Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2026 , Vol. 38 >Issue 2: 1469 - 1479

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2026.116

RESEARCH PAPER

Effects of Reed Silage Replacing Corn Stalks on in Vitro Ruminal Degradation, Fermentation Parameters and Methane Production of Sheep

  • YUAN Weiwei , 1 ,
  • LIU Lili 1 ,
  • ZHANG Yanlong 1 ,
  • BAI Tiantian 2 ,
  • LIU Xiaoqian 1 ,
  • LI Wenjie 1 ,
  • ZHANG Xiumin 3 ,
  • PU Xuanxuan , 1, 4, 5, * ,
  • GUO Xuefeng , 1, 4, 5, *
Expand
  • 1 College of Animal Science and Technology, Tarim University, Alar 843300, China
  • 2 College of Life Science and Technology, Tarim University, Alar 843300, China
  • 3 Institute of Subtropical Agriculture and Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changsha 410000, China
  • 4 Key Laboratory of Tarim Animal Husbandry Science and Technology, Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, Alar 843300, China
  • 5 Key Laboratory of Circular Tarim Animal and Forage Resources Utilization, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Alar 843300, China
* PU Xuanxuan, lecturer, E-mail: ;
GUO Xuefeng, professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2025-07-18

  Online published: 2026-02-12

Fold

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effects of reed silage replacing corn stalks on rumen degradation, fermentation parameters, and methane (CH4) production in sheep using an automatic in vitro rumen fermentation system. Reed at the heading stage was ensiled, and silage samples were collected on days 7, 14, 30, and 60 post-ensiling for fermentation quality evaluation and conventional nutrient determination. Additionally, reed silage fermented for 30 days was used to replace corn stalks at proportions of 0 (control), 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%, respectively, followed by in vitro rumen fermentation trials using the automatic in vitro rumen fermentation system. The results showed that: 1) the contents of dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM), crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), and acid detergent fiber (ADF) in reed silage showed no significant changes compared with those before ensiling, and there were no significant differences among different ensiling time points (P>0.05). 2) Compared with the control group, the in vitro rumen DM degradation rate, total gas production, and CH4 production in the groups with 50%, 75%, and 100% reed silage substitution were significantly decreased (P<0.05); the in vitro rumen DM degradation rate in the 25% group showed no significant difference (P>0.05), but the CH4 production was significantly reduced (P<0.05). 3) Compared with the control group, the total volatile fatty acid (TVFA) concentration in the in vitro rumen of the 50%, 75%, and 100% groups was significantly decreased (P<0.05), among which the molar proportion of acetic acid was significantly increased (P<0.05), while the molar proportion of propionic acid in the 25% group was significantly increased (P<0.05). In conclusion, replacing corn stalks with 25% reed silage can promote the shift of rumen fermentation towards a propionate-type pattern, reduce CH4 emissions, and exert no negative effects on rumen substrate degradation.

Key words： reed silage; corn stalks; in vitro rumen fermentation; methane production

Cite this article

YUAN Weiwei , LIU Lili , ZHANG Yanlong , BAI Tiantian , LIU Xiaoqian , LI Wenjie , ZHANG Xiumin , PU Xuanxuan , GUO Xuefeng . Effects of Reed Silage Replacing Corn Stalks on in Vitro Ruminal Degradation, Fermentation Parameters and Methane Production of Sheep[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2026 , 38(2) : 1469 -1479 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2026.116

我国集约化畜牧业的快速发展带动了反刍动物数量激增,但苜蓿、燕麦草等优质饲草资源供应日益紧张[1-2]。芦苇(Phragmites australis)作为一种广泛分布、产量大且具抗旱耐盐碱特性的禾本科植物[3-4],在生态修复[5]与饲料利用[6]方面潜力巨大。研究表明,粗饲料中芦苇草与玉米秸秆的比例为2∶8有助于提高芦苇草和秸秆饲料的利用率,降低饲料成本,提高经济效益[7]。但芦苇生长及木质化速度快,青贮则可成为有效保存和利用芦苇资源的重要手段之一。王郝为等[8]研究发现,青贮可有效保存芦苇营养物质,并提高其有机物质(OM)消化率。研究表明,芦苇在抽穗期营养价值更高,更适宜调制青贮[9]。王亭帅[10]研究发现,抽穗期芦苇青贮饲喂肉羊的经济效益最高。添加菌酶制剂可有效提升芦苇青贮发酵品质与瘤胃利用率[4,8]。反刍动物瘤胃发酵产生的甲烷(CH4)是重要的温室气体来源,不仅加剧气候变暖,还造成2%~12%的饲料能量损失,因此通过优化粗饲料结构实现减排已成为研究热点[11]。鉴于芦苇青贮作为潜在非常规饲料资源的价值及当前玉米秸秆的局限性[12],明确芦苇青贮替代玉米秸秆对瘤胃发酵动态及CH4生成的影响,以评估其瘤胃利用效率、减排潜力和替代可行性。本试验拟通过体外法探究芦苇青贮替代玉米秸秆对绵羊瘤胃降解特性、发酵参数及CH4生成的影响,旨在探究芦苇青贮的CH4减排潜力,为开发粗饲料资源提供理论依据。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验材料和预处理过程

试验所用芦苇采集于塔里木大学十团,处于抽穗期。将芦苇刈割后,进行揉碎处理,揉碎长度为2~3 cm,用于青贮制作。玉米秸秆由新疆阿克苏泰昆饲料责任有限公司提供,用于常规养分测定及体外模拟瘤胃发酵试验。

1.2 芦苇青贮的制作及样品采集

取揉碎好的抽穗期芦苇,添加屎肠球菌[屎肠球菌F11.1G为郭雪峰团队自主分离鉴定,于中国典型培养物保藏中心保藏(保藏号:M 2020793),活菌数≥1.0×108 CFU/g]后,置于聚丙乙烯袋中,抽真空后密封处理,于室温下分别青贮7、14、30和60 d,每个取样日期6个重复。到达预设青贮时间后,分别取青贮后7、14、30和60 d的样品20 g,加入蒸馏水180 g,于4 ℃存放24 h后,取滤液测定pH。分别取2份滤液2 mL于4 ℃、16 000×g离心10 min后,取上清液1.5 mL与25%偏磷酸混合均匀后,-20 ℃保存,用于有机酸和氨态氮(NH3-N)浓度测定。另外,分别取青贮后7、14、30和60 d的样品100 g,65 ℃条件下烘干,粉碎后过40目筛,用于常规养分测定,其中另取一份青贮30 d的芦苇青贮干样用于体外模拟瘤胃发酵试验。

1.3 体外模拟瘤胃发酵试验及样品采集

本试验于2024年10月在阿拉尔市塔里木大学动物科学与技术学院试验站进行,试验获得塔里木大学科技伦理委员会的批准,伦理标号为PB20250618001。
本试验采用体外批次培养法,设置青贮前、青贮后7 d、青贮后14 d、青贮后30 d及青贮后60 d共5个时间点,每个时间点设3个重复。选取3只健康、体况良好、体重接近并安装永久瘤胃瘘管的成年绵羊为瘤胃液供体动物,于晨饲前2 h采集瘤胃液,经4层纱布过滤后,装入保温瓶中,迅速带回实验室。根据Menke等[13]的方法配制缓冲液,配制好后持续通入二氧化碳,以确保厌氧环境,置于39.5 ℃水浴锅中预热后,与瘤胃液按4∶1的比例混合均匀,制成人工瘤胃液。分别以玉米秸秆(对照组)、75%玉米秸秆+25%芦苇青贮(R25组)、50%玉米秸秆+50%芦苇青贮(R50组)、25%玉米秸秆+75%芦苇青贮(R75组)及100%芦苇青贮(R100组)为发酵底物,共计5组。于150 mL血清瓶内加入底物各1.0 g,一式二份,在二氧化碳气流下加入60 mL人工瘤胃液,立即用橡胶塞封闭,将发酵瓶放入全自动体外发酵系统于39.5 ℃下厌氧发酵72 h。排气压力设置10.0 kPa,排出的气体自动进入气相色谱仪(7890A,安捷伦公司,美国),测定每个发酵瓶的CH4和氢气浓度。
72 h后终止发酵,使用便捷式pH计(上海奥塞斯仪器有限公司)测定发酵液pH;取2份2 mL上清液,于4 ℃、16 000×g下离心10 min,取上清液1.5 mL,一份用于NH3-N浓度测定,另一份转移至预先加入0.15 mL偏磷酸(25%,W/V)下的离心管中,混合均匀后置于-20 ℃保存,用于发酵液挥发性脂肪酸(VFA)浓度测定。将残余物过滤至称重好的尼龙布内,105 ℃烘干24 h用于干物质(DM)降解率测定。

1.4 测定指标及方法

DM含量参照GB/T 6435—2014的烘干法测定,粗蛋白质(CP)含量参照GB/T 6432—2018的凯氏定氮法测定,中性洗涤纤维(NDF)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)含量参照Van Soest等[14]方法测定,粗灰分(Ash)含量参照GB/T 6438—2007的灼烧分解法测定。有机物、中性洗涤可溶物及半纤维素根据公式计算。
有机物(OM,%)=100-粗灰分(%);
中性洗涤可溶物(NDS,%)=100-NDF(%);
半纤维素(%)=NDF(%)-ADF(%)。
NH3-N浓度参照冯宗慈等[15]的苯酚-次氯酸钠比色法测定;VFA浓度参照Wang等[16]方法使用气相色谱仪(7890A,安捷伦公司,美国)测定;根据Wang等[16]所述的公式计算总产气、CH4和H2产量/浓度;乳酸浓度参照Taylor等[17]方法,用比色法测定。

1.5 数据统计与分析

试验数据用Exce1 2016进行整理,采用SPSS 24.0软件进行单因素方差分析,Duncan氏法进行多重比较,结果用平均值和均值标准误表示,P<0.05为差异显著,0.05≤P<0.10为有差异显著的趋势。

2 结果

2.1 不同青贮时间芦苇青贮品质及营养成分变化

由表1可知,与青贮0 d相比,青贮7 d时pH显著降低(P<0.05),且青贮30、60 d时pH仍维持在4.00以下;乳酸浓度在青贮7 d时显著升高(P<0.05),青贮7~14 d时显著降低(P<0.05),并在青贮14~60 d呈持续降低趋势;乙酸浓度在青贮7~14 d时显著升高(P<0.05),青贮14~30 d时显著降低(P<0.05);丙酸浓度变化趋势与乙酸一致,青贮7~14 d显著升高(P<0.05),14~30 d显著降低(P<0.05);丁酸浓度在青贮7~14 d显著升高(P<0.05),14~30 d显著降低(P<0.05);NH3-N浓度在青贮0~30 d显著升高(P<0.05),30~60 d显著降低(P<0.05)。
表1 不同青贮时间芦苇青贮pH、有机酸及氨态氮浓度的变化

Table 1 Changes in pH, organic acids, and ammonia nitrogen concentration of reed silage at different silage time

项目
Items		 青贮时间Silage time/d SEM P值
P-value
0 7 14 30 60
pH 5.86a 3.79b 3.92b 3.90b 3.95b 0.154 0.005
乳酸Lactic acid/(g/kg) 0c 27.70a 25.60b 25.40b 24.60b 1.936 0.001
乙酸Acetic acid/(g/kg) 0d 3.37b 4.18a 3.31c 3.43bc 1.088 <0.001
丙酸Propionic acid/(g/kg) 0c 3.37b 4.18a 3.31b 3.43b 0.275 <0.001
丁酸Butyric acid/(g/kg) 0c 0.54b 0.82a 0.58b 0.54b 0.053 0.002
氨态氮Ammonia nitrogen/(g/kg) 0e 0.74d 1.19a 1.00b 0.88c 0.077 <0.001

同行数据肩标不同小写字母表示差异显著(P<0.05)。下表同。

In the same row, values with different lowercase letter superscripts indicate significant difference (P<0.05). The same as below.

由表2可知,随着青贮时间的变化,芦苇青贮前DM的含量为40.51%,青贮后14 d的DM含量最低,为37.47%;芦苇青贮前OM的含量为88.65%,青贮后60 d的OM含量最低,为86.77%;芦苇青贮前CP的含量为7.09%,青贮后60 d的CP含量最低,为7.24%;芦苇青贮前NDF的含量为75.14%,青贮后30 d的NDF含量最低,为73.36%;芦苇青贮前ADF的含量为43.21%,青贮后30 d的ADF含量最低,为43.29%,芦苇青贮前后营养成分未发生显著变化,表明青贮未对芦苇的营养组分产生负面影响。
表2 不同青贮时间芦苇青贮营养水平的变化

Table 2 Changes in nutritional levels of reed silage at different silage time

项目
Items		 青贮时间Silage time/d SEM P值
P-value
0 7 14 30 60
干物质DM/% 40.51 38.03 37.47 39.73 40.01 0.002 0.070
有机物OM/% DM 88.65 88.17 87.38 87.36 86.77 0.325 0.051
粗蛋白质CP/% DM 7.09 7.90 8.30 7.83 7.24 0.002 0.432
中性洗涤纤维NDF/% DM 75.14 75.11 73.95 73.36 74.33 0.001 0.351
酸性洗涤纤维ADF/% DM 43.21 43.90 43.68 43.29 44.23 0.002 0.070

2.2 芦苇青贮和玉米秸秆营养成分对比

由表3可知,芦苇青贮和玉米秸秆的DM、NDF、半纤维素和中性洗涤可溶物含量差异不显著(P>0.05),两者营养组分差异主要体现在CP、ADF和Ash含量上。与玉米秸秆相比,芦苇青贮的CP、Ash和NDF含量均显著高于玉米秸秆(P<0.05)。
表3 芦苇青贮和玉米秸秆营养水平对比

Table 3 Comparison of nutrient levels between reed silage and corn stalks

项目Items 芦苇青贮Reed silage 玉米秸秆Corn stalks SEM P值P-value
干物质DM/% 93.22 92.41 0.004 0.172
粗蛋白质CP/% DM 7.82a 4.11b 0.193 0.002
中性洗涤可溶物
Neutral detergent soluble substances/% DM		 26.64 29.60 0.008 0.051
中性洗涤纤维NDF/% DM 73.35 70.39 0.008 0.051
酸性洗涤纤维ADF/% DM 43.32a 39.66b 0.008 0.011
半纤维素Hemicellulose/% DM 30.06 30.73 0.007 0.697
粗灰分Ash/% DM 10.31a 8.89b 0.003 0.001

2.3 芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆对绵羊体外瘤胃DM降解率和产气量的影响

由表4可知,与对照组相比,随着芦苇青贮替代比例的增加,R50、R75和R100组的底物DM降解率显著降低(P<0.05),R25组则差异不显著(P>0.05)。与对照组相比,R25、R50、R75和R100组的总产气量显著降低(P<0.05)。与对照组相比,R25、R50、R75和R100组的CH4产量显著降低(P<0.05),R25和R100组的CH4/DM降解率也显著降低(P<0.05)。
表4 芦苇青贮替代玉米秸秆对绵羊72 h体外瘤胃DM降解率和产气量的影响

Table 4 Effects of reed silage replacing corn stalks on in vitro rumen DM degradation rate and gas production of sheep within 72 h

项目
Items		 组别Groups SEM P值
P-value
对照Control R25 R50 R75 R100
瘤胃干物质降解率
Rumen DM degradation rate/%		 58.38a 56.49a 52.07b 49.02c 47.82c 0.011 <0.001
总产气量
Total gas production/(mL/g)		 307.78a 285.42b 284.80b 267.49b 227.32c 7.549 <0.001
CH4产量
CH4 yield/(mL/g)		 35.33a 32.55b 32.84b 29.88c 25.21d 0.968 <0.001
CH4浓度
CH4 concentration/%		 14.34a 13.82ab 14.10a 13.31bc 12.72c 0.172 0.001
CH4/干物质降解率
CH4/DM degradation rate/(mL/g)		 60.41a 57.50b 62.98a 60.87a 52.52c 1.211 0.026
H2产量H2 yield/(mL/g) 0.18 0.19 0.18 0.13 0.14 0.010 0.236
H2浓度H2 concentration/% 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.002 0.508

2.4 芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆对绵羊体外瘤胃参数的影响

由表5可知,与对照组相比,随着芦苇青贮代替比例的增加,R50、R75和R100组体外瘤胃pH显著升高(P<0.05),R25组则差异不显著(P>0.05)。与对照组相比,R50、R75和R100组瘤胃总VFA浓度显著降低(P<0.05),R25组则差异不显著(P>0.05)。随着芦苇青贮添加比例的增加,R50、R75和R100组瘤胃乙酸摩尔比例显著升高(P<0.05)。与对照组相比,R25组瘤胃丙酸摩尔比例显著升高(P<0.05),导致该组瘤胃乙丙比显著降低(P<0.05)。
表5 芦苇青贮替代玉米秸秆对绵羊72 h体外瘤胃发酵参数的影响

Table 5 Effects of reed silage replacing corn stalks on in vitro rumen fermentation parameters of sheep within 72 h

项目
Items		 组别Groups SEM P值
P-value
对照Control R25 R50 R75 R100
pH 6.65d 6.65d 6.72c 6.80b 6.89a 0.025 <0.001
总挥发性脂肪酸
Total volatile fatty
acids/(mmol/L)		 78.66a 75.66a 66.86b 60.70c 57.06c 2.282 <0.001
VFA摩尔比例Molar proportion of VFA/%
乙酸Acetic acid 61.90b 62.25b 63.41a 63.71a 64.37a 0.271 0.001
丙酸Propionic acid 22.68bc 24.35a 23.25b 22.99bc 22.07c 0.232 0.005
丁酸Butyric acid 9.55 9.02 9.40 9.24 9.66 0.090 0.172
异丁酸Isobutyric acid 1.79 1.64 1.71 1.72 1.60 0.034 0.541
戊酸Valeric acid 1.76 1.67 1.65 1.64 1.38 0.085 0.768
异戊酸Isovaleric acid 2.32 1.07 0.54 0.70 0.90 0.242 0.125
乙丙比
Acetic acid to propionic acid ratio		 2.73b 2.56c 2.73b 2.77b 2.92a 0.034 0.030

3 讨论

3.1 青贮时间对芦苇青贮发酵品质和营养成分的影响

pH、有机酸和NH3-N浓度是评价青贮发酵品质的重要指标[18]。青贮发酵过程中,乳酸菌快速增殖可促进原料可溶性碳水化合物的降解,生成乳酸,进而使发酵体系的pH快速下降[19]。pH是评定青贮发酵品质的重要指标,pH低于4.2可定义品质为优良[20]。本试验中,芦苇青贮14 d时,pH降至3.92,并在14~60 d无显著变化,可见芦苇青贮在青贮14 d左右即可完成基本青贮发酵并且发酵品质较好。青贮通常在21 d后发酵成熟,pH进入稳定期[21]。本试验中,pH在青贮14 d开始稳定,这可能与青贮制作过程中添加屎肠球菌相关,有待进一步研究。乳酸在青贮中起到降低pH、抑制发酵体系中好氧微生物活动、防止饲料发霉变质、减少营养物质损失等作用。乳酸浓度达到一定数值可有效保存原料的营养组分[22]。黄棋等[4]研究表明,芦苇青贮60 d后,发酵品质良好,乳酸浓度为17.6 g/kg。本试验中芦苇青贮在青贮后30~60 d趋于稳定,乳酸浓度为24.2 g/kg,该浓度略高于黄棋等[4]研究结果,这可能与青贮制作过程中添加屎肠球菌相关,有待进一步研究。NH3-N浓度是评估青贮过程中蛋白质分解情况的关键指标,其含量与饲料中蛋白质腐败程度呈正相关[23]。康翠翠等[9]研究表明,芦苇青贮90 d后,发酵品质良好,NH3-N浓度为1.0 g/kg。本试验中,芦苇青贮14 d后,NH3-N浓度升高至1.19 g/kg,在青贮后30~60 d趋于稳定,浓度降低至0.88 g/kg,该浓度和康翠翠等[9]研究结果接近,该结果表明青贮可有效抑制芦苇蛋白质的降解。青贮发酵过程中,异型发酵乳酸菌可利用可溶性糖生成乙酸,乙酸的生成可有效降低青贮pH,并可抑制好氧微生物的活动,但过量的乙酸有刺鼻性气味会导致青贮品质降低[24]。张养东等[25]研究表明,优质青贮饲料的乳酸/乙酸的比值应该高于2∶1。本试验中,芦苇青贮的乳酸/乙酸为1.79∶1,该比值略低,这可能与芦苇青贮过程中布氏乳杆菌利用乳酸产生乙酸相关,使得乙酸浓度上升,导致乳酸/乙酸下降[26]。丁酸具有腐臭酸味,会导致饲料适口性降低,丁酸的生成不仅会引起青贮中可溶性糖和乳酸的分解,同时还会造成氨基酸的分解,生成胺及氨等物质,形成恶臭,降低青贮品质[21]。冀红芹等[27]研究表明,优质青贮饲料中,丁酸的含量应低于3.0 g/kg。本试验中,芦苇青贮在青贮30 d后丁酸摩尔比上升至1.0 g/kg,在青贮后30~60 d趋于稳定,表明芦苇青贮品质良好。综上所述,本试验芦苇青贮在青贮后30~60 d趋于稳定,发酵品质良好。
营养组分可在一定程度上反映饲料营养价值。本试验中,芦苇青贮前后营养成分未发生显著变化,表明青贮未对芦苇基本组分产生负面影响,即青贮工艺可有效保存芦苇的营养成分。随着青贮时间的延长,芦苇青贮DM含量略有降低,并在青贮30 d稳定,这可能与发酵过程中pH的降低抑制了好氧微生物的生长相关,该结果与徐双鹏等[28]研究结果接近。CP作为饲草营养品质评价的重要指标,适宜的CP含量可保证反刍动物机体对氮营养需求、促进瘤胃微生物蛋白的生成,还可有效降低氮排放对环境的污染[29]。本试验中,芦苇青贮前后CP含量差异不显著,均在7.0%~8.5%,该测定结果与王士博等[30]结果相近。熊志达[3]研究发现,芦苇青贮前CP含量在13.0%~15.5%,该结果显著高于本试验测定结果,这可能与地域和芦苇品种有关。另外,与熊志达[3]试验结果相比,本试验青贮前后CP含量差异不显著,这可能与青贮过程中乳酸菌剂使用的差异相关。NDF和ADF含量分别反映饲料中总纤维含量和难以消化的纤维素与木质素含量,降低饲草中NDF和ADF的含量可有利于提高反刍家畜的饲草利用率[31]。在本试验中,芦苇青贮前后NDF含量有所降低,这与王郝为等[10]试验结果接近。青贮过程中,乳酸菌可附着于饲草表面,促进饲草纤维转化为可溶性碳水化合物[32]。武齐丰等[33]研究发现,在象草青贮中添加乳酸菌会使象草纤维含量显著降低,这可能是本试验中芦苇青贮后NDF含量有所降低的主要原因。综上所述,青贮未对营养品质造成负面影响,表明青贮可有效保存芦苇中的营养成分。

3.2 芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆对绵羊体外瘤胃DM降解率和产气量的影响

体外瘤胃DM降解率反映了底物可被瘤胃微生物利用的程度,降解率越高表明底物可利用价值越高[34]。产气量反映瘤胃微生物对饲料的利用情况,利用率越高,产气量越高。通常情况下,体外瘤胃DM降解率和产气量呈正相关[35-36]。瘤胃降解率取决于底物本身的结构和组成,底物木质化程度越低,其越易被降解[37]。本试验中,随着芦苇青贮代替比例的增加,体外瘤胃DM降解率和总产气量显著降低。吴秋珏等[38]研究发现,饲料结构性碳水化合物含量较高时,饲粮的营养物质消化吸收会使CH4排放量显著降低,有效降低了饲粮能量损失,这与代替后饲粮本身纤维含量的变化和瘤胃发酵类型的转变相关。本试验中,随着芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆比例的增加,R25组瘤胃总产气量、CH4产量和CH4/DM降解率显著低于对照组,且DM降解率与对照组相比无显著差异,这可能与芦苇经过青贮后,富含易发酵碳水化合物相关,其可在瘤胃中快速降解,并促进瘤胃发酵模式向丙酸型转变。瘤胃发酵途径向着丙酸型转变会促进氢的利用,减少产甲烷菌可利用的底物,进而有效抑制瘤胃内CH4的生成[11,39]。综上所述,随着芦苇青贮替代玉米秸秆比例的增加,体外瘤胃DM降解率有所降低,替代比例为25%时,可有效降低瘤胃CH4产量,且对底物降解无负面影响。

3.3 芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆对绵羊体外瘤胃发酵参数的影响

pH是影响瘤胃内环境和发酵特性的重要指标。pH的变化可影响瘤胃中微生物的种类和数量,进而对饲粮消化产生一定影响[40]。瘤胃正常pH为6.0~7.5[41],本试验中,随着芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆比例增加,各组pH虽存在显著差异,但均在正常范围内,这说明芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆未对瘤胃内环境产生不良影响。VFA是瘤胃微生物降解饲粮碳水化合物的重要代谢产物,也是反刍动物的主要能量来源,其中乙酸、丙酸和丁酸含量约占VFA总量的95%左右[42-43]。饲粮中结构性碳水化合物的增加会降低瘤胃液中总脂肪酸产量,同时提高乙酸比例,导致乙丙比升高,非结构性碳水化合物含量的增加可提高瘤胃液中总脂肪酸产量和丙酸比例[44-45]。本试验中,随着芦苇青贮代替玉米比例的增加,底物中结构性碳水化合物含量有所上升,导致其瘤胃总VFA浓度降低,瘤胃发酵向着乙酸型转变。乙丙比反映了瘤胃发酵效率,一般来说,正常发酵范围内,瘤胃发酵向着丙酸型转变,可提升底物转化效率[46]。在本试验中,25%芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆后,促进了瘤胃发酵向着丙酸型转变,这可能与芦苇青贮替代比例较低,且芦苇青贮自身富含易发酵的碳水化合物相关,即25%芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆可能提升了底物中易发酵碳水化合物的含量,促进瘤胃微生物区系向着有利于丙酸生成的方向发展[47]。综上所述,芦苇青贮代替玉米秸秆为25%时,未对瘤胃发酵产生负面影响,并可促进瘤胃发酵向着丙酸型转变。

4 结论

本试验结果表明,抽穗期芦苇在经过青贮后发酵品质较好,可以基本保存其营养物质。体外瘤胃发酵条件下,芦苇青贮代替25%的玉米秸秆时,有效促进瘤胃发酵向丙酸型转变,显著降低甲烷产量,并未对瘤胃底物降解产生负面影响。综上所述,本试验条件下,芦苇青贮可替代玉米秸秆的适宜推荐比例为25%。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
陈亚飞. 南疆芦苇与甘草茎叶混合青贮及其饲用价值评价[D]. 硕士学位论文. 阿拉尔: 塔里木大学, 2023.

CHEN Y F. Evaluation of mixed silage of reed and licorice stems and leaves and their forage value in South Xinjiang[D]. Master’s Thesis. Alaer: Tarim University, 2023. (in Chinese)

[2]
郭豪杰, 王文信. 中国草畜生产的时空匹配格局及驱动机制[J]. 经济地理, 2022, 42(10):146-157.

DOI

GUO H J, WANG W X. Spatiotemporal matching pattern and driving mechanism between forage and livestock productions in China[J]. Economic Geography, 2022, 42(10):146-157. (in Chinese)

DOI

[3]
熊志达. 芦苇青贮益生菌添加剂配方的筛选与应用[D]. 硕士学位论文. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2022.

XIONG Z D. Screening and application of probiotics additive formulation for reed silage[D]. Master’s Thesis. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2022. (in Chinese)

[4]
黄棋, 汪水平, 黄桥深, 等. 复合菌制剂对芦苇青贮饲料发酵品质和瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023, 35(4):2443-2454.

DOI

HUANG Q, WANG S P, HUANG Q S, et al. Effects of compound bacteria preparation on fermentation quality and rumen fermentation characteristics of Phragmites australis silage[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2023, 35(4):2443-2454. (in Chinese)

DOI

[5]
郭小萌. 翅碱蓬、芦苇、狗尾草配置设计模式对胶州湾重金属Cd污染海岸线景观生态修复研究[D]. 硕士学位论文. 青岛: 青岛理工大学, 2024.

GUO X M. Study on the ecological restoration of heavy metal Cd pollution coastal landscape in Jiaozhou bay by the configuration design model of Suaeda salsa (L.) Pall,Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin.ex Steud,and Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv[D]. Master’s Thesis. Qingdao: Qingdao University of Technology, 2024. (in Chinese)

[6]
张长军. 集约化畜牧养殖对生态环境的影响及防治对策[J]. 北方牧业, 2024(6):19.

ZHANG C J. The impact of intensive livestock farming on the ecological environment and its prevention and control measures[J]. Northern Pastoralism, 2024(6):19. (in Chinese)

[7]
何云, 马思蓉, 马小俊, 等. 不同比例芦苇草和玉米秸秆全混合发酵日粮品质及体外消化率的研究[J]. 饲料研究, 2023, 46(24):7-12.

HE Y, MA S R, MA X J, et al. Study on quality and in vitro digestibility of mixed fermentation diets of reed grass and corn straw with different proportions[J]. Feed Research, 2023, 46(24):7-12. (in Chinese)

[8]
王郝为, 吴端钦. 芦苇青贮前后营养成分及饲用价值分析[J]. 粮食与饲料工业, 2018(2):59-61.

WANG H W, WU D Q. Study on the nutrients composition and feeding value of phragmites before and after ensiling[J]. Cereal & Feed Industry, 2018(2):59-61. (in Chinese)

[9]
康翠翠, 田川尧, 王晓敏, 等. 芦苇的营养特性及可青贮性研究[J]. 延边大学农学学报, 2016, 38(2):149-155.

KANG C C, TIAN C Y, WANG X M, et al. Nutritive peculiarity and silage study of Phragmites australis[J]. Agricultural Science Journal of Yanbian University, 2016, 38(2):149-155. (in Chinese)

[10]
王亭帅. 芦苇青贮饲料对育肥羊生产性能及消化代谢的影响[D]. 硕士学位论文. 晋中: 山西农业大学, 2024.

WANG T S. Effects of reed silage on performance,digestion and metabolism of fattening sheep[D]. Master’s Thesis. Jinzhong: Shanxi Agricultural University, 2024. (in Chinese)

[11]
李高龙, 吴兆海, 赵连生, 等. 反刍动物甲烷减排研究进展[J]. 中国畜牧兽医, 2024, 51(11):4812-4823.

DOI

LI G L, WU Z H, ZHAO L S, et al. Advancements in research on methane emission reduction in ruminant animals[J]. China Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Medicine, 2024, 51(11):4812-4823. (in Chinese)

[12]
张婷婷, 申玉建. 玉米秸秆与紫花苜蓿混合青贮对肉牛生长性能、养分消化率和经济效益的影响[J]. 中国饲料, 2025(2):105-108.

ZHANG T T, SHEN Y J. Mixed silage of corn stover and alfalfa on the growth performance,nutrient digestibility and the impact of economic benefits[J]. China Feed, 2025(2):105-108. (in Chinese)

[13]
MENKE H 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, 1988,28:7-55.

[14]
WANG M, JANSSEN P H, SUN X Z, et al. A mathematical model to describe in vitro kinetics of H2 gas accumulation[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2013, 184(1/2/3/4):1-16.

DOI

[15]
吴昊, 宋亚伟. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术探析[J]. 中国畜禽种业, 2020, 16(2):60.

WU H, SONG Y W. Exploration of feed analysis and feed quality testing technology[J]. The Chinese Livestock and Poultry Breeding, 2020, 16(2):60. (in Chinese)

[16]
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 determining ammonia nitrogen content in rumen fluid through colorimetric analysis[J]. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2010, 31(6/7):37. (in Chinese)

[17]
TAYLOR K A C C. A simple colorimetric assay for muramic acid and lactic acid[J]. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 1996, 56(1):49-58.

DOI

[18]
WU P W, LI L H, JIANG J F, et al. Effects of fermentative and non-fermentative additives on silage quality and anaerobic digestion performance of Pennisetum purpureum[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2020,297:122425.

[19]
NI K K, WANG F F, ZHU B G, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and molasses additives on the microbial community and fermentation quality of soybean silage[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2017,238:706-715.

[20]
李秀静, 肖国举, 郭占强, 等. 贺兰山东麓农田土壤有机碳空间分布特征及其对盐碱化的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2023, 42(3):612-623.

LI X J, XIAO G J, GUO Z Q, et al. Spatial distribution characteristics of farmland soil organic carbon and its effect on salinization in the eastern foot of Helan mountain[J]. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2023, 42(3):612-623. (in Chinese)

[21]
孟德伦, 孟繁佳. 青贮饲料发酵过程中pH值变化研究[EB/OL].(2016-11-18)[2025-07-18]. https://www.paper.edu.cn/releasepaper/content/201611-235.

MENG D L, MENG F J. Study on the change of pH value during the fermentation process of silage[EB/OL].(2016-11-18)[2025-07-18]. https://www.paper.edu.cn/releasepaper/content/201611-235. (in Chinese)

[22]
毛翠, 刘方圆, 宋恩亮, 等. 不同乳酸菌添加量和发酵时间对全株玉米青贮营养价值及发酵品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(10):172-181.

DOI

MAO C, LIU F Y, SONG E L, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculant level and ensiling time on nutritional value and fermentation quality of whole-crop maize silage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(10):172-181. (in Chinese)

DOI

[23]
郭旭生, 周禾, 刘桂霞. 苜蓿青贮过程中蛋白的分解及抑制方法[J]. 草业科学, 2005, 22(11):46-50.

GUO X S, ZHOU H, LIU G X. Proteolysis in alfalfa silage and its inhibiting method[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2005, 22(11):46-50. (in Chinese)

[24]
王旭哲, 张凡凡, 马春晖, 等. 同/异型乳酸菌对青贮玉米开窖后品质及微生物的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2018, 34(10):296-304.

WANG X Z, ZHANG F F, MA C H, et al. Corn silage fermentation quality and microbial populations as influenced by adding homo- and hetero-fermentative bacteria after silos opened[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2018, 34(10):296-304. (in Chinese)

[25]
张养东, 杨军香, 王宗伟, 等. 青贮饲料理化品质评定研究进展[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2016, 52(12):37-42.

ZHANG Y D, YANG J X, WANG Z W, et al. Progress assessment of chemical indicators of silage[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2016, 52(12):37-42. (in Chinese)

[26]
马壮, 范雪, 唐明欢, 等. 籽粒苋青贮品质的影响因素及其饲用价值[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2024, 60(1):43-48.

MA Z, FAN X, TANG M H, et al. Influencing factors and feeding value of Amaranthus hypochondriacus silage[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2024, 60(1):43-48. (in Chinese)

[27]
冀红芹, 孟令楠, 于明, 等. 青贮饲料的质量评价[J]. 现代畜牧兽医, 2021(6):92-96.

JI H Q, MENG L N, YU M, et al. Quality evaluation of silages[J]. Modern Journal of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine, 2021(6):92-96. (in Chinese)

[28]
徐双鹏, 赵永琦, 董晓慧, 等. 乳酸菌添加剂对高寒牧区燕麦与箭筈豌豆混合青贮品质及酶活性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2025, 33(8):2694-2702.

DOI

XU S P, ZHAO Y Q, DONG X H, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria additives on silage quality and enzyme activity of mixed oats and vetch in alpine pastures[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2025, 33(8):2694-2702. (in Chinese)

[29]
宗玉洁, 程志强, 刘翁博洋, 等. 不同粗蛋白水平颗粒料对断奶犊牛体外瘤胃发酵的影响[J]. 饲料研究, 2025, 48(5):1-7.

ZONG Y J, CHENG Z Q, LIU W B Y, et al. Effects of granular feed with different crude protein levels on in vitro rumen fermentation of weaned calves[J]. Feed Research, 2025, 48(5):1-7. (in Chinese)

[30]
王士博, 黄棋, 孙静静, 等. 不同功能菌剂配伍对芦苇青贮品质的影响[J]. 当代畜牧, 2023(5):27-32.

WANG S B, HUANG Q, SUN J J, et al. The impact of different functional bacterial inoculants combinations on the quality of reed silage[J]. Contemporary Animal Husbandry, 2023(5):27-32. (in Chinese)

[31]
陈浩, 高万顺, 王旭哲, 等. 不同品种田菁与青贮玉米混贮的养分及发酵品质[J]. 草地学报, 2025, 33(8):2713-2720.

DOI

CHEN H, GAO W S, WANG X Z, et al. Nutrients and fermentation quality of different varieties of Sesbania cannabina and Zea mays[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2025, 33(8):2713-2720. (in Chinese)

DOI

[32]
李福厚. 产阿魏酸酯酶乳酸菌对青贮饲料纤维降解、家畜消化及健康的影响及作用机制研究[D]. 博士学位论文. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2021.

LI F H. Study on the effect and mechanism of ferulic acid esterase-producing lactic acid bacteria on silage fiber degradation,livestock digestion and health[D]. Ph.D.Thesis. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University, 2021. (in Chinese)

[33]
武齐丰, 陈晨, 黄沁骄, 等. 纤维素酶和乳酸菌对杂交象草青贮结构性碳水化合物影响[J]. 草地学报, 2024, 32(7):2314-2322.

DOI

WU Q F, CHEN C, HUANG Q J, et al. A effects of cellulase and high-temperature tolerant lactic acid bacteria on structural carbohydrate of (Pennisetum ameri-canum×P.purpureum)×P.durpureum schum[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2024, 32(7):2314-2322. (in Chinese)

[34]
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.

DOI

[35]
谭健, 王荣, 张秀敏, 等. 体外法研究亚麻籽油对瘤胃甲烷、氢气产量和脂肪酸组成的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(11):6492-6500.

DOI

TAN J, WANG R, ZHANG X M, et al. Effects of linseed oil on rumen methane,hydrogen production and fatty acid composition using in vitro method[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(11):6492-6500. (in Chinese)

[36]
王文飞, 段娜, 姜灵伟, 等. 发酵全混合日粮对肉羊消化吸收功能和生长性能的影响研究[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2020, 25(12):40-48.

WANG W F, DUAN N, JIANG L W, et al. Effect of fermented total mixed ration on digestion-absorption function and growth performance of mutton sheep[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2020, 25(12):40-48. (in Chinese)

[37]
赵娜, 杨雪海, 魏金涛, 等. 饲用油菜的营养成分分析及其在山羊瘤胃降解特性研究[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(5):50-57.

DOI

ZHAO N, YANG X H, WEI J T, et al. Nutritional composition of forage rape and its rumen degradation characteristics in goats[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(5):50-57. (in Chinese)

DOI

[38]
吴秋珏, 郝正里, 李发弟, 等. 饲粮结构与非结构碳水化合物比例对绵羊消化代谢的影响[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2009, 40(1):66-71.

WU Q J, HAO Z L, LI F D, et al. Effects of ratios of structural to nonstructural carbohydrate in diets on digestion and metabolism for sheep[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2009, 40(1):66-71. (in Chinese)

[39]
WANG K, XIONG B H, ZHAO X. Could propionate formation be used to reduce enteric methane emission in ruminants?[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2023,855:158867.

[40]
任澎, 冯娟, 李若诚, 等. 体外产气法评价水培大麦苗替代苜蓿、燕麦对奶牛瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2022, 58(9):233-237.

REN P, FENG J, LI R C, et al. Evaluation of the effects of hydroponic barley seedlings as a substitute for alfalfa and oats on rumen fermentation characteristics in dairy cows using an in vitro gas production method[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2022, 58(9):233-237. (in Chinese)

[41]
ZHENG Y H, DU W, HUANG W M, et al. The rumen degradation characteristics of whole sugarcane for dairy cows and its application in substituting alfalfa,oat hay and concentrate in dairy cows’ diets[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2020, 51(11):2743-2756.

DOI

[42]
BERGMAN E N. Energy contributions of volatile fatty acids from the gastrointestinal tract in various species[J]. Physiological Reviews, 1990, 70(2):567-590.

DOI PMID

[43]
乔林慧, 邢杰, 徐子萱, 等. 芦丁对奶牛瘤胃体外发酵参数、微生物区系、乳酸代谢产物含量及酶活性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023, 35(4):2369-2382.

DOI

QIAO L H, XING J, XU Z X, et al. Effects of rutin on rumen fermentation parameters,microflora,lactic acid metabolite contents and enzyme activities of dairy cows in vitro[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2023, 35(4):2369-2382. (in Chinese)

[44]
PU X X, ZHANG X M, YI S Y, et al. Mixed ensiling plus nitrate destroy fiber structure of rape straw,increase degradation,and reduce methanogenesis through in vitro ruminal fermentation[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2024, 104(6):3428-3436.

DOI

[45]
LENG R A, BRETT D J. Simultaneous measurements of the rates of production of acetic,propionic and butyric acids in the rumen of sheep on different diets and the correlation between production rates and concentrations of these acids in the rumen[J]. British Journal of Nutrition, 1966, 20(3):541-552.

DOI

[46]
程冠文. 日粮碳水化合物类型调控瘤胃发酵乙/丙比的机制研究[D]. 硕士学位论文. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2019.

CHENG G W. Study on the mechanism of dietary carbohydrate types regulating acetate/propionate ratio in rumen fermentation[D]. Master’s Thesis. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2019. (in Chinese)

[47]
李宗军. 瘤胃丙酸发酵的增强策略及其对碳水化合物代谢的动态影响[D]. 博士学位论文. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2018.

LI Z J. The ruminal manipulation strategies for enhancing propionate fermentation and their dynamic effects on carbohydrate metabolism[D]. Ph.D.Thesis. Yangling: Northwest A&F University, 2018. (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.