Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculation in pre-harvesting period on fermentation and feed quality properties of alfalfa silage

  • Ertekin, Ibrahim (Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Hatay Mustafa Kemal University) ;
  • Kizilsimsek, Mustafa (Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University)
  • Received : 2018.10.24
  • Accepted : 2019.03.24
  • Published : 2020.02.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To develop the fermentation quality and chemical composition of alfalfa (Medicago sativa Lam.) silage, plants were inoculated with different lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strains at field 24 hours before harvest. Methods: The treatment groups were as follow: silage without additive as a control and inoculated with each strains of Lactobacillus brevis (LS-55-2-2), Leuconostoc citerum (L. citerum; L-70-6-1), Lactobacillus bifermentans (L. bifermentans; LS-65-2-1), Lactobacillus plantarum (L. plantarum; LS-3-3) and L. plantarum (LS-72-2). All the silages were stored at 25℃. Parameters such as pH, microorganism and volatile fatty acid contents, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, net gas, metabolizable energy, organic matter digestibility, dry matter intake and relative feed value were measured to determine fermentation quality, chemical compositions and relative feed value of alfalfa silages. Results: Significant differences were found among the control and treated groups in terms of pH and microorganism contents at all opening times and crude protein, net gas, metabolizable energy and organic matter digestibility of final silage. The pH values ranged from 4.70 to 5.52 for all treatments and control silage had the highest value of overall treatments at T75d silages. Volatile fatty acid of silages was not influenced significantly by inoculations. However, lactic acid content of L. bifermentans (LS-65-2-1) was higher than the other treatments. The highest metabolizable energy and organic matter digestibility were recorded from L. citerum (L-70-6-1) inoculation. In addition, no significant differences were found among treatments in terms of neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, dry matter intake and relative feed value. Conclusion: Among the treated LAB isolates, L. bifermentans came into prominence especially in terms of organic acid composition and quality characters of silages.

Keywords

References

  1. Tao L, Zhou H, Zhang N, et al. Effects of different source additives and wilt conditions on the pH value, aerobic stability, and carbohydrate and protein fractions of alfalfa silage. Anim Sci J 2017;88:99-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12599
  2. McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE. The biochemistry of silage. Abersyth, UK: Chalcombe Publication; 1991.
  3. Phelan P, Moloney AP, McGeough EJ, et al. Forage legumes for grazing and conserving in ruminant production systems. CRC Crit Rev Plant Sci 2014;34:281-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2014.898455
  4. Wen A, Yuan X, Wang J, Desta ST, Shao T. Effects of four short-chain fatty acids or salts on dynamics of fermentation and microbial characteristics of alfalfa silage. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2017;223:141-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2016.11.017
  5. Repetto JL, Echarri V, Aguerre M, Cajarville J. Use of fresh cheese whey as an additive for lucerne silages: effects on chemical composition, conservation quality and ruminal degradation of cell walls. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2011;170:160-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.09.004
  6. McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE. The biochemistry of silage, 2nd ed. Marlow, UK: Chalcombe Publications; 1981.
  7. Singh K, Honig H, Wermke M, Zimmer E. Fermentation pattern and changes in cell wall constituents of straw-forage silages, straws and partners during storage. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1996;61:137-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(96)00953-4
  8. Davies DR, Merry RJ, Williams AP, Bakewell EL, Leemans DK, Tweed JKS. Proteolysis during ensilage of forages varying in soluble sugar content. J Dairy Sci 1998;81:444-53. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(98)75596-1
  9. McAllister TA, Feniuk R, Mir Z, Mir P, Selinger LB, Cheng K-J. Inoculants for alfalfa silage: Effects on aerobic stability, digestibility and the growth performance of feedlot steers. Livest Prod Sci 1998;53:171-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(97)00150-4
  10. Kizilsimsek M, Erol A, Ertekin I, Donmez R, Katranci B. Relationship among silage micro flora and their effects on silage fermentation and quality. KSU J Agric Nat Sci 2016;19:136-40. https://dx.doi.org/10.18016/ksujns.35488
  11. Weinberg ZG, Muck RE. New trends and opportunities in the development and use of inoculants for silage. FEMS Microbiol Rev 1996;19:53-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-6445(96) 00025-3
  12. Zielinska K, Fabiszewska A, Stefanska I. Different aspects of Lactobacillus inoculants on the improvement of quality and safety on alfalfa silage. Chilean J Agric Res 2015;75:298-306. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-58392015000400005
  13. Muck RE. Recent advances in silage microbiology. Agric Food Sci 2013;22:3-15. https://doi.org/10.23986/afsci.6718
  14. Yitbarek MB, Tamir B. Silage additives: review. Open J Appl Sci 2014;4:258-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojapps.2014. 45026
  15. AOAC, Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official method of analysis. 15th ed., Washington, USA: AOAC International; 1990. pp. 66-88.
  16. 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
  17. Menke KH, Steingass H. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Anim Res Dev1988;28:7-55.
  18. Blummel M, Orskov ER. Comparison of in vitro gas production and nylon bag degradability of roughages in predicting feed intake in cattle. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1993;40:109-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(93)90150-I
  19. Menke KH, Raab L, Salewski A, Steingass H, Fritz D, Schneider W. 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 Agric Sci 1979;93:217-22. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600 086305
  20. Van Dyke NJ, Anderson PM. Interpreting a forage analysis. Alabama cooperative extension system; 1998. Report No.: ANR-890.
  21. Quiros ARB, Yusty MAL, Hernandez JL. HPLC analysis of organic acids using a novel stationary phase. Talanta 2009;78: 643-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2008.11.013
  22. Holden LA. Comparison of methods of in vitro dry matter digestibility for ten feeds. J Dairy Sci 1999;82:1791-4. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75409-3
  23. Sturgeon LS, Baker LA, Pipkin JL, Haliburton JC, Chisare NK. The digestibility and mineral availability of mutual, bermuda grass and alfalfa hay in mature horses. J Equine Vet Sci 2000; 20:45-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0737-0806(00)80320-2
  24. Jeranyama P, Garcia AD. Understanding relative feed value (RFV) and relative forage quality. South Dakota State University: Cooperative Extension Service: Extension Extra; 2004. p. 352-4.
  25. Palmquist DL. Influence of source and amount of dietary fat on digestibility in lactating cows. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:1354-60. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78290-8
  26. Denek N, Can A, Avci M, Aksu T, Durmaz H. The effect of molasses-based pre-fermented juice on the fermentation quality of first-cut lucerne silage. Grass Forage Sci 2011;66:243-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2011.00783.x
  27. 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
  28. Kizilsimsek M, Schmidt RJ, Kung L Jr. Effects of a mixture of lactic acid bacteria applied as a freeze-dried or fresh culture on the fermentation of alfalfa silage. J Dairy Sci 2007;90:5698-705. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0448
  29. Filya I, Muck RE, Contreas-govea FE. Inoculant effects on alfalfa silage: Fermentation products and nutritive value. J Dairy Sci 2007;90:5108-14. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2006-877
  30. Pitt RE, Leibensperger RY. The effectiveness of silage inoculants: a systems approach. Agric Syst 1987;25:27-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-521X(87)90097-7
  31. Rooke JA. The numbers of epiphytic bacteria on grass at ensilage on commercial farms. J Sci Food Agric 1990;51:525-33. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740510409
  32. Muck RE. Silage microbiology and its control through additives. R Bras Zootec 2010;39:183-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982010001300021
  33. Kizilsimsek M, Kusek M, Gezginc Y, Erol A. Isolation and identification of high lactic acid producer bacteria from forage and their silages grown in different ecologies. Kafkas Vet Fak Derg 2016;22:291-6. https://doi.org/10.9775/kvfd.2015.14291
  34. Silva VP, Pereira OG, Leandro ES, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria with bacteriocinogenic potential on the fermentation profile and chemical composition of alfalfa silage in tropical conditions. J Dairy Sci 2016;99:1895-902. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-9792
  35. Schmidt RJ, Hu W, Mills JA, Kung Jr L. The development of lactic acid bacteria and Lactobacillus buchneri and their effects on the fermentation of alfalfa silage. J Dairy Sci 2009;92:5005-10. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1701
  36. Yavuz M. Determination of some ruminant feeds' relative feed value and in vitro digestion values. Gaziosmanpasa Univ Zir Fak Derg 2005;22:97-101.
  37. Canpolat O, Karaman S. Comparison of in vitro gas production, organic matter digestibility, relative feed value and metabolizable energy contents of some legume forages. Tar Bil Der 2009;15:188-95. https://doi.org/10.1501/Tarimbil_0000001090
  38. Tekce E, Gul M. the importance of NDF and ADF in ruminant nutrition. Ataturk Universitesi Vet Bil Derg 2014;9:63-73. https://doi.org/10.17094/avbd.34439
  39. Przemyslaw S, Cezary P, Stanislaw M, et al. The effect of nutritional and fermentational characteristics of grass and legume silages on feed intake, growth performance and blood indices of lambs. Small Rumin Res 2015;123:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2014.11.008
  40. Dordevic S, Mandic V, Stanojevic, D. The effect of bacterial inoculant on chemical composition and fermentation of alfalfa silage. Biotechnol Anim Husb 2016;32:413-23. https://doi.org/10.2298/BAH1604413D
  41. Ce L, Yu-jiao L, Xiao-nan L, Ping-ting G, Hai-ling L. Effect of lactic acid bacteria inoculants on alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) silage quality: assessment of degradation (in situ) and gas production (in vitro). J Integr Agr 2016;15:2834-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61424-7
  42. Buxton DR, Mertens DR. Quality-related characteristics of forages. In: Barnes RF, Miller DA, Nelson CJ, editors. The science of grassland agriculture. Ames, IA, USA: Iowa State University Press; 1995. pp. 83-96.
  43. Gonzalez J, Faria-Marmol J, Rodriguez CA, Martinez A. Effects of ensiling on ruminal degradability and intestinal digestibility of Italian rye-grass. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2007;136:38-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.08.022

Cited by

  1. Selection of Lactic Acid Bacteria from Alfalfa Silage and Its Effects as Inoculant on Silage Fermentation vol.10, pp.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture10110518
  2. Effect of commercially purified deoxynivalenol and zearalenone mycotoxins on microbial diversity of pig cecum contents vol.34, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.20.0137
  3. Effect of inoculation with Penicillium chrysogenum on chemical components and fungal communities in fermentation of Pu-erh tea vol.150, pp.no.pa, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2021.110748
  4. Silage Fermentation: A Potential Microbial Approach for the Forage Utilization of Cyperus esculentus L. By-Product vol.7, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation7040273