1 材料与方法
1.1 试验材料
1.1.1 试验菌种和培养基
1.1.2 主要原料与试剂
1.2 试验方法
1.2.1 发酵种子液制备
1.2.2 菌株比例优化试验
表1 菌株比例试验设计Table 1 Experimental design of strain ratios |
| 试验编号 Experimental No. | 短小芽孢杆菌SE5 Bacillus pumilus SE5 | 酿酒酵母菌Sa Saccharomyces cerevisiae Sa | 乳酸乳球菌17 Lactococcus lactis 17 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
1.2.3 单因素试验和正交试验
表2 单因素试验设计Table 2 Single-factor experimental design |
| 因素 Factors | 水平Levels | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 料液比Solid-liquid ratio | 1∶0.6 | 1∶0.8 | 1∶1.0 | 1∶1.2 | 1∶1.4 |
| 发酵时间Fermentation time/h | 36 | 48 | 60 | 72 | 84 |
| 接种量Inoculum amount/% | 6 | 8 | 10 | 12 | 14 |
表3 正交表Table 3 Orthogonal table |
| 组别 Groups | 料液比 Solid-liquid ratio | 发酵时间 Fermentation time | 接种量 Inoculum amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
| 4 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 6 | 2 | 3 | 1 |
| 7 | 3 | 1 | 2 |
| 8 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
1.2.4 4种酶的适宜添加量试验
1.2.5 发酵前后营养价值比较研究
1.3 测定指标和方法
1.4 数据统计与分析
2 结果与分析
2.1 菌株比例优化
表4 不同菌株比例对抗营养因子的降解效果Table 4 Degradation effects of different strain ratios on anti-nutritional factors |
| 菌株比例 Strain ratio | 硫苷降解率 Glucosinolate degradation rate/% | 单宁降解率 Tannin degradation rate/% | 植酸降解率 Phytic acid degradation rate/% | 综合评分 Synthesis score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1∶2∶2 | 29.81±0.31a | 21.95±0.27a | 24.87±0.23ab | 99.69 |
| 2∶1∶2 | 18.78±0.39c | 18.44±0.82b | 21.62±0.31c | 79.81 |
| 2∶2∶1 | 20.32±0.66c | 17.37±0.61b | 24.26±0.21ab | 82.02 |
| 1∶1∶2 | 15.73±0.60d | 16.93±0.81b | 22.33±0.21bc | 75.17 |
| 1∶2∶1 | 18.91±0.92c | 9.22±0.45d | 23.31±0.19b | 62.62 |
| 2∶1∶1 | 25.10±0.93b | 10.21±0.22d | 25.12±0.25a | 71.76 |
| 1∶1∶1 | 24.03±0.41b | 12.97±0.78c | 24.00±0.14ab | 75.31 |
同列数据肩标不同小写字母表示差异显著(P<0.05),相同或无字母表示差异不显著(P>0.05)。表5至表7和表10至表12同。 | |
In the same column, values with different small letter superscripts mean significant difference (P<0.05), while with the same or no letter superscripts mean no significant difference (P>0.05). The same as Table 5 to Table 7 and Table 10 to Table 12. |
2.2 料液比优化
表5 不同料液比对抗营养因子的降解效果Table 5 Degradation effects of different solid-liquid ratios on anti-nutritional factors |
| 料液比 Solid-liquid ratio | 硫苷降解率 Glucosinolate degradation rate/% | 单宁降解率 Tannin degradation rate/% | 植酸降解率 Phytic acid degradation rate/% | 综合评分 Synthesis score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1∶0.6 | 26.37±0.43c | 19.81±1.71c | 22.48±0.59b | 82.30 |
| 1∶0.8 | 33.39±0.90a | 27.28±0.73a | 23.38±0.59ab | 97.18 |
| 1∶1.0 | 29.81±0.31b | 21.95±0.27b | 24.87±0.41a | 91.50 |
| 1∶1.2 | 26.08±0.83bc | 19.63±0.68c | 20.89±0.90bc | 78.91 |
| 1∶1.4 | 19.96±1.08c | 17.50±1.00d | 20.34±0.42c | 71.52 |
2.3 发酵时间优化
表6 不同发酵时间对抗营养因子的降解效果Table 6 Degradation effects of different fermentation time on anti-nutritional factors |
| 发酵时间 Fermentation time/h | 硫苷降解率 Glucosinolate degradation rate/% | 单宁降解率 Tannin degradation rate/% | 植酸降解率 Phytic acid degradation rate/% | 综合评分 Synthesis score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 36 | 20.60±0.95c | 14.66±0.83d | 15.83±0.61d | 54.38 |
| 48 | 29.81±0.31b | 21.95±0.27c | 24.87±0.41c | 82.09 |
| 60 | 38.78±0.64a | 24.86±0.85a | 27.01±0.66b | 94.52 |
| 72 | 40.09±1.11a | 21.59±0.63b | 31.57±0.58a | 94.08 |
2.4 接种量优化
表7 不同接种量对抗营养因子的降解效果Table 7 Degradation effects of different inoculation amounts on anti-nutritional factors |
| 接种量 Inoculation amounts/% | 硫苷降解率 Glucosinolate degradation rate/% | 单宁降解率 Tannin degradation rate/% | 植酸降解率 Phytic acid degradation rate/% | 综合评分 Synthesis score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 | 19.22±0.67c | 17.76±0.67d | 16.74±0.77d | 61.73 |
| 8 | 24.52±0.94b | 20.07±0.64c | 21.55±0.52c | 75.83 |
| 10 | 29.81±0.31ab | 21.95±0.27b | 24.87±0.41b | 87.18 |
| 12 | 31.84±1.41a | 23.41±1.17ab | 30.22±0.64a | 98.52 |
| 14 | 32.41±1.33a | 24.25±0.54a | 25.32±0.45b | 92.70 |
2.5 正交试验
2.5.1 正交试验结果和极差分析
表8 正交试验结果和极差分析Table 8 Results and range analysis of orthogonal experiment |
| 项目 Items | 料液比 Solid- liquid ratio(A) | 发酵时间 Fermentation time(B)/ h | 接种量 Inoculum amount(C)/ % | 硫苷降解率 Glucosinolate degradation rate/% | 单宁降解率 Tannin degradation rate/% | 植酸降解率 Phytic acid degradation rate/% | 综合评分 Synthesis score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 试验编号Experimental No. | |||||||
| 1 | 1(1∶0.6) | 1(48 h) | 1(10%) | 38.91 | 21.13 | 24.46 | 81.05 |
| 2 | 1 | 2(60 h) | 3(14%) | 41.56 | 18.47 | 29.53 | 82.26 |
| 3 | 1 | 3(72 h) | 2(12%) | 38.71 | 22.13 | 31.99 | 87.31 |
| 4 | 2(1∶0.8) | 1 | 3 | 37.69 | 18.89 | 30.22 | 80.21 |
| 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 41.48 | 19.72 | 35.85 | 88.23 |
| 6 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 37.93 | 22.97 | 34.32 | 89.50 |
| 7 | 3(1∶1.0) | 1 | 2 | 37.53 | 23.15 | 30.65 | 87.11 |
| 8 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 37.81 | 27.09 | 29.36 | 92.77 |
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 35.29 | 26.26 | 30.17 | 89.90 |
| k1 | 83.54 | 82.79 | 87.77 | ||||
| k2 | 85.98 | 87.75 | 87.55 | ||||
| k3 | 89.92 | 88.90 | 84.12 | ||||
| 极差R | 6.38 | 6.12 | 3.65 | ||||
| 优先因素Factors of priority | A>B>C | ||||||
| 最优方案Best practices | A3B3C1 | ||||||
2.5.2 正交试验方差分析
表9 正交试验方差分析Table 9 Analysis of variance of orthogonal experiment |
| 项目 Items | 自由度 Degree of freedom | 离差平方和 Sum of squares of dispersion | 因素均方 Factor mean square | F值 F-value | P值 P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 料液比Solid-liquid ratio | 2 | 190.360 | 95.180 | 50.373 | <0.001 |
| 发酵时间Fermentation time/h | 2 | 198.371 | 99.186 | 52.493 | <0.001 |
| 接种量Inoculum amount/% | 2 | 72.500 | 36.250 | 19.185 | <0.001 |
| 误差Error | 20 | 37.790 | 1.889 |
2.6 4种酶的适宜添加量发酵试验结果
2.6.1 纤维素酶、果胶酶适宜添加量发酵试验结果
表10 纤维素酶、果胶酶适宜添加量发酵试验结果Table 10 Fermentation experiment results of optimal addition of cellulase and pectinase |
| 项目 Items | 硫苷降解率 Glucosinolate degradation rate/% | 单宁降解率 Tannin degradation rate/% | 植酸降解率 Phytic acid degradation rate/% | 酸溶蛋白含量 Acid-gliadin content/% | 综合评分 Synthesis score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 纤维素酶添加量Cellulase addition/(U/g) | |||||
| 10 | 34.26±0.36a | 23.88±0.37b | 25.19±0.50ab | 8.40±0.34c | 92.28 |
| 20 | 33.89±0.14ab | 21.10±0.25c | 24.62±0.79ab | 9.27±0.25b | 90.81 |
| 30 | 33.07±0.40b | 24.85±0.34b | 25.87±0.65a | 9.49±0.16ab | 95.15 |
| 40 | 32.15±0.74c | 27.91±0.53a | 24.04±0.69b | 9.93±0.19a | 96.60 |
| 50 | 32.06±0.38c | 27.43±1.24a | 24.12±0.89b | 9.16±0.43b | 94.44 |
| 果胶酶添加量Pectinase addition/(U/g) | |||||
| 10 | 36.72±0.61a | 19.98±1.09b | 26.86±0.34d | 9.27±0.19c | 92.13 |
| 20 | 36.48±0.57a | 21.62±0.61a | 29.55±0.34c | 9.82±0.33b | 97.20 |
| 30 | 33.85±0.65b | 18.68±0.37c | 30.71±0.99b | 9.60±0.25ab | 92.59 |
| 40 | 33.04±1.00b | 13.76±0.71e | 31.49±0.56b | 10.31±0.28a | 89.06 |
| 50 | 34.25±1.50b | 16.18±0.49d | 32.54±0.20a | 9.44±0.09ab | 91.37 |
2.6.2 植酸酶、蛋白酶适宜添加量发酵试验结果
表11 植酸酶适宜添加量发酵试验结果Table 11 Fermentation experiment results of optimal addition of phytase % |
| 植酸酶添加量 Phytase addition/(U/g) | 植酸降解率 phytic acid degradation rate |
|---|---|
| 3 | 52.91±0.80c |
| 6 | 58.07±1.20b |
| 9 | 62.54±0.91a |
| 12 | 60.41±0.78ab |
| 15 | 55.97±0.83b |
表12 蛋白酶适宜添加量发酵试验结果Table 12 Fermentation experiment results of optimal additions of protease % |
| 蛋白酶添加量 Protease addition/(U/g) | 酸溶蛋白含量 Acid-gliadin content |
|---|---|
| 50 | 10.58±0.57b |
| 100 | 11.56±0.34b |
| 150 | 12.82±0.25a |
| 200 | 12.71±0.09a |
| 250 | 12.38±0.41a |
2.7 双低菜籽粕发酵前后营养价值比较
表13 双低菜籽粕发酵前后营养价值比较Table 13 Comparison of nutritional value before and after fermentation of canola meal |
| 项目 Items | 发酵前 Before fermentation | 发酵后 After fermentation | 变化率 Change rate/% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 营养成分Nutrients/% | |||
| 粗蛋白质Crude protein | 42.30±0.20 | 50.25±0.27 | +18.79 |
| 酸溶蛋白Acid-soluble protein | 5.32±0.08 | 13.64±0.09 | +156.39 |
| 粗脂肪Crude fat | 2.51±0.02 | 2.80±0.02 | +11.55 |
| 氨基酸Amino acids | 29.72 | 35.86 | +30.75 |
| 抗营养因子Anti-nutritional factors | |||
| 硫苷Glucosinolate/(μmol/g) | 22.98±0.32 | 17.05±0.49 | -40.38 |
| 单宁Tannin/% | 1.35±0.03 | 1.11±0.01 | -33.76 |
| 植酸Phytic acid/% | 6.69±0.66 | 2.64±0.16 | -68.08 |

京公网安备 11010802041926号