不同青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响

王亚芳; 姜富贵; 成海建; 毛翠; 安文娟; 董徽; 宋恩亮

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2020.06.036

动物营养学报 >

2020 , Vol. 32 >Issue 6: 2765 - 2774

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2020.06.036

反刍与草食动物营养与饲料 RUMINANT AND HERBIVORE NUTRITION AND FEED

不同青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响

王亚芳 ,
姜富贵 ,
成海建 ,
毛翠 ,
安文娟 ,
董徽 ,
宋恩亮

展开

1. 山东师范大学生命科学学院, 济南 250014;
2. 山东省农业科学院畜牧兽医研究所, 济南 250100;
3. 山东省畜禽疫病防治与繁育重点实验室, 济南 250100

王亚芳(1993-),女,辽宁朝阳人,硕士研究生,从事动物营养与黏膜免疫研究。E-mail:wangyafang6666@163.com

收稿日期: 2020-01-09

网络出版日期: 2020-06-16

基金资助

现代农业（肉牛牦牛）产业技术体系专项资金（CARS-37）

收起

Effects of Different Silage Additives on Nutritional Value, Fermentation Quality and Rumen Degradability of Whole Corn Silage

WANG Yafang ,
JIANG Fugui ,
CHENG Haijian ,
MAO Cui ,
AN Wenjuan ,
DONG Hui ,
SONG Enliang

Expand

1. College of Life Sciences, Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, China;
2. Institute of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Shandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Jinan 250100, China;
3. Shandong Key Lab of Animal Disease Control and Breeding, Jinan 250100, China

Received date: 2020-01-09

Online published: 2020-06-16

Fold

摘要

本试验旨在研究不同青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响。全株玉米青贮时分别添加不同青贮添加剂，试验共设5个组，分别为对照组（不添加任何青贮添加剂）、乳酸菌组（添加5×10⁵ CFU/g乳酸菌制剂）、有机酸组（甲酸、乙酸和丙酸按照7：1：2的体积比进行混合，添加量为4 mL/kg）、有机酸盐组（苯甲酸钠和山梨酸钾按照1：1的质量比进行混合，添加量为2 g/kg）和纤维素酶组（添加50 mg/kg纤维素酶），每组4个重复。青贮45 d后，测定全株玉米青贮的营养成分、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率。结果表明：1）有机酸组的粗蛋白质含量显著高于其他各组（P<0.05），有机酸盐组和纤维素酶组的中性洗涤纤维含量显著低于对照组（P<0.05），有机酸盐组和纤维素酶组的相对饲喂价值和非中性洗涤纤维性碳水化合物含量显著高于对照组（P<0.05），乳酸菌组、有机酸组、有机酸盐组和纤维素酶组的有机酸和可溶性糖含量均显著高于对照组（P<0.05）。2）乳酸菌组和有机酸组的总可消化养分含量、消化能、代谢能、维持净能和增重净能显著高于对照组、有机酸盐组和纤维素酶组（P<0.05）。3）乳酸菌组、有机酸盐组和纤维素酶组的pH显著低于对照组（P<0.05），乳酸菌组、有机酸组、有机酸盐组和纤维素酶的乳酸含量显著高于对照组（P<0.05），有机酸组和有机酸盐组的氨态氮/总氮（NH₃-N/TN）显著低于对照组（P<0.05），有机酸组和纤维素酶组的发酵系数、费氏评分、24 h干物质降解率和24 h中性洗涤纤维降解率显著高于对照组（P<0.05）。由此可见，乳酸菌、有机酸、有机酸盐和纤维素酶对全株玉米青贮的营养成分含量、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率均有不同程度的提升作用。综合以上各项指标进行评价，各组全株玉米青贮的综合营养价值从高到低依次为：纤维素酶组 > 有机酸盐组 > 有机酸组 > 乳酸菌组 > 对照组。

关键词： 全株玉米青贮; 添加剂; 营养价值; 发酵品质; 瘤胃降解率

本文引用格式

王亚芳 , 姜富贵 , 成海建 , 毛翠 , 安文娟 , 董徽 , 宋恩亮 . 不同青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2020 , 32(6) : 2765 -2774 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2020.06.036

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to evaluate effects of different silage additives on nutritional value, fermentation quality and rumen degradability of whole corn silage. When whole corn ensiling, different silage additives were added, there were 5 groups in the experiment, which were control group (without any silage additives), Lactobacillus group (supplemented 5×10⁵ CFU/g Lactobacillus preparation), organic acid group (formic acid, acetic acid and propionic acid were mixed in a volume ratio of 7:1:2, the additive amount was 4 mL/kg), organic acid salt group (sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate were mixed in a weight ratio of 1:1, he additive amount was 2 g/kg) and cellulose group (supplemented 50 mg/kg cellulose), each group contained 4 replicates. After 45 days of fermentation, the nutrient content, fermentation quality and rumen degradability of whole corn silage were measured. The results showed as follows: 1) the crude protein content of organic acid group was significantly higher than that of other groups (P<0.05), the neutral detergent fiber content of organic acid salt group and cellulase group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P<0.05), the relative feeding value and non-neutral detergent fiber content of organic acid salt group and cellulase group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.05), and the contents of organic acids and soluble sugars of Lactobacillus group, organic acid group, organic acid salt group and cellulase group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). 2) The total digestible nutrient contents, digestive energy, metabolic energy, maintenance net energy and weight gain net energy of Lactobacillus group and organic acid group were significantly higher than those of control group, organic acid salt group and cellulase group (P<0.05). 3) The pH of Lactobacillus group, organic acid salt group and cellulase group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P<0.05), the lactic acid content of Lactobacillus group, organic acid group, organic acid salt group and cellulase group was significantly higher than that of the control group (P<0.05), the ammonia nitrogen/total nitrogen of organic acid group and organic acid salt group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P<0.05), and the fermentation coefficient, Fleig score, 24 h dry matter degradability and 24 h neutral detergent fiber degradability of organic acid group and cellulase group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). In conclusion, Lactobacillus, organic acid, organic acid salt and cellulose had varying degrees of promote effects on nutrient content, fermentation quality and rumen degradability of whole corn silage. Comprehensive evaluation of the above indicators, the comprehensive nutritional value of whole corn silage in each group from high to low is: cellulase group > organic acid salt group > organic acid group > Lactobacillus group > control group.

Key words： whole corn silage; additives; nutritional value; fermentation quality; rumen degradability

参考文献

[1] 赵亚星,张兴夫,敖长金,等.全株玉米青贮在反刍动物生产中的应用与发展前景[J].饲料工业,2019,40(2):12-15.
[2] 姜富贵,成海建,刘栋,等.不同收获期对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响[J].动物营养学报,2019,31(6):2807-2815.
[3] HENDERSON N.Silage additives[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,1993,45(1):35-56.

[4] 张秀芬.饲草饲料加工与贮藏[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1992.
[5] REICH L J,KUNG Jr L.Effects of combining Lactobacillus buchneri 40788 with various lactic acid bacteria on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2010,159(3/4):105-109.
[6] 吕文龙,刁其玉,闫贵龙.布氏乳杆菌对青玉米秸青贮发酵品质和有氧稳定性的影响[J].草业学报,2011,20(3):143-148.
[7] JACOBS J L,MCALLAN A B.Enzymes as silage additives.1.Silage quality,digestion,digestibility and performance in growing cattle[J].Grass and Forage Science,1991,46(1):63-73.

[8] 陈勇,刘月,吴鑫,等.甲酸在青贮饲料中的应用研究[J].现代畜牧兽医,2018(1):15-19.
[9] KELES G,DEMIRCI U.The effect of homofermentative and heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria on conservation characteristics of baled triticale-Hungarian vetch silage and lamb performance[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2011,164(1/2):21-28.
[10] AOAC.Official methods of analysis of AOAC[S].18th ed.Arlington,VA,USA:Association of Analytical Chemists,2005.
[11] 国家市场监督管理总局,国家标准化管理委员会.GB/T 6436-2018饲料中钙的测定[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2018.
[12] 国家市场监督管理总局,国家标准化管理委员会.GB/T 6437-2018饲料中总磷的测定分光光度法[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2018.
[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[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1991,74(10):3583-3597.

[14] DUBOIS M,GILLES K A,HAMILTON J K,et al.Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances[J].Analytical Chemistry,1956,28(3):350-356.

[15] 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[D].硕士学位论文.北京:中国农业大学,2004.
[16] ROHWEDER D A,BARNES R F,JORGENSEN N.Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality[J].Journal of Animal Science,1978,47(3):747-759.

[17] NRC.Nutrient requirements of beef cattle[S].8th ed.Washington, D.C.:National Academy Press,2016.
[18] WEISS W P,CONRAD H R,PIERRE N R S.A theoretically-based model for predicting total digestible nutrient values of forages and concentrates[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,1992,39(1/2):95-110
[19] UNDERSANDER D J,MERTENS D R,THIEX N J.Forage analyses procedures[M].Ohama,NE:National Forage Testing Association (USA),1993.
[20] 姜芳,王佳堃,刘建新.内标法同时测定挥发性脂肪酸和乳酸的方法探究[J].中国畜牧杂志,2009,45(21):73-76.
[21] BARKER S B,SUMMERSON W H.The colorimetric determination of lactic acid in biological material[J].Journal of Biological Chemistry,1941,138(2):535-554.
[22] BRODERICK G A,KANG J H.Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media[J].Journal of Dairy Science,1980,63(1):64-75.

[23] 王国艮.不同类型全株玉米青贮营养价值评定[D].博士学位论文.北京:中国农业大学,2017.
[24] 冯仰廉.反刍动物营养学[M].北京:科学出版社,2004.
[25] 孙红,于应文,马向丽,等.黔西北岩溶区九种灌木综合营养价值评价[J].草业学报,2014,23(5):99-106.
[26] 孙贵宾,常娟,尹清强,等.纤维素酶和复合益生菌对全株玉米青贮品质的影响[J].动物营养学报,2018,30(11):4738-4745.
[27] 李金俐,董起飞,杨国义,等.不同添加剂对全株玉米青贮的影响[J].中国草食动物科学,2018,38(4):33-36.
[28] 尉小强,罗仕伟,哈志刚,等.添加乳酸菌和有机酸制剂对全株玉米青贮品质、微生物数量和有氧稳定性的影响[J].草学,2018(增刊):63-68.
[29] 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[J].饲料研究,2019,42(4):84-86.
[30] HRISTOV A N.Effect of a commercial enzyme preparation on alfalfa silage fermentation and protein degradability[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,1993,42(3/4):273-282.
[31] MOORE J E,KUNKLE W E.Evaluation of equations for estimating voluntary intake of forages and forage-based diets[J].Journal of Animal Science,1999(Suppl.1):204.
[32] 王菲.肉牛饲料有效能值预测模型的建立与评价[D].博士学位论文.北京:中国农业大学,2016.
[33] 李悦铭,陈勇,孟庆翔,等.不同浓度甲酸丙酸混合添加剂对全株小麦青贮品质的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2019,55(8):77-84.
[34] SHAO T,ZHANG Z X,SHIMOJO M,et al.Comparison of fermentation characteristics of italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) and guineagrass (Panicum maximum Jacq.) during the early stage of ensiling[J].Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences,2005,18(12):1727-1734.

[35] MCDONALD P,EDWARDS R A,GREENHALGH J E D,et al.Animal nutrition[M].6th ed.Gosport:Pearson Education,2002.
[36] WANG Y X,MCALLISTER T A,XU Z J,et al.Effects of proanthocyanidins,dehulling and removal of pericarp on digestion of barley grain by ruminal micro-organisms[J].Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1999,79(6):929-938.

[37] 薛春胜,刘瑞生,徐建峰,等.不同添加剂对陇东紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业科学,2018,35(2):456-462.
[38] DA SILVA T C,SMITH M L,BARNARD A M,et al.The effect of a chemical additive on the fermentation and aerobic stability of high-moisture corn[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2015,98(12):8904-8912.

[39] 刘帅,郑健,姜鑫,等.鼠李糖乳杆菌对全株玉米青贮品质及瘤胃降解率的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2019,55(7):111-116.
[40] 苗树君,马慧.不同生物制剂处理去穗玉米秸青贮对奶牛营养价值的影响[J].中国牛业科学,2008,34(5):27-30.
[41] 万江春,于辉,张延辉,等.纤维素酶及乳酸菌对棉花秸秆青贮饲料发酵品质及体外消化率的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2019,55(4):106-111.

Options

文章导航

摘要

本文引用格式

Abstract

参考文献

关于本刊

在线期刊

作者中心

相关单位

联系我们

模态框（Modal）标题

摘要

本文引用格式

Abstract

参考文献

关于本刊

在线期刊

作者中心

相关单位

联系我们