DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of corn stover during field exposure and the fermentation characteristics of silage prepared with microbial additives

  • Gao, Jun Lei (College of Animal Science, Jilin University) ;
  • Wang, Peng (College of Animal Science, Jilin University) ;
  • Zhou, Chang Hai (College of Animal Science, Jilin University) ;
  • Li, Ping (School of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Changchun Sci-Tech University) ;
  • Tang, Hong Yu (College of Animal Science, Jilin University) ;
  • Zhang, Jia Bao (College of Animal Science, Jilin University) ;
  • Cai, Yimin (Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences)
  • Received : 2018.11.23
  • Accepted : 2019.03.18
  • Published : 2019.12.01

Abstract

Objective: To effectively use corn stover resources as animal feed, we explored the chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of corn stover during field exposure and the fermentation characteristics of silage prepared with lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and cellulase. Methods: Corn ears including the cobs and shucks were harvested at the ripe stage. The corn stover was exposed in the field under natural weather conditions. Silages were prepared after 0, 2, 4, 7, 15, 30, and 60 d of exposure. Corn stover was chopped into approximately 1 to 2 cm lengths and then packed into 5 liter plastic silos. The ensiling density was $550.1{\pm}20.0g/L$ of fresh matter, and the silos were kept at room temperature ($10^{\circ}C$ to $25^{\circ}C$). Silage treatments were designed as follows: without additives (control), with LAB, with cellulase, and with LAB+ cellulase. After 45 d of fermentation, the silos were opened for chemical composition, fermentation quality and in vitro digestion analyses. Results: After harvest, corn stover contained 78.19% moisture, 9.01% crude protein (CP) and 64.54% neutral detergent fiber (NDF) on a dry matter (DM) basis. During field exposure, the DM, NDF, and acid detergent fiber (ADF) contents of corn stover increased, whereas the CP and water-soluble carbohydrate contents and in vitro digestibility of the DM and CP decreased (p<0.05). Compared to the control silage, cellulase-treated silage had lower (p<0.05) NDF and ADF contents. The pH values were lower in silage treated with LAB, cellulase, or LAB+cellulase, and lactic acid contents were higher (p<0.05) than those of the control. Silage treated with cellulase or LAB+cellulase improved (p<0.05) the in vitro DM digestibility (IVDMD) compared to that of the control or LAB-treated silage. Conclusion: Corn stover silage should be prepared using fresh materials since stover nutrients are lost during field exposure, and LAB and cellulase can improve silage fermentation and IVDMD.

Keywords

References

  1. Pang H, Zhang M, Qin G, et al. Identification of lactic acid bacteria isolated from corn stovers. Anim Sci J 2011;82:642-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2011.00894.x
  2. Wilkinson JM, Phipps RH. The development of plant components and their effects on the composition of fresh and ensiled forage maize: 2. The effect of genotype, plant density and date of harvest on the composition of maize silage. J Agric Sci 1979;92:485-91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600063024
  3. Muck RE, Emg N, Mcallister TA, Contreras-Govea FE, Santos MC, Kung Jr, L. Silage review: recent advances and future uses of silage additives. J Dairy Sci 2018;101:3980-4000. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13839
  4. Li M, Zi XJ, Zhou HL, Hou GY, Cai YM. Effects of sucrose, glucose, molasses and cellulase on fermentation quality and in vitro gas production of king grass silage. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2014;197:206-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.06.016
  5. Filya I. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the fermentation, aerobic stability, and ruminal degradability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages. J Dairy Sci 2003;86:3575-81. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73963-0
  6. Pholsen S, Khota W, Pang H, Higgs D, Cai Y. Characterization and application of lactic acid bacteria for tropical silage preparation. Anim Sci J 2016;87:1202-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12534
  7. Sun L, Wang ZJ, Gentu G, Jia Y, Hou M, Cai Y. Changes in microbial population and chemical composition of corn stover during field exposure and effects on silage fermentation and in vitro digestibility. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2019;32:815-25. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.18.0514
  8. AOAC. Official methods of analysis. 18th edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC, USA: AOAC International; 2005.
  9. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:3583-97. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  10. Deriaz RE. Routine analysis of carbohydrates and lignin in herbage. J Sci Food Agric 1961;12:152-60. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740120210
  11. Playne MJ, McDonald P. The buffering constituents of herbage and of silage. J Sci Food Agric 1966;17:264-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740170609
  12. Huang YY, Si R, Chen XB, et al. Feeding of cattle, sheep and goats. Beijing, China China: Agricultural University Press; 2013. pp. 140-54.
  13. Owens VN, Albrecht KA, Muck RE. Protein degradation and ensiling characteristics of red clover and alfalfa wilted under varying levels of shade. Can J Plant Sci 1999;79:209-22. https://doi.org/10.4141/P98-034
  14. Robinson D. Compensatory changes in the partitioning of dry matter in relation to nitrogen uptake and optimal variations in growth. Ann Bot 1986;58:841-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a087266
  15. Tilley JMA, Terry RA. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Grass Forage Sci 1963;18:104-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x
  16. Filya I, Sucu E, Karabulut A. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri on the fermentation, aerobic stability and ruminal degradability of maize silage. J Appl Microbiol 2006;101:1216-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.03038.x
  17. McEniry J, King C, O'Kiely P. Silage fermentation characteristics of three common grassland species in response to advancing stage of maturity and additive application. Grass Forage Sci 2014;69:393-404. https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12038
  18. Pordesimo LO, Hames BR, Sokhansanj S, Edens WC. Variation in corn stover composition and energy content with crop maturity. Biomass Bioenerg 2005;28:366-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.09.003
  19. Rambau MD, Fushai F, Baloyi JJ. Productivity, chemical composition and ruminal degradability of irrigated napier grass leaves harvested at three stages of maturity. S Afr J Anim Sci 2016;46:398-408. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v46i4.8
  20. Conaghan P, O'Kiely P, O'Mara FP. Possibilities of increasing the residual water-soluble carbohydrate concentration and aerobic stability of low dry-matter perennial ryegrass silage through additive and cultivar use. Grass Forage Sci 2012;67:177-98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2011.00833.x
  21. Waroon K, Pholsen S, Higgs D, Cai Y. Fermentation quality and in vitro methane production of sorghum silage prepared with cellulase and lactic acid bacteria. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2017;30:1568-74. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.16.0502
  22. Cao Y, Fang J, Matsuzaki M, Suzuki H. Effects of apple pomace proportion levels on the fermentation quality of total mixed ration silage and its digestibility, preference and ruminal fermentation in beef cows. Anim Sci J 2016;87:217-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12410
  23. Zhang Q, Yu Z, Wang X. Isolating and evaluating lactic acid bacteria strains with or without sucrose for effectiveness of silage fermentation. Grassl Sci 2015;61:167-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/grs.12097
  24. Jahanzad E, Sadeghpour A, Hashemi M, et al. Silage fermentation profile, chemical composition and economic evaluation of millet and soya bean grown in monocultures and as intercrops. Grass Forage Sci 2016;71:584-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12216
  25. Heinritz SN, Martens SD, Avila P, Hoedtke S. The effect of inoculant and sucrose addition on the silage quality of tropical forage legumes with varying ensilability. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2012;174:201-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.03.017
  26. Contreras-Govea FE, Muck RE, Armstrong KL, Albrecht KA. Nutritive value of corn silage in mixture with climbing beans. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2009;150:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2008.07.001
  27. Santos WCCD, Nascimento WGD, Magalhaes ALR, et al. Nutritive value, total losses of dry matter and aerobic stability of the silage from three varieties of sugarcane treated with commercial microbial additives. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2015;204:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2015.03.004
  28. Al-Masri MR. In vitro rumen fermentation kinetics and nutritional evaluation of Kchia indica as affected by harvest time and cutting regimen. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2010;157:55-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.01.013
  29. Mechin V, Argillier O, Rocher F, et al. In search of a maize ideotype for cell wall enzymatic degradability using histological and biochemical lignin characterization. J Agric Food Chem 2005;53:5872-81. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf050722f

Cited by

  1. Chemical composition, characteristics concerned with fermentative quality and microbial population of ensiled pearl millet and sorghum stover in semi‐arid West Africa vol.91, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.13463
  2. Impact of Cellulase and Lactic Acid Bacteria Inoculant to Modify Ensiling Characteristics and In Vitro Digestibility of Sweet Corn Stover and Cassava Pulp Silage vol.11, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11010066
  3. Analysis of main factors affecting silage fermentation of sorghum prepared with whole crop and stover in semiarid West Africa vol.38, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.2989/10220119.2020.1794959
  4. Exploring microbial community structure and metabolic gene clusters during silage fermentation of paper mulberry, a high-protein woody plant vol.275, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2020.114766