Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2025 , Vol. 37 >Issue 10: 6904 - 6915

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2025.562

RESEARCH PAPER

Effects of Mixed Silages of Sweet Sorghum and Licorice Stems and Leaves on Growth Performance, Serum Immune Indices, Slaughter Performance and Meat Quality of Karakul Sheep

  • WANG Jiao , 1, 2 ,
  • LU Shunping 2, 3 ,
  • ZHAO Mingxin 2, 3 ,
  • WU Qihui 2, 3 ,
  • WAN Jie 2, 3 ,
  • CHEN Xuewen 1, 2 ,
  • LU Dong 2, 3 ,
  • ZHANG Sujiang , 2, 3, *
Expand
  • 1 College of Life Science and Technology, Tarim University, Aral 843300, China
  • 2 Key Laboratory of Livestock and Grass Resources Utilization around Tarim, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (Co-Construction by Ministries and Provinces), Aral 843300, China
  • 3 Tarim Key Laboratory of Animal Husbandry Science and Technology, Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, College of Animal Science and Technology, Tarim University, Aral 843300, China
*professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2025-03-06

  Online published: 2025-10-15

Fold

Abstract

This experiment was conducted to study the effects of mixed silages of sweet sorghum and licorice stems and leaves on growth performance, serum immune indices, slaughter performance and meat quality of Karakul sheep. Fifty healthy 3-month-old Karakul sheep with similar body weight of (20.46±0.87) kg were selected and randomly divided into 5 groups, with 10 sheep in each group (half male and half female). Sheep in the five groups were fed total mixed rations prepared from mixed silages with sweet sorghum to licorice stems and leaves ratio of 100∶0 (100%SS group), 75∶25 (75%SS group), 50∶50 (50%SS group), 25∶75 (25%SS group), and 0∶100 (0%SS group) (based on dry matter), respectively, and the forage to concentrate ratio was 50∶50. The pre-test period was 15 days and the formal test period was 60 days. The results showed as follows: 1) the average daily gain in 50%SS and 25%SS groups was significantly higher than that in 100%SS and 75%SS groups (P<0.05), and the feed to gain ratio in 25%SS group was significantly lower than that in 100%SS and 75%SS groups (P<0.05). 2) The contents of serum immunoglobulin A, immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M in 25%SS group were significantly higher than those in 100%SS and 75%SS groups (P<0.05). With the increase of proportion of licorice stems and leaves in mixed silage, the contents of serum interleukin-1β, interleukin-2 and interleukin-4 were linearly increased (P<0.05). 3) The live weight before slaughter and GR value in 50%SS, 25%SS and 0%SS groups were significantly higher than those in 100%SS group (P<0.05), and the carcass weight and dressing percentage in 25%SS group were significantly higher than those in 100%SS, 50%SS and 0%SS groups (P<0.05). 4) There was no significant difference in pH45 min in longissimus dorsi among all groups (P>0.05); with the increase of proportion of licorice stems and leaves in mixed silage, the pH24 h in longissimus dorsi showed a linear increase (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the color and cooking loss of longissimus dorsi among all groups (P>0.05). The drip loss and shear force of longissimus dorsi in 100%SS group were significantly higher than those in 50%SS and 25%SS groups (P<0.05). In conclusion, the mixed silage with appropriate ratio of sweet sorghum to licorice stems and leaves can improve the growth performance and slaughter performance of Karakul sheep, as well as enhance their immune function and meat quality. Based on all the indicators, it is advisable to add sweet sorghum and licorice stems and leaves in a ratio of 50∶50 and 25∶75 for mixed silage prepared to the diet.

Key words： sweet sorghum; licorice stems and leaves; Karakul sheep; growth performance; serum immune indices; slaughter performance; meat quality

Cite this article

WANG Jiao , LU Shunping , ZHAO Mingxin , WU Qihui , WAN Jie , CHEN Xuewen , LU Dong , ZHANG Sujiang . Effects of Mixed Silages of Sweet Sorghum and Licorice Stems and Leaves on Growth Performance, Serum Immune Indices, Slaughter Performance and Meat Quality of Karakul Sheep[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2025 , 37(10) : 6904 -6915 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2025.562

养羊业是我国新疆南疆地区的传统养殖业,正逐步成为当地畜牧业的中流砥柱,释放出巨大的产业潜力与经济活力。粗饲料是推动养羊业发展不可或缺的关键物质基础,但南疆地区气候干旱少雨,土壤盐碱化程度十分严重[1],这一恶劣的自然环境极大地限制了植被的生长与繁衍,导致粗饲料资源严重短缺,给当地养羊业的发展带来了极大的阻碍。因此,大力开发高产优质、抗逆性强的饲草资源,对缓解当前粗饲料资源短缺困境、提升养羊业经济效益和产业竞争力意义重大。
甜高粱(Sorghum bicolor)属一年生禾本科植物,具备喜光热、水分利用率高、抗逆性强、光合效率高、生物产量大以及糖分含量高等显著优势,特别适宜在干旱、半干旱地区种植[2]。青贮是甜高粱饲料的主要利用形式,甜高粱的糖分对青贮发酵十分有益,可以加速青贮过程中乳酸的积累进而改善青贮品质,容易成功制作青贮,但粗蛋白质(CP)含量偏低、粗纤维(CF)含量偏高[3-4]。甘草(Glycyrrhiza uralensis)属多年生豆科植物,具有喜光耐旱、抗寒抗盐碱等优良特性[5]。甘草茎叶CP和粗脂肪(EE)含量高,CF含量较低,且含有多种氨基酸、黄酮和香豆素类等成分,具有独特的营养和药理双重价值[6-7]。南疆甘草资源丰富,但甘草茎叶利用方式粗放,未得到科学合理开发。由于甘草茎叶蛋白质丰富,糖分含量偏低,青贮过程蛋白质分解严重,不易青贮[8]。从营养构成的角度来看,禾本科牧草与豆科牧草混贮要比单一牧草青贮的能量和蛋白质组成更为合理,可以为瘤胃微生物提供同步化的能量和蛋白质营养,提高氮的利用效率,促进瘤胃微生物的生长,从而提高饲料消化率。研究表明,红三叶草和红豆草的代谢产物缩合单宁和多酚氧化物可与植物蛋白质形成稳定的复合物,使植物蛋白质免遭瘤胃微生物的降解,减少瘤胃氨态氮(NH3-N)浓度,增加过瘤胃蛋白质的含量,从而提高混贮氮的利用率[9]。Liu等[10]研究证实,通过调整玉米与苜蓿的混合比例,可以提高青贮的发酵质量。在甜高粱与苜蓿混贮中,甜高粱占比40%和20%时能获得高质量的混合青贮,并可以改善卡拉库尔羊的生长性能、营养物质消化率、胴体性状和肉品质[11]。此外,通过前期体外试验发现,适当比例的甜高粱与甘草茎叶混合青贮能有效提高发酵品质和瘤胃降解率[12]。据此可推断甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮可以克服各自缺点,实现营养互补,从而提高营养价值,这为实现南疆养羊业粗饲料的优质化供给提供了一条新的思路。
因此,本研究旨在研究不同比例甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊生长性能、血清免疫指标、屠宰性能和肉品质的影响,为开发种植甜高粱和有效利用南疆甘草饲料资源,缓解粗饲料资源匮乏,助力南疆养羊业持续发展提供科学依据。

1 材料与方法

1.1 青贮饲料的制备

甜高粱于2023年4月种植在新疆阿拉尔市托喀依乡科克库勒村八队,经过间苗定苗、中耕除草、合理施肥灌溉和防治病虫害等田间管理,于当年9月底乳熟期收获。甘草茎叶购买于阿拉尔市某公司,与甜高粱同一时间收割。收获的甜高粱和甘草茎叶使用秸秆揉丝机(9RSJ-6,乐陵市合一机械设备有限公司)将其粉碎成2~3 cm的粒径,按照甜高粱与甘草茎叶比分别为100∶0(100%SS组)、75∶25(75%SS组)、50∶50(50%SS组)、25∶75(25%SS组)及0∶100(0%SS组)混合均匀[以干物质(DM)计],使用圆草捆打捆包膜一体机(9YDB-0.5,乐陵市合一机械设备有限公司)制作成5种不同比例的混合青贮。所有裹包青贮在室温下保存60 d,直至饲喂。

1.2 试验设计和饲粮

本研究的试验动物按照《实验动物 动物实验通用要求》(GB/T 35823—2018)[13]进行,相关动物试验经塔里木大学科技伦理委员会批准(批准编号:No. 2023022),在塔里木大学动物科学与技术学院试验站进行。
试验选取体重[(20.46±0.87) kg]相近、健康的3月龄卡拉库尔羊50只,随机分为5个组,每组10只羊(公母各占1/2)。5组卡拉库尔羊饲喂精粗比为50∶50的全混合日粮(TMR),并分别添加不同比例甜高粱与甘草茎叶制成的混合青贮。试验饲粮参考《肉羊营养需要量》(NY/T 816—2021)[14],其组成及营养水平见表1。预试期15 d,正试期60 d。
表1 试验饲粮组成及营养水平(干物质基础)

Table 1 Composition and nutrient levels of experimental diets (DM basis) %

项目
Items		 组别Groups
100%SS 75%SS 50%SS 25%SS 0%SS
原料Ingredients
混合青贮Mixed silage 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
小麦秸秆Wheat straw 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00
玉米Corn 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00
麸皮Wheat bran 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.00
豆粕Soybean meal 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
石粉Limestone 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
氯化钠NaCl 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70
碳酸氢钠NaHCO3 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
预混料Premix1) 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
合计Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
营养水平Nutrient levels
代谢能ME/(MJ/kg)2) 12.53 12.58 12.79 12.96 13.05
粗蛋白质CP 13.38 14.06 14.81 15.65 16.05
中性洗涤纤维NDF 62.34 58.62 56.40 55.41 53.19
酸性洗涤纤维ADF 20.13 19.79 18.33 17.07 16.42
粗脂肪EE 3.51 4.18 4.23 4.31 4.35
粗灰分Ash 11.36 13.17 13.09 14.28 14.33
钙Ca 1.11 1.16 1.22 1.26 1.29
磷P 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45

1)每千克预混料含有 One kilogram of the premix contained the following:VA 150 000 IU,VD3 40 000 IU,VE 750 IU,Se 10 mg,I 10 mg,Cu 200~700 mg,Fe 1 000 mg,Mn 200 mg,Zn 1 000~3 000 mg,Ca 80~200 g,NaCl 80~240 g。2)代谢能为计算值,其余为实测值。代谢能参照《中国饲料成分及营养价值表(2022年第33版)》[15]和《肉羊营养需要量》(NY/T 816—2021)[14]计算,代谢能=0.82×(总可消化养分/4.4)。ME was a calculated value, while the others were measured values. ME was calculated according to Tables of Feed Composition and Nutritive Values in China (33rd edition, 2022)[15] and Nutrient Requirements of Meat-Type Sheep and Goat (NY/T 816—2021)[14], and ME=0.82×(TDN/4.4).

1.3 饲养管理

试验前对羊舍进行打扫消毒,羊舍保持自然通风和光照,所有试验羊经过统一编号并做防疫处理后,被安置在单独的饲养栏内,栏内配有喂料槽和水桶。在整个试验过程中,试验羊可以自由地获取清洁水和相应的试验饲粮。试验期间,定期对羊舍进行消毒,保持羊舍干净整洁。每日09:00和19:00各饲喂1次,每次饲喂前对前1次剩料进行称重,并根据10%的剩料量调整饲粮供给量。

1.4 测定指标及方法

1.4.1 饲粮营养水平

每周采集TMR样品500 g,用于营养成分的测定。DM、CP、EE、粗灰分(Ash)、钙(Ca)和磷(P)含量分别参照GB/T 6435—2014、GB/T 6432—2018、GB/T 6433—2006、GB/T 6438—2007、GB/T 6436—2018和GB/T 6437—2018中的方法进行测定;中性洗涤纤维(NDF)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)含量参照Van Soest等[16]的方法进行测定。

1.4.2 生长性能

分别于正试期第1天和第60天晨饲前对所有试验羊进行称重,记为初始体重(IBW)和终末体重(FBW),用以计算平均日增重(ADG);根据剩料量计算每日的采食量,并换算成平均干物质采食量(ADMI);根据ADMI和ADG计算料重比(F/G)。计算公式如下:

ADG=(FBW-IBW)/试验天数;

ADMI=总干物质采食量/试验天数;

F/G=ADMI/ADG。

1.4.3 血清免疫指标

正试期第60天晨饲前,试验羊通过颈静脉进行采血,用无抗凝采血管采集5 mL血液,倾斜静置20 min后,1 000×g离心15 min,吸取离心后的上清液,用于血清免疫指标的测定。血清免疫球蛋白A(IgA)、免疫球蛋白G(IgG)和免疫球蛋白M(IgM)、白细胞介素-1β(IL-1β)、白细胞介素-2(IL-2)、白细胞介素-4(IL-4)和肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)含量采用试剂盒(上海酶联生物科技有限公司)进行测定,操作步骤按照试剂盒说明书进行。

1.4.4 屠宰性能

饲养试验结束后,每组分别选取3只公羊和3只母羊(所选试验羊的生长水平均贴近所在组羊群的平均生长水平)进行屠宰。屠宰试验羊禁食24 h、禁水2 h,称重后颈动脉放血致死,随后进行屠宰性能的测定。
胴体重:屠宰后去皮毛、头、蹄及内脏,保留肾脏及肾脂,静置30 min后称重。屠宰率:胴体重与宰前活重的百分比。眼肌面积:第12~13肋骨间背最长肌的横截面积。GR值:第12~13对肋骨、距脊背中线11 cm处的肉组织厚度。

1.4.5 肉品质

屠宰后采集背最长肌样品200 g,测定pH、肉色、剪切力、滴水损失和蒸煮损失。
pH的测定:在屠宰后45 min时,使用pH计(SevenDirect SD20,METTLER TOLEDO,瑞士)测量胴体初pH,记为pH45 min;静止排酸24 h后测量胴体终pH,记为pH24 h。
肉色的测定:使用肉色测定仪(OPTO-STAR,MATTHAUS,德国)对肉色进行测定,每个样品选取3个位置,重复测定后取平均值。
剪切力的测定:将肌肉样本放置于密封袋中,在75 ℃的水浴中加热45 min,然后取出冷却至室温,随后将肉块切成3 cm×1 cm×1 cm的条状,使用数显式肌肉嫩度仪(C-LM3B,东北农业大学工程学院)对剪切力进行测定。
滴水损失的测定:将肌肉样品称重后,倒挂于一次性透明水杯中,于0~4 ℃冰箱中静置24 h后进行称重。滴水损失计算公式如下:
滴水损失(%)=[(滴水前重-滴水后重)/滴水前重]×100。
蒸煮损失的测定:称取30~50 g的肌肉样品,利用密封袋密封后以85 ℃的温度在水浴锅中煮40 min,取出后用滤纸吸干表面水分。蒸煮损失计算公式如下:
蒸煮损失(%)=[(蒸煮前重-蒸煮后重)/蒸煮前重]×100。

1.5 数据统计分析

试验数据采用Excel 2019进行整理,并采用SPSS 26.0软件进行单因素方差分析(one-way ANOVA)和Duncan氏多重比较,结果以平均值和均值标准误(SEM)表示,P<0.05为差异显著。同时,对甜高粱与甘草茎叶不同混贮比例与生长性能、血清免疫指标、屠宰性能和肉品质进行线性(linear)和二次(quadratic)回归分析。

2 结果

2.1 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊生长性能的影响

由表2可知,各组间卡拉库尔羊IBW差异不显著(P>0.05)。随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,卡拉库尔羊FBW和ADG呈现先升高后降低的二次变化趋势(P<0.05),其中25%SS组FBW显著高于100%SS组和75%SS组(P<0.05),50%SS组和25%SS组ADG显著高于100%SS组和75%SS组(P<0.05)。各组间ADMI无显著差异(P>0.05)。随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,F/G呈现先降低后升高的二次变化趋势(P<0.05),其中25%SS组F/G最低,显著低于100%SS组和75%SS组(P<0.05)。
表2 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊生长性能的影响

Table 2 Effects of mixed silages of sweet sorghum and licorice stems and leaves on growth performance of Karakul sheep

项目
Items		 组别Groups 均值
标准误
SEM		 P值P-value
100%SS 75%SS 50%SS 25%SS 0%SS 处理
Treatment		 线性
Linear		 二次
Quadratic
初始体重IBW/kg 20.47 20.65 20.14 20.23 20.83 0.386 0.371 0.725 0.167
终末体重FBW/kg 29.49c 31.16b 32.02ab 33.07a 32.33ab 0.783 0.001 <0.001 0.031
平均干物质采食量
ADMI/(g/d)		 924.78 969.60 1 000.64 1 018.94 969.73 33.713 0.077 0.071 0.029
平均日增重
ADG/(g/d)		 150.33d 175.17c 198.08ab 213.92a 191.75bc 10.065 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
料重比F/G 6.24a 5.58ab 5.08bc 4.81c 5.19bc 0.344 0.002 0.001 0.015

同行数据肩标相同字母或无字母表示差异不显著(P>0.05),不同字母表示差异显著(P<0.05)。下表同。

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

2.2 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊血清免疫指标的影响

由表3可知,各组间卡拉库尔羊血清IL-2和TNF-α含量无显著差异(P>0.05)。25%SS组和0%SS组血清IgA和IgG含量显著高于100%SS组和75%SS组(P<0.05)。随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,血清IgM含量呈现先升高后降低的二次变化趋势(P<0.05),25%SS组血清IgM含量显著高于其他4组(P<0.05)。与100%SS组和75%SS组相比,25%SS组血清IL-1β含量显著提高(P<0.05),0%SS组血清IL-4含量显著提高(P<0.05)。
表3 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊血清免疫指标的影响

Table 3 Effects of mixed silages of sweet sorghum and licorice stems and leaves on serum immune indices of Karakul sheep

项目
Items		 组别Groups 均值
标准误
SEM		 P值P-value
100%SS 75%SS 50%SS 25%SS 0%SS 处理
Treatment		 线性
Linear		 二次
Quadratic
免疫球蛋白A
IgA/(μg/mL)		 22.53b 22.68b 23.84b 28.53a 26.72a 1.249 0.002 <0.001 0.062
免疫球蛋白G
IgG/(μg/mL)		 703.43b 778.92b 869.12ab 975.00a 1 001.47a 73.107 0.010 0.001 0.903
免疫球蛋白M
IgM/(μg/mL)		 11.01c 11.81bc 12.74bc 16.67a 13.62b 0.835 <0.001 <0.001 0.004
白细胞介素-1β
IL-1β/(ng/L)		 30.67c 38.23b 39.91ab 46.86a 41.80ab 3.331 0.009 0.002 0.108
白细胞介素-2
IL-2/(ng/L)		 101.96 107.83 124.03 137.29 146.21 15.109 0.067 0.006 0.974
白细胞介素-4
IL-4/(pg/mL)		 61.43c 71.03bc 80.53ab 81.94ab 92.04a 6.023 0.005 <0.001 0.777
肿瘤坏死因子-α
TNF-α/(ng/L)		 183.60 169.15 163.60 149.71 145.40 27.347 0.651 0.165 0.960

2.3 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊屠宰性能的影响

由表4可知,随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,卡拉库尔羊宰前活重、胴体重和屠宰率呈现先升高后降低的二次变化趋势(P<0.05),其中50%SS组、25%SS组和0%SS组宰前活重显著高于100%SS组(P<0.05),25%SS组胴体重和屠宰率显著高于100%SS组、50%SS组和0%SS组(P<0.05)。各组间眼肌面积无显著差异(P>0.05)。与100%SS组和75%SS组相比,50%SS组、25%SS组和0%SS组GR值显著提高(P<0.05)。
表4 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊屠宰性能的影响

Table 4 Effects of mixed silages of sweet sorghum and licorice stems and leaves on slaughter performance of Karakul sheep

项目
Items		 组别Groups 均值
标准误
SEM		 P值P-value
100%SS 75%SS 50%SS 25%SS 0%SS 处理
Treatment		 线性
Linear		 二次
Quadratic
宰前活重
Live weight before
slaughter/kg		 30.32b 31.48ab 32.50a 33.07a 32.20a 0.734 0.030 0.009 0.042
胴体重
Carcass weight/kg		 14.27c 15.15bc 15.95ab 16.85a 15.65b 0.476 0.004 0.002 0.009
屠宰率
Dressing percentage/%		 47.04c 48.10bc 49.07b 50.96a 48.62bc 0.806 0.008 0.008 0.020
眼肌面积
Eye muscle area/cm2		 8.22 8.63 8.75 8.81 8.73 0.366 0.526 0.170 0.309
GR值
GR value/mm		 15.95c 16.92b 17.67a 17.84a 17.83a 0.292 <0.001 <0.001 0.008

2.4 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊肉品质的影响

由表5可知,各组间卡拉库尔羊背最长肌pH45 min无显著差异(P>0.05);随着储存时间的延长,各组背最长肌pH均呈下降趋势,0%SS组背最长肌pH24 h显著高于100%SS组和75%SS组(P<0.05)。各组间背最长肌肉色亮度(L*)、红度(a*)和黄度(b*)值以及蒸煮损失均无显著差异(P>0.05)。100%SS组背最长肌滴水损失显著高于50%SS组、25%SS组和0%SS组(P<0.05),100%SS组背最长肌剪切力显著高于50%SS组和25%SS组(P<0.05)。
表5 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊肉品质的影响

Table 5 Effects of mixed silages of sweet sorghum and licorice stems and leaves on meat quality of Karakul sheep

项目
Items		 组别Groups 均值
标准误
SEM		 P值P-value
100%SS 75%SS 50%SS 25%SS 0%SS 处理
Treatment		 线性
Linear		 二次
Quadratic
pH45 min 6.37 6.44 6.56 6.64 6.69 0.155 0.269 0.034 0.849
pH24 h 5.44c 5.55bc 5.68abc 5.80ab 5.88a 0.123 0.031 0.002 0.834
亮度L* 47.00 46.67 45.33 43.00 42.67 2.477 0.324 0.050 0.882
红度a* 14.67 15.00 16.33 16.67 17.33 1.282 0.260 0.035 0.924
黄度b* 3.67 3.33 3.33 3.00 3.00 0.632 0.812 0.266 0.846
蒸煮损失
Cooking loss/%		 44.60 44.04 42.75 42.17 43.90 1.760 0.643 0.425 0.283
滴水损失Drip loss/% 9.06a 8.19ab 6.27bc 5.53c 6.07bc 0.977 0.020 0.003 0.933
剪切力Shear force/N 42.52a 40.46ab 36.88bc 35.75c 38.57abc 1.768 0.021 0.010 0.026

3 讨论

3.1 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊生长性能的影响

随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,饲粮CP含量和能量水平逐渐提高,NDF和ADF含量逐渐降低。Zhang等[17]报道,反刍动物饲粮中CP含量与体重、ADG和干物质采食量呈正相关;一些研究也表明,饲粮CP含量对动物的采食量、健康状况和生长性能有显著影响[18]。本研究中,50%SS组、25%SS组和0%SS组卡拉库尔羊ADG高于100%SS组和75%SS组,但0%SS组的增重效果没有50%SS组和25%SS组好,这可能是由于0%SS组饲粮CP含量过高导致青贮质量不佳所致。以往的研究表明,蛋白质含量高的饲料不适合制作高质量的青贮饲料,因为蛋白质可能会发生过度降解,过多的NH3-N产生会导致pH升高,不利于乳酸菌的繁殖和发酵,从而降低青贮饲料的品质,影响动物的适口性和养分消化率[19]。此外,甘草茎叶比例高的混贮组饲粮NDF和ADF含量有降低的趋势,动物的饱腹感与纤维含量呈正相关,而纤维含量与采食量呈负相关[20-21]。因此推测,随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,ADMI的小幅升高可能与饲粮中的NDF和ADF含量降低有关。此外,甘草作为一种药用价值很高的中草药,其中还含有丰富的药用成分[7,22]。研究表明,在动物生产中使用中草药可以提高畜禽的生长性能[23-24];Muqier等[25]研究表明,在肉羊饲粮中添加黄酮类化合物能够显著提高ADG和干物质采食量,显著降低F/G;Redoy等[26]研究发现,与对照组相比,中草药添加组肉羊体增重和饲料转化率分别提高了18%~26%和13%~20%。本研究结果与前人研究结果相似,表明混贮中甘草茎叶的药用成分可以提高肉羊的生长性能。

3.2 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊血清免疫指标的影响

许多中草药具有免疫活性,是极好的免疫调节剂。甘草作为广泛使用的中草药,经常与其他中草药结合使用,它的添加不仅可以提高其他成分的有效性,还可以降低毒性,改善风味[27]。甘草提取物也可通过调节肠道屏障功能以及调节免疫细胞释放免疫因子来增强动物机体的免疫功能。研究表明,甘草黄酮类成分与免疫调节有着密切联系,甘草黄酮可促进小鼠淋巴细胞增殖,提高IL-2分泌量及IgG抗体水平,从而增强免疫调节作用[28]。本研究中,25%SS组和0%SS组卡拉库尔羊血清IgG、IgA和IgM含量方面效果较好。免疫球蛋白是一种由浆细胞分泌的具有抗体活性的动物蛋白,在特异性和非特异性免疫中都起着重要作用[29]。
白细胞介素在传递信息、激活和调节免疫细胞以及介导T细胞和B细胞活化、增殖和分化等方面发挥着重要作用[30]。本研究中,卡拉库尔羊血清IL-1β、IL-2和IL-4含量普遍随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高而提高。IL-4能够增强B细胞反应和巨噬细胞的选择性活化,促进组织修复[31]。Darvishi等[32]发现,甘草补充剂能够显著提高虹鳟鱼苗免疫相关基因的表达,包括IL-1β、白细胞介素-8(IL-8)和IgM。中草药多糖在体外具有重要的免疫刺激作用,可促进IL-2的产生和脾脏细胞的增殖[33]。而皂苷已被证明具有较高的IL-2诱导活性[34]。Yang等[35]研究发现,苜蓿皂苷提高了绵羊血清IgA、IgG、IgM和白细胞介素-1(IL-1)含量。TNF-α是一种主要由巨噬细胞和单核细胞产生的促炎细胞因子,参与炎症的早期反应,可导致运动能力下降、食欲不振等不良反应[36-37]。本研究结果显示,随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,卡拉库尔羊血清TNF-α含量逐渐降低,表明甘草茎叶比例高的混贮在一定程度上减轻了炎症反应对机体造成的损害,可能是由于甘草茎叶中含有的药用成分发挥了作用。

3.3 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊屠宰性能的影响

屠宰性能是衡量肉用家畜经济效益的主要指标[38],与饲粮组成密切相关[39]。本试验结果表明,随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,卡拉库尔羊宰前活重、胴体重、屠宰率和GR值呈现先升高后降低的变化趋势,25%SS组屠宰性能较好。先前的研究也表明,在甜高粱与苜蓿比为40∶60时,肉羊能够得到更高的宰前活重、屠宰率和皮下脂肪厚度[11]。这可能是由于适宜的混合比例为肉羊提供了更为均衡的营养成分,一方面甘草茎叶能够调节瘤胃环境,促进营养物质的消化吸收;另一方面,甜高粱能够提供充足能量,使得甘草茎叶的保健作用能更好地发挥,从而共同促进肉羊生长发育,提高屠宰性能。郑明利等[40]研究发现,白三叶与鸭茅混合青贮替代50%全株玉米青贮显著提高了湖羊宰前活重、胴体量、眼肌面积、胴体净肉率和肉骨比。此外,甘草茎叶中CP含量较甜高粱高,这为肉羊肌肉生长提供了充足的氨基酸来源,有助于提高胴体重[41]。甘草茎叶中的活性成分如甘草多糖、黄酮类等,可能通过调节肉羊瘤胃微生物区系,促进有益微生物的生长繁殖,抑制有害菌,从而提高饲粮消化利用率,对肉羊生长有一定促进作用。研究发现,饲粮添加甘草多糖有效提升了育肥猪屠宰率和胴体斜长,说明甘草多糖能改善屠宰性能[42]。

3.4 甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮对卡拉库尔羊肉品质的影响

肉色、嫩度、pH和失水率是鉴别肉品质的重要指标,且受饲粮营养水平、饲养管理等因素的影响。肌肉pH的下降速率与各类生化反应的进程息息相关,pH下降得越快,肌肉诸如蛋白质变性、酶促反应以及微生物增殖等生化反应的速度就越快;反之,pH下降得越缓慢,这些生化反应的速率也就越慢[43]。动物屠宰后肉品的最终pH与肉类的储存有着重要的联系,并能直接影响肉类的保质期和储存时间[44]。这是由于屠宰后肌肉的肌糖原酵解速率加快和糖原裂解酶活性提高,其中ATP被水解产生磷酸盐。此外,大量的肌糖原被分解,产生乳酸等酸性肌肉沉淀物,导致肌肉pH下降[45]。本研究中,随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,卡拉库尔羊背最长肌pH24 h逐渐升高,说明甘草茎叶的增加可以减缓羊肉品质的腐败速度,延长羊肉的保质期。
肉色是消费者决定消费的主要视觉因素,与肌红蛋白含量和肌纤维类型密切相关[46-47]。肌红蛋白可转化为含氧肌红蛋白,其比值可直接影响肌肉a*值。在肉的储存过程中,含氧肌红蛋白很容易被氧化形成高铁肌红蛋白。肌肉a*值越高,肉质越好;L*值越高,肉色越淡,肉质越差[48]。Chelh等[49]发现,蛋白质和脂质的氧化会产生脂褐素,会提高肌肉的b*值。本研究中,随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的提高,卡拉库尔羊背最长肌a*值有所提高,L*值和b*值有所降低,这与马艳华[50]用甘草提取物饲喂肉兔对其肉色的研究结果一致。推测甘草茎叶可能会产生一种影响蛋白质和脂质氧化过程中脂褐素生成的物质,具体机制还有待进一步研究。
蒸煮损失和滴水损失是肌肉持水力的主要指标,肌肉的持水力会影响肉的多汁性。当肌肉细胞结构完整,肌纤维之间连接紧密时,水分就能够较好地被保留在肌肉组织中,滴水损失就会较低。这样完整的肌肉结构也使得肌肉在咀嚼时能够保持较好的韧性和弹性,肉嫩度较好[51]。同时,较低的剪切力和水分流失率表明肉质越好,其特征是肌肉纤维更细,肌肉含水量更高[52]。本研究中,50%SS组和25%SS组卡拉库尔羊背最长肌剪切力和滴水损失低于100%SS组和75%SS组。Cheng等[53]在饲粮中添加甘草黄酮后发现,羊肉的保水性、硬度和咀嚼性显著提高;此外,饲粮添加甘草多糖显著降低了肉鸡胸肌和腿肌的蒸煮损失以及腿肌的滴水损失[54],这与本试验结果基本一致。一般来说,低pH会降低肌肉蛋白质结合水的能力。本试验中,随着混贮中甘草茎叶比例的降低,肌肉滴水损失逐渐提高,可能也与较低的pH有关。

4 结论

在本试验条件下,适宜比例甜高粱与甘草茎叶混贮可以提高卡拉库尔羊生长性能和屠宰性能,并提高免疫功能和肉品质。综合各项指标,饲粮中添加甜高粱与甘草茎叶比例为50∶50和25∶75的混合青贮为宜。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
BAI J D, WANG N, HU B F, et al. Integrating multisource information to delineate oasis farmland salinity management zones in southern Xinjiang,China[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2023,289:108559.

[2]
马仁诗, 蒋丛泽, 受娜, 等. 水氮梯度对饲用甜高粱生长和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2022, 28(12):2334-2346.

MA R S, JIANG C Z, SHOU N, et al. Effects of water and nitrogen gradients on growth and water use efficiency of forage sweet sorghum[J]. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2022, 28(12):2334-2346. (in Chinese)

[3]
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.

[4]
REN H W, LI J L, LAN Y Y, et al. Bioaugmented ensiling of sweet sorghum with Pichia anomala and cellulase and improved enzymatic hydrolysis of silage via ball milling[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2024,354:120327.

[5]
张东, 刘艳, 张晗, 等. 甘草叶片形态结构和光合作用对干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 植物研究, 2021, 41(3):449-457.

DOI

ZHANG D, LIU Y, ZHANG H, et al. Response of photosynthesis and leaf morphological characteristics to drought stress in Glycyrrhiza uralensis[J]. Bulletin of Botanical Research, 2021, 41(3):449-457. (in Chinese)

DOI

[6]
潘军, 迪力拜尔·阿木提, 谢元元. 甘草茎叶的营养价值及其在反刍动物中的应用[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2019, 40(5):48-51.

PAN J, DILBAIER A, XIE Y Y. Nutritional value and utilization of Glycyrrhiza uralensis stems and leaves in ruminants feed[J]. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2019, 40(5):48-51. (in Chinese)

[7]
李伟, 钟鹏, 刘泽东, 等. 甘草的药理作用及其在畜牧业的应用[J]. 中国饲料, 2023(17):49-55,71.

LI W, ZHONG P, LIU Z D, et al. Pharmacological action of licorice and its application in animal husbandry[J]. China Feed, 2023(17):49-55,71. (in Chinese)

[8]
FIJŁKOWSKA M, PYSERA B, LIPIÑSKI K, et al. Changes of nitrogen compounds during ensiling of high protein herbages-a review[J]. Annals of Animal Science, 2015, 15(2):289-305.

[9]
COPANI G, GINANE C, LE MORVAN A, et al. Patterns of in vitro rumen fermentation of silage mixtures including sainfoin and red clover as bioactive legumes[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2015,208:220-224.

[10]
LIU X, LI D, GE Q, et al. Effects of harvest period and mixed ratio on the characteristic and quality of mixed silage of alfalfa and maize[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2023,306:115796.

[11]
WANG J, YANG B Y, ZHANG S J, et al. Using mixed silages of sweet sorghum and alfalfa in total mixed rations to improve growth performance,nutrient digestibility,carcass traits and meat quality of sheep[J]. Animal, 2021, 15(7):100246.

[12]
陈凤. 不同比例甜高粱与甘草茎叶混合青贮的营养价值评定[D].硕士学位论文. 阿拉尔: 塔里木大学, 2023.

CHEN F. Nutritional value evaluation of mixed silage with different ration of sweet sorghum to licorice with stem and leaves[D].Master’s Thesis. Aral: Tarim University, 2023. (in Chinese)

[13]
中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 实验动物动物实验通用要求:GB/T 35823—2018[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.

General Administration of Quality Supervision,Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China, Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Laboratory animals—general requirements for animal experiment:GB/T 35823—2018[S]. Beijing: China Standards Press, 2018. (in Chinese)

[14]
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: 中国农业出版社, 2022.

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: China Agriculture Press, 2022. (in Chinese)

[15]
佚名. 中国饲料成分及营养价值表(2022年第33版)(续)[J]. 中国饲料, 2022(24):63-68

Anon. Tables of feed composition and nutritive values in China (33rd edition,2022)[J]. China Feed, 2022(24):63-68. (in Chinese)

[16]
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.

[17]
ZHANG B, WANG C, LIU H, et al. Effects of dietary protein level on growth performance and nitrogen excretion of dairy heifers[J]. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2017, 30(3):386-391.

DOI PMID

[18]
WANG X G, XU T W, ZHANG X L, et al. Effects of dietary protein levels on growth performance,carcass traits,serum metabolites,and meat composition of Tibetan sheep during the cold season on the Qinghai-Tibetan plateau[J]. Animals, 2020, 10(5):801.

[19]
ZHANG S J, CHAUDHRY A S, OSMAN A, et al. Associative effects of ensiling mixtures of sweet sorghum and alfalfa on nutritive value,fermentation and methane characteristics[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2015,206:29-38.

[20]
CHEN Y Y, GONG X X, YANG T Y, et al. Ginkgo biloba L. residues partially replacing alfalfa hay pellet in pelleted total mixed ration on growth performance,serum biochemical parameters,rumen fermentation,immune function and meat quality in finishing Haimen white goats[J]. Animals, 2021, 11(11):3046.

[21]
ARELOVICH H M, ABNEY C S, VIZCARRA J A, et al. Effects of dietary neutral detergent fiber on intakes of dry matter and net energy by dairy and beef cattle:analysis of published data[J]. The Professional Animal Scientist, 2008, 24(5):375-383.

[22]
WU Y F, WANG Z X, DU Q Q, et al. Pharmacological effects and underlying mechanisms of licorice-derived flavonoids[J]. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 2022,2022:9523071.

[23]
WANG M W, HUANG H J, HU Y P, et al. Effects of dietary supplementation with herbal extract mixture on growth performance,organ weight and intestinal morphology in weaning piglets[J]. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2020, 104(5):1462-1470.

[24]
CHEN G, LI Z Q, LIU S L, et al. Fermented Chinese herbal medicine promoted growth performance,intestinal health,and regulated bacterial microbiota of weaned piglets[J]. Animals, 2023, 13(3):476.

[25]
MUQIER, QI S, WANG T, et al. Effects of flavonoids from Allium mongolicum Regel on growth performance and growth-related hormones in meat sheep[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2017, 3(1):33-38.

[26]
REDOY M R A, SHUVO A A S, CHENG L, et al. Effect of herbal supplementation on growth,immunity,rumen histology,serum antioxidants and meat quality of sheep[J]. Animal, 2020, 14(11):2433-2441.

[27]
WAHAB S, ANNADURAI S, ABULLAIS S S, et al. Glycyrrhiza glabra (Licorice):a comprehensive review on its phytochemistry,biological activities,clinical evidence and toxicology[J]. Plants, 2021, 10(12):2751.

[28]
WANG K, ZHANG Y, CAO Y, et al. Glycyrrhetinic acid alleviates acute lung injury by PI3K/AKT suppressing macrophagic Nlrp3 inflammasome activation[J]. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 2020, 532(4):555-562.

DOI PMID

[29]
NIMMERJAHN F, VIDARSSON G, CRAGG M S. Effect of posttranslational modifications and subclass on IgG activity:from immunity to immunotherapy[J]. Nature Immunology, 2023, 24(8):1244-1255.

[30]
WANG X J, DING L M, WEI H Y, et al. Astragalus membranaceus root supplementation improves average daily gain,rumen fermentation,serum immunity and antioxidant indices of Tibetan sheep[J]. Animal, 2021, 15(1):100061.

[31]
CABRERA-PEREZ J, CONDOTTA S A, BADOVINAC V P, et al. Impact of sepsis on CD4 T cell immunity[J]. Journal of Leukocyte Biology, 2014, 96(5):767-777.

[32]
DARVISHI M, SHAMSAIE MEHRGAN M, KHAJEHRAHIMI A E. Effect of licorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra) extract as an immunostimulant on serum and skin mucus immune parameters,transcriptomic responses of immune-related gene,and disease resistance against Yersinia ruckeri in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2022,9:811684.

[33]
BO S, ZHANG M, DAN M. The traditional use,structure,and immunostimulatory activity of bioactive polysaccharides from traditional Chinese root medicines:a review[J]. Heliyon, 2024, 10(1):e23593.

[34]
SONG X M, HU S H. Adjuvant activities of saponins from traditional Chinese medicinal herbs[J]. Vaccine, 2009, 27(36):4883-4890.

DOI PMID

[35]
YANG F, YANG F, ZHAI Z H, et al. Effects of alfalfa saponins on the production performance,serum biochemical factors,and immune factors in small-tailed Han sheep[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2022,9:924373.

[36]
ARKHIPOV V I, PERSHINA E V, LEVIN S G. The role of anti-inflammatory cytokines in memory processing in a healthy brain[J]. Behavioural Brain Research, 2019,367:111-116.

[37]
MOORE K W, DE WAAL MALEFYT R, COFFMAN R L, et al. Interleukin-10 and the interleukin-10 receptor[J]. Annual Review of Immunology, 2001,19:683-765.

[38]
LUO J Q, ZENG D F, CHENG L, et al. Dietary β-glucan supplementation improves growth performance,carcass traits and meat quality of finishing pigs[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2019, 5(4):380-385.

[39]
FRANCISCO A E, JANÍČEK M, DENTINHO T, et al. Effects of alfalfa particle size and starch content in diets on feeding behaviour,intake,rumen parameters,animal performance and meat quality of growing lambs[J]. Meat Science, 2020,161:107964.

[40]
郑明利, 毛培春, 邰建辉, 等. 白三叶和鸭茅混合青贮饲喂对湖羊屠宰性能及肉品质的影响[J]. 河南农业科学, 2021, 50(5):142-148.

ZHENG M L, MAO P C, TAI J H, et al. Effects of feeding white clover and orchard grass mixed silage on slaughter performance and meat quality of Hu sheep[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 50(5):142-148. (in Chinese)

[41]
周颖, 刘维平, 陈建平, 等. 甘草及其提取物在羊生产中的应用研究[J]. 中国畜禽种业, 2023, 19(5):135-139.

ZHOU Y, LIU W P, CHEN J P, et al. Application of licorice and its extracts in sheep production[J]. The Chinese Livestock and Poultry Breeding, 2023, 19(5):135-139. (in Chinese)

[42]
李帅兵, 符璐, 田程程, 等. 甘草提取物、乳酸菌及其联合添加对肉鸡生长性能、屠宰性能、肉品质、营养物质表观代谢率及血清生化指标的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023, 35(5):2956-2968.

DOI

LI S B, FU L, TIAN C C, et al. Effects of glycyrrhiza uralensis extract,lactic acid bacteria and their combined supplementation on growth performance,slaughter performance,meat quality,nutrient apparent metabolic rates and serum biochemical indexes of broilers[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2023, 35(5):2956-2968. (in Chinese)

[43]
赵洋, 徐幸莲, 赵庭辉, 等. 混合冷却对宰后黄羽肉鸡能量代谢和品质的影响[J]. 食品科学, 2024, 45(3):102-109.

ZHAO Y, XU X L, ZHAO T H, et al. Effect of mixed cooling on postmortem energy metabolism and meat quality of yellow-feathered broilers[J]. Food Science, 2024, 45(3):102-109. (in Chinese)

DOI

[44]
REYNOLDS D, MIN B R, GURUNG N, et al. Influence of tannin-rich pine bark supplementation in the grain mixes for meat goats:growth performance,blood metabolites,and carcass characteristics[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2020, 6(1):85-91.

[45]
WANG Y C, WANG Q Y, DAI C P, et al. Effects of dietary energy on growth performance,carcass characteristics,serum biochemical index,and meat quality of female Hu lambs[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2020, 6(4):499-506.

[46]
FONT-I-FURNOLS M, GUERRERO L. Consumer preference,behavior and perception about meat and meat products:an overview[J]. Meat Science, 2014, 98(3):361-371.

[47]
JIANG J, TANG X Y, XUE Y, et al. Dietary linseed oil supplemented with organic selenium improved the fatty acid nutritional profile,muscular selenium deposition,water retention,and tenderness of fresh pork[J]. Meat Science, 2017,131:99-106.

[48]
LOPES L S, MARTINS S R, CHIZZOTTI M L, et al. Meat quality and fatty acid profile of Brazilian goats subjected to different nutritional treatments[J]. Meat Science, 2014, 97(4):602-608.

DOI PMID

[49]
CHELH I, GATELLIER P, SANTÉ-LHOUTELLIER V. Characterisation of fluorescent Schiff bases formed during oxidation of pig myofibrils[J]. Meat Science, 2007, 76(2):210-215.

DOI PMID

[50]
马艳华. 甘草提取物对肉兔生长性能、胴体性状和肉质的影响[J]. 中国饲料, 2021(2):114-117.

MA Y H. Effects of glycyrrhiza extracts on growth performance,carcass characteristics and meat quality of rabbits[J]. China Feed, 2021(2):114-117. (in Chinese)

[51]
吴亮亮, 罗瑞明, 孔丰, 等. 蒸煮时间对滩羊肉蒸煮损失、嫩度及水分分布的影响[J]. 食品与机械, 2016, 32(4):19-23.

WU L L, LUO R M, KONG F, et al. Effect of cooking loss,tenderness and water distribution of Tan sheep at different cooking time treatment[J]. Food and Machinery, 2016, 32(4):19-23. (in Chinese)

[52]
BERARDO A, CLAEYS E, VOSSEN E, et al. Protein oxidation affects proteolysis in a meat model system[J]. Meat Science, 2015,106:78-84.

[53]
CHENG C P, XIE X R, LI S B, et al. Analysis of bioactive substances in mutton and their effects on the quality of minced mutton[J]. Food Research International, 2025,200:115474.

[54]
LI T Y, QIN W Z, WU B, et al. Effects of glycyrrhiza polysaccharides on growth performance,meat quality,serum parameters and growth/meat quality-related gene expression in broilers[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2024,11:1357491.

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.