Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2025 , Vol. 37 >Issue 5: 3466 - 3475

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2025.284

RESEARCH PAPER

Evaluation of Fermentation Quality and Feeding Value of Pleurotus ostreatus Spent Mushroom Substrate Fermented by Different Microorganisms

  • YANG Xiaoxue ,
  • YANG Dongxu ,
  • LUAN Jiaming ,
  • FENG Xin ,
  • LIN Lingzhu ,
  • LIU Yutong ,
  • FANG Shibin ,
  • FENG Jian ,
  • GENG Chunyin , *
Expand
  • College of Agriculture, Yanbian University, Yanji 133000, China
* professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2024-10-17

  Online published: 2025-05-14

Fold

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to investigate the fermentation effect of Pleurotus ostreatus spent mushroom substrate (POSMS) fermented by different microorganisms and evaluate its feeding value. A single-factor experimental design was adopted to ferment POSMS with different microorganisms. The control group (CON group), lactic acid bacteria group (T1 group), yeast group (T2 group), Bacillus subtilis group (T3 group) and compound bacteria group (T4 group) were set up, and each group was set up with 3 repetitions. Equal amount of distilled water was added to the CON group, and 10% corresponding bacterial solution was added to all other groups. The bacterial solution was first mixed with POSMS thoroughly, then distilled water was added to adjust the moisture content to 60%, and the fermentation bag was filled with 1 kg of POSMS. The bag was placed in the fermentation box and adjusted to 30 ℃. After 7 d of fermentation, the bag was opened for sampling. First, the fermentation effect of different microbial fermented POSMS was preliminarily evaluated by measuring the contents of routine nutrients and fermentation indexes. Then, in vitro fermentation test was conducted using total mixed ration (TMR) containing different microbial fermented POSMS as the substrate. The feed value of different microbial fermented POSMS was assessed by measuring in vitro fermentation parameters and in vitro degradability. The results showed as follows: the sensory evaluation of fermented POSMS showed that the quality grades of CON, T1 and T4 groups were excellent, while the other groups were satisfactory. Compared with the CON group, the neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) contents in all test groups were significantly reduced (P<0.05), and the crude protein (CP) content in T1 and T4 groups was significantly increased (P<0.05). Compared with the CON group, the pH in all test groups was significantly reduced (P<0.05), the ammonia nitrogen content in T3 and T4 groups was significantly reduced (P<0.05), the acetic acid, propionic acid and lactic acid contents in all test groups were significantly increased (P<0.05), and the cellulase activity in T2 and T4 groups was significantly elevated (P<0.05). 2) For the in vitro fermentation test, the contents of lactic acid, total volatile fatty acids and propionic acid in T4 group were significantly higher than those in other groups (P<0.05), while the butyric acid content was significantly lower than that in other groups (P<0.05). Compared with the CON group, the acetic acid content and the ratio of acetic acid to propionic acid in all test groups decreased significantly (P<0.05), with the T4 group having the lowest ratio of acetic acid to propionic acid. The NDF and ADF in vitro degradabilities in T4 group were significantly higher than those in CON, T2 and T3 groups (P<0.05). Membership function analysis revealed that the comprehensive scores of all test groups were higher than those of the CON group, with the T4 group achieving the highest comprehensive score. In summary, microbial fermentation of POSMS can improve the efficiency of nutrients to varying degrees, enhance the fermentation quality, and the effect of compound bacteria is better than that of single bacterium; adding microbial-fermented POSMS to beef cattle diet can increase the in vitro degradabilities of NDF and ADF, and the addition of compound bacteria-fermented POSMS has a better effect.

Key words： Pleurotus ostreatus spent mushroom substrate; microbial fermentation; fermentation quality; in vitro rumen fermentation; membership function analysis

Cite this article

YANG Xiaoxue , YANG Dongxu , LUAN Jiaming , FENG Xin , LIN Lingzhu , LIU Yutong , FANG Shibin , FENG Jian , GENG Chunyin . Evaluation of Fermentation Quality and Feeding Value of Pleurotus ostreatus Spent Mushroom Substrate Fermented by Different Microorganisms[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2025 , 37(5) : 3466 -3475 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2025.284

传统畜牧业发展以大量的粮食作为饲料,给粮食供应带来了不小的压力。为了缓解这一矛盾,发展节粮型畜牧业成为了我国畜牧业发展的重要方向。农副产品是指农业生产中的非经济产品,具有产量大、价格低等优势,因此将农副产品饲料化对推动我国畜牧业实现可持续发展具有重要的现实意义[1]。
平菇菌糠(Pleurotus ostreatus spent mushroom substrate,POSMS)是指以棉籽壳、玉米芯、木屑、麸皮、秸秆、玉米粉等为原料栽培平菇后剩余的废弃培养料,属于农副产品的一种。由于食用菌在生长过程中合成大量的菌体蛋白,出菇后仍有部分未被利用的菌体蛋白和菌丝残留在培养基中,使菌糠中含有丰富的氨基酸[2],这些物质可以提高动物机体的免疫力和抗氧化能力,进而改善动物的健康[3]。2022年我国平菇总产量为615.67万t,占食用菌总产量的14.58%,位居第3位[4]。根据生产1 kg食用菌约产生3.25 kg菌糠计算[5],2022年我国POSMS产量约为2 001.22万t。
POSMS具有丰富的营养价值,但其具有纤维素含量高、适口性差和不易储存等问题,作为饲料资源仍有待继续开发,可通过发酵来延长POSMS的储存时间,并提高其营养价值。目前,常用于食用菌菌糠发酵的菌种有乳酸菌、酵母菌、枯草芽孢杆菌等[6]。乳酸菌经厌氧发酵后,可改善饲料的适口性,其发酵产生的乳酸可降低pH,延长贮存时间[7]。酵母菌可以通过自身在发酵过程中产生的酶,将大分子营养物质分解成小分子营养物质,进而提高饲料的利用率[8]。枯草芽孢杆菌可以在发酵过程中,将原料中的大分子蛋白质分解成小分子多肽[9]。有研究表明,对菌糠、秸秆等粗饲料进行发酵处理不仅能有效降低其中畜禽难以消化、吸收的成分,同时还能提高其适口性和营养价值[10]。相比单菌种发酵,多菌混合的发酵方式能够整合各个菌种的优势发挥更完善的作用[11]。
由于不同菌种的发酵能力和效果存在差异,因此筛选优良的菌种是保证POSMS发酵效果和营养价值的首要步骤。本试验选取酵母菌、枯草芽孢杆菌、乳酸菌以及3种菌种制成的复合菌对POSMS进行发酵,通过感官评定、有机酸等指标初步评价其发酵效果,再将发酵后的POSMS制成全混合日粮(TMR),通过体外瘤胃试验对其进行饲用价值评定,以期达到改善其营养品质,提高饲料利用率以及适口性的目的。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验材料

POSMS:本试验所用POSMS由玉米芯、麦麸、豆粕、玉米面、木屑、石膏组成,初始水分含量为53%。
菌种:枯草芽孢杆菌(菌种编号为CICC 10071,活菌数为6.19×107 CFU/g)购自中国工业微生物菌种保藏管理中心;乳酸菌(乳酸菌1号,活菌数为1.88×107 CFU/g)为本实验室保存菌种;酵母菌(法国拉曼酵母菌,菌种编号为CNCMI-1077,活菌数为1.88×108 CFU/g)为市售菌种。复合菌是将上述3种菌混合并将活菌数调成同一水平(2.5×107 CFU/mL)。

1.2 微生物发酵菌糠试验

1.2.1 试验设计

本试验共设5个组,分别为对照组(CON组)、乳酸菌组(T1组)、酵母菌组(T2组)、枯草芽孢杆菌组(T3组)以及复合菌组(T4组)。各组菌液活菌数均为2.5×107 CFU/mL。CON组添加等量的蒸馏水,其余各组均添加10%对应的菌液,先将菌液与POSMS充分混匀,然后添加蒸馏水调节水分含量至60%,再把样品装入带有单向排气阀的发酵袋中,每袋1 kg,放入发酵箱中,调至30 ℃,发酵7 d后开袋取样,进行发酵品质、营养成分等指标的测定。每个组设3个重复。

1.2.2 测定指标

1.2.2.1 感官评价

菌糠发酵饲料无专用感官评价方法,故参考德国农业协会对青贮饲料的评价标准[12]。从气味、色泽、质地3个方面对发酵后的POSMS进行评分,然后再按得分分为优良(16~20分)、尚可(10~15分)、中等(5~9分)、腐败(0~4分)4个等级进行感观评价。

1.2.2.2 常规营养成分

发酵后POSMS的干物质(DM)、粗蛋白质(CP)、粗脂肪(EE)、中性洗涤纤维(NDF)、酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)、粗灰分(Ash)含量根据国际标准AOAC(2000)[13]进行测定。

1.2.2.3 发酵品质

将发酵后的POSMS采用四分法取出20 g,放入密封袋中并向其注入180 mL的蒸馏水,在4 ℃中静置24 h充分浸提后过滤制成浸提液,用pH计测定浸提液的pH。将过滤后的液体排出至50 mL离心管中,4 ℃下5 311×g离心15 min提取上清液,置于-20 ℃保存。采用比色法测定发酵液中氨态氮(NH3-N)的含量[14]。参考杨平平等[15]的方法测定发酵液中乳酸的含量。利用气相色谱仪测定发酵液中乙酸和丙酸的含量。

1.2.2.4 纤维素酶活力

使用上海酶联生物科技有限公司生产的试剂盒测定发酵POSMS的纤维素酶活力。

1.3 体外瘤胃发酵试验

1.3.1 试验设计

本研究所有涉及动物试验的程序均经延边大学动物福利机构和使用委员会批准(批准号:20230115)。瘤胃液供体牛为3头体重500 kg左右、安装有永久性瘤胃瘘管的健康延边黄牛。发酵底物为TMR(表1,对照组为添加未发酵POSMS的TMR,试验组为添加发酵POSMS的TMR),烘干粉碎过80目筛。参考Menke等[16]报道的体外发酵法进行体外瘤胃发酵试验。采用单因素试验设计,共设置5个组:添加未发酵POSMS组(CON组)、添加乳酸菌发酵POSMS组(T1组)、添加酵母菌发酵POSMS组(T2组)、添加枯草芽孢杆菌发酵POSMS组(T3组)、添加复合菌发酵POSMS组(T4组)。每个组设3个重复。体外发酵试验是于试验前1天取200 mg发酵底物(含25.36 mg POSMS或发酵POSMS)装入人工瘤胃培养管中并置于39 ℃培养箱中预热备用。用自动分液器向提前39 ℃预热的培养管中加入30 mL人工瘤胃液(瘤胃液与人工唾液以1∶2的比例混合),混匀后迅速放入已预热(39 ℃)的恒温水浴培养箱中培养,48 h后终止发酵,进行体外发酵参数的测定。体外消化率试验是于试验前1天将1 g发酵底物(含0.126 8 g POSMS或发酵POSMS)称好后倒入纤维滤袋中,并将纤维滤袋装入体外消化率培养管中备用。用自动分液器向提前39 ℃预热的体外消化率培养管中加入70 mL人工瘤胃液,混匀后迅速放入已预热(39 ℃)的恒温水浴培养箱中培养,48 h后终止发酵,进行体外降解率的测定。
表1 TMR组成及营养水平(干物质基础)

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

原料Ingredients 含量Content 营养水平Nutrient levels 含量Content
玉米秸秆Corn stalk 66.682 增重净能NEg/(MJ/kg) 2.50
玉米Corn 3.475 干物质DM 84.20
豆粕Soybean meal 3.267 粗蛋白质CP 10.00
玉米胚芽粕Corn germ meal 11.599 钙Ca 0.50
尿素Urea 1.000 磷P 0.25
食盐NaCl 0.300 粗脂肪EE 1.75
预混料Premix1) 1.000 粗纤维CF 27.15
平菇菌糠POSMS 12.677 中性洗涤纤维NDF 60.35
合计Total 100.000 酸性洗涤纤维ADF 37.54

1)每千克预混料提供Supplied per kilogram of premix:VA 500 000 IU,VD 150 000 IU,VE 400 mg,Cu 1 000 mg,Fe 4 500 mg,Zn 2 400 mg,Mn 1 500 mg,I 10 mg,Co 10 mg,Se 45 mg。

2)增重净能参考NRC(2000)计算,其余为参照AOAC(2000)[13]方法实测。NEg was calculated according to NRC(2000), while the others were measured according to the methods in AOAC(2000)[13].

1.3.2 测定指标

1.3.2.1 体外发酵参数

将终止发酵的体外瘤胃发酵液使用pH测定仪测定pH;参考Broderick等[17]的方法测定挥发性脂肪酸(VFA)含量;NH-N3、乳酸含量的测定方法同1.2.2.3。

1.3.2.2 体外降解率

体外消化试验结束后,将纤维滤袋用蒸馏水反复清洗3次后放入105 ℃烘干箱内烘至恒重并称重记录数值,并测定DM、CP、NDF、ADF含量,测定方法同1.2.2.2。参考栾嘉明等[18]的计算公式计算DM、CP、NDF、ADF体外降解率。

1.4 数据处理与分析

采用Excel 2007对数据预处理,采用SPSS 22.0进行单因素方差分析,采用Duncan氏法进行多重比较,P<0.05表示差异显著,P>0.05表示差异不显著。采用隶属函数法综合评价发酵POSMS的饲用价值。按照如下公式计算各指标的隶属函数值,并通过对各指标的隶属函数值累加求平均值计算出综合得分。
$ \begin{array}{c}U_{x(+)}=\left(X_{i j}-X_{i \min }\right) /\left(X_{i \max }-X_{i \min }\right) ; \\U_{x(-)}=1-U_{x(+)}。\end{array}$
式中:X为样品各指标测定值;Ux(+)为与饲用价值呈正相关的各指标(乳酸含量、总挥发性脂肪酸含量、干物质体外降解率、粗蛋白质体外降解率、中性洗涤纤维体外降解率、酸性洗涤纤维体外降解率)的隶属函数值;Ux(-)为与饲用价值呈负相关的各指标(pH、氨态氮含量)的隶属函数值;Xij为某样品某指标测定值;Ximax为某样品某指标最大测定值;Ximin为某样品某指标最小测定值。

2 结果与分析

2.1 不同微生物发酵POSMS的品质评价

2.1.1 感官评价

由表2可知,CON组、T1组以及T4组发酵POSMS的品质等级均为优良,其余组均为尚可。
表2 不同菌种发酵POSMS品质的感官评分

Table 2 Scores of sensory determination of quality of fermented POSMS of different strains

项目
Items		 组别Groups
CON T1 T2 T3 T4
气味Smell 10 11 9 9 11
质地Quality 4 4 4 4 4
色泽Color 2 2 2 2 2
得分Score 16 17 15 15 17
等级Grade 优良 优良 尚可 尚可 优良

2.1.2 营养价值分析

由3表可知,T1组和T4组的CP含量较CON组显著升高(P<0.05);T4组的EE含量显著低于其他组(P<0.05);与CON组相比,各试验组的NDF、ADF含量均显著降低(P<0.05);DM、Ash含量各组间无显著差异(P>0.05)。
表3 不同菌种发酵对POSMS营养价值的影响

Table 3 Effects of fermentation of different strains on nutritional value of POSMS %

项目
Items		 组别Groups SEM P值
P-value
CON T1 T2 T3 T4
干物质DM 37.75 37.62 39.32 38.43 38.53 0.235 0.090
粗蛋白质CP 4.08c 4.36ab 4.21bc 4.14c 4.41a 0.046 0.022
粗脂肪EE 5.43a 5.64a 5.51a 5.25a 3.84b 0.229 0.005
粗灰分Ash 11.56 11.10 12.33 10.67 10.77 0.234 0.087
中性洗涤纤维NDF 64.12a 60.76b 61.95b 61.20b 61.99b 0.408 0.013
酸性洗涤纤维ADF 52.48a 45.04c 45.34bc 45.94bc 47.58b 0.941 0.002

同行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)。下表同。

In the same row, 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 below.

2.1.3 发酵品质分析

由表4可知,与CON组相比,各试验组的pH均显著降低(P<0.05);T3组和T4组的氨态氮含量与CON组相比显著降低(P<0.05);各试验组的乙酸、丙酸以及乳酸含量与CON相比均有显著提高(P<0.05);T2组和T4组的纤维素酶活力显著高于其他组(P<0.05)。
表4 不同菌种发酵对POSMS发酵指标和纤维素酶活力的影响

Table 4 Effects of fermentation of different strains on fermentation indexes and CL activity of POSMS

项目
Items		 组别Groups SEM P值
P-value
CON T1 T2 T3 T4
pH 5.50a 4.55b 4.24c 4.33c 4.30c 0.157 <0.001
氨态氮NH3-N/(g/kg) 0.38b 0.39b 0.46a 0.26c 0.30c 0.024 0.001
乳酸Lactic acid/(g/kg) 11.20d 16.91b 14.14c 14.41c 19.65a 0.949 <0.001
乙酸Acetic acid/(g/kg) 2.39e 2.93b 2.61c 2.54d 3.83a 0.172 <0.001
丙酸Propionic acid/(g/kg) 2.12d 2.39b 2.27c 2.25c 2.55a 0.048 <0.001
纤维素酶CL/(U/g) 346.50d 427.24b 459.06a 390.87c 458.32a 14.326 <0.001

2.2 不同微生物发酵POSMS的饲用价值评价

2.2.1 体外发酵参数分析

由表5可知,各试验组的pH与CON组均无显著差异(P>0.05),但T4组与各单一菌组(T1组、T2组和T3组)间有显著差异(P<0.05);T4组的乳酸、总挥发性脂肪酸、丙酸含量均显著高于其他组(P<0.05),丁酸含量显著低于其他组(P<0.05);与CON组相比,各试验组的乙酸含量、乙酸/丙酸比值均显著下降(P<0.05),T4组的乙酸/丙酸比值最低。
表5 各组48 h体外发酵参数比较

Table 5 Comparison of in vitro fermentation parameters among groups

项目
Items		 组别Groups SEM P值
P-value
CON T1 T2 T3 T4
pH 6.47ab 6.49a 6.50a 6.48a 6.43b 0.008 0.036
氨态氮NH3-N/(mg/dL) 45.37 43.27 45.05 41.73 48.55 0.865 0.109
乳酸Lactic acid/(mg/dL) 1.18d 1.27b 1.23c 1.23c 1.32a 0.013 <0.001
总挥发性脂肪酸TVFA/(mmol/L) 60.52d 68.84b 65.98c 65.10c 75.43a 1.333 <0.001
乙酸Acetic acid/% 66.74a 65.44b 64.97b 65.12b 65.36b 0.210 0.023
丙酸Propionic acid/% 16.04c 17.33b 17.43b 17.44b 18.03a 0.186 <0.001
异丁酸Isobutyric acid/% 1.86 1.74 1.86 1.78 1.84 0.034 0.804
丁酸Butyrate acid/% 10.79b 11.13ab 11.36a 11.29ab 10.25c 0.124 0.003
异戊酸Isovaleric acid/% 2.60 2.46 2.49 2.44 2.68 0.052 0.586
戊酸Valeric acid/% 1.96 1.89 1.88 1.93 1.83 0.041 0.894
乙酸/丙酸Acetic acid/propionic acid 4.16a 3.78b 3.73bc 3.73bc 3.62c 0.052 <0.001

2.2.2 体外降解率分析

由表6可知,T4组的NDF和ADF体外降解率显著高于CON组、T2组和T3组(P<0.05);DM和CP体外降解率各组间差异不显著(P>0.05)。
表6 各组体外降解率比较

Table 6 Comparison of in vitro degradability among groups %

项目
Items		 组别Groups SEM P值
P-value
CON T1 T2 T3 T4
干物质体外降解率IVDMD 31.27 32.03 31.08 32.89 33.54 0.544 0.624
粗蛋白质体外降解率IVCPD 66.56 70.24 70.54 69.53 74.06 1.009 0.228
中性洗涤纤维体外降解率IVNDFD 43.31b 45.95ab 43.86b 44.70b 47.63a 0.514 0.022
酸性洗涤纤维体外降解率IVADFD 49.68b 51.40ab 50.29b 51.03b 53.35a 0.422 0.029

2.2.3 隶属函数分析

由表7可知,综合得分排名为T4组>T1组>T3组>T2组>CON组,以T4组的综合效果最好,说明复合菌发酵POSMS的饲用价值最高。
表7 不同菌种发酵的POSMS的隶属函数值、综合得分及排名

Table 7 Membership function value, comprehensive score and ranking of POSMS fermented by different strains

项目
Items		 组别Groups
CON T1 T2 T3 T4
隶属函数值Membership function value
pH 0.400 0.100 0.000 0.200 1.000
氨态氮NH3-N 0.465 0.774 0.513 1.000 0.000
乳酸Lactic acid 0.000 0.711 0.400 0.418 1.000
总挥发性脂肪酸TVFA 0.000 0.558 0.366 0.307 1.000
干物质体外降解率IVDMD 0.076 0.386 0.000 0.734 1.000
粗蛋白质体外降解率IVCPD 0.000 0.491 0.531 0.397 1.000
中性洗涤纤维体外降解率IVNDFD 0.000 0.611 0.127 0.320 1.000
酸性洗涤纤维体外降解率IVADFD 0.000 0.470 0.165 0.368 1.000
综合得分Comprehensive score 0.118 0.513 0.263 0.468 0.875
排名Ranking 5 2 4 3 1

3 讨论

3.1 微生物发酵对POSMS营养价值的影响

发酵饲料的营养价值能够直接反映发酵饲料品质的优劣。NDF和ADF含量是衡量纤维质量的有效参数,其中NDF含量与动物采食量呈负相关,ADF含量则反映粗饲料的饲喂价值,其含量的降低表明饲料利用率的提高[19-20]。与CON组相比,添加单一菌和复合菌均可以使POSMS中的NDF和ADF含量显著下降,这可能是因为微生物发酵过程中产生了多种水解酶[21],对POSMS中的纤维成分进行了分解,从而使NDF和ADF的含量下降。蛋白质是饲料中的重要成分之一,提高蛋白质含量可以提高饲料的饲用价值。本试验结果表明,添加乳酸菌和复合菌的组CP含量显著提高,这可能是微生物在发酵时产生了菌体蛋白,进而导致CP含量的增加。也有研究表明,菌糠中含有丰富的多糖类物质,因此在菌糠中CP比例增加的原因还可能是菌糠在发酵时,其中的微生物优先利用发酵底物中的糖类等物质来提供能量,减少了发酵底物总量,从而导致发酵底物中CP含量的表观值增加[22]。

3.2 微生物发酵对POSMS发酵品质的影响

感官评价可以快速、直观地反映饲料的发酵品质[23]。CON组、添加乳酸菌的T1组以及添加复合菌的T4组均为优良等级,且以T1组和T4组评分最高,可能是由于乳酸菌产生的乳酸使发酵POSMS产生了独特的芳香酸味,可以改善POSMS的适口性并刺激动物的食欲[24]。
发酵饲料的生产过程中,pH、乳酸、氨态氮、乙酸、丙酸和丁酸对发酵品质的影响至关重要。这些因素相互作用,共同决定了饲料的发酵品质[25]。pH是影响发酵品质的重要因素之一。pH过高或过低都会抑制有益菌的活动,导致乳酸产生不足,从而影响发酵品质。因此合适的pH是保证饲料发酵品质的关键之一。本试验结果表明,与单一菌发酵相比,复合菌发酵POSMS更能提高有机酸的含量,使pH下降,可能是由于复合菌发酵POSMS时各菌种间存在相互强化或竞争关系,使有机酸含量增加[26]。在本试验中,添加复合菌发酵POSMS使得乳酸、乙酸、丙酸含量均显著提升。乳酸在有机酸中酸度最高,是导致pH降低的主要因素,当发酵产物的pH降低到一定的范围内则会抑制霉菌的生长繁殖,从而延长发酵饲料的保存时间,提高发酵饲料的品质。
氨态氮是蛋白质分解的产物,也是评判发酵饲料品质的重要指标之一[27]。但当氨态氮含量过高时,会导致饲料味道过苦,影响适口性,甚至对动物健康造成危害。在本试验中,添加枯草芽孢杆菌和复合菌发酵后的POSMS氨态氮浓度显著低于其他组,说明枯草芽孢杆菌和复合菌的添加提升了蛋白质的利用率。
纤维素酶作为一种由真菌发酵生产的复合酶,可降解纤维素生成葡萄糖,为瘤胃微生物提供速效碳源,促进营养物质的吸收[28]。在本试验中,添加酵母菌和复合菌发酵后的POSMS纤维素酶活力与其他组相比显著上升。此外,纤维素酶的活力也与温度、pH、微生物等因素相关[29],其增加的具体原因还有待进一步研究。

3.3 添加微生物发酵POSMS的肉牛饲粮的体外发酵参数

本试验中,各组瘤胃液pH均在正常范围[30]。与添加各单一菌相比,添加复合菌时pH显著降低。氨态氮的含量反映了瘤胃发酵过程中底物蛋白质的降解程度[31],各组的氨态氮含量没有显著差异,数值均处于正常水平(5~30 mg/dL[18])。乳酸是瘤胃内碳水化合物代谢的中间产物之一,通常情况下,瘤胃中乳酸含量可以反映瘤胃发酵水平。在本试验中,各组乳酸含量均在正常范围内[32]。以上结果说明在肉牛饲粮中添加微生物发酵POSMS不会影响瘤胃的正常发酵。
挥发性脂肪酸是反刍动物主要的能量来源,其中乙酸和丙酸在瘤胃中含量较高且影响瘤胃发酵类型,乙酸在反刍动物体内的主要作用是合成乳脂,丙酸参与体脂和乳糖的合成,因此乙酸/丙酸比值可以反映反刍动物能量利用的情况[33]。在本试验中,添加复合菌发酵POSMS的组的总挥发性脂肪酸和丙酸含量均显著高于其他组,丙酸含量的增加可能表明复合菌在发酵过程中微生物有更高的活性,对提高发酵效率和品质具有积极作用。添加微生物发酵POSMS的各组乙酸含量与对照组相比均显著降低。各组乙酸/丙酸比值均大于3.5,均为乙酸型发酵。与添加单一菌发酵POSMS相比,添加复合菌发酵POSMS显著降低了乙酸/丙酸比值,但不改变其发酵类型。

3.4 添加微生物发酵POSMS的肉牛饲粮的体外降解率

在瘤胃发酵过程中,干物质与营养物质降解率是评价饲粮饲用价值的重要因素,也反映了反刍动物对饲粮的消化能力[34]。在本试验中,各组DM和CP体外降解率无显著差异,但添加复合菌发酵POSMS组NDF和ADF体外降解率显著高于对照组和添加单一菌发酵POSMS组,表明复合菌比单一菌能更有效降解纤维素,与刘蓓一等[35]的研究结果相似。

3.5 不同微生物发酵POSMS饲用价值的隶属函数分析

隶属函数法作为一种较为常用的综合评价方法,可以对多个相关指标同时进行综合、全面地评价,通过隶属函数法求得多个相关指标的隶属函数值,并对相关指标的隶属函数值累加求平均值得到综合得分,综合得分越高,代表综合性能越好[36]。从综合得分来看,添加单一菌或复合菌发酵POSMS的组均优于对照组,其中添加复合菌发酵POSMS的综合得分最高,说明其饲用价值最高。

4 结论

本试验结果表明,利用微生物发酵POSMS在不同程度上提高了营养物质的利用率,改善了发酵品质,且复合菌的效果优于单一菌。在肉牛饲粮中添加微生物发酵POSMS提高了NDF和ADF体外降解率,且复合菌发酵POSMS较单一菌发酵POSMS的效果更优。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
张洁. 现阶段我国节粮型畜牧业发展概况[J]. 畜牧兽医科技信息, 2024(7):15-17.

ZHANG J. Overview of the development of food-saving animal husbandry in China at the present stage[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2024(7):15-17. (in Chinese)

[2]
王玖玖. 香菇菌糠寡糖提取的研究[D]. 硕士学位论文. 昆明: 昆明理工大学, 2017.

WANG J J. Study on extraction of oligosaccharides from Lentinus bran[D]. Master's Thesis. Kunming: Kunming University of Science and Technology, 2017. (in Chinese)

[3]
WANG X Y, WANG W J, WANG L M, et al. Lentinan modulates intestinal microbiota and enhances barrier integrity in a piglet model challenged with lipopolysaccharide[J]. Food & Function, 2019, 10(1):479-489.

[4]
中国食用菌协会. 2022年度全国食用菌统计调查结果分析[J]. 中国食用菌, 2024, 43(1):118-126.

China Edible Fungi Association. Analysis of the results of the 2022 national edible fungi statistical survey[J]. Edible Fungi of China, 2024, 43(1):118-126. (in Chinese)

[5]
王勤礼, 闫芳, 韩玉琦, 等. 姬菇菌糠发酵过程中理化指标变化研究[J]. 食用菌, 2020, 42(2):14-16.

WANG Q L, YAN F, HAN Y Q, et al. Study on the changes of physicochemical indexes during the fermentation process of Agaricus blazei spent mushroom substrate[J]. Edible Fungi, 2020, 42(2):14-16. (in Chinese)

[6]
张安荣. 菌酶协同发酵杏鲍菇菌糠工艺优化及其营养价值评定[D]. 硕士学位论文. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2021.

ZHANG A R. Optimization of fermentation technology and nutritional value of spent mushroom substrates of Pleurotus eryngii by solid-state bacterium-enzyme cofermentation[D]. Master's Thesis. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2021. (in Chinese)

[7]
刘敏, 崔金娜, 刘占英. 乳酸菌生物发酵饲料研究进展[J]. 中国饲料, 2023(9):131-135.

LIU M, CUI J N, LIU Z Y. Research progress of lactic acid bacteria biological fermentation feed[J]. China Feed, 2023(9):131-135. (in Chinese)

[8]
袁园, 葛莹, 钟佳祎, 等. 酵母菌在动物饲料营养学中的研究进展[J]. 饲料博览, 2018(4):19-22.

YUAN Y, GE Y, ZHONG J Y, et al. Research progress of Sacharomyces in animal feed nutrition[J]. Feed Review, 2018(4):19-22. (in Chinese)

[9]
王风青, 陈燕梅, 杨灿, 等. 食用菌菌糠饲用价值评估及其在反刍动物养殖中的应用[J]. 饲料研究, 2023, 46(23):163-167.

WANG F Q, CHEN Y M, YANG C, et al. Evaluation of feeding value of edible fungus bran and its application in ruminant breeding[J]. Feed Research, 2023, 46(23):163-167. (in Chinese)

[10]
王乐乐, 秦荣艳, 阿不夏合满·穆巴拉克, 等. 菌酶协同发酵香菇菌糠复合制剂的筛选研究[J]. 饲料研究, 2022, 45(17):58-63.

WANG L L, QIN R Y, ABUSHIMAN M, et al. Study on screening of compound preparation of Lentinus edoides chaff fermented by bacterial enzyme[J]. Feed Research, 2022, 45(17):58-63. (in Chinese)

[11]
成思源, 马涛, 杨东, 等. 发酵饲料在反刍动物中的应用技术研究进展[J]. 家畜生态学报, 2023, 44(12):1-7.

CHENG S Y, MA T, YANG D, et al. Advances in the application technology of fermented feed in ruminants[J]. Acta Ecologae Animalis Domastici, 2023, 44(12):1-7. (in Chinese)

DOI

[12]
李旭业, 董扬, 尤海洋, 等. 不同感官分级方法对全株玉米青贮饲料评价比较[J]. 现代畜牧科技, 2017(3):1-3.

LI X Y, DONG Y, YOU H Y, et al. Comparison of different sensory grading methods for whole plant maize silage evaluation[J]. Modern Animal Husbandry Science & Technology, 2017(3):1-3. (in Chinese)

[13]
AOAC. Official methods of analysis of the AOAC International[S]. 17th ed, Washington,D.C.: Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 2000.

[14]
冯宗慈, 高民. 通过比色测定瘤胃液氨氮含量方法的改进[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2010, 31(6/7):37.

FENG Z C, GAO M, Improvement of the method for determination of ammonia-nitrogen content in rumen fluid by colorimetry[J]. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2010, 31(6/7):37. (in Chinese)

[15]
杨平平, 甄玉国, 郑艳秋, 等. 优化对羟基联苯法定量测定瘤胃液中乳酸含量[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2013, 34(2):1-2.

YANG P P, ZHEN Y G, ZHENG Y Q, et al. Optimization on determination of lactic acid content in rumen fluid by p-hydroxybiphenol colorimetry[J]. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2013, 34(2):1-2. (in Chinese)

[16]
MENKE K H, STEINGASS H. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid[J]. Animal Research and Development, 1988, 28(5):47-55.

[17]
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.

[18]
栾嘉明, 杨东旭, 冯鑫, 等. 中精粗比饲粮条件下中链脂肪酸对肉牛体外瘤胃发酵的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2022, 34(5):3032-3045.

DOI

LUAN J M, YANG D X, FENG X, et al. Effects of medium chain fatty acids on rumen fermentation in vitro of beef cattle fed diet with medium concentrate to forage ratio[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2022, 34(5):3032-3045. (in Chinese)

[19]
宋双, 张怡. 芦苇混合青贮效果初步研究[J]. 宁夏农林科技, 2020, 61(8):15-17.

SONG S, ZHANG Y. Preliminary study on the efficiency of mixed silage of reed[J]. Ningxia Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Science and Technology, 2020, 61(8):15-17. (in Chinese)

[20]
张洋. 生孢噬纤维菌、枯草芽孢杆菌、产朊假丝酵母菌发酵稻草秸秆的条件与特性研究[D]. 硕士学位论文. 长沙: 湖南农业大学, 2008.

ZHANG Y. Study on the fermented conditions and characteristics of sporocyto phaga,Bacillus subtili,candida utilis on straw stalk[D]. Master's Thesis. Changsha: Hunan Agricultural University, 2008. (in Chinese)

[21]
KUMAR A K, SHARMA S. Recent updates on different methods of pretreatment of lignocellulosic feedstocks:a review[J]. Bioresources and Bioprocessing, 2017, 4(1):7.

[22]
冯辽辽, 马一翔, 刘广平, 等. 北虫草菌糠中多糖的提取及成分测定[J]. 延安大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 42(3):29-34.

FENG L L, MA Y X, LIU G P, et al. Extraction and composition determination of polysaccharides from spent mushroom substrate of Cordyceps sinensis[J]. Journal of Yanan University (Natural Science Edition), 2023, 42(3):29-34. (in Chinese)

[23]
刘娜, 王俊, 屠焰, 等. 玉米青贮饲料质量评定及其营养成分快速检测方法的建立[J]. 家畜生态学报, 2019, 40(10):1-7.

LIU N, WANG J, TU Y, et al. The quality evaluation and the development of rapid detection method for nutrient components of corn silage[J]. Acta Ecologae Animalis Domastici, 2019, 40(10):1-7. (in Chinese)

[24]
蒋润瑶, 武伟成, 陈东, 等. 杏鲍菇菌糠与植物乳杆菌对全株水稻青贮品质和体外瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J]. 饲料研究, 2024, 47(21):109-114.

JIANG R Y, WU W C, CHEN D, et al. Effects of Pleurocenti eryngii bran and Lactobacillus plantarum on whole rice silage quality and rumen fermentation characteristics in vitro[J]. Feed Research, 2024, 47(21):109-114. (in Chinese)

[25]
OKOYE C O, WANG Y L, GAO L, et al. The performance of lactic acid bacteria in silage production:a review of modern biotechnology for silage improvement[J]. Microbiological Research, 2023,266:127212.

[26]
杨奕凡, 高雁, 刘亚男, 等. 单一菌与复合菌发酵甘草渣产有机酸能力比较[J]. 中国饲料, 2024(11):167-172.

YANG Y F, GAO Y, LIU Y N, et al. Comparison of organic acid production capacity of licorice residues fermented by single and complex bacteria[J]. China Feed, 2024(11):167-172. (in Chinese)

[27]
CAO Y, CAI Y, TAKAHASHI T, et al. Effect of lactic acid bacteria inoculant and beet pulp addition on fermentation characteristics and in vitro ruminal digestion of vegetable residue silage[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2011, 94(8):3902-3912.

[28]
李秀丽, 石英, 庞纪彩, 等. 胍基乙酸和酿酒酵母菌与纤维素酶复合物对肉羊生长性能、消化代谢、屠宰性能及肉品质的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2024, 36(7):4428-4446.

DOI

LI X L, SHI Y, PANG J C, et al. Effects of guanidine acetic acid,Saccharomyces cerevisiae and cellulase complex on growth performance,digestion and metabolism,slaughter performance and meat quality of mutton sheep[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024, 36(7):4428-4446. (in Chinese)

[29]
胡爽. 青贮饲料中产纤维素酶细菌的筛选、发酵和产酶条件优化及酶学性质初探[D]. 硕士学位论文. 石河子: 石河子大学, 2008.

HU S. The preliminary study on the isolation and identification of cellulose-producing bacteria from silage,optimization of cultural conditions and enzyme-producing conditions and enzyme property[D]. Master's Thesis. Shihezi: Shihezi University, 2008. (in Chinese)

[30]
王加启. 反刍动物营养学研究方法[M]. 北京: 现代教育出版社, 2011.

WANG J Q. Research methods in ruminant nutrition[M]. Beijing: Modern Education Press, 2011. (in Chinese)

[31]
ZHENG Y H, ZHAO Y Y, XUE S L, et al. Feeding value assessment of substituting cassava (Manihot esculenta) residue for concentrate of dairy cows using an in vitro gas test[J]. Animals, 2021, 11(2):307.

[32]
张琪, 欧阳克蕙, 瞿明仁, 等. 反刍动物瘤胃内乳酸代谢的研究进展[J]. 饲料研究, 2013(10):24-28.

ZHANG Q, OU YANG K H, QU M R, et al. Progress of lactate metabolism in the rumen of ruminants[J]. Feed Research, 2013(10):24-28. (in Chinese)

[33]
杨双鸣, 马煜斌, 田梅, 等. 体外产气法评价菌酶协同发酵对花棒瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023, 35(11):7472-7480.

DOI

YANG S M, MA Y B, TIAN M, et al. Evaluation of effects of cooperative fermentation by bacteria and enzymes on rumen fermentation characteristics of Hedysarum scopariums by in vitro gas production method[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2023, 35(11):7472-7480. (in Chinese)

[34]
ZHANG S J, CHAUDHRY A S, RAMDANI D, et al. Chemical composition and in vitro fermentation characteristics of high sugar forage sorghum as an alternative to forage maize for silage making in Tarim basin,China[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2016, 15(1):175-182.

[35]
刘蓓一, 赵冉冉, 田吉鹏, 等. 菌酶协同发酵对奶牛发酵全价混合日粮营养成分、发酵品质、体外消化率的影响[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2024, 40(6):1038-1044.

LIU B Y, ZHAO R R, TIAN J P, et al. Effects of cooperative fermentation by bacteria and enzymes on nutrient composition,fermentation quality and in vitro digestibility of fermented total mixed rations in dairy cows[J]. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 40(6):1038-1044. (in Chinese)

[36]
王千军. 隶属函数法对饲用燕麦品种生产性能的综合评价[J]. 畜牧产业, 2023(4):63-66.

WANG Q J. Comprehensive evaluation of production performance of forage oat varieties by the affiliation function method[J]. Animal Agriculture, 2023(4):63-66. (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.