量显著低于60%含水量（P<0.05）；相同添加剂下70%含水量青贮料的CF和ADF含量显著高于60%含水量（P<0.05）。由此可见，乳酸菌和纤维素酶及两者复合添加均对苜蓿的青贮品质有明显的改善作用，并以添加6×50 mg/kg乳酸菌和纤维素酶效果最好，且60%含水量下的青贮效果更优。

关键词： 苜蓿青贮; 含水量; 乳酸菌; 纤维素酶

本文引用格式

钟书, 张晓娜, 杨云贵, 杨雨鑫 . 乳酸菌和纤维素酶对不同含水量紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2017 , 29(5) : 1821 -1830 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2017.05.043

Abstract

To solve the difficulty of alfalfa silage and improve the quality of silage, the study was conducted to investigate effects of moisture and additive on alfalfa silage quality. Used the two factor (moisture×additive) completely random design, the moisture was 70% and 60%, respectively; the additive divided into 4 groups, control group without additives, and the other three group contained three levels which were the lactic acid bacteria group (LA group; 3, 6 and 9 mg/kg), cellulase group (CE group, 25, 50 and 100 mg/kg) and mixture of lactic acid bacteria and cellulose group (LA×CE group; 3×25, 6×50 and 9×100 mg/kg), each group contained 3 replicates, altogether 20 groups. After silage for 90 days, the content of crude protein (CP), crude fiber (CF), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and water soluble carbohydrate (WSC) and pH, ammonia nitrogen/total nitrogen (AN/TN) were determined. The results showed as follows: compared with the control group, the silage WSC content in all LA groups was significantly increased (P<0.05), and the silage pH was significantly decreased (P<0.05); the content of CP and WSC of silage in 6 mg/kg LA group was higher than that in 3 and 9 mg/kg LA groups, and the pH was lower than that in 3 and 9 mg/kg LA groups. Compared with the control group, the ADF content and pH of silage in all CE groups was significantly decreased (P<0.05), and the ADF content and pH of silage in 50 mg/kg CE group was lower than those in 25 and 100 mg/kg CE groups. The CF and ADF content and pH of silage in all LA×CE groups most lower than those in all LA and CE groups, and the WSC content was higher than that in all LA and CE groups, the CF, ADF and WSC content and pH of silage in 6×50 mg/kg LA×CE group had significant difference compared with all LA and CE groups (P<0.05). The silage CP content in 70% moisture under the same additive were significant lower than that in 60% moisture except 9 mg/kg LA group and 100 mg/kg CE group (P<0.05); the silage CF and ADF content in 70% moisture under the same additive were significant lower than those in 60% moisture (P<0.05). In conclusion, lactic acid bacteria, cellulase and their mixture can apparently improve the quality of alfalfa silage, and the supplementation of 6×50 mg/kg lactic acid bacteria and cellulase has the best effects, meanwhile, the silage effect of 60% moisture is superior to 70% moisture.

Key words： alfalfa silage; moisture; lactic acid bacteria; cellulase

参考文献

[1] 孙全友.紫花苜蓿的营养价值及其在肉兔生产中的应用进展[J].中国养兔,2012(7):19-20.

[2] 李彦品,杨海明,杨芷,等.紫花苜蓿的营养价值及其在畜禽生产中的应用[J].饲料研究,2015(9):14-18.

[3] 杨春,王明利.我国的苜蓿生产与奶业发展——草畜结合是推进发展的关键[J].中国畜牧杂志,2011,47(16):14-17,21.

[4] SARICICEK B Z,KILIC U.Effect of different additives on the nutrient composition,in vitro gas production and silage quality of alfalfa silage[J].Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances,2011,6(6):618-626.  

[5] 单贵莲,初晓辉,陈功,等.紫花苜蓿青贮技术及其应用探讨[J].草业与畜牧,2011(7):21-25.

[6] TABACCO E,PIANO S,REVELLO-CHION A,et al.Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri LN4637 and Lactobacillus buchneri LN40177 on the aerobic stability,fermentation products,and microbial populations of corn silage under farm conditions.[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2011,94(11):5589-5598.  

[7] 张庆,张万军,田吉鹏,等.乳酸菌青贮技术研究进展[J].草业科学,2014,31(2):328-333.

[8] 刘婷,王腾飞,罗宽,等.苜蓿青贮添加剂研究进展[J].饲料研究,2016(19):12-14,22.

[9] 刘振宇,玉柱,智建飞,等.苜蓿青贮研究进展[J].河北农业科学,2013,17(6):62-65,83.

[10] 舒思敏,杨春华,唐智松,等.添加绿汁发酵液对不同含水量扁穗牛鞭草青贮料品质的影响[J].草食家畜,2011(4):41-43.

[11] 张英,周汉林,刘国道,等.不同含水量对不同生长时期的王草青贮品质的影响[J].家畜生态学报,2013,34(7):39-43.

[12] 张养东,杨军香,王宗伟,等.青贮饲料理化品质评定研究进展[J].中国畜牧杂志,2016,52(12):37-42.

[13] 李改英,陈玉霞,廉红霞,等.苜蓿青贮品质评定指标体系及测定方法的概述[J].草业科学,2010,27(8):151-154.

[14] 张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].3版.北京:中国农业大学出版社,2007:49-75.

[15] 闫晓红,邢旗,王君芳,等.锡林郭勒草原不同地区天然打草场营养价值评价分析[J].草原与草业,2015,27(4):40-44.

[16] WEATHERBURN M W.Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia[J].Analytical Chemistry,1967,39(8):971-974.  

[17] 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[J].Crop Science,1999,39(6):1873-1880.  

[18] 万里强,李向林,何峰.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业科学,2011,28(7):1379-1383.

[19] 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[J].草地学报,2013,21(6):1176-1181.

[20] 张学功,韩文祥.紫花苜蓿半干青贮技术[J].养殖与饲料,2010(8):78-80.

[21] YANG X L,LI J L,YU Z,et al.Influence of moisture content on the silage quality of Lolium multiflorum[J].Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances,2014,13(12):702-705.

[22] 张金霞,乔红霞,刘雨田.水分和添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业科学,2014,31(4):766-770.

[23] 张新平,万里强,李向林,等.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对苜蓿青贮品质的影响(简报)[J].草业学报,2007,16(3):139-143.

[24] 李光耀,陈建华,张力君.添加剂在苜蓿青贮中的应用进展[J].饲料研究,2014(7):14-16.

[25] HEINL S,WIBBERG D,EIKMEYER F,et al.Insights into the completely annotated genome of Lactobacillus buchneri CD034,a strain isolated from stable grass silage[J].Journal of Biotechnology,2012,161(2):153-166.  

[26] WEINBERG Z G,ASHBELL G,HEN Y,et al.The effect of applying lactic acid bacteria at ensiling on the aerobic stability of silages[J].Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1993,75(6):512-518.  

[27] 席兴军,韩鲁佳,原慎一郎,等.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对玉米秸秆青贮饲料品质的影响[J].中国农业大学学报,2003,8(2):21-24.

[28] 张英,周汉林,刘国道,等.绿汁发酵液与纤维素酶对王草青贮品质的影响[J].草业科学,2013,30(10):1640-1647.

[29] AL-GHAZZEWI F H,TESTER R F.Efficacy of cellulase and mannanase hydrolysates of konjac glucomannan to promote the growth of lactic acid bacteria[J].Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,2012,92(11):2394-2396.  

[30] ZHANG J G,LIU Q H,HATTORI I,et al.Applying cellulases to improve the fermentation quality and nutritive value of roll bale silage made with rice straw[C]//Proceedings of International Conference on New Technology of Agricultural Engineering.Zibo,China:IEEE,2011:972-974.

[31] SUN Q Z,GAO F Q,YU Z,et al.Fermentation quality and chemical composition of shrub silage treated with lactic acid bacteria inoculants and cellulase additives[J].Animal Science Journal,2012,83(4):305-309.  

[32] 李龙兴,王应芬,张明均,等.添加剂在青贮饲料中的利用与研究[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2015,36(4):60-63.

[33] 李静,高兰阳,沈益新.乳酸菌和纤维素酶对稻草青贮品质的影响[J].南京农业大学学报,2008,31(4):86-90.

[34] 侯美玲,格根图,孙林,等.甲酸、纤维素酶、乳酸菌剂对典型草原天然牧草青贮品质的影响[J].动物营养学报,2015,27(9):2977-2986.

[35] NI K K,WANG Y P,PANG H L,et al.Effect of cellulase and lactic acid bacteria on fermentation quality and chemical composition of wheat straw silage[J].American Journal of Plant Sciences,2014,5(13):1877-1884.  

[36] 徐然,陈鹏飞,白史且,等.乳酸菌和纤维素酶对光叶紫花苕青贮发酵品质的影响[J].草地学报,2014,22(2):420-425.

[37] 丁武蓉,杨富裕,郭旭生,等.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对二色胡枝子青贮品质的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版,2008,36(4):8-14,21.

[38] SUN Z H,LIU S M,TAYO G O,et al.Effects of cellulase or lactic acid bacteria on silage fermentation and in vitro gas production of several morphological fractions of maize stover[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2009,152(3/4):219-231.

[39] TIAN J P,YU Y D,YU Z,et al.Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculants and cellulase on fermentation quality and in vitro digestibility of Leymus chinensis silage[J].Grassland Science,2014,60(4):199-205.  
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉

    联系我们

  • 地址：北京市海淀区圆明园西路2号
    　　　中国农业大学动科动医大楼153室
  • 邮编：100193
  • 电话：010－62817823
  • 网址：http://www.chinajan.com
  • E-mail：cjan@chinajan.com
京公网安备 11010802041926号    京ICP备17050989号-2