Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2025 , Vol. 37 >Issue 1: 603 - 616

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2025.052

RESEARCH PAPER

Study on Nutritional Composition, in Vitro Fermentation Parameters and Enzyme Activity of Several Unconventional Feeds for Shaanbei White Cashmere Goats

  • LI Longping , 1 ,
  • WU Yi 1, 2 ,
  • WANG Xuhui 1, 2 ,
  • DU Yuanyuan 1, 2 ,
  • CAO Mengshuang 1, 2 ,
  • LI Tuo 2 ,
  • QU Lei 1 ,
  • LI Qiang , 2, *
Expand
  • 1 Shaanxi Province Engineering & Technology Research Center of Cashmere Goat, Yulin University, Yulin 719000, China
  • 2 College of Life Sciences, Yulin University, Yulin 719000, China
* professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2024-06-04

  Online published: 2025-01-10

Fold

Abstract

The aim of this experiment was to screen the suitable and efficient unconventional feed resources for Shaanbei white cashmere goats by studying the nutritional composition, in vitro fermentation parameters and enzyme activity of several unconventional feeds. The conventional nutrient composition, relative feeding value (RFV) and effective energy values of Panicum virgatum, Jerusalem artichoke straw, sunflower head, Astragalus adsurgens, potato vine, peanut vine, Leymus chinensis and corn straw were determined in this experiment. Combined with in vitro fermentation gas production test, the gas production, methane production, fermentation parameters and enzyme activity in fermentation liquid were determined to evaluate the comprehensive nutritional value. The results showed as follows: 1) the crude protein (CP) content in sunflower head and Astragalus adsurgens was extremely significantly higher than that in the other six feeds (P<0.01), the contents of crude ash (Ash) and calcium in Jerusalem artichoke straw and potato vine were extremely significantly higher than those in the other six feeds (P<0.01), and the contents of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) (except for corn straw) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) in Leymus chinensis were extremely significantly higher than those in the other seven feeds (P<0.01). 2) The dry matter intake (DMI) of Jerusalem artichoke straw was extremely significantly higher than that in the other seven feeds (P<0.01), the total digestible nutrient (TDN) content, RFV and relative forage quality (RFQ) of sunflower head were the highest, and the DMI (except for corn straw), TDN content, RFV and RFQ of Leymus chinensis were extremely significantly lower than those of the other seven feeds (P<0.01). 3) The digestible energy (DE), metabolic energy (ME) and net energy for gain (NEg) in sunflower head and Astragalus adsurgens were extremely significantly higher than those in the other six feeds (P<0.01). 4) The cumulative gas production of all feeds at 72 h from high to low was sunflower head>Jerusalem artichoke straw>Astragalus adsurgens>Panicum virgatum>corn straw>Leymus chinensis>peanut vine>potato vine. The methane production of peanut vine and potato vine was extremely significantly higher than that of the other six feeds (P<0.01). 5) The pH in fermentation liquid of Jerusalem artichoke straw was extremely significantly higher than that of the other six feeds (P<0.01). The ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) content in fermentation liquid of Jerusalem artichoke straw, potato vine and sunflower head was extremely significantly higher than that of the other five feeds (P<0.01). The microbial protein (MCP) content in fermentation liquid of peanut vine, potato vine and sunflower head was higher. The acetate content in fermentation liquid of peanut vine, sunflower head and Jerusalem artichoke straw was higher. The acetate to propionate ratio in fermentation liquid of Panicum virgatum was the lowest. The total volatile fatty acid content in fermentation liquid of sunflower head was the highest. 6) The α-amylase activity in fermentation liquid of peanut vine, the trypsin activity in fermentation liquid of sunflower head, the cellulase activity in fermentation liquid of Astragalus adsurgens, and the pectinase activity in fermentation liquid of Jerusalem artichoke straw were extremely significantly higher than those of the other seven feeds (P<0.05), the lipase activity in fermentation liquid of Panicum virgatum, Leymus chinensis, corn straw and peanut vine was extremely significantly higher than that of the other four feeds (P<0.01). In summary, the sunflower head, Jerusalem artichoke straw and Astragalus adsurgens have a higher utilization value in Shaanbei white cashmere goat production.

Key words： Shaanbei white cashmere goats; unconventional feeds; nutritional value; evaluate

Cite this article

LI Longping , WU Yi , WANG Xuhui , DU Yuanyuan , CAO Mengshuang , LI Tuo , QU Lei , LI Qiang . Study on Nutritional Composition, in Vitro Fermentation Parameters and Enzyme Activity of Several Unconventional Feeds for Shaanbei White Cashmere Goats[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2025 , 37(1) : 603 -616 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2025.052

陕北白绒山羊是陕北地区自主培育形成的绒肉兼用型绒山羊品种,具有羊绒品质好、肉质鲜美等诸多优点。随着养殖规模的不断扩大和绒山羊产业的快速发展,粗饲料在陕北白绒山羊养殖中的作用日益凸显,尤其是优质粗饲料不仅直接影响绒、肉品质,而且直接关联饲料价格和养殖成本。因此,开展非粮型粗饲料资源的研究,对于饲料新产品研发、节约饲料成本、提高绒山羊生产效率和养殖经济效益至关重要[1]。
榆林市是陕西省马铃薯主产区之一,马铃薯秧可作为陕北白绒山羊潜在的饲料资源,但龙葵素是其主要抗营养因子,新鲜马铃薯秧直接饲喂适口性差,还可能造成中毒[2]。研究发现,马铃薯秧青贮可降低有毒物质含量[3-4],但也有研究证实新鲜马铃薯秧干燥后直接喂羊取得较好效果[5],且牦牛瘤胃对其有较好的降解效果[6]。菊芋地下部分块茎富含果糖多聚物,地上部分茎叶是优质的粗饲料,含有多酚类、黄酮类和萜类等生物活性物质[7]。柳枝稷具有降低土壤盐分和增加土壤有机质含量的作用,具一种优质的盐碱地土壤改良剂,柳枝稷等量替代花生秧能够提高鲁波山羊体增重和降低料重比[8]。花生秧[9]和玉米秸秆[10]作为粮食副产物来源广泛,是反刍动物普遍使用的粗饲料。此外,榆林地处毛乌素沙地南缘与黄土高原过渡地带,豆科牧草沙打旺兼具防风固沙等生态作用[11],种植范围较广。向日葵成熟后收获葵花籽后的空壳葵花头往往被丢弃或焚烧,不仅造成浪费,还污染环境,但作为饲料营养价值较高[12]。因此,本研究以陕北地区具有较大种植优势或种植范围较广的马铃薯秧、葵花头、菊芋秸秆、沙打旺、柳枝稷以及陕北白绒山羊养殖中使用较普遍的玉米秸秆、花生秧和羊草为试验材料,通过营养成分分析、相对饲用价值(relative feeding value,RFV)评价、有效能值估算以及体外瘤胃发酵产气试验,筛选适宜陕北白绒山羊高效利用的粗饲料资源,为非粮饲料资源的开发利用提供参考。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验动物和饲养管理

本试验瘤胃液供体动物为4只3周岁、体重为(46.00±4.08) kg的陕北白绒山羊母羊。基础饲粮参照《肉羊营养需要量》(NY/T 816—2021)[13]及本课题组前期研究[14]配制,其组成及营养水平见表1。试验期间试验羊自由饮水,每天饲喂2次(08:30和18:00各1次)。动物试验经榆林学院实验动物福利与伦理委员会批准,批准编号为No.YLU2023-2。
表1 基础饲粮组成及营养水平(干物质基础)

Table 1 Composition and nutrient levels of the basal diet (DM basis) %

项目Items 含量Content
原料Ingredients
苜蓿干草Alfalfa hay 10.0
玉米秸秆Corn straw 20.0
燕麦草Oat grass 10.0
花生秧Peanut vine 10.0
大豆秸秆Soybean straw 10.0
柠条Caragana 10.0
玉米Corn 6.0
豆粕Soybean meal 6.0
棉籽粕Cottonseed meal 11.0
麸皮Wheat bran 5.3
食盐NaCl 0.5
磷酸氢钙CaHPO4 0.2
预混料Premix1) 1.0
合计Total 100.0
营养水平Nutrient levels2)
消化能DE/(MJ/kg) 9.6
粗蛋白质CP 11.8
粗脂肪EE 1.74
中性洗涤纤维NDF 49.90
酸性洗涤纤维ADF 37.20
钙Ca 1.15
磷P 0.63

1)预混料为每千克基础饲粮提供 The premix provided the following per kilogram of the basal diet:VA 1 800 IU,VD3 260 IU,VE 23 mg,Zn 30 mg,Mn 25 mg,Fe 50 mg,Cu 11 mg,Co 0.2 mg,I 1 mg。

2)消化能参照《肉羊营养需要量》(NY/T 816—2021)[13]根据原料组成以干物质为基础计算得出,为计算值;其他均为实测值。DE was a calculated value according to Nutrient Requirements of Meat-Type Sheep and Goat (NY/T 816—2021)[13] based on ingredient composition on dry matter basis, while the others were measured values.

1.2 试验材料

柳枝稷、菊芋秸秆、葵花头、沙打旺、马铃薯秧、花生秧、羊草和玉米秸秆从榆林市不同养殖场或种植基地采集得到。其中,菊芋、向日葵、花生、玉米、马铃薯在成熟期收获果实后,收集其秧、藤、秸秆等。

1.3 试验设计

饲料样品自然风干,65 ℃烘干至恒重,粉碎过40目筛和18目筛。其中,40目样品用于测定水分、粗灰分(Ash)、粗脂肪(EE)和粗蛋白质(CP)等营养成分含量;18目样品用于测定中性洗涤纤维(NDF)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)含量,以及评定饲料RFV和有效能值。
采用单因素完全随机试验设计,每种饲料分别称量200 mg装入小尼龙袋(4.0 cm×1.5 cm)作为发酵底物,每组6个平行,同时设6个空白对照,进行72 h体外发酵培养,测定发酵体系中累积产气量、甲烷(CH4)产量、干物质(DM)降解率、pH、氨态氮(NH3-N)含量、微生物蛋白(MCP)含量、挥发性脂肪酸(VFA)含量以及α-淀粉酶、脂肪酶、胰蛋白酶、果胶酶和纤维素酶活性等。

1.4 体外模拟瘤胃发酵试验

1.4.1 发酵底物

准确称取饲料样品200 mg装入4.0 cm×1.5 cm的尼龙袋中(孔径48 μm)放入玻璃注射器底部,并在玻璃注射器的内壁上均匀涂抹凡士林防止漏气,每个样品6个重复,并设置6支空白管,即玻璃注射器中只加空尼龙袋。

1.4.2 瘤胃液采集

选择4头健康、体重接近的成年陕北白绒山羊母羊作为瘤胃液供体,参照本课题组之前的方法[15],晨饲前2 h用胃管式瘤胃液采样管经口腔采集瘤胃液20 mL;为了避免动物唾液的污染,收集20 mL瘤胃液之前先弃去刚开始经口腔抽出的50 mL瘤胃液。采集的瘤胃液用4层纱布过滤后,装于保温瓶中运回实验室备用。

1.4.3 培养液的配制

采用Menke等[16]的方法配制人工瘤胃缓冲液,并将人工瘤胃缓冲液与瘤胃液按照2:1(体积比)的比例混合之后作为培养液。在瘤胃液与缓冲液混合前,缓冲液水浴加热至39 ℃并连续充入二氧化碳(CO2),将缓冲液pH调整至6.9~7.0。玻璃注射器提前39 ℃预热后加入30 mL培养液,将玻璃注射器中空气排尽,记录注射器初始刻度后于39 ℃人工培养箱振荡培养。

1.5 样品采集与分析

1.5.1 饲料常规营养成分测定

饲料DM含量参照GB/T 6435—2014,采用105 ℃烘箱干燥法测定;EE含量参照GB/T 6433—2006,采用索式抽提法测定;Ash含量参照GB/T 6438—2007,采用550 ℃灼烧法测定;CP含量参照GB/T 6432—2018,采用凯氏定氮法利用全自动凯氏定氮仪(K9860,济南海能仪器股份有限公司)测定;钙含量参照GB/T 6436—2018,采用乙二胺四乙酸二钠(EDTA-2Na)络合滴定法测定;磷含量参照GB/T 6437—2018,采用比色法测定;NDF和ADF含量参照Van Soest等[17]的方法测定。

1.5.2 饲用价值评价

参照张吉鹍等[18]的方法评估RFV、干物质采食量(dry matter intake,DMI)和可消化干物质(digestible dry matter,DDM)含量;参照Horrocks等[19]的方法计算总可消化养分(total digestible nutrient,TDN)含量;参照Moore等[20]的方法计算相对牧草品质(relative forage quality,RFQ)。计算公式如下:
DMI(% BW)=120/NDF(% DM);
DDM(% DM)=88.9-0.779×ADF(% DM);
TDN(% DM)=-1.291×ADF(% DM)+101.35;
RFV=DMI(% BW)×DDM(%DM)/1.29;
RFQ=TDN(% DM)×DMI(% BW)/1.23。

1.5.3 有效能值评价

饲料总能(gross energy,GE)参照本课题组之前的方法[21],采用全自动氧弹量热仪(ZDHW-5微机全自动量热仪,鹤壁市华诺电子科技有限公司,GB/T 30991—2014)进行测定;在TDN基础上,参考NRC(2001)[22]计算消化能(digestible energy,DE)、代谢能(metabolic energy,ME)、维持净能(net energy for maintenance,NEm)和增重净能(net energy for gain,NEg)。计算公式如下:
DE(MJ/kg DM)=0.044 09×TDN×4.184;
ME(MJ/kg DM)=0.82×DE;
NEm(MJ/kg DM)=1.37×ME-0.138×ME2+0.010 5×ME3-1.12;
NEg(MJ/kg DM)=1.42×ME-0.174×ME2+0.012 2×ME3-1.65。

1.5.4 产气量及其产气参数的计算

向玻璃注射器中加入配好的培养液30 mL,放置到恒温振荡培养箱中开始培养计时,分别在2、4、6、8、12、24、48、60和72 h各时间点,根据玻璃注射器刻度读取产气量数据。待体外培养72 h后,将玻璃注射器立即取出放入冰水中终止发酵。
产气量根据以下公式计算:
GPt=200/W×[(Vt-V0)-GP空白]。
式中:GPt表示样品在t时刻的累积产气量(mL);Vt表示样品发酵t时刻时产气管的刻度读数(mL);V0表示样品在开始培养时产气管的刻度读数(mL);W表示样品干物质含量(mg);GP空白表示空白对照在t时刻的产气量,其计算方式与GPt一致。
采用Ørskov等[23]的动态发酵模型计算体外发酵产气参数,计算公式为:
GPt=a+b(1-e-ct)。
式中:GPt表示样品在t时刻的累积产气量(mL);a表示发酵过程中快速发酵部分的产气量(mL);b表示发酵过程中慢速发酵部分的产气量(mL);c表示产气速率(%/h);a+b表示潜在产气量(mL)。a、b和c值依据非线性最小二乘法拟合得到。

1.5.5 体外干物质降解率(in vitro dry matter digestibility,IVDMD)测定

将发酵剩余残渣放入烘箱65 ℃烘至恒重后称重,计算IVDMD。

1.5.6 瘤胃发酵参数测定

试验结束后,收集发酵液样品,立即用Staidson便携式pH计测定pH;瘤胃液NH3-N含量参照团体标准《瘤胃液中氨态氮浓度的测定 碱性次氯酸钠-苯酚分光光度法》(T/NAIA 0004—2020),采用分光光度计(722型)测定;发酵液中的VFA,包括乙酸、丙酸、丁酸、戊酸、异丁酸、异戊酸和总挥发性脂肪酸含量参照团体标准《瘤胃液中挥发性脂肪酸的测定 气相色谱法》(T/NAIA 005—2020),采用气相色谱仪(磐诺GC-1949型)测定;瘤胃液MCP含量采用考马斯亮蓝比色法[24]测定。

1.5.7 发酵液混合气体中CH4产量测定

试验结束后,采用0.5 L铝箔气体采气袋(BKMAM)收集发酵产生的所有气体,然后采用气相色谱仪(磐诺GC-1949型)测定发酵72 h内产生气体中的CH4产量。

1.5.8 发酵液酶活性测定

发酵液中α-淀粉酶、脂肪酶、胰蛋白酶、果胶酶和纤维素酶活性分别使用南京建成生物工程研究所生产的α-淀粉酶测试盒(C016-1-1)、脂肪酶测定试剂盒(A054-1-1)、胰蛋白酶测试盒(A080-2-1)、果胶酶测试盒(A140-1-1)和纤维素测试盒(A138-1-1)进行测定。

1.6 数据统计分析

利用WPS Excel 2023软件对试验数据进行初步整理,然后采用SPSS 20软件进行单因素方差分析(one-way ANOVA),若有显著差异则采用LSD法对组间差异进行多重比较。所有试验结果数据以“平均值±标准误(mean±SE)”的形式表示,P<0.05表示差异显著,P<0.01表示差异极显著。

2 结果与分析

2.1 8种饲料的常规营养成分含量

由表2可知,花生秧和马铃薯秧DM含量极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头CP、EE和磷含量最高,极显著高于(沙打旺CP含量除外)其他7种饲料(P<0.01);羊草NDF(玉米秸秆除外)和ADF含量极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);菊芋秸秆和马铃薯秧钙含量极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01)。
表2 8种饲料的常规营养成分含量

Table 2 General nutrient contents in eight kinds of feeds

项目
Items		 菊芋秸秆
Jerusalem
artichoke straw		 葵花头
Sunflower
head		 柳枝稷
Panicum
virgatum		 花生秧
Peanut vine		 沙打旺
Astragalus
adsurgens		 羊草
Leymus
chinensis		 玉米秸秆
Corn straw		 马铃薯秧
Potato vine
干物质
DM/%		 92.69
±1.39Cd		 93.28
±0.08Bc		 94.49
±0.01Bb		 98.14
±0.27Aa		 93.03
±0.04Bc		 93.56
±0.06Bb		 91.81
±0.01Cd		 96.97
±0.02Aa
粗蛋白质
CP/% DM		 7.15
±0.33Cd		 11.25
±0.24Aa		 2.98
±0.25De		 7.84
±0.04Bc		 10.92
±0.08Aa		 6.73
±0.05Cd		 3.23
±0.01De		 8.43
±0.26Bb
粗脂肪
EE/% DM		 3.13
±0.39Bb		 4.36
±0.26Aa		 1.41
±0.01Dd		 1.06
±0.06Dd		 1.58
±0.28Dd		 2.84
±0.02Cc		 1.22
±0.01Dd		 1.97
±0.18Dd
粗灰分
Ash/% DM		 11.39
±0.25Ab		 10.49
±0.66Bc		 4.85
±0.03Ef		 9.00
±0.11Cd		 6.33
±0.41De		 6.08
±0.11De		 6.06
±0.01De		 12.26
±0.08Aa
中性洗涤纤维
NDF/% DM		 47.58
±1.68De		 52.36
±0.86Cc		 68.97
±1.06Bb		 54.57
±0.01Cc		 55.50
±1.62Cc		 78.72
±1.79Aa		 76.20
±0.01Aa		 50.34
±0.09Dd
酸性洗涤纤维
ADF/% DM		 43.50
±0.01Bb		 36.05
±0.63Dd		 40.33
±0.07Bb		 37.96
±0.52Dd		 36.18
±0.23Dd		 55.52
±1.82Aa		 43.56
±3.61Bb		 38.52
±0.48Cc
钙
Ca/% DM		 3.38
±0.06Aa		 0.43
±0.07Dd		 0.29
±0.03Ef		 0.85
±0.01Cc		 0.55
±0.001De		 0.34
±0.03Ef		 0.21
±0.001Ef		 2.59
±0.04Bb
磷
P/% DM		 0.28
±0.001Bb		 0.40
±0.01Aa		 0.21
±0.02Bc		 0.26
±0.03Bb		 0.18
±0.02Cd		 0.19
±0.01Cd		 0.06
±0.001De		 0.23
±0.01Bc

同行数据肩标不同小写字母表示差异显著(P<0.05),不同大写字母表示差异极显著(P<0.01),相同小写字母或无字母表示差异不显著(P>0.05)。下表同。

In the same row, values with different lowercase letter superscripts mean significant difference (P<0.05), and with different capital letter superscripts mean extremely significant difference (P<0.01), while with the same small letter or no letter superscripts mean no significant difference (P>0.05). The same as below.

2.2 8种饲料的饲用价值评价

由表3可知,菊芋秸秆DMI最高,极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头和沙打旺DDM含量最高,极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头TDN含量以及RFV和RFQ最高;羊草DMI(玉米秸秆除外)、DDM和TDN含量以及RFV和RFQ极显著低于其他7种饲料(P<0.01)。
表3 8种饲料的饲用价值评价

Table 3 Feeding value evaluation of eight kinds of feeds

项目
Items		 菊芋秸秆
Jerusalem
artichoke straw		 葵花头
Sunflower
head		 柳枝稷
Panicum
virgatum		 花生秧
Peanut vine		 沙打旺
Astragalus
adsurgens		 羊草
Leymus
chinensis		 玉米秸秆
Corn straw		 马铃薯秧
Potato vine
干物质采食量
DMI/% BW		 2.52
±0.09Aa		 2.29
±0.04Bc		 1.74
±0.03De		 2.19
±0.01Cd		 2.16
±0.06Cd		 1.52
±0.03Ef		 1.57
±0.01Ef		 2.38
±0.004Bb
可消化干物质
DDM/% DM		 51.84
±1.31De		 60.82
±0.49Aa		 57.48
±0.05Bc		 59.33
±0.41Bb		 60.72
±0.18Aa		 45.65
±1.42Ef		 55.01
±0.01Cd		 58.89
±0.26Bb
总可消化养分
TDN/% DM		 39.93
±2.16Df		 54.82
±0.80Aa		 49.28
±0.09Cd		 52.34
±0.67Bc		 54.64
±0.29Aa		 29.68
±2.35Eg		 45.19
±0.01Ce		 51.61
±0.44Ab
相对饲用价值
RFV		 101.49
±6.13Bc		 108.08
±2.59Aa		 77.54
±1.26Cd		 101.13
±0.69Bc		 101.80
±2.67Bc		 53.98
±2.91Ef		 67.16
±0.01De		 107.83
±0.29Aa
相对牧草品质
RFQ		 82.04
±7.33Cd		 102.17
±3.13Aa		 69.72
±1.19De		 93.57
±1.20Bc		 96.08
±2.28Bb		 36.83
±3.76Fg		 57.86
±0.01Ef		 100.43
±0.67Aa

2.3 8种饲料的有效能值

由表4可知,羊草和沙打旺GE极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头和沙打旺DE、ME和NEg均极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01);沙打旺、葵花头和花生秧NEm均极显著高于其他5种饲料(P<0.01)。
表4 8种饲料的有效能值

Table 4 Effective energy values of eight kinds of feeds MJ/kg DM

项目
Items		 菊芋秸秆
Jerusalem
artichoke straw		 葵花头
Sunflower
head		 柳枝稷
Panicum
virgatum		 花生秧
Peanut vine		 沙打旺
Astragalus
adsurgens		 羊草
Leymus
chinensis		 玉米秸秆
Corn straw		 马铃薯秧
Potato vine
总能GE 17.55
±0.78Cc		 16.68
±0.35Dd		 18.46
±0.15Bb		 17.30
±0.03Cc		 19.42
±0.37Aa		 19.37
±1.01Aa		 17.64
±1.27Cc		 15.43
±0.03Ee
消化能DE 7.37
±0.39Ee		 10.11
±0.15Aa		 9.09
±0.02Cc		 9.66
±0.12Bb		 10.08
±0.05Aa		 5.47
±0.43Ff		 8.34
±0.01Dd		 9.52
±0.11Bb
代谢能ME 6.04
±0.33De		 8.29
±0.12Aa		 7.45
±0.01Cc		 7.92
±0.11Bb		 8.27
±0.05Aa		 4.49
±0.36Ef		 6.84
±0.01Cd		 7.80
±0.07Bb
维持净能NEm 4.44
±0.28Ef		 6.74
±0.15Aa		 5.77
±0.02Cd		 6.29
±0.12Ab		 6.71
±0.06Aa		 3.19
±0.27Fg		 5.15
±0.01De		 6.16
±0.15Bc
增重净能NEg 3.27
±0.21Eg		 5.12
±0.13Aa		 4.32
±0.01Ce		 4.74
±0.09Bc		 5.09
±0.05Ab		 2.32
±0.21Fh		 3.82
±0.01Df		 4.63
±0.08BCd

2.4 8种饲料的体外发酵产气量、产气参数和CH4产量

由图1可知,72 h内8种非粮饲料的累积产气量均呈递增趋势,0~30 h产气量增速较快,30~48 h增速逐渐变的平缓,直至72 h基本不再增加。72 h累积产气量由高到低依次为葵花头、菊芋秸秆、沙打旺、柳枝稷、玉米秸秆、羊草、花生秧和马铃薯秧。
图1 8种饲料体外发酵产气量(风干基础)

Fig.1 Gas production from in vitro fermentation of eight kinds of feeds (air-dry basis)

由表5可知,葵花头和菊芋秸秆的快速发酵部分产气量和产气速率极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01);马铃薯秧、玉米秸秆和花生秧的快速发酵部分产气量为负值,说明这3种饲料存在产气滞后效应;羊草、玉米秸秆和马铃薯秧的产气速率极显著低于其他5种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头的慢速发酵部分产气量和潜在产气量均极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);马铃薯秧的慢速发酵部分产气量和潜在产气量均极显著低于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);花生秧和马铃薯秧的CH4产量极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01)。
表5 8种饲料体外发酵产气参数和CH4产量

Table 5 Gas production parameters and CH4 production of eight kinds of feeds in vitro fermentation

项目
Items		 菊芋秸秆
Jerusalem
artichoke straw		 葵花头
Sunflower
head		 柳枝稷
Panicum
virgatum		 花生秧
Peanut vine		 沙打旺
Astragalus
adsurgens		 羊草
Leymus
chinensis		 玉米秸秆
Corn straw		 马铃薯秧
Potato vine
72 h累积产气量
72 h cumulative
gas production/mL		 43.75
±4.11Bb		 55.50
±10.50Aa		 38.50
±2.08Cd		 24.50
±1.73Fg		 41.25
±1.26Bc		 28.75
±2.98Ef		 35.50
±1.00De		 17.00
±2.55Gh
a/mL 3.11
±0.49Aa		 3.51
±0.91Aa		 2.45
±0.38Bb		 -2.46
±0.21Bb		 2.69
±0.30Bb		 0.82
±0.15Cc		 -2.06
±0.44Bb		 -0.56
±0.15Cc
b/mL 45.14
±2.48Bb		 59.25
±4.25Aa		 43.39
±0.97Bb		 34.47
±2.83Cc		 46.45
±1.47Bb		 40.07
±5.33Bb		 34.97
±0.59Cc		 24.97
±0.67Dd
c/(%/h) 0.051
±0.002Aa		 0.046
±0.003Aa		 0.030
±0.001Bb		 0.023
±0.007Bc		 0.035
±0.002Bb		 0.009
±0.000Cd		 0.011
±0.003Cd		 0.016
±0.013Cd
a+b/mL 48.25
±2.64Bb		 62.76
±3.44Aa		 45.64
±1.09Bb		 32.02
±2.98Cd		 49.14
±1.61Bb		 40.89
±5.42Cc		 32.91
±0.91De		 24.43
±0.69Ef
甲烷产量
CH4 production/%		 8.87
±2.59De		 10.03
±3.20Cc		 8.97
±0.87De		 15.81
±1.16Aa		 12.82
±1.28Bb		 9.55
±0.61Cd		 9.68
±1.03Cd		 13.41
±1.85Aa

a为快速发酵部分产气量,b为慢速发酵部分产气量,c为产气速率,a+b为潜在产气量。

a was gas production of fast fermentation part, b was gas production of slow fermentation part, c was gas production rate, and a+b was potential gas production.

2.5 8种饲料的IVDMD以及体外发酵液pH、NH3-N和MCP含量

由表6可知,葵花头IVDMD极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);各种饲料发酵液pH均在7以下,菊芋秸秆发酵液pH极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);菊芋秸秆发酵液NH3-N含量最高,羊草最低;花生秧、马铃薯秧和葵花头发酵液MCP含量较高,玉米秸秆和羊草发酵液MCP含量较低。
表6 8种饲料的IVDMD以及体外发酵液pH、NH3-N和MCP含量

Table 6 IVDMD, pH and contents of NH3-N and MCP in vitro fermentation broth of eight kinds of feeds

项目
Items		 菊芋秸秆
Jerusalem
artichoke straw		 葵花头
Sunflower
head		 柳枝稷
Panicum
virgatum		 花生秧
Peanut vine		 沙打旺
Astragalus
adsurgens		 羊草
Leymus
chinensis		 玉米秸秆
Corn straw		 马铃薯秧
Potato vine
体外干物质降解率
IVDMD/%		 54.91
±9.62Bb		 81.35
±2.14Aa		 39.68
±7.81Cc		 59.11
±6.36Bb		 35.88
±14.96Cc		 27.85
±7.47Cd		 32.31
±11.11Cc		 47.25
±17.49Bb
pH 6.65
±0.05Aa		 6.47
±0.05Bb		 6.49
±0.01Bb		 6.47
±0.05Bb		 6.45
±0.02Bb		 6.35
±0.06Cc		 6.37
±0.12Cc		 6.45
±0.05Bb
氨态氮
NH3-N/(mg/dL)		 22.29
±1.33Aa		 18.74
±2.10Ab		 17.79
±0.62Bb		 17.66
±0.39Bb		 16.65
±2.41Cc		 11.90
±0.62Dd		 16.05
±0.36Cc		 19.74
±1.32Ab
微生物蛋白
MCP/(μg/mL)		 165.05
±24.22Bc		 183.78
±43.27Ab		 155.10
±15.69Bd		 275.09
±87.02Aa		 155.69
±58.62Bd		 136.96
±35.73Cf		 148.08
±47.95Ce		 182.61
±29.67Ab

2.6 8种饲料的体外发酵液VFA组成

由表7可知,花生秧、葵花头和菊芋秸秆发酵液乙酸含量极显著高于其他5种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头和菊芋秸秆发酵液丙酸含量极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01);花生秧发酵液乙酸/丙酸值极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头和花生秧发酵液总挥发性性脂肪酸含量极显著高于其他6种饲料(P<0.01)。
表7 8种饲料的体外发酵液VFA组成

Table 7 VFA composition in vitro fermentation broth of eight kinds of feeds

项目
Items		 菊芋秸秆
Jerusalem
artichoke straw		 葵花头
Sunflower
head		 柳枝稷
Panicum
virgatum		 花生秧
Peanut vine		 沙打旺
Astragalus
adsurgens		 羊草
Leymus
chinensis		 玉米秸秆
Corn straw		 马铃薯秧
Potato
vine
乙酸
Acetate/(mmol/L)		 62.29
±5.47Ab		 69.06
±5.38Aab		 50.84
±2.98Cc		 73.22
±8.16Aa		 52.95
±2.06Cc		 54.08
±10.48Cc		 59.72
±5.67Bb		 57.74
±5.64Bb
丙酸
Propionate/(mmol/L)		 20.02
±1.90Ab		 22.74
±1.94Aa		 16.92
±1.01Bd		 11.57
±0.82Df		 16.46
±0.69Ce		 17.12
±2.59Ce		 19.49
±2.13Bc		 10.97
±1.12Eg
丁酸
Butyrate/(mmol/L)		 8.54
±0.89Aa		 8.55
±0.57Aa		 7.36
±0.69Cd		 8.27
±0.31Ab		 6.55
±0.53De		 8.02
±1.75ABc		 9.92
±1.23Aa		 6.87
±0.66De
异丁酸
Isobutyrate/(mmol/L)		 0.49
±0.12Aa		 0.53
±0.02Aa		 0.43
±0.0.03Ab		 0.37
±0.07Bc		 0.35
±0.11Bd		 0.39
±0.05Bc		 0.37
±0.02Bc		 0.38
±0.04Bc
戊酸
Valerate/(mmol/L)		 1.04
±0.08Aa		 0.99
±0.06Aa		 0.99
±0.07Aa		 0.44
±0.24Cc		 1.04
±0.12Aa		 0.88
±0.09ABab		 0.74
±0.11Bb		 0.54
±0.11Cc
异戊酸
Isovalerate/(mmol/L)		 0.71
±0.13Aa		 0.69
±0.06Aa		 0.59
±0.07Ab		 0.44
±0.04Bd		 0.48
±0.09Bc		 0.49
±0.06Bc		 0.56
±0.27Ab		 0.51
±0.05Ab
乙酸/丙酸
Acetate/propionate		 3.01
±0.07Dd		 3.04
±0.02Dd		 3.01
±0.03Dd		 6.34
±0.69Aa		 3.22
±0.04Cc		 3.15
±0.16Cc		 3.17
±0.07Cc		 5.27
±0.19Bb
总挥发性脂肪酸
Total volatile fatty
acid/(mmol/L)		 96.21
±4.16Bc		 105.58
±3.96Aa		 80.14
±2.42Cd		 100.66
±4.58Ab		 81.05
±1.77Cd		 84.12
±7.50Cd		 93.87
±4.61Bc		 82.27
±3.69Cd

2.7 8种饲料的体外发酵液酶活性

由表8可知,花生秧发酵液α-淀粉酶活性极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);柳枝稷、羊草、玉米秸秆和花生秧发酵液脂肪酶活性极显著高于其他4种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头发酵液胰蛋白酶活性极显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.01);葵花头发酵液纤维素酶活性显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.05);菊芋秸秆发酵液果胶酶活性显著高于其他7种饲料(P<0.05)。
表8 8种饲料的体外发酵液酶活性

Table 8 Enzyme activity in vitro fermentation broth of eight kinds of feeds

项目
Items		 菊芋秸秆
Jerusalem
artichoke straw		 葵花头
Sunflower
head		 柳枝稷
Panicum
virgatum		 花生秧
Peanut vine		 沙打旺
Astragalus
adsurgens		 羊草
Leymus
chinensis		 玉米秸秆
Corn straw		 马铃薯秧
Potato vine
α-淀粉酶
α-amylase/(U/dL)		 16.38
±2.94Cd		 14.88
±0.61Ef		 14.80
±1.18Ef		 26.52
±1.89Aa		 16.16
±2.82Cd		 15.78
±2.01De		 17.63
±2.41Cc		 21.58
±1.25Bb
脂肪酶
Lipase/(U/mL)		 0.175
±0.017Bb		 0.167
±0.015Bc		 0.207
±0.014Aa		 0.203
±0.011Aa		 0.142
±0.014Ce		 0.208
±0.012Aa		 0.205
±0.015Aa		 0.150
±0.013Cd
胰蛋白酶
Trypsin/(U/mL)		 41.58
±4.36Bc		 60.31
±3.32Aa		 35.93
±6.22Ce		 39.54
±1.15Cd		 46.92
±2.45Bb		 38.44
±4.53Cd		 26.01
±6.09Df		 47.85
±2.31Bb
纤维素酶
Cellulase/(U/mL)		 42.33
±8.63b		 71.63
±7.69a		 23.72
±8.86c		 22.33
±11.41c		 39.07
±2.73b		 29.76
±4.13c		 43.26
±6.05b		 14.42
±5.80d
果胶酶
Pectinase/(U/mL)		 0.59
±0.02a		 0.25
±0.09c		 0.45
±0.01b		 0.32
±0.08c		 0.15
±0.07d		 0.42
±0.21b		 0.14
±0.04d		 0.21
±0.03c

3 讨论

3.1 8种饲料的常规营养成分含量

饲料营养价值评定的基础是饲料CP、EE、NDF和ADF等常规营养成分含量的高低。其中,CP是饲料中含氮物质的总和,是反映饲料品质的主要指标,对于动物的生长具有重要的作用。本试验测定的8种饲料的CP含量在2.98%~11.25%,葵花头和沙打旺的CP含量较高(11.25%和10.92%),这与格根图等[25]和张骞等[11]报道的沙打旺CP含量(8.36%和15.23%)不同,葵花头CP含量比赵喜印[12]报道的13.13%低;马铃薯秧CP、EE和Ash含量相较于蔡宏宇等[26]的研究结果,CP和EE含量均偏低,Ash含量偏高,其他营养成分相近,可能的原因与收割时期、收割部位和品种有关。饲料NDF和ADF含量的高低,影响动物对饲料的利用效率,特别是ADF含量越高,饲料利用率越低。本研究中,各种饲料NDF含量在47.58%~78.72%,ADF含量在36.05%~55.52%,其中羊草和玉米秸秆的NDF和ADF含量较高,菊芋秸秆NDF含量最低,葵花头、沙打旺和花生秧ADF含量较低。综上所述,本试验中所研究的菊芋秸秆、葵花头和沙打旺的常规营养成分价值较羊草和玉米秸秆要高,可作为陕北白绒山羊较好的非常规粗饲料资源加以利用。

3.2 8种饲料的饲用价值和有效能值

本研究中,菊芋秸秆DMI最高,葵花头和马铃薯殃秧次之;葵花头和沙打旺DDM含量最高,柳枝稷、花生秧和马铃薯秧次之,羊草最低;葵花头TDN含量以及RFV和RFQ最高,花生秧、沙打旺和马铃薯秧次之,羊草DMI、DDM和TDN含量以及RFV和RFQ值最低。这说明葵花头、沙打旺和菊芋秸秆的饲料品质更好一些,对陕北白绒山羊具有较好的饲喂价值。DE值是根据TDN计算出来的,ME值是根据DE值计算得到的,而NEm和NEg值又是根据ME值估计得到的,故DE、ME、NEm和NEg的变化趋势与TDN一致,即葵花头、沙打旺和菊芋秸秆显著高于玉米秸秆和羊草。综上所述,葵花头、沙打旺和菊芋秸秆对于陕北白绒山羊均具有较高的饲喂价值。值得一提的是,通常情况盛花期苜蓿的RFV为100,本试验菊芋秸秆、葵花头、花生秧、沙打旺和马铃薯秧5种饲料的RFV均在100~108。RFV大于100的粗饲料相对于基数100,整体上质量较好,本试验中菊芋秸秆、花生秧和沙打旺的RFV在101左右,葵花头和马铃薯秧RFV分别为108和107,但是沙打旺、葵花头和马铃薯秧作为绒山羊饲料大规模使用存在不容易收获、加工和使用受限等问题,且马铃薯秧普遍认为存在龙葵素等对动物不利的物质;而菊芋种植在陕北地区才刚刚起步,菊粉精制加工工艺相对复杂、投入大,菊芋秸秆作为陕北白绒山羊粗饲料加以利用还有很多问题需要进一步研究和解决。

3.3 8种饲料的体外发酵产气量

体外发酵产气试验是评价饲料在反刍动物瘤胃中可消化性的有效指标,瘤胃微生物对饲料有机物的降解产生大量气体,产气量不仅反映了瘤胃微生物对饲料营养物质的降解情况和瘤胃微生物活性,还代表饲料品质的优劣[27]。袁玖等[28]通过对玉米芯、苜蓿和精料的体外发酵产气研究发现,苜蓿和精料的快速发酵部分产气量为负数,说明苜蓿和精料具有产气滞后效应,而玉米芯产气不滞后,这些研究结果与本试验结果类似。研究表明,体外发酵快速发酵部分产气量与饲料CP含量呈正相关[29]。本试验中,柳枝稷CP含量(2.98%)最低,而柳枝稷快速发酵部分产气量较高;马铃薯秧虽然CP含量(8.43%)较高,但却存在产气滞后,造成这些不同研究结果的原因可能与饲料种类以及试验动物有关。本研究中,所有饲料的产气量曲线变化趋势呈现出随着发酵时间的延长(24~72 h)而不断上升至最后逐渐变得平缓的变化趋势,说明发酵刚开始,饲料发酵底物充足,且瘤胃微生物活性较好,产气量在较短时间(30 h)内累计较快;随着发酵时间延长,发酵系统中的VFA、NH3-N等发酵产物不断积累,发酵培养液整个生态环境发生了变化,加上可能是由于可发酵底物逐渐变少的原因,导致产气量变化曲线变得平缓[30]。产气量与IVDMD之间存在显著正相关[31]。本研究发现,累积产气量由高到低依次为葵花头>菊芋秸秆>沙打旺>柳枝稷>玉米秸秆>羊草>花生秧>马铃薯秧,且柳枝稷和菊芋秸秆的CH4产量较低,马铃薯秧和花生秧的CH4产量较高。饲料在瘤胃中发酵产生CH4是对营养物质的浪费[32],且造成环境问题,葵花头和马铃薯秧的体外发酵产气量高,但产生的CH4也高;菊芋秸秆和柳枝稷的体外发酵产气量高于花生秧、玉米秸秆和羊草,但是CH4产量较低,提示菊芋秸秆和柳枝稷的可发酵养分被充分利用的比例或程度更高。然而,本试验中柳枝稷的CP含量仅为2.98%,菊芋秸秆的CP含量(7.15%)相对较高,菊芋秸秆和柳枝稷作为反刍动物可利用的粗饲料是否有更高的利用率还需要进一步通过动物饲养试验进行深入探究。另外,饲料纤维含量与CH4产生有关,本研究结果发现羊草、玉米秸秆和柳枝稷的纤维含量高,但是体外产气发酵后CH4产量低,造成这些试验结果的可能原因与这几种饲料中纤维实际能够被陕北白绒山羊利用的效率或程度有关,同时结合发酵后残渣的IVDMD,这几种饲料的IVDMD都比较低,这也在一定程度上印证了上述研究结果。

3.4 8种饲料的体外发酵参数和酶活性

pH是瘤胃微生物活性及瘤胃功能是否正常的重要指标,瘤胃正常发酵情况下,pH维持在5.5~7.5[33]。有研究证实,当反刍动物瘤胃pH<6.2时,瘤胃对饲粮的利用效率和MCP合成效率降低[34]。本试验中,各种饲料发酵液pH均在正常范围内变化(6.35~6.65),表明本研究涉及的8种饲料均有利于瘤胃微生物生长,对瘤胃内环境无不良影响。饲料含氮物质被瘤胃微生物降解的终产物NH3-N含量变化反映了蛋白质降解(氮降解)和MCP合成(氮吸收)之间的平衡状态。研究表明,适宜的NH3-N含量在5.0~30 mg/dL,过高含量NH3-N容易造成氨中毒,而过低含量NH3-N会限制瘤胃MCP合成,造成饲料利用效率降低[35]。本研究中,8种饲料培养72 h后发酵液NH3-N含量均在正常范围内(11.90~22.29 mg/dL),表明这几种饲料在瘤胃发酵过程中产生的NH3-N对瘤胃稳态环境没有不利影响,且有利于MCP的合成。VFA为反刍动物提供70%~80%的能量,其中乙酸主要通过降解纤维产生,而丙酸和丁酸主要通过降解淀粉产生[36-37],且较低的乙酸/丙酸值可以为反刍动物提供更多的能量,有利于提高动物的生长性能[38]。本研究中涉及的8种饲料乙酸产量整体上高于丙酸产量,且花生秧、葵花头和菊芋秸秆发酵液的乙酸含量较高,菊芋秸秆和葵花头的乙酸/丙酸值较低,提示葵花头和菊芋秸秆饲料在瘤胃发酵有利于动物生长,具体有待于进一步通过动物饲养试验加以验证。
瘤胃微生物消化降解饲料的过程中分泌产生各种酶,不同种类的饲料影响瘤胃消化酶活性[39]。瘤胃微生物分泌多种酶降解纤维物质,瘤胃纤维素酶活性反映了纤维分解菌活力及纤维类物质在瘤胃的降解利用情况和生成MCP的能力[40]。本研究发现,葵花头发酵液纤维素酶活性最高,菊芋秸秆发酵液果胶酶活性最高,表明葵花头和菊芋秸秆有利于饲料纤维类物质在瘤胃降解。可能的原因与葵花头和菊芋秸秆作为发酵底物的纤维结构不同,不同类型和不同浓度的发酵底物产生不同微生物酶活性,这也反映了葵花头与菊芋秸秆的瘤胃发酵模式存在差异。脂肪酶、α-淀粉酶和蛋白酶活性反映了瘤胃脂肪分解菌、淀粉分解菌和蛋白质分解菌的生长和活性[41]。本试验结果表明,羊草发酵液脂肪酶活性最高,葵花头发酵液胰蛋白酶活性最高,花生秧发酵液α-淀粉酶活性最高,这可能与羊草EE含量较高、葵花头CP含量最高以及花生秧含有较多非结构性碳水化合物有关。总之,本试验研究的8种饲料在陕北白绒山羊利用过程中,对于瘤胃消化液酶活性的影响各有不同,提示这8种饲料在陕北白绒山羊养殖中的开发利用存在差异,具体对动物生长的影响有待于进一步研究。

4 结论

本试验通过对比8种非粮饲料的营养成分、RFV、有效能值、体外瘤胃发酵参数、发酵液酶活性、累积产气量以及CH4产量等指标,进行综合营养价值评价后发现,葵花头、菊芋秸秆和沙打旺相较于柳枝稷、玉米秸秆、羊草、花生秧和马铃薯秧综合营养价值更高,体外发酵特性表现更好,在陕北白绒山羊养殖中具有较高的利用价值和开发潜力。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
刘阿云. 陕北白绒山羊生产性能研究进展[J]. 中国草食动物科学, 2018, 38(2):65-68.

LIU A Y. Progress in the production performance of Shanbei white cashmere goat[J]. China Herbivore Science, 2018, 38(2):65-68. (in Chinese)

[2]
赵丹青, 张锋锋, 吴燕, 等. 宁夏不同地区不同品种马铃薯中龙葵素在不同生长期的积累含量测定[J]. 中国野生植物资源, 2017, 36(6):29-31,44.

ZHAO D Q, ZHANG F F, WU Y, et al. Quantitative determination of solanine in potato in different growing periods in different areas of Ningxia[J]. Chinese Wild Plant Resources, 2017, 36(6):29-31,44. (in Chinese)

[3]
杨宇为, 马吉锋, 于洋, 等. 三种马铃薯秧饲料在肉牛瘤胃中降解规律的比较[J]. 饲料工业, 2020, 41(11):11-18.

YANG Y W, MA J F, YU Y, et al. Comparison on degradation rule of three kinds of potato vines fodder in rumen of beef cattle[J]. Feed Industry, 2020, 41(11):11-18. (in Chinese)

[4]
封晔, 陈思, 张放. 添加不同比例的全株青贮玉米对马铃薯茎叶青贮品质的影响[J]. 中国饲料, 2018(12):74-78.

FENG Y, CHEN S, ZHANG F. Effects of different proportion of whole plant silage maize on silage quality of potato stem and leaf[J]. China Feed, 2018(12):74-78. (in Chinese)

[5]
MALECKY M, GHADBEIGI M, ALIARABI H, et al. Effect of replacing alfalfa with processed potato vines on growth performance,ruminal and total tract digestibility and blood metabolites in fattening lambs[J]. Small Ruminant Research, 2017,146:13-22.

[6]
鲍宇红, 普布卓玛, 曾钰婷, 等. 不同品种马铃薯秧营养成分及瘤胃降解率的测定[J]. 西藏农业科技, 2022, 44(1):34-39.

BAO Y H, PU B Z M, ZENG Y T, et al. Determination of nutrient composition and ruminal degradation rate of different potato seedlings[J]. Tibet Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 44(1):34-39. (in Chinese)

[7]
汪悦, 薛夫光, 蒋林树, 等. 菊芋饲料的营养价值、生物活性及其对动物生理功能的调控作用[J]. 动物营养学报, 2020, 32(2):497-507.

DOI

WANG Y, XUE F G, JIANG L S, et al. Nutritional value and biological activity of Jerusalem artichoke feed and its regulation effects on animal physiological function[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2020, 32(2):497-507. (in Chinese)

[8]
张京磊, 贾春林, 张进红, 等. 柳枝稷对滨海盐碱地的改良效果及饲用价值[J]. 草业科学, 2023, 40(6):1551-1558.

ZHANG J L, JIA C L, ZHANG J H, et al. Panicum virgatum improvement of coastal saline-alkali soil and its feeding values[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2023, 40(6):1551-1558. (in Chinese)

[9]
张立伟, 王辽卫. 我国花生产业发展状况、存在问题及政策建议[J]. 中国油脂, 2020, 45(11):116-122.

ZHANG L W, WANG L W. Development status,existing problems and policy recommendations of peanut industry in China[J]. China Oils and Fats, 2020, 45(11):116-122. (in Chinese)

[10]
张晓庆, 王梓凡, 参木友, 等. 中国农作物秸秆产量及综合利用现状分析[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2021, 26(9):30-41.

ZHANG X Q, WANG Z F, CAN M Y, et al. Analysis of yield and current comprehensive utilization of crop straws in China[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2021, 26(9):30-41. (in Chinese)

[11]
张骞, 毕台飞, 王克超, 等. 榆林市风沙区6种灌木开花期营养成分分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(2):41-44.

DOI

ZHANG Q, BI T F, WANG K C, et al. Nutritional components of 6 shrubs at flowering stage in sandy area of Yulin[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2017, 33(2):41-44. (in Chinese)

[12]
赵喜印. 葵花头可以饲用[J]. 饲料博览, 1994(2):26.

ZHAO X Y. Sunflower heads can be used for feeding[J]. Feed Review, 1994(2):26. (in Chinese)

[13]
中华人民共和国农业农村部. 肉羊营养需要量: NY/T 816—2021[S]. 北京: 中华人民共和国农业农村部, 2021.

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. Nutrient requirements of meat-type sheep and goat:NY/T 816—2021[S]. Beijing: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, 2021. (in Chinese)

[14]
李托, 屈雷, 朱海鲸, 等. 高羊毛氨酸硒对陕北白绒山羊羯羊生长性能、血液指标、瘤胃发酵、营养物质表观消化率及氮代谢的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2022, 34(12):7909-7922.

DOI

LI T, QU L, ZHU H J, et al. Effects of selenohomolanthionine on growth performance,blood indices,ruminal fermentation,nutrient apparent digestibility and nitrogen metabolism of Shaanbei white cashmere wether goats[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2022, 34(12):7909-7922. (in Chinese)

[15]
李陇平, 李托, 曹培文, 等. 饲粮不同能量水平对陕北白绒山羊断奶公羔瘤胃发酵特性和微生物组成的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2024, 55(7):3011-3023.

DOI

LI L P, LI T, CAO P W, et al. Effects of diets with different energy levels on rumen fermentation characteristics and microbial composition of weaned male Shaanbei white cashmere goats[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2024, 55(7):3011-3023. (in Chinese)

[16]
MENKE K H, RAAD L, SALEWSKI A, et al. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feedingstuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 1979, 93(1):217-222.

[17]
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.

[18]
张吉鹍, 卢德勋, 刘建新, 等. 粗饲料品质评定指数的研究现状及其进展[J]. 草业科学, 2004, 21(9):55-61.

ZHANG J K, LU D X, LIU J X, et al. The present research situation and progress of crude fodder quality evaluation index[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2004, 21(9):55-61. (in Chinese)

[19]
HORROCKS R D, VALENTINE J F. Harvested forages[M]. Cambridge: Academic Press,1999.

[20]
MOORE J E, UNDERSANDER D J. Relative forage quality:an alternative to relative feed value and quality index[C]// Proceedings 13th Annual Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium. Gainesville: IFAS Extension University of Florida,2002:16-32.

[21]
李陇平, 李托, 朱海鲸, 等. 饲粮不同消化能水平对25-35 kg陕北白绒山羊公羔生长性能、营养物质表观消化率和血清生化指标的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(11):6277-6289.

DOI

LI L P, LI T, ZHU H J, et al. Effects of dietary different digestive energy levels on growth performance,nutrient apparent digestibility and serum biochemical indices of 25 to 35 kg male Shaanbei white cashmere goats[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(11):6277-6289. (in Chinese)

[22]
NRC. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle:seventh revised edition[S]. Washington,D.C.:The National Academies Press, 2001.

[23]
ØRSKOV E R, MCDONALD I. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage[J]. The Journal Agricultural Science, 1979, 92(2):499-503.

[24]
白齐昌. 沙棘黄酮对绵羊生长性能、消化代谢、瘤胃发酵及血液指标的影响[D]. 硕士学位论文. 太谷: 山西农业大学, 2020.

BAI Q C. Effects of dietary different supplement levels of seabuckthorn flavones on growth performance,digestion metabolism,rumen fermentation and blood index in sheep[D]. Master’s Thesis. Taigu: Shanxi Agricultural University, 2020. (in Chinese)

[25]
格根图, 刘燕, 贾玉山, 等. 沙打旺茎秆的饲用价值评价[J]. 中国草地学报, 2013, 35(4):71-75.

GE G T, LIU Y, JIA Y S, et al. Evaluation on the feeding value of Astragalus adsurgens stalk[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2013, 35(4):71-75. (in Chinese)

[26]
蔡宏宇, 董宇, 马艳, 等. 五种非常规饲料营养成分分析与体外降解效果评价[J]. 饲料工业, 2023, 44(9):14-20.

CAI H Y, DONG Y, MA Y, et al. Evaluation of nutrient content and in vitro degradation rate of five unconventional feeds[J]. Feed Industry, 2023, 44(9):14-20. (in Chinese)

[27]
赵超, 马广明, 吕静怡, 等. 添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对豆渣与桑叶混贮品质及体外瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(4):2168-2177.

DOI

ZHAO C, MA G M, LV J Y, et al. Effects of adding lactic acid bacteria and cellulase on quality of mixed silage of soybean residue and mulberry leaves and rumen fermentation characteristics in vitro[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(4):2168-2177. (in Chinese)

[28]
袁玖, 唐德富, 万欣杰, 等. 体外产气法研究葵花籽壳、打瓜籽壳、花生壳与苜蓿不同配比饲粮的组合效应[J]. 动物营养学报, 2019, 31(4):1765-1772.

YUAN J, TANG D F, WAN X J, et al. Associative effects of diets with different ratios of sunflower seed shell,watermelon seed shell or peanut shell to alfalfa by gas production method in vitro[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(4):1765-1772. (in Chinese)

[29]
ZHANG D F, YANG H J. in vitro ruminal methanogenesis of a hay-rich substrate in response to different combination supplements of nitrocompounds;pyromellitic diimide and 2-bromoethanesulphonate[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2011, 163(1):20-32.

[30]
MCDONALD P, EDWARDS R A. The influence of conservation methods on digestion and utilization of forages by ruminants[J]. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 1976, 35(2):201-211.

PMID

[31]
LEI Y G, LI X Y, WANG Y Y, et al. Determination of ruminal dry matter and crude protein degradability and degradation kinetics of several concentrate feed ingredients in cashmere goat[J]. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 2018, 46(1):134-140.

[32]
TSETEN T, SANJORJO R A, KWON M, et al. Strategies to mitigate enteric methane emissions from ruminant animals[J]. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2022, 32(3):269-277.

DOI PMID

[33]
金亚倩, 赵俊星, 刘文忠, 等. 酿酒葡萄皮渣对绵羊瘤胃代谢及发育的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2017, 48(9):1683-1693.

JIN Y Q, ZHAO J X, LIU W Z, et al. Effect of dietary wine grape pomace supplementation on rumen metabolism and development in lambs[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2017, 48(9):1683-1693. (in Chinese)

DOI

[34]
王富伟, 何雅琴, 郑宇慧, 等. 饲粮能量水平对干奶期奶牛瘤胃发酵、消化代谢及血浆生化指标的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(10):5690-5700.

DOI

WANG F W, HE Y Q, ZHENG Y H, et al. Effects of dietary energy levels on rumen fermentation,digestion and metabolism and plasma biochemical parameters of dairy cows during dry period[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(10):5690-5700. (in Chinese)

[35]
THAO N T, WANAPAT M, CHERDTHONG A, et al. Effects of eucalyptus crude oils supplementation on rumen fermentation,microorganism and nutrient digestibility in swamp buffaloes[J]. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2014, 27(1):46-54.

[36]
JANSSEN P H. Influence of hydrogen on rumen methane formation and fermentation balances through microbial growth kinetics and fermentation thermodynamics[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2010, 160(1/2):1-22.

[37]
GIGER-REVERDIN S, RIGALMA K, DESNOYERS M, et al. Effect of concentrate level on feeding behavior and rumen and blood parameters in dairy goats:relationships between behavioral and physiological parameters and effect of between-animal variability[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2014, 97(7):4367-4378.

[38]
MA J, MUJTABA SHAH A, SHAO Y Q, et al. Effects of yeast cell wall on the growth performance,ruminal fermentation,and microbial community of weaned calves[J]. Livestock Science, 2020,239:104170.

[39]
张春梅, 周力, 桂林生, 等. 不同精粗比全混合日粮对黑藏羊瘤胃发酵参数、抗氧化能力及消化酶活性的影响[J]. 饲料研究, 2021, 44(17):1-4.

ZHANG C M, ZHOU L, GUI L S, et al. Effect of different concentrate to forage ratio total mixed rations on rumen fermentation parameters,antioxidant capacity and digestive enzyme activities of black Tibetan sheep[J]. Feed Research, 2021, 44(17):1-4. (in Chinese)

[40]
杨璐玲, 吕永艳, 张杰杰, 等. 啤酒糟对瘤胃发酵参数及纤维素酶活性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2013, 25(10):2414-2421.

DOI

YANG L L, LV Y Y, ZHANG J J, et al. Effects of brewer’s grains on fermentation parameters and cellulase activity in rumen[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2013, 25(10):2414-2421. (in Chinese)

[41]
杨宝钰, 王娇, 颜轶男, 等. 奶牛瘤胃pH、消化酶活性及原虫数量的日动态变化研究[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(3):1534-1544.

DOI

YANG B Y, WANG J, YAN Y N, et al. Daily dynamic changes of rumen pH,digestive enzyme activities and protozoa number in dairy cows[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(3):1534-1544. (in Chinese)

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉

京ICP备17050989号-2
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 010－62817823　E-mail: cjan@vip.163.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co., Ltd.